Wed Feb 12, 2020, 07:34 PM

Anti-Ship Budget Seriousness: US Navy Buying Hundreds of Missiles to Take on Chinas Fleet

As China’s navy continues to grow in size and capability, the Pentagon is taking the threat more seriously than ever. The US Navy’s 2021 budget requests include a nearly twentyfold increase in anti-ship missiles over the next five years, including newer long-range designs. However, they have yet to match Beijing’s ultra-long-range weapons.

The US Navy’s budget requests for fiscal year 2021 include a huge increase in anti-ship missile purchases in response to the steady increase in size of the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), which already outpaces the US Navy and has begun to explore blue-water operations.

The requests include 1,625 missiles of various types, including a series of longer-range missiles - an increase of nearly 20 times the five-year request in 2016.

According to Defense News, the Navy wants to buy: 189 Naval Strike Missiles; 210 Long-Range Anti-Surface Missile (LRASM); 451 kits for upgrading Tomahawk cruise missiles into Maritime Strike Tomahawks; and 775 of Raytheon’s SM-6, a modified version of the RIM-174 Standard Extended Range Active Missile, an anti-air weapon.

“This budget is a great signal of the Navy’s intent to finally get serious about the quality and quantity of the anti-ship missile inventory,” Eric Sayers, a Center for a New American Security adjunct senior fellow and former US Indo-Pacific Command staffer, told the outlet. “The request for LRASM, Naval Strike Missile and Maritime Strike Tomahawk is a real turning point in anti-ship budget seriousness.”


6 replies, 119 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Anti-Ship Budget Seriousness: US Navy Buying Hundreds of Missiles to Take on Chinas Fleet (Original post)
RCW2014 Feb 12 OP
His Daughter Feb 12 #1
uncledad Feb 12 #4
His Daughter Feb 13 #5
uncledad Feb 13 #6
Da Mannn Feb 12 #2
oldenuff35 Feb 12 #3

Response to RCW2014 (Original post)

Wed Feb 12, 2020, 07:43 PM

1. It is also the main production buy for LRASM

And much of our inventory is aging out after Obama era cutbacks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to His Daughter (Reply #1)

Wed Feb 12, 2020, 11:26 PM

4. A Look At Military Spending Under The Obama Administration

Defense spending

National security spending includes the Pentagon’s budget as well as spending by other agencies, like the Department of Energy’s work on nuclear weapons. On the whole, spending increased in 2010 and 2011, but decreased every year for four straight years by a cumulative 15%, write Jacobson and Sherman.

In 2010, national security spending made up 20.1% of the federal budget, but in 2015 it was roughly 15.9%. Over that same period, spending declined from 4.6% of gross domestic product to 3.3%.

The reason for this is two-fold. The Obama administration's decision to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq and Afghanistan caused defense spending to drop. The second reason has to do with sequestration, which refers to the automatic across-the-board cuts to both military and nonmilitary spending that was originally designed to force bipartisan negotiations in Congress. It didn’t work and when negotiators failed to strike a deal in 2011 the cuts went into effect in 2013.

Military equipment development and procurement

The Navy is constructing 12 ballistic missile submarines to replace the current force of 14. The Navy allotted $1.4 billion for research and development in 2016, but the total cost will be around $103 billion.

The Pentagon’s plan to acquire 2,443 F-35 joint strike fighters over the next 20 years is the largest procurement of its kind and will cost nearly $400 billion.


How Budget Sequestration Works

Congress initiated the process of sequestration with the 2011 Budget Control Act. Republicans and Democrats couldn't agree on the best way to lower the deficit. They used the threat of sequester to force themselves to reach an agreement. But when they couldn't agree, the sequester kicked in, cutting spending by 10% from 2013 to 2021.3

The sequester was designed to cut federal spending by $1.2 trillion over 10 years.4

 It accomplishes this in two ways. First, it cuts $109 billion from each fiscal year's budget, taking an equal amount each from both the mandatory budget and the discretionary budget.

In 2019, Congress repealed sequestration for the military budget for Fiscal Years 2019 and FY 2020.

A CBO analysis of President Trump's 2020 budget projects deficits would total $9.9 trillion over the next 10 years; mandatory health spending would be reduced by $1.5 trillion and federal revenues would be reduced by $0.9 trillion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to uncledad (Reply #4)

Thu Feb 13, 2020, 12:26 PM

5. The DoD has a long term planning cycle

A lot of things were life extended/refurbished vice being upgraded and replaced under Obama, even though newer/better were ready to go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to His Daughter (Reply #5)

Thu Feb 13, 2020, 12:54 PM

6. Which is where the Navy and Marines find themeslves now.

Reorienting, reorganizing, and adjusting to the shift. Once in the pipeline, it's make due with what you have that works, until the new stuff is proven capable.

Navy want remote control ships, but they don't count as hulls in the total count. So getting to 355 is a problem. Then it's what kind of hull is best suited to expeditionary operations for the crayon eaters?

F35 works on Monday then spends three days in the shop. To drone or not to drone? Too many cooks spoil the soup...

As far as ready to go, Being 737's were ready to go too. Boeing being a major supplier doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. The Pentagon supplies more general officers to Boeing and the defense industry then the combined services have at any one time. A two edged sword.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to RCW2014 (Original post)

Wed Feb 12, 2020, 08:12 PM

2. China is the real threat to the US in today's world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Da Mannn (Reply #2)

Wed Feb 12, 2020, 08:20 PM

3. I would say the China is a real threat to our forward positioning in the pacific and south china sea

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink