USAF Proposed FY21 Budget
Thread Starter
USAF Proposed FY21 Budget
Extracts:
$169 billion budget proposal submitted 10 Feb 20 - which for the first time includes funding for the newly created US Space Force while also focusing funds to help both services modernize, address threats from Russia and China, and sustain readiness.
Spending plan for FY21 represents a $900 million increase from FY20.
Unlike FY20, FY21 apportions $153.6 billion directed to the Air Force and $15.4 billion for the Space Force.
The budget proposal calls for increased investments in space as well as ensuring sufficient combat power to respond decisively to any attack against the US or allies.
The budget proposal also addresses what the service calls “logistics under attack,” ensuring equipment, personnel and supplies are available when and where they are needed to sustain high-tempo actions in combat operations.
$5.8 billion for 48 x F-35A Lightning II aircraft.
$3 billion for 15 x KC-46A Pegasus tankers.
$1.4 billion for 12 x F-15EX fighters.
R&D up $1.5 billion for the Air Force to a total of $26.9 billion, which includes increased investment in the burgeoning battle network – the Advanced Battle Management System – development and capability demonstrations connecting the joint force.
R&D for the Space Force up $0.5 billion to $10.3 billion.
$2.8 billion for continued development of the B-21 Raider.
$1.5 billion for upgrading and modernizing the ground-based nuclear force - up almost $1 billion on FY20 - underscoring the priority attached to modernizing the aging ground-based nuclear deterrent.
Anticipated retirements to balance the above:
13 x KC-135 Stratotankers.
16 x KC-10 Extenders.
24 x C-130H Hercules.
17 x B-1B Lancers.
24 x RQ-4 Global Hawk Block 20/30 aircraft.
Reflecting the importance of space, the budget funds the National Security Space Launch program to ensure access to space and achieve independence from relying on launch vehicles from non-allies.
$2.3 billion, rapid development of Next-Gen Overhead Persistent Infrared Space and Ground systems to provide strategic missile warning.
Funding to pay for flying hours increases in FY21 increases to $6.6 billion.
The budget envisions an increase in the Department’s force of active duty, Guard and Reserve by 1,500 personnel. That would bring the uniformed force to 512,100.
The proposal now goes to Congress for its consideration and what is likely to be months of deliberation, debate and revisions. Under the typical schedule, the budget for the new fiscal year must be approved and signed into law by the president by Oct. 1, 2020, when the new fiscal year begins.
https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Disp...etition-readi/
$169 billion budget proposal submitted 10 Feb 20 - which for the first time includes funding for the newly created US Space Force while also focusing funds to help both services modernize, address threats from Russia and China, and sustain readiness.
Spending plan for FY21 represents a $900 million increase from FY20.
Unlike FY20, FY21 apportions $153.6 billion directed to the Air Force and $15.4 billion for the Space Force.
The budget proposal calls for increased investments in space as well as ensuring sufficient combat power to respond decisively to any attack against the US or allies.
The budget proposal also addresses what the service calls “logistics under attack,” ensuring equipment, personnel and supplies are available when and where they are needed to sustain high-tempo actions in combat operations.
$5.8 billion for 48 x F-35A Lightning II aircraft.
$3 billion for 15 x KC-46A Pegasus tankers.
$1.4 billion for 12 x F-15EX fighters.
R&D up $1.5 billion for the Air Force to a total of $26.9 billion, which includes increased investment in the burgeoning battle network – the Advanced Battle Management System – development and capability demonstrations connecting the joint force.
R&D for the Space Force up $0.5 billion to $10.3 billion.
$2.8 billion for continued development of the B-21 Raider.
$1.5 billion for upgrading and modernizing the ground-based nuclear force - up almost $1 billion on FY20 - underscoring the priority attached to modernizing the aging ground-based nuclear deterrent.
Anticipated retirements to balance the above:
13 x KC-135 Stratotankers.
16 x KC-10 Extenders.
24 x C-130H Hercules.
17 x B-1B Lancers.
24 x RQ-4 Global Hawk Block 20/30 aircraft.
Reflecting the importance of space, the budget funds the National Security Space Launch program to ensure access to space and achieve independence from relying on launch vehicles from non-allies.
$2.3 billion, rapid development of Next-Gen Overhead Persistent Infrared Space and Ground systems to provide strategic missile warning.
Funding to pay for flying hours increases in FY21 increases to $6.6 billion.
The budget envisions an increase in the Department’s force of active duty, Guard and Reserve by 1,500 personnel. That would bring the uniformed force to 512,100.
The proposal now goes to Congress for its consideration and what is likely to be months of deliberation, debate and revisions. Under the typical schedule, the budget for the new fiscal year must be approved and signed into law by the president by Oct. 1, 2020, when the new fiscal year begins.
https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Disp...etition-readi/
OK, nice summary, but that's the "wish list," right? 
"The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office provides extensive analysis of the budget and its economic effects. It has reported that large budget deficits over the next 30 years are projected to drive federal debt held by the public to unprecedented levels—from 78 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2019 to 144 percent by 2049.=10.8333px The United States has the largest external debt in the world and the 14th largest government debt as % of GDP in the world. The annual budget deficit increased from $585 billion (3.2% GDP) in 2016 to $984 billion (4.7% GDP) in 2019, up 68%.[2][3] Relative to a CBO forecast prior to President Trump's inauguration, the budget deficits for 2019-2021 roughly doubled, due to the Trump tax cuts and other spending legislation. "
Another $900 mm wouldn't break the bank but it depends on how fiscally conservative Congress wants to be
Another $900 mm wouldn't break the bank but it depends on how fiscally conservative Congress wants to be
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020...-capabilities/
New and old aircraft programs could get axed as top US Air Force general seeks ‘ruthless prioritization’ of capabilities
WASHINGTON — With stagnant budgets on the horizon, the U.S. Air Force is hurtling toward “the most difficult force structure decisions in generations” and must cancel programs and sacrifice some of its existing aircraft inventory to prepare for a potential fight against Russia or China, the service’s top general said Monday.
A future war with either country could entail combat losses on par with those of a major conflict like World War II, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles “CQ” Brown wrote in a paper titled “Accelerate Change or Lose,” which outlines his vision as the service’s new top uniformed leader. Brown became chief of staff of the Air Force on Aug. 6.
Although the Defense Department has focused on war with an advanced, near-peer nation since 2016, Brown raised concerns that the Air Force’s sense of urgency is not strong enough and warned of potential mission failure unless the service accelerates the pace of change.
A “ruthless prioritization” of the service’s requirements is in order, he said.
“We must reframe platform-centric debates to focus instead on capabilities to execute the mission relative to our adversaries,” he wrote. “Programs that once held promise, but are no longer affordable or will not deliver needed capabilities on competition-relevant timelines, must be divested or terminated. Cost, schedule, and performance metrics alone are no longer sufficient metrics of acquisition success.”.......
New and old aircraft programs could get axed as top US Air Force general seeks ‘ruthless prioritization’ of capabilities
WASHINGTON — With stagnant budgets on the horizon, the U.S. Air Force is hurtling toward “the most difficult force structure decisions in generations” and must cancel programs and sacrifice some of its existing aircraft inventory to prepare for a potential fight against Russia or China, the service’s top general said Monday.
A future war with either country could entail combat losses on par with those of a major conflict like World War II, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles “CQ” Brown wrote in a paper titled “Accelerate Change or Lose,” which outlines his vision as the service’s new top uniformed leader. Brown became chief of staff of the Air Force on Aug. 6.
Although the Defense Department has focused on war with an advanced, near-peer nation since 2016, Brown raised concerns that the Air Force’s sense of urgency is not strong enough and warned of potential mission failure unless the service accelerates the pace of change.
A “ruthless prioritization” of the service’s requirements is in order, he said.
“We must reframe platform-centric debates to focus instead on capabilities to execute the mission relative to our adversaries,” he wrote. “Programs that once held promise, but are no longer affordable or will not deliver needed capabilities on competition-relevant timelines, must be divested or terminated. Cost, schedule, and performance metrics alone are no longer sufficient metrics of acquisition success.”.......
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020...t-will-permit/
The Air Force wanted to mothball over 100 planes. Here’s what Congress says it will permit.
WASHINGTON — Congress is seeking to block the Air Force from retiring any of its A-10 Warthog attack planes, KC-135 refueling tankers and RQ-4 Global Hawk surveillance drones this fiscal year.
On Dec. 3, the House and Senate Armed Services committees put forward the conference report of the fiscal 2021 National Defense Authorization Act — a final version of the defense bill that includes input from both chambers. The bill is expected to be approved by Congress sometime next week and will then move to the desk of President Donald Trump, who has threatened to veto it.
This year’s NDAA contained policy provisions on everything from the Pentagon’s organizational structure to military bases named for Confederate officers. For the Air Force, the biggest concern was whether Congress would greenlight the divestment of more than 100 aircraft, which service leaders said would free up funding for modernization priorities that include space technologies and the Joint All-Domain Command and Control concept (which was recently updated to Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control).
Lawmakers have opted to let the Air Force retire some bombers, tankers and cargo planes, but they stridently protected others like the A-10 and Global Hawk from any reductions.
Here is a breakdown of what the Air Force wanted to send to the boneyard, and how Congress responded:
A-10: Congress’ battles with the Air Force over the venerable A-10 have been legion over the past decade, with the service seeking to retire the entire fleet in the mid-2010s. In FY21, the Air Force sought a more modest adjustment — the retirement of 44 A-10s, or about three squadrons worth of aircraft, leaving about 237 Warthogs to fly close-air support missions in the next decade.
But Congress put the kibosh on that as well, stipulating in the NDAA that no funding be used to divest or retire any of the 281 A-10s currently in the Air Force’s inventory.
Bombers: The Air Force hoped to retire 17 of its oldest B-1s, which leaders said were putting strain on the fleet due to the manpower needed to keep them running. In the defense bill, Congress repealed an existing law that requires the Air Force to maintain at least 36 combat coded B-1 aircraft — essentially agreeing to a reduction to the B-1 fleet. However, lawmakers put several new stipulations in place: The Air Force must maintain 92 bombers of any kind in its primary mission aircraft inventory. The service must place four retired B-1s in storage so that they can be reclaimed if necessary. And it cannot remove any B-1 maintenance billets, ensuring that the B-1s that stick around will get the time and attention needed to keep them flying.
ISR fleet: Congress also rejected the Air Force’s plan to retire all the Global Hawk Block 20 and 30 surveillance drones — a total of 24 aircraft — which would have left RQ-4 Block 40s and the U-2 spy plane around to conduct the high-altitude surveillance mission.
Over the past decade, the Air Force has tried multiple times to divest its Global Hawks and U-2s, with Congress refusing to permit the retirement of either aircraft. In response, Congress has stipulated a list of requirements the Air Force must meet before lawmakers consider that request. Specifically, lawmakers have asked for certifications from the Defense Department that the Air Force is developing a cost-effective way to replace the RQ-4 or U-2, or a waiver from the defense secretary stating that a better but more expensive capability is in development.
Neither has been received, lawmakers wrote in the conference report.
“The conferees understand and acknowledge that modernizing airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities will necessitate divestment of legacy systems,” the conference report stated. “However, the conferees remain concerned about the Air Force’s continued inability to execute an ISR acquisition and replacement plan that appropriately manages operational risk to the global combatant commanders, as well as the service’s failure to comply with current public law.”
Tankers: The Air Force wanted to divest 13 KC-135s and 16 KC-10s in FY21, but the NDAA sketches out an alternative plan — one that forbids any KC-135 retirements over the next three years.
Congress will allow the Air Force to move down to 50 primary mission KC-10A aircraft in FY21, 38 primary mission KC-10A aircraft in FY22, and 26 primary mission KC-10A aircraft in FY23.
The Air Force currently has 56 KC-10s that are considered primary mission aircraft, so the language would allow the service to retire six aircraft in FY21 and a total of 30 tankers over the next three years, a source familiar with the bill told Defense News in June, when the House Armed Services Committee released identical language.
Cargo planes: The service hoped to retire 24 C-130Hs, most of which would be directly replaced by 19 C-130Js that are set to be delivered in FY21. While the NDAA does not address the issue directly, it sets a minimum airlift aircraft inventory at 287 aircraft, including 230 combat-coded cargo planes.
The report also included a provision that would prohibit the Air Force from retiring only Air National Guard airlift assets.
The Air Force wanted to mothball over 100 planes. Here’s what Congress says it will permit.
WASHINGTON — Congress is seeking to block the Air Force from retiring any of its A-10 Warthog attack planes, KC-135 refueling tankers and RQ-4 Global Hawk surveillance drones this fiscal year.
On Dec. 3, the House and Senate Armed Services committees put forward the conference report of the fiscal 2021 National Defense Authorization Act — a final version of the defense bill that includes input from both chambers. The bill is expected to be approved by Congress sometime next week and will then move to the desk of President Donald Trump, who has threatened to veto it.
This year’s NDAA contained policy provisions on everything from the Pentagon’s organizational structure to military bases named for Confederate officers. For the Air Force, the biggest concern was whether Congress would greenlight the divestment of more than 100 aircraft, which service leaders said would free up funding for modernization priorities that include space technologies and the Joint All-Domain Command and Control concept (which was recently updated to Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control).
Lawmakers have opted to let the Air Force retire some bombers, tankers and cargo planes, but they stridently protected others like the A-10 and Global Hawk from any reductions.
Here is a breakdown of what the Air Force wanted to send to the boneyard, and how Congress responded:
A-10: Congress’ battles with the Air Force over the venerable A-10 have been legion over the past decade, with the service seeking to retire the entire fleet in the mid-2010s. In FY21, the Air Force sought a more modest adjustment — the retirement of 44 A-10s, or about three squadrons worth of aircraft, leaving about 237 Warthogs to fly close-air support missions in the next decade.
But Congress put the kibosh on that as well, stipulating in the NDAA that no funding be used to divest or retire any of the 281 A-10s currently in the Air Force’s inventory.
Bombers: The Air Force hoped to retire 17 of its oldest B-1s, which leaders said were putting strain on the fleet due to the manpower needed to keep them running. In the defense bill, Congress repealed an existing law that requires the Air Force to maintain at least 36 combat coded B-1 aircraft — essentially agreeing to a reduction to the B-1 fleet. However, lawmakers put several new stipulations in place: The Air Force must maintain 92 bombers of any kind in its primary mission aircraft inventory. The service must place four retired B-1s in storage so that they can be reclaimed if necessary. And it cannot remove any B-1 maintenance billets, ensuring that the B-1s that stick around will get the time and attention needed to keep them flying.
ISR fleet: Congress also rejected the Air Force’s plan to retire all the Global Hawk Block 20 and 30 surveillance drones — a total of 24 aircraft — which would have left RQ-4 Block 40s and the U-2 spy plane around to conduct the high-altitude surveillance mission.
Over the past decade, the Air Force has tried multiple times to divest its Global Hawks and U-2s, with Congress refusing to permit the retirement of either aircraft. In response, Congress has stipulated a list of requirements the Air Force must meet before lawmakers consider that request. Specifically, lawmakers have asked for certifications from the Defense Department that the Air Force is developing a cost-effective way to replace the RQ-4 or U-2, or a waiver from the defense secretary stating that a better but more expensive capability is in development.
Neither has been received, lawmakers wrote in the conference report.
“The conferees understand and acknowledge that modernizing airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities will necessitate divestment of legacy systems,” the conference report stated. “However, the conferees remain concerned about the Air Force’s continued inability to execute an ISR acquisition and replacement plan that appropriately manages operational risk to the global combatant commanders, as well as the service’s failure to comply with current public law.”
Tankers: The Air Force wanted to divest 13 KC-135s and 16 KC-10s in FY21, but the NDAA sketches out an alternative plan — one that forbids any KC-135 retirements over the next three years.
Congress will allow the Air Force to move down to 50 primary mission KC-10A aircraft in FY21, 38 primary mission KC-10A aircraft in FY22, and 26 primary mission KC-10A aircraft in FY23.
The Air Force currently has 56 KC-10s that are considered primary mission aircraft, so the language would allow the service to retire six aircraft in FY21 and a total of 30 tankers over the next three years, a source familiar with the bill told Defense News in June, when the House Armed Services Committee released identical language.
Cargo planes: The service hoped to retire 24 C-130Hs, most of which would be directly replaced by 19 C-130Js that are set to be delivered in FY21. While the NDAA does not address the issue directly, it sets a minimum airlift aircraft inventory at 287 aircraft, including 230 combat-coded cargo planes.
The report also included a provision that would prohibit the Air Force from retiring only Air National Guard airlift assets.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Next to Ross and Demelza
Age: 53
Posts: 1,235
Received 52 Likes
on
21 Posts
As well loved and useful as it is, I can see a point at which all A-10s will have been grounded due to the airframes being past their fatigue index and still Congress will be refusing to let the USAF actually retire any of them.
Eventually the rest of the aircraft will age out, but the intent of the re-wing was to keep them viable for another ~20 years (the re-wing having been done over the last 10 years).
