US Department of Defense 2015 Budget Analysis

By David Klein posted 02-05-2014 10:46

  

US Department of Defense 2015 Budget Analysis

As part of the President’s budget submission to Congress (PB15), the Department of Defense (DoD) publishes information on all of their programs. We went through all of the budget sheets by department and flagged every program that contained a relevant key word (unmanned, UAV, etc.). Raw data (Excel format) is available for PB13, PB14 and PB15. Budget sheets may include a brief description of the funded program, funding amounts for FY14 – FY19, past contracts and funding, and a variety of other information. For PB15, we made a concerted effort to provide full details in the ‘Notes’ section for each line item we captured.  Access to the data sheets as reported to Congress is available on the DoD Comptroller website: http://comptroller.defense.gov/budgetmaterials.aspx. A full set of data references is available in the raw data for each fiscal year.  Please contact David Klein (dklein@auvsi.org) for further information.

The following analysis of the Defense budget is the same analysis that was completed in P13/PB14 with raw data (Excel format) available for all three years.  This analysis does not include effects of sequestration or other congressional changes as the budget is approved.

The above chart contains information on PB14 and PB15.  Trends of note:

·         There is a significant increase in funding lines captured from our PB14 to PB15 analysis.  Many programs related to UxVs (UxV is a generic abbreviation for unmanned systems across all domains – air, ground, maritime and space) are small parts of larger programs. These larger programs have dedicated funding lines for several years, but details on the portion related to UxVs is only given for the next fiscal year (FY). A large number of these lines were captured in PB15 where UxV-related funding has been noted for the first time.

·         Continued funding for UxV new starts and increased funding for existing programs.

·         The PB14 budget shows a steady decrease in funding from FY14 to FY18.

·         The newly captured programs in the PB15 budget shows a peak in FY16 followed by a slight decline through FY19.

·         As mentioned in our previous analysis, decreased funding over time can mainly be attributed to completion of acquisition efforts that have not been replaced by new acquisitions.  The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan required a lot of UxV purchases that are winding down. More detailed analysis of specific programs will be released soon.

The above graph provides some basic insight into the distribution of programs based on relevance to unmanned systems.  The blue bar ‘ALL’ represents programs that are entirely focused on Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) or Procurement of UxVs and their related subsystems.  The orange bar ‘SOME’ represents programs that partially relate to unmanned system technologies. A large portion of the overall funding lies in these ‘SOME’ programs.  It is important when stating the overall budget being dedicated to UxVs that this is taken into account.  This will be discussed further in a later section.

As established in previous year’s analysis, the air domain continues to dominate US Defense RDT&E and Procurement funding with maritime claiming a larger share than ground.

The above graph shows funding for the major services – Army, Navy and Air Force.  Army funding, after suffering a $600M decline from FY14 to FY15 shows a steady incline through FY19.  Navy funding remains the largest, though it peaks in FY16 and declining through FY19. Air Force funding also peaks in FY16, declining through FY18 and increasing through FY19. Notable program changes have been made in a section at the end of this analysis.

Procurement and RDT&E funding was also captured for other services as shown in this graph. DARPA invests significantly in unmanned systems and robotics, as does the OSD and Marine Corps. The seeming decline in funding after FY15 can be attributed to the lack of information for certain programs past the current PB proposal. This can be seen in the raw excel worksheets where you will find funding for FY14 and FY15 but nothing for FY16 through FY19.

A good mix of RDT&E and Procurement funding lines are important for the long term health of robotics development. The slow decrease in RDT&E funding as seen above is not directly alarming as a large portion of these investments are only detailed for FY14 and F15.  Thus, the increase from FY14 to FY15 indicates a steady rise of RDT&E over the long-term.  Procurement shows a slight reduction from FY14 to FY15 after which it increases by over $2B in FY16 and remains steady through FY19.

1 DoD Proposed Outyear Topline for the Base Budget, Chapter 1, Page 1-4 - http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/defbudget/fy2015/fy2015_Budget_Request_Overview_Book.pdf

Finally, a look at unmanned systems spending in relation to the entire defense budget.  The figure above shows the budget requested from PB14 and PB15. While the PB15 budget shows an upward trend in defense investments over time, a decrease in funding has been requested relative to PB14.

This graph shows the portion of the overall US defense budget that is being devoted to unmanned systems & robotics RDT&E/Procurement.  The analysis of the PB15 budget captured a large number of programs that had not previously been noted and therefore the significant increase in percentage from PB13/PB14.  The percentage seems to remain relatively steady at between 2-2.5% from FY14 through FY19. However, as discussed earlier, a large subset of the captured programs lie in the ‘SOME’ category where UxV funding is only a portion of the overall amount.  It is difficult to determine the actual percentage of a program’s funding that is dedicated to UxVs and last year’s analysis excluded this parameter.  Below you will see an adjusted total for PB15 under the assumption that an average 25% of the funding for programs marked as ‘SOME’ was related to UxVs.  By using this adjusted budget total, the percentage of the overall defense budget is closer to 1-1.25% and continues to represent an increase from PB13/PB14 estimates.

A more detailed analysis of the actual percentage of each program’s funding as it relates to UxVs will follow in a later Blog with detailed breakdowns of programs of interest. For now please see some notable program changes between PB15 and PB14 budget requests listed below.

Major Notes for PB15 – Air Force

·         Air Force RQ-4 Procurement funding has been reinstated for FY15 and beyond after having been zero’ed in PB14 ($54M in FY15, $90M in FY16 and $16M in fiscal years FY17 / FY18 / FY19).

·         Air Force RQ-4 Mods Procurement increased by $13M in FY15, $47M in FY16, $28M in FY17 and $83M in FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         Air Force RQ-4 GSRA/CSRA Mods actual funding in FY14 decreased by $6M compared with the PB14 budget request and has been zero’ed out for FY15 and beyond.

·         Air Force MQ-9 Procurement funding (actual) increased by $77M in FY14 from the PB14 budget request.  Funding decreased by $193M in FY15, $57M in FY16, $245M in FY17 and $8M in FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

Major Notes for PB15 – Army

·         Army Long Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle (LEMV) name changed to Endurance UAVs in PB15 and line has been zero’ed. In addition ‘Endurance Unmanned Aerial Vehicles’ has had funding zero’ed in FY15/FY16.

·         Army Tactical UAV RDT&E funding decreased by ~$10M each year from FY14-FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         Army MQ-1 Gray Eagle UAV RDT&E increase of $30M in FY15 from the PB14 budget (zero’ed in years after that).

·         Army MQ-1 UAV Procurement funding decreased by $81M in FY14, $42M in FY15 and $98M in FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request. Funding increases by $45M in FY16 and $33M in FY17.

·         Army MQ-1 Payload – UAS Procurement funding has been zero’ed for FY15 and beyond but has been realigned to a new program ‘MQ-1 Payload (MIP)’ and funding continues.

·         Army RQ-11 Raven UAV RDT&E zero’ed in PB15 budget (PB14 budget had allotted ~3M per year for FY15-FY18) – Marine Corps funding continues.

·         Army RQ-11 RAVEN Procurement funding decreased by $29M in FY15 compared with the PB14 budget request and zero’ed for FY16 and beyond.

·         Army RQ-7 Shadow UAV RDT&E funding has been halved in FY15-FY18 relative to the PB14 budget.

·         Army RQ-7 UAV MODS Procurement decreased by $42M in FY15, $90M in FY16, $53M in FY17 and $93M in FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         Army Unmanned Ground Vehicle Procurement funding has been reinstated for FY16 and beyond after being zero’ed in the PB14 budget request. ($2.5M in FY16, $6M in each year FY17-FY19)

·         Army Robotic Combat Support System (RCSS) Procurement funding decreased by $31M in FY15, $11M in FY16, $8M in FY17 and $27M in FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         Army TACTICAL UNMANNED GROUND VEHICLE RDT&E – new funding line starting in PB15 growing from $7M in FY15 to $123M in FY19.

·         Army Air Defense Targets Procurement – funding noted for the first time in PB15 but is not a new start program.

Major Notes for PB15 – SOCOM

·         SOCOM MQ-1 Predator A UAV RDT&E has had funding zero’ed in FY15 and beyond (PB14 budget had allotted ~$3M per year for FY15-FY18) – Air Force funding continues.

·         SOCOM MQ-1 UAV Procurement – actual funding for FY14 was -$18M compared with the PB14 budget request and funding has been zero’ed for FY15 and beyond (PB14 had allotted ~$5M per year).

·         SOCOM MQ-9 UAV RDT&E funding increased by $12M in FY14, $7M in FY15 and $15M in FY16/FY17/FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         SOCOM MQ-9 UAV Procurement funding increased by $11M in FY14, $10M in FY15, $6M in FY16 / FY17 and $7M in FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         SOCOM STUAS Procurement funding decreased by $5M in FY14, $15M in FY15, $12M in FY16, $12M in FY17 and $13M in FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         SOCOM RQ-11 UAV Procurement funding increased by $5M in FY15, $6M in FY16, $9M in FY17 and $4M in FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         SOCOM RQ-11 UAV RDT&E – New funding line found in PB15.


 

Major Notes for PB15 – Navy

·         Navy RQ-4 UAV (Triton) RDT&E increase of ~$160M in both FY15/FY16 and $90M in FY17 in comparison with the PB14 budget.

·         Navy MQ-4 TRITON Procurement funding decreased by $510M in FY15 from the PB14 budget request.

·         Navy MQ-8 Fire Scout UAV Procurement funding decreased by $77M in FY15, $113M in FY16, $47M in FY17 and $48M in FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         Navy MQ-8 Series Procurement funding increase of $8M in FY15, $18M in FY16, $20M in FY17 and $10M in FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         Navy Mine/Obstacle Detection using UxVs PB15 RDT&E funding allocates $2M per year in FY15-FY19 after the line was zero’ed in PB14.

·         Navy UCAV RDT&E funding for FY15 increased from $0M in PB14 to $36M in PB15 (remains zero’ed in FY16-FY19).

·         Navy UCLASS RDT&E funding for FY15 decreased by $120M compared with the PB14 budget request; funding is slightly increased for FY16-FY18 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         Navy LCS MCM Mission Modules Procurement funding decrease of $170M in FY15 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         Navy UAS Payloads RDT&E – new funding line for PB15 with $2M per year for FY15-FY19.

·         Navy Remote MineHunting System (RMS) new lines for Procurement and RDT&E in PB15 (was integrated into a line with SMCM in PB14) – funding continues.

·         Navy Aerial Targets/ASW Targets Procurement – noted for the first time in PB15 though they are not new program starts.

Major Notes for PB15 – Marine Corps

·         Marine Corps RQ-21 UAS Procurement funding increased by $60M in FY15 compared with the PB14 budget request.

·         Marine Corps RQ-11 UAV Procurement funding (actual) increased by $3M in FY14 and remains the same for FY15 and beyond compared with the PB14 budget request.

 

 

0 comments
932 views

Permalink