 How is the Sequester Affecting US Army Modernisation Plans?
In the wake of forced budget cuts by US Congress, DoD announces its plans and the industry feels the pinch
 |
| Members of Congress and staffers got a first-hand chance to examine weapons and have one-on-one discussions with Soldiers during Army Day, April 25, 2013. Here, congressional staffer Sarah Rogers handles a weapon as Major Kralyn Thomas, with the Army’s Program Executive Office Soldier, explains its capabilities. Photo Credit ©: Lisa Ferdinando, ARNEWS. |
Back in February of 2013 when the realities of the Sequester were first coming to light, Lt. Gen. James Barclay, deputy chief of staff, G-8, for the Army had this to say about how the mandatory budget cuts could affect the US Army’s modernisation plans over the next decade. “Sequestration, of course, isn’t just a one-year deal. After fiscal 2013, the Pentagon will have to continue spreading that $500 billion reduction to planned spending over nine more years. But while the fiscal 2013 cuts are simply a 9 percent “salami slice” to every account across the board, the services will control where they put their money in future years.”
Those words were delivered at the AUSA Winter Conference held in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Speaking on the last day of the conference to a very interested audience of contractors and industry heavy hitters, Barclay added that in order to deal effectively with the cuts, that could be as much as 18 to 20 billion dollars, the Army would have to, “… extend the timelines on our modernisation programs. We’re also looking at incremental changes in different variants, and staggering our modernisation efforts over a longer period of time.”
Some specifics the Lt. General mentioned in order to meet the new financial realties were, “The CH-47 [Boeing’s tandem engine legacy helicopter] will be pushed back a couple years, the Apache fleet is going to be extended by three to five years and the Black Hawk fleet is going to be extended by three to five years.”
However, extending modernisation programs really is only a Band-Aid type fix, that in the long run will increase the costs of these programs, since pushing them back will cause the Army to incur penalties in renegotiating contracts with key industry partners.
That Was Then, This is Now
That was the scenario Barclay painted back in February in the early days of the Sequester. Flash forward a few months to April, and let’s take another look. April 25th, 2013 to be exact, or “Army Day” as it is known on Capitol Hill.
Army Day, gives the US Army its best opportunity to showcase its latest technology and medical advances to members of Congress, to highlight the importance of funding for modernisation, and R&D efforts to “better equip, protect and care for soldiers.” It’s like a military trade show on steroids where members of congress get to have a literal “Field Day,” handling weapons, looking through night vision goggles and thermal imaging displays, trying on body armor, and really getting a hands-on experience with the latest in warfighter tech.
“A lot of the issues going on right now are with sequestration and funding, and it’s easy to just see that as numbers on paper,” said Congressional staffer, John Witherspoon, who was among the hundreds of lawmakers who got to speak with soldiers and handle their gear. “But once you get out here you can see what that money is going toward, and why it’s so important. It’s always a great opportunity when you are able to do that,” Witherspoon added.
Brig. Gen. Paul A. Ostrowski, with PEO Soldier, couldn’t agree more. “[Army Day is] an opportunity to educate the staffs as to what it is that their Army is doing – not only doing today, but what we’re going to do in the future – that runs the research and development lines, the science and technology lines, and in our procurement lines. The better we educate them, and the better that they are able to identify and understand the technology and the equipment that we are providing, the better off they are at making their decisions into whether to fund our Army.”
Lt. Col. Ed Ash, a budget liaison officer, said Army Day presents a great opportunity to demonstrate for Congress the importance of soldier modernisation.
“It makes it much easier to explain why something is important,” he said, using the example of heavy body armor. “They saw just for a little while how uncomfortable it was to wear something that was too heavy, and this is why we think it’s worthwhile to spend the money to make more effective soldiers by not having to carry heavy stuff.”
One of the other key aspects of Army Day is demonstrating advancements in combat medicine. “Thanks to the support of Congress, we have the lowest death rate from injuries at any time in history,” said Col. Dallas Hack, director of the Army’s Combat Casualty Care Research Program with the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command. “We’re able to do things to make people more resilient, we’re able to know when they’re having things like a brain injury, and we’re even able to do things that were unheard of 10 years ago to take care of our troops out there.”
outlined for visiting lawmakers the broad spectrum of advanced military medicine, not only improvements in treating battlefield trauma, but care for brain injuries and psychological health, to advances in prosthetic limbs that have allowed soldiers to remain on active duty, and even return to combat. Hack was also sure to point out to members of congress the “tactical to practical” aspects of combat medicine. He said that advances from the battle field always find their ways into civilian ERs. This was most recently evidenced with the excellent trauma care provided to victims of the Boston Marathon bombings.
“Thanks again to the support of Congress in helping us do these things,” Hack said, “not only are we saving lives in the battlefield, we’re now saving lives in the whole emergency system as well.”
Still, while events such as Army Day can help clarify to Congress the need to maintain funding of Modernisation Programs, the Army is still feeling the pinch of Sequester. According to The Army News Service, Lt. Gen. Barclay testifying before the Senate as recently as May 7th, said “[The Army] has had to carry out its three-year modernisation plan with less money than it expected due to sequestration.” Barclay said, “Fiscal realities endanger the progress we have made in equipping,” but he also related to Lawmakers that he still believed that the Army is “the best equipped and modernised it ever has been.” |
