Pentagon Keeps Weapons Production Answers Under Wraps
Posted By
Common Defense
On
In National Security, News |
No Comments
Twenty six days after the Pentagon’s deadline for weapons manufacturers to propose faster production schedules, the War Department had not publicly revealed how many companies responded.
Officials also had not disclosed what delivery timelines the companies offered.
Deputy War Secretary Steve Feinberg gave industry leaders until Aug. 26 to submit plans for “significantly faster, more aggressive delivery schedules and/or increased production for critical capabilities,” according to an Aug. 5 memo.
Feinberg instructed companies to identify methods for accelerating production and delivery. He also requested proposals for capital investments and facility expansions, along with explanations of how the Pentagon could help enable higher output.
The memo listed 16 critical programs being considered for accelerated production or increased procurement.
The industry responses were intended to help shape the department’s fiscal 2028 budget request.
The request followed pressure on American stocks of air defense interceptors and other precision munitions caused by the use of U.S. weapons during the Iran war.
The strain was particularly visible in Patriot and THAAD inventories.
U.S. stocks of Patriot interceptors fell from approximately 2,330 before the war to between 759 and 827 by the end of July, according to an analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. THAAD stocks dropped from 452 to between 234 and 278.
CSIS estimated that production timelines were approximately 42 months for PAC-3 MSE interceptors and 53 months for THAAD interceptors.
Those timelines provided a stark backdrop for the Pentagon’s push to obtain faster schedules from contractors.
Image Credit: DoW
A U.S. soldier patrols the perimeter of a THAAD system on Mar. 19, 2023, during a South Korea-based training exercise. (Spc. Gregory Menke/U.S. Army)
The Pentagon did not answer questions about how many companies responded to Feinberg’s request. It also did not say whether the department had accepted or funded any proposals submitted through the initiative.
General Dynamics declined to discuss its communications with the department. “We are not able to comment on our communications with the Department of War,” a General Dynamics spokesman said.
Lockheed Martin, a major supplier of U.S. missile defense systems, did not offer Military Times a specific production timeline.
“We continue to have dialogue with the U.S. government to deliver what the department is asking of us and our team is pushing to do even more, faster,” a Lockheed Martin spokesman said.
“We’re making significant investments in our workforce, infrastructure and production capacity and working with key suppliers to accelerate delivery of the critical capabilities that strengthen America’s Arsenal of Freedom.”
Image Credit: DoW
The Army is creating a new job for soldiers that will both operate and repair its Patriot and THAAD missile defense systems. Army photo by Sgt. David Poleski.
Lockheed separately announced Thursday that it received its first PAC-3 MSE housing components from GM Defense, only 22 days after the companies signed a production contract.
Lockheed said components that traditionally can take months or years to produce were manufactured using GM’s casting and machining capabilities.
The company said it is investing between $8 billion and $9 billion to expand munitions production.
The effort includes new buildings, facility expansions and thousands of jobs across more than 20 U.S. sites, with planned expansions increasing munitions production and warehousing space by nearly 50%.
Lockheed did not say whether those investments were submitted in response to Feinberg’s Aug. 5 request.
Image Credit: DoW
A THAAD interceptor is launched from the Reagan Test Site, Kwajalein Atoll in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, during Flight Test THAAD-23, August 2019. (U.S. Missile Defense Agency)
Meanwhile, the Pentagon had already been using framework agreements and contracts to accelerate production before the Aug. 26 industry deadline.
On July 27, the department announced seven year framework agreements aimed at increasing production of propulsion components for PAC-3 MSE and THAAD interceptors.
L3Harris said its PAC-3 agreement would nearly triple production of certain propulsion products, while the THAAD agreement was intended to quadruple production of key propulsion components.
On Aug. 3, the War Department, working with Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin, announced two framework agreements to expand production capacity for critical PAC-3 and THAAD components.
The agreements supported department goals of tripling PAC-3 production capacity and quadrupling THAAD production capacity.
The DoW announced separate framework agreements with Boeing and RTX on Aug. 14 to increase component production for SM-3 Block IB and SM-3 Block IIA interceptors.
Image Credit: Lockheed Martin
The Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system. (Lockheed Martin)
Three days later, the Pentagon announced a $22.9 billion Navy contract with RTX to accelerate Tomahawk missile production.
On Aug. 31, five days after the industry deadline, the Pentagon announced additional seven year multiyear procurement agreements with Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics.
Those agreements were designed to increase production quantities and speed delivery of critical missile subcomponents supporting PAC-3 MSE and THAAD.
The Pentagon separately set goals of tripling PAC-3 MSE production capacity and quadrupling THAAD production capacity, subject to annual congressional appropriations.
Public announcements did not identify any agreements as resulting from company responses to Feinberg’s Aug. 5 request.
The unanswered questions remain substantial: whether the 21 day exercise changed the Pentagon’s purchasing plans, how quickly officials expect industry to deliver weapons, and what additional funding or infrastructure the department will seek in its fiscal 2028 budget request.
