Military Review

American portal called the most expensive unrealized projects of the Pentagon

65
The Business Insider portal has compiled a list of the most expensive and subsequently abandoned Pentagon military projects in the 2000s.




“In the 2000s, the Pentagon spent 51,2 billion dollars on 15 major programs that were never completed. One of the main reasons that the projects were abandoned was a shortage of funds due to the sequestration of the military budget, the newspaper writes, citing a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies of the United States, Look.

The project of the future combat systems for the ground forces turned out to be the most expensive. These “systems were developed as part of a program for the production of ground combat vehicles, which was also collapsed. The costs for them amounted to 18,2 billion dollars, ”the resource notes.

In second place, analysts put the "project of a multi-purpose reconnaissance and attack helicopter RAH-66" Comanche "(Comanche)". $ 7,9 billion was invested here.

The XM2001 Crusader self-propelled howitzer, which has not been fully developed, cost the budget $ 2.2 billion.

The most expensive unrealized project for the US Air Force was the program to create an onboard laser system. 5,2 billion was spent on it. The program was canceled without a certain replacement.

Also, "the space-based infrared system, designed for the early detection of a ballistic missile launch (1,5 billion dollars), and the national polar-orbiting system of environmental control satellites (5,8 billion dollars) were curtailed, the newspaper writes.

The marines, in turn, did not wait for the new expeditionary infantry fighting vehicle, the development of which took $ 3,7 billion.

“With regard to canceled and deferred programs for the US Navy, they were an improved submarine delivery system for special operations forces (0,6 billion dollars) and a project to create the next generation cruiser CG (X) worth 0,2 billion dollars.” - concludes the edition.
Photos used:
weaponscollection.com
65 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. RuslanNN
    RuslanNN 1 February 2016 15: 23
    37
    This is not a child’s cut. Taburetkin nervously smokes on the sidelines.
    1. cniza
      cniza 1 February 2016 15: 28
      +5
      Quote: RuslanNN
      This is not a child’s cut. Taburetkin nervously smokes on the sidelines.



      They depend only on the efficiency of the machine for printing money ... print and drink.
    2. KAV
      KAV 1 February 2016 15: 28
      +6
      Hey! Wait! But what about the previous articles about the imminent appearance of a mega-super-trooper laser weapon ??? Well, that’s not fair ...
      The most expensive unrealized project for the US Air Force was the program to create an onboard laser system. 5,2 billion was spent on it. The program was canceled without a certain replacement.
    3. Cherdak
      Cherdak 1 February 2016 15: 31
      +7
      Quote: RuslanNN
      This is not a child’s cut.

      The Pentagon peppers should have hinted that Hollywood would have spent those 50 yards with greater benefit for the warriors ... but with a profit
    4. Voha_krim
      Voha_krim 1 February 2016 15: 43
      +4
      Quote: RuslanNN
      This is not a child’s cut.

      Earlier, American Thinker reported that the development of the F-35 fighter, on which the United States had high hopes, is unlikely to ever succeed, given the serious shortcomings.
      On January 7, the F-35 was included in the rating of the most unsuccessful fighters, compiled by the military-political publication The National Interest.
    5. Corsair
      Corsair 1 February 2016 15: 55
      12
      Quote: RuslanNN
      This is not a child’s cut. Taburetkin nervously smokes on the sidelines.

      But Chubais and our other oligarchs normally compensate for everything, not very far behind the foreign colleagues.
    6. rpek32
      rpek32 1 February 2016 16: 04
      +8
      Comanche looks great
    7. GSH-18
      GSH-18 1 February 2016 16: 29
      +1
      Well, what do you do? Salvage defeats evil! lol Rather, the lack of dough.
    8. Hon
      Hon 1 February 2016 17: 15
      +7
      These are the necessary costs of production, when you develop something new, you need to try, study design, make concepts. we have many projects that have not been implemented, money has been spent on everything, but they have remained projects. Before the armata tank, there were many similar projects that were conducted by various organizations, all of them were closed, but the experience gained was useful
      1. shuhartred
        shuhartred 1 February 2016 17: 44
        0
        Quote: Hon
        These are the necessary costs of production, when you develop something new, you need to try, study design, make concepts. we have many projects that have not been implemented, money has been spent on everything, but they have remained projects.

        By the way, it’s not a fact that they will remain. You never know what! And we have a ready-made project. If only they wouldn’t let them on cigarettes !!!!
  2. avvg
    avvg 1 February 2016 15: 23
    +8
    The American portal called the most incredible "cut" of the US military budget.
    1. kil 31
      kil 31 1 February 2016 15: 34
      +4
      Well it is in all countries of the world. Something is brought to mind, something does not work, somewhere there is no possibility in industrial volumes in some cases, and in truth funding is reduced. As for the amounts, well, this is their currency, for them 1 yard, as for us 1 lemon bucks. I did not see anything new from the article.
    2. Cherdak
      Cherdak 1 February 2016 15: 48
      +1
      Quote: avvg
      the most incredible "cuts" of the US military budget.


      They forgot this one: Projects of the flying aircraft carrier Boeing 747 AAC and the Boeing 985 Micro Fighter. USA - see http://alternathistory.com/proekty-letayushchego-avianostsa-boeing-747-aac-i-bor
      tovogo-istrebitelya-boeing-985-micro-fighter-ss? mini = calendar% 252F2015-12 #
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Cherdak
        Cherdak 1 February 2016 15: 53
        +3
        Quote: Cherdak
        Boeing

        There are generally big-headed lads - they will master any budgets ... and ask for more
  3. Vasya_Piterskiy
    Vasya_Piterskiy 1 February 2016 15: 23
    +5
    They cut the main thing ... They also talk about our corruption. laughing
    1. kil 31
      kil 31 1 February 2016 15: 49
      +1
      Quote: Vasya_Piterskiy
      They cut the main thing ... They also talk about our corruption. laughing

      For example, they recently revealed a new secret development. There are hunters on the site, the question is how much does the cheapest gun in the store and ammunition with a shot cost? I am sure that mnooooogo times less than their gun. I like English and American scientists and inventors.
      In the United States, a special device has been developed to counter drones and other unmanned aerial vehicles.
      According to the Mashable portal, the device weighs about 4,5 kg. The gun can “shoot” at a distance of up to 400 meters and uses radio frequencies reserved for industrial, scientific, medical devices and GPS signals. A new weapon for fighting drones is called DroneDefender. According to manufacturers, the main goal of the device was the increasing incidence of illegal surveillance and industrial espionage using drones.
      1. kil 31
        kil 31 1 February 2016 16: 25
        0
        http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2016/855/mlre758.jpg
    2. Hon
      Hon 1 February 2016 17: 19
      +3
      Quote: Vasya_Piterskiy
      They cut the main thing ... They also talk about our corruption.

      this is not corruption, this is work. for comparison, two of our examples, the Mi-12 helicopter and the "Lun" and "Eaglet" ekranoplanes are developed, embodied in hardware, the projects are closed
      1. shuhartred
        shuhartred 1 February 2016 17: 48
        0
        Quote: Hon
        this is not corruption, this is work. for comparison, two of our examples, the Mi-12 helicopter and the "Lun" and "Eaglet" ekranoplanes are developed, embodied in hardware, the projects are closed

        Mi-12 did not show what they wanted. And the ekranoplans were adopted and launched into the series, then what happened to them later had nothing to do with the flaws of the technology.
        1. Hon
          Hon 1 February 2016 20: 50
          0
          [img]http://resize.yandex.net/23e32884275f3f62e236d9d70cfa65d9?key=468ec24128aca
          f0fb916430aaf27cd7a&url=http://www.funlib.ru/cimg/2014/101608/2722060&width=640&
          height = 0 & typemap = png: png; *: jpg & crop = no & enlarge = 0 & use-cache-headers = yes [/ img]
          The project of the atomic tank. Developments that did not go into the series can be counted a lot. Money was allocated for everything
        2. clidon
          clidon 1 February 2016 22: 13
          0
          This is exactly the same. While the money was a river - it’s not a pity, but how to start calculating and it became clear that it was better to say goodbye to this project.
          And in the Yankees, the 90s were just held under the auspices - less iron - more development. As it came to incarnation, everything dubious went under the knife.
          1. Hon
            Hon 2 February 2016 08: 34
            0
            project of the 60s, and many such
  4. The black
    The black 1 February 2016 15: 25
    10
    Mdya .. so it turns out Serdyukov-just a small tweezer, compared with the American generals laughing
    1. Bulrumeb
      Bulrumeb 1 February 2016 15: 38
      +2
      Mdya .. so it turns out Serdyukov - just a small tweezer, compared with the American general laughing
      1. kepmor
        kepmor 1 February 2016 16: 09
        +2
        Yes, "it will be too small"!
        Where is the "poor minister" to the Americans!
        He even falls short of the "rusty Chub (ys) cabra" ...
  5. Limon1972
    Limon1972 1 February 2016 15: 25
    +6
    The machine prints, what problems .... It will be necessary for someone to squeeze out money, they will still print it.
  6. Great-grandfather of Zeus
    Great-grandfather of Zeus 1 February 2016 15: 25
    +4
    Bullshit from the pentagon will still think up super-pavers who aren’t even needed in FIG! Offhand I offer an underwater-based winged aircraft carrier
    1. RBLip
      RBLip 1 February 2016 15: 30
      10
      Quote: Great-grandfather of Zeus
      offhand I offer a winged aircraft carrier underwater

      Ha! surprised ...
      1. flSergius
        flSergius 1 February 2016 15: 40
        13
        RBLip beautiful but the joss wadden movie is cooler
    2. Cherdak
      Cherdak 1 February 2016 15: 34
      +2
      Quote: Great-grandfather of Zeus
      I offer a winged aircraft carrier underwater


      already tried ... rather weak

      And if without jokes, then see Submarine aircraft carriers at http://masterok.livejournal.com/814585.html

      ... The concept of an aircraft launched from a submarine is as old as naval aviation itself. On January 6, 1915, the completed Friedrichshafen hydroplane was lowered from the deck of the German U-12 submarine. In the autumn of 1917, the Brandenburg was already tested in Germany, already used for storage directly on board a diesel submarine.
  7. Pajamas
    Pajamas 1 February 2016 15: 27
    +2
    Well, thank God)) it is especially good that with the RAH-66 Comanche so.
  8. Michael67
    Michael67 1 February 2016 15: 28
    +2
    This information should be kept secret. :) And then our thieves will then blame, like: "And in the states vashsche lard rods!". Well done Americans. Keep it up!
    1. The black
      The black 1 February 2016 15: 32
      +2
      and Vasilieva poor fellow for a year under house arrest laughing because of some unfortunate millions ... am laughing
    2. clidon
      clidon 1 February 2016 22: 15
      0
      You confuse theft and design, for which the Pentagon did not spare or spare money (almost). However, it seems to me that they are doing this quite deliberately. Not so offensive for our punctures.
  9. Simon
    Simon 1 February 2016 15: 30
    0
    Apparently the Americans want to create their own super-weapon, so they create their crazy ideas. fool laughing
  10. Belarus
    Belarus 1 February 2016 15: 37
    +1
    I would call the most expensive project of the United States a project of world domination, as evidenced by the US national debt. Someone will say that Amer’s economy and all that, but all this is true, but this is not a project.
  11. flSergius
    flSergius 1 February 2016 15: 37
    0
    A couple of years ago, American military generals who are responsible for the lives of soldiers and not all were bought by Colt lobbyists, to at least partially get rid of the embarrassing M16, they scammed such a scam: they announced a fake tender for a new light machine gun, where Hekler-Koch was invited with a good HK416 auto rifle ( also cheated - sawed off a bayonet-knife and called it a new model, only now with a machine gun) and some kind of Asian noname company. Asians merged, and American soldiers got at least a couple of normal barrels (under the guise of RP) to platoon.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 1 February 2016 16: 15
      +2
      They, like, in the infantry in bulk M249 light machine gun.
      The Marines already have three per squad!
      Here is this:
      And you talked about?
      1. Kasym
        Kasym 1 February 2016 16: 50
        0
        Warrior, read bad reviews about the m249 for use in Afghanistan. They wrote that more often than not even one "store" did not have time to release. hi
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 1 February 2016 19: 11
          +2
          for flSergius:

          And, thanks, you're right, I looked in the English-language materials
          and figured it out. The Marines "went over" with the number of М249 -3 per squad.
          This amount of machine gun light is excessive. Causes chaos and loss
          battle control.
          In Israel, one light machine gun per squad.
          And the Marines adopted the M27 - a slightly redone HK416.
          Colt, in any case, lost the monopoly (fortunately!). Although the M-4 is not so bad
          as you see it. Izr. the paratroopers stubbornly do not want to abandon her,
          although the rest of the army has long been with Bulpap Tavor.
          Pictured is a marine in Afghanistan since M27, 2012.
          1. k_ply
            k_ply 2 February 2016 11: 42
            +1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            The Marines "went over" with the number of М249 -3 per squad.
            This amount of machine gun light is excessive. Causes chaos and loss
            battle control.
            In Israel, one light machine gun per squad.

            If without speculation, especially about "chaos and loss of control", and this is after 30 years of operation of the Minimi (М249) in the army.
            Let me remind you the structure, in the army infantry unit (9 people) - 2 M249, in the marines (13 people) - 3, i.e. on a machine gun for a fire group of 4 fighters (+ 40-mm grenade launcher). In addition, the standard USMC M16A2 / A4 rifles, in addition to the single one, have a fixed mode of 3 shots, the M27 has a fully automatic mode and a weighted barrel. The M27 was planned to replace the M249 only in 2 out of 3 fire groups of rifle squads, but it seems that the USMC generals cannot decide whether to prepare their marines to clean up small groups of "dushmans" in special conditions (mountains, n / a), or to a full-blooded war with a numerous enemy, as in Korea (including against the PLA) and Vietnam?
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 1 February 2016 19: 26
          0
          for Kasym:

          Yes, I also heard about the problems.
          At one time, I, nae ... with the Belgian MAG. And dreamed, cursing
          its weight and all kinds of jokes about a lighter and more reliable machine gun.
          But he did not find either the mini-MAG or the Negev ... sad
      2. flSergius
        flSergius 1 February 2016 18: 23
        0
        And you talked about?

        Read carefully - shoved an automatic rifle under the guise of a RP
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 1 February 2016 16: 37
      +1
      Hehehehe ... there was a wonderful sarcastic tale on the history of the American rifle Shooting Some Sacred Cows (http://mzmadmike.livejournal.com/74863.html). There was about H&K.
      In the free translation:
      Army: Colt, why don’t you want to give us what we want? So we go to Heckler und Koch! They promised us all this with a 12-inch barrel, a rocket-propelled grenade launcher and a weight of 5 pounds!
      Infantry: Boys, I'm so glad that we are returning to 7.62 mm by 2010. Well, or at worst, to 6.8 mm, which shaving after WWII came up with ...
      X&K: I weigh 25, as we do. 25 kilograms, me. Three charge grenade launcher, like a gun without a sight.
      Army: In 1960, we launched the SPIW program. 40 years have passed and now you call it OICW. Any other achievements?
      X&K: Me, me! Tafay us more money!
  12. Stinger
    Stinger 1 February 2016 15: 38
    0
    They know how to cut the budget. Where there Serdyukov with accomplices and even Chubais!
  13. izya top
    izya top 1 February 2016 15: 42
    +1
    yes that’s okay. what’s there with the unmanned trucks in Afghanistan? launched, no?
  14. Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 1 February 2016 15: 47
    0
    On the one hand, it is gratifying to read this, although they print their candy wrappers in large quantities, but they simply don’t like to spend money. On the other hand, it is clear that there will be as many successful projects for several unsuccessful ones, and they are abounding in the army with the latest achievements of science and technology. Hence the conclusion - to further strengthen the power of our army and navy.
  15. Mainbeam
    Mainbeam 1 February 2016 15: 52
    +3
    In the 2000s, the Pentagon spent 51,2 billion dollars on 15 major programs

    Could give each project more letters, and even pictures. I was interested to read about unrealized projects. There were entire articles about some of them, but here a couple of paragraphs were not allocated. This article is minus for the superficial presentation of information in a sensational style - there is more cry than information.
  16. EvgNik
    EvgNik 1 February 2016 15: 58
    0
    Are you sorry? Let them spend their budget. Although, to put it simply, they spend our budget (Why? It's simple. Our economy depends on the West. They don’t talk about it, but it is. And a lot depends on us. Do not buy dollars. And you will be happy.)
  17. Foresterer
    Foresterer 1 February 2016 16: 06
    +1
    It does not matter to me who stole how much money in the USA, it is important for me and it makes me happy that all this does not fly, does not submerge and does not float, does not shoot and will not. This is not the first time that the Americans themselves admit that the F-35 is not at all what they hoped for, and one can only guess what other unpleasant surprises it will present to the Air Force of an "exceptional" country. I'm waiting for some intelligible commentary from foreign tourists, and not simple petty minuses. So none of them has ever documented how many and what exceptional solutions are implemented in this "the best aircraft".
  18. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 1 February 2016 16: 06
    +2
    "Ground combat vehicles of the future" turned right.
    Nothing "breakthrough" and interesting happened.

    And "Comanche" is a pity. Beautiful car...
    But Americans already have 3-4 types of combat helicopters:
    and Black Hawk, and Apache and others. There was no money for another.
    1. Cherdak
      Cherdak 1 February 2016 16: 11
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      And "Comanche" is a pity. Beautiful car...


      Anything will remain. But the idea is not bad for the GRU, for example, but slightly.

    2. Your friend
      Your friend 1 February 2016 16: 18
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      "Ground combat vehicles of the future" turned right.
      Nothing "breakthrough" and interesting happened.

      And "Comanche" is a pity. Beautiful car...
      But Americans already have 3-4 types of combat helicopters:
      and Black Hawk, and Apache and others. There was no money for another.

      The Comanche program seems to have been replaced by a combat "reconnaissance helicopter" program.
      And "Ground combat vehicles of the future" were replaced by "ground combat vehicles".
    3. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 1 February 2016 17: 03
      0
      Comanche revised in favor of a high-speed helicopter, most likely. And technology will disperse into current models.
    4. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 1 February 2016 17: 03
      0
      Comanche revised in favor of a high-speed helicopter, most likely. And technology will disperse into current models.
      1. VP
        VP 1 February 2016 17: 20
        0
        Well, not a fact. When ordering F-35, it was believed that the project would greatly reduce the cost of experience and developments from F-22.
        Yeah, shchazz, we found fools to reduce the price of prices))
  19. spech
    spech 1 February 2016 16: 13
    0
    "Pentagon Wars" movie theme
  20. spech
    spech 1 February 2016 16: 21
    0
    The most expensive unrealized project for the US Air Force was the program to create an onboard laser system. 5,2 billion was spent on it. The program was canceled without a certain replacement.
    The project of the future combat systems for the ground forces turned out to be the most expensive. These “systems were developed as part of a program for the production of ground combat vehicles, which was also collapsed. The costs for them amounted to 18,2 billion dollars, ”the resource notes.

    Chet I do not understand so it is more expensive than 5,2 or 18,2 fellow
    Or did they implement "the project of the future combat systems for the ground forces"?
    1. Your friend
      Your friend 1 February 2016 16: 23
      +1
      Quote: spech
      The most expensive unrealized project for the US Air Force was the program to create an onboard laser system. 5,2 billion was spent on it. The program was canceled without a certain replacement.
      The project of the future combat systems for the ground forces turned out to be the most expensive. These “systems were developed as part of a program for the production of ground combat vehicles, which was also collapsed. The costs for them amounted to 18,2 billion dollars, ”the resource notes.

      Chet I do not understand so it is more expensive than 5,2 or 18,2 fellow

      5,2 most expensive for the US Air Force, 18,2 for the ground forces.)
  21. VVM
    VVM 1 February 2016 16: 37
    0
    Here I understand the level of corruption
    1. Tjeck
      Tjeck 1 February 2016 17: 32
      +1
      Percentage of ordinary corruption. It’s just that the amounts there are usually one or two zeros more and lobbying to legalize the very corruption. In other words, if our corrupt officials are thieves, then they have serious gangs there who turned corruption into a legitimate business.

      But you should not take an example from the worst. For example, the same Germans from the late 70s methodically began to break contracts with the United States after their joint development of the tank stupidly guzzled money for almost 10 years. Today, German weapons have almost completely replaced American models from Europe, only countries of the 3rd world still buy American equipment.
  22. The comment was deleted.
  23. 52
    52 1 February 2016 16: 49
    +1
    In the 2000s, the Pentagon spent $ 51,2 billion on 15 major programs that were never completed. - It's a gorgeous life! The author of the article is simply envious! And to be honest, this is the whole of Africa that can not only be fed, but also reduced to severe obesity. Not, I'm for the Stalin Strait!
  24. VP
    VP 1 February 2016 17: 16
    0
    Until the F-35 is adopted, it is also considered an unrealized project.
    And they still haven’t accepted him, despite the fact that more than a hundred have already released them.
  25. Warm Padded Jacket
    Warm Padded Jacket 1 February 2016 17: 31
    0
    they didn’t take such a thing, but did hell)))
  26. corporal
    corporal 1 February 2016 19: 16
    0
    I read the comments and am amazed. Corruption ... cut ... forgot to mention the word "rollback".
    1.- what a personal matter those who comment on corruption in the American military-industrial complex, after all, they still will not share with you, and not your money is being cut.
    2.- no one wondered what money was invested in the development of new technologies and the development of new technological processes? And the fact that they have not come in handy yet, there is certainly a reason for that.

    We can’t afford such amounts recourse , and they are easy.
    Thus, they have ready-made developments of what we are up to, like walking to the moon.
    This is what you need to think about.
  27. DMM2006
    DMM2006 1 February 2016 20: 04
    +1
    Quote: Vasya_Piterskiy
    They cut the main thing ... They also talk about our corruption.

    Well, what are you a colleague what can be cut in a "civilized" country. The money is officially allocated by the budget, the Pentagon holds a competition in which the most "respected" companies win naturally, these, in turn, are officially researched, designed, and built. And then again! and it turns out that the project has no ECONOMIC prospects and is also officially closed. EVERYTHING IS HONEST! The perfect example of the American business approach.
    And this is far from being only in the sphere of armaments, it concerns almost all the costly items of their budget.
    And then they are surprised like this: over the period of 91 years, in the conditions of the end of the Cold War, the external debt of the Tan increased almost 10 times! With 2 trillion. to 17,5.
  28. freerider
    freerider 1 February 2016 20: 40
    +1
    winked that would be all for shooting a couple of films about the warhammer 40000 ..
  29. Fearless
    Fearless 2 February 2016 05: 16
    0
    This is a budget to grab. I understand ours, if they would have left them in their underpants.