Follow us on social

POGO The Bunker

Army prematurely pushes Black Hawk replacement into production

This week in The Bunker: Plans to shortcut testing of new tiltrotor, decrepit U.S. military barracks on Guam, and more

Analysis | Military Industrial Complex

The Bunker appears originally at the Project on Government Oversight and is republished here with permission.

Cutting the Pentagon’s testing office is nuts

Pentagon weapons are pretty much perfect, which is why Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is slashing the Defense Department’s independent testing office in half.

Just kidding!

Sure, the Pentagon chief issued a memo (PDF) May 27 gutting the place. But unfortunately, with a kennelful of dogs like the multi-service F-35 fighter, the Navy’s Constellation-class frigate, the Marines’ V-22 tilt-rotor, and the Army’s hypersonic Dark Eagle drone, the Pentagon needs more oversight and rigorous testing, not less.

Hegseth said the move would save more than $300 million annually; the office had a $446 million budget (PDF) in fiscal year 2023. Talk about penny-wise and pound-foolish: The 94 employees in the Pentagon’s Office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (to be cut to 45) represent about 0.003% of the Defense Department’s roughly 3.3 million employees.

DOT&E is charged with overseeing the testing done by the military services, which tends to be performed with kid gloves. The Project On Government Oversight has been pushing for more thorough weapons testing even before DOT&E’s creation in 1983.

Hegseth has declared war on DEI, but it’s not like these uber-testers are pushing the diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts denounced by the administration (unless you’re talking about diversity of expertise when it comes to testing multi-billion-dollar weapons, taxpayer equity in what they’re buying, and including professionally skeptical outsiders to ensure the biggest bang for the buck).

DOT&E’s annual report is one of the few independent sources of information available on the arcane — but vital — topic. “Hegseth’s memo highlights a key misunderstanding — or rejection — of why Congress created an independent testing office in the first place,” Greg Williams, The Bunker’s boss here at the Project On Government Oversight, said. “The law tries to make sure weapons are evaluated outside the chain of command that develops and promotes them.”

Let’s face it: The Trump administration doesn’t like oversight, whether it’s from universities, law firms, or the press. Last week it challenged the century-old Government Accountability Office, whose solid reports have been a bracing tonic to Pentagon privilege for years.

What’s now unfolding before taxpayers’ green eyeshades is nothing less than internal accountability self-destruction.

Army prematurely pushes platform into production

The U.S. military is always racing to get ahead of … well, something that the fog of future war hides. But the Army is willing to cut corners to get the replacement for its UH-60 Black Hawk to the troops sooner rather than later, even if it means accepting greater risk that it won’t perform as promised.

Basically, the service wants to begin building its new aircraft before prototype flight tests are completed on its recently named MV-75 tiltrotor (previously known as the V-280, and the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft). Improved modeling, MV-75 backers say, will lead to prototypes that will closely match the final design. That means they won’t have to wait, cooling their rotors, for pesky test-pilot reports on what needs fixing before production begins. The Army incredibly predicts this will cut the MV-75’s testing schedule from the typical four to 10 years, to two.

We’ve seen this movie before. It doesn’t end well. Tilt-rotors — well, the Pentagon’s own V-22 (PDF) is the only model in production — are notoriously unreliable and, therefore, costly to maintain. Like the V-22, the Pentagon’s F-35 (PDF) is flown by three services — the Air Force, the Navy, and the Marines. It too has been plagued by cost overruns and delayed deliveries, due in no small part because the Pentagon rushed it into production.

The MV-75 program could end up costing $70 billion. Its accelerated fielding is already making the Army rethink its speed and range “requirements,” which are roughly double those of the Black Hawk. “Rather than pursue perfect, we are pursuing an aircraft that is close to being what we asked for,” Colonel Jeffrey Poquette, the MV-75 program manager says. The Army brass, he adds, would rather get the MV-75 sooner rather than “design yourself to death.”

Missile defense’s red flag on Guam

René Kladzyk here at the Project On Government Oversight had a grim story May 29 about lousy U.S. military barracks on the Pacific island of Guam. In fact, Navy Secretary John Phelan told POGO he was “appalled” and “very upset” after touring them on a recent visit. Alas, it’s only the tip of the iceberg for conditions on the U.S. territory. That’s also where the Pentagon is building an $8 billion missile shield to defend it and Guam’s extensive U.S. military assets against attacks from China and/or North Korea.

President Trump recently declared how good, fast, and cheap “The Golden (née Iron) Dome for America” continental aerial (i.e., more than mere missiles) shield will be. Two days later, the Government Accountability Office told a much different story about the much smaller Guam Defense System (GDS) — including its lack of decent housing. “Guam already faces a housing shortage for military personnel,” the GAO said. The U.S. military population there is projected to grow from 10,000 now to 20,000 in 2033. “GDS planners have expressed doubts about their ability to build housing on time.”

Beyond housing, the watchdog agency tallied a list of what’s missing from Guam to support the personnel who will be needed to tend to its expanded missile-defense system. They range from schools, to medical facilities, to commissaries, to drinking water. In fact, the U.S. is having trouble maintaining the simple missile defense shield currently in place. The Army had to scramble to secure its launchers and radars from a 2023 typhoon, and is leaving “spare parts unprotected outside” leading to “corrosion of spare parts.”

The GAO interviewed Pentagon officials about Guam’s missile defense before Trump unveiled his Golden Dome initiative. They said Guam’s modest missile defense system “will be the department’s largest and most complicated, presenting communication and planning challenges among the various DOD stakeholders.”

They ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

Here’s what has caught The Bunker’s eye recently

Military-industrial-complexity costs

The price of maintaining military aircraft is likely to spike as the world’s air forces buy ever more complicated warplanes, Defense News’ Stephen Losey reported May 23.

→ “Get rid of all the endless, useless crap

Small-to-medium companies remain leery of doing business with the Defense Department despite years of effort and legislation designed to expand its industrial base, John A. Tirpak reported May 26 in Air & Space Forces Magazine.

Stop the press!

Jamie McIntyre, CNN’s Pentagon correspondent from 1992 to 2008, wrote May 30 of the war now underway between the Pentagon and the reporters who cover it for the Washington Examiner, where he is now a columnist.

Once again, The Bunker is taking next week off. We’ll be back June 18. Kindly consider forwarding this on to colleagues so they can subscribe here.



Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight
Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
US Marines
Top image credit: U.S. Marines with Force Reconnaissance Platoon, Maritime Raid Force, 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, prepare to clear a room during a limited scale raid exercise at Sam Hill Airfield, Queensland, Australia, June 21, 2025. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Alora Finigan)

Cartels are bad but they're not 'terrorists.' This is mission creep.

Military Industrial Complex

There is a dangerous pattern on display by the Trump administration. The president and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth seem to hold the threat and use of military force as their go-to method of solving America’s problems and asserting state power.

The president’s reported authorization for the Pentagon to use U.S. military warfighting capacity to combat drug cartels — a domain that should remain within the realm of law enforcement — represents a significant escalation. This presents a concerning evolution and has serious implications for civil liberties — especially given the administration’s parallel moves with the deployment of troops to the southern border, the use of federal forces to quell protests in California, and the recent deployment of armed National Guard to the streets of our nation’s capital.

keep readingShow less
Howard Lutnick
Top photo credit: Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on CNBC, 8/26/25 (CNBC screengrab)

Is nationalizing the defense industry such a bad idea?

Military Industrial Complex

The U.S. arms industry is highly consolidated, specialized, and dependent on government contracts. Indeed, the largest U.S. military contractors are already effectively extensions of the state — and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is right to point that out.

His suggestion in a recent media appearance to partially nationalize the likes of Lockheed Martin is hardly novel. The economist John Kenneth Galbraith argued for the nationalization of the largest military contractors in 1969. More recently, various academics and policy analysts have advocated for partial or full nationalization of military firms in publications including The Nation, The American Conservative, The Middle East Research and Information Project (MERIP), and The Seattle Journal for Social Justice.

keep readingShow less
Modi Trump
Top image credit: White House, February 2025

Trump's India problem could become a Global South crisis

Asia-Pacific

As President Trump’s second term kicked off, all signs pointed to a continued upswing in U.S.-India relations. At a White House press conference in February, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke of his vision to “Make India Great Again” and how the United States under Trump would play a central role. “When it’s MAGA plus MIGA, it becomes a mega partnership for prosperity,” Modi said.

During Trump’s first term, the two populist leaders hosted rallies for each other in their respective countries and cultivated close personal ties. Aside from the Trump-Modi bromance, U.S.-Indian relations have been on a positive trajectory for over two decades, driven in part by mutual suspicion of China. But six months into his second term, Trump has taken several actions that have led to a dramatic downturn in U.S.-India relations, with India-China relations suddenly on the rise.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.