Dear Valued Visitor,

We have noticed that you are using an ad blocker software.

Although advertisements on the web pages may degrade your experience, our business certainly depends on them and we can only keep providing you high-quality research based articles as long as we can display ads on our pages.

To view this article, you can disable your ad blocker and refresh this page or simply login.

We only allow registered users to use ad blockers. You can sign up for free by clicking here or you can login if you are already a member.

General Dynamics Corporation (GD), Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc (HII): Will Sequestration Sink The Aegis Destroyer?

Page 1 of 2

General Dynamics logoSequestration’s in full swing, and it’s putting a kink in the Navy’s ship-buying plans. Before sequestration took effect, the Navy signed a multi-year procurement contract, which saved money by buying ships in bulk. Now, however, the defense budget has been cut, and that contract’s in jeopardy. This is bad news for defense contractors on the DDG 51 Aegis Destroyer contract and could also be bad news for investors. Here’s what you need to know.

General Dynamics Corporation (GD), Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc (HII): Will Sequestration Sink The Aegis Destroyer?

U.S. Navy photo by Paul Farley. Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

Who builds what
Both General Dynamics Corporation (NYSE:GD)‘ Bath Iron Works shipbuilding company and Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc (NYSE:HII)‘ Ingalls Shipbuilding build the DDG 51 Aegis Destroyer, with the Navy typically buying ships from each builder.

In a move to save money, the Navy signed a 30-year shipbuilding plan that saw the purchase of 10 Aegis Destroyers for the price of nine. It also increased the Navy’s shipbuilding budget from $15 billion to almost $19 billion annually. Now, Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, has expressed grave concerns about funding the 30-year plan and has asked the Navy for “a scintilla of evidence” that it can be done.

One of the reasons the Navy’s costs are so astronomical is that the service also has to replace the Ohio, a nuclear-capable submarine dating to the 1980s. Adm. Jonathan Greenert, chief of Naval operations, has stated, “People ask me what is my No. 1 program of concern, and I will tell you it’s the Ohio replacement program.” Not only is the Ohio outdated, but the replacement program will also provide 70% of the United States’ nuclear deterrent capabilities.

With the price of the new subs and the need for new ships, the Navy is seeing its costs escalating, which of course conflicts with the 10-year, $500 billion cut to defense spending under sequestration .

Page 1 of 2
Loading Comments...