NICKO WEST: Good afternoon. I'm Lieutenant Nicko West, the public affairs officer for the Department of the Navy's fiscal year 2027 presidential budget request. I would like to introduce the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Budget, Rear Admiral Ben Reynolds, who will brief the Department of the Navy's submission for FY '27.NICKO WEST: Good afternoon. I'm Lieutenant Nicko West, the public affairs officer for the Department of the Navy's fiscal year 2027 presidential budget request. I would like to introduce the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Budget, Rear Admiral Ben Reynolds, who will brief the Department of the Navy's submission for FY '27.

Following the brief, I will open it up for questions as time permits. All responses will be on the record. Questions should focus specifically on the Department of the Navy's FY '27 budget request. We will hold all questions until after the briefing. Each reporter will be permitted one question before we move to the next. Additional follow up questions will be allowed if time permits. Should we be unable to address all questions, please inform us and we'll staff them appropriately to provide you with a response. Thank you guys all for being here.

Sir, over to you.

BEN REYNOLDS: Thanks, Nicko. Good morning. The Navy's FY '27 budget request answers our nation's call to action: move faster, build smarter, and deliver capability now. This is a strategy driven budget focused on outcomes and decisive resourcing of the Golden Fleet Initiative.

On the left, we are strengthening our shipbuilding and maritime industrial base. To build the fleet of the future, we must first build the foundry. This budget makes a generational investment to rebuild our nation's industrial might. This is a massive multi-decade undertaking, and this budget makes the down payment by authorizing the procurement of 34 ships, including investments in the battleship and frigate, for a more capable, adaptable and lethal force.

In the center, we're investing in a larger, more survivable high/low mix of forces capable of hedging against risks in all domains. To best execute this budget, we are changing the way we do business. And I think you'll hear that as a recurring theme as I go through this, changing the way we do business.

To ensure we maximize return on our taxpayer investment, we are empowering portfolio acquisition executives, establishing the Rapid Capability Office, and accelerating and adding discipline to our requirements process.

Finally, we're investing in the foundation of our readiness, our people. Our sailors and Marines are the ultimate asymmetric advantage, the combat ready heart of the force. This budget invests in compensation, barracks and other quality of life initiatives while funding the advanced training needed to create the world's most capable warfighters.

These priorities ensure the Department of the Navy is building the force required to defend our nation and secure our interests across the globe. Next slide, please?

We are a maritime nation, and a maritime nation needs the strongest navy in the world. The department delivers homeland defense, global stability and deterrence and national prosperity. Our fleet consists today of 291 battle force ships, with over a third of them, 104 ships, currently deployed. Our presence is truly global.

Right now, the Gerald R Ford and Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Groups are actively supporting Operation Epic Fury. Ford's strike group, including DDGs like Winston Churchill and Mahan and others, have been deployed continuously for well over ten months.

Beyond this operation, our Navy and Marine Corps is operating around the globe today. In the Indo-Pacific today, you'll find USS Boxer ARG MEU and the George Washington Carrier Strike Group, among many others. Ships and aircraft continue to operate in the Atlantic and the Mediterranean. And then you have ships, USS Lake Erie, USS San Antonio and others are deployed to Operation Southern Spear.

Again, what the Navy and Marine Corps uniquely brings to the fight is this, the ability to project and sustain American power from the sea to anywhere in the world at a time and a place of our choosing. This is our differentiated value, and it is indispensable to our national security. Next slide?

The Department of the Navy is changing the way we do business to enhance our strategic advantage and maximize the value of every taxpayer dollar. First, we are establishing a -- single accountable portfolio acquisition executives to speed up delivery of critical capabilities. At the same time, we're restoring discipline and stability in shipbuilding through a disciplined requirements process, smarter contracts using new AI tools, and ensuring predictable, on-time delivery.

Through the Navy Rapid Capabilities Office, we are innovating faster. We are also leveraging private capital, creating new pathways to engage the private sector and improve efficiency for our most critical missions. You know, a good example of this is -- is our partnership with Hadrian in Alabama, so as we're -- where we are investing in rapid outcomes to improve accountability. Hadrian put in $1 billion of their own money before we even start to put in our own -- of their own private capital before we even put it on our own money into that.

Our government -- our government funding follows that, and this is a step change in how we share risk, demand results and build the ships we need at the speed of relevance. Underpinning these efforts is a strong commitment to fiscal discipline. The Marine Corps has achieved a clean audit for the third year in a row, a military first -- military first, second and third.

We are -- we are on track for a Navy working capital fund opinion this year, this is in '26, and Navy general fund opinion in -- in -- in 2028. That's -- those are huge accomplishments. As Secretary Phelan said, we cannot credibly project strength abroad while ignoring fiscal sanity at home. Next slide?

This is my favorite slide, the budget slide. Department of the Navy's FY '27 budget request is an historic $377.5 billion. That's a strategic investment. It represents a 23 percent increase over previous years that signals a clear commitment to modernization, a ready force and our warfighters.

The single largest portion of this budget, $150 billion, is dedicated to procurement. This is a 43 percent increase from FY '26. This is money that builds the future fleet. It funds 34 ships and 123 aircraft, directly translating dollars into the platforms and systems that will guarantee our maritime dominance for decades to come. The budget allocates a significant $36 billion for research and development to maintain our technological edge over our adversary.

And then -- but it's important to note that this budget does not make tradeoffs, as you heard in the previous brief, between capacity and modernization on one hand and then infrastructure, readiness and our -- and our people. $111 billion for operations and maintenance focuses on core readiness. This funding keeps our ships steaming, our aircraft flying, and our forces supplied. It pays for fuel, parts and the essential training required to ensure that, when the call comes, we are ready to answer it instantly.

70.1 billion for military personnel directly improves the quality of life for our sailors and Marines through better pay, compensation and benefits. An additional $10 billion is dedicated to military construction to build our bases and shore infrastructure. In summary, the FY '27 budget is a decisive pivot towards building a larger, more capable and more lethal force while reinforcing our commitment to our near-term readiness and the well-being of our warfighters and their families. Next slide, please?

So, the next two slides, you'll see I'm going to lay out the fleet of the future with three pillars. And you've heard SECNAV -- probably secretary of Navy and CNO talk about these, this maintain and enhance maritime dominance, revitalize America's shipbuilding industrial base and change how we do business.

FY '27 revitalizes the industrial base with a generational investment in shipbuilding. $65.8 billion procures 18 battle force ships and 16 non-battle force ships for an historic 34 ship total. We fund $837 million in R&D and $1 billion in advanced procurement in FY '27 for our lead battleship, USS Defiant. That's in FY '28.

This is the most capable platform that will deliver overwhelming combat power. It is a lethal, survivable response to the future fight, designed to lead the surface action battle groups, deliver long range fires and anchor the most capable fleet in our history. We buy the lead frigate in FY '27.

Built upon the Coast Guard Legend class national security cutter with only minimal changes, it will deliver DD -- it will relieve DDG of lower priority tasking and act as a tactical quarterback for unmanned surface and undersea systems as part of this high/low mix that I talked about.

Navy continues to invest in our undersea advantage. In FY '27, we expect to award the fourth and fifth Block VI Virginia class submarines. FY '27 fully funds the fourth Columbia and provides advanced procurement for eight future ships. These SSBNs will be the survivable leg of the -- of our nation's deterrence triad, carrying the vast majority of the nation's nuclear warheads into the 2080s.

Turning to the amphibious portfolio, we will procure one LPD and one LHA in FY '27 to maneuver and sustain our expeditionary forces. Nuclear aircraft carriers provide our joint force with unmatched sustained high-end sea control and worldwide power projection. We continue to fund CVN 80 and 81 and the advanced procurement of our next carrier, CVN 82, in FY '27. Next slide?

A global navy demands support ships to maintain our worldwide naval presence. $11.1 billion procures a total of 16 non-battle force ships, which are the lifeline that sustains our global naval operations. Additionally, it's critical to highlight that the procurement of this -- of the support fleet expands our nation's industrial base. You know, support ships are built by a wider range of shipbuilders, providing the stable workload to sustain and grow our national shipbuilding ecosystem.

Revitalizing America's maritime industrial base is a nationwide effort. Spanning -- spanning 130,000 companies across 50 states, this will require 250,000 new workers over the next decade as well as modernizing infrastructure, strengthening suppliers and accelerating advanced manufacturing. To meet the demand of our FY '27 budget, invest $3.2 billion in nuclear shipbuilder capabilities, $2.5 billion directly in the submarine industrial base, and 1.3 billion for our surface ship industrial base.

Additionally, for our organic -- for organic shipyards, in FY '27 we invest -- we invest $1.8 billion in our Navy's public shipyards. These investments are critical as our public shipyards average 62 years old, with drydocks averaging 108 years. That's pre-World War I. Next slide?

We are committed to integrating robotic and autonomous systems across all warfighting domains. The objective is to create a more lethal, distributed, and resilient tailored force. This budget leverages cost effective UAVs to give the fleet persistent sensing and strike options, directly enhancing our lethality and resilience in contested environments.

Beneath the surface, unmanned underwater vehicles are giving us access to contested areas, conducting surveillance and other critical missions in high risk environments. On the surface, unmanned ships are being developed to perform a variety of missions, augmenting our manned fleet and increasing our overall presence.

Through initiatives like CNO's Containerized Capability Campaign Plan, we separate payload from hull to generate scalable, tailorable combat power to gain speed, adaptability, and strategic unpredictability. Additionally, we're committing $2 billion to counter unmanned systems of our enemies, investing in new and innovative solutions to defend against this ever increasing and evolving threat. Next slide?

Our PB '27 aviation request is $34.4 billion, a 93 percent increase over FY '26, procure -- procuring 123 aircraft and funding modernization, spares and support. We are doubling F-35 procurement, and additionally investing $1.8 billion in F-35 sustainment to improve mission readiness. We are also restarting the P-8 production line and extending the E-2D Hawkeye line. We continue CH53-K multiyear procurement. We also are procuring KC-130J and MQ-25 Stingray.

Finally, we are -- we are committed to the sixth generation fighter. The -- this -- this fighter's operational need is unquestionable. This is a strategic imperative to ensure the Joint Force maintains uncontested air superiority for decades to come. Next slide?

Turning now to our weapons procurement, our approach is built on two pillars, first maximizing production of capabilities we currently employ. To do this, we are sending a clear and stable demand signal to our current munitions industrial base. Second, we are rapidly expanding our capacity by welcoming new innovative industry partners. We are aggressively expanding competition to reverse three decades of consolidation that has diminished the industrial base from 50 primes to five today.

To execute this strategy, we are pulling every available lever. This -- this budget invests an additional $1.6 billion in our weapons industrial base on top of the 1.5 billion from last year to increase production rates for critical systems like Standard Missile, Tomahawk, AMRAAM, and PAC-3 while strengthening our entire supply chain.

We are leveraging multi-year procurement. We continue our multi-year contracts for LRASM and NSM while initiating new multiyear agreements for both Tomahawk and Standard Missile. We're also bringing in new partners and procuring a low range of lower cost alternatives.

We're investing $370 million in FY '27 in innovative systems like MACE, CHAOS, and RAPTOR to give our commanders more options to create a more resilient -- to create a more resilient industry. This comprehensive effort is reflected in our FY '27 budget request of $22.6 billion, which will fund over 4,600 all-up rounds across the portfolio. Next slide?

Our ground procurement budget accelerates Marine Corps force design initiatives with a $2.6 billion increase to advance the lethality and readiness of the Fleet Marine Force. We continue invested -- investment in the protected tactical mobility of our Marines, supporting ACV as it completes its acquisition objective in FY '26 and transitions to the operations and sustainment phase in FY '27, and continue fielding JLTV, our Humvee replacement to -- and key enablers to low density, high demand capabilities like MATTIS [PH] and NEMESIS, with future procurement contingent on vendor performance to ensure accountability. NEMESIS launchers and Naval Strike Missile enhance precision fires capabilities and contribute meaningfully to the joint kill chain.

The request also advances ground based air defense with procurement of medium range intercept capability, MRIC, that enables Marines to maneuver and operate under complex aerial threat conditions, as well as the procurement of Javelin missile systems that are cornerstone of a Marine ground force combat power. Next slide?

To maintain maritime superiority, we must make our kill chains whole. These investments are the critical enablers that connect our entire force, allowing us to command, maneuver, and sustain the fleet. Starting on the left, long range fires are orchestrated by our Maritime Operations Center, which synchronize our kill webs to ensure our dispersed forces act in concert.

Next, our nuclear command control and communications, NC3, systems are the bedrock of our national security. The funding ensures survivable, reliable command link to our ballistic missile submarines, the cornerstone of our strategic deterrence. Our investment in counter C5ISRT is about -- is about dominating the information fight. These capabilities are designed to blind and deceive the enemy, manage our signatures and break their kill chains, enabling us to strike first and strike when we need to and when we want to.

Finally, we are funding contested logistics. Since supply lines will be targeted, we are shifting to a resilient AI enabled network to sustain our forces under fire and win the campaign. Next slide?

We remain committed to readiness for our warfighters. This isn't a choice between readiness today and modernization tomorrow. This budget does both, ensuring we field a force that is ready for the current fight and dominant in the future one.

First, we're investing $7.4 billion in ship operations to keep our fleet deployed globally, conduct repairs and access vital port services. We are dedicating $17 billion to ship maintenance. This robust investment is aimed squarely at executing on time maintenance availabilities and buying back the material readiness of the fleet.

We are funding $12.2 billion for flight operations to ensure we have the world's best pilots. This includes -- to ensure that we have the world's best pilots, this includes 131 million increase for undergraduate pilot training, directly investing in the next generation of naval aviators. This is paired with a $2.4 billion investment in aviation maintenance to return aircraft to the fleet and to the fight.

For the Marine Corps, we're investing $2.8 billion in field logistics. This funding ensures our Marines have the equipment, parts and sustainment needed to be expeditionary, survivable, and lethal inside a contested environment, fully aligned with force design.

Finally, with $3.3 billion for our operational forces, this investment enables large scale exercise, live fire training, and the modernization of our ranges. It ensures that our Marine Expeditionary Units are certified and ready to respond globally, embodying the tip of the spear for our Naval and Joint Forces. Next slide?

Sailors and Marines remain at the heart of our war fight. Record recruiting and strong retention have continued thanks to robust investment in military pay and quality of life initiatives. We are raising pay by 7 percent for E-5 and below, 6 percent for E-6 to our O-3, and 5 percent for our O-4 and above. $70.1 billion funds the pay and compensation for 621,500 active and reserve sailors and Marines.

Our in-strength growth across the department meets global demands and provides a resilient and sustainable fighting force. To attract and, more importantly, retain the talent that we need, we are making foundational investments in quality of service. $12.5 billion improves housing for both unaccompanied sailors, Marines and military -- and our military families, ensuring they have the safe and modern living conditions that they deserve.

We also increase funding across our quality of service portfolio to include child and youth programs, morale, welfare and recreation, our galleys and messing, as well as education and training. These are foundational investments in our warfighting readiness, ensuring that we field the most lethal and effective naval force in the world. Next slide?

PB '27 prioritizes critical shore investments. This provides the foundation for everything we do: deploy our fleet, maintain our readiness, and take care of our people and their families. The top half of the slide requests a total of $27.9 billion for operating and maintaining the department's Navy -- 90 Navy and Marine Corps installations, a $10.4 billion or 59 percent increase from FY '26.

In addition to our investments in housing, $8.6 billion sustains and repairs our base infrastructure, and $9.5 billion in base operating support funds operations, the operations facilities management, utilities and improves quality of life.

Moving to the bottom half of the slide, the FY '27 budget request of $8.4 billion is $2.6 billion above FY '26 military construction, and includes 64 projects in support of new platforms, shipyard improvements, global posture, and quality of life. Next slide?

In closing, this is a strategy driven budget. It's not about business as usual. It's about making generational investments in our most decisive instrument of national power. We are changing how we do business to revitalize our industrial base and prioritize the readiness of both our foundry and our fleet, because every decision and every dollar in this budget is focused on delivering the scale -- the scale of ships, aircraft, and weapons our sailors and Marines need to overwhelm any adversary and ensure American maritime dominance.

Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.

NICKO WEST: Thank you, sir. And with that, we'll open it up for questions. Each reporter will be permitted one question before we move to the next. Additional follow up questions will be allowed if time permits. To open it up, do we have AP?

 

Q: I -- just to start going back to the munitions slide, I noticed the Navy is spending money procuring PAC-3 Patriot missiles this cycle. Obviously, that's the first time you guys have done that using Army munitions. Can you talk a little bit more about what the intended use here is, and whether you guys have any concerns that the Navy sort of coming in to buy Patriots on top of the other services would constrain that production capacity?

BEN REYNOLDS:

Yeah, Thanks, Constantine. I -- yeah, I think this goes -- let me -- just a little bit up front, I think this goes down to what we were saying about pulling every lever. So, you know, in addition to buying the munitions, we're going to do -- we're doing modifications and upgrades to our Mark 41 VLS system.

So, we intend to be able to use these in many -- in most of our platforms afloat. It'll complement what we already have there. You know, we -- of course, Tomahawk, Standard Missile, and others that we are already able to use in our VLS, we want to have as many opportunities as possible.

I -- I'm optimistic. And then on the -- on the capacity, we'll let OSW and Joint Force sort that out. But I'm optimistic where we're seeing capacity improvements for PAC -- for PAC-3 going forward.

Q: And just to -- just to follow up briefly, are -- is the intent here for the PAC-3 to bring a new capability that the Standard Missile doesn't currently provide, or is this just the magazine depth?

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah, I think it's more magazine depth and complement. I think that -- that as we look at all the different Standard Missile variants, I mean, the capability of that missile is fantastic. But I think that -- the PAC-3 will then -- will help augment that. And hopefully we'll get down -- what we want to get to is where we can increase our magazine depth and then go down the cost curve as well so we're -- so we're not firing a very expensive missile at a not very expensive target when we can. Thank you.

NICKO WEST: How about Jane's in the back?

Q: Yeah, Mike Beebe from Jane's. Thanks for doing this. A couple of clarifications, if you could, please, on the frigate and the battleship.

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah.

Q: For one, you have the 4.5 in R&D for both, and I was wondering if you could break that out for -- how much for which. How much AP funding do you see, advanced procurement funding, for the -- for the battleship? And also, what kind of modifications for the frigates are you envisioning?

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah. Let me -- thanks, Mike. When I hear Jane's, I have flashbacks to midshipman year and trying to remember all the --

Q: [Off mic] to say that, sir.

BEN REYNOLDS: Oh, my god. Like, I'm, like, really nervous right now.

[Laughter]

Hey, just because of Jane's.

The -- yeah. So 4.5, that's across multiple. For -- for battleship, it's eight -- I think 837 in R&D in -- in '27. That's -- and we have $1 billion in -- we have $1 billion in AP in '27.

And let me hit on this, Mike, about battleship. I just want to say that we're already in this year, in '26, spending at least 134 million already in R&D for battleship today as we -- as we -- as we try to really, really tighten and refine that requirements process. And I think we'll likely go to try to put more money into that in '26 as well.

So, 837 for R&D in battleship, and then frigate has 212 million in -- in FY '27 in R&D.

Q: Ok. What about the modification frigate, any idea of anything --

BEN REYNOLDS: Oh, the -- I'm sorry. The question was about the modifications?

Q: Division modifications.

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah. I'll let that go back to our acquisition folks. But as we've been following it, this is the great thing about going with the Legend class. You know, like, I mean, heck, we've deployed with -- you know, we've deployed with this Coast Guard ships already with our strike -- so, it is, you know, ready -- it is a -- already able to deploy and fight with our strike groups.

So, we're making very few changes, but the details we'll get back to you.

Q: Thank you.

BEN REYNOLDS: Thank you.

NICKO WEST: We'll go Bloomberg right here.

Q: Hi. Tony Kapasi with Bloomberg. On the Virginia class, I wanted to get your rationale for why you're buying two a year through FYDP when each of the ones -- the Block 5s that contract now are, like, three years late to delivery and the HH -- HHI and GD can't hit the 2.0 goal per year as it is. Why give them more business or more orders when they can't meet today's demands?

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah, Tony. The operational and strategic need is no doubt, right? I mean, that's a -- that's -- there's no argument there. Submarines are a tremendous asymmetric advantage for the United States.

Backing up a little bit, we've invested -- we've been investing in -- in our submarine industrial base for a few years, and especially our sub tier vendors and those areas that constrain our ability to build submarines. I'm optimistic with where we're going that we will see improvements in these builds because of those investments and the investments that we're making now.

I'm optimistic in what we're doing with our distributed shipbuilding. You saw my discussion of Hadrian and others. That will then relieve these two primes. And I think we'll -- and I think we'll have -- we -- we'll have a good path forward to start improving our production of our Virginias.

Q: Can I ask one quick battleship question?

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah.

Q: Lots of interest because it's seen in some quarters as a Trump vanity project. What's the FYDP investment? Isn't it like 42 billion or something like that?

BEN REYNOLDS: Well, let me just say on the need for battleship, we've been -- I mean, heck, we've been talking about needing a service combatant larger than DDG, as you all -- as you professionals all know for years. So, we've been investing in DDG-X for several years, five and maybe seven years.

And, you know, as we kept on looking at DDG-X, we kept on finding that the whole form and size that we were looking at, we continued to make tradeoffs in power, you know, or whether you can do this or do that. And this ship is designed to operate -- it gives us the opportunity to operate in the future, to expand the capabilities as we need them and then complement the fleet.

And so, this is absolutely something that -- that the Navy has been talking about for a while that we need, and then I think that the requirement is clear.

And then your follow up was?

Q: Through the FYDP, how --

BEN REYNOLDS: This FYDP cost?

Q: Much did -- is it, like, 42 billion or something like that?

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah it's across FYDP, it's $43.5 billion in shipbuilding and then additional money in R&D. We have 3.9 of R&D.

Q: 46 billion in the FYDP for --

BEN REYNOLDS: For R and --

Q: Battleship?

BEN REYNOLDS: That's right, for R&D. And this buys -- and this is three -- this is three -- this is AP R&D and then three battleships across the FYDP.

Q: Thank you.

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah.

NICKO WEST: USNI?

Q: Hi, sir. Mallory Shelbourne at USNI. Just to follow up on the battleship, I hear you on saying you need a larger ship. But the concept design work that went into DDG-X the last few years, that was for a smaller ship. So, now that you're pursuing the battleship and you want to buy the first one in the next budget cycle, how are you going to compress that new R&D cycle into the next year to get all of that done? And what does that next year look like for the acquisition pathway?

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah, Mallory, the -- thank you for that. The -- so, I'd say a couple of things. As you heard, I talked about changing the way we're doing business. We have to start now, and we are. So, you -- we are -- been involved in several meetings of some very detailed work on ship design and really, really refining that requirements process, so that way we have this -- we have this nailed down.

Like I said, $134 billion, I think we'll likely go above that, you know, maybe 100 to 120 billion -- I mean, million, excuse me, more in R&D in '26. So, that's incredibly important. I think that the R&D work and AP that we do in '27 will be incredible -- incredibly important.

And I think through that -- that very disciplined requirements process and then expanding the way we're building ships, I expect us to be able to start construction in '28. Remember, it's a battleship. It's a large ship, and so we will start construction in '28 and then work in construction through the next few years.

Q: And then a quick follow up on the [Off mic] effects. Do you project buying -- starting procurement of that in this FYDP, or is that in the out years?

BEN REYNOLDS: We have -- we only have R&D for FAXX in this FYDP. So, we are not -- we are not -- we have no AP -- no air -- aircraft procurement for FAXX in the FYDP.

NICKO WEST: Go right here.

Q: Yes. Hi. Thomas Novelly with Defense One. Following up on FAXX, you know, CNO made a comment that there was a down select in -- expecting a down select in August on that. There's only 140 million that we've seen that has been flagged for that. Half of that is coming from reconciliation. It's not a really solid bet, so I was wondering if you could, you know, kind of square those two realities.

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah, great question. And I'm sorry. Your name again?

Q: Thomas Novelly, Defense One.

BEN REYNOLDS: Thomas. So, the -- so, I think -- so, let's go where we are today, right? So, here we are in April in this fiscal year. We have $1.7 billion between mandatory and discretionary of money that we already have that we don't have obligated in '26. That will -- so, we will have no problem supporting EMD and getting going in -- in '26 and well into '27.

Acknowledge the challenge, and good point, 141 in -- in '27. I think 72 of it is mandatory. We can have another discussion of, you know, what bill is, you know, harder to pass or, you know, whatever. We -- I will say, though, as an aside, we do need our mandatory budget as part of our PB for all of our weapon systems and platforms.

But 141, as we go down to EMD, I think that this 1.7 will be a significant -- get us significantly through '27 and then we'll see as we go forward if we need to ask Congress to add additional money in '27.

Q: And then a follow up with that is your CCA funding for the Navy is -- there's only a slight increase, it seems like, from last year on that. Certainly compared to the Air Force, it's not a massive increase. Is a lot of that investment in Navy CCAs tied to the progress on FAXX in your view? Is it, you know, putting the cart before the horse in some way?

BEN REYNOLDS: I think we -- you know, where we want to go first is MQ-25. And I think that's important because what that does is -- not as a CCA, but it's certainly unmanned on the -- on the carrier.

We need to have -- we need to be able to expand unmanned in aviation on the carrier and for our Marines and for our -- and off the carrier, just as we're expanding unmanned across the board. I think that it's -- some work to be done and then you'll -- I think you'll see increases for CCA as we -- as we move through the FYDP.

NICKO WEST: We'll go right here.

Q: Hi. Thank you. Tara Copp with the Washington Post. Back to the munitions page on the Tomahawks, you know, it -- your last procurement was about 58 or 55 and anticipating a jump to 785. What conversations have you had with industry to know that that's a realistic target, that you can actually produce -- can get 785 with -- you know, and then the spin up to almost 3,000 total? And I guess if you could talk a little bit about the necessity. Obviously, we've had a really high TLAM burn rate in this conflict. Is that's what's driving those numbers?

BEN REYNOLDS: Well, thanks, Tara. The -- let me go -- I'll take the last part first. I think that, you know, this budget is -- was built before what we see in Epic Fury.

I think what Epic Fury just shows in my mind is it just really underlines the value of our Navy and Marine Corps force, you know, being there, ready to go and also the value of the weapons that we use today, including Tomahawk. Tomahawk has proven to be tremendously value -- valuable, and we continue to improve its capability. This isn't the Tomahawk that, you know, we had ten, 20 years ago.

The -- I acknowledge -- I really do think that, across our weapons industrial base, this is absolutely a challenge. It really is. And I -- so, I think that if I got up here and said it wasn't, that would be untruthful.

I think, though, that -- Tara, that we have to -- like, we are pulling every lever that we can to get there. And so, you saw we have invested, I think, $2 billion over the last -- over the last two years in our -- in our weapons industrial base and trying to help those primes. I mean, things like second source rocket motors, the control unit system, these things that are what I would call the critical path to get there, we've been investing heavily in those. And we really need to see some of those -- some of those things come through in the next year or two.

And then the other thing I'm pleased about, you heard Secretary Hirsch talk some about investment in -- in industries, capital equipment and their ability to improve. So, you know, Tomahawk is Raytheon product, and we need and expect Raytheon to invest very, very heavily now to be able to ramp up production.

I mean, you know, it's not -- it's not magical. We know how to build them. We just need to build them in -- in more production lines and with more people.

Q: So, do you anticipate the 785 coming in the next fiscal year or over the time? Can you give us a sense of how quickly you think you can spin up to just this first buy of the 785?

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah. We'll see. We're procuring -- we're procuring them all in '27. It's in mandatory money, and mandatory money is usually four year money. But we also want to procure and then obligate and liquidate and actually get that -- get those weapons as quickly as we can, yeah.

NICKO WEST: We'll go back row on this side.

Q: Thanks for doing this, Admiral. Quick question on you're funding 34 ships. How many are you retiring?

BEN REYNOLDS: Ten in this year. And I think -- I had a note on it. I think it's ten in activations, but none of them are what you call pre ESL. So, no early inactivations. We have the Nimitz in '27. We have four cruisers, a SSN and SSBN, so Ohio. And then I think Jackson -- maybe Henry Jackson. Don't -- I'll have to check that. But the SSGN, SSBN, SSN, and then three -- or two T class.

Q: Just by the -- can you give us a little bit more detail on how the numbers are going to fluctuate in the next few years? Like, are you -- when are you going to cross the 300 mark, or are you going to get close to 360 ships? Like, what's the -- is it going to go down or is it going to go up in the next few years?

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah, I think this year we'll probably dip a little bit as we see through. I'm thinking that we'll probably get through -- you know, we're 291. We'll probably be, you know, high 280s, 288, 289 around there in '27, which is understandable. And then I'll have to get back with you on exactly what that ramp up is in the -- in the FYDP.

One thing worth seeing when it comes out here, should be in the next week or so, is the shipbuilding plan. The shipbuilding plan has traditionally been loved by, you know, Navy, you know, budget acquisition nerds like myself. This one is actually BAT [PH], but it's also really good and very informative. I would ask all of you all to read it, and that -- and you'll have some details on it.

But one thing I want to talk about on that, Tara, is that for -- as we talk about ship numbers, I think we have to think a little bit different. We've been talking about for some time about how we think of ships and our battle force. And we're not going to -- you know, we'll say keep battle force battle force.

But as we think of our total inventory, think of like what we're doing with our MUSVs, the -- and being able to -- having this adaptable ship, and these are big, right, and how we're approaching that and the great work that Rebecca Gassler [PH] and the team are doing in looking at a mix of capital lease and procurement to bring MUSVs in part of our fleet. You know, bringing this tailored fleet together is a big deal, and I think we need to watch that going forward.

Q: [Off mic] fleet ship numbers in the USV?

BEN REYNOLDS: The USV is not counting in the battle force number. But you will see that, if you look at that -- that slide that I made, I hope I wasn't trying to be too clever. I think it was actually pretty smart. What I did was I showed the battle force -- I show the battle force number, but then I did put M -- MUSVs as a row below that, not to confuse anybody, not to try to obfuscate, but just to say, hey, look, I really, really, really want us to think about our unmanned as part of the fight. I mean, we gotta -- we see it today. In every combat theater in the war, our remote and autonomous systems are important.

Q: Can I get one more clarification? I could do it for a bunch of ships, but for the big decks, you're adding a big deck, but you're behind a big deck with the Bonhomme Richard situation. So, what was behind the decision not to add -- not to try to catch up, but just try to break even?

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah, I think you'll see across the -- so, what we're trying to do is balance -- you know, this is an important thing as we talk about what we can do and where we can do it. We're trying to get away from -- you know, there were -- you know, say, a shipyard in the Gulf Coast that I'm thinking of that -- that has this tremendous ability. I mean, that thing is a beautiful factory, tremendous ability to build a lot of ships. And they need to be able to build the right ships and they need to be repeatable.

And between us and industry, we got them down there to, I don't know, four or five, six different types of ships. And they weren't -- and they -- and it wasn't like an assembly line, right? So, we need to balance what the shipyards can do when they can do it. But you'll see across the -- I think the FYDP numbers are very, very important for you to look at for our amphibs. As we look at -- as our -- as our big decks LHAs, LPDs across the FYDP is a tremendous commitment, and then I'd ask you to think also about our LSMs. I'm really excited about what they'll bring to our fight.

NICKO WEST: We'll go right here.

Q: Thank you very much. Excuse me. My name is Janny Baldon [PH], USA Journal. Regarding the shipbuilding industry, has the budget been allocated for the construction of the US naval vessels, such as warships, at the overseas shipyard? Thank you.

BEN REYNOLDS: Yeah. Just so I have the question right, is the question about overseas shipyards?

Q: Um-hmm.

BEN REYNOLDS:

As with our weapons, we were going to -- we're going to pull every lever that we can for our shipbuilding. The thing that I like most -- the thing where I think we can see our biggest advantage is our overseas shipyards that -- that do -- that build shipyards so well, our overseas investments in our shipyards today.

You see like, uh, Hanwha in Philly. And I think we're seeing some great opportunities there to pair these proven shipyards that -- that can build ships quickly with our American worker. And then we will look -- and then we'll continue to look over this next year plus at if there are opportunities to team with foreign shipyards for construction as well.

But I think that the -- that what we want to focus on most is what we're building here in the United States with the -- with the teamwork of the -- of our foreign shipyards. I noticed that at Sea Air Space yesterday, both Hanwha and Hyundai were represented very well here in Washington, DC.

NICKO WEST: We go right here, and this will be our final question.

Q: Thanks. Nick Wilson, Inside Defense. So, there's one carrier in the FYDP projected for 2029. We also understand the Navy is looking at the baseline design for CVN-82. What prompted that review, and what specific aspects of the design are being looked at?

BEN REYNOLDS: Nick, the -- well, that's one carrier, like I would call like, you know, your tick mark. One carrier you see in '29 for a CVN-82. We also continue funding for finishing 79, which we'll deliver, and 80 and 81. So, shoot, across the FYDP, we have $39 billion in shipbuilding for our carriers.

So, we are -- we remain absolutely committed to this. I mean, goodness, you'd see whether -- a high end fight anywhere in the world, you see the value of the -- of the carrier, not just the value of like its power projection, but also the sea control and the sustainability. I think that there's no doubt about that.

I think that for the new design, some work to be done. I mean, shoot, you know, Ford was a first -- was a -- is a -- is a first in class. We're learning as we go. Every ship that we've -- that we've designed, you build it, you operate it -- and this is really the right way to do it. Build it, operate and then learn and say, hey, are there some things that we need to -- that we want to change on it? And I think that this is an appropriate -- an appropriate time to do that as we look at where 82 is in -- in the process, and where we are operationally.

Q: And can you tell us specific areas that you'd like to maybe improve on what you're seeing from Ford already?

BEN REYNOLDS: Well, let me just say this. I remember a couple of years ago -- and this happens every time for some of us that are a little bit older. But every time, you know, a new class of ship comes out and they're like, oh, my gosh, these ships are horrible. You know, DDG came out, and they're like, oh, my gosh, that thing will never be as good as the Perry, you know, or the -- you know, and you're like, hmm, maybe, and, you know, and -- or the Spruance, right?

And it has just crushed it. Look at Ford now, right, 10 months of continuous deployment moving from one theater to another theater to another theater. I think you'll see the sortie rate come out, and it'll be eye watering. The capability is just absolutely incredible.

So, I -- I'm not going to, you know, pick on my good friend Admiral Lanzilotta that's out there with that strike group. I'll just say that it's always good to refine systems as we go forward and learn, and I'll leave it at that.

NICKO WEST: Thank you, sir. And that's all we have time for today. Thank you all for your attendance. Again, if you have any outstanding questions, please reach out so we can staff those appropriately. Thank you.