WASHINGTON (AP) — The new Sentinel nuclear warhead program is 81% over budget and is now estimated to cost nearly $141 billion, but the Pentagon is moving forward with the program, saying that given the threats from China and Russia it does not have a choice.

The Northrop Grumman Sentinel program is the first major upgrade to the ground-based component of the nuclear triad in more than 60 years and will replace the aging Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile.

It involves not only building a new missile but the modernization of 450 silos across five states, their launch control centers, three nuclear missile bases and several other testing facilities.

The expansiveness of the program previously raised questions from government watchdogs as to whether the Pentagon could manage it all.

Military budget officials on Monday said when they set the program’s estimated costs their full knowledge of the modernization needed “was insufficient in hindsight to have a high-quality cost estimate,” Bill LaPlante, under secretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, told reporters on a call.

The high cost overrun triggered what is known as a Nunn-McCurdy breach, which occurs if the cost of developing a new program increases by 25% or more. By statute, the under secretary of defense for acquisition then must **undertake a rigorous review of the program to determine if it should continue; otherwise the program must be terminated. **

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    5 months ago

    This isn’t the program to produce more warheads. It’s the program to update the missile force silos and rockets. Which was really needed.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        You misunderstand, like a half dozen of the current high yield mirv ones could end most life on earth. This is just making them faster and as always the Pentagon lied and got caught.

        • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          My God, I certainly did. Such a pissing contest. Without threats like kaiju literally no reason to have this.

      • Podunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        As dumb as it sounds, mutually assured destruction does have the perk of keeping everyone from using nukes. If modern countermeasures prevent that, it isnt a deterrent anymore. Updating these nukes improves the likelihood we dont have to use them.

        Relevant example: russias tanks. They are outdated and weren’t adequately improved over decades. and are now getting wrecked by consumer grade drones and guys with while fancy, in all honesty, second grade hand me down rocket launchers. Before we knew this fact, they were a reasonable deterrent to not fucking with russia. Now, not so much.