Budget fight: big-ticket weapons square off.

• Author: Erwin, Sandra I.
• Position: Defense Watch

* In these times of tight military budgets, there is no shortage of conspiracy theories surrounding the future of big-ticket weapon systems. Contractors anxiously parse every word uttered by generals, admirals and civilian leaders, searching for clues about where key programs might be headed.

And who can blame them? With only a handful of banner weapon projects up for grabs over the next few years, each one becomes a make-or-break proposition for Pentagon contractors.

With the future of their companies at stake, executives obsessively look for hidden messages in senior officials' pronouncements, as well as in their silence.

One upcoming major procurement that has defense contractors on edge is the Air Force's long-range strike bomber, a program that could be worth as much as $100 billion over the next two decades. All three manufacturers in contention for the contract--a Boeing-Lockheed Martin team competing against Northrop Grumman Corp.--see the strategic stealth bomber as the last major opportunity in the combat aviation market for the foreseeable future, and are pulling out all the stops in anticipation of a summer award.

Although the bomber program has been endorsed by the Pentagon's top leadership, contractors worry about what-ifs, and they fear that the yet-to-be-built bomber is already under attack. Further, they see warning signs that the bomber-even if the Pentagon selects a contractor this year--will be vulnerable over the coming decade as other expensive projects compete tor a fixed pool of military procurement dollars.

Case in point were recent comments by Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert. Many contractors gasped last month when, during a presentation at a technology conference, Greenert suggested that "stealth may be overrated."

His words were read--or possibly misinterpreted--as a swipe at the F-35 joint strike fighter, although the comment was in line with Greenert's previous declarations that radarevading aircraft are not silver bullets. He said future threats will require a mix of stealth and electronic warfare technologies to counter enemy "anti-access/area denial" systems like multi-frequency radar and highly accurate surface-to-air missiles.

Regardless of what the CNO really meant to say, to bomber advocates, Greenert's skepticism about stealth is a "big blow," according to one executive, because it raises doubts about the effectiveness of stealth aircraft, especially among policy makers who might be...