Pima
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 13,900
I took this link from the general discussions, and thought this portion of the link was important.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...ps-involuntarily-under-budget-reductions.html
It gives in clear concise numbers where they expect FY17...realize FY budgets run Oct to Sept.
Just placing that out there so people who wonder about the future now have a glimpse of the strategic planning for personnel within each branch. It does not state what the officer/enlisted ratio, but I would think it will remain the same as it has been for yrs.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...ps-involuntarily-under-budget-reductions.html
Today’s budget proposal fleshes out the cuts for each of the military branches.
Army forces would be reduced by less than 1 percent to 1,115,300 in 2013 and then drop to 1,048,200 in 2017. That’s still far greater troop strength than in February 2002, a year before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, when the Army numbered about 480,000 on active duty.
The Navy would have 1.7 percent fewer personnel, or 385,200 in 2013, and faces a reduction of 3.9 percent to a total of 376,600 people in 2017.
The Marines would be down to 236,900 in 2013, or 2 percent fewer than this year. By the end of 2017, the Marines face a reduction of 8.3 percent from this year to 221,700.
The Air Force will have 501,000 personnel in 2013, or 1.9 percent fewer than this year. In 2017, Air Force personnel will decline to 499,300.
It gives in clear concise numbers where they expect FY17...realize FY budgets run Oct to Sept.
Just placing that out there so people who wonder about the future now have a glimpse of the strategic planning for personnel within each branch. It does not state what the officer/enlisted ratio, but I would think it will remain the same as it has been for yrs.