Appropriations Timing Hinders Vehicle Autonomy
Scott Sanders, Chief Growth Officer at Forterra, on autonomy for every vehicle
The real bottleneck is not demand for autonomy, it is the government’s ability to turn appropriations into signed contracts and delivered systems on a one year political clock. For companies like Forterra building integrated hardware and software, money arriving late in the fiscal year can create a trap. Congress adds funding, programs cannot obligate or field it fast enough, then weak execution becomes evidence against the category in the next budget cycle.
-
This is a hardware ramp problem, not a software scaling problem. Forterra describes autonomy as ruggedized computers, sensors, communications, and vehicle integration that must be installed, tested, and supported on real vehicles. That cannot be sped up the way software licenses or contract manufacturing orders can.
-
The budget system reinforces the problem. GAO notes that delayed full year appropriations compress the time left to obligate funds, and DoD still tracks first year execution benchmarks, roughly 90% for RDT&E and 80% for procurement. Miss those marks and programs face extra scrutiny and possible future funding pressure.
-
This is why defense startups spread demand across many buyers and markets instead of betting on one giant line item. Forterra frames DoD as many micro markets, and Anduril followed a similar path, building from small contracts into larger programs. The goal is to show steady usage and obligation, not one flashy plus up.
The winners in defense autonomy will be the companies that can match product strategy to budget mechanics. That means designing systems that can be bought in smaller increments, integrated quickly, and expanded across programs and allied buyers. As autonomy budgets rise, execution discipline will matter as much as technical performance.