Military

Statement of Chairman Curt Weldon
Hearing on Department of Defense Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) and Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Programs

Prior to beginning these proceedings, I want to pause to acknowledge the valiant men and women in our armed forces, coalition forces, and civilian personnel who are leading the fight against global terrorism. Recent events in Spain only serve to emphasize the pervasive nature of this problem. We extend our condolences to the families and loved ones of those who have been injured or have given the ultimate sacrifice fighting to defend the fundamental freedoms on which our nation was founded. Our prayers are with those in harm's way around the globe, and we hope for their safe return.

This afternoon the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee is meeting to receive testimony on the Department of Defense's (DOD) unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) programs. I would like to welcome:

(1) Our first panel members from the General Accounting Office (GAO): Mr. Neal Curtin, Director, Defense Capabilities and Management, and Mr. Paul Francis, Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management.

(2) Our second panel member is Dr. Glen Lamartin, Director, Defense Systems, Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD); and

(3) Our third panel members: Lieutenant General Walter E. Buchanan III, Commander, Central Command Air Forces and Commander, 9th Air Force, and Major General James D. Thurman, Director, Army Aviation Task Force.

Mr. Curtin and Mr. Francis will present testimony based on their extensive work on the subject of UAV programs and will contribute both a historical perspective and discuss their recent findings.

Following their testimony, Dr. Lamartin will present the DOD perspective on UAV acquisition, including the DOD UAV Roadmap to the future.

And to complete the picture, General Buchanan and General Thurmond will provide the warfighter perspective on the use of UAV's, both in combat and post-combat operations.

You will notice that we have a static display of operational small UAV's from each of the services that will be available for examination following the hearing.

I have, since the mid-90's when I was Chairman of the Research and Development Subcommittee, advocated an aggressive fielding of UAV's. Recent conflicts have demonstrated their utility, and today, UAV's are an integral part of our intelligence and military operations. Though UAV's continue to prove themselves daily, the cultural opposition within the services has not been overcome. Nor has the resistance to one Service adopting a UAV developed by another service.

I continue to be concerned that though OSD and the services have developed a UAV acquisition roadmap, compliance is not mandatory, and services are free to do as they wish. OSD, after having gone to all the effort to jointly develop a logical UAV acquisition roadmap with the Services, should have a mechanism to ensure that UAV acquisitions within the Department conform to that roadmap.

Though small UAV's cost comparatively little individually, in aggregate the cost is very significant as we seek to procure hundreds, perhaps thousands. There should be a competitive selection of each class of UAV, from high-altitude endurance to small man-portable UAV's. Only in this way will the warfighter get the most capability while the taxpayer gets the best price. I am pleased to hear of the recent decision that the Navy intends to competitively select a system to meet its broad area maritime surveillance requirements.

The joint unmanned combat air system is another area of concern. The schedule and missions are still unclear. In addition the program has now been moved again, this time to DARPA. It is not clear to me that DARPA is the preferred location rather than have a military service execute development and acquisition. I am very interested to hear the various witnesses' comments on this program.

Before we get started, the last point I want to make is that UAV's are sensor platforms, and if the sensor information does not get to the users, UAV's have little value. Standards resulting in interoperable systems are the key to successful UAV operation. Any place where a system can be standardized such as by using a common link, such as the Tactical Common Data Link (TCDL) builds in inherent interoperability. Joint service use of a common UAV offers the same advantages.

###

Do Not Sell My Personal Information