Air and Land Forces Subcommittee Chairman Neil Abercrombie Opening Statement Hearing on United States Transportation Command and Air Force Mobility Aircraft Programs
April 1, 2008
"Today the Air and Land Forces Subcommittee meets to receive testimony from Air Force officials on the posture of U.S. Transportation Command (TRANSCOM), and the status of Air Force mobility aircraft programs.
"Our panel of witnesses today includes: the Honorable Sue Payton, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition; General "Norty" Schwartz, Commander of the United States Transportation Command; and General Arthur Lichte, Commander of Air Force Air Mobility Command.
"The three main issues the subcommittee will strive to understand are:
"Concerning the Department of Defense's (DOD's) mobility requirements and airlift aircraft inventory, there appears to be conflicting views within the Department as to what the C-5 and C-17 inventory should be.
"TRANSCOM states 205 C-17s and 111 C-5s; Air Force planning officials state 248 C-17s and 52 C-5s; and General Lichte, your written statement indicates that the actual program of record of 189 C-17s and 111 C-5s doesn't provide what is really needed.
"There also appears to be a mixed message as to what size the C-130 fleet should be. On the one hand, the Air Force indicates that 395 C-130 aircraft are enough, but then eight C-130J aircraft are included in the Air Force Unfunded Requirements List.
"Regarding the C-17, currently the last C-17 will be delivered in June 2009 - 14 months from now. There is a 34 month lead time for key C-17 components. The budget request does not include funding for additional aircraft or funding for shutting down the C-17 production line. Yet, 15 C-17 aircraft for $3.9 billion are included in the Air Force's Unfunded Requirements List.
"Six key DOD mobility studies were recently delivered to the committee.
"However, we understand that the mobility studies do not account for several key factors: . The end strength growth of 92,000 personnel for the Army and Marine Corps; . Mobility requirements of the Army's Future Combat Systems (FCS) and Army Modularity; . The determination by the Army that its FCS Manned Ground Vehicles are too large to fit into a C-130 aircraft; and . Use of dedicated C-17s in an intra-theater airlift role for which they are extensively being used.
"All of these factors call into question the value of the recently completed airlift studies.
"Concerning the final issue, we would like to better understand the Air Force's rationale for its procurement plans for the Joint Cargo Aircraft.
"According to our understanding of the conclusions of the Department's airlift studies, the Air Force's airlift capability would be better met by investing in other mobility aircraft, rather than the Joint Cargo Aircraft.
"There also appears to be a significant unit cost difference between the Air Force and Army version of the aircraft that needs to be reconciled. The Army says its version will cost $36 million dollars, but the Air Force version is reportedly projected to cost almost $61 million dollars per aircraft.
"We therefore need to better understand the JCA requirement and cost structure. It seems the Pentagon first made the decision to procure the JCA, then did studies associated with the procurement decision using outdated information or incomplete information, and is now trying to determine what the program costs are.
"Before we begin, I would like to turn to my good friend and colleague from New Jersey, Jim Saxton."
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
