140 likes | 496 Views
ARMY UTILITY AVIATION. Congressional Update and Potential Force Structure Reductions. CONGRESSIONAL UPDATE. HH-60L MEDEVAC UH-60L UTILITY. FY2004 DEFENSE BUDGET STATUS (additional H60s). Desired Results Senate Recedes to House Language directing 9 A/C to ARNG.
E N D
ARMY UTILITY AVIATION Congressional Update and Potential Force Structure Reductions
HH-60L MEDEVAC UH-60L UTILITY FY2004 DEFENSE BUDGET STATUS(additional H60s) Desired Results Senate Recedes to House Language directing 9 A/C to ARNG
DISTRIBUTION PLAN FY2004 Outcome? 5-7 UH-60Ls 0-4 HH-60Ls
RECENT ACTIVITYTAA-11 • TAA-11 • Requirements and resourcing council of colonels phases nearing completion • Resourcing GOSC review mid-Oct • CSA Decision Nov timeframe • COA under consideration • Transfer utility AVN structure of 2 ARNG Divs to active Army • Remission 2 other divisions for homeland defense missions • Recent testimony (Sept 8) from Gen Myers and Mr. Wolfowicz talks about the need to rebalance the active/reserve mix (see Backup slides)
RECENT ACTIVITYARMY AVN TASK FORCE • Army AVN TF met 8-12Sep • Army will not cascade 38 H60s from 101st AVN • SOF Requirements increasing, straining budgets • AVN TF position: AVN MOD plan is un-executable • COAs are under consideration to • reduce H60 structure in the ARNG by 192-271 A/C • replace it with a requirement for a COTS MUH (multi-purpose utility helicopter) aircraft for “HS” missions • procure 58 MUH for base and range support • In addition, BGF MEDEVAC requirement may change
POTENTIAL FORCE STRUCTURE REDUCTION • Other information received indicates that these aviation COAs may be part of a larger plan to reduce/eliminate/re-mission ARNG force structure • ARNG structure at risk • ARNG may have to give up over 130 H60s from their existing inventory • 35,000-36,000 personnel at risk • AVN Force Structure affected
SUGGESTED GUARD POSITION • Maintain current requirement • Anything less than an H60 not acceptable • ARNG utility aviation modernization should continue with pure fleet H-60 plan • MUH (LUH) concept has been studied, and is not an inexpensive alternative • A deployable MUH aircraft (Full logistics support, New Cockpit, Self protection systems etc.) will cost over $8 Million per aircraft to procure • Engineering, test and evaluation phase will take years to complete before the 1st production aircraft is delivered • ARNG cannot have unique aviation force structure and remain relevant
GEN MYERS TESTIMONY FROM 9/9/03 SASC HEARING Opening Statement “We are a nation at war. Our military forces are actively engaged to meet our national security interests by combating terrorism, providing peace and stability in many troubled regions around the world, and conducting military exercises with many different countries. US military ground forces are currently experiencing a high OPSTEMPO. Selected high demand units resident in both the active and reserve force are also heavily committed. We must reexamine which military capabilities best reside with our Reserve and Guard components and which belong in the active duty force. Our goal is to minimize future demands on high demand units in the reserve force, such as civil-support teams, military police and intelligence teams. We also need to ensure we have enough of a given specialty, regardless of whether it is in the active or reserve component.” • Question from Sens Levin and McCain Re extension of Guard deployments • Myers Response (paraphrased) • Majority of CS/CSS structure is contained in reserve component • Looking for work-around, must put predictability into Guard/Reservists lives, but right now they are needed to support the effort • We are a nation at war, the stakes are very high, We are using our forces they way they were designed to be used • They perform magnificently, but we have to be concerned about what we could do to our reserve forces over the long term
GEN MYERS TESTIMONY FROM 9/9/03 SASC HEARING • Question from Sen McCain – Will congress be asked to increase the size of the armed forces due to the over extension of our reserve component?\ • We are looking at the mix of active and reserve component missions, some of this you may see reflected in the FY05 budget we submit to you. • We are a ways off from saying we need more troops • Question from Sen Inhofe – To maintain our efforts, we do have to extend the deployments of our guardsmen and reservists. I thought We cut back too far, we are going to have to do something about this. 2 additional divs could cost 18-19 Billion and take five years, so that option doesn’t look viable, what other options are avail • 223k reservists were mobilized, today the numbers are 173k, as I said we have a lot of CS and CSS in the guard and reserves. The CBO study is using peacetime parameters for ops tempo in their analysis. • Question from Sen Reed regarding the future requirements to be replaced on guardsmen • Particularly with military police and civil support we are examining not only the mix, but whether we have enough in our armed forces • Questions from Sen Talent on size of the Army Force Structure • Wolfowitz – too early to tell, but we clearly need to look at the mix. We can’t put all of one type of skill in the reserve component and then repeatedly call them up • Myers – Its mix between active and reserves and also do we have enough of certain skills, and we need to move forward quickly and you may see some of this in the FY2005 budget submittal • Sen Nelson – Guard leadership is being overwhelmed with calls from families asking when their soldiers will be coming home FL 9 infantry companies have been attached, detached and re-attached more than 40 times to different units in the theater. Livelihoods and civilian careers are at risk for deployed guardsmen. • Wolfowitz – We understand the urgency to look at the active reserve mix quickly. Many jobs that guardsmen are doing today, can be done by civilians and the active force. Possibly between 10,000 and 50,000 jobs can be moved