Hearing Of The Subcommittee For Air And Land Forces Of The House Armed Services Committee - Army Acquisition And Modernization Programs

Statement

"The subcommittee meets today to receive testimony on the Army's acquisition and modernization budget request for fiscal year 2011. The Army's FY 2011 base budget includes $10.3 billion in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, and $21.3 billion in procurement. The Army is requesting an additional $151 million for research and development and $8.9 billion in procurement in the "Overseas Contingency Operations' request.

"Overall, this total request for more than $40 billion appears to be a solid request that will provide the Army with what it needs for today's wars and investments in future capabilities. With regard to specific programs, this hearing will highlight several new initiatives and changes to ongoing programs.

"First, the subcommittee expects to hear an update on the Army's new Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) program. This program, begun in the wake of the termination of the FCS manned vehicles, seeks to field a new infantry carrier vehicle by 2017.

"While I hope that the Army uses some of the technology developed for the FCS Manned Ground Vehicles (MGV), it is imperative that the Army not go down the same path in terms of a development and acquisition strategy.

"Specifically, a key failing of the FCS MGV program was its poorly thought through set of requirements -- such as the need to put one on a C-130 aircraft -- which pushed the limits of technical feasibility, and which led to a design eventually deemed not appropriate by Secretary Gates for today's combat environment.

"Another key failing of the FCS MGV program was its schedule-driven nature, which emphasized ramping up production over a solid test program that would inform the design before Congress was asked to commit many billions in procurement funding.

"For GCV, it is my hope that the Army takes a lower-risk, more measured approach to developing the vehicle, with some flexibility in requirements as the program moves along.

"Finally, the Army must also pay attention to cost and be realistic about what it can afford. The GCV is set to field in 2017, a time at which we hope that the Army is out of Iraq and Afghanistan. As a result, Army resources may not be as plentiful then as they are today.

"The FCS MGVs were expected to cost almost $20 million each. I hope that the Army is not headed toward a similar cost figure for the initial GCV vehicles. Such a high per-vehicle cost may not allow the Army to procure a sufficient number of GCVs, when the time comes.

"With regard to what is left of the Army's FCS program, now dubbed the "Early Infantry Brigade Combat Team' program, I was disappointed in the most recent test results, which showed some potential for the equipment, but also pointed out very poor reliability rates and the need for complete redesigns of some system elements.

"Based on these concerns, in last year's defense authorization act, Congress prohibited the Army from moving forward with more than one Early Infantry Brigade Combat Team (EIBCT) brigade set of equipment, with exceptions for urgent theater needs.

"I remain concerned that the Army is moving too quickly into procurement of EIBCT equipment before it is fully tested and performing at a level that justifies its high cost, given some of the current alternatives the Army has in the field today. I also remain concerned that while the FCS program has been officially terminated, its base contract with the Lead System Integrators lives on.

"As a result of this contract, the Army appears destined to be committed to using an LSI for the EIBCT program through 2014 -- more than five years after the base FCS program was terminated by the Department.

"With regard to the Stryker vehicle program, I am aware that the Army is considering a new "Double V' hull upgrade for some Strykers, in order to improve their protection against Improvised Explosive Devices. I look forward to hearing an update on the status of that plan today.

"This year's request also includes a substantial investment in Army aviation, both in new aircraft, new aviation brigades, and additional training funds. While clearly an appropriate investment to support today's combat operations, I hope to hear more about what the long-term costs could be to the Army of maintaining more aviation units.

"Another issue facing the Army this year is the future of the M4 Carbine. The Army has fielded hundreds of thousands of these weapons in recent years, and is now looking at both an upgrade program and a potentially new weapon development effort as well. Today I hope to hear about the need for this "dual track' approach, and how the Army plans to proceed.

"Finally, today's hearing also covers areas that don't get that much attention in the media, but which represent very large annual investments by the Army: communications equipment and trucks.

"This is a critical year for the Joint Tactical Radio System, which recently transitioned to the Army for program management. The success or failure of elements of this program will have long-lasting implications for Army communications and networking equipment.

"In the area of trucks, the Army continues to spend billions a year on a wide range of vehicles. Of note this year is the shift of production for Army Medium trucks from BAE to Oshkosh.

"In addition, the Army's future plans for humvee production appear to have changed significantly, with funding for new US Army humvees being zeroed out in the FY2011 budget submission.

"Overall, regardless of the rise and fall of particular programs, the Air and Land Forces subcommittee will continue to support the Army's needs in a bipartisan manner."

Source