Mr. FLOOD. I had a very definite feeling that the shortage of funds just came by coincidence and gave you a secretly hoped for excuse to chop off this arm and let it go.

Admiral PIRIE. No, sir. During our budget review in the CNO Advisory Board, and through our Secretary, and our Secretary's recommendation to the Department of Defense, it included the money for operating lighter-than-air in the numbers that I have told you, two squadrons.

Mr. FLOOD. This was not a case, at whatever levels this was discussed, of giving them a fair trial before you hung them or anything? Admiral PIRIE. No, sir. We had it in our budget definitely, and it was cut out purely because of this $17.7 million we had to absorb in the O. & M. funds from operating forces.

Mr. FLOOD. With the advent of Chinese and Soviet submarines of all types and kinds, obviously the other fellow was dedicated to a big undersea fleet in both oceans. We are aware of what the Chinese are doing. We are aware of the narrow seas over there. He is most probably making his own stuff now.

There is a serious problem with the Red Chinese submarine development. We know the problem with the Russians.

Do you think in waters like that, or in all coastal waters, that the lighter-than-air is not important for the submarine business, with their snorkles, the nuclear subs, their ability to stay under great lengths of time, months at a time, that the fixed-wing aircraft is the best ASW, or the helicopter, for these narrow waters in coastal operations instead of the lighter-than-air?

Admiral PIRIE. Yes, sir. As I stated last year, and I believe the year before, we believe that heavier-than-air craft are a more effective and more economic means of doing the same job. You must realize

there are many phases of antisubmarine warfare. The phase which they have had for the lighter-than-air has been the coastal patrol-type sort of thing. We also do this coastal patrol type of operations in heavier-than-air craft. Heavier-than-air craft can respond quickly and more readily to contacts because it has a great deal more speed and it is more effective in all weather. So we think that having one vehicle which can perform many of the tasks of antisubmarine warfare versus just one is a more effective and economical way to do the job.

Mr. FLOOD. Is there any consideration for the large dirigible for airlift of not only bodies, but logistic support?

We are going to limited war. We are talking about limited war. I am concerned about logistics, supplies going by surface ships. We know what the problems are. Is there any discussion at all, any intelligent discussion of the dirigible in the future as a speedier airlift for logistics for troops all over the world?

Admiral PIRIE. I cannot answer that specifically about a specific study being made in this regard.

Admiral STROOP. I am not aware of any study with regard to lifting troops.

Mr. FLOOD. What about hardware?

Admiral STROOP. Yes, sir. I have heard of one of the manufac turers who has made a study specifically with the thought of lifting large ballistic missile cases, and large ballistic solid propellent grains

from the point of manufacturer to the point of use. This is only in the study stage.

As far as I know, there have been no experiments, I am sure, along this line.

Mr. FLOOD. Is there any future in this pigeon at all; at all?

Here is a platform. Here is a big airborne flat platform of some kind. How can we utilize a platform in the air that can move with speed and carry great quantities of things, especially things? Is this a platform for nuclear propulsion?

One of our big problems for nuclear airplanes is a platform. Is this that kind of platform? I do not know. Is it?

Admiral STROOP. I do not think anybody here can give you a specific answer to that. It is under study. I am sure the economics of the situation would have to be balanced against what you would get out of it.

LOAD CARRYING CAPABILITIES FOR LIMITED WAR

Mr. FLOOD. The original purpose and intent for the creation of this is obviously gone. Does this go with it or is there developing, at the same time that it has become obsolete, is there almost on the horizon a new scope, a new field of limited warfare that is going to call for this kind of platform, this kind of transport?

I am altogether unhappy with the Air Force's position as far as the Marines and the Army is concerned on limited war. I have been after this for 10 years. It looks as though with this new administration I am about to get some attention. They are about to go into this limited war.

We expect more Marine bodies and more Army bodies. We expect the Army to become respectable again around here and to be used all over the world, if and when. If I had all these things I like, I cannot get it there. You are set up to supply them. You have given me all that. That is all right. But I have to have something more for the first couple of weeks that I cannot get with surface ships and that the Air Force fixed-wing aircraft cannot do. They are not big enough, or something.

I am wondering if we are going to do this and if we are moving into East and West, and you are coming along with your Marines with your helicopters and your carriers, but how am I going to handle these troops? How am I going to get them hardware and supplies for the first 3 and 4 weeks while your bridge of ships starts operating? Is there anything in that, or is this wishful thinking? Am I hoping against hope, or what?

Admiral PIRIE. I would say in the field of dirigibles—we had dirigibles and gave them up. In this field it is not an economical way to transport material because they do not have load-carrying capacity. Mr. FLOOD. They do not?

Admiral PIRIE. And the same thing applies to the airplane versus the ship. When you are trying to supply large amounts of stores overseas, the only economical way to do it is on the sea. This can be proved very easily in studies we have because, well, for example, if you want to carry a given number of tons of things to the Far East, you have let's take fuel-for every 2 gallons of fuel you land in the Far East and the Philippines, or Okinawa, or China, you have

to transport 3 gallons of fuel out there to get the airplane back. There gets to be a point of no return.

Studies have been made along these lines which are very conclusive. We would like to give you our limited war presentation to show the only thing that makes much difference in limited war is to be there. Our whole attitude toward limited war is being there. We do have the forces in being in the Far East, and in the Mediterranean now, who can be used immediately, and they have been in seven or eight different conflagrations of various sizes in the last 10 or 15 years.

For example, in the Far East we have the Marine amphibious lift and the marines there. We have had those marines in and out of those ships many times in the last 2 or 3 years. We do not advertise it too much, but those boys get in those ships when there is a situation that demands it and they stay there ready to go until the situation becomes stable again.

Mr. FLOOD. This is the old story of the way of all flesh. They are at about the end of the line; is that about it?

Admiral PIRIE. We think so, compared to other weapon systems. We are doing this every day in the Defense Department, comparing one system against another, and

Mr. FLOOD. You are not to be criticized for these evaluations. This committee, you know, urges this year after year after year. When the times comes to get rid of something, get rid of it.

The great problem with all military people is, you being sentimental fellows, you do not like to get rid of anything.

"The girl you will not marry but you hate to see her go," that type of thing. That has been our big trouble with you fellows for years. The Army still insists upon the 45 on the hip. I think they should be supplied with wheels to drag that behind them. It is things like that. I just want to be sure about this. I take it for granted you are right.

I am interested in this catapult. You spent a lot of time on the catapult. What kind of catapult?

Admiral STROOP. Steam catapult.

Mr. FLOOD. Is this a British thing?

Admiral STROOP. It was a British concept. The United States developed it, however.

Mr. FLOOD. You have gone beyond the British? We have something really our own now?

Admiral STROOP. I do not believe they ever built any large ones. We have built all the large ones.

Mr. FLOOD. Is this anything newer than what I have taken off on in the last couple of years? What is the big one?

Admiral STROOP. The A3D.

Mr. FLOOD. That is a lot of aircraft to go off anything.

Admiral STROOP. Yes, sir.

Mr. FLOOD. Are these catapults any different, any better, or are they the same thing?

Admiral STROOP. I do not know which one you went off on. It is about the same design.

Mr. FLOOD. My quarters were pretty well forward in the carrier. Can anybody do anything when those catapults go off to hold the

ship together? Every time one of those things go off, I start saying hail Marys.

Admiral STROOP. You have to get used to it.

Mr. FLOOD. I know that. That does not answer my question.

In the thinking of this business, is there any possibility at all of putting Maxim silencers on these things?

Admiral STROOP. I would think not.

Mr. FLOOD. What about the fillings of the teeth of the personnel on board?

Admiral JAMES. I understand you are going to have the medical officers over here.

Mr. FLOOD. As far as my question is concerned, apparently nothing can be done about it.

Admiral STROOP. The best thing to do is to get out of that part of the ship.

Mr. FLOOD. Of course, there is a better answer than that. We could do away with the carrier.

Admiral JAMES. I think your problem has been solved this morning with this new accolade that has been handed you. You will be given better quarters.

Mr. FLOOD. I was just wondering. It is a frightful problem.
You cannot do anything about it, you cannot.

COST OF OPERATING AND MAINTAINING HELICOPTERS

Mr. FORD. In looking through the weapons and facilities justification I do not see any mention of how much it costs you to maintain and operate helicopters, and what your relative costs are this year compared to last year. This has always been a very significant summary. You have had a lot of problems. The costs have been relatively high compared to fixed-wing aircraft.

What is the picture?

Admiral STROOP. I believe we have some backup material on that. I would like to ask Admiral Dodson who has the maintenance and operation of our aircraft to speak to this.

Mr. FORD. I think the committee would be interested in this problem. It is one that was quite serious a year or 2 ago.

Are you doing any better or worse?

Admiral DODSON. We have complete backup tables we would furnish for the record on the costs of each of our specific models of aircraft, both the cost for the maintenance and rework as well as the cost of the flight operations.

Mr. FORD. I think that would be good for the record.

Could you give us an outline of the situation as far as helicopters are concerned, your per hour costs of maintenance, or however you describe it?

Admiral DODSON. The backup tables show the cost of maintenance and operation of our helicopters in general is remaining fairly steady over the past 3 years, sir.

Mr. FORD. What is the figure?

Admiral DODSON. Operating costs per hour on the average run around $14 to $15 an hour for the helicopters.

Mr. FORD. That figure is for this fiscal year?

Admiral DODSON. For their budget year, 1962, the average is about $14.85 per hour for the helicopters.

Mr. FORD. What was it in fiscal year 1960, and what is it in fiscal year 1961?

Admiral DODSON. In fiscal year 1960 the cost is $13.59, just $1 less approximately.

Mr. FORD. It is going up rather than down?

Admiral DODSON. Just about $1 an hour, which is related to the slight increasing complexity of the helicopters.

Mr. FORD. We heard some discussion a year or two ago about for every hour of flight for a helicopter it took about 5 to 6 hours of maintenance. Is that an accurate figure, or what are the circumstances?

Admiral DODSON. No, sir. It is not quite that high. It does run around 3 or 4 hours of line maintenance per hour of flight. That is for the helicopters in our 1962 pictures.

Mr. FORD. How does that compare with fixed-wing aircraft?

Admiral DODSON. Actually, the maintenance time on the ground for our aircraft varies rather drastically, Mr. Ford. Of course, on the less complex models, the transport and utility, it is quite low.

Mr. FORD. That is fixed-wing aircraft?

Admiral DODSON. Yes.

On some of the more complex jet aircraft such as the new A3J airplane, the new F4H, which are entering the picture in 1962, we may spend 35 or 40 hours of line maintenance on the ground for each hour of flight. It is because of the complexity generally of the avionics equipment, the electronics equipment in particular. It is because of the necessity for complete thorough checkout of all this electronics equipment after each flight and in preparation of the next one.

Mr. FORD. How have the figures changed as far as hours on the ground maintenance for helicopters now compared to the past? Admiral DODSON. The figures I quoted you of about 3 or 4 hours on the ground for each hour in flight for helicopters remain fairly steady. It is perhaps going up just a slight amount each year, sir. Admiral HIRSCH. I believe I can add something.

I believe you have reference to the period when we were introducing the HR2S into the fleet. This is a large, complex and new helicopter for the transportation of marines. At the time we introduced this helicopter it did take a great many hours to keep it in the air. We could provide for the record the number of hours it takes, but that has come down substantially since its introduction. I remember this was one point raised a couple of years ago the tremendous amount of manpower and effort that went into every hour of flying.

MAINTENANCE HOURS AND FLIGHT HOURS, AIRCRAFT BY TYPE

Mr. FORD. I think the committee would like to have whatever information you can put in the record to show what the trends are as to hours on the ground compared to hours in flight and also your maintenance cost per hour of flight for the various helicopters, particularly, but also fixed-wing aircraft.

Admiral DODSON. We will put a complete story right in the record. (The information to be supplied follows:)