Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

It is accepted policy that maximum use will be made of military flights which are scheduled for valid mission support purposes, accordingly, all authorized travelers going to the same general area will be accommodated to the extent of available space without transportation charge. An example of who would be considered in this category is contained in Air Force Regulation 76-6, jointly established with Army Regulation 96–20 and Navy's OPNAV Instruction 4630.10, June 11, 1953. This specifies that military personnel of the National Guard, members of the Reserve components, and retired military personnel whose names appear on the published retired lists may ride in Department of Defense aircraft on a space available basis upon presentation of orders issued by competent authority or presentation of proper identification. Army, Navy, and Air Force Reserve personnel may also be transported by specially scheduled flights when officially established that such action would serve Department of Defense objectives and regular modes of commercial transportation are inadequate.

PROPORTION OF FLYING HOURS FOR MISSION SUPPORT

Mr. MAHON. General Agee, can you quickly tell us what the figures would be for table 7, page 7, if the percentages were hours by purpose instead of cost by purpose?

We had some figures here this morning which we were looking at. I refer you to page 7 of your statement.

General AGEE. Mr. Chairman, the only way I could respond quickly to that question is by referring you to page 6, and this is simply a comparison numerically-it is not a percentage comparison. I could work that out very quickly.

Mr. Mauon. Our figures indicate that for mission support, as shown on page 7, for fiscal year 1962, the estimated percentage is 8.6 percent. When you come to the hours involved, the hours involved would be 28 percent of the hours flown. Do you get my point!

The percentage is much higher when you consider the hours.
General AGEE. That is correct.
Mr. Mahon. What significance do you give to that factor, if any?

Mr. RHODES. Mr. Mahon, I think one of the things would be the type aircraft involved between mission support and tactical aircraft where you are talking to the B-52 and KC-135. This is because in mission support aircraft you have a much lower average cost per flying hour than in the tactical flying area.

General AGEE. I think the answer is quite straightforward, Mr. Chairman. I do not have the sheet avialable to me right now which proves the accuracy of the 28-percent figure, but it is very easy to work it out. I will do it right now.

Mr. Mahon. We will agree for the purpose of this discussion that it is 8 percent on the dollar cost and 28 percent on the hour cost.

You find that sort of comparison running throughout this. This comparison as to hours would increase the significance, it would seem, of your mission support program.

That is the point I am undertaking to make.

General AGEE. I think that the allocation of that number or that percentage of mission support hours in comparison to the total hour program is significant; yes, sir.

(The data referred to follow :)

Percentage of total hours and dollars for mission support flying (p. 410) Fiscal year 1960:

Percent Hours

28. 0 Dollars.

8.8 Fiscal year 1961: Hours

28. 2 Dollars--

8.4 Fiscal year 1962: Hours.

28. 7 Dollars.

8.6

PILOT TRAINING LOADS

Mr. MAHON. On page 8 you show an average of 2,379 pilots in training. Can you relate that to the total production of 1,401 shown on page 6 of Colonel Smith's statement?

General AGEE. I think the answer to that question is this, Mr. Chairman: The 4,379 figure relates to total students including pilots and navigators, whereas the 1,401 relates only to pilots graduated. Further, the figure of 4,379 is the average number of students in flying training during a year including pilots, navigators and other flying training

There are, of course, several classes during the year. They are not held at a definite level. They may be higher in one class and somewhat lower in the following class. Part of this is due to the introduction of military assistance program students.

Mr. Mahon. On page 58 of tab 12 we have quite a table. I wonder if you could relate that table to the subject which we are discussing. The question remains, Where do you get the figure of 2,379 pilots?

General AGEE. I believe the answer lies in the fact that portions of your first reference, page 58, are production figures whereas the table on page 8 of my presentation is a figure representing the average number of students, of pilots in training during the year. Not all of those people in training will be graduated.

Mr. Chairman, I think Colonel Smith can add to that.
Mr. Mahon. Yes, Colonel.

RECONCILIATION OF FLYING TRAINING DATA

Colonel Smith. Mr. Chairman, the table of page 8 of General Agee's statement refers to the 4,379 average number of students in flying training. Your first reference was to my statement, which deals with production of 1,401 pilots only. On page 58, which was your third reference, relates back to General Agee's statement of 4,379 average students. This is what we call “student load" and deals with both undergraduate pilot training and those who are in advanced flying courses. You can translate, and I can if you desire, reconcile the table on page 58 with the average students in training as shown on page 8 of General Agee's statement.

Mr. Mahon. I wish you would do this.

Colonel SMITH. Yes, sir. It would include the primary pilot load, the basic pilot load, the intercepter fighter load and the specialized flying load.

[blocks in formation]

1. P. 6 of General Agee's statement: Average students in

training 1. 2. P. 58 of tab 12:

Student loads:

Primary pilot.
Basic pilot

Undergraduate navigator.
Combat crew student loads: 2

Interceptor fighter.
Specialized flying.
Advanced navigator.

1, 273

102 312

879

Specialized navigator.
Less nonflying navigator training courses

169
-321

Total

2,370

2,000

4,370

1 This refers only to students taking courses which involve flying.

2 Excludes the line for the survival student load of 204, which is a nonflying course for all types of aircrew members,

3 These totals from p. 58 of tab 12 reconcile with data on p. 6 of General Agee's statement.

Mr. Mahon. All right. Thank you.

AIRCRAFT SUPPORT FOR MISSILE SITES

You make reference in your statement or in the justifications, I am not sure where, to Malmstrom Air Force Base.

General AGEE. I did that, sir.
Mr. Mahon. You talk about the need for mission-type aircraft, do

you not?

General AGEE. Yes, sir.

Mr. Mahon. You point out some of these launching pads are as far as 150 miles, possibly, from headquarters.

General AGEE. They are spread out over a 125-mile radius from the headquarters.

Mr. Mahon. You want to get in touch with these through or by the use of aircraft?

General AGEE. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mahon. What kind of aircraft?

General AGEE. They will be light aircraft, a helicopter, for instance, or a light airplane which will land on short fields.

Mr. Mahon. Do you propose to build landing fields at these launching pads?

General AGEE. We would surely want to avoid building anything more than the very least we could get by with.

Mr. Mahon. This seems a little strange. Are we going to build landing fields adjacent to all these launching pads or at many of them throughout the Nation?

General AGEE. No, sir. It is not contemplated that we build any substantial improved landing field that would cost any large amount of money.

Mr. SIKES. Are you talking about dirt strips?

this job.

General AGEE. Dirt strips or very short ones. Mr. SIKES. For what type plane! General AGEE. For a very light, short landing airplane. Mr. MAHON. I wonder if this thing has been thought through. I am a little startled by this proposal. General AGEE. At this point in time we are using helicopters for

The requirement is there in order to support the Air Materiel Command on the one hand, who have the site activation problem, and SAC, on the other hand, who have the getting-ready problem and at the moment we have no light aircraft which would have this kind of capability.

Mr. MAHON. Is there any research and development money to design an aircraft to land at missile pads?

General FRIEDMAN. No, sir; not as such. We are actually doing this now while some of these sites are under construction.

We are talking about knocking the ruts out and the sagebrush back-this kind of thing. There may be some helicopter landing pads, depending on what the rate of activity is going to be but this whole matter has been considered carefully. We are doing a minimum of this now during the construction and I. & C. phase. We certainly do not envisage any airport-type operation.

Mr. Flood. Well, now, don't be so sure about it. You may not but I am telling you what will happen. First it will go with : dirt strip, then it will have to be a hard surface because it rains too much there, then you will have to have lighting, then there will be a control tower, then there will be a hotdog stand and pretty soon we will have a nice, secluded dispersed missile site that nobody will ever be able to find.

Mr. MAHON. This seems a little unrealistic, General. These places could be reached in an emergency, I am sure, by helicopter, but when you talk about using planes, I am a little startled.

General AGEE. In the use of the word "planes" I intended to include the helicopter. Today I believe that we have allocated SAC and AMC combined, but under SAC, a total of 40 helicopters and some 16,800 flying hours to do the very thing I am speaking of, sir. This is all with helicopters. There may be some L-20 operation in it, but I doubt that.

Mr. Mahon. I wish you would explore this fully and insert a statement in the record at this point as to just what you have done, what you are doing, and what your long-range proposals are with respect to the utilization of helicopters and aircraft otherwise in connection with these missile sites.

(The information requested appears on p. 861.)

MISSILE SITE SUPPORT ESTIMATES

Mr. MAHON. It would seem difficult to build up the statistics for a mission support program if you did not know the number of aircraft that would be used and the type of aircraft. It appears that you

would have a difficult problem of estimating your requirements for fiscal year 1962 on this.

Colonel SEARLES. We have some information on that.
Mr. Mahon. I am talking about these missile sites.
Colonel SEARLES. Yes, sir.

Mr. Mahon. Colonel, why don't you stand up and give us some information on this.

Colonel SEARLES. I am Colonel Searles, assigned to the Directorate of Operations.

The Strategic Air Command has requested for fiscal year 1962, 67,500 hours for missile site support. Included in this is support not only for the sites themselves, but home base support, that is, the headquarters responsible for more than 165 different areas in this 125-mile complex. So part of these hours will be for home base support. Part of the hours will be for support for the launch control centers and the sites. This support will be provided by helicopters and by light aircraft.

TYPES OF AIRCRAFT INVOLVED

Mr. Mahon. If we knew the light aircraft, we would be in a better position to evaluate.

What are the titles, names, and description of the aircraft?

Colonel SEARLES. I do not believe the decision has been made as to the exact type.

Mr. Mahon. How can you estimate the cost when you do not know the plane?

Colonel SEARLES. The dollar cost for the hours involved is quite similar for the light aircraft.

General Ages. I believe the support requirement will be there, whether we use a light airplane or a helicopter. I think the requirement is quite valid.

Mr. MAHON. The cost is quite different. You have to maintain a helicopter many hours for every hour in the air. The costs will vary on the light aircraft.

Do you have any aircraft you propose to use on this!

General AGEE. I believe we have no aircraft other than helicopters in sufficient quantity to permit this kind of support.

You are quite right, the problem of maintenance on a helicopter is altogether different than on a light airplane. That is one of the considerations we will have to make before deciding what we have to do about this. Meanwhile, the requirement we consider to be valid in terms of flying hours, and mission support in order to accomplish this task.

PROGRAM FOR MISSILE BASE SUPPORT

Mr. Mahon. This does not occur to me, General Friedman, as being a very well thought out operation.

General FRIEDMAN. I believe it is more precise than it would appear to be on the surface.

As General Agee has indicated, we have made specific allocations, 40 helicopters. There are a number of light aircraft, such as the L-20, that are available which can also perform this function. I think all General Agee is saying is that insofar as the fuel and oil costs are concerned, we are talking in approximately the same type of figure for the number of hours that are intended to be flown for

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »