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 AGEE. 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

this operation. I think we can put in the record something somewhat more precise.

Mr. MAHON. Most of the communication will be by automobile? General FRIEDMAN. The maintenance teams of course, as I indicated, will have to be carried by these road caravans that I referred to. There will be instances perhaps where speed is a greater element, in other words, where you have to interrupt a well defined schedule and proceed into these bases by helicopter.

Mr. MAHON. Will all missile bases have landing fields for heavy aircraft?

General FRIEDMAN. At the home base-the support base. But, we are using existing bases as you know in each of these instances.

POTENTIAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Mr. MAHON. There is no plan to enter into research and development programs for development of an aircraft for this sort of work, is there, General?

General FRIEDMAN. There is no approved plan to do that.

Mr. MAHON. Is there any request for this plan?

General FRIEDMAN. We are looking into the requirement at the moment because the need to support these outlying sites is, as I indicated, valid. How best to do this we are now studying.

Mr. MAHON. You have not begun to consider getting to work on R. & D. on a new plane for this program?

General FRIEDMAN. We are only considering the ramifications involved in going into a light wing airplane, or a helicopter.

I can say this: as of this time, there are no funds allocated this fiscal year, nor are there any in the 1962 budget for the development of a new aircraft for this purpose.

Mr. FLOOD. Let's be sure we are not going to get into another Lockheed-McDonnell jam. Nobody has been talking to Lockheed and McDonnell and saying, if you fellows on your own would like to do something, this will happen sure. Why do you not design. something? We cannot tell you this officially. No contract, but we have to have this plane and let's see who wins this one.

General FRIEDMAN. I can assure you that has not taken place. Mr. MAHON. Let me ask you if it is not true that if you need the light aircraft in some instances you will not explore something that is being used for the other services if such a plan is in existence? General AGEE. Yes, indeed.

Mr. MAHON. Any further questions in regard to the problem?

REQUIREMENT FOR LANDING FACILITY AT MISSILE SITES

Mr. SIKES. At what point was the requirement for some landing facility at outlying missile sites cranked into the program?

Was this an original requirement, or is it something that was developed at a later date after the construction plans were originally developed?

General AGEE. I would say, Mr. Sikes, the need for the support of the outlying sites, the recognition of this need, developed pretty concurrently with the construction. Now, the construction and initial operational capability, the initial checkout requirement

CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION

Mr. SIKES. Did the authorization request to Congress contain a request for such landing facilities in connection with the outlying sites?

General AGEE. So far as I know, we have made no request. There is no money included in the 1962 construction budget for landing areas at these sites.

Mr. SIKES. Are they now a part of the construction program as such?

General AGEE. They are not; no, sir.

Mr. SIKES. Is it something that will be brought to Congress and a request for authorization and a request for funding made in the event it is decided to go ahead with such a program, or will it be built out of O. & M. funds?

General FRIEDMAN. If this involves new construction, I am sure we will come over with the construction appropriation request.

EXISTING FACILITIES

Mr. SIKES. Are none of these landing strips, or facilities now under construction?

General FRIEDMAN. Certainly not to my knowledge, sir, other than of the type I described previously.

Mr. SIKES. Will you check the facts and supply us with them? General FRIEDMAN. I will do that. I know at Warren helicopters are using roadways to land.

Mr. FLOOD. If you want to modify some old sagebrush and push back a couple of hills and clean a few rocks away, that is not construction.

Mr. MAHON. Any further questions in regard to this problem? Mr. FLOOD. I think this is Pandora's box. You and I have been here 100 years. The Air Force will never be satisfied without lace curtains on these landing fields. You and I know it. Maybe they need them. If they do, I will be the first for them. We are not getting any place here. I think you should ask to have this presented, or described to you at the Chief of Staff and Secretary level.

Mr. MAHON. General Friedman, will you call to the attention of Secretary Zuckert and to General White this testimony in regard to this matter and will you ask one of them in behalf of the Air Force to insert at this point a statement in regard to the program and the plans?

General FRIEDMAN. I will, sir.

(The information supplied appears on p. 861.)

Mr. MAHON. Then we will be sure from the very top echelon this matter has been given consideration.

CHANGE IN MISSILE PROPULSION CHANGES SUPPORT NEEDS

Mr. RILEY. I have a question I would like to ask: General, when you go from liquid-propelled missiles to the solid propellants, will you require as many supporting bases as you will under the present program, or will you be able to eliminate some of them?

General FRIEDMAN. Not because of the change itself. However, in the instance of MINUTEMAN, which is a solid-propellant-type mis

sile, being smaller, there will be more missiles satellited on a support basis than in the instance of the larger missiles. This would be true whether it was liquid propelled or solid propelled. It is the nature of the missile itself.

Mr. RILEY. You will not require as much support for the solid as for the liquid?

General FRIEDMAN. No, sir. That is why you can satellite, shall we say, more missiles on one installation than you can another. That would be one of the factors.

Mr. RILEY. So if you have any number of bases for your present missiles, you may have to abandon some of them later, or would abandon some later when you perfect your solid-propellant missile, is that not so?

General FRIEDMAN. I think the answer to the question is, without a better grip on something that is going to happen clear out in the future, there is no intent now-for the foreseeable future to replace the liquid propellant, large ICBM's which we are currently bringing into operation with the solid-propellant MINUTEMAN. In other words, it would be a mixed force, or an additive force rather than a replacement force.

Some time way out in the future some of the initial ATLAS, which are in a soft configuration, I would feel that at some time they will become obsolete and would be replaced. This is something considerably into the future, sir.

PROPOSAL FOR REQUITAL PAY

Mr. MAHON. You refer on page 17 to the requital pay legislation apparently now pending.

As I understand it, you mean a person would have his flight pay reduced down gradually by some sort of technique which could be provided in the law; is that what you have reference to?

General AGEE. That is the theory of it.

Mr. MAHON. He would not be required to do the flying in order to draw certain amounts of pay?

General AGEE. He would not.

Mr. MAHON. I suppose that is where the word came from. Well now, it has been said to us if we change this basis from 20 years to 15 years, it might not be necessary to have this proposed legislation. Do you know what the situation is with respect that?

General FRIEDMAN. This was only proposed as an interim measure pending a study, or resolution of the problem before the Armed Services Committees in terms of permanent legislation. What we indicated was that if that particular provision, section 514, were amended to preclude flying of those officers with over 15 years of service, we could remove from flying status, now, 4,000-odd excess rated personnel. We would also be able to phase the remainder, some 2,700 pilots, off of flying status in the succeeding 18 months' period.

The reason we asked for this was to not place these particular people, who we need in other jobs, and need very seriously, in a position of losing pay through no fault of their own rather for the convenience of the Government.

Mr. MAHON. This would require congressional action?

General FRIEDMAN. Yes, it would require congressional action. Whether or not it would require action on the part of the Armed Services Committees do not know.

Mr. FLOOD. Is there a law to permit this to be done?

Are we going to amend an existing statute on this subject?

Mr. MAHON. We have sought to save money in O. & M. by making it possible for certain people to get flight pay without actually flying. That is the current law.

Mr. FLOOD. They have to fly.

Mr. MAHON. No. Not if they have had 20 years. That is the law we have approved.

Mr. FLOOD. And the Congress of the United States has approved in the appropriation bill, which is a law, that once a man gets flight pay in the Air Force, he never gets unlatched from that flight pay because if for any reason, to save money or because he no longer is flying, or whatever the reason is, then we can no longer deprive him of this flight pay because if you do this, you would make him unhappy, he would get upset and it would be bad for morale.

Mr. MAHON. I do not think that is a correct statement.
Mr. FLOOD. Then is this?

Is it he has become so accustomed to a standard of living, as in a divorce case, that you can no longer disturb this standard of living to which we are responsible for permitting him to enjoy.

Mr. MAHON. This problem of flight pay involves all the services, the Air Force, Navy, and Army, and we had some hearings on it and we took some special action last year to reduce the number of officers who draw flight pay. We did make some reductions. We undertook to.

Mr. FLOOD. I went all through that. I remember that. But what is this?

Mr. MAHON. This is projected into this discussion as a result of the mission support aircraft presentation which they have made.

DEPOT LEVEL MAINTENANCE FOR C-47 AND C-54 AIRCRAFT

I would like to ask you a couple of questions, General Bennett. On page 3 you refer to the absence of depot level maintenance for C-47's, and C-54-type aircraft.

General BENNETT. Yes.

Mr. MAHON. You have quite a large number of these. How are they being maintained in respect to safety and reliability?

General BENNETT. Wherever safety is involved, Mr. Chairman, we do the necessary maintenance. If the safety of the crew is involved, we go ahead and do that whether it be depot or base level maintenance.

We are not programing the C-47's and the C-54's other than special mission aircraft for Iran (inspect and repair as necessary), in the depot level workload.

Mr. MAHON. It is a more modest repair and maintenance operation? General BENNETT. That is correct.

CONTRACT VERSUS IN-HOUSE AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE

Mr. MAHON. On page 5 you refer to the accord with the Defense directives in the matter of contract and in-house aircraft maintenance.