(Participating were Les Brownlee, acting secretary of the Army; Claude M. Bolton, Jr., assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology; Army Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker, chief of staff, U.S. Army; Army Lt. Gen. Richard A. Cody, deputy chief of staff, G-3. U.S. Army.; and Army National Guard Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum, chief, National Guard Bureau.  Slides shown during the briefing can be found on the Web at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2004/d20040224armav.pdf.  A photo taken during the briefing is located at http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Feb2004/040223-D-9880W-004.html.)

 

     Brownlee:  Good afternoon.  I'm Les Brownlee, acting secretary of the Army, along with the chief of staff of the Army, General Peter Schoomaker.

 

     We're here today to announce a major restructure and revitalization of Army aviation resulting from a study initiated within the Army several months ago.  This study reflects the lessons learned and experiences gained by the Army's recent two-and-a-half years of combat in the global war on terror as well as the operational environments envisioned in the foreseeable future.

 

     Briefly, the study affirms that we should continue to provide the most effective survivability enhancements to our rotary and fixed-wing aircraft as soon as possible.  The study also indicates that we should upgrade, modernize and rebuild our attack, utility and cargo helicopter fleets, and replace our light observation and scout/attack helicopters as rapidly as possible.

 

     In addition, we must replace the older helicopters in our fleet, especially in the National Guard and Army Reserve.  We must ensure the National Guard and Army Reserve have the capabilities necessary to accomplish the missions they are performing with great dedication and commitment in the war on terror in numerous deployments around the world, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to meet their responsibilities for homeland defense as well.

 

     To accomplish this in the near term will require a substantial investment in Army aviation.  We've examined closely our resourcing plans for aviation and concluded that some of the capabilities those funds would provide are no longer consistent with the changed operational environment.  Therefore, General Schoomaker and I have recommended that the Comanche helicopter program be terminated and those resources reallocated to restructuring and revitalizing Army aviation.  With the approval of the president and the secretary of Defense, we began briefing key members of Congress this morning.

 

     It's critical to the Army now, as we're at war, and for the future that the funds that were identified for the Comanche program in the fiscal year 2005 budget, as well as those funds in the future year's defense plan, remain with Army aviation.  We are preparing now to submit an amendment to the fiscal year 2005 budget currently before the Congress to reflect those changes.

 

     Our revised plans for the next several years, out to fiscal year 2011, include the procurement of almost 800 new aircraft for the active and Reserve components and the enhancement, upgrade, modernization and recapitalization of over 400 -- 1,400 aircraft.

 

     We will retain relevant technologies developed in the Comanche program and our technological base, and we'll pursue research and development more applicable to future aviation initiatives, to include the joint multi-role helicopter, the joint airlift aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles.

 

     We also believe that the helicopter industry will benefit, both now and in the future, from these actions and programs.

 

     I want to emphasize that this is an Army initiative which emerged from a study conducted within the Army.  We will take these actions concurrent with a reorganization of our aviation brigades throughout the Army, which will standardize their structure and provide the modularity and flexibility we must have to achieve the joint and expeditionary capabilities that are so essential to the Army's role now and in the future.

 

     General Schoomaker and I have made the recommendation together, are in -- and are in total agreement on this plan to revitalize Army aviation.

 

     Now I'd like to turn the podium over to the chief of staff, General Pete Schoomaker.  And following General Schoomaker's remarks, we'll take a few questions before turning this over to Lieutenant General Cody, our G-3, who will go into more detail on the restructuring of Army aviation.

 

     Pete?

 

     Schoomaker:  Okay.  Thanks, Mr. Secretary.

 

     I'll be very brief here.  I'd just like to make a couple comments to emphasize some of the points in Secretary Brownlee's statement.

 

     First of all, very, very important to emphasize this is an Army initiative as a result of our studies, and it is about fixing Army aviation for the future, for today and for tomorrow, not just about terminating Comanche.  It's a big decision.  We know it's a big decision.  But it's the right decision.  And I think when you take a look at the specifics, and as General Cody speaks, you'll come to that conclusion.

 

     You have to -- I'd like to emphasize that it's important that we all maintain this in the full context of the kind of restructuring and the other initiatives that we have have going on in the Army -- modularity; the balancing and restructuring of the active component and the Reserve components -- and take a look at it in that context, along with some of the other focus areas that we have announced.

 

     This also -- a very important point here -- leverages many aspect of special operations aviation that they -- and progress that's been made over the years that we can bring into the conventional fore.  And I'd like to reemphasize the fact that much of what we've gained out of Comanche we can push forward into the tech base for future joint rotorcraft kinds of capabilities as we look further out.

 

     Finally, I'd like to say that I'm extremely pleased that we've got the assurance of the president of the United States and the secretary of Defense that this termination of Comanche and the resources that are available over this current program will be applied to the Army aviation program, which is very, very important to us.

 

     So anyway, I would -- I think we're prepared to take some questions if you'd like.  And go ahead, sir.

 

     Brownlee:  I think you were first.

 

     Q:  Yes, in terminating this program, have you decided that it simply was too expensive and it would've been obsolete by the time it was put out there in any kind of significant numbers?

 

     Brownlee:  Yeah, I think we looked at several things.  One was, we looked very closely at the operational environment in which we're currently operating and have operated in the last two and a half years and what we could see in the foreseeable future, and decided   that it was inconsistent with the capabilities that were in the Comanche as opposed to those things we could do to the rest of Army aviation with the resources if we applied it to other aircraft.

 

     Pete?

 

     Schoomaker:  I would say, when you take a look at it from a purely business standpoint, we have about a little over $14 billion in the program out to 2011, and if you take a look at the in excess of $100 billion worth of inventory we have in the current fleet and the capability that we can achieve out of the investment we have there vice 121 Comanches, it makes a lot of sense to pull this over and to take ourselves forward.  And General Cody will brief things like Block III Apache and some other things, and you'll see the capability you accomplish.

 

     Yes, sir?

 

     Q:  This helicopter's been envisioned for the last decade, even when you were on the Senate Armed Services Committee, this thing was envisioned as the quarterback of the digital battlefield, the "Tom Brady of helicopters," for football fans.  (Laughter.)  Now when you lose this quarterback for future combat system and all the other systems you've had that this was going to be dependent on, where do you go for the quarterback?

 

     Brownlee:  Tony, it's a good question.  Let me give little intro and then I'll let Pete fill in.

 

     First of all, the Block III Apache, which we will now be able to do in some numbers, will have all of the capabilities that we would have built into the Comanche with the exception of one, and that's the low observability.  And if you look at the operational environment in which we're now operating and the one we think we'll be operating in the future, we think that is not where we should put our focus.

 

     Pete?

 

     Schoomaker:  And I agree with that.  I think you will see that the quarterback capability is picked up in what we want to do and it also provides a survivable aircraft.  To have Comanche survivable and to do the kinds of things we'd have to do in the current threat environment, we have to add things to Comanche, which takes away from its primary stealth capability and also requires an investment of several billion dollars to do that.

 

     Q:  Low observable is less of a priority now given the current war-fighting environment you see over the next decade?

 

     Schoomaker:  If you take a look at when Comanche was envisioned, starting in 1983, and you take a look at the threat that we faced at that time and the kind of battlefield that we envisioned, Comanche made a lot of sense, but it makes less sense today as we go forward.

 

     Q:  General, can I ask you, is this a case of technology outstripping the program or bypassing the program, or is it a case of the threat changing enough to make the program --

 

     Schoomaker:  I think it's both and it's more.  I think it has to do with the contemporary operating environment, what we envision the future operating environment to be, it's got to do with the threat, it's got to do with emerging technologies and it's got to do with just the overall context in which this helicopter will fly.

 

     Q:  Sir, just if I could follow up on these questions, can you give a sense of -- you mentioned that the threat has changed and you need different types of investments.  Where, specifically?  What types of rotocraft are you going to be investing in?  What sort of technologies that you feel are more appropriate than the Comanche investment?

 

     Schoomaker:  If we just let General Cody brief you, I feel he'll brief you in significant detail upon what we're going to do.

 

     Brownlee:  We can take one more question.

 

     Q:  Both of you have emphasized that this is an Army initiative.  What is it that you're trying to prevent us from writing? That Donald Rumsfeld shoved this down your throat?

 

     Brownlee:  No, we --