ARMY AL&T
“How can you look to the future when you’ve got a $7 billion [budget] with just over $100 million in S&T?” Crosby asked. “How can you modern- ize? How can you sustain? How can you go to the next vertical-lift technology?”
The operational tempo of Army aviation is high, Crosby noted, with more than 4.3 million flight hours since February 2003. Crosby advised that flying aircraft at this rate greatly shortens their life cycle; a projected 20-year life cycle can be compressed to five years. Reset, while it can extend the life of the aircraft, doesn’t negate the wear and tear on that aircraft.
“How can you look to the future when you’ve got a $7 billion [budget] with just over $100 million in S&T?” asked Program Executive Officer Aviation MG William T. Crosby, then a brigadier general, Jan. 13 at the AUSA Institute of Land Warfare’s Army Aviation Symposium and Exposition. (U.S. Army photo by Todd Mozes.)
aircraft. There is nothing perfect. We lost sight of the goal,” Crutchfield said. “Even though technology will change and the environment will change, the aim point needs to remain the same.”
Crutchfield noted that after 22 years in the Comanche timeline, only two air- craft were produced, versus the UH-1’s eight-year timeline, in which 16,000 were made.
Aviation Portfolio As the life-cycle manager of manned and unmanned aviation weapon sys- tems, Program Executive Office (PEO) Aviation is tasked with supporting overseas contingency operations while also maintaining Army aviation for the Current Force and transforming for the Future Force. The PEO man- ages seven project offices and 2,250 personnel, with a Program Objective Memorandum (POM) of $35 billion in FYs 10-15 and foreign military sales case value of $7 billion.
But while PEO Aviation’s total FY10 budget was $7 billion, its S&T budget was only $107 million.
58 APRIL –JUNE 2011
“Are we going to continue to sustain these aircraft for another 20, 30, 40 years?” Crosby asked the AUSA audience. “That’s the struggle we’re going to be looking to resolve.” The only new aircraft program in the PEO Aviation portfolio is unmanned aerial systems, he noted. Every other program is one of modernizing or upgrading existing platforms.
Combat Multipliers Crutchfield’s personal commitment to Army aviation, he said, is to remain the “combat multiplier of choice” for the Army’s ground maneuver commanders, provide resolute leadership in support- ing continuous combat operations, and prepare for the future.
“Nothing is more important than how we train and sustain the flow of highly qualified aviation professionals to rap- idly meet the demands of commanders worldwide and expertly employ the full- spectrum capabilities aviation brings to the Army and the Joint Force,” he said. “I want to know what’s good about Army aviation and what can be improved, so we can meet the demands of the com- manders and Soldiers in the field.”
Crutchfield referred to a series of “avia- tion imperatives” that are necessary to meet his goals:
• Work as a team • Be rapid and responsive • Keep “cost culture” in mind • Professionally develop the aviation force • Maintain strong relationships with local, regional, and national communities
• Eliminate the aviation training backlog • Significantly reduce aviation accidents
Learning from the Past Crutchfield stressed the importance of past experience in looking forward. “We’re here today because of young Soldiers,” he said. He reminisced that when he was training as a young second lieutenant, he learned how to fly on the UH-1 Hueys under the instruction of Vietnam veterans, whom he called “visionaries.” He eventu- ally flew the AH-64 Apache helicopter in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.
“They knew we would need new air- craft and equipment. I owe the same vision to today’s young Soldiers,” he said. “They will not fight the same war we are. Twenty-five years from now, I don’t want them, I don’t want my grandchildren, to fly the AH-64Z.” Currently, the Army uses the AH-64D Apache Longbow.
“Our [aviation] branch has to lay out what it needs, and it must be done now. It’s all about the future,” Crutchfield said. “We may not get all we want, but we’re going to get all we need. We must have a healthy aviation branch, postured for full-spectrum operations in defense of our Nation and our national inter- ests. We may not get it all right, but we must not get it all wrong,” he said.
Looking Ahead Current vertical-lift platforms are critical enablers in today’s conflicts. Without planning for their future, Army avia- tion will be unprepared when these platforms need replacing, Crosby said. Almost 50 percent of future vertical-lift decision points (e.g., whether to begin acquisition of replacement aircraft) occur within the next 10 years, and 85 percent within the next 15 years.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88
