tv Marine Corps Pentagon Officials on Presidents 2023 Budget CSPAN July 21, 2022 4:16pm-5:24pm EDT
officials with the marine corps in panic on saying u.s. weapons given to ukraine to fight russia must be quickly re-supplied. it made these remarks that house armed services subcommittee hearing on the president's 2023 budget request. for modernizing marine corps programs. this is just over an hour.
year 2023 requests. but before i continue, i need to review protocols for all members who are locally joining the hearing. members participating must be visible on screen for the purposes of identity, verification, establishing and maintaining a, participating in proceedings and voting. members must continue to use the software platform, video function, while in attendance. and an experience connectivity issues or technical problems that render them unable to participate. if a member is experiencing technical difficulties they should contact the committee staff for systems. with that, i'd like to turn to my opening remarks, as i mentioned, we believe we have -- we will stretch it as far as we can. we appreciate you working with us. first of all, welcome, the
principal civilian deputy -- lieutenant general wise deputy for aviation and lieutenant general heckle, commanding general for calm that development command and deputy -- for combat development and integration. thank you for being with us today. we look forward to this discussion. it's important that we acknowledge the context of this year's marine corps modernization budget request three years ago, -- we embarked on a significant orientation to better align the core with national security challenges posed by realities of today and tomorrow. certainly, anybody who is reading any of the defense news, plenty to be said about that. or the three years congress on the marine corps modernization strategy, generally relevant, stable, affordable and achievable. and accordingly, we've done it
straight with our support. however, modernization is not without challenges or risk. there are programs within and outside the jurisdiction the subcommittee that certainly merit scrutiny. in today's hearing we will specifically focus on rotary aviation and ground systems which across the marine corps program is generally in good shape. particularly interested in hearing from our witnesses assessments and impacts on the departments equipment and ammunition -- in support of the conflict in ukraine. we also look forward to hearing your thoughts on modernization management and the use of acquisition authorities intended to accelerate research development and the acquisition process. finally, we look forward to hearing updates nonspecific programs such as the ch-53k, the act, amphibious combat vehicle and tactical network.
long-range anti ship fires and air tanks. much to cover, and certainly, we would like to yield to my partner here, technical air and land for missouri. i'm a jersey guy. it said missouri here. we will go with that. >> thank, you mister chairman. i'd like to first of all thank our witnesses for being here today and for your dedicated services to our country. three years ago, confidant berger introduced forces in 2030, a plan to radically and aggressively redesign and modernize the marine corps into a lighter, more lethal fighting force, better equipped and more capable to deter and defeat current and future peer adversary threats. one of the most commendable aspects that the marine corps -- it proposed paying for resourcing majority of this change from within. the marine corps has continued to deliver on their promise to transition from older platforms
to better capable systems in a stable, affordable and achievable way. the majority burned marine corps programs that remain on time, on track and on budget. this is not in lost on congress. i look forward to robust conversations with our witnesses about the current status of the marine corps's 30 -- design development and implementation, and the critical defense program is necessary to yield the marines with the capabilities and capacities for success, specifically this committee has demonstrated our support for this program and the strategy that the confidant has placed in front of us. i commend the marine corps leadership for their dedication and hard work to continuously reassess investment priorities and reallocate already limited resources to fund the development and procurement of essential defense requirements and capabilities necessary to build a more lethal defense force. as we discussed, the future modernization of marine corps
grown and roll right programs, i would like the witnesses to identify which risks the marine corps is accepting in the short term in order to keep plant modernization program of four double and on course to meet mid to long term defense require mince of creating a more lethal resilient and natural force able to compete, detour and win against future threats from road actors. i'm also interested in the marine corps assessment of how a flat top line and the resulting in position of cuts and decreases to lower priority programs and investment accounts affect the health and stability of your modernization strategy as well as the industrial base that supports it. and lastly, the fy 23 defense budget requested not factoring russians invasion of ukraine or the ongoing response by the u.s. and their allies to provide vehicles, munitions, missiles and other military equipment to ukrainian forces
and support of their fight against russia. today i hope that our witnesses can inform us on how these missile many quentin transfers have affected u.s. stockpiles and whether you are getting what you need through the various supplemental appropriations to fund these operations, replace vehicle and equipment transfers, and replenish deep needed munition stockpiles. if there are additional funding or authorizations we can provide and fy 23 ndaa at budget, to get after replenishing some of these replenishments now, and avoid the need to continue funding supplemental through 2023, to restore your depleted capabilities, we need to be having this critical discussion now. i thank the chairman for organizing this important and timely hearing and i yield back. >> thank you, and again, i want to mention that what you have been doing with the limited funds and redirection of those
items that are of the highest priority is not lost on this committee on what you are doing, and it is much appreciated. not to suggest that there aren't things that are of concern, but i think generally we are headed in a very good direction. i think you will hear that, speaking from myself and generally, we certainly believe it. miss stefany, great to have you back here. >> thank, you sir. thank you for that comment. chairman norcross ranking member -- on behalf of myself, lieutenant general heckl, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to speak to the department of fy 23 for the requested marine corps modernization. during this hearing you will hear that the marine corps has undertaken aggressive modernization of its war fighting programs over the last five years. sorry, three years. they will explain why this
modernization was required while emphasizing while the fundamental mission of the marine corps to be the most ready when the nation is least ready, has not changed. the marine corps will continue to serve as a force and readiness, prepared to answer the nations call whenever and wherever that may be around the globe. as we watch the events unfold in ukraine, it is clear that warfare is changing. small, distributed formations with powerful and precision lethality, using advanced intelligence, surveillance and recognizance pro platforms. loitering missions and anti-armor fires have proven to be very effective in combat operations. it is evidence we cannot stand still, in the marine corps force design initiative recognizes this new reality, focusing on more capable intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms and smaller systems for growing formations.
additionally, the marine corps investing in research and development of its future loitering munition, which we call organic precision fires. we are using middle tier acquisition authorities for this program and other forest design programs that will allow us to rapidly develop field -able prototypes and demonstrate new capabilities. speeding the delivery of those capabilities to the marines. the marine corps's top priority remains the navy marine corps expeditionary ship interdiction system or nemesis. a ground based anti ship missile system. we have successfully conducted two tests of nemesis, most recently in august 2021, and our currently conducting developmental and operational assessment events for that system. i believe nemesis will have an immediate effect in the operational environment when it is deployed in 2023. the fy 23 budget request continues the pattern of investing in successful
programs that will make a difference in future conflicts. this includes the air ground air task oriented radar, which is currently supporting nato operations. the amphibious combat vehicle, which has just met its benchmark for the mobility, protection and safety, and will deploy with marine platoons later this year. and the joint light tactical vehicle, the modern ground vehicle that will replace legacy humvees over the next several years. the marine corps's forward posture is reliant on ground, aviation and service mobility. rotary wing platforms, such as the ch-53k, and the h1 play critical roles within force design, providing lethality, maneuverability, targeting, flexibility and persistent sustainment. we have completed operational testing of the ch-53k, heavy lift helicopter and last month declared an initial operational capability or ioc of that
aircraft. the fy 23 budget includes a request for black by 44 fy 23 and 24 aircraft production with a projected savings of 100 and $50 million over purchasing the aircraft when you're at a time. we have also reached ioc for the vh-92 presidential helicopter program in the last year and are starting the white house commissioning efforts. the success and the navy marine corps team to be ready to answer the nations call is rooted in being forward deployed. this readiness provides options and decisions space for our senior leaders such as yourself. the navy marine corps for presence also helps incidents from becoming crisis, or a crisis from becoming a conflict. we are confident that the programs in our marine corps portfolio are achievable, affordable and will make our marines more successful. thank you for the opportunity
to appear before you today. and for your strong support of the marine corps modernization. we look forward to your questions. >> thank, you lieutenant. >> so that was one statement for all three of those. sorry about that. >> so, repeat the same, right? >> i am all in. thank you for your statement. we have read them and certainly this gives us more time for questions, which is certainly on top of that. you started your statement talking about ukraine and what we have been witnessing. and the impact, particularly with the javelins and the stinger to a lesser extent in this area. given the performance, and that's tougher to suggest in
russian vehicles in ukraine, the assessment of what you are witnessing both the lack of -- the armor of russia and the ability for ukraine to use the missiles, particularly the javelin to literally doesn't make much of that armor. -- the assessment that would impact it might have on our existing fleet and future? lieutenant heckl and why is, if you could comment on that. >> yes, sir. thank you for the question. i want to echo, real quick, mr. stephen's comment about them -- from this committee and some committees. it's been tremendous. from that, thank you. first, all i think we exercise caution and draw conclusions too early, overseeing ukraine clearly.
we are very, very cautiously and closely monitoring events, and certainly as it would apply to the marine corps team. one of the things they consider about, just as an overarching, to kind of frame the discussion, the russian tactics techniques they've employed, it seems like they are not there, right? we use combined arms. there's an inherent amount of protection and safety in the way we employ our forces, as a combined arms magtf, specifically to the weapons systems, i believe our nation makes some of the best gear on the planet. i don't think it, i know it. it proves itself time and time again, all the way from the mujahideen, to afghanistan. they've said there was no change in ideology, no change in tactics. there was a stinger. that's a case from history. i think we are burying it out again.
i think the armor issue, the character of warfare is changing quickly in front of us. i think we are seeing, just putting yourself, wrapping yourself in a bunch of armor requires a lot of fuel and a lot of sustainment, isn't necessarily gonna make you safe and make you effective on the battlefield. >> sir, i think, also, it i would add is the distributed nature of how the ukrainians are operating in the benefits they've seen from operating that banner is very and cite full and instructive -- to kind of validate in some ways some of the approaches we've taken there from the aviation size. talk much like the commentators is it makes sense and how that allows you to be more effective in the battle space, i think we are seeing some of that from those operations as well which flows directly and the arm around the javelin and do that
targeted activity upfront. many protections. i would say there's couple of we just need to learn the right license in other words but counter effect of the russians using or not out there so that we make sure that we put resilient systems out there that can survive in any battle space. sir. >> thank you. i want to state just for a moment -- and what we are learning from ukraine and we are shipping a tremendous amount of systems and weapons in addition to the humanitarian aid over to ukraine and the marines have been part of that draw down. so i want to ask is from your perspective is that assessment of risk of what we are sending versus what we have available to us, but from an operational capabilities, but also in terms
of what we are shipping, what do we need to have available to us, other words the resupply in particular, because of the change in your operating concept? what was the last number? 5500 javelins, and that's a rough number, have been provided. didn't split up where they are coming from. but what's the impact is on the marine corps? >> yes, so. i think much of those weapons would be in general heckl's area, so general. >> so sir, we've, the marine corps is supplied first to -- comment about when, this budget request, as you alluded to, was not constructed with the, euro, supply kit ukrainians in mind. so that is an issue, you're exactly right. second, and then third, we have, we have provided approximately 8000 javelin missiles systems and approximately 1000 stain or
stinger missile systems to ukraine. and they are absolutely critical to be re-supplied for us. >> >> and i would like to mr. if stefany there's any industrial -- concert. >> yes, sir. so the other question you had to the opening was supplemental. and that first, very small supplemental, i think 3. 4 billion, not enough, obviously not enough to resupply, so we look forward to both your committee and the larger congress on the larger effort, funding effort for the supplemental. but we do have a little bit of money and we are starting to reach our stat line right now, sir. >> thank you. obviously, your waiting eagerly for the latest to pass through the other house and get that moving. but certainly, there is nothing unique to the marines javelins and stingers that isn't facing the other services. i just want
to shift over a little bit to the ch-53ks, which are moving along, and talk about the brown out issue. and lieutenant general wise, we've read a lot about, it we've heard a lot about it, and there's been some medication changes made along the lines. can you tell us where you are no and going forward, the risk that we're looking at in the present configuration? >> sir, i do for, the question, on the 53 k. >> okay, i think the lights just a little, sorry about that. sir, for the 53 k, the initial assessment was very early in the test process. and so, i would answer it in two ways. because we address it from multiple different angles.
the 53 k, when we start the test events, we start at the very heart of the envelope and we work out. and so, the initial test events are very limited. so things like, you know, time limitations within a certain environment. and then we know that the envelope will go beyond that but we tested in trenches out from there to validate the fact that we got the envelope right. so some of the limitations were based on those initial envelope limitations. what we've found since then is a couple of things on the equipment side. one is the diagnostic capability of tariffs air frame is spectacular, meaning the pilot can actually get a realtime engine performance capability readout to make realtime decisions on how the engine is performing regardless of the environment that includes a brown not conditions. so that's part of it. it's actually been expanding the envelope much wider than those initial
assessments indicated. the other side, too, is the automation on the air frame. because the automation is designed to allow a pilot to get that air frame into even the worst brown out conditions and on the ground safely, and minimize its time in that particulate matter, which also really negates the issues we have with potential issues you might have with the burnout conditions. so far, since then, we have actually demonstrated in the worst brad not conditions that that aircraft has performed for 21 minutes in the west granite conditions with zero degradation of the engines. so it kind of points back to initial test parameters can be taken in the wrong way we. purposely-limited until we prove ourselves correct as we go out. but it's been performing brilliantly but. there are multiple systems on board that make that airplane the safest one out there. >> thank you. let me shift over for mr. stephanie. when you
talk about acquisition, quite often, what are we doing right, what are we doing wrong? but in this one, you have asked for the block by authority rather than a multi-year. can you explain to us why the plug by forces a multiyear at this point? >> yes, so. so the water is still in our plan. right off the right off the bat is the criteria to. not more probably not more authority but we may be more industry based money to get them up to a higher enough production level they can with. the army and we will takes care
of a big part of that, two years worth of equipment that once, to get the supply chain spun up so that when we do the five year a multi year they are up to full speed. >> incredibly important. coming off the pandemic with that, i turn to the ranking member. >> thank. you to build on the conversation we already had back to the depleted stocks and the supplemental's that have been through. if the senate approves the bill that was passed in the house, is that gonna be adequate or are you gonna need more in the fy 23 fta? >> ma'am, i --
for what we know right now, we can project that would be adequate. again, when the work continues on, and more requests for drawdown material, it could, obviously, change overtime. right now, we believe that is sufficient for what we can project going forward. >> please keep us posted on that. as it relates to the industrial this, this situation in ukraine and global ally -- by way of equipment ammunitions has shone a light on -- with our industrial base and supply chains. how are you working with partners in the military industrial base and supply chain to mitigate and fix these issues? >> yes, ma'am. very close partners -- stinger in javelin are made with our partners in our air force. we are working with together with industry, recognizing
something like javelin, the production line is able to scale easier. stingers, we will have to go back and probably, if not need more authority, we may need more money to get them up to high enough production level that they can restock in sometime. that's an effort we are working with the army. we will certainly come back to this committee once we get those results. >> when do you anticipate that to be? >> i don't have a day. i will take that for the record to get you that. >> because we need this answer yesterday, really. you know, so we can produce those stingers again or shift to another munition that another country has perfected. that same capability. is there any changes you've made in our current defense acquisition sustainment strategies to get over these problems. long lead times, shortfalls, material obsolescence? >> between authorities we already have as well as defense production act authorities, i
think we have the authorities we need. we now need to finish the assessment where the risks are and then start moving out on addressing those. >> okay. yeah, as soon as possible, obviously. >> yes, ma'am. >> and then, as far as the ch-53k, i'm really glad to hear about the problem, i mean the solution, it seems like, with the brown out concerns. 21 minutes without any degradation at all. that's encouraging about the ch-53k from the start though has had per unit cost concerns. i want to ask about that because it currently cost as much if not more for aircraft in the per unit cost of a joint strike fire. can you explain why this is? >> ma'am, thank you for the question. for the 53 k, we realized the cost reductions in
the acquisition launch, the lowest two so far that came down a little each. the cost for the most recent 53 cases, if you look at the same measurements that we use for the f-35s, it's actually lower. >> how much is it now? >> the last lott was negotiated at 93 point $7 million for coffee. if you use the same metric for the 35, depending on which variant, it's approximately 117 to 170, depending on the variant. >> so how are you working with them to bring down costs? >> yes ma'am. we actually are working at multiple angles. part of it is the program office to drive down costs in the actual process, as well as the vendor at sikorsky and --
martin. but there are other things that are helping us. one is congress, their generosity for the addition of two additional air frames, and the last two lots per lot. that was for additional air frames. it helps drives down the cost through quantity by. recently, on the international side, the israelis committed to purchase 12 aircraft with an option for six more, it looks very good that they will go down that road. there are additional opportunities starting to show up for the 53 k. i know it will be part of the berlin airshow this year. so looking at more opportunities to drive down costs through quantity by as well. so approaching it from multiple angles, not just manufacturing, by allowing their learning to come up and produce in a more effective manner. >> we will switch to another platform, the n. e. m. e. s. i. s., you mentioned in your opening statement -- it does sound like a very exciting platform. can you provide us more information on what the
system is, and the advanced capabilities it brings to the fight? >> i'm on now. here we go. yes ma'am. glad to, thanks for the question. the n. e. m. e. s. i. s. is another one of the programs alluded to by yourself and the chairman, as far as things going right for us. the n. e. m. e. s. i. s. is our number one modernization priority. it can -- it consists of two navy strike missiles, which we work in partnership with our navy brothers and sisters, and it's fired from the joint light tactical vehicle chassis. we've had a lot of success. as the -- as mr. stefany alluded to, it's a been employed numerous times, as recently at the end of april, doing envelope expansion, we've had successful shots over three days. so the system continues to perform, and quite frankly, from august of 21, during
large-scale exercises, we actually fired two navy strike missiles against a maritime target, both at very successful launch flight impacts. so we are very pleased with that, and at this level, this classification level, the range is -- we are pleased with the range as well. so going forward, we are looking forward to fielding a system, getting out to the fleet as soon as we possibly can. >> when do you anticipate that fielding? it sounds like a great capability. >> end of fy 53. >> -- >> i don't know the exact number, i will have to take that for the record, i will get back to you on the specific number. >> i have more if you have a second round, but i yield back. >> miss sherrill, you are now recognized. >> >> thank, you mister chairman. first, i'd like to just compliment the army and marine corps on resourcing initiatives to improve the form, fit, and function for the
soldiers and marines in their ppe here, that's been a long time concern of mine, and i -- mister stefany, we just heard from general heckl, the battlefield is changing rapidly. in a recent hearing with the commandant, general berger said he wanted to give the enemy multiple problems on the battlefield to solve. the new forced design for the marine corps is to acquire and field indirect fire systems with increased range, accuracy, long-range precision -- fire that can service both maritime and ground targets. one, if, any cannon artillery platforms as the marine corps looking at to meet this need? >> and have to defer that one to general heckl on the platform. >> yes ma'am. thanks for the question, about cannon artillery? so as you know, ma'am, the commandant has said from the start -- as we experiment and within our campaign of learning, which
informs the analytical rigor that underpins every decision we make, we will make changes, the commandant made a change. we were initially going to draw down to five batteries of triple 7155 meter artillery, we will go down to seven, but we are increasing those batteries from six tubes to eight, will have four on the west, three in the. does that answer the question? >> that answers the question of what you are looking at now, because surely the bulkier missile batteries, with long occupation times and a large geographic signature, we'll put the morale at risk, so i'm wondering, if the marines of explore adding some of the long range under research and development as a way -- long range fires without sacrificing survive ability amiability. >> you bet, ma'am. you are absolutely right. -- it's very susceptible, absolutely. we are, as you may or may not know, we have high mars currently, within our inventory. and we are working closely with the
army. the marine corps is not big enough to pursue programs on our own, so we always seek out sister services to work with, it makes it more affordable. so we are doing that with the army. we are going down the route, as you know, or may not know, high mars will turn into the mrls multiple rocket -- which will include killers, attack homes, and eventually prism missiles, which will be a phenomenal capability, which will do both land and surface targets. did that get at it, ma'am? >> thank you. and stepping away a bit from the need to service targets. i'd like to talk about how the mrl will sustain south with platforms being bulking presenting significant challenges for commanders hoping to maintain a basic load of ammunition for their formations in a contested environment. does the marine corps have a solution for conducting ship to shore
resupply of the bulky missile platforms, and when it comes to combat logistics, i know every bit of space on a truck, ship, aircraft matters, especially when delivering all classes of supply to regiments. do you feel the marines will face a challenge in re-supplying the bulk missile systems throughout the theater? >> ma'am, you are just firing one great question -- obviously, right, now -- logistics in a contested environment is our pacing effort right now. it is absolutely our pacing effort. we are laser focused on it, and getting after it done at my command, particularly within the marine corps -- so we are all over it. it's -- logistics, anyone who tells you otherwise, logistics is always a challenge. it can never be emphasized enough in preparation. i will simply tell you the strength of the marine corps, the mag taft, the regiment is simply a form of a -- it is [inaudible] we have the organic lift we have,
within the -- it's one of our greatest strengths. so for instance the n. e. m. e. s. i. s. is fully transferable in the 53 k. or rather within a kc-103j -- with 16 aircraft going to hawaii specifically to provide additional organic live within the indo-pacific. so that brings me to the line amphibious warship. it will be absolutely critical -- to keep it short, the important aspect of a law or landing ship medium really is it's appropriate name, is the fact that it is a short to shore connector. when you are seeing play out in ukraine, big signatures of any type whether it's logistics or anywhere in the electromagnetic spectrum, trails of fuel trucks to refuel armor, those are signatures. their target-able and they become vulnerabilities
so the shortage -- of the law is critical. we don't require ports. we don't require 12,000 foot runways. we do things from an austere perspective. didn't answer it, ma'am? >> thank. you yes, thank you, general. my time is expired, but i will say, maybe for my oversight responsibilities, i should come test some of those 53 ks for you guys so maybe one of these days. thanks! i yield back. >> thank you. mr. wittman, you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you so much for joining us. general heckl, let me ask about the commandant's guidance. he talks about lightning the force, when it comes to combat and transportation. he talks about it being theater agnostic, to make sure we can operate in the indo --
, but also have the ability to cross over into the european theater, wherever we're needed, -- the update 2022 refines the testing what you have done to really get that concept down to where it needs to be. can you give us a little bit more insight about that whole concept of lightning at the force. where you are with the testing of this, with marines in the field, figuring this out, and where you are today. i know you've made a number of adjustments with the size of battalions, the number of mv-22sx -- can you tell us about how you have that in the planning guide and how you achieve a national defense strategy? >> sir, great question. you and i have talked before, sir. lightning any force simply -- dynamic component of that -- we are seeing that play out in realtime in ukraine. we have seen wildly dispersed, well equipped, precision, lethal
munitions, and the ability to move. let me give you -- we have demonstrated multiple times how we can load n. e. m. e. s. i. s. on the kc-130 -- which can line -- -- it gets back in the aircraft and is gone before the impacts -- that's the kind of dynamic i'm talking about -- lightning any forces going to make that easier to do. and i will also say that with the ubiquity of the sensors right now, particularly in the indo-pacific, if you can be seen and you are a worthy target, meaning the cost, physician, i'm going to expend an expensive weapons system, you can be hit. and that is -- we are getting after signature management and always. and it's kind of back to the future a
little bit. we are doing camo netting, we now have companies that we were on contract with that have netting that goes over vehicles, as well as people who reduce ir signatures, eliminate visual, it's pretty impressive, and that kind of technology advanced as well. the wider, the better -- the lighter means less sustainment, which means and reducing the signature. did they get after, it sir? that's a big question i can go on all day. >> that's spot on. let me ask to look at today's situation, and that is as you are looking at late lightning the force. one of the -- with munitions that are going out the door, both javelin and sting rays, we've heard it. we understand what needs to be done with the industrial base to resupply those sorts of things. but i think the more important than immediate question is what is the marine corps doing in the meantime as a mitigation? so as these weapons stores are going down, what happens if something occurs between now and the time that we resupply? and what can congress do to help you in that
mitigation strategy? >> sir, i think -- maybe mr. stefany will have something to say, i'm not super familiar in how the industrial basis posture, and what's capability -- like in world war ii, rolling 16 b-17s's off the line a day, boeing did. there are ways to mitigate risk. a big part of that is good to continue deterrence for just reference in -- we want to avoid actual kinetic operations. the threshold of violence may be breached every now and then as we compete, and we deter. but the point is to deter, to avoid getting into a situation where the levels of our stores are a concern, right? so for a marine, it means being forward. moving forward, being present, with our allies and partners. nothing, quite frankly -- there's a lot of strength in our allies and partners who utilize similar weapons systems, and i think we
need to play to that advantage. i don't know if you have any comments about this. >> i would just add that the rank or has not reached a place where they can't support the -- we haven't got there. and we will certainly comment and talk to you before we get that place. it's on that we will lay all of our -- we still have plenty of them for the forward deployed marines. >> as you know, we track very carefully and closely the training status of our units. those same weapons systems have to be used. our marines have to fire them on a periodic basis to maintain their readiness and proficiency. >> that's right, thanks. i think is incredibly important for us to know well ahead of time, because as you know, the ability to resupply right now is atrophied, and that's a risk in and of itself. thank you, mister chairman. i yield back. >> mr. -- >> thank you for being here, for your leadership. i want to ask you about long-range strike capabilities. i know the marines are investing in it, so as the army. what we are challenging -- you have basing
concerns, and my question would be, how do you envision this working in the pacific theater? i say that because the air force has the b 21, they have stand up weapons. the navy will have, shipped born capabilities. is this a real viable -- and basing issues, how do we deal with it? thank you. >> great question. as you know, n. e. m. e. s. i. s. is one of our systems. the other one is long-range precision fire, which is a tomahawk. we share that with the navy. an incredibly long range weapon. we have demonstrated that weapons system firing off of one of our platforms, ground based. and we are very happy with it. we have yet to determine going forward, it is a larger missile system than the naval strike missile and the n. e. m. e. s. i. s., so again, from my concert as a requirements guy for the marine corps, i get concerned when i
see something that are big and heavy, read signature, difficult to resupply, signature, the ground based tomahawk -- and by the way, it's launched out of a vertical launch system, which is similar, looks similar, to other ones, so there's opportunities there as we go forward. leave at that. so yes sir, we have that capability. it's very viable. your concern about access, with allies and, partners absolutely. one of the things, the marine regiment and the multi domain task force that the army is fielding, the multi -- they are complimentary in nature. mlr is a little smaller, nimble -- further punch. it will be up to allies and partners to tolman but they will allow in. from my perspective, we have -- living
inside here they in and they out, and we depend on what they allow in. but to your point, big missile systems might not be something -- it might be a little bit concerned. >> i worry about the access. i would think that those capabilities between the air force, navy, army, and marines's bus, but if you don't have the basic abilities, that's the concern i have. maybe in europe, in the middle east, there's other opportunities. is there a primary weapon that we need to have republished for the marines? what's your number one or number two things that the marines need replenished? >> sir, i will tell you right now, the comments on one issue is -- not pretending to this, is amphibious ships, to be forwarded deployed. biden's system wise, it's the n. e. m. e. s. i. s.. >> for dealing with ukraine, was there certain weapons of the marines had to send over that we need to be focused on for replenishment? >> the javelin stingers. >> we touched on that a little bit. that would be your priority. >> yes, sir. >> okay. one of the things i
felt like we could have done quicker in this ukraine fight is the capabilities of tanks, 20, 30, 40 miles behind the line, we are starting to see that. we see other countries that have some really good capabilities that ukraine is using right now. what would be your advice here on how we could be, i guess, -- our capabilities, our remote pilot aircraft, for example, i feel like we are hindered by our rules set. other countries are filling their capabilities. do you see the same issue? >> that's a good question. >> i hope that follows. >> sir, i think, and i don't know -- as you mentioned, uavs -- i did a couple of years with nato as a brand-new one star striker of nato -- spent a good amount of time when the, doing exercises. from our perspective, i think whatever we do, -- i
think we can contribute more. i don't disagree with you. you always wish you could move faster in hindsight. i don't know if -- >> gentlemen, we do have restrictions on uavs, uas's, as you know. that slows us down. on the surface, i think we can have a conversation of unmanned surface type things we are doing in a different form that are not as slow as those are going on. >> this is the area the other countries are with the -- much faster, and i feel like we are losing an opportunity to provide our great weapons in that case. but i'm running out of time, so i yield back. i thank you for your time. >> thank, you dr. jackson you are now recognized for five minutes. >> thank, you mister chairman. thank you ranking member, hartzler. they to our distinguished guests. i know that this is -- modernization
program such as robbery aberrations and -- i briefly want to touch on the importance of modernization of -- as an aside here. as we constantly [inaudible] looking towards making cuts on the medical side to support the needs of the line side, most recently, we saw the medical officer of the marine corps position get cut, which is a decision that i wholeheartedly disagree with. a mistake like cutting the pmo sets us further back in our modern nation efforts and could cause irreparable damage to our medical readiness. i understand that having the latest aircraft and weapon systems is extremely important, but it doesn't matter if we forget to care about our people. if we are forced to compete and we end up in the pacific without appropriate leadership -- it's going to be paramount for success, as we modernize our military, out encourage the department of the navy leadership to reconsider the decision and reinstate the t mo. that said, i want to shift
gears now and talk about some of the modernization efforts included in this year's budget requests. on wednesday, the full committee heard testimony from general burger that i was impressed with on the modernization efforts of being undertaken -- adapt to the needs of the indo-pacific theater. one thing mentioned was the need for funding for the v 20 to nestle improvement. -- telling the committee if you hear that you share the same feelings that we have and the need to make sure that we ensure our fleet and increase of platforms overall readiness. in the unfunded priorities less committed to congress, nearly 75 million was requested for an improvement. these documents also show a commitment from the marines to continue this vital program in future years. modernizing our b 22 is not something that we can wait on. it's something we need to get started on now. as you know, the workforce in amarillo, where i represent, has risen to the occasion of completing the
air forces improvement process ahead of schedule. there is no doubt in my mind that this would be the case for the end between two improvement program as well. in the written submission to the committee, when asked the you know of any factors that have the potential to hinder execution of additional funds for this item in fy 23, the answer was clearly stated as no. all of this leads me to wonder if the amount requested on the unfunded priority list is enough, that's the question, or if congress needs to consider even larger amounts to ensure that we can dominate any future conflict. my question, if additional work can be accommodated by the workforce conducting this improvement, -- general wise wise, would the marines be able to accelerate this further if additional funds are appropriate over the -- unfunded priorities list? >> great question. and as we mentioned before, we are very laser focused on making sure there's no break in that line,
and that we continue that to sell improvement. we've already laid in money through fiscal year 23 for the long lead to ensure that it starts right at the back side of the air force upgrades to keep that going. as far as accelerating, i believe the line does have the capacity to accelerate. we would also have to balance that with aircraft off the line to make sure we had an optimum sequencing, so as the rest of the readiness of the fleet to deploy is balanced. so that part i would have to take for the record as far as how we could accelerate it further in order to make sure we still have adequate capacity for deployments and still maximize the line. but certainly, we are very interested in the program because it does offer so many readiness perks for us, of course. >> yes sir, i agree with that. i've had the opportunity to go out to bail and look at these things when they tear them apart. some of them look fairly good, some of them look like they really need a lot of work.
so i'd like to see us do that as soon as possible. on a bipartisan basis, many members of the committee have agreed that the president's budget request is not giving us the resources that we need. i do anticipate that we will need to provide additional funding to account for the inadequate budget that we received. one more question, i would like to ask you, general, related to the mv-22s. as we look at the need to compete and win in the indo-pacific in the next few years, what are the gaps that we are facing for did not have adequate -- any other platforms i would be able to accomplish this mission instead? >> so the v-22 is extraordinarily capable, just because of the speed, the battlefield tempo develops. there's still nothing else that can do it that way. can we lift folks, assault support with 53's, with other platforms? can you do those missions? you cannot at the speed, and speed is very important. so it does feel a unique area, and that's
something we need to make sure that we maximize readiness to have those assets for when we need them. >> thank you sir. my time is up now, but i wanted to also say, i had a third questionable summit for the record. it's related to the armies future vertical if and where the marines are looking if they are looking at with the army is doing, because i hope that we go down that path that the me -- thank you, sir. >> thank you. just a note, they have called votes, there's at least question that we have. do you have another? okay, so -- i will let vicky jump in here. let's talk about the humvees. obviously, we are moving towards the jail tv, but it's no surprise that anybody in this room, many of the accents -- and the mitigation that has been going on, you are well aware of that. he had there is nothing in this year's request in terms of mitigating that.
can you explain to us why you have elected not to include any of the state of the upgrades? >> absolutely, sir. so the marine corps is all in on jltv, and we are not returning the humvee. so we will get out of the humvee business, period. so the faster we can do that, the better. the jltv has proven itself to be a really solid weapons system, it is more safe, more capable, more survival from every perspective, it has a lot of safety features that are inherent. and by the, way some of the overlay -- you can't even upgrade. we have very carefully identified the best of breed, and the worst of breed. we are getting rid of the worst as soon as possible. the older vehicles that are in worse shape, but the jltv, and you lock brakes, steering control, all the things that
contribute to a lower mishap rate all the way around, things such as roll overs. so again, we have -- we feel that approximately 2500 of them, and our ao is 12,500. and we are just moving out as quickly as we can. as you, know i think there's 413 in this requests, and there's some unfounded priorities list of the faster we go with them, the faster we can replace humvees. >> we agree with you with the jltv, it's a great vehicle. but at today's estimate, we are talking about 2031 before we get rid of those. mitigation, getting rid of those, it can be retrofitted, obviously. that's a long time. and this is a serious issue that we know how to fix at a relatively low cost. it is something that we
believe is extremely important and nobody likes to throw good money after bad, but 2031 is a long time off and i will just defer to -- >> just a quick follow-up. it was my impression that in this budget, the jltv is on the unfunded priority list, there is not. you just said these 413 requested? >> i'm pretty sure we have 430 vehicles in this budget requests, yes ma'am. >> thank you. mr.? wittman >> general wise, we talked a lot about the platforms, but the most important part of that platform is the pilot. i wanted to get your thoughts on rotary ruing pilot retention and recruitment into the future. it looks to me, at the company level, between third and eight year, those pilots become more and more of a challenge to keep. give us your perspective on what the marine corps is doing in -- to make sure we retain those piles, which we will need in the years to come? >> yes sir, thank you for the
question. so obviously, we track very closely all of our pilot retention issues. there's some areas that are very complex and challenging right now, as we know. and we attack those from multiple different directions. so some of it is making sure that the accession piece is adequate, but the big thing, which i think really gets more towards the question is, there were tension side of the house. so some of that is looking at bonuses. we have a range of bonuses depending on the platform in order to provide some enticement. i would tell you, from a very personal perspective, when i was being looked at for retention in the early years, and though enticing and nice, it was not the sole thing that kept me because when it really comes into play, i think most would agree, is that right command climate, selecting the right people to provide that
hemisphere that people want to come to work every day, they want to be part of something like that, so we are very focused there as well. the other good piece of it is being very tied in closely with my counterparts in the naval aviation enterprise. specifically, sinatra, the chief of naval aviation training, and watching those pipelines to make sure, as they go through, that we are meeting our requirements for those pilots. for instance we if you short this year. but of course, the year is only about a half over. so it will fluctuate a little bit 20 and. but we watch them so closely because we don't want to get behind him. most communities, we are actually considered healthy, which is 85% or above. in the rotary wing community, i would not say that's true across the board. there are plenty of challenges to go around. but that one we stay very glued to. we are relatively healthy now in that regard.
>> mr. veasey, you're now recognized. >> mister chairman, thank you very much. general weiss, i wanted to ask you a question. now that each service is orienting it's a modernization strategy and priorities on some variation of multi domain operations, how does the v 22 fit into this in any future till rotor platforms? >> sir, thank you for the question. i'm looking at really distributed operations widely distributed operations particularly as we look at the pacific the v-22 is for us very uniquely capable, not just because of the fact that it can deliver a statement to anywhere or people but it's the speed at which it can do that. it's demonstrated over and over since it started combat deployments in 2007 that it is uniquely capable to do things that no other platform can do so. the top quarter side i think is demonstrated across all the services as we've seen it taken the navy and air force a special operations and
everyone is seeing the value of the platform. the japanese have come on board as well. so, as far as future of tilt rotor and other opportunities and there was a question earlier having to do with future vertical lift and how the marine corps is really expanding its view of some of the capabilities that have been developed through that program that would suggest that some of the tilt rotor and potentially unmanned capabilities to further expand our ability and capacity to sustain forces and widely distributed environments. there's huge potential in that area, moving forward. so we are working very closely with all the vendors, at the army, the air force, and the navy, through what we are now calling a family of systems within the future vertical lift to address those specific additional capacity requirements. >> what about the tilt rotor? what about the tilt rotor industrial base, and how they're rotary bring aviation industry industrial base. this is kind of like your overall assessment of that right now? >> for the industrial base, i'd
probably let mr. stefany talk to that one. >> yes, please, please, thank you. >> yeah i think it's, we're kind of in a, certain lines coming to an end, and army's first. but for future vertical lift is the future, and we have this kind of gap in the middle, right? that's why the nestle program was potentially a very good way of filling that void to keep the workforce hot as forcefully armies in the navy and -- make a selection for future vertical lift. we are looking. a future aircraft suppliers, and just play, is that a group, to try and make sure we're doing it smartly with our air force and army counterparts. >> when you think of the biggest challenges as you look at that base, what do you think are some of the biggest challenges that we're going to have to be able to overcome to keep moving forward? >> yes, so i think as we go -- just the skilled workers, right?
being able to get the right skilled mechanics in the right area, it's maybe not as appealing a career field as maybe it was ten or 20 years ago. and so getting the right skills or the right workforce, not losing them in places like amarillo, but other parts of the country, making sure we are, we as a nation are keeping those -- skills active and a choice career for our younger folks. >> yeah. no, you absolutely. yeah, we're definitely seeing a lot of that in the dallas fort worth area. thank you very much. i appreciate your answers. and i will turn it back over to the chair. >> thank you. and to our witnesses, very much appreciated. votes have been called so this is perfect timing and very much appreciate the testimony and certainly answering those questions. we are adjourned.