Tom Cole Presses Navy Official About ‘Offloading’ Takamo Mission Responsibilities To The Air Force

Forbes Breaking News

During a House Appropriations Committee held before the congressional recess, Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) questioned Navy and Marine Corps Officials about collaboration with the Air Force.

Transcript

00:00Chairman Cole. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to go back to something I mentioned in my

00:08opening statement, Secretary Phelan. Could you tell us whether or not that we're looking at

00:16restructuring the Tacoma mission and whether or not we're looking at offloading some of those

00:21functions that it currently provides to the Air Force?

00:24Thank you for the question, Chairman. I think I'm going to let Admiral Kilby answer that,

00:32but let me just give you my thoughts. Look, the investments in both the E-6B and its replacement,

00:38the E-130, are critical to nuclear modernization. I'm committed to improving that. It is a critical

00:44part. I'm going to let Admiral Kilby comment on your specific question.

00:48Yes, sir. So as Secretary Phelan said, the E-6, which you now know so much about,

00:54has served us well, we need to make sure that aircraft gets through its service life and is

00:59replaced by its replacement. There is another mission assigned to that aircraft now, the

01:05ADMIN CAP mission, and that is the mission that needs another platform or a home because the

01:10EC-130 just does not have the room in it that the E-6 does to perform both those missions.

01:15But most important, and I agree with Secretary Phelan, we must stay on track for the Tacoma

01:21replacement program. We've gotten more than our money's worth out of the E-6s. We've had this

01:26empennage problem, and we're repairing those aircraft to make sure they're safe to fly,

01:30to provide continuity of NC-3. But I'm committed to the Tacoma replacement program and staying

01:36on budget and on delivery for that so we can do what we do for the nation.

01:40And again, just to not be redundant, but to be specific, are we talking about any of that

01:46mission moving to the Air Force or are we talking about keeping it within the Navy?

01:51That's a discussion still at the Department of Defense. The part I specifically talked

01:57about though was it will not go into the EC-130 replacement because there's just no room for

02:03the kit for that aircraft. So there's a limitation to what the 130 can do. And it's a performance

02:10game for us, we think, in the execution of NC-3. So we'll have to figure out, as a department,

02:15the Department of Defense, what happens to that initial mission. And it may not be an aircraft.

02:19It might be another means to provide that secure comps.

02:22Well, I would ask you to keep us apprised of that. And I will tell you, since I've got a lot of E-6s

02:29based out of my district and E-3s that are all being retired from the Air Force, where we're

02:37having to scramble to find replacements, I'm not sure the Air Force would have the capacity

02:41to do some of the things you need to do. So again, I would very much like to know when

02:49and if that decision is made. Let me ask you to quickly, if I may, and I put this to all

02:56of you, and Chairman Calvert raised it, I'm very concerned about where we're at in terms of munitions,

03:04in terms of what's available, what you need, what we would have if, God forbid, we were in, you know,

03:10a short-term conflict. It would be short-term because we don't have enough munitions to sustain

03:15a long-term fight. So where are we at in procurement and stockpiling of the munitions,

03:20particularly precision strike types of munitions that you think you would need in a conflict with

03:26the near pure power?

03:27Sure, I'll take that one just for the Navy. We are investing in the munitions we need,

03:33particularly to be ready to, if we need to go to war with China. Those are precision-guided,

03:39long-range munitions like Tomahawk, Maritime Strike Tomahawk, Larasm, SM-6, SM-2, Argum,

03:49AIM-9X, AIM-120 and the heavyweight torpedo. So all those munitions we need to increase production

03:56on. I'm also of the mind that we need to look at other vendors and they may not be able to produce

04:01the same exact specification, but they might be able to produce a missile that's effective,

04:06which is more effective than no missile. So I think we've got to open our aperture a little bit,

04:11but those munitions that I listed, we need to increase production. And we've done so with things

04:16like the SM-6, which used to have 125 rounds a year. We're ramping up to 300 rounds a year. We've

04:23restarted our Mark 48 line. That's our premier torpedo. We stopped doing torpedoes in 1996 and now

04:30have just reconstituted that line and are going to deliver 10 a month. So that's 120 a year. That's

04:35a step in the right direction. But we need to stop looking, like I have, at the minimum sustaining

04:41rate and look at what we need for protraction. I think it's foolish to think that we're going to be

04:47in a short, sharp war. If we go to war with China, this is going to be a big deal and it's going to be

04:52bloody and there's going to be casualties and it's going to take time and munitions. So our stocks need

04:56to be full. Well, again, I would ask you to keep us informed on that and what we can do to accelerate

05:04that process because I think we're all very, very concerned. I'm glad to hear you're looking at

05:09alternatives because I think you're exactly right. I'm not sure the capacity exists in the traditional

05:14munitions that we have to do it in a short term and speedy fashion. Last question,

05:20if I could get to you quickly, General Smith, I'm just curious of your assessment

05:24where we're at on force design 2030. How are things going? Are you on schedule?

05:33Sir, thanks for that question. Sir, we are on schedule. I'm committed to force design,

05:37balanced against our crisis response and readiness missions. We're investing in key

05:43capabilities such as unmanned systems, long range precision fires, which you addressed,

05:48air defenses, counter small UAS. We're enabling modernization while retaining our capability for

05:54competition and crisis response, which is our nom de guerre. It preserves the capability of the

06:00Marine Expeditionary Unit. Based on combat operational employments, the COCOMs have asked us to accelerate

06:07some of our capabilities such as the MQ-9, our big wing drone. Pair that with Mattis, our Marine Air

06:15Defense System and an EMREC, a medium range intercept capability. And we are well on our way to realizing

06:22the value of force design as a stand in force to enable us to deter the PRC from, I won't say breaking

06:31out, but breaking out. And if they do, to punish them for it. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

06:37Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Happy to recognize the ranking.

Category

Transcript

Recommended