    [House Hearing, 115 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                             [H.A.S.C. No. 115-120]

                         CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO C-130

                        MISHAPS AND OTHER INTRA-THEATER

                               AIRLIFT CHALLENGES

                                   __________

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                 SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES

                                     OF THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD
                               SEPTEMBER 28, 2018

                      [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                  ___________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    33-476                     WASHINGTON : 2019

                 SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES

                     ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia, Chairman

    K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas            JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
    VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri             SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
    BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama, Vice Chair   JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
    SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee          MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam
    MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin            JOHN GARAMENDI, California
    PAUL COOK, California                DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
    STEPHEN KNIGHT, California           SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
    RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana         COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii
    PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan              A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia
    (Vacancy)
                    Bruce Johnson, Professional Staff Member
                  Phil MacNaughton, Professional Staff Member
                              Megan Handal, Clerk

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                  STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

    Courtney, Hon. Joe, a Representative from Connecticut, Ranking
      Member, Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces.........     2
    Wittman, Hon. Robert J., a Representative from Virginia,
      Chairman, Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces.......     1

                                   WITNESSES

    Conn, RADM Scott D., USN, Director, Air Warfare, Office of the
      Chief of Naval Operations, Department of the Navy..............     5
    Harris, Lt Gen Jerry D., Jr., USAF, Deputy Chief of Staff for
      Strategic Plans and Programs, Department of the Air Force......     3
    Kirkland, Lt Gen Donald E., USAF, Commander, Air Force
      Sustainment Center, Department of the Air Force................     4

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:

        Conn, RADM Scott D...........................................    43
        Harris, Lt Gen Jerry D., Jr..................................    25
        Kirkland, Lt Gen Donald E....................................    33
        Wittman, Hon. Robert J.......................................    23

    Documents Submitted for the Record:

        [There were no Documents submitted.]

    Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

        [There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.]

    Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

        Mr. Courtney.................................................    53

     CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO C-130 MISHAPS AND OTHER INTRA-THEATER AIRLIFT
                                   CHALLENGES

                                  ----------

                      House of Representatives,
                           Committee on Armed Services,
                Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces,
                            Washington, DC, Friday, September 28, 2018.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:02 a.m., in
    Room HVC-210, Capitol Visitor Center, Hon. Robert J. Wittman
    (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT J. WITTMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE
         FROM VIRGINIA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND
                           PROJECTION FORCES

        Mr. Wittman. We will call to order the House Armed Services
    Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces. And today, the
    subcommittee convenes to receive testimony on contributing
    factors to C-130 mishaps and other intra-theater airlift
    challenges.
        The distinguished panel of Air Force and Navy leaders
    testifying before us today are Lieutenant General Jerry D.
    Harris, Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Plans and Programs,
    Department of the Air Force; and Lieutenant General Donald
    Kirkland, Commander, Air Force Sustainment Center, Department
    of Air Force; and Rear Admiral Scott D. Conn, Director, Air
    Warfare, Office of Chief of Naval Operations, Department of the
    Navy.
        Gentlemen, thank you so much for being here with us today.
    We deeply appreciate your time and your viewpoints.
        Recently, there have been an alarming rise in noncombat
    aviation accidents. From fiscal year 2013 to 2017, manned
    fighter, bomber, helicopter, and cargo warplane accidents rose
    nearly 40 percent, resulting in the loss of life of over 130
    service members in aviation mishaps.
        Of these incidents, over 20 percent of fatalities occurred
    in three accidents involving legacy intra-theater aircraft C-
    130H Hercules, KC-130T, and C-2A Greyhound aircraft operated by
    the Puerto Rican Air National Guard [PRANG], U.S. Marine Corps
    Reserve, and Navy Active Duty, respectively.
        Considering these three mishaps involve legacy intra-
    theater aircraft, it is my fervent belief that the services
    must do everything possible to ensure the safety of flight. To
    this end, among the things this committee must consider is the
    recapitalization and modernization of the oldest and most
    vulnerable legacy aircraft.
        A review of the Air Force's intra-theater airlift portfolio
    shows that the service is on track to recapitalize its Regular
    Component units with C-130J aircraft. The Air Force is now
    recommending that the Reserve and Air National Guard retain
    significant capacity in the legacy C-130H aircraft.
        To extend the life and relevance of the legacy Guard and
    Reserve fleet, the Air Force is recommending funding for major
    modernization programs, such as center wing box replacement, to
    lengthen service life in addition to pursuing aviation
    modernization program upgrades to keep these aging aircraft
    relevant.
        This committee has been active in supporting propulsion
    system upgrades for legacy C-130 aircraft in the Reserve
    Component by authorizing additional funds for this important
    effort. To date, the Air Force has not requested this funding
    in its base budget.
        Our review of Marine intra-theater aircraft shows that the
    service is also on track to fully recapitalize its aging KC-
    130T fleet with 79 new KC-130J aircraft, to include its Reserve
    squadrons, to be completed by 2023.
        And finally, the Navy begins to recapitalize its legacy K-
    130T fleet of 25 aircraft by procuring its first 3 new aircraft
    in 2023. With that said, questions remain as to the level of
    effort being placed in the pursuit of this program by the Navy
    and Air Force Reserve sponsors as they seek to balance the
    needs of competing service priorities.
        Additionally, there is concern over how the services
    respond--or responded to the crash of the KC-130T and PRANG C-
    130H, with Navy and Marines grounding their fleets and Air
    Force choosing to continue to fly those aircraft.
        And more specifically, this committee is interesting in
    learning how and why the legacy C-130 propeller systems are
    serviced differently between the Marine Corps and Air National
    Guard aircraft at the depots.
        George Patton once said, ``The more you sweat in peace, the
    less you bleed in war.'' Our most urgent responsibility is to
    ensure enough sweat is being shed to reduce this bleeding.
        With that, I will go to our ranking member, Mr. Courtney,
    for his opening remarks.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Wittman can be found in the
    Appendix on page 23.]

         STATEMENT OF HON. JOE COURTNEY, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
       CONNECTICUT, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND
                           PROJECTION FORCES

        Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to the
    witnesses for their testimony here today.
        The Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee today meets
    once again to consider a rash of tragic mishaps that have cost
    the lives of many service members.
        In 2017, we held a series of hearings and briefings to
    consider the causes, consequences, and path forward following
    four ship collisions and groundings alongside--groundings.
    Alongside our partners on the Readiness Subcommittee, we
    conducted frequent oversight of this issue and also guided
    through a number of reforms in the NDAA [National Defense
    Authorization Act] on surface ship procedure which, again, we
    believe will reduce the amount of risk for these kinds of
    events happening in the future.
        As the chairman said, in the last year and a half,
    unfortunately, we have also seen three fatal mishaps across our
    Air National Guard, Marine Corps Reserve, and Navy air fleet.
    Tragically, these incidents have taken the lives of 28 service
    members. Once again, Congress and military services must come
    together to assess the causes of these mishaps and to ensure
    that the right focus is being applied in order to prevent
    similar mishaps in the future.
        As we have learned from the process of reviewing ship
    collisions and groundings, a single mishap has immediate
    causes, but a rash of mishaps derives from systemic issues
    within the force. Fewer flying hours leads to less experienced
    pilots who are more likely to make mistakes during stressful
    situations; decreased material readiness of our fleet makes
    mechanical failure--sometimes catastrophic--more likely.
        As we review each individual tragedy, we must be focused
    not only on what a mishap says about the individual case, but
    what each mishap can tell us about the state of military
    aviation overall.
        While we are focused here today on the intra-theater
    airlift fleet, I was glad to see that the full House and
    Senate, under the leadership of Mr. Thornberry and Ranking
    Member Smith, included a provision in the fiscal year 2019
    National Defense Authorization Act which establishes a national
    commission on military aviation safety.
        This commission will review the rates of military aviation
    mishaps across the services and across aviation missions,
    assess the underlying causes of these mishaps, and make
    recommendations to improve safety training and maintenance and
    personnel policies.
        I hope the testimony here today will help inform and guide
    the work of this commission as it gets started on this
    important mission.
        I look forward to hearing the witnesses' views on these
    issues today and yield back my time.
        Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Mr. Courtney.
        I will now turn to our witnesses for their opening
    statements.

    STATEMENT OF LT GEN JERRY D. HARRIS, JR., USAF, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
     STAFF FOR STRATEGIC PLANS AND PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR
                                 FORCE

        General Harris. Thank you, Chairman Wittman, Ranking Member
    Courtney, for the opportunity to appear before the HASC [House
    Armed Services Committee] Subcommittee on Seapower and
    Projection Forces.
        On behalf of Secretary Wilson and Chief of Staff of the Air
    Force General Goldfein, I would like to also commend you for
    the fiscal year 2019 NDAA efforts. If the Congress and the
    executive branch are able to continue on their current pace, we
    expect to have a fiscal year 2019 budget on time. First time in
    decades that's not starting a year with continuing resolution,
    or worse, a sequester budget. And that's a favorable start for
    fiscal year 2019. Well done and thank you.
        As we review your draft legislation for the fiscal year
    2019 NDAA, we all recognize the sacrifices that the American
    families make to live and enjoy the freedoms in a safe and
    secure democracy.
        With committees like yours as our best supporters and
    guarantors of that freedom, we recognize the importance of
    hearings like today on C-130 modernization and safety.
        Let me be the first to say that we would like to do more
    and go faster when it comes to modernization of our C-130
    fleet.
        We have reduced most of our fleets over the last decade,
    and the C-130 fleet has been no exception, falling from more
    than 400 aircraft to about 300 in the Air Force inventory. The
    C-130 continues to be a workhorse that accomplishes tactical
    airlift, Antarctic resupply, aeromedical evacuation, natural
    disaster relief missions, search and rescue, firefighting
    duties, and support to special operations.
        But we have had to make hard choices because of declining
    budgets, late budgets of the past, sequestration, and new
    strategies for changing threats.
        During this period, we prioritized safety and then
    compliance, when it comes to operating, maintaining, and
    sustaining all of our capabilities. We just haven't been able
    to get to it all.
        Readiness, lethality, and cost-effective modernization
    efforts have guided our plans as we continue to deliver the
    world's greatest air and space force.
        I request our written statements be entered into the
    record, and I look forward to your questions and our ensuing
    discussions. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of General Harris can be found in
    the Appendix on page 25.]
        Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Lieutenant General.
        Lieutenant General Kirkland.

     STATEMENT OF LT GEN DONALD E. KIRKLAND, USAF, COMMANDER, AIR
         FORCE SUSTAINMENT CENTER, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

        General Kirkland. Chairman Wittman, Ranking Member
    Courtney, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you
    for the opportunity to update you on legacy C-130 sustainment
    and readiness.
        On behalf of our Secretary, the Honorable Heather Wilson,
    and our Chief of Staff, General David Goldfein, I appreciate
    your continued support and demonstrated commitment to our
    airmen, Air Force civilians, our families, and veterans.
        As I attest in my written statement for the record, the C-
    130s are safe, effective aircraft for its missions, and we have
    programs in place to ensure these conditions going forward. We
    take our responsibilities for our people and our mission very
    seriously.
        Earlier this spring, General Goldfein directed all wing
    commanders and operational maintenance leaders to conduct a
    one-day operations safety review. Commanders focused on
    assessing processes and looking for areas of improvement to
    prevent future mishaps. Our service members and citizen airmen
    are our greatest asset. We are absolutely committed to their
    safety as we continue to deliver combat power to our combatant
    commanders.
        On the sustainment front, this year we began a
    consolidation of all C-130 program depot maintenance workload
    currently at the Ogden Air Logistics Complex in Utah to the
    Warner Robins Air Logistics Complex at Robins Air Force Base,
    Georgia. This transition will be completed by fiscal year 2022.
        Because all three of our complexes operate as an
    enterprise, our Air Force will be able to achieve efficiencies
    and greater economies of scale.
        Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of General Kirkland can be found in
    the Appendix on page 33.]
        Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Lieutenant General Kirkland.
        I will now go to Rear Admiral Conn.

     STATEMENT OF RADM SCOTT D. CONN, USN, DIRECTOR, AIR WARFARE,
    OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

        Admiral Conn. Chairman Wittman, Ranking Member Courtney,
    and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for
    the opportunity to appear before you today and discuss the
    Navy's intra-theater airlift plan.
        The Navy provides continuous forward-deployed maritime
    strike and expeditionary power projection force. Supporting
    that force requires a unique logistics infrastructure.
        Due to the distributed nature of naval operations,
    logistics support includes inter-theater lift that bridges the
    gap between the joint force provider of aerial ports of
    debarkation to those fleet logistics sites around the globe. We
    call this capability the Navy Unique Fleet Essential Airlift,
    or NUFEA.
        Operated entirely by the Navy Reserves, NUFEA consists of
    24 C-140Ts, 15 C-40 aircraft, and provides the responsive,
    flexible, and rapidly deployable air logistics to support
    necessary combat operations from the sea.
        The C-40A leads the NUFEA fleet in range and capacity, able
    to carry in excess of 36,000 pounds, 121 personnel, or a
    combination of both. And it is the only medium-lift aircraft
    that's able to transport hazardous cargo and personnel at the
    same time.
        Thanks to congressional support, the Navy will now field
    its last two program aircraft in fiscal year 2019, to complete
    a program record of 17 aircraft.
        The C-130T fills the NUFEA requirements for medium-lift and
    outsized cargo. It is the only Navy aircraft capable of moving
    all modules of the F-35 engine.
        Additionally, the C-130T provides unique capability,
    delivering passengers and cargo to austere locations, including
    unprepared fields and runways less than 3,000 feet. And in
    light of the landscape that we are in right now strategically,
    that's probably an important capability that we need.
        The Navy completed the procurement of the C-130Ts in 1996.
    We are now looking to recapitalize our effort, beginning with
    advanced procurement in 2019, buying three aircraft, as you
    said, sir, in fiscal year 2023.
        But it is not just recapitalizing. It is the modernization
    of the aircraft; we have to keep them relevant.
        In fiscal year--or PB [President's budget] 2019, there's
    $28.5 million for avionics, communications, and obsolescence
    upgrades to keep the aircraft compliant with FAA [Federal
    Aviation Administration] and ICAO [International Civil Aviation
    Organization] standards to able to--in the air traffic control
    management systems across the world.
        Additionally, of the $121 million that Congress adds for
    the NP2000 props [propellers] to be able to--to get us out of
    ``Red Stripe'' as well as getting the--the new legacy blades
    that we are getting from Warner Robins, in concert we will have
    all the aircraft up by fiscal year 2019 and all the aircraft
    converted to the NP2000 by fiscal year 2020.
        That is--there was also $8.9 million to update the carbon
    brakes that Congress gave us through NGREA [National Guard and
    Reserve Equipment Appropriation] funds for our Reserves to
    improve the reliability and maintainability of those aircraft.
        These modernization efforts are critical to maintain the
    Navy logistics support to our deployed forces. As I said, we
    began advanced procurement in fiscal year 2019 to recapitalize
    our KC-130Js, with three aircraft being bought in 2023.
        If the budget changes, budget profiles changes in
    subsequent budget cycles, we may have to revisit whether we
    continue to recapitalize or modernize; based on those budget
    levels, that decision will be made for--at a different time.
        As people and parts arrive to our fleet logistics sites via
    the NUFEA aircraft, they are transferred to one of our Navy's
    34 C-2 aircraft, that completes that last tactical mile to get
    those parts and people out to our carrier strike groups.
        C-2A is over 30 years old. We have our maintenance material
    condition challenges associated with that. We are addressing
    those, but we are also looking to recapitalize that aircraft
    for our CMV-22.
        Initial plan was to sundown the C-2 in 2027. With the help
    of Congress, with additional adds, we have been able to push
    that left to fiscal year 2024. CMV-22 will IOC [intial
    operating capability] in the Navy in 2021, and that is mapped
    to our first F-35 deployment for those engine considerations,
    and we will continue to transition to be transition-complete by
    the end of fiscal year 2024.
        Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Courtney, distinguished
    members, thank you for their--your leadership and the support
    of this subcommittee to provide the resources that enable our
    sailors to do their job. On behalf of the men and women working
    tirelessly to protect American interests at home and abroad, I
    thank you for the opportunity to discuss Navy inter-theater
    lift plans, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Admiral Conn can be found in the
    Appendix on page 43.]
        Mr. Wittman. Rear Admiral Conn, thank you. Thanks so much
    for your comments on the Navy's efforts there with KC-130T.
        Lieutenant General Kirkland, I want to start with you. It
    is my understanding that the KC-130T, the Navy version, and the
    C-130H, Air Force, both have their propulsion system as well as
    other depot-level maintenance done at Warner Robins Air
    Logistics Center.
        I do understand that both the Navy and the Air Force have
    taken a different approach to propeller assemblies, so I wanted
    to--to dig down a little bit into that, and could you explain
    to me what steps have been taken to consolidate those efforts,
    and what we are doing to upgrade propeller assemblies?
        And has the Air Force and Navy response or their efforts in
    addressing propeller assemblies, has that led to a difference
    in how they responded to these recent accidents? And what do
    you think is the outcome of where we are now with the safety of
    those aircraft, based on this depot-level maintenance?
        General Kirkland. Chairman Wittman, thank you for that
    question. I will address both those in turn.
        Sir, you are aware that the--Warner Robins Air Logistics
    Complex it is a single, complete, overall facility for all 54
    H-60 four-bladed propellers. That's the one used on the Air
    Force C-130H and its variants, Navy, Marine Corps, C-130T, KC-
    130T aircraft, and a slightly different version of the
    propeller is used on the Navy's P-3.
        The differences in the manuals evolved due to incorporation
    of changes. These updates to technical manuals occur
    frequently. Their purpose is to correct errors or include
    process improvements that we have learned or identified during
    maintenance.
        And although the Warner Robins technicians were trained on
    all manuals, and although there was collaboration and
    coordination between Navy and Air Force C-130 program offices,
    there was no formal effort to ensure respective changes were
    synchronized between the two services in their manuals.
        Last fall, our Air Force program executive officer
    responsible for the C-130 formed an independent review team
    [IRT]. The IRT was formed to guide development of updated
    propeller overhaul requirements. The IRT consisted of members
    from the Air Force, the Navy, Marine Corps, and members of the
    aerospace industry.
        Additionally, the U.S. Navy Propeller Program embedded an
    engineer within the Air Force C-130 program office. Based on
    IRT recommendations, both services' program offices are
    updating propeller overhaul processes to create a common set of
    procedures. Overhaul processes updates are complete for all
    components except for the propeller blade.
        Using these updated procedures, Warner Robins began buildup
    and delivery of the 54 H-60 propellers in March 2018 in support
    of naval aircraft. These propellers are assembled using new
    production blades procured from the original equipment
    manufacturer, who is currently increasing delivery from 30 a
    month to 48 a month, we believe by October.
        Procedures for propeller blade overhaul continue to be
    updated and refined. Initial validation efforts, which started
    last April, should conclude this fall, and we expect that
    Warner Robins depot will reach full production capacity in
    early 2019.
        I would add the Coast Guard is participating in these same
    efforts and will incorporate those changes in their manuals,
    and we will also distribute this to partner nations through
    country-specific technical orders.
        With respect to the response, Chairman Wittman, I would
    focus--it is my understanding the focus was more on the
    operational impacts that--the differences.
        The fleet sizes had something to do with that, but our
    program office--it is my understanding that our program office
    made a value determination based upon the severity of the risk
    against the probability of occurring, and arrived at a serious
    risk, and accepted that risk so that the U.S. Air Force may
    continue to provide the tactical lift that the C-130 provides.
        Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Lieutenant General Kirkland.
        Lieutenant General Harris, I wanted to ask and dig down a
    little bit deeper on what is happening with some of the
    upgrades. You know, since 2014, Congress has put additional
    dollars in over and above the base budget for C-130H propulsion
    system upgrades, and that includes the T56 3.5 engine upgrade
    program, the NP2000 eight-blade propellers.
        Looking at that, if you look at where it is been applied,
    the Wyoming Air National Guard has put those upgrades in place
    and they have seen a 14 percent increase in fuel efficiency and
    performance increases. And I know currently, the Air National
    Guard is testing this engine enhancement and propeller upgrade
    package to see if they can bring additional operational
    sustainment benefits.
        Give me your perspectives. Does the Air Force support these
    engine and propeller upgrades? And if so, why hasn't the Air
    Force requested these funds for upgrade kits for the Air
    National Guard and the Air Force Reserve C-130H fleets? And is
    there a possibility for the Air Force to prioritize
    modernization efforts for the C-130H fleet, given its current
    age and material condition state?
        General Harris. Chairman, sir, thank you for those
    questions.
        Yes, the Air Force is prioritizing the upgrade of this
    fleet, but the average C-130 age is 26 years old, and when we
    look across our fleets, we have got tankers that are pushing
    50. We have bombers that are over that age. So as we do a
    priority across our budget, we have to look at all of the
    fleets that we operate, and the capability associated with
    that.
        For the congressional adds, we thank you for that. It is
    giving us an opportunity to study and look at efficiencies and
    improvements that we can bring into the legacy fleet. We have
    an ongoing operational utility evaluation that should report
    out in March of this year to give us the--the information we
    need to make those decisions.
        When it comes to submitting it in a budget as a budget
    request, our process working through OSD [Office of the
    Secretary of Defense] and then through the OMB [Office of
    Management and Budget] effort, we are limited on topline total
    and I can't ask for everything. So we prioritize across there.
    We do start with safety first, and then we move through
    compliance, and our efforts across all of those fleets. And
    once we have our--the operational utility evaluation out in
    March, we will have better understanding in how this plays.
        We are seeing improvements, as we have said--as you said,
    sir, the Wyoming Guard unit is seeing an ability to get better
    efficiencies out of the aircraft, which is certainly something
    that warrants do them across our fleet.
        Mr. Wittman. Very good. Thanks, Lieutenant General Harris.
        We will now go to our ranking member, Mr. Courtney.
        Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Just really, one quick question to Admiral Conn. Again, you
    described the replacement program for the C-2 planes. And
    again, just for the benefit of people who may be watching this
    and don't know, maybe, some of the acronyms.
        Again, those are the prop planes that, again, deliver
    people and cargo to aircraft carriers and land with a tailhook.
    And then, they are going to be replaced by the MV, CV-22
    Ospreys, which, again, will land vertically. Is that correct?
        Admiral Conn. Yes, sir, it is.
        Mr. Courtney. Okay. Thank you.
        So, again, the plan that you described, you know, clearly
    the Navy's trying to accelerate that replacement process. These
    are still extremely old planes, as you and I discussed the
    other day, the C-2s.
        I mean, what I heard from your description is, it is still
    about a 5-year window, right? For total replacement by 2024, is
    that?
        Admiral Conn. That is correct, sir.
        Mr. Courtney. Right now. I mean, do you still feel like
    that's the right plan, given the age of those planes? And you
    know, obviously you can't spin straw into gold.
        But I mean, really, this is your opportunity, if you feel
    that, you know, that there's a--that that should be something
    we should be looking at in terms of trying to accelerate it
    further, you know. I just want to yield the floor to you to
    talk about that.
        Admiral Conn. Yes, sir.
        First of all, the C-2 is a cargo aircraft, propeller with
    an arresting gear that catapults and arrests for landing off
    the carrier. It is the primary means by which we get cargo
    airborne, via airlift, out to the carrier--or people, or U.S.
    mail, to keep our sailors--although, there is the internet now.
        But the--it is a 30-year-old airplane. We have gone from 32
    percent mission-capable rate in 2017, to a 40 percent in 2018.
    So the trajectory's in the right directions, but it is nowhere
    near where we want it to be.
        And we are going to continue to make those investments to
    make sure those aircraft are safe to get airborne until the end
    of its service life. I have to fully fund that aircraft until I
    am completely done with it.
        The transition plan is the CMV-22, which is the--it is just
    a modified version of what the Marine Corps flies, but with
    more fuel and a different com [communications] architecture for
    blind--beyond-line-of-sight communications.
        The range, endurance of the CMV-22 exceeds that of the COD
    [carrier onboard delivery] when you consider a hot tropical
    day, fully loaded with 10,000 pounds of cargo, being able to
    fly in excess of 1,100 miles, which meets our requirements for
    combat operations.
        We have accelerated the sundown of the C-2 from 2027 to
    2024. We have our first aircraft being built in Philadelphia
    today, rolling down the line. That aircraft will deliver in
    fiscal year 2020.
        We then have to do a modified OT [operational test] and DT
    [development test], and the only thing--the operational tests--
    the only thing that we are testing are the things different on
    the CMV-22 as compared to the MV-22. So that's going to be a
    very compressed test.
        We then IOC and get our first three aircraft to deploy in
    2021. There is no means by which I can accelerate that any
    further when you look at the MILCON [military construction],
    the training that's required for our sailors to operate,
    maintain, and the aircrew that have to fly and get the hours
    they need. We are going as fast as we can go.
        Any additional aircraft at this point would relieve or
    provide a shock absorber during the transition, as we go from
    transition to deployment and follow-on detachments until we are
    completely divested of our C-2.
        Mr. Courtney. Great. Well, thank you. I mean, that's a very
    helpful picture you painted in terms of the program. And again,
    I just encourage you guys to just keep, you know, us abreast.
        You know, one question is, obviously, there was an accident
    and there was a loss of life. And I realize this hearing is not
    about individual--because it--maybe just talk about the status
    of the case investigation.
        Admiral Conn. Yes, sir. Well, the investigation is still
    ongoing. Our recovery and salvage efforts, we have the 22,000
    feet of Kevlar cable to recover the aircraft that is at 18,000
    feet of water in the Philippine Sea.
        We have to do some follow-on testing with the winch on the
    salvage vessel, to be able to reel up this aircraft. And then,
    now that we are in typhoon season in that part of the world, we
    are going to have to wait for the seas to abate.
        Our best estimate right now is, when we look at the
    conditions that the ocean will provide, we are looking late
    spring, early summer of next year.
        Mr. Courtney. Great. Well, thank you for your testimony and
    your great efforts, and also to the other witnesses for being
    here. I yield back.
        Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Mr. Courtney.
        We will now go to Mr. Gallagher.
        Mr. Gallagher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        To follow up on that line of questioning that the ranking
    member was pursuing, you talk about the differences between the
    C-2 and the CMV-22, which you are testing right now. My
    understanding is that one of the biggest differences is the
    lack of a pressurized cabin on the CMV-22.
        Can you talk to me about what impact that might have
    physiologically on passengers and aircraft, and what we should
    know about those implications?
        Admiral Conn. Yes, sir. The V-22 program has in excess of
    425,000 hours in all unpressurized cockpits. And we haven't
    seen any concern at all about having people inside that
    unpressurized cockpit.
        For the CMV-22, it will fly 10,000 feet and below. We--and
    that was part of the requirements, that it has to be 10,000
    feet and below with a full load of equipment, and meet the
    range specifications to that. And the aircraft will be able to
    do that.
        Additionally, for the--it also has some opportunity because
    it is tiltrotor, not only to go on carriers but when any deck
    is certified for that aircraft--Afloat Forward Staging Base or
    whatnot in the future, that gives us flexibility to distribute
    parts in a distributed maritime operations environment.
        Did I answer your question, sir?
        Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir.
        General Kirkland, we have heard a lot, you know, when we
    travel around to various shipyards, bases, whatnot--anyone that
    involves hiring of Federal civilian employees, just how
    difficult that process can be. And even with aggressive energy
    and management, it can take as long as 140 days to hire a new
    worker.
        So as you look at, sort of, additional C-130 workload, talk
    to me a little bit about whether you feel like you have the
    skilled labor on hand and the challenges contained in the
    Federal civilian hiring process.
        General Kirkland. Congressman Gallagher, thank you for that
    question.
        I would first like to thank the committee and the larger--
    this Committee on Armed Services, for the direct hiring
    authority which we have been provided, which was approved in
    2016. And we have used, through the NDAA, temporary authority
    which I believe is through 2025. Thank you for that.
        It has allowed us to hire over 1,500 employees, averaging
    at 78 days. And that is a combination of the direct hiring
    authority, but also process improvements with our personnel
    center to skinny-down that process. Using direct hiring
    authority, we have accounted for about 75 percent of our
    external hires at the air logistics complex for our depots.
        We are working to expand the direct hiring authority to
    those organizations which directly support our depots, and
    specific to the C-130 workload. Through the combination of
    those efforts, we are 100 percent manned for all of our fiscal
    year 2019 C-130 work at Warner Robins.
        Now the challenge remains, because as we grow our workload
    there, particularly as we transition the naval aircraft
    currently going to Utah down to Georgia, we will continue to
    hire year after year. But the DHA, the direct hiring authority,
    is a key element of the ``1200 in 12'' [hire 1,200 technicians
    in 12 months] initiative going on at Warner Robins right now,
    which began this past summer.
        I would add to that one other thing, that while we work
    closely with vocational and technical schools around the
    locations where our depots are, the Air Force Sustainment
    Center would also benefit from creating an on-ramp for our
    recently retired military personnel. These skilled journeymen
    bring years of experience and a vital buffer as we experience
    other people in the workforce.
        And we are looking--asking through our service to make an
    exception to the 180-day waiting period in support of Federal
    wait system in some of the lower-level general schedule
    employees, particularly with the logistics and supply chain
    management. We need to retain this experience for our service
    members as they walk out the door.
        Mr. Gallagher. I appreciate that. I mean, I tend to think
    that the health of the civilian industrial base is one of the
    most important issues that we face. It could be a limiting
    factor if, God forbid, we had to scale up in response to a
    great power conflict and it is something that's easy to
    overlook.
        It is certainly something I hear, too, beyond the military
    industrial base from every company in Northeast Wisconsin. It
    is just the challenge of finding people, keeping people,
    retaining talent. And so I think it is something we are going
    to need to continue to think about here on the committee.
        And with that, I yield the remainder of my time, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Mr. Gallagher.
        We will now go to Ms. Bordallo. Thank you. Thank you.
        Ms. Bordallo. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and ranking
    member, and thank you to our witnesses, General Harris, General
    Kirkland, and Admiral Conn.
        Well, I certainly have traveled on C-130s multiple times. I
    consider them to be the military horses of their aircraft. But
    gentlemen, the fiscal year 2019 NDAA outlined a framework
    proposed by Ranking Member Smith for a national commission on
    military aviation safety.
        So I want to ask you, General Harris or Admiral Conn, can
    you please offer your thoughts on how this commission will
    benefit mobility mishaps and impact intra-theater airlift
    challenges?
        General Harris. Yes, ma'am, if you don't mind, I will
    start.
        Ms. Bordallo. Surely.
        General Harris. Our approach to any option to look at
    safety, that's our number one guidance for the business that we
    do in the defense of our Nation, so an opportunity to look into
    that and have those discussions are certainly something that we
    look forward to and are working with.
        That element will be part of a larger study that's being
    released by Transportation Command on the study of our overall
    airlifts, not just TAC [tactical] lift, but also our strategic
    lift.
        We will continue to work with that and make sure that we
    get the information that we need, and the safety is our number
    one issue. That's where we will focus resources if we determine
    that that's where we have to go.
        Ms. Bordallo. Very good. You consider it, then, a benefit?
        General Harris. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Bordallo. Admiral Conn.
        Admiral Conn. Anything that addresses or looks into the
    safety of our people, our equipment, or civilians that fly on
    them, I think it is definitely value-added.
        Ms. Bordallo. Very good. My second question is, Lieutenant
    General Harris, Secretary Wilson outlined her plan for a 386-
    squadron Air Force to us on Wednesday morning, just this last
    Wednesday.
        The Air Force leadership calls for reducing the number of
    tactical airlift squadrons by 2, but increasing special ops,
    fixed-wing electronic warfare, and fixed-wing rescue units by
    17. Now, if the pilot crisis is depleting our experienced
    aviators, how does the Air Force intend to man these new units
    with senior aviators and mitigate risk across the C-130 force?
        General Harris. So ma'am, you bring up a great question.
        The first thing we want to do is retain the fantastic
    airmen that we have now. If we have an aircrew with 10 or 15
    years of experience, training more will take us 10 to 15 years
    to get that experience back. So we recognize the most important
    feature that you are asking about is how do we take care of the
    fantastic airmen and the aviators that we have across all the
    services? So that's our start that we are working with.
        But we also have to get after the foundation, so we are
    improving our capacity to generate new pilots and new aircrew
    members, and then our ability to absorb those.
        So with our requirement to grow, based on the National
    Defense Strategy [NDS], which is where Secretary Wilson is
    pulling her information from, we have to be able to resize to
    fit the Air Force that we need to win our Nation's wars. So we
    are starting at the beginning to retain those that we already
    have, and then growing our capacity to build new ones and bring
    them on.
        Ms. Bordallo. Very good. My third question, the ``Air Force
    we need'' outlined by the Secretary and the Chief also ties the
    service's way forward to the National Defense Strategy and
    long-term strategic competition with China and Russia.
        General Harris and Admiral Conn, can you speak to how
    intra-theater airlift requirements will change in this
    environment, in regards to tactical and strategic airlift?
        General Harris. Yes, ma'am. Intra-theater airlift will
    continue to be a workhorse, as you described, and the C-130
    will provide that for the long term.
        And the focus of that ``Air Force we need'' study
    recognizes that we actually have more risk in our strategic
    lift, so you see some growth in our ability to--to get after
    what we are required to do to meet, as the NDS says, our bigger
    threats of China, then Russia. And that's a different focus
    than we have had in the last several years. So you are going to
    see a requirement to grow across many of our capabilities in
    the Air Force.
        Ms. Bordallo. Oh, that's good news. Admiral Conn.
        Admiral Conn. I think if you look at the size of the
    Pacific, and you think of sustaining combat operations, the
    importance of logistics cannot be overstated, whether it be our
    MSC [Military Sealift Command] fleet that provides surface
    lift, whether--or our NUFEA aircraft, or C-40As, and our C-
    130Ts right now. They are going to play an integral part of
    making sure the warfighters have what they need to wage combat
    operations in that environment.
        Ms. Bordallo. Well, that's good news.
        And Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Ms. Bordallo.
        Before we go to Ms. Hartzler, I want to take this
    opportunity, since this is the last of our subcommittee
    hearings for this subcommittee, to thank Ms. Bordallo for her
    service and the tremendous efforts that she has put forward on
    behalf of all of our men and women in uniform.
        She has been, I think, the leading proponent anywhere she
    goes. If anybody comes across her and doesn't know where Guam
    is, or what goes on on Guam, then it is--you are not listening,
    because she is absolutely the number one fan of the people of
    Guam, and I know that they appreciate your service to the
    Nation.
        You have done a spectacular job. We have had the
    opportunity to travel around the world together on CODELs
    [congressional delegations], and you have just been
    spectacular. So thank you so much. What a real testament to
    public service, and our Nation is better because of your
    service, and we thank you.
        Ms. Bordallo. Thank you very much, Mr. Wittman, and I have
    enjoyed working with you.
        Mr. Wittman. Yeah, it is been a--been an honor and a
    pleasure.
        So with that, we will to Ms. Hartzler.
        Mrs. Hartzler. Mr. Chairman, I would concur on those
    remarks, and we are going to--we are going to miss you.
        So gentlemen, thank you for being here on this very
    important topic.
        According to the DOD [Department of Defense] National Guard
    and Reserve Equipment Report for Fiscal Year 2018, the average
    age of the C-130H fleet is 27 years old. The aircraft assigned
    to the Puerto Rico Air National Guard were among some of the
    oldest in the fleet. The mishap aircraft was delivered in 1965.
        So can you explain how the decision is made to assign
    aircraft to Air National Guard units?
        General Harris. Yes, ma'am. I will take that.
        We actually have our Strategic Basing Process that works
    through how--where and how we assign the aircraft that are
    changing. Based on the guidance that we have been given, we
    have put new J model C-130s into both the Active, Guard, and
    Reserves, so we have elements that are in each one of those
    fleets.
        And once we had that, then we looked at replacing the
    oldest aircraft first, and many of those were in the Active
    Duty. So that's why most of the E models have been retired--
    actually, all the E models have been retired at this point, and
    we are getting after the last aging ones.
        So Puerto Rico is some of the oldest aircraft that are
    still flying. They are down to just a few airplanes. And we are
    continuing to work through the Strategic Basing Process to
    determine what is the best mission suitable for the fantastic
    airmen that we have there.
        Mrs. Hartzler. What is the age of the oldest aircraft? So
    are there still other ones in Puerto Rico that are 1965 models?
        General Harris. There are some 1965, ma'am, spread across
    the fleet. Most of those are simple Hs, because we have an H,
    an H1, 2, 3--different variants of those. We show that C-130Hs
    are resident both in Puerto Rico and we also have some in Great
    Falls and a couple other locations.
        Mrs. Hartzler. So there is a plan, then, to recapitalize
    the legacy C-130 aircraft?
        General Harris. To recapitalize? No, ma'am. We are doing
    our best to modernize; and, at this time, we are not asking for
    additional recapitalization efforts.
        We do see support here from Congress for more. And as we
    get new C-130Js, we do put those into the oldest fleet. And
    that's how we will work the Strategic Basing Process.
        Mrs. Hartzler. Okay, very good.
        After the mishap, there was a strategic review that was
    done. That came out with some--a list of risk and recommended
    mitigations, corrective actions to be completed not later than
    June 15th of this year.
        And I apologize, I was a little late. Maybe you have
    already covered that. But can you give me an update on, kind
    of, that report? I haven't had a chance to read it. What were
    some of the recommendations that were part of that? And where
    are you at in implementing those that were supposed be done by
    June?
        General Harris. With regard to a specific accident, ma'am,
    we--the investigation's still ongoing. And we have not
    implemented the--anything that would have come from there yet.
        For the strategic report that you are speaking of, if it
    was a June implementation, I will have to get back with you for
    that.
        Mrs. Hartzler. Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate. Yield
    back.
        Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Ms. Hartzler.
        We will now go to Mrs. Davis.
        Mrs. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I, of course,
    acknowledge my colleague and all the teachable moments that
    you--that you created for us. I think we learned a great deal
    from you, and I appreciate it.
        I wanted to just go back to sort of a basic question.
    Because I know that, Rear Admiral Conn, you raised in your
    statement the fact that Congress--you would like to see
    Congress prioritizing preparedness. And also, you were
    concerned about the resilience, I think, as well, of our force
    posture and, certainly, accelerating technological
    advancements. What--could you you be somewhat specific about
    it?
        And--to others as well, what would you really like to see
    in Congress' desire, of course, and our opportunity to really
    help in this situation?
        Admiral Conn. Well, certainly, Congress helped. We have
    guidance from the National Defense Strategy that gives us
    priorities. We have guidance from the CNO [Chief of Naval
    Operations] in terms of the things we need to prioritize. He
    calls it ``the Navy the Nation needs,'' which is the maritime
    expression of that single strategy in the National Defense
    Strategy.
        Readiness recovery across all our aircraft is a priority at
    the mission-capable rates that we have right now. It affects
    retention. It affects combat capability. It affects our ability
    to--lethality, of what we need to do. For the NUFEA aircraft it
    affects our ability to do the things we need to do, based on
    the various priority missions, and if our aircraft aren't up,
    we aren't able to execute those missions or train the people to
    execute those missions.
        So from a PB19 level and what is in that budget, we can
    do--we are doing a lot. We will always have more requirements
    than resources. It would always come down to prioritization. I
    just don't want to go back to where we have to make false
    choices of readiness or modernization or recapitalization. We
    have been there before and we shouldn't go back.
        Mrs. Davis. General Kirkland, did you want to respond as
    well?
        General Kirkland. Ma'am, actually, in that topic, I will
    defer to General Harris on the program ex [execution].
        General Harris. Ma'am, very similar to the Navy response.
    Resiliency is extremely important, and as long as we pay our
    airmen a fair wage and then give them a value-added mission
    where they feel like they are working and attaining the freedom
    that this country fights for, we find that the airmen are
    empowered and want to do what it is that they do so well.
        Our job to take care of those airmen is to make sure they
    have the resources they need to get that job done in the most
    efficient, effective, and safe manner, and we do start with
    safety, then compliance.
        So, much like our Navy colleagues, we do have to make some
    tough choices. We do our best to prioritize those, and it is an
    older fleet for the C-130s but our KC-135 and our B-52 fleets
    are even older. So we are doing what we can to modernize and
    make those airplanes sustain and get the mission done that we
    need based on the priorities that we have.
        Mrs. Davis. Yes. So I think I am hearing you also say not
    to ignore the personnel issues in making sure that we are
    attracting and bringing into the force as well as maintaining
    the force that we have. And sometimes I think that we have a
    tendency to think that, well, that's where we can save money.
    And it sounds like that's not been your experience. Thank you.
    I appreciate that.
        I know my colleague brought up the need for--and you have
    responded about the skilled journeymen that we need. I am also
    wondering about STEM [science, technology, engineering, and
    math] fields, as well. I mean, there's been a tremendous amount
    of focus on this, and yet, when it comes to the number of
    individuals that are needed in just a host of different areas,
    you know, we graduated about 500,000 STEM students. China
    produced about 1.3 million.
        What--how is your job really made harder by the fact that
    we have not invested, actually, in human capital as well as we
    could?
        General Harris. Well to this point, the service has been
    able to hire the talent that we have needed, which is very
    helpful for us, so we see that coming out of the American
    public.
        We do what we can to invest in STEM, and our Secretary,
    Secretary Wilson, has been very good about that coming from her
    background, so she has been most helpful and encouraging us to
    work with the universities and academia to make sure that we
    have people understanding that it is a great career field to
    come into any of our services and defend our country.
        General Kirkland. If I might add, from the sustainment
    perspective on the Air Logistics Complex Air Force side,
    engineers in that technical workforce are absolutely part of--
    that we have to have. It is a national defense issue.
        Our growth industries and software, both in the development
    and the sustainment of the software, sometimes for 50, 60 years
    of a weapon system, we need to recruit and retain electrical
    engineers and other engineers to keep that business going and
    provide a cost-effective solution for our readiness.
        Mrs. Davis. Do you see us doing that across the board as
    well as we could? I mean, making sure that--what role should we
    all be playing, really, I think, in terms of reaching out to
    students, whether it is in middle school, high school, to
    really help them to see--you know, we always say you can't be
    what you can't see.
        We have--in some communities, we have the opportunity for
    young people to know something about what is going on with the
    military, and certainly with the--with the Air Force, Navy, et
    cetera. But there are many communities in which that is not
    true. How do we make sure that we are reaching them as well?
        Admiral Conn. I think all the services are in a competition
    for talent with industry, with academia, and within the
    services itself. I think we have to look at how we train
    differently for our people. How do we set them up for success?
        That is part of the Ready, Relevant Learning. It is not
    just about the individual's academic background, but what is
    the environment in which we are training them in that gives
    them the relevant information to be able to do the tasks they
    need to do when they need to do them?
        But we can't understate the challenge we have, and this is
    a little outside my lane, but of recruiting the talent we need
    as we are growing the force. And I think the recent--there has
    been changes to bonuses that have been helpful. I can't speak
    to the trends yet, but initially they look good. But it is also
    getting those talented sailors who maintain those aircraft, who
    work on those ships. It is going to be a challenge, in my view.
        Mrs. Davis. I would wonder if perhaps, in your thinking
    about this, it sounds like you have given it some thought,
    whether there are ways that we could be organized differently
    to do that better, and to make sure that as you suggest, the
    environment and the incentives could possibly be different?
        General Harris. So ma'am, if I may respond to that,
    Secretary Wilson has recently nearly doubled our College Intern
    Program, which is bringing much more young talent to us. But
    she is also having us change the capacity of our recruiting
    squadrons, both in where they are at, and where they go to get
    to the talent that's available for us.
        And then finally, a lot of the people are getting
    experience. As we said, software is one of our growing
    concerns. Instead of bringing everybody in as a young airman or
    a young officer, it is hiring people to the right skill level
    that they are already at, and we are working with Congress to
    get that authority, and it has been very helpful.
        Mrs. Davis. Okay, we will continue to work on that. Thank
    you. Thank you all.
        Mr. Wittman. Thank you, Mrs. Davis.
        If there are no other questions from the committee members,
    I want to thank our witnesses. Lieutenant General Harris, thank
    you. Lieutenant General Kirkland, thank you. Rear Admiral Conn,
    thank you. Thanks for your perspectives.
        As you have pointed out, we have some challenges ahead, but
    we want to make sure that we are on track with the upgrades
    with existing aircraft and modernization with aircraft
    replacement, and making sure that we stay on track. So we
    appreciate your efforts, and we look forward to continued
    progress in those realms.
        And if there's nothing else to come before the
    subcommittee, we stand adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 9:51 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

    =======================================================================

                                A P P E N D I X

                               September 28, 2018

    =======================================================================

    =======================================================================

                  PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                               September 28, 2018

    =======================================================================

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    =======================================================================

                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                               September 28, 2018

    =======================================================================

                      QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. COURTNEY

        Mr. Courtney. The Air Force and the Navy are pursuing propeller
    modifications to legacy C-130Hs and the Navy C-130T. Do you believe
    that the NP2000 propeller modifications will help to prevent future
    propeller casualties and are you confident that the inclusion of the
    NP2000 system will not induce risk given it was not the original
    propeller system?
        General Harris. All flight and operational testing conducted by the
    U.S. Air Force (USAF) indicates that installation of NP2000 propellers
    on C/LC-130H aircraft does not change the overall operational risk to
    these aircraft. Since 2005, USAF C-130 engineering has partnered with
    Lockheed Martin, Hamilton-Sundstrand, Rolls Royce, USAF test centers
    (Edwards AFB, Eglin AFB, Air National Guard Air Force Reserve Command
    Test Center), the Air National Guard and various integration companies
    to accomplish tasks necessary to integrate the NP2000 propellers onto
    USAF C-130H aircraft. Areas of concerns discovered were adequately
    addressed by additional USAF testing and redesign. Airworthiness of C/
    LC-130Hs with NP2000 propellers conforms to the requirements of the
    USAF military airworthiness process. To safely operate the aircraft,
    performance and handling differences between the original propeller
    system and the NP2000 have been documented in all appropriate technical
    orders, flight and maintenance manuals. The primary purpose of the
    NP2000 propeller is to improve the performance of the C/LC-130H
    aircraft in conditions where it is currently limited; for example, LC-
    130H aircraft are now able to takeoff from remote fields in Antarctica
    without the use of Jet Assisted Takeoff bottles and with much shorter
    takeoff distances. The USAF has accumulated approximately 4,000 flight
    hours including C/LC-130H flight test and LC-130H operational missions
    to Antarctica and Greenland. The USAF also shared the NP2000
    certification data with Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR); the NP2000
    propeller is currently installed on the following USN aircraft: 2 C-
    130T, 34 E-2D, 39 E-2C and 34 C-2A. The USN has accumulated over one
    million flight hours on the NP2000 propeller installed on these
    aircraft.
        Mr. Courtney. Lieutenant General Kirkland, in your written
    testimony, you touched upon the importance of corrosion prevention and
    control. I understand that the Air Force has recently looked at
    adopting a new liner blanket technology for the C-130, originally
    developed for the Army's CH-47 fleet, and that this technology has the
    potential to significantly reduce corrosion to the airframe. Could you
    discuss this effort specifically, as well as the importance of
    corrosion control for the C-130 in general?
        General Kirkland. Corrosion prevention and control remains one of
    the top sustainment drivers for the C-130. Much of the field and depot
    maintenance that is conducted on the C-130 is performed to identify,
    correct, and prevent corrosion. It is estimated that $550M per year is
    expended on the C-130 in corrosion prevention and control. The C-130
    Program Office has an active corrosion control program; to include,
    continued assessment of emerging and existing corrosion issues,
    incorporation of newly developed corrosion control measures,
    performance of up to 7 field visits per year, and holding regular
    Corrosion Prevention Advisory Board meetings. As part of the corrosion
    prevention and control efforts, the Improved Thermal Acoustic Blanket
    (ITAB) that was incorporated on the CH-47 was identified as a
    replacement for the existing aircraft interior insulation. The C-130
    Program Office is currently working on a contract to procure prototype
    blanket kits to replace the interior insulation blankets. The new
    blankets will be a preferred spare to the current blankets and fleet
    implementation is planned to be carried out via attrition during
    programmed depot maintenance (PDM). The breathability, along with
    several other technical properties, of the improved blanket material
    will help to prevent corrosion. Additionally, the improved ITAB
    attachment methods will make interior aircraft inspections easier to
    accomplish and repair kits will enable unit-level repair of the
    improved blankets.
        Mr. Courtney. The Air Force and the Navy are pursuing propeller
    modifications to legacy C-130Hs and the Navy C-130T. Do you believe
    that the NP2000 propeller modifications will help to prevent future
    propeller casualties and are you confident that the inclusion of the
    NP2000 system will not induce risk given it was not the original
    propeller system?
        Admiral Conn. NAVAIR has begun to modify 24 C/KC-130T aircraft with
    the NP2000 propeller. The NP2000 propeller is currently installed on
    the following Navy aircraft: 2 C-130T, 34 E-2D, 39 E-2C and 34 C-2A.
    USAF has installed the NP2000 propeller on 10 USAF C/LC-130H aircraft.
    USAF tested and certified the NP2000 installation on the C/LC-130H and
    updated performance manuals with modified procedures to safely operate
    the aircraft. USAF shared certification data with NAVAIR, which used it
    to determine airworthiness of the NP2000 propeller installed on Navy C/
    KC-130T aircraft. The same data was used to generate maintenance
    manuals, an operator's manual, and a performance manual to support
    fleet operations. USN has accumulated over one million flight hours on
    the NP2000 propeller installed on the E-2D/E-2C/C-2A fleet. USAF has
    accumulated approximately 3900 flight hours on C/LC-130H aircraft. The
    inter-service cooperation resulted in USN avoiding millions of dollars
    in redundant costs. Since NAVAIR used the USAF data to certify NP2000
    propeller installed on the C/KC-130T, Navy was able to develop the
    modification package, modify the first aircraft and prepare for
    functional check flight in 97 days. This expedited NAVAIR certification
    process and aircraft modification is a key contributor to accelerating
    the restoration of the legacy C/KC-130T fleet to flight operations post
    grounding. NAVAIR has concluded that the NP2000 propeller system
    performance characteristics are slightly different than the legacy
    54H60 propeller; however, the operational risk posture of the C/KC-130T
    aircraft remains unchanged.

                                      [all]