visibly evident capability to prevent or bring lesser aggressions to a successful conclusion as it is to prevent a general war. Our success in the cold war is to a large extent also dependent on our possessing both of these capabilities.

As a member of the triservice defense team, the Army is charged by law with the mission of organizing, training, and equipping itself for the conduct of prompt and sustained combat operations on land.

May I digress just enough to say that we have tens of thousands of these young officers and men trained over a period of time, a long period of time, ready, able, and willing, with high morale, and conditioned to move, and by that I mean not only in body but in mind, and just waiting for the bell to ring, if it happens. And that is something that has been done over the past several years and will be ready at any time and is ready at the moment.

It must, therefore, meet the requirements of emergency plans which call for Army forces of varying size and composition to cope with the diverse contingencies which may arise on a worldwide basis. The only means by which the Army can react quickly to meet these commitments is to rely on the strategic mobility provided by the other services to move our forces rapidly to the various objective areas. Tactical mobility in the form of airlift is also required to move these forces directly into combat should the exigencies of the situation so dictate. To insure that it has the requisite strategic and tactical mobility, the Army must make its requirements known.

In our presentations, the Army will express these requirements in terms of units, personnel, and tonnages of supplies and equipment to be lifted. However, our responsibility extends beyond the statement of these simple categories. In addition, we must control the order in which Army forces are introduced into the combat zone, the timing of the arrivals of the various units, and the type of Army weapons and equipment which must be airlifted to produce a balanced combat force. Having stated our Army requirements in these terms, which I would like to emphasize are subject to approval by the Department of Defense and are not unilateral, and in terms of suitable aircraft to meet our needs, then the determination of the aircraft inventory required is, of course, the responsibility of the service charged with the actual procurement and operation of the aircraft.

With this understanding of what the Army believes to be the factors involved, we have a particular interest in the following problem areas which will be presented later in the hearing:

1. The total airlift capability to meet the requirements of all services. 2. Modernization of the strategic and tactical fleets.

3. Preallocation of airlift.

4. Prestockage of supplies and equipment.

5. Joint mobility exercises, such as the Puerto Pines and others that we hope would be generated in the days to come, including plans that we are thinking about in connection with not only Europe but the Far East, meaning as far out as Okinawa and possibly as far out as Thailand. In other words, Puerto Pines is simply the forerunner of things to come.

Again, may I say I have appreciated the opportunity to lead off the Army's presentations on the subject of airlift. General Lemnitzer and following Army witnesses will develop in considerably more detail our views on this subject. But we are very appreciative of this opportunity

to have us all together for confrontation not so much with each other but for confrontation of the problem together in the presence of this committee of the U.S. House of Representatives with broad powers to undertake it.

Thank you.

Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Secretary, you made a very fine statement. And as you have observed, our desire to have these hearings, having everybody who has a vital and constructive interest to have a say, demonstrates the wisdom of our course of action.

You have given us information that normally might not occur to us. We will certainly need you later on.

Secretary BRUCKER. Thank you very much.

Mr. RIVERS. Because there will be questions we will want to ask you. And I think, in keeping with which I have said earlier, we will excuse you with this statement and ask you to be ready for recall later on as things develop.

Secretary BRUCKER. Yes.

Mr. RIVERS. Because there will be many questions.

Secretary BRUCKER. At your convenience, sir, we will be here.
Mr. RIVERS. Thank you.

How about Secretary Milton, will he

Secretary BRUCKER. NO.

Mr. RIVERS. We are always glad to have him come here, whether he has anything to say or not. We will certainly need to have you back.

Secretary BRUCKER. He authorizes me to say again that he corroborates all I have said. [Laughter.]

Mr. RIVERS. Now, Mr. Smart, the next witness is Secretary Sharp? Mr. SMART. Secretary Sharp of the Air Force.

(A biographical sketch of Secretary Sharp follows:)

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF HON. DUDLEY C. SHARP, SECRETARY OF THE AIR

FORCE

Dudley Crawford Sharp became Secretary of the Air Force on December 11, 1959, after having served as Under Secretary from August 3, 1959.

Mr. Sharp was born in Houston, Tex., on March 16, 1905. He attended both public and private schools in Houston and completed his precollege schooling at the Gilman Country School in Baltimore, Md. He was graduated from Princeton University with a degree of bachelor of science in 1928.

Immediately after graduation, Mr. Sharp joined the Mission Manufacturing Co. of Houston, Tex., as vice president. He was elected executive vice president in 1935, and became president in 1946, which office he held until his appointment as Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Materiel on October 3, 1955. Upon his resignation from this position on January 31, 1959, he returned to Houston and served as Vice Chairman of the Board of Mission Manufacturing Co. The Mission Manufacturing is engaged in the development, manufacturing, and distribution of equipment used in the petroleum industry. Mr. Sharp was appointed Under Secretary of the Air Force in August 1959.

Mr. Sharp served in the U.S. Navy from 1942 to 1945. He was on sea duty in various capacities as executive officer and commanding officer on antisubmarine warfare vessels and later served in the Office of Procurement and Materiel with the Navy Department in Washington. He was relieved from active duty early in 1945 to assume the position of administrative manager of the Applied Physics Laboratory, Silver Spring, Md.

As Under Secretary of the Air Force, Mr. Sharp served as the principal assistant to the Secretary and Chairman of the Air Force Requirements Rivew Board. Mr. Sharp was married to Tina Cleveland January 2, 1929, and they have two children, Dudley C. Sharp, Jr., and Julia May Sharp.

Mr. RIVERS Mr. Sharp, we will be very pleased to hear Day 2 Secretary SHARP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and nenibers of the committee.

༤ ་ས ་སྣ།

It is a pleasure to be here today to meet with you ensthis very weighty subject. boy daet Our general objective has already been outlined by Secretary Douglas. He has referred to certain aspects of the recently published Department of Defense study entitled, "The Role of MAES w Peace and War." I shall not discuss this matter in the course of these hearings. Nevertheless there are four of the Presidentially approved courses of action which I believe merit particular comment even though they have already been touched upon by Mr. Dough The first in order of importance is course of action No. 2, who calls for modernization of MATS hard-core military airlift capabilite. The statement is made that this should be undertaken inanvorderly manner consistent with other military requirements?? Flere is no question that the MATS fleet is approaching obsolescence with the sole exception of the C-133's. For example, the C-124's which comprise 57 percent of the present fleet are 8 to 10 years old must move ahead as rapidly as we can with the-modernization of the bulk of the MATS fleet. In this connection our plans included modern economical turbine-powered cargo aircraft designed specifically for the cargo hauling job. You will be given a great deal more detail on the aircraft we have in mind later on in these presentations wish only to emphasize at this stage that we are requesting $50 million in the fiscal year 1961 budget for modernization of MAP and we certainly hope to receive that amount. Dure evad I Te ensers

The second Presidentially approved course of action which I wish to stress is that which provides that MATS routine channel traffic operations (that which moves on regularly scheduled, fire routes) be reduced on an orderly basis consistent with assured commercial airlift capability at reasonable cost and consistent with conomical and efficient use, including realistic training, of the MATS capacity resulting from its training for its wartime job. I want to emphasize the word "assured." By their very nature we know that the civil airlines cannot respond as completely to military emergency requirements as can MATS It is not a question of patriotism but of primary mission. The primary mission of the civil carrier is to operate an airlift service for the public,, Civil carriers are not charged with the responsibility of national security. The Department of Defense and the military services are: Civil air carriers can and do assist the Air Force by supplementing the MATS effort in moving air cargo and personnel. They could do more of this than they are doing today. But if they are to have a bigger role in handling DOD traffic not only in general war but in lesser emergencies and in peace, they must be willing and able to provide a greater assurance of reliable response to their assigned military tasks than in the past. To this end the Air Force thinks it desirable to seek legislation which will give the President broader power to take possession and assume control of transportation systems, including of course air transportation. Although adequate legislation presently exists to enable the President to control transportation systems "in time of war" we do not believe that any permanent reduction in MATS wartime.capability, or the peacetime operating rate so necessary to the assurance of that capability, should

2

be made antil and unless this legislation is amended to enable the President to take control of all or part of the air transportation systeme in time of emergency as well as in wartime or some other means of positive assurance is provided. The Department of Defense must be assured of continued operation of the air transportation industry and its people in carrying out its assigned duties in any emergency. We recognize that this requirement poses serious problems which we must work out and present to Congress. We are also examining further into the possible need for legislation which will provide for such things as a more flexible civil reserve air fleet program which takes into account the changing role of commercial carriers war and peace, and the possible need for appropriate legal protections and status for civil crews operating in areas which may becomesdangerous.

In addition to the legislation to which I have just referred which would provide increased assurance of civil carriers performance when needed, we also feel that we will require improved contractual arrangements with the carriers which would include at least the following general areas of agreement: Tart good!

f

(a) That each carrier will equip itself with modern cargo and passenger aircraft which the Air Force considers suitable for the airlifterade performed. A

(b) That cach carrier will operate into agreed geographic areas at fair and predictable rates and will continue to operate planned missionstine emergencies so long as this is considered feasible by the militace; further, that each carrier will provide a guarantee of expanded airlift or emergencies if required. Our current thinking is that these econtracts should contain a clause providing that the Secretary of Defense may decide what circumstances constitute emergencies for purposes of these contracts.

(e) That each carrier will obtain agreements from the operating unions aunt/oraindividual personnel with whom it enters into contracts that all smion members or individuals will provide required airlift at allatinas-bran ar

Before leaving the question of increased utilization of civil carriers I should also point out there must be economical and efficient use of MATS training hours needed to assure wartime readiness. We do not envision that MATS would ever withdraw from channel traffic operation to the extent that its operations in wartime over worldwide air routes arould be impaired or that its training would become inrealistick aroun

་་

Thesnext: Presidentially approved course of action deals with the modernization of the commercial carriers and their making available to the DOD such modern, economical: long-range cargo aircraft. I have already spoken of the modernization required in MATS. The civil industias not only the problem of modernization but of expansion. We in the Air Force certainly wish to see both of these things come about. We believe that we can help to improve the civil carrier fleet, particularly the cargo fleet, by participating in the joint development of a new air freighter and by indicating our willingness to make increasing use of such modern aircraft in peacefine providede they are effectively committed to the wartime task and subject to the guarantees that I have mentioned, to al

Finally stewould like to cominent on The rather complicated course of action which deals with procurement. It states that with respect

to services overseas and to foreign countries, commercial augmentation airlift procurement policies and practices should be better adapted to long-range Department of Defense requirements, so as to encourage and assist in sound economic growth and development of increased air cargo capability. We recognize that, whatever the reasons, the civil cargo fleet is neither modern nor adequate and that the manner in which we have procured our civil augmentation in the past has been challenged. I have named a committee headed by Mr. Gordon Reed, chairman of the board of the Texas Gulf Producing Co., to investigate among other subjects, the most advantageous method of contracting for commercial airlift.

I should also make clear that the Department of Defense policy on airlift is going to require time to implement. A number of areas must be explored to insure that we move ahead in such a way as to provide an orderly transition at the minimum cost and in the most efficient manner. I have already referred to the Reed committee. In addition to the question of procurement practices, I have asked that committee to make recommendations concerning such subjects as the number of hours that MATS aircraft must fly to exercise the MATS system in order to assure readiness in emergency, the role of the Air National Guard and/or Air Reserve in furnishing backup strategic airlift in time of emergency, and the most advantageous equipment for MATS. I have referred to the Civil Reserve Air Fleet. We are searching for practical means of making the concept of this organization more responsive to our present needs. We intend to reexamine the hard-core tasks which MATS must perform and the number of aircraft which will be required based upon peak periods when simultaneous sorties are the governing factor rather than tonmiles of productivity over a given period of time. All of these matters require thorough study.

The Air Force intends to commence implementation of the DOD policy as soon as practicable. Let me make it clear once again however that MATS will at all times continue to fly routine channel traffic to the extent required to remain alert for its hard-core wartime mission and for that part of the wartime requirement beyond civil capability and commitment. Above this minimum, which may change from time to time, as civil carriers undertake more of the wartime task and the war mission of MATS is revised, commercial augmentation will be procured in peacetime on a continuing basis.

As you have noted from the schedule of presentations, every important aspect of national airlift will be covered including the views of other services. I believe that the total picture that will be presented should give to this committee a very complete report on the entire subject. Hence, I will not attempt, at this stage, to comment on other facets of the airlift question.

Mr. Chairman, I would like here--I repeat Secretary Douglas' expressions of pleasure that this committee is going to be able to be on hand to see the Puerto Pine-Big Slam operation. I think this will help a great deal in the understanding of the overall problem for this committee. I only wish that this committee could see the whole operation.

Now, the Puerto Rico-I mean the Puerto Pine part of the operation is the airlift of the 20,000 people and approximately 12,000 tons of materiel to Puerto Rico. The Big Slam part of the operation is the