because of our previous conversation that the ukrainians attacked recently, from what i understand, an iranian drone factory inside russia. here we are talking about the risks, and should there be attacks inside iran and so forth, yet no one has raised the ukrainians attacking the drone factory inside russia, a nuclear armed power, and the win in washington seems to have -- and no one in washington seems to have blinked an eyelash. sina: i would like to take more questions, but i am told we have to wrap it up. thank you for coming. please thank michael singh and steven simon. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> the house will be in order. >> c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like none

other. since 1979, we have been your primary source for capitol hill, providing unfiltered coverage of government, taking you to where the policy is debated and decided, all with the support of american cable companies. c-span, 45 years counting, powered by cable. >> army under secretary gave camarillo highlighted the military branch's budget priorities in an attempt to modernize equipment. this is about 50 minutes. >> welcome, it is great to have everybody here, and we are fortunate to have the under secretary with us. what an amazing team we have. the army has gone through the largest transformation in more than 40 years, a really critical time, and we all know what a challenging situation it is in the world, so we are fortunate. the secretary is the furry fifth test the 35th under secretary of

the army -- the 35th under secretary of the army. he is the principal advisor on matters related to the management and operation of the army, also the chief management officer for the army. that is one sense, but that is a lot of work right there, holy smokes. prior to this, mr. camarillo served as the assistant secretary of the air force, manpower and reserve affairs. he was also with the army. before entering government service, mr. camarillo's career included significant experience in law, government, national security, and private industry. mr. camarillo received a bachelor of arts in government from georgetown university and a law degree from stanford university. please join me in welcoming the under secretary, the honorable dave camarillo. [applause] mr. camara low: i appreciate it.

>> please start thinking about your questions. i will kick it off and get it started, but what makes this effective is really good, in-depth questions. thanks for joining us at the global force just last week. you gave a great talk. you mentioned the different buying models the army needs to experiment with. can you dive into that a little more? what are the different buying models? it was a great presentation when you were covering that. what are the different buying models? mr. camarillo: sure. first, i want to thank you, general brown, for the introduction. i want to thank you guys for hosting me. you gave a lot of opportunities to engage with the teammates and thanks to all of you in the industry for coming. it is important for us to maintain this frequent dialogue, communication, and to hear from

all of you and get feedback. there is so much we are focused on in the building, particularly as we get budgets ready and release, and we are reacting to questions that come from congress, so i want to also make sure i touch base with all of you in the audience. thank you very much. as i spoke with ausa, i think where we are in the story, there was a recognition of the fact that when it comes to modernizing the army, giving us new capabilities, we are having a lot of success and building real momentum on what many have referred to as our signature modernization system. these are developing, for example, a new infantry fighting vehicle, developing long-range fires that are going to be critical in the pacific aor, building a new long-range hypersonic weapon, air and missile defense investments. those are deliberate acquisition programs that we have been able to go fairly quickly for the

last several years .we know how to work with industry on those. we are doing well. there is a subset of capabilities the army needs where the current way that we do business needs to change. you heard me talk about it a lot . you heard secretary warmath and the chief talk about it pretty frequently, and i think all of us in the department recognize it, and that subset of capabilities are typically very software defined, they have in many cases commercial variants , and what often is happening is you have the technology cycles that are far outpacing our buying models. often, those buying models are driven by the two year appropriation process, and they are also driven by the normal way we do business, which is a much more deliberate process. we have to, in many ways, find a new way to get after that subset of capabilities differently, and the examples i always give, tactical ua s systems are

evolving very quickly, counter uas systems are evolving very quickly. most software that has commercial components to it is evolving quickly. tactical radios, i have talked about that as an example of having sensitive but unclassified communications. we normally structure a program to define a requirement, develop it over a number of years, and test the capability, then we plan for a procurement cycle that goes into the avenue years. that works great if you are thinking about xm30. but when you're looking at a subsystem of capabilities that do not lend themselves easily to that model, we are figure out another way -- we have to figure out another way to do it. the reason i talk about a different buying model is you want to incentivize industry to innovate, and they need to understand that there is a revenue stream, that they can make a profit, and that there is

some incentive for them to continue to invest their own internal r&d, and on the same side, we want to be able to pick it over time so that we can adjust to what vendors in the market will provide in terms of innovation. one last example. a great capability that the army developed a program for several years ago. as we started that program, i think the way it was structured did not account for the fact that there would be continuous hardware and software of race -- software upgrades to that capability. we have since restructured it to account for that, but that is a good learning example of where we need to kind of look at the way we do programs in some of these areas to enable us to have that flexibility. gen. brown: that is a great point. that age-old problem, by the time you have purchased it, it is out of date. that is a challenge. do you see major changes having to be made to be able to do that, to purchase the software

items? is it more systemic changes? what do you think the biggest challenge is? mr. camarillo: it is a couple of things. we have to change a lot within the army. the way we define our requirements probably has to evolve. how we structure our programs has to change. people always ask about funding flexibility. that could help in some areas like software, but even in the absence of kind of more liberal authorities about funding, i think it is all about how you structure programs. do you plan for the tech conversion? you have the ability to pivot from one system to an upgraded system more quickly? that is going to be different for industry, and that is why i talked about providing incentive. whether we do that in terms of smaller byes more frequently, or whether we look at service models where you guaranteed to a vendor a revenue stream over time but then they bury responsibility for some of that hardware and software upgrades,

we've got to just think about, how do we allocate the incentives in the right way to get the army what it means? gen. brown: that makes a lot of sense. thanks, mr. secretary. very smart. ukraine supplemental's, a lot of talk about that. we are all hoping for sure that it passes, but let's say it does not. what is the impact on the army, in particular the area of not just the impact on the army, but how it affects the defense industrial base modernization, and also how it would impact critical munitions that are needed both in ukraine or for us elsewhere? mr. camarillo: thanks for bringing it up. we always say that the need to pass the supplemental is crucial, not just because we are supporting ukraine and his vital we support ukraine in its conflict against russia, not passing the supplemental would have devastating effects to the united states army. let me explain why.

as i have said, many current operations costs that we are currently undertaking in the army, for example, all of our support mission to nato and deployments to europe, that cost has been, up until december of 2022, paid for by supplementals. since december of 2022, we have been cash flowing -- i'm sorry, december of 2023, we have been cash flowing a lot of those costs with our own internal army funding. until the supplemental has passed, we have a running tally, and i am looking at general mark bennett from the army budget office, it is around the nature of north of $500 million at this point that we have been essentially cash flowing to date for these operations costs. we need that supplements or reimburse us, because that is essentially operations funds that we cannot reimburse for other things we had planned to do.

that impacts things like exercises that we had planned in europe and the pacific. it affects operations activities at the unit level that they want to do. other areas where we have to take risks because we are cash flowing these costs. the second example is the area of procurement that is in the supplemental, all through the replenishment funding. we had sent very clearly, the need for 155 artillery, to be able to produce it had a need of 100,000 rounds per month by the end of 2025. we can only get there if two things happen in the supplemental. first of all, if we get some of the investments first facilities -- for facilities in that bill, and they goes to domestic sources like army ammunition plant in scranton and holston and some of our vendor base. the other thing we need are the procurement of critical munitions, which is part of the supplemental. it is vital to the industrial

base. it generates jobs in the united states. it supports our ally in ukraine. it definitely reflects our commitment to that cause. it is vital for the army that we get that supplemental passed. gen. brown: that is an even bigger impact than i realized. that is critical. in the 2025 budget, there is a whole bunch of counter grown capabilities, which makes sense. can you explain in more detail how this will impact this threat that is worldwide now, these particularly small, unmanned aerial systems? how will that, if fy 25 we get that, how will that impact that? mr. camarillo: that is a great question. i am frequent he asked, what are the lessons learned from ukraine? -- frequently asked, what are the lessons learned from ukraine? we see it not just in europe, but around the world. the nature of warfare is constantly evolving, but the threat of uavs, small uavs in

particular, is here to stay. i think we have seen that consistently over the last few years. this is an area that the technology continues to become lower-cost, more accessible, and it is proliferating. the cost factor for us to be able to defeat these threats can be very expensive if we use traditional approaches that are really based on air and missile defense principles. as we look ahead, and certainly what is in our budget, it is, how do we make sure first and foremost we protect our soldiers? that is mission number one. but also, how do we make sure we are making the right types of investments to grow our counter you have capabilities in a way that enables us to have more options? we are investing in our programs of record. we are investing in more interceptors, like coyote and

others. we are looking at r&d on the directed energy side. that is in the fy 2025 budget. that includes high-energy lasers, high-powered microwave systems. in addition to that, there is a significant investment as well in the ability to make sure all of these work within a command system that can be easily used by our operators. there is a great deal of investment in the budget in this area, but it is when i want to continue to focus in on over the next couple of years. gen. brown: that seems incredibly smart. will we ever have air superiority again, per se? so cheap and the technology increasing. that's great. thanks for that summary. finally, you recently were at project convergence, which has been a combined joint experiment a program. can you give an update on what you saw? are you encouraged with what you saw from project convergence, or

did we discover more issues than we thought? how was your visit there? mr. camarillo: i want to first to my hat to army futures command for putting on the capstone of that for project convergence. it is now in its fourth iteration, and they had two different experiments. the first was at camp pendleton about a month ago. i was not able to leave to go to that. the chief and secretary were there. i went to the second one, at the national training center. the first was focused on air and missile defense from a joint perspective and what they were able to sex fully do was show that -- successfully do was show that we could pass target tracks for multiple joint sensors to different 20 factors within an architecture that was truly combined in a way that we had never done before. i was really encouraged from when i saw secondhand on that front. when i went to the ntc at fort or when, it was a different emphasis, focused on

experimentation, primarily on the area of integration of human machine teams. it was primarily in the area of experimentation on things like robotic combat vehicles, support vehicles, ground robots, drones, a whole manner of things that were put into a battalion sized demonstration. what we were able to witness was the first live fire ever doneges in the life i is great. mr. camarillo: obviously i think every service, to include the army, is recognizing it is time to get very serious about robotics systems and autonomy and how we incorporate them and how we aurburn -- how we operate. you can see the navy doing the same thing in undersea unmanned formation and we are doing the

same on this side. the partnership with industry was key. for many years we talked about it but i think understanding c theons, how the industry can tailor its r&d to match that. that's where the cycle has to get quicker and i give general rainey a lot of credit, the way he's going about the experimentation will help us a lot. gen. brown: the discussion at global force, first contact be a robot, not a human being, which makes a lot of sense when using about it. let's go to the audience, we want easy questions, i think we said. softballs. >> good morning. this is a softball question. based on what you were talking about the advance of technology and innovation and machine learning, artificial

intelligence and automation, the talent pool of soldiers that would be required to do this are the same talent pool microsoft is looking for, apple is looking for. how does the army go about attracting the servicemembers required for the next wave of innovation the army has to have to stay competitive on the battlefield? mr. camarillo:. . that's a great question -- that is a great question. i think we are all competing for similar talent pools for different objectives. that's a concern i have. i will say in the area of skill sets regarding software, ai, machine learning, it's a little different. i think the allocation of skill sets between the army and industry needs to be rightly understood. here is what i mean by that. we rely on the industrial base to generate those capabilities

and provide us with cutting-edge technology. i think what the army, especially those soldiers in uniform, primarily have to do is rely on integrated and incorporated with the mission objectives they have. that's a different skill set. one area where they converge is the exchange of information into the understanding of each other's needs. that's why it talked about shifting some of the models earlier and how important that is but i think one area where it can help is if there's a little bit more exchange of information if you will between the two sides -- the last two years, we've put in a lot of emphasis on soldier centered design. i think the industry has made a great deal of investment in terms of understanding our problem cases.

i think there are some enterprise things the army has to do that is separate from all of it. for us to leverage machine learning we got to get our data right and that is an institutional challenge for the army, where data resides in many different pockets in very different states of utility. part of our hard work is to get that to the point where it can be used by our soldiers, made accessible, trusted, verified and secure. i took the question in a different direction but i think it is important. >> good morning, to see you this week. so many of you last week in huntsville was great. i was going to ask you this after the keynote but we ran out of time. the organic industrial base to

the tactical ledge and security assistance to allied partners, can you help us highlight the importance of compliance to combat power. readiness and mediation and how we connect the balance sheet to the battlefield? mr. camarillo: absolutely, this is an area place a lot of emphasis on as undersecretary. it's critical to mission effectiveness for a couple different reasons. congress has passed a requirement that the department has to be auditable by fy 28, so calendar year 27. we are going to meet that mandate by congress, and i think it's import we show we are investing a significant amount of taxpayer dollars in capabilities for the department

and army and think it's important just intrinsically on that basis. here's the other reason why it's important. what the audit compliance process is helping us do is understand how to track our inventory, get it to a point of need, understand where we have efficiencies, inefficiencies, where our financial systems and poverty accountability systems need to be upgraded, all to help us be more effective at our mission. it is causing a lot of change in the army to get to this compliance. some of it are system changes that need to be done. we are converting our enterprise systems into a new erp capability we will bring online the next couple of years. another example is understanding, for example, some of our policies. how do you adapt to ensure we are able to track our property,

ensure we have the best data on operational readiness of weapons systems, and we can do what we need to do on a regular basis in a much more effective manner. it is very important for us. >> thank you for being here. i just wanted to clear up some confusion i think some people were critical of our involvement with ukraine, as one of them is how we provide munitions ukrainians need while at the same time being able to keep ourselves fully stocked and supported from a budget way standpoint with china on the horizon and so forth. how do you program a budget or is the budget congress is giving you adequate to doing both? mr. camarillo: that's why talked about the importance of supplemental, going through all of fy 23, we were very grateful

for support on a bipartisan basis congress has given, particularly in this area. you think about the picture meant -- picture meant -- procurement properties we've been able to get, the new subliminal has investments for patriot production capacity in arkansas. this all counts because it's making our industrial base much more resilient. your question about inventory and able to balance the needs of ukraine with our requirements, we have a very thorough prices -- process to do that. make no doubt, if the army is called upon to fight or perform missions, we have what we need, we will prioritize that and we will win, that is priority number one. all of our processes account for that requirement as we are calculating how we can support ukraine as a partner.

we can do that but we need to have continued support from congress on the supplemental to be able to buy back the critical inventories we need. not even just ukraine, the most recent supplemental, we requested additional procurement dollars to be able to buy coyote interceptors. the ability tobuy more needs we can deploy them to more sites and ensure we have depth and ensure soldiers are protected. i may be looking at it from an army first perspective but there's a lot of goodness in the supplemental bill that will help us get where we need to go. >> i also have a few follow-ups from supplemental. the cash flow today, is that

since december 23? mr. camarillo: i think it is since the last supplemental was enacted. >> [indiscernible] mr. camarillo: since first of october. 800 because you combine europe and syncom operations -- centcom operations. >> got it. what is your sense of confidence the supplemental will pass and the final form of what is eventually passed will include everything you mentioned so far, everything army needs in terms of continuing theme munitions ramp-up and everything like that? mr. camarillo: you're asking me to predict how congress will -- [laughter]

if i could do that confidently, i would be a very successful prognosticator. i will say this -- i think we have enjoyed bipartisan, strong support for the united states army and what we are doing to support ukraine. i remain optimistic and confident that will continue. we have to have this supplemental bill, it is vital to the army getting healthy and restoring health in our industrial base. >> good morning. as part of the aviation rebalance, the army talked about accelerating capabilities. when you look in the budget documents also the inverse is happening, pneumatic cuts -- dramatic cuts. can you square this with me, how is the army accelerating this capability? mr. camarillo: the push in the

aviation rebalance was to refocus on unmanned assistance. it's acceleration of programs of record, there are about 25 million four pro kill human of systems -- 25 million for two year meant systems. you got to look at what we've done since we have a 24 appropriation. we are able to -- if we can reprogram some money, we can accelerate some work sooner. i would encourage you not to look at just one particular funding line, and we are happy to give you more of a complete story in multiple programs of record, some of which we are doing on the o&m sign, and what we are doing in 24 to accelerate

some of that activity. >> good to see you again. you mentioned some of this last week but army unfunded priorities list as many different you a s and kerry ua s -- uas and carry uas capabilities on its list. how do you go about prioritizing that? mr. camarillo: i think if you want to look at it, we have a program of record that provides a counter smalluas accountability. those are well-funded in our base budget, both what was enacted in 24 and what we submitted in 25. there's always an opportunity to do more to provide more depth. that's the base. in addition, what you've looked at in terms of our submission

for 25, some of which i think you also saw elsewhere, the idea that you might be able to place multiple bets. can we find a way to invest in notable types of interceptors used for counter small uas? the idea is that you want to place multiple bets. some of it is high-powered microwaves, some of it in the base budget. i think another example is how are we looking at developing lower cost interceptors and putting r&d money behind that to generate more options over the long-term. we think the threat is here to stay. ensuring that the way we are looking at our overall counter

uas investment provides for tech insertion opportunity at multiple points over the next several years to give us multiple options. i don't think it is one system with one specific configuration that will used for five to 10 years in the same way against this threat. we recognize it will evolve and change, we have to plug-and-play different components, upgrade different components over time, so it seems a little scattered by design. >> good morning. i brought this question from huntsville last week too. where do you think we are in the ambitions to do modular open systems architecture? several peo's are trying to push it. are we still kind of at startup? mr. camarillo: we are pretty

evolved, actually and i'm pleased where we are. if you've known me a while, 10 years ago, we were talking a good game about the ability to own the architecture. it was very nascent, that conversation 10 years ago. it is far more advanced today. i think whether it is what we did on future vertical lift that continues to support not just the development of flora but the rest of the aviation ecosystem, how sm 30 has been designed as a requirement and reflected in different vendor designs coming in at this stage of development of the program, or if you look at our portfolio over in aberdeen, they are really embracing with their vendor base , most approaches, and you are witnessing an ability to plug and play components with a card-based architecture in a way

we've never been able to do before. it will greatly expand our options space, create a much more imperative dynamic, and importantly i think it creates more tech insertion opportunities over time. >> thank you for your comments last week and for taking time to talk to us. i just came for the breakfast, i heard they had good eggs. [laughter] there was a commission stood up about two years ago and just last month they came out with a final report, which is very comprehensive. there were 28 recommendations, categories, and a couple more recommendations were using data to make informed decisions. do you have initial feedback on

the reform and is there some money set aside or will there be money set aside to actually implement some of the recommendations in that document? mr. camarillo: great question. first i want to to my hat and commend the commission for their hard work. they are very talented people, some come from industry, some from congress, it's a great intersection of talent and i had a privilege of being briefed by them i want to say about a month ago, and walked me through their analysis and i think they did a fantastic job and they raised really good points. the thing about implantation is this, first of all we will follow the departments lead. it is a set of recommendations that doesn't just affect the army, it is a dod wide approach to taking this on.

i know the deputy defense secretary is looking at this closely and we will be as an army closely nested as part of that conversation about how we adopt or implement reforms that have been proposed. she's been very complement tree as well of some of their findings. back to the specifics in the report, in a nutshell they are calling for much more transparency and collaboration with oversight in congress, particularly the appropriations subcommittees. i think that's always a good idea. that conversation and transparency i think there are ways to do it at her as we track execution over the course of the year. i think it builds more confidence and they are oversight, that is their job, so anything to support that is helpful. there's a set of recommendations that talk about funding flexibility, and i think as we

look at it, we are all very supportive of ways to be more agile, to figure out how to adopt technology more quickly, as i alluded to earlier, and make sure we get through some of the challenges we face, especially if appropriations are delayed, new start authorities and things of that nature. there are a lot of recommendations that speak to that that have merit and we should look at them. more specifically think we also have to look at some of the things we do to ourselves. how many funding lines for r&d exist in the army budget, for example. we need to see if we can help ourselves a little bit but also at the same time providing that transparency to our committees of oversight. altogether i think we will look at the report, work collaboratively to assess what makes sense in terms of implementation and into her into a conversation with congress

about the best way to move forward. i know they are eager to have that conversation with us. >> good morning, think you for your time today. my question is on the follow along. it's my understanding the army is holding an industry day on the follow on program today. what are your expectations coming out of this industry day and for the program moving forward? mr. camarillo: the requirement for extended range canon artillery capability remains. i think recognizing the effort that had largely been underway the last couple of years, just based on challenges on the engineering side we could not overcome. i don't think we overcome without a significant investment and longer development of timeline. so the thought is let's stop and take a look at what is available

in terms of nondevelopment of systems around the industrial base today, conduct some research with industry, ultimately support some kind of demonstration to see how these systems perform, and we will look at that and evaluate whether it makes sense to procure something that's non-developmental to meet that requirement. i think the industry days the first step in that process. >> i will do my best to ask you a good question. the congress has passed the fy 24 appropriations after a lengthy continuing resolution of about six months. can you comment on how this hasn't been helpful for the army for six months of continued resolutions and why support for congress needs to pass in time

for the new fiscal year? mr. camarillo: absolutely, and i talk a lot about this, but if you think about conducting the missions and performing the role in our national security that the united states army does, it is not just unproductive, i think it is inimical to our well-being to operate under a cycle of such delayed appropriations. what does this really mean? think about what army leadership has talked about that we need to do. we need to deliver capabilities to soldiers that first or foremost come up protect them and give them the capabilities they need to perform the mission . we talked about counter ua is -- uas. we really could have used procurement dollars to buy them sooner, we just got them a week and half ago or whenever the

budget was passed. think about when that requirement probably first was confirmed, to the point in time where it showed up in the 24 submission, to the point and time that congress enacted it, that's probably too-plus years, more than two years that have intervened in that. of time -- that period of time. it's very difficult to have the capability want to have. we talked about infrastructure for soldiers, their well-being and quality of life is a vital, top priority. we put together a budget when we fill up 24 budget that had a series of milk on investments for areas like soldier barracks that needed repair or replacement your those projects had not been able to get started even though they were anticipated to get started october 1 or shortly thereafter of 2023. we have been waiting until this

point to get the resources to do that. what happened during those six or seven months is construction costs have gone up, probably other factors in terms of labor availability might have shifted over that period of time. it will now cost us more money to complete those projects, it will take longer to have the upgraded barracks and it could be a situation where you've got deteriorating housing conditions you want improved but we can't get after it until we get the appropriations bill. i try to give you illustrations to put in real terms what it means to operate under delayed appropriations. it's easy to talk about it as aggregate numbers or process, but if you are a soldier facing a threat of a small system that is legal or living in a barracks that is substandard or needs to be improved or renovated, these are very real daily things for you. that's why it is important we

try to get to a cycle of predictable funding and timely appropriations for the army. i will just say, for 25, we remain very hopeful and i would urge prompt, speedy passage of those appropriations bills could are multiple reasons why. you saw, we are serving investment in housing. same thing, but to a greater extent. the sooner we can get started on that, we can have a better chance of constraining some of the long term because we are facing. >> thank you, we will health care your message to the hill. mr. camarillo: thank you. >> terrific presentation. last week, there was testimony

in front of congress about significant concerns about the cuts and special operations forces coming out of the army. your comments on that, we had a large symposium with general salzman and every thing else and he talked about increasing availabilities of space, and able to perform missions we are currently doing with manned platforms in the air force. is the army looking at the same kinds of things that can be done from space? mr. camarillo: those are excellent questions per let me take on the special forces one first. i will start by saying that soft is and will continue to be a vital part of the army structure.

the teams were very much involved in the beginning, all the way through briefing congress earlier this year on the structure changes we announced earlier. i would point out that the soc community has an active role in designing where the army would take those reductions could this is not something -- productions. this is not something they would receive, they were actively involved in. we needed to bring down excess structure that had grown over 20 years of counterterrorism wars to one that was better aligned with large-scale combat operations and where the army needs to be for the next 20 or 30 years. we need to grow new capabilities and we had to look at areas to take new risks. when the soc community worked with us on how to take those reductions, they focused primarily on areas where they

were hoping to grow but were not able to. so a lot of the areas were actually empty billets they could not recruit who. i think the best description of these cuts was given to me by someone who said it is a slicing capacity, not a cut in capability. i thought that was a really good formulation. these are for example areas where maybe we have special operators and we have a pretty good number today but we were hoping to row it by 30%. maybe we have now scaled ambitions to recognize the number we've got today is probably about right in certain disciplines in the soc community. i am pleased with the work that was done in that community and i think of her flex a lot of thoughtful analysis. your second question was about space-based capabilities and the army has very much been a

partner with spaceport on this transformation. i think at the department of defense we are making the investments we need to make in a resilient, robust, really diverse space-based architecture to provide those secure communications we know we will need in the event of a conflict. where the army plays into this is we are active and vocal and ensuring our requirements for all of the things we need to do for our missions are reflected in the requirements of the space force, and broadly the broader community has and understands from us. we are playing actively with them. i think we have an opportunity to help the army with the aviation rebalance. if you look at the reconnaissance capabilities, they will continue to be a blend of capabilities, some

reconnaissance capabilities that are aerial, some launched effects, and we will rely on space-based capabilities. if it hadn't been a blend of those capabilities i think it will continue to be a blend of those capabilities, but mature across the space force, we intend to be more of a consumer. gen. brown: our audience brought their a game today. join me in thanking the secretary for being with us today. [applause] that was great and i couldn't agree more how important it is, and think industry for being here, so we can answer those questions, and certainly it is a team effort to help protect our nation, no doubt about it. we have a few events coming up.

join us for the seventh operation deploy your dress pop event, a spouse lead that is fantastic. that is 15th april at the women's memorial at arlington cemetery. i think last year we had 700 folks at the one here. also land pack, about 45 indo pacific nations, a premier event in the pacific, great speakers and the networking will be fantastic, plus it is in hawaii, so hope to see you there. next coffee series is 21 may. you won't want to miss that one. hope to see you there. questions on any of those events

or others, visit our website and you can see all that is going on so you don't miss anything. i want to thank our sponsors, general dynamics. couldn't do it without you. membership, i think everyone in here is a member. 1.5 million members strong and growing. join the team that supports your army. thank you for coming, have a great army day. [applause] >> all this week we are showing recent supreme court cases the high court is expected to rule on by the end oth term, and we will talkitreporters about some ofhe eagle issues involved, begin each night at 9:30 eastern on c-span. tonight, a cas