screeria -- nigeria. -

briefing. later in discussion future of u.s. foreignl6d4 policy. president obama is holding a year endkc news2 white house. the president's likelyqw to discuss new cuba policy, the cyber attackir on sony pictures combatting isis, ebola, and theod+ñ immigration executive order.c9t 1 o live cvi'(tt begins at 1:30+ehuá cf1 o p.m. eastern on our companion network,"o c-span. >> with live coverage onmr c-span here on c-span3dá>áñ kbliment that coverage by showing you most

relevant congressional hearings and public affairs events. then on weekends c-span3 is the home to american:4zy history tv. but programs tell our nation's story including six unique series, the civil war's 150th anniversary, visitingw battlefields and key events. american f&ñ÷artifacts, touring museums and sites to discover what artifacts reveal about america's past. history bookshelf with the best known american history writers, the presidency lookingzy.ñ policies and legacies of our nation's commander in chief.ñ lectures and history, top college professors delves into and our new series, real america, featuring government and educational films from the 1930s through the '70s. created by the cable tv industry$/svqr(t&háhp &hc% and funded by local cable ora satellite provider. watch usr1ci$jz hd, like us on facebook, and follow us on/7qk twitter. >> next, the director and the chief of u.s...6&ñé&"] army aviation give an update on the army's aviation

restructure initiative. it's expected to save the army $12 billion. this is hosted >!xú the center for strategic and international studies in& ["kçhour.k=1vñ lt$ 2h#÷(y4$ i >> good.xlyafternoon, everybody. thanks for coming. we are here today to have a conversation to one that we started a whileoe-hw(tz when the army announced the aviation restructuring was one of the more contentious elements of the army's portion of that budget debate. thatsdiñu#q 5ijjju as of aczj few days ago. and so we wanted to have a follow7m where that initiative stands and the future aviation with large

given the guidance that was recently given by the congressecç and to do that i think we have a really terrific panel lined up. so to my immediate right is the9f director of the defense office. he is a career aviator who commanded and had the opportunity to command a troop in iraq and go back to the brigade many years later which while he was there became the first enhanced combat aviat~kn brigade. so was in charge of all operations in iraq. he's done:eñ a few other things along the way.#ea&zf1 o hymf=ñ first came to theuy+v army staff in g-8 in and then was able to escape for a year and go backjça[w to the real army at ft. riley where& involved with the%w&>z implementation of aligned forces and how that applied tou

>> so he is leading the charge and÷sq%÷ framing next one maybe i don't but manages tos"s keep busy of he's going to offer perspectives on the overalll fiscal aviation land xap is place. to his right is colonel johnr7(tx lindsey who is the director of aviation and army chief.c/s6÷ colonel lindsey is one of the architects of the aviation restructure. so he's going to talk about how that is proceeding and where that stands looking forward. and then finally we have -- it's always great ,&d& have back our=vfjñ alumni. he was a csi fellow in 2012. he was noting in the old building and the digs since he was here last.

also a career aviator who commanded both in the general purpose forces and in special q^ñ operations.5zc aviation regiment at ftîpqw a campbell. he just came from brigade command in korea and has now the opportunity to implement or try to synthesize all the lessons assignment into being the director ofx@ develonnp9ñ again, i think0l8 expertise, you guys are sort ofok÷ cumulatively touched many of ther'0)ç same places along the way. but you have also sort of >> like a lot of the% the enterprise piece is what we like to talk about. here and between us. 8,000 flight hours and about over 1,000 combat flight hours as aáa

apache guy and a specialñu operations blackhawk aviator. so i mean, you know, got that. >> goodjirt÷ afternoon. this is our version of aimq÷ this is not gray7-f goose. so my name isbix frank booth. i was introduced. and what i'd like to do is as my position before when i was director of material and also the division chief for 2012, 2013, i think i gotq[]yp a pretty good kind of experience as where the budget was going specifically related torp the equipment pay or associated withihr÷ the modernization. and so what i'd like to do,aj÷ is having that perspective and then turning around in 2013 and going back and being the deputy commanding general for support for the big red one by the way, the oldest, most historicktu division in the united states

army, i got myññy perspective of what is the impact of budget -- i got a vision -- notn8 vision a window of what impacts are the budget constraints and also the potential forumn sequestration have i know we're here to talk about something else. but it's important to frame it around the discussion of the budget airy cuts and also the impacts of sequestration. so let's talk. in the last -- because of the budget e"iairary constraints, well over 270 programs have been impacted. and whether that has beenkaje2y programs have been basically taken off they've been descoped or whether they've been delayed in some way, shape or fwasa 270. that is aq, significant amount. if you lookh4y at the overall pay on the average historically it ranges anywhere in a wvz÷ balanced force, not a hollow force. it ranges anywhere

24% of the overall budget. withinzjs the ee pay. that is about ló3 22% 24% of the budget. right now we're sitting at about 17%. that is a significant cut in""ñ our modernization programs. a significant impact on the 4 11 strategic, basically, what theía2iz army is now withpa$x -- as it pertains to the budget. so if we go to full sequestration, then what occurs to the programs we talked b i and some of them more than once. when you reshape one year, you have a more budget cuts than"ñ/ñ that, you have to keep descoping. additional 137 programs, whether they will kill or whether they'll be vaúdescoped or moved to the right in some shape or form. that is an impact to the modernization of ourh".íólau÷e4br÷÷

so it was september time frame. we went into the governmentj 3÷ shutdown. it occurred%8aa"÷ that we were told even though we were requesting based ong="r previous years budget which was 147 million to run the division, we requested about 135 million. and now that understand that is two armored brigade combat teams and aviation brigade and sustained brigade. what happened was when all occurred in september october, november time yrame, we were told you're going toía-s get $w= million. in.4dbgw so everyone askwgh how do you portray the impacts of readiness? this happened in the division. immediately we had to implement anything over $50,000, any type of a purchase@wany for?w3bv the division, i had to personally approve. you have to understand that an

armor brigade combat team for a year on an average this is very rough order of magnitude, $14 million to train. that doesn't include thez( ctce+s2c ) rotation. you can imagine what that -- our1lmñ average brigade combat team is sitting for the year based on what we wereay projecting at 4 million to 5 million.'fsó one tank enk sin $472,000. can you go through almost 2y: 1/2 months of if one tankkcf.r went down. so everything we stopped driving ourmq vehicles. we stopped shooting. we stopped training.wfmy so at the operational @vvzside we stopped training. we stopped driving our vehicles. i said yo0-m)cb know that could be the big red line. i ñ talked to] anotherbâz deputy!1hñ general in a class last week. he said they did the same thing

with the strikers. they drove them back and forthllfúñ three or four feet just so the tires wouldn't get kind of indended on one side or another. just to keep the engines going. you didn't have the gas. you didn't have the money to pay for any miles or! or any type of bullets. so that is the division. that is trying to getóí trod do some of theiz1i missions that we were tasked to do. so what was occurring]hv@ tactically at the company level? nothing. as theyom possibly can to -- you know, sore soldiers and leerdship development. when it 84i comesknf at the platoon which requires you to get-8ú into[9 maneuver on the btr' )q&d andjxu"

the áxáejt that we asked for and we could start to get that training back up we were able to get back on to a path.64i but everybody always xhfasks, what happens. what is the = impact? from my perspective, last year, i think we saw a pretty good idea of what would occur at a division if sequestration occurred and your budget was cut essentiallytní in half. that's what happened to us. you know to me that was very telling. come back here in the building and have die logs with folks and explain, there is what occurred at a division. by the way, your aviation brigade wentfmhau to less than 11 per month per pilot. can you maintain the current and your current but are you proficient on day night aerial gun operationors company decisive actions? absolutely notñl#l so the readinessdxi$ñ impacted the division significantly. and that'szln.m>÷ what if we move forward with sequestration, at least what i saw last year, i

could certainly see that we could see that occur wnt division when it comes to the readiness and#?s overall. i look forward to having a dialogue about aviation restructuring or how the impacts of both across the board and the savings of around $12 billion a little over $12 billion has on thatvhmle strategic impact. operational and the tactical? thank you very much. john? >> sir thank you very much. i appreciate it. i see a lot of familiar faces in here today. we talked to!j many of you in the past year and a half. it's been a long road. were sort of building. but that's in fact not the b0 ccase.9hñ we conceived of this a long time ago with some very solid analytical underpinnings. it feels like a long road because of the process, right? the process is we submit something into the 1519 palm.

it happened in the fall of 2013. hxq it gets sent forward inm of this year. as part of the secretary of defense and president's budget.

for equipping alo be significantlyíubg reduced and we're going to talk about that in a little bit. the approach was very6q characteristic of the way things are often done and that is a salaamy slice. it's a cut of whole units. we didn't look into the unitg&m andf n rearrange things inymxéb them. we cut whole units out of the force. and that was five aviation brigades. the plan was.%ló to induce itnd three.z it cut all of the modernized systems associated with thosea ìáhp &hc% aviation brigades,o3jç it cut allt"k ofd+c2ñ the best stuff. it cut when we looked at that. we thought there's got to be am, better way. this plan"1!?o this original plan

included> keeping many of the£ay!"ñ legacy systems that had been in our fleet have been in our army:g inventory for 40 years.e#í]nd that included÷n;ñ archival warriors, our charlies and our aging training fleet.o$ñ so what the army's$gxg plan did is solve for a short term fiscal bogey. it didn't solve for a training aircraft. it didn't solve for scout helicopter. it was the approach to put billions of dollars into the aging warrior which was going tojd@ give you a marginal upgrade inóhñcapability down the $# road. it didn't do anything to our aviation structures. they all remain the same. we had across the force.q so we tooki'a different look.

is there a way to solve many aviation problems? one of the things we put together is this idea that we wanted to keep preserve our best stuff. let's not take our aircraft ouruñ best stuff and sweep it off the side of the aircraftñp "t&et's not doçgfcz that. let'sk5(#÷ safe our apaches. let's save our uh 60s. that became an organizing principle for our aviation. there was no idea that we were going to h!&a ablelm p to goó'fo to the armyéuq÷ç and ask for more money. that wasn't going to happen. the money was gone in the program in the outyears. so we( choices. if you agree that the organizing principle is to keep your best stuff, thenñdá5 you have to throw into play, throw into the mix

the idea/bi that you die vest yourf÷1 mix, of course, is your aircraft. we had 368 aircraftv2,z in the fleet. we got ten squadrons.brawpand we imagined what the army would be if we die vested the x oh-a8-d. of course, the question came up what do we do next? what happensmrmwith the scout? of [|ie, we have the ah-64-d which studieño3 have7!,ñ shown can and has over the past many years2zft performed the scout role very, very infectively in the p.>army. so that is one ofdrq@b the organizing principles in the army. we had to pay close attention to the mix within the ac and the rc because, again, dieúdásingtkx6 the

o hiv g! the number of the battalions in the army fromhi down to 20. and when you go downé to that few number of battalions based on t over the past 13 years at least then you have to think very carefully about where youñx put those assets. and we make the recommendation to the leadership andmh agreed that we(i3ç needed to put based on tempo and training requirements that asset, the ah-64 into the you know you could not move one thing from one component into the other without having it corresponding balance back to the reserve component for that reason. on shedding structure active pro poen enlt. we can move someá6ú the national guard.(&p ]e:tñ

way currently have a single engine nonglass cockpitp@ trainingerro0y down at ft. y and the idea with: to put a duel engine aircraft in place with a glass cockpit. that does a couple thingsv us.wc(çt

of all of t0 % change78x is occurring in the active4bñ component. officer transition panel in past over 350 warrant officers for advanced aircraft transitions. and so those folks are currently being programmed for the nextyt several years to pursue training in other.6dñ aircraft. that's happening. we have canceled training at ft.h$tñ rutger. and we have turned in all of our oh-58ejhyy deltas at ft. rutger and moved them to davis forjg÷

demilitarization.xqhqñl ñy kzf we havee1!1 hbq .ñ63 aircraft currently fielded.$k$(t&háhp &hc% and that process is on going throughout the army. we've converted two aviatit ÷ qt$ades that have the objective structure rightn5 --grass m!ñhû9crñ and]x they began to ñ/c thi,é capable force. so with that, i have5.9ñ plenty of other information we can share once we get the questions. but i'llé$k(h(ass it off to my wing man.mrgp>#fqc%#cq+++,bx+wq

along with managing also the portfolio. so certainly an exciting time. over 20% of the army dollars go to army aviation.

that is a significant ib vestnvestinvestment by the army. getting best bang for the buck certainly what we put in front of us as we go forward. this year, you know we have reallocated the warrior funds, the cockpit censor upgrade funds much that's been about 1.4 billion. we put that into our ari programs. so the remanufacture of the ah-64 into the oak owe model. some modifications and the ah-64 benefited from those funds the shadow as well. we've been able to put incrypted data link in the shadow. and we'll continue to do that. and also we've invested some of those funds into grade. and so certainly the theme as you see is we have to stick on this modernization path. we have to stay focused on

keeping the most modern platforms and equipment that support that -- those platforms in army aviation. and lastly, you know, we're neutral in cost. so a significant number of these cast of dollars the censor upgrade dollars have gone to the training that john lindsey brought up. the extra -- there is no extra cost in training and reformatting our force to give me the right flat forms. a few of the collars, over $600 million went into transitions. lastly thanks to bringing me back. the place looks great. and i wish i could have been here for the ribbon cutting. >> thanks very much to all of you. i want to start with a couple questions and then open it up to all of you. i forgot to mention it's been fortuitous, i just almost turned my phone off. so if people can preclude any

future phone calls that would be great. and then when we bring the mikes around, if you can wait for the mike and then quickly identify yourself and ask a question as quickly as possible is appreciated. i have two questions, you can diffy them however you like. the first is about we've had a series of events around the future vertical lift initiative and longer term aviation prospect. and the army is a major player and probably the principal player in that initiative. i want to know from the gentlemen, what's the impact of the fiscal environment that you talk about on the step after the restructure? what does all of this mean for fel going forward and how important is the development of

the capabilities to the future army aviation? my second question has to do with how you view the impact of the commission on active and national guard. active and reserve components of the army which is -- which -- whose activities over the next year and a half will inform how ari goes forward? >> let me take the commission first. then i'll let my esteemed colleague at the end of the table because they just finished up analysis. he can talk about the potential path forward or the path forward. so the commission you know i think pretty common knowledge that the army did not think we needed a commission. just because of the studies that have been done whether it's with rant and of course cape just did analysis and, of course we did our own internal analysis and we thought it was very good. a lot of analytical rigor put to

it to determine the cost benefit analysis with ari. and how that impacts both just like john talked about the modernization and impact to aviation, you know as an entire branch and ability to kind of move forward. but all indications are there is going to be a commission. and so of course, if there is you know, as transparent and as whatever the commission needs in terms of information, the army is going to move forward and provide that information to ensure they have everything they need at the end of the day to make the best recommendation to go forward. then we'll go from there. there are several things you know the -- and i'll let him explaining more of that later. ari, as he talked about, is already more than apache moves.

it is several other things taking place. they'll continue to occur. you know, whether it's the -- we've already stopped the training of the pilots. we're already starting to retrain the pilots. all those things he talked about, that stuff will continue to kerr and appear the language is going to indicate that first of february 2016 the commission will be complete and have their report done. >> the timing is important on the commission. commission is scheduled to report out as the general said. so we were aware that was a proposed date in the language from early in the process and so when we were putting together our implementation plan, we were very selective when it came to the timing associated with the transfer and activation of certain units. so our template called for the

inactivation of the units. but that's what when we talk about 48 aircraft in the language that's what the plan calls for. we can move to 48. the 31st of march 2016. that's what the language calls for. we're remindful of that. that's what the four structure file over in the g-3 reflect. so no way are we getting ahead or contradicting anything written. our language range invest.

strategy brief outs and staffing, we look at our 20-year plan and certainly the part is one of our priorities in that 20-year plan. we're looking very closely at the joint demonstrator, the s & t effort that has been awarded this past september. so as the efforts go forward, we're going to watch what technologies come out of that and certainly that will inform them. but we're excited to be partnering with, you know our joint partners you know, the navy and certainly signed on along with the army. and we've been in touch with the joint staff with many of our aviation leaders. the army is getting smaller.

they're not immune to that. so if we're forced to keep additional structure that is not part of the program or procure additional aircraft that is not part of the program, that's impactful to our modernization. even though it's a priority the aviation portfolio is not -- you know, it's a finite portfolio even though it's large, it's finite. so if we see additional demands come into that portfolio, something's got to give. so it's, you know, it's a math problem. and currently it is supportable. but it assumes ari. ari allows us to modernize. >> so here's the pressure that's on the entire budget airy process right now, especially as it relates to the equipment.

now they have $13 billion. you can see the downward pressure on every program and on every portfolio within your equipment pay, remember, there are seven divisions. the largest consumers of the dollars that go into the procurement of the ee pay is aviation, ground combat vehicles and the communications. those consume most of that. so when there is pressures which includes the fdl and everything within the programs the decisions have to be made. and you have to descope. those are the programs i was talking about already about the 270 in the potential 137 in the future. those are those programs that get impacted. that's a huge bill that you have to try to assume and absorb within your portfolio. did you want to add anything else? >> no, sir. great followup. it is a priority. >> thank you. questions from the audience?

>> hi. i'm wondering if can you talk a little bit about the spending bill that passed congress and there is language in there to study the impact of the th 67's retirement. what are you doing to take a look at those impacts and you know, you have made any head way in discussing things with the helicopter? >> i'll take that one. >> we're studying the language. obviously, this is not necessarily a large prize to us. the th 67 aircraft as we divert of those, they're an old aircraft. they have really been used very, very hardly in the training base. as you know as john talked

about, we do a lot of auto rotations to the ground. so these aircraft are probably older than the 20 years would show. but we are studying that. we owe that industrial base impact study to congress. we plan on cooperating with that. the whole aviation enterprise from the folks in the a-sult to ga to the pm are mindful that we need to have a light hand on our industry partners. we'll continue to look at it. >> there is aviation restructure calls for the divestment of 780 legacy systems. then, of course, the th-67s. for delta charlies which is the

balance of the 78 o aircraft, those aircraft will be divested and demilitarized and have no commercial application. what we're talking about is the remaining 181 aircraft in that fleet. and what happens with those aircraft and, of course, as many of you know there's a long process that the department of defense has to go to per guidance from both statute and pod policy for the process for those th-67s. the last step of which is to put it in the hands of the st within the department of defense and gsa and make it available for commercial sale. >> if it gets that far. he doesn't have a guy up here.

i talk to him before i came over. the folks in the community have three big concerns about ari, particularly apaches, of course. the big policy issue of the bar c should mirror the ac and if they should mirror the combat portions of the army not just cs and css. the second issue that they bring up is in your saying that ari you know, pays for itself. are you accounting for the in the guard potential need for milcom and guards retraining and for possible personnel churn across states. as missions change in units. they can't just order people to pack up and go to ft. hood or

whatever. >> all right. okay. i'll take a crack at that. unless you want to jump in, sir. >> i'll jump in where i can. so what we would say to the point about the units mirroring one another and the active component, we say that our units should be and capability should be complimentary, not every unit that we have in the active component is reflected in

reserve component. we don't have the ranger regiment or battalions in the reserve component. we don't have thad in the reserve component. we do have maintenance support groups in the national guard which we don't have in the active component. and we have sns battalions in the national guard which we do not have in the active component. so i'm not sure we are in agreement that we have to look exactly. and the other piece of your question that we have to point out time and again is that it is

absolutely incorrect to say that a uh 60 helicopter are not combat aircraft. they're combat aircraft. and they are called upon to go into some of the most difficult and challenging and harrowing places in the world every day. and the bravest people, some of the bravest people we know are us 60 drivers. wally can attest to that fact having spend something time in special operations aviation. i think that is to the first point. on the second point about the movement of people personnel and milcon absolutely. we have accounted for the transition and training of people in the reserve component who will assume and fall in on the new structure.

that is to say not everybody in the national guard who flies aircraft, likal patchies today, is going to get a transition. we don't have a one for one aircraft going between apaches and uh 6 o's in the national guard. we are going to transition naem we require for the new structure. we said we had i think 750 or so active component warrant officers who fly and not every one of those individuals is going to be transitioned into the -- another aircraft.

this is stationed at ft. knox. it's a u.s. army reserve apache battalion who has moved out well in advance of the effective date of that unit's transition to an assault capability. they have broken the code and they have many of the same concerns about folks coming from other places in order to fall in on that structure for training and readiness, et cetera. as far as the readiness question goes, whether or not we're going to have tiered readiness, we hope that whatever levels we have to assume in term of flying our op tempos, we hope that is a temporary condition.

we cannot afford to maintain 20 battalions of ah 64s at a low level of readiness. there are a couple things that they do that no other aircraft does. we shoot weapons systems. we team with unmanned platforms. and we fly this thing called a night vision system which is unique to the ah 64 platform. i hope that answers your questions. if there is anything i missed, let me know. >> i think that is spot on. >> go to the back. >> my name is andre peterson.

i'm with the national guard association. thank you for taking the time to be here today. i have a followup to sidney's question. ari creates a situation where there are two types of aviation brigades. those with guidance those without. given the likelihood of nonveneered battle fields in the future, it's hard to emergency a situation where attack aviation would not be involved in the equation. if army guard brigades are capable of deploying with augustmaugust augmenting apache units how do you see them piecing together and would acrbs be deployed to army guard training activities? >> i've had the opportunity as the 82nd airborne division to deploy with the first national guard division. i want to say i got this history right since korean war. i was the commander and worked for the brigade commander was

mark burke. and we did the entire training together. and matter of fact, we brought in the reserve and was another national guard assault battalion. so that made the aviation brigade. and the entire division was made up of a multicomposition of active duty and national guard. i have to assume, no i know for a fact it would be done the same way. they train together up at for the drum new york. multiple exercises before we deployed. then we did training together in kuwait and fought together side by side for 11 months. i didn't have the opportunity to train with all of the battalion commander -- battalion commands i worked with. i have under the command three national guard battalions.

it is phenomenal out of wisconsin, minnesota and did i say that right? and then second 285th out of arizona. again, we didn't get the opportunity to train together. we met mid stride. i hope to say i hope they agree with me. we work well together. we did lots of combat together. to answer your question i don't think it would change from what we've done last few years which is train together, fight together side by side and continue that brotherhood, sisterhood into the future. >> i would like to make pinlt. our aviation brigade that we current sli in kuwait today is a national guard aviation brigade and working for that national guard aviation brigade commander in iraq is an active component. so exactly like it's working so well today. that is how we expect it will work in the future.

>> you're up here. >> i would like to ask for a little bit of clarification on the changes to the training fleet in the schedule associated with those changes. when does it start for the new pilots? one of the lawsuit and why not compete this way? >> i'll give you a run down of the status of where we are with the training fleet. we have about 12 aircraft scheduled to be at ft. rutger by the end of the quarter. we've already undertaken a training of our instructor pilots down at ft. rutger who are currently pilots but now are proving the evaluation program of the structure. so that is under way. we expect that will get to the point where we're capable of

going through a program of construction from start to finish in the summer of 2015. and thn our first class is scheduled to begin in the first quarter of fy-16. that's when things begin and it's not something that you can do very quickly. you can't turn over the entire fleet in a 12-month period. it's going to take several years to do that. so that by fy-18 we'll have the full compliment of 170 -- 187 of those on hand and everybody on the instructor pilot side trained and ready to carry the students through from start to finish about 1,000 students a year. so that's where we are on the training fleet. do you want to talk about the compete piece? >> yeah. so we have to remember how this generated. so the initial plan was that we were not initial plan was that we were not going to increase our fleet at all. and as part of a a large

compromise, the secretary of defense agreed to -- because the army national guard came in and said these aircraft are in almost every state and territory and they're critical to our mission. and so the secretary of defense agreed to this compromise to add some additional aircraft to our requirement. and so initially as we went into this plan the plan always was to cascade additional -- or existing air frames into ft. rutger. so as we've gotten the top line ad i think that's why there was no compete and we felt again as we went from seven fleets of aircraft to four and the luh being fourth pleat, we like the efficiencies and savings that brings us. to bring another aircraft in was just not economical feasible or affordable. and so in the tradition that

army aviation has routinely done with the uh-1 iroquois and the alpha charlie. we took existing on-hand aircraft that we owned and maintained already and we transitioned that into the training fleet. and so that's kind of the history there. and again, you know ongoing litigation, you know we're not sure exactly where that's going to be, so i don't know that i can comment on it. certainly above my level. >> hi i'm marcus weiss with defense one. several months ago frank kendall asked for business case on the ari. has that business case been delivered and can you share some specifics from it? >> are we talking about the cape study? >> cape analysis. >> a bunch of reporters in

august. he said he asked specifically for a business case on the a.r.i. >> cape did a comparison analysis of the a.r.i. plan wland the national guard had proposed as a counter. >> when was it done? >> it was done throughout the summer and into the fall. >> is it going to be released publicly? >> not very many cape analyses are. >> well, it's a controversial issue and the air force when they had the c-27 issue they came and released a lot of documents after the fact to aid their argument so -- >> i don't have the authority -- i'm not in the position to be able to answer if that's going to be released or not. we were working on it. >> i hope we're not talking about two different things. >> yeah. >> can i take your name and let's follow up with you on your specific question? because i have been to osd several times, i've never briefed personally mr. kendall, but i've definitely briefed several members of his staff. i just want to be sure i'm

answering the right question and we're not talking about two different thing, one a business case analysis and one is an analysis of the national guard counterproposal by the capability assessment valleyation. i think that might be two different things. we'll clarify it for you. >> personally i've not worked on anything which i just described which was the comparison of both a.r.i. and the national guard proposal. >> and osd. >> right, for cape. for cape did it. >> i think did you have another question? other questions out here? yes, go ahead. >> to be quick for a change, the additional 100 luh-72s they recalled, that's money above bca caps and i believe that goes over some years. so how is that money you know at stake of sequester returns? i imagine a lot of money is. but those aircraft are not yet in the bank as it were.

>> well, it was osd top line ad that you reference and it was -- we procured a number and will procure a number in '14, '15 and '16 is the program. and again, many of them are already procured. so -- >> 100 or 1200 -- >> of the osd top line, of the 100, yes. >> can i ask a quick question about a slightly off topic or sort of off topic about mostly for you, john, about the innovation initiative and how it impacts the aviation community specifically, again, having -- you're in the middle of something now, but as you also are required to think about the

future with your other elements of the aviation enterprise what types of aviation innovation are you -- are you thinking about, would you like to be thinking about looking longer term? >> so i would like to spend more time thinking about innovation, but i and my friend here, we spend most of our time in a knife fight every day looking -- >> looking for money? >> looking for money looking relatively short-term. by relatively short term we mean within the program. that's short term. we're talking about innovation. so we definitely are tied in with the aviation enterprise. the smart guys who run the show, and that includes general lundy of course, down at the aviation center and mr. shipley down at

ft. eustis and i know that general lundy is probably the best person to -- but based on our six-pack conversations, i don't know if you want to. >> dve is probably a big one. talk to any aviator out there that's been deployed to combat, you just know that dve, what it could provide for both the -- i'm sorry, degraded visual environment. so basically it provides you the ability to see through whether it's weather or also dust. dust, it was traditionally what it was brought forth to dialogue about because of the the dust landings and the threat to the crews as you were going into with a blackhawk to a combat situation landing to the x, as a combat aircraft. and so a lot of times we had aircraft that would run into significant issues because of the dust. so dve helps get through that, but also it can add another tier of capability, which goes into working into a frank complex environment with whether it's

smoke, whether it's fog whether it's some type of weather or whether it's dust. it's all of that and it's not just about landing but operating, fully operational in that environment whether it's self-generated, your own smoke or operating in an environment that has it again, mega cities in the future things like that. so to me dve, if you're trying to be innovative, that's something that's out there. >> how do you secure an advantage that is not equalized across the board? it used to be nights and night vision systems came on board many years ago, that gave the u.s. military in particular a decided advantage, and we hope some day that our ability to overcome the degraded visual environment is going to give us that asymmetric advantage down the road. the other thing of course, i think is unmanned systems and what manned and unmanned teaming is going to bring. we're on the very edge of proving out what some of that capability is and can be in

combat environments and, of course, when we look forward to what happens beyond our capability, beyond our shadow capability you know that's certainly an area for growth and improvement. >> and we can capitalize on some great lessons learned. first the 229 16th just came back from the range with the models and we look forward to sitting down with paul mealy and a great team of warriors to figure out those lessons learned, what they learned, what we can do better across the board to improve that capability. but i mean, that's the cutting edge in the flying tigers which we know we have some people with history of that in the audience and they did phenomenal. so we look forward sitting down and kind of what's the path forward an what are ways we can improve that collective team working together with that new capability that we have within the model a-64. >> i echo all those comments.

we spent a lot of time on airline survivability equipment. i think that's a very high growth area. you know, we have to keep up. i think the threat out there is much cheaper to develop and so we're constantly countering that. i think the itap is exciting and we're pleased with the pace of the itap and how it's looking. jmrtd exciting s and t as well and we're watching that which again feeds into fvl which goes into my last comments. we've done obviously training innovation, too. you know, we are transitioning ft. rutger into a duel engine glass cockpit trainer, and i think we're going to see some really good things from that too. everything from cost savings due to better simulation to you know, just again producing a better system operator leader,

aviation leader. and i guess the last thing i'd say is we are working on sustainment as well. we continue to try to chip away at what can we do to lower the cost of our per hour because we're quite expensive and so we're constantly grinding on that as well. so we do, we spend a lot of time on this because, you know, one, we got to maintain our asymmetric advantage that has been army aviation these past 13 years, but we're not going to rest on our laurels and i think that we see that there's a lot of threats out there and a lot of capabilities that we want to leverage to maintain it. >> so as we move forward with these three areas we talked about, we have to -- you know how do we nest this with the army operating concept. the army operating concept, we as the army will either be part of or lead a joint interorganizational multinational team kind of scalable or tailorable to be expeditionary. how do we innovate our capabilities with army innovation to be sure it's

nested with this ip kaeblt and what the aoc is going to take us into 2025? so we have to make sure that as we come up with these great ideas we're nested within that capability. these are great technical capabilities, but unless we can apply it on the battlefield and what we're doing in the future whether it's, you know natural disaster support or whether we're out there trying to combat ebola or whether it's dealing with issues in europe or also in afghanistan, we want to make sure that it's all nested in moving forward to 2025. >> let me ask the final -- sorry, we'll have the final question from one of our multinational partners. >> i'm from the british embassy. just following on from a point you made that and with the recent events in europe and the repositioning of some of your armored combat teams back to europe, are you confident that under the restructuring initiative that you've got the

right assets or enough assets within europe or -- >> john, you want to take the first one? >> i think we spend a lot of time talking to our rsccs around the world. >> army service -- >> sorry. army service component commands. and sorry, with the acronym soup here. we were talking about pegs earlier. great record on that. so we stay closely tied, and the aviation restructuring initiative is about adding capability increasing capability even though we're going to have less structure because it is the best step. and we're going to tie that to the idea that we need to become more expeditionary and we need to proat a time forcerotate forces

on a regular basis. we did in hawaii this summer and we put a company out of colorado in hawaii for three months. that was a great example of how rotational forces can work. we haven't made any decisions. the the army hasn't made any decisions and that includes the 148, beyond that it would be premature for me to talk about what it looks like anywhere else around the army. but yes, we think we have it right and we have accounted for the requirements of our combatant commanders and our asccs. >> when i go back to my former job as an avs brigade commander in korea. you talk about rotational forces and what happened to second cab over in korea, we had a squad rotate in and it was a game

changer. they came trained ready. you know, it wasn't doing the constant training as i got typically one year tours out of my air crew. these guys came for their nine-month rotation and they were trained and ready and it took just a small amount of time to get them environmentally current in the area, but after that it was a tremendous capability. and so you know, i think our partners who receive rotational forces will see that because we're able to train them here at conas and then rotate them in they're going to see a better product. that was my experience anyway. >> it's very similar to what we've been doing the last 12 years. i talked about the three national guard battalions that we had under the command during that 12 months in iraq. it wasn't all at once. i mean, the right side rz guyarizona guys were the first, then came in minnesota, wisconsin and then after that california. they arrived fully trained ready to hit the ground running.

if you look at our force being a rotationally focused force but surge ready, so rotationally focused but surge ready your ability to get that unit to c-1 before it goes into a rotational requirement hits the ground and you've got their focus for nine months, whatever -- i won't put a month time on it, but it's for a duration and then they rip out with somebody else. i mean these guys are ready to go. and we proved it the last 12 years. >> okay. thank you all very much for taking the time to come out. and we look forward to seeing you in the new year, if not before. hope you all have happy holidays and thanks to all of you. >> happy holidays, everybody.n2 the

brookings institution will host a forum on the military health care system. panelists will discuss reform proposals and lessons learned from implementing the -- >> here are some of the programs you'll find this weekend on the c-span networks. saturday noit at 9:30 on c-span actor seth rogen discussing politics and humor with "daily show" co-creator lizz winstead. sunday night at 8:00 on c-span's

q&a, katie pavlich on what she sees as the hypocrisy of liberals. william deresiewicz argues that the top universities are missing the mark in education and students should learn to think critically, be creative and have a goal in life beyond material. and book tv visits west lafayette, indiana, to visit several of the city's authors. and on american history tv on c-span3 saturday at 6:00 p.m. eastern, historian damian shields talks about the life of patrick cleburne and his role in the confederate army during the battle of franklin tennessee. sunday afternoon at 4:00 reel mek, a piece from kron-tv on the history of police brutality in neighboring oakland. find our complete television

schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. call us at 202-626-3400. e-mail us at comments@c-span.org or send us a tweet @cspan #comments. follow us on facebook. like us on fwirt. now to the pentagon where army lieutenant general james terry briefs reporters on current air strike operations against isis and discusses the role of iraqi security forces and other coalition members engaged in the conflict. this is 35 minutes. >> it's definitely taller today. good morning everybody. i won't make this long, but i wanted to welcome lieutenant general james terry, the commander of the combined joint

task force operation inherent resolve. our anti-isil efforts. i want to welcome him to the briefing room. this is his first briefing in this new command with you all. we're delighted to have him here. we're going to keep this to 30 minutes. the general has a short opening statement. i will be moderating from over here calling on you. please when i do call on you, identify who you are and who you're with before you ask your question so that the general knows who he's talking to. and i would ask you to please limit follow-ups if you can so we can get through as many people as possible. again we've got 30 minutes from the time we start. thank you. with that general? >> thanks, john. good morning everyone, happy holidays to each of you out there. as many of you may know, we recently established the combined joint task force for operation inherent resolve as a headquarters of more than 40 nation coalition. that is designed to integrate our collective military capabilities to defeat isil. or as i have picked up in the region of vernacular of the

region daaesh. various countries will contribute national capabilities on different timelines. the strength of this team is in our common purpose, and what unites us is a strong resolve to combat this threat. daaesh, is why we're here. daaesh uses terror and fear to dominate people and reward themselves. it has demonstrated time and time again a disregard for life and humanity. it has also openly stated intentions to ply its trademark barbaric methods not only regionally but globally as well. while we recognize the ruthlessness and capability of this enemy, we also realize that the strategic advantage and tremendous strength of the coalition will ultimately lead to the defeat of daaesh. the combined joint task force inherent resolve is a command of centcom under general lloyd austin and we have three foundational priorities.

first we'll contribute to build and maintain the coalition, the combined joint task force provides an organizing framework that's designed to synchronize and integrate capabilities and amplify our efforts. nations contributes to this effort provide a strategic advantage through which we intend to harness the collective strength of all those involved. as a coalition we'll relentlessly pursue daaesh and defeat their efforts. up to this point we've conducted more than 1,300 air strikes. i just checked before coming in this, 1,361. many of you may be following recent events from two nights ago in support of iraqi security force operations around sinjar and jumar. 53 precision strikes that have resulted in allowing those forces to maneuver and regain approximately 100 square kilometers of ground.

combined efforts like these are having a significant effect on daaesh's ability to command and control, to resupply and to conduct maneuver. we will continue to be persistent in this regard and we will strike daaesh at every possible opportunity. also coalition will work to deny daaesh safe haven and sanctuary. we'll do this through precision strikes but by enabling our partners to expand their footprint and expand their influence, rehave been mooing opportunities for daaesh, to harness youth recruit citizens and recruit fighters. the key is assisting the government of iraq in improving their security forces which after 16 military operations are regaining their confidence and proving more capability every day. while several places remain contested iraqi security forces have retaken many critical areas. examples include mosul dam,

hadit had a, karma rip ya and zum ar. that leads us to our third priority, as a part of the broader diplomat economic effort the coalition will enable regional partner security. iraqi security forces must be a capable force, one that can restore iraq's sovereign borders, retake territory from daaesh and secure the iraqi people. an offensively minded and trained security force backed by an inclusive gft of iraq is the key to future stability. as you know we have been authorized an additional 1,500 u.s. personal. they'll serve in noncombat roles to support additional advise and assist rifrmts and the building partner capacity effort. in addition we anticipate coalition contributions that should produce at least an additional 1,500 personnel in these efforts. we're seeing initial successes in this fight. my assessment is that daaesh has

been halted in transiging to the offense and is attempting to hold what they currently have. you'll see some local counterattacks in that regard. there will be challenges down the road that will require patience. the government of iraq understands the great threat they face and they resolve to defeat it. the combined joint task force represents what i believe is a new chapter of what i assess will be a successful campaign to bring the coalition's power to bear and ultimately to lead to the defeat of daaesh. thanks for your attention and i'll now take your questions. >> general, thanks for doing this. lolita with the associated press. i'm wondering if you can explain a little bit more about some of the coalition forces you expect to be coming in. are you looking for more than 1500? and when do you expect to see some of those forces move in and, although iran isn't obviously one of those coalition forces can you talk a little bit about what you're seeing

from iran's air operations? is it is consistent? it is sporadic? and is it a help? >> let me start with the coalition. part of the coalition's obviously already there so the 1500 in addition that i'm speaking to are additional capabilities in relationship to advise and assist and build partner capacity site. so what we look at then is how we balance those capabilities as a coalition comes in in relationship to the requirements that we see in iraqi security forces where we have to advise and assist and where we need to create some of that additional capability in those forces so that over time they become increasingly capable, as you heard me discuss there, i think the key to success there will be increasing the capabilities iraqi security forces and combining that with an inclusive

government. i think that's the key to success down the road, at least it leads to stability on the side of iraq. i see the same reports you see on iran. obviously iran has interests in iraq. i don't think any of us deny that. what i will tell you is that all of my activities are focused on daaesh and that i coordinate those activities through the minister of defense and his offices in iraq. so i don't directly coordinate with anyone else outside the coalition in iraq. >> j.d. mcintyre with al jazeera america. two quick questions. one is is there any way to quantify how much ground has been retaken from the isil rebels? and then a more broad question. we're told that the key to iraqi forces standing up and fighting is for them to feel that their government is more inclusive and

less corrupt. can you give us any idea of what the progress on that is? and can you explain this new name that you've given isil. >> daaesh? it's a term that our partners in the gulf use. and in fact, it's -- it speaks to a name that's very close to isil in arabic and it speaks to another name that means to crush underneath the foot. and so it's a regional acronym for daaesh. and i would just say that our partners, at least the ones i work with, ask us to use that because they feel that if you use isil, that you legitimize a self-declared caliphate. and it actually -- they feel pretty strongly that we should not be doing that. so i'll slip back and forth every now and then isil or

daaesh. i apologize. >> is there any way to quantify how much ground has been retaken or territory has been retaken and what about progress on more inclusive government? >> yeah, i would say the -- the way i look at the progress is more in line with the effects that we're having against daaesh, as an example. we're not seeing a broad offensive movement like we saw in may and june and even into july. we've -- my headquarters has really been here since about the july timeframe and moving to a cjtf later in the september/october timeframe. so that broad offensive becomes important to daaesh as they try to gain territory and populations for the caliphate, the self-declared caliphate. so what that allows them to do

then is message, and that's one of the things they do well. i think we're all familiar with that. and they do it in two ways. it becomes attractive to some populations out there so that they can recruit. and i think the -- we know they intentionally do it then to create some fear inside the minds and the perceptions is of some of these populations. and so a large part of countering that ability to message is the fact that, you know broadly i see them as transitioning to the defensive piece of this. you will see some local counterattacks, again some of these areas will be contested. again, i would just say it takes some patience as we continue to build iraqi security forces out there. and then as a transition like this, it provides an opportunity for iraqi security forces specifically to become more offensive in nature and it now starts to uncover daaesh in

certain capabilities and allows us to strike them. so i would just broadly characterize it as that and say that i think they're having a hard time in terms of communicating right now, in terms of resupply and we're seeing indications -- i mean you can go to the social media and see some of the stuff that's coming out of places like mosul in relationship to the inability of the self-declared caliphate to govern populations out there. >> i wonder if you can talk a little bit about mosul. there are reports that the iraqi forces want to take it sooner rather than later. when can iraqi forces takeç mosul? what will the u.s. forces be on the ground. general dempsey is talking about j-tax and several places are still contested. >> that's four questions. my georgia public education, let me start with mosul.

and specifically you want to know about conditions inside mosul? >> what do you think iraqi forces can retake it? what will the u.s. role be maybe on the ground? >> we essentially 24/7 work with iraqi security forces. a large part of that goes into the planning but also part of that planning has to be how you generate force to do operations. up to this point, the iraqi security forces have been challenged with continual redistribution forces out there i guess is the best way to say it. so now how do you get into a place where you can generate some capability, pull some units back so that you can make them better and then now start to put those against operations down the road in a more campaign plan-like fashion. i don't want to disclose any timelines, but certainly i think part of the capacity effort that

we're doing right now will certainly play into resourcing those capabilities and moving the iraqi security forces forward. two places not just mosul but you ask about contested places, there are places in anbar that are certainly contested. the reports i'm seeing certainly indicate places like ramadi are contested. the center of ramadi is i think being cleared and secured in a lot of ways by the iraqi security forces, but the east and the northeast part of it still contested as example. we have some contested places in and around baji right now. we can expect that certainly as iraqi security forces continue to conduct some of these more offensive operations and daaesh's ability then to counter that at the tactical level it will create some of these contested spot ss.

>> quickly, when do you think the 1500 u.s. additional forces will be in place? and on the issue of national guard, i heard a report this morning, doipt know if it's true, but describing fears that that plan is entirely on hold. that it stalled entirely. what's your estimation of the national guard plan? >> 1500 and iraqi national guard. the 1500 i think we'll start to see flowing in a couple weeks. but what you need to understand is we're not waiting on those 1500. we've actually used some of the forces and capabilities that are there like the regional force from the army and the special purpose magtaf in the region. that's what they're there for. provides general austin with a lot of flexibility like we're seeing up in iraq. they're starting to move forward. and have moved forward in many cases to make sure that we are

preparing the sites out there. we've got the legislation moving through that gives us the authorities to train and we want to be ready and we certainly will be as the iraqis now start to designate in a deliberate way which units now will go to those partner capacity sites, either pull them out of the line somewhere or create new capabilities out there. second question again. guard? national guard again as many of you realize, we've got this initial tribal 5,000 bridging strategy that the department of state is working directly and of course, all these activities go through the government of iraq. so we got the initial 5,000 started, 250 trained, and contracted. more coming to do that. and again this is iraqis.

we participate with the iraqi security forces in training them on how to train, you know this initial capability there. that's important because, for this program to be successful, i firmly assess that it has to be done by the government of iraq. now, over time there are several versions of legislation as i understand, and i talked to general west the 14th before departing, there are several versions of that language that have to go before the counsel of representatives to be approved. but i'm optimistic that it is going to go through. there are many that see this as a way to not only bring those tribes back in the national guard piece, but also to bring some of those government