{"id":19678,"date":"2018-10-10T13:00:09","date_gmt":"2018-10-10T13:00:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/armytimes\/uncategorized\/2018\/10\/10\/can-the-army-pull-off-buying-two-new-helicopters-back-to-back\/"},"modified":"2026-08-07T21:53:42","modified_gmt":"2026-08-07T21:53:42","slug":"can-the-army-pull-off-buying-two-new-helicopters-back-to-back","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/armytimes\/news\/your-army\/2018\/10\/10\/can-the-army-pull-off-buying-two-new-helicopters-back-to-back\/","title":{"rendered":"Can the Army pull off buying two new helicopters back to back?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

WASHINGTON \u2014 The Army\u2019s track record over the past few decades hasn\u2019t been good when it comes to trying to buy a new helicopter<\/a>, but now the service wants to buy not one, but two different aircraft <\/a>in order to modernize its force to be able to operate in increasingly challenging future environments against adversaries with similar capabilities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The service decided this year that it would push to develop and field a long-range assault aircraft <\/a>that would fit in the medium-lift aircraft category, as well as an attack reconnaissance aircraft, relatively back to back.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Army had already been developing a medium-lift Future Vertical Lift <\/a>helicopter through its Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstration program. Bell and a Sikorsky-Boeing team are each building and flying aircraft that will inform requirements for an FVL program of record.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And the Army just released a solicitation to industry asking for designs for a Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft, unveiling plans that it will enter a competitive prototyping effort to ultimately buy and field the aircraft.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under the new Army Futures Command, tasked to develop a modernized force focused on six major priorities, Future Vertical Lift is the third highest priority behind Long Range Precision Fires and Next-Generation Combat Vehicle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet skeptics are asking, \u201cCan the Army pull it off this time around?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While the Defense Department received an influx of cash from Congress in fiscal years 2018 and 2019, future defense budgets are not expected to rise. At the same time, the Army is undergoing one of its biggest modernization pushes since the 1970s and 1980s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That was the last time it was able to bring on several different helicopter fleets in close succession \u2014 the CH-47 Chinook cargo helicopter, the UH-60 Black Hawk utility helicopter and the AH-64 Apache attack helicopter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For more coverage from the AUSA annual meeting, click here.<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Army has acquired a commercial off-the-shelf helicopter since then \u2014 the LUH-72A Lakota \u2014 to perform missions in the continental U.S., medical evacuations and be the service\u2019s initial rotary-wing trainer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the Army has tried, and failed, to buy a replacement for its aging OH-58 Kiowa Warrior armed scout helicopters three times \u2014 the Comanche program, the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter program, and an Armed Scout Helicopter fly-off that looked for commercial off-the-shelf offerings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Army decided nothing it saw during the demonstrations met all of its needs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The service in 2013 retired the Kiowa without a replacement, choosing to fill the gap by teaming AH-64s and UAS \u2014 a less-than-ideal solution due to the expense of flying Apaches.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Army leadership, this is not about whether the service can buy two new helicopters. In their minds, the Army has to get something new.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe can\u2019t just do one. We need both,\u201d Lt. Gen. James Pasquarette, the Army G-8, in charge of planning, developing and resourcing programs, told Defense News.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
A soldier with the 12th Combat Aviation Brigade, conducts routine maintenance on a AH-64 Apache helicopter on Aug. 29, 2018, at Katterbach Army Airfield in Germany. (Charles Rosemond\/Army)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Apaches and Black Hawks have been \u201cworkhorses for 40 years,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But, \u201cthey are not going to be what we need in the future. Our competitors out there, that we anticipate having to be ready to operate against, the environment drives us to make decisions. We think we can do it where we are heading.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The one-star in charge of making FVL a reality, Brig. Gen. Wally Rugen, said in a recent interview that \u201cwe are very much studying the decisions we made in Comanche to make sure we don\u2019t repeat them.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rugen, who leads the FVL Cross-Functional Team \u2014 which resides under Futures Command \u2014 said the team has put together a \u201cvery innovative plan\u201d this time around.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of the main differences is that the Army has put affordability goals into its requirement documents, Rugen said, which is relatively unprecedented, at least when it comes to buying new aircraft within the service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe absolutely assess and feel that we can bring on and flow through these efforts,\u201d Rugen said. \u201cFunding is synchronized out through our long-term planning.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And it\u2019s also about making trades, something the Army has been less flexible with in the past when developing capabilities to match requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe are having early, and often, discussions with senior leadership about trades, and trades are important because that is what is really going to drive affordability,\u201d Rugen said. \u201cSo, it\u2019s important that we understand what is truly, truly important to us, what we must have, and what would be nice to have.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Through Futures Command, communities from science and technology, requirements development, acquisition, testing, sustainment and logistics, and training all come to the table to hash out the road map, a big difference from the old stove-piped process.<\/p>\n\n\n\t