Overall, what is the status of those legacy Marine Corps aviation platforms after a decade of combat and multiple humanitarian missions?
Whenever we introduce a new aircraft into the inventory, we are constantly managing it in terms of service life and make subsequent decisions based on remaining life. For deployed forces, the rates at which we’ve flown those aircraft have significantly increased.
We have a weapons system planning document for every aircraft that provides a nominal number of hours that particular aircraft is expected to fly each month, allowing you to figure out its life cycle and plan accordingly. For our aircraft, as well as those of the other services, during combat operations we tripled the planned flight rate, which we have to include in our calculations for service life.
What will the replacement platforms bring to the fight compared to the legacy helicopters they replace, beginning with the UH-1Y Venom for the UH-1N Huey medium-utility C2/Assault (delivered 1971-1979)?
Of all our legacy platforms, the UH-1N is the most used – and not just the airframe, but the lift capacity of the aircraft slowly degrades over time; that’s just the nature of engines. So what you see is an aircraft designed as a utility aircraft, which means it can fire weapons but also carry troops.
Because of the age and diminished capacity, we don’t carry troops in the UH-1N anymore. It still performs important functions as airborne command and control [C2], but we need that platform to be able to carry Marines. Sometimes you have to go into zones that are difficult to reach and the UH-1 is a perfect utility platform. With the -1Y, you get all that lift capacity back and more, along with increased speed and range.
The AH-1Z Viper for the AH-1W Super Cobra (1986-1998) attack helicopter?
We are changing our HMLA [light-attack helicopter] squadrons from 18 Cobras and nine Hueys to 15 Vipers and 12 UH-1Ys because the Zulu, replacing the Whiskey, can carry a lot more weapons at greater range and speed, so we don’t lose any firepower. And we increase the capacity to move Marines around the battlefield.
The CH-53K for the CH-53E Super Stallion (1981-2003) and CH-53D Sea Stallion (1969-1971) heavy-lift transports?
When you talk about the CH-53 series, we are sundowning the -Ds in the next couple of years, but the -E will continue to serve for many more years. That series is all about lift capacity, especially when talking about a large amphibious operation, where the CH-53 is a critical enabler.
One of the challenges is how much do we want to carry in lift and how much do we want to bring through other means? The -K essentially triples the lift capacity of the -E – 27,000 pounds up to 100 nautical miles. With large amphibious operations, we were right on the margins of having enough lift capacity [with the legacy aircraft].
The MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor for the CH-46E Sea Knight (1966-1972) medium-lift assault transport?
I look at all our platforms as a capability and not necessarily as a one-for-one replacement. For example, we talk about replacing the Sea Knight with the Osprey, but I tell guys to think of the V-22 and CH-46 together.
While the airframes are doing OK on the CH-46, the lift capacity does decline with age and we can only move about half the original number of Marines. So while they continue to perform an important function as part of the Marine expeditionary capability at sea, we are no longer deploying those to Afghanistan.
The VXX for the VH-3D (1974-1976) and VH-60N (1989-2010) presidential helicopters?
That’s a unique case, obviously. Those requirements are articulated by the White House military office, as well as HMX-1 [Marine Helicopter Squadron One], which is charged with transporting the president. This obviously is a mission of utmost priority and we will ensure we have no gaps in performance. Having said that, the H-3s and H-60s also are getting on in years and will have to be replaced, although they receive utmost priority and continue to perform.
Where does the MV-22 Osprey, which achieved initial operational capability (IOC) in 2007, fit into Corps missions and capabilities in the next two decades?
It will be the centerpiece of our ability to move Marines around the battlefield. The Corps is a light general-purpose force, which has advantages in getting somewhere quickly, and the V-22 gives you the maneuver capability you need to rapidly build up combat power, far exceeding anything you could do with legacy platforms.
Turning to fixed-wing, what impact has the war had on their operational life expectancies?
The war does have an impact, especially on the F-18s, but there are ways to manage that. If you have flown a lot in contingency operations, you can recover some service life by flying less in the future on that airframe. The Hornets will continue to fly for many more years, but we will have to look at the hours remaining on each airframe and manage that.
Overall, we are confident in our transition plans and have some margin to absorb some of the challenges of contingency operations.