The Army on Wednesday detailed its decision to cancel the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) program for lawmakers, attributing its major aviation pivot to an embrace of unmanned systems that could help meet the same requirement and concerns over the potential shuttering of its UH-60 Black Hawk and CH-47 Chinook helicopter lines within the next five years.
Lawmakers seemed generally in approval of the Army’s aviation restructuring decisions, with the service explaining during the House Armed Services Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee hearing how the decision was shaped by lessons learned from the Ukraine conflict and potential industrial base risks.
“These rebalancing decisions did not come lightly, nor was it any single factor that drove the Army to make these shifts in its aviation portfolio,” Doug Bush, the Army’s acquisition chief, told the panel. “Given the evolution of aerial reconnaissance, transport, and combat technologies—evidenced in Ukraine’s defense against Russian aggression—we know we must shift to focus on a mix of current, unmanned, joint, and space-based assets to do the mission originally envisioned for the FARA aircraft. This mix of capabilities can provide persistent and plentiful awareness at a lower cost than FARA.”
The Army last month announced it was canceling the potential multi-billion dollar FARA program, which was in a competitive prototyping phase with Sikorsky [LMT] and Bell [TXT], as part of a slate of changes to its aviation modernization priorities (Defense Daily, Feb. 8).
Along with the FARA cancellation, the Army also detailed plans to end production of the UH-60V Black Hawk digital cockpit upgrade, delay production of the GE [GE] T901 ITEP engine and move to retire Shadow and Raven drones, adding it would free up resources for investments in the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft, a new multi-year contract for UH-60Ms, eventual full-rate production of the CH-47F Block II Chinook and research and development into unmanned systems.
“I actually think you did the right thing by divesting from the FARA program. I think, as a guy who would least likely want to be in the scout industry in an urban warfare environment, it would be outrageous nowadays with the technologies we have not to gather the same information with something so much smaller, cheaper and with less risk to personnel,” Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) said during Wednesday’s hearing.
Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.), the subcommittee’s chair, told reporters on Thursday the hearing provided a “deeper understanding” of the Army’s decision, which he noted he agrees with, while maintaining some questions on the length of time it took to reach this point.
“I don’t have a problem with them discontinuing FARA. But what I do have a problem with is, why did it take this period of time? Why did we spend $2 billion? What was it 12 month earlier [that they said it’s] ‘the most indispensable asset in what we have to do in Army aviation’ and then a year later it’s like, ‘No, no, we don’t need that,’” Wittman said following remarks at the McAleese Conference in Washington, D.C .“I think there has to be the ability for folks to redirect these programs sooner.”
The Connecticut Congressional delegation released a statement in February following the Army’s announcement pushing back on the decision to end FARA, with competitor Sikorsky based in their state (Defense Daily, Feb. 9).
Gen. James Rainey, head of Army Futures Command, reiterated to the lawmakers on Wednesday that the Ukraine conflict helped reinforce the Army’s pivot away from a manned helicopter to meet its scout and reconnaissance requirements, adding “the right thing to do is to use unmanned systems and not put humans in harm’s way.”
“I feel comfortable that we understand what we need to do [and] that we have requirements. There’s no shortage of great technology in the United States. We just need to continue to follow through and move faster,” Rainey said. “I believe that manned aircraft [for that mission] against a high-end threat on the future battlefield is extremely high risk.”
Bush told the panel the Army is planning for at least $2.5 billion in unmanned systems investments “across a range of systems” over the next five years.
“I think when we get to come over to give you the whole story with [the budget guidance for FY] ‘25-’29, I think we have a much better, clearer plan of how to invest and where to invest,” Bush said. “We’re getting to the point now where we really know, acquisition-wise, how we’re going to get at each one of those [unmanned requirements].”
On the industrial base impacts that factored into the aviation pivot, Bush noted the new approach will ensure plans and resources are in place to continue sustaining Sikorsky’s UH-60M Black Hawk line with another multi-year procurement contract and a commitment to full-rate production of the new Boeing-built CH-47F Block II Chinook.
“Prior to the rebalance, the aviation industrial base was on a path to have two production lines likely going cold within five years,” Bush said. “The conflict in Ukraine has reinforced the importance of the U.S. having a robust industrial base that is equipped to respond to the demands of the battlefield, the nation’s stockpiles, and the needs of our allies. In light of these lessons learned, the Army determined the previous path carried too much long-term risk.”
Rep. Donald Norcross (D-N.J.) pressed the Army officials during the hearing on what lessons and progress can be retained after spending $2 billion on FARA development.
Rainey said the Army “learned numerous things” from the FARA effort to date, while Program Executive Officer for Aviation Brig. Gen. David Phillips said specific progress will help inform some research and development priorities for future Black Hawk upgrades.
“We did not spend the money we spent on FARA and waste it. We learned numerous things,” Rainey said. “[There was] modeling and simulation we developed that was part of this. The whole launched effects ecosystem was one of the main things that we benefited from over the course of this study. And those are things that we’re going to apply. The idea of open architecture is cascading not just to our other aviation platforms but it went a long way to informing things like the XM-30 development, [the Bradley replacement effort] and next-generation tank.”