Senator KNOWLAND. Some have been used in the NATO program and a few have gone to South America. Admiral CLEXTON. That is correct. Some were recently sold to South America and some of our ships were sold under MDAP to France and Italy. Senator KNOWLAND. A few were used as guinea pigs in Bikini and elsewhere. Admiral CLEXTON. That is right; some of the old ships out there. Senator O'MAHONEY. Would you say, Admiral, that of the combatant ships which we had at the height of the war we still had most of them except of such as were disposed of under these various programs to North Atlantic Treaty nations and otherwise? Admiral CLEXTON. Yes, sir. We have almost the number of combatant ships that we had during the war available now either in the reserve fleet or in the active fleet. Senator O'MAHONEY. So that the real strength of the Navy has been maintained. Admiral CLEXTON. In combatant ships, yes, either in the reserve or active fleets. The estimates for the fiscal year 1952, which we have been reviewing here for the past several weeks, the total is $15,071 million. That will support for the fiscal year 1952 a Navy of approximately 805,000 men and a Marine Corps of about 204,000 men. As you recall, the testimony by the Marine Corps shows that they are reducing from 204,000 down to 175,000. We indicated that, if operations in Korea continued, the reduction would not be carried out. PAY AND SUBSISTENCE Senator O'MAHONEY. The pay and subsistence of the Navy forces is still one of the major elements of expense. Admiral CLEXTON. Under the 1952 plan 19 percent of the funds go into military personnel and 22 percent into maintenance and operation of the combat forces and their support. Senator O'MAHONEY. That is because the amount of procurement is high. Admiral CLEXTON. It is again high, as in 1951. It is 48 percent. I have two or three charts which I believe will give you a picture of what we are asking for in 1952 as against 1951. The first chart shows that in 1951, for the military personnel cost, we had $2,339 million, and in 1952 for a larger force, we are requesting $3.073 million. In maintenance and operations of the forces and shore support we had $2,856 million in 1951 and $3,488 million for maintenance and operation in 1952. MAJOR PROCUREMENT AND PRODUCTION Then, as was indicated by my previous testimony, in 1951 and 1952 the major procurement and production category is about 50 percent of the budget. In 1951 we have $5,993 million for major procurement and production, and in 1952 $7,629 million. Even those amounts, as you recall from the testimony of the Deputy Secretary of Defense, will not pay for the program of modern ization of the United States naval service. They only pay for the amount of production of end combat items which are going to be actually produced in 1952, plus the repeat order lead time for each individual item of equipment. That was the means of financing by which the budget was reduced from $104 billion down to $60 billion. The other categories of expenditures, namely research and development, industrial mobilization, civilian components, and so forth, seem insignificant in comparison. I would like to leave you with this thought: that when you are operating a navy, and maintaining as large a force as practicable for the protection of the country, your major expenditures are for military personnel and maintenance and operation. If you do not modernize your forces, procurement is very low. But when you want to modernize your ships, aircraft, Marine Corps, the cost is great. Senator O'MAHONEY. That is very clear. Can you get to the next chart now. Admiral CLEXTON. I have broken down the major procurement and production category into a chart, so you can see what kind of material is included. Aircraft, as you can see, is the largest program. Shipbuilding and conversion are next, and then combat vehicles and artillery. Senator O'MAHONEY. I notice you changed the order of the columns here. You have the 1952 column first on this chart. Admiral CLEXTON. That is right. This category of combat vehicles and artillery is where the marine tanks are bought. You can see that the ammunition and guided missiles program is quite large. It is $1,097 million in 1951, and $661 million in 1952. Senator KNOWLAND. In that total for ships, how much of it is represented in carriers and how much in other vessels? Admiral CLEXTON. There is only one new carrier, as you know, in that program. The approximate estimate for that carrier is $218 million. There are, however, four carrier conversions, and they cost about $60 million apiece, or $240 million for carrier conversions. Senator KNOWLAND. Is the Navy carrying on its full Reserve flying program during the coming fiscal year? Admiral CLEXTON. Yes, sir. The Navy and the Marine Corps Air Reserve programs are at about the same level for 1952 as they were in 1951 using world War II aircraft. Senator KNOWLAND. Mr. Chairman, I have a subject to bring up at this time, because we will be getting to it, although it is not in the Navy province. Senator O'MAHONEY. Just one question about the chart first. Senator O'MAHONEY. Let me draw your attention to the fifth and sixth categories. Of all the categories, those are the only two in which 1952 expenditures are less than 1951. Why is that? Admiral CLEXTON. The category of ammunition and guided missiles is that way because in 1951 the supplemental appropriations started the missile program of the Navy, and the funds for 1952, as I have pointed out, as far as missiles are concerned, is to keep it going; which requires much less money than to start it. Senator O'MAHONEY. Yes; the same is true with respect to electronics, is it not? Admiral CLEXTON. Yes, sir. Senator O'MAHONEY. I think, Admiral, if you could have these charts reproduced with the year 1951 preceding 1952 in each case and have them done in black and white or cross-hatch and black, they could be reproduced in the record to great advantage. Admiral CLEXTON. Do you feel the charts would be better than this sort of document I have here? It is the same thing, a category table but gives the figures, just the dollars and the use. Senator KNOWLAND. I think a chart would be very helpful in the record. Senator O'MAHONEY. The chart would be very helpful but you had better put in the document, too. Admiral CLEXTON. The document is the same thing with just the dollar figures. It is a system developed by the Defense Department to high light the use of the funds in the services. It does not correspond in any way to the appropriations. You cannot refer to the appropriations for "Ships and facilities" and for "Construction of ships" and find the charted figures, because, for example, the ammunition for ships is found in the ammunition category. (The material referred to is as follows:) |