Mr. SEGAL. Yes.

When we initiate action for a procurement, this thought has gone through our mind, that the reason we are going out of house is because of this particular problem, sir.

Mr. MEYER. At Rome Air Development Center I know there is a special group of technical people that do get together before they initiate a requirement to procurement.

Mr. SEGAL. There is.

Mr. MEYER. To consider the possibilities of doing it inhouse other

ways.

Mr. SEGAL. This is shared by the technical director of the Rome Air Development Center.

Mr. HÉBERT. The next one, Mr. Sandweg.

Mr. COURTNEY: May I have one question for the record from Colonel Riemondy, on his presentation from yesterday?

Whether or not the cyclic arrangement you have worked out, the 5-year cycle, can be accomplished within the limits of your manpower resources?

Colonel RIEMONDY. The plan which I showed the committee yesterday can be accomplished within the manpower which we expect to have on board.

Mr. COURTNEY. That is right.

Colonel RIEMONDY. For the next 5 years.

Mr. COURTNEY. So there is no question of manpower ceilings or additions or subtractions involved?

Colonel RIEMONDY. That is correct.

Mr. COURTNEY. That is all I have.
Mr. SANDWEG. That is all.

Mr. HÉBERT. Well, thank you, Mr. Secretary, and gentlemen who have appeared. We appreciated your appearance.

The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock, at which time General Trudeau will be here representing the Army to close out the Army phase.

Thank you, gentlemen, very much.

Secretary IMIRIE. Thank you, sir.

(Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 2 p.m. of the same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

(The subcommittee for Special Investigations reconvened at 2 p.m.) Mr. HÉBERT. The committee will be in order.

Mr. Courtney.

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, we have for discussion this afternoon the research and development contracts, or at least a selected few of them, as to which the committee had some questions.

Mr. Sandweg has a list and so has the Department of the Army, and I would presume we would be ready to speak to them now.

General Trudeau is the head of research and development now. Aren't you, General Trudeau?

General TRUDEAU. That is correct.

Mr. COURTNEY. You can parcel out the answer yourself, or parcel out the subject as the contracts would indicate. I think you have the same number in order that we have, General.

General TRUDEAU. I believe so.

Mr. HÉBERT. General, for the record, let me on behalf of the committee welcome you.

General TRUDEAU. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HÉBERT. This is your first opportunity to sit in the electric chair, whether we pull the current or not. We of course know you favorably and well in the full committee, and I have the pleasure of personal acquaintance with you.

General TRUDEAU. It is a mutual pleasure, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. HÉBERT. Particularly in New Orleans.

General TRUDEAU. It is a mutual pleasure.

Mr. SANDWEG. We will begin where we left off with the contract CEIR, to design and develop and build a war game.

(The description of the contract is as follows:)

Type of effort: Feasibility study

Contractor: CEIR, Inc. (formerly General Analysis Corp), Research Center, 11753 Wiltshire, Los Angeles 25, Calif.

Contract No.: DA36-039-sc-80004.

Date of award: March 31, 1958.

Cost of contract: $1,419.868; partially funded in amount of $962,943.
Completion date: March 31, 1963.

Subject matter: Services to conduct a study for period of 60 months beginning April 1, 1958, and ending March 31, 1963.

The primary objective is the development of a war game specifically designed to aid the study, analysis, development, and synthesis of combat systems of particular interest to the Signal Corps. Such systems include communications systems, electronic warfare systems, battle area surveillance systems, and automatic data processing systems.

In addition to the general purpose war game there shall be developed a variety of modifications of the game especially suitable for particular applications of the game.

The game shall be comprehensive in that it will take full account of the various interactions of signal systems with combat elements. It shall be capable of measuring the contribution of signal systems to combat effectiveness.

The game shall be mechanized, using suitable computing and analog equipment so that it can be played rapidly.

The rules shall use terms familiar to military personnel and shall be sufficiently clear and simple that the game can be played with little or no special training.

Recommendation or suggestion and to whom made: Contract approximately 60 percent completed. No recommendation or suggestions submitted to date. Acceptance or rejection of recommendation or suggestion and why: Not applicable.

Mr. HÉBERT. Read the title to the general, Mr. Sandweg.
Mr. SANDWEG. All right.

This is a contract with C-E-I-R, Inc., formerly General Analysis Corp., of Los Angeles, Calif., contract DA36-039-sc-8004, awarded March 31, 1958, in the amount of $1,419,868. It has been partially funded in the amount of $962,943, with completion date on or about March 31, 1953.

The subject matter of the contract was to provide services to conduct a study for the period of 60 months, and the primary objective is the development of a war game specifically designed to aid the study, analysis, development, and synthesis of combat systems of particular interest to the Signal Corps.

Could you take it from there, General, and tell us just what this contract is all about, why was it necessary that this be contracted out, the method by which it was contracted out, and the authority for this contract.

General TRUDEAU. I will call upon the repersentative of the Signal Corps to make a presentation.

Mr. SANDWEG. Would each of the witnesses identify themselves for the reported by full name and title, please.

Colonel JOHNSON. I am Col. J. W. Johnson, Chief, Research and Development Division, Office of the Chief Signal Officer.

Major BEAM. Maj. W. M. Beam, Office of the Chief Signal Officer, Research and Development Division.

Colonel JOHNSON. If I may, I wouold like to explain briefly that this particular study is to set up a method by which we in the Signal Corps can apply to war games situations, communications systems and electronics systems that are necessary for the support of the tactical army in the field.

This is a very complex problem in the sense that a communications network will react or operate with one organizational grouping in one environment in one way; if you change either the organization itself, or the enviornment in which it operates, it reacts in a totally different way.

With the increase in the dependence of the Army upon electronic devices, we felt it essential that we have a method by which we could predetermine, if you will, what this reaction interoperation might be.

I think the best way of summarizing this is to mention that at the end of World War II the Army in the field had approximately 30,000 to 35,000 radiating devices, either communications devices, radars, but radiating devices using frequencies.

At the present time in our organization of tables and equipment we are authorized 75,000 radiating devices so we feel this play and interplay of the systems is extremely critical to our capability to provide command control and to insure the effective operation of our electronic systems.

Major Beam is the project officer on this particular contract and can. give the committee any specific information that it may desire.

Mr. HÉBERT. Well, the committee is interested in this: Why is it necessary to hire out to a civilian something that the military is trained to do?

Major BEAM. Basically the reason that we have taken this action with regard to this specific contract is that the Army does not possess the technical capability to do this particular job.

Mr. NORBLAD. Of war games?

Major BEAM. No, sir; not of war games.

The document which was read into the record specifies that this is a war game, but it is a different type of war game from that with which the military is usually concerned.

Mr. COURTNEY. In what way?

Major BEAM. Normally a war game is a matter of opposing tactics, that is what we normally fight in a war game. In this particular war game, our objective is to compare communications systems or electronic warfare systems and other complex communications devices within the field army.

Mr. COURTNEY. You had better elaborate, because it sounds like these people were selected to determine the posture of the troopsthis just says to develop games, this involves troops, their deployment and movements.

Mr. NORBLAD. There is a million and a half dollars of the taxpayers' money involved, too.

Major BEAM. Let me elaborate how this works.

Colonel Johnston says, our objective is to compare communications systems, one against the other, and, if I may use the example, we would propose to do it by using this system on this basis: we will take a specific military organization of division size and we will then establish within that division size organization a specific communication system which we will call communications system No. 1.

Through the war-gaming process which we will use, we will fight that division with that communications system against a specific enemy, and we will either take or not take our objective.

We will then use that same organization in the next phase, apply to it communications system No. 2, and then go throught the same process.

Now we can control the environment when we do this on what we call CPX's, or map exercises and maneuvers; the human element is there, which, of course, changes our response and gives us a result which may or may not be true. It is true within certain parameters.

Under the systems where we compare one system against the other, we have a controlled environment and there are many things which we can do.

We can determine whether system No. 1, communications system No. 1-what effect it will have upon the outcome of the battle.

Mr. COURTNEY. Are these mechanical systems or electronic systems or what?

Major BEAM. This is a system using an electronic computer.
Mr. HÉBERT. You have bought the system?

Major BEAM. We rent it.

Mr. HÉBERT. You rent the system and pay somebody else to tell you how to use it?

Major BEAM. The computer is a rented device. The model, and it is a mathematical model, is something we are developing in this particular problem.

Mr. HÉBERT. The thing, Major, that we are trying to get at is why is it necessary to spend over a million dollars to develop war games with any system or any weapon which is in the hands of the Army or any branch of the service. Aren't you people trained in this field? Major BEAM. The answer to your question, sir, is that none of our other war games are suitable for this particular purpose.

Our purpose is to compare the effects of a particular war game on the communications system. We change the system and there are many advantages that we can see. For instance, we can design a system and we have done this for the 1962-65 Army, we have designed. a system for this particular army.

It may or may not be the best system that could be designed. It is, however, the system that we can live with.

We have equipment in that system which has particular characteristics, that is, you may communicate between certain points by a certain number of communications channels.

Now we are faced continuously with the question: is that an adequate number of channels of communications to give this organization the communications capability that it requires?

If we say that 12 channels between these two points

Mr. HÉBERT. I don't want to keep interrupting you, these details are interesting for information, but we want to apply ourselves to the overall principle.

Now you are saying that you do not have the competence in the Army.

Major BEAM. That was my original response to your question, sir,

yes.

Mr. HÉBERT. Now if I may ask this question to pursue it, to get down to what we are interested in, why is it that you do not have the competence? Is it lack of manpower? Is it lack of brains? Why isn't a man in uniform which the Government has spent thousands and thousands of dollars to train at West Point and train at the universities of our country, why do we have to go outside of the uniform to develop war games?

Major BEAM. We must go back to 1956 to answer your question, sir. In 1956 the proposal was made that we might develop a system of this type. The Army decided that a feasibility test was necessary to find out whether it would continue the effort on this.

It went right to its military people and determined it didn't have the capability in 1956. It then went to probably the recognized leader in the field, which was Rand Corp., and Rand Corp. said that they could not do this job for the Army. They suggested the ORO, Johns Hopkins, be contacted.

Johns Hopkins said that they did not have the capability. Johns Hopkins suggested that the General Analysis Corp., which had broken off from Rand, might have the competent people to do it.

Mr. COURTNEY. What are you determining precisely, the mathematical probabilities of communicating via A, B, C, or many different methods? Is that what you are determining?

Major BEAM. To great extent this is true, sir.

We hope to bring this down to the point that we can say we can use a cheaper piece of gear than what we have designed, or that we can use one piece of gear instead of four pieces of gear to satisfy our communications requirements.

Mr. COURTNEY. Well, are you testing the gear, or are you merely computing on a machine-I don't know what the answer is, maybe I have it stated entirely wrong, but I am trying to think through to what you are getting at.

Are you testing the equipment under certain conditions that are devised by this organization, which is a noncombatant outfit, I would suppose?

Major BEAM. We are not testing the equipment. We are utilizing the characteristics of that equipment in our model.

Mr. COURTNEY. Well, does this company devise the deployment of the troops in a given battle condition or combat condition, both friendly and adversary, and then does it figure out the different movements of the troops?

Major BEAM. This is what this company is doing; yes, sir.

Mr. COURTNEY. Well, why wouldn't that be within the competence of the military people to determine the kind of game that you are having?

General TRUDEAU. Let me take this over, Major.