ment and the expense of the research and development lready stated, the Army, during this period, lived for the which was carried over from World War II. ition cost, of the military supplies and equipment on hand imated at approximately $31,500,000,000. This amount that date and prior to the Korean operations by some actions (as of June 30, 1950) as follows: f the Korean operations, supplies and equipment in the ment of the Army have been reduced further by some ne categories. Included are transfer to military defenseems excess to the Army the acquisition cost of which is ›n, and transfer of items costing $80 million to United than the United States operating in Korea. Also, supting about $2.2 billion have been consumed in combat es and equipment on hand today, the original cost of on, are in the hands of Army troops, in supply pipelines, tocks. OUSE ACTION ON 1952 ESTIMATES e made by the Appropriations Committee of the House he Department of Defense appropriation bill, 1952, in igust 6, 1951. This report was adopted by the House of rsday, August 9. With respect to the Department e bill as passed, the $20,113,524,200 approved is a reduc1 the total contained in the President's budget. After proposed Army programs of the reductions made, the 1 of $169,788,830. Details of the restorations requested u in a separate document.' In general, the restorations 7,038,830 for civilian personnel restorations and $132, n other objects of expenditure. The most significant $60 million requested in the "Clothing and equipage" "Quartermaster Service, Army" appropriation. The the basis of the necessity to replace clothing withdrawn the interior and elsewhere in order to supply personnel his emergency action, there are many troops in the field r full allowances of clothing. The restoration is necesowances to peacetime levels. ing statement, Mr. Chairman. I should like at this rmy representatives who have appeared here to explain 1 year 1952 to thank you and the members of the ation you have given our requests and for your patience Army for which the Congress made provision in fiscal on of which all Americans can be proud. We have from the situation and state of readiness which perthe fiscal year. We feel that, with your support, we is progress in fiscal year 1952. Thank you. ARMY CARGO AND ASSAULT HELICOPTERS Senator O'MAHONEY. I will ask that there be inserted in the record at this point a statement with reference to helicopters included in the Army and the Air Force 1952 budgets. (The statement referred to is as follows:) Army-cargo and air-assault helicopters (H-21) included in Army and Air Force 1952 budgets Army aircraft does not include auto pilot or electronics equipment which is a part of the Air Force price. Army communications equipment is budgeted by Signal Corps and not included. Army spares are computed at 40 percent of flyaway plus engineering changes. Cargo-transport helicopters (H-19) included in Army and Navy fiscal year 1952 budgets Current estimates based on prices being negotiated with the contractor indicate fly-away price for the Army and Navy aircraft to be approximately the same. Current Navy estimate is $143,510 and Army estimated $136,700. The price including spares for Navy aircraft is estimated at $255,915 compared with the Army estimate of $206,000. This difference can be explained by the spare parts procurement policy of the two departments. Navy procures 55 percent airframe spares; 65 percent engine spares, plus additional life-of-craft engine spare parts; T ›r other parts. In contrast the Army's policy is to buy EY. This will conclude the presentation on behalf the Army. has supplied information in regard to civilian Army appropriated funds, and the proportion y employees. The information will be inserted point. eferred to is as follows:) |