---------------------------------------------------------------- The United States Navy on the World Wide Web A service of the Navy Office of Information, Washington DC send feedback/questions to comments@chinfo.navy.mil The United States Navy web site is found on the Internet at http://www.navy.mil ---------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. John J. Young, Jr., Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research, Development, and Acquisition) at the Navy League 2002 SEA-AIR-SPACE Exposition, the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel, Washington, D.C., 26 March 2002 Thank you for that introduction. It is truly a great privilege for me to be here for the SEA-AIR-SPACE 2002 Exposition. I want to complement the Navy League, its Staff, an the others who have organized this event. Sea-Air-Space each year does a great job of bringing people together as well as getting out the Navy and Marine Corps' message. I think some previous words of JFK state that message. He said, "Control of the seas means security. Control of the seas means peace. Control of the seas can mean victory. The United States must control the sea if it is to protect our security." Today, the Navy and Marine Corps are meeting that goal – they are protecting and ensuring our nation's security. ASN (RDA) Many of you know I previously worked with the Senate Defense Appropriations Committee, primarily on aircraft procurement and research and development programs across all of the services. Unfortunately, that background did not allow me the opportunity to fully understand all the varied aspects of the Navy or Marine Corps. I say unfortunately, because I have learned more each day that the heart of the Navy is the fleet…the men and women who serve our country at sea. To help me get acclimated, my speechwriter gave me a list that described "How to simulate life in the Navy." He suggested I try a few things… Walk around your car for 4 hours checking the tire pressure every 15 minutes. Sit in your car and let it run for 4 hours before going anywhere. This is to ensure your engine is properly "lighted off." Sleep on the shelf in your closet. Replace the closet door with a curtain and then have your wife whip open the curtain about 3 hours after going to sleep, shine a flashlight in your eyes and mumble "Sorry, wrong rack." Once a month, take every major appliance apart and then put them back together again for no apparent reason. And finally, assign a different child each night to wake you up any time a car comes within a mile of your house. While my kids do practice the last task, I am growing in my understanding of the capabilities, and concerns, of our navy. If I had given this speech in August As I was thinking about what to say to you, I looked back to when I first took over this job. If I had given this speech last August, I could have started by telling you that the United States has always been a maritime nation - the Navy is even older than our country. I would have quoted Senator Warner's comments to Secretary England during his confirmation hearing. Senator Warner said, "…the economic strength of this country is dependent on overseas trade and the protection of the sea lanes of the world. And that responsibility falls heavily on the United States Navy." Our mastery of the seas, sustained by forward-deployed U.S. naval forces, ensures our access to our economic, political, and security interests overseas. Senator Warner understands, Secretary England understands, and each of you understands. I would have gone on to say that our economic prosperity, now more than ever, is tied to the global economy and that that economy is totally reliant upon maritime trade to sustain its growth. I would have discussed how command of the seas, provided by U.S. sovereign power deployed forward and unfettered by the need to negotiate base access, provides a tangible demonstration of our commitment to shared interest, and underwrites our political alliances and friendships across the globe. As President Theodore Roosevelt once said, "A good Navy is not a provocation to war. It is the surest guarantee of peace." Finally, I would have finished by discussing how the success of future Joint combat operations will require us to have immediate and sustained military access wherever and whenever it is needed. Command of the Seas provides that global access. Operation Enduring Freedom That may have been a nice speech…but, today, I don't have to tell you that. You see it every day on CNN, on the Evening News, in all the papers - At its peak, we had over thirty ships - three carrier battlegroups and two amphibious ready groups - supporting Operation Enduring Freedom, attacking targets and providing support and logistics to our Marine forces in a land-locked nation! Many of you know about Admiral Morgan and the Enterprise Battlegroup… On September 11, as the first news of the tragedy reached the ENTERPRISE, the crew began to watch CNN to find out what was going on at home. As the tragic images were broadcast, the Battlegroup Commander ordered the ENTERPRISE back into the Indian Ocean without any other guidance. He knew that the unique mobility of the Naval Forces and their forward presence would be needed. By the next morning, he was within reach of Afghanistan… ready to launch and sustain operations. This is a great example of our ability to respond quickly throughout the world, wherever and whenever our country needs us. Likewise, we quickly had two ARGs in position ready to deploy 4500 Marines ashore. The distances were quite large, but as you know, we soon proved the flexibility of both carriers and the ARG. Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz once said, "It is the function of the Navy to carry the war to the enemy so that it will not be fought on U.S. soil." Mission accomplished. Other Navy and Marine Corps actions Besides our efforts in Afghanistan, the United States Navy maintained a continuous carrier presence in the Arabian Gulf, which included combat operations in support of Operations Northern and Southern Watch over Iraq. Fifth Fleet surface combatants continued Maritime Interdiction Operations in support of United Nations economic sanctions against Iraq, while Marines participated in training and exercises with allies throughout Southwest Asia. In addition to the Gulf region, our forward deployed naval forces based in Japan, Hawaii, and the West Coast provided visible overseas engagement in East Asia. The Navy and Marine Corps executed humanitarian assistance and some 30 other missions in support of the International Forces in East Timor. Even back home, the Naval Services have provided daily support for homeland defense and continue to work closely with other departments and agencies - especially the Coast Guard. Elements of the deployed fleet are keeping a vigilant eye on other ships at sea. Thanks to our fleet, the sea will not be a refuge for terrorists. President Bush has said that this will not be a quick war. We must be ready for a sustained battle on many fronts. Our naval forces are already there; ready to provide the essential access anywhere, anytime. I think the public stands well informed of these facts because we are very well represented in the media, and in particularly by your wonderful SEA POWER Magazine. I think the Navy League provides a tremendous national service in this and so many other ways. From Sea Cadets and your scholarship program to your support of the active military through your publications, your councils, and this great exposition. Foundation for Transformation in the Navy I see these as great days for the Navy. The importance of the military has re-surfaced in the minds of our country. Naval power has delivered the message. Moreover, we are positioned to take advantage of this spirit and transform the Navy. Leadership Team The current administration, from President Bush on down - Secretary Rumsfeld, Secretary England, and Secretary Aldridge - are all ardent supporters of the Navy. Last year, President Bush charged the leadership of the armed services to "build forces that draw upon the revolutionary advances in the technology of war … a force that is defined less by size and more by knowledge and swiftness and that relies heavily on stealth, precision weaponry and information technology." Of course, this seems like a good description of the current naval forces and their performance in the War Against Terrorism. It is worth noting that Secretary Rumsfeld called us to arms one day before the attacks of September 11 when he directed the military leadership to transform our military and to drive resources from the bureaucracy to the battlefield. He also correctly predicted the forces and flexibility required for a conflict few of us could have previously imagined. Secretary England has defined four strategic thrusts for the Department of the Navy - Combat Capability, People, Advanced Technology, and Business Practices. The Secretary's strategic thrusts acknowledge that the Navy has to focus on both today – combat capability and people – and tomorrow – advanced technology and business practices. The leadership is prepared to support the current needs of the Navy and to enable transformation. In the strongest terms, I need to assure you that we are prepared to bring down barriers and change rules to improve the combat capability of our naval forces of today and tomorrow. Combat Capability remains the top priority. It is what we are about and why the nation supports us. Earlier, I mentioned the exceptional state of today's combat capability. Indeed, the CNO and Commandant have worked very hard with Secretary England to ensure that current readiness needs are recognized and funded. People are our greatest asset. The enduring strength of the U.S. Naval Service is the highly trained, highly motivated, very capable Sailors, Marines, and Civilians. So, one of the key questions the leadership is asking with the new systems we're going to be fielding in future years is, how do we enhance our people's ability to operate and fight the fleet? We need to ensure our technology enables the creativity and innovation of our people, not get in the way of it. Advanced Technology provides our people a significant advantage in combat. If you put superior technology in the hands of superior forces, you have an unbeatable combination. Now we also know that vastly superior technology is a huge discriminator. Case in point: take an F-14, an older airplane, but put a second generation FLIR on it; compare it to an F-18, a newer generation airplane, but with a first generation FLIR. Guess which one is the best weapons system. It makes a big difference. I'd say the best FLIR and with the best display is more important than the airplane itself when it comes to precision delivery. So technology is very important. It allows us to dramatically improve TODAY's force while we work to build tomorrow's platforms. Finally, better business practices are essential for freeing up resources for enhanced procurement and transformation. All Navy leaders, uniformed and civilian, are now thinking in terms of maximum productivity, minimum overhead, and measurable output. Every dollar the taxpayers entrust to us for the Nation's defense needs to be spent wisely. Financial and Program Stability I have tried to paint a broad vision for how we improve today's force as we transform to meet tomorrow's challenges. But, as the old saying goes, the devil is in the details…and in my part of the business that means financial and program stability. I believe this is a critical background for our discussion of transformation. After years of under funding, the FY '03 budget request, building on improvements in the FY '02 Department of Defense Authorization and Appropriations Acts, represent a dramatic improvement for the Department of the Navy. Although the Department of the Navy still had to make difficult priority decisions, the final request represents the best mix possible among competing priorities. Our highest priority items are pay and benefit improvements for our most valuable resource - our people. The next priority was to provide them the necessary spares, tools and munitions to carry out the nation's requirements. * Personnel salary and benefits are improved approximately $4.1 billion. This represents improvements in salary, health care, housing allowance and increased sea pay both in amount and number of military personnel covered. In this budget, civilian health care is also on an accrual basis and that administratively adds $750M dollars to this budget in Operation and Maintenance and working capital accounts that was not accounted for in prior years. * Operation and Maintenance and working capital accounts are increased by $3.4 billion, funding steaming and flying hours, including spares and depot/contractor repair of major systems. This funding does not, however, include any incremental costs associated with Operation Enduring Freedom * Munitions accounts are increased $973M which is allocated predominately to tactical land attack Tomahawk cruise missiles and precision ordnance to be delivered from Navy and Marine Corps ships and aircraft * The airplane account is increased by $323M. Although the number of attack airplanes remains the same as in FY '02, the total number of airplanes declines due to the mix of airplanes being procured in FY '03 * The RDT&E accounts increased by $1.1B reflecting the need to continuously invest in the future and to incorporate new technologies into our naval services. Within these numbers, the Navy and Marine Corps have also worked to improve and leverage the equipment that we now have and will use for years to come. Improving sensors, installing data links, and networking the command and control systems allows our current assets to fight more effectively. Systems such as Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) and the Naval Fires Network (NFN) are in the fleet today and will enhance the performance of the current warfighting systems. Secretary England has testified before Congress about the quantum improvements in warfighting effectiveness that come by coupling evolutionary improvements in existing systems to new operational concepts and tactics. Finally, we are working to properly fund and carefully manage the ongoing modernization programs. To enable the transition to new capabilities, we first must have a foundation of solid, stable funding for our ongoing programs as well as a more business-like approach to acquisition. For example, the Navy has taken steps to fully fund the projected cost of ships and other programs requested in the FY '03 budget, seeking to avoid new bills, such as prior-year completion costs. Cost growth on major program contracts has reduced the confidence of the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Congress in our ability to manage these major capital programs and eroded our sound business foundation. The Navy is committed to restoring that confidence and building stable programs to ensure force structure requirements are sustained. This includes termination of programs that are not able to provide the required performance within programmed dollars. Further, we are placing greater emphasis on understanding the potential for technology or requirements changes to grow the cost of our existing acquisition programs. Spiral development and back-fitting of technologies may be the best approaches to ensuring that we avoid cost growth and make the proper trades between competing investment priorities. The Navy and Marine Corps are also looking to the future. A number of programs will deliver new capability that will provide the tools necessary in an uncertain threat environment. DD(X), AAAV, JSF, and JASSM are key examples of programs that will provide survivable, flexible capability which can be used by the Navy and Marine Corps team to hold at risk all of the assets of future adversaries. I would like to take several minutes to talk to you about recent changes and the status of a few programs that will be the foundation of our future Navy and Marine Corps. Transformational Programs in the Navy DD(X) Any discussion of transformation in the Navy should start with DD(X). Since I was sworn-in, I have spent more time on this program than probably any other program. I am convinced that the family of combatants, led by DD(X), is essential to the future of the Navy. Let me talk to you about why I felt it necessary to completely restructure the program. Success oriented schedule First, the transition from DDG to DD-21 posed significant risks for the industrial base. DDG production was to end with two ships ordered in FY '04. There was to be one DD-21 ordered in FY '05, the lead ship, followed by three more orders in FY '07. The destroyer industrial base could not survive this profile, PERIOD. Further, it would have been difficult to defend before both OSD and the Congress the three DD-21's in one year following the lead ship. Inadequate risk reduction Second, the DD-21 program also allowed very little technical risk reduction, and yet, many of the technologies are quite transformational. With DD-21 we were taking a single step to full capability. There was a success-oriented assumption that everything would proceed on schedule and cost. There were limited opportunities for prototyping and no room for error. We were risking significant Navy dollars, the industrial base, and the future surface fleet capability. Heavy requirements and not enough consideration of CG(X) Third, the requirements placed on the DD-21 program were, in my view, too aggressive. The system, never knowing what the future holds, is often tempted to load requirements on the platform at hand. I believe we had put too many requirements on DD-21, hedging bets that CG-21 may take longer than expected, or never come. The requirements were driving substantial size and complexity into the ship. Many questioned affordability In the end, these factors compounded, resulting in a ship that was at risk. Indeed, the Navy was promising to deliver, within about 8 years, a significantly larger and more complex destroyer with all new systems for the price of a DDG. Many people felt this was a formula for problems. The CAIG certainly did not agree with our cost estimate. Since funding to the CAIG estimate is current policy, this alone could have broken DD-21 or other Navy and Marine Corps programs. And so, DD(X) was formulated to employ a broad range of strategies to make our entire family of next-generation surface combatants more affordable. Stable DDG production to enable the industrial base transition First, as part of the restructuring, we have stabilized DDG production so that the destroyer industrial base is not put at risk. The Department of the Navy added 6 DDGs in the '05-'07 time period at a cost of roughly $6 billion. So, from this stable base, we can go forward and competitively build the new family of surface combatants. Prototypes Second, I talked about technical risk and the single step to full capability; the restructured DD(X) program adds several land-based and sea-based prototypes for the key technologies. This provides an excellent means of reducing risk within each area. We will see problems earlier in the process, giving us a chance to solve them. We now have a much better chance of delivering a functional destroyer - within cost and schedule. To allow these prototyping efforts, DON added $1.2 billion to properly fund the DD(X) development effort. Lead ship in RDT&E Third, we plan to produce the lead ship using RDT&E funds. This is a new way of doing business in shipbuilding. The Program Manager will be required to demonstrate progress on an annual basis to defend his budget. The Navy can react to problems without the risk of resorting to prior-year completion funding. This gives us the best chance to control costs and define a production process that allows the Navy to affordably build these next-generation surface combatants. Currently, a PM gets a budget for the lead ship before there is even a design. When the inevitable cost challenges arise, one of the easiest trades is to drop producibility and production process investments. We need R&D funding of the lead ship to establish the manufacturing process - just as is done with development of every other weapons system. Despite the change to R&D funding of the lead ship, make no mistake, we are building the first ship in the class - a ship that will be a full, participating member of the operating fleet - we are just building it in a smarter way. Spiral development Fourth, the spiral development approach will allow technologies to be fielded when they are ready through a flight approach, forged to capture cutting edge initiatives. As DD(X) drives the development of technology in many areas, we will look for opportunities to backfit advancements on existing platforms. Carefully focused upgrade and conversion programs will ensure that the existing core of surface combatants maintain the capability for battlespace dominance. Summary of DD(X) Technologies DD(X) with its transformational technologies will be the cornerstone for a family of next-generation surface combatants. These combatants must be affordable to produce and less costly to operate. They must be designed from the keel up to enable dramatic, 50-70%, manpower reductions. Automated damage control systems will help, as will improved human interfaces and a total-ship computing environment. Equally important, the next-generation of surface combatants will be designed to reduce signatures across the full spectrum - radio frequency/RADAR, magnetic, acoustic, and infrared. This reduced signature will have implications for tactics, systems, and self-defense requirements. Reducing the signature of our surface combatants is essential for ships that will face our adversaries in 2030 and beyond. Finally, the coupling of electric drive with an integrated power system is truly transformational. No Navy ship currently employs electric drive, though it is becoming common in the commercial world. Electric drive propulsion greatly improves design flexibility - the engine compartments are no longer tied to a mechanical shaft. We can disburse the turbines throughout the ship, improving redundancy, reliability, and survivability. We can also improve efficiency by allowing the crew to match power generation to power consumption. Lastly, electric drive prepares the Navy to employ advanced weapons systems of the future such as high power lasers and directed energy systems. Having built a sound program and chosen the right technologies, the Navy and industry must design and build DD(X) on cost and schedule because the Navy must have this ship. I am happy to report that we remain on track for an April downselect! LCS In the shift to DD(X), the navy also endorsed the need for a smaller littoral combat ship, or LCS. LCS will provide focused-mission, warfighting capabilities. There are many innovative hull designs that can provide both the stability and speed necessary to enable an LCS to be effective in the littorals. LCS will be outfitted with network- centric capabilities, like the multi-mission combatants, to make this ship a combat multiplier. LCS' modular design will provide significant flexibility in both displacement and combat capability. LCS' flexibility may make it a candidate for the Coast Guard's Deepwater effort. SSGN Transformation and innovation are not limited to new construction ships. There has been a lot of talk about the SSGN program. I am sure this audience is interested in how the decisions were made on this program during the FY '03 budget build. I am frankly very pleased to be able to tell this audience how I approached this program, since I think we applied some sound business judgment in the decision. First, as I discussed earlier, Secretary England has directed that we stop the increase in the prior year completion account. Thus, my highest priority was to construct an SSGN acquisition strategy that provided low risk and the least chance of cost growth. My second priority was to construct a program which was conscious of the current workload in yards and which provided some flexibility for the industrial base. Lastly, I was very conscious of the FY '03 impact of SSGN on the Navy budget. Originally, the program proposed roughly concurrent refueling and conversion of 4 SSGN's. 2 refuelings and conversions would have been performed at Puget Sound Shipyard and 2 at Norfolk Naval Shipyard. A major concern under this plan was the workload situation in Norfolk. The Navy is currently experiencing delays and cost growth on CVN-76 and the CVN-69 overhaul because of worker shortages, particularly in key trades such as electricians and machinists. Norfolk Naval and Newport News are currently hiring people from each other, at labor increases, to deal with the labor shortages. Thus, the original proposal had the potential to dramatically increase the labor shortages in Norfolk and to force the Department of the Navy to cut or eliminate other programs to pay for SSGN conversion. So, working with the program leadership, we developed a more business- like strategy. Under the new proposal, one submarine was to be refueled and converted as fast as possible. The other 3 submarines were to be refueled on the original schedule. However, the conversions would be done somewhat sequentially, that is, after the refuelings. This strategy provided several benefits to the Navy. First, the initial submarine was to be converted and refueled as fast as possible – in order to get this transformational capability into the hands of the user. Second, the team that performed the first conversion, possibly a tiger team led by Electric Boat, may participate in the next three conversions, providing some learning curve benefits to lower the cost and risk of the next three conversions. Third, sequencing the conversions will provide the Navy the option of completing the next three conversions in public yards, private yards, or through a public-private competition. This would allow the Navy to seek competitive cost reduction, balance workloads in yards, and reduce the cost growth risk. Thus, this new strategy was a more business like approach to the SSGN conversion program. In the end, we settled on a slightly modified version in which the 2 Puget submarines will be refueled and converted concurrently. The 2 east coast submarines will have their conversions initiated roughly as the refueling is completed. Compared to the 4 concurrent conversions under the original proposal, this compromise provides some reduced risk and a great opportunity to save dollars through learning curve experience. The good news is that we now have a plan and development of this transformational capability is underway. These converted OHIO class submarines will perform strike missions while also enabling Special Operations Force support missions. We have all seen the utility of special operations forces in Operation Enduring Freedom. Further, the SSGNs are also being examined as a platform for our Long-range Mine Reconnaissance System (LMRS). JSF The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) commenced System Development and Demonstration in October 2001 and is on schedule to deliver operational STOVL variants to the Marine Corps in 2008 and the Navy variant in 2010. The JSF program is on track to deliver on the promise of providing a high degree of commonality across three different service variants. This commonality will enable dramatic reductions in the acquisition and operating costs of Navy and Marine Corps tactical aircraft. It will also allow an even greater integration of Naval Aviation into the Joint Battlespace than we have had in the past. Indeed, international participation in JSF will provide enhanced interoperability among both the services and our allies. Further, the signature of JSF will allow the Navy and Marine Corps to take another step forward in enhancing survivability. Emphasizing affordability, the Department will carefully manage requirement creep using various methods including a senior oversight group. We must guard against costly changes and creep in requirements which will undermine our ability to deliver JSF on cost and on schedule. JASSM The Navy budget also fully funds the integration of JASSM on the F/A-18 E/F. I believe this is a small, but overlooked, transformational effort in the Navy. The power of carrier-based F/A-18 E/F launching JASSM provides the Navy a chance to hold ANY target at risk on Day One of a conflict. Tactical Tomahawk One of the tools effectively used by the surface Navy has been Tomahawk. Tactical Tomahawk will streamline mission planning and add flexibility to mission execution. Further, Tactical Tomahawk will address my recurring issue – cost. An affordable Tactical Tomahawk will become an immediate force multiplier for the current fleet as well as future Navy combatants. TBMD You have all heard of the problems with Navy Area development program, and some of you are worried about how that will affect the fleet. OSD recognizes the unique requirement for sea-based, terminal ballistic missile defense capabilities as well as extended-range anti-air warfare (AAW) capability against cruise missiles and aircraft. A study is underway to determine the way ahead to acquire a Sea Based Terminal Defense capability. A companion study will be conducted to establish the Navy's plan for a long-range AAW capability. These studies are due for completion by 1 May. The Navy's mid-course system is moving ahead. As most of you know, we achieved a skin-to-skin intercept in January. While the testing did not require contact, this marks a major step forward in this critical area and showcased the outstanding capability of our Navy/Industry team. Just as important, we still have the foundation air-defense program we need to stay, fight, and win. Many of the concepts that were progressing in Navy Area Missile Defense, such as the new software and hardware associated with air defense capabilities, remain. The Congress was extremely helpful at the eleventh-hour through shifting Navy Area funds to allow these essential Aegis baseline upgrades to proceed. CEC In other areas, although our forces already have a high degree of interconnectivity, the opportunity for additional improvements is vast. Cooperative Engagement Capability, or CEC provides a common view of the battlespace, greatly leveraging our existing force. CEC has just successfully completed OPEVAL. This is completely transformational for the fleet. CEC will be installed on ship and planes and available to Marine units. Now, we will be able to place the optimum weapon on the target - which may or may not be organically held! We will be working to bring the principles of cost control, upgradeability, and open architecture to CEC. Navy / Marine Corps Internet (NMCI) Navy Marine Corps Internet is both an enabling and transformational capability. After September 11, the need to ensure the security of our information networks has increased. The future also requires our Systems Commands and even the fleet to be connected with our industry partners. NMCI provides enhanced information technology capability, planned refresh of our IT systems, and reduces the software sustainment burden across the Department. NMCI creates the secure, interoperable network demanded for defense information systems in the future. We are committed to making this very challenging undertaking a success. Recently, we reorganized the program to bring it directly under my office and we placed two of the service's finest officers - Rear Admiral Chuck Munns and Colonel Bob Logan in charge. We need NMCI and we will make it happen! Business Practices While less concrete than a new ship or weapon, the need for transformation of the Department's business practices is so important that it is one of Secretary England's strategic thrusts. I recently visited the Marine Corps Depot at Cherry Point. The depot is serving basically as a subcontractor to the industry prime on aircraft auxiliary power units. This effective partnership has reduced cost and, more importantly, improved the availability of APUs to fleet aviation units. An equally innovative practice has been the decision to look carefully into where we should divest capability, infrastructure, and programs faster than originally planned. Led by our System's Commands, with the concurrence and support of senior OPNAV leadership, we are actively reviewing our present capability against future requirements and will eliminate those programs and systems that are not directly supporting the path to meet those requirements. These and other models will be expanded as we change the way the Navy does business in an effort to reduce operating costs and provide service to the primary customer – the fleet. Closing Today, the forces of the Navy and Marine Corps remain forward deployed and are protecting America's strategic interests near and far as an essential part of the Joint Force. Naval Forces fight and win; they are capable of initiating and sustaining nearly unlimited combat operations on the sea, land, and in the air without the burden or liability of a logistics tail or host nation support. We have the finest Naval Force in the world and we remain ready to assure allies and friends, deter potential adversaries, and defeat enemies while providing our nation the most flexible instrument of military capability both today and tomorrow. While we face a number of challenges such as, recapitalizing an aging infrastructure and fighting both symmetrical and asymmetrical threats, we are clear of purpose, confident in our capabilities, and focused on the future. However, the most advanced aircraft, ship, or weapons system does our country no good without highly motivated and trained people. Ultimately, people and leadership are the real foundations of our naval capabilities. I thank each of you for your service and your attention and I am grateful for the chance to talk with each of you. I will be happy to take a few questions.