The CHAIRMAN. Which as to cover the then existing situation? General PATRICK. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You had quite a number of nonflying officers in the unofficial Air Service at that time, and this was to permit you to keep 10 per cent of the total number as nonfliers?

General PATRICK. It was expected that that would result in having in each grade 10 per cent of nonfliers, but for the reason I have just given it does not work that way.

Senator BINGHAM. How many nonflying officers have you now,, what percentage?

General PATRICK. Twelve.

Senator BINGHAM. Twelve per cent?

General PATRICK. No, sir; 12 officers.
Senator TYSON. What per cent?

General PATRICK. Out of about 900.

Senator TYSON. About 12 per cent, then?

General PATRICK. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. The provision in the House bill to which you refer is that on line 14, I assume:

Provided, That at least 90 per centum of the officers in each grade below that of brigadier general and at least two brigadier generals shall be flying officers. General PATRICK. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You have much more than 90 per cent now? General PATRICK. More than 90 per cent now of flying officers; yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What would be the effect of that proviso coupled with the operation of the proviso following, and also that other proviso of the bill which authorizes the addition of 403 officers by allotment to the Air Service with respect to the 10 per cent and 90 per cent division?

General PATRICK. I will have to take them in this order, I think. The proviso about those who are detailed for the purpose of learning to fly will eliminate all except those who actually become flying officers. Therefore, it will not affect the 10 per cent of nonfliers as written here.

The CHAIRMAN. That is for the future. It says "that hereafter in time of peace.

General PATRICK. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. In effect, they are given one year?

General PATRICK. They are given one year to learn to fly, as the House puts it. If they do not learn to fly or qualify as flying officers in that year, they merely go back to the branch from which they were detailed.

Senator FLETCHER. How many brigadier generals have you?,
General PATRICK. There is one now.

Senator FLETCHER. It provides that at least two brigadier generals shall be flying officers.

General PATRICK. Yes, sir. The bill so provides. The preceding provision about the 90 per cent, etc., would permit having in the corps at any time approximately 10 per cent of nonfliers.

The CHAIRMAN. How would you get them in?

General PATRICK. They could be put in directly. They could be transferred to the corps as nonfliers from any branch of the service, Senator Wadsworth, but this was intended to cover, I think, men

who had been fliers but who were not really physically qualified and could no longer fly, to permit their retention. As they grow older that state of affairs will exist.

The CHAIRMAN. Will it?

General PATRICK. Yes. So that I think the intention was to provide for them. But there are two ways: Men who have lost their flying ability and are no long fliers, and men who could be transferred as nonflying officers to fill up the 10 per cent. As to the succeeding provision as to the 403 officers, those two things which I have just said apply to that just as well.

Senator FLETCHER. The question might be whether the term used shall be "flying officers." That would indicate that they must be actually performing duty as flying officers. Couldn't that be better expressed by saying that they shall be qualified?

General PATRICK. That is defined on the next page, what a flying officer is. It is defined in lines 7 to 14.

Senator FLETCHER. In other words, a man, although he has been a flying officer and has been actively engaged in that sort of thing, still after a while he is perfectly competent as a general, as a commanding officer, and all of that, but his flying days are over. He ought not to be excluded.

General PATRICK. He is not, under the definition of a flying officer which appears on the following page. He still remains as a flying officer.

Senator FLETCHER. Then that is all right.

Senator BINGHAM. General, it seems to me that, at the bottom of page 2, lines 24 and 25, and the first line on page 3, that if an officer should be assigned to the Air Corps for the purpose of having an opportunity to qualify as a flying officer and is tremendously interested in military aviation, but finds that when it comes to those qualifications which have sometimes been referred to as "born flier"-in other words, that he is a real mechanical flier but does not fly naturally, and has to think about everything he does and therefore does not quickly qualify in the highest grade of aviation, after a year of trying to so qualify, he has then got to go back in some other branch of the Army, and he can not be detailed any further; he can not be commissioned in the Air Service, and yet he might be just the type of officer that you wanted-sympathetic, theoretically understandable, having had a year's education in it, and a high type of man, who might be extremely useful in the supply branch, but he can not command flying units because he would not be a flying officer, but he might be extremely useful to the Air Corps and yet he could not be detailed in it or be commissioned in it under the bill the way it reads now.

General PATRICK. He could not.

Senator BINGHAM. And you would lose that type of man.

The CHAIRMAN. Whereas, some other officer might, under the 10 per cent provision, be commissioned in the Air Service without any of those qualifications just because he was able to fly.

Senator BINGHAM. Exactly, and that would discourage the fellow 40 years old, who wanted to go into it, and who thought that his chief value in it might be in some position not requiring active flying, from ever attempting to fly, for the minute he comes in with the object of attempting to fly, then he knows he can not stay in for

more than a year unless he succeeds. In other words, it seems to me that the words "be permanently commissioned therein" ought to be stricken out or else you would lose some very good men.

Senator REED. What happens to the men who, having been qualified pilots, become disqualified by age and who exceed the 10 per cent limitation that is given here? Are they retired for disability?

General PATRICK. No, sir; they are not retired for disability. They are still regarded as flying officers within the provisions of the law, Senator Reed. They are not disrated, nor are they retired or taken out of the corps at all. They still fulfill the definition of a flying officer.

Senator BINGHAM. He does not have to be an active flying officer. The CHAIRMAN. They lose the flying pay?

General PATRICK. They may or they may not. Some of them qualify, in addition to aircraft pilots, as observers. It has been thought that in future wars the man who commands air troops in the air would not necessarily pilot his own machine; in fact, he probably would not. He would give his entire attention to commanding the air force and would be flown by some one else. So there is a chance there for them to use the knowledge they have acquired in a proper fashion in commanding air troops in 'the air, although they themselves do not pilot the machines in which they ride.

The CHAIRMAN. Again referring to the House bill, section 2, it reads:

That section 13a of the act entitled "An act for making further and more effectual provisions for the national defense'

etc., the national defense act, as amended

be, and the same is hereby, amended by striking out the same and inserting the following in lieu thereof.

So we are really striking out all of the original section, and I am not sure that I am right, but would not such action have the effect of repealing those portions of the original section 13a which are not restated in the proposed section 13a?

Senator REED. Surely.

General PATRICK. I think so, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. If that is the case, can you count upon having officers transferred from other branches of the service for assignment with the Air Service as nonflying officers?

General PATRICK. Oh, yes, sir. The War Department has that power, anyhow. They can transfer.

The CHAIRMAN. By implication at least it is limited to 10 per cent?

General PATRICK. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And in the new section 13a that 10 per cent provision disappears entirely.

General PATRICK. That is left in the new section

that at least 90 per cent of the officers in each grade below that of brigadier general and at least two brigadier generals shall be flying officers.

That leaves the margin of 10 per cent still that can be filled in that way under this new section 13a.

The CHAIRMAN. But when we read the rest of the section I can not see how any future accretions to the Army Air Service can be de from among nonflying officers.

Senator BINGHAM. It was stated in the debate in the House, as printed in the record, that it was the intention to have 100 per cent flying officers in the Air Service.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that would be the final effect of this provision. How can you get into the Air Service anybody but a flying officer in the future? You have a few left now, only 12, which is much less than the 10 per cent.

General PATRICK. If any amendment can be suggested which would permit some of the men who attempt to learn to fly to remain in, that would answer, but as passed by the House that is not possible.

Senator BINGHAM. What would you think of an amendment of this sort? On page 2, line 24, after the word "detailed" a period, and then crossing out the word "but" and the word "such," so that it reads: "Hereafter officers shall not remain detailed to the Air Corps," and then inserting the words "for this purpose"—that is, for learning to fly-"for a period in excess of one year," unless they qualify as flying officers. In other words, you would not have an officer detailed to learn to fly for more than a year.

General PATRICK. If that means, Senator Bingham, that he could be retained for an additional period, even though he does not qualify as a flyer, and I assume that would be the intent of it, I think that should be qualified in some way so as to permit the retention of men who are particularly qualified for other work, for work other than flying in the Air Corps. In other words, if that is to go in, it seems to me it would be well to insert something to this effect, after the words "flying officers" in line 2 of page 3:

or unless for special reasons the Chief of the Air Corps may recommend their retention in the Air Corps for a longer period.

Senator BINGHAM. That would cover the objection that I raised there, would it not?

General PATRICK. I think so, sir.

Senator BINGHAM. Is there any provision for transferring to the Air Corps a nonflying officer who does not come in to learn to fly? General PATRICK. It has always been my understanding that that power did reside in the War Department, that they could transfer men if they chose to do so.

Senator BINGHAM. I would like to ask also, while we are on this question, on page 2, lines 8, 9, and 10, if the allotments were increased as suggested on page 10 by 403 officers, wouldn't it bring up the number of officers in the Air Service from 1,514 to 1,650?

General PATRICK. I believe there is a discrepancy between the two provisions of the bill, Senator Bingham, yes, sir. The present allotment to the Air Service is I think 1,247, and to add 403 to that would give the number 1,650. The present allotment of enlisted men is 8,760, and to add the 6,240 gives I think 15,000 instead of 16,000.

Senator BINGHAM. Then why should not we change on page 2 the 1,514 to 1,650, and change the 16,000 to 15,000

General PATRICK. I had not caught that until to-day. I think the change should be made in order to make the two sections accord. Senator FLETCHER. I think you should do one or the other, either change that on page 2 or on page 10, whichever one is correct.

Senator BINGHAM. They ought to be consistent. They are not consistent now. On page 2 in lines 14, 15, and 16, where we have a provision for 90 per cent of officers below the grade of brigadier general and at least two brigadier generals, should we not also have a provision that the Chief of the Air Service should be a flying officer? What would you say to having a proviso reading as follows:

Provided, That the chief of the air corps, at least two brigadier generals and at least 90 per cent of the officers in each grade below that of brigadier general, shall be flying officers.

General PATRICK. It seems to me, sir, that would be a very proper provision.

Senator TYSON. Why do you leave out any of the brigadier generals?

Senator BINGHAM. When the Secretary of War suggested to the present Aircraft Board the appointment of two brigadier generals, he and General Patrick called attention to the fact that at the head of the supply division there should be a brigadier general, and it was felt it was not necessary for him to be a flying officer.

Senator TYSON. That would keep him ineligible from ever being made chief of the Air Service?

Senator BINGHAM. Unless he qualified.

General PATRICK. It would if the amendment you have just suggested should come in there, but as it reads now, without that insertion, he might be chief of the corps.

Senator TYSON. Yes.

Senator BINGHAM. You do not think that the head of the Air Service ought ever to be a nonflying officer, any more than you would have a chief of the Cavalry a man who was afraid to ride a horse? General PATRICK. I do not.

The CHAIRMAN. However, on page 8 you will find that provision setting up a certain standard for the chief of air corps. It says he shall have extended service in such corps, such as to qualify him for such appointment-actual and extended service.

Senator BINGHAM. He might be the Chief of Supply a great many years without having flown.

The CHAIRMAN. True; but let us recollect that every time we put a provision in a bill affecting the Army, tying it down to a certain rigid procedure, we take the chance of getting in trouble in time of war. It might very well happen in time of war, with an enormously expanded Air Service, the President, the Commander in Chief, might want to appoint some very distinguished officer who happened to have spent most of his life in another branch of the service as head of the Air Service, and suddenly would find that the law passed by Congress 10 or 15 years before prevented him from doing it.

Speaking for myself alone, I think the fewer restrictions we have with respect to the tactical organization of the Army, the better it is for the Army. We used to have on the statute books here provisions to the effect that a company of Infantry should consist of 106 menso many sergeants, so many corporals, and so many privates-and that was the law in 1916, when we went into the war. Congress had assumed the job of perfecting by legislation the interior or tactical organization of the Army, and every time you put special qualifications upon a given task or job in the Army, you deprived the Com