Chapter 15—
Getting There: Focused Logistics
Paul M. Needham
The search for new military strategies necessitates the transformation
of the logistics processes and organizations that support the current
military structure. We begin this chapter by examining the logistics transformation
process, reviewing various definitions of logistics (especially those
used by the Department of Defense and Joint Staff). Each definition places
emphasis on a specific reason for logistics processes and organizations
to exist.
Next, we look at Joint Vision 2010 Focused Logistics and Joint
Vision 2020 Focused Logistics to examine the direction that the Joint
Staff is pursuing in linking logistics and operational concepts. We look
at the process of generating military power by considering logistics organizations
in the Department of Defense (DOD), theüservices, the Defense Logistics
Agency (DLA), and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) to identify
the logistics initiatives that these organizations are pursuing and the
potential impact on operational capability. We then analyze the two fundŽmental
processes of projecting and sustaining military power. Finally, we briefly
discuss some vulnerabilities related to focused logistics.
Definitions
To define logistics, we focus first on the DOD dictionary:
The science of planning and carrying out the movement and maintenance
of forces. In its most comprehensive sense, those aspects of military
operations which deal with:
- design and development, acquisition, storage, movement, distribution,
maintenance, evacuation, and disposition of material
- movement, evacuation, and hospitalization of personnel
- acquisition or construction, maintenance, operation, and disposition
of facilities
- acquisition or furnishing of services.1
This definition both highlights the movement and maintenance of forces
and identifies a comprehensive systems approach to logistics.
The Joint Staff defines logistics as “the process of planning and executing
the movement and sustainment of operating forces in the execution of a
military strategy and operations.”2
This definition directs our attention to a process approach to logistics.
A third definition comes from the civilian realm. The Council of Logistics
Management (CLM) states that “logistics is that part of the supply chain
process that plans, implements, and controls the efficient, effective
flow and storage of goods, services, and related information from the
point of origin to the point of consumption in order to meet customers’
requirements.”3
The range of DOD logistics responsibilities includes those identified
by the CLM definition, planning and controlling the “efficient and effective”
flow of goods, services, and related information to meet customers’ requirements.
In addition, DOD logistics operations concern the repair of capital assets,
such as aircraft, tanks, vehicles, engines, and avionics boxes. DOD logistics
also includes design, development, acquisition, inventory responsibilities
of storage and distribution, reverse logistics (return of items), and
disposal. DOD logistics responsibilities include building and obtaining
infrastructure; obtaining services; and movement, evacuation, and hospitalization
of personnel.
Thus, the range of DOD logistics responsibilities far exceeds the traditional
logistics responsibilities in commercial firms. However, if we consider
the CLM definition—planning, implementing, and controlling “efficient,
effective” flow and storage of güods, services, and related information
from point of origin to point of consumption based on the customers’ needs—the
military finds much in common with the civilian definition. Recognition
of the similarities in the processes, and the need to support customers
efficiently and effectively, has led DOD and the services to examine the
military logistics processes and organization thoroughly. DOD has a strong
incentive to adopt and adapt the best business logistics practices.
Logistics transformation is essential to the defense transformation
efforts that have been labeled the revolution in military affairs (RMA).
The RMA new operational concepts all demand improved logistics. These
include joint response strike forces, enhanced information networking,
accelerated deployment of missile defenses, realigned overseas presence
and swifter power projection, interoperable allied forces, maritime littoral
operations, standoff targeting, forcible entry, enhanced tactical deep
strikes, and decisive close combat operations.4
The logistical support processes and current logistics organizational
structure must be transformed to support these new, flexible military
operations.
Joint Vision 2020: Focused Logistics
Transformation of military doctrine, strategic and operational concepts,
and logistics processes began with the reviews that took place after Operations
Desert Shield and Desert Storm. The Joint Staff, in 1996,
published its vision of the direction the military should focus on for
the future in Joint Vision 2010 (JV 2010). The tenets of
JV 2010 were primarily directed toward the operational capability
of forces and called for the capabilities of dominant maneuver, precision
engagement, information superiority, and force protection, as well as
focused logistics.5
Joint Vision 2010 was followed by Joint Vision 2020, which
takes the Focused Logistics goal of JV 2010 and continues the implementation
actions it began. Focused logistics is intended to refocus the services
and the commanders in chief (CINCs) toward reducing forward inventories
to a minimal amount (“reduced footprint”) and relying instead on consistent
resupply. The idea of reduced footprint is intended to apply not only
to inventory but also to other support systems, such as hospitals. This
reliance on transportation and throughput requires careful analysis, confidence
on the part of the CINC, and continued access to ports.
Focused logistics is more, however, than a “reduced footprint.”
JV 2020 identified six elements of the focused logistics program:
- Joint Deployment/Rapid Distribution
- Multinational Logistics
- Agile Infrastructure
- Force Health Protection
- Information Fusion
- Joint Theater Logistics Command and Control (C2).
These six program initiatives are leading to significant transformation
of logistics processes.
Improvements within the deployment and distribution arena are being
pursued by the U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM), the Defense Logistics
Agency, and the services. Under the Multinational Logistics program, planners
must consider what is available in the location to which American forces
will deploy. Agile Infrastructure is aimed at changing from a presumption
that DOD must build and own the infrastructure to the expectation that
it can lease infrastructure or use it temporarily. Force Health P›otection
is aimed at improving healthcare while reducing the support forces needed
in a forward location. Information Fusion and Joint Theater Logistics
C2 are information programs aimed at
providing visibility of the inventory, transportation, and material management.
Two enabling programs, the Joint Total Asset Visibility program and the
In-transit Visibility program, are aimed at providing reliable datû to
decisionmakers and reducing the total cost, while continuing to provide
effective support. Focused logistics is transforming the way in which
logisticians plan to support warfighters and provide them with flexible
options for military operations.
Recognizing that it needed to streamline logistics processes and logistics
systems, DOD looked to business for models. Businesses had begun close
examination of logistics processes to decrease costs, increase profits,
and improve customer service. In doing so, they found that these objectives
were not mutually exclusive. Improving logistics systems—that is, inventory,
order processing, transportation, warehousing, and distribution networks—improved
their bottom line: profit.
Changes in the logistical processes of firms originate from the application
of various theoretical constructs. These included the inventory-transportation
paradigm, which makes tradeoffs between inventory and expedited transportation;
the postponement principle, which delays the final form or assembly; the
speculation principle, which attempts to anticipate demand; substitution,
which allows the use of other components; adoption of “lean” manufacturing,
which reduces work-in-progress; just-in-time and time-definite delivery;
and application of information technology to logistics processes. Although
these constructs fit in the category of logistics tradecraft, each construct
affects the firm’s entire strategy. These principles are now being applied
to military transformation.
Organization
DOD created various organizations to provide support for both combatant
commands and administrative commands. The Unified Command Plan creates
various geographical and unified combatant commands. The administrative
lines are formed by the Title 10 responsibilities of the services—the
Army, Navy, and Air Force—to organize, train, and equip their forces.6
This requirement leads the services to create organizations that support
the forces; both the forces and their supporting organizations are assigned
to the warfighting CINCs.
The services follow a straightforward paradigm in creating combat forces.
First, they identify the tasks that the forces must accomplish. Then,
the services develop doctrine as to the best way of accomplishing tasks.
The services train and experiment to test doctrine and strategy and make
changes as needed. These changes can significantly affect logistics requirements.
External changes also can change logistics requirements significantly.
For example, improvements in microcircuitry can result in an improvement
in reliability of avionics systems. A ten-fold increase in reliability
reduces the frequency of repair and calibration; this ripples through
the logistics organization to result in fewer maintenance technicians,
fewer sets of repair equipment, and less equipment, repair parts, and
people to deploy.7
The need to repair parts and systems to balance operational use rate
and investment in spare parts has decreased because of improved reliability.
The impact of improved reliability on the organization is seen in the
reduction and elimination of intermediate-repair capability at the unit
level. The ripple effect of this is geographic centralization of repair,
the reduction in manpower (for example, repair technicians and warehouse
workers), and an increase in transportation (in the return logistics channel
for repair and overhaul).
This cascading effect of technological change and the impact on logistics
functions requires a continuing review of the organizational structure
that provides logistical support to warfighters. The organizational change
as a result of improving reliability has a secondary benefit of reducing
the need for deploying large numbers of repair technicians and equipment.
We will look at how each service has responded to these changes.
Navy
The Navy, like the other services, has seen improvements in reliability
of its weapon systems, with a cascading impact on its repair parts requirements
and manpower reductions. However, the operational demands on logistics
systems have changed little since the mission of the Navy—power projection
and protection of sea lines of communication—has not changed.
Improvements in reliability and transportation have, however, allowed
the Navy to focus on reducing its large inventory of spare parts and the
large infrastructure of land- and sea-based repair facilities and ships.
The Navy has seen organizational changes as repair and storage of parts
have become more centralized. These changes in the shore environment have
included the consolidation of fleet support centers, maintenance depots,
and both shipbuilding and repair facilities. Under the DOD Strategic Logistics
Plan 2001, the Navy has just one inventory control point (Naval Supply
Systems Command) from which it is able to manage all unique or Navy-assigned
items with the use of modern information technologies. The Navy Sea Systems
Command manages three depot maintenance centers and two Trident submarine
repair facilities. The Naval Air Systems Command manages three aviation
repair depots. The overhead for the Navy’s material management and repair
capability is spread over three separate commands. In addition to this
decentralized organizational structure for material management, the Navy
has additional organizations for intermediate-level repair for the fleets.
The Navy’s combat logistics system that supports ships and battlegroups
at sea has also been changed as a result of improvements in reliability,
the reduction in the total number of ships, and improvements in transportation.
The Navy has reduced the number of logistics ships (ammunition and stores
ships) and the number of tenders (repair ships). To provide the necessary
support, the Navy has turned to refueling in various ports, taking on
provisions during these port visits, and applying common business practices
of buying commercial off-the-shelf instead of acquiring customized, purpose-built
materiel for all its needs.
The Navy has implemented a program called High Yield Logistics. The
goal of this program is to optimize available funds through best value,
customer support and communication, process innovation, and workforce
productivity.8 The objectives of the program are to “provide extraordinary
support to the warfighter, strategically source support inventory, infrastructure,
maintenance, and service functions and to optimize the resources the Navy
keeps to increase effectiveness and reduce redundancy within the remaining
infrastructure.” The Navy plans to create a one-touch system using the
Internet for access to the Navy and DOD inventory control system at all
customer service points. A Navy-Marine Corps intranet is being established
to create a central information system that will eventually replace 200
separate Navy and Marine computer systems.
Reliability improvements are allowing some organizational realignment
within the Navy, but the service is retaining much of the organizational
overhead that was previously needed for a much larger support structure.
Thus, there is a need to continue transforming the logistics structure.
Marine Corps
The Marine Corps has begun several initiatives to improve and speed
logistics processes. These initiatives center on the need for an integrated
logistics system and a centralized organization to focus and manage the
various logistics systems. A third initiative is aimed at creating a cadre
of officers who are exposed to the best current logistics practices in
industry and the best current applied logistics research. As with the
Navy, the thrust of these initiatives is to improve the effectiveness
of the combat forces and create the efficiencies found in the best-run
commercial organizations.
The Corps’ Integrated Logistics Capability initiative is aimed at examining
a total program—from development to disposal—for the best total-cost solution
to logistics. This initiative recognizes the inherent relationship among
such qualities as reliability, maintainability, availability, and serviceability.
In the acquisition logistics arena, for example, these relationships are
expressed as mean-time-between-failures, which helps determine the number
of anticipated replacement parts that must be acquired. The mean-time-to-repair
is a measure of the degree of maintainability associated with a system.
Balancing these product characteristics, along with transportation-inventory
trade-offs, helps to define the logistics support structure required for
different systems. The Marine Corps seeks to balance these characteristics
to maximize effective operational support.
The Corps has created a single organization to focus on the life cycle
of the product—its equipment and materiel—from design to production to
support to disposal. The newly established Marine Corps Materiel Command
will be the single point within the Corps to evaluate operational requirements,
field solutions (systems) to satisfy the requirements, and (perhaps from
a logistics viewpoint most important) to sustain the system through to
disposal. This command will operate in a manner similar to the existing
Air Force Materiel Command and the Army Materiel Command; it will be a
single organization responsible for all materiel used by the operating
force.
The Marine Corps has partnered with academia and industry to ensure
that its officers are exposed to innovative commercial practices. The
benefit will be seen in more effective and efficient Marine Corps support
to the operational forces. As the Marine Corps develops new operational
concepts, the logistics officers will be able to design optimal logistics
systems to support the forces.
Air Force
The current Air Force logistics organizational structure was defined
by the Air Force to support its operations structure. Its centralized
supply and maintenance concept centered on the Air Force’s need for a
main base with a runway. The fact that the runway is in a fixed location
dictated the operational structure and allowed the logistics organization
to be centralized. This allowed certain economies of scale.
The Air Force has now begun changing its organizational structure to
decentralize maintenance and supply to individual operating squadrons.
Air Force doctrine has changed to reflect the post-Cold War need for deployable
units. The new Expeditionary Air Forces now have supply and maintenance
personnel as integral parts of the squadrons. This new squadron structure
with integrated maintenance and supply personnel is similar to the structure
found in Navy units. The changes are intended to improve operational effectiveness
and flexibility and create efficiencies based on reliability improvements.
The Air Force has initiated several programs to improve logistics support
to operational units, known as Agile Logistics, Logistics Transformation,
and Product Support Strategy. Although these programs are aimed at improving
the efficiency and effectivengss of support, they also create opportunities
to alter operational deployment and support strategies.
The Agile Logistics program is an adaptation of the lean logistics concept
that reduces the amount of inventory maintained. This program intends
to use time-definite transportation and real-time information to reduce
inventory levels at centralized storage locations and to allow deployment
and support of units with fewer parts. A goal is to reduce the forward
support footprint by 50 percent.9 Agile Logistics will allow operational
concepts to be considered without the extensive “logistics tail” seen
in the past. Reliability improvements, transportation enhancements, and
support-organization changes are enablers of the Agile Logistics program.
The Air Force also is embarking on a Logistics Transformation program.
The goal of the program is to transform the focus from providing massive
support to large, forward-deployed units to, instead, mobile precision
support for smaller deployable operational units. Several key concepts
of the program are “time-definite delivery; time-definite resupply; effective
command and control; theater ‘reachback’ to [the continental United States
(CONUS)] logistics centers; and the use of integrated, state-of-the-art
information systems to source, acquire, and transport items directly to
the warfighter.”10 The desired effect of this logistics transformation
program is to make logistics support more effective and efficient while
capitalizing on technological and other changes in the transportation
industry, the use of new information technologies, and improved reliability.
The third new Air Force logistics initiative is a new Product Support
Strategy. This strategy is based on the need for comprehensive management
of products (weapon systems) from design to production to support to disposal.
The Air Force plans to have a single product manager who will be responsible
for the product throughout its life cycle. This initiative aims at incorporating
“best business practices” such as a prime (single) support integrator,
long-term business relationships, use of commercial standards, partnering,
developing service-oriented, performance-based agreements between suppliers
and warfighters, and emphasizing long-term continuous improvements.
Army
The Army has made similar organizational changes for almost the same
reasons. Reliability of equipment has allowed the reduction of the intermediate-level
logistics organizations required to repair equipment. Reliability improvements,
increases in transportation availability, and improved speed of repair
have contributed to the changes. The Army has initiated several logistics
initiatives, identified in the DOD Strategic Logistics Plan 2001 as Velocity
Management, the Single Stock Fund, and the Wholesale Logistics Modernization
Program.11
The Wholesale Logistics Modernization Program is intended to develop
an enterprise resource planning service for the Army to replace the legacy
systems that it uses to manage maintenance and supply. The Army’s Velocity
Management program is one of its initiatives to improve processes and
transform the logistics system.
Velocity Management is the Army program to examine the full range of
product development and support in order to analyze and redesign the logistics
system to leverage improvements in reliability, transportation, and information.
It is based upon recognition that rapid material movement allows the commercial
business sector to reduce inventory and improve customer service levels.
Business logistics transformation resulted in applying rapid transportation
and information rather than keeping large inventories (the information/inventory
tradeoff). The reliability improvements now engineered into equipment
result in fewer failures, longer periods between major repairs, and greater
assurance that the equipment will function as expected. In the past, multiechelon
maintenance organizations (unit, intermediate, and depot) were established
to take advantage of economies of scale and investments in inventory,
maintenance technicians, repair equipment, and transportation. Improved
reliability has reduced the need for intermediate-level maintenance. Tradeoffs
in terms of manpower, deployment requirements (people and equipment),
and cost (dollars) reduce deployment requirements while retaining required
effectiveness. The new logistics structure incorporates a unit-level organizational
structure that focuses on remove-and-replace forward maintenance; intermediate
and depot-level repairs are done at a centralized facility. To reap all
of the benefits of Velocity Management, the Army objective is to substitute
velocity of material movements for inventory investments.
The Velocity Management program also aims to “reduce processing times
for repairs, financial management, and determination of inventory requirements,
procurement, transportation, and financial management.” The Army’s own
internal management processes have been partially responsible for the
large, bulky logistics systems that existed. Over the years, each level
of the organization developed to respond to various management directions
that the Army or other agencies have imposed. The combinations of reliability
improvements and process reengineering allow significant organizational
changes that should result in a leaner, lighter, more mobile Army.
The Single Stock Fund is an initiative to improve the logistics and
financial processes of the Army’s Working Capital Fund. This initiative
merges the retail (local) and wholesale processes into a single, centrally
managed fund. The purpose of the initiative is to bring better financial
accounting procedures and logistics functions together.
Defense Logistics Agency
Another major organization within DOD also has logistics responsibility:
the Defense Logistics Agency, which was established originally to act
as a wholesaler for DOD. Its purpose has changed over the years with various
defense management reform actions; it is now responsible for 94 percent
of the consumable items managed within DOD, all of the distribution centers
within DOD, and the processing of 88 percent of all material requisitions.
DLA is transforming itself through three initiatives: DLA 21, Strategic
Sourcing, and Business Systems Modernization.
The DLA 21 transformation initiative is a broad, integrated plan for
DLA to provide “essential military logistics support for the 21st century
warfighter.” This plan focuses on “organizational redesign, modernization
of automated business systems, employment of strategic partnerships with
industry, better knowledge and understanding of customer (warfighter)
needs, and replenishment and development of a world-class workforce.”12
Each segment of the plan creates a more flexible and responsive organization
with a customer-focus orientation.
The organizational redesign has focused on streamlining DLA. The new
Logistics Operations organization is intended to focus on supply-chain
management, readiness, and contingency operations support. An Information
Operations organization has been created to integrate information technology
and electronic business practices. A Financial Operations organization
has been created to centralize and streamline financial systems for DLA
and the interfaces with the Defense Financial and Accounting Service.
The Human Resources department has been created to develop and maintain
the workforce. These organizational changes reflect a major effort to
transform DLA from a large bulk provider to the “provider of choice.”
The DLA Strategic Sourcing Initiative is aimed at creating and maintaining
supply-chain relationships with key suppliers. DLA is attempting to create
the types of partnerships with producers that are successful in business,
such as sharing information in exchange for lower total price commitments.
DOD is attempting to create a win-win situation for itself and the producers
of materials. Within this initiative are several DLA initiatives—including
Prime Vendor, Virtual Prime Vendor, and Direct Vendor Delivery—that seek
to incorporate “best business practices” into DLA operations.
Deployment Issues
U.S. military strategy calls for significant military power to be forward
deployed. The operational side of DOD is currently organized into geographic
regions and functional areas. The geographic regional commanders are assigned
forces for daily operations and forces for contingency planning purposes.
The functional commanders are assigned specific functional areas to operate
in and provide support to the geographic commanders. These include space,
transportation, strategic, and special operations. These functional commanders
are assigned forces for daily operations and forces for various other
levels of increased activity. Of specific interest in logistics transformation
is the U.S. Transportation Command because of the service that it provides
to the services and the CINCs.
USTRANSCOM is in the process of transforming itself to provide better,
more integrated transportation service to the warfighters. Three transformation
initiatives have been started: Reinvention CINC; Defense Transportation
System Enterprise Architecture; and Strategic Distribution Management
Initiative. These initiatives are aimed at improving the deployment ability
and sustainment ability for the geographic CINCs.
The Reinvention CINC initiative started when Secretary of Defense William
Cohen tasked the Commander in Chief, U.S. Transportation Command (USCINCTRANS),
to “emulate the best business practices of private industry.”13 The areas
that the USCINCTRANS chose to focus on are financial controls, organizational
controls, and process controls. USTRANSCOM operates with a revolving-fund
financial system similar to that used by DLA. The system basically requires
the command to üharge its customers (warfighters) for their transportation.
Customers request funds for transportation and then use their operating
accounts to buy from and pay USTRANSCOM for the service. The method of
financing the operations creates the need for change. This transformation
effort is aimed at improving this process and having real-time financial
data available to decisionmakers. This financial process focuses on peacetime
activities, but the overall viability of the system is dependent on proper
financial management in peace in order to be able to operate in war or
a crisis.
Organizationally, USTRANSCOM consists of three major components: Air
Mobility Command from the Air Force, Military Sealift Command from the
Navy, and the Military Traffic Management Command from the Army. USTRANSCOM
was created originally to operate in wartime or a crisis to coordinate
and manage the deployment of forces and their equipment. In the early
1990s, the peacetime transportation responsibility was also given to USTRANSCOM.
This move allowed it to organize better, operate for maximum performance,
and integrate wartime training into peacetime support operations.
Change to the process controls is the other major initiative included
under the Reinvention CINC umbrella. The DOD Strategic Logistics Plan
states that “instituting business rules, information processes, and contracting
decisions for optimal effectiveness and efficiency” are the objectives
of this initiative.14 Sound business practices and procedures are needed;
the objective of these changes improved deployment and sustainment of
warfighters—that is, customers.
The Defense Transportation System Enterprise Architecture is directed
toward building the military transportation system of the future. The
primary focus of this effort is to create an information system with a
set of decision support tools (models) that will enable rapid analysis
and decisions. New information technology will enable optimal use of transportation
assets for deployment and sustainment.
USTRANSCOM and DLA, along with the services and DOD agencies, are improving
the DOD distribution system. The Strategic Distribution Management Initiative
is aimed at reducing friction between the elements of the distribution
system.15
Within the distribution system, USTRANSCOM has transportation responsibility
between a designated port of embarkation and a port of debarkation (“port
to port”). DLA, which has responsibility for the distribution centers,
is working with USTRANSCOM to improve the flow of materials to warfighters.
The CINC, representing the warfighter or customer, is currently responsible
for the distribution system from a designated port of debarkation to the
forward location of the warfighters (“from port to fort”). The current
term for this segment of the distribution system is “reception, staging,
onward movement, and integration.” The CINC identifies where he or she
wants forces and material delivered, where to assemble, how and by what
means they will travel forward, and how the forces and material will be
integrated into the existing operational structure. The Strategic Distribution
Management Initiative is intended to create an integrated supply chain
in which stockage decisions are integrated with storage locations, with
distribution nodes such as ports and transshipment locations, and with
transportation.
The above initiatives accomplish two tasks. The first is to make the
daily operation of USTRANSCOM as efficient as possible so as to reduce
the overall costs for the users of transportation services. Second, by
examining the entire supply chain and making it more effective,
USTRANSCOM, along with DLA, is improving provision of the essential sustainment
support.
Service Initiatives
Additional initiatives from the services are also aimed at enhancing
the capability to deploy. The Army is fielding the Interim Armored Tactical
Vehicle to be able to deploy more quickly. This vehicle provides several
new enhancements related to deployability. First, the new armored vehicles
are much lighter than the 30-ton Bradley or the 70-ton Abrams. Second,
because they weigh less, the vehicles need less fuel to operate. Additionally,
the lighter vehicles may be candidates for electric drives now being developed,
which would reduce the fuel requirement further.
Research and development are coming up with new products all the time;
the potential second- and third-order effects from adapting this new technology
are being examined for potential further reductions in support requirements.
The other services are also making changes to fielded equipment to take
advantage of improved operating capability along with reduced logistical
support requirements.
Several other research and development projects may have significant
impact on the deployment of forces. One is the large, medium-speed dirigible
that is currently being researched by several firms. If this effort is
successful, then 1 million pounds could be airlifted on a single air ship
traveling at 150 to 200 miles per hour. Another project is a high-speed
cargo ship that would permit transportation of large military forces to
be accomplished very quickly. These would be transformational changes
to the deployment equation.
Strategic Reach
Deployment considerations also raise questions of strategic reach, touching
on the system of bases, departure ports, en-route support bases, arrival
ports, and destination locations. These are not new issues. In a 1959
book, Logistics in the National Defense, Henry Eccles discussed
these issues in the context of lessons learned from World War II.16
The deployment process begins at a home station: a base where forces
are garrisoned. The deployment commences with the passing of information
from the Joint Staff, to the services, to the commands, to the individual
units. Information about the number of people, weight and size of equipment,
support equipment, and the like is passed to USTRANSCOM and to the geographic
CINC who will be relying on the forces. USTRANSCOM, in conjunction with
the services and CINC, plans the movement of the forces to a port of debarkation.
The first movement is thus “from the fort to the port.” The USTRANSCOM
Military Traffic Management Command arranges for movement via motor carrier
or rail to airports or seaports; Air Mobility Command from airports; and
Military Sealift Command from one seaport to another.
Several decisions must be made by USTRANSCOM and its components regarding
the method of movement. Will DOD transportation equipment be used? Will
equipment have to be leased or chartered? Since DOD does not own sufficient
transport aircraft and ships to move forces for a major contingency, agreements
have been made with the airlines and shipping firms to ensure the availability
of aircraft and ships in time of crisis. This Civil Reserve Air Fleet
(CRAF) has worked and enables the participating firms to receive various
benefits, such as government business and operating subsidies based on
added expenses to support DOD. The use of the commercial transportation
system was a significant initiative in 1952, but it must now be reexamined.
From a strategic standpoint, these agreements and the intent to use the
commercial transportation system raise the importance of the system to
a national security level. The issue related to deployment is what level
of investment DOD should make in airlift and sealift assets and how to
obtain the necessary lift in a crisis. A new program called VISA is modeled
on the CRAF program; it ensures that space for containers will be available
in crises. Both this program and CRAF must be examined continuously to
ensure that they meet the deployment demands of the future. The recent
relief package for the airlines is an example of the possible support
that DOD must give to the airlines to keep them viable, healthy, and available
for the CRAF program. Although some would question this government relief,
most would agree with the decision to provide relief support to the airlines
that contribute to national security.
Strategic Bases
Another major logistical issue related to deployment is the need for
strategic bases. Current aircraft technology requires that aircraft be
refueled after 3,000 to 4,000 miles. Several options exist to fill this
need. First, bases can be established to allow aircraft to land and be
refueled. They can be military bases on U.S. territory, commercial bases
on U.S. territory, or allied bases, military or commercial, that the ally
has agreed to allow us to use. If the desire is not to land certain aircraft
on an ally’s homeland, then a tanker bridge could possibly be created
using refueling aircraft. However, even tankers must be able to land and
load fuel.
For sealift, the issues of concern include throughput, access, and resupply
at sea. Throughput is a measure of the rate of arrival and servicing available
at a port to bring materials forward to the warfighter. Access refers
to the ability to use a port—that is, whether permission from some other
government has been received and whether the draft of the port is adequate.
Resupply at sea also presents challenges. The Navy has perfected the ability
to perform underway replenishment, but the supply ships must obtain supplies
(food, fuel, and repair parts) from some location in the area. Some sort
of forward support base is needed to support the Navy. In Operational
Naval Logistics, Eccles proposed an offshore, mobile, floating base
that gives the Navy the capability to take its base with it anywhere the
ocean allows.17 This concept is currently reflected in the Navy with the
use of aircraft carriers as landing fields for helicopters and the system
of repair ships that accompany battlegroups. This concept needs further
exploration.
Transformation in the area of deployment may require new technology
to provide lift; new information systems to optimize deployment flow with
available lift assets; and new thinking. Technology may provide the opportunity
to bypass ports of debarkation and strategic bases en-route and go straight
to a deployed location. New information systems can ensure optimal use
of transportation assets and the tracking of forces at all times. New
thinking is what will transform the deployment process and allow new operational
concepts to be explored without current constraints.
Sustainability
Sustaining deployed forces depends upon the distribution network that
will transport sustainment stock along the supply chain.18 The distribution
network will in most cases be similar to the deployment network, although
the nodes—ports of embarkation and debarkation—may be different. The supply
chain is of critical importance since DOD split logistics responsibility
requires careful coordination and cooperation. A separate but equally
critical issue is that of maintaining the defense industrial base that
provides critical support for sustaining the forces.
The distribution channel that leaves the factories to go to warehouses,
then to the distribution centers, and onward to the forward support bases
must be able to handle the requirements for the forces deployed. The capacity
of the system depends on the ability of the nodes (ports) to support throughput
levels sufficient to provide a constant flow of material or to build up
a sufficient inventory. The current practices call for a just-in-time
inventory approach, where minimal inventory levels are retained; this
critically depends on assured, timely transportation. This idea is an
extension of the classic inventory-transportation paradigm of building
and maintaining a large inventory versus using expedited transportation
to provide items when needed.
Industry
A major area of concern for all logistics issues is the capability of
industry to provide timely support to DOD. The economics of the reduction
in the size of the military establishment has contributed to a real decline
in the numbers of firms that manufacture defense products. The challenge
for the future is how to ensure the viability of critical firms in a market
that is DOD-controlled. This problem requires innovative approaches to
ensuring that the American domestic defense industry remains capable of
supporting the U.S. military.
The other problem area connected to industry is the globalization of
world trade due to efforts of firms to find the most efficient manufacturing
sources. The result is that many firms now locate manufacturing operations
off shore. As more components for major systems are manufactured off shore,
questions arise as to how reliable the source is and whether it can be
counted on, especially in a crisis. As the transformation of our logistics
operations continues, we need to ensure that efficiency does not become
the sole criterion for decisions. Preservation of domestic defense industrial
capability may thus require changes in acquisition regulations and laws
to ensure that an adequate level of manufacturing capability is retained
within the United States.
Vulnerabilities
üs the United States transforms its military logistics to focused logistics
processes to support deployed forces, certain vulnerabilities may be created
for those forces. The new focused logistics processes—lean logistics,
velocity management, and the like—require rapid, dependable transportation;
assured communications; and continuous throughput. When any of these elements
are inadequate, support to the deployed forces could be jeopardized. Additionally,
new operational concepts that rely on the assumption of focused logistics
will be at risk when any of its enabling elements is not available.
An opponent could attack several of the enablers. Along the supply and
communications chain, several weaknesses could reduce the logistics support
for deployed forces. First, rapid, dependable strategic transportation
must be available. This includes sealift, airlift, rail and road, pipelines
for fuel distribution, and inland waterway transport. Along the first
leg of the deployment—from the “fort to the port”—the communications channels
and the command and control channels are vulnerable. Units and commands
must have timely, accurate information for unit activation, preparation,
and movement scheduling. Accurate, assured communications are essential
to planning timely unit movements.
The next leg of the deployment—“from port to port”—requires use of en-route
support bases for refueling, crew rest and changeout, and throughput considerations.
Such bases have several vulnerable points: force protection, protection
of communications, and assured availability of fuel for aircraft. Throughput
considerations are critical to sealift, including the availability of
ports for discharging forces, unit equipment, and sustainment stocks.
There are vulnerabilities in force protection issues, assured communications,
and the availability of suitable ports and facilities. Although most problem
areas can be alleviated for some time period, this may not be enough:
focused logistics requires the constant arrival of rapid forces and resupply
to avoid a large buildup of sustainment stocks. Time is a major factor,
especially when suitable infrastructure is not adequate.
The final leg of the deployment—“from the port to the fort”—is from
the point of arrival to the forward location that needs support. Here
there are several specific vulnerabilities, especially in transportation
and communication. As units, equipment, and sustainment stocks are moved
along, there is significant dependence on rails, roads, and inland waterways.
The geographic CINCs, along with CINCTRANSCOM, design and develop the
transportation network to ensure that CINC operational capabilities are
integrated with the distribution systems.
Joint Vision 2020 and focused logistics provide new capabilities
to increase flexibility, but their vulnerabilities must be addressed.
Two major areas of concern are the deployment and sustainment stages of
support for deployed forces (Joint Deployment/Rapid Distribution). Other
areas of focused logistics also create vulnerability, in particular the
communications required in order to “trade information for inventory,”
maintain Joint Theater Logistics C2,
and provide Information Fusion. Multinational Logistics requires the support
of host nations providing material, manpower, and infrastructure. Force
Health Protection is required for medical regulation and care of troops.
Stabilizing and evacuating injured troops can allow reductions in deployed
hospital staff, support, and protection forces, but they require communications
for diagnosis, rapid transportation to protected areas for treatment,
and new technology to allow enhancement of treatment capabilities. Agile
Infrastructure recognizes the need for ports, bases, transportation systems,
and communication systems, yet vulnerabilities are created because the
services or the CINC do not necessarily own and control the infrastructure.
An additional major concern is in the services’ support to deployed
forces. Several services, most notably the Air Force, have adopted a support
concept called reachback. The concept recognizes the need to
be able to deploy without very much support equipment or very many people,
and instead to receive the necessary level of support from a secure area
far away. The secure areas may be a unit’s home station within the continental
United States, a centralized facility within the United States, or a forward,
secure main support base within or closer to a theater. This concept reduces
the initial lift requirements but shifts the sustainment requirement to
assured, time-deýinite transportation and communication links. Herein
lies the vulnerability. For reachback to work, transportation must be
guaranteed, and communication of logistics requirements from a forward
theater to the support location must also be guaranteed. Transportation
and communications are the vulnerabilities in a reachback support system.
The Future
The fundamental logistical processes that contribute to flexibility
in military strategy are those involved in generating military power,
deploying military forces, and supporting military forces. Each of these
three fundamental processes are subject to the frictions that arise because
of organizational issues, relationships, and “seams” between organizations.
We must also examine the secondary and tertiary effects of acquisition
changes, engineering changes, and changes in the logistics “tradecraft.”
Organizational issues require the coordination and cooperation of the
people involved, to ensure that the seams do not become barriers or rifts.
Engineering changes provide new applications of science and manufacturing
that result in products that require less support and maintenance.
Logistics will remain a comprehensive discipline in support of military
operations. As DOD continues to transform its processes, it will find
new ways to incorporate the best practices developed in civilian business
contexts. DOD will continue to move its logistics processes closer to
the Council of Logistics Management ideal: planning, implementing, controlling
the efficient, effective flow of goods, services, and related information
from origin to the point of consumption to meet the customer’s requirement.
Joint Vision 2020 and focused logistics, along with the efforts
of the services, will provide direction for transforming current logistics
processes. Logistics transformation in conjunction with development of
new military concepts or reassessment of old concepts must ensure that
DOD has the flexibility to respond to any crisis.
Notes
- 1. Joint
Publication 1–02, Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and
Associated Terms (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office,
April 2001). [BACK]
- 2. Ibid.
[BACK]
-
- 3. Council
of Logistics Management, accessed at <www.clm1.org>.
[BACK]
-
- 4. See chapter 3
in this volume by Richard Kugler and Hans Binnendijk. [BACK]
5. Joint Chiefs of
Staff, Joint Vision 2020, Focused Logistics, accessed at <www.dtic.mil/jcs/j4/
projects/foclog>. [BACK]
6. 10 USC 3013, 5013,
8013. [BACK]
7. Eccles discussed the snowball
effect that described the expansion of support forces. The concept
described in the text is the inverse of the snowball effect. Henry Eccles,
Logistics in the National Defense (Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole
Company, 1959). [BACK]
8. Goals as stated
in the DOD Logistics Initiatives of the 2001 DOD Logistics Strategic
Plan, 2001, accessed at <www.acq.osd.mil/log/programs/logtransformation/log_transformation.pdf>.
[BACK]
9. Ibid. [BACK]
10. Ibid. [BACK]
11. Army Strategic
Logistics Plan, May 11, 2000. [BACK]
12. DLA 21 Strategic
Plan 2000. [BACK]
13. DOD Logistics
Strategic Plan, 2001. [BACK]
14. Ibid. [BACK]
15. USTRANSCOM
Strategic Guidance FY 2002, accessed at <www.transcom.mil/J5/fy02sg.pdf>.
[BACK]
16. Eccles, Logistics
in the National Defense. [BACK]
17. Henry Eccles,
Operational Naval Logistics (Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing
Office/Bureau of Naval Personnel, 1950). [BACK]
18. James Toth,
Military Strategy Note Theater Distribution Concepts, ICAF Military
Strategy and Logistics Note, 2001. [BACK]
-
-
-
-
|