Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Force Projection Symposium IV
8 May 2003
LTG Chuck MahanUnited States Army
Deputy Chief of Staff , G-4
LTG Chuck MahanUnited States Army
Deputy Chief of Staff , G-4
“Deploying the Objective Force”
2 of 16
Given our current operations, what force projection challenges did
we face, what lessons did we learn, and what can we do better?
3 of 16
Transporting soldiers and equipment to and from Iraq will run $7.1 billion. On any given day, more than 120 U.S. ships packed with supplies are on the seas…. The United States has sent more than 145 million pounds of cargo and supplies to the Persian Gulf by plane since January. An additional 1.1 billion pounds have arrived by sea.
Renae Merle, “Fighting, In Dollars And Cents”, Washington Post, 12 April 2003
4 of 16
ACCESSIBILITYCHALLENGE Northern ports (Turkey) lacked depth, which required smaller, slower, shallower draft ships
CHALLENGE “Anti-access” implied “hostile” environment, must also consider diplomatic and bureaucratic “anti-access”
DISCUSSION
12 LMSRs to move 101st AA Division with enablers vs. 29 “Cape class” ships to move 4ID and its enablers
Change in ports required change in plan and review of priorities (what equipment, supplies were needed most)
Requirement for customs / convoy clearances and overflight permissionTheater Support Vessel
ISB / TSV
ITV
5 of 16
DEPORD PROCESS – TPFDD* FLOW
CHALLENGE Incremental approval of deployment orders and port accessibility issues resulted in changes to TPFDD flow
DISAGGREGATION OF TPFDD
Movement of personnel through mobilization sites
Challenge in processing soldiers / DA civilians / contractors at CONUS Replacement Center (CRC) and preparing for onward movement
Maintenance of unit integrity (combat loading)
Enabling units arriving after combat units
Challenge in matching arriving equipment with mobilizing / arriving soldiers
*TPFDD – Time Phased Force Deployment Document
6 of 16
RELIANCE ON THE RESERVE COMPONENT
CHALLENGE Over 70% of all EAD CSS is in Reserve Component
SecDef directed “Reserve Component Comprehensive Review” intended to reduce reliance on RC early in operations (first Major Combat Operation (MCO) totally active component??)
* Source: SAMASAUG 02 Master Force File
AC
ARNG
USAR
TOTAL
26.5%
29%
44.5%
100.0%
ACARNGUSAR
607
580
1078
2265
UNITS
51,989
57,594
87,385
196,968
AUTH
DISCUSSION RC (particularly theater-level logistics) must be mobilized early
RC OPTEMPO (what can be sustained? – emerging policy is one 270-day deployment / 60 months)
7 of 16
“I’m certain that when the history of this campaign is written that people will look at this move that the land forces have made in this amount of time as being not only a great military accomplishment, but an incredible logistics accomplishment.”
LTG John Abizaid Deputy Commander (Forward)
Combined Forces Command, CENTCOM 31 March 2003
Richard Lewis, Associated Press
8 of 16
We had great success in Operation Iraqi Freedom, but PHYSICS STILL APPLY.
9 of 16
Demand reduction “Spartan” support
There are five complementary and necessary strategies for effectively deploying and sustaining the Objective Force….
Deployment capabilities Forward positioning Distribution-based logistics
10 of 16
Deployment process improvement (e.g., TC-AIMS II, Movement Tracking System, In-transit Visibility, Logistics Common Operating Picture)
Increase lift capacity through increased numbers of legacy lift systems and development of new systems
Infrastructure improvement (e.g., improved port throughput)
DEPLOYMENT CAPABILITIES
CONSIDERATIONS
Better Processes, Lift Capacity, and Infrastructure Improvements Will Increase
Capabilities
Movement Tracking System
Radio Frequency Tag
TC-AIMS II
11 of 16
FORWARD POSITIONING
Pre-positioning of equipment
Materiel (composition of stocks) Facilities (humidity-controlled
warehouses, vessels)
Location (adjacent to strategic transportation nodes)
Permanent forward basing of units’ equipment (with rotating units)
First to Fight equipment
12 of 16Source: CASCOM Rock Drill
DISTRIBUTION-BASED LOGISTICS
Distribution-based logistics reliant on reach Limited days of supply upon initial deployment
Limited carrying/storage capacity – cargo and fuel trucks
Bulk water and bulk fuel must immediately come from reach
Reduced patient holding capacity
Sustainment flow requirements Configured loads
Must establish immediate sustainment flow, concurrent with deployment
Sustainment flow must be frequent and consistent
Aerial sustainment as required by METT-TC
Broad, shallow ASL with rapid replenishment
Reduces Footprint, But Introduces New Sustainment Flow Requirements
13 of 16
DEMAND REDUCTION Platform efficiency
More efficient platforms through new technologies (e.g., hybrid electric engines, embedded diagnostics / prognostics)
More efficient CSS equipment (e.g., organic upload / download capability, No RTCH outside of APOD / SPOD)
Force efficiency
More efficient forces through combat multipliers (e.g., throughput without re-configuration)
More efficient forces through commonality (e.g., one common chassis)
Personnel efficiency (e.g., built in diagnostics)
Improved treatment of sustainment in requirements development and acquisition
14 of 16
SPARTAN SUPPORT
Use augmentation or reach for:
Infrequently needed capabilities (e.g., POW evacuation)
Tasks that can be deferred or scheduled outside of combat periods (e.g., scheduled vehicle services)
Capabilities that can be foregone for short periods of time (e.g., hot food)
Accept increased risk to reduce resources (e.g., refuel every other day instead of topping off each day)
Minimizes Initial and Forward Requirements-Only What Must Be With a Force Every Day
Will Be Organic to a Force
15 of 16
Today’s requirements compared to our force projection capability….. This will not change without an integrated approach to our force
projection strategies.
Phone: (703) 695- 4102 (DSN 225)Email: [email protected] or
LTG Charles S. Mahan, Jr.HQDA DCS, G-4ATTN: DALO-ZA, Suite 1E394500 Army PentagonWashington, DC 20310-0500
Return Address
SEND ME YOUR CARDS AND LETTERS
17 of 16
THE ARMY
AT WAR AND TRANSFORMING
