ARTICLE

August 2004

No Quick Fixes on the Horizon For Army Logistics Operations

by Sandra I. Erwin

The Army intends to field quick-reaction brigades that can respond to contingencies and help facilitate the deployment of a larger force. The goal is to avoid the lengthy buildups that preceded the most recent conflicts in the Persian Gulf.

The plan, however, may be overly ambitious, given the heavy logistics tail that must follow combat units. The Army already has begun to reorganize divisions into smaller but more agile “units of action,” but there are no signs that the service will be able to make these units less dependent on massive logistics support.

That reality is not likely to change, said Lt. Gen. Claude V. Christianson, Army deputy chief of staff for logistics.

“Some laws of physics you can’t violate,” he told reporters. When a brigade shows up with 1,200 pieces of equipment, it still takes a certain amount of effort to unload and prepare for combat, he noted.

But Christianson still believes the Army can take a leading role in “opening the theater” for a follow-on joint force. It would do so by dispatching brigade-size units specially equipped and trained for that job. “They have to be able to run airports and seaports, receive forces off planes and off ships, marry them up with their equipment and deliver them into a tactical assembly area so the commander can get ready to do the operation,” he explained.

Both military and industry logistics experts, for years, have tried to fathom ways to reduce the Army’s support tail. Under the future combat systems program, for example, efforts have focused on fuel-efficient vehicles, techniques to make drinking water out of exhaust fumes, and other ambitious technologies. But no silver bullet yet exists to shrink the logistics tail.

“Those technological breakthroughs are not on the horizon for anybody,” Christianson said. “We can’t just hope we’ll get a 50 percent reduction in fuel and ammo requirements, because that’s not going to happen in the future.”

At best, he added, “you can work on the margins to drop down consumption,” but the only way to achieve substantial results is to empower logisticians with better information about the supply and demand on the battlefield.

“If you can see what the need is and you have a throughput that is rapid and precise, you don’t have to carry as much stuff,” said Christianson. “The only way we can gain leverage on logistics is to have absolutely 100 percent real-time visibility requirements everywhere and have a distribution system that is so good, that once you see the requirements, you can deliver precisely.”

Even if the Army managed to achieve this ideal distribution system, it would still need to convince the soldiers that it works as advertised. As a career logistician with 33 years of service, Christianson is aware that most soldiers have little confidence in the Army’s logistics system. “The reason is that they don’t know if anyone is coming,” he said. “They don’t know that the requisition they sent got there. They have no connectivity. … We’ve got to have 100 percent connectivity all the way back to the strategic base.”

The Army has moved one step in that direction with the deployment of satellite communications terminals throughout the U.S. Central Command area of operations. The service spent millions of dollars on “very small aperture satellite terminals,” which are helping ease the stress on Army logisticians in the field by keeping them connected up the chain of command. These expensive systems in the past were considered unaffordable luxuries for support units.

Army planners, meanwhile, remain skeptical about the prospects of lightening the logistics burdens in combat units. A cautionary tale is the deployment of the Army’s new Stryker brigade, composed of about 300 eight-wheel light armored vehicles. Although the Stryker is considered a success story from a war-fighting perspective, many observers were surprised by the large logistics footprint that it required to sustain operations in Iraq. The Army put “enormous resources” into the logistics support of Stryker to make sure it was a success, noted a logistician during a private meeting with military and industry officials. The Stryker brigade has a dedicated logistics operations center in Europe and deploys with a large contingent of contractors from General Dynamics Land Systems.

“What happens when these resources go away?” the logistician asked. He appeared skeptical that the Army would be able to afford that kind of support across the service for any extended period.

These issues are fueling debate within the future combat systems program as to whether FCS can conceivably break any new ground in logistics. Of most concern is the inability of the support units to keep up with the speedy pace of combat operations, as was the case in the Iraqi conflict. “The tempo is dramatically different than at any time in history,” said an industry expert. The current logistics structure is based on “tactical pauses every day,” which may not be realistic.

Even if FCS vehicles are equipped with hybrid-electric engines, that only will reduce fuel consumption by a small amount, he said. The exhaust-to-water technology is too cumbersome and consumes too much fuel. Food packaging is another sticking point. The desire to simplify logistics in some cases runs counter to an Army culture that wants to create, despite the circumstances, a comfortable environment for the soldier. Even something as mundane as providing hot meals can add tremendous pressure to the logistics operations, the expert noted. “We haven’t yet figured out how to deal with that.”

Back To Top