analyzing the effects of airfield resources on airlift capacity
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
1/92
DOCUMENTED BRIEFING
RAND AnalyzingtheEffectsofAirfield ResourcesonAirliftCapacityJamesP .Stucker,LauraMelodyWilliams
National Defense Research Institute
OTICQUAUTT INSPECTED3
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
2/92
TheresearchdescribedinthisreportwassponsoredbytheOfficeoftheSecretaryofDefenseOSD).heresearchwasconductedinRAND'sNationalDefenseResearchInstitute,afederallyfundedresearchanddevelopmentcentersupported bytheOSD,theJointStaff,heunifiedcommands,andhedefenseagenciesunderContractDASW01-95-C-0059.
ISBN:-8330-2637-2
TheRANDdocumentedbriefingseriessamechanismorimely,easy-to-readreportingofresearchhathasbeenbriefedoheclientandpossiblyootheraudiences.lthoughdocumentedbriefingshavebeenformallyreviewed,heyarenotexpectedtobecomprehensiveordefinitive.nmany cases,theyrepresentinterimwork.
RANDsanonprofitnstitutionthathelpsmprovepolicyanddecisionmakingthroughresearchandanalysis.ANDisaregisteredtrademark.AND'spubli-cationsdonotnecessarilyreflecttheopinionsorpoliciesofitsresearchsponsors.
Copyright1999RANDAllrightsreserved.opartofthisbookmaybereproducednanyormbyanyelectronicormechanicalmeans(includingphotocopying,recording,orinformationstorageandretrieval)withoutpermissioninwritingfromRAND.
Published1 9 9 9 byRAND1700MainStreet,P.O.Box 2138,SantaMonica,CA 90407-2138
1333HSt.,N.W.,Washington,D.C.20005-4707RANDURL:http://www.rand.org/
ToorderRANDdocumentsortoobtainadditionalinformation,contactDistributionServices:elephone:310)451-7002;Fax:310)451-6915;Internet:[email protected]
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
3/92
DOCUMENTED BRIEFING
R A N D AnalyzingtheEffectsofAirfield ResourcesonAirliftCapacityJamesP .Stucker ,LauraMelodyWill iams Prepared forth e Office of th eSecretaryofState
D&-Z3O-0SJ)Nat iona l De f enseResea rch Insti tute
PrecedingPagefiank
Approved forpublicrelease;distributionunlimited
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
4/92
PREFACE
Thisresearchinvestigatedhowdifferinglevelsanddistributionsof airfieldresourcescanaffectthequantityofairliftdeliveries.T heresearchwasconductedfortheForceProjectionDirectorateintheOfficeoftheSecretaryofDefensewithintheForcesandResources PolicyCenterofRAND'sNationalDefenseResearchInstitute,afederallyfundedresearchanddevelopmentcentersponsoredbytheOfficeoftheSecretaryofDefense,theJointStaff,theunifiedcommands,andthedefenseagencies.TheRANDanalystspresentedthisbriefingtotheclientandto representativesfromtheJointStaff,theU.S.TransportationCommand,theAirMobilityCommand,theAirForceStudiesandAnalysisAgency,andotherorganizationsatScottAirForceBase,IllinoisonJuly9 ,1997 .Thisreportshouldbeof interesttodeploymentplannersandtoairmobilityresourceprogrammersandmanagers.
in
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
5/92
SUMMARY
Airliftcapacitythenumberof passengersandthenumberoftonsof cargothatcanbedeliveredtoaspecificlocationinaspecificperiodof timedependsonthecharacteristicsof(a)thecargoestobedelivered,(b)theairfieldsandtherouteslinkingthecargooriginationswiththecargodestinations,(c)thegroundresourcesattheairfieldssupportingtheairassets,and(d )theairassetsi.e.,theaircraftandtheaircrewsflyingthoseroutes.T he majormobilitystudiesperformedbyandfortheOfficeoftheSecretaryofDefense(OSD)inthe1980sfocusedonthecargoes,theroutes,andtheairassets.nthe1990sthefocuswasexpandedto includeatleastlimitedconsiderationoftheenroute,off-load,andrecoveryairfields. T heair-mobilitymodelofchoicehasbecomeMASS(MobilityAnalysisSupportSystem),alarge-scalesimulationcreatedandoperatedbytheAirForce'sAirMobilityCommand(AMC).Groundresourcesarenotmodeledbutareinputasconstraintstotheairliftmodel.MorerecentlyaseriesofdevelopmentshasledtothecreationofN R M O(theNavalPostgraduateSchool/RANDMobilityOptimization),alarge-scalelinear-programmingmodelofmilitaryairlift,andACEAirfieldCapacityEstimator),arelativelyhigh-resolutionmodelofairfieldresourcesandoperations. ThisstudydemonstratesthecombineduseoftheACEandNR M Omodelsto improveandfacilitatetheanalysisof theeffectsofairfieldresourceson airliftperformance.Whenourstudywasinitiated,AM Canalystswerebriefingthefindingsof theirstudyoftheenrouteairfieldsneededtosuccessfullyexecute theMRC-Eastdeployment. OursponsoraskedthatweusetheAM CscenariotodemonstratehowourmodelsandmethodscouldcomplementAMC'smodelsandanalysesandhowourestimatesmightexpandorvalidatetheirs.Ouranalysesaccomplishedbothobjectives. W evalidatedAMC'sfindingsthatforthe1996scenariothecurrentEuropeanenrouteinfrastructurewouldsignificantlyconstraindeliveriesofmilitarycargoesduringamajordeploymenttoSouthwestAsia. BothweandAM Cestimatedthatcurrentenrouteresourceshortageswouldreduce
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
6/92
cargodeliveriesbyroughly20percentfromwhattheycouldbeifthoseshortagesdidnotexist.Moreover,weexpandedAMC'sfindings(a)bydemonstratingthesensitivityofdeliveriestoassumptionsconcerningaircraftgroundtimesattheon-load,enroute,andoff-loadairfieldsand(b)bydemonstratinghowabetterdistributionofexistingenrouteresourcescouldsignificantlyincreasetheamountofcargodeliveredduringthefirst30daysof theconflict.In apreviousstudyforOSDandtheAirStaff,wedemonstratedthatmanyofthestandardgroundtimesusedinairliftstudieswerenotlongenoughtoallownecessaryinspectionandservicingofairliftaircraft.1In thepresentstudy,wehaveestimatedspecificgroundtimesforon-load,enroute,andoff-loadstopoversbyeachtypeof airliftaircraftandthencomparedestimatesofairliftdeliveriesbasedonthosetimesas inputswithestimatesofdeliveriesbasedonthemostrecentAirForce-standardgroundtimes.W efoundthatuseof thestandardtimesoverestimateddeliveriesby12to13percent.Airliftsimulationmodelsuseprespecified"rules"oallocatecargoestoaircraftandaircrafttoroutes. Similarly,thegroundresourcesavailableateachairfieldmustbespecifiedbeforeeachrun. T he modelsthenestimatetheflowsanddeliveriesresultingfromtheuseof thoseresourcesandtheapplicationofthoserules. Airliftoptimizationmodelsontheotherhand,cansearchforthebestallocationsofcargoestoaircraftandaircrafttoroutes.he ycanalso,as wehavedemonstrated,searchforthebestallocationof groundresourcesto enrouteairfields. T heresultinganalysescanbequiteusefulto decisionmakerslookingforwaystoexpandairliftcapacitywhenresourcesarelimited.Forsuchascenario,weestimatethatnegotiatingwithourEuropeanalliestoredistributetherampspaceandfuelcurrentlyavailabletoU.S.airliftoperations,withoutincreasingthetotalofeither,couldincreasedeliveriesoverthefirst30daysofthe1996scenarioby12to13percent.Forotherscenariosandotherbaselines,theestimateswilldiffer,buttherelativestrengthsof theanalysesandfindingsshouldremainthesame.ThisstudydemonstratesthatACEandN R M OcancomplementandexpandthestrategicmobilityanalysesneededbyOSDandothers.Together,theseanalytictoolsdetectcapabilitiesandprovideinsightsX J.P .Stucker,R.Berg,etal.,Understanding AirfieldCapacityforAirliftOperations,SantaMonica,Calif.: RAND,MR-700-AF/OSD,1998.
VI
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
7/92
thatare notavailablefromothermodels.heauthorsrecommendthatACEandNR M Obeadoptedforusebytheair-mobilitycommunity.
Vll
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
8/92
CONTENT S
Preface iiSummaryAcknowledgments iGlossary iiiINTRODUCTIONRECENTAIRLIFTSTUDIESRevisedIntertheaterMobilityStudyMobilityRequirementsStudy
MobilityRequirementsStudyBottom-UpReviewUpdate 0En Route Structures 2MajorRegionalConflictinSouthwestAsia(MRC-East)1996Scenario 3T HERANDSTUDY 5ApproachandProcedures 6Findings 8T he1996Baseline 9 Effectsof LongerGroundTimes 3EffectsofOptimizing 2AllocatingCargoestoAircraft 5AllocatingAircrafttoRoutes 9 AllocatingRampandFueltoAirfields1CONCLUDINGREMARKS 7References 1
IX
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
9/92
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Ourprojectmonitor,Lt.Col.NormanA.WeinbergoftheForceProjectionDirectorateoftheOSDProgramAnalysisandEvaluationunit,facilitatedourresearchanddataacquisitionactivitiesthroughoutthestudyandorganizedthemeetingsatwhichwepresentedthisbriefing.DaveMerrill,senioranalystattheAirMobilityCommand(AMC),coordinatedandfacilitatedthetransferofdatafromAM CtoRAND andwasinstrumentalin ourunderstandingofAMC'sanalysismethodsandtechniques.RichardRosenthalof theNavalPostgraduateSchool,DavidMortonof theUniversityofTexasatAustin,andStevenBakeroftheU.S.AirForceAcademyprovidedproductiveconsultingandntellectualsupport.AtRAND,SusanHosekguidedthestudy. Sh eandCraigMoore oversawanearlier,lead-instudy,andbothprovidedcontinuingcounselandsupport. PaulDavisandRichardHillestadcritiquedanearlierversionof thisbriefingandprovidedcommentsandsuggestionsonthisreport.CarolZarembaprocessedthefinaldraft. BettyArnoskillfullyeditedandguidedthedocumentthroughfinalproduction.
XI
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
10/92
GLOSSARYACEAF/XOFMAFMAFSAAALDAMCAPODAPOEBURUCdayCINCCOEACONUSCRAFDoDJ S JS/J8MACMASSMIDASMOGMOMMRCMRC-EastMRC-WestMRSnbNPSNRMOOSDPA&EPODRDDRIMSTPFDL
AirfieldCapacityEstimatorMobilityDivisionoftheDirectorateofForces,Headquarters,U.S.AirForceAirliftFlowModelAirForceStudiesandAnalysisAgencyAvailable-to-loaddateAirMobilityCommandAerialPortofDebarkationAerialPortofEmbarkationBottom-UpReviewUpdateTheunnameddayonwhichadeploymentoperationbeginsoristobeginCommanderinChiefCostandOperationalEffectivenessAnalysisContinental(contiguous)UnitedStatesCivilReserveAirFleetDepartmentofDefenseJointStaffForceStructure,ResourcesandAssessmentDirectorate
oftheJointStaff(Old)MilitaryAirliftCommand,nowAMCMobilityAnalysisSupportSystemModelforIntertheaterDeploymentbyAirandSeaMaximum(aircraft)onGroundMobilityOptimizationModelMajorRegionalConflictMajorRegionalConflictinSouthwestAsiaMajorRegionalConflictinSoutheastAsiaMobilityRequirementsStudyNarrowbody(aircraft)NavalPostgraduateSchoolNPS/RANDMobilityOptimizationOfficeoftheSecretaryofDefenseProgramAnalysisandEvaluationPortofdebarkationRequireddeliverydateRevisedIntertheaterMobilityStudyTime-PhasedForceDeploymentListing
xin
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
11/92
UTCnitTypeCodeUTEtilization(rate)wbidebody(aircraft)
xiv
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
12/92
ProjectOverview NDRIi
Challenge: Allocatescarceresourceswisely inorderto improveairliftthroughputProjectpurpose:Adaptandrefinemodelsandmethodsto providebetterinformation todecisionmakers Demonstrate valueofnew analytic perspectives Objectiveofthisbriefing:Demonstra te useofA C Ean dNRM O in estimating thecapaci t ies o fairliftresources
J^^M^^^^^^^^^^^wWWW^^^^^^^^^^M*wwa8^8aiaw^a^^^^^^^^^ iS RAND S U M M M s
INTRODUCTIONThisresearchprojectwasdesignedtoexpandOSD's(OfficeoftheSecretaryofDefense's)capabilityforconducting,understanding,andusingmobilityanalyses.Morespecifically,theresearchobjectivesweretofindwaystousetheACEandN R M Omodelstogethertolinkairfieldresourceswithairfieldcapacity. ACEisourAirfieldCapacityEstimator,amodeldevelopedoverthepastseveralyearsatRANDforOSDandtheU.S.AirForce. N R M OistheNavalPostgraduateSchool/RANDMobilityOptimization,anairliftmodeldevelopedoverthepastyearatRANDandtheNavalPostgraduateSchool.T heobjectiveofthisbriefingistodemonstratehowthetwomodelscanbeusedtogethertoestimatethecapacityof aspecificairliftsystem the1996airliftfleet,routes,andresourcesinaspecificscenario MRC-East(majorregionalconflictinSouthwestAsia).
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
13/92
Conceptua lOverview (1 )[ Inputs
Missionvariables C argoesRoutes & policies Leg & gro undt imes I" = J Airli ftresourcesAircraf tAircrews Airfield capabil it iesI" = J
-Vf \AirliftMod e l
^ J
-> AirliftCapacity
RAND
First,wewillgiveaquickoverviewofourprocedures.We'regoingto beusinganairliftmodeltoestimateairliftcapacitythenumberof passengersandthenumberof tonsofcargothatcanbedeliveredtoaspecificlocationinaspecificperiodoftime.Thatcapacitydependsbothonthecharacteristicsofthemissionswewanttheairlifttoperformandontheresourceswehaveavailableto performandservicethosemissions.
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
14/92
ConceptualOverview (2 )NDRli
DataorModel (s) Ground Times Dataor Model (s)
I nputs Missionvariables Cargoes Routes &policiesLeg &ground timesetc..AirliftresourcesAircraftAircrews Airfieldcapabilities*=r \AirliftMode l - AirliftCapaci ty > . )
RAND
Airliftcapacityalsodependsonthetimestheminutesandhoursthatweexpecttheairliftaircraftwillneedtobeonthegroundattheon-loadpoints,attheenroutestops,attheoff-loadpoints,andperhapsatrecoveryairfields;anditdependsonthenumberandthequalityoftheresourcesavailableateachofthoseairfields.W efocusonthesetimesandresourcecapacitiesinthisbriefing.In thepast,estimatesof aircraftgroundtimeandairfieldcapacityusedasinputsinairliftstudieswereproducedatleastsomewhatindependently,perhapsevenbydifferentorganizations. W ewillsummarizeseveralof themoreimportantandrecentairliftstudies. But first,we'llintroduceourprocedures.
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
15/92
Conceptua lOverview (3 )I nputs Inputs
Mission variables Aircraf ttypeAircraf tquant ityServices needed etc...Ground resources Parking spaceServicing crews Fueletc...
Aircraf tGrou nd TimesAirfieldMod e l
Missionvariables C argoesRoutes &pol iciesLe g&gro undt imes
irfieldCapacit ies Airli ftresourcesAircraf tAircrews Airfield capabil it iesetc...
->
-*
f > AirliftMod e l)-> AirliftCapacity
RAND
Ourproceduresnvolveusinganairfieldmodeltoproducemore-detailedandmore-consistentestimatesofaircraftgroundtimesandairfieldcapacities.
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
16/92
Conceptua lOverview (4)I nputs
Missionvariables Aircraf ttype Aircraf tquantityServices neededGround resources Parking spaceServicingcrews Fueletc...
AirfieldModel
i! II AircraftGrouna Times iiAirfield Capacit ies
I nputs MissionvariablesCa rgo esRoutes&pol iciesLe g &ground t imesI" = Airlift resources Aircraf tAircrewsAirfieldcapabil i t iesetc...
AirliftCapacity
ACE NRMO
RAND
Inparticular,ourprocedureswillinvolveusingACE andusingN R M O .
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
17/92
ThisBriefing Objectives:
Demonstrateuseof AC EandNRMOinestimating th ecapacities ofairliftresourcesPlan:
I. In t roduct ion =>I- Recent airliftstudies -RIMS,MRS,MRS-BURU -AMC'sStudyof EuropeanAirfields
i n . TheR A N D study -Approach-Findings
IV . C o n c l u d i n gremarks RAND ^ n
RECENTAIRLIFTSTUDIESW ewillverybrieflysummarizethemajormobilitystudiesof thepastdecade: theRevisedIntertheaterMobilityStudy(RIMS)thatwasconductedin thelate1980sanddocumentedinaseriesofreportsissuedin1989;theMobilityRequirementsStudy(MRS)thatwasdoneafe wyearslaterandpublishedin1992;andtheMRS-Bottom-UpReview Update(MRSBURU)thatwasdoneafe wyearsafterthatandpublishedin1996. Althoughthesereportsareclassifiedbecauseofsomeofthedetailedinformationtheycontain,ourpurposeswillbeservedbyreferringtothemoregeneralproceduresandfindingsthatarenotclassified.Then,wewillsummarizetheAM Cstudy,conductedduring1996,oftheMRC-East(MRC-E)enrouteairfields. ThiswascalledtheEuropeanAirMobilityInfrastructureAnalysis. Anditisthestudy,ormorecorrectlythescenario,onwhichOSDaskedustodemonstrateourmodelsandourtechniques.Afterthat,wewilldescribetheRANDstudy.
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
18/92
S u mma r yofStudies(1 )NDRIl
Title RIMSYear: 1989Model: MIDASOwner: OSD/JSTypesofaircraft:#groundt imes: 5 2 Typesofairfields: Resources: O ff R a m p Findingconcerning enrouteairfields: n/a
RAND
RevisedIntertheaterMobilityStudyRIMSwasconductedinthecold-warera. ItsscenarioinvolvedtheUSSRinvadingIran,andthenaconsolidatedattackbytheWarsaw-PactnationsagainstWesternEurope.AirliftcapacityinthisstudywasestimatedusingMIDAS,the(thenandnow)majormobilitymodelusedbyOSDandtheJointStaff(JS).MIDASstandsforModelforIntertheaterDeploymentbyAirandSea.Ithasbeenupdatedseveraltimes;atthattimeitmodeled,ingreatdetail,sealiftships,theircargoes,andtheirroutingsandprogressalongthoseroutingsbuthadonlyanequationortwodealingwithairlift. Thoseequationsrelatedseveralexogenousvariablesthenumberandtypesofaircraft,theircycletimes,andtheirallowable-useratestoairliftcapacity.1RIMSwascoordinatedbytheJointStaffandwassupportedbyallthemilitaryservices,includingtheAirForce,which(throughAM C(thenMAC,MilitaryAirliftCommand))providedtheestimatesofaircraftgroundtimes.hegroundtimesattheoff-loadingsiteswere2hours1J.Schnk,M .Mattock,G .Sumner,I.Greenberg,J.Rothenberg,andJ.P .Stucker,AReviewof StrategicMobilityModelsandAnalysis,SantaMonica,Calif.: RAND,R-3926-JS,1991.
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
19/92
and20minutesfo rrelativelynarrow-body(nb)aircraftliketheC-141 and3hoursand20minutesforwide-body(wb)aircraftliketheC-5.On-loading,enroute,andrecoveryairfieldswereassumedtohavecapacitysufficientnottoconstraintheairliftflow.T heonlyairfieldresourceinvestigatedwasramp,orparkingspace:thespace(andtime)availableforparkingandservicingaircraftattheairfield.2Airfieldcapacitywasexpressedassortiesperdaybyaircrafttype. T heanalysisrevealedsomebottlenecksattheoff-loadingsitesinvestigated.2In air-mobilitystudies,rampspaceisoftenreferredtoasM O G ,themaximumnumberofaircraftthatcan beparked(and/orserviced)on thegroundaton etime.
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
20/92
S um m aryofStudies(2 )Title RIMS MRS
Year: 1989 1992 Model: MIDAS MO M Owner: OSD/JS JS/J8Typesofaircraft:# ground t imes: 5 2 88Typesofairfields:Resources: O ff R a mp En/OffR a m p Finding concerning enrouteairfields: n /a O K
RAND
MobilityRequirementsStudyTheMobilityRequirementsStudy,conductedafe wyearslater,movedawayfromtheEuropeanscenarioandlookedatthethennewMRC-EastandMRC-West(majorregionalconflictinSoutheastAsia)scenarios.AirliftcapacityinthisstudywasestimatedusinganoptimizationmodelnewlydevelopedbyJS/J8ForceStructure,Resources,andAssessmentDirectorateof theJointStaff),calledM O M ,ortheMobilityOptimizationModel . ProfessorRichardRosenthaloftheNavalPostgraduateSchoolwaspartofthatdevelopmentteam,andmorerecentlyhewasinstrumentalintheNR M Odevelopment,soM OM is likethegrandfather(or,moreappropriately,thegrandmother)of NR M O .AircraftgroundtimesandairfieldcapacitiesintermsofsortiesperdaywereprovidedbytheAirForce. Bothenrouteandoff-load airfieldswerestudied;on-loadandrecoveryairfieldswerenot.Differentgroundtimeswerespecifiedfo reighttypesofaircraft;airfieldcapacitystilldependedonlyonrampspace.T hestudyidentifiedsomeAP O D(AerialPortofDebarkation)shortfallsbutconcludedthattheenrouteairfieldscouldhandlethedeploymenttrafficadequately.
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
21/92
S um m ary ofStudies(3 )Title RIMS MRS MRSB um
Year: 1989 1992 1994 Model: MIDAS MOM MASSOwner: OSD/JS JS/J8 AF/AMC Typesofaircraft:#groundt imes: 52 88 832 Typesofairfields: Resources: O ff R a mp En/OffR a m p En/Off/RecR a m p ,FuelFinding concerning enroute airf ields: n/a O K O K
RAND
MobilityRequirementsStudyBottom-UpReviewUpdateM RSBURUwasrun bytheJointStaff,withparticipationbyOSD,thecombatantcommands,andthemilitaryservices.T heAirForcehadmorevisibilityhere. T heairliftestimateswereprovidedbyAMC'scomputerizedanalysissystem,MASSMobility AnalysisSupportSystem),anditsprimarysimulationmodel,AFM (AirliftFlowModel).Groundtimesweredifferentiatedbyaircrafttypeandbystopovertype.hatis ,on-loadstopswerethelongest;enroutestopswereonlyforrefueling,aquickinspection,andminorservicing;andoff-load stopsusuallydidnotinvolvethefueling,servicing,orcrewchangesthatwerehandledattherecoveryairfields.Thisstudyinvestigatedairfieldcapacityforenroute,off-load,andrecoveryfields.3tconsideredfuelaswellasramp. AirForceplannersspecifiedthedailyquantityorquotaof fuelthatwasassumedtobeavailable;theneachaircraftusedsomeofthatfueluntilitwasallgone.3Thisstudy,asdidthosebeforeit,assumedthattheon-loadairfields,mostlywithinthecontinentalUnitedStates,wouldal lhavemorethansufficientcapacitytosupporttheairlift.
10
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
22/92
Despitetheincreasedfocusonairfields,however,thestudyfoundtheairfieldresources,includingthoseattheenrouteairfields,tobe sufficient.
11
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
23/92
AMC'sStudyofMRC-EEnRouteAirfields (1996)NDRIl
MRC-EAirliftestimatedusingMASSAircraftgroundtimes
141,C5,C-17,KC-10,747P ,747C,NBCOn-load,enroute,off-load
Airfieldcapacityfor enrouteairfieldsAirfieldcapacity expressedas sortiesperdayby aircraft type-BasedonMOG(nb,wb)and fuelocation,forcelimitationsSomeenrouteshortfalls RANDiiiiii
E nRouteStructuresMostrecently,AMCanalystshavelookedatboththeEuropeanenroutestructureandhePacificenroutestructure.Asourstudywasbeingstructured,theywerebriefingtheirfindingsfortheEuropeanscenariohroughouttheAirForceandOSD.AMCanalystsusedMASS,theirairliftsystemsimulation. Theyagainusedaircraftgroundtimesbasedonaircrafttypeandstopovertype,andtheylookedatbothrampandfuelconstraintsateachoftheenrouteairfields.Theyalsoconsidered,butinqualitativeways,studyfactorsastheweatheratthedifferentairfieldsandthepotentialpoliticalconstraintsthatmightaffectthedifferentnationsandregions.TheyranMASStoestablishrequirementsforinfrastructureneededatenrouteairfields. TheyusedstandardAMCoperatingrulesforallocatingaircraftandcargoestoroutesandairfields. Theyderivedaverageenrouteneedsoverdays0-29. Theyassessedairfieldcapabilityatpackagesofenrouteairfields. Andtheyestimatedairliftthroughputassociatedwitheachofthosepackages.Asaresultofthatanalysis,theyestimatedaneedforadditionalairfieldresources.
1 2
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
24/92
AM C' sFindings 1,000 tons of f re igh tp er da y
2001 1996 ,,nj/Sixairfields:Fairford MildenhallMoron RotaR a mst e i n
RheinMain RAND IBMajorRegionalConflictinSouthwestAsia(MRC-East)1996ScenarioForMRC-East ,ourscenarioof interest,AM Canalystsmodeledthemovementofcargoesunderthreescenarios:
he1996aircraftfleetandthe1996airfieldresources;he2001fleetandresources;andhe2006fleetandresources.ConsideringbothmilitaryandCRAF(CivilReserveAirFleet)capabilities,theyestimatedthatcurrentairfieldresourceswould
significantlyconstrainthedeliveryofMRC-Ecargoes: T he1996airliftfleetwouldbe capableofdeliveringanaverageof 4.3thousandtonsofcargoperdayfo rthefirst30daysof theconflict, butlimitationsattheenrouteairfieldswouldconstrainthosedeliveriestoabout3.5 thousandtonsperday.AM Canalystsestimatedthatthesituationwouldbeimprovedsubstantiallyby2001:heacquisitionof C-17swouldmorethanoffsettheretirementofC-141s,andtheimprovementsinrampandfuelingattheenrouteairfieldscouldincreasethroughputtoabout4.2thousandtonsperday. Furtheradditionsandimprovementstotheenrouteinfrastructureby2006wouldincreasethroughputtonearly5thousand
13
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
25/92
tonsperday,atwhichpointthebindingconstraintwouldbetheaircraft,nottheenrouteairfields.
14
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
26/92
ThisBriefingObjectives:Demonstrateuseof ACE andNRMOinestimatingthecapacities of airliftresourcesPlan :
I . Introduction II. Recentairliftstudies
!=!> III. TheRAND study-Approach-FindingsIV . Concluding remarks
RAND
THERANDSTUDY Asmentionedbefore,thisstudywasbeinginitiatedwhenAMC'sbriefingontheEuropeanenrouteinfrastructurewasbeingworkedthroughtheDepartmentofDefense(DoD). Consequently,oursponsorsuggestedthatweusethatsamescenarioandmuchof thesamedatato demonstratehowournewlydevelopedmodelsandmethodscouldcomplementAMC'smodelsandanalyses,aswellashowourestimatesmightexpandorvalidateAMC's.
15
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
27/92
O urProcedures MRC-Escenario
M o v e m e n trequirements Orig ins&dest inat ions
AMC'sparameters n route airfieldconstra ints -B u tnoonload oroff load constra ints Aircraftf leets&availabilit ies -Military&C R A F -C R A Fenroutes i ndependen t
RAND /NPSmodelsaysC +0th roughC + 2 9 ACE :ircraftground t imesR M O :ptimized al locat ions RANDlist
ApproachandProceduresW eusedtheairlift,aircraft,andairfieldparametersprovidedbyAMC,thesameparametersusedin itsMRC-Estudy.Butweusednewmodels:nsteadofusingtheAirForce'sstandardestimatesforthegroundtimesofairliftaircraftatthevarioustypesofairfields,weusedourairfieldoperationsmodel,ACE,togeneratenewerestimates. Thenweusedthoseestimatesinouroptimizationmodel,NR M O .T henextseveralchartsbrieflydescribeACEandN R M O .
16
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
28/92
Genea logyofth eModels NDRI I
( MOM )1M0^< JS/J8 "Enhancing the EffectivenessofMobility Forces" I Airf ieldCapab i l i t y i i Tanker St u d y IIC-17Tact icalUtil ity |
( Ac e ( C O N O P )
CHRUPUT)"*"RANDTHROUGHPUrII(PABNDRI) '
\ M o d e lDevelopment NPS/RAND (PAF)jt'
this studyRAND(NDRI)
RAND Note:A F isProjectAI RF OR C E ,RAND' sfederal ly fundedd e ve l o pm e ntcenter forth eU. S .AirForce.
Thisslideshowsthebackgroundof themodelswe'vedevelopedoverthepastseveralyears.OntheNR M Osideof thegraph:
M O M ,theMobilityOptimizationModel,developedbyJS/J8andusedintheMobilityRequirementsStudy,representedtimeadequatelybutallowedlittlegeographicaldetail.4H R UP UT ,developedbytheAirForceStudiesandAnalysisAgency(AFSAA),was,on theotherhand,asteady-statemodelallowingextensiverepresentationof thegeographicalnetwork.5
HR O U G HP U TIIwasdevelopedbytheNavalPostgraduateSchool(NPS)undercontractwithAFSAA. Itcombinedthebestof 4V .F.Wing,R.E.Rice,R.W.Sherwood,andR.E.Rosenthal,Determininghe OptimalMobilityMix,Washington,D.C.:JS/J8,ForceDesignDivision,October1, 1991.5K.A.Yost,TheTHRUPUTStrategicAirliftFlowOptimizationModel,AirForceStudiesandAnalysesAgency,June30,1994.
17
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
29/92
T H R UP UTandM O M ,allowingextensiveelaborationofbothtimeandgeographicaldetail.6
CONOPisaRANDmodelthatextendedandappliedthoseprinciples. Ithasbeenusedinpolicyanalysesaddressing(a)theoptimumdeploymentandemploymentoftankers,exploitingtheircargo-carryingaswellastheirrefuelingcapabilities,and(b)theutilityoftheC-17sintactical,strategic,andcombinedroles.7
NR M Oisatruemerger/offspringofthislineage.Althoughitwasspecifiedandprogrammedfromscratch,itcontainsmanyofthecontextual,analytic,andprogrammingtechniquesdevelopedinassociationwiththeearliermodelsdescribed.ACE,ontheotherhand,wascreatedinresponsetoaspecific need.n thespringof1994,OSDwascoordinatingtheAirliftRequirementsStudy,inwhichMASSwastobeusedtoanalyzealternativefleetsof passengerandcargoaircraft. Butthethen-recentCostandOperationalEffectivenessAnalysis(COEA)fo rtheC-17hadseriouslyquestionedcertainMASSinputs: (a)theutilizationratesforaircraftandcrewsand(b)capacityestimatesforairfields. In response,AM Cundertookto improvetheestimatesoftheutilizationrates,andOSDandtheAirStafffundedRANDtodevelopmethodsforestimatingairfieldcapacity.ThatinitialdevelopmentofACEwassponsoredbytheProjectionForcesDivision,OSDProgramAnalysisandEvaluation(PA&E),andtheMobilityForcesDivision,HeadquartersAirForce. SubsequentdevelopmentandthisapplicationhavebeenfundedbyProjectionForces.86D.P .Morton,R.E.Rosenthal,andT.W .Lim,"OptimizationModelingforAirliftMobility,"OperationsResearch ,ol. ,No.3,1 9 9 5 . (AlsoavailableasNPS-OR-95-007,Monterey,Calif.: NavalPostgraduateSchool.)7P.KillingsworthandL.Melody,ShouldC-17sBeUsedtoCarryIn-TheaterCargoDuringMajorDeployments? SantaMonica,Calif.: RAND,DB-171-AF-OSD,1997 ; andunpublishedRANDreasearchbyP.KillingsworthandL.Melodyon"Tankers: AirMobilityRolesforthe1990s."8J.P.StuckerandR.Berg,withA.Gerner,A.Giarla,W .Spencer,L.Arghavan,andR.Gates,UnderstandingAirfieldCapaci tyforAirliftOperat ions,SantaMonica,Calif.:RAND,MR-700-AF/OSD, 998.
1 8
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
30/92
Airfield Capacity Est imator8 , 000f eet
R a m p C
1,000 feet
3,500f eet
5b u sesG P U sR L1 2 H S V s20WBELSmain te nanc e crewsR9 fuel trucks20 40k- load ersoreach type of aircraftR11 f u e l trucksFu el inge q u i p m e n t&p e r s o n n e lsufficientto work5aircraft ta time,24 hou rspe r d ay .Load ing e q u ipme nt& personnel sufficient to work5 aircraft ta time,24 hou rsperd ay .Servic ing equipment & personnel sufficient to work 5aircraf tt a time,24 hou rsperd ay .
RAND Note:B EL =wid e bo d yelevatorloader ,GP U =gr o und -po we runi t ,an dH SV =hydrant-servicevehic le .
TorunACE,theuserfirstdescribestheairfield. Hecanspecifyupto sixseparateanddistinctparkingareas,orramps;eachwithaspecific setupfo rhydrantfueling,andallsharingtanker-trucksandcrewsfor truck-basedfueling. Eachrampislocatedaspecifieddistancefromthecargo-dispensingandstoragearea,thepassengerterminal,andthefuel-dispensingfacilities.ACEestimatesthenumberofaircraftassignedtoparticularmissionsandthusrequiringparticularservicesandservicingthattheairfieldcanserviceinatypicalday.
19
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
31/92
A C EGr aph ic a lU se rIn ter face
Excels /VBA
RANDACEisaMicrosoftExcelapplication.heACEpackageconsistsof7Excelworkbooks,containing52worksheetsand16codemodules(the codeisVisualBasicforApplications(VBA));themodelitselfconsistsof4workbookscontaining34worksheetsand13codemodules.9ACErepresentstheparkingandservicing,loadingandunloading,andfuelingoperationsindetail. Italsorepresentsair-trafficcontrol,groundcontrol,andair-crewservicing,butwithlittledetail.ACEcoversmanygroundoperations,tasks,andresources,butwehavenotattemptedtomodelal lof theresourcesandtheiruses.orthemostimportantareasparking,servicing,oading,andfuelingACE containsbothanaggregateresourcethepackages,orUnit-TypeCodes(UTCs),ofskillsandequipmentthattheAirForceregardsas necessarytoperformthosefunctionsandseveralindividualresourcesthatexpertshaveidentifiedasbeingespecially(ormostvisibly)associatedwithairfieldcapacity. Iftheuserhasinformationon thoseindividualresources,thatinformationcanbeinputandthemodelwillcalculatethelimitsof thoseresourcesandtesttose eifanyof themaremoreconstrainingthantheaggregateresource.Ontheotherhand,iftheuserhasnoinformationon someof theindividual9Inearly1 9 9 8 ,softwarefortheACEmodelbecameavailableontheRANDhomepageontheWorldWideWebathttp://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR700/ACE/.
20
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
32/92
resources,orevenoftheaggregateresource,hecansettheirquantitiesto9999andthemodelwillconsiderthemasunlimitedandneverconstraining.
21
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
33/92
AC EServicingProfile:uick Turn Standardopera tions:
1 81 IIhru-flight| General BO | Nitroj Oxygen 11Nitrogen [ Open jj Repair | Repair
Mission-related options: BE Fuel IIH [Load]
j Oo-iee|Unloadpax | Loadpa*\ Unloadcargo \ Loadcargo
\ TotalAircraft Ground Time 1
AGTl=BI+MaxMi
'G+DI+BO
RAND
ACErecognizesairfieldresources,operations,andtasks;usingthose,itconstructsservicingtimesforeachresourceandthenthetotaltimethateachaircraftmustspendonthegroundatthatparticularairfield. Thatis,dependingonthetasksandquantityrequirementsforaparticularmission,themodelcomputestheamountandtimerequiredofeachtypeofresource(e.g.,GPU-hours,parking-space-hours,etc.).ACEconsiders1 7groundoperations,morethan40typesofgroundresources,uptosixtasksineachoperationforeachresource;uptosixdistinctareasforparkingandservicingaircraft(eachareamayhaveadistincthydrant-fuelingsystem;allmaybeservicedbycommonfuelingtrucksandteams);anduptoninetypesofaircraft,withuptosixofthoseinterminglingoperationsinatypicalday.10Weshowheretheoperationsassociatedwitha"quickturn,"oneofourground-servicingprofiles. Thetimelinesindicatethesequencingoftheservicingoperations;theyalsoshowtheoperationsthatcanbe10ACEwasdevelopedovertwoyearsofstudyandexperimentation.Weinterviewedscoresofservicepersonnel,technicians,andplannersduringvisitstomorethanadozenairfieldsaroundtheworld,andwemademultiplevisitstotheheadquartersoftheAirMobilityCommandatScottAirForceBase,Illinois. WecollectedmuchofourC-17dataduringitssurgetestingunder"austere"conditionsat Barstow/DaggettAirFieldandFortIrwin,California,inJulyof1996.
2 2
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
34/92
conductedconcurrently(suchasinspections,repairs,off-loadings,andsomeservicingoperations),andthosethatmustbeconductedinisolation(suchasfueltransfer,oxygenservicing,andde-icing).Aquickturnisnormallyassociatedwithservicingatenrouteandoff-loadairfields. Morecomprehensiveservicing,normallyassociatedwithhome-fieldorCONUS(Continental(contiguous)UnitedStates)stopovers,iscalled"full-service." In additiontoquickturnsandfull-servicestops,themodelalsoenablestheusertocustomizetheground-servicingprofilesforanygroupofaircraft,allowingconcurrencyof fueltransferandservicing,"engine-runningoff-loads,"andmanyothersequences.Ofthe17operationswemodel,weuseaveragetimes(byaircrafttype)foreight,becausewebelievethattheirdurationandresourcedemandsvarylittleformissionsorairfields.he otherninearetreatedinon eof twoways.orfiveofthemfueling(transfer),passengerandcargoloading,andpassengerandcargounloadingwecalculatespecifictimesfo reachmissionateachairfieldbyaccumulatingtimesforparticulartaskse.g.,drivingafueltrucktotheaircraft,hookingup,loadingonepalletontoak-loader,ormovingonepalletfromthek-loaderontotheaircraft.hisallowsustoaccountforloadtypesandsizesandforthedistancesthatloadsandfuelsmustbetransported.Furthermore,itallowsustoidentifyandquantifyaircraftdelayswhenresourcesarelimited. Thatis,whenfuelingandloadingareinvolved,aircraftgroundtimedependsonthequantityofairfieldresourcesaswellasonthetypeof aircraft,thetypeofstopover,andtheparticulargroundoperationsspecifiedforthestopover.Timesfortheremainingfouroperationsnitrogenservicing,oxygenservicing,repair,andde-icingdoseemtovarywidely,evenforaircraftofaspecifiedtypeandassignedtoaspecifiedmission.
23
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
35/92
BreakRatesandServicing Times NDRII
a x=probabilityofneedingnilrogen service ,=dummyfo rneedingnitrogen service o,=probabilityofneedingoxygenservice h=dummyfo r needingoxygenservice cc 3= probabilityofneedingrepairs 03 =dummyfo rneedingrepairs tt4= probabilityofneeding de-icing . =dummyfor needingde-icing
AGT= Ma x,i,h,)
MinimumGroundTime+DI+BORAND
ACEhandlesthevariabilityofthesefouroperationsineitherof twoways,attheuser'soption.non eoption,theusercanspecifyexpected-valuecalculationstoestimateaverageresource-usetimes,aircraft-groundtimes,andairfieldcapacities. Thisprocessdoesnotyieldthetrue"expectedvalue"ofcapacitybecauseboththeservice-timeequationsandthecapacityequationsarenonlinear,butinallthecaseswehavetested,ityieldsacloseapproximationtothatvalue,anditis quick.Alternatively,theusercanspecifythatACEconductMonte-Carloexperiments,drawingvalues(foreachaircraftineachmission)forthoseoperationaltimesfromempiricallyderiveddistributionsofpasttimes.11herandomdrawsforeachsetofmissionscanbeiterated10,20,oreven1,000times,producingrepresentationsof theoutputdistributionsforusetimes,aircraftgroundtimes,andairfieldcapacity.Thisprocessinsuresthatsomeexceptionallylongandsomeexceptionallyshortrepairtimeswilloccur,atleastoccasionally. Givenvaliddata,thisprocessproduces"better"estimatesthantheexpected-valueapproximation,butittakessubstantiallylonger.nD.A.Goggins,StochasticModelingforAircraftMobility,Master'sThesis,Monterey,Calif.: NavalPostgraduateSchool,1995,AppendixB.
2 4
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
36/92
ACEMission-Specification Screen Expected-ValueComputations
Mission1MissionSpecifications
A: pecifyaircraftcharacteristics Mssionidentifier(userd) X001NumberofaircraftdesiredpBr dayAircrafttypeAircraftconfigurationProfileforgroundoperations
Pressbeforeproceeding: y SetupM1JB:pecifymissioncharacteristics Quantityof fuelrequiredfbs)
Fueltransfermustbeisolated
X005 XOOG 0 0 KC10 74 7 Carao ^ Cargo QuickTurn QuickTurn "
CetupM2Q ( Set upM3 ( SetupM4~) ( SetupMsQ (etupM6~)
Paxto beoff-loaded Paxto beon-loadedPaletstobeoff-loaded Paletstobeon-loadedTypeofnonpailetizedcargo
Percenttobeoff-loaded Percenttobeon-loaded
De-icingrequired(on%of flights)MnimumgroundtimerequiredMintimeetween lockout& lockn
50,000 125.000 300.000 150.000 300.000 300,000 Yes Yes Yes Yes V y.. 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 13 36 IS 26 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 (none) Inonol Ineno) (none) (nono) [nono) ( ) - 1 (n/a) W (n/e) T (n/ (n/a) (n/a) |In/) -I In/a) w ( > In/e) < r (n/a) (n/a) |(one, (none)
(nono)
" ,e., (one, (nono) ^ (none) ^ ,| M Lone,
- 1 - 1 1none)|,e.)
(nonn,- 1 , . , (nona
I(one, (one, (nono) 1
GotoParameterControl[EvaMjf EvalM2 j|f EvalM3 W EvalM4 \~EvalM5 Jf EvalM6 jp j
f Evall-2 j( Eval1 -3 ] I Eval1- 4 j :i].Tocustomizemissiontimes&freqs,
chooseyesherebeforepressingeva
T heACEmission-specificationscreenlookslikethis. Ausercansetupasmanyassixmissiontypesatatime,workingfromrighttoleft.AnACEmissiontype,usuallyjustcalledamission,issomenumberof aircraftofaparticulartypeandconfiguration,eachrequiringthesamegroundservicing.Foreachmission,workingfromtoptobottom,theusermustspecifythefollowing,usingthedrop-downmenus:
umberofaircraftrequiredtoperformthemission;ypeofaircraft(C-141,C-5,C-17,etc.);onfigurationofthoseaircraft(maximumcargo,maximumpassenger,mixed);heground-servicingprofile(quick-turn,ull-service).
Enteringthisinformationgetstheuserthroughtheupperportionof thescreen.henhemustpushthe"setitup"button,whichtellsthemodeltobringinthespecificparametersassociatedwiththataircrafttype,configuration,andservicingprofileandsetsupspecializedmenusforthedrop-downinthelowerportionofthescreen.
25
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
37/92
Continuingdownthecolumnassociatedwiththemission,theuserthenselects: thequantityof fueltobeon-loaded;whetherthattransfercanbeconcurrentwithotherservicing;howmanypassengerstooff-loadduringthisstopover;howmanypassengerstoon-load;howmanypalletstooff-load;howmanypalletstoon-load;whattypeofnonpalletizedcargotooff-loadandon-load;thepercentageofthisparticularaircrafttype'scapacityforthetypeof cargotooff-load;thepercentagetoon-load;thepercentageofthetimethatde-icingmayberequired(maybe zero);theminimumgroundtimefo rthisstopover(maybezero);andthe"opentime"betweenaircraftusingaparticularparkingspot.
Makingtheseselectionsfullyspecifiesthemission.Nextcomestheevaluationprocess.Nearthebottomof thescreenareanumberof"eval"buttons. Oneforeachmissiontellsthemodelto evaluatethatparticularmission;andbelowthat,onefo reachof theright-mostfivemissionstellsthemodeltoevaluateallof themissionsfromthefirstthroughtheparticularmissionassociatedwiththebutton.Missionsareevaluated,astheywereprioritized,fromlefttoright.Aircraftassociatedwiththefirstmissionhaveaccesstoalltheresourcesavailableattheairfield. Aircraftassociatedwiththesecondmissionhaveaccesstoal ltheresourcesnotusedbythefirstmission.notherwords,whennon-zeronumbersofaircraftareassociatedwitheachmission,theestimatedcapacitiesare"and"capacities. Thatis,theresourcesavailableattheairfieldcanservicethenumberofaircraftassociatedwiththefirstmissionandthenumberof (thetypeof)aircraftassociatedwiththesecondmission,andsoon ,untiltheairfieldresourcesaredepleted.
26
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
38/92
Iftheuserspecifiesthatzeroaircraftshouldbeassociatedwitha(orwitheach)missiontype,thenthemodelestimatesthetotalnumberof aircraftonthat(those)mission(s)thatcouldbeservicedwiththeavailableresources. Iftheuserspecifieszeroaircraftforeverymission,thenthemodelestimates"or"capacities:heresourcesatthisairfieldcouldsupportX Iaircraftassignedtomission1,orX2aircraftassignedtomission2,etc.* Whenauserspecifiessomemissionswithzeroaircraftandotherswithsomeaircraft,ACE estimatescombinationsof"ands"and"ors."*Notethatausercan runthemodelfo rmission1,thenconsidertheresultingoutputandse tupthesecondmissionandrunit,etc.,solongasheunderstandsthateachmissionhasaccessonlytotheresourcesavailableattheconclusionofthelastrun(exceptfo rthefirstmission,whichalwayshasaccesstoalloftheairfield'sresources).Thatis,iftheuserevaluatesfourmissionsandthenattemptstoevaluatesomeversionofmission2again,themodelwillprovideestimatesfo rthatmission2,butthoseestimateswillbe basedonlyon theresourcesremainingaftertheevaluationsofthepreviousfourmissions. Only(re)evaluatingmission1resetstheairfieldresourcesto theiroriginallevels.
27
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
39/92
AC E"Output"ScreenMissionan dCapacityEst imates
Expected-Value C omp iMissionspecifications
MssionD Aircraft onMssionAircraft typeAircraft configuration ServicingprofileFuelingmustbeFuelneededlbs) Passengersoff,onPaletsoff,onNonpaletized cargoNPCpercentoff,on
MissionoutputsCapacityusedaircraft perday)Averagemissiontimeshours,minutBs
Loading&unloading FueltransferAircraftgroundtime
Margina (FPA)timeshours,minutes)Loading&unloading FueltransferAircraftgroundtime
Capacitiesremaining:Parkingtota)Aircraft servicing
j tations Medium SizedAirfield Executiontimeminutes)= 3.22Mission Mission2 Mission3 Mission4 Mission5 Mission6
X001 0
X0020
X0030
X0040
X0050
X00G0
C130Cargo C141 Cargo
C5Cargo C17Cargo
KC10Cargo747Cargo
Quick TurnSequentia
QuickTurnSequentia
QuickTurnSequentia
QuickTurnSequentia
Quick TurnSequentia
QuickTurnSequentia
60,0000 0
125,0000 0
300,0000 0
150,0000 0 300,0000 0300,000
0 0 6 0
(none)13 0
(none)36 0
(none)18 0
(none)26 0
(none)42 0
(none)(n/a) (n/a)
0 0 0"0 0"0 0"0 23"0 46"1 41
(n/a) (n/a)
00 0"0 0"0 0"0 31r 4"2 50"
(n/a) (n/a)
0 0 0"0 00 0"1 14"r 57"4 24"
(n/a) (n/a)
0 0 0"0 0"0 0"0 36"1 12 2' 62"
(n/a) (n/a)
0 o* o-0 0"0 0"0 58"1' 57"4' 46"
(n/a) n/a)
0 0 0"0 0"0 0"2 17"1 57"4' 33"
32366
17637
2723
18236
2521
2622
LoadingAircrewsupportAir-traffic controlFuelingGroundcontrol
72250
72250
27250
54250
30250 250
24042
24042
24042
24042
2404224042
60 80 80 80 eo 80ReturntoMissionControl
ThisgraphicshowstheACE"output"screen. Again,sixmissionscan be shownfromlefttoright.heupperportionofthescreenrepeatsthemajorspecificationsof themissions. Itshowsthenumberof aircraftrequestedforeachmission.T hecenterportionshowsthetimeestimatesforservicing,loading,andfueling,aswellasthetotalrequiredgroundtimefortheaircraft.tshowsthenumberofrequestedaircraftthatthemodelestimatescouldbeservicedusingtheairfield'savailableresources.T helowerportionshowstheresourcecapacitiesremaining,byservicefunction,aftertheaircraftassignedtoeachmissionareserviced. Eachofthesecapacitiesisexpressedintermsoftheparticularmissionspecified. (Amoregeneralcapacitycannotbeestimatedatthattimebecause,atthecompletionofeachmissionevaluation,themodelmuststandreadytoevaluateanyspecificationofthenextmission.)Thus,whentheuserasksforzeroaircraftforamission,thelowerportionofthescreenshowsthetotalcapacityoftheairfieldfor servicingaircraftassignedtothatmission. T hesmallestcapacityreportedherewill,ofcourse,bethebindingcapacityandwillidentifytheconstrainingfunction.
28
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
40/92
When theuserasksforsomepositivequantityofaircraftforamission,thetotalcapacityoftheairfieldfo raircraftassignedtothatmissionisthesumoftheestimatereportedinthecenterportionandthelowestresidualcapacityreportedinthelowerportion.
29
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
41/92
CaveatRegardingth eU seofAC EinThisStudyWedon othavedetai ls onairfield resources ,( inventories,avai labi l i t ies,a n duses)a tthese enrouteairf ields.Wecan es t imateground t imesbyaircraft type ,an db ymission ( typeofstop ,quanti ty ofn e e ds )ateach airf ield.Wec a n n o test imatecapaci t ies fo rresourcesn otinvest igatedby A M C .
He n c e ,o u ranalyses an df indings willnecessar i ly b e exp loratoryan dc o m p l e m e n ta ry .R A N D
ACEisapowerful,flexiblemodel. Intheanalysesassociatedwiththisstudy,however,wehavebeenabletouseonlyafewofitscapabilities,becausewehavenoinformationonthespecificresourcesavailableatanyof thebases.WehaveaccessonlytotheAirForce'sestimatesoftherampspaceorworkingrampandthefuelavailableateachairfield.Thus,wecanconsideronlyconstraintsbaseduponthoseitems.OurcontributionistouseACE'sspecificationofthegroundoperationsassociatedwitheachtypeofstopover,anditsdataonthetimesrequiredforthoseoperationsoneachtypeofaircraft,toestimatethespecificparkingandworkingcapacityofeachtypeofaircraftateachairfield.
30
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
42/92
Th eNPS/RANDMobilityOptimizerInputs
Mo v e m e n trequi rements C o m m o d i t y codes A L D s ,R D D so n n a g e / p a s s e n g e r sOrigins,dest ina t ionsRoutes Aircraft toroute compatibil i t ies B a s e sCapaci t ies ,t iming Capabil i t ies
Fleetsizea n dm ix Bas ingNRMO Flex iblefo rmu la t ionsuppor tsvary ing ana lys isobject ives OutputsAircraftmiss ionsN u m b e r ,cargoes Routes ,t iming Aircraftbas ing ep loyments ,t iming Resource util ization Aircraft ,bases ,routes Fleetsizea n dm ix Allocat iono fa i rbase resourcesRAND
Note:LD =avai lable-to-loaddate,RD D =requireddel iverydate. Nowwewillbrieflysummarizetheoperationof NRMO.12 NRMO,likeallmodels,transformsinputsintooutputs. Requiredinputsfor N R M Onclude
movementrequirements,includingtheunitaffiliation,available-to-loaddate,requireddeliverydate,commoditycode,andnumberof tonsandpassengers. Thesedataarecommonlyinputintheformofatime-phasedforcedeploymentlisting(TPFDL);outedata,includingthenamesandlocationsoftheairfieldsandwaypointsalongeachrouteandtheaircrafttypesthatareallowedtoflyeachroute;
irfielddata,includinglocation(specifiedinlatitudeandlongitude),capacity(intermsofthenumberofnarrow-bodyand/orwide-bodyaircraftthatcanbeservicedsimultaneously),andusages(suchason-loadoroff-load,crewstaging,tankerorshuttlebeddown,recoverybase,ordivertbasefo ruseduringaerialrefuelingoperations);and
12UnpublishedRANDresearchbyL.Melody,S.Baker,R.Rosenthal,D.Morton,andP .Killingsworthon"NPR/RANDMobilityOptimization(NRMO): ANewModelfo rAirMobilityAnalysis"providesamoredetaileddescription.
31
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
43/92
leetdata,includingthenumberofaircraftofeachtypeandthedayeachentersservice,andthecharacteristicsofeachtypeofaircraft,suchasitspayload,airspeedandallowable-userate.
Modeloutputsncludemissiondata,includingthenumberofaircraftflyingoneachroute,carryingeachcargo,eachday;
umbersandtypesof aircraftdeployedastankersandas intratheaterhaulersoneachdayandfromeachassignedairfield;tilizationinformationonaircraft,routes,andbases;andmarginaloperationalvalueof aunitincreaseineachresource.
32
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
44/92
ConceptualFormulation NDRIg
Maximize: On-t ime deliveries + air assetsmeasure ofper fo rmance+ g r o u n dassets measure o fper fo rmanceSubject to :Meett ime -phasedd e m a n d s : byl ineidentif ication,car g otype Aircrafta l locat ion/ba lance: by type,air f ield,t ime ,fo rstrategic, tanker ,an d tact icalmiss ionsCargo /passengercapaci ty: byl ineidentif ication, aircraft type,t ime Aircraft uti l izationrates:yaircrafttype,t ime Airf ieldcapacity (MOG):yair f ield,t ime Aer ia lrefuel ing capaci ty:ylocation,t ime Cr ew availabil ity:yaircraft type,stage b as e ,t ime RAND
NR M Oattemptstomaximizeon-timedeliveries. Itaccomplishesthismathematicallybyminimizingthepenaltiesassociatedwithlateornon-deliveredcargo. Itmayalsoincludesecondaryobjectives,suchas minimizingfleetusageorcosts,orminimizinginfrastructurecosts.The majorsystemconstraintsincludethefollowing:
Meetingthetime-phaseddemand.Notethatthedemandmaybe metwithlateorevenundeliveredcargo. Thisconstraintsimplyinsuresthateverycargoisaccountedfor,anditallowsafeasible solutionevenwhendeliveriesareseverelyconstrained.
alancingequationstoensurethatthemodeldoesnotcreateordestroyaircraftorcargo.imitingcargoandpassengercapacitytoensurethatthecargodelivereddoesnotexceedthecapacityoftheaircraftdeliveringit.imitingthenumberof hoursperdaythataircraftmayfly.imitingthenumberofaircraftthatmaybeservicedateachairfieldorair-refuelingpoint.nsuringthatnoaircraftproceedswithoutarestedcrew.
Note,however,thatwithsomeminorreformulations,themodelcanitselfdeterminesomeof thesevalues.orexample,weoftenusedthe
33
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
45/92
earlierCONOPmodeltodeterminetheminimum-costfleettosatisfyparticularscenarios.In thisstudy,wesimplyminimizethepenaltiesattachedtolateandnondeliveredcargoes.
34
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
46/92
WeSimplifyEnRouteAirfieldStructure(1 )
Airfie ld MO G Fue lE n g l a n dMildenhall XX XX Fairford XX XXG e r m an yRheinMainRamstein XXXX XX XX Spain MoronRota XXXX XX XX
^^^^ RANDK $ & &
Onefurtherpointneedstobeaddressedbeforewegoontodiscussourfindingsthatis,tosimplifyouranalysis,wesimplifiedtheenroutestructureoftheproblem.AM Cworkedwithsevenenrouteairfields:woinEngland,twoinGermany,andthreeinSpain. Thisallowedthemtoconsider,atleastqualitatively,theeffectsof le glength(andhencetheneedforfuelandtheresultingallowablecargoloads)andweather,aswellasthepoliticalfactorsimportantinthespecificregionsoftheinvolvednations.
35
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
47/92
WeSimplifyEnRouteAirfieldStructure(2 )NDRI I
Airfield MO G Fue lEngland Mildenhall XX XXFairford XX XX G e r m an y RheinMainRamstein XXXX XXXXSpaiiMoronRota XXXX XXXX
Airfield MO G FuelEnglandMildenhall XX XXFairford GermanyRheinMainRamstein
XX XX
Spain MoronRota XX XX
IX I'I\J w c S S S S m S S S S a
W esimplifiedthatstructure.W erepresentthesystemashavingonlyasingleairfieldineachcountry. TheoneinEnglandislocatedatMildenhallandhasthecombinedcapabilitiesofMildenhallandFairford.heGermanairfieldislocatedatRamsteinandhasthecombinedcapabilitiesofRamsteinandRheinMain. T heSpanishairfieldislocatedatMoronandhasthecombinedcapabilitiesof MoronandRota.Thissimplificationreducedthesizeofourmodelandallowedittosolvefaster,providinguswithadditionaltimeforinterpretingoutputs,reformulatinginputsandconstraints,andconductingmoreruns.Moreover,ithaslittleeffectonourquantitativefindings. T he differencesinle glengthsbetweennationsareslight,asweshallillustratelater,butarestillsignificantlygreaterthanthedifferencesbetweenairfieldswithinacountry. Weatherandpoliticsalsoprobablydiffermorebetweenthanwithincountries,butweconsideredneitherquantitativelyinthisstudy.
36
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
48/92
S u m m a r yofO urApproach TocomplementAMC'sworkWithou rairf ield capac i tymo de l ,w e - roducemoredetailedandconsistentestimatesofairfieldcapacities andaircraftgroundtimes.With ou rairliftoptimization mo de l ,w e - irectly determineconstraining resources;-stimatemarginalcontributions ofgroundresourcesateachairfield to airliftthroughput;and-stimatebestdistributionofth egroundresourcesamongth eairfields.
W ecan there fores u g g e s tbetterrulesand a l locat ionso fscarceresourcesfo rtr ialinsimula t ions an d operat ions . RAND
Insummary,ourapproachusesACEtoproducemoredetailedandconsistentestimatesofaircraftgroundtimesandairfieldcapacities,anditusesN R M O(a)todirectlydeterminetheconstrainingresources,(b)toestimatethemarginalcontributionsofgroundresourcesspecific toeachairfield,and,aswewilldescribemorefullylater,(c)toestimatethebestdistributionof thegroundresourcesamongtheairfields."Best"meanswithintheconfinesofourmodelandourworkingassumptions.
37
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
49/92
ThisBriefing NDKIJ
Plan:1 . In t roduct ion II . Recen tairliftstudies
III. Th eR A N D s t udy -Approachi*>Find ings
Th e1996baseline Effectsof longergroundt imesEffectsof optimizing
IV . Conc lud ing remarks
RAND Hui
FINDINGSNowlet'sdiscussourfindings.
38
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
50/92
1996FreightDeliveriesA re Constra ined,Pa ssengerDeliver iesAreNotNDRIl
1,000 tonsof f re igh tor passengers p er day ^
1996
Freigh t RAND
The1996BaselineRememberthatweusetheMRS-BURU,MRC-Escenarioandcargoes,withmostparametervaluestakenfromAMC'srecentstudy. However,weuseourairfieldandairliftmodels.W euseonlythe1996airliftfleetandthe1996airfieldresources.W edonotmodelthe2001andthe2006scenarios.Forthe1996scenario,weestimatethatallofthepassengermovementsincludedintheTPFDLcanbedeliveredwithintheirallottedtimewindows.heaverageissome6.6thousandpassengersperdayoverthefirst30daysof theconflict.W eestimatethatallof thesepassengerscanandwillbecarriedbyCRAF(Stage2)aircraft.W eestimatethatnearly135thousandtonsof freightwillbe deliveredbyacombinationofmilitaryandCRAFaircraftoverthefirst30daysof thedeployment.hisisanaverageof 4.5thousandtonsof cargoperday.131 3 Inal lofthecasesdiscussedinthisbriefing,weassumethatAMC's1996fleetof 5C-5s,18C-17s,174C-141s,and37KC-10sisavailablefo ruse.
39
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
51/92
IllliiNDRll
OurEstimatesofFreightDeliveries ExceedAMC's(l)1,000 tons,. of freightper day *
A MC RAND
OurestimateofcargodeliveriesexceedstheestimateproducebyAMC.heirestimatewas3.5thousandtonsperday;oursis4.5thousandtonsperday,orabout30percentgreater.Aminorportionof theremainderof thisbriefingwillbedevotedto discussingandexplainingthatdifference. Ourpurposehere,however,isnottocalibrateeitherourmodelortheirs.Mostofourdiscussionswillfocusonwaysofusingthemodelstobetterunderstandtherelationshipsbetweenairfieldresourcesandairliftflows.
40
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
52/92
NDRIl
O u rEstimates ofFreightDeliveries Exceed AMC's (2 )1,000 tons of fre igh tp er d a y 7f -
1996
AMC RAND
Lookingcloserattheestimates,wese ethatourestimatesof bothdeliveriesbyCRAFaircraft(theupperportionsofthebars)andofdeliveriesbymilitaryairliftaircraft(thelowerportionsofthebars)exceedAMC's.OurestimateofCRAFcapacityisroughly40percentgreater. Andourestimateofmilitaryairliftcapacityisroughly20percentgreater.W hydotheestimatesdiffer?T womajorproceduraldifferencesbetweenourstudyandAMC'simmediatelydrawsuspicion: ThefirstisouruseoflongergroundtimesderivedfromACE;thesecondisouruseofanoptimizationmodelratherthanAMC'ssimulationmodel.Otherfactors,suchasdifferencesinassumptionsandinotherinputs,probablyalsocontribute,but,asjustnoted,mostofthosedifferenceswillnotbepursuedhere. Ourobjectiveinthisstudyistoexploreandcontrasttheoptimizationandsimulationprocedures,nottoproducedefinitiveestimatesofairliftcapacity.W efocusontheeffectsofgroundtimesandof optimization.
41
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
53/92
BothOptimization an dLo ngerGround Times A reImpor tant(1)NDRII
1,000tons offreight p er day 1996
RAND/NPSMode lsA C EG r ou n d AMC Ground Timesim e s A MC Mode lsA MC Gr o u n d Times
itiiiiiiggi RANDUlli
First,let'slookatwhatourmodelwoulddousingtheAirForce'sstandardgroundimes.Thisprocedureaddsathirdestimatetoourgraph. ThecenterboxinthischartisourestimateofcargodeliveriesusingAMC'sstandardgroundimes.ThisestimateisgreaterthanAMC'sestimatebecauseitusesouroptimizationmodel. TheuseofNRMOincreasestheestimatedflowbyabout45percent.Thisestimateisalsogreaterthanourbaselineestimateabout12percentgreaterbecauseitusesAMC'sshortergroundtimes.
42
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
54/92
NDRIl
BothOptimization andLo ngerGround TimesAreImpor tant(2 )1,000 tons of f re igh tp er day^"'"7f/
RAND/NPSMode lsA C EGr o u n d A MC Ground Timesi m e s 1996AMC Mode ls A MC Ground Times RAND EffectsofLongerGroundTimesHereweshowthoseestimatesagain,differentiatingbetweenthetwotypesofcarriers: CRAFandmilitary.Notefirstthattheincreasesbetweentheright-handcaseandthecentercasearequitesimilarfordeliveriesbyCRAFaircraftanddeliveriesbymilitaryaircraft. Bothincreasebymorethan40percent.Butthen,whenweintroducethelongergroundtimes,thedeliveriesof themilitaryaircraftarereducedfromanaverageof3.5thousandtonsperdaytoanaverageof2.9 thousandtonsperday.hedeliveriesbyCRAFaircraftremainatabout1 .6thousandtonsperday.Whyisthis?ThisisbecausetheCRAFfleetrepresentedherehasexcesscapacity.swewillse elater,CRAFaircraftcancarryonlybulkcargo,andin ourscenariotherearesufficientCRAFaircrafttocarryallthebulkcargocontainedintheflowforthefirst30daysof theTPFDL.heCRAFfleetcancarrythatcargoevenwithourlongergroundtimes.Deliveriesbythemilitaryaircraft,ontheotherhand,decreasebecausethoseaircraftarebeingusedasintensivelyaspossible,inboththestandard-ground-timecaseandthelonger-ground-timecase.Now,let'slookmorecloselyatthedifferencesingroundtimes.
43
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
55/92
StandardGround Times NDRIl
AircraftG r ou n dTime(in ho ur s)
'12'" ; \10'4*
O P #-&
En routeAM C
RAND l^^B
ThischartshowsthestandardgroundtimesusedinAirForcestudiessinceMRS-BURU.Theyrangefrom2hoursand50minutes(C-141sandC-17s)to5hours(KC-10s)foron-loads;from3hoursand15minutes(C-141sandC-17s)to4hoursand30minutes(C-5s)forenroutestopovers;andfrom2hoursand15minutes(C-141sandC-17s)to3hoursand20minutes(KC-10s)fortheoff-loadingstopovers.
44
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
56/92
O urGround TimesA reSignif icantlyLongerThanStandardGround Times
I W/n-I i_>'On-loaloadRAND On-loadAMCEn routeRAND
En routeAM C " ***, Off-loadRAND Off-loadAM C isa RAND HB
Nowweaddourgroundtimes,whicharesignificantlylonger,especiallyfortheon-loads. (DetailonboththestandardtimesandtheACE-generatedtimesareshownin Table1 below.)Ouroff-loadsrangefrom2hoursand45minutes(C-141s,NBCs)to5hoursand15minutes(C-5s).heseareroughly40percentgreaterthanthestandards.Ourenroutestopoversrangefrom2hoursand45minutes(C-141s,C-17s,andNBCaircraft)to4hoursand45minutes(KC-10s).heseareroughly11percentlongerthanthestandardtimes.Andouron-loadsrangefrom7hoursand45minutes(C-17s)to11hoursand45minutes(KC-10s).heseareabout150percentgreaterthanthestandards.Tose ewhytheACE-generatedtimesaresomuchlonger,weneedto lookmorecloselyatthemannerin whichACEbuildsupestimatesof groundtimefromestimatesof operations'andtasks'times.
45
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
57/92
Table1 AircraftGroundTimes
(hours)Source,AircraftType On-load Enroute Off-loadStandardtimes74 7Cargo 5.00 3.44 3.00
NBC 3.88 3.49 3.00KC-10 5.00 3.44 3.32C-5 3.75 4.53 3.25C-17 2.87 3.23 2.25C-141 2.87 3.23 2.2574 7Passenger 3.00 1.50 3.00
ACE-generatedtimesforthisscenario74 7Cargo 8.25 4.00 4.50NBC 9.25 2.75 2.75KC-10 11.75 4.75 4.75C-5 10.75 4.50 5.30C-17 7.75 2.75 3.50C-141 9.25 2.75 2.7574 7Passenger 8.75 4.00 5.25
46
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
58/92
A C EBuilds Ground Timesfrom ServicingOperat ions andTasks NDRIl
ktumStandardoperations:
I"--!
nnSI | lmi-fligM| (tanaraf |Nitro|) Oiyer> ||Nilrogn| I OP""a flapa.r fnapj R p l > Mission-related option
[Pf B1 Fual:sEadpa | 10. 11Un it )cargo | |L O U I | LOW!Mtgo 1 TotalAircraft Ground Urne
FullserviceStandard o para t io m :
| Pu.Ul.gM || C-w
3i~p"iU huio n-ra la tadoptions: |Wjj ~ a > ||fl|
|^ - n ^ h i ~]a o lam!
iaHmjmnjiJB.1 &m t TotalAircraftGroun d Tint R A N D !
Note:l=block- in ,BO =block-out . Aswementionedbefore,ACEcomputesaircraftgroundtimesinthreeways:singaquick-turnprofile(whichweusedinestimatingtheenrouteandoff-loadingstopovers),usingafull-serviceprofile(whichweusedinestimatingthetimesfortheon-loadingCONUSstopovers),orusingsomecustomizedprofile.T heupperportionofthisgraphicillustratesthequick-turnprofile.14tcomprises15groundoperations,severalof whichcanbeperformedsimultaneously. T hefouroperationsonthetopline(recovery,through-flightinspection,generalservicing,andlaunch)areoperationsthatmustbeperformedforeveryaircraftoneverymission.15Theotheroperationsmayneedtobeperformedonlyonsomemissionsoronlyorsomeaircraft(regardlessof theirassignedmission).he fuelingandtheaerial-portoperationsaremission-levelspecifications.Thenitrogenservice,oxygenservice,andrepairoperations,ontheotherhand,areaircraft-levelspecifications. Finally,thede-icingoperationisbothamissionandanexpected-valuespecification. Itsneed,asapercentof theaircrafton themission,isexplicitlyspecifiedbytheuserforeachmission.14Theseservicingprofilesandmanyof theservicing-operationtimeswereestablishedfo rusby CaptainAndreGernerduringhisAirForceFellowshipatRAND.15Unless,ofcourse,theusercreatesacustomizedmissionprofile.
47
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
59/92
Theunshadedportionsofthefiguresrepresentintervalsoftimeduringwhichseveralconcurrentoperationscanbeperformedontheaircraft.Theshadedareasrepresenttimeswhenasingleoperationprecludestheperformanceofotheroperations: duringblock-inandblock-out,theaircraftisstillinoperation,ifnotinmotion;fueltransfer,oxygenservicing,andde-icingareconsideredhazardousoperationsandarenormallysolated.ACEconsolidatesimesforalltheseoperationsspecifictimesorfuelingandloadingbasedonmissionspecifications,andstandardtimes(byaircrafttypeandconfiguration)ortheotherstoconstructitsestimatesofaircraftgroundtime.Notethatwedonotrequiretherepairoperationorcargoloadingtobeaccomplishedinasingleapplication: Theseprocedurescanbebrokenupforfueltransferorforoxygenservicing.hiskeepsthetotalgroundimerombecomingunnecessarilylong.Theull-servicestopoversinvolvebothmorenspectionsand,typically,longerservicingtimes. Table2showstheexpectedground-operationtimesforC-17aircraftunderbothquick-turnandfull-servicestopovers.Customizingcanbedoneinmanyways. Asoneexample,theusermightdesiretomakeaquickturnevenquickerbysettingthetimesforthethrough-flightinspectionandforgeneralservicingtozero. Thenthestopwouldconsistonlyoftheblock-inof5minutes,theoff-loadingtimewhichiscalculatedwithinthemodel,andtheblock-outof15minutes.hatis,theaircraftwouldbeintherampareaonly20 minutesplusthetimefortheoff-load.
48
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
60/92
Table2 ExpectedGroundTimesorC-17 s
(minutes)Quick-TurnTimes Full-ServiceTimes
GroundOperation Operation Aircraft Operation AircraftStandardoperations
Block-in 5 5 5 5Through-flightinspection 42 42 Post-flightinspection 1 20 1 20 Generalservicing 20 20 30 30 Repairs 6 0 1 2 12Nitrogenservicing 1 1 2 2Oxygenservicing 7 7 1 7 1 7Pre-flightinspection 96 9 6Block-out 15 15 1 5 1 5
Subtotal 9 0 29 7OptionaloperationsFueling
Pre-fuel 5 5 5 5Fueltransfer(150,000lb) 72 72 72 72 Post-fuel 5 5 5 5
LoadingSetupaircraftforloading 6 6 6 6Setupaircraftforpallets 5 5 5 5
On-loadingpallets 32 0 32 0Off-loadingpallets 32 0 32 0
SetupaircraftforNPC 6 6 6 6On-loadingrollingstock 75 75 75 75 On-loadingotheroversized 150 1 15 1 50 1 50 On-loadingoutsizedcargo 150 115 1 50 1 50 Off-loadingrollingstock 45 1 5 45 0Off-loadingotheroversized 150 1 20 1 50 0Off-loadingoutsizedcargo 150 1 20 1 50 0
SOURCE:nputsandoutputof ACE.NOTE:heseestimatesbasedon thefollowingassumptions;e-icingisnotrequiredfo ranyaircraft; resourceshortagesdonotincreasetheexpectedaircraft-servicingtimes;
andall aircraftareparkedon emilefromtheaerialport. Se eJ.P .StuckerandR.Berg,RAND,MR-700-AF/OSD,p.vi ,fo rdetails.
49
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
61/92
Table3ExpectedValuesortheProbabilisticOperations,C-17s
(minutes)
GroundOperationDuration,
whenNeeded
ProportionofTimeNeeded
ExpectedDuration
RepairsQuickturnFullservice
60 60
0.100.206.0012.00
NitrogenservicingQuickturnFullservice
1520
0.100.101.502.00
OxygenservicingQuickturnFullservice
45 45
0.150.38
6.7517.10
SOURCE:nputstoACE;originally fromAMC.
Asanotherexample,theusermightwishtocustomizeon-loads,perhapsperformingseveraloperationsinparallel,orperhapsusingaquick-turnprofileratherthanfullservice.W ecautiontheuser,however,againstseverelyshorteningthegroundtimes.Afteranaircrafthasflown3,000-somenauticalmiles,spendingsevenoreighthoursorlongerintheair,itrequiresatleastroutineservicingandnspection.
50
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
62/92
ThisBriefing NDRll
Plan:I.ntroductionII.ecent airliftstudies
III.heR A N D study-Approach-FindingsThe1996baseline
Effectsof longergroundt imesEEffectsof optimizing -Allocatingcargoestoaircraft-Allocatingaircrafttoroutes-Allocatingramp& fuel to airfieldsIV .oncludingremarks
RAND
Nowlet'sexaminehowtheoptimizationmodelaffectsourestimatesofcargodeliveries.W ebeginbydiscussingthemeaningof a"good"airliftflowandhowsuchflowsarenormallyestimatedbymobilitysimulationsandoptimizations.
51
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
63/92
NDRIlAirliftObjectives
S up p or tmajordeployments Deliversspecifiedcargos -Ont ime -Safely
Suppor totherair - t ransportoperat ionsEmployairliftassetseffectivelyan defficiently
RAND
EffectsofOptimizingAnairliftsystemmustbeabletosupportmajordeploymentsdeliveringtherequiredcargoesontimeandsafelyatthesametimethatitcontinuestosupportothernationaloperations. Todothiswithlimitedresources,itmustemploythoseresourcesaseffectivelyandasefficientlyaspossible.PlannersspecifytheirmovementrequirementsinaTPFDL,atime-phasedforce-deploymentlisting. Thislistingspecifiesboththecargoesandtheirpriorities: cargoesspecifiedtoarrivein thetheaterondayxareexpectedtoarrivebeforethosespecifiedtoarriveondayx+1.16Each"cargo,"representedona"line"intheTPFDL,canconsistof passengers,bulk(palletized)freight,oversized(larger)freight,andoutsized(fitsonlyinaC-5orC-17)freight,al lassociatedwithoneof some33commodityclassesofmilitaryresourcesandorganizations.Eachcargohasanavailable-to-load(earliest)dateandarequired-delivery(latest)date. Thesedatesdetermineitslocationin theTPFDL.16AdditionalprioritiesaresometimesassignedusingfieldsdesignatedasPOD(portofdebarkation)priority,PODpriorityadd-on,CINC's(commanderinchief's)RDD(requireddeliverydate),etc.,butthesearetreatedlesssystematically.
52
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
64/92
Mobilitysystemsandmobilitymodelsattempttomovethosecargoesintheirprioritizedorder.
53
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
65/92
ModelsMimicAirliftFlows Mobility simulat ions Dea lwith cargoes on e a tat imeSelectatypeofaircraftaccord ingtorules Routethataircraft accord ing to rules H a n d l em a n ycargoes ,aircraft ,routes
Mobility opt imizat ionsoo k a ta llcargoes togetherSelectb e s taircraftforeachcargo Selectb e s troute foreachtype o faircraftH a n d l efewercargoes ,aircraf t ,routes
RAND Ilium
Mobilitysimulationstypicallyworkwithcargoesandaircraftoneatatime,astheyappearintherequirementsfileandastheybecomeavailableforuse. In MASS,whenanaircraftbecomesavailable,themodellooksfo rthelocationof itspreferredcargotype,withtheearliestavailabilitydate;andthenitlooksfo rtheleast-congestedpreferredroute. Thenthenextavailableaircraftlooksforitspreferredtypeofcargo,andsoon . Thisrule-basedbehaviorallowssimulationmodelstohandlemanycargoes,manyaircraftof manytypes,andmanyairfields.MobilityoptimizationssuchasNR M O ,ontheotherhand,considerallpossibilitiesandthenselectthebestcargoandrouteforeachaircraftineachtimeperiod. Thisdifferenceresultsinmuchlargerdecisionspaces;consequently,optimizationshavebeenabletohandlefewercargoes,aircraft,androutes. Overtime,however,withcontinuingincreasesincomputingpowerandalgorithmictechniques,thesizeoffeasibleproblemshasincreasedsubstantially.NR M OsolvedthelinearproblemsreportedhereinlessthananhouronaSunSPARC20with256megabytesofRAM.hemore-complexrunsincorporatingintegerconstraintstookseveralhours.
5 4
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
66/92
NRMO Allocates CargoestoAircraftEfficientlyNDRIl
1,000tons off re igh tpe r day^.
2.0f
1996
C-141 KC-10C -5 C-17 RAND
AllocatingCargoestoAircraftAswenotedbefore,N R M Oattemptstomaximizeon-timedeliveriesbyminimizingthepenaltiesassociatedwithlateornon-deliveredcargo.NR M Oattachesapenaltytoeachcargo(andtoeachportionofthatcargoassignedtoadifferentaircraft).hispenaltyincreasesinvalueeachdaythecargoislate(thatis ,estimatedtobedeliveredafteritsRDD),thusencouragingthedeliveryofcargoesintheirTPFDL-orderedsequence. Cargoesaredeliveredoutofsequenceonlywhenappropriateaircraftarenotavailableorwhenslightingadeliverynowwillallowamore-than-compensatingincreaselater.17Thisgraphshowsourestimatedcargoflowsbyaircrafttype.T heCRAFaircraftthecargoversionof the747andthenarrow-bodycargoaircrafthandlebulkcargo(thatis,cargopackedintostandardizedpallets)efficiently. Butwiththeirlowwings,highbodies,andsmalldoors,theyhandleoversizedandoutsizedcargoes(suchitemsasH M M W V s ,aircraftengines,andevenhelicopters)quiteinefficiently. Consequently,intheserunstheytransportonlybulk17Mostpenaltiesaresettoleveloffafteracertainnumberofdayssothatafewespeciallydifficult-to-delivercargodonotdisrupttheentireairliftflow.
55
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
67/92
cargo.W eestimatethatin theserunswehavesufficientCRAFaircrafttodeliveral lofthebulkcargoes.Militaryaircraft,in contrast,withtheirhighwings,lowbodies,andwidedoors,aredesignedtoefficientlytransportoversizedcargo. T he C-5sandC-17sarealsodesignedto efficientlytransportoutsizedcargo.In thiscargo-allocationscenario,however,weestimatethattheC-5sandtheC-17shaveinsufficientcapacitytodeliverallof therequiredcargoes.Heretheydeliver70percentoftheoversizedcargoesandonly13percentoftheoutsized.Thisshort-shriftingof theoutsizedcargoesreflectsthestructuringof theTPFDLthatis,theprioritizingof thecargoesmorethananyotherfactor.uttosomeextent,whenthemodelisconsideringtheallocationofeitheroversizedoroutsizedcargoesofequallatenesstoaC-5orC-17,italsoreflectsthefactthat,forthissetofmovementrequirementsatleast,theoversizedcargoes(fully-loadedtrucksandC-5engines,forexample)carriedaresubstantiallymoredensethantheoutsizedcargoes(helicoptersandthelike). Thatis,moretonsof oversizedcargocanbecarriedthantonsof outsizedcargo,andthusthetotalpenaltyvalueisreduced. Se eTable4.Thisdepictionrepresentsthebaselineoperationof NRMO. However,ifwehavesomeinformationsuggestingthatthewarfightershaveasignificantpreferencefo routsizedcargoes,andifforsomereasontheTPFDLcan/shouldnotbechanged,theNR M Openaltiescanbeadjustedtoincreasethosedeliveries.
Table4 AverageTonsCarried,byAircraftType
(the4.5thousandton-per-dayrun)TypeofAircraft Bulk Over OutC-17 41 483C-5 243SOURCE: OutputsofNRMO.NOTE: Entriesareaveragesofthemorethan30differenttypesofcargoes(commoditycodes)carriedbyeachtypeofaircraft.
56
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
68/92
NRMO Allocates Cargoes toAircraftEfficientlybutAllows forOtherPriorit iesNDRIi
1,000tons of fre igh tp er d ay 1996
747'CNB C C"141 KC-10 C -5 C-17
I? AK1 ftfiiii
Thisgraphdepictsthedeliveryprofilewhenwevalueatonofoutsizedcargotwiceasmuchasatonof bulkandathirdmorethanatonof oversizedcargo.CRAFaircraftcontinuetocarryal lof thebulk.ecausetheyareveryinefficientatloadingoversizedandoutsizedcargo,transportingbulkcargo,evenwhenitisvaluedless,remainstheir"bestuse."T heC-141sandKC-10s,whichcantransportoversizedbutnotoutsized,continuetodoso.uttheC-5sandC-17s,whichcantransportoutsizedaswellasoversizedcargoes,nowspecializeintransportingoutsizedcargo.nthisscenario,theytransportal lof theoutsizedcargoes.hatis,withaweightingfactorof2,1.5,and1on theoutsized,oversized,andbulkcargoes,respectively,the1996airliftfleetdeliversal lthebulkcargo,lltheoutsizedcargo,andmuchof theoversizedcargo.Butnotethatthisweightingschemereducesthetotaldeliveriesoverthe30-dayperiodby10,828tons,or byanaverageof 0.36thousandtonsperday.Whereasitincreasesthedeliveriesofoutsizedcargoby23,918tons,itdecreasesthedeliveriesof oversizedby34,746tons,atrade-offofabout1.45to1.hiscouldbegoodiftheoutsizedtonsarein factmoreimportanttothedeploymentthantheoversizedtons;oritcouldbebadiftheyarelessorevenequallyimportant.he pointhereisthatal lweightingshouldbecarefullyconsidered,insimulationsaswellas inoptimizations.
57
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
69/92
BothOptimization andLongerGround Times AreImportantNDRI
T on s _ Weighted To n= To n A C EGround Times AMC Ground Times
RAND/NPSMode lsAMC Mode ls
_|AMC Gr o u n dTimes RANDHH
Beforewegoon ,let'slookatthisresultoncemoreandputitintocontextwithourearlierfindings. Weightingthecargoestorepresentadditionalinformationonprioritieshasreducedthedeliveriestoanaverageof4.1thousandtonsperday.hatamountisstillsignificantlylargerthantheAM Cestimateof3.5thousandtonsperday,butitis significantlyreducedfromourestimateof 4.5thousandtonsperday.IftheobjectofourexerciseistoreplicatetheAM Cestimate,wecouldproceedfurtherdownthisroad: observingwhichcargoestheAM Cmodelcarriesandweightingourinputstoprioritizethose;observingwhichaircraftareassignedwhichroutesbytheAM Cmodel,andtweakingourinputsaccordingly. W ebelieve,however,thatsimplyfollowingtheTPFDLlistingsproducesthepreferreddeliveryprofile.
5 8
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
70/92
ThisBriefingPlan:
I.ntroduct ionII .ecen tair l if tstudies I I I .h eR A N D s t udy-Approach -FindingsTh e1996baseline Effectsof longerground t imesEffectsof optimizing-Allocatingcargoes to aircraft^ -Allocatingaircraftto routes-Allocatingramp&fuelto airfields
IV .onc lud ingremarks AllocatingAircrafttoRoutesNowlet'slookatthewayN R M Oassignsaircrafttoroutes.Andthenwe'llfinishupbydemonstratinghowNR M Ocanefficientlyallocatealimitedresourcelikeramporfuelamongtheseveralairfieldsinwaysthatimprovetheoverallflowof theairliftsystem.
59
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
71/92
Al locat ingAircrafttoRoutes
From From D o v e r D h a h r a n Tota lMildenhal l, 123Ramste in, 437Moron, 213 2,953,076 2,765,2022,879 6,092 RANDt ^M
W eassumeinthisstudythatallof themilitaryaircraftloadandleave fromacommonlocationintheUnitedStates(Dover,Del.),flyto Europewheretheyrefuel,flytoacommonoff-loadingsiteinSouthwestAsia(Dhahran),flybacktoEuropeformorefuel,andthenreturntotheUnitedStates.W eidentifyenrouteairfieldsinEngland,Germany,andSpainforthemilitaryaircraft,sotheyhaveachoiceof routes,bothgoingandcoming.18Thetableshowsthedistancesinnauticalmilesthatthemilitaryaircrafttravelwhenroutedthroughthealternativeenrouteairfields. Notethatineachcasethecriticallegthele gwheretherequiredfuelloadlimitstheamountof cargothatcanbecarriedistheU.S.-Europeleg.StoppingoverinEnglandallowsthemostcargotobetransportedandrequirestheleast(total)fuel. GoingthroughSpainincreasesthelengthofthecriticallegby3percentandincreasesthetotaldistancebyaboutaquarterof1percent. GoingthroughGermanyincreasesthecritical18CRAFaircraftflyfromDovertoanairfieldinEngland(collocatedwithMildenhall,butnotcompetingwithitforresources),thentoDhahran,andthenbackthroughEnglandtotheUnitedStates.
60
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
72/92
legby10percentandincreasesthetotaldistancebyjustover2percent.191 9 GoingthroughMontdeMarsan,Francewouldincreasethecriticalle gby4.5 percentwhileloweringthetotaldistancebyabout3.5percent.
61
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
73/92
The"Best"RouteDepends on..NDRII
Geog r ap h y Politics W eath erType o faircraf tType o fcargo Airf ieldresources
RANDH B
In additiontodistance,selectingthe"best"routedependsonanumberoffactors,notallof whichwecanconsiderinthisstudy.Geographyisimportantbecauseitdeterminesthedistances. W edoaccountforthat.Politicsisimportantbecauseitcancauseshutdownsatairfields. W edonotaccountfo rthat. Politicsisalsoimportantbecauseitmaypreventusfromflyingovercertaincountries,andthiswedoaccountfor. Asshowninthepreviouschart,theroutesthroughEnglandand,especially,GermanymustdetoursignificantlytoavoidflyingoverItalyandthenationsof EasternEurope.Weatherisimportant butwedonotconsiderit.Aircrafttype,cargotype,andairfieldresourcesareal limportant,andwedomodelthemall.
62
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
74/92
TheBestRoutes(1 )NDRII
C-5s C-17sC-141SKC-10S
NoCons tra in ts R a m p ,Servicing Servicing FuelR a m p Servicing
AMC's Cons tra in tsRAND
Ouranalysisofthebestroutingofaircraftthroughtheenrouteairfieldsconsistoffourcases:newithnoconstraintsonanyoftheenrouteairfields;newithconstraintson servicing,byaircrafttype,whichweexplain;newithconstraintson servicingandontherampspace availableattheindividualairfields;andnewithconstraintsonservicing,rampspace,andfuel.
63
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
75/92
TheBestRoutes(2 )1,000tons offreightp er d ay ,^m
5 .7
C-Ss, G,SC-17S,G,SC-141S,G,SKC-10S,G,S
Noam p Fuel,RampConstraints Servicing Servicing ServicingAMC'sConstraints No cons t ra in ts
NOTE:= England;G= G e r m an y ;S= Spain . RAND^ m
Whenwehavenoenrouteconstraints,thatis ,whenweallowthemodeltoselectthe"best"enrouteairfieldforeachmilitaryaircraftoneachtriptmakestoandfromSaudiArabia,themodelroutesaircraftthroughalloftheairfields. EverytypeofaircrafthasmostofitsplanesroutedthroughEngland,butsomeofthemgothroughGermany,andsomeofthemgothroughSpain.TheTPFDLidentifies33differentcategoriesofcargo. TheAMCaircraftdataspecify"typicalloads"ofeachcargocategoryforeachaircrafttype.Andmanyofthoseloadings"bulkout"theaircraftbeforeitsliftinglimitormaximumcabinloadisreached,somarginallylongerroutesdonotreducetheamountofthosecargoesthatcanbecarried.Additionally,becausewedonot"charge"forfuelandthequantityoffuelavailableisnotlimitedinthisrun,andbecausethedifferencesintraveltimeandincycletimeresultingfromusingthealternativeenrouteairfieldsareminorandarelostinthetime-periodstructureusedbythemodel,themodeljustdoesn'tcareinthiscasewhichenrouteairfieldsareselectedbytheaircraft.Withnoactiveairfieldconstraints,weestimatethatinthiscase,the1 9 9 6airliftfleetcandeliveranaverageof5.7thousandtonsperdayoverthefirst30daysoftheconflict.
64
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
76/92
TheBestRoutes(3 )NDRIi
1,000 tons of f re igh tpe rda y
C-55 E,G,S SpainC-17S E,G,S GermanyC-141S E,G,S England KC-10S E ,G,S Germany
No Constraints Ramp Fuel,Ramp Servicing Servicing ServicingAMC's Constraints
constraints, AMC'sconstraints RAND
Whenweimposethe"servicing"or"servicecenter"constraint,theprofileslooklikethis.Thisconstraintrecognizesthatthesupplyofservicingpersonnelfor eachtypeofaircraftislimitedandthatacriticalmassof correctlytrainedtechniciansisrequiredtoserviceandrepairthesecomplex,fragileaircraft.ThisconstraintrequiresthatalloftheC-5sroutethroughthesamecountry,thatallof theC-17sroutethroughadifferent(single)country,andthatalltheC-141sroutethroughadifferentcountry.W eallowtheKC-10s,becausesofewofthemareavailableasairlifters,toflow throughanysingleairfield.W ecallthisour"birdsofafeather"constraint.hatis,themodelselectsthe"best"routingfo reachtypeof aircraft,giventhese tofcargoes,thecharacteristicsoftheroutes,andthedifferentcapabilitiesoftheaircraft.Withthisconstraintimposed,ourmodelroutestheC-5sthroughSpain,theC-17sandtheKC-10sthroughGermany,andtheC-141sthroughEngland. But,again,theroutingsappearnottobecritical: Little differencein thetotalnumberoftonsdelivered,whichweestimatehereas5.6thousandtonsperday,wouldresultifotherroutingswerechosenorimposed.
65
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
77/92
Th eBestRoutes (4 )NDRI I
1,000tons of freightp er day
C-5S E,G,S Spain Spain
C-17S E.G.S Germany England C-141S E,G,S England GermanyKC-10S E,G,S Germany England
No Constraints Servicing Ramp Fuel,Ramp Servicing ServicingAM C sConstraints
No constraints ,Servic ing RampServic ing
A M C'scons t ra in ts RAND
Introducingtheservicingconstraintreduceddeliveriesbyabout1 00 tonsperday.NowweseethatintroducingthesetoframpconstraintsimposedbyAMCreducesdeliveriesbyanother500tonsperday,downtoanaverageof5.0thousandtonsperday.Theseconstraintshurt. TheC-5sgoingthroughSpainsaturateitsairfieldeverydayfromthe2nddaythroughthe30thday.heC-17sandKC-10sgoingthroughEnglandfillitsairfieldeveryotherdayandkeepitatover9 0percentofcapacityontheodddays.heC-141skeeptheGermanairfieldatover90percentofcapacityeveryday.Table5belowshowstheresourcesavailableattheindividualenrouteairfieldsin1 9 9 6 .
66
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
78/92
Table5ResourcesAvailableattheEnRouteAirfieldsn1996
AirfieldRamp
(narrow-body-equivalenthoursperday)
Fuel(milliongallons
perday)EnglandGermanySpain
24 033 61 68
1.61 1.570.82NOTE: MRC-E scenario fo r1996.
67
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
79/92
TheBestRoutes(5 )iiliiNURli
1,000 tons of freightpe rda y
Serv icing RampT* ervic inguel,R a m p Constra ints .e r v i c i n a
A M C'scons t ra in ts
Spain GermanyEngland Germany
Constra ints Servicing
SpainermanyEnglandpainGermanyngland Englandpain
Ramp Fuel,Ramp Servicing ServicingAMC'sConstraints
RAND
Finally,imposingthesetoffuelconstraintsusedbyAM Creducesdeliveriesbyanother500tonsperday. Thisduplicatesourbasecase andourbase-casedeliveriesof4.5thousandtonsperday.his estimateisbasedonAMC'sestimatesofthecurrentlyavailablerampandfuelateachairfieldandontherequirementthatal laircraftofthesameypemaketheirenroutestopoversinthesamecountry.T heramp,orparking-space,constraintlimitstheC-5sinGermanyandtheC-141sinEngland. Butboththosefleetsconsumesubstantiallymorefuelinthosecountries,respectively,thantheywouldhavebeenableto ,hadtheybeenroutedthroughSpain.heC-17andKC-10fleets,withsubstantiallyfeweraircraft,exhaustthelimitedsuppliesof fuelinSpain,butdonotstresstherampthere.Now,asafirstcheckonitsrobustness,wecomputetheserunsagainusingtheAirForcestandardgroundtimes.
68
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
80/92
Th eBestRouteswith A C ETimes and withStandardTimes 1,000tons of freightp er d ay
No constraints, Servicing
A MC ' sconstraints
C-5s E,G,SEngland Spain Spain Spain Spain GermanyGermanyC-17S E,G,SE,G,S GermanyGermany England England Spain SpainC-141S E,G,SEngland England England GermanyGermany England England KC-10S E,G,SE,G,S GermanySpain EnglandEngland SpainSpain
No Constraints Servicing Ramp Servicing Fuel,RampServicingAM C sConstraints
StandardGroundTimesACE __ GroundRampServicinguel,Ramp TimesServicing
RANDf e s r f M ^
T hestandardtimes(secondlinein columns2-5)donotchangetheprofiles. Deliveriesincreasebecauseof theshortgroundtimes,buttheroutingsremainthesame.nthefullyconstrainedcase,theC-5sstillstopoverinGermany,theC-17sandtheKC-10sinSpain,andtheC-141sinEngland.Asasecondcheck,wewilllookattheseroutesfromadifferentangleto se ewhathappensiftheaircraftaresystematicallymisrouted.
69
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
81/92
ImproperRoutingReducesDeliveries NDRIl
1,000tonsoffreightp er d ay 5r-
1996 Rout ing Profi le ABC
C-141S E G SC-5s G S EC-17s S E G KC-10S S E G
Route StructuresNOTE:= England;G= G e r m an y ;S= Spain . RAND ^ B
Thegraphicshowsdeliveriesforrunsincludingthethreeconstraints(servicecenters,ramp,andfuel),butroutingtheaircraftthroughdifferentcountries.Thebestroutingof aircraftthroughairfieldsProfileAhere,withtheC-5sgoingthroughGermany,theC-17sthroughSpain,andtheC-141sthroughEnglanddeliversanaverageof4.5thousandtonsofcargoperday.ProfileBwiththeC-5sroutingthroughSpain,theC-17sthroughEngland,andtheC-141sthroughGermanydeliversanaverageofmorethan4.4thousandtonsperday. Thisisapproximatelya2percentreductionndeliveries.ProfileCwiththeC-5sroutingthroughEngland,theC-17sthroughGermany,andtheC-141sSpaindeliversanaverageof morethan4.2thousandtonsperday,ornearlya7percentreductionindeliveries.Insummary,whenresourcesarelimited,therouteschosenfo r(orallocatedto)theseveraltypesofaircraftcansignificantlyaffectthetotaltonsofcargothataredelivered.
70
-
7/27/2019 Analyzing the Effects of Airfield Resources on Airlift Capacity
82/92
ThisBriefingPlan:
I. Introduct ion II .ecen tair l if tstudies III.h eR A N D s t udy -Approach -Findings Th e1996baseline Effectsof longerground t imes Effectsof optimizing-Allocatingcargoes to aircraft-Allocatingaircraft to routesEZ^-Allocatingramp&fuelto airfields
IV .onc lud ingremarks RANDfeil"' ' '
AllocatingRampandFueltoAirfieldsIn additiontooptimallyallocatingcargoestoafixedfleetofaircraftandoptimallyallocatingthoseaircrafttoafixedsetofroutes,optimizationmodelslikeNR M Ocanalsoestimatethe"best"fleet(mix)ofaircraftandthebestspecificationof theroutes.nthisscenario,MRC-East,wheretheenrouteairfieldsareal llargeinternationalairportsandwheretheportionof theairfieldanditsfuelresourcesmadeavailableto