Document created: 24 August 04
Air University Review,
July-August
1970
Brigadier General A. A. Riemondy
The more things change, the more they remain the same. Technological improvements in computers, communications, and transportation merely sharpen the tools we use to solve the age-old military problem of supplying operating units.
The Directorate of Supply and Services in Hq USAF is responsible for designing and implementing, within available resources, the best management system for supplying materiel required to maintain the effectiveness of Air Force weapon systems. This involves managing 1.8 million Federally Stock Numbered items, valued at almost $13 billion, that support more than $38 billion in Air Force weapon systems and equipment.
The Air Force supply system is managed through the Air Force Logistics Command (AFLC), which operates five large CONUS depots called Air Materiel Areas (AMA’S). The AMA’S provision new weapon systems, compute requirements, procure, store, and issue all centrally procured supply items. They also redistribute assets, dispose of excess materiel, and repair items coded for depot repair. Some 940,000 items, representing the bulk of the $13-billion Air Force supply inventory, are centrally managed by the AMA’S. Through stock fund procedures, Hq AFLC monitors acquisition of the other 860,000 items from Department of Defense wholesalers, the General Services Administration, or local purchase.
Standard Base Level Supply System
To standardize the supply function at Air Force bases and establish a firm foundation upon which to build the supply systems of the future, this Directorate designed and implemented the Standard Base Level Supply System. The system, programmed on the Univac 1050-II computer, is presently operating at all major Air Force installations, worldwide.
In 1962 most Air Force base supply accounts were managed by a mix of manual, punch-card, or computerized inventory control systems. Eleven different systems were in use, each designed autonomously by the major commands to fit the peculiarities of their accounting equipment. Proliferation of nonstandard base supply systems, designed with minimal Hq USAF control, restricted the Air Staff in establishing meaningful supply policy. Lack of standardization prevented measurement of support effectiveness, diluted the Air Training Command’s capability, and required base supply organizations that were costly in manpower. The decision to develop a centrally controlled standard supply inventory system was announced in 1962, when it became obvious that the Air Force had outgrown first generation computers.
The resultant system uses the Univac 1050-II computer, which provides real-time processing; that is, information stored within it is updated with each supply transaction and therefore is always current. Its building-block design allows expansion or reduction of capacity to accommodate changing workload. The system was the first in DOD to offer direct and immediate customer access to the computer by remote input/output devices. Varying configurations of the 1050-II computer support base supply operations ranging from 32,000 item records operating on an 8-hour 5-day week at Maxwell AFB, Alabama, to 123,000 item records operating on a 24-hour 7-day week at Tan Son Nhut Air Base, Vietnam.
Four major advantages accrued from adoption of the Standard Base Level Supply System:
· Central development and control of system design, implementation, and operation. Central control makes it possible to change a computer program simultaneously at all bases to implement a policy decision or improve system design. The Air Force recently, with a single program modification, changed procedure at all Air Force bases to establish a stock level for stock fund items on the fourth rather than third demand. An accompanying benefit of central control was reduction of personnel required to develop inventory control systems. Prior to standardization nine major commands maintained development groups, each as large as the supply portion of the Air Force Data Systems Design Center which replaced them.
· Standard supply organization. The number of different supply organizations paralleled the systems in existence prior to 1963. A single standard organization with standardized operations, system products, forms, and training now serves all bases.
· Reduction in supply manning. Frequently, when a manual management system is converted to automated data processing equipment, additional personnel are required to use the computer’s voluminous output. The opposite was true in our mechanization of the base supply operation. From 1957 to 1962, during the major command change from manual to “interim” computers, Supply Unit Manning Documents were reduced by 2500 manpower spaces. Acquisition of the Univac 1050-11 system resulted in 862 fewer base supply personnel; later an additional 290 spaces were eliminated through system improvement. The installation of the standard supply organization led to development of engineered manning standards for 39 base work centers, resulting in reduction of another 3020 positions.
· More effective instruction by the Air Training Command (ATC). The eleven different inventory control systems in existence prior to 1962 diluted base supply training offered by ATC; personnel trained by ATC had to be retrained in the specifics of the system used by their command. With the introduction of the Standard Supply System, ATC assumed total system training and presented a complete course of instruction. Of approximately 49,000 military personnel in the Air Force supply career field, about 38,000 have received formal training in the Standard Base Level System.
satellite bases
Our standard system supports many different sizes and varieties of Air Force bases. However, there are 45 bases whose supply accounts have insufficient items or too few monthly transactions to qualify for assignment of a computer. To benefit from real-time computer operation and the accompanying manpower savings at these smaller bases, a “satellite system” was developed. The supply accounting records of the satellite base are maintained on a host-base supply computer, and immediate access is provided through a remote device located at the satellite base. All supply functions, other than posting accounting records, are performed at the satellite base. By the end of FY 70 the last satellite base will be converted, and all active bases will be operating under the Standard Base Supply System.
In addition, we have jointly agreed to convert all 92 Air National Guard supply accounts to our satellite system, beginning in 1970.
mobile computer
A feasibility study exploring the use of a “mobile” 1050-II supply computer was completed in June 1966. At that time it was intended primarily for installation at Southeast Asia (SEA) bases. A poll of the major commands suggested other uses and resulted in expanding the concept. Now the mobile computer serves as a worldwide backup for temporarily inoperative systems or those destroyed by enemy action, fire, or natural disaster.
The mobile computer comprises an entire Univac 1050-II installed in three vans. Completely self-sufficient, carrying its own power supply and air-conditioning equipment, it can be operational within six hours after delivery. It is air-transportable in three C-141s or four C-130s and can be shipped by rail on flat cars or by tractor over roads.
A mobile computer is presently stationed at Clark Air Base in the Philippines. It has twice been deployed successfully, providing computerized base supply operations at U-Tapao Air Base, Thailand, and Osan Air Base, South Korea, when the local base computers were shut down for major modifications. The need to provide computerized supply capability for deploying forces and the proven value of the mobile 1050-II computer have resulted in our requesting additional sets.
war readiness materiel
Combat aircraft of the present-day Air Force are hungry machines that devour huge amounts of bombs, bullets, fuel, and other war consumable items in carrying out their combat assignments. The bomb load of the B-52, for example, exceeds the bomb load of a squadron of World War II B-17s, and the firepower of the modern fighter plane is awesome. Providing materiel to keep this modern force effective and “ready to go” calls for imaginative thinking and detailed planning to develop sound management techniques.
One of the techniques that contributes to the combat readiness of our modern Air Force is the procurement and stockpiling of war materials in advance of their need. This concept, as old as military history, has to keep pace with advancing technology.
The current concept of stockpiling war materiel dates back to the end of World War II, when vast amounts of materiel were on hand and “excess” to any foreseeable requirement. Much of this materiel was identified, packed, and stored on the East and West coasts.
When the strategic concept of massive retaliation was dominant in the early fifties, primary emphasis was placed on supplying the Strategic Air Command (SAC) with prepacked, air-transportable materiel to support a “short” war, generally 30 to 90 days.
In 1952 we started stockpiling war materiel at selected bases to enable Air Force units to become operational immediately after deployment, rather than waiting for delivery of supplies and equipment by surface shipping. “Seaweed,” “Nightlife,” “Big Top,” and “Flyaway Kits” identified the various coded programs for stockpiling war materiel.
In 1959 the term “war readiness materiel” (WRM) was adopted, covering the entire spectrum of war reserve stocks in the Air Force. In the late fifties and early sixties the doctrine of flexible response replaced that of massive retaliation. Flexible response required a force structure capable of rapidly responding to the outbreak of a limited war, contingency, or insurgency while retaining the capability to support a general nuclear or nonnuclear war. This change precipitated the storage of war readiness materiel at specific locations where likelihood of need could be anticipated. Our national defense policy continues to stress flexible response, with increasing emphasis on controlled response and nonnuclear options.
The current USAF war readiness materiel program, with an investment of more than $2 billion in materiel, has an impact on every operational command and practically every air base in the free world. It furnishes the initial wartime punch for our combat forces, assuring them of sufficient supplies and equipment until normal supply channels can be established.
Items set aside for WRM, the quantities required for a specified period of time, and the locations for prepositioning them are determined by a series of planning documents. The Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) is the focal point for military planning, and two JCS plans provide the basis for the WRM program. The Joint Strategic Objectives Plan, published annually, projects the forces and strategies for countering the threat to our national security over an eight-year period. The Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan, also published annually, looks one year into the future in depicting the capability of available forces. The services are required to publish plans to support the JSOP and the JSCP.
The USAF War and Mobilization Plan (WMP), published in ten volumes, covers the period of the USAF Five-Year Defense Program and directly supports the JSCP for the following year. Volume 4 (WMP-4) establishes the approved USAF and major command coordinated position on operational use of bases in wartime through five years. It lists time-phased wartime aircraft activity for USAF forces. Volume 5 (WMP-5) shows approved USAF planning factors for expenditure of war consumables and includes missile requirements. The war consumable requirements for each planned operating base are published in the USAF War Consumable Distribution Objectives (WCDO). This document, derived quarterly from WMP-4 and WMP-5, informs base commanders of changing requirements in war consumables stockage objectives.
The acquisition phase of the WRM program originates with an annual Logistics Guidance Letter forwarded by the Secretary of Defense to all services. It sets general parameters upon which we compute requirements and submit budgets to attain WRM acquisition objectives. We implement this by publishing an annual Air Force letter pertaining to buying/budget and related policies for wartime logistics support.
WRM categories
War consumables are expendable items aggregated in the general categories:
Airmunitions
Petroleum, oil, and lubricants (POL)
Tanks, adaptors, racks, and pylons
Film, chaff, in-flight rations, and other miscellaneous items.
War consumables comprise the largest portion of our war readiness materiel—about 75 percent of the total cost—but we also have the following important categories of materiel in the program:
· War readiness spares kits (WRSK’S)—air-transportable collections of spare parts and related technical items, stored and maintained by using activities, to provide initial support upon deployment
· Station sets – limited supply of ground support equipment maintained at selected bases for initial support of deploying units
· Housekeeping sets--equipment to provide billet and messing support for base augmentation, including bare-base sets
· Field rations – prepositioned rations to ensure support of base augmentation forces.
WRM management
A two-pronged reporting system is used to manage the WRM program. All bases responsible for storing WRM consumables submit monthly war consumable asset reports to their parent major command. The reports list, by item, what is currently authorized, the stock on hand, and where it is stored. Major commands review and consolidate the reports and forward them to Hq AFLC and Hq USAF. At Hq USAF we publish the reports in various formats, including one for maintaining an up-to-date data base in our command and control computers. This greatly enhances our ability to support unplanned contingencies. For example, WRM prepositioned in the Pacific area was available for immediate use during the 1968 Pueblo crisis. Our computer program, coupled with the WRM data base, enabled us to quickly determine support requirements for the tailored deployment forces and move necessary assets into position.
The WRM Capabilities Report, commonly referred to as the “M-rating” report, provides commanders with a standard measurement tool to determine the ability of their war readiness materiel to support WMP combat requirements. WRM assets are assigned to separate categories by type of materiel, and each category is assigned an M-rating by the bases or units responsible for its management. Standard percentage factors are established for assigning M-ratings, but commanders may alter the rating if the percentage factors are not truly representative of actual capabilities. Each rating change must be explained.
In May 1969 we directed an in-depth study of the WRSK concept. These kits have long been important to the mobility of Air Force units, allowing them to deploy and operate from new locations on short notice. We have approximately 500 WRSK'S, representing an asset investment of more than $400 million. The cost of WRSK’S has risen sharply with each new and progressively more sophisticated weapon system. With this in mind, we undertook to find the optimum method of supporting deploying units at minimum essential cost. When the study is completed in May 1970, we anticipate that improved WRSK management techniques and some changes in mobility support concepts will emerge.
airmunitions
We in Supply and Services manage both the nuclear and conventional nonnuclear airmunitions programs.
It is no longer news that the Southeast Asia conflict caught us virtually flatfooted with an arsenal of World War II conventional munitions, fuzes, and associated components and equipment. We spent the first two years of SEA escalation “catching up,” modifying, improving, borrowing, and trading with other services. The use of out-of-date airmunitions relegated our sophisticated jet aircraft to unsophisticated roles.
Changing tactics of Communist aggression require continuous updating of nonnuclear countermeasures. Our experience in Korea and Vietnam has taught us that our conventional munitions as well as weapon delivery systems must be modernized and upgraded. We can no longer rely on a single “family” of firepower such as nuclear weaponry. I am sure that this theme will stand out when the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Joint Logistics Review Board and the Air Force Project Corona Harvest study group analyze the lessons learned from Southeast Asia.
Research and development of conventional munitions was suspended between World War II and Korea and again between Korea and the Vietnam conflict. The lapse cost us valuable lead time required to establish and expand production facilities, initiate research, and train engineers and support personnel. We should not be willing to gamble on having as much lead time again as we had during the Vietnam conflict.
Our current airmunitions inventory has been significantly enhanced by the expedited research and development prompted by the conflict in Vietnam. Because our new munitions were tested and evaluated in an actual rather than a simulated combat environment, we were able to choose the best new developments for countering potential near-term threats.
Standard Airmunitions Packages
The Coronet Bare exercise in October 1969 proved the effectiveness of many systems and concepts developed over the last few years. Among these were Standard Airmunitions Packages (STAMPS), which are selected packages of airmunitions that can be prepackaged for airlifting and prepositioning so that sorties can be launched within hours from any operating location in the world. The advent of the C-5 Galaxy will permit a larger variety of STAMPS. Although tested and validated, the concept is still in its infancy, and new ideas and variations of existing methods will be needed to ensure a viable program.
The reporting of airmunitions from base to depot evolved from a manual system in 1965 to an almost fully mechanized system. The computerized Standard Airmunitions Reporting and Management System was implemented in 1969 by every major command that had a significant volume of airmunition transactions. Continuing refinements and improvements are being directed toward the reporting of complete rounds and in-transit data. This system is interfaced with our mechanized munitions inventory system at the Ogden Air Materiel Area, Hill AFB, Utah. From these two data systems the Air Force can obtain almost any information required for munitions management and capability studies. Selected information is fed into the Air Force Command and Control System twice a month and provides the Air Staff with visibility of current munition assets. Ogden Air Materiel Area and Warner Robins Air Materiel Area, Georgia, also furnish selected data from these systems to JCS and OSD, and many of the airmunitions funding, production, and distribution decisions are based on these data.
Just as computers require extensive peripheral equipment to function at maximum efficiency, munitions rely on currency and flexibility of supplementary hardware and software for effective employment. At the beginning of the Vietnam involvement we were hard-pressed to supply fighter units with airmunitions and related support components. Munition storage facilities in Vietnam were inadequate or nonexistent. Vietnam ports were not capable of handling the thousands of troops and hundreds of thousands of tons of support supplies and equipment, and the in-country rail and road systems were inadequate and dangerous. We had to furnish most of the equipment and train hundreds of personnel to offload, handle, and transport cargo. The airmunition delays encountered at the Vietnam ports were overcome by the Air Force Special Express System, which had been proposed by a Thirteenth Air Force staff study. It consisted of a fleet of ships chartered for exclusive use by the Air Force to transport airmunitions to Southeast Asia. These ships, loaded with selected airmunition items and their related support components, served as floating warehouses. Our bases ordered through the Airmunitions Control Point (ACP) at Headquarters Seventh Air Force. The ACP, equipped with copies of the ships’ manifests, directed one of these Special Express vessels to a port for offload of the required munitions and supporting components. This system proved an excellent interim solution between March 1965, when the first ship sailed from CONUS, and January 1967, when the Special Express was phased out. At the peak of the operation we had 19 ships under charter.
supply services
Nine hundred thousand blue-suiters and their two million dependents require an extensive network of facilities to supply them with essential services. The Directorate of Supply and Services monitors the operation of 156 clothing stores, 202 commissaries, 1081 feeding facilities, 32 laundry and dry-cleaning plants. In addition, we establish policies and procedures for supplying Air Force housing and operating mortuary facilities. The availability and quality of these services vitally affect the welfare and morale of Air Force personnel and their dependents. This realization has resulted in placing increased emphasis upon improving these services and the facilities that house them.
commissaries
Crowded commissary stores and lack of commissary warehouse space have become almost a way of life. Commissary sales increase every year and the growing shortage of facilities threatens to become critical, but actions are being taken to alleviate these problems. Authority has been obtained to use excess commissary surcharge funds, not to exceed $200,000 per project, for alterations and minor construction of commissaries. This will help, but excess funds available for this purpose are limited and probably will continue to be. The Office of the Secretary of Defense has been requested to approve an increase in surcharge funds, which would slightly raise commissary prices, and to authorize use of these funds for major commissary construction. This procedure would be used only when funds could not be obtained through the Military Construction Program. Approval of the increased surcharge for building and enlarging commissaries would satisfy growing requirements for commissary facilities within five years.
The Air Force Data Systems Design Center is developing computer programs for commissary accounts which will integrate them into the Standard Base Supply System on the Univac 1050-II computer. This will eliminate time-consuming monthly inventories and concurrently update supply, accounting, and finance records. In addition, mechanization will automate price changes, requirement computations, semiannual inventories, and the commissary operating program.
clothing stores
Uniform clothing management has been attracting increasing attention, and a vigorous program of modernizing facilities is under way. Clothing stores in dilapidated out-of-the way buildings do not attract customers; facilities comparable to those in civilian clothing outlets are the ultimate goal. Transformation of the WAF Clothing Issue Center, Lackland AFB, Texas, into a “House of Fashion” resembling a modern dress shop set an important precedent. Similar actions are under way or planned for several other clothing outlets. Equipment tables of allowances have been revised to authorize equipment suitable to the location and decor of attractively appointed stores.
Service tests at Air Training Command bases showed the desirability of automating Air Force clothing store operations using the basic Univac 1050-II Standard Base Supply System. Computerization is under way and will be completed by July 1970.
Following this trend toward computerizing all base supply activities, priorities have been established to add munitions, aviation fuel, base housing supply, and redistribution and marketing accounts to the base 1050-II computers.
food services
Many improvements have been implemented in food services, and various other innovations have been tested and evaluated to make the dining halls more attractive to Air Force personnel. Convenience foods were tested, and it appears that they may be incorporated into menus as more specialized equipment and methods of reconstituting and serving them are developed. Central preparation of foods has proved to be practical and economical, so meats, vegetables, and bakery products are being processed at one location on a base and delivered to the individual dining halls.
The military services completed six months of testing on an Armed Forces Standard 42-Day Cycle Menu. It was determined that locale had to be given greater consideration in planning menus: what is traditional in one section of the country often is not acceptable in another. Findings from the test are being incorporated into the master menu now being planned for calendar year 1971.
aviation fuels and oils
An allied responsibility of the Supply Services Division is management of aviation fuels and oils, which are subject to exceedingly rapid turnover. During the past year an average of 779 million gallons valued at $97 million was issued each month. The worldwide inventory, reported monthly, averaged 2.2 billion gallons valued at $266 million. These products are stored and issued at 243 bases supported by 94 storage terminals.
changes in supply philosophy
In the years following World War II the Air Force stored large stockpiles of materiel in numerous CONUS and overseas depots to support its activities. In recent years, improved technology in logistics processes paved the way for “direct support” of our operating units, which now requisition much of their materiel, as required, from Air Materiel Areas. Overseas depots were eliminated and CONUS depots consolidated into the existing five AMA’S. Requisitions instantaneously transmitted by AUTODIN, computer processing of supply actions at AMA’S and bases, and increasingly rapid transportation make it possible to support a larger inventory of Air Force weapon systems and equipment with proportionately less support materiel. During the past ten years the total value of Air Force weapon systems and equipment increased by more than 40 percent, from $26.9 billion to $39.8 billion, while the supply support inventory increased less than 5 percent from $12.3 billion to $12.9 billion. During the same period supply effectiveness, as measured by operational readiness of Air Force operating units, increased.
How this was accomplished can be partially explained by an examination of our requirement computations, which are designed to represent mathematically what occurs in the supply system. Support requirements are directly related to supply experience, and they vary in direct proportion to changing supply conditions. For instance, on each recoverable line items, the procurement lead time requirement is computed from the item’s procurement history, the replacement requirement from the item’s failure and condemnation data, the order and shipping requirement from time of requisitioning to receipt of materiel, and the repair cycle requirement from time needed to repair the item. Management improvements over the years have decreased the time required to perform these functions and proportionately reduced stock levels required to support a given level of weapon system activity.
In FY 69 the Air Force brought all expense items under stock fund management. Stock funding brings control of supply resources down to the operational commander’s level. He estimates annual budget requirements within his consumer funds availability and then operates within monies allocated for that purpose. Seven hundred thousand items centrally procured by Air Force AMA’S, valued at $1.9 billion, are now managed under the Systems Support Division of the Air Force Stock Fund. An additional 858,000 items, procured from DSA, GSA, other service stock funds, and local purchase, valued at $705 million, have been placed under the control of the General Support Stock Fund.
Advanced Logistics System
The interrelationships of logistics functions will be brought into focus within the Advanced Logistics Systems (ALS) which AFLC is currently designing. Using third-generation computers, ALS will combine existing AFLC supply, maintenance, engineering, procurement, and transportation data system into one unified system. It will be possible to appraise immediately the impact of a logistics action upon all aspects of item management. By providing complete visibility, ALS will isolate the source of logistics problems and direct our attention to the solutions.
Frequently, an apparent supply shortage is actually a symptom of a deficiency in one of the other logistics areas. Unreliability of item performance may be causing excessive failures, difficulties with engineering specifications may be lengthening procurement lead time, or unrealistic preservation and packaging instructions may be delaying shipment. And then again, the item may be available but unreported somewhere in the vast Air Force supply complex. Since AMA computers do not now function on real time and item managers do not have access to daily asset information at base level, on items other than AFRAMS, the item is lost to the system until reported. ALS will provide random access on a near real-time basis to worldwide asset information, thus contributing to optimum distribution of assets.
As the world’s largest user of computers, Air Force supply personnel are acknowledged leaders in implementing modern supply techniques. While we are proud of past achievements, in a climate of stringent military budgets we must intensify our review of all supply policies and procedures to find more cost-effective ways of providing optimum supply support. No supply technique, no matter how well established, will be exempt from this relentless search.
What does the future hold in store? Forecasting is always a precarious undertaking. However, the potential of third-general computers strongly suggests the direction in which the Air Force supply system will evolve in the seventies.
Because item managers will have constantly updated worldwide visibility of spares, their management capability will increase. Knowledge of the worldwide supply status at bases will lend itself to a “push” system. Base requirements will be known by the item managers, who will be able to routinely ship materiel to where it is needed without requisitioning. Stock funded items, obviously, would be excluded from the “push” system. Supply discipline on stock funded items results from charging items against the limited funds of the requisitioners and then crediting them for return of items excess to their needs.
Mathematical modeling will play a large role in creating supply stockage policy. In the past, experience was our only criterion, and experience often depicts the expedient than the optimum way of doing business. Computer simulation will test proposed supply policies before implementation to preclude costly trial-and-error testing within the supply system. Advanced analysis techniques will more effectively detect errors and suggest corrective actions.
Overall, the established trend of supporting a given inventory of weapon systems and equipment with a proportionately smaller investment in support materiel will continue.
Hq United States Air Force
Brigadier General A. A. Riemondy (B.S., Lehigh University) is Director of Supply and Services, DCS/S&L, Hq USAF. Entering active duty from ROTC in 1941, he served in the Southwest Pacific (1942-46) as squadron commander, assistant chief of maintenance, and commander of the 4th Group. Postwar assignments have been as maintenance technical inspector; student, Air Force Institute of Technology; Division Chief, Office of Assistant for Development Programming, DCS/D, Hq USAF; Director of Maintenance Engineering and Commander, 3131st Maintenance Group, France; Acting Deputy Director of Maintenance Engineering, Hq Air Force Logistics Command; Deputy Commander, Middletown Air Materiel Area, Pennsylvania; and Director of Material Management, Ogden AMA, Utah.
Disclaimer
The conclusions and opinions expressed in this
document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression,
academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official
position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air
Force or the Air University.
Home Page | Feedback? Email the Editor