Chris Ballard, Wyly Gilfoil, Kathy Lau, Jay Miseli, Scott Ostrowski, Sebastien Prangere, Sug Je Sohn,

Heather Stevenson, Jaroslav Tyman

Military Logistics Cargo Distribution Management for the Next Conflict

Agenda

• Mission Statement• Logistics Problem (Externally Affirmed)• Team Organization• Demand Analysis Update• Feasibility Update• Applicability Update• Timeline

Mission Statement

• By April 19, 2004, determine the feasibility of, and demand for, tactical cargo delivery optimizers(software or hardware) to support Army logistics operations at multiple echelons for future conflicts.

Logistics Problem Statement

• “Four major improvements must be made to our logistics systems. We must connect our logisticians; modernize theater distribution; improve force reception; integrate the supply chain. [The] force was set [to support Iraq] in half the time of Operation Desert Storm/Shield, but the distribution system collapsed as soon as hostilities began.”– Lieutenant General Claude V. Christianson, Army G-4

Team Organization

• Based on compressed timeline, these teams are working in parallel.• Demand - Jay, Wyly

• Feasibility - Scott, Heather, Kat, Jaroslav

• Applicability - Chris, Sebastien, Sug Je

Role and Plan - Demand

• Demand Team assesses the scope of this capability and the levels of usefulness.

• Step 1 – Read relevant articles and After-Action Reviews detailing performance of logistics agencies during Operation Iraqi Freedom for the 3rd Infantry Division

• Step 2 – Conduct online survey to determine actual demand from units executing logistics and scope of this capability

• Relevant Articles:•Army Logistics: Our Reality, Our Future•Logistics White Paper•Moving Those Beans and Bullets•Sustainment of the Army Depends on Continuing Logistics Transformation•DLA: Logistics Backbone of Iraqi Freedom•Delivering Logistics Readiness to the Warfighter

• After-Action Reviews Utilized:•3rd Infantry Division (Mechanized)•HHC, Task Force 2-69 Armor•C/1-3 ADA•HHC/1-24 Infantry

• Survey (being conducted)

Current State - Demand

•Continue survey via WWW and e-mail; collect results• After-action reviews and articles

summarized for use•Capabilities/requirements determined by

survey feedback (and compared with AARs and articles)

Future Tasks - Demand

Role and Plan - Feasibility

• Feasibility team determines the platform, echelon, and technical aspects of the system through• Capabilities Analysis• Cost-Benefit Analysis

• Software/Hardware• Personnel/Training• Per Unit Cost and Army Budgeting• Existing Decision Support Tools

Current State - Feasibility

• Analyze demand results• Adjust direction to meet survey results•Continue feasibility analysis and

research

Future Tasks - Feasibility

Role and Plan - Applicability

Applicability team analyzes and assesses the proposed application from managerial perspectives to include the strategy of technology integration.

Plan

Research current and pending technologies

Research technology integration

Coordinate with demand and feasibility study

Provide estimate of the anticipated integration

Current State - Applicability

• Competitive Priorities• Measures of Performance• Data Transfer and Interoperability

• Network architecture

• Composability, compatibility

Future Tasks - Applicability

• Additional research on integration of new technology

• Refinement of scope, dependent on preliminary findings by Demand and Feasibility teams

• Additional research on planned technology integration in Army

Timeline Feb 4 - Initial Coordination meeting Feb 9 - Subgroup synchronization Feb 18 - Coordination meeting 1 March 3 - Coordination meeting 2

- March 15 - Project Program Report

- March 22 - Coordination meeting 3

- April 5 - Coordination meeting 4

- April 7 - Internal Deadline

- April 14 - Written product complete

- April 19 - Turn in final report

Questions?