Overseas CFBs

[Loachman]

To address these tactical planning/scheduling decision problems, good and robust optimization methods are needed and, preferably, within the framework of the network design and transportation models. A robust optimization tool can provide a complete business solution that manages the CF overseas operations and monitors the technical performances of the entire logistics network (Navy, Army and Air Force). In contrast to the simple approach of decomposing the CF logistics using a conventional planning/scheduling methods (pre-positions supplies, amongs others, as proposed by CIRRELT report), the optimal network design modeling approach should accounts for actual materials flows in the entire CF supply chain, from the basic professional equipment to the overseas operations. Therefore, a global optimum solution for the CF operations could be generated which is different from a local optimum or a feasible solution that is found using simple decision support tools (CIRRELT report). The cost savings could be important since the logistics decisions have a huge impact on the cost of CF overseas operations.

I am hoping that you are just a manic super-Dilbert fan and do not really believe that random buzzwords actually communicate anything of value.

 

[AERO2012]

I cringe whenever I see "cost savings" and "optimization" in discussions of military logistics.

"Just in time" and "lean" and all the other great corporate buzzwords are fine in many circumstances.  For military logistics, however, margins need to be built in; supplies stockpiled and kept on hand, and inherently, there will be cases of oversupply.  It's a trite saying, but the enemy gets a vote in these matters.  The best analytical model in the world is just that - a model, that may or may not match reality.  And being forced to tell the commander that his plan is unsupportable because his ammunition consumption doesn't match the model...

I think I deserve these harsh replies, I really neglected to put some context in my previous writing. My post tried to challenge the findings of the Cirrelt report, entitled “Canadian Forces Overseas Supply Network: Strategic Need and Design Methodology”, which you provided for our info. As you know, the goal of logistics planning is to make planning decisions optimizing the trade-off between economic objectives such as cost minimization and the objective of mission success. To achieve this goal military logistics can not be modeled by a simple approach, as proposed in Cirrelt report. A more integrated and sophisticated optimization models are needed in order to take into account CF features/constraints.

The report claims, “Since international needs and Canada's roles have significantly evolved during the last decades, and given that supply network efficiency and robustness are critical factors for mission's success, the reengineering of the CF supply network to incorporate permanent international Operations Support Depots (OSD) has become a critical issue. This position paper discusses fundamental factors that may affect Canada's role fulfillment, establishes supply capability needs, and proposes a methodology to design the best overseas supply network for the CF”. I believe, with all due respect, that the authors overstated their findings in that regard, given the fact that the study examined a focal supply chain, rather than an entire supply chain of the CF, as a unit of analysis. Furthermore, while mission's success is clearly a construct of central importance in the report, the authors failed to provide solid theoretical and analytical background on the validity of using permanent international Operations Support Depots, let alone its locations. Therefore, it is true, as you suggested, that conventional design and methodology can not be applied to the CF context. I believe that a more comprehensive design methodology of CF overseas supply network should be developed to take into account that military organizations are global in scope and relate to other organizations at numerous levels.

 

[AERO2012]

I am hoping that you are just a manic super-Dilbert fan and do not really believe that random buzzwords actually communicate anything of value.

No Sir, I am not a super-Dilbert fan, I am just a scientist with over 20 year experience in the private and public sector.

That being said, special thanks for your reply. There will be no progress if there is no harsh criticism.

 

[Loachman]

You're welcome.

If something's not written in a recognizable language such as English or French, very few people will read beyond the first sentence.