Dominant Logistics
The Future of Prepositioned Stocks
As may be noted in other articles I've written, I adamantly oppose the use of prepositioned equipment for a variety of reasons. It is purely a waste of resources and money that could be much better spent on other options. This is not because prepositioning is a bad concept; it is because we are prepositioning the wrong materials.
Instead of prepositioning vehicles and systems, we should focus our efforts on prepositioning the supplies needed by forces deployed abroad. Food, water, construction materials, and similar supplies can all be prepositioned effectively. At many locations, large stocks of fuel, ammunition, and medical supplies would also be very useful. This approach offers a number of advantages over current practices.
Because our allies typically have similar supply needs, these stocks can be rotated out on a regular basis as these nations purchase supplies from us. When a host nation needs a given material, they could purchase it from us and simply pick up the materials from the preposition site. This would also be a very valuable resource to our allies in the event that they need materials to defend themselves - the bulk of what they will need will alreeady be on-hand.
Unlike tanks and artillery, host nations will rarely object to keeping large stocks of supplies in their borders. The only military force present would be a modest team to defend the site against the rare threats that would be encountered. After all, there is little benefit to blowing up stocks of MREs while a large quantity of Abrams tanks makes a very inviting target. There would also be no need to tear up the countryside for training of blivets of water and fuel either.
A typical preposition site would be structured on the following lines:
Two parallel runways of sufficient length for operating C-17s would be on site as well as room for loading and unloading the aircraft
Between the runways would be tanks for fuel buried sufficiently underground and compartmented to limit blast effects
Warehouses for loading and unloading would rest on top of buildings built underground instead of above - these bunkers would provide storage for materials without exposing them to potential threats
Where available, these facilities will be located near pier facilities where conveyors would carry palletized cargo from the bunkers to waiting ships
Site security comes from weaponized Cessna Cargomasters in the air and foreign 4X4 vehicles on the ground to make these assets available to special operations
This design would require the least amount of space while maximizing capacity and capability. It's small enough that a site of this design can be placed in any nation that currently receives foreign aid from the United States. Consequently, any nation that DOES receive aid from the U.S. should be host to at least one of these facilities. For that matter, many of our existing military facilities abroad could easily be converted into a preposition site of the proposed design.
With this approach, we could establish dozens of prepositioned stock sites throughout the world. These sites can support the local nations military needs as well as operations other than war. For our own needs, this would dramatically reduce the requirements of delivering materials to forward deployed units.
The possibility also exists for units to receive their sustainment resources directly from these sites when deployed. Instead of relying upon log bases to sustain smaller forces, units could receive supplies directly from these sites via helicopter or C-130. This would also make available a wide array of operating sites for support aircraft like UAVs and the U-2.
While these sites are small and capable of limited sortie capacity, they would also be very numerous. Instead of having all of our transport aircraft operating from a handful of large, vulnerable support sites they could be spread around dozens of locations. Instead of having 3 or 4 sites handling about two dozen sorties per day, we could have 10 to 12 sites supporting about one dozen sorties per day increasing our sortie rate between 50% and 100% for larger aircraft. And because many more sites will be available, rotorcraft and C-130 can also play major roles. This also allows us to adjust for those situations where nations deny access to their airspace for military flights over political issues.
Simply put, we have much to gain from prepositioning of military materials but vehicles and other major systems must not be a part of the equation. The challenge in logistics is supporting the deployed force - not delivering it. Keep the systems at home where they can be properly maintained and put the supporting materials where they are needed - out where they will be used instead of sitting in American depots collecting dust.