Gulf War Air Power Survey



Download 5.55 Mb.
Page24/61
Date26.11.2017
Size5.55 Mb.
#35436
1   ...   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   ...   61


* Derived from multiple sources including AFR 400-24, AFM 67-1, WMP-1 (AN­NEX E), draft Supply Concept of Operations (AF/LGSS), Supply War­time Plan­ning and Execution Guide, and OPLAN 90-1002.

height of the war, the Air Force was issuing approximately 15 million gallons of jet fuel per day, including over 11 million gallons per day issued in the AOR and 4 million gallons per day issued to aircraft operat­ing out of Europe. In all, over 111,000 U.S. and allied combat sorties were supported. Storing and issuing this much fuel required over 120 R-14 air-transportable hydrant refueling systems, 220 R-9 refueling vehicles, 679 50,000-gallon fuel bladders, and over 926 fuels personnel.557
Fuels personnel coordinated several interoperability fuels issues with the Saudi hosts and Central Command. The issues ranged from loaning R-14s to the Saudis, arranging offshore tanker deliveries, ensuring quality control, and installing and training personnel in the use of fuels mobility support equipment (FMSE). Fuels personnel also managed and coordinat­ed use of the Aerial Bulk Fuel Delivery System to move over 600,000 gallons of fuel to sites as far north as Kuwait in support of allied forces. They also used that delivery system to move Jet Petroleum Thermally Stable (JPTS), which the U2/TR-1 uses, from bases in Europe to the AOR.
Host nation support was a major contributor to the success of the fuels operation. All ground fuels and most of the jet fuel except for JP-5 (for Navy Aircraft) and JPTS were provided from within the theater. Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Oman contributed 1.76 billion gallons of fuel for land, sea, and air operations.558 (Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates donated the fuel.) Without the contributions of those nations, the fuel would have required extensive sealift, which would have exposed the inadequacy of the U.S. tanker fleet.559 The dollar amount of this contribution (calculated in U.S. dollars at $1.20 per gallon) is approximately $2 billion. Additionally, commercial airport contractors provided into-plane refueling support, host military provided aircraft refueling at military bases, and host nation trucks and drivers accom­plished most of the inland distribution of fuel from refineries and depots to the bases. Host nation help with inland fuel distribution removed a major burden from Army Central Command (ARCENT), which was re­sponsible for bulk fuel inland distribution and had committed most of its truck companies to moving fuel for ground forces.
By the time the war started, Air Force fuels mobility equipment (air transportable hydrants, air transportable bladders, and air transportable pumps and transfer systems), refueling vehicles, and personnel combined with host nation personnel and fuels facilities were available at each de­ployed location (except at Al Kharj and the forward operating loca­tions) to provide refueling support to sustain operations. Additionally, fuel distribu­tion and storage equipment from the Army Southwest Asia Petroleum Distribution Operational Project was deployed from the conti­nental United States to the AOR. The project consists of pipeline, tactical petroleum terminals, and pump stations for distributing large quantities of fuel across great distances. During Desert Shield and Desert Storm, more than 127 miles of tactical pipeline were laid to respond rapidly to urgent operational support requirements and to enable movement and storage of greater quan­tities of fuel forward to support Army require­ments.
The Fuel Situation
This section will cover all the major aspects of fuels during Desert Shield and Desert Storm. It describes the fuels situation before Desert Shield and during Desert Shield, build-up, Desert Storm, and redeploy­ment. It ends by discussing the implications of successes and failures during those times.
Before Desert Shield
A supply of jet fuel (for planned arriving forces) was prepositioned in or near the AOR before Desert Shield. [DELETED]560 The fuels in­cluded product owned by the U.S. Air Force in Oman and product owned by the Defense Fuel Supply Center (DFSC) at storage sites in the theater, Soma­lia, Diego Garcia, Singa­pore, and Italy. DFSC also owned POL in three Afloat Prepo­si­tioning Ships which were stationed at Diego Garcia. As Table 24 depicts, approxi­mate­ly 8.5 million barrels of fuels were available before Desert Shield. How­ever, as depicted in Figure 62, about 4.1 million barrels of the storage was mal­posi­tioned outside the AOR. Even the fuel in the AOR was some­what malposi­tioned, since very little of it was located at the places where the users need­ed it. Also, most of the jet fuel prepositioned in the AOR was JP-5. While JP-5 was not the fuel with the greatest de­mand, it was the CENTCOM choice of fuel for prepositioning for two rea­sons. First, JP-5 was more difficult to source in the AOR than JET A-1; second, JP-5 pro­vides more flexibility in that it can be used by both ground- and sea-based aircraft as well as by ground combat support equip­ment.561
Table 24

CENTCOM Fuel Storage

(Millions of Barrels)562


ASHORE JP-5 JET A-1 DFM563

Bahrain 1,536

UAE 954 470

Oman 117 382 248

Djibouti 181 316

Somalia 129 22

Singapore 350 1,000

Italy 2,028



AFLOAT

Bahrain (one ship) 13

Diego Garcia (three ships) 760

TOTAL 4,040 3,432 1,034



(source: USCENTCOM/JPO)


Figure 62

DFSC Fuel Locations
Although this fuel was prepositioned, its malpositioning would ne­cessi­tate significant inland distribution. Therefore, plans called for a sig­nificant amount of reliance on host nations for adequate refueling sup­port. Howev­er, in the absence of any signed agreements, much of this support was based on hand shakes and assumptions.564 The United States had been negotiating unsuccessfully for years with the Saudi Government for fuel storage in Saudi Arabia.565 Additionally, very little was known about the fuels capabili­ty at in-country airports and bases. Airport data from the Worldwide Automated Airfield Intelligence File Database pub­lished by the Defense Mapping Agency did not contain key information such as storage capacity, receipt modes and capacity, and distribution modes and capacity on most of the Southwest Asia airports.566 Because they lacked that information, fuel planners had difficulty in determining what each base would need to provide refueling support.567
In addition to prepositioning fuel, the Air Force also preposi­tioned some of its FMSE in the AOR. Knowing that deploying aircraft would beddown at host nation airports and military bases where addition­al fuels support would likely be required, the CENTAF fuels planners prepositioned 59 R-9 refuelers, 42 R‑14 portable hydrant systems, 139 50,000 gallon fuel bladders, 29 R-22 storage distribution pumps, and a 5-ton liquid oxygen generating plant in the Air Force prepositioning sites in Oman, Bahrain and aboard the three prepositioned ships in the Indian Ocean.568 Additional refueling units and FMSE were prepositioned in war reserve materiel status at Seymour Johnson and Myrtle Beach Air Force Bases.569 These assets were maintained in a constant state of readiness and could be brought out of storage and set up at any bare base to pro­vide quick and safe refueling support. A more detailed discussion of the preposi­tioned equipment will follow in this chapter.
The combination of prepositioned fuel and equipment in or near the AOR was not adequate to support forces eventually deployed during Desert Shield and Desert Storm. However, it did provide some initial fuels capa­bility and provided an excellent supplement to the host nation support.
Desert Shield Build Up
As forces began to deploy, an initial cadre of three fuels person­nel arrived at Riyadh to guide force beddown and establish movement priori­ties.570 In a short time, six more fuels specialists arrived to ensure twenty-four-hour coverage, effect liaison with Army forces, and con­duct field assistance visits to determine which and how much fuels equipment and manpower should be deployed.571 Unit fuels personnel and some fuels mobility equipment deployed with aircraft aviation and combat support unit type codes. However, it soon became apparent that addi­tional equip­ment beyond that prepositioned in theater would be needed. Due to space limiting factors in the AOR, an additional ninety-two R-9s, thirty-six R-14s, twenty-five R-22s and various other FMSE owned by the Tactical Air Command and earmarked for deploy­ment to Southwest Asia were in war reserve material status at Myrtle Beach and Seymour Johnson AFBs.572 As forces deployed, and bed­down locations were made known, the equip­ment from Myrtle Beach and Seymour Johnson was airlifted to the AOR.
The major refueling concerns during the early days of deploy­ment were at Dhahran and Riyadh, which were the major Aerial Ports of Debar­kation. Host nation refueling capability at these loca­tions could not sustain the flow of aircraft, and some delays in takeoffs of MAC aircraft occurred. The situation existed for about two weeks until CENTAF estab­lished a forward operating location at Al Jubayl Naval Airport for inter­mediate refueling.573 The situation was com­pletely overcome when ade­quate FMSE and refueling units were in place.
As force levels were increased over and above what had been previous­ly planned, in-theater petroleum, oil, and lubricants (POL) re­quire-ments increased proportionately. Fuels planners were not only responsi­ble for determining how much manpower and equipment would be re­quired at each location, but were also required to establish fuel require­ments to support combat operations. The requirements were to be passed forward to Central Command's Joint Petroleum Office, which in turn consolidated each Service's requirements and passed them to the Defense Fuel Region/ Middle East (DFR/ME), a sub­ordinate element of the Defense Fuel Supply Center. Tables 25 and 26 depict the pre-Desert Storm daily requirements provided to Central Command by the Services.
DFR/ME identified sources of supply and, in coordination with the Military Sealift Command, scheduled the tanker ships to carry the bulk petroleum to the AOR. However, as previously stated, most of the re­quire­ments (ninety-three percent) were satisfied from within the AOR. In Saudi Arabia, the Saudi Arabian Marketing and Refining Company (SAMAREC) was tasked by the Ministry of Defense and Aviation (MODA) to provide fuel to all Coalition forces operating in country. A written agreement in November 1990 formalized the procedures and scope of fuel support the Saudis would provide. A written pre-Desert Shield agreement with the Omani Air Force made fuel support available to U.S. aircraft operating in Oman. All other agreements were either verbal or based on some other type of contractual agreement. In December 1990, MODA established a National Petroleum Management Council com­posed of repre­sentatives from MODA, SAMAREC, Petrolube, the Ministry of Petro­leum, and the Arabian American Oil Company, which dealt primarily with crude production. A similar agency existed in the UAE. The coun­cils coordinated Coalition fuel requirements and resolved problem areas.
The CENTCOM stockage objective was to maintain a minimum of a thirty day POL supply despite that more aircraft were arriving than had been planned for in OPLAN 1002-88.


Table 25

Daily Requirements by Component (Millions of Gallons)









Theater

Saudi

Air Force

10.8

7.6

Navy

5.5

5.3

Army

6.3

6.3

Marines

2.4

1.5

Total

25.0

20.7



Table 26

Daily Requirements by Product (Millions of Gallons)





Theater

Saudi

Commercial Jet Fuel (Jet A-1)

15.0

10.9

Army Preferred Diesel (DF2)

4.2

4.2

Navy Preferred Jet Fuel (JP-5)

1.9

1.7

Diesel Fuel Marine (DFM)

3.5

3.5

Motor Gasoline (MG)

0.4

0.4

Total:

25.0

20.7



Determining the POL requirements was a difficult task for the Servic­es; Air Force requirements were the most sensitive. Not only was the Air Force the largest user, aircraft beddown locations as well as the number and type of aircraft being deployed were changing con­stantly. Require­ments were estimated by multiplying the number of aircraft de­ployed by the War Mobilization Plan (Volume V, Daily Sortie Rates) times the average hourly aircraft fuel burn rates estab­lished in AFR 144‑4.574 More exact requirements could not be derived, as the estimators did not know how long the sorties would be or how many would be flown each day. This information could not be provid­ed by any of the air campaign plan­ners.575 Thus, the requirements provided to CENTCOM were only rough estimates at best.
Service requirements (when consolidated) were forwarded to SAMAREC officials who continually assured Defense Fuel Region and Central Com­mand representatives that they could provide the fuel. SAMAREC officials also provided assurance that they could transport the fuel from their depots and refineries to the locations where it was needed. Inland distribution was a continuing concern by the entire fuels communi­ty and will be discussed later. As a side note, fuel requirements from the Military Airlift Command were passed forward to the Defense Fuel Supply Center (DFSC) as well. Fuel requirements at continental U.S. aerial ports of embarkation and intransit locations in Europe went up significantly when the deployment began. DFSC had to ensure that the supplier at these loca­tions could meet the increased requirements. Prob­lems encountered in Europe will be discussed later in this section as well.
Fuel Additives
Since JET A-1 (commercial grade jet fuel) was the primary jet fuel being provided by in-theater suppliers, Air Force fuels personnel were responsible for injecting the fuel with the proper additives before it was consumed by Air Force high-performance jet aircraft. Prescribed amounts of fuel system icing inhibitor, anticorrosion additive, and anti­static addi­tive had to be injected into the fuel to avoid engine damage resulting from prolonged use of commercial grade fuel. With additives injected, JET A-1 is identical to JP-8, the standard used in Europe/NATO.
According to USCENTAF OPLAN 1021-88, each deploying unit was to take a ten-day supply of additives with them when they deployed. Howev­er, many of the units did not take the additives, and additional stocks were required to resupply what additives had been taken. DFSC, the agency responsible for providing the resupply, needed to take some special con­tracting initiatives to correct the situation. At the onset of Desert Shield, it was apparent that an inadequate inventory of additives was on hand in Saudi Arabia, especially if the conflict situation was prolonged. The quickest method to relieve the insufficiency was to purchase the additives through an existing contract in the Middle East. Therefore, DFSC arranged for the purchase of 9,361 drums of Fuel System Icing Inhibitor, 271 drums of Anti Corrosion Inhibitor, and 88 drums of Anti Static Inhibitor from Caltex Oil Products Company.576
With resupply made available from DFSC, Air Force fuels person­nel were responsible for injecting the additives into the fuel at all loca­tions. This proved to be very difficult. The fuel additive injectors, as currently designed, slowed down fuel flow because the diameters of the piping within the injectors were smaller than those of the equipment used to offload tank trucks.577 This situation was exacerbated by numerous injector diaphragm failures and the lack of qualified repair technicians. Thus, the rapid initial lay-in and continued preservation and maintenance of fuel inventories was more important to fuels managers than actually injecting the additives. It cannot be determined if fuel additives were injected at all locations. However, fuel additives or the lack thereof were not “show stoppers”; aircraft flew with and without them, depending on location, with no apparent ill effects.
Deployment Location Capability
As fuel requirements were determined and passed forward, the CENTAF fuels planners turned their attention to aircraft refueling capacity at each location. Ensuring the proper mix between Air Force organic refueling capability (equipment and personnel) and host nation support refueling capability was a very sensitive area. Effort had to be made to ensure round-the-clock sortie-generation capability; yet the United States did not want to offend the host by bringing in massive numbers of fuel trucks, hydrant systems, bladders, and personnel.578
Since little was known about deployment locations, the senior fuels technicians on the ground were basically responsible for determining their equipment and personnel requirements. Many of these technicians were junior grade non-commissioned officers (NCOs) with little experience in setting up mobility equipment to support combat operations.579 The situa­tion was caused by the combining of small unit type codes rather than the use of one large unit type code. The lack of senior supervision led to favoritism toward certain host base personnel, discontentment among personnel of the same rank, and a split of refueling responsibilities (i.e., “you refuel your aircraft and we'll refuel ours”).580 The lack of familiarity with fuels mobility support equipment also led to unnecessary delays in equipment operation. The vast majority of fuels supervisory personnel had little if any idea of how to actually set up and locate a bare base FMSE system.581 For example, at one location with over one-hundred fuels person­nel, the R-14s were out-of-service because no one knew to flip the reset switch.582 Over ten years had elapsed since many individuals had any contact (i.e., training) at all with the equipment. To overcome this lack of experience and knowledge Air Force, Central Command established a special team to set up FMSE at most of the beddown loca­tions.583
Once the requirements for refueling equipment and personnel were established at each of the beddown locations, CENTAF, with the assistance of the Tactical Air Command (TAC) Fuels Staff, was responsi­ble for sourcing the assets to meet the requirements. Once sourced, the two organizations were responsible for ensuring that the requirements were provided to CENTCOM for inclusion in the Time Phased Force De­ployment Listing. Initial sourcing of equipment came from the fuels equipment prepositioned in the AOR. Follow-on requirements were sourced from additional TAC prepositioned assets at MacDill and Seymour Johnson. When the stocks at MacDill and Seymour were exhausted, equipment from both USAFE and PACAF were sourced. In all, ninety-two percent of the worldwide inventory of FMSE was deployed. This deploy­ment left the other combatant commands with limited ability to establish any kind of bare base refueling capability, had it been neces­sary.
JPTS Stocks
The absence of an inventory of jet propellant thermally stable (JPTS) fuel in Saudi Arabia for U-2 and TR-1 aircraft generated one of the most time-consuming fuels problems to overcome by the fuels community in the first weeks of SWA operations.584 Because POL managers at Taif were denied use of a storage facility on the base, CENTAF secured and received approval from the Saudi government to install several 50,000-gallon storage bladders. The closest sources of JPTS to fill the bladders were at Torrejon Air Base in Spain and Royal Air Force (RAF) Base Akrotiri on Cyprus. The JPTS at Torrejon consisted of 3,000 55-gallon drums, which were airlifted to Taif by SAC KC-10s and MAC C-141s. The JPTS at RAF Akrotiri consisted of approximately 700,000 gallons stored in bulk fuel tanks. C-141s equipped with area bulk fuel delivery systems airlifted approximately 100,000 gallons from Akrotiri to Taif. Trucks moved additional fuels in drums from the refinery in Texas to Barksdale AFB, Louisiana, where it was then airlifted to the AOR. Once a 60-day stock supply level was established in theater, resupply was established by sealift and line-haul tank trucks.
Inland Distribution
U.S. Army Forces, Central Command was responsible for inland distribu­tion of bulk petroleum to supported Service components in the AOR.585 The 475th Quartermaster Group (Reserve) was responsible for providing the necessary support. On 7 January 1991, the 475th, through the Commander-in-Chief, Central Command, published an Inland Distri­bution Plan.
The publishing of the Inland Distribution Plan was delayed by the late arrival of the 475th QM Group, which did not arrive until the last part of October 1990.586 The arrival of this Reserve Group was delayed mainly because of the decision to give deployment of combat forces priority.587 According to the plan, the primary resupply of all storage facilities in theater was to be by commercial (host nation) and U.S. Army line haul. Support from theater bulk storage facilities forward to the Army Marine Corps, and CENTAF was accomplished primarily by a combination of host nation tank trucks and U.S. Army tankers. Distribu­tion to each base was accomplished through use of in-place contracts, fixed airfield storage facilities, and host nation truck line haul in combi­nation with U.S. assets received by airlift and sealift during the mobiliza­tion period.
The expansion of U.S. support to the Eastern, Central, and West­ern Provinces of Saudi Arabia utilized the 127 miles of tactical pipeline laid to help meet operational requirements. The pipelines were laid by the Army Southwest Asia Petroleum Distribution Operational Project, which was a coordinated effort of military and contract personnel using preposi­tioned assets in the AOR. The effort augmented the host nation petroleum distribution system.
Distribution to Saudi Arabia's Central Province
According to the inland distribution plan, the 226th Area Support Group, utilizing its organic petroleum assets, was to establish general support (GS) bases for units in and passing through its area of support. These bases were to be established at King Khalid Military City and Logbase Alpha to provide direct support and retail support to Echelon Above Corps units at each location and direct support to divisional and non-divisional units passing through their areas of operation. Additional­ly, the 226th Area Support Group was to provide gasoline and diesel support to CENTAF at King Khalid Military City.
The 2d Area Support Base was to provide limited general sup­port, direct support, and retail support for MOGAS and diesel in the Ri­yadh area of operations to Echelon Above Corps units, CENTAF, and units passing through the Riyadh support base area. In addition, Army-project­ed distri­bution planning for the Central Province included extending the six-inch tactical petroleum pipeline from the Eastern Province at Bastognein in a northwestern direction toward King Khalid Military City. CENTAF's 55th Surveillance and Reconnaissance Wing at Riyadh and the 340th Air Rescue Wing at King Khalid International were to be resup­plied by host nation tank trucks. CENTAF storage facilities were used at the respective airbases. These plans were not fully implemented before Desert Storm.
Distribution to Saudi Arabia's Western Province
According to plan, the 475th Quartermaster Group was to provide class III bulk support to CENTAF locations through employing Liaison teams in the Western Province of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Liaison teams were to be responsible for ensuring orderly resupply of fuel at all beddown locations by host nation contracts, planning future support requirements, and providing an operational link with the 475th Quarter­master Group as operators of the inland petroleum distribution system. CENTAF beddown locations included the 190th Air Rescue Service at Jeddah New, the Tactical Fighter Wing at Khamis Mushait, the 33d Tacti­cal Fighter Wing at Tabuk, and the 48th Tactical Fighter Wing at Taif. As was the case in the Central Province, these plans could not be fully implemented before Desert Storm.
Distribution Outside Saudi Arabia
In addition to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, ARCENT through the 475th POL Group was responsible for distributing Class III bulk to Ser­vice components located in Oman, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar and Egypt, which encompass the rest of the CENTCOM Theater of Operations. The major customer in these locations was CENTAF. Distribution to the locations was accomplished by plane, truck and bladder contracts initiated by the respective Service component through DFR‑ME/DFSC.
Host nation support was a major contributing factor to the distri­bution of petroleum within the theater. According to interviews with Air Force Lt. Col. David Herrick and Army Lt. Col. Bob Ross from the JCS/J4 staff, the Army could not have provided the required support if it were not for the assistance of the host nation. All but four of the twenty-eight Army line haul units were in the reserve, and they did not arrive in-theater until after the Presidential call-up, causing significant concern on the part of CENTAF and Air Staff Logistics staffs.
The CENTAF logistics staff felt that host nation support for line haul would collapse once the shooting began.588 Knowing that the Army was stretched to its limit already, CENTAF took the initiative to establish its own line haul transportation organization. Dubbed the “Blueball Express,” its primary mission was to transport munitions and aviation fuel to sustain the air campaign and subsequent ground offensive.589 Consist­ing of over 200 drivers and 118 commercially leased tractor trailers, the Blueball Express moved over 20 million pounds of USCENTAF cargo and munitions.
JP-5 for the Navy
The U.S. Navy required JP-5 for carrier based aircraft. Since the Air Force was providing the majority of the aerial refueling for Navy aircraft, JP-5 storage sites were established in Seeb, Oman, and Jiddah in Saudi Arabia, to provide the required product. Approximately 400,000 gallons of JP-5 were available at Jiddah to support aircraft operating out of the Red Sea; 200,000 gallons were available in Seeb to support aircraft operat­ing out of the Persian Gulf. All storage was in 50,000-gallon col­lapsible bladders. DFSC established resupply from stocks in Oman and afloat in the Red Sea. Air Force tankers operated from both Seeb and Jiddah to pro­vide JP-5 aerial refueling for the Navy, in addition to the other locations throughout the AOR where the tankers operated with the standard host nation provided JET A-1. Al­though JP-5 was the avia­tion fuel the Navy pre­ferred, dedi­cat­ing part of the tanker force to JP-5 only to support the Navy was not practi­cal. The Navy requested exclu­sive JP-5 support because of safety con­cerns once the aircraft landed on the carri­ers. JP-5, a more stable fuel, has a flash point of 140 degrees F.590 The flash point of JET A-1 is 100 degrees F, which makes it less stable to handle. JP-4, the common fuel used in the conti­nental United States, has a flash point of -20 degrees F. It was available at four (non-tanker) bases in the AOR and at Incirlik, Turkey. According to USCENTAF/DO, the Air Force would provide JP-5 to the Navy whenever possible, and would inform the pilots when something other than JP-5 was issued.591 A review of fuel issue records maintained in the Contin­gency Supply Support Agency computer data base at Langley AFB indi­cates that 20,386,486 gallons of jet fuel were issued by the Air Force to the Navy during Desert Shield and Desert Storm. Eighty-five percent of the fuel provided to the Navy was JET A‑1, 5 percent was JP-5, 7 percent was JP-4 and 3 percent was JP-8.
Intransit Fuels Support (Europe)
The fuel support to transiting aircraft as well as equipment and man­power provided by USAFE were major contributing factors to the success of Desert Shield, Desert Storm, and Proven Force. For example, USAFE fuels staff personnel sourced Command assets and worked airlift require­ments for critical fuels issues in minimal time. The fuels division tasked 356 USAFE fuels personnel for Desert Shield and Desert Storm, thereby placing over 35 percent of all fuels specialists at the forward operating locations.592 Over 300 fuels mobility support assets and approxi­mately 100 refueling vehicles were deployed. With almost 80 percent of the MAC airlift transiting USAFE bases and a large number of SAC tank­ers and B-52s bedding down at USAFE bases in England and Spain, the USAFE experienced a command-wide 200 percent increase in fuels con­sumption, equating to an unprecedented 600 million gallons of avia­tion fuel con­sumption during August 1990-February 1991.
The only significant problem arose in Spain where fuel consump­tion increased by 300 percent. Torrejon and Zaragoza Air Bases were saturat­ed. While no sorties were lost, some diversions were made be­cause fuel inventories at the terminals supplying the bases were reduced to critical levels. The resupply capability from the terminals to the bases was a key concern to those determining fuel supportability of scheduled MAC mis­sions. Moron had little difficulty supporting fuel requirements, but the fuel system there was not tasked as heavily. The primary resup­ply to terminals supporting U.S. bases in Spain is through the Spanish Pipeline System operated by CAMPSA, the Spanish governmental petro­leum trans­portation agency. CAMPSA must balance U.S. military require­ments against those of the Spanish Military and the Civil Sector. USAFE institut­ed unprecedented measures to resupply the terminals. Normally, only the U.S.-built Rota-Zaragoza pipeline supplies terminals feeding all three U.S. bases. However, fuel demands in southern Spain at Moron and Torrejon restricted the availability of fuel to northern Spain, which resup­plies Zaragoza. In October 1990, negotiations resulted in an agreement to utilize a CAMPSA northern pipeline route, thus enabling the United States to receive fuel directly from Zaragoza.
In mid-November 1990, it was evident that the northern pipeline route would not be able to maintain fuel stocks at Zaragoza. The around‑ the-clock pipeline receipts from the south were not sufficient to build fuel inventory levels at Torrejon. Fuel levels continued to drop at terminals resupplying Torrejon and Zaragoza. Since the rail system in Spain could not augment fuel deliveries, tank truck deliveries began in January 1991. At one time, as many as sixty trucks were delivering jet fuel from hun­dreds of miles away. When USAFE asked for additional tank truck deliv­eries, they were told by Spanish officials that the United States had saturated the CAMPSA fleet. However, base fuel levels continued to drop to as low as one day of supply. By late January 1991, the fuel situation in Spain, which was a priority issue in USAFE's efforts to support the Gulf Crisis, received General Officer attention. In February 1991, the issue was elevated to the U.S. Ambassador, who requested more pipeline time from Spanish officials. At the expense of civil requirements, the United States was able to receive more pipeline time for fuel deliveries, allowing for full mission accomplishment without any loss of sorties. During August 1990-February 1991, over 300 million gallons of jet fuel was issued at USAFE bases in Spainsix times the normal amount. Torrejon alone issued sixty percent of this total, or seven times their normal peace­time workload.
Single Fuel on the Battlefield
During Desert Shield, CENTCOM designated JET A-1 as the single fuel on the battlefield. However, throughout Desert Shield the Army experi­enced a growing concern about the suitability of JET A-1 as a re­placement for diesel in tanks. The biggest operational problem cited was the lack of smoke-generating capability with JET A-1 in tanks. Because diesel smokes more than JET A-1, diesel fuel would give them more cover. There was also a concern that during the conversion of diesel burners to JET A-1, excessive filter clogging would occur because of the cleaning nature of JET A-1.593 Operators also speculated that JET A-1 lubricity was not as great as diesel fuel and would cause equip­ment failures. Finally, some equipment fires were attributed to the use of JET A-1 instead of diesel. As a result of these concerns, ARCENT pro­posed giving their commanders a choice of using either JET A-1 or diesel fuel. CENTCOM concurred with this decision because the operation­al concerns outweighed the logistical advantages of using a single fuel. The decision optimized the Saudi's capability to provide fuel to the forward Army Logbases. Specifically, the use of diesel by the Army allowed the Saudis to draw from some diesel storage sites located nearer to Logbases, thus reducing the transportation time. It also maximized the use of Saudi transportation because it allowed for the use of Saudi trucks and pipelines in diesel service that may not have easily converted to JET A-1. Finally, the deci­sion maximized the Saudi refining capacity, which was at the maxi­mum for JET A-1 but had excess capability for diesel.
Desert Storm: Sustaining the Flow
During Desert Shield, CENTCOM established a goal to achieve a thirty-day fuel stockage objective. The fifty-day supply prepositioned ahead of time was no longer adequate, since requirements planned for in CENTCOM OPLAN 1002-88 more than doubled. The OPLAN stock level represented only about fifteen days of supply before the start of the war. To meet the thirty-day stockage objective, the remaining stocks were stored as fol­lows:
• Five-day supply at base level (bladders storage plus host nation tankage)

• Ten-day supply at depots and refineries in the host countries.


The CENTCOM/JPO coordinated with fuel representatives from each coun­try, asking them to maintain fuel stocks equal to a ten-day supply. Saudi Arabia and UAE agreed, but other countries were either unable or unwill­ing to make the commitment. As a result, the Saudis agreed to supply fifteen days of fuel for Coalition forces based in Saudi Arabia. Using imported and fuel they produced themselves, the Saudis positioned 250 million gallons in tankers off the coast of UAE. Before Desert Storm began, CENTCOM's fuel supply had reached a level of twenty-six days theater­wide.
Table 27 indicates that when Desert Storm began, both Air Force-owned fuel and equipment and host-nation-owned fuel and equip­ment were stored at each of the deployed locations. The combination of these assets allowed for the issue of 906 million gallons of jet fuel to support 111,000 Allied sorties without any delays or incidents. The months of preparation had provided the fuels community with ample time to build stocks and establish the infrastructure for sustaining combat operations. However, three significant concerns arose related to Desert Storm: (1) host nation drivers would walk off the job when the war began; (2) in-theater refineries and port facilities would be destroyed, thereby requiring stocks to be brought in from outside sources; and (3) keeping bases resupplied with fuel could be a problem in view of in­creased consump­tion rates.
Some host nations drivers did walk off the job during the first few days of the war. However, Air Force drivers provided by the Blue­ball Express were able to take their places without any degradation in support. As the war went on, some of the host nation drivers came back to work.
With the majority of the fuel being provided from sources within theater, the concern over the loss of in-theater refining capability was well founded. This concern prompted a study by DFSC in early Novem­ber hypothesizing the loss of differing percentages of in-country refining capability. According to DFSC, only a degradation of one-hundred percent of the in-country refining capacity would result in fuel nonsupport. The concern that port facilities might be damaged or destroyed prompted the deployment of two Navy Offshore Petroleum Discharge Systems (OPDS) and the Army's inland petroleum distribution system (IPDS). The systems provided the capability to establish over-the-shore fuel support in ports that had been damaged or in undeveloped coastal areas that required support. Personnel from the Navy Amphibious Construction Battalion deployed to the AOR to operate the Navy's system, but the system was never employed.594 The magnitude of the host nation refining support, with the length of the mobilization period, created the ability to sustain fuel supplies so robust that it was never challenged.


Download 5.55 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   ...   61




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page