PurposeThis paper recommends new criteria for selecting seaports of embarkation during military deployments. Most importantly, this research compares the current port selection criterion, which is to select the seaport with the shortest inland transport time from the deploying installation, to the proposed port selection criteria, which are to select the seaport based on the shortest combined inland and oceanic transit time to the destination theater.Design/methodology/approachThe authors construct an original integer program to select seaports that minimize the expected delivery timeline for a set of notional, but realistic, deployment requirements. The integer program is solved considering the current as well as the proposed port selection criteria. The solutions are then compared using paired-samples t-tests to assess the statistical significance of the port selection criteria.FindingsThis work suggests that the current port selection criterion results in a 10–13% slower delivery of deploying forces as compared to the proposed port selection criteria.Research limitations/implicationsThis work assumes deterministic inland transit times, oceanic transit times, and seaport processing rates. Operational fluctuations in transit times and processing rates are not expected to change the findings from this research.Practical implicationsThis research provides evidence that the current port selection criterion for selecting seaports for military units deploying from the Continental United States is suboptimal. More importantly, logistics planners could use these recommended port selection criteria to reduce the expected delivery timelines during military deployments.Originality/valueSeveral military doctrinal references suggest that planners select seaports based on habitual installation-to-port pairings, especially for early deployers. This work recommends a change to the military's current port selection process based on empirical analyses that show improvements to deployment timelines.
PurposeThis study aims to examine ship loading strategies during large-scale military deployments. Ships are usually loaded to a stowage goal of about 65% of the ship's capacity. The authors identify how much cargo to load onto ships for each sailing and propose lower stowage goals that could improve the delivery of forces during the deployment.Design/methodology/approachThe authors construct several mixed integer programs to identify optimal ship loading strategies that minimize delivery timelines for notional, but realistic, problem variables. The authors study the relative importance of these variables using experimental designs, regressions, correlations and chi-square tests of the empirical results.FindingsThe research specifies the conditions during which ships should be light loaded, i.e. loaded to less than 65% of total capacity. Empirical results show cargo delivered up to 16% faster with a light-loaded strategy compared to fully loaded ships.Research limitations/implicationsThis work assumes deterministic sailing times and ship loading times. Also, all timing aspects of the problem are estimated to the nearest natural number of days.Practical implicationsThis research provides important new insights about optimal ship loading strategies, which were not previously quantified. More importantly, logistics planners could use these insights to reduce sealift delivery timelines during military deployments.Originality/valueMost ship routing and scheduling problems minimize costs as the primary goal. This research identifies the situations in which ships transporting military forces should be light loaded, thereby trading efficiency for effectiveness, to enable faster overall delivery of unit equipment to theater seaports.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.