兰德-Tankering-Fuel-on-US-Air-Force-Transport-Aircraft_-An-Assessment-of-Cost-Savings_64页_2mb

报告摘要

Summary of "Tankering Fuel on U.S. Air Force Transport Aircraft: An Assessment of Cost Savings"

Core Content

This report assesses the cost-saving potential of fuel tankering for the U.S. Air Force (USAF), with a focus on the Air Mobility Command (AMC). Fuel tankering involves carrying excess fuel on an aircraft from a location where jet fuel is cheaper to a location where it is more expensive, thereby reducing overall fuel costs. The study uses historical flight data, fuel price information, and a detailed analysis of four decision factors to evaluate the feasibility and economic impact of tankering.

Main Points

Purpose

The report evaluates whether tankering can reduce fuel costs for the USAF, particularly for AMC, which uses about 28% of all DoD fuel.
It focuses on the C-5, C-17, and C-130 aircraft and examines both peacetime and wartime scenarios.
The analysis is part of a broader initiative to reduce fuel expenditures across the Mobility Air Forces (MAF).

Methodology

The study compares fuel costs of over 94,700 flights completed without tankering in FY 2012 with those that would occur if tankering were used.
It uses data from the Global Decision Support System (GDSS) and incorporates independent market price data.
Four key decision factors are considered: aircraft capacity, fuel burn penalty, fuel required for the next mission segment, and fuel price differences.

Key Findings

Baseline Scenario (Wartime): Tankering could save AMC $151 million annually, representing about 2% of the total Air Force aviation fuel budget.
Peacetime Scenario: Tankering savings are lower due to smaller price differentials, but still significant if AMC has access to complete market price information.
Price Information Sharing: When AMC uses DLA standard prices (incomplete information), it saves $8.6 million annually, but DLA faces a $11.9 million shortfall, resulting in a net loss of $3.3 million for DoD. Conversely, if AMC uses actual market prices (complete information), it incurs a $31.1 million annual loss, but DLA gains $56.5 million, leading to a net DoD saving of $25.4 million.
Fuel Offloading: Offloading tankered fuel at the destination significantly increases savings. When AMC and DLA cooperate, offloading increases DoD savings by 3.0 times in peacetime and 3.8 times in wartime.

Key Information

Aircraft Characteristics

C-5: Maximum takeoff weight = 840,000 lb, Operating empty weight = 400,000 lb, Maximum usable fuel = 332,500 lb, Maximum cargo payload = 285,000 lb, Cruise speed = 450 knots
C-17: Maximum takeoff weight = 585,000 lb, Operating empty weight = 282,500 lb, Maximum usable fuel = 244,854 lb, Maximum cargo payload = 164,900 lb, Cruise speed = 450 knots
C-130: Maximum takeoff weight = 175,000 lb, Operating empty weight = 83,628 lb, Maximum usable fuel = 43,560 lb, Maximum cargo payload = 47,812 lb, Cruise speed = 360 knots

Fuel Procurement Process

The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) procures fuel at fluctuating market rates and sells it to AMC at fixed standard prices.
DLA standard prices vary by location type, and there are four categories of locations.
DLA aims to reduce volatility in fuel costs by setting standard rates, but these can be updated if market prices change significantly.

Savings Potential

In peacetime, tankering could save DoD up to $25.4 million annually if AMC uses actual market prices.
In wartime, the savings are higher, with AMC potentially saving $151 million annually.
The majority of savings come from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Recommendations

The USAF should work with DLA to provide AMC with complete market price information to maximize savings.
An internal compensation mechanism within DoD is needed to shift some of the savings to AMC to encourage participation.
Fuel offloading can significantly enhance tankering savings and should be considered in future planning.
Implementing tankering in phases, starting with basic efforts, could be a practical approach to managing the complexity of the practice.

Structure

1. Introduction

Background: DoD is the largest U.S. energy consumer, with aviation fuel accounting for 50% of total use.
Purpose: To assess the potential cost savings from fuel tankering for AMC and the broader DoD.
Approach: Historical flight data and market price analysis were used to simulate tankering decisions.
Organization: The report is structured into chapters covering datasets, decision factors, cost-saving analysis, fuel offloading, and conclusions.

2. Flight and Fuel Price Datasets

Flight Data: Derived from GDSS, covering 122,921 sorties between 2011 and 2012.
Data Reduction: Training flights and those requiring mid-air refueling were excluded.
Fuel Price Data: Includes DLA standard prices and independent market price estimates.

3. Four Decision Factors

Capacity Available: The amount of fuel an aircraft can carry.
Fuel Burn Penalty: Additional fuel burned due to increased weight.
Fuel Required for Next Leg: The fuel needed for subsequent missions.
Fuel Price Difference: The difference in fuel prices between origin and destination.

4. Is Tankering a Cost-Saving Strategy?

AMC Perspective: Tankering can save money based on DLA standard price differences.
DoD Perspective: Savings are based on market price differences.
Cooperation Potential: If AMC and DLA share information, savings can be significantly increased.

5. Fuel Offloading

Economic Effect: Offloading increases savings by allowing excess fuel to be used by other aircraft.
Feasibility: Involves time, manpower, fuel quality, and ground logistics considerations.
Barriers: Include coordination, infrastructure, and information access.

6. Conclusions and Recommendations

Tankering can be a cost-effective strategy for AMC, especially when using market price data.
Cooperation between AMC and DLA is essential for maximizing savings.
A phased implementation of tankering, starting with basic systems, is recommended to manage complexity and build expertise.