ISO containers are in widespread use in the world of logistics, as we all know. Whether being used to transport materials inter theatre or from a main operating base to a forward operation base. Wherever containers are used there is the return leg to consider, in a civilian context it is the cost of returning empty containers that is the main concern but when moving a container from for example Camp Bastion to a FOB in Helmand there are other factors at play.
Empty containers need more or less the same transportation resource whether they are full or empty.
Of course not all containers will be returned empty, they can be used for accommodation, base construction and to return any sorts of material back. If however, any are returned empty they will still need a DROP’s or flatbed truck, each truck will have a crew of two, require maintenance, fuel and spares. Combat Logistic Patrols are likely to happen whether there are a few empty containers or not but if we can improve the efficiency of the return leg by increasing the number of empty containers that can be shipped per vehicle then this is worthy of consideration.
One idea is to use collapsible containers.
There are a few examples,FOLDX, Cargoshell and Staxxon.
Whilst most of the buzz about collapsible containers is focussed on cost and carbon reduction I wonder if anyone has seen the military angle?
Boss,
Logistically carbon reduction is a military angle, as a variety of North American (US & Canadian) strategic studies show.
Ah, collapsible ISO containers … decided to spend a bit of time Friday night in our happy place, did we? Excellent vids as always.
Well,
Before that was invented, the French / Italian mineral water cost the same in China, as in Europe (only hundreds of miles away from the source)…
- what will I drink in China now??
ACC,
That was a magnificent question for a Friday evening.
Jackstaff, when I get into the land forces theme I am going to have a look at fuel usage reduction. Its a very interesting subject where baby killers and yoghurt knitters agree!
TD,
Quite so — I like those strange communions a lot. Sometimes when something’s just practical it’s just practical (and I find it interesting, for the yoghurt knitters, that the baby killers did their sums faster and better than most of the corporate types and indeed many a yoghurt knitter….)
TD
Fuel usage great subject. I was reading an article on the USMC recently and in it the guy in charge of the marines said a $10 rise in the barrel of oil price would cost the marines as much in fuel cost increases as the cost of their entire procurement budget.
there was an interesting thread on ARRSe not long ago where somebody was actually going to a meeting/demo on alternative power for FOB’s it received quite a lot of response, obvious candidates were solar and wind but a few good ideas came forth, it seems the MOD are as keen as the USMC on this maybe because a lot of FOB resupply is by chinnok, expensive, double expensive if you lose the aircraft!!
I’d have to check but i’m sure there was a link where the US were looking at portable nuke generators!!!! now that’s scary, almost as scary as that collection of ISO’s TD has at the bottom of the garden
bugger, yes before the spelling police come along i spelt chinook wrong, star jumps…standby, go!
not much use i’m afraid.
If patrol base iso needs 10 iso containers of gear, 10 trucks have to deliver it.
Those 10 trucks then need to back to bastion.
Theres little benefit to 1 carrying 10 foldup containers and 9 going empty
@ TD – one for you…
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/battle-boxes-for-the-bundeswehr-updated-01042/
Cheers Gareth, have seen that one before but its interesting still
Damn. Too slow again…
Found this interesting; every gallon of fuel used in A-stan uses 7 to get there.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/commanders-in-iraq-urgently-request-renewable-power-options-02548/
Wouldn’t there be a chance that the hinges/collapseable parts means the overall structure may become more weaker? I mean for civvie use, its alright if a bit of the strength goes, but in theater?
I agree though, nifty idea.
Might have a point there Mike, of course there might be downsides and that cargoshell one does look a bit flimsy but as you say, interesting idea
Sorry for the rather long link but its about the US marine core gas guzzling and afghanistan.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3abc86a25b-38b1-4c60-8c3c-1a85a7cc65e2&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest
Godd idea made overly-complex. Why not just make flat-pack kits your average squaddie can bolt togther with an adjustable spanner? Ok, it would need some plant/a forklift to help put it up, but it would be stronger, cheaper and almost as versatile. This would be peanuts compared to the invention of the Bailey Bridge.
Jackstaff said “spend a bit of time Friday night in our happy place, did we? ”
After reading that I dare say a casual visitor to the site would think twice before clicking on the link “Container Handling.” Ooh-er-misses!!!
@Dominicj 26/03: If a FOB needed 10 containers of supplies and needed to use all of them *immediately* it would be a very busy place indeed!
I think the situation TD is thinking of is a container of supplies that is dropped off one day, drawn on gradually and then picked up, empty, at some point in the future.
It would be useful to send one log patrol out to collect many empty containers in a “round-robin” manner, rather than have to have one log partol per container (possibly not my best example, but I’m tired). It would reduce overall time one the road in theatre and, in a COIN situation like Afganistan, reduce the opporunity for IED attacks by Terry and his friends.
Container porn… gross!
I’m off to Google ‘sexy girls wearing glasses’.