LEADER 03034oam 2200517zu 450 001 9910219976103321 005 20220902155043.0 010 $a0-8330-8120-9 035 $a(CKB)3360000000476903 035 $a(SSID)ssj0001048546 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)12472179 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0001048546 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)11014462 035 $a(PQKB)10666471 035 $a(oapen)doab115130 035 $a(EXLCZ)993360000000476903 100 $a20160829d2013 uh 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurmn|---annan 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 10$aCommercial intratheater airlift $ecost-effectiveness analysis of use in U.S. Central Command /$fRonald G. McGarvey [et al.] 210 $cRAND Corporation$d2013 210 31$aSanta Monica, CA :$cRAND Project Air Force ;$d2013 215 $a1 online resource (xviii, 82 pages) $cillustrations 225 0 $aReport Commercial intratheater airlift 300 $aBibliographic Level Mode of Issuance: Monograph 311 1 $a0-8330-7837-2 330 $aIntratheater airlift delivers critical and time-sensitive supplies, such as blood products for transfusions or repair parts for vehicles, to deployed forces. Traditionally, military aircraft have provided this airlift. However, for various reasons, in recent years a number of commercial carriers have provided a significant amount of airlift within U.S. Central Command. But was this more cost-effective than using organic U.S. Air Force aircraft? To explore this question, the authors collected historical (2009) U.S. Central Command data and created models to identify the most cost-effective combination of commercial and organic airlift to perform the required movements. The calculations needed to address differences in fixed and marginal costs across alternatives as well as the effects of price elasticities of demand for commercial airlift providers. Model optimization runs showed a preference for U.S. Air Force-organic aircraft but suggested that commercial alternatives should be retained to supplement Air Force aircraft for a small fraction of movements. The authors further observed that U.S. Central Command planners could have benefitted from more sophisticated decision support tools to make daily intratheater cargo-aircraft allocation decisions. 517 1 $aCITA, cost-effectiveness analysis of use in US CENTCOM 606 $aAirlift, Military$xEvaluation$xCosts$zUnited States 606 $aAirlift, Military$xContracting out$xEvaluation$zUnited States 615 0$aAirlift, Military$xEvaluation$xCosts 615 0$aAirlift, Military$xContracting out$xEvaluation 676 $a358.4/40681 700 $aMcGarvey$b Ronald G.$00 702 $aThomas$b Brent 702 $aSanchez$b Ricardo R.$f1979- 702 $aLight$b T$g(Thomas), 712 02$aProject Air Force (U.S.) 801 0$bPQKB 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910219976103321 996 $aCommercial intratheater airlift$92907503 997 $aUNINA