Sustaining the Naval Expeditionary Force

Any beach is a sustainment pathway

Sustaining the Naval Expeditionary Force (NEF) in a distributed maritime operating environment requires methods for assured logistics over the shore. This means bringing warfighting capabilities and life-sustaining supplies from ship-to-shore, shore-to-shore, and potentially shore-to-ship. For survivability in a contested operating environment, the NEF will need the flexibility of operating over opportune landing sites versus known and routine port facilities.

Traditional NEF operations have been tied to the Navy amphibious force. This force includes amphibious ships with attached landing craft, beach master units, and Marine elements task-organized for throughput across designated beaches. These Navy and Marine Corps forces train together during pre-deployment exercises for operational certification. Through operational experience, policies have been developed and refined to govern landing operations with deliberate collection and analysis of hydrographic data.

These policies relate to institutional confidence in a ship and landing craft commander to navigate safely through seas and to land the landing force. This approach of capabilities and policy has worked well for today’s amphibious readiness group and MEU (ARG/MEU) team.

A different approach is necessary for the employment of a NEF that is not tied to amphibious ships. Stand-in forces (SIF) operating from a distributed network of seabases and expeditionary advanced bases (EABs) in a maritime operating environment require logistics over the shore through opportune beach landing sites to survive, particularly in a contested operating environment. These forces will not have a direct tie to amphibious ships and will, therefore, not have access to the landing craft, beach master units, and Marine Corps landing support teams that are traditionally part of the ARG/MEU.

The Marine Corps’ premiere SIF is the Marine littoral regiment (MLR), which is designed to be sustained even when amphibious ships are not present. Sustainment of the SIF will occur through multi-domain distribution platforms that are likely to flow from shore-to-shore, versus the traditional ship-to-shore method that is enabled by the continuous presence of amphibious ships. The MLR will enable sea denial for the NEF, which implies there will be some presence of Navy ships in the operating area, though not necessarily amphibious ships. For the NEF to persist in a contested, distributed maritime operating environment, policies, organizations, and training must be adapted.

Policies
Intentionally beaching a ship or vessel is not a normal practice, and determining where a vessel can be safely beached is nearly a lost art. Historically, the Navy operated tank landing ships designed for landing capability directly onto a beach. This dates back to World War II. These ships have since been decommissioned in the 1990s—many of which were sold to partner nations like Mexico, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Malaysia, and Spain. Since World War II, the Navy and Army have gradually shifted from beaching larger vessels to the use of ship-to-shore connectors designed for maritime-domain theater distribution. These craft include the landing craft utility, landing craft mechanized, and landing craft air cushion.

Ship commanding officers (COs) are responsible for the safe navigation of their ships, informed of the maritime operating environment across the oceans, seas, and littoral areas of operation. Most ships are not designed to beach and recover as a routine, and accidentally running a ship aground can be disastrous for the ship, and the CO. Further, there may also be impacts on the flow at the port, harbor, or canal (ex. Ever Given in the Suez Canal, 2021). Commanding officers are informed by updated maps and charts, trained navigators, experienced maritime pilots, and hydrographic safety officers. This layered combination is designed to prevent grounding and safely execute intentional beaching for deliberate
amphibious and littoral maneuver.

By policy, the Navy is responsible for providing oceanographic services for all elements of the DOD.1 Specifically, the Navy is tasked with collecting source data necessary for oceanographic, hydrographic, and bathymetric (OHB) surveys to “produce the maps, charts, and databases needed to support
navigation, operational plans (OPLANS), joint and naval operations and exercises, and intelligence preparation of the environment.”2

Today, the Navy has approximately 65 military and civilian members assigned to the Fleet Survey Team (FST) as an “expert, efficient, and responsive resource for littoral battlespace characterization and hydrographic surveys.”3 This FST construct has proven to be sufficient for a deliberate response for a crisis or disaster (such as Hurricane Katrina and Haiti earthquake relief). However, this is not responsive enough to support landings at varying opportune beaches across a distributed maritime operating environment during campaigning and when the emergent situation escalates to contested crisis response.

As an operational visualization of this challenge, consider the NEF operating with Marine Corps and Naval support elements ashore in the Philippines. The Philippine archipelago includes over 7,500 islands. The NEF will leverage this whole maneuver space to extend the range of capabilities with survivability. Not all coastlines on these islands are accessible by current landing craft and vessels, which narrows the focus on potential landing sites. Even if the entire 65-member FST were positioned in the Philippines, this would not be very responsive and efficient due to the operational necessity for tactical distribution. Fleet Survey Team members may not need to be on-site if they have the appropriate data to advise a ship CO. However, some collection of accurate, realtime data will always be necessary for safe navigation and the beaching of vessels to support littoral maneuver. Thus, the existing challenge is to have the right capability in many places at once to provide operational agility in the distributed maritime operating environment.

Organizations
Positioning the right capability at the right place and at the right time is the essence of sustainment, yet ensuring this littoral maneuver enabler capability is positioned effectively is the challenge. The organization to provide assured littoral maneuver over opportune landing sites can be accomplished by Navy and Marine Corps elements who have the expertise, the equipment, and the access.

Since forward positioning elements of the limited-capacity FST at all the possible global hot spots is not feasible, there are ways to leverage organizations that are already forward every day. In competition, the SIF has access geographically and politically to collect marine data in the littoral operating area. This includes military surveys, hydrographic surveys, and marine scientific research, all of which help to inform potential opportune beach landing sites.4 A key to collecting this data on foreign soil is diplomatic clearance, which the SIF will already have in competition.

Expanding organization options for collecting marine data will propagate beach landing site opportunities. Marine Corps meteorology and oceanography specialists may seem an obvious choice to collect marine data, though there are current limitations of capacity, and their primary focus is to support aviation operations. Intelligence specialists are another choice, though there can be some challenges to diplomatic clearance for these Marines. Explosive ordnance disposal technicians are increasing organic abilities for operations in littoral operating areas with equipment designed to operate in near-shore water. Another option may be to use infantry or engineers to conduct reconnaissance. Of note, engineers are trained to conduct tactical and technical reconnaissance for mobility. Any of these options can be appropriate with the right equipment and training. However, a key factor for these options is the acceptability of the collection and analysis by ship COs to navigate waters and beaches.

Emerging technology can be used to ensure standardized collection for integrated realtime analysis to assure safe navigation at sea. Marine data may be collected using strategic geospatial capabilities integrated with tactical-level autonomous means. In competition, forces operating ashore can use unmanned or uncrewed multi-domain systems with multi-spectral sensors. Integrating these systems in realtime, and tying them to reach-back experts can effectively identify and validate potential opportune landing sites. From the sea, unmanned or uncrewed surface, subsurface, or aerial systems may be launched from littoral maneuver connectors, or other maritime platforms, to do the same. Autonomous systems used to inform OHB surveys need not be fully dedicated to these sensors; instead, these sensors may just be bolt-on sensors that can be affixed or carried by any vehicle or craft and networked to appropriate analysis teams.

Beyond the organization to collect marine data, the SIF requires an organization to support the landing of vessels at opportune beaches. Recall the traditional shore party teams attached to an ARG/MEU to enable a landing and assure mobility at these beach landing sites. This includes Navy beach group yellow patchers, Marine Corps landing support red patchers, and engineers. For SIF, who do not have assigned, attached, or supporting amphibious ships, these same capabilities are required to assure sustainment can flow across opportune beach littoral transition points. Therefore, the SIF must organize elements to support the landing of shore-to-shore vessels.

Historical precedence exists for shore party teams to conduct reconnaissance and support beach landing areas. Australia established its first pioneer battalion in the aftermath of the failed Gallipoli campaign, forming a unit with light combat engineer functions to support beach landings. During World War II, the Marine Corps formed pioneer battalions to conduct shore-party operations during amphibious assaults to provide mobility support across beaches. Pioneer battalions were eventually redesignated to engineer battalions within the Marine Division and then to combat engineer battalions.

Today, the Navy and Marine Corps no longer have a unit exclusively organized for shore party operations, though the precedence exists and the concept has been rekindled from history. An output of the Marine Corps force design efforts since 2019 was the publishing of a Pioneer Battalion Concept of Employment. This concept presents a standing organization consisting of Navy and Marine Corps engineer and landing support specialists that would support the MLRs operating across the western Pacific area of operations. While the standing organization from this concept has not been embraced by the Navy and Marine Corps, the general concept is employed regularly during combined training and large-scale exercises.

Training
Building the institutional experience for sustaining the NEF across littoral transition points requires training. While the ARG/MEU teams conduct cyclic training for certification before deployment, units operating routinely across the distributed maritime operating area do not routinely build the same integrated training experience. The NEF must train as they will respond to crisis and fight in conflict. Deliberately training to identify and validate opportune landing sites, and then emplace the shore party team for assured mobility across littoral transition points is necessary to assure sustainment for the SIF.

In recent years, Navy and Marine Corps engineers have trained to increase integration toward the missions of expeditionary advanced base operations. Exercises Pacific Pioneer, Summer Pioneer, and Winter Pioneer have strengthened interoperability between Marine Corps engineer support battalions and Navy Seabees. These exercises have incorporated scenarios of beach landing sites and port operations, though they have not drawn in the full mission profile of OHB collection and analysis.

Transitioning from annual exercises to routine interoperability training is the next step for assured mobility. Today, Navy and Marine Corps elements are already operating forward day-to-day in a competition context. Supporting the landing of maritime vessels at opportune beaches is not the only mission for any of these units, yet they must be agile enough to shift on-call to support this mission. Even without the availability of landing craft and vessels, these elements can collect OHB data to update potential landing sites. Doing so overseas also increases interoperability with partner and host nations, and potentially has an integrated deterrent effect.

Conclusion
Sustaining the NEF in a distributed maritime operating environment necessitates the ability to maneuver between seabases and EABs using opportune landing sites that provide flexibility and survivability. To navigate across these littoral transition points, the Navy and Marine Corps must refine policy, organize, and train in competition to be always ready for crisis and conflict. The necessity of accurate OHB collection and analysis for safe maritime navigation should be matched with the existing SIF access. Additionally, transitioning from the occasional exercising of the Navy and Marine Corps Pioneer Battalion concept to routine interoperability training will ensure the NEF can persist in the contested, distributed littoral operating environment.

>Col Angell is a Logistics Officer currently assigned as the Director, Logistics Combat Element Division within Headquarters Marine Corps, Combat Development and Integration.

Notes

1. Department of the Navy, OPNAVINST 3140.55C, Oceanographic, Hydrographic, and Bathymetric Survey Program, (Washington, DC: December 2018).

2. Ibid. Oceanography is the study of the ocean surface, water column, and bottom features including the propagation of acoustic, optical, and other forms of energy. Hydrography is the depiction of shallow water bottom features, coastline, beach, tides, and surf characterization. Bathymetry is the measurement of water depths and bottom contour lines with precise geographic locations. 

3. Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command, “Fleet Survey Team,” Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command, n.d., https://www.cnmoc.usff.navy.mil/Our-Commands/Naval-Oceanographic-Office/Fleet-Survey-Team.

4. Department of the Navy, OPNAVINST 3128.9G, Diplomatic Clearance for U.S. Navy Marine Data Collection Activities in Foreign Jurisdictions, (Washington, DC: April 2021). 

Share this: