Keeping Epic Fury alive

Speaking to Blueprint in a written interview, a serving US Navy (USN) official said a mission-aligned support plan is developed by integrating the intent of the military operation, the composition of the forces involved and the requirements for sustaining both.

This helps to ensure that every package, deployment cycle and supply movement is tied to a broader framework that anticipates both demand and disruption.

Admiral Brad Cooper, chief of the US Central Command (CENTCOM), has indicated that hundreds of cruise missiles and new weapons have been used during the campaign.

While the strikes have delivered significant operational advantage, the volume of high-end munitions expended has also brought the logistics backbone into focus. The cost of these weapons and the need to maintain a steady flow to the theatre are raising critical questions — not just for the US government, but also for the country’s defence manufacturing ecosystem.

Weapons stockpile

The ongoing conflict — where the US is yet to establish full control over the Strait of Hormuz — has seen continued campaigns by the USN and Air Force (USAF) using precision strikes, naval firepower and air operations. Yet behind every strike, availability and replenishment of missiles and munitions remain a concern.

Captain Bradley Martin (retired), USN, who is now a senior policy researcher at the US-based think tank RAND Corporation, framed the issue around sustainability and replenishment. “We’ve used a significant number of Tomahawk missiles… replenishing that will take some time,” Martin said.

Similar concerns were raised by Captain Bill Hamblet (retired), USN, currently working at an independent non-profit forum, the US Naval Institute. He spoke of how the current conflict has placed pressure on both reserves and the systems required to replenish them. The tempo of operations determines how quickly such stockpiles are drawn down and how planners sequence weapons to maximise effect while managing inventory. 

“The highest priority is given to items that directly support the flight schedule and combat operations. This will be determined by the strike group commander in conjunction with the combatant commander,” said the serving navy official.

“The ship’s company uses historical data and operational plans to forecast the demand for fuel, ordnance and spare parts to ensure enough of the right material is on hand to support the mission.”

The overall plan is coordinated at the carrier strike group level, while individual divisions and work centres carry out their specific tasks — such as refuelling aircraft, handling ordnance and managing their own storerooms.

Beyond immediate operational planning, the navy is also leveraging data-driven frameworks to strengthen the efficiency and reliability of its sustainment systems.

The official noted that by using data analytics, the navy has been able to identify issues and key factors to improve maintenance capacity, reduce delays and remove barriers to boost mission capacity.

However, at sea, the challenge lies not just in transferring munitions but in the technical and operational complexity involved in doing so under combat conditions. “Reloading vertical launch systems at sea is possible but it’s difficult, slow and not the preferred method,” Hamblet said.

“Replenishments at sea, also known as an underway replenishment (UNREP), are a complex and demanding task, requiring teamwork and dedicated effort from all on board,” the navy officer said, highlighting that it consists of transferring fuel, munitions and supplies from one ship to another while both vessels are moving through the water. 

Heavily armed surface combatants must be withdrawn from high-threat zones to safely rearm.

By contrast, aircraft carriers retain a key advantage. “An aircraft carrier can sustain offensive operations longer because bombs can be replenished at sea, unlike missiles on destroyers,” Hamblet noted. That distinction has shaped how naval forces plan for deploying carriers, which act as persistent strike platforms that are escorted by ships providing layered defence.

Sustainment aboard a carrier is a continuous process designed to maintain peak operational readiness, as these routines are meticulously planned and executed to ensure the vessel, its aircraft and all personnel remain fully functional.

Maintenance of the on-board systems, aircraft and the carrier is also ensured in a 24/7 preventive and corrective cycle to ensure operational readiness.

At the same time, the mission also extends to crew welfare — covering food, laundry, postal services and morale, welfare and recreation (MWR) programmes —highlighting that readiness is ensured by the well-being of personnel on board ships.

“In peacetime, an aircraft carrier takes on about a million gallons of jet fuel every three days. In higher operational tempo, that could be every day or every day-and-a-half,” Hamblet said. The implication is clear: as sortie rates rise, so does the logistical burden.

Managing this demand requires constant prioritisation, which is allocated based on requirements and mission tempo. This helps to ensure that missions can continue without interruption, even as demand rises.

Air power faces similar constraints. “Tanker aircraft are absolutely critical—they determine how far and how effectively air power can be projected,” Hamblet said. The loss or damage of such assets has immediate consequences.

Lieutenant General Thomas Trask (retired), USAF, highlighted an Iranian attack at the Prince Sultan Airbase in Saudi Arabia that damaged several KC-135 aircraft, which are primarily used for aerial refuelling. “Replacing the tankers that were lost is at the top of the air force’s list,” Trask said, pointing to the immediate operational pressure created by even limited losses.

“The tanker force is just not big enough to support all the needs,” he added, citing over five decades of service by the aircraft.

This shortfall is becoming evident as air operations increase in number. “The demand signal right now is growing,” Trask noted. At the same time, he pointed to evolving solutions within the broader military ecosystem. “Commercial air refuelling is going to grow significantly,” he said. “They won’t refuel over the combat zone, but for transit missions, commercial refuelling can be used.” This will help extend operational reach and support without overburdening core military assets.

Hamblet highlighted the changing nature of drone warfare and the expensive upkeep associated with countering such attacks: “We can’t afford to use million-dollar assets to knock down every drone attack.”

The overall execution has remained effective despite these pressures.

“Operations today are deeply integrated as you have air force bombers, navy missiles and electronic warfare aircraft all working together in a single mission,” noted Hamblet. This level of coordination, however, comes with its own demands. “The amount of data flowing between commands is mind-boggling,” he added, pointing to the scale of communication required to keep such operations aligned.

The complexity also introduces vulnerabilities, such as a recent fratricide incident in which a Kuwaiti air defence system shot down three USAF F-15 jets, highlighting the risks involved. Trask acknowledged that the “incident shows how difficult this coordination can be,” noting that even a single gap in the system can have serious consequences.

This level of integration requires a structured command framework that enables such operations. Trask said that the primary purpose of combatant commands is to prepare for contingency operations. These include over seven geographic commands, which are responsible for specific regions and four functional commands that support missions across domains.

Within this framework, the United States Transportation Command (TRANSCOM) emerges as one of the most critical commands, which plays a central role in sustaining operations globally. “TRANSCOM has a global responsibility and supports all operations,” Trask said, highlighting the preparations during peacetime and how logistics, movement and coordination are tied together within the command structure. 

Bases across the globe

According to various media estimates, the US operates more than 750 military bases across nearly 80 foreign countries and territories, though the exact number remains unclear due to the classified nature of many facilities. This includes an extensive logistical architecture built up across West Asia.

Maintaining this vast global footprint requires billions of dollars annually, covering everything from infrastructure and personnel to logistics and security. Despite the cost, these bases form the backbone of US power projection, enabling rapid deployment, sustained operations and strategic reach in times of crisis.

“For 35–40 years, we have been set up in that region (West Asia), so that logistical panel was already established,” Trask said. “It’s more a matter of maintaining these bases than creating them, as it includes airbases, ports and pre-positioned stockpiles, all supported by diplomatic agreements. The agreements with partner countries are critical to making those plans work.”

But the damage and disruption caused by Iranian strikes have forced a reassessment of the scale of bases used during the current conflict.

“A lot of logistics is now being run through Diego Garcia, which adds roughly 2,300 nautical miles to the supply chain,” Hamblet noted, adding that extended distance increases transit time, fuel consumption and vulnerability.

Other bases have also come under threat. “Ports in Oman were being used, but operations had to stop for some time due to Iranian drone and missile strikes,” Hamblet said. The result is a constantly shifting network.

“Routing a carrier around Africa instead of through the Suez adds weeks and significantly increases fuel demand for escort ships,” Hamblet added.

Martin said, “Most movement is by sea actually… a good proportion of sustainment goes by ocean transport, while personnel and time-sensitive items like munitions tend to move by air.”

However, sustaining this flow over time increases pressure on forces, particularly at sea. Hamblet pointed to the strain of prolonged deployments on sailors on board the USS Gerald R. Ford. “A normal carrier deployment should be six to seven months. Beyond that, you start building a backlog of maintenance.” As missions extend and routine upkeep is pushed, the systems begin to wear down faster under operational stress. “When deployments extend to nine, 10, 11 months, the problems compound — not just for one ship, but across the fleet,” he added, highlighting how delays can affect other ships needing hangars for their scheduled maintenance.

“The navy uses validated and accredited models to estimate the need for maintenance,” the serving navy officer quoted before said. “The current approach relies on a combination of historical maintenance data, readiness metrics, reliability predictions and other predictive analytics.”

The officer noted that these models are designed to keep forces combat-ready for national objectives across joint and combined operations. He added that ships, aircraft and submarines are ensured that maintenance is carried out on schedule and within budget, with focus on achieving an 80 per cent combat surge readiness rate — an indicator that these platforms are fully certified and maintained for deployment at any given time.

This strain is further increased by the intensity of operations, where higher sortie rates leave little room for recovery and upkeep.

“Instead of five or six days of flight operations, they were going 10 to 15 days before taking a maintenance day,” Hamblet said. “When you fly more often, you have to do more maintenance — the entire system works harder,” he added, outlining its impact on crew morale.

However, training is kept as realistic as the operations on a carrier. This ensures that sailors can operate effectively even when systems are stretched.

Amid increasing strain on the supply chain, food supplies are also affected. According to recent media reports, 

the USS Abraham Lincoln, along with several other ships, lacks full meals for sailors. However, such claims have 

been rejected by USN officials as false and untrue.

“The most important thing for morale at sea is food,” Hamblet said. Sailors rely on four meals a day, which include breakfast, lunch, dinner and midnight rations.

“Taking care of our people is taking care of the mission. To ensure consistent performance and morale, the navy relies on foundational MWR programmes alongside comprehensive quality-of-service initiatives,” the navy officer said, adding that these systems are directly tied to sustaining both the well-being and operational readiness of sailors and their families.

The support addresses living conditions, family welfare, childcare, spouse employment, housing and mental health — factors that collectively ensure sailors remain ready to maintain an operational edge.

Defence production vs reality

Beyond the battlefield and the military bases is the industrial and economic system that keeps the entire architecture running.

“Logistics are completely essential. You cannot fight a war without that being taken care of,” Martin said. “If the sustainment piece is not there, the war will be very short and over very quickly.”

Sustaining this effort comes down to industrial capacity. Martin pointed out that the US system was never designed for prolonged surges. “We are built to a minimum sustaining rate, not to surge capacity,” he noted, adding that scaling up production is neither quick nor straightforward, requiring time and investment.

The implication is clear: replenishing high-end munitions at the pace they are being expended will require rapid industrial mobilisation. 

The strain is already visible in stockpiles. General Trask acknowledged that while the situation is not critical yet, buffers are shrinking. “We are not at risk of running out, but we now have lower stocks than we have had for decades,” he said, warning that a prolonged conflict would turn this into a more serious challenge. Addressing this gap will require not just funding, but a deliberate effort to restart and expand production lines to replace what is being used in conflict.

At the same time, the supply chain itself remains exposed to external dependencies. Martin highlighted that a significant portion of critical inputs comes from outside the US, making the system vulnerable to disruptions. Even basic inputs can become constraints. “Shortages in things like helium or semiconductors can directly impact weapon production,” Martin said.

Hamblet described the situation as parallel with global commerce to explain the scale of the challenge, except for the difference in urgency and consequence. Every part moved forward must be replaced, creating a continuous loop of demand and replenishment that defines modern sustainment.

This entire system also rests heavily on international partnerships — access to bases, transit routes and hubs depending on cooperation from allied or host nations. Without that support, even the most capable military might be limited in its ability to project and sustain power.

The war has made it clear that firepower alone is not decisive — it is the systems that sustain and support that firepower that truly determine outcomes. From the rapid use of precision munitions to the movement of fuel, spare parts and personnel, each strike is planned by a chain that stretches across continents. The pressure on stockpiles, strain on deployed forces and the limits of industrial production have all come into sharp focus in this war.

The execution of power and precision on the battlefield is, in reality, the result of years of planning and coordination with global partnerships. The same system also reveals its vulnerabilities, whether in supply lines, dependence on allies or the time required to rebuild capacity.