|
|
|
|
MOR Journal Abstracts
|
 | Number 1 |
| Number 2 |
| Number 3 |
| Number 4 |
Air
Force Research Laboratory Space Technology Value Model: Creating Capabilities
for Future Customers (Gregory S. Parnell, FS, Roger C. Burk, Deborah Westphal,
Aaron Schulman, Lauren Kwan, Jack L. Blackhurst, Phillip M. Verret and, Harry A. Karasopoulos)
The Air
Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) develops space technologies to provide future
warfighting capabilities of the U.S. Air Force.
In 2001, AFRL asked Toffler Associates to help develop and implement a Space
Technology Value Model to identify
future warfighting capabilities and help develop the best space R&D
portfolio to provide these capabilities. We
describe the model development process, and illustrate how the value model was
used to improve resource allocation decision-making. This methodology has been used for two POM cycles. We used
Value-Focused Thinking and some new techniques for analyzing R&D portfolios,
including an explicit model of risk and a nonlinear aggregation of project value
into portfolio value. (Pg. 5)
Modeling
Military Strategic Effects with an Input-Output Metamodel (Anthony W.
Snodgrass, Mark A. Gallagher and Gregory A. McIntyre)
Incorporating
strategic effects to assess effects-based operations into a combat simulation is
a challenging task. Where detailed
interactions between different functions are difficult to incorporate in a
combat model, the authors propose implementing the Leontief’s macro-economic
input-output model as a metamodel. In
this military application, the economic sectors are replaced with combat
functions. The input-output model
links desperate functions that are not currently link in the underlying model.
The article demonstrates the approach by incorporating the impacts of air
attacks against communication centers on ground combat unit strengths.
This approach provides a
relatively simple first-order approximation to incorporating and assessing
critical interactions in combat simulations.
(Pg. 19)
Assessing
the Reliability of a Contingency Logistics Network (Marlin U. Thomas)
The
logistics support functions of receiving, transporting and distributing
materials and equipment to critical operating can be structured as a network of
supply chains. For the case of
contingency operations, these processes generally involve high levels of
dynamics and uncertainties which make it very difficult for decision makers to
plan and coordinate the logistics support activities with the operations.
This paper describes a method for quantifying the effectiveness of a
contingency logistics system based on a reliability interference based network
reliability model. (Pg. 33)
A
Hybrid Tabu Search/Set Partitioning Approach to Tanker Crew Scheduling (Todd E.
Combs and James T. Moore)
Aerial
refueling is a crucial component of modern day military operations.
A vital part of this refueling process is the individual tanker crews.
Constrained by the number of tanker crews available, the United States
Air Force must find ways to efficiently schedule them.
This
paper discusses an effective hybrid tabu search/set partitioning approach to Air
Mobility Command’s tanker crew scheduling problem.
This hybrid approach combines the metaheuristic tabu search with a
classical optimization approach. The
results show our approach reduces the number of crews needed to fly a specific
flight schedule. In scheduling the
crews, the amount of time crews spend waiting is drastically reduced. (Pg. 43)
Military
Operations Research Society Oral History Project Interview of Alfred
Lieberman, FS (Alfred Lieberman, FS and Dr.
Robert Sheldon, FS)
Early
Operations Research In World War One: Viscount Tiverton And The Strategic
Bombing Of Germany (Maurice Kirby)
This
paper provides an original contribution to the pre-history of Operations
Research by describing and analysing the contribution of Lord Tiverton (later
the Earl of Halsbury) to the ‘first principles’ of strategic bombing.
The relevant principles were to underpin Britain’s offensive air
strategy for the greater part of the interwar period. They also provided the rationale for RAF Bomber Command’s
area offensive against Germany in World War Two.
The paper complements other contributions in identifying the early
applications of the ‘scientific method’ to the study of warfare in World War
One. (Pg. 5)
The
Effect of Battle Circumstances on Fitting Lanchester Equations to the Battle of
Kursk (Thomas W. Lucas and John A. Dinges)
A
dearth of high-quality, detailed battle data has hindered the many efforts to
use historical battles to answer the question:
Is there a Lanchester law for aggregate attrition?
Consequently, no consensus has emerged.
This research addresses this question using the most detailed two-sided,
time-phased, force-on-force battle data—the Kursk Data Base, built by the
Dupuy Institute and the Center for Army Analysis.
While only one battle, our findings indicate that the choice of
Lanchester law is simply not that important.
That is, substantially more of the variation in casualties during the
Battle of Kursk is explained by the status of the forces considered and the
phases of the battle than by the Lanchester variant used. (Pg. 17)
The
Relationship of Weapon Cannibalization to Weapon System Mission Capability (James Hoover, S. Craig Goodwyn, James M. Jondrow, Robert P.
Trost and Michael
Ye)
In
2001, there was concern by the Military Services and the US Congress about
shortages of spare parts for aviation units and about the workarounds, such as
part cannibalization, that are required to keep those units near readiness
goals. This paper was written to provide a theoretical framework to the U.S.
Navy for understanding why weapon system cannibalizations occur, what factors
influence those cannibalization rates, and how to predict cannibalization rates
given the interaction of these factors. Using probabilistic operations research
techniques, the paper develops a model to predict the cannibalization rates
necessary to achieve a specified readiness goal for a weapon system given
expected customer wait times for the delivery of spare parts.
(Pg. 31)
OPELINT
Architecture Assessment Methodology (Joseph Manzo, and David C. Moon)
Probability
Distribution Function for Damage Expectancy (Mark A. Gallagher and Philip
(Bud) Whiteman)
When the
military units plan precise engagements with limited assets, the commander
should have not only an assessment of mission success, but also the uncertainty
in that assessment. In this article, the authors examine the method of dividing
the mission into a series of phases; often called either planning factors or
kill chain. The expected mission
success is the product of the probabilities of success in each phase.
For kinetic attacks, this product is commonly referred to as damage
expectancy, which specifies the probability of achieving a prescribed damage
criterion. The authors show how to
combine the uncertainty in the estimated probabilities of success for each phase
to determine a probability distribution function for the probability of mission
success. Their technique enables planners to provide the uncertainty
in the assessed mission success to the commander. (Pg. 5)
A
Rule Based Approach for Aircraft Dispatching to Emerging Targets (Seethal
Mishra, Rajan Batta and Robert J. Szczerba)
We
consider strategies to handle time critical targets in a battlefield. These
targets are assumed to be of different priorities. The approach is to model this
as a multiple server spatial queue with priorities, where aircraft required to
handle the targets are treated as servers. We consider a cutoff policy on
servers that keeps some spare aircraft handy to accommodate higher priority
targets that arrive in the near-term future. We also explore situations in which
it would be worthwhile sending a non-closest aircraft. Further, both
first-come-first-served and distance-based aircraft dispatching policies are
examined. The three situations (cutoff policy; which aircraft to dispatch; which
target to hit) are separately examined using a simulation model. The
simultaneous impact of all three situations is also tested.
Based on extensive statistical testing and results from a case study we
conclude that it is of significant benefit to simultaneously use these policies
when managing the dispatch of aircraft in a battlefield environment. (Pg. 17)
Using
Value-Focused Thinking To Select Innovative Force Protection Ideas (David M.
Jurk, Stephen P. Chambal and Alfred E. Thal, Jr.)
The
United States Air Force has seven battlelabs, including the Force Protection
Battlelab. A variety of proposed
solutions or “initiatives” are presented to the battlelabs as alternatives
to improve the Air Force’s ability to execute its core competencies and Joint
Warfighting. The battlelabs must
prioritize these initiatives to maximize the use of their limited resources.
David Jurk, Stephen Chambal, and Al Thal develop a value-focused thinking
model to evaluate and rank the competing initiatives for the Force Protection
Battlelab. The results of this
study provide a decision analysis approach for allocating their budget in an
objective, defendable, and repeatable manner. (Pg. 31)
Military
Operations Research Society Oral History Project Interview of Dr. Ralph Beatty,
Jr. (Edward A. Smyth and Eugene P. Visco)
No Executive Summary. (Pg. 45)
Our
Living Heritage (Lee Dick)
No
Executive Summary. (Pg. 5)
Military
Operations Research Society Oral History Project Interview of General Larry D.
Welch, US Air Force (Jim Bexfield, FS and Robert
Sheldon, FS)
No
Executive Summary. (Pg. 7)
Military
Operations Research Society Oral History Project Interview of Wayne P. Hughes (Michael
Garrambone and Robert Sheldon, FS)
No
Executive Summary. (Pg. 29)
Military
Operations Research Society Oral History Project Interview of Ervin Kapos (Robert
Sheldon, FS)
No
Executive Summary. (Pg. 55)
Ellis
A. Johnson and Wilbur B. Payne, FS: Two Unsung (Relatively) Pioneers (Eugene
P. Visco, FS)
No
Executive Summary. (Pg. 67)
Military
Operations Research Society Oral History Project Interview of Alfred S. Rhode,
FS (Robert Sheldon, FS)
Military
Operations Research Society Oral History Project Interview of John A. “Jack”
Englund, FS (Robert Sheldon, FS)
Some
of our links are in portable document format (pdf); they will be indicated by
this symbol
|
