Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 31917
Fighter Aircraft Selection Using Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution with Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis

Authors: C. Ardil

Abstract:

This paper presents a multiple criteria decision making analysis technique for selecting fighter aircraft for the national air force. The selection of military aircraft is a process consisting of contradictory goals and objectives. When a modern air force needs to choose fighter aircraft to upgrade existing fleets, a multiple criteria decision making analysis and scenario planning for defense acquisition has been put forward. The selection of fighter aircraft for the air defense force is a strategic decision making process, since the purchase or lease of fighter jets, maintenance and operating costs and having a fleet is the biggest cost for the air force. Multiple criteria decision making analysis methods are effectively applied to facilitate decision making from various available options. The selection criteria were determined using the literature on the problem of fighter aircraft selection. The selection of fighter aircraft to be purchased for the air defense forces is handled using a multiple criteria decision making analysis technique that also determines a suitable methodological approach for the defense procurement and fleet upgrade planning process. The aim of this study is to originate an approach to evaluate fighter aircraft alternatives, Su-35, F-35, and TF-X (MMU), based on technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS).

Keywords: Fighter Aircraft, Fighter Aircraft Selection, Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution, TOPSIS, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis, MCDMA, Su-35, F-35, TF-X (MMU)

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 361

References:


[1] Ardil, C., Bilgen, S. (2017) Online Performance Tracking. SocioEconomic Challenges, 1(3), 58-72.
[2] Ardil, C. (2018) Multidimensional Performance Tracking. International Journal of Computer and Systems Engineering, Vol:12, No:5,320-349
[3] Ardil, C. (2018) Multidimensional Compromise Optimization for Development Ranking of the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries and Turkey. International Journal of Mathematical and Computational Sciences Vol:12, No:6, 131-138.
[4] Ardil, C. (2018) Multidimensional Compromise Programming Evaluation of Digital Commerce Websites. International Journal of Computer and Information Engineering Vol:12, No:7, 556-563.
[5] Ardil, C. (2018) Multicriteria Decision Analysis for Development Ranking of Balkan Countries. International Journal of Computer and Information Engineering Vol:12, No:12, 1118-1125.
[6] Ardil, C. (2019) Scholar Index for Research Performance Evaluation Using Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis. International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, Vol:13, No:2, 93-105.
[7] Ardil, C. (2019) Military Fighter Aircraft Selection Using Multiplicative Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis Method. International Journal of Mathematical and Computational Sciences, 13(9), 184 - 193.
[8] Velasquez, M., Hester, P. T. (2013) An Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods. International Journal of Operations Research Vol. 10, No. 2, p.56-66.
[9] Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., Nor, K. MD., Khalifah, Z., Zakwan, N., Valipour, V. (2015) Multiple criteria decision-making techniques and their applications – a review of the literature from 2000 to 2014. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 28:1, p. 516-571.
[10] Mardani, A., Zavadskas, E. K., Khalifah, Z., Jusoh, A., Nor, K. MD. (2016) Multiple criteria decision-making techniques in transportation systems: a systematic review of the state of the art literature, Transport, 31:3, p.359-385.
[11] Wang Tien-Chin, Chang Tsung-Han (2007) Application of TOPSIS in evaluating initial training aircraft under a fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 33, 870–880.
[12] Sánchez-Lozano, J.M., Serna, J., Dolón-Payán, A. (2015) Evaluating military training aircrafts through the combination of multi-criteria decision making processes with fuzzy logic. A case study in the Spanish Air Force Academy. Aerospace Science and Technology, 42, 58-65.
[13] Ali, Y., Muhammad, N., Salman, A. (2017) Selection of a fighter aircraft to improve the effectiveness of air combat in the war on terror: Pakistan air force - a case in point. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v9i2.489
[14] Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K. (1981) Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
[15] Lai, Y.J., Hwang, C.L. (1994) Fuzzy Multiple Objective Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
[16] Lai, Y., Liu, T., Hwang, C. (1994) TOPSIS for MODM. European Journal of Operational Research, 76, 486-500.
[17] Chris Tofallis (2014) Add or Multiply? A Tutorial on Ranking and Choosing with Multiple Criteria. INFORMS Transactions on Education 14(3):109-119. https://doi.org/10.1287/ited.2013.0124
[18] Choo, E., Schoner, B., Wedley, W. (1999) Interpretation of criteria weights in multicriteria decision making. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 37, 527-541.
[19] Vafaei, N., Ribeiro, R.A.,Camarinha-Matos, L. (2018) Data normalisation techniques in decision making: case study with TOPSIS method. Int. J. Inf. Decis. Sci., 10, 19-38.
[20] Zavadskas, E., Turskis, Z. (2008) A New Logarithmic Normalization Method in Games Theory. Informatica, 19, 303-314.
[21] Yager, R. (2004) Decision making using minimization of regret. Int. J. Approx. Reason., 36, 109-128.