ANALYSIS OF THE CAPABILITIES OF PORTABLE MINE-HUNTING EQUIPMENT OF THE AUXILIARY MINE COUNTERMEASURE DIVISION TO SUPPORT THE SUCCESS OF AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULTS

Priyanto Widodo, Benny Sukandari, Pebrianto Eko Nugroho

Abstract


Revolution in Military Affair (RMA) has encouraged technological developments in the field of mine warfare. Technological developments in the field of mine warfare have produced smart littoral mines, in which a threat that can thwart the implementation of amphibious assaults. This study tries to analyze the Auxiliary Mine Counter Measure (MCM) Division portable mine-hunting equipment capabilities to support the success of amphibious assaults. This study uses the Measurement of Effectiveness (MoE) and the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) methods to measure capabilities and determine priorities for increasing the capability of portable mine-hunting equipment to support amphibious attack support. As a result, the equipment that rushes portable mines is an increase in support for amphibious assaults because it is incompatible with existing technological developments. To be able to support the spirit of the invasion, it is necessary to procure new equipment designed by following latest developments in mine warfare technology.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Boose, D. W. (2008). Over the beach: US Army amphibious operations in the Korean War (1st ed.; E. Weigand, Ed.). Fort Leavenworth: Government Printing Office.

Gibson, J. L., Ivancevich, J. M., Donnelly, J. H., & Konopaske, R. (2012). Organizations: Behavior, Structure, Processes (14th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Retrieved from http://dl.motamem.org/organizations_behavior_structure.pdf

Kasiram, M. (2010). Metodologi penelitian kualitatif-kuantitatif. Malang: UIN-Maliki Press.

NATO. (2016a). MTP-06 VOL II Naval Mine Countermeasures Operations, Planning and Evaluation. In MTP-24 Volume I Naval Mine Countermeasures Tactics and Execution (Edition D). Brussels: NATO Standardization Office (NSO). Retrieved from https://community.apan.org/cfs-file/__key/docpreview-s/00-00-12-13-52/MTP_2D00_24-VOL-I-EDD-V1-E.pdf

NATO. (2016b). MTP-24 Volume I Naval Mine Countermeasures Tactics and Execution (Edition D). Brussels: NATO Standardization Office (NSO). Retrieved from https://community.apan.org/cfs-file/__key/docpreview-s/00-00-12-13-52/MTP_2D00_24-VOL-I-EDD-V1-E.pdf

Saaty, T. L. (2000). Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process (Vol. 6). RWS publications.

Smith, N., & Clark, T. (2006). A framework to model and measure system effectiveness. In 11th ICCRTS.

Sub Song, K., & Chu, P. C. (2012). Conceptual design of future undersea unmanned vehicle (UUV) system for mine disposal. IEEE Systems Journal, 8(1), 43–51.

Tangen, S. A. (2009). A methodology for the quantification of doctrine and materiel approaches in a capability-based assessment. Georgia Institute of Technology.

U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2009). Capabilities-Based Assessment (CBA) User’s Guide (Version 3): Force Structure, Resources, and Assessments Directorate (JCS J-8) (3rd ed.). Washington DC: Joint Chiefs of Staff. Retrieved from https://acqnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Capabilities-Based-Assessment-CBA-Users-Guide-version-3.pdf




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.33172/jp.v7i1.950

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times

Lisensi Creative Commons
Jurnal Pertahanan is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.