Cheryl Eisler, Dave Allen


This paper describes a stochastic discrete event simulation model for scheduling of joint military force structures. The model employs capability-based methods to link scenario requirements to force structure assets. Assignment of assets to scenarios is designed to attempt to mimic the decisions of a military scheduler. Force structure performance is evaluated based on how well and how often scenario capability requirements are met. The model output permits options analysis, capability gap analysis, determination of optimal force structure composition, and evaluation of force structure performance in the face of changing requirements and policies (such as readiness and sustainment, operations tempo, and personnel tempo constraints).


  1. Abbass, H., Bender, A., Baker, S. , Sarker, R. A. Year. Anticipating future scenarios for the design of modularised vehicle and trailer fleets. In: SimTecT, 2007 Brisbane, Australia.
  2. Baker, S. F., Morton, D. P., Rosenthal, R. E. , Williams, L. M. 2002. Optimizing Military Airlift. Operations Research, 50, 582-602.
  3. Brown, G. G., Clemence, R. D., Teufert, W. R. , Wood, R. K. 1991. An optimization model for modernizing the army's helicopter fleet. INTERFACES, 21, 39-52.
  4. Bulut, G. 2001. Robust Multi-Scenario Optimization of an Air Expeditionary Force Force Structure Applying Scatter Search to the Combat Forces Assessment Model. Air Force Institute of Technology.
  5. Cortez, L. A. , Kaiser, T. J. 1991. U.S. Coast Guard Fleet Mix Planning: A Decision Support System Prototype. Master of Science in Information Systems, Naval Postgraduate School.
  6. Crary, M., Nozick, L. K. , Whitaker, L. R. 2002. Sizing the US destroyer fleet. European Journal of Operational Research, 136, 680-695.
  7. Davis, P. K. 2002. Analytic architecture for capabilitiesbased planning, mission-system analysis, and transformation. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
  8. Diestel, R. 2005. Graph Theory. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol. 173. 3rd ed. Heidelberg: SpringerVerlag.
  9. Dugan, K. 2007. Navy Mission Planner. Master of Science in Operations Research, Naval Postgraduate School.
  10. Farr, J. V., Nelson, M. S. , Diaz, A. A. 1994. Resource Allocation Methodology to Support Mission Area Analysis. West Point, NY: United States Military Academy.
  11. Fildes, L. 2006. A Decision Support Tool for the Procurement and Planning of Royal Naval Ships. Master of Science in Operational Research, University of Southampton.
  12. Gallagher, M. A. , Kelly, E. J. 1991. A New Methodology for Military Force Structure Analysis. Operations Research, 39, 877-885.
  13. Gauthier, Y., Wardrop, W., Price, A. , Lawrence, A. 2008. The size of MARS: quantifying requirements for the Royal Navy's future afloat support fleet. 25th International Symposium on Military Operational Research. Cranfield University.
  14. Greer, W. L., Kaufman, A. I., Levine, D. B., Nakada, D. Y. , Nance, J. F. 2005. Exploration of Potential Future Fleet Architectures. Alexandria, VA: Institute for Defense Analyses.
  15. Horn, M. E. T., Jiang, H. , Kilby, P. 2007. Scheduling patrol boats and crews for the Royal Australian Navy. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 58, 1284-1293.
  16. Klerman, J. A., Ordowich, C., Bullock, A. M. , Hickey, S. 2008. The RAND SLAM program. RAND National Defense Research Institute.
  17. Mattila, V., Virtanen, K. , Raivio, T. 2008. Improving Maintenance Decision Making in the Finnish Air Force Through Simulation. INTERFACES, 38, 187- 201.
  18. Mattock, M., Schank, J., Stucker, J. , Rothenberg, J. 1995. New capabilities for strategic mobility analysis using mathematical programming, RAND Corporation.
  19. Salmeron, J., Wood, R. K. , Morton, D. P. 2009. A Stochastic Program For Optimizing Military Sealift Subject To Attack. Military Operations Research, 14, 19-39.
  20. Taylor, B. , Lane, A. 2004. Development of a Novel Family of Military Campaign Simulation Models. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55, 333- 339.
  21. Walmsley, N. S. , Hearn, P. 2004. Balance of Investment in Armoured Combat Support Vehicles: An Application of Mixed Integer Programming. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55, 403- 412.
  22. Wesolkowski, S. , Billyard, A. 2008. The Stochastic Fleet Estimation (SaFE) model. Proceedings of the 2008 Spring simulation multiconference. Ottawa, Canada: Society for Computer Simulation International.
  23. Whitacre, J. M., Bender, A., Baker, S., Fan, Q., Sarker, R. A. , Abbass, H. Year. Network Topology and Time Criticality Effects in the Modularised Fleet Mix Problem. In: SimTecT, 2008 Melbourne, Australia.
  24. Wolf, A. 2006. Intelligent Search Strategies Based on Adaptive Constraint Handling Rules. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 6, 213-224.
  25. Wu, T. T., Powell, W. B. , Whisman, A. 2009. The optimizing-simulator: An illustration using the military airlift problem. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, 19, 1-31.
  26. Zadeh, H. S. 2009. NaMOS; Scheduling Patrol Boats and Crews for the Royal Australian Navy. 2009 IEEE Aerospace Conference. Big Sky, MT.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Eisler C. and Allen D. (2012). A STRATEGIC SIMULATION TOOL FOR CAPABILITY-BASED JOINT FORCE STRUCTURE ANALYSIS . In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Operations Research and Enterprise Systems - Volume 1: ICORES, ISBN 978-989-8425-97-3, pages 21-30. DOI: 10.5220/0003727800210030

in Bibtex Style

author={Cheryl Eisler and Dave Allen},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Operations Research and Enterprise Systems - Volume 1: ICORES,},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Operations Research and Enterprise Systems - Volume 1: ICORES,
SN - 978-989-8425-97-3
AU - Eisler C.
AU - Allen D.
PY - 2012
SP - 21
EP - 30
DO - 10.5220/0003727800210030