This study develops a framework using the Lanchester Laws in a hybrid system dynamics model. Two models of the Lanchester Laws are compared. The first is a traditional discrete event simulation and the other is a system dynamics model. System dynamics models are able to represent qualitative aspects of combat that are difficult to capture in a discrete event simulation. This is directly applicable to modeling combat since some key drivers within the expected environment are difficult to model. Additionally, the system dynamics construct allows for the modeling of continuous events and incorporating system feedback. Both of these properties are favored when modeling combat or asymmetrical operations. Results from the discrete event simulation and the system dynamics model are analyzed and contrasted.
[1] Law, A. M., and W.D. KeltonSimulation Modeling and Analysis, Third Edition, p. 6. New York: McGraw Hill, 2000.
2.
[2] Kelton, W.D., R.P. Sadowski, and D.A. Sadowski. Simulation with Arena, Second Edition, p. 24–29. New York: McGraw Hill, 2002.
3.
[3] Banks, J.Handbook of Simulation, p. 10–12. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc, 1998.
4.
[4] Forrester, J. W.Principles of Systems 2nd preliminary edition, p. 1.1–1.5. Boston: Wright-Allen Press, Inc, 1968.
5.
[5] Sweetser, A.“A Comparison of System Dynamics and Discrete Event Simulation”Proceedings of the 17th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society (1999)
6.
[6] System Dynamics Society. www.systemdynamics.org accessed 9 November 2006
7.
[7] Forrester, J. W.Industrial Dynamics, p. 68–69, Boston, M.I.T. Press, 1961.
8.
[8] Kirkwood, C. Vensim PLE Quick Reference and Tutorial, http://www.public.asu.edu/kirkwood/sysdyn/VenPLE.pdf, 2005.
9.
[9] Coyle, R. G.“Qualitative and Quantitative Modelling in System Dynamics: Some Research Questions”System Dynamics Review16 (3, 2000): 225–244.
10.
[10] Aracil, J.“On the Qualitative Properties in System Dynamics Models”, European Journal of Economic and Social Systems13 (1, 1999): 1–18.
11.
[11] Forrester, J. W.Urban Dynamics, Boston: M.I.T. Press, 1969.
12.
[12] Forrester, J. W.World Dynamics, Boston: Wright-Allen Press, 1971.
13.
[13] Forrester, J. W.“System Dynamics, System Thinking and Soft OR”System Dynamics Review10 (2, 1994): 245–256.
14.
[14] Forrester, J. W., and P. M. Senge.“Tests for Building Confidence in System Dynamics Models”TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences14 (1980): 209–228.
15.
[15] Sterman, J. D.“Appropriate Summary Statistics for Evaluating the Historical Fit of System Dynamists Models”Dynamica10 (II, 1984) 51–62.
16.
[16] Coyle, R. G., and D. Exelby. “The Validation of Commercial System Dynamics Models”System Dynamics Review16 (1, 2000): 27–41.
[18] Lanchester, F. W.“Aircraft in Warfare: The Dawn of the Fourth Arm”Engineering98, (1914): 422–423 & 452–454.
19.
[19] Taylor, J. G.Lanchester Models of Warfare, Volume 1, p. 54–62Washington DC: Operations Research Society of America, 1983.
20.
[20] Helmbold, R. L.“A Modification of Lanchester's Equations”Operations Research65 (1965): 857–859.
21.
[21] Chen, P. S., and P. Chu. “Applying Lanchester's Linear Law to Model the Ardennes Campaign”Naval Research Logistics48 (2000): 653–661.
22.
[22] Lucas, T. W., and T. Turkes. “Fitting Lanchester Equations to the Battles of Kursk and Ardennes”Naval Research Logistics51 (2004): 95–115.
23.
[23] Hung, C-Y., G. K. Yang, P.S. Deng, T. Tang, S-P Lan, and P. Chu“Fitting Lanchester's square Law to the Ardennes Campaign”Journal of the Operational Research Society56 (2005): 942–946.
24.
[24] Bracken, J., “Lanchester Models of the Ardennes Campaign”, in Warfare Modeling, ed. Bracken, J., Kress, J. and Rosenthal, R., p. 417–436, Washington DC: The Military Operations Research Society, 1995.
25.
[25] Deitchman, S. J.“A Lanchester Model of Guerrilla Warfare”Operations Research10 (1962): 818–827.
26.
[26] Schaffer, M.B. Lanchester Models of Guerrilla Engagements, Santa Monica California: The RAND Corporation, RM-5053-ARPA, DTIC # AD648863, 1967.
27.
[27] Bratley, P., B.L. Fox, and L.E.Schrage. A Guide to Simulation, Second Edition, p. 17. New York: Springer, 1987.
28.
[28] Dewar, J.A., J.J. Gillogly, and M.L. Juncosa. “Non-Monotonicity, Chaos and Combat Models”Military Operations Research2 (2, 1996): 37–49.
