2025, Vol.8, No.2

Journal of Advances in Military Studies 2025 KCI Impact Factor : 1.0

pISSN : 2635-5531 / eISSN : 2636-1329
https://journal.kci.go.kr/jams

This study proposes a novel quantitative analysis framework for establishing a robust requirements management system, specifically designed for Force Support Systems (FSSs), grounded in the Requirements Management (REQM) process area of the CMMI-DEV model. The framework introduces classification criteria that distinguish Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) from System Performance Parameters (SPPs) in Operational Requirements Documents (ORDs) and integrates quantitative decision-making techniques─including CVR, AHP, QFD, and MDS─to enable evidence-based requirement analysis. The proposed framework is systematically mapped to the five specific practices of the CMMI-DEV REQM process area: understanding requirements (SP 1.1), obtaining commitment to requirements (SP 1.2), managing requirements changes (SP 1.3), maintaining bidirectional traceability of requirements (SP 1.4), and ensuring alignment between project work and requirements (SP 1.5). Through these linkages, the framework enhances the structure, prioritization, and consistency of requirements throughout the acquisition lifecycle. Case studies on a training simulator and a next-generation combat uniform verified the quantitative validity of KPP/SPP classification and demonstrate the framework's effectiveness in improving traceability and decision-making in defense acquisition. Overall, the study offers a formalized and practical approach to FSS requirements management, thereby improving the efficiency and reliability of defense acquisition projects.

In defense force improvement programs, requests for total project cost (TPC) increases—arising from deviations from the initially planned budget—can hinder the initiation of new projects and negatively affect overall force modernization. This research investigates three cases of naval acquisition programs in Korea—the Jangbogo-III Batch-I, Ulsan-class Batch-III, and KDDX naval projects. These cases were selected due to significant total project cost increases primarily driven by escalating material costs during their implementation phases. Naval projects are distinct from general weapon system acquisitions; they are long-term endeavors that progress through conceptual design, basic design, system development (including detailed design and lead ship construction), and subsequent mass production of follow-on ships. Our analysis reveals that cost increases in these naval acquisition programs were predominantly caused by design modifications resulting from evolving operational performance requirements from the Navy, occurring either after the initial conceptual design phase or following lead ship construction. Furthermore, annual price fluctuations over the extended project durations significantly contributed to the overall cost escalation. These findings align with observations that inflation can affect defense spending, even when contract spending appears stable. To improve the effectiveness of TPC analysis, we propose that the initial total project costs for approved programs should be meticulously managed. it should be managed similarly to the defense mid-term planning framework, by maintaining cost estimates and rationales at the contract-item and detailed cost-element levels from the initial TPC confirmation stage. And strengthening data sharing and coordination between Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) and cost and contract management teams is necessary to enhance the efficiency of TPC analysis for ship acquisition programs. Finally, there is a pressing need to stimulate academic research that rigorously analyzes the major variable factors and their root causes that may emerge during actual project implementation stages.

This study quantitatively analyzed the operational effectiveness of helicopter Manned–Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) across plains, urban, and mountainous environments. To this end, the Army Weapon Effectiveness Analysis Model (AWAM) was enhanced to conduct integrated simulations of attack helicopters operating in concert with reconnaissance-and-loitering (suicide) unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The survivability of helicopters and the tank destruction rate were compared between manned-only operations and combined manned–unmanned operations. The analysis showed that MUM-T operations outperformed manned-only operations in every terrain type. In plains, the tank destruction rate increased by 1.13 and helicopter survivability by 1.04. In urban terrain, the tank destruction rate rose by a factor of 5.07 and helicopter survivability by 1.91, while in mountainous terrain they increased by factors of 3.96 and 1.62, respectively. These results are attributed to the advance deployment of UAVs, which suppressed enemy air-defense weapons and provided real-time target data to support precision strikes. Given that more than 90 percent of the Korean Peninsula consists of mountainous and urban areas, building MUM-T capabilities into future attack-helicopter forces is essential. In particular, systematic comparison and validation are required for various operational models—such as helicopter–vertical-takeoff-and-landing (VTOL) drone teaming, helicopter–Air-Launched Effects (ALE) teaming, and hybrid helicopter–VTOL–ALE configurations—while simultaneously securing key technological infrastructures, including real-time sensor-to-shooter networks, AI-based situational awareness and decision-support systems, and high-reliability data links. By incorporating terrain variables—plains, urban, and mountainous—into simulation experiments, this research provides empirical evidence of MUM-T’s operational benefits and offers foundational data to guide the Republic of Korea military's force development and doctrinal advancement of manned–unmanned teaming systems.