@article{ART003397172},
author={Park Hongsuk},
title={A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems},
journal={Journal of Advances in Military Studies},
issn={2635-5531},
year={2026},
volume={9},
number={2},
pages={1-13}
TY - JOUR
AU - Park Hongsuk
TI - A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems
JO - Journal of Advances in Military Studies
PY - 2026
VL - 9
IS - 2
PB - Institute of Defense Acquisition Program
SP - 1
EP - 13
SN - 2635-5531
AB - With the acceleration of Defense Innovation 4.0 and advancements in artificial intelligence and autonomous control technologies, the acquisition and fielding of Manned-Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) have emerged as a critical agenda in defense capability development. However, existing effectiveness evaluation methodologies for defense acquisition and requirements validation remain heavily oriented toward conventional manned systems, focusing primarily on kinetic and physical combat metrics. Consequently, they fail to adequately quantify the inherent operational merits of unmanned systems, such as zero-casualty benefits, multidimensional autonomy levels, battlefield visualization enhancement, and network-centric synergies. This study aims to conduct a comparative analysis of effectiveness evaluation methodologies between manned and unmanned weapon systems and to propose an integrated, mission engineering-based multidimensional evaluation framework. To demonstrate the applicability of the proposed model, an illustrative case study of a coastal defense and complex anti-submarine/mine countermeasures scenario was analyzed using quantitative scenario data. The simulation results demonstrate that the MUM-T architecture drastically reduces human casualty risk by over 85% compared to manned-alone forces, while improving battlefield visualization by approximately 1.95 times through multi-domain sensor integration. Furthermore, the MUM-T configuration extended operational mission continuity fourfold and lowered total ownership costs by approximately 22%, confirming balanced operational utility under the simulated scenario conditions. The findings provide practical guidelines and analytical consulting criteria for defense requirement authorities, acquisition managers, and defense analysts in evaluating requirements and optimizing resource allocation.
KW - Unmanned weapon systems;Manned-unmanned teaming (MUM-T);Effectiveness evaluation;Mission engineering;Requirements validation
DO -
UR -
ER -
Park Hongsuk. (2026). A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems. Journal of Advances in Military Studies, 9(2), 1-13.
Park Hongsuk. 2026, "A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems", Journal of Advances in Military Studies, vol.9, no.2 pp.1-13.
Park Hongsuk "A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems" Journal of Advances in Military Studies 9.2 pp.1-13 (2026) : 1.
Park Hongsuk. A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems. 2026; 9(2), 1-13.
Park Hongsuk. "A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems" Journal of Advances in Military Studies 9, no.2 (2026) : 1-13.
Park Hongsuk. A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems. Journal of Advances in Military Studies, 9(2), 1-13.
Park Hongsuk. A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems. Journal of Advances in Military Studies. 2026; 9(2) 1-13.
Park Hongsuk. A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems. 2026; 9(2), 1-13.
Park Hongsuk. "A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness Assessment of Manned and Unmanned Weapon Systems" Journal of Advances in Military Studies 9, no.2 (2026) : 1-13.
