Sürdürülebilir Ürün Tasarım Stratejisi: M113 Üzerine Karşılaştırmalı Analiz

Abstract

Bu deneysel çalışma, Türkiye ve ABD savunma sektörlerindeki M113 zırhlı araç envanter eğilimleri ile sürdürülebilir tasarım stratejileri arasındaki ilişkiyi endüstriyel tasarım açısından araştırmaktadır. ARIMA modellemesi ve doğrusal korelasyon analizi kullanılarak 2022'ye kadar toplanan veriler, araç envanteri dinamiklerinde belirgin desenler ortaya koymaktadır. Sınırlı veri bulunabilirliğine rağmen ARIMA analizi güvenilir katsayılar üretmiş ve uygulanabilir sayısal değerlendirmeler önermiştir. Bulgular, ABD'de, sürdürülebilir prensiplerle tasarlanmış Bradley gibi alternatif araçların tanıtılmasının, M113'lerin aşamalı olarak azalmasına yol açtığını göstermektedir. Buna karşılık, Türkiye'nin envanter trendleri, tasarım bütünlüğüne sahip araçların eksikliği ile sürdürülen M113 kullanımı arasında doğrusal bir ilişki yansıtmakta ve modernizasyon çabaları varlığını uzatmaktadır. Çalışma, zırhlı araç geliştirme sürecinde sürdürülebilir ürün tasarım stratejilerinin uygulanmasının ekonomik avantajlarını vurgulamakta, özellikle ABD'nin Abrams tankı ve Bradley paletli zırhlı taşıyıcısının üretiminde açıkça görülmektedir. Türkiye'de M113'lere uzun süreli bağımlılığa rağmen, sürdürülebilir tasarım stratejilerini uygulamak için kapsamlı geri bildirim mekanizmaları ve profesyonel birimlerin gerekliliği vurgulanmaktadır. Ayrıca, gelişmekte olan ülkelerde operasyonel araç sayıları sadece modernizasyona dayanmanın etkin olmadığını göstermektedir. Teknolojik gelişmelerle araç tasarım bütünlüğü arasında denge kurmanın önemi vurgulanmaktadır. Bu çalışma, savunma sektörlerinde sürdürülebilir tasarım stratejilerinin evrilen doğasına ışık tutmakta ve ülkeleri uzun vadeli etkinlik ve ekonomik sağlamlık için kapsamlı geri bildirim mekanizmalarını ve tasarım stratejilerinin evrilen doğasına ışık tutmakta ve ülkeleri uzun vadeli etkinlik ve ekonomik sağlamlık için kapsamlı geri bildirim mekanizmalarını ve tasarım bütünlüğü prensiplerini zırhlı araç geliştirme süreçlerine entegre etmeye çağırmaktadır.

Keywords

• Sürdürülebilir tasarım
• endüstriyel tasarım
• M113
• bradley
• envanter karşılaştırması

Sustainable Product Design Strategy: A Comparative Analysis on the M113

Abstract

This empirical study investigates the relationship between the inventory trends of M113 armored vehicles and sustainable design strategies in the defense sectors of Türkiye and the USA with the perspective of industrial design. Utilizing ARIMA modeling and linear correlation analysis, data collected up to 2022 reveals distinct patterns in vehicle inventory dynamics. The ARIMA analysis produced reliable coefficients despite limited data availability, suggesting feasible numerical assessments. Results indicate that in the USA, the introduction of alternative vehicles such as the Bradley, designed with sustainable principles, led to the phased reduction of M113s. Conversely, Türkiye's inventory trends reflect a linear relationship between the absence of vehicles with design integrity and sustained M113 usage, with modernization efforts prolonging its presence. The study underscores the economic advantages of implementing sustainable product design strategies in armored vehicle development, particularly evident in the USA's production of the Abrams tank and Bradley tracked armored carrier. Despite Türkiye's prolonged reliance on M113s, it highlights the necessity of comprehensive feedback mechanisms and professional units to perform sustainable design strategies. Moreover, it reveals the inefficiency of solely relying on modernization for operational vehicle counts in developing countries, emphasizing the importance of balancing technological advancements with vehicle design integrity. This study sheds light on the evolving nature of sustainable design strategies in defense sectors, urging countries to integrate comprehensive feedback mechanisms and design integrity principles into their armored vehicle development processes for long-term effectiveness and economic viability.

Keywords

• Sustainable design
• industrial design
• M113
• bradley
• inventory comparison

References

1. Army Technology. (2004, June 3). ACV-S Tracked Armoured Combat Vehicle [Press Release]. https://www.army-technology.com/projects/acv-s/
2. Askeri Fabrika ve Tersane İşletme. (2020). Products and capabilities (pp. 8-38). https://www.asfat.com.tr/docs/asfat2020.pdf
3. BAE Systems. (2011). M113 family of vehicles. https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/m113-family-of-vehicles
4. Berman, M. S. (1995). Modal analysis of the M113 armored personnel carrier metallic hull and composite hull (Report No. ARL-MR- 246). U.S. Army Research Lab Adelphi. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA299926.pdf
5. Bhamra, T., & Lofthouse, V. (2007). Design for sustainability: A practical approach. Gower Publishing Limited.
6. BMC. (2023). https://www.bmc.com.tr/savunma-sanayi/altay/teknik-Ozellikler
7. Bowles D. C., Butler C. D., & Morisetti N. (2015). Climate change, conflict and health. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 108(10), 390-395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0141076815603234
8. Breaking Defense. (2015, March 31). 70-year-old M113s: The army’s long march to ampv [Press Release]. https://breakingdefense.com/2015/03/the-armys-long-march-to-ampv-expect-70-year-old-m113s/

9. Carter, D. A. (2015). U.S. Army campaigns of the Vietnam War: The U.S. army before Vietnam, 1953-1965. Center of Military History U.S. Army.
10. Central Intelligence Agency. (1988). The Military balance between Greece and Turkey: How it stands- where it is headed- what it means (Public Release in 2013). Interagency Intelligence Memorandum. https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP93T00837R000400040002-4.pdf
11. Chen, C. W. (2018). Guidance on the conceptual design of sustainable product–service systems. MDPI, Sustainability 2018, 10(7), 2452.
12. Clark, G., Piperias, P., & Traill, R. (1999). Life-cycle cost/capability analysis for defence systems. AMRL, Defence Science and Technology Organisation, Department of Defence. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281061307_Life_Cycle_CostCapability_Analysis_for_Defence_Systems
13. Congressional Budget Office. (2006). The Army’s future combat systems program and alternatives. https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/74xx/doc7461/08-02-army.pdf
14. Congressional Budget Office. (2021). The U.S. Military’s force structure: A primer, 2021 update. https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2021-05/57088-Force-Structure-Primer.pdf
15. Cooper, T. (1999). Creating an economic infrastructure for sustainable product design. The Journal of Sustainable Product Design, 8 (7).
16. Defense News. (2016, December 15). BAE systems presents first AMPV prototype to US Army [Press Release]. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2016/12/15/bae-systems-presents-first-ampv-prototype-to-us-army/
17. Didenko, N.I., Skripnuk, D.F., & Mirolyubova, O.V. (2017). Urbanization and greenhouse gas emissions from industry. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. IOP Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/72/1/012014
18. European Commission. (2022). Ecodesign & sustainable products regulation. https://commission.europa.eu/energy-climate-change-environment/standards-tools-and-labels/products-labelling-rules-and-requirements/sustainable-products/ecodesign-sustainable-products-regulation_en
19. Field, A. (2017). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
20. FNSS. (2021). M113 FoV capability & Sustainment program programme [Brochure]. https://www.fnss.com.tr/uploads/docs/products/1628602060_m113-brosur-2021-eng.pdf?1646898804
21. Foss, C.F. (2011). Jane's Armour & Artillery Upgrades 2011-2012. Jane’s Information Group.
22. Green, M., & Stewart, G. (2003). Modern U.S. tanks and AFVs. MBI Publishing.
23. Hackett, J. (Ed.). (2022). The military balance 2022, the international institute of strategic studies. Routledge.
24. Hellyer, M. (2018). The cost of defence: ASPI defence budget brief 2018–2019. Australian Strategic Policy Institute. https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/ad-aspi/2018-05/Cost%20of%20 Defence %202018-2019_1.pdf
25. Hooper, C. (2022, December 30). America’s tough M2/M3 Bradley fighting vehicles are perfect for Ukraine fight [Press Release]. https://www.forbes.com/sites/craighooper/2022/12/30/americas-tough-m2m3-mini-tanks-are-perfect-for-ukraine-and-nato/?sh=664e79171996
26. Langton, C. (Ed.). (2004). The military balance 2004-2005. The international institute of strategic studies. Oxford University Press.
27. Margolin, V. (2013, Winter). The United States in World War II: Scientists, engineers, designers. The MIT Press, 29(1), 14-29.
28. Military Factory. FNSS ACV-15. https://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.php?armor_id=689
29. National Defense Magazine. (2012, December 17). Vendors pour funding into armored vehicle development. [Press Release]. https://web.archive.org/web/20150904034738/ http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2013/January/Pages/VendorsPourFundingIntoArmoredVehicleDevelopment.aspx
30. Nuckols, W.T., & Cameron, R.S. (2016). Don’t harness an ox to a racehorse: Get the M113 out of the armored brigade combat team… now, please!. ARMOR, Mounted Maneuver Journal, PB 17-16-1.
31. ORYX. (2022, April 25). Beyond the call - Dutch Arms deliveries to Ukraine [Press Release]. https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/04/beyond-call-dutch-arms-deliveries-to.html
32. Otokar. (2021). TULPAR modüler zırhlı paletli araç [Brochure]. https://defense.otokar.com.tr/OtokarSavunma/media/Otokar-Savunma/arac-brosur/TULPAR-TR-BR-2021-(AP02TG-21)-onizleme.pdf Parmentola, J.A., Rajendran, A.M., Bryzik, W., Walker, B.J., McCauley, J.W., Reifman, J., & Nasrabadi, N.M. (Eds.). (2006). Transformational science and technology for the current and future force. World Scientific Pub Co. 42, 64-93. https://doi.org/10.1142/6290
33. Reuters. (2014, December 24). UPDATE 1-BAE wins U.S. Army contract worth up to $1.2 bln for new armored vehicle [Press Release]. https://www.reuters.com/article/bae-systems-contract-vehicle-idCNL1N0U722E20141223
34. Robinson, M.J., & Kosmatka, J.B. (2011). Dynamic response of a light-weight composite bridge. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2011.
35. Schubert, F.N., & Kraus, T.L. (1995). The whirlwind war: The United States Army in operations desert shield and desert storm. Center of Military History United States Army.
36. Shumway, R. H., & Stoffer, D. S. (2006). ARIMA models (pp. 83-173). Time series analysis and its applications: With R examples. Springer.
37. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. (2022). SIPRI arms transfers database 1959-2003 [Data Set]. https://doi.org/10.55163/SAFC1241
38. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. (2022). SIPRI military expenditure database 1949-2022 [Data Set]. https://doi.org/10.55163/CQGC9685
39. The New York Times. (1981, October 18). Vehicle to honor bradley [Press Release]. https://www.nytimes.com/1981/10/18/us/vehicle-to-honor-bradley.html
40. Tischner, U. (2001). Sustainable product design. Sustainable solutions (1st ed.). Routledge.
41. Tobias, J. M. (1993). Business base analysis the missing link. U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Command (TACOM) Directorate of Cost & Systems Analysis (AMSTA-V). https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA275656.pdf
42. U.S. Department of Defense. (2021). National guard and reserve equipment report for fiscal year 2022 (pp. 70-126). https://prhome.defense.gov/Portals/52/Documents/RFM/Readiness /docs/FY2022NGRER.pdf
43. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2015). Defense acquisitions 2015 (pp. 75-120). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-15-342sp.pdf
44. Webster, G.D., Glass, R.G., & Hutton, G.J. (1981). The low temperature chamber testing of the compression ignition engine and system of the armoured personnel carrier (apc) M113A1. Defence Research Establishment. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA112968.pdf
45. Willey, D., & Hudson, I. (2017). The tank book. Dorling Kindersley.
46. Xia, W. (2011). Study on PLM-based industrial design processes. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Innovation and Management (pp.714-718).