Sahil güvenlik yüzer unsurlarının arama ve kurtarma önceliklerinin tanımlanmasında analitik ağ süreci kullanımı

Yıl 2019, , 819 - 834, 23.05.2019

Günay Uzun , Mehmet Kabak

https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.460482

Öz

Denizde arama ve kurtarma (AK) sahil güvenliğin en yaygın ve oldukça önemli görevlerinden biridir. Sahil güvenlik, denizde tehlikede olduğu ihbar edilen vasıta ya da insanlar için derhal araç görevlendirebilecek imkana sahip olmalıdır. Sahil güvenlik yüzer unsurlarının tasarımı doğal olarak mühendislik değişikliklerini içerir ve AK görevi için ideal olan tek bir unsur tipi dizaynı mümkün değildir. Son dönemde Ege Denizini kullanan göçmen sayısındaki artış, Türk Sahil Güvenlik yüzer unsurlarının özellikle AK konusunda bilimsel yöntemlerden yararlanarak maksimum fayda sağlayacak şeklide görevlendirilmesi ihtiyacını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Sahil Güvenlik Komutanlığında sahil güvenlik yüzer unsurlarının AK durumu ve önceliklerini tanımlamak için Analitik Ağ Süreci (ANP) ile Faydalar, Fırsatlar, Maliyetler ve Risklere (BOCR) dayalı bir model önermektir. Bu bütünleşik yaklaşım, AK görevlerine göre yüzer unsur tiplerinin ağırlık ya da öncelik olarak da adlandırılan boyutsuz ölçümlerini bulmamıza olanak vermektedir. Bu çalışma sahil güvenlikte AK görevlerine yönelik karar verme problemleri için temel girdiyi sağlamaktadır. Sonuç olarak KAAN 29/33, SAR 33/35 ve 80 sınıfı botların AK görevi için daha uygun oldukları tespit edilmiştir.

Search and rescue (SAR) at sea is one of the most common and extraordinarily important missions for the coast guard. The coast guard must have the capability of assigning a vessel immediately for reported vessel or people in distress at sea. Coast guard surface vessel design inherently involves engineering trade-offs and there is not a single vessel type design, which is ideal for SAR mission. The significant increase in the number of immigrants crossing the Aegean Sea in recent years has revealed the fact that the Turkish Coast Guard assets should be assigned by utilizing scientific methods so as to provide maximum benefit. The purpose of this study is to propose a model based on Analytic Network Process (ANP) and Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks (BOCR) to determine the SAR status and priorities of coast guard surface vessels in Turkish Coast Guard command. This integrated approach allows us to find dimensions, measurements called as weights or priorities of the surface vessel types according to SAR task. This study provides the basic input for decision making problems related to SAR mission. Consequently, KAAN 29/33, SAR 33/35 and 80 class of boats have found to be more suitable for SAR task. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sahil Güvenlik, Analitik Ağ Süreci; Arama ve Kurtarma/Coast Guard; Analytic Network Process; Search and Rescue

Kaynakça

• Azofra, M., Pérez-Labajos, C.A., Blanco, B. ve Achútegui, J.J., “Optimum Placement of Sea Rescue Resources”, Safety Science, 45, 941–951, 2007.
• Breivik, Ø. ve Allen, A.A., “An Operational Search and Rescue Model for the Norwegian Sea and the North Sea”, Journal of Marine Systems, 69, 99-113, 2008.
• Seppänen, H., Mäkelä, J., Luokkala, P. ve Virrantaus, K., “Developing Shared Situational Awareness for Emergency Management”, Safety Science, 55, 1–9, 2013.
• Hansen, H.L., Jepsen, J.R. ve Hermansen, K., “Factors Influencing Survival in case of Shipwreck and Other Maritime Disasters in the Danish Merchant Fleet since 1970”, Safety Science, 50, 1589–1593, 2012.
• Kujala, P., Hanninen, M., Arola, T. ve Ylitalo, J., “Analysis of the Marine Traffic Safety in the Gulf of Finland”, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 94, 1349–1357, 2009.
• Narayanan, L., Ram, G. ve Ibe, O.C., “A Joint Network for Disaster Recovery and Search and Rescue Operations”, Computer Networks, 56, 3347–3373, 2012.
• Abi-Zeid, I. ve Frost, J.R., “SARPlan: A Decision Support System for Canadian Search and Rescue Operations”, European Journal of Operational Research, 162, 630–653, 2005.
• Forman, E.H. ve Selly, M.A., Decision by objectives: How to convince others that you are right. The Analytic Hierarchy Process and Expert Choice, [On-line] Available: http://professorforman.com/DecisionByObjectives/DBO.pdf, 43–125, 2004.
• Bergin, A. ve Bateman, S., “Law and order at sea in the South Pacific: the contribution of the Pacific Patrol Boat Project”, Ocean & Coastal Management, 42, 555–568, 1999.
• Wagner, M.R. ve Radovilsky, Z., “Optimizing boat resources at the U.S. Coast Guard: Deterministic and stochastic models”, Operations Research, 60, No.5, 1035–1049, 2012.
• Brown, G., Dell, R. ve Farmer R. “Scheduling coast guard district cutters”, Interfaces, 26, No.2, 59–72, 1996.
• Tavana, M., Bailey, M.D. ve Busch T.E., ‘A multi-criteria vehicle-target allocation assessment model for network-centric Joint Air Operations’, Int. J. Operational Research, Vol. 3, No. 3, 235–254, 2008.
• Merrick, J.R.W. ve Harrald J.R.. “Making decisions about safety in US ports and waterways”, Interfaces, 37, No.3, 240–252, 2007.
• Saaty, T.L., Fundamentals of the Analytic Network Process, Proceedings of International Symposium on the AHP, Kobe, Japan: 48–63, 1999.
• Sarkis, J. ve Sundarraj, R.P., “Hub location at digital equipment corporation: A comprehensive analysis of qualitative and quantitative factors”, European Journal of Operational Research, 137, 336–347, 2002.
• Mandic, K., Bobar, V. ve Delibašić, B., “Modeling Interactions Among Criteria in MCDM Methods: A Review”, Decision Support Systems V – Big Data Analytics for Decision Making, Volume 216 of the series Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, 98–109, 2015.
• Wua, W.Y., Sukoco, B.M., Li, C.Y. ve Chen, S.H., “An integrated multi-objective decision-making process for supplier selection with bundling problem”, Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 2327–2337, 2009.
• Chang, Y.H., Wey, W.M. ve Tseng, H.Y., “Using ANP priorities with goal programming for revitalization strategies in historic transport: A case study of the Alishan Forest Railway”, Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 8682–8690, 2009.
• Büyüközkan, G. ve Berkol, Ç., “Designing a sustainable supply chain using an integrated analytic network process and goal programming approach in quality function deployment”, Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 13731–13748, 2011.
• Kabak, M. ve Dağdeviren, M., “A hybrid MCDM approach to assess the sustainability of students’ preferences for university selection”, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20:3, 391–418, 2014.
• Gencer, C., ve Gürpınar, D., “Analytic network process in supplier selection:A case study in an electronic firm”, Applied Mathematical Modelling, 31, 2475–2486, 2007.
• Meade, L., “Strategic analysis of logistics and supply chain Management systems using the analytical network Process”, Transpn Res.-E (Logistics and Transpn Rev.), Vol. 34, No. 3, 201–215, 1998.
• Saaty, T.L., Decision making with dependence and feedback: the Analytic Network Process, Pittsburgh: RWS Publications, Second Edition, 2001.
• Saaty, T.L., “Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network process”, European Journal of Operational Research, 168:5, 57–70, 2006.
• Kabak M. ve Dagdeviren, M., “Prioritization of renewable energy sources for Turkey by using a hybrid MCDM methodology”, Energy Conversion and Management, 79, 25–33, 2014.