IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jtrsec/v13y2020i3d10.1007_s12198-020-00219-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The interconnectedness between efforts to reduce the risk related to accidents and attacks - naval examples

Author

Listed:
  • Hans Liwång

    (Swedish Defence University
    KTH Royal Institute of Technology)

Abstract

Fatalities on board military vessels are the result of different types of incidents, including both accidents and antagonistic attacks. The aim of this study is to identify aspects that determine the safety and operability of military vessels from a sociotechnical perspective. Safety is studied in relation to four different types of operations: the Falklands War in 1982, antagonistic attacks in situations other than war from 2000 to 2012, submarine incidents from 2000 to 2015, and severe accidents involving military vessels in Norway and Sweden from 1990 to 2015. For the incidents analyzed, the study identifies qualitative aspects that contributed to the outcome and consequences of the incident and, if possible, the risk level. The importance of organizational and management safety issues, personnel safety issues and design safety issues are analyzed. The study shows that different operational types have different risk levels but, to some extent, the same types of safety issues. In general, risk is high when the ship is not prepared and managed for war; the recoverability, i.e., the ability to limit consequences, is an important safety factor in all of the operational types studied. The probability of an incident occurring is governed by management decisions, and the recoverability is governed by the capacity for effective crew actions despite limited management. The presence of external threats leads to a need for extra levels of system understanding, for management and for personnel.

Suggested Citation

  • Hans Liwång, 2020. "The interconnectedness between efforts to reduce the risk related to accidents and attacks - naval examples," Journal of Transportation Security, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 245-272, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jtrsec:v:13:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s12198-020-00219-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s12198-020-00219-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12198-020-00219-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12198-020-00219-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wayne P. Hughes, 1995. "A salvo model of warships in missile combat used to evaluate their staying power," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 267-289, March.
    2. Mokashi, A. J. & Wang, J. & Vermar, A. K., 2002. "A study of reliability-centred maintenance in maritime operations," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 325-335, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael J. Armstrong, 2007. "Effective attacks in the salvo combat model: Salvo sizes and quantities of targets," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 66-77, February.
    2. Michael J. Armstrong, 2013. "The salvo combat model with area fire," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(8), pages 652-660, December.
    3. Michail Cheliotis & Evangelos Boulougouris & Nikoletta L Trivyza & Gerasimos Theotokatos & George Livanos & George Mantalos & Athanasios Stubos & Emmanuel Stamatakis & Alexandros Venetsanos, 2021. "Review on the Safe Use of Ammonia Fuel Cells in the Maritime Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Cullen, Andrew C. & Alpcan, Tansu & Kalloniatis, Alexander C., 2022. "Adversarial decisions on complex dynamical systems using game theory," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 594(C).
    5. Kolebaje, Olusola & Popoola, Oyebola & Khan, Muhammad Altaf & Oyewande, Oluwole, 2020. "An epidemiological approach to insurgent population modeling with the Atangana–Baleanu fractional derivative," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    6. Chad W. Seagren & Donald P. Gaver & Patricia A. Jacobs, 2019. "A stochastic air combat logistics decision model for Blue versus Red opposition," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 66(8), pages 663-674, December.
    7. Claire Walton & Panos Lambrianides & Isaac Kaminer & Johannes Royset & Qi Gong, 2018. "Optimal motion planning in rapid‐fire combat situations with attacker uncertainty," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(2), pages 101-119, March.
    8. Anelí Bongers & José L. Torres, 2017. "Revisiting the Battle of Midway: A counterfactual analysis," Working Papers 2017-01, Universidad de Málaga, Department of Economic Theory, Málaga Economic Theory Research Center.
    9. Thomas W. Lucas & John E. McGunnigle, 2003. "When is model complexity too much? Illustrating the benefits of simple models with Hughes' salvo equations," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 197-217, April.
    10. Anelí Bongers & José L. Torres, 2021. "A bottleneck combat model: an application to the Battle of Thermopylae," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 2859-2877, December.
    11. Michael J. Armstrong, 2004. "Effects of lethality in naval combat models," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(1), pages 28-43, February.
    12. Zhongyun Yue & John Mangan, 2024. "A framework for understanding reliability in container shipping networks," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 26(3), pages 523-544, September.
    13. Michael J. Armstrong, 2014. "Modeling Short-Range Ballistic Missile Defense and Israel's Iron Dome System," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(5), pages 1028-1039, October.
    14. Eriksen, Stig & Utne, Ingrid Bouwer & Lützen, Marie, 2021. "An RCM approach for assessing reliability challenges and maintenance needs of unmanned cargo ships," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    15. Michael J. Armstrong, 2005. "A Stochastic Salvo Model for Naval Surface Combat," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 830-841, October.
    16. Aziz, Abdul & Ahmed, Salim & Khan, Faisal & Stack, Chris & Lind, Annes, 2019. "Operational risk assessment model for marine vessels," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 348-361.
    17. Michael Armstrong, 2011. "A verification study of the stochastic salvo combat model," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 186(1), pages 23-38, June.
    18. Donghyun Kim & Hyungil Moon & Donghyun Park & Hayong Shin, 2017. "An efficient approximate solution for stochastic Lanchester models," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(11), pages 1470-1481, November.
    19. Chen Wang & Vicki M. Bier, 2016. "Quantifying Adversary Capabilities to Inform Defensive Resource Allocation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 756-775, April.
    20. Younglak Shim & Michael P. Atkinson, 2018. "Analysis of artillery shoot‐and‐scoot tactics," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(3), pages 242-274, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jtrsec:v:13:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s12198-020-00219-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.