An Additional Model to Control Risk in Mastering Defense Technology in Indonesia
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Conceptual
2.1. Sustainability
2.2. Purchased License
2.3. The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Calculator
- The basic principles of technology have been observed.
- The concept of technology and its application has been formulated.
- Important concepts and characteristics of technology have been proven analytically and experimentally.
- The code, component, and breadboard have been validated in the laboratory environment.
- The model or prototype has been validated in a laboratory or simulation environment.
- The prototype has been tested in a natural environment.
- System prototypes have been demonstrated in the actual environment or application.
- The system has been demonstrated and tested in the actual environment or application.
- The technology has genuinely been tested or proven through successful operation.
2.4. Post-Production Defence Product Development
- Research on critical subcomponents and outdated software
- 2.
- Modifying or upgrading the half-lifecycle product performance
- 3.
- Upgrading or disposing the product performance in one lifecycle
- 4.
- Replacing the system using reverse engineering
2.5. The Concept of Reverse Engineering
3. Methodology
- What is the history of mastery of assault rifle technology by PT. Pindad?
- How does PT. Pindad conduct the SS-2 production process?
- What are the differences between SS-1 V1 and SS-2 V1?
- What are the efforts of PT. Pindad to improve the performance of assault rifles in the future?
4. Case Study
4.1. A Defence Industry Case in Indonesia
4.2. Reverse Engineering Activities
- 1.
- Observing SS-1 technology components and subcomponents during routine maintenance and repairs to identify the superior and critical ones.Replacing components and subcomponents is used as data for sorting. In particular, for replacing components or subcomponents, a test is carried out according to SOPs. If it is associated with the TRL theory, the test repeats the TRL7 test process. Retesting helps train engineers to update processes constantly; improve procedures, methods and equipment; complete drawings and test equipment.
- 2.
- Developing the variants of the SS-1 was carried out to meet user demands.Altering the buttstock and barrel components involves a low-risk development [30]. Therefore, the changes are minor, changing the shape of the buttstock without changing other significant components. The activity required designing the buttstock and integrating it with the central part (see 081 Appendix C). Activities start with TRL7, TRL8, and TRL 9 (see Appendix B).
- 3.
- Developing the SS-1 V4 by adding a telescope.This is a moderate risk because it combines two different technologies. This development is an attempt to explore the possibility of combining the SS-1 technology with other technologies. This development changes product drawings (see 201 Appendix C) and testing SOPs. This development should repeat TRL5 to TRL9 (see Appendix B).
- 4.
- Creating the unique design of the SS-1 V5 for tank crews and SS-1 M for the marines.The SS-1 V5 was a unique design for tank crews, making it smaller than the SS-1 V1 and the SS-1 M series involved with paint resistance to seawater. These activities must start with TRL 2. This development step helps to improve the engineers’ abilities by changing the design to be smaller. Mastery of technology is needed before adding variants with different designs because this activity has a high risk [30]. The increase in the level of risk is caused by changes in design, the setting of production equipment, and testing SOPs. Activities must be carried out from the beginning by using existing tools and facilities. This activity focuses on design and production capabilities. Failure to add variants would have a significant impact on efforts to meet the needs of special market segments. The role and support of R&D agencies are needed to conduct research and assessments to support these processes [20]. The success of PT. Pindad in building variants shows that PT. Pindad has mastered the SS-1 assault gun technology.
- 5.
- Designing the SS-2After developing several variants of the SS-1, PT. Pindad started designing the SS-2 in 2001. The technology concept was developed in stages, from the initial TRL to marketing the product in 2005. Prior to the redesign, PT. Pindad already knew user needs, competitor technologies, and the essential elements to be developed. The parts that are lacking in the SS-1 are well developed, including the strength of the primary component materials, a larger gas cross-section, and an ergonomic shape. These are performance improvement parameters that can reduce the use of resources.
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Appendix B
TRL | Definition/Indicator |
---|---|
1 | The basic principles of technology have been observed. |
| |
2 | The concept of technology and its application has been formulated. |
| |
3 | Important concepts and characteristics of the technology have been proven analytically and experimentally. |
| |
4 | Code, component, and/or breadboard have been validated in the laboratory environment. |
| |
5 | The model or prototype has been validated in laboratory/simulation environment. |
| |
6 | The prototype has been tested in the real environment. |
| |
7 | Demonstration of system prototypes in the actual environment/application. |
| |
8 | The system has been demonstrated and tested in the actual environment/application. |
| |
9 | The technology is truly tested/proven through successful operation. |
|
Appendix C
References
- Kemhan, R. Buku Putih Pertahanan Indonesia; Kementerian Pertahanan RI: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Cho, T.H. Challenges in research and development for the Korean aircraft industry. Article 2017, 235–343. [Google Scholar]
- Eceral, T.Ö.; Köroğlu, D.B.A. Incentive Mechanisms in Industrial Development: An Evaluation through Defence and Aviation Industry of Ankara. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 195, 1563–1572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hendrickson, J.R.; William, A.; Albrecht, D.B.C. Preventing plunder: Military technology, capital accumulation, and economic growth. J. Macroecon. 2018, 58, 154–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Setiadji, A. Ekonomi Pertahanan Mengahadapi Perang Generasi Keenam, 1st ed.; Kementerian Pertahanan RI: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Technology Readiness Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Evaluating the Readiness of Technology for Use in Acquisition Programs and Projects no GAO-16—410G. Available online: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-16-410g.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2022).
- Simatupang, T. A Study of Technology Acquisition Modes: The Choice between ‘Making’ And ‘Buying’ Technology. Available online: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/15614827.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2022).
- Mankins, J. Technology Readiness Levels–A White Paper (1995); Office of Space Access and Technology, NASA: Washington, DC, USA, 1995; pp. 4–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mankins, J.C. Technology readiness assessments: A retrospective. Acta Astronaut. 2009, 65, 1216–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sadin, S.R.; Povinrlli, F.P.; Rosen, D.R. The NASA Technology Push Toward. Acta Astronaut. 1989, 20, 73–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malm, A. Technology Transfer within Related Offset Business—From an Aircraft Production Perspective. Ph.D. Thesis, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Minbaeva, D.; Park, C.; Vertinsky, I.; Cho, Y.S. Disseminative capacity and knowledge acquisition from foreign partners in international joint ventures. J. World Bus. 2018, 53, 712–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bongers, A. Learning and forgetting in the jet fighter aircraft industry. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Arezki, M. Technology in Society Obsolescence—A review of the literature. Technol. Soc. 2020, 63, 101347. [Google Scholar]
- Saiga, K.; Ullah, A.S.; Kubo, A. A Sustainable Reverse Engineering Process. Procedia CIRP 2021, 98, 517–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Qiu, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Huang, Z.; Bodeveix, J.-P.; Filali, M. C2AADL_Reverse: A model-driven reverse engineering approach to development and verification of safety-critical software. J. Syst. Archit. 2021, 118, 102202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Straub, J. In search of technology readiness level (TRL) 10. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2015, 46, 312–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) Deskbook; Version 2.4. Available online: https://pdf4pro.com/view/manufacturing-readiness-level-mrl-deskbook-5556dc.html (accessed on 27 January 2022).
- Sauser, B.J.; Long, M.; Forbes, E.; McGrory, S.E. Defining an integration readiness level for defense acquisition. INCOSE Int. Symp. 2009, 19, 352–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, M.-C.; Chang, T.; Chien, D.W.-T.C. An Approach for Developing Innovation Readiness Levels. Int. J. Manag. Inf. Technol. 2011, 3, 18–37. [Google Scholar]
- Sauser, B.; Verma, D.; Ramirez-Marquez, J.; Gove, D.R. From TRL to SRL: The concept of systems readiness levels. In Proceedings of the Conference on Systems Engineering Research, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 26–28 April 2006; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Kobos, P.H.; Malczynski, L.A.; Walker, L.T.N.; Borns, D.J.; Klise, G.T. Timing is everything: A technology transition framework for regulatory and market readiness levels. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2018, 137, 211–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mankins, J. Technology readiness and risk assessments: A new approach. Acta Astronaut. 2009, 65, 1208–1215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future Acronyms and Note on Terminology Chairman’s Foreword. Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf (accessed on 28 January 2022).
- Truffer, B.; Schippl, J.; Fleischer, D.T. Decentering technology in technology assessment: Prospects for socio-technical transitions in electric mobility in Germany. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2017, 122, 34–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khabiri, N.; Rast, S.; Senin, A. Identifying Main Influential Elements in Technology Transfer Process: A Conceptual Model. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 40, 417–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nolte, W.L.; Kennedy, B.C.; Dziegiel, D.R.J., Jr. Technology Readiness Calculator; United Nation: New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Peraturan Menteri Riset, Teknologi, Dan Pendidikan Tinggi Republik Indonesia Nomor 42 Tahun 2016 Tentang Pengukuran Dan Penetapan Tingkat Kesiapterapan Teknologi. Available online: http://kopertis3.or.id/v2/wp-content/uploads/No.-42-Tahun-2016-Lampiran.pdf (accessed on 28 January 2022).
- Hicks, B.; Larsson, A.; Culley, S.; Larsson, D.T. A Methodology for Evaluating Technology Readiness During Product Development, (ICED 09). In Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, Palo Alto, CA, USA, 24–27 August 2009; pp. 157–168. [Google Scholar]
- Yin, R. Case Study Research Design and Methods, 3rd ed.; SAGE Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- White, M.A.; dan Bruton, G.D. The Management of Technology and Innovation a Strategic Approach, 2nd ed.; Cengage Learning: Boston, MA, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- MRL Working Group. Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) Deskbook Prepared by the OSD Manufacturing Technology Program in Collaboration with the Joint Service/Industry MRL Working Group. 2015. Available online: https://www.dodmrl.com/MRL_Deskbook_2018.pdf (accessed on 17 October 2021).
- Stig, D.C.; Isaksson, O.; Hogman, U.; Bergsjö, D. TERA—An Assessment of Technology Reuse Feasibility. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2015, 44, 507–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yoon, J.; Oh, Y.; Lee, J.D. The impact of policy consistency on technological competitiveness: A study on OECD countries. Energy Policy 2016, 108, 425–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robinson, J.W.; Chen, D.T.T. The Need for Technology Maturity of Any Advanced Capability to Achieve Better Life Cycle Cost (LCC). In Proceedings of the 45th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, Denver, CO, USA, 2–5 August 2009; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar]
- Koroglu, B.A.; Eceral, D.T.O. Human Capital and Innovation Capacity of Firms in Defense and Aviation Industry in Ankara. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 195, 1583–1592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kang, H.; Ali, J.; Bashir, S.; Nurul, M.; Ali, S. Moderating role of information system and mobile technology with learning and forgetting factors on organizational learning effectiveness. Learn. Motiv. 2021, 76, 101757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Definition | Indicator |
---|---|
The technology has been observed. |
|
The risk has been assessed. |
|
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Muda, F.J.; Govindaraju, R.; Wiratmadja, I.I. An Additional Model to Control Risk in Mastering Defense Technology in Indonesia. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1658. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031658
Muda FJ, Govindaraju R, Wiratmadja II. An Additional Model to Control Risk in Mastering Defense Technology in Indonesia. Sustainability. 2022; 14(3):1658. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031658
Chicago/Turabian StyleMuda, Faried Jaendar, Rajesri Govindaraju, and Iwan Inrawan Wiratmadja. 2022. "An Additional Model to Control Risk in Mastering Defense Technology in Indonesia" Sustainability 14, no. 3: 1658. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031658