IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joudef/v23y2026i1p123-145.html

A quantitative comparison of two different models of minefield transit

Author

Listed:
  • Mikel D Petty

Abstract

Naval mines are used to cause damage and inflict casualties on ships and to deny access to mined areas. Two distinctly different Monte Carlo models of surface ships transiting minefields were implemented and compared. An analytic model represents mines abstractly as mine density within the minefield. It determines the probability of a ship encountering a mine as a ratio of the area of the ship’s track through the minefield, with width equal to the mines’ effective radius and the area of the minefield. A geometric model represents the ship’s track and the mines’ locations explicitly. It determines whether a ship encounters a mine using a calculation of the distance between a ship’s track and the mines’ locations. The two models’ results were quantitatively compared for multiple values of five experimental variables: minefield dimensions, mine density, mine placement method, ships per group, and ship transit procedure. Each model was executed for each combination of experimental variable values and their results were compared to determine whether the models produced comparable results. In addition, the effectiveness of two mine placement methods at disabling ships and two ship transit procedures at avoiding mines were also compared. All comparisons used statistical hypothesis tests.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikel D Petty, 2026. "A quantitative comparison of two different models of minefield transit," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 23(1), pages 123-145, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:joudef:v:23:y:2026:i:1:p:123-145
    DOI: 10.1177/15485129241257528
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/15485129241257528
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/15485129241257528?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:joudef:v:23:y:2026:i:1:p:123-145. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.