Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Fire Patrol Helicopters Selection Using AHP-Entropy-TOPSIS
Keywords:
Helicopter Selection, MCDM, AHP, Entropy, TOPSIS, Aviation, Subjective Weighting, Objective Weighting, Combine Weighting, Firepatrol
Abstract
Forest fires pose a significant threat both locally and globally, with indirect impacts including global air pollution and human health issues. Aerial patrols using helicopters are a crucial measure in wildfire management. However, selecting the appropriate helicopter model involves multiple factors. Poor decision-making can lead to increased operational costs, accidents, and mission failure. To address this, operators must choose the most suitable helicopter for fire patrol operations. This study aims to enhance the decision-making process by integrating subjective and objective weighting methods in Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). Subjective weights are determined using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), while objective weights are derived from the Entropy method. The Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) is applied to identify the optimal helicopter model. By analyzing the combined weighting results, this study provides a robust decision-support tool, ensuring the selection of the most efficient and effective helicopter for wildfire patrols.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Abdul Kadir, E., Listia Rosa, S., Syukur, A., Othman, M., & Daud, H. (2022). Forest fire spreading and carbon concentration identification in tropical region Indonesia. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 61(2), 1551–1561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2021.06.064
Al-Aomar, R. (2010). A Combined AHP-Entropy Method for Deriving Subjective and Objective Criteria Weights. In International Journal of Industrial Engineering (Vol. 17, Issue 1).
Alemi-Ardakani, M., Milani, A. S., Yannacopoulos, S., & Shokouhi, G. (2016). On the effect of subjective, objective and combinative weighting in multiple criteria decision making: A case study on impact optimization of composites. Expert Systems with Applications, 46, 426–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.11.003
Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana. (2024). Data Bencana Indonesia 2023 (Vol. 3). Pusat Data Informasi dan Komunikasi Kebencanaan Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana.
Boonsothonsatit, G., Vongbunyong, S., Chonsawat, N., & Chanpuypetch, W. (2024). Development of a Hybrid AHP-TOPSIS Decision-Making Framework for Technology Selection in Hospital Medication Dispensing Processes. IEEE Access, 12, 2500–2516. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3348754
C. Ardil. (2022). Military Attack Helicopter Selection Using Distance Function Measures in Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, 16(2), 20–27.
Chakraborty, S. (2022). TOPSIS and Modified TOPSIS: A comparative analysis. Decision Analytics Journal, 2, 100021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2021.100021
Chen, P. (2019). Effects of normalization on the entropy-based TOPSIS method. Expert Systems with Applications, 136, 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.06.035
de Assis, G. S., dos Santos, M., & Basilio, M. P. (2023). Use of the WASPAS Method to Select Suitable Helicopters for Aerial Activity Carried Out by the Military Police of the State of Rio de Janeiro. Axioms, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12010077
Dožić, S. (2019). Multi-criteria decision making methods: Application in the aviation industry. Journal of Air Transport Management, 79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2019.101683
Herawati, H., & Santoso, H. (2011). Tropical forest susceptibility to and risk of fire under changing climate: A review of fire nature, policy and institutions in Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 13(4), 227–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.02.006
Jozi, S. A., Shafiee, M., Moradimajd, N., & Saffarian, S. (2012). An integrated Shannon’s Entropy-TOPSIS methodology for environmental risk assessment of Helleh protected area in Iran. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 184(11), 6913–6922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2468-x
Kumar, A., Dash, M. K., & Seharawat, R. (2017). Using entropy and AHP-TOPSIS for comprehensive evaluation of internet shopping malls and solution optimality. International Journal of Business Excellence, 11(4), 487. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBEX.2017.082575
Lotfi, F. H., & Fallahnejad, R. (2010). Imprecise shannon’s entropy and multi attribute decision making. Entropy, 12(1), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.3390/e12010053
Mohamadi, S., Ebrahimi, A., & Alimohammadlou, M. (2017). An application of fuzzy screening, fuzzy AHP and fuzzy Shannon’s entropy on identification and prioritisation of effective factors in assessment of contractors in Fars Electric Power Distribution Company, Iran. International Journal of Procurement Management, 10(2), 194–226. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPM.2017.082787
Nila, B., & Roy, J. (2023). A new hybrid MCDM framework for third-party logistics provider selection under sustainability perspectives. Expert Systems with Applications, 234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121009
Rodrigues, M. V. G., dos Santos, M., & Gomes, C. F. S. (2024). Selection of helicopters for offshore service using three multi-criteria decision analysis methods: AHP-TOPSIS-2N, THOR 2 and Gaussian AHP-TOPSIS-2N. Journal of Control and Decision. https://doi.org/10.1080/23307706.2024.2302491
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590
Setiawan, A. D., Hidayatno, A., Putra, B. D., & Rahman, I. (2020). Selection of Charging Station Technology to Support the Adoption of Electric Vehicles in Indonesia with the AHP-TOPSIS Method. 2020 3rd International Conference on Power and Energy Applications (ICPEA), 85–88. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPEA49807.2020.9280125
Singh, M., & Pant, M. (2021). A review of selected weighing methods in MCDM with a case study. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, 12(1), 126–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-020-01033-3
Al-Aomar, R. (2010). A Combined AHP-Entropy Method for Deriving Subjective and Objective Criteria Weights. In International Journal of Industrial Engineering (Vol. 17, Issue 1).
Alemi-Ardakani, M., Milani, A. S., Yannacopoulos, S., & Shokouhi, G. (2016). On the effect of subjective, objective and combinative weighting in multiple criteria decision making: A case study on impact optimization of composites. Expert Systems with Applications, 46, 426–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.11.003
Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana. (2024). Data Bencana Indonesia 2023 (Vol. 3). Pusat Data Informasi dan Komunikasi Kebencanaan Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana.
Boonsothonsatit, G., Vongbunyong, S., Chonsawat, N., & Chanpuypetch, W. (2024). Development of a Hybrid AHP-TOPSIS Decision-Making Framework for Technology Selection in Hospital Medication Dispensing Processes. IEEE Access, 12, 2500–2516. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3348754
C. Ardil. (2022). Military Attack Helicopter Selection Using Distance Function Measures in Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, 16(2), 20–27.
Chakraborty, S. (2022). TOPSIS and Modified TOPSIS: A comparative analysis. Decision Analytics Journal, 2, 100021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2021.100021
Chen, P. (2019). Effects of normalization on the entropy-based TOPSIS method. Expert Systems with Applications, 136, 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.06.035
de Assis, G. S., dos Santos, M., & Basilio, M. P. (2023). Use of the WASPAS Method to Select Suitable Helicopters for Aerial Activity Carried Out by the Military Police of the State of Rio de Janeiro. Axioms, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12010077
Dožić, S. (2019). Multi-criteria decision making methods: Application in the aviation industry. Journal of Air Transport Management, 79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2019.101683
Herawati, H., & Santoso, H. (2011). Tropical forest susceptibility to and risk of fire under changing climate: A review of fire nature, policy and institutions in Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 13(4), 227–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.02.006
Jozi, S. A., Shafiee, M., Moradimajd, N., & Saffarian, S. (2012). An integrated Shannon’s Entropy-TOPSIS methodology for environmental risk assessment of Helleh protected area in Iran. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 184(11), 6913–6922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2468-x
Kumar, A., Dash, M. K., & Seharawat, R. (2017). Using entropy and AHP-TOPSIS for comprehensive evaluation of internet shopping malls and solution optimality. International Journal of Business Excellence, 11(4), 487. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBEX.2017.082575
Lotfi, F. H., & Fallahnejad, R. (2010). Imprecise shannon’s entropy and multi attribute decision making. Entropy, 12(1), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.3390/e12010053
Mohamadi, S., Ebrahimi, A., & Alimohammadlou, M. (2017). An application of fuzzy screening, fuzzy AHP and fuzzy Shannon’s entropy on identification and prioritisation of effective factors in assessment of contractors in Fars Electric Power Distribution Company, Iran. International Journal of Procurement Management, 10(2), 194–226. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPM.2017.082787
Nila, B., & Roy, J. (2023). A new hybrid MCDM framework for third-party logistics provider selection under sustainability perspectives. Expert Systems with Applications, 234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121009
Rodrigues, M. V. G., dos Santos, M., & Gomes, C. F. S. (2024). Selection of helicopters for offshore service using three multi-criteria decision analysis methods: AHP-TOPSIS-2N, THOR 2 and Gaussian AHP-TOPSIS-2N. Journal of Control and Decision. https://doi.org/10.1080/23307706.2024.2302491
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590
Setiawan, A. D., Hidayatno, A., Putra, B. D., & Rahman, I. (2020). Selection of Charging Station Technology to Support the Adoption of Electric Vehicles in Indonesia with the AHP-TOPSIS Method. 2020 3rd International Conference on Power and Energy Applications (ICPEA), 85–88. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPEA49807.2020.9280125
Singh, M., & Pant, M. (2021). A review of selected weighing methods in MCDM with a case study. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, 12(1), 126–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-020-01033-3
Published
2025-06-14
How to Cite
1.
Suprapto RKN, Setiawan AD. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Fire Patrol Helicopters Selection Using AHP-Entropy-TOPSIS. JIA [Internet]. 2025Jun.14 [cited 2025Jun.26];18(2):94 - 102. Available from: https://journal.ppicurug.ac.id/index.php/jurnal-ilmiah-aviasi/article/view/1353
Section
Articles
Copyright (c) 2025 Ready Kresna Nanda Suprapto, Andri Dwi Setiawan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
.png)
1.png)
.png)
