Simulations in the Training Environment Continuing on the historical perspective that began in Chapter 4, this chapter focuses on both

broad and specific areas with which the trainer must be familiar. The Combined Arms Training Strategy (CATS) provides the trainer with the broad perspective of how the Army incorporates simulations into the Army's complete training strategy. The chapter addresses more specific topics in training simulations including a discussion of simulators and simulations used in training and ending with simulation training in digital units.. units.. Section 5.1 The Combined Arms Training Strategy (CATS) The CATS provides a road map for the management and planning of Army training into the future. CATS gives us our regulatory foundation for having and using simulations and simulators available for training. The regulatory basis for this strategy is TRADOC Regulation 350-35, TRADOC Pamphlet 350-10, and Army Regulation 35041. TRADOC Regulation 350-35 and TRADOC Pamphlet 350-10 embed CATS within the command. The regulation describes responsibilities and functions for CATS development, and the pamphlet serves as a single source "how to" document on the production of strategies and their relationship to the training development, budget, and combat development process. Army Regulation 350-41 prescribes CATS policy for training in units. The broad scope of the Army's missions in the joint and combined arena necessitates a comprehensive strategy that supports training in all aspects of military operations. Institutional and unit training strategies comprising CATS describe training events used by schools and commanders at all levels to train their personnel and units to standard on their Mission Essential Tasks List (METL). Major resource components of the CATS are OPTEMPO, Training Ammunition, Ranges and Training Areas, Combat Training Centers (CTCs), RC-unique needs, simulators, and the FAMSIM. Recent international events and budget pressures demand an Army that is efficiently trained to exacting standards. In today's environment this equates to (1) some areas decreasing in either use or funding (OPTEMPO, Training Ammunition, Ranges and Training Areas, and CTCs) and (2) other areas seeing increased use and potential funding (RC-unique needs, simulations, and simulators). Therefore, the Army needs to be deliberate in the use of simulations to maintain unit readiness. By creating a realistic operational and battlefield environment, simulations provide the conditions for training many tasks to standards required in Army Training and Evaluation Plans (ARTEPs) and Mission Training Plans (MTPs).

29

The unit strategies of CATS describe the frequency of specific events, by echelon, recommended for maintaining warfighting proficiency. Both unit and institutional strategies address leader development. Institutional strategies describe the contribution of Army schools to leader development and initial entry training. CATS defines certain events to support the training of units or commanders and battle staffs. These events can be either single-echelon events or multiple-echelon events involving several echelons in a single common scenario. * * * * * * Map Exercises (MAPEXs) depend primarily upon maps rather than computer-based simulations to support training. Cell and Staff Section Training focuses on the development of collective skills within individual staff sections. Staff Exercises (STAFFEXs) can be any event, such as a seminar, that focuses on training single or multiple sections of a staff. Command Field Exercises (CFXs) are leader and staff-only maneuver exercises. Fire Coordination Exercises (FCXs) are platoon leader and above exercises that focus on the synchronization of fires and maneuver. CPXs involve commanders, battle staffs, CPs, and HQs. Special types of CPXs include Force Projection Logistics Exercises (FPLXs) and Battle Command Battle Staff Training events. Warfighter Exercises (WFXs) and special CPXs that support BCTP objectives. Joint Training Exercises (JTXs) involve HQs and forces from other services. Combined Training Exercises (CTXs) involve HQs and forces from other nations. Field Training Exercises (FTXs) focus on C2 of all echelons in battle functions against actual or simulated OPFORs.

* * * *

CATS recognizes that training occurs in institutions (both civilian and military), in units, and through off-duty self-development. It captures which tasks are taught in each of these locations and the resources required to train those tasks to standard. CATS provides a system which places scarce training resources at the right times and places to provide trained soldiers and units that can accomplish required tasks across the scope of military operations. The use of strategy matrices within CATS allow

proponents to identify the training strategies, events, and resources needed now and in the future. To meet future needs, CATS integrates with both the budget and combat developments systems. CATS strategies are developed well into the future to identify the potential training needs associated with the materiel, organizational, and doctrinal solutions required by an evolving Army. Proponents can also identify the types and quantities of resources needed in the future to meet evolving training needs.

Proponent Strategies School Strategies Unit Strategies Training Resources Resource Mngmt

CATS
FAMSIM Training Ammunition Combat Tng Centers OPTEMPO Ranges & Tng Areas

Integrated Force Training

RC-Unique Needs

Simulators

Figure 5.1 - The Combined Arms Training Strategy (CATS) Future CATS focuses on training a smaller, more deployable force, capable of conducting a wide variety of operations. The strategies will support the training of soldiers and units that are both competent and flexible to meet the requirements of the post-cold war era where the Army can expect to be employed in a wide variety of missions. Training technology and techniques will continue to improve, and CATS provides a means to effectively focus results of training research and development against priority needs. Automation support for CATS is being pursued to permit the TRADOC community to effectively implement CATS and gain the maximum benefit of what it has to offer. The current program which permits automated production and update of future strategies will be replaced or revised. Additional systems to be fully integrated within the Training Module (TRAMOD) concepts are being planned and will be pursued as funds become available. 31

Section 5.2 How the Army Manages Simulations Simulations, Simulators and Models are managed at Army level under a centralized management process. AMSO (Army Models and Simulations Office) functions as the executive staff for the AMSEC (Army Models and Simulations Executive Council) which approves and funds all M&S programs. Three M&S Domains (TEMO. ACR & RDA) have field responsiblity. M&S capability used by units or schools fall under the responsibility of TEMO with Director, National Simulation Center dualhatted as the TEMO Executive Agent. He has authority over the four (4) TPOs (TRADOC Project Offices) having responsibility for the three Training Environments of the Army (Live, Virtual and Constructive) with the 4th TPO (STOW) having responsibility for linking the three training environments activities. ALL M&S PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS FALL UNDER THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE 4 TPOs FOR APPROVAL OF REQUIREMENTS AND MANAGEMENT OF POM FUNDING. (See Figure 5.2)

M&S Requirements Integration & Approval

REQUIREMENTS INTEGRATION COUNCIL

TRADOC DCG for Approval

MBO
Continue TP 71-XX Process

RIC -- Advises DCG -- Works mainly cross-domain issues -- TRADOC DCG Chair

CROSS-DOMAIN REQUIREMENTS & ISSUES

MBE

REQUIREMENTS INTEGRATION WORKING GROUP (AMSO/DCSSA) Co-chairs

RIWG - Collects and Reviews all M&S rqmts - Refers cross-domain issues to RIC

AWSG

Cross Domain Integration Working Groups

Quarterly Review Process

AMSMP WG

DOMAIN MANAGER

ODCSOPS (DAMO-TR)

ODCSOPS (DAMO-FD)

SARDA (SARD-ZD)

DOMAIN AGENT

TRADOC (DCST) Tng, Exercises & Mil Ops

TRADOC (DCSCD) Adv Concepts & Requirements

AMC RD&A

DOMAINS - Review, integrate, and validate domain reqs. - Provide all M&S reqs through DCSSA to RIWG.

OTHER M&S REQUIREMENTS MRDs (Not Traditional Acquisition Process)

MNS/ORD/OCR/FOC (Traditional Acquisition Process)

Formal Documentation Process

MBE - MGT BY EXCEPTION (NON CONCUR) MBO - MGT BY OBJECTIVE (CONCUR)

Figure 5.2 - M&S Requirements Integration and Approval Process

Under the M&S management concept , each model, simulator and simulation must be managed in accordance with the following Army publications:. DOD Directive 5000,59, DOD Modeling and Simulations Management DOD Directive 5000.59-P, DOD M&S Master Plan, 1995 AR 5-11, Army M&S Management Program AR 70-1, Army Acquisition Policy AR 71-9, Material Requirements DA Pamphlet 5-11, VV&A of Army M&S

* *

Army M&S Master Plan, 1997 TEMO Management Plan, 1997 TRADOC Pam 71-9 Requirements Determination Each simulation has a TPO (Live, Virtual, Constructive or STOW) that has managerial responsibility for the M&S simulation during its life cycle. Throughout this cycle certain developmental, acceptance, and maintenance functions have to be performed to meet the requirements of the above regulations. Six terms are key in this process which, when executed, provide the Army with simulations that meet their intended, original application and end use. These terms follow with a brief explanation. Requirements Integration and Approval Process (RIAP) : Army directed process for the mangement of all M&S requirements. Follows procedures as directed in chapters 11 and 12 of TRADOC PAM 71-9. All future M&S requirements must be formally approved via this process. A review of existing M&S requirements is ongoing during the POM 00-05 formulation process to bring all M&S programs in compliance with this Army requirement. Army M&S Investment Plan POM 00-05: This plan is a management tool that centralizes all M&S requirements as approved by the RIAP. It prioritizes funding effort and provides a grand strategy for the fielding and employment of the Armys M&S capabilities and programs. It integrates the three Domains (ACR, RDA & TEMO) Investment Plans into one Army level Investment Plan which is updated biannually in concert with each POM build. * Configuration management (CM) is the application of technical and administrative direction and surveillance to identify and document the functional and physical characteristics of a simulation, control changes, and record and report change processing and implementation status. CM focuses on documentation, control, status accounting, and audit. * Verification is the process of determining that a simulation accurately represents the developer's conceptual description and specifications. Verification evaluates the extent to which the simulation has been developed using sound and established software engineering techniques. * Validation is the process of determining the extent to which a simulation is an accurate representation of the real-world from the perspective of the intended use of the simulation. Validation methods include expert consensus, comparison with historical results, comparison with test data, and independent review. * Accreditation is the official determination by management that a simulation is acceptable for a specific purpose.9

33

Section 5.3 Why the Army Needs a Simulated Battlefield for Training C2 Why did we go to training simulations? There a number of reasons why the Army and, in fact, the DoD, have concentrated a lot of effort and resources into the area of simulations, particularly those simulations that have a concentrated focus on C2 functions. However, the one reason that drove it initially was money. It is less expensive to train the entire force using simulations rather than trying to put them in the field.

TR EA TI ES

T I M E

RO VI EN

N ME N

LET HAL IT

NG RA NG LO

DEPLOYMENT
JOIN

Maneuver Space
PS TO
DO C

INTEGRATION
TRI NE

B PU

SE CU LI

SA F

$ $

ET Y

Figure 5.3 - Why Do We Need a Simulated Battlefield? There have been a lot of other factors that have affected the movement toward using simulations in training. Most of these factors will continue to support the Army's focus on training with simulations; other factors will emerge. Some of the other influences that focused the Army's attention on training with simulations are listed below. * * safety (of the force) lethality (elimination of lethality in weapons systems)

* * * * * * * * * * *

environment (no environmental damage created) public land use (not created by simulations, but reduced) time (great time reduction on the force) range requirements (range distances on actual ground not a concern as they are in live-fire training) maneuver space (maneuver space for unit training is at a premium, especially overseas) integration (of unit training is complemented in the ease of simulations over staff exercises) treaties deployment (deployment training can be exercised easily) C4I (systems can be realistically employed in simulations) joint operations (possible with sister service models being linked to Army models during an exercise) doctrine (requirements to train as one would fight are achievable in simulations)

Section 5.4 The Training Battlespace and Simulation "M&S Toolbox" Available to Trainers The Armys total training environment is comprised of three zones called training environments: the Live Training Environment, the Virtual Training Environment and the Constructive Training Environment. These three training environments provide synergestic training support when used in mutual support of a units or schools training plan. FMs 25-100 and 25-101 remain the doctrinal basis for our training in the near term, mid term and in the long term. CATS in conjunction with WARFIGHTER XXI and WARRIOR XXI provide a road map for the management and planning of Army training for the current force and the future force. Reduction of OPTEMPO, Flying Hours, Training Ammunitipon, Live Fire Ranges and Combat Training Centers deployments of the Live Training Environment are to be offset with the synthetic training support capability of the Virtual and Constructive Training Environments. A balance use of these training support capabilities will enable all commanders and trainers to provide a Trained and Ready Force to meet our Armys missions needs. The training support capability or the three training environments is often referred to as the "trainers toolbox".

35

Figure 5.4 - The Simulation Toolbox Before the proper "training tools" can be employed, three basic questions must be asked by the commander and his staff. * * What unit(s) [collective] and individual(s) [leader/soldier] are to be trained? What tasks need to be trained? What training support tools best meet the requirements?
FORCE XXI ox Trainers Toolb

Constructive Tng Environment

MODELS & SIMULATIONS

Virtual Tng Environment

SIMULATORS

LIVE Tng Environment

TRAINING AIDS and DEVICES

What unit(s) [collective] and/or individual(s) [leaders / soldiers] are you training ? What tasks need to be trained? What tool(s) should you choose?

These three questions will help to focus on the training mission at hand. Commanders guidance and training situation METT-T will help the trainer select the best array of the three training environments support capabilities. In meeting overall training objectives, several training support tools may be employed. The three types of "training support tools" in the Force XXI trainers toolbox are: (1) Constructive (2) Virtual and (3) Live . A brief look at each type of training support capability should help the trainer select the best training support tool to meet the training objectives in question. All of the training support tools in the FORCE XXI Trainers Toolbox perform specific training support tasks for the trainer. Selection of the proper tool or tools (in the proper training sequence) should be of utmost concern to the trainer. The trainer should be aware of the relationship between tools and training needs and not fall into the training trap of using the improper tool. Section 5.5 Constructive Simulations

Constructive simulations are in wide-spread use within the Army and other DoD agencies and have proliferated greatly within the last ten years. They are usually identified with the large scaled, complex computer-driven models most often associated with exercises dealing with battalions, brigades, divisions, corps, and EAC. The primary training audience of constructive simulations is the commander and subordinate commanders and battle staffs associated with that echelon of command. In the majority of cases, these simulations are exercise drivers for CP type training exercises where the commander and staff are in field CPs. The adjacent, higher, and lower units are "played" in computer workstations transparent to the primary training audience. Communication between the commander and workstation units is with organic communications. Examples of constructive simulations where the training audience does not personally or physically interact with the simulation is the BBS and CBS models, and JANUS when it is being used as a staff trainer. The most formal use of constructive simulations is by the BCTP which conducts division and corps level WFXs to the Total Army.
Although primary training audiences do not come in direct physical contact with most constructive simulations, some of these simulations do require direct interaction with the trainee. This is the case with JANUS when used as a tactics trainer or as an individual leader trainer.

Orders outcome from constructive simulations are based on models of attrition and algorithms within the simulation. Most constructive simulations require interactive free-play from the workstation role-players from both friendly and OPFORs. Regardless of which specific constructive simulation is used, all can be efficient in training leaders and staffs from company through EAC. Section 5.6 Virtual Simulations Virtual simulations are designed to train individual soldiers and small crews in collective training tasks. Virtual simulations are often associated with crew-served weapons systems and focus on training devoted to emphasize familiarity, skill development, and practice. These simulations are simulators that closely replicate all or parts of tanks, armored personnel carriers, aircraft, and other equipment and normally require the trainee(s) to immerse into the simulation. The trainee then inputs the applicable information into the controls of the simulator while visual, sound, and motion playback is provided to cause the trainee to continue to interact with the simulator through a prescribed number of tasks. Virtual simulations are often referred to as simulators because they are either a 37

single part or complete replicas of individual or crew-served weapon systems and/or vehicles and crafts. Examples of virtual simulations are found in flight simulators at Fort Rucker, tank simulators at Fort Knox, infantry fighting vehicle simulators at Fort Benning, and engineer vehicle simulators at Fort Leonard Wood. Airlines (as well as the US Air Force and US Navy) and other business and industrial firms have had extensive experience and success with virtual simulations. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has had long, extensive, and successful experience with spacecraft simulators in its space program. Virtual simulations are designed to provide primary training to individuals and crews in collective training experiences. Section 5.7 Live Simulations The last tool in the simulation toolbox, live simulations, is represented by training events where all trainees physically deploy (usually against an OPFOR) and use (weapons) simulators to replicate certain parts of combat. Live simulations can take place almost anywhere the maneuver space is available, but the most notable formal training in the Army that utilizes live simulations are the National Training Center (NTC), the Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC), and the Combat Maneuver Training Center (CMTC). In each of these CTCs, troops conduct tactical operations as units and utilize various simulators in the course of training. Some of the simulators used are MILES and SAWE-RF which replicate weapons systems interaction and damage resulting when these simulators are employed. Much of the battlefield is instrumented in live simulations to allow units to train in the force-onforce environment. Live simulation training is often associated with training conditions presented by force-on-force exercises. The target training activity is focused on specific individual, collective and leader tasks that must be replicated in a field environment. . Section 5.8 Combining Constructive, Virtual, and Live Simulations in the Same Training Event The goal of the future is to be able to tie virtual to constructive to live simulations and instrumentation routinely. When these three tools are linked together in the same exercise, it would allow commanders to train (constructive) with crews (virtual) operating on the "terrain" of the commander's situation map while individuals and crews (live) actually conduct force-on-force operations on the terrain represented on the commander's map. The Army has a good start on this as linkage of the three tools in the simulation toolbox is ongoing at the CMTC in Europe. Combining constructive, virtual, and live simulations could have a number of training advantages as they, in combination, create a synthetic environment of warfare or military operations other than war. [Refer to DIS (Section 10.6) and STOW (Section 10.7)].

Section 5.9 Simulations and Simulators as Training Tools A lot of experimentation and study has been conducted to determine how far up the scale (echelon size of units) that simulators ought to go and where simulations begin. Studies to date indicate that the cross-over point is probably at the battalion level. This indicates that from battalion on down a unit can probably be trained effectively with a simulator. Above the battalion level, then, effective training almost has to be conducted with a simulation. This is because of the sheer size and the number of simulators that would be required in order to do that action.

Figure 5.9 - Echelons and Uses

After discussing CATS, this chapter addressed some specific terms and concepts that the trainer should understand in the selection of which simulation "tool" to chose. This discussion on constructive, virtual, and live simulations will be expanded in upcoming sections of this handbook, but the foundation of these terms is basic as the future demands their simultaneous use. 39