Operational and Policy Perspectives to Mission Training & Simulation
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
1 recomendación•5,255 vistas
A co-presentation with Neil Sierens DFC at the Royal Aeronautical Society 13 June 2013. What makes good Mission Training? Drawing on recent operational experience in both Afghanistan and Libya, this presentation discusses the current state of the art. It then provides an historical context to where we are today and the challenges that organisations face in the delivery of Mission Training. Concluding, what is the future for Mission Training?
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Destacado
Destacado (7)
Similar a Operational and Policy Perspectives to Mission Training & Simulation
Similar a Operational and Policy Perspectives to Mission Training & Simulation (20)
Más de Andy Fawkes
Más de Andy Fawkes (20)
Último
Último (20)
Operational and Policy Perspectives to Mission Training & Simulation
- 1. OPERATIONAL AND POLICY PERSPECTIVES TO MISSION TRAINING & SIMULATION Andy Fawkes & Neil Sierens Royal Aeronautical Society – 12/13 June 2013
- 2. • Operations – role of simulation • Policy – the journey to now • Operations – future requirements • Policy – a new way forward Contents
- 3. • Operations – role of simulation • Policy – the journey to now • Operations – future requirements • Policy – a new way forward Contents
- 4. What is the purpose of Mission Training and Simulation? • Mission preparation, in order to: – Maximising the effect of resources – Win the fight – De-risk the operation or
- 5. • Joint/Combined • Minimal risk appetite • Established procedures • Corporate knowledge • Transitional nature Competency/Familiarity Mission rehearsals Refinement/development Roulement (RiPs/HOTOs) Training & Mentoring tool Nature of Conflict Role of Simulation Operation HERRICK - Afghanistan
- 6. Operation ELLAMY - Libya
- 7. • Joint/Combined • Politically Sensitive • Minimal preparation – No corporate knowledge • Area of Operations – Vast/Unfamiliar – Non-permissive Operation ELLAMY - Libya Nature of Conflict Role of Simulation Competency/Familiarity Minimising risk (rehearsals) In-theatre training Development of plans Familiarisations (database) Force-on-Force preparation
- 8. Op ELLAMY – AH Strike Mission Composition ProtectionFind / Cue CoordinateC2
- 9. Planning / Briefing / Rehearsal / AAR
- 10. Mental Capacity Demands of a Mission Aviate Comms & Procedures Mission / Situational awareness Enemy Forces Friendly Forces Internal External othersFly Checks Crew Training Mission Training
- 11. Military Simulators: One size doesn’t fit all (The right sim, in the right place, at the right time)
- 12. • Operations – role of simulation • Policy – the journey to now • Operations – future requirements • Policy – a new way forward Contents
- 13. Mission Training Requirement Reflects the C4ISTAR Easily Accessible Reflects the Operation
- 14. Anything New?
- 15. 1960s - Mobile Simulation for B52s Source - A Career in Simulation - Jeff Beish (http://www.alpo-astronomy.org/jbeish/MyCareer.htm)
- 16. SIMNET Vision - 1978 Enemy aggression detected Planning a response Rehearsal and analysis Real time mission observation Source - Trends in Modeling, Simulation, & Gaming: Personal Observations about the Past Thirty Years and Speculation about the Next Ten. Jack Thorpe, Ph.D. Networks of simulators that would be used for combat planning, rehearsal, and execution 1 2 3 4
- 17. SIMNET Principles • “concepts which tightly align training systems with real combat readiness and make them indistinguishable” • Best use of simulators might be for non- substitution tasks • Selective fidelity • The 60% solution – Fast approximate and cheap was better than slow, deliberate and expensive Trends in Modelling, Simulation, & Gaming: Personal Observations about the Past Thirty Years and Speculation about the Next Ten. Jack Thorpe, Ph.D.
- 18. 1990s and 2000s • 1990 – Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) • 1994 – US STOW-E (Synthetic Theater of War) • 1995 – High Level Architecture • 1999 – UK MTDS Concept • 2004 - NATO First Wave • 2005-8 UK MTDS CCD • 2006 - UK and Coalition Universal Networks • C4ISTAR/Simulation Interoperability Initiatives (eg. C-BML)
- 19. Challenges Now • Mission Training Requirement – Essentially remains the same • Research/Acquisition – Technology has changed, but little organisational change • Post Defence Reform – Delivering an enterprise approach in a more delegated world
- 20. • Operations – role of simulation • Policy – the journey to now • Operations – future requirements • Policy – a new way forward Contents
- 21. Tomorrow’s Conflict • Where? • What? • With who? • Against who?
- 22. Tomorrow’s Conflict • Joint/Combined • Preparation – Short notice – Distributed planning/training • Duration – Shorter that HERRICK(!) • „More-from-less‟ • Area of Operations – Unfamiliar? – (non/semi)permissive? • Political complexities Nature of Conflict Competency/Familiarity Deployed, in theatre training Course of Action analysis No planned Msn Specific Training Max efficiency thru rehearsal Familiarisation (database) Force-on-Force preparation Minimising risk (rehearsals) Role of Simulation
- 23. Deployed Mission Simulation Air/Land Maritime
- 24. • Operations – role of simulation • Policy – the journey to now • Operations – future requirements • Policy – a new way forward Contents
- 25. The Mission Training Requirement • Long Standing Vision • Operational Requirement Clear and Unchanging • Operation Specific Requirement Unpredictable • We have the Technology and Standards • Years of Research, Demonstration and Reports • Mission training requires the rapid integration of C4ISTAR and simulation elements
- 27. Meeting the Mission Training Requirement • Rapidly reconfigurable networked simulation – Single network – Common rapidly available up-to-date simulation data – Minimal simulation software diversity – Targeted fidelity – 60% solution • Accessible/Mobile • Simulation and C4ISTAR Interoperability
- 29. Digital Convergence • Digital technology advances and convergence offer the prospect of changing the way we create simulations, learn, deliver training content and interact with each other • We may need to train less Source - Digital Media Convergence in Flight Simulation and Training Conference 20/21 Nov 13
- 30. One Digital Acquisition Organisation Simulation C4ISTAR Systems Learning Technologies Office Systems
- 31. Simulation for Operations: More than just training? • Exploiting the simulation facility • Collating, filtering, displaying the information • Through-mission simulation
- 32. Enduring Principle • Focus on the Human Element of Warfare and Decision Making
- 33. Summary • The mission simulator must: – be easily accessible – represent the operation – represent the C4ISTAR • No new concepts.. • Enduring requirement – Acquisition organisation changes required? Representative
- 34. Questions ??
Notas del editor
- 4 months tours – simulator training requirementsMission planning/rehearsal/De-briefingTTP Development – evolutionary not revolutionary Field Deployable Simulators – 6yrs circa £18m
- MECS 2010 – hardest imaginable mission
- I’m certainly not a military aviation psychologist – so please talk this with a pinch of salt. Capacity – Aviate/Navigate/Communicate/Mission Ref - http://www.zedasoft.com/products/rds.jsp
- Heli – DSC_4864Technology capabilities that are theoretically possible but militarily & logistically impractical…
- Network & bandwidthTargeted fidelityAdvances in technology helps
- We are not organised to generate/procure/acquire an integrated solution.Mission trg requires the rapid integration of C4ISTAR and simulation elements. Fundamentally we are not organised to deliver this…60% solution now, via targeted fidelityScalable / Flexible / InteroperableDefence spending on Flight Simulators vs Mission simulators?Rapidly integrate a system you need to have an integrated organisation.