Computer Military Simulation Essay, Research Paper

Computer Simulation

WARSIM 2000 is simulation software, used by the armed forces.

Extensive, thorough, and tiring work has been done on thgis program. It

covers almost all aspects and situations required for realistic,

meticulous and a complete simulation. Information Technology has lead to

the advancement of the tools required to build the simulator.

Information Technolgy?s guideleines and technolgy have reinforced this

creative simulator

General Description of Operational Capability. WARSIM 2000 will

increase the effectiveness of commander and battle staff training by

dramatically increasing the realism and the scope of the available

training environment. In conjunction with other services’ simulations,

WARSIM 2000 will provide a complete operational environment with

scenarios drawn from the entire operational continuum to support Army,

joint and coalition force training distributed across the globe.

a. The WARSIM 2000 simulation system will use a computer-based

simulation and associated hardware to support the training of unit

commanders and their battle staffs from battalion through theater-level

as well as to support training events in educational institutions.

Designed and built using modern computer technology, modern software

engineering techniques, and validated

algorithms and databases, it will allow units world-wide to train using

their organizational equipment. A key feature of the system will be its

use of technology to minimize the total Army’s overhead associated with

supporting training. The system will be designed to meet emerging

Distributed Interactive

Simulation (DIS) standards and protocols to facilitate linkages with DIS

compliant simulators and live training events.

b. The WARSIM 2000 simulation system will consist of, or use, several

components:

(1) Computer-based battle simulation models that portray the

joint and combined environment needed to support Army training events.

(2) Software modules for linking WARSIM 2000 to other simulation

models to expand the training environment for joint force training

exercises.

(3) Databases.

(4) Computer systems to run the simulation models and support

the databases.

(5) Technical control systems/workstations for use by personnel

in an exercise support function e.g., simulation controllers, analysts,

and opposing/ surrounding forces role players.

(6) Flexible and responsive terrestrial/satellite communications

gateways and media for transmitting voice, data, facsimile, and video

between different elements at remote locations involved in supporting a

training exercise.

c. WARSIM 2000 will meet the Mission Need Statement’s (MNS’s)

requirement for providing a training environment that will allow unit

commanders and battle staffs to focus their warfighters and systems in

countering threats across the operational continuum. WARSIM 2000 must

provide an environment that presents problems to stress and stimulate

commanders and their battle staff to assess the situation, determine

courses of action, and plan and issue new orders in a timely manner,

all while using their organizational equipment and procedures.

d. Logistical support for WARSIM 2000 will be based on a government-

owned contractor-supported system. The government will own necessary

hardware, have all proprietary rights to the developmental hardware and

software components, and full license rights to the non-developmental

software components of WARSIM 2000. Contracted logistical support will

provide for the maintenance of government-owned computer hardware at all

times.

e. The acquisition and development strategy for WARSIM 2000 must

abide by several constraints.

(1) The WARSIM 2000 acquisition must build upon the successful

infrastructure of current simulations so that the training community

(Army and international) can train in an evolutionary progressive yet

consistent manner. The Army has invested significant resources into

developing its training simulation systems, linking them with other

service simulations via the Aggregate Level

Simulation Protocol confederation, and proliferating them throughout the

Army and the international community. While these systems have

shortcomings that must be fixed, they provide a training environment

and representations of combat that have been accepted by the training

community world-wide. The WARSIM 2000 acquisition must allow the

confederation of simulations structure to evolve

in a manner that allows current users (Army and international) to

maintain access to the confederation without having to make a

substantial near-term investment in resources.

(2) Meeting the WARSIM 2000 requirements will demand

significant technological innovations. However, there are many existing

and developing systems that could and should be part of the overall

solution. The acquisition strategy must ensure that developers optimize

the investment of each service in existing systems (instead of starting

from a blank sheet of paper) and insert echnology into the training

environment in a way that improves training.

(3) Fielding of new capabilities, whether they be functional

representations or technological enhancements, must be either

practically transparent to the user or be accompanied by training so the

user can understand and receive the benefit of the new capabilities.

(4 The acquisition strategy must allow for regular user

involvement in the development process. User evaluations and

requirements must serve as a primary source for determining changes to

the system.

2. Threat. Rather than counter a specific threat, WARSIM will provide a

training environment capable of representing threats from across the

operational continuum.

3. Shortcomings of Existing Systems. Current simulations were designed

for training corps and division staffs on command and control techniques

for Army operations in mid-intensity combat. Current software is bound

to proprietary operating systems and hardware. The software design,

especially the underlying representation of terrain, precludes

representing the detailed functionality required for resolving the high

resolution interactions needed to train commanders and battle staffs at

levels from battalion to operational level

commanders in joint scenarios for war and operations other than war.

4. Capabilities Required. WARSIM 2000 will support commander and battle

staff training from battalion up to theater level. While the major

simulation models of WARSIM 2000 will run on computers housed in fixed

regional facilities, transportable Simulation Support Modules (SSMs)

will provide support functions under the control of a senior controller

at locations near the training unit. Users of the simulation will train

under the guidance of a senior trainer, usually the unit’s commander,

the next higher level commander, or an instructor at institutions.

WARSIM will provide users a complete training environment consisting of

simulations, data, support functions and communications.

a. System Performance. The following description of requirements for

the WARSIM 2000 training environment addresses in turn each of the

functional components described in paragraph 1.b.

(1) The Simulation. WARSIM 2000’s simulation component must have

the following functional characteristics.

(a) General Attributes.

(i) Size. The model must be large enough to support a

multi- echelon corps or theater exercise. The model must also be able to

link to other copies of itself to support larger exercises. The

simulation must also be able to support multiple, concurrent, smaller

training exercises, such as several battalion headquarters training

independently.

(ii) Weather. The simulation must accurately portray the

impact that weather elements have on operations (space, air, and

ground). At a minimum, the simulation must account for the following

weather elements: cloud amount and height, visibility, restrictions to

visibility (e.g. precipitation, fog, smoke, dust and sand),

precipitation accumulation, surface wind direction and

speed, temperature, relative humidity, altimeter setting, and solar and

lunar light data. These weather elements must be allowed to range from

tropical to arctic regions, to vary over the geographic area of

interest, and to change as often as hourly. In addition, wind direction

and speed and temperature in a vertical profile up to 70,000 feet must

be allowed to impact Nuclear Biological and Chemical

NBC) weapons with changes incorporated at least twice per day.

(iii) Terrain. The simulation must provide a level of

resolution of terrain such that tactical considerations of terrain

analysis and the dynamic effects of man-made or natural occurrences

(e.g. bomb craters, minefields, battle damage on roads, the obstacle

effect of rivers, hydrography, and weather) as considered during

Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB) will affect the

battle. The minimum acceptable tactical considerations include the

following areas: the impact of line-of-sight (to include sonar and

electromagnetic spectrum considerations of concealment, thermal, optical

and radar visibility, and signal site emplacement) between potential

interactors whether they be sensors or weapon systems, air, ship, or

ground mounted; the ability of terrain to support the movement of

personnel, vehicles and units over time, and the accurate portrayal of

the location of natural and man-made obstacles. The outcomes of the

simulated events must be sensitive to changes in the weather (described

above in paragraph 4.a.(1)(a)(ii)) as it affects terrain.

(iv) Time. The simulation must be capable of running

faster than real time to a pre-defined point in time or an event, while

requiring minimal input, and providing summarized output. Users must be

able to “age” the simulation to accommodate a training scenario that

describes actions in the midst of a campaign. The senior controller must

be able to have the simulation start, stop/interrupt, rollback to any

specified point in scenario, restart from a given point or the initial

conditions and conduct concurrent replay. The senior

controller must have the capability to change any attributes of the

simulated entities or the game characteristics at any time.

(b) Conditions and Constraints.

(i) Scenarios. The goal is for the simulation to portray

events that could arise from scenarios based on any point in the

operational continuum. At a minimum, requirements are for scenarios for

war in Europe, Southwest Asia, Southeast Asia and Korea and for

operations other than war in these locations as well as Central and

South America and Africa.

(ii) Fidelity. The simulation must allow commanders and

battle staffs to do their tasks under the conditions and standards

outlined in the Army Training and Evaluation Program Mission Training

Plans (MTPs) for command groups and staff referenced in Appendix 1 to

Annex A.

(iii) Level of Detail. The simulation must be able to

portray a level of detail that captures the effects of individual

entities on the battle, e.g., single weapon platform, emitter, and

sensor systems. Entities that operate near each other as cohesive units

can be portrayed in aggregated units from team to battalion that

represent the normal mode of employment. Individual, low-density,

entities that operate in a geographically dispersed mode must be

portrayed as they are employed, e.g., signal nodes, radars, jammers,

missile and rocket systems, engineer obstacle systems, and individual

surveillance and laser designation systems. All systems will be

portrayed using performance data appropriate to the level of

classification of the exercise.

(iv) Reports. The simulation must provide feedback to

the training unit by sending reports of simulated events. These reports

must be formatted in a doctrinally correct fashion and occur in a

time-appropriate banner. The reports must not reveal all of ground truth

but reflect that information that the simulated unit would reasonably

know given its status, time removed from the reported incident, and

deployed intelligence assets.

(v) Human Factors. The simulation must portray the

effects of operations on the human condition as it relates to combat

effectiveness. At a minimum, the simulation must consider unit morale

and cohesion, time subject to hostile actions, availability of religious

support, unit attrition rate over time, weather, and operational tempo.

(vi) Simulated Mistakes. The simulation must cause

simulated entities to “make mistakes” based on a predetermined level of

training and a variable combat effectiveness determined by human factors

. The mistakes should be of two types: mistakes in actions taken and

mistakes in actions reported. Mistakes in actions taken fall along the

lines of getting lost e.g., arriving at or attacking the wrong location,

delivering the improper quantities of supplies, or delivering the wrong

supplies. These types of mistakes will change the ground truth of the

simulation. Along with reports that are accurate but incomplete, other

reports will contain information that is different from ground truth.

These mistakes in reporting will occur when a simulated unit makes a

report to the training unit that conflicts with ground truth in the

simulation. These mistaken reports will not change ground truth. The

simulation must have the ability to provide the correct information if

challenged for confirmation. The level of training and combat

effectiveness must change over exercise time with a corresponding

change in the number of mistakes. The senior trainer must have the

capability to cause a simulated unit to make specific mistakes during

the exercise. The senior trainer must be able to easily adjust the

severity and frequency of simulated mistakes during an exercise to

include being able to set the level to zero, in effect turning off the

mistakes. The senior trainer and the After Action Review systems must

have access to both ground truth and mistakes data.

(vii) Surrounding Units. Training units, to include

combat, combat support, and combat service support units that support

maneuver brigades, must be able to interact with the simulation without

the presence of any other units. This will require the simulation to

emulate forward, flank and rear units, supported and supporting units,

as well as the next higher and lower echelon units, that would normally

exist on the battlefield, but are not present for the particular

training event. The simulation must be able to portray dynamic scenario

and event dependent intelligence and reports concerning the activities

of these units as well as their requests for information and resources

from the training units.

(viii) Multi-Level Input/Output. The simulation must be

able to accommodate an exercise where different levels (division,

igade, battalion) are interacting with the simulation. Each level must

be able to train using the simulation by issuing only its normal orders

and instructions to the simulation while receiving only its normal

reports and data from all sources. The simulation must receive and

present its information in the format and level of detail appropriate

to the training unit. The simulation-provided information must not

always be 100 percent accurate. The information should at times contain

errors that one could expect to obtain in a realistic setting.

Bibliography:

?WARSIM 2000, The Few, The Proud, The… hey they?re not there!? Article

#45, SIRS Encyclpaedias, Applied Science, 1994.