Army Modelling

1
ArmyModelling Simulation(MS) Update JSMARTS
Its about time!
Paul A. Roman 17 June 2004
2
Outline

• Historical Acquisition process
• The Army SE Strategy/Vision
• Recent success examples
• The Army Combat Development Process
• Evolution of the Directorate of Land Synthetic
  Environments
• A look at Warrior 2020
• Romans MS Cautions
• three things to remember

3
Historical Acquisition Cycle
4
LFSDG 2001

• Part 1 - The strategic Context
• Chapter 2 Concepts (Section 9 Deductions)
• The Army must also encourage the development of
  a single concept-to-fielding methodology for
  doctrine, structures and technology that employs
  simulation, experimentation and validation. This
  methodology must also include a flexible,
  accelerated acquisition cycle.

5
Proposed Acquisition Cycle (SEBA)
6
The Army Synthetic Environment Vision

• The Army will exploit synthetic environments
  (SEs) as the primary enabling technology
  necessary to effectively meet Army strategic
  objectives. SEs will merge the real and virtual
  worlds in ways that empower leaders to visualize
  the future, analyze decision alternatives and
  prepare for operations throughout the spectrum of
  conflict.
• In order to maximize effectiveness and optimize
  efficiency, Army SEs will be centrally controlled
  and coordinated to achieve appropriate levels of
  validation, standardization and modular
  development for potential use and reuse in a
  distributed environment.

7
Enabling the Army Strategy

• From the Army Vision
• Using progressive doctrine, realistic training
  and leading-edge technologies, the Army will be a
  knowledge-based and command-centric institution
  capable of continuous adaptation and task
  tailoring across the spectrum of conflict

• From the SE Strategy
• SEs will provide the Army with a powerful and
  resource efficient medium for the exploration of
  doctrinal alternatives, realistic training and
  experimentation that will help generate the
  knowledge-base from which the command-centric
  institution will emerge with the tools it needs
  to continuously analyze and adapt across the
  spectrum of conflict.

8
AE 7B ERSTA Griffon

• Together, the UAV and ERSTA simulations provided
  very important complementary information to the
  recce troop commander, permitting a faster
  advance with less OPFOR detections of Blue forces
  as well as less Blue kills
• Griffon ERSTA and a UAV are extremely valuable
  sensors within the ISTAR System of Systems,
  permitting the recce team to operate more
  efficiently and effectively in complex terrain
• Comd 1 Wing 10 Apr 2003

9
Weapon Effects Simulation Project
10
Weapon Effects Simulation Project

• Laser and radio-based live simulation system
• WES will permit soldiers to use themselves, their
  weapons and their vehicles as simulators to train
  as closely as possible to the way they will fight
• Constructive simulation of area weapons
  (artillery, mortars, mines NBC)

11
Weapon Effects Simulation Project

• Training with WES will significantly improve the
  probability of mission success and
• Make the enemy die for his country

12
Army Application of Simulation

• Training support has been the main focus of
  simulation to date
• In addition to increased training support,
  Simulation must now address the requirements for
  the other domains
• Support to Operations
• Concept Development and Experimentation
• Research and Development
• Simulation Based Acquisition

13
Comd LFDTS Intent
In order to establish a fully SE Enabled Army, I
will create DLSE as the Army COE for Modelling
and Simulation (MS), and Digitization. DLSE
will centrally control and coordinate all aspects
of Army SE capabilities as the primary enabling
technology necessary to effectively meet the
Armys strategic objectives. DLSE will be
established incrementally by building on current
capabilities providing an initial focus on
generating appropriate policies and plans to
ensure that Army SE requirements are well
defined, prioritized and understood across the
Army and integrated within DND.
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
Employment of SE Capability vs Time
Capability
1995
2005
2010
2000
17
Current Status

• Army SE Strategy (Comd LFDTS 21 Mar 03)
• Simulation Policy (draft)
• Simulation Master Plan (concept and outline)
• DLSE Transition Plan (draft)
• Move to new (renovated Facility August 2004)
• OneSAF Integrated Development Environment
• Continued participation in
• SEWG, JSMARTS, CASE, OneSAF

18
(No Transcript)
19
A-31 Our New Home
20
The Ultimate SE
http//www.beyond.olm.net/download/
21
Warrior 2020
22
Romans MS Cautions

• All models are wrong!
• There are lies, damn lies and statistics, but
  MS offers a whole new level of potential
  solution spinning especially through the use of
  fancy animation!
• Simulation is habit forming, the more you do it,
  the more you begin to think it is the real thing!

23
But it is definitely worth the risk
Provided it meets a requirement!
24
Questions?
25
DLSE Constructive Simulation Strategy
FY 02/03
FY 03/04
FY 04/05
FY 05/06
FY 06/07
2003
2004
2005
2006
J
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
J
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
J
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
J
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
New Facility A-31
B- 19 and Grant Bldg
OTB (ABCA) v1
OTB (ABCA) v2
OOS Block B Beta (Eval)
OOS Block C IOC (US)
?
OOS FOC(US)
?
?
WARSIM
Enabling Army Strategic Objectives Through
Simulation
26
THE SYNTHETIC WARIntellectual Challenges
Development of conceptual actual model requires
person with operational/system expertise
Analysis requires clear understanding of the
short-comings of the model
Decision(s) should be made with a clear
understanding of both the shortcomings of the
model and operational/system expertise
Definition of problem very important akin to
Mission Analysis
Graphic adapted from Eppen, Gould, Schmidt, Moore
Weatherford