Training Benefits of Interactive Air Combat Simulation

1977

Philosophical journal of conflict and violence, 2021

2018

2017

The U.S. Army Aviation Combined Arms Training Strategy highlights the use of Training Aids, Devices, Simulations, and Simulators (TADSS) as key, low cost tools to prepare Army aviation forces for future combat. A prominent component of this strategy is an increasing reliance on games-for-training. Game-based systems are capable of supporting training and assessment of mission procedures and situational judgement tasks. However, little research exists on the capabilities of the specific types of game-based systems for supporting Army aviation collective training. The present study evaluated the effectiveness of the Virtual Battlespace 3 and Microsoft Flight Simulator game-based training environments for a set of collective air assault mission tasks. Study participants consisted of previously qualified Army aviators recruited from various U.S. Army Aviation Center of Excellence (USAACE) schoolhouses located at Fort Rucker, Alabama. An air assault mission scenario, consisting of a set ...

2020

Flight training is costly and workload intensive. According to a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, the US Navy and US Air Force predict a 25% shortage of fighter pilots by 2023 (GAO, 2018). The military needs empirical research to determine the effectiveness of flight simulation training and whether simulation training can decrease the overall training time for student pilots. The purpose of this study was to compare intermediate and advanced military student pilots’ scores on the T-45C OFT simulator training events and scores on the T-45C aircraft training events in four training domains; the intervention in this study included debriefs by flight instructors after simulator training. Significant differences between preand post-tests were observed in contact training of intermediate trainees (p < .001; d = 0.54); instrument training of intermediate and advanced trainees (p < .001; d = 0.19); tactical training of intermediate and advanced trainees (p <.00...

The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology, 2019

This paper advances live (L), virtual (V), and constructive (C) simulation methodologies by introducing a new LVC simulation framework for the development of air combat tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP). In the framework, TTP is developed iteratively in separate C-, V-, and L-simulation stages. This allows the utilization of the strengths of each simulation class while avoiding the challenges of pure LVC simulations. The C-stage provides the optimal TTP with respect to the probabilities of survival ( Ps) and kill ( Pk) of aircraft without considering the human–machine interaction (HMI). In the V-stage, the optimal TTP is modified by assessing its applicability with Pk and Ps, as well as HMI measures regarding pilots’ situation awareness, mental workload, and TTP adherence. In the L-stage, real aircraft are used to evaluate whether the developed TTP leads to acceptable Pk, Ps, and HMI measures in a real-life environment. The iterative nature of the framework enables that V- o...

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2015

Live training is where air combat personnel gain practice and experience with situations as close to real combat as possible. Computer-generated entities could expand the range and complexity of scenarios used in live training and could offer instructors a new means of manipulating the training environment. These new capabilities might help aircrew boost their proficiency beyond what is currently achieved in live training. On the other hand, computer-generated entities add artificiality to the live training environment, reducing its similarity to real combat. As part of a research program conducted to examine how the introduction of Live, Virtual, Constructive (LVC) training technology may change air combat training, we identified strategies to support learning and the acceleration of proficiency development. In this paper, we present these new possibilities for live training and discuss their implications for the fidelity of the training experience, related research, and research needs.

2016

The Longbow Crew Trainer (LCT) is a cost effective, safe alternative to live training in the AH-64D/E Apache helicopter. Current Army doctrine and regulations have provisions for the limited use of simulator in lieu of aircraft hours toward semiannual minimum flight hour requirements. With the defense budget in decline, the Army must find innovative, cost effective methods to conduct realistic, relevant training to sustain proficiency in their warfighting capabilities. The LCT fully replicates the cockpit environment through training scenarios for requisite crew tasks and missions in a realistic, modular, and transportable solution. An attack helicopter crew can safely train in customizable scenarios ranging from basic aviation tasks to crew-level missions and gunneries. The Army is currently aligning one LCT per attack battalion under the Aviation Restructure Initiative. There are 20 Armed Reconnaissance Battalions/Squadrons in the active component with approximately 35 aircrews per battalion. The premise of this study was to review cost benefits of training in a virtual environment over a live environment while exploring the effects on proficiency. The difference in cost per hour between an AH-64D and the LCT is approximately $3,998. Using this figure and the semiannual flight hour requirements from the current Aircrew Training Manual in a weighted average between Flight Activity Category (FAC) 1 and FAC 2 pilot's flight minimum requirements formed the basis for four models: Low, Status Quo (baseline), Moderate, and High Virtual Simulation Models. This study found that while the High Virtual Simulation Model resulted in the greatest cost savings, the current budget and previous literature does not require such drastic measures. The Low Virtual Simulation Model resulted in higher costs. Therefore, the Moderate Virtual Simulation Model, proved most relevant to budget analysts, aviation unit commanders, and pilots by decreasing annual costs by an estimated $76.2 million without degrading proficiency. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge those who made this possible. First, I would like to thank my kids for sacrificing time and providing support through this process. Thanks to the Army for selecting me for advanced civil schooling at my beloved University of Central Florida.

2015 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 2015

Computer generated forces (CGFs) inhabiting air combat training simulations must show realistic and adaptive behavior to effectively perform their roles as allies and adversaries. In earlier work, appropriate behavior for these CGFs was successfully generated using reinforcement learning. One of the key concepts in reinforcement learning is the reward, with which desirable behavior is reinforced. Until now, we rewarded learning air combat agents with rewards based on domain knowledge. However, an important factor known as the probability-of-kill of missiles was not taken into account in these rewards. The probability-of-kill is the probability that a launched missile hits its intended target. However, because this factor still remains a probability, missiles with a high probability-of-kill may still miss their targets. Likewise, missiles with a low probability-of-kill may still hit their targets. We surmise that using this information in the Rewarding Air Combat Behavior in Training Simulations UNCLASSIFIED