HaCKeRz KrOnIcKLeZ 3/HaCKeRz_KrOnIcKLeZ.iso/anarchy/essays/schoolsucks/army.txt

Text File | 1996-04-27 | 16KB | 249 lines

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 TechnolgyÆs 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:
ôWARSIM 2000, The Few, The Proud, The... hey theyÆre not there!ö Article
#45, SIRS Encyclpaedias, Applied Science, 1994.