Networked simulators are blurring the boundary between training and operations as simulation threatens to replace live exercises
NATO pilots have been in action again over the Balkans. Last month, Canadian Boeing CF-18 Hornets joined Dutch Lockheed Martin F-16s, French Dassault Mirage 2000s, German and Italian Eurofighter Typhoons and UK Panavia Tornados on missions over disputed Bosnia. They were supported by UK Boeing E-3 Sentrys and faced opposition from Serbian MiG-29s.
It was a replay of the Bosnian conflict of the 1990s - but this time the bombs dropped and missiles fired were virtual, and the pilots were flying simulators as geographically dispersed as Montreal, Canada and Turin, Italy. The landmark exercise, First Warfighter Alliance in a Virtual Environment (First WAVE), was intended to kick-start NATO's use of distributed, networked simulation for aircrew mission training.
First WAVE illustrated the strengths of distributed mission training, with participating aircrews saying the virtual sorties compared in intensity with real Maple Flag and Red Flag exercises. But it also underlined the challenges, with the USA pulling out late in the planning phase because of security and other concerns.
Prohibitive expense
With large-scale live-flying exercises becoming prohibitively expensive and increasingly rare, military commanders are looking to distributed simulation to provide the realistic tactical training needed to ensure aircrew readiness. The USA is already running regular Virtual Flag exercises over its growing distributed mission operations (DMO) network, and First WAVE was designed to drive home to NATO the value of what it calls mission training via distributed simulation.
"We have been doing distributed mission simulation for years with uniformly positive results, but we needed a way at NATO level to put across that this is the way forward," says Lt Col Rick Thompson, director of air requirements for modelling, simulation and training within the Canadian Department of National Defence. "We needed a point of departure - a mobilising, motivating event."
The US Air Force needs little convincing of the value of distributed mission training, and the US Army, Navy and Marine Corps are rapidly following its lead in networking their simulators. Beginning with fielding the first Boeing F-15C mission training centre (MTC) in 2000, the USAF's combat air force DMO network has grown to include the E-3 AWACS and F-16C and by the end of the decade is expected to encompass the A-10, B-1, B-52, F-15E, F/A-22, F-117, E-8 JSTARS, EC-130 Compass Call and RC-135 Rivet Joint as well as the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned air vehicles.
Distributed simulation is gaining momentum in the USA because of increasing constraints on live training, including aircraft fuel and maintenance costs, aircrew and airspace availability, classified aircraft and weapon capabilities, and the complex rules of engagement required for joint operations. Advances in simulation, meanwhile, are enabling more realistic exercises to be run virtually than can safely be staged live.
Training centres
Under a commercial training simulation services contract, Boeing has so far delivered three mission training centres for the air-superiority F-15C, each equipped with four full mission trainers (FMT) linked locally and long haul over the DMO network. Further Boeing-owned and -operated F-15C MTCs are planned, including the first outside the USA - at Kadena AB in Japan and RAF Lakenheath in the UK. Boeing is also under contract to set up MTCs for the F-15E strike aircraft at four USAF bases, including Lakenheath, beginning in 2006, each with two or four networked FMTs.
Under a similar fee-for-service contract, Lockheed Martin is building mission training centres for the F-16C Block 40/50. Two are already in place in the USA and 18 of the one-, two- or four-ship MTCs are planned by the end of the decade, as far flung as Japan, South Korea, Germany and Italy. The E-3 MTCs, comprising multiple operator workstations, are provided by Plexsys. Two are operational, with four more planned.
In addition to these commercially provided centres, the USAF plans to expand the DMO network by linking in existing simulators for other combat aircraft types, ranging from FMTs already being fielded for Fairchild A-10 attack and forward air-control aircraft, training devices for the Lockheed Martin/Boeing F/A-22 stealth fighter, and simulators for the Boeing B-52, Rockwell B-1 and Northrop Grumman B-2 bombers. Eventually transports, tankers and other assets will be added to the net.
Meanwhile, the US Navy has begun procurement of a distributed mission training capability for its principal combat aircraft, the F/A-18 Hornet. The first four-ship set of networked training devices built byL-3 Link Training & Simulation is in acceptance testing at NAS Oceana, Virginia and a second suite is on order for NAS Leemore, California.
Not surprisingly, the trend towards networked simulation is catching on internationally. Boeing has installed two-ship F-15C mission training systems, based on its USAF MTCs, at three Royal Saudi Air Force bases. Canada's CF-18 advanced distributed combat training system (ADCTS), provided by Bombardier, will include six Link-built simulators at two mission training centres, plus 10 part-task trainers that can also be networked. Australia's Hornet aircrew training system, to be supplied by Raytheon, will comprise three networked AF-18 simulators at two locations, also built by Link and also based on the company's distributed mission trainers for the US Navy.
In France, Sogitec and Thales Training & Simulation (TTS) are building simulation centres for the F2-standard Dassault Rafale, one for the air force and one for the navy. Each centre has four networked pilot stations, reconfigurable between air force and navy versions and, by virtual coupling of cockpits, between single-seat and two-seat variants. Plans call for the Rafale simulators to be linked with similar centres for the Mirage 2000D and 2000-5. As a first step, TTS networked two simulators for the Mirage 2000C at Orange and one for the E-3 AWACS at Avord for First WAVE.
Planning for First WAVE began in September 2000, seven NATO members signing up to participate: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, the UK and the USA. The four-day series of exercises conducted last month involved four Canadian Forces CF-18 simulators, the two French air force Mirages, Eurofighter simulators at Alenia in Turin and EADS in Munich, three Royal Netherlands Air Force F-16s and Royal Air Force Tornado GR4s at RAF Lossiemouth. They faced four MiG-29s simulated by CAE, one of several manufacturers involved in the exercise.
Support forces
Supporting these combat-aircraft simulators, RAF Lossiemouth in Scotland provided the blue-force (friendly) AWACS and computer-generated forces, as well as white-force (neutral) referees and role players, while over at CFB Cold Lake in Alberta the Canadian Forces commanded the red-force (enemy) MiG-29s being simulated by CAE at its Montreal, Quebec plant.
As if the geographic dispersion was not enough of a challenge, the exercise used two different distributed-simulation protocols to network together devices of differing fidelity levels and technology generations. The seven sites in Canada were linked using the latest HLA networking standard, as were the Eurofighters and Mirages, while the rest of the participants used the earlier DIS protocol. The real-time data interchange was accomplished using gateways, says Thompson.
The devices involved ranged from full-mission simulators to desk-top trainers, and on the Canadian side included two 1970s-vintage CF-18 operational flight trainers that were retrofitted with HLA networking capability by CAE. The Eurofighter simulators, meanwhile, have designed-in HLA capability.
CAE was responsible for generating a common scenario database for all participants in First WAVE, says Dave Kurts, director of synthetic environments for the Canadian simulation specialist. This was based on actual combined operations over Bosnia, to provide a reference against which to assess the effectiveness of the exercise. The database was furnished in industry-standard Open Flight format for translation to the propriety systems of the disparate image generators on the various simulators.
First WAVE demonstrated the value of working from a single source of data, says Kurts. A lingering problem with distributed simulation is how to network devices with differing levels of fidelity without dragging everyone down to the lowest common denominator. A pilot in a high-end simulator may be able to see things that cannot be displayed on a desktop device, making it impossible to hand off a target from one simulated aircraft to another, for example.
The key, says Kurts, is to look at the capability of the devices involved up front, and to assign tasks to each participant according to the fidelity of their simulation. "Low-end devices can only do so much, and they should be tasked with things they can accomplish," he says. Working from a common scenario database makes this easier.
WAVE off
As originally planned, First WAVE was to involve US Air Force F-15C and F-16 simulators at two sites: the USAF's distributed mission operations centre at Kirtland AFB, New Mexico and Northrop Grumman's network-centric warfare laboratory in Orlando, Florida. But the USA withdrew from participation in the actual exercise - while still fulfilling its obligations under the memorandum of understanding, Thompson says - because of concerns over security.
The lack of multi-level security for distributed mission training is a major issue holding back its wider application. Networked training allows aircrews with different security levels to share a common simulation battlespace. While classified aircraft and weapon performance data resident in a simulator does not need to be transmitted over the network, anyone observing the virtual mission can infer valuable information from the way the participants behave. As a result, developing a multi-level security capability is a priority for the USAF.
In the absence of US participation, meanwhile, First WAVE used commercial security equipment, adding the burden of encryption to the communications bandwidths required for a real-time distributed simulation spanning half the globe. "This is the first time distributed mission training has been done to this extent in a secure environment," says Kurts. "We have demonstrated we can provide coalition training over a secure simulation network."
Graham Warwick / Washington DC
Source: Flight International
