1 octobre 2018 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR

Here is what Marines really need for realistic simulations training

MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va., ― Last year at the annual military expo here, Commandant Gen. Robert B. Neller told industry his vision for simulations is a kind of Star Trek-like holodeck in which any Marine could fight any battle on any terrain in virtual reality.

Since then, Secretary of Defense James Mattis has said that close combat infantry units should fight 25 battles before they ever taste real combat.

This year one of the Marines in charge of bringing those simulation dreams to reality laid down some of the tangible needs of the Corps now and in the near-term.

Lt. Col. Byron Harder, with Training and Education Command's capabilities division, told the audience at this year's Modern Day Marine military expo that while live training will always remain the standard against which a unit's readiness is measured, even live training has its limits.

It costs a lot of money to ship Marines out to Twentynine Palms or other areas. It costs money to fire munitions. Some of those munitions can't be fired in most areas.

Some of the advanced weapons, such as cyber and electronic warfare types, can't be used for fear of damaging civilian networks or facilities in the United States. And some really advanced weapons can't be demonstrated where just anyone can see them in action, thus revealing our tech to adversaries.

And that is where simulations can help bridge the gap.

But first, there's a list of things that must come to fruition.

Much of that is going to be software and bandwidth, basically getting better versions of terrains and simulations that are more realistic and can accommodate as much as a division's worth of players and an equally complex, simulated adversary.

But some items are smaller and more hands-on, like better virtual reality and augmented reality headsets.

Those headsets are key since the Marines want them to work not as they do now, with pounds of cabling in bulky indoor shooting simulators but light with long-lasting batteries that can be taken in the field and on deployment.

Harder said a goggle that is about twice the weight of existing eye protection, perhaps with its power source somewhere on the body, is likely five to 10 years away based on his survey of the field.

There's another an ongoing need: better drones.

But instead of longer flying, large-scale drones that can coordinate complex fires and sensors for the operational environment, what Harder said simulations needs are smaller drones that can fly lower, giving Marines a street-level, detailed view of the battlespace so they can create their own terrain maps and fight the simulated fight in the areas they'll really be operating in.

And those video feeds that are now on every ISR platform in the real world? Simulations need them too, to be realistic. That means game designers have to have human-like activity going on in areas instead of some digital “blob” representing enemies. That way, when a commander wants to zoom in on a tactical frame in the game, they'll be able to do it just like in theater.

Which brings it to one of the more ambitious items beyond terrain and hardware: getting simulations to act more like humans.

As it works now, unit commanders set up their forces, work their mission sets and then the virtual “forces” collide and often a scripted scenario plays out.

Not too realistic.

What's needed is both civilian simulations to act like civilian populations might act in the real world and the same for the enemy, taking advantages, fighting and withdrawing.

But one step further is key: The enemy has to talk back.

When a commander finishes the fight, they should be able to query the virtual enemy and figure out why it did what it did, how it gained a certain advantage.

And it shouldn't take a programmer to “talk” with the simulation. Units communicate via voice and chat. That's how simulations users must be able to talk with their simulated civilians, allies and enemies, in plain language.

These pursuits are not happening in a vacuum. This April for the first time Marine pilots at both Yuma, Arizona, and Camp Pendleton, California, ran flight simulations coordinated with ground units at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms, California.

Those were done at a battalion level with a short prep time, far different than the large-scale Marine Expeditionary Unit or Marine Expeditionary Brigade-sized training that is typical.

That is part of a larger effort to create a “plug-and-play” type of training module that any battalion, and later smaller units, can use at home station or on deployment to conduct complex, coordinated training.

What made that work new was pairing legacy systems with a variety of software and operating systems between them.

That's another example of what needs to be fixed.

Marines and other services are, in many cases, using systems that were designed decades apart and creating a labyrinth of patchwork methods to get the hardware to work together when it wasn't built for that type of operation.

The new systems must be open architecture so that new tech, new weapons and new terrain can be added on the fly. But also secure enough to operate across networks and not be spied upon by those who would want a peek at our tactics.

Across the infantry battalions Marines received new gear last year called Tactical Decision Kits. These allow for squad to company-sized elements to do video game-play for their unit exercises, complete with NFL-style replay of engagements and decisions.

That's a low-level example of one thing that's lacking in current training, Harder said. Right now the main piece of tech for a Marine commander conducting an after action review is a pen and paper pad.

But with ISR drones, body cams and sensors, Marines in the near-term future should be able to monitor individual Marine's energy and hydration levels, where they pointed their weapon, when they fired, how many rounds, if they hit their target, even where their eyes were looking while on patrol.

And, if on deployment, Marines can't rely on a cadre of civilian contractors back home to run their hardware. To that end, the Corps began two courses last year, the Simulation Professional Course and the Simulations Specialist Course.

Both give Marines in infantry units experience setting up simulations and running the games for their units. They input training objectives and can understand and put together training for the unit staff or just for their fire team back in the barracks.

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2018/09/28/here-is-the-current-checklist-for-marine-corps-simulations-training

Sur le même sujet

21 janvier 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - January 17, 2020
NAVY Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems, Tewksbury, Massachusetts, is awarded a $30,358,285 cost-plus-fixed-fee and cost-only modification to previously-awarded contract N00024-19-C-5509 to exercise the option for dual band radar design agent support efforts. Work will be performed in Tewksbury, Massachusetts (69%); Port Hueneme, California (17%); and Arvonia, Virginia (14%), and is expected to be completed by January 2021. Fiscal 2020 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy); and fiscal 2019 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funding in the amount of $2,099,910 will be obligated at time of award, and funds in the amount of $1,069,769 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. CACI International Inc./BIT Systems, Sterling, Virginia, is awarded a $13,336,559 firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost reimbursable, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. This contract provides engineering, program management and technical services to support the installation, integration and sustainment of counter unmanned aerial systems. Installation and integration includes modeling and simulation, hardware installation, software integration, verification testing and integration trouble shooting support. System sustainment includes maintainability and deployment upgrades of operational systems, reconfiguration of installed systems, training, system maintenance, software updates and hardware repairs. Work will be performed in Sterling, Virginia (34%); various locations within the continental U.S (33%); and various locations outside the continental U.S. (33%), and is expected to be completed in January 2022. No funds will be obligated at the time of award. Funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1). The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00421-20-D-0020). ARMY Phillips Corp.,* Hanover, Maryland, was awarded a $28,570,997 firm-fixed-price contract for the procurement of Computer Numeric Control mill and lathe assemblies. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 16, 2025. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity (W9098S-20-D-0004). Four Tribes Enterprises Inc.,* Gaithersburg, Maryland, was awarded a $13,147,968 firm-fixed-price contract for the construction of a perimeter security entry point at Rome Laboratory. One bid was solicited via the internet with one bid received. Work will be performed in Rome, New York, with an estimated completion date of July 14, 2021. Fiscal 2020 civil construction funds in the amount of $13,147,968 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York, New York, is the contracting activity (W912DS-20-C-0005). Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., McLean, Virginia, was awarded an $8,873,629 firm-fixed-price contract for program management support services on the Integrated Personnel and Pay System-Army for the Functional Management Division, Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, Technology and Business Architecture Integration Directorate. Fifty-five bids were solicited with one bid received. Work will be performed in Arlington, Virginia, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 17, 2023. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance, Army, funds in the amount of $8,873,629 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, New Jersey, is the contracting activity (W15QKN-20-F-0144). DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Honeywell International, doing business as Honeywell Aerospace-Tucson, Tucson, Arizona, has been awarded a $25,664,750 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for helicopter generators. This was a sole-source acquisition using justification 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1), as stated in Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. This is a one-year base contract with four one-year options periods. Location of performance is Arizona with a Jan 17, 2026, performance completion date. Using military service is the Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 Army working capital funds. The contracting activity is Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama (SPRRA1-20-D-0016). *Small Business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2060522/source/GovDelivery/
20 novembre 2023 | International, Terrestre

India, Australia to hold talks to boost defense ties
India and Australia are part of the Quad, an alliance that includes Japan and the United States, which aims to counter China’s rising influence in Asia.
22 octobre 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité, Autre défense

Otan : les dépenses militaires européennes progressent encore en 2020
Par Le Figaro avec AFP Les dépenses des pays européens de l'Otan et du Canada en matière de défense vont augmenter pour la sixième année consécutive en 2020, avec un tiers des pays atteignant l'objectif des 2% du PIB, a indiqué mercredi le secrétaire général de l'Otan, Jens Stoltenberg. «Cette année sera la sixième année consécutive de hausse des dépenses militaires par les alliés européens et le Canada, avec une progression réelle de 4,3%. Nous nous attendons à ce que cette tendance se poursuive», a déclaré Jens Stoltenberg lors d'une conférence de presse, à la veille d'une réunion par visioconférence des ministres de la Défense de l'organisation. L'Organisation du traité de l'Atlantique nord a publié mercredi ses chiffres sur les dépenses de défense de ses membres. D'après ces données, qui ne sont que des estimations pour 2019 et 2020, les États-Unis devraient encore fournir de très loin le plus gros effort budgétaire, avec des dépenses représentant 3,87% de leur PIB. Les pays de l'Otan, Allemagne en tête, sont budgétairement sous la pression du président américain Donald Trump qui leur réclame un effort plus massif pour arriver à l'objectif de dépenses égales à 2% du PIB. Sur les 30 pays membres, 10 se situeraient au-dessus de ce seuil en 2020, dont la Grèce (2,58%), le Royaume-Uni (2,43%), la Pologne (2,30%) et la France (2,11%). Ils n'étaient que trois l'an dernier (États-Unis, Grèce et Royaume-Uni). L'Allemagne resterait encore en dessous (1,57%), tout comme le Canada (1,45%). Les ministres de la Défense des pays de l'Otan doivent se réunir jeudi et vendredi par téléconférence. Parmi les sujets abordés, sera discutée «la juste répartition du fardeau» militaire, a indiqué M. Stoltenberg. https://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-eco/otan-les-depenses-militaires-europeennes-progressent-encore-en-2020-20201021

Toutes les nouvelles

Here is what Marines really need for realistic simulations training

Sur le même sujet

India, Australia to hold talks to boost defense ties India and Australia are part of the Quad, an alliance that includes Japan and the United States, which aims to counter China’s rising influence in Asia.

India, Australia to hold talks to boost defense ties
India and Australia are part of the Quad, an alliance that includes Japan and the United States, which aims to counter China’s rising influence in Asia.