Table Of ContentAD-A282' 744
Document Number ,-,.I,,- .,1I,,I.,. ,I.,,
W003264
,, DTIC
w.n,..
ELECTE
--- _'~~~ ' > l I1994JI-
SAUG 10 1994~
F
COMBAT VEHICLE
COMMAND & CONTROL (93)
RESEARCH REPORT (FINAL)
The Combat Vehicle Command And Control System:
Combat Performance Of Armor Battalions Using
Distributed Interactive Simulation
Submitted By:
Loral Systems Company
ADST Program Office
Orlando, Fl
a\
Prepared For:
United States Army
Simulation, Training & Instrumentation Command
Orlando, Fl
In Response To:
Contract N61339-91-D-0001 %s49
Delivery Order D006 4-25210
I CDRL Item A001 I[IIlIIIiil!I~ll!l
31 January 1994
94 8 09 09,-(
BDM Federal. Inc. Direct Dial Number:
A lum1 P0BOox .9 67
FEDJERAL (F5o0r2t )K 9n4o2x-, 1K6Y4 840121-0967
AIt ~i0aM Coian,
(502)9421648BDM/FTK-GAM-0617-94
I January 31, 1994
Dr. Kathleen A. Quinkert
Team Leader, Future Battlefield Conditions
U.S. Army Research Institute for the
Behavioral and Social Sciences
Fort Knox Field Unit
Fort Knox, KY 40121-5620
SUBJECT: Transmittal of Final CVCC Battalion Evaluation
Operational Effectiveness Research Report
Dear Dr. Quinkert:
BDM Federal is pleased to deli,. er the final research report
entitled "The Combat Vehicle Command and Control System: Combat
Performance of Armor Battalions Using Interactive Simulation."
This report is the result of work performed under Combat Vehicle
Command and Control Delivery Order 0003 (Advanced Distributed
Simulation Technology, Contract No. N61339-91-D-0001/0025).
This final revision of the research report is based on
comments received on 12 January 1994, which resulted from the ARI
peer review process. Comments were received from Mr. Kristiansen
5
and MAJ Henderson. The following paragraphs summarize the actions
taken to address the reviewers' written comments.
1. Mr. Kristiansen's comments: We have incorporated nearly all of
3Kristiansen's
the general recommendations and editorial suggestions in Mr.
memorandum dated 3 January 1994.
a
a. All of the minor stylistic and editorial modifications
(comments 3, 4, and 6 from the 3 January 1994 memorandum) have been
incorporated as suggested. The editorial questions (comments 2, 5,
and 7) have been resolved by appropriate modifications.
b. In response to the concern about frequent references to
Leibrecht et al. (in preparation), a paragraph has been added to
the Acknowledgments section explaining the allocation of detailed
methodological materials across the family of reports from the
Ibattalion evaluation.
batlo vlain
i
I
IBDM/FTK-GAM-0617-94
Dr. Kathleen A. Quinkert
January 31, 1994
Page 2 of 3
c. The concern about lack of comparable groups affecting
comparisons of direct fire performance led to no change in wording,
given the evaluation's primary focus on command and control
processes. This follows an agreement with Future Battlefield
S
Conditions (FBC) Team members in discussions on 24 January 1994.
d. As agreed in the 24 January discussions, the suggestion to
give the reader outcomes of statistical significance tests has not
been implemented, because of the operational nature of the target
audience.
e. In response to the concern about discussing findings when
significant trends were not apparent in figures, discussion of data
5 has been modified to deemphasize minor differences between
conditions.
2. MAJ Henderson's comments: We have made nearly all of the
modifications suggested by MAJ Henderson in his 4 January 1994
memorandum and on his annotated copy of the draft final report.
a. Discussion of IFF has been modified by adding to the
Conclusions and Recommendations section a recommendation to
investigate an IFF system integrating lasing and automated position
reporting.
i b. Interpretive and explanatory clarifications have been
incorporated in several places, as suggested in a number of
annotations.
c. As agreed in the 24 January discussions, we have not
replaced "command and control" with "battle command." However,
some wording from the new AR 100-5 has been incorporated in the
Background section to acknowledge the Army's current framework.
d. We have highlighted the CVCC capability to update fire
support coordination measures in the Fire Support subsection of the
Results and Discussion.
e. We have eliminated the mention of the lack of a "heads-up"
display in the Maneuver subsection of the Results and Discussion.
f. We have expanded the discussion of leadership in the
S Battlefield Integration subsection of the Results and Discussion to
better explain how CVCC could enhance leadership functions.
t
I
I Dr. Kathleen A. Quinkert
BDM/FTK-GAM-0617-94
January 31, 1994
Page 3 of 3
3. In addition to the above modifications, a few changes have been
made in response to the 24 January 1994 discussions.
a. The report's title has been changed to include only
"Interactive Simulation" instead of "Distributed Interactive
Simulation."
b. The funding numbers on the SF 298 and the cover page have
been corrected.
S
c. The discussion of the kills per hit data has been modified
to to broaden the interpretive options.
d. Department of the Army publications in the Reference list
have been reformatted in accordance with guidance received from
ARI-Fort Knox on 25 January 1994. References to Working Papers
have been changed to Research Notes.
Included in this final delivery are an original copy, three
Xerox copies, and electronic files on floppy diskettes. All text
files are in WordPerfect 5.1 on a labeled diskette. Figure files
are contained on a Gem Draw diskette and a Windows Draw diskette.
Subdirectories and file labels are organized to be self-explana-
tory. The BDM Federal Team appreciates
the peer review comments
of
Icomments
Mr. Kristiansen and MAJ Henderson, as well as earlier review
by the FBC Team. The ARI comments and input have greatly
enhanced the quality of this final report. I
Please direct questions concerning this report to myself.
I
BDM FEDERAL, INC.
5'
Bruce C. Leibrecht, Ph.D.
Manager, Human Factors and
I Simulation
as stated
Enclosure:
S
CF: Dr. Doherty
5 Gen Heiden
Mr. Uliano
I!
I
Research Report XXX
The Combat Vehicle Command and Control System: Combat
Performance of Armor Battalions Using Interactive Simulation
Glen A. Meade, Ryszard Lozicki, Bruce C. Leibrecht,
Paul G. Smith, and William E. Myers
I
Accesion For
J NTIS CRA&I
BDM Federal, Inc. UtlC TAG 0
JU;:.jh lOUced [3
J1titific.ation .......... .......... ........
By ...............
Dist ib ut ion I
January 1994
JAvailability Codes
Avail andlor
Dist Special
1A1
II United States Army Research Institute
for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
5
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188
4hcqdoaIpbtie ab11dn - Iolf l0al IIanIaogm f bafwnudalafQa thffor1arl4rn gtah.t hceauPtd d caaatgaft 1a.SYf g enteli~e, ea, t0 ananll~al dtfOIt oorrm rmeadh.an a ctarnlim gegialte hn~tadi ni arbeteanda l date O.l l aet on tf W agaCleoh lllile gh toOOuoIOCrttI ~ah0ee t alndoqsf il0mOaafctllelt,*of. ifetruSnnnad/9Iei gt. C DtOhrmeee ttetio~mirne.~O. e,:oe r7 .1olrr*~ lnanv. C flh--dthgll l tit nlbO1~nrau rOCdeo1net$ele anptStlta. lomSneaia treac nhOtidrnv agR n teyeiD aoOtttfih,n egr dI1 (a taJ oe sfoltue ftntr-hcoeanst
OaeN fleg) way. hate 104. Artngton. VA 22202-4302. and to the Office of Management and Budget. Papervtork Readucton ProjeCt (074-011). Was.gtton. OC 20503.
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS
The Combat Vehicle Command and Control System: Combat N61339-91-D-0001/0025
erformance of Armor Battalions Using Interactive 62785A
imulation 791
6. AUTHOR(S) 2221
eade, Glen A.; Lozicki, Ryszard, Leibrecht, Bruce C.; R01
Imith, Paul G.; and Myers, William E.
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) S. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER
BDM Federal, Inc.
P. 0. Box 967
Fort Knox, KY 40121-0967
£
9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND AODRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING
U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences AGENCY REPORT NUMBER
ATTN: PERI-IK
5001 Eisenhower Avenue
Alexandria, VA 22333-5600
11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Contracting Officer's Representative, Kathleen A. Quinkert
12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE
Approved for public release; A
distribution is unlimited.
13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)
This research evaluated the operational effectiveness, training, and soldier-machine interface (SMI)
mplications of a Combat Vehicle Command and Control (CVCC) experimental configuration that
ncluded the Commander's Independent Thermal Viewer and a Command and Control display. Using
1 tank simulators in the Mounted Warfare Test Bed at Fort Knox, KY, the evaluation focused on tank
attalion operations. Each of twelve groups of soldiers completed a 1-week training and testing
chedule that culminated in a simulated combat scenario. One of a series, this report documents
actical unit performance, and techniques and procedures employed to take advantage of the CVCC
ystem's capabilities. Companion reports address operational effectiveness data, and training and SMI-
"elatedf indings. The collective findings provide input to the design and development of training
rograms for future automated command, control, and communications systems in ground combat
ehicles.
14. SUBJECT TERMS S. NUMBER OF PAGES
;VCC Command and control C3 training requirements
1TV Operational effectiveness Soldier-in-the-loop 16. PRICE CODE
ll tank Distributed interactive simulation assessment
17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT
Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified Unlimited
3
NSN 7540-01.280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev 2-89)
~Pe.Cho-o
1 by ANSl Sid 135.9t
i
Research Report XXX
I
THE COMBAT VEHICLE COMMAND & CONTROL SYSTEM:
COMBAT PERFORMANCE OF ARMOR BATTALIONS
USING INTERACTIVE SIMULATION
Glen A. Meade, Ryszard Lozicki, Bruce C. Leibrecht
Paul G. Smith, and William E. Myers
BDM Federal, Inc.
Field Unit at Fort Knox, Kentucky
Barbara A. Black, Chief
Training Systems Research Division
Jack H. Hiller, Director
U.S. Army Research Institute
for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22333-5600
Office, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel
5 Department of the Army
January, 1994
Army Project Number Training Simulation
2Q262785A791
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
iii
S
FOREWORD
The Fort Knox Field Unit of the U.S. Army Research Institute
I
for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) conducts soldier-in-
the-loop simulation-based research that addresses Training
Requirements for the Future Integrated Battlefield. Efforts
under this program are supported by Memoranda of Understanding
(MOU) with (a) the U.S. Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, Subject:
Research in Future Battlefield Conditions, 12 April 1989, and (b)
the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Command (TACOM), Subject: Combat
Vehicle Command and Control (CVCC) Program, 22 March 1989.
The CVCC research program combines advanced digital and
thermal technologies to enhance mounted warfighting capabilities
to accomplish command, control, and communications (C3). The
CVCC system includes digital map, report and overlay features,
positioning and navigation functions, digital transmission
capabilities, and independent thermal viewing for unit and
vehicle commanders. This configuration provides a powerful
medium for investigating combat development and training
requirements of future automated technology for armored vehicles.
The research reported here used Distributed Interactive
Simulation to evaluate the CVCC capabilities at the battalion
level. The preliminary findings presented in this report support
Army developers in determining user requirements, specifying
training reguirements, and assessing operational effectiveness of
automated CJ systems for ground combat vehicles. In addition,
the training and simulation techniques developed for this effort
are of use to other Army training and testing agencies.
Information resulting from this research has been briefed to
the following personnel: Commanding General, U.S. Army Training
and Doctrine Command; Commanding General, U.S. Army Armor Center
and School; Deputy Commanding General for Combat Developments,
U.S. Army Combined Arms Command; Deputy Chief of Staff for
Training, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command; Chief of
Staff, U.S. Army Armor School; Director, Directorate of Combat
Developments, U.S. Army Armor School; and Director, Mounted
Warfighting Battlespace Lab.
EDGAR M. JOHNSON
Director
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The following members of ARI's Fort Knox Field Unit provided
invaluable input to this evaluation: Dr. Barbara Black, Field
Unit Chief; Dr. Kathleen Quinkert, Leader of the Future
Battlefield Conditions (FBC) Team; Dr. Carl Lickteig and Mr. Gary
Elliott, FBC Team members; and MAJ Jimmy Whitehead, the Field
Unit's Research and Development Coordinator. In addition to
these, Mr. Donald M. Kristiansen, Principal Scientist with the
ARI Fort Knox Field unit, and MAJ James Henderson, currently
assigned to the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, also
made important contributions during pre-publication review.
In addition to the authors, The BDM Federal, Inc. research
staff included Dr. William Doherty, Dr. Nancy Atwood, MG (Ret)
Charles Heiden, Ms. Alicia Sawyer, and Mr. Owen Pitney. Dr.
Laura Ford, Dr. Beverly Winsch, Mr. Jeffery Schmidt, Mr. Timothy
Voss, Mr. Robert Sever, and Mr. Jack Burkett provided invaluable
assistance in developing and editing the report. Research
Assistants supporting the project included Mr. Silver Campbell,
Ms. Ann Cash, Mr. Kenneth Fergus, Mr. Brian Gary, Mr. Lewis
Graff, Mr. Gary Gulbranson, Mr. Michael Gustafson, Mr. John
Jawor, Mr. David Johnson, Mr. Ronald Jones, Ms. Khristina Orbock,
Mr. Robert Pollock, Mr. Ronald Reyna, Mr. Charles Sawyer, Mr.
Daniel Schultz, Ms. Margaret Shay, Mr. Harold Wager, and Mr.
Cfiarles West.
Personnel of the on-site support contractor, Loral Training
and Technical Services, supported simulation equipment and data
collection/analysis. These included Mr. Jimmy Adams, Mr. Fred
Brady, Mr. David Clippinger, Mr. Michael Krages, Mr. Paul Monday,
Mr. Rob Smith, and Ms. Diane York.
To present the large, multifaceted set of data resulting
from the evaluation, a family of three reports has been
organized. Each report focuses on a different aspect of the
data--operational effectiveness, tactical performance, and
training and user interface issues. To avoid unnecessary-
redundancy across these reports, the detailed descriptions of
specific materials and procedures generally have been allocated
to one or another of the reports. Thus, by design the reports
are mutually supporting, and the reader will be referred
frequently to companion reports for methodological detail.
I
V
I
THE COMBAT VEHICLE COMMAND & CONTROL SYSTEM: COMBAT PERFORMANCE
OF ARMOR BATTALIONS USING INTERACTIVE SIMULATION
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Requirement:
Meeting the command, control, and communications (C3)
challenges of the high speed, high intensity, widely dispersed
future battlefield requires a knowledge of the use and
capabilities of current and future automated C3 systems.
Systematic research and development efforts, including careful
assessment of operational implications and training requirements,
are necessary to field and deploy these systems. The U.S. Army's
Combat Vehicle Command and Control (CVCC) research and
development program uses soldier-in-the-loop, simulation-based
methodology to evaluate future C3 technology. Previous CVCC
research focused on tank crews, platoons, companies, and the
battalion Tactical Operations Center (TOC). A focus on
performance of unit commanders and executive officers led to the
battalion-level evaluation.
I
Procedure:
The research compared battalion operations in two
conditions: (a) Baseline, modeling conventional M1 tank and TOC
C3 tools (mainly voice radio and paper maps), and (b) CVCC,
supplementing Baseline capabilities with a digital
Position/Navigation (POSNAV) system, a digital Command and
Control Display (CCD), the Commander's Independent Thermal Viewer
(CITV), and digital TOC workstations. Using autoloading tank
simulators in the Mounted Warfare Test Bed (MWTB) at Fort Knox,
Kentucky, eight MOS-qualified armor crews (battalion commander,
battalion operations officer, three company commanders, and three
company executive officers) were integrated with semiautomated
elements under their control to form a complete tank battalion.
Each battalion-group operated in either the Baseline or the CVCC
condition, with six groups assigned to each. Each of the twelve
battalioius completed four days of training and testing,
culminating in a simulated combat test scenario.
Findings:
The digital communications capabilities of the CVCC system
resulted in significant improvements in both the accuracy and the
amount of tactical information transmitted (e.g., FRAGOs, enemy
and friendly information), while significantly reducing the
amount of voice radio traffic. The POSNAV system allowed
commanders and staff to maintain a more accurate and up-to-date
appreciation of the unit's status, and to coordinate maneuver
more effectively. The CITV enabled crews to acquire targets
i
sooner and at a greater range than in the Baseline condition, and
vi
I
