ebook img

DTIC ADA282744: The Combat Vehicle Command and Control System. Combat Performance of Armor Battalions Using Interactive Simulation PDF

202 Pages·10.8 MB·English
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview DTIC ADA282744: The Combat Vehicle Command and Control System. Combat Performance of Armor Battalions Using Interactive Simulation

AD-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

See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.