In future military deployments, combat vehicle crews will have
access to sophisticated training aids, regardless of their location,
U.S. Army officials predict. Those training tools would be built
into the combat vehicles, making it possible for soldiers to hone
various war-fighting skills in their spare time.
The U.S. Army plans to install these so-called “embedded”
trainers in its next-generation combat vehicle, known as the future
combat system (FCS). The FCS is in the early stages of design, under
a program managed by the Army and the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA). Four industry teams are competing for a
contract award in 2003.
FCS operators will be able to fight virtual battles in computer-generated
scenarios, or will have the capability to conduct live-fire drills
against three-dimensional virtual targets, said Michael Macedonia,
program director at the U.S. Army Simulation, Training and Instrumentation
Command (STRICOM), in Orlando, Fla.
“We are an Army that is losing training space,” Macedonia
told an industry conference, sponsored by the Association of the
U.S. Army. Less access to ranges means more simulator-based training,
he noted. In the context of the FCS program, particularly, preparing
soldiers for that vehicle will be more demanding than the training
that M1 Abrams tank and Bradley infantry vehicle crews typically
undergo, he said. The FCS will have “exotic gear” and
much more complicated command and control systems, Macedonia added.
“Imagine the kinds of soldiers you’ll have in FCS. ...
The weapons are complex, the ammo is very expensive. Missions will
be complex.”
To field successful training tools, the Army will have to “figure
out how to simulate the city, for example, in a contingency operation,”
he said. That means having digital models that represent actual
cities where soldiers would be expected to fight. “We have
to start thinking how we’ll employ [the simulations] in a
joint task force and how we train for the mission.”
The complexity of the FCS platform will be compounded by the use
of unmanned vehicles as part of the standard formations, and the
sophisticated digital networks that will link every vehicle and
weapon system in the battle zone.
The training devices developed for FCS crews will have to address
a number of issues, said Macedonia. “How do soldiers interact
with robotic systems? ... How do sensors interact with shooters?”
Additionally, he said, “We have to recognize that our enemies
will have similar equipment.”
The Army has attempted to develop embedded trainers for about 20
years and has not been successful. “There has been a requirement
for all Army systems [to have embedded trainers] since the late
1980s,” Macedonia said. “We haven’t done it very
well for a variety of technological and cost issues.”
FCS mandates the use of embedded training, but at a more advanced
level than previously envisioned for other weapon systems, he explained.
“It doesn’t just mean you pop up a manual on the screen
to explain the assembly or disassembly of a gun.” It means
being able to perform “virtual gunnery,” for example,
or learning how to integrate FCS platforms into the instrumentation
at the National Training Center ranges.
STRICOM developed a prototype M1 tank turret trainer with embedded
gunnery, Macedonia said. “But we still haven’t resolved
the technical issues.” Soldiers in the field, meanwhile, are
waiting for advanced training equipment to become available. “Every
time they go to a mission, they call STRICOM and ask for training
equipment to polish skills and prepare people before they go into
battle,” he said. “The solution is embedded training,
so when they deploy, they can prepare virtually [and] get their
heads into the problem of that fight.”
One problem that has emerged in Army training is the lack of ranges
or simulators that support specific weapons. The upshot is that,
when the Army conducts a major exercise at the National Training
Center (NTC), the commanders will choose to not use those weapons
because the shots cannot be registered by the NTC range instruments.
“There are weapons that commanders don’t take to the
NTC because they don’t count,” said Macedonia. “They
can’t be represented, can’t use it with MILES.”
MILES is a laser-based direct-fire training system. One example
is the Mk 19 grenade launcher, Macedonia said. “We don’t
have ranges or simulators to support it. Can’t take it to
the NTC and get credit for kills. So nobody trains with it. I hope
FCS won’t be that kind of system.”