Maneuver Battle Lab OneSAF Experiences
Maneuver Battle Lab OneSAF Experiences
Maneuver Battle Lab OneSAF Experiences
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Maneuver</strong> <strong>Battle</strong> <strong>Lab</strong><br />
<strong>OneSAF</strong> <strong>Experiences</strong><br />
MAJ Roy Zinser & John Bayer<br />
U.S. Army <strong>Maneuver</strong> Center of Excellence<br />
Fort Benning, GA<br />
1
Agenda<br />
• MBL Overview<br />
• Recent Use Cases<br />
• MBL Face Validation<br />
• Hurdles<br />
2
MBL M&S Experimentation Capability<br />
• Places Soldiers in the Fight<br />
• Removes Computer “Perfection”<br />
Human in the Loop Experimentation<br />
• Equates to More Realistic Experimentation<br />
• Improves Analysis by Making it more Accurate<br />
LIVE<br />
• Instrumented<br />
Soldier and Vehicle<br />
Feeds<br />
VIRTUAL<br />
SVS: Immersive and<br />
Desktop<br />
•Soldiers & Leaders<br />
• Omni Directional<br />
Treadmill<br />
Reconfigurable Ground<br />
Vehicle Simulators<br />
•C2 Vehicles<br />
•ICV, Tank, Strykers<br />
ll<br />
ll<br />
ll<br />
CONSTRUCTIVE<br />
<strong>OneSAF</strong><br />
X<br />
X<br />
or<br />
XX<br />
X<br />
X<br />
• Live Instrumentation<br />
integrated into events<br />
• Real C2 Systems<br />
stimulated by Live and<br />
Simulations<br />
• Virtual M&S enables<br />
multiple runs and<br />
feedback from Soldier &<br />
small units<br />
• Constructive M&S<br />
equals flexibility to scale<br />
from Platoon to Brigade<br />
• Data Collection and<br />
Analysis for LVC<br />
Universal Controller<br />
•Unmanned Aerial Sys<br />
•Unmanned Ground Sys.<br />
•Unattended Sensors<br />
•Terrain Generation as<br />
needed to meet event<br />
requirements<br />
5
Recent Use Cases<br />
160<br />
140<br />
S<br />
y<br />
s<br />
t<br />
e<br />
m<br />
s<br />
120<br />
100<br />
80<br />
60<br />
40<br />
20<br />
76<br />
24<br />
36<br />
12<br />
104<br />
30<br />
50<br />
20<br />
C2 Adapter<br />
MCT<br />
SimCore<br />
BM<br />
SCAMT<br />
Interop<br />
0<br />
NetBCT BEAR AEWE TS/OF10 FCIE<br />
6
AEWE Simulation ‘Wrap-Around’<br />
Constructive: Adjacent Companies and Battalion Enablers<br />
I<br />
Virtual & Constructive: Sister Platoons<br />
Live: EXFOR PLT & Company HQ<br />
Forces the Co. Cdr.<br />
to cross talk with<br />
and maintain<br />
awareness of his<br />
entire Area of<br />
Interest<br />
SUGV<br />
Forces the Co.Cdr.<br />
to maneuver a full<br />
company<br />
Event Focus<br />
7
Experiment V V & A<br />
• There’s never going to be a blanket ‘Accreditation’<br />
of <strong>OneSAF</strong> for experimentation<br />
• Must accredit that the models, simulation, and C2<br />
meet the requirements for each event.<br />
8
• What we look for:<br />
MBL Face Validation<br />
9
MBL Face Validation<br />
10
Example Validation Lanes<br />
• All Event Munition types versus All Targets<br />
• All Sensor Packages versus all Targets<br />
• Critical Unit and Entity Behaviors<br />
• Operators document observed effects.<br />
• Data is collected and compared with the<br />
observed results<br />
• Correlated with Data Docs<br />
Sample Lethality Validation Lanes<br />
Sample Sensor Validation Lanes<br />
SMOD Info Briefing<br />
Sample Unit Behavior Laydown<br />
11
Experiment V V & A Outcomes<br />
• Identification and mitigation of gaps.<br />
• Understanding of the relevance of remaining<br />
discrepancies:<br />
• Critical issues that force delay of the experiment<br />
• Fair Fight issues<br />
• Impact on how units fight<br />
• Where are the potentials for ‘gaming’<br />
• Approval of remaining discrepancies or<br />
workarounds from Experiment Sponsor and<br />
Stakeholders.<br />
12
Challenges<br />
• Terrain<br />
• Multiple Clusters<br />
• Check-Points<br />
• Data Collection<br />
• C2 System Interoperability<br />
• Scenario Generation<br />
• Performance Data<br />
13
Challenges with Terrain<br />
• UHRBs<br />
• Bridges<br />
• Visualization<br />
• Sight Attenuations<br />
• Dynamic Terrain<br />
14
Challenges with Multiple Clusters<br />
• “Wait… <strong>OneSAF</strong> is a Brigade and Below Simulation!”<br />
• Master SCAMT<br />
• Clusters that span a single switch<br />
• Interactions over DIS / HLA<br />
15
Challenges with Check-Points<br />
• Not Consistent<br />
• Unreliable<br />
• Time Hack on Restore<br />
16
Challenges with Data Collection<br />
• Multiple SimCores<br />
• Performance Hit<br />
• AAR Tool vs DCT vs 3 rd Party<br />
• Running KV Scoreboard<br />
17
Challenges with C2 Systems<br />
• FBCB2<br />
• CPoF<br />
• AFATDS<br />
• Land Warrior<br />
• Graphic Overlays<br />
• PASS<br />
• Air Tracks<br />
18
Challenges with Scenarios<br />
• Unit Compositions<br />
• Unit Composer vs Task Org window<br />
• Entity Compositions<br />
• LDIF<br />
• Relationships<br />
• Commander’s<br />
• Names vs “Entity ID”<br />
• MSDE<br />
19
Challenges with Data<br />
• Base line data = Wile E. Coyote<br />
• Classified AMSAA SNF<br />
• Problems with ingesting AMSAA DATA<br />
• Surrogates<br />
20
Challenges<br />
• Terrain<br />
• Multiple Clusters<br />
• Check-Points<br />
• Data Collection<br />
• C2 System Interoperability<br />
• Scenario Generation<br />
• Performance Data<br />
Bottom Line: Configuration of <strong>OneSAF</strong> is<br />
complex & requires Developer / Engineer<br />
level expertise<br />
21
Overall<br />
• <strong>OneSAF</strong> is facilitating MBL experimentation<br />
• SAF Behaviors = cost savings due to reduced<br />
simulation operators<br />
• Composability allows for modifications to meet<br />
the various experimentation needs<br />
• Learning curve is starting to ‘flatten out’<br />
• Looking forward improvements in ARES,<br />
Dynamic Terrain, SORD over WAN, etc.<br />
22
![2 R-Interoperability_Mechanisms.ppt [Read-Only] - OneSAF Public ...](https://img.yumpu.com/47020836/1/190x143/2-r-interoperability-mechanismsppt-read-only-onesaf-public-.jpg?quality=85)
Change language