Tài liệu Examining the Army’s Future Warrior - Force-on-Force Simulation of Candidate Technologies pdf

LINK DOWNLOAD MIỄN PHÍ TÀI LIỆU "Tài liệu Examining the Army’s Future Warrior - Force-on-Force Simulation of Candidate Technologies pdf": http://123doc.vn/document/1043915-tai-lieu-examining-the-army-s-future-warrior-force-on-force-simulation-of-candidate-technologies-pdf.htm

iii
Preface
This report summarizes work performed during a quick-response
analytic effort in support of the 2001 Army Science Board (ASB)
Summer Study on Objective Force Soldier, along with subsequent ef-
forts in related areas. The work used high-resolution constructive
simulation to examine key aspects of “objective soldier,” with the
modeling taking place in the 2015–2020 time frame. In conducting
the study, the research team interacted with various members of the
ASB and, in particular, with key members of the Analysis, Fightabil-
ity, and Concepts panels, drawing extensively on their forward-
looking ideas and ultimately integrating many of these ideas into the
research. The primary scenario employed was a highly stressing mis-
sion involving a dismounted attack on an enemy position in complex
terrain.
This work should be of interest to those involved in technology
assessment, force structure, and examination of new tactical concepts.
This research was sponsored by the Assistant Secretary of the
Army (Analysis, Logistics and Technology) and was conducted in the
Force Development and Technology Program of RAND Arroyo
Center. The Arroyo Center is a federally funded research and devel-
opment center sponsored by the United States Army.
iv Examining the Army’s Future Warrior
For more information on RAND Arroyo Center, contact the Direc-
tor of Operations (telephone 310-393-0411, extension 6419; FAX
310-451-6952; e-mail Marcy_Agmon@rand.org), or visit the Arroyo
Center’s web site at http://www.rand.org/ard/.
v
The RAND Corporation Quality Assurance Process
Peer review is an integral part of all RAND research projects. Prior to
publication, this document, as with all documents in the RAND
monograph series, was subject to a quality assurance process to ensure
that the research meets several standards, including the following:
The problem is well formulated; the research approach is well de-
signed and well executed; the data and assumptions are sound; the
findings are useful and advance knowledge; the implications and rec-
ommendations follow logically from the findings and are explained
thoroughly; the documentation is accurate, understandable, cogent,
and temperate in tone; the research demonstrates understanding of
related previous studies; and the research is relevant, objective, inde-
pendent, and balanced. Peer review is conducted by research profes-
sionals who were not members of the project team.
RAND routinely reviews and refines its quality assurance pro-
cess and also conducts periodic external and internal reviews of the
quality of its body of work. For additional details regarding the
RAND quality assurance process, visit http://www.rand.org/
standards/.

vii
Contents
Preface iii
Figures and Table
ix
Summary
xi
Acknowledgments
xvii
List of Acronyms
xix
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction 1
Background
1
Objective
2
Methodology
3
Scenarios Chosen
4
Simulation Tools Used for the Analysis
7
Organization of This Document
9
CHAPTER TWO
How Might a Current-Generation Soldier Unit Perform in a
Challenging Combat Operation?
11
How Does the Current-Generation Soldier Unit Fare?
11
Why Do We See the Results We Do?
12
CHAPTER THREE
What Are Some Key, High-Leverage Technologies for the Objective
Soldier?
17
What Technologies Are Examined?
17
viii Examining the Army’s Future Warrior
What Are Some Other Potential Excursions? 19
CHAPTER FOUR
What Is the Impact of Such Technologies in Combat, Using High-
Resolution Simulation?
21
What Effect Do Future Technologies Have on the Performance of
Future Objective Soldier?
21
Excursions on Individual Technology Options
22
Excursions on Synergistic Effect of Multiple Options
29
What Effect Do “Far Future” Technologies Have on the Performance
of the Future Objective Soldier?
31
CHAPTER FIVE
What Are Some of the Alternatives (Non-Soldier-Based) for
Accomplishing the Same Mission?
39
What Can We Learn from Other Relevant Studies About Fighting in
Complex Terrain as in Scenario 1?
39
What Can We Learn from Other Relevant Studies About Fighting in
MOUT Situations as in Scenario 2?
45
What Improvements in Modeling and Simulation Are Needed for
Representing Dismounted Infantry Operations and Complex
Terrain?
49
CHAPTER SIX
Observations and Conclusions 55
Bibliography
58
ix
Figures and Table
Figures
S.1. LER Improvements as Individual Changes and Then
Combinations of Changes Are Made to the Blue Force
xiii
1.1. Modification of High-Resolution Fort Hunter Liggett Terrain
to Represent Kosovo Engagement
5
1.2. Details of Scenario 1
6
1.3. Details of Scenario 2
7
1.4. Simulation Environment Used for This Analysis
8
2.1. Results of Baseline Case for Current-Generation Soldier Unit
12
2.2. Janus Screen Showing Good Lines of Sight for the Red Force
13
2.3. JCATS Screen Showing Composite Lines of Sight for the Red
Force
13
2.4. Detections, Shots, and Kills for the Blue and Red Forces
14
2.5. The Effects of Poor Weather on Detections of Blue Forces
15
3.1. Various Technologies to Improve Soldier Operations
18
4.1. Different Conditions Examined in the Analyses
22
4.2. Effect of Reducing Signature
23
4.3. Performance of XM-29 by Target Characteristics
24
4.4. Effects of Smoke
25
4.5. Effect of Cannon Fire Without Good Knowledge of Enemy
Positions
27
4.6. Effect of MLRS with DPICM Without Good Knowledge of
Enemy Positions
28
4.7. Effect of Fires with Good Knowledge of Enemy Positions
29
x Examining the Army’s Future Warrior
4.8. Effect of Synergies of Indirect Fire, XM-29, and Body Armor 30
4.9. Effect of Synergies of Indirect Fire, XM-29, and Body Armor
on LERs
31
4.10. Effects of Faster and Slower Sprint Speed Under Heavier Load
32
4.11. Effects of Adding Very-High-Quality Body Armor
33
4.12. Effects of Further Reducing Signature
34
4.13. Effects of Outfitting Only a Portion of Force with XM-29
34
4.14. Effects of XM-29 and M-16 on LER
35
5.1. Effects of C2 Delay on Indirect Fire Munitions
41
5.2. Effects of Different Types of Intelligence Gathering by the
Light Force
42
5.3. Importance of Sensor Height on UGVs
43
5.4. Effect of Reducing UGV Size on Detections
44
5.5. Effect of Using Armed UGVs for Recon
45
5.6. Difficulty of Attacking an Urban Area
46
5.7. Modeling MOUT “Pointman” Function Using Janus
46
5.8. Effects of Using UGVs in Convoys in MOUT Scenario
48
5.9. Effect of Smoke on Convoy Survivability in MOUT Scenario
48
5.10. An Illustration of the Problem of Noncombatants (White)
Using JCATS
50
5.11. Usefulness of Visualization Programs in MOUT Modeling
Using OneSAF Testbed
50
5.12. Usefulness of OTB Maps in Showing Terrain
51
5.13. Movement in Three-Dimensional Terrain Represented by
OTB
52
5.14. A MOUT Scenario Represented Using OTB
52
5.15. An Alternative MOUT Scenario Represented in JCATS
53
Table
4.1. Effects of Adding “Junkyard Dogs” to the Force 37
xi
Summary
Introduction
The U.S. Army is in the process of adapting to meet the needs of the
new millennium. The vision for accomplishing this, as defined by the
senior Army leadership, will ultimately lead to an increase in the
Army’s ability to quickly and effectively respond to situations across a
full spectrum of contingencies. Much of this work has focused on ex-
amining alternative vehicle platforms and technologies for the Future
Combat Systems (FCS) concept.
1
As a result, integrating the FCS
concepts with future dismounted operations has not been given com-
parable levels of attention, although soldier systems occupy a promi-
nent position in Army and Lead System Integrator (LSI) documents.
2
The Army Science Board (ASB) Summer Study attempted to balance
the picture by focusing on the future soldier.
3
The purpose of the
work reported here is to provide an initial quantitative exploratory
analysis of objective soldier options, within the context of several
_____________
1
Matsumura et al., Exploring Advanced Technologies for the Future Combat Systems Program,
Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, MR-1332-A, 2002.
2
Department of the Army, Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity, Army Future Combat
Systems Unit of Action Systems Book, Version 3.0, May 13, 2003.
3
This study and many other examinations of future soldier systems are reported in the ASB
2001 Summer Study on the Objective Force Soldier/Soldier Team. An electronic copy can
be found at https://webportal.saalt.army.mil/sard-asb/ASBDownloads/OFS-Vol-III-All.pdf.
xii Examining the Army’s Future Warrior
stressing scenarios. The effort focuses on a series of research ques-
tions, starting with How might a current-generation dismounted
force perform in a challenging combat situation? and ending with
What are the impacts of key, high-leverage technologies in combat?
The report also references relevant research prior and subsequent to
the ASB summer study.
Approach
Our approach entails a constructive simulation effort that centers on
using Janus
4
and a set of locally connected models to represent dis-
mounted operations. Two scenarios were examined, the first a dis-
mounted Blue force attack on a Red force defending inside a treeline,
and the second a convoy operation through an urban area. A high-
resolution terrain database describing Fort Hunter Liggett was modi-
fied with additional foliage to represent the treeline scenario, while
data from Sarajevo were used to represent the urban convoy opera-
tion. The primary focus of this work was on the treeline scenario.
Before using Janus and associated models, we examined the
benefits possible by changing to more sophisticated models: JCATS
(Joint Conflict and Tactical Simulation) and OTB (OneSAF Test-
bed). Each of these models offers advantages when representing urban
terrain, including the modeling of noncombatants and presenting the
results in the form of 3-D visualization.
Findings
The bulk of our work focused on use of the treeline scenario. Here, a
40-soldier platoon of Blue dismounted soldiers attacked a 13-soldier
squad of Red infantry dug into a treeline. The attack was made under
covering fire by machine guns, with the force advancing in alternat-
_____________
4
Janus is a system-level force-on-force simulation originally developed by Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory.