A coalition of NATO members will benefit from a centralised simulation and training centre equipped with interoperable kit and equipment to enhance exercise effectiveness and improve tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs), Saab has envisaged.
Addressing a media roundtable ahead of DSEI 2015, Saab officials described how 11 NATO Armed Forces had expressed an interest in training in such a complex.
According to Claes-Peter Cederlof, Saab’s Vice President in charge of UK operations, such a centre could be located on existing range complexes in Germany where the UK and US own vast training establishments. “In today’s fiscal environment, we are witnessing armed forces with fewer soldiers but we are seeing much better training regimes comprising a combination of live and virtual training at the same time. Over the next couple of years, we will see a totally different type of training for troops,” Cederlof explained.
Describing how NATO Armed Forces had used training areas including the US Army base at Grafenwohr as well as the US Army’s Joint Multinational Readiness Center (JMRC) in Oberpfalz, Bavaria, for joint training over the last five to 10 years. The US Army’s JMRC provides 15 Observer Coach Trainer Teams, a battalion sized opposition force (OPFOR) and the army’s Decisive Action Training Environment and Mission Rehearsal Exercise concepts over a 163km2 training area which includes a short take-off/landing airfield and over 1,300 buildings.
Cederlof illustrated how individual nations had failed to train effectively with each other due to utilisation of varying tactical engagement simulators (TES), each relying on different laser-based signatures which remain incompatible to work together. According to Saab, NATO training forces must adopt the same technology or adjust laser-codes accordingly to enjoy increased interoperability.
Meanwhile, a NATO Working Group is currently considering such a concept which could see countries including the UK, Sweden, Norway, France, the Netherlands, US, and other European nations partaking in a joint simulation and training effort.
In 2014, seven countries conducted the largest joint TES exercise in Norway ("Cold Response") with Saab ensuring all countries participating were equipped with the same laser codes even though various TES systems had been procured from companies including Saab, Rheinmetall, and Cubic.
Cederlof then called on NATO’s Armed Forces to reflect best practice utilised by Special Operations Forces including US Navy SEALS, Germany’s Kommando Spezialkräfte (KSK), and UK Special Forces (UKSF) to concentrate on training with “consequences.” However, he was unable to disclose further information due to operational sensitivities relating to SOF TTPs.
Another popular alternative, favoured by special forces at the tactical level, is the use of simunition which allows assault rifles to fire paint rounds with the integration of specialist bolt assemblies.
Cederlof also described how Saab’s Consequence Training Scenarios detailed changing medical states of individual soldiers; movement of friendly forces through a training area; and fall of shot on targets. “SOF are doing it now but wider forces need to start doing the same. Some units are running the same exercises as they did 25 years ago and they are proving inefficient,” Cederlof warned while highlighting examples in the Uk and Denmark.
“Quantifiable training is more efficient, allowing a force to measure hit and misses,” he added while describing Location of Hit and Miss (LOHM) technology which relies upon acoustic gunshot technology to measure fall of shot around a pre-designated radius of a pop-up target. A total of 5,000 LOHM systems are currently in service across the UK Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) live fire training ranges in the UK and Kenya.
Saab’s Deployed Tactical Engagement System (DTES) system comprises a Personal Detection Device (PDD); laser detecting vest; GPS locator beacon to track movement across the battlefield; radio system for tactical communications; and networked Small Arms Transmitter (SAT).
Cederlof explained to MT how the system allowed forces to conduct thorough After Action Reviews and analysis of actions conducted up to light battlegroup levels against an opposing force (OPFOR) with integrated civilian population.
The PDD is capable of detecting when a soldier has been hit by small arms, fragmentation munitions or indirect fire with the latest versions also describing escalating medical emergencies if they remain untreated. Supporting soldiers would then have to input any medical attention provided into the PDD in order to increase the casualty’s health status and prevent any fatalities.
Meanwhile, GPS sensors are distributed across the battlefield although Saab outlined how SOF units required detail of troop movements down to “centimetres” in accuracy, while more conventional military formations required “metres.”
SOF routinely use the GPS detectors inside building complexes such as killing houses for live fire training, in order to accurately monitor and record troop movements inside to clear rooms and dominate stairwells, particularly important when conducting hostage rescue (HR) missions and operations to kill or capture high value targets (HVTs).
Conversely, conventional military units require an ability to identify whether a target room or building has been cleared by friendly forces, Cederlof said, as part of a wider operation to clear and hold a village for example.
Additionally, Saab’s simulation and training technology is capable of recreating the penetrating effects of various types of ammunition and munitions through different materials on the range, which can include concrete through to plywood. Other simulation tools allow Saab to create smoke and smell effects around the battlefield.
In June 2014, Saab was contracted by the UK MoD for a three-year extension for managed training services for British Army Oversea Training Exercises using the DTES system. The deal was worth SEK200 million.
“This deal provides the infrastructure, instrumentation and resources to enable force elements to conduct realistic, live, force-on-force training while the movements and combat performance of individuals, vehicles and equipment are tracked and monitored for After Action Review,” Cederlof explained while highlighting how the UK armed forces spend approximately GBP5 million on ammunition each year. “The MoD will spend less if it understands the training environment better.”
Currently, the UK employs DTES across multiple training areas in the UK as well as British Army Training Unit- Kenya (BATUK). However, Cederlof explained MoD aspirations to conduct the same training up to brigade and division levels with a possible move to German training areas for required real estate involved. “This would provide the combination of live and virtual training at the same time,” he said.
Such a move would be unaffected by plans for British Forces Germany to leave the headquarters element in Herford and garrison towns of Gütersloh, Hohne, and Paderborn in 2019, an MoD source informed MT.
Elsewhere, Saab commented on the growing role of simulation and training aids across Europe, highlighting how the company was supporting the Danish Army with target lifters and a control system contract.
Six months ago, Saab was contracted by the Norwegian MoD to provide vehicle high-fidelity laser simulator systems for the CV90 infantry fighting vehicle (IFV), while Cederlof proclaimed how the Swedish Army was saving “millions of pounds” by training with laser-activated CARL GUSTAF anti-tank guided munitions instead of using live rounds.
He also predicted that the British Army would follow the US Army to use the Combat Vehicle Training Effects System (CVTESS). The Instrumentable Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (I-MILES) CVTESS is designed to simulate the firing capabilities and vulnerability of armoured vehicles as well as serving as a means to objectively assess weapon effects during training.
The US Army currently uses the system on board Abrams main battle tanks, Bradley infantry fighting vehicles and various OPFOR platforms with the system capable of being networked to PDDs for casualty role-play effects.
A spokesperson for the US Army explained: “It will reinforce crew duties, reward proper engagement techniques and develop tactical manoeuvre skills of armour and mechanised infantry combined arms teams up to brigade level. It provides unit commanders an integrated training system in force-on-force and force-on-target training events at home station training areas through instrumented training. The system interfaces with instrumentation systems at Maneuver Combat Training Centers (MCTC).” The system is also capable of networking new weapon systems as and when they become operational with the Army.
Finally, Cederlof hailed the integration of augmented reality (AR) technology into military training and simulation exercises although he said it remained too early for such systems to be integrated into larger scale battlegroup exercises.
Addressing a media roundtable ahead of DSEI 2015, Saab officials described how 11 NATO Armed Forces had expressed an interest in training in such a complex.
 |
| British Army Training Team in Saab Deployable Tactical Engagement System (DTES) equipment in Kenya. (Photo: Saab) |
According to Claes-Peter Cederlof, Saab’s Vice President in charge of UK operations, such a centre could be located on existing range complexes in Germany where the UK and US own vast training establishments. “In today’s fiscal environment, we are witnessing armed forces with fewer soldiers but we are seeing much better training regimes comprising a combination of live and virtual training at the same time. Over the next couple of years, we will see a totally different type of training for troops,” Cederlof explained.
Describing how NATO Armed Forces had used training areas including the US Army base at Grafenwohr as well as the US Army’s Joint Multinational Readiness Center (JMRC) in Oberpfalz, Bavaria, for joint training over the last five to 10 years. The US Army’s JMRC provides 15 Observer Coach Trainer Teams, a battalion sized opposition force (OPFOR) and the army’s Decisive Action Training Environment and Mission Rehearsal Exercise concepts over a 163km2 training area which includes a short take-off/landing airfield and over 1,300 buildings.
Cederlof illustrated how individual nations had failed to train effectively with each other due to utilisation of varying tactical engagement simulators (TES), each relying on different laser-based signatures which remain incompatible to work together. According to Saab, NATO training forces must adopt the same technology or adjust laser-codes accordingly to enjoy increased interoperability.
Meanwhile, a NATO Working Group is currently considering such a concept which could see countries including the UK, Sweden, Norway, France, the Netherlands, US, and other European nations partaking in a joint simulation and training effort.
In 2014, seven countries conducted the largest joint TES exercise in Norway ("Cold Response") with Saab ensuring all countries participating were equipped with the same laser codes even though various TES systems had been procured from companies including Saab, Rheinmetall, and Cubic.
Cederlof then called on NATO’s Armed Forces to reflect best practice utilised by Special Operations Forces including US Navy SEALS, Germany’s Kommando Spezialkräfte (KSK), and UK Special Forces (UKSF) to concentrate on training with “consequences.” However, he was unable to disclose further information due to operational sensitivities relating to SOF TTPs.
Another popular alternative, favoured by special forces at the tactical level, is the use of simunition which allows assault rifles to fire paint rounds with the integration of specialist bolt assemblies.
Cederlof also described how Saab’s Consequence Training Scenarios detailed changing medical states of individual soldiers; movement of friendly forces through a training area; and fall of shot on targets. “SOF are doing it now but wider forces need to start doing the same. Some units are running the same exercises as they did 25 years ago and they are proving inefficient,” Cederlof warned while highlighting examples in the Uk and Denmark.
“Quantifiable training is more efficient, allowing a force to measure hit and misses,” he added while describing Location of Hit and Miss (LOHM) technology which relies upon acoustic gunshot technology to measure fall of shot around a pre-designated radius of a pop-up target. A total of 5,000 LOHM systems are currently in service across the UK Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) live fire training ranges in the UK and Kenya.
Saab’s Deployed Tactical Engagement System (DTES) system comprises a Personal Detection Device (PDD); laser detecting vest; GPS locator beacon to track movement across the battlefield; radio system for tactical communications; and networked Small Arms Transmitter (SAT).
Cederlof explained to MT how the system allowed forces to conduct thorough After Action Reviews and analysis of actions conducted up to light battlegroup levels against an opposing force (OPFOR) with integrated civilian population.
The PDD is capable of detecting when a soldier has been hit by small arms, fragmentation munitions or indirect fire with the latest versions also describing escalating medical emergencies if they remain untreated. Supporting soldiers would then have to input any medical attention provided into the PDD in order to increase the casualty’s health status and prevent any fatalities.
Meanwhile, GPS sensors are distributed across the battlefield although Saab outlined how SOF units required detail of troop movements down to “centimetres” in accuracy, while more conventional military formations required “metres.”
SOF routinely use the GPS detectors inside building complexes such as killing houses for live fire training, in order to accurately monitor and record troop movements inside to clear rooms and dominate stairwells, particularly important when conducting hostage rescue (HR) missions and operations to kill or capture high value targets (HVTs).
Conversely, conventional military units require an ability to identify whether a target room or building has been cleared by friendly forces, Cederlof said, as part of a wider operation to clear and hold a village for example.
Additionally, Saab’s simulation and training technology is capable of recreating the penetrating effects of various types of ammunition and munitions through different materials on the range, which can include concrete through to plywood. Other simulation tools allow Saab to create smoke and smell effects around the battlefield.
“This deal provides the infrastructure, instrumentation and resources to enable force elements to conduct realistic, live, force-on-force training while the movements and combat performance of individuals, vehicles and equipment are tracked and monitored for After Action Review,” Cederlof explained while highlighting how the UK armed forces spend approximately GBP5 million on ammunition each year. “The MoD will spend less if it understands the training environment better.”
Currently, the UK employs DTES across multiple training areas in the UK as well as British Army Training Unit- Kenya (BATUK). However, Cederlof explained MoD aspirations to conduct the same training up to brigade and division levels with a possible move to German training areas for required real estate involved. “This would provide the combination of live and virtual training at the same time,” he said.
Such a move would be unaffected by plans for British Forces Germany to leave the headquarters element in Herford and garrison towns of Gütersloh, Hohne, and Paderborn in 2019, an MoD source informed MT.
 |
| Saab has delivered vehicle weapon simulators to almost all types of infantry fighting vehicles and main battle tanks in the world. |
Six months ago, Saab was contracted by the Norwegian MoD to provide vehicle high-fidelity laser simulator systems for the CV90 infantry fighting vehicle (IFV), while Cederlof proclaimed how the Swedish Army was saving “millions of pounds” by training with laser-activated CARL GUSTAF anti-tank guided munitions instead of using live rounds.
He also predicted that the British Army would follow the US Army to use the Combat Vehicle Training Effects System (CVTESS). The Instrumentable Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (I-MILES) CVTESS is designed to simulate the firing capabilities and vulnerability of armoured vehicles as well as serving as a means to objectively assess weapon effects during training.
The US Army currently uses the system on board Abrams main battle tanks, Bradley infantry fighting vehicles and various OPFOR platforms with the system capable of being networked to PDDs for casualty role-play effects.
A spokesperson for the US Army explained: “It will reinforce crew duties, reward proper engagement techniques and develop tactical manoeuvre skills of armour and mechanised infantry combined arms teams up to brigade level. It provides unit commanders an integrated training system in force-on-force and force-on-target training events at home station training areas through instrumented training. The system interfaces with instrumentation systems at Maneuver Combat Training Centers (MCTC).” The system is also capable of networking new weapon systems as and when they become operational with the Army.
Finally, Cederlof hailed the integration of augmented reality (AR) technology into military training and simulation exercises although he said it remained too early for such systems to be integrated into larger scale battlegroup exercises.
Andrew White
No comments:
Post a Comment