Today’s Navy is a cost-conscious service in which even the fitness reports of its officers reflect their ability to recognize their economic as well as military responsibilities. The fleets, material bureaus, and planning offices alike are faced with the problem of maintaining an adequate state of naval readiness despite a background of steadily increasing operating and material costs. Budgets are carefully screened to ensure the most advantageous expenditure of funds. Means are continually sought to stretch the defense dollar without impairing the Navy’s ability to fulfill its obligations throughout the world.
There is a means, too little known and too little used, by which substantial naval economy can be safely effected. Not only does it enable costs to be reduced without any accompanying reduction in the readiness of the fleets, but it actually serves to increase their operational efficiency as well. This means is synthetic warfare—the simulation of sea and air operations by synthetic training equipment.
Regardless of its size and of the modernity of its equipment, a navy is no better than the proficiency of the personnel who man it. Useful employment of aircraft, submarines, and surface vessels depends upon the availability of trained crews. Radar, sonar, and the other electronic complexities of modern warfare are useless without technically qualified personnel for their operation, maintenance, and repair. Key to operational readiness, training is the essence of naval effectiveness.
Naval training can be achieved in two ways. One is to use operational equipment, the other to use synthetic equipment. Ships and aircraft are the training tools of the one; simulators and special training devices, the tools of the other.
Training with operational equipment is essentially training through doing. Ships and aircraft must be provided in sufficient quantities to permit crews to become proficient in their use through experience in their actual operation. Where complex techniques and skills must be acquired, many hours of operation are frequently necessary. Training carried out with operational ships, aircraft, and equipment is inevitably accompanied by high operating costs and material wear and tear. In aviation, such training can result in the loss of aircraft and of their crews.
Synthetic training is training through simulation. Operational ships and aircraft are not used; instead, their characteristics and those of their equipment are exactly and synthetically reproduced. Through synthetic training equipment, practice in airborne radar can be obtained in a hangar space; experience with shipboard sonar, in a classroom.
An anti-submarine exercise is a typical and frequent naval aviation training problem. If operational equipment is used, it requires the availability of an aircraft, a submarine, and certain expendable tactical equipment. Frequently, this availability is delayed by operational commitments, equipment failures, or weather. If the weather is satisfactory and if all participating units are operating and available, they ordinarily proceed to rendezvous. Time is consumed as these units proceed to and from the rendezvous point where additional delay is encountered while communications are established and the participants take position for each run.
When the submarine dives and the problem begins, the aircraft executes search and attack operations in accordance with established doctrine. Ideally, when tactical errors are made, those portions of the exercise should be repeated until operating proficiency has been established and errors eliminated. Furthermore, it should be possible to reconstruct the operation in such exact detail as to enable a critical post-flight analysis to be made of the aircraft’s tactical performance throughout the entire exercise. Unfortunately, aircraft fuel limitations, sometimes the weather, and usually the general arrangements under which the exercise is held do not permit such ideal training conditions. The problem normally ends with a return to base, a post-flight conference, and a conclusion, usually based on none too accurate or detailed information, regarding the aircraft’s effectiveness against the submarine.
The same anti-submarine exercise can be carried out on the ground with greater efficiency and without the inconveniences, difficulties, and hazards of. actual flight. The aircraft, whether it be fixed wing, rotary wing, or lighter-than-air, can be exactly simulated. Its radar and all other tactical equipment can similarly be synthetically reproduced and their operation accurately duplicated.
Simulation of the aircraft is achieved by means of operational flight trainers, a type of training equipment which is seeing increasing use in naval aviation. Essentially, these are highly developed descendants of the well known Link Trainer of World War II. By use of computing mechanisms, they resolve the aerodynamic equations for the particular aircraft type which they are built to represent. They convey these solutions to the simulated cockpit where they appear as correct instrument indications and realistic control feel for all conditions of flight.
The cockpits of operational flight trainers are exact replicas of the control compartments of the aircraft which they duplicate. All controls, switches, instruments, lighting, and associated cockpit equipment are present. Noise levels and vibration are accurately reproduced. Visual effects, in the form of the illusion of clouds passing the windscreen, are included to simulate actual cockpit environment as closely as possible. There is a provision for introducing buffeting and rough air. Communications equipment and radio aids to navigation are included and are synthetically operable.
Tactical simulation can be added to flight simulation. Moving targets can be artificially generated and positioned on radar scopes. Other airborne detection devices can be synthetically actuated. In this manner, the tactical equipment of an aircraft can be made operable on the ground. If their synthetic operation is properly coordinated and tied into the flight trainer, whole operational missions can be simulated. Aircraft crews can be trained as units; their flight and tactical proficiency can be accurately evaluated.
In the case of the simulated ASW exercise, the entire operation can be “flown” on the ground. There is no dependence upon satisfactory weather, and there is no need to wait upon the availability of a submarine. No aircraft is required; no flying costs are incurred.
Simulated missions are carried out under the close supervision of a specially qualified instructor. Aircraft flight path is permanently recorded in three dimensions as is the course of the simulated submarine. These records are combined and synchronized on a time- related basis which makes it possible to assess crew performance at virtually every instant of the exercise. If required, the exercise can be stopped and certain phases repeated to correct for errors in crew procedure or for failure to adhere to established doctrine. To save time, the problem can be speeded up; parts which are unimportant can be accelerated. If necessary, the trainer can be operated around the clock and a large number of crews trained in the problem.
Emergencies and equipment failures can be introduced into the problem from the instructor’s station. This is an important safety consideration and has been a major factor contributing to the increasing acceptance of the synthetic training concept by naval aviation and by the commercial airlines. It is not unusual for as many as thirty equipment failures to be capable of simulation in a single operational flight trainer. This enables training in emergency procedures and acquisition of correct instinctive pilot response to be achieved without danger to aircraft or crew. Propeller reversal in flight, electrical failures, hydraulic system malfunctions, and even such external factors as icing can be realistically presented. In the actual aircraft, there is no “second chance” when these or other dangerous situations arise. Flight simulators and synthetic training equipment enable mistakes to be made, “second chances” to be had, and “crashes” to occur. Simulation of emergencies has had an impressive psychological— often emotional—effect upon pilots, particularly upon those who unintentionally “crash” the trainer.
Flight simulation has a valuable role in transition training. Pilots normally experience some difficulty in checking out in an aircraft type which is substantially different from those to which they have been accustomed. Here, operational flight trainers serve a valuable purpose by familiarizing pilots with the cockpits and flight characteristics of new aircraft before they fly the actual operational equipment. This feature of flight simulation has been most attractive to the airlines.
Much of the civilian air transport interest in flight simulators, however, is based on economics. The first commercial operational flight trainer was built for Pan-American World Airways in the configuration of the Boeing Stratocruiser. Pan-American crews regularly undergo training on this device to maintain their proficiency in instrument flight and emergency procedures. Prior to the availability of the simulator, Stratocruiser training was carried out in the actual aircraft. Such training not only represented a cost in fuel and maintenance but a loss of passenger revenue as well. Availability of the Stratocruiser simulator reduced these operating costs and made more aircraft available for passenger carrying purposes. For economic, therefore, as well as for training proficiency reasons, other flight simulators are being developed for commercial use. Latest is the DeHavilland Comet simulator now under construction for the British Overseas Airways Corporation.
Navy utilization of synthetic training equipment is enhanced by trailerization. This provides mobility and enables flight simulators, for example, to be delivered to a naval activity prior to its receipt of the actual aircraft. In this manner, pilots and crews can be largely checked out in an aircraft type prior to the time that the aircraft itself is delivered.
Training effectiveness and economy through simulation apply beneath the sea as well as above it. Synthetic trainers can be used, for example, to teach submarine conning officers and fire control parties how to approach and attack enemy vessels. This is done by means of a submarine attack teacher which is well known to personnel of the submarine service. This device is housed in a special building, with submarine conning tower and bridge located beneath a floor through which the periscope rises. On this floor are model cars which bear target ship models and which can be maneuvered by an operator either in convoy or independently. The floor drops off radially from the periscope to simulate the curvature of the earth. The conning tower and bridge duplicate the equipment normally found in a submarine.
This submarine trainer enables attack conditions to be realistically simulated. Targets are accurately observed and tracked with periscope, radar, or sonar; they are also attacked with simulated torpedo firings. Submarine performance characteristics are embodied in the device so that the trainer responds normally to the helm and experiences normal acceleration and deceleration as a result of turns and changes in speed. Virtually any submarine approach or attack problem can be carried out and assessed with this device. Training with the submarine attack teacher can be supplemented with a torpedo tube trainer and a diving control trainer by which it is possible to provide integrated training in these aspects of submarine operations.
The submarine attack teacher of the subsurface Navy, like the operational flight trainer of the air Navy, provides the means of effecting sizable economies. Use of this device eliminates those operating costs incurred in sending a submarine and a surface target, possibly a destroyer, to sea to carry out operational training. Availability of an operational submarine and of the surface vessel is not required and training is not subject to delays or cancellations caused by unsuitable weather. Like the operational flight trainer, the submarine attack teacher can be used at any time, for as long as desired, and without the need of advance operational preparations.
Whereas aircraft and submarines readily lend themselves to over-all operational simulation, surface vessels generally do not. Training in certain aspects of shipboard activity, however, can advantageously be carried out with synthetic equipment.
Anti-aircraft gunnery, for instance, can be realistically duplicated for training purposes by use of motion pictures showing attacking aircraft. From behind a synthetic gun mount or gun director, the student observes these films projected on a screen before him. Here, he is faced with the problems of recognition, range estimation, lead, and ammunition conservation in the same rapid sequence as in combat.
When an attacking aircraft appears on the screen, the student tracks it with his sight—which the device has already taught him how to adjust and check—and opens fire. By means of a dual projector, the correct point of aim for each instant of target flight can be projected on the screen together with the attacking plane. His hits are scored by a device which additionally tabulates the total rounds expended. The value of this gunnery trainer lies in its ability to provide accurate practice in anti-aircraft gunnery without the expenditure of ammunition. The device further enables shipboard personnel to acquire or maintain gunnery proficiency when there is no opportunity for live firings.
Sonar, shipboard radar, loran, navigation, and even meteorological soundings are other aspects of surface Navy operations and activity which can be accurately and realistically simulated for training purposes.
Simulation equipment is admittedly expensive. An aircraft operational flight trainer represents an investment of several hundred thousand dollars; in some isolated cases, the price may approach the million mark. But cost, like everything else, is relative.
At first glance, a flight simulator may appear excessively expensive, particularly for a piece of non-operational equipment. Actually, in relation to that of the aircraft which it duplicates, its cost is low. The airplane often bears a price tag of well over a million dollars, many hundreds of thousands greater than the cost of the trainer. Each time the simulator prevents an aircraft crash and strike it pays for itself.
One cost cannot be stated in dollars and cents. This is human life! If an F9F operational flight trainer averts the crash and death of a single F9F fighter pilot, the device was worth the money.
Operations, maintenance, and repair costs must be included in any assessment of the economic value of simulation equipment and techniques. Such costs are substantially lower in the case of the simulators than in that of the actual equipment. Differences in the operating expenses of synthetic and actual equipment largely account for much of the enthusiastic support of flight simulators by cost-conscious airlines.
There are other costs to consider. With the use of simulation equipment, the services of operational craft for training exercises can be reduced. Submarines, for instance, need not be diverted from tactical employment in order to serve as a target for air anti-submarine training; they can be freed for assignment to war patrols. Similarly, the fleets need not be deprived of the availability of operational ships and aircraft to carry out strictly training functions. Surface and air units can be more directly employed against an enemy. Ships and aircraft can be made to spread farther and material procurement requirements made to decrease. In the air, on the surface, and beneath the sea, material-wise and operations-wise, naval costs can be reduced by substituting synthetic for operational training.
This substitution can never be a complete one. Some naval operations may not be suited for simulation; others will always require some operational training. But where synthetic training is used to represent sea or air activity, it can be used effectively. It provides a flexibility and adaptability not characteristic of training with operational equipment. It enables training to be carried out under continuous close supervision and control. With synthetic equipment and techniques, training results and crew performance can be evaluated in detail.
For reasons of low cost, efficiency, flexibility, and safety, simulation provides the means for effective training. It points the way to increased naval economy, greater personnel proficiency, and a higher state of fleet readiness.