Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Military Battlefield Management

Expand Messages
  • Matt Grimaldi
    It occurred to me today during a conversation that the various first-person-shooter and real-time-strategy games might be very useful if applied to real-world
    Message 1 of 5 , Jan 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      It occurred to me today during a conversation
      that the various first-person-shooter and
      real-time-strategy games might be very useful
      if applied to real-world combat.

      I imagine something like: each unit (including
      infantry, armor, aircraft, etc.) might be
      equipped with GPS and various sensors to detect
      damage, weapons fire, POV cams, etc. that could
      feed into a battle management system to track
      the overall situation from a command center.

      The command center could have some kind of
      warcraft-like interface with a map overlay
      to help direct troops to the right places,
      while the HUDs would be able do display
      similar info for the location(s) of local
      friendly units, and their status, as well
      as display command-center orders on a map
      overlay (I would imagine something like
      Battlefield 1942.)

      The more I think about it, the more I'm sure
      that the military has at least explored
      such troop management technologies. At the
      same time, however, I can also see many points
      of failure as well as other problems related
      to outputting so much RF to keep in constant
      contact.

      Anyway, can anyone tell me if I'm too far off
      the mark?

      -- Matt


      _______________________________________________
      http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
    • J Gibson
      Matt {and all}, This is already being explored in CS labs, universities & companies around the country. The problem with off-the-shelf simulation software
      Message 2 of 5 , Jan 3, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Matt {and all},

        This is already being explored in CS labs, universities & companies
        around the country.
        The problem with off-the-shelf simulation software {like games} is they
        rarely approach _anything_ near the complexity/randomness needed to
        track/anticipate/react to what happens in the field - so far. Training
        wheels only get you so far, but simulations are recognized as very
        important.

        The mil-spec shooter games {mostly based on the Half-Life engines} you
        see across High Schools of America much like we used to see AOL
        "coasters" is the result of several efforts by various military
        branches. They are not limited to these shooters and include
        explorations of Logistics, Supply and C+C functions as well as the more
        problematic issues {logically and legally} of bio-metrics to spot
        troublemakers in a crowd. I was involved with network security
        simulations at the Naval Post-Graduate School in Monterey, Ca just
        prior/after to 9/11. I saw lots of great work being done, some of
        which was mentioned in the NOVA special CyberWar { streaming
        http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cyberwar/view/ } ...
        this was four years ago.

        The military is keen to break out of their usual boxes to find
        solutions they may not have otherwise been able to work around. I got
        lots of positive feedback about the game/SW methods and goals, but I
        could see there is way-way-way too much entrenched procedures meant to
        break/bow men's {in the universal sense} will and to conform to SOP. I
        was tolerated as a kinda-sorta artist-savant.

        Unfortunately, for my project the stymied Congress and a catatonic
        Administration post-9/11 starved ALL projects of funds even as Congress
        OK'd whopping funds for "security" ... many of the worthy projects
        around me were essentially de-funded through neglect... I haven't been
        called back, nor anyone I know. I do know other such projects, under
        protectorship of other {more politically-favored} sponsors are
        underway, but secrecy shrouds all.
        BTW - I haven't held a SW job since then in this turgid excuse for an
        economic recovery.

        So, I'm curious what others on the list know about the topic.

        - Jonathan -
        UI Designer and iTV Producer
        www.formandfunction.com/word {blog-thang}



        On Jan 3, 2005, at 1:37 PM, Matt Grimaldi wrote:

        >
        > It occurred to me today during a conversation
        > that the various first-person-shooter and
        > real-time-strategy games might be very useful
        > if applied to real-world combat.
        >
        > I imagine something like: each unit (including
        > infantry, armor, aircraft, etc.) might be
        > equipped with GPS and various sensors to detect
        > damage, weapons fire, POV cams, etc. that could
        > feed into a battle management system to track
        > the overall situation from a command center.
        >
        > The command center could have some kind of
        > warcraft-like interface with a map overlay
        > to help direct troops to the right places,
        > while the HUDs would be able do display
        > similar info for the location(s) of local
        > friendly units, and their status, as well
        > as display command-center orders on a map
        > overlay (I would imagine something like
        > Battlefield 1942.)
        >
        > The more I think about it, the more I'm sure
        > that the military has at least explored
        > such troop management technologies. At the
        > same time, however, I can also see many points
        > of failure as well as other problems related
        > to outputting so much RF to keep in constant
        > contact.
        >
        > Anyway, can anyone tell me if I'm too far off
        > the mark?
        >
        > -- Matt
        >
        >
        > _______________________________________________
        > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
        >

        _______________________________________________
        http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
      • Maru Dubshinki
        http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,65403,00.html http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66085,00.html Those seem pretty close to what you
        Message 3 of 5 , Jan 3, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,65403,00.html
          http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66085,00.html
          Those seem pretty close to what you describe (the first especially).

          ~Maru

          On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 13:37:34 -0800 (PST), Matt Grimaldi
          >
          > It occurred to me today during a conversation
          > that the various first-person-shooter and
          > real-time-strategy games might be very useful
          > if applied to real-world combat.
          >
          > I imagine something like: each unit (including
          > infantry, armor, aircraft, etc.) might be
          > equipped with GPS and various sensors to detect
          > damage, weapons fire, POV cams, etc. that could
          > feed into a battle management system to track
          > the overall situation from a command center.
          >
          > The command center could have some kind of
          > warcraft-like interface with a map overlay
          > to help direct troops to the right places,
          > while the HUDs would be able do display
          > similar info for the location(s) of local
          > friendly units, and their status, as well
          > as display command-center orders on a map
          > overlay (I would imagine something like
          > Battlefield 1942.)
          >
          > The more I think about it, the more I'm sure
          > that the military has at least explored
          > such troop management technologies. At the
          > same time, however, I can also see many points
          > of failure as well as other problems related
          > to outputting so much RF to keep in constant
          > contact.
          >
          > Anyway, can anyone tell me if I'm too far off
          > the mark?
          >
          > -- Matt
          >
          > _______________________________________________
          > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
          >
          _______________________________________________
          http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
        • Nick Lidster
          ... From: Matt Grimaldi To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 6:07 PM Subject: Military Battlefield Management ...
          Message 4 of 5 , Jan 3, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Matt Grimaldi" <matzebrei@...>
            To: <brin-l@...>
            Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 6:07 PM
            Subject: Military Battlefield Management


            >
            > It occurred to me today during a conversation
            > that the various first-person-shooter and
            > real-time-strategy games might be very useful
            > if applied to real-world combat.
            >
            > I imagine something like: each unit (including
            > infantry, armor, aircraft, etc.) might be
            > equipped with GPS and various sensors to detect
            > damage, weapons fire, POV cams, etc. that could
            > feed into a battle management system to track
            > the overall situation from a command center.
            >
            > The command center could have some kind of
            > warcraft-like interface with a map overlay
            > to help direct troops to the right places,
            > while the HUDs would be able do display
            > similar info for the location(s) of local
            > friendly units, and their status, as well
            > as display command-center orders on a map
            > overlay (I would imagine something like
            > Battlefield 1942.)
            >
            > The more I think about it, the more I'm sure
            > that the military has at least explored
            > such troop management technologies. At the
            > same time, however, I can also see many points
            > of failure as well as other problems related
            > to outputting so much RF to keep in constant
            > contact.
            >
            > Anyway, can anyone tell me if I'm too far off
            > the mark?
            >
            > -- Matt


            Well Matt, IMO your not off the mark. The US military has explored, and
            continues to explore this technology. many of the base principals are
            current being depolyed with new hardware, and some older equipment that is
            capable of the upgrades. However where I am Canadain, Ill give you the
            canadian prespective on that technology. ISTAR, TCCCS, IRIS, LFC2IS.

            ISTAR stands for Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition, and
            Reconnaissance. ISTAR is not a piece of equipment, rather it is a capability
            that links several battlefield functions together to assist the force
            commander in achieving his aims. It is a 'system of systems' in which
            information is collected on the battlefield through systematic observation
            and sensing by deployed soldiers and a variety of electronic sensors. This
            information is then passed to intelligence assets for analysis, and to the
            commander and his or her staff for the formulation of battle plans. The role
            of ISTAR is to link the intelligence process with surveillance, target
            acquisition and reconnaissance in order to improve a commander's situational
            awareness. This allows the commander to commit his manoeuvre and offensive
            strike assets at precisely the right time and place on the battlefield.
            ISTAR is a relatively new concept that will greatly enhance the
            effectiveness of the Canadian Army. It will take several years and new
            equipment to fully develop the ISTAR capability, but the Army has enough
            cutting-edge assets in place now to begin implementing ISTAR principles. The
            Land Force Command Control and Information System (LFC2IS) and the Tactical
            Command and Control Communications System (TCCCS) will provide the backbone
            upon which the ISTAR capability will be developed. Concepts will continue to
            be developed and assets added to ISTAR as the Army transitions to the Army
            of Tomorrow and the Army of the Future.

            The Tactical Command and Control Communications System (TCCCS) replaced old
            radio equipment used by the Army with the state-of-the-art Iris Digital
            Communications System. (TCCCS is the name of the overall project, while Iris
            is the name of the actual communications system). Iris provides the Army
            with secure, reliable and integrated communications. Ultimately, it will be
            part of a digitized command system designed to create a seamless web for
            rapid transmission of information between sensors, combat troops and
            decision-makers. For example, one component called the Situation Awareness
            sub-System (SAS), will permit vehicle and unit commanders to know where all
            unit and enemy vehicles are with pinpoint accuracy day or night and in any
            weather.

            Now that the $1.4 billion system is installed and fully operational, the
            Canadian Army has the most integrated digitized command and control system
            in the world. The project began in 1985 and was completed at the end of
            2002.

            Army trials new digitized command and control system
            By Maj Tony Balasevicius

            CFB PETAWAWA -The First Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment (1 RCR) will
            lead the Land Force into the future as the unit moves to the forefront of
            the Army's digitization effort.

            1 RCR has started training on a new digitized command and control system
            called the Land Force Command and Control Information System Version 1
            (LFC2IS V1). The basic components of this advanced concept consists of a
            tactical communication system, which connects the Command and Control system
            (ATHENA), the Situation Awareness System (SAS) and the Operational Database
            (OPERA) to the national command system. When LFC2IS V1 is fully deployed, it
            will provide the Army with common communication, data and automated
            functionalities that will give commanders information superiority over any
            potential enemy.

            Because of the project's complexity, LFC2IS V1 is being implemented
            incrementally. The first objective, which started some time ago, was to make
            the system's various components interoperate. This phase has developed to
            the point where the Army can now take the next step. During this subsequent
            phase, the plan is to optimize the system's capabilities by studying a
            combat unit's organization, procedures and doctrine. This will be done
            through the Command Support Pilot Project using 2 Canadian Mechanized
            Brigade Group as the Trial Formation and 1 RCR as the Trial Unit.

            The Command Support Pilot Project will focus on two themes; it will validate
            the Information Management (IM) process and determine the most effective
            headquarters structure at the brigade and unit level. This will be achieved
            by testing various organizational structures in an effort to develop the
            optimal configuration for each headquarters. To validate the IM process, the
            project will focus on acquiring information about the tools and procedures
            that will be needed by a headquarters working in the digitized environment.

            The results of this trial will form the basis of recommendations to the Army
            commander on the structure, procedures, tools and processes needed to
            support commanders and staffs. These recommendations will provide the
            blueprint for the eventual establishment of an Army tactical level command
            and control system in a digitized environment.

            All in all it is the basic premise of what you are talking about, warcraft
            like command and control, with realtime updates to friendly units in yuour
            area, and across the battlefeild. As for now the Army is the only aspect
            being deployed with this tech. The remainder of the military will be
            intergrated, including Navy and Airforce. granted implimnation of this
            technology will be rather easy based onthe Military size of deployed Units
            in the canadian forces. compared to that of the US, however the same
            problems will exist with both.

            hope that this helps you out... and if i get some time later ill post one
            based on the US tech side for the Digital Soilder.



            Nick

            _______________________________________________
            http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
          • Nick Lidster
            ... From: Matt Grimaldi To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 6:07 PM Subject: Military Battlefield Management ...
            Message 5 of 5 , Jan 4, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Matt Grimaldi" <matzebrei@...>
              To: <brin-l@...>
              Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 6:07 PM
              Subject: Military Battlefield Management


              >
              > It occurred to me today during a conversation
              > that the various first-person-shooter and
              > real-time-strategy games might be very useful
              > if applied to real-world combat.
              >
              > I imagine something like: each unit (including
              > infantry, armor, aircraft, etc.) might be
              > equipped with GPS and various sensors to detect
              > damage, weapons fire, POV cams, etc. that could
              > feed into a battle management system to track
              > the overall situation from a command center.
              >
              > The command center could have some kind of
              > warcraft-like interface with a map overlay
              > to help direct troops to the right places,
              > while the HUDs would be able do display
              > similar info for the location(s) of local
              > friendly units, and their status, as well
              > as display command-center orders on a map
              > overlay (I would imagine something like
              > Battlefield 1942.)
              >
              > The more I think about it, the more I'm sure
              > that the military has at least explored
              > such troop management technologies. At the
              > same time, however, I can also see many points
              > of failure as well as other problems related
              > to outputting so much RF to keep in constant
              > contact.
              >
              > Anyway, can anyone tell me if I'm too far off
              > the mark?
              >
              > -- Matt


              Well Matt, IMO your not off the mark. The US military has explored, and
              continues to explore this technology. many of the base principals are
              current being depolyed with new hardware, and some older equipment that is
              capable of the upgrades. However where I am Canadain, Ill give you the
              canadian prespective on that technology. ISTAR, TCCCS, IRIS, LFC2IS.

              ISTAR stands for Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition, and
              Reconnaissance. ISTAR is not a piece of equipment, rather it is a capability
              that links several battlefield functions together to assist the force
              commander in achieving his aims. It is a 'system of systems' in which
              information is collected on the battlefield through systematic observation
              and sensing by deployed soldiers and a variety of electronic sensors. This
              information is then passed to intelligence assets for analysis, and to the
              commander and his or her staff for the formulation of battle plans. The role
              of ISTAR is to link the intelligence process with surveillance, target
              acquisition and reconnaissance in order to improve a commander's situational
              awareness. This allows the commander to commit his manoeuvre and offensive
              strike assets at precisely the right time and place on the battlefield.
              ISTAR is a relatively new concept that will greatly enhance the
              effectiveness of the Canadian Army. It will take several years and new
              equipment to fully develop the ISTAR capability, but the Army has enough
              cutting-edge assets in place now to begin implementing ISTAR principles. The
              Land Force Command Control and Information System (LFC2IS) and the Tactical
              Command and Control Communications System (TCCCS) will provide the backbone
              upon which the ISTAR capability will be developed. Concepts will continue to
              be developed and assets added to ISTAR as the Army transitions to the Army
              of Tomorrow and the Army of the Future.

              The Tactical Command and Control Communications System (TCCCS) replaced old
              radio equipment used by the Army with the state-of-the-art Iris Digital
              Communications System. (TCCCS is the name of the overall project, while Iris
              is the name of the actual communications system). Iris provides the Army
              with secure, reliable and integrated communications. Ultimately, it will be
              part of a digitized command system designed to create a seamless web for
              rapid transmission of information between sensors, combat troops and
              decision-makers. For example, one component called the Situation Awareness
              sub-System (SAS), will permit vehicle and unit commanders to know where all
              unit and enemy vehicles are with pinpoint accuracy day or night and in any
              weather.

              Now that the $1.4 billion system is installed and fully operational, the
              Canadian Army has the most integrated digitized command and control system
              in the world. The project began in 1985 and was completed at the end of
              2002.

              Army trials new digitized command and control system
              By Maj Tony Balasevicius

              CFB PETAWAWA -The First Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment (1 RCR) will
              lead the Land Force into the future as the unit moves to the forefront of
              the Army's digitization effort.

              1 RCR has started training on a new digitized command and control system
              called the Land Force Command and Control Information System Version 1
              (LFC2IS V1). The basic components of this advanced concept consists of a
              tactical communication system, which connects the Command and Control system
              (ATHENA), the Situation Awareness System (SAS) and the Operational Database
              (OPERA) to the national command system. When LFC2IS V1 is fully deployed, it
              will provide the Army with common communication, data and automated
              functionalities that will give commanders information superiority over any
              potential enemy.

              Because of the project's complexity, LFC2IS V1 is being implemented
              incrementally. The first objective, which started some time ago, was to make
              the system's various components interoperate. This phase has developed to
              the point where the Army can now take the next step. During this subsequent
              phase, the plan is to optimize the system's capabilities by studying a
              combat unit's organization, procedures and doctrine. This will be done
              through the Command Support Pilot Project using 2 Canadian Mechanized
              Brigade Group as the Trial Formation and 1 RCR as the Trial Unit.

              The Command Support Pilot Project will focus on two themes; it will validate
              the Information Management (IM) process and determine the most effective
              headquarters structure at the brigade and unit level. This will be achieved
              by testing various organizational structures in an effort to develop the
              optimal configuration for each headquarters. To validate the IM process, the
              project will focus on acquiring information about the tools and procedures
              that will be needed by a headquarters working in the digitized environment.

              The results of this trial will form the basis of recommendations to the Army
              commander on the structure, procedures, tools and processes needed to
              support commanders and staffs. These recommendations will provide the
              blueprint for the eventual establishment of an Army tactical level command
              and control system in a digitized environment.

              All in all it is the basic premise of what you are talking about, warcraft
              like command and control, with realtime updates to friendly units in yuour
              area, and across the battlefeild. As for now the Army is the only aspect
              being deployed with this tech. The remainder of the military will be
              intergrated, including Navy and Airforce. granted implimnation of this
              technology will be rather easy based onthe Military size of deployed Units
              in the canadian forces. compared to that of the US, however the same
              problems will exist with both.

              hope that this helps you out... and if i get some time later ill post one
              based on the US tech side for the Digital Soilder.



              Nick

              _______________________________________________
              http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.