1 of 43

Enhancing Education at the �Air Command & Staff College

Matt Caffrey

ACSC/DEWM

XXX

XXX

SOF

XX

XX

XX

XX

“Learning by virtual warfare”

2 of 43

����

A world-class team

educating

midcareer officers

to lead in developing, advancing, and applying

aerospace power

across the spectrum of service, joint, and

combined military operations

ACSC’s MISSION

3 of 43

Implementing ACSC’s Mission �

Semester I: International

Security and Military Studies

Semester II: The Profession of Arms

Leadership and Communications Studies Phase 2

5 sem hours

DEC

Electives and Research

3 sem hours

DEC

DEC

DEI

DEI

DEI

DEW

DEW

DEC

1.5 sem

hours

3 sem

hours

3 sem

hours

3 sem

hours

3 sem

hours

2.5 sem

hours

4 sem hours

1 sem

hour

1.5 sem

hours

GOE

​

​

Aero-�space Exercise

L & C

Phase

3

Aero-

space

Ops

Joint

Forces

Airpower

Studies

Nature

Of

War

National

& Inter-

national

Security

Studies

L & C

Phase

1

DEW

DEW

Joint

Camp

Plng

DEW

1.5 sem

hours

Nat’l

Plng

Sys

4 of 43

ACSC/DEWM’s Mission

Identify, Secure or Design, & Deliver Exercises that Support & Apply the ACSC Curriculum

5 of 43

On Wargaming

“It is not a game…it is training for war!”

​

​

General Muffling, 1821

Chief of Prussian General Staff

6 of 43

Implementing DEWM’s Mission

  • Curriculum Capstone

​

  • Course Capstone

​

  • Lesson Enhancement

​

7 of 43

Maximum Duration �by Type of Application

  • Curriculum Capstone (Weeks)

​

  • Course Capstone (Days)

​

  • Lesson Enhancement (Hours)

​

8 of 43

Options for application Exercises

  • Two sided, adjudicated, exercises (a.k.a. Wargames)
  • Non-adjudicated exercises

​

9 of 43

Relative +/- of Wargames

  • +
    • Highest Level of Learning
    • Engaging
    • Competitive
    • Memorable
    • Fun
  • -
    • Wrong Lessons Possible�(‘negative learning’ if game is not done well)
    • High Cost (time more precious then money)
    • Difficult to create/limited selection

10 of 43

Relative +/- of Non-adjudicated Exercises

  • -
    • Not as High a Level of Learning
    • Not as Engaging
    • Not Competitive
    • Not as Memorable
    • Little if any Fun
    • Wrong Lessons Possible (‘negative learning’ if done poorly or poor plans not identified)
  • +
    • Cost Unusually Lower (in time and money)
    • Relatively easier to create

11 of 43

What Does a Good War Game Look Like?

  • Effective - teaches the right lessons accurately
  • Efficient - a competitive amount of learning accomplished for the time and resources required

12 of 43

What Does a Good War Game Look Like?

Effective

  • Accurately depicts the aspect of the curriculum being taught
  • For the command level depicted, students:
    • Possess appropriate information
    • Must make appropriate decisions
    • The decisions produce reasonable consequences

13 of 43

What Does a Good War Game Look Like?

Efficient

  • Easy and fast to learn
  • Easy and fast to input �(scenario should be hard, NOT interface)
  • Educationally rich�(high decision making/low drudge work)
  • Hardware friendly�(runs well in our notebooks* & LAN)�* Worst case 800x600 res, 200 MHz

14 of 43

Specific Wargame Needs

  • Instruments of Power
  • National Objectives
  • Force Development
  • Information Warfare
  • Aerospace Packaging
  • Cascading Effects
  • Intelligence Gathering
  • Space (theater impacts & scarcity)
  • Lift (strategic & theater, deployment & sustainment)
  • Force Protection & Base Operations
  • Deliberate Planning
  • Aerospace Operations
    • all aerospace power functions
  • Ground Operations
  • Naval Operations
  • Airpower employment capstone … and more

15 of 43

Sources of Wargames

  • CADRE/AFWI (ACES)
  • Joint & Service PME (Decisive Action)
  • Commercial Off-the-Shelf (InfoChess)
  • ACSC Faculty Designed & Developed
  • ACSC Student Designed & Developed
  • JMEANS (Visualization & Reference)
  • AFRL (3rd Gen WG, modes to COTS)

16 of 43

ACSC Designed & Developed

Faculty

  • Instruments of Power Exercise
  • Logistics/Deployment Exercise
  • Intelligence Allocation Exercise
  • Cascading Effects Exercise

Student

  • Aerospace Employment Exercise
  • National Objectives Exercise
  • NEOSim Exercise

17 of 43

Instruments of Power Exercise

  • Highlights:
    • Software-assisted group role playing
    • Discussion centered
    • Scenario: Iran hostage crisis of 1979-80
    • Student Goal: Stability of the Gulf Region
    • School Goal: Understand the complex inter-relationships between Instruments Of Power

​

18 of 43

19 of 43

20 of 43

21 of 43

22 of 43

Logistics/Deployment Exercise

  • Highlights:
    • Software-assisted group role playing
    • Discussion centered
    • Student Goal: Deploy selected units into theater to meet CINC timelines
    • School Goal: Understand logistical issues and limitations for time-critical deployments

​

23 of 43

24 of 43

25 of 43

Intelligence Allocation Exercise

  • Highlights:
    • Software-assisted group role playing
    • Discussion centered
    • Student Goal: Allocate intelligence resources to collect data on units of interest
    • School Goal: Understand limits of intelligence resources and criticality of planning

26 of 43

27 of 43

28 of 43

29 of 43

Cascading Effects

  • Highlights:
    • Software-assisted individual exercise
    • Discussion centered follow-up session
    • Student Goal: Shut down enemy Integrated Air Defense System and command structure
    • School Goal: Understand concept of cascading effects and effects-based targeting

30 of 43

31 of 43

32 of 43

33 of 43

Airpower Employment

  • Highlights:
    • Won best student project of AY 00
    • Software-assisted individual exercise
    • Discussion centered follow-up session
    • Student Goal: Properly employ airpower assets to meet CINC objectives
    • School Goal: Apply tenets of airpower

34 of 43

35 of 43

36 of 43

National Objectives Exercise

  • Highlights:
    • Software-assisted group role playing
    • Discussion centered
    • Student Goal: Meet national objectives while preventing any other state from becoming too powerful
    • School Goal: Illustrate the fundamental truth of coalition building: sovereign states do what you want not because you want them to, but because you convince them it is in their best interest.

​

37 of 43

The Origins of WWII

Program written by:

Major Alan Barys

&

Major Scott Maser

​

Original game by James Dunnigan

38 of 43

39 of 43

NEOSim Exercise

  • Highlights:
    • Won best student project of AY 01
    • Software-assisted group role playing
    • Discussion centered
    • Student Goal: Evacuate non combatants with minimum losses to all sides.
    • School Goal: Apply crisis action planning procedures. Conceive, assess and implement a strategy.

​

40 of 43

41 of 43

42 of 43

Current Gaming Challenges

  • Applying airpower at the operational level of war
  • Depicting Effects Based Operations:
    • Indirect physical effects
    • Human impacts (abilities & decisions)
    • Sufficient length of time
  • Employing the AEF concept
  • Developing Joint/Combined decision making

43 of 43

Value of Wargaming

Wargames that Depict the Full Contribution of Space and Air Power -

Our graduates, through their actions :

  • Win wars:
    • Faster
    • With fewer casualties - on all sides
    • With less destruction - on all sides
  • Hence promote a “better state of peace”