1 of 14

What is a War Game

13

0-3a-6

CGN

12 - * - 5

B7 - 0 - Z

6-4-8

2 of 14

DOD / Commercial

War Games in the 1990s

Analysis

Training

PME

Prof Dev

Recreation

[Bottom Up]

Operational

Research

Models

History Based

War Games

[Top Down]

3 of 14

Proliferation & Problems

War Games are used at all:

PME schools, Army bases,� Naval ships, CinC HQs,

New WGs were not ready for the QDR

JSIMS: Budget $ 0.7 Billion to ?� IOC 1999 > 2002 ?

>build 1< Although war games are wide-spread in the defense community, a number of items cry out to be addressed. Human factors in wargaming still seem elusive in a number of cases. Bad depiction of possibly critical aspects of war can lead to “negative training” of participants. Command influence and “cooking the books” is still present in some cases. Mirror imaging of the enemy and invalid assumptions can skew any game. Perhaps the worst mistake is to use a game for the wrong purpose.

>build 2< A good example of this was the use of TACWAR as an analytical tool during the last Quadrennial Defense Review. A Cold War legacy game, TACWAR depicts a FEBA and Piston situation, geared toward attrition only. The result was that attack aircraft sortie effectiveness was depicted as not only worse than historical data for Bosnia and the Gulf War, but worse than during Vietnam. So far, the replacement for TACWAR, JWARS, of the JSIMS program, has been essentially a costly dry hole.

From my perspective, at an intermediate level PME school, the DoD M&S domains of Analysis, Acquisition, and Training, leave education out of the equation.

4 of 14

Ourselves

The Problem

Wargames, Models and Simulations do not depict how war is fought today and are likely to become more wrong in the future. The tools we do have are not widely accessible.

Impacts

The Joint Community

Congress

The American People

Stovepipes, ignorance

OPLANs unchanged

Unsat tools for QDR

Lack of insight

5 of 14

What is a 3rd Generation Wargame?

3rd Generation - system on system

2nd Generation - force on force

1st Generation - mind on mind

Evolve the State of the Art

STRATEGY

ATTRITION

EFFECTS

6 of 14

3rd Generation War Game

Retains the two sidedness of the 1st,

the attrition of the 2nd and adds

Human

Factors

Treatment

of Time

System

Effects

7 of 14

FUSION: The Future of Wargaming

Convergence of Hardware

- Old world

- military: mainframe computers� - civilians: the kitchen table

- New world

- military: personal computers� - civilians: personal computers

Convergence of Interfaces

8 of 14

Commercial/DOD Integration

Analysis

Training

PME

Prof Dev

Recreation

[Bottom Up]

Operational Reasearch Models

History Based Wargames

[Top Down]

9 of 14

Why Commercial Wargaming

“COST”

DOD in house or DOD contractor:

- $$$, Range:- $1M to $1B

- Time, Days to learn and to execute

Commercial:

- $$$, Range: $9 to $79, average $49

- Time, Hours to learn and to execute

10 of 14

STTR�Small business Technology Transfer Research

- Run by AFOSR (basic research arm of AFRL)
- Phase I = $100K/yr, Phase II = $500K for 2 yrs
- Business MUST give at least 30% to a university partner
- Easier to get because bigger overall pot

11 of 14

SBIR �Small Business Innovative Research�

- Run by AF labs (NOT AFOSR)
- Phase I = $100K/yr, Phase II = $750K for 2 yrs
- Business gets ALL the money
- Harder to get because smaller overall pot

12 of 14

White Paper

Run by interested parties at DOD
Funding usually scavenged from within organization
Often sole source
Maximum paperwork

13 of 14

BAA�Broad Area Announcement

- Run by various DOD agencies
- Variable but substantial funding
- Full spectrum competition
- Maximum paperwork

14 of 14

The Future

More effectively educated leaders

More agile and effective planning

More knowledgeable voters