Printer Friendly

Military simulation scenarios.

Military Simulation Scenarios

With few exceptions, you do not test EW systems by firing live missiles at them. And even the staunchest advocate of realism would think twice before launching an AIM-9 against a piloted vehicle. In EW training scenarios, flying or sailing against real threats is another step farther out of the question.

Yet both testing and training demand that systems and operators be evaluated in a realistic context. Balancing this quest for realism with concerns about safety and resource conservation, the military has turned to simulation systems, ranging from relatively small part-task trainers to large anechoic chambers.

Simulation systems are particularly useful in initial ground-based training for fledgling pilots; many flight and weapons systems trainers contain an EW component (see "Real from Unreal," JED, September 1989, p. 44). AAI Corp. is the most prolific supplier of EW part-task and flight-trainer simulation systems, having provided all or part of the EW simulation capabilities for A-10, B-52, EA-6B, EF-111, F-4, F-14, F-16, MH-53J and Compass Call trainers. AAI and other companies in the flight-trainer business are awaiting the January release of an RFP for a new EA-6B trainer, configured to emulate the ADVCAP version of the aircraft. Not much is known about the Navy's expectations, other than the simulator capabilities will be required to stimulate actual GFE in some cases.

Simulation-based training is not tied to the ground, however. All the services use training ranges, where pilots fly against threat signals radiated from the ground or from airborne platforms. The systems on which these pilots are being trained have usually faced a variety of simulated threats already during their development, often at other ranges and testing centers. The ranges and simulation facilities used for testing and training are the subjects of this article. As the services are often leery of providing details of their simulation capabilities for security reasons, a complete picture is difficult to draw. It is hoped that by providing sketches of some of the military's present capabilities, the reader can piece together a representative collage.


One of the Air Force's most important EW test centers is the Air Force Electronic Warfare Evaluation Simulator (AFEWES), located in Ft. Worth, TX. Operated and maintained by General Dynamics/Ft. Worth Division under the direction of the Aeronautical Systems Division's Directorate of Electronic Combat, the AFEWES facility provides a secure laboratory setting in which to evaluate developing EW systems and new ECM techniques.

AFEWES contains a wide variety of simulation systems, including individual radar and threat system simulators; the Multiple Emitter Generator (MEG), designed to simulate multiple, dynamic radar signals simultaneously; a communications/data link simulator to evaluate the effects of RF jamming on voice and data communications; [C.sup.3] elements to replicate brigade, battalion and regimental control over the facility's surface-to-air missile (SAM) simulations; the Jammer Techniques Simulator (JETS), for simulation of actual or theoretical ECM techniques at radio frequency; and an IR simulator to evaluate IR missile-seeking heads and IR counter-measures.

These systems are frequently being upgraded as new threats emerge or new capabilities are required. According to Lt Col John Humphries, the facility recently brought on-line an SA-8 simulation capability which is currently being put through demonstration/validation testing. SA-10 simulation should be possible by October of next year, he predicted. AFEWES also is installing ground pulsed surface radar simulation equipment, designed to bring more realism to several of the SAM simulators by adding clutter.

AFEWES also is in the process of upgrading its MEG to add more RF sources and expand into the millimeter-wave region. A new nine-axis table is being installed in the IR laboratory, and the capability to add IR clutter is being developed. A test director system that links the audio, video and data output of the AFEWES facility to test management centers will make multidimensional testing easier and more efficient.

New simulators under development include a reconfigurable airborne interceptor simulator and a reconfigurable SAM emulator. "The reason why we're going into this reconfigurable arena is probably obvious: funding cuts and trying to make our systems a little bit more flexible," Lt Col Humphries explained.

Budget tightening is a fact of life at AFEWES, according to Lt Col Humphries. "We took a pretty good cut in '90 and so we had to shift some things to the right," he said. "If the '91 budget comes in [with similar cuts], I would suspect we're going to have the same problem." "Shifting to the right" involves stretching program deadlines, a fate already suffered by several of these upgrade programs. Lt Col Humphries is sanguine concerning the resulting delays. "It's kind of hard to hold the contractors to schedules if you don't pay them," he said.

Cousin to AFEWES is REDCAP, which is located in Buffalo, NY. Like AFEWES, it is operated and maintained by a single contractor, Arvin/Calspan. REDCAP is used for testing strategic and tactical "penetration aids" (in the words of a company brochure) against a netted-area defense. REDCAP provides manned real-time simulation of ground-based and airborne surveillance radars, tracking facilities, command and control centers and defensive weaponry. Hybrid approaches -- including real RF signals, man-in-the-loop testing and computer models -- provide improved accuracy in the simulation of all areas of hostile air defense systems, including the interactions of experienced defense-system operators and commanders. The facility is used in three main applications: simulation of integrated air defense systems, battle management [C.sup.3] modeling and simulation of air defense radars.

Like AFEWES, REDCAP is undergoing a major upgrade. Calspan was awarded a $58 million contract in March for the second phase of this effort, following a $18 million pact for phase one. The upgrades will enable the facility to replicate more contemporary threats. Calspan's operational and maintenance contract for the facility is expected to increase to approximately $15 million annually in light of the increased use of REDCAP the improvements will spark.

A new simulation facility has just opened at ASD's Wright Research and Development Center. Called Mission Simulator-1, the dome-style flight simulator will be used by researchers in the Flight Dynamics Laboratory to study a range of topics, from aircraft handling qualities and flight safety evaluations to integrated system performance during multi-aircraft combat engagement, according to an Air Force press release. The simulator is housed in a 40-ft-diameter shell and features a unique glass cockpit that enables the pilot/operator to see a virtually global representation of the flying environment. Four laser-generated target airplanes or missiles can be programmed to appear within this environment, while aircraft sounds and warning signals are also replicated. A computer system links the simulator with other stations for integrated testing.

"In-house" simulation such as that taking place at AFEWES is combined with range testing at Eglin AFB, FL (see "Sun, Sand and Simulation," in this issue, p. 66). The Air Force Development Test Center at Eglin has several facilities at its disposal to test EC and ECCM systems, including the Preflight Integration of Munitions and Electronic Systems (PRIMES) Facility, the Guided Weapons Evaluation Facility (GWEF, still under construction), the Electromagnetic Test Environment (EMTE) and an 86,000-sq.-mi over-ocean range it shares with the Tactical Air Warfare Center, MacDill AFB and the Navy.

The PRIMES Facility, opened in April 1988, is used to evaluate whether developing systems are ready for flight testing over the range. It features an anechoic chamber, outfitted with an Advanced Multiple Threat Emitter System (AMES) II from Advanced Systems Development Inc., and two versions of an in-house designed portable static test system, designated the SIMCART I and II. Jammer simulation capabilities are provided via AN/BLQ-3B systems and an "Advanced ECM System."

The GWEF will be used to evaluate the performance of precision-guided weapons, including ECCM. It will contain laboratories devoted to lasers, IR, [CO.sub.2], millimeter-wave, RF, electro-optic/visible, mid-course and dualmode guidance studies. A pair of anechoic chambers, one each for the RF and millimeter-wave frequencies, will be major test assets. The threat-generation equipment for these chambers has not yet been purchased.

The EMTE is part of Eglin's range equipment. It currently supports flight testing of between 100 and 150 EW programs. These tests are flown against such electronic equipment as the AN/FPS-16 precision track reference radar and simulators that replicate early warning/ground control intercept threat radar, SAM radar and anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) radar. Airborne threat simulators also are used.

The exact nomenclature of these simulators is difficult to pin down. (The only complete list at Eglin was contained in a classified brochure.) However, it is known that Vitro Services Corp. has sold a number of its RS 565 Series Radar Simulators to Eglin, and Metric Systems has been involved in the provision of Eglin's AN/MPQ-T3A Multiple AAA Threat Radar Simulator and AN/MPS-T9 Early Warning/Ground Control Intercept Radar.

Another busy Air Force range is that administered by the Strategic Air Command's Curtis E. LeMay Strategic Warfare Center at Ellsworth AFB, SD. Called the Strategic Training Route Complex (STRC), the range covers 250,000 sq. mi stretched over parts of North and South Dakota, Wyoming and Montana. It is designed to teach bomber crews the intricacies of low-level flying against a variety of threats. Key to threat simulation is the AN/MST-T1A Multiple Threat Emitter System (MUTES) developed by General Dynamics. (Aydin Radar and EW Division recently won a follow-on contract for production of this system for future Air Force use.) Martin Marietta's AN/MSR-T4 Countermeasures Signals Training Set is used to measure the aircrews' responses to the MUTES-generated threats.

Nellis AFB, NV, also has an active flying range that has been used by both the Strategic and Tactical Air Commands. While JED could not get precise information on this facility by press time, it is known the facility has made use of such equipment as the AN/MPS-10 from Whittaker, which emulates SAM fire-control radar, and Sanders's MLQ-T2. The Air Force is also known to use the company's AN/MSQ-T43 Modular Threat Emitter, but whether these are now located at Nellis or Eglin (or both) could not be ascertained. Similarly, the Air Force has purchased several of Metric Systems' Model 3131 Modular Threat Simulators, but their exact deployment is unknown.

One of the best known uses of the Nellis assets is the annual Green Flag exercise. This large-scale, live-flying EC trial is hosted by the USAF Tactical Fighter Weapons Center and its subordinate units, primarily the 4440th Tactical Fighter Training Group (Red Flag) and the 554th Range Group. Each six-week exercise is a joint service effort, with air and simulation assets from the Navy and Army joining the fray. "Red" and "Blue" forces are directed by on-scene commanders and planning staffs. Thus, training is provided not only to aircrews, but to command and ground personnel as well.

The Combat Electromagnetic Environment Simulator (CEE-SIM) produced by Amherst Systems Inc. is comparatively easy to spot in the Air Force inventory. The most recent CEESIM delivery went to Edwards AFB for use in the giant anechoic test chamber opened there last year. The chamber measures 250 x 264 x 70 ft and is being used to evaluate the B-1B's ALQ-161 defensive suite.

Other simulator systems are being employed at such bases as Mountain Home and George, the later for Wild Weasel training. In addition, many of the Air Logistic Centers use simulators for test and evaluation purposes. EW testing at the Warner Robins facility is currently being aided by AN/ALM-234 systems from AAI.

Several Air Force simulator programs are in predelivery stages. For example, LTV Missiles and Electronic Group is hard at work on the Unmanned Threat Emitter (UMTE), a small, portable, ground-based system designed to provide range training against ground-based threats. The company was awarded a $16 million contract in June 1988, with options that could extend the value to $35 million. Acceptance testing of the system is due to start in June of next year, with delivery scheduled for 1992.

Harris Corp. recently won a production contract for the Mini-MUTES, a smaller version of the MUTES system used by SAC. The Mini-MUTES, like its MUTES parent, was developed by General Dynamics.

An even newer start is the FSQ-XX, a joint Air Force/Navy program designed to provide EW training to EF-111A Raven and EA-6B Prowler crews. AEL is the prime contractor; the company recently signed Canadian Astronautics Ltd. to provide six Tactical Signal Simulator (TASS) systems as part of the program.

Finally, the Air Force is moving ahead with the On-Board EW Simulator (OBEWS), a system designed to provide airborne EW training without the use of range equipment (although the system can be used in conjunction with range systems). The prototype system was developed by AAI, with Whittaker and SAIC as subcontractors. It consisted of a podmounted unit (actually, the electronics were housed in an AM-RAAM shell) that stimulated the host plane's EW gear in accordance with preplanned instructions programmed into the system's EEPROM module. While the Air Force is reported to have been pleased with the operation of the system, it has decided to seek an internally mounted system when the program moves to full-scale development. A draft RFP for this procurement is scheduled to be released by the end of this year (see "Sun, Sand and Simulation" in this issue on p. 66).


The Navy has four major EW test and training facilities. One of these is the Pacific Missile Test Center (PMTC) at Pt. Mugu, CA (see "Electronic Warfare Directorate Continues Work, Growth at Pt. Mugu," JED, May 1989, p. 60). The PMTC is the Navy's largest test and evaluation facility; it covers 4,500 acres and supports 50 laboratories and various support facilities. A 35,000-sq.-mi Sea Test Range, bristling with fixed and mobile instrumentation systems, is used to conduct testing in space, air, marine and underwater environments. General-purpose laboratories like the Radar Reflectivity and Environmental Test Laboratories serve multiple users.

The PMTC's EW activity is conduct by the EW Directorate, which has a 40- x 40- x 100-ft anechoic chamber at its disposal. A new chamber, to measure 60 x 150 x 150 ft, is under construction. Advanced Systems Development's AMES, versions I and II, are known to be among the resources tapped by the directorate. The equipment has Phase Angle of Arrival Simulation capabilities.

The Vulnerability Assessment Division within the directorate provides threat ECM simulation gear for air weapons DT&T within the DOD. Its principle products, according to a Navy brochure, are the AN/DLQ-3C(V) and AN/ULQ-21(V). The former is a modular, analog device initially designed for use in aerial targets. It can generate 21 sophisticated "techniques" ranging from continuous noise to complex deception techniques in the frequency range of 0.4 to 18.0 GHz. It can be configured for use with Whittaker's AN/ALQ-167(V) pods, as well as surface vehicles and laboratories. The ULQ-21(V) is designed to replace the DLQ-3C(V); it will initially operate in the 5- to 11-GHz range but will be expanded to meet 1- to 40-GHz requirements.

The division also provides the TREE series of high-power ECM pods (for use by the Fleet Electronic Warfare Support Group), the AN/ASR-101 ECM pod, the Basic ECM Environment Simulator and Portable Shore Based Jammers, all of which can be used for training. Threat RF emitters developed and produced by the division, according to the brochure, include the AN/DPT-1(V) and -1A(V) follow-on (the original DPT-1 was produced in conjunction with Metric Systems), designed for installation in BQM-34 aerial targets and subsequently mounted within the AN/AST-4(V) pod. The AN/DPT-2A(V) is a smaller, lower-power version of the -1(V). Meanwhile, the division is working on the AN/AST-6(V) pod, which will replace the AST-4. The new pod will be able to transmit up to 99 different ASCM threat emission sequences. The AN/ULQ-23 ECM Simulator (also called "Future-jam") is another part of the division's arsenal.

Finally, the EW Directorate also has initiated the Combat Environment Realism Simulation (CERS) program, designed to provide an integrated EW environment for testing and training. CERS will provide mobile and fixed ground, air and surface threat simulators; noise, barrage and data link jammers; and response monitors.

The Navy's second major test center is the Naval Weapons Center (NWC) at China Lake, CA. The Electronic Warfare Threat Environment Simulation (EWTES) flight range at China Lake, perhaps better known as Echo Range, covers approximately 700 sq. mi of the Mojave Desert. The range possesses sophisticated electronic technology that can actually simulate ocean-going ships -- complete with surveillance and tracking radars -- in the middle of the desert. It is used to test the effectiveness of ECM systems, the seekers and avionics of antiradiation missiles and other systems and technologies.

Ford Aerospace (recently purchased by Loral) is heavily involved in providing equipment and engineering services to the NWC for the Echo Range and other Navy ranges. The company won a delivery order contract in July 1984. Called the Training Range EW Simulators (TREWS) program, the effort included the provision of engineering expertise, from studies to hardware, in two major areas. The first involved the Range EW Simulator (REWS) program, which provided shipboard training for EW operators against cruise missiles. This facility is located in southern California. The other area involved aircrew training systems, principally for Naval Air Stations at Fallon, NV, and Pinecastle, FL, and the Marine Air Station at Cherry Point, NC. As part of this effort, Ford worked with Metric Systems to provide an AN/MLQ-T9 early warning radar simulator for Fallon. This capability was upgraded with the addition of a height-finder system, also in conjunction with Metric Systems. Ford also is developing a Threat Radar Emitter Simulator (TRES) for use at Fallon and Cherry Point. These emitters can emulate three different threat systems, including "single-digit" SAM sites.

Ford won a follow-on task order contract in December 1988. Called Simulator Device Development Support (SDDS), this contract covers the two areas of TREWS, plus R&D and management of the Tactical Air Ranges Integration Facility effort. Much of this effort concerns the Navy's Tactical Aircrew Training System (TACTS) initially produced by Cubic Corp. An outgrowth of the Navy's Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation program, TACTS comprises airborne pod, tracking intrumentation, computational and display and debriefing subsystems. Besides being a second source for TACTS systems, Ford is the prime contractor for R&D of improvements to the system. TACTS equipment is used at the Yuma, AZ, Oceana, VA, and Charleston, SC, facilities; Cherry Point is expected to receive this capability in the future. The SDDS also brings Ford onto China Lake's own ranges. The company is working with subcontractor Microwave Applications Group on a phased array antenna and beam steering computer that eventually will become a "double-digit" threat simulator.

The "ships in the desert" simulation capability is augmented by the Emitter Simulator System (ESS) Ford is providing as part of a July 1988 award. Ford will develop and deliver a control center and a fleet of field interface vans that connect the control center with the individual emitters. These emitters are designed to emulate signals radiated by ocean-going vessels. Ford will also provide a pair of TRES systems as part of the program.

Ford is not alone at the EWTES, however. The RCA Electronic Systems Division of GE aerospace has provided the Crossbow-S Generic Radar as part of a triservice development effort. The reprogrammable, phased array system was designed to simulate a wide variety of threats. gE is currently publicizing the system as a pulse Doppler threat radar simulator.

Vitro Services also has sold a large number of its RS 545, 565 and 572 radar emitter simulators to China Lake. Some of these were subsequently shipped to other Navy ranges, including the Yuma AZ, TACTS facility.

The third facility on the Navy's list is located at Patuxent River, MD. Like the two facilities already mentioned, Patuxent River also is blessed with both range and laboratory resources. Vitro Services has provided its RS 565 and 572 radar emitter simulators to Patuxent, for use on the facility's Chesapeake Test Range and for subsequent shipment to the Navy's Dare County range in North Carolina. Meanwhile, Advanced Systems Development has shipped a Microwave Generation Subsystem and provided Phase Angle of Arrival simulation capabilities for a CFE tactical EW simulator, both of which are used at Patuxent's EW Integration Systems Test Laboratory.

The fourth range is located at NAS Fallon. Both Metric Systems and Ford Aerospace have provided simulation equipment to this facility. as indicated previously, other facilities that use simulation capabilities are located in Oceana, VA, Pinecastle, FL, and the Marine Air Station at Cherry Point, NC.

As in our Air Force overview, some contractors would reveal sales to the Navy, but would not comment on where the equipment had been placed. This is the case for Whittaker's AN/MSQ-T43; Metric Systems' Model 3131 Modular Threat Radar Simulator, Model 8877 Modular Threat Simulator System and AN/MPQ-T3; and Watkins-Johnson's EW Simulator System, which is designed to generate threat signals between 0.1 and 40 GHz.

As befits its mission, however, not all of the Navy's simulation capabiliteis are land based. The Fleet EW Support Group provides EW training and testing to ships at sea using a variety of systems, including those provided to it by the EW Directorate at China Lake. On-board training is also provided by systems like the AN/USQ-93(V) Shipboard Radar Environmental Simulator System from Republic Electronics. The system will be part of the New Threat Upgrade Anti-Air Warfare Combat System program on Tartar and Terrier ships. It will simulate, in real time, hostile and friendly aircraft, missiles, IFF, chaff, ECM jamming, weather and clutter signals expected to be encountered in battle.



Much of the Army's EW vulnerability assessment activities are completed in conjunction with the EW Support Division of the US Army Vulnerability Assessment Laboratory. The division provides projected hostile threat environments against which such assessments can be made; airborne and groundbased platforms for EW experiments, tests, trials and training; and test support capabilities. The group's most visible asset is the NKC-135A "Big Crow" autonomous flying laboratory (it also possesses a fleet of ground-support instrumentation vans and heliborne assets). The Big Crow has been used in a variety of programs, including Navy and Air Force development efforts. It is stationed at Kirtland AFB, NM.

Ft. Huachuca, AZ, hosts another Army facility that makes use of simulation capabilities. The Electronic Proving Ground is using threat simulation systems from Advanced CounterMeasures Systems Inc. Meanwhile, General Dynamics has developed the XM-11S Threat Radar Simulator for the Army's Missile and Space Intelligence Center. The system is used for the test and evaluation of EW equipment, development of electronic combat tactics and aircrew training.

A relatively new program was awarded tl LTV Missiles and Electronics Group. Called the Aircraft Survivability Equipment Trainer (ASET) IV, the system uses technology developed by LTV for the Air Force's UMTE program. The mobile system, which comprises five different types of systems, simulates a variety of enemy air defense batteries, including AAA and SAM threats. LTV was awarded an $11 million contract in October of last year; production options could raise the value to $34 million. Delivery is anticipated in 1993.

Georgia Tech Research Institute has also developed some simulators for the Army. This equipment has benefited from RS 565 technology provided by Vitro Services.


While the preceding paragraphs provide a glimpse of the military's use of simulators for testing and training, they do not tell the whole story. Other systems, either newly developed or noteworthy but difficult to place within the context above, are worth examination.

One of the newer systems is the ExCEL from Excalibur Systems Ltd. of Canada. The ExCEL family includes an extensive line of cards and modules tied together with unique software and a flexible architecture. The modular hardware and software can be joined in several configurations, to be used in a range of applications that include classroom/lab digital or video injection, classroom/lab RF injection, shipboard training, field-deployable stimulation, airborne stimulation and man-portable uses. A range of receiver interfaces, including custom digital and video interfaces, can be provided. Typical receiver interfaces include digital data, video, low-power and high-power RF and microwave direction of arrival. An "intuitive" man-machine interface using Microsoft Windows, keyboard and mouse is designed to provide extensive ease of use.

Anaren's Digital EW Simulator (DEWS) is a desktop digital RF environment simulator designed for operator training, classroom applications and digital signal processor testing, evaluation and development of EW, [C.sup.3.I], ELINT, ESM and radar systems. DEWS can generate up to 256 emitters simultaneously -- 20 per platform -- through the use of up to 32 signal generator boards. When it is necessary to simulate a complete EW receving system, an RF section can be added to DEWS to create the RF Environment Simulator (RFES) 6000 Series. Base capability covers 0.5 to 18 GHz in octave bands, with a nominal output power of 0 dBm. Additional RF and sub bands can be added optionally.

A system that has attracted attention within the vendor community is the Hewlett-Packard HP 8791 family of signal, radar and threat simulators. The system is designed to provide a wide variety of threat signal simulation through powerful off-the-shelf software packages. While the system is still fairly new, it has already impressed several members of he simulator fraternity. Canadian Astronautics has combined the HP 8791 with its TASS system to crate the FAST TASS simulator. Meanwhile, AAI has incorporated the Signal Generation Subsystem of its AN/ALM-234 with the HP8791 to create the Frequency Agile Multiple Emitter Simulator (FAMES).


The military use of simulation is even more extensive than portrayed in this article. Simulation systems in test and training applications combine comparatively low cost with risk to create a powerful tool whose utility will increase as budgets tighten. Technology advances that will create even more realistic emulation of threat environments will make simulation a truly irreplaceable asset -- until someone has the guts to shoot live weapons at live pilots. We doubt the military will be looking for volunteer any time soon.
COPYRIGHT 1990 Horizon House Publications, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1990 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:includes related articles
Author:Hardy, Stephen M.
Publication:Journal of Electronic Defense
Date:Nov 1, 1990
Previous Article:The analytical modeling and simulation of electronic combat.
Next Article:EW agressor squadron moves out.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters