The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Issue No.05 - September-October (1997 vol.17)
pp: 30-39
Air Force leaders, recognizing the need for improved training, implemented the Red Flag exercises at Nellis AFB. At the heart of this training is the Red Flag Measurement and Debriefing System (RFMDS) and its capability to accurately reconstruct the elements of an intense mock air battle fought over the deserts of Nevada. This research utilizes the emerging technology of distributed interactive simulation (DIS) to translate and communicate the dynamic flight activities of Red Flag participants onto a nationwide simulation network. For the first time, the operational world of the premier Air Force training facility is merged with the synthetic world of man-in-the-loop simulation demonstrating that integrating live participants with simulated entities is possible. A portable prototype system called the Remote Debriefing Tool (RDT) facilitates the merger of the real and virtual environments. RDT's analysis tools and graphical user interface provide the capability to either monitor live Red Flag missions or perform post-reconstruction of airborne activities at any site with compatible communications equipment and software, producing more effective and comprehensive training.
Michael T. Gardner, Philip Amburn, "Simulation-Based Remote Debriefing for Red Flag Missions", IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, vol.17, no. 5, pp. 30-39, September-October 1997, doi:10.1109/38.610202
1. F.W. Ault, "The Ault Report Revisited," The Hook, Spring 1989, pp. 36-39.
2. R.D. Riggs, "Red Flag—Realistic Training in a Simulated Combat Environment," Proc. Interactive Networked Simulation for Training, 1989, pp. 33-38.
3. H.G. Miller, "Wargaming Networks for Training," Proc. Interactive Networked Simulation for Training, 1989, p. 44.
4. Univ. of Central Florida Institute for Simulation and Training, "Distributed Interactive Simulation: Operational Concept," Jan. 1992, Draft.
5. "Standard for Information Technology—Protocols for Distributed Interactive Simulation Applications," Tech. Report IST-CR-93-15, Institute for Simulation and Training, May 1993, Version 2.0, Third Draft.
6. M.J. Zyda et al., "NPSNet and the Naval Postgraduate School Graphics and Video Laboratory," Presence, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 244-258.
7. "Cubic Defense Systems," Appendix: A Message Catalog of the Computer Program Performance Specification for the Control and Computation Subsystem (CCS), Mar. 1992, SP1507198C, Ch. 1.
8. M. Snyder, ObjectSim—A Reusable Object Oriented DIS Visual Simulation, master's thesis, Air Force Institute of Tech nology, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, 1993.
9. M.H. Overmars, Forms Library v2.1—A Graphical User Interface Toolkit for the Silicon Graphics Workstations, Utrecht University, Netherlands, Dept. of Computer Science, 1992, e-mail
10. E.P. Harvey and R.L. Schaffer, "The Capability of the Distributed Interactive Simulation Networking Standard to Support High Fidelity Aircraft Simulation," Proc. 13th Interservice Networked Simulation for Training, 1989, pp. 33-38.
11. "The Pentagon's Technology Targets," Air Force Magazine 76, Nov. 1993, pp. 59-61.
20 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool