War games for Defense and Security
Canadian Defence looks to computers to slash costs and improve safety in the training battleground. In the early days of reconstructing battle scenarios, Lt.-Col. Rusty Bassarab recalls some defence computer games taking a few liberties with physics.
“On one of the old (platforms), if you held up your hand in front of your body and a (bullet) hit your hand, your hand would bleed but the round would stop,” recalls the Department of National Defence’s director of land synthetic environments. “That’s something that used to be there, but was corrected because we said, ‘Hey, that’s no good.’ And of course, once people learn that all you have to do is put something in front, well (they’ll do it because) they’re trying to win.”
It’s an ongoing struggle to completely replicate the “theatre” of combat in a war game, a battle that at least two Ottawa firms are willingly facing as the defence industry moves to less expensive simulations to train the troops.
Acron Capability Engineering’s software is already in place at CFB Gagetown – for training on artillery procedures – as well as the Defence Research and Development Canada in Toronto, where infantry can learn their tasks in a wrap-around 3D simulator.
Even outside of defence, the simulation company is doing well. The firm just recently signed an agreement with Prague’s Millennium Gate Company to distribute Acron’s 3D modelling software in eastern Europe, and also flew down to Mexico to discuss influenza modelling in light of the current swine flu situation.
“You don’t necessarily need to be in the field shooting really expensive missiles to learn how to use them,” says John Nicol, chief executive of Acron.
“It’s not only time and money, but it’s also the safety issues. You can make mistakes with the simulator or training course without putting you or your comrades in immediate danger.”
Make mistakes and also make actual kills; Lt.-Col. Bassarab points out a soldier being trained on patrol duty can’t exactly kill his crewmates during a simulation, something a computer would have no trouble showing.
But there the technology runs into a wall. Showing an event is one thing. Actually experiencing it on the field is another, says industry observer Philippe Lagasse.
“Obviously the closer that you get to the reality of the environment, the better trained the soldier in question will be,” says Mr. Lagasse, who teaches at the University of Ottawa.
“If you do want to mitigate some … costs through simulation, it’s a very attractive model. But you can’t solely rely on that. You can’t take a soldier exclusively trained in a computer-simulated environment and ploink them into an actual war zone.”
The technology still offers a lucrative revenue stream for companies such as Calian, though. That firm specializes in replicating situations that would take hundreds of soldiers to achieve, such as an all-out scale battle.
Its software is deployed at Canadian Forces bases in Kingston, Quebec City, Gagetown, Edmonton and Petawawa.
“When we started (in 1995) it was organizational training, sort of typical training within (defence); how you bring the next commander along,” says Jerry Johnston, vice-president of outsourcing at Calian.
“But in the last few years, it’s really become a mission rehearsal type facility. It’s been used by the teams that go to Afghanistan; it’s one of the standard training steps they now take before they actually deploy.”
Before long, full-scale simulations may be a standard training step for budding businesspeople as well, says Lt.-Col. Bassarab.
Already the forces have the capability to run a 3D simulation or computer game in the classroom rather than go over a procedure with a few PowerPoint slides – and Lt.-Col. Bassarab has already participated in two virtual conferences in platforms such as Second Life.
From his conversations in this virtual world, he says he knows schools outside the drama of defence are looking to use the technology in their own way.
“We ask people what is it are you trying to achieve and what are their training needs for your experiment, to meet their objectives,” he says.
“I think there’s a lot of (non-defence) professors and classrooms starting to do the same thing.”
