The Air Force Agency for Modeling and Simulation:Advancing Modeling and Simulation for the Warfighter

Robert DeForest

Department of the Air Force, Orlando, Florida

In the mid 1990s General Ronald Fogleman,then U.S. Air Force (USAF) Chief of Staff,was determined to correct the deficiencies inmodeling and simulation (M&S) that wereuncovered in the months and years following

Desert Storm. The existing models, technology, andexpertise did not accurately represent air and spacepower, particularly in Joint exercises, experiments, andstudies. This was exacerbated in that the CombatantCommanders did not have accurate air and spacepower representations when formulating contingencyplans, nor the ability to accurately rehearse those planswith the limited airpower simulations that would drivetheir exercises. Additionally, the Air Force was not yetexploiting the power of simulation to properlycommunicate to Congress and the Office of theSecretary of Defense on such issues as roles, missions,and funding. An M&S policy office was establishedbut still had no governance structure. The Air Forcehad no top-level Air Force integrator or servicewidecoordinating processes and integrating initiatives, andhad many competing air models.

As a result, General Ronald Fogleman signed ‘‘ANew Vector’’ in 1995 (Figure 1), outlining the USAF’splan to improve its use of M&S. At a four-starSummit, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force (CSAF)and the Secretary of the Air Force (SAF) sponsoredthe creation of an Air Staff Field Operating Agency(FOA) in Orlando, Florida, to specifically meet thesechallenges, the Air Force Agency for Modeling andSimulation (AFAMS). Headquarters USAF ProgramAction Directive 96-4 officially implemented theCSAF’s decision and AFAMS stood up on June 3,1996.

Today, AFAMS, which is aligned under theSecretary of the Air Force, Office of WarfightingIntegration and Chief Information Officer (SAF/XC),is commanded by Colonel James Dennis. Col Dennisleads a diverse organization that oversees M&Sactivities around the globe and maintains liaisonofficers at Nellis and Hurlburt Air Force bases.AFAMS is strategically located in Orlando, Florida,because of the synergy created by the presence of all of

the Services: Army Program Executive Office—Simulation, Training, Instrumentation; Naval AirWarfare Center Training Systems Division; andMarine Corps Program Manager Training Systems.The Services’ primary simulation and training acqui-sition and sustainment organizations comprises over2500 people and $5 billion a year in business, and arecolocated in the Central Florida Research Parkadjacent to the nation’s sixth largest university, theUniversity of Central Florida.

AFAMS’ mission is to ensure appropriate represen-tation of air, space, and cyberspace in modeling andsimulation; integrate and ensure interoperability of AirForce models and simulations; coordinate Air ForceM&S support for Service, Joint, Inter-Agency andCoalition events, and develop and maintain appropriateM&S skills and knowledge for Air Force personnel.AFAMS provides oversight and is the Executive Agentfor a suite of simulations known as the Air, Space, andCyber Constructive Environment (ASCCE). Thesesimulations are the authoritative representation of air,space, and cyber power for U.S. Title 10 trainingexercises and mission rehearsals conducted jointly in allmajor commands around the world (Figure 2). TheElectronic Systems Center at Hanscom Air Force Base(AFB) is the program office overseeing development of

Figure 1. General Ronald Fogleman articulated his vision for

M&S in 1995.

Featured CapabilityITEA Journal 2009; 30: 23–28

Copyright ’ 2009 by the International Test and Evaluation Association

30(1) N March 2009 23

Report Documentation Page Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, ArlingtonVA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if itdoes not display a currently valid OMB control number.

1. REPORT DATE MAR 2009 2. REPORT TYPE

3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2009 to 00-00-2009

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE The Air Force Agency for Modeling and Simulation: AdvancingModeling and Simulation for the Warfighter

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Department of the Air Force,Orlando,FL,32803

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT Same as

Report (SAR)

18. NUMBEROF PAGES

6

19a. NAME OFRESPONSIBLE PERSON

a. REPORT unclassified

b. ABSTRACT unclassified

c. THIS PAGE unclassified

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

the simulations. The 505th Distributed Warfare Groupat Kirtland AFB, the Korean Air Simulation Center atOsan Air Base, the Warrior Preparation Center inGermany, and the 1st Air Force at Tyndall AFB are theorganizations and major simulation centers conductingTitle 10 training and other exercises where ASCCE isleveraged. AFAMS provides M&S expertise and thesimulations for such venues as Pacific Command’sTerminal Fury, European Command’s Austere Chal-lenge, and U.S. Forces Korea’s Ulchi Freedom Guard-ian. ASCCE stimulates real world systems for AirOperations Centers and provides air power; intelligence,surveillance, and reconnaissance virtual imagery; andintegration. ASCCE provides the ability to interfaceand stimulate operational command and control sys-tems, broadcast systems, and can interface to virtual andlive-fly systems to provide for integration in a Live,Virtual, and Constructive (LVC) environment.

AFAMS works with the Air Force, the otherservices, and Joint Forces Command on a broad rangeof activities where M&S is required to represent airand space power. AFAMS also provides oversight andsubject matter expertise of the ASCCE for use inexperimentation and demonstration events such as theJoint Expeditionary Force Experiment (JEFX) and theCoalition Warrior Interoperability Demonstration(CWID). JEFX is conducted by another FOA underSAF/XC, the Global Cyber Integration Center. JEFXconsists of experiments with participation from sisterservices, coalition nations, combatant commands, and

government agencies to assess initiatives to fulfillidentified gaps in warfighting capability. CWID isthe Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s annualevent, enabling combatant commanders and ourcoalition partners to investigate command, control,communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance,and reconnaissance solutions for enhancing coalitioninteroperability. CWID investigates information tech-nologies that have the potential to integrate into anoperational environment within the near term follow-ing demonstration execution every year in June.

In the early 2000s, AFAMS, along with Air CombatCommand and the Air Staff and several otherorganizations, led an initiative to increase the distributedsimulation capabilities across the Air Force and achievethe CSAF’s vision for Distributed Mission Operations(DMO). An Initial Requirements Document and aConcept of Operations were approved by the Air ForceRequirements Oversight Council and the CSAF topromote the concept of using distributed virtual fighters,bombers, and intelligence-surveillance-reconnaissanceplatforms with constructive simulations supportingbattlestaff (up to the Combined Air Operations Center)in a small team and larger total team environment.Bridging the tactical to operational levels of war, DMOhas grown to include more players at more locationsaround the world. AFAMS leads the DMO TechnicalManagement Working Group to address the overarch-ing technical challenges and issues with bringing such adiverse group together for training events.

Figure 2. ASCCE is used throughout the USAF for warfighter events. It is the authoritative air, space, and cyber representation for

certifying Joint Force Air Component Commanders and their staff.

DeForest

24 ITEA Journal

AFAMS continues to provide capabilities to thefield in ever-expanding arenas. One such area has beendeveloping the architecture to support the USAFWarfare Center’s (USAFWC) training of the AirSupport Operations Center Initial QualificationCourse. Complementary to this, AFAMS is providingthe architecture expertise and simulations for the JointTerminal Attack Controller on the live ranges that theUSAFWC integrates with during joint training events.AFAMS is working with Red Flag at Nellis, amultinational exercise providing a realistic environ-ment to practice combat scenarios, to support the livefly with computer simulations in a variety of means(intelligence-surveillance-reconnaissance, commandand control, threats). These and similar activities arepart of a broad effort to integrate ‘‘live-fly’’ participantswith participants in virtual simulators and constructivesimulations representing computer generated forces(collectively termed LVC) into a seamless environmentthat can be used for training, testing, experimentation,analysis, and similar functions.

5-year plan for an LVC ConstructiveIntegrating Architecture

The Army has established a Joint RequirementsOversight Council (JROC)–approved LVC Integrat-ing Architecture (LVC-IA) program to help manageArmy progress in using LVC capabilities for training.Building in part on the Army’s success, an Air ForceLVC-IA program is being initiated to establish acoordinated, programmatic approach to achievingpersistent, integrated LVC capabilities.

The key precepts to accomplishing this objective are:(a) Do no harm (don’t break what works). (b)Interoperability is not free (focused investment isrequired). (c) Start with small, immediate steps (workfifth generation training shortfalls and other criticalchallenges first). (d) Provide centralized management(provide a corporate Air Force perspective and cross-functional standards and solutions). The fundamentalapproach and focus of the LVC-IA is to establish anLVC Enterprise perspective to all LVC efforts, andforge commonality, consistency, and efficiency throughan integrating architecture. The Air Force is develop-ing an LVC-IA 5-Year Plan to guide the majorcommands and the acquisition product centers on aclear path to success.

The LVC-IA Program will have multiple areas oftechnical and nontechnical challenges to work onbehalf of all user communities. The guidelines for theLVC-IA 5-Year Plan and for an initial implementa-tion plan are in coordination across the Air Force in adraft document worked on throughout 2008. AFAMShosted two government-only meetings in June and

September 2008 and briefed the M&S General OfficerSteering Group in November 2008 on the way aheadto achieving an LVC-IA.

Why a USAF Enterprise LVC-IA?The Air Force has Integrated LVC simulation

capabilities in select areas within the Air Force trainingcommunity. Blue Flag exercises have used virtualenvironments to enhance their training objectives.Virtual Flag exercises have merged multiple virtualsimulators with constructive simulations and select livesystems for training and mission rehearsal. Red Flaghas provided venues for large scale exercises such asJoint Red Flag to prove the value of LVC simulationprimarily for training and mission rehearsal events.Unfortunately, an LVC environment must be createdfor each exercise, with its own tools, network services,and simulations, with no guarantee of persistent on-demand capabilities. These environments take monthsto plan, build, integrate, test, and then finally use forthe event. They disappear after the exercise with littlereuse the next time the event is staged. Seniorleadership recognizes this, and at the April 2008CORONA conference, it was noted that the DMOProgram of Record is resource limited and not fundedfor such a broad LVC capability.

Additionally, the Air Force test and training rangesno longer have the capability to exercise to their fullcapability current or future weapons, systems, andaircraft. Live range space, availability, and technicalcapabilities are being outpaced by warfighter systems’technology. We cannot exploit the capabilities of thefifth generation F-22 or F-35 fighters, and we cannotproduce adversary support sufficient to test and trainfifth generation fighters. Range restrictions, won’tallow for effective test and training of emergingmunitions with extended range footprints. The feasi-bility and cost of procuring realistic double-digitsurface-to-air missiles (SAMs) or limiting factors inour capability to retool existing range simulator assetshighlight the challenges in training to known adversarycapabilities. Reduction in the flying hour programmeans fewer sorties to generate the same number ofaircrew needed to fill cockpits with fully mission-capable individuals. There are a number of databasesand networks used by multiple players each unable tonetwork with the other. We need architectures andstandards that will fix this to provide fifth generationtraining. The creative integration of virtual andconstructive capabilities into live test and trainingranges is the only means to replicate full scaleoperational capabilities and support realistic training,testing, and other functional area support. In short, liverange space, availability, and technical capabilities are

Modeling & Simulation for the Warfighter

30(1) N March 2009 25

being outpaced by warfighter systems technology. Thiswill only be exacerbated as the Air Force continues todevelop technical and doctrinal capabilities to defeatemerging threats. This is a primary driver for theLVC-IA program.

A persistent LVC Enterprise will be based onenterprise standards and protocols and not just a singlesite’s architecture, resulting in a consistent environ-ment for development and testing (Figure 3). This willhelp to ensure that systems acquisitions result in moreinherent interoperability and simulator concurrencyupon fielding. It will also help solve operational testlimitations. For example, given physical range limita-tions, a live aircraft could fly a target engagementscenario with simulated weapons release, while avirtual-constructive environment could concurrentlybe used for modeling and evaluating weapon fly-outand end-game effects of the weapons.

AFAMS is working closely with the test andevaluation (T&E) community to ensure future enter-prise capabilities are on track with the Office of theSecretary of Defense’s Testing in a Joint EnvironmentRoadmap as well as the Air Force Operational Test andEvaluation Center’s (AFOTEC) Test Capability Road-map. The LVC-IA will leverage the Joint MissionEnvironment Test Capability (JMETC), which wasestablished in October 2006 to address the shortfalls inT&E with joint operational context. This will alsoserve to keep the Air Force aligned with the new

Department of Defense Instruction 5000.02, ‘‘Opera-tion of the Defense Acquisition System,’’ datedDecember 2, 2008, which states in part:

‘‘The PM, in concert with the user and the T&E

community, shall coordinate DT&E, OT&E,

LFT&E, family-of-systems interoperability test-

ing, information assurance testing, and modeling

and simulation (M&S) activities, into an efficient

continuum, closely integrated with requirements

definition and systems design and development.’’

[DoDI 5000.02, December 2, 2008]

Access to real-world architectures, weapon systems(including operational flight programs), and oppositionforce conditions during interoperability testing will beenhanced by leveraging the advances the trainingcommunity makes along with the test communities’continued development of current and future systems.

While all functional communities are includedwithin the 5-year plan, training will be the primaryinitial focus for LVC integration because of the urgentshortfall in training capabilities for fifth generationfighters and weapon systems, and ongoing global waron terror operational needs. Because of the interrela-tionship of testing and training, commensurate needsof the testing community will necessarily be addressed,with a parallel focus on working the breadth of testintegration issues. The training and education needs ofour workforce cannot be overlooked because they affect

Figure 3. The LVC Integrating Architecture Enterprise Initiative will allow for more efficient federation composition and reuse in the

LVC domains.

DeForest

26 ITEA Journal

the current and emerging capabilities of our warfight-ers. Finally, as the plan is developed, the phasedimplementation of an integrated LVC architecturemust be adaptable to rapidly assimilate new tactics,techniques, procedures, and technologies.

The integrated infrastructure for conducting LVCactivities must be robust and responsive. The currentplanning and setup times are too lengthy to beresponsive to rapid demands, especially in a wartimeenvironment. A sudden Air Expeditionary Task Forcedeployment requires the ability to provide a missionrehearsal capability to the warfighter in days versusmonths. This realization means the warfighter mustperform rapid planning and rehearsal using a persistentLVC environment that is relevant to the expectedemployment area. Further, rapid development andfielding of a critical warfighting system, such as a newweapon system, requires ready access to LVC capabil-ities that represent Command and Control, Intelli-gence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, weapons,platforms, sensors, synthetic forces, and threats. Forthis LVC vision to come to fruition, an effective LVC-IA must describe a set of protocols, specifications,standards, and software that support the implementa-tion and operation of a seamless and integratedenvironment.

Areas of emphasisThe LVC-IA 5-year plan is in reality a series of

plans. These plans lay out measurable goals andmilestones for the designated periods. Each annexrepresents a 5-year period, with objectives andmilestones to achieve measurable progress in thismultifaceted LVC-IA program. Annexes will be addedover time to cover subsequent periods. The long rangegoal and the objective of these incremental steps is apersistent, adaptable, sustainable, and fully integratedLVC Enterprise Architecture that meets the needs ofall M&S functional areas.

Workforce managementAn integrated LVC Enterprise Architecture must

address personnel resources as well as technical resources.Through workforce management, the Air Force willidentify, educate, professionally develop, and track M&Sexpertise to support the LVC training environment. Asthe M&S training functional manager, the LVC-IAprogram will collaborate with major commands andother career field functional managers to determine theoptimum makeup of the Air Force M&S futureworkforce and focus M&S capabilities and tools tosupport the warfighter. The Professional DevelopmentProgram will provide continuing education, assistsupervisors in creation of an individual development

plan, and provide a community of practice with relevantinformation for all levels of the M&S workforce.

Policy alignmentPolicies for integration and interoperability, from

headquarters Air Force down to simulation centers, needto be reviewed to ensure clear and consistent guidance onimplementation of M&S capabilities in support of allfunctional areas. Policies codifying responsibilities atmajor command level and below are inconsistent and, insome cases, nonexistent. To ensure effective integrationand implementation of LVC-IA driven capabilities, theAir Force will need to align its policy. Working withSAF/XCDM, the Air Force’s M&S Policy Division atthe Pentagon, we are implementing and improvingpolicy and procedures identified in current and future AirForce M&S policy directives and instructions. This willrequire top level oversight. An Air Force Requirementsfor Operational Capabilities Council (AFROCC)–approved program will facilitate this and help achieve apersistent LVC environment.

ProgrammaticsA fundamental precept of this LVC-IA plan is that

a centralized management structure must be estab-lished. The acquisition category level and milestonestart point will be determined based on estimated lifecycle costs and HQ Air Force priorities. Properdocumentation and coordination, in accordance withthe Joint Capabilities Integration & DevelopmentSystem (JCIDS) process, will be required for programauthority and funding approval. This includes securingAFROC and JROC approval to proceed. To complywith JCIDS requirements for establishing an LVC-IAProgram Office, we are working on the 5-Year Plan toensure that applicability and timelines are addressed forcompleting all relevant documentation.

ConclusionUpon establishment of a centralized LVC-IA

Program Office, with adequate funding for sustain-ment, the future of LVC activities will be on the roadto persistent or semipersistent operation. Proliferationof unique solutions will diminish, reusable architec-tures will be established and managed, and built-ininteroperability will emerge.

Operational art, according to Joint Publication 3-0, is:

‘‘The application of creative imagination bycommanders and staffs—supported by their skill,knowledge, and experience—to design strategies,campaigns, and major operations and organizeand employ military forces… Operational artgoverns the deployment of those forces, their

Modeling & Simulation for the Warfighter

30(1) N March 2009 27

commitment to or withdrawal from battle, andthe arrangement of battles and major operationsto achieve operational and strategic objectives.’’

Testing and training must be tied to this conceptfirst and foremost, for testing and training to any otherpurpose is meaningless to the warfighter (and ulti-mately the nation). Robust environments for tacticaland operational level test and training that is pertinentto the tasks necessary to achieve the joint operatingconcepts of the Combatant Commanders requires apersistent LVC architecture:

1. Accurate and readily available operating environ-ments relevant to anticipated current and futureconflicts;

2. Composable friendly forces and opposition forcesthat represent enemy intent and capabilities;

3. Feedback capabilities that provide measurable datapoints to the warfighter for training tasks, and tothe tester for developmental test and evaluation,operational test and evaluation, and live fire testand evaluation.

This architecture will achieve savings by reducingredundancies, inefficiencies, and standardizing the way

we conduct testing and training. However, the truevalue of an integrated architecture to support theseevents is not simply a cost savings; rather, in most casesit is the quality measures that truly demonstrate theadded benefit to accomplishing unit missions. None-theless, the value must be measured. Whether themission is one of training, testing, experimentation, orother individual, team, or organizational tasks, appro-priate data will be analyzed continually to ensure theoptimum use of our limited Air Force resources. %

ROBERT DEFOREST is a program analyst with the Air

Force Agency for Modeling and Simulation (AFAMS) in

Orlando, Florida. Since joining the USAF in 1983, he has

held leadership positions in Space Operations, at Air

University, and at AFAMS. Upon retirement from active

duty, he worked as a systems engineer and operations

analyst for the Northrop Grumman Corporation and as

a consultant with Booz Allen Hamilton. He entered his

current position as a Department of the Air Force civilian

with AFAMS in November 2008. E-mail: robert.deforest@

afams.af.mil

DeForest

28 ITEA Journal