Leadership Insight
MT2 2011 Volume: 16 Issue: 8 (December)
Rear Adm. Frederick Lewis (USN, Ret.)
President
National Training and Simulation Association
Fred Lewis graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1962 and was designated a naval aviator in November 1963. As an F-4 Phantom pilot during the Vietnam War, he twice deployed to the Gulf of Tonkin for combat operations over North Vietnam. Subsequently, he attended the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School and led the stand-up of the Atlantic Fleet’s F-14 FRS. During his first carrier wing command, he led the wing in successful operations in the Gulf of Sidra during which his pilots downed two Libyan fighter aircraft. During a second air wing command he inaugurated the Navy’s “Super CAG” program. As a flag officer he was the director, Strike and Amphibious Warfare, commander, Tactical Wings, Atlantic and commander, Naval Safety Center. He returned to sea in 1991 as commander, Carrier Group Four and commander, Carrier Striking Forces, Atlantic. In 1993 he led the stand-up and became the first commander of the Naval Doctrine Command. During a 33-year career he accumulated over 6,500 accident-free flying hours in tactical aircraft and over 1,200 carrier arrested landings. In December 1995 he became the president of the National Training and Simulation Association in Arlington, Va. There, he has inaugurated numerous programs to promote the modeling and simulation community of practice and to bring M&S technologies to national prominence. His efforts led to a congressional declaration in 2007 that M&S is a National Critical technology. He is a member of the Naval Aviation Museum Foundation Board of Trustees. He has served as a director of the Navy Mutual Aid Association, former chairman of the Tailhook Association, chairman of the Washington, DC Battle of Midway Commemoration Committee, director of the Air Warrior Courage Foundation, and is a member of the Early and Pioneer Naval Aviators Association (Golden Eagles).
Q: What are the goals of the National Training and Simulation Association?
A: Fundamentally, the National Training and Simulation Association [NTSA] exists to inform and educate the public about the importance of modeling and simulation in everyone’s daily life and the promise it holds for all our futures. We do this by providing national and worldwide platforms for the entrepreneurial needs of the industry while simultaneously promoting dialogue about future trends and directions. I/ITSEC is of course the annual culmination of these efforts, but NTSAsponsored events throughout the year provide a continuing platform for dialogue and exploration.
At I/ITSEC, our goals, broadly stated, are to:
- Establish and maintain a climate which is conducive to successful business contacts and transactions among hundreds of exhibiting entities
- Provide multiple avenues for in-depth exploration of the present potential and future promise of the industry
- Involve as wide a variety of persons and organizations in I/ITSEC as possible, mirroring the expansion of M&S into ever more diverse fields
- Mesh these elements into a cohesive whole which is truly greater than the sum of its parts and which advances the interests of the entire M&S community.
For a number of years, NTSA has enjoyed a close and very productive relationship with the Congressional Modeling and Simulation Caucus. We have worked closely with them to develop HR 487, which designated modeling and simulation as a national critical technology. Recently, we at NTSA decided that now is the time to bring together all the diverse elements of the technology into an interdisciplinary, interagency, inter-organizational framework to advance the interests, goals and objectives of the technology and community of practice in a more unified, orderly manner. We are therefore in the process of establishing the National Modeling and Simulation Coalition [NMSC]. An interim board has been named, and the mission and objectives of the new organization have been laid out in preparation for an inaugural event to be held in Washington, D.C., on February 6, 2012. This event will be open to all who are involved in modeling and simulation in any way.
Q: What are the biggest challenges to meeting these goals?
A: We clearly face constant or declining defense outlays for the next several years at least. The role of modeling and simulation technology in alleviating some of the adverse consequences of this situation becomes even more important than in happier days. Our biggest challenge, given this environment and the inherent advantages of modeling and simulation, is to make certain that all segments of our national security structure are fully aware of the comprehensive savings that can be attained through exploitation of this technology. The man-machine interface is now a very mature technology, with simulation replicating very closely the sights, sounds and feel of the real thing. This fidelity allows us to supplant, to a great extent, live platform training. Every hour spent in a simulator is an hour’s fuel saved, as well as lubricants, and even use of land in the case of surface vehicles. It also means savings in expensive replacement parts and major overhauls, reducing wear and tear on our already overtaxed equipment. “Down time” is thus reduced, making equipment more mission-available. Less time spent on maintenance translates directly into personnel savings and availability of personnel for other duties. Simulation thus contributes directly to a reduction in DoD’s operations and maintenance and personnel accounts—savings that can be redirected into other critical categories such as RTD&E and procurement.
Q: What do you anticipate the greatest impacts to training and simulation in 2012 will be and why?
A: As a direct result of the emergence of irregular conflict and asymmetrical threat environments, we have seen the urgent demand for the most complex form of simulation training—what can be called the human-to-human interface. Human-to-human interactions, as we all recognize, are orders of magnitude more complex than interactions with mechanical devices, regardless of how sophisticated. All the nuances of body language, speech, cultural norms and many other subtle but vitally important clues to attitude and intent must be taken into account. Given the security environments in which we operate today— be it interaction with a tribal elder, a passenger at an airport security checkpoint, or even a visa applicant from a third world country—this new training realm is critically important, if unforeseen only a decade ago. While we are making comprehensive strides toward bringing these training environments up to the level of maturity the industry has achieved in other areas, we still have a considerable distance to go. We are now at the stage where the suspension of disbelief is still difficult to achieve, inserting an element of distraction into the training equation.
Q: How has training and simulation grown over the past couple of years in the U.S. military?
A: In the past few years, private industry has taken the lead through development of PC-based first-person shooters and more advanced games. While the military has pioneered the development of much of the bedrock of simulation technology, the commercial demand for ever more complex and realistic video games has resulted in remarkable strides in fidelity and user flexibility that the military is just now beginning to capture in small unit training scenarios. I might add that this technology is emerging as a valuable tool in treating PTSD, as scenarios now exist which create stressful environments similar to those which trigger the disorder in real life. Using these scenarios, the training experience provides avatars which walk the individual through the experience, coaching him or her along the way with coping mechanisms. This is proving very useful in initial phases of PTSD treatment.
I am pleased to note in this regard that the serious games competition at I/ITSEC is beginning to play a significant role in advancement of military applications for PC-based games, with a number of the games shown and awarded at I/ITSEC being selected for further commercial development and ultimately for full scale utilization as training tools.
We are also seeing the maturation of training technologies across services, distance and time. Several platforms now exist that create synthetic battlespaces which seamlessly incorporate tactical level capabilities into operational level environments, making them ideal for modeling multi-sided coalition warfare. These simulations, by modeling air, ground and naval elements with special operations and logistical support, can incorporate all levels of simulation training—live, virtual and constructive—into a unified matrix: a distributed learning environment.
I believe that in the not too distant future, we will train with avatars, wholly immersed in a three dimensional alternative world. Creating such environments is in fact the next great technological challenge for our industry. With it, among other precedent-setting applications, we will be able to expose our warfighters to new and unfamiliar cultures, allowing them to learn by immersion, for example, in the middle of a Middle Eastern marketplace. I do not believe this technology will be available as we pursue our objectives in Iraq or Afghanistan, but we will nevertheless see it in the near future and it will play an invaluable role in many critical areas of national importance, as well as revolutionizing much of how we as humans learn.
Q: How have your experiences in the U.S. Navy benefitted you in your current role as president of the NTSA?
A: All unrestricted line officers—aviators, surface warriors, submariners— in the U.S. Navy spend the vast majority of their careers in billets where training for combat operations is the rule of the day. In my case I spent a great deal of time at sea flying on and off of aircraft carriers across all the seas and oceans of the world in peacetime and wartime. By training in our particular specialties, be it in live or virtual conditions, we maintained our readiness to be able to respond to whatever tasking the National Command Authority might levy upon us to protect the nation’s vital interests. Later in my career I had the good fortune to be in on the ground floor when we began to realize and understand the virtues of distributed training over long-haul networks when we first began to integrate simulators at widely separated geographic positions. So my experience with very rudimentary simulators and then with six axes of motion air combat simulators followed by advanced distributed simulators went a long way to get me prepared for my current position. That was 16 years ago, however, and so very much has changed for the better since I left active duty.
Q: Why does modeling and simulation need to attract young people so that the U.S. can maintain primacy in the field?
A: Part of your question in fact answers itself—we in fact need a constant infusion of new talent into the industry precisely to maintain our lead in this critical area. The importance of enhancing the teaching of science, technology, engineering and math [STEM] in the U.S. is by now widely and properly recognized as a national priority. While strengthening the STEM curriculum at the secondary level, we must also—and just as importantly—find ways to excite and engage students in the sciences to increase the alarmingly low proportion of students that now decide to pursue those disciplines into their graduate studies and professional careers. I sense that we are making steady, if uneven, national progress on both these fronts, if the number and variety of recent STEM programs and initiatives is any indication. I believe however that these efforts, as commendable as they are, would benefit from a more coordinated approach from the national level. Perhaps an initial effort could be made to catalog all STEM-related programs so that the overall dimensions and character of the national effort could be better discerned. This first step could help to avoid duplication of effort while sharing best practices across geographical and organizational boundaries. At the same time, shortcomings in approach could be made known and acted upon.
Q: What is the NTSA’s role in the International Training and Simulation Alliance and what is the goal of the Alliance?
A: The International Training and Simulation Alliance [ITSA] is worldwide network of training and simulation associations that share common goals. ITSA’s strength derives from the voluntary association of its members in order to provide a continual, communicative environment for the worldwide M&S community. ITSA exists to educate and inform the legislative, policymaking, acquisition and regulatory functions of governments whose agencies are actively engaged in exploitation of simulation technologies. It promotes the highest levels of responsibility and business ethics, and it provides direct contact with acquisition activities to better communicate with industry regarding requirements, procurement policies and issues. The ITSA currently counts within its membership the KTSA [Korean Training and Simulation Association], the SIAA [Simulation Industry Alliance of Australia], the ETSA [European Training and Simulation Association] and NTSA. The Alliance promotes the worldwide furtherance of modeling and simulation technology through a series of conferences and other events. Recently, the Simulation Industry Association of Australia held SimTecT2011 in Melbourne—another in a series of very successful events organized and sponsored by SIAA as part of overall Alliance activities. ♦