Future Operational Training In The Royal Air Force

As the cost of acquiring and operating modern aircraft increases, coupled with an elevated real-world operational tempo and other considerations such as Operational Security (OpSec) and Environment, finding the correct mix of live and synthetic training continues to be of crucial importance. The increases in defence spending promised by most European NATO nations, while encouraging, have yet to be reflected in any reduction in budgetary pressure. MS&T’s Dim Jones looks at how the UK is addressing this problem.

The Live-Synthetic Balance

The great ‘live-synthetic balance’ debate used to be just that: ‘live’ was flying the aircraft, ‘synthetic’ was sitting in the simulator. However, while live training is arguably still the practice of flying and operating the real aircraft, synthetic training (ST) has developed, and is still developing, beyond recognition. ‘Synthetic’ also used to mean a Full Mission Simulator (FMS) or equivalent (‘lower-fidelity devices’, while useful for conversion and some continuation training, did not count towards operational currency); this is no longer true. Indeed, such devices are an essential part of the future Operational Training (OT) mix. It is generally accepted that a minimum level of live flying is required: to maintain safe currency in aircraft handling and avoid skill fade; to perform certain specific handling tasks; and to generate the enhanced adrenaline levels which cannot be replicated in a simulator. In the RAF, this minimum level for each aircraft type is recommended by the appropriate Force Commander, and signed off by Higher Command. Meanwhile, advances in ST fidelity mean that some requirements which previously could only be accomplished ‘live’ can now be undertaken in a simulator – Instrument Rating Tests are one example; others, such as deck landings and air refuelling, may still need to be practised live.

Mission Training

Mission Training requires a different approach, primarily driven by security, both operational and physical, and necessitated by the advent of 5th-generation aircraft, and the requirement for them to be able to inter-operate with 4th-Gen. The F-35 is a prime example, in that the capability of the aircraft means that much high-level training can only be done in the FMS, but physical security constraints mean that the FMS can only be connected to systems with an equivalent security level; in practice, this results in the F-35 force talking only to itself.  

The solution to this conundrum is an Effects-Based Simulator (EBS) which allows mission-focused training at a lower security level than the FMS, and connectivity to other systems for collective and distributed training. 

The hub for UK training, giving access to other hubs in NATO and elsewhere, is the Air Battlespace Training Centre (ABTC), and the Gladiator programme enables Distributed Synthetic Training (DST) with other UK elements and with NATO partners. The first four EBS are already installed at RAF Marham, with another four to follow. 

The concept originated in the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO), was enabled by Lockheed-Martin emulation hardware and software, rendered affordable by the UK through the use of COTS products to create the cockpit environment and displays, re-adopted by the JPO and christened FENIX. 

Apparently the USAF were initially sceptical about the utility of EBS, but are now enthusiastic adherents and are installing it at all F-35 units; indications are that European NATO F-35 nations will follow suit. EBS are inexpensive, can operate at a lower security level than, and relieve pressure on, FMS and, if something doesn’t work, it can easily be fixed; software updates are already in train.  Initial feedback from Marham indicates that there is no negative training penalty.

LVC Options

Despite OpSec constraints, 4th/5th-Gen live mission training remains essential. The problem is how to make it both realistic and cost-effective, since the required quantity and capability of live Red Air almost certainly renders it unaffordable. The solution is clearly some form of Live/Virtual/Constructive (LVC) mix but this is not without its challenges. 

The best solution is probably utilisation of the extensive White Force capability at ABTC, either using role-player stations (V) or computer-controlled entities (C); an enhancement would be generic Red Air cockpits in ABTC, flown by dedicated WF Red Air pilots. As regards Blue Air, how much of it should be live, how much virtual and how much constructive? 

Whatever the solution, the presentation to Blue Force players is dependent on the sensor-fusion capabilities of their aircraft and simulators - primarily a function of aircraft equipment and therefore the province of the OEMs, possibly also constrained by multi-national agreements - and is electronic rather than visual; the ability to generate synthetic visual manoeuvring adversaries along the lines of Red 6’s ATARS is as yet unfielded, although progress is encouraging. 

There is a flight safety angle here also: it would be unfortunate to generate a collision risk with a real aircraft while trying to manoeuvre against a virtual one.

Upcoming Enhancements

A welcome development will be the acquisition of the next-generation tactical training pod, Collins Aerospace Tactical Combat Training System Increment II (TCTS II), known in the UK as Future ACMI System (FACMIS), which would be fitted to Typhoon, and a plan developed for F-35. 

The new pod has increased bandwidth, which enhances LVC potential, and encryption for multi-layered security, allowing interoperability between players. Involvement of Multi-Engine and Rotary-Wing assets in live training is possible, but it may be that, in an era of heavy operational tasking, the training value to those forces would be limited and they might better be replicated by White Force input. 

Similarly, UAV and ‘Loyal Wingmen’ can be represented; these may seem ‘way down the road’, but Boeing Australia are already trialling Ghost Bat, controlled by RAAF F-18. Lastly, UK EW live training will be enhanced by an upgrade to the capabilities currently operated from RAF Spadeadam,

As ever, the quest is for the optimum blend of training at an affordable price and, despite the well-merited intervention of POTUS and governmental promises of ‘jam tomorrow’, competition for funding remains fierce and outcomes uncertain.

Key to future capability is the Gladiator system, an update on which  will be published in the very near future.