Changing Strategies for Training Military Units

  • Franklin L. Moses
  • Jack I. Laveson
Part of the Defense Research Series book series (DRSS, volume 4)


New technologies and methods are emerging for training military units. The promise of simulation technologies is discussed as an element of a family of effective training methods. Historically, unit training has been provided through a mixture of small-unit drills and periodic field exercises. However, a new variety of threats, an increasing need for rapid deployment, and the availability of more capable equipment make operational and related training requirements more complex. At the same time, there will be fewer resources in the future: the size of the force will be reduced, budgets will decrease, and range and maneuver facilities will fall short of needs. The question addressed in this chapter is how training can meet a changing threat and the need for operational readiness.


Virtual World Training Method Large Unit Training Strategy Task Cluster 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alluisi, E.A. The Development of Technology for Collective Training: SIMNET, a Case History. Human Factors, 33(3), 1991.Google Scholar
  2. Brown, F. J. A Simulation-Based Intensified Training Readiness Strategy for the Reserve Component (IDA Paper P-2611). Alexandria, VA: Institute for Defense Analyses, December 1991.Google Scholar
  3. Deitchman, S.J. Preliminary Exploration of the Use of a Warfare Simulation Model to Examine the Military Value of Training (IDA Paper P-2094). Alexandria, VA: Institute for Defense Analyses, March 1988.Google Scholar
  4. Hicinbothom, J.H., Zachary, W.W., Knapp, B.G., Zaldad, A.L., Bitter, A.C., & Broz, A.L. Doing Deception: Attacking the Enemy’s Decision Processes (Research Report 1550). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, February 1990.Google Scholar
  5. Loper, M.L., Thompson, J.R., Williams, H.L. Simulator Networking: What Can It Offer the Training Community? Military Simulation & Training April 1991Google Scholar
  6. McFann, H.H., Hiller, J.H., & McCluskey, M.R. Unit performance measurement: Concepts, Techniques, and Examples. Presented at the Military Operations Research Society (MORS) Meeting, Williamsburg, VA, June 1990.Google Scholar
  7. Miller, G.J., & Bonder, S. Human Factors Representation for Combat Models (Technical Report 571). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, July 1982.Google Scholar
  8. U.S. Army Armor School. SINNET Users’ Guide. Ft. Knox, KY: USAARMC, April 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Franklin L. Moses
    • 1
  • Jack I. Laveson
    • 1
  1. 1.U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social SciencesAlexandriaUSA

Personalised recommendations