An HLA interface to the Virtual Strike Warfare Environment VSWE

1
An HLA interface to the Virtual Strike Warfare
Environment (VSWE)

• Veridian Engineering
• Systems Analysis Research Group (SARG)

2
Outline

• Goals
• VSWE Federation Development and Execution Process
  (FEDEP) Experience
• Summary

3
Experiment Goals

• IRD Goals
• Enable VSWE interoperability within DMT
• Complete development within fixed budget and
  schedule
• VSWE Federation Goals
• Apply FEDEP within VSWE arena
• Build experimental federation
• Consider direct and Agile FOM interfaces

4
Virtual Strike Warfare Environment
FRED/SAR/OTW/TFLIR
INTEGRATED MISSION SUPPORT TOOLS AFMSS,
SUBRSCENE, VBMS (Planning/Rehearsal/Stealth
Viewer)
Via SWEDAT
Mission Debrief VBMS/ Video Playback

• Mission Planning/Rehearsal
• AFMSS/CLOAR
• SUBRSCENE

Network Links
SEAD Scenario
SWEG / JIMM Simulation Warfare Environment
Generator via FRED provides 2 Detailed Manned JSF
Cockpits within the Large Threat Laydown
contained in the Generic Composite Scenario
(GCS) .
Via SWEDAT
5
FEDEP Overview
Program Objectives
Initial Planning Documents
Define Federation Require-ments 1
Sponsor Requirements
Develop Federation Conceptual Model 2
Federation Scenario
Available Resources
RTI RID File
Federation Objectives Statement
Federates
Federation Development Plan
Design and Develop Federation 3
Federation Conceptual Model
Integrate and Test Federation 4
Federation Requirements
FOM
Execute Federation and Analyze Execution
Results 5
FED file
Scenario Instance
Testing Data
Test Evaluations Criteria
Tested Federation
Results Analysis
Corrective Actions
6
Define Federation Requirements

• Step 1 of the FEDEP
• The federation sponsor and federation
  development team define and agree on a set of
  objectives, and document what must be
  accomplished to achieve those objectives.
• VSWE/HLA Objectives
• Evaluate ilities
• Prove or disprove hypothesis

7
Experiment Definition

• Hypothesis The UCAV/SEAD mission (enhanced)
  force package is more effective that the
  (baseline) force package.
• Measures of effectiveness
• Percent of SAM batteries
• identified, engaged, destroyed
• Time from emission to
• weapon commit
• weapon on target
• Assess sensitivity of results to target operating
  policy
• Maximum attrition - long emission time, short
  hiding
• Maximum survival - short emission time, long
  hiding
• Balanced

8
Develop Conceptual Model

• Step 2 of the FEDEP
• A representation of the real world domain of
  interest is developed, and described in terms of
  a set of required objects and interactions.
• UCAV/SEAD Conceptual Model
• Mission Scenario Definition included specific
  asset types, numbers, initial locations, and
  orders over the course of the experiment
• Excursions based on content of force package

9
Conceptual Model UCAV/SEAD
10
Design and Develop Federation

• Step 3 of the FEDEP
• Federation participants are determined (if not
  previously identified), and a FOM is developed to
  explicitly document information exchange
  requirements and responsibilities.
• HLA / VSWE Development
• Federate survey and selection
• Functional allocation to federates
• Data collection strategy
• FOM design

11
Design and Develop Federation Federate Selection
Federate on SGI IRIX 6.5 Platform
MIL- AASPEM II
??? Real-time Platform Reference FOM (RPR-FOM) ???
??? STOW Run-Time Infrastructure (RTI) ???
Network Communications
12
Design and Develop Federation Functional
Allocation to Federates

• JSAF
• SEAD UCAVs

13
Design and Develop Federation Data Collection
Strategy

• Data collection approach
• Options were to collect data with logger
  federate, locally by individual federates, or an
  interface logger
• Chose to have an interface logger
• Data collection plan
• For each MOE
• textual description, explanation, implications,
  and assumptions
• algorithms required for reduction
• description of each variable in algorithm
• logging responsibility and format for each
  variable
• File naming conventions
• Manual data correlation and reduction approach

14
Design and Develop Federation FOM Design

• Strawman FOM based on Conceptual Model
• refined iteratively to meet federate data
  exchange requirements, ensure experiment issues
  reflected by federates
• Reconciled several SOM/FOMs of interest
• SWEG/JIMM
• JointSAF
• Trailblazer
• JTLS-GCCS-NATO C2
• DIADS

15
Federation Integration and Test

• Step 4 of the FEDEP
• All necessary federation implementation
  activities are performed, and testing is
  conducted.
• HLA/VSWE Experience
• Test Federation

16
Federation Integration and Test Test Federation
Federate on SGI IRIX 6.5 Platform
Federate on Sun Solaris 2.5.1 Platform
Federate on SGI IRIX 6.5 Platform
Federate on SGI IRIX 6.5 Platform
MIL- AASPEM II
JointSAF
FRED PIL
SWEG / JIMM
SWEDAT to HLA Interface
Agile FOM Interface
VSWE FOM
DMSO Run-Time Infrastructure (RTI) 1.3v5
Network Communications
17
Summary Lessons Learned

• MOE/MOPs to measure the outcome of experiments
  must be defined in advance
• Requirements evolve as federation is developed
• Identify key events, objects, and activities -
  model these precisely
• Strawman FOM and functional allocation - good
  start
• Initial FOM design should consider excursions
• Plan for facility and hardware early
• Conduct individual federate testing for each
  federate
• Conduct incremental integration tests - risk
  reduction

18
Summary Federations for Experimentation

• VSWE federation has potential as a persistent
  federation
• can be augmented, subsetted, or modified to meet
  other experimentation requirements
• The HLA provides the common architecture, tools,
  and processes to meet new requirements
• FEDEP provides the framework for federation
  solutions
• Architecture is usable now
• Tools and technical support are helpful
• Plan on extra time...