Читать книгу Simulation and Wargaming - Группа авторов - Страница 11

1 1 It was a project of NATO's Research and Technology Organization sponsoring the research task group SAS‐026 chaired by Dr. David S. Alberts. It was published first by the Pentagon's C2 Research Program in 2002.

2 2 Starr, Stuart H. (2001) ““Good Games” – Challenges for the War‐Gaming Community,” Naval War College Review: Vol. 54: no.2, Article 9.

3 3 Founded in 1962, IABG became, in addition to its engineering facilities for testing military hardware designs, the principal Operations Research and Defense Analysis Institution of West‐Germany's Defense Ministry.

4 4 The mathematical air war model had been developed, together with analysts of the RAND Corporation and the USAF Systems Command, by IABG's Air OR group for the assessment of combat aircraft designs proposed by industry.

5 5 At the time, Mortensen, a senior member of the Norwegian Defence Research Establishment, was head of STC's OR division.

6 6 The Special Program Panel on Systems Science (SPOSS) was the follow‐on of the Advisory Panel on Operations Research (APOR), which was established by the NATO Science Committee in 1958 tasked to organize conferences and symposia, develop educational programs, and award scholarships for study visits to spread methods and applications of operational research in WW 2 and thereafter, thus facilitating the buildup of both NATO and national military institutions to support defense planners and militaries in sustaining a NATO force structure capable of deterring a Soviet aggression. The initial Chairman of APOR was Prof. Phillip Morse, a pioneer of OR research in WW 2 and chairman of the US Navy's Anti‐Submarine Warfare Operations Research Group (ASWORG). In 1973, the Science Committee replaced APOR by SPOSS arguing that, after 15 years, APOR has accomplished its mission and a reorientation of its effort was necessary toward applying previously developed techniques und theories to deal with real large‐scale systems continuing, however, along the high scientific standards of APOR and its chairmen.

7 7 The War Gaming Center evolved from a classical manual “Kriegspiel” group set up by retired German Army officers in the mid‐1960s, and the Air OR Group mentioned above, to eventually develop air/land games and simulations for investigating force structure and theater‐wide defense operations.

8 8 Reiner K. Huber, Lynn F. Jones, Egil Reine (Eds.): Military Strategy and Tactics – Computer Modeling of Land War Problems. 1974 Plenum Press, New York, pp. 9–12.

9 9 Dr. Payne was a pioneer in army operations research and pre‐eminent leader in the field for more than three decades. He began his career in 1955 as an analyst at the Army Operation Research Office at Johns Hopkins University to eventually become the first deputy under secretary of the Army Operations Research from 1968 to 1975 and the first director of the systems analysis activity of the US Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) from 1975 to 1986. In 1990, the Department of the Army Systems Analysis Award became the Dr. Wilbur B. Payne Memorial Award for Excellence in Analysis in order to honor the memory and contributions of Dr. Payne to the Operations Research field.

10 10 The terms “reactive” and “active” were used as defined by Saadia Amiel to characterize two complementary land force elements within the framework of a defensive strategy. In contrast to the all armor general‐purpose forces of the Cold War designed to fight in both, the reactive and active mode, Amiel proposed a land force structure “…of two components: one consisting of defensive combined arms teams committed to reactive defense where precise and high firepower is at a premium, and the second of offensive combined arms formations where maneuverability is at a premium.” [Amiel, Sadia: “Deterrence by Conventional Forces”. Survival March, April 1978. pp. 56–64].

11 11 Initially, the Bundeswehr Universities in Munich and Hamburg were founded in 1973 primarily as academic institutions to meet the significant deficit of officer candidates at the time by preparing them for professional carriers after leaving the military. As one of the institutes of the computer science departments in Munich, IASFOR's teaching and research emphasized defense and security issues as applications for computer science.

12 12 The categories of reactive defense include: 1) Static Area Defenses characterized by small combat teams fighting from a network of prepared positions and field fortification; 2) Dynamic Area Defenses fighting a mobile attrition‐oriented delaying battle by falling back through a series of prepared and partially reinforced positions; 3) Continuous Fire Barrier Defenses feature a fire belt along the demarcation line acting as a barrier that the enemy has to penetrate; 4) Selective Barrier Defenses are implemented depending on the tactical situation by “barrier brigade” composed of thee infantry battalions and one engineer battalion deployed to fight the initial forward defense battle from prefabricated field fortifications set up prior for the opponents expected assault. The brigades are manned largely by reservists living in the vicinity of their battalions.

13 13 For a detailed description of BASIS the reader is referred to Hans W. Hofmann, Reiner K. Huber and Karl Steiger: “On Reactive Defense Options – A Comparative Systems Analysis for the Initial Defense Against the first Strategic Echelon of the Warsaw Pact in Central Europe,” Modeling and Analysis of Conventional Defense in Europe (Huber, Ed.). 1986 Plenum Press, New York. pp. 97–139.

14 14 Reiner K. Huber (Ed.): Systems Analysis and Modeling in Defense. 1984 Plenum Press, New York.

15 15 In 1976, after the mandate of SPOSS was widened to cover scientific and environmental affairs, the NATO Science Committee decided to terminate supporting System Science and OR/SA altogether feeling that military applications should fall within the realms of other more endowed NATO divisions and directorates concerned with armaments and defense research such as the DRG and its Panel 7 (on Defense Applications of Operations Research) that adopted the members of SPOSS. DRG had been established in 1967 by the NATO Military Committee with the mandate to specific problems that NATO militaries may be faced with.

16 16 Therefore, many of the participants of the Brussels conference suggested that, in order to keep up with state of the art of scientific military modeling and analysis, a time interval between meetings of five years would be more appropriate than the eight years since the Ottobrunn conference in 1974.

17 17 As part of the reorganization of NATO in 1998, NATO's Research and Technology Organization (RTO) was created through the merger of DRG and AGARD (Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development founded in 1952 as an agency of the NATO Military Committee). Among others, RTO reorganized, not without some controversy, DRG's Panel 7 by establishing two panels, the new “Modeling and Simulation Group” (MSG) and the panel “System Analysis and Studies” (SAS). Both, SAS and MSG build on the methodological legacy of the Science Committee's APOR/SPOSS and DRG's Panel 7, albeit pursuing different objectives. Finally, in 2012, RTO was replaced by the NATO Science and Technology Organization (STO) “with a view to meeting, to the best advantage, the collective needs of NATO, NATO Nations and partner Nations in the fields of [military] Science and Technology.”

18 18 G.G. Armstrong: “Canadian Land Wargaming.” Systems Analysis and Modeling in Defense (Huber, Ed.). 1984 Plenum Press, New York, pp. 171–179.