Rigged Training, Lesser Learning??

[snowsub]

What's with the US and training exercises and "adjusting" the rules to suit the outcome they want?
I would have thought that learning from things that don't go as you would like, whould actually be benifitial for the miltary personnel involved, rather than just having them go though the motions.

I just watched a dvd on the collins class submarine (HMAS Rankin) and it's voyage taking in the 2004 RIMPAC exercises.
Rankin was involved in a small exercise on the way to hawaii with 4 US ships and a US Submarine, during which after loosing contact with Rankin the US activated Active sonar which was not supposed to be part of the exercise (passive sonar only), nevertheless Rankin avoided the sonar, and took pictures of the target destroyer "winning" the exercise.
Next during RIMPAC, the US stationed 3 helo's above Rankin before the exercise even started so Ranking couldn't be "lost" (reason being on the previous RIMPAC, HMAS Waller "sunk" one of the US's Aircraft Carriers and the US didn't want the same thing happening to USS Stennis sp?).

During the Exercise, HMAS Rankin avoided a torpedo fired at it (using emergency blow ballast :hmm: ) and sucessfully evaded the helo's using another ships noise.

I've also heard that during another exercise where the US was testing they're new intergrated systems (global electronic network etc) against a "modern military" (they used Isreal as the model enermy), the US general commanding the Op-For used instant, co-ordinated overwhelming attacks to overload the electronic systems of the US forces, which the US then didn't count, changed the rules so it wouldn't happen again and consequently "won" the exercise.

Now I'd have though it would have been much better for US forces to actually learn from losses and make sure they can counter such circumstances, or is the US more interested in projecting the image of being Supreme rather that the actually facts?

Sorry, pretty long winded I know, just curious on what other people, specifically ex-military people thoughts on the issue?

Snowsub.

[Camaero]

Politics as usual perhaps? Although, I think I did read about some kind of war games where Americans took on another airforce but were not allowed to use their normal long range weapons systems. (In F-15's I think...) The Americans lost but claimed that if they could have done what they were trained to do then it might have been different.

Rules have no place in those war games as far as I am concerned. You are supposed to find out what would happen if such and such happened! Let both sides throw everything they have at eachother. Otherwise, how the hell are you learning anything?

[Etienne]

It's all politics. If the US lost to some "lesser" nation, they'd have some congressman from Idaho bitchin' that with all the money they pour in the navy, they should be able to beat Kukumenistan in a wargame.

Once things get a budget over a million, it's all about covering asses.

[snowsub]

But that's just dumbing down your military, surely learning from losses is infinitely better that rigging a win to please some pollies.

I'd have bet the military thinks so, cause if some small country can get an advantage it'd be better to find a counter that just rig the exercise so they can't use that advantage, cause I'm sure in the real world and opponent would use it, and if you have no countermeasure...

Snowsub

[Camaero]

I am sure the real military guys in the U.S. Navy would certainly not wish to see that happen. It is obviously best to learn from your failures. However, the political game has overrun the military and thats why when the **** hits the fan, we will just have to pretend it's chocolate.

[August]

Sometimes rules are bent so that the exercise can continue. Lots of stuff gets tested in these wargames and they cant afford to let anything disrupt it.

For example, when i was stationed in Germany our Infantry battalion once held off an opfor brigade at a river crossing for two days during the opening of REFORGER 80, a huge annual exercise which involved entire army corps from several nations. Although we could have held longer (we were kicking serious butt), and it was our mission to hold out as long as possible, our riverside stand was holding up the whole exercise and the umpires ordered us to retreat so that it could go forth.

[Kapitan]

thursday war is scripted in the royal navy new harrier and tornado pilots use hawks they under training so to make them feel they have achived a great feat they say you sank the ship

[snowsub]

I'm not too concerned about avoiding timetables and delays, it is an exercise after all, but to have things re-done, just so a favourable outcome can be achieved is a little on the nose.

It's like playing hide and seek and when you can't find someone, redo it and make them tell you where they are. :nope:
How are the soldiers etc meant to learn in those circumstances?

[diver]

Snowsub, where can i get my hands on that DVD? I thought it wasn't out till dec 19?

[Kiwi Zero Six]

Train as you fight.

This isn't how you fight.

[snowsub]

Snowsub, where can i get my hands on that DVD? I thought it wasn't out till dec 19?

I got it at an ABC Shop $30 or thereabouts by memory. :up:

It's quite interesting, I'm sure some people here would enjoy viewing it
:hmm:
TlLAMStrike
Kapitan
Bill Nicols
just to name a few...

A good scene was watching the prop of an asutralain frigate just infront of the periscope :o

[Konovalov]

I just watched a dvd on the collins class submarine (HMAS Rankin) and it's voyage taking in the 2004 RIMPAC exercises.

Mate, just a couple of questions if I may? What is the title of the DVD and where did you purchase it from? It sounds interesting.

[Konovalov]

Snowsub, where can i get my hands on that DVD? I thought it wasn't out till dec 19?

I got it at an ABC Shop $30 or thereabouts by memory. :up:

It's quite interesting, I'm sure some people here would enjoy viewing it
:hmm:
TlLAMStrike
Kapitan
Bill Nicols
just to name a few...

A good scene was watching the prop of an asutralain frigate just infront of the periscope :o

Sorry, question answered. I'll get my Dad to get me a copy and mail it across to the UK. It sounds well worth it. :|\

[diver]

Just for the others out there it is called "submariners"

I got it at an ABC Shop $30 or thereabouts by memory.

It's quite interesting, I'm sure some people here would enjoy viewing it


Cheers!
Looks like I'm making a trip to the ABC shop some time in the next week :D


For those interested the first episode is on at 7:30 on the 21st of December (this coming wednesday) on SBS here in Aus. It will be part of the "Inside Australia" series.

[snowsub]

I just watched a dvd on the collins class submarine (HMAS Rankin) and it's voyage taking in the 2004 RIMPAC exercises.

Mate, just a couple of questions if I may? What is the title of the DVD and where did you purchase it from? It sounds interesting.


The Title is "Submariners"

[Apocal]

I've also heard that during another exercise where the US was testing they're new intergrated systems (global electronic network etc) against a "modern military" (they used Isreal as the model enermy), the US general commanding the Op-For used instant, co-ordinated overwhelming attacks to overload the electronic systems of the US forces, which the US then didn't count, changed the rules so it wouldn't happen again and consequently "won" the exercise.

I know the situation you speak of. It was a wargame to show how a theoretical invasion of Iraq would go, the Marine general given command of the OPFOR essentially cheated the wargame (designed as a operational level simulation) by placing elements that weren't meant to simulated in there. The Navy (rightfully) called foul and had them restart, sans the exploits of the game system. He then commenced to commit ever more wacky and improbable strategies, until the umpires got fed up and took control of his forces. Then he went off and cried about it to the media.

Note that wargame (after umpires took over) showed that a fast-moving ground campaign, beginning with a decapitation strike, would destroy the Iraqi armed forces in weeks. Funny how that worked out, isn't it?

Now I'd have though it would have been much better for US forces to actually learn from losses and make sure they can counter such circumstances, or is the US more interested in projecting the image of being Supreme rather that the actually facts?

It would be much better if we could fight as we train, with full power active sonar and millions of square miles of ocean to hide in, but the powers that be dictate that exercises maximize training value. Which means the carrier sails donuts in an incredibly small area, there is little-to-no active sonar (which is pretty much crippling to ASW forces), and vessels sunk early are refloated.

Sorry, pretty long winded I know, just curious on what other people, specifically ex-military people thoughts on the issue?

Currently serving in the Navy, I think it's pretty much BS. Train as you fight, fight as you train. It's one thing when you are supporting development of new systems and need a controlled situation for data collection. It's quite another when you are preparing men and women for situations where second place swims home.