SAF centre for Military Experimentation
-
Something new from SAF to give us that extra edge..........
Minister Unveils SAF Centre for Military Experimentation
(Source: Singapore Ministry of Defence; issued Nov. 5, 2003)
The Minister for Defence, Rear-Admiral (RADM) (NS) Teo Chee Hean, officiated at the opening of the SAF Centre for Military Experimentation (SCME) this afternoon.
Housed with many new technologies and developments, the SCME is the one-stop centre for all SAF experiments. Through experimentation, the SAF can acquire new war-fighting knowledge, develop innovative operational concepts and doctrines to enhance mission planning.
Located at the heart of Stagmont Camp, the two-storey experimentation centre has three laboratories – the Command Post of the Future Lab, Battlelab and the C4I Lab. These laboratories provide users and engineers with an environment to explore, experiment and demonstrate technology capabilities for the SAF’s future force.
The SAF, together with its technology partner, the Defence Science & Technology Agency (DSTA), began planning for SCME in mid-2002 because it realised that in future, physical boundaries of air, land and sea would be made artificial by the increasing reach of weapons and sensors. Hence, SCME is an integrated effort between the SAF and DSTA where technologists work alongside military experimenters to transform SingaporeÂ’s defence capabilities.
SCME undertakes a multi-year strategy, which will systematically build up a highly re-configurable command and control system. This also involves the integration of an indigenously built modelling and simulation engine to create a rich repository of re-usable models and exercise scenarios as new models are created to meet specific experimentation requirements.
SCME is part of the SAFÂ’s continued emphasis to leverage on technology to enable force transformation. It marks another step in MINDEF/ SAFÂ’s strategy in investing in continuous transformation of our defence capability. Transformation is a process that absorbs new technologies, concepts and capabilities into the SAF, to ensure that we stay ahead and maintain a strategic edge to overcome future complexities and challenges to our security.
Fact Sheet: the SAF Centre For Military Experimentation
The SAF Centre for Military Experimentation (SCME) consists of three laboratories. They are the Command Post of the Future Lab, Battlelab, and the C4I Lab.
1. Command Post of the Future Lab (CPoF Lab)
This lab serves to explore questions and possibilities for command and control in the future. It addresses questions like:
--What is the best C2 (command and control) for a force operating in a network?
--What are the best ways for the commander, his staff, and the ground forces to interact with each other in the future?
--How would new technology in areas such as decision support systems enable faster, effective and better decision-making – what is hype and what is real?
--How are good and bad decisions made?
The physical and technical infrastructure is intended to simulate fixed, distributed and mobile command posts at various levels of command and control. These are designed to be re-configurable to meet different experimentation needs. New C2 tools, such as visualisation tools, collaborative software, man-machine interface technologies, will be in place for use and trials.
2. Battlelab
This lab allows for virtual experimentation of operational concepts for air, sea and land platforms. It addresses questions like:
--What is the increased effectiveness of forces with co-operative engagement capabilities?
--What should be the new operational concepts with a network-centric force?
--How would you effectively use superior battlespace knowledge?
This lab includes simulation systems and games to create force-on-force scenarios. Some of the games include Joint Conflict And Tactical Simulation (JCATS) and Full Spectrum Command (FSC). The systems are re-configurable to simulate different platforms such as UAVs, ships or tanks.
3. C4I Lab
This allows for experimentation of the technical issues related to implementation of C4I technologies. It will answer questions like:
--What are the challenges for implementing a network-based fighting system?
--What is the latency between modes in a network of a particular topology?
The lab has facilities to allow technical tests of C4I technologies in a controlled environment, especially prior to field trials.
-ends- -
Excract from ST:
Brigadier-General Jimmy Khoo, SAF's future systems architect, told The Straits Times: 'We think the edge in the battlefield is going to be about knowledge. The battle for information, the battle for knowledge. We think SAF has a very sound strength relative to potential adversaries.'
The air force & navy is already quite advance in term of RMA, now is the army turn , I wondered is it as sophisticate as the US as they are upgrading their AFV with network PC.
There are three laboratories set up for this: a battle lab, a command post of the future lab and a C4I lab.
According to Colonel Ravinder Singh from the Future Systems Directorate, the command post lab alone cost just under $1 million, while the entire complex cost 'a couple of millions'.
In the battle lab, soldiers can engage in a virtual battle, much like with the commercial flight simulator or shoot-out games.
The lab also allows the three services - air force, navy and army - to come together to plan and coordinate their operations. The three forces can also test new weapons and systems at the lab before acquiring them.
Col Singh said: 'We can create a virtual environment, with different configurations, to understand how to design a force or weapon we can use most effectively in the battlefield.'
The command lab simulates a central command post, where officers-in-charge get a bird's eye view of the entire operation with the help of huge touch-screen displays and projectors. This also helps them to plan the use of resources and explore new battle options.
The third lab - command, control, communication, computers and intelligence, or C4I in military speak - is where commanders carry out networks planning to see how effective the channels of communication are.
The SAF Armour Brigade is one of the first to have carried out extensive tests at the centre and will go to Australia next week for the annual Exercise Wallaby, armed with some new capabilities.
Lieutenant-Colonel Low Jin Phang, head of the C4I lab, said that things like flip-charts and plastic overlays for maps have now been replaced by tablet PCs and PDAs.
Other experiments involve the use of digital radios with 288 kilobits per second broadband access, a wireless local area network and testing it all out on a virtual battle simulation system.
He said military capabilities can now be developed in a shorter time, at a lower cost and be incorporated into the unit's training next week.
This will make the SAF's ABG even more potent.
I believe the SAF will be totally changed in 5-10 years time,all major equipment & maybe even individual section will oso be in a system within a bigger system of SAF. The next revolution is coming!!!
-
when i first saw the word "military experimentation", the image tt flashed across my mind was tt of the unit 136 the japanese established in china to do cruel military experiments on pows!
-
if it's run by the scholars, we all doomed..
-
think its run by col ravinder singh, whom i dun think is a scholar.Originally posted by the Bear:if it's run by the scholars, we all doomed..
anyway i dun see wats wrong wif it being run by a scholar. but o cos i dun wan to get into an argument abt scholars here.
-
I think not all of u realise how this could change the way SAF fight in the future. Let me give u a possible senario ,purely my imagination.
War in the 80s without UAV & networkcentric force:
I think the potential for this revolution is tremendous, that why SAF is setting up this centre to do simulation, experiment with it. It will be costly but certainly worth it if they r implemented.
Bde Cdr :Intel report said that the "Hill 285" is occupied by a enemy battalion of light infantry, you r to take it with your Armoured battalion.
CO: Yes Sir.
Abt 500m away from "hill 285" , A & B coy from 4XX SAR will be the main assault force to take hill, C coy about 100m behind will be the reserve.As the tanks from A & B coy as well as 120mm SP mortar r firing against the enemy so to soften their defence b4 the assault. Suddenly,
OC of C coy: Tiger 1(code word for the CO),this is tiger 4, we r under attack at our 9 o'clock, I think is at least a coy of armoured force, oh fxxk ,I am hit , I am hit...........
CO : Tiger 4,this is tiger 1, what is your situation Over......
B4 they know it , A & B coy under attack from both 9 & 12 o'clock, the CO give the order for retreat, mission failed.
War of the future:
The senario is the same, likewise they too did not detect the well hidden enemy armoured Coy just behind the "hill 285" under thick vegatation. But this time,as the enemy armoured forces move to flank them, it was captured by the UAV.
CO: Tiger 4, this is tiger 1, from the video feed from the UAV ,we could see that a enemy armoured forces is moving toward your 9, you will setup your coy here & here(touching the screen of the map around "hill285" ),& tiger 3 will help reinforce in here to setup a ambush......
Using touch pen or touch screen monitor,the CO has just deployed the C & B coys via the battlefield network, the CO as well as all the OCs has video feed from the UAV via the the network, they noe exactly what going on around them , therefore noe what to expect, six Sibmas & 12 Condors coming at their 9. They setup the ambush & successfully crushed the flanking force. The enemy retreated from "Hill 285".Mission Accomplished.
Bde Cdr: Well done , Tiger 1, I see that you guys r running low on ammo ,only 30%, resupply will despatch to you now.
(Every ammo & fuel expended from each AFV is recorded and been send out via the network to the Cdr if they run below 30%. Logistic resupply will take action automatically with the exact amount w/o the unit requesting it)
CO : Thank you Sir. -
If you have time, you guys can read Tom Clancy's book. I think it is called "The Bear and the dragon" or something. Anyway about a fictional war between Russian Republic and PRC. The US is allied to Russia and the book illustrates how a US Amoured Div crushed the PRC forces, using technologies illustrated above.
-
These VERY YOUNG ppl don't even know how current command post work in war and they are experimenting with future concepts?!!!
Testing in Wallaby???
Against what???!!!
Dust mites???
I remember how a "proven" general/colonel from country X LAUGHED when he visited a Div HQ command post in Taiwan many many years ago.
This time round probably got to get a nurse on standby he might have a heart attack!
Sigh I guess all the taxes got to go somewhere. It's ok as long as we can afford it AND NOBODY DIES! -
and how much do you know about that unit to make such a claim??
i mean... RMA is a new thingy... and each country must create their own version.... this thingy cant be transplanted one...
anyway... so what if a taiwan general had a laugh of his life... he is no GOD and he aint gonna guarantee us a victory or somthing if we follow his style... and how much can he know about our style in a short visit?
so... dont take it so hard about one taiwan general's comment... are you gonna fight or escape based on the opinion of a single man who is not even part of SAF?
lastly... its important to learn... and be humble... but.. its also important to take criticism where it is reasonable... -
Actually the Chinese spear head got owned by the Russian army...with the 1st cav hitting the flanks(i think lah forget the story liao).The part that screwed the PRC forces was the US bombing the fuel lines to hell and them not being able to rebuild them fast enough.Thus their tanks were sitting ducks.Didnt help when that old man killed the general commanding the chinese 3rd army(or something liddat).The book that showed all this tech is the tom clancy 1 called...executive orders....Originally posted by spencer99:If you have time, you guys can read Tom Clancy's book. I think it is called "The Bear and the dragon" or something. Anyway about a fictional war between Russian Republic and PRC. The US is allied to Russia and the book illustrates how a US Amoured Div crushed the PRC forces, using technologies illustrated above. -
that book was a racist piece of carp lah...Originally posted by |-|05|:Actually the Chinese spear head got owned by the Russian army...with the 1st cav hitting the flanks(i think lah forget the story liao).The part that screwed the PRC forces was the US bombing the fuel lines to hell and them not being able to rebuild them fast enough.Thus their tanks were sitting ducks.Didnt help when that old man killed the general commanding the chinese 3rd army(or something liddat).The book that showed all this tech is the tom clancy 1 called...executive orders....
sure, the fight scenes were interesting... opens up many interesting possibilities in future developments, but the fact that the agenda was to slime the chinks in the first place, it was a very lop-sided portrayal...
and thats the worst possible thing we can do too... to assume that our technology gives us SO much of an edge that the enemy will have no choice but to capitulate...
be realistic... its an added edge, but its not an end in itself. -
I think you dun even noe what you r talking abt, did u see the movie "Black Hawk Down" & the movie " We R soldiers" ? the command post from 60s & 90s.Originally posted by Fairyland:These VERY YOUNG ppl don't even know how current command post work in war and they are experimenting with future concepts?!!!
Testing in Wallaby???
Against what???!!!
Dust mites???
I remember how a "proven" general/colonel from country X LAUGHED when he visited a Div HQ command post in Taiwan many many years ago.
This time round probably got to get a nurse on standby he might have a heart attack!
Sigh I guess all the taxes got to go somewhere. It's ok as long as we can afford it AND NOBODY DIES!
One with charts & lot of radio communication w/o knowing exactly what going on the field.
One with video feeds from the LOH & satallite, digitised map of the entire battle, knowing exactly where his troops & his enemy were & redeployed his troop with a bird eye view.
Which one do you want to be associated with during a war?
And do you know what is this so called proven "General" is laughing at?
He could be laughing at low tech of our command post, still using chart to deploy your troops!
The computer age has come to modern warfare, there r lot of things you could implement into the new force, but what is effective ? & what is just gismo? That is why the centre is setup , using computer simulation & eventual test on the field to gauge it effectiveness.
Things that could implemented like having every AFV GPS navigation system where it will be f/b it's exact location to the CP, it oso give f/b whether they r immobilise or kill, running low on fuel or ammo via the network.
The Cdr may even have constant video feed if one or two of the AFV has camera installed that upload realtime image of the actual battle via the network to the CP.
All this realtime f/b via various sensors ,knowing what is your situation & what & where your enemy is , that give you great advantage over your enemy that have none of the above. -
Actually it's over stating the US forces...and underestimating both Chinese army and the Russian will to defend the country.Overall i dint really understand much of the book actually ahha it was mostly political i guess.Originally posted by CX:that book was a racist piece of carp lah...
sure, the fight scenes were interesting... opens up many interesting possibilities in future developments, but the fact that the agenda was to slime the chinks in the first place, it was a very lop-sided portrayal...
and thats the worst possible thing we can do too... to assume that our technology gives us SO much of an edge that the enemy will have no choice but to capitulate...
be realistic... its an added edge, but its not an end in itself. -
executive order is even more political.......until nw i still dun quite understand wad is about except a Japanse terrorist kill the former president in the book......Originally posted by |-|05|:Actually it's over stating the US forces...and underestimating both Chinese army and the Russian will to defend the country.Overall i dint really understand much of the book actually ahha it was mostly political i guess. -
I think it is becos you didn't read the previous book "Debt of Honour"Originally posted by duotiga83:executive order is even more political.......until nw i still dun quite understand wad is about except a Japanse terrorist kill the former president in the book......
where the Jap against the US in two fronts, both military & economical.
Tom Clancy books abt Jack Ryan r in way all connected. -
Well, the guy was impressed with how much information was plastered all over the tent when only one white board was carrying what matters to him the most!
And do you know what is this so called proven "General" is laughing at?
He could be laughing at low tech of our command post, still using chart to deploy your troops!
BTW they are very good at keeping things SIMPLE and focus only on getting effective results. I have seen their command vehicles with flat tyres even! Oh, the aircon was working fine though.
The power of digitising the battlefield with PC allows one to crunch and display much more info than paper charts etc. But with typical Singaporean Kiasu syndrome you risk information overload.
Of course fleetmapping GIS application like MapInfo is a great help provided you know what info counts the most when you need it and put the rest aside.
Hey I maybe wrong but I still standby my opinion. -
the dragon was tasty when i stewed it
but seriously... don't you guys thing Clancy's books are all crap?
i tried.. laboured through "Red October"... could not even bring myself to half-way of "It's Clear the President's a Danger" and decided the rest of the convoluted stuff was a clear sign of use of heavy drugs...
oh well.. my 2 bits' worth...
experiment all they want.. like some guy's sig, no plan withstands first contact...Originally posted by spencer99:If you have time, you guys can read Tom Clancy's book. I think it is called "The Bear and the dragon" or something. Anyway about a fictional war between Russian Republic and PRC. The US is allied to Russia and the book illustrates how a US Amoured Div crushed the PRC forces, using technologies illustrated above. -
His pioneer bks are gd...esp Red October and Red Storm Rising and got 1 is on Submarine tat 1 is also gd....but after tat....it goes down hill.....Originally posted by the Bear:the dragon was tasty when i stewed it
but seriously... don't you guys thing Clancy's books are all crap?
i tried.. laboured through "Red October"... could not even bring myself to half-way of "It's Clear the President's a Danger" and decided the rest of the convoluted stuff was a clear sign of use of heavy drugs...
oh well.. my 2 bits' worth...
experiment all they want.. like some guy's sig, no plan withstands first contact...
-
Another example is the total belief in the accuracy and over-reliance on computer generated graphics in the battlefield simlab.........especially on thermal images???
What about the radio propagation simulation on the C4I software??? I have my doubts on that too especially in build up areas.
Alot depends on the digital database on board. Ok you can get hold of terrain elevation but clutter losses in tropical forest???
Garbage in Garbage out young ppl! -
Is the PRC forces really that lousy?Originally posted by spencer99:If you have time, you guys can read Tom Clancy's book. I think it is called "The Bear and the dragon" or something. Anyway about a fictional war between Russian Republic and PRC. The US is allied to Russia and the book illustrates how a US Amoured Div crushed the PRC forces, using technologies illustrated above. According to what you post is like the US Div easily crush the PRC forces!
What do you guys think of the PLA? I read from some military web site that the PLA is one of the most powerful army in the world.
How does the SAF match up against the PLA? Men to men, equipment to equipment? Any of you guys talk to or know a PLA officer? -
you get enough ordinance delivered accurately and timely, every "elite" army is just a pile of scorched smoldering bones...Originally posted by want to know:Is the PRC forces really that lousy? According to what you post is like the US Div easily crush the PRC forces!
What do you guys think of the PLA? I read from some military web site that the PLA is one of the most powerful army in the world.
How does the SAF match up against the PLA? Men to men, equipment to equipment? Any of you guys talk to or know a PLA officer? -
One cannot conduct a comparison between an American div and a Chinese one and conclude that one will triumph over another in a real war. Side by side comparison of firepower, the American division might even lose, but when taken into consideration that an American division is 'networked' and thus plugged into the massive information gathering capabilities of the USAF as well as the US's national technical gathering means, then a US division's lethality is much more than a PLA's one. (in fact, the US div's organic recon capabilities is also more than a PLA's one. The addition of the Shadow 200 will in the near future wil boost their info gathering capability even further)Originally posted by want to know:Is the PRC forces really that lousy? According to what you post is like the US Div easily crush the PRC forces!
What do you guys think of the PLA? I read from some military web site that the PLA is one of the most powerful army in the world.
How does the SAF match up against the PLA? Men to men, equipment to equipment? Any of you guys talk to or know a PLA officer? -
To Fairyland,
From your posting.I wonder you have even ever commandered any combat unit(grp ,section ect) or even a combat soldier vocation.
If you have you should noe that in all military training, you r expected to expect the unexpected. From grp to all the way Div level, the controller will not give you perfect infomation, especially from coy level onward becos "shxt" happen in a real war becos you will not have perfect information in a real war.The controller will "hide" critical info so that to see how the Cdr react to the new threat , how he redeploy his troop to counter the new threat.This is part of the almost every exercises conducted in the SAF.
Therefore every Cdr & soldiers involved in those exercises noe how critical is "perfect infomation", so to prevent "shxt" from happening.
Some info is better than no info becos in a real war & there is no such thing as perfect info becos the enemy could hide their troop in thick vegatation or building or even underground(If i am not wrong today thermal imaging could not penetrate thick vegatation), they could jammed our sensors & as you said distortion due to natural barrier etc.
Therefore all Cdr r trained to expect the unexpected & purposefully redeploy to counter it.Another example is the total belief in the accuracy and over-reliance on computer generated graphics in the battlefield simlab.........especially on thermal images???
All the above as you said is something that will happen in real war, it is becos limitation of today technology, but our Cdr has to expect them & work on the current info (in the simulation)& will react accordily when better info & especially timely info from RMA is presented to them.
What about the radio propagation simulation on the C4I software??? I have my doubts on that too especially in build up areas.
Alot depends on the digital database on board. Ok you can get hold of terrain elevation but clutter losses in tropical forest???
Garbage in Garbage out young ppl!
As you said there will be limitation in simlab but this is the best they could do in the SAF or any army. Do you expect the SAF to invite the MAF to Tekong so that they could have a real fight with real bullets so to gauge their effectiveness?