Develop a Better Simulation Strategy for Army Aviation
Gregory A. Adams
Abstract
Gregory A. Adams
Abstract
Aviation modernization programs do not assure that Army aviation forces will remain trained and ready. Modernization programs for Army helicopters throughout the 1990s did not include upgrades to the fleet of supporting training devices leaving them outdated. The U.S. Army currently operates a fleet of 36 high fidelity helicopter flight simulators at 17 sites around the world to include the continental U.S., Alaska, Hawaii, Germany and Korea. Fielding of these devices began in 1980 through 1996 and represents an investment of more than $600,000,000. Army Aviation has relied and continues to rely on these simulators for initial and sustainment training. But the computation systems, image generation and instructional system technology used in these simulators is approaching 20 years in age, and has been in great need of modernization for many years. After nearly a full decade of under-funded flight training and research, development and acquisition, Army aviation readiness is down. This represents a significantly increased operational risk to the aviation mission. A partial cause of the reduction in Army aviation readiness is outdated flight simulators.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Aviation modernization programs do not assure that Army aviation forces will remain trained and ready. Modernization programs for Army helicopters throughout the 1990s did not include upgrades to the fleet of supporting training devices leaving them outdated. The U.S. Army currently operates a fleet of 36 high fidelity helicopter flight simulators at 17 sites around the world to include the continental U.S., Alaska, Hawaii, Germany and Korea. Fielding of these devices began in 1980 through 1996 and represents an investment of more than $600,000,000. Army Aviation has relied and continues to rely on these simulators for initial and sustainment training. But the computation systems, image generation and instructional system technology used in these simulators is approaching 20 years in age, and has been in great need of modernization for many years. After nearly a full decade of under-funded flight training and research, development and acquisition, Army aviation readiness is down. This represents a significantly increased operational risk to the aviation mission. A partial cause of the reduction in Army aviation readiness is outdated flight simulators.
Key concepts: Aeronautics, Aviation, Military aviation, Operations research, Computer science, Engineering, Operations management, Aerospace engineering