How A Sim Made The USAF Better At Air Combat

[@andyaim4764]

I went to an air show in the UK a number of years ago, I was in a virtual F16 squadron at the time and still am, I just love the jet and it's capability. I came across a US F16 on static display and had a chat with the pilot, I felt bit embarrassed admitting to being in a virtual squadron but he was like "it that Falcon 4.0?" and even knew the latest software patch, we had a great chat and he confirmed releasing an Aim120 was the same procedure as in the sim, he actually told me there was stuff in the sim manual that he was told was restricted information when he was training. He then told me it was ok to take a picture right next to his jet and lifted the rope to let me through, much to the envy of the other spectators. What a great guy and what a great jet!!

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

That's awesome. Those are the kind of memories that last a lifetime.

[@fonesrphunny7242]

Had a similar experience at an RNLAF airshow. They had an F-16 simulator set up and did a few "demos" each day. As a BMS player (4.32.7 iirc), I immediately recognised the pause message at the top of the screen. Got to talk to one pilot about how well BMS simulates the aircraft. "It's missing some small (confidential) details, but otherwise it's almost spot on." Got to talk to a lot more people that weekend and on following events. Hope the world calms down and Lichtmachdagen makes a return.

[@andyaim4764]

@@fonesrphunny7242 nice!! I’m bumped into a few real life fast jet pilots on sims and they said pretty much the same.

[@abinodattil6422]

What’s a virtual squad?

[@fonesrphunny7242]

@@abinodattil6422 A group that plays flight sims together, usually in a more serious manner, with proper procedures, tactics etc

[@NozomuYume]

"Collect over 55 billion data points" is marketing speak to non-computer-literate boomers for "The log file is 55 gigs."

[@MattWagner]

Great stuff as always, Mike. Keep up the fantastic work.

[@ImperiumLibertas]

Having similar metrics like this in the AAR of a match would be great for training in DCS.

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

Thanks for the kind words. Its appreciated.

[@Bonta22]

I just saw this comment --and I immediately heard Matt's voice in my head

[@lukalekov1530]

Thank you guys for making and trying your best for your players. Thanks again and cheers we are waiting for new video for upcoming 2025!!

[@TheWizardGamez]

No shot!

[@Cee64E]

The Air Force aren't the only service that have used simulators. Back in the late 80s the army began using a Tank simulator that allowed the entire crew to work together in the sim for the first time. This was primarily a Gunnery practice sim. It was designed to help crews build a rhythm around tank gunnery. Eventually they added actual driver's and loader's positions and activities so that the virtual tank could be operated in simulated battles. This was important because, as I mentioned, the crew needs a rhythm to develop and be well practiced for effective combat shooting and maneuvering. It takes each member of the crew doing the right thing at the right time to produce the best percentage of first round kills, and it's something that only develops with practice. When you can get that practice without expending live ammo, burning hundreds of gallons of diesel, or accumulating maintenance hours, that's a _huge_ win. Even if the simulated environment looks like something out of a 16-bit video game.

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

You're exactly right. Practice and building muscle memory is the key.

[@craggleshenanigans]

Tom Scott has a video on a analogue tank simulator used by the Swiss. Basically a tiny camera scaled on a diorama

[@Cee64E]

@@craggleshenanigans, I've seen that. The US Army tried something similar, but it was less of a driving simulator and more of a driving procedures sim, at least in the early 80's at Ft. Knox where I trained. Essentially, it was how a driver would operate the various parts of the driver's compartment that were not actually part of driving the tank, such as the fire suppression system, the NBC air filtration system, the turret-to-hull sealing system, basically all the things _not_ concerned with fire control and targeting. This simulator was just the driver's compartment excised from the tank with all the bells, whistles, switches, and levers in their proper places. The computerized sims didn't come until the mid to late 80's and were installed at most posts that had tank battalions such as the 4th Infantry Division (Mech) at Ft. Carson.

[@sergeantklein6026]

I hated pulling UCOFT/BATTS training at 0200 hours

[@aviationrambler]

For someone who's always been researching this stuff, having a good sim helps tremendously. You can read about aircraft and weapon statistics, how ECM works, procedures, all this stuff, but it's really almost completely beyond human imagination. Having a good sim really exposes you to the practical implications of what you read about and really offers a brand new level of comprehension. And as you're exposed to it, your imagination is able to comprehend it. So as I read about a new piece of technology, I can, more or less to a degree of accuracy, plug it into the simulated experience I've gained. Of course sims aren't flawless and allow for detrimental experience to be accrued if unaware but nothing's perfect really. It's why you use it for practice, not for learning.

[@mikem.s.1183]

Having worked for Defense contractors (space and military aviation)...this is absolute GOLD. 💯 Can't wait for more. Subbed.

[@piedpiper1172]

There is just no substitute for practice. Nothing is harder than the first time at a task, and it’s tough for your first time at a task-such as BVR combat where the other guys shoot back-if it involves direct mortal risk. My grandfather was a WW2 pacific veteran and he bought me the F/A-18 flight sim that came out, gosh it had to be the mid 90’s. First time he saw me play it he got kinda distant, but I was pretty young and didn’t think much of it. Years later he brought it up, and told me he’d thought about it often. He shared a story of a torpedo bomber pilot he met when they were both on a hospital ship after Iwo that had been on Big E during some of her early engagements. The pilot always stressed to him how overwhelming it was to come down out of cloud cover and for the first time in his life be shot at by those IJN AA guns, and at the same time need to make a for-real torpedo run for the first time. Granddad stressed that the pilot would always go on and on to him about how differently he flew his later missions than that first one, and how many of his squad mates didn’t live long enough to learn those little differences. Granddad would occasionally bring that game up for the rest of his life, always saying he sure liked that we were letting today’s pilots get a lot more practice before getting shot at for real, and that it made him feel better knowing it wouldn’t be quite as hard as his buddy had it that first time. There’s just no substitute for practice.

[@yappydawg8985]

I can't wait for the next video. Getting good hard data to learn from sounds awesome.

[@questioneverythingalways820]

As someone who sits at the other end of the sim training spectrum - being dismounted combat sims/virtual trainers, and having actual experience as an infantry rifleman in Australia…. Physical repetition and cognitive loading is what’s required. As someone who also uses DCS often - keen for the next video.

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

You're absolutely right about the repetition. It's easy to regurgitate some details from a slide. It's quite another thing to actually do it all in the middle of a real exercise (or combat).

[@questioneverythingalways820]

@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom yep, sims are the best medium possible if done correctly for the use case.

[@MondoChow777]

​@@questioneverythingalways820 I find it extremely interesting how the motorsport industry only started warming up to simulators for their drivers when Max Verstappen turned Formula One on its head after Red Bull had him training on a sim years before his first race, of which he won and has been a force to reckon with since.

[@Notyou5556]

Us navy did same study. Basic training was say 20 flights. Do 12 in simulator, and final 8 in real aircraft. It works.

[@dakaodo]

It's similar in sports and martial arts. Solo work and visualization training that are done mindfully with a focus on performing in the real deal as the end goal of the exercises works. I spent approx 200 hrs in racing sims for rally and rallycross. When I eventually decided to give real local amateur events a try, the guys spotting me said I had a decent grasp on basics for a first timer. A lot of the car handling was immediately visually recognizable and felt familiar to me -- I just had to get used to the actual sensation of forces shifting me in my seat. In all these cases, leavening the simulated training with doses of IRL training or actual events gives the practitioner context to their training. Otherwise, training in a vacuum can lead to training artifacts simply b/c they don't know which bits are compromises on reality.

[@lorenzobosi8650]

Super interesting video Mike! I wonder how sophisticated and realistic the AI the Air Force was using at that time was though as you said the aim of the study was different. Really looking forward to your next video. As always thank you for your precious contribution to the DCS community

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

Yeah they didn't specifically lay out how the AI works. But judging by the increase in scores between Monday and Friday, it looks like the groups had some significant push back early on but then later overcame it. So whatever the AI was like, it was not a pushover.

[@pyr0duck676]

These are great videos! Have you ever considered working with a campaign developer to make a realistic training campaign in DCS?

[@RogueSpecterGamingOfficial]

Definitely looking forward to the next video. Amazing work Mike. Keep up the good work man.

[@UCh905]

Thanks Mike, as always, another superb video. Can't wait for Part-ii.

[@jochentram9301]

I'd love to see a deeper dive into the why. I suspect it may in fact be the greater frequency, coupled with the sims being less physically demanding, leading to more repetition. Which is how we learn a lot of things, really, by repeating and repeating and repeating them until they become automatic. The lower physical stress levels may in fact improve that learning effect - stress is not something, AIUI, that improves ability to learn. If my suspicion is correct, sims may be more effective than live flights at training these techniques, simply bcause you can do 5 of them in a single workday, and stil have the energy to chat about them with your colleagues after. Another factor at the force level is that flying fighters, even in training and even with the greatest care taken, is riskier than sitting down in a sim pod. It's a lot less likely for the USAF to lose a pilot for months, or permanently, if they screw up in a sim, and of course, in a sim, you never have an engine just die on you midflight, which AIUI has happened IRL.

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

You're exactly right. The effectiveness comes from being able to jump right into the learning objective. There's a lot that goes into any flight. So its incredibly helpful to be able to get right to the part you want. When you can skip all the other parts it means you can get in a lot more practice on that one part in a single day.

[@daveg5857]

Great job! Intensely interesting.

[@Saddl3r]

Hey Mike! Just wanted to thank you for all your great videos!

[@ComdrStew]

We have been using some kind of simulator since WW1. It is so cool that simulators are this advanced now. Even games like DCS simulating 15+ year old technology is even extremely good.

[@navyseal1689]

Really informative and interesting topics. Keep up the great work

[@DerekSpeareDSD]

great video, Mike!

[@maddog7989]

Very informative! Can’t wait for the next one.

[@colinterry7261]

Excited for the next video!

[@ralph_f16simulator]

Don't forget the Dutch pilot that downed a Mig-29 above Serbia with a AIM-120

[@palleh.jensen4648]

Once again Mike, thanks for sharing.

[@Ghost-pz3uy]

I hope we need not wait a full month for your next video!

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

Thanks. I try to get them out as fast as I can. But I have to work with what time Real Life let's me have. There's quite a bit more I'd like to share. So I'll do my best to get it out as quickly as I can.

[@Ghost-pz3uy]

@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom Of course, i am happy to see a new video every 3-6 weeks - other creator had stop long time ago!

[@S3NTRY]

Great stuff as always, thanks Mike. Looking forward to the next one.

[@StealthTheUnknown]

It seems perfectly reasonable: it is more economic to put pilots through a $1.2M sim that they can crash as many times as they have to, than it is to sit them in a $20M aircraft they can only crash once and requires at least a dozen times the flight duration to service and keep.

[@jmh1189]

Seems similar to the navy's acts(aegis combat system tactical simulator)/bftt (battle force tactical trainer). Only difference being we can do this from our actual consoles and interact with other ships both in port and underway.

[@SimRacingPakistan]

This is amazing! will love try this on DCS WORLD

[@TSHKKRipper]

As a person who has over 1000 hours in Falcon BMS, yes, I do confirm. 😊

[@JTFFIMarcoI79thFS]

Great stuff !

[@00calvinlee00]

Great report! BVR is important but the DoD (wisely) continues to train for the ACM/WVR fight. BVR is the perfered type of engagement however, the lessons of Vietnam, the Bekaa Valley, the Gulf of Sidra shaped the DoD doctrine for the 1990s to the present day. RED FLAG, TOP GUN, and the lesser known MAWTS-1 all feature ACM,WVR and BVR training. The employment of firms like Draken, ATAC and Top Aces in WVR or Phoenix Air or ATAC in BVR shows that WVR is equally important with BVR. This was an excellent report and I did have to think about the trick question. Most US DoD kills were WVR. Even the AIM-120 kill on the Sukhoi was because the AIM-9X failed. The AIM-120 over Bosnia was used well Within Visual Range in conjunction with an AIM-9 in the same incident.

[@cdyjv118]

Was that english?

[@JosephMitchell-zw3db]

Cool thanks 😊

[@b.a.sbadassugar5007]

How can i build the type of simulator the airfoirce has at home?

[@jochentram9301]

Try VR-capable flight sims like DCS. Probably easier and cheaper than having 16 monitors do the same for you. Actual pilots consider it pretty good. That said, as a civilian, you will NEVER have a mil-grade flight (or other combat) sim. The exact radar cross section of an F-22, Eurofighter or Felon are classified, as are the exact capabilities of those airplanes' radars and missiles. Combat sim games guesstimate those values. War Thunder had a few classified docs leaked to its forums by servicemembers who knew that WT's assumptions were off. If you could reprogram DCS with the real values for RCS, radar and missile capability, it'd get fairly close . . . but, as I said, those are classified.

[@thespacemanfil]

5:07 That's an Su-33, not an Su-27

[@baaamakingbaaaa]

Good spot. Su-33 and the 27 are the best non high fidelity aircraft in DCS.

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

That's right it is. I reused some old footage and those forward canards went right past me. The rest of the imagery should be the correct Flanker variant though.

[@PrimarchX]

Wasn't that AIM-120 kill a within-visual-range shot when an AIM-9X shot failed against the Syrian Su-22?

[@eliashernandez1391]

Whene i was in U.S. ARMY as a Cav Scout i remember sim training on the Bradley fighting vehicle. Sim training is definatley an excellent training tool and very cost effective as mentioned. The military should contract DCS Eagle Dynamics to give their sims an overhaul their sims look like they are decades behind whats out now.

[@SDsc0rch]

sweet b-roll

[@cdyjv118]

Sims are great, but theres no replacing reps in the jet.

[@SDsc0rch]

part II when??

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

I wish I could give a solid date. I have to work with what time I have available for making videos.

[@nibbler2281]

Count me in.

[@cmdrbigity6914]

This is what you went into after leaving Goodfellow yea?

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

I was working on wargames at the time of this study (at a different base). It would have been awesome to work on this project. But then I would have missed out on something else awesome. Thankfully, the folks that worked on this sim published their work so I could at least read about it.

[@russia7152]

can u do one for the chinese or russians

[@SgtZekeMitsubish]

How?

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

As much as I would like to I don't know of any published sources for their efforts. But it would certainly be interesting to read about how they do things.

[@richarddiss1643]

👍🏾🙏🏾

[@jackhew93]

amazing video thanks. I wish there was a study of tactics used in the video game, battlefield. I know its not super realistic but, im more thinkin about player solutions to combat scenarios in the game

[@DefaultProphet]

It’s too unrealistic and silly.

[@jackhew93]

@@DefaultProphet thats irrelevant! when i hear the creative solutions that won battles in war, i see the exact same creative quick thinking that wins fights in battlefield 5. Someone is going to figure out soon enough that people who do well in multiplayer games are very talented

[@DefaultProphet]

@@jackhew93 it’s not irrelevant. The solutions you come up with in a world that has things that can’t happen in real life can’t then be applied to real life.

[@jackhew93]

@@DefaultProphet its the quick thinking of top performers that count. Its the same reason top businesses invite high performing athletes and military veterans to speak at conferences and seminars. Like a gold medallist rower might speak at a business seminar and say in training, she tells herself to just turns up. This also applies to business, the same way that high preforming people in video games will have tactics that relate to real life scenarios

[@DefaultProphet]

@@jackhew93 lol no. You aren’t really citing people saying “well work hard and persevere and where’s my check for telling a couple stories?” As a positive example.

[@mdu2112]

The word for *fillers* is fills. ❤🇨🇦

[@IntertropicalConvergence-gf3bm]

Play dcs … employ sidewinder the KZbinr ..

[@dennissmith6783]

chuck yeagers air combat is all the training you need

[@user936]

Do they simulate UFO sightings though 👽 🤔

[@michaelmorrison687]

Gee wizzz! BFD!!! Remember a fighter pilot is a person. The "art" of aerial combat is courage and aggressiveness! Not how well one plays video games. All the gee wizz crap is useless if the fighter pilots runs away!! Courage and aggressiveness is what win air battles. Ask Manfred von Richthofen. Billy Bishop. Bong. Maguire. Campbell. Olds. My father!!!

[@aniksamiurrahman6365]

How do u know that they actually become better? Did they face any real-world, near peer adversary after the introduction of this Sim? No? Then it's just a hypothesis to put it gently.

[@HomeDefender30]

So you didn’t even make it 4 minutes into the video where they explain exactly how they determine performance before and after sim training?

[@aniksamiurrahman6365]

@@HomeDefender30 I have better use of 4 min than a MIC advertisement trash.

[@underskillednunderpaid]

​@aniksamiurrahman6365 So.. what, you clicked the video.. left a bitchy comment and refuse to listen to someone's entire point before invalidating it? Yikes.

[@joeds3775]

​@@underskillednunderpaid don't feed the troll

[@kerbalairforce8802]

Hypothesis implies no data. Experiments have been done and data collected, which would make it a theory, not a hypothesis. In the event that US pilots have to delete another country's Air Force, it'll be confirmed.

[@gandalfff69]

"...the participants ... in many cases were also instructors and weapon school graduates..." "...these inexperienced Pilots were able to fulfill the responsibilities .." Therefore, instructors and weaps grads are inexperienced?