Combat Modeling: Issues & Technology

WA04.1 ATR & Fratricide: Panacea, Status Quo or Pandora's Box Gerald M. Evans --- US Army Missile Command, AMSMI-RD-AC, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898 , (evans-rd-ac@redstone.army.mil)

Fratricide is a concern in combat for obvious reasons. Previous work¨ has shown the utility of ATR in a force-on-force engagement. This¨ effort will compare 3 scenarios to see if there are noticeable ¨ efforts on fratricide by incorporating ATR into 2 of the scenarios.¨ The base case scenario will feature force-on-force engagement¨ without ATR. The platform ATR will place ATR capability on Blue's¨ capability to the Blue shooting platform(s)...

WA04.2 Valuing the Non-Killers Donald R. Peterson, Bruce W. Fowler --- US Army Missile Command, Adv. Systems Concepts Office, Missile RD&E Ctr., Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-5242, (peterson-rd-ac.@redstone.army.mil)

We present initial findings of a new effort to investigate¨ methodologies for estimating or assessing military worth of units¨ other than killers and in environments other than decisive war. We¨ explore a simple, aggregate force structuring model developed as an¨ initial set of experiments in this effort.

WA04.3 Initiating Battle in Models Bruce W. Fowler --- US Army Missile Command, Attn: AMSMI-RD-AC, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898 , (fowler-bw@redstone.army.mil)

Experimental work by McNaught and examination of history and¨ platform-level model results indicate that initiation of battles and¨ engagements using Lanchester theory may be flawed. The phase¨ aggregation model is used as a numerical laboratory to investigate¨ battle initiation and Lanchester theory responses.