A Patriot monitor (center) allows students seated in the ECS 2 amphitheater to compare the behavior of targets on the geospatial screen to the corresponding behavior of targets on the tactical scenarios projected on the screen to the left, while a third screen to the right displays target range, speed and altitude. [Photo by Jean M. McClintock.]

Patriot ECS 2 System Increases Situational Awareness

Simulator Incorporates Iraqi Freedom Lessons Learned to Enhance Operational
Effectiveness and Prevent Fratricide

By John C. Faber

            At the US Army Air Defense Artillery School (USAADASCH), Fort Bliss, Texas, Patriot tactical control operators (TCOs) began training on the new Cognitive Air Defense-Training System (CAD-TS) Engagement Control Station Simulation (ECS 2) designed to enhance operational effectiveness and prevent fratricide by increasing situational awareness.

            Designed for total immersion, virtual interaction and future advancement capabilities, the system allows hands-on education in battlespace visualization in a way that other engagement operation trainers cannot. The ECS 2 correlates ghost tracks on Patriot monitor screens to animated graphics representing the real world outside Patriot ECS vans. The ECS 2 allows the Soldiers to visualize the situation in real-time and the effects of their actions in the battlespace. The visualization encourages Soldiers to take the initiative to move on to the next level.  This approach is especially significant to Soldiers who tend to grasp the concepts, learn the lessons and retain the information better when provided a visual stimulus rather than just a written or auditory explanation. The operators actions in the ECS van are also seen by the other students in the amphitheater where every move is replicated on a big screen; thereby, ensuring that as many students as possible benefit from the training.

            Senior Air Defense Artillery (ADA) leaders who have visited the ECS 2 are impressed with the simulation’s potential combat and training applications. Allied forces have expressed a great interest in the ECS 2’s ability to virtually train in any location on the globe. Israeli Air Defense Officers were particularly enthused over the ability of the ECS 2 to geographically represent the tactical air picture above the Golan Heights.

Patriot monitor (center) allows students seated in the amphitheater compare the behavior of targets on the geospatial screen to the corresponding behavior of targets on the tactical scenarios projected on the screen to the left, while a third screen to the right displays target range, speed and altitude.[Photo by Jean M. McClintock.]

           The ECS 2 overlays animate three-dimensional computer graphics of threat aerial platforms onto National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) World Wind geospatial imagery. Instructors can zoom to any spot on the globe, including actual theaters of operations, to present a variety of tactical scenarios, including ballistic and cruise missile and/or fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft engagements. These tactical scenarios are projected onto a giant screen flanked by a second screen that replicates a Patriot monitor screen. Students seated in the ECS 2 amphitheater compare the behavior of targets on the geospatial screen to the corresponding behavior of potential targets on the Patriot monitor screen. A third screen displays target range, speed and altitude. The side-by-side projection enables TCOs to better visualize what goes on in the crowded airspace outside the ECS van and more fully understand the sometime erratic behavior of what is projected on their Patriot monitors. For example, students can compare animated graphics showing a cruise missile suddenly gaining altitude as it soar over a ridgeline before dipping into a river valley to the corresponding tack on the Patriot monitor screen.

            A full-size replica of a Patriot ECS van housed at the rear of the amphitheater permits instructors to gauge each student’s comprehension level. Instructors use the replica to test students’ ability to sort out spurious tracks and identify abnormalities, such as a target identified by the Patriot system as a ballistic missile or anti-radiation missile that doesn’t seem to conform to normal track parameters.

A full-size replica of a Patriot ECS van housed at the rear of the amphitheater permits instructors to gauge each student’s comprehension. [Photo by Jean M. McClintock.]

            The ECS 2 is a direct consequence of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) lessons learned. During the spring of 2003, as US and Coalition forces prepared to launch OIF, the Patriot missile force began flowing into theater. At the onset of major combat operations in March 2003, 41 of the Army’s 50 Patriot batteries were in position to defend key nations, including Turkey, Israel, Qatar, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia from air and missile attacks. As major combat operations got underway, Patriot battalions surged into Iraq to provide coverage for US and coalition forces advancing on Baghdad. During the initial stages of the conflict, Patriot batteries intercepted and destroyed every Iraqi ballistic missile that threatened friendly forces. One Patriot intercept on 20 March 2003 is credited for saving the Combined Forces Land Component Commander (CFLCC) Headquarters from what might have been a direct hit. However, the Patriot force’s triumph was marred by tragedy. In two separate fratricide incidents, Patriot missiles destroyed friendly aircraft: a British Tornado and a US Navy F-18.

            A Defense Science Board (DSB) investigation into the fratricide incidents produced Patriot hardware and software modifications. From a human perspective, the board made two recommendations:

• The Patriot system should migrate to more of a ‘man-in-the-loop’ philosophy versus a fully automated philosophy— providing operator awareness and control of engagement processes.
• Patriot training and simulations should be upgraded to support this man-in-the-loop protocol, including the ability to train on confusing and complex scenarios that contain unexpected surprises.

Situational Awareness Built on Technical and Tactical Expertise

           The DSB concluded that, “the primary implication . . . is that marginally skilled or apprentice operator/controllers cannot develop the situational awareness necessary for effective supervisory control, regardless of the sophistication of the battle command hardware suite provided to them. Technology is important, but it is only part of the solution. Relevant and in-depth operator expertise is an equal factor in developing situational awareness and providing effective human oversight of system operations. Technology can amplify human expertise, but it cannot substitute for it.”

            In an Air Defense Artillery magazine article titled “Patriot Fratricides: The Human Dimension Lessons of Operation Iraqi Freedom,” Dr. John K. Hawley, Chief of the Army Research Laboratory Field Element at Fort Bliss, Texas, expanded on the DSB recommendations. “The central notion in the first DSB recommendation is captured in the phrase ‘providing operator awareness and control of engagement processes.’ Simply put, Soldiers and not the automated system must be the ultimate decision makers in AMD [air and missile defense] engagements. Decisions to shoot or not to shoot must be made by crews having adequate situational awareness for the particular situation at hand and the expertise to understand the significance of the information available to them.”

            The CAD-TS ECS 2 represents a collaborative effort among the University of Southern California’s Institute for Creative Technologies (ICT), Game Production Services (GPS), Research Analysis and Maintenance Inc. (RAM) and USAADASCH’s Directorate of Training, Doctrine and Leader Development (DOTD-LD).