Evaluation of a Computer-assisted Battle Simulation CAMMS Versus a CPX
Information
Date
April 1979
Summary
The Computer-Assisted Map Maneuver System (CAMMS) creates a simulated battle to train battalion and brigade command groups in the exercise of command and control. In contrast to a conventional manual command post exercise (CPX) which is driven by prefabricated messages, CAMMS calculates weapons effects, movement rates, and logistical support in real time to provide the command group with realistic feedback about the consequences of its actions. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the cost and training effectiveness of CAMMS in comparison to a CPX. The players’ attitudes toward the alternative training systems were assessed by means of questionnaires administered to 50 battalion command groups and 12 brigade command groups after they participated in CAMMS exercises. Estimates of the preparation time and the number of controllers required for each type of exercise were obtained from 14 CAMMS exercise directors and, for a CPX only, from 5 division and brigade commanders. Analysis of the data showed that the players judged CAMMS to be significantly and consistently more realistic and more interesting than a CPX. The functional areas in which CAMMS enjoyed the greatest advantage were related to preparing and organizing the battlefield, controlling and coordinating combat operations, and concentrating combat power as rated by the S3; and in the exercise of command and control rated by the commander, especially exposure to the capabilities of enemy weapons systems, facing a thinking enemy, and making decisions under real—time constraints. The principal weaknesses of CAMMS were that it did not produce much stress, and it did not exercise the players in security procedures, such as electromagnetic and communications security, nor did it require them to react to special situations like enemy jamming, chemical, biological, or nuclear warfare. The CPX also received low ratings in these areas. A CAMMS exercise cost 25—30% less than a CPX, primarily because CAMMS required much less preparation time. Overall, CAMMS produced a distinctly superior exercise at a moderate saving in cost over a conventional CPX. This report is written for the researcher in command-control investigations, although military personnel will be interested in implications of the results.
Evaluation of a Computer-assisted Battle Simulation CAMMS Versus a CPX, Hoover Institution Library & Archives, https://wargaming.hoover.org/view/ark:/54723/h3pv6bh1v