Do you think that the military should invest in Virtual Reality as a safe and cost efficient way to train troops?

ENS Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 16:27:34 -0400

I've read a couple posts on here regarding VR, but none seem to focus on the safety and cost effectiveness of VR. With the advancement of VR technology, troops may be able to train in a very detailed and realistic scenario without breaking the bank. Weapons, enemy forces, environments, tactics and mission planning.. all from the safety of a training room. Can this be the way of the future?

Response by SN Greg Wright made Aug 14 at 2016 4:30 PM

SN Greg Wright — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 16:30:23 -0400

It surely is, but at this present time, setting it up WOULD break the bank, I'm afraid. Give it 10 years, though.

Response by LTC Kevin B. made Aug 14 at 2016 4:32 PM

LTC Kevin B. — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 16:32:48 -0400

In many ways, the military has already been doing that with the many realistic simulators that are available. I think it's only inevitable that the technology expands to other areas of training across the services. VR should complement realistic training, but it should not replace realistic training.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 14 at 2016 4:34 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 16:34:01 -0400

No. Combat is not a virtual reality game. You train hard because combat is hard and is no game.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 14 at 2016 5:08 PM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:08:51 -0400

Personally, I have used one of those simulators that they are a good way to train effeciently but is not a substitue for real world situations. However, those simulators has their own limitations such as a limited battery pack, lack of simulated environments, over sufisticated controls also didnt I mention they cost 70-150k a pop?

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made Aug 14 at 2016 5:12 PM

CPT Joseph K Murdock — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:12:10 -0400

There exist simulators, but I suspect they are for complex vehicles and aircraft.

Response by PO1 Brian Austin made Aug 14 at 2016 5:37 PM

PO1 Brian Austin — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:37:36 -0400

Maybe in some respects yes, in a complimentary way. But we need to train with real people, real weapons, environments where things go wrong, bad weather happens, equipment breaks. Make you improvise, adapt and overcome. Train how we fight, as real as possible.

Response by SGM Steve Wettstein made Aug 14 at 2016 6:12 PM

SGM Steve Wettstein — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:12:24 -0400

For some areas it might be effective, like the crawl phase of training. But you train as you fight. Nothing is as good as going out to the woods and getting dirty doing your wartime mission. I always looked forward to going to the field.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 14 at 2016 6:43 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:43:10 -0400

Run two miles on a tread mill everyday for 30 days. On day 31, try running 1 mile on the road. The tread mill may help to prepare you but will never really give you a true feel of "real" running. VR might be good for a CRAWL or WALK phase but for a RUN it's likely to fall short.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 14 at 2016 7:22 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 19:22:12 -0400

Negative. See how they're all fat and gross? That's because they aren't embracing the suck in the field. This is unnecessary and expensive. Draw your rifles, pack your rucks, and get your ass into the woods. It's good for you.

Response by Sgt Jamie Grippin made Aug 14 at 2016 8:21 PM

Sgt Jamie Grippin — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 20:21:22 -0400

We were using MILES gear in the 80's for small unit training. This would allow even more in-depth training scenarios.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Aug 14 at 2016 8:33 PM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 20:33:07 -0400

Good advice from all the posts so far, and I fully concur with them. I've never used it, the only "simulator" I've ever used was the weaponeer. It was good to get a private the basics of firing, but there's nothing like being on the line for real.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Aug 14 at 2016 8:41 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 20:41:01 -0400

Yes and I don't know what they are doing but it looks cools and I'm jealous I don't get to Play.

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 14 at 2016 8:43 PM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 20:43:59 -0400

I would say Simulators should just be used for crawl and walk concepts of training.

We use them for familiarization training and to run through what to do out on the live fire range, like moving shooting and transition shooting. Using Sims is a good way to make sure they are comfortable with movements, they will do in live fire. The sims also let you run through things like gun jams, running guns a other malfunctions you will face. This is another way to read your troops and get a grasp on who needs more training or one on one and even maybe have to pull from training, instead of finding out with live rounds. This is a requirement for us to use sims for going to range and the CAT III shooting course before they go live. The other thing is you can take your Platoon (PLT) or Squad (SQD) and run through drills and or practice patrol planing and other thing like that. I would send my platoon through before we went out on FTX so we run through drills and practice calling ADDRACS(Alert Direction Description Range Assignment Control) and other commands. This is a good way to work on communication and to understand strengths and weaknesses of the SQD or PLT.

We also have convoy sims use the same way and these are pretty real even down to the comms and weapons on the Trucks. You can fell the weapons just like doing a real convoy. The purpose here again is to run through before you go live and familiarization training.

So in the end they are a good supplemental, to increase training, but not to replace the live training that everyone needs.

Response by SPC Steven Schoenhut made Aug 15 at 2016 1:05 AM

SPC Steven Schoenhut — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 01:05:14 -0400

My Guard unit used it a couple of months ago and it was fun, but it was cumbersome and not very practical in my opinion . We spent an hour going over the equipment and the safety brief. We spent another hour and half trying to get all issues resolved and everyone online in the game (simulator). By the time all of that happened and we had all issues resolved we had maybe 30-40 minutes of time to run thru a simulation before our reserved time was up. In my experience I have felt more accomplished and proud of what I had done for the day when we finished the shoot house or something of that nature.

Response by SGT Tony Clifford made Aug 15 at 2016 1:33 AM

SGT Tony Clifford — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 01:33:22 -0400

I don't think that you can expect a soldier to be ready for combat with VR training. There needs to be a physical stress that VR can never provide. Another thing to think about is that there needs to be some danger involved in training. That's why we do live fire exercises. You need to have confidence in your ability to make good decisions in a dangerous situation. One final reason is that you will have these soldiers training in a nice room, but there are environmental factors in training that are important. A soldier should be able to do their job in any weather. Rain, snow, cold, heat , humidity are all elements to training that can't be discounted. So ultimately VR is just an expensive toy with limited training benefit.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2016 2:39 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 02:39:41 -0400

yes this is the best option we have drones and other un-manned equipment that can get the job done and take out more targets then humans can the future is gonna be fighting behind computers anyway conventional is dead if you think about it

Response by MAJ Javier Rivera made Aug 15 at 2016 9:00 AM

MAJ Javier Rivera — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 09:00:18 -0400

Good tool but far from intensive and realistic training!!

Response by Cpl Anthony Pearson made Aug 15 at 2016 10:13 AM

Cpl Anthony Pearson — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:13:41 -0400

Yes, I think it should be tested as a supplemental way to train troops. Lots of possibilities if done right.

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made Aug 15 at 2016 2:08 PM

CPT Joseph K Murdock — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 14:08:41 -0400

I would suggest it for the crawl, walk, run phases. It is dependent on the unit and the activity. As an example the M1 crews must shoot gunnery in a simulator to be certified for full up gunnery.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Aug 17 at 2016 12:05 AM

COL Charles Williams — Wed, 17 Aug 2016 00:05:46 -0400

It has a place, but it is not the be all end all. Real live, at combat speed needs remain on the table.