<p class="MsoNormal">When militaries started using simulators back in the 1930s, live training remained the priority. Things have reversed now where live training opportunities seem to be few and far between. Most militaries seem to have adopted the strategy of General Charles Krulak USMC who, in the 1990s, purchased commercially available gaming equipment to hone his troops decision-making under pressure. Today, as explained by Rusmat Ahmed from Bohemia International Simulations, the opportunities are better than ever but much depends on who is in charge. And the future shouldn't simply be about integrating at ever greater scale – not if value-for-money and training outcomes are the predominant consideration.</p>

When militaries started using simulators back in the 1930s, live training remained the priority. Things have reversed now where live training opportunities seem to be few and far between. Most militaries seem to have adopted the strategy of General Charles Krulak USMC who, in the 1990s, purchased commercially available gaming equipment to hone his troops decision-making under pressure. Today, as explained by Rusmat Ahmed from Bohemia International Simulations, the opportunities are better than ever but much depends on who is in charge. And the future shouldn't simply be about integrating at ever greater scale – not if value-for-money and training outcomes are the predominant consideration.

<p>When militaries started using simulators back in the 1930s, live training remained the priority. Things have reversed now where live training opportunities seem to be few and far between. Most militaries seem to have adopted the strategy of General Charles Krulak USMC who, in the 1990s, purchased commercially available gaming equipment to hone his troops decision-making under pressure. Today, as explained by Rusmat Ahmed from Bohemia International Simulations, the opportunities are better than ever but much depends on who is in charge. And the future shouldn't simply be about integrating at ever greater scale – not if value-for-money and training outcomes are the predominant consideration.</p>

Simulation has changed military training. A lot.

Training a military force is a proposition unlike the one faced by other civil organisations: It has to prepare people to perform in the chaos and turmoil of battle – even simple tasks like making deliveries or baking bread become very different in the face of artillery fire or roadside bombs. It's not just about mental pressure and physical discomfort, it is about facing death while doing the mundane and business-as-usual tasks. It is, perhaps, the greatest test of humans and has always been so. As military training has evolved (along with the force it enables), so have the opportunities in technologies such as simulation: are the benefits without bounds, or is there a point that the benefits of simulation tail off? What mix of virtual and physical performance maximises performance? And amongst all of this is the reality of organisational culture, and the cost-effectiveness of training. How much of this training can be outsourced to a commercial provider? What is the optimal amount of training done away from the cauldron of combat, and how much must be exercised under arms and stressing conditions? Answering these questions is crucial if we are to all understand the importance of training in a military force – and how to optimise it to win in the greatest of contests. Listen to the series as we talk to people who think a lot about military training - from the professional soldiers and commanders to the academics who study it, as well as the commercial operators who are increasingly being employed to deliver it.

Share Simulation has changed military training. A lot.

Sign up to save your podcasts

Simulation has changed military training. A lot.

Simulation has changed military training. A lot.

More shows like How To Train A Military

The Cove Podcast

This Means War

Command and Control

Cogs of War