Simulation Systems and Applications, Inc.
10460 Roosevelt Blvd., PMB #301, St. Petersburg, Florida 33716-3821 USA
+1 727-544-4673  +1 727-544-6154 (fax)  Toll free: +1 877-4SIMSYS (474-6797)

Simulation Systems

Aircraft Systems

Network Technologies

Info Engineering

Search Site

Company Info Press Releases Simulation Resources Tampa Bay Links

Contact Us

Customer Feedback

Privacy Statement

Y2K Statement

Employment

Home

 

I/ITSEC 1991 – 13TH I/ITSEC

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

EXPERIENCES IN WRITING READABLE AND UNDERSTANDABLE ADA   5

ADA TYPES:  THE CORNERSTONE OF SIMULATION MODELS  5

THE CHALLENGES OF DEVELOPING A REAL-TIME ENVIRONMENT IN ADA   6

DRLMS TECHNOLOGY–A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE  STATE-OF-THE-ART  6

ACTIVE SONAR CLASSIFICATION TRAINING USING RECORDED DATA   7

A LOW-COST/HIGH PERFORMANCE SENSOR SIMULATION THE NEXT GENERATION   8

GUIDELINES FOR EMBEDDED TRAINING DECISIONS  8

APPLICATION OF A KNOWLEDGE COMPILATION MODEL OF INSTRUCTION TO EMBEDDED TRAINING   8

SPEECH RECOGNITION IN REALTIME TRAINING METHODS OF RECOGNITION RECOVERY   9

VIRTUAL REALITY–THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS  10

FORWARD LOOKING INFRARED SIMULATION FIDELITY IN AIRCREW TRAINING DEVICES  10

RAPID-RESPONSE IMAGING SENSOR SIMULATION   11

SENSOR DATA BASE CORRELATION   11

TRAINING IN BATTLEFIELD OBSCURANTS  11

STANDARD PROTOCOL DATA UNITS FOR ENTITY INFORMATION AND INTERACTION IN A DISTRIBUTED INTERACTIVE SIMULATION   12

THE CAPABILITY OF THE DISTRIBUTED INTERACTIVE SIMULATION NETWORKING STANDARD TO SUPPORT HIGH FIDELITY AIRCRAFT SIMULATION   13

APPLICATION OF THE SIMNET UNIT PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM TO AFTER ACTION REVIEWS  13

OBJECT-ORIENTED ANALYSIS–THE TRANSITION FROM REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS TO DESIGN   14

SOFTWARE RELIABILITY MEASUREMENT ON THE B-2 AIRCREW TRAINING  DEVICE (ATD) 15

SOFTWARE METRICS, ADA, AND THE B-2 ATD   15

ELECTROMAGNETIC PROPAGATION MODELING FOR DISTRIBUTED SIMULATION   16

PACKETIZED VOICE FOR SIMULATED COMMAND, CONTROL, AND COMMUNICATION   16

VOICE AND DATA INTEGRATION IN REAL-TIME SIMULATION NETWORKS USING A MODIFIED FDDI PROTOCOL  17

USING PARALLEL ADA IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SIMULATION AND TRAINING SYSTEMS  17

EFFICIENCY AS A PART OF SOUND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING DOES ADA NEED C?  18

DO YOU SEE WHAT I SEE? INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR TACTICAL DECISION MAKING TEAMS  19

INSTRUCTIONAL DISPLAY DESIGN FOR SUBMARINE TACTICS TRAINING   19

TACTICS AS DECISION MAKING–ISSUES IN TACTICAL TRAINING DEVELOPMENT  20

INTEGRATED TRAINING AND REUSABLE SIMULATIONS  20

APPROACHES TO AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL/AIR DEFENSE WORKSTATION SIMULATION AND TRAINING (CATEGORY: TECHNICAL) 21

RECONFIGURABLE SIMULATORS FOR SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES MISSION REHEARSAL  21

BATTLEFIELD SMOKE–A NEW DIMENSION IN NETWORKED SIMULATION   22

ANTIALIASING WITHOUT SUPERSAMPLING   23

AN EVALUATION OF DOME DISPLAY SUITABILITY FOR SIDE-BY-SIDE CREWMEMBER VIEWING   23

A NEW CRT PROJECTOR WITH ISOTROPIC EDGE-BLENDING AND DIGITAL CONVERGENCE  24

WHY SIMULATORS DON’T FLY LIKE THE AIRPLANE – DATA   24

UTILIZING A BLADE ELEMENT MODEL FOR HELICOPTER PILOT TRAINING   24

THE CHALLENGES OF SIMULATING A HOVERCRAFT OCEAN ENVIRONMENT  25

ADVANTAGES OF AN OBJECT-ORIENTED DESIGN APPROACH TO THE SIMULATION OF LEADSHIP EFFECTS  25

SEMI-AUTOMATED FORCES–A BEHAVIORAL MODELING APPROACH   26

MODELING OF THE INTELLIGENT THREAT IN A DENSE TACTICAL TRAINING ENVIRONMENT  26

A ROBOTIC SYSTEM CONCEPT FOR PARTIALLY AUTOMATING THE SECOND ECHELON OPPOSING FORCE AT THE NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER   27

A HIERARCHICAL RULE-BASED ARCHITECTURE FOR IMPLEMENTING INTELLIGENT ADVERSARIES IN A SIMNET ENVIRONMENT  27

12TH I/ITSC-1990–SIMNET FIGHTER AIRCRAFT APPLICATION   28

AN OBJECTIVE LOOK AT THE MODULARIZATION AND STANDARDIZATION OF TRAINING SYSTEMS  28

A MODEL FOR COMPUTER-BASED TRAINING QUALITY ASSURANCE  29

U.S. ARMY MATERIEL COMMAND’S INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY BASE PLAN   29

A GENERIC MODEL FOR RAPID ESTIMATION OF CBT DEVELOPMENT TIME  30

TRAINER TEST AND EVALUATION PROCESS REVIEW    30

TODAY’S NEED FOR VIABLE TRAINING MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS  31

EMBRACING THE DEMONS OF TRAINING DEVICE ACCEPTANCE  TESTING–THE PROCESS IMPROVEMENT LEGACY   31

INTEGRATED AIRCREW TRAINING MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS–AN ORGANIZATIONAL PERSPECTIVE  32

A DISTRIBUTED TRAINING SYSTEM FOR LARGE TRAINING MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTS  33

THE MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS OF THE MODULAR SIMULATOR CONCEPT  33

EMPOWERMENT–A MODEL FOR MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY   34

THE CHALLENGE OF DEVELOPING A COMPLEX TRAINING SYSTEM WITH AN INTERNATIONAL TEAM    34

STREAMLINED SOURCE SELECTION or WRITE YOUR OWN SPEC! 35

CTASC-II TRAINING – KEEPING PACE WITH AN NDI ACQUISITION   36

TRAINING ANALYSIS–PANACEA OR PLACEBO? THE US ROYAL AIR FORCE EXPERIENCE  37

DESERT STAARS–SUSTAINMENT TRAINING FOR ARMY AVIATION READINESS THROUGH SIMULATION   37

QUICK-RESPONSE TRAINING SYSTEM MODIFICATION AND ITS IMPACT ON ARMY AVIATION SUSTAINMENT TRAINING   38

TRAINING AND MISSION REHEARSAL FOR DEPLOYED NAVY AND MARINE AVIATION   39

VIRTUAL REALITY–A PRIMER A DISCUSSION OF DEFINITIONS AND POSSIBLE APPLICATIONS FOR MILITARY TRAINING SYSTEMS  39

INVESTIGATING THE SUITABILITY OF SPEECH RECOGNITION FOR TRAINING SYSTEMS  40

WATERFRONT TRAINERS–LESSONS LEARNED FROM AN EXPERIMENT  IN REMOTE TRAINING DELIVERY   40

DOES THE FLIGHT SIMULATOR USER KNOW WHAT HE HAS GOT?  41

THE ADVANCED AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT FRONT END ANALYSIS PROCESS–AN APPROACH TO BALANCE DESIGN AND OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENTS  41

AIR NATIONAL GUARD PART TASK TRAINERS A FLEXIBLE,  COST-EFFECTIVE ADDITION TO FIGHTER PILOT TRAINING   42

INTEGRATING A FORCE-LEVEL SIMULATION SYSTEM INTO SHIPBOARD COMBAT SYSTEMS  43

EMBEDDED TRAINING FOR ARMORED SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION   43

ELECTRONIC WAREFARE CONTINUUM ASSESSMENT PROGRAM FOR NAVAL AVIATION   44

THE USER’S ROLE IN SOURCE SELECTION   44

TACTICAL MISSION TRAINING DESIGNING THE VISUAL SYSTEM TO PILOT PERCEPTUAL REQUIREMENTS  45

 

 

 

EXPERIENCES IN WRITING READABLE AND UNDERSTANDABLE ADA

John Glaize, Staff Scientist

CAE-Link Corporation

 

 

A critical and much-publicized advantage of the Ada programming language is the potential for producing more reliable, maintainable software by enhancing program readability and understandability.  Many people in the programming community have wondered just how well this potential would be realized on a large-scale Ada project.  Is it really easier to read and understand Ada code?  The CAE-Link Corporation, utilizing the actual code developed on the B-2 Aircrew Training Device, has now been afforded the opportunity to investigate this question.  This paper presents some of the issues raised and the results discovered by this investigation.  A critical issue is the recommended naming of language components such as packages, subprograms, parameters, types, and objects, as well as how readability is affected by the various contexts in which the components can appear.  Other issues are program formatting, renaming of components, and the length and understandability of the Ada statements.  The system architecture, which defines the relationship and interconnection of program components, is very important for ensuring understandability of the systems as a whole.  Finally, the paper addresses the training that is necessary to educate engineers in the art of writing and of reading Ada programs.  The conclusion is that Ada programs are not inherently more readable and understandable, but that successful Ada development in this area requires special awareness of the issues and unique programming efforts.

 

This paper is available on the I/ITSEC Compendium CD-ROM.

Order it from I/ITSEC’s Website.

 

 

 

ADA TYPES:  THE CORNERSTONE OF SIMULATION MODELS

David C. Gross and Lynn D. Stuckey, Jr.

Boeing Defense and Space Group

Missiles and Space Division

 

 

System simulation is the definition, control, and implementation of algorithmic models that replicate a system’s real world behavior.  Developing a useful simulation model requires a clear abstraction of the system.  Software engineering supports abstraction by imposing a consistent structure on objects.  One structural feature introduced by recent programming languages is strong [data] typing, aiming at two benefits: clarification of the design and enhancement of model verification.  Strong typing clarifies the design by controlling the characteristics of an object, and enhances model verification by revealing errors early in the design cycle.  Designers have traditionally viewed strong typing only as over-restricting the mixture of data units (e.g., meter versus degrees), an experience, which has left a bad taste in many mouths.  However, strong typing is a multifaceted tool, which can apply to a broad range of software design problems.  Simulation model designers can use Ada types to define, control, and implement models yielding:

 

1)       requirements consistency and traceability,

2)       interface definition/control,

3)       maintainability,

4)       reusability, and

5)       portability.

 

Because designers imagine and implement complex systems in parallel, projects can suffer from the fracturing effect of multiple visions of the final product.  Strong typing can unify the system design; however, strong typing is only a tool – the availability of which does not ensure its correct application.  The challenge is to successfully implement it.  This paper examines the successful use of Ada types for the design of simulation models, and points out the pitfalls of extreme approaches such as no typing and over-typing