Over the years, a number of different approaches to train commanders and their staffs have emerged. So-called Command and Staff Training (CAST) exercises featuring maps, counters and dice have been supplemented with computer-aided exercises (CAX), while more recently, games-based solutions are being offered. The challenge facing the military today is what solution, or solutions, should they adopt?

To say that the pace of military change is on an exponential path would be a vast understatement. Most modern military academics and writers presage their work with caveats such as ‘the increasing complexity of the operational environment’ but this only partially reveals the challenges facing today’s military forces. In the West for example, military forces have moved on from a focus on high-intensity, manoeuvre warfare that featured heavy armour and highly centralised command and control (C2) prevalent 40 years ago during the Cold War to a counter-insurgency (COIN)-based model typified by operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Weapons, and how they are used, have also changed.

Watching Ukraine from a distance, the world’s military forces are now having to assimilate some painful realities of modern warfare. Innovation, decentralisation, complexity and adaption are generating a re-think of the centralised C2 model and axiomatically, how the military trains is commanders and staff to manage C2. Training to enable successful C2 of deployed troops is not new and has its roots in the Prussian Kriegsspiel – or wargame – that became popular in the 19th century. Kriegsspiel was used to train commanders and staff officers in how to conduct battles and in some cases, campaigns. Using maps, counters and dice, these wargames were often supplemented by riding over the real terrain to see the effects of cover, ‘going’ – the ease of moving over particular surfaces – and the impact of geographic features such as rivers. Known by the Prussians as Stabs-Reise, these ‘staff rides’ are still widely used today, normally at company level and higher.

In essence then, today’s military has different options for teaching commanders and their staff at the tactical, operational/theatre and strategic levels. As well as staff rides, Tactical Exercises Without Troops (TEWTs) are used at the platoon and company level to teach tactical deployments. As with staff rides, TEWTs are overseen by a senior officer with staff rides often featuring input from an academic authority. CAST is also provided in the constructive domain using computers that replicate such elements as friendly forces, logistics, OPFOR, obstacles such as minefields, air assets and communications. Such systems are typified by the US Army’s Joint Theater Level Simulation – Global Operation (JTLS-GO). According to system designers, Rolands & Associates, JTLS-GO “is an interactive, web-enabled, joint and coalition wargaming system [that] represents civil-military decision-making environments from a globally integrated operational-level perspective…”

2024 saw NATO supervise a foundation course to introduce member countries to the Joint Theater Level Simulation – Global Operations system. JTLS began development in 1983 as a project funded by the US Readiness Command, the US Army Concepts Analysis Agency and the US Army War College.
Credit: Rolands & Associates

As well as the US, the NATO Modelling & Simulation Centre of Excellence (COE) ran a JTLS-GO Foundation Course in Rome in June 2024. The plan is to expand the use of JTLS within NATO both as a “powerful simulation tool” but also as “a strategic asset, which enables us to model complex scenarios and analyse the effects of different courses of action,” explained Col Francesco Pacillo, NATO M&S COE Director.

In the UK, its CAST is largely provided by Raytheon UK using its Advanced Battlespace Computer Simulation System (ABACUS), a solution also in service in Canada. In the case of the British Army, ABACUS is deployed at Warminster (UK) and also at Sennelager in Germany with a small detachment in Catterick (UK). According to Raytheon UK, the role of ABACUS is to “train and validate combat readiness of the UK’s Warfighting Division Brigade Headquarters.” In effect though, ABACUS can be used from Battle Group to Corps levels.

The UK’s Exercise CERBERUS took place in 2022 and combined constructive and live training. The former was provided by Raytheon UK’s ABACUS CAST system.
Credit: Raytheon UK

Although training and simulation systems have been historically stovepiped within the live, virtual and constructive domains, CAST constructive systems have frequently been used as the engine to drive integrated domain exercises. In the case of ABACUS, this was exemplified in Exercises CERBERUS and ULU WARRIOR. The former exercise featured 3,500 troops and 800 vehicles and was managed from the ABACUS site in Sennelager. Exercise ULU WARRIOR meanwhile was much smaller in scope, designed to ‘train and validate’ the 1 Battalion Royal Gurkha Rifles in Brunei.

Despite its clear capabilities, the British Army has been looking for an ABACUS replacement for a number of years with the Future Joint CAST (FJCAST) requirement being the latest to emerge. With a Prior Information Notice (PIN) issued in May 2024 for this GBP 50–70 million requirement, it now only needs to clear the hurdle of convincing the UK’s new government and its strategic defence review.

Other options

Systems such as JTLS-GO and ABACUS are aimed at providing the CAST solution for higher formation training and are typified by requiring significant engineering support. Companies such as CAE, MASA and MAK Technologies have all entered the CAST market to address the challenge of C2 training from a lower-cost perspective. CAE’s offering is its GESI constructive training system that was launched more than 25 years ago. The system is used for computer-assisted exercises (CAX) and instructor-delivered classroom education. An example of the latter can be seen at the German Army’s officer training school in Dresden where it is known as SIRA.

The CAE GESI system can be used for conventional CAST or for teaching tactics. These officer cadets are using the system at the German Army Officer Academy in Dresden.
Credit: Trevor Nash

In France, MASA Group’s SWORD provides CAST for battalion to divisional size staffs. In service with some 27 users worldwide, it continues to generate considerable interest. In many ways, SWORD epitomises some of the changes that are occurring in the world of CAST. Historically, the prime contractor would provide the complete technological infrastructure for the product but MASA has recently worked with 4C Strategies and Hadean to use the latter’s Exonaut exercise management and assessment software to provide a more ‘user friendly’ experience. The company also provides integration with BISim’s VBS4 visualisation software thereby leveraging other sources of expertise where required.

In a modified form, SWORD is also used for civil defence, emergency service planning and crisis management. This version, known as SYNERGY, is used in France at Le Havre; it is also used by the NATO Crisis Management and Disaster Response School of Excellence in Bulgaria, as well as by the governments of Brazil and Bangladesh for flood response exercises.

The result of companies such as CAE and MASA providing lower cost CAST solutions and technological enhancements being available through the likes of 4C Strategies, VBS and Hadean with its Exonaut scenario generation solution has opened the door to the increased interest in CAST systems. Peter Swan, Director of International Business at MAK told ESD that CAST “is certainly a hot topic at the moment with adopters highlighting the need to aggregate forces [typically] from the brigade level down”.

The aggregation of forces describes the ability to define the size and complexity of a given asset. In the case of an infantry company for example, this could see replication levels vary from a company-size entity, through platoons, sections (squads) to individual riflemen. Depending on who is being trained dictates the level of aggregation.

A typical CAST environment showing the major constituent parts. This example uses MAK ONE components from MAK Technologies.
Credit: MAK

Historically, MAK has either built its own CAST solutions based on its VR-Forces – part of its MAK ONE simulation toolbox – or provided VR-Forces to other companies to develop their own offerings. “One of the advantages of MAK ONE in general and VR-Forces in particular is its scalability,” explained Swan. MAK’s CAST customers are numerous and include the US DoD, Slovenia, the Royal Netherlands Army [with Elbit as the prime contractor], India and Rafael.

Return to Kriegsspiel?

One of the main themes at IT2EC 2024 held in London was war gaming. A number of speakers pointed out the challenges involved in assembling the correct staff and command personnel to conduct an exercise using constructive CAST systems while others challenged the true capabilities of these higher-end constructive systems.

“CAST has no value for training,” explained Maj Tom Mouat, Head of the UK’s Defence Modelling & Simulation School at the Defence Academy in Shrivenham. “Conventional CAST systems are good for assessment and validation but for practise they have no value.”

Another perspective was provided by Maj Theo Bossom from the British Army’s Land Warfare Centre in Warminster. “Time to train is being squeezed and we need to replace opportunities that were previously provided by BATUS [British Army Training Unit Suffield – the British Army’s live training facility in Canada]. The result is that we are looking to expand war gaming for joint and land applications.” Maj Bossom’s comments about lack of time to train are echoed in the recent UK National Audit Office (NAO) report on the time and resources being expended by the UK MoD to train Ukrainian forces to the detriment of domestic training.

With the publication of the NATO Wargaming Handbook in 2023, it is clear that the subject is being taken seriously at the very highest levels. In his foreword, VAdm Guy Robinson, Chief of Staff at HQ SACT said, “Wargaming is a powerful tool for generating insights into complex issues and problems. Whether the insights are from player decisions made in analytic wargames or insights for players participating in learning wargames, wargaming is a tested and effective method for organisations to generate greater understanding across the military and political spectrum at all echelons.”

US Marine Corps officers conduct a war game at the US Marine Corps War College in Quantico, Virginia. Such systems have the benefit of being low-cost and take little effort to organise, therefore providing opportunities for frequent use.
Credit: USMC

HQ SACT has now created an Experimentation and Wargaming Branch that is “supported by wargaming professionals across NATO” to monitor emerging technologies and methods and to develop best practice. In many ways, NATO is playing catch-up as despite the rise in the use of constructive CAST systems, wargaming has never really gone out of fashion. The British Army’s Wargaming Handbook, published in 2017 states that historically “…the UK military was accomplished at wargaming but this culture has largely been lost.” The British Army is now going through a process of “reinvigoration” that is seeing the wider adoption of wargaming at all levels.

One of the significant challenges facing NATO and committed adopters such as the US and UK is how they present war gaming and describe its application so as to inform others of its potential benefits. There is also the challenge of defining the wargame and positioning it alongside conventional constructive CAST systems. According to Stavroula Oustoglou, a NATO Defence Analyst and Innovation Officer, “…it is high time that we had this debate.”

We then come to the question of wargame credibility and perception. After all, how can the roll of a dice be considered to match the carefully constructed, high-fidelity software that drives a constructive CAST simulator? Such simulators use a Monte Carlo simulation method that include elements of uncertainty and randomness. In fact this approach simulates the roll of a dice and both replicate the friction and uncertainty of war. To muddy the waters still further, another medium to provide CAST has emerged through the professional gaming sector.

Matrix Pro Sims – through Slitherine Software UK Ltd, Slitherine Corporation (USA), and Matrix Games LLC – is focusing on strategy videogames and wargames to military forces. Through its offices in the US, UK, Poland and Italy, Matrix Pro Sims is pushing a number of different wargame products such as Command Modern Operations, Combat Mission and Flashpoint Campaigns to military users throughout the world. With 150 clients in 23 countries, customers include the US Army, Air Force and Marine Corps, the UK’s Dstl, Taiwan and Australia.

“These wargames bring new capabilities to the military training, education and analysis sectors, becoming benchmarks that are leading a rapidly expanding and disruptive business unit,” the company stated.

Iain McNeil, CEO of Slitherine Ltd and Matrix Games Ltd explained that “our databases are easy to build and include such things as geography, weapon systems and airfields that together, provide a monolithic battlespace that you can plug-in entities as required.” The company’s next step is to integrate an analysis tool, McNeil added, “We’re talking to some providers to address this at the moment and it is certainly something that is of interest to us.”

Flashpoint Campaigns has been developed by On Target Simulations (OTS) and is published by Matrix and Slitherine. OTS says that “Flashpoint Campaigns are games of modern grand tactical combat, with players in charge of formulating and managing the battle plan for their forces. Players issue orders during their specific orders phase and then the game resolves all actions until a new orders phase occurs.”

There is an increasing trend towards using commercial gaming engines to provide professional military training. This example is Flashpoint Campaigns, developed by On Target Simulations and published by Slitherine Software.
Credit: On Target Simulations

There is no doubt that this games-based approach is gaining traction, especially when one considers the UK Fight Club that was formed in early 2020. UKFC provides an opportunity for all ranks to experience or expand their gaming capabilities through weekly gaming competitions. This approach has become extremely popular and has been taken-up by a number of other countries.

On balance

Like most things in the world of military procurement, selecting the right tools for the job come down to understanding what the job is, what the tools are and how those tools fit in to the wider scheme – the context. Iain McNeil is very forthright on these issues: “The main issue is that the military needs to understand what a wargame is,” he told delegates during a panel discussion at this year’s IT2EC in London.

The other issue is that “defence understands that they are not an informed customer. In the UK for example, there is no simulation career path, unlike the US.” This, argues McNeil, makes it difficult for the customer to understand what they are being offered and to evaluate that offering against competitor solutions.

As to the future of CAST, there is still room for improvement. Matrix’s McNeil suggests better integration of cyber, UAV and EW models. From MASA’s perspective, technical support manager Zubair Hossain added that, “as well as EW and cyber, I would like to see improvements to crowd behaviour to enhance urban operations training”.

All three types of solution are viable and present valid methods to teach, what the UK MoD Wargaming Handbook describes as to “gain and sustain an intellectual overmatch” and “enhancing the cognitive capacities of joint warfighters”. The real question is should the “Wild West” of CAST teach current doctrine and tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP) or develop new ones? If it is the latter, who has oversight?

Trevor Nash