NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE REPORTBY THE COMPTROLLERAND AUDITOR GENERAL Ministry of Defence: Use of Simulators in Training ORDEREDBY THE HOUSEOF COMMONS TO BE PRINTED 2 NOVEMBER1992 LONDON: HMSO 247 f7.95 NET MINISTRY OF DEFENCE: USE OF SIMULATORS IN TRAINING This report has been prepared under Section 6 of the National Audit Act, 1983 for presentation to the House of Commons in accordance with Section 9 of the Act. John Bourn National Audit Office Comptroller and Auditor General 7 September 1992 The Comptroller and Auditor General is the head of the National Audit Office employing some 900 staff. He, and the NAO are totally independent of Government. He certifies the accounts of all Government departments and a wide range of other public sector bodies; and he has statutory authority to report to Parliamenton the economy,efficiency and effectiveness with which departments and other bodies have used their resources. MINISTRY OF DEFENCE: “SE OF SIMULATORS IN TRAINING Contents Pages Summary and conclusions 1 Part 1: Introduction and background 8 Part 2: The acquisition of Simulators for the Royal Air Force 10 Part 3: Utilisation of Simulators in the Royal Air Force 15 Part 4: The effectiveness of Simulators used by the Royal Air Force 23 Part 5: The use of Simulators by the Royal Navy and the Army 26 Appendices 1. National Audit Office Case Studies 29 2. Views Expressed by Simulator Manufacturers 37 3. Commissioned Work on Effectiveness 39 4. Examples of Simulators in the Royal Navy and the Army 41 MINISTRY OF DEFENCE: USE OF SIMULATORS IN TRAINING Summary and conclusions 1 Members of the Armed Forces must train effectively to achieve and maintain individual and collective operational capability. Simulators, in combination with more traditional forms of training, have a key role in the achievement of this objective. 2 In 1990 the Ministry of Defence (the Department) estimated that the 3000 or so simulators in use by the three Services had cost in excess of E450 million. The Department plan to spend E700 million on simulators over the next ten years. 3 The training of the Armed Forces in peace presents many problems, especially in a developed society. United Kingdom airspace is limited, the extant and use of training land for large scale exercises is inevitably circumscribed by the needs of civil society and the economy, and coastal waters carry heavy traffic. Simulation can provide an important way of supplementing the amount of live training that it is practically and economically possible to carry out at home and overseas. For example, simulation may allow training to be conducted in greater safety, in adverse weather conditions or regardless of time of day. It can also reduce the need for live training which might damage the environment. As regards financial benefits, the operating costs of simulators are generally about 10 per cent of those for parent equipments [paragraphs 1.1-1.2, 1.7-1.8). 4 The National Audit Office examined the acquisition, utilisation and effectiveness of simulators used in training. The examination covered the use of simulators in all three Services but concentrated on the Royal Air Force because of the wide range of simulators employed, the high cost of flight simulators and the special relevance of simulation to Royal Air Force training and flight safety. But this should not obscure the attention already paid and in prospect for simulation in the Royal Navy and the Army, and the findings and conclusions of this Report are applicable in large part to all three Services. The acquisition of 5 Where possible the Department acquire simulators by competitive tender. Simulators for the They also pursue opportunities for collaboration with other nations, for Royal Air Force example simulators are being developed collaboratively for the European Fighter Aircraft. Some commercial simulators are used on a repayment basis, and the Department are considering the scope for contracting out simulator training for multi-engined aircraft (paragraphs 2.5-2.17). 6 The Department have not acquired any simulator specifically to avoid damage to the environment, but they take account of environmental factors when considering acquisition of simulators. In October 1991 the Department announced that they expect the planned withdrawal of operational squadrons and the introduction of Tucano propeller turbine aircraft for flying training to reduce jet low flying in the United Kingdom by about a 1 MlNISTRY OF DEFENCE: USE OF SIMULATORS IN TRAINING third over three years; and that simulators would be used where possible. However there are no simulators currently in service which can provide realistic low flying training. The simulator for the Tornado GRl, the Royal Air Force’s principal low flying aircraft, is significantly behind available technology-in particular it does not have a visual system. The Department recognise the need for improvements to the existing Tornado GRl simulators, but have other priorities for funding (paragraphs 2.8-2.11). 7 In March 1990 the House of Commons Defence Committee recommended that the Department substantially increase their research and development in simulation technology. The Department informed the Committee that El25 million had been spent on flight simulators in the previous five years, a significant proportion of which was for research and development for the new Harrier GR5 simulator. The Department added that this simulator may be used to study the extent to which similar systems could provide a cost- effective contribution to low flying. Research in Germany is examining how simulation might substitute for Tornado low flying (paragraphs 2.10-2.12). 8 The Department point out that they have not always had the resources to acquire the simulators they would like, and that they have not always been able to update or replace simulators to keep pace with rapidly changing simulator technology. Moreover, as the acquisition of simulators is an infrequent occurrence in relation to the pace of technical developments--no contracts for major flight simulators have been let since 1987-it is difficult to capitalise on up-to-date technology. The Department recognise, however, that there have been inadequacies in the definition of training needs and failures in making the most effective use of available technology which, in the past, have contributed to simulators failing to meet users’ needs. And as simulators have frequently entered service after parent equipment the full benefits of simulation have not always been achieved (paragraphs 2.13416). 9 The Harrier GR5 aircraft, for example, has been in service since 1988, but the simulator is not due to be introduced until late 1992. Training has therefore been undertaken on other nations’ less appropriate simulators at an estimated extra cost of f~2 million. Recognising that where possible simulators should enter service with or before parent equipment, the Department have identified a need for future proposals for simulators to be developedconcurrently with thosefor newparent equipment. Commercial airlines require that simulators are in service before new aircraft (paragraphs 2.16-2.18). 10 In recognition of previous acquisition problems, a “Policy for Synthetic Training” in the Royal Air Force was promulgated by the Department in 1989. A cornerstone of the Policy is “Training Needs Analysis”, which is now mandatory for all new simulator programmes. The approach is supported by simulator manufacturers and has been adopted by other countries. The aim is to achieve the best mix of what the Department wants and can afford, as well as revealing what technologies might be exploited. The Department have conducted two major Training Needs Analyses to date-for the European Fighter Aircraft and Tornado GRl Mid-Life Update. As the simulators so identified are not yet in-service, it is too early to assess the impact of the approach-but the Department expect it to help overcome many of the limitations of earlier acquisitions. At present, however, there is 2 MlNlSTRY OF DEFENCE: USE OF SIMULATORS IN TRAINlNG no standard structure for such analyses, nor authoritative guidance on all the points that analyses should cover (paragraphs 2.19-2.22). 11 The National Audit Office conclude that, to maintain and build on the significant progress already made in overcoming weaknesses in the acquisition of simulators for the Royal Air Force, the Department should pay particular attention to: ensuring that acquisition choices are based on improved, and more timely, definition of training needs, and on a full appreciation of the technology available. To this end it is important that the Department’s initiative to introduce Training Needs Analysis, which is still in its early days, is driven home-and strengthened by standardising the approach to such analysis. It will be important for the Department to assess the impact of the early analyses carried out, and identify lessons for the future; formulating a clear plan, with well defined priorities, for future acquisitions; ensuring that Departmental environmental objectives are fully considered in decisions to acquire simulators, and in deciding the most cost-effective balance between simulation and live training. Research in Germany, and study opportunities provided by the new Harrier GR5 simulator, could make a positive contribution in the environmentally sensitive area of low flying training. The utilisation of 12 In 1989 the Department recognised the need for “Operating Policy of Simulators in Statements” specifying the training role of simulators, the resources the Royal Air Force required to operate them and the utilisation levels expected. A total of 20 such statements will be required to cover the existing major flight simulator inventory. As at July 1992, one statement had been issued and a further nine were in an advanced state of preparation. The work has been hampered by staff shortages, the Gulf War and uncertainties over the future location of simulators as a result of extensive re-deployment proposals resulting from Options for Change.