IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v47y2016i1p103-129.html

Improving Air Combat Maneuvering Skills Through Self-Study and Simulation-Based Practice

Author

Listed:
  • Mikel D. Petty
  • Salvador E. Barbosa

Abstract

Background. Although instructor participation is generally thought to improve the effectiveness of simulation-based training, trainees may have time and opportunity to practice skills in simulation when an instructor is not available . Aim. The question of whether complex psychomotor skills , such as air combat maneuvering, can be acquired and improved entirely without instructor assistance through self-study and simulation -based practice is investigated. Method. The results of an extended sequence of simulated air combat missions flown by a single experimental subject are reported and analyzed. Over a period of eight calendar years the subject flew 2,950 simulated air combat missions organized into 138 campaigns using seven different aircraft types. Throughout the period the subject studied air combat maneuvering in a self-guided , self-study mode and consciously used maneuvers and tactics learned during that study with the intent of improving his performance . However, determining whether the subject’s skills were actually improving over time was confounded by the fact that between some campaigns the subject changed the aircraft type he was flying as well as the aircraft types flown by the opposition, making direct campaign-to-campaign performance comparisons problematic . Consequently, a type-independent measure of performance was developed to normalize for the different aircraft types and allow direct comparison of performance across different aircraft types flown and opposed. Results. Two different nonparametric statistical tests were applied to the normalized performance measure across all campaigns . A third nonparametric statistical method was applied to victories within each aircraft type . All three showed st atistically significant improvement in the subject’s skills over time despite the complete absence of instructor assistance. Conclusions. Although this case study must be considered anecdotal because it involves only a single experimental subject, it does provide an existence proof that self-guided self-study and simulation -based practice without an instructor can produce improvement in complex psychomotor skills in some learners. In addition, the analytical methods used to normalize for different aircraft types and test for improvement may be useful in similar situations where performance must be compared across time -varying circumstances.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikel D. Petty & Salvador E. Barbosa, 2016. "Improving Air Combat Maneuvering Skills Through Self-Study and Simulation-Based Practice," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(1), pages 103-129, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:47:y:2016:i:1:p:103-129
    DOI: 10.1177/1046878116628236
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1046878116628236
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1046878116628236?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gwenda Fong, 2006. "Adapting COTS games for military experimentation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 37(4), pages 452-465, December.
    2. Andrew Robinson & Katerina Mania, 2007. "Technological research challenges of flight simulation and flight instructor assessments of perceived fidelity," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 38(1), pages 112-135, March.
    3. Roger Smith, 2010. "The Long History of Gaming in Military Training," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 41(1), pages 6-19, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael D. Coovert & Jennifer Winner & Winston Bennett Jr., 2017. "Construct Development and Validation in Game-Based Research," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(2), pages 236-248, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Benjamin Schechter & Jacquelyn Schneider & Rachael Shaffer, 2021. "Wargaming as a Methodology: The International Crisis Wargame and Experimental Wargaming," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 52(4), pages 513-526, August.
    2. Suzanne de Castell & Jennifer Jenson & Kurt Thumlert, 2014. "From Simulation to Imitation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(3), pages 332-355, June.
    3. Graham Morgan, 2009. "Challenges of Online Game Development: A Review," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 40(5), pages 688-710, October.
    4. Peter Landwehr & Marc Spraragen & Balki Ranganathan & Kathleen M. Carley & Michael Zyda, 2013. "Games, Social Simulations, and Data—Integration for Policy Decisions," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 44(1), pages 151-177, February.
    5. Wendy L. Bedwell & Davin Pavlas & Kyle Heyne & Elizabeth H. Lazzara & Eduardo Salas, 2012. "Toward a Taxonomy Linking Game Attributes to Learning," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(6), pages 729-760, December.
    6. Hans J. E. Korteling & Anne S. Helsdingen & Ralf R. Sluimer, 2017. "An Empirical Evaluation of Transfer-of-Training of Two Flight Simulation Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(1), pages 8-35, February.
    7. John Curry & Tim Price & Phil Sabin, 2016. "Commercial-Off-the-Shelf-Technology in UK Military Training," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(1), pages 7-30, February.
    8. Katherine A. Wilson & Wendy L. Bedwell & Elizabeth H. Lazzara & Eduardo Salas & C. Shawn Burke & Jamie L. Estock & Kara L. Orvis & Curtis Conkey, 2009. "Relationships Between Game Attributes and Learning Outcomes," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 40(2), pages 217-266, April.
    9. Tomas By, 2012. "Formalizing Game-play," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(2), pages 157-187, April.
    10. John Curry & Dana Ruggiero & Phil Sabin & Michael Young, 2017. "Modelling the Outcomes of International Crises Using Confrontation Analysis," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(3), pages 314-328, June.
    11. David Crookall, 2010. "Serious Games, Debriefing, and Simulation/Gaming as a Discipline," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 41(6), pages 898-920, December.
    12. Timothy C. Lisk & Ugur T. Kaplancali & Ronald E. Riggio, 2012. "Leadership in Multiplayer Online Gaming Environments," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(1), pages 133-149, February.
    13. Anders Frank, 2012. "Gaming the Game," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(1), pages 118-132, February.
    14. David Crookall, 2012. "The founding of modern simulation/gaming," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(1), pages 5-14, February.
    15. Cindy L. Kovalik & Chia-Ling Kuo, 2012. "Innovation Diffusion," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(6), pages 803-824, December.
    16. Clint A. Bowers & Stephen Serge & Lucas Blair & Janis Cannon-Bowers & Rachel Joyce & James Boshnack, 2013. "The Effectiveness of Narrative Pre-Experiences for Creating Context in Military Training," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 44(4), pages 514-522, August.
    17. Per Backlund & Henrik Engström & Mikael Johannesson & Mikael Lebram, 2010. "Games for traffic education: An experimental study of a game-based driving simulator," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 41(2), pages 145-169, April.
    18. Jim Scullion & Daniel Livingstone & Mark Stansfield, 2014. "Collaboration Through Simulation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(3), pages 394-409, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:47:y:2016:i:1:p:103-129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.