A comparative analysis of commercial off-the-shelf naval simulations and classic operations research models

Abstract

No longer does Naval Surface Warfare merely entail battle between symmetric naval fleets conducted in large open water engagements. Today's Surface Warriors must have the training and capability to also fight asymmetric threats in congested locations of strategic value. Operations conducted within straits, choke points, and island cluttered littorals pose considerable risk and numerous challenges for today's Navy. Shore based anti-ship missiles, torpedo and missile carrying small fast patrol boats, and mines present capable threats across naval warfare areas such as Anti-Surface Warfare and Mine Warfare. In addition, conventional and midget submarines present an ever-growing threat within strategic littorals. Previous studies have generated high-end simulations to determine composition of blue force fleets, and suggested tactics for addressing various modern threats. This thesis compares how well off-the-shelf simulation software in the form of Larry Bond's HARPOON3 Advanced Naval Warfare (H3 ANW) emulates high-end simulations validated through modified Hughes' Salvo Equations. The results demonstrate the complexities involved in comparing the output of two completely different analytical tools. The mathematical nature of Hughes' Salvo Equations provides a focused deterministic aspect; while the dynamic interaction of platforms, environments, and tactics designed into H3 ANW provide a completely different aspect with potential use as a learning tool for Surface Warrior.