Use of Weaponeer marksmanship trainer in predicting M16A1 rifle qualification performance.

Schendel, Joel D.; Heller, Frederick H.; Finley, Dorothy L.; Hawley, John K.

doi:10.1037/e459712004-001

Cited by 12 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Immediate feedback is available for critiquing the shooter's application of the integrated act of firing, including misfire procedures and the four fundamentals of marksmanship (Schendel & Heller, 1985).…”

Section: Shooting Simulatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some of this research has been performed to assess the effect of predicting record fire scores from simulator training performance (Hagman, 1998;Schendel & Heller, 1985). Schendel and Heller stated that the Weaponeer was a good predictor of record fire (live) performance when the Weaponeer shooting scenario was most difficult.…”

Section: Simulated Fire and Live Fire Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison of Live and Simulated Fire Soldier Shooting Performance

Scribner¹,

Wiley²,

Harper³

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, ARL-TR-4234 SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S) DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ABSTRACTThe use of simulation is increasing as our capabilities of producing high-fidelity virtual environments expand. This is true for marksmanship and engagement shooting trainers as well. Many marksmanship studies have used simulated fire, but not many of these simulators have been validated with a live fire comparison. The U.S. Army Research Laboratory's dismounted infantry survivability and lethality test bed (DISALT) is highly effective as a research tool because of its high-fidelity data capture and flexibility for shooting scenarios. However, no live fire validation data have been published for it. A simulated version of the outdoor small-arms experimental range at Aberdeen Proving Ground (known as M-Range) was built by the authors. A study was designed in which live fire would be compared to the simulated fire during controlled laboratory conditions with the use of DISALT. Participants were 12 U.S. Army Soldiers, military occupational specialty 11C (indirect fire dismounted infantryman). The shooting task consisted of an 18-target pop-up scenario that used olive drab green E-type silhouettes. Ranges consisted of 75-, 100-, 150-, 200-, 250-, and 300-meter targets from a kneeling foxhole-supported position. Each participant was exposed to 10 trials each of simulation and live fire, half performing simulated fire first and vice versa. Target exposure time was 3 seconds with a 3-second inter-target interval. De-militarized M16A2 rifles with iron sights outfitted with electronics were used for the simulated fire, while operational M16A2 rifles with iron sights were used with M855 ball ammunition for the live fire portion. Data collected included hit percentage, time to first shot, radial aiming error, subjective workload and stress data. All data were analyzed with a repeated measures analysis of variance. Statistical differences and non-differences in the performance and subjective data are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Shooting Simulatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Simulated Fire and Live Fire Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Live and Simulated Fire Soldier Shooting Performance

Scribner¹,

Wiley²,

Harper³

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Schendel, Heller, Finley, and Hawley (1985) reported that the Weaponeer marksmanship trainer could be used to predict live-fire performance when marksmanship training was not provided immediately prior to Weaponeer testing. When marksmanship training immediately preceded Weaponeer testing, on the other hand, Weaponeer scores consistently (across three different test conditions) failed to predict subsequent live-fire results.…”

Section: The Marksmanship Training Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Extrapolating from the Schendel, et al (1985) findings, optimal conditions were deemed most likely to occur when LMTS and live-fire ALT-C firings were conducted without preceding marksmanship training. A glance at Table 1 in Appendix A shows that this state of affairs was scheduled to occur in Control Group C. Accordingly, it was determined that the next data collection effort would eliminate LMTS-based training and include only the firing of LMTS and live-fire ALT-C. By the time the next effort was scheduled, moreover, a pistol (Commander, SATT, 1999b) POI was ready for evaluation, along with its associated LMTS-based Alternate Pistol Qualification Course (APQC) (Headquarters, Department of the Army, 1988).…”

Section: The Marksmanship Training Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Research on the Laser Marksmanship Training System

Smith¹,

Hagman²

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Simulation has also been successfully used to train and evaluate rifle marksmanship (e.g., Schendel, Heller, Finley, & Hawley, 1985). Recently, for instance, the Laser Marksmanship Training System (LMTS) has incorporated the use of barrel-appended, trigger-activated, eye-safe lasers and light-sensitive, scaled targetry within a computer-managed environment to give shooters (a) the benefit of training with their own weapons witHout the need for live ammunition (Dunlin, 1999;, and (b) the opportunity to fulfill yearly qualification requirements without going to the range (Smith & Hagman, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

More Efficient Live-Fire Rifle Marksmanship Evaluation

Hagman¹

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use of Weaponeer marksmanship trainer in predicting M16A1 rifle qualification performance.

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

A Comparison of Live and Simulated Fire Soldier Shooting Performance

A Comparison of Live and Simulated Fire Soldier Shooting Performance

A Review of Research on the Laser Marksmanship Training System

More Efficient Live-Fire Rifle Marksmanship Evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About