Live-Virtual-Constructive (LVC) Training in Air Combat: Emergent Training Opportunities and Fidelity Ripple Effects

  • Kelly J. NevilleEmail author
  • Angus L. M. Thom McLeanIII
  • Sarah Sherwood
  • Katherine Kaste
  • Melissa Walwanis
  • Amy Bolton
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9183)


Live training is where air combat personnel gain practice and experience with situations as close to real combat as possible. Computer-generated entities could expand the range and complexity of scenarios used in live training and could offer instructors a new means of manipulating the training environment. These new capabilities might help aircrew boost their proficiency beyond what is currently achieved in live training. On the other hand, computer-generated entities add artificiality to the live training environment, reducing its similarity to real combat. As part of a research program conducted to examine how the introduction of Live, Virtual, Constructive (LVC) training technology may change air combat training, we identified strategies to support learning and the acceleration of proficiency development. In this paper, we present these new possibilities for live training and discuss their implications for the fidelity of the training experience, related research, and research needs.


Training Opportunity Training Environment Negative Training Cognitive Work Training Range 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This research was sponsored by the Office of Naval Research (ONR). We wish to thank our interviewees for taking time out of their busy schedules to talk to us in-depth about the domain. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not represent the official views of the organizations with which they are affiliated.


  1. 1.
    Bar-Yam, Y.: Making Things Work. NECSI Knowledge Press, Boston (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kauffman, D.L.: Systems One: An Introduction to Systems Thinking. Future Systems Inc., Minneapolis (1980)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Klein, G.A., Calderwood, R., MacGregor, D.: Critical decision method for eliciting knowledge. IEEE Syst. Man Cybern. 19, 462–472 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3, 77–101 (2006)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hoffman, R.R., Feltovich, P.J.: Accelerated proficiency and facilitated retention: recommendations based on an integration of research and findings from a working meeting. Technical report, Air Force Research Laboratory, Mesa, AZ (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Feltovich, P.J., Coulson, R.L., Spiro, R.J.: Learners’ (mis) understanding of important and difficult concepts: a challenge to smart machines in education. In: Forbus, K.D., Feltovich, P.J. (eds.) Smart Machines in Education, pp. 349–375. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kelly J. Neville
    • 1
    Email author
  • Angus L. M. Thom McLeanIII
    • 2
  • Sarah Sherwood
    • 3
  • Katherine Kaste
    • 1
  • Melissa Walwanis
    • 1
  • Amy Bolton
    • 4
  1. 1.Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems DivisionOrlandoUSA
  2. 2.Georgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  3. 3.Embry-Ridde Aeronautical UniversityDaytona BeachUSA
  4. 4.Office of Naval ResearchArlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations