Development of a Scoring Metric for Air-to-Air Combat Engagements

Abstract

This paper describes a scaling study which was conducted as an integral part of a Navy research program designed to develop and validate air-to-air combat task performance measures. Evaluation of aircrew proficiency and estimation of training progress by training personnel are but two of the many uses of valid performance measures. The primary rationale of the validation study (described in companion paper presentation; see Ciavarelli and Breidenbach) was to determine the degree of relationship between measures of air combat task performance and final engagement outcomes. In general, the outcome of an air combat engagement may be expressed as a win, loss or draw event. A favorable outcome, or win, is considered an ultimate criterion measure of air combat success. On the other hand, an unfavorable outcome, or loss, is viewed as failure. The primary objective of the scaling study was to obtain aircrew estimates concerning the desirability of engagement outcomes. It was anticipated that favorable outcomes would be weighted more substantially than unfavorable ones. A magnitude estimation scaling questionnaire was developed, pilot tested and administered to Navy fighter aircrews who had extensive air combat experience. Results of the scaling study were in agreement with other magnitude estimation experiments reported in the literature. The obtained metric (named the Air Combat Engagement or ACE Score) was successfully employed as a dependent variable in regression analysis performed during the air combat validation study. The ACE Score was also found to be sensitive in discriminating squadron performance differences. Potential applications of the ACE scale and scaling methodology include determining the willingness of aircrews to commit forces to battle and studying combat decision behavior, motivation and stress.