October 29, 2024
The military is working hard to help warfighters respond more quickly and effectively to new challenges. There are some real lessons the fire service can take from their efforts. In my article, Time Keeps on Ticking, I explore how moving faster through the OODA loop (observe, orient, decide, act) is critical in emergencies. Using live, virtual, and constructive (LVC) environments is another way the military ensures their people can respond quickly and confidently when it matters most.
I recently listened to a podcast with Jennifer McArdle, Ph.D. , Senior Director for Futures at CAE USA. She broke down how the military uses these three types of training environments. You can find the podcast here:
Below is my attempt to summarize the different training environments are, how the fire service is already using some of them, and where we can improve.
Live training involves actual people performing real tasks in real environments. Dr. McArdle referenced Top Gun—which happens to be my favorite movie—where pilots fly live drills in real jets. It’s the closest thing to the real deal.
In the fire service, live training includes things like burning buildings, extrication drills, and hazardous materials exercises. It gives firefighters hands-on experience, helping them build muscle memory and get used to working under pressure. However, live training has limits—we don’t always have access to specialized facilities like high-rises, and the demands on personnel and equipment can make frequent repetition difficult.
Virtual training takes place in a digital environment, where real people interact with simulated scenarios. In the military, this might involve soldiers training in flight simulators or practicing combat using virtual reality. The strength of virtual training is that it allows frequent, low-risk repetition, without the wear and tear of live drills.
In the fire service, our ARIES platform provides a similar opportunity. We use it to simulate fireground operations, helping firefighters practice communications, coordination, and command decisions. Virtual environments allow us to drill scenarios that are tough to replicate in the real world, like complex multi-vehicle accidents or mass-casualty incidents. However, access to virtual training tools is a challenge—many departments lack the resources to build or maintain these systems. Platforms like Unity and Unreal offer a solution by providing accessible gaming engines, but creating realistic environments still requires significant time and investment.
Constructive training uses computer-generated environments where virtual entities perform tasks without human interaction. The military leverages this approach to model large-scale operations—like how a cyberattack might unfold alongside an air assault.
For the fire service, constructive training could be impactful to our idustry. Imagine simulating a wildfire spread across specific topography, with different weather variables in play. In fact, tools like the WRF-Fire model already allow us to predict how wildfires might behave in different conditions (WRF-Fire Model). But constructive simulations could go beyond wildfires. We could use them to rehearse rare but high-stakes events, such as active shooter responses, drone-supported rescues, or crowd management during evacuations. These are scenarios that are too complex and risky to practice live, but they could be modeled digitally to help us develop strategies and prepare for the unexpected.
The fire service has traditionally done a great job with live training, we know how to run effective drills. But the future lies in combining live, virtual, and constructive environments. This approach will allow us to prepare for increasingly complex incidents, while also providing safe spaces to experiment and fail without real-world consequences.
The future of the fire service most likely requires that adopt new technologies proactively. AI-assisted tools, for example, could enhance command and control, streamlining decision-making by offering real-time suggestions based on incoming data. Automated personnel tracking systems could monitor firefighters during operations, flagging safety risks early and ensuring accountability. Drones deployed ahead of crews could provide invaluable situational awareness, helping commanders understand what they are walking into before they even arrive. Meanwhile, automated public alert systems could use cellular networks to send real-time instructions to the public, reducing confusion and improving safety during emergencies.
We are often slow to adopt new technology because we operate in a zero-fail environment where trust is essential. Before new tools are accepted, they need to prove their reliability repeatedly. Trust isn’t given freely; it’s earned through consistent, successful use. Constructive environments provide a way to test new technologies repeatedly without the risks of real-world consequences. With enough practice and demonstrated success in these simulated settings, trust builds, paving the way for confident implementation in the field.
Incorporating multi-agency simulations will also help us better prepare for large-scale, complex events. Just as the military integrates air, land, and cyber domains during training, we need to practice with police, EMS, and public works to ensure seamless coordination when responding to disasters. These simulations would allow all agencies to rehearse working together under pressure, identifying weak spots and improving communication before real incidents occur. This is particularly important as more emergencies, like mass casualty events or extreme weather, require cross-discipline cooperation.
The military’s use of live, virtual, and constructive environments is helping warfighters respond faster and more effectively, and there are clear lessons here for the fire service. We’ve already made progress, but there’s more we can do. By embracing virtual and constructive simulations, we can better prepare for rare and complex incidents that live training alone can’t cover.