The evolution of major training acquisition organizations from a device/equipment focus to a total systems emphasis is more than a reflection of the growing concern for more accuracy, timeliness and economy on the part of both using organizations and program managers. It is a Ear more basic statement of policy and philosophy that recognizes that training should be an integral and primary function of all military activity and cannot be separated into component parts (i.e., initial, mission, continuation) without the whole becoming significantly less than the sum of its parts. While this systems integration requirement will affect the user and technical arenas in many profound ways, the real challenge to the success of acquiring accurately configured, timely, cost effective and objectively based total training systems lies in the ability of management to direct, control, measure and coordinate each element and resource to its maximum benefit to the system.

It has been stated on more than one occasion that the Army's job is to ‘equip the man’ while that of the Air Force is to ‘man the equipment’. Using the change in focus from equipment to systems, it appears that these two quips might be modified to ‘equip and prepare the available human resources to maximize his or her ability to do the mission’. This description contains many provocative concepts and implications but as a minimum suggests that management focus must evolve from simple training tasks and devices definition to a total responsibility for the integration of the man's or woman's entire education and training throughout their military exposure. This tasking and/or responsibility takes on special criticality when considering the following:

A. Demographics suggests that manpower availability and quality may be significantly lower in the not too distant future. Since existing and near future systems have been designed and implemented around a sufficient number of highly qualified (mostly male) personnel, the impact that lower numbers and lower qualification level may have on, miss ion readiness is potentially profound.

B. The Air Force is currently utilizing an available manpower pool of over 1,138,000 personnel to accomplish its mission worldwide. One of the requirements of acquiring a new weapon system must be insuring that available manpower is present to support the new system and that every person assigned is used to his or her maximum potential and benefit to the Air Force. Using a task or device concept in training requirement definition negates consideration of this responsibility. Assumption of responsibility For total system acquisition requires managers to account for all MPT issues on a life cycle cost basis.

C. As high technology continues to provide new and more capable weapon systems to the Air Force, current methods of specifying and acquiring training are becoming more and more suspect. With major issues such as contractor vs. ‘blue suit’ training and specialist vs. generalist force structures, questions on the ability of the task and skill oriented ISD process' ability to support training system specification and statement-of-work requirements have arisen.

D. Program managers, facing the new requirements of training system acquisition, are now required to have a whole new set of skills, knowledges and perspectives available for decision making. How many such managers are qualified and equipped to integrate MPT issues, high technology advances in both the weapon system and the training arenas, research and development activity and mission and operational requirements with the complex and demanding requirements of the acquisition "process"?

This paper is intended to address these issues with particular emphasis on the program manager and his relationship with industry. This emphasis is especially appropriate because of industry desire to provide totally supported weapon systems and because of the fact that industry will continue to be the major source of training system acquisition support for the Air Force. The paper will define the evolving issues in training systems acquisition, define the current tools and methodologies which are currently being implemented, and propose several initiatives and requirements which must be achieved if program managers of the future are going to be able to realize the total benefit a training system concept has to offer.