SUMMARY On 13 Jan 2007, we conducted an IMU training session in the "train the trainer" fashion. This session had two objectives: 1) Train key Mission Base staff personnel in the general usage of IMU 2) Test the IMU system in a simulated larger scale SAREX exercise for its suitability in the upcoming exercise 07-T-3500. The results lead to the following recommendations from Maj Susan Wolber and myself: 1) Utilize only the Incident Checkin functionality of IMU at 07-T-3500. The primary benefit is the accurate screening of CAPF 101 qualifications of participants, which had been a critical problem at recent exercises. 2) Optionally "follow" the exercise progress with the Air Operations Module of IMU with the intent of maintaining the IMU Status Board and perhaps printing documents such as the CAPF 107. This activity would occur only if time and resources allowed, and may serve as a continuation of the training accomplished in the 13 Jan session. 3) Establish an IMU/WMU "Triage" station at the SAREX to handle checkin problems. This station will allow "normal" checkins to proceed without delay by quickly diverting members with problematic online records to a place where they can get assistance. Lt Col Karl Schultz would likely operate this station. I further recommend that individual units should consider using IMU to conduct unit exercises (e.g. Jeffco/Ginther monthly exercises) when IMU-trained personnel are present. Using IMU at large (100+ people) exercises will require much more thorough training of a larger number of people to avoid having IMU interfering with the actual training goals of these exercises. The course materials can be found on the Jeffco website (http://www.coloradowingcap.org/jeffco), in the IMU Training area. Additional details follow. Karl Schultz -------------------------------------------------------------- ADDITIONAL DETAILS and LESSONS LEARNED Networking We encountered many delays and difficulties while connecting approximately ten computers to a network for IMU operation. Part of the problem was due to the increased complexity of the network configuration required by IMU Version 2. IMU 2 utilizes a distributed database architecture rather than the single shared database in IMU 1. This configuration requires each machine to have a copy of the IMU database and share it as writable to the rest of the network. This requires additional configuration steps on each IMU "client" computer. The wide variety of computers present also contributed to the delays. Variations of the Windows version, firewalls, network domain configurations, and other issues were a problem. None of these problems were directly related to IMU. Action: Plan extra time for network setup prior to the exercise. Try to have additional staff present with Windows network experience. I'd like to thank the many experts we had in class who corrected these problems. IMU Performance The class members were very pleased with the performance of the Incident Checkin Module. We were able to check in about 120 participants in about 30 minutes. We therefore think that IMU 2 will be very useful for checkins at a large exercise, probably due to its new distributed DB architecture. The only other module we really used was the Air Operations Module. It performed very sluggishly, raising the possibility that it may slow down Air Ops IMU procedures. We may have had too many people using that module at once in class. In a more realistic situation, there would be fewer people and so may operate at an acceptable level. We also noted that the apostrophe-in-the-name bug appears to be fixed, now making it safe to checkin people with names like "O'Brien". Action: Encourage only appropriate users to operate the Air Operations Module at large exercises. IMU Training Class Effectiveness This is a difficult topic to teach to a lot of people. Part of the difficulty lies in lack of a good IMU manual. Such a manual would be about the size of a textbook, but is badly needed so that members can at least start learning the material on their own. I felt that many of the class members came in "cold" by not reviewing or practicing the "script" I prepared for the class. If we can get people to prepare more on their own, there would be fewer "trivial" problems like the "hunting and pecking" at the menu items that occurs when using tools for the first time. In other words, members who want to be IMU operators are going to have to do more work than just coming to a couple of classes. A class size closer to five would also be more effective. We needed more people for this class due to the stress test goal. Otherwise, it is too hard to keep more than five people engaged. Also, it is usually bad to have more than one person in a "role" during simuation or script execution. For example, having more than one person creating sorties at once can be very problematic, due to the way IMU is implemented. Action: Continue IMU training in smaller groups. Focus on using IMU at smaller exercises until the IMU experience base is larger. END