Immersive Training Guide

VR and simulation training for the military, government, healthcare and business


Immersive training for the military, government, healthcare and business

Last updated

This guide explains what VR and simulation training is, why the services use it, and who provides it. Each training category compares its providers side by side, with the same fields for every provider and a source for every fact.

Training categories

Military and government

  • Suicide prevention and SAPR. VR and simulated-conversation practice for suicide intervention and postvention, bystander intervention, and supporting victims of sexual assault. Providers compared (7): Alteristic (Green Dot), Catharsis Productions, LivingWorks, Mentors in Violence Prevention (MVP), Moth+Flame, SIMmersion and USC Institute for Creative Technologies.
  • Leadership, safe AI use and cybersecurity. VR and simulated-conversation practice for leaders, plus simulation-based training on safe AI use, operational security and cyber threats. Providers compared (11): Bodyswaps, Cornerstone (Talespin), Hack The Box, Lockheed Martin, Moth+Flame, Mursion, SimSpace, Skillsoft, Strivr, USC Institute for Creative Technologies and VirtualSpeech.
  • Aviation maintenance. VR, AR and 3D simulation for aircraft maintainers: procedures, inspections and troubleshooting on virtual aircraft. Providers compared (12): AVATAR Partners, Boeing, CAE, DiSTI, FlightSafety International, HTX Labs, Lockheed Martin, Mass Virtual, Moth+Flame, Pinnacle Solutions, Rolls-Royce and VRAI.
  • Shipbuilding and shipyard trades. Welding simulators and VR trades training for naval shipyards and the shipbuilding workforce. Providers compared (6): Industrial Training International (ITI), Lincoln Electric, Miller Electric, Moth+Flame, Seabery and VRSim.
  • Drones, counter-drone, EW and space. Simulation and VR training for drone operators, counter-drone teams, electronic warfare operators and space operations crews. Providers compared (11): CAE, FAAC, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems (GA-ASI), InVeris, Lockheed Martin, Moth+Flame, Northrop Grumman, OneArc (formerly BISim), Operator XR, Red 6 and Slingshot Aerospace.
  • AI-powered training. Simulations with AI role players, adversaries and tutors, and generative-AI conversation practice. Providers compared (11): Alelo, CAE, Charles River Analytics, Cubic, Discovery Machine, Lockheed Martin, Moth+Flame, Mursion, SoarTech, Synthesia and Virti.
  • Readiness assessment and analytics. Performance measurement and analytics for VR and simulation training: proficiency, behavior and readiness. Providers compared (12): 2 Circle, 4C Strategies, Aptima, CAE, Cognitive3D, Cubic, Design Interactive, Eduworks, HTX Labs, Lockheed Martin, Moth+Flame and SoarTech.
  • Pilot training and flight simulation. Full simulators, portable VR flight trainers and augmented-reality training for military pilots and aircrew. Providers compared (10): ASTi, Boeing, CAE, FlightSafety International, King Crow Studios, Lockheed Martin, Loft Dynamics, Moth+Flame, Red 6 and Vertex Solutions.

Healthcare

  • Healthcare communication. VR and virtual-patient practice for nurses, physicians and hospital staff: difficult conversations, de-escalation and patient communication. Providers compared (11): Bodyswaps, Embodied Labs, Engineering & Computer Simulations (ECS), Moth+Flame, Mursion, Oxford Medical Simulation (OMS), PCS, SimConverse, SimX, UbiSim and Virti.

Business and workforce

  • Corporate leadership and soft skills. VR and AI role-play for managers and teams: feedback, conflict, coaching, difficult conversations and leading change. Providers compared (9): Bodyswaps, Cornerstone (Talespin), Moth+Flame, Mursion, Skillsoft, Strivr, Virti, VirtualSpeech and Yoodli.
  • Hiring and realistic job previews. VR job previews and simulation-based assessments that show candidates the real job and help employers judge fit. Providers compared (7): Adaptive Immersion, Harver, HireVue, Moth+Flame, SHL, Strivr and Transfr.
  • Skilled trades and workforce training. Welding simulators and VR trades training for employers, community colleges and workforce programs. Providers compared (9): Heartwood, Interplay Learning, Lincoln Electric, Miller Electric, Moth+Flame, Realityworks, Seabery, Transfr and VRSim.

What immersive training is

Immersive training uses computer-generated or filmed environments that surround the learner. Virtual reality (VR) replaces the user's view of their surroundings with a simulated, interactive environment; a headset may be required. Augmented reality (AR) overlays digital images on the real world. Extended reality (XR) is an umbrella term for these and related technologies, including 360-degree video.

The military uses these tools alongside established forms of training. GAO describes live training as real people operating real systems, virtual training as real people operating simulated equipment, and constructive training as computer simulations, such as units shown as icons on a map. The Army's Synthetic Training Environment aims to merge live, virtual, constructive and gaming training.

Not every immersive tool needs a headset. Soldiers rehearse missions in 3D game environments on laptops, and junior leaders practice counseling conversations with virtual characters. GAO reports that the Army and Marine Corps treat simulation as a complement to live training, and the Army's acquisition magazine says it does not replace live training.

Virtual reality (VR)
A simulated, interactive environment replaces the user's view of their surroundings; a headset may be required. In Army training, for example, a forward observer can use a VR headset to see a virtual battlefield and call in indirect fire.
Augmented reality (AR)
Digital images are overlaid on the real world through a phone, head-mounted display or heads-up display. An Army research tool, for example, overlays 3D anatomy on a casualty and shows triage information to medics.
Mixed reality (MR)
Real-world and virtual elements are combined. The FDA notes that AR is sometimes called mixed or merged reality. One example is a prototype Air Force helicopter simulator that presents an interactive cockpit replica in mixed reality.
360-degree video
Spherical video, typically filmed with 360-degree cameras and stitched together, that viewers pan around on a computer or phone or watch in a VR headset. W3C counts 360-degree content among extended reality experiences.
Simulated conversation practice
Trainees practice hard conversations, such as counseling a struggling subordinate, with characters that respond to what they say, then review their performance. The Army's ELITE Lite trainer, described in 2014, uses virtual role-players; traditional courses use live role-play.
Desktop 3D simulation
Interactive 3D scenarios run on laptops, desktops or touchscreens, with no headset. The Army's Games for Training program runs a PC-based 3D training environment, and Navy trainers let sailors practice equipment procedures on large touchscreens.

Why the military uses it

What the evidence says

A 2021 meta-analysis in the journal Human Factors pooled transfer-of-training studies of VR, AR and MR from many fields. It found XR training as effective as conventional training, not more effective, and concluded that XR's value lies where danger or cost rule out traditional methods.

GAO reported in 2013 that the Army and Marine Corps cited benefits of simulation-based training but had not set outcome metrics to measure its effect on performance or proficiency, and had no method to compare its full costs with live training.

In 2016 GAO found that the Army's seven effectiveness analyses of virtual training devices since 2012 used differing objectives and approaches, and that expected usage was sometimes calculated only after devices were fielded. DoD generally concurred with GAO's recommendations, including defining how effectiveness is analyzed.

A 2022 Institute for Defense Analyses conference briefing on an Air Force Research Laboratory-supported review said AR/VR training studies report details unevenly. In an initial set, studies lacked descriptions of users' task experience (26%), technology experience (28%) or performance measures (29%).

How this guide works

Each category page explains the training, answers the questions buyers ask most, and compares the main providers side by side: what each offers, who it serves, how its training is delivered, assessment and analytics, AI features, public programs, and how to buy. Sources are listed at the end of each page.

Sources

  1. Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality in Medical Devices. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, September 4, 2026. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  2. XR Accessibility User Requirements (W3C Working Group Note). World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), August 25, 2021. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  3. Upload 180- or 360-degree videos - YouTube Help. Google (YouTube Help). Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  4. Army and Marine Corps Training: Better Performance and Cost Data Needed to More Fully Assess Simulation-Based Efforts (GAO-13-698). U.S. Government Accountability Office, August 22, 2013. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  5. Reality Check. U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center (Army AL&T magazine), June 20, 2025. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  6. Game On. U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center (Army AL&T magazine), May 26, 2021. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  7. Elite Training. U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center (Army AL&T magazine), December 1, 2014. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  8. Next-Level Reality. U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center (Army AL&T magazine), July 26, 2025. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  9. DIU, Air Education and Training Command Partner To Develop Modern, Data-Enabled Virtual Pilot Training Capabilities. Defense Innovation Unit, November 27, 2023. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  10. Ready, Relevant Learning Fleet Summit Emphasizes "Right Training at the Right Time". DVIDS (Naval Education and Training Command Public Affairs), October 20, 2017. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  11. New Tech Helping Airmen Think Faster in Training, AETC Boss Says. Air & Space Forces Magazine, May 8, 2024. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  12. The Effects of Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, and Mixed Reality as Training Enhancement Methods: A Meta-Analysis (Human Factors 63(4):706-726). Human Factors (record on PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine), June 2021. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  13. Army Training: Efforts to Adjust Training Requirements Should Consider the Use of Virtual Training Devices (GAO-16-636). U.S. Government Accountability Office, August 16, 2016. Retrieved October 21, 2026.
  14. What is Known and What is Hype? Understanding the State of AR/VR Training Effectiveness (NDIA Human Systems Conference briefing). Institute for Defense Analyses (briefing hosted by DTIC), June 2022. Retrieved October 21, 2026.