Platform
Modules
By sector
By sector
By standard
Blog
News
Events
STANREC 4800
National defence authorities and NATO bodies choosing which federation object model to build interoperable simulation systems to
STANREC 4800 is a NATO recommendation, not a binding agreement, naming AMSP-04 Edition C as the object model for federating NATO education and training simulation systems.
STANREC 4800 is a NATO Standardization Recommendation on the NATO Education and Training Network - Federation Object Model (NETN-FOM). As with every STANREC, the distinction that matters most is in its name: unlike a STANAG, it does not commit a nation to ratify anything. NATO's own text is explicit that "Nations are invited to use the Allied standard(s) covered by the STANREC and to provide feedback to the NSO on the use of the covered Allied standard(s)" - an invitation, not a ratification obligation. Nothing in this document creates a duty for a supplier to sign up to directly.
The document's aim is to "list recommended practices regarding: common information exchange data model for developing interoperable federated and distributed simulation systems applicable to Computer Assisted eXercises (CAX), Distributed Synthetic Training (DST) and distributed modelling and simulation in general." Its recommendation is a single Allied Publication: AMSP-04, Edition C, the standard that actually defines the NETN-FOM object model. The document names two families of related reading alongside it: STANAG 4603, on modelling and simulation architecture standards for technical interoperability (High Level Architecture, HLA), and the SISO RPR FOM suite - SISO-STD-001, the guidance and rationale document, and SISO-STD-001.1, the Real-Time Platform Reference FOM standard itself. None of these is described as a prerequisite; they are named as adjacent reading, not as something that must already be in place.
This is Edition 3, and it supersedes "STANREC 4800, Edition 2, dated 26 March 2021." The letter of promulgation is specific that the change is not cosmetic: "the changes include a major restructuring with new modules using the latest High Level Architecture (HLA) Federation Object Model (FOM) modelling principles and techniques," with the full list of changes held in AMSP-04's own section 1.2. An organisation already building to Edition 2's object model has real modules to re-map, not a paperwork update.
STANREC 4800 has no clauses of its own to audit against. Nations and NATO bodies are asked to "provide feedback to the NSO on the use of Allied standards covered by a STANREC," and the document itself "is to be reviewed in accordance with AAP-03," with the result recorded in the NATO Standardization Documents Database. That review checks the recommendation's own currency, not an organisation, and the testable content - the object model's modules and interfaces - sits inside AMSP-04, not here.
STANREC 4800 is a recommendation, not a technical specification: it names an object model to build to rather than requirements to meet, so there is nothing in this document itself to implement in software. The actual technical content, and the testable requirements, sit inside AMSP-04.
What that leaves an organisation to do is the ordinary discipline of choosing and evidencing a standard: recording which edition of AMSP-04 a programme's federation is built to, holding that decision and its rationale as a controlled document, and keeping the training record that shows engineers were trained on the current object model rather than the one it superseded. ComplyTrain gives a place to hold that record, track who approved it, and keep it current as a programme's simulation architecture evolves.
What ComplyTrain does not do: define, build or validate a federation object model itself. That is simulation engineering work carried out with AMSP-04 and the HLA architecture it runs on, not in a compliance platform. Which edition a given programme must build to is set by the contract and the customer's quality clause, not by this page - our standards explorer shows what sits alongside STANREC 4800, and we're glad to talk through what a specific tender is actually asking for.
Tell us how you need to work with STANREC 4800 and what you need from it. We will come back to you about what ComplyTrain can do.
Thank you. Your list is on its way to your inbox, and we will come back to you on what working with these standards in ComplyTrain involves, usually within one business day.
No. A STANREC is a recommendation: NATO nations are invited to use the standard it names, without the ratification obligation a STANAG carries. Whether AMSP-04 applies to a specific programme is a question for that programme's contract.
A STANAG is an agreement nations ratify and commit to implement. A STANREC recommends a standard without that obligation - nations are invited to use it and to report their experience, but nothing requires them to.
It recommends AMSP-04, Edition C: the NATO Education and Training Network Federation Object Model, the common data model for building interoperable federated and distributed simulation systems.
Yes. This edition explicitly supersedes STANREC 4800, Edition 2, dated 26 March 2021, and restructures the object model with new modules built to the latest High Level Architecture FOM modelling principles.
The document names Computer Assisted eXercises (CAX), Distributed Synthetic Training (DST) and distributed modelling and simulation in general as its applications.
One system for the whole compliance programme. Start with the module you need most.
Collect information the same way every time, and decide in advance what happens next.
Know whether your controls are operating, not just whether a policy says they exist.
Turn the compliance work you already know about into a plan with owners, dependencies and dates.
Know what you can offer, and hold the evidence behind every configuration you offer it in.
Eight built-in reports across every module, scheduled, delivered, and filed where the evidence lives.
The sector news that matters to your organisation - read and rated by AI, and delivered as a scheduled digest in your own language.
AI reads the tender pack and pulls out the requirements, deadlines and rules - then helps you draft the response from your own approved content, with you reviewing every step.
One current register of the suppliers and partners you depend on - each risk-assessed, re-assessing itself on schedule, and wired straight into your risk register.
See every requirement you face - across every standard, plus your own contracts and policies - traced to the documents, evidence and processes that satisfy it.
Identify, score, treat and review your risks in one place - with AI to help anyone run a proper assessment, and a defensible trail behind every decision.
Assign training, prove it was understood, and hold the competence records an auditor asks for.
Draft compliance documents with AI, keep every version under control, and export them beautifully branded - all in one place.
Audits, corrective actions, processes and approvals in one quality system, organised around ISO 9001.
A 90-day plan for the smallest defence suppliers: let the tender set your scope, document what you already do, fix the security basics primes check, and keep the system small enough for two people to maintain.
Learn how to qualify, approve and monitor sub-suppliers, flow down requirements through purchase orders, and keep the records an auditor will ask to see under ISO 9001 clause 8.4 and AQAP.
Learn how to run an ISO 9001 Clause 9.3 management review that turns evidence into decisions, with the right inputs, actionable outputs, and a cadence that fits your risks.