Bill Otten

It was back burner'd due to higher urgency issues. It will be raised as an issue next week at Fire Support Interoperability Board (FSIB) meeting at Fires Center of Excellence.

I briefed this topic at March semi annual FSIB; Chairman stated he thought the same "MINIMUM SAFE DISTANCE AND RISK ESTIMATE DISTANCE" table in the Infantry manual is also in...

I should have a decision from the Fires center of Excellence at the next FSIB semi annual meeting - September, I believe, but the meeting announcement has not gone out...

second semiannual FSIB meeting has not yet been held. No date set yet, chairman is waiting for key systems scheduling information before setting a meeting date. Would welcome the opportunity...

Good Morning All, I believe there should be a common size. Not necessarily for the whole standard, but within a symbol set or functional area (land units, land equipment, etc.)...

On the surface this makes perfect sense. As we have found many times though, the symbol set a system or group of like systems implement can be different, so mandating...

For •MEDICAL EVACUATION REQUEST (MEDEVAC): 

@joebayles 6016 and 6017 are under the Joint Multi Tactical Data Link Configuration Control Board (JMTCCB). 6016 has a ratified companion document, STANAG 5516; 6017 has an unratified STANAG 5519...

Military symbology should support military doctrine. We have a symbol for a medical evacuation request and we have symbols for calls for fire - symbols for point targets, linear targets...

Doctrine has evolved. Army does not use "9 line" for much of anything; that's pretty much a CAS term. In our approved mission threads / test threads, we use mostly...