Icons and Symbols - MIL-STD-2525 Symbology. Sailor-in-the-Simulation (SITS) Workshop 8 June 2005. Basic Commerce and Industries, Dahlgren, VA



Similar documents
COMBATSS-21 Scalable combat management system for the world s navies

Venator -110 General Purpose Light Frigate Technical Brief

JLENS Overview. 9 May 2013 R AY T H E O N P R O P R I E TA R Y

9LV CMS COMBAT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Modifying Colors and Symbols in ArcMap

IAI/Malat Solutions for the Maritime Arena

Seapower Capability Systems is Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems business area dedicated to the development and delivery of critical seapower

DATA VISUALIZATION GABRIEL PARODI STUDY MATERIAL: PRINCIPLES OF GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS AN INTRODUCTORY TEXTBOOK CHAPTER 7

Nasams. Air Defence System.

Multilink Processors (Link 11/16/22) and Integration Architectures

Coordinated Operation Capability Using Scalable C2

Encl: (1) Surface Warfare Tactical Requirement Group Membership

3D Interactive Information Visualization: Guidelines from experience and analysis of applications

University of Arkansas Libraries ArcGIS Desktop Tutorial. Section 2: Manipulating Display Parameters in ArcMap. Symbolizing Features and Rasters:

Rapheal Holder From Platform to Service in the Network Centric Value Chain October 23, Internal Information Services

OPNAVINST A USFF/CNO N3/N5 10 Nov 2014

Our long-term transformation strategy will exploit these tactical advances to achieve two key operational level objectives:

Data Visualization. Prepared by Francisco Olivera, Ph.D., Srikanth Koka Department of Civil Engineering Texas A&M University February 2004

Enabling Joint and Coalition Success: A Perspective from the System Provider RDML Jim Syring Program Executive Officer Integrated Warfare Systems

User Recognition and Preference of App Icon Stylization Design on the Smartphone

Graphic Design. Background: The part of an artwork that appears to be farthest from the viewer, or in the distance of the scene.

Army Doctrine Update

The Tactical Tomahawk Weapons Control System: Interface Design Project

CATIA Basic Concepts TABLE OF CONTENTS

WATCHKEEPER X UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM (UAS)

Accurate Risk Assessment Using Multi-Relational Hazard/Mishap Pairings

Emerging Threats and Challenges for Homeland Air Security

Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Atlantic

CHAPTER 2 AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER (AC) NAVPERS F CH-64

La Royale. The French Navy. Capability Briefing To Their Lordships, The Board of the Admiralty 20 April 1939

SECRETARY OF THE NAVY SAFETY EXCELLENCE AWARDS

UNCLASSIFIED. R-1 Program Element (Number/Name) PE N / Directed Energy and Electric Weapon System. Prior Years FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

The Top Twenty Internet Security Vulnerabilities. and How To Get Rid Of Them

Using Spiral Development To Reduce Acquisition Cycle Times

Propulsion & Power Generation : The Present. Challenges & Emerging Technologies. Future induction requirements

Petrel TIPS&TRICKS from SCM

FUTURE NAVY VISION. The Royal Navy Today, Tomorrow and Towards Projecting maritime power to protect and promote our nation s interests

Application of Technology to Create an Integrated, Multidisciplinary Approach to Safe and Secure Ports

UDENRIGSMINISTERIET, MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF DENMARK TECHNICAL MODERNISATION PLAN OF THE POLISH ARMED FORCES

Case No COMP/M FINMECCANICA / BAES AVIONICS & COMMUNICATIONS. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Laser Weapon System (LaWS) Adjunct to the Close-In Weapon System (CIWS)

Context and Background 5. The Equipment Budget 5. Summary of equipment spending plans 7. Sector analysis where does the money go? 9.

This document contains Model statistics for the Kingdom of Denmark Faction. The statistics are compatible with the Dystopian Wars 2.0 Game Engine.

Airspace Control in the Combat Zone

Chapter 1. Creating Sketches in. the Sketch Mode-I. Evaluation chapter. Logon to for more details. Learning Objectives

LEADING THE WAY FROM SEA TO LAND SURVEILLANCE RADAR SOLUTIONS

Asset Track Getting Started Guide. An Introduction to Asset Track

The Challenge. Shipboard crew members need training because cadres are not expected to provide a long-term ConOps for UUV employment.

Ms. Alyse C. Bullock DoN OSBP Assistant Director

About the Port. Created as an act of state legislation Five member cities. Coronado. San Diego. Coronado. National City.

Physical Security Simulation and Analysis Tools A presentation for the Canada & United States Security Simulation Technologies Group

Part 0 - Classification and Surveys Classification and Surveys I

simplify printing TX Guide v. 1. make IT simple Tricerat, Inc Cronridge Drive Suite 100 Owings Mills, MD , All rights Reserved

An Overview of Romanian Command and Control Systems

USING THE UPSTREAM-CONNECT WEBSITE

WW2 SUBMARINE CHASING ACE

Help Document for Step by step, how-to instructions for navigating and using the Savannah Area GIS viewer.

ELBIT SYSTEMS. Jefferies Global Industrials Conference - August Joseph Gaspar EVP & CFO

Johannes Sametinger. C. Doppler Laboratory for Software Engineering Johannes Kepler University of Linz A-4040 Linz, Austria

Outline. Intro Navy at Large NUPOC Program. NUPOC Eligibility How to Apply. Job Options and Descriptions

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY COMMANDER NAVAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND 250 DALLAS STREET PENSACOLA, FLORIDA

Public Law th Congress An Act

Version 1.3 Last Updated June 20 th 2014

U.S. Military Proposes Challenge to China Sea Claims

Designing a Schematic and Layout in PCB Artist

Pavement Management System Overview

Student Employment Website Employer User Guide Updated March 12, 2008

Scheduling Guide Revised August 30, 2010

Chapter 2. Basic Airplane Anatomy Delmar, Cengage Learning

Data Visualization. Brief Overview of ArcMap

BMO NESBITT BURNS. Gateway User Guide. An Online Standard in Connectivity

Coast Guard Top Acquisition Priorities and the Interoperability Imperative

Visual Signals FM HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SEPTEMBER 1987

Course of fire begins with a proper load and make ready for each relay.

Understanding SKUs. This ebook explains why and how to manage your product SKUs successfully.

Cognos Introduction to Cognos

PEO LAND SYSTEMS MARINE CORPS Planning Brief to Industry. 22 Sep 2015 Michael D. Halloran Director S&T, PEO LS

MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS. Delivering a Full Range of Integrated Planning Services

TestManager Administration Guide

IntelCenter Database (ICD) for Colleges & Universities 30 Jan info@intelcenter.com

NATO UNCLASSIFIED Releasable to Internet. 3rd. Conference. on Operational Maritime Law September 2015 AGENDA. Time Topic Who Remarks

Pro/ENGINEER Wildfire 4.0 Basic Design

ENHANCING INTELLIGENCE SUCCESS: DATA CHARACTERIZATION Francine Forney, Senior Management Consultant, Fuel Consulting, LLC May 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS. INTRODUCTION... 5 Advance Concrete... 5 Where to find information?... 6 INSTALLATION... 7 STARTING ADVANCE CONCRETE...

Introduction to CATIA V5

Realist A Quick Start Guide for New Users

Leveraging Network Infrastructure to Bring Critical Information to Users

SPDD & SPAU Adjustments Handbook

Bitrix Site Manager 4.0. Quick Start Guide to Newsletters and Subscriptions

3D-GIS in the Cloud USER MANUAL. August, 2014

Preliminary Analysis of an Aircraft Capable of Deploying and Retracting a

Executive Summary - 1 -

Rapid Prototyping: Leapfrogging into Military Utility

Planning Terrestrial Radio Networks

Military Transactions

Information Dominance as a Warfighting Discipline

Suggested Application Options Settings for Autodesk Inventor

Step-by-Step Guide to Bi-Parental Linkage Mapping WHITE PAPER

3D Viewer. user's manual _2

Position Descriptions. Aerospace

Transcription:

Icons and Symbols - MIL-STD-2525 Symbology Sailor-in-the-Simulation (SITS) Workshop 8 June 2005 Basic Commerce and Industries, Dahlgren, VA In support of: NSWCDD/PEO IWS

Outline Background Symbology principles, MIL-STD-2525 history, other symbol sets Previous Work Studies on symbology and situational awareness Current Work PEO Integrated Warfare Systems (IWS) project on implementation of MIL-STD-2525 for Littoral Combat Ship (LCS)

What is Good Symbology? Enable rapid learning Use established conventions Use easy-to-learn conventions Compatible with previous symbology used Support user s tasks, decisions, communications Rapidly assess the situation Support visual search and sorting Reduce button actions Allow for useful annotations Allow tailoring or filtering to role or task Commonality across systems Provide the right information platform vs function

History of MIL-STD-2525 Aug 1993: DISA tasked to take lead in standardizing warfighting symbology Sep 1994: MIL-STD-2525 published, drawn from: NATO STANAG 2019 (APP 6), Military Symbols for Land Based Systems US Army FM 101-5-1, Operational Terms and Graphics NATO STANAG 4420, Display Symbology and Colours for NATO Maritime Units Dec 1996: MIL-STD-2525A published Jan 1999: MIL-STD-2525B published Mar 2005: Cut-off date for comments on 2525B Change 1 Future symbol updates to be independent of new versions

MIL-STD-2525 Overview Compliance does not require use of all symbols Applicable to data transmission, but most useful for visual representation Different displays or systems, same symbol Primary origin in Force Domain application is difficult to Engagement Domain Intended to provide all useful information in monochrome display

Filled and Unfilled Symbols Example: Friendly Cruiser Filled Symbol Frame: Shape Identifies both Affiliation and Category Fill: Color Identifies Affiliation Icon / Letter Code: Identifies Platform Type Unfilled Symbol Frame: Colored Shape Identifies both Affiliation and Category Fill: Not Used Icon / Letter Code: Identifies Platform Type

Unknown Neutral Friend MIL-STD STD-2525B Sea Surface Tracks Vehicular Sea Surface Track Hostile Combatant Non-Combatant Non-Military Ownship Carrier Line Amphibious Warfare Ship Mine Warfare Vessel Patrol Hovercraft Double-Line Shapes Indicate Existence of Lower-Level Symbols Merchant Fishing Leisure Craft Law Enforcement Vessel Hovercraft

MIL-STD STD-2525B Sea Surface Tracks - Combatants Combatant Carrier Line Amphibious Warfare Ship Mine Warfare Vessel Patrol Hovercraft Battleship Assault Vessel Mine Layer ASW/USW Cruiser Landing Ship Mine Sweeper ASUW Destroyer Landing Craft Mine Hunter Unknown Neutral Friend Hostile Frigate/ Corvette MCM Support MCM Drone

SSDS Mk 2 Mod 1 Symbology Platform Modifiers Categories

3-D Symbology: Area Air Defense Commander Source: March/April 2001 Surface Warfare Magazine

Area Air Defense Commander (AADC) Symbology Air Unknown Evaluate -In an Airway Note: SUSPECT symbols are Red with embedded yellow symbol Air Unknown Air Friendly Surface Unknown Surface Friendly Air Unknown Assumed Friendly Air Hostile Surface Planned Position Surface Hostile Air Unknown Evaluated Air Unknown Evaluate - Not in an Airway Surface Unknown Assumed Friendly

Outline Background Symbology principles, MIL-STD-2525 history Previous Work Studies on symbology and situational awareness Current Work PEO Integrated Warfare Systems (IWS) project on implementation of MIL-STD-2525 for Littoral Combat Ship (LCS)

Previous Research Symbol Sets and 3D Displays Symbol Sets Multiple studies comparing operator performance 3D Displays Advantages of 3D based on task to be performed Perspective View Technology (ONR/SSC Project) Orient (3D) and Operate (2D) 2525B symbols more easily identified than realistic icons Symbicons abstract, not realistic, icons Perspective displays prevent accurate size or distance estimates in a single dimension

ONR Situational Awareness Study Supporting the goal of instant situational awareness for DD 21 Three components: Automated support of watch turnover Cognitive agents for operator support Symbology comparison Mapping of MIL-STD-2525 symbols to available Aegis options Subjective operator feedback Objective performance comparison

Situation Awareness and Tactical Symbology Comparison of ADS/NTDS Symbology to MIL-STD STD-2525B

Symbol Set Sizes Vehicular Tracks 70 60 50 40 30 20 NTDS 2525B 2525B Reduced Scope 10 0 Air Surface Subsurface Note: Symbol counts are across ID/affiliation. MIL-STD-2525B includes 475 Land Unit and Equipment Symbols. Sources: ADS COM OPP 5.3/3A; MIL-STD-2525B

ADS/NTDS to MIL-STD- 2525B Symbol Mapping Symbol Group ADS/NTDS Platform Statements ADS/ NTDS Symbols MIL-STD- 2525B Symbols ADS/ NTDS Symbols w/o Match Air Platform Symbols 30 10 23 3 Surface Platform Symbols 20 2 18 0 Subsurface Platform Symbols 27 6 5 3 Land Platform Symbols 16 2 7 0 Sources: ADS COM OPP 5.3/3A; 6P3 SRS CPRS; MIL-STD-2525B

ADS/NTDS to MIL-STD- 2525B Symbol Mapping Symbol Group ADS/NTDS Platform Statements ADS/ NTDS Symbols MIL- STD- 2525B Symbols ADS/ NTDS Symbols w/o Match Space Category Symbols 1 1 0 1 Miscellaneous Track Symbols 3 3 1 2 Special Symbols 4 4 1 3 Special & Miscellaneous Category Symbols 89 82 52 30 Sources: ADS COM OPP 5.3/3A; 6P3 SRS CPRS; MIL-STD-2525B

Sources: ADS COM OPP 5.3/3A; 6P3 SRS CPRS; MIL-STD-2525B Mapping Results ADS Platform Statements More platform statements have unique symbols in 2525B than in ADS/NTDS Track Category Air Vehicular Tracks ADS/NTDS Platform Statements 31 ADS/NTDS Unique Symbol Pairings 7 Percent Coverage 23% MIL-STD-2525B Unique Symbol Pairings 22 Percent Coverage 71% Surface Vehicular Tracks 21 2 10% 15 71% Subsurface Vehicular Tracks 27 3 11% 5 19%

Results ADS Platform Statements ADS/ NTDS MIL-STD- 2525B Percent Unique Platform-Symbol Matches Category: Surface 80 NTDS 2525B 70 ID: Hostile 60 50 Platform: Frigate 40 30 20 More information inherent in the symbol Sources: ADS COM OPP 5.3/3A; 6P3 SRS CPRS; MIL-STD-2525B 10 0 Air Surface Subsurface

Mapping Results Unique ADS/NTDS Symbols Nearly all vehicular track symbols have comparable symbols in 2525B, except Radar processing symbols ( Flying rocks, Tentative Track) Boom/Drogue Tankers, Missile Carrier LAMPS Mk 3 POSSUB, PROBSUB, CERTSUB Missile Submarine Many Special Point symbols have no match in MIL-STD-2525B Most common symbols have counterparts

Aegis Symbol Modifiers Upper Left Alphanumeric Amplifier A Upper Bar (Full or Half) A Upper Right Alphanumeric Amplifier Flag Middle Half bars Alphanumeric Amplifier Lower Middle Alphanumeric Modifier A 1 Half Circle (Upper or Lower) Numeric sub- Amplifier Main Symbol

Engagement Symbology Engagement Modifiers Assignment or cover order has been ordered Local Weapon Engagement Assign / Cover Engagement in progress or ordered Engage Missile in flight / Target under missile attack Local engagement indicator Missile in Flight Source: SSDS Mk 2 Mod 1/2 HMI SRS

Mapping Results Symbol Modifiers Few relevant modifiers in MIL-STD- 2525B Critical modifiers omitted in 2525B TacSig, Non-Real Time, Training tracks Engagement modifiers With internal icons in 2525B symbols, modifiers are more difficult to implement T T

Situation Awareness and Tactical Symbology Warfighter Feedback on MIL-STD STD-2525B

Warfighter Feedback Symbology Options MIL-STD-2525 vs. NTDS symbols MIL-STD-2525 preferred over NTDS symbols due to additional information Filled vs. Unfilled symbols Filled symbols preferred to allow readability for overlapping symbols

Warfighter Feedback Symbology Modifications Symbol Size Smaller symbols preferred 2525B symbols used by most Naval operators still identifiable at smaller size Scope Full version preferred Letter codes easier to understand and recognize than icons COMAIR Preferred purple, no-frame COMAIR symbol Size and color make it less obtrusive

Situation Awareness and Tactical Symbology Situation Assessment Tasks

Situation Assessment Testing Three symbol types tested: Colorized NTDS Adaptation of MIL-STD-2525B (filled) Smaller size, purple frame-off COMAIR Realistic 3D icons Four test tasks used Each task addressed a different symbology issue Color coding and track filtering was identical across symbol sets NTDS and 2525B shown using same software

Background and Constraints Tactical Scenario: Static situation, 296 tracks & special points Tracks filtered out based on task requirements No display manipulation allowed, 2D or 3D 2D display: Custom display, changeable symbol sets 3D display: PC-based, small symbol library (<20 symbols) Only fixed location CRO available in 3D displays Participants: 45 total: 25 Active Duty, 10 Navy experienced, 10 non-navy

Symbol Sets and Color Codes Friend Hostile/Suspect Neutral Unknown Assumed Friend/ COMAIR

Modified Filled 2525B Colorized NTDS 2D Screen shots

3D Icons 3D screen shot Drop Lines for Altitude and Position

Situation Assessment Test Tasks Search for specific air tracks IFF check of friendly aircraft Expect NTDS = 2525B = 3D Search for specific surface tracks Locate neutral tankers Expect 2525B > NTDS = 3D Altitude check air tracks Locate COMAIR under specific altitude Expect 3D > NTDS = 2525B Recognize specific air tracks Count number of threat fighter aircraft Expect 2525B > 3D > NTDS

Search Task Results Mean Time [sec] Mean Time [sec] 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 90% Confidence error bars Fixed Relative CRO Location 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 90% Confidence error bars Fixed Relative CRO Location Surface Tracks 2525B 3D NTDS Air Tracks 3D Display slower than 2D 2525B 3D NTDS 2525B faster than NTDS or 3D Icons: 60% less time required Required information included within MIL-STD-2525B symbols sets: 36% increase More difficult to pick out tracks in 3D display Higher symbol complexity, larger symbol size, and drop lines used in 3D

Altitude Task Results Mean Time [sec] 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 90% Confidence error bars 2525B 3D NTDS 3D marginally faster than 2525B and NTDS, but not significantly Fixed CRO Location Relative Drop lines underneath 3D icons allowed altitude estimation without pre-hooking track, but: High track load prevented drop lines from being visible, and Air tracks already shown to be harder to hook in 3D

Track Recognition Task Results 40 Mean Time [sec] 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 2525B 3D NTDS MIL-STD-2525B significantly faster than NTDS or 3D Icons: Up to 40% reduction 0 90% Confidence error bars Fixed CRO Location Relative 2525B symbols include platform/function information 3D Icons show airframe, implying function Given exact platform to function mapping, performance with 3D would improve

Situation Assessment Test Summary Search for specific air tracks Expected NTDS = 2525B = 3D 3D slower than NTDS or 2525B Search for specific surface tracks Expected 2525B >> NTDS = 3D 2525B faster than NTDS or 3D Altitude check air tracks Expected 3D > NTDS = 2525B No significant differences for any symbol sets Recognize specific air tracks Expected 2525B > 3D > NTDS 2525B faster, 3D and NTDS equivalent

Situation Assessment Testing Conclusions High track loads may reduce benefits of 3D displays for specific tasks Drop lines hard to pick out with many tracks No difference between 2D and 3D displays in hooking surface tracks Harder to hook air tracks in 3D displays than in 2D Amplifying info in 2525B symbols significantly reduces response time 3D potentially better than NTDS, but not better than 2525B Despite strong operator preference, no performance benefit with Relative CRO

Outline Background Symbology principles, MIL-STD-2525 history Previous Work Studies on symbology and situational awareness Current Work PEO Integrated Warfare Systems (IWS) project on implementation of MIL-STD-2525 for Littoral Combat Ship (LCS)

PEO IWS MIL-STD-2525 Effort Goal is to impact systems for Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Funding cut, but may be restored Three components: Conduct evaluations of implementation options and necessary modifications Develop Implementation Guide Develop sample symbol filtering capability

Planned Evaluations Selection of symbol fill colors Selection of default symbol sizes Impact of alternative Neutral frame shape on filled symbol discriminability Selection of new symbols Selection of new symbol modifiers Definition of engagement modifiers Design of HCI for symbol filtering

Study Summary Preliminary Study: Results COLOR: Saturated pure colors have faster search times than standard pastel colors vs ID: Hostiles & Friendlies have faster search times and less errors than Neutrals & Unknowns VS SIZE: Size of symbol from small (16x16 pixels) to large (32x32) had no impact on performance Operators preferred medium (24x24) and large (32x32) icons VS I VS TYPE: Neutral symbols were difficult to discern type (air, surface, subsurface) Alternate Neutral symbol with a notched fill greatly improved search times VS I Current Study NEW 2525B SYMBOLS: Fill in current gaps between AEGIS B/L 7 and MIL-STD-2525B Create new symbols (i.e., LCS, USV, & Ballistic Missiles) NOTCHED FRAME FILL: Determine if performance benefits transcend Neutral tracks SPEED LEADERS: Test speed estimation and icon legibility with speed leaders in front or in back of symbols SUSPECT & ASSUMED FRIEND MODIFIERS:? modifier is standard but may be occluded in high density TACSITs Dotted symbol frame options are being tested in addition to? modifier COMAIR TRACKS: Determine alternate way to represent commercial air (COMAIR) tracks Test the use of purple fill to denote COMAIR

Planned Content of Implementation Guide Recommended symbol set (subset of MIL-STD-2525) Recommended symbol sizes and colors Default filtering options Navy-specific additions Additional symbols Additional symbol modifiers Engagement modifiers

Recommended Changes to MIL-STD-2525 (1) Change Civil Air symbols to Frame Optional (High Priority) Civil Sea Surface symbols currently Frame Optional COMAIR tracks often ID d as Assumed Friend, requiring external modifier Removal of frame allows symbols to be less obtrusive (2) Add Non-Real Time symbol modifier (High) Visual distinction for NRT tracks is needed Aegis internal alphanumeric modifier can t be carried over to MIL-STD-2525

Recommended Changes to MIL-STD-2525 (3) Permit use of dashed outline for Assumed Friend and Suspect (High) Planned or Anticipated positions have little to no utility for Surface Navy Users have strong association for dashed symbols and this use Dashed outline appears to be more easily identified than question mark external to the frame

Recommended Changes to MIL-STD-2525 (4) Permit use of purple fill for commercial tracks (High) COMAIR tracks may be various Affiliations, but treated similarly Could lose representation of Affiliation if shown Frame Off Could reconcile with Icon Outline in Affiliation color, filled with commercial color Assumed Friend Neutral Civilian COMAIR Civilian COMAIR

Recommended Changes to MIL-STD-2525 (5) Add symbology for Littoral Combat Ship (High) New symbol needed for new class of ship Symbol should allow for reconfigurability of ship, much like UAV symbols But designation of the ship class is still TBD (Defense News, 13 Dec 04) (6) Add symbology for Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs) (High) Current symbols include UAVs and UUVs, but no USVs USVs with different functions are critical part of LCS concept

Recommended Changes to MIL-STD-2525 Carrier Line Amphibious Warfare Ship Mine Warfare Vessel Patrol Hovercraft (7) Change Patrol Boat symbols (High) Use of Icon for ASUW Patrol violates symbology paradigm; twoletter codes used for all other detailed symbols PC more appropriate for ASUW than ASW/USW Opportunity for consistency with Aircraft codes (N = ASUW, S = ASW) ASW/USW ASUW

Recommended Changes to MIL-STD-2525 (8) Add SPACE track for TBM/ICBM (High) Generic Space Track would have to be used now (9) Add new symbols (Medium Priority) Electronic Counter Measure (ECM) and Surface Decoys Use same basic symbol as Air and Subsurface decoys Command Ship

Recommended Changes to MIL-STD-2525 (10) Add Submarine Modifiers (Medium Priority) No modifiers available for certainty of classification (POSSUB, PROBSUB, CERTSUB) No modifiers available for submerged/surfaced submarines (11) Add symbology for missile submarines (Medium Priority) Current symbols only account for type of propulsion Current Navy symbology provides visual distinction Fielding of SSGN may need to be addressed