Unification of Calls for Support

Oh! turns head towards you I didn't see you there. Slight smile 

I'd like to address some things that I have noticed since my return regarding the best position in the unit - The JTAC - and the second best position in the unit - The RTO - and the training involved with both therein. 

Its always been curious to me why we have have 3 different calls for support... logistics, CAS, and Artillery. 
In the RTO document: 

General 6-line Request

• • Line 1 : Request Type
  • Line 2 : Target Type/ Priority
  • Line 3 : Target Location (reference or 8-digit)
  • Line 4 : Marker Type
  • Line 5 : Approach
  • Line 6 : Remarks

In the JTAC document: 

The "HGS" 5-Line CAS Request

• • Line 1: Type of request and ordnance request
  • Line 2: Target type
  • Line 3: Target location
  • Line 4: Mark
  • Line 5: Ingress and egress
  • Remarks: Anything that does not fit within the 5-line call

The JTAC request is basically the general 6 line request, with a couple of specifics with respect to the type, and severity of certain pieces of information. There SHOULD be specifics, because an RTO is not a JTAC, and a JTAC is not an RTO. 

But then we get to the RTO call for fire from artillery: 

1st transmission:

1. 1. Observer ID (call sign)
   2. Warning order (“fire for effect”)

2nd transmission:

1. 1. Target location (8 digit grid)

3rd transmission:

• • Target description (type/amount)
  • Number of rounds
  • Type of rounds(HE/Smoke)
  • Example (follows IDF request):
    1. "[IDF Asset Callsign], [Unit Designation]-Romeo, Fire For Effect;"
  • Response:
    1. "one-two-three-four BREAK one-two-three-four;"
  • PAUSE:
    1. "Mortar Pit;
    2. 4 rounds;
    3. HE (High Explosive);
    4. how copy?;"
  • Asset Read-Back.
    

Argument:

That style of call out is not in the training outline for RTO, but is in the qualification? Why should it be different than a standard 6 line call for support? We have basically universalized the way that support is called with regard to logistics and CAS, so why not throw artillery into that fold? For the same reason we don't do standard 9-lines in the CAS calls - some of the information is irrelevant, and does not add to the usability of the request - I believe we shouldn't have a specialized call for artillery. Its just another thing that people wont use (I say this because I have heard people use the standard 6-line for calls for artillery, and it was just as effective.) 

Acknowledgement:

As a JTAC and RTO enthusiast, I get it... part of my LARPing experience on Saturday's is using the correct calls to support the unit in their movements and missions, but we have changed the others to both support the pacing that ARMA allows, and the relevance that is necessary. Because of that, FO and the RTO artillery call seems like just a hold out because "that's the way its been" or the way it "should be." I disagree and put this change forward... or at least a discussion. 

To follow this, all 3 trainings should be reworked to be cohesive, and formatted such that its clear that the 17th uses a unified system. 

Is this a semantic thing? Probably. In the heat of the moment, things get missed. That's a training thing, and since we all have lives outside of ARMA, presumably, we can't train the way we probably should. It just makes it more difficult if we train 3 different ways when we DO train, so lets bring it together. 

As I was a large part in codifying the JTAC doctrine in years past, and having something to do with the RTO doc (not swinging my $#&*, just saying that I'm versed in the material,) I will offer my time to make this happen, with relevant documents subject to command review and approval. Additionally, It would be a good idea to bring in the ideas and input of someone that is well versed / a fan of being an FO over the other positions. 

TL;DR: Clarification, unification amongst the RTO, JTAC, and FO doctrine.