• OODA loop; a similar process but for pilots instead of intelligence agents

Classical trivium comparison

Basically a Department of Defense version of the Classical Trivium.

Grammar: collecting sensor data

Logic: associating reports, sensor data

Rhetoric: compiled report/briefing to give to command

Command

Telling recon to "record everything you see" they will think you are full of shit. Give specific instructions (why are you sending the recon unit?)

An optimal SIR is simplified to the level it could be understood by a child. "Did you see any antennas on the buildings?"

Context might be worth including; telling the recon team they are looking for an enemy that has been bothering friendlies might be motivating.

Recon missions are boring and units may become unmotivated if they are never told why they are doing anything.

Debriefing: primarily listen to the recon unit. Ask questions if necessary, but let them speak and record what you need. Try to debrief the entire unit, have each member speak their own report. Rank and experience is not important during debriefing.

Give credit to recon units or individuals (for civilians) for data points, possibly including the unit crest on the finished documents.

Units appreciate seeing their intelligence product on the briefing and being told how their collection mattered.

Steps

Planning and Direction: get general objectives (PIR), break down to testable questions (SIR.)

Collection: obtain sensor data that answers the SIRs.

Processing: read over collected data, reports, arranging datum in to intelligence

Analysis and Production: typesetting, prepping documents for presentation,

Dissemination: distributing completed briefings to stakeholders

Planning

Priority Intelligence Requirement: priorities handed down from command. Ex. "what is the status of this bridge?"

Specific Information Requirements: a more specific list of questions to break down a PIR. Ex. "is the bridge still up? has it been repaired? is it accessible?"