Jump to content

Let's go!


Dannyvandelft

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, NeedzWD40 said:

It's distro C thus not open source. I'd kill that link ASAP.

Every NATOPS is Distro C, but not all appear restricted. Former RIO Ward Caroll says all white-cover NATOPS are not restricted (I think it was the yellow covers that he said were). With all the holes in the DCS-specific manuals it's kind of funny we would have to rely on documents we aren't supposed to have to know about certain features or limitations modeled in our sim.

To be fair, this stuff is so muddy not even the SMEs know what is or isn't restricted/classed, so I can see why ED implemented a "statute of limitations" of sorts on posting docs after a certain time period.


Edited by Nealius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Nealius said:

Every NATOPS is Distro C, but not all appear restricted.

if it's not Distribution A, then it is restricted information. Says right there on the tin:

Quote

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C Distribution authorized to U.S. Government Agencies and their contractors to protect publications required for official use or for administrative or operational purposes only (1 January 1991).
...
DESTRUCTION NOTICE For unclassified, limited documents, destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document.

The assumption folks make is that unclassified == unrestricted, free for all, open source. That isn't the way it works, even though we'd like it to. For example, "UNCLASSIFIED, FOUO" means it's unclassified, but the document is for official use only and thus restricted.

More info:

https://www.contractsconsultingservices.com/distribution-statements/

http://www.wingovernmentcontracts.com/distribution-codes.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...