US Army Publishing Directorate – Technical Manuals(armypubs.army.mil)
armypubs.army.mil
US Army Publishing Directorate – Technical Manuals
https://armypubs.army.mil/ProductMaps/PubForm/TM_Admin.aspx
21 comments
What a span of time! KITCHEN EQUIPMENT; REPAIRS AND UTILITIES was published in 1946, and a document on UPS selection/installation/maintenance was published in 2007.
Having worked on a military base, I can confirm that the kitchens have not been repaired since 1946.
I am puzzled why there are only 141 documents. There should be thousands. The US Army has been around a long time and bureaucracy begets documentation.
This is only a subset, apparently only those TM's in the 5 series. Explore the Publications dropdown to find thousands more Technical Manuals and other publications.
These appear to all be from the Corps of Engineers. The menu pulldown shows entries like "TM - Technical Manuals (Range 1-8)" that have thousands of entries each. One example: https://armypubs.army.mil/ProductMaps/PubForm/TM_1_8.aspx
[deleted]
How do we see the actual documents themselves? Clicking on the link only seems to open a docket which has info about the document, by not the document itself.
Yeah only some of them seem to be actually viewable, for example [1] has a link to the PDF but most seem to not have this.
1 - https://armypubs.army.mil/ProductMaps/PubForm/Details.aspx?P...
1 - https://armypubs.army.mil/ProductMaps/PubForm/Details.aspx?P...
Anyone got a shortlist of the ones applicable to this audience?
See this comment I made in another post:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33017733#33020509
It's by no means an exhaustive list, but those are some good ones to have. Like I said there, I particularly appreciate the literature on radio.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33017733#33020509
It's by no means an exhaustive list, but those are some good ones to have. Like I said there, I particularly appreciate the literature on radio.
You want to go higher on the menu hierarchy and explore from "Home" -> "Publications"
I find some of the "Field Manuals" interesting. Some of them have sections on OSINT
https://armypubs.army.mil/ProductMaps/PubForm/FM.aspx
I find some of the "Field Manuals" interesting. Some of them have sections on OSINT
https://armypubs.army.mil/ProductMaps/PubForm/FM.aspx
From looking at the list of 141 entries, everything from
TM 5-852-1 ARCTIC AND SUBARCTIC CONSTRUCTION - GENERAL PROVISIONS {AFR 88-19, VOL 1}
onwards looks pretty interesting, as it covers:
- building stuff in arctic
- building stuff to resist nukes
- "security engineering" including electronics
But interestingly enough, I can't figure out how to get PDFs.
TM 5-852-1 ARCTIC AND SUBARCTIC CONSTRUCTION - GENERAL PROVISIONS {AFR 88-19, VOL 1}
onwards looks pretty interesting, as it covers:
- building stuff in arctic
- building stuff to resist nukes
- "security engineering" including electronics
But interestingly enough, I can't figure out how to get PDFs.
> But interestingly enough, I can't figure out how to get PDFs.
Click on the links for each item in the first column. On the details page, you'll get a pdf link.
Click on the links for each item in the first column. On the details page, you'll get a pdf link.
Thanks! Not every directorate has a PDF attached, and given that the first few I tried didn't have them I assumed that none of them had PDFs.
I doubt you'd see anything exciting that's approved for public release
The US often operates as part of a coalition and it is desirable for coalition partners to be able to understand how to cooperate with US army units. If you encrypt docs that you want to share with partners, then you have to share your encryption mechanism, which may be much more problematic.
Also, these sorts of docs contain general procedures, not the actual plans of a specific operation.
Also, these sorts of docs contain general procedures, not the actual plans of a specific operation.
Some of these docs are literally how to frame a house. Or set up the plumbing for a communal latrine. Much of it is not sensitive.
Yes. Even things like the average speed of an advancing column of tanks, or the largest vehicle that can cross a particular bridge, are going to be fairly obvious to any army that has its own armoured vehicles.
Fun .gov overclassification anecdote: I worked for a startup that had a contract with .mil and, long story short, we needed a snippet of code that described soil slippage under load, as it remains the gold standard in the simulation of various things including armored vehicles.
IIRC, it had been originally written in the 1950s by the Army Corps of Engineers in FORTRAN (then C, then we used it with Modelica). It was — and is — still export-controlled. I had to get permission to send it to our UK (yes, UK) subsidiary for fear that said deeply dark secrets might reach the eyes of our enemies...
IIRC, it had been originally written in the 1950s by the Army Corps of Engineers in FORTRAN (then C, then we used it with Modelica). It was — and is — still export-controlled. I had to get permission to send it to our UK (yes, UK) subsidiary for fear that said deeply dark secrets might reach the eyes of our enemies...
The US Navy docs are held back probably because they won ww2.
I think it's debatable given the pace of change in most technology organizations whether it's even desirable to codify the standard tasks and competencies expected from different classes of information workers (ie. SRE1 vs Data Systems Analyst) but having at least ADP level documents that allow employees to align their efforts with company strategic aims is a good idea and having some sort of reference documents for involved technical tasks probably makes sense when the work is not able to be automated.