Know and Understand Your World: A fellow in Arkansas and a Damaged Home

1
KNOW AND UNDERSTAND YOUR WORLD
- A Fellow in Arkansas and a Damaged Home -
Reflections of Dr Robert (Bob) Williams
Topographic surveyor and cartographer
Through Five Decades of Experience and Knowledge
2020
The farther backward you can look,
The farther forward you can see” [Winston Churchill]
During the past year (December 2019 – October 2020), we have experienced
devastating events here in Australia that have resulted in many deaths; lives
adversely affected; property losses; possible extinction of native animals and
birds; and more – from drought and floods; to the White Island (New Zealand)
volcano eruption on 9 December 2019 when 21 died including 19 from the
Ovation of the Seas cruise ship (14 Australians); to the Dark Summer bush
fires where 33 people died and an estimated 400 died through secondary
causes including respiratory causes; and COVID19 including 21 deaths linked
to the Ruby Princess cruise ship.
Our leaders and responders struggled under very difficult circumstances to
improvise responses against extreme challenges that they had never
encountered, and honestly never been trained to meet.
We need to do better. We must have better information support systems.
We need to reflect on responses in the past in addressing what might appear
to be impossible challenges!
We Need “to See to be Prepared” [Videre Parare Est] - We need vision!
So, I now wish to step back to the year I was born – 1946.
A Strategic Imperative
Post World War II was a time to review aspects of the South West Pacific and
the mapping issues including technologies that could be adapted for
surveying an ‘unmapped world’.

2
(Then) Colonel Lawrence FitzGerald (Director of the Army Survey Corps)
oversaw many technological changes in surveying and mapping. For
example, the expectation that the Australian Army Survey Corps still had an
important contribution to make by completing the map coverage of Australia,
requiring in the first place a proper network of triangulation, continued to be
an important article of faith that guided certain actions within the corps. It was,
for instance, for this reason that, as FitzGerald explained to the Congress of
the Australian and New Zealand Association for the Advancement of Science
held in Adelaide in 1946, considerable interest was being taken in recent
developments in the application of RADAR to surveying.
In 1947 FitzGerald attended two important conferences in London: the
Commonwealth Survey Officers Conference in August, and a Military
Mapping and Aeronautical Charting Conference held immediately afterwards.
It was probably the military mapping conference in England that brought
home to FitzGerald the extent to which Australia was being drawn into the
widening web of alliances and agreements that characterised the immediate
post war period. At a previous Anglo-American conference on military map
and air chart policy, held in October 1946, these two powers agreed to each
accept particular responsibility for map production for half the world. Now
Britain was asking its dominions to accept a further subdivision of its share.
Australia was invited to accept the Netherlands East Indies as an area of
primary interest. Under the same scheme the US was also given
responsibility for New Guinea, as an arrangement that was not meant to
restrict in any way the conduct of operations Australia (as the governing
power) might choose to run there.
Royal Australian Survey Corps – Videre Parare Est
Returning to the year 1946, US Colonel Geo. W. Hansen, Deputy Chief,
Photographic Laboratory published an article titled “Mapping in the Southwest
Pacific” in Photogrammetric Engineering (December 1946). He describes the
state of mapping and declares, “Mapping of the face of the earth is a peace
time job”. An extract follows.

3
A fellow in Arkansas
“Military mapping of the face of the earth is a peace time job. It can be likened
to a fellow in Arkansas. When it was raining, he couldn't fix the leak in his
roof; when it wasn't raining, there was no need to fix it. That is about where
military mapping stood in 1941 when we suddenly found ourselves at war.
During the previous peace time years, there was no immediate need for us, in
cooperation with other nations, to map the Solomon Islands, Truk, Okinawa,
Tarawa, New Guinea, the Dutch East Indies, Borneo, French Indo China,
China, Philippines, Manchuria, or Japan. There was no project set up in the
War Department to do any such mapping in such far off corners of the globe.
It wasn't raining then-we didn't need the maps. But all of a sudden in 1941, it
started to rain. Unlike the fellow in Arkansas, we couldn't say - while it is
raining we cannot fix the roof - we had to produce the maps while the war
was going on, maps which could have been much more easily obtained
during peace time. Gentlemen, you can't effectively do precise aerial mapping
under wartime conditions. You can't for two reasons: (1) a pilot cannot (and
live through it), hold a precise flight line at a precise altitude for "more than a
short time while being fired upon by anti-aircraft and dived on by a bunch of
Zeros; (2) there usually isn't time to prepare the maps to meet a D-day
deadline. Military mapping of the earth is a peacetime job.
The war in the South and Southwest Pacific was fought largely over
unmapped regions. I say unmapped in the sense there were no maps at all,
or no up-to-date maps. Maps that existed were based on unreliable data. It is
true, certain foreign countries had maps of their territory, and our Army Map
Service and Aeronautical Chart Service had produced maps and charts of
these regions but they were based upon old unreliable data. They were not
the maps required by modern warfare. We did try to produce new maps of
these regions in the South Pacific and the Southwest Pacific areas while the
war was going on, but I for one, am not proud of them in spite of the
numerous difficulties encountered and overcome in producing them”.
So innovation was needed to undertake such a challenging task.
Measuring and Mapping the World
Measuring and mapping the world required innovation. The United States Air
Force 1370th
Photo-Mapping Wing was tasked to undertake a Southwest
Pacific Survey as part of a project assigned the name of AF60-13. View the
amazing story at
https://www.xnatmap.org/adnm/videos/hiran.mp4

4
The Australian Army Survey Corps participated in survey operations in the
1950s.
Projects XYLON and CUTLASS – just amazing!
The close liaison with the U.S. Army Map Service, which was established
during the war, was sustained and applied to cooperative projects in the post
war period. One result, Project Xylon, was the survey and mapping of New
Britain using joint resources of equipment and personnel in 1954-55. A
complete perimeter traverse of over 800 miles was made using a unique
method of survey developed by the Americans in other theatres.

5
This was the “Ship-Shore” method of
triangulation using simultaneous and
synchronized observations from shore stations
to a beacon on a ship at anchor off shore. Over
240 such stations were observed; 19 third order
base lines were measured with astronomical
fixes for latitude, longitude and azimuth.
The 1956 survey (Project Cutlass) of ship-shore triangulation included a 186
mile (300 kilometres) chain traverse on New Ireland. It was an entirely
Australian operation.

6
These two projects, Xylon and Cutlass, proved to be just the first in a
succession of cooperative activities undertaken throughout the 1960s with a
range of American agencies. Many of these, such as Project Quarterstaff (a
lunar occultation survey in 1964-65 aimed at accurate measurements of long
geodetic lines), and Project Pageos (aimed at obtaining geodetic information
through observation of artificial earth satellites) required the participation of
small teams of Survey Corps personnel specially trained to assist with
observations.
Others, such as Projects Secor, Anna and Transit (also geodetic satellite
programs) required the establishment of temporary tracking stations on
Australian soil, usually with some local survey assistance to connect
triangulation for position determination purposes. Still others, such as Hiran
(an airborne electronic survey program by the US Air Force taking in New
Guinea and north-eastern Australia), and Southpaw (an aerial photography
program conducted by the US Navy in Australia and New Guinea), yielded
benefits in the form of information and data, while requiring limited direct
participation.
The 1960s – A Decade of Radical Change
I was fortunate to commence my career in a Decade of Radical Change! I
undertook three trade-training courses as a topographic surveyor and used all
of the equipment (below) except for the IBM1130 computer.
We didn't view the change from plane table mapping to stereo-
photogrammetric plotting, or slotted template assembly to analytical
photogrammetry as digital transformation. Nor did we view the use of a
computer as a disruptive technology.
The need to survey and map our world is enduring! Surveyors and
cartographers have always had to be innovative and visionary.
My first survey operation as a
topographic surveyor was in
Arnhem Land, Northern Territory
in 1967. The survey was by
AERODIST (airborne surveying
equipment based on US AF60-
13). I was sent to the point
(13°00’S – 133°30’E - on
attached images) by helicopter
where I stayed for fourteen days
(the first 24 hours by myself). I,
and a partner, prepared an area
for a drop zone for a fuel dump
and placed the ground mark.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/remote-
survey-point-robert-bob-williams/
Whilst my involvement as a technician on the survey operation was minor it
was part of one of the survey wonders of the world!

7
A Decade of Radical Change
On my return to the (then) AHQ Survey Regiment I worked, firstly, on map
compilation through operating Wild B8 and B9 Aviograph stereo-plotters and
the became one of the earliest technicians in Australia to operate, under the
direction of (then) WO1 Frank Bryant, a Cambridge stereo-comparator.

8
This instrument permitted accurate observations to be measured on aerial
photography for the purpose of aerotriangulation of strips of photography. It
was used as a ’proof of concept’ for analytical photogrammetry and the
production of point positioning datasets 1 2
.
In 1970, the Army Survey Regiment acquired a Calcomp 718 digital
coordinatograph flat-bed plotter for grids, graticules and base compilation
sheets with aerial triangulated model control.
The 1960s - The Digital Transformation had begun.
The Age of Automation has begun!
The 1970s – A decade of Vision … With Visionaries
The Second Australian Cartographic Conference was held in Adelaide, South
Australia. The conference included a theme “Automation in Cartography”
with a paper by Major Frank Bryant, MBE. The paper was titled “Digital Data
Acquisition, Manipulation and Output for Topographic Cartography” and
described Army Survey Regiment’s AUTOMAP SYSTEM – the first
operational computer mapping system utilising stereo-photogrammetric
plotters in Australia.
The Keynote Address to the conference was titled “Meeting the
Environmental Crisis”. The address was given by Professor Desmond
O’Connor, Foundation Professor of Environmental Studies, Murdoch
University, Perth, Western Australia. O’Connor had previously held positions
of Director at the US Army Topographic Laboratories Research Institute and
Chief, Environmental Sciences Division, US Army Research Office.
O’Connor’s vision was:
… “For the future, I believe that cartographers should be thinking of a broadly
defined concept for the operational use of modern sensors, the full range of
data processing equipment and methodology, and large scale communication
devices receiving input from space, airborne and terrestrial platforms for the
purpose of carrying out surveys of the earth’s surface, monitoring the
environment, and classifying and compacting the information in
environmental data banks so that real-time or near real-time information may
be provided when and where it is required”.
I was fortunate to be a student on a unique academic course at the Canberra
College of Advanced Education in 1977-79. German mathematician and
geodetic surveyor Waldemar Wassermann established a course Bachelor in
Arts in Computing Studies with a Cartography major. It included several
mathematics courses plus operations research and machine intelligence.
Wally was previously Chief Surveyor of the Snowy Mountains Authority. My
period of experience for the period 1977-79 is at the Education section of my
LINKEDIN profile. https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-bob-williams-
a1b067126/

1
Frank Bryant was at the forefront of research into computer cartography at the Survey
Regiment in the 1960s and 1970s. In 1969, Francis Bryant was made a member of the Order
of the British Empire (MBE) for his services to photogrammetry.
2
Photogrammetry is the science and art of obtaining reliable measurements by means of
photographs.

9
Unfortunately, Desmond O’Connor’s vision remains that – a vision. Also,
unfortunately, Wally Wassermann’s unique course remains just that – a
unique course.
AUTOMAP 1 - 1976

10
AUTOMAP 1 [Future Applications] - 1976
The 1980s – A Decade of Innovation … With Experience and Vision
In the early part of the decade RASVY (Royal Australian Survey Corps)
acquired Phase 2 of AUTOMAP. This system was truly ‘state-of-the-art’ in
computer mapping and offered the chance to embark on an exciting journey.
In 1983-85 I had the opportunity to undertake post-graduate studies at the
University of Wisconsin and the request was that I return to Australia with the
knowledge to advance our capabilities. My experience at Madison, WI is in:

11
https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/NBa8Vms43oxCCe
AUTOMAP 2 [Future Applications] - 1984
During that period the US exchange officer at the Army Survey Regiment was
Major John Charland. John had previously been on the academic staff in the
Department of Geography and Computer Science, United States Military
Academy, West Point. Major Charland gave a paper and presentation at the
International Cartographic Association Conference & AUSTRA CARTO 3,
Perth, 1984. In it he described future applications of AUTOMAP could be:

12
v “Permit the Transportation Officer to point to a bridge and have the
system return the width, allowable load and structural components of the
bridge.
v Permit the Medical Officer to point to all hospitals in an area and have
the number of beds currently available.
v Permit the Commander to point to a geographical area and have the
system return enemy unit designations, locations, strength and
equipment status, and have the system designed to permit data base
update so that the information returned is current and accurate”.
In 1985, RASVY published a document titled “Digital Terrain Modelling: An
Overview”. The major contributor was US exchange officer, Major Doug
Campbell. He suggests that:
“A more profound area of application is expected in the field of airborne
navigation systems. It will include both military and civilian aircraft;
particularly low-flying manned and unmanned weapon systems. In all
these cases, DTMs will afford real time information about the terrain below
and the effects of distant terrain on the aircraft whether it is using terrain
matching for navigation or making use of natural cover to avoid enemy
detection”.
My Director RASVY was enthusiastic about the value of advanced education
and I was given the third opportunity to undertake tertiary studies; this time for
the award of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of New South Wales at
the Australian Defence Force Academy. The purpose was to investigate
advanced models for describing our world. My thesis was titled “Analysis of
Geographic Information: A Cognitive Approach”.
https://www.unsworks.unsw.edu.au/primo-
explore/fulldisplay?docid=unsworks_55053&context=L&vid=UNSWORKS&se
arch_scope=unsworks_search_scope&tab=default_tab&lang=en_US
Unfortunately, major ill-informed changes to the Automap 2 system notably
the deletion of a Relational Database Management System meant that Doug
Campbell’s and my developments were not achievable.
Digital Terrain Models were produced then and have been since.
1990s – A Decade of Uncertainty …
In 1990, the annual meeting of the 5 Nations MC&G Directors forum was held
at the Army Survey Regiment, Victoria, Australia. The five nations were/are
the UK, USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. MC&G is the acronym for
mapping, charting and geodesy. The origins of this group (less New Zealand)
go back to 1947 when Colonel Lawrence FitzGerald (Director of the
Australian Survey Corps) attended two important conferences in London after
World War 2: the Commonwealth Survey Officers Conference in August, and
a Military Mapping and Aeronautical Charting Conference held immediately
afterwards.

13
I, as officer-in-charge of the Technical Development Cell [that year - 1990],
provided the welcome and introduction to our overseas visitors. I noted that
our meeting was being held in what was previously the conservatory of
historic Fortuna Villa. I explained that the Regiment is a truly unique
organisation. We have approximately 240 members; 24 officers with 18
having tertiary qualifications and 15 in the primary geodetic/surveying and
cartography/mapping sciences from Australian and overseas universities with
2 at Master's level and 1 PhD. We have diversity with around 30 female
members; a RAAF liaison officer; a RAN liaison officer (civilian); a UK
exchange Major and Warrant Officer (from UK Military Survey); and a US
exchange Major. Over the years the US officer has arrived from Defense
Mapping Agency (DMA) HQ; ETL/TEC and from the academic staff at West
Point Military Academy (3 officers).
I was interviewed by a reporter for the Australian newspaper and an article
was published that described capability development projects.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/computers-high-technology-defence-
forgotten-robert-bob-williams/
A project to develop a Digital Chart of the World (DCW) was first proposed
by the US Defense Mapping Agency (DMA) in early 1988. The DCW project
was a joint R&D venture involving the US, Australia, Canada and the UK, and
sought to develop internationally accepted standards for the exchange of
digitally based mapping, charting and geodetic information. The Australian
partner in the DCW project was the Royal Australian Survey Corps (RASVY).
The project was funded through the Nunn Amendment to the 1987 US
Military Appropriations Bill, which provided for the funding of approved
cooperative R&D projects with certain NATO and non-NATO countries. The
DCW project had TREATY status.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dcw-digital-chart-world-esri-robert-bob-
williams/
The DGIWG (Digital Geospatial Information Working Group) is the multi-
national body responsible for geospatial standardization for the defence
organizations of member nations. DGIWG was first established in 1983 with
representatives from France's Centre Geographique Interarmées, Germany's
Amt für Militærisches Geowesen, the United Kingdom's Directorate General
of Military Survey, and the United States' Defense Mapping Agency.
Over the years, additional members have been added, including Belgium's
Institute Geographique Nationale, Denmark's Chief of Defense Geographic
Office, Italy's Istituto Geografico Militare Italiano (IGMI) and Centro

14
Informazioni Geotopografiche Aeronautiche (CIGA), Netherland's
Topografische Dienst, Norway's Forsvarets Karttjeneste, and the newest
members, Canada's Directorate of Geographic Operations and Spain's
Centro Cartografico Y Fotografico del Ejercito del Aire and Servicio
Geografico Del Ejercito. In some cases, the organisations represented above
are also represented by their respective nations' Defense Ministries.
In 1993 Australia was invited as an Observer nation.
The DGIWG is not an official NATO body; however, the DGIWG's
standardization work has been recognized and welcomed by the NATO
Geographic Conference (NGC). DGIWG developed and maintains DIGEST
as an exchange standard to facilitate the exchange of Defence Geospatial
Information to support interoperability within and between nations, and
burden sharing of digital data production. The scope of this activity includes
dataset specification development and harmonization of standards.
1995. The 24th DGIWG Steering Committee Meeting was held in Berlin,
Germany 9 November - 17 November 1995. The US Defense Mapping
Agency (DMA) gave a number of presentations: VMap AD and TLD.
VMap AD. The DIGEST Dataset AID (Aeronautical Information Dataset) has
been split into VMap AD (Aeronautical Data) that contains 'static' aeronautical
information and DFLIP that will contain more dynamic data. The product is at
a prototype stage with development being driven by the F16 upgrade and the
Eurofighter project.
Tactical Littoral Data. The Tactical Littoral Dataset (or Littoral Warfare
Dataset - LWD) is a value-rich specialist product (being a super set including
Terrain Analysis Dataset (TAD), Urban Vector Map (UVMap), Digital Flight
Information (DFLIP), Digital Nautical Dataset (DNC)) identified to support
missions such as amphibious assault, special operations, mine
countermeasures, shallow water ASW and logistics- over-the-shore.
Requirements have been provided by US Navy and US Marine Corps and
endorsed by ACS C4I USMC (MAJGEN Van Riper) and validated by D
DMA (MAJGEN Nuber). This product will be designed to cover the area
200NM either side of the coastline and will include METOC, hydrographic and
topographic data in the littoral areas.
Back in May 1991, the Government introduced a Commercial Support
Program (CSP) to promote the transfer of non-core support activities from
Defence to industry, emphasising that the CSP must be understood as part of
wider initiatives to strengthen civil-military relations, which would foster
Australia’s strategic defence interests and its policy of self-reliance. The Army
Survey Regiment at Bendigo was identified to undergo two separate
commercial support reviews: one logistic (Tier One), the other technical (Tier
Two).
Three commercial tenders were submitted in Tier Two. The In-House Option
was selected as the Preferred Commercial Option. The contract awarded in
April 1994.

15
The implementation of the second CSP would prove to be “painful”. A
Defence decision in November 1994 to introduce Project Parare in two
phases dramatically narrowed options. Phase One would establish the Army
Topographical Support Establishment (ATSE) staffed by defence civilians to
conduct digital topographic tasks of Australian sovereign territory. It was
decided that a study would be conducted to determine the ADF’s total digital
requirement including examination of core strategic non-sovereign tasks and
another major capability submission would precede the implementation of
Phase Two.
In 1996 the Royal Australian Survey Corps RASVY) was disbanded after
eighty one years.
Formally, RASVY was integrated into the Royal Australian Engineers Corps.
In reality, A Topographic Survey Squadron, a wing of a trade training school,
a small map depot, and some small units were transferred. The Directorate of
Survey – Army soldiers were transferred the unit operated, in Canberra, as a
strategic level unit and became the DMGI (Directorate of Military Geographic
Information). It administered the ATSE which would become DTA (Defence
Topographic Agency) as well as a detachment in Defence Intelligence
Organisation (DIO).
In 1996 I had the opportunity to write an article titled “Cartography enters a
new era”, in Cartography.
“Cartography is amongst the oldest of the scientific disciplines and has
developed a distinct body of theory and practice. Technologies may well have
changed dramatically over the past two thousand years but the requirement
to represent and communicate geospatial information remains as valid today
as it was thousands of years ago”.
During this same period a 2-Star Defence Concepts and Capabilities
Committee convened a number of Major Capability studies. One was the
EGICS (Environmental and Geographic Information Capability Study). I
was appointed Study Manager.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/environmental-geographic-information-c3i-
equation-williams/
“We’ve got to have a system which will allow us to know more about the
enemy than he knows, and far more about our environment, our own people,
our own resources than we’ve ever thought was possible. We need a
command and control system which ensures that the appropriate commander
gets the appropriate information at the appropriate time”.
MAJGEN J. Connolly AM, ADFA Canberra, November 1994
The first activity in managing this capability study was to address the
‘awareness’ issue. The ‘information’ document was titled “Geographic
Information: Scoping the Topic”
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/geographic-information-scoping-topic-robert-
bob-williams/

16
The EGICS was suspended in 1997 due to the Defence Efficiency Review
and Defence Reform Program. One of the sub-committees was the
Geographic Requirements Committee. I gave a presentation on EGICS and
introduced the key requirement as being “From maps and charts to a
Geospatial Information Infrastructure” and concluded with a vision of a
Geographic Support Agency (GSA).
The concept of a GSA was Option 1 in Initiative 15 (Military Geographic
Information) of the DER. Unfortunately; the option was not agreed by all
principles.

17
This resulted in DMGI being supplemented by Air Force and Navy personnel
to become DSMGI (Directorate of Strategic Military Geographic Information).
Then, in 1998, what had been predominately ex-RASVY in DIO, split to
become the Australian Imagery Office (AIO).
1999 – East Timor. The International Force East Timor (INTERFET) was a
multinational non-United Nations peacemaking taskforce, organised and led
by Australia in accordance with United Nations resolutions to address the
humanitarian and security crisis that took place in East Timor from 1999–
2000 until the arrival of UN peacekeepers.
On Sunday 10 October 1999, Australian peacekeeping troops of the
INTERFET force exchanged gunfire with Indonesian police officers near the
town of Motaain. Reports indicate that the incident left two police officers
injured, one seriously, whilst a third Jakarta alleged that the Australian troops
had strayed into Indonesian West Timor, having confused an Indonesian
border post for a militia outpost. Other accounts, however, indicate that the
incident was triggered by uncertainty over whether the town of Motaain lies
within East or West Timor. Most accounts of the events describe the
Indonesian police opening fire, either with warning shots or directly at the
advancing Australians.
Journalists accompanying the peacekeeping troops reported that the
Indonesian and Australian forces later compared mapping over the area. The
Indonesians were using a Dutch produced map that showed Motaain in West
Timor (probably the HIND 637, 1:100,000 scale mapping). This mapping
shows the town of Motaain to be in West Timor. Ironically, the Australians
were using more current Indonesian produced mapping (probably overprinted
1:25,000 or 1:50,000 mapping). This mapping places Motaain in East Timor,
but could be misleading. Although the name label “Motaain” is to the east of
the boundary line, there are built-up areas without labels nearby and to the
west of the boundary alignment. These built-up area symbols reflect the
position of Motaain on some of the earlier mapping sources. The different
position of the boundary alignment on these sources has also been a
contributory factor in this incident.
Almost a ‘fellow in Arkansas’ time! Australia held library copies of the
Indonesian topographic maps but that was through ‘luck’. Downsizing,
outsourcing and change in organisations had meant that a consequence of
those activities meant that library and depot resources had been adversely
affected including very limited map coverage of Timor. Fortuitously, the
DSMGI map librarian had visited his UK counterpart earlier that year in
Singapore. The UK officer assisted him in purchasing, from a map shop, the
topographic maps of Timor. The maps did not have grids and had an old
geodetic datum. This was rectified via the ‘old boy’ network. Then, being a
UN operation I was able to acquire copies of the Dutch and Portuguese maps
through DGIWG member officers.
The 1990s was certainly a decade of uncertainty! The decade commenced
with initiatives with the unstated goal of transitioning from a map and chart
production capability focused on transitioning to a Geospatial Information
Infrastructure model. Project PARARE was initiated and the DCW project was
completed.

18
INTERFET and the Motaain Border Post Incident - 1999
The mid-decade period saw processes culminating with the disbandment of
the Royal Australia Survey Corps and causing delays to major projects. The
period saw the termination of surveying and mapping cooperative programs
with South-East Asia and South West Pacific nations. The period saw the
suspension of education (including post graduate programs) and training
courses.
The later period saw the reviews and organizational changes along with a
multinational peacekeeping operation. But more uncertainty would follow!

19
2000s – A Decade in Disarray …
Awareness of future trends in the development of a Geographic Information
Infrastructure became an important issue in informing the wider community
(Defence and civilian). I produced a presentation and an article in April 2000.
They were intended to be discussion documents in aid of developing a
capability development strategy for the Australian Defence Organisation.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/developing-geospatial-environment-robert-
bob-williams/?trackingId=gXmEpDBzStSk%2FkdnufpnTw%3D%3D%20%20)

20
The Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation (DIGO) was established
under a Cabinet Directive on 8 November 2000 by amalgamating the
Australian Imagery Organisation and Directorate of Strategic Military
Geographic Information (DSMGI), and the Defence Topographic Agency
(formerly ATSE). On 2 December 2005 DIGO came under the provisions of
the amended Intelligence Services Act 2001 (ISA).
I became the first DSTO (Defence Science and Technology Organisation)
scientist to have a sponsored task with DIGO. My task was to provide
mapping science support to DIGO. In this task I had a number of ‘chats’ with
the Director, produced a number of documents and gave presentations to
staff.
DSTO introduced new FRACs (Force Research Area Categories) in 2000
replacing Defence Output Points of Contact with STCC (Science and
Technology Coordinators). I was DSTO POC for Defence Output 6 – Military
Geographic Information. I was not given an interview regarding the change,
nor was I advised of the new relationship with Defence clients. I finally ended
‘formal’ direct contact with DIGO in 2004.
The Year 2001
At a chance meeting with an Air Force Group Captain at a QANTAS Club I
chatted about some aeronautical information issues. I followed up with a
meeting at RAAF Aeronautical Information Services (AIS), Victoria Barracks,
Melbourne in March. One topic was the importance of vertical obstructions
(high rise buildings and West Gate Bridge) and a lack of staff to manage a
database known as a Vertical Obstructions Database.
The RAAF Group Captain in an email dated Sunday, March 25, 2001 noted "I
am rapidly learning about stuff called 'adaptation data' (AD); an expression I
had not come across until I moved into my new job at RAAF Headquarters in
Canberra. AD is the underlying data that sits behind air traffic control (ATC),
air defence and (I think) automated flight management systems. Numerous
RAAF projects require AD and assume that it will be available through AIS or
some other ill-defined magic mechanism”.
“The most immediate problem concerns the Australian Defence Air Traffic
System (ADATS) project. ADATS has a long and vexed history that is
exacerbated by the collapse of ATC manning levels that began last year and
continues apace. The ADF has no option but to seek a much closer
relationship with civilian ATC authorities and the civilian system (TAAATS)”.
In June I had an overseas trip with the primary purpose of attending the
DGIWG 33rd
Steering Committee Meeting hosted by France in May.

21
The objective was to obtain information on overseas initiatives relevant to
enhancing the Australian Defence Organisation’s geospatial environment with
interest areas of research and development in the mapping sciences,
interoperability and standards, multinational issues, information management
and libraries, including ‘open-source’ materials. Other topics of interest
included international boundaries and project acquisition of ADATS.

22
The Chairman of the DGIWG SC Policy and Technical Strategy Group
convened a special session to acknowledge needs of emerging systems:
Precision weapons, UUVs, UAVs, Robots, C2 systems, Sensor and asset
management, Air traffic control and Intelligent logistics and transportation
systems.
On Friday 24 August. I gave briefings to a number of groups in Canberra on
my overseas trip.
I concluded my presentation to DIGO’s Corporate Management Team making
comments on Interoperability and Standards, Geospatial Information
Management, Capability Development issues and Research topics.

23
One example of existing standards was DI (G) Ops 20-3 -
DI(G) OPS 20-3 (Digital. Geographic Information Exchange Standards
and Data Product Standards) Issue 1 was published by the Department of
Defence on 6 May 1994. The original version included three fundamental
concepts: (1) Exchange of digital geographic information between defence
organizations and systems should be DIGEST compliant; (2) Exchange of
digital geographic information for hydrographic purposes should conform to
IHO (International Hydrographic Organisation) requirements; and (3)
Exchange of digital geographic information with civilian organizations should
conform to ASDTS (Australian Spatial Data Transfer Standard).

24
During the presentation I proposed a number of audacious goals. I suggested
that it seemed possible to amend JP2064 Phase 2 to link ADATS which
would also enable a transition from a publication paradigm to an information
service paradigm.
I expressed concerns regarding research and development. I suggested that
there was a need to create a virtual Advanced Research and Technology
Division for Surveying and Mapping with external academic initiatives
managed through the Australian Defence Force Academy and industry
initiatives through a prototype facility.
Of critical importance are formal qualifications of staff and exchange
personnel. I suggested the need to review the ‘people’ issue.

25
In a supplementary session I highlighted deficiencies in the air traffic
management systems. I introduced my presentations with a hypothetical
event: an unidentified aircraft was approaching Australia across the Indian
Ocean. What action needs to be taken? And when? My event was similar to
the USS Vincennes – Iranian Air IR655 incident on July 3, 1988. In my
presentation I reported that the databases were not designed to permit
analytical processes; such as, does the ‘dot on the screen’ lie on a
recognized air route? And does the ‘dot’ appear where a scheduled flight
should be?
Eighteen days later!

26
The day before the attacks, on September 10, 2001, Australian Prime
Minister John Howard met President George W. Bush for the first time. They
spent four hours together, including talks over lunch at the White House,
starting what became a strong political alliance and personal friendship. “We
didn’t talk about terrorism,” Howard said later. “Nobody knew this terrible
event was just around the corner.”
BUT what led to that response. I assert that what happened on September
11, 2001 was an air traffic management issue and a domestic incident! Four
US commercial aircraft (AA11, UA175, AA77 and UA93) were high-jacked in
US airspace and crashed into US domestic buildings and territory. The
incident was a US domestic issue to which the response was the Global War
on Terrorism.

27
On September 11, PM Howard
was in his Washington hotel, only
a few blocks from the White
House, when the first attack
happened. Howard invoked the
ANZUS military alliance to
America.
In October 2001 the invasion of
Afghanistan began. Three special
forces squadrons were deployed
in initial offensive against the
Taliban.
The Bush administration declared the
War on Terror and this initiated a
Change in World Order.
Another Fellow in Arkansas moment!
Where is Afghanistan? What do we know about the country? These were just
a couple of questions that were being asked at the time.
My own response was to compile an eGeoBrief (electronic Geographic
Brief). I developed this multi-media product a couple of years earlier. Multi-
media cartography permits us to present geographic and environmental
information in a range of forms and formats from a traditional country
brief, to enhanced infrastructure directories to abstract visualisations.
I had a request on 2 October 2001 from a RAAF Group Captain in Canberra if
I could produce an eGeoBrief from open-source material on the WWW. I
returned to Canberra on 23 October with a document that was given to a unit
preparing for assignment to Afghanistan.
“I would like to take this time to outline my and my organisation’s appreciation
for this CD ROM. We have found it to be a very detailed and an informative
product” (Special Air Services soldier).

28
The document had information organised into themes: Politics, History,
Facilities, Communications, Economy, Resources, Geography and
Environment.
As an example of the diversity of information the Politics theme included
overviews of key leaders, al Qaeda, Osama Bib Laden, Mullah Mohammed
Omar, the Taliban, the Loya Jirga, and a copy of the Constitution of
Afghanistan 1990.

29
In addition, the full text of a document, entitled Responsibility for the Terrorist
Atrocities in the United States, released by [UK] Downing Street on Thursday
4 October 2001 about the evidence against Osama Bin Laden.
After this rapid development of a new style of document, which I had
designed to create a hyperlinked, multi-media product, I re-styled the pages
and made a presentation titled “Geographic Intelligence: The Key to
Information Superiority” to the Joint AURISA and Institute of Surveyors
Conference at Adelaide, November 2002.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-bob-williams-
a1b067126/detail/treasury/position:855278544/?entityUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_
profileTreasuryMedia%3A(ACoAAB75-vcBffp-TqxcrvgaYT8FCHmWZIC1-
tw%2C1554937278780)&section=position%3A855278544&treasuryCount=11
Part of Abstract - This presentation will use a ‘story-boarding’ technique to,
not only expand our view of what geography and geographic intelligence
might be, but note historical events that have shaped developments in
surveying and mapping (the mapping sciences). Having set the scene, the
presentation intends to describe a capability development strategy that might
lead to the creation of a SAGE (virtual Specialist Advisor on Geography and
the Environment) and eGeoBriefs (electronic Geographic Briefs). Whether
terms such as SAGE and eGeoBrief come into common usage only time will
tell.

30
I developed my idea of a ‘virtual specialist advisor’ over the years with the
SAGE home page / entry being designed in 2003. My last entries were in
2008.
SAGE included entry points for past, present and future topics and issues
plus warnings and indicators. Entry icons (symbolic representations) were:
v History and Heritage – Know and understand your past and learn from
experience.
v Know Your World – Describe, represent, and communicate knowledge
of our geo-strategic world.
v Capability development – Develop a Geospatial Information
Infrastructure using mapping and geospatial sciences and
technologies.
v Vision for the Future – Develop policy and strategic concepts and
mange capability development over the long term.
v Warnings and Indicators – Learn from warnings and indicators and
observe catalysts for change.
My vision is that one day virtual advisors will become a reality and I
believe that this capability will be necessary to build truly autonomous
systems.
Then came another day in history and almost a ‘fellow in Arkansas’
time! How well do we Know Our World?

31
On February 5 2003, United States
Secretary of State Colin Powell appeared
before the United Nations to prove the
urgency to engage a War with Iraq. His
speech was approved by former US CIA
chief George Tenet.
US President Bush and his advisors built much of their case for war
on the idea that Iraq, under dictator Saddam Hussein, possessed, or
was in the process of building, weapons of mass destruction.
The Australian Government released its National Counter-Terrorism Plan in
June 2003 and followed up with its Defence Capability Plan 2004-2014.
… “convergence of the fighting power of the three
services is made possible by networking and by the
support provided by greatly enhanced intelligence
capabilities. The upgrades of our space-based
surveillance capability and our Geospatial Information
Infrastructure will provide us with superior situational
awareness”.
Launch Of The Defence Capability Plan 2004-2014, Sydney
Convention and Exhibition Centre. Wednesday 4 February 2004 -
MIN40204/04
Defence Minister Robert Hill said providing national security was the first
priority of the Howard Government.
“Recognising that intelligence is the front line in the war against terrorism,
extra money will be used to:
v Enhance the Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation’s capacity
to support domestic counter terrorism forces, law enforcement
agencies and emergency response activities through providing
essential infrastructure information at critical locations. This is part of a
whole-of-government Critical Infrastructure Protection initiative”.
Media Release - Increased Funding For National Security, MIN83/04, 11 May 2004
Critical infrastructure is that infrastructure which, if
destroyed, degraded or rendered unavailable for an
extended period, will significantly impact on social or
economic well-being or affect national security or
defence.
November 2004

32
How do we ‘map’ our World?
The Australian Defence Organisation had a major project that could be
developed to address Whole-of-Defence and Whole-of-Nation needs.
JP (Joint Project) 2064 Geospatial Information Infrastructure and Services
(Phase 3 Dryad) Year of Decision 09/10 with band $250-$350 million
included: Electronic access into other Federal, state, and local government GI
sources; Electronic access into industry GI data sources; Electronic access to
UK, US, CA, and NZ military GI data sources; Provision of access by other
Federal security, intelligence, and surveillance organisations; and Provision of
controlled access by Federal, state, and local emergency organisations.

33
In 2004 my research tasks with a capability development group in Defence
Canberra and DIGO were near to termination and renewal was required. In
order to place activities into context I compiled a poster titled “GeoInt for C2”.
My new tasks were initially ‘registered’ on 3 February 2004 but then, almost
immediately, ‘rejected’ on 11 February 2004.
I had hoped that my decades of work, which included support to Capability
Development staff since 1992 and DIGO staff since 2000, would continue and
specifically concerning items in Thrusts 2 and 3 (as above and in figures).
That wasn’t to be. I was replaced as task manager by my supervisor Dr Ian

34
….. This move, I was told, was to expand DSTO’s involvement in geospatial
research. I could not, at first, understand how this change could result in more
specialist expertise being allocated to sponsors since Dr …. had made no
attempt to research the issues through visiting establishments, universities,
conferences, and the like.
Of course there were a number of issues that led to my tasking.
From a Defence Capability Development perspective my work was within a
Defence Output termed DO6 MGI (Military Geographic Information). I was
DSTO Point of Contact.
But in 2000 DSTO introduced FRAs and FRACs: Force Research Areas and
Force Research Categories. I do not know the process of designating the
‘leaders’ but I was not advised that FRAC IGI (Imagery and Geospatial
Information) was assigned to Dr J………. who was in a different Division in
DSTO to myself. This resulted in ill-defined areas of responsibility and
assignment of resources (funding). In April 2002 I received the an email that
included comment on “thrusts of Bob’s work” and then the comment “my
experience of Bob is that he is able to identify problems and issues but
has not yet ever delivered any solutions”. This comment was worrying
and, more significantly, that comment had wide distribution that has affected
my reputation until this present day. A couple of years later Mr C………
returned to Australia after a long-term posting to US NIMA/NGA. He met with
senior leaders in DSTO, undoubtedly to present topics and issues from his
overseas attachment, and became DSTO’s S&T adviser for GII&S
(Geographic Information and Services). He had considerable contact with Dr
J………..
Roles and responsibilities had become confused.
The 2000’s decade was definitely a decade in disarray.
It was time to change groups and my opportunity arose as the contemporary
issues of the mid-decade were National Security and Safeguarding
Australia. My new task would focus on this theme.
As backgound, in April 2004 the relationship of geographic information with
endorsed Government initiatives was addressed through a Spatial Data and
Geographic Information workshop.
An Invitation
Spatial Data and
Geographic Information
Workshop
April 2004
You are invited to participate in the Spatial Data and Geographic
Information System Workshop: A joint initiative of the Department of Prime
Minister & Cabinet (PM&C), the Protective Security Coordination Centre
(PSCC) and Geoscience Australia (GA).
The aim of the workshop is to progress a national policy approach to
spatial information and modelling capabilities, identify technology
requirements and articulate any impediments to moving forward,

35
drawing on lessons learned from recent counter terrorism exercises.
Some objectives, in terms of priority areas for future development, you may
wish to consider in preparation for the workshop include the following:
² Moving the focus from data gathering, and its immediate application
in an incident or exercise, to longer term planning and mitigation. For
example, what are the areas of highest vulnerability or risk? Where
can we concentrate future work in order to be better prepared for a
terrorist incident? How can we develop a national coordinated
framework?
² Once we have gathered a wide range of data how do we best add
value to make it more valuable in addressing terrorist risk? To date
we have used these data in a very limited context to address
incident response. What can we do to improve our ability to manage
our response? How can we value-add the data in a timely manner in
order to mitigate the impact or to reduce the potential for an incident
in the first place?
² What tools (technologies, products) need to be developed to assist
incident responders, consequence managers, and risk managers to
make better informed decisions?
² How do make optimum use of our resources at all levels?
The Workshop was held at Geoscience Australia (GA) in Canberra,
Wednesday-Thursday 28 and 29 April 2004.
I initiated a task titled “ Critical Infrastructure Modelling for National
Security”.

36
https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-bob-williams-
a1b067126/detail/treasury/position:855278544/?entityUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_
profileTreasuryMedia%3A(ACoAAB75-vcBffp-TqxcrvgaYT8FCHmWZIC1-
tw%2C1585102941756)&section=position%3A855278544&treasuryCount=11

37
The topic, Safeguarding Australia, gained prominence in 2005. On 27 June
Australian Prime Minister announced the establishment of the Science,
Engineering and Technology (SET) Unit. Staff were seconded from Defence
Science and Technology Organisation; the Department of Education, Science
and Training; the CSIRO; the Australian Federal Police; and the intelligence
community. The SET Unit developed strong linkages with the scientific
community, to focus science, engineering and technology efforts in support of
Australia’s counter-terrorism needs. The unit surveyed a broad range of
security, intelligence, law enforcement and emergency management
agencies to determine their counter-terrorism research and development
needs, sorting those needs into priority areas of interest for further
development.
SET Summit was included in Safeguarding Australia 2005 Summit on Day 3.
In my view the term Safeguarding Australia is an overarching concept
including contemporary Threats to Security.
In 2005 I produced a paper titled “Geospatial Intelligence and a Geospatial
Information Infrastructure: Contemporary Defence and Security Challenges“
and presented at SSC 2005 Spatial Intelligence, Innovation and Praxis; the

38
national Conference of the Spatial Sciences Institute, Melbourne, 2005.
Abstract. “The importance of security and safety to Australia has been
underscored by recent events. Australia has to be capable of anticipating and
tackling critical threats to society, strategic areas of the national economy and
the environment and these threats can come from within and outside
Australia.
In addition to potential security threats involving conventional military attack,
Australia’s security is now affected by emerging dangers posed by
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, chemical and biological
weapons, and their chief means of delivery – ballistic missiles), terrorism and
attacks on information systems. Furthermore, non-military threats to national
security include natural disasters, pandemic disease, illegal immigration,
illegal fishing, people smuggling, environmental degradation, narcotics and
transnational crime.
This paper overviews contemporary geo-strategic influences and catalysts for
change demanded by a changing environment as well as challenges of
Safeguarding Australia. The paper describes the terms geospatial intelligence
and a geospatial information infrastructure and describes how they relate to
current Defence capability development and current government
Safeguarding Australia initiatives”.
In 2007 I produced a paper titled “Geographic Intelligence: Know Your World
Through Story-telling“ and presented at SSC 2007; the national biennial
Conference of the Spatial Sciences Institute, Hobart, 2007
Abstract. Most people would agree that our world is complex. We are
confronted by increasingly important security and defence challenges and by
very real environmental and infrastructure management challenges. Most
people would also agree that there is now public awareness of the
seriousness of major issues including “national security” and “effects of global
warming”.
But how do we (the spatial information community) translate these issues and
challenges into topics, capabilities and strategies that will enable the creation
of ‘geographic intelligence’ and the creation of a ‘geospatial information
infrastructure’ that will underpin decision support systems, modelling and
simulation systems, intelligent transportation systems, intelligent weapons
systems, and so on?
This paper addresses a number of issues by using a ‘story-telling’ approach
to identify key capability development issues”.
Keynote speakers included Vanessa Lawrence (Director-General and Chief
Executive, UK Ordnance Survey) and Gary Nairn MP (Special Minister of
State).
Then followed a series of “Spatially Enabled Government Conferences” in
2007, 2008 and 2009 initiated by the Hon Gary Nairn MP, Special Minister of
State.
My goal was to contribute to the Defence Information Environment through
information exchange to:

39
• Defence Imagery & Geospatial Organization specifically the
Geospatial Incident Response Capability
• JP2064 Geospatial Information Infrastructure Phase 3 & JP2030 Joint
Command Support Environment Phase 9 specifically:
• Improving reach in Defence Information Environments domains and
networks;
• Improving online geospatial services; o Determining additional
geospatial information databases (including
• allies and commercial); o Assessing geospatial information agency
technology insertion; o Scoping the integration of intelligence and
geospatial capabilities; Providing mapping science support to
agencies, branches & units in the ADO;
• Continuing the education and awareness of advantages and uses
of geospatial technology to senior Defence officers.
My approach was focused on applied research. Again, I received only token
support from DSTO; DSTO staff, in the main, are comfortable doing basic
research but don’t really understand the complexities in applied research.
Hence, yet again, my initiative floundered.
In 2006 I submitted an application for a Long-Range Research (LRR) grant. I
developed a submission titled “Phenomenological Structuring of Geographic
Information”. I corresponded with Professor Mike Goodchild regarding the
suitability of my submission as a research project. Mike agreed but, yet again,
DSTO Executive rejected the proposal. I received a letter with the note “due
to the number of excellent proposals, etc ... ...”!
In 2007 I re-submitted by LRR proposal. My new Chief of Division, Dr Mark
Anderson, did not even acknowledged the submission nor return a reply.
I visited Canberra on 1 July 2008 for discussions on topics in my task;
specifically on application of spatial and related technologies for counter
terrorism and critical infrastructure protection. SKM (Sinclair Knight Mertz)
developed a prototype titled GRID (Geospatial Reactive Incident Database)
for DIGO (Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation) in 2004. I became
aware that DIGO was developing a strategic plan. I made an offer to G….
……, Director Geospatial Exploitation, to assist in developing a Geospatial
Intelligence Strategic Plan. During a telephone conversation between myself
and M…… on 9 July 2008, he informed me that he had discussed the offer
with the DIGO Director who rejected the offer. Maiden said that they were
developing (what he called) a ‘business plan’ and didn’t want any ‘geo
people’ with ‘baggage’ and that it was for the ‘intelligence community’.
When I asked whether the Director, Mr C…. ….., knew me and my
background he said ‘yes’. I expressed concern because the only time that I
have spoken to L…. was at a conference in Bendigo whilst eating a ‘party
pie’. [M…… has degrees in Business (Management) and Science (ICT).
L…… has an honours degree in French Language and Literature.]
JULY 2008 – APPROACHING THE END OF A LONG CAREER. During the
first week of July 2008 I attended and participated in a seminar titled “Smart
Decision Making for Clean Skies (Modern Air Traffic Management and the
Environment)” at UNSW@ADFA (University of New South Wales at the
Australian Defence Force Academy) in Canberra. On return to DSTO

40
Edinburgh I attended one of the few group meetings that was characteristic of
my group over many years. One of the topics on the agenda was the group’s
travel budget. We were informed that the Division (C3I) needed to cut its
travel budget. I was allocated $1000 for the financial year. So, with the travel
to attend the UNSW@ADFA seminar my budget had been used. This meant
that my contact with the broader Defence and civilian community would be all
but terminated.
So, not having ever taken long service leave I decided that it was time to take
leave and plan my retirement.
2009 - I returned to DSTO Edinburgh during January and February. During
that period I completed writing a paper and organizing attachments to the
document. The paper was titled “SAGE: A Military Mapmaker’s Story” and
the attachments included multi-media electronic document I titled “SAGE”
and an early 1990s Apple Macintosh computer with software applications that
I wrote for my PhD at UNSW@ADFA and in the early 1990s in Information
Technology Division, DSTO (S).
SAGE: A Military Mapmaker’s Story is a 243 page, 80,000 word document
with hyperlinks to SAGE. My story and SAGE, an attachment to my paper as
a multi-media electronic document on an external hard disk drive, attempt to
report and comment on a range to initiatives, topics, capabilities and
challenges (from my viewpoint).
SAGE contains in excess of 100,000 files in almost 6,000 folders with a size
in excess of 450 Gigabytes made up of in excess of 1400 web pages, 300
PDF documents, 800 JPEG pictures, 10 Word documents, 60 Powerpoint
presentations, 30 audio clips, 200 video clips, 10 DVDs, 20 Wikipedia links,
40 Google Earth links, and more – all hyper-linked.
A second attachment to my My Story is an early1990s Apple Macintosh
computer with software applications that I wrote for my PhD at
UNSW@ADFA and in the early 1990s in Information Technology Division,
DSTO(S). This computer contains demonstration applications that have been
shown to be visionary. In 1990 I received a Cartographic Excellence award
from the Australian Institute of Cartographers for the way cartographic
information was presented and an Australian Institute of Cartographers and
BHP Engineering Technology Research and Development Award for
Innovation in Cartographic Communication. I believe that the Macintosh
computer and its contents deserve to be lodged in an appropriate place for
display as I requested in my DSTO paper.
I acquired a small table with wheels and set up my computer and external
hard drive containing SAGE; my Macintosh computer with applications and
examples with instructions and a copy of my paper prepared for internal
DSTO publication.
[My request was these should be sent for a public display at Defence
Imagery and Geospatial Organisation (DIGO) – a part of ‘a military
mapmaker’s history’].

41
The documents, computers and request were provided to my Head of Group
Dr D…. L……. as custodian of a ‘unique’ set of resources. Dr L……’s office
was one of the untidiest offices I have seen in my long career. Furthermore,
the group’s storeroom was a mess of boxes and equipment tossed in.

42
At the time:
• I seriously doubted whether my paper SAGE: A Military Mapmaker’s
Story and SAGE would ever be published without some external (to
DSTO Edinburgh) intervention;
• I doubted if my old Mac with truly unique computer software
applications would be delivered to DIGO and placed in a historical
display without some external (to DSTO Edinburgh) intervention; and
• I doubted if the messages in the paper “DR BOB WILLIAMS’
ODYSSEY: A Military Mapmaker’s Story, 1965 – 2009” would be
heeded in my lifetime.
MY LAST DAY at DSTO (Edinburgh) - Wednesday 11 February 2009 was my
last day at work prior to taking my final leave and retiring after forty three
years service to the Australian Defence Force and Defence Science and
Technology Organisation. I was walking along the connecting walkway
between buildings 205 and 206 at DSTO Edinburgh. I passed my Chief of C3I
Division, Dr Mark Anderson and said “good morning”. Dr Anderson, in his
usual style, kept looking at the floor and kept walking. What a moment! After
such a long period of service I would have thought a simple gesture as
stopping to say “good bye” would have seemed reasonable; but not to be. I
felt disappointed and, indeed, that is why I used the phase “sole destroying”
at the beginning of ‘my’ story - SAGE: A Military Mapmaker’s Story.
During the second half of the decade I was receiving little support
regarding my work in my speciality of the surveying and mapping
sciences from my supervisors, research leader and division chief.
I was also blocked from visiting traditional contacts in Canberra.
So, after forty-three years I retired in 2009.
This period was a time of, in a sense, a cultural change essentially from an
engineering and rigorous review perspective to a generalist and non-
specialist perspective.
I continued to follow up via emails and letters, including five letters to the
Office of the Chief Defence Scientist, regarding publication of the reports and
forwarding of SAGE and the Macintosh computer to DIGO. Some were
answered and others with comments relating to higher priorities taking
precedence over reviewing my work.
Thirteen months after leaving Adelaide (DSTO (Edinburgh)), in one of the
letters, I was informed that the Apple Macintosh was accessed in October
2009 (nine months after leaving it with the other documents) and it was not
possible to recover any data despite all attempts, the internal hard disk failed
to boot. Since it was not possible to recover any data from the hard disk, it
was subsequently destroyed as classified waste and the machine returned to
stores at the same time for disposal, as is normal procedure.
That news, over a year after my departure, was sole destroying. Unique
intellectual work had been destroyed.

43
Some twenty months after my departure I received my final correspondence
that concluded in saying “DSTO priorities need to be dynamic and the work
you performed is no longer being pursued by DSTO. In accordance with
current priorities, we are unable to allocate resources to undertake the work
required to make the reports suitable for publication; accordingly it will remain
an unpublished report. [Dated 23 December 2010 – the last working day of
the year.]
The 2000s was ‘A Decade in Disarray’. The decade featured a number of
incidents and accidents. The decade featured organizational changes both
military and civilian. The decade featured the introduction of new, or modified,
terms such as Spatial, and the confusing GEOINT (see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geospatial_intelligence). Importantly, the decade
featured an erosion of scientific terms and the lack of recognition of the
traditional disciplines. In a sense, core science has been ignored and
specialist knowledge and expertise has been ignored.
In a sense the 2000s could be considered the ‘naughtys’ decade. In a sense
we have a Fellow in Arkansas period; meaning that we are aware of a range
of contemporary threats to security and safeguarding a nation issues BUT we
have lost the specialist science, technology, engineering and
mathematical skills to ‘win the contemporary wars’.
And 2010s – A Decade of Uncertainty and capability development
delays; Events and Disasters
Uncertainty and capability development delays. Being retired I cannot
comment in specific topics and their current status but can make the following
comments based on personal experience.
DIGO Office of Capability Coordinator – Geospatial Information published
its 2nd
Issue of its newsletter “Longitude” on 2 June 2011.
• “Foundation for the Geo Domain”. The article notes that the
foundation would be established through Joint Project 2064 Phase 3.
The article does not provide any background to the origins of the
project or the delays to the project”.
In 1997, the “Rationalization of Military Geographic Information
Organisations” was addressed in a Defence Efficiency Review. The
recommended option was to establish a Geographic Support Agency.
This option was not supported by key principles and there was a
suggestion to create a “virtual agency”; hence JP2064 (Geospatial
Information Infrastructure and Service) was initiated in a number of
phases. The article notes that this should occur in Phase 3 BUT Phase
2 was intended to address the “virtual agency amalgamation” issue
supported by a “Data Services Centre”.

44
• “CADRG upgrade (e.g. 1:25,000 TLM CADRG)”
CADRG (Compressed Arc Digitized Raster Graphic) is a US Defense
Mapping Agency product developed circa 1988. The picture below is
from a presentation “The Environmental and Geographic Information
Capability Study [EGICS] addressing the Geospatial Information
Component in the C3I Equation (January 1996).
TLM (Topographic Line Map) CADRG is a raster copy of a conventional
topographic map.
January 1996 – Policy was also in place to enable the transition to ‘smart
maps’ as in VMap (Vector ‘smart’ map). VMap products were intended to
provide the fourndation for thematic topologically vector products such as
UVMap (Urban Vector Map)
• “Multinational Geospatial Co-production Program (MGCP)
producing world coverage of geospatial data at scales between
1:50,000 and 1:100,000 in one degree by one degree cells to DGIWG
Feature Data Dictionary (DFDD) specification. Australia’s commitment
covers some areas of the South West Pacific and South East Asia
region”.

45
In November 2003, the Multinational Geospatial Co-Production Program
(MGCP) was initiated. This program contributed toward bolstering
international cooperative production and coordination of high-resolution
digital vector data in high-interest regions where inadequate data
currently exists. The project represents the most current evolution of a 10-
year, global vector-map level 1 (VMAP1) effort that began in 1993 and was
revamped in 2003. In the new format, the program was created to be not
only more international, but also more streamlined in terms of data analysis
and user access.
Spatial@Gov Conference. During the period 2007 to 2012 there were three
‘Spatially Enabled Government’ and four ‘Spatial@Gov’ conferences. Each
year, however, the participation by executive level staff from the various
Commonwealth and State mapping / spatial agencies dropped. The 2012
conference featured a presentation on Joint Project 2064 (Geospatial
Information Infrastructure & Services) Phase 3 that included Defence wide
integrated capability.
Defence‐wide integrated geospatial
capability on Defence Restricted Network,
Defence Secret Network, and deployed
systems providing:
• Visualisation and situational awareness
(geography, meteorology /
oceanography, infrastructure, etc)
• Geospatial data, analysis tools and
services
• Geospatially enabled collaboration (real
time)
• Hosting data & services provided by
Defence Geospatial Producers
• Hosting for community sourced
geospatial information
• Data and services support to other
Defence systems C2, ISR, Logistic,
Health, etc
• Data and services support to allies,
Whole of Government and NGA
Defence JP 2064 Phase 3
Kevin Rosenbaum, DIGO
Geospatial Development
Centre
22 August 2012
JP2064 Phase 3
$100m-$300m
(Middle of band)
What was significant about that presentation was the exclusion of capabilities:
Capabilities that are critical for “Whole of Government / Whole of Nation”
purposes such as emergency management.

46
Back in 2004, during the launch of the Defence Capability Plan 2004-2014,
the Minister of Defence Senator the Honourable Robert Hill stated “...
convergence of the fighting power of the three services is made possible by
networking and by the support provided by greatly enhanced intelligence
capabilities. The upgrades of our space-based surveillance capability and our
Geospatial Information Infrastructure will provide us with superior
situational awareness”. The plan included reference to JP2064 Phase 3 with
Year-Of-Decision FY09/10.
SSC2005 Conference. I, in my role as a provider of science and technology
support, gave a presentation at SSC2005 held in Melbourne. The list bellow
shows enhanced functionality not in the 2012 Spatial@Gov presentation.
Initial scoping papers identify possible
features of the phase to include:
JP2064 Phase 3 (Project Dryad). YOD
09/10
• Electronic access into other
Federal, state, and local government
Geographic Information source
• Electronic access into industry GI
data sources
• Electronic access to UK, US, CA,
and NZ military GI data sources
• Provision of access by other
Federal security, intelligence, and
surveillance organisations
• Provision of controlled access by
Federal, state, and local emergency
organisations
GEOSPATIAL INTELLIGENCE AND
A GEOSPATIAL INFORMATION
INFRASTRUCTURE:
Contemporary Defence and
Security Challenges
Dr R.J.Williams
September 2005
JP2064 Phase 3
$250m-$350m
(Upper end of band)
So, there is a serious loss of Whole of Government / Whole of
Nation functionality. The cost reduction was possibly
reported as ‘savings’.

47
Locate16 conference. A senior executive officer of the Australian
Geospatial-Intelligence Organisation (previously the Defence Imagery and
Mapping Organisation) gave an address to the Locate16 conference in April
2016. The presentation was titled “From data silos to integrated content:
delivering richer and more accessible GEOINT”. The key points were data
silos, integrated content, and GEOINT delivery.
This presentation reveals that capability development is now fourteen years
behind in acquisition. There was a presentation given to ASIBA (Australian
Spatial Industry Association) on 10 October 2002 (shown in illustration below)
and titled JP2064 Phase 2 - Geospatial Information Infrastructure and
Services (GII&S).

48
So what went wrong with JP2064 Phase 2 which included a DATA
SERVICES CENTRE identified to specifically address the topic?
Ms Rose then went onto to provide an update on the Multinational Geospatial
Co-production Program (MGCP).
Multinational Geospatial Co-production
Program (MGCP):
“Australia is a member of the Multinational
Geospatial Co-production Program (MGCP),
which currently involves 32 nations and is
aimed at producing 1:100 000 scale maps of
the entire world. MGCP member nations will
contribute data to a central data warehouse
and will, in time, have unlimited access to a
Map of the World”.
So, it appears that the transition
from standard maps and charts to
‘smart’ maps has not occurred!
“Helmand Operation to start”, Afghanistan. SBS – Television News 2016
I find the presentations to be embarrassingly poor. That is clear evidence
that US NGA and UK DGIA appear not to have addressed the transition from
a paper-based service to a geospatial information service model.

49
The presentations worry me greatly. I am disappointed that decades of effort
by military mapmakers working on the development of what is an 'enduring
capability' seem to have been dismissed. How embarrassing - but it at least
provides public source evidence on just how poor our systems are!
Hydro18 Conference. Being retired, for four months a year I am a grey
nomad and travel north for the winter staying just south of Cairns,
Queensland for a couple of months before travelling home on the far south
coast of New South Wales – a mere 2,800KM.I was visited by John Maschke
(Convenor of the upcoming HYDRO18 conference) at Kurrimine Beach, Qld.
John took the hour trip south from Cairns on three occasions. He asked if I
could prepare a visionary presentation for the HYDRO18 to be held in
Sydney in 30 October – 1 November 2018. I felt honoured and proud to be
invited and developed what I believe is a unique presentation that I titled
“Back to the Future: OIESS2025, Burrows and Rosetta”.
I set scenarios in the year 2025. This timeframe allowed me to present
plausible scenarios and discuss plausible solutions.
So, introducing OIESS 2025.
“A new era in the way we plan and manage our infrastructure and our
environment has arrived.
It is a balmy 20 degrees Celsius this evening, Wednesday 19 November
2025, at Garden Island, Sydney. I am enjoying a pleasant conversation and a
glass of red wine with Ken Burrows, Ron Furness and John Maschke outside
AEPCOTAT Conference Centre. AEPCOTAT [Adapted from Disney’s EPCOT
– Future world] stands for Australasia Experimental Prototype Community of
Today and Tomorrow. Adjoining AEPCOTAT is the visionary system
the Geranium Oceania Infrastructure and Environmental Support System
(OIESS). It is the OIESS that will ’enable a new era’ and AEPCOTAT that will
prototype some of the new concepts initiated in the AEPCOTAT laboratories.
During the evening we chatted about the Digital Earth and the evolution of our
digital capability, contemporary challenges, a range of incidents, future
concepts and our proud history. I mentioned that many issues are difficult for
senior managers to understand so it seemed appropriate to use a ‘story-
telling’ approach. I have used a ‘story-telling’ approach at past conferences
and, so, now onto ‘future’ stories.
We have already experienced one of the new systems; that being
the Endeavour autonomous launch on our trip from Circular Quay to Garden
Island. So tomorrow the main 2025 conference will commence and the theme
is concerned with Managing Events and Incidents in a Complex
Environment”.
https://www.slideshare.net/RobertBobWilliams/back-to-the-future-oiess-2025-
burrows-and-rosetta?ref=https://www.linkedin.com/
The first scenario featured a cruise ship visiting a volcanic region and future
‘intelligent navigation’.

51
Just over a year later the cruise
ship Ovation of the Seas had 38 of
the 47 people trapped on New
Zealand’s volcanic island Whakaari
/ White Island.
The volcano explosively erupted on
9 December 2019. 21 people were
killed.
ABC News
Black Summer. From September 2019 to March 2020 fires heavily impacted
various regions of New South Wales and Victoria.
There were 34 deaths directly related to the fires and 445 died indirectly due
to smoke inhalation. The burned area was immense – 18 million hectares.
There were over 9 thousand buildings destroyed.
But how prepared are our agencies, from a command and control
perspective, for the planning and conduct of operations?
Of course, that question is way beyond the scope of an opinion piece and,
indeed, requires a major capability study. So, I’ll just review (from my
experience and observation) the “mapping” component.
For weeks now the morning news have featured a briefing from the New
South Wales Rural Fire Service Operations Centre.

52

NSW RFS “Knowledge Wall”

53
The “Knowledge Wall” looks impressive but appears to be composite of
simple Google maps with symbols and relatively simple annotation, along
with (what appears to be) spread-sheets, media screens, etc.
Elsewhere, there are images of paper maps joined together with ‘sticky
notes’, notes on walls and scribbled notes on whiteboards.
We need to do better. We must have better decision support systems.
And now to 2020!
BLACK SUMMER fires continue. Thursday, January 23 2020 at about
1.15 pm Coulson N134CG ‘Zeus’, a C130 Hercules, crashed whilst fighting
fires. In a preliminary report into the crash, the Australian Transport Safety
Bureau (ATSB) said after the drop, the aircraft was flying at a very low height
with its left wing down and it hit a tree before crashing into the ground,
leading to a post-impact fuel fire (Feb 27, 2020).
ROYAL COMMISSION – “The Royal Commission into National Natural
Disaster Arrangements” was established on 20 February 2020 in response to
the extreme bushfire season of 2019-2020 which resulted in devastating loss
of life, property and wildlife, and environmental destruction across the nation”.
“Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements” report was
released publically on 30 October 2020.
The report is 594 pages (plus appendices in a separate document)
Browsing the report reveals a serious lack of details on ‘mapping’ topics. For

54
example, the word “mapping” only appears on 22 pages; geospatial only
appears on 2 pages; the word “spatial” only appears on 12 pages and the
term “topographic mapping” does not appear at all. Geoscience Australia
appears on 22 pages that include several paragraphs describing their
activities; but the Australian Geospatial-Intelligence organization does not
appear at all.
Comments on publicly-funded organisations.
“23.21 Geoscience Australia develops national-scale datasets, collated
from a range of public and commercial sources. It develops platforms to
present these data to end-users, for example, Land cover, National Wind
Multiplier Dataset, Marine Sediments Database (MARS), Tropical Cyclone
Hazard Assessment Data, National Exposure Information (NEXIS)” [p.116].
Comment. Geoscience Australia’s mapping programs are at scales 1:100,000
and smaller and, thereby, not detailed enough for tactical level operations.
Traditionally, 1:50,000 and larger are needed for tactical level planning and
operations.
“9.68 The Australian Government should facilitate the identification and
assessment of risks in advance of a natural disaster, given its existing role in
identifying sensitive infrastructure assets and in mapping infrastructure
interdependencies and vulnerabilities through the Critical Infrastructure
Program for Modelling and Analysis [CIPMA]. This could involve the
Australian Government leading a process, with contributions from state and
territory governments and critical infrastructure operators, to determine key
risks to critical infrastructure from severe or catastrophic natural disasters.
This information could then be shared with governments and critical
infrastructure operators to enable effective planning for and mitigation of
risks, and inform response priorities” [p.120].
Comment. On 27 June 2005 the Prime Minister announced the establishment
of the Science, Engineering and Technology (SET) Unit. The SET Unit
developed strong linkages with the scientific community, to focus science,
engineering and technology efforts in support of Australia’s counter-terrorism
needs.
The PACCT (Publicly funded Agencies' Collaborative Counter-Terrorism -
(CSIRO, DSTO, ANSTO, GA)) was established along with the CIPMA
(Critical Infrastructure Protection Modelling & Analysis) program but ceased
around 2007.
“The CIPMA Program .The Attorney-General’s Department was the lead
coordinating agency for CIP, and was sponsor and manager of the CIP
Modelling and Analysis (CIPMA) Program, one of the priority initiatives
funded in the 2004–05 Budget. A CIPMA development team, consisting of
representatives from that department, CSIRO and Geoscience Australia was
established to source necessary skills and expertise, and build the capability.
The overall aim of the CIPMA Program was to build and demonstrate the
capability to answer the most important questions posed by key decision
makers in government and industry about CI dependencies and
interdependencies, and the flow-on consequences of a failure in one sector.

55
The CIPMA Program involved modelling, simulation and analysis of the
primary dependencies and interdependencies and flow-on consequences for
three priority sectors: banking and finance, communications, and energy”
[Geoscience News, Issue 79 September 2005] .
Comment: There was little effective outcome – inter-Government agency
activity is difficult!
And then along came COVID19. On 11 March 2020, the Director-General of
the World Health Organisation “made the assessment that COVID-19 can be
characterized as a pandemic”. Since then the pandemic, and the
management of the spread and tracking of the virus, has dominated our lives.
Border security became a critically important issue and cruise ships
highlighted the issue.
In Australia, the Ruby Princess departed Sydney on 8 March for a 13-night
cruise around New Zealand. The cruise was cut short on 15 March and
returned to Sydney arriving on 19 March. The ship disembarked 2,700
passengers later that morning in what some have stated as in a shambolic
way. By 30 March 440 passengers had tested positive for the virus and 5 had
died.
My wife had recovered from a chronic medical condition earlier in the year to
the extent that we were able to go on our first ever cruise to celebrate our 50th
wedding anniversary. So, on 10 March we departed Melbourne for what was
to be a 13-night cruise around New Zealand on the Golden Princess.
Soon after sailing [I do not know the exact day], three passengers were
quarantined on-board after one was suspected of having the coronavirus
when they began developing symptoms. [We were told that they had arrived
in Melbourne on an international flight from Los Angeles that had passengers
on board with suspected symptoms]. At the time of the announcement, the
ship was bound for Akaroa (Christchurch) and proceeded to anchor in Akaroa
Harbour to allow for New Zealand medical officials to test the guests, who
ultimately tested negative. The remainder of the voyage was subsequently
cancelled and the ship was cleared to return to Melbourne, following the
Australian government's ordinance for all cruise ships to return to their
homeports. On 19 March we berthed at 0630 and my wife and I were
scheduled to disembark at 0840. However, we ‘waited’! Victoria medical
officials boarded the ship to test the isolated passengers and records. Finally,
late afternoon the passengers had tested negative and we finally
disembarked.
As for the Ruby Princess, disembarkation was shambolic. The arrival form
was a paper document. Some forms were collected by staff, some were
thrown in bins and some were on the floor. That form would have the
destination of the passenger – critically important information in the
tracing process!

57
I was surprised by this arrival process especially in an important time; i.e. a
pandemic. I recalled that a former Director/CEO of the Australian Geospatial-
Intelligence Organisation, M….. ……… had moved to the Department of
Home Affairs to take the position of Deputy Secretary Intelligence and
Capability. I remember seeing that the Group had Divisions: Information and
Communications Technology; Major Capability; Intelligence; Data; and
Identity and Biometrics. So, I would have thought that the information
systems would have been more advanced. On my return home I did a search
but that group no longer appears in the Border Force organisation structure.
This pandemic has been referred to as a ‘war’ and, as such, we need
better ISR and Command and Control systems.
We need to do better. We must have better decision support systems.
Back to our Fellow in ARKANSAS
“Mapping of the face of the earth is a peace time job. It can be
likened to a fellow in Arkansas. When it was raining, he couldn't
fix the leak in his roof; when it wasn't raining, there was no need
to fix it”.
Recall that in 1946 US Colonel Geo. W. Hansen, Deputy Chief, Photographic
Laboratory, described the state of mapping in the South-West Pacific and
declared “Mapping of the face of the earth is a peace time job”.
“That is about where military mapping stood in 1941 when we
suddenly found ourselves at war. During the previous peace
time years, there was no need for us, in cooperation with other
nations, to map the Solomon Islands, Truk, Okinawa, Tarawa,
New Guinea, the Dutch East Indies, Borneo, French Indo
China, Philippines, Manchuria, or Japan. There was no project
set up in the War Department to do any such mapping in such
far off corners of the globe. It wasn’t raining then – we didn’t
need maps. But all of a sudden in 1941, it started to rain. Unlike
the fellow in Arkansas, we couldn’t say – while it is raining we
cannot fix the roof – we had to produce the maps while the war
was going on, maps which could have been much more easily
obtained during peace time”.
Under the Australian Defence Cooperation Program, the Army Survey Corps
completed many cooperative and collaborative projects with nations in
Australia's area of strategic interest. These projects included ground surveys,
definition of geodetic datums, air photography, and assistance with definition
of Exclusive Economic Zones.

58
The program also included mapping, provision of equipment and technology
transfer and training of officers and technicians. Projects commenced in 1970
in Indonesia and expanded over 25 years to include Solomon Islands, Fiji,
Tonga, Kiribati, Nauru, Tuvalu, Vanuatu and Western Samoa. Technical
Advisers were posted to national survey and mapping organisations in Fiji,
Indonesia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu.

59
The DCP ended in 1994 and two years later the Royal Australian Survey
Corps was dis-established. So, an important capability was lost. Since 1996
we have experienced a disruptive time of delays in capability development.
The mid-1990s and ‘it wasn’t raining”. We can down-size; we can
out-source; we can have organizational changes; we can cut
education and training programs; and we can introduce a whole
host of new terms .
This was prior to East Timor. This was prior to 911. This was prior
to Afghanistan. This was prior to Iraq 2. This was prior to COVID19.
All is well but times were about to change and we were in a position
similar to Colonel Hansen’s time!
Today, we have a capability [a Geospatial Information Infrastructure] that is
decades behind in development and acquisition and we have a range of
contemporary challenges that require the CAPABILITY to model our world
and manage contemporary challenges including natural disasters as for Black
Summer fires and pandemics as for COVID-19.
Firstly, what is CAPABILITY?
In 1996, the Australian Defence Organisation’s Concepts and Capabilities
Committee defined capability as:
Capability is defined as the capacity to achieve a specific effect, in
a nominated operating environment or location, within a specific
degree of notice, and to sustain that effect for a given time.
Capability, as a function of force structure and preparedness, has
as its components:
• Policy and doctrine;
• Organisation and structure;
• Equipment and facilities;
• Preparedness and deployment;
• Personnel including education and training.
The key term used in the major study, the Environmental and
Geographic Information Capability Study, was Military Geographic
Information (MGI). MGI, the product of MC&G (Mapping, Charting
and Geodesy), is the information concerning physical aspects,
resources and artificial features necessary for planning and operations.
This broad definition includes a range of information including
infrastructure, natural terrain features and environmental information,
which, in turn can be subdivided into the following:
• Infrastructure information;
• Hydrographic information;
• Topographic information;
• Aeronautical information;
• Oceanographic information;
• Meteorological information;
• Geodetic information; and
• Imagery.

60
2020s – We have a ‘fellow in Arkansas’ time – There must be a Phoenix
Project!
We need to undertake a Major Capability Study, say, Safeguarding
Australia: The Environmental and Geographic Infrastructure Capability.
We need to build an experimental system as described in my HYDRO18
presentation titled “Back to the Future: OIESS2025, Burrows and Rosetta”.
See a comprehensive description in:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/back-future-oiess2025-burrows-rosetta-robert-
bob-williams/
We, also, need to establish a National Mapping Agency and within that
there needs to be a National Disaster Organisation. Of course this needs to
be appropriately staffed at professional and technical levels.
We need to establish a strategic level organisation in government; an
organisation that has a Whole-of-Government / Whole-of-Nation capability.
The organisation should have an iconic characteristic; as for UK’s Ordnance
Survey.

61
The organisation should have a culture whereby the difficult can be done
immediately whilst the impossible may take a little longer. That culture was
needed when Gough Whitlam promised topographic map coverage of Papua
New Guinea for their independence; with the technology of the day that task
was impossible – it was time for innovation!
The organisation needs staff and leadership with a strong feeling of suitability
for the specialist career or occupation – Vocation. In March 2020 Aurora
Expedition’s Greg Mortimer departed Ushuaia, Argentina for a cruise to
Antarctica. Of 217 people on board 128 contacted COVID19. Mauricio Usme,
a Colombian emergency doctor in Medellín, Colombia, was the ship’s doctor.
The ship’s expedition doctor New Zealander Jeff Green described Mauricio
as “a very moral person with a profound and unshakable moral integrity” and
“’old school’ viewing medicine as a calling, a vocation rather than a job”.
The organisation should also be enduring (not subject to continual change
often influenced by interest groups and technology changes).
videre parare est

Know and Understand Your World: A fellow in Arkansas and a Damaged Home

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (10)

Similar to Know and Understand Your World: A fellow in Arkansas and a Damaged Home

Similar to Know and Understand Your World: A fellow in Arkansas and a Damaged Home (20)

More from Robert (Bob) Williams

More from Robert (Bob) Williams (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Know and Understand Your World: A fellow in Arkansas and a Damaged Home