MROs in the field

[UWONGO2]

I've been chatting with a few folks in my wing about the concept deploying comm guys (MROs) with ground teams in the field. We once had a multi-agency exercise where the ground teams were flown into an extremely remote area by Chinooks that had no radio or phone coverage of any kind. We put a highbird overhead who relayed traffic back to the command post (mission base). The ground teams designated a few of their members as being responsible for comm, but that took them from the search.

I proposed the idea for similar future exercises or missions that we deploy MROs with the ground team. I've heard everything from that's not allowed unless the MRO is also GT qualified to that's fine as long as the MRO doesn't participate in any GT tasks and focuses solely on comm tasks (radio relay, setting up a portable repeater, etc).

Has anyone seen any ground response plan that involves sending MROs with ground teams? Is it even allowed?

[Eclipse]

MROs in the field are a bad idea, they are not trained or equipped to be self-sufficient, which means they are a mission liability.
The same goes for this idea that "mom can drive the team", or "we need an adult on the team so Maj Payne is going just to chaperon".

All GTs are required to be able to properly operate a CAP radio, so they are not "removed from the search", they are performing a necessary function
which is part and parcel of GSAR.

[Brad]

Agreed. A good GTM or especially the GTL will have an understanding on how to operate a CAP radio in the field. As far as communications relay, a good mission base MRO would likely ask, "Any Ground Team that copied Ground Team 4's traffic please relay the message to Mission Base, it was unreadable on this end" or something along those lines.

As far as a portable repeater, unless you're up on a hill or whatnot, you're not going to get the most efficient use of your setup. That's what we have Highbirds for, they have the altitude to effectively repeat radio traffic in areas where the primary repeaters have no coverage for whatever reason.

Besides, I don't think you'd want to be lugging this around in addition to your 24/48/72-hour pack:

[ProdigalJim]

Well, by odd happenstance, I just did more or less that very thing today as part of an annual Wing Comms exercise concurrent with Constant Watch. We took a small ground team, plus a GTM-qualified CUL, a VHF rig, some masts and antennae, a tool box and a generator, humped it all a little bit into the woods and jumped on a directed net.

We had enough gas in the generator to have stayed in business many, many hours if asked. And we were able to hit fairly distant repeaters in our network.

It was pretty cool, and a good demonstration of the ability to deploy remote nodes completely off the grid wherever we might need them.

And with the ice and sleet and snow coming tomorrow, probably little interest in a highbird.

[Eclipse]

Well, by odd happenstance, I just did more or less that very thing today as part of an annual Wing Comms exercise concurrent with Constant Watch. We took a small ground team, plus a GTM-qualified CUL, a VHF rig, some masts and antennae, a tool box and a generator, humped it all a little bit into the woods and jumped on a directed net.

That's the key.

That's not a "field-deployed MRO", that another member of the GT with a specific duty, and if things go FUBAR,
he's expected to be self-sufficient for 24 hours.

My impression is the OP is asking about being able to go with a GT and play Army without doing the other field training
or having the proper equipment, in that case that is literally no different then just letting "anyone" hang with the team.

The only advantage is that are the first ones to be eaten.

[JeffDG]

There's an update coming to the comm es quals.

One will be the addition of "Relay Teams" as a qualification, who will be qualified and trained to operate in the field.

That said, I'd not have an issue with some qualified only as an MRO going with a GT and remaining with the vehicle and doing relay from low-power handhelds to the more powerful mobile sets.

[Brad]

Well, by odd happenstance, I just did more or less that very thing today as part of an annual Wing Comms exercise concurrent with Constant Watch. We took a small ground team, plus a GTM-qualified CUL, a VHF rig, some masts and antennae, a tool box and a generator, humped it all a little bit into the woods and jumped on a directed net.

We had enough gas in the generator to have stayed in business many, many hours if asked. And we were able to hit fairly distant repeaters in our network.

It was pretty cool, and a good demonstration of the ability to deploy remote nodes completely off the grid wherever we might need them.

And with the ice and sleet and snow coming tomorrow, probably little interest in a highbird.

Right, and there's certainly a place for that in an ongoing response mission or a disaster relief mission, but a first-out Ground Team likely won't want to bring all that extra stuff just to locate an ELT or a downed plane or such unless they regularly train on it as part of their "routine" response.

[Eclipse]

And what do you do if things go bad and you have to stay in the field?

Who's feeding Radio Ray?

[Combat_Comm]

I'm playing with a similar idea about a team to set up a hilltop comm site. I'm hoping the new standards don't require a full GTM qual. There are many tasks that wouldn't be needed for such a team. We shall see I guess.

[UWONGO2]

My impression is the OP is asking about being able to go with a GT and play Army without doing the other field training or having the proper equipment, in that case that is literally no different then just letting "anyone" hang with the team.

Your impression of me asking to "play army" is incorrect and I don't know how you could come to that conclusion.

Now I understand why I was warned against visiting this site.

[JeffDG]

And what do you do if things go bad and you have to stay in the field?

Who's feeding Radio Ray?

He has a radio, he can call mission base and have someone come and relieve him.

[UWONGO2]

I'm playing with a similar idea about a team to set up a hilltop comm site. I'm hoping the new standards don't require a full GTM qual. There are many tasks that wouldn't be needed for such a team. We shall see I guess.

That would be great. While I'd like to think it's common sense that sending a MRO into the field means appropriately equipped, but earlier postings in this thread clearly demonstrate that common sense isn't as common as it should be and apparently everything needs to be spelled out in regulation.

Missions that involve dropping ground teams off in the middle of nowhere via helicopter are extremely rare around here (in fact, it's only been done during exercises), but we've seen a lot of challenges when we do. With numerous teams from various agencies on the ground, a comm plan that provides the appropriate interoperability in addition to direct communication with our team members while they're all in the middle of nowhere is not a simple task. Having comm experts on the ground would likely help iron out some of the unforseen gremlins that pop-up, but we currently do not have any comm experts on our ground teams (and none are interested in becoming one). It seems silly to require a ground team certification for a MRO who has no plans or desire to serve in a ground team capcity. If we need requirements to include a deployed MRO needs to self-sufficient, then so be it, but again, I go back to the common sense concept.

I'm a huge proponent of comm training that involves the bare minimum of what an end user needs to know to effectively operate the radio and typically that's all you need in a ground team member. That said, when you're running one or two local nets plus the link to the high bird and another for CAP only coordination, you've likely surpassed the skill set of most GT members. There are reasons why police departments will deploy dispatchers in their mobile command posts. Cops use radios everyday and do just fine, but most won't have the skill set to handle dispatcher-type duties.

It's unlikely I'd ever volunteer to leave the comforts of the command post, but the idea of sending comm people into the field as needed seemed like an idea worth discussing.

[JeffDG]

The new comm curriculum that I've seen includes a "3 level" RDO (Radio Operator) qual (MRO will disappear), much like we have GTM3, GTM2 and GTM1.  CUL would also become a 3-level qual, along the lines of the IC qual (with perhaps a dozen or 2 dozen CUL1's nationwide).  Finally, there would be a new "Radio Relay Team" qualification, and my memory is fuzzy, but I think it was a 3-level as well.

For the relay teams, they would be qualified to operate "in the field".  I don't think they need GTM qualification, they can pack food and such in the vehicle that they're operating the relay from, and not have to pack it with them.

[Eclipse]

And what do you do if things go bad and you have to stay in the field?

Who's feeding Radio Ray?

He has a radio, he can call mission base and have someone come and relieve him.

If he's that close, then he's not needed.

Missions that involve dropping ground teams off in the middle of nowhere via helicopter are extremely rare around here (in fact, it's only been done during exercises), but we've seen a lot of challenges when we do. With numerous teams from various agencies on the ground, a comm plan that provides the appropriate interoperability in addition to direct communication with our team members while they're all in the middle of nowhere is not a simple task. Having comm experts on the ground would likely help iron out some of the unforseen gremlins that pop-up, but we currently do not have any comm experts on our ground teams (and none are interested in becoming one).

What's the idea here?  Program radios in the field?

A "comm expert" isn't going to have anything to do day-of if that interoperability hasn't been established well in advance at much higher levels.
If necessary, field expediency is going to mean that one of the agencies hands us a radio, or we hand them one of ours, and we communicate,
or more appropriately the communications are relayed through the ICP, miles away, where robust infrastructure is located.

I'm a huge proponent of comm training that involves the bare minimum of what an end user needs to know to effectively operate the radio and typically that's all you need in a ground team member. That said, when you're running one or two local nets plus the link to the high bird and another for CAP only coordination, you've likely surpassed the skill set of most GT members. There are reasons why police departments will deploy dispatchers in their mobile command posts. Cops use radios everyday and do just fine, but most won't have the skill set to handle dispatcher-type duties.

Local nets?  This isn't a Field day this is a SAR/DR mission.  A ground team is out there for a reason, search or help, nothing else.
The team needs comms for only one thing - command and control.  "Where are you, what are you doing?"

[Eclipse]

For the relay teams, they would be qualified to operate "in the field".  I don't think they need GTM qualification, they can pack food and such in the vehicle that they're operating the relay from, and not have to pack it with them.

That's reasonable, but a different conversation, also doesn't exist today.

[JeffDG]

For the relay teams, they would be qualified to operate "in the field".  I don't think they need GTM qualification, they can pack food and such in the vehicle that they're operating the relay from, and not have to pack it with them.

That's reasonable, but a different conversation, also doesn't exist today.

I'm going off memory of what was presented at the national conference...they had a dial-in/webex type thing for Wing DCs to see the Communication presentation.  It seemed close to release, but then again, the annual National Communications plan is over a year late at this point too.

The slides from that presentation are available, just check with your DC (they're in the DC Documents and Downloads section on the Communications website)...I've asked and been given clearance to share them within my wing (but this is obviously not a "CAP" owned system...)

[Brad]

There are reasons why police departments will deploy dispatchers in their mobile command posts. Cops use radios everyday and do just fine, but most won't have the skill set to handle dispatcher-type duties.

It's unlikely I'd ever volunteer to leave the comforts of the command post, but the idea of sending comm people into the field as needed seemed like an idea worth discussing.

Not sure how they do it in your neck of the woods, but if I'm needed for some mass casualty or other mutual-aid response, if I don't report to my regular dispatch work location then I likely get told to go to the county EMD facility. We have road Troopers come in to pass information directly to us and give us a "tactical mindset" on what to say to the Troopers in the field during large scale incidents, but we don't go out in the field at a mobile command post....mainly because that would leave the phones that the public calls in on unattended.

Plus the IC having to pass a message to the mission base MRO who has to pass it to the MRO operator in the field who has to then pass it to the GTL only increases the likelihood of the message becoming distorted in both meaning and reception. You're adding an unnecessary link. Am I advocating against MCPs? No. In fact we have two FEMA trailers we converted into mobile comms trailers, and I've personally set one up at Encampment before. But my role there was strictly Communications, not that plus deploying out with the ground teams on their SAREX.

In short, Comms needs to worry about Comms, and GT needs to worry about GT. When you add advance comms topics to a front-line GT deployment, then you get the inevitable wave of wireheads who raise their hands eager to show their stuff (for some reason that's a thing with us comms folks...) then they get out there in the sticks and don't know what to do because they're too used to sitting behind a base radio (with a computer these days) or a comfortable awning tent setup at your local ham field day. Ground Team is a different beast, I've participated in a couple of exercises and decided it's not for me. I will happily stick to running the radio from the base or doing the Mission Observer thing.

[Eclipse]

Just like HRO, there's been a fair amount of discussion in my wing about relay stations, and similar.

Typical of CAP, the field has been putting MROs in the right seat on highbird missions for years
(got a few bladder-killers at 10k myself),  by the time someone finally realizes that we need a rating for
this, they get airbone repeaters deployed to the field, essentially negating the need.

[ol'fido]

Unless you need a high bird and the only available aircraft isn't wired for it. BTDT. Recently.

[Eclipse]

Unless you need a high bird and the only available aircraft isn't wired for it. BTDT. Recently.

We're working that.