Flash Mirror idea

[Smithsonia]

An additional item that was slowing the comm traffic was/is:
In an mixed group of County SAR and CAP Ground Teams you will find some on Lat/Lons and some on UTM references. It is usually the IC shack/Comm Shacks responsibility to sort this out.

The plane isn't equipped to do the sorting and in the turbulence of the mountains will find it extremely difficult. So in the specific case of the SAREX I was on... one of the comm guys did it. It took time away from his comm duties. At this moment comm traffic stacked up. Once again an easy solution is the flash mirror and report in "CAPFlight 49Echo... Circling Ground Team 3 awaiting instructions."

[Smithsonia]

I have now done 2 low light experiments. One in the early morning less than an hour after sunrise and today's on a cloudy day. The target was stationary as was the photographer. We were on a mountain hillside and 1500 ft apart.

I brought several signaling devices and recorded the following results ranking these results in visibility top to bottom. (first to last place)

1. Shiny Aluminum pie plates (4 for $2.49 at the Grocery store)
2. Back of a license plate (not shiny taken from a car I traded in a few years ago)
3. Official Air Force Rescue Mirror (brand new from Army Navy Store. $11.29)
4. Shiny aluminum mirror. (standard camping supply - $2.49)
5. CDs/DVDs... that said if you were stuck in a car with 50 CDs on board... you could weaponize
   your signaling device and shoot the plane down with a light beam. SIZE MATTERS IN LOW LIGHT.

In the conditions I was in I could not really detect the red and we colored each item red dry erase marker for a second test. So in low light - red was a waste of time.

As a result - I am putting the cheap shiny aluminum (like heavy tin foil) pie plates in my 24 hour kit.

In low light size matters and 4 of these will make a difference. The weight is negligible. In low light, and provided that you are in a team -- Everybody should signal with everything they've got in order to be seen. Punch a hole in the center and I think you'll get the best low light results.
Once again, in low light, size matters. 4 PIE PLATES WORKS BEST.

Also regarding color of clothing. My team member was in a standard Orange Safety Vest with yellow striping and reflective tapes. He was standing next to a smaller woman in a bright white sweat-shirt. She was taking pictures with a flash camera. She was much much more visible than he was.

The flashes from her camera were clearly visible a 1500 ft. His flashes from the various reflectors were visible only occasionally. So put a cheap flash camera in your kit too. Next I'll do full light test.

[RiverAux]

strobe light.

[Smithsonia]

RiverAux;
I don't have a strobe light but I can see it's use on a cloudy day. The flash camera is in many peoples kit. It is directable... as in take a picture of the nice red/white/and blue plane... no take as many pictures as you can as fast as you can. it worked better than anything else. We tried rescue lasers too. In daylight, nothing. Not even a faint glow. That said, it could be that the thing put my eye out and I didn't know.

[RiverAux]

Many people carry them in their kits anyway for use at night.  If they're seeing a camera flash during daylight, they should be able to see a strobe light flash even better (never tested it though).  I think there are also colored strobe lights available to address your other issues, but have not tested them for how well the colors might show during the day or night. 

[Smithsonia]

RiverAux;
I looked at strobes but for another purpose. There are dozens of variations in size, color, battery configuration, and weight. I got lost before I bought. I didn't use it for this other purpose but did shop it.

I am looking for a KISS solution in this case. We have a SAREX next week. I am going to form a line with each team member exactly the same distance apart, (5 or 10ft apart in one line shinning 4 plates) each with a flash (pie pan) this uniformity in size of the reflection and distance in spacing does not occur in Nature. This may be a solution. We won't know until we try... but we are going to try.

Also we are going to have the whole team stand close together with their various flash mirrors that they have in their kit... then flash like fools... and see how that does. I'll update this thread in 8 days with the results. ED O

[SJFedor]

I experimented this morning with the flash mirror idea above.

SO far I can't tell the difference between a 25 cent DVD and a $10 survival mirror at distance. DVDs (at least blank ones) are cheaper than survival mirrors. Plus DVDs come with a nifty hole in the center for sighting.

The morning sun seems to make everything yellowish. I'll try again in a few hours.

But, as a mission pilot and GTL, I can tell you right now that I can definitely tell the difference between a DVD/CD and a survival mirror from 1000' AGL. Mirror gets a lot more attention.

Honestly, you've got multiple options. Your easiest one is to clear off the main communications channel and go to another channel to do your on-scene coordination with the aircraft, instead of trying to relay from point to point to point through mission comms. There's no reason the GT can't, or shouldn't be, talking direct to the aircraft when they're linked up or trying to link up. We do the same thing on the ambulance. We have the dispatch channel where most of the pertinant talking happens relating to the call. If we have extra traffic or need to coordinate w/ another truck, fire, PD, or the shift supervisor, instead of tying up the main channel, that has anywhere from 10-16 trucks on it, we pop over to another one.

You're thinking KISS? Use multiple channels, that's the simplest way. And if you have non-CAP teams out there as well, there's other frequencies that can be used. Get your non-CAP teams equipped with a simple airband radio, and they can talk on 122.9, 123.1, or 123.45.

[Smithsonia]

SJFedor;

I did a field test today. We used a good survival mirror and a CD/DVD and I reported the result above. Did you miss that?

I ranked today's results in order. You may read everything that I have written. AS a Pilot (although not a CAP pilot but an Observer) and Ground Team member myself I am conducting this experiment in a methodical manner.

Some days because of atmospherics the results change. I have included the changes and reported the differences.

Thanks for the COMM suggestion. Once again this is NOT A COMM fix. It is a COMM smoother (as in momentary work around). I've been on 8 missions or SAREXs in the last 4 months. Six with Ground teams involved. All had different comm teams and plans, ICs, planning groups, ops, pilots/crews and various SAR teams were involved. All teams were good or at least were doing relatively well. Many of the teams were absolutely superior.

At some point we have to have a solution for the IC... a protocol while we wait for Comm to clear.

Comm in the field will always always go to its failure point. It can be because of comm shack clogs up, too much traffic on freq, lost comm (which then gets repeated calls trying to find that team, while everyone else stands by), everybody calling for their half-hour report-ins at the same time, OR, as teams join up in an ever expanding mission... a new comm plan is impossible to brief with teams already in the field.

So if you don't like what I suggest -- ignore it. OR use it if you need it. OR, keep repeating to yourself, "it doesn't happen". I can't do any more than offer solutions. I'm working on the problem
but I am not the problem. I have to give the IC a solution. You may always do as you see fit.

[SJFedor]

I hear what you're saying Ed, and I'm not criticizing your work. However, you're saying you're trying to find a "Comm smoother (as in momentary work around)" while comm clears.

Instead of working around the problem, why don't you work to fix the actual problem? If comm is a bottleneck, work to fix the bottleneck, not circumvent it.

Signal mirrors have their place in what we do, but I wouldn't heavily rely on it. You, as a GTM, should know that it's hard, if not impossible, to use them in more heavily wooded areas (which I would imagine a good chunk of Colorado is).

All that we're saying is that you may find it easier to not try and reinvent the wheel on this one. Signal mirrors are good as a backup, along with other signaling devices (panels, et al) but don't focus on that too much.

For example, you're having some issues, especially with terrain and comm getting clogged. Here's some things you can do:

1) Separate air and ground traffic on different frequencies. Put your birds on channel 1, ground assets on 2. If you need it, put up a high bird to support each channel. Personally, airmobile repeaters are a lot more practical in high tempo operations. Put your channel operators (MROs at base) next to each other. If you have to put a GT and a bird together, you've got 2 more channels to use, have them both go to that channel to work out what they have to do.

2) Brief loss comms procedures from the easier to remember and execute on down. Don't start with signal mirrors and panels if you've got some other options. Airband radios, talking to the GT through their DF, and simply checking your own equipment are all good choices. However, you're right, training w/ the hard stuff is always a good idea sometimes as well. Don't dwell on it too much though.

3) Brief your comm plans with expanding capability. Don't draft your comm plan with just 2 aircraft and a GT in mind if you think there's even a remote possibility of it expanding. Remember the 6 "P's"

There's plenty of other options here. It all really depends on what you're trying to do. Again, i'm not trying to hate on you here, but there's a lot of people with a lot more field experience here who can give you lots of different options besides what you're coming up with.

[RiverAux]

SJ, I think you may be with me in trying to understand how visual identification of ground teams by an airplane can solve a comm problem.  It sounds like this is a quite complicated operation and I commend them getting involved in something like that and it seems like I'm just not understanding this particular approach to the problem. 

[SJFedor]

SJ, I think you may be with me in trying to understand how visual identification of ground teams by an airplane can solve a comm problem.  It sounds like this is a quite complicated operation and I commend them getting involved in something like that and it seems like I'm just not understanding this particular approach to the problem.

Absolutely. I love doing "lost comms" sorties because they're challenging, and usually a lot of fun, when a GT and an airplane get to play together w/o using the radios. But again Ed, it seems like you're making this a lot more drawn out and complex than it really needs to be.

[Short Field]

From the Equpped to Survive website: http://www.equipped.org/
==============================================
NOTE: We are often asked about, or see the recommendation online and elsewhere, the use of a CD-ROM as signal mirror. It is shinny, reflects light, has a hole in the center, and thus looks somewhat like a signal mirror. Moreover, many of us have lots of useless CDs around, AOL continues to send many of more of them, thus its appeal.

In tests a CD proved to be only about 20%-25% as effective (distance and brightness at distance, judged subjectively) as a 3 x 5 mil-spec plastic signal mirror, a bit more effective, but not even 50% compared to a small 2 x 3 mil-spec plastic signal mirror. It would compare worse against higher quality mirrors.

From an operational persepctive, in an After-Action Report of a major SAREX (Search and Rescue Training Exercise) conducted in 2001 by the Colorado Wing of the Civil Air Patrol, the conclusions were, "that "victims" who had never used a signal mirror (with the aiming hole in the middle) were able to use them effectively, while CD's (AOL etc.) are useless as signal mirrors."

It also has the disadvantage of requiring two hands to aim it as compared to a signal mirror with an integrated aiming device, the hole is not an aiming device. The mil-spec plastic mirrors also float, the CD may or may not, and certainly not as well. Given that a good signal mirror is not very expensive and is the most effective daytime (sunlight) signaling device, using a CD hardly seems worth the savings.

Not to say you couldn't be rescued using a CD. People have been rescued using the hologram on a credit card to signal with and the CD is far superior to that small reflective surface. A CD makes a decent improvised signal mirror compared to many other options and since they are essentially free, it may be worth carrying some for other members of your crew or party to use, multiplying your signaling capability. However, we cannot recommend a CD as a primary survival signaling device.

[Smithsonia]

It is easy and cheap to experiment. BUT, it needs to be done in a methodical manner, one piece at a time. Then glued together and tested in its compositional form. I am giving test results here.

You're conclusions and ideas are appreciated: Some one who wants to test panels? Go test panels. Put the results here too. I am working out one thing at a time right now. I'll work on more and add it to the pile as soon as I can. Today I picked up some valuable information about seeing white and a flash camera on a cloudy day v seeing blaze orange and a reflector. It wasn't part of the experiment but it is part of the results. Use if you like. Disregard if you don't.

I am not suggesting I have all the answers. I am suggesting that the results give me more information than speculation does. I am for fixing problems that I encounter, through experimentation and knowledge. I am also for testing what I/we believe to be true but which in fact may not be true. Anyone tried that WW2 shark repellent lately? It actually attracts sharks. The Navy owned that stuff for 40 years before Drs. Bill Hansey and Rusty Moore proved them wrong.

In the same vein here's some hikers last week rescued in Colorado by using flash mirrors.
http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_13044496

Anyway, validated opinions are worth something. Complaints aren't. I am not asking for your time or treasure. I'm not asking for CAPs either. We'll do more tests next week. Stay tuned if you like.

[SJFedor]

My apologies, I didn't realize this was your personal experiment blog.

And by the way, most of the people on here are not complaining, they are giving validated opinions. And considering that most people in here have been mission rated longer than you've been in, we might have something to share on the topic.

[heliodoc]

Nothing wrong with a new idea from someone not in CAP for more than "X" yrs

Nothing wrong with mission rated folks chiming in 

NOTHING wrong with folks who want to share

Nothing detected as a personal experiment blog

[SJFedor]

Nothing detected as a personal experiment blog

Well...

Anyway, validated opinions are worth something. Complaints aren't. I am not asking for your time or treasure. I'm not asking for CAPs either. We'll do more tests next week. Stay tuned if you like.

I take that as a nice way of him telling me to shut up and color. And yes, nothing wrong with new ideas, but, in true CAPTalk form, it's a solution looking for a problem.

[Smithsonia]

SJFedor;
If you are not experiencing the problem, and you've said so in the previous postings to this one, then you have no information to give. You have opinion about the problem. Got it. Thanks.

By the way - I am not heavily interested in my opinion either - I'm stating a premise upon which I intend to conduct experiments. Those experiments are under way.

I am interested in the problem. I am interested in the solution. In between those two; I am interested in the experiment.