The Future of UDF...?

[lordmonar]

No doubt.  But that's still a far cry from "CAP will be out of the ELT business in a few years!"

No..that will never happen.  We will still have to do ramp checks and planes will still fall out of the sky.  But we may be put out of a job once the level of work falls below the point where we need to have a dedicated fleet of aircraft and personnel on standby to do them.

It is simply a cost/benifit analysis.

To stave this off we have to do it better and cheaper than anyone else for as long as we can.  We need to improve our relationships with local and state level agencies.  Being in close with the USAF is all well and good....but if the local sherrif or state emergency services director does not know or trust our capabilities we will never get the call.

[Dragoon]

The faster/cheaper point is well taken.

While I'm a big fan of getting closer to local ES authorities, I'm not sure that effects the ELT mission.  That goes straight from the satellites to AFRCC to us.  Of course, there's always the chance that a state (like Washington did) will decide that they want someone other than CAP to be the primary ELT chaser in their area.  But that normally only comes if we really really piss them off (like Washington did)

But getting more connected locally will give us more missions which may help justify the current fleet size when things get a bit more sparse on the ELT side.

[RiverAux]

Where the satellite info goes depends on what agreement the AFRCC has with each individual state.  They do not automatically call CAP in all cases. 

[sardak]

I've always wondered about the registration of 406 GPS's.  For example, when I sell the plane, are there safeguards to make sure the GPS registration gets moved to the new guy?  Or when I move or change my phone number, how do they know?

The government is trying to make it as easy as possible.  406 beacon (ELT, EPIRB, PLB) registration is done on the Internet at http://www.beaconregistration.noaa.gov/
However, some owners don't register because this is one more way that Big Brother can track you.  Which, well, is the whole idea.  Federal law also requires registration.  But if you never set off the beacon, no one knows if it's registered or not.

An owner can go in and update the information as often as desired.  PLB owners have been known to update their information with trip itineraries.  The system also reminds a registered owner every two years to check the information. 

Mike

[brasda91]

There are many who are calling the future of UDF into question.  With advances in ELT technology and continued advancement in GPS it seems that call outs are 0300 hrs to go to some GOD forsaken little airstrip my be numbers. 

DNALL has expressed the date of 2009.  This got me thinking...

1) There are those that seem to the that CAP's UDF is specifically for false alarms.

2) UDF and its purpose will have to evolve.

It is from here I would like to solicit speculations...

I see UDF as becoming more of a tool of a search than a search itself.

For example, and I know there may be issues with this at current.

Let say a aircraft goes down in an isolated wooded area or other area of difficult under developed status.  Could an aircrew drop an ELT-like beacon from an aircraft to assist in guiding a ground team to that position? Thus a gorund team woudl have to have a LEADER, a team memebers and a UDF member as well.

In a world were an ELT search of the type we do now would better be serviced by a phone call to the aircraft's owner or airport manager from some GROUP LEVEL OFFICER or even directly from AFRCC...would such a skill be possible in the manner I described?

If not, propose sepcultation of the future of UDF...

Hello everybody.  I have been more of a Patron member than an Active member the last couple of years.  I'm starting to get back into the swing of things.  Has there been some changes/or suggestions to the use of UDF teams?  I noticed on my 101 that my UDF qualification was gone (everything else is still current).  What is the current news with ES?

[DNall]

No doubt.  But that's still a far cry from "CAP will be out of the ELT business in a few years!"

No..that will never happen.  We will still have to do ramp checks and planes will still fall out of the sky.  But we may be put out of a job once the level of work falls below the point where we need to have a dedicated fleet of aircraft and personnel on standby to do them.

It is simply a cost/benifit analysis.

To stave this off we have to do it better and cheaper than anyone else for as long as we can.  We need to improve our relationships with local and state level agencies.  Being in close with the USAF is all well and good....but if the local sherrif or state emergency services director does not know or trust our capabilities we will never get the call.

With respect... I mean you're not wrong, but I think we need to do that stuff TOO, not first. Doing a better job w/ ELTs may keep us alive a little longer as the work trickles away, but it doesn't secure the future. At some point it's eacier to give DF's & planes to the state & let them deal with it. Actually, we're already past that point, but at some point you can't justify keeping CAP in business just cause it does theis AND cadet programs.

I don't know what the local sherriff is going to do for you. We did something like 360 ELT searches last year, about average. How many missing persons searches you think you can come up with? Or disaster work? The volumen between the two is low, and both REQUIRE NIMS certification, which very soon is going to have to be verifies & documented by FEMA on a card they issue you. Soon as you go that direction, PT test & all, CAP takea  bit of a turn don't cha think? When you get up under those standards then you can do quite a bit of other stuff too. It's still going to be more training & fewer missions, but the missions will be more important front line type stuff.

All that's fine & dandy, we should do everything just mentioned. However, not one bit of it has anything to do with the AF & so plugs in as ZERO in that cost benefit analysis. That's a problem, a big honkin massive problem. That's going to mean CAP adapting to another kind of business. Lots of HLS/HLD flying is what we'd like to do, but we're going to have to tighten up w/ AF to get that work & find other things we can do for them too. I mean there ain't no HLD GT work to be had.

[Ricochet13]

Here's a thought on UDF teams as they have a couple of advantages for initial deployment. 

One, UDF teams require a minimum of two members while GND Teams require a minimum of four members.  That makes their use a little more agile in remote areas for any initial search while reinforcements or an separate GND Team can be mobilized and placed in position if needed. 

Two, they provide a good one-on-one learning environment for officers and cadets new to ES and its procedures and get them out into the field enviironment.

Similar to MS in the aircrews.  They are not expected to do everything, but rather learn through an introductory experience. 

Being UDF qualified myself I have no great desire to move to GTM.  Communications or Planning are where I normally participate on missions.  It is nice however, to get into the field.  Reminds me of what the folks with their "boots on the ground" go through.  So far only beacons . . . but always mindful it may turn out to be the "real thing" one day.

Oh . . . and I do go "into the woods" when necessary.  It's pretty remote where I live.  My vehicles has my snowshoes mounted on a rack in the back right now as a matter of fact.

[Dragoon]

How many missing persons searches you think you can come up with? Or disaster work? The volumen between the two is low, and both REQUIRE NIMS certification, which very soon is going to have to be verifies & documented by FEMA on a card they issue you.

I think you're moving way too fast here.  Most missing person searches are executed and funded locally.  I can't see any requirement to NIMS.

Also, the NIMS standards are in draft and are evolving,aren't they?  The govt moves slow.  Things will change (and the standards will change) long before "the sky starts falling" and we get cut off.  Plus, if there is ANY cost involved in the certs, rest assured state assets will raise holy hell unless funds come from on high to pay for it.

That said, when something does come out that is official, CAP should (and I think will) attempt to get in on it early, if only to show that we are team players.

[sardak]

Local SAR incidents do not require NIMS compliance, certification, credentialing or anything else.

NIMS compliance is required for federal grants and participation on "incidents of national significance."  A local agency (e.g. sheriff's office) needs to be NIMS compliant to receive federal grants.  The SO may require its local SAR group to be NIMS compliant but that is the SO's call, not the feds.

Now, if an incident of national significance occurs in a county where the local SAR group is not NIMS compliant, the feds can keep the local agency from participating because the feds are in charge of the incident.  But the ability for the feds to keep a local agency from participating exists today and pre-dates NIMS.

EMAC (Emergency Management Assistance Compact) which is the non-federal system for states to request mutual aid from other states, may require deployed resources to be NIMs compliant.  That remains to be seen, but is likely.

Look at the need for SAR resources to be deployed nationally.  Excluding hurricanes and possibly some multi-state tornado outbreaks, there has been only one SAR incident of national significance, the shuttle Columbia recovery.

The FEMA resource typing documents are not drafts.  They have been in effect for a couple of years.

The NIMS credentialing document for SAR ("job titles") has not been adopted yet.  The public review period on that closed January 15 so the working group has hardly gotten started on reviewing the comments.

As for FEMA issuing credentials, this is from the NIC Credentialing FAQs.

Q8.
Will DHS/FEMA issue credentials?
No. Current governmental and non-governmental credentialing bodies at the federal, state, territorial and local levels will continue to issue credentials. Many of these credentialing systems are rooted in state licensure statutes and other well-established requirements and processes. Where no processes or requirements presently exist, those elements listed in Q6 will be important for participation in a national system.

Q6.
What are the requirements for a national credentialing system?
A national credentialing system must:
• Function within existing federal, state, tribal and local identification and qualification protocols, where feasible;
• Not place undue burden on federal, state, tribal or local governments;
• Support (primarily) interstate augmentation of state and local resources;
• Conform to ICS protocols; and
• Use current credentialing emergency responder systems, where possible.

Now the skeptics in the crowd may believe that someday the feds will cram compliance and credentialing down everyone's throat anyway, regardless of federal funding, incident type or what is posted on a website.  Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion.

Mike

[RiverAux]

Part of NIMS is a requirement that state governments become compliant with it, so yes, it will be involved in just about any incident you can think of.