New CAP Gridded Sectionals

[starshippe]

   downloadable sectionals, and a lot of other neat stuff, can be found at

http://www.cap-es.net/

   it would have been nice if both systems had been shown on the chart, but there are many conversion sheets available.

bill

[RiverAux]

If you're using the new system, how are you keeping track of where you planes are and have been?  I'm curious.

[LGM30GMCC]

Same way you could on the old system. Keep a list with Lat/Long/ABCD on it. Same as if you are using Sectionaly XYZ Grid 123.

[RiverAux]

So, you're not mapping out where your planes have been or are at?  Trying to do it all by looking at a list and then interpreting in your head the proximity of the planes to each other?

[jeders]

So, you're not mapping out where your planes have been or are at?  Trying to do it all by looking at a list and then interpreting in your head the proximity of the planes to each other?

Planning makes a list of grids to search. Ops assigns the grids to be searched. Once a grid is searched you check it off the list. Lather, rinse, repeat.

[starshippe]

   i keep a "sticky" tab marker on the main map in the grid or area that an aircraft is in. i use blue tabs for aircraft and green tabs for ground teams. they measure about 3/4 by one inch, and come in dispensers, available at any office supply. 
   u can use a sectional, and scotch tape, if ur careful when u remove the tape. i mark the aircraft i.d. on the tape, or the ground team number. fold back the tape on one end to make it easier to remove.

bill

[vento]

Recently I heard at least twice from members telling me that in Texas they only use the Cell Grid system and don't even teach the conventional CAP Grid system anymore. Since it is only hearsay, I would like to ask our TXWG members if this is really the case? If so, how are SQTRs signed off?

Thanks!

[jeders]

Recently I heard at least twice from members telling me that in Texas they only use the Cell Grid system and don't even teach the conventional CAP Grid system anymore. Since it is only hearsay, I would like to ask our TXWG members if this is really the case? If so, how are SQTRs signed off?

Thanks!

I don't know about other TXWG SETs, but I evaluate them on the old CAP grid system which shouldn't be used by anyone during the initial qual. If they dump it from there memory 3 seconds after I pass them, That's fine with me; because in all my time I've never actually used it, I always use the "new" grid system.

ETA: When I'm teaching instead of evaluating, I spend about 30 seconds to a minute discussing the old CAP grid system that no one should be using.

[a2capt]

That -no one should- be using?  Where is the direction from NHQ that says we "should not be" using it?

That's almost like the whole PAWG Ranger thing to me. A parallel universe of NIH syndrome.

In the case of PAWG, we've got NHQ telling us that we are not first responders, we are not medics, and PAWG is training a whole program that is based on that very thing.

This is the kind of stuff the organization needs to work on as a whole.

[Eclipse]

As long as it's part of the national curriculum, it's still a part of CAP parlance, so you still need to be aware of it on at least a cursory level.
It's still on renewal tasks, so I'll have to pretend it's relevent for a few minutes to get my star lit up again.

With that said, it's never been in much use in the 14 years I've been in CAP, and certainly hasn't been relevent during any mission or training
in recent memory.

No one with any sense would deploy people or report their position with a grid system when everyone has a GPS with moving map display in front of them.

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

It's all we use out here in the West.  Don't use the "new" grid system.

[jeders]

That -no one should- be using?  Where is the direction from NHQ that says we "should not be" using it?

If we were to use it locally, our customers would not know where we were talking about. As far as I can tell, the "New" system is standard in the SAR industry and is what we should be using. That NHQ has perpetuated the old way as a proprietary grid system is irrelevant, and hopefully it will be going away. If you are exclusively using the old system, you are only hurting yourselves.

[sardak]

There are no standard grid systems in the SAR industry. Here are the major choices:
"Point systems"
Lat/Lon
UTM
USNG
MGRS

"Area Systems"
GARS
Old CAP  grids
New CAP grids

In decades of doing this, in different parts of the country, and having been on national SAR committees, the only groups using the two CAP grid systems are AFRCC and CAP. GARS was developed as an airspace deconfliction system, and a few years ago AFRCC proposed replacing both CAP grid systems with it. The National Search and Rescue Committee (NSARC) now lists GARS only as a system for area organization and accountability.

The National SAR Supplement (NSP) says this about the old CAP grid system (no mention of the new system) in Appendix E, Gridding:
E.1 The standard sectional aeronautical chart and the following grid identifications system is used by CAP when coordinating missions with the AFRCC and other agencies. CAP does not preclude the use of local procedures where they are deemed necessary or more practicable. Many missions are "local" in nature, and local procedures may be highly efficient and effective in the management of SAR resources within a defined geographical boundary.

The Land SAR and Catastrophic SAR Addendums to the NSP list for land SAR responders USNG first, lat/lon second, and for aeronautical responders the two systems are swapped. For airspace deconfliction lat/lon is listed as the only system.

The CAP grid systems, old and new, are CAP's last grasp at living in its own world.

Mike

[vento]

Regardless of the current CAP grid system or the proposed Cell grid system, I am a firm believer that we should: "Say what we do" AND "Do what we say". If there is a supp from the Wing then fine, otherwise is just applying double standards and introducing inconsistencies.

[SunDog]

My Wing uses CAP grids, but I'm not sure why, except maybe because we always have? Our Stan Eval also insists on a "pilotage" grid search on a Form 91, no electronic aids to be used.

The Form 91 states "Locate the grid (or starting point)", but every two years, we go out and fly at least part of grid using pilotage, because "it's good practice".

It is good fun, and if the grid is on a tac chart, pretty easy. Scale on a sectional makes it less fun. I guess if I lost my panel mount GPS, iPad/Foreflight, and VOR/DME electrons (or couldn't receive) we could soldier on with Mark 1 eyeball. You'd think a checkride would concentrate on more real world scenarios, but what the heck, the checkride is funded.

I guess our ICP might be converting our system to a customer's when reporting, or if it's imaging, the point lat/long is universal and not an issue. But it might get real awkward if we mix folks from diffrent Wings on a big mission, and we aren't all using the same system. Might exacerbate the usual FUD  in the ICP. .

[Eclipse]

[vento]

^^^ Love the little guy with the shotgun standing guard, which agency is he with?