ES Taskbooks -- do they govern operations or just training?

[RiverAux]

Everybody is familiar with all the various taskbooks and reference manuals that are in use for training people in various CAP ES specialties.  Every now and again on this board someone makes a reference to something in a task guide as if it is a regulation that must be followed. 

For example, Task 0001 in the GT/UDF task book lists the minimum required equipment for a 24-hour pack, including a BDU (or presumably a BBDU) uniform.  Obviously, you need to posses this equipment to receive a pass on that part of the task evaluation. 

Sticking with this example, does this actually mean that you are required to wear BDUs on ground team/UDF missions?  Obviously, this is the uniform that makes most sense to wear, but is it required by CAP regulation? 

Actually, I do not think it is.  The way I look at it, the requirements in CAP task guides are what you need to know and do to get qualified in that specialty, but that you are not specifically required to use those exact techniques and methods in CAP operations. 

Yes, I know that some tasks in the CAP guide actually do include material that is discussed in specific CAP regulations.  No question about the validity of those. 

Is there any phrase in any CAP regulation that specifically requires members to follow procedures (or equipment lists as per my example) detailed in a task guide?  I'm not aware of one, but I could be wrong.

[IceNine]

As you mentioned with the exception of specific tasks being listed in a parent organization I don't know of there being any requirement to follow the ideas written in those manuals.

And if there are especially when it comes to techniques, and search patterns that would extremely close minded and restrictive to the execution of a search.

[Eclipse]

The task guide says "BDU" - completion of that task requires you have one.
Completion of the qualification requires completion of the task.

Ergo, BDU's are the uniform for Ground Team members.

Anything else is silly or legalistic.

(though I'm not a big fan, the jumpsuit is "legal" for fieldwork, I have been considering one for my go kit because they are cheap and easy to configure.)

You're also going to walk into the buzzsaw which is the "manual vs. regulation" argument.

[RiverAux]

We have quite a few actual regulations that discuss CAP ES operations and operational requirements and except for where they specifically lay out the training requirements, I know of nothing that requires that anything else be done according to the task guide. 

[Eclipse]

We have quite a few actual regulations that discuss CAP ES operations and operational requirements and except for where they specifically lay out the training requirements, I know of nothing that requires that anything else be done according to the task guide. 

Well good luck with that...

[Trouble]

We have quite a few actual regulations that discuss CAP ES operations and operational requirements and except for where they specifically lay out the training requirements, I know of nothing that requires that anything else be done according to the task guide. 

True. But this goes back to the "One CAP" argument.

The Task Guides are CAP's National standard as far as knowledge and performance requirements for Specialty Qualification. The purpose was and is to ensure that a GTM in Washington State knows how to and can do the same set of skills with the same "base line" level of competence as a GTM in Washington DC.  Anything extra and above that "base line" is a plus and most likely required by a particular State Government Agency or is dictated by the environment that we are operating in.

Therefore the argument could be made, and I would make it, that the Task Guide is the same as a S.O.P., though one must always integrate changes as they come down the pipe, the same as we do with Manuals and Regulations on any other matter. Ex, the task guide says BDU, well they were written prior to the BBDU being an authorized uniform. In fact the BBDU and Utility Uniform were in the wear test phase when the original Task Guides first came out (clone of the 1997 MD Wing GTM & GTL Task Guides).

Now? Should NHQ update the Guides to reflect changes? Yes they should, but obviously they have not done so, though I think common sense would guide us here, if 39-1 authorizes BBDUs in place of BDUs them it should be understood that I can substitute a spare set of BBDUs in my 72 hr pack and meet the requirement for that task..

Also to the extent that a Task Guide can be looked upon as a SOP then it may very well be viewed as a legal document. Now I am by no means a law expert but if the specific color of a GTM's safety vest could effect insurance coverage than how they actually did their job as it related to the GTM Task Guide standards might be just as vital an issue.

[Eclipse]

Excellent response.

That also brings one to ask >why< anyone would deviate enough from the curriculum in the task guides as to need this discussion.

The majority of us learn the majority of the skills through the taskings - in order to pass the tasking, you have to do "X", and "X" is defined within the book. Couple that with the Reference text which as more detail, and I also have a copy of the USAF Survival guide (some of which our curriculum comes from verbatim), and its about all I've ever needed.

Certainly people learn things outside CAP which come into play, but for the most part the curriculum is appropriate and an excellent ongoing guide when you forget something.

So what are you, or one of your people, saying is "ok", that's not in the book(s)?

[Dragoon]

Here's an example.   If a GTL and a couple of GTMs  (who are not UDF qualfieid) are called out for an ELT hunt (a mission for which a UDF team could have been called) there is nothing requiring those individuals to bring all their gear and wear BDUs.

If they hop in a car with an L Per and wearing golf shirts, they are within CAP regs.  This may or may not be the smartest thing to do, but I see nothing in the regs to preclude it.

[davedove]

Here's an example.   If a GTL and a couple of GTMs  (who are not UDF qualfieid) are called out for an ELT hunt (a mission for which a UDF team could have been called) there is nothing requiring those individuals to bring all their gear and wear BDUs.

If they hop in a car with an L Per and wearing golf shirts, they are within CAP regs.  This may or may not be the smartest thing to do, but I see nothing in the regs to preclude it.

Actually, Task 0010 - Prepare Urban DF Team Individual Equipment just calls for a CAP uniform appropriate for the environment, so you would still be within the task book's rules there.

Like was said before, I think the Task Books are basically SOP's.  They should be followed, with some allowance for mission variables.  I couldn't begin to tell you the legal standpoint.

[Dragoon]

Here's an example.   If a GTL and a couple of GTMs  (who are not UDF qualfieid) are called out for an ELT hunt (a mission for which a UDF team could have been called) there is nothing requiring those individuals to bring all their gear and wear BDUs.

If they hop in a car with an L Per and wearing golf shirts, they are within CAP regs.  This may or may not be the smartest thing to do, but I see nothing in the regs to preclude it.

Actually, Task 0010 - Prepare Urban DF Team Individual Equipment just calls for a CAP uniform appropriate for the environment, so you would still be within the task book's rules there.

Ahhh...but as I stated, this is Ground Team who is not UDF qualified.  I don't believe Task 0010 is required for Ground Team folks.

[davedove]

Here's an example.   If a GTL and a couple of GTMs  (who are not UDF qualfieid) are called out for an ELT hunt (a mission for which a UDF team could have been called) there is nothing requiring those individuals to bring all their gear and wear BDUs.

If they hop in a car with an L Per and wearing golf shirts, they are within CAP regs.  This may or may not be the smartest thing to do, but I see nothing in the regs to preclude it.

Actually, Task 0010 - Prepare Urban DF Team Individual Equipment just calls for a CAP uniform appropriate for the environment, so you would still be within the task book's rules there.

Ahhh...but as I stated, this is Ground Team who is not UDF qualified.  I don't believe Task 0010 is required for Ground Team folks.

True, I guess around here folks tend to just get both the qualifications.  In fact, many are working on both at the same time.  Other than beginning trainees, I don't think I've seen anyone here who is only qualified in one or the other.

[Bluelakes 13]

Here's an example.   If a GTL and a couple of GTMs  (who are not UDF qualfieid) are called out for an ELT hunt (a mission for which a UDF team could have been called) there is nothing requiring those individuals to bring all their gear and wear BDUs.

If they hop in a car with an L Per and wearing golf shirts, they are within CAP regs.  This may or may not be the smartest thing to do, but I see nothing in the regs to preclude it.

If three members go hunting for an ELT then, by regs, they are NOT a Ground Team.  Their scope of perfromance should be limited to urban settings only, regardless of what gear they brought or what other qualifications they hold.

[floridacyclist]

It's been my experience that the average CAP member does not yet realize that there is a difference between a GT and UDFT

[Eclipse]

Here's an example.   If a GTL and a couple of GTMs  (who are not UDF qualfieid) are called out for an ELT hunt (a mission for which a UDF team could have been called) there is nothing requiring those individuals to bring all their gear and wear BDUs.

If they hop in a car with an L Per and wearing golf shirts, they are within CAP regs.  This may or may not be the smartest thing to do, but I see nothing in the regs to preclude it.

If three members go hunting for an ELT then, by regs, they are NOT a Ground Team.  Their scope of performance should be limited to urban settings only, regardless of what gear they brought or what other qualifications they hold.

I agree with Jim, and we have an issue here - members roll on a mission, with no checking by the IC as to whether they are qual'ed, or whether their qualifications are appropriate to the task, then after the fact everyone is figuiring out what they should get credit for.

1-3 is a UDF team, with though that qual, they don't go.

Ground Teams are required to have at least 24 hours worth of gear, non negotiable.

Anything else but the above is skirting the intention of the program and some of the built in safety valves.
If I let a GT go out in their golf shirts because we are "sure its on an airport", and then it turns out that the airplane crashed "quiet" with no flame in a field across the street - they can't go in there, and will delay the search while we get a qualified team.

As an aside to this, if you are a qualified or trainee Ground Team Member, and not at >least< a UDF-T, you need to look again at the tasking - the gear is already in your kit, and a phone tree.

Much of the tasking is the same or similar, and complements the GT curriculum.  It's not a "gimme", but its real close.

My strong suggestion to unit CC's is to get their people UDFT fast and early - it means they can start chasing ELT's immediately, and give them ample additional opportunity for further training and tasking.

In two tasks you a real-world CAP asset.

[Dragoon]

Here's an example.   If a GTL and a couple of GTMs  (who are not UDF qualfieid) are called out for an ELT hunt (a mission for which a UDF team could have been called) there is nothing requiring those individuals to bring all their gear and wear BDUs.

If they hop in a car with an L Per and wearing golf shirts, they are within CAP regs.  This may or may not be the smartest thing to do, but I see nothing in the regs to preclude it.

If three members go hunting for an ELT then, by regs, they are NOT a Ground Team.  Their scope of perfromance should be limited to urban settings only, regardless of what gear they brought or what other qualifications they hold.

Show me the reg that states that a GTL and his team are not a ground team when hunting ELTs, please.

[Dragoon]

Anything else but the above is skirting the intention of the program and some of the built in safety valves.
If I let a GT go out in their golf shirts because we are "sure its on an airport", and then it turns out that the airplane crashed "quiet" with no flame in a field across the street - they can't go in there, and will delay the search while we get a qualified team.

Yeah, and if you sent a UDF team out under the same conditions, you'd be in the same boat.  Like I said, it might not be the SMARTEST thing for a GT to go out with less, but it's within regs.

As an aside to this, if you are a qualified or trainee Ground Team Member, and not at >least< a UDF-T, you need to look again at the tasking - the gear is already in your kit, and a phone tree.

Much of the tasking is the same or similar, and complements the GT curriculum.  It's not a "gimme", but its real close.

GTM 3s have no knowledge of triangulation, which ain't always easy to master.  It can take a fair amount of time for a newbie, expecially a cadet, to master magnetic variation conversion and precise plotting of points and azimuths.  A UDF guy needs to know this stuff cold.  I know a fair number of folks who can handle the basic GTM 3 stuff no problem, but can't work with a map to save their lives.   That's why those tasks were moved out of GTM 3 in the first place.

[Trouble]

In MD Wing we encourage (almost at a level of "Require" though I don't remember seeing it in writing) folks to get their UDFT before are concurrent to their GTM3 we will not train you to ONLY be a GTM3.  The thinking is, and especially on the East coast, that a GTM that cannot deploy on a UDF team is not flexible enough to meet the mission requirements in this area.  We get lots of non-distress ELTs and our share of distress searches both ELT and other, so it just makes sense.

Personally I think that National should add the UDF tasks to GTM 2.  Then if you have folks that only want to chase ELTs as a UDF team they can chose that level of Deploy-ability as a UDFT, otherwise by the time a member becomes a GTM 2 they are also UDF team capable.  And require Team Leaders to be a GTM 2 prior to training for GTL.  That would simplify the system and cover all the bases.  Leaving GTM 1 for those SM's and majority of Cadets that do not want to be or cannot be GTLs.

[Trouble]

Anything else but the above is skirting the intention of the program and some of the built in safety valves.
If I let a GT go out in their golf shirts because we are "sure its on an airport", and then it turns out that the airplane crashed "quiet" with no flame in a field across the street - they can't go in there, and will delay the search while we get a qualified team.

Yeah, and if you sent a UDF team out under the same conditions, you'd be in the same boat.  Like I said, it might not be the SMARTEST thing for a GT to go out with less, but it's within regs.

As an aside to this, if you are a qualified or trainee Ground Team Member, and not at >least< a UDF-T, you need to look again at the tasking - the gear is already in your kit, and a phone tree.

Much of the tasking is the same or similar, and complements the GT curriculum.  It's not a "gimme", but its real close.

GTM 3s have no knowledge of triangulation, which ain't always easy to master.  It can take a fair amount of time for a newbie, expecially a cadet, to master magnetic variation conversion and precise plotting of points and azimuths.  A UDF guy needs to know this stuff cold.  I know a fair number of folks who can handle the basic GTM 3 stuff no problem, but can't work with a map to save their lives.   That's why those tasks were moved out of GTM 3 in the first place.

And that is fine. The solution is, and this is an issue to be addressed at the Wing and IC level is that a GTM3 does not deploy on a UDF team without at least being UDF-T qualified. 

On a personal note, IMHO, the Golf Shirt and Grey pants combination or any other non-work type uniform even if it is approved for Flying, and is appropriate for Mission Staff assignments, is not appropriate for any ground based field activity, UDFT or otherwise.  The Blue Utility Uniform should be the minimum for UDF teams.

[davedove]

Here's an example.   If a GTL and a couple of GTMs  (who are not UDF qualfieid) are called out for an ELT hunt (a mission for which a UDF team could have been called) there is nothing requiring those individuals to bring all their gear and wear BDUs.

If they hop in a car with an L Per and wearing golf shirts, they are within CAP regs.  This may or may not be the smartest thing to do, but I see nothing in the regs to preclude it.

If three members go hunting for an ELT then, by regs, they are NOT a Ground Team.  Their scope of perfromance should be limited to urban settings only, regardless of what gear they brought or what other qualifications they hold.

Show me the reg that states that a GTL and his team are not a ground team when hunting ELTs, please.

It's the fact that there are only three members.  The regs require 4 members on a ground team.  Only 2 are required for UDF.

From 60-3:

3) Composition of the ground or urban DF team will vary depending upon the assignment. Ground teams will not be dispatched with fewer than four individuals, and urban DF teams with less than two.

[SAR-EMT1]

In so much as finishing all the tasks gets you certified and eligible to wear something such as a GTM insignia or Observer wings or whatnot, and as those items are in themselves regulated I would assume that the Tasks and therefor the task books are govern'd / Regulated as to operations.

Look at it this way: If the directions in the task guides (TRAINING GUIDES)
isnt to be followed in the Operations/Real World Arena ...
Then WHAT may I ask is the point of that training material in the first place?