GTM1

[airdale12]

I heard something from our group ES Officer that for GTM1 you have to be in the field for something like 3+ days in order to get the Participation in a sortie signed off. Is this true and were can I find this information?

Thanks

[Eclipse]

Not true.

The tasks for GTM1 are clear in the task guide.

"Mission Participation" is traditionally one sortie signed into a real or training mission, however by regulation this doesn't even have to have a mission number assigned to it.

Anything else is a wive's tale or local mandate.  Ask for a citation from either the task guide, 60-series, or a properly approved wing supplement or unit SOP.

[airdale12]

Thank You! That is nice to know!

[N Harmon]

I have heard claims that you can not get sortie credit for GTM1 on a team that is not able to conduct ground operations at that level (ie. one or more members are not GTM1 qualified or trainee). Same with GTM2. Thoughts?

[Short Field]

And what separates a GTM3 sortie from a GTM2 or GTM1 sortie?   

[Eclipse]

And what separates a GTM3 sortie from a GTM2 or GTM1 sortie?

Operations or tasks which the members are not qualified to perform.  A respective team's capabilities drop to the
lowest common denominator of the members and / or leader.

Specific to GTM1:

O-0401 Work with Canine Search Teams 
O-0416 Plan Search Line Operations 
O-0417 Organize a Search Line 
O-0418 Control a Search Line 
O-0419 Plan and Organize a Hasty Search 
O-0703 Employ Ground to Air Signals 
O-0802 Plan and Organize Site Surveillance 

So unless the team & leader's LCD is GTM1, they cannot do line searches, hasty searches, be involved with a dog team,
or a sortie which would involve a/g coordination or site security.

Specific to GTM2:
O-0104 Set up Shelter 
O-0202 Measure Distance with Pace Count 
O-0203 Navigate past an Obstacle 
O-0209 Identify The Major Terrain Features On A Map 
O-0210 Identify Topographic Symbols On A Map 
O-0211 Determine Elevation On Map 
O-0212 Measure Distance On A Map 
O-0213 Convert Between Map And Compass Azimuths 
O-0215 Determine Azimuths On A Map Using Two Points 
O-0216 Orient A Map To The Ground Using Terrain Association
O-0217 Orient A Map To North Using A Compass 
O-0420 Perform An Airfield Search (Ramp Check)

So any sorties where the tasking or ORM would dictate advanced navigation, the potential for having to shelter in place,
or even a ramp check would be prohibited unless the members and leader's LCD is at least GTM2.

This was one of the main reasons that a lot of us did not understand the need for a 3-tiered rating.  As defined, GTM3
is really only allowed to participate in low-ORM daylight ELT searches.  They have received no training beyond very basic
"don't touch this and what to do when lost" information, and while they have learned to be a part of a line search, the don't know how to organize or control the line (which is the GTL's job).

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

And what separates a GTM3 sortie from a GTM2 or GTM1 sortie?

Operations or tasks which the members are not qualified to perform.  A respective team's capabilities drop to the
lowest common denominator of the members and / or leader.

Specific to GTM1:

O-0401 Work with Canine Search Teams 
O-0416 Plan Search Line Operations 
O-0417 Organize a Search Line 
O-0418 Control a Search Line 
O-0419 Plan and Organize a Hasty Search 
O-0703 Employ Ground to Air Signals 
O-0802 Plan and Organize Site Surveillance 

So unless the team & leader's LCD is GTM1, they cannot do line searches, hasty searches, be involved with a dog team,
or a sortie which would involve a/g coordination or site security.

Specific to GTM2:
O-0104 Set up Shelter 
O-0202 Measure Distance with Pace Count 
O-0203 Navigate past an Obstacle 
O-0209 Identify The Major Terrain Features On A Map 
O-0210 Identify Topographic Symbols On A Map 
O-0211 Determine Elevation On Map 
O-0212 Measure Distance On A Map 
O-0213 Convert Between Map And Compass Azimuths 
O-0215 Determine Azimuths On A Map Using Two Points 
O-0216 Orient A Map To The Ground Using Terrain Association
O-0217 Orient A Map To North Using A Compass 
O-0420 Perform An Airfield Search (Ramp Check)

So any sorties where the tasking or ORM would dictate advanced navigation, the potential for having to shelter in place,
or even a ramp check would be prohibited unless the members and leader's LCD is at least GTM2.

This was one of the main reasons that a lot of us did not understand the need for a 3-tiered rating.  As defined, GTM3
is really only allowed to participate in low-ORM daylight ELT searches.  They have received no training beyond very basic
"don't touch this and what to do when lost" information, and while they have learned to be a part of a line search, the don't know how to organize or control the line (which is the GTL's job).

I think you missed a few bits of information.

GTM3 has tasks to participate in hasty and line searches (O-0413, O-0404) . If they are UDF qualified they have O-0420 and could do ramp checks.
As far as working with A/C does the whole team have to know how to signal?

[Short Field]

^^^ According to this, a GTM3 can never be part of a line search because you would need to have a GTL leading the team and they could only operate at the lowest level of training.  So the GTL couldn't lead or organize a line search.

Back to the OP's question:  If he has been signed off on all the SQTR tasks and just needs two sorties to finish his quals, what needs to happen on the sortie to make it count as a GTM1 sortie instead of a GTM3 sortie?

[Eclipse]

Nothing.

A sortie is a sortie in that instance.  This really only defines what you can't do, not what you must.

[Short Field]

A sortie is a sortie in that instance.  This really only defines what you can't do, not what you must.

Totally agree.

[wacapgh]

Back to the OP's question:  If he has been signed off on all the SQTR tasks and just needs two sorties to finish his quals, what needs to happen on the sortie to make it count as a GTM1 sortie instead of a GTM3 sortie?

Show the evaluator that you can perform at the GTM1 level:

CAPR 60-3, 2-3,c "These sorties must be complete sorties and/or operating periods where the member participates in all aspects of their assigned mission specialty."

[lordmonar]

You don't have to show the evaluator anything.....if you have completed all the training before the sorties.

GT1-3 can be taught 100% in the class room and behind the squadron building.

The sotie requirment is to just do the sortie.

If you are a GTM1 trainee and you get called out to do a ramp check......it counts.  Even if you did not have to work with dog teams, organise a search line et al.

[lordmonar]

On this subject.

Why do we even have GTM 2 and GTM 3?

Let's just combine them and have two rateing GTM and GTL.

YMMV.

[Eclipse]

I concur with the above two posts, I think the multi-tiered rating was a misguided attempt at retention n and getting people their badge quicker.

All it has done is confuse people without adding mission advantage.

[jeders]

I concur with the above two posts, I think the multi-tiered rating was a misguided attempt at retention n and getting people their badge quicker.

All it has done is confuse people without adding mission advantage.

This.

Despite the fact that the SQTR would probably be about 3 pages long, I really hope at some point there is a push at higher levels to go back to a single level of GTM and get rid of all this 1,2,3 madness. FW, JC, you listening?

[davidsinn]

I concur with the above two posts, I think the multi-tiered rating was a misguided attempt at retention n and getting people their badge quicker.

All it has done is confuse people without adding mission advantage.

This.

Despite the fact that the SQTR would probably be about 3 pages long, I really hope at some point there is a push at higher levels to go back to a single level of GTM and get rid of all this 1,2,3 madness. FW, JC, you listening?

I think this should happen as well. What I would do is cut a large chunk of the GTM tasks out since a lot of 2 and 3 tasks are doubled on GTL.

[cap235629]

how about just adopting the NASAR skill set?

[Eclipse]

That or pull them from leader.

Most are important, but why they are doubled up is anyone's guess - you can't be a GTL w/o being a GTM.

[RiverAux]

how about just adopting the NASAR skill set?

Except for the rope stuff that we aren't going to use anyway, they are essentially the same.

[lordmonar]

how about just adopting the NASAR skill set?

Except for the rope stuff that we aren't going to use anyway, they are essentially the same.

I would keep the rope things.....it is as useful a skill for someone going into the woods as the map and compass skills.

That is one of the things I do like about the HMRS ranger thing.

[davidsinn]

That or pull them from leader.

Most are important, but why they are doubled up is anyone's guess - you can't be a GTL w/o being a GTM.

I think the theory was that you could have a <18 cadet get GTM1, turn 18 and then only have one or two tasks and a couple sorties to become a GTL. Still any planning and controlling tasks really should be GTL only.

[lordmonar]

Yes....but then comes the BS about GT levels and what a "team" could or could not do.

60-3 talks about the difference in team as how long they are prepared to go out into the field.  ICS talks about different types of teams by how big they are, wether or not they have organic EMTs and how many support (GBD, MRO, LSC ect) with them.

Add the silliness about what the GT badge means and it gets all screwy.

Simple enough to just say this is GT qualified...and be done with it.  If it means more training up front....I got no problem with that.

The additonal tasks for GTM2 are tasks I would want any of my team member to have anyways.

And the most of the GTM1 tasks are really GTL tasks.

So rolling GTM 1-3 into just GTM would add some time to training but not a lot.  It would make getting fully qualified GT out there instead of some half trained GTM3.  It would make our teams more professional.

[Eclipse]

As I recall, the other argument was that by GTM-1 you had 3x's the mission sorties, and by leader another two - 6-8 sorties or more, making it much harder to pencil whip.

So recombine the qual and then just require more sorties.

[davidsinn]

As I recall, the other argument was that by GTM-1 you had 3x's the mission sorties, and by leader another two - 6-8 sorties or more, making it much harder to pencil whip.

So recombine the qual and then just require more sorties.

Yeah, that falls flat because you can go from GT3 to GTL.

[Eclipse]

As I recall, the other argument was that by GTM-1 you had 3x's the mission sorties, and by leader another two - 6-8 sorties or more, making it much harder to pencil whip.

So recombine the qual and then just require more sorties.

Yeah, that falls flat because you can go from GT3 to GTL.

Agreed, which was another reason a lot of olde schoolers had heartburn with the whole idea.

[N Harmon]

I never had any heartache over the GTM levels. GTL is simple an add-on to GTM. It means you can operate at your GTM level, plus lead the team. And GTM3/GTLs should be rare because all (iirc) of the GTM2 skills are part of GTL, and your GTL sorties should count for GTM2 as well.

GTM3 is like a General ES for field operations. That is how I treat it. If you are GTM3, you are basically an warm body who is insured and will probably not injure yourself walking around in the woods. And in many situations that extra manpower comes in handy.

[davidsinn]

And GTM3/GTLs should be rare because all (iirc) of the GTM2 skills are part of GTL, and your GTL sorties should count for GTM2 as well.

You can only function in one role at a time on a ground sortie. If you're the GTL, you're it from brief to debrief. That's why I'm a GT3/GTL. I haven't had time to upgrade my ground quals.

[arajca]

Part of the reasoning behind the three levels was it took a long time for members (esp. cadets) to get qualified as a GTM since you were going from nothing to GTM1 as far as the task list goes. Getting the necessary training took a couple of years if you were lucky, and most of the advanced skills weren't being used. Seriously, how often do CAP ground teams spend days in the field without any chance to get back to civilization? Not counting the intentional ES schools and training, of course.

The SAR teams here in the mountains of CO generally spend no more than one night, and that's only if they have a late call out.

[lordmonar]

I never had any heartache over the GTM levels. GTL is simple an add-on to GTM. It means you can operate at your GTM level, plus lead the team. And GTM3/GTLs should be rare because all (iirc) of the GTM2 skills are part of GTL, and your GTL sorties should count for GTM2 as well.

GTM3 is like a General ES for field operations. That is how I treat it. If you are GTM3, you are basically an warm body who is insured and will probably not injure yourself walking around in the woods. And in many situations that extra manpower comes in handy.

Well that's just my point.

"work at your GTM level"....what exactly does that mean?  And why does it mean that?

Finally....where in the regulations are you limited to you minimun level?

Because the three different places where it talks about "levels" they mean three different things.

[N Harmon]

"work at your GTM level"....what exactly does that mean?  And why does it mean that?

It means if you are a GTL, then your GTM qualification level determines the highest level of team you can lead. In other words, a GTL who is GTM3 qualified may have nothing but high-speed GTM1s on his ground team, but his team is still a level 3 ground team. I guess you could say your GTM level determins your GTL level if you have the GTL qualification.

At least that is my understanding. The regulations are not clear on this.

Finally....where in the regulations are you limited to you minimun level?

(2) Team training and experience must be appropriate for the mission (proficiency in DF use, ground rescue knowledge, concentrated area search procedures, missing person search, etc.). Ground Team Members – Level 1 should be prepared to conduct ground team operations within their limits of training up to 72 hours. Ground Team Members – Level 2 should be
prepared to conduct ground team operations within their limits of training for up to 48 hours. Ground Team Members – Level 3 should be prepared to conduct ground team operations within their limits of training for up to 24 hours.

(a) A ground team may only conduct operations within the limits of training of its lowest qualified member. A member qualified at one level, and having supervised trainee status for a higher level may be used operationally at the higher level if the trainee is properly equipped and supervised.

What are the other two places?

[davidsinn]

"work at your GTM level"....what exactly does that mean?  And why does it mean that?

It means if you are a GTL, then your GTM qualification level determines the highest level of team you can lead. In other words, a GTL who is GTM3 qualified may have nothing but high-speed GTM1s on his ground team, but his team is still a level 3 ground team. I guess you could say your GTM level determins your GTL level if you have the GTL qualification.

At least that is my understanding. The regulations are not clear on this.

Finally....where in the regulations are you limited to you minimun level?

(2) Team training and experience must be appropriate for the mission (proficiency in DF use, ground rescue knowledge, concentrated area search procedures, missing person search, etc.). Ground Team Members – Level 1 should be prepared to conduct ground team operations within their limits of training up to 72 hours. Ground Team Members – Level 2 should be
prepared to conduct ground team operations within their limits of training for up to 48 hours. Ground Team Members – Level 3 should be prepared to conduct ground team operations within their limits of training for up to 24 hours.

(a) A ground team may only conduct operations within the limits of training of its lowest qualified member. A member qualified at one level, and having supervised trainee status for a higher level may be used operationally at the higher level if the trainee is properly equipped and supervised.

What are the other two places?

There is no such thing as a level 3 team. It's a ground team. Period.

I just looked at my SQTR and between GTM3, UDF and GTL I'm only missing five tasks for GTM2 and GTM1. The GT quals are broken. We should only have three levels: UDF, GTM and GTL. UDF should be a prereq for GTM. That gets them into the field quickly and then you add on the woods stuff and field survival stuff to make a GTM and then add on the planning and leading stuff to make a GTL. There is way too much overlap and redundancy between the tracts.

[Eclipse]

^ This makes perfect sense.

I don't buy the argument that it "takes to long" - that is one of the things that gave the GT badge some actual weight, and members could still participate in mission while in FAM/PREP.

[cap235629]

Once again, adopt NASAR and then move on.  So much easier and INTERNATIONALLY recognized!

[lordmonar]

Harmon,

That is exactly my point.

The SQTR talk about the three levels as seperate levels of training.  A GTL 1 know more stuff then a GTL 2 or three.

60-3 talks about the three levels by how long they are prepared to stay in the field.....not by what skills they have.
It then throws out something about only being able to operate at the lowest level.
Which is pure BS.

If I got a four person ground team GTL/GLM-3, GTM-1, GTM-2 and GTM-3.

I can't stay out at night because only one of my guys does not know how to put up a shelter (GTM-2).
I can go farther then I can see the van because only one guy does not know how to do a pace count (GTM-2)
I can take my team past an obsticale because only one guy does not know how to navigate past and obsticle (GTM-2)
We can't use maps because only one guy does not know how to identify map symbols, determin elevation, distance or orient his map. (GTM-2)
We can't do a ram check because on guy does not know how do them?(GTM-2)
We can't work with dog teams because two guy's have not signed off that task (GTM-1)


No.  That stupid rule is as useless as teats on your brother.

Now....I got no problem with talking about ORM.  Am I going to take 10 GTM-3 trainees into some heavey moutounous terrain with threats of flash floods and thudnerstorms?   No way.  But 60-3 with this completly un-realistic rule is just stupid.

The third place we have reference to types of teams is in the DRAFT NIMS resource typing guide.
There the type of teams all assume that every individual is fully qualified to be there.  The types are about sizes and number of team, whether they have the right vehicles, organic EMTs, a GBT and base support staff.

My entire argument is that 8 of the 11 GTM-1 tasks are actually GTL tasks (plan, lead, organise)
That 10 of the 12 GTM-2 tasks are all MAP and orienteering tasks....that should be taught when teaching the GTM-3 compass tasks and would maybe add 8 hours of class room time to their training.

The distinciton that a GTL who is only a GTM-3 is pure BS as well.  Except for one or two tasks that got left off the SQTR the GTL has the same training as any GTM-1.....just less sorties under his belt.....and that can be fixed by requiring more sorties to get GTM qualfied in the first place and requiring some additional sorties as a prerequisit.

[lordmonar]

Once again, adopt NASAR and then move on.  So much easier and INTERNATIONALLY recognized!

For the most part we do have the same standards.  The only problem I got with NASAR is the costs.  If we adopted NASAR we whould have to do their training and take their tests......we complain about adding costs.  There is nothing really wrong with our training.....only how we manage it and how we tie that into operations.

[Eclipse]

Why not just do the same things and call them NESAR?

[lordmonar]

Why not just do the same things and call them NESAR?

We already do 90% of the same thing (they do more rope work)....and call them Ground Teams.

[RiverAux]

When we are the largest ground SAR organization in the country, why should we adopt the "standards" of some other organization that self-appointed themselves to come up with them.  Ours are just as legitimate and as said, are basically the same except in tasks that CAP members aren't allowed to do anyway. 

That being said, our system is not very well thought out.  The tasks are split up between the 3 levels with no real rhyme or reason.   There was a proposal floating around a while back that re-arranged the tasks so that similar stuff was done at the same time, for example, all the nav tasks were taught at the same time. 

And I agree that there is no clear operational reason to have 3 levels of GTMs.  The only real difference between them in the regs is how long they stay in the field, which makes absolutely no sense. 

[Spaceman3750]

"How do you operate at your GTM level when your team's lowest common denominator is 3?"

GTM3s - "You guys remember how to do a line search, right?"
GTM2 - "You're my navigator, here's the maps. I need to get the team here and I need our position in the logbook every 15 minutes. If you have any questions just ask - I'll spot check you here and there."
GTM1 - "You're my assistant. I will task you as things arise but you will help me plan the search line and make sure the team is equipped. Go take the team and do a vehicle inspection while I get briefed."

There. Everyone is operating at their level. Look at the tasks. The only major issue with operating a team with GTM3 as the lowest common denominator is how long you can stay overnight. Depending on the makeup of the team the GTL may have to do more or less work. That's it.

By the way, if I ever get to lead a team with more than GTM3-Ts outside of a NESA setting this is how I would run it.

[RiverAux]

Has anyone ever come up with a reasonable explanation linking GTM level with number of nights deployed? 

[lordmonar]

Has anyone ever come up with a reasonable explanation linking GTM level with number of nights deployed?

I am just guessing that it may be tied with the assemble personal gear task in the GTM-3 SQTR.  It seems we don't really make out GTM-3 get the 72-hour gear. 

Don't really know way...except as a way to get people partially trained to give them a taste of GT training before they really spend some big bucks.

I still don't really why we have a GTM 1,2,3, in the first place.

As we can see here is just confuses the who thing to no end.

[Spaceman3750]

GTM3 allows members to get operational faster while requiring our top ground people to have at least 6 sorties under their belt (or a week at an academy) for the top GTM qual. If we say "Well, just recombine it and make GTM 6 sorties" it means that it takes way longer for a new member to be useful unsupervised.

[lordmonar]

GTM3 allows members to get operational faster while requiring our top ground people to have at least 6 sorties under their belt (or a week at an academy) for the top GTM qual. If we say "Well, just recombine it and make GTM 6 sorties" it means that it takes way longer for a new member to be useful unsupervised.

Except that we then have 60-3 saying you can't do anything if you have any GTM-3 on your team.

Your argument is kind of at cross purposes.  You get a less qualified team faster and you reduce the capabilities of your fully qualifed trainees.

You see where I am going.  Even if you have a robust training program you will always have someone not fully qualified or some new trainee who is going to hold the entire team back.

So I go back to what I was saying before.  Even if we punched it up to six sorties.... that is three duty days....(two sorties a day)  Two week ends. 
Say 20 hours of class room instruction.

By combining the ratings into one...you get out the door quicker....and you reduce the actual training time it gets a fully qualified team member.

[Spaceman3750]

GTM3 allows members to get operational faster while requiring our top ground people to have at least 6 sorties under their belt (or a week at an academy) for the top GTM qual. If we say "Well, just recombine it and make GTM 6 sorties" it means that it takes way longer for a new member to be useful unsupervised.

Except that we then have 60-3 saying you can't do anything if you have any GTM-3 on your team.

I still don't get what you mean by that. I understand that the 60-3 says that you can only operate at the least common denominator of your team. Again, as far as I can tell all that really means is that your 72 hour gear stays in the van (which, BTW, couldn't make me happier ). What can you not do with a GTM3 on the team that you could with only GTM 2 or 1's, besides stay overnight (and even then, at least in my area we aren't doing too many overnights in the field that aren't part of a bivouac setup).

EDIT: Oh, dogs and helicopters, I forgot about those. You can pretty much field brief those if you have to, and IMHO that SHOULD be acceptable, though it isn't by the current standards.

[ol'fido]

I guess I'm one of those "old hands" that think this is all silly. You train your team to the highest standard possible from the get go. I also think that we need to train teams and not collections of individuals. I also feel that UDF and GT should not be separate quals. But that's just MHO.

[RiverAux]

Given the radical decline of ELT missions, we probably need to re-examine the need for having a separate UDF qualification.  When you could count on a bunch of ELT missions, it made sense to have a specialty that left out a lot of the field work.  Now that we're only having a fraction of the ELT missions, there is no real reason to keep that one around. 

[Eclipse]

The list of what you can't do as a GT-3 is in this thread.

Anything not on the GT-3 list means your team drops down, not individuals.

The idea is that anyone on your team can perform anything the team is tasked with, not that you've got "1 guy" who can do "x".

Look at the list again.

[davidsinn]

The list of what you can't do as a GT-3 is in this thread.

Anything not on the GT-3 list means your team drops down, not individuals.

The idea is that anyone on your team can perform anything the team is tasked with, not that you've got "1 guy" who can do "x".

Look at the list again.

If only one person on the team can do it than the team as a whole can do it. I don't need six GTMs that can work a map if I, as the GTL, can. I really only need one person that can recognize air to ground signals.

[Eclipse]

Until that "person" is injured or incapacitated, and then you're stuck in the woods, lost.

The regs are clear.  The team is based on LCD, the highest of a few.  That's why everyone is "equal" in equipment as well - we don't just bring one compass, etc.

There's also a 1-3 trainee ratio that a lot of people are either ignorant of or ignore (not saying you are, but it is pretty common).

The idea that the GTL can, and usually does, all the heavy lifitng is incorrect as well.  The GTL is supposed to command the team, and usually from the back is a better position.  If his nose is in a map, that's when Cadet Baggie falls into the river.  Also, a GTL3 would not have proven map skills, either.

[davidsinn]

Until that "person" is injured or incapacitated, and then you're stuck in the woods, lost.

The regs are clear.  The team is based on LCD, the highest of a few.  That's why everyone is "equal" in equipment as well - we don't just bring one compass, etc.

There's also a 1-3 trainee ratio that a lot of people are either ignorant of or ignore (not saying you are, but it is pretty common).

The idea that the GTL can, and usually does, all the heavy lifitng is incorrect as well.  The GTL is supposed to command the team, and usually from the back is a better position.  If his nose is in a map, that's when Cadet Baggie falls into the river.  Also, a GTL3 would not have proven map skills, either.

You have a point which is why we need to go to a single GTM rating. I try whenever possible to delegate but navigating is not something I'll delegate if I can avoid it simply because I've been working maps since before some of my cadets were born. GTLs have all the map tasks on their SQTR currently.

[Spaceman3750]

Until that "person" is injured or incapacitated, and then you're stuck in the woods, lost.

The regs are clear.  The team is based on LCD, the highest of a few.  That's why everyone is "equal" in equipment as well - we don't just bring one compass, etc.

There's also a 1-3 trainee ratio that a lot of people are either ignorant of or ignore (not saying you are, but it is pretty common).

The idea that the GTL can, and usually does, all the heavy lifitng is incorrect as well.  The GTL is supposed to command the team, and usually from the back is a better position.  If his nose is in a map, that's when Cadet Baggie falls into the river.  Also, a GTL3 would not have proven map skills, either.

Personally, I think you're taking too strict of an interpretation of the 60-3, but if you were my GBD I'd do whatever you told me to do. I'm not saying I would take a team of GTM3's into an overnight expedition or into a mountain range, but 90% of what you posted that a team with a GTM3 can't do can either be delegated to a GTM2 or 1 (or done by the GTL) (like navigation) or field briefed and GTL-directed (like working with a dog team, helicopter operations, ramp search, etc).

Unfortunately and frustratingly, I've been to almost every SAREX with a ground component in our wing this year (I don't even want to think about what my car thinks of me right now) and I have yet to see a GTM2 or 1 (or even a trainee). It's useful for me to add on experience in crew management but the folks I've been working with for the most part aren't the ones who we would see turning out for a 6pm mission person search (most of them were young-middle teens cadets). Not that they couldn't, I just don't think they would.

[RiverAux]

If the theory is that a ground team that only has a GTL and 3 GTM3s on it can't do ANYTHING that isn't a GTM3 task, then how in the world are the GTM3s going to be able to go on a sortie to learn GTM2 tasks? 

[ßτε]

If the theory is that a ground team that only has a GTL and 3 GTM3s on it can't do ANYTHING that isn't a GTM3 task, then how in the world are the GTM3s going to be able to go on a sortie to learn GTM2 tasks?

They would need to be a GTM2 trainee.

[Spaceman3750]

If the theory is that a ground team that only has a GTL and 3 GTM3s on it can't do ANYTHING that isn't a GTM3 task, then how in the world are the GTM3s going to be able to go on a sortie to learn GTM2 tasks?

As a GTM2 trainee. A commander or designee can pretty much instantly make them a GTM2-T after GTM3 completion, there's no prep/fam,

[cap235629]

If the theory is that a ground team that only has a GTL and 3 GTM3s on it can't do ANYTHING that isn't a GTM3 task, then how in the world are the GTM3s going to be able to go on a sortie to learn GTM2 tasks?

As a GTM2 trainee. A commander or designee can pretty much instantly make them a GTM2-T after GTM3 completion, there's no prep/fam,

But who is going to supervise the trainee?  Who is going to be the SET who signs them off?

[Eclipse]

And, if you go as a GTM2-T, that screws up your 1-3 ratio.

[Eclipse]

If the theory is that a ground team that only has a GTL and 3 GTM3s on it can't do ANYTHING that isn't a GTM3 task, then how in the world are the GTM3s going to be able to go on a sortie to learn GTM2 tasks?

You don't have to task in a mission environment.

[Spaceman3750]

If the theory is that a ground team that only has a GTL and 3 GTM3s on it can't do ANYTHING that isn't a GTM3 task, then how in the world are the GTM3s going to be able to go on a sortie to learn GTM2 tasks?

As a GTM2 trainee. A commander or designee can pretty much instantly make them a GTM2-T after GTM3 completion, there's no prep/fam,

But who is going to supervise the trainee?  Who is going to be the SET who signs them off?

In my case, being a SET for GTM 3 and 2, I would just like I would supervise and sign off any GTM3s I have. Of course, it depends on how many trainees I already have (Eclipse, can you cite your 1-3 ratio, I've never seen it but I'm going to check 60-3), and they can always be there as a GTM3 in their own right if need be, they just can't be signed off.

[Eclipse]

...Eclipse, can you cite your 1-3 ratio...

60-3, Page 9

d. Only qualified CAP members, qualified members of other agencies with which CAP
has an approved memorandum of understanding, and CAP mission trainees under the
supervision of a qualified person may participate in CAP operational missions. There will be at
a minimum a 1-to-3 ratio of supervisors to trainees when trainees are utilized.

[Spaceman3750]

60-3, Page 9

d. Only qualified CAP members, qualified members of other agencies with which CAP
has an approved memorandum of understanding, and CAP mission trainees under the
supervision of a qualified person may participate in CAP operational missions. There will be at
a minimum a 1-to-3 ratio of supervisors to trainees when trainees are utilized.

There it is. Thanks .

[cap235629]

well I would read that to mean that you can't use trainees unless you have 3.  No where does it say the maximum ratio is 1-3

     

[davidsinn]

well I would read that to mean that you can't use trainees unless you have 3.  No where does it say the maximum ratio is 1-3

That is so poorly written it's not even funny. Are they saying you must have three supervisors for every trainee or you can have up to 3 trainees for every supervisor? It seems to be that since it says 1 to 3 of supervisors to trainees that I can take a team of my self and three nugget GTM(t) into the field.

[N Harmon]

well I would read that to mean that you can't use trainees unless you have 3.  No where does it say the maximum ratio is 1-3

It isn't a maximum ratio. It is a minimum. And it is supervisors to trainees, not qualified members to trainees.

[RiverAux]

A minimum of a 1:3 ratio?  That means that you could have 1 supervisor and 10 trainees.  I think they meant a maximum 1:3 ratio. 

And in any case 1 GTL could supervise 3 GTM1T or 3GTM2T or 3 GTL trainees without breaking that ratio. 

[N Harmon]

A minimum of a 1:3 ratio?  That means that you could have 1 supervisor and 10 trainees.  I think they meant a maximum 1:3 ratio.

1/10  <  1/3

[Eclipse]

For those scoring at home...

You must have a minimum of 1 (one)  qualified supervisor for every three (3) trainees.

10 trainees would require 3.33 supervisors. Since it is currently illegal in CONUS to make 1/3 a person, that would be 4.

[cap235629]

For those scoring at home...

You must have a minimum of 1 (one)  qualified supervisor for every three (3) trainees.

10 trainees would require 3.33 supervisors. Since it is currently illegal in CONUS to make 1/3 a person, that would be 4.

The reg is poorly written and grammatically incorrect.  The letter of the law so to speak supports my reading.

[N Harmon]

There will be at a minimum a 1-to-3 ratio of supervisors to trainees when trainees are utilized.

The minimum ratio is 1:3. This does not mean you have to have 3 trainees. This means that the ratio must be greater than or equal to 1:3. So if you have a UDF team with one supervisor and one trainee, the ratio is 1:1. And 1:1 is greater than 1:3. The regulation could also read, "There will be at maximum a 3:1 ratio of trainees to supervisors when trainees are utilized", and it would mean the same thing.

I am not sure what is grammatically incorrect about it, except that "1-to-3" should be either "one-to-three" or "1 to 3". Though "1:3" would be preferable.

[JC004]

I concur with the above two posts, I think the multi-tiered rating was a misguided attempt at retention n and getting people their badge quicker.

All it has done is confuse people without adding mission advantage.

This.

Despite the fact that the SQTR would probably be about 3 pages long, I really hope at some point there is a push at higher levels to go back to a single level of GTM and get rid of all this 1,2,3 madness. FW, JC, you listening?

This issue has been added to the list of issues that need to be addressed.  There is quite a lot being discussed that would impact the ES program and, if executed properly/fully, make CAP a serious national leader in our operational areas.

What do people think about reducing to two levels of GTM and adding some additional standards that would increase capabilities?  (I'm exploring specifics)

Has anyone ever come up with a reasonable explanation linking GTM level with number of nights deployed?

Not really, no.

[Eclipse]

What do people think about reducing to two levels of GTM and adding some additional standards that would increase capabilities?  (I'm exploring specifics)

Assuming that means "leader" and "member" or something like that, yes please.  I think the "member" qual should be based on a single set of criteria for all.  I would also do away with the NESA provision.  Just do or do not, all the same.

Give those existing 3's and 2's a year to catch up, stop anyone new from entering as a "3", and we can all get back to something that makes sense and limits confusion.

[JC004]

I guess that you could say that NASAR has two "GTM" quals (SARTECH III and II) and the "GTL" qual (SARTECH I).  This was suggested as a possibility and a better approach than 3 levels.

What about adding a mantracking qualification, like NASAR has?  I am not against the push by some to just adopt NASAR but the problem is the cost and getting people signed off (depends how we'd arrange that).

[davidsinn]

I guess that you could say that NASAR has two "GTM" quals (SARTECH III and II) and the "GTL" qual (SARTECH I).  This was suggested as a possibility and a better approach than 3 levels.

What about adding a mantracking qualification, like NASAR has?  I am not against the push by some to just adopt NASAR but the problem is the cost and getting people signed off (depends how we'd arrange that).

If you want to add mantracker it should be added as an endorsement to the basic qual like AP is an addon to MS.

[davidsinn]

Yesterday I spent some time making up a matrix showing all of the GT quals and how they overlap between UDF, GT3-1 and GTL. I also put together a plan to reduce to just three levels. UDF would be the entry level and would be a prereq for GTM and then GTL would be a follow on the GTM. For the most part I merged GT1 with GTL and merged GT2 with GT3 which basically only added navigation to GT3. UDF picked up the first aid requirement from GT3 because I feel that anyone going out of mission base should be able to help themselves and their team until EMS arrives.

[lordmonar]

Yesterday I spent some time making up a matrix showing all of the GT quals and how they overlap between UDF, GT3-1 and GTL. I also put together a plan to reduce to just three levels. UDF would be the entry level and would be a prereq for GTM and then GTL would be a follow on the GTM. For the most part I merged GT1 with GTL and merged GT2 with GT3 which basically only added navigation to GT3. UDF picked up the first aid requirement from GT3 because I feel that anyone going out of mission base should be able to help themselves and their team until EMS arrives.

Okay.....looking at the your matrix right now.
O-0217 (orient a map to north) has got to be a UDF task.
O-1101 (condcut witness interview) has got to be a UDF task....as part or ramp checking.

And as has been stated before....we could use add on qualificaitons such at mantracking, medium-low angle resuce (rope work).

Use the UDF rating as the inital entry training kind of like the MS is for the aircraft side of ES.

[davidsinn]

Yesterday I spent some time making up a matrix showing all of the GT quals and how they overlap between UDF, GT3-1 and GTL. I also put together a plan to reduce to just three levels. UDF would be the entry level and would be a prereq for GTM and then GTL would be a follow on the GTM. For the most part I merged GT1 with GTL and merged GT2 with GT3 which basically only added navigation to GT3. UDF picked up the first aid requirement from GT3 because I feel that anyone going out of mission base should be able to help themselves and their team until EMS arrives.

Okay.....looking at the your matrix right now.
O-0217 (orient a map to north) has got to be a UDF task.
O-1101 (condcut witness interview) has got to be a UDF task....as part or ramp checking.

And as has been stated before....we could use add on qualificaitons such at mantracking, medium-low angle resuce (rope work).

Use the UDF rating as the inital entry training kind of like the MS is for the aircraft side of ES.

Done. I won't repost though. I'm thinking about sending this up the pipe to see if we can get this fixed at the national level.

[N Harmon]

Wasn't the UDF qualification put into place to increase the number of available people for simple ELT missions? Is that even a major need any more?

[sardak]

The UDF rating first appeared in the June 1999 task guide, which was prepared for an upcoming major rewrite of the ES regs, but it was never officially published. The reason for the rating, as correctly speculated above, was so that non-ground team rated persons could DF a signal at the local airport or in an urban area. Ground teams in some areas were getting burned out doing all the DF missions and there were other members who wanted to help. There was no need to send full-blown ground teams to find the "in-town" beacons, and some wings had already created different types of ground teams and ICs to work these.

The new reg, CAPR 60-3, and task guide came out in May 2001 and contained the UDF rating in addition to GTL and GTM, but no types/levels yet.

Typing/levels was first discussed for the next revision of CAPR 60-3 in early 2003. Changes in emergency services in all sectors were occurring as a result of 9/11 and the Shuttle Columbia breakup had just occurred. The one-eyed NIMS which replaced the two-eyed NIIMS was still a year away. In preparation for it, FEMA/DHS started talking about typing of resources. So did CAP.

A preliminary matrix with five types (levels) of CAP ground teams was floated, following the wildland fire concept of typing. UDF was a type 5 ground team. It was agreed that UDF should remain separate and not be a ground team rating for the reasons stated above.

This was pared down to UDF plus three levels of ground team and GTL. What knowledge, skills and abilities (KSA) each needed was taking a long time to hash out. It was clear that the work wouldn't be done in time to for approval of the revised CAPR 60-3 at the 2003 summer boards, and it was withdrawn for approval by the NB. To expedite the process, rather arbitrary divisions of the tasks identified in 1999 were made for the three proposed levels of GTM. 

The IC rating was also divided during this time. The original intent was for IC3 to be for "in-town" ELT searches, IC2 for simple incidents using limited resources such as a couple of ground teams and/or a plane or two, and IC1 for full blown missing aircraft searches. This was never settled before the next deadline and is why the differences between each level is simply 2 missions, without any formal description of incident complexity.

This next version of CAPR 60-3 containing the GT and IC divisions was approved and released with a date of 26 May 2004. The one-eyed NIMS was released by DHS on 1 March 2004.

I've attached a matrix comparing the ground team/UDF tasks of each version from 1999 to the current ones which haven't changed since 2004. This comparison was made, or updated, in 2007. The original is very similar to David Sinn's matrix he posted several messages ago.

As mentioned, one can go from GTM3 to GTL without being a GTM2 and 1, because the complete task set (except for one, an oversight) of ground and UDF tasks is covered by GTM3 and GTL. Completing GTM3, 2, 1 provides the same skill set as a GTL, but without the need to be 18 years old, as required for GTL. That is the only reason for having the divisions as they currently are.

As for the 24, 48, 72 hour division, that is what was proposed in the April 2003 GT typing matrix. FEMA resource typing uses these same times for Type3-4, 2 and 1 Wilderness SAR Teams.

Mike

[RiverAux]

Yesterday I spent some time making up a matrix showing all of the GT quals and how they overlap between UDF, GT3-1 and GTL. I also put together a plan to reduce to just three levels. UDF would be the entry level and would be a prereq for GTM and then GTL would be a follow on the GTM. For the most part I merged GT1 with GTL and merged GT2 with GT3 which basically only added navigation to GT3. UDF picked up the first aid requirement from GT3 because I feel that anyone going out of mission base should be able to help themselves and their team until EMS arrives.

Not sure why the CAP grid task is a GTL task.  Seems like that should be lumped in with basic nav stuff for GTM. 

sardaks chart reminds me of that time period where UDF was basically a GTL-light.  It was actually harder to get people qualified to be UDF than GTM for a while.

[JC004]

The UDF rating first appeared in the June 1999 task guide, which was prepared for an upcoming major rewrite of the ES regs, but it was never officially published. The reason for the rating, as correctly speculated above, was so that non-ground team rated persons could DF a signal at the local airport or in an urban area. Ground teams in some areas were getting burned out doing all the DF missions and there were other members who wanted to help. There was no need to send full-blown ground teams to find the "in-town" beacons, and some wings had already created different types of ground teams and ICs to work these.
...

Well done here.  Don't get too far. 

[ol'fido]

As far as the UDF thing, I could never figure out why one of the tasks was to "navigate with a map using terrain association" but they didn't require "be able to identify symbols on a map". How exactly are you supposed to do the former if you can't do the latter?