What can I do in CAP Comms?

[cap235629]

Again, please cite the "no self deploy" regulation. Really, if I missed it I want to fix that here and now. And show how simply remaining in the air circling on a B17 flight while trying to DF the signal from my current location is a violation of that regulation. Really, I want to know.

CAPR 60-3 1-16(d)(3):
Aircrews will not self-dispatch; they must be properly released, even remotely via
phone or other means if necessary, and noted appropriately on a CAPF 104, Mission Flight
Plan/Briefing Form; 107, Flight Operations Log; and other mission documents, as appropriate.
Signatures are not required on the CAPF 104, but the CAPF 104 must note who briefed and
released the crew accordingly.

Still, pilot flying solo in a CAP plane hears an ELT. He informs ATC. Now what?

Being released on a B17 is not a proper release for a SAR mission.

Thank you. I am looking that up now.

And I don't think it is clear from this section (which is talking about how to conduct a mission) that trying to get a bearing on an ELT while reporting it is a violation.

So now you are "Just getting a bearing" a minute ago you were trying to contact ground units to prosecute the signal.  Which is it?

[Eclipse]

"Why didn't the first CAP plane try and get a better fix on the signal before leaving the area? Might these people still be alive if the CAP plane had done it's job?"

"Because at the time the CAP aircraft believed they heard a signal, the crew was not qualified, nor authorized, to prosecute the mission."

Chasing an ELT in a CAP aircraft is SAR.

SAR requires authorization from the USAF, or at a minimum a corporate officer.

Hearing an ELT does not equal a mission.

One of the differences between CAP and organizations which charge themselves as "similar" is that we follow the rules of our organization, and that protects our members.

In nearly all cases, a qualified crew is required to chase an ELT, not just a pilot.   A lone pilot, without a crew, chasing an ELT, is a potential danger to himself and others as he is not paying full attention to driving the bus.

If you are a qualified mission pilot, or even a trainee, you already know this.

[MilesDyson]

Again, please cite the "no self deploy" regulation. Really, if I missed it I want to fix that here and now. And show how simply remaining in the air circling on a B17 flight while trying to DF the signal from my current location is a violation of that regulation. Really, I want to know.

CAPR 60-3 1-16(d)(3):
Aircrews will not self-dispatch; they must be properly released, even remotely via
phone or other means if necessary, and noted appropriately on a CAPF 104, Mission Flight
Plan/Briefing Form; 107, Flight Operations Log; and other mission documents, as appropriate.
Signatures are not required on the CAPF 104, but the CAPF 104 must note who briefed and
released the crew accordingly.

Still, pilot flying solo in a CAP plane hears an ELT. He informs ATC. Now what?

Being released on a B17 is not a proper release for a SAR mission.

Thank you. I am looking that up now.

And I don't think it is clear from this section (which is talking about how to conduct a mission) that trying to get a bearing on an ELT while reporting it is a violation.

So now you are "Just getting a bearing" a minute ago you were trying to contact ground units to prosecute the signal.  Which is it?

You decided I was trying to get ground units to go look. That is not what I was doing.

In fact, I was trying to get ahold of some ground unit to make a phone call to wing or AFRCC whatever. I was specifically calling a commander to get direction. I cannot believe that it would be a bad idea to call on the CAP radio to get in touch with the appropriate CAP authority to discuss what I should do.

[Eclipse]

Direct question.

Are you a mission pilot or do you hold any ES quals at all?

[MilesDyson]

"Why didn't the first CAP plane try and get a better fix on the signal before leaving the area? Might these people still be alive if the CAP plane had done it's job?"

"Because at the time the CAP aircraft believed they heard a signal, the crew was not qualified, nor authorized, to prosecute the mission."

Chasing an ELT in a CAP aircraft is SAR.

SAR requires authorization from the USAF, or at a minimum a corporate officer.

Hearing an ELT does not equal a mission.

One of the differences between CAP and organizations which charge themselves as "similar" is that we follow the rules of our organization, and that protects our members.

In nearly all cases, a qualified crew is required to chase an ELT, not just a pilot.   A lone pilot, without a crew, chasing an ELT, is a potential danger to himself and others as he is not paying full attention to driving the bus.

If yo are a qualified mission pilot, or even a trainee, you already know this.

"So Captain Eclipse, you are saying that your pilot, who was directly over the people who were trapped in the burning wreckage, continued on to his training flight 200 miles away simply because he didn't have the correct paperwork?"

[MilesDyson]

No, I am completely pulling your leg and wasting your time. I am not a pilot. I am not even in CAP. In fact, it is getting light outside and I have to get up and go to work in Belgrade.

[Eclipse]

"So Captain Eclipse, you are saying that your pilot, who was directly over the people who were trapped in the burning wreckage, continued on to his training flight 200 miles away simply because he didn't have the correct paperwork?"

No, if you are over burning wreckage, you would report it to ATC, who would roll local EMS and you would then leave the area.  An aircraft that is visible and burning is not..."lost"...therefore CAP would not..."search"...for it, nor would they generally be involved in any way.

I am not a pilot. I am not even in CAP.

OK, glad we cleared that up, because the above would really be the only explanation for your lack of understanding of the basic SOP for CAP operations.

[MilesDyson]

"So Captain Eclipse, you are saying that your pilot, who was within just a few miles of the people who were trapped in the burning wreckage, continued on to his training flight 200 miles away simply because he didn't have the correct paperwork? Those people suffered for hours before being found even though your airplane was close by and could have helped locate them hours sooner?"

[Eclipse]

Yes.

[MilesDyson]

No, if you are over burning wreckage, you would report it to ATC, who would roll local EMS and you would then leave the area.  An aircraft that is visible and burning is not..."lost"...therefore CAP would not..."search"...for it, nor would they generally be involved in any way.

Oh, you haven't spent much time up north. A crash in the forest miles from a road nearest FD 20 miles away, less than five miles visibility in haze, oh that burning plane is lost.

[Eclipse]

You've got emergency lights on your personal vehicle, don't you?

[cap235629]

You've got emergency lights on your personal vehicle, don't you?

Be careful I resemble that comment!

I am also a responder for another agency though!

[DH]

I will probably regret getting into this. I was hoping this was somone truly interested in making a positive contribution to COMM but instead they may have done much to harm the program in the eyes of many who may read the postings, especially new or prospective members. The COMM program has much to offer in it's design, but there are many who while understanding there are limitations in other areas, cannot accept the role the program is currently geared for.  Just as a note to pilots, in our Wing we encourage pilots to make prior contact with known radio operators (IC's, Relay stations, etc.) to monitior while they are in the air. It provides opportunities to train with the radios, provides a means of passing information, and may provide an additional safety net for the pilot. Our pilots are encouraged to monitor a wide area repeater also while airborne. There have been several cases when we have had a qualified air crew in the air on a proficiency flight that have been tasked to a mission. It's all about preparation and planning. There's nothing wrong with inviting a MS or MO to fly along with you for company when on a proficiency flight. You never know. Wow, what a concept, a marriage between flight and comm proficency.

[SarDragon]

Here's some closing traffic from a recent mission, sanitized.

AFRCC search mission 11M[xxx] was opened on 21 Aug and closed 22 Aug as a resulted of detection of a 121.5 ELT signal by a CAP aircraft already airborne on a proficency flight. CAP [xxx] tracked the signal to the [local] airport, landed, teamed up with a UDF crew and DF'ed the signal to a private hangar.

Non-distress finds authorized for Aircrew [member A] and [member B] and UDF team [member A] and [member B].

Details.
After calling in the distress signal¹ [Aircrew member A] and [Aircrew member B] remained airborne untill AFRCC could be contacted and a mission # assigned². They are both from [unit], and were flying CAP [xxx] from [unit]. After landing they were joined by [UDF team member A] and [UDF team member B] and worked together to locate the signal. Even though the hangar seemed occupied they could not gain anyone's attention. The [local] PD was called to the location and also could not get anyone to come to the door, and were not able to enter the hangar. A follow up was conducted the next morning and the signal had ceased.

That's exactly the way it was supposed to be done.

1. Notify someone - ATC, another CAP member, AFRCC directly if necessary.

2. Stayed in the area, but didn't self deploy, i.e. start looking for the ELT until the proper time.

This isn't rocket surgery. The rules in place for a reason, and they aren't that hard to follow.

[N Harmon]

In fact, I was trying to get ahold of some ground unit to make a phone call to wing or AFRCC whatever.

No need to. There is a representative from the FAA a few desks back from the AFRCC console at Tyndall AFB. Chances are good that your ELT report to ATC will be relayed to AFRCC before anyone on the ground can dial the number.

The point being: We have a procedure for this; You notify ATC. They, in turn, notify AFRCC, and maybe contact other aircraft in the area to see if they are hearing it. AFRCC launches a mission only after confirmation of a signal and/or an existing missing aircraft case. The process sounds a lot more drawn out than it really is, and the decision is made quickly enough that a CAP aircraft can be re-tasked appropriately while still in the air.

[MilesDyson]

Here's some closing traffic from a recent mission, sanitized.

AFRCC search mission 11M[xxx] was opened on 21 Aug and closed 22 Aug as a resulted of detection of a 121.5 ELT signal by a CAP aircraft already airborne on a proficency flight. CAP [xxx] tracked the signal to the [local] airport, landed, teamed up with a UDF crew and DF'ed the signal to a private hangar.

Non-distress finds authorized for Aircrew [member A] and [member B] and UDF team [member A] and [member B].

Details.
After calling in the distress signal¹ [Aircrew member A] and [Aircrew member B] remained airborne untill AFRCC could be contacted and a mission # assigned². They are both from [unit], and were flying CAP [xxx] from [unit]. After landing they were joined by [UDF team member A] and [UDF team member B] and worked together to locate the signal. Even though the hangar seemed occupied they could not gain anyone's attention. The [local] PD was called to the location and also could not get anyone to come to the door, and were not able to enter the hangar. A follow up was conducted the next morning and the signal had ceased.

That's exactly the way it was supposed to be done.

1. Notify someone - ATC, another CAP member, AFRCC directly if necessary.

2. Stayed in the area, but didn't self deploy, i.e. start looking for the ELT until the proper time.

This isn't rocket surgery. The rules in place for a reason, and they aren't that hard to follow.

Sigh. That's what I love about internet forums - the knee-jerk judgmental opinions one gets by people who didn't take the time to find out the details before rendering their opinions.

What part of this does anyone claim I violated? I heard an ELT. I had 2 1/2 hours of fuel available beyond reserves. I notified ATC. I remained aloft orbiting the area at about 8000 feet. I contacted a ground station, who later turned out to be the IC. He contacted the Wing commander who gave authorization for me to try and get a bearing while the IC organized ground units to go check local airports. I was then directed to land and consult with the IC, who was happy that I had done as I had done. I was then requested to check an airport 50 miles away where an aircraft was overdue. I did, nothing was found and the incident was closed. I went home after 6 hours of flying that day. Would someone please tell me how it is that I don't fit in with CAP as a pilot?

[MilesDyson]

So I am arrogant person who does not understand anything about CAP and who should not even be a pilot in CAP. Wow. I sure am glad I stopped lurking on Captalk and started posting! Thanks fellow CAP members!

[Persona non grata]

Grow up, its only the virtual world here not the real one.   

[MilesDyson]

Grow up, its only the virtual world here not the real one.

Oh so in the virtual world CAP members don't have to be polite to each other. I get it.

[Mark_Wheeler]

Here's some closing traffic from a recent mission, sanitized.

AFRCC search mission 11M[xxx] was opened on 21 Aug and closed 22 Aug as a resulted of detection of a 121.5 ELT signal by a CAP aircraft already airborne on a proficency flight. CAP [xxx] tracked the signal to the [local] airport, landed, teamed up with a UDF crew and DF'ed the signal to a private hangar.

Non-distress finds authorized for Aircrew [member A] and [member B] and UDF team [member A] and [member B].

Details.
After calling in the distress signal¹ [Aircrew member A] and [Aircrew member B] remained airborne untill AFRCC could be contacted and a mission # assigned². They are both from [unit], and were flying CAP [xxx] from [unit]. After landing they were joined by [UDF team member A] and [UDF team member B] and worked together to locate the signal. Even though the hangar seemed occupied they could not gain anyone's attention. The [local] PD was called to the location and also could not get anyone to come to the door, and were not able to enter the hangar. A follow up was conducted the next morning and the signal had ceased.

That's exactly the way it was supposed to be done.

1. Notify someone - ATC, another CAP member, AFRCC directly if necessary.

2. Stayed in the area, but didn't self deploy, i.e. start looking for the ELT until the proper time.

This isn't rocket surgery. The rules in place for a reason, and they aren't that hard to follow.

Miles,
In that closing traffic, I'm the one that got the call. I was sitting on my computer at home and I had my personally purchased NTIA compliant ICOM radio next to me on the local repeater. Out of the blue I hear " Any Station this is CAP4XX" And I of course pick it up and ask what I can do to be of assistance. They report hearing the ELT in the vicinity of a major VOR in Southern California at a mid-level altitude and that the bearing as it was on the becker was 290. I reminded them not to DF the signal and I would contact an IC and open a mission. I then called the Wing Alerting Officer, whom advised me to contact an IC. The IC then called the alerting officer and opened the mission with AFRCC. I continued to act as relay (I'm a CUL) as the IC was geographically separated from the repeater. Then in a matter of 15 minutes the aircrew had found that the signal was on airport and we proceeded from there. It was under an hour from my first call to the ELT being identified at an airport.

Mark