Safety Follies -- Are We Really Safe?

Started by RADIOMAN015, May 07, 2011, 06:29:44 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RADIOMAN015

Interestingly while I was undercover at the NER Color/Drill Team competition, I observed during lunch time that a CAP van, with two senior members in it started to backup right next to the outside pavilion area that had in excess of 100 cadets & senior member walking/standing around for lunch.  The senior member in the passenger side DID NOT get out of the van to spot even though the van was right in the crowded area.   Fortunately a cadet (Maj or LtCol) ran behind the van and placed himself as a spotter so the van wouldn't hit the pavilion or any person walking out of the hangar/competition area.

I salute the cadet who did this  :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:  However, I've really got to wonder what the heck is wrong with those senior members in that van >:(   Also was there a safety plan/briefing for this competition and did it specifically state spotters will be used ANYTIME a van is backed up ??? :-[   Also got to wonder where all the safety officers were during this :-[     

Before any you start to chastise me for not running over, the cadet beat me to it.

HOWEVER again I've got to ask myself with all this administrative mumbo jumbo training & documentation are we really safe, what else do we need to do to make sure that simple safety procedures like this aren't overlooked :-[ :( >:(   
RM   

EMT-83

As Ron White says, you can't fix stupid.

mclarke


RADIOMAN015

Quote from: mclarke on May 07, 2011, 07:16:10 PM
heres your sign
Could you explain what you wrote above, it doesn't make sense to me ???
RM

Hawk200

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on May 07, 2011, 07:25:46 PM
Quote from: mclarke on May 07, 2011, 07:16:10 PM
heres your sign
Could you explain what you wrote above, it doesn't make sense to me ???
RM
A couple places to start: Here's your sign

Or you could try here: "[lmgtfy]Here's your sign[/lmgtfy]"

lordmonar

I don't know.....I have backed a vehicle up for the last 30 years or so....and have only hit something one or two times.

I really, really, really hate the "spotter" idea....or the concept that you are stupid if you don't use one.

It is just another one of those safety mandate that get imposed on use with no real value added.

If having a spotter is so important.....then no one should ever be able to drive a vehicle with out a shotgun to act as a spotter.

End of Rant.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

ol'fido

Quote from: Hawk200 on May 07, 2011, 08:25:37 PM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on May 07, 2011, 07:25:46 PM
Quote from: mclarke on May 07, 2011, 07:16:10 PM
heres your sign
Could you explain what you wrote above, it doesn't make sense to me ???
RM
A couple places to start: Here's your sign

Or you could try here: "[lmgtfy]Here's your sign[/lmgtfy]"
Git-r-done!!!!
Lt. Col. Randy L. Mitchell
Historian, Group 1, IL-006

wuzafuzz

We try our best to idiot proof everything, but there are some truly determined idiots out there.  In the meantime we really annoy the heck out of folks who are reasonably intelligent.
"You can't stop the signal, Mal."

jeders

Quote from: lordmonar on May 07, 2011, 10:43:59 PM
I don't know.....I have backed a vehicle up for the last 30 years or so....and have only hit something one or two times.

I really, really, really hate the "spotter" idea....or the concept that you are stupid if you don't use one.

It is just another one of those safety mandate that get imposed on use with no real value added.

If having a spotter is so important.....then no one should ever be able to drive a vehicle with out a shotgun to act as a spotter.

End of Rant.

:clap: :clap: :clap:
If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse

davidsinn

You know you had some really good points.

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on May 07, 2011, 06:29:44 PM
HOWEVER again I've got to ask myself with all this administrative mumbo jumbo training & documentation are we really safe, what else do we need to do to make sure that simple safety procedures like this aren't overlooked :-[ :( >:(   

Like that one; and this one

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on May 07, 2011, 06:29:44 PM
I salute the cadet who did this  :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:  However, I've really got to wonder what the heck is wrong with those senior members in that van >:(   Also was there a safety plan/briefing for this competition and did it specifically state spotters will be used ANYTIME a van is backed up ??? :-[   Also got to wonder where all the safety officers were during this :-[   

But you blow it when you say something ridiculous like this:

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on May 07, 2011, 06:29:44 PM
Interestingly while I was undercover at the NER Color/Drill Team competition,

Because the whole time I was reading it the only thought I had was: "Seriously?" You are constantly reminding us that we are civilians and that you are ashamed of the military connection and heritage that we have but then you pull secret squirrel like this and the OPSEC post and the rescue ricky crap about monitoring radio traffic with the phone number of base ops so you can call them if you hear something odd and identify yourself as a CAP officer. You really have no credibility.
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

a2capt

I just stopped reading when I got to the word "undercover".

RADIOMAN015

Quote from: lordmonar on May 07, 2011, 10:43:59 PM
I don't know.....I have backed a vehicle up for the last 30 years or so....and have only hit something one or two times.

I really, really, really hate the "spotter" idea....or the concept that you are stupid if you don't use one.

It is just another one of those safety mandate that get imposed on use with no real value added.

If having a spotter is so important.....then no one should ever be able to drive a vehicle with out a shotgun to act as a spotter.

End of Rant.
It was VERY poor judgement by those seniors in that van.  This particular circumstance where the vehicle was in relation to what was going on with the number of people walking around was dangerous.   Do we need a spotter every time, probably not BUT tell me what's the big deal if you have another competent person in the van with you to ask them to spot you while you back up ???
RM   

PHall

Was the backup beeper sounding while they were in reverse?
It's not like they were in stealth mode.

Now, here's my question. Did you stop the gentlemen in the van and ask them, civilly, why they didn't use a spotter.
Or would doing that have blown your cover since you were there "undercover".

Hawk200

Quote from: wuzafuzz on May 07, 2011, 11:48:55 PM
We try our best to idiot proof everything, but there are some truly determined idiots out there.  In the meantime we really annoy the heck out of folks who are reasonably intelligent.
Seen a few of those determined idiots.

Personally, I like the quote: "Everytime you idiot-proof something, someone invents a better idiot."

I think it pretty much covers it.

NCRblues

wow...really radioman....
After all your crazy post as of late, i have come to the conclusion that you are just trolling this board.

Your post's make no sense at all...you make it well know that you hate the military connection that CAP has. You claim military service, yet don't understand simple base entry procedures or simple (brick wall simple) opsec....your a fake, a phony that just likes to cause trouble on the board.

Who sent you "undercover"? Id like to know, because "undercover" is not authorized by any rule or regulation in CAP or AFMANS.... A good argument good be made that you were stalking or harassing the people that you were watching while "undercover".

Please, do each and every one of us a favor, and show yourself to the door.....
In god we trust, all others we run through NCIC

EMT-83

Despite the manner in which the original post was made, the point is valid.

Without taking the time to look us the exact numbers, we all know that backing accidents account for large percentage of avoidable vehicle incidents. In fact, CAPR 77-1 requires the use of a spotter when one is available.

Whenever members are willing to ignore data, not to mention regulations, because they know better or have more experience, or whatever the excuse might be, there is a problem.

RADIOMAN015

#16
Quote from: NCRblues on May 08, 2011, 06:12:04 AM
wow...really radioman....
After all your crazy post as of late, i have come to the conclusion that you are just trolling this board.

Your post's make no sense at all...you make it well know that you hate the military connection that CAP has. You claim military service, yet don't understand simple base entry procedures or simple (brick wall simple) opsec....your a fake, a phony that just likes to cause trouble on the board.

Who sent you "undercover"? Id like to know, because "undercover" is not authorized by any rule or regulation in CAP or AFMANS.... A good argument good be made that you were stalking or harassing the people that you were watching while "undercover".

Please, do each and every one of us a favor, and show yourself to the door.....

I like CAP too much to quit. I do believe in supporting the overall 3 overall missions of CAP within my personal limitations.  Some of my posts sometimes appear to inflame some members -- it is not my intention to inflame anyone, I am not trolling the boards (perhaps some members just need to take a step back a bit).  Perhaps "undercover" is the wrong/poor word choice to use :-[-- I was not in a CAP uniform (thus I really wasn't in the position to go up to a CAP van and stop them and ask them about use of a spotter in a congested area, and also that cadet had enough safety attitude to go and help them immediately when he saw the issue, so it was solved by a cadet -- also wouldn't you think IF I ran up to them not in uniform that this would cause a problem ??? >:().

Regarding CAP's long history with the military, I am fully aware of our WW II activities and what we continue to do for the AF.  The point of it is we are Civilians and again I would refer every member to do a comprehensive reading of AFI 10-2701 to FULLY understand what our current relationship with the USAF is.   I never use my CAP rank when talking with AF military & civilian personnel (or any outside agency), just my name (sometimes squadron) and Civil Air Patrol.  I make no apology about wanting to see primarily senior members go to Blue flight suits & Blue BDU's and perhaps change the tapes to red background as well as the rank to red background due to differentiation issues on missions.

Regarding OPSEC, I believe what any member observes going on while they are "inside the fence line", shouldn't be broadcasted to the public.  (The military & civilian employees aren't telling others, for those of you that think you are so military related as CAP members wouldn't you think you would do the same thing ??? >:( ).   

I am also fully aware about base security procedures and challenges the security personnel face.  I have a radio scanner/receiver dedicated to various intrabase radio nets, so have real time information as to what may be happening.

I am a retired AF military officer (primarily serving during the "cold war"/Viet Nam)  who also was an NCO for a number of years before being commissioned. 

I don't lie on this board, and some other things I've been proactive on (e.g. ELT signal on base, open transmitter mike on base ops/command post frequencies), are reasonable within my limitations and show the local military officials that CAP is ready to assist (also I personally know the person in charge of the command post :angel:).
RM

caphornbuckle

A question for the OP:

Was the vehicle in motion before the cadet stepped up to the plate and performed the duties of the spotter?

The reason I ask is that perhaps the cadet was assigned the duty of spotting for vehicles at the event and perhaps the signal that the driver was ready was to put the vehicle in reverse and activate the backup alarm thus getting the cadet's attention to perform his duties.

Just something to think about.
Lt Col Samuel L. Hornbuckle, CAP

jimmydeanno

You know, I'm starting to wonder where people get their driver's licenses where they can't back up a 12 passenger van with windows all around it.

When I turned 21 I got my Class A driver's license.  I didn't go to a driving school, just read the manual, and took the road test.  I had a job that only required a class B license.  It was a tank truck, with two side windows and the windshield.  The only way to see where the edges of the vehicle were, were the side mirrors.  I had no difficulty backing into spots that had mere inches on either side, down hills, around corners, near trees, fire hydrants, people, whatever. 

I drove our squadron's van on the flightline of the airshow we had this weekend.  THOUSANDS of people everywhere.  I didn't hit anyone.

I honestly can't stand using a spotter.  I don't need someone else backing me into something because they don't understand the turning radius of the vehicle I'm driving, or that I can't turn that hard, etc.  I've seen spotters make backing up a far more difficult task than it needed to be, making the driver have to make 3-4 attempts at a straight shot.
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

SarDragon

One of my teen jobs was driver for an auto parts store. I drove a full size van with all metal sides. There were windows in the doors, front and rear, and mirrors on both sides. Parking in the back of the store involved backing up an alley with a right angle turn to the back of the store, all with just mirrors. Backing anything else I've driven has been relatively easy.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

lordmonar

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on May 08, 2011, 04:38:05 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on May 07, 2011, 10:43:59 PM
I don't know.....I have backed a vehicle up for the last 30 years or so....and have only hit something one or two times.

I really, really, really hate the "spotter" idea....or the concept that you are stupid if you don't use one.

It is just another one of those safety mandate that get imposed on use with no real value added.

If having a spotter is so important.....then no one should ever be able to drive a vehicle with out a shotgun to act as a spotter.

End of Rant.
It was VERY poor judgement by those seniors in that van.

BS!  No one was killed, no one was injured.  The fact that some one helped out is a non player. 

QuoteThis particular circumstance where the vehicle was in relation to what was going on with the number of people walking around was dangerous.   Do we need a spotter every time, probably not BUT tell me what's the big deal if you have another competent person in the van with you to ask them to spot you while you back up ???

That is exactly the attitude that I hate with safety!  Instead of the safety person actually justifying his position....they fall back to the "what's the big deal"  "It only takes a second"  "don't question the reflective belt".

If you need a spotter use one.  If you don't need one don't use one.  End of story.

If the SM were operating their vehicle in a negligent/unsafe manner....then why did you not correct them on the spot and/or report them to the the appropriate commander?
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

BillB

I drove a F-350 van for several years, and never had a problem backing up. Perhaps rather than CAP requireing spotters, CAP should have a driving test and instruction on driving vans.
Gil Robb Wilson # 19
Gil Robb Wilson # 104

sneakers

CAP does have a test to get a CAP driver's license. The problem is, no matter what you do at the top (ORM, Intro to Safety, etc.), that doesn't fit the root problem, which is people's apathy/stupidity.

Eclipse

Quote from: pilot2b on May 13, 2011, 05:24:16 PM
CAP does have a test to get a CAP driver's license. The problem is, no matter what you do at the top (ORM, Intro to Safety, etc.), that doesn't fit the root problem, which is people's apathy/stupidity.

There is no CAP test for a CAP driver's license.
The approval is based on a subjective review of the applicant's driver's record as provided by the respective Wing's DMV.


"That Others May Zoom"

jimmydeanno

Quote from: Eclipse on May 13, 2011, 05:26:34 PM
Quote from: pilot2b on May 13, 2011, 05:24:16 PM
CAP does have a test to get a CAP driver's license. The problem is, no matter what you do at the top (ORM, Intro to Safety, etc.), that doesn't fit the root problem, which is people's apathy/stupidity.

There is no CAP test for a CAP driver's license.
The approval is based on a subjective review of the applicant's driver's record as provided by the respective Wing's DMV.

My last wing made all of their driver's take a driving evaluation in each type of vehicle they wanted to be able to drive.  The squadron's transportation officer would go through a briefing about the differences between their Honda Civic and a 15-pax, then go through a series of maneuvers with the driver.  If they passed, their application was sent in with the evaluation sign-off, and they'd get licensed in that type of van.
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

davidsinn

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 13, 2011, 06:02:16 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on May 13, 2011, 05:26:34 PM
Quote from: pilot2b on May 13, 2011, 05:24:16 PM
CAP does have a test to get a CAP driver's license. The problem is, no matter what you do at the top (ORM, Intro to Safety, etc.), that doesn't fit the root problem, which is people's apathy/stupidity.

There is no CAP test for a CAP driver's license.
The approval is based on a subjective review of the applicant's driver's record as provided by the respective Wing's DMV.

My last wing made all of their driver's take a driving evaluation in each type of vehicle they wanted to be able to drive.  The squadron's transportation officer would go through a briefing about the differences between their Honda Civic and a 15-pax, then go through a series of maneuvers with the driver.  If they passed, their application was sent in with the evaluation sign-off, and they'd get licensed in that type of van.

I like that..
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

Eclipse

Sounds good on paper, until you encounter a state with more than a few miles from end-to-end, and the LGT is in another part from the
rest of the population.

Be careful what you wish for...

"That Others May Zoom"

jimmydeanno

Quote from: Eclipse on May 13, 2011, 06:15:04 PM
Sounds good on paper, until you encounter a state with more than a few miles from end-to-end, and the LGT is in another part from the
rest of the population.

Be careful what you wish for...

I think I noted that it was each individual unit's transportation officer that did the evaluation, not the Wing's.  They'd do them at the unit meetings, then scan/mail the application and evaluation record.  It wasn't a burden at all, really.  I think the most our unit's had to do at one time was two in one night.
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

Spaceman3750

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 13, 2011, 06:02:16 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on May 13, 2011, 05:26:34 PM
Quote from: pilot2b on May 13, 2011, 05:24:16 PM
CAP does have a test to get a CAP driver's license. The problem is, no matter what you do at the top (ORM, Intro to Safety, etc.), that doesn't fit the root problem, which is people's apathy/stupidity.

There is no CAP test for a CAP driver's license.
The approval is based on a subjective review of the applicant's driver's record as provided by the respective Wing's DMV.

My last wing made all of their driver's take a driving evaluation in each type of vehicle they wanted to be able to drive.  The squadron's transportation officer would go through a briefing about the differences between their Honda Civic and a 15-pax, then go through a series of maneuvers with the driver.  If they passed, their application was sent in with the evaluation sign-off, and they'd get licensed in that type of van.

I don't think that proves you're a safe driver in a specific vehicle so much as you can drive it once without screwing up.

Eclipse

Not to mention who decided what was appropriate? I understand and even semi-agree with the idea, but unless there is some evidence to
show the need, one could certainly question the extra effort.

After all, despite the assertions by some people that these are somehow "different", in 99% of the cases these are standard passenger
vehicles, not exactly rocket science.  At legally posted speeds there should be no issues, even fully loaded.  Most of the mishap reports
I have read indicated a failure of common sense, which is hard to evaluate objectively.

In a wing with groups, at least three people are supposed to be subjectively evaluating someone's fitness for a CAP DL.

"That Others May Zoom"

jimmydeanno

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on May 13, 2011, 06:52:39 PM
I don't think that proves you're a safe driver in a specific vehicle so much as you can drive it once without screwing up.

Maybe state DMVs should stop having drivers take the driving exam, then. 
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

Spaceman3750

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 13, 2011, 07:17:18 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on May 13, 2011, 06:52:39 PM
I don't think that proves you're a safe driver in a specific vehicle so much as you can drive it once without screwing up.

Maybe state DMVs should stop having drivers take the driving exam, then.

In my state I won't be required to take another road test until I'm 75 (at least that's what I gather from the website). Apparently they don't take them very seriously either.

Eclipse

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on May 13, 2011, 07:32:22 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 13, 2011, 07:17:18 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on May 13, 2011, 06:52:39 PM
I don't think that proves you're a safe driver in a specific vehicle so much as you can drive it once without screwing up.

Maybe state DMVs should stop having drivers take the driving exam, then.

In my state I won't be required to take another road test until I'm 75 (at least that's what I gather from the website). Apparently they don't take them very seriously either.

It depends on your driving history.  You have to have some level of testing interaction every 9 years, sometimes just a written test, but if you
have accidents or tickets they raise the bar.

"That Others May Zoom"

davidsinn

Quote from: Eclipse on May 13, 2011, 07:48:20 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on May 13, 2011, 07:32:22 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 13, 2011, 07:17:18 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on May 13, 2011, 06:52:39 PM
I don't think that proves you're a safe driver in a specific vehicle so much as you can drive it once without screwing up.

Maybe state DMVs should stop having drivers take the driving exam, then.

In my state I won't be required to take another road test until I'm 75 (at least that's what I gather from the website). Apparently they don't take them very seriously either.

It depends on your driving history.  You have to have some level of testing interaction every 9 years, sometimes just a written test, but if you
have accidents or tickets they raise the bar.

Maybe in the People's Republic of Illinois. Here in Indiana all we have to do is renew our license. That's being done online now.
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

Spaceman3750

Quote from: davidsinn on May 13, 2011, 07:56:41 PM
People's Republic of Illinois.

+1 :angel:

Yeah, he meant Illinois. We're in the same wing.

davidsinn

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on May 13, 2011, 08:02:08 PM
Quote from: davidsinn on May 13, 2011, 07:56:41 PM
People's Republic of Illinois.

+1 :angel:

Yeah, he meant Illinois. We're in the same wing.

Ah. Did not know that. I live close enough to Chicago that it has effects on my area. Mainly idiots that can't drive and high crime rates.
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

Eclipse

Indiana's online renewal appears to be about the same as Illinois.

"That Others May Zoom"