Will CAP ever give GSAR serious attention?

[Jerry Jacobs]

I pointed out that with No DF gear for 406Mhz readily availible that meant sending Ground Teams to the GEO Cords of the fix

I've been working on a new technique with working a 406 mHz signal.  I just recently found out one of my radios has the capability to listen into them.  So the next time I go on an ELT hunt I'm going to monitor 406 if we have confirmed 406 SARSAT hit.  But with the half second data burst it will be near impossible to DF it without ideal conditions and Doppler equipment.

[heliodoc]

^^^^

Great suggestion there, RiverAux

Think the leadership could ever dream up the word regional resource, regional training centers, or the like?

It really isn't that hard to do this stuff locally.  But the taskbook sure leaves alot to be desired.  So making up scenarios at the squadron level isn't that hard and yes I have seen some easy ones, too.

Lack of GSAR by CAP-USAF?   More like CAP.... USAF has the highly skilled PJ's and are pretty revered from the past......and doing great work now.

Square the problem on the "new corporate leadership" at CAP.  There is where ALLL the HELP and education needs direction.

It's easy to come out with a task book with no real support behind leaving it up the squadrons to dream up whatever they need.  So apparently it is up to individual squadrons, because there is really NO training STANDARDIZED training support in tow from NHQ, so in CAP you get what you get, Wing by Wing.....  CAP in its zeal, should have all sorts of scenarios based training packets distributed to each Wing...if not , too bad, whatever the individual Wing or squadron dreams up should be good enough then, huh?  ' Cuz there is NO National training packet or standardized training support for GSAR...just a MART ....truly a sad state of affairs....

With that kind of training support... I feel my Infantry skills received in the RM for map and compass, map reading, and land nav ought NOT be questioned...nor should any other member who is signing of SQTR's with those backgrounds.  Too often in CAP the question appeared..."where did you get that info?"  I still carry my Army FM's with me so there is NO question who is the SME SET in CAP.  None of this task book training is that difficult...but there are those folks in CAP, pilots included, that think it's a waste of time or supplement "last minute training" to fill time.

Good on arajca for his work at COWG

[NavLT]

Jerry Jacobs you should start a topic on 406 Mhz and tell us about your radio and how it works out! Awsome.

RiverAux has a very valid point about having somebody who does GSAR at the right levels of staffing.  When I attended Middle East Region SAR College, I found they had a LtCol on Region staff as an additional duty who was the Ground SAR guy.  They acutally did some of the resource stuff you suggested but they are rare recognizing the need, finding a good guy to fill the role and working with the Evals to generate real training and real evals.

I find that many of the evaluations get the laundry list of known weaknesses (IE you need to flex CISM, Flight Line, and Section cheifs because the roles are not getting used enoug).  So they write a scenario that has a big componenet of those items roled in but they don't connect it to the reason they fail in the first place.  They don't actively train and use them locally all the time.  If you never do flight line functions because the local FBO does it, then when you pull together 8 CAP A/C for a major search who has the skills?  I recently had a lot of mirth at the Plans Section cheif role being enforced from wing for a SAREX, they mandated the role, the only people qualified were the old school ICs (by default I might add) who dont generally do Plans to begin with.  Then they had a sarex that lasted 5-6 hours which is enough time to build the IAP and maybe launch a sortie or two but leaves all the functionality of multi shift and Planning the next Op period to dust.  The PSC trainee was trying to do what ICS 300 did a fair job of teaching but the IC/PSC was firmly in I can do all these functions myself. 

Having done ICS in Fire and EMS at some larger incidents the whole image of a new style trainee and an old style trainer was like watching an old Candid Camera episode wondering when allan funt was going to jump out.

[sardak]

I've been working on a new technique with working a 406 mHz signal.

Jerry Jacobs you should start a topic on 406 Mhz and tell us about your radio and how it works out! Awsome.

Good idea, these thoughts get lost when posted in unrelated threads like this one. He could start a new discussion or add it to one of these threads that discuss 406 DF.
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=9609.0
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=4246.0
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=9103.0
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=9160.0
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=8692.0

Mike

[Short Field]

the whole image of a new style trainee and an old style trainer was like watching an old Candid Camera episode wondering when allan funt was going to jump out.

You are forgetting that the whole purpose of a SAREX is to launch the first sorties as fast as possible and then go to breakfast.  This is followed by getting the correct hobbs and tach times, fuel slips, and then lunch.  As soon as lunch is over, the SAREX is officially over - with the exception of the pesky ground team that is still slowly (less than 115 Kt per hour) making its way back to town.  Who needs a planning staff?

[lordmonar]

Or vans 

[billford1]

If we consider how well we are networked with official Emergency Response organizations how well they know us matters a lot. If we tell them we'll show up we have to be able to guarantee that we'll really show up with so many people. The fitness of the GT Members matters a lot but so does our ability to get them there. We don't have helicopters or many off road vehicles. What we do have are vans that are limited for where they can go. There aren't many 4WD vehicles available. If we show up and there's a long walk involved we have to consider who we can call on who can get to the injured persons quick enough.  I really hope that someday CAP stops buying the big rear wheel drive vans that are limited to paved roads without much mud or snow. With their well known roll over risk when loaded with people I would invite CAP get rid of them.  As for GSAR the video I saw that showcased the Colorado GSAR school impressed me a lot. I like it when I can get qualified Cadets who want to come along. They're very able but I think about keeping tabs on them and having enough situational awareness to make sure they're not encountering a dangerous situation like hazardous terrain, isolation or criminal activity that they could encounter by chance. Motivated qualified Cadets are great to bring along when we can get them. I just want to make darn sure that they're well tuned in with the GTL who should be risk conscious.

[RiverAux]

Of all the reasons CAP's GSAR capabilities are underutilized, vehicles are probably about the least important.  You can drive WAY into the depths of some of the most isolated parts of the US in our vans.  Can you get everywhere?  Of course not, but I'd say that we can probably get to almost anywhere a GSAR command post is likely to be set up anywhere in the US in dry weather. 

My WAG on this would be that a very, very, tiny percentage of GSAR cases require any 4WD. 

So, getting new vehicles for GSAR is not on my list of national level priorities. 

Besides, I'd be willing to wager that if there are parts of the country where 4WD is absolutely essential, CAP members are likely to own them as POVs and could use their vehicles if absolutely necessary for a mission in that situation. 

[Short Field]

If we consider how well we are networked with official Emergency Response organizations how well they know us matters a lot. If we tell them we'll show up we have to be able to guarantee that we'll really show up with so many people.

That is the major issue I see with GSAR.  I know I do not have the capability to guarantee I can even field a five person ground team.  I can launch at least 80% of the wing's aircraft on a given weekend for a search but I never know if I can round up enough people who are ground team qualified.    The last time we tried it, we got all of five people to respond.   

[SARDOC]

Do we still need to teach fundamental GSAR? Yes, 
Do we still need to learn and become proficient in GSAR? Absolutely
Should we complain that we are not being used like we used to? Not any more than we should cry that we no longer bomb u-boats.

Okay..Now that's funny

[lordmonar]

1.  Well, first they need to highlight ground SAR in the CAPabilities handbook.  In the "Overview" section ground SAR is only mentioned in passing (we list having 900 vans and then happen to mention they're used by ground SAR teams).  Under "Personnel", ground SAR is mentioned pretty far down the list, but at least its there.  We're the largest ground SAR organization in the country and we should make that known.

Are we?

2.  I think there needs to be some strong encouragement from NHQ that working on developing ground SAR missions is a priority.  As CAP is the Civil AIR Patrol, we have a very air-centric culture as might be expected and I just don't think that ground SAR is very high on anyone's agenda, especially the pilots that dominate the organization.

I agree....but how to affect that change?

3.  Ramp up the Ground Branch Director training qualifications significantly.  As I said, we're probably not going to be running any missions ourselves, but in order to conduct decent CAP exercises our GBDs need to know more about ground SAR planning than they do now.  We need GBDs that know more than how to hide an ELT.

NOPE!  The PSC does the planning.  The GBD sorties, tracks and supervises the TACTICAL planning that can only be done by the GTL.   As a GTL I don't want the GBD dictating anything to me...just give me the task.  The PSC is the one generating the task and determining what area needs to be searched.  More training at the PSC and the GTL level are of course both warrented.  But of all the ES specialties the GBD is one of the few that is a square peg in the square hole.  Don't screw with it.

4.  I hate to open this can of worms, but we need some physical fitness standards for ground team members.

Agreed...what standard?

5.  In the past I have suggested mission-related skills promotions be given for those with military background that gave them some of the skills we expect to see on ground teams.  That didn't go over well here.  As an alternative, perhaps we should think about giving them for those with certain NASAR qualifications as a way to encourage more ground SAR people to join.  We would still expect them to test for CAP ES qualifications just as we do with pilots and radio folks, but give them a leg up in rank.  Much as I hate our mission-related skills system, so long as we have one, we might as well try to make it work for us and help get us some more ground SAR folks.

Half and half on this.....assuming that we plan to bring our GT training in line with NASAR standards.....would that mean we would promote from within?  What NASAR standard would go with what rank?

[lordmonar]

Of all the reasons CAP's GSAR capabilities are underutilized, vehicles are probably about the least important.  You can drive WAY into the depths of some of the most isolated parts of the US in our vans.  Can you get everywhere?  Of course not, but I'd say that we can probably get to almost anywhere a GSAR command post is likely to be set up anywhere in the US in dry weather. 

My WAG on this would be that a very, very, tiny percentage of GSAR cases require any 4WD. 

So, getting new vehicles for GSAR is not on my list of national level priorities. 

Besides, I'd be willing to wager that if there are parts of the country where 4WD is absolutely essential, CAP members are likely to own them as POVs and could use their vehicles if absolutely necessary for a mission in that situation.

When your vans get pulled to support RSC instead of GSAR training it is a problem.

[arajca]

Of all the reasons CAP's GSAR capabilities are underutilized, vehicles are probably about the least important.  You can drive WAY into the depths of some of the most isolated parts of the US in our vans.  Can you get everywhere?  Of course not, but I'd say that we can probably get to almost anywhere a GSAR command post is likely to be set up anywhere in the US in dry weather. 

My WAG on this would be that a very, very, tiny percentage of GSAR cases require any 4WD. 

So, getting new vehicles for GSAR is not on my list of national level priorities. 

Besides, I'd be willing to wager that if there are parts of the country where 4WD is absolutely essential, CAP members are likely to own them as POVs and could use their vehicles if absolutely necessary for a mission in that situation.

When your vans get pulled to support RSC instead of GSAR training it is a problem.

How about when all the wing vans get pulled to support national and regional activities for most of the summer?

[heliodoc]

^^^^ X2

AHHHH Yes, the old addage...."corporate property" comes to mind on alll that corporate capital equipment!!!!

[RiverAux]

We're the largest ground SAR organization in the country and we should make that known.

Are we?

I haven't been able to find a ground SAR team with 4,000-5,000 members.  NASAR membership may be in that range, but they are not an operational organization so I don't count them. 

[Jerry Jacobs]

We're the largest ground SAR organization in the country and we should make that known.

Are we?

I haven't been able to find a ground SAR team with 4,000-5,000 members.  NASAR membership may be in that range, but they are not an operational organization so I don't count them.

The National Association for Search and Rescue is composed of 132 instructors, 247 evaluators, 84 lead evaluators, and 10,533 members

http://www.nasar.org/nasar/downloads/Chapter_1_-_NASAR_Description.pdf

[heliodoc]

NASAR, albeit, small has plenty of information and training on SAR that many of us in CAP do not realize who may be tapping THEM for SAR expertise before us.

So what if NASAR is small?  They obviously have a dedicated and training program with just as many "real" evaluations or MORE than CAP does for training and curriculum evaluation.

Not counting them?  How do CAP members KNOW they do not work as an operational organization?  They are not operational 'cuz they are not flashing around with toys and equipment provide by Uncle Sugar and the USAF, running around with BDU's and chest full of bling?

Next thing you know, CAP will say is they are more operational than CERT and other volunteer organizations..,.

CAP has its place.  NASAR, with its small membership, has a definite place in the whole SAR picture.  Some of THEIR training is just as "hard core" as CAP's, but it really looks like NASAR has its stuff together with the various curriculum / class loads out there and probably just as stand up and effective as CAP 's old favorite.....NESA.

CAP members do not "have to count NASAR as operational."  But some statements by CAP members here on CAPTalk.....probably do not know all the facts on other organizations true SAR capabilities just 'cuz they are not floating around with a uniform and 39-1 in their hand, rendering them nearly useless in some CAPTalk arenas

[arajca]

NASAR is NOT an operational organization. Don't believe me, how about this little piece of information:

The National Association for Search and Rescue, Inc., (NASAR) is a not-for-profit membership association dedicated to advancing professional, literary, and scientific knowledge in fields related to search and rescue. NASAR is comprised of thousands of paid and non-paid professionals interested in all aspects of search and rescue - the humanitarian cause of saving lives - throughout the United States and around the world. "...that others may live."

Response to persons in distress has long been an honorable, charitable tradition. The professionals in search and rescue have carried on this tradition of helping others by dedicating time, information, skills, equipment and funding to the relief of suffering. We are actively working toward the development of improved coordination and communications among federal, state, local, and volunteer groups. Our primary goal is to develop and provide professional credentialing products and services for your search and rescue community.

So, you can't count them as as SAR agency.

[heliodoc]

OK

I will admit my ignorance and will stand corrected...which many on CAPTalk readily will not admit when they are wrong

So why then is CAP so bent against NASAR and its credentialing system anyway...obviously CAP thinks its "SAR" program is far superior to NASAR's.

CAP vs NASAR credentialing process...seems to me that CAP is CAP specific whereas NASAR is a professional service to outside SAR community
CAN CAP claim that? 

I do not see CAP in the credentialing biz OTHER than CAP itself.

Did not say  I did not believe anyone here.....but there are CAPTalkers here who get real defensive about their CAP SAR only centric world as if the  entire SAR and EM community is knockin at CAP's door for CAP's services.

Maybe if there was a TRUE CAP STANDARDIZED training system in ALL 52 Wings...not PAWG, NESA, NBB etc etc etc etc etc alll CAP...then MAYBE CAP would not have its 68 going 69 yr old identity crisis it has begging for missions and claiming we are cheaper....somebody still pays directly or indirectly no matter how CAP sells itself as nationally  credentialed SAR organization

I will stand corrected as NASAR as not being a SAR agency.  But CAP still does not carry a SQTR nor true DR  curriculum...prove that CAPTalkers

[arajca]

I will stand corrected as NASAR as not being a SAR agency.  But CAP still does not carry a SQTR nor true DR  curriculum...prove that CAPTalkers

No argument here.