Long term viability of CAP as an air SAR/DR force

[RiverAux]

The latest Airman article has a good article on the AF Predator program http://www.af.mil/news/airman/0707/uav.shtml

If you pay attention you'll see that they're flying just about as many hours with the Predator as CAP flies on AF missions.  Sooner or later these hot wars are going to cool down and they're going to have a lot of excess capability and it will start cutting into CAP missions. 

Lets face it, the Predator is just more capable than CAP in some areas.  It is far superior to CAP in terms of aerial damage assessment, which has been one of our few growth areas (it seems).  It may be better for general visual search missions as well. 

Yes, prices are still very high for these things and availability is still limited, but that will change over time.

Frankly, I am not very optimistic about the long term viability of CAP as a primary provider of light aircraft services in disaster and SAR.  We're probably still good for another 5-10 years before really starting to get squeezed, but thats about it. 

Combine this with the fact that more and more local sheriffs departments are getting helicopters and the increasing restrictions on CAP's ability to actually do the low level flying needed to spot missing airplanes and the outlook is not good. 

Will the AF still want to fund corporate airplanes primarily used for cadet o-rides and occassional transport missions (which are also increasingly restricted)?  Or, will they begin to look harder at the CG Aux model using all private planes for which the CG Aux reimburses gas and some maintenance money?   

[ZigZag911]

Right now the Predators are too valuable in combat zones to use them much domestically.

Will that change some over the years?  Yeah, I'd think so....but I still see them being used sparingly:

1) in situations where you prefer not to risk human aircrew (marginal weather, mountainous terrain, forest fire recon)

2) in situations where there is a lot of territory to narrow down as soon as possible.

I'm not sure how good the UAVs would be on DFing, for instance.....I think that requires a human touch, hearing the signal firsthand.

[RiverAux]

By the way, I'm not forgetting the significant concerns voiced by AOPA about using UAVs in the airspace with other aircraft.  First, I think that concern will drop over time and second, the option is still available (to the FAA of course) to close the airspace over the search area to all but UAVs below a certain altitude. 

[ZigZag911]

I was not aware of AOPA's concern regarding UAVs....I guess in heavy traffic airspace it makes a great deal of sense....but that is not generally where I'd see UAVs used.

You now where they could really replace us big time is CD....

[RiverAux]

I'm not sure how good the UAVs would be on DFing, for instance.....I think that requires a human touch, hearing the signal firsthand.

Not really.  Some human judgement would be necessary to get a pinpoint location, but I'm confident a UAV could probably get more than close enough for ground teams to take it from there.  

But, as we all know, UAVs will not be the cause of decreasing CAP ELT missions -- that will be the change in ELT technology that will gradually eliminate a significant percentage of the missions we have now.  Thats the other hurdle our program faces.  

[RiverAux]

You now where they could really replace us big time is CD....

Some Wings aren't even doing the traditional pot hunting now and are just being used as aerial radio relay platforms for the NG helicopters flying at very low levels.  You can bet that the National Guard will want to use their new toys for this mission as well -- though their helicopter pilots aren't going to want to hear it. 

[floridacyclist]

I'm not sure how good the UAVs would be on DFing, for instance.....I think that requires a human touch, hearing the signal firsthand.

That would be easy enough by radio relay so that the drone operator and asst would hear exactly what a pilot and observer would be hearing.

[Flying Pig]

I have thought about this myself.  Especially in here in Ca.  It is very common to here that Law Enforcement has several aircraft of their own.  My Dept has an extremely organized and dedicated SAR team.  My Dept has 2 helicopters and a Stationair TC.  The PD has two helos and a 206, and the CHP has one helo and a 206.  And were all at the same airport.  Although the PD doesn't do SAR.
There are a lot of departments out there who have aquired aircraft through Homeland Security grants. 

[ZigZag911]

I'm not sure how good the UAVs would be on DFing, for instance.....I think that requires a human touch, hearing the signal firsthand.

That would be easy enough by radio relay so that the drone operator and asst would hear exactly what a pilot and observer would be hearing.

I'm still not convinced that one can do as effective a job 'wing nulling' and other tricks of the trade from 20+ miles away....time will tell, of course

[RiverAux]

You shouldn't need to hear the signal in order to DF it anyway. 

[Dragoon]

You shouldn't need to hear the signal in order to DF it anyway. 

Ahh, but it sure does help!  :-)


I've wondered about how UAVs will affect us.  I think they will end up cutting into what we do now.  So will satellite imagery, which is getting better in resolution and timeliness every day.

I can see a peacetime Army and USAF volunteering UAVs for searches because it provides great operator training. 

But my guess is we've got a decade or two to go before things really change.  It's just like the 406 ELT - I've been hearing for over 10 years about how it's going to put CAP out of the ELT hunting business within a few years.  And I'm sure eventually it will - but it's taking a HECK of a lot longer than the naysayers proclaimed.  These things normally do.

[SeattleSarge]

Now this is the type of topic I joined this blog to discuss...

In the Puget Sound area several law enforcement jurisdictions have formed an aviation consortium.  It's called the Puget Sound Regional Aviation Project. They have combined fixed and rotary wing resources and have much greater response time.

Here is a link to the story:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002356419_helicopter03m.html

Our State Aviation Emergency Coordinator is using their assets more and more especially since CAP in Washington is having "organizational issues".

If CAP is to survive in this region, we must take aggressive action to get our own house in order.  Before this turns into a "if you can't beat em, join em" situation. 

-SeattleSarge

[Dragoon]

Now this is the type of topic I joined this blog to discuss...

In the Puget Sound area several law enforcement jurisdictions have formed an aviation consortium.  It's called the Puget Sound Regional Aviation Project. They have combined fixed and rotary wing resources and have much greater response time.

Here is a link to the story:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002356419_helicopter03m.html

Our State Aviation Emergency Coordinator is using their assets more and more especially since CAP in Washington is having "organizational issues".

If CAP is to survive in this region, we must take aggressive action to get our own house in order.  Before this turns into a "if you can't beat em, join em" situation. 

-SeattleSarge

Washington State has had problems with CAP  since at least 1995.  That's when I first corresponded with the State employee responsible for Air Search and Rescue.  I can't remember his name, but he truly had it in for CAP - I think he was an ex member.  It got so bad that when a CAP member crashed, he allegedly forbid CAP from participating in the search.  The poor pilot was found frozen to death, and CAP sent Doug Isaacson (the CP guy from National at the time) up to investigate.  He intimated that keeping CAP out of the search helped kill the guy!  Needless to say, this kind of rhetoric didn't exactly mend any fences.....

I believe that guy was at the heart of the creation of WASAR (http://www.eskimo.com/~c180tom/), which kind of eliminated CAP's monopoly on air search.  From the looks of the web page, things have gotten a little better.  I don't recall CAP being mentioned at all on the site in the past.

But yeah, if the sheriff's dept is willing to underwrite the cost of the helicopters, I'd use them before CAP fixed wing as well.  The cost is the only reason not too, and it seems like they've got enough bucks to take that objection off the table.

[Pumbaa]

Just an FYI.. You are going to find that UAV is going to be called UAS..

The emphasis is on 'System' rather than vehicle.

[RiverAux]

Well, it looks as if the overall assessment of the group is pretty pessimistic as to whether or not we're still going to be doing much air sar/dr in the future.

[sandman]

Will the AF still want to fund corporate airplanes primarily used for cadet o-rides and occassional transport missions (which are also increasingly restricted)?  Or, will they begin to look harder at the CG Aux model using all private planes for which the CG Aux reimburses gas and some maintenance money?   

If I were "suddenly in command" as national commander, I would prefer the CGAux air model, and lobby hard to reroute the same funding from airframe procurement, repair, and replacement to officer and cadet development, training, and "deployment" opportunities.

I agree that our corporate air force will become an obsolete entity shortly. Funds should be available to wings to dole out to squadrons for deployments, fuel reimbursements, repair, maintenence, membership development of individual skills and scholarships for cadets.

/r
LT

[Dragoon]

It might make sense to wait until the airfleet becomes obsolete rather than starve it while it's still needed.

I remember the "bad old" CAP when no two planes were the same, and a plane might sit on the ground all day because the owner/pilot wasn't around and didn't want anyone else flying his baby, and when many of the owner planes didn't have all the equipment we really need.

There are real advantages to having a standardized fleet of aircraft, all with GPS's, CAP radios, IFR instrumentation, etc.  Not something to throw out early.

[wingnut]

Gentleman

the current cost of one global hawk is 20 million dollars, and the cost of ground crew is more than 1 million plus per year ( 10-20 FTEs) fuel cost per hour is in-excess of $1,000 plus maintenance. Ops requires the use of an extensive Satellite High Speed Communications link (there is a charge for each second of data use) a close source tells me with all the costs a Global hawk is about $4,000 per hour to operate, can you see a global hawk doing a grid search (I don't think so). Besides they will be stationed at Bases such as several in a few California bases and they are not a 24-7 operation, those will have bombs on them if they do, well that would be a disaster have a bomb fall off a global hawk or one of its off spring, hit a US City, than again what a great way to eradicate the dope, NAPALM

As for the Local PDs getting homeland security money for Aircraft, that is true, but how long will it last, PDs get money for things and can't support it. I believe CAP is doing a week job of Liason with the Local Governments, we need people like the 'Flying Pig" to help us become more user friendly resouces to the Cities we live in.

[RiverAux]

You're forgetting that most States have tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars of airplanes and helicopters in their National Guards so high cost isn't an issue.  Right now distribution is limited, but it will not be that way for long.

Its ridiculous to think that they can only fly with rockets or bombs on them and they're certainly not going to be doing that within the US except when they're training specifically for that mission. 

[ZigZag911]

If I were "suddenly in command" as national commander, I would prefer the CGAux air model, and lobby hard to reroute the same funding from airframe procurement, repair, and replacement to officer and cadet development, training, and "deployment" opportunities.

This was the situation (use of privately owned aircraft) well into the 80s.

The problems included:

--limited aircraft availability
--aircraft not properly or fully equipped for SAR
--lack of aircraft standardization

As long as we have a flying role -- at least cadet orientation flights -- there will be a need for some corporate AC

[Ricochet13]

One way or the other, it will all boil down to a matter of dollars.  Funding at all levels of government is going to remain very tight for at least the next couple of decades. 

While UAV/UAS will be a growth area for the military and the services are already competing to see which will control this resource - interservice rivalry which will be reminiscent of the funding battles in the late 40's-early 50's. 

However,  the costs of deploying this asset in situations similar to those CAP handles will be limited and  use of CAP aircraft in the initial stages of a mission will continue.

That having been said however, all levels of CAP from flight/squadron through CAP-NHQ need to continue developing the missions profiles which can be successfully accomplished. 

The advantage being that few governments./agencies will be willing to pay more than the least expensive option will charge to perform the mission.  Somewhat like the "Iron Law of Wages" economists refer to.

[SARMedTech]

The latest Airman article has a good article on the AF Predator program http://www.af.mil/news/airman/0707/uav.shtml

If you pay attention you'll see that they're flying just about as many hours with the Predator as CAP flies on AF missions.  Sooner or later these hot wars are going to cool down and they're going to have a lot of excess capability and it will start cutting into CAP missions. 

Lets face it, the Predator is just more capable than CAP in some areas.  It is far superior to CAP in terms of aerial damage assessment, which has been one of our few growth areas (it seems).  It may be better for general visual search missions as well. 

Yes, prices are still very high for these things and availability is still limited, but that will change over time.

Frankly, I am not very optimistic about the long term viability of CAP as a primary provider of light aircraft services in disaster and SAR.  We're probably still good for another 5-10 years before really starting to get squeezed, but thats about it. 

Combine this with the fact that more and more local sheriffs departments are getting helicopters and the increasing restrictions on CAP's ability to actually do the low level flying needed to spot missing airplanes and the outlook is not good. 

Will the AF still want to fund corporate airplanes primarily used for cadet o-rides and occassional transport missions (which are also increasingly restricted)?  Or, will they begin to look harder at the CG Aux model using all private planes for which the CG Aux reimburses gas and some maintenance money?   

Predators and other drone type assets are invaluable. But I think that there are better ways that the USAF-CAP team could spend its resources in terms of personnel, finance and material assets.

[SARMedTech]

You now where they could really replace us big time is CD....

Some Wings aren't even doing the traditional pot hunting now and are just being used as aerial radio relay platforms for the NG helicopters flying at very low levels.  You can bet that the National Guard will want to use their new toys for this mission as well -- though their helicopter pilots aren't going to want to hear it. 

Here is another possible ground team tasking in cooperation with LE...ground teams walking suspected areas of marijuana planting and along with LE (as an armed presence because pot growers dont appreciate losing their product) destroying the plants and further disrupting the growth and distribution. One area where this would be effective is getting farmers permission to walk through large farm fields with LEOs looking for pot plants between the rows. This is VERY common, since the pot growers can just sort of leach on to the use of water and pesticide from the farmer and alot of time, once corn and other cereals get big enough, the farmer may not know the plants are there depending on how automated his farming operation is. If he is a resounding NO [explative] WAY! and a slamming door, you might find that we have helped law enforcement by providing the beginnings of probable cause for a search warrant of the field since a farmer not engaged in growing pot probably wouldnt mind having a team inspect his property so long as we were careful with his crops. What a great use of ground teams!

[SARMedTech]

PS- as someone who was on the ground at the WTC and as an EMT in the Gulf states after katrina, I can say that there would be one major consideration for natural distaster relief should CAP get involved, and its something that just must be thought of long and hard and not just dismissed out of hand. I worked with an EMS agency in NO that allowed me to carry a sidearm for self defense from looters, angry disaster victims, desperate family members, etc. Eventually if CAP is to go hard and heavy with DR, somebody needs to have the conversation of us being armed, even if with less lethals, or of having armed escorts. The mindset after a natural disaster can be more deadly than the disaster itself. There were many murders and rapes that occured after Katrina and also attacks on members of the Red Cross, USCG an CGAUX. Its not a pleasant topic or a popular one, but one  that must never the less be seen for what it is...the elephant in the room. The old, we've never done that, our charter doesnt allow for it, the CAP-USAF complex would never allow it argument simply cant be sufficient. We have to look at the realities of this issue. Almost all DR/EM training and educational programs (even as grass roots as CERT teams) include some in depth discussion of how disaster relief workers protect themselves from people who have lost everything including their loved ones, feel that the DR workers arent doing enough and start to do some desperate things they would not otherwise do. Im not some gun toting yahoo and I would live for the rest of my life if I had to take a life or inflict less lethal harm against someone during DR, but the fact is that we are no good to anyone if we are dead or injured and then our families have to deal with it. Perhaps it comes down to things like ASP batons (with certification training) OC spray, LE level tasers, etc, rather than firearms, but its something that cannot be dismissed because the first time that a CAP member is killed or maimed by a desperate disaster survivor, CAP is going to pull out and all hell is going to break loose. There is talk in the DR community about the use of less lethals including things like blaze orange painted shotguns with bean bag rounds and batons....even old fashion riot clubs. Something would be a necessity. And of course the less imposing it seems to the public the better as in no knives at crash sites. But we will all go to CAP funerals sooner or later, do we really want to do it because one of our officers or God forbid a cadet is killed in service to others? I know i dont.

[ZigZag911]

You may be correct, but I have to admit the concept of CAP personal armed (even with 'less than lethal' weapons) makes me uncomfortable.

Have there been actual incidents in which CAP personnel were accosted/assaulted?
I mean documented, not just anecdotal evidence.

I'm thinking it will be hard to find....this is one instance, I believe, when the military style of our uniforms probably offers some protection to the members -- people in these circumstances, under this stress, seeing regular military & National Guard all over the place, no doubt assume we are armed, even if the weapons are concealed!

[SARMedTech]

To my newbie knowledge, no CAP officers have been attacked during the course of their duties to the extent that they would neaalled to resort to deadly force. What I was trying in my long winded way to indicate is that this is becoming a genuine concern in the DR/EM community. Even CERT is contemplating letting team members carry OC. I know they will be in the team I am in the process of starting. Im just thinking about information I am getting through the grapevine in grad school and would hate to see a CAP officer hurt by a desperate and grieving disaster survivor or looter. Thats all. The idea of all DR officers with guns is a little nervous making, but I still say that the need for protection in a really solid DR team needs to be addressed. Of course, most of us are armed to the teeth anyway...survival knives, entrenching tools, pocket knives,  axes in our packs. Like they told me in EMT school, anything is a weapon if you swing it hard enough.

PS...sorry about taking up other peoples space by typing multiple long posts in a row. I will stop doing that. Sorry, friends.

[Hawk200]

I know there has been a lot of talk of using unmanned aircraft to do the kind of work we do, but there is an issue that does come up. You cannot operate any of those aircraft for less funding than most CAP missions. The're expensive. I think we'll be around doing that for awhile, we're cheaper.

[Dragoon]

On UAVs - as long as the war's on, they won't be available for anything but the biggest disasters (killing bad guys takes precedence, dontcha know).

Once the war's over, you'll probably see the military (especially the NG) offer up UAVs for ES work because of the training benefit.  After all, they're gonna fly either way; might as well do someone some good while they're up there.  But this assumes we get over the FAA/NTSB objections about UAVs and manned aircraft sharing the airspace - that may take a little time.

On the gun topic - I doubt CAP needs to be a "leader" in the area of arming ES personnel.  If it becomes the standard, we can look at it.  And be prepared to pay double or triple dues to cover the additional corporate liability insurance......

[RogueLeader]

If you have Cadets/SMs walking corn fields, be sure to have water, water, water, even more water, and salt tablets.  Having walked corn rows in July, with the corn being watered, makes for long hot work.  I wasn't paying attention and almost had to go to the hospital.  Heat stress/strokes are no fun at all.

[SARMedTech]

If you have Cadets/SMs walking corn fields, be sure to have water, water, water, even more water, and salt tablets.  Having walked corn rows in July, with the corn being watered, makes for long hot work.  I wasn't paying attention and almost had to go to the hospital.  Heat stress/strokes are no fun at all.

Not for nothing, but salt tablets have pretty much gone the way of the dodo bird because we know a little more about fluid metabolism than we did 50 years ago. I wouldnt give salt tablets to anyone who was dehydrated as an EMT and I would strongly try to get them away from them before they took them. There is a medical addage: Where salt goes, water goes. When your dehydrated, especially severely t the point where electrolytes are in trouble, pure salt may as well be cyanide. The body cannot handle high concentrates of salt when dehydrated. It needs isotonic saline..less than 1% What will happen is that there body will not be able to process that salt safetly and it acts as a toxin, so the body tries to get rid of it...by urinating and taking water with it, increasing dehydration, further depleting electrolytes and sends heat stroke and core temp through the roof and the chance of metabolic shock increases on something like orders of 10. If you must give salt, it MUST be isotonic which salt tablets are not. the best thing is 1 part gatorade to one part water or even better the same mixture of pedialyte because it doesnt have as many flavorings and colorings and crap which the already compromised system would really rather not have. If Im the health services officer and I find someone with salt tabs, im going to do my best to flush the tabs down the john and give then powdered gatorade instead. No sir...no salt tabs for anyone I am looking after. If dehydration and heat stroke are severe enough, you may as well give cyanide caps.

[RogueLeader]

Just rechecked the label. . . sodium chloride, and potassium chloride, added up to like 4 or 5% as active ingrediants.

[SARMedTech]

Just rechecked the label. . . sodium chloride, and potassium chloride, added up to like 4 or 5% as active ingrediants.

Im not sure if you mean the salt tablets or the electrolyte replacers...but 4 or 5% is still too high for straight salt. There have also been studies where salt tablets cause th e tongue to swell and partially occlude the upper airway.  Even in most EMS agencies where ringers lactate have largely gone by the way side in favor of D5W and
.9% saline IV prefereably in the anti-cubital space if your patients veins arent shot from dehydration. Salt tablets just arent good. Not on my HSO watch 

[thefischNX01]

As an aside, In response to the first post by SARMedTech, he makes a valid argument that we haven't really considered in terms of weapons.  When a disaster strikes, and as he said, people have lost property and loved ones, this creates what ciminologists refer to as Anomic Conditions.  Anomic Conditions are when the norm has been altered and no longer exists.  In this case, society is gone and anarchy has replaced it.  Usually law abiding citizens are placed in a different mindset: survival.  Anomic Conditions increase one's propensity for crime, and in the post-disaster world of survival, people aren't rational, they are instinctive.  I'm sure they saw the Uniforms the Coast Guard and National Guard guys were wearing, but it didn't register as much as "I bet that guy has some food".  Or, as SARMedTech also said, they feel their needs aren't being attended to as well as they should have, and they become violent.  We have to remember that we're sitting here in a (nice) house with a computer, and they may be lucky to just have a roof over their heads and a hot meal.  Who knows what any of us would do if we suddenly were forced to fend for ourselves.  Some food for thought. 

With regard to the original topic, however, I think it depends on what CAP wants to do.  If we want to stay with Emergency Services, being SAR and DR, we might want to look outside the Air Force to remain current and keep the missions coming.  However, if we wanted to play a greater role in Homeland Security and other related missions, we should grow closer to the Air Force. 

However, I don't think the issue is lack-of-missions, it's the standards of professionalism we place on our members.  According to Samuel Huntington and his book "The Soldier and the State", the first thing any militarized force needs is a high degree of professionalism.  Sadly, CAP is poorly lacking in this.  If we want to stay competitive in ES, the first step is to require all members to take the FEMA NIMS courses, like every other ES Agency in the United States.  (My wing is experimenting with this, so I'll get back to you on it's effect.)

Bottom line: With professionalism comes missions. 

[RiverAux]

Predators and other drone type assets are invaluable. But I think that there are better ways that the USAF-CAP team could spend its resources in terms of personnel, finance and material assets.

I wasn't proposing that CAP use them, I was saying that as they become more widely distributed within the National Guard that there is a high probability that they will become the air SAR asset of choice rather than CAP -- not that they would be particularly more effective than we would be (and yes, they do have some advantages) its just that when people have toys, they want to use them and the owners of these toys will be in desperate need of justification for having them in the first place and will be fighting hard to use them whenever possible. 

[RogueLeader]

Just rechecked the label. . . sodium chloride, and potassium chloride, added up to like 4 or 5% as active ingrediants.

Im not sure if you mean the salt tablets or the electrolyte replacers...but 4 or 5% is still too high for straight salt. There have also been studies where salt tablets cause th e tongue to swell and partially occlude the upper airway.  Even in most EMS agencies where ringers lactate have largely gone by the way side in favor of D5W and
.9% saline IV prefereably in the anti-cubital space if your patients veins arent shot from dehydration. Salt tablets just arent good. Not on my HSO watch 

They were electrolyte replacers, and that was the whole percentage of all active ingredients.  Not sure of just salt.

[SARMedTech]

Just rechecked the label. . . sodium chloride, and potassium chloride, added up to like 4 or 5% as active ingrediants.

Im not sure if you mean the salt tablets or the electrolyte replacers...but 4 or 5% is still too high for straight salt. There have also been studies where salt tablets cause th e tongue to swell and partially occlude the upper airway.  Even in most EMS agencies where ringers lactate have largely gone by the way side in favor of D5W and
.9% saline IV prefereably in the anti-cubital space if your patients veins arent shot from dehydration. Salt tablets just arent good. Not on my HSO watch 

They were electrolyte replacers, and that was the whole percentage of all active ingredients.  Not sure of just salt.

OK..now I follow what youre saying. I just worry about salt tablets especially with the cadets. They can really be dangerous.  The tablets...not the cadets.

[RogueLeader]

Even when I took those, that was with plenty of water as well.

[SARPilotNY]

Need we talk about the CAP member that pulled over the DUI suspect and held him at gunpoint until the state troopers arrived?  (In a CAP uniform)
Firearms for CAP will keep F. Lee Bailey flying high at our expense

[RogueLeader]

Need we talk about the CAP member that pulled over the DUI suspect and held him at gunpoint until the state troopers arrived?  (In a CAP uniform)
Firearms for CAP will keep F. Lee Bailey flying high at our expense

No.

[SARMedTech]

Need we talk about the CAP member that pulled over the DUI suspect and held him at gunpoint until the state troopers arrived?  (In a CAP uniform)
Firearms for CAP will keep F. Lee Bailey flying high at our expense

Probably not. He was disbarred for tax evasion I believe.

[Major Lord]

Bailey studied at Harvard College, and was a member of the class of 1954 [3]. He dropped out of Harvard[4] to join the United States Marine Corps in 1952, and received his aviator wings in 1954. He served as a jet fighter pilot and a legal officer. He was discharged in 1956. Bailey received his LL.B. from Boston University, where he was first in the graduating class of 1960.

A Marine and an Aviator? You can almost forgive him for being a criminal defense attorney! Well, almost...

Capt. Lord

[RiverAux]

Lieutenant General Daniel James III
Vice Chief, National Guard Bureau and Director,
Air National Guard

2007 Posture Statement: http://www.ngb.army.mil/ll/Reports/07/posture07/james.html

On November 25, 2004, the Secretary of the Air Force and Chief of Staff of the Air Force outlined a Total Force vision for Air Guard Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance by calling for the standup of two MQ-1 Predator flying units in Texas and Arizona by June 2006 to help fill worldwide Reconnaissance, Surveillance, and Target Acquisition requirements. Air Guard Predator operations will first fill worldwide theater requirements, but will also likely evolve into providing direct defense for the Homeland in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Northern Command.

FYI, he also uses "America's Hometown Air Force" prominently.

And to pile on...in the same report...

Lieutenant General Clyde A. Vaughn
Vice Chief, National Guard Bureau and Director, Army National Guard

Unmanned Aircraft Systems. The SHADOW tactical Unmanned Aircraft System is being fielded to both Active and Army National Guard Brigade Combat Teams on an accelerated basis. The Army National Guard has a requirement for 36 SHADOW systems (one for each of our 34 Brigade Combat Teams and two Training Brigades). Twelve systems are currently funded by a combination of Army procurement and supplemental funding. If this positive trend continues, then all Army National Guard SHADOW requirements may be filled within current program funding.

Still think National Guard UAVs aren't a potential threat to CAP's ES missions?

[aveighter]

Actually, no.  At least not any time soon.  What he wrote is "pie in the sky" stuff.  Doesn't fit with the reality.

FOUO, SBU.

Nuff said.

[RiverAux]

Hmm, well if they've got 12 systems funded right now, it doesn't really seem like its going to take them very long to have them for every brigade, and if every brigade has them that means that they will be in most states of the country fairly soon. 

[SARMedTech]

Last time I checked, a UAV couldnt tend to a crash victim or carry them out of the crash site on a Stokes. I think we're ok. Thinking that we will be replaced by drones is the same sort of thinking that thought by this point in human history we would all be the lackies of robots. Not gonna happen.

[RiverAux]

Combine Army and Air NG UAVs along with the ever growing DHS Homeland Security Air Wings and they will cover just about every ES activity we can do with our airplanes. 

[ZigZag911]

RiverAux,

Did the ANG stand up the UAV units in Texas in Arizona by June of 2006?

It would be interesting to know what the status of that program is.

I still say our mission may change in ES, but we are not going away anytime soon unless we stay on the self-destructive spiral of recent years.

Mission + Members are our FIRST priorities.

[SARMedTech]

My stance remains the same:

UAVs are a great "weapon" in the arsenal and they may well be able to find downed aircraft, etc faster than we can. However, they cannot remove a person from a disaster site, they cant care for that person by providing food and water, they cant treat for shock or render any other kind of stabilizing care including emergency medical care of any sort. They also cannot carry a injured party out to the nearest road, or interact with non-CAP rescue personnel for the good of the victim. As others have said they may replace or diminish our role in certain situations, but when the rubber meets the road, there is no substitute for boots on the ground and situational decision making by GTs.

[Nick Critelli]

After working very closely with state emergency management and the Air and Army National Guard I believe that the need for ES/DR services within each state will only grow.  Remember two MAJOR events have rocked  the ES/DR world: 9/11 and Katrina.  Those events ushered in a whole new approach to how ES/DR is delivered. 

Start in February 2003 when President Bush issued HSPD-  "to (1) To enhance the ability of the United States to manage domestic incidents by establishing a single, comprehensive national incident management system.:   Enter NIMS.   

In December 2003 the President issued HSPD-8   National Preparedness" (HSPD-8). The purpose of HSPD-8 is to "establish policies to strengthen the preparedness of the United States to prevent and respond to threatened or actual domestic terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies by requiring a national domestic all-hazards preparedness goal, establishing mechanisms for improved delivery of Federal preparedness assistance to State and local governments, and outlining actions to strengthen preparedness capabilities of Federal, State, and local entities."  Enter the NRP.

A little known provision of NIMS created a classification system for all disaster-related resources. This classification system, provides a unified cross-agency, cross-jurisdictional means of classifying all resources that are or could be used in response to a NRP/NIMS event, whether these resources are equipment or personnel.   Enter the the National Resource Typing System (NRTS). 

That, my friends is the lay of the land.  Every state is working feverishly to be NIMS, NRP and NRTS compliant.   Resources (CAP is a resource provider) that are not compliant cannot and will not be used.

Now...  will CAP be "viable" in the long term for SAR/DR? Yes...but only if and until  it becomes NIMS, NRP and NRTS compliant. .  You and assure your Wing's viability...but you must do the following:

1.  Urge your Wing to establish a special NRTS task force that will study, study and study HSPD- 5 and 8 note those items which will apply to your Wing  in ES/DR work. Make sure you can comply.  If not create a plan to fix it.


2.  Develop a program that requires  all mission deployable members take and complete ICS 100, 200, 700 and 800 as soon as possible. This is easy to do and can be done on line.

3.  Require your Wing leadership, IC's,AL, PSC, OSC, ABD and GBD to attend and successfully complete ICS 300 and 400. Each is a two day residency course but they are a MUST.

4.  Beef up the inland SAR training for your members by the CG or NASAR courses.

5.  Have your GR develop a close working relationship with your state's director of Emergency Management and the state National Guard's Director of Military Support. and keep in regular monthly contact with them.

6. Lastly, understand and appreciate that  CAP is not a mere "vendor" of ES/DR services and the state/local government are not "customers".  We are all part of a governmental response. 

If you do the above... you will have a viable future.  If you don't you will probably survive but you will not be doing ES/DR work.

[RiverAux]

Our new enemies:
http://www.auvsi.org/

[SARMedTech]

Our new enemies:
http://www.auvsi.org/

The only enemy is ourselves when we become too sedentary and lazy to maintain current ES standards that everyone else in the country involved in ES is working very hard to train to meet.

There is really no excuse not to take the ICS sequence. As has been said it can be done online, 100 and 200 together can be completed in a couple of hours and for no cost. Most of the other courses can be completed through the DHS website at no cost.

The ES world is changing in leaps and bounds and the only way CAP ES will fall by the wayside is if its members refuse to keep pace with the national standards.

[Nick Critelli]

Our new enemies:
http://www.auvsi.org/

UAV's are not our enemy. UAV's equipped with TV can be a useful SAR tool...especially if it has FLIR capability.  It's just another tool for us to use for SAR/ES.  The key is for us to demand that NHQ stay abreast of this technology and start thinking out of the box. 

There's a whole new and wonderful role for CAP COMMS.   The technology and opportunity are about to intersect.  Think creative, be creative or die.

[Ricochet13]

Our new enemies:
http://www.auvsi.org/

The only enemy is ourselves when we become too sedentary and lazy to maintain current ES standards that everyone else in the country involved in ES is working very hard to train to meet.

There is really no excuse not to take the ICS sequence. As has been said it can be done online, 100 and 200 together can be completed in a couple of hours and for no cost. Most of the other courses can be completed through the DHS website at no cost.

The ES world is changing in leaps and bounds and the only way CAP ES will fall by the wayside is if its members refuse to keep pace with the national standards.

SARMedTech is absolutely correct.  FEMA-EMI offers a variety of courses which can add new insights and expand on training and knowledge already possessed.  I have taken many and find each has added something to how I view my participation in CAP.  You can access FEMA's independent Study Course List at http://training.fema.gov/IS/.  Take a look and see if one or more of the courses doesn't get you interested.

[RiverAux]

Folks that is completely off topic.  Our long term viability as an air SAR/DR force has nothing to do with the FEMA courses.  Heck, they aren't even officially required by DHS yet, so CAP isn't delinquent by not changing our regs to reflect standards that aren't even adopted yet.

And, even if we had already taken all of them it wouldn't do a darn thing about the fact that we're stuck with basically obsolete techniques using fixed-wing aircraft that won't be needed much longer for SAR/DR work. 

Yes, UAVs can be a great SAR tool, but we won't be the ones using them.  The ones we can afford have limited SAR uses and the ones that can do the job will be way too expensive for us for many years. 

[aveighter]

Folks that is completely off topic.  Our long term viability as an air SAR/DR force has nothing to do with the FEMA courses.  Heck, they aren't even officially required by DHS yet, so CAP isn't delinquent by not changing our regs to reflect standards that aren't even adopted yet.

And, even if we had already taken all of them it wouldn't do a darn thing about the fact that we're stuck with basically obsolete techniques using fixed-wing aircraft that won't be needed much longer for SAR/DR work. 

Yes, UAVs can be a great SAR tool, but we won't be the ones using them.  The ones we can afford have limited SAR uses and the ones that can do the job will be way too expensive for us for many years. 

A hearty chuckle and rolling of the eyes upon reading this stuff.     

[Nick Critelli]

River Aux ...Wake UP.

NIMS, NRP and NRTS is the law of the land. Even federal funds are tied to state compliance. If CAP is not in compliance we will be SOL.

[isuhawkeye]

UAV's are a long way from truly competing with the Mark 1 Eyeball. 

The issue is not optics, the Machine will always win on that realm.  They can read lisecnes plates, and beam those pictures around the world, but thats not a product that I see much demand for. 

The issue comes down to the human ability to recognize areas of probability, and to coordinate those observations with our ground teams. 

With this total package we can maintain a presence for decades to come. 

Unfortunately NIMS is the law of the land, and no matter how good of a product we have, and how dedicated our volunteers are we will no longer be a usable resource. 

[SAR-EMT1]

What does IOWA require of its ES types in regard to these courses?

[isuhawkeye]

everyone going through the OTS goes through ICS 100.  We then assign 200, 700, and 800 as home work. 

The amazing thing is that they are all doing it, and they come back eager for more. 

We are working with the other ES agencies int eh state to complete 300, and 400. 

we've got about a half dozen folks who have completed those last two courses.  Not bad so far. 

[RiverAux]

Yes, yes, NIMS is the "law", but as of at least a few months ago the actual standards for training for various SAR positions have NOT been approved and were only available in draft form.  More than likely the final versions will be similar to the drafts, but it would be stupid for CAP to take any significant actions until they are finalized. 

[ZigZag911]

CAP already requires ICS 300 for IC/AL2 and ICS 400 for IC/AL1.

[isuhawkeye]

OK guys this thread has gotten way off topic. 

Yes the standards are out, and are very new.  As of today what most agencies are doing is simply comparing their system to the drafts.  No major changes are expected immediately.   

YES CAP requires ICS for upper management positions.  Unfortunately our requirements do not match the prescribed break down as suggested by NIMS. 

The frustration on my end is that like many many issues CAP at the national level has provided no guidance on this topic, and many wings have plowed ahead. 

We have talked many times about NIMS, and resource typing.

As far as CAP's long term viability goes,

I truly believe that we are a viable resource, and that we will be in the future, but to be used we need to train to our standards, build local, and state relationships, act like a professional, and deliver a quality response to meet the needs of the other agencies. 

[sardak]

You're correct.  The credentialing "job titles" for SAR have not been finalized.  However, the requirements for NIMS training are independent of those, and have been phased in over several years.

FY07 NIMS compliance requirements for federal, state, local, tribal, private sector & non-governmental personnel to include:

Entry level first responders & disaster workers - EMS personnel, firefighters, hospital staff, law enforcement personnel, public health personnel, public works/utility personnel, skilled support personnel, other emergency management response, support, volunteer personnel at all levels
ICS-100, IS-700

First line supervisors, single resource leaders, field supervisors, and other emergency management/response personnel that require a higher level of ICS/NIMS Training.
ICS-100, ICS-200, IS-700

Mid-level management including strike team leaders, task force leaders, unit leaders, division/group supervisors, branch directors
ICS-100, ICS-200, ICS-300, IS-700, IS-800

Command and general staff, select department heads with multi-agency coordination system responsibilities, area commanders, emergency managers
ICS-100, ICS-200, ICS-300, ICS-400, IS-700, IS-800

An organization does not have to be NIMS compliant.  However, to receive federal grant money and to be eligible for response on an event of national significance, an agency has to meet NIMS requirements. 

Mike

[isuhawkeye]

 :clap:
thanks for summarizing the point

[RiverAux]

As I said, when all the specific standards are set, I'm sure CAP will get in line but that is just a short-term issue and won't affect our long-term viability. 

[JC004]

:clap:
thanks for summarizing the point

Will someone ever fix that applause emoticon?

[SARMedTech]

Yes, yes, NIMS is the "law", but as of at least a few months ago the actual standards for training for various SAR positions have NOT been approved and were only available in draft form.  More than likely the final versions will be similar to the drafts, but it would be stupid for CAP to take any significant actions until they are finalized. 

USCGAUX REQUIRES ICS 100 and 200 before you can even get on the water. With the entire ICS sequence freely available to anyone who wants/needs to take them, there just isnt any excuse.  I already have 100 and 200 under my belt, but I took them over a year ago and am going to take them online again to refresh my memory.

This is the kind of thing I am always talking about: people want to do good jobs, they say we are going to become obsolete if we dont get in line with federal ES/DR programs and they are right. Im not really sure why you see so resistant to take FREE courses that will make you better at what you do. It seems that you want to do the bare minimum to just get by. Youre always saying we are good enough, we have the basics down. Actually many members dont have the basics and even if all of us did, as I have said before: Is there some reason we cant do better than that?  The laws requiring ICS/NIMS is going to be the standard, thats a forgone conclusion, so why not spend some of the time you spend posting and take a few classes,...that way when they are the law of the land that would stop you from getting into the game if you dont have them, you will already have them as completed in your CAP records and be good to go. I just go crazy when I hear people talk about the fact that  "good enough." Why would any of us want to just be good enough. If we want to truly become a force multiplier, we have to be better than good, we have to be as nearly perfect.

Personally I think CAP should put this into play now. If I were a unit commander I would say, you have 2 months to get ICS 100 and 200 or you are out of the game until you have proof that you have completed them.

[davedove]

Personally I think CAP should put this into play now. If I were a unit commander I would say, you have 2 months to get ICS 100 and 200 or you are out of the game until you have proof that you have completed them.

That is exactly what Maryland Wing is doing.  Everyone is required to have the classes, based on their specialty, by the end of September to retain their ratings.

[Ricochet13]

Yes, yes, NIMS is the "law", but as of at least a few months ago the actual standards for training for various SAR positions have NOT been approved and were only available in draft form.  More than likely the final versions will be similar to the drafts, but it would be stupid for CAP to take any significant actions until they are finalized. 

USCGAUX REQUIRES ICS 100 and 200 before you can even get on the water. With the entire ICS sequence freely available to anyone who wants/needs to take them, there just isn't any excuse.  I already have 100 and 200 under my belt, but I took them over a year ago and am going to take them online again to refresh my memory.

This is the kind of thing I am always talking about: people want to do good jobs, they say we are going to become obsolete if we don't get in line with federal ES/DR programs and they are right. I'm not really sure why you see so resistant to take FREE courses that will make you better at what you do. It seems that you want to do the bare minimum to just get by. You're always saying we are good enough, we have the basics down. Actually many members dint have the basics and even if all of us did, as I have said before: Is there some reason we cant do better than that?  The laws requiring ICS/NIMS is going to be the standard, thats a forgone conclusion, so why not spend some of the time you spend posting and take a few classes,...that way when they are the law of the land that would stop you from getting into the game if you dint have them, you will already have them as completed in your CAP records and be good to go. I just go crazy when I hear people talk about the fact that  "good enough." Why would any of us want to just be good enough. If we want to truly become a force multiplier, we have to be better than good, we have to be as nearly perfect.

Personally I think CAP should put this into play now. If I were a unit commander I would say, you have 2 months to get ICS 100 and 200 or you are out of the game until you have proof that you have completed them.

Find myself in agreement with SARMedTech once again.  New squadron members are completing ICS-100 and 200.  Consider it part of being an active member.  Will eventually look to completing ICS-700 after tackling ES qualifications and PD.  Wing has had numerous discussions regarding ICS-300 and 400 level training. 

And this is connected to the long-term viability of CAP.  Not going to wait for national to act.  We will educate outselves on our own initiative.  The worst that might happen is that we learn something, the best that might happen is the we help lead the way.  The "cheese" has been moved.

Also noted that "Sovereign Deed, a civil defense firm" has announced it is expanding into the area.  http://www.petoskeynews.com/articles/2007/08/14/news/news01.txt.  Don't know if this is good or bad from CAP's perspective, but things are changing. 

Point is, "do something" to enhance the role and position of CAP.  If one thing doesn't work out, try something else.  Become viable by acting viable.  Even a wrong action is often better than no action.  Don't consider that "stupid" at all.  Think that's exactly what IAWG did and the result appears to speak for itself.

[RiverAux]

I am all for what will likely become the new standards.  I'm just against CAP wasting a lot of time writing and redesigning regulations, task guides, etc. before they are actually finalized.  Should we do all that now based on what we THINK will be the standards and then have to redo them next year?  Just not an efficient use of resources. 

We will adopt the new standards and it will certainly keep us in the ballgame, but it won't be enough to overcome the fact that our services just will not be up to 21st century needs, capabilities or standards in 10-20 years. 

[SARMedTech]

Im not really that worried about Sovereign Deeds. Ive heard a little about them and Im not overly impressed with what I have heard so far. What they are trying to do is be the Blackwater of ES. What I have read and heard tells me that have that mercenary, "we'll save you if you can afford us" type of mindset.

One thing that we do need to think about is that these kinds of groups are going to be cropping up, competing for their piece of the post-9/11 world in which we leave. Im hearing while working on my MS in biosecurity and emergency management is that alot of these operations that are fly by night. As I say, the are trying to be the private military companies of the ES world. However, that doesnt mean that we wont have to compete with them. These kinds of business are showing up and thats all the more reason that we have to step up and be better than just good enough and not wait until there is a deadline put on us to get ICS, etc done. We have to be very proactive.  Blackwater hasnt put the US military out of business and they cant, but you see who the US government calls when it needs someone to handle messy jobs. Its just a fact of life in 21st century Emergency Services.  Its also all the more reason that we need develop a fully functional medical rescue branch of CAP, because if we dont, as sure as God made little green apples, we will find ourselves being edged out by SAR/DR/ES mercenaries.

[RiverAux]

I hadn't really thought of that angle...

There is a precedent -- CAP used to do all sorts of blood-transport flights for the Red Cross until we were more or less run out by private companies doing it for a profit.  Since the 80s, the Coast Guard and CG Aux basically have had to give first dibs on towing boats to private for-profit companies in areas where such companies exist. 

There are more and more private med-flight helicopter operations across the country and what county might not want to put one on retainer for SAR backup duty? 

[ammotrucker]

I am all for what will likely become the new standards.  I'm just against CAP wasting a lot of time writing and redesigning regulations, task guides, etc. before they are actually finalized.  Should we do all that now based on what we THINK will be the standards and then have to redo them next year?  Just not an efficient use of resources. 

We will adopt the new standards and it will certainly keep us in the ballgame, but it won't be enough to overcome the fact that our services just will not be up to 21st century needs, capabilities or standards in 10-20 years. 

If you all think that the requlations will include these points, then I for one do not see then need to postpone the taking of these courses.

You all seems to get caught up in the what the reg's say currently, even though you know the reg's will be updated at some point.

I'm new to CAP and this site. 

But, I believe that if your going to be here.  You might as well be doing something that will benefit the organization.

[afgeo4]

When the operational tempo slows down in the military world, you'll find that funding for operations slows down with it.

Sure we'll have plenty of Predator and Global Hawk birds around to phase CAP out of work, but where's the money gonna come from? These aircraft don't cost $100/hr to operate you know. USAF already knows this and that's why so many new Predators will go straight to ANG. After the war they will end up flying a few times a month like any other ANG aircraft. Sure, they could have additional roles for the a/c like border patrol and others, but I suspect those roles will be handed out to active duty units primarily.

You'll also see many UAV's taking place of manned systems and those will operate in training mode most of the time.

Remember, although Predators are tasked with many missions and hours, there are still relatively few aircraft around, so the deployment tempo with those units seems to be much higher than any other. That will slow down drastically as most of the second generation Predators come on line.

CAP will still fly DR and some SAR (little) and a lot of HS work in the future because of the same reasons that we fly today and have flown since 1941. We're CHEAP!