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

[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.