Vehicle Roof Markings

[Capt Hudgins]

Our pilots would like our wing to put some sort of markings on the roof of our vehicles so they are visible from the air.  What do other wings do?  Anyone have an "best practices" out there?

Thanks!

[JC004]

Oh no!  It's back!

[Al Sayre]

Reference CAPR 77-1:

3-5. COV Appearance, Identification and Marking. COVs shall be maintained to the highest possible standard in order to reflect a positive image for the organization. With the exception of golf cart type utility vehicles, all COVs are to be marked in accordance with this regulation. Appropriate markings are as follows:

a. A vehicle identification number consisting of five digits (using 2-inch black numerals) shall be affixed to the lower left rear of hatch door on van type vehicles (see attachment 3). On trucks, affix numerals on lower left tailgate and on sedans affix numbers to the lower left bumper. The first two digits are the region or wing vehicle identity number. Example: 01XXX for Alabama, 23XXX for Missouri, 93XXX for Great Lakes Region, etc., (see attachment 4). Reuse of vehicles identity numbers is not authorized for a period of 1 year.

b. Only permanently affixed CAP emblem door decals shall be used on COVs. Magnetic door emblems are not authorized. These decals are to be centered on left and right driver compartment doors. Door emblems containing "US" can remain on vehicles until they must be replaced due to wear or fading. A decal featuring the CAP website shall be placed under the CAP emblem on side doors and centered on the rear of the vehicle. A CAP banner decal shall be placed on both sides of vans (see attachment 3). All CAP vehicle decals are available through NHQ CAP/LGT.

c. Rescue vehicle marking must conform to federal, state and local laws. The type of light bar used on vehicles must be approved in writing by the wing commander (region commander if a region vehicle) and must follow the narrowest guidelines established by the resident state and all surrounding states. Colors used on approved light bars will be amber or amber/white. Red and blue colors on light bars or the use of sirens are not authorized for use on any CAP vehicle.

Nope, don't see anything about marking the roof.

[Eclipse]

My wing does nothing.  The vans are bit white vehicles, easily spotted from the air, especially at our working altitudes.

No roof markings necessary.

[♠SARKID♠]

IIRC, the NCAC hacked this up in the past and while it seemed like a swell idea, national wasn't going to pay for it so it didn't happen.
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=1143.msg14430#msg14430

I don't have much time doing air searches, I'm a MS-T with only one sortie, but I seem to remember those vehicles being relatively small even at search altitude.  I don't know how much numbers on top of the vehicle would help.  I would think that you'd need something bigger for it to be worthwhile.  What are you going to do at night?

[jks19714]

...  What are you going to do at night?

That's easy - tritium paint like the old compasses.   Or you could use radium paint and then find it with a geiger counter... 

[Eclipse]

The NCAC?

At one point they were mandated, then  there an argument over what was to be used, and the expense, and then it was rescinded.

he requirement to paint distinctive roof markings for CAP vehicles was repealed by the March 2007 National Board. See note below.

In order to enhance Emergency Services operations, the August 2006 National Board approved the addition of distinctive roof markings for CAP vehicles. The memorandum contained detailed instructions for the design and application of those markings. They were effective upon receipt and were to be incorporated into the next edition of CAPR 77-1, Operation and Maintenance of CAP Vehicles.(Repealed by the March 2007 National Board)


March 2007 National Board Executive Summary of Agenda Items
LG CAP Vehicle Roof Markings
- Agenda item to repeal earlier decision to mandate orange triangle on roofs of CAP vehicles
- Passed


And based on the above quote, I would hazard they are not only unnecessary, but not authorized.

[ZigZag911]

I would question that roof markings are not necessary -- there are an awful lot of white vans on the road, at least here in NER!

[whatevah]

Several years ago there was a push locally to get all vehicles marked with a large orange triangle pointing in the direction of travel with the radio call sign of the vehicle behind it.  Considering how many plain white vans are on the road, it does help.  The decals were large, I think a 2 foot triangle and 18" numbers.

[Eclipse]

That wasn't local that was the national mandate that lasted about 6 months (see above).

The number of times that an aircraft would need to identify a CAP vehicle in a crowd of other vehicles approaches zero, and certainly doesn't
justify the cost.  Generally there is one, maybe two in the area, and in those cases they are usually by themselves.

Roof markings are needed when there are multiple identical vehicles (like police cars), and proper identification might be a life-safety issue or needed
later for legal identification.  That's just not a situation CAP encounters enough to justify the effort.

As I recall the cost was in the neighborhood of $3-500 per vehicle with installation.  The decals themselves were expensive and if not installed properly
were coming off in car washes and with regular use.

I know I saw a couple competed vehicles, but can't find any of the pics.

[EmergencyManager6]

My wing does nothing.  The vans are bit white vehicles, easily spotted from the air, especially at our working altitudes.

No roof markings necessary.

HAHAHAHA.  Do you know how many White vans there on on the road?  THOUSANDS!

[RiverAux]

Bright orange magnetic signs work ok.

[SarDragon]

Bright orange magnetic signs work ok.

Only if there's no roof rack. This isn't as big an issue on real vans, but many SUVs, including my personal 'Burb, have them, and any sort of roof marking becomes tedious and complicated.

[Eclipse]

Bright orange magnetic signs work ok.

Not on the roof.

If they are not applied properly, or not the correct magnetic strength, all it takes is a loose corner on the highway and the next thing you know
your arrow is on the windshield of the vehicle behind you.

Also, if you put them on over dirt, then can scratch the surface, which on a roof, especially, can cause corrosion quickly.

They are also easily stolen, which is likely the reason for the ban on mag signs on COVs.

[Eclipse]

My wing does nothing.  The vans are bit white vehicles, easily spotted from the air, especially at our working altitudes.

No roof markings necessary.

Do you know how many White vans there on on the road?  THOUSANDS!

What's your point?

Unless the "thousands" of vans are in the same vicinity of the CAP vehicle the aircraft is interacting with, how many others there are is irrelevant, and
the odds of another white van, let alone "thousands" of them being in the vicinity of a CAP vehicle interacting with an aircraft are slim to none, since rarely do we do a/g coordination on busy highways and streets.

Further, we are rarely tasked with searching for our own vehicles, and even more rare is that search at the Ford commercial vehicle assembly parking lot.

[isuhawkeye]

Back in the day this is what one wing did to their vehicles



http://isuhawkeye.blogspot.com/2007/10/vehicle-markings.html

[N Harmon]

I have had numerous aircrews tell me how difficult it is to spot a CAP vehicle from the air among the many vehicles on the road. And air/ground coordination without radio is a skill we are supposed to have. Markings seem like they would help a lot. We don't need numbers, or anything fancy. Just some bright lines to distinguish the CAP vehicle from the rest. Like maybe...

http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/3M-Conspicuity-Tape-4TDV4

Laid out as a double arrow pointing in the direction of vehicle travel.

\  /
\\//
 \/

[RiverAux]

Bright orange magnetic signs work ok.

Only if there's no roof rack. This isn't as big an issue on real vans, but many SUVs, including my personal 'Burb, have them, and any sort of roof marking becomes tedious and complicated.

Hood.

[EmergencyManager6]

Eclipse...have you ever flown in a CAP aircraft and tried to find a van?

"I have had numerous aircrews tell me how difficult it is to spot a CAP vehicle from the air among the many vehicles on the road"

[EMT-83]

Actually followed the wrong white van once at a SAREX. We were practicing ground/air coordination without direct radio contact between units.

Our van entered a section of road with a pretty good canopy. When it emerged from the trees a couple of minutes later, we resumed the track (of the wrong vehicle).  With communications relayed through mission base, it took a few minutes to figure out what had happened.

[EmergencyManager6]

Actually followed the wrong white van once at a SAREX. We were practicing ground/air coordination without direct radio contact between units.

Our van entered a section of road with a pretty good canopy. When it emerged from the trees a couple of minutes later, we resumed the track (of the wrong vehicle).  With communications relayed through mission base, it took a few minutes to figure out what had happened.

Eat it Eclipse!

[Eclipse]

Actually followed the wrong white van once at a SAREX. We were practicing ground/air coordination without direct radio contact between units.

Our van entered a section of road with a pretty good canopy. When it emerged from the trees a couple of minutes later, we resumed the track (of the wrong vehicle).  With communications relayed through mission base, it took a few minutes to figure out what had happened.

And then everyone moved on with their life.

Would roof markings make an occasional situation like this easier?  Probably.  Is it worth the $150-200k projected coast of retrofitting the fleet (low-end 2006 estimate)?
No.

[davidsinn]

You could get a cheap lightbar for less than the decals. Even if you didn't turn them on it should be more than distinctive for our purposes. Plus it has the addition feature of making you more visible on the flight-line and when stopped along the side of the road unlike the one trick pony that is a decal.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Actually followed the wrong white van once at a SAREX. We were practicing ground/air coordination without direct radio contact between units.

Our van entered a section of road with a pretty good canopy. When it emerged from the trees a couple of minutes later, we resumed the track (of the wrong vehicle).  With communications relayed through mission base, it took a few minutes to figure out what had happened.

Eat it Eclipse!

Just bursting with professionalism.

Can someone explain a reason for an aircraft to follow a van?

[Eclipse]

You could get a cheap lightbar for less than the decals. Even if you didn't turn them on it should be more than distinctive for our purposes. Plus it has the addition feature of making you more visible on the flight-line and when stopped along the side of the road unlike the one trick pony that is a decal.

A decent lightbar, professionally installed, would be even more, but a magnetic strobe from Pep Boys would be a good solution, and could be moved to other vehicles if needed, and stowed when no in use (less temptation to use it).

[RiverAux]

I have been in situations where they didn't want to broadcast target coordinates over the radio and they had the van lead the aircraft to the site. 

But, generally the aircraft is trying to lead the van somewhere.

[DakRadz]

Actually followed the wrong white van once at a SAREX. We were practicing ground/air coordination without direct radio contact between units.

Our van entered a section of road with a pretty good canopy. When it emerged from the trees a couple of minutes later, we resumed the track (of the wrong vehicle).  With communications relayed through mission base, it took a few minutes to figure out what had happened.

Eat it Eclipse!

Just bursting with professionalism.

Can someone explain a reason for an aircraft to follow a van?

So this is being posted by an Emergency Manager from FLWG??

A guy by that description was banned once. Then he made a second account, and I caught him, reported him, ban. Is this the third?

Of course, I could be wrong.

[jeders]

Actually followed the wrong white van once at a SAREX. We were practicing ground/air coordination without direct radio contact between units.

Our van entered a section of road with a pretty good canopy. When it emerged from the trees a couple of minutes later, we resumed the track (of the wrong vehicle).  With communications relayed through mission base, it took a few minutes to figure out what had happened.

I would wager that this almost never happens. Usually the only time that a marking on the roof would help is when a ground team is staged somewhere and the aircrew is going to lead them in. And then it's only really needed at the meetup. If your ground teams and aircrews are training properly, this becomes a moot point because they will know how to use other attraction techniques and how to maintain contact with a vehicle/aircraft. And in case you think I don't know what I'm talking about, at a recent SAREX I worked the same basic sortie on two separate days, first as an observer then as a GT SET.

[NIN]

bunch of years ago (1998? Ouch) I had a Nissan Pathfinder as my POV/GT Vehicle.
We went out on a SAREX once, aircrew kept complaining it was hard to see from the air (its not exactly a "big white van" or like Dave's big 'burb.)

So I went out, got a 3/8" sheet of plywood and cut a 4x5 or 4x6 chunk off, painted it gloss white, and then masked and sprayed an almost 4' wide orange triangle on it with not quite 2' high orange numbers below the triangle.  8 drilled holes and some of those industrial sized zip ties later, I had this big honking air-ground ID panel atop my GT vehicle.  Two pieces of foam pipe insulation kept the plywood from scratching up the roof rack.   It was easily removable with a pair of wire dikes, and reinstallable with 4 more zip ties. (again, I used the big thick black ones, not the little flimsy ones)

For a vehicle with a roof rack, it took about $25 in supplies to give it just enough to be seen and identified.

[SarDragon]

Bright orange magnetic signs work ok.

Only if there's no roof rack. This isn't as big an issue on real vans, but many SUVs, including my personal 'Burb, have them, and any sort of roof marking becomes tedious and complicated.

Hood.

BAD idea!

Sunlight at the correct angle can cause a horrendously distracting reflection.

[DakRadz]

Actually followed the wrong white van once at a SAREX. We were practicing ground/air coordination without direct radio contact between units.

Our van entered a section of road with a pretty good canopy. When it emerged from the trees a couple of minutes later, we resumed the track (of the wrong vehicle).  With communications relayed through mission base, it took a few minutes to figure out what had happened.

Eat it Eclipse!

Just bursting with professionalism.

Can someone explain a reason for an aircraft to follow a van?

So this is being posted by an Emergency Manager from FLWG??

A guy by that description was banned once. Then he made a second account, and I caught him, reported him, ban. Is this the third?

Of course, I could be wrong.

And the PM... By the way, everyone, I am in no way, shape, nor form a moderator, nor do I intend to impersonate one.

Though I did consider buying the site a few months back...

Your petty smart!

PLEASE ban me!   

I only spoke up in the first place because I've never seen anyone tell Eclipse (or anyone else) to "eat it." The attitude seemed familiar...

[KyCAP]

Hrm...

The saying.. "Trust but verify" comes to mind.

How about we start with the assumption there are "thousands of white vans" on the road.   When you make first contact.. Tell them to pull OVER to an driveway or shoulder of the road so that you can VERIFY you have them.   Takes 30 seconds, costs nothing.

Placing things on the roof is also going to have to be continuously maintained.. So, the $500 is just the start - 10 years later.. you're doing it again... If you need to stick antennas on the roof then you cause problems with the materials, etc.  For those of us who are learning from those who "been there and got the T-shirt" it's a "good idea" with a problematic implementation and very little payback...

[PHall]

Pull over to the side of the road, have somebody get out and wave?
Aircrew sees person waving, problem solved.

[♠SARKID♠]

Have cadet put on ANSI-3 safety vest, duct tape to roof.  Light cadet on fire for night ops. 

[SarDragon]

bunch of years ago (1998? Ouch) I had a Nissan Pathfinder as my POV/GT Vehicle.
We went out on a SAREX once, aircrew kept complaining it was hard to see from the air (its not exactly a "big white van" or like Dave's big 'burb.)

So I went out, got a 3/8" sheet of plywood and cut a 4x5 or 4x6 chunk off, painted it gloss white, and then masked and sprayed an almost 4' wide orange triangle on it with not quite 2' high orange numbers below the triangle.  8 drilled holes and some of those industrial sized zip ties later, I had this big honking air-ground ID panel atop my GT vehicle.  Two pieces of foam pipe insulation kept the plywood from scratching up the roof rack.   It was easily removable with a pair of wire dikes, and reinstallable with 4 more zip ties. (again, I used the big thick black ones, not the little flimsy ones)

For a vehicle with a roof rack, it took about $25 in supplies to give it just enough to be seen and identified.

Awesome idea! I bet that corrugated plastic they use for election campaign signs would work well, too.

[DakRadz]

Have cadet put on ANSI-3 safety vest, duct tape to roof.  Light cadet on fire for night ops.

Safety and CPPT come to mind, as well as pure idiocy.

You have to make sure the cadet is in a Nomex flightsuit if you're going to set them afire. Then it's okay. Remember what HMRS says- safety before uniform regulations!

[SarDragon]

From Dan, you really gotta assume a crap-ton of smileys with the post.

[DakRadz]

I was going for the same effect. Gotta read the second line as a continuation of the first, heh.

Besides, who wouldn't at least put on some Nomex before being set blazing?

[tribalelder]

Flexible magnetic sheeting in a contrast color either in the 3 foot triangle or cut into numerals (not necessarily ome piece numerals). There may be another white van, but not with roof of hood markings. Old sources were Dick Blick and Johnson Plastics- haven't done this anew in ages.

[RiverAux]

I just don't understand how anyone could believe that this isn't a good idea.  Certainly there are a lot of good ideas that may cost too much for CAP to implement and there are a variety of ways it could be done and those warrant discussion, but increasing the visibility of a target on the ground is ALWAYS going to make things easier on the aircrews.   

[BillB]

I'd almost bet that if you contacted your local police department opr sheriffs office they would sell at a reasonbile price or donate the 3 numbers that make up the radio call for each CAP vehicle. They have a large supply of numbers they put on the roof of police vehicles and might be willing to give CAP a set.

[Flying Pig]

I think its a great idea. Looking down and seeing "452" or whatever, on the roof top.  I know its a CAP vehicle and what their call sign is.  If there are several CAP vehicles in the area, I know and they know exactly who I am talking to.  A white van in an urban area!  They are everywhere!  There is a reason pretty much every LE and EMS vehicle has some sort of roof top marking.  Its for the aircraft.  Not for the people standing on their balconies!

All you have to do is get vinyl numbers and stick them on.  Im not sure where people are getting "$500 in materials".  Our Department cars have had them for years and they never require any up keep.  If you are planning on working with LE or other non-CAP air assets, it would really help.  Although CAP isn't setting up perimeters, thats how I do it in the helicopter.  "Rooftop 123, I need you at 5th and Elm.  Rooftop 456 I need you at 4th and Elm.."  "Rooftop 678, the suspect is in the back yard of that house you are parked in front of."  In LE, the roof top number is usually their call sign.  But when you have 15 cops on scene there is no way to coordinate what everyone call signs are and keep them straight. 

As far as blinding people which is what was mentioned earlier, Ive never been blinded or even seen any reflection off of rooftop numbers.  So far, any arguments against it that have been posted here, I would say are completely without foundation.  Im seeing more personal opinion stated as fact. 

If for some reason I was coming onto the scene assisting CAP as an LE helicopter or fixed wing, having rooftop numbers matching the call sign would be very helpful because thats what we look for.  If I was a CAP crew coming into an area I might not be familiar with or working with a unit I might not be familiar with, it definitely wouldnt hurt.

[lordmonar]

The $500 of materials and labor number came from the last time NHQ tried to mandate roof markings and wanted the squadrons to eat the costs.

I got no problem with pushing the costs to the squadrons.....that should be one of their jobs.   But the problem with the last time was that while it was standardised....it assumed that everyone had the same access to the right materials and labor.

What needs to bone is NHQ develope and purchase the 500+ orange decales and have the squadrons apply them.

[Flying Pig]

Is there something that says you cant just tape it off and stencil it real nice and just paint them with a rattle can?  It would take $3.99 and 15 minutes and would probably turn out pretty nice.  Or did it need to be $500 stickers?

[davidsinn]

The $500 of materials and labor number came from the last time NHQ tried to mandate roof markings and wanted the squadrons to eat the costs.

I got no problem with pushing the costs to the squadrons.....that should be one of their jobs.   

Why should the units be responsible for paying for an NHQ mandate for a corporate asset that doesn't even belong to them? I like the rooftop marking idea but Podunk Comp. Sqdn. should not be paying for it. Wing or higher should. Maybe use left over funds at the end of the year and buy one less vehicle with them and use that money instead to mark what we have?

[Flying Pig]

Is there something that says you cant just tape it off and stencil it real nice and just paint them with a rattle can?  It would take $3.99 and 15 minutes and would probably turn out pretty nice.  Or did it need to be $500 stickers?

OOOO  I have an idea!

Pig...your a genius....

Yes, I know, thank you.

[arajca]

Is there something that says you cant just tape it off and stencil it real nice and just paint them with a rattle can?  It would take $3.99 and 15 minutes and would probably turn out pretty nice.  Or did it need to be $500 stickers?

That was National's assumption when they mandated it earlier. Then people realized that many folks who thought they knew what they were doing, didn't. The rattle can paint jobs looked like crap and didn't last. To get one that looked decent and would last beyond the first hard rain, you needed to have it professionally done or use the same techniques. That cost $$$

[Flying Pig]

I guess expecting people to take the time to do it right was expecting to much.  And expecting them to touch it up once in a while was over the top.  I changed my mind. Its a very bad idea. 

[tribalelder]

Local spray can orange triangles made sense back when CAP vehicles were old DOD 125k miles clunkers. I did a few as a cadet in the day.  The flexible magnetic sheeting triangle or numerals was handy for POV's.

Current cost, not including shipping, from Blick art supply for the sheeting $6/foot from a 24 inch wide roll, so 2 one piece numerals, 24x18 inches would be about twice the cost of bad spray can supplies. If you 'pieced' the numerals, it would take less material.

Pluses- looks decent, only displayed when needed, low cost

Minuses - if roof has ridges, may have highway speed adhering problem, needs to be stored flat on metal - like on refrigerator or cookie sheet, may not lie flat if applied at low - like below 20

[RiverAux]

I don't know that the markings would need to be standardized as there aren't many vehicles of any type with orange markings on their roof.  Instead of one large symbol, if you've got ridges you could get a series of strips to lay along the flat parts. 

[Spaceman3750]

You could get a cheap lightbar for less than the decals. Even if you didn't turn them on it should be more than distinctive for our purposes. Plus it has the addition feature of making you more visible on the flight-line and when stopped along the side of the road unlike the one trick pony that is a decal.

but a magnetic strobe from Pep Boys would be a good solution

First hand experience from the last SAREX I was at says that the strobes don't have upward visibility (at least not the ones we were using, kinda like the Pep Boy light) - I know because I got on the radio and asked the aircraft leading us to the target. My team had two POVs, one with a rotator and one with a strobe, neither light could be seen from the air (though this was daytime and anything smaller than a mini lightbar is hard to see during the day).

On the topic of finding vehicles from the air, after they lost us once and were coming around for a racetrack to find us again we spotted them (we temporarily lost visual contact) and "We're at your five o'clock" was quickly followed by "OK, we see you".

[tribalelder]

Yes-don't need to standardize --Could use hood if roof has ridges ...  Just need to find OUR white van. As to strobe vs rotating light  -- ages ago I heard anecdotal account that rotating can work better as light gets low - no first hand knowledge on my part.

[SarDragon]

As far as blinding people which is what was mentioned earlier, Ive never been blinded or even seen any reflection off of rooftop numbers.  So far, any arguments against it that have been posted here, I would say are completely without foundation.  Im seeing more personal opinion stated as fact. 

That was probably me, and the reference was for stuff on the hood, not the roof.

[whatevah]

Fwiw... I have two bright yellow vehicles, and I've never been blinded by sunlight hitting the hoods.  If the sun is low enough to bounce light off the hood into my eyes, it's low enough to already be visible in the windshield.   YMMV 

[SarDragon]

Fwiw... I have two bright yellow vehicles, and I've never been blinded by sunlight hitting the hoods.  If the sun is low enough to bounce light off the hood into my eyes, it's low enough to already be visible in the windshield.   YMMV 

Shiny paint isn't an issue. The original suggestion was for "Bright orange magnetic signs", which I interpreted to mean reflective material, not just shiny.

[whatevah]

Oh ok. The rooftop markings locally aren't reflective, just contrasting colors. Black on white, white on black, yellow on dark blue (state police).

[NIN]

First hand experience from the last SAREX I was at says that the strobes don't have upward visibility (at least not the ones we were using, kinda like the Pep Boy light) - I know because I got on the radio and asked the aircraft leading us to the target. My team had two POVs, one with a rotator and one with a strobe, neither light could be seen from the air (though this was daytime and anything smaller than a mini lightbar is hard to see during the day).

I always see school buses with a white strobe about 3/4 of the way back on the top. No clue what thats about (ie. is it there to tell people 'Hey, look, this is a big [redacted] yellow school bus!"?)  I would think a similarly configured yellow "PepBoys" strobe might not be too much different.

As for visibility from the air, about 6 weeks ago we were doing night jumps and our pilot had he service vehicle with 2 yellow strobes on the roof parked right in front of where the Twin Otter parks, about 75 yards from the designated and lit landing area.  That vehicle and the strobes were visible from 12,500 ft directly above it, and all the way down to 1000 ft AGL (when I stopped paying attention to it and started paying attention to landing in the lighted area)

The hard part is, from the air, at night: not mistaking the strobes for head lights that are occluded by trees and ground cover that look a lot like strobes.  They move, and any occluding doesn't last long, unlike the strobe, but it takes a few seconds to separate the wheat from the chaff.

[PHall]

First hand experience from the last SAREX I was at says that the strobes don't have upward visibility (at least not the ones we were using, kinda like the Pep Boy light) - I know because I got on the radio and asked the aircraft leading us to the target. My team had two POVs, one with a rotator and one with a strobe, neither light could be seen from the air (though this was daytime and anything smaller than a mini lightbar is hard to see during the day).

I always see school buses with a white strobe about 3/4 of the way back on the top. No clue what thats about (ie. is it there to tell people 'Hey, look, this is a big [redacted] yellow school bus!"?)  I would think a similarly configured yellow "PepBoys" strobe might not be too much different.

As for visibility from the air, about 6 weeks ago we were doing night jumps and our pilot had he service vehicle with 2 yellow strobes on the roof parked right in front of where the Twin Otter parks, about 75 yards from the designated and lit landing area.  That vehicle and the strobes were visible from 12,500 ft directly above it, and all the way down to 1000 ft AGL (when I stopped paying attention to it and started paying attention to landing in the lighted area)

The hard part is, from the air, at night: not mistaking the strobes for head lights that are occluded by trees and ground cover that look a lot like strobes.  They move, and any occluding doesn't last long, unlike the strobe, but it takes a few seconds to separate the wheat from the chaff.

The strobes are there so that the bus doesn't get rear-ended on foggy/snowy days.
At least that's what I have been told.

[RADIOMAN015]

Our state police vehicles have a darker blue roof scheme so they use white lettering for the cruiser/vehicle number (which is the callsign assigned to the vehicle).  My understanding is that lighter colors are easier to see than darker colors from the air, so black lettering on a white van might not work that well.
RM

[RRLE]

The USCG Aux has an optional Surface-To-Air Recognition Banner for its boats. These are the specs from the Operations Policy Manual

3.E.2. Use

Auxiliarists may display the surface to air recognition banner in the following manner:
• Use it only on a surface facility that is assigned to duty.
• Do not permanently affix the banner to any facility.
• Use the banner as an optional display.
• Display the banner in a horizontal plane, on the fore-deck, pilothouse, or bimini top. The base of the "A" must be towards the stern of the boat.

3.E.3. Construction

Auxiliarists may make a surface to air recognition banner under the following guidelines:
• The banner must be 36 inches by 36 inches in size. Use a larger banner only if adequate display area is available on the facility.
• Make the banner using nylon, hemmed edges, and grommets for fastening banner to display location.
• Sew on the letter "A" (for better durability) or use the silk screening process.
• Use international orange color for the background and black for the letter "A". The "A" must be 80% of the banner's height.

It should be easy to adapt that to a vehicle.

[RADIOMAN015]

The USCG Aux has an optional Surface-To-Air Recognition Banner for its boats. These are the specs from the Operations Policy Manual

3.E.2. Use

Auxiliarists may display the surface to air recognition banner in the following manner:
• Display the banner in a horizontal plane, on the fore-deck, pilothouse, or bimini top. The base of the "A" must be towards the stern of the boat.

3.E.3. Construction

Auxiliarists may make a surface to air recognition banner under the following guidelines:
•
• Use international orange color for the background and black for the letter "A". The "A" must be 80% of the banner's height.

It should be easy to adapt that to a vehicle.

We ran a joint exercise with the USCG Aux on a river last year.  Our aircraft crews found that the dark lettering was difficult to see.  Also we found that having multiple boats on the water it's better to display a unique number or letter for each boat, so the aircraft coordinating any water response can give better instructions by easily identifying the USCG Aux vessel in that specific location.
RM     

[Capt Hudgins]

This is the first time I have used CAP Talk for a question.  I have an estimate for 4 foot by 3 foot decals for $110 for the radio call sign.  They are easy enough to install.  I checked with Nationals and was told roof marking are up to the individual wing.

Does anyone have any constructive suggestions I can take to my ES folks and Commander for review?  The vast majority of the "suggestions" have been negative as opposed to constructive.

Thanks!

[RiverAux]

I don't know about tying a banner to the roof of a vehicle that could be driving 70 or 80 miles an hour down a highway.  Of course, you're probably not going to be getting directions from an aircraft at highway speeds, so could wait until you're in the boonies to put it on. 

[Eclipse]

The call sign?  Why would you tie this to the radio?

A big "CAP" is all you really need, assuming you need anything.

[davidsinn]

The call sign?  Why would you tie this to the radio?

A big "CAP" is all you really need, assuming you need anything.

To differentiate from the other CAP vehicles? I can imagine some scenarios where you would have two vehicles working with one aircraft.

Idk about other wings, but here radios do not have call signs. People or vehicles have a callsign. I have used a handheld and the mobile on different channels to talk to different people and used the same callsign the whole time.

[SarDragon]

Unit base station radios also have assigned call signs.

[davidsinn]

Unit base station radios also have assigned call signs.

Actually the unit has a callsign, not the radio. My unit has a callsign but not a base station.

[Eclipse]

In my wing it is a hot mess based on the previous DC's "plan".

In theory, both people and stations are licensed with a call sign, however they will not issue call signs without a radio, and people with more than
one radio have multiple call signs, yet everyone uses the same one, all the time, for obvious reasons. 

I believe that between my 7 radios I have 7 call signs.

And then the other day our DC stopped by and we were talking this exact issues and he said "and after all that, no one uses their call sign anyway, because whenever we're doing "real work", we use tactical calls, anyway".  To which I rolled my eye and move onto something else.

[davidsinn]

In my wing it is a hot mess based on the previous DC's "plan".

In theory, both people and stations are licensed with a call sign, however they will not issue call signs without a radio, and people with more than
one radio have multiple call signs, yet everyone uses the same one, all the time, for obvious reasons. 

I believe that between my 7 radios I have 7 call signs.

And then the other day our DC stopped by and we were talking this exact issues and he said "and after all that, no one uses their call sign anyway, because whenever we're doing "real work", we use tactical calls, anyway".  To which I rolled my eye and move onto something else.

That's why you don't assign a callsign to a radio.

[Eclipse]

That's why you don't assign a callsign to a radio.

Yep.  I usually don't stop banging my head until it bleeds, but my Dr. has asked me to knock that off for a while.

[Spaceman3750]

In my wing it is a hot mess based on the previous DC's "plan".

In theory, both people and stations are licensed with a call sign, however they will not issue call signs without a radio, and people with more than
one radio have multiple call signs, yet everyone uses the same one, all the time, for obvious reasons. 

I believe that between my 7 radios I have 7 call signs.

And then the other day our DC stopped by and we were talking this exact issues and he said "and after all that, no one uses their call sign anyway, because whenever we're doing "real work", we use tactical calls, anyway".  To which I rolled my eye and move onto something else.

That's especially frustrating when you're trying to call a specific van (maybe on the inbound/outbound) so you call the callsign listed in emirs and get the callsign of the guy holding the mic back. At least airplanes can fairly reliably be called with an aircraft callsign so long as the guy in the right seat knows how to use a radio, which can be another issue unto itself.

[Flying Pig]

Our state police vehicles have a darker blue roof scheme so they use white lettering for the cruiser/vehicle number (which is the callsign assigned to the vehicle).  My understanding is that lighter colors are easier to see than darker colors from the air, so black lettering on a white van might not work that well.
RM

I spend all day looking at black numbers on white roof tops.  Never had a problem reading them.

[lordmonar]

You know...I don't really care about the numbers all that much.

Some sort of hi-vis marking that says "this white van is different" is all that is needed.

As Eclipse points out....we don't need this fucntion all that much and being able to tell the difference between that CAP van and another is even less often.

Heck.....simply tying a marker panel to the roof is all that you really need.

[BillB]

Which doesn't give any information as to the radio call of the van. A rooftop panel is great but who would the aircraft talk to without getting 2-3 vans responding to it at the same time. Just the vehicle radio call number on the roof solves that.

[wacapgh]

... because whenever we're doing "real work", we use tactical calls, anyway".

Tactical Calls - (1) Call signs. Properly issued Air Force Voice Call Signs (AFVCS, commonly called "Tactical call signs") CAPR 100-3, 1.3,a(1)

Functional Desiginators - "...Functional designators should reflect the nationally-standardized ICS/CAP positions or job functions that are represented, or geographic locations, or both. Examples of valid functional designators are "Air Ops" "Ground Ops" "Flight Line" "Admin" "Transport four" "Ground Team Six" "Jackson Base" "Camp Six" "Highbird", etc. Geographic prefixes are used ONLY with airborne relay stations or bases and other stationary facilities." CAPR 100-3, 1.9,b

Strangely enough, if the van is talking to a base, it is not required to use an AFVCS:

"...Mobile and portable stations need not state their AFVCS on frequencies used to communicate with a base, however, they must identify using their AFVCS using the same rules as for a base station if they are using a frequency without communicating to a base." CAPR 100-3, 109, e

Ex 97G 

[Eclipse]

No one is calling to talk to the van.

Using the station's ID is useless during missions.

[davidsinn]

No one is calling to talk to the van.

Using the station's ID is useless during missions.

Why don't we treat vans the same as aircraft? They both have tail numbers. We don't assign functional callsigns to aircraft so why not use the van's when it makes things less confusing like air to ground coordination?

Hypothetical: Ground team 3 is led by Firefox 245 and has members Firefox 333, FF 212 and FF 434. The van's ID number is 1234 which would make the callsign Firefox 1234. Aircraft N12345(callsign CAP1245) is over head. Which callsign makes the most sense for the aircraft to use? The van's number is painted on top(hypothetically) so it can be used in one way air to mud communication. If you have two vans working with the same aircraft it would be much easier for the aircraft to control.

[SarDragon]

No one is calling to talk to the van.

Using the station's ID is useless during missions.

No, you are talking to whoever's in the van. Vans can't talk. But, do you really care who you are talking to in the van? If the crew changes out for some reason, you still need to use the van's call sign, not necessarily any personal call sign within the crew. Like Sinn says, treat it like an airplane.

[RADIOMAN015]

In my wing it is a hot mess based on the previous DC's "plan".

In theory, both people and stations are licensed with a call sign, however they will not issue call signs without a radio, and people with more than
one radio have multiple call signs, yet everyone uses the same one, all the time, for obvious reasons. 

I believe that between my 7 radios I have 7 call signs.

And then the other day our DC stopped by and we were talking this exact issues and he said "and after all that, no one uses their call sign anyway, because whenever we're doing "real work", we use tactical calls, anyway".  To which I rolled my eye and move onto something else.

No reason why radio call signs assigned to the radio (s) shouldn't be used.   The Ground Base director knows what ground teams are deployed and should have the information for the Radio assigned to that team. If there's multiple radios, the team appropriate CAP callsign is utilized and the other radios use the callsigns that were previously issued for the radio.   At our mission bases, the CUL has a group of  reserved callsigns he can assign (one) to each specific team dispatched.   Usually the CAP vans already have working radio installed so that is the primary callsign, the portable could be one of the reserved call signs.

As far as you having seven radios, IF they all are authorized to transmit on CAP frequencies, likely your DC should assign only one callsign to you.  Pick the "radio of the day".  IF you decided to lend your other compliant radios, than there should be a cache of mission wing call signs that can be assigned at that time to EACH radio.   

We really dumd'd this who thing down to these so called tactical callsigns ground team #1, 2, 3, UDF Team Alpha -- so we really lost ANY chance of OPSEC whatsoever.   IF CHARTER OAK 47 is ground team 1,  only mission base really needs to know that, the aircraft can be instructed to contact CHARTER OAK 47, a team in their area on AIR 1 or CC 1 or whatever.  IF you want to go one step further come up with a way to put a temporary designator on top of the vehicle e.g. "A","B", "C", so the aircraft could say, vehicle alpha this is CAP 601, and the response would be CAP 601 this is CHARTER OAK 47, vehicle Alpha.  Further exchanges would use the proper CAP assign callsigns.
RM             

[RiverAux]

How is using Ground Team 1 less secure than using Charter Oak 47?  If anything, using permanent call signs in a mission environment would be less secure since those call signs have to be kept on a list somewhere, and such lists can get loose.  Ground Team 1 could be just about anyone in any vehicle. 

And you really think that its a good idea to have mission base and aircraft using different call signs to contact the same ground team?  If that isn't a whole bucketfull of confusion in the making, I don't know what is. 

And, in any case, the radio comm security issues will be going away in the not too distant future. 

[lordmonar]

Well one of the whole reasons for the ICS system is to forget about OPSEC.

Tactical call sign are there to make it easier for different agencies to communicate.

No one knows who Silver State 123 is....it is a whole lot easer to know that CAP1234 is and an aircraft and CAP GT1 is one of our ground teams.

Does that blow OPSEC?  Sure it does....but really who cares that much?  If the press is listening (and they are) let them.  If they intefere...well thats when we call in the LE dudes to deal with them.

For normal comm operations, I think it is easier to just assign the radio a call sign....I don't care who is operating it...I just need to know where they are so I can judge the interity of the net.

If I were the comm Gods......I would assigne 01-99 to specific positons (wing CC, DO, group CC, Wing PAO, etc) then 100-199 would be base stations, 200-299 would be Van Radios, 300-399 would be hand held radios.  That leave 400-999 to be assigned to indviduals with their own radios.

So when Sliver State 521 called into the net I would instantly know he is not on a CAP asset and judge his value to net intergrity accordingly.

Remember that the CAP Comm system is not the same as ES communcations although it uses the same equipment and network.

[RADIOMAN015]

Well one of the whole reasons for the ICS system is to forget about OPSEC.

Tactical call sign are there to make it easier for different agencies to communicate.

No one knows who Silver State 123 is....it is a whole lot easer to know that CAP1234 is and an aircraft and CAP GT1 is one of our ground teams.

When CAP operates its' own teams, on its' own radio system, controlled by its' own mission base/IC, than we should be using our appropriate wing tactical callsign for aircraft, base, and portable units.  IF we are part of a large operation using other than CAP radio comm systems than we should use appropriate FUNCTIONAL callsigns both for ground as well as air teams.
This whole notion of functional callsigns has gotten out of hand.  The radio used on CAP frequencies MUST have an assigned callsign & properly approved/licensed as being compliant with the regulations.

Again as far as what's on the top of the vans or other vehicles to help ID them from the air, whatever it is, needs to be told to mission base, and it is added to the information about that ground team.
RM   

[caphornbuckle]

I would think that keeping things simple would be better than trying to spend a ton of money for the same results as anything you may already have available to you.

What about...

In the day time, have someone with a signal mirror stick it out the window?

At night, shine one of those powerful spotlights in the air to show your position?

Now I know there's gonna be the "what if's" like an overcast and things like that but there's other things you can do to keep it simple as well.  Reflective vest tied to the roof is an example.

[RiverAux]

In the day time, have someone with a signal mirror stick it out the window?

I've never tried it, but I would think it might be difficult to properly aim a signal mirror in a moving vehicle.  Also seems like a good way to lose a lot of signal mirrors. 

[lordmonar]

Radioman.

I agree with you.  Hence what I said before about assigning callsigns to radios and to people.

Joe Blow brings in his personal compliant radio.  Wing Director of Comm verfiies it as compliant, logs it into the system and issues a call sign FOR THAT RADIO (a 400+ number).

Then all is good.  Joe Blwo brings in another radio he gets a new call sign for that new radio.  Now he can share his radios to other members (who have BCUT) to assist in operations or communications.

One of my biggest beefs with CAP is the Comm System.
The regulations are very clear (for once) and fairly simple (supprisingly) but they still don't seem to work.

It is like pulling teeth to get a BCUT or ACUT class out of someone.  They have been promising for two years now about getting the training on line.

Too many wings don't run their nets regularly.  (I know NVWG doesn't).  Requests for call signs go unanswered.  Requests to Private Owned Radios registered go unanswered.

They still have not completely migrated to digital operations.

There are great big gapping holes in net coverage.

As for what we use on our own nets compared to what we use on a joint operation......following the ICS system we should tailor our system to be as close to what we use on a joint net so that increase our interoperablity.

I am not a CAP comm guy......but I am a Professional Comm guy in my day job.....and I have just not been impressed by CAP comm.

Granted it may just be a local thing...YMMV.

[caphornbuckle]

In the day time, have someone with a signal mirror stick it out the window?

I've never tried it, but I would think it might be difficult to properly aim a signal mirror in a moving vehicle.  Also seems like a good way to lose a lot of signal mirrors.

The vehicle can pull over.  Besides, I always kept a lanyard on my signal mirror  .  YMMV.

[cap235629]

Granted it may just be a local thing...YMMV.

From where I stand, it is.  The system works fine as written.  Individuals are issued call signs so you know who you are talking to.  Functional designators are used to identify the resource you are talking to.  Vehicle callsigns are your AF issued wing designator (in Arkansas' case Wildwood) and the last 4 digits of the vehicle id number. Aircraft call signs are CAP plus the state issued numerical designator.

This isn't difficult.  If you have a staff position, there is a predetermined call sign for you already established.  If you do not have a staff position, you are part of a resource and use that functional designator.

[arajca]

Radioman.

I agree with you.  Hence what I said before about assigning callsigns to radios and to people.

Joe Blow brings in his personal compliant radio.  Wing Director of Comm verfiies it as compliant, logs it into the system and issues a call sign FOR THAT RADIO (a 400+ number).

Then all is good.  Joe Blwo brings in another radio he gets a new call sign for that new radio.  Now he can share his radios to other members (who have BCUT) to assist in operations or communications.

Joe Blow gets assigned Hot Shot 432 for his first radio. Folks learn that if you want to get Joe Blow on the radio, you can HS432. Now he gets a second call sign for his second radio, HS458. How do you get hold of him if you do not know which radio he has at any given time? Carry out this to some folks who have three or four or more radios (I have four - 2 VHF portables, one VHF mobile, and 1 issued 800MHz) I know of a few who have six or seven when you add in HF.

One of my biggest beefs with CAP is the Comm System.
The regulations are very clear (for once) and fairly simple (supprisingly) but they still don't seem to work.

It is like pulling teeth to get a BCUT or ACUT class out of someone.  They have been promising for two years now about getting the training on line.

Sounds like a local issue.

Too many wings don't run their nets regularly.  (I know NVWG doesn't).

Many have dropped their nets altogether since there usually is no traffic to be passed.

Requests for call signs go unanswered.  Requests to Private Owned Radios registered go unanswered.

Another local/wing issue

They still have not completely migrated to digital operations.

There is no current plan to do so for non-incident traffic, and not at this time for incident traffic. Doing so will kill off most of the privately owned radios in CAP.

There are great big gapping holes in net coverage.

I presume you're talking about the repeater coverage. The current repeater plan was developed a few years ago by each wing. Any holes in your wing's coverage were put in or left in by the wing.

As for what we use on our own nets compared to what we use on a joint operation......following the ICS system we should tailor our system to be as close to what we use on a joint net so that increase our interoperablity.

No arguements here. However, almost every agency I have dealt with runs their nets differently, so we are not unique in that aspect.

[ZigZag911]

Even on CAP only missions and exercises, the functional call signs are more efficient and effective, because generally an ES mission draws members from a variety of units who may not be familiar with others' tactical call signs.

Now, if the whole mission is being conducted by a single squadron, then it could work.

[Buzz]

In LE, the roof top number is usually their call sign.

YMMV.

Most roof numbers that I've ever seen have been vehicle shop numbers.  Tactical callsigns may be assigned to the personnel, not the vehicle, and in an agency with a large fleet, there is often a certain amount of circulation between zones.

For CAP use, a good scheme would be a "two-line," with the last 3 of the VIN in 24" contrasting numbers, left-right, with the (REAL) 12" diameter CAP insignia on the line above.

[Buzz]

So when Sliver State 521 called into the net I would instantly know he is not on a CAP asset and judge his value to net intergrity accordingly.

Well, gee, Major, I'm a lowly Captain . . .if I'm visiting the Sharp End and log into your squadron net with my own radio, how will you judge my value? 

Will it be for my being a CAP cadet in the 1970s and a senior member for a decade and a half?  For the three Unit Citations that I helped various squadrons earn?  My saves?  My having held every slot in squadron leadership except CO?  Will it be for the Astro Saber I'm logging in with (keep your Jedi, I like the Saber platform), or if I'm on one of the Astro Spectras on my various vehicles and plane?

Or will I be judged less worthy because I'm not using a Corporate asset to check in with?

How about if you don't use that as any kind of indication, and just welcome me to the net . . ?

[Buzz]

Doing so will kill off most of the privately owned radios in CAP.

Again.

However, when they came out with the first list of compliant/non-compliant radios, Astro Sabers were $1200+.  Today, you can find one (with P25 working) for $200 on Fleabay.  It shouldn't be hard to find a shop with the software to program it, and maybe they will cut a deal for CAP.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if there are a bunch of them, RFS, being sat on by Ma Batwings shops, waiting for buyers.  A group buy might be made in larger metropolitan areas for radios programmed for CAP.

[lordmonar]

So when Sliver State 521 called into the net I would instantly know he is not on a CAP asset and judge his value to net intergrity accordingly.

Well, gee, Major, I'm a lowly Captain . . .if I'm visiting the Sharp End and log into your squadron net with my own radio, how will you judge my value? 

Will it be for my being a CAP cadet in the 1970s and a senior member for a decade and a half?  For the three Unit Citations that I helped various squadrons earn?  My saves?  My having held every slot in squadron leadership except CO?  Will it be for the Astro Saber I'm logging in with (keep your Jedi, I like the Saber platform), or if I'm on one of the Astro Spectras on my various vehicles and plane?

Or will I be judged less worthy because I'm not using a Corporate asset to check in with?

How about if you don't use that as any kind of indication, and just welcome me to the net . . ?

I will judge you as a temporary part of the net....of value to the net based on your personal availablit.

Just like I would judge any other temporary part of the net.

Corporate base assets should be assigned based on the geographic location....so that the has coverage to survive the collapse of the normal comm net.

When testing the net...I am primarilly worried about the fixed base stations and their health, then the mobile (van) stations, then the portables and last but not least the POR and out of state asstes in my net.

I got nothing against POR's......it is just that I would not build my net relying on them.

[Spaceman3750]

So when Sliver State 521 called into the net I would instantly know he is not on a CAP asset and judge his value to net intergrity accordingly.

Well, gee, Major, I'm a lowly Captain . . .if I'm visiting the Sharp End and log into your squadron net with my own radio, how will you judge my value? 

Will it be for my being a CAP cadet in the 1970s and a senior member for a decade and a half?  For the three Unit Citations that I helped various squadrons earn?  My saves?  My having held every slot in squadron leadership except CO?  Will it be for the Astro Saber I'm logging in with (keep your Jedi, I like the Saber platform), or if I'm on one of the Astro Spectras on my various vehicles and plane?

Or will I be judged less worthy because I'm not using a Corporate asset to check in with?

How about if you don't use that as any kind of indication, and just welcome me to the net . . ?

I will judge you as a temporary part of the net....of value to the net based on your personal availablit.

Just like I would judge any other temporary part of the net.

Corporate base assets should be assigned based on the geographic location....so that the has coverage to survive the collapse of the normal comm net.

When testing the net...I am primarilly worried about the fixed base stations and their health, then the mobile (van) stations, then the portables and last but not least the POR and out of state asstes in my net.

I got nothing against POR's......it is just that I would not build my net relying on them.

Interesting position to take given that the TOA bases assignments on operations use not net value. There's a couple of exceptions to that, HF base stations and RDP being one example but with ALE being rolled out fast and hard I don't think we're going to see any personal equipment on the HF nets any more.

[caphornbuckle]

What does all this have to do with vehicle roof markings?

[SarDragon]

It went from markings, to call signs, to operators, to equipment, to equipment accounting.

Is the clock ticking?

[PHall]

At least it hasn't devolved into a Uniform thread, yet...

[Eclipse]

At least it hasn't devolved into a Uniform thread, yet...

Well...ifin you ask real nice laik...