Archer -- Ever really used?

[airdale]

I may have the opportunity to take the Archer training at Maxwell, but I am wondering if that is simply a ticket to dog & pony shows and SAREXs.  Is there any significant history of these systems getting used and being effective?  Not potential.  Actual.

[Hoser]

Yes ARCHER is used beyond the dog and pony shows and exercises. The biggie of course was the Fosset search and I haven't heard what was learned from that operation. I used it on one down aircraft search and found wreckage critical to the NTSB investigation, i.e. the powerplant. I have also done extent of contamination missions. One was for a chemical plant fire and the other was the refinery spill secondary to the flooding in June in Coffeyville KS and am in the process of planning a mission to refly areas of interest in Coffeyville along with other environmentally sensitive area in OK and MO. There are numerous threads here cussing and discussing ARCHER and the prevailing  thought in this forum is that it isn't worth the investment. I say it is because it has capabilities that are not readily apparent but may not be totally useful in the context of the glamour mission of CAP, SAR. However in the areas of environmental assessment, EER, or seismic analysis, ARCHER is an invaluable tool. Also there are big operational changes coming down the pike regarding ARCHER that aren't overly publicised and I cannot delineate them here. I will say they involve CD and HLS . Since I have been an operator I have maintained that sitting in some dark basement office is some techno-spook who knows that if we can find "A" with ARCHER then we can find "B" with it and they aren't saying what "B" is. Almost every government agency, Federal and State has a high degree of interest in this technology whether it is the Air Force, the EPA, Coast Guard, State Dept of Natural Resources etc etc. That tells me this, it is a highly useful and powerful technology that has myriad applications and this is being driven by people who have forgotten more about this technology than CAP has ever learned. As I have stated in here numerous times I question its efficacy in the SAR application when a life threat is involved, not because it is "flawed technology" but simply due to the logistical problems associted with it. Sixteen units scattered about the country and in accordance with Murphy's Law, not in the best place when it is needed. That does not preclude its use in that scenario, rather it reinforces the principle of "even a blind sow finds an acorn now and then." Simply a matter of right place at right time.
I would say if you get chosen to take the training, jump on it. ARCHERology is going to become very exciting in the very near future and my guess is all the nay sayers will be kicking themselves in the posterior. Just beacuse ARCHER isn't out looking for every lost airplane and person doesn't mean its capabilities are wasted, it just means that CAP members need to expand their paradigm and definition of what Missions for America means. While flying an ARCHER mission for say, the US Geological Survey may not sounds glamorous, macho and heroic,  that does not make it any less a mission for America! I don't think so. BTW the oil spill mssion I flew in Coffeyville KS WAS for USGS, and we took a Coast Guard officer on one flight. I'd say that's interagency cooperation on a mission that benefited the surrounding community in two states. Yes jump on ARCHER school if you can go.
That is my opinion, I could be wrong

Hoser

[Walkman]

Both my Chaplain and Group CC did Archer missions this last summer working with the DEA.

[bosshawk]

Advice: if you can afford five days and the costs of going to Maxwell, it may be worth your time and money.  CAP is seriously short of good ARCHER operators: note that I said good.  We have some folks who were trained and have never set foot in the aircraft since.

There are shortcomings in the system and they are being evaluated: what CAP and the AF decide to do about them will be coming down the pike.

Being in CA, I have not heard a single positive thing said about using the system during the Fossett search.  One of the major shortcomings is an absolute lack of knowledge about the system among the ICs: thus, they really don't know how to employ the system,

I ran a series of tests on the CD problem last summer here in CA and I can tell you that the results were less than overwhelming.  More I can't tell you right now: sorry.

There seems to be more hype about the system than hard facts, but that is often true about newly introduced technology(of course, ARCHER isn't exactly new, having been deployed three or four years).

I would hope that more people will opt to go to the training.

[RiverAux]

Whatever the value of the system, I wouldn't bother getting trained on it unless you have one of the aircraft based in your wing.  Otherwise the chances of you getting regular work on it are probably slim.  I'd save my vacation time for something else in that case. 

[Hoser]

I incurred no cost whatsoever when I went to Maxwell. CAP paid airfare, put us up on base and reimbursed meals after I got home and sent in paperwork. Unless things have changed there is NO cost to the student

Hoser

[cnitas]

CAP is seriously short of good ARCHER operators: note that I said good.  We have some folks who were trained and have never set foot in the aircraft since.

I scored 100% on the exam, I am an observer, Major, 30 yrs old and have been in CAP for over 15 years.  We have an Archer system at about 1/2 our SAREXs.
I have expressed my willingness to go to wing multiple times.

If there is such a shortage, why don't they send me?

[177B]

I was on an aircrew that found a downed plane in SE Oklahoma.  We would not have found it without ARCHER providing coordinates.   The area was densly wooded and the only way you could see was by looking straight down.  It took 2 days After the ARCHER covered the area to get the coords to us.  We had a first location and we look until we were low on fuel.  After we refueled and made contact with the ground team they relayed a second "Archer" location.  We did a tight expanding square and found the target.  We worked the ground team in to the target. The pilot was deceased, still strapped in the cockpit.  Not a happy ending but the family got to bury there loved one.  Slant range visability through the trees was nil.  The ARCHER deserves the find.

[SJFedor]

Plus it's capabilities just doing downward looking hi-res imaging holds a lot of good possible applications, i.e. tornado path damage and tracking after a storm, providing imaging of an area affected by a natural disaster, etc.

Even without the HSI stuff, it's still a great tool when you need images of an area. Definitely better for large scale then SDIS is.

[MSgt Van]

CAP is seriously short of good ARCHER operators: note that I said good.  We have some folks who were trained and have never set foot in the aircraft since.

I scored 100% on the exam, I am an observer, Major, 30 yrs old and have been in CAP for over 15 years.  We have an Archer system at about 1/2 our SAREXs.
I have expressed my willingness to go to wing multiple times.

If there is such a shortage, why don't they send me?

There's a push to get a fairly large number of additional operators trained before Summer's end. Maybe they'll finally call you.  If you aced the test you should float to the top of the pool for consideration.  In the past about 8 operators per system was considered to be sufficient.

[wingnut]

I have flown at least 15 sorties in Archer, since I have had some flight experience using a sensor display in flight I stopped shooting chunks when I was 20. However, this has not been the case for many of the operators who were chosen to be the "Original Operators" (thus making them a liability not an asset). Second, many operators will not look at the data when they land (not sexy enough?) this is a crime ( data must be reviewed). There are many issues that are related to Leadership, or lack of! all the way down to the squadron level.

I think the ongoing research as to capabilities will enhance it's uses. I firmly believe that CAP could use an A2 section that is organized around several platforms to provide the customer with a professional product. Archer can be modified and enhanced, with the landsat 7 dying, much can be done with Archer for global warming research. Archer can certainly find a person in a life vest floating in the sea (try finding that with your mark 1 eye ball after a  6 hour search).

since Uncle Sam paid for it we need to use it, improvise! adapt!

[jpnelson82]

Anyone know what the pre-requisites are for ARCHER training? There's some ARCHER aptitude test or something on e-services, is that it? just a passing score?

[AlphaSigOU]

Anyone know what the pre-requisites are for ARCHER training? There's some ARCHER aptitude test or something on e-services, is that it? just a passing score?

You have to score an 80 or above on the online screening exam. STUDY THE MATERIAL THOROUGHLY! The test will trip you up if you're not prepared.

Once you have passed the eaxm, you also need to be a qualified and current mission scanner or observer. It definitely helps if you live within 50-100 miles to where an ARCHER asset is based (for SWR, it's KADS (Addison, Texas - my squadron) and KABQ (Albuquerque, NM). The wing DO selects class participants for ARCHER training when there are vacancies available. Then you'll spend about 4 days on CAP's dime either at Maxwell AFB or Mojave, CA getting hands-on training on ARCHER. It is a very intense course; expect 10-12 hour course days and an inflight checkout before getting qualified. Not everyone passes.

[Flying Pig]

I do enjoy the residency requirement of within 50-100 miles.  Considering CA is about 500 miles long and skinny, take a wild guess at where CA put ours.  Yup....at the bottom of the state.  Of course, to be fair, there is an abundance of pilots in the L.A. Area.

[PHall]

I do enjoy the residency requirement of within 50-100 miles.  Considering CA is about 500 miles long and skinny, take a wild guess at where CA put ours.  Yup....at the bottom of the state.  Of course, to be fair, there is an abundance of pilots in the L.A. Area.

The fact that the Wing Headquarters is at the same airport may have had something to do with where to put it too!

[SJFedor]

I do enjoy the residency requirement of within 50-100 miles.  Considering CA is about 500 miles long and skinny, take a wild guess at where CA put ours.  Yup....at the bottom of the state.  Of course, to be fair, there is an abundance of pilots in the L.A. Area.

The fact that the Wing Headquarters is at the same airport may have had something to do with where to put it too!

In SER, the Airvans are controlled by region, not wings.

[KyCAP]

Does anyone know if ARCHER has been used for Tornado damage assesment?  If so, can we get images or letters of reference from the customer (NOAA/State EM Office)?   We in the field need to see this to be able to educate customers (and ourselves) if this is the case for the scenarios where ARCHER can be used.   Maybe this already exists?

[DNall]

I've heard some reviews from some very good folks that I trust. The case is that the system just isn't effective for SaR & it's designed to do damage assessment. That includes the Fossett search.


It's excellent for DEA missions, & I have no doubt effective for environmental research. Those are not however our missions. We do counter-drug because we already have the asset/sensor/equipment on hand for something else (SaR/DR) and it serves as effective training cause you're doing the same thing. Not just because it's hours to put on planes.

We should not be doing stuff like enviro mapping. If that's what the platforms are good for, then transfer control to NOAA/CG/EPA & use the money to acquire sensors that are effective for our mission set. I still argue that's low-cost off-the-shelf intuitive FLIR. You can run that on ALL of our 182s for less than we have in ARCHER, it's easy to operate, and it dramatically increases our capability across a wider spectrum of missions.

If you want to get the training then go for it, but I personally see ARCHER as a case of a pie in the sky idea that resulted in the wrong technology for far too much money & very limited usefulness.

[wingnut]

I repsectfully disagree

The Archer is infact ahead of its time for CAP, our organization has not Always been just SAR, we have been an intregal part of the Civil Defense network from the get go. Archer was purchased with money earmarked for Archer, not flir or  anything else, money was obtained as a supplemental to CAP/USAF funding.

Now the truth, it will need some modification and upgrades, but it has some real potential for many Homeland security missions and Yes environmental missions. You see, the USAF, US Navy have always flown environmental Mapping missions, however the customers ( other federal & State agencies) cannot afford the cost ($4,000+), I know because I have paid for U2 , C130 , and P3 Imaging data.

but lets be real, the biggest problem and that is a BIG problem is CAP aircrews will not respond to mission, let me repeat, the same guys are the same crews that show up over and over again, Lack of response is a big issue. Finally, try reading the latest information on Hyperspectral imaging, besides ARCHER on line information. This technology has revolutionized mapping and surveillance. The system has been paid for, Northcom, and 1st Air Force have asked for us to make the system operational even if it takes extra money from the USAF.

The biggest problem is ignorance and (I can see better with the Mark 5 eyeball) attitude. I agree FLIR has uses, but  Archer was not designed or intended for that use. As for understanding the technology and computer program, go on line to ESRI in riverside Ca., take a few classes in Geographical Information Science. it is very interesting and useful.

[RiverAux]

but lets be real, the biggest problem and that is a BIG problem is CAP aircrews will not respond to mission, let me repeat, the same guys are the same crews that show up over and over again, Lack of response is a big issue.

What else can we expect when there are so few planes that have it?  You can only rotate around a resource so much so as to allow crews in other areas time to train and be ready to use it.  Its not like we have several dozen people in the town where each plane is assigned that can operate it so of course we're going to be dependent on a small number of skilled operators. 

See that was always going to be the problem with this type of resource and is why we probably shouldn't have gone with it in the first place.  DNALL is right on target about what we should be doing.  FLIR simpler and more applicable to the majority of our missions and could be mounted on enough aircraft that every wing would have a few, so would have more than enough trained operators.