Ground Team Badges - Basic, Senior, Master

[Shuman 14]

So if the Basic Badge is awarded for GTM-3 and the Master is awarded for Ground Branch Director, when is the Senior awarded at... GTM-2, GTM-1, or GTL?

The question came up, but got six different answers and no one can point to a black and white regulation that states when and where.

Any help would be appreciated.

[NovemberWhiskey]

CAPR 35-6 section 5(b) - either GTM1 or GTL.

https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R035_006_70213217D50CA.pdf

[Shuman 14]

CAPR 35-6 section 5(b) - either GTM1 or GTL.

https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R035_006_70213217D50CA.pdf

THANK YOU!

[N6RVT]

CAPR 35-6 section 5(b) - either GTM1 or GTL.https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R035_006_70213217D50CA.pdf

Also note you can become a ground branch director directly from GTM3 and skip over the senior rating entirely.  I did.

[Jester]

I see this come up a lot and constantly answered incorrectly by people who should know better.  It's been that way for at least the last few years.

[Shuman 14]

CAPR 35-6 section 5(b) - either GTM1 or GTL.https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R035_006_70213217D50CA.pdf

Also note you can become a ground branch director directly from GTM3 and skip over the senior rating entirely.  I did.

Or do UDF to Ground Branch Director and skip 3,2,1 and Leader altogether.

[Spam]

Or GES to IC3 directly to get the IC badge, because who needs actual field experience.

(Just kidding! Kidding!)

Cheers
Spam

[Eclipse]

Or do UDF to Ground Branch Director and skip 3,2,1 and Leader altogether.

It just shows how much these ratings are setup for retention and expediency vs. actual operations
(with an eye to the fact that actual Group ops left the building 15 years ago).

How is someone who carried a ruler and lunch money on two ramp checks going to
evaluate the readiness and search plans for GTs in the field?

The same goes for the GT 3-2-1 RETAIN! Plan that was literally intended to get cadets the badge quicker.

[Spam]

As I've said here a few times, if the real objective of the GT badging system was to promote cadet activity/retention, then GT3 certainly was a very poor showing at lowering that first bar.

GT3 offers instead a relatively HIGH bar for an initial qual, with first aid on top of the indiscriminate salad of tasks, missing any prioritization to enable the novice to be a safe deployable member.  I've proposed before, to no avail, that we restructure GTM3 as a basic field striker, starting with "actions on lost" (hug a tree) in lieu of advanced (but incomplete!) land nav. That we include heat/cold/hydration, all the self care and safety items, all the personal gear checks, and self-shelter... and for SAR, basic visual scanning and line movement only. As low a bar as is safe, and gets them the badge. Slap the basic badge on them, load them up as "mules" and take them out.

Then, push technical training (including all the functionally grouped and updated Nav tasks, first aid, and all the electronic SAR tasks) into GTM2. That crafts GTM3 as a mule/basic member, GTM2 centralizes technical SAR training, and then GTM1 would contain team management, tactical planning and the like as a lead in rating for GTL.

This all would functionally group the tasks so they are taught in concert/logically, it would lower the bar to get GTM3 ratings/badges out, and would align the tasks to the levels of responsibility matching the badge.

Which brings me to the master badge... when I see someone with the star and wreath for any rating I expect complete mastery of the functional area. Now that we have other paths, and I can look up quals, I know who I cannot trust and will not appoint as a GBD, no matter what fruit salad they sport on their chest. Its always been that way (assign the task to the ability not the badge), but with the UDF straight to GBD track... my masters GT badge that I've had ever since I got grandfathered in whenever they invented this thing, now means zip.

And so does yours, hence my GES to IC3 joke. The badges are now trinkets on the GTM side.

R/s
Spam

[Eclipse]

I fondly remember having the conversations with Wing & NHQ, not to mention local
ICP staff about not being able to deploy certain GT levels to do certain tasks,
which means your GBDs had to be microing each sortie and fully aware of team composition.

GT3s can't do anything that requires a shelter, work with dogs, line searches, most of the land nav, a/g signals or even a hasty search (among other things) unless there is an SET for 1/2 on the team.

You get the crickets, the puppy sideways head, a moment of saucer eyes, and then generally
the typical CAP response which is just doing it anyway.

Don't get me started about GES slick sleeves being "Ground Team drivers", UDF being "mini-GT",
or trainee ratios.

[RiverAux]

This reminded me that back in 2008 I had spent a fair bit of time tinkering with developing a system somewhat similar to what SPAM mentioned that would divide all the GT/UDF tasks into training blocks of similar nature (basic and advanced navigation, ground electronic search, radios, leadership, medical, survival, basic GSAR, advanced GSAR) and then relate those to levels of UDF and GT qualification. 

The current three level GT system could have gone that way, but as he mentioned, it is a weird hodgepodge with no real logical progression of skills. 

[heliodoc]

Before I go headlong into "ground electronic search" I'd like to know other than cell phone forensics...what is truly replacing Lper and since my 2 Sqdn have 2 we are now down to one Lper....what is the NHQ CAP "Approved" replacement for Lper in both 121.5 and 406? Or am I just dreamin? Is there an Lper THSP (Technical Specialist) in ICS terms that can repair some of these units?

[N6RVT]

The current three level GT system could have gone that way, but as he mentioned, it is a weird hodgepodge with no real logical progression of skills. 

The current ground team manual dates from 2003.  Two years later in 2005 FEMA defined standards for air, ground and even UDF.  NHQ knew it had to implement those standards, which are in fact not particularly more difficult than the current standards CAP has....just different.  There is actually a presentation somewhere on the NHQ website about doing this.  Rewriting the entire ground team guide will be a lot of work and it isn't a high priority, so instead there is a 19 year old obsolete manual training members to standards nobody else recognizes.

Incidentally, CAP does not meet the FEMA standards for UDF as ground teams cannot DF 406, at least not with any equipment I ever knew about.

CAP aircraft only fit the lowest category for air ops, which is cat IV.  If they were able to DF 406 from aircraft they would fit category III.  Without member owned aircraft, which were pretty much eliminated around 2011, the standards for CAT II cannot be met. 

All of this is in
https://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/usr/mod1_u4.pdf
https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_urban-search-rescue-incident-support-team_draft-resource-typing-definition.pdf

Which glancing through it, I see a requirement to be vaccinated for a lot more than just covid, so I already know why everything just stopped in 2005, and they certainly are not taking it up now.

[arajca]

Those standards cover Urban SAR, not land SAR.

[Eclipse]

They are also largely irrelevant, since CAP is already on the call sheet, regardless of who shows up.

[Spam]

Side note: it is possible to DF a 406 MHz signal as a GT (I've done it). You need an air band scanner [edit: with a signal strength meter] and a reasonably accurate map (e.g. I used a diagram of the airport I was at, from the plates for the airport). Move to a known location, wait for the once-every-53 second data pulse, record the signal strength, repeat twice for reliability, move and repeat at several other known locations (such as, down the taxiway, at each crossing, looking down T hangars etc.). Go to the max signal point, pick a direction left or right, and continue the process, being sure to listen for the 121.5 side tone in close.

Pretty simple, just time consuming waiting for the pulse. We found a new, unencoded, active 406 one night that way on new years day 2017. Felt like I was developing a new TTP... it was almost as fun as the time I got a find on an EP-3 Aires in the RF shielded anechoic test hangar at Pax River (but thats another story).

R/s
Spam

[Capt Thompson]

Before I go headlong into "ground electronic search" I'd like to know other than cell phone forensics...what is truly replacing Lper and since my 2 Sqdn have 2 we are now down to one Lper....what is the NHQ CAP "Approved" replacement for Lper in both 121.5 and 406? Or am I just dreamin? Is there an Lper THSP (Technical Specialist) in ICS terms that can repair some of these units?

The MK4 sniffer is pretty much the standard now, they are relatively inexpensive and work very well. They won't pick up a 406, but they will pick up the 121.5 homing tone.

[Eclipse]

The MK4 sniffer is pretty much the standard now

Is it though?

It's the defacto because there's not much else reasonable for the average
squadron to afford to buy, but meanwhile NHQ keeps testing these A.R.C.H.E.R-esque
vapor-ware products that cost 4 figures.

The very fact that there is no national standard, and that units that want to
get into the DF game have to buy their own speaks volumes about the state
of the non-mission from a CAP perspective.

This situation has been devolving since the early 2000's when NHQ thought
CAP was going to become an HLS partner, and there has been little to no effort to fix it.

Essentially, when L-Tronics went (*poof*) so did UDF.

[heliodoc]

About that HLS "pardner" stuff ...what did CAP do to derail that operation. Some of the FEMA folk on PDA in this State about 4 yrs ago were wondering why weren't in the loop ....so locally...there were some questions from some 25 yr FEMA folk..

[sardak]

ncidentally, CAP does not meet the FEMA standards for UDF as ground teams cannot DF 406, at least not with any equipment I ever knew about.

CAP aircraft only fit the lowest category for air ops, which is cat IV.  If they were able to DF 406 from aircraft they would fit category III.  Without member owned aircraft, which were pretty much eliminated around 2011, the standards for CAT II cannot be met. 

You need to go here to find the current FEMA SAR resource typing. https://rtlt.preptoolkit.fema.gov/Public  Enter "search and rescue" in the search box. There are 62 resource types listed. There are no specific frequency requirements for the air search and ground DF teams.

I've also DF'd 406 signals using a handheld spectrum analyzer. You just have to be patient, as Spam said, waiting for that 1/2 second burst every 50 seconds.  The beacons I chased were both defective in that they didn't have the 121.5 MHz homing signal, which is only supposed to be off during the 406 MHz burst.

Mike