Technical or Specialized Operations

Started by AALTIS, December 20, 2014, 02:57:46 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Eclipse

#20
Quote from: lordmonar on December 22, 2014, 05:39:46 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 22, 2014, 01:29:16 AM
Quote from: AALTIS on December 22, 2014, 01:13:26 AM
Eclipse,  my guess is that the above teams that have had articles published have been given approval to utilize their dogs.

By whom and how, exactly.

Quote from: AALTIS on December 22, 2014, 01:13:26 AM
I have found in my recent exploration of this topic, that one wing has a member that has been signed off for USAR and high angle.

Cite please - not in a CAP uniform during ES he isn't.
I've looked....and I can't find the reg that says CAP can't do high angle rescure......don't know what USAR is is.

Where I can point out in CAPR 60-3 that they can do it on CAP time.

Quoteemergency services operations unless required by state law. More specific guidance on CAP's firearms policy can be found in CAPR 900-3, Firearms - Assistance to Law Enforcement Officials.
1-31. Technical or Specialized Operations. CAP often recruits personnel with specialized training or expertise that can be useful on emergency services missions. Though the training required to specialize in these areas is often too cost prohibitive or risky for most personnel to undertake, CAP can still utilize these resources.
a. Members wishing to utilize the training they have earned must have prior permission to do so from NHQ CAP/DO, with written endorsement by the wing and/or region commander. The request must state the limitations proposed for use and how they propose to mitigate risk. If approved by the Air Force for use on an Air Force mission, these members will receive FTCA and FECA coverage just like any other member. Any additional liability coverage required to exercise these privileges is at the expense of the member. CAP personnel choosing to train to be useful in technical areas do so at their own risk. Background training and documentation will be kept at the wing or higher unit for each person given permission for these specialized operations.
b. Any special equipment or resources required for these personnel to exercise their privileges are furnished at the member's own expense and risk.
c. The following technical or specialized operations are considered acceptable but still require prior written approval:
(1) Technical (Rope) Rescue or Mountain Rescue
(2) Canine Search and Rescue
(3) Mounted Search and Rescue
(4) Urban Search and Rescue
Additional areas will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Questions on other areas should be addressed to the NHQ CAP/DO.
d. Wing and region commanders should review the current letters of permission on file at least annually and coordinate revisions as necessary. New wing and region commanders should review the current letters of permission as soon as is feasible after accepting command. Commanders can contact NHQ CAP/DO to request copies of letters on file if necessary.

The level of special and >specific< permission required tells you exactly how many members are currently properly authorized to do anything on that list.

We have members all over the place who do all sorts of things, until the right people hear about and the knock it off letters are sent,
generally resulting in sour grapes and response about how "messed up CAP is"...

For the record I didn't' say it wasn't allowed, I said there was no one in CAP properly authorized to do it - citing that is easy
when anyone finds someone properly authorized, because I can guarantee you anyone with a letter signed by
NHQ/DO, a Wing CC, Region CC, and the USAF that says they can do something "kewl" mentions it somewhere
between the letters "Hel..." and "...lo"...

"That Others May Zoom"

lordmonar

And you sitting in your position in ILWG know this for sure because?

Eclipse....I love you like a brother.....but you are so full of BS sometimes.

Your love of the regulations gets in the way of other people getting on with the mission.   And then you complain that we only get the mission done by accident.  And when we try to build up the organization around professional standards you complain that it just wont happen because we don't have professionals.  And then we try to make them professionals you complain that we forget that they are just volunteers.     

If someone somewhere is doing high angle rescue on the CAP dime....it is not your problem....unless you recently became a wing commander that I don't know about.   

PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Flying Pig

My big issue with people bringing assets like a dog into a place like CAP is certifications and verifiable performance and evals on the performance of the handler and the dog.  Have you ever spent valuable time following a useless animal and a useless handler?  I have. 

Ive been on a couple SAR missions where the SAR turned into rescuing the horse back mounted searchers because they got themselves into a situation they couldnt get out of.... to include one of the riders being medivac'd.    Volunteer Jeep patrol shows up..... Oh whatayaknow IC... one of the Jeepers was letting his wife drive (for training while on a real SAR) and she just roiled their jeep down the side of the hill and now its upside down in a ravine.....  All true stories. 

Bringing assets to CAP based on geographical needs and abilities is great. Could it be assumed the AK Wing may have people who can cross country ski or have snow mobiles?  Could it be a possibility that Montana Wing may have members with horses?  Sure.  Could the local CAWG member have a little rat-dog that has a yellow USAR vest with some patches?  Sure.  But it doesn't mean we know anything about their capabilities to actually call them an asset.  One approach I witnessed, "Hey, if you want to ride your horse in the same mountains we are searching in, great.  But you aren't going to do it wearing our uniform."  (Non-CAP search)

AALTIS

Flying Pig,  While I agree with what you are saying, for the most part that is a problem with SAR in just about every state.  We do have a large number of people in SAR that are just plane not qualified playing in the game. 

As far a canines, please remember that every dog has its day.  I have seen some dogs that are VERY good most of the time just have a terrible day.  I worked with one that most of the time I would have bet money on her.  On one search she couldn't have found a steak 10 feet in front of her.  It happens.
Alan Altis, Captain
EMT/ B
MO Wing Group I
Emergency Services &
Communications Officer

Flying Pig

I get that... Ive worked with LE patrol dogs, drug dogs, bomb dogs, SAR dogs, cadaver dogs, blood hounds...... there are people out there who love the idea of being "handlers" but don't invest the time, money or training dollars into making them a real tool.   They join some organization that sends them a patch in the mail.   Lets face it, volunteer organizations are magnets to people who just want to help.  99% of the time they are a legit resource.  However, there are times where they are completely useless.  Its an interesting perspective.  Ive been on several missions where on Sunday I was at the mission as a CAP member, and Monday morning I came back to work the same mission in an LE pilot capacity.  CAP just needs to be careful about trying to be the jack of all trades and master of none.  Aviation, Comms, establishing a mission base, are probably some of the areas CAP is great in as an asset.  Even aviation...... CAP is great when nothing else is available.   Beyond that, even when I was flying the FW for the department, I would get lower and more technical in my flying canyons while CAP was flying 1000' above me.  Not because I was some amazing pilot... heck... my CAP flying skills were honed working CD and doing mountain flying for CAP.   There are a lot of things CAP does on the aviation side that get them made fun of.  Like polo shirts and grey slacks while flying CD missions.  CAP thinks it looks professional while everyone else is asking why I stole grandpa's clothes to go flying today.  Is it superficial?  Yes.  Does it matter?  Yes it does.  Someone told CAP that green flight suits would make escape and evasion more difficult if we got shot down I guess. 
Ground Teams.... Ehhhhhhhhh....... Seriously, in 20+yrs in CAP I have yet to meet a CAP ground team member that I was the slightest bit impressed with as a rescuer vs just a guy walking around in surplus gear with a radio and an orange vest.  Some of you just fell out of your chairs but its true.  Technical rescue?  No.   K9 abilities?  That would be a local asset and it would have to be someone who did it outside of CAP.  If someone is a real handler, they will be part of another organization.  I would have the person come as a member representing that organization, not as a CAP member.   At least in CAWG, CAP is almost always starting at a disadvantage with impressions.  The agency I flew for absolutely would not work with CAP because of a prior incident YEARS earlier.   As the Sq. CC at that local unit I like to think I made some decent strides in getting CAP used on CD ops.  Where you are, CAP may be the go-to organization that makes things happen.   Situational awareness is a key. 

The Orange shirt CAWG recently switched to as a SAR uniform was probably one of the best ideas Ive seen in a while.  Ive heard my share of jokes about people searching in Camo.

I may have gone off on some tangents and my perspective is primarily from a CAWG and CA Law Enforcement perspective.  I realize its not all relevant.  CAP is a national organization that cant cater to each geographic areas individual quirks.....but, thats CAPs issue, not the agencies CAP is trying to work with. 

Eclipse

#25
Quote from: lordmonar on December 22, 2014, 08:25:35 AM
And you sitting in your position in ILWG know this for sure because?

Because I have the same relative access to members outside my wing, not to mention "social" media,
CAP news stories, and back-channel scuttle that you and everyone else does.  I don't limit myself to
news broadcast over the net, I frequent AOL, Geocities web rings, not to mention my Juno email.

We live in a world where Wright Brothers awards are literally a national news story, and when "Frank"
in IDWG gets an ROS for a lost $5 cigarette lighter adapter for a cell phone every front porch member in the
country lights up and discusses it, but you're going to assert there are members in CAP doing properly
approved technical rescue as defined by that document and it's a "secret"?

This is easy, just show use where these people are.

Quote from: lordmonar on December 22, 2014, 08:25:35 AM
Eclipse....I love you like a brother.....but you are so full of BS sometimes.
I certainly am.  However being "full of BS" and "correct" are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Quote from: lordmonar on December 22, 2014, 08:25:35 AM
Your love of the regulations gets in the way of other people getting on with the mission.   And then you complain that we only get the mission done by accident.  And when we try to build up the organization around professional standards you complain that it just wont happen because we don't have professionals.  And then we try to make them professionals you complain that we forget that they are just volunteers.

There's no context to the above? I'm just some guy who argues all sides of every argument because I'm bored?...OK, wait...anyway...

What you have done above is frame the current situation of CAP ES quite nicely, however, pretty much making my point. NHQ's
conservative nature, coupled with its lawyers and actuaries, have defined such a narrow lane for ES that it is near impossible
to grow or change it without a literal Act of Congress.  CAP recruits people at all levels with all manner of technical expertise and training,
then tells them "Welcome aboard, however there will be none of that here...", and then wonders why a significant number of these
people quit and move on to smaller, less stringent organizations so they can actually use their purported skills and equipment.

The professional / volunteer argument?  Again the paradigm, caused by NHQ's lack of will in enforcing existing regulations coupled
with its lack of will in impressing upon commanders that CAP participation requires "more" then "just" volunteers for anyone who
wants to be involved in the "kewl" stuff.  You can't have members who are allowed to fall back on the "we're just volunteers" mentality
when things get "busy" or "uncomfortable" (you know like work, inspections, training, discipline, appearance, bearing) and yet consider themselves
an asset at a professional (or even semi-pro) level when the flashing lights are on and the waters are rising.

And again, context.     

Quote from: lordmonar on December 22, 2014, 08:25:35 AM
If someone somewhere is doing high angle rescue on the CAP dime....it is not your problem....unless you recently became a wing commander that I don't know about.

It's all of our problems when its not done properly, because it put the membership and the organization at significant risk,
while also setting improper expectations for everyone from the member to the customer.

"That Others May Zoom"

Flying Pig

Quote from: PHall on December 21, 2014, 10:28:34 PM
We have a member in CAWG who has a certified Search dog and she does use him on missions.
She's also a very active member of a Search Dog organization and they are the ones who certified her and the dog.

Thats the point of my discussion.  She is a handler outside of CAP who happens to bring her skills to CAP.  CAP doesn't train, maintain or have anything to do with her dog.  When one day she leaves CAP, so does that skill set. Its not a CAP qualification or mission.  Therefore, not something CAP should promote.  Sure, use the resource while its available, but don't promote it as an ability CAP brings to a mission.

Eclipse

Quote from: Flying Pig on December 22, 2014, 03:28:57 PM
Thats the point of my discussion.  She is a handler outside of CAP who happens to bring her skills to CAP.  CAP doesn't train, maintain or have anything to do with her dog.  When one day she leaves CAP, so does that skill set. Its not a CAP qualification or mission.  Therefore, not something CAP should promote.  Sure, use the resource while its available, but don't promote it as an ability CAP brings to a mission.

Such a simple truth...

"That Others May Zoom"

argentip

Quote from: Eclipse on December 22, 2014, 01:29:16 AM
Quote from: AALTIS on December 22, 2014, 01:13:26 AM
Eclipse,  my guess is that the above teams that have had articles published have been given approval to utilize their dogs.

By whom and how, exactly.

The OHWG member has gone through the NHQ process of getting K-9 Handler on her 101 card.  The dog also has been issued a 101 card by NHQ so it can be used as a "CAP asset".

I don't know the details on how it all came about, but this case is legitimately approved through NHQ.
Phil Argenti, Col, CAP
GLR-IN-001

Eclipse

#29
Someone pinged me on this via PM as well, had my attention until the comment about a dog being issued a 101.
http://www.goldstardogtraining.org/Kudos/CAP.pdf

"Sawyer" is approved as an "internal" SAR dog only - presumably that means he's OK to be around CAP and can be
used for the canine tasks of GT training (i.e. "stay away from the dogs), but no actual missions, at least not AFAMS,
which granted may not be an issues as most missing persons are corporate missions.  I'm open to being shown otherwise.

Sounds entirely ceremonial / honorary.


"That Others May Zoom"

EMT-83

And why is that stupid dog requirement still on the SQTR. I'm guessing it's the most pencil-whipped task out there.

Eclipse

Quote from: EMT-83 on December 22, 2014, 06:42:11 PM
And why is that stupid dog requirement still on the SQTR. I'm guessing it's the most pencil-whipped task out there.

Seriously - same goes for the kitty holes.

"That Others May Zoom"

Storm Chaser

Quote from: EMT-83 on December 22, 2014, 06:42:11 PM
And why is that stupid dog requirement still on the SQTR. I'm guessing it's the most pencil-whipped task out there.

There's no "dog requirement" on the SQTR. Task O-0401 is a knowledge based task, which doesn't required ground team members to actually work with canines. The purpose of this task is to familiarize CAP GTMs with K-9 SAR teams, as they may have to work side-by-side them on certain missions.

Flying Pig

Ok.....so my question is, is the handler a CAP member?  If so, then this criteria used should be open to all CAP members interested in using a dog.  If they issued Tina the handler a 101 card, then CAP just made it a skill set that any member should be able to pursue correct?

Storm Chaser


Quote from: Flying Pig on December 22, 2014, 07:30:51 PM
Ok.....so my question is, is the handler a CAP member?  If so, then this criteria used should be open to all CAP members interested in using a dog.  If they issued Tina the handler a 101 card, then CAP just made it a skill set that any member should be able to pursue correct?

Any CAP member who's certified through an external organization can request permission to use those skills and training within CAP. That said, the process to request approval is quite cumbersome, as it must go through the chain of command, all the way to NHQ/DO for final approval.

Flying Pig

Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 22, 2014, 07:36:02 PM

Quote from: Flying Pig on December 22, 2014, 07:30:51 PM
Ok.....so my question is, is the handler a CAP member?  If so, then this criteria used should be open to all CAP members interested in using a dog.  If they issued Tina the handler a 101 card, then CAP just made it a skill set that any member should be able to pursue correct?

Any CAP member who's certified through an external organization can request permission to use those skills and training within CAP. That said, the process to request approval is quite cumbersome, as it must go through the chain of command, all the way to NHQ/DO for final approval.

Well now that someone has obtained the quals it should be pretty easy for someone to follow along behind now.

lordmonar

How is this process cumbersome?   It only takes an E-mail.

Wing CC to Region CC.   "My member has a canine and wants to us it on missions, please endorse"
Region CC to CAP DO.  "I endorse this use on CAP missions please approve".
CAP DO....."done"

This is not rocket science and should be a no brainer....and can be done in an afternoon.

Why do you all thing working with NHQ is so hard?


PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Storm Chaser

Because we all know that in CAP it doesn't take an afternoon to approve things like this.

JeffDG

Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 22, 2014, 08:15:36 PM
Because we all know that in CAP it doesn't take an afternoon to approve things like this.

With a well-written justification they are.

I once got approval for non-CAP passengers on an AFAM (Wing/CC, NOC, LR/ADO, LR/CC, CAP-USAF/XO, CAP-USAF/CC) approved in under 2 hours.

Eclipse

Quote from: lordmonar on December 22, 2014, 07:58:01 PM
This is not rocket science and should be a no brainer....and can be done in an afternoon.

Why do you all thing working with NHQ is so hard?

Coming from an eager new guy, that might be amusing, you know better.  A >LOT< better.

I'm still not buying this is anything but honorary, and the word "internal" is the key to this description.

NHQ can't correct legitimate typos and regulatory conflicts, let alone generate a custom 101 card
with a specialty that doesn't actually exist.  I can make you anything you want to be with Photoshop,
show me how that's done for real.

"That Others May Zoom"