CAP GSAR capability

[RiverAux]

In another thread, one of our distinguished members said this:

I think we're in no way trained or qualified for any kind of GSAR personally, but that's another subject. Anyone can walk a search line with at most 5mins training. Where something more complex is involved, LE will be doing it anyway. We're not a highly qualified specialized SaR force.

I think this is a gross understatment of CAP's GSAR capabilities in relation to lost person in the woods scenarios.  Our GTLs and GTMS are more than capable of participating in such missions and have been given all the knowledge they need to do so.  Anyone wishing to compare CAP's GT training sylabus to what is expected of NASAR SARTECH III, II, and I will see that they are roughly equivalent with the exception of the rope skills.

Now, there are several areas where CAP would generally fall behind in comparison to many county SAR teams, and they primarily relate to the fact that GSAR is currently a small subset of what CAP does while it is the primary focus of the local teams.  In general, because of that fact, we do not practice these skills as teams nearly as much as they seem to do and when we do, probably use much less complicated scenarios. 

The other area where we lack is that our Ground Branch Directors are definetely not really prepared to serve in that capacity on a lost-person search and we don't really have the training tasks required for them to be.  However, seeing as how CAP is not going to be the lead agency on such searches, I'm not really sure it is that necessary to traing our GSAR folks at that level (at least in relation to lost person searches). 

But, if all we're doing is comparing a CAP ground team to a NASAR-qualified team or just a local team with no NASAR qualifications in their ability to participate in a non-technical search for a lost person, I think we would rate very well. 

Now, some of this may change as we get deeper into the national standards program.  I have a hard time NASAR is going to maintain their monopoly on certification and that at some point there will be a non-NASAR national credentialling system.  Should that happen, CAP will be on the same playing field and what differences there are now, will lessen or disappear. 

And by the way, most LE folks aren't going to have all that much, if any, training in leading or participating in lost person searches either.   Heck, the local sheriff may not even have any law enforcement training, much less SAR. 

[Eclipse]

The other area where we lack is that our Ground Branch Directors are definitely not really prepared to serve in that capacity on a lost-person search and we don't really have the training tasks required for them to be.   

Unless you are speaking for yourself, you're going to need to be more specific on why.

[JayT]

The other area where we lack is that our Ground Branch Directors are definitely not really prepared to serve in that capacity on a lost-person search and we don't really have the training tasks required for them to be.   

Unless you are speaking for yourself, you're going to need to be more specific on why.

Speaking for myself, it seems to me that CAP doesn't really.........understand.......how to play within ICS. To often, we treat ICS as a single agency tool, when it's not.

Can you really take a CAP GBD and stick them with a team from another organization? Could you take a CAP team and stick them under another organization? Could a CAP 'IC' really operate as an IC for a large multi agency response? If one of my bosses was an IC at an incident, he/she would take a dim view of some CAP guy calling up and introducing themselves as the 'CAP IC.'

I think CAP should do away with our own training all together, and go to the SARTECH and what not standards.

[RiverAux]

The reason CAP GBDs are not really qualified to lead lost person searches is that it just isn't really in our training curriculum.  Take a look at the GT task book and reference text and the GBD training tasks and you will only see minimal attention to the more "strategic" aspects of leading such missions.  We give our GTLs enough information to understand what they're doing, but there is a lot more to missing person SAR mission planning and execution than is in our program.

But, we are very well qualified to participate at the grunt and team leader level in such missions. 

Can you really take a CAP GBD and stick them with a team from another organization? Could you take a CAP team and stick them under another organization? Could a CAP 'IC' really operate as an IC for a large multi agency response? If one of my bosses was an IC at an incident, he/she would take a dim view of some CAP guy calling up and introducing themselves as the 'CAP IC.'

I can't imagine any circumstances where a CAP IC would be the IC for a lost person search, so your statement is moot.  However, a CAP ground team would fit right in with other agencies when doing GSAR and most likely would be some of the best prepared people on scene compared to the untrained volunteers that would be showing up. 

and go to the SARTECH and what not standards.

Say goodbye to all cadet particpation and most senior participation.  You do realize that the online exam for the lowest level of NASAR certification is $50 and that certification costs for the upper levels are even higher?  That you have to buy the textbooks from them?  Why pay for NASAR certification when our own system is comparable and doesn't cost extra money? 

As stated, other than ropework there is very little difference between our standards and NASAR, so there is no real advantage to doing it. 

[IceNine]

Because our SAR training is not recognized as standardized.  Theirs is.

I just had a meeting with my local SAR managers and they were all hesitant to accept anything other than NASAR, or their own training Certifications.

It is a matter of shut up and color for a lot of these people

[sarmed1]

That you have to buy the textbooks from them?

No you dont....only if you are conducting a NASAR sponsored course, you can receive your "training" from anywhere...including CAP (or just read a SAR book and challenge)

SARTECH standard is nothing special really, its just a standard that everyone, usually recognizes, including those that dont do SAR as a regualar job (ie LE, Fire/EMS)

GBD for missing person SAR isnt really that differant from missing AC SAR.  Its a resource managing postion, assign and brief teams to tasks sent to you by planning, based on their ability/capability.  Debrief them as they return and forward the "intel" back to planning.  Dont let anyone get lost of overdue....

mk

[RiverAux]

Because our SAR training is not recognized as standardized.  Theirs is.

I just had a meeting with my local SAR managers and they were all hesitant to accept anything other than NASAR, or their own training Certifications.

It is a matter of shut up and color for a lot of these people

We too have a nationally standardized program that is just as valid.  Heck, there are almost as many people currently qualified under CAP's standards as have ever been qualified under NASAR.  We have 3-4 times as many members who specialize in GSAR than NASAR does.  If there is another volunteer organization with GSAR capabilities on a national scale bigger than us, I haven't heard about it. 

[FlyingTerp]

That you have to buy the textbooks from them?

No you dont....only if you are conducting a NASAR sponsored course, you can receive your "training" from anywhere...including CAP (or just read a SAR book and challenge)

I challenged the SARTECH III exam using only CAP training and references.  Passed it, no problem.  SARTECH III is only a test, no practicals. 

There is an expired MOU between CAP and NASAR. http://www.nasar.org/nasar/downloads/NASARLOA_Final_May_2003_no_sigs.pdf Its disappointing that there is not more of a partnership between the two organizations.   

[IceNine]

Because our SAR training is not recognized as standardized.  Theirs is.

I just had a meeting with my local SAR managers and they were all hesitant to accept anything other than NASAR, or their own training Certifications.

It is a matter of shut up and color for a lot of these people

We too have a nationally standardized program that is just as valid.  Heck, there are almost as many people currently qualified under CAP's standards as have ever been qualified under NASAR.  We have 3-4 times as many members who specialize in GSAR than NASAR does.  If there is another volunteer organization with GSAR capabilities on a national scale bigger than us, I haven't heard about it. 

I doesn't matter how qualified we think/know we are.  Until we (CAP) do some footwork to either (a) get NASAR to recognize our traininig as equivilent (b) push our members to get NASAR qual's.  Then we are just spinning out wheels.

I agree that our training is pretty close to equivilent, it is not however equal because we don't get a card saying we are NASAR Certified.

It is all a matter of perception, everyone knows the vetting process for NASAR Cert's they don't know CAP's. 

So at the end of the day you can try to argue here that CAP is just as good as NASAR, but until you get the rest of the SAR world to recognize that you are pushing a chain.

[RiverAux]

We have gotten far off track here.  The question is does a CAP ground team have the training necessary to participate in a lost person search?  I say yes. 

[IceNine]

Minus rope skilz necessary to search high incline areas absolutely.

Validation you ask?  I sent 2 teams composed of seniors and cadets to look for an elderly alzheimers patient just a few weeks ago.

I had an opportunity to speak with one of the EMA directors w/ whom I've been friends for a long time.  He gave me some very constructive feedback. 

One thing he mentioned was searching high incline areas (like river banks), He also mentioned that our interoperability was sufficient with the exception of our ability to integrate reports and other paperwork type stuff.  Some of the minor things he mentioned was safety equipment, they were surprised that we don't make our people wear knee pads, and glasses.

Positives- He said our people were very professional, knew the job, and found some evidence that one of the EMA team's had missed.

He was also amazed at the fact that we integrate training w/dog search teams into our ground training.  And from what I hear they paired us with dog teams several times for collection, and "cleanup".  And apparently we found quite a few things the dog handlers missed or ignored.

Over all I feel we are sufficiently trained, However my group goes through extra effort to have the training that all of our customers require.  And we do A LOT of foot work ahead of time to clear the air of misnomers with all of the local SAR teams.

[notaNCO forever]

    I think one big problem in C.A.P.'s GSAR training and capabilities, at least in my state, is that you get people that get their qualifications and don't know what their talking about. Then those people precede to "teach" and sign of other people.

[DNall]

I'd really like to participate more extensively in this conversation, but I hope you'll understand why I'm a little busy with other priorities right now.

One quick point though. This may be hard for a lot of people that haven't seen it from my side, but...

As you know, I commissioned in the Army not too long ago. A lot of the training there was a waste of time, but the one really key thing that did matter was small unit leadership & operational planning.

It requires knowing, training, and being proficient in tactics by the baseline soldier. In addition to them having discipline, professionalism, capability, and dedication. That is not the case for CAP GTMs. It is not in general the case for CAP members, nor is it ingrained as part of our organizational structure. I am not in any way arguing for some strict authoritarian military style whatever. I can promise you no such stereotyped system exists anywhere in the military, particularly in the AF, and that includes everything from Marine basic training to Army infantry units. I'm talking about a foundation of dedication, competence by industry standards, and professionalism. Everyone is capable of achieving that, regardless of pay or not & without any more time than CAP members are putting in now.

The other aspect is the leader. It's first of all selective of who gets to even train to be leaders. Then those with the talent to do so are trained. You learn a checkbox form of leadership at the entry level, but it's something almost no one at any level of CAP seems capable of doing. The level of detail & precision with which I'm supposed to expect an NCO squad leader or recently commissioned 2LT to conduct just about every task they do is just non-existent in CAP. I can't tell you how frustrated I get when I hear a CAP briefing & they haven't properly planned for anything or given me a quarter of the information I actually need to go forward & do the mission safely, effectively, and efficiently. You can say the two things are Apples to Oranges, but they absolutely are not. The mission planning task on the GTL SQTR is the exact same 5-paragraph opord format we use in the Army. What it neglects to teach is the 8 troop leading procedures by which that process is formulated & executed, or the planning elements to get there, which makes it worthless. 

My point is that CAP is an outstanding organization with enormous potential. We have some amazing members that can accomplish enormous things. A lot of them get really scared that we're going to overwhelm them when you start talking about higher standards and more intensive training. There's also the fear that we'll run people off while we already have issues with our size & retention. I can tell you flat out that the stuff I'm talking about is incredibly simple. It takes no more time than what we're doing now. Being able to actually operate to standard would increase our mission capabilities 10-fold, and that would bring in & retain more members than you could imagine. I think CAP has greatness deep down inside it, but we have to get past our fears to let it out.

[CadetProgramGuy]

I have taken the GTL, and added a few things gear wise, and then passed the SARTECH II written and practicals.

Yes, once you acheive the GTL level, the written is farily easy.

The practicals will take some time to learn and then be able to show off your skills.

Tracking is not easy, the Land Nav course I was on, was a pain in the buttocks.  Other wise, it's all good.

I say, get the GTL, then on to the SARTECH II.

Somthing also to consider is that on a National level, CAP will have its diffucility due to the "Self Certifying" nature we have of our Ground Teams.  Thats why NASAR is popular, because the National level tells you WHO can certify your people.

[sarmed1]

I think that GSAR is one of those local area specific emphesis missions.  If you arent going to be used as an asset by the local ES establishment, dont spend to much time training into it beyond the tasks that fit into the normal GTM program.

But if you are (or think you will be) then by all means make it the emphesis of your program there are a few areas I would look at (off the top of my head), seek NASAR certification (at least the SARTECH III) for those in the GTM 2 and GTM 1, GTL should strive for SARTECH II. (like mentioned, it lends credability when dealing with outside agencies)  I would also try to meet the DHS reccomended trainnig criteria if possible...ie someone first responder or above, everyone with Hazmat awareness and WMD/Terrorism awareness (both availble as on line classes)  Get someone  to get you the basics of rope work, at least knots, basic rigging and simple hauling/lowering systems (need not rappel)

Some bigger things down the road, make sure you have a compatable radio system with the local SAR units (hint 155.160 is frequently common wilderness SAR frequency) Stokes basket and pataint packaging equipment is the stretcher of choice.  Swift water safety (if you have it in your area)  you should have some basic water safety training and a few PFD's (type III/IV) and a few throw bags available.

mk

[RiverAux]

This recent mission in AL is why I think lost person searches are our only real potential mission growth area --- 37 flight hours and 8 ground sorties over three days -- done as an A-1 AFRCC mission.  There are many, many more of these going on in every state when compared to missing airplane or DR missions, apparently we just have to train the sheriffs in the right way to ask for help. 

http://www.cap.gov/visitors/news/cap_news_online/index.cfm?fuseaction=display&nodeID=6192&newsID=4753&year=2008&month=9

[DNall]

They don't need to be expert in how to request help. They just need to know our capabilities are avail & the point of contact for the local unit. They should be calling that local unit, who then starts putting people on alert standby, while at the same time helping format the request thru NOC. I've seen the same thing happen on redcap missions too.

It's still a small mission. It doesn't happen all that much, and frankly, 37 flight hours is miniscule. For a standard redcap, we're going to run at least 7 aircraft and as many as 15. We're going to run 6-12 sorties per launch, with possibly two sets per day, plus highbird. I'd eat up more than 37hrs on the first launch of day one & get very little coverage out of it. 8 Ground sorties is small time too. I would have 5 teams per day (replacements rotating thru) for the first week at min.

Look, I get hurricanes here, Cali get earthquakes, the north gets snow/flood/fire/etc... each region has its own thing. If somehow none of that happens in your state, well first of all be thankful for that, and sure you can train for other stuff.

I don't know that missing person is the thing though... I mean it's really two categories. There's the highly specialized expert SaR team type - which is wilderness and mountain SaR - and, there's the general giant search line or broke up teams in moderate terrain - for which any volunteer of the street can do that & the agency training is in how to operate search lines, logistics, leadership/mgmt, etc of those masses of untrained people. There isn't a middle ground there where CAP could fit.

I understand we can fly a lot, but helos are MUCH better suited to that mission. To the extent other resources aren't avail or can't be afforded, then sure CAP could try to help, but I'm afraid in most cases we'd just be drawing off resources that would be better used in other ways by other folks.

[RiverAux]

They don't need to be expert in how to request help. They just need to know our capabilities are avail & the point of contact for the local unit.

The evidence arising from recent requests for CAP assistance in both SAR and DR capabilities tells me that we have to tell the sheriffs how to request us in such a way that it will get approved as an AFAM.  I'm not talking about telling them how to game the system, but if they've got a legit request for our help as an AFAM it seems that if they don't use the right buzzwords, the AF will turn it down.     

[DNall]

That's what the word liaison means. You are a translator for the different languages, processes, chains of command, and contacts used on each side of the fence.

1) You as a local ES officer develop tactical working relationships with local agencies - say your county EOC for instance. You exercise with them to display your capabilities, and work to incorporate those capabilities in their operational response plans for certain types of situations that you know we can assist in, while making sure they know where you can't help them.

2) You then act as a liaison to that agency when they need to make a request. Their first call should be to you. You should help them format their request & send it to the appropriate contact - that's generally NOC, but may be forwarded thru a state EMA. Ours is done that way a lot of times, as the state has aviation and other resources & also funds certain local requests for outside support. You may also need to cross-deck with your Wg/CC or director of ES. Whatever the local process is, your job as local liaison is to know it & navigate it for the requestor, or at least hold their hand thru that process.

3) Eventually the request will go to NOC with the requestor signature line on it, and they'll work their process. It'll come back approved or not & that's all there is to it.

As far as terming things so AF will approve them... CAP's job isn't to do everything under the sun just cause a local community needs it done. If that were the case, I'm sure they could use an auxiliary trash pickup crew or dog catchers they don't have to pay. Likewise, the AF has limitations on what is or is not their job. They have a higher purpose than having a big heart. You need to not only respect that, but in many ways emulate it.

[RiverAux]

As far as terming things so AF will approve them... CAP's job isn't to do everything under the sun just cause a local community needs it done.

As I have said in this thread and others, I am talking about totally legit requests for normal CAP missions that should be done as AFAMs, not the sort of crazy stuff you suggest.