MRO's days numbered?

[Garibaldi]

That's a different one than I remember.

Orca 1 burned down; under-body caught fire on the freeway about four or five years ago.  That's Orca 2.

Ah yes...Orca. Spent many an EAA Precautionary in it at Fond du Lac...

[flyboy53]

This is just a symptom to me of the fact that CAP only pays superficial attention to ICS. We either need to go whole hog with ICS(forms and all) or go home. Anyone who has taken the AUXCOMM class from FEMA will tell you that unless you can show up at an incident looking professional and using the proper ICS forms and terminology, you will be asked to go home. BTW, CAP is desribed by FEMA as a "SPECIAL NEEDS ORGANIZATION". Take from that what you will.

Agreed. Especially when CERT would be more used in an emergency than a ground team.

[Eclipse]

Where?

[wuzafuzz]

About two weeks ago, while discussing the upcoming ICUT, the Wing DC mentioned that Mission Radio Operator would be
going away soon, and the CUL quals would be changing as well.

The reasoning being that anyone with ICUT should be capable of the basicv radio operations done by the average MRO.
Anyone else heard that?

I need a requal, but there's no point if this is coming soon.

I missed a lot of the National Communicators Meeting yesterday, due to technical difficulties with the stream.  However, I did hear through a third party that MRO is in fact going to be replaced by RDO3, 2, and 1.  (Guessing we are borrowing from the RADO role in ICS.)  Further, CUL will be changed to a tiered structure with level 3, 2, and 1 ratings.  Meeting notes are supposed to be released fairly soon.  No idea on the timing of the changes to the ratings.  Is there anyone else on here who knows more?

[Eclipse]

That's essentially exactly what I had heard.

[arajca]

About two weeks ago, while discussing the upcoming ICUT, the Wing DC mentioned that Mission Radio Operator would be
going away soon, and the CUL quals would be changing as well.

The reasoning being that anyone with ICUT should be capable of the basicv radio operations done by the average MRO.
Anyone else heard that?

I need a requal, but there's no point if this is coming soon.

I missed a lot of the National Communicators Meeting yesterday, due to technical difficulties with the stream.  However, I did hear through a third party that MRO is in fact going to be replaced by RDO3, 2, and 1.  (Guessing we are borrowing from the RADO role in ICS.)  Further, CUL will be changed to a tiered structure with level 3, 2, and 1 ratings.  Meeting notes are supposed to be released fairly soon.  No idea on the timing of the changes to the ratings.  Is there anyone else on here who knows more?

Hmmm. Might need to design a new badge...









Three pages and no uniforms mentioned - gots to maintain standards

[RogueLeader]

You mean I'm going to have to retrain to keep my MRO.  Or that it will transfer into the new designation.

Three pages and no uniforms mentioned - gots to maintain standards

What Standards?

[arajca]

You mean I'm going to have to retrain to keep my MRO.  Or that it will transfer into the new designation.

Good question. No answer. The training cabal committee hasn't released any information other than planned to happen.

[sardak]

I would like to see us move closer to the COM-L, COM-T, and RADO desingnators used in ICS...I did hear through a third party that MRO is in fact going to be replaced by RDO3, 2, and 1. (Guessing we are borrowing from the RADO role in ICS.) Further, CUL will be changed to a tiered structure with level 3, 2, and 1 ratings.

RADO (radio operator) is no more ICS than MRO or CUL or MP or...whatever. You won't find RADO or radio operator in any ICS or NIMS documentation. RADO is a position created within the wildland fire community by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG). In NWCG's Wildland Fire Qualification System Guide, better know by its document number 310-1, RADO is listed as an incident support function, not an ICS position. NWCG also created airbase radio operator (ABRO), comm tech (COMT), incident communications center manager (INCM) and of course, communications unit leader (COML). The 310-1 does list the latter three as ICS positions, although the only one on the "book solution" ICS org chart is COML, but hey, ICS allows flexibility. Changing MRO to RDO is change for change sake, as is creating levels.

Is it really necessary to create tiered structures for RDO and CUL, or is CAP just trying to sound NIMS-ish again, like with GTM and IC? Neither of these, as they are, have the need for levels, i.e. typing. From FEMA, "Resource typing is categorizing, by capability, the resources requested, deployed and used in incidents. Measurable standards identifying resource capabilities and performance levels serve as the basis for typing." These changes are just more ratings to fill the 101 card. (merit badges for the sash)

Mike

[ol'fido]

My own personal opinion is that we should have:

Mission Radio Operator(MRO): Basically, can pick up the radio and talk on it. Could be a secondary qual for mission base staff not directly assigned to comms who may need to pick up a radio and use it every now and then. Could also be used on flight line, high bird, and ground team. The ground team MRO would be either the non-GTM qualified van driver(who stays with the van) or an additional MRO(who also stays with the van) if a GTL or GTM is the van driver.

Mission Communicator(MC): This would be someone who has trained specifically for communications and basically has all the knowledge and quals of someone with a Tech rating in communications. Although, the MC would generally work base comms, they could be sent out with two or three MROs to set up a remote relay station or portable repeater.

Communications Leader(COML): Supervises the entire Comm Unit. Basically, what we have now with a CUL.

[wuzafuzz]

Is it really necessary to create tiered structures for RDO and CUL, or is CAP just trying to sound NIMS-ish again, like with GTM and IC?

I don't see much need for multiple levels in the radio operator role, but I do believe additional levels for CUL (or whatever it's called this week) can be useful.  The bar for CUL is exceptionally low, but many in CAP believe CUL to be a necessary role for most scheduled activities.  The skill set needed to effectively run comm for a squadron bivouac is worlds away from that needed to excel in communications at a wing OPSEVAL, large scale incident, or incident involving non-CAP players.  The current SQTR for CUL doesn't recognize a difference, nor does it encourage anything more than minimal talent.

Of course they could also rebuild the single CUL SQTR to something more meaningful, rescind all current CUL quals, and make us all prove our mettle once more.

Seriously, communications is one of the most common gripes at incidents, events, and exercices in many disciplines.  Everyone benefits if our communicators have more than half a clue.

[wuzafuzz]

It would also be nice to see an increased emphasis on communications technical skills.  Most CUL's I've met will completely vapor lock if they are asked to use a soldering iron, wattmeter, or volt meter.  Those tools are necessary for basic setup and troubleshooting at a comm unit of any size. 

Whether those skills should be required of a CUL vs. MRO vs some new qual is another discussion.

[arajca]

It would also be nice to see an increased emphasis on communications technical skills.  Most CUL's I've met will completely vapor lock if they are asked to use a soldering iron, wattmeter, or volt meter.  Those tools are necessary for basic setup and troubleshooting at a comm unit of any size. 

Whether those skills should be required of a CUL vs. MRO vs some new qual is another discussion.

I believe, but could be wrong, they are looking at a COM-T position.
RDO# - sets up and operates the radios
COM-T - sets up radios, troubleshoots equipment, and fixes things
CUL - Manages the network, does planning (ICS205), and supervises

Most CULs do not have access to or training on that type of equipment.

[jhsmith400]

Having had more than 20 years in emergency communications, I say that no one at a mission base should be soldering on equipment anyway, that should be reserved for the refit areas.  Plug and play redundant backups should be ready at all times.  With the new focus on disasters don't get me started on folks using travel trailers for the only communications center.  All this being said the CUL's should spend their time planning and setting up comm. routines and such and the setting up of equipment should be someone else.

[Eclipse]

Having had more than 20 years in emergency communications, I say that no one at a mission base should be soldering on equipment anyway, that should be reserved for the refit areas.  Plug and play redundant backups should be ready at all times.  With the new focus on disasters don't get me started on folks using travel trailers for the only communications center.  All this being said the CUL's should spend their time planning and setting up comm. routines and such and the setting up of equipment should be someone else.

+1

One of the identified issues with the way comms were trained was that far too much time was spent on the technical aspects, and far too little time
on the user aspects.

A normal user of a CAP radio has no more need to know how it works then a normal email user needs to know what TCPIP is.

[wuzafuzz]

Having had more than 20 years in emergency communications, I say that no one at a mission base should be soldering on equipment anyway, that should be reserved for the refit areas.  Plug and play redundant backups should be ready at all times.  With the new focus on disasters don't get me started on folks using travel trailers for the only communications center.  All this being said the CUL's should spend their time planning and setting up comm. routines and such and the setting up of equipment should be someone else.

+1

One of the identified issues with the way comms were trained was that far too much time was spent on the technical aspects, and far too little time
on the user aspects.

A normal user of a CAP radio has no more need to know how it works then a normal email user needs to know what TCPIP is.

True, a "normal user" has no need to know those things.  The folks who need to setup power supplies, antennas, feed line, etc DO need to know those things or they are not serving their internal customers.  I've seen comm (and radios) fail because people connected our high quality radios to bad feed line or antennas.  There are simple tests to avoid those problems.  Sure, the folks with comm vehicles or fixed installations can just flip the power on, but those of us who live as gypsies should be checking every time we setup the toys we are trusted with.

I don't care if it's the CUL, the MRO, or a crossing guard, but someone needs to be able to do those things.

[Brad]

Agreed. Are radio repair skills handy to have? Sure. But if you don't qualify under 100-1 then you're SOL, even if you have a ton of ham experience or such. Besides, with the emphasis on national standardization (EF-Johnsons and the Astrons with the built-in radio slot) are making base radios more and more plug and play. Going NORDO for an extended amount of time (and yes I consider cracking open a radio to do a quick solder "extended amount of time") is a Very Bad Thing.

Example: when our base radios mess up at work (I dispatch for my state highway patrol) we immediately jump to a backup radio, or switch to a handheld. Sure we'll have the techs come and take a look, but that's a non-critical priority. Your critical priority should be 100% comms uptime.

[Eclipse]

Yes, someone needs to know, just not the operators.

Pilots don't fix the planes, drivers don't fix the cars, and radio ops don't repair radios.

[Fubar]

Yes, someone needs to know, just not the operators.

I think that was the point expressed. A MRO should have enough technical skills to turn the radio on, know the difference between digital and analog, and which button to push to talk.

There is a need for someone who understands basic radio theory in order to hook up radios to antennas and power supplies, understand SWR, and perhaps the concept of a NVIS antenna. Given the technical aspects of the old ACUT test, and that ACUT was required for CUL, it would seem right now those responsibilities fall upon the CUL, yet CUL is a managerial position that should not be concerned with grunt work. Personally, I'd like to see some sort of MRO-TECH qualification to help ensure someone setting up a radio at a mission base or temporary location has at least a little bit of training behind them.

[cap235629]

As a DC one of my biggest aggravations is the the (forgive me) HAM mindset.  Our communications system is designed around operations as opposed to theory.  99% of our communications are handled by people who need to know "what channel am I on"  "What channel am I supposed to be on to contact...insert callsign or functional designator here...." and which button do I push to talk to...insert callsign here..."

Fort too long CAP communications has thought of itself as a mission as opposed to a support function to accomplish a mission.

Maybe I am just an old cranky cop but propagation means jack to me, I just want the radio to work...

That being said, I feel my job as DC is to ensure that CAP commanders have the ability to communicate to units in the field as needed, regardless of the situation.

My boss leads me to believe that I am accomplishing this task..


KISS

Enough said.....