Holes in the GT training program

[Eclipse]

^ Not only do I like the above, I am doubly impressed that MDWG actually has a properly approved and posted supplement to 60-3!   

I hope you're being sarcastic since Maryland does not have an approved supplement to 60-3 and if true the additional requirements they are imposing are "illegal". 

Yes, they do:  http://cap.gov/documents/MD603Supp18Sep06.pdf

Here are the rest of them:  http://cap.gov/visitors/members/operations/supplements/index/

[RiverAux]

We appear to have dueling web pages on the NHQ site (what a surprise):
http://level2.cap.gov/visitors/programs/operations/emergency_services/index.cfm?nodeID=5326

[_]

We appear to have dueling web pages on the NHQ site (what a surprise):
http://level2.cap.gov/visitors/programs/operations/emergency_services/index.cfm?nodeID=5326

How did you get to this page?  The other one can be gotten to through a link in the ops page.  I did a text search and got both but can't get to the one above other than that.

[RiverAux]

Start here: http://level2.cap.gov/visitors/programs/operations/emergency_services/ and chose supplements and then Approved Supplements to CAP ES regulations.

[Eclipse]

^   

[_]

I think the emergency services pages on there are not used anymore.  Looking at the site map and just looking around I can't get to the emergency services page other than typing in the URL.  I think they decided not to use "emergency services" as a term anymore and switched to "operations".  The problem is that instead of getting rid of the old pages they just didn't link to them and figured no one would find them. 

[RiverAux]

The "sitemap" is about as good as a map of North America from about 1608.  CAP has long had the absolute worst web site "design" that it is possible to come up with.  I think they possibly consulted with the CIA on the best way to hide information.  Heck, I've managed to find two entirely different pages about the patron program. 

[sardak]

But, so what, the regs don't require a ground team to have a GTL.

Maybe it's not directly stated, but it's certainly implied.  The very existence of the GTL rating is the first identifier.  The statement under the UDF rating is another:

Note: There is not a separate qualification for members and leaders on Urban Direction Finding Teams, but one member will be placed in charge, and operations must still meet the requirements for cadet protection and vehicle usage.

The CAPF 109 requires the signature of the ground team leader, which (as stated above) can be anyone on a UDF team with the UDF rating, but for a GT it has to be someone with a GTL rating or GTL SQTR (which means there must be a qualified GTL to train the trainee).
Plus there's the Air Force evaluation pamphlet which requires the GTL to be qualified and current as a GTL.
I'm hoping you were joking, but come on...

None of what you quoted or say are requirements for there to be a GTL on a ground team.  Even the 109 just reads "Signature of Team Leader" (and has for many years).

Prior to CAPR 60-3 (2001), there were explicit statements in the regs requiring a GTL on ground teams. 

The question is the same as that regarding the requirements to be a GTL.  Is the lack of a specific GTL requirement due to an oversight when the 60 series replaced the 50/55 series, or was it intentional? 

I think the answer to both questions is that there was poor implementation of an intentional desire.

Mike

[Pace]

None of what you quoted or say are requirements for there to be a GTL on a ground team.  Even the 109 just reads "Signature of Team Leader" (and has for many years).

Prior to CAPR 60-3 (2001), there were explicit statements in the regs requiring a GTL on ground teams. 

The question is the same as that regarding the requirements to be a GTL.  Is the lack of a specific GTL requirement due to an oversight when the 60 series replaced the 50/55 series, or was it intentional? 

I think the answer to both questions is that there was poor implementation of an intentional desire.

Mike

Ya'know what, you're right.  I dare you to send your evaluated ground team at an Air Force evaluated SAR out in the field without a qualified and current GTL and see what happens (hint: seen it happen and it doesn't end well).

[Dragoon]

On big problem with the new system is that there is no definition of the operational differences of a GTM3 team vs a GTM 1 team.


Here are the relevant lines from 60-3 that I could find

Team training and experience must be appropriate for the mission (proficiency in DF use, ground rescue knowledge, concentrated area search procedures, missing person search, etc.).

Ground Team Members –
Level 1 should be prepared to conduct all facets of ground team operations for at least 72 hours.
Level 2 should be prepared to conduct limited ground team operations for up to 48 hours.
Ground Team Members – Level 3 should be prepared to conduct basic ground team operations for up to 24 hours.

\


Soooo, what exactly are "limited ground team ops" or "basic ground team ops"

No definition.  Effectively, you can have any team do anything for up to 24 hours, as long as you think they can handle it.



To make matters worse, GTM3s are not required to have overnight stuff like sleeping bags, and yet I can put them in the woods overnight.

The concept of 3 levels is nice, but the operational doctrine on using them sucks.

[Pace]

I was referring back to the requirements in task 0-0002 which only require certain equipment for GTM1 & 2, but not GTM3. 

Somehow I missed your post here.

I went back and reread O-0001 (at least that's the one I think you meant - if not clue me in and I'll head back into the task guide).  Even though a GTM3 is restricted to 24 hours in the field at a time, the task doesn't make a distinction between 24 and 72 hour gear for different GT levels.  You have to have both to get the task signed off.  The task even says it's a good idea to bring the 72 hour pack in case the mission is extended past 24 hours or you're sent to another mission without relief to go home and pack more supplies.

[_]

In the evaluation area of O-0001 it says:

2. Has all required items of the extended duration pack (GTM-2 & 1 Only).

As GTM3 you are not required to have 72hr gear. 

[Pace]

In the evaluation area of O-0001 it says:

2. Has all required items of the extended duration pack (GTM-2 & 1 Only).

As GTM3 you are not required to have 72hr gear. 

Ok, that explains it.  I was looking at the old version of the task guide (circa 2001).  I need to go through and make sure I have everything else updated in the folders I use.

Thanks Bayhawk.

[_]

Funny how the 2004 version isn't really an improvement over the 2001 version.  As far as I can tell they just changed the gear task according to the GTM levels and took out a couple other tasks all together.  The writing didn't improve and quite a few typos are still there. 

[sardak]

To make things more confusing, there are two versions of the 2004 task guide - 17 March and 24 May.  The SQTRs are all dated March, but match the May version.

I've attached a matrix showing the changes in tasks between 1999, 2001 and 2004.

Mike

[IceNine]

In MD wing, to become GTL you have to be GTM2 before becoming a GTL-T.  This makes sure you cover all of the navigational tasks, have at least 7 missions before you become a GTL, and means that all GTL's are capable of staying in the field for extended periods as would a GTM2.  We also have a check ride system where you have to be evaluated by a GOBD on a mission before you can be approved for GTL.  The checkride needs to have an ELT scenario, a crash site surveillance scenario, a ground search, and all the other assorted admin and organizational stuff.  If you can't do all of them you have to do it again another time.  The evaluator also can't be someone who had a major part in your training.  All of this allows for an objective evaluation of someone's skills and readiness.  It's not easy to get GTL and if you are one, you have a good idea of what you're doing.  It was a pain in the butt for me to get GTL between starting from scratch, again, with GTM3 and these procedures, but I like the system.

So how about throwing some of these documents (IC kit, GTL Checkride, GT Resource Form, etc.) 

I can't get into your wings system to see them, and I like the concept of them all

[_]

Attached is the check ride.  It's basically a check list of the tasks for GTL.  You can show someone you know each of the tasks individually easily but you need to be able to do many at once so the checklist checks that you are doing all of them.

The IC kit is basically a list of forms to have:
- CAPF 2a, 78, 79, 104, 109, 122
- MDF 103- personnel roster
- MDF 121- aircraft and vehicle registration
- memo from national on how to use WMIRS
- ORM worksheets
- Group duty officer roster.