ICS

[cap235629]

Thank God it wasn't a CAP SM because I was confident that was the next scene.

But it wasn't and I haven't heard of any CAP SM incidents.    Feel free to not sign-off anyone you feel is not qualified to be on a Ground Team, but you need to have an objective guideline you are following.  What physical fitness standard do we use?  Army? USAF? Navy?  I really don't see out-of-shape SMs pushing themselves beyond their physical abilities.  The out of shape ones do the GTM3 and GTL quals so they can become competent GBDs.   Besides, being in shape didn't help Jim Fixx.

But are you really a competent GBD if you're too out of shape to do anything other then the 2 sorties each for GTM3 and GTL? 

Since GBD is a COMMAND role I would say YES as this job requires the ability lead, direct, multi-task, make decisions, conduct briefings, plan missions and keep up with your teams IN THE COMMAND POST.  You use your brain, not your brawn.  The purpose of having the GBD qualified as a GTL and GT3 is so that they have an UNDERSTANDING of how a team works in the field.

How many of you have ever been frustrated by the expectations and instructions from an OPS chief or IC that came up through the air side of the house and cannot undestand why it is taking so long for the team to get to the area that the aircrew identified an hour ago?

That is why they do this training, NOT so they can be the High Speed, Low Drag super trooper of SAR.

[Short Field]

But are you really a competent GBD if you're too out of shape to do anything other then the 2 sorties each for GTM3 and GTL? 

Well, I figure I have to be more competent than I am now.     Besides, I just need 2 sorties as I already have GTM3.   

I have reviewed a lot of ICs records and it looks like a lot of them got the "magic wave" and were appointed GBD because they were ICs.  That is simply based on them not having GTL showing up anyplace in their records.  I would expect to at least see GTL and GTM3 showing up in eServices as "expired" on a person who recently became an IC.  They got qualified as a GBD the month after they got qualified as an IC.  duh.... 

[Stonewall]

But it wasn't and I haven't heard of any CAP SM incidents.    Feel free to not sign-off anyone you feel is not qualified to be on a Ground Team, but you need to have an objective guideline you are following.  What physical fitness standard do we use?  Army? USAF? Navy?  I really don't see out-of-shape SMs pushing themselves beyond their physical abilities.  The out of shape ones do the GTM3 and GTL quals so they can become competent GBDs.   Besides, being in shape didn't help Jim Fixx.

No, it wasn't a CAP SM.  And luckily, no major incidents have happened with SMs that I know of either.  But I personally witnessed at least 3 SMs "go down" during training exercises and all 3 were far too heavy to be humping through the woods during the heat of the summer.  Then, on a REDCAP circa 2000, while on a search for a missing plane, an SM from another wing stopped in the middle of a ground sortie due to exhaustion.

Fortunately for me none of these members were under my watch or in my squadron.  I'm no superman but I can hold my own.  And I am not saying that a specific weight restriction needs to be applied, but I think it is ridiculous that people can be qualified on paper but no checks and balances are there to certify that someone is physically competent to perform certain tasks.  I don't have the GTM task guide in front of me, but I don't think there is a 6 mile hike requirement with 72 hour gear.  There should be.

[cap235629]

I am a 350 lb GBD and I WILL NOT go into the field as a GTL beyond the scope of an ELT search because I do not want to burden my comrades when I pass out.  MOST of the members who are in my situation feel the same way.  For those who have delusions of grandeur and are clueless as to the realities of extended field operations maybe a one on one "chat" from the GBD might be in order.  I still believe that having ALL GBD's qualified is a good idea from a command standpoint so you know how the teams are going to respond.

[MikeD]

But are you really a competent GBD if you're too out of shape to do anything other then the 2 sorties each for GTM3 and GTL? 

Well, I figure I have to be more competent than I am now.     Besides, I just need 2 sorties as I already have GTM3.   

I have reviewed a lot of ICs records and it looks like a lot of them got the "magic wave" and were appointed GBD because they were ICs.  That is simply based on them not having GTL showing up anyplace in their records.  I would expect to at least see GTL and GTM3 showing up in eServices as "expired" on a person who recently became an IC.  They got qualified as a GBD the month after they got qualified as an IC.  duh.... 

According to the SQTRs, IC3 has Ops Section Chief as a prerequisite, OSC has Planning Section Chief as a prerequisite, and PSC has *both* GBD and AOBD as prerequisites.  Or am I reading that wrong?  I have to be, otherwise all ICs have to be GTMs and Mission Pilot...

[RiverAux]

Actually you can become an AOBD by being a Mission Observer.

And keep in mind that there are still a host of active ICs that were holdovers from the old Mission Coordinator days that were grandfathered in.  You're probably not going to find much in the computer about their old qualifications.  Also, keep in mind that once you're an IC you aren't required to maintain qualifications in the lower skills, so some of the folks that look like they have no GT experience may have gotten it very long ago and just didn't keep it current so it was never in the system or dropped out once they let it expire.

[MikeD]

Actually you can become an AOBD by being a Mission Observer.

And keep in mind that there are still a host of active ICs that were holdovers from the old Mission Coordinator days that were grandfathered in.  You're probably not going to find much in the computer about their old qualifications.  Also, keep in mind that once you're an IC you aren't required to maintain qualifications in the lower skills, so some of the folks that look like they have no GT experience may have gotten it very long ago and just didn't keep it current so it was never in the system or dropped out once they let it expire.

The way I read the SQTR for AOBD it looks like you have to be both MO and MP.  Or is it an either/or?   Either/or makes the most sense.

[cap235629]

According to the SQTRs, IC3 has Ops Section Chief as a prerequisite, OSC has Planning Section Chief as a prerequisite, and PSC has *both* GBD and AOBD as prerequisites.  Or am I reading that wrong?  I have to be, otherwise all ICs have to be GTMs and Mission Pilot...

You are reading it wrong, in order to be a PSC you must have EITHER GBD or AOBD, NOT BOTH

[MikeD]

Alright, I'm glad I got that cleared up, thanks!

[SJFedor]

Actually you can become an AOBD by being a Mission Observer.

And keep in mind that there are still a host of active ICs that were holdovers from the old Mission Coordinator days that were grandfathered in.  You're probably not going to find much in the computer about their old qualifications.  Also, keep in mind that once you're an IC you aren't required to maintain qualifications in the lower skills, so some of the folks that look like they have no GT experience may have gotten it very long ago and just didn't keep it current so it was never in the system or dropped out once they let it expire.

The way I read the SQTR for AOBD it looks like you have to be both MO and MP.  Or is it an either/or?   Either/or makes the most sense.

Either/or, as not everyone is a pilot.

CAPR 60-3, Chapter 2 gives you a breakdown of pre-reqs/trainee requirements.

[Short Field]

An AOBD becoming a PSC must also be a GTM3 or UDF.  A GBD becoming a PSC must also be a MS.

[Short Field]

And keep in mind that there are still a host of active ICs that were holdovers from the old Mission Coordinator days that were grandfathered in.  You're probably not going to find much in the computer about their old qualifications.  Also, keep in mind that once you're an IC you aren't required to maintain qualifications in the lower skills, so some of the folks that look like they have no GT experience may have gotten it very long ago and just didn't keep it current so it was never in the system or dropped out once they let it expire.

I was only refering to ICs created under the new system.   The is a belief among some people that since a IC is qualified to run a mission base by himself, that it automatically results in being fully qualified in all the mission base qualifications.   When an IC renews his qualification, all of his other mission base qualifications get renewed at the same time.    However, this doesn't mean if you renew or get a IC qualification, you automatically get the other mission base qualificatoins - just the ones you earned the way everyone else earns them.

[JohnKachenmeister]

The NIMS system is a corruption of what every military officer is already familiar with... the staffing system.  I was forced as a lieutenant to sleep with FM 101-5, and as such I can easily adapt to the NIMS system, once I learn the new silly terms and definitions that the government is so fond of.

My problem is that I sometimes still refer to the "2-shop" when I should say the more political-correct term, the "Planning Section."

[NJMEDIC]

NIMS has evolved from the Incident Command System which got it's start in Calf. as a means to manage large wildfires. The New Political correct saying Incident Management System. Not only Fire/EMS have to use it now. All Town Mayor and government group must have a form of it, Public Works and Law Enforcement also. During my deployment to New Orleans during KATRINA, the NJ State Police OEM ran our group under this system. There were State and local police, Fire Dept. haz mat teams, private hospital teams and NJ Task Force 1 USAR team all under a NIMS system under the State police. Worked very well.

[isuhawkeye]

NJMedic,

ICS is a component of NIMS.  NIMS did not evolve out of ICS. 

NIMS composes many different components.  ICS is just one aspect of that system

[heliodoc]

^^^

THE Original NIIMS was started with wildland fire under FIRESCOPE in 1970.  NIIMS or double eyed NIMS has been around in CA and the wildfire system since then.........

The "new" NIMS is the DHS whiz kid crud that was plagarized from the wildland fire folks back in the day and put into form so that everyone from city officials to volunteers can understand a management sytem.

The ICS system for lack of better terms is the playbook for on scene on site operations.  So yes ICS is a component of NIMS

Right the ICS is a  staffing system and all those silly terms are just something the current day CAP'ers will have to get used to

Wildland fire folks have done this tuff for pushing forty years now.  I served the arena of both  wildland fire and Army aviation and when one has to learn two sytems..... well that is just education

just because some of us were former military we should be able to adapt to the silliness, God knows there was plenty of silliness in the military.... such as painting rocks, wasting time for hours on dog and pony shows like pass and review.... now there is a silly waste of time.... I would rather screw around with NIMS and ICS and learn how CAP OUGHT to integrate into the REAL ES system and getting to the real business of CAP moving into the real world...

Oh and I slept with FM 101-5, too   ..... as an enlisted man

[isuhawkeye]

Its good to see someone who knows the difference between NIMS, and NIIMS. 

[Eclipse]

According to my best friend Wiki:

NIMS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Incident_Management_System
The system's development was instigated on February 28, 2003 by President George W. Bush, who in Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD)-5, Management of Domestic Incidents directed the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and administer the system. [1] After the proposed system went through a period of vetting and coordination among federal agencies, NIMS was released by Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge on March 1, 2004.[2]

The 2003 presidential directive required all federal agencies to adopt the NIMS and to use it in their individual domestic incident management and emergency prevention, preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation programs and activities. The directive also required Federal departments to make adoption of NIMS by State, tribal, and local organizations a condition for Federal preparedness assistance beginning in Fiscal Year 2005. In addition, all State, tribal, and local emergency personnel with a direct role in emergency preparedness, incident management or response were to have completed NIMS training by October 1, 2005. After the directive was adopted, all State, tribal and local personnel with any role in emergency response were given until October 1, 2006 to complete training for NIMS compliance.

ICS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incident_Command_System
The Incident Command System (ICS) is a standardized, on-scene, all-hazard incident management concept in the United States. It is a management protocol originally designed for emergency management agencies and later federalized. ICS is based upon a flexible, scalable response organization providing a common framework within which people can work together effectively. These people may be drawn from multiple agencies that do not routinely work together, and ICS is designed to give standard response and operation procedures to reduce the problems and potential for miscommunication on such incidents. ICS has been summarized as a "first-on-scene" structure, where the first responder of a scene has charge of the scene until the incident has been declared resolved, a superior-ranking responder arrives on scene and seizes command, or the Incident Commander appoints another individual Incident Commander.

My scope is admittedly limited on this subject, but I have never heard of any connection between NIMS and the Wildfire Service, while every ICS class I have ever taken starts with the origins of ICS being in the fire services after a major fire in the 70's.

[RiverAux]

Right the ICS is a  staffing system and all those silly terms are just something the current day CAP'ers will have to get used to

You mean the ones we've been using since about 2000?

[heliodoc]

The really was no connection to NIMS and the wildland fire service

Only that the current NIMS has been plagarized by a system that has worked in the past

NIIMS or National Interagency Incident Mamagement System was a joint venture of the US Forest Service, California Dept of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) or current Cal Fire, USDOI in some parts

But in all these posts there has been no stating that NIMS originated out of the fire service although all of this new push of "knowledge" has been borrowed, plagariged, quoted, whatnot from the people that have had to depend on this for life safety...

Whether or not CAP wants to take this stuff seriously,,  that'll be up to them and apparently with the push that has happened in the last week evidenced by CAP nationwide.......... some could not take simple instruction


Makes you wonder how they would work outside of SAREX's, ARCHER missions and some disaster operations.  Some have with the infamous Katrina and other disasters nationwide.  Wouldn't be too critical of how this is all being interpreted....   But thanks for the distinctions of both ICS and NIMS for those who have been working in for years... CAP just has to adopt if it wants to play and become more than just a force muliplier to the AF...... They need to be a force multiplier in getting minor online assignments done!!!

The real disaster is not getting the basics done as requested.