Why Do We Need Radios When We Have Cellphones?

[RADIOMAN015]

Surely our cellphone always work when we need them, even in urban areas  Recently, this specific point was driven to one of our senior members, who is an avid blackberry type user as well as voice comms.  He was at the annual St Patrick day's parade and decided to make a phone call to coordinate with another family member at the same activity.   He tried numerous times to make the call but due to the number of people trying to make calls the system was overwhelmed and he could not make a call, constantly getting busy/no access.  I might add that the location is right next to the cell phone towers of all the commercial providers in a fairly large city/urban area.

So now we in the comm area, have another interested member in not only CAP comm but considering amateur radio technician class (primarily VHF/UHF access).   So here's another example when perhaps not even a repeater access would be necessary but just access to a simplex frequency/channel would have allowed adequate communications with family members.

Surely, the CAP radio communications program has seen reduced VHF assets due to DOD/NTIA imposed revised technical standards (virtually no modified ham gear), but what we do have, we do need to test and have a very good idea not only to our repeater(s) access from various locations, but also simplex range on VHF from various radio high spots accessible by vehicles or even high buildings with portable units.

From a family prospective, even those 1/2 watt FRS radio portables may be beneficial to you in an emergency, although ideally the members are looking at amateur radio licensing (tech class) for higher powered radios (likely the most cost effective out of the choice discussed).  In additional the Multi Use Radio System, licensed by rule (e.g. no license required) offers 2 watt radios operating on 5 high band VHF channels  see:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Use_Radio_Service.   Another possible service for family members utilization is the General Mobile Radio Service, which also offers repeaters as well as higher powered radios see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Mobile_Radio_Service, but can be relatively expensive.

Regardless of the choices, always keep in mind that your cellphone instruction booklet specifically has a disclaimer in it that in an emergency the phone may not work.  Consider alternative radio communications methods and for CAP operations/exercise ensure radio comms are always in the exercise plan an adequately tested.

RM   

[wuzafuzz]

I use all the above.  Since my kids have no interest in ham radio I can toss them a radio on MURS, GMRS, or FRS. 

For those who do rely on cell phones, texting often gets through when voice calls won't.  But you don't have to go far off the beaten path to have NO cell signal at all.  I live in town but can be in multiple no cell signal areas in less than 10 minutes.  My cell phone is a convenience, not a life line.

[Eclipse]

Surely our cellphone always work when we need them, even in urban areas

Always?  No.  Tried to use HF for anything other than a net check?  Usually takes about 2 days to get working, assuming
the people who have it in their basement will bother to show up to a mission.  And during the spin up process, the HF operators
are using their cell phones for coordination.

Nothing works "always", but cell phones these days are very reliable, especially the data and text layers.  In many disasters,
the local POTS phones won't work because the physical cable is cut or under water, but the CELL networks are self-healing
and up and running as long as they have power, which in some areas is autonomous.

Surely, the CAP radio communications program has seen reduced VHF assets due to DOD/NTIA imposed revised technical standards (virtually no modified ham gear),

Surely that is incorrect.  In the last 5 years we have seen a significant increase in high-quality, professional-grade radios issued by NHQ.  The kind
that work when you expect them to.  The constant complaint of HAMS who also play CAP is that they can't use their home-grown gear.  So?
The majority of the HAMS in my AOR and also experience, who make the loudest complaints about not being be able to use their personal stuff, also
have no ES qualifications and don't participate in missions.  For every CUL / MRO who actually plays on a regular basis, there are 5 who's only involvement is net checks, which are a useless waste of time if you are confidence checking equipment never used for anything but confidence checks.

Kid yourself all you want about "Armageddon" - being able to talk to Australia when your basement is flooded and the zombies are banging on the door serves no purpose.  They will have their own zombies to deal with.  But if you think just having an A-Cut and a personal radio will get you in a mission base, think again.  It wont.  Period.  Yet I can't tell you how many times I have had that conversation.

Was I miffed when they disavowed my venerable VF-150?  Yes, for about 20 minutes.  Then the USAF handed me an EFJ with spare batteries, better range, and more channels, and I sold my 6-year old, $125 radio for $50.  Then I stopped thinking about it.

Bottom line, there are more radios in the hands of people who actually need them for their intended purpose, and plenty on the NTIA approved
list that are in the same price range as the VX-series that those who want to sit around and just listen in can also participate.

Any system that is intended to protect life and property should not rely on any single channel. VHF has its place, and during missions there is a lot
of value in the mass communications of conversations between two parties overheard by the whole team.  But to spread FUD about the cell system being overloaded, or not working at all, benefits no one. Since Katrina, where the cell system mostly worked, all the way down to the Gulf, the service
providers have made their systems more robust, more self-healing, and firmed-up their process for designating priority coverage for key players (i.e. GETS & WPS).

I use simplex radios all the time - my kids go to the park and use GMRS to keep in touch (yes, I'm one of the goofs who actually paid $80 for a license because I have a HAM friend I want to look in the eye...), but as soon as the "spy gear" factor wears off for them and me, they will get a PAYG cell phone
so I can be sure they can call not just me, but the local PD if they get hurt, etc.

[wuzafuzz]

The truth lies in the middle here.

Anyone who takes 2 days to place an HF circuit into operation needs remedial training. 

Cell phone networks are very reliable.  But they do get overloaded.  I've experienced it and so do many people I know.  That's why cell providers bring in extra equipment for special events.  Surprise "events" don't have that luxury.  In those cases it might take a few hours or even days to get the things working reliably again.  Having an inkling of a plan for the interim isn't paranoid.  Nor is knowing where cell phones aren't intended to work.

Ham equipment isn't always going to come through either.  I've seen ham repeaters cobbled together with questionable equipment and a healthy serving of luck.  Those can fail if you look at them sideways.  There are others that are assembled very professionally.  Which ones do your local "emcomm" hams rely on?  Who knows?  Although I participate in ARES and see a use for it (I understand hams are quite busy in Japan right now), some of the amateur community claims about saving the world "when all else fails" are laughable.   

In my neck of the woods there were definitely fewer CAP stations on the air after wide-band gear disappeared.  Yes, all our CAP gear has been issued.  There isn't a secret treasure trove of radios on a shelf at Wing.  Recently I have noticed many of the interested members have purchased their own compliant radios.  They aren't the full featured radios with more features than we need, but most who had radios in the past are back on the air.  While the transition was a PITA, it wasn't CAP-COMM Armageddon.

[Major Lord]

The basic handheld  VHF radio is an unreliable means of contacting a mission base. In a disaster, mountaintop repeaters have a way of being blown, burned, or washed away. Their real utility is in Small Unit Tactics. Being able to contact a team member to DEFUBAR you at short, but timely range, is better than a call to a mission base that may have higher priority than your skin. If getting into the publicly switched telephone network is a high priority, a SATPHONE is the way to go. However, in Armageddon, the PSTN is going to come off faster than a prom dress. I think the possibility that CAP will ever be a primary message trafficker in an apocalyptic scenario is very, very unlikely. Hams out-number us a gazilllion to one, and the probability of CAP stations being accessible when the roads are gone, versus thousands of home-based stations with better gear, more power, and better antennae, seems to lean towards the Amateur Radio ( and MARS) community as being a better COM backbone.

Major Lord

[cap235629]

Here is a timely reminder of why we use HF.

Last weekend our wing conducted a 24 hour HF exercise in preparation for a major earthquake drill that is coming soon.  All ALE HF radios in the wing participated in the exercise which entailed every ALE radio calling every other ALE radio each hour for a 24 hour period to establish reliability standards based upon propagation and other factors.

I took this as an excellent opportunity to make one heck of a squadron SAREX out of the weekend.

We packed up our RDP and 72 hour gear and deployed to what is called "the Bermuda Triangle of Franklin County".  We arranged for joint agency training with the Franklin County Search and Rescue Team and K9 Search Team.

We set up a forward "mission base" at a pavilion in the Ozark National Forest that was situated in a small valley.  We set up a 15 foot portable antenna mast with CAP VHF and a liaison VHF antenna attached and the RDP wire antenna strung between the top of the mast and a nearby tree.  We were able to access the local CAP repeater as well as the Franklin County repeaters.  Interestingly we were unable to access the statewide microwave linked 700-800 Mhz trunked public safety radio system from the 50 watt mobiles in our vehicles, never mind the portables.  We also were not able to access any repeaters on VHF, both ours and theirs, on portables either.  We also HAD NO CELL COVERAGE!  The RDP set up to operate using NVIS was able to reliably contact stations over 300 miles away and as close as 20 miles away for the entire weekend.  All team communications and team to base communications were conducted on simplex.

Here is where it gets interesting.

We were conducting our comm exercise and had deployed ground teams and K9 teams on a simulated search when the inevitable happened.  Our exercise turned in to a live mission when a group of Boy Scouts came up missing.

Because we had no cell coverage or repeater access (our wing repeaters are not linked), I was able to contact Wing HQ on HF and advise them of the situation and request instructions. 

Luckily as the local EM director, who had to drive 10 miles to get a cell phone signal and access the statewide repeater system, was arranging for an official CAP response from the NOC, the Boy Scouts appeared from the woods.

The only contact I had with higher HQ was HF and it was able to be utilized when all other systems were not AND it was done with a field expedient, less than desirable set up.

So in other words, the system worked just like it was designed to and we had long distance comms operable in less than 30 minutes, the time it took to set up the portable masts and radios.

[RADIOMAN015]

Radioman is going to answer in this color

Surely our cellphone always work when we need them, even in urban areas

Always?  No.  Tried to use HF for anything other than a net check?  Usually takes about 2 days to get working, assuming
the people who have it in their basement will bother to show up to a mission.  And during the spin up process, the HF operators
are using their cell phones for coordination.
I would agree with you that on the HF/SSB, ALE side, propagation does play havoc with CAP on establishing some links that would be needed.  Perhaps with more practice there will be vast improvement.  Antennas specific designed for Near Vertical Incident Skywave NVIS really need to be used by most for the comms to be effective

Nothing works "always", but cell phones these days are very reliable, especially the data and text layers.  In many disasters,
the local POTS phones won't work because the physical cable is cut or under water, but the CELL networks are self-healing
and up and running as long as they have power, which in some areas is autonomous.
Unfortunately, bandwidth loading/requirements versus availability of compatible frequencies is forcing all cellphone providers to actually set up wireless LAN access which is connected to fiber lines, versus cellphone sites.  It's unclear IF the LAN access is lost how the provider will limit bandwidth use to all or selected users at this point

Surely, the CAP radio communications program has seen reduced VHF assets due to DOD/NTIA imposed revised technical standards (virtually no modified ham gear),

Surely that is incorrect.  In the last 5 years we have seen a significant increase in high-quality, professional-grade radios issued by NHQ.  The kind
that work when you expect them to.  The constant complaint of HAMS who also play CAP is that they can't use their home-grown gear.  So?
The majority of the HAMS in my AOR and also experience, who make the loudest complaints about not being be able to use their personal stuff, also have no ES qualifications and don't participate in missions.  For every CUL / MRO who actually plays on a regular basis, there are 5 who's only involvement is net checks, which are a useless waste of time if you are confidence checking equipment never used for anything but confidence checks.
The ES requirements for MRO aren't really that difficult, the issue is that some that get it really aren't competent and are just after the "qualification".  Generally someone who uses a radio all the time (public safety dispatcher or ham's involved with nets) would have no difficulty in stepping in with very little training.  I was in CAP comms before I was a ham (was encouraged by the Assistant Wing DC to get my ham license), so I have no complaints.  I do know that the technical standards are much tighter for the radio bandwidth and the Vertex 150's just won't meet it, you could key up the repeater but would loose audio and the signal because the radio goes past the bandwidth.  The radio can be used effectively to monitor all of CAP's new VHF frequencies without an issue 

Kid yourself all you want about "Armageddon" - being able to talk to Australia when your basement is flooded and the zombies are banging on the door serves no purpose.  They will have their own zombies to deal with.  But if you think just having an A-Cut and a personal radio will get you in a mission base, think again.  It wont.  Period.  Yet I can't tell you how many times I have had that conversation.  Well depending upon the type of disaster it its likely that those affected in an area will not be able to respond.  At that point it will be federal assistance coming in and perhaps CAP members from other areas will assist.  I know our state emergency planners don't really count on unpaid volunteers to show up in their plans

Was I miffed when they disavowed my venerable VF-150?  Yes, for about 20 minutes.  Then the USAF handed me an EFJ with spare batteries, better range, and more channels, and I sold my 6-year old, $125 radio for $50.  Then I stopped thinking about it.  Bottom line, there are more radios in the hands of people who actually need them for their intended purpose, and plenty on the NTIA approved list that are in the same price range as the VX-series that those who want to sit around and just listen in can also participate.
Yes there are table of allowances on equipment issue and CAP has told the AF that they will comply with that.

Any system that is intended to protect life and property should not rely on any single channel. VHF has its place, and during missions there is a lot of value in the mass communications of conversations between two parties overheard by the whole team.  But to spread FUD about the cell system being overloaded, or not working at all, benefits no one. Since Katrina, where the cell system mostly worked, all the way down to the Gulf, the service
providers have made their systems more robust, more self-healing, and firmed-up their process for designating priority coverage for key players (i.e. GETS & WPS).
Well I'm not sure that every place in the US that has cellphone coverage really has the same type of planning to be more robust, especially when you get out into more rural areas that may have one cellphone tower that has all the providers on the same tower

I use simplex radios all the time - my kids go to the park and use GMRS to keep in touch (yes, I'm one of the goofs who actually paid $80 for a license because I have a HAM friend I want to look in the eye...), but as soon as the "spy gear" factor wears off for them and me, they will get a PAYG cell phone
so I can be sure they can call not just me, but the local PD if they get hurt, etc.
The FCC right now has a proposal to deregulate individual licensing (e.g. go by licensing by rule like CB, FRS, Marine Radio), at least for the portable radios, as opposed to the 50 watt mobiles and repeater access.  Will just have to see what the final results are

[Major Carrales]

The Radio Network is a failsafe, CELL PHONE towers and the like are limiting in times of disaster; hurricanes blow them down, earthquakes disrupt their operation and other scenarios. 

We should, based on the nature of our organization, have an independent communications infrastructure to support our operations and to offer to Civil Defense authorities when called for.

A solid network of HF hubs supplemented bu VHF local grids with trained personnel to relay any and all info is a very desirable "tool" in one's shed.

If you ask me, we have allowed that aspect of CAP to erode way too much. 

[Eclipse]

Any "infrastructure" that is permanent is just as susceptible to failure in a disaster as the cell system.

Spend a lot of money on permanent towers and the like and all you have is a less-capable, just as vulnerable, radio network.

A hand held and a highbird or airborne repeater fill the needs of 90% of our missions.

[Major Carrales]

Any "infrastructure" that is permanent is just as susceptible to failure in a disaster as the cell system.

Spend a lot of money on permanent towers and the like and all you have is a less-capable, just as vulnerable, radio network.

A hand held and a highbird or airborne repeater fill the needs of 90% of our missions.

You are assuming the "traditional" notion of infrastructure, the idea of stationary permanent set ups. 

We should have mobile systems in kits that can be picked up an moved.  Something like a truck or mobile unit that can be taken to any location and set up.  That requires equipment and trained personnel to operate.  Its "permanence" exists in that we have such set ups ready to go at a level that would and could be activated under certain conditions (outlined in the COMM PLANS). 

A "highbird or airborne repeater" is part of such an "infrastructure" that has to be maintained as well.

Unless we maintain to tool to a better degree and in more places, we are asking for trouble.

Nothing wrong with wanting better and strong COMM, is there, Eclipse?  or are you just trying to be contrarily poised or "Devil's Advocate?"

[cap235629]

Any "infrastructure" that is permanent is just as susceptible to failure in a disaster as the cell system.

Spend a lot of money on permanent towers and the like and all you have is a less-capable, just as vulnerable, radio network.

A hand held and a highbird or airborne repeater fill the needs of 90% of our missions.

You are assuming the "traditional" notion of infrastructure, the idea of stationary permanent set ups. 

We should have mobile systems in kits that can be picked up an moved.  Something like a truck or mobile unit that can be taken to any location and set up.  That requires equipment and trained personnel to operate.  Its "permanence" exists in that we have such set ups ready to go at a level that would and could be activated under certain conditions (outlined in the COMM PLANS). 

That is exactly what an RDP is.  Our squadron also built a VHF version.  Both radios were used in the SAREX I mentioned above.

[Major Carrales]

Any "infrastructure" that is permanent is just as susceptible to failure in a disaster as the cell system.

Spend a lot of money on permanent towers and the like and all you have is a less-capable, just as vulnerable, radio network.

A hand held and a highbird or airborne repeater fill the needs of 90% of our missions.

You are assuming the "traditional" notion of infrastructure, the idea of stationary permanent set ups. 

We should have mobile systems in kits that can be picked up an moved.  Something like a truck or mobile unit that can be taken to any location and set up.  That requires equipment and trained personnel to operate.  Its "permanence" exists in that we have such set ups ready to go at a level that would and could be activated under certain conditions (outlined in the COMM PLANS). 

That is exactly what an RDP is.  Our squadron also built a VHF version.  Both radios were used in the SAREX I mentioned above.

Kudos!!!

[NIN]

I do think that part of the issue is that we've gotten into the era of "ubiquitous consumer communications capability" (cell phones or even, to a lesser extent, GMRS/FRS) where you don't have to be wonkish to get into it.

I got my ham ticket in 1978, right around the time that CB radio had saturated the masses.  You could buy a cheapie CB at KMart and without much technical knowledge could be up and running with a mobile or base station.  Hand-held comms were still pretty much the province of amateur radio VHF ops.

However, since the advent of consumer-available mobile comms (aka cell phones) that don't require licensure hoops or any more technical knowledge than "Do I have enough bars and is the phone on?" interest in amateur radio (and non-phone "wireless comms") has dropped off substantially.  Heck, I remember when you got word from HHQ via the radio net or the phone. Look what email has done to that channel.

We've seen the result of this in CAP comms, even, where its not required that you be an uber-tech-geek to get things working and continue operations.  Repeaters are far more modularized.  Hand helds are "program and forget" channelized sets. HF had gone to ALE systems that are substantially automated (no more "peak the power, dip the plate"... hahaha. its been 20+ years since I tuned an HF set, and I still remember some of that.  Might take someone to remind me...<GRIN>)

Will cell phones be available when the armageddon comes?  Maybe. Maybe not.  Same holds true for VHF repeaters, too.

But you don't have to be a technical sort to do comms anymore.

[Eclipse]

Nothing wrong with wanting better and strong COMM, is there, Eclipse?  or are you just trying to be contrarily poised or "Devil's Advocate?"

No - we have that today, the problem is that it is mostly in the hands of people who don't have the qualifications to respond in an emergency.

[wuzafuzz]

...the problem is that it is mostly in the hands of people who don't have the qualifications to respond in an emergency.

That is a problem.  Communications officers should be working to comply with the Table of Allowances.  Most communications equipment is allocated based on ES needs and should be assigned accordingly.  For instance, VHF-FM portable radios are allocated to support ground teams only.  Not commanders, not communications officers, not incident commanders, nor people who just want one.

Although the allocated radios can be used for other needs, they should be readily available for their allocated purpose.

[RADIOMAN015]

Nothing wrong with wanting better and strong COMM, is there, Eclipse?  or are you just trying to be contrarily poised or "Devil's Advocate?"

No - we have that today, the problem is that it is mostly in the hands of people who don't have the qualifications to respond in an emergency.

Not sure what you mean by the above statement.  In my wing  IC's have radios (EF Johnson's) and generally comm officers and assistants may have category II type radios (e.g. Tait 2020's) (and these radios can be brought to the mission support base to add radio capability or used in conjunction to support transportation needs), teams also have portable radios available, and many if not most corporate vans have EF Johnson mobile radios installed.  Many squadrons also have base/mobile type stations assigned that are either permanently installed in the unit or the unit has a temporary base antenna that can be placed outside the window of the building being used.  Radio comms are pretty easy to learn but do require some repetitive use at least quarterly (ideally monthly (although some may need training even more often) training for those who otherwise would never use a radio.  There's a very good outline on the password protected NTC site that outlines the vision of what various communicators would do.  Although not finalized/implemented fully it is a good guide.    I personally don't like the idea of any "army of one" conducting anything operationally and would prefer to see CAP facilities appropriately equipped with radio communications, telephones, and computer support, backed up by emergency power, staffed by a group of trained communicators and other operational personnel perform all mission support.   Also the idea of self contained smaller C3 vehicles (e.g. about the size of one of those little bus used at airports) (BTW not my idea but one from our wing comm training officer), being utilized.

BTW regarding confidence checks, it's interesting that just about every fire department in the country does a radio check on every piece of radio equipment DAILY, and most public safety inter community coordination nets test on at least a weekly basis.  Is the weekly net test in CAP really that difficult to achieve (since most wings have daily nets)    Also Eclipse since you are so anal on all these CAP regulations, don't you think a good IG inspection item would be to ensure that the radio equipment is checked weekly and documented to ensure that it is operational via a simple one page log

Also since you seem to be the big cheese  in your area, than IF you think radios are inappropriately assigned take action to get them reassigned where in your opinion the equipment will be better utilized (whatever that means in your world of CAP fantasy).
RM

       

[Eclipse]

Nothing wrong with wanting better and strong COMM, is there, Eclipse?  or are you just trying to be contrarily poised or "Devil's Advocate?"

No - we have that today, the problem is that it is mostly in the hands of people who don't have the qualifications to respond in an emergency.

Not sure what you mean by the above statement.
In my wing  IC's have radios (EF Johnson's) and generally comm officers and assistants may have category II type radios (e.g. Tait 2020's) (and these radios can be brought to the mission support base to add radio capability or used in conjunction to support transportation needs

Let me help.

A lot of equipment, traditionally, was issued to GOB comm guys instead of ES operators.  Stricter adherence to the TOA's has alleviated that for the most part, but when you start talking about HF it might as well be ten years ago, mostly because the stuff is so flaky and a PITA that few members have the time or inclination to play with it.

IC's?  Not sure, would have to check the TOA, but we have enough to go around, so K-SARAH.

Comm Officers?  Unless they are also GTM's, they don't need equipment permanently assigned to them outside what the unit gets via their discretionary
unit radio for the CC.  This has been a fair point of contention in my wing - a lot of Comm Officers without even GES complaining they don't have radios
to check into the nets, without realizing that the nets serve only one purpose - to confidence check equipment for emergency use.  They are not, and have not been, even a secondary source of information in CAP for 10 years.  So to issue a radio to a Comm Officer, who isn't also at least an MRO,
is a waste of time, because when the fan starts spinning poop, he has to stay benched.

Saying they "can" bring equipment to the ICP is basically meaningless.  They "can" do a lot of things, but clearly ES is not on their list of interests,
so the odds that they will happily get in their POV and drive 4 hours to the AO (and we all know how expensive gas is, right RADIO?) are pretty slim.

BTW regarding confidence checks, it's interesting that just about every fire department in the country does a radio check on every piece of radio equipment DAILY, and most public safety inter community coordination nets test on at least a weekly basis.  Is the weekly net test in CAP really that difficult to achieve (since most wings have daily nets)    Also Eclipse since you are so anal on all these CAP regulations, don't you think a good IG inspection item would be to ensure that the radio equipment is checked weekly and documented to ensure that it is operational via a simple one page log ?

Missing the point again. 

See, in CAP, we have two types of members - those with ES quals, and those without.  You may have a radio card in your pocket, and a radio on your desk, but without an appropriate ES qual, you are not being called in an emergency, and if you are on the air, you will be told to stay off.  So confidence checking that equipment is useless and a waste of everyone's time, since it can not, and will not, ever be used in even a training mission, let alone
a real world.  There are wings with Patron members who check into the nets every night.  What is the point of that?  I also guarantee you that if we cared to check, we would find wings with equipment assigned to members in "000".

Fire departments check their equipment because they will more than likely use it, and it isn't issued somewhere with a phone no one will answer
if their is a HAM Fest the weekend of the tornados.

Also since you seem to be the big cheese in your area, than IF you think radios are inappropriately assigned take action to get them reassigned where in your opinion the equipment will be better utilized (whatever that means in your world of CAP fantasy).

For the most part, it is.  The "real" gear is in the hands of qualified, active, ES operators, and the rest is based on the "administrative" TOA's so that
each unit has at least one base radio.

But if you believe an IG has any say over how a radio is used once it is properly issued per the TOA, then you have no idea how this works.

[RADIOMAN015]

RADIOMAN --  I like the color purple so will place comments within below

Nothing wrong with wanting better and strong COMM, is there, Eclipse?  or are you just trying to be contrarily poised or "Devil's Advocate?"

No - we have that today, the problem is that it is mostly in the hands of people who don't have the qualifications to respond in an emergency.

Not sure what you mean by the above statement.
In my wing  IC's have radios (EF Johnson's) and generally comm officers and assistants may have category II type radios (e.g. Tait 2020's) (and these radios can be brought to the mission support base to add radio capability or used in conjunction to support transportation needs

Let me help.

A lot of equipment, traditionally, was issued to GOB comm guys instead of ES operators.  Stricter adherence to the TOA's has alleviated that for the most part, but when you start talking about HF it might as well be ten years ago, mostly because the stuff is so flaky and a PITA that few members have the time or inclination to play with it.

Communications contingency planning needs to look at adaptable networks to support emergency services.  At least in my wing that's what we are looking at and testing out.  There's appropriate equipment issued to ES teams, and remain comm assets issued to comm officers etc will support ES activities.   

IC's?  Not sure, would have to check the TOA, but we have enough to go around, so K-SARAH.

Comm Officers?  Unless they are also GTM's, they don't need equipment permanently assigned to them outside what the unit gets via their discretionary
unit radio for the CC.  This has been a fair point of contention in my wing - a lot of Comm Officers without even GES complaining they don't have radios
to check into the nets, without realizing that the nets serve only one purpose - to confidence check equipment for emergency use.  They are not, and have not been, even a secondary source of information in CAP for 10 years.  So to issue a radio to a Comm Officer, who isn't also at least an MRO,
is a waste of time, because when the fan starts spinning poop, he has to stay benched.

Well the GES is required, and any IC, MRO or CUL will make use of  GES personnel at a mission base as they see fit. If someone has a radio card & trained we can just open them up as a trainee and use them.  No big thing for me.  Again should we be so pencil pointed regulation wise that we loose all flexibility.  Sometimes real (not make believe practice, scheduled type) missions come up and you have to use the staffing that is available to get it done.


Saying they "can" bring equipment to the ICP is basically meaningless.  They "can" do a lot of things, but clearly ES is not on their list of interests,
so the odds that they will happily get in their POV and drive 4 hours to the AO (and we all know how expensive gas is, right RADIO?) are pretty slim.
Well it seems that you are trying to apply the unsolved problems in your wing to the entire CAP wings universe.  In our wing there's adequate resources in each task force/operational area that would minimize travel.  IF you don't have that in your wing than that appears to be a problem.

BTW regarding confidence checks, it's interesting that just about every fire department in the country does a radio check on every piece of radio equipment DAILY, and most public safety inter community coordination nets test on at least a weekly basis.  Is the weekly net test in CAP really that difficult to achieve (since most wings have daily nets)    Also Eclipse since you are so anal on all these CAP regulations, don't you think a good IG inspection item would be to ensure that the radio equipment is checked weekly and documented to ensure that it is operational via a simple one page log ?

Missing the point again. 

See, in CAP, we have two types of members - those with ES quals, and those without.  You may have a radio card in your pocket, and a radio on your desk, but without an appropriate ES qual, you are not being called in an emergency, and if you are on the air, you will be told to stay off.  So confidence checking that equipment is useless and a waste of everyone's time, since it can not, and will not, ever be used in even a training mission, let alone
a real world.  There are wings with Patron members who check into the nets every night.  What is the point of that?  I also guarantee you that if we cared to check, we would find wings with equipment assigned to members in "000".
Looks to me again like your wing's problem and not what is fact in other wings.   Again IF we had someone qualified as a radio operator (that we knew was active on nets etc), even without MRO status, we likely would just start the MRO training status and use them. The world won't end of course, unless it's an AF evaluation that's looking at all the regulatory compliance.  HOWEVER, that being said we definitely would encourage the individual to finish the training.


Fire departments check their equipment because they will more than likely use it, and it isn't issued somewhere with a phone no one will answer
if their is a HAM Fest the weekend of the tornados.
My wing has an alert method in place (cellphones, text messaging, voice calls) that require a call back IF available.  ANY volunteer organization (including fire departments), may have issues with staffing availability and even response time.  In our wing we have a fair amount of retirees and others that have the flex ability to respond to actual emergency situations tasked to the wing. HOWEVER, there still can be potential problems.  There can be a vast difference between staffing available for a scheduled weekend training exercise and a no notice emergency during the week!  Remember even the radio guy or gal (perhaps with some mobility disability) may still be able to act as a relay in any ES situation -- again are we getting too rigid in our regulatory approach to get the mission done
         

Also since you seem to be the big cheese in your area, than IF you think radios are inappropriately assigned take action to get them reassigned where in your opinion the equipment will be better utilized (whatever that means in your world of CAP fantasy).

For the most part, it is.  The "real" gear is in the hands of qualified, active, ES operators, and the rest is based on the "administrative" TOA's so that
each unit has at least one base radio.

But if you believe an IG has any say over how a radio is used once it is properly issued per the TOA, then you have no idea how this works.
Bottom line is the radio has to work and if other professional public safety officials seem to be able to test all of their radios with dispatch as required, I think the so called CAP professional ES operators should be doing the same thing, and since CAP has a fetish to document everything, why not make it an inspection item for the IG   Many (if not most) of the comm people in our wing have appropriate ES qualifications.  Again we in comm are looking at how effective our current networks are, what is our actual coverage within each repeater foot print, if a repeater goes down, what's the alternatives & adaption that can be made (especially if a high bird is unavailable or can't be used due to weather), and actually where do the various cellphone providers have a signal (especially in rural mountain/hilly area), since a hybrid comm system may have to be used (e.g. one comm unit on a hill with cellphone access communicating with others simplex on VHF or UHF.       

RM

[Eclipse]

RADIOMAN --  I like the color purple so will place comments within below

That what the quote function is for.

As to GES - it is not a qualification.  It is a pre-requisite to begin your training.  A GES member can't do anything but stand in the back and watch, unless they have an open SQTR with FAM / Prep completed.

This idea that members are "GES qualified" needs to end.  They certainly can't sit in at a comm station and use a radio.  No one wants "some radio guy"
who can't be bothered to do the simple work required to complete MRO sitting at a station in a real-world mission.  Last I checked the FCC requires training to operate a civilian radio, why should we be any different?

The reason we have regulations, procedures, and rules, is to maintain structure during stressful times when people are over-taxed and life or property
are at risk.  I find it infinitely amusing that many comm people will have a conniption fit if someone in the neighborhood keys up a radio without a license and a Ph.d in RF theory, but make the assertion that during an emergency we should just "get it done".   That is not how it works.

Being a secondary and tertiary responder asset, CAP is not involved until infrastructure starts to spin up, and even when earlier involvement is warranted, ICS fundamentals indicate that we don't put our C&C assets inside the disaster area.  It is supposed to be located outside in an area with robust infrastructure.

Edit:  Those wondering why the USAF is being so strict with the sensor-ball operators should look to those in CAP who view our regulations as a "nice to have" and not a requirement.

[RADIOMAN015]

RADIOMAN --  I like the color purple so will place comments within below

That what the quote function is for.

As to GES - it is not a qualification.  It is a pre-requisite to begin your training.  A GES member can't do anything but stand in the back and watch, unless they have an open SQTR with FAM / Prep completed.

This idea that members are "GES qualified" needs to end.  They certainly can't sit in at a comm station and use a radio.  No one wants "some radio guy"
who can't be bothered to do the simple work required to complete MRO sitting at a station in a real-world mission.  Last I checked the FCC requires training to operate a civilian radio, why should we be any different?

The reason we have regulations, procedures, and rules, is to maintain structure during stressful times when people are over-taxed and life or property are at risk.  I find it infinitely amusing that many comm people will have a conniption fit if someone in the neighborhood keys up a radio without a license and a Ph.d in RF theory, but make the assertion that during an emergency we should just "get it done".   That is not how it works.

Being a secondary and tertiary responder asset, CAP is not involved until infrastructure starts to spin up, and even when earlier involvement is warranted, ICS fundamentals indicate that we don't put our C&C assets inside the disaster area.  It is supposed to be located outside in an area with robust infrastructure.

Edit:  Those wondering why the USAF is being so strict with the sensor-ball operators should look to those in CAP who view our regulations as a "nice to have" and not a requirement.

I never meant to say that I would let ANYONE operate a radio, surely I would want them to at least have their B Cut completed and of course GES.  As far as MRO goes, as with other CAP ES qualifications, there's some individuals that love to have lots of ES qualifications, and it may have been close to 3 years since they even used a radio ANYWHERE and of course they want to keep that qualification (and also want to spend the very minimum time with the very minimum of effort in doing that), as opposed to a guy or gal who uses a radio on a regular basis, has up to date experience but isn't a full fledged MRO/CUL but has the necessary skill and motivation, that's where the priority needs to be.   Again in a real emergency I think the senior MRO's/CUL's know who's going to effectively assist with running the radios and that ES data base isn't necessarily the primary determining factor.   

My understanding is GES folks can be used to assist in any areas, as long as they aren't making in decisions e.g. drive vehicles, act as runners, post information to status boards, and assist other mission base functions.

In our wing the IC's know who can actual do the job versus who's on paper or who really can't produce the quality that is needed.  Again in CAP's fantasy land of ES statistics a lot of people with a lot of qualifications look good on paper, but the reality can be quite different (especially if they aren't training on at least a quarterly basis in those priority skills).   Frankly we've had a couple of NESA graduates taken on actual UDF missions that were pretty clueless in their ability to interpret the readings and even do simple tasks like change the battery in the UDF unit  

As far the regulations go, no one is going rogue for the sake of not complying, but things come up and mature adults need to make appropriate decisions and that's never going to change.

Also IF the cellphone or land line phone system, as well as computer access works, than surely we should use it, I'm not advocating to use radio exclusively BUT on the other hand have a  "tested" plan IF the other comms won't work.     

As far as the predator program goes, I don't think that there's that many CAP people involved.  It is possible though that CAP may actually get that technology installed in additional aircraft (maybe one per region).  Yes we do want the most qualified crews to fly these missions, and again the various wing stand eval people know who are the best and who are average and decisions will have to be made.  Likely a long complicated checklist  

RM

[davidsinn]

My understanding is GES folks can be used to assist in any areas, as long as they aren't making in decisions e.g. drive vehicles, act as runners, post information to status boards, and assist other mission base functions.

Your understanding is wrong. Runners and the like that you mentioned are MSAs. As for driving that's a fuzzy area because there is not a specific task I can think of that it would fall under if we're talking a shuttle between an ICP and an air field for example. If you're talking driving a ground team around then every person in the vehicle should be at a minimum a ground team member.

[Eclipse]

My understanding is GES folks can be used to assist in any areas, as long as they aren't making in decisions e.g. drive vehicles, act as runners, post information to status boards, and assist other mission base functions.

Your understanding is incorrect.  Any and all involvement in ES requires you have at least FAM/PREP completed for the task you are
doing.  Your repeated assertions that this is "too hard", or "people don't practice enough" doesn't not move that line one bit, though it is a
typical attitude we get from many members who want to just show up without doing any of the preliminaries.

Also, randomly citing some less than stellar qualified person, doesn't move the line, either.  Those who "know better" have no issue
tasking and staying current, nor is that process complicated or onerous for those willing to make it happen.

As far the regulations go, no one is going rogue for the sake of not complying, but things come up and mature adults need to make appropriate decisions and that's never going to change.

Let's hope together that it does, and or their sake they don't bend anything expensive while they are "rogue".

As far as the predator program goes, I don't think that there's that many CAP people involved.  It is possible though that CAP may actually get that technology installed in additional aircraft (maybe one per region).  Yes we do want the most qualified crews to fly these missions, and again the various wing stand eval people know who are the best and who are average and decisions will have to be made.  Likely a long complicated checklist.

You missed the point of my comment, which was about attitude, not quantity.  For better or worse the USAF knows exactly how we operate, and that includes a number of people who think they are "special" and routinely choose "field expedience" over following procedures.  In other words, they simply do whatever they want, complain when others make an issues of it, saying things like "we are being administered to death", or "I can't get this done", or "They won't let me play, even though I know better...".

Then they further complain that we are unable to produce a consistent product or any coherent programs, when the main reason we can't is far too many people with attitudes of entitlement, or persecution complexes when they are simply asked to follow the rules.

[Spaceman3750]

The General Emergency Services specialty rating is required of all individuals qualifying in emergency services and will be completed prior to commencing training for any other specialty. This training authorizes members to attend missions, observe activities and perform administrative and general operations support tasks under the direction of qualified staff personnel, essentially as a license to learn.

The 60-3 does seem to give some leeway for the use of GES-only individuals under supervision. I don't see why someone who is GES qualified couldn't be used as a driver or in some other general capacity, although it would really only take 10 minutes and a call to the unit cc to make them an MSA-T.

[Eclipse]

I hear the "driver" argument all the time, especially from people who mistakenly believe ground team activity is a "cadet thing" - I mean
after all, "Who will drive them around?"  Or..."...Joe is too old to be camping outside, he just wants to help.  He can just stay in the van...."

If you are driving a vehicle with a team in it, you are part of that team, and subject to all potential risk and pitfalls nature and the mission can throw at you.  The last thing you want is someone driving a team who is not themselves equipped and ready.  They become a huge, unnecessary liability, and that is beyond the temptation to just "tag along" as the qualified team performs their duties.

I don't even buy the argument about airport shuttle drivers or lunch gofers, but at least there is some wiggle room in the text for that.
You certainly should not had GES-only members manning a Comm station or doing anything else operational.

[Major Carrales]

We have had GES people attend (on their own) as observers to see how a SARex works, it is made clear that they (which would be OPSEC compliant) were there to do nothing more than take notes or offer some advice (which would be noted).  That it would be a boring experience and not to expect anything more than a tour and would likely be treated as guests.

At times when people showed up with no GES or with no initial training they were, if possible, corraled into a room and given the training and test (on line, if there was a laptop or land line).  Others were given UDF training on the spot, but, it should be made clear that these things need to be done at the SQUADRON during ES training with a SET...most times, there is not enough personnel to provide these trainings and one will find themselves sitting and waiting until someone can address that.

The rule of thumb would best be not to take people or encourage them to show up if they do not have the training.

And, if you are not prepared with the training...DO NOT NAG the people who are doing things.  I remember operating a RADIO for MRO training and some SM kept coming into the radio shack and yelling at me that he needed GES training to the point that I was missing messages and had to ask for the messages to be resent.  He was obviously frustrated and of the personality that tries to force an issue.  I remained polite and felt for the fellow, but I had work to do.   

[arajca]

Gee. You guys are nice. Typically, I've seen them sent home. Every IAPP I've seen says if you don't have the appropriate training completed, don't show up.

[Spaceman3750]

anything else operational.

But that's just it, 60-3 gives specific guidance that GES only members CAN be used for general operations so long as they are supervised. There's no qualification for Lunch Runner or Taxi Driver. In fact, further guidance is given later in the 60-3 that jobs without qualifications (RUL, LUN [Lunch Runner], or TXI [Taxi driver] for example) can be filled by any GES member that the IC feels can do the job.

[Eclipse]

Having to supervise your taxi drivers and lunch runners pretty much defeats the purpose of them being there, just background noise to
no value.

And as Carreles said, they then expect to do baseline training and other background noise which gets in the way of the mission.

The don't belong there until FAM/PREP has been completed elsewhere, and elsewhere is supposed to be at the home unit, not the
biennial eval, where I have personally been accosted on a number of occasions by new guys wearing the "how can I do ES?" badge
in the middle of a 6-team / 4 aircraft mission.