Why Do We Need Radios When We Have Cellphones?

[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.