Every Comm Question You Never Got Answered

Started by ♠SARKID♠, October 29, 2014, 01:00:53 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

UWONGO2

Quote from: Eclipse on November 03, 2014, 06:21:53 AM
If you can't type a simple message and don't trust computers, it's time to
park it on the porch and watch those kids mess up your lawn.

Every agency CAP purports to emulate or support is fully, 100% computerized.

Can't say I don't agree, can't say I can do anything about it either. The Red Cross faces similar challenges, a large portion of the folks they can rely on to be available are retired folks who if they ever used a computer tell stories about punch cards.

The computer, like radio comms, is a tool not a mission. Sometimes I do worry we don't tailor our tools to fit the unique needs of our volunteers, then other times I consider a rage-quit moment when I get an email asking how to find the link to eServices.

wuzafuzz

What have I always wanted to know about comm?

Why in the world does comm have to have it's own logistics program?  I HATED that part of being a wing DC.  OK, back to the real topic.

It sounds like what you want is a CUL school.  I did that in my wing some time back and want to do so again.  Take the best of AuxComm, blend it with CAP, and add some techno-stuff.  Things like scenario based planning.  Have breakout groups devise comm plans for realistic scenarios and ensure they meet the needs of the mission.  Include interoperability topics and some "comm charm school" so we learn to play with other children/organizations a little better.  Make sure your CUL's actually know how radio works; basics like "simplex doesn't talk through mountains," "this is a repeater," and so on.  Add some regional or wing specifics not covered in ICUT.  Do some hands on time setting up radios, antennas, power supplies, etc.  Use the portable repeaters.  Introduce them to SWR or wattmeters so they don't blow radios up.

All those things should be minimum expectations for CUL's.  (Could be a COM-T thing but we don't have those.) 

As for radio operators, they don't need all that stuff.  They DO need recurring oportunities to change channels and zones, decide which channels to use, and practice proper voice procedures.  Instances of ICUT "graduates" using 200 words when 10 would suffice are far too common.  Sending aircrews home because they don't know how to change channels should never happen, but it does.  Radios are a tool, but we have every right to expect people to use them efficiently.

On a related note, I created a YouTube channel to house some communications training videos for COWG.  I'm no cinematographer or voice talent (the first two were created entirely on an iPad), but they are serviceable and cover topics outside of ICUT.  Within a week I should post one showing how to operate a portable repeater in a G1000 182.  Check them out here http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfpFtxcO7yXcZa7CaEmXccw 

Blue Mesa 42 OUT.
"You can't stop the signal, Mal."

arajca

Quote from: wuzafuzz on November 11, 2014, 03:00:49 PM
What have I always wanted to know about comm?

Why in the world does comm have to have it's own logistics program?  I HATED that part of being a wing DC.  OK, back to the real topic.
Because that's what national wants.

wuzafuzz

#43
Quote from: arajca on November 11, 2014, 04:51:33 PM
Quote from: wuzafuzz on November 11, 2014, 03:00:49 PM
What have I always wanted to know about comm?

Why in the world does comm have to have it's own logistics program?  I HATED that part of being a wing DC.  OK, back to the real topic.
Because that's what national wants.
But WHYYYYY!?!?!  :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( ;)
"You can't stop the signal, Mal."

arajca

Quote from: wuzafuzz on November 11, 2014, 07:03:22 PM
Quote from: arajca on November 11, 2014, 04:51:33 PM
Quote from: wuzafuzz on November 11, 2014, 03:00:49 PM
What have I always wanted to know about comm?

Why in the world does comm have to have it's own logistics program?  I HATED that part of being a wing DC.  OK, back to the real topic.
Because that's what national wants.
But WHYYYYY!?!?!  :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( ;)
Probably because of ego issues. We can't have non-comm or ops folks managing comm equipment, now can we? ::)

Al Sayre

Quote from: Eclipse on November 03, 2014, 06:21:53 AM
Quote from: UWONGO2 on November 02, 2014, 11:31:17 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on November 02, 2014, 05:55:31 PMHow about developing a simple system to pass message traffic, or better, grab something free and robust like Google Apps?

Good luck with that. We wrote a decent comm logging solution that attached comm traffic to a status board of aircraft. It worked pretty well, except for two issues:


  • Nearly all of our MROs lacked the typing ability to log information in real-time
  • Nobody was willing to "trust" the computer, so everything entered into the system also had to be logged on paper

The massive duplication of effort wasn't worth it. Even if WMIRS 2.0 actually worked, I doubt anyone will use it. CAPF 110 and CAPF 105 forever!

If you can't type a simple message and don't trust computers, it's time to
park it on the porch and watch those kids mess up your lawn.

Every agency CAP purports to emulate or support is fully, 100% computerized.

Wait until you work a big disaster and have to use WEB EOC...  That's what most state agencies are using or going to.
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787

THRAWN

Quote from: Al Sayre on November 11, 2014, 07:46:26 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on November 03, 2014, 06:21:53 AM
Quote from: UWONGO2 on November 02, 2014, 11:31:17 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on November 02, 2014, 05:55:31 PMHow about developing a simple system to pass message traffic, or better, grab something free and robust like Google Apps?

Good luck with that. We wrote a decent comm logging solution that attached comm traffic to a status board of aircraft. It worked pretty well, except for two issues:


  • Nearly all of our MROs lacked the typing ability to log information in real-time
  • Nobody was willing to "trust" the computer, so everything entered into the system also had to be logged on paper

The massive duplication of effort wasn't worth it. Even if WMIRS 2.0 actually worked, I doubt anyone will use it. CAPF 110 and CAPF 105 forever!

If you can't type a simple message and don't trust computers, it's time to
park it on the porch and watch those kids mess up your lawn.

Every agency CAP purports to emulate or support is fully, 100% computerized.

Wait until you work a big disaster and have to use WEB EOC...  That's what most state agencies are using or going to.

What's wrong with WebEOC? If used correctly, it's a great tool.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

Al Sayre

Nothing is wrong with it.  My point is that if you work a big event you're going to have to use electronic logs, like it or not.  From what I've seen, the electronic logs in WIMRS 2.0 are very similar to WEB EOC.
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787