SAR Planning Software

[Eclipse]

CAP is no more an ES island than any other agency.

There is no integrated national ES system.  Period.  NIMS is working on that right now, but we won't see it for a long time.

Your constant assertions that CAP is somehow an impediment to operations or tries to constantly run the show are simply not true.  Your local perception might be your local reality, but its not the same everywhere.

And regardless, CAP personnel do not sign into the systems of incidents as independent resources, we manage our own personnel and provide resources up the chain into whatever system we re working with.

A FEMA ICP in Baton Rouge isn't going to know who are people are or their quals any more than they would know what some random fire or police department can do.  They depend on the agency providing the resources to properly type and vet their people.

To insinuate otherwise is simply not true.

[heliodoc]

Thanks for the education, Eclipse

I do know a little bit how NIMS works and how interagency ops works, also

My "assertions" about CAP are probably just that, to alot of folks.  We are up there with CERT only with aerial resources and are volunteers. In some EM/ES views, we are an impediment due to our past

Thanks also for telling me we do not sign into incidents as independent resources, knew that all along, some of that in the industry is known as freelancing.

I also know that CAP is a SUPPORT resource and not a front line responder and in some of the parts of the world CAP folks are like volunteer FD's and paid outfits [censored]ing about the onslaught of the NIMS system back in 2003-2004 and "how much more work doing and tracking of all this" and "what good is it really"

The NIMS and FEMA driven "stuff" is what's gonna get us funding and in some states such as Interop commo, resource typing, HMGP, PDM, Fire grants, CEDAP for equipment,etc are AAAALLLLL going to hinge upon NIMS requirements.   So, that being said, in order to play, CAP should be required to do this also

As of today, there is an update on the Knowledgebase(CAP) requesting everybody get on the NIMS bandwagon... Sure tells me CAP is behind the power curve and most likely will need 3-6 more reminders this year to get on it like the ol OPSEC stuf... took CAP prbably two years to get complian ton there own stuff... Si I can imagine it will take as long to get CAP onto the NIMS train...

Thanks for the NIMS education, brother.. 

[Eclipse]

Thanks for the NIMS education, brother.. 

Anytime...

[Smithsonia]

Architecturally, ICS/NIMS and the Air Force Battle Staff are basically the same system, with different nomenclatures and tasks, obviously. Infact, if I'm not mistaken, General's Battle Staffs are where the ICS system came from. So it seems that. FEMA/HSD/AF and some people smarter than me -- should have some way of doing this system right. I'm not an IT guy and I don't speak computer-eez. BUT, it would be helpful if someone in CAP who is a real deal, high end computer geek... could watch an Air Force Battle Staff Exercise. I'll bet you they do that all the time at Nellis and Maxwell. Anybody got that kind of clout? I think the future is already on a system somewhere in the Military realm. As I said before, this ain't Rocket surgery.

[KyCAP]

OK.

Just a reality check here. There are two issues that are being addressed and where the we're missing the bus.

1) E-services is geared toward the DAY to DAY management functions of CAP and inside of that was MIMS maintained by PAID developers.

2) There needs to be a "field" (internet untethered)  deployed application FUNDED from CAP NHQ.

OK - So, since #2 hasn't been funded then several volunteers have created with their own time a couple of applications to get the job done.   I know that in KY there is an application wrapped around Excel and VisualBASIC for applications.  I've also been deep diving into the IMU.

Now, in the real world I have owned a custom software engineering business for over a decade.   I would put an estimated "initial shot" SWAG on Pete's application in real $$$ at about $100,000 at least.   Now, considering the time he's (and his crew) invested without ANY support from NHQ (to my knowledge) then I would say that if he were to read this he'd probably say.. Why in the world do I try to help?  If I did nothing there would be nothing  to complain about.

Redundancy is not the problem with e-services.     Servers, routers, and internet are commodities that can be bought fairly easily.   Being able to interpret NIMS and CAP and design business processes and software diligently that handles those are SKILLS.

There probably is some system that the Interior Department or Forestry Service has to do what they do, but I would bet lunch that modifications to ANY system on a Federal Price Contract developed by and EAGLE contractor like L3 Communications, SAIC, or Northrop Grumman IT systems is $500,000 to $1,000,000 without sneezing.   So, until the leadership get's the dough and nerve to ask for it, then.. well.. we've got we have have from the precious people that we have working paid and un-paid doing what is probably the best that they know how to do.

No.. I don't work for NHQ, but I have been a small-business contractor on the other side of this battle getting paid and I can NOT imagine tackling something like this for FREE and then getting criticism about it.   

My hat is off to all of the Volunteers trying to make OUR CAP volunteering more tolerable for better or worse.. 

Kudos.  Sorry this just touched a nerve.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

I also make my living writing custom applications at different times as employee and contractor. The $100K SWAG (Supper Wild A@% Guess for those not familiar with the term) seems on target to me. I might gripe about some of the e-Services applications, but I'd have a hard time boiling all the business logic out the regulations I'm really familiar with. I can only imagine someone with no CAP experience attempting it.

[Short Field]

There is no ONE program that handles everything for CAP SAR planning and execution.  However, if you know how to use eServices, WMU, IMU, WIMRS, and Google Earth jointly, you can do a pretty good job.

I just finished a statewide SAREX with one local and four remote launch bases - several of the remote bases were 450+ miles from mission base.   Only two of the remote launch bases had any type of computer support and these closed down due to lack of personnel or equipment problems within a couple of hours of the SAREX starting.  Only one remote launch base had a ground staff (AOBD & MRO)that stayed until the last aircraft recovered.  We launched airborne and ground sorties.

The IMU supported the SAREX extremely well.  We had a problem with some members coming up without the correct Ops Quals.  It was extremely easily to update the individual's' Ops Quals in the IMU once we got confirmation.  Confirmation required faxing the member's 101 card to us.  I only had eServices access to members of one squadron so I couldn't do the check myself.  In one case, after I got the 101 card and qualified the person in the IMU, the Wing CC called to tell me the 101 card was invalid as the Ops Qual was incorrectly entered into eServices.  So that person didn't fly and we put another person on the crew.  Most of the crews were briefed, released, and debriefed over the telephone.  Once the SAREX was over, I uploaded all the data to WMIRS the WMU with one command.  The only thing we had to fax to Wing Hq was the fuel receipts - everything else was on-line and available to them. 

The automated support is there - you just need good training, a trained and experienced base staff, and access to eServices.  Without internet access, I could still have ran the SAREX in local mode with the same results.  The negative would have been if the IMU flagged a member as not qualified, I could not have validated a member's current qualifications via eServices and would have had to rely on paper 101s to update.  In the case of this SAREX, that would have allowed a unqualified member to fly based on his inaccurate 101 card.

The IMU can be a pain - make no mistake about it!!!  Lt Col Andersen keeps improving it but problems do keep popping up.  It still needs more error-checking and error-trapping routines.  He corrects problems as they get identified but it is hard to idiot-proof software when the idiots keep getting smarter  .  Still, I would not consider running a SAR without the IMU - even if I was running it in Local mode on a laptop pulled into a cigarette lighter.