Interoperability in large missions

[CommGeek]

How do we ( CAP) handle a large mission when we are required to interface with other communications systems and agencies?   We advertise that we have airborne repeaters available....What is the point of advertising if we can not release the freqs to the 'Customer'?  I am very familiar with the process of getting permission to release the freqs, this process takes several days / weeks.   How do we handle this in an emergency / deployment situation?

Also, If we can not talk to the other agencies involved in an incident what good are we? 

What good are we at an event if we can not re-program our radios on the fly to add a interop freq?

Does national need to look at maybe revising the regs?

[RiverAux]

Depends on the incident.  On large scale DR missions we are usually more or less operating on our own taking photographs, so usually isn't much need for comm with others.  On smaller missions like SAR its a matter of different frequences not that we can't tell others what our freqs are -- they wouldn't have the equipment to operate on them anyway. 

[arajca]

There are specific frequencies designated for Interoperability purposes. These are NOT CAP channels, but are detailed in federal interoperability plans. They are programmed into CAP radios as IR1, IR2, etc. That is also the federal tag for the channels.

Chances are each state has specific channels that are used for SAR and interoperability purposes. Your wing dc should have information about these and you may find they are already programmed into the CAP radios in your wing in the wing specific zones.

[cap235629]

There are specific frequencies designated for Interoperability purposes. These are NOT CAP channels, but are detailed in federal interoperability plans. They are programmed into CAP radios as IR1, IR2, etc.

HUH? I have 3 CAP radios assigned to me all on the new channel plan and none of them have these IR channels.....

[arajca]

They should be in Zone 7 - Liaison

[CommGeek]

I am very familiar with the fed and non-fed interop channels. ... IR and Tac channels..   IR is ONLY used to coordinate with federal agancies with prior approval!

In a large event we WILL be required to communicate with others!  The question is why do we advertise airborne repeaters if we wont allow others to use them?

Depends on the incident.  On large scale DR missions we are usually more or less operating on our own taking photographs, so usually isn't much need for comm with others.  On smaller missions like SAR its a matter of different frequences not that we can't tell others what our freqs are -- they wouldn't have the equipment to operate on them anyway. 

I dissagree... On a large event we will be required to coordinate wit others.

[RiverAux]

You may disagree, but it is the norm. 

Keep in mind CAP's usual primary job during most disaster relief missions -- taking damage assessment photographs.  That doesn't require much air-ground coordination with other agencies, if any.  We pretty much operate on our own.

I'm not saying that we shoudn't have such capability, but just pointing out that we normally don't and still get our mission done.   

[arajca]

Also, based on my experience, few agencies have the ability for line level folks to reprogram radios on the fly. When reprogramming is needed, they call in specialists who handle that. Also, when you're talking about a large incident, say Type 2 or higher, they will have a large comm staff, for which reprogramming is a minor issue.

If you need specific frequencies for state or local incidents, contact YOUR wing DC. They will make the determination and identify what is needed to add those frequencies.

[CommGeek]

Also, based on my experience, few agencies have the ability for line level folks to reprogram radios on the fly. When reprogramming is needed, they call in specialists who handle that. Also, when you're talking about a large incident, say Type 2 or higher, they will have a large comm staff, for which reprogramming is a minor issue.

If you need specific frequencies for state or local incidents, contact YOUR wing DC. They will make the determination and identify what is needed to add those frequencies.

I disagree... I happen to be a real world comm-tech. Most agencies in the State have a comm-tech on thier MCV/MCP  and re-programming is a normal issue on an incident.  You never know who you will be working with or the situation.

Most CAP guys are not real word comm types.  CAP has only been trained to talk to themselves.  Times have changed...if we cant talk to other agncies we will be left in the dark.   

[cap235629]

They should be in Zone 7 - Liaison

The only channels in the CAP comm plan in zone 7 are the Coast Guard Channels.  There are provisions for adding more but the only "official" ones approved are the CG channels.  If you have others it may be a wing/region thing but it is not nationwide.

[arajca]

Interesting. They were in the code plug I got from National, although there was no explaination about them at the time.

[RADIOMAN015]

Also, If we can not talk to the other agencies involved in an incident what good are we? 

CAP radios are only capable of operating in the VHF highband 138-174 mhz.  Most base/mobile antennas currently installed are generally very narrow in frequency range, and likely would cause some technical issues that would affect the communications range effectiveness of the radios.  Additionally many public safety organizations seem to be migrating to UHF, 700 & 800 mhz frequencies.

It is probably a better idea for CAP to borrow our "customers'" radios (even just portables) for typical "on scene" air to ground comms" and utilize our radio equipment for comm back to our mission base or IC that may be at the joint operations EOC.  (It also is a good idea to check out your comm range from the various EOC you are going to operate out of, BEFORE an actual mission, so that you know the comm range limitations both ground & air wise).

I think you will find also that's there's very limited programming software and cables available in order to reprogram radios, so it is unlikely this could be done quickly anyways.

RM
   

[CommGeek]

There are plenty of VHF interop freq available that most public safety agencies monitor...At least in FL. 

EOC's are NOT a Command and Control function.  Why would I need to talk to an EOC?  EOC's Support the on Scene personel!  I would talk to the on scenen command before an EOC.

Again... Most CAP guys are not exposed to this type of event... We need to educate our members in public safety Comms...

[EMT-83]

CTWG aircraft and vehicles have VHF statewide inter-op frequencies programmed. You can talk to all state police troops, regional dispatch centers, and most (but not all) local agencies.

I was surprised to find a couple of channels that I could use to talk to my own fire department. Something tells me our wing comm guys sat in the same room with some EM-types when they put the statewide plan together a few years ago.

[wuzafuzz]

If it's a large mission we'd probably roll out our own CUL's and MRO's, along with our own IC or Liaison Officer.  Most likely CAP would be delegated their own tasks to do and we would primarily communicate with other CAP members.  Interfacing with other agencies would likely be done at the LO or IC level.

The idea of everyone being able to talk to everyone else all the time might sound cool, but I think it's actually a recipe for problems at a large incident.  As a CUL I don't want to encourage people to roam all their channels, unless they are savvy enough to constantly monitor the primary channels assigned for that incident or team.

Smaller incidents?  Sure, it's nice to be able to talk from a CAP aircraft to a sheriff's SAR team on the ground.  Make advance arrangements with likely customers so you don't have to figure it out on a moments notice.  Lots of SAR teams use VHF NASAR channels (even when other local agencies have gone to other bands).  We have them too.  For those that went to other bands, we can get creative with planning.

Personally I think the concept of total interoperability is a pipe dream.  Sure, tons of money is being thrown in that direction, but too many agencies insist on doing their own thing and then whine to Big Brother to fix the situation they created.  There are some slick workarounds out there, but those are too expensive and complex for CAP to consider on its own.  It will always fall to the comm folks to pull rabbits out of their hats on the fly. 

[Smithsonia]

Whatever happened to the 4G cellphones with Emergency Service Codes? Supposedly, using a double secret civilian cell phone with special codes... ES organizations could take over cell phone tower traffic and give you Jack Bauer capabilities. This was an out growth of the lessons learned from 9-11. It was promised but I've heard nothing more in the last 2 or 3 years.

This system was supposed to be almost akin to having your own personal satellite-phones. I'd like that a lot.

[Mustang]

Also, based on my experience, few agencies have the ability for line level folks to reprogram radios on the fly. When reprogramming is needed, they call in specialists who handle that. Also, when you're talking about a large incident, say Type 2 or higher, they will have a large comm staff, for which reprogramming is a minor issue.

If you need specific frequencies for state or local incidents, contact YOUR wing DC. They will make the determination and identify what is needed to add those frequencies.

I disagree... I happen to be a real world comm-tech. Most agencies in the State have a comm-tech on thier MCV/MCP  and re-programming is a normal issue on an incident.  You never know who you will be working with or the situation.

This is precisely why I keep a copy of the reprogramming instructions for the NAT and Technisonic radios in my in-flight guide.  I've had to program access tones, alternate repeater pairs, etc on more than one occasion.

[ammotrucker]

I disagree with a lot of what is being said here.  It is obvious that most of the CAP Wings must not have agreements to work with the State EOC's ,being at a recent comm event here  some have stated that individuals would not need interoperable radio and only LO or IC would interface.  That is a croc of S?&t seeing as ALL and I repeat ALL ground personnel had to have a safety radio, WHICH IS NOT IN ARE (CAP) PROGRAMMING. 

From what I have seen from this event and others that I have participated in we will more likely be asked to step aside, because of the fact that we CAN NOT interact with othere agencies.  This is a sad state of affairs, seeing as how we bill as one of the best communications networks around.

I see CAP as lacking.  We need interoperable radio, we need the options for reprograming to other agency freq's, we need to be allowed to hand out our freq's to agencies that we are servicing.  This is my opinion

[RiverAux]

Every CAP Wing has an agreement with the state for running missions. 

CAP is a nationwide organization and it isn't possible for us to equip ourselves to be able to communicate with probably tens of thousands of local, county, and state fire, police, and emergency management agencies.  We've spent tens of millions of dollars in recent years just getting our own radio system to meet the new requirement.  Do you think we have a spare billion or so to make us capable of talking with everybody?

[arajca]

If you know of a particular need for VHF radio frequencies for interop, LET YOUR WING DC KNOW! If you know of a need for non-VHF frequencies, find the money for radios. CAP will not fund UHF, 700/800/900 MHZ, etc radios. We just do not have the money.

There are a few dozen channels that are reserved for wing specific programming. With the removal of the wide band channels, I think even more will be available. IT IS UP TO YOUR WING DC TO DETERMINE WHAT IS PROGRAMMED INTO THESE CHANNELS. Unless needs are made known, how the heck is the DC supposed to know what members need?!

CAPR 100-1 lists the documentation required for non-CAP channels (excluding amateur which is verbotten) to be LEGALLY programmed into CAP radios.

[CommGeek]

I dont understand why most CAP Comm types have issues about talking to other agencies...  The fact is if we want to play in the sandbox with the big kids we have to step up to the plate and increase our Comm training and equipment to do so.  The typical CAP Comm course talks about talking to ourselves...doesn't mention interoperability with other agencies.  What can we do to open the eyes of CAP members to realize that we HAVE TO be able to talk to others.?Especially if we can not share our freq's, we must be able to use their (other agencies) freqs to communicate!

If you look at any other volunteer agency..Red Cross, Salvation Army, Christan Contractors Association...and so on...  they all have interoperable radios and some type of satellite based internet.   Its pretty sad when a small church pulls up and they have more capability to communicate than we do!

CAP is stuck in the dark ages!  We need to seriously reevaluate our comms system, we HAVE to have more capabilities when we are deployed....or we will slowly fade away into nothing.

We talk a big game about comms and technology....but in reality we are at the very bottom of the totem pole....we need to act before we get buried!

[ammotrucker]

There are a few dozen channels that are reserved for wing specific programming. With the removal of the wide band channels, I think even more will be available. IT IS UP TO YOUR WING DC TO DETERMINE WHAT IS PROGRAMMED INTO THESE CHANNELS. Unless needs are made known, how the heck is the DC supposed to know what members need?!

I understand that there may be channels that may be incorporated into the band plan that each Wing is alloted, but how do you know until you arrive at the location which are the correct ones.  I still believe that we need the availability to program on the fly. 

I understand that if it is outside of the normal realm of CAP we would need to secure the additional radios from outside sources.  It just seems that everyone that respond to this post believes that we operate OUTSIDE the realm of any guidance while doing missions in DR related activities.  We do photo missions  for post disaster related photographs!  But in this State they are directed from the State EOC, yes we have a team at the State to accept these missions.  But, I know that we will get tasked with missions during this time frame.

I believe that we have a need for 800 Mhz, UHF upper and lower bands, additional VHF (non-amatuer) radios (portables and mobiles), and HF all of which should be available for reprogramming when needed. 

We need to be able to get the freqs to other agencies when needed, not after a 2  or 3 day wait from National to agree.  How do you employ a airbourne repeater  if only you have the availabity to transmit or receive on the the freq.  How do you try to explain to other agencies that are freqs are FOUO when there fregs are also yet there have the option in an emergency allowed with a sebsequent release that the freqs will be deleted after the event. (WOULD BE MONITERED DELETION).  We are intentionally placing this organization in a position of NOT wanting to be interoperable. 

It is amazing that I can talk to the FBI, FEMA, FLANG, FANG, and other agencies that have FOUO freqs but not I can not allow then access to CAP, because we take the FOUO a little to far. 

[Thom]

There are a few dozen channels that are reserved for wing specific programming. With the removal of the wide band channels, I think even more will be available. IT IS UP TO YOUR WING DC TO DETERMINE WHAT IS PROGRAMMED INTO THESE CHANNELS. Unless needs are made known, how the heck is the DC supposed to know what members need?!

I understand that there may be channels that may be incorporated into the band plan that each Wing is alloted, but how do you know until you arrive at the location which are the correct ones.  I still believe that we need the availability to program on the fly. 

I understand that if it is outside of the normal realm of CAP we would need to secure the additional radios from outside sources.  It just seems that everyone that respond to this post believes that we operate OUTSIDE the realm of any guidance while doing missions in DR related activities.  We do photo missions  for post disaster related photographs!  But in this State they are directed from the State EOC, yes we have a team at the State to accept these missions.  But, I know that we will get tasked with missions during this time frame.

I believe that we have a need for 800 Mhz, UHF upper and lower bands, additional VHF (non-amatuer) radios (portables and mobiles), and HF all of which should be available for reprogramming when needed. 

We need to be able to get the freqs to other agencies when needed, not after a 2  or 3 day wait from National to agree.  How do you employ a airbourne repeater  if only you have the availabity to transmit or receive on the the freq.  How do you try to explain to other agencies that are freqs are FOUO when there fregs are also yet there have the option in an emergency allowed with a sebsequent release that the freqs will be deleted after the event. (WOULD BE MONITERED DELETION).  We are intentionally placing this organization in a position of NOT wanting to be interoperable. 

It is amazing that I can talk to the FBI, FEMA, FLANG, FANG, and other agencies that have FOUO freqs but not I can not allow then access to CAP, because we take the FOUO a little to far.

I tend to agree with you on most points, although I will point out that the gulf between NEEDING UHF, etc. radios, and being able to AFFORD UHF, etc. radios makes the Pacific look like a backyard pond.

BUT, railing about this here will make no real difference.

If you have a worthy idea, preferably a usable plan, to remedy the shortcomings of CAP, package it up and send it up through your chain of command.  Via your Wing or Region Commander it can then make its way to the NB/NEC which can then act upon it and make real changes to the way CAP operates.

I didn't say it was easy, but it is relatively simple.

Thom

[arajca]

Each state should have an interoperability comm plan. Check it out. Remember, your wing comm staff (and various others) have just completed one of the largest projects in CAP's history. The fact that they haven't been able to do everything any member thinks they should have needs to keep in mind that they are volunteers like the rest of the members and only have a limited amount of time for CAP. Everyone sets priorities for how they use their time, and they do not always match what someone else may think. For many involved with the transition and repeater replacement, it was almost a full time job in itself.

For those involved on public safety/emergency management communications, how have you helped CAP with interop communications? Do you just complain about CAP not being able to hand out our frequencies? Not having the 'right' channels programmed in their radios? Not talking to other agencies? Not having the latest and greatest new radios available? Not having field programmable equipment? Have you offered to help resolve the issues? I am positive most wing DC's would welcome your assistance.

[wuzafuzz]

I disagree with a lot of what is being said here.  It is obvious that most of the CAP Wings must not have agreements to work with the State EOC's ,being at a recent comm event here  some have stated that individuals would not need interoperable radio and only LO or IC would interface.  That is a croc of S?&t seeing as ALL and I repeat ALL ground personnel had to have a safety radio, WHICH IS NOT IN ARE (CAP) PROGRAMMING. 

So add that channel to our CAP programming.  Do the research, obtain necessary permissions, and talk to your DC.  If it's not VHF, well CAP might not be invited to play.  Or there might be cache radios available if it's a disaster (depending on your state).

Exactly which part of using LO's to coordinate activities is a crock?  Short of possessing magical radios we would be heavily reliant on liaison people.  LO's should be gonig 200 MPH anyway if we are working with others.

From what I have seen from this event and others that I have participated in we will more likely be asked to step aside, because of the fact that we CAN NOT interact with othere agencies.  This is a sad state of affairs, seeing as how we bill as one of the best communications networks around.

It CAN work without everyone on the same channels. I've been there done that...at incidents large and small.  It sure is nice to have interoperable radios, but absent that the Earth keeps spinning. 

I already addressed the need for pre-planning and even some creativity.  Those can overcome some technology issues, and will be necessary in our future.  Seriously, what are the chances of CAP being provided field programmable liaison radios on every possible public safety band, and distributing those to every member with a possible need?  Or having readily available systems to patch our VHF comms to other systems? 

I see CAP as lacking.  We need interoperable radio, we need the options for reprograming to other agency freq's, we need to be allowed to hand out our freq's to agencies that we are servicing.  This is my opinion

I'll be the first to agree our FOUO take on frequencies is unnecessarily limiting.  It keeps us from monitoring each other, at a minimum, so we can communicate.  We used to do that all the time when I worked for a sheriff's dept on UHF, for talking to the local city cops on VHF.  It worked great.  Low budget too.  On the bright side, any reasonably savvy comm planner can figure out our secret squirrel stuff (excepting encryption, when we go there) in short order.  It'll be all over the Internet before long.

Having said all that:
We definitely need more radios in more hands.  VHF radios first, so we can talk to each other before chasing the technological masterpiece we'd all like. 

I miss the good old days when most everyone was on the same band.  It sure was easier for mutual aid.  But when agencies started fracturing off into different bands and system types, we still managed to work together.

[ammotrucker]

I disagree with a lot of what is being said here.  It is obvious that most of the CAP Wings must not have agreements to work with the State EOC's ,being at a recent comm event here  some have stated that individuals would not need interoperable radio and only LO or IC would interface.  That is a croc of S?&t seeing as ALL and I repeat ALL ground personnel had to have a safety radio, WHICH IS NOT IN ARE (CAP) PROGRAMMING. 

So add that channel to our CAP programming.  Do the research, obtain necessary permissions, and talk to your DC.  If it's not VHF, well CAP might not be invited to play.  Or there might be cache radios available if it's a disaster (depending on your state).

Exactly which part of using LO's to coordinate activities is a crock?  Short of possessing magical radios we would be heavily reliant on liaison people.  LO's should be gonig 200 MPH anyway if we are working with others.

First I was stating that all ground personel were required to have a safety radio.  I was not meaning to imply that the LO would not be running around at over 200 mph.  I was just stating the fact a minimal costing VHF portable needs to be available to all members at some bases.  It would not have to be NTIA compliant

Secondly, I would never purpose that all members be handed out every radio listed in this above thread.  That is unrealitic and cost prohitive.  But, a Wing should be able to supply each group with the neccesary tools weather funded by CAP/HQ or by WG/HQ or by secondary grants.

I believe that there should be a way that AT-RISK Wings with or without groups should have available radio equipment to manage the mission in disaster relief.  In the format that we currently have I feel that it can not happen.  Weather we as members want it to happen or are respective Wings bill it to happen. 

[Slim]

In my experience, if there is a need for interoperable radios, they will be there and available.  I've yet to see a mobile incident command post that didn't have a cache of radios to be made available, especially considering all of the communications deficiencies brought to light on 9/11/01.  Even our wing MCP has a cache of CAP VHF radios available.  We also have capability to operate on our statewide 800 MHz trunked system via several handheld radios in the MCP or in the hands of key wing staff officers.  We also, as part of our wing-specific bank, have the statewide interop VHF frequencies for both police and fire available to us.

Trunked radio systems are a different breed altogether, and they aren't necessarily limited to 800 MHz either.  The federal government is already using trunking systems on both VHF and 400 MHz bands.  It's not like you can just pull a radio out of the box, program the frequencies, and talk.  The radio has to be authorized by a system administrator to even access the system, and have a radio specific ID number assigned to it before the end-user can use it.  Think of a trunked radio as being the same as a cell phone (in fact, a lot of the technology is the same between the two).  You can't just buy a cell phone, take it out of the box and start talking.  It has to be activated by your carrier first.  In the case of a trunked radio, the carrier is the agency that owns the system.

In a real-world incident, what would most likely happen is that a CAP radio station would be set up in a command post, with a CAP MRO who would pass traffic and taskings from the incident commander, via the CAP agency liaison officer.  We don't necessarily need to talk to the big boys directly, we just need to be able to talk to the EOC/command post, etc.  If there was a need for us to be able to talk directly to them, radios would most likely be provided to those who need them

[cap235629]

In a real-world incident, what would most likely happen is that a CAP radio station would be set up in a command post, with a CAP MRO who would pass traffic and taskings from the incident commander, via the CAP agency liaison officer.  We don't necessarily need to talk to the big boys directly, we just need to be able to talk to the EOC/command post, etc.  If there was a need for us to be able to talk directly to them, radios would most likely be provided to those who need them

That is precisely why we have RDP's.  I also constructed a VHF homebrew RDP using a good sized toolbox and various parts I had lying around the house.  In the past we had to take the radio from the squadron headquarters and MY mag mount antenna and set up in the CP when we are working with local agencies.  As a result I petitioned the Wing DC for another power supply and radio and solved the problem.  If you can justify it, you can have it, that is what the gear is for.

The VHF homebrew RDP has the ability to run on 12V DC or throw a switch and run off of the power supply.  It has a 100 foot coax extension, a 15 foot mag mount and a 15 foot pole mount that attaches to our mast kit. I also installed a 3 way 12v accessory socket to charge cell phones (became an issue on last large op)

Some day I will get around to posting pics.........

[CommGeek]

Number One Fatal Error on interop communications is assuming that another agency will let you 'Borrow" a radio.

If everyone used the above as thier source of interop radios, knobody would have any equipment becouse they would  be under the false impression that somone else would have a raido for them.

If you dont own the equipment and bring the equipment to the event it dosent exist.

It may have worked in the past...but if you count on it next time your just shooting yourself in the foot.

In a large event gaining access to a trunked system is no big deal. It only takes a few min to program a new radio into the system. ( I do it every day, on the State Wide Trunked System).

[wuzafuzz]

Number One Fatal Error on interop communications is assuming that another agency will let you 'Borrow" a radio.

If everyone used the above as thier source of interop radios, knobody would have any equipment becouse they would  be under the false impression that somone else would have a raido for them.

If you dont own the equipment and bring the equipment to the event it dosent exist.

It may have worked in the past...but if you count on it next time your just shooting yourself in the foot.

In a large event gaining access to a trunked system is no big deal. It only takes a few min to program a new radio into the system. ( I do it every day, on the State Wide Trunked System).

OK, you have rejected many of our statements, even those based on our experiences.  It would appear what has worked in our locations hasn't worked for you.  Obviously you have some ideas.  So...what do you suggest we actually do?  How do we do it?  How do we PAY for it?

[Nick]

In a large event gaining access to a trunked system is no big deal. It only takes a few min to program a new radio into the system. ( I do it every day, on the State Wide Trunked System).

That's fine and dandy, assuming you have a Motorola 800 MHz SmartNet radio.  Or a M/A-COM Harris 900 MHz EDACS radio with ProVoice.  Or whatever kind of radio that works with the local trunked system.

1) Not all states have state-wide trunked systems.  Texas is one of 'em.  I need at least 5 (yes, 5) disparate radios just to access all the systems around the state, ranging from $3000-5000 a piece.  And that's not mentioning the conventional freqs that get stacked into trunked radios to keep the number down.

2) If you plan on any kind of interoperability without the need for item 1, then the host systems need to be P25 compliant.  Many aren't.  Even then, you need a radio to cover each band (700/800/900, and 400 if you want to get into Federal-land).

3) What if the agency owning the host system is using encryption and your radio doesn't have the encryption option?

4) What if you bring in one type of radio that will work with the system (say they're using SmartNet) but have a radio they don't support (let's say an EF Johnson 5100 ES).  Who's going to program it if they don't release system keys?

There's a whole slew of what-if's when you get into the "I have a catch-all radio cache in my trunk" approach.  The ideal approach is that everyone is P25 compliant.  The realistic approach is that you can expect to either 1) pre-stage exchange radios, 2) pre-populate radio channel plans, or 3) beg for a radio when you show up.

Historical Disclaimer: 10 years in public safety communications in which I deployed a 350-square mile coverage, 855-subscriber trunked radio system, and developed my agency's communications interoperability plan with 15 agencies throughout the metropolitan area.

[Slim]

Number One Fatal Error on interop communications is assuming that another agency will let you 'Borrow" a radio.

If everyone used the above as thier source of interop radios, knobody would have any equipment becouse they would  be under the false impression that somone else would have a raido for them.

If you dont own the equipment and bring the equipment to the event it dosent exist.

It may have worked in the past...but if you count on it next time your just shooting yourself in the foot.

In a large event gaining access to a trunked system is no big deal. It only takes a few min to program a new radio into the system. ( I do it every day, on the State Wide Trunked System).

Ok, pointed question, if your anonymity will allow you to answer.  What state do you work for?

In Michigan, radio techs who service the MPSCS work at the network control center in Lansing.  If an incident in Houghton, MI (about 500 miles and 12 hours drive north of Lansing) needs more radios in a hurry, who's going to handle that?  A fast-paced incident will be long over before they could probably get a tech into the shop to program them, let alone get them to where they're needed.  Next problem, the NCC doesn't have boxes of $5000 portable radios just laying around the shop to program.  When an agency joins the system, they purchase the radios from Motorola or another approved vendor, who ships the equipment to the shop.  The shop programs them to the customers specs, activates them, then ships them to the agency.  Ohbytheway, those agencies pay a minimum of $200 per year, per radio for connection fees to access the system.  And, in order to be authorized to use the system, every user (cop, firefighter, medic, DPW worker, etc) must attend a 6 HOUR training class to learn how to use the equipment.

My county uses a Harris OpenSky system (don't even get me started on what a colossal disaster this has been), and uses the same procedure.  Agency joins the system, buys the radios, they go to the shop for programming/activation, then go to the agency, the users receive training (again, 6 hours, I'm in the process of going through the TTT course for it) before they can go live.  No stockpile of equipment in the shop for contingencies.  A lot of agencies in the county don't plan to join this system for many reasons, political, system coverage, or cost.  My agency, a utility model private EMS service, doesn't plan on full-scale deployment on this system due to cost.  We'll have limited access for ambulance-to-hospital comms, and MABAS mutual aid talkgroups, but only 8 radios (we have 30 ambulances in our fleet).  We also have access to the state system for contingency response through our region bioterrorism response network (12 portables and a base station in our dispatch center).

Both agencies maintain stockpiles of programmed/activated radios in their mobile command vehicles and at key locations (state police posts and substations) to deploy if needed on large incidents. 

Mind you, this is for public safety.  I don't anticipate a CAP ground team leader being handed a $5000 radio to use for an incident.  Every large-scale CAP response I've been involved in (from assisting my fire dept with a lost person SAR, to a multi-agency response to an airliner crash), has involved CAP teams using their own radios to communicate with a CAP ALO located in the main EOC/CP.

What do ARES/RACES teams use to communicate when they support an incident?  Does an agency give them radios to talk to the command post?  No, they use their own equipment to talk to an ARES/RACES operator located in the EOC/CP.

[CommGeek]

I work for Florida.   Why do we need to do trunked? We Don't!  Every band (UHF Low & Hi , VHF Low & Hi ,700,  800) all have there own nationwide conventional Mutual aid channels.  (Refer to the NIFOG)  All we need is a radio in each band, and a gateway (ACU-1000, ACU-M, Sytek) and we are set.  That way we can communicate to anyone!
We cant give out our freqs?  Well fine...give us yours and we will patch you to our system.   Any smart comm manager should have programmed the MA channels in their radios.

You are correct with trunking...You have to register the radio on the system...We use a Harris/Ma-Com System. Ours is too controlled by a Central Control center or NOC.  IT takes about 5 min to get the LID of the radio to register with the NOC.  Is this an ideal way to handle interoperability...NO.. But we are able to do it if needed.

So how does CAP get a radio in each band and a audio gateway to patch to? Good question? We need to think outside the box to make it happen.  How do we coordinate so other agencies can use our airborne repeaters?  We are one of very few organizations who have the capability...we advertise it... but we cant give the freq out  so others may use it...Wasted resource!

All I meant to get as is we need to think outside the box and get out of the mentality that we only need to talk to ourselves......

[Nick]

Why do we need to do trunked? We Don't!

I agree 100%.  Trunking is great for multi-agency large-scale events and networked trunked systems are great for wide-area communication, but during a disaster (like, a hurricane or tornado) you'll be doing good if the trunking system is even up and running.  If it withstands the initial disaster but there's a widespread power outage, someone's gotta keep gas in the generator.

With respect to a CAP comm capability, I'm all for taking a couple ACU-Ts with three handhelds (one VHF, one UHF, one 800 MHz) tuned to a VTAC, UTAC and 8TAC channel, sticking them in a few C172s and rotate sending them up as high-birds.  If there's any interagency communication to be had, there's your fix.

Problem is, I don't think the NPSPAC channels are advertised and utilized nearly as much as they should be.  As soon as they were released, I had them in my agency's radios.  I was hard pressed to find any other agency in the area that was using them up until the time I moved (July '09).

[CommGeek]

I agree.  We have a hard time getting the  NPSPAC  channels as the standard. 

Ok...  anybody want to Volunteer their ACU-T to demo?

Im working on a low cost ($500) or so VOIP app to be used in place of an ACU.  It should do the same thing, for one tenth the cost.   When I get it up if anyone want to help test, let me know.

I like the idea of putting the gateway in the a/c.  Smart!

[Gunner C]

Is VOIP going to work in a large scale disaster such as a hurricane or earthquake?  Phones and broadband are toast when power is cut.

[Nick]

I think CommGeek's idea here is more VoIP just as a protocol to mix the voice traffic, not actually long-haul VoIP like Skype or other commercial solutions.  Take a laptop computer with a USB interface to the audio in/out/PTT on a handheld radio, do some software-based audio mixing, and you have a RoIP gateway.

[CommGeek]

I think CommGeek's idea here is more VoIP just as a protocol to mix the voice traffic, not actually long-haul VoIP like Skype or other commercial solutions.  Take a laptop computer with a USB interface to the audio in/out/PTT on a handheld radio, do some software-based audio mixing, and you have a RoIP gateway.

Your right on the money!

It could be used as a nation wide system...as long as the network is up.  Link all the repeaters in the Wing??

Is VOIP going to work in a large scale disaster such as a hurricane or earthquake?  Phones and broadband are toast when power is cut.

One more reason why CAP should consider Satellite internet.....
You can get a decent shared system dedicated for EM type users for $3,500 plus $1,700 a year service   1.5 Down  512 up

[heliodoc]

Isn't this about thesame amont of money CAP has spent for all of its 64 iterations of eServices??

There "got" to be plenty-o-dough in the CAP kitty for all sorts of interop commo

Plenty of CAP money being piddled away elsewhere... 'bout time CAP get with the program of interop anyways for all the CAPers wanting thise DHS HLS missions

Whadddya think..  DHS, HLS, FEMA, and EM types are center there world around CAP missions??

CAP OUGHT to wrap its heads and arms around who is going to drive the missions...more ti the ES world than SAREX's!!

[PHall]

Is VOIP going to work in a large scale disaster such as a hurricane or earthquake?  Phones and broadband are toast when power is cut.

Phones should have power if the cables are intact. The telephone system, including the switch, is always on battery power. (48vdc)

The commercial power runs the trickle charger that keeps the batteries charged and there is always a diesel generator available which will come on-line if they lose commercial power for more then 30 minutes.

The fiber optic hut in the field where the telephone signal switches from the fiber back to the copper cable has batteries on site that will keep it running for a minimum of 48 hours.

Most cell site have batteries too.

This is why if you use cordless phones in your house you may want to have a simple, cheap telephone available.
When you lose power to your house the cordless goes out too since the base station needs power. But, plug in the "regular" phone and you're back in business.

Your VOIP will work as long as you have back up power for the DSL modem and the computer.

[CommGeek]

Isn't this about thesame amont of money CAP has spent for all of its 64 iterations of eServices??

There "got" to be plenty-o-dough in the CAP kitty for all sorts of interop commo

Plenty of CAP money being piddled away elsewhere... 'bout time CAP get with the program of interop anyways for all the CAPers wanting thise DHS HLS missions

Whadddya think..  DHS, HLS, FEMA, and EM types are center there world around CAP missions??

CAP OUGHT to wrap its heads and arms around who is going to drive the missions...more ti the ES world than SAREX's!!

Heli you are right on the money... The problem is the leadership at Wing, Region, and National only know the 'CAP Way'  and only think they know how the real world operates....the first hurdle is to educate them.  (in my opinion that's the hardest thing to do).  After the 'education' i think they may be willing to listen to the Real world Comm guys! and do something about interop.

[Nick]

Your VOIP will work as long as you have back up power for the DSL modem and the computer.

Important point to note.  If you ever want something survivable, go with DSL over cable modem.  The repeaters that cable modems need aren't necessarily always backed up with emergency power.

[Fubar]

Is VOIP going to work in a large scale disaster such as a hurricane or earthquake?  Phones and broadband are toast when power is cut.

I believe the American Red Cross now uses VOIP for everything. They FedEx satellite kits from their warehouse to the main headquarters (mission base if you will) for the disaster. The ARC then uses it's own resources to deliver the kits to their forward operating headquarters. The comm guys get the dish pointed in the right direction and hook up something like 10 phones and 10 laptops to the link and they're off and running.

Operating in a disaster area requires bringing a lot of resources with you. Resources cost money and from what I'm told, we ain't got the money.

[PHall]

Your VOIP will work as long as you have back up power for the DSL modem and the computer.

Important point to note.  If you ever want something survivable, go with DSL over cable modem.  The repeaters that cable modems need aren't necessarily always backed up with emergency power.

Hunh?   Most CATV stuff (amplifiers and such) in the field has limited, if any battery back-up.

[wuzafuzz]

I think CommGeek's idea here is more VoIP just as a protocol to mix the voice traffic, not actually long-haul VoIP like Skype or other commercial solutions.  Take a laptop computer with a USB interface to the audio in/out/PTT on a handheld radio, do some software-based audio mixing, and you have a RoIP gateway.

Your right on the money!

It could be used as a nation wide system...as long as the network is up.  Link all the repeaters in the Wing??

I love linked repeaters and use them all the time in COWG (also use linked systems as a ham).  The linking is extremely useful and makes us far more effective than we might otherwise be.

We must use caution to ensure that any encrypted traffic stays encrypted as it passes through linked systems.  Systems that rely on the decrypted audio out may inadvertently repeat secure comms in the clear at other locations.   Not much of an issue, yet, but who knows what the future holds.

[Thom]

Your VOIP will work as long as you have back up power for the DSL modem and the computer.

Important point to note.  If you ever want something survivable, go with DSL over cable modem.  The repeaters that cable modems need aren't necessarily always backed up with emergency power.

Hunh?   Most CATV stuff (amplifiers and such) in the field has limited, if any battery back-up.

Yes, that was McLarty's point, though I believe his statement can be misinterpreted.  He said that, and I'm paraphrasing here: "One should choose DSL, rather than Cable Modem" due to the lack of supporting infrastructure to keep Cable Modems (and the whole CATV infrastructure) going during a major disaster.

In contrast, as PHall and others have noted, DSL uses the PSTN network which is 99% backed up by large battery banks at every CO, and generators to maintain those batteries at many locations.

The PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) is almost unbelievably durable compared to any of the more modern information/communication installations in the US.

FYI, for the Telecom/Datacom geeks in the house, and pertinent to this thread: The FCC has recently begun issuing requests for comment on a plan to migrate ALL of the existing PSTN network in the US from POTS to VoIP.  That would mean the elimination of the current switched backbone down to the CO level, with likely migration to a digital infrastructure and either offering FXS ports to customers still on old copper, or SIP trunks to newer customers for direct VoIP phone access.  Either way, it would mean the end of the astoundingly resilient PSTN/POTS network we have had for ~100 years in the US.

Thom

[RADIOMAN015]

Genrally I think that we have adequate radio coverage with our aircraft flying and reporting back via radio to mission base their status.  This can be further enhanced/supplemented by some "high bird" relay activity if required.

A potential serious problem though is air to ground over an emergency scene, where there's no CAP ground assets and the local fire & rescue squadrons are responding & immediate coordination is imperative (and the local F&R doesn't operate on the same radio frquency band as CAP and/or CAP aircraft don't have the appropriate working frequency installed in the radio system).

As far as interoperability goes, there are ways to be "creative" by CAP and maybe even those small town public safety agencies that don't have any money to buy expensive gear.

1.  CAP can transmit one way via our typical VHF AM transeiver in the aircraft and the local agency can monitor via a radio scanner on the appropriate frequency (122.9/123.1 mhz).  CAP aircraft could also carry a portable (or even install a radio scanner, similiar to what one state police agency does both in it's vehicles & helos), so the local agency could talk back to the CAP aircraft.  The challenge is for CAP to know what frequency to monitor for the response.

2.  CAP aircraft could carry the least expensive compliant VHF portable radio with a few of channels programmed in the radio.  The radio could be air dropped as a protected bundle to the ground forces.  Hopefully we would get the radio back, because non return would also result in logistics Report of Survey requirements.

3.  CAP aircraft could carry an inexpensive Family Radio Service (FRS) or Intrasquad (ISR) portable radio and air drop it to the responding forces.   An appropriate portable radio would also be carried in the aircraft. Limitations are:  FRS radios could get interfered with by others not related to the mission and current regulation prohibit the use of ISR radios while aircraft are in flight.

Also regarding #2 & #3, CAP doesn't allow CAP mission pilots to train to do small bundle air drops at this point, so without practice, the success of any bundle drop would be questionable, so that #1 may be the only alternative available.

I think overall it's a challenge for CAP to think creatively "out of the box", and sometimes simple less costly communications alternatives might work, with appropriate practice & qualification.
RM         

[NavLT]

the real problem is that we plan on interoperatbility on large missions but never practice it to see if it works.

The repeat statement of all we do on large scale missions is take photos and don't need to work together is because most agencies don't see any value in CAP doing anything else.  I have brought CAP folks trained into Plans and Ops at larger state and county practice exercises not in CAP uniform because when you remove that stereo type packaging they get to do lots of functions.  Put them in greens and its off to Air ops only......

V/R
Lt J

[FW]

Comm interoperability should not be a problem in any mission.  I never realized we still had the problem.   I know of a couple of wings already having MOU's with their respective EMAs.  I'm kind of surprised this isn't more widespread.  At the region and national level, there are CAP Liasons with FEMA.  Hasn't there been agreements yet for comm?   In the last few years we've had a number of very large missions.  Was there nothing positive, as far as "best practices" to come of them?  With the $200,000 or so we have left over to spend every year for new radios, money is the least of our worries.
just my $.02

[arajca]

With the $200K end of year money we spend on radios, we're buying radios to talk to ourselves, not to talk to other agencies.

I know of ONE unit in CO whose ground team has an airband radio to talk to aircraft. They bought it with unit funds. They also have two vhf liaison radios, also purchased with unit funds.

I can't get enough equipment to equip COWG to meet the ToA, let alone anything extra like liaison or airband radios. I've asked repeatedly.

[NavLT]

I know all about the MOUs, they all say we will play well together.  At Katrina and 9/11 and etc..... I found that the paper saying and actually doing it fail.  and the Post Mort on the event always says "we need to practice more to work out the bugs before the crisis" but we don't.

just my .02 or maybe .01 after taxes....

V/R
LT J.

[Eclipse]

I know of ONE unit in CO whose ground team has an airband radio to talk to aircraft. They bought it with unit funds. They also have two vhf liaison radios, also purchased with unit funds.

And what are they going to actually do with this extra weight?  We don't have a need to communicate on AV band, for starters.

[FW]

With the $200K end of year money we spend on radios, we're buying radios to talk to ourselves, not to talk to other agencies.

I can't get enough equipment to equip COWG to meet the ToA, let alone anything extra like liaison or airband radios. I've asked repeatedly.

This is a matter of want vs. need.  If the need is shown, the money is available, priorities can be changed.  However, for positive change to happen, there needs to be a plan with specific objectives and a final goal to be achieved.  I'm sure this is on someone's wish list right now.  Anyone have a "round to-it" to get?

[arajca]

I know of ONE unit in CO whose ground team has an airband radio to talk to aircraft. They bought it with unit funds. They also have two vhf liaison radios, also purchased with unit funds.

And what are they going to actually do with this extra weight?  We don't have a need to communicate on AV band, for starters.

Not for talking to ourselves, but working with other agencies or private aircraft.

[Eclipse]

I know of ONE unit in CO whose ground team has an airband radio to talk to aircraft. They bought it with unit funds. They also have two vhf liaison radios, also purchased with unit funds.

And what are they going to actually do with this extra weight?  We don't have a need to communicate on AV band, for starters.

Not for talking to ourselves, but working with other agencies or private aircraft.

That's my point - agency traffic should not be the AV band, and our need to speak to other private aircraft is essentially zero.

[cap235629]

I know of ONE unit in CO whose ground team has an airband radio to talk to aircraft. They bought it with unit funds. They also have two vhf liaison radios, also purchased with unit funds.

And what are they going to actually do with this extra weight?  We don't have a need to communicate on AV band, for starters.

Not for talking to ourselves, but working with other agencies or private aircraft.

That's my point - agency traffic should not be the AV band, and our need to speak to other private aircraft is essentially zero.

how about talking to MEDEVAC?

[Eclipse]

how about talking to MEDEVAC?

That would be done by the fire/EMS on scene, not us.  CAP is not directly calling in airlift, at least not in 90+% of situations where we would be involved.

[wuzafuzz]

I'm a GTM and I will gladly carry an airband portable.  My radio harness has two pouches, one for my CAP radio, the other for an ISR, liaison, or airband HT.  Doing so increases my chances of talking to more people.  (Handy for extra DF too.)  Does it happen often?  No.  But it's awesome to have it if you need it.  The weight penalty is tiny and preserves my "comm cred."   

[SKYKING607]

We have a pair of these products in use where I work.  One is in a mobile configuration and the other in a portable package.  The portable package links 4 portable (hand-helds) while the mobile rig links some UHF and VHF equipment.

http://www.ncsradio.com/commercial/c250.shtml

New Communications Solutions products are reasonably priced.  In our law enforcement environment, they've come in handy in MANY missions.

/mc

[ammotrucker]

[That's my point - agency traffic should not be the AV band, and our need to speak to other private aircraft is essentially zero.

That seems funny to me, as I was just at a training event Sponsered by the state in which the only way that most of the ground teams could talk to CAP aircraft was on the AV band VHF.  If we are put in the same position of talking to there aircraft for support AV VHF may be the only way.

Which we where, how else is there to do that.  Interoperablitity should not be a pipe dream of what we think we need, CAP National should have discussed this issue and there should be a plan implemented NOW.  If there is no plan in place, and they need suggestions then we need to set-up a interoperable task force to discuss it.

[Eclipse]

That seems funny to me, as I was just at a training event Sponsered by the state in which the only way that most of the ground teams could talk to CAP aircraft was on the AV band VHF.  If we are put in the same position of talking to there aircraft for support AV VHF may be the only way.

How about CAP radios?

[davidsinn]

Why do our GTs need to talk to anybody that doesn't already have a CAP radio? I can understand having inter-agency radios to equip a mission base but why do I, the GTL need to talk to anyone but our own base?

[RiverAux]

There may not be a CAP base.  Imagine that you are a combo CAP IC/GTL leading a team and being directed by the county sheriff.

[davidsinn]

There may not be a CAP base.  Imagine that you are a combo CAP IC/GTL leading a team and being directed by the county sheriff.

ICs should not be in the field. Their job is to run the mission and support the assets prosecuting the mission. Even in your hypothetical the sheriff should be supplying the radio.

[Short Field]

ICs can be "on-scene" commanders.  The first motorcycle cop who shows up on an accident scene is the IC until someone else takes over.  CAP ICs cannot flight release themselves.  There is nothing in the regs that says a IC cannot participate.  NHQ says that "prudent judgment"  would have the IC managing, not participating. 

I can see where a deployed IC would work on a small ground team operation.

[davidsinn]

ICs can be "on-scene" commanders.  The first motorcycle cop who shows up on an accident scene is the IC until someone else takes over.  CAP ICs cannot flight release themselves.  There is nothing in the regs that says a IC cannot participate.  NHQ says that "prudent judgment"  would have the IC managing, not participating. 

I can see where a deployed IC would work on a small ground team operation.

We don't deploy like that though. In our organization the (CAP) IC should be in the rear with the gear.

[wuzafuzz]

Put a radio equipped MRO and or CUL at the mission base/ICP.  That'll solve a fair amount of interoperability concerns.

Ground teams should include a radio savvy person, not just a person with a radio.  Knowing which channels are in your radio(s), and how to best use them will help fill in some other gaps. 

Perfect?  No.  However I firmly believe well trained people can make the most of our gear and improve communications with other agencies when needed.

Sure, readily available liaison radios sounds great.  However, the unfortunate truth is too many current members are completely lost if they can't reach their usual CAP repeater.  All to often, making informed choices about changing channels is too much to ask.  Throw yet another radio and channel set into the mix and you'll muddy the waters even more.  (Every single time I've been an MRO or CUL, I've had to teach someone how to use their radio before they leave mission base.  Pencil whipped ROA?).  I really enjoy radios, but more whiz bang gadgetry won't solve much unless more of our members develop a solid, yet basic, communications skill set.

[Short Field]

We don't deploy like that though. In our organization the (CAP) IC should be in the rear with the gear.

We know your opinion - now give us a regulation cite to support it. 

And you do understand that saying "in the rear with the gear" is insulting.  That's why the combat AFSCs and MOSs use it.  It ranks right up there with REMF.   In CAP, the gear tends to be deployed out with the aircrews and ground teams.  The only "gear" we tend to have at mission base is radio equipment to match what the deployed teams have so we can communicate with them and then computers so we can record what is happening as well as release the sorties.  Not much "gear" to be had in our location but maybe your location has better luck.

No where in IS 300 or IS 400 does it state the IC cannot be on-scene.  CAP does not have a regulation that states that either.  If you can find it, I would appreciate knowing about it.

[Eclipse]

IC's have no business being in the search or DR area.  At most a branch director or strike team leader could be out there.

IC's are not supposed to be involved in tactics.  Of course you can make up all sorts of ultra-tiny missions where the IC is also one of the UDF team members or something, but then we probably don't have a need for comms to start with. We're talking about common sense here.  Want some ICS?

Look where it tells you the ICP should be - and the IC belongs in there.

One common failing of CAP IC's is being "on the ground" instead of being in the office discussing SMART objectives.

[Short Field]

ICs can be "on-scene" commanders.  The first motorcycle cop who shows up on an accident scene is the IC until someone else takes over.  CAP ICs cannot flight release themselves.  There is nothing in the regs that says a IC cannot participate.  NHQ says that "prudent judgment"  would have the IC managing, not participating. 

I can see where a deployed IC would work on a small ground team operation.

You seem to have missed what I said.  There is a big difference between what is required vs what is "prudent judgment".   Size of the incident and available communications would be major factors as well.   In the major of cases, prudent judgment would preclude the IC being on-scene unless there was a mobile command post set up.

[davidsinn]

IC's have no business being in the search or DR area.  At most a branch director or strike team leader could be out there.

IC's are not supposed to be involved in tactics.  Of course you can make up all sorts of ultra-tiny missions where the IC is also one of the UDF team members or something, but then we probably don't have a need for comms to start with. We're talking about common sense here.  Want some ICS?

Look where it tells you the ICP should be - and the IC belongs in there.

One common failing of CAP IC's is being "on the ground" instead of being in the office discussing SMART objectives.

What he said.

There is no regulation to back me up merely common sense. I just took ICS300 last month so it's still fresh in my mind. Yes in other ES organizations the IC is first on scene but his job on an expanding incident is to set up an ICP that is outside the incident area and manage, not perform the mission.

Yes in the rear with the gear is somewhat insulting but that doesn't make it any less true. A ground team is the pointy end of the stick. The IC is at the back providing the thrust with the GBD being the guiding hand.

[wuzafuzz]

Since the subject of this thread is interoperability:  I'm no IC but I'll go out on a limb and suggest that interoperability will be best served by having the CAP IC at or near the mission base or ICP.   Close to those other agency IC's or liaisons. 

It might not be required in our regulations, but would seem to make a whole heap of sense.

[NavLT]

Interoperatbility is by definition the ability of more than one organization to work together with some cohesion.  The location of the ICP, the location of the Staff, The locaiton of the IC, the Radio carried by a team are all small factors that effect interoperability.  The only way to find out if you can work together with cohesion (in buisness substitute ROI) is to practice doing so and find out where it does not work/why and fix the issues. 

As an IC out side of CAP (merely a OSC in CAP) how involved the IC gets at a mission is a great thread to have in another posting because some best practices about that whole ICS (type 1, type 2, type 3, type 4 and type 5) sizing of an incident dictates how ICS system responds.  Type 1 incidents the IC is on site because the ICP is his car.......Type 5 indicents you cannot even see the smoke from the fire usually.

911, Katrina, Hugo, Andrew, Earthquakes in Haiti..... It gets thrown in our faces every year that figuring out how it should work on paper is a good first step but failing to test the plan until the mess happens usually results in lost lives, lost property and wasted $$$$.


Practice Practice Practice!

"Perfect practice makes perfect, not just practice" so we need to work on improving our practice.

V/R
LT J.

[wuzafuzz]

^^^  :clap: :clap: :clap:

[ammotrucker]

That seems funny to me, as I was just at a training event Sponsered by the state in which the only way that most of the ground teams could talk to CAP aircraft was on the AV band VHF.  If we are put in the same position of talking to there aircraft for support AV VHF may be the only way.

How about CAP radios?

How would you like to explain how to talk to Fish and Wildlife on a CAP radio?  While they are transmitting on 800MHz

[davidsinn]

That seems funny to me, as I was just at a training event Sponsered by the state in which the only way that most of the ground teams could talk to CAP aircraft was on the AV band VHF.  If we are put in the same position of talking to there aircraft for support AV VHF may be the only way.

How about CAP radios?

How would you like to explain how to talk to Fish and Wildlife on a CAP radio?  While they are transmitting on 800MHz

You don't. You put a CAP GTM with an ROA card with the F&W team.

[sardak]

Type 1 incidents the IC is on site because the ICP is his car.......Type 5 incidents you cannot even see the smoke from the fire usually.

Check your numbers. A Type 1 is a federal level incident and a Type 5 is a single tree smoldering from a lightning hit.

I'm no IC but I'll go out on a limb and suggest that interoperability will be best served by having the CAP IC at or near the mission base or ICP.  Close to those other agency IC's or liaisons.  It might not be required in our regulations, but would seem to make a whole heap of sense.

On small incidents (5, maybe 4), ICS doesn't prohibit the IC from being in the field. If the incident is big enough to have an ICP, then yes, that's where the IC is supposed to be per ICS. If the incident is big enough to have multiple ICs, agency reps and liaison officers, then you need to have a unified command going. Unfortunately, unified command isn't carried out well very often - because it doesn't happen very often. As stated, practice, practice, practice. The classic case is the fire IC being interviewed in front of the fire ICP explaining how the law enforcement IC is in the LE ICP is down the street.

As for interoperability in its intended sense - comm - SAR in general, not necessarily CAP, has had to learn to make it work more often then most agencies. SAR teams have to deal with hams, local law and fire, park rangers, aircraft, and various federal agencies, so they often have more diverse communications capabilities than the other groups. "Frequency agile" is a term not heard much anymore. It's become "radio agile."

Mike

[CommGeek]

Doesn't work that way!

  Have you ever seen the Fire Dept driving around with a Sheriff in the engine so they can talk to the cops?
Or the FBI driving around with the local Police so they can talk?

FWC Teams have 2 people, in a pickup truck with only 2 seats...

Same issue for the National Guard... Civilians (CAP) cant ride in a HUMMVEE!   

And its not practical.....

Were not in the old days anymore guys.  The bottom line is if we cant talk, we need to take a back seat and give up on DR!

[arajca]

1. This topic is currently being discussed among the DCs, DCS/Comm, and National. It is fairly lengthy email discussion.

2. There is a reason why there are INTEROPERABILITY CHANNELS. No one makes a radio that can have every frequency programmed into it. Most agencies buy radios that have enough channels for their day-to-day needs and mutual aid and/or interoperability channels, but not many extra channels.

3. Part of the COML's (the rest-of-the-world designation for Comm Unit Ldr) job is developing a comm plan for an incident. Part of this process involves finding out what bands everyone operates on and how to cross-band communicate. Not often an easy task.

4. Sometimes, it may be necessary to embed CAP personnel with other agencies for this purpose.

5. While we, as an organization, need to be able to communicate with other agencies, individual members generally don't. On large incidents, each agency uses its own channels to talk to their own people and mutual aid or inter op channels to talk to other people.

[Slim]

Doesn't work that way!

  Have you ever seen the Fire Dept driving around with a Sheriff in the engine so they can talk to the cops?

They don't have to.  Chances are that the sheriff's dispatcher is sitting in the same room as the fire department dispatcher.

Or the FBI driving around with the local Police so they can talk?

Historically, the FBI doesn't talk to anybody anyway.

FWC Teams have 2 people, in a pickup truck with only 2 seats...

Assume you're referring to Florida Fish and Wildlife cops (we have something similar here, we call them critter cops).

Same issue for the National Guard... Civilians (CAP) cant ride in a HUMMVEE!

Guess someone should tell all those guardsmen on the east coast who were transporting civilian cops and EMS to calls, and transporting hospital staff so they could get to work, and even taking patients to hospitals that they can't transport lowly civilians in their vehicles.

And its not practical.....

Were not in the old days anymore guys.  The bottom line is if we cant talk, we need to take a back seat and give up on DR!

We can talk just fine within our own organization, and back to the ICP/EOC, just like all those other agencies are doing.

[CommGeek]

I give up!   you guys just don't get it!   When EVERYONE ELSE can talk to all the players, we are the ONLY ones that cant talk, we have problems!

I am very familiar with the COM-L , I happen to be a COM-L instructor!   you can not even begin to compare a CAP CUL to a COM-L,  its like comparing a little league team to a pro team!

[wuzafuzz]

I give up!   you guys just don't get it!   When EVERYONE ELSE can talk to all the players, we are the ONLY ones that cant talk, we have problems!

I am very familiar with the COM-L , I happen to be a COM-L instructor!   you can not even begin to compare a CAP CUL to a COM-L,  its like comparing a little league team to a pro team!

We get it.  Some of us just disagree with some of your statements. Chill Dude.

I've participated in some real-world DR where CAP could barely talk to CAP.  We still made a valuable contribution to the overall effort.  Was that ideal?  Of course not.  Is there room for improvement?  Yes.  Do we have an epic fail if we ALL can't talk to everyone else?  No.

We need to do the best we can with the money and resources available to us.

[PHall]

I give up!   you guys just don't get it!   When EVERYONE ELSE can talk to all the players, we are the ONLY ones that cant talk, we have problems!

I am very familiar with the COM-L , I happen to be a COM-L instructor!   you can not even begin to compare a CAP CUL to a COM-L,  its like comparing a little league team to a pro team!

Maybe you should leave CAP. Wouldn't want you ruining your reputation by being associated with a bunch of amateurs who can't even talk to each other.

[CommGeek]

if we keep it up thats what the NON-CAP  types will label us as!

Bottom line is if we are going to play with the real guys, we need to act like them, and be equipped like them!

[arajca]

The thing is NOT EVERYONE ELSE can talk to everyone. In the big cities where the feds have dropped lots of money for interop, they're pretty good at it. Away from there, not so good, especially working across different bands. Many rural areas are real good at communicating between agencies since they are usually on the same channels and may even be part of multiple agencies, i.e. the fire chief (vol) is a capt (paid) on the sheriff's department. Many rural areas have improved their systems and operational capabilities to where CAP was several years ago, but still have a ways to go to get to where we are now. Not only in terms of equipment, but also capabilities, training, and planning.

The feds have finally realized that PLANNING and TRAINING are as important, if not more, than equipment. There are rural agencies that have been given several thousand dollars worth of equipment for "Interoperability" but have not been given any training. The equipment sits in the factory boxes, unused, because of this. No one figured on providing training during any times other than M-F, 8-5, which is typically when the volunteers are working. Then they are told the training would take 20+ hours.

Until comms stops being in the top ten serious issues at disasters (whcih it has been for the past 30+ years) even for paid agencies, quit whining about how CAP can't do what paid fire, police, ems, etc, departments can't do with budgets (and grants) significantly larger than CAP's budget.

BTW, despite it's flaws, CAP's system is not the retched mess you seem to think it is. I'm a retired vol fire fighter and I know the folks I ran with would have killed for a system as good as CAP's - and their system was one of the better non-metropolitan systems around.

[Slim]

We get it just fine.  In fact, I've been getting it for 25 years as a CAP communicator, almost 20 as a HAM, and 20 as a public safety professional out there doing it every day.  My experience working many incidents-both CAP and in my job-is that I don't need to be able to talk to the cops, or the FBI, or the critter cops, as long as I can talk to the dispatcher (in CAP's case, the MRO), incident commander, or whatever ICS title may be given to the head cheese in charge of me, who is responsible for my movements and activities.

if we keep it up thats what the NON-CAP  types will label us as!

Being called an amateur would be among the more mild titles if an untrained CAP communicator who doesn't speak the lingo, is given the task of trying to communicate with a public safety agency on their radio/frequency.  Been there, done that (I've been known to forget which radio I have in my hand from time to time, as has anyone else who gets paid to talk on radios for a living).

Bottom line is if we are going to play with the real guys, we need to act like them, and be equipped like them!

No, we don't need to act like them.  We need to act like what we are, a dedicated group of unpaid professionals trained perform certain tasks.  And, we are equipped like them.  While I find the EFJ radios (and even my personal stuff) to be a step back from the HAM gear we used to use, this equipment is the same grade/quality as the public safety professionals.  They're like bricks with a PHD button and a few other controls.