How to communicate latitude and longitude

[RiverAux]

Actually, using UTMs would probably reduce the problem that is the topic of this thread since you would be using two numbers each with a different number of digits in them and with no decimal points.  Communicating those would be easier than dealing with latitude and longitude.

But, I don't think the comm issue is a big enough problem to be worth trying to make that change and in any case getting the pilots to use them would be a losing battle. 

[mynetdude]

Actually, using UTMs would probably reduce the problem that is the topic of this thread since you would be using two numbers each with a different number of digits in them and with no decimal points.  Communicating those would be easier than dealing with latitude and longitude.

But, I don't think the comm issue is a big enough problem to be worth trying to make that change and in any case getting the pilots to use them would be a losing battle.

Not only would getting pilots to use them be a battle, UTM sounds like a better idea because we are instructed to encode the coordinates to protect the location of the find (crash, lost person, etc) would the media not be able to decipher UTM?

[RiverAux]

UTMs aren't that special.  Pretty easy to plug them into google earth.  Might fool them for a bit, but they would catch on. 

[mynetdude]

UTMs aren't that special.  Pretty easy to plug them into google earth.  Might fool them for a bit, but they would catch on.

So UTM would need to be encoded as well, can't see that a hard thing to do as its already done to Lat/Long

But for argument's sake I prefer Lat/Long LOL

[sardak]

If written and/or read correctly, both the easting and northing in UTM have the same number of digits. The leading zeros are supposed to be used. The difference between UTM and MGRS/USNG coordinates is the use of letters to replace numbers for the million and hundred thousand digits in the latter. The reason being to cut down on the long string of numbers.

I agree that the first time or two UTM coordinates are used they might catch the media off guard, but after that they'll figure it out.  Besides, this whole concern about coding locations is unneeded.

Just as an historical note, one of the original ground team tasks when they were created in 1999 was O-0208 Locate a Point on a Map Using UTM. It was required for GTL and UDF. The task was dropped in the 2004 version of CAPR 60-3.

Mike

[mynetdude]

If written and/or read correctly, both the easting and northing in UTM have the same number of digits. The leading zeros are supposed to be used. The difference between UTM and MGRS/USNG coordinates is the use of letters to replace numbers for the million and hundred thousand digits in the latter. The reason being to cut down on the long string of numbers.

I agree that the first time or two UTM coordinates are used they might catch the media off guard, but after that they'll figure it out.  Besides, this whole concern about coding locations is unneeded.

Just as an historical note, one of the original ground team tasks when they were created in 1999 was O-0208 Locate a Point on a Map Using UTM. It was required for GTL and UDF. The task was dropped in the 2004 version of CAPR 60-3.

Mike

2004? Guess I wasn't lucky enough to join CAP then, I still regret having not joined CAP before 2006.

If there is no need to encode coordinates why do we have instructions to do so in certain situations?

[RiverAux]

Just as an historical note, one of the original ground team tasks when they were created in 1999 was O-0208 Locate a Point on a Map Using UTM. It was required for GTL and UDF. The task was dropped in the 2004 version of CAPR 60-3.

Darn, I should have remembered that.  But, that still doesn't absolve the guy who was trying to get us to use them back in the late 80s...

[lordmonar]

We don't bother to encode the coordinates.

1) Too confusing
2) Too time consuming
3) Makes ground to air coordination next to impossible.

[desertengineer1]

We don't bother to encode the coordinates.

1) Too confusing
2) Too time consuming
3) Makes ground to air coordination next to impossible.

Let's just call it a Duck here...

We can't get current Ground Team and Aircrew to do it accurately and correct as it is.  The outcome of adding more levels is obvious.

It would be nice to have such ability, but that's an optimization - only after the basic proficiency is taken care of.

If I can't get them to recognize the error in N 98 122.23, I'm not going to try anything beyond the basics.

[lordmonar]

The major problem in application is that the ground team does not know the pilots CAP ID and the aircrew does not know the ground team leaders.

Niether one of them have an decode application like they have on the the IMU.

Now if they did it with a WOD (word of the day) that would be given out with the comm breifing and could be changed as needed (say it get compromised) then it would go much smoother.

Either way....I don't agree with the need to keep locations that secure.  If the press is listeining in (and they are) they also have the ability to just follow us along as well.

The added security is off set by how complicated it makes the reporting system.

[a2capt]

One thing we've done, and still do, when it's been established that the base or whomever we are reporting to knows where we are, from the start- like you briefed and were assigned Grid 264A, and you know that the coordinates are N33, W117, we leave that stuff off. Our communications are going to the base. The base knows where we are when we said we are "in grid" at xx:xx, anyone else that needs to know, was at that briefing, is at the base, or has been briefed.