My BBDU experiment: after two years, I be done with this nonsense

Started by NM SAR, September 24, 2013, 05:45:46 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RiverAux

Quote from: Eclipse on September 25, 2013, 11:07:54 PM
If and when something similar happens in regards to GTs, then you can make the case.

Oh, I didn't realize that we weren't supposed to propose ideas to reduce risks to our personnel and our missions until after something happens.  Must have missed that in all the monthly safety briefings. 

Although to be clear, my idea is based about 75% on making sure we can get the mission done and about 25% on reducing risk.  Most of the time fat people slow you down

Eclipse

Quote from: RiverAux on September 25, 2013, 11:30:21 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on September 25, 2013, 11:07:54 PM
If and when something similar happens in regards to GTs, then you can make the case.

Oh, I didn't realize that we weren't supposed to propose ideas to reduce risks to our personnel and our missions until after something happens.  Must have missed that in all the monthly safety briefings. 

Although to be clear, my idea is based about 75% on making sure we can get the mission done and about 25% on reducing risk.  Most of the time fat people slow you down

Now you're just being mean.  Yes, I see those briefings all the time, they are mostly irrelevant and time-wasting as well.
(BTW - I just completing my test on "fainting", so I will be prepared if ABUs are ever approved...)

When you propose an idea, you have to have some relevent factual basis for the proposal.  You have zero to indicate any
specific risk which be mitigated in a CAP context.  The one guy you were involved with wasn't even a member.

From a relevent statistical point of view we have lost far more aircrews during missions and training then ground team members.

"That Others May Zoom"

Luis R. Ramos

Eclipse, safety briefings a waste of time? Irrelevant???

???

My experience with the Safety Officer of the past two squadrons have been with a pilot who is the Safety Officer. All his briefings are on flight safety. Every time he gives a briefing to the squadrons, there are no pilots present. Meanwhile we have a room full of cadets and senior members who are or want to become ground team members.

Yep. No safety briefs related to ground operations.

Could have made some. Something on Blood-borne pathogens. Cold and Hot-weather injuries. Sterile cockpit applied to travel in vans - here is a particular one that could be applied to both air and ground ops! Checking a vehicle prior to travel. Radio room safety...

And that safety officer is well - regarded in both squadrons, so trying to suggest he do otherwise is pretty much like shooting myself in the foot.. I do esteem him. He is a nice guy, knows his stuff, I seem to remember I processed his application a long time ago. And presents his briefings in a funny way! Yet, if he delivers a safety briefing that is doubtful whether it will be used by someone in the near or distant future... Not saying it is a waste of time, we all end becoming safety current...

:P

Flyer
Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer

SunDog

This uniform contretemps is new to me, even after a long time in CAP; I was of the mind that we sure seemed to have a lot of options. I just gravitated to what people wore in my sqdn.

We tend to wear corporate blue (BBDU, blue flightsuits, polo shirts). Rarely, someone will be in a USAF combo, for a special event, say. I haven't ever perceived a bias concerning uniform selection, no negative connontation applied to one, as opposed to another. Maybe I just didn't pick up on it. . .

Maybe NHQ could approve a "Wing experiment year", and have a trial of several GT combos, based on the lessons learned to-date? Approve the  "winner", and pick one to "expire" in it's place - slowly, over a few years, to stay out of the GT's wallets/purses? Some $$$ loss for the volunteer participants, but they'd know that going in. . .Just saying, an idle thought - don't explode on me; I ain't GT!

Non-GT side, leave it as-is? Sounds like some folks are really attached to the USAF uniforms. Others, not so much, or don't care. Live and let live? And if you perceive a personal bias directed against your choice, tell 'em to . . .







Eclipse

Quote from: flyer333555 on September 26, 2013, 12:08:41 AM
Eclipse, safety briefings a waste of time? Irrelevant???

???

My experience with the Safety Officer of the past two squadrons have been with a pilot who is the Safety Officer. All his briefings are on flight safety. Every time he gives a briefing to the squadrons, there are no pilots present. Meanwhile we have a room full of cadets and senior members who are or want to become ground team members.

Yep. No safety briefs related to ground operations.

Could have made some. Something on Blood-borne pathogens. Cold and Hot-weather injuries. Sterile cockpit applied to travel in vans - here is a particular one that could be applied to both air and ground ops! Checking a vehicle prior to travel. Radio room safety...

And that safety officer is well - regarded in both squadrons, so trying to suggest he do otherwise is pretty much like shooting myself in the foot.. I do esteem him. He is a nice guy, knows his stuff, I seem to remember I processed his application a long time ago. And presents his briefings in a funny way! Yet, if he delivers a safety briefing that is doubtful whether it will be used by someone in the near or distant future... Not saying it is a waste of time, we all end becoming safety current...

:P

Flyer

Amazing - I had a similar experience in my first unit - far too many hours spent watching Shorty's videos about deicing boots.

Seriously.

"That Others May Zoom"

cap235629

Quote from: flyer333555 on September 26, 2013, 12:08:41 AM
Eclipse, safety briefings a waste of time? Irrelevant???


No but redundancy breeds irrelevancy.  Things are getting ridiculous......
Bill Hobbs, Major, CAP
Arkansas Certified Emergency Manager
Tabhair 'om póg, is Éireannach mé

Private Investigator

Quote from: RiverAux on September 25, 2013, 08:27:25 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on September 25, 2013, 07:03:22 PM
What about aircrew that are so heavy they force the 4th member out of the plane?

Goose and Gander.

Well, thats a little more variable.  Under some situations the heavy member(s) isn't/aren't a problem. 

Not sure I've ever actually seen 4 adults in a CAP plane.

C206   8)

Private Investigator

Quote from: NM SAR on September 24, 2013, 05:45:46 AM
Pros of the BBDU:

  • Boonie cover is authorized.

Cons of the BBDU:

  • Stigma: in NM Wing, at least, the BBDU has always been relegated to members who don't meet the weight and grooming standards

BBDU biggest plus for me is the boonie cap. That is just practical headwear for many reasons. BBDU is just more practical for Senior Members due to H/W issues.

Everyone wants to go to ABUs and that includes some 300 pounders too.  ::)

Panache

Quote from: RogueLeader on September 25, 2013, 10:23:13 PM

Maybe in your neck of the woods. . .

Out here in Wyoming is another story.

Last actual GT mission I was on, we had no choice but to hike up 2,500 ft elevation change to GET to the search altitude on trails that went from decent to moderate, to rough, to really rough, to there isn't any trail but our own.

Speaking as somebody who has worked as a LEO in both the PA Game and Fish & Boat commissions, I can tell you this assumption doesn't fly.

I've seen hunters and fishermen who would generously be described as "obese" easily (for them) trek through very rough terrain either in search of the perfect hunting and/or fishing spot or avoid being observed by Law Enforcement (sometimes both).  Height/Weight have little to do with it.  Familiarity with the terrain and being acclimated with the area makes all the difference.

RogueLeader

Quote from: Panache on September 26, 2013, 08:59:11 AM
Quote from: RogueLeader on September 25, 2013, 10:23:13 PM

Maybe in your neck of the woods. . .

Out here in Wyoming is another story.

Last actual GT mission I was on, we had no choice but to hike up 2,500 ft elevation change to GET to the search altitude on trails that went from decent to moderate, to rough, to really rough, to there isn't any trail but our own.

Speaking as somebody who has worked as a LEO in both the PA Game and Fish & Boat commissions, I can tell you this assumption doesn't fly.

I've seen hunters and fishermen who would generously be described as "obese" easily (for them) trek through very rough terrain either in search of the perfect hunting and/or fishing spot or avoid being observed by Law Enforcement (sometimes both).  Height/Weight have little to do with it.  Familiarity with the terrain and being acclimated with the area makes all the difference.

I'm not arguing that.  You are absolutely right.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 25, 2013, 09:45:46 PM

The vast majority of CAP ground ops are no more strenuous then your average picnic or campout.  Anything more is likely busting ORM.


This is what I disagree with.

"Most" people don't hike to the top of a 10,400 foot mountain for a picnic or camp out.  Some do.  most don't.

I'm in fairly decent shape, not like I was in my Real MilitaryTM days; and it was a little rough.
WYWG DP

GRW 3340

Eclipse

Quote from: RogueLeader on September 26, 2013, 02:24:24 PM"Most" people don't hike to the top of a 10,400 foot mountain for a picnic or camp out.  Some do.  most don't.

Most wings don't have mountains at all, and the number of times anyone from CAP is hiking to the top of one for a mission is statistically zero.
Also, this is what ORM is for.

"That Others May Zoom"

RiverAux

Its not just mountains.  Try heat, thick ground vegetation, etc.

I'm pretty confident in saying that most obese people are not fit.  Yeah, there are those few weird bodybuilder types that mess up height/weight and BMI and sure there are probably some outdoors types that actually can do some serious field work, ,but they are by far the exception in the US, not the rule.

Unfit people are a liability on any ground team mission.  Probably not going to die on us, but sure decrease mission effectiveness. 

Eclipse

Quote from: RiverAux on September 26, 2013, 03:46:58 PMUnfit people are a liability on any ground team mission.  Probably not going to die on us, but sure decrease mission effectiveness.

Yeah, I'll say it.  Cite, please.

Relevant to CAP experience, not just generic assumptions, because in my experience, the majority of people in ES could "lose a few", including and especially the cadets,
and I've never seen an issue directly related to obesity in ground ops.  Our membership pool is couch-riding Americans, and that majority now, "could lose a few".

We don't do jungle, we don't do austere, and we have ORM.  If you're off-trail it's fairly unusual on a real mission and almost unheard of in training.  Cornfields don't count.

Most of our missions are point-to-point in a vehicle, wander around a bit, back in the vehicle.

"That Others May Zoom"

RiverAux

Oh, I get it now.  Because so many of our folks are fat the average ground team movement speed is already degraded to the point that we don't need to worry about it getting worse by keeping obese folks on the team. 

If it is unusual for your ground teams to get off-trail in training, then you're pencil-whipping your training. 

Eclipse

If it were anyone else I'd chalk it up to "doesn't know what he's talking about", but you do, so you must just be typing to make your point.

There is zero evidence that fitness has ever been a limiting factor in CAP ground ops. Certainly none if you are including the reasonable mean
and not just those who have to unload their Rascal before they can lead the team.  Cite it if you have it.
Further, since we have ORM and work well outside the "golden hour", movement speed isn't really a factor, anyway.

There is nothing on a GT SQTR that requires getting into heavy brush.  Nothing.  And further CAP-USAF doctrine for SARExs requires they keep
to marked trails and similar.  Certainly if the situation warrants it, we'll go there.  It rarely does.

The one person you're basing the assumption on wasn't even in CAP, yet now you're trying to assert this is a CAP problem, despite zero experiential
evidence.  If there was, there'd be plenty of 78s in this regard.  I can point to the ones about hangar rash, cadet antics, and tow bars, but can't recall anything
ever reported that was related to fitness issues on a GT.

Lastly, if CAP actually did this, especially to the point you wanted which is anyone who can't wear camo is off a GT, then it would basically
shut down CAP ground ES that day.

Is there an increased risk?  Maybe, but then again Jim Fixx had heart attack while he was jogging, didn't he?
So my skinny jogger statistically balances your fat SAR dude.  Back to zero.

ORM is about evaluating likely risk, not "every possible risk".


"That Others May Zoom"

RiverAux

You can't meet CAP GT training requirements without going off trail.  If CAP-USAF has a "doctrine" requiring trail usage, I'd like to see it. 

All search is an emergency and our GTs most certainly can be working in situations where speed is a factor.  Remember, GT work isn't just looking for planes that crashed a week ago. 

Eclipse

Quote from: RiverAux on September 26, 2013, 06:17:39 PM
You can't meet CAP GT training requirements without going off trail. 

Cite please.

There are no tasks which require going off-trail.

You can meet al the requirements in both letter and spirit at your local city park (though if you poop in the sandbox you'll probably get a ticket.

"That Others May Zoom"

johnnyb47

I'm curious what you both mean by "obese".
Are we talking BMI chart definition or visual, "DAAAAANG!!!!" scale?

At 5'11" im technically obese by BMI scale standards yet just barely within CAP H/W standards to wear the AF uniforms (unless I had a big breakfast... then I'm over)
Capt
Information Technology Officer
Communications Officer


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

NIN

Quote from: Eclipse on September 26, 2013, 06:42:35 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on September 26, 2013, 06:17:39 PM
You can't meet CAP GT training requirements without going off trail. 

Cite please.

There are no tasks which require going off-trail.

You can meet al the requirements in both letter and spirit at your local city park (though if you poop in the sandbox you'll probably get a ticket.

Uh, its been awhile I admit since I was a GTL, but whether or not there is a task for it doesn't mean that you don't do it.

There are a LOT of places where GT is a LOT more strenuous than the picnic at the park, BTW.

There are some places here where the elevation difference between where you can park the van and where the target is located is probably 3x the entire terrain variation in the State of Illinois.

Just sayin'.
Darin Ninness, Col, CAP
I have no responsibilities whatsoever
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2007-2024 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

Eclipse

Quote from: NIN on September 26, 2013, 06:45:51 PM
Uh, its been awhile I admit since I was a GTL, but whether or not there is a task for it doesn't mean that you don't do it.

I don't disagree, but we're not talking about "extra". River said if you stay on trail, you're whipping GT.  Not true.

I prefer and strongly advocate doing the compass taskings at our local orienteering course that offers just about every type of terrain you can imagine, but you can also fully accomplish it in an airport parking lot or your local forest preserve.

Quote from: NIN on September 26, 2013, 06:45:51 PM
There are a LOT of places where GT is a LOT more strenuous than the picnic at the park, BTW.

There are some places here where the elevation difference between where you can park the van and where the target is located is probably 3x the entire terrain variation in the State of Illinois.

I agree that there's plenty of "other" and "extra" you can and should do if you want to be an effective GTM, but it isn't required.  And on the mean or average, this country is pretty flat, not to mention that we don't generally get called for ground missions in more challenging areas for all the complex reasons
of the world of CAP.   Further to that, your average EMA or adhoc SARTech team is more likely to meet at
Dunkin Donuts then World gym.

"That Others May Zoom"