Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 09, 2018, 02:58:47 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Emergency Services & Operations  |  Topic: No mo' Ground Team Alpha?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 [All] Print
Author Topic: No mo' Ground Team Alpha?  (Read 2099 times)
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,328

« on: September 19, 2018, 05:58:02 PM »

Last mission I was told CAP now uses numerical designators vs. alpha for Ground Teams.

IOW "This is Ground Team one" vs. "This is Ground Team Alpha".

Is this true?  Cite?

Or is the Goode Ider Fairy at work?
Logged


Holding Pattern
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,293
Unit: Worry

« Reply #1 on: September 19, 2018, 06:02:02 PM »

Since 2013 we've only used numerical designations.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,328

« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2018, 06:34:26 PM »

Since 2013 we've only used numerical designations.

I can tell you that's not universal, but what prompted the change?
Logged


Capmonkey
Forum Regular

Posts: 118

« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2018, 06:35:54 PM »

Ever since I've been in (since 2013), it's always been Ground Team Alpha. Just stating my experience  :)
Logged
sardak
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,215

« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2018, 06:41:35 PM »

Quote
Last mission I was told CAP now uses numerical designators vs. alpha for Ground Teams.

IOW "This is Ground Team one" vs. "This is Ground Team Alpha".

Is this true?  Cite?
Cite where the "former rule" about using alpha designators is.  Probably in the same place where it now says to use numerical designators. Just more pulling rabbits out of hats.

Mike
Logged
arajca
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,308

« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2018, 06:52:54 PM »

My experience has been Ground Team One, Two, Three, ad nauseum, since 2005.
Logged
jeders
Global Moderator

Posts: 2,117

« Reply #6 on: September 19, 2018, 07:03:23 PM »

I have never once in 18 years seen, heard, or used Alpha; it's always been 1, 2, 3, etc. for me. But I think on the next SAREX that I'm GBD for I'll use colors.
Logged
If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,328

« Reply #7 on: September 19, 2018, 07:15:05 PM »

Quote
Last mission I was told CAP now uses numerical designators vs. alpha for Ground Teams.

IOW "This is Ground Team one" vs. "This is Ground Team Alpha".

Is this true?  Cite?
Cite where the "former rule" about using alpha designators is.  Probably in the same place where it now says to use numerical designators. Just more pulling rabbits out of hats.

Who said "rule"?  Was just the practice in my region and on the major National real-worlds I'd been on.

Sounds like it's a "local practice" and a wives tail by me.
Logged


NIN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,016
Unit: of issue

« Reply #8 on: September 19, 2018, 07:16:31 PM »

But I think on the next SAREX that I'm GBD for I'll use colors.

Dare you to use My Pretty Pony characters.

"Ground Team Applejack"
"Ground Team Rainbow Dash"
Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2007-2018 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,328

« Reply #9 on: September 19, 2018, 07:17:32 PM »

I have never once in 18 years seen, heard, or used Alpha; it's always been 1, 2, 3, etc. for me. But I think on the next SAREX that I'm GBD for I'll use colors.

Actually, for security, team names now need to be Alpha-Numeric, and contain at least one special character.

"This is Ground Team Delta_Four%&".

And then each message should require 2-factor authentication.
Logged


TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,563

« Reply #10 on: September 19, 2018, 07:19:48 PM »

Under CAPR 100-3, 1.8 Functional Designator Usage, you would use a two-digit numerical suffix if appropriate.

Logged
NIN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,016
Unit: of issue

« Reply #11 on: September 19, 2018, 07:20:17 PM »

<ERROR: Ground Team Name does not contain a numeric character. Please correct entry and resubmit>
Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2007-2018 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,563

« Reply #12 on: September 19, 2018, 07:34:48 PM »

Is "Stinger One-One Actual" out of the question?  8)
Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,349

« Reply #13 on: September 19, 2018, 07:49:49 PM »

Is "Stinger One-One Actual" out of the question?  8)

Yeah, the Air Force doesn't do the "Alpha" thing. That's a Squid thing! >:D
Logged
Nick
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 519
Unit: SWR-TX-001

« Reply #14 on: September 19, 2018, 11:31:36 PM »

Last mission I was told CAP now uses numerical designators vs. alpha for Ground Teams.

IOW "This is Ground Team one" vs. "This is Ground Team Alpha".

Is this true?  Cite?

Or is the Goode Ider Fairy at work?
Our practice around these parts is to use the sortie number as the numerical designator.
Logged
Nicholas McLarty, Lt Col, CAP
Texas Wing Staff Guy
National Cadet Team Guy
Nick
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 519
Unit: SWR-TX-001

« Reply #15 on: September 19, 2018, 11:33:04 PM »

Under CAPR 100-3, 1.8 Functional Designator Usage, you would use a two-digit numerical suffix if appropriate.
One or two digit.
Logged
Nicholas McLarty, Lt Col, CAP
Texas Wing Staff Guy
National Cadet Team Guy
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,328

« Reply #16 on: September 19, 2018, 11:44:30 PM »

So GT25 becomes GT32 later in the day?

I guess that works.
Logged


Nick
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 519
Unit: SWR-TX-001

« Reply #17 on: September 19, 2018, 11:52:34 PM »

So GT25 becomes GT32 later in the day?

I guess that works.
Yeah. It makes it easier to track what their current tasking is, especially when you’re running 7+ staging areas.
Logged
Nicholas McLarty, Lt Col, CAP
Texas Wing Staff Guy
National Cadet Team Guy
GroundHawg
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 607

« Reply #18 on: September 20, 2018, 07:59:31 AM »

I think combining them all is the best plan of action, that way no one gets left out, and we all know how important that is in our society today.

Red 1 Delta

Pink 7 X-ray

Tan 4 Tango

etc....

As a side note, our call out for finds has always been a musician or a band. I think last sarex it was Timberlake....

Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,328

« Reply #19 on: September 20, 2018, 08:24:14 AM »

I think combining them all is the best plan of action, that way no one gets left out, and we all know how important that is in our society today.

Red 1 Delta

Pink 7 X-ray

Tan 4 Tango

etc....

"Alpha Velveeta Knuckle Underwear, you are cleared for takeoff."


As a side note, our call out for finds has always been a musician or a band. I think last sarex it was Timberlake....

This is no longer allowed, either, despite common usage.
Logged


arajca
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,308

« Reply #20 on: September 20, 2018, 10:09:27 AM »

I think combining them all is the best plan of action, that way no one gets left out, and we all know how important that is in our society today.

Red 1 Delta

Pink 7 X-ray

Tan 4 Tango

etc....

"Alpha Velveeta Knuckle Underwear, you are cleared for takeoff."


As a side note, our call out for finds has always been a musician or a band. I think last sarex it was Timberlake....

This is no longer allowed, either, despite common usage.
Since someone will ask, here's the cite:
Quote from: CAPR 100-3, Para 2.12.10
2.12.10. Use of locally created pro-words, or agency codes from other services such as law
enforcement 10-codes and “signal” codes, Q-Codes or other amateur radio terminology, and other
shorthand terminology not in this regulation.
Logged
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,563

« Reply #21 on: September 20, 2018, 10:13:01 AM »

"Alpha Velveeta Knuckle Underwear, you are cleared for takeoff."

I just freaking lost it in the office
Logged
THRAWN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,899

« Reply #22 on: September 20, 2018, 10:28:44 AM »

"Alpha Velveeta Knuckle Underwear, you are cleared for takeoff."

The first HOT SHOTS quote of the day! And probably the last.....
Logged
Strup
"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
audiododd
Member

Posts: 61
Unit: SWR-AZ-083

« Reply #23 on: September 28, 2018, 02:15:43 AM »

I think combining them all is the best plan of action, that way no one gets left out, and we all know how important that is in our society today.

Red 1 Delta

Pink 7 X-ray

Tan 4 Tango

etc....

"Alpha Velveeta Knuckle Underwear, you are cleared for takeoff."


Nice Hot Shots! reference  :D
Logged
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,659

« Reply #24 on: September 28, 2018, 02:59:37 PM »

So GT25 becomes GT32 later in the day?

I guess that works.
Yeah. It makes it easier to track what their current tasking is, especially when you’re running 7+ staging areas.
The only problem I can see with that, is that it does not follow the same rule as aircraft.   CP1234 is always CAPFLIGHT 34 no matter what the sortie number.   Now that may not be set in stone anywhere but that's they do it in NVWG.

Having said that....the way the air force does it...is by mission number.    REDRUM 11 is the first sortie of the day for the REDRUM squadron.   Tail 123 might fly 2-3 sorties in a day  and it would be REDRUM 11 on the first sortie and REDRUM 14 on the second (REDRUM 12 and 13 being flown by other sorties)....and if they are standard mission they would repeat the cycle again the next day.

It is a six of one half dozen of the other sort of thing.
It would be nice to be consistant and maybe do it the same way in every wing....but at the end of the day.....so long and mission base and the actual teams know who is who....it does not really matter that much.
Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,328

« Reply #25 on: September 28, 2018, 04:37:48 PM »

CP1234 is always CAPFLIGHT 34 no matter what the sortie number.   Now that may not be set in stone anywhere but that's they do it in NVWG.

CAP aircraft callsigns haven't used "flight" for at least 4-5 years, probably longer.
CAPR 100-1, Page 29:
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R100_001_162D77B8183A1.pdf
"7.13.3. Aircraft Call Signs. CAP corporate aircraft use the call sign “CAP” (pronounced
“kap”) plus a three or four-digit number at all times, except as provided in para. 7.13.3.3. and 7.13.3.4. below."


As I recall the change occurred when the airline using it went out of business.

Edit: Actually 2009 http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=9097.0

« Last Edit: September 28, 2018, 04:48:32 PM by Eclipse » Logged


NovemberWhiskey
Recruit

Posts: 24
Unit: NER-NY-301

« Reply #26 on: September 28, 2018, 04:59:49 PM »

The only problem I can see with that, is that it does not follow the same rule as aircraft. ... Now that may not be set in stone anywhere but that's they do it in NVWG.
It is essentially set in stone, the only permitted use of a functional designator by CAP aircraft is "Highbird" - refer CAPR 100-1 para 7.13.3.4.

I can see why you wouldn't want the pilot/observer to have to keep switching between callsigns depending on whether they're talking to ATC on the air-band radio or a ground-team on the CAP frequencies.
Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,349

« Reply #27 on: September 28, 2018, 07:21:00 PM »

The only problem I can see with that, is that it does not follow the same rule as aircraft. ... Now that may not be set in stone anywhere but that's they do it in NVWG.


Maybe NVWG needs to check the reg to make sure they're doing it right.
Logged
Vegas1972
Member

Posts: 66
Unit: PCR-NV

« Reply #28 on: September 28, 2018, 09:39:10 PM »

The only problem I can see with that, is that it does not follow the same rule as aircraft. ... Now that may not be set in stone anywhere but that's they do it in NVWG.


Maybe NVWG needs to check the reg to make sure they're doing it right.

I’ve been in NVWG for 3 years and have never heard capflight xx ...it’s always been CAPxx since I’ve been here.   I think it was just a mistype molehill that’s being turned into a mountain. 
Logged
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid.", Sgt. John M. Stryker.
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,726

« Reply #29 on: September 28, 2018, 09:44:09 PM »

I have been in CAP for 24 years or so and initially I used CAPFlightXXXX (pronounced CAPFlitexxxx).

About 15 years ago or so it changed to CAPXXXX.
Logged
Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
Vegas1972
Member

Posts: 66
Unit: PCR-NV

« Reply #30 on: September 28, 2018, 09:59:50 PM »

I have been in CAP for 24 years or so and initially I used CAPFlightXXXX (pronounced CAPFlitexxxx).

About 15 years ago or so it changed to CAPXXXX.f

Yep.  That was established 3 or 4 posts ago. 
Logged
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid.", Sgt. John M. Stryker.
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,502
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #31 on: September 28, 2018, 10:34:39 PM »

I have been in CAP for 24 years or so and initially I used CAPFlightXXXX (pronounced CAPFlitexxxx).

About 15 years ago or so it changed to CAPXXXX.
To be specific - CAPR 100-3 (C1) 24 MARCH 2010
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,328

« Reply #32 on: September 28, 2018, 11:22:52 PM »

Does >anyone< read anything but the last post in a thread anymore?
Logged


Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,726

« Reply #33 on: September 29, 2018, 06:45:29 AM »

Nope.

That WAS the reason for what I wrote. In the SAME tone that person wrote. Apparently HE or SHE missed the message of "three or four posts ago..."

I could swear that today's media makes more people reacting rather than thinking about what they just read...

Logged
Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,726

« Reply #34 on: September 29, 2018, 07:11:55 AM »

This happens in part I think because in a thread, you are not reading consecutively. You are reading it in interrupted periods.

You read several messages. Several days pass. You come back and read only the latest responses, and forget what was posted before.

In reality, what was "posted three or four messages ago" may have been posted "several days ago" as well so you loose the connection. Unless you start reading the thread from the beginning again you will not remember that what was answered or established "three or four posts ago."


Logged
Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
ol'fido
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,889
Unit: DOTCOTE.

« Reply #35 on: September 29, 2018, 10:00:02 AM »

At our recent WLE, my group had two ground teams in the field. These teams were from two of the squadrons in the group. Because it was a wing level exercise and there might be several ground teams in the field from all over the state, we used unit charters as functional identifiers. One team was Ground Team  061 and one was Ground Team 286. We knew which team was which immediately and which area they were working in. It also prevented confusion with other teams from other groups in the wing. If there were more than one team from a unit, we could use a phonetic suffix such as Ground Team 061 Alpha.
Logged
Lt. Col. Randy L. Mitchell
Historian, Group 1, IL-006
Pages: 1 2 [All] Print 
CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Emergency Services & Operations  |  Topic: No mo' Ground Team Alpha?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.079 seconds with 25 queries.
click here to email me