Drone/UAV/UAS/sUAS Update?

Not against you, Gunsotsu, but addressing CAP in general,

Rant on/

This is EXACTLY the secret-squirrel crap that Members do not like. If they are in Beta testing or have actually signed people off in these new Ops Quals (to include SET's), it should be available for the rank and file Members to see the SQTR at least. Transparency is something CAP is not good at, things like this lead to a 'good ol' boys' club perception by the average Member.

Rant off/

We got a short (but valuable) briefing from the program director two weeks ago at the SER Operations Conference in Montgomery. He briefed the six platforms, the training standards, the legal issues, the funding, and the pending mission sets. There are test units engaged with evaluations. As I understand it, part of the rationale behind the close-hold on the draft quals and standards is that the new mission set includes a mission for the USAF customer to provide a type of SUAS support training, and thus we are still engaged at a national level with the customer as they develop a weapons and tactics approach, which then impacts our CAP quals down stream as we define the KSAs (Knowledge, Skills and Abilities) of our operators, as well as training tasks, conditions, and standards to meet the customers profiles.

It would be inappropriate to conduct such development and discussions openly on a national level, as CAP works to craft a training approach which does not require our people to be cleared/briefed. I understand that this can be frustrating to people who've never been cleared. Please bear with them as "transparency" in national defense isn't always a good thing.

As to the cost element, I hear that concern also, but I see that as somewhat akin to manned CAP sorties which may require a type rating or an instrument ticket... the KSAs are what they are based on the customers determination of their needs.

V/R
Spam

Spam,

I am going to assume that you got this from someone and put it all together to reply, and you have my thanks as it is more than I have heard through official channels.. My reply is not aimed at you but at this topic in general:


"It would be inappropriate to conduct such development and discussions openly on a national level, as CAP works to craft a training approach which does not require our people to be cleared/briefed."

Since when does a CAP mission require a security clearance, or did these people already trained have to submit to one?

" Please bear with them as "transparency" in national defense isn't always a good thing"

We have 3 missions, national defense is not one of them, unless I missed an update. Transparency means that we all train to the same standard with the same material, see below..

"the KSAs are what they are based on the customers determination of their needs."

And yet we have SM's posting on FB that allege to already have these OpsQuals as well as SET status.. What are they and who approved them? If I have some random 1st Lt from Delaware come to my unit to train me without even a 101 card entry, how am I to even check their ability to do so? Should I take their word?

Again, I have no problems with new missions for us, the UAV field is long overdue for our attention. I have a problem with people posting on social media to "contact your DO or Wing Commander for more" when these very Officers have no idea what I am talking about when I just asked them..  perhaps it's a failure on this Wing/Region level? I don't know..

Since when does a CAP mission require a security clearance, or did these people already trained have to submit to one?

While they might not have a named clearance (TS, S, C), the folks who accomplish our CD mission are certainly investigated and cleared to do so.

Agreed, and the requirements are published and made well-known to all..

Apple products not allowed due to DOD specs.

What does DoD have to do with anything? Private corporation and all that. By that logic, why are we authorized to use DJI products? Something (else) stinks about this entire process.

As to the cost element, I hear that concern also, but I see that as somewhat akin to manned CAP sorties which may require a type rating or an instrument ticket... the KSAs are what they are based on the customers determination of their needs.

The problem is, that particular add-on expense does nothing to increase the skill set of an individual already holding a Part 107 certificate.

It’s funny, we complain when CAP releases incomplete solutions (“they just don’t understand!”), and we complain when CAP waits for a solution to be complete and field-ready before releasing it (“those darn secret squirrels and their lack of transparency!”)

Listen guys, this is a national organization, not your local book club. You don’t get to be involved in every single aspect of planning or execution. I would rather have a complete solution delivered ready to go, than a half-baked one delivered too early or locked into an incomplete vision because it was briefed too soon. Honestly, it’s a refreshing change of pace.

Since when does a CAP mission require a security clearance, or did these people already trained have to submit to one?

While they might not have a named clearance (TS, S, C), the folks who accomplish our CD mission are certainly investigated and cleared to do so.

Some members of CAP maintain various access levels and have been used in the past by DoD for certain missions. For example, I recall in 1990/91, CAP flew courier flights from FORSCOMHQ at Fort MacP here in south Atlanta, to SOUTHCOM in Tampa, and back, on a semi-regular basis, under the then-current guidance for cleared couriers. That's one of the open source examples (CAP NEWS, for those who remember it).


Regarding the use of Facebook, or CapTalk, as an authoritative source, I can't but shake my head. That's like complaining about unconfirmed rumors of your active duty unit deployment based on Army or Navy Times articles. Stand by, and await further from higher that will be approved material. And for Gods sake, don't waste personal or especially appropriated funds on training or equipment based on unconfirmed gouge.


For the past 20 years or so, some of us have been predicting (and now are watching) the post FAA TSOC91a ELT collapse of the false alarm justification for our extensive CAP ground team force structure (a reduced need for GTs is in the NHQ Ops Briefs, btw). The SUAS roles and missions discussion is probably "the" key to revitalizing and reinventing a meaningful role for CAP ground ops personnel. Lets not rush to judgment, let the soup cook without too many chefs in the kitchen.


A final thought
Reference:  http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=19695.0;all
Some of y'all may remember I commented on the "White House UAV crash" thread a few years ago. Consider that, even as in World War Two when CAP flew aerial tow targets to help train anti aircraft gunners, CAP of today may have a parallel role in helping train against the SUAS threat. Just as we supported national defense then, we can continue to now, after careful consideration of our limitations and risk assessments of what we'll accept as we safeguard our most important assets: cadet and adult members.


V/r
Spam

Transparency is something CAP is not good at, things like this lead to a 'good ol' boys' club perception by the average Member.

I just reflexively went looking for the upvote button.  Clearly, I spend too much time on Reddit. 

SPAM is on target, in the know, and obviously has the correct info.

Someone mentioned that his Wing folks had no knowledge yet.  This is due to it all being rolled out to just a few Wings at a time. The AF is calling the shots, and is determining which Wings go, in which order. They have their reasons for doing so. Out of CAP's hands. So many of us eager beavers will simply have to be patient.

When the time does come for your Wing to get involved, you'll be a step ahead if: 

• You are an existing Part 107 holder. You have experience in flying something thing similar to a DJI P4P and know the DJI Go4 software. What we will be using is modified for our use and approved by DOD. The software will be run on a supplied Android Tablet. No Apple device.
  
  
• You have verifiable flight records that can be pulled from your device to show experience.
  
  
• Start practicing now in ATTI mode. The ability to fly in ATTI mode will be part of testing to become a sUAS Mission Pilot. Typical missions will be flown in safer GPS mode, but the AF wants to be sure you can still fly safely and not crash, if the unit loses GPS. So practice, practice, practice.
  

Until we hear from our Wings, at least let them know you are qualified and interested, so they can keep a list. After that ..... patience Grasshopper.

Slow Scan, SDIS, ARCHER, GIIEP, etc., etc. Secret squirrel programs artificially limited to a small group
because "reasons", despite the fact that much of it was / is either a science / pet project (business plan)
or consumer tech raised to "magic" by people who don't understand either.

Low / no adoption, orphaned airframes, and lots of lost money and initiative.

The difference here is that the public has already moved on.   No one will care about licenses
when the headlines read "Community teen helps find missing child...".  And there's no
ES or LEA that is waiting for CAP to decide to "do a thing".

I have a $50 FPS UAV in my closet that can go looking for a missing kid, do perimeter photography,
or any of the other things mentioned today. Part 107 is just a value-add like CB and FRS licenses.

With that said, if CAP was serious, they would have already started a program that pushes every
adult member to get their 107 in the next year.  That would change this from a "whatever happened to"
into a "what are you waiting for?".

Fund a consumer UAV for every unit. It would cost under $150k and you'd have a ready force in a year.

Secret squirrel programs artificially limited to a small group....

Patience. The info will all be out here in the next few weeks and months. A few Wings at a time. For anyone who is interested.

Again.  This is ALL from the Air Force.  This is NOT CAP Hdqs personnel playing "black ops secret games".  LOL

The info I've already given on this thread is good advice for anyone wanting to start now, so they will be ready when their Wing starts the program.

No ... every Squadron will not be getting them in the beginning. But we need many sUAS Mission Pilots across each Wing, so that when a mission comes up, someone will be ready to go.

With that said, if CAP was serious, they would have already started a program that pushes every
adult member to get their 107 in the next year.  That would change this from a "whatever happened to"
into a "what are you waiting for?".

Fund a consumer UAV for every unit. It would cost under $150k and you'd have a ready force in a year.

I understand from this thread that the Air Force is slow-walking this for what are probably very good reasons, but I hope that someone at NHQ prints this quote out and puts it on a wall for all to see when Ma Blue gives her blessing to take the program nationwide.

I understand from this thread that the Air Force is slow-walking this for what are probably very good reasons,

Yes.

First, you have to develop the system and find a handful of folks to be the primary trainers.  Those trainers then have to hold schools for a few wings at a time, to train new trainers, who can then go their their respective Wings, and start training other folks. While the original trainers are then holding school for the next few Wings.

Imagine scheduling all that. Just to get a handful of folks in each Wing trained. And then they have to schedule training back in their home states. These things take time.

With that said, if CAP was serious, they would have already started a program that pushes every
adult member to get their 107 in the next year.  That would change this from a "whatever happened to"
into a "what are you waiting for?".

Fund a consumer UAV for every unit. It would cost under $150k and you'd have a ready force in a year.

I understand from this thread that the Air Force is slow-walking this for what are probably very good reasons, but I hope that someone at NHQ prints this quote out and puts it on a wall for all to see when Ma Blue gives her blessing to take the program nationwide.

Eclipse I would respectfully disagree. 150K would not even get you a single fully missionized system for each Wing, let alone each unit. Remember we're looking at 6K cameras, LIDAR, IR, and DF packages (field portable, all). Blowing 150K just to get toys (and yeah, at 150K, they'd be toys for that many) has been done before. Remember the cheap RC airplanes handed out about ten years ago and probably every one of them was crashed within six months? An approach to make sure that we're treating tax payer funded assets carefully, and are investing appropriated money wisely/safely, makes far more sense to me.


"If CAP was serious"? You know, if CAP did as you said, and started pushing its membership to start investing their own money on a specific training/cert path, and then USAF changed their requirements for us and obviated the need for same, all of you would be lining up with pitchforks. Don't say you wouldn't!


Therefore, I would not characterize the careful development path and a USAF legal review with 1AF as "slow walking", either, in the interests of insuring against disappointment and future regret (and liability). "Reconnaissance" vs. "surveillance", forsooth? Costly legal actions against CAP, anyone?


V/r
Spam

^ This is literally the reason this will just be another failed Tech Hail Mary^®.

A $100 UAV for each unit, coupled with an initiative to get the 107 license as ubiquitous as GES gets thousands interested,
involved, and well on their way to the skills needed.

You don't need a $6k device to learn the basics of UAV flight any more then you need a 25MP DSLR to do aerial
photography, but in both cases, the assertion that you do winds up with the $$$! device in "Jim's basement" that few
members ever get to see, let alone learn to use.

This is either a pet project or a poorly thought out plan.  Either way, it'll wind up on the pile with the rest of the THM^®s.

"Tech Hail Mary^®" and "THM^®" are registered trademarks of eClipseco Mining and Heavy Machinery Consortium.  All Rights Reserved.  Let eClipseco service all of your rhetoric and propaganda needs!

^^^ Off target.

Again.  This is ALL from the Air Force.  This is NOT CAP Hdqs trying to play "catch up" in the drone game.
New full time paid hdqs staff member to roll this out, with separate funding from the AF for this new program. But for now, we are all on a "need to know basis". Not sure what the end game for the AF is. We will know when they want us to know. Our job now is to roll it out, train folks to be sUAS Mission Pilots, and train folks to be  sUAS Technicians. 

If your interest is less flying a sUAS and more into computers, and processing imagery captured and creating mapping, models, etc. ... the sUAS Technician route will be a great track for many.

Learning software similar to this:

https://www.agisoft.com/features/standard-edition/

I think we have a fundamental misunderstanding of the mission set here.


Eclipse, I believe you think that "the" mission is AE.  Teach members fundamentals of flight, control technologies, and datalinks, which can indeed be done with the cheapo 100 dollar semi-disposable toys. There is a good argument for that, within the CAP AE mission. Bob, I completely get that (and concur to a point, my question being funding for essentially expendable, nondurable assets).


However, the full mission set is far more complex than that. To expect that a toy (sorry, but lets be honest) will fill a payload/duration mission gap which the USAF is defining based on a combat threat isn't realistic. Therefore, NHQ is (properly) looking a high/low capability mix of technology (*think: against a diverse threat/mission set, you need a high/low mix of F-22s/F-16s against advanced IADS vs. insurgents... the parallels are there). This is why NHQ is testing a high/low mix of six (6) different sUAS platforms, with a tailorable alternate mission equipment kit designed to be man-portable (i.e. a small laptop case).


Sure, every unit could "use" (however briefly, until they destroy it) a $150 small UAS to have fun and teach the basics of flight. Using that tactically for a SAR/DR mission with more than a five minute (or whatever) duration with a usable payload is another ball game in terms of technical, cost, and schedule risk (the sUAS capable DF payload is 30K per unit, alone). Using the system to represent a threat platform (i.e. a high end dji type drone carrying an IED payload) which the DoD wants to practice interdicting, is a completely different realm.  Lets not confuse these three example missions (I am probably missing one or two as well) when discussing our full set of requirements, and while NHQ is engaged in an Analysis Of Alternatives, and comparative testing.


Eclipse please, lets lay off the hyperbole. The football analogy and your implications of incompetence at NHQ are silly and needless, and (I reiterate) if they went with your acquisition "strategy" of rushing right out to deploy cheap toys, and failed at the other two thirds of the mission set, you'd be the first criticizing it. Win/win for you, right? So, unless the objective is merely for you to win at the armchair critic game every time... lets stay on an even keel here please.


V/r
Spam

OK, wait.  There's a mission?

Well then let's full stop and not prepare or excite anyone at the unit while those 10 guys make a video and
talk about surveillance observation at the Olympics!!

No, I'll say it again: there are multiple missions.


OK, you're still in "that" mode. I'll see your hyperbole and raise with data: If you want to take shots at the effectiveness of small team tech solutions, then I would cite the (by far) most effective unit in CAP (at like 60 or so saves out of the 158 credited to CAP in FY18) being the cell phone forensics team. Which is three guys and a trainee.

So, yeah.

Stand by, there are more technical capes coming at us, from waldo air digital cameras which could image an entire DR area in one sortie, to a revitalized HF net. I'll await your sarcasm and negativity in lieu of constructive inputs - insert here please: ____________________________ (add continuation sheets as needed).


V/r
Spam