FL Wing RECON

[Capt Rivera]

Someone mentioned in the Gustav thread that they were NOT Recon certified and that FL Wing was activating Recon qualified people/squadrons/teams... something like that....

anyone can share about what a certified CAP Recon person is? Is it only in FL?

[RiverAux]

Florida has some ungodly complex plan for responding to major disasters from which this concept is drawn.  Can't seem to find it on their web site now. 

[JoeTomasone]

Essentially it involves covering an assigned area in the air or on the ground and taking geocoded pictures of damage that are transmitted back to the State, where they are integrated into an online map showing what damage has occurred so that resources can be better distributed.   Additionally, ground teams inquire as to the status of food, water, shelters, and anything else relevant and transmit same back as well.

The training (beyond normal Ground Team) generally consists of teaching you how to properly take geocoded pictures and how to upload them to the State.    You are told to expect to be pre-positioned just outside the area expected to be affected so that you can move in immediately when it is safe to do so. 

[Eclipse]

Nice!

[Tubacap]

What do you use for Geocoding?  Do you use private cameras?

[JoeTomasone]

What do you use for Geocoding?  Do you use private cameras?

Yes.   The general theory is that each RECON member must have a GPS, digital camera, and laptop.  The clocks on the camera and GPS are synchronized, and the resulting GPS track log and images are uploaded to Wing, where they will run geocoding software that matches the date/time of the picture to the lat/long in the track log, then writes the lat/long to the picture's EXIF data.   

Besides that, I am currently checking to see if my iPhone 3Gs pictures will pass muster in this regard.  Might be a big time saver, plus I can queue them to be emailed when a network (cellular or wifi) is available.

[Eclipse]

I doubt it, the 3g's GPS capabilities are not all that hot, and the pics won't hold a candle to what you can get from even a low-end digital camera.

A pinch is a pinch, but if you have time to get the right gear, it should be the preferred.

[JoeTomasone]

I beg to differ.   The GPS is as accurate in my testing as my Garmin, my Delorme, and my Jeep's nav system.

While the camera won't win awards, the pictures are adequate in my estimation (and I have been shooting Canon DSLRs with L glass for years).     

Here's picture of my daughter in front of the SR-71A at the Virginia Aerospace Museum in Richmond, VA, and a Google Earth picture of the GPS Coordinates embedded within.  It appears to be about 30 feet away from the true location.

[Eclipse]

Not bad on the pic, if you're doing ground recon, fine, but it'll be useless from the air.

As to the GPS, the articles I've read indicate that the location features rely heavily on cel towers and only switch to actual sats when absolutely required, which then burns the batteries fast.

Hey, if it works, it works, but I'll take my Garmin and my Nikon 5700, and then just email the pics with my MDA.

[JoeTomasone]

Oh, I am 100% ground-pounder - for the moment, anyway.   It would be useless for the air.

Actually, the iPhone uses the GPS unless it cannot.  Been there, tested that.   You can tell if it is using the GPS or not as the GPS position is indicated by a blue dot rather than a round blue recticle.   It also moves along Google Maps with smooth motion like a GPS nav system does.  When using my old 2G (non-GPS) iPhone, you only get the recticle, and it updates every 10 seconds (or whatever) and is correspondingly jerky.

[RiverAux]

Actually ground photos can be a major help to aircrews in locating specific buildings in urban areas that need to be photographed from the air. 

[DNall]

^I don't think that was being argued. Rarely though are photos of a specific building needed from the air after the ground. More typically the air is doing broad overview while ground is doing more focused work.