|
||||||||||||||||||
Military.com Forums
Coast Guard Discussions
Coast Guard Auxiliary
Emergency Comms And The Aux|
Go
![]() |
New
![]() |
Find
![]() |
Notify
![]() |
Tools
![]() |
Reply
![]() |
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
The idea for this thread came from this post in the Aviation Flotillas thread.
apparently, they are forming a communications focused flottilla in the NO area. Ham radio operators are banging down aux organization's doors to be a part of something they can help in the event of another katrina. We're trying to scoop up as many as we can before they join a different org. I thought you might be interested in this news item from the ARES (Amateur Radio Emergency Service) Newsletter that was dropped in my email in-box this morning. It is reprinted from the ARRL (Amateur Radio Relay League) Letter.
Other related items in the same newsletter:
If we knew what we were doing and how to do it the Aux could participate in SET. I believe as an organization we tried to do something last year for the next item but I haven't heard thing one about any national involvement this year. It would seem a natural activity for the Aux.
... to be continued |
||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
continued ....
same newsletter. The Aux used to have an MOU with MARS. I found out earlier this year that the MARS MOU was allowed to expire or cancelled.
|
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
This item relates to our ICS course requirements. Credentialing is more then just providing a responder with an id card. Credentialing involves providing the responder with id that documents their proven qualifications and competencies, which includes ICS courses taken. Up until now, ARES, RACES and the ARRL (among other responding agencies)have been recommending that its members "shrink wrap" the ICS course certificates and carry them on the ID card lanyard. "Shrink wrapping" involves reducing the FEMA certificate on a copier to its smallest readable size and then laminating it.
See FEMA NIMS Integration Center Fact Sheet: NATIONAL EMERGENCY RESPONDER CREDENTIALING SYSTEM and the FAQ for more info. |
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
Here is a handy free resource.
|
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
ChDirAux announced this on 19 August.
COAST GUARD AUXILIARY HF TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM POLICIES AND PROCEDURES |
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
From The ARRL Letter; Vol. 25, No. 40; October 6, 2006
|
|||
|
|
Member |
I just got a copy of the Auxiliary HF frequency plan.
It looks like national and CG622 had their stuff in one sock. Speaking as a former wing level communications directer, it is good that the Coast Guard is having us start out on the right foot. Making our frequencies FOUO, restricting the list to only registured HF COMMFACS, rthey are looking very hard at requireing NTIA complyence (a very very good idea), and having the same frequency dezignation plan as our active duty and reserve counterparts makes since. We have a good spred of frequencies throughout the spectrem, and have a flexable frequency plan. I like it. I do know there is talk of plugging us directly into NCS and other government communications plans, but we have to get our HF nets up, and I know that national and CG622 are working very hard and fast to get this up and running. HAL, I'd reguster your HF comms station and by the way, if your a ham I know it will help get your aproved. For the first go round they oonly want operaters who know what their doing. Not to say that only hams know what their doing, or there aren't lids who are hams, but it helps to have the magic ticket. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Now, I don't pretend to know all the technical details, but a nationwide HF net seems like the sort of thing that CAP and CG Aux should team up on. After all, why should we duplicate this sort of national system that would cost so much to each organization and, lets face it, is probably never going to receive much use.
Personally, I'm in favor of leaving this sort of thing to the hams and have CAP and the Aux focus on making sure our short-range radio comm systems are disaster survivable. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Couple of more millions, time, effort on interoperability and agencies being able to communicate in a disaster that will go nowhere. Every post mortem of major disasters will include interoperable communications problems. 9/11, katrina, 20 years before, and I bet, next 20 yrs, too..... William Baldwin,BS,MD-S MBA HCM program Ground below Zero New Orleans, La. www.coastguardauxiliaryfc61.org |
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
The FCC's Amateur Radio proceeding, WT Docket 04-140, was released October 10. The Report
and Order will not take effect until 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. For a summary of the Report and Order see the ARRL web page FCC Releases Long-Awaited "Omnibus" Amateur Radio Report and Order
Among the changes that could effect the Aux and its EmComm plans:
The complete text is available for viewing as a PDF file on the FCC Web site, http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-149A1.pdf |
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
More stuff that could effect the Aux and its EmComm plans. This is from the ARRL Monthly Southern Florida Section News Summary
|
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
From Quarterly Briefing To the Commandant on the state of the USCG Aux Oct 2006
|
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
The latest issue of Up Top In Operations is all about our new Comms program. There is some interesting stuff in there.
And now for a look at yesteryear. The time is 16 May 1954, the place Lake Okeechobee (as reported in the Breeze Oct 1954), the event Opereation JOCO.
Simulated messages were passed between all agencies and Aux fixed land stations in Miami, Deland, West Palm Beach and an Aux land-mobile unit operating out of Pahokee. Auxiliarists manned stations at both the north and south ends of the lake. End report above. Operation JOCO, as reported in the Breeze, would become an annual event for several years with major Aux involvement. I have never been able to find out why we stopped participating. |
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
I have been compiling my own 24 and 72 hour emergency response equipment lists. I have used a variety of lists from both SAR and Comm response organizations. I ran into one study that compared the 24 hour equipment lists from 20 national and local SAR organizations. I found the results interesting.
The following was the author's criteria for the study: 1. Only those lists identified as minimum, basic, 24 hour, hasty or similar terms were included. 2 Equipment lists identified as technical, cold weather, rescue, etc. were excluded. That pretty much left the author with the lists of equipment that any responder should bring into the field. The author had 4 point scoring methods to try and determine an items value to a responder. He came up with interesting results. Without regard to the scoring method: 1. There were a total of 100 items contained on the 20 lists. 2. No list had all 100 items. 3. Only six items were listed on all 20 lists. After applying the scoring weights: The first 16 items were in the same order by all scoring methods, although the items were not present on all lists (except the first 6 items). Those 16 items (in descending order): compass, flashlight or headlamp, water (2 quarts or liters minimum), multipurpose knife/tool, rainwear or poncho, personal first aid kit, matches (the basic requirement is some means of starting a fire), ready-to-eat food for 1 day (survival/emergency ration), whistle, spare batteries for light or second light, notepad with pen or pencil, drinking cup, leather work gloves, signal mirror, sun glasses, shelter material. Items 17 thru 25 were in the group by all scoring methods but not in the same order by each method. Those items are: spare bulb for light (or second light), 25' of nylon cord, large trash bag(s), helmet/hard hat, fire starter, toilet paper, sleeping bag, candle, goggles. The items above appeared on between 11 to 13 of the 20 lists. Items 26 thru 31 appeared on 10, 11 or 12 lists. Item 35 appeared on 11 lists. Items 32 thru 34 appeared on 9 lists but scored higher then item 35 because they were more often required, whereas item 35 was usually recommended or optional. The order of the items varied on the individual lists. The items were: 26. Spare socks 27. Insect repellent (usually DEET based) 28. Sleeping bag (more often optional then required) 29. Water purification tablets 30. Flagging material - surveyor's tape etc. 31. Cook kit (more often optional then required) 32. Carabiner - footnote states "Technical or rescue equipment which a Level I land search team member is not required to know how to use. These items shall only be used by Level I land search tema members trained how to use them." 33. Headgear (ball, fleece or wool cap). 34. watch 35. stove (more often optional then required) Items 36 to 100 appeared on less then half the lists. Items 43 to 100 appeared on 8 or less lists. Items 48 to 100 appeared on 5 or less (1/4) of the lists with the exceptions of Item 53 (water purification filter) and Item 55 (Gaiters) which appeared on 6 lists. Items 81 thru 100 appeared on only 1 or 2 lists. A big issue with any of these lists is the basic assumption of how the team is responding. If the assumption is that the team is responding as part of a larger group, then things like shelter, food and cooking (72 hour or more) aren't an issue - since the larger team is responsible for that. However, if the team is sent to a remote location or is the first on-scene - then it might have to bring all of its own gear - which is why my basic list or "Doomsday" List runs to 11 pages. |
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
From a special email alert from the ARRL.
ARLB030 FCC to Drop Morse Testing for All Amateur License Classes
|
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
How well did your community do?
Tactical Interoperability Communication Scorecards.
Technical Interoperability Communication Area Scorecards by State and Area Tactical Interoperable Communications Scorecards Summary Report and Findings (170 pages) |
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
The following is from The ARES E-Letter January 17, 2007. Since some of our Auxies WSs are also Hams, I thought there might be some interest in the first item.
Some other items that might interest Auxie Sparks:
|
|||
|