Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: New ARRL ARES Plan and Standardized Training Plan  (Read 861 times)

N7WE

  • Member
  • Posts: 35
New ARRL ARES Plan and Standardized Training Plan
« on: September 05, 2019, 05:43:03 AM »

Any comments?
Logged

K6CPO

  • Member
  • Posts: 839
RE: New ARRL ARES Plan and Standardized Training Plan
« Reply #2 on: September 05, 2019, 11:49:25 AM »

It's about time ARES moved into the modern era.  The reality is that the "I've been licensed for 50 years. I'm qualified" mentality just doesn't work any more.  If someone wishes to assist in an emergency, beyond passing out blankets in a shelter, they will need to have passed at least the basic ICS courses (100, 200 700 and 800.)  Otherwise, they're liable to be turned away. 

This process will also standardize training throughout all of ARES, rather than the piecemeal approach that has existed up to now.  The ARRL is allowing some flexibility because different ARES groups have different missions, but there is a core of requirements everyone will have to pass.
Logged

N8AUC

  • Member
  • Posts: 1007
RE: New ARRL ARES Plan and Standardized Training Plan
« Reply #3 on: September 05, 2019, 09:06:33 PM »

In our post-9/11 world, standardized training like this is very important.

Ohio ARES has had these training requirements for quite a while.
So to us, most of this is not new. This is the first time I've seen the task book mentioned.
Looks like a good idea though.

I've known Scott Yonally for quite a while. He's very capable, knowledgeable and experienced.
He definitely knows what he's doing.

73 de N8AUC
Eric
(An ARES District EC in Ohio)
Logged

N9AOP

  • Member
  • Posts: 1280
RE: New ARRL ARES Plan and Standardized Training Plan
« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2019, 11:13:26 AM »

Is ARRL ARES plan their answer to DHS AUXCOMM?
Art
Logged

KB8VUL

  • Member
  • Posts: 654
RE: New ARRL ARES Plan and Standardized Training Plan
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2019, 07:15:59 PM »

I think it's a good path to go down.  ICS knowledge will help groups to review and modify their operating procedures when deployed and help them to follow the chain of command during a deployment.
It also helps with understanding manpower requirements and why.  If you are deployed, you should go in groups of two to three.  That way if you are providing communications, one guy is on the radio on guy is standing by and one is the backup for the other two.  Something as mundane as needing to take a leak at a bad time can cause issues, if you have three operators, then it's not a big deal.  And getting to be the age we are, we pee a lot. 

But really the bigger thing here is EVERYONE ELSE is operating under ICS procedures at a deployment, so we should be too and not doing our own thing our own way.  It's not that our ways didn't work, but it streamlines things when you are all playing the same game under the same rule book.
Logged

KD7YVV

  • Member
  • Posts: 33
RE: New ARRL ARES Plan and Standardized Training Plan
« Reply #6 on: September 12, 2019, 11:23:37 AM »

Just an observation, but about 10 years ago on the Zed, I posted an article "If it were a real emergency".
It generated about 10 pages of discussion. The question back then was basically why get yourself on an
ARES roster if you're not going to show up for meetings, training sessions etc.
There are hams out there that live and breathe emcomm 24/7. Then on the other end of the spectrum (pun intended)
you have hams that take the training for a while, then stop showing up. They'll show up when something happens, but
their training/info will be outdated. The standardization of everyone having to have the same training (ICS) is a step
in the right direction, but it's important to keep that training up to date as well. ICS is always evolving, new data
and information is learned over time and we need to do the same. Case in point. About 10 years ago I moved away
from Kirkland, WA but still kept in touch with the ARES group there. I'll hopefully be moving back to the area soon.
My approach will be, "My training is out of date and I will need help to bring me up to speed on the latest procedures."
Things have changed, the Emergency Coordinator is not the same one I knew, the radio room isn't in the same place it was.
You get the idea. If everyone is on the same page and using the same playbook, then everyone know what to expect from everyone else.
So, you know that I know, that you know that I know that the things you know are the same things that I know. (Sorry, couldn't resist.)
Besides, I like learning new things. Keeps the old noggin sharp.

--KD7YVV, Kirkland ARES
Logged

K6CPO

  • Member
  • Posts: 839
RE: New ARRL ARES Plan and Standardized Training Plan
« Reply #7 on: September 12, 2019, 01:24:00 PM »

Is ARRL ARES plan their answer to DHS AUXCOMM?
Art

I'm not sure I understand your question.  ARES and AUXCOMM serve two different functions.  AUXCOMM trained personnel would go into the Communications unit at an Incident Command Post or an EOC and provide backup or secondary communications during an incident.  The function of ARES varies by location.  In my locale, ARES supports the county hospital system in providing backup communications, although that isn't all we do.
Logged

N9AOP

  • Member
  • Posts: 1280
RE: New ARRL ARES Plan and Standardized Training Plan
« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2019, 10:08:35 AM »

Where I live many ARES are AUXCOMM and function based upon the mission.  They are equally comfortable in either position and that is a best case outcome.  I still question what the ARRL is hoping to do and why now but I will be at a large 'fest next Saturday and will ask the central division director this question.
Art
Logged

KG7LEA

  • Member
  • Posts: 100
RE: New ARRL ARES Plan and Standardized Training Plan
« Reply #9 on: September 19, 2019, 07:00:58 AM »

The ARRL plan is a good idea and mirrors the training and task book our local group has had in place for years. It gives groups and volunteers a common language for qualifications especially if volunteers deploy outside their home jurisdictions. We can see some of the lessons learned from vaunted Force Of Fifty and Hurricane Maria. A volunteer completing a task book is qualified on paper to contribute, but is he or she physically and emotionally suitable?

I would like to see solid procedures for requesting and deploying volunteers out-of-town. In recent disasters there have been kerfuffles over who makes requests, how they are processed, and the roles of ARRL and local emergency coordinators. Many states require background checks of volunteers and we have had hams absolutely refuse to do that. Un-backgrounded volunteers are still valuable resources.

We need procedures how to handle spontaneous volunteers like the Cajun Navy and its spin-offs. I assume all that is coming.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up