I havent read it in depth but it seems that WBGTs are unlikely to be available for local events (shock!) and instead we should be using MOMIDS forecasting as a back up option.
I am also sure that I read unless your qualified to use a WBGT then you have to use MOMIDS, so essentially unless HQAC are organising a major event MOMIDS forecasting is to be used
Yeah it does say that.
I think it does also say that support should be sought from the parent unit to see if they have a QT34 and someone to operate it who can assist before you default to MOMIDS.
It also recognises that a spot WBGT reading isn’t very useful for activities where you don’t stay in one place like a DofE Exped and says to use MOMIDS forecast instead.
They also seem to have changed some references to higher level policies.
So, say again how I get a MOMIDS account…?
There’s a guide on sharepoint with the region passwords.
You don’t. There are HQAC and Regional logins on Sharepoint and you can just use any of them.
And will we get the training on how to use the information
Not everyone is trained as an Airfield Met man
And if used without required training, and it goes wrong, go directly to the Coroners Court because you will have no top cover.
It’s almost like we all pointed that out day one…
It’s not rocket science… The forecast gives an estimated WBGT reading throughout the day.
Use this to make an assessment of the work / rest required using the tables depending on the activity level.
Feed this into your RA / planning.
and I say again - having looked at MOMIDS - who is going to tell us where it is in all the information as i can’t find anything readily identifiable - nice cloud pics though
Pretty sure it’s on the information leaflet with the passwords - but Station Products / WBGT. Find your location, or get it added by emailing the nice lady at the met office.
Which still doesn’t account for the need to put our application in 6 weeks out
OK read the sheet and found it now - Doh
but do we take the average or the theoretical maximum - i realise it wont matter unless it crosses a boundary but i am sure we would always take the worst case
Do we have to take the temperature effects of bubblewrap into consideration as well? I assume that counts as clothing etc in the assessment.
It’s pretty simple . . . add a line in your RA and Admin order stating you’ll be checking MOMIDS in the days before the event and will adjust plans accordingly up to and including postponing.
It’s exactly the same as having a QT34 on site during the activity, you may have to dynamically change the activity there and then.
So, just done the heat illness training, and it is dry and dragging after the initial shock hit.
My main takeaway though is that WRTs are stated as being able to be used as “approximate guidance” for under 18s.
Unhelpfully vague would be one description of that.
Should we go a temperature block higher, or 2, or maybe take a step up the workrate column?
I actually think my approach will be a mixture, maybe upping work rate with inexperienced and/or less fit cadets, or bumping up a temp for easy work (or for higher work rates with advanced groups).
That feels sensible, right?
I still think someone needs to stick their name to something more prescriptive if we’re taking this seriously and not just paying lip service to policy, ticking boxes, and letting CFAV fall into the cracks of ambiguity when they cock it up based on “approximate” though.
I underwent the pain of HI Training over the weekend as well. There was much ranting a swearing. And i’ll never get that time back.
On the plus side, I’ve swerved suspension and it means I can keep doing AT until it gets cold and we’ll undoubtedly have a Cold Injury course which will be mandated.
Did I learn anything? The MOD policy statements. But that’s about it. All the mitigations etc are things we already do (certainly in the AT world - Too hot. Stop. Find shade. Chill and cool down. Reassess and replan accordingly. Full Stop if necessary. Fill in forms and report accordingly.).
I wholeheartedly agree about the adjustments we need for the WRT to accommodate under 18s. And the whole Risk Assessments should “take into account individual circumstances” etc - I’d like some further guidance on how exactly HI impacts on a 12 year old female vs a 17.5 year olds so my risk assessments could be appropriately informed!
It’s great having this training - but ultimately, it’s entirely pointless if the core group we work with isn’t actually covered by training!!!
There is also some value in the additional (to previous training) content around the RA and activity planning processes specific to HI.
It’s not a bad course overall, but it misses the mark for our circumstances in terms of how to actually apply the policy in JSP 375 to CADETS.
“Here’s a thing you need to know; by the way, cadets will need to be treated differently”. Ok, HOW?
Why are you all being forced to do the new training? We’ve been told “Unless specifically directed to complete HI Training Modules 1 and 2, for a role or event, previously completed CI training will remain extant for 2023.”
So not required until 2024. Thought this was in the IBN?
Depends on location, I think.
OC SW has given a directive that it needs to be completed by Friday this week (if I remember correctly).
Clearly learning from the old RC SW! We’ve been told no worries until 2024! The only change is that cadets need to view the new PowerPoint sooner rather than later.