Moving Map Topos in the Cockpit

[MarkZ]

Please describe your experience with using moving map topos in the
cockpit. How useful is it, how would you improve thnigs. do you use
overlays of the fire, dozer lines, etc?

[John Watt]

Previous to working with Mark I worked with CWN Air Tactical platform
operators Tom Jaharis and Jan Ostrat using Motion tablet computers.
Jan had worked a fire some years ago in the CDF Butte Unit (with Steve
Norris) where they were able to get the daily fire map from the GIS
team and used it to great benefit. Jan worked with the TNF on
lightning recon with downloaded strike data. They concentrated on
positive strikes as having the greater potential for a start. In the
course of flying to the positive strikes they over flew most of the
negative strike area.

Working with Jaharis in Grand Junction several years ago we got the
daily strike data and used it to plan our recon flights. The number
of strikes obliterated the Delorme screen so I started pulling out the
positive strikes by selecting from Excel to a new sheet. It took more
time than I wanted to commit but did give us the same results as
Ostrat found on the Tahoe. By concentrating on the positive strikes
we also saw most of the negative strike territory.

With Mark dealing in the technical end of getting the data from the
GIS teams and formatting for our map program we were able to cut down
a lot of confusion in covering the Lime Complex (SHF-2008) with
adverse visibility. As I identified landmarks, hot spots, helispots,
etc. I added them to a layer that built our knowledge of the
situation. We were able to fly the boundaries of the TFRs in limited
visibility and define our approach to the fires themselves, if able,
and quickly assess aerial conditions for ground supervisors and
ourselves.

There is a tremendous advantage to this process in working large and
multiple fires. As the technical aspects are streamlined the end user
should not need to be as much of a techno person. I've not used
Google maps as a base layer. My map sets have been Delorme Topo USA,
Map Tech, and National Geographic TOPO. The problem for me as an AD
is buying new map sets for state specific programs v. Delorme's
national coverage (at a reasonable detail level) and the simplicity of
the Delorme program (I also play at the informed novice level with
ArcView on the side).

Futuring into data transmission can be blessing and a curse! Keeping
the basis of the program in the tactical arena is important. If
attention, effort, and money is focused on strategic data gathering
the field process will be stalled. CDF was on the path to put FLIR on
about 50% of their Air Tactical aircraft when a decision was made to
concentrate on one strategic platform which would not have had any
tactical impact if it had ever been placed in service. In the end
neither system was ever placed in service. While the data is the same
the are two very different user groups when trying to meet every
level's information needs.

As for the data we got last year, we didn't get the geographical
breakouts (branches, divvisions, etc.) or landmarks like drop points.
Much of our identification was through asking ground personnel as we
spent time orbiting and looking for the places they were describing.
We were carrying the same 30 pages of maps the ground personnel
received and had to use them to correctly identify the management
breakouts. Each air tactical crew was developing their own personal
data bases based on the events of their shifts. It wasn't practical
to try and share data from one platform to another, especially when
aircraft were rotated on and off the fires. I'd like to see a full
series of data layers available for down loading. One repository of
good information is critical.