Posts Tagged ‘Search Sector’

The POD of a Search Dog

January 28th, 2010

I wrote a short piece last week entitled “The POD of a Search Dog is 100%” and promised to give my thoughts on the subject at a later date. It is interesting to note that the two commenters – Daryl Toogood and Johnnie Walker – highlighted the two main issues I wanted to cover with regard to calculating PODs for search dogs.

Essentially I see two issues here.

The first is whether searching to 100% is a useful tactic, or whether as Johnnie noted “that it has slowed people down”. If you, as a dog handler, are trying to ensure you do not possibly miss the misper – do you spend too much time in any one area? Remember that search, like many other things, complies with that pesky law of diminishing returns. For each unit of search you put in, you get less out each time in added POD.

You would often do better (find more mispers!) by travelling further at a quicker rate.

The second issue here is calculating the POD of a search dog. As Daryl Toogood stated;

I would challenge any dog handler that gives a POD for their dog no matter whether it be 1% or 100% as I am not confident of the system for calculating the POD of a Dog. [Read more here...]

But this leaves search management and the search planning team a very large problem!

In order to best utilise their search resources search planners are required to decide whether to re-search a search sector, or put it aside for now and search somewhere else. Get it wrong and they potentially leave the misper to die in an area that could have been searched. How can we expect them to make such an important decision with so little clue!

I think that I will be revisiting this – both of these issues need discussing in further detail – but feel free to add your thoughts.

  • Share/Bookmark

Calculating Probability Density Distribution for Missing Person Search

January 26th, 2010

The first of the four elements of the optimal search problem is having a probability density distribution (predicting the likelihood that an object is in any particular search area or region.)

To achieve this during a Maritime Search and Rescue Incident one takes into account the accuracy of the initial location report, the current, wind and so on. Computer models can then accurately map the likelihood of the boat (or whatever search object is being sought) being in any particular area.

However, the variables for a vulnerable missing person search are not yet known with any particular accuracy. They may choose any direction; may stay on paths or tracks, or depart from them; camp or find shelter; try to cross rivers; go uphill or down; and so on and so on.

Computer models of missing person behaviour then are not as useful or accurate as Maritime models. This does not, however, mean that we cannot come up with useful probability density distributions. Take a quick glance at Robert Koester’s, Lost Person Behavior book to see that the world SAR community has over 50,000 incidents’ data to draw upon.

From this we can predict the likelihood a given misper will travel a certain distance from their initial location and misper “type” or “category”. This is sufficient to draw a couple of circles on a map and calculate probability density’s for concentric regions on a map. It is a small step from this to calculate actual Probability of Areas (POAs) for specific search sectors.

Other potential methods for calculating probability density distributions include the consensus method – allowing for subjective calculation based upon search planners’ experience, the individual misper intelligence and the actual search terrain limitations.

  • Share/Bookmark

Coverage

January 22nd, 2010

Coverage as a word is often used to describe how much of a search area or sector has been searched. This is wrong.

Coverage has a specific mathematical definition in search theory. It refers to the Area Effectively Swept divided by the Area of the Search Sector.  This figure is then used in Koopman’s Exponential Detection Function to calculate POD.

  • Share/Bookmark

Probability Density (Pden)

January 22nd, 2010

The probability density is found by dividing the Probability of Area (POA) by the size of the search area or sector.

This gives you an idea of the likelihood that the missing person or object is in an area of the same size in two different search sectors. It is an extremely important concept to understand in managing a search. The higher the Pden, the better the chances of finding the misper.

  • Share/Bookmark

Search exercise planners handbook – Part Four

November 11th, 2009

or Terrain Analysis for Search Exercises

Once you have selected your search area, looked at the practicalities of holding the search exercise and gone about gaining the required permissions, you need to undertake a terrain analysis of the whole search area. You will need to look at the possible search sectors, the hazards and the health & safety for the search exercise.

Planning a search exercise requires a good knowledge of Search Control / Search Management. Because at this stage you are going to need to sit down with a map and try to think like the Control Team and work out the various ways in which they might sector the map. [Do not sector the map for them; they need the practice. Just look at what they might potentially do]

Are there sufficient search sectors for the numbers expected on the exercise? Or are there too many; too large? and so on. This is a difficult job. You will need to be able to look at a map, and indeed on the ground, and be able to estimate search times for the terrain/conditions. Getting an exercise right means being able to judge how long it will take to search the ground, and not relying too often on “intelligence gathered” or “sightings” to put teams in the right area. [How realistic is that?]

You will need to get out on the ground. This will help you to do the above, but what you really need to be doing is looking for those hazards and health and safety issues that just cannot be seen from a map.

This is not to say we should wrap our searchers up in cotton wool – it is possible to have a perfectly safe search (and search exercise); just don’t do it and leave the misper to it. Or we could trust our searchers to make sensible risk managment decisions on the ground?

What you are really trying to do is identify any potential issues, hazards and health & safety issues in order to decide beforehand how to manage them. It might be briefing the search control team prior to the exercise or it might just be ensuring suitable PPE is available if and when the issue is identified. Either way, knowing in advance is best.

ALSAR Units should have a generic risk assessment for search. However, anyone planning an exercise should carry out their own risk assessment for the exercise. Ask those, What If? questions. Do we need first aid cover? Do we need a safety team available? Where is the nearest hospital? and so on.

As I said before, better to prepare in advance, than rely solely upon your searchers’ professionalism all the time; they DESERVE BETTER!

Return to Search Exercise Planners Handbook Index

  • Share/Bookmark