1st Lt for Life...Oy!!!

[Dutchboy]

Well, my post maybe null and void when the new CAPSOC on-line course is up and running, but the AFIADL 13 is a course very hard to take seriously. 

When is this suppose to happen anyway? I heard about at encampment this past summer , and I was told look for it in august. Any idea anyone?

[NavLT]

I can not help but laugh at the issue.  My best friend and I joined CAP at the same time he made it to C/LTC and Me to C/1LT (before going active duty) 20 years later I am a Maj (who may never make it to LTC due to politics) and he is a 1LT for life (ECI 13).  We both are Air Crew, GT, Base Staff.  We both have been Deputy commander and on Group staff.  What is the difference in the real world.  In a year when we are both ICs will it matter that he is a 1LT and I am a Major?  When the next command vacancy comes up will it matter which of us fills the need?

V/R
LT J.

[Eclipse]

If I was the one making the decision about the command slot, yes, it would make a difference.

You are both specializing, which is fine in terms of your personal experience and contribution, but when it comes to Commanders, we need members who are committed to the whole program, including the stuff which isn't as "fun" or objectively rewarding.

I see it all the time - members who like to play where they like to play, but have no time for SLS/CLC/TLC, etc., and then don't understand the totality of the organization, or the issues which sometimes result in the decisions that affect where they like to play.

I would be asking direct questions about why its so hard to take the ECI-13.  If he can't be bothered to set the example, how can he, as a commander, expect others to do so with a straight face?

[Eclipse]

Well, my post maybe null and void when the new CAPSOC on-line course is up and running, but the AFIADL 13 is a course very hard to take seriously. 

When is this suppose to happen anyway? I heard about at encampment this past summer , and I was told look for it in august. Any idea anyone?

They are still shipping the ECI-13 materials and test as of last month.

[NavLT]

I would have some respect with reguards to the command selection issue (and believe me the unpleasant stuff we both shovel with all of our CAP roles is deep) except for the # of LTC types who don't do half of what we do in CAP in any of the 3 missions.  ECI 13 in our area is a running Charlie Foxtrot.  Everyone orders it, studies for it and requests the test.  Then 3 or 4 attempts to get the test later the majority give up.  It gets lost at wing, Lost at Group. Not sure where it gets lost and asking our PD folks at group and wing does not seem to help.

V/R
Lt J.

[PaulR]

I'm a 1st Lt for Life and I'm not a "unit level bloke."  I'm just stuck there because apparently PAWG hasn't figured out how to get AFIADL tests to people.  Maybe they're looking for "ECI" on the envelopes instead?

Ironically, I don't think badly of "unit go getters" that stay at that level and work for the unit.  I think, dare I bring it up, this might be what CAP NCOs should be.

I think that unit NCOs should be heavily utilized in a training capacity, as they have the real specialty experience.  Not misused as "go-fers".

[heliodoc]

Yep

The life of a CAP LT......  being just like an RM NCO.  Who else in CAP is making things happen??  Do you really think it's all happening above CAP LT??    WRONG!!!  Who else is going to make the connections at the EM and community level??  Do you really think its all the high speed CAP LTC' and Col's??

Don't let that LT bother you all.  Some of us "got" plenty of real life ICS experience to include real life IC work and even did I 300 and 400.

Just because one is CAP LTC and Col, it doesn't mean that they see the whole program picture. Plenty of us DO see the whole picture we just have not got a chance to attend all those wonderful RSC's and to see that part of the "whole picture"

CAP leadership ought to be more than online courses, lame OPSEC issues, and whoever is having problems getting or having an ECI issues that shows some real LAME looking out for the troops

We Lt's do specialize and contribute just as much as any CAP Col out there...some CAP Col types out there just do not want recognize that just because we "haven't" been around, we as CAP LT's fail to see a larger picture

From RM enlisted experience.........  that is and the subject of "whole picture" and us not getting and accepting !@!@@# assignments is pure bunk.....

[PaulR]

It is nice to know that I am not the only one who had to endure all of the ICS mind melt!!  I completed 100-800.  The worst was the 300!!  I thought my mind was going to implode though that week!

What is a RM?(Royal Marine?)

I had rather have a competent 13 year 1st Lt who loves what he/she does in the field with me than some book smart gungho "Oberst Klink"(Colonel) driven with the sole intent to get that next promotion or ribbon.   

[MIKE]

What is a RM?(Royal Marine?)

Here it means RealMilitary usually followed by trademark.

[PaulR]

Too funny!  Thanks for the clarification!

[Eclipse]

Don't let that LT bother you all.  Some of us "got" plenty of real life ICS experience to include real life IC work and even did I 300 and 400.

Just because one is CAP LTC and Col, it doesn't mean that they see the whole program picture. Plenty of us DO see the whole picture we just have not got a chance to attend all those wonderful RSC's and to see that part of the "whole picture"

CAP leadership ought to be more than online courses, lame OPSEC issues, and whoever is having problems getting or having an ECI issues that shows some real LAME looking out for the troopsg and accepting !@!@@# assignments is pure bunk.....

I find it infinitely amusing that generally the people complaining most about all the "BS tests, etc." are the same ones who can't seem, to find the time to take those "BS tests".

We don't have the advantage of standardized up-front training, or on-going, fully-funded college level courses, so CAP people either need to bring it to the table with them, in which case they are granted grade and qualifications based on outside training, or do what they can within the program to work the program.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with specialization, we need more people who find something they are good at and stick with it to the point of real proficiency, rather then the multitude of members who try to "do it all" and do nothing well.  However don't complain if commanders make an issue of your choice to specialize when you are being considered for a command slot.

Individual members have the choice to specialize, commanders don't.  CC's need to be comfortable with the whole program in order to provide for everyone's needs, and while you might not think SLS/CLC is "important", there are many of us who know it is a key component of building good staff officers (when done with the proper curriculum and executed properly).

For those who were NCO's in a monetarily compensated service, there's no ECI-13 excuse because completion of an NCO academy grants a waiver to ECI-13.

What trips up a lot of those members is the inability to attain a Technician, etc. rating in a specialty because they have no interest in serving a staff position, which again is fine, but don't complain when you aren't processing or considered for command.

If you're happy with your level of involvement, that's great, CAP needs happy "doers", but to say that PD you're not interested in completing is "BS" is not cricket.

[Short Field]

People tend to forget that the purpose of the professional development program (tech - master in a speciality track, ECI-13 through NSC, Levels I-V) is to train competent staff officers to run the squadrons, groups, and wings.  Rank is just one of the rewards you get for learning how parts of a CAP organization work, and then actually working in it.

[Pumbaa]

Is Gore still the Veep in the ECI 13?  Mine had it and that was 6 years after he left office!

[SarDragon]

What is a RM?(Royal Marine?)

Here it means RealMilitary usually followed by trademark.

Like this:

RealMilitary™

[AlphaSigOU]

What is a RM?(Royal Marine?)

Here it means RealMilitary usually followed by trademark.

Like this:

RealMilitary™

Or this: RealMilitary® . My usual when referring to Ma Blue is RealAirForce®. 

[Timbo]

People tend to forget that the purpose of the professional development program (tech - master in a speciality track, ECI-13 through NSC, Levels I-V) is to train competent staff officers to run the squadrons, groups, and wings.  Rank is just one of the rewards you get for learning how parts of a CAP organization work, and then actually working in it.

I have to disagree.  CAP PD neither qualifies a person to run any level of CAP nor does it make the Officer a "better Officer".  All it is, are "rings of fire" a person has to jump through to get promoted.  The courses are largely outdated, and usually are presented by a person who had until just recently never taken the course themself. 

The whole "Officer Development" (Professional development) in CAP needs an overhaul.  They have started, but they are far from finished. 

[davedove]

People tend to forget that the purpose of the professional development program (tech - master in a speciality track, ECI-13 through NSC, Levels I-V) is to train competent staff officers to run the squadrons, groups, and wings.  Rank is just one of the rewards you get for learning how parts of a CAP organization work, and then actually working in it.

I have to disagree.  CAP PD neither qualifies a person to run any level of CAP nor does it make the Officer a "better Officer".  All it is, are "rings of fire" a person has to jump through to get promoted.  The courses are largely outdated, and usually are presented by a person who had until just recently never taken the course themself. 

The whole "Officer Development" (Professional development) in CAP needs an overhaul.  They have started, but they are far from finished. 

While the way the program is being run may not accomplish it, it is still the purpose of PD to make better officers and commanders.  Don't confuse "purpose" with "practice".

I don't think anyone would disagree that the program could be improved.

[Short Field]

So requiring a person to be assigned to a squadron duty position and work in it long enough to understand it well enough to achieve a Master rating does nothing to teach a person to run that level of the organization?  Training a person to have a Master rating in Personnel, Professional Development, Operations, Emergency Services, Administration, Aerospace Education, or any of the other speciality tracks is just "rings of fire"?  

I will not even attempt to defend the current SLS or CLS courses except to say that they are better than the previous ones.  It also depends greatly on the leadership as to how well the courses are taught.  I know of some wings that allow SLS and CLS to be taught as a one day, eight hour course just to give people credit for it.  RSC and NSC tend to be ran better.  However, they are only a small part of the PD program.   The PD program is defined by the requirements to achieve the PD Levels I - V.  

You only get out of the program what you put into it.  I never attended a RM course that made people a better officer.  I attended a lot of courses that made you a better follower and gave you an expanded knowledge base to to use in making decisions.  Officership was taught by senior officers guiding junior officers.  Some produced good officers, others produced inept bureaucrats.     This applies to commissioned officers, noncommissioned officers, and the corporate business world.  Why should CAP be any different.

[stratoflyer]

I have to disagree.  CAP PD neither qualifies a person to run any level of CAP nor does it make the Officer a "better Officer".  All it is, are "rings of fire" a person has to jump through to get promoted.  The courses are largely outdated, and usually are presented by a person who had until just recently never taken the course themself.

The whole "Officer Development" (Professional development) in CAP needs an overhaul.  They have started, but they are far from finished.

It sure seems to run that way, don't it? Here's the thing--It SUPPOSED to develop those who join who have no idea of what or how to do in a military environment. It supposed to be basic training for new officers and then progress to more important stuff. The idea of getting promoted would be reflecting how much you've learned in the organization. SO yes, a LT can do a lot more than a LTC, but the LTC had some more schooling--theoretically.

I'm very tempted to stay where I am but the fact is what would those around me (namely cadets) see in me? Complacency? I think that to set the example, I should be getting promoted, but most importantly, getting all those classes underneath my belt.

But these courses MUST be updated immediately...and thankfully it's underway.

[heliodoc]

Updated YES

Including the Specialty Tracks for Ops still referring to the 55 series CAPM's

Pilots have to update medicals, Form 5/91's etc

How about Papa CAP and updating Specialty tracks while they are "updating" websites

A true disservice to pilots as well as ground folks............