Main Menu

Forecast of Iowa Wing.

Started by RogueLeader, June 20, 2007, 04:33:30 PM

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Dragoon

Quote from: RogueLeader on June 21, 2007, 06:13:10 PM
The plus side of having full composite squadrons that are linked into a super unit is to help maintain connections, availability of help, and learn to work with others than your unit.

For example: There are 3 squadrons- A, B, and C.  All three are composite. Squadron A is 1hr from B, and 1.5 hr From C.  B is 1.25 hr from C.  They are not joined, and all three are having problems with getting some training.  Unit A has a strong AE, but a weak CP.  Unit B has strong CP but a weak ES.  Unit C has a strong ES but weak AE.  The commanders are getting uneasy due to the fact that people are leaving due to fulfillment.  Now, the 3 commanders get together, along with their staffs, and form a joint venture. They are able to have a couple members travel to the other squadrons once every other month to give training.  Then they can start reaching out to other units to see what is going on with those squadrons.  If help is needed, the opportunity arises to help out other units.  Distance is a problem if the time is much longer than that, but it still should be considered.

We can talk all day about squadrons being where training occurs, but it doesn't really seem to work that way. Because to train, you need qualified trainers.

CAP is too broad, it has too many areas to train in for most units to have qualified instructors in everything.  So what normally ends up happening is that the training occurs outside the squadron - the people go to where the trainers are.  Group schools.  Wing SAREXs.  Region Academies.  Wherever.

But.

If a squadron only support a couple of missions/specialties, it would stand a much better chance of being able to provide all the training neccessary.  You'd only need a few qualified experts.

And, with a laser like focus on training those core things, you could get really good.  And you could probably do so with fewer meetings.

Members who want to "do it all" would simply participate with multiple units, same as now.  But each squadron would have a more reasonable (and achievable) focus.

Dragoon

Quote from: RogueLeader on June 21, 2007, 06:17:24 PM
Back to topic PLEASE.

Okey dokey - you were talking about centralization.   You don't like it.  Got it.   :D

RogueLeader

Right, like I said this is about what we can do to make ourselves more relevant to our communities.  Iowa has become relevant to Iowa, and we need to do the same.
WYWG DP

GRW 3340

RogueLeader

Quote from: Dragoon on June 21, 2007, 06:22:41 PM
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 21, 2007, 06:17:24 PM
Back to topic PLEASE.

Okey dokey - you were talking about centralization.   You don't like it.  Got it.   :D
Not quite true.  It all has to do with the organization and the presentation of what the changes are, and how they are being implemented.
WYWG DP

GRW 3340

ColonelJack

Quote from: RogueLeader on June 21, 2007, 06:23:46 PM
Right, like I said this is about what we can do to make ourselves more relevant to our communities.  Iowa has become relevant to Iowa, and we need to do the same.

...we need to become relevant to Iowa?   ;D

Jack
Jack Bagley, Ed. D.
Lt. Col., CAP (now inactive)
Gill Robb Wilson Award No. 1366, 29 Nov 1991
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
Honorary Admiral, Navy of the Republic of Molossia

ZigZag911

Quote from: Eclipse on June 21, 2007, 03:46:53 AM
When you work THE program, you can be reasonably sure that the majority of your operations won't just disappear overnight.  When you make up your own rules and depend on outside resources or organizations, you run the risk of all your work being for nothing.

You frequently mention "THE Program" as if it were some monolithic force with the constancy of Newton's Laws....I would simply ask you to consider that  the way the CAP programs (we have 3 main ones with lots of offshoots) develop is precisely through the kind of innovation and creativity that Iowa Wing is exercising.

Will it work for every wing?  Certainly not!

Is it going to last forever? No, but then little does in this life, does it?!?

ddelaney103

I guess the questions is are we one USCAP, or 52 (2 letter state abbreviation)CAP's?

There has to be adaptation for each local situation, AKWG being the old extreme example, but IAWG is way out there without being "private pilots+scary wilderness land."

Is there any limit a Wing King can do to their wing?

Dragoon

Quote from: ddelaney103 on June 21, 2007, 08:07:44 PM
I guess the questions is are we one USCAP, or 52 (2 letter state abbreviation)CAP's?

There has to be adaptation for each local situation, AKWG being the old extreme example, but IAWG is way out there without being "private pilots+scary wilderness land."

Is there any limit a Wing King can do to their wing?

The old CAP was very much about "each Wing doing whatever works."  But with more centralized oversight and funding (both have been building since the 80s), plus more multi Wing missions, it ain't the future.

So when we look at Iowa, or any Wing, just saying "glad it worked for you - but we're different" requires a little more thought.  Exactly WHY are we different?  If it works for them, then WHY won't it work for us? 

Because we need to spread the good ideas.

The Iowa folks pretty much admit they are in the prototype stage.  Some of their stuff won't work.  Some only works because of their unique situation (size, state funding, etc). 

But some of it will.  And not just the "have lots of energy and try to improve" part - some specific business practices.

If we find out that centralizing functions above the squadron helps, we should not be afraid to try it on a larger scale.

If we find that the key is NG support, we shouldn't be afraid to arrange for that at the National Level.

And yes, if we find out that tying promotion, however loosely, to higher levels of responsiblity works for them, then we might seriously consider mandating that as well.

Or having lots of senior member NCOs.

Or whatever.

Of course, the key will be the metrics.  And I think the one thing Iowa needs to do, as a test case, is establish the quality metrics NOW. Before they get too far into it.  Decide now how they will measure "betterness."  Make those metrics publich.  Then use them to determine what works and what doesn't.

There will always be individual diferences as long as we operate under different state laws and in different climates.  But to the extent possible, we need to standardize into one USCAP.

mikeylikey

The real factor that comes into play if other wings were to "adopt" the Iowa plan would be size.  SIZE in regards to the number of members, the geographic, money, squadrons...... etc.  The individual wings will be larger or smaller in size to Iowa.  I think some things from Iowa may work.....but not all.
What's up monkeys?

Eclipse

Quote from: RogueLeader on June 21, 2007, 06:23:46 PM
Right, like I said this is about what we can do to make ourselves more relevant to our communities.  Iowa has become relevant to Iowa, and we need to do the same.

IAWG has become >visible< to the state government and the guard.

My guess is they are even less relevant in their local communities because of their centralized participation.
IMHO, this runs contrary to the whole point of CAP.

"That Others May Zoom"

Eclipse

Quote from: ZigZag911 on June 21, 2007, 07:33:25 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 21, 2007, 03:46:53 AM
When you work THE program, you can be reasonably sure that the majority of your operations won't just disappear overnight.  When you make up your own rules and depend on outside resources or organizations, you run the risk of all your work being for nothing.

You frequently mention "THE Program" as if it were some monolithic force with the constancy of Newton's Laws....I would simply ask you to consider that  the way the CAP programs (we have 3 main ones with lots of offshoots) develop is precisely through the kind of innovation and creativity that Iowa Wing is exercising.

Will it work for every wing?  Certainly not!

Is it going to last forever? No, but then little does in this life, does it?!?

I do this because too many members, and outsiders, think the way to "fix" CAP is to change the program, when in fact, the way to fix it is to work it.

If you change our missions, operational structure, or other significant parts of CAP, changes to local operations and procedures may be warranted, but I can assure success is possible, and likely, if yo pick up the book and follow what it tells you to do.

"That Others May Zoom"

Nick Critelli

Quote from: Eclipse on June 21, 2007, 09:25:47 PM
IAWG has become >visible< to the state government and the guard.

My guess is they are even less relevant in their local communities because of their centralized participation. IMHO, this runs contrary to the whole point of CAP.

Wrong O. Remember the underlying ES operational theory: All emergencies are local...the state only provides resources to the locals. Consequently CAP has to become extremely relevant to local government. This is done in concert with state government.



isuhawkeye

I have been watching the Iowa threads for some time now.  I wanted to address some issues and concerns.

First of all we discuss the wing centric, vs the squadron centric model.  Many CAP people explain that the squadron is where the rubber meets the road, and that the squadron is where the program is delivered.  I agree with these statements completely.  Unfortunately with out a strong centralization of structure, and command you run into problems.  Below is a look at a few of those concerns. 

Emergency services.

Under a squadron centric model you (in theory) build relationships with your local EMA, EMS, fire, LEA, and others.  You get to know them, and work with them.  Unfortunately in Iowa we only have squadrons in 12 counties.  In a state made up of 99 counties you are not even scratching the surface.  Of the 12 counties only three have had any form of relationship established.  And god only knows what those counties expect from us. 

Under the wing centric model we brief all county agencies to get a hold of the state.  Under this model we have more than tripled the number of missions Iowa has been assigned to (I can produce stats later). 

Training is another important factor.  Under the squadron centric model each squadron trains its own response teams.  Some were very good at ground team missions (hurrah 91st).  Others were good at other ES specialties.  Unfortunately you couldn't mix and match teams, and you never knew what level of training or experience you could expect. 

In Iowa (before the change) we held about 7 large scale wing wide exercises.  All training was being done at the wing level any way.  Why not formalize things. 


Cadet Programs.

Cadet programs are the meet of CAP.  And strong squadrons are a thing of beauty.  Unfortunately those squadrons are very dependant upon strong dynamic leadership, and under my experience the only consistant way to keep cadets in a program is to
1.   get them in an airplane,
2.   get them to encampment.

Interestingly enough encampments are run at wing and region level, and local squadrons had a bad record of conducting O flights and wing CP had to forxce them to happen. 

Again wing driving the buss. 

Being called to dinner.  More later. 

RogueLeader

Quote from: Nick Critelli, Lt Col CAP on June 21, 2007, 11:35:01 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 21, 2007, 09:25:47 PM
IAWG has become >visible< to the state government and the guard.

My guess is they are even less relevant in their local communities because of their centralized participation. IMHO, this runs contrary to the whole point of CAP.

Wrong O. Remember the underlying ES operational theory: All emergencies are local...the state only provides resources to the locals. Consequently CAP has to become extremely relevant to local government. This is done in concert with state government.



Believe it or not, I really have to agree with Nick.  Even after going to the Wing Centric operational view, the Squadrons have still been as "visible" to the local area.  When I was in Dubuque IA, we actually got involved with a couple Boy Scout troops across the border into WI.  It was specifically due to the training that was furnished at Wing HQ.As of the time that I left, we had an operation for flight activity, that was to open to area students-IIRC.  I also had some contacts within some of the Dubuque area boy scouts so we could offer our support to them as well- teach SAR techniques as well as communicate w/ aircraft.  I can not say what happened with the other Iowa Squadrons, but that what IA-043 was doing. 
That just goes to say that if/when a Wing goes to a more centralized system, that does not mean that the local presence is lost.
WYWG DP

GRW 3340

RiverAux

Personally, I think that any Wing or group that offered a day of structured training every month would see similar benefits even if there weren't accomodations for overnight lodging.  That in and of itself can lead to major improvements.  The other stuff Iowa is doing may help a little, but I don't think is quite as important. 

isuhawkeye

Well dinner was good.  Ill keep going with my rant. 

Several questions have been asked referencing the stability of the Iowa wing.  Having been a part of this wing through six wing commanders I have watched as some of them have been exceptionally good while others have been amazingly bad.  Of those wing commanders only 1 has served out a full term, and that CC has been Colonel Ralph Tomlinson (the current commander)

Recent National Level politics and the rapid change over in commanders in nearly every wing has led me to assume that CAP has a stability problem nation wide. 

Under the traditional CAP model the wing commander and his staff are usually friends who have come up through the system together.  The head quarters moves to that city, and all information and decision making is isolated to that environment.  I personally watched the wing head quarters move from Des Moines, to Cedar Rapids, to Iowa City, to Davenport, and now full circle back to Des Moines.  During these moves every file and piece of historical record was lost, or destroyed.  These moves made sense at the time, but with our new WTA concept all staff, commanders, and officers are in one place every month.  Mail can be distributed, and staff meetings can take place.  Currently Col. Tomlinson Lives in Humboldt IA, which is nearly 100 miles from the Head Quarters. 

Clearly a new commander would have the power to move the HQ away from its current location, but I would hope that the benefits would outweigh the desire to move.

Some have expressed concern over the future commanders of the Iowa wing.  Iowa has always looked to the existing leadership for the next CC.  Some times it is a successful squadron commander, or an accomplished staff officer, but there was never any fore thought, or planning geared towards long term growth and development options.  The foundation set forth in the OTS has allowed senior leadership to identify talent, and place that talent where it can be most appropriately utilized by the wing.  No one is picking a wing commander out of an OTS class, but it is exciting to see, and identify strong dynamic leaders, and to assist them to grow.

Finally there are concerns over changes in government, and changes within the Iowa national guard.  Believe me we have been very concerned about this.  What is probably not known to the public is the simple fact that every point of contact, and liaison we have established has changed over in the past three years.  Some have been promoted, others have changed jobs, and others have left the service.  Our state has even elected a new governor.  With each change comes an opportunity for CAP to become more entrenched within the system.  Our staff has even gone so far as to train and teach new officers about their new position. 

Clearly I can not predict the future, and I can not guarantee that Iowa will have this relationship for ever, and as a friend once said "a years worth of attaboys can all be lost with one "expletive" up". 

My goal is to turn this organization over to the next generation of officers better than I found it. 


Well that's about all I have to say about that.    <<Flame on.>>

ZigZag911

We really need a mix of centralization & decentralization.

Until there is sufficient experienced personnel and trained leaders at squadron & group level (for all 3 missions), the smaller & mid-size wings need to keep a tight rein on operations.

Once you start having trained & experienced folks below wing level, you really need to decentralize, or your trained personnel are going to feel hemmed in and lose interest.

At that point wing becomes the site for setting & maintaining standards, offering advanced opportunities, and long range planning.

Speaking of which, does Iowa have long term plans?

Is the concentration of field grade officers at wing HQ, for instance, a temporary measure?  Or are you viewing it as a permanent policy?


JohnKachenmeister

I love being a controversial agitator.

A few years ago, I would have agreed with capchiro and others.  But for almost three years now, I've been an IG officer.  I have no idea how a "Composite" squadron with less than 60 or so people is able to accomplish all 3 CAP missions.  Normally, one finds:

1.  Commanders at the local level have neither the time nor the expertise to do all the missions.  Things get thrown out to lighten the load.  Usually the first piece of jetsam is the external AE program.

2.  Then the officer AE program gets ditched, because nobody's got the time.

3.  There are Composite squadrons with less than 6 cadets.  How much leadership training can go on with that kind of situation?

4.  Unless a unit has pilots, and not all do of course, the cadet AE program gets weak.  How can a non-pilot answer some of the questions cadets have?

5.  Squadron commanders can choose to focus their effots as they see fit, which is some cases means that a cadet squadron gets real good at drill, but never sees an ES mission.

I'm sure somebody will chime in the "MY unit does this and that and all things with appropriate excellence... " and that's good.  But understand any unit that is doing all three missions well is a rare bird indeed.

I suggest that it is time to think outside the "Box" and come up with new solutions to re-invigorate CAP and its missions.  I'm not saying that the brief suggestions we post here are THE ultimate solution to all of CAP's problems, but they are solutions that need to be considered.

If things were going well at all units, we wouldn't be having this discussion.  So one cannot define this as "Change for the sake of change."
Another former CAP officer

Eclipse

Quote from: Dragoon on June 21, 2007, 06:20:50 PM
We can talk all day about squadrons being where training occurs, but it doesn't really seem to work that way. Because to train, you need qualified trainers.

A commander sets the goals and mission for his unit with regards to training and then makes it happen, that's his job.

Whether that means using internal qualified people, bringing resources in, or going to them, - that's just a logistical detail.

Besides to LEARN something requires nothing but reference material and an interested audience.  Taken step by step, I have yet to see anything CAP does which cannot be self-taught.  Its only the qualification sign-offs which need a "trainer", and if you're motivated, getting to an SET is not that big a deal.

Need a mission to complete your rating?  Instead of whining about no activity, plan one yourself.  No funding for flying?  Split the gas, fly a canned 60-1 scenario usiing the Wing's monthly training number and get it done.

"That Others May Zoom"

Eclipse

Quote from: Nick Critelli, Lt Col CAP on June 21, 2007, 11:35:01 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 21, 2007, 09:25:47 PM
IAWG has become >visible< to the state government and the guard.

My guess is they are even less relevant in their local communities because of their centralized participation. IMHO, this runs contrary to the whole point of CAP.

Wrong O. Remember the underlying ES operational theory: All emergencies are local...the state only provides resources to the locals. Consequently CAP has to become extremely relevant to local government. This is done in concert with state government.

Has to, yes.  Has, I don't know.  Feel free to cite examples where the state-based unit is being more effective with local response than any other state is using standard CAP practices.

"That Others May Zoom"