Re-thinking the "One CAP" policy

[mikeylikey]

I like getting rid of SQD names.  It sounds more military sounding to say "128th Operations SQD, 28th Wing, Third Region, USCAP" then it does to say "fighting Tom's Bangor Fire Department Cadet Squadron, Oklahoma Wing, Southnorthern Region, USCAP".  (names and places made-up to protect the innocent)

[MIKE]

I call dibs on the 666th Cadet Squadron. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

Of course, the flip side to that would be that other (non-operations) squadrons are assumed to not do operations (ie ES and other flying)

We'll just be honest and call Senior-only squadrons what they are: Krispy Kreme Corporate HQ Field Offices"

Excuse me, I prefer Duncan myself. And they're finally coming to Vegas! If they didn't I'd have to move back to PA.

"Dunkin" is a donut.  "Duncan" is running for President.  25 years as a street cop, I know my donuts!

[JohnKachenmeister]

What is it now, 138th Belt Busters Squadron?

I've heard cadets refer to the Dark Side in passing, "the only thing that you start gaining on is belt sizes", over there.. ;-)

However on topic, too, the fact that they say "California Wing - Civil Air Patrol" and "286th Operations Squadron - Civil Air Patrol", still means there's separate units to one organization.

It's just in the naming..

If you think you're going to 'make it easier' for the media, you have another thing coming. 

Well... there ARE three separate types of squadrons in CAP.

Would you prefer -- The 96th Civil Air Patrol Squadron (Cadet) (Montana)

                            --  The 69th Civil Air Patrol Squadron (Composite) (West Virginia)
                           
                            --  The 123rd Civil Air Patrol Squadron (Officers) (New York)?

[jimmydeanno]

To make things even more confusing, we have CAP units in California that belong to Nevada Wing (aka "Nevada Civil Air Patrol") - such as the unit at Truckee, CA.

It's not any different than National Capital Wing.  IIRC there isn't a single unit within the border of DC.

[Major Carrales]

Since most CAP units are not deployed as units, it seems strange to call them by numbered designations.

Now, if a CAP was organized as deployable units...where one Squadron would be a sort of "WHOLE CAP" entity with Ground and Air Resources and could be called up, that might alter the naming scheme.

As it stands, the CAP unit as it currently exists is more or less geared to 1) Location 2) managing the CAP Officers and Cadets in that Location and 3) exist as an entity, on its own, (sometimes greatly isolated) with no real descision making (much less policy) function that contributes members to a greater effort.

While the Corpus Christi Comp Squadron has "deployed en masse" (meaning as many of us that can go to a SARex actually go to one at the same time and make up a presence in a neighboring unit); the Corpus Christi Comp Squadron could not be "activated," for example, to deploy to a Hurricane effected area.  Instead, the members would arrive and be disbursted into the ICS system.

Thus...I don't see how chaning the names to numerals would reflect any sort of change.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Since most CAP units are not deployed as units, it seems strange to call them by numbered designations.

Now, if a CAP was organized as deployable units...where one Squadron would be a sort of "WHOLE CAP" entity with Ground and Air Resources and could be called up, that might alter the naming scheme.

As it stands, the CAP unit as it currently exists is more or less geared to 1) Location 2) managing the CAP Officers and Cadets in that Location and 3) exist as an entity, on its own, (sometimes greatly isolated) with no real descision making (much less policy) function that contributes members to a greater effort.

While the Corpus Christi Comp Squadron has "deployed en masse" (meaning as many of us that can go to a SARex actually go to one at the same time and make up a presence in a neighboring unit); the Corpus Christi Comp Squadron could not be "activated," for example, to deploy to a Hurricane effected area.  Instead, the members would arrive and be disbursted into the ICS system.

Thus...I don't see how chaning the names to numerals would reflect any sort of change.

You are right.  Actually CAP squadrons act more like "Training Centers" in the Naval Reserve do.  They are home-based entities that people deploy from as individuals.

[Major Carrales]

You are right.  Actually CAP squadrons act more like "Training Centers" in the Naval Reserve do.  They are home-based entities that people deploy from as individuals.

Excellent, Kach!  I yield to your concise verbage.

[SarDragon]

A. KK donuts suck. Really. I wouldn't eat them with King Kong's mouth.

B. Numbered unit designations make my head hurt. Some folks do fine with the numbers - Sq 57, Sq 10, Sq 144, etc. I don't. It's much easier for me to work with squadron names - San Diego Senior Sq, Jon E. Kramer Composite Squadron, San Diego Cadet Squadron, etc. Even if the name isn't geographical, I can still remember it better that way, than with just a number.

YMMV.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Actually, the discussion began when we were trying to collectively discover a way to keep CAP from being viewed by the Great Unwashed and Uninformed Multitudes (GUUM) as state organizations, i.e., the "Missiouri Civil Air Patrol."  One of the solutions was to number the wings rather than name them.

That extended to the groups and the squadrons.

But Sparky is right, our squadrons do not deploy as units.  The first thing we cast aside in a mission is unit integrity.  Every mission is commenced by formation of a mission task force under an incident commander.  I really do not take a position on naming vs. numbering squadrons. 

In fact, I don't think they should be called "Squadrons" since they do not deploy as units.

Why not call them "Stations?"

"Civil Air Patrol Station West Podunk"

"The Pancho Barnes Memorial Civil Air Patrol Station"

A "Group" could still exercise command over a number of CAP stations, and a "Wing" which could then be numbered or named, would exercise C&C over the Groups.

Or...  "Training Centers?"

"The North Elbowbend Civil Air Patrol Training Center"

"The Wrongway Corrigan Memorial Civil Air Patrol Training Center"

[RiverAux]

Since most CAP units are not deployed as units, it seems strange to call them by numbered designations.

Though not unusual at all in the military either.  Quite common for training or "administrative" units to have numeric designations even though they're not intended for actual operational use.

As I think I said earlier, this is really more of a problem in how CAP public affairs officers phrase things in their press releases and interviews than a real "structural" problem within CAP. 

[Major Carrales]

Hummm...?

How easy would it be to say...

CAP STATION KINGSVILLE, Texas Wing, USCAP?

CAP STATION BROWNSVILLE, Texas Wing, USCAP?

CAP STATION CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas Wing USCAP?

These sound a bit like names of CAP FACILITIES, unit's that gather there would/should have a geographic/function name;  Corpus Christi COMP SQUADRON, Kingsville CADET SQUADRON etc.   Units that share facilities and pitch in to maintain said facilities.

Save the fancy names for Flights and Aircrews, Brahma Cadet Flight,  Alpha Aircrew etc; if you wanted them at all.  I might be a nice way to honor some CAP hero... to name a flight after them.

If this, however, a problem?  Do we have problems being once CAP based on unit names?

Again, the fact is we do not deploy as units and, aside from squadron pactches, we blend into the ICS system at an Exercise or REDCAP.

[Major Carrales]

Hummm...?

How easy would it be to say...

CAP STATION KINGSVILLE, Texas Wing, USCAP?

CAP STATION BROWNSVILLE, Texas Wing, USCAP?

CAP STATION CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas Wing USCAP?

These sound a bit like names of CAP FACILITIES, unit's that gather there would/should have a geographic/function name;  Corpus Christi COMP SQUADRON, Kingsville CADET SQUADRON etc.   Units that share facilities and pitch in to maintain said facilities.

Save the fancy names for Flights and Aircrews, Brahma Cadet Flight, Smilin' Kach Senior Flight, Alpha Aircrew etc; if you wanted them at all.  It might be a nice way to honor some CAP hero... to name a flight after them.  Squadrons would deal with that, if at all.

Is this, however, a real issue/problem?  Do we have problems being once CAP based on unit names?

Again, the fact is we do not deploy as units and, aside from squadron pactches, we blend into the ICS system at an Exercise or REDCAP.

[MIKE]

Non-specific numbering is best because it is more or less standardized.  The 666th Cadet Squadron is still that regardless of what town/city it's in or where it moves within the wing.  If the unit wants to re-designate to a Composite or Senior Squadron, they could in theory just deactivate and reactivate as one of the appropriate units that wing has in its pool of deactivated units... with appropriate heraldry etc attached to it.  So wing would have a pool of charters for each type of unit to issue/reissue as appropriate.

Instead of having the East Podunk Cdt Sq have to change all their stuff when they move to Mooselick and become a "Memorial" Composite Sq.

[Grumpy]

As I see it your main complaint is keepping the press from assuming that we have separate CAPs.
I've seen a lot of suggestions but I sum it up this way.

After 29 years in Law Enforcement, I have NEVER seen the press get anything right so no matter what you would change the name to, they'd get it wrong.

[rdmcii]

The old Wing numbers are not sequencial. They are the Region number plus the Wing number, thus the "52" on the Indiana Wing patch means Region 5 (GLR) wing 2, not that it was the last wing.

Bob

[JohnKachenmeister]

The old Wing numbers are not sequencial. They are the Region number plus the Wing number, thus the "52" on the Indiana Wing patch means Region 5 (GLR) wing 2, not that it was the last wing.

Bob

And Ohio's "51" had nothing to do with "Area 51" except that the bodies of the dead aliens from the Roswell crash were stored at Wright-Patterson for a while.

[mikeylikey]

The old Wing numbers are not sequential. They are the Region number plus the Wing number, thus the "52" on the Indiana Wing patch means Region 5 (GLR) wing 2, not that it was the last wing.

Bob

I don't think that is correct.  I remember reading that the wing numbers were the old designators from the Army.  As in Third Corps, First Army (31).  Didn't we have a link on CAPTALK in one thread that lead to a site with the point paper on the subject??

[JohnKachenmeister]

The original Regions paralleled the Continental Army Groups  All of the states in 5th Army Group became the 5th Region, and the wings were numbered sequentially within the Region.  Michigan and Wisconsin were in the 6th Army Group, and they became 63 and 62, even though there were only 52 total wings.

[flyerthom]

Of course, the flip side to that would be that other (non-operations) squadrons are assumed to not do operations (ie ES and other flying)

We'll just be honest and call Senior-only squadrons what they are: Krispy Kreme Corporate HQ Field Offices"

Excuse me, I prefer Duncan myself. And they're finally coming to Vegas! If they didn't I'd have to move back to PA.

"Dunkin" is a donut.  "Duncan" is running for President.  25 years as a street cop, I know my donuts!

There can be only one ...

See what happens when your cholesterol gets dangerously close to normal!