The topic about whether you would be in CAP without ES reminded me about this.
All too often I'm trying to plan something for our squadron like a cadet basic training program when I hear, "But what about the cadets that don't like the military stuff and just wanted to join for the o-rides and AE training? Won't they leave if there's too much military stuff?"
Can you be a cadet and only participate in the AE aspect of the program, or do you think all cadets should be cadets first and do AE and ES second?
Some unit cadet programs can lean more toward AE than others, but I think your topic title is a bit misleading... being in the program just to fly can be a lot different than cadets who like AE activities.
Last night I asked cadets what sort of activities they wanted to do over the coming months. Most of the stuff they came up with would be considered an AE activity by most... Though they are also really interested in standing up a color guard since most of them attended a seminar on CG at wing conference.
Cadets can be in the program for whatever reason they want.
We shouldn't be trying to mold their interests to fit what we want to put in a schedule.
You can go ahead and plan something military-oriented and the cadets can either try it out or choose not to. Heck, they may even find they like it.
Or you can see what the cadets' interests are and try to plan activities according to that.
Either way, it's nobody's job but the cadet's to decide what they are interested in.
And I'm not sure what you mean by "should they be cadets first and do AE and ES second?" What does "being cadets" mean to you? To me, it means participating in the missions of Civil Air Patrol, which, of course, include AE and ES.
I'm pretty sure when the CAP cadet program was founded, they intended the cadets to be heavily involved in ALL aspects of the program, as demonstrated by the early implementation of AE summer programs for cadets, etc. They were not limited to doing drill inside a building.
Its about paying dues...literal and figurative.
If a cadet wants to fly, so be it. But there are other elements of the program that must occur also. There are only so many O-FLights they can get. Let them to AE and learn all there is about flying.
If a cadet is in it "just to fly," then let them take it to the NTH DEGREE and go to the flight encampments.
If we get a pilot out of it...it's not so bad. But if it is "cheap thrills" and their gone. Well, at least we got 'em in a plane.
Okay, okay... sorry.
I was just wondering if you thought it was important for all cadets to at least know all of the basic stuff you learn at encampments (a little bit about uniform wear, some customs and courtesies, some drill here and there). I don't want every one of my cadets to go out and join a drill team and honor guard... I just want them to be able to do simple things like read grade insignia.
It seems as if some people join so that they can stay at C/AB the entire time and take the o-flights. Should you be allowed to do that?
Per CAPR 52-16, which governs cadet programs, cadets may be kicked out of the program for not advancing 2 grades per year. Note, however, that is a "can" not a "must" so if you let them remain C/ABs forever, then I guess that's your deal.
If they are advancing, they must be able to read grade insignia, do basic drill, know customs and courtesies, and proper uniform wear, since that is all in the tests they must pass to advance in grade.
So, if you do follow the minimum 2 grades/year guideline, there should be no problem at all.
However, about your other point of staying C/AB and taking the o-flights, that's a whole other issue. That is what the O-flights are there for, and if that is their interest and they want to spend most of their time doing that, then so be it. Like I said above, it is a cadet's choice what they want to be interested in and what part of the program they want to focus on, not ours.
You'll find that every cadet has a sort of "focus field" where they focus their energies and knowledge. For some it is drill, some like leadership best, for others it is aviation. It doesn't really matter, though, because having people that are interested enough in one portion of the program increases the likelihood that they will study that portion to a further extent, resulting in your squadron having several people who are very knowledgeable in those areas rather than a whole slew of people who are kinda knowledgeable about everything.
But, in short, yes. Every member should have a basic knowledge of ALL parts of the program. We should all have a basic working knowledge of customs & courtesies, drill (heavily neglected by many senior squadrons), uniform wear, emergency services, ae, and cadet programs. Then, each member can decide where they would like to devote most of their interest.
Quote from: Jolt on March 15, 2007, 05:23:37 PM
It seems as if some people join so that they can stay at C/AB the entire time and take the o-flights. Should you be allowed to do that?
No, I do not like ticket punchers of any sort. I'd include the C/Amn Rescue Rangers and Fast Burners.
No I think the military aspect is highly important. I think kids come to us for all kinds of reasons from wanting to fly to being discipline problems. Maybe they want to be here, maybe their parents are making them, I don't care. The point is they are with me for a specified time & I get to mold them within the purpose of the CAP cadet program... which is to produce aerospace-minded leaders (in a military-style) who if they don't choose the military wil still make good citizens & either way will be of service to community, state, & nation. The reason the program doesn't ahve as strong amilitary element in every place is frankly the adults there are too weak to provide it. You shouldn't be allowing a Sq to be dominated by people that don't want that aspect of the program. It's a total package we have here & they are not free to pick & choose which elements they want to emphasize.
Quote from: Jolt on March 15, 2007, 05:23:37 PM
Okay, okay... sorry.
I was just wondering if you thought it was important for all cadets to at least know all of the basic stuff you learn at encampments (a little bit about uniform wear, some customs and courtesies, some drill here and there). I don't want every one of my cadets to go out and join a drill team and honor guard... I just want them to be able to do simple things like read grade insignia.
It seems as if some people join so that they can stay at C/AB the entire time and take the o-flights. Should you be allowed to do that?
Last month I visited a squadron that really has their stuff together. They have a proceedure:
Cadets must be C/SrAmn before applying to their Cadet Commander to participate in ES training. Then the application goes up to the Deputy Commander of Cadets and then a panel of Cadet and Officer leaders interviews the cadet. The cadet understands that ES is an "extra", that is to say the Cadet Program is priority. Scholastics have priority over the Cadet Program. In order to be allowed to participate in ES, the cadet must maintain his/her grades in school and continue to develop and advance in the Cadet Program.
This is also discussed with the parental units of the cadet. The parents understand that the squadron leadership can and will put a stop to ES participation by the cadet if either the cadet's grades deteriorate or the cadet fails to continue advancement in the Cadet Program. The parenal units also understand that cadets may learn things in ES that may be classified or sensitive information.
The cadet signs the application, the parental unit(s) sign the application, as does the Cadet Commander and the Deputy Commander of Cadets...only then can ES training begin.
Remember too, that failure to advance in the Cadet Program is grounds for termination of membership. The Cadet Program is as interesting and engaging as you make it, the only limit is the collective imagination.
Quote from: DNall on March 15, 2007, 05:38:01 PM
The point is they are with me for a specified time & I get to mold them within the purpose of the CAP cadet program... which is to produce aerospace-minded leaders (in a military-style) who if they don't choose the military wil still make good citizens & either way will be of service to community, state, & nation.
(emphasis added)
That's funny. That's not what my copy of CAPR 52-16 says:
Quote from: CAPR 52-161-1. The Cadet Program’s Mission & Goals. The mission of the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program is to provide the youth of our nation with a quality program that enhances their leadership skills through an interest in aviation, and simultaneously provide service to the United States Air Force and the local community.
Notice aerospace is mentioned. Military-style is not. The only thing related to the military mentioned in the Cadet Program's Mission and Goals is that we provide service to the Air Force.
Now please don't get me wrong. I believe a military aspect to the program is necessary and that CAP is modeled after the Air Force structure, and we should, therefore, have a military approach to all aspects of CAP's three missions.
However, that doesn't change the fact that the purpose of the cadet program is not to "produce leaders in military style" per se, it is simply to produce great leaders.
Quote from: DNall on March 15, 2007, 05:38:01 PM
The reason the program doesn't ahve as strong amilitary element in every place is frankly the adults there are too weak to provide it. You shouldn't be allowing a Sq to be dominated by people that don't want that aspect of the program. It's a total package we have here & they are not free to pick & choose which elements they want to emphasize.
Disagreed. Just because someone does not emphasize a military element does not make them "weak." I would love to see how you would justify such a statement.
I do agree that a squadron should not be
dominated by people who "don't want" that aspect of the program, since I think that aspect to some degree is necessary.
But just as important is that you shouldn't let a squadron be dominated by those who want a gung-ho all military program, either.
The key is
balance. Find a balance of the programs, and you are set.
P.S. Might I also mention that CAPR 52-16 lists 5 elements of the cadet program and explains them. They are a)leadership, b) aerospace education, c) physical fitness, d) moral leadership, and e) activities.
Once again, aerospace is mentioned, military method is not.
Like I said, don't get me wrong. a military model is necessary, but we must be careful where we put it on the spectrum of the cadet program. It is not a goal or purpose of the program, nor is it even an element.
We should be running our cadet programs in accordance with CAPR 52-16 at all times.
Quote from: CAP428 on March 15, 2007, 05:33:55 PMBut, in short, yes. Every member should have a basic knowledge of ALL parts of the program. We should all have a basic working knowledge of customs & courtesies, drill (heavily neglected by many senior squadrons), uniform wear, emergency services, ae, and cadet programs. Then, each member can decide where they would like to devote most of their interest.
Believe it or not... you basically agreed with me.
Another thing that I want to add is that if you're just in for the o-flights and nothing else, that's great, but you're taking away the opportunity to fly from the active cadets in your unit, pretty much wasting the pilot's time, and taking money away from the organization. I think you have to give back a little before you keep taking.
CAP428, I don't know what you're talking about with DNall. You just quoted him, said he was wrong, and then showed a paragraph from CAPR 52-16 that echoed what he was saying.
Quote from: Jolt on March 15, 2007, 06:01:01 PM
CAP428, I don't know what you're talking about with DNall. You just quoted him, said he was wrong, and then showed a paragraph from CAPR 52-16 that echoed what he was saying.
Not quite. I agreed with the overall concept put forth in his statement, but disagreed with the phrasing that the CAP cadet program's
purpose was to make aerospace-minded leaders
in a military style, since nowhere in the cadet program's goals/purpose does it mention the military, nor does it in the 5 elements of the cadet program.
I agree with his approach, but not the wording.
Quote from: Jolt on March 15, 2007, 04:30:44 PMCan you be a cadet and only participate in the AE aspect of the program, or do you think all cadets should be cadets first and do AE and ES second?
Only for one year. If you don't participate in the "military" stuff you cannot even pass your curry....and by extensiton cannot particpate in nearly anything else. If you don't promote at least 2 times a year then you are subject to 2b for failure to progress.
ES is NOT a formal part of the Cadet Program.....you must do the ES portion to progress as a cadet.
Semantics, and being legalistic about the wording of our mission statement will not change what CAP is.
Our cadet mission is to promote aerospace education and support the USAF, the way we DO that is through a paramilitary program.
Cadets only interested in flying, who don't want to so the "rest" drag down the unit as a whole, and slow everyone's progression.
There are more appropriate organizations such as local flying clubs which would better server everyone involved.
If unit CC's are honest with the cadets and parents from day one, this should not be an issue.
Very true. But that can be said from any angle.
For example, someone who is only interested in ES, but does not want to learn any sort of marching or aerospace-related things also drags down the unit and can be directed to a local private SAR organization.
You know I been a cadet progrms officer for a very long time now, and I'm pretty sure I know what the program is about.
If you'll rewind there a minute kid you'll find I said we use a military-style program to create aerospace-minded leaders. And this is my fourth or fifth version of the reg, so don't think I particularly care if the soften definitions to be politically correct. This is a military affiliated program operated in a military-style on military funding in order to accomplish military objectives. The rest is about playing nice.
What you'll find is that the military aspect is not itself one of the objectives, neither is it an objective at basic training in any branch of the real military. It is in fact a major element of teh underlying foundational methodology by which the stated objectives are reached, and without which those objectives cannot be fully reached to produce the intended outcome.
Quote from: DNall on March 16, 2007, 12:38:07 AM
You know I been a cadet progrms officer for a very long time now, and I'm pretty sure I know what the program is about.
If you'll rewind there a minute kid you'll find I said we use a military-style program to create aerospace-minded leaders. And this is my fourth or fifth version of the reg, so don't think I particularly care if the soften definitions to be politically correct. This is a military affiliated program operated in a military-style on military funding in order to accomplish military objectives. The rest is about playing nice.
What you'll find is that the military aspect is not itself one of the objectives, neither is it an objective at basic training in any branch of the real military. It is in fact a major element of teh underlying foundational methodology by which the stated objectives are reached, and without which those objectives cannot be fully reached to produce the intended outcome.
And I'm a current member of the program, so what makes you think I
don't know what the program is about? It doesn't take a genius to figure it out. You go read the 52-16.
Well there,
old man, I never challenged you on your point. If
you'll "rewind" you'll see I challenged your wording. The
purpose of the cadet program does not involve military training or whatever you want to call it, it is simply the
method with which we accomplish our goal.
We're saying the same thing, you just added the word "purpose," which it is not. Fourth or fifth version or not, the rest of us are using the current version, so let's get on the same page.
And my, is that a high horse you sit upon! ::)
That was not smart.
I would say something, but I'm sure someone else will.
I just had to quote it so you can't change it later:
Quote from: CAP428 on March 16, 2007, 04:16:39 AM
Quote from: DNall on March 16, 2007, 12:38:07 AM
You know I been a cadet progrms officer for a very long time now, and I'm pretty sure I know what the program is about.
If you'll rewind there a minute kid you'll find I said we use a military-style program to create aerospace-minded leaders. And this is my fourth or fifth version of the reg, so don't think I particularly care if the soften definitions to be politically correct. This is a military affiliated program operated in a military-style on military funding in order to accomplish military objectives. The rest is about playing nice.
What you'll find is that the military aspect is not itself one of the objectives, neither is it an objective at basic training in any branch of the real military. It is in fact a major element of teh underlying foundational methodology by which the stated objectives are reached, and without which those objectives cannot be fully reached to produce the intended outcome.
And I'm a current member of the program, so what makes you think I don't know what the program is about? It doesn't take a genius to figure it out. You go read the 52-16.
Well there, old man, I never challenged you on your point. If you'll "rewind" you'll see I challenged your wording. The purpose of the cadet program does not involve military training or whatever you want to call it, it is simply the method with which we accomplish our goal.
We're saying the same thing, you just added the word "purpose," which it is not. Fourth or fifth version or not, the rest of us are using the current version, so let's get on the same page.
And my, is that a high horse you sit upon! ::)
How is that military program you are part of? I'm just wondering cause seems like the good order & discipline seem in short supply, bit on those core values also.
If I might respectfully review... what I said was:
QuoteThe point is they are with me for a specified time & I get to mold them within the purpose of the CAP cadet program... which is to produce aerospace-minded leaders (in a military-style) who if they don't choose the military wil still make good citizens & either way will be of service to community, state, & nation.
...and I repeated:
Quotewe use a military-style program to create aerospace-minded leaders.
...then I clarified:
QuoteWhat you'll find is that the military aspect is not itself one of the objectives, neither is it an objective at basic training in any branch of the real military. It is in fact a major element of teh underlying foundational methodology by which the stated objectives are reached, and without which those objectives cannot be fully reached to produce the intended outcome.
Now what you said in response was, and see if this makes sense:
QuoteThe purpose of the cadet program does not involve military training... [military training] is simply the method with which we accomplish our [purpose].
(cleaned up for effect)Everything that comes from national is not gold, in fact most of it doesn't surpass average, and I do in places have trouble calling it marginally acceptable.
You take a look at my real world resume & that of my adult staff, and/or spend a half hour talking to the people I command, & I think you'll find yourself in a position where you're better off acting like a sponge than the alternative. I'd give you a little quote to carry with you in that sequence, "Leadership is caught, not taught." ...so quit scaring away the fish.
<sigh> Like I said, we're saying the same things.
But if it makes you feel better, whatever.
(http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_17_10.gif)-------> DNall
Whatever kid, have a good night.
Quote from: Jolt on March 15, 2007, 05:23:37 PM
Okay, okay... sorry.
I was just wondering if you thought it was important for all cadets to at least know all of the basic stuff you learn at encampments (a little bit about uniform wear, some customs and courtesies, some drill here and there). I don't want every one of my cadets to go out and join a drill team and honor guard... I just want them to be able to do simple things like read grade insignia.
It seems as if some people join so that they can stay at C/AB the entire time and take the o-flights. Should you be allowed to do that?
You cant do that? CAPM 52-16 says you HAVE to advance in grade and if you dont in a certain time period ( I think its three years) you can be terminated from CAP. SO you cant just stay at one rank like Senior Members can.
What folks have to realize is the the Cadet program is VERY different than the Senior Member program. The cadet proam IS a military program, the Senior member program not so much. Cadets have to participate in Drilll and Ceremonies, Physical Fitness and leadership training. Its required to progress in the program and its required as per CAPM 52-16.
Too many people try to comapare the wo programs and they are very different. Yes, A senior member can join and if all they want to do is ES then they can do that. A cadet is not in that situation.
And I do not believe that cadets HAVE to participate in ES to be active in CAP. The primary purpose of the cadet programis to build leaders in an aerospace environment. They are to be encoruaged to get into the aviation or aerospace field. Nothing in this mandate says anything about search and rescue. We ALLOW cadets too particiapte in ES. It is not mandatory
Cadets do have to participate in military drill and military leadership. If a cadet joins soley to fly or build time he is inthe wrong organization. A cadet can get his lisences all the way up to CFI in CAP, but if it were me, he or she would have to give to CAP in order to get from CAP
As cap428 said, balance is key. There are units that do nothing but drill, drill, drill and win competitions, of course. But, as I've told cadets in the past, if the only unit that placed better than you is one that ignores the rest of the program and does only drill, I don't think they have a thing to be ashamed of. There are three blades on the prop. As someone else said, pay attention to 52-16; it's the bible for how to run things. If you're not with it, either in letter or in spirit/intent, then you're just flat wrong.
If all that a cadet, or senior member for that matter, wants to do is fly, I say send them on their way, and let 'em pay the going rate for the privilege of exercising their hobby. We are tasked to do more than fly, and there are quite a few jobs that are necessary and important, and never touch an aircraft. If you don't buy into the whole pkg, go where it's all about the flying - a flying club.
I like to spend time in the right or back seat as much as anyone. But I know that sometimes I'll have to mind a radio, or man a desk because the mission requires it. I hate prima donnas, no matter what their skill. When I was on wing staff years ago, and helping to run a SAREX, I actually had a guy show up wanting to get his CAPF5 ride so that he could fly that weekend. I told him that we needed some trainees in some other slots that weekend. He told me "Look, I'm just a a pilot, OK?" Since he was a Lieutenant and I was a Capt I quoted him back to himself and said "That's 'Look, I'm just a pilot currently, SIR." He looked at me for a second and got the idea. I went on to tell him that if all the aircraft were currently on sorties, and all he could do was fly, then he wasn't much good to us at the moment, was he? I also pointed out that subdued insignia on the flight suit wasn't authorized. He told me that's what came on it. I repeated that it wasn't authorized, and neither were his brown cowboy boots. He made a wise decision stop while he was behind, and not to argue from the position of weakness any more that weekend. The Wing Ops Officer also made sure that the good Lieutenant got schooled in a couple of other mission slots that weekend so that he wasn't just a pilot.
You see, what some folks forget is that there's almost always plenty of people that show up at scheduled exercises and tests. But when the phone rings at three AM on Wednesday, you could find that you have five people with which to execute a mission.. Hello multitasking and cross-functionalization. I also participated in one mission where they didn't need us to fly, as Oklahoma Highway patrol was doing that, and they didn't need ground teams as as the guard, and Dept of Corrections was doing that. They just wanted us to plan, coordinate, direct, organize, and help everyone else do their jobs as efficiently and non-wastefully as possible. In small units, and when called to real missions, we all have to be multi-talented and cross-functional.
V/R,
I've already gotten one PM taking me to task for my actions. I knew what I meant, but hadn't anticipated all the 'alternate interpretations' of my 'issue.'
I'll reprise some of what I wrote that person privately. I thought I might save some of you the typing to do the same thing, and maybe avoid making some folks 'jack--hole' list if I posted part of my response publicly. After all, unlike some other boards, I might actually run into some of you folks somewhere eventually, so yeah, I *do* kinda care what you think... ;)
Actually, I had a far greater problem with his attitude about 'just being a pilot,' and not caring to learn or do anything else, and not caring about how (dis)courteously or inappropriately or emphatically he expressed it. One should use plain human courtesy, at least. He seemed annoyed that someone should even suggest there were other jobs that he could do to contribute.
My father is a former Marine. I grew up learning to say 'please' and 'thank you', 'sir' and ma'am, respecting my elders and my superiors (in rank or position), whether in or out of uniform. It didn't kill me. I also grew up learning that I should never have to apologize for having manners.
And no, I'm not a party to that whole UCMJ discussion thread, either. It won't work, and isn't appropriate for all the reasons stated there, so don't read *that* into me, either.. ;-)
So, the major issue was his general attitude and demeanor, the fact that he didn't even care enough to wear his uniform correctly. The courtesy thing was just the 'hook' to grab his attention with. All those things, right at that particular moment, added together contributed to my response, and not necessarily any one issue. On a different day, with different issues, now "several" years later, who knows how it might go down.
My point was more about being cross-functional, being aware that there are several facets to our program, and that we can't take any of them to the exclusion of the others -- balance, etc, and not being a one-trick prima donna., My apologies for not expressing the focus more clearly to begin with. Hopefully, I've done a better job of clarifying it now.
Great topic. Great board. Great people.
V/R,
I suppose I don't have anything wrong with people focusing on one aspect of the program so much as I have a problem with people coming into the program and taking things away from it without giving back.
If SM pilots come in just to fly for cheap (and I think I even read once a long while back that some paid their girlfriends' membership and got her a ball cap for a uniform so they could go flying together), then those are the people I have a problem with. We have an example of a senior member that's in the program only to fly in our very own squadron, but I have no problem with that at all because he gives back to the program. He only comes to the meetings every month for the safety briefing so that he's allowed to fly, but he's a CFI and he constantly volunteers his time to give lessons to our cadets. One 17 year old cadet recently earned his private pilot's license under his tutelage and he was rated as the best CFI in the North East last year.
I think I can sum up my thoughts: CAP is a volunteer program, not a discount business. If you want to take some of the benefits (what, cheap car rentals at Hertz or something? CAP magazine? Discount flights?), you have to volunteer and give something back. I think the same should apply to cadets. AE is a great reason to join, but they should do the customs and courtesies and drill and ceremonies the same way a cadet who joined for the military environment has to participate in the AE activities.
Cadets dont have the choice not to do the military customs and curteousies. If your cadets arent doing that, then they arent doing the cadet program properly.
I agree that you need to work for CAP to enjoy the benefits. Thats why I am against people that join CAP to be in the military flying club.
But one thing I'd like to point out. WHen I think of the AE mission of CAP, I dont think of flying. Thats aviation not aerospace.. WHen I think of aerospace, I think of NASA, model rocketry, going to visit a shuttle lanch or gooing to space camp or reading abut a satalite that was launch. Ther eis a difference between aerospace and aviation
Quote from: flyguy06 on March 24, 2007, 08:28:36 PM
You cant do that? CAPM 52-16 says you HAVE to advance in grade and if you dont in a certain time period ( I think its three years) you can be terminated from CAP.
Two achievments per year or you can be terminated.
Quote from: flyguy06 on March 25, 2007, 01:38:14 PM
But one thing I'd like to point out. WHen I think of the AE mission of CAP, I dont think of flying. Thats aviation not aerospace.. WHen I think of aerospace, I think of NASA, model rocketry, going to visit a shuttle lanch or gooing to space camp or reading abut a satalite that was launch. Ther eis a difference between aerospace and aviation
Fair enough. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. But when the Air Force started using the term "aerospace" it was to
include space, not
exclude aviation. [yes, I know we're not the US Air Force. Just citing one example.] I think we should be introducing cadets to the entire spectrum, whatever you choose to call it.
Quote from: flyguy06 on March 25, 2007, 01:38:14 PM
But one thing I'd like to point out. WHen I think of the AE mission of CAP, I dont think of flying. Thats aviation not aerospace.. WHen I think of aerospace, I think of NASA, model rocketry, going to visit a shuttle lanch or gooing to space camp or reading abut a satalite that was launch. Ther eis a difference between aerospace and aviation
Yes, there is a difference - aviation is a subset of aerospace. As such, there is much more to AE than what you've listed and aviation/flying is most definitely a critical component.
Just to help you out a bit - from P15 (AEO Handbook) (my emphasis added):
QuoteAerospace Education is defined as that branch of general education concerned with communicating knowledge, skills, and attitudes about aerospace activities and the total impact of air and space vehicles upon society.