exercise participation GTM

Started by miked95, December 09, 2021, 10:53:58 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

miked95

for exercise participation for GTM you need 2 for 3,2,1 do these need to be actual in field searches for can we have a saturday "table talk" that counts for an exercise? I have GTM3 done and GTM 2 mostly done I just need the exercises. what counts as getting a mission number without having to do much outside now that the snow is coming.

HandsomeWalt_USMC

I haven't been involved in ES since I was a cadet, but BITD we had to attend wing SAREXs and I doubt any of my evaluators would have accepted a table talk. In field searches showing that you are capable of performing the requisite tasks cannot be done by chatting over coffee.

Now, prefacing this by saying I'm completely insane and actually enjoy the challenge of training in winter weather; Don't let snow deter you from training. If you actually get the call to deploy a ground team, there's a good chance it's going to be inclement weather. The old adage goes "Train how you fight." In this case, train how you're going to deploy. If you don't want to get cold, wet and miserable then invest in proper training and equipment OR find another specialty.

We don't get to choose when someone needs rescuing. Embrace the suck and get outside. The crappier the weather the better. Get comfortable with being uncomfortable. It builds character and resilience.
HANDSOME SENDS

Semper Fidelis

"PRIDE IS CONTAGIOUS"

Eclipse

They generally need to be WMIRS-assigned mission activities that are to the satisfaction of
the SET approving the mission entry, and also the Wing's DOS.

As an SET, I'd accept a C-Mission table exercise if it included discussions around GT tasking,
paperwork, and preferably a full work up with injects and responses that mimic a typical mission
evolution and tempo.

I wouldn't accept a general discussion or presentation, etc.

Anything more specific would need to come from your Wing's DOS, specifically, because ultimately
it's going to be him who gets the final approval and is going to be looking up those numbers
he doesn't recognize to see what was done.

FWIW, being outside in the snow is pretty much a GTM "thing", so there's really no reason to
not be running real training outside.  The Wing's monthly A12 missions are perfect for this.

"That Others May Zoom"

etodd

Quote from: Eclipse on December 09, 2021, 11:25:35 PMFWIW, being outside in the snow is pretty much a GTM "thing", so there's really no reason to
not be running real training outside.

Might depend on who the Safety Officer is, and whether he thinks the ground is too slippery.
"Don't try to explain it, just bow your head
Breathe in, breathe out, move on ..."

Spam

30+ year GTM, SET GBD, GTL etc and current IC here.

If these are initial quals there is zero chance I would accept a table top 'talk through' mission as evidence of task proficiency or for your two mission credits. Further, when I was a Wing CV, I recall we denied people who tried such maneuvers, from the standpoint that (a) if the conditions to train are truly unsafe, your qualified staff/IC will Rolex the event to your rain date(s), but (b) otherwise snow and rain and mud are the Glory of the Ground Team, and should be accepted as your lot in life. After all, people do go missing in bad wx, and disasters generally happen in or because of bad wx - so to demonstrate your proficiency in those conditions is optimal training.

For experienced members who are up for a renewal (only - not an upgrade from 3 to 2 for instance), I have considered a task walk through/talk through to assure myself that the member retains the concepts and isnt rusty. However - I still would require the minimum actual or exercise AFAMs, snow or otherwise. 

There is no substitute for field work. 
On the other hand, there is very little call for it, these days.
Due to both of these, the last thing we need to risk, is a shrunken number of paper-only qualified people in the field.


R/s
Spam

"He who trains in the harshest schools, prevails" - Thucydides, c. 400 BC.

miked95

reason I ask is most of gtm 2 is map work only thing i can see requiring an "exercise" is setting up a shelter, navigate past an obstacle, and airfield search. almost everything else can be taught and evaluated in a classroom setting. any thoughts for teaching and evaluating these? 

heliodoc

Miked95...eventually you'll have to do some land nav outside of classroom. All that map stuff is / was taught in the classroom when I was in in the US Army and reviewed and practiced when I attended NCO schools. So I would go ahead and get that accomplished and schedule a UTM or meeting for a meeting night or weekend. Eclipses'
and few other explanations I'd go with. Train up to SAREX level for the 2 Mission numbers needed. But remember, 2 sign-offs on mission numbers mean one is qualified not proficient. Just because CAP has 2 sign off SQTRs, doesn't mean one is done. People have reminded off this constantly, but some of those people believe that SAREXs are the only thing CAP lives for....have fun doing the training and don't think you need to drive 4 hours and have to have 60,000 acres to train on when a city or State park will do.

Eclipse

Quote from: miked95 on December 10, 2021, 05:31:00 AMreason I ask is most of gtm 2 is map work only thing i can see requiring an "exercise" is setting up a shelter, navigate past an obstacle, and airfield search. almost everything else can be taught and evaluated in a classroom setting. any thoughts for teaching and evaluating these? 

None of the tasks for any rating require a mission, per se.  They can all be evaluated
individually as long as an SET is available.  Many of the tasks could be evaluated remotely via teleconference.


"That Others May Zoom"

Spam

Quote from: miked95 on December 09, 2021, 10:53:58 PMwhat counts as getting a mission number without having to do much .

Meaning no offense, but that is your issue right there, Mike.

SQTRs and the two exercises required are separate requirements. You need to demonstrate (not table talk) each individual SQTR, AND then the original intent of the reg for exercise participation has always been to ensure that for each new rating the trainee had participated in two missions.  Not sitting and talking.  Not "without having to do much outside". You demo the SQTR task to the Task/Condition/Standard physically and in person the first time, AND, you participate fully in at least two missions at a GTM2 level of performance as expected.

I haven't seen you work in the field at all - but based only on my perception of your attitude towards training via your statements here, I might not be inclined to sign you off on your GTM2 successful mission completions if this is your attitude throughout the exercise components. Least amount possible does not cut it, and SQTR alone does not cut it, especially when we have so few actual missions these days to maintain proficiency, as I say. Strong concur with Doc here who is on target that two missions is a MINIMUM level of proficiency to demonstrate.

It is OK for you to not to want to (or to not be able to) go outside. Please consider just being mission staff if you don't want to do field work. But if you want to rate as GTM, then - Up your game, my man!  Ultimately this isn't about your tickets or badges.

R/s
Spam

Spam

Quote from: Eclipse on December 10, 2021, 02:23:07 PM
Quote from: miked95 on December 10, 2021, 05:31:00 AMreason I ask is most of gtm 2 is map work only thing i can see requiring an "exercise" is setting up a shelter, navigate past an obstacle, and airfield search. almost everything else can be taught and evaluated in a classroom setting. any thoughts for teaching and evaluating these? 

None of the tasks for any rating require a mission, per se.  They can all be evaluated
individually as long as an SET is available.  Many of the tasks could be evaluated remotely via teleconference.

Concur - some, but not all, can be done indoors.

Yet there are a number of key tasks that cannot be done remotely, or talked through. For GTM2, for example, Task O-0203 Nav past an Obstacle requires a 400 meter course in a wooded area (outside). O-202 pace count, O-104, etc. all are outdoors.

BREAK BREAK
And because of the vagaries of the poor design of the GTM curriculum 20 years ago, where the nav elements were cut up and spread throughout the ratings, the right way to evaluate if the trainee understands and retains how to use resection/intersection/map skills and actual practical movement through terrain has to be demonstrated together, in the field.

Someday, (off thread), I'd like to see GTM3 be reduced to just basic safety and self care/logistics tasks (including actions if lost) and move all the technical SAR elements to GTM2 (all the nav and DF tasks) and the remaining tasks to GTM1. This would reduce the impact to get someone onto a team, and rationalize the nav tasks. But, thats not what we have of course, and whatever effort may have been started to update the green book at an NHQ level seems to have stalled and failed several years ago. So. I'm still looking at the same typos I made when I put a couple of these nav tasks together for the old yellow MDWG GT task book back in the 90s, when our work was adapted into the green book... sigh... we have SMs who were not born when we wrote this stuff.

R/s
Spam

heliodoc

Yeah....common sense curriculum would have grouped tasks together and being nearly 20 rs old, that 2004 Ground Team and UDF taskbook needs some serious updating. I simply do not have time as many here, where folks in charge of this GT program need to own and improve process and content. We chirp at FEMA training, yet they are getting their input from other SME groups, time for CAP to do the same

N6RVT

CAP ground team standards date from 2003.  FEMA Standards for ground teams were established in 2005.

Ground SAR (in California) is the purview of the Sheriff department, CAP is not going to run any ground searches here.  However the SD would most likely accept having an additional ground team under their control provided they had the training and credentials to function.  Ours do not, the CAP ground team standards are not recognized as valid by anyone outside of CAP. Our lack of 508 credentials is why ground teams do not get used in my state.

What makes this doubly aggravating is when you look at the FEMA standards, they are not more difficult than our own, just different.  We could easily do this.

And at least at some point, that must have been the intention.  CAP standards were never again updated after the FEMA standards were established 16 years ago.  National has, on their own website, a presentation from a group called NASAR that offered to come in and modernize the program, probably at low cost or even free as the presentation was by someone who was also a CAP member.

I can only conclude that ground SAR is only considered to be a fun activity for cadets at this point and is no longer part of the main mission.  It seems to have been abandoned.

PHall

In California we do UDF, period. Of course the definition of "Urban" does get stretched a bit at times.

SarDragon

Dwight, I think your perception of the CAWG GT activity is a little flawed. There have been a few GT missions here in the past few years, a couple of which drew on our GT resources all over the state. I don't recall specific details (one possibly a missing person search up north), but they were well discussed at our squadron meetings.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

miked95

Quote from: Spam on December 10, 2021, 02:23:49 PM
Quote from: miked95 on December 09, 2021, 10:53:58 PMwhat counts as getting a mission number without having to do much .

Meaning no offense, but that is your issue right there, Mike.

SQTRs and the two exercises required are separate requirements. You need to demonstrate (not table talk) each individual SQTR, AND then the original intent of the reg for exercise participation has always been to ensure that for each new rating the trainee had participated in two missions.  Not sitting and talking.  Not "without having to do much outside". You demo the SQTR task to the Task/Condition/Standard physically and in person the first time, AND, you participate fully in at least two missions at a GTM2 level of performance as expected.

I haven't seen you work in the field at all - but based only on my perception of your attitude towards training via your statements here, I might not be inclined to sign you off on your GTM2 successful mission completions if this is your attitude throughout the exercise components. Least amount possible does not cut it, and SQTR alone does not cut it, especially when we have so few actual missions these days to maintain proficiency, as I say. Strong concur with Doc here who is on target that two missions is a MINIMUM level of proficiency to demonstrate.

It is OK for you to not to want to (or to not be able to) go outside. Please consider just being mission staff if you don't want to do field work. But if you want to rate as GTM, then - Up your game, my man!  Ultimately this isn't about your tickets or badges.

R/s
Spam

Just to be clear i am currently a GTL i have everything done for GT3 and the only things i need for GT2 and GT1 are the exercises. i have a very good perception on training that's why all my SQRT are done and complete i have proven to know the material otherwise i wouldn't be a GTL. you completely misunderstood me. its having to do exercises with 3 feet of snow with more coming that's why i was wondering is a "table talks" are an option especially with phase one happening now. i never said i don't want to "go outside" again i'm a GTL i just need the exercises to complete my SQRT and looking for the best solution to do this in the winter season. 

miked95

Quote from: Spam on December 10, 2021, 02:38:19 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 10, 2021, 02:23:07 PM
Quote from: miked95 on December 10, 2021, 05:31:00 AMreason I ask is most of gtm 2 is map work only thing i can see requiring an "exercise" is setting up a shelter, navigate past an obstacle, and airfield search. almost everything else can be taught and evaluated in a classroom setting. any thoughts for teaching and evaluating these? 

None of the tasks for any rating require a mission, per se.  They can all be evaluated
individually as long as an SET is available.  Many of the tasks could be evaluated remotely via teleconference.

Concur - some, but not all, can be done indoors.

Yet there are a number of key tasks that cannot be done remotely, or talked through. For GTM2, for example, Task O-0203 Nav past an Obstacle requires a 400 meter course in a wooded area (outside). O-202 pace count, O-104, etc. all are outdoors.

BREAK BREAK
And because of the vagaries of the poor design of the GTM curriculum 20 years ago, where the nav elements were cut up and spread throughout the ratings, the right way to evaluate if the trainee understands and retains how to use resection/intersection/map skills and actual practical movement through terrain has to be demonstrated together, in the field.

Someday, (off thread), I'd like to see GTM3 be reduced to just basic safety and self care/logistics tasks (including actions if lost) and move all the technical SAR elements to GTM2 (all the nav and DF tasks) and the remaining tasks to GTM1. This would reduce the impact to get someone onto a team, and rationalize the nav tasks. But, thats not what we have of course, and whatever effort may have been started to update the green book at an NHQ level seems to have stalled and failed several years ago. So. I'm still looking at the same typos I made when I put a couple of these nav tasks together for the old yellow MDWG GT task book back in the 90s, when our work was adapted into the green book... sigh... we have SMs who were not born when we wrote this stuff.

R/s
Spam
correct me if I'm wrong but I thought I heard during the nation conference the the green "bible" is getting updated?

Spam

Mike, on the first issue (your situation), I'd advise that you could still train in the weather safely. You would understandably discount the advice of a Georgia boy like me, but I have (not so fond) memories of shivering in snow drifts during NER actual blizzard missions, of shoveling five foot mounds of snow away from hangar doors in NCR and using preheaters for aircraft/vehicle engines, etc. So - I get your concern, really. As part of your training you can learn from your locally experienced SET staff how to make it work, because if you can't, then you are NMC (non mission capable) during some seasons.

Now, there are times when you simply have to cancel the exercise, and ground your gear. One annual exercise I've gone to on the Appalachian Trail for years has on occasion had to relocate to lower, more sheltered gaps and flats because the normal AO on the actual Trail has been iced over. Learning how to analyze, adapt, and still safely operate in snow/ice is a skill set to be maintained like others (cf. the 10th Mountain Division at Ft. Drum). So, I would say don't just write off winter training, but talk with your local SET staff and discuss using ORM to plan some safe winter training. Failing that, punt to spring time by all means, but don't try to pencil whip tasks and practical mission required training.

On the latter issue (updates to the sequencing and content of GT/UDF ratings, to our CAP CONOPS and TTPs, and to our resource typing and work with agencies), many of us have heard the story that this will all be revamped/updated many times. A group of officers supposedly was engaged in the curriculum project six or so years ago, and I was asked to assist - and the contacts stopped, and nothing went forward. I would love to see us do a tech refresh, remap the tasks as part of an update to the GT CONOPS/TTPs, and strategically reorient our structure and quals to be easily usable by our partner agencies and customers. There are many many people here on CT and coast to coast who I respect and who would probably love to give of their time, vast experience, and local knowledge to work an analysis/rewrite. I recently had the pleasure of helping to write updates on a complete set of TTPs for a SOCOM customer, and boy, CAP could use a full flush and rebuild, stat. But, I'm not holding my breath.

Salute smartly and execute safely, and thanks for playing Mike.

V/r
Spam
"So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past".

N6RVT

Quote from: SarDragon on December 10, 2021, 11:23:22 PMDwight, I think your perception of the CAWG GT activity is a little flawed. There have been a few GT missions here in the past few years, a couple of which drew on our GT resources all over the state. I don't recall specific details (one possibly a missing person search up north), but they were well discussed at our squadron meetings.

They participated in the search and rescue operation to the same degree that we participated in the red cross food bank mission.  As perimeter security and unskilled manual labor.  And were no doubt considered to be very useful and valuable in that capacity, but they were not used as a ground SAR team.

Spam

Quote from: Dwight Dutton on December 11, 2021, 08:26:45 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on December 10, 2021, 11:23:22 PMDwight, I think your perception of the CAWG GT activity is a little flawed. There have been a few GT missions here in the past few years, a couple of which drew on our GT resources all over the state. I don't recall specific details (one possibly a missing person search up north), but they were well discussed at our squadron meetings.

They participated in the search and rescue operation to the same degree that we participated in the red cross food bank mission.  As perimeter security and unskilled manual labor.  And were no doubt considered to be very useful and valuable in that capacity, but they were not used as a ground SAR team.

Hey Dwight, do the phrases "perimeter security" and "unskilled" in the same sentence give you any pause for thought?  Because they surely do for me. In these days of civil instability and violence I question whether the decades-old assumptions about our oddly/marginally trained volunteers providing crash site/incident site "security" are still valid, which bring me back to my other off-topic thread above about reconsidering our entire concept of operations with an eye to ORM today. Once, back in the 80s, a far younger version of me met a truck of drunk rednecks at midnight on a logging road and politely asked them not to disturb a site (with good results), but in todays atmosphere, if a they met a guy in camo in "their" local woods, could we have had a bad result? Hmm.

But I digress. Thanks for your support of the ARC, Dwight.

V/r
Spam

N6RVT

Quote from: Spam on December 11, 2021, 08:37:39 PMHey Dwight, do the phrases "perimeter security" and "unskilled" in the same sentence give you any pause for thought?

CAP participation at airshows is almost always as perimeter security, and its more often than not cadets doing it.  This was still true as recently as a helicopter airshow that was only a few weeks ago.

Unskilled teenage perimeter security.