The Ideal Wing.

[lordmonar]

Units exist where they can exist...where there is enough interest to sustain the unit.  It's that simple.

Yes that is true....because there nothing pushing wings/groups to do anything about it.  A unit folds.....it folds....no one is tasked to rebuild it. 

Perhaps in some cases but that sounds like a local issue.  Have you ever served at the Wing level?   I can assure you there is a serious amount of effort and consideration that takes place before a squadron is deactivated.  I know of squadrons that were deactviated, combined, reactivated, etc...only to fail again later.  Can you imagine how much more time would be spent on such activities in your model?   It'd be more than a full time job for numerous people.

Yes....we would make Wing and Group recruiting officers actually do something....they would have a hard number of squadrons they need to maintain, and a hard number of people for each squadron.......and yes maybe it may become a full time job for some one....and maybe with the membership numbers we are talking about we could actually afford to pay someone to do the job.

Point is.....currently there is no target, model or goal.  Squadron fails....so what.   Now....squadron is failing....someone is going to have to step in and make sure it gets fixed.

[A.Member]

So, are you throwing in your hat in for the next Wing CC?

Relevance?

As you stated, all you need is 10 or 20 people with a "clue" to fix the issues.  If that's all you need, then why not?  Start small and let's see what you can do.

And a2capt,  I have no issue with someone bringing criticism...but be prepared to offer a solution or do something about it. You don't just get to sit and grumble.   That is indeed UNSAT.

[A.Member]

Units exist where they can exist...where there is enough interest to sustain the unit.  It's that simple.

Yes that is true....because there nothing pushing wings/groups to do anything about it.  A unit folds.....it folds....no one is tasked to rebuild it. 

Perhaps in some cases but that sounds like a local issue.  Have you ever served at the Wing level?   I can assure you there is a serious amount of effort and consideration that takes place before a squadron is deactivated.  I know of squadrons that were deactviated, combined, reactivated, etc...only to fail again later.  Can you imagine how much more time would be spent on such activities in your model?   It'd be more than a full time job for numerous people.

Yes....we would make Wing and Group recruiting officers actually do something....they would have a hard number of squadrons they need to maintain, and a hard number of people for each squadron.......and yes maybe it may become a full time job for some one....and maybe with the membership numbers we are talking about we could actually afford to pay someone to do the job.

Point is.....currently there is no target, model or goal.  Squadron fails....so what.   Now....squadron is failing....someone is going to have to step in and make sure it gets fixed.

So, wait....earlier you argued there was no increased cost.  But now, you're hiring paid recruiters?  All while throwing the Recruiting Officers under the bus.  Nice.

So, let's see...reading back, so far, Wing Staff is worthless, filled with empty shirts, with particular emphasis on Plans & Programs as well as Recruiting.  OoooK.    For the sake of argument, let's say for a minute, this is true.  Does any of this improve with volume?

I agree with your comment that there must be targets/goals.  Where we disagree is your contention that there is no target or anyone monitoring health in the current model.  Wings should be monitoring the health of their squadrons.  If you are correct and that's not taking place, it's a local issue that needs to be addressed.

[lordmonar]

No one said wing staff is worthless.

I have pointed out time and time again.....that if a squadron if failing.....it is wing/group jobs to fix it.....that is they should be engaged with the local squadrons and making sure that they doing well and giving assistance and making changes as required.

Too often it is as you pointed out "We thing about it real hard, make some change but it fails anyway".  So the answer seems that "there is just no need for a squadron there".

I disagree.

Wing's Number One job is to coordinate CAP's plans with the States Emergency Management Plans.
Group's Number One job is to coordinate CAP's plans with the county Emergency Management plans.
Squadron's number one job is to TRAIN, EQUIP and MAN to fulfill assigned missions.

We have no OPLANS, we have no idea where squadrons should be located, we have no idea how large/small a squadron should be.  We have lots of regulations telling us that we should be making these plans and training up our personnel.....but no one know who is actually responsible for coordinating them.   Here in Las Vegas metro area  (a single county with 5+ cities) we have 5 senior/composite squadrons.....who is responsible for coordinating our plans with the county EMS?  All of us individually?  We don't have a group because wing does not think it can support another level of admin....so there is almost NO county/CAP coordination.

Yes this will be a lot of work.  Yes it would be a full time volunteer job......but what is wrong with that? 
I am throwing staff under the bus...because too long we have had wing staff too interested in power politics than in fact running their squadrons.  Yes this has changed......now lets continue the change.  Give our wings some mandates to create OPLANS, Develop some squadron manning level directives....and a goal for CAP presences.

I know that it may not work perfectly everywhere....but it gives us a goal and guidelines of what we are shooting for.

The Goal of this is to INCREASE CAP presence at the SAR/ES level.  Increase our manning at the county level so that we have a usable force a county level EMS agency could call onto for assistance.

Increase our CP penetration to 5% of all CAP aged students.

[Eclipse]

So, are you throwing in your hat in for the next Wing CC?

Relevance?

As you stated, all you need is 10 or 20 people with a "clue" to fix the issues.  If that's all you need, then why not?  Start small and let's see what you can do.

And a2capt,  I have no issue with someone bringing criticism...but be prepared to offer a solution or do something about it. You don't just get to sit and grumble.   That is indeed UNSAT.

Because you, I, and everyone else reading this knows that my statement is both true, and not possible, for very much the same reason(s) it is essentially not
possible to get much done in government anymore either.  I may well throw my hat in the ring the next time around, however I have no interest in playing politics
on any level.  When asked what I would do as wing CC, I would tell the board exactly what I would do, who would go day 1, etc.  My experience has been that
when otherwise experienced members apply for these jobs, when they espouse disruptive change, they are thanked for their time and the board moves on.

I know exactly what CAP needs, I know exactly how I'd go about it, which areas are fires and which areas should be left by the wayside, and most of it has been consistently posted here, and I would do it on Day 1.  Now, I am not under the illusion that I wouldn't open a file on Day 1 and find that more then a few of the things I want to change aren't as clear-cut as they look
from my current vantage point, but I also know that there's a lot of time, effort, and money spent on things that are either irrelevant, or that simply need a "Period-Dot" decision,
and then closed, that's all Day 1.  Lordmonor and I argue about minutia, but the kind of strategic planning he's espousing is exactly what CAP needs ASAP.

Ask anyone who has worked with me in CAP and they will tell you that's how I operate, when I have the authority and latitude to do it.  I never got 1/2 what I wanted to do done,
but I wasn't and am not afraid of uncomfortable conversations.  I cleared a lot of brush and made things easier for the next guy to actually get things done.
Thankfully there have been some outstanding people who succeeded me and who are in the process of real impact and change  within the areas they have authority.

Not sure how much more then that I can do.

[Ricochet13]

So, are you throwing in your hat in for the next Wing CC?

Relevance?

As you stated, all you need is 10 or 20 people with a "clue" to fix the issues.  If that's all you need, then why not?  Start small and let's see what you can do.

And a2capt,  I have no issue with someone bringing criticism...but be prepared to offer a solution or do something about it. You don't just get to sit and grumble.   That is indeed UNSAT.

Because you, I, and everyone else reading this knows that my statement is both true, and not possible, for very much the same reason(s) it is essentially not
possible to get much done in government anymore either.  I may well throw my hat in the ring the next time around, however I have no interest in playing politics
on any level.  When asked what I would do as wing CC, I would tell the board exactly what I would do, who would go day 1, etc.  My experience has been that
when otherwise experienced members apply for these jobs, when they espouse disruptive change, they are thanked for their time and the board moves on.

I know exactly what CAP needs, I know exactly how I'd go about it, which areas are fires and which areas should be left by the wayside, and most of it has been consistently posted here, and I would do it on Day 1.  Now, I am not under the illusion that I wouldn't open a file on Day 1 and find that more then a few of the things I want to change aren't as clear-cut as they look
from my current vantage point, but I also know that there's a lot of time, effort, and money spent on things that are either irrelevant, or that simply need a "Period-Dot" decision,
and then closed, that's all Day 1.  Lordmonor and I argue about minutia, but the kind of strategic planning he's espousing is exactly what CAP needs ASAP.

Ask anyone who has worked with me in CAP and they will tell you that's how I operate, when I have the authority and latitude to do it.  I never got 1/2 what I wanted to do done,
but I wasn't and am not afraid of uncomfortable conversations.  I cleared a lot of brush and made things easier for the next guy to actually get things done.
Thankfully there have been some outstanding people who succeeded me and who are in the process of real impact and change  within the areas they have authority.

Not sure how much more then that I can do.

Once again . . . +10   :clap:

[lordmonar]

I have been thinking about the subject of span of control and I came up with an ideal that help solve this issue.

Assuming that the "average" squadron only has 25 or so people.....let's build on that.

Create Flights and Elements as "stand alone" units.

And create "areas" to stand between groups and wings in larger states.

This keeps the basic duties of wings, groups and squadrons the same......coordinating plans with state, county, city governments.

Flights and elements would focus on only a few taskings.....A comm element, an aviation SAR element, a GSAR element, an AE element,  a Cadet Flight.

Elements and Flights would be driven by the size of those units.....elements having between 10-30 individuals and Flights having between 20-100.

Because flights and elements are small they would not be expect to have a lot of staff over head....only enough to cover the basics....Personnel Records, Logistics, training.

Operations and planning would be part of the squadron, group and wing functions.....as well as Professional development, and other staff heavy functions.

In this we embrace the concept of volunteer service and wants and needs of our volunteers.

A city of around 10K people could have 3-4 different elements and Flights under a single staff.  Smaller towns may have only flights grouped under a squadron geographically central to them.

So  Take a notional city of 25K....(cabot Arkansas)  It has 2 middle schools, 2 junior highs and 1 high school.
The Cadet Flight Could be organized into five elements each meeting at a school. 
There could be a GSAR flight or ES flight with a Communications element, and a GSAR Element.  All under a squadron Staff.

The squadron CC would have his staff coordinate with the city ES managers and work with the city Schools to administer the CP program.  He could have a dedicated AE element working with local groups and the school math and science teachers.

Since the GS tasking would specific (say 3 Ground Teams) the ES elements would not need a lot of over head to be useful.

That would mean that the Group Commander in Little Rock would not have to deal with three or more squadron commanders from Cabot but only one.

Extrapolate this to large METRO areas and we could have a workable system where span of control is not a huge issues.

In communities smaller then 10K where the CAP presence may only be 10 or so individuals (say a remote airstrip element) they could be attached to the nearest squadron or group several of the smaller ones under a centrally located HQ squadron.

In large states (CAWG, TXWG, NYWG, FLWG) where the sheer size of the state or the population density makes groups to wing span of control too burdensome....we can create "areas" to coordinate and administer the activities of several groups.

[Lord of the North]

At one time CAP did have "area" commands.   They were called Sectors.  Each Sector had a number of groups under them...the number 5 comes to mind but I'm not sure.  They didn't work very well in my opinion.  The just turned into another layer to work through.

[Storm Chaser]

Additional organizational layers can only be effective if approval authority is delegated accordingly. Otherwise, they just become another layer of bureaucracy to overcome.

[lordmonar]

In what way do you mean "approval" authority?

For the most part...while more layers may be added....the layer would be closer both operationally and geographically....Group is not going to be some half a state away but will be maybe only 30-40 miles away.

Squadron will be in the same city or maybe the next one over.

I believe my model will actually get units to work closer together in their daily operations then they do now.  Increasing our mission response, and CP presence while at the same time reducing the amount of over head at the "rubber meets the road" level.

It would put more of a burden on group/area staffs....as they will pick up a lot of things that squadrons do now (PD for one) but over all not a lot of changes of "approval" authority (for things like promotions and permissions for waiver, would need to be done.

Promotions for Element officers would still need to be routed to squadron for approval (for Capt and below).  Yes some things could/should be delegated down.....cadet promotions would be delegated to Element Commanders.

A lot of titles and CAPR 20-1 would have to be rewritten......but that would be one of the first things I would do if I were to implement this model.

[Storm Chaser]

In what way do you mean "approval" authority?

I mean that certain wing and group approval authority would have to be delegated to these new structures in order for this to work in an efficient manner. For example, for someone at the squadron level to be promoted to major under the current organization, that promotion has to be approved by the squadron, group and wing commander. The same occurs with most Ops Quals. If we were to add all these additional layers of organization, the approval process could become inefficient if approval was required by every level. Using the same example, such promotion or qualification would have to be approved by the element leader, flight commander, squadron commander, group commander, area commander and, finally, wing commander.

With a new organizational structure in place, the approval process could become very cumbersome and inefficient if certain decisions are not delegated accordingly.

[lordmonar]

No change would be required.  Element or Flight Commander would submit the promotion request to the Squadron CC who would forward it to group or wing as required.....just like they do now.

[Storm Chaser]

So then I'm right; these personnel actions would have to be approved by the element leader, flight commander, squadron commander, group commander, area commander and wing commander. Add a couple of more layers if they have to go to region and national. You don't think this could make the approval process more lengthy, cumbersome and inefficient?

[lordmonar]

No need to go through the Area or the Flight Commander.....Squadron, Group, and Wing.

I guess Wing could pass authority down to the Area commander....but it's not necessary.

Just because there is a layer of organization.....not everything MUST go to that layer.

[RiverAux]

Simple, just require that the element/flight/whatever leader pass along all such paperwork to the squadron commander.  In other words, they don't have any approval authority over that sort of thing. 

[lordmonar]

Simple, just require that the element/flight/whatever leader pass along all such paperwork to the squadron commander.  In other words, they don't have any approval authority over that sort of thing.

Yes....the Element/flight commander is the "requester" as it is on the current CAPF 2a

[Danger]

Minnesota has 87 counties. 4 groups gets the job done. This "ideal" wing doesn't sound very ideal. And keep in mind, not everyone in schools are interested in CAP. And it is better to have squadrons at airports IMHO (more convinient for cadet o-flights). An Ideal wing is one with good recruiting, qualified and experienced people in their field, with a broad variety of options for people to choose what to specify and focus. What gets the mission done is the task force of different people getting the mission done. I'd love to see a squadron of only pilots get a mission done by themselves. Somebody needs to get their boots dirty.

[lordmonar]

Danger.

The idea is not to wait until people are "interested in CAP"....but to market and sell CAP to them.

MNWG has 87 counties....and only 20 squadrons.

Four groups means that each group is coordinating with 20+ counties.

So we could have 9 Areas each with about 10 counties/group.  Each Group would have 10 or so squadrons with enough flights and elements to get the penetration into the schools and have enough ES presence to actually be of service to our Community, State and Nation.

[Spaceman3750]

Your area must be different than mine. Most schools around here don't want anything to do with us. Not because they're anti-military (though some are), but if they let us in they potentially have to let every org in.

[lordmonar]

When I say "in the school"....while it would be cool to actually meet in the school itself.....but if that is not possible we should still have one unit per school.....the idea is that we recruit from where we know our target audience is five days a week....in stead of just letting them come to us.