New SQTR / SET Module

[bflynn]

Speaking of renewals, that is another area that causes some heartburn. 

Under the new (current) SET system, it will be hard to renew some qualifications, especially the advanced or the not so popular ones. MSO, AOBD, etc. In most cases there is only one MSO (or AOBD, or insert your own specialty) working at a given mission or SAREX, but since the system requires another MSO (or AOBD, etc) who is also SET to sign off on the renewals, it will be hard for current Officers to renew on time. The Officer who worked the mission may have demonstrated total competency, but since there is no "qualified" person to sign him/her off for renewal, the rating will probably lapse. Do we have a workable and reasonable workaround without sacrificing quality?

It is not so much of a problem with the more common specialties like MSA, or MS, or MO, etc since we usually have plenty of SETed guys around.

This is not necessarily a new problem, but the system just makes it even harder.
Just an observation.

Keep in mind that not only might there be only one SET at a given SAREX, but that SET is supposed to personally observe the demonstration of the tasks, while doing whatever job they are actually assigned to for the SAREX.

In our squadron, I'm considered the go-to AP.  I was one of the first to qualify, I teach the classes, I've trained most of the current APs and I've probably done more missions as an AP than anyone else in the squadron.  Yet, my qualification lapses next year and I really don't see it being renewed because of professional time constraints.  When that happens, I suspect I'll drift away from CAP and go find other things to do, maybe fly more.

[Spaceman3750]

If there's only one SET at a SAREX of any scale, your wing needs more SETs.

[Eclipse]

If there's only one SET at a SAREX of any scale, your wing needs more SETs.

The Wing doesn't grow SET's, the units do.  If there aren't enough of a given specialty, its because the Units aren't recruiting and growing enough resources.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Beg to differ.

It is the Wings that schedule the SET classes, it is the Wings that prepare the SET rosters, and it is the Wings that approve the SETs.

I am still waiting for my Wing to approve me as MSA SET, I took the class over three weeks ago...

Flyer

[Spaceman3750]

What SET class? It's been awhile, but last time I checked TTT was a 10-question test. If your wing is stacking more requirements on top of the regs, that is part of the problem right there.

And Eclipse, I wasn't trying to say that Wing HQ is responsible for producing them, just that the group of members collectively known as a "wing" needs more.

[Luis R. Ramos]

My Wing requires us to still go through the class similar to the TTT in person but takes a long time to schedule them. And after I went through one, I am still waiting.

Flyer

[Eclipse]

The key is "your wing", and unless there's a supp, they shouldn't be doing it.

There's a 10-question SET test, no matter your feeling on the comprehensiveness of the test, that's NHQ's standard.

Qual + 1 year, Unit CC recommends, Group approves, wing approves.  The assumption should be
everyone is qualified unless there is evidence to dispel that.

Done.

I can't begin to imagine why there's a "class" needed on top of that.

[a2capt]

I can't begin to imagine why there's a "class" needed on top of that.

Fiefdoms, Controlfreakism, etc. My opinion is, if there is a legitimate need, then push it up the chain and see if many more agree. Then get the proper supplement published.

[bflynn]

If there's only one SET at a SAREX of any scale, your wing needs more SETs.

The Wing doesn't grow SET's, the units do.  If there aren't enough of a given specialty, its because the Units aren't recruiting and growing enough resources.

There's no problem that can't be solved by throwing more volunteers at it?

[SarDragon]

If there's only one SET at a SAREX of any scale, your wing needs more SETs.

The Wing doesn't grow SET's, the units do.  If there aren't enough of a given specialty, its because the Units aren't recruiting and growing enough resources.

There's no problem that can't be solved by throwing more volunteers at it?

"Strength in numbers" comes to mind, and can be very broad.

[bflynn]

Yes, but we're talking about an issue of being unable to grow more resources.  If the answer includes growing more resources then we've made a circular loop.

I don't disagree that the two are related.  You need to have qualified and experienced people to train new people.  I believe membership levels are falling.  When you put more barriers to qualification in place, saying that answer is that fewer volunteers do more work to cover for the increased requirements is a tough sell to me.  I see that accelerating the decline, not correcting it.

Keep in mind that I'm a management consultant in real life...so doing this kind of strategic analysis is what I do almost every day.  I spend a great deal of time figuring out why things don't work and fixing processes so they do.  I have some assumptions above that aren't backed up by data - but based on my experience of having done this, I believe I'm correct with my assumptions.

[vento]

IMHO, there must be a plan B for everything. The current SET way shall not be the only way to get things done.
Again I am talking about the harder to get ratings like AOBD, MSO, etc. In some areas there is only one AOBD and the guy works in every SAREX or mission and yet he can't get his quals renewed by the current SET system because there is not another soul who can validate what he did.
Frankly, not everybody is interested in becoming an AOBD..... hence the low number.

I don't think this concern is a issue for the troops like MO, MS, GTM, etc. There are plenty of SET'd guys around at any given mission or SAREX.

[Garibaldi]

IMHO, there must be a plan B for everything. The current SET way shall not be the only way to get things done.
Again I am talking about the harder to get ratings like AOBD, MSO, etc. In some areas there is only one AOBD and the guy works in every SAREX or mission and yet he can't get his quals renewed by the current SET system because there is not another soul who can validate what he did.
Frankly, not everybody is interested in becoming an AOBD..... hence the low number.

I don't think this concern is a issue for the troops like MO, MS, GTM, etc. There are plenty of SET'd guys around at any given mission or SAREX.

In my old unit, a member wanted to be qualified as an aerial photographer or ADIS, and I think the Wing CC had to get involved because NO ONE ELSE IN THE WING had that qualification to be able to sign her off.

[Eclipse]

Yes, but we're talking about an issue of being unable to grow more resources.  If the answer includes growing more resources then we've made a circular loop.

I don't disagree that the two are related.  You need to have qualified and experienced people to train new people.  I believe membership levels are falling.  When you put more barriers to qualification in place, saying that answer is that fewer volunteers do more work to cover for the increased requirements is a tough sell to me.

This issue does not exist, except in the minds of those unwilling to make the effort to fix it.

SETs are not required to train or learn, they simply evaluate what you say you already know, which means they are the >last< link in the chain, yet for some reason
people think they are the first.

No one in your unit is an MSO?  Go to NESA or one of the Regional schools, reach out to someone outside your unit or even your wing. Crack a book pdf and figure it out yourself, which is about how most members ultimately learn this stuff anyway.  Then call Wing and tell them you're ready to be tasked.  They will find someone to help you.  Don't forget to show up occasionally to a mission or two.

The entirety of the curriculum, requirements, training materials, and the list of everyone who is qualified in a given wing is freely available to all members, 24x7x365.

Keep in mind that I'm a management consultant in real life...

I believe you may have mentioned that before.

[Eclipse]

Seeing some anecdotal issues with expired quals being renewed because of a single task being updated or completed.

An example - a member completes or retakes Ground Handling.  The updated single task renews FLM even though
the member has had no other activity since 2005.

[MacGruff]

SETs are not required to train or learn, they simply evaluate what you say you already know, which means they are the >last< link in the chain, yet for some reason
people think they are the first.

No one in your unit is an MSO?  Go to NESA or one of the Regional schools, reach out to someone outside your unit or even your wing. Crack a book pdf and figure it out yourself, which is about how most members ultimately learn this stuff anyway.  Then call Wing and tell them you're ready to be tasked.  They will find someone to help you.  Don't forget to show up occasionally to a mission or two.

The entirety of the curriculum, requirements, training materials, and the list of everyone who is qualified in a given wing is freely available to all members, 24x7x365.

I'd like to agree and build on Eclipse's point made here. I have been interested in becoming a Mission Observer and stated so when I joined in April of this year. In May, one of the squadron's members - who is a SET - sat down and trained several of us on several of the courses needed for the Mission Scanner qualification. After the training, we updated e-services and he validated the trainings.

Unfortunately he took ill after a few weeks and has since moved to Florida and will not be likely to return. So, in a sense, we've been stuck.

This past month I brought up this situation with some of the group-level folks and an arrangement was quickly made. To wit:
- one of our Aerospace Officers who is also a Mission Pilot is teaching the various modules.
- At the conclusion of each training session, the members update e-services and an email is sent to Group.
- A group level SET contacts us back to "test" us on what we've learned.
- If we pass, that Group person validates e-services for us.

While I am not a fully-qualified Mission Scanner as of this writing, I have moved forward and consider that progress.

[JeffDG]

SETs are not required to train or learn, they simply evaluate what you say you already know, which means they are the >last< link in the chain, yet for some reason
people think they are the first.

No one in your unit is an MSO?  Go to NESA or one of the Regional schools, reach out to someone outside your unit or even your wing. Crack a book pdf and figure it out yourself, which is about how most members ultimately learn this stuff anyway.  Then call Wing and tell them you're ready to be tasked.  They will find someone to help you.  Don't forget to show up occasionally to a mission or two.

The entirety of the curriculum, requirements, training materials, and the list of everyone who is qualified in a given wing is freely available to all members, 24x7x365.

I'd like to agree and build on Eclipse's point made here. I have been interested in becoming a Mission Observer and stated so when I joined in April of this year. In May, one of the squadron's members - who is a SET - sat down and trained several of us on several of the courses needed for the Mission Scanner qualification. After the training, we updated e-services and he validated the trainings.

Unfortunately he took ill after a few weeks and has since moved to Florida and will not be likely to return. So, in a sense, we've been stuck.

This past month I brought up this situation with some of the group-level folks and an arrangement was quickly made. To wit:
- one of our Aerospace Officers who is also a Mission Pilot is teaching the various modules.
- At the conclusion of each training session, the members update e-services and an email is sent to Group.
- A group level SET contacts us back to "test" us on what we've learned.
- If we pass, that Group person validates e-services for us.

While I am not a fully-qualified Mission Scanner as of this writing, I have moved forward and consider that progress.

That seems unnecessarily complex.  How long as that AEO been a Mission Pilot?  Mission Scanner is a pre-req for MP, so why doesn't he get the SET designation and just take care of it?  For that matter, the Wing DOS can waive the 1 year requirement if necessary, and a bunch of folks willing to put in the training work with nobody nearby to be SET would seem to be a good reason to me (this presumes, of course, that the AEO is competent...and you've given me no reason to assume otherwise)

[Elioron]

Mission Scanner is a pre-req for MP, so why doesn't he get the SET designation and just take care of it?  For that matter, the Wing DOS can waive the 1 year requirement if necessary, and a bunch of folks willing to put in the training work with nobody nearby to be SET would seem to be a good reason to me (this presumes, of course, that the AEO is competent...and you've given me no reason to assume otherwise)

In our wing, there are a lot of people who are good enough to teach, but Evaluator status is only given to a few.  The goal of restricting it was to make sure that there is uniformity amongst those who get qualified.  That doesn't prevent training to happen, we just don't get immediately signed off until we later show that we know what we're doing. 

Similarly, as an evaluator, I'm not going to sign off on something I taught you unless you show that you can do it on your own.  I feel it's my responsibility to make sure that anyone I sign off on can go to any incident in any Wing and perform.

[JeffDG]

Mission Scanner is a pre-req for MP, so why doesn't he get the SET designation and just take care of it?  For that matter, the Wing DOS can waive the 1 year requirement if necessary, and a bunch of folks willing to put in the training work with nobody nearby to be SET would seem to be a good reason to me (this presumes, of course, that the AEO is competent...and you've given me no reason to assume otherwise)

In our wing, there are a lot of people who are good enough to teach, but Evaluator status is only given to a few.  The goal of restricting it was to make sure that there is uniformity amongst those who get qualified.  That doesn't prevent training to happen, we just don't get immediately signed off until we later show that we know what we're doing. 

Similarly, as an evaluator, I'm not going to sign off on something I taught you unless you show that you can do it on your own.  I feel it's my responsibility to make sure that anyone I sign off on can go to any incident in any Wing and perform.

So, does your wing have a 60-3 Supplement that outlines the additional steps necessary, above and beyond the regulation, to become evaluators?

[Elioron]

So, does your wing have a 60-3 Supplement that outlines the additional steps necessary, above and beyond the regulation, to become evaluators?

No, nor is one necessary.  If I, as an ES Officer, feel that someone in my unit should be an evaluator for a specific qualification, I check the box in eServices and send an email to our Wing DO & DOS.  They will make the determination on a case by case basis.