The Reaper Mission in Syracuse, NY

[Spam]

If Spam was NYWG DO-for-a-day I would try something like this (bearing in mind, this is a lunchtime off the cuff plan):



- Develop the ANG customer requirements for the mission
Define CONOPS for representative mission(s)
Derive CAP aircraft requirements (C172? 182? Maule? etc.)
Derive CAP aircrew Knowledge/Skills/Attributes (KSAs) in terms of quals/hours/clearances
Draft requirements for sortie generation rate (per class? seasonal? other factors?)
Draft requirements if any for form flight training (lesson learned from CAP multi ship low levels)
Draft requirements if any for program sight level (visual) security, base access, and ramp access (probably none)
Draft requirements if any to read in per the Security Classification Guide for this program
Based on SGR, aircraft burn rates, and TDY estimates, draft funding profiles and documents (for a MIPR to CAP through 1AF)
Define required CDRLs (documentation) and monthly reporting (to include safety reviews)
Write a Safety/Mishap plan (what to do in case of midairs/ramp mishaps)
Prep a short training package for incoming/rotating CAP crews and staff
Define required program reviews and any other deliverables
Allow time for review chain and NHQ (corporate officer) approval NLT x weeks before need date
Allow time for core mission staff formation and fam, and then a call for aircrew, NLT y weeks before need date
Do not announce program yet Document a proposed PA plan (and cover story if necessary) to the customer for approval.

- Meet with NYWG/CC and selected ops staff
Staff a draft Ops Plan for the above mission content for comment / present a smooth for signature chain
Plan would have an aircrew sortie generation rate requirement
Plan would document what portion would be NYWG organic, NER organic, and nationally sourced members
Plan would flow down all customer requirements and answer how CAP would track and meet them
Thus plan would include aircrew requirements and security requirements
Plan would include a staffing plan to quietly screen/select/invite aircrew based on documented requirements
Do not announce program yet - propose a coordinated PA plan or cover story based on customer security requirements

- Staff the plan through NER/DO and NER/CC
Gain approval on a staffing plan to quietly screen, select, invite NER candidates
Gain approval on PA plan elements

- Staff through NHQ/NOC/etc.
Gain approval on a staffing plan and PA elements
Signature for CAP

- Route back through 1AF (or whoever, on the USAF/ANG side) to the ANG Wing, and commence ops

- Execute staff and aircrew selection IAW the security and operational requirements
This means that aircrew selection may indeed be via personal vetting and the use of the online eServices security/JPAS system
This does not imply favoritism, but a DoD approved process to verify cleared individuals are properly accessed and read in to programs

- At the approved point, execute the planned PA program
This could include a national level PA release
It could include a statement that "aircrew are selected based on a set of customer criteria including _____ (formation flight experience, security clearances, etc.)".
It could include a POC for further inquiry.


In my mind, I would hope to see something like this, ideally.

You can ask your customer to make a determination pretty quickly (would take a half hour to review their SCG and have a chat) and document it for CAP.

Do not assume something is (U) and then release program information just because someone else did (customer or CAP, of any level, even if it is a Secretary level or POTUS).


V/r
Spam

[NIN]

So here's the thing:

The existence of MQ-9s in SYR is *clearly* not secret. The AF, the ANG, the local pols and news media have all heralded the arrival of the replacement for the F-16s, etc.

But the release of information on the transition to the MQ-9 for the ANG in SYR has come from "authorized sources," ie. the ANG PAO shop, the NYANG PAO shop, etc, people who are trained and authorized to communicate information about missions, capabilities, etc, to the media and the public.  They know what is fair game and what is verboten.

The MQ-9's as an aircraft, and its mission set isn't secret, either.  Spend 10 minutes of AF.mil and you'll know pretty much all you need to know about the MQ-9, and lacking in that, General Atomics and Wikipedia can fill in your gaps.

Again, there are people who are putting this kind of information out there in a controlled, managed process who are trained and authorized to do so.  They don't let Sparky the avionics tech from the factory write unfettered website copy for GA's site. Things shown there get reviewed for appropriateness, security, etc.

These are very general, very safe things to talk about.

So, too, is our support mission for the MQ-9. That we are supporting our ANG partners as part of the Total Force™ is not a secret.  Even the broader sense of _what_ we're doing and _why_ isn't a secret.  That paints a nice good light for our contribution to GA safety, etc.  Super. Again, however, the communiques on this are put out by people who have reviewed and adjusted their messaging and have had it reviewed by our Total Force™ partners, so that everybody is on the same page and putting out the correct, non-specific information.

Now, someone comes along with a cell phone snappie somewhere north of the airport with the MQ-9 in view over the glareshield and the compass and altimeter in plain view (or the GPS unit).  Or posts a screengrab of her Foreflight with GPS coordinates and other "operational details."  Or blabs on CAPTalk about how "from 3000 ft the entire Finger Lakes region is beautiful, if only we didn't have to fly so fast to keep up.." or something similar.

Saying "Hey, I'm going to SYR this week to participate" or "Just came back, and the mission is excellent" is not the same as "We'll be taking off at 0900 as a two ship, CAP5592, and flying the southern route to the MOA, returning to escort the bird to the barn at 2000 that night."

[Spam]

Yep.... sounds about right. I was merely speculating about the steps I would take to determine a reasonable support plan for such missions, as opposed to either guessing or varying wildly between knee jerk "secret squirrel" and "blab everything" reactions.

Having a plan to assess the (total) risk (safety, security, organizational, etc.) puts us in a good position to then enact a measured resource call across our many units. As opposed to a word of mouth/spasmatic deployment.

Cheers,
Spam

[SarDragon]

I'm going to cherry pick some statements from various posts that all point to the same conclusion (all emphasis mine):

But the release of information on the transition to the MQ-9 for the ANG in SYR has come from "authorized sources," ie. the ANG PAO shop, the NYANG PAO shop, etc, people who are trained and authorized to communicate information about missions, capabilities, etc, to the media and the public.  They know what is fair game and what is verboten.

Again, there are people who are putting this kind of information out there in a controlled, managed process who are trained and authorized to do so.

Again, however, the communiques on this are put out by people who have reviewed and adjusted their messaging and have had it reviewed by our Total Force™ partners, so that everybody is on the same page and putting out the correct, non-specific information.

Do not assume something is (U) and then release program information just because someone else did (customer or CAP, of any level, even if it is a Secretary level or POTUS).

It isn't your place to decide what's OK, and what's not. If you want to pass on already released information, that's great. But that's all. You should not be giving out random stuff that you have collected just because it seems to paint a better picture of this kool new mission.

[etodd]

If you want to pass on already released information, that's great.

YES,  that's the point. Already released information.  All I have ever wanted to do from day one on our local squadrons website and Facebook page is already existing information and saying that we participated.  It would be a great marketing tool for new members.

But with the horrible inconsistencies between different wing commands some wings are saying no, no, no. That is my point. I've showed what others are doing  And there are many more around the country. Not showing anything at all secretive, but just showing what the Air Force and Cap headquarters has already been doing.   But you have some brass at wing levels that enjoys the power trip it seems, at able to talk about operational security and putting the clamp down, even on Air Force publicly available material.

Consistency across command levels would be a really good thing.

[Holding Pattern]

If you want to pass on already released information, that's great.

YES,  that's the point. Already released information.  All I have ever wanted to do from day one on our local squadrons website and Facebook page is already existing information and saying that we participated.  It would be a great marketing tool for new members.

Have you worked with your PAO to put together a news release?

[etodd]

If you want to pass on already released information, that's great.

YES,  that's the point. Already released information.  All I have ever wanted to do from day one on our local squadrons website and Facebook page is already existing information and saying that we participated.  It would be a great marketing tool for new members.

Have you worked with your PAO to put together a news release?

PAO received orders from Wing to not publicize. Shot it down from the start. Hence my frustrated posts above in regards to no consistency from one Wing to another.

Oh well.  It is what it is.  I'll move on now and not mention it again.  I'll just become one of 'those old Senior guys' who just enjoy flying the airplane and ignores the rest of the program. I'm starting to understand how they got that way.

[Luis R. Ramos]

I am not commenting on this one...

Oh yes I am. You have been publicizing it so much, the PAO would not have been able to keep with you!