Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2017, 07:16:27 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: Cadets under 18 wearing aircrew wings
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4  All Print
Author Topic: Cadets under 18 wearing aircrew wings  (Read 2628 times)
Fubar
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 578

« Reply #40 on: December 29, 2016, 07:04:55 PM »

And just so we're all clear, under 18 cadets can't fly on Corporate Missions right?  There's no manipulation of the rules that could maybe let this happen?

They can't serve in any mission crew capacity (MS/MO), but if the C mission is simply for personnel relocation or something along those lines, I don't see why they can't serve as ballast. Heck, I'd like to see on A missions if there is space (or weight) available for a cadet to tag along for the experience, but I'm not sure that's allowed.
Logged
Storm Chaser
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,657

« Reply #41 on: December 29, 2016, 07:55:35 PM »

All aircrew SQTRs in Ops Quals (MS, AP, MO, TMP, MP, etc.) require members to be 18 or older. Unfortunately, the GIIEP SQTR is not available publicly, so I don't know what the requirements are.

Neither CAPR 60-1 nor CAPR  60-3 are specific about whether cadets under 18 can fly on anything other than Orientation Flights, transport to and from location, or flight instruction. CAPR 60-3, Para. 1-10e, does state, "Additional guidance for employing cadets on missions can be found on the NHQ CAP/DOS website." The CAP/DOS website states the following:

Quote
Only cadets 18 years of age and older, who hold a valid CAPF 101, Specialty Qualification Card are authorized to fly on aircraft involved in the performance of emergency services operations. Any cadet may be flown directly to and from a mission base when needed to perform mission duties, provided the pilot-in-command is at least a qualified mission transport pilot.

If cadets under 18 are indeed doing ES flight training on C missions, I suspect someone has decided to interpret this guidance in a more liberal fashion. Personally, I prefer to interpret it in a more conservative way, which is what I normally do when guidance seems lacking or in a gray area. Of course, it's probably best to seek clarification from NESA or the CAP/DO.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,347

« Reply #42 on: December 29, 2016, 08:03:49 PM »

And just so we're all clear, under 18 cadets can't fly on Corporate Missions right?  There's no manipulation of the rules that could maybe let this happen?

They can't serve in any mission crew capacity (MS/MO), but if the C mission is simply for personnel relocation or something along those lines, I don't see why they can't serve as ballast. Heck, I'd like to see on A missions if there is space (or weight) available for a cadet to tag along for the experience, but I'm not sure that's allowed.

Being "ballast" isn't being part of the crew, and there are special crew requirements any time you transport cadets for any reason.

One of the responsibilities of an FRO is making sure that the crew is properly qualified for any given sortie, and this would be a red flag
when going into the release system (either the cadet not being on the manifest, not being listed as crew, or not having the proper quals).

I don't see any way a cadet under 18 can be released as part of "crew" - the mission type A,B,or C is an administrative matter
related to funding and insurance coverage - the rules about who can fly and when do not change between symbols.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2016, 10:38:37 PM by Eclipse » Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,637

« Reply #43 on: December 29, 2016, 10:02:19 PM »

So why is the GIIEP SQTR not available?  It's not like it Classified or something.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,347

« Reply #44 on: December 29, 2016, 10:40:35 PM »

So why is the GIIEP SQTR not available?  It's not like it Classified or something.

Based on the most recent training slides, it doesn't appear to actually exist in a formal way.
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

waukwiz
Recruit

Posts: 37
Unit: GLR-WI-048

« Reply #45 on: December 29, 2016, 11:12:55 PM »

So why is the GIIEP SQTR not available?  It's not like it Classified or something.

Based on the most recent training slides, it doesn't appear to actually exist in a formal way.
Here's the CAPF101 of the cadet I mentioned earlier. It certainly does exist.



The only potential reason I can imagine as to why the SQTR is secret is potential weak points it would show to those wishing to eavesdrop on the system (maybe???)

Cadet Cullen Mayes
GLR-WI-048
"Flight Sergeant, why are we standing here in the mud?"

Logged
Cadet Cullen Mayes
ES Sergeant
Waukesha Composite Sq.
"Ok, how about instead of doing that, let's not do that. Ok?"
The senseless drivel in this post is Copyright © 2017 by waukwiz. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
xray328
Seasoned Member

Posts: 479
Unit: IL-189

« Reply #46 on: December 29, 2016, 11:15:40 PM »

I think the issue is whether or not flying is required to achieve the rating, and if so how cadets under 18 are achieving it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,347

« Reply #47 on: December 29, 2016, 11:32:31 PM »

Quote
Based on the most recent training slides, it doesn't appear to actually exist in a formal way.
Here's the CAPF101 of the cadet I mentioned earlier. It certainly does exist.


We know the rating exists, it's the SQTR we're discussing - the infinity symbol is also a red flag as all "real"
ES quals expire in 3 years without recurrent training, which is also not currently possible sans an approved SQTR with
recurrent tasks.

There's supposed to be Commander approval for all ratings as well, FAM / Prep, Pre-req, and Final, however
NESA staff have rights which trump local CCs.

The briefing slides on the national website indicate that the SQTR and 3-year recurrency are still in draft, that
was a year ago, which by CAP standards = "new".

The only potential reason I can imagine as to why the SQTR is secret is potential weak points it would show to those wishing to eavesdrop on the system (maybe???)

We're using "secret" in a facetious manner - it simple isn't final / approved, so a few people have the ability to manually approve members.
This is much the same as when AP was a thing but had no SQTR.  This is 10+ year old technology which is hardly confidential.

The most likely scenario is that the draft SQTR simply forgot to include "minimum 18 Years old" and / or "Mission Scanner" as pre-req.
There's no reason cadets couldn't be ground station qualified in this, but not air crew by the current standards.

If any cadets did, in fact, fly a mission under 18, that is not likely to happen again after this public conversation.

[fixed quotes]
« Last Edit: December 30, 2016, 12:52:58 AM by SarDragon » Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

waukwiz
Recruit

Posts: 37
Unit: GLR-WI-048

« Reply #48 on: December 29, 2016, 11:39:56 PM »

Based on the most recent training slides, it doesn't appear to actually exist in a formal way.
Here's the CAPF101 of the cadet I mentioned earlier. It certainly does exist.

/quote]

We know the rating exisits, it's the SQTR we're discussing - also, the infinity symbol is also a red flag as all real
ES quals expire in 3 years without recurrent training, which is also not currently possible.

The briefing slides on the national website indicate that the SQTR and 3-year recurrency are still in draft, that
was a year ago, which by CAP standards = "new".

The only potential reason I can imagine as to why the SQTR is secret is potential weak points it would show to those wishing to eavesdrop on the system (maybe???)

We're using "secret in a facetious manner - it simple isn't final / approved, so a few people have the ability to manually approve members.
This is much the same as when AP was a thing but had no SQTR.
I get that it's being said facetiously, just trying to think outside the box.

But I guess when you frame it that way, I could understand it being something without a check off list of tasks to complete.

I had only contemplated that it DID exist, just was not public for some strange, above-my-pay-grade reason.
Logged
Cadet Cullen Mayes
ES Sergeant
Waukesha Composite Sq.
"Ok, how about instead of doing that, let's not do that. Ok?"
The senseless drivel in this post is Copyright © 2017 by waukwiz. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,347

« Reply #49 on: December 29, 2016, 11:56:06 PM »

CAP received it's first 5 GIIEP systems in Jan 2011, and had been using it on "please can we borrow it basis" for a year or two before that.

The scuttle at the time, actually, was that the Guard was moving on to New! Exciting!, and CAP was the beneficiary of their no longer needing it.

From my low vantage point and conversations with several of the players, it appears that CAP did such a good job using what it was given that
it re-invigoratated the program and technology itself.
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

xray328
Seasoned Member

Posts: 479
Unit: IL-189

« Reply #50 on: December 30, 2016, 12:25:45 AM »

So, if cadets are being awarded the GIIEP rating and GIIEP operators are authorized the aircrew wings, doesn't that mean that cadets are authorized to wear them? The 39-1 specifically says cadets and seniors are authorized and does not differentiate between cadets over or under 18, nor is there an under/over 18 GIIEP rating.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,347

« Reply #51 on: December 30, 2016, 12:50:25 AM »

So, if cadets are being awarded the GIIEP rating and GIIEP operators are authorized the aircrew wings, doesn't that mean that cadets are authorized to wear them? The 39-1 specifically says cadets and seniors are authorized and does not differentiate between cadets over or under 18, nor is there an under/over 18 GIIEP rating.

I'd say more detail from Lt Col Templeton is needed as to how, exactly, these cadets earned the GIIEP rating and
whether there is a differentiation between a ground operator and air crew member (beyond what the regs say which make no distinction).

I would think the original intent and assumption would be that GIIEP rated members would be aircrew and aircrew have to be 18.

I ran this by CAP-USAF and they don't know how a cadet under 18 could fly as actual aircrew, either, since there's no allowance for that
in the regs that actually allow cadets to fly and all mentions assume over 18.

My guess is that this was "one of those things" and won't happen again, assuming it did, and if ground operators are going to get wings,
that needs to be added to the regs.

Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,391

« Reply #52 on: December 30, 2016, 12:53:38 AM »

CAPM 39-1 does not state who qualifies to wear what rating, only where the wing or insignia is worn. The regulation that authorizes aeronautical ratings is CAPR 35-6. I quote:

Quote

CAP Aircrew  Rating:
 
Be qualified as a CAP Mission Scanner (MS), Aerial Digital Imaging System Operator (ADIS), Airborne Photographer (AP), ARCHER Operator (ARCHOPR), ARCHER Trac Technician (ARCHTRK), Geospatial Information Interoperability Exploitation Portable Operator (GIIEP), Surrogate Unmanned Aerial System Green Flag Sensor Operator (GFSO), or Highbird Radio Operator (HRO). 


Others will disagree with me, but if you read any other aero ratings in the regulation quoted, it specifies flying times or prerequirements that require the person be above 18. It may have been a typo not to include "above 18 years," or it may have been because it is being developed. I would take advantage of this omission and let those cadets under 18 years apply for it. Since this award has to be approved by those above the squadron anyway, I would justify it by stating "It appears the intent was for the basic badge to be awarded to any member qualifying as GIIEP regardless of age since the Senior and Master do state specific age while the Basic does not require such." Or similar wording but better composed. And let those above me scratch their heads.

Although some may argue "It was the intent that for any such award the member has to be over 18 years and this was an omission" based on the prerequisites for the other aero awards. Still, I would let them apply and have those above me sort it out.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2016, 01:21:11 AM by Luis R. Ramos » Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
xray328
Seasoned Member

Posts: 479
Unit: IL-189

« Reply #53 on: December 30, 2016, 12:55:58 AM »

Agreed.  Reminds me of the ABU debacle, the regs need to catch up.

Might be a stretch but AF UAV operators are ground based and wear wings, maybe we need a new set of wings for ground based operators.  Are the CAP drone guys wearing them?
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,347

« Reply #54 on: December 30, 2016, 12:57:47 AM »

Are the CAP drone guys wearing them?

CAP Drone guys?
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

xray328
Seasoned Member

Posts: 479
Unit: IL-189

« Reply #55 on: December 30, 2016, 01:00:45 AM »

Yeah, did you see the Drone (UAV) class at the Conference? They taught a handful of guys to fly them/it at a special session at NESA last year.

"CAP UAV Program – Emerging Technology
Presenter: Captain Gary Brown

Synopsis: Come see the new large CAP Drone/UAV, meet the Illinois Wing UAV team and learn all about how the CAP NHQ UAV Program is dramatically augmenting and enhancing our flight operations for Emergency Services. In this session, you’ll learn the objectives of the new program, learn how to plan a photography mission, actually watch the drone fly the sortie (weather permitting), process the photos and see the stunning orthomosaic images that can be generated."
« Last Edit: December 30, 2016, 01:05:25 AM by xray328 » Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,347

« Reply #56 on: December 30, 2016, 01:15:20 AM »

Well, the "wing Team" is people from one unit - ahead of the curve, which is great, but not much fire there (yet).

If CAP doesn't get this lit, it'll miss out on a train that's already well down the track as it is - maybe they will issue
wings to those operators.
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

Alaric
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 704

« Reply #57 on: December 30, 2016, 09:43:44 AM »

Well, the "wing Team" is people from one unit - ahead of the curve, which is great, but not much fire there (yet).

If CAP doesn't get this lit, it'll miss out on a train that's already well down the track as it is - maybe they will issue
wings to those operators.

NESA is having both a basic and advanced UAV school this year
Logged
xray328
Seasoned Member

Posts: 479
Unit: IL-189

« Reply #58 on: December 30, 2016, 09:56:18 AM »

Well, the "wing Team" is people from one unit - ahead of the curve, which is great, but not much fire there (yet).

If CAP doesn't get this lit, it'll miss out on a train that's already well down the track as it is - maybe they will issue
wings to those operators.

NESA is having both a basic and advanced UAV school this year

Really? Well that's the cats meow, where does one sign up?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Alaric
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 704

« Reply #59 on: December 30, 2016, 09:58:15 AM »

Well, the "wing Team" is people from one unit - ahead of the curve, which is great, but not much fire there (yet).

If CAP doesn't get this lit, it'll miss out on a train that's already well down the track as it is - maybe they will issue
wings to those operators.

NESA is having both a basic and advanced UAV school this year

NESA

https://www.capnhq.gov/CAP.Events_NESA.Web/Default.aspx

Really? Well that's the cats meow, where does one sign up?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: Cadets under 18 wearing aircrew wings
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.295 seconds with 20 queries.