Disbandment of the National ES Committee

Larry Mangum · September 14, 2009, 04:47:23 PM

Lt Col Pete Anderson was dismissed as the head of the team last month and it appears that the team has been disbanded as it no longer appears as a committee inthe latest staff reports out of NHQ. I don't think thaty any of us who were part of the team where formally notified of the teams disbandment, except for the email we all received from Pete, saying he had been dismissed.

RiverAux · September 14, 2009, 05:09:14 PM

Obviously all our ES issues have been resolved. Good to know.

lordmonar · September 14, 2009, 05:57:51 PM

What was the ES commitee chartered to do?

arajca · September 14, 2009, 07:19:50 PM

Was it an ad hoc or standing committee?

Larry Mangum · September 14, 2009, 08:09:15 PM

It was chartered to rewrite CAPR 60-3 and the SQTR's to start.

DG · September 15, 2009, 01:13:17 PM

Can we get more details?

arajca · September 15, 2009, 01:58:12 PM

So it was chartered to do a specific project, completed its work, and was disbanded. Seems like a normal life span for an ad hoc committee. Nothing evil there, although how the information got out wasn't the best.

Eclipse · September 15, 2009, 02:21:51 PM

Quote from: DG on September 15, 2009, 01:13:17 PM
Can we get more details?

The messages I've seen from Lt. Col. Anderson and others seem to indicate that even committee members weren't given much notice or information.

In that case, if the committee members themselves want to either tell us what they know or conjecture publicly, fine, otherwise we should probably just leave this be without a lot of speculation.

SarMaster · September 17, 2009, 07:03:46 PM

Bye Bye IMU........

If CAP kills IMU we go back 10 years!

Eclipse · September 17, 2009, 07:21:34 PM

Quote from: SarMaster on September 17, 2009, 07:03:46 PM
Bye Bye IMU........

I'll hold the door open on its way out...

SarMaster · September 17, 2009, 07:51:45 PM

IMU is a great software app.... If national would let Pete develope it. He has kicked Butt...Here national goes again with the 'If we didnt create it...were not going to use it' turds...

FW · September 17, 2009, 08:24:04 PM

IMU is a great app. It's not going anywhere. Pete is working with NHQ/IT for transfering the app to Maxwell. I've heard it direct from the CAP/EX; IMU is here to stay.

Eclipse · September 17, 2009, 09:31:22 PM

Quote from: SarMaster on September 17, 2009, 07:51:45 PMturds...

Well, as long as we can respectfully disagree...

Short Field · September 17, 2009, 10:38:02 PM

And every time we have a class on GPS, we have a few of the older members who start whining how things were better before we used GPS on the missions....

Larry Mangum · September 17, 2009, 10:53:17 PM

The demise of the Committee has nothing to do with the IMU. The team had completed its work on CAPR 60-3 and the SQTR's and the work was passed on to another committeee that is working on adding the HLS and CD missions into the regulation. The purpose of my post was to let, you the members, know that the committee no longer existed and that there was no "offical" announcement of the committes being disbanded. If I mishandled that. then you have my sincre apology.

lordmonar · September 17, 2009, 11:14:43 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 17, 2009, 07:21:34 PM
Quote from: SarMaster on September 17, 2009, 07:03:46 PM
Bye Bye IMU........

I'll hold the door open on its way out...

Sure IMU has some problems....but we use it all the time I would take it over paper any day of the week.

When you add the remote capabilities......it is greatly superior to paper.

Short Field · September 18, 2009, 04:13:35 AM

The nice thing about just using paper for a SAR or SAREX is you don't have to worry about makiing sure all the data is entered correctly.

lordmonar · September 18, 2009, 05:18:17 AM

Quote from: Short Field on September 18, 2009, 04:13:35 AM
The nice thing about just using paper for a SAR or SAREX is you don't have to worry about makiing sure all the data is entered correctly.

So long as the tach time and hobbs time match

Gunner C · September 18, 2009, 05:43:39 AM

Yep - Hobbs & tach are as important to some as getting a find.

Strange but true.

Nick · September 18, 2009, 05:45:08 AM

I'm the first guy to advocate using technology. It's part of my job, all across the board (civilian, military and CAP). But, there has to be some provision for a failback in the event the technology isn't available.

Example: An ICP that doesn't have Internet access. How are you going to manage the incident without WMIRS/IMU access if NHQ is saying that everything must be done through these platforms?

Another example: In the post-strike phase of a disaster (take Katrina or its relative companions) where there is no internet connectivity, how are you going to validate someone for a current ES qualification if they don't have a eServices-generated CAPF 101 on them and you can't verify the status in eServices?

The point is -- what's the backup anymore?