Florida Wing gets "outstanding" in SAREVAL

[BuckeyeDEJ]

News release: http://flwg.sercap.us/news/presentation-5-17-09.asp

The wing got an "outstanding," which comes as no surprise.

[CFI_Ed]

News release: http://flwg.sercap.us/news/presentation-5-17-09.asp

The wing got an "outstanding," which comes as no surprise.

Congratulations to FL Wing - I know this took lots, and lots of hard work.

[Larry Mangum]

What is even more astonishing is that this is the wing's 5th "Outstanding" in a row. That has to be some kind of record.

[Gunner C]

 :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
That'll be hard to top - they seem to be setting the standard.

[Stonewall]

Did cadets actively participate on ground teams?  Or were they primarily used for base support?

An email was sent to me stating that if cadets wanted to participate they would be used as "gophers" and for traffic.  If that's the case, maybe there's a lesson to be learned.

[JoeTomasone]

I saw cadets as FLM and mission support staff.   There were others there that came and went -- so they may have been on a ground team.

One of the evaluators said in the debrief that it was the first Outstanding he's ever given -- which really was the icing on the cake.   

   

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I don't know anyone who was invited to participate, so I don't have much of an inside scoop. Someone want to talk about turnout, etc.?

[BrandonKea]

Is there a published AAR so we can all see what it takes to be Outstanding?

[maverik]

I am more concerned with what the cadets purpose for it was I am not being disrespectful but I would shoot for  cadet ground teams than an oustanding. But I may be wrong

[DC]

I am more concerned with what the cadets purpose for it was I am not being disrespectful but I would shoot for  cadet ground teams than an oustanding. But I may be wrong

I have found FLWG to be funny about cadets participating in Ground Team ops. UDF, FLM, mission base staff, even aircrew (if over 18), sure, but there seems to be some kind of 'thing' about FLWG cadets fully participating on Ground Teams.

[RiverAux]

Is there a published AAR so we can all see what it takes to be Outstanding?

They usually mark SAREVAL and CI results as super secret squirrel stuff and they rarely get seen outside Wing staff. 

[JoeTomasone]

I received a copy of the evaluation report, but:

1.  I am unsure as to whether or not it is OK to post publicly.

2.  It doesn't offer much of a roadmap for others to follow.


I was happy to note that my section (IT) got an Outstanding. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

I saw cadets as FLM and mission support staff.   There were others there that came and went -- so they may have been on a ground team.

One of the evaluators said in the debrief that it was the first Outstanding he's ever given -- which really was the icing on the cake.

I briefed all the ground teams, and no, there were no cadets on any GT.  There were only a handful there, and they were busy assisting the Staging Area Manager and the Flight Line Supervisor.   

[Ranger75]

While I add my congratulations to those in FLWG whose training and efforts resulted in the attainment of the "outstanding" rating, I regret that our organization fails to capitalize on such criticism .  Our organization lacks a process to learn from it own succeses and failures.  As has been stated in a number of other posts, we lack the capacity to subject ourselves to self-criticism and, therefore, to identify our weaknesses and possible corrective actions through the conduct of rigorous AARs.  Equally so, we lack the means to share best practices and widely disseminate improved TTPs across the organization.  My own experience is that those organizations that do so effectively rightfully are viewed as "professionals." 

[heliodoc]

There is a  number of us out here that agree with you Ranger75

It is an organization that needs and deserves a swift kick in its fourth point of contact

REAL professional organizations do it and it is about time CAP does its own or LEARN how to do it.....it's as easy as creating online tests for everything

It great everyone yaps about uniforms and safety.....GREAT  now the real work will begin when CAP owns up to its own AAR's OR failure to do them

[ammotrucker]

I was happy to note that my section (IT) got an Outstanding. 

I thought that you were going to be in Comms during the event.  SEMPER GUMBY

[JoeTomasone]

I was happy to note that my section (IT) got an Outstanding. 

I thought that you were going to be in Comms during the event.  SEMPER GUMBY

I would have been happy there too..   They got an O as well..   So either way I'm happy.

[ammotrucker]

you next week at RECON training and the State Hurricane exercise

[BuckeyeDEJ]

After a little bit of thought: This is the first wing in CAP I've ever been in where SAREVAL participation is by-invitation-only. Are there any other wings that do that?

[Gunner C]

After a little bit of thought: This is the first wing in CAP I've ever been in where SAREVAL participation is by-invitation-only. Are there any other wings that do that?

That part of it seems a bit scripted.  Keep out the riff-raff and make sure you look your best?  Hmmm.

[ammotrucker]

I would believe that if all Wing had the amount of members that FLWG has they would do the same thing.  There are just so many positions that can be filled.  Why not have your best.  IMHO. 

If you feel slighted I am sorry.  I didn't feel that way when they removed me from the PSC position.  It was a relief because of the amount of time that I have been giving in the past two months.  I needed a break.  Now its on to RECON training in TLH

[JohnKachenmeister]

Gunner's assessment is off the mark.

I'm riff-raff, and I was invited.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Don't you mean "inappropriate riff-raff," Kach? 

[JohnKachenmeister]

Hey... The Wing King called me a "Rogue."

Chicks dig rogues.

[Gunner C]

Gunner's assessment is off the mark.

I'm riff-raff, and I was invited.

[Mustang]

While I add my congratulations to those in FLWG whose training and efforts resulted in the attainment of the "outstanding" rating, I regret that our organization fails to capitalize on such criticism .  Our organization lacks a process to learn from it own succeses and failures.  As has been stated in a number of other posts, we lack the capacity to subject ourselves to self-criticism and, therefore, to identify our weaknesses and possible corrective actions through the conduct of rigorous AARs.  Equally so, we lack the means to share best practices and widely disseminate improved TTPs across the organization.  My own experience is that those organizations that do so effectively rightfully are viewed as "professionals."

And until CAP clues into this and starts doing it officially, we ought to be doing so unofficially here--by sharing best practices, sharing SAREVAL and CI results (which are probably subject to FOIA disclosure requirements  anyway).

[JoeTomasone]

(which are probably subject to FOIA disclosure requirements  anyway).

According to a bulletin from the FLWG IG (and quoting higher authority, as I recall), CAP is not subject to the FOIA as it is not "an instrumentality of the United States".   Just another point to ponder in our existential dichotomy.

[Gunner C]

(which are probably subject to FOIA disclosure requirements  anyway).

According to a bulletin from the FLWG IG (and quoting higher authority, as I recall), CAP is not subject to the FOIA as it is not "an instrumentality of the United States".   Just another point to ponder in our existential dichotomy.

What about that nasty little problem when we are acting as the AF Aux on missions for the government?

[RiverAux]

Keep in mind that SAREVALs and CIs are done by the Air Force through CAP-USAF so results potentially could be FOIA'd through those channels even if you can't really do it to CAP. 

[BillW]

Best practices should certainly be shared, but that doesn't mean you give the test out to others before they take it. I've had many people ask for more hints about what was in the evaluators play book, but that wouldn't be fair to the evaluators who worked hard to build realistic scenarios and challenges for the event and will probably want to reuse some of them on the next SAREVAL. Internally there was a very thorough analysis of what went right and what didn't go as planned, but publicizing some of that could unnecessarily embarrass very committed members who don't deserve that kind of public attention.

After 2 SAREVALs and 1 Graded Exercise, the one item I've seen that has put Florida ahead is filling every box on the ICS org chart – even if it means one person having to cover a couple of obscure and seldom used boxes during planning. If you go into the mission without having someone responsible for every conceivable function, that hole will be discovered and exploited by a good evaluator. You can't be looking for a logistics person to handle traffic at the last minute when suddenly 100 unexpected cars show up at the mission base. The corollary to that is that the more cross-training of personal the better so an IC can step into flight line supervising with no ego problems.

To answer an earlier comment, 88 members participated in the SAREVAL and more were "accepted" (not invited) to participate and for whatever reason did not attend. Florida is fortunate to have so many qualified members volunteer to participate and I'm sure some were disappointed they weren't accepted, and others may have decided not to attend since they weren't accepted to the position they wanted. There were many there who were at the Graded Exercise last year, but there were also many new faces, and some so new they got an SQRT sign-off for the day. As the Maj pointed out, we had rogues, riff-raff, and inappropriates on the mission too.

On an individual level there are no "tricks" to achieving an Outstanding, but doing your job as accurately and professionally as possible – while looking for ways to exceed expectations. As the MIO, I was given one ding for carelessness when I left a time stamp off one of the 7 media releases I distributed, but made up for it by being prepared enough to survive the most hostile simulated TV interview I've ever had.

[BrandonKea]

After 2 SAREVALs and 1 Graded Exercise, the one item I've seen that has put Florida ahead is filling every box on the ICS org chart – even if it means one person having to cover a couple of obscure and seldom used boxes during planning. If you go into the mission without having someone responsible for every conceivable function, that hole will be discovered and exploited by a good evaluator. You can't be looking for a logistics person to handle traffic at the last minute when suddenly 100 unexpected cars show up at the mission base. The corollary to that is that the more cross-training of personal the better so an IC can step into flight line supervising with no ego problems.

Isn't this counter productive to ICS mentality though?

ICS is supposed to be exandable, not totally expanded at the onset of an incident. Having one person in charge of "obscure and seldom used" areas might show me as an evaluator that you don't have enough qualified people to properly staff mission base, and that your current staff is spread too thin.

I'm totally new at this, but that's just my view on it. Obviously it works for you FLWG since you got the "O".

[BillW]

After 2 SAREVALs and 1 Graded Exercise, the one item I've seen that has put Florida ahead is filling every box on the ICS org chart – even if it means one person having to cover a couple of obscure and seldom used boxes during planning. If you go into the mission without having someone responsible for every conceivable function, that hole will be discovered and exploited by a good evaluator. You can't be looking for a logistics person to handle traffic at the last minute when suddenly 100 unexpected cars show up at the mission base. The corollary to that is that the more cross-training of personal the better so an IC can step into flight line supervising with no ego problems.

Isn't this counter productive to ICS mentality though?

ICS is supposed to be exandable, not totally expanded at the onset of an incident. Having one person in charge of "obscure and seldom used" areas might show me as an evaluator that you don't have enough qualified people to properly staff mission base, and that your current staff is spread too thin.

I'm totally new at this, but that's just my view on it. Obviously it works for you FLWG since you got the "O".

I probably could have phrased that better. It's not that you're necessarily going to fill every box, but you must always be thinking about every box in planning and doing what-ifs in case you need to expand there. Too often we get complacent doing 3 or 4 person ELT missions that never grow, and we fail to keep in mind (and plan for) that the most simple appearing ELT mission could very quickly grow into a large complicated mission as it develops. What if you're on a simple ELT mission at 0200 when news breaks that a major celebrity is on an airplane in your area with no flight plan that never arrived? Will you know who to call if you land and are greeted by 3 TV news crews, 4 newspaper reporters, the paparazzi, and 300 frantic fans? If your simple SAR in a matter of hours requires 30 members, do you know how you'll feed them with the least disruption to the mission or where they'll park after the squadron lot is full? Years ago I had a 2 person ramp check at 0300 turn into a 30 person mission by 0630, and fortunately a save by 0830. What if I had needed to keep those 30 people searching all day? Do you know how soon you can get a Chaplain or CISM Officer on site if a family member arrives during a search?

[Stonewall]

How many cadets participated and in what role?

[JoeTomasone]

I saw a handful, two were FLM, one was an MSA, couldn't say what the others were doing.

[BillW]

How many cadets participated and in what role?

A quick look through the 211s, and I'd say 10-12 were cadets. I think MSA and FLM were where most of them served. The problem as I remember it was that many cadets couldn't participate because the event was on a Friday and Saturday, while most were still in school. For many of the posts it wouldn't have been fair for them to come in on Saturday and be a day behind the activities and try to catch up in the hectic pace of the mission. The other issue was nothing was set up for cadet accommodations and many participants needed to spend at least one night at Ormond Beach, and many spent 2 nights there.

[davidsinn]

How many cadets participated and in what role?

The other issue was nothing was set up for cadet accommodations and many participants needed to spend at least one night at Ormond Beach, and many spent 2 nights there.

What special accommodations need to be set up? I've been to many a SAREX where everybody slept in the same drill hall. I've been to an encampment where the only thing separating the seniors from the cadets in the bay was the standard 24" between racks.

[RiverAux]

realistic scenarios

Not a strong suit at most SAREVALS.  After all, how realistic is it for one Wing to face all these things on the same day:
1.  Missing airplane search
2.  ELT mission
3.  CD mission
4.  Disaster relief mission
5.  Homeland Security mission
6.  Having a key mission staff member die or otherwise become incapacitated while working at base
7.  Having to evacuate the base for some reason
8.  Finding a bomb in a CAP GT vehicle.
9.  Having a CAP airplane go missing while on a mission

[BrandonKea]

realistic scenarios

Not a strong suit at most SAREVALS.  After all, how realistic is it for one Wing to face all these things on the same day:
1.  Missing airplane search
2.  ELT mission
3.  CD mission
4.  Disaster relief mission
5.  Homeland Security mission
6.  Having a key mission staff member die or otherwise become incapacitated while working at base
7.  Having to evacuate the base for some reason
8.  Finding a bomb in a CAP GT vehicle.
9.  Having a CAP airplane go missing while on a mission

I wouldn't call this unrealistic. Your missing aircraft and ELT mission could be a CD aircraft reported overdue because it ran into unforcast severe storms that are dumping heavy rains on an area. That, in conjunction with a HLS mission in the vicinty (such as Aerial Recon for some multi-national event), and having to evacuate the base after finding a possible bomb in a GT Vehicle, which later goes off, killing your IC who stayed at the base after shooing out the last of the staff....

No, not unrealistic, but totally improbable...

[Eclipse]

For many of the posts it wouldn't have been fair for them to come in on Saturday and be a day behind the activities and try to catch up in the hectic pace of the mission.

Those are called "relief troops", and is part of the game, in fact, a good idea even.  Nothing is (or should be) so complex that you can't be in-briefed and then take over.  That's kind of the point.  I bet they would have appreciated the help.

The other issue was nothing was set up for cadet accommodations and many participants needed to spend at least one night at Ormond Beach, and many spent 2 nights there.

Cadets do not require, nor should they expect "special accommodations" - they sleep with everyone else.  If anything, a shared situation is better for CPT and supervision.

Welcome to the show.  Lead, follow, or make way.

Considering the size of the program, I'm a little surprised at the turn out.  The ultimate score indicates that the mission was adequately manned and more than adequately executed, but we had more at our eval, and we've got 1/2 the members.

As to the comments about being invited - that's not being exclusive, that's playing your varsity team for the big game, same as you would for the real-world missions.

You don't have people participating with wet 101 cards and no clue why they are there in actual missions.

[BrandonKea]

As to the comments about being invited - that's not being exclusive, that's playing your varsity team for the big game, same as you would for the real-world missions.

You don't have people participating with wet 101 cards and no clue why they are there in actual missions.

If they have the quals, I would expect someone to be able to show up to an exercise/eval/real mission and do the job. Does this mean they'll do it as good as the GTM1 or the GTL, probably not.

I can see playing your A team for an eval, but not thowing the B team in on a real mission will stop them from ever seeing a real mission.

YMMV

[Eclipse]

You don't have people participating with wet 101 cards and no clue why they are there in actual missions.

I wouldn't define the above as the "B" team - that's Frosh-soph at best.  Their time will come and there is likely someplace they can be of value and make good use of their time.

You and I both know I'm referring to people barely clear of level one who are wandering around trying to "help", or worse, asking directors and other staff to sign things off, print their 101, whatever, when those BD's are trying to actually get things done.  My favorite are the MP's who think there is time to do Form 5 / 91 check rides because they haven't touched a stick since last year.

They have no business in that ICP - training is done at the home unit - SAREX's and certainly real missions are for showing what you've learned at home. That doesn't mean you can't get some tasking done, and certainly learn something, but its not where you get your credential issues worked out because you couldn't be bothered the 6 months previous.

[BillW]

How many cadets participated and in what role?

The other issue was nothing was set up for cadet accommodations and many participants needed to spend at least one night at Ormond Beach, and many spent 2 nights there.

What special accommodations need to be set up? I've been to many a SAREX where everybody slept in the same drill hall. I've been to an encampment where the only thing separating the seniors from the cadets in the bay was the standard 24" between racks.

By accommodations I mean everything that would go into having more cadets at the event. Originally it was planned to have many more participating, but the AF changed the Eval date about 45 days out. I already had a dozen cadets from my group alone committed to support an EAA activity (which they preferred to a SAREVAL), many were preparing for the Ultimate Cadet Challenge, and finding any available cadets within 100 miles of the event was tough enough. There was no bivouac available on-site, so many of the seniors funded their own hotel rooms making the cost prohibitive for a few of the available cadets. Probably half the participants had to travel over 200 miles and many over 400 miles to the event, so they couldn't come in on Friday morning and make a trip back overnight to get the cadets for Saturday. Because of how spread out people are in the state we had many coming in one at a time by various means which would prevent them from bringing cadets with them.

[BillW]

As to the comments about being invited - that's not being exclusive, that's playing your varsity team for the big game, same as you would for the real-world missions.

You don't have people participating with wet 101 cards and no clue why they are there in actual missions.

If they have the quals, I would expect someone to be able to show up to an exercise/eval/real mission and do the job. Does this mean they'll do it as good as the GTM1 or the GTL, probably not.

I can see playing your A team for an eval, but not thowing the B team in on a real mission will stop them from ever seeing a real mission.

YMMV

The last SAREX I attended at Grundman Field had people arrive, without prior arraignment, from Atchison to Grand Island, and it was no problem finding missions for them. But, when you have 50 people already scheduled for training during a SAREX, you can't just let people show up at the last minute and expect to get a mission any more than you can allow 40 people to self-deploy to an actual mission base unannounced. What if 12 mission pilots show up and there's only 5 sorties - and none of the pilots are qualified in anything but aircrew?

As for getting newly qualified members real experience, I'd say 50% of our new crews participate in an actual mission (assuming they're available) within 6 months. I recently had a couple new UDF/MO trainees get 2 actual finds (non-distress) within 3 hours of completing training. Between all the boats and 20% of the world's flight training within 200 miles you get plenty of practice, which is a big help for Florida.

[Stonewall]

The email I got in FLWG stated simply that "cadets can participate but they must have a 101 card and will be assigned solely to gopher or parking duties".

IMHO, it was pre-planned that cadets' participation would be limited.  YMMV.

[BrandonKea]

The email I got in FLWG stated simply that "cadets can participate but they must have a 101 card and will be assigned solely to gopher or parking duties".

IMHO, it was pre-planned that cadets' participation would be limited.  YMMV.

And I would say as a Cadet, I wouldn't have gone to that, which was probably the intention of putting that out the way it was.

[Gunner C]

The email I got in FLWG stated simply that "cadets can participate but they must have a 101 card and will be assigned solely to gopher or parking duties".

IMHO, it was pre-planned that cadets' participation would be limited.  YMMV.

And I would say as a Cadet, I wouldn't have gone to that, which was probably the intention of putting that out the way it was.

Well, it's their sandbox and the ploy seemed to work.

[DBlair]

After a little bit of thought: This is the first wing in CAP I've ever been in where SAREVAL participation is by-invitation-only. Are there any other wings that do that?

That part of it seems a bit scripted.  Keep out the riff-raff and make sure you look your best?  Hmmm.

I agree. In other Wings, any qualified members can participate and so it better evaluates the whole of the Wing rather than a few hand-selected members who are probably the best at what they do.

I'm not saying that FL doesn't do an excellent job, but the fact that it is by invitation-only makes it seem kind of rigged and tends to further discourage qualified members from participating in ES.

Already many members in FL complain that ES (as well as certain other areas) is a 'good ol' boys' club of only certain people being included and so they start to not see the point of getting qualified or remaining current.

This complaint is especially strong among Cadets, but equally applies to SMs. When we try to push Cadets (or SMs) to get involved in ES and so forth, it is increasingly met with the attitude of "Why bother? Its not like Cadets in FL get to go out on GTs anyway..." or "Why bother? We'll never get to participate anyway..."

In my previous Wing, we used Cadets to a very large extent on GTs (GTs were mainly comprised of Cadets) as they were often highly trained (usually, more than the SMs regarding GT stuff) especially considering that back then the Wing's Basic and Advanced GSAR school was considered the pinnacle achievement of Wing-sponsored activities and it was mostly attended by Cadets with a few SMs here and there. Cadets were also included to a great deal in the Comm section as well as other Mission Base operations.

My point is that to exclude Cadets from Ground Teams is to greatly limit your pool of qualified, eager, and highly motivated personnel, and I don't think it is right to push them to get qualified only to have them learn that they will never get to participate.

[Gunner C]

IMO:

• It gives the non-invitees a feeling of being second tier members (especially cadets)
• It perpetuates the "Good Ol' Boys", which is a problem in every wing I've been a member

[BuckeyeDEJ]

IMO:

• It gives the non-invitees a feeling of being second tier members (especially cadets)
• It perpetuates the "Good Ol' Boys", which is a problem in every wing I've been a member

But not just that. It misrepresents the true capabilities of the wing -- if your 'A' team shows for the evaluation, but a week later, a team of run-of-the-mill members is called on an actual and blows it, what does that say? It doesn't look good. That's my concern, that maybe we're not "keeping it real."

[heliodoc]

Good for FL for their eval

How many of those more qualified members gonna be around to assit in the training of the future???

Hand selection of a few members???  You all "gonna" be around in the next 50 or so years for all you 50 and 60 year old "special CAP operators??""  I know being 50 yrs old, that I will not be the only "hand selected" for SAR EVALs

Better train your future leaders!!!  How do suppose the RM survives???

Again GREAT for your successes, now look to training your future replacements ...Can't hand select for every mission to "look good!"

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Hang on, Helio.

Aren't we all trained to the same standard? Aren't we all supposed to be trained using the same consistent curriculum and evaluated fairly by truthful and knowledgeable evaluators?

So why are some invited and some discouraged? That's what smacks of "good-ol'-boy"-ism. Unless it's an admission that the system is broken -- that we're not all trained to the same standard because we have problems with our own system and its veracity. That's an even bigger problem, one that smacks us right in the core values.

An announcement went out calling for SAREVAL participants with the line that members shouldn't be surprised they're not invited "if I don't know you." I didn't know that guy, and I'm a qualified IO, MO, MS and MRO, and have been in three or four different wings. When would I ever meet that guy? I don't have an answer to that, nor would I. As a result, I didn't think about participation, and with that sort of approach, I doubt I'd ever break into the inner circle.

A hand-picked group evaluated, representative of the entire wing? With all due respect, as more than one old, cranky editor would say, "that just doesn't pass the smell test."

[heliodoc]

I am there with ya, Buckeye

It DOES NOT pass the smell test...

In the RM ALOT of folks did not KNOW each other when I was a turbine engine mech...we all went to the same turbine engine school at FT Eustis, VA but we knew our gig and were more than helpful getting the new guys up to speed for those dreaded"inspections" by Gen Rottencrotch and how he  knew things about those T53L13B and 703 engines

So my views is:  If your are not training your successors or the future, just 'cuz you want to look good for the AF SAR EVAL Team, that is your business.  The real training and future of CAP is HOW WELL those SPECIAL CAP OPERATORS who were hand selected and tellin all those others writing here on how it is on the squadrons (which it is) and thinking just b"cuz "we don not know you" is a crock of craaaaap

But CAP iss STILLLLLL a !@#$$%^GOB and anyone  denying that is BSing the rest of the membership!!  Thosefolks still need an education.  And know what??  Those folks ARE STILL volunteers.  They may think they are somethin' special....but theysupposedly "train" like the rest of us but need MORE education on how ell to play with others

Yep it may be their sandbox,,,,,,,,,  BUT it's a joke and there is STILL plenty of time to train DURING a SAREX no matter what.  No matter what those folks in FLA tell us , me , or you!!

[Gunner C]

I am there with ya, Buckeye

It DOES NOT pass the smell test...

:clap: :clap: :clap: