Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 14, 2017, 03:04:04 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

 1 
 on: Today at 02:04:00 PM 
Started by dmandrell - Last post by dmandrell
SarDragon - How did you confirm your antenna tuning, or did you just do the math and trim to the theoretical length?

EMT-83 - I have done this with other antennas, but had not thought about trimming a 2M down as SarDragon suggested.  I know the J-Pole has a pretty large low sensitivity zone overhead, but I assumed that aircraft relatively overhead would also have the most signal strength reaching the antennas vs. aircraft low/distant on the horizon.  I don't have a lot of experience with this, so the dead zone may be a bigger issue than I recognize.  I did not see their ground plane models, so I will have to go back and take a look at those too.

radioguy - I stumbled upon DPD's site, but could not tell if their antennas were designed for transmit capability.  Most of the text seemed to imply they were for scanners/listening, but it wasn't very clear to me.  One of their omni's mentioned transmitting, but it had to be tuned for the single frequency it would be used on.

 2 
 on: Today at 01:00:07 PM 
Started by Picy3 - Last post by TheSkyHornet
And if someone doesn't approve and files a complaint, the Group CC isn't overriding the Squadron CC. It's going to go through the formal process to review the complaint and address it as needed, within protocol.

I'm assuming my Group CC would raise an eyebrow if I said I had a cadet that I didn't think should promote, wondering what was so bad that it got taken to that level. And I would expect to receive some questions from him to figure out what the problem is and assist in making that determination. But in the end, the Squadron CC will make the call.

As is happens, the only cadet I've recommended to sustained in grade has been my Commander's kid. Okay, that's not entirely true. I once accidentally promoted the wrong cadet in eServices.  :-\

 3 
 on: Today at 12:15:28 PM 
Started by Picy3 - Last post by Eclipse
You are not following me.  Yes, the unit CC is the approving authority but when the unit CC disapproves Cadet Johnny's promotion and the parents are mad they go up the chain.  If that authority is delegated to the CDC then the parents can go to the squadron CC as an impartial judge.  I have seen this happen more than once where a cadet was not promoted and it actually became a huge issue despite everything being done properly and documented.  The parents went to the IG and since the unit CC is the one who withheld the promotion, it had to be brought to the Group CC for review.

The Unit CC is always and the only approving authority for promotions. The authority can be delegated, but not the responsibility.  If
someone else is allowed to check the box in the unit, it's still in the CC's name, and supposed to be with their knowledge and blessing.

There is no "appeal to a higher authority", either implied or actual, in this regard outside an appeal based on a material failure
to follow the required processes which requires the involvement of the IGs, and starts at the Wing, outside the chain.
Any other "whine challenges" are "social", not "regulatory".

If a CC says Johnny doesn't promote, has a legitimate reason why (legitimate being subjective, but obviously can't violate a reg about retaliation, extra
local policy or requirements, etc.), and followed the denial / deferral / demotion procedures properly, Johnny doesn't promote, and absent replacing
that CC for cause (and bear in mind, command discretion / disagreement is not a cause for dismissal), Johnny's not promoting.

The Group or Wing CC can use their higher authority to promote Johnny themselves, but that is not good for order or discipline within the organization,
and certainly not something they should be doing if they otherwise have confidence in their respective CCs.

Any other conversations, appeals, etc., are in the spirit of member retention, compassion, and common sense best practices in a volunteer
environment, but there's no requirement they happen, nor regulatory support for pressure on the CC.

Group and Wing CC's are not "the next level of appeal" when someone doesn't get promoted, nor the CC when the CDC won't check the box.

 4 
 on: Today at 12:12:38 PM 
Started by CAPSOC_0pur8ur - Last post by Eclipse
+1 - CAP made this bed and is now stuck with it.  You can't hold a vendor to a non-existent
specification, and it's made worse in that it appears the contracts have stipulations regarding the need to
buy out existing inventories when changes are made, so that limits the ability to fix things assuming you want to.

When they C&D'ed the Hock, that was the end of any other company, at least one in the CONUS,
ever being a CAP supplier again.

NHQ can put out an annual RFP and its not going to get any other takers because the tooling costs
won't bring a decent ROI for the low-volume insignia they would need to create and stock.

VG is the only game in town because they have the molds, dies, and designs.   

The only way this changes is if CAP went to using standard military insignia for the majority of their badges
and jelly beans, even if they aren't used in the same way as the military, you know like what just about every
LEA and FD does so that they can buy stuff off the shelf from a large swath of commercial vendors. That
"low light" provision is a handy way to insure that never happens unless the leadership is very motivated to
make changes no one apparently wants.

At some point the idea that AAFES is an option for CAP uniforms needs to be removed from the ether, it's not.

 5 
 on: Today at 11:53:57 AM 
Started by deepblue1947 - Last post by Eclipse

 6 
 on: Today at 11:32:03 AM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by Live2Learn
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2017/december/11/the-art-of-disaster-response-by-drone

Nice discussion of 'drones' and DR on the AOPA website.

And as a reminder, this NTSB describes a litany of errors and violations that the drone operator committed in his September 2017 mid air collision with a Blackhawk helicopter.   Anyone who wants to conduct 'do it yourself' SAR with their toy drone should keep these in mind.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?EventID=20170922X54600&AKey=1&RType=HTML&IType=IA%EF%BB%BF

 7 
 on: Today at 10:55:14 AM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by Live2Learn
Bottom line. If you are currently a Part 107 pilot and want to use your gear for SAR, then go visit your local EMA, police and fire folks, and volunteer on your own. NOT as part of CAP, and don't wear your uniform. Just go 'make a difference' as John Q. Public and help. :)

Agree.

 8 
 on: Today at 10:51:39 AM 
Started by CAPSOC_0pur8ur - Last post by HandsomeWalt_USMC
Something I've touched on here before, and my primary complaint with the Vanguard-CAP relationship, is the lack of proper specifications for CAP insignia.

Vanguard, as noted before, is a primary supplier to the military and provides excellent products, because military insignia are made to exacting specifications issued by the various services. Fabric, thread colors, embroidery ratios, sizing, logo designs, etc are all given in explicit detail and the insignia made to those specs. This ensures that each time one orders a particular insignia, like my wings of gold, for example, the product recieved will be consistently the same.

CAP, to my knowledge, has not given Vanguard the same consistent specifications for it's insignia. This results in situations like the funky styling on the embroidered new silver on dark blue wings (for the record, I actually think they look cool), and the "Bozo the clown" commander's insignia. When CAP gets around to providing VG with proper specs, then we will have higher quality insignia available to us.

The other gripe I have is somewhat minor, and that is Vanguard's lack of military insignia on the flight suit nametags. I can order my Naval Aircrew wings in gold with silver stamped lettering IAW CAP requirements from another vendor, but if I wanted a nametag with both them and CAP insignia such as observer wings if I rated them, or an EMT badge, then I'd be SOL. In a perfect world, I would like to see the license agreement amended to allow certain manufacturers, such as nametags4u or wings'n'things, to produce CAP nametags. Vanguard doesn't seem to be interested in providing flight suit tags with other branch insignia.

 9 
 on: Today at 10:30:03 AM 
Started by Picy3 - Last post by TheSkyHornet
When I was a squadron CC I chose to delegate board chair and promotion authority to the CDC.  They knew the cadets better than me and if a cadet was not getting promoted then there was a level of appeal if the cadet or parents disagreed. If I was on the board then the next step up would be the Group CC and I really didn't want to involve Group in any cadet promotion issues.

Uh, the Group CC should not be involved in that discussion.

CAPR 52-16, 5-2(a):
Quote
The unit commander is the approving authority for all achievements and awards.

You are not following me.  Yes, the unit CC is the approving authority but when the unit CC disapproves Cadet Johnny's promotion and the parents are mad they go up the chain.  If that authority is delegated to the CDC then the parents can go to the squadron CC as an impartial judge.  I have seen this happen more than once where a cadet was not promoted and it actually became a huge issue despite everything being done properly and documented.  The parents went to the IG and since the unit CC is the one who withheld the promotion, it had to be brought to the Group CC for review.

Also, I'm a firm believer in delegating to the lowest level possible and if I can't trust my CDC to make the right call regarding cadet promotions then I really need to get a new CDC.  They are the ones who should know the cadets the best.

Tracking. Absolutely no disagreement on anything there.

 10 
 on: Today at 10:04:17 AM 
Started by deepblue1947 - Last post by NIN
Next up in the CAP balloon fleet:  The giant NIN-head.   ;D

Oh, dear lord.

"Small children ran screaming from the Albuquerque Balloon Fest ground upon the inflation of the Civil Air Patrol's newest 'shape' balloon, the NIN-head."

Stahp!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.069 seconds with 13 queries.
click here to email me