Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 22, 2018, 03:01:55 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10

 11 
 on: Yesterday at 08:33:40 PM 
Started by airbatic - Last post by s.cap
Iíve not posted more than a few words on these forums and it is my hope that this is helpful to those wondering how to get this done.

My experience with this came as I attempted to figure out how to get this done for myself.

What I discovered after as few years of watching the forums and asking the questions was:

(apologies for not abbreviating)

CAPR 50-17 Chapter 9 Sections a & b,
Quote
CHAPTER 9 - SPECIAL RECOGINITION PROGRAMS

9-1. Special Recognition Programs for Prior Cadets. Achievements that were earned as a CAP cadet may be applied to fulfill Senior Member Professional Development Program credit(s). This applies to all senior members who earned certain achievements as former cadets, regardless of the dates of their cadet memberships. These achievements are explained below:

a. Credit will be awarded to former cadets based on specific accomplishments. Those members who earned the Mitchell Award and have a less than two-year break in service may receive credit for Level I completion. Members who earned the Earhart Award may receive the technician rating in the Cadet Programs Officer specialty track. Members who have earned the Eaker Award may be awarded completion of SLS, the CAP Officer Basic Course, and Level II. In addition to Level II completion, members who earned the Spaatz Award may be awarded the senior rating in the Cadet Programs Officer specialty track and the Yeager Award.

b. Official recognition of these achievements will be awarded on an individual basis. Former cadets who qualify for these awards should submit a written request, approved by their commander, to NHQ/DPR to have the memberís permanent record updated to reflect the appropriate equivalency as described above and issuance of the Yeager Award, if applicable. If completion of required cadet accomplishments is not already a part of the memberís permanent record, then supporting documentation must be attached to the request.

I now just send a email to LMMEFORMS@capnhq.gov with an attached PDF memorandum: (printed with permission of Capt Holberton)



A week later we get the Davis in the mail and the record reflects the appropriate levels.

I've done this successfully with 3 former cadets now although I confess getting the PD awards back-dated has never happened.  Get this done quickly on the squadron side.

Sending in the form 2's, for a Section 2, is a bit more challenging.  Commanders at all echelons have become accustom to clicking on pending approvals in eServices.  To my knowledge there is no way to request special promotions for former cadets within eServices.  I would suggest some polite hand-holding on processing the form 2's from group through wing.

Good luck!

 12 
 on: Yesterday at 07:21:41 PM 
Started by careyhead - Last post by TheSkyHornet
That's because they don't, and there's no such thing as a "Senior Member Flight Commander".

The Senior Members are not in the cadet chain and it would be inappropriate for them to "report"
to a cadet.

There's no issue with having Seniors in formation, I've always encouraged the practice, but
no reason for them to report, and in the case they would be, the only appropriate person for
them to report to would be CDS.


Agreed on this point. You report in formation to the person to whom you report outside of formation.

For the sake of drill and ceremonies, the CDS is effectively the Flight Commander if performing in that capacity at the time. But there is no "Senior Member Flight Commander" in practicality.

Composite Squadrons are a funky setup. The Cadet portion is essentially a squadron in itself. Then you have a cadre team of Cadet Programs staff to whom the Cadet Commander would report (the CDC, to whom the senior Cadet Program staff also reports). So by that point, you've got a funky formation. Generally, in a military formation, you wouldn't report to a "Deputy Commander;" you'd report to the Commander. The Deputy may be posted elsewhere (say, behind the formation, or behind the Commander). This turns the Composite Squadron more into a Group-type setup than a Squadron-type setup because of those weird under layers.

What I've seen squadrons do is have a cadet flight form, reporting to the Cadet Commander, who reports to the Commander; and a senior flight form, reporting to the Deputy Commander for Seniors, who reports to the Commander. This puts the Deputy Commander for Cadets in a weird spot (if he/she has an issue with it), because now they're reporting to someone who isn't their superior by report; but for the sake of a quick and easy formation, it works.

What I've also seen is the cadets form themselves up, and the Commander posts out front (as normal) with the seniors forming from behind the commander and to the side in a separate flight. They have no role during the formation (they don't salute and render the report of the day); they're just there in formation.

Remember, for the purposes of drill and ceremony, this is a Cadet Program function even though seniors may conduct drill as appropriate. For cadets, it's a formal training process. It's not so much for senior, again, in practicality.

If you want a full squadron formation, just expect it to be funky and "unofficial" because there is no such thing from a regulatory/manual standpoint. The Air Force structured their echelons to report to one another (Squadron > Group > Wing), not internal sub-squadrons for ROTC-style training programs. ROTC cadets, similarly, do not form up with cadre generally. The cadre will be off to the side not in the formation.

 13 
 on: Yesterday at 07:12:14 PM 
Started by FNelson - Last post by TheSkyHornet
Consider how you order these to avoid having a bunch of money tied up in a stack of t-shirts at any given time. My squadron is going to move to a just-in-time type system where we do two orders a year, loosely aligned with our three cohorts, and order exact quantities of what we need. Iím tired of stocking t-shirts. Your ability to do this depends on what the minimum run for your supplier is - our local company likes us and doesnít seem to have a minimum run, but weíll find out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is what we do.

You want to attempt to order sizes that are going to be accurate and be utilized. So what happens when you order 5 smalls, 5 mediums, and 5 larges, but you only use 2 smalls and need 7 mediums?

It may be more cost effective to order 100 shirts, but the end result in cost may be higher because you ordered a bunch of supplies you didn't need or not enough of a particular size.

 14 
 on: Yesterday at 07:09:45 PM 
Started by Live2Learn - Last post by TheSkyHornet
Looking doesn't necessarily mean seeing.

How many runways have you looked down where you can't see the opposite end, whether due to slopes in the terrain, or mirages? A mile down can be totally obscured.

Now, could it be a factor? Absolutely. But the root cause here is a miscommunication/miscoordination between ground and local controllers.

 15 
 on: Yesterday at 07:05:00 PM 
Started by etodd - Last post by Eclipse
I know it's been said by me and others before - CAP is not intended to be a replacement force of
people working for free in roles that would otherwise be done by paid professionals, it's intended to
be an augmentation force to supplement in areas where the resources don't exist, aren't robust enough,
or are exhausted.

This has been a noted issue forever with professional flight instructors - everyone is all in favor of
recruiting new pilots and getting member CFIs to do it for free, until the subject of "bread and butter"
comes up in that you're asking someone to literally give up their meal ticket. Most can on occasion,
or with some limitations, but few can do it at a level that impacts their own livelihood.

A great way to engender animosity towards CAP is to start wandering into areas with strong unions
and discussing CAP working for free.  It's bad enough that most of these jobs will be
gone in 10 years with UAVs, let alone by unpaid aircrews in "free" airplanes that the person
losing the work is actually supplementing through their taxes.

At least in my parts, CD, for example, is an area where the state has its own taxpayer-funded
resources and sworn pilots.   CAP gets work in areas where there is no state resource, or
when their resources are unavailable for maintenance, vacation, etc.  Everyone wins.
But start discussing much more then that, and people get quiet fast.

As a taxpayer, I want the biggest bang for the buck, as a member, I want a GA community
that welcomes CAP's presence.

Which is it?  Scylla or charybdis?

(And the above is "blue sky" and doesn't even account for typical CAP issues regarding
depth, availability, and execution.)

 16 
 on: Yesterday at 07:04:00 PM 
Started by Ozzy - Last post by Ozzy
Thanks to getting married in a few days, I've been losing a lot of weight. Doing some closet cleaning, I have this Ralph Lauren Navy Blazer I can't wear any more due to the weight loss. It's been worn maybe 8 times and is still in perfect condition. I'll even throw in the CAP crest you need for it.

Looking for $130 or best offer, I'll pay shipping.

It's the same one as here: Ralph Lauren Mens 2 Button Navy Blue Wool Blazer Sport Coat Jacket - Size 44R https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000WWXRTW/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_jKjFBb878QSFD

 17 
 on: Yesterday at 06:53:02 PM 
Started by etodd - Last post by PHall
My wing has been flying a fire patrol mission for the last few years. Our dept of forestry has cut back on the funding for staffing fire towers,  and we have a good sized national forest, so we fly an afternoon/evening patrol to look for things so they don't burn overnight.

Puts a fair amount of time on the planes, we actually have a hard time finding crews due to the week day nature of the sorties.

Depending on where the funding comes from, there might be constraints on using USAF equipment to displace private businesses.  I think Federal funds may have don't compete requirements.  I'm surprised State governments don't have similar stipulations for appropriated tax dollars.

If it's an AF mission, then yes you have to exhaust all other resources first. Same rule that is followed when Guard/Reserve aircraft are used to fight fires.
If it's a CAP mission then it's up to the MOU between CAP and the state.

 18 
 on: Yesterday at 06:01:52 PM 
Started by etodd - Last post by Live2Learn
My wing has been flying a fire patrol mission for the last few years. Our dept of forestry has cut back on the funding for staffing fire towers,  and we have a good sized national forest, so we fly an afternoon/evening patrol to look for things so they don't burn overnight.

Puts a fair amount of time on the planes, we actually have a hard time finding crews due to the week day nature of the sorties.

Depending on where the funding comes from, there might be constraints on using USAF equipment to displace private businesses.  I think Federal funds may have don't compete requirements.  I'm surprised State governments don't have similar stipulations for appropriated tax dollars.

 19 
 on: Yesterday at 05:51:49 PM 
Started by Live2Learn - Last post by Live2Learn
https://www.flyingmag.com/ntsb-investigation-near-collision-springfield

This issue of Flying Magazine has a couple really spooky near misses.  The link above is for a near collision between a ground vehicle and a departing RJ full of people.  The RJ had a takeoff clearance, and the ground vehicle was also cleared to occupy the active runway.  Did the cockpit crew LOOK before pushing throttles foward?  Did the driver LOOK before entering the runway?  Does a "clearance" come with a (life-back) warranty?

https://www.flyingmag.com/faa-investigation-drone-helicopter-florida

The other article was built around a video of a very near miss between a cruising helicopter and a hovering drone.  The stationary drone captured some very clear images of the chopper as it passed rapidly below.  Based on structures on the nearby beach front properties the drone was probably at or near the legal maximum altitude of 400'... though it's a stretch to say the operator had a good visual on it.

These two articles with their accompanying videos might generate some good discussion for an aircrew safety meeting, stand down, or whatever.

 20 
 on: Yesterday at 05:41:07 PM 
Started by darkmatter - Last post by MacGruff
I have sent my paper work in for my level 3 to be approved 5 months ago.  have inquired of my commander and the commander has resent it multiple times.   not sure what to do. I dont want to jump the chain of command, but really frustrated.  any suggestions?

CAP Guy - Not sure why you sent paper. Please do it via eServices. It does not take anywhere near as long and no one can claim that it was "lost", either.

All your records will show up there anyways so it should be a simple matter for your PDO to verify that you met all the Level 3 requirements and click the button which will generate an entry in you squadron commander's queue. From there it goes to Group - if you are in a Wing that has Groups - and the Wing. That's as far as it goes for Level 3.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.04 seconds with 13 queries.
click here to email me