Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 22, 2017, 10:58:39 PM
Home Help Login Register

CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10

 on: Today at 02:42:07 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by Spam
You may like them, but to me a donut is that sugared confection with a hole in the middle. Anything filled with jelly or other stuff, is not a donut.

And you are making me hungrier, dear sir! I had no breakfast or lunch and it is 12:38 EST.


Its dark here - after seven thirty at night - and I'm going to miss my Squadrons PT night tonight, which I could use very much right now thanks to all the German doughnuts at the beginning of the day and the German beers at the end of the day. I think I'd have trouble making the FIRST mile tonight (GA045 typically runs a three mile PT).

Auf Wiedersehen, Kameraden!

 on: Today at 02:33:56 PM 
Started by capmaj - Last post by Spam
I'll speak for at least some of the others.  For the past two years, Georgia Wing has announced, then cancelled, their cadet comp. No one wants to compete, given the short time fuze of the announced schedule and how the extended event has been destructing for the past three years.

The short fuze announcement in Georgia this winter that there would BE a competition three weeks hence (now cancelled - they're going to try to cherry pick a team, apparently) led to many discussions about essentially crashing the plans and schedules of our units for a month to focus on winning - essentially shutting down the unit for all our guys to focus on getting a small group of cadets to win. Our cadets said lets forget it, and press on with worthwhile training (their words - THEY, the defenders of the GA Wing color guard trophy, didn't think it was worth it). Hard to hear, since my cadets had won at Wing level all four previous times they competed (they took a year off, then came back and won again). I am convinced that my cadets made the right choice - and as we continue to meet the QCUA criteria, and promoted two more Mitchells this last month, and deployed a heavy GT to the tornado DR mission last month, I am proud that they decided to skip participating in yet another rush job poor effort to hold to high standards.

Here's some factors why, though, I feel that it was unfair to put our cadets in that spot, and why we're ending up with an unfair NCC aimed squarely at the half a percent of cadets. Aside from announcing the event so close (three or four weeks) in advance is always a bad idea, but all in all, the confusion over the NCC redesigns, coupled with insufficient volunteer staff on hand for such events produces poor execution of CP events from national to regional to wing levels and has led most of the folks I know to say forget it, and to focus on excellence in all we do at our unit level, partnering with one or two other local units, rather than expose cadets to a shoddy or marginally planned or led effort. I don't see our units strategy (of eschewing Wing/SER level events) changing much in the near future, frankly. We get far better feedback from our internal customers (cadet and parental satisfaction) when we plan, staff and execute our own events.

What eating the event up, causing poor execution and declining participation? I would suggest a need to:
FOCUS ON KEY EVENTS (not peripherals like robotics).
FOCUS ON DESIRED OVERALL EFFECTS (like, improving metrics for all units/all cadets, rather than petting the dream teams)
Same approach I would recommend to rewrite the overblown new PT manual, really...

Taking a page from GUNSMOKE, or other USAF competitions, the "desired effects" that I mentioned that you'd want to see from any competition would be that your competitors would learn and trade TTPs (Tactics Techniques and Procedures) as they worked to hit the mark for each competition. With fewer units competing every year... that is a FAIL on that metric for Cadet Comp. Adding two teams per Wing doesn't fix the structural problems, however.

At the end of the day, we're not serving those small units, or encouraging individuals to compete. The expansion makes it more complex (and harder to understand and execute for volunteers at Wing and below), and the event continues to follow its history of spending a vastly tilted amount of time and effort on the bigger, wealthier units (and I say that having led several successful units that were repeat winners). In the end, allowing two Wing/Region teams merely lets more rich and or large units play with a big slice of CP funding for travel (that was approx. $3,000 - 3500 per year from GA Wing for its teams, and what was it, 80+K at NHQ level for plane tickets and rooms?) that won't be available for smaller, further away units that cant team up, or cant afford to play.

The added complexity of the events is (I am convinced) playing a factor in reducing interest in staffing it and in competing. Recognizing this and the "elite units only need apply" phenomenon when I was a DCP, I proposed a (Wing) Cadet Comp with a simplified "sand lot" format, where cadets could sign up on an individual basis, being evenly assigned on the basis of age and grade to teams under the leadership of an assigned cadre senior cadet. The cadets would then show up and meet their team leader/partners for the first time, and roll right into competing in round robin on events and on written tests, with cadets from the various units being distributed among teams (just as with Encampments). I had suggested a simplified event cycle - standard mile run, standard drill, an inspection, a written test, and an AE quiz bowl. Perhaps do it only in BDUs... At the end of the event we would give awards to the teams and individuals and dismiss (best Airman score, best C/NCO score, best C/Officer score, etc, as well as best team in category and best overall). Such a format would encourage greater participation from small units or those too remote to team up, or those units with only a handful of cadets and/or with no C/NCOs/officers to form or lead a team. At the end of the day rather than a number of vans full of disappointed cadets and only one van of winners, we would send home cadets who'd competed as individuals, AND as team members, and had had a competition experience where they may never have had a chance coming from a small unit. They would go home singly or in pairs to talk up the event and what they'd learned to their small or remote units, helping to standardize the program and to bring them into the fold - rather than to keep spending cadet funds only on the large and the big units. Who now will get to send TWO teams to compete...


 on: Today at 02:28:15 PM 
Started by xray328 - Last post by LATORRECA
Is anyone seen my crayons. I'm hungry. 💂💂💂

Sent from my HTC Desire 530 using Tapatalk

 on: Today at 02:24:48 PM 
Started by xray328 - Last post by Майор Хаткевич
To be fair, his idea requires no new insignia...just a coating change.

 on: Today at 02:12:24 PM 
Started by xray328 - Last post by kwe1009
Agreed.  The cadet officer rank insignia is not unique to CAP.  If we were to create different insignia there would also likely be an increased cost. 

Really the easiest solution is to just use the same epaulets that are on the blue shirt.  If the service coat doesn't have epaulets you can buy a kit and have them added for around $30.  That is a one-time cost and when that jacket gets sold or handed down to the next cadet then it is already done.

 on: Today at 01:53:50 PM 
Started by PatrickHall603 - Last post by MSG Mac
Hopefully when the Regulations are all updated and published (one of MG Vasquez's pet projects), all these problems will be solved.

 on: Today at 01:47:49 PM 
Started by capmaj - Last post by Ned
Anyone have any insight into the logic/reason for this type of setup?

Let me see if I can help.


So apparently it has been decided at NHQ to allow each Region to send multiple teams to the National CG competition. This apparently is based on Nationals interest in increasing the number of cadets who participate. The Region winning team and the second place team both go to the national team and compete against the other Region teams and each other !

Yes, yes, and yes.

We absolutely retooled NCC to engage more cadets at all levels.  Deliberately so.  We had found that statistically it was more likely for a cadet to earn an Earhart than it was to simply participate in a cadet competition at any level (wing, region, or national).  Restated, less than 10% of our units entered a team, and less than 5% of cadets ever competed in a cadet competition at any level.  Obviously, we needed to engineer the process to be more inclusive of average, regular community-based cadet and composite squadrons.

Because the whole point of NCC is to support local units by encouraging cadets to engage in the same sorts of activities found at the unit level, while providing additional fun, recognition, and the spirit of competition.  We specifically do not want units to "specialize in NCC" and do things like expend precious resources on "competition only uniforms" tailored multiple times, or expensive custom embroidered matching track suits, or as Bob mentioned, spending hours upon hours on the drill pad creating and choreographing unique drill routines useless in any other venue.  NCC is now specifically designed to be accessible to the typical unit.

My question is, (perhaps to some of our CP gurus) doesn't this.....

1) Send the message to the Region champions that " Yes, you won. But you have to now have a 'do-over' in which you again compete against a team you already beat", and.....

Not really.  Historically, given that the wing and region competitions were held months before the national comp, it was unusual for the exact same team that won their wing or region comp to compete at NCC in any event.  Significant "roster moves" were routine, and perhaps unavoidable.  Teams continued to practice and changed aspects of their game.  Wings and region competitions often hold different events as part of their competitions.  So the fact that a given team with perhaps a significantly different membership competing in different events months later might have different results is probably not very surprising to the cadets and adult leaders involved.  The fact that Team X were the champions of their wing or region during a particular competition is hugely important, of course, to the cadets and leaders involved in those competitions.  I suspect something that they will remember and treasure for years.  I still have very fond memories of competing in the CAWG drill competitions decades later.  And South Bay Group 17 certainly never won the competition.  But I remember receiving a trophy from Gen Doolittle for third place in some category.

2) Create a scenario in which a Region winner would lose to the other Region participant, thereby creating the question of who is the actual champion! In the extreme, you could see a situation in which Team A beats Team B at Region. Team A then loses to Team B at Nationals. Team B then goes on to win the national championship. So then you have Team A as the Region champs and Team B as the National champs. So who is the champion!!

Generally, the team whose name is inscribed on a given trophy is pretty much the champion.  The fact that the results of a different competition held months later with different events and probably different team members will never take anything away from an earlier competition.  I'm no NFL expert, but I am given to understand that a Superbowl championship team may well have lost to one or more other teams earlier in the season.

We are just over 4 months out from the competition, let me see when we can expect the website to be updated and advise.

Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Program Manager

 on: Today at 01:47:35 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by AlphaSigOU
Anywhere you find a sizable Polish-American community, there's always paczki (punch-ski), which are essentially jelly donuts served until Mardi Gras.

 on: Today at 01:43:56 PM 
Started by xray328 - Last post by PHall
I said this before but I never liked them a bit. I thought they were excessively gaudy. I can't say I care for the little tiny (almost invisible) cadet rank insignia for the slip on epaulets, either. They would be ok if they used full size cadet rank.

Full size insignia works when you have 1 or 2 devices, but that 3rd device makes them too wide to fit on the epaulet sleeve.

Two possible fixes for that:

1) Make a new size, somewhere between the current tiny ones and the long-standing large ones. Then scrap the largest and smallest, using the new mid sized for everything.

2) (and easiest fix of all) - get rid of the need for a third insignia device. Gold pip for C/2nd Lt, silver for C/1st Lt, two silver pips for C/Capt. Continuing - gold lozenge (that's what they are, they aren't diamonds) for C/Maj, silver lozenge for C/Lt Col.  C/Col can be two silver lozenges.

Think about it - that would actually put the insignia colors in parallel with bars and leaves. (Except for C/Col, but ya can't win 'em all. Or can you? Maybe a new C/Col insignia would be something to consider...

Your easiest fix is a total non-starter do to the fact that it would require regulation changes and new insignia to be produced.
Totally not worth the hassle to fix this "non-problem".

 on: Today at 01:35:05 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by PHall

The local donut shops pretty much have the market cornered.

As they should. No matter what part of the country. Regional preferences are important. The Applebeeization and McDonaldsizing of America takes away from the novelty of regional specialties.

Although SuckDonald's in Hay-waii and Goo-am (misspelling intentional ;) ) does offer regional specialties not available anywhere else: their Local Deluxe breakfast (steamed rice, scrambled eggs, Portuguese sausage and Spam), Spam Egg McMuffin and McSaimin (doesn't come close to real saimin), along with the occasional taro and coconut pies. Booger Kink has a similar local kine menu. (Not on Kwaj - the Booger Kink there does nt do breakfast.)

McDonalds in Australia serves Vegimite!   

For those who don't know what vegimite is, google it.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.12 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.077 seconds with 13 queries.