Venting about attitudes

[Tubacap]

I'm pretty sure pending some pre-requirements for Hawk, that you do come out with GTM1 from the Summer School.

[Major Carrales]

I'm pretty sure pending some pre-requirements for Hawk, that you do come out with GTM1 from the Summer School.

I should very much like for that to be one of the focused objectives.

[floridacyclist]

It pretty much is. Both my kids went in with UDF and came back with all of GTM3 and most of GTM2 and 1 signed off. With a few more weekends since then, they now have all of GTM and most of GTL as well as MRO, CUL, MSA etc..starting to look for new challenges since they have just about ran out of things they can do as minors. They've been working on learning to teach (we actually have a DEM class on teaching this weekend) so they can help their squadron members. To me, this is what the program is all about.

[JohnKachenmeister]

So, if WE want to have a force that we call "Rangers," and our rangers exist to:

1.  Provide trained rescue teams capable of operating for extended periods in austere conditions without external support.

2.  Provide trained rescue personnel to integrate into conventional CAP rescue units as trainers and cadre, and,

3.  Provide trained rescue personnel to assist CAP leaders at all levels in training Emergency Service force personnel...

Then they are the Rangers! 

And, by the way, Big Mother Blue recognizes them as such in some AFI I read once.

Excellent training goal statements Maj Kach. May I steal them? Or did you already steal them from someone else?

Nope.  I made them up based on what HM Rangers are supposed to do.  If you want them, they are all yours.

[LittleIronPilot]

Well this thread has been entertaining...good think I am an old hand at forums and para-military units, or I, as a new member here and in the CAP, would be wondering what the heck I have gotten myself into.

BTW...I never heard of the HM Ranger program...but as a former Paratrooper and LRS member, I LOVE the idea.

[Skyray]

O.K. you guys, play nice.  I happen to agree with both of you.  Sometimes the arrogant attitude instilled in students at R<redacted> School is irritating.  The training, however, is invaluable.  As I commented a little earlier, we need to concentrate on instilling humility.

[Stonewall]

Gene,

Not that I've said the "R" word in a few months, but as long as I've been a senior member, going on 16 years now, I have never ever needed to use a special title, i.e. "Ranger", to motivate cadets to advance through CAP's ground team standards.  I just don't see the need for it.  You say if it motivates cadets and doesn't violate any regulations, then why not.  I ask, why?  Isn't working towards, earning and then excelling as a cadet ground team member/leader enough?  Once qualified, you do what?  Hone your standard skills and begin teaching newer members who are still striving to achieve GTM/GTL.  It's that simple to me.

I can go on and on and on about my experiences up in DC wing with several different squadrons.  Never once did we call ourselves "Rangers" or use some other title to boast our capabilities.  It's like knot tying.  I'm sure there are some "Ranger standards" to knot tying that exceed the standard GT requirement.  Why call it a Ranger thing, why not just call it training.  Semantics is all it is.  The success that I've seen within the ground operations community as it relates to cadets has always been from within the standardized program.  It has so many avenues to teach, motivate, re-train, enhance skills and evolve that there just isn't a need for anything else.

I remember showing up to my first MER SAR College in like 1993.  When we showed up to sign in, there were these cadets from another wing lined up with some sort of ascot around their neck and a rigid squadron hat.  It screamed "I'm Special".  It was, in fact, some sort of self-initiated ranger program.  Naturally, the head dude from the activity spoke to their senior representative and told them to knock it off.  Halfway through the weekend we learned those "Rangers" had no concept of CAP ground team operations.  All they had was some wanna-be senior member trying to re-live the days of when they weren't a Ranger.  Pathetic if you ask me.  We always prided ourselves in showing to outside wing activities as plain looking as possible.  No squadron hats, t-shirts, bells, whistles, or anything.  The only thing we had was our standardized gear.  We showed up to numerous ES missions and training exercises with other wings and often out-searched them.  No berets, no nothing.  Always getting comments on the cadets' discipline and professionalism.  It's easy.

I just don't understand the need to call anything a special program like Ranger, or whatever.  I have no issue with the term "Ranger" as it relates to the Army.  That's irrelevant to me.  I take no offense to it and could care less.  My point is using any special name.  Recondo, Ranger, Sapper, Mike Force, Tree Hugger, whatever.  Those were things from my cadet days, when I was a young cadet, trying to be more than just another Ground Team Member.  The future showed me one thing, and that was I wasn't even a good ground team member.  But things have changed since then.  We have a national standard.  Who cares if it isn't regionally specific based on terrain.  You know what you do?  You simply modify the training to fit your needs.  No need to re-invent anything or create some goofy title for yourself.  Just be a "Ground Team", except you're a Florida Ground Team, not a Colorado Ground Team.  I think the locals won't expect a North Dakota Ground Team to be proficient in Swamp Operations or a Virginia Ground Team experts in Desert SAR.  It's just common sense to me.

I have had lots of experience with Hawk Mountain folks.  From cadets in my wing to actually attending Winter Hawk in 2002.  It's a good venue for ground team training.  It's really good for region specific mountain training.  If I were king, I'd take away all the bells and whistles and simple make it Hawk Mountain SAR School.  But that's me.  Sort of like the National Guard's Mountain Warfare School in Vermont.  It's a 4 week school, 2 summer weeks and 2 winter.  Guess what you get out of it?  TRAINING!!!!  Sure, there is some unofficial badge that isn't authorized by the Army, but other than a certificate, you get some awesome training.  That's the way I think schools should be in CAP.

Screw Everglades Ranger School, call it Florida Ground Operations School.  Motivate cadets and seniors through a good solid training program, probably something you guys already have.  But do away with the name.  Again, I don't have an issue with the word "Ranger", it just happens to be the term you used.  Throw away white belts, ascots, tabs and whatever else you use as identifiers.  The ultimate goal should be the coveted GTM badge, Senior and Master.  Then EMT badges.  Nothing gets me more than getting a task signed off and then never using it again.  You can tie a bowline knot enough to pass the test, but are they tying in the performance of a simulated exercise, at night, randomly during round robin training?  GTM is not s stepping stone to being Ranger qualified, it's the end result.  Then, as a GTM, you hone, polish, and master the GTM skills.  Want to go to Hawk?  Great, more training, but when you come back, you're still a GTM.  There's no MOS designator and you don't get to wear a boonie cap.

I just don't think we, CAP as a whole, has mastered the art of ground search and rescue to the point where we're bored and need some special qualifications.  Using cadets is an awesome thing.  Personally, I consider ES a major aspect of a cadets' experience.  To me, there is no cadet program without emergency services; it's a motivator.  That being said, I don't think there is any one squadron, ground team, cadet ground team member, that truly is an "expert".  It is said it takes 8 years for a person to become a good, safe driver.  People drive every day and spend as many as 2 or 3 hours in their car, every day.  But cadets, and most senior members, are merely volunteers.  Cadets, who are a part of CAP should only be dedicated about 1/3 of their efforts towards ES.  It's an extra curricular activity with some bonus features, like getting called out on a Friday night to help search for a missing person, non-distress ELT, or quite possibly, if they're out of school, hang out in hurricane stricken community and pass out water.  All cool stuff that I loved as a kid.  But I'm grown up now, I see a bigger picture.  I grew out of the days of thinking berets were necessary or a special program was the only way to go.  I learned a lot from watching the good guys up in NATCAP wing, guys that didn't sport a white pistol belt, upside down survival knife on their gear or boonie caps.  These guys were just good at ES, Air Ops, Ground Ops, Cadet Programs, Moral Leadership, Aerospace Education and running encampments. 

I like the idea of state (wing) specific GSAR training.  It's an idea that's been spoken about for as long as I've been in CAP.  It's great that someone is doing it.  I just don't see the need for special titles.  It's a waste; a false sense of superiority.  That one cadet, Gene, you know who I'm talking about, when she walked into the squadron meeting and was the only one wearing Ranger garb out of 17 cadets, I felt embarrassed for her.  Her starched BDU cap that looked like a dog dish, white pistol belt, whistle, ascot and whatever else she wore, man, I wondered who told her it looked good, professional.

Well, that's my two page opinion based on 20+ experience in CAP, as an EMT, HAZMAT Technician, Cop, Soldier, Airman, Lt Col, Hawk attendee, SERE graduate, First Aid/CPR Instructor, Field Training Officer, NGSAR Advanced Course Commandant, 6 MER SAR Colleges, being a Ground Branch Director, and a GTM/GTL in two different wings/regions. 

I have listened and thought about it for years.  I've even played devil's advocate.  But I just can't bring myself to believe there is a need for a "Ranger program".  I say just be the best [darn] ground team you can be, for your specific geographical region, and never quit training.  Memorize basic skills and pass them on to others.

[Stonewall]

Col Bowden, you posted while I was finishing up with this. If you don't mind, I'll start the new thread with your message and leave this one be.

Whatever floats your boat.  I'm easy.  Don't tell my wife.

[RiverAux]

I think I've only come across a few Hawk graduates, but it was years after they had gone and they were seniors when I met them.  No attitudes observed at that time, but can't vouch for right after they got back.

For cadets in particular, they get pretty exicted to do regular ground team training so I don't think having a "special" camp or name is necessary to keep them motivated.   

Don't see any real reason to change the name -- its been around more than long enough to qualify as "tradition" in my book even if apparently they aren't doing much beyond what is in the regular GT curriculum.

[floridacyclist]

Col Bowden,

You and I agree on a lot of stuff. Like the fact that we don't need a special name, or special uniforms. You and I have talked before about that, and those are a couple of aspects of the program I would like to see changed, at least locally; I don't have any hopes of changing the PA wing program, but for now I seem to have at least a small voice in the FL program. You say a lot of things that make sense and I do agree with you on much of it...and even understand what you mean on the things that I disagree with you on. You said a lot and there is much to digest and discuss...we can probably go for a while replying to your message and analyzing it; I know that a quick reply would not do justice to the amount of thought and feeling that went into it, but I will not be able to put that much time into it on this sitting. I will hit a couple of key points and let some others have at it while I head home.

Yes, I too feel bad about "She who shall not be named"; we have spoken on a couple of occassions and if she is still wearing that stuff to squadron meetings, I would seriously question her judgement. It is one thing to come back from Hawk, show off your bling a little to the younger cadets, then quietly put it away to be taken out again for the next trip to the mountain. It is another to continue to wear it when people over you, both in and out of the program have told you it is not cool. You and I are in almost total agreement on the uniform bling...I don't know how you feel about the BTDT patch, but I personally see no harm in it or on the orange ballcaps since they make good sense in an ES environment.

As I said in the email I referenced earlier (link in the last thread), the name itself is not that important, but with 50 years on the sign, we are probably not going to get it changed. Like RiverAux just said, it's been around long enough (almost as long as CAP) to qualify as tradition. This brings up the question of whether there is an advantage to being associated with a nationally-recognized program or if we should do it on our own. I will leave that part open for discussion...I am sure there are some interesting thoughts on it.

My own thought is that if you're going to do something above the minimum, that is not covered in teh standard-issue books, then having some kind of "brand recognition" is a good thing...especially if everyone agrees that the training itself is good and that by offering the same training in different locations, you can act as a force multiplier rather than a competitor. If you remember, that was what made franchising so big was consistency; in some ways, I see us as being in the same boat.

As covered in that email, my kids have made huge strides, not just in CAP but in school as well since becoming involved in the program; you yourself said it was a good experience. I'm not so sure why having the same program offered at home so that they can work on their skills etc before they go back is such a bad thing. Without the local school, they would not have had the experience of being in staff training this past Summer. I believe I mentioned that the 15yo made honor cadet; he wasn't even aware as he left 2 days early to catch a Greyhound to MS for AF SUPTFC. If we had been offering the same training under the title of "Tallahassee Ground Team Training" that would not have happened. By the same token, our 13yo C/SSgt buddy would not have been able to go to A) Any other NCSA due to his age, or B) Hawk Mountain if he hadn't attended one of our local schols and been bitten by the bug.

Actually, we could not have offered the same training as I have only recently been appointed ES officer and prior to that, we had no ES program or functional ES officer (She - my ex-GF, was MIA). After coming back from Glades and expressing frustration to Maj Cason about the lack of training opportunities here, Maj Cason suggested that our squadron host a Ranger weekend, which was promptly shot down as the group and squadron commander (the same person) felt that we did not have the resources to host anything (like how many resources do you need to go camping in the woods?). Maj Cason then made me the Wing Ranger Training Officer and we went ahead on our own, hosting the first GT training Tallahasssee had seen in a couple of years, and a rather successful one at that (see tall tales).

You are right, we don't NEED Ranger training, but it has made CAP life a little more bearable for some of us at times. I admit, I enjoy it (I have been accused of forgetting that I'm no longer a cadet LOL) and the entire squadron loves how everyone is coming back to life now that we have 3 Ranger cadets on cadet staff and running the show if not like Hawk, at least in a much more motivated fashion than the last C/CC asked for.

By the same token, you talk about how cool you thought it was at their age....you have to keep in mind that they are still at that same age. We can't look at their world through our eyes, but at the same time we do owe it to them to put the training into perspective and help them understand how best to use it to benefit themselves and CAP.

On time spent doing ES vs other stuff, I agree. I have been asked a rather interesting question twice now by two seperate people: The old DCC asked why didn't I plan more Cadet activities, to which I replied that was the DCC's job - (he has since been replaced...by my wife who does a much better job at keeping the cadets busy doing cadet things), and the new CC said that I needed to plan more Senior activities , to which I suggested that he speak to the DCS, but that I was already running the OTS and upcoming SLS.

You and I are much closer in thought than you realize. We mainly seem to disagree on the advantages of identifying with a national institution or not for our advanced training. As far as the advanced training goes, not everyone wants to be even remotely familiar with swamp operations, and for them the standard GT quals work great....but some want more of a challenge, and it can be rather fun trying to give it to them. I agree that the standards should come first...and with two kids who have completed almost every qualification allowed at their age, I don't think you will see me disagree.

Time to go home..my wife is coming from dance class to pick me up. Have a good one and we can talk about this some more.

Gene,

Not that I've said the "R" word in a few months, but as long as I've been a senior member, going on 16 years now, I have never ever needed to use a special title, i.e. "Ranger", to motivate cadets to advance through CAP's ground team standards.  I just don't see the need for it.  You say if it motivates cadets and doesn't violate any regulations, then why not.  I ask, why?  Isn't working towards, earning and then excelling as a cadet ground team member/leader enough?  Once qualified, you do what?  Hone your standard skills and begin teaching newer members who are still striving to achieve GTM/GTL.  It's that simple to me.

I can go on and on and on about my experiences up in DC wing with several different squadrons.  Never once did we call ourselves "Rangers" or use some other title to boast our capabilities.  It's like knot tying.  I'm sure there are some "Ranger standards" to knot tying that exceed the standard GT requirement.  Why call it a Ranger thing, why not just call it training.  Semantics is all it is.  The success that I've seen within the ground operations community as it relates to cadets has always been from within the standardized program.  It has so many avenues to teach, motivate, re-train, enhance skills and evolve that there just isn't a need for anything else.

I remember showing up to my first MER SAR College in like 1993.  When we showed up to sign in, there were these cadets from another wing lined up with some sort of ascot around their neck and a rigid squadron hat.  It screamed "I'm Special".  It was, in fact, some sort of self-initiated ranger program.  Naturally, the head dude from the activity spoke to their senior representative and told them to knock it off.  Halfway through the weekend we learned those "Rangers" had no concept of CAP ground team operations.  All they had was some wanna-be senior member trying to re-live the days of when they weren't a Ranger.  Pathetic if you ask me.  We always prided ourselves in showing to outside wing activities as plain looking as possible.  No squadron hats, t-shirts, bells, whistles, or anything.  The only thing we had was our standardized gear.  We showed up to numerous ES missions and training exercises with other wings and often out-searched them.  No berets, no nothing.  Always getting comments on the cadets' discipline and professionalism.  It's easy.

I just don't understand the need to call anything a special program like Ranger, or whatever.  I have no issue with the term "Ranger" as it relates to the Army.  That's irrelevant to me.  I take no offense to it and could care less.  My point is using any special name.  Recondo, Ranger, Sapper, Mike Force, Tree Hugger, whatever.  Those were things from my cadet days, when I was a young cadet, trying to be more than just another Ground Team Member.  The future showed me one thing, and that was I wasn't even a good ground team member.  But things have changed since then.  We have a national standard.  Who cares if it isn't regionally specific based on terrain.  You know what you do?  You simply modify the training to fit your needs.  No need to re-invent anything or create some goofy title for yourself.  Just be a "Ground Team", except you're a Florida Ground Team, not a Colorado Ground Team.  I think the locals won't expect a North Dakota Ground Team to be proficient in Swamp Operations or a Virginia Ground Team experts in Desert SAR.  It's just common sense to me.

I have had lots of experience with Hawk Mountain folks.  From cadets in my wing to actually attending Winter Hawk in 2002.  It's a good venue for ground team training.  It's really good for region specific mountain training.  If I were king, I'd take away all the bells and whistles and simple make it Hawk Mountain SAR School.  But that's me.  Sort of like the National Guard's Mountain Warfare School in Vermont.  It's a 4 week school, 2 summer weeks and 2 winter.  Guess what you get out of it?  TRAINING!!!!  Sure, there is some unofficial badge that isn't authorized by the Army, but other than a certificate, you get some awesome training.  That's the way I think schools should be in CAP.

Screw Everglades Ranger School, call it Florida Ground Operations School.  Motivate cadets and seniors through a good solid training program, probably something you guys already have.  But do away with the name.  Again, I don't have an issue with the word "Ranger", it just happens to be the term you used.  Throw away white belts, ascots, tabs and whatever else you use as identifiers.  The ultimate goal should be the coveted GTM badge, Senior and Master.  Then EMT badges.  Nothing gets me more than getting a task signed off and then never using it again.  You can tie a bowline knot enough to pass the test, but are they tying in the performance of a simulated exercise, at night, randomly during round robin training?  GTM is not s stepping stone to being Ranger qualified, it's the end result.  Then, as a GTM, you hone, polish, and master the GTM skills.  Want to go to Hawk?  Great, more training, but when you come back, you're still a GTM.  There's no MOS designator and you don't get to wear a boonie cap.

I just don't think we, CAP as a whole, has mastered the art of ground search and rescue to the point where we're bored and need some special qualifications.  Using cadets is an awesome thing.  Personally, I consider ES a major aspect of a cadets' experience.  To me, there is no cadet program without emergency services; it's a motivator.  That being said, I don't think there is any one squadron, ground team, cadet ground team member, that truly is an "expert".  It is said it takes 8 years for a person to become a good, safe driver.  People drive every day and spend as many as 2 or 3 hours in their car, every day.  But cadets, and most senior members, are merely volunteers.  Cadets, who are a part of CAP should only be dedicated about 1/3 of their efforts towards ES.  It's an extra curricular activity with some bonus features, like getting called out on a Friday night to help search for a missing person, non-distress ELT, or quite possibly, if they're out of school, hang out in hurricane stricken community and pass out water.  All cool stuff that I loved as a kid.  But I'm grown up now, I see a bigger picture.  I grew out of the days of thinking berets were necessary or a special program was the only way to go.  I learned a lot from watching the good guys up in NATCAP wing, guys that didn't sport a white pistol belt, upside down survival knife on their gear or boonie caps.  These guys were just good at ES, Air Ops, Ground Ops, Cadet Programs, Moral Leadership, Aerospace Education and running encampments. 

I like the idea of state (wing) specific GSAR training.  It's an idea that's been spoken about for as long as I've been in CAP.  It's great that someone is doing it.  I just don't see the need for special titles.  It's a waste; a false sense of superiority.  That one cadet, Gene, you know who I'm talking about, when she walked into the squadron meeting and was the only one wearing Ranger garb out of 17 cadets, I felt embarrassed for her.  Her starched BDU cap that looked like a dog dish, white pistol belt, whistle, ascot and whatever else she wore, man, I wondered who told her it looked good, professional.

Well, that's my two page opinion based on 20+ experience in CAP, as an EMT, HAZMAT Technician, Cop, Soldier, Airman, Lt Col, Hawk attendee, SERE graduate, First Aid/CPR Instructor, Field Training Officer, NGSAR Advanced Course Commandant, 6 MER SAR Colleges, being a Ground Branch Director, and a GTM/GTL in two different wings/regions. 

I have listened and thought about it for years.  I've even played devil's advocate.  But I just can't bring myself to believe there is a need for a "Ranger program".  I say just be the best [darn] ground team you can be, for your specific geographical region, and never quit training.  Memorize basic skills and pass them on to others.

[floridacyclist]

I think I've only come across a few Hawk graduates, but it was years after they had gone and they were seniors when I met them.  No attitudes observed at that time, but can't vouch for right after they got back.

Mine were pretty cool about it. Very hyed about getting to do stuff in the mountains that htey don't get to do here. Very confident about how they can help the squadron rebuild

For cadets in particular, they get pretty exicted to do regular ground team training so I don't think having a "special" camp or name is necessary to keep them motivated.   

Yes, but if each advanced team has it's own standards, then you have to start from scratch any time you visit another team. If it's standardized (just like the basic national curriculum) then you can visit and build your skills at your convenience..and the signoffs count when you return to Hawk.

Don't see any real reason to change the name -- its been around more than long enough to qualify as "tradition" in my book even if apparently they aren't doing much beyond what is in the regular GT curriculum.

Hawk is about much more than GT training, it is an excellent leadership lab. Folks tend to forget that and focus in on the Signoff sheets (similar to SQTRs) and forget what the kids are learning about leadership and motivation in the process.

I have yet to see a GT training event outside of Hawk that involved a formal uniform inspection or written test (very similar to the SARTECH exam).

Speaking of SARTECH, one of our goals is to get everyone up to Type III WSAR standards. We would have a hard time doing that as an independent squadron GT...we're simply not big enough, and not enough folks outside our squadron are even aware of what NIMS typing is or why they should meet it. yet when we have a Ranger event, we get 30 people from around the region who are there expecting hard training. Needless to say, we have a lot of fun at these.

[MIKE]

Col Bowden, you posted while I was finishing up with this. If you don't mind, I'll start the new thread with your message and leave this one be.

Rather than have yet another thread... Topics merged.

[fyrfitrmedic]

 Along with humility, it's necessary to embrace a concept that Zen practicioners refer to as "beginner's mind".

There are many who should take this to heart, no matter where they are in CAP an no matter their opinions.

[Stonewall]

Sorry, I type like 70 words per minute and I can type just as fast I think, probably faster than I talk.  I don't expect a whole bunch of folks to read this, but I typed it anyway...

Look at a fire department as an example.  You're a firefighter, that's cool; I used to be a volunteer for about 1 1/2 years.  Loved it!  But I was a firefighter.  I went to extrication school.  When I came back, I was a firefighter.  I went to an engineer course.  What was I when I got back?  A firefighter.  I went to EMT; again, a firefighter.

Same goes for a police department, excluding SWAT (a different mission than regular beat cops).  I went to breath test operator's course, I'm still a plain cop.  I went to patrol rifle course, same thing.  I went "vehicles in combat", still, just a cop.

The Army is a little different in some ways.  As an infantryman, you go to Ranger school, you're still an infantryman when you get back to your platoon/company, but you're sportin' a tab.  But your mission and job function doesn't change.  

Same should go for CAP.  Go off to Hawk, NESA, PJOC, CSS, or "Glades".  All great training, but when you come back, you're still a ground team member/leader.

You speak of your kids being in CAP and having basically gotten signed off on all the tasks as a GTM.  That's cool, but "getting signed off" is easy.  But to master the skills is another task altogether that isn't tracked until it's time to gett'em signed off again when you need to renew.  When cadets get to the point of being a GTM, then they need to work on GTL skills, even if they aren't of age.  The whole "train your replacement thing".  After all, the cadet program is a leadership lab, right?  And like you, I believe from the bottom of my heart that ES is the best venue to use as a leadership lab.  Then, once they've mastered the skills of GTL, they better be teaching classes on the basics, to future GTMs.

I got tired of seeing only seniors teach stuff at MER SAR College (ground ops school).  One year we blew their (the other 6 wings in the region) minds.  We managed the program (I was commandant) and had senior cadets teach people from 7 wings basic ground team skills.  Cadets were teaching cadets and seniors alike.  Teaching, to me, is the best way to become the resident SME (subject matter expert) on a topic, task, or skill.  Had them prepare their one or two classes months in advance.  Had them practice giving their classes to their cohorts.  Then we critiqued them and offered advice.  Some didn't cut it, but we used them as support staff.  It was awesome.  To me, I saw that as thinking out of the box at a region activity.  That was their next step once they mastered the standard skill base for GTMs.

Not tooting my horn or throwing out an "I'm better than you", because I'm not and would never say that, but I never had an issue with teaching cadets, motivating them, or seeing them get bored.  There are so many GTM tasks that I don't see how you could get bored and master them all, even after a couple years.  Every FTX was different and usually managed, from start to finish, by someone different.  If we had a newer project officer, one of the more experienced ones would shadow them.  Everything we did was outside the box, but based solely on basic ground team tasks.  I can't imagine a 13 year old cadet is bored with standard GTM skills.  My assessment of that would be that someone in charge isn't using others' ideas or maybe doesn't have enough folks trained and willing to take lead in planning and executing training exercises.  I've heard horror stories from cadets who say "it's just another stupid DF exercise where a SM drives the van and we sleep in the back until we get a signal.  Then we find the simulated ELT, shut it off, and eat lunch at BK".  Nothing blows more than 90% of the training resources going to aircrews and one unlucky guy is stuck holding the bag for training the ground pounders.

If you aren't incorporating water survival (drown proofing) into your basic GTM training, you shouldn't be "advancing" to a new program called "Ranger".

If you aren't doing survival training within the scope of CAP ES, then you shouldn't be attending some superman ground team course.

If you aren't spending at least 3 FTX's a year focusing on air/ground communications using voice and non-voice signals, then you shouldn't call yourself elite.

If you don't have K-9 SAR folks involved with your basic ground ops FTX once or twice a year, plus a standard orientation, then you have no right to begin training as a SAR A-Team.

If you think knowing 10 knots vs 3 makes you something special and warrants a new title, you're wrong.

How many ground team FTXs and training weekends do most members, specifically cadets, attend in one year?  Enough to make them "experts" or have an "advanced" tab on their uniform?  I know of groups that thought they were the bee's knees but when asked how often they trained outside of regular meetings, it was something like 3 or 4 times a year.  Heck, we had several different specific training exercises a year just to maintain minimum standards.  1.  Winter Exercises  2. Mountain Exercise.  3. Tactical Communications Exercise. 4. Disaster relief exercise.  5. Standard DF exercise.  6.  USAF Eval prep.  7. USAF eval.  8. Survival.  Not to mention what, one or two classroom training weekends for new folks; comms, basic GTM skills, first aid/CPR quals, advanced training for GTLs.  That about covers 12 weekends (1 a month) of training.  Didn't even mention color guard, AE, model rocketry, parades, air shows, tours, and all the other standard activities CAP does outside of ES.  And don't forget, summer time when lots of cadets are on vacation, at special activities or at encampment.

I remember my cadet daze very well.  I remember having very little guidance and supervision.  Only one guy stayed with us through the almost 5 years I spent as a cadet, one guy, a Vietnam Vet Marine Officer and Helicopter Pilot.  Also a former Mitchell cadet.  Lots of times we'd have an old WWII vet "baby-sit" us but they had no clue.  So yeah, I remember very well wanting to start a "Recondo" SAR program.  Wanted to and did wear berets, but never at meetings or real CAP events.  We did lots and lots of unofficial CAP activities, from rappelling to going to Camp Blanding with Army Guard Special Forces for an entire weekend.  Different times back then, before CPPT and real supervision.  But if we had guys like me and the handful of quality seniors that I worked with in NATCAP, I would probably have been able to see beyond that stuff.  In fact, the cadets under my supervision did see beyond berets and boonies.  If I can do it, so can a lot of others.  It's not that hard, it just takes setting the right example, holding yourself to the real CAP standards, not those of a "Ranger program".  Not to mention offering varied training of basic ground team skills through well-thought out scenario based exercises.

My opinion still stands, I don't think specialized ground team programs that call themselves something other than Ground Teams is a good idea.  Just me, and that's cool.  Not looking for anyone's vote to become National Commander or anything.  I've tried to agree with it, I just can't.

[Stonewall]

Along with humility, it's necessary to embrace a concept that Zen practicioners refer to as "beginner's mind".

I am open and eager to new things, including advanced training.  I don't care for creating a new title for training that should already be accomplished based on our current doctrine.  I don't feel there is a need for eliteness, special accouterments, or titles.  If I weren't open to these things I wouldn't have gone to Hawk instead of basing my opinion on preconceived notions or heresay.  Opinions don't make people right or wrong and it doesn't mean I wouldn't stand beside you while you carry my arse up a mountain in search of a lost tree hugger.  Just because I don't agree with some things doesn't mean I don't agree about others.  And for certain, it doesn't mean I wouldn't let you buy me a drink.

[culpies]

From what I know of CAP "Ranger" courses, the training seems to be solid.  Good schools that pass on good knowledge.  Where I think the problem comes in is when you take an adolescent mind and let them start thinking that they are "special", "better", or "elite". 
As a cadet I Went to PJOC (back in the day when it was offered in WV if you can date that).  I came back feeling all special, and wanted everyone to know that I was special so I sewed that big silver signal panel looking PJ flash patch right on the pocket of my BDU's.  I walked into the next squadron meeting strutting a bit, and luckily there was my DCC to smack me back down to earth.  The patch came off and I settled back to earth.  The term silent professional was instilled in my head.  I quit trying to make myself stand out as "better" or "special"and instead focused on the team.  My badge of pride was my senior GTM badge, and my solid core GT skills.
I am currently enlisted in the Air Force and am serving as a PJ.  You know what the same thing happens.  When a new PJ graduates, he's been told he invincible and how virtually impossible the training he just completed was.  Put a beret on his head, now he feels "special", and "elite".  When they get to their first unit, one of the first thigns to happen is to remind them that they are just a piece of the machine, no more important than any other part, not "special".
There in lies the problem I have with telling someone they are special.  It's hard to control, the focus needs to be on teamwork not individualism.  No one strives to stand out, it is up to the whole team to succeed or fail.  A cadet who went to as ES school in Maine, should be on the same page as someone who went to one in Florida or New Mexico (allowing for minor changes due to environment)  Then when your GT members have solid core skills and experience, it's time to to take that professionalism up a notch and become the teacher.  If it fits in between all of that you go to advanced skill courses.  Let's all just remember to keep our egos in check, put the team before self, and core skills before advanced. 
On a side not the bling has got to go, a 13 year old in BDU's already is hard to take seriously, throw in ascots, white pistols belts and whistles and people start having flash bacsk to Major Payne.  Keep it clean, simple, professional.  If it helps CAP says I can't wear my PJ beret in my CAP uniform, I'm not complaining about that.

[floridacyclist]

I was just reading some of this stuff and a thought hit me where we're looking at this totally differently.

It is assumed that we identify ourselves as "Rangers".

I don't think of myself as a Ranger...a CAP member, all positions up the ground and comm side to IC2(t), Personnel Officer, PAO, ES Officer, cadet parent...all of those, but I have never thought of myself as a Ranger. I tried putting "Ranger Level 1" in my sig line a few times, but it seemed pretentious, so I dropped it. I feel odd claiming "Commander" staus for NFRS, but the wing put me in the job so I might as well learn to wear the pants.

Still, I'm just a CAP member with some Ranger training.

I just asked my wife how she thought the kids saw themselves, specifically "Do they see themselves as Rangers?". Being totally oblivious to this conversation she replied that they are proud of what they have done, but they don't see themselves as Rangers but cadets who have had the privilege of Ranger training. I too see myself as having had the privilege of Ranger training and I've earned some of the bling that goes along with it (and I've even been known to wear some of it at Ranger activities, because frankly nobody else cares elsewhere), but it doesn't make me a Ranger...just a CAP member who is learning stuff and having fun. Maybe we can try to pass this attitude on to the folks we work with.

[Skyray]

There is no doubt that the Ground Teams need more training.  Recently two wings looked for an itinerant signal on 121.5 and gave up after two days.  The news article said that one of the teams got close enough to hear voices, and since the voices weren't discussing distress matters, they abandoned the search.  Some years ago two ground teams in a red cap searched for an interfering signal for eight hours without finding it.  Turned out the local air force base had been testing their fifty watt backup guard transmitter and inadvertently left it on.  And it took CAP more than eight hours to find it!  That is totally unacceptable performance.

[Sgt. Savage]

I've met 2 Cap Rangers. The first came back Cocky and arrogant. At 15 Y/O he tried to "School" me about the land. He says " Hold on Sgt.... This is the way we do it at Hawk"

I quickly locked him up at Parade Rest and lifted my BDU shirt pocket, where I wear my Ranger Tab. I had to let him know under no uncertain terms that his "Tab" didn't give him the authority to correct every trainer he encountered as though he were omnipotent and that if he ever disrespected me in my class again, he would not attend one.

The second CAP Ranger I met left as a good cadet and returned as a good, well trained cadet. He knew me before he left and has never gotten pompous with anyone regarding their individual accomplishments. He is a GOOD example.

I guess it's about the individual and their understanding of schools and hierarchy. Some use the training, some abuse the title.

[Al Sayre]

There is no doubt that the Ground Teams need more training.  Recently two wings looked for an itinerant signal on 121.5 and gave up after two days.  The news article said that one of the teams got close enough to hear voices, and since the voices weren't discussing distress matters, they abandoned the search.

If you are referring to the one in the Memphis area last week, there were actually two signals, the one that they heard voices on was playing childrens cartoons and assumed to be interference, as it was bleeding over from 121.3 to 121.7 and not stable enough to get a DF lock, it was turned over to the FCC.  The actual 121.5 signal was tracked to a large FEDEX warehouse area south of Memphis about 15 miles straightline distance from the interference signal, but it went "missed pass 3" and died before the ground team could get their hands on it.  Suspect it was unit being shipped for repair or battery replacement that got set off in a shipping container.