2011 HMRS

[sarmed1]

I'll be there all week......I'll be the guy (at least on of..there may be more) in the AF uniforms.

Bill, I agree on the regional concept; the difficulty when that was proposed before was the difficulty in finding/training quality staff to maintain such schools.  There have been plenty of interested PA folks to go and help setup an run an initial school, but as we area all aware from other CAP activites, just because ou went to an activity once, doesnt make you an acceptable candidate to staff it; finding the right qaulities, of leadership, drive, organization and instructor ability are sometimes not so easy (especially from a limited manpower pool)

I personally have run small group ES schools with a limited number of qualified instructors (2 senior and 2 cadet) for 20 students.  There doesnt have to be some lofty plan to have an HMRS equivilent size school......but sometimes the orange shirts reflection of the sun blinds some people to see the practical reality of things.......start small and work your way up. (TXWG started with a 12 cadets advanced training squadron as part of encampment.....and now they have basically an entire NESA south)

mk

[capes]

(TXWG started with a 12 cadets advanced training squadron as part of encampment.....and now they have basically an entire NESA south)

mk

I know that LTC Long's WESS program down in Alabama started as a test program for the ES curriculum with only a handful back sometime in the 90s.  I guess they had almost 150 each weekend this year. 

[Eclipse]

I agree there should be a region-level ES school in each Region, but NESA should be the model, not HMRS.
The curriculum should be wholly-CAP allowed practice, and aircrew should be a significant part of the schedule.

[FW]

It's interesting to note the Vangard funds to CAP were to be used to establish Region ES facilities.
No one seemed to be interested except for HMRS.  They got quite a bit in the last 5 years.  NESA received some funds and NBB got some money a few years ago but, no new schools were ever considered.  I wonder if there really is a viable interest?

[arajca]

It's hard for folks to generate significant interest in something like this when it seems like all National cares about is flying. The impression I get is that ground ops are fine for cadets top play around with, but not something CAP is prepared to do anything serious with.

[NCRblues]

It's interesting to note the Vangard funds to CAP were to be used to establish Region ES facilities.
No one seemed to be interested except for HMRS.  They got quite a bit in the last 5 years.  NESA received some funds and NBB got some money a few years ago but, no new schools were ever considered.  I wonder if there really is a viable interest?

I would be interested in seeing what type of funds NBB got, and when they got it. National told us we are not getting "start up" money this year for NBB. In 2009 we had to use SM's to dig our own trench line to run a new cable, because "we have no money". NBB cant get enough golf carts to complete the massive mission we have during the airshow week because "we don't have enough money".

If NBB got money, I would like to know when, and how it was spent. I have been to NBB 5 times since 2004, and NBB survives on the kindness of members who are present (read, members checkbooks)

NBB has a real world mission, yet year after year we struggle with money and general funds. Fred, want to look into this for me?

[jimmydeanno]

It's interesting to note the Vangard funds to CAP were to be used to establish Region ES facilities.

I think that the ES mindset is what gets many members upset.  More than 1/2 of our membership works with cadets, or are cadets, yet every new funding source seems to be immediately directed to support operations, despite the majority of our funding being directed there anyway. 

I understand that operations pays some bills, but they pay bills that are a result of operations.

Perhaps there would be more interest if the plan was to develop "regional training facilities" that could be used for encampments, staff colleges, ES courses, etc. 

Once you label the facility as an "ES Facility" then the ES guys take possession and don't want anyone else using "their stuff."

[Eclipse]

It's interesting to note the Vangard funds to CAP were to be used to establish Region ES facilities.
No one seemed to be interested except for HMRS.  They got quite a bit in the last 5 years.  NESA received some funds and NBB got some money a few years ago but, no new schools were ever considered.  I wonder if there really is a viable interest?

I would be interested in seeing what type of funds NBB got, and when they got it. National told us we are not getting "start up" money this year for NBB. In 2009 we had to use SM's to dig our own trench line to run a new cable, because "we have no money". NBB cant get enough golf carts to complete the massive mission we have during the airshow week because "we don't have enough money".

If NBB got money, I would like to know when, and how it was spent. I have been to NBB 5 times since 2004, and NBB survives on the kindness of members who are present (read, members checkbooks)

NBB has a real world mission, yet year after year we struggle with money and general funds. Fred, want to look into this for me?

Where's the EAA checkbook?

[FW]

^NBB received money back in 2006 or 2007 for building renovations.  You can look back in the NEC minutes for the details.  Requirements for the funds have changed because of the lack of interest.  There used to be a "matching fund" requirement for existing facilities however, I don't know if it is still on the books. 

I would think, if NBB needs money for capital improvements, all you need do is have the activity director to apply.  Last I heard, the fund was flush with cash.

[NCRblues]

It's interesting to note the Vangard funds to CAP were to be used to establish Region ES facilities.
No one seemed to be interested except for HMRS.  They got quite a bit in the last 5 years.  NESA received some funds and NBB got some money a few years ago but, no new schools were ever considered.  I wonder if there really is a viable interest?

I would be interested in seeing what type of funds NBB got, and when they got it. National told us we are not getting "start up" money this year for NBB. In 2009 we had to use SM's to dig our own trench line to run a new cable, because "we have no money". NBB cant get enough golf carts to complete the massive mission we have during the airshow week because "we don't have enough money".

If NBB got money, I would like to know when, and how it was spent. I have been to NBB 5 times since 2004, and NBB survives on the kindness of members who are present (read, members checkbooks)

NBB has a real world mission, yet year after year we struggle with money and general funds. Fred, want to look into this for me?

Where's the EAA checkbook?

EAA helps us out with fuel at half price and other little perks, but since CAP owns the "NBB compound" they give us no help on that at all. Then the current NHQ forgets they own the compound and tells us to use the money cadets pay to go to the activity, yet that is for food.... Feeding 150ish 16-17-18 year olds (who work 18 hours a day at NBB) is EXPENSIVE.

NBB seems to struggle with everyone, from NHQ to EAA, they both think the other is taking care of the problems and money.

At the end of each year, we ask all the SM's who went to NBB to do after action reports and send them to national. Every single AAR asked about the funds problem, and national never responds. The EAA helps out when they can, but i have seen the EAA's books, and they don't clear much money from AIRVENTURE.

NBB is lost between 2 major organizations, with lawyers, who forget what we do... and its alot, something like 62 active ELTS last year, about 200 and some change overdue aircraft that we have to search through 10,000 aircraft on the ground for.... then working flightline from sunup to sundown. Its lots of gas, water and food.... we can only ask the cadets and SM's to pay for so much before people will stop coming....

[Eclipse]

True, but like every NCSA and similar activity, you have to pay to play.

If we can't get EAA to appreciate us, maybe we should back off for a while.

[Ned]

At the end of each year, we ask all the SM's who went to NBB to do after action reports and send them to national. Every single AAR asked about the funds problem, and national never responds.

Please remember that "national" in this sense is volunteers, just like you and me.  The national adviser for NCSAs is Maj Joe Winter (who is also Chief of Staff at MDWG).  His boss is the National Cadet Adviser, Col Craig Treadwell.  Both have day jobs, just like you and me. The only people who can allocate funds to NBB (which, BTW, since the total amounts of funds are limited,  means that every dollar given to NBB has to be taken from some other cadet activity) are the volunteer NB, NEC, and BoG members.

There is a formal budget process every year with a lot of activities and units competing actively for funds.  From where I sit in the budgeting process, all of the requests are reasonable and come from folks with solid reputations for being good guardians of both appropriated and corporate funds.  But there isn't enough money for everything, and each year many very worthy requests for money go "unfunded."

NBB is a terrific airshow, and the cadets and staff perform difficult work under adverse conditions.

Please do not confuse a lack of full funding with the notion that "national" doesn't care about NBB.

Feel free to talk with the Activity Director, Lt Col Pease, directly concerning your budgetary concerns.

Ned Lee

[HGjunkie]

And NBB isn't necessarily the only NCSA hurting for funds.

[Eclipse]

NBB is unique in that it is split between the training and the service.

Week 1 is understandable, and should be able to stand on its own, but week 2 should be receiving significant financial and
ancillary support from the EAA.

If we really are the "partners" with Airventure that we purport to be then they should be picking up the tab for legitimate
operational expenses.  The EAA might be a 501c, but that doesn't mean there isn't a whole lot of profit being made by
vendors and others providing services.

Or is this another of those situations where we are so desperate to get in the game we're willing to pay for everything?

[NCRblues]

At the end of each year, we ask all the SM's who went to NBB to do after action reports and send them to national. Every single AAR asked about the funds problem, and national never responds.

Please remember that "national" in this sense is volunteers, just like you and me.  The national adviser for NCSAs is Maj Joe Winter (who is also Chief of Staff at MDWG).  His boss is the National Cadet Adviser, Col Craig Treadwell.  Both have day jobs, just like you and me. The only people who can allocate funds to NBB (which, BTW, since the total amounts of funds are limited,  means that every dollar given to NBB has to be taken from some other cadet activity) are the volunteer NB, NEC, and BoG members.

There is a formal budget process every year with a lot of activities and units competing actively for funds.  From where I sit in the budgeting process, all of the requests are reasonable and come from folks with solid reputations for being good guardians of both appropriated and corporate funds.  But there isn't enough money for everything, and each year many very worthy requests for money go "unfunded."

NBB is a terrific airshow, and the cadets and staff perform difficult work under adverse conditions.

Please do not confuse a lack of full funding with the notion that "national" doesn't care about NBB.

Feel free to talk with the Activity Director, Lt Col Pease, directly concerning your budgetary concerns.

Ned Lee

Ned, i talk to Lt. Col. Peace daily, as well as the past NBB director Col. Aye, I also have weekly conversations with Col. Granville another past director.

They all say the same things. It seems NBB is lost in a kind of void.

Eclipse's argument is the one held at "national", and the EAA's argument is that "you advertise as volunteers, shouldn't the AF be paying for it, since you guys have to be here to do the ELT searches already."

Both sides think the other should be the one feeding us, and the cadets, and the mission, get lost in the "war of words".

Ned, Id like to extend an invitation to you to come to NBB to see the operation we do, and to talk about the funding issue. Ill send you a PM.

[Eclipse]

Eclipse's argument is the one held at "national", and the EAA's argument is that "you advertise as volunteers, shouldn't the AF be paying for it, since you guys have to be here to do the ELT searches already."

That's a valid argument - nothing says we have to provide anything but ELT search assistance, within normal response expectations. Especially since the vast majority of the work are anticipated / expected non-distress activations,  which could be found by local units on an as-needed basis.

It's CAP that has chosen to make a large, residential activity of Airventure, not the other way around.  I've heard more than one person from the EAA say that they could do that work themselves.

I am not saying our presence doesn't have value for CAP, but it sure sounds like the EAA is getting the benefit of the relationship.

The more this is talked through both here and elsewhere, the more this sounds like a situation where CAP is more excited about helping than
the recipients are of being helped, or at the very least, like much of our ES involvement, two large organizations with a status quo balancing on
a fine edge who need to sit down and have some direct conversations about cost / benefits and ROI's and decide if our presence is necessary,
and if so, how much it really costs.

[NCRblues]

Eclipse's argument is the one held at "national", and the EAA's argument is that "you advertise as volunteers, shouldn't the AF be paying for it, since you guys have to be here to do the ELT searches already."

That's a valid argument - nothing says we have to provide anything but ELT search assistance, within normal response expectations. Especially since the vast majority of the work are anticipated / expected non-distress activations,  which could be found by local units on an as-needed basis.

It's CAP that has chosen to make a large, residential activity of Airventure, not the other way around.  I've heard more than one person from the EAA say that they could do that work themselves.

I am not saying our presence doesn't have value for CAP, but it sure sounds like the EAA is getting the benefit of the relationship.

The more this is talked through both here and elsewhere, the more this sounds like a situation where CAP is more excited about helping than
the recipients are of being helped, or at the very least, like much of our ES involvement, two large organizations with a status quo balancing on
a fine edge who need to sit down and have some direct conversations about cost / benefits and ROI's and decide if our presence is necessary,
and if so, how much it really costs.

Agree 100%

[sarmed1]

I agree there should be a region-level ES school in each Region, but NESA should be the model, not HMRS.
The curriculum should be wholly-CAP allowed practice, and aircrew should be a significant part of the schedule.

Actually I dont think that anyone school should be the "model"...... Develop a school that meets the needs/interests of its participants (or potential participants)  take best practices from where you can find them and roll them into a program that works best for you.....

Just make sure that you follow the standard for whatever you advertise the activity as.

mk

[titanII]

It's hard for folks to generate significant interest in something like this when it seems like all National cares about is flying. The impression I get is that ground ops are fine for cadets top play around with, but not something CAP is prepared to do anything serious with.

***personl opinion warning***
The reason for that, I think, is because there are people whose job it is to do ground SAR (department of the interior, national park service). CAP assisst those people (in a very valuable way, no doubt) in SAR. CAP is not the end-all-be all for SAR. SAR, I will remind you, is only one of CAP's three missions.

[arajca]

It's hard for folks to generate significant interest in something like this when it seems like all National cares about is flying. The impression I get is that ground ops are fine for cadets top play around with, but not something CAP is prepared to do anything serious with.

***personl opinion warning***
The reason for that, I think, is because there are people whose job it is to do ground SAR (department of the interior, national park service). CAP assisst those people (in a very valuable way, no doubt) in SAR. CAP is not the end-all-be all for SAR. SAR, I will remind you, is only one of CAP's three missions.

May I remind you the SAR is only a part of Emergency Services, not the entire thing.