Pathfinder Technical School

[cpyahoo]

If anyone is interested, Missouri Wing is standing up the Pathfinder Technical School again.  It's running from 28 June - 5 July 2014 at Ft. Leonard Wood, MO.  More info on their website... 
http://pathfindertechschool.org/index.html

[Eclipse]

More opportunities for training are always welcome, it's just unfortunate that we have another
area that has chosen affectation over function and made up their own names and quals,
not to mention another SAR school purporting to train medics.

For all it's perceived shortcomings, not to mention the aged date on its cover, the CAP
ES curriculum is fairly comprehensive and covers pretty much everything a member needs
to accomplish the current mission set.

If we all just stuck to >THAT< we'd be better off.

Also, considering there's only 20 open spots and those who intend this year are supposed to be
staff in subsequent years, was this really supposed to be "opened" to other wings and regions?

[LSThiker]

More opportunities for training are always welcome, it's just unfortunate that we have another
area that has chosen affectation over function and made up their own names

Not going to comment on the other items, but just as a point of fact, the name Pathfinder has been used in previous CAP activities.  From talking with people who were members from the 1970s and 1980s, I remember being told by one previous Spaatz cadet that Missouri used to host a Pathfinder school back in the 1980s.  Yes that was the name then.  He remember being awarded an orange beret after completion. 

[Eclipse]

We used to do a lot of things "BITD", we don't any more and we'd be best served in standardization vs. creating another
subgroup within a given wing.

[LSThiker]

We used to do a lot of things "BITD", we don't any more and we'd be best served in standardization vs. creating another
subgroup within a given wing.

Not necessarily disagreeing. Just simply pointing out that the name was not made up and it holds a historical footnote. Probably the reason why MOWG chose it.

[Eclipse]

Actually the name of the school isn't really the issue - if you look at the school's currcilum documents,
it created MOWG-only "Pathfinder" ratings, including "Pathfinder Medic".

Unnecessary and inappropriate for CAP.

We already have GTM and Aircrew ratings that are compliant with CAP's mission set.

[lordmonar]

Actually the name of the school isn't really the issue - if you look at the school's currcilum documents,
it created MOWG-only "Pathfinder" ratings, including "Pathfinder Medic".

Unnecessary and inappropriate for CAP.

We already have GTM and Aircrew ratings that are compliant with CAP's mission set.

Just playing devil's advocate....GTM may be okay as a vanilla generic mission set....it may not be enough for the situation in MOWG.

So....again no problem with people adding new ratings....so long as they are not chaing CAP ratings.

[LSThiker]

Just playing devil's advocate....GTM may be okay as a vanilla generic mission set....it may not be enough for the situation in MOWG.

So....again no problem with people adding new ratings....so long as they are not chaing CAP ratings.

Since I still have not looked at the requirements, and quite frankly probably will not, it is possible.  The Ozarks can present an interesting challenge in certain areas. 

[Alaric]

Actually the name of the school isn't really the issue - if you look at the school's currcilum documents,
it created MOWG-only "Pathfinder" ratings, including "Pathfinder Medic".

Unnecessary and inappropriate for CAP.

We already have GTM and Aircrew ratings that are compliant with CAP's mission set.

I have to agree with Eclipse, unless you never want to leave the Missouri Wing, what is the value add of coming up with your own internal rating, has it been vetted by National?; will it appear on a 101 card?; Why would an IC from an adjoining wing want to use you if your rating is internal only?

[Private Investigator]

More opportunities for training are always welcome, it's just unfortunate that we have another
area that has chosen affectation over function and made up their own names

Not going to comment on the other items, but just as a point of fact, the name Pathfinder has been used in previous CAP activities.  From talking with people who were members from the 1970s and 1980s, I remember being told by one previous Spaatz cadet that Missouri used to host a Pathfinder school back in the 1980s.  Yes that was the name then.  He remember being awarded an orange beret after completion.

I would think a "mohawk" haircut would be along the lines of the "Pathfinders" of WWII. A orange beret? Well bless their little hearts indeed   

[lordmonar]

If you look at their pathfinder ratings....you will see that all start with "GTMX"......so if you got a Pathfinder 1st Class....you got a GTM1....so is is useable outside of MOWG.

So again.....what really is the problem here?   

[LSThiker]

I would think a "mohawk" haircut would be along the lines of the "Pathfinders" of WWII. A orange beret? Well bless their little hearts indeed   

Pretty much the same thing I said when I heard that.  Eh.  Oh well.  Not my Wing and definitely not my history.

[Garibaldi]

I would think a "mohawk" haircut would be along the lines of the "Pathfinders" of WWII. A orange beret? Well bless their little hearts indeed   

Pretty much the same thing I said when I heard that.  Eh.  Oh well.  Not my Wing and definitely not my history.

They do tend to do things a bit differently in "Miss-ou-rah"

[Alaric]

If you look at their pathfinder ratings....you will see that all start with "GTMX"......so if you got a Pathfinder 1st Class....you got a GTM1....so is is useable outside of MOWG.

So again.....what really is the problem here?

The problem is, as with any non-vetted designation; it implies a difference in training.  We are a national organization and we have a training standard.  If there is a legitimate need for a skill set not currently covered by, for instance, GTMx; then that needs to be addressed at a national level.  If the designation is just because it is Tact-i- kewl, then why bother.  To me much like in the corporate world, where is the value add?

[jeders]

Actually the name of the school isn't really the issue - if you look at the school's currcilum documents,
it created MOWG-only "Pathfinder" ratings, including "Pathfinder Medic".

Unnecessary and inappropriate for CAP.

We already have GTM and Aircrew ratings that are compliant with CAP's mission set.

If you look at their pathfinder ratings....you will see that all start with "GTMX"......so if you got a Pathfinder 1st Class....you got a GTM1....so is is useable outside of MOWG.

So again.....what really is the problem here?   

lord beat me to this. With the PAWG Ranger ratings, they are their own special thing that out of pure coincidence happen to have similarities with the regular ES curriculum. It seems that MOWG on the other hand is taking the preexisting ratings and building on to them in order to make better GTMs. And if you look at the ratings, you'll see not only do they require an equivalent GTM level first, some of the requirements are things that USED TO BE required nationally; things which were taken out, usually because it "took too long"; things which I for one would like to see in the national requirements still. They also include things like Storm Spotter training which is of little to no use to a lot of the country, but absolutely invaluable to a GT operating in Missouri.

Whereas the PAWG Rangers seem to be all about the bling and are pretty useless in actual operations, this school seems to be focusing on 1) getting people trained to the national standard and 2) giving advanced training to help meet local needs. I believe that every wing (except for the northeast where the entire region is probably smaller than one group in some western states  ) should have a school or training program like this. One where you take people who already have the national baseline training and then give them the added training needed to meet local demands. Maybe that local training is in the form of Storm Spotter training, or disaster relief after a major tornado, or maybe it's wilderness survival in snow conditions, or even surviving in a swamp.

So, other than the name and the chance of some bling (which wasn't even broached in any of the material I saw on the website), what is the problem?

ETA:

The problem is, as with any non-vetted designation; it implies a difference in training.  We are a national organization and we have a training standard.  If there is a legitimate need for a skill set not currently covered by, for instance, GTMx; then that needs to be addressed at a national level.  If the designation is just because it is Tact-i- kewl, then why bother.  To me much like in the corporate world, where is the value add?

Who says this wasn't vetted? How do we know that this wasn't coordinated at the Region and National levels? Also, how can you honestly say that because Idaho doesn't need Storm Spotter training, Missouri can't do it. Every area is different and there are local training needs that are going to be needed in one area that aren't needed in others.

I agree that if the sole purpose of the Pathfinder 1/2/3 is to be tactikewl, then it's pointless; but if that were the case, they probably wouldn't worry about making the GTM ratings a part of the training requirements. If, on the other hand, those ratings get people to engage in advanced training to serve their local communities and state, then I say more power to them.

So again, where is the problem in this?

[JeffDG]

So, other than the name and the chance of some bling (which wasn't even broached in any of the material I saw on the website), what is the problem?

Because, don't you listen to the news?  Everything has to be a national standard, and if it's not, it's defective per se.  Local concerns detract from a national focus.

So, by God, they need to teach high-altitude mountain survival in FLWG, and you better believe that NDWG better get their hurricane awareness training...not to mention HIWG's blizzard survival curriculum.

[lordmonar]

If you look at their pathfinder ratings....you will see that all start with "GTMX"......so if you got a Pathfinder 1st Class....you got a GTM1....so is is useable outside of MOWG.

So again.....what really is the problem here?

The problem is, as with any non-vetted designation; it implies a difference in training.  We are a national organization and we have a training standard.  If there is a legitimate need for a skill set not currently covered by, for instance, GTMx; then that needs to be addressed at a national level.  If the designation is just because it is Tact-i- kewl, then why bother.  To me much like in the corporate world, where is the value add?

No.....if locally you need or may need specialized training...it is local training.....why does it need to be addressed at a national level?   Let's say for instance here in NVWG we determine our aircrews need desert survival....we don't need NHQ to vet it....it is a local requirement.   So long as we are not adding it to the MO/MP/MS requirments it does not cross National's Stream.   

If the only reason why you are against it is because the have a "Tact-i-Kewl" name....then you are just as bad as those who think they are "all that" just because they went to a school with a cool name.

Value added?    a)  Additional specialized training.  b) Physical Fitness Tests  c) advanced SAR skills.

Over all a Pathfinder 1st Class has more training then your GTM1.....so the value added is that he is better trained.

If they were just doing GTM1 and calling it something special....you may have an argument.   But they are special...because they got more training then your average GTM1.

[Eclipse]

If the only reason why you are against it is because the have a "Tact-i-Kewl" name....then you are just as bad as those who think they are "all that" just because they went to a school with a cool name.

No, you're trying to get people to adopt common sense, and think about the external appearance as well.

"Missouri Wing ES Academy" or "Missouri Wing SAR School" raise zero eyebrows, nor does simply adding
ancillary training, as needed, to the curriculum.

As soon as you start coming up with Tacti-Kewl names, your credibility starts being impacted inversely.

Same goes for the wings that come up with an code name every time someone goes to the head.
"Operation Over Water Drop", etc. 

What we need is good training and meaningful missions, not a bunch of meaningless affectation.

[lordmonar]

So you  are upset......because you are focusing on the affections......and not the training.

You are guilty of the thing you are mad about!

Just because they call it "Pathfinder" you hate it.  End of story.....forget about anything else.....they are "posers" because they want a "kewl" name.

You can't have it both ways.....if it is a meaningless affection......it is meaningless....ergo any heart burn you have over it.....is disingenuous at best.

As for "cool" operational names....really....."Operation SPRING FLING" is interfering with may SAREX?

[LSThiker]

No, you're trying to get people to adopt common sense, and think about the external appearance as well.

"Missouri Wing ES Academy" or "Missouri Wing SAR School" raise zero eyebrows, nor does simply adding
ancillary training, as needed, to the curriculum.

As soon as you start coming up with Tacti-Kewl names, your credibility starts being impacted inversely.

Same goes for the wings that come up with an code name every time someone goes to the head.
"Operation Over Water Drop", etc. 

What we need is good training and meaningful missions, not a bunch of meaningless affectation.

Wait, I thought you said:

Actually the name of the school isn't really the issue

So why are you focusing on the name and not the real issue?