"First Reponse Team" ---- Yes or No in CAP

Started by maverik, December 30, 2008, 05:23:35 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Duke Dillio

Quote from: SARADDICT on December 31, 2008, 01:54:09 AM
Sqn72DO, I was saying that if I have members that are qualified MRO's then how would I go about getting them on mission base support staff?
Well, if there is a mission base than it isn't a problem unless the mission base is on the other side of the state...

Otherwise, you could do what we do which is set up a satellite mission base and let them work from there.  You would have to keep get an okay from the IC but for the most case, the IC's around here prefer to let us go that way because then they don't have so much paperwork to do.  Just a thought for you.

Short Field

Quote from: SARADDICT on December 31, 2008, 01:54:09 AM
Sqn72DO, I was saying that if I have members that are qualified MRO's then how would I go about getting them on mission base support staff?

Best way would be to directly contact the person who is assigning people to mission base positions.  That would probably be either the IC, the PSC, or the CUL.   Offically, they should be able to just sign into mission base and be assigned to where their qualificaitons are needed the most.  Unoffically, a bit of pre-coordination never hurts.
SAR/DR MP, ARCHOP, AOBD, GTM1, GBD, LSC, FASC, LO, PIO, MSO(T), & IC2
Wilson #2640

IceNine

This is the one I use.  It is based off of a corporate overtime rotation.  The concept is that everyone that is qualified gets called on an objective basis, to ensure equal opportunity for training etc.

The concept is very simple. 

If we have a mission, you get called and you participate that mission counts as 2 points.
If we have a mission, you get called but DO NOT participate that mission counts as 1 point.
If we have a mission, and we don't call you.  That mission counts as 0 points.

On the next mission the people with the least points get called first and so on.

We got an Outstanding on our last SUI with this being a benchmark item.

(FYI- I use excel, and I can't load that here.  If you like what you see send me a PM with your email address I'll pass it along.)

"All of the true things that I am about to tell you are shameless lies"

Book of Bokonon
Chapter 4

Short Field

Nice concept.  I wanted our squadron to start using something like this before we went to a wing wide alerting system.  However, this will still work well for the initial launches. 

The only recommendation I would make would be to split it into three sections - aircrew, mission base, and ground team.  That way a aircrew or ground team member who works mission base doesn't get dropped down on the list because they stayed behind to run the mission.
SAR/DR MP, ARCHOP, AOBD, GTM1, GBD, LSC, FASC, LO, PIO, MSO(T), & IC2
Wilson #2640

wingnut55

#24
Great Subject

As will be expected  2009 will see massive cutback in training funding, So:

1. Should training funds be allocated  on a basis of: those who actually fly vs the flying club people who seldom if ever fly a mission?

2.  Should all the States have 'First response Teams' and Standardize  how the USAF/CAP alerts them.? In CAWG we have people manning a Telephone  with immediate response  that activates a .5 hour response to AFRCC by a Qualified IC.  (24/7 x 365 days/year)

3. Should "First response Teams", include a Tree of Flight Crews, IC, GT, a Base staff? 

Short Field

AFRCC calls one phone number for our state which automatically routes to the on-call IC.

If you want to fairly "share the wealth" on actual missions, I firmly believe you need to have separate rosters for aircrews, mission base, and ground teams.  Why should I lose my chance to fly on the next mission because I manned the radios on this mission?  A lot of aircrew members refuse to get qualified in mission base positions just so they don't have to stay on the ground. 

 
SAR/DR MP, ARCHOP, AOBD, GTM1, GBD, LSC, FASC, LO, PIO, MSO(T), & IC2
Wilson #2640

arajca

Quote from: Short Field on December 31, 2008, 05:39:34 PM
If you want to fairly "share the wealth" on actual missions, I firmly believe you need to have separate rosters for aircrews, mission base, and ground teams.  Why should I lose my chance to fly on the next mission because I manned the radios on this mission?  A lot of aircrew members refuse to get qualified in mission base positions just so they don't have to stay on the ground. 
Those same aircrews are the ones who get pissed off when they are passed over for flying time at SAREX's for the crew that spent time helping at mission base when there were more aircrews than aircraft.

maverik

Quote from: wingnut55 on December 31, 2008, 10:17:21 AM
Great Subject

As will be expected  2009 will see massive cutback in training funding, So:

1. Should training funds be allocated  on a basis of: those who actually fly vs the flying club people who seldom if ever fly a mission?

2.  Should all the States have 'First response Teams' and Standardize  how the USAF/CAP alerts them.? In CAWG we have people manning a Telephone  with immediate response  that activates a .5 hour response to AFRCC by a Qualified IC.  (24/7 x 365 days/year)

3. Should "First response Teams", include a Tree of Flight Crews, IC, GT, a Base staff? 
Exactly.. and you know I simply do not want people who are untrained in the field sure if they want to get qualified then I will include them in the first response team roster. Just because we have a van full doesn't mean people don't have POVs so if the whole squadron were to be qualified I guarantee that my squadron commander would call every single one of them and find away to get them to the mission. Also if you're in a squadron that has a flight crew or two then have a first response flight crew if you know you can only take one.
KC9SFU
Fresh from the Mint C/LT
"Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking." Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne

Timbo

Quote from: SARADDICT on December 31, 2008, 09:09:12 PM
........Exactly.. and you know I simply do not want people who are untrained in the field

So......train them!!!  Instead of creating lists and ranking individuals, why not train those that want to be trained, and call every single one of them when a mission comes up.  If you have too many personnel then the ones that were called first because of how they are written on your alert roster (most likely alphabetically) get the mission and too bad for those that have a last name starting with "Z".

 

maverik

#29
agreed although it takes a little longer to train someone that doesn't want to put in effort because a 5th monday ES ngiht won't cut it I believe it is ultimately the trainees responsibility to get out there and train by going to NESA and volunteering to give up their weekends to go to a SAREX.
KC9SFU
Fresh from the Mint C/LT
"Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking." Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne

Timbo

^ That is why I said "train the ones that want to be trained".  If your unit is only doing ES on 5th week meeting nights your unit is in the wrong.  If you expect that members should have to go to NESA or SAREX's and not get "in house" training that is wrong (not referring to you SARADDICT) 

Many members don't have the time to go to a week long training activity.  They must get their training at the local level, and on an occasional weekend.

Duke Dillio

I would also point out that sometimes the best training comes from being in the field during an actual.

As for numbers, on ground teams it is usually better to have more people than less.  It is very difficult to do a proper line search with four people.  On the other hand it is difficult to take a ground team to the field in a 15 passenger van.  You have to weigh the pros and the cons when preparing your teams for the field.  Also, why does it have to be NESA or a SAREX?  You can sign tasks off during a squadron bivouac/FTX.  They just need two with mission numbers to get qualified.  Normally, I try to run 4 exercises a year.  For every FTX/bivouac, I apply for a mission number.  These normally don't get turned down because I ask for them to be non-funded and then we use squadron money to pay for the incidentals (gas, etc.)  It is not that difficult to get the people trained and ready to deploy.  Every year, we train and qualify people up to GTM-1 with the majority becoming UDF/GTM-3 qualified.

As for aircrews, that is an entirely different story...

maverik

I unerstand and actually I want to try and work on geeting that ES night to be the 4th or 2nd monday and our main problem is we have people that are almost qualified GTM3s, but unfortunately we have a hard time getting people to come to southern Indiana and train cadets in say B-CUT everything else I can teach while my squadron commander signs off on it (i know I can but i feel better when he does it, just for issues with I being under 18). AS far as FTX's go e need to get up to speed on that because half the time I (the ES officer) and another cadet (kind of like another ES officer) barely get to plan these things and that's on me which I am working on. So my next question does anyone have a method of planning a FTX to run effiecently?
KC9SFU
Fresh from the Mint C/LT
"Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking." Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne

heliodoc

SARADDICT

Do not knowbit what you mean by efficient..... I'll give some help to what I am capable of

Start small in bite sized chunks.  Start with the things that folks need immediately to get signed off.

Find a training area. A state park or National Guard training site or even an armory.

The training does not need to be elaborate or expensive or have every CAP bell and whistle.

Make a round robin type of operation, individual training stations that cover the basic GTM-3 tasks and progress from there.  Just use the SQTR sheet to develop small training stations to handle 3 to 5 people to start with and make sure folks with "SET" qualifier are observing so no one is getting shorted any training opportunities

Station 1  Task O-0001 Prep GTM individ equip
Station 2  Task O-0002 Conduct individ refit

and so on

Make it fun

Tear apart the 24 /72 pack and redo for task O-0002 have the newbies tear it apart and watch them and suggest different repack methods, for instance


Some of the tasks can be discussed as indicated in the taskbook, others probably need to be demonstrated.  This stuff isn't so called "Hawk Mountain toughguy stuff"  like the old method of dropping for 50 pushups 'cuz ones socks weren't rolled right

The idea is to make it fun and a learning experience and all this HOOAH stuff about being 100 per cent trained in CAP in one weekend and in one year is non sense

The idea is to get both the cadets and seniors out on these missions and to say " you're not going 'cuz one did not complete task  O-0103 this weekend  or past meeting" is also weak.

Training is a 24/7/ 365 operation.  Training even a little when not on a CAP sponsored mission still can go on.  Practice, Practice is the key.  It would be nice to get all the SQTR's signed off on a weekend or meeting night, but not always realistic.

Some of these tasks I have done on a on demand basis right in the field.... its called OJT and if folks are not doing this already, then they are wasting folks time saying that all this needs to be done only at a FTX

Wrong

Hope this helps a little and hopefully this fits 'efficient"

Duke Dillio

That's a point that I forgot to mention.  You don't have to be in the field to sign off tasks.  You can do that at a meeting night or whatever.  With respect to the ground teams, be aware that they are not in an official training status until they have completed all of the familiarization and prep training.  That's basically making sure they have the right equipment, that they know how to identify and treat hot and cold weather injuries, etc.  That doesn't mean they can't go to FTX's but it does mean that they cannot participate in AF missions as a GTM.  Just some things to consider.

RiverAux

QuoteSome of the tasks can be discussed as indicated in the taskbook, others probably need to be demonstrated.
I can't think of a GT task that you can get signed off on for just "discussing" something.  You either have to demonstrate the ability to perform a task or prove that you know some bit of knowledge by answering questions about it correctly.

But you are right that there are a lot of things that can be done indoors.

Nathan

Just my opinion, but it seems counterproductive to call out the people with all the experience, and leave the "less qualified' people at home.

I mean... let's be honest... how many REAL missions do we end up on? What's the percentage of hanger-bangers out of all missions called? Do we really need the super-duper commando team for EVERY mission, considering that 99% of the missions in most wings consist of finding an ELT in some grumpy pilot's garage?

Leaving the less qualified people at home doesn't get them any better, and when your "first response" team isn't fully available when you need it, or when they start filtering out due to other committments, I think you may wish that you had better trained the guys you left home on the hanger-bangers.

I would just call everyone. Really. The teams should ideally consist both of the really experienced and the unexperienced, in order for the more experienced to pass on their knowledge and training to the guys below them. That way, you'll be keeping your top guys sharp, and sharpening your less experienced members. I suppose if you have some sort of a disaster mission or something of the like, you can have your A-Team roster, but even then, CAP doesn't generally get called into missions that require experience far beyond what a NESA graduate has. I can't think of many excuses to leave anyone who is qualified to participate in a mission home. After all, they work for free. Why not use them?

YMMV
Nathan Scalia

The post beneath this one is a lie.

DNall

Thought I responded to this earlier, well guess not...

Do not put all your best people on one go-team. It cuts off training/opportunity to everyone else, so you can't replace your top folks over time, and you have no one to back them up.

Spread your resources out. Split your best folks over a couple teams (however many you can support), and fill in the rest with trainees & less experienced folks. That gives them an opportunity to learn from the best, and gives you extra bullets in the magazine. Build 2-3 teams on that format, and rotate them on alert status.

RiverAux

It would be great to have enough trained personnel to have semi-permanent teams as DNALL suggests.  It would make it a bit easier to rotate call-outs in a fair manner.  However, for the average squadron which doesn't have a lot of trained people to start with, it would be difficult to make work in real life, with the possible exception of 2-person UDF teams for ELT missions.