Emergecncy Services vs. Cadet Programs

[flyguy06]

major Carralles,

I am not saying dont provise it to them, I am saying that may not be the interest of the gorup you target. You know the interetstof a cadet when you recruit them. Or you should. We have very limited resources. We cant afford to purchase ES equipment if its never going to be used. If I told my cadets "Hey, we're going on an FTX next month? I already know they are not going to buy the neccessary equipment for that FTX. they are not going to spend the time on it. But if I say "hey, we're gong to have O-flights next month" they will beg their parents and promise to do chores if their parents will bring them to the airport on that day. Its all about knowing your people and what motivates them.

Again, I do not have a lot of money or a lot of time. So, if I invest my time inCAP, I want to make sure it will be worthwhile. Now lest say i did have one or two cadets that wanted to do ES> No problem. I would send them to a close by suadron and let them train with that unit withtheunderstanding that they still belong to me. But again, in my years of doing this, that issue has never come up.

[floridacyclist]

Just keep in mind that cadets are barred from flying ES positions and many mission staff positions (command and general staff), so other than operating a couple of radios or parking airplanes, the rest would be sitting on their butts while the Sherriff's Explorers get the find.

Oh so wrong. Cadets can do any flying or mission staff assignment, even IC. There is nothing in the SQTRs that states you have to be a senior, just 18.

And how many cadets are over 18? I don't know about your squadron, but in mine we only have one, the vast majority are 17 or younger. Please don't try to confuse the whole meaning of the conversation with an irrelevant semantical twist based on the fact that some cadets choose to remain cadets even after reaching adulthood. You know that we are talking about "kids" here.

[BlackKnight]

In my squadron we give all of our cadets a basic introduction to Emergency Services training.  From that point on they can decide on their own whether they want to include ES qualifications and SAR operations as part of their CAP experience.  Some become pilots, some become GTLs, some do neither, others do both.
Some become drillmasters and collect bling.  There's something for everybody

Here's why we provide that basic ES introduction:

CAPR 52-16 Cadet Progams Management:
Figure 5-1. Encampments: Minimum Course Content & Curriculum Overview
2. CIVIL AIR PATROL FUNDAMENTALS – 10 Hours
2a. Emergency Services: Cadets will receive an introduction to CAP's emergency services mission, which may include actual emergency services training. Opportunities for cadet participation in emergency services should be emphasized.

Also note that CAPR 52-16 Figure 1-1. Suggested Quarterly Schedule shows "Emergency services" as suggested  special training (50 minutes).

So there you go. It's in the cadet program regulation.  You can emphasize ES or not, but if you're running the cadet program the way you're supposed to you have an obligation to expose your cadets to the CAP Emergency Services mission.

BTW, I'm with Stonewall:  51% CP, 49% ES.   

[ZigZag911]

Agan, I have to say in my unit I wouldnt get much participationm from cadets if I had a first aid class. ow do I know? Because I tried it. A while ago we had 20 active cadets. I had a first aid class and four showed up to it. I had a aviation ground school class and 17 showed up for it.  What does that say?

And again, if it was a requirement, as I feel it ought to be, those who wanted to advance would do what was necessary.

Please not, also, that I stipulated minimal ES training for the Mitchell.

I think it's great that your cadets are so interested in ground school, and wish them success in it....however, since cadets are trainees, they need to be oriented to all aspects of the CAP program...once that basic information is acquired, it is only natural that the cadets will focus on areas of personal interest.

[floridacyclist]

I see no problem with bringing up a cadet's lack of participation at his/her next promotion board and asking for an explanation.

[JayT]

I see no problem with bringing up a cadet's lack of participation at his/her next promotion board and asking for an explanation.

And what would be an acceptable explanation?

[floridacyclist]

The board would have to exercise some judgement at that point

[eaglefly]

I was a cadet once upon a time, now I'm a Squadron Commander (the best and worst job in CAP - those of you who have had it know what I'm talking about.)

I don't see it as an ES vs CP thing.  ES actually IS a CP program.    Where else can I teach the kind of real world leadership we are supposed to be instilling in our cadets?   No, Drill is definately NOT real world.   And neither is 'Chain of Command', if I tried pulling 'Chain of Command' at work the way some cadets do at CAP I would not last a day.

Now don't misunderstand,  drill and the other CP things are important.   But they are NOT the end all of learning leadership, or even of learning about the military.  Leadership requires discipline, the kind that comes from within.    I know of no better way to teach/instill that discipline than by giving a young person (who has reached the appropriate level of maturity) the opportunity to do real world work.   To hit a job, do, do it well and have made a difference in the world.    (Yes flying an AC gives me the same jolt, but that is $imply not in the card$ for all cadet$)

In my squadron the Cadets simply LOVE to park AC at air shows, so we have made FLM the first step in becoming an ES operator.    We also want hem to get MRO rated.  After FLM they can work on GTM (They also like to go camping.)

So, ES DOES NOT compete with Drill and the other 'CP' programs, it builds on and complements them.   Yes the Seniors who are running the program have to be sesnitive to the needs and wishes of the cadets.   Meeting this balance requires WORK, but that is what we signed up for when we took on the job as leaders .

Lets don't short change our Cadets, or ourselves, by pitting AE, CP and ES against each other.  ALL of us, Cadet and Senior alike, are supposed to be supporting all three.

End of sermon.

[RiverAux]

The thing that drew me into CAP in the first place back WIWAC was ES.  I was already getting more than enough drill as part of the marching band.  One of my friends was in and got to participate in a missing plane search and was in on the find -- thats what drew me in.  After two years of being in and not having a single mission I left.  The lack of real ES wasn't the primary reason for leaving, but it was a contributing factor.

I'm sure that same streak runs through at least some of our cadets today.  After all, it is the potential to actually do real mission for the AF that sets us apart from the JROTC folks. 

That being said, I am for the well-rounded approach to cadet programs and if all possible the program should let cadets have the option of which direction to head in.  Unfortunately, there are so many options in CAP that the smaller units in particular have to make a choice.  Do they want a ground team or a reasonably proficient honor guard or drill team? 

[jeders]

Just keep in mind that cadets are barred from flying ES positions and many mission staff positions (command and general staff), so other than operating a couple of radios or parking airplanes, the rest would be sitting on their butts while the Sherriff's Explorers get the find.

Oh so wrong. Cadets can do any flying or mission staff assignment, even IC. There is nothing in the SQTRs that states you have to be a senior, just 18.

And how many cadets are over 18? I don't know about your squadron, but in mine we only have one, the vast majority are 17 or younger. Please don't try to confuse the whole meaning of the conversation with an irrelevant semantical twist based on the fact that some cadets choose to remain cadets even after reaching adulthood. You know that we are talking about "kids" here.

Actually I know quite a few. Both I and my fiancee stayed cadets til we were 21. Most of the cadets that I've had contact with have chosen to stay cadets until 21.

As far as calling cadets "kids", I take great offense to that. If I don't let the Red Cross get away with it, I certainly am not gonna let a CAP SM get away with it. To think that all cadets are kids is asinine.

[flyguy06]

Wow. I have been away the last three days up inthe extreme north GA mountains of catoosa doing weapons qual with my guard unit. I have seen the internet before 5 minutes ago. Glad to see my thread is alive and well. 

[DeputyDog]

Oh so wrong. Cadets can do any flying or mission staff assignment, even IC. There is nothing in the SQTRs that states you have to be a senior, just 18.

Cadets cannot be qualified as incident commanders. The highest they can go is PSC. In order to train for OSC (the prerequisite for IC3), you have to be at least 21.

Edited: I just checked CAPR 60-3. It looks like there is another difference between CAPR 60-3 and the SQTRs.

According to CAPR 60-3, you have to be at least 21 years of age to train for PSC.

Other differences are that while the CAPR 60-3 states that you must be 18 years of age to train for LSC and FASC, the SQTRs state that you must be at least 21 years of age.

[floridacyclist]

And how many cadets are over 18? I don't know about your squadron, but in mine we only have one, the vast majority are 17 or younger. Please don't try to confuse the whole meaning of the conversation with an irrelevant semantical twist based on the fact that some cadets choose to remain cadets even after reaching adulthood. You know that we are talking about "kids" here.

Actually I know quite a few. Both I and my fiancee stayed cadets til we were 21. Most of the cadets that I've had contact with have chosen to stay cadets until 21.
[/quote]That doesn't change the fact that the vast majority are still under 18 and playing semantical word games will not change that fact

As far as calling cadets "kids", I take great offense to that. If I don't let the Red Cross get away with it, I certainly am not gonna let a CAP SM get away with it. To think that all cadets are kids is asinine.

You saw the "kids" in quotes to differentiate from the (relatively few) adult cadets. My website even says that I agree with you, so stop playing games and concentrate on the real issue of the fact that minors are not allowed most jobs other than ground-pounding, communications, and MSA. You're clouding the real issue that we're trying to discuss here.

[Short Field]

Edited: I just checked CAPR 60-3. It looks like there is another difference between CAPR 60-3 and the SQTRs.
CAPR 60-3 states that you must be 18 years of age to train for LSC and FASC, the SQTRs state that you must be at least 21 years of age.

The disconnect is between the current Task Guides and the eServices SQTR in the Ops Quals Module.  The current Task Guides referenced in CAPR 60-3 are dated Apr 2005.  The eServices SQTR in the Ops Quals Module are based on the March 2004 Task Guides.

[DeputyDog]

The disconnect is between the current Task Guides and the eServices SQTR in the Ops Quals Module.  The current Task Guides referenced in CAPR 60-3 are dated Apr 2005.  The eServices SQTR in the Ops Quals Module are based on the March 2004 Task Guides.

So which is right? The CAPR 60-3, the SQTRs or the e-Services SQTRs?

[jeders]

As far as calling cadets "kids", I take great offense to that. If I don't let the Red Cross get away with it, I certainly am not gonna let a CAP SM get away with it. To think that all cadets are kids is asinine.

You saw the "kids" in quotes to differentiate from the (relatively few) adult cadets. My website even says that I agree with you, so stop playing games and concentrate on the real issue of the fact that minors are not allowed most jobs other than ground-pounding, communications, and MSA. You're clouding the real issue that we're trying to discuss here.

Actually I'm not just playing semantics. The original topic was whether or not the organization is over-emphasizing ES and dropping much of the emphasis on CP. You eventually responded with saying that it's pointless to emphasize ES for cadets since there's very little that they could do, at least this is how I interpreted it. I then responded that cadet can actually do a lot of ES stuff, especially when you consider the fact that not all cadets are under 18.

As far as saying cadets can be ICs, well it had been awhile since I've read through that section of 60-3 and cede to the point that they can't quite reach that high. As far as putting kids in quotes to say that only some of us are kids, then you better start using that to apply to SM also, just to be fair. I've met a number of senior members who were more childish than 13 year old cadets.

[floridacyclist]

I never said that it's pointless to emphasize ES, only that they (meaning the under-18 cadets) can't participate in flying ES activities. Therefore, if you want cadets to have a spot in ES for more than the few mission staff jobs they can do (MRO,CUL, and MSA) they need the GT and UDF training unless the goal is to practically freeze them out of ES.

[Eclipse]

I never said that it's pointless to emphasize ES, only that they (meaning the under-18 cadets) can't participate in flying ES activities. Therefore, if you want cadets to have a spot in ES for more than the few mission staff jobs they can do (MRO,CUL, and MSA) they need the GT and UDF training unless the goal is to practically freeze them out of ES.

Required or not, GT and UDF are a huge part of the cadet program's appeal.

A udf rating can be achieved for nearly zero cost - the fam & Prep are 2 tasks requiring equipment everyone has at home, and <*BAM*> they are a real-world ES asset.

A school bag, compass and ham sandwich are just as effective for most training environments as a $150 tac vest and case of MRE's.

Its only expensive if you make it expensive, and its only hard to start if you want it to be.

The importance of good people in key base staff jobs should not be down played, either, and although cadets can't actually fly in ES roles until they are 18, they can participate in a lot of the training, and be ready for it at 18.

[Short Field]

[So which is right? The CAPR 60-3, the SQTRs or the e-Services SQTRs?

Ooh, tough question!    Especially since the LSC and FASC SQTRs in the current Mission Base Staff Task Guide (MBSTG) have a Mar 2003 date on the form and not the Apr 2004 date of the current MBSTG. 

The eServices SQTRs punt on both LSC and FASC by saying "Age eligibility check (center current date) instead of stating an age.  We don't have any under 21 members right now so I don't know if eServices automatically checks the personnel record for the age of the person based on the current date.  What age that would be I don't know.

Normally you go with the latest dated publication as being the most current and correct.    CAPR 60-3 is dated 26 May 2004.   The MBSTG is dated 11 Apr 2004.   So CAPR 60-3 should take precedence.  However, CAPR 60-3 para 2-3 states:  "For each specialty rating, standards have been developed to train and qualify members in stages.  The most current versions of the task guides for all specialties are found at the National HQ Operations website.  Prerequisites must be completed prior to initiating training requirements. .... NOTE:  All personnel will conduct training using the standardized National task guides."   That implies that the most current MBSTG takes precedence.   

However, the real answer is I will call National tomorrow and let you know what I find out.   

[Short Field]

Just waiting for National to get back to me.  The guy with the answer is on vacation this week...