PAWG shuts down

[John Bryan]

Does anyone have any idea as to how often Wings have been shut down, which ones and when?  thanks, 

A few years ago Indiana was shut down for failure of a wing SAR Eval...I think it was 2002 or so.....we were down a couple months until the "retest"...of course they let us keep flying CN.....no orientation flights....no life saving SAR....but CN was allowed....thats just an interesting side note. AND of course we have spent like 11 of the past 12 years on one type of logistics freeze or another....so....I feel bad for PA....I know the failures in Indiana over the years had very little to do with the membership and readiness of the wing at the local level to perform ES, AE, and CP... and everything to do with the leadership or lack there of at the wing level. PA members hang in there.....

[FW]

One thing PAWG must understand,  SAFETY is Job 1.

I have to disagree with you there. Safety is not job one. Our mission to support 1AF is job one. Our Cadets are job one. Aerospace education is job one. Safety comes in a very close second. If you are too focused on safety you lose sight of why you are there and we might as well all go home. What we do is inherently dangerous. It is everyones job to work in a safe fashion but the mission must get done. From what I've read PAWG has really screwed the pooch and needs to be grounded. They have not followed though with established safety procedures.

LT, thank you for your opinion.  However, I would suggest you add your name to the list of those who should take the ORM course.  Yes, all we do has risk.  Understand we take "acceptable" risk.  Everything we do, requires us to do it in the safest way possible.  To do otherwise is foolish and wrong.  
To repeat:" Safety IS Job 1."  Everything else follows suit.

[Major Carrales]

I have to disagree with you there. Safety is not job one. Our mission to support 1AF is job one.

We'll see how well a unit fares if there is a death due to some safety issue.  I think, generally, it is good practice to conduct Missions without careless safety "causalties" on our side.

[Johnny Yuma]

After those experiences I stoped looking at PA wing with rose colored glasses

....just like Iowa wing when given a change of leadership members decided to "quit" rather than accept change because they didnt agree with it.

1. It's a volunteer organization.

2. Where's your naysaying of all those IAWG members who left when the WTA was enacted and didn't like the idea, and

3. From all accounts I got, those who left were marked men.

[SDF_Specialist]

I won't say for sure, but it would be nice of Ohio to help. I'd be willing to jump in there, and pick up the slack until this mess is sorted out. Sorry about the bad luck guys (and gals).

[mikeylikey]

LT, thank you for your opinion. however, I would suggest you add your name to the list of those who should take the ORM course.....  
To repeat:" Safety IS Job 1."  

I checked out the ORM course, and have to say it should be required CAP-Wide.  It is a decent DOD/AF product.  PAWG members only have to comply with the first module and test, and send WING HQ the proof they did it, but the entire thing taken together in its entirety is great.  

I will also say Safety is JOB 1, but we all know people who "go over the top" in regard to playing safe.  

[mikeylikey]

I won't say for sure, but it would be nice of Ohio to help. I'd be willing to jump in there, and pick up the slack until this mess is sorted out. Sorry about the bad luck guys (and gals).

You may get your chance.  Depending on the attitudes and the work required by all PAWG members to comply with the ORM course, it may be MONTHS before Penna gets back to performing. 

[JayT]

One thing PAWG must understand,  SAFETY is Job 1.

I have to disagree with you there. Safety is not job one. Our mission to support 1AF is job one. Our Cadets are job one. Aerospace education is job one. Safety comes in a very close second. If you are too focused on safety you lose sight of why you are there and we might as well all go home. What we do is inherently dangerous. It is everyones job to work in a safe fashion but the mission must get done. From what I've read PAWG has really screwed the pooch and needs to be grounded. They have not followed though with established safety procedures.

LT, thank you for your opinion.  However, I would suggest you add your name to the list of those who should take the ORM course.  Yes, all we do has risk.  Understand we take "acceptable" risk.  Everything we do, requires us to do it in the safest way possible.  To do otherwise is foolish and wrong.  
To repeat:" Safety IS Job 1."  Everything else follows suit.

But when you get tunnel vision over it, then you become less safe.

To me safety is my naggling ex girlfriend in the back of my mind that periodally screams "THAT'S REALLY STUPID!" or "Don't LET THOSE CADETS DO THAT!"

Safety is looking where I step, and making sure I can interpert the sights, smells, and sounds of what's around me and my team.

[sarmed1]

...was just all over the place

sorry was just trying to hit on a few high points....I wasnt trying to shift blame, just pointing out that PA is likely not the only "culprit" just the one that got caught...something about glasses houses and stones came to mind...its still a problem that they could have and should have avoided.

....Quote from: sarmed1 on Today at 07:06:53 PM
Quote
After those experiences I stoped looking at PA wing with rose colored glasses

just like Iowa wing when given a change of leadership members decided to "quit" rather than accept change because they didnt agree with it.
1. It's a volunteer organization.
2. Where's your naysaying of all those IAWG members who left when the WTA was enacted and didn't like the idea, and
3. From all accounts I got, those who left were marked men

.

all I was pointing out (and I may have left that vauge) that the thought that Iowa was the model for everyone else to look to change to, yet all was not the perfect picture it seemed like....disidents on both sides, the quitting before, the quitting after,  etc etc....just trying to point out that the rose colored glasses should never be used when looking at anyones CAP operation...there will always be faults to some degree.

I dont think the bobcat counts as a vehicle....at least compared ot aircraft and vans type catagory...actually I dont how it counts period?....never have been able to figure that one out.

mk

[kpetersen]

To me safety is my naggling ex girlfriend in the back of my mind that periodally screams "THAT'S REALLY STUPID!" or "Don't LET THOSE CADETS DO THAT!"

You are a rare individual if you actually pay attention to what an ex-girlfriend tells you to do, particularly if she she is nag.   :clap: I will hold back from any other jokes.  

[SARMedTech]

Just my $.02

My wing sent a GBD to hawk.  That person came back as a certified IC with out the home wing's approval.  That same person then Put out a "Study aid" for FEMA EMI courses.  That study aid was a list of answers to questions. 

When I approached a leader at hawk about attendin gthe program I was informed to not come.  The reason was "We dont like having people with experience attending our courses"

After those experiences I stoped looking at PA wing with rose colored glasses

This is common throughout the emergency services world, not just in CAP and it seems to be especially common with ICS 100, 200 and 700. I dont want to run to far afield but this really torques my transmission as it speaks to honor and integrity especially since every person certifies that their test taking will be an individual effort. I think anyone who can be found to either be cheating or complicit in cheating on any ICS course should have their course certification pulled and not be allowed to ever take it again or to take any further EMI courses. I'm sorry, but if you either cant pass these courses on your own or simply cannot be bothered to do so, this speaks volumes to your character and if you had to crib to get through these ultra-simple courses, I don't want you (the general, universal "you") anywhere near any incident I am working. I also think that any CAP member found complicit in ANY cheating on required courses should be immediately stripped of rank and drummed out in stocks.

[SARMedTech]

I have to disagree with you there. Safety is not job one. Our mission to support 1AF is job one.

We'll see how well a unit fares if there is a death due to some safety issue.  I think, generally, it is good practice to conduct Missions without careless safety "causalties" on our side.

Safety is always job one in ES. First thing we were taught as EMT's was that your own safety and that of your partner come FIRST. From not running to and from the rig to wearing your seatbelt. If you become a casualty, you become a drain on the system and a danger to everyone around you.  1. SAFETY  2. MISSION  3. EVERYTHING ELSE

[FW]

I have to disagree with you there. Safety is not job one. Our mission to support 1AF is job one.

We'll see how well a unit fares if there is a death due to some safety issue.  I think, generally, it is good practice to conduct Missions without careless safety "causalties" on our side.

Safety is always job one in ES. First thing we were taught as EMT's was that your own safety and that of your partner come FIRST. From not running to and from the rig to wearing your seatbelt. If you become a casualty, you become a drain on the system and a danger to everyone around you.  1. SAFETY  2. MISSION  3. EVERYTHING ELSE

Well said.  For those who still don't understand this concept.  Take the ORM course.  For those "youngsters" among us who feel that "gung ho" urge to climb that hill during an ice storm or get into that Cessna to find an ELT during a thunderstorm, or take those 16 cadets in a 15 pass. van to the airshow.  I say, "Welcome to the Darwin Awards".  
Tunnel vision; no.  Thoughtfulness and common sense; yes.  Safety; always.  
This and proper documentation will keep your wing from PAWG's predicament.  

[sarmed1]

Slightly off topic...safety is job 1.

In my varied experinces I have to say I have seen more safety officers that are "over the top"  (or at elast those are the ones I remember).  The ones that threaten to shut down operations because they are the safety officer and can, wont be responsible for something bad happening when they were in charge of safety or yell at people to stop doing something because they dont think its safe (I had someone tell me I shouldnt do a rappeling activity once because you can fall so its not safe, they didnt look into or understand the safety factors that are built into the training, skills or the equipment)  
We have a fire department in my area where their safety officer responds reds lights and sirens to every call they are dispacted on (and its not a very safe vehicle operation the times I have seen him) under the theory that HE needs to be there to monitor safety.  Where this is an important job, me thinks not so important that I imagine he needs to risk his life and the publics by running code to every call just to monitor safety.  Somewhere I think this task should have failed an ORM assessment.

The point being that safety may not be job 1...but its consideration 1 in all jobs we do.  There was a post in the safety section where someone quted Mike Rowe, and the point seemd to be that everything could always be done safer (at least from some angle)...   You can always make something super-safe...but what kind of detriment are you going to have toward your goal accomplishment (and does your safety fixes create a whole new set of safety concerns)

But thats the point of ORM...its weighing the risks vs the consequences and making an informed decision to go or not go. (and with a form, that you can show documentation later if things went badly).

Safety first I think is a better slogan than safety is job 1.  

mk

[Short Field]

Yes, what we do is risky and bad things can happen.  But to do it with equipment that has not been checked out 100% to our established standards is not risky - it is just plain stupid.  The same concept applies to training requirements.   Yes, bad things happen to well-trained people with well-maintained equipment - but they tend to have better outcomes than ill-trained people with poorly maintained equipment.   You make a lot of your own luck - and you don't do it by being stupid.

[jimmydeanno]

Does anyone have any idea as to how often Wings have been shut down, which ones and when?  thanks, 

IIRC, not too long ago, GAWG was in a world of hurt and CAWG was shut down a few years back, both not for safety reasons, but logistical freezes...

[LittleIronPilot]

Any chance that, instead of an unauthorized Hawk, that the REGION or CAPNHQ could take it over for this occasion? 

I would highly doubt this.

To be honest... why would I want to send cadets to an activity hosted by a wing that has rampant safety issues.  Some people might say these are a lot of little items... I.E. paperwork... or burnt out lightbulbs...

But... for crying out loud... if these folks aren't even doing their routine pre-use vehicle safety inspection... how can I feel safe having cadets do something like rappel? 

While I agree with you regarding the silliness of not getting the paperwork and minor items fixed. Please do NOT make the same silly mistake with believing that means major safety items are not looked at/taken care of.

I am NOT in PA Wing (not even close) but this kind of leap to a conclusion just drives me nuts.

[LittleIronPilot]

Slightly off topic...safety is job 1.

In my varied experinces I have to say I have seen more safety officers that are "over the top"  (or at elast those are the ones I remember).  The ones that threaten to shut down operations because they are the safety officer and can, wont be responsible for something bad happening when they were in charge of safety or yell at people to stop doing something because they dont think its safe (I had someone tell me I shouldnt do a rappeling activity once because you can fall so its not safe, they didnt look into or understand the safety factors that are built into the training, skills or the equipment) 
We have a fire department in my area where their safety officer responds reds lights and sirens to every call they are dispacted on (and its not a very safe vehicle operation the times I have seen him) under the theory that HE needs to be there to monitor safety.  Where this is an important job, me thinks not so important that I imagine he needs to risk his life and the publics by running code to every call just to monitor safety.  Somewhere I think this task should have failed an ORM assessment.

The point being that safety may not be job 1...but its consideration 1 in all jobs we do.  There was a post in the safety section where someone quted Mike Rowe, and the point seemd to be that everything could always be done safer (at least from some angle)...   You can always make something super-safe...but what kind of detriment are you going to have toward your goal accomplishment (and does your safety fixes create a whole new set of safety concerns)

But thats the point of ORM...its weighing the risks vs the consequences and making an informed decision to go or not go. (and with a form, that you can show documentation later if things went badly).

Safety first I think is a better slogan than safety is job 1. 

mk

Thank you! BTW...I LOVE the Mike Rowe reference, because I think he is right.

I am neither "young" or "gung-ho" but I did not join CAP to be a safety person, I joined to do ES. Now, please do not confuse that for being reckless. Heck in my daily job I am IN Risk Management...but that is what so many seem to lose sight of.

It is all about Risk Management, but not eliminating all risk.

If we want to be "safe" we would not fly airplanes, period. Safety is not JOB #1, but as stated above it certainly can be factor #1 in planning and executing any mission. However it STILL is simply one factor of many. One must take the totality of all factors, weigh them accordingly and determine the risk level and if it meets or exceeds our risk tolerance threshold.

I have just seen this silliness with safety go way to far. Reciting the "safety pledge"...you have GOT to be kidding me. I pledge to my flag, to my country, but I will not pledge to safety. That does NOT mean I am not safe...fly with me sometime and see how professional and calculating I am, but I think this pledge and the safety-nazi's that worry more about perception of safety than actual safety have given safety a bad name.

Our JOB #1, at least on the ES side, is finding downed pilots, as safely as possible, it is not to be safe, and find down pilots. That is just my view.

[FW]

OK, you guys.  "Safety first" is a better phrase than "Safety is Job 1".  The theme, though, is well understood by those who argue this.  But, the idea of "everyone being a safety officer" also is true.  Just don't make it more than it is. 
Take the ORM course and find out what we're trying to put forward.  CAP needs more Turner awards to give out and fewer Darwins.
PAWG is learning this the hard way.  Don't make excuses; learn and improve.

[davedove]

The whole safety issue is to basically keep yourself and your team from becoming casualties.  Just getting up in the morning has some risks, as does staying in bed for that matter.  We can never eliminate all risk, but we can work to minimize it.

My basic philosphy on risk boils down to what was told to me years ago in a pool safety class.  We were told that if you don't know what you're doing, don't go into the water to save someone, because it's better for one person to drown than two.