American Cadet Alliance

[stratoflyer]

Just found out about these guys. I've been doing some reading and they are going to be Army Cadets exclusively real soon. Anybody have experience with these folks?

[IceNine]

You can go to cadetstuff.org there is a bunch of information about them on the forums there.

NIN the managing editor of cadet stuff is the National Deputy Commander or something of the sorts.

He is also on this board

[DNall]

There's a few older threads here about their program as well, particularly the adult officer trainign aspect, but it covers quite a lot about their org. I have some stuff from them here somewhere.

Basically, they are dropping the other service programs (mostly naval cadets) and becoming the US Army Cadet Corps. They have strong backing by the top of the Army. They are seeking congressional charter that would give them status very similar to if not better than CAP has w/ AF.

They've traditionally been based mostly on the coasts. They are now aggressively expanding across the country. They are gaining and utilizing support of guard and SDF/state guard to find locations, resources, etc.

They are currently securing financing to purchase the Millersburg Military Academy in KY that used to be a CAP based resident military prep school. They intend to turn that into their NHQ, national training center, and possibly in the future open a military HS or Jr Col at the site.

Their adult members fall into either civilian instructor status or officer/NCOs. The officers go thru an OCS program modeled on NG OCS. It is a 1-2weeks session one summer, a reading/assignments program over the year, then another 1-2week finishing process in the second summer. It is from what I understand very good. Current/former mil officers bypass that training of course. I don't know what orientation they do though. I do know we talked a little about their cadet protection program, I don't remember too much about it, but it was up to par.

Overall it's a lot less gay version of the CAP cadet program. They don't have any issues saying it's military career exploration & leader training thru military program. They drop kids of pushups, etc. They do some decent field training, don't know about weapons but I would expect so. But, they don't have the real-world mission or the technical/AE aspects that CAP delivers, which is what I think makes CAP a significant factor in servicing the AF and our overall CP mission. There's pros & cons comparing the two programs.

Also, the costs are higher for yearly participation. There's a lot more required travel & other items than with CAP. Lot might be a bit strong actually, I'll go with comparatively higher.

Personally, I want to see them get up & running in my area, and I'd like to help to the extent I can, but I won't be leaving CAP to accomplish that.

[RiverAux]

It is also MUCH smaller.  The last time I saw some figures on their web page, they only had about 30 units.  Maybe a bit more in the future.  Personally, I would wait for official Army backing before I got involved with them. 

[stratoflyer]

There are definitely a lot cadet type programs out there, but as far as I know it, only CAP offers a cadet program, and a real world mission, AND lets cadet participate in those missions.

The ACA website could definitely use some bolstering up as I found broken links and information was hard to find. I sifted through some of their regs and I thought CAP's were better written.

I understand that there's a 2 week program for Officer training, and the there is a national unit for those who don't belong to local units because of distance. What if someone wanted to join as an officer but the summer training already took place. Would they have to wait until next summer to start their training?

I agree on waiting until they get themselves sorted out with the Army and phasing out the Naval cadets. Then again, someone can join and make an effort and contribute to the success of the program.

I was curious, that's all. I'm happy with CAP, and although I wish our cadets were able to do a little more sometimes, I just look at it as a challenge to find other activities and methods of instruction.

[DNall]

They're a good program, and I'll support them when they get ready to go out here, but I won't leave CAP for it, and I have some limitations between the guard, CAP, and having a life. What they really want are motivated leaders with some experience that can take the lead to stand up new units. They have all the support in the world, but they need those key folks on the ground. I can support all day, but I don't have the time to take the lead on something like that.

The officer training from what I understand is TWO 2wk sessions. One over a summer, do the year in a reading/guided professional development program, then another 2wk session the second summer. I'm just about certain about that.

As far as joining too late... it's not automatic to be accepted to their officer program. You can join and then apply, and not everyone is accepted. There's interviews and review board before you can start the training. If you joined in Jan/Feb, you'd probably be on track to make the summer OCS session.

[NIN]

You can go to cadetstuff.org there is a bunch of information about them on the forums there.

NIN the managing editor of cadet stuff is the National Deputy Commander or something of the sorts.

He is also on this board

Wow, awesome.  I guess I missed the orders appointing me..



Seriously, I'm the Director of Officer Professional Development (at least, that's what my business cards say!) and the OIC of the demonstration parachute team.

[NIN]

There's a few older threads here about their program as well, particularly the adult officer trainign aspect, but it covers quite a lot about their org. I have some stuff from them here somewhere.

Basically, they are dropping the other service programs (mostly naval cadets) and becoming the US Army Cadet Corps. They have strong backing by the top of the Army. They are seeking congressional charter that would give them status very similar to if not better than CAP has w/ AF.

Thats true.  Getting a congressional charter is like attempting to milk gold from a rock, however.  (there has been a moratorium on congressional charters)

The charter does not automagically confer the status, however. Thats still got to be written into law (on the congressional side) and regulation (on the Army side).

They've traditionally been based mostly on the coasts. They are now aggressively expanding across the country. They are gaining and utilizing support of guard and SDF/state guard to find locations, resources, etc.

Well, the program was extensive in the NYC area (down into Jersey, and up into CT, too, after a fashion) from its inception until just after the Vietnam War when interest in "things military" waned considerably.  The ACA had units in Michigan for years (back into the 1970s, as I recall from speaking to one of our retired warrant officers at the Birthday Ball last year at Selfridge), and in the "middle" of the country now there are units in Michigan, Missouri and Wisconsin.

The problem is, standing up a unit is a LOT tougher than starting a CAP unit from a "chicken or the egg" perspective, and also from a training and support standpoint.  We got a unit going in Missouri, and the OIC up and got deployed before he could get critical mass happening.  We had a unit starting up in Dallas or someplace like that, and the folks behind it decided to march in a different direction that was counter to the national guidance.  Ooops. 

They are currently securing financing to purchase the Millersburg Military Academy in KY that used to be a CAP based resident military prep school. They intend to turn that into their NHQ, national training center, and possibly in the future open a military HS or Jr Col at the site.

You're thinking of the Miller School in Virginia.   Millersburg is by no stretch of the imagination a "done deal," and while it *could* serve as military school again, that would be a *long* way down the road.

Their adult members fall into either civilian instructor status or officer/NCOs. The officers go thru an OCS program modeled on NG OCS. It is a 1-2weeks session one summer, a reading/assignments program over the year, then another 1-2week finishing process in the second summer. It is from what I understand very good. Current/former mil officers bypass that training of course. I don't know what orientation they do though. I do know we talked a little about their cadet protection program, I don't remember too much about it, but it was up to par.

CPPT is on par with CAP, because, frankly, we use the gold standard of CPPT to base our program on: CAP.  Duh! Why re-invent the wheel? 

OCS Phase I is 10 days at Annual Training, followed by Phase II, which is a distance-learning model of 11 or so courses (each corresponding approximately to 1 month) and then Phase III, which is another 10 days at Annual Training.

Current/former military folks do not exactly bypass the training, but complete either Phase III or the direct commission course (DCC) which is also for CAP folks who might be interested in shipping over (to borrow a Marine term). 

Overall it's a lot less gay version of the CAP cadet program.

Uh, that's not quite how I'd characterize it.   And I'd appreciate it if you found a better comparison.

They don't have any issues saying it's military career exploration & leader training thru military program. They drop kids of pushups, etc. They do some decent field training, don't know about weapons but I would expect so. But, they don't have the real-world mission or the technical/AE aspects that CAP delivers, which is what I think makes CAP a significant factor in servicing the AF and our overall CP mission. There's pros & cons comparing the two programs.

The entire cadet program development staff are either current or former CAP members. We have a former Spaatz cadet as our G-3 (Training) and three former Phase III & IV cadets, all of whom have had military careers in either the Army, the Air Force, or the Marines.  Three are also current CAP members.

Also, the costs are higher for yearly participation. There's a lot more required travel & other items than with CAP. Lot might be a bit strong actually, I'll go with comparatively higher.

You could probably go with "a lot" and not be far off.  I've spent more in 2 1/2 years in the USAC than I've spent in over 10 years in CAP.  I've flown to 2 CAP activities in 27 years.  I've flown to 4 USAC events in just 2 years (nature of the beast, I'm a HQ pogue!)

Personally, I want to see them get up & running in my area, and I'd like to help to the extent I can, but I won't be leaving CAP to accomplish that.

Shouldn't be too long now.

[NIN]

It is also MUCH smaller.  The last time I saw some figures on their web page, they only had about 30 units.  Maybe a bit more in the future.  Personally, I would wait for official Army backing before I got involved with them. 

You're right, there are actually closer to 22 or 23 units.  It _is_ very small right now.

But thats changing. Slowly. And we're building for the future. 

Go ask someone who's been in the Young Marines what happened when HQ USMC issued its "ALLMAR" to the Corps supporting the Young Marines.  Katy, bar the door!

[stratoflyer]

Sounds neat. I would like to give it a try. How much is it to join? There's no unit near me and I'm too involved with CAP at the moment. But wouldn't hurt to get that training so that when I'm able to help more I can.

[DrJbdm]

 I took a good hard look at the program and spent some quality time with Col. Land when he came to the Austin area. He actually drove a couple of hours out of his way to visit with me and try and get a program started down here in Austin. I think that shows the kind of drive and determination that Col. Land has for this program. You can tell from talking to him that this program means everything to him. I admire that in him.

However, I'm in the same situation as DNall, I just do not have the time and or the resources to build a unit up from scratch. Besides my wife would divorce me if I spent all my vacation time doing Annual Training every summer. I believe the USAC are in many ways superior to CAP when it comes to training their Officers. I have strongly believed for many years that not everyone in CAP needs to be an officer. We should be just as selective if not more so on who becomes a CAP officer. This is a lesson we could learn from the USAC. Their cadet program has a lot that CAP could learn from, they seem to be much more high speed then CAP has allowed itself to become. Perhaps things could change for the better. I believe we could both learn from one another.

  In my opinion, the USAC is an awesome program, it's one that I would love to have a very active part in; however it does have a few negatives that need to be worked out, one being the amount of time required to start a new unit that's such a long ways away from any support. However there really isn't anything you can do to change that except find the people who have the time, talent, and resources to stand a unit up. The other major downside; at least for me is the financial consideration involved. Traveling every year or so to Annual training can be very expensive, not to mention any other trips that might be needed in addition to AT. However, your situation might be different; I wish it was the case for me.  My department gives me 2 weeks of vacation a year, my wife normally wants us to vacation together yearly as a family. So, for me to go to her and say "Honey, I'm sorry but I have to spend 10 days at AT again this year; Oh and I have to eat up our travel budget to fly out there" just wouldn't work to well for her....now, if only I could get her to join too...... 

  I have to thank Col. Land for having spent so much time and effort on me and on trying to get a unit established in this area, it's ripe for a unit, there's tons of interest but as Lt. Col. Ninness has said, it's a bear of an effort to get something up and running. I feel bad that in the end I just wasn't able to step up and take the effort over.

[Pathfinder]

They don't have a real good reputation in my area.  They did an activity the same time as ours on a post and seemed to have some problems pulling everything off.  I talked to a couple of their guys who seemed nice enough but not really tuned in to cadet management which caused them some problems.  Their people even talked about having a hard time to have a sense of direction in their program. 

[dwb]

They don't have a real good reputation in my area.  They did an activity the same time as ours on a post and seemed to have some problems pulling everything off.  I talked to a couple of their guys who seemed nice enough but not really tuned in to cadet management which caused them some problems.  Their people even talked about having a hard time to have a sense of direction in their program. 

You could just as easily be describing a struggling CAP unit with those words.

Right now, ACA/USAC is growing slowly, organically, in places where they can find the talent to pull things off.  They're being selective because they can be.  This is a good thing.

However, I suspect they will have growing pains if/when they pull off the Army sponsorship thing.  They'll have a bunch of new units starting all at once, and new members joining all at once, and will probably struggle to make the "culture" of the organization permeate consistently across all of the units.  Annual Training helps with that, but it'll be an imperfect solution.

Still, I think USAC is a better fit for some cadets than CAP is, and I wouldn't hesitate to refer someone to it.  The people at the top are doing all the right things, and that's going to matter a lot if they have an explosion in growth.

[COL Land]

If there is an issue with one of our units, I'd like to know the specifics.   Please contact me by PM.


COL Land

[BillB]

A couple of years ago I had lunch with Col Land (he lives only 45 minutes away). But my problem is the training. I can't afford the mileage to training. A V,A, Disiblity Pension doesn't go very far.  While a LtCol in CAP (up through Air War College, and 8 years as Wing and Region DCP) I could have been a Major in ACA. That's fine, grade doesn't mean that much.
The training cites and costs were the only problem I saw. Otherwise it semmed a good organiztion decently run. To bad there are no Army posts on Florida to get uniforms or training.

[Major Carrales]

As with all things, it is the talent and willingness of people in the local areas to make these things happen.  An organization cannot and will not grow without people "faning the fires."

There has to be that core/corps (both apply) of individuals that serve as the guardian of the program.  To do the leg work.  To meet with the cadets and their parents as a teacher in s public/private school would.  A group or individual that can bring prjects to fruition and attract interested parties that will add to the mixture and solidify the program.

In CAP, I call it " regular unit maintenance."  The situation where stagnation never is allowed to happen.  Where everyone takes a small, or large part, in making that unit advance.

Without such leadership and direction, the organization...be if CAP, RED CROSS, ACA, Salvation Army or Knights of Columbus, will not survive.

ACA sounds great, if they had got me first I might have become as dedicated to them as I am to CAP.  I also wouldn't mind helping such a unit get started.  I wouldn't mind offering CAP STATION CORPUS CHRISTI to their use.  However, they would have to have the motivated individuals for it to work.

Then there is the whole idea of sharing membership.  I don't beleive in being the rivals of other cadet programs.  I face the impression of that with NJROTC and Amry ROTC.  Most people assume that we "must be rivals" and thus, all sorts of nonsense results.  I see it better as an enhancement...we offer things that they cannot and vice versa.

In reading the above posts I get the impression that most people have the "grass is greener" approach. Dennis' reference to the CAP cadet program being "gay" for example smacks of "CAP self-loathing."  We instill good citizenship and leadership...just because we aren't a "Factory" for USAF airmen or soldiers does not diminish our importance.

Fact is, if it was our goal to channel the youth into these directions...why have we so few resources?  I mean really, what direct operation funds have we at the unit level?  How can we expect a consistant product when the conditions are so varied from unit to unit?  People do what they can with what they got.  Anyone with a problem with that had better have funding to offer or move to and area to contribute to a struggling unit.  If not, all such talk is academic.

That applies to ACA as well as CAP.  I understand that LTC Land does just that in his dedication to his program.  I know countless CAP officers that liteerally and figuratively "go that extra mile" to insure their cadets have a good experience.  What more can ever be asked.  If there are inconsistancies, it is many times not for lack of trying.

This debate, if even that, on ACA and CAP is a good "apple to oranges" situation; different goals, different parent service.  I suggest we look at them for what they are...not through the prism of each on eachother.  It will be there that some common ground will be found that will benefit everyone.

[CAP Producer]

As with all things, it is the talent and willingness of people in the local areas to make these things happen.  An organization cannot and will not grow without people "faning the fires."

There has to be that core/corps (both apply) of individuals that serve as the guardian of the program.  To do the leg work.  To meet with the cadets and their parents as a teacher in s public/private school would.  A group or individual that can bring prjects to fruition and attract interested parties that will add to the mixture and solidify the program.

In CAP, I call it " regular unit maintenance."  The situation where stagnation never is allowed to happen.  Where everyone takes a small, or large part, in making that unit advance.

Without such leadership and direction, the organization...be if CAP, RED CROSS, ACA, Salvation Army or Knights of Columbus, will not survive.

ACA sounds great, if they had got me first I might have become as dedicated to them as I am to CAP.  I also wouldn't mind helping such a unit get started.  I wouldn't mind offering CAP STATION CORPUS CHRISTI to their use.  However, they would have to have the motivated individuals for it to work.

Then there is the whole idea of sharing membership.  I don't beleive in being the rivals of other cadet programs.  I face the impression of that with NJROTC and Amry ROTC.  Most people assume that we "must be rivals" and thus, all sorts of nonsense results.  I see it better as an enhancement...we offer things that they cannot and vice versa.

In reading the above posts I get the impression that most people have the "grass is greener" approach. Dennis' reference to the CAP cadet program being "gay" for example smacks of "CAP self-loathing."  We instill good citizenship and leadership...just because we aren't a "Factory" for USAF airmen or soldiers does not diminish our importance.

Fact is, if it was our goal to channel the youth into these directions...why have we so few resources?  I mean really, what direct operation funds have we at the unit level?  How can we expect a consistant product when the conditions are so varied from unit to unit?  People do what they can with what they got.  Anyone with a problem with that had better have funding to offer or move to and area to contribute to a struggling unit.  If not, all such talk is academic.

That applies to ACA as well as CAP.  I understand that LTC Land does just that in his dedication to his program.  I know countless CAP officers that liteerally and figuratively "go that extra mile" to insure their cadets have a good experience.  What more can ever be asked.  If there are inconsistancies, it is many time not for lack of trying.

This debate, if even that, on ACA and CAP is a good "apple to oranges" situation; different goals, different parent service.  I suggest we look at them for what they are...not through the prism of each on eachother.  It will be there that some common ground will be found that will benefit everyone.

Well Said Joe!

[stratoflyer]

Right on, Major.

All cadets in American national programs share many common things--more than what most people are willing to admit. I agree that a lot of times people just want to blindly compete--some people just want to see who could spit into the spittoon better. Is there anything there worth noting? Negative.

As such, learning from others is something we should always strive to do--academically, professionally, sometimes even spiritually. The key is to have an open mind.

I opened up this discussion here and so far I haven't heard any negative comments about ACA, only a few minor drawbacks insomuch as training and new unit startups.

Look at todays military, especially all you "hardcore" folks--I got two words fer you all: JOINT OPERATIONS!

Even in CAP we see this. Anyone recently get their 101 card would tell you about the Incident Command System and how it's designed to be flexible to allow interagency cooperation, aka joint interoperability. When CAP does a DR or SAR or CD mission, it is working with others.

Why should cadets be different? A successful future leader of America should and must learn how to work with others. We should not look at other cadet programs as forbidden entities, but rather as separate sections of a greater movement aimed at giving youth a chance to excel and better themselves within a military structure.

And I am glad that others so far have covered that little comment about our cadet program. If you are dissatisfied with the cadet program, please, by all means improve it, for we have much leeway to do so because if you really sit-down to analyze the regs, there is a lot that can be done to make our CP tougher, more stringent, and overall more exciting. I've seen units do this, and I've seen cadets step up to the plate. Just respect current and former cadets, and the CP.

I look forward to seeing the ACA make progress and hope someday to work with them and their cadets!

[DNall]

Makes you think of those guys back in the early days of CAP. GREAT, but small unknown organization, building from the ground up, requires absolute dedication, considerable time, and money from extremely talented folks that should otherwise be applying those talents to great success in military or civilian life (and thereby not have the time).

I mean if they had a larger program like we do, w/ several inter-supporting units & functional echelons of command that aren't states away... yeah absolutely I'd be over there HELPING them attain greater success & using my talents and resources to achieve that. BUT, I can't carry the world on my back. I can't be an active guard officer (certainly not a highspeed one), and an overtasked CAP staff officer, and carry one of their units from the ground up in some herculean effort. That's more than I can manage. Even w/o CAP I still couldn't do it.

I want them to succeed, and I'd like to help with that, but I think a lot of people (in or out of CAP) are in the same boat. It seems like there should be a better way when utilizing volunteers than so overtasking so few people. It's better to build a cohesive team and build up from there.

[NIN]

Look at todays military, especially all you "hardcore" folks--I got two words fer you all: JOINT OPERATIONS!
<snip>
I look forward to seeing the ACA make progress and hope someday to work with them and their cadets!

Without giving away the farm, I suspect you will see CAP & ACA cadets working jointly very, very soon...

[Flying Pig]

How exactly are the two going to work "very closely"?  We have 2 different missions.  Are we going to have joint encampments or something?  Are they going to go on SAR's with us?

[arajca]

A couple yearas ago, ACA and CAP worked together in a joint color guard...

[Major Carrales]

In such situations, joint CAP and ACA, it would be necessary to truly examine the matter in a way that would find commonalities.

I'm about finding solutions...the way it would best work in my eye would be to form an ACTION COMMITTEE made up of three CAP CP Officers and three ACA Officers who knew their respective programs intimately. And someone to serve as chair.

They would meet to create the nature of joint activities that would best serve both organization.  A clear list of possible activities would be outlined and codified in a true joint manual that would be both an ACA and CAP regulation...identical in each.

A set-in-stone timeline would be given and adhered to to do that.  Then the plan would go into effect.

Before anyone says, "well, you know" about there committees..."they never get anything accomplished."  Then I would suggest that such naysayers volunteer for the committee and that all understand that this would require a level of dedication commiserate to "getting the job done."

It might also be good to mention the MOU with the Boy Scouts and dual chartering of squadrons and posts.

[Eclipse]

How exactly are the two going to work "very closely"?  We have 2 different missions.  Are we going to have joint encampments or something?  Are they going to go on SAR's with us?

Our missions may have different text in the headers, but the organizations are not that different, and share a fair number of members.

The first step in "working together" is simple joint awareness and possible sharing of resources.  As an example, I could see a joint encampment that shared logistics, operated separately where required, and brought success to the table from both sides as being a very good idea.

I personally know of several situations where similar organizations have been treated as malevolent competitors by CAP people (to the point of literally getting into verbal and physical confrontations) which is unacceptable and unprofessional.  There's a big difference between "service pride" and acting like a bad-parent soccer coach.

At the end of the day we're all just trying to build good citizens, leaders, raise military awareness, and help our communities.

The rest is nuance.

[NIN]

I'm not in a position to necessarily detail the conversations that have been occurring in the last 30 days between the ACA & CAP.  I'm not saying they're secret, I'm just saying that they're nascent and for me to go blabbing all over the Interwebs about stuff that's ongoing is outside of my lane.

However, high-level conversations have occurred, and will continue to occur, between the two outfits.


CSM Schanabel (left), senior enlisted advisor to the National Commander, BG Charles R. Tornow, US Army Cadets National Commander, and then-BG Amy Courter, Civil Air Patrol's National Commander, chat at the Civil Air Patrol National Board Meeting in Kissimmee, FL.

And that's a good thing.

Now, going forward, I would not be surprised to possibly see CAP cadets attending USAC training functions, and vice versa.

Leadership is, more or less, leadership.  So having several CAP cadets attend USAC's BLC (Basic Leaders Course) would not be out of line.   Or having a few USAC cadets come to a regional cadet leadership school would be pretty cool, too.

Sure, the USAC doesn't have ES.  Not everything CAP cadets do is rooted in ES.

But I bet that CAP cadets love to rappel and throw hand grenades.

[Ned]

I'm about finding solutions...the way it would best work in my eye would be to form an ACTION COMMITTEE made up of three CAP CP Officers and three ACA Officers who knew their respective programs intimately. And someone to serve as chair.

Guys,

I sat in a meeting with MG Courter and BG Turnow just a couple of weeks ago, and let me assure you that the guidance from both GOs is to find a way for us to work together.

And we are doing that.

Things like MOUs and joint activities were discussed and plans made.

While we appreciate the suggestions, remember that there are two separate organizations here, with somewhat different traditions and cultures.  I am confident that we can resolve any issues that may arise, but we do need to work on issues like supervision of  one organization's troops by adult leaders of the other.  This raises issues like CPPT and other legal stuff that takes some time and discussion to resolve.

But look to see some joint activities by next summer.

Ned Lee
National Cadet Advisor
Former CAP Legal Officer

[MIKE]

But I bet that CAP cadets love to rappel and throw hand grenades.

Oh yeah! 

If you ask me, CAP needs to get off the ES Hobby Horse as it relates/doesn't to Cadet Programs.

[BillB]

Ned Lee hit the nail on the head. ACA is the way AP USED to be. CAP's CPPT and no pushups for punishment etc etc will be stumbling blocks. Another difference is the age of cadets. The majority of CAP cadets tend to be younger than the average age of ACA cadets. A survey (in 2004) indicated that CAP cadets wanted a more military atmosphere (65% vs 30% with 5% undecided). This flies in the face of CPPT and the CAP program The old CAP cadet program had classes following a set curriculum for each achievement, not progress at your own pace. If a cadet failed a test, he/she tried harder to learn the material and pass when the test was given again. Now there is little incentive to learn AE materials since the cadet knows he/she can take the test in 30 days.

[Eclipse]

If you ask me, CAP needs to get off the ES Hobby Horse as it relates/doesn't to Cadet Programs.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however to me it is one of the most important distinctions between CAP and other similar organizations - a genuine operational role in helping communities in times of disaster.

The fact that it is not executed uniformly, or as well as it should be, doesn't change that.

[Eclipse]

A survey (in 2004) indicated that CAP cadets wanted a more military atmosphere (65% vs 30% with 5% undecided). This flies in the face of CPPT and the CAP program.

No, it doesn't, and if you believe it does, you're missing the point.

"more military" does not necessarily mean "more mean".  It means setting specific standards of performance and training, adhering to them across the board, and making few, if any, exceptions when people can't perform to that standard.

Punitive PT just makes you tired, which may be an end in itself, but it does not make you a better cadet or soldier.

[MIKE]

If you ask me, CAP needs to get off the ES Hobby Horse as it relates/doesn't to Cadet Programs.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however to me it is one of the most important distinctions between CAP and other similar organizations - a genuine operational role in helping communities in times of disaster.

The fact that it is not executed uniformly, or as well as it should be, doesn't change that.

The problem I have with it is that by and large CAP plays ES to the exclusion of throwing hand grenades and earning NRA Marksmanship badges etc, etc.

[Eclipse]

If you ask me, CAP needs to get off the ES Hobby Horse as it relates/doesn't to Cadet Programs.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however to me it is one of the most important distinctions between CAP and other similar organizations - a genuine operational role in helping communities in times of disaster.

The fact that it is not executed uniformly, or as well as it should be, doesn't change that.

The problem I have with it is that by and large CAP plays ES to the exclusion of throwing hand grenades and earning NRA Marksmanship badges etc, etc.

Neither of those things has anything to do with CAP, which first and foremost is a benevolent, non-combative organization. It was only recently that USAF Basic Training started to stress ground-combat skills, either. For better or worse, that's not what the USAF is about.

Not sure about the grenades, but there's plenty of shooting going on in CAP, especially at encampments (both simulated and live-fire).

[Major Carrales]

If you ask me, CAP needs to get off the ES Hobby Horse as it relates/doesn't to Cadet Programs.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however to me it is one of the most important distinctions between CAP and other similar organizations - a genuine operational role in helping communities in times of disaster.

The fact that it is not executed uniformly, or as well as it should be, doesn't change that.

I agree, Emergency Services provides that "real" thing that many cadets either want or greatly grow because.  For the former of this statements, there are cadets that really want to be of service to their community in times of need.  These are the sorts that grow into the EM managers and maybe even municipal/state ES people and community servants.

For the later, remember that adolescents are always seeking to be taken seriously.  They are at that stage where they are not year adults and no longer children.  Socially, they are in need of doing things with "actual" significance.  The limited role in ES, in COMMS and UDF/GROUND TEAM, makes them feel like they belong to something "worthwhile."  I have had, back in the days when the Corpus Christi Comp Squadron was in slim times and less than operational, cadets leave because they were tired of "marching in squares and in circles" and doing nothing else.

Get this, I imagine that some children turn to gangs because the "regular society" limits them and relegates them to second class...while in a GANG they can rise in that structure and participate in "real" shootings and crime.  That is food for thought on the gang issue and stresses how ACA and CAP can be alternatives to that lifestyle.

Working together is worthy...we can go much further together.  Merging some activities and connecting where goals are similar will  only bring more resources to both units.

[Major Carrales]

If you ask me, CAP needs to get off the ES Hobby Horse as it relates/doesn't to Cadet Programs.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however to me it is one of the most important distinctions between CAP and other similar organizations - a genuine operational role in helping communities in times of disaster.

The fact that it is not executed uniformly, or as well as it should be, doesn't change that.

The problem I have with it is that by and large CAP plays ES to the exclusion of throwing hand grenades and earning NRA Marksmanship badges etc, etc.

Pity you have that attitude on the subject. 

When done correctly, ES is a powerful motivator for cadets.  Now, ES means "EMERGENCY SERVICES" not the "EXTRA STUFF," like excessive gear, combat like clothing and RAMBO-ism.  I am pretty sure that this where the issue of things like "bonnie hats" and "berets" comes to a head.

[Flying Pig]

If you ask me, CAP needs to get off the ES Hobby Horse as it relates/doesn't to Cadet Programs.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however to me it is one of the most important distinctions between CAP and other similar organizations - a genuine operational role in helping communities in times of disaster.

The fact that it is not executed uniformly, or as well as it should be, doesn't change that.

I agree, Emergency Services provides that "real" thing that many cadets either want or greatly grow because.  For the former of this statements, there are cadets that really want to be of service to their community in times of need.  These are the sorts that grow into the EM managers and maybe even municipal/state ES people and community servants.

For the later, remember that adolescents are always seeking to be taken seriously.  They are at that stage where they are not year adults and no longer children.  Socially, they are in need of doing things with "actual" significance.  The limited role in ES, in COMMS and UDF/GROUND TEAM, makes them feel like they belong to something "worthwhile."  I have had, back in the days when the Corpus Christi Comp Squadron was in slim times and less than operational, cadets leave because they were tired of "marching in squares and in circles" and doing nothing else.

Get this, I imagine that some children turn to gangs because the "regular society" limits them and relegates them to second class...while in a GANG they can rise in that structure and participate in "real" shootings and crime.  That is food for thought on the gang issue and stresses how ACA and CAP can be alternatives to that lifestyle.

Working together is worthy...we can go much further together.  Merging some activities and connecting where goals are similar will  only bring more resources to both units.

Thats got to be one of the most off base analogies I think I have ever read on CAPTalk.  I dont think Ive ever met a gang member who joined because they thought their true potential was being hampered.

[Major Carrales]

Thats got to be one of the most off base analogies I think I have ever read on CAPTalk.  I dont think Ive ever met a gang member who joined because they thought their true potential was being hampered.

I'm thinking you missed the point.  You may look at gang members when their caught, in processing or in the "act."  I deal with them at school...when I can clearly see that the "main stream" is 1) yelling at them, 2) looking at them as criminal  and 3) ignoring them.

A 6th grader that comes from "a broken home and filthy neighborhood" (to quote E. G. Marshall in 12 Angry Men) can go far with family support or if a teacher or pastor gives them something "real."  If they are not "feeling like Americans" or "given something real,"  then they...MAKE IT UP FOR THEMSELVES.

SCHOOL KIDS won't wear school uniforms, but they will dress in gang colors and other acutremants?  Why is that? 

They won't attend school regularly, but they will wander the streets and attend their functions not only regularly...but also punctually.  Why is that? 

They won't "dress out" in PE or do any sport, but they display outstanding phyiscal preformance in running from the POLICE.  Why is that? 

They will take a "beating" to join a GANG, but won't life a finger to support their own efforts in school? Why is that? 

It is because they find belonging and misguided worth in the structure of gangs and no value whatsoever in the established Society.

CAP can help...it can give them focus.  Much more so if there is a "real element" to it.  If ACA developed an operations element...maybe in joint participate with CAP...I don't know, maybe that would enchance them just the more.  I see no problem in qualifying ACA cadets, if this were established at some future time, to augment CAP ground operations.

That is my observation, you may have a different experince as I.  To that I say, so be it. 

[CadetProgramGuy]

Punitive PT just makes you tired, which may be an end in itself, but it does not make you a better cadet or soldier.

Being on the blunt end of punishment PT, I would have to disagree.  All I thought about while in the front leaning rest, is what I have to do to not be here again.

HOWEVER....... I would have to agree that punishment PT has no place in CAP.  We are here to build and mold young americans into responsible citizens, and punishment PT hinders that concept.

[DNall]

A survey (in 2004) indicated that CAP cadets wanted a more military atmosphere (65% vs 30% with 5% undecided). This flies in the face of CPPT and the CAP program.

No, it doesn't, and if you believe it does, you're missing the point.

"more military" does not necessarily mean "more mean".  It means setting specific standards of performance and training, adhering to them across the board, and making few, if any, exceptions when people can't perform to that standard.

Punitive PT just makes you tired, which may be an end in itself, but it does not make you a better cadet or soldier.

That's what more military means to you & I, and in reality is more like the real military, BUT look at that from a cadet perspective and I think you'll find they actually want yelling drill sgts, yada yada. I don't call that mean, nor do I have a problem with punitive PT, which is an effective training tool if used correctly by leaders.

I drop RSP soldiers all the time. Doing pushups doesn't make disciplined professional soldiers. Forcing people to actually listen an pay attention to the lesson you're delivering & be accountable at all times, that does make a difference.

The reason we don't do that in CAP has nothing to do with cadets or usefulness of the practice as a training tool. It has everything to do with the baseline competence level of CAP leaders (cadet & adult of all ages), and the risk mgmt consequences for letting incompetent people misuse good tools to maltrain people.

[Eclipse]

The reason we don't do that in CAP has nothing to do with cadets or usefulness of the practice as a training tool. It has everything to do with the baseline competence level of CAP leaders (cadet & adult of all ages), and the risk mgmt consequences for letting incompetent people misuse good tools to maltrain people.

I'd have to agree, DI's, TI's, & RDC's, etc., all receive specialized training and are closely monitored, we do not have that in CAP.

I think you'd also find that while the caliber of our cadets as a whole would increase, the numbers would drop substantially if we really became bootcamp.

Most kids have no interest or tolerance for that today and their parents would simply allow them to go back to the Px3 and FaceSpace.   

[DNall]

Actually, none of those people receive any training on how/when to use punitive PT as a training tool. No such training exists in the military. Those individuals also work under almost zero supervision.

I am not a DS, and have received no such training, but I do very effectively utilize this tool for training junior enlisted soldiers.

You know what's key there? Neither of us are morons. We were selected for responsibility and underwent intensive training - not training that qualifies us to use this disciplinary tool, but training that weeds out people that suck. In that process we've proven our professionalism, personal discipline, core values, etc... and really just maturity.

On the other hand, CAP lets virtually anyone in the door as long as they aren't a serious criminal. And then makes no distinction between competent qualified leaders and worker bees. Our freakin officer selection and training program is an absolute travesty. For all the good things about CAP, that one fact just about spoils it all. It certainly is the reason we gay up the program by disallowing so many tools out of the toolbox to get the job done.

I can just as effectively train someone with out that one tool, but every option you take away from me makes the job harder, take longer, and cuts down the number of people I can get thru to. As you apply that situation to less qualified/experienced/trained leaders, their capabilities are cut back exponentially more. That has a real effect on the program.


Let me also note that there are a lot of misconceptions about what "bootcamp" is. There is almost no yelling there, at least in the modern Army version. There is a two-week period focused on getting in shape and instilling discipline, etc. After that, it is a fairly lax environment focused on training soldier skills. Full Metal Jacket is a fantasy, and most of what happens in that movie would get a DS thrown off the trail & out of the Army, if not in jail.

And as far as retention... actually, standardized application of a structured program, which may include things like disciplinary PT, would drastically increase retention. It's the standardized application, and conducted to standard aspects that are currently impossible for CAP to achieve. We are our worst enemy.


Bringing this back home to USAC Corps... they are trying to avoid these pitfalls with: a MUCH stronger officer selection and training program; cadet leader training programs that do address how to apply tools like disciplinary PT; and by growing as an org at a pace that allows the spread of their program to the standards they expect. It'll take forever for them to achieve what CAP has, and they may never do it, but they're stronger right from the start for doing it right. In that respect I think CAP can take some major lessons.

[Major Carrales]

On the other hand, CAP lets virtually anyone in the door as long as they aren't a serious criminal. And then makes no distinction between competent qualified leaders and worker bees. Our freakin officer selection and training program is an absolute travesty. For all the good things about CAP, that one fact just about spoils it all. It certainly is the reason we gay up the program by disallowing so many tools out of the toolbox to get the job done.

Uh, Dennis.  When you make statements like this I get the impression you miss the reality of the situation.  CAP is a communty service organization of volunteers that are locally driven by a core of people that want to serve their nation in the spirit of the Civil Defense movement during the Second World War.

It had been demonstrated most incredulously here that those that have "other agendas," ones that are more about personal glory than that afore mentioned community spirit, encounter the most problems and backlash.  We, thus, are called to do CAP for that reason...for the Community and for the CADETS.  Many times we do that with no resources from WING/NATIONAL, only with resources we bring in as individuals.

In my eye, then, the only "officer selection process" is on that keep criminals et al out and bring the communitarians in.

For me, I am a Community Servant...that is why I swithced from Engineering to teaching.  That is why I give violin lessons for the ridiculously low price of 10 dollars per hour to students that want to become musicians.  That is what I pay the dues of Cadets whose parents cannot because of situations beyond that families control. 

If I was not in CAP, I would be doing the same thing elsewhere as a Scout Master, or in a Squire Circle at the Knights of Columbus or raising money for such programs in the Optimists Club.  CAP officers me a unique form of service involving Emergency Services work as well as molding the future.

It would be the same with the ACA in the communities of the so called "fly over" country.  There will be interested people with the desire and without the resources.  They will not be able to traverse the nation to get the training.  Either ther standards will have to come down a bit...or...less than qualified people will have to fill the positions in a unit (the problem you seem to see in CAP)...or...the effort fails.  That will lead to heartbroken communitarians and cadets.  That is too high a price to pay.

A new unit is often started in isolation, with folks that, many times, have only their outside experiences and a regulation manual to get started. Competent qualified leaders are made in CAP, most time, out of the necessity of having a unit. 

That you would call us "worker bees" is a might insulting.  Especially to those of us that have invested so much time, energy and money in making it work with what we have.

And what is thus constant use of the term "gay?"  This is the second time you have used it here that I have read.  Is that how you see us in CAP?  Are we "CAP HAPPY?"  Are you insinuating that we are "homosexuals?"  Your use of such a phrase is less than professional...from any angle.  Consider use of a more fitting term.

[RiverAux]

It appears that the use of the term "gay" has become very common in teenagers and young adults as a synonym for "wimpy", "weak", "soft" or "unmanly" without necessarily meaning homosexual though obviously it started out meaning that based on common stereotypes about homosexuals.   

[Major Carrales]

It appears that the use of the term "gay" has become very common in teenagers and young adults as a synonym for "wimpy", "weak", "soft" or "unmanly" without necessarily meaning homosexual though obviously it started out meaning that based on common stereotypes about homosexuals.   

It would definitely seem so.  However, I think there are better terms to use here than such adolescent verbage. 

[NIN]

Actually, none of those people receive any training on how/when to use punitive PT as a training tool. No such training exists in the military. Those individuals also work under almost zero supervision.

I am not a DS, and have received no such training, but I do very effectively utilize this tool for training junior enlisted soldiers.

Not exactly true.  TRADOC Reg 350-6, I think it is, outlines the use of physical training for corrective training, and you can darn sure bet that Drill Sergeants and other cadre are fully briefed on the hows and wheres of that policy.  At least, the USAR drill sergeants I was working with this summer were.

Its corrective training, not "punitive PT."   Have I used it (not in CAP)?  Yep. Have I used it a bunch? Nope.  Maybe twice in 2 years.  And both times were an appropriate application of physical training for the purposes of corrective training.  Its used as an attention getter and not much more. 

The problem always comes from the folks who are the least capable of understanding that, however, and wind up "smoking" a platoon of cadets for some dumb reason.

You know what's key there? Neither of us are morons. We were selected for responsibility and underwent intensive training - not training that qualifies us to use this disciplinary tool, but training that weeds out people that suck. In that process we've proven our professionalism, personal discipline, core values, etc... and really just maturity.

I saw that in the WLC POC: "If you suck, you will not graduate WLC.."

Uh huh.

<snip>
Let me also note that there are a lot of misconceptions about what "bootcamp" is. There is almost no yelling there, at least in the modern Army version. There is a two-week period focused on getting in shape and instilling discipline, etc. After that, it is a fairly lax environment focused on training soldier skills. Full Metal Jacket is a fantasy, and most of what happens in that movie would get a DS thrown off the trail & out of the Army, if not in jail.

And as far as retention... actually, standardized application of a structured program, which may include things like disciplinary PT, would drastically increase retention. It's the standardized application, and conducted to standard aspects that are currently impossible for CAP to achieve. We are our worst enemy.

Unfortunately, you're right: too many cadets watch Full Metal Jacket as a training film...

Lot of seniors, too!

I don't know that it would drastically increase retention, but what you have to consider is that CAP has nearly deliberately been tremendously vague in defining hazing such that my definition and your definition and Joe Carrales' definitions may be so far apart as to be utterly unusable.  And with such broad interpretation, we lose the ability to standardize. 

Bringing this back home to USAC Corps... they are trying to avoid these pitfalls with: a MUCH stronger officer selection and training program; cadet leader training programs that do address how to apply tools like disciplinary PT; and by growing as an org at a pace that allows the spread of their program to the standards they expect. It'll take forever for them to achieve what CAP has, and they may never do it, but they're stronger right from the start for doing it right. In that respect I think CAP can take some major lessons.

Indeed. 

[DNall]

Neither of those things has anything to do with CAP, which first and foremost is a benevolent, non-combative organization.

Not to be overly picky here, but benevolent means you do no harm, and non-combat means you don't participate in direct engagements. Okay. I don't wear dresses & I don't ride unicycles. Do you know anything about what I actually do based on that statement? No, that's cause it's a completely wrong answer to what CAP "first and foremost" is.

It was only recently that USAF Basic Training started to stress ground-combat skills, either. For better or worse, that's not what the USAF is about.

The AF has been lazy for a long time. They're changing that now. 90% of the Army doesn't engage in direct ground combat, but you'll see supply units out running squad attack drills. The AF is now directly engaged on the ground on a wide scale, and are providing basic skills training in basic training. That's has little to do with what the AF is or is not about, and whole lot to do with basic skills necessary to survive in a combat zone regardless of job.

[DNall]

Actually, none of those people receive any training on how/when to use punitive PT as a training tool. No such training exists in the military. Those individuals also work under almost zero supervision.

I am not a DS, and have received no such training, but I do very effectively utilize this tool for training junior enlisted soldiers.

Not exactly true.  TRADOC Reg 350-6, I think it is, outlines the use of physical training for corrective training, and you can darn sure bet that Drill Sergeants and other cadre are fully briefed on the hows and wheres of that policy.  At least, the USAR drill sergeants I was working with this summer were.

I'm not certain such a brief is part of DS school, and if it is it's part of the fire hose treatment in which they remember nothing. I've never gotten such a brief, nor does anyone else in the Army need to have it in order to use this tool, nor am I bound by any TRADOC regs.

Its corrective training, not "punitive PT."   Have I used it (not in CAP)?  Yep. Have I used it a bunch? Nope.  Maybe twice in 2 years.  And both times were an appropriate application of physical training for the purposes of corrective training.  Its used as an attention getter and not much more. 

I was using his term, but yeah that's about it. I'm not a staff officer at those events, I'm a direct trainer & OIC of the training they're doing. That's working with people just coming into the Army, who are in the complete wrong mindset & have no desire to change. Our job there is to set them up for success. So, getting attention and establishing a discipline instantly is key. We then maintain & train on for the rest of the wknd and send them on their way. Our retention/ship rate since amping up to that level (versus being lax & just teaching classes) is up over 100%. I got a commendation medal out of that.

The problem always comes from the folks who are the least capable of understanding that, however, and wind up "smoking" a platoon of cadets for some dumb reason.

You know what's key there? Neither of us are morons. We were selected for responsibility and underwent intensive training - not training that qualifies us to use this disciplinary tool, but training that weeds out people that suck. In that process we've proven our professionalism, personal discipline, core values, etc... and really just maturity.

I think those two statements are in agreement.

Let me also note that there are a lot of misconceptions about what "bootcamp" is. There is almost no yelling there, at least in the modern Army version. There is a two-week period focused on getting in shape and instilling discipline, etc. After that, it is a fairly lax environment focused on training soldier skills. Full Metal Jacket is a fantasy, and most of what happens in that movie would get a DS thrown off the trail & out of the Army, if not in jail.

And as far as retention... actually, standardized application of a structured program, which may include things like disciplinary PT, would drastically increase retention. It's the standardized application, and conducted to standard aspects that are currently impossible for CAP to achieve. We are our worst enemy.

Unfortunately, you're right: too many cadets watch Full Metal Jacket as a training film...

Lot of seniors, too!

I don't know that it would drastically increase retention, but what you have to consider is that CAP has nearly deliberately been tremendously vague in defining hazing such that my definition and your definition and Joe Carrales' definitions may be so far apart as to be utterly unusable.  And with such broad interpretation, we lose the ability to standardize. 

I wasn't even talking about disciplinary PT anymore, more the program at large. Standardized, structured, professionally run, strong planning/organization by officers, disciplined execution... those things are all lacking in our program. When a kid comes to a military based program, they don't want to see their leaders untrained/incompetent, making up the schedule as they go, etc. They want to see military precision executed by professionals to established high standards, they want to be held to those standards, and they want to be shown an example and taught how to get there through training, mentoring, and experience.

Tags - MIKE