CAP Former Cadets Successes & Failures

[heliodoc]

 

To the above posts who really cares?

I personally was a double diamond and kid I know completed his Spaatz in approx 1980 is now a MX officer for the USAF hanging in Qatar as we speak... He pretty level headed and asked what in tarnation what I was doing in CAP.... he grew and out of CAP and could return

PLENTY O' ol cadets out there who completed something....me tooo!!

We all completed something.

What is CAP?? A foot race ?? Plenty o Spaatz cadets probably aren't all looking back at CAP and alot are

Who cares??

OH and thanks John, for your service, some of ALSO went on the military like you, got lucky and did not get drafted.....we still all wore the uniform and some of are former cadets in CAP who saw that the awards in CAP are pretty good BUT won't really get you a cup of coffee anywhere in my neighborhood and I wasn't going to wave my Earhart around to get ahead of other CAPers who signed on at the same time I did second time around.

Hey, but to each their own in CAP maybe there ought to be a Congresional mandated study to see how many successes and failures as to the cadet program and also to see how many former cadets return as seniors after say, let's say 25 to 30 yrs, and see what has or has NOT changed!!!

[Major Carrales]

It is more important to me for a cadet to have had a meaningful time in CAP be it 1, 2 or 3 years.

I count a success those time when a contributing adult members of society sees a modern CAP cadet and feels like that made a difference...that they fondly remember CAP.  I count a failure all those that feel it was a waste of time because of the politics, raw ambition and malaise that sometime manifests itself in CAP.

I pray for the former and condemn the latter.

[heliodoc]

Soo do I, Sparky

But there are folks out there as cadets now years later and saw the merit in the program and there are others such as I, second time around, saw some improvements.

But there are STILL problems such as the 39-1 debacle, ICL's that "hold weight" and many CAPers looking for the bling, lack of standardization in the G1000 program

Good program after 60 years..........STILL LOT of room for improvement in this organization to make it "more memorable!"

[Always Ready]

Two years ago, I attended a college out of state for my freshman year. I was surprised to find two other people on my floor in my dorm were former cadets. It was funny that we all connected with each other within a week of being at school. We didn't know each other before going to school together, but we remain friends. All three of us obtained the Mitchell Award, but only one of us was still in CAP (me and as a SM). We talked about our experiences, which were mostly good, what we had accomplished (one was a Hawk Mountain grad, the other went to NCC), and why they quit. We still talk through Facebook. Having a common experience (CAP) helped us connect and ease our transition into college life.

For me, the Mitchell Award does not mark the completion of the Cadet Program, but it shows the former cadet succeeded in the program. Just like in school, you don't need to be in the top 10% or even 50% of your class in order to graduate. As a mentor to cadets, I consider any cadet that gains something from the program a success in general. I try to give them back to their parents better than I found them. Completing the milestone awards, going to NCSAs, etc. are just icing on the cake.

Ned: I'm glad to hear that NHQ is working on establishing Cadet Alumni Association. You guys are doing some great work!

[PHall]

I'll have Level 4 completed next week after RSC.

Though how far any one person gets in the program is irrelevant to the discussion of what "completing" it is.

Many Senior make the argument Level 4 is the "completion" of the program because its the last level where you get any grade with it. 

That's not how it works.  If you don't make Level 5, you didn't complete the program.

Nice try, but we're talking about the cadet program here.

[Eclipse]

I'll have Level 4 completed next week after RSC.

Though how far any one person gets in the program is irrelevant to the discussion of what "completing" it is.

Many Senior make the argument Level 4 is the "completion" of the program because its the last level where you get any grade with it. 

That's not how it works.  If you don't make Level 5, you didn't complete the program.

Nice try, but we're talking about the cadet program here.

Yes, and how far any one person in particular makes it through the cadet program is irrelevant to any excuses or internal rationalization for someone else not completing the program, especially if  based on some mis-guided notion that Mitchell, Eaker, or "other" is "really" the completion of the program.

What they did in the 60's is also irrelevant - they used to have a Falcon award, too.

Spaatz completes the cadet program.

Wilson completes the Senior program.

Anything else, even if it meets the member personal goals or needs, is a DNF.

[Flying Pig]

Uhhhhhhh.....its a youth organization.  I think whats more important is what you do after, not what CADET rank you earned.

[AlphaSigOU]

Uhhhhhhh.....its a youth organization.  I think whats more important is what you do after, not what CADET rank you earned.

Exactimundo! While some of my contemporaries in the cadet program completed all 15 achievements (back then) or earned the Spaatz I topped off my cadet career with the Earhart and a single diamond (cadet major) on my shoulderboards before enlisting in the Air Force. Does it make me any less of an individual because 'I didn't finish what I'd started'? NO! Do I look down on my fellow senior members who only sport a Mitchell or lesser achievement on their ribbon rack? NO!

It ain't the blingage you sport... it's the lessons you learn in leadership and in aerospace education that makes you a better person.

[BillB]

PHall.  The Cadet COP wasn't in reality the highest cadet achievement. There were three achievements past the COP which earned a clasp on the cadet COP.  Jack Sorenson told me that the three old achievements equaled the Earhart (and now Fike) and Spaatz awards. The new 1960's program followed the old program in total number of achievements a cadet could complete. The percentages of cadets that completed the COP and earned the three clasps is roughly the same percentages that earn the Spaatz. Most cadets earned the COP and like todays Mitchell, dropped out of didn't progress in the program. The main difference between the old program and the current program, promotions were not tied to completing an achievement. You could be promoted or demoted by the Squadron Commander.

[AlphaSigOU]

PHall.  The Cadet COP wasn't in reality the highest cadet achievement. There were three achievements past the COP which earned a clasp on the cadet COP.  Jack Sorenson told me that the three old achievements equaled the Earhart (and now Fike) and Spaatz awards. The new 1960's program followed the old program in total number of achievements a cadet could complete. The percentages of cadets that completed the COP and earned the three clasps is roughly the same percentages that earn the Spaatz. Most cadets earned the COP and like todays Mitchell, dropped out of didn't progress in the program. The main difference between the old program and the current program, promotions were not tied to completing an achievement. You could be promoted or demoted by the Squadron Commander.

You mean Eaker? Feik is for completion of achievement 3.

[PA Guy]

PHall.  The Cadet COP wasn't in reality the highest cadet achievement. There were three achievements past the COP which earned a clasp on the cadet COP.  Jack Sorenson told me that the three old achievements equaled the Earhart (and now Fike) and Spaatz awards. The new 1960's program followed the old program in total number of achievements a cadet could complete. The percentages of cadets that completed the COP and earned the three clasps is roughly the same percentages that earn the Spaatz. Most cadets earned the COP and like todays Mitchell, dropped out of didn't progress in the program. The main difference between the old program and the current program, promotions were not tied to completing an achievement. You could be promoted or demoted by the Squadron Commander.

There was really not much incentive to complete the additional achievements.  Cadets had to contend with the Manning Table which allotted grade based on the size of the sqdn.  For instance, to be a C/Maj one not only had to complete the training but have 50 cadets in the sqdn and the one slot for a C/Maj had to be open.  C/Maj was also the highest cadet grade.  C/Lt Col and C/Col were temporary grades used only at encampments.  As a cadet I never saw a C/Maj and maybe 1 C/Cpt.

[heliodoc]

OMG!!

I am suprised that there are not more cadet suicides ''cuz they did not "complete" the cadet program by getting to the Spaatz

I can see it now, hehehehehe, cadets walking around calling themselves failures for not completing the "program"

Like pointed out earlier....its what you learn and how you apply it and not how much bling one can accumulate

SHHEEEESH

[Eclipse]

There's a difference between being a "failure", and not completing the program.

I know any number of cadets with "only" pips or a single diamond who simply ran out of time (or steam), that are assets to the program and gained a lot from it.

But starting to say things like ..."Mitchell is the defacto completion..." sets a bad precedent akin to the "Chief Experience").

[JohnKachenmeister]

Maybe I didn't explain myself right.

Question:  What is the point of the Spaatz?  To document "Success" or to document "Excellence?"

If it documents merely success, and everyone else is a failure, it loses a lot of its meaning.

If it documents excellence, it is more worthy of honor. 

The Sapaatz honors successful cadets who have the drive and the smarts to go a few extra miles.  It is for those who are not satisfied with being "Successful" in terms of meeting minimums, but for those who want to stand out.

For most of us, Mitchell equals success.  Earhart equals real good, and Spaatz equals exceptional.

But in ANY case, it is a youth program.  And sometimes a Mitchell cadet can out-achieve a Spaatzoid.  Sometimes a Mitchell cadet is a prison guard, and sometimes a Spaatz cadet is the prisoner.  Sometimes former cadets murder only their ex-girlfriends and are quickly forgotten, and sometimes they murder the president and are remembered forever.

It is just a starting point in the game of life.  It is simply what cards get dealt out before the first roll of the dice.  Where the game token goes is up to the player from then on!

[Stonewall]

When I first read the title of this thread I thought it was more in regards to post-CAP.  Former cadets and their successes as adults or lack there of.

In that regards, I have a few stories that represent both sides.  More successes than failures, but that's probably because we tend to detach ourselves from those who start down the path that leads to trouble.

I like to think that "success" isn't defined as someone doing something extraordinary, like Eric Boe.  Obviously he's a "success" as he can be considered a hero of sorts.  I've always thought astronauts were kind of hero-like.  I think "success" can be measured by a lot of things in each person's life and most are meassured differently.  Say, for instance, if someone joins the military, success can be measured by the rank they achieve.  But saying someone is enlisted vs. officer does not automatically say that the officer is more successfull than the enlisted guy.

Thoughts on this type of success?

:redx:

[JohnKachenmeister]

When I first read the title of this thread I thought it was more in regards to post-CAP.  Former cadets and their successes as adults or lack there of.

In that regards, I have a few stories that represent both sides.  More successes than failures, but that's probably because we tend to detach ourselves from those who start down the path that leads to trouble.

I like to think that "success" isn't defined as someone doing something extraordinary, like Eric Boe.  Obviously he's a "success" as he can be considered a hero of sorts.  I've always thought astronauts were kind of hero-like.  I think "success" can be measured by a lot of things in each person's life and most are meassured differently.  Say, for instance, if someone joins the military, success can be measured by the rank they achieve.  But saying someone is enlisted vs. officer does not automatically say that the officer is more successfull than the enlisted guy.

Thoughts on this type of success?

:redx:

"Success" is defined by the individual. 

What are a person's life goals?  Did the person achieve them?

Understand that life's goals are subject to change without notice.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Spaatz completes the cadet program.

Wilson completes the Senior program.

Anything else, even if it meets the member personal goals or needs, is a DNF.

I disagree. There is no "completion." Yeah, there's 16 achievements and five phases. But the training isn't why we're here. It's emergency services, aerospace education and the cadet program, to include all its facets, not just completion of achievements. Many of our members don't finish Phase 3 -- so what? If they're completing the mission, it shouldn't matter what bling they wear on their chest or pockets. Much of that bling gets obnoxious, anyway. Besides, it's irrelevant to much of our operational readiness and execution.

[Eclipse]

Besides, it's irrelevant to much of our operational readiness and execution.

Ah!

The Great Fallacy! 

[John Young]

I've worked with a number Spaatz cadets that I would define as successful and a number that I would define as unsuccessful. The same goes with any other level within the program.

The "level of progression" is not the definitive measure of achievement or success in the program, what that cadet does within the program and what that cadet does after the program is the definitive measure.

Spaatz is an honor and an impressive achievement, but it speaks more to priorities and drive than anything else.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Besides, it's irrelevant to much of our operational readiness and execution.

Ah!

The Great Fallacy!

You don't have to be a light colonel to be an incident commander. Heck, there are many company grade officers who, as ICs, tell oak leaves where to fly and pound the ground. Rank does NOT denote responsibility, and training to achieve grade is so detached from ops that the two only meet when someone first joins CAP. Find a way to put the two together, and maybe rank and grade (and "professional development" training) will mean more in CAP.