Hey fellow super rangers and those who aspire to be!!!
The purpose of this forum post is to open up discussion about the upcoming 2010 HMRS winter & summer schools! I must humbly ask that all who participate (at least try ;)) to stay on topic.
To kick it off. Hear is the link to the HMRS website http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/ and the link to the Ranger testing sheets http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/standardsandeval.htm that should give all who are interested an idea as to what will be required. Also, it is a good idea (if you plan to attend) to take an extra copy of the ranger testing sheet that you will be working on (that way you won't have to bother your Ranger Staff for another one).
I hope you all will enjoy this topic.
Have fun!! I know I will!
"These Things We Do So Others May Live"
As a former OHWG cadet and R/Adv grad (1st year), I too wish to encourage those interested in going. It is a great school that can, if done right, teach valuable skills, both personal and CAP related.
Remember, a HMRS grad is still a CAP member first and foremost.
Aspire to be a great CAP member and you will be a good "Ranger School" grad once you leave.
Reverse the order above and you will be something else entirely.
Quote from: C/TSgt RD on December 15, 2009, 06:28:31 PM
"These Things We Do So Others May Live"
Can you tell us who the first person to say this phrase was? And what year?? (this is a history nerd question) --And, no it was not some Ranger Staff Cadet.
Oh no. Another "super rangers" thread....
Quote from: capes on December 16, 2009, 01:49:46 PM
Oh no. Another "super rangers" thread....
No :P This is a thread to discuss the upcoming Ranger Schools.
Quote from: Spike on December 15, 2009, 09:25:42 PM
Quote from: C/TSgt RD on December 15, 2009, 06:28:31 PM
"These Things We Do So Others May Live"
Can you tell us who the first person to say this phrase was? And what year?? (this is a history nerd question) --And, no it was not some Ranger Staff Cadet.
And no, I am sorry I do not know who was the first to say that. :-\
And please stay on topic. It's not as if this has been even a rabbit trail. It's only five post's long...
I think what they are hinting at is their unhappiness with the ranger school and the inflated ego's that appear to roll out of them after every class.
Quote from: NCRblues on December 16, 2009, 02:28:43 PM
I think what they are hinting at is their unhappiness with the ranger school and the inflated ego's that appear to roll out of them after every class.
I have expressed a want to stay on topic about an upcoming NCSA that interest myself and others. I am not trying to discuss the ego's of Rangers who think the world of *themselves*. I am trying to discuss (as i said before) a summer activity. So I ask again that we please stay on topic. If you want to discuss the ego's of some rotten eggs (and yes not all Rangers have this ego) than you may create your own thread. Thank you for expressing your opinion.
P.S.
What you have expressed as "the inflated ego's that appear to roll out of them after every class" is not normally ego. It is a sense of accomplishment. A sense that the individual cadet can and is making a difference. What HMRS and CAP in general teaches will not only serve you in S&R it will serve you throughout life and throughout your CAP career. Is that the "ego" you are talking about?
MIKE....can we get a LOCK before this gets out of hand??
I almost got myslef suspended again. I can give lists of ego centered Cadets and Senior Members who came back to the Squadron and had to be reminded the Squadron is not the "Mountain".
What the heck is a "super Ranger" and "those that aspire to be"??
Anyway...I will give advice, as a person who went twice (once in 1994, and again in 2004): Be able to hike for 2 hours while carrying your equipment. Make sure you can run 2 miles. If you have allergies, they may be more severe at Hawk, bring your allergy meds.
Sir,
Did you not reguard anything I said? I am (was) only trying to talk about 2010 HMRS. A super ranger is non exestent. I was trying to be humorous. If people can not have an on topic discussion than please lock this topic. Obviously I touched a raw nerve. I had no intentions of doing so. Please accept my sincere apologies.
Thank you.
QuoteI was trying to be humorous
Was not funny and thus why I made the statements that I made so as to hedge this conversation but you took others bait and have some blame as to why this has now gone off topic.
Refer back to post 2 of this topic.
Hawk was one of my most favorite activities WIWAC.
I encourage any with the right attitude to attend and learn.
Quote from: C/TSgt RD on December 16, 2009, 03:07:32 PM
Sir,
Did you not regard anything I said? I am (was) only trying to talk about 20010 HMRS.
Thank you.
So what do you want me to answer? Do you have specific questions?? So, based on your reply, unless we went last year to Hawk....our info is not valid enough for you? I think I know more about Hawk than you do. Just because I have not gone since 2004, does not mean I lost all contact with those currently in charge.
What exactly do you want us to talk ABOUT HERE? List the topics, and I will try to accommodate you.
The new and improved HMRS 2010 thread,
The purpose of this forum post is to open up discussion about the upcoming 2010 HMRS winter & summer schools! I must humbly ask that all who participate to stay on topic.
To kick it off. Hear is the link to the HMRS website http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/ and the link to the Ranger testing sheets http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/standardsandeval.htm that should give all who are interested an idea as to what will be required. Also, it is a good idea (if you plan to attend) to take an extra copy of the ranger testing sheet that you will be working on (that way you won't have to bother your Ranger Staff for another one).
Thank you all for your participation and advice. All those who have been and plan to go or just have something interesting ES related or just plain funny please post hear. ;D
I hope you all will enjoy this topic.
Have fun!! I know I will!
Quote from: Spike on December 16, 2009, 03:19:36 PM
Quote from: C/TSgt RD on December 16, 2009, 03:07:32 PM
Sir,
Did you not regard anything I said? I am (was) only trying to talk about 20010 HMRS.
Thank you.
So what do you want me to answer? Do you have specific questions?? So, based on your reply, unless we went last year to Hawk....our info is not valid enough for you? I think I know more about Hawk than you do. Just because I have not gone since 2004, does not mean I lost all contact with those currently in charge.
What exactly do you want us to talk ABOUT HERE? List the topics, and I will try to accommodate you.
Sir,
I meant no offense and I stand duly corrected. I hope this thread can be fun for all.
OK.....I checked out the site and when I got to the part about a pink web belt being worn by the worst performer for the day.....well I have lost all respect for the school, its leadership and the participants that carry on this stupid tradition.
IF I did this in my Squadron, I would be fired, and sued by the parents of the Cadet I made wear a pink web belt. That is a form of HAZING. PERIOD.
PERIOD!!!
I'll bite. Will HMRS 2010 continue to flaunt the uniform regulations and wear unauthorized(and tacky) uniform items? (ascots, white boot laces, orange tshirts)
Quote from: davidsinn on December 16, 2009, 05:36:06 PM
I'll bite. Will HMRS 2010 continue to flaunt the uniform regulations and wear unauthorized(and tacky) uniform items? (ascots, white boot laces, orange tshirts)
I'm glad to know I'm not the only one to think so.
I am so horribly surprised that cap has not been sued yet over the treatment of the cadets there. I refuse to attend this, and have little respect for those that flaunt this school as something wonderful. I had several people apply for one of the "advanced" positions in my old unit, which were turned down. One of the senior members that applied was an air force SERE instructor and an IDMT and was told that his training did not count towards the advanced courses (he left cap shortly thereafter). I have to agree with spike on this one, this "school" is out of control.
The degrading treatment of cadets at Hawk is not necessary to train competent Emergency Services personnel. A few years back I had a cadet that wanted to "wear the orange scarf", well after about five staff training weekends I could keep my mouth shut no longer. I took the young man and showed him some old footage that was taken at one of our squadron training events, in it it showed him as a good leader one that was respected and well liked, I asked him if he liked how he currently was, his response was "well I'm a staff cadet now" . Long story short when he actually thought about it he did not like who he was becoming and did in fact drop out of the training. What never ceases to amaze me is that National is aware of what goes on up at Hawk and yet does nothing to stop it. :(
I think more cadets would be better served by what's done at the Colorado Wing GSAR School.
It's about training, not elitism or special uniform items or about having a cool but meaningless title, i.e., "Ranger."
Take a look:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SzvIsMC6B4
Quote from: Spike on December 16, 2009, 05:21:02 PM
OK.....I checked out the site and when I got to the part about a pink web belt being worn by the worst performer for the day.....well I have lost all respect for the school, its leadership and the participants that carry on this stupid tradition.
IF I did this in my Squadron, I would be fired, and sued by the parents of the Cadet I made wear a pink web belt. That is a form of HAZING. PERIOD.
PERIOD!!!
I agree but couldn't find the reference to the pink belt on the page but did find a photo of MG Courter attending the course as a BG, maybe that is the answer to the questions people are raising?
Ive had it. This forum is worthless. I have tried to carry on a constructive and fun thread but nobody wants to STAY ON TOPIC!!!! You all can't respect a cadet's simple wishes to carry on a conversation about preparing to go to Hawk Mountain in 2010. You all should be ashamed. You call your selves leaders?!?! I am one of those cadets who went to Hawk. What I saw there wasn't hazing. It was tough.... but not hazing. It all goes back to the age old saying.... "don't knock it tel you try it"... I don't understand how someone who have never even been to Hawk, who have just herd stories form others, who don't know squat about what he is talking about, can judge what goes on there. I for one am done with this forum.. and will not come back.
P.S.
This was only my first thread. Sad isn't it....
Quote from: C/TSgt RD on December 16, 2009, 06:58:05 PM
Ive had it. This forum is worthless. I have tried to carry on a constructive and fun thread but nobody wants to STAY ON TOPIC!!!! You all can't respect a cadet's simple wishes to carry on a conversation about preparing to go to Hawk Mountain in 2010. You all should be ashamed. You call your selves leaders?!?! I am one of those cadets who went to Hawk. What I saw there wasn't hazing. It was tough.... but not hazing. It all goes back to the age old saying.... "don't knock it tel you try it"... I don't understand how someone who have never even been to Hawk, who have just herd stories form others, who don't know squat about what he is talking about, can judge what goes on there. I for one am done with this forum.. and will not come back.
P.S.
This was only my first thread. Sad isn't it....
Yes, it is sad that your skin is so thin.
I completely agree with the cadet. He is the OP, nothing any of you have discussed has been even remotely related to the topic that he wanted to discuss.
It has nothing to do with his skin being "so thin," it has to do with the lot of you not being able to keep your mouths shut and opinions to yourself.
It has nothing to do with you talking about how much you dislike the program or hazing or whatever. It's purpose was to:
Quote
he purpose of this forum post is to open up discussion about the upcoming 2010 HMRS winter & summer schools!
Meaning that those who are going can ask questions, get answers, etc. The activity is going to happen, whether you like it or not. Cadets are going to go, whether you like it or not.
The next time you guys start a thread, I should just come in a **** all over it, completely destroying your thread and original intent.
I am so glad that CAPTalk is not representative of the rest of the organization...
Quote from: Rotorhead on December 16, 2009, 07:00:48 PM
Quote from: C/TSgt RD on December 16, 2009, 06:58:05 PM
Ive had it. This forum is worthless. I have tried to carry on a constructive and fun thread but nobody wants to STAY ON TOPIC!!!! You all can't respect a cadet's simple wishes to carry on a conversation about preparing to go to Hawk Mountain in 2010. You all should be ashamed. You call your selves leaders?!?! I am one of those cadets who went to Hawk. What I saw there wasn't hazing. It was tough.... but not hazing. It all goes back to the age old saying.... "don't knock it tel you try it"... I don't understand how someone who have never even been to Hawk, who have just herd stories form others, who don't know squat about what he is talking about, can judge what goes on there. I for one am done with this forum.. and will not come back.
P.S.
This was only my first thread. Sad isn't it....
Yes, it is sad that your skin is so thin.
Wow.... Insulting cadets now are we. Sir you are an exact example of what I am talking about. In one word arrogant. I ask that a moderator lock this forum.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 16, 2009, 07:07:39 PM
I completely agree with the cadet. He is the OP, nothing any of you have discussed has been even remotely related to the topic that he wanted to discuss.
It has nothing to do with his skin being "so thin," it has to do with the lot of you not being able to keep your mouths shut and opinions to yourself.
It has nothing to do with you talking about how much you dislike the program or hazing or whatever. It's purpose was to:
Quote
he purpose of this forum post is to open up discussion about the upcoming 2010 HMRS winter & summer schools!
Meaning that those who are going can ask questions, get answers, etc. The activity is going to happen, whether you like it or not. Cadets are going to go, whether you like it or not.
The next time you guys start a thread, I should just come in a **** all over it, completely destroying your thread and original intent.
I am so glad that CAPTalk is not representative of the rest of the organization...
Thanks for that jimmydeanno. :clap: I decided that online forums aren't for me.
You're upset that we did not get on here and sing the ranger's praises? That is the attitude I mentioned earlier. It seems like those that attend every year, cannot stand a little criticism of their precious program. This subject (along with others) is a sure fire way to get those that don't like it fired up. You have found out that not everyone loves this program; it's a tuff life out there. I had several cadets one time tell me they couldn't talk about what happens there, other cadets went and never ever showed back up to cap again, they were treated like scum because they could not handle the physical aspects of the program. There is no room for this kind of treatment in cap to children or adult volunteers. To make one where a pink belt, or to haze a cadet because he can't handle the extra pt is outrageous and should not be tolerated at any level. BTW, this is on topic. The topic was " hawk mountain ranger school" not, "only post here if you love it and never want to criticize it" or "only post great things about it here because we don't want to listen to our critics". Grow up and learn that people have opinions on a *gasp* public opinion discussion board.
Quote from: C/TSgt on December 16, 2009, 07:07:46 PM
Quote from: Rotorhead on December 16, 2009, 07:00:48 PM
Quote from: C/TSgt RD on December 16, 2009, 06:58:05 PM
Ive had it. This forum is worthless. I have tried to carry on a constructive and fun thread but nobody wants to STAY ON TOPIC!!!! You all can't respect a cadet's simple wishes to carry on a conversation about preparing to go to Hawk Mountain in 2010. You all should be ashamed. You call your selves leaders?!?! I am one of those cadets who went to Hawk. What I saw there wasn't hazing. It was tough.... but not hazing. It all goes back to the age old saying.... "don't knock it tel you try it"... I don't understand how someone who have never even been to Hawk, who have just herd stories form others, who don't know squat about what he is talking about, can judge what goes on there. I for one am done with this forum.. and will not come back.
P.S.
This was only my first thread. Sad isn't it....
Yes, it is sad that your skin is so thin.
Wow.... Insulting cadets now are we. Sir you are an exact example of what I am talking about. In one word arrogant. I ask that a moderator lock this forum.
Did you not say, "I for one am done with this forum.. and will not come back"
Yet, here you are, continuing to post.
When someone starts a topic on an internet board, they do not get to control how people will react to it or what they will say.
That's a risk you take.
Why should this topic be locked? Because people had honest reactions that were not what you wanted them to have?
I swear, y'all are stuck on stupid...
What part of "please stay on topic" is not clear in your minds?
The purpose of this thread was not to criticize or praise the hawk mountain program. It was intended to be a helpful resource for those who were going to the 2010 activities.
Your personal feelings or past experiences, good, bad, or indifferent, are completely irrelevant to the conversation at hand - so you might as well just keep your mouths shut.
The cadet started a discussion and a bunch of curmudgeony senior members who are so disenfranchised by the program felt it necessary to put words in the cadet's mouth about what the intent of his thread was.
This cadet is in no way, "in the wrong." Every single one of you who are continuing to further derail this thread, insult this cadet, and bash the program that he has signed up to participate in, is in the wrong.
If you hate HMRS that much and have these horrid stories of hazing, perhaps your complaints would better be directed at someone who can investigate and change things rather than here. In fact, I know I would prefer not having to read through all your crap to find something of value here. Actually, because of your juvenile reactions to this thread, there is nothing of value to it.
Instead you derail the thread from the very first post, argue with the cadet, telling him to grow thicker skin and if he doesn't like it, oh well.
I swear, if I could reach through my computer screen I'd slap half of you...
I hate senior members...
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 16, 2009, 07:24:34 PM
....fixing my message...
Oh, no, you don't. You said, "I hate senior members."
As for the other part you deleted, this is
precisely the right place to "open one's mouth."
"I hate senior members"?
....so...wait...you hate yourself then? Your profile says your 27 so..... :-\
Quote from: Rotorhead on December 16, 2009, 07:27:03 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 16, 2009, 07:24:34 PM
....fixing my message...
Oh, no, you don't. You said, "I hate senior members."
As for the other part you deleted, this is precisely the right place to "open one's mouth."
I wasn't trying to change my message, but most of my reply didn't make it over when I hit submit, just the last line...trust me, there isn't any attempt to change what I had said. In fact, if I could make it more insulting to the lot of you, I probably would.
Quote from: NCRblues on December 16, 2009, 07:28:40 PM
....so...wait...you hate yourself then? Your profile says your 27 so..... :-\
Yep, I am one. Doesn't change my opinion of them...
I did ask a question that was germane to the OP.
I asked if 2010 will continue to do something that previous years had.
The OP started a thread to discuss the program. When discussions began, the individual demanded that it "stay on topic". Every post was about it. It simply looked like the OP wanted to make an announcement, not have it discussed. I took other things from the OP's first post, but those are my opinions so I'm not going to post them.
Many people here have had negative interactions with graduates. The program has a large amount of "look at me" bling. Personally, I can live with a patch/badge and a hat. The tabs would show progression, I can live with that, although I think they should be a little more understated.
However, things like multiple colors of belts, multiple colors of scarves, orange shirts, white boot laces further remove anyone wearing them from their peers. If it was just a patch or a badge, I doubt many people would be so interested in it.
When it comes to discussion, people loving it or hating it is part of that. To demand that people only respond in a supportive manner isn't gonna happen.
Quote from: Rotorhead on December 16, 2009, 06:53:24 PM
I think more cadets would be better served by what's done at the Colorado Wing GSAR School.
It's about training, not elitism or special uniform items or about having a cool but meaningless title, i.e., "Ranger."
Take a look: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SzvIsMC6B4
While in Colorado Wing, I designed a badge for that program. It was pretty simple, just a badge, nothing additional. No ropes, belts, t-shirts, hats or anything added. I was thanked for my submission, but told that the school was more concerned about getting people educated with high quality training than they were about any badges, and that most of their training would apply to GT qualifications anyway.
Quote from: C/TSgt on December 16, 2009, 07:07:46 PMWow.... Insulting cadets now are we.
It still amazes me how people turn things into something they're not.
I will admit that we did get off of topic somewhat, BUT the poster in a way was asking for it by calling himself a super ranger!
I'm with Jimmy. I am not a fan of the "personality" of HMRS, but I like the idea of the school. I've said it many times; my disgust for a lot of the elitism, etc.
But this Cadet started what I believe to be a well intended topic. Senior members jumped on this and attacked without regard to this cadet's experience, age or desire to enjoy an activity.
I'm embarrassed on behalf of my fellow senior members; most of whom (who posted) I generally like.
Quote from: Stonewall on December 16, 2009, 08:29:12 PM
I'm with Jimmy. I am not a fan of the "personality" of HMRS, but I like the idea of the school. I've said it many times; my disgust for a lot of the elitism, etc.
But this Cadet started what I believe to be a well intended topic. Senior members jumped on this and attacked without regard to this cadet's experience, age or desire to enjoy an activity.
I'm embarrassed on behalf of my fellow senior members; most of whom (who posted) I generally like.
Not attacking the OP, but I can see how some of the replies added to the problems. Some of the statements came across as less than pleasant.
The school may be a great idea, but when it's thought of negatively, it's a problem. Even though the OP claimed that the "super rangers" statement was humorous, it was taken as a negative by people that have had bad experiences with Hawk Mountain "Rangers".
The "So that others may live" line has been thought of as particulary bold by many who know where it comes from. Pretty much anything mentioned in a post is subject to scrutiny, analysis, and sometimes ill will.
Well then. Go to Pawingcap.com/hawk
You (Cadet TSgt RD) can find everything you need to know. What specifically shall we now discuss? Are there unanswered questions you have about Hawk 2010.
Here are questions I have about Hawk 2010;
1) Does every one have to eat Rabbit stew?
2) Is the Pink Web Belt allowed to be presented to Senior Members who are "less than perfect rangers"?
3) Are the Expert Rangers going to be partying all week like last year?
4) Is the Cadet with asthma who never had any symptoms before going to be called weak during the march up the mountain when he has his first asthma attack? Like a certain Cadet last year who had to be taken to the local med center? (a neighboring Squadrons Cadet BTW)
5) Are pushups in the shower going to be part of training this year again?
Seriously.....all 5 items are issues that are now sitting at Maxwell.
What other things does anyone need to know before attending?? I am a wealth of knowledge, or I can direct you to the General Counsel at Maxwell should you have other questions.
Quote from: Spike on December 15, 2009, 09:25:42 PM
Quote from: C/TSgt RD on December 15, 2009, 06:28:31 PM
"These Things We Do So Others May Live"
Can you tell us who the first person to say this phrase was? And what year?? (this is a history nerd question) --And, no it was not some Ranger Staff Cadet.
"These things we do...
that others may live"
This motto hasbeen adopted by Search and Rescue (SAR) teams worldwide to signify thecore values of those who, at times, risk their own lives to save thelives of others. The phrase, which may have been adapted from itsoriginal Biblical origin, aptly describes the SAR goal of saving thosein need of rescue.
The motto "That others may live" has originsfrom the USAF Pararescue: reported by Time Magazine in 1966. Mostrecently, the quote was prominent in the movie, The Guardian,portraying U.S. Coast Guard rescue swimmers.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 16, 2009, 10:57:26 PM
The motto "That others may live" has origins from the USAF Pararescue: reported by Time Magazine in 1966.
Almost right, it is from Pararescue, but what general spoke the first recording of the phrase?? In the same recording he did say "These things we do so that others may live". If you are a "Hawk history buff", you will get your answer now.
Quote from: Spike on December 17, 2009, 01:51:16 AM
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 16, 2009, 10:57:26 PM
The motto "That others may live" has origins from the USAF Pararescue: reported by Time Magazine in 1966.
Almost right, it is from Pararescue, but what general spoke the first recording of the phrase?? In the same recording he did say "These things we do so that others may live". If you are a "Hawk history buff", you will get your answer now.
I ain't no Hawk buff, just more interested in the quote.
"... that others may live" was the ending of the Code of the Air Rescueman's as penned by BG Richard Kight (a LTC at the time and commander of the Air Rescue Service ..'46-'52)... i
mk
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 02:36:15 PM
"... that others may live" was the ending of the Code of the Air Rescueman's as penned by BG Richard Kight (a LTC at the time and commander of the Air Rescue Service ..'46-'52)... i
mk
You win! :clap: :clap: :clap:
ok trivia aside: my HMRS disclaimer...of sorts
As with all CAP activities your personal mileage (and experiences) may vary. That being said either to the positive or the negative of HMRS or any activity your opinions should be based on your personal experience rather than the experience of others...
poor.....Recon sucks because people told me they had a horrible time and the instructors are dumb.
not so poor....Others in my have squadron have told me that Recon school sucks; they had a bad experience there
I would expect that senior members here would make the same analogy.....go experience it for your self, then spew your opinion (good or bad or somewhere in between) based on what you saw/did...not what others told you
I would be more than happy to answer any questions about either winter or summer courses (of at least things I have knowledge of....specific incidents I doidnt see I cant really say much about)
mk
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 04:57:26 PM
ok trivia aside: my HMRS disclaimer...of sorts
As with all CAP activities your personal mileage (and experiences) may vary. That being said either to the positive or the negative of HMRS or any activity your opinions should be based on your personal experience rather than the experience of others...
poor.....Recon sucks because people told me they had a horrible time and the instructors are dumb.
not so poor....Others in my have squadron have told me that Recon school sucks; they had a bad experience there
I would expect that senior members here would make the same analogy.....go experience it for your self, then spew your opinion (good or bad or somewhere in between) based on what you saw/did...not what others told you
I would be more than happy to answer any questions about either winter or summer courses (of at least things I have knowledge of....specific incidents I doidnt see I cant really say much about)
mk
Normally I would like to form my own opinion but I flat refuse to spend that much money to go to an activity that hazes cadets like that and then publishes it on the net for all to see with the cadet hazee named!
Quote from: Spike on December 16, 2009, 10:40:20 PM
Well then. Go to Pawingcap.com/hawk
You (Cadet TSgt RD) can find everything you need to know. What specifically shall we now discuss? Are there unanswered questions you have about Hawk 2010.
Here are questions I have about Hawk 2010;
1) Does every one have to eat Rabbit stew?
2) Is the Pink Web Belt allowed to be presented to Senior Members who are "less than perfect rangers"?
3) Are the Expert Rangers going to be partying all week like last year?
4) Is the Cadet with asthma who never had any symptoms before going to be called weak during the march up the mountain when he has his first asthma attack? Like a certain Cadet last year who had to be taken to the local med center? (a neighboring Squadrons Cadet BTW)
5) Are pushups in the shower going to be part of training this year again?
Seriously.....all 5 items are issues that are now sitting at Maxwell.
What other things does anyone need to know before attending?? I am a wealth of knowledge, or I can direct you to the General Counsel at Maxwell should you have other questions.
I hope the answers will be such that the school will continue. We had similar situations about 9 years ago after some serious investigations found many problems with the curriclulim and, attitude of the instructors and staff. NHQ, at the time, planned on closing it. After some major revisions, the school remained open and, all went smoothly. I would hope the "old days" are not back as, we've spent some major cash on improvements to the site. If the school closes, maybe we can recoup the money by developing the site for "time shares or vacation rentals" ;D
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 04:57:26 PM
I would expect that senior members here would make the same analogy.....go experience it for your self, then spew your opinion (good or bad or somewhere in between) based on what you saw/did...not what others told you
I base my opinion of an activity on either attending a particular activity or seeing the results of an activity. My experience with the few hawks rangers I have met has been less than positive. I have no reason to go there just to form an opinion. For those who say not all hawk rangers are bad actors, remember, we have to go with what WE see, not what you say.
That being said, if a cadet or senior wants to go, fine. If they ask my opinion about, I'll give it to them. If they come back with a big head, there are ways to deflate the ego. Blue Beret has a similar image issue, but they're starting to get it under control.
I would like to think that if the NHQ staff including the National Legal officer did not identify the use of the pink belt to signify the squadron that did the poorest on inspections as hazing that it must not be (I mean maybe they kept him distracted from the mid day formation for the days he was there).... but I suppose that could be an interpretation one could get from that
But then we should avoid the use of any term that may signal out individuals or groups of individuals that dont succeed at the tasks we give them.... so use of the word failed would be out.....nor should we list anyone's rank or order of selection choices for NCSA's as it may make them feel inferior, and I suppose identifying honor cadet, or honor squadron would equally make someone feel "less than adequate" and well that whole cadet competetion thing is right out the window...everyone who came is a winner (because obviously if you arent the winner...you are the looser)
I'll bite that the push-up thing in the shower if substantiated, is hazing.....fairly clear cut there (its hard to identify that as a physical training evolution)
Ego deflation should occur to anyone in CAP...we may be cool but we arent that cool....I dont care if its HMRS, Blue Beret or encampment staff....I have seen it from just about any activity even whithin just a squadron organizations....
mk
Well like most things.....it is usually the exceptions that stand out in most people's minds.
I would probably say that most HMRS grads are just normal CAP members who do their job well and move on.
We always get one or two people who come back with an "all that" attitude....and not just from HMRS....I've seen it from encampment as well.
Ego issues are easy to handle....you ignore them. That is the meanest, dirtiest thing you can do to someone with and Ego problem. You don't ask them to come out to help, you don't task them to be instructors, you don't let them wear their extra bling (unit CC's still retain the right to dictate head gear and NCSA patchs).
Having said all that......I like the idea of HMRS and will attend one of these days.
The idea may be good, but the execution is flawed.
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 06:54:57 PM
I would like to think that if the NHQ staff including the National Legal officer did not identify the use of the pink belt to signify the squadron that did the poorest on inspections as hazing that it must not be (I mean maybe they kept him distracted from the mid day formation for the days he was there).... but I suppose that could be an interpretation one could get from that
But then we should avoid the use of any term that may signal out individuals or groups of individuals that dont succeed at the tasks we give them.... so use of the word failed would be out.....nor should we list anyone's rank or order of selection choices for NCSA's as it may make them feel inferior, and I suppose identifying honor cadet, or honor squadron would equally make someone feel "less than adequate" and well that whole cadet competetion thing is right out the window...everyone who came is a winner (because obviously if you arent the winner...you are the looser)
I'll bite that the push-up thing in the shower if substantiated, is hazing.....fairly clear cut there (its hard to identify that as a physical training evolution)
Ego deflation should occur to anyone in CAP...we may be cool but we arent that cool....I dont care if its HMRS, Blue Beret or encampment staff....I have seen it from just about any activity even whithin just a squadron organizations....
mk
52-10
Quote1c. Hazing. Hazing is defined as any conduct wherebysomeone causes another to suffer or to be exposed to any activity thatis cruel, abusive, humiliating, oppressive, demeaning, or harmful.Actual or implied consent to acts of hazing does not eliminate theculpability of the perpetrator. Examples of hazing include usingexercise as punishment or assigning remedial training that does not fitthe deficiency (such as making a cadet run laps for having poorlyshined shoes). Hazing, as defined in this policy, is considered a formof physical abuse and the reporting procedures for physical abuse mustbe followed.
A pink belt seems demeaning and humiliating to me. Especially if it makes the cadet cry and then they post his picture on the internet, name him and point out that he's crying because he has to wear it.
Your middle paragraph is not what I'm wanting. I hate the idea of everybody gets a trophy and crap like that. We are not equal. That's life. I get it. We do not need to point and laugh at the underdog though. I was the target of hazing my whole life and it will be a cold day in hell before it's allowed to happen in front of me. I would have no problem calling out a senior officer that allows crap like that to happen.
QuoteA pink belt seems demeaning and humiliating to me. Especially if it makes the cadet cry and then they post his picture on the internet, name him and point out that he's crying because he has to wear it.
If you could point me to that particular posting, I was not aware of it.....PM would be fine or here doesnt matter to me.
......so back to the topic (I think hazing is a separate thread
I have to agree there are parts of the HMRS program that could use improvement. For the end user its all about what you are looking to get out of the program:
If you are looking for "cool uniform bling" then you are in luck..no shortage there...course out of the Wing you are likely to feel the wrath.....
If you are looking to say you are a RANGER...because Army Rangers are cool...well you are misguided, and will likely feel the wrath...in or out of the PAWG
If you are looking for an exercises in teamwork and leadership...it has that
If you are looking to challenge yourself physically or mentally, well it kind of has that (pretty much dont say I quit and you're pretty much going to finish...even if they have to drag you thru) I would recommend PJOC if thats your thing
If you are looking to learn outdoor skills, spend time in the woods, it definitely has that (there is nothing that flushes....)
If you are looking for CAP GSAR training...it does have that....but I would go with NGSAR or you own local/Wing program; what it does cover are geared to what happens in PAWG
If you are looking for uniques SAR skills it has that.....rope/steep terrain rescue, medical operations and wilderness survival
details.......more than happy to discuss
mk
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 09:19:46 PM
QuoteA pink belt seems demeaning and humiliating to me. Especially if it makes the cadet cry and then they post his picture on the internet, name him and point out that he's crying because he has to wear it.
If you could point me to that particular posting, I was not aware of it.....PM would be fine or here doesn't matter to me.
Look at the Hawk site and click on the newsletters for each day from last year's Hawk. I believe it is second or third day. Better do it quick, before PA WING takes them down though!
Quote from: Spike on December 17, 2009, 09:57:59 PM
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 09:19:46 PM
QuoteA pink belt seems demeaning and humiliating to me. Especially if it makes the cadet cry and then they post his picture on the internet, name him and point out that he's crying because he has to wear it.
If you could point me to that particular posting, I was not aware of it.....PM would be fine or here doesn't matter to me.
Look at the Hawk site and click on the newsletters for each day from last year's Hawk. I believe it is second or third day. Better do it quick, before PA WING takes them down though!
Looks like they beat us to it. Won't load.
I did look at the other newsletters. Frankly, I don't see anything that's particularly hard. AAMOF, I see a bunch of stuff that's, well, chicken droppings. White laces??? Really? Photographing "gigs"? Please. I see a bunch of lard-butt SMs running around playing ranger. Even the SMs who are there as instructors and students aren't in any semblance of a uniform. Red bibs? That went out years ago. I don't even think the Army has those branch color bibs anymore (and the Army used to be crazy about that crap).
This thing appears to be a drain on resources. Get rid of it and put more resources into NGSAR. Much better. More professional.
http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/news/20070708-hawk-news.pdf
Quote from: davidsinn on December 17, 2009, 10:15:14 PM
http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/news/20070708-hawk-news.pdf
Ah, there it is. I'm not sure that the cadet is crying, but the whole thing is dumb IMO.
That cadet may or may not be crying, but just by making us think he could be is wrong. That little article smells of sarcasm, in a horrible way to cover up a shameful item at this event. No PAO in the world should ever place a picture of a cadet possibly crying on a public newsletter. That is wrong, just plain wrong.
I have a couple of questions for those that have attended.
1. What are the ascots for? I thought the pistol belts marked the staff. So now you have ranger tabs, ascots, boot laces AND pistol belts?
2. In several of the pictures, cadets can be seen carrying around neck bracers. Are we training the cadets to place these immobilization units on injured personnel?
Quote from: NCRblues on December 18, 2009, 12:02:30 AM2. In several of the pictures, cadets can be seen carrying around neck bracers. Are we training the cadets to place these immobilization units on injured personnel?
If we are....is there something wrong with that? IMHO that is something we do need to teach our ground teams.
At least in this state, you have to have an EMT license to use one of them, so I am not against this being taught, but a disclaimer needs to be used, and I was wondering if one was given.
Quote from: NCRblues on December 18, 2009, 12:27:10 AM
At least in this state, you have to have an EMT license to use one of them, so I am not against this being taught, but a disclaimer needs to be used, and I was wondering if one was given.
Which state? I'd be interested in reading the state statutes/regulations/scope of practice regarding the use of c-collars.
spinal immobilization is an EMT-B level skill here as well. Not part of the training in any DOT first responder class. It was the same when I was in Massachusetts as well.
NREMT-I with advanced protocols for trauma and cardiac emergencies.....
After looking up the law, it simply states that cervical collar devices should be utilized as little as possible by untrained personnel. Spoke to soon, I was wrong my apologies.
disregard. :)
In some misguided and pointless boyscoutish plan developed in the 70's it goes something like this, and this was state wide, not just for the school:
Black pistol belt-Expert Ranger
Red Pistol Belt -Master Medic
White pistol belt everyone else
White scarf-Team Commander
Green scarf-first year medic
Red scarf-2nd year or fully qualified medic
Infantry Blue scarf-Team member
Orangescarf-Full staff member (school only)
Yello scarf-Junior staff member (school only)
The ascots were meant to be a means to rapidly identify team postions. Now they are pretty much for show and and pretty much annoying.
Tabs were meant as a way to identify capability/skill sets, now they are a way to show your award....pointless, but we have a buttload of other awards to show accomplishment so ...
White laces were for parade (ie showing off) stolen from USAF SP's I imagine....also very silly.
I have to agree that there are a lot of silly practices that eat up valuable training time. For exmple, years ago I pulled the medic students from the noon formation, it was 45 minutes more or less that they could be training... same goes for the team commanders course and the survival course.
There are split shchools of thought...one group says its a leadership lab excercise for cadets using SAR as the medium, another says its a SAR school, and yet another says its both (or more specifically why cant it be both)...no one really wants to pin it down to one or the other....SAR school you loose funding from cadet programs..... Leadership lab you loose ES funding. Personally I think the "wasted" resources and time wont go away....not until one group fully takes ownership.
mk
In the published newsletter posted above, what the heck does Captain Kee have over his Civil Air Patrol tape!?
That is the uh "ranger tab" ::)
Is that in the uh "CAPM 39-1"?
HMRS instructor tab.....its a little used rating for persons that have "expert" level knowledge in a minimum of 3 seperate skill areas/specialty certifications beneficial to the program but for what ever reason they dont pursue the "expert" rating...usually its something special that's considered a special examination test at the expert ranger rating. Expert rangers can test expert candidates in most skills, a few though require a special sign off due to the in depth nature of the material; ie rope rescue requires NFPA 1006 cettification/Fire academy ropes instructor certification; firearms requires a NRA or military firearms instructor cert adn edible plants requires the examiners to know more than the number required for the basic test.... http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/forms/InstructorTestingSheetMar2007.pdf (http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/forms/InstructorTestingSheetMar2007.pdf)
mk
Quote from: C/TSgt on December 16, 2009, 07:11:01 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 16, 2009, 07:07:39 PM
I completely agree with the cadet. He is the OP, nothing any of you have discussed has been even remotely related to the topic that he wanted to discuss.
It has nothing to do with his skin being "so thin," it has to do with the lot of you not being able to keep your mouths shut and opinions to yourself.
It has nothing to do with you talking about how much you dislike the program or hazing or whatever. It's purpose was to:
Quote
he purpose of this forum post is to open up discussion about the upcoming 2010 HMRS winter & summer schools!
Meaning that those who are going can ask questions, get answers, etc. The activity is going to happen, whether you like it or not. Cadets are going to go, whether you like it or not.
The next time you guys start a thread, I should just come in a **** all over it, completely destroying your thread and original intent.
I am so glad that CAPTalk is not representative of the rest of the organization...
Thanks for that jimmydeanno. :clap: I decided that online forums aren't for me.
Try your questions here: http://forums.cadetstuff.org/ (http://forums.cadetstuff.org/)
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 16, 2009, 07:40:30 PM
Yep, I am one. Doesn't change my opinion of them...
Means you haven't eaten enough doughnuts >:D
Quote from: lordmonar on December 17, 2009, 07:23:39 PM
Well like most things.....it is usually the exceptions that stand out in most people's minds.
I would probably say that most HMRS grads are just normal CAP members who do their job well and move on.
We always get one or two people who come back with an "all that" attitude....and not just from HMRS....I've seen it from encampment as well.
Ego issues are easy to handle....you ignore them. That is the meanest, dirtiest thing you can do to someone with and Ego problem. You don't ask them to come out to help, you don't task them to be instructors, you don't let them wear their extra bling (unit CC's still retain the right to dictate head gear and NCSA patchs).
Having said all that......I like the idea of HMRS and will attend one of these days.
I'll go with you. I still owe Mark an adult beverage from our EMS days.
Quote from: NCRblues on December 18, 2009, 12:53:18 AM
After looking up the law, it simply states that cervical collar devices should be utilized as little as possible by untrained personnel. Spoke to soon, I was wrong my apologies.
No problem - I was genuinely curious, not seeking to take anyone to task :)
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 18, 2009, 02:49:30 AM
Is that in the uh "CAPM 39-1"?
Nope, but these people clearly feel they can ignore the regs.
Great thing to "teach," huh?
I for one would actually like to go to Hawk one day. I just can't get over the poor reputation that the school has. I don't post much, but I lurk quite a bit. it seems like once a year some Hawk "super ranger" thread gets started, and the general consensus is that, though a hoo-rah type of program, the attitude is just wrong there.... I just don't get that kind of "expert ranger" attitude, which will prevent me from ever wasting my time on that school. Perhaps I shouldn't judge unless I actually go there.
I have been to NESA a couple of times in a few of the different schools there, both as a cadet and as a senior member. One of the things that impressed me was that the GSAR Commandant made a very specific point in his opening briefing (all three times I was there) that graduating from NESA does NOT make you any type of expert. That graduating from the school is only the beginning of one's training, and he encouraged people to learn more skills, and keep practicing the ones they gain. To me, THAT seems like the right attitude.... - just my 2 cents
Quote from: fyrfitrmedic on December 18, 2009, 08:52:26 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on December 18, 2009, 12:53:18 AM
After looking up the law, it simply states that cervical collar devices should be utilized as little as possible by untrained personnel. Spoke to soon, I was wrong my apologies.
No problem - I was genuinely curious, not seeking to take anyone to task :)
This is kind of a double edged sword in my opinion. Do many CAP teams carry backboards and head blocks? What about other packaging equipment? Do they have any formal certification in there use?
Of course, I'm sure the medical instructors are skilled and experienced, but I don't know how comfortable I'd be with accepting care from a bunch of teenagers in camo.
Quote from: capes on December 18, 2009, 09:02:13 PM
I for one would actually like to go to Hawk one day. I just can't get over the poor reputation that the school has. I don't post much, but I lurk quite a bit. it seems like once a year some Hawk "super ranger" thread gets started, and the general consensus is that, though a hoo-rah type of program, the attitude is just wrong there.... I just don't get that kind of "expert ranger" attitude, which will prevent me from ever wasting my time on that school. Perhaps I shouldn't judge unless I actually go there.
I have been to NESA a couple of times in a few of the different schools there, both as a cadet and as a senior member. One of the things that impressed me was that the GSAR Commandant made a very specific point in his opening briefing (all three times I was there) that graduating from NESA does NOT make you any type of expert. That graduating from the school is only the beginning of one's training, and he encouraged people to learn more skills, and keep practicing the ones they gain. To me, THAT seems like the right attitude.... - just my 2 cents
I think perception is everything with these type programs.
I have not run into any "expert ranger" types that have been to Hawk in my years in the program, other than their little ranger tab thing that drives me nuts but I hear about "them" all the time. I don't spend a lot of time around these people and I don't follow or fixate on the program because it doesn't interest me.
However I will not consider going to NESA because I have run into the "super trooper" ego crap from members who have gone there and are on staff. I get tired of the "NESA Speak" (all two and three letter abbreviations and "code" talk) and the attitude that if I haven't been and taken the blood oath that you can't do missions like those that have. That being said, members who have been that I know and not on staff don't give off that attitude. I did consider going quite a while back, but won't even think about it now.
Again those are the perceptions I get because of the people from those programs I have been associated with or worked with in CAP.
I won't even start on the blue beanie bunch.................
What do you mean by "NESA Speak"?
Quote from: JThemann on December 18, 2009, 09:06:04 PM
Quote from: fyrfitrmedic on December 18, 2009, 08:52:26 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on December 18, 2009, 12:53:18 AM
After looking up the law, it simply states that cervical collar devices should be utilized as little as possible by untrained personnel. Spoke to soon, I was wrong my apologies.
No problem - I was genuinely curious, not seeking to take anyone to task :)
This is kind of a double edged sword in my opinion. Do many CAP teams carry backboards and head blocks? What about other packaging equipment? Do they have any formal certification in there use?
Of course, I'm sure the medical instructors are skilled and experienced, but I don't know how comfortable I'd be with accepting care from a bunch of teenagers in camo.
Well that is one of my question....is there a formal certification for spinal injury management? I know back in the day when I was a BSA lifeguard instructor and a Red Cross Lifeguard instructor we taught backboard, C-Collors and head blocks. This was also taught in the old Advanced First Aid Course.
I don't really see this is as a very technical skill....and of course all first aid actions should take into account the access to professional medical care....but for back country first aid....with the right equipment....I think this is a vital skill that needs to be taught, especially if we are also teaching patient transport.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 18, 2009, 09:43:37 PM
Quote from: JThemann on December 18, 2009, 09:06:04 PM
Quote from: fyrfitrmedic on December 18, 2009, 08:52:26 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on December 18, 2009, 12:53:18 AM
After looking up the law, it simply states that cervical collar devices should be utilized as little as possible by untrained personnel. Spoke to soon, I was wrong my apologies.
No problem - I was genuinely curious, not seeking to take anyone to task :)
This is kind of a double edged sword in my opinion. Do many CAP teams carry backboards and head blocks? What about other packaging equipment? Do they have any formal certification in there use?
Of course, I'm sure the medical instructors are skilled and experienced, but I don't know how comfortable I'd be with accepting care from a bunch of teenagers in camo.
Well that is one of my question....is there a formal certification for spinal injury management? I know back in the day when I was a BSA lifeguard instructor and a Red Cross Lifeguard instructor we taught backboard, C-Collors and head blocks. This was also taught in the old Advanced First Aid Course.
I don't really see this is as a very technical skill....and of course all first aid actions should take into account the access to professional medical care....but for back country first aid....with the right equipment....I think this is a vital skill that needs to be taught, especially if we are also teaching patient transport.
There's no certification, like there is for CPR or AED or First Aid, but it is certainly a skill thats taught to be performed in a specific way, and we are tested on that way at the Academy off of a New York State Skills Evaluation form.
Actually, we just got a protocol change in that allows clinicals to elect not to perform full spinal immbolization in certain cases (no distracting injury, no AMS or ETOH, witness to the accident, no signifiant MoI) to reduce the secondary complications of spinal immbolization or to reduce the cost for needless immbolization.
Don't take this the wrong way Major Harris, but what era of first aid at you talking about? In New York State at least, the old Red Cross Advanced First Aid course was the foundation of the first EMT courses.
I took ARC Advanced First Aid in 1977! ;D
I was an instructor trainer for First Aid, CPR, Life Guarding, and Swimming from around 1989-1997.
As far as training to standards.....I don't know but would assume that HMRS uses a SQTR like training matrix to conduct and rewiew their training.
Quote from: cap235629 on December 18, 2009, 12:44:18 AM
spinal immobilization is an EMT-B level skill here as well. Not part of the training in any DOT first responder class.
Wrong. It is part of the Brady 7th edition First Responder textbook, though it does mention that this might not be allowed for everyone.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 18, 2009, 11:22:18 PM
I took ARC Advanced First Aid in 1977! ;D
I was an instructor trainer for First Aid, CPR, Life Guarding, and Swimming from around 1989-1997.
As far as training to standards.....I don't know but would assume that HMRS uses a SQTR like training matrix to conduct and rewiew their training.
True, but is Hawk training accedited by any state or national organization? Even their sign off forms don't totally match the CAP forms if memory serves.
Quote from: JThemann on December 19, 2009, 12:56:47 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on December 18, 2009, 11:22:18 PM
I took ARC Advanced First Aid in 1977! ;D
I was an instructor trainer for First Aid, CPR, Life Guarding, and Swimming from around 1989-1997.
As far as training to standards.....I don't know but would assume that HMRS uses a SQTR like training matrix to conduct and rewiew their training.
True, but is Hawk training accedited by any state or national organization? Even their sign off forms don't totally match the CAP forms if memory serves.
Is any CAP training accreditied by any state or national organisation (other than CAP :D)?
We're talking medical training, which can be a big Charlie Foxtrot if something happens...
I think they use http://www.ashinstitute.org/ (http://www.ashinstitute.org/) but sarmed1 would have to verify.
ECSI is the program that is used for initial entry medic training; 36 hour wilderness First Aid with proffesional CPR forms the base certification. The texts are written by AAOS. Qualified medics (the "red Scarves") are required to have at minimum First Responder Certification, we provide via AAOS/ECSI if needed but suprising most go out and get it outside of HMRS and usually continue by running with a local fire company or ambulance squad. Progression to the other two medical levels (Senior and Master Medic) require certification as an EMT of higher.
AAOS text for wilderness includes boith spinbal immobilization skills and C-spine clearing in the field as mentioned above. The text and teaching outline talks about immobilization using improvised equipment primarily; we folow that up with regular EMS gear; when they test its using the NREMT standard as the basis of pass/fail.
If you are interested on the standards and Eval page of the HMRS web site, the skill sheets for all 4 medic qualifications are listed there as well as the skill sheets for everything except Expert Ranger. For non medical skills, the tasks that match up to GTM/GTL are identified by the GT task number and are tested using the same evaluation griteria as GTM/GTL. Obviously HMRS specific tasks are listed without the task numbers.
mk
Under whose authority are the HMRS tasks certified? Are they just made up ("Hey, this looks like a cool thing to do") or is there a formal process where the tasks are examined and deemed tasks necessary to accomplish a particular mission? As a former Army Special Forces training developer, I'm kinda shocked that you folks are using tasks that are just HMRS tasks. That may be part of the problem.
In the RM (and probably in any other type of training organization), the tasks have to go through an entire process including having the customer (the unit receiving the trained individual) saying "yea verily", this task is something we need our soldiers/marines/airmen/sailors/guardsmen trained in. Having presided over one of these boards for JFK Center, I was surprised that there were units that said some of our most "sacred tasks" (had been taught since von Steuben was a Lt) were a waste of time - they didn't need them. I'm sure that NREMT has a similar process. When you teach what you think the customer needs instead of what the customer TELLS you they need, then you're just initiating into a club, not training for a mission.
I tell you for certain that SF soldiers going through the "Q" course right now are getting training that I didn't in the mid 70s. I can also tell you that they've gone back to some things that were lost in the 90s that in that environment were deemed irrelevant.
From what I can see, some of the training there is good. Some of it is crap. Some of it is just initiation into the club. Seems to be a great deal of wasted time.
Quote from: Gunner C on December 19, 2009, 10:52:13 PMIn the RM (and probably in any other type of training organization), the tasks have to go through an entire process including having the customer (the unit receiving the trained individual) saying "yea verily", this task is something we need...
I got to call BS on this one Gunner. I was a USAF training manager for many years. There is NO formal procedure for most tasks to be certified by outside agencies....You just make them up, provide the training reference and press on.
I got no problem with local training standards for local training issues. In the case of HMRS....standard GTM training does not fit their need so they add training. No need to ask for permission. No need to seek accredidation.
When I say HMRS specific task, I am refering to those not part of the National Curriculum, that Hawk teaches because they are part of what people (customers) are expecting out of PA's Ranger teams (or what they sell themselves as being capable of doing They do constant program review at looking what tasks they are doing, are they usefull do they need to be updated or eliminated. Rope rescue work is one of these areas:as the outside standards evolve so do the task for Ranger grade progression...WIWAC pretty much all you had to do was tie a few knots, be able to demonstrate a safe rappel (2 carribiners on a piece of rope tied into a swiss seat) and describe how to raise and lower a stretcher .....today well I wont get into explaining the NFPA 1670/1006 standard.
I can speak personally from the medical side, the same thing occurs there...as those of us in the medical field know, standards change sometimes weekly. I have been involved in helping rewrite the training curriculum and qualification standards for all 4 medical grades
mk
Quote from: lordmonar on December 19, 2009, 11:05:45 PM
Quote from: Gunner C on December 19, 2009, 10:52:13 PMIn the RM (and probably in any other type of training organization), the tasks have to go through an entire process including having the customer (the unit receiving the trained individual) saying "yea verily", this task is something we need...
I got to call BS on this one Gunner. I was a USAF training manager for many years. There is NO formal procedure for most tasks to be certified by outside agencies....You just make them up, provide the training reference and press on.
I got no problem with local training standards for local training issues. In the case of HMRS....standard GTM training does not fit their need so they add training. No need to ask for permission. No need to seek accredidation.
So an AF service school just teaches what it wants to? I'm sure that AETC has the same thing - AETC writes the training programs and the schools execute. Unit training is completely different.
Quote from: Gunner C on December 20, 2009, 12:28:45 AMSo an AF service school just teaches what it wants to? I'm sure that AETC has the same thing - AETC writes the training programs and the schools execute. Unit training is completely different.
When an AETC course is rewritten it goes through a validation phase......but HMRS is not...nor is any CAP course an AETC course.
Hello? ::::tap, tap, tap:::: Is this thing on? :o
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 19, 2009, 02:37:27 PM
ECSI is the program that is used for initial entry medic training; 36 hour wilderness First Aid with proffesional CPR forms the base certification. The texts are written by AAOS. Qualified medics (the "red Scarves") are required to have at minimum First Responder Certification, we provide via AAOS/ECSI if needed but suprising most go out and get it outside of HMRS and usually continue by running with a local fire company or ambulance squad. Progression to the other two medical levels (Senior and Master Medic) require certification as an EMT of higher.
mk
Thabks Mark, I got ECSI mixed up with ASHI.
Tom
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 18, 2009, 02:21:41 AM
In the published newsletter posted above, what the heck does Captain Kee have over his Civil Air Patrol tape!?
More questions:
What's that chain hanging off his buttonhole, and does it lead to a set of keys? That's no whistle lanyard (which should go around the neck, not be worn like a cop) — it should be tied to a dog leash.
And what's with the hat and the patch on it? Who really thinks all that silly bling is reasonable? Anyone in the Keystone State ever see CAPM 39-1? No wonder we get ridicule, when we turn out for a mission looking like the Barnum and Bailey Clown School.
/rant
No its a whistle chain.....thats the way HMRS wants it to be worn....
Of course they have seen the 39-1...however when you are told to do something/wear something by corporate officers that run the show...what do you do? and please dont throw the integrity card/core value thing out there...
The former PAWG commander said wear the LL patch on the Left shoulder (it may even have been a policy letter), the current CC has not rescinded it
The school commander (the MOWG commander) said wear the orange/red t-shirt, pin on grade on a ball cap and ranger tabs...and will tell you it was approved by the NB, they are just waiting for it to be incorporated into the new 39-1; and he is backed by the current PAWG commander (and a few others at the NB level)
The National Commander has been there and worn her Orange hat and pretty sure they had her in an orange T-shirt (and there was no "....dont wear this when you leave 'cause its not really legal..." speech at the end)
http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/summer.htm (http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/summer.htm)....about 3/4 of the way down
And no they dont have a supplement to 39-1 (on their site or National)
No there is no published Ranger Supplement (...though I have seen the draft...even contributed some)
If you dont like it complain to NHQ...but I bet holding your breath waiting for an answer or intervention isnt a good idea
mk
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 21, 2009, 07:34:21 AM
No its a whistle chain.....thats the way HMRS wants it to be worn....
Of course they have seen the 39-1...however when you are told to do something/wear something by corporate officers that run the show...what do you do? and please dont throw the integrity card/core value thing out there...
The former PAWG commander said wear the LL patch on the Left shoulder (it may even have been a policy letter), the current CC has not rescinded it
The school commander (the MOWG commander) said wear the orange/red t-shirt, pin on grade on a ball cap and ranger tabs...and will tell you it was approved by the NB, they are just waiting for it to be incorporated into the new 39-1; and he is backed by the current PAWG commander (and a few others at the NB level)
The National Commander has been there and worn her Orange hat and pretty sure they had her in an orange T-shirt (and there was no "....dont wear this when you leave 'cause its not really legal..." speech at the end)
http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/summer.htm (http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/summer.htm)....about 3/4 of the way down
And no they dont have a supplement to 39-1 (on their site or National)
No there is no published Ranger Supplement (...though I have seen the draft...even contributed some)
If you dont like it complain to NHQ...but I bet holding your breath waiting for an answer or intervention isnt a good idea
mk
I'll just stick with the last line on that "website": ALL LINKS SHOWN ON THIS SITE DO NOT INDICATE AN ENDORSEMENT BY CIVIL AIR PATROL OR ITS AGENTS OF THE MATERIAL OR PRODUCTS PRESENTED. THE INFORMATION PRESENTED IS FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE END USER.
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 21, 2009, 07:34:21 AM
...And no they dont have a supplement to 39-1 (on their site or National)
No there is no published Ranger Supplement (...though I have seen the draft...even contributed some)
If you dont like it complain to NHQ...but I bet holding your breath waiting for an answer or intervention isnt a good idea
mk
Wonder if CAP-USAF is aware of HMRS's uniform violations. Or HAF. After they finished laughing, what would they do?
See here (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1851&p_created=1158847849&p_sid=WRB_u*Pj&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_srch=1&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9Nyw3JnBfcHJvZHM9JnBfY2F0cz0wJnBfcHY9JnBfY3Y9JnBfc2VhcmNoX3R5cGU9YW5zd2Vycy5zZWFyY2hfbmwmcF9wYWdlPTEmcF9zZWFyY2hfdGV4dD1IYXdr&p_li=&p_topview=1) for the documentation where the NB voted to allow them.
Hawk items are authorized on the BBDU and rumor is that they are pending the USAF for approval on the BDU.
But this was 3 years ago.
Quote from: SilverEagle2 on December 21, 2009, 08:49:26 PM
See here (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1851&p_created=1158847849&p_sid=WRB_u*Pj&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_srch=1&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9Nyw3JnBfcHJvZHM9JnBfY2F0cz0wJnBfcHY9JnBfY3Y9JnBfc2VhcmNoX3R5cGU9YW5zd2Vycy5zZWFyY2hfbmwmcF9wYWdlPTEmcF9zZWFyY2hfdGV4dD1IYXdr&p_li=&p_topview=1) for the documentation where the NB voted to allow them.
Hawk items are authorized on the BBDU and rumor is that they are pending the USAF for approval on the BDU.
But this was 3 years ago.
Jason, you and me (as well as most CAPTalkers) know RUMINT and urban legends are no way to run an organization, though we all see it in action every day. Some points, using this as a springboard:
— If the National Board authorized anything for the blue BDU, great, but where's the regulations to back it up? Other regulations are updated as needed, so why not CAPM 39-1?
— Outside of the patch, the HMRS accoutrements are NOT authorized for the woodland BDU. To the best of my knowledge, there are NO supplements to CAPM 39-1 that address said items.
So why are we discussing this here? Only because someone wants to play outside the lines, and has been allowed to for so long that it's been tacitly accepted... and a violation of the core ethics ensues. (Before you roll your eyes: The core values define everything we do, and when we fail to live up to them, we provide fodder for CAPTalk.) Is it possible for an entire wing to blow off the core values? Guess it's as possible as National Headquarters selectively issuing and updating directives... hmmm.... (groan)
Besides, what does HMRS do that can't be taught on the outside? What makes them so more special than any other groundpounder with exactly the same credentials? An orange hat and some illegal bling? OK, OK, so that was drastic, but come on.
To be clear, I am not advocating the wear/non wear of the items (despite having earned them myself). I was simply mentioning that the NB has voted them OK. As I understand it, that is as good as a supplement per the bylaws and constitution of CAP.
I have asked National several times when they would be included and the answer is, in the next revision of 39-1.
"Rumor" was a poor choice of a word. Once the vote was made and passed, it required approval for the woodland from the USAF. I am not sure if that has or has not occurred to date.
Further research shows that the May 2008 NEC also approved these items for wear with clarification and follow up items specifically in reference to the USAF uniform combinations. See Agenda Item 5. These minutes have been approved and finalized.
QuoteTo be clear, I am not advocating the wear/non wear of the items (despite having earned them myself). I was simply mentioning that the NB has voted them OK. As I understand it, that is as good as a supplement per the bylaws and constitution of CAP.
Dude, how does that make sense?
So the NB approved it, but did they lay out any instruction on how to wear it? Sure the Hawk school probably has its own rules for the wear of the bling and its probably pretty straight forward (above the name tape or whatever), but for all we know the NB approved it for wear and wanted it on the right sleeve or something crazy.
CAPM 39-1, says its the sole source for uniform information so why not believe it?
Quote from: Fuzzy on December 22, 2009, 07:28:04 AM
CAPM 39-1, says its the sole source for uniform information so why not believe it?
A) The board has the power to change the regulations on a whim. Notification to the field is an administrative process not related to the actual powers of the board.
B) Despite its assertion to the contrary, 39-1 has not been the sole authority regarding uniform wear for most of the last 10 years, and certainly not since about 2005.
QuoteWonder if CAP-USAF is aware of HMRS's uniform violations. ....
Again they likely are aware...as the previous CAP-USAF commander has been there (for more than 5 minutes) and I think last year the NER CAP-USAF commander was there as well as 3 or 4 CAP-RAP types every year.
Generally speaking its not CAP-USAF's job to enforce CAP's policies and regulations on their members, ony to ensure that CAP complies with the appropriate USAF directives and policies. Based on historical precedant...CAP-USAF only seems to care about CAP uniforms when those uniforms (or the wearers by thier actions) may create confusion as to if someone is USAF or CAP...ie Blue epulates, TPU. It woud be clear to me that a CAP member sporting HMRS ranger accessories is NOT a member of the USAF... and if I recall correctly thats because the USAF directive to CAP is "...a uniform clearly distinctive to CAP...." or something along thsoe lines.
mk
QuoteBesides, what does HMRS do that can't be taught on the outside? What makes them so more special than any other groundpounder with exactly the same credentials
First I say go read thru the skill shets for each of the Ranger Ratings....that should provide you with that info specifically.
Personally I will say the spread of knowledge is not as drastic as it once was. Years ago CAP's GSAR training program was non existant....there were heading topics for "training" for GTM and GTL, but it was up to local level to determine what was actually trained in each....to most people the Rescue part of SAR was use cell phone to call fire department, or even Search was limited to ELT (or worse..I once saw a team show up for a missing aircraft excercise without DF gear...there plan was to drive around and look for a crashed plane from their van....) HMRS has had specific training skills and objectives since the 70's that produced personnel capable of providing wilderness SAR comparable non-CAP SAR teams.
Now that was the past...since 2000ish CAP as a whole does a much better job of training their personnel to accomplish the ground SAR mission.
The area that HMRS trains in outside of the standard GTM curriculum are pretty much steep terrain evacuation, enhanced land navigation and outdoor/wilderness skills. They are nothing special per say that couldnt be taught at any other school or even the local level; they just arent usually. As I stated before the biggest reason they are taught is that is the skill sets needed by PA SAR teams to operate in PA....(Pennslyvania litterally means Penn's woods, we have a pretty good amount of "wilderness"), its not flat (a car goes off the road here and you pretty much have to use low angle hauling and lowering to get the patient up to the ambualnce)
mk
Quotefor all we know the NB approved it for wear and wanted it on the right sleeve or something crazy.
That is why the NEC clarified the NB information and stated the policy. If you read the minutes, you will see that.
OK, so we're back to one thing and one thing alone when it comes to the HMRS appurtenances to the uniform, as well as to all our other uniform ills...
CAPM 39-1 NEEDS TO BE REWRITTEN.
IT CAN'T WAIT ANY LONGER.
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on December 23, 2009, 02:31:03 AM
OK, so we're back to one thing and one thing alone when it comes to the HMRS appurtenances to the uniform, as well as to all our other uniform ills...
CAPM 39-1 NEEDS TO BE REWRITTEN.
IT CAN'T WAIT ANY LONGER.
Agreed. Maybe it could then exclude all the "Ranger" silliness.
I had to look up what "appurtenance" meant and am not ashamed to admit it...
Quote from: Rotorhead on December 24, 2009, 03:23:35 AM
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on December 23, 2009, 02:31:03 AM
OK, so we're back to one thing and one thing alone when it comes to the HMRS appurtenances to the uniform, as well as to all our other uniform ills...
CAPM 39-1 NEEDS TO BE REWRITTEN.
IT CAN'T WAIT ANY LONGER.
Agreed. Maybe it could then exclude all the "Ranger" silliness.
Has anyone thought that instead of just calling all the ranger bling silliness.......that maybe we could work with PAWG and come up with a happy compromise?
Just trying to do away with it will only keep the status quo....namely PAWG will do what they want dispite the regulations.
Here is my idea. Change the ranger tabs...to small arcs that can be worn on the beret. The HMRS patch can be shrunk down to a beret flash with the ranger rateing over the flash.
That way HMRS gets their bling....they get a cool hat and we can then hold them to all the rest of the regulations (like black or brown T-shirts.
^ Or arcs on the School Patch that is worn on BDU's. One would wear the highest earned ranger "grade, rating, title etc.".
No whistles, no chains, no multicam web belts, no scarves, no tabs and no blousing blues trousers during ranger "ceremonies".
Oh, and no slaughter of innocent rabbits so you can have a "cool story" to tell your Mom.
Or...wear the BDUs as BDUs and do the fracking job without all that other stuff...*rolls eyes*
I would settle for simply allowing just the tabs, reasonably semi-subdued. They're pretty unique, there isn't much like them in the military at all.
Lose everything else. Yeah, it's a nice patch, but is it really necessary to have tabs
and a patch?
As for a beret, they're a PITA. I wouldn't even bother.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 24, 2009, 06:51:34 AM
Or...wear the BDUs as BDUs and do the fracking job without all that other stuff...
Or, try that.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 24, 2009, 04:11:23 AM
Quote from: Rotorhead on December 24, 2009, 03:23:35 AM
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on December 23, 2009, 02:31:03 AM
OK, so we're back to one thing and one thing alone when it comes to the HMRS appurtenances to the uniform, as well as to all our other uniform ills...
CAPM 39-1 NEEDS TO BE REWRITTEN.
IT CAN'T WAIT ANY LONGER.
Agreed. Maybe it could then exclude all the "Ranger" silliness.
Has anyone thought that instead of just calling all the ranger bling silliness.......that maybe we could work with PAWG and come up with a happy compromise?
Just trying to do away with it will only keep the status quo....namely PAWG will do what they want dispite the regulations.
Here is my idea. Change the ranger tabs...to small arcs that can be worn on the beret. The HMRS patch can be shrunk down to a beret flash with the ranger rateing over the flash.
That way HMRS gets their bling....they get a cool hat and we can then hold them to all the rest of the regulations (like black or brown T-shirts.
Shouldn't they be held to ALL the regulations just like everyone else?
Berets will just make the problmes worse.....because we all know that berets make you elite......
Back when the grade tabs were outlawed...the arc thing was propsed, it was pretty much shot down becuase they were going to force the tab issue at NB..which is where we are at now.
(I was a fan of deigning a badge that goes in place of the GTM badge, basic for R/1, senior for R/Adv and Master for R/Exp....that was you would have someithing for BDU's or service dress)
If someone is telling you that they blouse their blues because they are a "ranger" they are making it up as they go along, that has never been a "ranger" uniform variant....at least anytime in the past 20 years that I have seen in publication or been offically told about.
The general approval for "bling" (tabs, scarves, orange/red t-shirts, orange hats, whistle chains and pistol belts) has been granted by the NB, its only a matter of time until its incorporated into the 39-1...other than a rallying of Wing Commanders against HMRS at the next NB, its going to happen. The only legitimate argument that bling haters have is that the Sq Commander dictates the uniform at the squadron level (or pending 39-1 release, if you prescribe to the theory that NB decisions are not effective until they are incorporated into a reg/manual or ICL)
mk
Quote from: Rotorhead on December 24, 2009, 01:07:02 PMShouldn't they be held to ALL the regulations just like everyone else?
Absolutely......so.....are we going to fire the entire wing? This has been allowed to go on for way too long. They are following the DEFACTO regulations. That is because 20 years ago no one at national ever stomped on them they were allow to establish their traditions.
About the only time it ever becomes and issue is when a PAWGer goes out of state and gets a ration of fecal matter about his uniform. So the PAWGers just mark it up to jealousy and everyone marks it up to Ranger Arrogance....and the poor cadet is just wearing his uniform the way he was told to.
So...here we are at 2010......just taking everything away seems to me to be too harsh. So lets do a little horse trading and give them some reasonable bling and clean up their uniform a little.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 24, 2009, 04:40:05 PM
Quote from: Rotorhead on December 24, 2009, 01:07:02 PMShouldn't they be held to ALL the regulations just like everyone else?
Absolutely......so.....are we going to fire the entire wing? This has been allowed to go on for way too long. They are following the DEFACTO regulations. That is because 20 years ago no one at national ever stomped on them they were allow to establish their traditions.
About the only time it ever becomes and issue is when a PAWGer goes out of state and gets a ration of fecal matter about his uniform. So the PAWGers just mark it up to jealousy and everyone marks it up to Ranger Arrogance....and the poor cadet is just wearing his uniform the way he was told to.
So...here we are at 2010......just taking everything away seems to me to be too harsh. So lets do a little horse trading and give them some reasonable bling and clean up their uniform a little.
It's more than the uniform. What about the attitude? Doesn't go beyond the wing? one word:
KATRINAAnd no, I am not rumor mongering. You can find AAR's out there that tell the story.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 24, 2009, 04:40:05 PM
So...here we are at 2010......just taking everything away seems to me to be too harsh. So lets do a little horse trading and give them some reasonable bling and clean up their uniform a little.
I do not see it as harsh. All other activities get a patch, if that. WHY is HMRS ssssooooooo special that they are given a "bye"on insignia.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 24, 2009, 04:40:05 PM
About the only time it ever becomes and issue is when a PAWGer goes out of state and gets a ration of fecal matter about his uniform. So the PAWGers just mark it up to jealousy and everyone marks it up to Ranger Arrogance....and the poor cadet is just wearing his uniform the way he was told to.
I've seen the ranger arrogance w/o the bling. Last I checked, we teach cadets to read regulations, esspecially 39-1. I seem to recall numerous cadets getting hammered for not looking up things in 39-1 before posting here. So, the cadet should know that the stuff is wrong when he's told to wear it. Or am I asking too much of cadets?
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 24, 2009, 02:11:20 PM(I was a fan of deigning a badge that goes in place of the GTM badge, basic for R/1, senior for R/Adv and Master for R/Exp....that was you would have someithing for BDU's or service dress)
That's not a bad idea either. Treat this ranger qualification as another ES one, there's a badge just like Ground Team. However, since it already includes GT quals, I'd say wear one or the other, not both.
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 24, 2009, 02:11:20 PM(If someone is telling you that they blouse their blues because they are a "ranger" they are making it up as they go along, that has never been a "ranger" uniform variant....at least anytime in the past 20 years that I have seen in publication or been offically told about.
I've run into people that think they should be able to do that. Having been military and dealt with some of the Spec Ops type personnel, I don't agree. Ranger school may teach some advanced skills, but nothing that relates to the combat affiliation that blousing blues signifies.
Quote from: cap235629 on December 24, 2009, 04:48:19 PMIt's more than the uniform. What about the attitude? Doesn't go beyond the wing? one word: KATRINA
And no, I am not rumor mongering. You can find AAR's out there that tell the story.
I can't do anything about attitude, except at a local level. There is that fine line between being proud and feeling elite and ego driven arrogance.
We all have to deal with people who are full of themselves and who embarrass the organisation.
By toning down the bling we may be able to get a handle on the out of control egos. I have not actually met or worked with any PAWGers or HMRS rangers. But I truly feel that the over the top arrogance is probably the exception not the norm.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 24, 2009, 04:40:05 PMAbout the only time it ever becomes and issue is when a PAWGer goes out of state and gets a ration of fecal matter about his uniform. So the PAWGers just mark it up to jealousy and everyone marks it up to Ranger Arrogance....and the poor cadet is just wearing his uniform the way he was told to.
The problem is that the "poor cadet" should have been told what the right thing to do is, or should have known enough that they looked it up. Still a failure. I've given a lot of cadets a lot of grief about wearing unauthorized T-shirts, and the answer is almost always "Well, that's what the encampment staff told me!" (or something similar).
Quote from: lordmonar on December 24, 2009, 04:40:05 PMSo...here we are at 2010......just taking everything away seems to me to be too harsh. So lets do a little horse trading and give them some reasonable bling and clean up their uniform a little.
This still strikes me as them entitled to a consolation prize. I can be reasonable and accept something in good taste, but they don't have a right to it.
Quote from: RogueLeader on December 24, 2009, 05:51:21 PMI've seen the ranger arrogance w/o the bling. Last I checked, we teach cadets to read regulations, esspecially 39-1. I seem to recall numerous cadets getting hammered for not looking up things in 39-1 before posting here. So, the cadet should know that the stuff is wrong when he's told to wear it. Or am I asking too much of cadets?
But holding a wing to the regulations should be a top down issue.
PAWG C/AB Newby reads 39-1 and say "that's not right"....he gets told..."well that's the way we do it here in PAWG" so he follows suit. That is not really wrong. What is wrong is that National and Region has allowed PAWG to ignore the rules for so long we now have to fight institutional inertia.
So....proper change managment says you should try to get buy-in from the organisation. Explain why you want to make the change and make compromises that fit everyone's needs.
PAWG has a need for bling. They have a need for the extra training and pride that goes with the ranger program. The rest of us have a need to get PAWG out of the rediculous parts of their uniform.
So we should work with that. Offer bling that is not so stupid looking. Codify their bling and incorporate it into the regs.
Doing that makes it easier to work with them and bring them back into the fold of the rest of us regs following wings.
Holding some cadet accountable for the policies of his leadership is just stupid. Giving him a hard time just wastes our and his time.
^ The Cadet still makes the decision to sew patches on and wear a whistle, even though he or she knows its not in 39-1 or a letter from the current Wing King (Check PAWGs website).
I will send a hawker away should they choose to show up wearing unauthorized uniform junk.
Quote from: Spike on December 24, 2009, 07:31:02 PM
^ The Cadet still makes the decision to sew patches on and wear a whistle, even though he or she knows its not in 39-1 or a letter from the current Wing King (Check PAWGs website).
I will send a hawker away should they choose to show up wearing unauthorized uniform junk.
Yeah....but that is the point.....from the Hawker's point of view....it is NOT unauthorized uniform junk. So you are going to give someone a hard time because his wing commander, the regional commander and national commander are not doing their job?
That sounds kind of harsh. :-\
Hawk Arrogance is extremely terrible for cadets. A few years back a local unit had some cadets go to Hawk. A few months after Hawk our unit arranged for a KC-135 flight. Some of the cadets from that unit signed up to go, and knowing the issues that had ALREADY arisen in that time, an e-mail sent to all members was to make sure that their uniforms are IAW CAPM 39-1.
Lo and behold, the day we were to drive to the base, one of the cadets shows up with a ranger tab on his left shoulder (where the only thing authorized is the now optional wing patch in our state). We gave him two choices: patch off, or we'll see you when we get back. After arguing with myself and a SM who was a cadet for some 7 years prior that his "ranger patch" was authorized in CAPM 39-1, he decided that the KC-135 flight was more interesting than his patch. He ended up taking it off his uniform before we rolled from the unit.
And that illistrate my point.....the problem was not with the cadet but his chain of command and PAWG, NER, and National.
You sent out the E-mail...but Cadet Hawker thinks his uniform IS within 39-1 because no one has told him otherwise.
Not saying it was right...and your actions were an acceptable fix to the situation....but it is not fixing the root problem.
If somone else outside of your chain is mis-educating CAP members.....you doing spot corrections is only 1/4 the job. You have to follow up the chain and make sure his commander is aware and makes the wider correction....because let's face it....even commanders don't know all the rules. The wing commander and region commanders need to be notified and they need to take a stand to get their peers to toe the line. Finally we need to National to step up and establish what that line is.
As it is today.......If I see someone outside my unit wearing something that is "not authorised" I don't usually even say anything to them. I may point out the regulations but that is all. I do find out who their commander is and let them know what is going on....and point out the right regulations. But that is far as I go. Because if Cadet X says "My commander told me to wear this" IS an acceptable answer from the cadets point. It is the commander at fault.
Lordmonar,
We're in IL, and the cadet only went to Hawk.
He was a C/CMSgt, and more or less knew 39-1, just not enough to admit he is wrong.
The problem for HIM began when HAWK staff told him that NB approved their bling-o and that they could wear it all, anywhere. As far as I am aware, only the wings who endorse the ranger crap wear the 'ranger patch' on the left sleeve, those being PAWG, FLWG, PRWG.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 24, 2009, 11:25:07 PM
As far as I am aware, only the wings who endorse the ranger crap wear the 'ranger patch' on the left sleeve, those being PAWG, FLWG, PRWG.
I must have missed that interim change letter from National on that issue. Point me to the section of 39-1 that states "wing commanders can move patches around on the BDU's even though they are dictated to a specific placement per 39-1".
Wearing the patch in place of a Wing Patch, and not following existing guidance in 39-1 on the proper placement of Special Activity Patches creates elitism, and two separate classes of members in those wings. The first class being "ordinary Joe member" the other being the "Ranger" or "better than everyone else member".
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 24, 2009, 11:25:07 PM
Lordmonar,
We're in IL, and the cadet only went to Hawk.
He was a C/CMSgt, and more or less knew 39-1, just not enough to admit he is wrong.
The problem for HIM began when HAWK staff told him that NB approved their bling-o and that they could wear it all, anywhere. As far as I am aware, only the wings who endorse the ranger crap wear the 'ranger patch' on the left sleeve, those being PAWG, FLWG, PRWG.
I beleive that was what I was trying to say.
You can't really blame the cadet (no matter what his rank) if senior members at a national level activity give him bad information and his own commander does not correct him when he returns.
Again....the finger of blame is pointed not really at the cadet but at National on down for providing poor guidance.
You know, Lordmonar, you are absolutely right! It's not his fault, he was told wrong he didn't know. It was a failure in leadership because they didn't enforce the standard.
Last I checked, as citazens we are all bound to the law, even if we never heard of some of the laws that are out there. Using that logic I can get away with alot of things.
We are all responsible to others, but we answer for our own actions. A couple weeks ago, we had a Class A inspection in the Army. I was missing a ribbon that I didn't know I was authorized ( GWOT Service btw). In my last Battalion, it wasn't authorized for me. I didn't argue; just asked for clarification, and problem solved.
"Someone told me" is never an acceptable excuse "Sorry Officer, I was told that the speed limit was going to be upped from 35 to 55, and that you guys wouldn't pull me over." Whereas being able to say in CAPM 39-1 etc etc. Such and such is authorized in such and such a place is a valid response to a uniform issue.
I'm not expecting everyone to have 39-1 memorized; I don't; but having a good working knowledge of it is needed.
I just want everyone to take responsability for their own actions. Thats it.
Quote from: RogueLeader on December 25, 2009, 01:25:59 AMI'm not expecting everyone to have 39-1 memorized; I don't; but having a good working knowledge of it is needed.
And a good working knowledge would start with having read it with at least once.
Quote from: RogueLeader on December 25, 2009, 01:25:59 AM
You know, Lordmonar, you are absolutely right! It's not his fault, he was told wrong he didn't know. It was a failure in leadership because they didn't enforce the standard.
Last I checked, as citazens we are all bound to the law, even if we never heard of some of the laws that are out there. Using that logic I can get away with alot of things.
Sure you can....you can go to the judge and tell him your story and if it sounds plausible he will let you off. It is called mitigating circumstances.
QuoteWe are all responsible to others, but we answer for our own actions. A couple weeks ago, we had a Class A inspection in the Army. I was missing a ribbon that I didn't know I was authorized ( GWOT Service btw). In my last Battalion, it wasn't authorized for me. I didn't argue; just asked for clarification, and problem solved.
Good for you. But what if your last unit told you were authorised a unit citation medal. You didn't see the order, but your battalion commander stood in front of everyone and said "pin them on boys!". Then in your new unit someone challenged you....what then?
That is the situation we are dealing with now.
Quote"Someone told me" is never an acceptable excuse "Sorry Officer, I was told that the speed limit was going to be upped from 35 to 55, and that you guys wouldn't pull me over." Whereas being able to say in CAPM 39-1 etc etc. Such and such is authorized in such and such a place is a valid response to a uniform issue.
A disagree. "someone in authority told me it was okay" is an acceptable excuse within reason (let's not get into illegal orders and LOAC ;)). We are all followers. We often are given contradictory orders. In my 22 years on AD USAF I have many times have been given orders that were against regulations. I knowing did them, after properly challenging them. I have many, many, many, many times have been given wrong information my people who should have known the correct information. I have been caught by the short hairs on that.....but my superiors listened to me and set me straight and more times then not set the idiot with the wrong information straight.
You can't fault people who are working in good faith for bad information.
QuoteI'm not expecting everyone to have 39-1 memorized; I don't; but having a good working knowledge of it is needed.
I just want everyone to take responsibility for their own actions. Thats it.
The problem with 39-1 is that it is full of mis information. It contradicts itself. National won't update it. On set of regulations says to do one thing another says to do something else.
Many cadets.....heck many AD USAF member have never opened the actual regulation or AFI and seen the source document about uniforms. They go off of what they were told, crib sheets, and allow the base alterations shop do the work for them. I know I never looked up the proper placement of my stripes on my ABUs.....I just took them in and they did it.
Personal responsibility is a good thing......but you have to look at good faith intentions as well. C/CMSgt Hawker wore his bling in good faith. He was instructed by other cadets and senior members who in good faith were simply passing on what they were told. Someone dropped the ball. That someone dropped it 20 years ago. The only fix for it now is for National to take an intrest in it and make some changes.
My reason for posting was to give them some options other than "you are all wrong......take it off!"
Quote from: Hawk200 on December 25, 2009, 02:10:12 AM
Quote from: RogueLeader on December 25, 2009, 01:25:59 AMI'm not expecting everyone to have 39-1 memorized; I don't; but having a good working knowledge of it is needed.
And a good working knowledge would start with having read it with at least once.
So...at what rank do we do that?
Do we really expect a 13-14 year old cadet on his first NCSA to be challenging a bunch of orange T-shirted, Ascot wearing, ranger crushing, tab wearing, pistol belt toting Cadet officers and Senior Members?
We already know that there are lots of ICLs and NB decisions that are NOT in the regulations. We already know that no one at national every considered a lot of issues in the regulations (like NCO stripes on the CSUs).
I consider my knowledge of 39-1 to be very good....and even I get confused about all the different rules because of lack of consistency and because of my USAF background.
And just to put some of this into perspective....as far as the USAF is considered.....when I was last at Lackland (during the Sept 09 NB) the new trainees were given town liberty after graduation....a lot of them were sporting this little eagle pin on their uniforms over their name plates. I asked them what it was......it was a pin for donating to the Combined Federal Campaign! NOW I know AFI 36-2903......and I know that that pin was in no way, shape or form authorised. But I did not yell at the new Airman. Why? Because he would say "My TI said I could".....and that my friends is the WORD OF GOD for a basic trainee! Fight that.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 25, 2009, 02:24:16 AM
Quote from: Hawk200 on December 25, 2009, 02:10:12 AM
Quote from: RogueLeader on December 25, 2009, 01:25:59 AMI'm not expecting everyone to have 39-1 memorized; I don't; but having a good working knowledge of it is needed.
And a good working knowledge would start with having read it with at least once.
So...at what rank do we do that?
You're kidding right? Cadets shouldn't know about regulations?
Now you're a retired Air Force Master Sergeant, what did you do to correct the obvious uniform violation you spoke of? Did you make an attempt to follow up with the chain of command to clarify that CFC pins were only authorized for wear on base? Or did you let it go because "the TI told him"?
We can correct inappropriate uniforms, and show people where to find the right information. My TI showed us 35-10, passed it around to reinforce that what he expected of us was
regulation. I had a day of class on regs in BMT, and another thing reinforced was "Ask someone if you can't find it".
"It's not in the currently published reg" is not an acceptable excuse in any way shape or form. Allowing it is a failure of leadership.
"But my TI told me to"...."but my commander told me to"...are acceptable answers.
If I tell my cadets or seniors to do somethimg.....I want them to do it. I don't want anyone giving them a hard time about it.
You can give me a hard time about...but not them.
I extend the same courtesy to othe chains of command.
In my entire career I was never given 35-10 or 36-2903. I have a BMTS study guide and a PFE Study guide. No one ever told me to look at 35-10. I did because I'm that type of an NCO.
I correct MY people and keep them in line. I encourage my peers (leaders in other squadrons) to do the same. I communicate my concerns up the chain of command.
But I am not going to give the cadet from another squadron a hard time for doing what his squadron commander told him to do.
It's not right and it is not fair to the cadet.
As for the Airman with the pin.....I let him go with a shake of my head. I think it is silly....but what's an old MSgt on TDY to do? I am certainly not going to challange a TI's authority by brow beating an Airman Basic freash from graduation.
As for the "ask someon if you can't find it".....only works so far as the person you ask. We teach the chain of command. "Hey sir....can wear this Boonie hat"?......"Sure...go ahead"!
We depend on our superiors to know what the hell they are talking about. If we feel they are mistaken....it is right and proper to challenge them (in private).....but we are constrained by the chain of command.
"It's not in the currently published reg" is an acceptable excues in CAP because national consitantly fails to keep them updated. The regs say that once the NB votes on something it is law. Obviously we can't hold someone to a regulation they can't find....because not everyone knows how to find the NB minutes.....but likewise if someone is following the guidance spelled out in those NB minutes....we can't hold them responsbile for the failure of national to do their job and up date the regulations.
It is a failure of leadership.....but not necessarily on the part of me and others at my level.
How do you go about challenging these decisions?
Our wing authorizes the Officer Service Cap for Cadet officers. The ICL also states that it is not to be worn outside of ILWG.
Given that a Wing Commander can authorize some things (certainly not all that Hawk crap though) for their wing, who in their right mind began telling cadets from across the country that they can wear their Hawk bling in ILWG?
Understanding that Hawk is like the Drummond Island MIWG used to have, it needs to be stopped and regulated.
And speaking of wings that let the 'ranger patches' slide, the current Volunteer magazine has an article about a PRWG cadet who received two lifesaving awards, and his picture in BDUs clearly shows his PR Ranger patch.
That is why I don't get too bent out of shape is some cadet not in my chain of command is wearing this sort of thing.
How do you challenge it?
You first set and maintain the standard for yourself and your unit.
Then you encourage your peers to do the same.
Then you talk to your wing commander about how you feel about this subject and urge him to make your case for you at region and national level.
I too feel it needs to be regulated....not eliminated....but regulated. Eliminate the gross errors (orange T-shirt, pistol belts, ranger tabs and ascots). Work with them to come up with a good compromise (an arc that goes over the wing patch for instance or on a beret).
Wing commanders can authorise items for their wing. Unless it is clearly spelled out that is can only be worn in their wing...it is good for everywhere.
As for who said they can wear their Hawk Bling outside of HMRS....well that would be the National Board.
QuoteSee August 2006 National Board Minutes
AGENDA ITEM 19 Action
SUBJECT: New Business
4. ITEM: Wear of Blue Beret and Hawk Mountain Uniforms & Devices
COL FAGAN/MO MOVED AND COL LEVITCH/FL SECONDED that the National Board vote to allow wear of the Blue Beret and Hawk Mountain head gear by cadets and senior members on both the BDUs and dress uniform.
COL NELSON/CA MOVED TO AMEND AND COL OPLAND/DE SECONDED the amendment to allow wear of both activity head gear only on BDUs.
MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED
COL DAVIES/NATCAP MOVED TO AMEND AND COL FAGAN/MO SECONDED the amendment to allow wear of head gear at the discretion of wing commanders.
MOTION DID NOT PASS
MAJ GEN PINEDA RESTATED THE AMENDED MOTION: The members can wear the head gear that they get at Hawk Mountain and Blue Beret with their blue BDUs and green BDUs only.
COL LEVITCH/FL MOVED TO AMEND AND COL APPLEBAUM/PA SECONDED the amendment to allow the wear of any awarded items that go on the uniform or the head from Hawk Mountain and Blue Beret with BDUs only.
MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED
COL OPLAND/DE MOVED TO AMEND to allow wear of any distinctive head gear awarded at any national special cadet activities.
MOTION TO AMEND DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND
ANOTHER RESTATEMENT OF THE AMENDED MOTION: All members that attend the Blue Beret and national Hawk Mountain training can wear any awarded items that go on the uniform or the head gear with their BDUs, blue or green.
AMENDED MOTION CARRIED
FOLLOW-ON ACTION: National Headquarters implementation of policy, notification to the field and change to appropriate CAP regulations.
So...you should be happy that you only had a cadet wearing his ranger tab.....it could have been worse.
Oh, he had the whistle, but that was easy to take off. And even since that decision, either because it hasn't yet been ICL'd or updated in 39-1, I've never seen anyone in IL dressed like a PAWGer.
Either way, I don't see how someone in a wing half the nation away can regulate something for ILWG where things like berets, etc have their own ICLs.
Oh I agree with you. Local units still have the right to dictate uniform wear.
And I agree the lack of ICLs is an issue....but not a reglatory one....just a lack of adminstrative follow through. The quote I posted came from Knowledge base....which NHQ considers reglatory.
But that just adds to my point about giving someone a hard time about this stuff. No one really knows what is and is not allowed.
The NEC provided clarifiaction on what crapbling can be worn:
HMRS - Orange cap, ranger tabs (only one), HMRS activity patch with staff rocker if appropriate. Scarves, colored pistol belts, and orange t-shirts are specifically prohibited away from the activity.
NBB - Beret w/NBB device, activity patch.
These were in the May 2008 NEC minutes, pg 21.
Also, while immediate approval was granted for wear with the field uniform, AF approval was needed for wear with the bdu.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 25, 2009, 05:14:14 AM
I've never seen anyone in IL dressed like a PAWGer.
Then you either don't get out much in the Wing or you run in a very tight circle in the Wing. They show up every now and again at missions, weekend campouts and even come dressed that way to encampment until they get option of changing or going home.
I was on a ground team on a mission out of Marion once where we left a guy standing in the parking lot with his beret, whistle, ladder laced boots, ranger tab and coil of repelling rope around his neck/chest and waved by by at him that we were not taking him with us because he looked so stupid.
They are in Illinois, just pretty few and far between, but they are there.
Thankfully Group 22 is spared most of that then. :)
Quote from: RedFox24 on December 25, 2009, 07:20:16 PMI was on a ground team on a mission out of Marion once where we left a guy standing in the parking lot with his beret, whistle, ladder laced boots, ranger tab and coil of repelling rope around his neck/chest and waved by by at him that we were not taking him with us because he looked so stupid.
What amazes me is that someone would think that actually helps mission accomplishment in any way, shape, or form.
It's one thing to look pretty, it's another entirely to believe it's gonna help you in any manner.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 24, 2009, 06:15:10 PMHolding some cadet accountable for the policies of his leadership is just stupid. Giving him a hard time just wastes our and his time.
It is the responsibility of each unit commander, mandated IAW CAPM 39-1, to enforce all uniform standards. That "some cadet" doesn't know what's kosher and what's not is ultimately his squadron commander's fault. Period.
And if wing and region commanders don't follow suit, they're rogue in the eyes of CAPM 39-1, as well. We are an organization of regulations we must follow; if we don't do so, we violate not only the regulations, but the core values and our own integrity.
Hey guys... I'm confused. I was reading through the "pink belt" thing in the beginning of the thread, and what was stated seems contradictory to what was in the newsletter. According to the people here, the pink belt was used to denote the LOWEST performing member or team at Hawk. But according to the article, it's used to denote the HIGHEST.
http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/news/20070708-hawk-news.pdf
One of three things happened:
1) I'm reading it wrong and am failing to understand due to bad sarcasm.
2) People here read it wrong because they wanted to.
3) The Hawk people changed it to say something completely opposite of what it used to say.
Help me out here.
Quote from: Nathan on December 28, 2009, 03:02:05 PM
Hey guys... I'm confused. I was reading through the "pink belt" thing in the beginning of the thread, and what was stated seems contradictory to what was in the newsletter. According to the people here, the pink belt was used to denote the LOWEST performing member or team at Hawk. But according to the article, it's used to denote the HIGHEST.
http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/news/20070708-hawk-news.pdf (http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/news/20070708-hawk-news.pdf)
One of three things happened:
1) I'm reading it wrong and am failing to understand due to bad sarcasm.
2) People here read it wrong because they wanted to.
3) The Hawk people changed it to say something completely opposite of what it used to say.
Help me out here.
Go here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAP_Ranger) Read down to the pistol belt section. Notice what it says. Follow the cite and notice which pdf it links to.
Huge edit:
I was duped. I just ran through the history of that wiki page and it turns out that line I mentioned was edited to it's current state just one day before the OP posted the first msg in this thread. It originally stated the pink belt is worn by the distinguished sqdn. Now I'm unsure as to the truth of the matter. I don't think pink=best passes the reasonableness test but then again most of the stuff they do out there is weird.
Is Hawk really worth the money to attend?
I do agree that the picture posted doesn't show the general "crying from happiness" that you expect with such an honor, and rather seems to be a rather depressed cadet.
Too bad that it's unlikely anyone who's gone to the school recently is going to just tell us, since it would be known obviously to them.
Quote from: Nathan on December 28, 2009, 03:02:05 PM
Hey guys... I'm confused. I was reading through the "pink belt" thing in the beginning of the thread, and what was stated seems contradictory to what was in the newsletter. According to the people here, the pink belt was used to denote the LOWEST performing member or team at Hawk. But according to the article, it's used to denote the HIGHEST.
http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/news/20070708-hawk-news.pdf
One of three things happened:
1) I'm reading it wrong and am failing to understand due to bad sarcasm.
2) People here read it wrong because they wanted to.
3) The Hawk people changed it to say something completely opposite of what it used to say.
Help me out here.
I'd guess that you just didn't get the bad sarcasm. The list at the bottom of that article is the giveaway to me; if the pink belt goes to the best squadron, why have a separate citation for an Honor Squadron?
For a definitive answer, the article on page three of the July 13, 2009
Hawk Herald indicates the true nature of the pink belt:
http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/newletter/July%2013%202009hmrs.pdf
Quote from: NC Hokie on December 28, 2009, 03:55:20 PM
Quote from: Nathan on December 28, 2009, 03:02:05 PM
Hey guys... I'm confused. I was reading through the "pink belt" thing in the beginning of the thread, and what was stated seems contradictory to what was in the newsletter. According to the people here, the pink belt was used to denote the LOWEST performing member or team at Hawk. But according to the article, it's used to denote the HIGHEST.
http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/news/20070708-hawk-news.pdf (http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/news/20070708-hawk-news.pdf)
One of three things happened:
1) I'm reading it wrong and am failing to understand due to bad sarcasm.
2) People here read it wrong because they wanted to.
3) The Hawk people changed it to say something completely opposite of what it used to say.
Help me out here.
I'd guess that you just didn't get the bad sarcasm. The list at the bottom of that article is the giveaway to me; if the pink belt goes to the best squadron, why have a separate citation for an Honor Squadron?
For a definitive answer, the article on page three of the July 13, 2009 Hawk Herald indicates the true nature of the pink belt:
http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/newletter/July%2013%202009hmrs.pdf (http://www.pawingcap.com/hawk/newletter/July%2013%202009hmrs.pdf)
Looks like hazing to me.
For those of you who have better things to do than download the PDF:
QuoteThe pink belt was tired of hanging in the operations room for a year and it choose its new owner for the day. C/Maj Giles, Charlie Cadet Squadron Commander, was the pink belts best choice according to the inspection team and the overall performance for the day. The Pink Belt is given to the squadron that doesn't do the best throughout the day. Who will get it next?
Squadron Alpha, lead by C/Maj McDonough, earned honor squadron for July 12. Can they keep it up?
As if the torture of the English language isn't bad enough ("and it choose its new owner..."), the taunting in the last two sentences sure seems like singling someone out for embarrassment to me — a good case could be made for a CPPT violation. A certain Cadet McDonough ought to feel shamed, since he's singled out by name.
Why pink? Is it effeminate? Does its use here imply that female members are less capable? Is it representative of a false bravado that should be reviewed? Discuss.
They should change the HMRS motto to: THESE THINGS WE DO SO OTHERS MAY LOOK SILLY...... >:D
Quote from: Strick on December 28, 2009, 06:23:00 PM
They should change the HMRS motto to: THESE THINGS WE DO SO OTHERS MAY LOOK [AT US] SILLY...... >:D
Fixed.
OK, here is a suggestion...
Incorporate the "Silly" tabs for achievement level attained into the actual special activity patch.
i.e. Change the color of the keystone to denote level attained or a variant of that. Then the "Silly" tabs go away, and all is well.
No further approvals, HMRS school participants can show participation and level with one patch, etc.
The rest (belts, scarves, whistles, ladder lacing, etc.) is left to the wear at activity only.
Everyone wins, and it is clear and simple and in line with all other NCSA participant uniform items.
Then all they look like is a participant at a NCSA and no different than the rest.
Just a thought.
2
The information regarding the Pink Web Belt was changed, once the Staff from Hawk read the posts here. However it was not changed very well, and is now an issue for the IG. They fabricated misinformation to cover a clear issue of hazing, once the hazing issue had been discovered (by us). Let me assure you the person who made the changes is now in the process of writting his first draft appeal to recent membership termination.
This act alone shows what type of character and leadership Hawk Mountain produces.
Shame on those involved in trying to cover up mistakes made.
Quote from: Spike on December 30, 2009, 01:42:01 AM
Shame on those involved in trying to cover up mistakes made.
Doesn't using the word "mistake" imply that the act was unintentional? I think that the posters here have argued that the acts are indeed on purpose, therefore, not a "mistake."
Quote from: Spike on December 30, 2009, 01:42:01 AM
The information regarding the Pink Web Belt was changed, once the Staff from Hawk read the posts here. However it was not changed very well, and is now an issue for the IG. They fabricated misinformation to cover a clear issue of hazing, once the hazing issue had been discovered (by us). Let me assure you the person who made the changes is now in the process of writting his first draft appeal to recent membership termination.
This act alone shows what type of character and leadership Hawk Mountain produces.
Shame on those involved in trying to cover up mistakes made.
Ah, sunshine — the best disinfectant.
So...if someone has been 2B'd for this, I'm assuming the silliness is gone? Or do they call it a motivation belt and keep it?
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 30, 2009, 02:50:32 AM
Quote from: Spike on December 30, 2009, 01:42:01 AM
Shame on those involved in trying to cover up mistakes made.
Doesn't using the word "mistake" imply that the act was unintentional? I think that the posters here have argued that the acts are indeed on purpose, therefore, not a "mistake."
By the Merriam-Webster definition, "mistake (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mistake)" is an applicable term. Especially when it comes to the "faulty judgement" part.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 30, 2009, 04:50:19 AM
So...if someone has been 2B'd for this, I'm assuming the silliness is gone? Or do they call it a motivation belt and keep it?
That belt is lavender.
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on December 30, 2009, 05:52:04 AM
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 30, 2009, 04:50:19 AM
So...if someone has been 2B'd for this, I'm assuming the silliness is gone? Or do they call it a motivation belt and keep it?
That belt is lavender.
Which changes what?
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 30, 2009, 06:28:46 AM
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on December 30, 2009, 05:52:04 AM
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on December 30, 2009, 04:50:19 AM
So...if someone has been 2B'd for this, I'm assuming the silliness is gone? Or do they call it a motivation belt and keep it?
That belt is lavender.
Which changes what?
Nothing. You missed the sarcasm.
QuoteA certain Cadet McDonough ought to feel shamed, since he's singled out by name
Why? That wasnt tounge in cheek/sarcasm; his squadron was the honor squadron.
mk
The pink belt or even the giving of the pink belt is not a hazing act.....no more than saying the last place squadron is...."___________" or 'so and so's" squadron is in last place. Putting a picture of a cadet crying(or making it appear as such) because he was in last place then pointing it out (via a publication), particularly if the point was to ridicule and embarass him was hazing.
The "mistake" would be not having someone review the article and realize that even if the intention was tongue in cheek, that it was inappropriate to say the least and could be hazing at worst. There in general seems to be a lot of hawk trashing being done by people that have never been to the school, and base thier opinion on what the hear from others or what they interpret to be going on. (I met a hawk grad who was a tool does not qualify really...I have met a number of tools in CAP that think because they belong to this group or that or have obtained this award or that they are special; its usually not a reflection of the group as a whole)
Is HMRS a den of sin and evil and a scourge on the wholesome image of CAP....NO, is it a beautiful place where everyone does everything right and correct without exception....NO. Are there elements of the program there that could be better, sure. Is the uniform bling ridiculous, mostly. Has hazing occured, probabally, but that in no way should be interpreted to say that activity leaders condone flagrant or covert CPPT violations, but I am sure they have happened (as they have at many other activites)
Every level of the organization has problems, everyone has bad apples. There always seems to be someone who bends, breaks ore doesnt understand the rules. No matter how hard people try there is somehow something or someone that slips thru the cracks and causes someting stupid to happen. Everyone at any of our levels does their best to control it but it doesnt always work.
I can think of quite a number of similar incidents of possible hazing or doing things stupid that I have seen or read about that also fit the monday night quarterback defination of hazing.....Nathans hazing thread contains a few just off hand; and there are yet likely a number of others you can find scaterd around this and other CAP forums That doesnt make the activites they occured at bad or horrible or even the command element involved bad leaders.
mk
Let me get this straight:
Humiliating in public and making a cadet cry because he's humiliated isn't hazing but publishing a picture of him crying is? :o [Redacted so I don't meet the Banhammer]
The whole purpose of the pink belt is to demean it's wearer. That's the textbook definition of hazing.
We have only to assume he was even crying, it looks like he could be rubbing his eyes...maybe he's sleepy and the picture was taken out of context, we have already established the PAO did a poor job.
If you deny me the position of squadron commander at encampment and becuase everyone else knows I didnt get the positon and it emabarases me to the point I cry, did you haze me? What if people saw me crying?
For the record I think giving the pink belt is a stupid tradtion that should go the way of the dodo. It has (as we have all helped to illustrate) has the potential to cause or be interpruted as hazing; good enough reason to get rid of it. For those of you that havent been there, there is a seperate formation before lunch that the results of the area inspections are announced (this is where the pink belt comes into play), as an instructor this eats up about 30 minutes (at least) that I could be training. Its unfortunate that an accusition of hazng has to be the cause of its demise (and negative attention brought toward a CAP activity), but I wont shed a tear it it has to go.
mk
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 30, 2009, 07:35:29 PM
We have only to assume he was even crying, it looks like he could be rubbing his eyes...maybe he's sleepy and the picture was taken out of context, we have already established the PAO did a poor job.
It could very well be that it was taken out of context, but it
looks like he has been singled out due to a failure, and humiliated because of it. If it can be construed as
appearing to be hazing, it doesn't belong. It's not exactly treating people with dignity.
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 30, 2009, 07:35:29 PMIf you deny me the position of squadron commander at encampment and becuase everyone else knows I didnt get the positon and it emabarases me to the point I cry, did you haze me? What if people saw me crying?
To the first question, no, you weren't hazed. There was no intended action to humiliate you.
To the second question, not sure what you're asking. Maybe someone saw you cry. Not a big deal. But if you were crying, and people draw attention to it, I'd say there's an issue. Is it hazing? I don't know, but I would put an end to such behaviour (drawing attention to someone crying) very quickly. It may not be hazing by definition, but it's [darn]ed rude and immature to do so.
Attempting to rationalize actions so that they're not considered hazing is a dangerous game. At what point do actual hazing actions get rationalized away? Slippery slope.
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 30, 2009, 07:35:29 PMFor the record I think giving the pink belt is a stupid tradtion that should go the way of the dodo.
I agree. Every belt color from Hawk has some type of assigned meaning. There's what? Four or five different ones? The pink (or lavender, or whatever color it actually is) doesn't seem to be visible in any other place than the school. When it's only in one location, it creates questions.
If you want to have an "honors" belt for the school, I got no issues. But if you want to have what could be considered a "dishonors" belt, we got problems.
QuoteThere was no intended action to humiliate you.
The way this discussion is going , there doesnt have to be intention to humiliate you...that was the point...its do I feel that I have been to humiliated, or can others assume that I should feel humiliated, that makes it hazing. Having been to HMRS many times including on staff never has anyone said or implied the reason for the pink belt is to humiliate the recepient.
Giving the pink belt to the cadet in question was not itself a hazing act, the fact that he was mocked (in jest or in actuality) could be a hazing act, the fact that the HMRS administration allowed that publication to be circulated and the behavior to continue deserves some attention if even for the fact that is was in very poor taste. My point of ire with this whole discussion is that this photo is over 2 years old, I find it very difficult to beleive that after 1000's of people (including wing, regional and national) have viewed it only now does someone say hey that's hazing!
As I said I can see where the practice opens the door to hazing potential, and for that reason it should disapear, but I dont see that as a condemnation of the entire school.
mk
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 30, 2009, 09:54:56 PM
QuoteThere was no intended action to humiliate you.
The way this discussion is going , there doesnt have to be intention to humiliate you...that was the point...its do I feel that I have been to humiliated, or can others assume that I should feel humiliated, that makes it hazing. Having been to HMRS many times including on staff never has anyone said or implied the reason for the pink belt is to humiliate the recepient.
Just feeling humilitated isn't enough. A person can trip and fall, people around them might laugh, although it's rude, it's not hazing. Tripping someone, and then laughing at them might be. See the difference?
It also doesn't matter if no one has ever said it's supposed to humiliate someone. It's still a targeted action to do so. A pink belt? Most people wouldn't consider that an "award" any more than requiring them to wear a pink bow. With our uniforms, there is no precedence as a fashion statement.
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 30, 2009, 09:54:56 PMGiving the pink belt to the cadet in question was not itself a hazing act, the fact that he was mocked (in jest or in actuality) could be a hazing act, the fact that the HMRS administration allowed that publication to be circulated and the behavior to continue deserves some attention if even for the fact that is was in very poor taste. My point of ire with this whole discussion is that this photo is over 2 years old, I find it very difficult to beleive that after 1000's of people (including wing, regional and national) have viewed it only now does someone say hey that's hazing!
You act like before now, no one has ever thought of it or said it was hazing. There are people here in this thread that have been to the school in the past few years that are vehemently against some of the school's actions. Just because you haven't heard of it before now doesn't mean it hasn't been considered as such all along. Just because "No one's ever had a problem with it", doesn't mean it's a non issue.
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 30, 2009, 09:54:56 PM
As I said I can see where the practice opens the door to hazing potential, and for that reason it should disapear, but I dont see that as a condemnation of the entire school.
I can appreciate good school content, but there seems to be some other aspects that are negatives. Those negatives need to be dealt with. Out of the thirty or so Hawk grads I've met, the majority of them have behavioural issues. If it's only one or two, I can consider that the individuals, but when it's so large of a group, there's reason to be concerned.
....sorry 30 with behavorial issues is not a big deal to me when the school graduates over 100 students every year on top of that 9 days at HMRS likely wasnt the cause of their behavorial issues. Some of the issues with HMRS attitudes may not have helped the predisposed to bling wanting/elite wanna- beism.....
QuoteJust feeling humilitated isn't enough. A person can trip and fall, people around them might laugh, although it's rude, it's not hazing. Tripping someone, and then laughing at them might be. See the difference
yes differant, but the first is still a hazing potential; "...Yes sir I cant take it here anymore, the other day I tripped and fell, the cadet staff just stood there laughing at me and making fun of me, no one even asked if I was all right, they always do this this to me to the point that I am to afraid to even say anything in class anymore because I am afraid they are just going to make fun of me more....." they feel that they are humiliated by the actions of the poeple laughing at them; the poeple laughing at weren trying to haze them, but the result was the same.
mk
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 31, 2009, 07:57:20 PMyes differant, but the first is still a hazing potential; "...Yes sir I cant take it here anymore, the other day I tripped and fell, the cadet staff just stood there laughing at me and making fun of me, no one even asked if I was all right, they always do this this to me to the point that I am to afraid to even say anything in class anymore because I am afraid they are just going to make fun of me more....." they feel that they are humiliated by the actions of the poeple laughing at them; the poeple laughing at weren trying to haze them, but the result was the same.
I find your statement interesting in that it seems to contradict earlier ones. An individual tripping, and always being laughed because of it
is potential hazing, but a person who fails to meet a certain criteria, is singled out and given a belt to wear because of it is not?
One is potential, even though the action laughed at was not through intent (in any manner), but an intentional action is not because of what? I guess maybe the concept of hazing isn't clear to everyone.
As the number of people I've deal with, the number of graduates is irrelevant. 30 people is a statistics pool. Of those, 28 all had the same superior behaviour. I haven't seen this behaviour in non attendees, so the 30 Hawk grads are what I'm looking at. That's a majority of the ones I've known. Discounting my view because I've not attended Hawk is just a continuing example of the elitism that people seem to be learning at the school.
Others here have seen the same type of behaviour from the same group of people. Now, I could get together all the people that have ever dealt with a Hawk grad, and eventually put together a pool that would include all those graduates. I suspect that the it would still show a majority of Hawk grads have the same behaviour. Even the individual with the "super rangers" thread showed it, and tried to say it was "tongue in cheek". People don't make such remarks unless they believe it.
I believe that there are plenty of schools that good content, but the people are taught some other things that are an issue. One example is Air Force cops. I've run into a more than a few of them (a few which were good friends) that had the little saying of "Don't confuse your rank with my authority". At times, some of those folks had some troubles, especially when their authority didn't apply to the situation. Now, their training is very useful, keeps them alive and maintains order. But the viewpoint is a bad one to express.
Someone may think they're superior to others because of their training. The problem is when it gets expressed out of context. The
training is superior, but the
person isn't any better than anyone else.
QuoteDiscounting my view because I've not attended Hawk is just a continuing example of the elitism that people seem to be learning at the school.
No it isnt. You opinion is just that your opnion. You can give your view on people you've met; thier attitude, their competency, thier appearance and you can equate that to whatever thier experience was. But when you comment on someplace or something you havent ever expereinced for yourself you opinion does not carry the same weight. Yes if you run into 30 people that all have the same experience from something you can draw a conclusion from that; however you're still basing your "facts" from those people, not the actual activity.
If 50 people come into work and all tell you the sky is green, are you going to take their word for it and tell all your friends the sky is green, or are you going to go out an look for yourself before you tell everyone else?
QuoteSomeone may think they're superior to others because of their training. The problem is when it gets expressed out of context. The training is superior, but the person isn't any better than anyone else.
I coundn't agree more, and HMRS is by far not the ony culprit here (they just seem to flood the market, maybe its a numbers thing 100 every year vs 30 from PJOC for example...I dont know).
I dont know where/how they learn it, When I was a Sq CC & Primary instructor at HMRS I always told my students they are no one special, they just have more training the next guy; Scarves, belts and whistle chains dont make you superior to anyone, and I know a number of others that told thier students the same thing. Unfortunately there seems to be a disconnect between what seniors say and what cadets hear (CAP wide, not just at HMRS) I know just like encampments, there is a certain amount of "build up" done at the school for the basic squadron, building towards graduation..."look how far you have come, 9 days ago you were a bunch of disorganized cadets....now you're a team etc etc..." there is a fine line between building unit pride and esprit de corps and building elitesm.
mk
Ulimately, what matters is the product of the activity. HMRS, NBB, NESA, whatever. You can have top notch materials (members), outstanding process (training), and have crap for an output (attitude problems, elitism, etc). If I see something like that, as far as I am concerned - and I will spread my opinion - the activity is worthless. Even if I haven't been to the acitivity.
That output was one big reason NBB lost the ability to wear their beret outside of NBB, with a few local exceptions.
I have been to Hawk, ONCE. I was a guest and spent 2 days there. I was not impressed with the training, the staff or the ritualistic way of doing things. There is a difference between having a tradition, and trying to invent one on the spot. It seems most staff (cadets included) were trying to start their own traditions, and cared more about looking good than actually training.
When I saw staff cadets go inside the cottages and turn on an air conditioner pop open a soda and not come out for 2 hours, I lost respect. When I saw cadets being yelled at for not going fast enough on the O-Course during their fifth attempt in 20 minutes, I lost respect.
When I see how much Money is dumped into that place for the small amount of attendees actually going, I lost respect for its leadership.
It could very well be a great school, but lets make it a NESA "East" school, and dump the "Ranger" crap.
On a note more related to the original post....I received an email invite for a staff meeting:
Quote....to go over Winter School, Staff Training, Summer School and publications.
So with the spirit of improvement (is is a new year) I am looking for constructive idea to bring to the meeting.
Ides with the creativity of an internet troll are not what I am looking for (ie 1 liners like stop abusing cadets, get rid of bling or close the school are pointless...)
Normally I mostly advise on medical stuff, but do chime in on others...heres what I have already:
-The left shoulder patch thing....either update the ICL from the last commander (rescind it or re-indorse it) but publish it as a wing supplement (ie assumingly NHQ approved)
-The whole ranger accessories-either develop a PAWG 39-1 supplement that spells out their placement on the uniform, what they actually are and when and where to wear them (again NHQ approved) or ensure that a 39-1 is coming (like within a few months) that includes that info
Ranger Con-ops. What exactly do ranger teams do that reg CAP GTMS's dont and how and why you should develop and employ them. Or if you get one to show up on a mission how to use them most effectively. More specifically this spells out what exactly the training done at the school is and why it benefits you or your people to go.
Specific to the school-Some of the complaints in this thread (and others) lead me to the following thoughts: create some prereq's: age up the minimum to maybe 15 (solves some maturity issues) require a previous encampment and/or a rank requirement...ie C/SrA. (also the maturity issue, but also they alredy have the ideas of how teamwork & leadership work in a bigger than the home squadron setting). GTM3-You cant do "0" to ranger in 9 days and expect any kind of competency...if they already have a basis of CAP ES operations more training time can be spent on ranger/advanced GTM skills.
Staff Training: Find people with established leadership ability (the team commanders seem to always come out of the program with the leadership style of yell louder rather than a true ability to act the leader......) concentrate more on skill competency and teaching ability.
The one drastic thing I am looking at is a new niche for the ranger skill set. Basically for years HMRS was all about wilderness SAR, where no one else in CAP (as a whole) really did much more than ELT's. That has changed, the GTM program is fairly inclusive. There really serves minimal purpose for a seperate identifier of "ranger" or ranger team if the skills are pretty much the same as everyone else. (There is a push to make Ranger a 101 qual) One area CAP is lacking in is Disaster Releif Ops (besides hand out water or fill sandbags) The concepts of FLWG recon program would be a good fit. It involves a lot of the skills that the ranger program uses....mobility and navigation, 72 hour self sustainability, communications.
mk
From where I sit out here in the midwest the problem is more wide spread than HMRS. It's the whole Pennsylvania wing. Widespread disregard for uniform regs. The whole wing go shut down for failing to follow through on safety regs. Sounds like a cultural issue out there.
I'd also have to disagree with the more training assertion. I know some cadets from a nearby unit that went to HMRS and then complained when they came back and didn't have GTM from it. Sounds like it's less training to me. Also what use is rope work when regs prohibit us from utilizing it in the field?
Uniforms are big issue. PAWG needs to rescind it's practice of wearing the Hawk Patch in place of the Wing Patch on BDU's. NHQ says to wear special activity patches in one place, yet PAWG thinks it can disregard that written order and replace the wing Patch. As a Squadron Commnader, members who have gone to Hawk are allowed to wear thier Hawk patch on the pocket like the guidelines say, and nothing else. NOTHING ellse.
We are supposed to look uniform, but when I have 5 hawk rangers wearing 4 other pieces of bling in formation, it stands out.
Anyway, get the uniform issue in line. Rangers don't need tabs or badges to be a ranger.
Second, invite NESA leaders to hawk ranger schools and get thier opinion. I bet you would be surprised by what they have to say.
more emphasis on the ICS system. One of the biggest gripes I have heard about PAWG is that at Katrina, they wanted to do their own thing even to the point of disregarding their assignments and calling home for instructions. PAWG is PAWG, once you leave you are part of the bigger picture.....
Since I have become off the grounding list from the Mods here for approx 6 weeks...thank you Mods!!
I am coming on with this one in relation to the above post regarding 1) the ICS system 2) doing "your own thing" during an incident
AND reference to FEMA Independent Study Course IS 244 Developing and Managing Volunteers
I want to refer EVERYONE here to Appendix A Page A-10 and LOOK at the list......... I want some one here to FIND CAP in that list
When you are done....Why is CAP NOT on that list?? Overlook the religious component and look at the other ARC, REACT etc....lots of those folks are also 501 (c) 3 organizations...
I have been doing the non CAP EM real world stuff the last 6+ weeks.... I would really like to know, too
What CAP type ticked off FEMA BITD?? If I was a true EM with more empathy....I would involve CAP more....but apparently CAP like the crew in PAWG and its elite and uniform issues, probably influenced more than one decision YEEEEEAAAARS ago.
As a Forester, I can match "pretttneer" all of their (Hawk Mountain) skills by virtue of living it every day without roping up white ladder lacing on my LPC's and then some
Calling home for instructions on a Natl incident? REALLY? How that for a come back from my 6 week grounding from CAPTalk?
CAP is not on the list because CAP is called up through some group called the US Air Force for ANY federal taskings.
CAP is specifically mentioned in FEMA's online search and rescue course, so there is no anti-CAP conspiracy. And I suspect that arajca's comments are on the nose as CAP is considered a federal resource as far as state and local agencies are concerned rather than the more local volunteer groups that are probably the object of that particular course.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 01:49:08 PMNo it isnt. You opinion is just that your opnion. You can give your view on people you've met; thier attitude, their competency, thier appearance and you can equate that to whatever thier experience was. But when you comment on someplace or something you havent ever expereinced for yourself you opinion does not carry the same weight. Yes if you run into 30 people that all have the same experience from something you can draw a conclusion from that; however you're still basing your "facts" from those people, not the actual activity.
No, it's not my "opinion", it's my experience. 28 out of 30 people had issues. Period. That
fact does not change because I have not attended the school. School attendance is completely irrelevant.
It seems like you're trying tell me this: "You haven't been to Hawk, so what you claim to say didn't happen".
I'd be willing to accept that I may have just run across all the bad apples if
everyone that has posted here said "Well, I don't understand that, I've never had a problem with them." I'd certainly consider the possibility that maybe I just misconstrued the behaviour. The thing is, I'm not the only person that has posted here saying there's issues. It makes no sense to deny that some kind of issue exists because I haven't "been there".
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 01:49:08 PMIf 50 people come into work and all tell you the sky is green, are you going to take their word for it and tell all your friends the sky is green, or are you going to go out an look for yourself before you tell everyone else?
Of course not, but I'm certainly not going to believe one person that tells me the sky is green. So why are you trying to tell me the sky is green?
Besides, this isn't about people
telling me that all Hawk grads are problem children. It's about me actually
witnessing, with my own eyes and ears, problematic behaviour.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 01:49:08 PMQuoteSomeone may think they're superior to others because of their training. The problem is when it gets expressed out of context. The training is superior, but the person isn't any better than anyone else.
I coundn't agree more, and HMRS is by far not the ony culprit here (they just seem to flood the market, maybe its a numbers thing 100 every year vs 30 from PJOC for example...I dont know).
I've only met a handful PJOC grads. Most seemed to be hardcore motivated types, but nothing I would consider a behavioural issue. Then again, the four I've known of (over a ten year period) isn't enough to make a determination.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 01:49:08 PMI dont know where/how they learn it, When I was a Sq CC & Primary instructor at HMRS I always told my students they are no one special, they just have more training the next guy; Scarves, belts and whistle chains dont make you superior to anyone, and I know a number of others that told thier students the same thing.
That's an excellent thing to teach people, completely regardless of what school they're attending.
One thing about Army Rangers (and I know Hawk isn't the same thing) is that they're not only trained in some hardcore tactics, they were originally trained to teach the same thing they learned back at their units, basically propogating the knowledge. Maybe a similar program intention should be included at Hawk. Besides, I've read that when you think you know everything, teach. You be surprised at what you learn from "amateurs".
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 01:49:08 PMUnfortunately there seems to be a disconnect between what seniors say and what cadets hear (CAP wide, not just at HMRS)
I wouldn't class it in that manner, I would state "what
instructors say and what
students hear" is a more appropriate way of putting it. Of the people I met, it was a mix of both, therefore it isn't limited to cadets. It's a little unfair to pigeonhole cadets.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 01:49:08 PMthere is a fine line between building unit pride and esprit de corps and building elitesm.
I'll agree there.
No conspiracies considered here
I know the steps for CAP tasking thru AFRCC etc
Nonetheless the organizations are out on both Federal and State taskings. Seen 'em all on one variation or another in the wildfire environment whether or not Fed or State taskings
Some group called the USAF thanks for the sarcasm...that IS my welcoming back. Is that REALLY WHY CAP is not the list??? Like Eclipse says... CITE PLEASE!!! Got proof that is why CAP is not on that list in 244? CAP not a local resource?? Maybe when I'm in Emmitsburg, PA I'll ask the question. I seem to think the list in IS 244 is a NATIONAL list for both Fed and State incidents. Can you CAPTalkers prove different?
Doesn't matter we are still a 501(c)3 like the others and a "Corporation."
Some here like to split hairs... We just better be happy we get called at all..... Not being on a NVOAD list....hasn't that got allll those "branding issues" CAPTalkers have been chirping about??
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 03:59:47 PMNormally I mostly advise on medical stuff, but do chime in on others...
OK, a question: How is a "Ranger Medic" different that a regular Ranger? Yes, I know, obviously they have medical quals, but does a "Ranger Medic" still carry the same basic/core/foundation/etc quals that just a regular Ranger does? Wondering how much difference or additional qual there is.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 03:59:47 PMheres what I have already:
-The left shoulder patch thing....either update the ICL from the last commander (rescind it or re-indorse it) but publish it as a wing supplement (ie assumingly NHQ approved)
I still think it should be worn on the pocket just like other activity patches. To me, it presents an appearance of nose-thumbing at National directives. Just an opinion, others may have similar opinions, but I'm stating it as mine only.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 03:59:47 PMRanger Con-ops. What exactly do ranger teams do that reg CAP GTMS's dont and how and why you should develop and employ them. Or if you get one to show up on a mission how to use them most effectively. More specifically this spells out what exactly the training done at the school is and why it benefits you or your people to go.
I think that's a good plan. What does the Ranger team provide that GT's don't? It's gonna have to be something, or else it's just another special activity.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 03:59:47 PMSpecific to the school-Some of the complaints in this thread (and others) lead me to the following thoughts: create some prereq's: age up the minimum to maybe 15 (solves some maturity issues)
I like the idea, I think it might help.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 03:59:47 PMrequire a previous encampment and/or a rank requirement...ie C/SrA. (also the maturity issue, but also they alredy have the ideas of how teamwork & leadership work in a bigger than the home squadron setting).
I think a previous encampment is probably a good idea. One individual I overhead saying "I went to Ranger school for my encampment!" in response to someone talking about encampment. I don't know if it substitutes or not, but I don't think it should.
As to the rank, I don't know. That's not a "I don't like it", I just honestly don't know. I'd lean toward it, considering what you're saying about learning teamwork prior to attending.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 03:59:47 PMGTM3-You cant do "0" to ranger in 9 days and expect any kind of competency...if they already have a basis of CAP ES operations more training time can be spent on ranger/advanced GTM skills.
Like this too. The school should be building on previous experience, not presenting material that's completely new to the attendees. There are people that look to individuals with those Ranger tabs for knowledge, and it can be a negative when the person doesn't know anything more than any other GT Member.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 03:59:47 PMStaff Training: Find people with established leadership ability (the team commanders seem to always come out of the program with the leadership style of yell louder rather than a true ability to act the leader......) concentrate more on skill competency and teaching ability.
Definitely. Many people know that sometimes a quiet word with someone can make more difference than a day of yelling at them.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 02, 2010, 03:59:47 PMThe one drastic thing I am looking at is a new niche for the ranger skill set. Basically for years HMRS was all about wilderness SAR, where no one else in CAP (as a whole) really did much more than ELT's. That has changed, the GTM program is fairly inclusive. There really serves minimal purpose for a seperate identifier of "ranger" or ranger team if the skills are pretty much the same as everyone else. (There is a push to make Ranger a 101 qual) One area CAP is lacking in is Disaster Releif Ops (besides hand out water or fill sandbags) The concepts of FLWG recon program would be a good fit. It involves a lot of the skills that the ranger program uses....mobility and navigation, 72 hour self sustainability, communications.
Someone mentioned earlier about ICS. I'd say include some of the ICS courses that might relate to the types of skillsets that Rangers already possess. I'd also suggest that some of your higher classifications get more advanced ICS training. Advanced Rangers get ICS300 course (and anything else 3XX), Master Rangers 400 (and continuing into 4XX).
Maybe require something like a "Continuing Education" or at least have it available. There are lots of jobs in the world that don't end when you finish classes, it's just a foundation for the additional learning that's about to begin. In many places, we refer to ourselves as "unpaid professionals". Yeah, we all know we're unpaid, now lets work on the "professional" part.
I think the program could go a long way. I think it also might not hurt for some other states to consider some schools in their regions to cover their AOR's. Desert training (Desert Rats perhaps?), Snow/Extreme Cold, maybe those additional concepts are obviously out of your purvue, but I think other states should consider them.
Out of curiosity, is there a training plan document available? I'd be interested in reading it.
Disagree on the 300/400. HMRS is really a field-level course and 300/400 are more management-related. Two different ballgames.
As for the purpose of the rangers, the only difference between them and regular GT folks are rope-related, the use of which CAP has severely restricted. Why we're teaching cadets (and I suppose some seniors) techniques that we are not going to let them use on missions is beyond me.
Ranger Medic: The medical qual is an additional qualification (Ranger first, medic second) each progression carries an additional Ranger requirement up thru advanced ranger.
Shoulder patch-I dont understand this one at all, I clearly explain to out of state cadets that 39-1 says left pocket; PA cadets it says left pocket...but if your commander tells you differant thats on you.
Encampment-HMRS hasnt counted as an encampment since the early 80's, so anyone that tells you that is either lying or sadly confsed
ICS-I dont know if it was post Katrina based or just the general flo of how the world is shifting, but ICS requirements are part of the program Advanced needs IS 200, and I think experts do 300
The entire school is set up around an ICS structure actually, and its used during all simulated missions either durig the summer or during the year.
Con Ed-Not so much on the Ranger side, but on the medical side we have a con ed requirement for progression
Other Programs-There was discussion when Pineda was the commander about expanding the program nationally; basically creating regional schools; each school might have a regional specific "extra" skill, such as desert, winter, or swamp type operatoins..where PA is ropes/mountians; I think that fell to the back burner when he got sacked though.
What do rangers do differant from GT types...personally I dont see that big of a differance anymore...Basically there is more emphasis on wilderness skills, land navigation (at a lower level than the equivilent GTM program) and the rope work...which is allowable by special waiver to your wing/region, and not an uncommon skill required for wilderness SAR in PA
mk
I plan on attending the Winter School on the mountain this year in Echo squadron.
Is there a physical fitness exam at the beginning of that course?
To anyone considering going-
I've gone to winter school twice before, and it's a great experience. It's tough, but you'll be glad you did it.
If you do go, make sure you're gear is packed well, and that you're able to hydrate quickly and frequently. In addition, make sure you dress in layers, and wear waterproof boots. They tell you to do so for a reason.
I'm Ranger Staff. If any of you have any questions, I can answer them for you.
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 16, 2010, 07:51:29 PM
I'm Ranger Staff. If any of you have any questions, I can answer them for you.
Why does this school advocate ignoring uniform regulations in favor of non-reg bling?
QuoteCAP is specifically mentioned in FEMA's online search and rescue course, so there is no anti-CAP conspiracy. And I suspect that arajca's comments are on the nose as CAP is considered a federal resource as far as state and local agencies are concerned rather than the more local volunteer groups that are probably the object of that particular course.
FYI FEMA does bot have an on line Search and Rescue course. They have an on line course which is an orientation to ESF #9
Quote from: Rotorhead on January 19, 2010, 05:45:50 AM
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 16, 2010, 07:51:29 PM
I'm Ranger Staff. If any of you have any questions, I can answer them for you.
Why does this school advocate ignoring uniform regulations in favor of non-reg bling?
X2
Hawk does not advocate ignoring uniform regulations. Ranger staff wears something called Ranger parade, which consists of a whistle chain, pistol belt, and scarf. Grey scarf means staff in training, yellow means team commander, orange means squadron commander and above, green means medic in training, and red means medic. yellow and green are roughly on the same level, as well as red and orange. In addition, staff wears pistol belts, which expert rangers have black belts, and master medics wear red.
So, the color scarf you have denotes your rank, the color belt denotes how much you know. All staff and medics wear whistle chains.
However, none of these things may be worn outside of Hawk Mountain. Even the school commander cannot wear his orange scarf to squadron meetings. If any cadets in your squadron are wearing these things, feel free to rip them off. They have not earned that right, and cannot wear them outside of the mountain.
Post Note: the Hawk path can be worn only on the right hand chest pocket. Only PAWG can wear them in place of the wing patch.
Anything else?
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
Hawk does not advocate ignoring uniform regulations. Ranger staff wears something called Ranger parade, which consists of a whistle chain, pistol belt, and scarf. Grey scarf means staff in training, yellow means team commander, orange means squadron commander and above, green means medic in training, and red means medic. yellow and green are roughly on the same level, as well as red and orange. In addition, staff wears pistol belts, which expert rangers have black belts, and master medics wear red.
(sigh)
OK, I'll bite. Please cite the sections in 39-1 or the ICL authorizing these items to be worn with a Civil Air Patrol uniform.
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
However, none of these things may be worn outside of Hawk Mountain. Even the school commander cannot wear his orange scarf to squadron meetings.
Umm... Why not?
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
Hawk does not advocate ignoring uniform regulations. Ranger staff wears something called Ranger parade, which consists of a whistle chain, pistol belt, and scarf. Grey scarf means staff in training, yellow means team commander, orange means squadron commander and above, green means medic in training, and red means medic. yellow and green are roughly on the same level, as well as red and orange. In addition, staff wears pistol belts, which expert rangers have black belts, and master medics wear red.
So, the color scarf you have denotes your rank, the color belt denotes how much you know. All staff and medics wear whistle chains.
However, none of these things may be worn outside of Hawk Mountain. Even the school commander cannot wear his orange scarf to squadron meetings. If any cadets in your squadron are wearing these things, feel free to rip them off. They have not earned that right, and cannot wear them outside of the mountain.
Post Note: the Hawk path can be worn only on the right hand chest pocket. Only PAWG can wear them in place of the wing patch.
Anything else?
What's the benefit of wearing them 'on the mountain?' Am I doing my patients at work a disservice by not rcking a scarf with my EMS blues?
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 16, 2010, 07:51:29 PM
I'm Ranger Staff. If any of you have any questions, I can answer them for you.
Are you a cadet or a senior?
What role do you have on staff?
Quote.... Am I doing my patients at work a disservice by not rcking a scarf with my EMS blues?
Do you wear a badge/patch that denotes your certification/position? Thats more or less where the scarf thing comes into play. (ok its more for staff/students to identify them rather than Joe Q public, but you get the gist)
Quote(sigh)
OK, I'll bite. Please cite the sections in 39-1 or the ICL authorizing these items to be worn with a Civil Air Patrol uniform.
Really are you just trolling for a reason (as if needed) to begin a whole new series of bashing on someone for following a practcice they assume to be legitimate (or more specifically trying to make this person look foolish). Or did you really not read the other 10 pages of this thread (or the countless others) that its been clearly pointed that there is no such ICL or cite in CAPM 39-1.
otherwise I would say they arent worn off the mountain because they are activity specific. Just like some encampmanets that wear specifc colored hats or t-shirts to denote assignemnt or position. (yes there is bling worn off the mountain too)
mk
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 19, 2010, 04:34:46 PM
Really are you just trolling for a reason (as if needed) to begin a whole new series of bashing on someone for following a practcice they assume to be legitimate (or more specifically trying to make this person look foolish).
Actually, I was looking to reconcile the following two statements:
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
Hawk does not advocate ignoring uniform regulations.
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
Ranger staff wears something called Ranger parade, which consists of a whistle chain, pistol belt, and scarf. Grey scarf means staff in training, yellow means team commander, orange means squadron commander and above, green means medic in training, and red means medic. yellow and green are roughly on the same level, as well as red and orange. In addition, staff wears pistol belts, which expert rangers have black belts, and master medics wear red.
It struck me as odd that someone would make a bold statement and then contradict it in the very next sentence.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 19, 2010, 04:34:46 PM
Or did you really not read the other 10 pages of this thread (or the countless others) that its been clearly pointed that there is no such ICL or cite in CAPM 39-1.
No, I pretty much stopped at page 1 with the "pink web belt" story. While we're at it, perhaps that can be addressed in the context of the above as well.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 19, 2010, 04:34:46 PM
otherwise I would say they arent worn off the mountain because they are activity specific. Just like some encampmanets that wear specifc colored hats or t-shirts to denote assignemnt or position. (yes there is bling worn off the mountain too)
See, that's my point. There is only one "activity specific" uniform item in 39-1, and that is a beret. The items listed above are not even in the table describing what items may be permitted by a Wing Commander. You acknowledge that there is no support for wearing these items in 39-1, so then how does the Hawk Mountain staff justify their use?
And the encampments that circumvent regulations should be taken to task as well IMHO.
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
Post Note: the Hawk path can be worn only on the right hand chest pocket. Only PAWG can wear them in place of the wing patch.
Not true. The National Board allowed for the following patches to be worn in place of a Wing patch:
- National Emergency Services Academy
- National Flight Academy
- Cadet Officer School
- National Honor Guard Academy
- Hawk Mountain Ranger School
- Blue Beret
- Air Force Space Command Familiarization Course
- Pararescue Orientation Course
Florida Wing sent out a policy letter last year specifically stating as such, and other Wings have probably done the same. So, it isn't just a PAWG policy.
The key part of that NB decision was that WING CC could authorise other event patches in place of the Wing Patch. PAWG only allows the HMRS patch on the right shoulder....and just because they do does not imply that it is authorised in other wings.
FLWG allows others.....I know that NVWG does not allow any other patch but the wing patch on that shoulder.
Quote from: JoeTomasone on January 19, 2010, 01:29:13 PM
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
Hawk does not advocate ignoring uniform regulations. Ranger staff wears something called Ranger parade, which consists of a whistle chain, pistol belt, and scarf. Grey scarf means staff in training, yellow means team commander, orange means squadron commander and above, green means medic in training, and red means medic. yellow and green are roughly on the same level, as well as red and orange. In addition, staff wears pistol belts, which expert rangers have black belts, and master medics wear red.
(sigh)
OK, I'll bite. Please cite the sections in 39-1 or the ICL authorizing these items to be worn with a Civil Air Patrol uniform.
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
However, none of these things may be worn outside of Hawk Mountain. Even the school commander cannot wear his orange scarf to squadron meetings.
Umm... Why not?
If you're looking to debate the official rules of the uniform, you're arguing with the wrong guy. I have no freaking clue how PA WG and National worked this out, but thats how it is, whether you like it or not.
Quote from: Eclipse on January 19, 2010, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 16, 2010, 07:51:29 PM
I'm Ranger Staff. If any of you have any questions, I can answer them for you.
Are you a cadet or a senior?
What role do you have on staff?
I'm a cadet, Team Commander for Bravo Squadron, will be an orange scarf and a Squadron Commander for Hawk 2010.
Quote from: DBlair on January 19, 2010, 05:36:13 PM
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
Post Note: the Hawk path can be worn only on the right hand chest pocket. Only PAWG can wear them in place of the wing patch.
Not true. The National Board allowed for the following patches to be worn in place of a Wing patch:
- National Emergency Services Academy
- National Flight Academy
- Cadet Officer School
- National Honor Guard Academy
- Hawk Mountain Ranger School
- Blue Beret
- Air Force Space Command Familiarization Course
- Pararescue Orientation Course
Florida Wing sent out a policy letter last year specifically stating as such, and other Wings have probably done the same. So, it isn't just a PAWG policy.
Missing my point there. The Hawk patch can only be worn on the chest pocket, except in PA where it can also be worn in the WG place. Not saying nothing else can be worn in the WG place.
So, other than bashing on Hawk Mountain about uniforms, does anyone have any other real questions? I'm just spitballing, but I'm pretty sure that's the purpose of this thread, for cadets to get an idea of what to expect.
Quoteso then how does the Hawk Mountain staff justify their use?
The same way most people in CAP with a wrong uniform do (as I have got in the past when I used to question seniors about uniform issues)....... "My commander told me I could" (suprisingly most dont say thanks for the help, I didnt know)
so in this case the guy with the eagle and scramble eggs on his hat says this is the uniform, and its approved; so like good paramilitary types people salute and execute.... Is it right, no; is the world going to end, no; is it worth making an incident over at the time...not really.
mk
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 05:59:37 PM
If you're looking to debate the official rules of the uniform, you're arguing with the wrong guy. I have no freaking clue how PA WG and National worked this out, but thats how it is, whether you like it or not.
I don't care one way or the other - I'm not involved. I'm rather disappointed, however, that you don't care either. You see, National and PAWG apparently did NOT "work this out", because there is no guidance from either echelon on the matter. Funny that National remembered to authorize the Hawk patch for the BDUs but forgot all the other stuff, isn't it?
WIWAC, they never taught me to ignore regulations because "someone said it was OK". Perhaps the program has changed.
<shrug>
Carry on, Cadet. I'll take my leave of the thread now.
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 06:15:34 PM
So, other than bashing on Hawk Mountain about uniforms, does anyone have any other real questions? I'm just spitballing, but I'm pretty sure that's the purpose of this thread, for cadets to get an idea of what to expect.
Are you a cadet or a senior?
What is your position on staff?
Quote from: Eclipse on January 19, 2010, 06:33:48 PM
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 06:15:34 PM
So, other than bashing on Hawk Mountain about uniforms, does anyone have any other real questions? I'm just spitballing, but I'm pretty sure that's the purpose of this thread, for cadets to get an idea of what to expect.
Are you a cadet or a senior?
What is your position on staff?
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 06:00:41 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 19, 2010, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 16, 2010, 07:51:29 PM
I'm Ranger Staff. If any of you have any questions, I can answer them for you.
Are you a cadet or a senior?
What role do you have on staff?
I'm a cadet, Team Commander for Bravo Squadron, will be an orange scarf and a Squadron Commander for Hawk 2010.
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 06:03:34 PM
Quote from: DBlair on January 19, 2010, 05:36:13 PM
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
Post Note: the Hawk path can be worn only on the right hand chest pocket. Only PAWG can wear them in place of the wing patch.
Not true. The National Board allowed for the following patches to be worn in place of a Wing patch:
- National Emergency Services Academy
- National Flight Academy
- Cadet Officer School
- National Honor Guard Academy
- Hawk Mountain Ranger School
- Blue Beret
- Air Force Space Command Familiarization Course
- Pararescue Orientation Course
Florida Wing sent out a policy letter last year specifically stating as such, and other Wings have probably done the same. So, it isn't just a PAWG policy.
Missing my point there. The Hawk patch can only be worn on the chest pocket, except in PA where it can also be worn in the WG place. Not saying nothing else can be worn in the WG place.
No, you are missing my point here. You state that it can only be worn on the pocket, except that in PAWG it can be worn in place of the Wing patch. My point is that this is not exclusive to PAWG as you claim- other wings allow it to be worn in place of the Wing patch as well.
PAWG has a habit of thinking they are an island and that policies are exclusive to them.
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 06:00:41 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 19, 2010, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 16, 2010, 07:51:29 PM
I'm Ranger Staff. If any of you have any questions, I can answer them for you.
Are you a cadet or a senior?
What role do you have on staff?
I'm a cadet, Team Commander for Bravo Squadron, will be an orange scarf and a Squadron Commander for Hawk 2010.
Sorry,
Read the Friendly Thread.
My advice, as a cadet, and not a spokesperson for HMRS, would be to just leave this alone.
Quote from: DBlair on January 19, 2010, 06:47:48 PM
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 06:03:34 PM
Quote from: DBlair on January 19, 2010, 05:36:13 PM
Quote from: Ranger Staff on January 19, 2010, 01:07:07 PM
Post Note: the Hawk path can be worn only on the right hand chest pocket. Only PAWG can wear them in place of the wing patch.
Not true. The National Board allowed for the following patches to be worn in place of a Wing patch:
- National Emergency Services Academy
- National Flight Academy
- Cadet Officer School
- National Honor Guard Academy
- Hawk Mountain Ranger School
- Blue Beret
- Air Force Space Command Familiarization Course
- Pararescue Orientation Course
Florida Wing sent out a policy letter last year specifically stating as such, and other Wings have probably done the same. So, it isn't just a PAWG policy.
Missing my point there. The Hawk patch can only be worn on the chest pocket, except in PA where it can also be worn in the WG place. Not saying nothing else can be worn in the WG place.
No, you are missing my point here. You state that it can only be worn on the pocket, except that in PAWG it can be worn in place of the Wing patch. My point is that this is not exclusive to PAWG as you claim- other wings allow it to be worn in place of the Wing patch as well.
PAWG has a habit of thinking they are an island and that policies are exclusive to them.
Well then apparently that's my mistake. I was under the impression that only PA WG could wear it there.
Serious Question.... How many rabbits will be slaughtered this year to make everyone on the mountain feel better about themselves?
Or...
Will Cadets leave Hawk with staph infections like last year??
Or...
Will we see pictures floating around again of Cadets smoking like last year??
Or...
and the questions can go on forever.
A cadet comes on this board with the intent of responding to questions from other cadets about attending Hawk Mtn. In typical CapTalk fashion he is immeditatley dogpiled about things he has no direct knowledge of or control over by seniors that should know better.
Quote from: PA Guy on January 19, 2010, 07:19:22 PM
A cadet comes on this board with the intent of responding to questions from other cadets about attending Hawk Mtn. In typical CapTalk fashion he is immeditatley dogpiled about things he has no direct knowledge of or control over by seniors that should know better.
Seriously.
Yep those over grown cadets at CAPTalk over the age of 26
Knowing everything
From my point of view, which is about .02333333333333333333333 cents on this board
Hawk Mountain does draw a serious amount of self dog piling year after year
PJOC is taught by Pros also....maybe even exceeding that of Hawk Mountain
PJOC even does it in regular BDU's apparently with not too much uniform fanfare
CAPTalk........ where dogpiling is a day to day ritual and where one can learn even next to NOTHING about uniforms.....except how many there are and HOW many ways to wear it....correctly or incorrectly
And EVEN more with a reckless 39-1 that needs a WHOLE lotta updating to include REAL wording about ALLLLLLL these fancy field uniforms...
Thinking that's the Bible? Well it IS time for a re write even for you hard core CAPtalkers who may defend the 39-1
Quote from: raivo on January 19, 2010, 07:22:30 PM
Quote from: PA Guy on January 19, 2010, 07:19:22 PM
A cadet comes on this board with the intent of responding to questions from other cadets about attending Hawk Mtn. In typical CapTalk fashion he is immeditatley dogpiled about things he has no direct knowledge of or control over by seniors that should know better.
Seriously.
Gentlemen,
A someone who identifies himself as Ranger Staff comes onto the forum with out reading the entire thread, makes statements about the policies of PAWG and and HMRS as if he in fact did have some control over them, then follows up with a contradiction of that same same policy statement....deserves to be dog piled.
PAWG and HMRS have flouted 39-1 for many years. Anyone trying to defend them is going to get dogpiled....and rightly so. The only defense I accept from anyone is "I was told to wear it by my commander". At that point I stop giving the individual a hard time and start looking for the commander.
Unfortunately in this case National is not doing their job....there is nothing else we can do except correct our people as they return from HMRS and toe the line as best we can.
^ Agreed. I mention Hawk when giving the annual NCSA speech. Honestly, I support NESA and their vision, more so than Hawk, but if a Cadet wants to go to PA Wing and spend his or her days hiking up a Mountain, I will not try to persuade them differently. In fact, the Squadron pays for all NCSA costs, and we have one of the largest NCSA attendance rates in the Wing.
However, I make sure that all the ranger bling comes off when they appear at the next Squadron Meeting following Hawk. All except the patch, which I mandate to be affixed in the same position as all other NCSA patches.
Quote from: lordmonar on January 19, 2010, 07:40:52 PMPAWG and HMRS have flouted 39-1 for many years. Anyone trying to defend them is going to get dogpiled....and rightly so. The only defense I accept from anyone is "I was told to wear it by my commander". At that point I stop giving the individual a hard time and start looking for the commander.
I guess I'm not understanding everyone's eagerness to band together and denounce HMRS' uniform wear, *at* HMRS. I honestly don't care what they do at HMRS - their activity, their business. If National wants to enforce it, then that's their prerogative; otherwise, I'm going to treat it like the wearing of morale patches on flight suits in the AF:
Is it technically authorized? No.
Do most people do it? Yes.
Am I going to make it my business to tell people who do it, that they're wrong? No.
Quote from: lordmonar on January 19, 2010, 07:40:52 PMUnfortunately in this case National is not doing their job....there is nothing else we can do except correct our people as they return from HMRS
Once they're back at their home unit, yes, that's perfectly reasonable.
^ PAWG does not authorize wear of any HMRS "bling" outside the school. Approved patches are authorized as to the (not yet updated) CAPM 39-1. If any individual decides to flout 39-1, it should be dealt with by their unit commander.
National not doing "their job"? I can agree with that comment because 39-1 hasn't been updated in the last .... years. But, then, when it comes to uniforms; who does have "authority" anymore? Maybe we will receive some real guidance in the near future.
Oh, and just to clarify some other issues, The HMRS curriculum has been approved by NHQ/CP. The last 2 National Commanders have attended the school as students and were very satisfied with the experience. And unlike PJOC, HMRS was never closed down for CPPT violations.
I didn't come onto this website to argue endlessly about uniform regs. I appreciate the support of all the members that came to my aid, but this sniping over Hawk gear that nobody here has control over has to stop. It's pointless.
Cadets can only wear the SAR patch. Nothing else, unless they're staff and have earned the staff rocker that goes beneath it. They can't wear a chain, belt, scarf, white laces, or Ranger Grade tab. They can't roll their covers. If they have a problem with that, give me their names and ensure they come to Hawk in 2010, and I'll remind them of the rules face to face.
So, do any CADETS that have noncynical questions about the upcoming winter or summer schools? Packing, equipment, preparation, ect?
QuoteThey can't wear ... Ranger Grade tab
Actually they can on the BBDU per the National Board. Should be incorporated in the next 39-1 :angel:
I went WIWAC and loved it. I remember thinking I had learned some valuable skills. Overall, I had a ton of fun.
Quote from: SilverEagle2 on January 19, 2010, 11:06:09 PM
QuoteThey can't wear ... Ranger Grade tab
Actually they can on the BBDU per the National Board. Should be incorporated in the next 39-1 :angel:
I went WIWAC and loved it. I remember thinking I had learned some valuable skills. Overall, I had a ton of fun.
No they can not. Show me the current ICL, which is not out of date per Nationals own policy regulations. Honestly, more members wear the ranger tabs on BDU's illegally than on BBDU's.
Quote from: Spike on January 20, 2010, 12:30:27 AMShow me the current ICL, which is not out of date per Nationals own policy regulations.
Yeah, that's been tried already, spin again.
QuoteCadets can only wear the SAR patch. Nothing else, unless they're staff and have earned the staff rocker that goes beneath it. They can't wear a chain, belt, scarf, white laces, or Ranger Grade tab
not so fast there high speed......Firstly your off a little in your Ranger uniform issues:
The unifrom you described is technically Ranger Base....add in white laces and its Ranger Parade.
Secondly:
The only items that are restricted to "staff cadets" are yellow/orange scarves, hats with a keystone on them and the staff rocker.
Belts, whistle chains, grade tabs, white laces and other scarves are tehcnically uniform items "authorized" to all ranger team members as authorized by the squadron commander (or some such paraphrase from the last PAWG Ranger team SOP)
And for the record there is no such things as "rolling" the hat; its pretty much just shaped to make a better front; and its not exclusive to Ranger Staff.
Frankly its crap like this that makes the program look bad to the rest of the world. People complain about the "elitest" attitude of HMRS pesonnel; stating that there is a special class of Ranger that is the only group allowed the "Ranger Bling" just promotes that attitude. Hate to shake up your world but you are no one special because you are on staff....
mk
For those of you not familiar with the HMRS uniform standards...
(http://www.box.net/shared/static/dysfl9l4et.jpg)
Quote
The Ranger Uniform
Pressed and Starched BDU Uniform, complete with all patches and rank (if an Officer, cloth rank will be sewn on). The SAR (Summer School is required) patch will be sewn on. Uniform must be in good condition. Pants and Blouse must match.
Shined Combat Boots, jungle boots will not be accepted
Orange Hat, with squadron numbers or Keystone (if Orange or Red Scarf) Cloth Rank sewn on - If an Officer
Bib-Scarf. Scarf will be ironed, but not creased down the center.
Gray - Staff Candidate
Yellow - Basic Staff
Orange - Advanced Staff
Green - Field Medic
Red - Medic First Class
Pistol Belt with Brass Eyelets
White - Staff & Staff Candidates
Black - Expert Ranger
Red - Master Medic
Whistle & Chain
Grooming Standards as described in CAPM 39-1
Pen and small notebook will be carried on your person at all times.
OK Spike...they will be able to when the new 39-1 is delivered. I still believe this is not completely accurate.
According to the CAP Knowledgebase (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1261&p_created=1083596073&p_sid=LtDherSj&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_srch=1&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9MjQzLDI0MyZwX3Byb2RzPSZwX2NhdHM9MCZwX3B2PSZwX2N2PSZwX3NlYXJjaF90eXBlPWFuc3dlcnMuc2VhcmNoX25sJnBfcGFnZT0yJnBfc2VhcmNoX3RleHQ9Ym9hcmQgZGVjaXNpb25z&p_li=&p_topview=1), it says they can wear the Ranger Grade Tabs on the BBDU (and BDU once USAF approval is in hand).
Per policy, NB\NEC agenda items are in effect when approved. You state it must have an ICL, however, I respectfully disagree.
ICL's as outlined by CAPR 5-4 state an ICL can be used if needed for a listed set of circumstances.
QuoteSituations requiring immediate action due to a state of emergency, an unforeseen circumstance involving the preservation of life or property, or other contingencies that may require prompt action may result in an interim change letter being issued outlining immediate policies.
This does not fall into those categories and thus by the regs does not need an ICL. Therefore, the minutes and votes stand as policy and the update of the 39-1 is all that needs to occur. If they did issue an ICL and the change was to be permanent, the policy states that it must be incorporated within 90 days.
Since no ICL was issued (cause it did not warrant one), then no expiry is required and the agenda item stands as acceptable and in effect.
Unfortunately, NHQ has issued ICL's on Uniform Decisions did not warrant one. This is why there is mass confusion. 39-1 needs an update, we all agree. However, ICL's should never have been used as a method of informing the masses on these types of changes and thus causing this repetitive argument.
Now back to the topic at hand...
Go to Hawk and strive to be the best CAP member you can and you will be a great Hawk student.
I would like to say so many things to all of this, too much for me to even think of at once. I can sit here and quote regs, dog pile cadets trying to make friends, discredit a program that has produced some of the finest cadets and military personnel, and flat out bash someones passion. But what do I get out of it? I certainly wouldn't feel better about myself.
As a cadet, I started young in the Ranger program and as I grew up and became Staff I was introduced to the politics and mudslinging. To be quite honest it has RUINED my time as a cadet. I like so many others had (and still do) a deep passion for the program since my first Ranger school. You would say that's because I was brainwashed with all that "Ranger Lore" But what attracted me like so many others wasn't at all like that. While other instructors sat around and clicked PowerPoint's all day my Ranger staff not only taught me the material but actually sat down in the dirt, in the rain, and got down to my level and practiced with me until I could do it as well as they could. That's what sets us apart. Do I have an elitist attitude, no I don't. You can say I do but I treat everyone all the same with the same respect. If you've got something to teach me than I'm ready to learn. But don't prejudge me or any other Ranger until you know them.
Quote from: Rodriguez on January 20, 2010, 02:38:01 PM
I would like to say so many things to all of this, too much for me to even think of at once. I can sit here and quote regs, dog pile cadets trying to make friends, discredit a program that has produced some of the finest cadets and military personnel, and flat out bash someones passion. But what do I get out of it? I certainly wouldn't feel better about myself.
As a cadet, I started young in the Ranger program and as I grew up and became Staff I was introduced to the politics and mudslinging. To be quite honest it has RUINED my time as a cadet. I like so many others had (and still do) a deep passion for the program since my first Ranger school. You would say that's because I was brainwashed with all that "Ranger Lore" But what attracted me like so many others wasn't at all like that. While other instructors sat around and clicked PowerPoint's all day my Ranger staff not only taught me the material but actually sat down in the dirt, in the rain, and got down to my level and practiced with me until I could do it as well as they could. That's what sets us apart. Do I have an elitist attitude, no I don't. You can say I do but I treat everyone all the same with the same respect. If you've got something to teach me than I'm ready to learn. But don't prejudge me or any other Ranger until you know them.
I haven't seen anyone say the training isn't good. The problem is the all the attitude crap that comes out of hawk. As for not prejudging any ranger until I know them, well, based on my experience with them, too bad. The attitude issues I've had with them - not just one or two, but almost every one of them - tells me the training isn't worth the headaches afterward. Rightly or wrongly, the ranger tab tells ME you have a attitude problem and I probably won't worry about getting to know you if my only contact is at an incident or exercise.
I did regular old ground team and my CAPC experience hasn't been ruined.
Oh, and my instructor was right there with me, teaching me the skills. It was hard for him to set up the projector in the woods though.
Quote from: Rodriguez on January 20, 2010, 02:38:01 PMBut don't prejudge me or any other Ranger until you know them.
I didn't pre-judge; I went and saw for msyelf. And I know several HMRS graduates. Most (not all) do have a certain attitude about them that screams elitist. Silly whistles, ascots and belts. Check those along with the attitude at the door and come back with a skillset to share, not brag about.
That said, I would still support any cadet going to HMRS, but I'll be the first to greet them upon their return >:D
Quote from: Stonewall on January 20, 2010, 03:27:48 AM
For those of you not familiar with the HMRS uniform standards...
(http://www.box.net/shared/static/dysfl9l4et.jpg)
Quote
The Ranger Uniform
GAK! Ugly! Makes you look like an orange salad. Whoever thought that up needs to see an eye doctor for a color vision test!
And they wonder why people laugh at CAP?
Why do we need all of the colors and ruffles and flourishes? Just go to the school. I could maybe see the arm patch, OK, throw 'em a bone. But white belts and orange ascots? What is required to be a Ranger Master Medic?
The issue I have with CAP sometimes is using terms that have other meanings elsewhere in SAR. You show up with "ADVANCED RANGER MASTER MEDIC" on your shirt you better know whats up.
As a Ranger Medic, What are you authorized to do on an acttual mission, other than basic first aid?
Got this off the ol' Wiki pedia
Medic advancement
Field Medics have completed the basic Field Medic course, and hold certification in Adult CPR and Wilderness First Aid.[12]
Field Medic 1st Class is the typical medic assigned to a Ranger team. In addition to CPR and Wilderness First Aid, they have First Responder or Professional Rescuer qualifications. They have also completed the advanced field medic course.[12]
Senior Medics are Operational medical specialists. Although qualified to assist ground teams, Senior Medics typically support base operations or even multi-agency mission bases. Senior Medics must be at least 18 years of age, hold EMT-B qualifications or higher, and be well versed in several areas of advanced medical care. Senior Medics are awarded Red Scarves to wear with their uniform.[12]
Master Medic represent the leadership of the Medic Program, and are similar to Expert Rangers. They typically hold instructor ratings in multiple medical fields. In addition to the Red Scarf, Master Medics are awarded a Red Pistol belt. Only 21 people have become Master Medics since 1972.[12]
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 20, 2010, 09:48:06 PM
Got this off the ol' Wiki pedia
Medic advancement
Field Medics have completed the basic Field Medic course, and hold certification in Adult CPR and Wilderness First Aid.[12]
Field Medic 1st Class is the typical medic assigned to a Ranger team. In addition to CPR and Wilderness First Aid, they have First Responder or Professional Rescuer qualifications. They have also completed the advanced field medic course.[12]
Senior Medics are Operational medical specialists. Although qualified to assist ground teams, Senior Medics typically support base operations or even multi-agency mission bases. Senior Medics must be at least 18 years of age, hold EMT-B qualifications or higher, and be well versed in several areas of advanced medical care. Senior Medics are awarded Red Scarves to wear with their uniform.[12]
Master Medic represent the leadership of the Medic Program, and are similar to Expert Rangers. They typically hold instructor ratings in multiple medical fields. In addition to the Red Scarf, Master Medics are awarded a Red Pistol belt. Only 21 people have become Master Medics since 1972.[12]
Sounds fine. Now what can they really do per CAP regulations?
Hint:
Quote from: CAPR 160-1a. Medical care within CAP is limited to emergency care, only (i.e., first aid and stabilization) within the training and qualifications of the person rendering such care, until such time that private professional or authorized military care can be obtained.
(http://www.ci.yakima.wa.us/services/fire/clip_images/911_clip_image002_0002.jpg)
Same as the rest of us...
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 20, 2010, 06:31:18 PM
Why do we need all of the colors and ruffles and flourishes? Just go to the school. I could maybe see the arm patch, OK, throw 'em a bone. But white belts and orange ascots? What is required to be a Ranger Master Medic?
The issue I have with CAP sometimes is using terms that have other meanings elsewhere in SAR. You show up with "ADVANCED RANGER MASTER MEDIC" on your shirt you better know whats up.
As for the attitude, yea there are a few people in the Ranger program that take that tradition and abuse it and make it into something to brag about. But then again Ive met plenty of cadets from PJOC who take on an elitist attitude. I like most Rangers in CAP wear my Ranger parade items at Ranger activities when I'm serving as staff. At any other CAP activity I don't wear it, anyone who does is wrong but that doesn't mean the whole program is to blame.
We don't teach that attitude at hawk. As a matter of fact we teach our students that they are ambassadors to the program and that they have to represent it right.
^An excellent "attitude". As an NCSA, HMRS is a great place for a member to experience the PA countryside, learn something different and have some fun. Thousands have been students and participated in traditions that are over 50 years old. Yes, some of those traditions are strange but; that's "the mountain" for you. I've witnessed a tremendous increase in professionalism of the staff over the last 10 years and have no question as to its continued existence. I enjoy my "visits" every so often and, I feel welcomed and at home when I'm there. I recommend the activity for anyone as an alternative to PJOC or Blue Beret.
Quote from: Rodriguez on January 21, 2010, 02:42:36 PM
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 20, 2010, 06:31:18 PM
Why do we need all of the colors and ruffles and flourishes? Just go to the school. I could maybe see the arm patch, OK, throw 'em a bone. But white belts and orange ascots? What is required to be a Ranger Master Medic?
The issue I have with CAP sometimes is using terms that have other meanings elsewhere in SAR. You show up with "ADVANCED RANGER MASTER MEDIC" on your shirt you better know whats up.
As for the attitude, yea there are a few people in the Ranger program that take that tradition and abuse it and make it into something to brag about. But then again Ive met plenty of cadets from PJOC who take on an elitist attitude. I like most Rangers in CAP wear my Ranger parade items at Ranger activities when I'm serving as staff. At any other CAP activity I don't wear it, anyone who does is wrong but that doesn't mean the whole program is to blame.
We don't teach that attitude at hawk. As a matter of fact we teach our students that they are ambassadors to the program and that they have to represent it right.
I didnt say anything about an attitude. I was curious what a CAP Senior or Master Medic can do in CAP? So since I am an EMT, I can call myself an Senior Medic? Lets face it. Even in the "operations world" EMTs really arent allowed to do much to begin with. And the rating description says
Senior Medics typically support base operations or even multi-agency mission bases. So you sit in the First Aid hut during searches? I mean, I get it. Being an EMT, I put my skills to work on a limited basis at work probably once per week. Having those skills on a GT is valuable and knowing how to employ them in a non-hospital setting is even better.
Let me put this out there. I have NO issue whatsoever with Ranger School. I think its great. I tried to go as a cadet, but Hawk being in PA and me being in CA, it just never worked out. However, now that I am on the full time side of SAR, I've used some of my skills as as EMT, I've been a Tactical EMT on a SWAT Team and have used my EMT training, I can tell you titles mean something to the outside world. With CAP showing up to a SAR and working with other SAR agencies, I think its time that Hawk took a look at its symbolism. I mean C'mon? First Aid and CPR card and your wearing a "RANGER MEDIC" badge? EMT-B and your a "Senior Medic" and Master medic makes you a Hawk medic Instructor? I see volunteers all the time who show up to SARs with patches from every 2 day SAR course they've attended. Generic EMT patches on their sleeves, CPR, First Aid patches all over, High Angle Rescue Tech patches from a 3 day rope course they paid 1 million dollars to attend. They have so many patches they look like outlaw bikers. Then you look at the guys who do it for a living and they have a name tag. Something to think about.
Wait wait wait Captain, are you saying the guy with the most patches doesn't win?
As an outsider who works EMS professionally, I can say that (and this goes to all CAP ES types), nobody outside of CAP knows what your patches mean, and even less care. Someone with a well maintained shirt, and boots that don't look like they just came out of the box will get more attentioned then someone with a 'Master Medic' patch on their shirt. Furthermore, if some didn't have a local qualification to back up their training, I'd be relutant to let them give me a hand unless I really needed it.
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 21, 2010, 07:01:52 PMHigh Angle Rescue Tech patches from a 3 day rope course they paid 1 million dollars to attend.
Just as an FYI, my classes are only 1/2 a Mil - REGISTER TODAY!
[/quote]
I didnt say anything about an attitude. I was curious what a CAP Senior or Master Medic can do in CAP? So since I am an EMT, I can call myself an Senior Medic? Lets face it. Even in the "operations world" EMTs really arent allowed to do much to begin with. And the rating description says Senior Medics typically support base operations or even multi-agency mission bases. So you sit in the First Aid hut during searches? I mean, I get it. Being an EMT, I put my skills to work on a limited basis at work probably once per week. Having those skills on a GT is valuable and knowing how to employ them in a non-hospital setting is even better.
Let me put this out there. I have NO issue whatsoever with Ranger School. I think its great. I tried to go as a cadet, but Hawk being in PA and me being in CA, it just never worked out. However, now that I am on the full time side of SAR, I've used some of my skills as as EMT, I've been a Tactical EMT on a SWAT Team and have used my EMT training, I can tell you titles mean something to the outside world. With CAP showing up to a SAR and working with other SAR agencies, I think its time that Hawk took a look at its symbolism. I mean C'mon? First Aid and CPR card and your wearing a "RANGER MEDIC" badge? EMT-B and your a "Senior Medic" and Master medic makes you a Hawk medic Instructor? I see volunteers all the time who show up to SARs with patches from every 2 day SAR course they've attended. Generic EMT patches on their sleeves, CPR, First Aid patches all over, High Angle Rescue Tech patches from a 3 day rope course they paid 1 million dollars to attend. They have so many patches they look like outlaw bikers. Then you look at the guys who do it for a living and they have a name tag. Something to think about.
[/quote]
Good points about the patches, what they mean and how they dont mean you can do what they say. Let me fill you in on the "Master Medic" role at HMRS.
The Master Medic serves as an instructor for the medic program at Hawk Mt. We plan the medical aspects of any events that may be going on at the training facility. That means that we know where choppers can land and when we can use them. That means we know how long it takes a BLS or ALS crew to arrive on base. That means we know that there are certified 1st Responders right down the street that can be at base with in 5 mins. We know all the hospitals in the area and they know us. As you can see by the job description, it says that the lowest qualification you can have is EMT-B with PHTLS. If you look at the Master Medic list on the HMRS website, there are only 23 of us, and some of them have passed away or are no longer in the program. At this time there may only be 10 Master Medics that are currently serving. What the list does not tell you is that those Medics are Doctors, PAs, EMT-Ps, Combat Medics, RNs, or some other medical field professional. If you see a Master Medic you can be sure that they know what they are talking about when it comes to emergency treatment of the sick and injured.
That said- CAP is not a paramedic organization and we do not treat critically injured people beyond the first aid level or what is neccesary in our scope of practice to prevent death and suffering. (basically what the regs say). Operationally, Senior and Master Medics do more than just treat people. Since our Scope is limited in CAP, we train to recognize hazards beyond what the ORM teaches. We train in field hygene and sanitation, to prevent our teams from becoming ill in the field. We serve as advisors to instruct the basic 1st aider on what to do if they find an injured person. Our job is preventitive, unlike paramedic organizations who pick up the pieces after an incident. We prepare teams to deploy into the field with knowledge that will keep them safe. That is what a Master or Senior Medic would be doing during a "real" mission
What it takes to be a Master Medic is dedication. Of course any one with a professional medical background wants to go into the field and save lives. However, we all know that CAP does not allow us to use most of our skills, no matter what kind of insurance you have, or how well you can do it. The new Medics at Hawk are trained in Advanced Wilderness First Aid, just like they do at NESA. As medics progress through the program, they learn more about the program, gather outside certs (even if they can not use them in CAP), and begin building a background in Emergency Care. That can carry them into a professional career in the medical field and eventually bring them back to the Medic Program at HMRS to instruct. It is the dedication to the program and inspiring young individuals to get interested in the medical field that makes you a Master Medic, not whether you can intubate or give meds.
I hope this clears up some of the misconceptions about Medics at HMRS. We are not out there to go against the regs and treat all kinds of illnesses, we are out there to prevent illnesses from occuring.
Sincerely,
RK
Master Medic#23
Expert Ranger #229
So, a Master Medic does what a unit or activity HSO does (or should be doing). Got it.
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 21, 2010, 07:01:52 PMI see volunteers all the time who show up to SARs with patches from every 2 day SAR course they've attended. Generic EMT patches on their sleeves, CPR, First Aid patches all over, High Angle Rescue Tech patches from a 3 day rope course they paid 1 million dollars to attend. They have so many patches they look like outlaw bikers. Then you look at the guys who do it for a living and they have a name tag. Something to think about.
And that about sums it up. Nice. Nice.
I've had my fair share of debating about Hawk. I've softened up a bit since my cadet days of arguing, but there are still some questions I haven't figured out.
1) I have often heard that it is okay for PAWG people to wear certain uniform items because "it's authorized." That's fine. If it is authorized, I have no problem with it. But who exactly signed off on the order? The wing commander can't authorize whistles, scarves, tabs, and a new place for the Hawk patch, at least not outside of a special occasion. So if the PAWG commander did sign off on it, the signature is as valid as my signature would be. So who exactly is the approving authority for these uniform violations, and why are they only permitted in a single wing? Did the mountain itself sign off on it? I guess I wouldn't want to fight a mountain, but my guess lies in that nobody legal signed off on this order, and it's only going on because it's been going on for a while.
2) Concerning the tabs, as others have pointed out, what exactly do they signify that would be necessary for them to be distinguished from a regular GTM badge. From what I can tell by looking at the website, many of the ranger grades lie up pretty close with the criteria required for a GTM level (but never completely). So, if I were a GTL, should I expect someone with a Ranger 2nd class to be more capable in the field than my GTM 3? Are the skills that a Ranger 2nd class uses that would make him/her superior or different applicable in CAP? Are the skills even useful when in an environment different than that found on the mountain? For instance, rappelling is pretty hard to justify using in CAP anyway, but in Kansas, the only places we could rappel from are sidewalk curbs. So if I'm in Kansas, should I care what your ranger level is?
3) Although we can argue back and forth as to whether or not Hawk provides an elitist attitude all day, I have found that the only people who generally assert that there are such attitudes are people who have had EXPERIENCE with such attitudes. People who haven't generally don't have anything to say about the issue. And with so many members on at least two different boards who have had some negative experience regarding the "ranger 'tude", I have to imagine that there is a bigger issue going on than just a few bad apples. Either that, or these few bad apples are bad enough for many of us to hear about, and they're spread all over the country.
And no, I will not deny that there are bad attitudes that come from other activities as well. I have definitely, personally dealt with elitist attitudes from NBB, PJOC, and HGA graduates. I've dealt with bad attitudes from Spaatzens. However, not only does this not excuse Hawk grads from having an elitist attitude, but, in my experience, there are far less graduates that have this bad attitude from other activities than those who come from Hawk. Perhaps it is because Hawk is so much bigger than most cadet activities. Perhaps it is because Hawk has the support of a whole wing that ignores uniform regulations in support of Hawk. Maybe it's because the requirements to enter Hawk generally allow younger and less experienced cadets to enroll than the other activities. I can't say for sure. But I do know that there are some issues that probably need to be fixed, and while the uniforms that PAWG members wear are so far down on my priority list that it is awe-inspiring, I do care that I seem to have to fix discipline issues with almost every single cadet from my squadron that has attended the activity.
For what it's worth, I actually remember that as a cadet officer, I only had three cadets fight me on uniform issues, on three separate occasions, and all three involved those silly ranger tabs. I cannot imagine what these cadets must feel in regards to showing off that they are a "ranger" that they would openly back-talk a C/Capt-C/Col about taking it off, but elitism is a pretty simple explanation. I guess one could owe it to me not having the respect of my inferiors, but I can't recall any cadet ever back-talking me about any other uniform issue, so I don't feel particularly bad establishing a correlation.
A two-man dog team came to demonstrate to some classes at one of the schools I work in. They came wearing soiled K-9 hats, BBDUs that saw their best days long long ago, and one of them was even wearing those moccasin-style shoes instead of boots (actually, they looked quite comfortable). They definitely wern't sleek and shiny with freshly starched uniforms and ascots, tabs, etc, like some would prefer CAP GTs to be. But you know what? Nobody cared. Why? Well, from the perspective of others on the mission, they are there to get the job done and that only. And to the ones being demonstrated to? They were the ones holding the dogs that would probably save their life if they ever had an accident in the woods.
Moral of the story: get the job done and don't worry about how uber-kewl you are, how well-pressed your BDUs look, or how shiny your boots are (or how many patches you are wearing, or whatever). If you do your job well, nobody will care what you look like. They will simply be glad you saved a life.
EDIT: In retrospect this does stray a bit from the eb and flow of this thread, but it's a point that's worth making regardless.
Quote from: Nathan on January 22, 2010, 09:43:32 PM
I guess one could owe it to me not having the respect of my inferiors,
I think you meant subordinates. . .
Other than that, I'd agree.
Quote from: Nathan on January 22, 2010, 09:43:32 PM
I've had my fair share of debating about Hawk. I've softened up a bit since my cadet days of arguing, but there are still some questions I haven't figured out.
As a former PAWG/CC, I'll attempt to answer these questions for you, Nathan.
Quote
1) I have often heard that it is okay for PAWG people to wear certain uniform items because "it's authorized." That's fine. If it is authorized, I have no problem with it. But who exactly signed off on the order? The wing commander can't authorize whistles, scarves, tabs, and a new place for the Hawk patch, at least not outside of a special occasion. So if the PAWG commander did sign off on it, the signature is as valid as my signature would be. So who exactly is the approving authority for these uniform violations, and why are they only permitted in a single wing? Did the mountain itself sign off on it? I guess I wouldn't want to fight a mountain, but my guess lies in that nobody legal signed off on this order, and it's only going on because it's been going on for a while.
No PAWG/CC in the last 20 years "signed off" on the various paraphernalia worn at the HMRS. As in other NCSA's, CAP allows certain distinguishing items to be worn only at the activity. They can not be worn any other time.
Quote
2) Concerning the tabs, as others have pointed out, what exactly do they signify that would be necessary for them to be distinguished from a regular GTM badge. From what I can tell by looking at the website, many of the ranger grades lie up pretty close with the criteria required for a GTM level (but never completely). So, if I were a GTL, should I expect someone with a Ranger 2nd class to be more capable in the field than my GTM 3? Are the skills that a Ranger 2nd class uses that would make him/her superior or different applicable in CAP? Are the skills even useful when in an environment different than that found on the mountain? For instance, rappelling is pretty hard to justify using in CAP anyway, but in Kansas, the only places we could rappel from are sidewalk curbs. So if I'm in Kansas, should I care what your ranger level is?
The tabs signify a "ranger level". How the levels compare to CAP GT levels is written down. You can contact the Activity Commander for more information.
Quote
3) Although we can argue back and forth as to whether or not Hawk provides an elitist attitude all day, I have found that the only people who generally assert that there are such attitudes are people who have had EXPERIENCE with such attitudes. People who haven't generally don't have anything to say about the issue. And with so many members on at least two different boards who have had some negative experience regarding the "ranger 'tude", I have to imagine that there is a bigger issue going on than just a few bad apples. Either that, or these few bad apples are bad enough for many of us to hear about, and they're spread all over the country.
And no, I will not deny that there are bad attitudes that come from other activities as well. I have definitely, personally dealt with elitist attitudes from NBB, PJOC, and HGA graduates. I've dealt with bad attitudes from Spaatzens. However, not only does this not excuse Hawk grads from having an elitist attitude, but, in my experience, there are far less graduates that have this bad attitude from other activities than those who come from Hawk. Perhaps it is because Hawk is so much bigger than most cadet activities. Perhaps it is because Hawk has the support of a whole wing that ignores uniform regulations in support of Hawk. Maybe it's because the requirements to enter Hawk generally allow younger and less experienced cadets to enroll than the other activities. I can't say for sure. But I do know that there are some issues that probably need to be fixed, and while the uniforms that PAWG members wear are so far down on my priority list that it is awe-inspiring, I do care that I seem to have to fix discipline issues with almost every single cadet from my squadron that has attended the activity.
For what it's worth, I actually remember that as a cadet officer, I only had three cadets fight me on uniform issues, on three separate occasions, and all three involved those silly ranger tabs. I cannot imagine what these cadets must feel in regards to showing off that they are a "ranger" that they would openly back-talk a C/Capt-C/Col about taking it off, but elitism is a pretty simple explanation. I guess one could owe it to me not having the respect of my inferiors, but I can't recall any cadet ever back-talking me about any other uniform issue, so I don't feel particularly bad establishing a correlation.
After 50 years, there have been enough "few bad apples" to bring a pretty large sample into view. Good leadership at the squadron level should correct any problems arising from a cadet returning with the wrong perception. As of this date, the tabs are not authorized on the BDU (they are authorized on the BBDU). There are no exceptions.
QuoteNo PAWG/CC in the last 20 years "signed off" on the various paraphernalia worn at the HMRS
except for the policy letter a few years back authorizing the wear of the LL patch in place of the wing patch for school graduates...
I have a fuzzy memory of a PAWG letter back around 2000/2001 about only authorizing/clarifying ranger tabs for wear in PAWG only by PAWG members
and though maybe more than 20 years (mid/early 90's) there was a Ranger SOP published (pre electronic pubs) that spelled out uniform items....I cant say that was actually signed by the wing commander though.
mk
^Most of that crap was from the "Ranger Club", which had nothing to do with today's NCSA-Hawk Mountain Ranger School. Remember before becoming an NCSA (and it was a huge battle for that) it was a Wing Activity that at one time counted as credit for Encampment (how they managed that I will never know). Today it is following actual guidelines from NHQ, but still do stupid things.
...HMRS hasnt counted as an encampment since the 80's...
All of the complaining about uniform bling has everything to do with the "club" days.... all the tabs, scarves etc are hold overs from the 70"s even. Everytime NHQ tries to do away with "treasured" ranger uniform items therer is an uproar.
When Westover Wings were phased out from the OG's to BDU's there were people who wore greens or jungles up until the phase out only so they could wear thier wings
When tabs got axed a few years ago there were people that sewed them to the undersides of thir pocket flaps.... (and these were cadets that were never part of the "club")
mk
Quote from: FW on January 23, 2010, 12:46:34 AM
No PAWG/CC in the last 20 years "signed off" on the various paraphernalia worn at the HMRS. As in other NCSA's, CAP allows certain distinguishing items to be worn only at the activity. They can not be worn any other time.
Who in CAP? Berets are specifically authorized per CAPM 39-1. Hats can be authorized by the wing king. But everything else? I'm not sure about that, especially in light of the "ranger uniform" thing that was posted a page or so ago. But I haven't visited PAWG, and haven't seen any of their grads recently, so I'll take your word for it.
Quote from: FW on January 23, 2010, 12:46:34 AMAfter 50 years, there have been enough "few bad apples" to bring a pretty large sample into view. Good leadership at the squadron level should correct any problems arising from a cadet returning with the wrong perception. As of this date, the tabs are not authorized on the BDU (they are authorized on the BBDU). There are no exceptions.
No argument that good squadron leadership is the key to FIXING the issue. But I'm not sure why I should be dealing with the "wrong perception" in the first place. Obviously, the issue is starting at Hawk, and I'd like to see it stop at Hawk, not at the squadron. Bad attitudes, if acknowledged as a bad attitude by the activity, should end at Hawk.
The same goes with the uniform issues. I think that part of the problem is that so many PAWG members I had met as a C/officer did boast about wearing their Hawk bling back at the squadron, but why are the grads coming back with the idea that they can wear the stuff off the mountain, despite what we weeny non-rangers say about it? Like I said, I have not been to Hawk, so I don't know if they're making these issues clear. But there is something in the line of communication that isn't making sense to these cadets, and given that they are already confused by the time they get back home, I don't know what else I can do to fix the issue except ask Hawk why the grads don't have a better idea of what they should be doing when they get back to their squadrons.
Granted, I'm not saying that this is an issue exclusive to Hawk. I know at NBB they said at least once (the year I went) that berets were NOT authorized for wear outside of NBB, or even off the NBB compound, yet some grads obviously do anyway. However, a beret issue seems to be much easier to fix than having to rip three different patches off a uniform, so I guess it hasn't been seen as a major issue when compared to Hawk grads.
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 23, 2010, 01:04:18 AM
QuoteNo PAWG/CC in the last 20 years "signed off" on the various paraphernalia worn at the HMRS
except for the policy letter a few years back authorizing the wear of the LL patch in place of the wing patch for school graduates...
I have a fuzzy memory of a PAWG letter back around 2000/2001 about only authorizing/clarifying ranger tabs for wear in PAWG only by PAWG members
and though maybe more than 20 years (mid/early 90's) there was a Ranger SOP published (pre electronic pubs) that spelled out uniform items....I cant say that was actually signed by the wing commander though.
mk
No policy letter allows for the ranger "LL" patch to be worn anywhere other than authorized by 39-1. No policy letter was written on the "tabs" (I was the CC then). The only policy implemented at the time was to corelate ranger grades with CAP ground team member levels. The Ranger SOP printed in the 90's was only for school purposes and, not for general uniform wear. It was not signed by the wing/cc. In fact, the "SOP" was never approved by any CAP authority until HMRS was approved as a NCSA.
Quote from: Nathan on January 23, 2010, 04:16:40 AM
Quote from: FW on January 23, 2010, 12:46:34 AM
No PAWG/CC in the last 20 years "signed off" on the various paraphernalia worn at the HMRS. As in other NCSA's, CAP allows certain distinguishing items to be worn only at the activity. They can not be worn any other time.
Who in CAP? Berets are specifically authorized per CAPM 39-1. Hats can be authorized by the wing king. But everything else? I'm not sure about that, especially in light of the "ranger uniform" thing that was posted a page or so ago. But I haven't visited PAWG, and haven't seen any of their grads recently, so I'll take your word for it.
We let activity commanders allow uniform items like; special shirts, pins, hats, etc to be worn at encampments and other special activities so CAP allows HMRS to have belts, scarves, etc.
QuoteNo argument that good squadron leadership is the key to FIXING the issue. But I'm not sure why I should be dealing with the "wrong perception" in the first place. Obviously, the issue is starting at Hawk, and I'd like to see it stop at Hawk, not at the squadron. Bad attitudes, if acknowledged as a bad attitude by the activity, should end at Hawk.
The same goes with the uniform issues. I think that part of the problem is that so many PAWG members I had met as a C/officer did boast about wearing their Hawk bling back at the squadron, but why are the grads coming back with the idea that they can wear the stuff off the mountain, despite what we weeny non-rangers say about it? Like I said, I have not been to Hawk, so I don't know if they're making these issues clear. But there is something in the line of communication that isn't making sense to these cadets, and given that they are already confused by the time they get back home, I don't know what else I can do to fix the issue except ask Hawk why the grads don't have a better idea of what they should be doing when they get back to their squadrons.
Granted, I'm not saying that this is an issue exclusive to Hawk. I know at NBB they said at least once (the year I went) that berets were NOT authorized for wear outside of NBB, or even off the NBB compound, yet some grads obviously do anyway. However, a beret issue seems to be much easier to fix than having to rip three different patches off a uniform, so I guess it hasn't been seen as a major issue when compared to Hawk grads.
Cadets at the school (I've been told) are instructed in the proper wear of the "LL" patch and the current prohibition of the tabs on the BDU. The current PAWG/CC has assured me there are no exceptions to the wear of these items. Cadets who have trouble understanding this should be "re instructed" by their unit. Leadership development should be constantly taught and its principles reinforced at all levels. Discipline at home is as important as the skills taught at any NCSA. I would continue to remind cadets of this and hold them accountable for their actions. That's my $.02 on the issue; YMMV.
Quote from: FW on January 24, 2010, 05:28:07 AM
We let activity commanders allow uniform items like; special shirts, pins, hats, etc to be worn at encampments and other special activities so CAP allows HMRS to have belts, scarves, etc.
By "we", whom are you referring to, sir? In what manner was this approved, and in what form was this approval promulgated?
It's very difficult for the troops "on the ground" to understand what is permitted and what is not when said permissions cannot seem to be found in regulations, manuals, pamphlets, ICLs, and Board minutes. Pointing out where this permission was overlooked would go a long way towards resolving these issues.
QuoteThe current PAWG/CC has assured me there are no exceptions to the wear of these items.
He should probabally put that into a memo to the Wing/School and send an enforcer there...because last time I was there (first aid weekend) everyone (or just about) had on either a medic or ranger tab above the cap tape on their BDU's.
mk
Quote from: JoeTomasone on January 24, 2010, 07:31:46 AM
Quote from: FW on January 24, 2010, 05:28:07 AM
We let activity commanders allow uniform items like; special shirts, pins, hats, etc to be worn at encampments and other special activities so CAP allows HMRS to have belts, scarves, etc.
By "we", whom are you referring to, sir? In what manner was this approved, and in what form was this approval promulgated?
It's very difficult for the troops "on the ground" to understand what is permitted and what is not when said permissions cannot seem to be found in regulations, manuals, pamphlets, ICLs, and Board minutes. Pointing out where this permission was overlooked would go a long way towards resolving these issues.
Joseph; "We" meaning "all of us". I have no idea if it's been written down however, it is standard SOP with many activities. It's up the the NB to make it regulatory if they desire. Maybe it's kind of the "What happens in Vegas Stays in Vegas" syndrome.
The point I'm making: NO one in the higher levels of the CAP Chain of command condones the wearing of unauthorized uniform items in CAP outside of an individual activity. The Air Force does take this seriously and, so should "we".
Bottom line is to use your best judgement when dealing with any uniform violation. HMRS is not the problem, IMO. Enforcing what is correct is.
Quote from: FW on January 24, 2010, 05:28:07 AM
We let activity commanders allow uniform items like; special shirts, pins, hats, etc to be worn at encampments and other special activities so CAP allows HMRS to have belts, scarves, etc.
Encampments and other activities authorizing the wear of multi-colored shirts, metal grade on ball caps, or anything outside 39-1 are violating regulations and receiving the benefit of the same "look the other way" apathy that HMRS does.
The only t-shirts any members are allowed to wear are white, brown, or black (depending on uniform). Insignia on those t-shirts also have specific rules.
Unit commanders can authorize ball caps, but grade on those caps is specifically prohibited.
You can't use this as a precedent.
^It is what it is, Eclipse. I'm only stating my opinions on what I've observed over the last 30 or so years. Right now; 39-1 only allows HMRS bling to be worn on the BBDU. That's the guidelines I go by when making comments to members not being correct. Wear of the "bling" on the BDU is still going through AF channels for a yes or no decision.
The precedent has been set by continually allowing uniform violations for many many years. Only until a clear consice CAPM 39-1 is written, a strong and representative uniform board is developed and, membership buy in occurs, will it change.
Quote from: FW on January 24, 2010, 05:28:07 AM
We let activity commanders allow uniform items like; special shirts, pins, hats, etc to be worn at encampments and other special activities so CAP allows HMRS to have belts, scarves, etc.
Well... yes and no. There are some activities that can have items that are authorized by the commander, but NOT for encampments or special activities. Allow me to quote the CAPM 39-1...
Quote from: CAPM 39-1 Table 1-3 Cell 2In all cases, these items will have no national significance or recognition as a part of the CAP uniform. They will not be worn at summer encampments or national events (cadet exchange, special activities, etc.), unless specifically
authorized by National Headquarters. They may be worn only while performing the duty for which the use of the items was authorized. Wing/region approved items will be worn only within the boundaries of the authorizing commander.
The list of items following includes the scarves, pistol belts, etc. So unless Hawk Mountain Ranger School specifically has written authorization to have these items be worn at the activity, they are not and cannot be authorized for wear either at Hawk or outside of it. Period. Since you have said that nobody at national level has signed off on these items (indicating that such authorization does not exist), then it becomes clear that Hawk is wearing their items either in clear ignorance or in clear defiance of written regulations. Simple as that.
Quote from: FW
Cadets at the school (I've been told) are instructed in the proper wear of the "LL" patch and the current prohibition of the tabs on the BDU. The current PAWG/CC has assured me there are no exceptions to the wear of these items. Cadets who have trouble understanding this should be "re instructed" by their unit. Leadership development should be constantly taught and its principles reinforced at all levels. Discipline at home is as important as the skills taught at any NCSA. I would continue to remind cadets of this and hold them accountable for their actions. That's my $.02 on the issue; YMMV.
What you have been told happens at the activity goes directly against what the results show. If the cadets are being told that wear of Hawk Mountain bling is unauthorized, or that in PAWG the LL patch does not replace the PAWG wing patch, then either the vast majority of graduates I've met are profoundly stupid or profoundly defiant.
I might be accused of being stubborn on this, but I can promise that I have no personal vendetta toward Hawk when I make my argument. I simply cannot accept that when the majority of cadets I've met who come out of Hawk have these bad attitudes that it is MY JOB to fix it. I have very little control over what happens to my cadets when they are at the mountain, and so to tell me that I simply need to deal with the fact that these cadets are going to have these attitudes is, in my opinion, unacceptable.
To date, I have never had to deal with a cadet defiantly wearing a Glider Academy booney, or HGA bling, or PJOC hat, or COS pin. I've never even had to deal with cadets coming home and insisting on wearing a colored hat worn at an encampment. The only thing that has come close is the beret, and the regulations covering the beret are more confusingly flexible than those covering Hawk bling, so I can at least understand why a cadet might think that the beret is authorized when the regs at least offer a possibility of this being true.
But Hawk bling has no leg to stand on, even at the activity itself, and yet it somehow manages to not only find its way outside of the activity, but back to the squadron. The only way for me to have any more control over the situation is to chaperone my cadets to Hawk myself and sit there and correct the Hawk guys with a set of regulations in my hand every second of the day. I really think that if it comes down to me doing THAT, then there needs to be a little bit of reform at the school itself.
Quote from: FW on January 24, 2010, 06:35:19 PM
The precedent has been set by continually allowing uniform violations for many many years. Only until a clear consice CAPM 39-1 is written, a strong and representative uniform board is developed and, membership buy in occurs, will it change.
Interesting concept - if the regulation doesn't permit what they want to do, or is wordy, or sometimes unclear, Hawk can pretty much do whatever it wants and wait for it to become precedent, and then have an affirmative defense for its actions. Or is this just limited to 39-1? Can they institute motivational pushups, if they choose? Are Form 78's still required? This opens up a multitude of possibilities. I'm beginning to really appreciate this program the more I learn about it.
Quote from: FW on January 24, 2010, 06:35:19 PM
^It is what it is, Eclipse. I'm only stating my opinions on what I've observed over the last 30 or so years. Right now; 39-1 only allows HMRS bling to be worn on the BBDU. That's the guidelines I go by when making comments to members not being correct. Wear of the "bling" on the BDU is still going through AF channels for a yes or no decision.
The precedent has been set by continually allowing uniform violations for many many years. Only until a clear consice CAPM 39-1 is written, a strong and representative uniform board is developed and, membership buy in occurs, will it change.
I don't mean to sound rude when I ask this, but if you agree that enforcement is the key (I agree with you), then why didn't you enforce it as the PAWG commander? Why did you continually allow uniform violations that allowed the precedent to continue? From what I read, the CAPM 39-1 is fairly clear on the issues that we're talking about, so I am genuinely interested in why you are willing to say that enforcement is a problem when you were one of the few people in a position to actually deal with the issue.
^ +1
Never once saw a policy letter from any wing Commander on Hawk Uniforms until Mr Applebaum a few years back dictating the wearing of the hawk patch in place of the wing patch. I assume he did this because he was infatuated with the school, being a student himself in his cadet days.
Quote from: Nathan on January 24, 2010, 07:24:18 PM
Quote from: FW on January 24, 2010, 06:35:19 PM
The precedent has been set by continually allowing uniform violations for many many years. Only until a clear consice CAPM 39-1 is written, a strong and representative uniform board is developed and, membership buy in occurs, will it change.
I don't mean to sound rude when I ask this, but if you agree that enforcement is the key (I agree with you), then why didn't you enforce it as the PAWG commander? Why did you continually allow uniform violations that allowed the precedent to continue? From what I read, the CAPM 39-1 is fairly clear on the issues that we're talking about, so I am genuinely interested in why you are willing to say that enforcement is a problem when you were one of the few people in a position to actually deal with the issue.
A fair question. I did enforce these issues when I was the wing/cc. I even went so far as to begin the process to close the school, relieved a vice commander over it and forced the resignation of the previous wing/cc as a member (who was an expert ranger). However, the new HMRS standards became a reality, the school staff promised to uphold the standards, the NB allowed the wear of the "LL" patch and NHQ allowed HRMS to continue. If my successor made any changes, I wasn't aware of them. However, whatever he allowed wasn't authorized, now was it...
^ Sir, I heard most of that was over money issues. That the property was purchased from the family by a "ranger club" and it was a legal mess??
From its very beginnings the School has had problems. It takes some digging, but the truth is out there.
A very short history of Hawk Mt facility (please pardon my poetic license ;D ):
Phil Neuwiller owned the land and "sold" it to Rangers, Inc for $1.
Rangers, Inc. owned the land and let the Rangers use it for fun until 2001.
At that time the PAWG/CC got PO'd over all the fun without being invited.
He, with the help of CAP NHQ and quite a few others, "persuaded" the Rangers, Inc. board to sell to CAP, Inc for $1. HMRS became a full fledged NCSA; lot's of bucks were spent to get it in shape (thanks to the kick backs from Vangard).
Facility looks great, is up to code and has no money problems.
No digging necessary (except for the septic system). Just good "governance and transparency"......
BTW; "we" have done the same at NBB and NESA.
The just received 2010 Hawk Mountain flyer contains this:
"Students who successfully complete the HMRS can wear the NCSA ribbon and school "LL insignia" and any other earned insignia".
So it appears that they are following the guidelines mentioned several times above, although I'm unclear about what is included in "... any other earned insignia". ???
According to my last foray into the HMRS saga with wing is that anything earned at HM is open territory to wear in the general population.
The last cadet I dealt with got to wear his orange hat (with roll), ranger tab, and LL patch. I was literally told to go away by the Wing Commander.
Do these guys actually get ranger tabs?
Yes, keeping in mind they are completely different than the US Army RANGER tab.
Exmples from the Hock Shop: http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1
And as for NBB and Hawk Mountain Uniform items, they have been approved for wear with/on the BDU Green or Blue uniform by the National Board.
They are forbidden with/on any AF Blues Combination.
Quote from: TACP on February 07, 2010, 08:30:32 AM
Yes, keeping in mind they are completely different than the US Army RANGER tab.
Exmples from the Hock Shop: http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1 (http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1)
And as for NBB and Hawk Mountain Uniform items, they have been approved for wear with/on the BDU Green or Blue uniform by the National Board.
They are forbidden with/on any AF Blues Combination.
Until the AF signs off on it they can not be worn on woodland BDUs. However that hasn't stopped anyone from doing it.
^ Agreed! As a Squadron Commander I can dictate uniform policy at the local level. The LL Patch and nothing else. I like to try to keep everyone looking ........"uniform".
Quote from: davidsinn on February 07, 2010, 03:11:17 PM
Quote from: TACP on February 07, 2010, 08:30:32 AM
Yes, keeping in mind they are completely different than the US Army RANGER tab.
Exmples from the Hock Shop: http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1 (http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1)
And as for NBB and Hawk Mountain Uniform items, they have been approved for wear with/on the BDU Green or Blue uniform by the National Board.
They are forbidden with/on any AF Blues Combination.
Until the AF signs off on it they can not be worn on woodland BDUs. However that hasn't stopped anyone from doing it.
Several in our wing have it on BDU's.....Cadets and Seniors.....
Then again CAP NHQ did put out the ICL on Blue Beret and HM gear approving it for wear.
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on February 08, 2010, 07:52:30 AM
Quote from: davidsinn on February 07, 2010, 03:11:17 PM
Quote from: TACP on February 07, 2010, 08:30:32 AM
Yes, keeping in mind they are completely different than the US Army RANGER tab.
Exmples from the Hock Shop: http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1 (http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1)
And as for NBB and Hawk Mountain Uniform items, they have been approved for wear with/on the BDU Green or Blue uniform by the National Board.
They are forbidden with/on any AF Blues Combination.
Until the AF signs off on it they can not be worn on woodland BDUs. However that hasn't stopped anyone from doing it.
Several in our wing have it on BDU's.....Cadets and Seniors.....
Then again CAP NHQ did put out the ICL on Blue Beret and HM gear approving it for wear.
Only on the Corp. uniforms. The AF style is pending AF approval.
Things in CAP would be SOOOOOO much better if the uniforms were totally eliminated
HAWK Mountain included
If a uniform is all you got to hang onto.....you reallly have problems
CAP, in general, needs to move away from ALLLL uniforms issues and grow up
Hawk Mountain could then be better respected!
I wonder how CAP-USAF's recent statements regarding their authority to veto any CAP uniform item, whether on corporate or AF-style uniform might affect some of these items.
QuoteThings in CAP would be SOOOOOO much better if the uniforms were totally eliminated
Not to deviate to far from the usual dog plie...but I have to agreee to a certain extent. The only area of the program that I think needs to have military uniforms is the cadet program; or even a military grade structure for that matter.
The rest of the time the idea of
civilian aux is perfectly acceptable...the military has civilian employees the are even often responsabile for militrary equipment and members and the world does not come crashing down. ...the only thing you dont see very often is deployable civilian assets (other than PMC type contractors)
CP you play the military, leaders wear military style uniforms but thats where it ends...everyone/thing else BBDU, polo's or grey/whites...corporate/EMA/firefighter style
This might force HMRS to decide if they are a cadet leadership activity or a SAR school....not the part of both that they like.
mk
Quote from: heliodoc on February 08, 2010, 01:17:32 PM
Things in CAP would be SOOOOOO much better if the uniforms were totally eliminated
HAWK Mountain included
If a uniform is all you got to hang onto.....you reallly have problems
CAP, in general, needs to move away from ALLLL uniforms issues and grow up
Hawk Mountain could then be better respected!
Does that include the cadet program or just the senior program?
Quote from: RiverAux on February 08, 2010, 01:39:09 PM
I wonder how CAP-USAF's recent statements regarding their authority to veto any CAP uniform item, whether on corporate or AF-style uniform might affect some of these items.
Where was that?
Quote from: Eclipse on February 08, 2010, 10:01:23 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on February 08, 2010, 01:39:09 PM
I wonder how CAP-USAF's recent statements regarding their authority to veto any CAP uniform item, whether on corporate or AF-style uniform might affect some of these items.
Where was that?
2010 NB agenda.
Just received an announcement for HMRS Aircrew Survival Training.
Is this a new course? If it is not new, then has anybody attended
the course?
I see that HMRS also offers a Ranger Command and Staff College.
Is this a new course? Has anyone attended it?
Quote from: davidsinn on February 08, 2010, 11:16:10 AM
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on February 08, 2010, 07:52:30 AM
Quote from: davidsinn on February 07, 2010, 03:11:17 PM
Quote from: TACP on February 07, 2010, 08:30:32 AM
Yes, keeping in mind they are completely different than the US Army RANGER tab.
Exmples from the Hock Shop: http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1 (http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1)
And as for NBB and Hawk Mountain Uniform items, they have been approved for wear with/on the BDU Green or Blue uniform by the National Board.
They are forbidden with/on any AF Blues Combination.
Until the AF signs off on it they can not be worn on woodland BDUs. However that hasn't stopped anyone from doing it.
Several in our wing have it on BDU's.....Cadets and Seniors.....
Then again CAP NHQ did put out the ICL on Blue Beret and HM gear approving it for wear.
Only on the Corp. uniforms. The AF style is pending AF approval.
While that is very true, I'm pretty sure I can find pics of BDU's with Ranger garb......
Take a look at these pics:
Cadets and seniors (with blackouts, on purpose) that show HM garb on AF uniforms.
I even like the Capt in Tan boots......
http://yfrog.com/dy035qujx
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on February 09, 2010, 04:36:11 AM
Quote from: davidsinn on February 08, 2010, 11:16:10 AM
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on February 08, 2010, 07:52:30 AM
Quote from: davidsinn on February 07, 2010, 03:11:17 PM
Quote from: TACP on February 07, 2010, 08:30:32 AM
Yes, keeping in mind they are completely different than the US Army RANGER tab.
Exmples from the Hock Shop: http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1 (http://www.thehock.com/shop/?cat=44&shop=1)
And as for NBB and Hawk Mountain Uniform items, they have been approved for wear with/on the BDU Green or Blue uniform by the National Board.
They are forbidden with/on any AF Blues Combination.
Until the AF signs off on it they can not be worn on woodland BDUs. However that hasn't stopped anyone from doing it.
Several in our wing have it on BDU's.....Cadets and Seniors.....
Then again CAP NHQ did put out the ICL on Blue Beret and HM gear approving it for wear.
Only on the Corp. uniforms. The AF style is pending AF approval.
While that is very true, I'm pretty sure I can find pics of BDU's with Ranger garb......
I've seen it with my own eyes...
Still doesn't mean it is correct. . . .
The 2006 National board passed a motion to allow NBB/Hawk Mtn patches/Beret to be worn with Blue/Green BDUs. What is needed for the final 'good to go' and how long does that take?
Quote from: TACP on February 10, 2010, 03:08:25 AM
The 2006 National board passed a motion to allow NBB/Hawk Mtn patches/Beret to be worn with Blue/Green BDUs. What is needed for the final 'good to go' and how long does that take?
The AF needs to formally approve it.How long is halfway?
Quote from: TACP on February 10, 2010, 03:08:25 AM
The 2006 National board passed a motion to allow NBB/Hawk Mtn patches/Beret to be worn with Blue/Green BDUs. What is needed for the final 'good to go' and how long does that take?
An act of God? The AF must give permission and an update to 39-1 or an ICL as is the current fashion would need to be written. Until then the ranger tabs are not allowed even though many people do it.
Quote from: davidsinn on February 09, 2010, 11:13:36 AM
I've seen it with my own eyes...
+1
I even called the cadet on it at a wing function, and his response was that his unit CC authorized it. I wasn't going to push the issue further, but I knew even that was incorrect. I respect the young man otherwise, but that stuck in my craw. As far as I remember in my CAP career, the rules for the tabs, etc., haven't changed. Perhaps it's time to set the definition clearly.
Edit to add: Same activity had a SM wearing a blue beret with NBB hat device. I held my tongue on that, too.
Quote from: Dracosbane on February 10, 2010, 04:09:09 AM
Quote from: davidsinn on February 09, 2010, 11:13:36 AM
I've seen it with my own eyes...
+1
I even called the cadet on it at a wing function, and his response was that his unit CC authorized it. I wasn't going to push the issue further, but I knew even that was incorrect. I respect the young man otherwise, but that stuck in my craw. As far as I remember in my CAP career, the rules for the tabs, etc., haven't changed. Perhaps it's time to set the definition clearly.
Edit to add: Same activity had a SM wearing a blue beret with NBB hat device. I held my tongue on that, too.
I think I know who you are talking about and that is authorized although the regs could be a bit clearer on that.
The aircrew survival course has been going on for about a year. Its been on 2 differant weekends and during the summer school. So far the participation has been limited (suprisingly...aircrew types arent fond of going out of the comfort zone)....I know that there were very good things to be said from the participatns during the summer school. All of the instructors were current AD/RES military aircrew types that have a HMRS background.
One of the excercises the participants liked was besides the usual snake eating, lost in the woods stuff they did a number of emergency crash drills: Driving in the van and the instructor notifys them....you're at 10000 ft, engine failure call a mayday and start your emergency/crash checklist...real time...
mk
regarding uniforms: I think it depends on the mood of those on the AF side of the house on their thoughts....lets face it when it comes to military uniforms the AF has a tendency to be "boy scouty" itself sometimes (better since the ABU, but historically they are patch happy) It could honestly go either way. Really I think thats why there are no sleeve pockets on the ABU....enough chiefs didnt want to get rid of their giant stripes.....they liked the "bling" likewise fire and cops got to keep their pocket patches..... I think it was just good lobbying (which HMRS has at the NHQ level)
The "rumor story" from the past was two fold a) the AF doesnt have rangers b) the tab doesnt fit the usual AF badges style, so thats why the axed it previously. (of course neither does shoulder patches/reversed US flags)
Personally I am for a badge design in place of the GT badge that is Ranger specific....that way it'll be ABU compliant down the road and there wont be a need for this fiasco to repeat itself
Otherwise unless another memo apperas from NHQ specifically ordering the removal of all Ranger insignia from the woodland BDU uniform until AF approval you will continue to see pictures and in the flesh Ranger Bling on BDU's.
mk
Quote from: sarmed1 on February 10, 2010, 04:05:18 PM
Otherwise unless another memo apperas from NHQ specifically ordering the removal of all Ranger insignia from the woodland BDU uniform until AF approval you will continue to see pictures and in the flesh Ranger Bling on BDU's.
mk
There shouldn't be an order to tell people not to do something they already weren't supposed to do.
^^
Well then, a rewrite of the lame and infamous 39-1 is really what is needed.
CLEAR CONCISE NATION WIDE CAP STANDARDIZATION OF UNIFORM POLICY
Now does that hurt the eyes? CAP hurts itself with a caaackamaammy document that does not address HAWK and NBB clearly enough!! Apparently there are a number of those folks who would rather go out on their own and do their own thing...
But that is what you get in CAP... whatever everyone wants to do...That is why it is time for CAP to have NO more military uniforms 'cuz apparently there are at least 10,000 threads here on CAPTalk PROVING that no one can follow simple instruction
Is that right? If so CAP best do its level best to REDO 39-1 in the next 6 months and BE DONE with it
Ordering people in CAP? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P
I think we should just rename "Ground Team" to "Ranger Team", and drop the tabs, fancy patches, etc.
Quote from: N Harmon on February 10, 2010, 06:42:45 PM
I think we should just rename "Ground Team" to "Ranger Team", and drop the tabs, fancy patches, etc.
Where's that puking smily?
Quote from: davidsinn on February 10, 2010, 06:59:33 PM
Quote from: N Harmon on February 10, 2010, 06:42:45 PM
I think we should just rename "Ground Team" to "Ranger Team", and drop the tabs, fancy patches, etc.
Where's that puking smily?
Ground Team is just fine. When working with other agencies and a CAP Member says "our Ground Team is searching......", the other agency understands two thing;
1) Members on the GROUND
2) A Team working to do something
Say "Ranger" and a myriad of different meanings can pop into a persons head that is not even close to what CAP does.
Quote from: Spike on February 10, 2010, 07:14:07 PM
Quote from: davidsinn on February 10, 2010, 06:59:33 PM
Quote from: N Harmon on February 10, 2010, 06:42:45 PM
I think we should just rename "Ground Team" to "Ranger Team", and drop the tabs, fancy patches, etc.
Where's that puking smily?
Ground Team is just fine. When working with other agencies and a CAP Member says "our Ground Team is searching......", the other agency understands two thing;
1) Members on the GROUND
2) A Team working to do something
Say "Ranger" and a myriad of different meanings can pop into a persons head that is not even close to what CAP does.
And some agencies understand "ground team" to be analogous to "ground crew".
^ Guess we should just call them "CAP Members working as a team, following the guidance of a person with more checkboxes checked, and really just walking around while real SAR teams find the missing person, provide medical assistance and get the credit for it".
Put that in the form of an acronym and slap it on a nametape and I'm sold!
Quote from: Fuzzy on February 10, 2010, 10:02:59 PM
Put that in the form of an acronym and slap it on a nametape and I'm sold!
Beat me to it by seconds!
Acronym, eh
_UBAR comes to mind rather quickly as a couple of others that I saw on a nametape (CAP) back at an encampment in 1977
Want that one??
Quote from: Fuzzy on February 10, 2010, 10:02:59 PM
Put that in the form of an acronym and slap it on a nametape and I'm sold!
CAPMWAATFTGOAPWMCCARJWAWRSARTFTMPPMAAGTCFI
Senior CAPMWAATFTGOAPWMCCARJWAWRSARTFTMPPMAAGTCFI
Master CAPMWAATFTGOAPWMCCARJWAWRSARTFTMPPMAAGTCFI
Expert CAPMWAATFTGOAPWMCCARJWAWRSARTFTMPPMAAGTCFI
Medic CAPMWAATFTGOAPWMCCARJWAWRSARTFTMPPMAAGTCFI
Did I get them all? >:D
^ haha :clap:
Good work. I was way too lazy to do that.
It looks like it, but they aren't really acronyms, since they don't make pronounceable words. They are, more properly, initialisms.
Radar and laser - acronyms.
GPS - initialism.
Quote from: SarDragon on February 11, 2010, 12:01:34 AM
It looks like it, but they aren't really acronyms, since they don't make pronounceable words. They are, more properly, initialisms.
Radar and laser - acronyms.
GPS - initialism.
I can pronounce it! So there! ;D
Gesundheit!
Hi! Everyone knows course from HMRS is physically demanding, can I get some examples about it? E.g. Full Gear hiking is different from Full gear running, and what are the typical morning PTs are? How long and in what intensity?
I am interested in the course contexts but it is the physically part making me to consider...
(I am referring to the Officer (Senior) Basic Course)
Thanks!
They do "full gear runs"?
^Yes....... of back packs full of 6 packs. ;D
(I'm only kidding, guys.)
Actually, you can get all the information you need from the HM website.
Senior PT is always taken with a grain of salt..... do what you can that doesnt produce chest pain, fainting or shortness of breath (prolonged anyway)
AM PT is typically stretching and the usual calesthetics (ie push-ups, sit ups, jumping jacks etc etc) followed by a daily dose of the obstacle (confidence) course.....for a quick tour: 6ftish jump (over water), tires, balance beam, rope climb, inverted ladder, rope swing (over water) concrete tunnel, pull up bars, monkey bars (over water) "rope" bridge (technically steel cable, and yes over water) then a run (or three ball soccer, though I dont think the senior squadron plays, cadets only)
There is no full gear run as part of any official curriculum (that I am aware of) there have been a few instances where one or two of the advanced squadrons may airborne shuffle back to the base after the 3 day field excercise...but thats more of a motivational thing than part of the "plan"
mk
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on December 28, 2009, 04:28:14 PM
For those of you who have better things to do than download the PDF:
QuoteThe pink belt was tired of hanging in the operations room for a year and it choose its new owner for the day. C/Maj Giles, Charlie Cadet Squadron Commander, was the pink belts best choice according to the inspection team and the overall performance for the day. The Pink Belt is given to the squadron that doesn't do the best throughout the day. Who will get it next?
Squadron Alpha, lead by C/Maj McDonough, earned honor squadron for July 12. Can they keep it up?
As if the torture of the English language isn't bad enough ("and it choose its new owner..."), the taunting in the last two sentences sure seems like singling someone out for embarrassment to me — a good case could be made for a CPPT violation. A certain Cadet McDonough ought to feel shamed, since he's singled out by name.
Why pink? Is it effeminate? Does its use here imply that female members are less capable? Is it representative of a false bravado that should be reviewed? Discuss.
A response to the earlier arguement on the fact of the pink belt, and how it suposebly is offensive to females and how it is sexist, well if you ever took a white belt and tried to bleach it it turns pink. i was always told that someone a longtime ago wore a pink belt after bleaching it and it kinda stook as a joke(in between staff not in any kind of hazing way) and turned into a tradition that what ever squadron did the worst throughout the day gets the pink belt. the squadron commander is the bearer of the pink belt and all staff understand what it represents and they no its not in a hazing manner its a motivation to work harder for the next day and make improvements on what the squadron staff is doing so that they can make the expericence better for there cadets so they can get as much tarining out of the school as they can, because i mean jeez they pay alot of money to come and learn as much as they can so the pink belt is basically a motivation for squadron staff to work harder for their cadets and not slack so they can make the expericence ten times better for there students.
-Redacted-
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 23, 2010, 02:02:48 PM
A response to the earlier arguement on the fact of the pink belt, and how it suposebly is offensive to females and how it is sexist, well if you ever took a white belt and tried to bleach it it turns pink. i was always told that someone a longtime ago wore a pink belt after bleaching it and it kinda stook as a joke(in between staff not in any kind of hazing way) and turned into a tradition that what ever squadron did the worst throughout the day gets the pink belt. the squadron commander is the bearer of the pink belt and all staff understand what it represents and they no its not in a hazing manner its a motivation to work harder for the next day and make improvements on what the squadron staff is doing so that they can make the expericence better for there cadets so they can get as much tarining out of the school as they can, because i mean jeez they pay alot of money to come and learn as much as they can so the pink belt is basically a motivation for squadron staff to work harder for their cadets and not slack so they can make the expericence ten times better for there students.
Like doing push ups every time I show up with scuffed boots, can motivate me to shine my shoes. Its not
hazing its
motivation..... Surrrre
Its all negative reinforcement "You do bad, something you don't like happens to you". Can't the rangers just get the same effect by rewarding the best flight?
Who cares if the flight staff "want to do it" (because they would tell you if they didn't right? /Sarcasm) directives tell you not to do it.
Also as its been probably pointed out. Singling out the worst flight commander by making him wear a Pink belt is the textbook definition of hazing.
Seriously its almost like you guys at hawk were trying specifically to create an example of Hazing.
IMO that's what happens when you have amatures (like Hawk Mtn "Ranger" instructors) trying to break bad on the students. The pros know how to motivate someone. HMRS "Ranger" instructors just do stuff that they saw on a movie. Oh please.
If you want to see how the real professionals do it, watch "Two Weeks in Hell" (Special Forces Assessment and Selection). I'm not talking about how they make students puke and quit in the 1st 20 minutes, but how everything has its training objective. You'll also notice that after the first two hours, there's no yelling (there was even less when I went through - hardly any). If HMRS wants to teach something, do it like the later phases in the SFQC. There's classroom instruction, no harrassment, no yelling. Just learn it and do it.
You're not running an assessment and selection program, you're trying to teach people how to do "X" and "Y". Do one or the other, but not both. But on a uniform note, why not have white spats, too. Nifty bling! >:D
The responses defending that stupid belt make me wonder if they even do RST out there.
It does raise the question as to whether or not anyone is actually awake during those magic two hours.
Some high points of our review this last weekend.
CAP is trying to instill a culture of performance vs. compliance, raising the bar to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, and stressing
remediation which directly addresses the issue, not simply provides punishment. (i.e. making a cadet clean the latrines because his boots are not shined properly may result in clean latrines but not shiny boots)
But then again...those are just slides right off the NHQ-mandated training for any activity of 4-nights or more... ::)
I recently had a conversation with someone from CAWG about the "tadition" of the CTG commander having to one push up for each of the CTGs...the cadet told me that it was not hazing because he wanted to do it.
I explained that there is a fine line between "wanting to do something" and when peer pressure crosses the hazing line.
I can think of several more appropriate ways of motivating the the flight to do better.
Loose the belt.
Quote from: lordmonar on March 23, 2010, 04:26:19 PM
I explained that there is a fine line between "wanting to do something" and when peer pressure crosses the hazing line.
"Consent does not eliminate the culpability of the perpetrator."
How many of you have been to a summer school and saw how it operated, or are you all just making opinoins on what other people have said about the program.
I've been to quite a few and plan to visit this year also. I hope NOT to see a pink belt in sight. This kind of "show" was to have been purged years ago. Promises to profesionalize the conduct of the staff has kept HMRS alive. I sincerely hope this type of "tradition" is gone. :-[
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 23, 2010, 05:00:58 PM
How many of you have been to a summer school and saw how it operated, or are you all just making opinoins on what other people have said about the program.
I base my opinion on HMRS's own newsletter as well as statements you and your predecessors in this thread have made. Per RST the pink belt is hazing. There is no other legitimate interpretation.
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 23, 2010, 05:00:58 PM
How many of you have been to a summer school and saw how it operated, or are you all just making opinoins on what other people have said about the program.
Here's a polite suggestion: Before you continue in your attempts at defending HMRS, how 'bout identifying yourself for the sake of credibility and reading this thread and a few previous ones for background? It's important for you to understand that this is one of those thread categories that never really ends.
Quote from: Fuzzy on March 23, 2010, 02:38:06 PM
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 23, 2010, 02:02:48 PM
A response to the earlier arguement on the fact of the pink belt, and how it suposebly is offensive to females and how it is sexist, well if you ever took a white belt and tried to bleach it it turns pink. i was always told that someone a longtime ago wore a pink belt after bleaching it and it kinda stook as a joke(in between staff not in any kind of hazing way) and turned into a tradition that what ever squadron did the worst throughout the day gets the pink belt. the squadron commander is the bearer of the pink belt and all staff understand what it represents and they no its not in a hazing manner its a motivation to work harder for the next day and make improvements on what the squadron staff is doing so that they can make the expericence better for there cadets so they can get as much tarining out of the school as they can, because i mean jeez they pay alot of money to come and learn as much as they can so the pink belt is basically a motivation for squadron staff to work harder for their cadets and not slack so they can make the expericence ten times better for there students.
Like doing push ups every time I show up with scuffed boots, can motivate me to shine my shoes. Its not hazing its motivation..... Surrrre
Its all negative reinforcement "You do bad, something you don't like happens to you". Can't the rangers just get the same effect by rewarding the best flight?
Who cares if the flight staff "want to do it" (because they would tell you if they didn't right? /Sarcasm) directives tell you not to do it.
Also as its been probably pointed out. Singling out the worst flight commander by making him wear a Pink belt is the textbook definition of hazing.
Seriously its almost like you guys at hawk were trying specifically to create an example of Hazing.
I am a Squadron Commander at HMRS, and there has never been an instance where when someone that did not have their boots shined, that they had to do push ups. At least not in this day and age, i have no clue where you got that idea. The cadets going through staff training are told relentlessly that there image is a very important part of being a staff member on the mountain, as it is in any leadership position within the Civil Air Patrol or throughout life for that matter.
As the mandated RST training teaches us, there's plenty of creative ways to haze people without involving PT.
Quote from: Gunner C on March 23, 2010, 02:53:59 PM
IMO that's what happens when you have amatures (like Hawk Mtn "Ranger" instructors) trying to break bad on the students. The pros know how to motivate someone. HMRS "Ranger" instructors just do stuff that they saw on a movie. Oh please.
If you want to see how the real professionals do it, watch "Two Weeks in Hell" (Special Forces Assessment and Selection). I'm not talking about how they make students puke and quit in the 1st 20 minutes, but how everything has its training objective. You'll also notice that after the first two hours, there's no yelling (there was even less when I went through - hardly any). If HMRS wants to teach something, do it like the later phases in the SFQC. There's classroom instruction, no harrassment, no yelling. Just learn it and do it.
You're not running an assessment and selection program, you're trying to teach people how to do "X" and "Y". Do one or the other, but not both. But on a uniform note, why not have white spats, too. Nifty bling! >:D
Okay, first off all you contradicted yourself by saying us "HMRS RANGER Instructors" do what we see in movies. Then you start telling us about how we should run our program off of a movie that is from my understanding full blown military, well i personally thought Civil Air Patrol was a civilian organization or did that change?
Second of all you clearly stated in your post that we do not have training objectives, Well i beg to differ. If you think that because are staff members get vocal at times that its hazing, now i don't believe you believe that but there are people out there that do.(I Will Confess) At Hawk Mountain Ranger School we place our students under high stress environments, by being vocal at times where maybe we're working in the area and or getting to a class on time but we don't do it just to uphold the schedule, we place them in situations where they have to push themselves past what their minds tell them because when on a mission there could very well be a person lost, or a plane down with someone in danger right well, being a Ground team leader on a search i want a team that can push past their own comforts, and find a person and potentially save their life. Thats what Hawk Mountain Ranger School is... We are there not just there to teach the skills to be an effective search member but also be a person that has a mindset of "placing these duties before my own personal desires and comforts.", Without actually being at a summer school and hearing about what we do at hawk, i can understand where most of you come from when you think we haze but WE DON'T, If we hazed, why do we have people returning to the school, summer after summer. I dont know about everyone else but i would rather stay home and be with my friends, then go away for nine days if i knew i was going to be hazed. We do not haze.
"That Others May Live"
And the purpose of the pink belt?
I understand your intent to defend the HMRS.....but the bottom line is that CAP does not HAZE. The US Army does haze for all the same reasons you quote. But HMRS is NOT ALLOWED to HAZE even if it to reach an specific course goal.
HMRS may be a good program....but it (like many other CAP activities) has a lot of "traditions" and "motivational activities" that have no real training objectives.
Yes having team that knows how to push themselves is a good thing......but is it really necessary? Is the Pink Belt...used to motivate the lowest performing team....really the best tool? If the problem is simply a motivational issue then I would agree with you. But HMRS is a SCHOOL......low performance is most likely a function of not knowing or grasping the training objective. If you were an operational squadron......where you KNEW that everyone had the basic skills and knowledge to get the job done....then maybe you can use tools like the pink belt (or to use another movie reference the Leper Colony) to improve motivation.
But the problem from my point of view is that there is too much emphasis on the OOOOH RHAAA motivational training and not enough focus on basic skills training.
On the topic of evidence of hazing.
Just because a person does not know that he is hazing....or accepts it as part of the price to play.....does not justify it.
Hazing is clearly defined in the regulations. HMRS does haze. It has hazed in the past, it probably will haze in the future.
YOU as a leader at HMRS should be looking at each and everything that you do and say to your trainees and assess....is this really necessary to achieve my training objectives. Are there any alternatives to THIS method that are not entering the danger zone of becoming hazing? Do I know, REALLY KNOW, where the line is?
I have seen and participated in all sorts of hazing in my days as an ROTC cadet, AD USAF officer and CAP member. I know where the line is, I know where "having a little fun" stops and hazing begins. I know the difference between "he just wanted to see how many pushes up he could do" and hazing.
Gunner C was just stating that when the Army SF haze......they have clear objectives of why they are doing it. They have very clear directions of when to stop. They are trained, staffed, and supervised on multiple leaves to push that line as hard as the can but still stay on the safe side of it.
These sorts of professionals have months of training before they are let loose on trainees. They always have a 2-3 person integrity just to insure someone is watching the watchers.
CAP does not have any of this. We strive to get as best as we can with the time and people that we have.
But it almost always seems to be the case when clear violations of the hazing rules are pointed out here on CT.....there is always someone out there ready to defend it.
Bottom line......what is the purpose of the Pink Belt.....and does it or does it not violate the RST hazing rules?
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 24, 2010, 08:09:51 PM
Okay, first off all you contradicted yourself by saying us "HMRS RANGER Instructors" do what we see in movies. Then you start telling us about how we should run our program off of a movie that is from my understanding full blown military, well i personally thought Civil Air Patrol was a civilian organization or did that change?
You missed his point. A documentary =/= Full Metal Jacket.
Quote
I am a Squadron Commander at HMRS, and there has never been an instance where when someone that did not have their boots shined, that they had to do push ups. At least not in this day and age, i have no clue where you got that idea. The cadets going through staff training are told relentlessly that there image is a very important part of being a staff member on the mountain, as it is in any leadership position within the Civil Air Patrol or throughout life for that matter.
Because it's image that gets them to respect you, right?
QuoteAt Hawk Mountain Ranger School we place our students under high stress environments, by being vocal at times ...we place them in situations where they have to push themselves past what their minds tell them
QuoteC/2Lt. CAP
I'm sorry, how old are you? I'm 20, and neither my CAP experience, nor life experience would give me enough skill to be responsible for pushing people past their limits...
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 24, 2010, 07:23:47 PM
Quote from: Fuzzy on March 23, 2010, 02:38:06 PM
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 23, 2010, 02:02:48 PM
A response to the earlier arguement on the fact of the pink belt, and how it suposebly is offensive to females and how it is sexist, well if you ever took a white belt and tried to bleach it it turns pink. i was always told that someone a longtime ago wore a pink belt after bleaching it and it kinda stook as a joke(in between staff not in any kind of hazing way) and turned into a tradition that what ever squadron did the worst throughout the day gets the pink belt. the squadron commander is the bearer of the pink belt and all staff understand what it represents and they no its not in a hazing manner its a motivation to work harder for the next day and make improvements on what the squadron staff is doing so that they can make the expericence better for there cadets so they can get as much tarining out of the school as they can, because i mean jeez they pay alot of money to come and learn as much as they can so the pink belt is basically a motivation for squadron staff to work harder for their cadets and not slack so they can make the expericence ten times better for there students.
Like doing push ups every time I show up with scuffed boots, can motivate me to shine my shoes. Its not hazing its motivation..... Surrrre
Its all negative reinforcement "You do bad, something you don't like happens to you". Can't the rangers just get the same effect by rewarding the best flight?
Who cares if the flight staff "want to do it" (because they would tell you if they didn't right? /Sarcasm) directives tell you not to do it.
Also as its been probably pointed out. Singling out the worst flight commander by making him wear a Pink belt is the textbook definition of hazing.
Seriously its almost like you guys at hawk were trying specifically to create an example of Hazing.
I am a Squadron Commander at HMRS, and there has never been an instance where when someone that did not have their boots shined, that they had to do push ups. At least not in this day and age, i have no clue where you got that idea. The cadets going through staff training are told relentlessly that there image is a very important part of being a staff member on the mountain, as it is in any leadership position within the Civil Air Patrol or throughout life for that matter.
Dude, the boot thing was an example of pure hazing and how Hazing might get me to do what you want (enough push ups will eventually get me to shine my shoes) but there are more efficient ways.
I didn't even need to give an example because you guys are up the dreaming up text book examples..
Seriously the pink belt sounds like something someone came up with as a hypothetical example of an extreme scenario. Its hazing mmm'kay.
How you guys manage to get away with it is truly a mystery to me. I want to get away with random crazy stuff too....
EDIT: Maybe its just me but am I the only one who doesn't like when people use the pararescue slogan? I know the coasties use it to for rescue swimmers, but dang come up with your own slogan.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on March 24, 2010, 10:18:37 PM
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 24, 2010, 08:09:51 PM
Okay, first off all you contradicted yourself by saying us "HMRS RANGER Instructors" do what we see in movies. Then you start telling us about how we should run our program off of a movie that is from my understanding full blown military, well i personally thought Civil Air Patrol was a civilian organization or did that change?
You missed his point. A documentary =/= Full Metal Jacket.
Quote
I am a Squadron Commander at HMRS, and there has never been an instance where when someone that did not have their boots shined, that they had to do push ups. At least not in this day and age, i have no clue where you got that idea. The cadets going through staff training are told relentlessly that there image is a very important part of being a staff member on the mountain, as it is in any leadership position within the Civil Air Patrol or throughout life for that matter.
Because it's image that gets them to respect you, right?
QuoteAt Hawk Mountain Ranger School we place our students under high stress environments, by being vocal at times ...we place them in situations where they have to push themselves past what their minds tell them
QuoteC/2Lt. CAP
I'm sorry, how old are you? I'm 20, and neither my CAP experience, nor life experience would give me enough skill to be responsible for pushing people past their limits...
Did i say that it was my appearance that gave me the respect, no, what gives me the respect is me knowing my skills and being able to teach them the skills i learned to help further the entire civil air patrol emergency services program not only for the benefit of civil air patrol but for the fact of having search ready teams to help any person that would need our assistance. To be honest whether or not my cadets would respect me or not does not matter to me, because im not their to gain their respect im their to instruct, maybe thats what alot of people think ranger staff is there to do gain the respect of their cadets, no We are their to teach students plain and simple, give them their moneys worth. But having a sharp looking uniform as a staff member is required because, we are the united states air force auxiliary and we need to be able to represent the united states military in a professional manner, just like every member in civil air patrol should strive to do. maybe we enforce it a little bit more then everyone else by repeating our selfs over and over again, never by any means hazing them. I haven't been around for the since the start of the ranger program obviously so i cannot represent the school for the years i wasn't there, and yes i am almost certain that hazing did occur on the mountain, but nowadays you know the present there is no hazing done on the mountain, and the one thing you all dont understand about the pink belt is it is presented to and worn by the squadron commander, not any one student EVER. The pink belt is nothing towards the cadets of the squadron at all, its towards the SQUADRON
STAFF, The staff then no that they need to get more things done within the time allotted during area time, because if you get the pink belt it means you were the squadron that during area inspection had the most gigs. which is not the students fault, its the staff. so the pink belt is a staff thing, not students and ask any squadron commander that have worn the pink belt if they were hazed , they would respond to u "no its just a stupid tradition, w/e". Believe me if any staff member would think that they were being hazed it would have stopped a long time ago.
Quote from: Fuzzy on March 25, 2010, 01:00:24 AM
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 24, 2010, 07:23:47 PM
Quote from: Fuzzy on March 23, 2010, 02:38:06 PM
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 23, 2010, 02:02:48 PM
A response to the earlier arguement on the fact of the pink belt, and how it suposebly is offensive to females and how it is sexist, well if you ever took a white belt and tried to bleach it it turns pink. i was always told that someone a longtime ago wore a pink belt after bleaching it and it kinda stook as a joke(in between staff not in any kind of hazing way) and turned into a tradition that what ever squadron did the worst throughout the day gets the pink belt. the squadron commander is the bearer of the pink belt and all staff understand what it represents and they no its not in a hazing manner its a motivation to work harder for the next day and make improvements on what the squadron staff is doing so that they can make the expericence better for there cadets so they can get as much tarining out of the school as they can, because i mean jeez they pay alot of money to come and learn as much as they can so the pink belt is basically a motivation for squadron staff to work harder for their cadets and not slack so they can make the expericence ten times better for there students.
Like doing push ups every time I show up with scuffed boots, can motivate me to shine my shoes. Its not hazing its motivation..... Surrrre
Its all negative reinforcement "You do bad, something you don't like happens to you". Can't the rangers just get the same effect by rewarding the best flight?
Who cares if the flight staff "want to do it" (because they would tell you if they didn't right? /Sarcasm) directives tell you not to do it.
Also as its been probably pointed out. Singling out the worst flight commander by making him wear a Pink belt is the textbook definition of hazing.
Seriously its almost like you guys at hawk were trying specifically to create an example of Hazing.
I am a Squadron Commander at HMRS, and there has never been an instance where when someone that did not have their boots shined, that they had to do push ups. At least not in this day and age, i have no clue where you got that idea. The cadets going through staff training are told relentlessly that there image is a very important part of being a staff member on the mountain, as it is in any leadership position within the Civil Air Patrol or throughout life for that matter.
Dude, the boot thing was an example of pure hazing and how Hazing might get me to do what you want (enough push ups will eventually get me to shine my shoes) but there are more efficient ways.
I didn't even need to give an example because you guys are up the dreaming up text book examples..
Seriously the pink belt sounds like something someone came up with as a hypothetical example of an extreme scenario. Its hazing mmm'kay.
How you guys manage to get away with it is truly a mystery to me. I want to get away with random crazy stuff too....
EDIT: Maybe its just me but am I the only one who doesn't like when people use the pararescue slogan? I know the coasties use it to for rescue swimmers, but dang come up with your own slogan.
To be one hundred percent honest the whole slogan thing, whats it matter what we use as our creed, does it really matter. no, so stop complaining about completely irrelevant nonsense.
To bring all of this to a close, I refuse to associate myself or waste my time with such poor excuses for representatives of this organization and furthermore, this nation. I respect your opinions, however they are extremely mis-informed and uneducated. For those of you that havent been to the school to actually make analytical judgments, please stop associating the school with such unprofessional behavior. Myself and the other staff, past and present, have worked relentlessly to EARN respect for ourselves and the program as a whole the respect that it deserves.
Quotemaybe we enforce it a little bit more then everyone else.....
Dude you owe me a new keyboard and a Dr Pepper! Now I know your joking.
Also we get that just the commander wears the pink belt. Your Hazing the Cadet Squadron Commander. It can be argued that your hazing his cadets as well considering it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out who the worst squadron is. Why point something like that out?
Also I might be a little sensitive to the PJ slogan for personal reasons. They probably don't even mind the moutain and other groups using it. I just think its cheesy to rip it off.... just me.
Ok sorry everyone for the cadet fur ball. I'm done.... Thread drift I know. Lock imminent.
(http://i41.tinypic.com/33ze68z.jpg)
Quote from: Fuzzy on March 25, 2010, 03:12:27 AM
Quotemaybe we enforce it a little bit more then everyone else.....
Dude you owe me a new keyboard and a Dr Pepper! Now I know your joking.
Also we get that just the commander wears the pink belt. Your Hazing the Cadet Squadron Commander. It can be argued that your hazing his cadets as well considering it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out who the worst squadron is. Why point something like that out?
Also I might be a little sensitive to the PJ slogan for personal reasons. They probably don't even mind the moutain and other groups using it. I just think its cheesy to rip it off.... just me.
Ok sorry everyone for the cadet fur ball. I'm done.... Thread drift I know. Lock imminent.
Listen when i said enforce it more then others i mean that we TELL(not force to do push ups.) our staff canidates that they need to have a fresh sharp uniform, kinda of like a cadet commander of an ENC would tell his staff to have a good looking uniform, thats all i meant by that. That at hawk we enforce(encourage) our staff to have a good looking uniform
i think your point gets acros better when you actually use proper gramar. also may show some profesionalism. you know.
QuoteYour Hazing the Cadet Squadron Commander
Thechnically speaking its the senior squadron commander that is "supposed" to wear the pink belt. (I personally avoid the "gig" formation that it's "awarded" at, as it wastes my training time....so I can't speak with 100% certainty as to who is actually wearing it at any given time) So technically speaking there is no hazing unless a cadet is made to wear it (as there is no senior protection policy)
Regardless it's a stupid game that really doesnt do anything relative to the training environment. It would be just as easy to tell a squadron that they have the worst area in regards to inspections.
Equally its a stupid discussion that has already taken place in this thread (and others). Why dont we try to actually entertain some other topics of discussion rather than re-hash one already beaten to death.
mk
Quote from: HMRSRANGER on March 24, 2010, 08:09:51 PM
Quote from: Gunner C on March 23, 2010, 02:53:59 PM
Iwe place them in situations where they have to push themselves past what their minds tell them
Really? What, exactly, are your qualifications to do that?
Training, education--go ahead, list your credentials that allow you to properly evaluate an individual's emotional/mental limitations and then to know how far beyond those you can safely "push them."
I asked him the same thing. He chose to avoid answering it.
The trick is he gets them to "Push themselves". ::)
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on March 24, 2010, 10:18:37 PM
I'm sorry, how old are you? I'm 20, and neither my CAP experience, nor life experience would give me enough skill to be responsible for pushing people past their limits...
I'm a 25 year old Captain that started as a SMWOG. I read a lot. I pay attention when other members talk. It other words I think I have a pretty good grasp of this program but I'm going to have to agree with this very wise cadet. I don't know near enough nor would I expect to learn how to safely push people past their limits.
If you are pushing your people past their limits then I would have to say you are not a very good leader as a mark of good leadership is taking care of your people.
once again this thread goes no where and im sad to say it never will. Im sure you all could sit here and discredit the Rangers with all kinds of seemingly valid points, and likewise I could give you a rebutle for everysingle one of them. But, thats besides the point. The point is people have different ways of doing things. Weather thats the pink belt or whatever else we do to motivate our staff. I dont even know what to say anymore, HAWK is what it is everyone that goes there knows exactly what there getting into, if they dont like it they can leave, its a simple concept. From the moment I went to my first FALCON Ranger school here in florida back in the day, I knew what i was in for, and at no point was I forced to do anything. This summer it will be my 3rd year on the mountain at HAWK and I wouldnt be back there if i didnt support what was done there. If you dont support whats done there than dont worry about it. Do your own thing and If there is a serious issue at HAWK im sure it will be dealt with properly.
And as a side note, "Pushing your people past their limits" is a bad way of putting it. I like saying that we get people to come out of their shell and grow as a person. If your not doing that than yeah, you are a bad leader. What people dont understand is that we do it in a caring and compasionate way. Yes were stern in what we say to motivate people but if my students have a problem you can bet that im gonna be there for them.
Quote from: Rodriguez on March 25, 2010, 01:52:35 PM
once again this thread goes no where and im sad to say it never will. Im sure you all could sit here and discredit the Rangers with all kinds of seemingly valid points, and likewise I could give you a rebutle for everysingle one of them. But, thats besides the point. The point is people have different ways of doing things. Weather thats the pink belt or whatever else we do to motivate our staff. I dont even know what to say anymore, HAWK is what it is everyone that goes there knows exactly what there getting into, if they dont like it they can leave, its a simple concept. From the moment I went to my first FALCON Ranger school here in florida back in the day, I knew what i was in for, and at no point was I forced to do anything. This summer it will be my 3rd year on the mountain at HAWK and I wouldnt be back there if i didnt support what was done there. If you dont support whats done there than dont worry about it. Do your own thing and If there is a serious issue at HAWK im sure it will be dealt with properly.
And as a side note, "Pushing your people past their limits" is a bad way of putting it. I like saying that we get people to come out of their shell and grow as a person. If your not doing that than yeah, you are a bad leader. What people dont understand is that we do it in a caring and compasionate way. Yes were stern in what we say to motivate people but if my students have a problem you can bet that im gonna be there for them.
Hawk discredits itself. They knowingly and willfully violate the rules. The pink belt is hazing. Period. There is nothing compassionate about humiliating someone. Why don't you rebut our arguments? Dodging them is cowardly and just shows that there isn't a valid rebuttal.
QuoteWhy don't you rebut our arguments?
Your arguments have been rebutted. You (and others) continue to deny the rebuttal because you disagree and then pick a fight everytime some new cadet full of the program comes on here feeling like HMRS is being attacked. Following the practice of our legal system, innocent until proven guilty; YOU may think its hazing, but our leadership either does not or chooses not to see it as such. Otherwise we assume they would have put a stop to it and 2B'd or applied other disciplinary measures to the leadership and members responsible for such hazing. (and we are talking about multiple NHQ/CC's, Wing Commanders, National Legal officer, and CC's CAP-USAF that have first hand knowledge)
Simply put, the pink belt is a silly custom with no real training value, its continued use lends very easily to entanglement of hazing potential.
mk
Quote from: Rotorhead on December 16, 2009, 07:00:48 PM
Quote from: C/TSgt RD on December 16, 2009, 06:58:05 PM
Ive had it. This forum is worthless. I have tried to carry on a constructive and fun thread but nobody wants to STAY ON TOPIC!!!! You all can't respect a cadet's simple wishes to carry on a conversation about preparing to go to Hawk Mountain in 2010. You all should be ashamed. You call your selves leaders?!?! I am one of those cadets who went to Hawk. What I saw there wasn't hazing. It was tough.... but not hazing. It all goes back to the age old saying.... "don't knock it tel you try it"... I don't understand how someone who have never even been to Hawk, who have just herd stories form others, who don't know squat about what he is talking about, can judge what goes on there. I for one am done with this forum.. and will not come back.
P.S.
This was only my first thread. Sad isn't it....
Yes, it is sad that your skin is so thin.
Great Example "CAPT"
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 06:54:57 PM
I would like to think that if the NHQ staff including the National Legal officer did not identify the use of the pink belt to signify the squadron that did the poorest on inspections as hazing that it must not be (I mean maybe they kept him distracted from the mid day formation for the days he was there).... but I suppose that could be an interpretation one could get from that
But then we should avoid the use of any term that may signal out individuals or groups of individuals that don't succeed at the tasks we give them.... so use of the word failed would be out.....nor should we list Antone's rank or order of selection choices for NCSA's as it may make them feel inferior, and I suppose identifying honor cadet, or honor squadron would equally make someone feel "less than adequate" and well that whole cadet competetion thing is right out the window...everyone who came is a winner (because obviously if you arent the winner...you are the looser)
I'll bite that the push-up thing in the shower if substantiated, is hazing.....fairly clear cut there (its hard to identify that as a physical training evolution)
Ego deflation should occur to anyone in CAP...we may be cool but we arent that cool....I dont care if its HMRS, Blue Beret or encampment staff....I have seen it from just about any activity even whithin just a squadron organizations....
mk
I think this is the best post I have read here so far!
People in Civil Air Patrol have made "hazing' a huge deal. Like you said what about CC and honor cadet?? Your not going to die by being hazed.
I do understand the push-up issue in the showers.
The pink belt I see it more as something that should motivate you to step up and do your s*** right!
Now when is comes to EGO, I haven't been to Hawk yet, I leave 8 July this year and will talk when I come back. I can say this, there are two experts and many R3s, R2s, R1s, and advanced in my squadron. All of them know their s*** and are very efficient in getting things done.
If there Ego is high, I don't blame them, the can go out and perform their tasks quickly and efficiently.
I currently am an R2 and I have learned different topics not covered in GTM3 which I also have. As a ranger I feel that it is my responsibility to continue my education, which I do, I always try to stay proficient in both survival and SAR.
"...These things we do that others may live..."
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 06:54:57 PM
I would like to think that if the NHQ staff including the National Legal officer did not identify the use of the pink belt to signify the squadron that did the poorest on inspections as hazing that it must not be (I mean maybe they kept him distracted from the mid day formation for the days he was there).... but I suppose that could be an interpretation one could get from that)
Could you please cite the complaint, report, or any evidence you have that the NLO was aware the belt was worn and why or that he ever rendered an opinion? His mere presence indicates nothing, not even his awareness of the issue. Just because someone is the NLO doesn't make him an expert on Hazing, abuse, or even the program as a whole. I know a couple CAP legal people personally, one I consider a friend. He can beat the heck out of a hangar contract, but starts making phone calls when the regs and policies about ES or CP come up.
The legal people aren't going to do anything without direction.
Quote from: airdale12 on June 24, 2011, 02:30:12 PM
Your not going to die by being hazed.
Seriously? Those that have died and / or been permanently injured during hazing disagree. A generally accepted statistic is that
there at least one death on a college campus each year attributed directly to hazing, and that doesn't count the thousands of issues
each year where people are injured but not reported as hazing, and/or kids scarred permanently by some FMJ Goober who's seen too many
movies and the kid disengages from the organization, and/or life.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 24, 2011, 03:09:51 PM
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 06:54:57 PM
I would like to think that if the NHQ staff including the National Legal officer did not identify the use of the pink belt to signify the squadron that did the poorest on inspections as hazing that it must not be (I mean maybe they kept him distracted from the mid day formation for the days he was there).... but I suppose that could be an interpretation one could get from that)
Could you please cite the complaint, report, or any evidence you have that the NLO was aware the belt was worn and why or that he ever rendered an opinion? His mere presence indicates nothing, not even his awareness of the issue. Just because someone is the NLO doesn't make him an expert on Hazing, abuse, or even the program as a whole. I know a couple CAP legal people personally, one I consider a friend. He can beat the heck out of a hangar contract, but starts making phone calls when the regs and policies about ES or CP come up.
The legal people aren't going to do anything without direction.
Quote from: airdale12 on June 24, 2011, 02:30:12 PM
Your not going to die by being hazed.
Seriously? Those that have died and / or been permanently injured during hazing disagree. A generally accepted statistic is that
there at least one death on a college campus each year attributed directly to hazing, and that doesn't count the thousands of issues
each year where people are injured but not reported as hazing, and/or kids scarred permanently by some FMJ Goober who's seen too many
movies and the kid disengages from the organization, and/or life.
I don't believe they are going to die from being hazed at hawk. Now your talking about college and other locations.
Get proof that a cadet has died from being hazed at hawk and then we will talk.
Quote from: airdale12 on June 24, 2011, 04:47:37 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 24, 2011, 03:09:51 PM
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 06:54:57 PM
I would like to think that if the NHQ staff including the National Legal officer did not identify the use of the pink belt to signify the squadron that did the poorest on inspections as hazing that it must not be (I mean maybe they kept him distracted from the mid day formation for the days he was there).... but I suppose that could be an interpretation one could get from that)
Could you please cite the complaint, report, or any evidence you have that the NLO was aware the belt was worn and why or that he ever rendered an opinion? His mere presence indicates nothing, not even his awareness of the issue. Just because someone is the NLO doesn't make him an expert on Hazing, abuse, or even the program as a whole. I know a couple CAP legal people personally, one I consider a friend. He can beat the heck out of a hangar contract, but starts making phone calls when the regs and policies about ES or CP come up.
The legal people aren't going to do anything without direction.
Quote from: airdale12 on June 24, 2011, 02:30:12 PM
Your not going to die by being hazed.
Seriously? Those that have died and / or been permanently injured during hazing disagree. A generally accepted statistic is that
there at least one death on a college campus each year attributed directly to hazing, and that doesn't count the thousands of issues
each year where people are injured but not reported as hazing, and/or kids scarred permanently by some FMJ Goober who's seen too many
movies and the kid disengages from the organization, and/or life.
I don't believe they are going to die from being hazed at hawk. Now your talking about college and other locations.
Get proof that a cadet has died from being hazed at hawk and then we will talk.
It is not necessary to cite an instance where someone specifically at Hawk was injured as a result of hazing to show that hazing ANYWHERE is a problem. Ask any school counselor worth their salt about the problems brought on by bulling & hazing. It's not a big jump to say those issues would be a problem in CAP too.
The Jason Foundation website might have some good info. Check it out sometime and let me know.
Quote
Get proof that a cadet has died from being hazed at hawk and then we will talk.
Why would a cadet need to die before we discuss hazing, hmm? ??? Is not the fact that hazing is wrong and should be stopped anytime, anywhere that it is detected enough? You say that this is a dead topic but I disagree. We seem to have someone who does not recognize hazing, and in fact defends it. :'(
So, airdale12 comes in to troll an 18 month old post, and we all jump in to argue with him?
I'm wondering, how are you an "R2" (and what is that in CAP anyway?) without being at Hawk?
Quote from: airdale12 on June 24, 2011, 02:30:12 PM
....Now when is comes to EGO, I haven't been to Hawk yet, I leave 8 July this year and will talk when I come back....
.....I currently am an R2 and I have learned different topics not covered in GTM3 which I also have. As a ranger I feel that it is my responsibility to continue my education, which I do, I always try to stay proficient in both survival and SAR.....
Erm... Anyone else confused?
Quote from: HGjunkie on June 24, 2011, 09:24:41 PM
Quote from: airdale12 on June 24, 2011, 02:30:12 PM
....Now when is comes to EGO, I haven't been to Hawk yet, I leave 8 July this year and will talk when I come back....
.....I currently am an R2 and I have learned different topics not covered in GTM3 which I also have. As a ranger I feel that it is my responsibility to continue my education, which I do, I always try to stay proficient in both survival and SAR.....
Erm... Anyone else confused?
Yup, that got me wondering too. Even more though, he lists his sqn as the FL wing patron sqn which doesn't allow you to participate in activities.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on June 24, 2011, 09:21:10 PM
I'm wondering, how are you an "R2"
(http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/107/r2d2hmrs.jpg)
Quote from: airdale12 on June 24, 2011, 04:47:37 PM
I don't believe they are going to die from being hazed at hawk. Now your talking about college and other locations.
Get proof that a cadet has died from being hazed at hawk and then we will talk.
Your
belief is
irrelevant as hazing is explicitly prohibited at any CAP activity.
Perhaps some time spent with CAP regs would be better spent than working on upgrading your "R".
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on June 24, 2011, 10:14:49 PM
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on June 24, 2011, 09:21:10 PM
I'm wondering, how are you an "R2"
(http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/107/r2d2hmrs.jpg)
The Ranger is missing his gear. He's also going into my files. :P
Quote from: airdale12 on June 24, 2011, 04:47:37 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 24, 2011, 03:09:51 PM
Quote from: sarmed1 on December 17, 2009, 06:54:57 PM
I would like to think that if the NHQ staff including the National Legal officer did not identify the use of the pink belt to signify the squadron that did the poorest on inspections as hazing that it must not be (I mean maybe they kept him distracted from the mid day formation for the days he was there).... but I suppose that could be an interpretation one could get from that)
Could you please cite the complaint, report, or any evidence you have that the NLO was aware the belt was worn and why or that he ever rendered an opinion? His mere presence indicates nothing, not even his awareness of the issue. Just because someone is the NLO doesn't make him an expert on Hazing, abuse, or even the program as a whole. I know a couple CAP legal people personally, one I consider a friend. He can beat the heck out of a hangar contract, but starts making phone calls when the regs and policies about ES or CP come up.
The legal people aren't going to do anything without direction.
Quote from: airdale12 on June 24, 2011, 02:30:12 PM
Your not going to die by being hazed.
Seriously? Those that have died and / or been permanently injured during hazing disagree. A generally accepted statistic is that
there at least one death on a college campus each year attributed directly to hazing, and that doesn't count the thousands of issues
each year where people are injured but not reported as hazing, and/or kids scarred permanently by some FMJ Goober who's seen too many
movies and the kid disengages from the organization, and/or life.
I don't believe they are going to die from being hazed at hawk. Now your talking about college and other locations.
Get proof that a cadet has died from being hazed at hawk and then we will talk.
Trolls will be trollin....
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on June 24, 2011, 09:21:10 PM
So, airdale12 comes in to troll an 18 month old post, and we all jump in to argue with him?
I'm wondering, how are you an "R2" (and what is that in CAP anyway?) without being at Hawk?
Units can conduct their own training using the Ranger Curriculum; testing/sign off must be done by a member holding the next highest rating.
The written test can ony be administered by a member with an Expert Rating unless granted a waiver/exception by the Stan/Eval section. Completion of the summer school is not a requirement for completion of Ranger grade. ( Winter School is required fro R/1 and above, but that is waivered on a case by case basis for those in warmer climates or upon curriculum review for a local equivilent training)
mk
sorry , I am going to have to feed the troll just a little.
Quote from: airdale12 on June 24, 2011, 04:47:37 PM
.......I don't believe they are going to die from being hazed at hawk. Now your talking about college and other locations.
Get proof that a cadet has died from being hazed at hawk and then we will talk.
There is a 60' rappel tower
There is a confidence/obstacle course with a 30' inverted ladder, monkey bars, rope swing and cable bridge (the last 3 over water)
There are creeks and ponds
There are wild animals and posionus snakes
There is a huge mountain range
There is extreme weather (hot and humid during the day, cold and damp at night, rain, thunder storms.......)
There is private property with live stock all around (and gun toting farmers)
Maybe after you have been to the school you can talk about how likely a chance there is that someone could overstep their bounds and a hazing incident could result in serious injury or death.... (at HMRS or any CAP activity for that matter)
Good ORM, safety procedures and general adult supervision at any activity should prevent an incident (but I'm sure commanders of activites that we use as training examples thought theres was good enough too....)
just sayin'
mk
OH NOES....you feed it. Now it will keep coming back.... >:D
I'm going to give a little benefit of the doubt here....he has like 3 posts to his name & doesnt know that resurecting old topics just to offer your personal (and frequently misguided) opinion (especially ones about HMRS) is bad for your health.......
mk
PS wrong droid: the HMRS R2 unit has orange accents, not blue & the SAR patch is in the wrong location.... obviously a poser!
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT8A6mRqIAoEM9jQUWhJU5xYCto6JwwrerlYgNkGhj07ZJEq_u6dw&t=1)