You must have a GTL, either trainee or fully qualified. If a trainee, the GTL must be supervised by a qualified GTL, preferably a SET who can also sign them off.
^ I agree 100% - honestly, I have no idea how yo can ascertain is someone should be leading a team looking to save a life via phone.
My squadron does not have a qualified GTL yet. Can we deploy with a GTL in training though?"Composition of the ground team, urban DF team, or Community EmergencyResponse Team (CERT) will vary depending upon the assignment. Ground teams will not bereleased without a qualified ground team leader and at least three qualified ground teammembers or supervised trainees. " -From 60-3How about a loophole to this?Thank you
Quote from: Eclipse on March 09, 2017, 02:04:15 PM^ I agree 100% - honestly, I have no idea how yo can ascertain is someone should be leading a team looking to save a life via phone.It's more useful for renewals than trainees but it's there and I've been the beneficiary of it before.
Quote from: Kallan09 on March 09, 2017, 01:04:58 PMMy squadron does not have a qualified GTL yet. Can we deploy with a GTL in training though?"Composition of the ground team, urban DF team, or Community EmergencyResponse Team (CERT) will vary depending upon the assignment. Ground teams will not bereleased without a qualified ground team leader and at least three qualified ground teammembers or supervised trainees. " -From 60-3How about a loophole to this?Thank youThe fact that you're looking for a loophole makes me automatically say negative on that. Now, you won't like to hear this, but you need to, because I'd love to see you do it right, because lives and safety could depend on it:From a holistic standpoint, if your entire unit is in building mode for fully mission qualified personnel, you need to step back and first evaluate your priorities. If you truly want to embrace our core values (including "Excellence in All We Do", you'll accept that you need to stop aiming for the lowest bar, and stop looking for loopholes in obviously clearly stated regulations. Right from the start, your unit needs to take the time to Do It Right The First Time, or you'll perpetuate the trend towards accepting crappy performance in CAP (this isn't finding easier ways to do the job - you're specifically looking for ways to skip out on the work). Sorry, but you need to hear that push back.Which means accepting some of the very positive suggestions offered here, from (a) sending your GTL* to NESA or to one of the other fine in-residence schools, to (b) forming a partnering relationship with the best available SET-Qualified GTLs/GBDs around there to team up with them as their padawan learners.To stay with the weak Star Wars analogy, don't try to be Anakin Skywalker, rushing the training and looking for a way around the regs and trick the system, which is based on many many years of trial and painful error in training Jedi Masters. Because safety of life and limb could be at risk (and necause many of us have seen the halfass GTLs make dangerous calls), good Squadron/Group/Wing DOSs will not send or approve weak qual packages - and yes, as such in the past I have actually taken the time to look up the cited AFAM numbers, check the sign in logs in WMIRS, and call the listed mission staff to verbally check and confirm the claimed levels of supervision, tasking, and competence cited. Often with embarrassing results for the unit, submitting commander, and the individual. So: do it right - first time quality.Speaking as a GBD/GTL SET, and former WG/DOS.V/rSpam
Yes, I agree totally. Soon we already plan on sending the senior member for GTL training BUT, in the meantime if a mission rolls out, how can we respond? I guess for know we will find another GTL. Thank you.
If I knew you were near us, I'd love to have y'all train with us (and with our local partner units).Suggest practically that you start swapping alert info with other local units, and pre-authorize selected member deployments in the case of alerts. Not all trainees are ready to deploy on every actual. Not every partner unit GTL (or MP) will feel comfortable with assuming responsibility for trainees on actuals.But, starting that conversation now with them would preclude a bunch of problems and disappointment some evening in the future.Best regards and good luck,Spam
Quote from: Spam on March 09, 2017, 02:20:04 PMQuote from: Kallan09 on March 09, 2017, 01:04:58 PMMy squadron does not have a qualified GTL yet. Can we deploy with a GTL in training though?"Composition of the ground team, urban DF team, or Community EmergencyResponse Team (CERT) will vary depending upon the assignment. Ground teams will not bereleased without a qualified ground team leader and at least three qualified ground teammembers or supervised trainees. " -From 60-3How about a loophole to this?Thank youThe fact that you're looking for a loophole makes me automatically say negative on that. Now, you won't like to hear this, but you need to, because I'd love to see you do it right, because lives and safety could depend on it:From a holistic standpoint, if your entire unit is in building mode for fully mission qualified personnel, you need to step back and first evaluate your priorities. If you truly want to embrace our core values (including "Excellence in All We Do", you'll accept that you need to stop aiming for the lowest bar, and stop looking for loopholes in obviously clearly stated regulations. Right from the start, your unit needs to take the time to Do It Right The First Time, or you'll perpetuate the trend towards accepting crappy performance in CAP (this isn't finding easier ways to do the job - you're specifically looking for ways to skip out on the work). Sorry, but you need to hear that push back.Which means accepting some of the very positive suggestions offered here, from (a) sending your GTL* to NESA or to one of the other fine in-residence schools, to (b) forming a partnering relationship with the best available SET-Qualified GTLs/GBDs around there to team up with them as their padawan learners.To stay with the weak Star Wars analogy, don't try to be Anakin Skywalker, rushing the training and looking for a way around the regs and trick the system, which is based on many many years of trial and painful error in training Jedi Masters. Because safety of life and limb could be at risk (and necause many of us have seen the halfass GTLs make dangerous calls), good Squadron/Group/Wing DOSs will not send or approve weak qual packages - and yes, as such in the past I have actually taken the time to look up the cited AFAM numbers, check the sign in logs in WMIRS, and call the listed mission staff to verbally check and confirm the claimed levels of supervision, tasking, and competence cited. Often with embarrassing results for the unit, submitting commander, and the individual. So: do it right - first time quality.Speaking as a GBD/GTL SET, and former WG/DOS.V/rSpamYes, I agree totally. Soon we already plan on sending the senior member for GTL training BUT, in the meantime if a mission rolls out, how can we respond? I guess for know we will find another GTL. Thank you.
I'm not 100% sure but can't a UDF team deploy without a GTL?
Ah, that chart... thanks for posting this. I'd forgotten about that chart (which is non regulatory as far as I can tell?). It bothers me from a couple of standpoints.
First, it "covers" (insofar as it isn't directive in nature) only supervision, not SET-qualified endorsement, so it is inadmissible as far as I can see for the purposes of claiming training credit for a sortie ("hey, why wont the DO accept my mission sortie on 17M1234 under the non-GTL/SET qualified GBD?").
(Yes, before y'all start, I know where it came from... twenty or thirty years ago, an earlier version of this table used to be printed in the back of the old CAPM 50-15 operations training manual, when 50-15 was ops training, 50-16 was cadet training, and 50-17 was senior training). It made for a simpler lookup table for simpler times, but now it is just "simplistic", and inaccurate and misleading w.r.t. the approved process).
QuoteAh, that chart... thanks for posting this. I'd forgotten about that chart (which is non regulatory as far as I can tell?). It bothers me from a couple of standpoints.Here’s where it’s regulatory/directive authority comes from. The chart was in the 2001 and 2004 editions of CAPR 60-3. The 2004 version was superseded by the 2009 version which includes this in the Summary of Changes “This revised regulation is 14 pages shorter than the previous version. To accomplish that, some of the sections from the previous CAPR 60-3 are now posted online on the NHQ CAP/DOS website.” The chart was one of the items moved to the website and the text of the reg, including the current 2012 version, in several places refers the reader to the website, where the stand-alone chart resides. Knowledgebase Answer ID: 1839 concerning evaluation and supervision also refers to the sections of 60-3 which reference the website.
(Note, you've got to agree to join my aircraft design team as a senior Systems Engineer - your understanding of how to do a chained/nested requirements trace is superb).
Quote(Note, you've got to agree to join my aircraft design team as a senior Systems Engineer - your understanding of how to do a chained/nested requirements trace is superb).Sorry, Spam, BTDT. I learned that as a structures engineer in your LockMart cousin that flew big things that didn't have wings.Mike
You worked across the base at the Ministry of Massive Machines (C-5) didn't you?
cousin that flew big things that didn't have wings.
Also (and I was waiting until I could dig this up), per this PDF on the NHQ Ops site, GBDs can remotely supervise trainees remotely. However, I strongly advise this capability be used with discretion. This is better to do when the GTL trainee has all tasks and one sortie done, just needs a second sortie, and is otherwise proven safe and semi-effective in the field. I would not do this with a green GTL trainee with few tasks and no prior sorties, if for no other reason than someone's going to ask a lot of hard questions if something bad happens. It's way easier to justify with a near-finished trainee than a brand new one.https://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/QUALIFIED_SUPERVISOR_CHART_887FF22488458.pdf