Air Branch Director

[Tim Day]

Was I wrong? Yes, I could have handled it better. Was the cadet wrong? Yes and no. Wrong in that he approached me in the wrong way, but in the right with regards to his position.

Concur, although I'd stop at the cadet was wrong. A smart C/Lt Col would phrase his order in the form of a courteous request, given that there was no real time-critical obedience required. Just for practice and overall respect, even as a SM Lt Col I usually phrase orders to juniors as a polite request. "C/CMSgt Smith, would you please take the post at the west end of the runway?"

If there's any question about options, I can always clear that up in the ensuing discussion. But, by the time someone passes their Eaker they should have a working grasp of basic military courtesies.

I agree with your likely scenarios as well, and hope they'd all be part of the curriculum for our cadet AOBD-trainee. I have to say though, I could see some 55-yo MPs questioning a 45-yo AOBD the same way...

[Brit_in_CAP]

This thread reminds of the chapter in Heinlein's Starship Troopers when Rico was a cadet at OCS and had to be given the probationary, temporary, and supernumerary rank of Third Lieutenant because a cadet cannot give an order in the field.

A most excellent book

:clap: :clap:

Read it or the first time many years ago, and I've read it regularly since.

Like Panzebjorn said, if you're read the book you probably despise the movie...I certainly do!

[THRAWN]

This thread reminds of the chapter in Heinlein's Starship Troopers when Rico was a cadet at OCS and had to be given the probationary, temporary, and supernumerary rank of Third Lieutenant because a cadet cannot give an order in the field.

A most excellent book

:clap: :clap:

Read it or the first time many years ago, and I've read it regularly since.

Like Panzebjorn said, if you're read the book you probably despise the movie...I certainly do!

The two versions share little aside from the title. The film series was entertaining. Had the feel of the story as well as Rick Shelley's DMC series. (If you've never read those, get the set. Might run you about $10 from Amazon or HPB)

[winterg]

This thread reminds of the chapter in Heinlein's Starship Troopers when Rico was a cadet at OCS and had to be given the probationary, temporary, and supernumerary rank of Third Lieutenant because a cadet cannot give an order in the field.

A most excellent book

:clap: :clap:

Read it or the first time many years ago, and I've read it regularly since.

Like Panzebjorn said, if you're read the book you probably despise the movie...I certainly do!

The two versions share little aside from the title. The film series was entertaining. Had the feel of the story as well as Rick Shelley's DMC series. (If you've never read those, get the set. Might run you about $10 from Amazon or HPB)

If they had changed the title of Starship Troopers to Imperial Guard vs Tyranids, it would be one of my all time favorite movies. But, no.

[Panzerbjorn]

I personally have issues with cadets being in positions of "authority" over seniors with many more years of service and experience. I had an experience about 15 years ago at the EAA mission in Wisconsin. A cadet Lt. Col., about 17 years of age, was given the task of staffing assignments for FLD airport. He ordered me to take a post at the west end of the runway, no sir, no nothing. I reamed his butt out in front of the rest of the seniors, who would have stopped me if I crossed the line. He stood his ground, saying the IC gave him authority to order anyone and everyone, and I would take my post. Sir. I refused on the grounds that he was a cadet, I was a major, and he would show me some respect if he wanted me to do anything. He threatened to report me to the IC, to which I said "feel free to do so, but until I hear a "sir, can you please _____" I was not going to do anything. Later that evening, he duly reported my "insubordination" to the IC, and based on the subsequent one-sided "yes, sir/no sir" conversation I overheard, the cadet was given new instructions with regards to handling his position.

Was I wrong? Yes, I could have handled it better. Was the cadet wrong? Yes and no. Wrong in that he approached me in the wrong way, but in the right with regards to his position.

There is a big difference between having the authority to do something and letting your ego get the better of you and think that you can just order people around like they're C/ABs at an encampment.  Cadets don't ORDER Seniors to do anything.  They REQUEST.  While I was finishing my GTL qualification, a cadet instructor came up and gruffly demanded that I give him a Tracker I was carrying.

"Pardon me?"

"Give me the Tracker!"

"It's dark out, cadet, perhaps you're unaware you're addressing a superior officer?"

He stood his ground one more time, thinking his position as an instructor overrides basic customs and courtesies.  I gave him another chance to realize the error of his ways, and he relented.  He had every right to take the Tracker, and every right to give me instructions on what he wanted me to do.  But regardless of the position that cadet is in, he didn't have the right to ignore the basic courtesy that all cadets are expected to show senior members. 

In your case, the idea that this cadet stood his ground all the way up to reporting you to the IC for insubordination is laughable, and I'm glad to hear the IC straightened him out and made him see the error of his ways.

Most senior members won't blink an eye and do what a cadet asks them to do if they are ASKED to do it.

[thebeggerpie]

 Sounds like Cadets get big-headed with a lil bit of power. Well, some cadets at least.

[THRAWN]

Sounds like Cadets get big-headed with a lil bit of power. Well, some cadets at least.

'Cause that would never happen with a SM...or National Commander...

It's a failure in the cadet's leadership, not just in the cadet. People tend to emulate what they see and do what they are allowed to get away with. If you don't teach cadets, or seniors, how to be effective instructors or leaders, they won't be. If those lessons aren't reinforced consistently and constantly, that also leads to failure.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Sounds like Cadets get big-headed with a lil bit of power. Well, some cadets at least.

'Cause that would never happen with a SM...or National Commander...

It's a failure in the cadet's leadership, not just in the cadet. People tend to emulate what they see and do what they are allowed to get away with. If you don't teach cadets, or seniors, how to be effective instructors or leaders, they won't be. If those lessons aren't reinforced consistently and constantly, that also leads to failure.

I'd usually agree, but I've also seen some type A personalities that were simply "like that" with zero chance of being fixed by a lowly CAP Captain with almost as much CAP time as the cadet had walking on two feet.

[THRAWN]

Sounds like Cadets get big-headed with a lil bit of power. Well, some cadets at least.

'Cause that would never happen with a SM...or National Commander...

It's a failure in the cadet's leadership, not just in the cadet. People tend to emulate what they see and do what they are allowed to get away with. If you don't teach cadets, or seniors, how to be effective instructors or leaders, they won't be. If those lessons aren't reinforced consistently and constantly, that also leads to failure.

I'd usually agree, but I've also seen some type A personalities that were simply "like that" with zero chance of being fixed by a lowly CAP Captain with almost as much CAP time as the cadet had walking on two feet.

True, but if they're "like that", are they truly being successful in the program?

[Storm Chaser]

The more I read these posts and different opinions, the more I'm convinced of how diluted our qualifications are. In the military, an officer doing similar functions to that of an Air Operations Branch Director would normally be a Maj or Lt Col with 11-20+ years of experience and hundreds to thousands of flight hours. Yet, some are arguing here about how a cadet with a fraction of that experience can be an effective AOBD. And just to be clear, inexperienced senior members shouldn't be qualified as AOBD either.

Other agencies have similar high standards and it can take years to reach those qualifications and assignments. Branch Directors and Section Chiefs should be experienced personnel in those areas. Yet we qualified people to the bare minimum, even if they can't really do the job effectively when it's really needed. Just because someone is a great Logistics Officer, doesn't mean they can be an effective Logistics Section Chief (although that's not even a prerequisite for this qualification). And just because someone is a great Mission Observer or Mission Pilot, doesn't meant they're going to make a good AOBD.

How can external agencies take us seriously if our training and qualification standards are so low?

[The Infamous Meerkat]

I second this opinion.

[Flying Pig]

How can external agencies take us seriously if our training and qualification standards are so low?

Ive been on missions where on Monday I was flying as a CAP pilot.... and on Tuesday, I was flying on the same mission as an LE pilot.  It can be interesting explaining to your work partners why CAP does what they do.  But I guess its a give and take.  yes, people get offended when people say "We are volunteers"   That not an excuse to be unprofessional or lower standards, however CAP also cant make their requirements so high that they price themselves right out of the business. 

[Storm Chaser]

I don't disagree. Requirements need to be practical and attainable. That said, in theory a member can become a MS at a SAREX, an MO at another one, and an AOBD at a third one. Of course, in many wings that wouldn't fly. But since the regulation doesn't quite prohibit it, it can not only be done, but it actually does happen. A GBD doesn't even have to be a GTL anymore, but only UDF qualified. There's not even a requirement for a member to have experience as a UDF team leader, so someone (at least in theory) can go from being a UDF team member to being a GBD. I can keep going on and on about this, but I think I've made my point.

It's up to the commanders at each echelon to determine who can do what (that's what the commander approval on the SQTR is for), but in practice (I've seen it many times) members get qualified in some of these specialties because they can, not because they should. Most tasks are simple enough to do and can be completed outside of a mission. And because there's no requirement on a specific type or size of mission, the exercise participation is not only subjective, but lacks standardization. For example, an AOBD can be qualified while managing 10 aircraft or one, three sorties or 15; there's no specific requirement. Because it's up to the skills evaluator and each commander or designee to decide whether someone is ready or not, members get qualified in some of these positions while being held to different standards depending on unit, group or wing.