Brooklyn Tech Cadet/ Composite Squadron History

Started by BTCS1*, December 27, 2009, 05:00:16 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BTCS1*

Hi Everyone,
The other day my CC and I were having a discusion on CAP history, when we cam to realize we know almost nothing about our own squadrons history. And do not even know when our charter was first granted. So if any of you guys know anything about my squadron's past, a post or pm would be greatly appreciated. Or even how to find out about the history of it. Btw the charter number is NY 384.
Thanks,
C/SSgt Garelick
C/2d Lt. B. Garelick, CAP

lordmonar

Contact your wing Historian or the National Historian.  They can help you find that information.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

VPI18

Quote from: BTCS1* on December 27, 2009, 05:00:16 AM
Hi Everyone,
The other day my CC and I were having a discusion on CAP history, when we cam to realize we know almost nothing about our own squadrons history. And do not even know when our charter was first granted. So if any of you guys know anything about my squadron's past, a post or pm would be greatly appreciated. Or even how to find out about the history of it. Btw the charter number is NY 384.
Thanks,
C/SSgt Garelick

Google is priceless:

Archived BTCS site from 1999: http://reocities.com/Area51/aurora/8883/OFFLINE/
CAC minutes mentioning BTCS: http://www.nywgcadets.org/cac12-2000.html

So we know the squadron has existed for at least 10 years. Also, why not try asking the school?

BTCS1*

Once school is back in sesion I am going to talk to the school's alumni foundation's historian. And I have heard that it was around in the 80's, but have no details further than that. I think that the school will give a lot of info.
C/2d Lt. B. Garelick, CAP

Smithsonia

I have a secondard source regarding this topic - So while I think this information is authoritative, I cannot fully certify it --
The Brooklyn Cadet Squadron was founded in 1943.    The Harlem Sqdn & Queens Sqdn were founded in 1942.  Harlem may have been the first African American Squadron in the CAP, but cannot confirm yet.   I do know Harlem SQ was one of the first all African American squadrons though. 

I hope you had a Great Xmas!   
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

BTCS1*

Wow! That's an interesting history. I do not know if Brooklyn cadet squadron morphed into mine, but if we date back to the early days of CAP that would be amazing! Thank you for that information.
C/2d Lt. B. Garelick, CAP

RiverAux

While I am sure Smithsonia's statements are accurate, they are also a little misleading as far as its relationship to your unit....Many, many, many units wink in and out of existence in the same town so just because there was a unit there at one time does not mean that it is in any way related to the current unit.  For example, in my state almost every squadron is in a town that had a unit in WWII, but almost none of them are directly descended from those units.


SarDragon

+1 on that.

There is currently a Gloucester County Composite Squadron in NJWG. It has ZERO connection to the Gloucester County Composite Squadron I was a member of in the '60s. ZERO.

My unit (29059/NJ059) still exists as Jack Schweiker Composite (Cadet?) Squadron, which no longer meets in Gloucester County.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

lordmonar

On the other hand....there is no reason why you can't hijack the heritage.

The military does that all the time.  When the Navy commissions a new ship with an old name...the old herritage comes along with it.  The current USS Enterprise has nothing to do with the first six ships by that name and the 7th it only shares the fact that they were both carriers.

The USAF often reactivate units with new names but carrie along the herritage of other units.

The 3rd Special Operations Squadron started as the Photographic Section No. 1 on 4 Apr 1918. Demobilized on 3 Jul 1919. Reconstituted, and consolidated (1924), with 1 Photographic Section which was authorized on 15 Aug 1919. Organized on 27 Sep 1919. Redesignated: 3 Observation Squadron on 1 Jun 1937; 3 Observation Squadron (Medium) on 13 Jan 1942; 3 Observation Squadron on 4 Jul 1942; 3 Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron on 11 Aug 1943. Disbanded on 2 Jul 1944. Reconstituted, and redesignated 3 Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron, Medium, on 9 May 1952. Activated on 28 May 1952. Inactivated on 1 Jul 1958. Consolidated (19 Sep 1985) with the following units: 3 Special Operations Squadron (constituted 3 Air Commando Squadron, and activated, on 5 Apr 1968; organized on 1 May 1968; redesignated 3 Special Operations Squadron on 1 Aug 1968; inac¬tivated on 15 Sep 1969); and 3 Tactical Electronic Warfare Training Squadron (constituted 3 Tactical Electronic Warfare Training Squadron on 13 May 1976; activated on 15 May 1976). Consolidated squadron retained designation: 3 Tactical Electronic Warfare Training Squadron. Inactivated on 30 Sep 1991. Redesignated 3 Special Operations Squadron on 20 Oct 2005. Activated on 28 Oct 2005.

So....unless some other unit can show a closer linage to the WWII unit.....I see no reason why you could not use it for your unit.  In a way it preserves the old history and builds on it.


PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Smithsonia

Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia was lining up CAP squadrons along with Air Raid Wardens, Civilian Pilot Training Programs, and motorcycle messengers -- for the Civilian Defense Authority. If your squadron was organized back that far, and I believe it is so... likely your
squadron paperwork has Mayor LaGuardia's signature attached. Rummaging around long enough should provide you the library, museum, university where these items have gone. Best to start with the Mayor, then his papers from his days with the Civil Defense Authority, then hone in on CAP and a squadron or two. Good Luck 
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

RiverAux

Quote from: lordmonar on December 29, 2009, 12:43:57 AM
On the other hand....there is no reason why you can't hijack the heritage.
So....unless some other unit can show a closer linage to the WWII unit.....I see no reason why you could not use it for your unit.  In a way it preserves the old history and builds on it.
Well, to the extent that CAP has no rules on these things (which we need by the way), they certainly could try.  However, it would be intellectually dishonest to do so without a lot of caveats. 

Yes, the military reactivates old units all the time and there is nothing wrong with that.  However, just because the 999th Fighter Squadron was based in Smithville doesn't mean that the 9999th Fighter Squadron, also based in Smithville can claim to be part of their heritage.  Now, the town of Smithville would be justly proud of having both units in that town in different periods of their history, but the units themselves are in no way related.

Now, lets say that there is absolutely no relationship between the unit that is the subject of this thread, and those that were created in WWII.  Does this mean that the current unit can't mention them in various contexts ("CAP has been present in our community since the creation of the X squadron back in 19xx...)?  Of course not.    But, it would be dishonest to say something along the lines of "The Brooklyn Tech Cadet/Composite Squadron was organized in 1943..." unless you can prove that is the case.  It might be for all we know, but the odds are probably against it. 

Майор Хаткевич

Taking on such heritage also messes with other units which have been around since 1942 up to the present.

lordmonar

Oh of course....I agree.

But just like the 3SOS's linage was broken 2-3 times.  So long as it was not given to someone else....just about anyone can take it.

The Brooklyn Tech Composite Squadron can certainly claim some sort of linage from the WWII Brooklyn Composite Squadron.   Even if it is a history of CAP squadrons in Brooklyn.

Formed in '43 disbandined in 19XX, re formed in 199X.  No dishonesty....and we preserve the history.

Back in the 1990's Gen Mc Peak simply renamed a number of units across the world simply to preserve the history those unit had.

I was assigned to one of those units.  We had zero historical linage with the unit (It was a WWII european fighter command but they moved it to PACAF on a base with no planes)...but they wanted to keep the name alive so the made us change.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

BTCS1*

Quote from: Smithsonia on December 29, 2009, 12:51:07 AM
Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia was lining up CAP squadrons along with Air Raid Wardens, Civilian Pilot Training Programs, and motorcycle messengers -- for the Civilian Defense Authority. If your squadron was organized back that far, and I believe it is so... likely your
squadron paperwork has Mayor LaGuardia's signature attached. Rummaging around long enough should provide you the library, museum, university where these items have gone. Best to start with the Mayor, then his papers from his days with the Civil Defense Authority, then hone in on CAP and a squadron or two. Good Luck 
My squadron being in NYC, that idea will probably prove to be very successful. But I do not think that my squadron was functional in WWII, but I do think that there is a chance we may have absorbed some other squadrons cadets. I think the best route to start would be asking my senior staff to contact the NYWG historian to find our founding date. I think that the NYC Dept. of Education or even another agency in the city may have further info once we understand the basics.
C/2d Lt. B. Garelick, CAP

Майор Хаткевич

Quote from: BTCS1* on December 29, 2009, 01:23:59 AM
Quote from: Smithsonia on December 29, 2009, 12:51:07 AM
Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia was lining up CAP squadrons along with Air Raid Wardens, Civilian Pilot Training Programs, and motorcycle messengers -- for the Civilian Defense Authority. If your squadron was organized back that far, and I believe it is so... likely your
squadron paperwork has Mayor LaGuardia's signature attached. Rummaging around long enough should provide you the library, museum, university where these items have gone. Best to start with the Mayor, then his papers from his days with the Civil Defense Authority, then hone in on CAP and a squadron or two. Good Luck 
My squadron being in NYC, that idea will probably prove to be very successful. But I do not think that my squadron was functional in WWII, but I do think that there is a chance we may have absorbed some other squadrons cadets. I think the best route to start would be asking my senior staff to contact the NYWG historian to find our founding date. I think that the NYC Dept. of Education or even another agency in the city may have further info once we understand the basics.

NHQ should have charter information...I hope.

Smithsonia

#15
Ladies and Gents; I said Brooklyn Cadet Squadron. I did not say Brooklyn Tech Squadron. Likely there is some association. I've provided what little I know. Leg work will have to be done by the squadron to link it up. There is an newspaper article which I am trying to find announcing it. If the Brooklyn Tech Historian (BTCS1) will PM me, I'll supply it through regular email channel only.
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

Smithsonia

#16
BTCS1;
Regarding the issue of intellectual honesty and aligning "blood lines" as a legacy are ephemeral to satisfy. In the great story of the CAP I think we are, in our way, the sons and daughters of Maj. Gen. Curry. However, since a daughter of his lives, it is not something I say as a declaration. This is out of respect to her and her family.

In the same way the battle heritage of the WW2 USS Enterprise (Midway, Guadal Canal, Okinawa, etc) is tied to the
Big E of the Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam, and Gulf Wars. AND being there is nothing but the same name and the naval service, both Air Craft Carriers tie their linage to the variety of naval ships that bare the name, Enterprise. Some folks even to the Sci-Fi versions of the future (Star Trek) I think that is a reach and silly, but some still do.

Col. Harold Moore of Vietnam, tied his situation in the Ia Drang to the 7th Cavalry of George Custer to rally his men and redeem his units battle history and the beloved battle hymn Garryowen. In this way we work on more than bloodlines... we work on consistent story lines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Moore http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7th_Cavalry_Regiment_%28United_States%29

Certainly Commisioning/DeCommisioning dates must be noted.Common members or commands may exist, or may not. Common names, commanders, members, towns, duties, draw linage and compose heritage. Linked up the story of both becomes legacy, heritage, and continuity.

Clarity of dates(com/decom)  does not eliminate these threads. Intellectual propriety/honesty/ethics means these things should be addressed. However, in the end Common threads of STORY establish the links. The more threads, the more tightly bound Brooklyn Tech of today and Brooklyn Cadet of WW2 become. As a Storyteller you are not in charge of the threads (elements of fact) but of the binding (making the thread (s) conclusively draw the linage).

In the case of the Brooklyn Squadrons: Work the problem from both ends. The beginning of WW2 forward and today's Squadron backwards. If you find that this squadron is one of the first (or tied to) one of the first African American Squadrons then you have a large story indeed. You have information that changed the Military (CAP was integrated by race and gender before the Military) and therefore tied to the great change in American Culture. Your's could be a seminal work. Your hopes will propel you on. What you find should be of interest to us all. Being that this is important work keep intellectual honesty in mind. Draw your conclusion transparently. But, given the necessary disclosures, don't be afraid to bind yourself to any heritage which is rightfully yours.
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

RiverAux

Quote from: Smithsonia on December 29, 2009, 10:32:41 PM
As a Storyteller you are not in charge of the threads (elements of fact) but of the binding (making the thread (s) conclusively draw the linage).
Absolutely wrong.  If the story is the history of a particular squadron, then the story must only be that of the squadron in question and the "storyteller" is 100% responsible for determining that the story is factually correct. 

If there are other squadrons in the same general vicinity they must only be included in the "story" of the squadron if in fact they are linked to each other by more than geography. 

If the "story" is the story of CAP in Brooklyn, then of course you would want to bring in the history of all the units that were ever in Brooklyn.  But that is not the topic in question. 

As I said in my first reply, there are no CAP rules on squadron lineage as there are in the military.  My suggested rules are:
1.  Charter Number should be the key element linking current squadrons with those in the past as the charter number has been pretty consistent while the squadron names often change.  For example, NY100 could have started as the Smithville Squadron in 1959, changed its name to Smithville Composite Squadron in 1966, then to Smithville Cadet Squadron in 1978 and then became the Homer J. Simposon Composite Squadron in 1999 while maintaining the same charter number throughout its history. 

2.  I have seen cases where a squadron is deactivated and then a new unit is organized years later using the charter number of the previous unit.  Say NY100 was deactivated in 1979 and then a new unit was given that same charter number in 2006.   In that case I would say we treat it just as the military does when it reactivates old units.

3. What about those units formed before charter numbers were first granted?  Well, if you find that in 1955 NY100 was first chartered in Smithville and if you can determine through newspaper articles and other sources that there was a unit continuously present in Smithville from 1942 through 1955 then I'd say you are on firm ground in saying that NY100 was first organized in 1942.  Given the paucity of CAP records for this period it may be very difficult to make this link. 



Smithsonia

#18
RiverAux; Again you have taken out of context a quote of mine. That is intellectually dishonest of you. Perhaps the best way to say it is:
Fit the story to the facts, not fit the facts to the story. Stories are in and of themselves lies. Not in the sense that these are an attempt
to deceive readers but to compress time, decide where a story begins and ends, all are the storytellers craft. Calling people to this craft does not mean we are summoning liars. Far from it. We are summoning humans to do what likely only God can actually do... see all things and every moment, to know the hearts and thoughts of each participant/character, to tell the story well and honestly as a human can. In this we all are trying. In this we all fail. In this we all work toward better storytelling. In this we are all vulnerable to those with better facts and more incisive conclusions. SO we work harder to be honest than most humans.

As an example let me point you to the US Army's Old Guard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Guard
They track their linage back to the Revolutionary War although they have be reconstituted and changed names many times.
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

RiverAux

Quote from: Smithsonia on December 29, 2009, 11:36:26 PM
As an example let me point you to the US Army's Old Guard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Guard
They track their linage back to the Revolutionary War although they have be reconstituted and changed names many times.
The difference is that this is in accordance with Army regulations regarding unit lineage and honors.  They claim to go back that far because under Army regulations they do.  Entirely different situation.

CAP has no similar regulations (we should) so it is up to the individual historian to be honest about only claiming things that they can prove and I offered up my suggestions as a way to do that.  Now, if CAP all of a sudden passed a regulation saying that any current CAP unit could claim the lineage and honors of any CAP unit previously based in their town, then that would "legalize" it as far as CAP is concerned. I would personally still think that it is intellectually dishonest, but so be it.