ICUT

[MSG Mac]

Now to complete the hands on part.

[Luis R. Ramos]

I agree with Eclipse that this will ease a problem I saw in my area, which he also describes.

Not enough Comms basic classes.

Flyer






[Edited to take out duplication]

[SarDragon]

Fortunately, Comm classes have never been an issue in my area. I've been teaching them for almost 10 years. Available almost any time.

[Eclipse]

Who's qualified locally to do the hands-on evals?  Those could become the new pinch points.

[SarDragon]

That's covered in the new 100-1.

[arajca]

There is a plan for a classroom program for ICUT. It hasn't been released yet, but should be soon. I won't try to define "soon".

[AngelWings]

I did the beta in classroom. It definitely helped. A good 3 hour meeting could get everyone trained and signed off on ICUT.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Hi-

I just ran the "Reports" feature on the Ops Qual module selecting "ICS ICUT Completion" report.

The report that was printed read "ACUT completion, 0 members have completed, 0 members have not completed." It said so twice.

Comments?

Apparently it does not credit those who have taken only the OP1 module of ICUT. On my unit, two have taken ICUT that way. The commander and me.

I guess it did read properly that two members did an attempt, but did not know what to post.

Flyer

[Eclipse]

There's a new report specific to the ICUT that shows what you're referring to, I don't see a report called "ICS Completion", nor one for the ACUT.

The ICUT report shows, by unit and then cumulative for the wing (if you have rights), those who have completed it, and those who have started it but not completed it (for whatever reason).

It is automatic and requires nothing be posted by the member.

[jeders]

Interesting, I just ran the ICUT completion report (I assume ICS completion was a typo) and it says one person in my squadron has completed ICUT, me. It shows, under the member listed, the ICUT status, when the online test was completed, and under T1 and OP2 it lists ACUT credit.

It said so twice.

Apparently one time is for the unit you're looking at and the other time is for the whole report. If you were looking at multiple units at once, like you would from the group or wing level, it shows the totals for each unit you look at as well as the total for the entire report.

[ßτε]

Hi-

I just ran the "Reports" feature on the Ops Qual module selecting "ICS ICUT Completion" report.

The report that was printed read "ACUT completion, 0 members have completed, 0 members have not completed." It said so twice.

Comments?

Apparently it does not credit those who have taken only the OP1 module of ICUT. On my unit, two have taken ICUT that way. The commander and me.

I guess it did read properly that two members did an attempt, but did not know what to post.

Flyer

I had the same problem. I changed the date range to start 19 Aug 2012 and it worked.

[Dracosbane]

(The icons in the new safety reporting system are also blatant ripoffs from various Operating Systems and Applications, as someone pointed out here once... is the trend to not request permission or give credit to the artists that create such things or get permission to utilize them? Not a good precedent to set.)

Sorry for the threadjack, but I wanted to comment on this.

While the safety system icons are similar to some operating systems, you can go online and download untold numbers of these icons that are free to use by anyone.  I know this because I've done exactly that while doing some graphic design.  I keep a folder of stock graphics that has several different versions of these icons just so I don't use the same ones every time I need something similar.

My guess is someone Googled "icons" or "system icons" or "3D icons" and found a nice set they liked and threw them into the radio button design.

[Extremepredjudice]

Except they used copyright ones.

[Eclipse]

Except they used copyright ones.

If you know that is a fact, contact the national legal officer and discuss.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Ok.

Reported my results with the ICUT reports to Nat HQ Communications. Ran the ICUT report again. The same way. The same results. Then I followed BTE's suggestion, that is, use the start date 19 Aug, and this time worked. A very complete and nice report. With the modules completed and credited. And it included a member that started after we did but had not completed other modules.

Take care,

Luis Ramos

[jeders]

Ok.

Reported my results with the ICUT reports to Nat HQ Communications. Ran the ICUT report again. The same way. The same results. Then I followed BTE's suggestion, that is, use the start date 19 Aug, and this time worked. A very complete and nice report. With the modules completed and credited. And it included a member that started after we did but had not completed other modules.

Take care,

Luis Ramos

How did you handle the date fields initially, filled or blank? I left them blank when I ran it and the report came out correctly.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Jeders,

I thought those date fields had to be filled before running the report, so I filled them. 20 Aug for the start and 21 Aug for the end.

Now after I read your post, I left them blank. Same results as you stated. The nice report, complete as if the date fields had been filled.

Flyer

[Eclipse]

How did you handle the date fields initially, filled or blank? I left them blank when I ran it and the report came out correctly.

Ditto - no dates = full report.

[denverpilot]

If you know that is a fact, contact the national legal officer and discuss.

Or just switch them to something not even close, or that we have a published license to utilize, just to make sure we're following our own standards of ethical behavior.

We don't need a lawyer to tell us it's questionable, when we can all see it.

If someone released new letterhead with something that resembled say, the McDonald's or Boeing logos on it, would we need "proof" it was wrong, and need to contact the National Legal staff? 

No.

Just change it. Honest mistake, no harm, no foul. Lesson learned about Intellectual Property of artwork in digital systems.

Folks that work on software typically are more educated about this than others, which is what made it so surprising when I saw it. I can't think of a pro software developer in my professional life who wouldn't have cringed at the icons.

It's more important as an ethics/morals issue than a legal one. Sure the legal folks may say it's okay, but we all know when we stole someone else's work and called it our own. 

[Extremepredjudice]

Here is just one...


ta-da