Main Menu

The Ideal Wing.

Started by lordmonar, May 15, 2013, 09:18:41 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lordmonar

I had a conversation about how we organize and task our wings to accomplish our missions.

So.....I was toying with the idea of what should a wing look like.  Where should squadrons be placed and what sort of tasking's those squadrons should have.

So Try this on for size.

The wing should be made up of groups....one group per county.
The group should have one cadet squadron for every middle school and/high school in the county.
Every town with a population of over 10,000 should have a Senior squadron.
Every town with an airport should have a senior squadron.

Here is my reasoning.

On the ES side of things the Wing's job is to coordinate with the State officer of emergency management/national guard/state police etc.
Groups do the same thing at the county level.
And the squadron coordinates with the city or town.

The "airport" squadron would be mainly there to establish presence if we need to use their airport as mission base.

On the cadet side of things...by assigning cadet squadrons by schools....defines clear lines recruiting.  We can use a percentage (say %5 just as a WAG) of school population to determine how much penetration into the target audience.

ES operations would be usually executed at the Group and Wing level.  Squadron ES training and personnel requirements would be driven by the coordinated OPLANS written at wing and group level......i.e. no squadron would be expected operate a mission on their own...but would contribute personnel and equipment to support those operations.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Eclipse

As a model, it works, though I don't like non-composite squadrons.

In the real world, we haven't had that many charters or members in 20 years, if ever.
I'd love to see this a a mandate, maybe with a 5 year implementation.

I also don't think we can, or should try to seperate the CP from ES, unless you want to throw down the cards
and accept that cadets would be barred from participation in anything except training.

"That Others May Zoom"

lordmonar

My idea is to move away from "composite" squadrons and have specialized squadrons....some flying, some GT, some comm, come a mix based on population and proximity to other squadrons.

It allows the squadrons to focus on one or just a few aspects of CAP's core missions.

Try to be the best at the mission assigned instead of being only good enough at all of them.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

A.Member

Quote from: lordmonar on May 15, 2013, 09:34:06 PM
My idea is to move away from "composite" squadrons and have specialized squadrons....some flying, some GT, some comm, come a mix based on population and proximity to other squadrons.

It allows the squadrons to focus on one or just a few aspects of CAP's core missions.

Try to be the best at the mission assigned instead of being only good enough at all of them.
Disagree.   Everything we do is inter-related.  Composite is the right approach and explains why most squadrons are Composite.  And a squadron for every county is way too much.

As for the best model, the one we have works pretty well.   If I made any change, it might be to eliminate Groups.  If a Wing had more than 25 squadrons, then it could be helpful from a management perspective but in most cases I see little value at that layer. 

Where you get to "ideal" is by having the right mix of engaged and competent members in the right positions, particularly in a leadership capacity.  Are the right people being attracted and retained.  That's ultimately what it comes down to...the people. 
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

Ned

Interesting thought.

CAWG would certainly be an interesting place.

According to their Department of Education, there are something on the order of 1,286 high schools and 1,303 middle schools located in our 58 counties.

So, with a minimum of 3 seniors per cadet unit (which we all know is really too few), we'd need 7,500 seniors to staff just the cadet units.  Span of control will be interesting as well with the 2,500 squadrons assigned to a "mere" 58 groups.  Wing commander's calls could get a little crowded.

On the senior side, we apparently have 71 cities with a population over 10, 000.  (Some, like Los Angeles, with over four million, are a bit larger.)

And according to airport data.com, there are 963 airports in the Golden State.


So, our ideal wing would have 2,500 cadet units, and about 1,000 senior units.  I suppose we should assume that cities with a population of over 10,000 probably also have one of the 961 airports, so lets just go with the conservative figure of 3,400 squadrons organized into 58 groups.

What would your ideal wing be like?


A.Member

#5
^ LOL

And let's not even talk about what that would cost, not to mention the logisitics behind it all.  CAP a force multiplier?  Oh, contraire...the actual Air Force might become our force multiplier (not that we'd need it at that point).  ;) ;D
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

Storm Chaser

Quote from: lordmonar on May 15, 2013, 09:34:06 PM
My idea is to move away from "composite" squadrons and have specialized squadrons....some flying, some GT, some comm, come a mix based on population and proximity to other squadrons.

It allows the squadrons to focus on one or just a few aspects of CAP's core missions.

Try to be the best at the mission assigned instead of being only good enough at all of them.

While that works for the Air Force, I'm not sure it would work for CAP. In the Air Force, a wing is, for the most part, in a single installation. And manning for their specialized units comes from all over the country (i.e. PCS). I'm not sure how feasible it would be to have a Communications Squadron, for example, where that would be the only thing they do. Even if you could get enough people interested to join such a squadron, how would that squadron support other units that are geographically too far apart? It would certainly be a challenge.

I've seen a "specilized" squadron for flying before, but it ended up becoming sort of a "flying club".

Storm Chaser

The change I would like to propose is to move some support and admin functions from the squadrons up to the groups. I think this may provide the following advantages:


  • It would ensure that certain group support functions were fully manned with talented and qualified people without having to compete with squadrons for these personnel resources.
  • This additional manning at the group level would enable Group HQ to provide better support to all subordinate units, ensuring no unit was at a disadvantage in areas such as finance, legal, etc.
  • This would allow unit to better focus on training and operations.

I'm sure a change like this would require a lot of thought to prevent issues within the units themselves since they would now depend on group for things that they were previously self sufficient. But it could potentially help units with fewer resources. Either way, I don't think many would go for it.

I do like the idea of having groups and/or squadron better aligned with county and/or city governments, but I don't think we would have the manpower to support such a structure.

SarDragon

Quote from: lordmonar on May 15, 2013, 09:34:06 PM
My idea is to move away from "composite" squadrons and have specialized squadrons....some flying, some GT, some comm, come a mix based on population and proximity to other squadrons.

It allows the squadrons to focus on one or just a few aspects of CAP's core missions.

Try to be the best at the mission assigned instead of being only good enough at all of them.

CAP used to do that a long time ago. There were specialized squadrons like you suggested. They worked fairly well within their little area of expertise, but they became little kingdoms, with little care or regard for the big picture. Another problem was geography. If the closest squadron didn't fit a potential member's interests, he had to travel farther away to participate, or as often as not, simply not join. Specialized units went away for these reasons.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

Ned

Some additional factoids for the Ideal California Wing:

The least populous county in the United States is Alpine County in Northern California with no incorporated cities and a county-wide population of just 1,175 folks.  It does have a GA airport, however.

Similarly, the most populous county in the US is Los Angeles County, with a little over 9 million folks, more than three dozen cities with over 10,000 population, four large commercial airports, and about 10 other public airports.

Finally, California is also home to the largest geographic county in the US, San Bernadino County, which, with are area of over 20,000 square miles, is larger than 9 US states and 71 foreign countries.  As you might expect, it is primarily rural, but still has over 2 million folks living in 24 incorporated cities and the great desert beyond.

It will be hard to align groups with counties here in the Golden State.

RiverAux

I think we'd be better off with a goal of one squadron per county in "rural" counties and then some sort of goal for "urban" and "suburban" counties based on middle/high school population such as one squadron per 3000 students. 

lordmonar

Okay.

First COST?  It does not COST CAP anything to set up a new unit.  Yes equipping this IDEAL WING would cost money....assuming that each squadron would get at least 1 van and 1 VHF Base Station.   But beyond that as it is now.....squadrons are on their own for equipping their ES teams with equipment, securing facilities, etc.

Second 1 Group Per county target of course is the rough rule of thumb target.....some places may need more then one group per county...some places may not need to have their own group.

Third Squadron Size, If we cut down the sort of things a squadron has to do then we cut down the size of the squadrons....but each squadron will have a definite hard number of what they were expect to man, train and equip.  A small airport squadron would maybe only need 10 people....say 5 FLMS and 5 MRO's.  Some squadrons may be tasked with a lot more and would need more people.  The size of the squadron is based on their ES mission tasking's.

Same story with Cadet squadrons.....with the 5% target per school....some would only have 5 cadets and some would have 50 or 100 cadets....and a scaling number of seniors to support it.

Fourth: Specialization....We integrate at the group/count level.  No one is allowed to become a little empire.  But it allows the squadron to focus on one part of the ES mission.  Aircrews, ground crews, comm, support.   Most counties are not too large so the travel time for these units to come together fore training, meetings, SAREX should not be more then an hour or two for the majority of the country (see my second point above).

Fifth Span of Control: That could be an issues with many wings with lots of counties...one possible fix for this to split the state into two or more wings....and invent a new organization "Areas"  to handle the state level coordination.  Another way to go would be build flights as a stand alone unit and one squadron per county....then groups with 10 or so counties and wing controlling the 5 groups.

Sixth separation of cadet squadrons and senior squadrons....again allows us to focus our efforts on a specific mission.   This would not mean that cadets can't participate in ES only that those cadet squadrons would not be directly tasked with providing manning, training or equipment towards the wings/groups ES OPLAN.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

A.Member

#12
The state of Georgia has 159 counties with 30+ of those counties having entire populations under 10K. 

North Dakota, one of the least populous states, has 53 counties with only 13 having total populations over 10K. 

Texas has 254 counties... 

Really don't need to go any further to illustrate the problems with the approach.
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

lordmonar

Quote from: A.Member on May 15, 2013, 09:49:27 PMDisagree.   Everything we do is inter-related.

  Composite is the right approach and explains why most squadrons are Composite.  And a squadron for every county is way too much.

As for the best model, the one we have works pretty well.   If I made any change, it might be to eliminate Groups.  If a Wing had more than 25 squadrons, then it could be helpful from a management perspective but in most cases I see little value at that layer. 

Where you get to "ideal" is by having the right mix of engaged and competent members in the right positions, particularly in a leadership capacity.  Are the right people being attracted and retained.  That's ultimately what it comes down to...the people.
I don't think our current model works well at all.  In some places we have deep penetration but we have zero presence anywhere else.  Also currently we have no mandate to wing/group/squadrons to grow more squadrons.  We got what we go....and no one is thinking about growing.  My model goes with the idea that every city with 10K people with have a CAP squadron.  Every middle school and high school will have a CAP squadron.  We would be there training, working with or local government so that when they have a problem....they call us first.....via the NOC.

PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

lordmonar

Quote from: A.Member on May 15, 2013, 10:13:18 PM
^ LOL

And let's not even talk about what that would cost, not to mention the logisitics behind it all.  CAP a force multiplier?  Oh, contraire...the actual Air Force might become our force multiplier (not that we'd need it at that point).  ;) ;D
What cost?  Except for the CAP van and the CAP radios.....my squadron carries the entire cost of operating.
Force multiplier....every county in the U.S. would have a group working with their emergency management people helping their squadrons train equip and man ready to help out in an emergency.  It what we are already supposed to be doing.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

lordmonar

Quote from: Storm Chaser on May 15, 2013, 10:32:41 PM
While that works for the Air Force, I'm not sure it would work for CAP. In the Air Force, a wing is, for the most part, in a single installation. And manning for their specialized units comes from all over the country (i.e. PCS). I'm not sure how feasible it would be to have a Communications Squadron, for example, where that would be the only thing they do. Even if you could get enough people interested to join such a squadron, how would that squadron support other units that are geographically too far apart? It would certainly be a challenge.

I've seen a "specilized" squadron for flying before, but it ended up becoming sort of a "flying club".
The reason why you get "flying clubs" is because no one is forcing the to play a part larger then themselves....and if you next largest formation is wing......it is easy for the little quiet squadrons to hide.

As for Communications squadrons....they would be tasked with maintain the wing comm equipment in their group, running the group comm net, maintain any "fly away" kits or airborne repeaters.....and again we are talking countly level....even is big states we are not talking about too far of a drive....and if its....you split it into two groups. 
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

SarDragon

Pat, please define, "not too far a drive." San Diego County is about 80 miles by 80 miles. That's a 70-80 minute drive at typical speeds on Interstates. Corner to corner is substantially longer.

We have 11 airports in the county. Three or four of them are unsuitable for CAP operations, due to remoteness, runway composition (dirt), or traffic volume. They are clustered mostly on the west side of the county.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

a2capt

Soon to be Group 8, apparently.

Private Investigator

Quote from: A.Member on May 16, 2013, 01:14:16 AM
The state of Georgia has 159 counties with 30+ of those counties having entire populations under 10K. 

North Dakota, one of the least populous states, has 53 counties with only 13 having total populations over 10K. 

Texas has 254 counties... 

Really don't need to go any further to illustrate the problems with the approach.

Which county is Petticoat Junction located in? I will locate Group HQ there   ;)

BillB

In the 1960's Florida did have the "Area" concept in place, They were called "Sectors". There were four sectors which oddly enough followed the 1943 Group geographical areas. Each Sector Commander was a Wing Vice Commander. At the time Florida had 25 Groups and almost double the current membership. Now the Wing is down to I believe eight Groups. (this changes often) In the Floridea Panhandle there are several counties without even a public airport and small rural populations even though there are two large Air Force Bases (Eglin and Tyndall) You can almost count on a three hour drive from one Squadron to another.
Gil Robb Wilson # 19
Gil Robb Wilson # 104