Here's what I see as the ideal CAP squadron. A unit based at a small airport, with their own facilities, including ideally a hangar as well as a CAP aircraft assigned.
I don't see the ideal CAP squadron as being on military bases, behind armed gate guards; meeting in a church or a youth center; meeting in a school, etc. We are the Civil Air Patrol , civil aviation related, performing 'missions for America" in our communities. We are a community based program.
Now how many squadrons do we have nationwide that meet my "ideal" concept ???
RM
We're pretty close to that here. Hangar and CAP aircraft, check. Office and space available within small airport, check. We do have most of our meetings at the local National Guard armory, as there's more room to work with. Then again, a lot of community programs here use the armories as staging/working areas.
With, or Without someone like you as a member?
As a USAF Aux. Officer and anti corporatist (in cap only) I think just the opposite is an ideal squadron.
I like to see squadrons meeting on base, having a great working relationship with the Guard, reserves and active duty. I love to see military bases house units and there aircraft.
RM, you should know this since (or so you claim) to be prior service... Military bases are a community. They have police forces, Church's, schools, food stores, shopping center, fire Depts....heck even animal clinics... Why cant a CAP squadron serve a MILITARY community as well?
Or would that make them wannabes?
I would say that it is probably an idea situation for a senior squadron, but I'm not sure that it would always be ideal when cadets get involved, primarily because the airport may or may not be fairly close to town and could be enough of a hassle to get to that parents of potential cadets may not want to go that far. The other problem with airport-based facilities is that they are often so small that they limit what you can do. Very few have meeting rooms that could handle 50 people, for example. The small airport may or may not have good internet access, which is becoming critical.
Being close to the airplane and aviation facilities isn't that big an advantage in my book for regular meetings.
And meeting on a base would be about my last choice given all the security issues that would make life there more trouble than proximity to the real military would be worth.
The squadron I'm in:
-Meets at a local small airport
-Has our own facilities (but it's not a hanger)
-Has an airplane assigned to the airport
Though I don't think you need any of those to be an ideal CAP Squadron.
A lot of what goes into an "ideal" squadron is the people and community involved. A "community based program" isn't about meeting at an airport or having an airplane.
To me, community = people
There are many CAP units out there that provide service to the community, their people get the missions done and they regularly meet at youth centers, churches and schools, in many cases, thanks to the generosity of the community in providing that space. Who's to say they aren't ideal simply because they aren't located at the airport?
The ideal squadron, as described above, might be true from a facilities standpoint. However I submit that an ideal squadron is one comprised of ideal members. Those are people who gladly accomplish CAP's missions, and do so professionally regardless of any facilities related hurdles.
My squadron is awesome, IMHO, but it sure would be nice if we had a permanent place to call home. Then again, my first squadron had a really nice facility and was downright dysfunctional when I left.
Quote from: NCRblues on August 14, 2011, 11:37:34 PM
As a USAF Aux. Officer and anti corporatist (in cap only) I think just the opposite is an ideal squadron.
I like to see squadrons meeting on base, having a great working relationship with the Guard, reserves and active duty. I love to see military bases house units and there aircraft.
RM, you should know this since (or so you claim) to be prior service... Military bases are a community. They have police forces, Church's, schools, food stores, shopping center, fire Depts....heck even animal clinics... Why cant a CAP squadron serve a MILITARY community as well?
Or would that make them wannabes?
Economically, I would totally agree that being on a military base for a squadron is much better than having to pay our own way out at the civilian airport. Hey we get free utilities (electric, heat, a/c), local telephone/DSN service (but no computer internet access), significant classroom space, excellent office space, access to a large hanger to practice drill and even due PT in, etc. --- It is likely VERY difficult for squadrons to have their own building out at the local airport and requires extensive monetary support.
My experience (my dad was a military veteran of WWII, not associated with the military when I joined), way back in the mid 1960's, interestingly with the unit on a SAC base, was that the vast majority of cadets were "civilians" with no ties to the military via their parents. It varied with the senior members, we had two commanders (during my five years I was in the unit) that were active duty members, but most were civilians (and of that mix many were veterans of one of the armed forces). I can only say that in my 20+ years of active military service, stationed permanently at seven different CONUS bases (one base twice), with the exception of one base in Michigan, I NEVER saw a recruitment effort either for cadets or seniors on those bases. Now things may have changed CAP wide, but it would be interesting to see some statistics on this -- I don't see CAP as being a big draw to military dependents. I do think that being on a military base, can be a big benefit to recruiting the civilians outside the gate, since it is a big deal for them to come onto the base. Our unit is currently right on the flight line so we get to see any aircraft that lands, etc.
RM
Why did you write all this? All you would have needed to write was:
"Subject: Squadrons shouldn't be on military bases
Squadrons shouldn't be on military bases because we are CIVIL Air Patrol."
Seems to me that I should moderate the topic title. I do not see how being on a military installation or airport makes an ideal unit. Seems this has more to do with "CIVIL Air Patrol" broken records.
Quote from: JC004 on August 15, 2011, 01:27:43 AM
Why did you write all this? All you would have needed to write was:
"Subject: Squadrons shouldn't be on military bases
Squadrons shouldn't be on military bases because we are CIVIL Air Patrol."
Seems to me that I should moderate the topic title. I do not see how being on a military installation or airport makes an ideal unit. Seems this has more to do with "CIVIL Air Patrol" broken records.
I have no interest in getting a fire fight with members on the board. I just expressed a theory regarding us as an organization, much more readily accessible and performing our primary missions --- I have no experience being in a unit that was in the community or at the local airport. HOWEVER, after the post I did realize that it would be taken the wrong way, and it was likely a fantasy of mine, that wouldn't hold water overall because the cost factor alone limits what units can do and in these pressing economic times :( what we can get for facilities support at no cost or low cost is likely our reasonable objective. :(
RM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on August 15, 2011, 02:02:32 AM
I have no interest in getting a fire fight with members on the board.
That's a load of crap and you're just too coward to admit it. Nearly every post you make is meant to be inflammatory. The constant harping on our civilian status. Calling us wannabees. Trying to downplay our military heritage at every turn.
Quote from: davidsinn on August 15, 2011, 02:18:53 AM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on August 15, 2011, 02:02:32 AM
I have no interest in getting a fire fight with members on the board.
That's a load of crap and you're just too coward to admit it. Nearly every post you make is meant to be inflammatory. The constant harping on our civilian status. Calling us wannabees. Trying to downplay our military heritage at every turn.
Hmm, I'm just repeating information from a military official source document that governs Civil Air Patrol. Please refer to the AFI 10-2701, chapter 1, the very first paragraph at http://www.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFI10-2701.pdf (ftp://www.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFI10-2701.pdf)
The Civil Air Patrol (CAP) is a Federally chartered non-profit corporation that may be utilized as a civilian
volunteer auxiliary of the Air Force. The Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) can employ the services
of CAP in lieu of or to supplement Air Force resources to fulfill the non-combat programs and missions
of the Air Force. Such services may include Air Force-assigned missions (AFAMs) in support of homeland
security operations, consequence management, support to civilian law enforcement, and other civil
support. Certain CAP cadet and aerospace educational programs may also be approved and assigned as
Air Force non-combat missions. When performing Air Force-assigned programs and missions, CAP
assets function as an auxiliary of the Air Force. CAP is not authorized to perform AFAMs outside of the
territories of the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico without specific authorization.
Refer to Appendix 1 for the history and organization of the Civil Air Patrol.
Neither of us can change what is in that regulation. Actually NO one in Civil Air Patrol can change what is in that regulation. I'm not so sure why this is such a hot button topic with some on this board, because it is what it is and that is the reality of it. That doesn't mean we don't provide excellent support as volunteer civilians to the USAF, because we do and it is noticed and appreciated :clap:
RM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on August 15, 2011, 02:41:07 AM
Quote from: davidsinn on August 15, 2011, 02:18:53 AM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on August 15, 2011, 02:02:32 AM
I have no interest in getting a fire fight with members on the board.
That's a load of crap and you're just too coward to admit it. Nearly every post you make is meant to be inflammatory. The constant harping on our civilian status. Calling us wannabees. Trying to downplay our military heritage at every turn.
Hmm, I'm just repeating information from a military official source document that governs Civil Air Patrol. Please refer to the AFI 10-2701, chapter 1, the very first paragraph at http://www.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFI10-2701.pdf (ftp://www.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFI10-2701.pdf)
The Civil Air Patrol (CAP) is a Federally chartered non-profit corporation that may be utilized as a civilian
volunteer auxiliary of the Air Force. The Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) can employ the services
of CAP in lieu of or to supplement Air Force resources to fulfill the non-combat programs and missions
of the Air Force. Such services may include Air Force-assigned missions (AFAMs) in support of homeland
security operations, consequence management, support to civilian law enforcement, and other civil
support. Certain CAP cadet and aerospace educational programs may also be approved and assigned as
Air Force non-combat missions. When performing Air Force-assigned programs and missions, CAP
assets function as an auxiliary of the Air Force. CAP is not authorized to perform AFAMs outside of the
territories of the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico without specific authorization.
Refer to Appendix 1 for the history and organization of the Civil Air Patrol.
Neither of us can change what is in that regulation. Actually NO one in Civil Air Patrol can change what is in that regulation. I'm not so sure why this is such a hot button topic with some on this board, because it is what it is and that is the reality of it. That doesn't mean we don't provide excellent support as volunteer civilians to the USAF, because we do and it is noticed and appreciated :clap:
RM
We know we're civilians. We do not need reminded of it every other post. That's what's obnoxious. Plus you do it in a manner that insinuates we are second class compared to members of the military.
In my three units, airport meeting locations were attempted.
Due to the small sizes of the airport's facilities, the squadrons were faced with a choice-
Relocate, or die.
We could not invite new people all into the same room with the squadron. We could not get the squadron in a single group if it was raining. No space.
However,
The squadron meeting on Wright-Patt AFB has great facilities, several rooms, and during my visit there, I saw a two-star Gen walk through the door ahead of me. Very nice setup indeed.
Sorry, RM. This is from three different states in as many units. All were forced off airport property in order to actually prosper instead of becoming GOB flyin' clubs.
Quote from: DakRadz on August 15, 2011, 03:41:14 AM
In my three units, airport meeting locations were attempted.
Due to the small sizes of the airport's facilities, the squadrons were faced with a choice-
Relocate, or die.
We could not invite new people all into the same room with the squadron. We could not get the squadron in a single group if it was raining. No space.
However,
The squadron meeting on Wright-Patt AFB has great facilities, several rooms, and during my visit there, I saw a two-star Gen walk through the door ahead of me. Very nice setup indeed.
Sorry, RM. This is from three different states in as many units. All were forced off airport property in order to actually prosper instead of becoming GOB flyin' clubs.
His post is a part of the "I'm too tired to use my brain and think things through for a second" group. My squadron meets on a military base. We happen to help out the bases units hold races, we helped out a unit clean stuff out of a trailer, help the units train by being casualties, and stuff like that. In turn, we get access to bases runway, LRC and Obstacle course, DFAC, BX/PX, a flight on a blackhawk, UTES facility tour, usage of a cermonial sight on a restricted part of the base, and much more. I guess I am in a very un-ideal squadron! Even worse, I do all of it in a military style uniform. May god bless my soul, I think I sinned by being so close to the military!
Oh, cripes, RM...
(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR5gBLyyJRA-TMsdlcryPwDeG5eDCs2BcLvsieZOcCoi5q9heU6)
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRG-jKgnVrozTH_rWBouO3c107uxSS5nBtrinuG_HKa-zIo3B8MRQ)
We are the
CIVIL Air PatrolWe are the
CIVIL Air PatrolWe are the
CIVIL Air PatrolWe are the
CIVIL Air Patrol(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQefnmEE96PyTvet0zyXgV0sBbLc8exG_INFfYhwVFEHUPC1tjJ)
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQhpdqL17lL8g5OvGQtE9LJ9ahg9jADV-fyCom60sCGC0DbvsAp)
The "Ideal" CAP Squadron does not exist, but if it did...
- It would be a composite squadron with an active senior side and an active cadet side.
- All members would observe customs and courtesies, with one another and with military personnel.
- It would be based on an ANG (or AFRES) installation at the invitation of the base commander and given a hangar for its aircraft and other activities, with 24/7/365 access.
- Everyone would wear the uniform they were authorised to wear, clean, pressed and all devices in order.
- There would be active training for aircrews and ground teams who realised their interdependence, not treating one another as adversaries.
- There would be an active PD programme.
- There would be an active Cadet side, with Mitchell and above achievements the rule, not the exception.
- Relations with the military personnel on the base would be cordial and friendly, with regular interaction. CAP officers would be instructed not to troll for salutes, with disciplinary action for infractions.
- Pilots would recognise that the
universe squadron did not revolve around "getting their hours in."
Note: The above list is only partly fictitious.
I was in a
good ole' boys flying club senior squadron that was offered hangar space (heated, with office space) on an ANG installation, use of dining facilities, 24/7/365 access, use of the fitness room...all simply out of the grace of a wing king who believed that, as an AIR FORCE asset, we should be on an AIR FORCE installation.
The offer was REFUSED. Why? Because the "flying club" side didn't want to bother with uniforms, C&C's etc...
I was so embarrassed by this that I ended up leaving that unit not long after. :-[
There's a problem with meeting at a small airport, and that's the space issue. My sq. meets at our own facilities at an airport and there's enough room for maybe 25-30 cadets maximum. We get the parking lot for drill & PT. Don't get me wrong, i'm glad we have the facilities, but it can be limiting at times.
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on August 15, 2011, 02:41:07 AMNeither of us can change what is in that regulation. Actually NO one in Civil Air Patrol can change what is in that regulation. I'm not so sure why this is such a hot button topic with some on this board, because it is what it is and that is the reality of it. That doesn't mean we don't provide excellent support as volunteer civilians to the USAF, because we do and it is noticed and appreciated
Whether or not the members of CAP are military by their membership status is irrelevant to day-to-day operations, however the fact that we are a paramilitary organization, by form, function, and mission, negates your constant nonsense about golf shirts and "only-volunteer" status.
That paramilitary structure mandates adherence to uniform wear, customs, courtesies, and specific expectations of behavior, our interaction with other
services, or how they feel about us, is 100% irrelevant to that fact. And if our members would simple accept that reality, then our interaction outside CAP would also be smoother.
If you don't like that, sign your voluntary 2b and let others get on with things without the drag of your attitude, which I am sure makes for some amazing meetings and conversations. Stick to the myriad other organizations you affiliate with that do not purport to have the same level of expectations and requirements as CAP.
Quote from: wuzafuzz on August 15, 2011, 12:23:41 AM
The ideal squadron, as described above, might be true from a facilities standpoint. However I submit that an ideal squadron is one comprised of ideal members. Those are people who gladly accomplish CAP's missions, and do so professionally regardless of any facilities related hurdles.
My squadron is awesome, IMHO, but it sure would be nice if we had a permanent place to call home. Then again, my first squadron had a really nice facility and was downright dysfunctional when I left.
I can relate to this! - oh wait... that's cuz Wuz and I are from the same Squadron! - we don't have a "home" but are allowed to use some AWESOME facilities at our 'local' university. CAP doesn't like 'owning' real estate so 'housing' a 147 member squadron has it's logistics challenges.
Hey wait... RMR-CO-147 has 147 members... hehe that's cool!
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2011, 03:14:01 PM
Whether or not the members of CAP are military by their membership status is irrelevant to day-to-day operations, however the fact that we are a paramilitary organization, by form, function, and mission, negates your constant nonsense about golf shirts and "only-volunteer" status.
:clap:
The overwhelming majority of CAP members that I have known over the years do not
need to be reminded about our status viz. the Air Force, DOD, UCMJ, etc.
Why?
Because we
ALREADY KNOW!!!!!! It doesn't matter if you wear a golf shirt and Bermuda shorts or have a snazzy sage NOMEX zoom bag, or whether or not you wear the G/W or blue uniform, your status is
exactly the same as other active CAP members.
The only ones who
don't seem to "get it" are the ones who troll for salutes, and they
do need to be reminded...and if they are not complying, then those are the types we do not need. Those are the ones who wear absolutely all the frootsalad they can find and think they can get by with because no-one will notice...including but not limited to these sharp-looking but decidedly un-regulation (intended for display cases, I think) "commemorative medals:"
http://www.medalsofamerica.com/ItemList--Commemorative-Medals--m-599
However, that segment of our membership is so small as to be almost insignificant.
If RM wants to wear golf shirts and repeat his mantra "we are the CIVIL Air Patrol" to his heart's content, let him...however, I can say safely that wouldn't fly (in any sense of the word) at my unit.
Quote from: CyBorg on August 15, 2011, 05:14:14 PM
If RM wants to wear golf shirts and repeat his mantra "we are the CIVIL Air Patrol" to his heart's content, let him...however, I can say safely that wouldn't fly (in any sense of the word) at my unit.
I don't know. He'd probably fly at my unit.
10 - 12 feet, more if we open the doors. >:D
QuoteI don't see CAP as being a big draw to military dependents.
Situationally dependent (no pun intended) I think, When I was a DMAFB I'd say average at least 50% cadet membership was military dependents. (AD, res and retired family status)
The down side to military cohabitation is FPCON; For example, 9/11 saw non military essential personnel restricted from base for a few weeks at least. I dont know how that would go if CAP was part of a manmade/terrorist disaster response, with the equipment and airframes on a FPCON Delta instalation.... or how long it or how much "O"-power it would take to get members cleared to even access the base just for equipement removal, let alone "operations"
mk
Then we need to get whatever background checks and clearances that basic civilian contractors get, so that our access isn't impeded in times of crisis.
Military bases rely heavily for basic services these days on civilians - food service, trash removal, sometimes medical care and emergency services, Exchange employees, building repair and contractor services, not to mention base security, and any number of private businesses located on military facilities which have leases that grant access, etc.
These services do not shut down when the FPCON goes up. They have been accounted for in the planning, and those plans and processes go into effect to insure everyone is safe, and the business of the military can continue.
A military auxiliary ought to be afforded at least the same level of access as someone who works at the base's McDonald's.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2011, 10:15:26 PM
A military auxiliary ought to be afforded at least the same level of access as someone who works at the base's McDonald's.
Well, as an alternative, you could always get a couple of cadets to get jobs at said McDonald's >:D. They can smuggle equipment out after they get off shift :angel:
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on August 15, 2011, 10:16:59 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2011, 10:15:26 PM
A military auxiliary ought to be afforded at least the same level of access as someone who works at the base's McDonald's.
Well, as an alternative, you could always get a couple of cadets to get jobs at said McDonald's >:D. They can smuggle equipment out after they get off shift :angel:
Fryalator?
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2011, 10:15:26 PM
Then we need to get whatever background checks and clearances that basic civilian contractors get, so that our access isn't impeded in times of crisis.
A military auxiliary ought to be afforded at least the same level of access as someone who works at the base's McDonald's.
You do mean "Civilian Auxiliary of the United States Air Force", don't you ??? :angel:
Apparently you don't have a "need to know" but those with a "need to know", are well aware of the access procedure in place that will be utilized, as CAP mission operational support dictates.
RM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on August 16, 2011, 12:03:35 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 15, 2011, 10:15:26 PM
Then we need to get whatever background checks and clearances that basic civilian contractors get, so that our access isn't impeded in times of crisis.
A military auxiliary ought to be afforded at least the same level of access as someone who works at the base's McDonald's.
You do mean "Civilian Auxiliary of the United States Air Force", don't you?
No.
I.
Do.
Not.
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on August 16, 2011, 12:03:35 AM
Apparently you don't have a "need to know" but those with a "need to know", are well aware of the access procedure in place that will be utilized, as CAP mission operational support dictates.
Nice tryoll.