DI

[Eclipse]

My summary of this thread is as follows:

1) Senior Members should *NOT* take a direct role in training cadets
2) Senior Members in Cadet Squadrons should at least be able to demonstrate the basics of drill
3) If in Uniform, Senior Members should be held to the same (or higher) standards as the Cadets
4) Leadership Officer should ensure that the Cadet Officers are properly prepared to teach D&C to their subordinates

I don't have any issue with anything else you said, but what's that about?
Of course they should and do...

[krnlpanick]

I don't have any issue with anything else you said, but what's that about?
Of course they should and do...

sorry - I mean training them specifically in Drill - the Cadet Officers should be the ones training the Cadets

My role will be to aid in this process where needed - ie if the Cadet Officer doesn't understand how to correctly perform a move, help them or show them. Also evaluating individual members and leaders on performance and informally offering advice where and if needed.

[Cool Mace]

I don't have any issue with anything else you said, but what's that about?
Of course they should and do...

sorry - I mean training them specifically in Drill - the Cadet Officers should be the ones training the Cadets

My role will be to aid in this process where needed - ie if the Cadet Officer doesn't understand how to correctly perform a move, help them or show them. Also evaluating individual members and leaders on performance and informally offering advice where and if needed.

What about the Senior Leadership Officer? Does it not say that s/he is over D&C? I think different seniors will do it different ways. As long as the job is done correctly and no one is upset with the way the unit runs it, then no problem.

[krnlpanick]

What about the Senior Leadership Officer? Does it not say that s/he is over D&C? I think different seniors will do it different ways. As long as the job is done correctly and no one is upset with the way the unit runs it, then no problem.

That is precisely what it says - however, the Leadership Officer doesn't issue drill orders to the squadron (for purposes of teaching drill) - the exception, and one I plan on using as an instructional tool is to use AT YOUR COMMAND, <thing> COMMAND

[abdsp51]

I believe the appropriate command is "by my command".

[krnlpanick]

That is if I want to mass command - which may be the case in some situations, in most situations I want the Flight Sgts to command their flights. An example --

Me: BY YOUR COMMAND, Call the flight to ATTENTION, COMMAND
FS: Flight, ATTENTION
Me: Have the Flight Right FACE, COMMAND
FS: Right FASE
Me: Have the Flight MARCH forward
FS: Forward, MARCH
Me: Halt the Flight, COMMAND
FS: Flight, HALT
Me: AT MY COMMAND, Parade REST
Me: FALL OUT

The really cool thing about doing this is that it doesn't take the command away from the Flight Sgts -- but it allows me to have the entire Squadron perform a set of commands that I would like to see. This is also (vets and active duty, correct me if I am wrong) the "correct" way to command the squadron in formal situations.

BY YOUR COMMAND, COMMAND - Starts Mass Commands - Commands are given down the chain of command and executed by the flight or element (depending on the command) when the Flight Sgt. issues the command, not when I do.

AT MY COMMAND - Ends Mass Command - Commands are executed as they are given by me (or whoever has command at that point)

[ßτε]

I am pretty sure there is no such thing as "BY YOUR COMMAND" (unless, of course you are a Cylon ).

"AT YOUR COMMAND" and "AT MY COMMAND" are indeed used to start and end Mass Commands, but it doesn't work the way you are describing.

[abdsp51]

I'm pretty sure in the manual there is no at my or your command anywhere.  The term would be by my command to assume command of the formation.

[ßτε]

AFMAN 36-2203:

2.6. Mass Commands:

2.6.1. Mass commands help develop confidence, self-reliance, assertiveness, and enthusiasm by making the individual recall, give, and execute the proper commands. Mass commands are usually confined to simple movements with short preparatory commands and commands of execution executed simultaneously by all elements of a unit.

2.6.2. Each person is required to give commands in unison with others as if that person alone were giving commands to the entire element. The volume of the combined voices encourages every person to perform the movement with snap and precision.

2.6.3. When the instructor wants to conduct drill by mass commands, the command is AT YOUR COMMAND. For each exercise and cadence drill, the instructor announces the movement to be executed and commands the element COMMAND. Personnel then give the commands and execute them in unison.

2.6.4. The following are examples of mass commands:

Instructor: AT YOUR COMMAND, Call the Flight to Attention, COMMAND.
Mass: Flight, ATTENTION.
Instructor:Have the Flight Stand at Parade Rest, COMMAND.
Mass: Parade, REST.
Instructor:March the Flight Forward, COMMAND.
Mass: Forward, MARCH.
Instructor:Halt the Flight, COMMAND.
Mass: Flight, HALT.

2.6.5. When desiring to end mass commands, the instructor commands AT MY COMMAND.

[krnlpanick]

You sir, are correct - apologies. It is AT YOUR COMMAND. And I misunderstood how it works (I honestly didn't know about this until today)

Instructor: AT YOUR COMMAND, Right FACE
Everyone: Right, FACE

I like that even better!

Thanks for calling me out on this - that is why I am studying up!

[coudano]

I'm pretty sure in the manual there is no at my or your command anywhere.  The term would be by my command to assume command of the formation.

False, there is no such thing as "by my command" to assume command of a formation, that is a drill myth/legend.

There is "at my command" which is used to revoke the state of mass commands (as noted above)


There is also no "by your command", we aren't at war with the cylons just yet...

[abdsp51]

Yep open mouth insert foot.

[krnlpanick]

we aren't at war with the cylons just yet...

Maybe you aren't at war with the cylons....

[coudano]

As a senior member, I *directly* teach my cadet NCO's how to teach, evaluate, and correct drill, of their assigned airmen.  The NCO's should have already mastered the /execution/ of basic drill before ever putting on C/SSgt.  We don't pass them for their milestone review board if they haven't.  (sometimes they get it together and then regress, but they certainly had it together at least once, before we put that fourth stripe on them)

We teach these skills in our NCO Academy, held for cadets who have earned C/SrA or the WBA, but ideally before they take the first test to advance to C/TSgt.

We use mass commands at NCOA, as a tool to help the NCO's develop their command voice.  It happens first, before we put them out in front of a flight of NCOA attendees and let them drive solo.



If i'm the senior member monitoring drill, and one of my NCO's is flailing trying to lead, or command, then I might step in and provide advice, pointers, or even corrections to that C/NCO.  CERTAINLY preventative measures for safety (don't march your flight into oncoming traffic).  What I will not do is directly correct an airman in the flight.  Instead i'll notice that airman snuffy has jacked up, and start nagging at my NCO in command of the flight
"why is your airman wrong"
"why haven't you noticed your airman is wrong"
"why haven't you made an on the spot correction yet"

"why is it taking you so long to figure out what to do next"
"why are you leaving your airmen at attention while you sort out your thoughts"
"do you remember when you were an airman in the flight?  did you like standing at attention for 5 minutes while the guy in charge tried to figure out what to do next?   no, you didn't like that???  then don't do it to them..."

Sometimes, to make the point, I will walk into the flight, make an on the spot correction on an airman (demonstrating what the NCO's ought to be doing), and then turn around and ask the cadet NCO in charge, why i'm doing his job instead of him.  I try to get them to understand that they should be so all over their business that there is no /opportunity/ for someone else to interject in their flight.  That's the level of vigilance i'm looking for out of my C/NCO's.  Once they start to get it, they will see me hoovering and immediately go into checking their flight over, sometimes even go put themselves physically between me and the flight to prevent me from getting in to make a correction (and then getting there first).  NCO's protecting their troops from nonsense from up the chain of command, nyeh.  It is at this point that i cross my arms and give one of those sneering grins like the sensei at cobra kai dojo.  No mercy!



I directly interact even more with cadet officers, whom are conducting staff duties, writing SDA's, handling administrative and operational details of the squadron, and planning and executing upcoming squadron activities (or debriefing ones that just ended).  Indeed, my squadron only spends at most 20 minutes a meeting at the drill pad, including inspection (zero, on pt night).  So that just isn't a huge fraction of what we do; thus it's important to use it well.


Moral of the story, there is plenty of direct interaction to be had between senior members and cadets.
But it's always in a mentor / instructor role to the cadet staff.

Where I think most senior members go wrong (and imho it's a stage that all of us grow through), is in assuming the role of a C/NCO or a C/Officer themselves, and stepping into that role (effectively pushing the cadets that SHOULD BE doing that job, to the side).  That stinks, because not only should the senior member not be doing that;  it is also cheating the C/NCO that got pushed aside out of their chance to gain experience in their core competency; AND it sends the wrong message / example to the junior cadets, that when they get to that rank they should expect to stand aside while the senior members do everything (dead wrong).  There simply aren't enough training hours in the year to waste time like that...

[titanII]

...

Well said, Sir.

[Pylon]

My premise was a simple question and observation.  What happens if the people you're leading don't want to play the same game you're playing?  Namely, in this example, what happens if SMs are told they must do close order drill? 

The bottom line, bflynn, is that in CAP nobody can make you do anything.  Some things aren't required in regulations.  So yes, it's true that nobody can make you learn basic drill movements.  It's also true that if you don't want to, you don't have to bother learn virtually anything at all in CAP.  For example, you don't have to learn a thing about cadet programs or even enroll in the specialty track to serve in a cadet programs-related duty assignment.  But guess what?  I know if I (along with probably most other SMs) were your commander, and you didn't have interest in learning key facets of a particular mission or aspect of CAP, I'd either find a different duty assignment that better met your interests or, failing to find something you did have an interest in mastering, I'd suggest that CAP isn't for you at this time.


Just because the only thing CAP requires, by regulation, is that you complete Level I to serve in most duty assignments doesn't mean that many commanders would keep you around if you only did the bare minimum and didn't want to learn things that aren't required by regulation but are key factors to doing a particular job. 


Is knowing basic drill a key component to being a senior member?  That depends I'd say on a few factors, but in certain duty assignments (cadet programs in particular) I'd say a basic knowledge is critical knowledge.  But even outside of cadet programs, it sure would help a member (and by extension Civil Air Patrol as a whole) to not look like a soup-sandwich when they report to their commander at a conference or event to accept an award or promotion, or get their graduation certificate at a PD seminar graduation, or when they have to unexpectedly fill in for the deputy commander for cadets at the cadets' closing formation because the DCC is out of town, or when on a military installation in uniform for a CAP function and colors sounds.

[krnlpanick]

cuodano -

That is sound advice and I agree with most everything you said. As has been said many times, there is no such thing as a cookie cutter squadron and I am sure it will take me a month or two to learn the ropes and get the program really where the rest of the staff wants it to be. Right now we spend about the same 20 minutes drilling at the beginning of the meeting, then after the activities we will do some more drill if time allows. The cadets really enjoy drill so I think the concept is that we allow them to do it as much as possible - we just need to get them all on the same page.

Thank you for your insight Sir!

[bflynn]

My premise was a simple question and observation.  What happens if the people you're leading don't want to play the same game you're playing?  Namely, in this example, what happens if SMs are told they must do close order drill? 

The bottom line, bflynn, is that in CAP nobody can make you do anything.  Some things aren't required in regulations. 

Yes, that's the point I've been trying to say.  But the question isn't really just about drill, it's about the bigger picture.  There are those who disagree with how much military there is in paramilitary.  When you push for things that others disagree with, you harm unit cohesiveness.  I don't get the sense that people recognize that.

There is a fine line between leading and following.  You can only insist on a little more than the volunteers want to do - any more and you're destroying volunteer energy.

What I'm hearing is that some leaders don't recognzie that.

[Major Carrales]

It was anti-war.

Is there anyone who is pro-war?  Or anyone who ISN'T anti-war?

All we are saying is...GIVE WAR a CHANCE!   Just kidding....I could not resist it.

[lordmonar]

Yes, that's the point I've been trying to say.  But the question isn't really just about drill, it's about the bigger picture.  There are those who disagree with how much military there is in paramilitary.  When you push for things that others disagree with, you harm unit cohesiveness.  I don't get the sense that people recognize that.

There is a fine line between leading and following.  You can only insist on a little more than the volunteers want to do - any more and you're destroying volunteer energy.

What I'm hearing is that some leaders don't recognzie that.

I disagree.....I think most sucessful leaders in CAP understand that very well.  We get it rubbed into our faces all the time.
Everytime we try to make a rule change (add IS100 requirments to ES, Safety Currency).  Just tyring to get a uniform change......heck defining the bloody thing.  Good thing RM is not on this thread!  He would be blowing a gasket right now any.

Well....all I have got to say....is that the one thing that makes CAP different then the military.....is that you can always quit CAP anytime you choose.  In that way it makes it almost exactly like any other volunteer organisation and most employment situations.  You don't like your job at Mc Donalds......well then quit and go work for someone else. 

Now I am all for making nice to our volunteers....but there is a line there somewhere.   There is a point where we just have to say......sorry you don't want to drill/do safety training/get your IS 400/wear your unifrom properly.......please go play somewhere else.