Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 13, 2018, 09:09:08 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Emergency Services & Operations  |  Topic: ES - The forgotten mission?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 3  All Print
Author Topic: ES - The forgotten mission?  (Read 2189 times)
CAPSOC_0pur8ur
Member

Posts: 52

« on: April 20, 2018, 11:39:22 AM »

So I know the title of this thread is probably a little bit of an exaggeration, but it's something I think isn't being addressed properly. Ever since each of us joined, we've all been told that CAP has three missions: AE, cadet programs, and ES. Cadets get the opportunity to fly planes, lead their peers, and participate in actual search and rescue/disaster relief missions. Or at least, they're supposed to. We do a pretty good job of producing outstanding cadet leaders and aerospace geeks. But when it comes to ES we're lacking... Badly. Ground team equipment is outdated at best, and downright useless at worst. Cadets usually aren't even GTM3, and most of those who are have never been on a real-world mission. Both AE and leadership have written tests that cadets must pass, and even drill gets a practical test. Why doesn't ES have a required test? Why can't GTM3 be a requirement for Mitchell, and GES be a requirement for the Wright Brothers? Why should the other two missions of CAP be pre-requisites for promotions while ES isn't? Something has to change if CAP is going to continue to claim ES as one of its primary missions. If it means we move to cell phone forensics and NRAT, great! Let's start getting cadets involved! Either way, we can't continue to claim ES as one of our missions and then be completely ineffective when it comes time to perform.
Logged
"To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. Thatís when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?Ē -Col John Boyd
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,704

« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2018, 11:49:21 AM »

Hummmm.

Last I trained, a SET-qualified member tested me on GTM and GTL tasks. Not more than 4 weeks ago, 4 members of my squadron were trained on GTM3 tasks.

So yes, we still test.

Maybe your Wing has decided not to test ES personnel? can you let us know which Wing is that? Did they publish the reason why not to test ES personnel?

Logged
Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
CAPSOC_0pur8ur
Member

Posts: 52

« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2018, 11:51:11 AM »

Itís not that GTM3 members donít get training... itís that CAP as a whole doesnít require this training like they do for AE and leadership.
Logged
"To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. Thatís when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?Ē -Col John Boyd
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,704

« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2018, 11:54:50 AM »

I am surprised by that assessment. CAP NHQ has recognized me with ES ratings and badges, so I cannot agree with your assessment.


Logged
Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
CAPSOC_0pur8ur
Member

Posts: 52

« Reply #4 on: April 20, 2018, 11:58:51 AM »

It's not something you can disagree with... it's fact. CAP does not require members to attain ES quals. They do, however, require cadets to take leadership and AE tests in order to promote. See the difference? All three are missions of the CAP, but only two are actively enforced. As a result, ES often doesn't get the attention it needs or deserves.
Logged
"To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. Thatís when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?Ē -Col John Boyd
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,704

« Reply #5 on: April 20, 2018, 12:23:37 PM »

Oh, but taking leadership and AE tests are akin to being tested by senior members. Just like you fail leadership tests, you can fail a senior member test. Promoting as a cadet is equivalent to getting an ES rating.
Logged
Squadron Safety Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
CAPSOC_0pur8ur
Member

Posts: 52

« Reply #6 on: April 20, 2018, 12:27:57 PM »

No, it's not equivalent. Cadets can earn ES ratings. Cadets can also take leadership and AE tests. Both AE and ES are CAP missions, but only AE is required for cadets to promote. Do you see my point?
Logged
"To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. Thatís when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?Ē -Col John Boyd
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,591
Unit: Classified

« Reply #7 on: April 20, 2018, 12:44:00 PM »

ES is not required to advance and shouldn't be.  Not everyone wants to do ES amd it shouldn't be forced.  But given your ID its hard to takr you seriously.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2018, 12:56:23 PM by abdsp51 » Logged
Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,141
Unit: GA-001

« Reply #8 on: April 20, 2018, 12:48:00 PM »

You guys are talking past each other.

Luis, what CAPSOC is suggesting (if I read him correctly) is that the Cadet Program should add an ES test to the existing AE, Lead Lab, and PT tests currently used as advancement criteria for each cadet promotion.

Per the program of record, ES is an optional element - not a core element - of the Cadet Program. Completion of an Ops Quals specialty is not, repeat NOT, a requirement for cadet promotion. This is a suggestion to change that.



- break break - to address that suggestion:
I've known a few CAP Squadrons which link the award of the GES rating and/or a subset of task completions to unit level awards. Ten years ago as a unit/CC I discontinued the (improper) procedure at one unit of withholding the Curry ribbon to new cadets until they'd passed a group of ES quals and a 120 question test (you can't add to or take away from National promotion criteria). Instead, I had the unit CP and DO staff work up a plan to reward cadets with the right to earn the Squadron Patch based on completing GES + the tasks for cold and hot weather injury awareness, actions on being lost, and doing a call down roster.  My logic was that these tasks are all useful, safety related SQTR tasks even for cadets who do NOT choose to go far in the ES mission. For example, hot and cold weather injury prevention and response are directly useful at airshows, encampments, etc. as are the others... and all 4 are creditable, standards-based training on the top half of the GTM3 SQTR, which gets the new cadet a taste of creditable ES training to whet their appetite.

That much at least can be done at the unit level right now, using existing training standards, without warranting National level changes to the program.  Just a suggestion to throw out there.

V/r
Spam






Logged
CAPSOC_0pur8ur
Member

Posts: 52

« Reply #9 on: April 20, 2018, 12:49:14 PM »

ES is required to advance and shouldn't be.


First of all, there is no ES requirement for cadet promotions. Second, just because some cadets aren't interested in aerospace, does that mean it shouldn't be required? It's one of our missions, it should be required. If we don't care enough about it to make it a requirement, then we shouldn't advertise it as a main priority.
Logged
"To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. Thatís when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?Ē -Col John Boyd
CAPSOC_0pur8ur
Member

Posts: 52

« Reply #10 on: April 20, 2018, 12:50:22 PM »

You guys are talking past each other.

Luis, what CAPSOC is suggesting (if I read him correctly) is that the Cadet Program should add an ES test to the existing AE, Lead Lab, and PT tests currently used as advancement criteria for each cadet promotion.

Per the program of record, ES is an optional element - not a core element - of the Cadet Program. Completion of an Ops Quals specialty is not, repeat NOT, a requirement for cadet promotion. This is a suggestion to change that.



- break break - to address that suggestion:
I've known a few CAP Squadrons which link the award of the GES rating and/or a subset of task completions to unit level awards. Ten years ago as a unit/CC I discontinued the (improper) procedure at one unit of withholding the Curry ribbon to new cadets until they'd passed a group of ES quals and a 120 question test (you can't add to or take away from National promotion criteria). Instead, I had the unit CP and DO staff work up a plan to reward cadets with the right to earn the Squadron Patch based on completing GES + the tasks for cold and hot weather injury awareness, actions on being lost, and doing a call down roster.  My logic was that these tasks are all useful, safety related SQTR tasks even for cadets who do NOT choose to go far in the ES mission. For example, hot and cold weather injury prevention and response are directly useful at airshows, encampments, etc. as are the others... and all 4 are creditable, standards-based training on the top half of the GTM3 SQTR, which gets the new cadet a taste of creditable ES training to whet their appetite.

That much at least can be done at the unit level right now, using existing training standards, without warranting National level changes to the program.  Just a suggestion to throw out there.

V/r
Spam








That's an idea. I'll have to keep that in mind.
Logged
"To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. Thatís when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?Ē -Col John Boyd
Holding Pattern
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,281
Unit: Worry

« Reply #11 on: April 20, 2018, 12:51:07 PM »

I was hoping this would be a conversation about 10+ year old task guides.

If you want further cadet engagement in ES, make a really big deal out of GT medal pinning ceremonies. Have a parent do the pinning.
Logged
CAPSOC_0pur8ur
Member

Posts: 52

« Reply #12 on: April 20, 2018, 12:54:25 PM »


If you want further cadet engagement in ES, make a really big deal out of GT medal pinning ceremonies. Have a parent do the pinning.

Again, another good idea.

What do you guys think is the probability that ES could become a prerequisite in the future? Would y'all support making it so? Why or why not?
Logged
"To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. Thatís when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?Ē -Col John Boyd
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,591
Unit: Classified

« Reply #13 on: April 20, 2018, 12:57:22 PM »


If you want further cadet engagement in ES, make a really big deal out of GT medal pinning ceremonies. Have a parent do the pinning.

Again, another good idea.

What do you guys think is the probability that ES could become a prerequisite in the future? Would y'all support making it so? Why or why not?

No and no. 
Logged
CAPSOC_0pur8ur
Member

Posts: 52

« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2018, 01:00:00 PM »

Why? You're not contributing anything worthwhile to the thread, so please, either be helpful or stop interrupting our discussion.
Logged
"To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. Thatís when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?Ē -Col John Boyd
Holding Pattern
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,281
Unit: Worry

« Reply #15 on: April 20, 2018, 01:00:50 PM »


If you want further cadet engagement in ES, make a really big deal out of GT medal pinning ceremonies. Have a parent do the pinning.

Again, another good idea.

What do you guys think is the probability that ES could become a prerequisite in the future? Would y'all support making it so? Why or why not?

I have a laundry list of reasons it is a bad idea at a national level.

1. Our training is outdated and not accepted by many, many agencies. This means they don't call us as often as the other teams out there. While callouts vary by state, there are few things that can damage morale quite like training to an outdated standard that isn't accepted and will never be used in your state.

2. ES is a high tempo, high stress activity. Not every cadet can cut it in ES, nor should we demand it of them.

3. Many states have tightened up their rules about individuals under 18 serving in ES roles. As you can imagine, there is a strong "protect the children" mentality in emergency response; rightly or wrongly, many states think that a 12 year old shouldn't be exposed to the things one can be exposed to on a SAR mission in those worse scenarios.

EDIT: Spelling
« Last Edit: April 20, 2018, 01:09:25 PM by Holding Pattern » Logged
NC Hokie
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 913
Unit: MER-NC-057

« Reply #16 on: April 20, 2018, 01:08:30 PM »

What do you guys think is the probability that ES could become a prerequisite in the future? Would y'all support making it so? Why or why not?

IMHO, the probability is microscopic because 1) we now live in a world that greatly restricts what cadets ("kids" in the world's eyes) can do in the realm of emergency services; and 2) CAP as an organization no longer has a viable ground-based mission, which is the only type of mission cadets under the age of 18 can participate in.

To clarify my second point, yes, cadets work as MSAs and MROs, but the need for those specialties isn't great enough to justify making every cadet train for those specialties as a prerequisite to advancement in the cadet program.  A nationally-organized ground-based mission (missing person SAR, PODS, etc.) might be enough to move the needle on that.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2018, 01:24:44 PM by NC Hokie » Logged
NC Hokie, Lt Col, CAP

Graduated Squadron Commander
All Around Good Guy
CAPSOC_0pur8ur
Member

Posts: 52

« Reply #17 on: April 20, 2018, 01:11:49 PM »

Holding, I'm going to address each of your points for the sake of discussion. Please don't see this as me shooting down your suggestions.

1. If our training is so outdated that we aren't effective, maybe it's time we update it as well.

2. I'm not saying every cadet should go on real-world missions on a ground team. After all, we don't make cadets who are scared of heights do O flights. Likewise, we don't prevent cadets from flying because it's hard or dangerous. There are positions such as MSA, MRO, and other support staff positions that are neither high stress nor high tempo.

3. Again, there are support staff positions that, while being mission critical, are not dangerous our high stress.
Logged
"To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. Thatís when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?Ē -Col John Boyd
Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,141
Unit: GA-001

« Reply #18 on: April 20, 2018, 01:22:06 PM »

CAPSOC,


respectfully suggest that you need to define your terms more closely. When you paint with a broad brush, e.g. "ES as a prerequisite" you will get broad brush responses "No and no". Since you ask, my response to your overly broad question is also "no and no", exactly because I will by default vote no on undefined, unbounded, poorly thought out proposals to change what has been refined by a 70 year process of trial and experimentation.


If you were to put forward specific proposals, you might merit a better, more thoughtful response. Were you to draw some comparison between 13 year old cadets taking AE tests although they're not Aerospace Engineers or pilots - and thus proposing similar training to teens who will not be certified first responders.  Try thinking about the CP framework within which you'd ask such questions: would you propose, for example, linking a first aid class to the Wright Bros. award, or the completion of communications training to the Mitchell (both of which awards have applicability well beyond the ES mission, which might be very limited for cadets as stated on a state by state basis). I think you'd get more traction.


So... can you think this through, and give us a better question set before hitting a reflexive reply all?  Give us some specific ideas.

V/r
Spam

(Obviously I'm in my Socratic mode today... I just mentored a new PhD in aircraft flight test methodology and the mood is still there..)




Logged
Holding Pattern
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,281
Unit: Worry

« Reply #19 on: April 20, 2018, 01:24:28 PM »

Holding, I'm going to address each of your points for the sake of discussion. Please don't see this as me shooting down your suggestions.

1. If our training is so outdated that we aren't effective, maybe it's time we update it as well.

2. I'm not saying every cadet should go on real-world missions on a ground team. After all, we don't make cadets who are scared of heights do O flights. Likewise, we don't prevent cadets from flying because it's hard or dangerous. There are positions such as MSA, MRO, and other support staff positions that are neither high stress nor high tempo.

3. Again, there are support staff positions that, while being mission critical, are not dangerous our high stress.

1. Zero arguments here. I'd love to be helping rebuild our manuals.

2 (and 3). You are an MSA. A woman comes into the ICP crying because their daughter is missing and keeps asking you where she is over and over again. The site was just activated and it has a GTL whom is briefing a hasty team and a radio operator in a tent... and you. The IC is available by radio but is 30 minutes out. How many cadets are equipped mentally to deal with this problem? Note I'm not asking for the technical answer to the problem, but commenting on the mental issues at hand.

You are an MRO. This is your first time as an MRO and your best friend is on the first ground team heading out. You get a call from the radioman on the searchline that one of the members fell into a mine ventilation shaft that wasn't marked. How many cadets are equipped mentally to deal with this problem?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Emergency Services & Operations  |  Topic: ES - The forgotten mission?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.074 seconds with 26 queries.