July 13, 2020, 04:14:09 am

CAP and Why We are Civilian

Started by francisderosa16, July 01, 2018, 09:04:15 pm

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mitchell 1969

Quote from: TheSkyHornet on September 04, 2018, 02:21:55 pm
Can we stick to present-day regulations and standards, and stop using remnants of past heraldry to suffice as active guidance?


You lost me. What "...past heraldry..." is being invoked here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.

TheSkyHornet

Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on September 14, 2018, 06:58:16 am
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on September 04, 2018, 02:21:55 pm
Can we stick to present-day regulations and standards, and stop using remnants of past heraldry to suffice as active guidance?


You lost me. What "...past heraldry..." is being invoked here?


I'm referring this comment:

QuoteFactually correct, but what is the relevance to PCA?  Especially in light of the significant evolution of the organization in the last 30 years?


But even in reference to other comments through this subject...what does a good bulk of this topic have to do with CAP? I mean, we're talking about the General Orders of the different service branches. That's not a thing in CAP. It has no relevance.

CAP has evolved significantly over time. It's pretty clear today that it does not have a military role, or law enforcement. There seems to still be a lot of "back in my day." Back in that day doesn't apply anymore. It's histories, not basis or intent for today's CAP.

I don't mean it as a snide remark or insult to anyone. But we really need to be living in the present here. ... and I've had enough of the topics about how we need to go back to x-service uniform because reasons.

I'm with Eclipse on this. What is the relevance of most of the points discussed?

Mitchell 1969

Quote from: TheSkyHornet on September 14, 2018, 02:30:08 pm
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on September 14, 2018, 06:58:16 am
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on September 04, 2018, 02:21:55 pm
Can we stick to present-day regulations and standards, and stop using remnants of past heraldry to suffice as active guidance?


You lost me. What "...past heraldry..." is being invoked here?


I'm referring this comment:

QuoteFactually correct, but what is the relevance to PCA?  Especially in light of the significant evolution of the organization in the last 30 years?


But even in reference to other comments through this subject...what does a good bulk of this topic have to do with CAP? I mean, we're talking about the General Orders of the different service branches. That's not a thing in CAP. It has no relevance.

CAP has evolved significantly over time. It's pretty clear today that it does not have a military role, or law enforcement. There seems to still be a lot of "back in my day." Back in that day doesn't apply anymore. It's histories, not basis or intent for today's CAP.

I don't mean it as a snide remark or insult to anyone. But we really need to be living in the present here. ... and I've had enough of the topics about how we need to go back to x-service uniform because reasons.

I'm with Eclipse on this. What is the relevance of most of the points discussed?


The "relevance" is indeed of the historical variety, perhaps in simple background.

What threw me for a loop was the objection to heraldry, which was not referenced anywhere in the thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.

Spam

Sidebar:

last night I was using that GTL SET designation and was reviewing a fellow member on Ground Team task O-0803 (Supervise a Site Surveillance Shift) from the Ground Team and UDF Task guide of 24MAY.

The task required "4) Knowledge of General Orders". This appears to have been a final gasp of the writers who probably were former cadets like so many of us (grin).

I stopped, checked the 2003 GTL Reference Text, Chapter 15, and it was silent on this, so I advised him to ignore the referenced text. We discussed the intent of "using no force nor the appearance of force", and moved on.


V/r
Spam


Eclipse

September 16, 2018, 06:23:04 pm #64 Last Edit: September 16, 2018, 06:26:11 pm by Eclipse
What a mess - just looked at the task guide - I'm sure when I did this BITD
absent actual verbiage the general "first, do no harm" or similar was assumed.

The task guide isn't even consistent on the dates - some pages say 01, some say 04.

I am not a proponent of the whole "CAP should be GSAR compliant", etc., however at least in that
case it wouldn't have this type of problem.



sardak

Quote from: Spam on September 16, 2018, 05:56:37 pm
Sidebar:
last night I was using that GTL SET designation and was reviewing a fellow member on Ground Team task O-0803 (Supervise a Site Surveillance Shift) from the Ground Team and UDF Task guide of 24MAY.

The task required "4) Knowledge of General Orders". This appears to have been a final gasp of the writers who probably were former cadets like so many of us (grin).

I stopped, checked the 2003 GTL Reference Text, Chapter 15, and it was silent on this, so I advised him to ignore the referenced text. We discussed the intent of "using no force nor the appearance of force", and moved on.

V/r
Spam

Quote from: Eclipse on September 16, 2018, 06:23:04 pm
What a mess - just looked at the task guide - I'm sure when I did this BITD absent actual verbiage the general "first, do no harm" or similar was assumed.

The task guide isn't even consistent on the dates - some pages say 01, some say 04.

I am not a proponent of the whole "CAP should be GSAR compliant", etc., however at least in that case it wouldn't have this type of problem.

Youngsters. In 1998 (It was 20 years ago today this month/Sgt. Pepper taught the band to play/They've been going in and out of style...) there existed:
Task O-0801 "Man a Surveillance Point."
CONDITIONS
You are part of a ground team on a Surveillance mission, and have been assigned a guard post.
OJECTIVES (sic)
Successfully maintain surveillance of your portion of the perimeter and correctly deal with potential intruders.
Training Outline
1. Once a downed airplane is located, CAP often is tasked to secure the wreckage until FAA investigators or other authorities arrive. Once a missing person is found, that scene may need to be secured as well for evidentiary reasons, like if any fowl  ::) play is suspected by law enforcement. The purpose of a CAP Surveillance mission is to ensure the wreckage is not disturbed. This will make the job of the investigators much easier.
2. In order to successfully man you (sic) post, you must know and use the 4 General Orders. You should memorize the General Orders, and know how to apply them.

The task proceeded to list and explain the the Four General Orders.

The evaluation tasks were:
1. Correctly recites the four general orders from memory.
2. Asks appropriate questions when posted to ensure he knows the post.
3. Correctly and politely handles the intruder: (with four sub-tasks)
4. Correctly briefs his relief.
5. Does not leave the post for any reason until properly relieved.

This was an advanced (not F&P) GTM task (before -1, -2, -3). It got dropped when the task guides and SQTRs were updated in 2004. In the early days there were separate task guides for GTM, GTL, and GES.

QuoteThis appears to have been a final gasp of the writers who probably were former cadets like so many of us (grin).
It was indeed added by a former cadet, a Spaatzen, which eliminates me on both counts.

Mike