September 25, 2020, 10:07:17 pm

Remember that one uniform idea?

Started by Stonewall, August 09, 2020, 06:35:13 pm

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TheSkyHornet

Quote from: baronet68 on August 27, 2020, 08:32:11 pm
Quote from: Capt Thompson on August 27, 2020, 01:26:02 pmIf we eliminate the ES mission for Cadets, we would say goodbye to 75% of my Cadets.

Your unit must be recruiting with an emphasis toward ES missions because your unit definitely doesn't match the national trend.

When completing online membership applications, cadet applicants are asked to select their top two choices from a list of six reasons to join CAP. 
Based on 47,253 responses:

Reasons Cadets Give for Joining CAP
Flying or learning about aviation62.8%
Developing leadership skills47.9%
Learning about the military30.5%
Search and Rescue23.9%
Serving the community16.0%
Making new friends14.2%

That's pretty on par with our squadron. We don't recruit ES much, and when we've taken the steps to implement it, it doesn't go far or get much involvement. We have far more involvement in Aerospace, and we're seeing more enrollment lately for STEM-related career paths. We've shifted a lot of our focus to STEM recently because of that.

Still, we have a very ES-oriented Group climate that emphasizes ES. It's just not something I see taking off with this body of individuals. It may shift over time, but I don't see it in the next year.


QuoteI'm curious to hear from any of our "vintage" members who were cadets in the 50s and 60s.  Based on photos I've seen from that era, it looks like cadets back then did just about everything in their khakis.  Where khakis considered a utility uniform that could be used for dress, or was it a dress uniform that could be used for utility?

Nearly everything we have to do in Cadet Programs could be done in a service uniform.

Nearly everything we want to do in Cadet Programs could be done in utilities.

Capt Thompson

Ok I will admit I was wrong on the blues comment, as it appears many of you wear blues for a lot more activities than I've seen in the past.

Quote from: baronet68 on August 27, 2020, 08:32:11 pm
Quote from: Capt Thompson on August 27, 2020, 01:26:02 pmIf we eliminate the ES mission for Cadets, we would say goodbye to 75% of my Cadets.

Your unit must be recruiting with an emphasis toward ES missions because your unit definitely doesn't match the national trend.

When completing online membership applications, cadet applicants are asked to select their top two choices from a list of six reasons to join CAP. 
Based on 47,253 responses:

Reasons Cadets Give for Joining CAP
Flying or learning about aviation62.8%
Developing leadership skills47.9%
Learning about the military30.5%
Search and Rescue23.9%
Serving the community16.0%
Making new friends14.2%
Not targeting ES specifically, but sometimes that's how it works out. First off, our Squadron has always had a culture where everyone is encouraged to participate in ES, most Cadets at least become GTM3 trainees, and most Seniors train for GTM3 and MS. We do classes during the regular weekly meeting so that everyone has a chance to learn about ES and knock out their F&P's, and then if they want to go further we run an all day Saturday training at least once a month where they can do the advanced tasks.

Many of our Cadets are home schooled, and CAP is the only extra curricular activity for many of them. When we moved into Phase I and were able to do limited ES training outdoors on the weekends, we immediately had more signups than we could allow with the 10 or less restrictions. We started doing ES training every other weekend and rotating Cadets so that everyone who wanted to participate could have a chance. Right now, almost every one of our active Cadets is in trainee status for GTM3, most only need to finish the FEMA courses and first aid to complete the qualification.

I have 7 Cadets in Great Start that graduate next Thursday. Last week during a training mission we had a really cool turn of events that resulted in us having to check a hangar that contained a B-17, B-25, C-47, a Huey and a Ford Tri-Motor in addition to several GA aircraft. After showing the pictures and telling the story, every one of the Great Start Cadets want to start GTM3 next month.

If you give everyone a little exposure to Ground Team, make it interesting and a little fun, they usually want to participate and for the past month or two it's been the only activity many of our Cadets have been able to take part in that didn't involve Zoom.

Luckily we are now in Phase II in MIWG and have O-flights scheduled for 8 Cadets tomorrow, although now it looks like mother nature will have other plans.

Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

Spam

Quote from: Eclipse on August 27, 2020, 08:47:48 pm
Quote from: Capt Thompson on August 27, 2020, 01:26:02 pmA few months ago you were all about expanding ES and getting Cadets involved in drones. Most drone teams will deploy as part of Ground Teams, so scaling back on ES isn't going to help the drone program any,

A UAV operator has zero need of GT skills, nor should they be linked to, or deployed with, GTs. UDF at most.
2 guys with the UAV, that's all you need. They aren't going camping with the thing.


If you think a sUAS team will only operate its (short battery life) system within a hundred meters of pavement, great. Also if you think all SAR imaging objectives will be within flight/loiter range of said pavement, great.

However, a valid tactical scenario is where I've got 2 - 3 teams out working the ridge lines at the middle and outer beacon on an approach, looking at the last datum from NTAP, and an organic sUAS capability with the GT would save us a full hour or more of climbing vertically to go cover the back slopes. In such cases, fat old guys in polos and wing tips (points finger at self) would be a liability rather than an asset, and should be relegated with the UDFs to Training missions looking for orange tarps and bug hunts on airport property.

I base that scenario on an actual MDWG mission that we ran on Catoctin Mtn back in the 90s (FIND to the St. Marys Sqdn. team). Ceiling too low and terrain too high for manned flights, aircraft was found on the ridge line at middle marker after hours of foot searcher sweat. Polos and grays would have been shredded in the heavy brush.

V/r
Spam

Capt Thompson

Quote from: Spam on August 28, 2020, 03:44:11 pm
Quote from: Eclipse on August 27, 2020, 08:47:48 pm
Quote from: Capt Thompson on August 27, 2020, 01:26:02 pmA few months ago you were all about expanding ES and getting Cadets involved in drones. Most drone teams will deploy as part of Ground Teams, so scaling back on ES isn't going to help the drone program any,

A UAV operator has zero need of GT skills, nor should they be linked to, or deployed with, GTs. UDF at most.
2 guys with the UAV, that's all you need. They aren't going camping with the thing.


If you think a sUAS team will only operate its (short battery life) system within a hundred meters of pavement, great. Also if you think all SAR imaging objectives will be within flight/loiter range of said pavement, great.

However, a valid tactical scenario is where I've got 2 - 3 teams out working the ridge lines at the middle and outer beacon on an approach, looking at the last datum from NTAP, and an organic sUAS capability with the GT would save us a full hour or more of climbing vertically to go cover the back slopes. In such cases, fat old guys in polos and wing tips (points finger at self) would be a liability rather than an asset, and should be relegated with the UDFs to Training missions looking for orange tarps and bug hunts on airport property.

I base that scenario on an actual MDWG mission that we ran on Catoctin Mtn back in the 90s (FIND to the St. Marys Sqdn. team). Ceiling too low and terrain too high for manned flights, aircraft was found on the ridge line at middle marker after hours of foot searcher sweat. Polos and grays would have been shredded in the heavy brush.

V/r
Spam
This^^ A UAS team needs to be able to deploy within VLOS of the UAS while it's in the search area. If that happens to be on pavement, great. If that requires them to be 3 miles into the woods to deploy, they will need to be 3 miles into the woods to deploy. If I were the IC, I wouldn't send a 2 man UAS team deep into the woods without them having knowledge of Ground Team F&P's and being accompanied by a team.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

Spam

Quote from: Capt Thompson on August 28, 2020, 04:03:10 pm
Quote from: Spam on August 28, 2020, 03:44:11 pm
Quote from: Eclipse on August 27, 2020, 08:47:48 pm
Quote from: Capt Thompson on August 27, 2020, 01:26:02 pmA few months ago you were all about expanding ES and getting Cadets involved in drones. Most drone teams will deploy as part of Ground Teams, so scaling back on ES isn't going to help the drone program any,

A UAV operator has zero need of GT skills, nor should they be linked to, or deployed with, GTs. UDF at most.
2 guys with the UAV, that's all you need. They aren't going camping with the thing.


If you think a sUAS team will only operate its (short battery life) system within a hundred meters of pavement, great. Also if you think all SAR imaging objectives will be within flight/loiter range of said pavement, great.

However, a valid tactical scenario is where I've got 2 - 3 teams out working the ridge lines at the middle and outer beacon on an approach, looking at the last datum from NTAP, and an organic sUAS capability with the GT would save us a full hour or more of climbing vertically to go cover the back slopes. In such cases, fat old guys in polos and wing tips (points finger at self) would be a liability rather than an asset, and should be relegated with the UDFs to Training missions looking for orange tarps and bug hunts on airport property.

I base that scenario on an actual MDWG mission that we ran on Catoctin Mtn back in the 90s (FIND to the St. Marys Sqdn. team). Ceiling too low and terrain too high for manned flights, aircraft was found on the ridge line at middle marker after hours of foot searcher sweat. Polos and grays would have been shredded in the heavy brush.

V/r
Spam
This^^ A UAS team needs to be able to deploy within VLOS of the UAS while it's in the search area. If that happens to be on pavement, great. If that requires them to be 3 miles into the woods to deploy, they will need to be 3 miles into the woods to deploy. If I were the IC, I wouldn't send a 2 man UAS team deep into the woods without them having knowledge of Ground Team F&P's and being accompanied by a team.

Since I was IC that morning on the mission referenced, I made a related call. Two, really. One was LTC Ayres and I agreed that we would not release aircraft even on an electronic sortie, even if they were instrument current and highly experienced. Second was that I accepted the request from a, lets say highly mature set of officers from a western MD unit who looked at the GT tasking which I needed to staff, and requested a less strenuous sortie. I publicly thanked them for their ORM wisdom in not getting in over their heads. Those older gents that morning dressed for the worst case in BDUs, but were Professional Volunteers, and impressed me greatly with their honest humility in service of the mission (we used them as a split team, roving patrol and static visual scanning/smelling/listening post in the AO).

We need MORE people like that in CAP, who are in it for the customer lost out there on the mountain, not for the uniform (which is a tool) as a cosplay end unto itself. 

Spam

So one other thought (thread drift, perhaps we need a sUAS TTP thread), CAP needs to write, test, and promulgate some NLOS UAS TTPs, and use them to guide future sUAS fleet acquisition.

In the scenario above, lugging a pelican case deep into (and UP into!) the AO buys me no time/effort savings if it can only look down on what I already see. The tactical capes that I need is NLOS Non Line of Sight target search and tagging over ridgelines and around spurs, etc. That means we need sUAS systems with onboard DTED/DGED, coordinate route planning, and lost link climb/return to launch site/return to lost signal pattern automation.

We now return you to your normally scheduled uniform/multiform thread.  :-[

V/r
Spam

TheSkyHornet

The uniform used in the field needs to do two things:
  • Establish an organizational structure and reporting lines (i.e., what organization are you; what is your role here)
  • Provide protection for the purpose wearing it

Everything else can be added/attached. Backpacks, bags, pouches, all of those are add-ons.

I don't know why our field uniform for SAR isn't some bright neon color.

We need to stop with the "The Cadet Program wears this because it has the military feel" rhetoric. The Cadet Program is not a ground team, and a ground team is not the Cadet Program. These are totally separate things. Just because a cadet happens to be on a ground team doesn't intertwine the two. The Cadet Program is a JROTC-like youth leadership program with an aerospace focus. Everything else is a voluntary addition whether at the local level or on the individual seeking to do more. The Cadet Program uniform doesn't need to have any level of interface with whatever a ground team wears or whatever an aircrew wears. These are totally separate functional duty uniforms.

If you're on a non-combat, non-hostile SAR mission, camouflage is the last thing you should be in. You should be in something that identifies your visible person which protects you from the environment and climate in which you operate. This can be accomplished by either having a single-scheme uniform that can have outer garments placed over it with some form of reflective/easily observed colored article on the outside (such as a vest or helmet even), or you can have a common set of colored, visible clothing of comparable-appearance winter and summer wear (e.g., a bright pink long-sleeve shirt and bright pink heavy jacket).

This whole "running around the city/woods in camo" isn't necessary for a civilian, non-combatant, community/emergency response team. You don't need cammies to train ES. You don't need cammies to execute ES.

Running a JROTC is an entirely different operation. It can really be in camo or not. It doesn't matter from a training curriculum standpoint, but we know that many cadets join because of the military appearance of the program. That should be an absolutely separate topic.

From a functional service standpoint, in regard to running the so-called "paying mission" that Emergency Services, why are we continuing to talk about having all of these different colored uniforms and what you can or can't wear based on how hefty or how shaven you are? They have nothing to do with the mission. Put on a common set of clothing, and just do the job. If the rule is going to be "Well, the Air Force will never let the big guys wear ABUs," then drop the ABUs. This whole notion of "As the Air Force Auxiliary, we need to resemble the Air Force in appearance" is bogus. We're literally not wearing their uniform anymore; they changed what they wear. Nearly all of the branches have. It's time to move on from that mindset because the reality is that we don't need to look anything like the Air Force to execute Civil Air Patrol's operations.

I say this as someone who only owns and only wears ABUs and Blues (minus my CAP hoodie that I wear at PT and squadron moto t-shirt). If CAP, tomorrow said, "Senior members no longer wear fatigues, and everyone will wear corporate whites from now on," then I guess I need to go on a shopping spree. I'll take my time. I'll complain about the cost. But I'll get over it. I prefer to wear the common uniform that my cadets wear for the sake of camaraderie and using it as a visual training tool for the program by having the adult version of what they do.

If a person quits because they don't get to dress up in battle rattle anymore, well, I'm going to ask them: "Did you really need to? Is that really what you're worried about?"

This is all really a senior member problem. The Cadet Program has a uniform for cadets. I think some seniors really need to get over themselves in whining about what they are allowed to wear vs. what they want to wear. There's way too much leeway in this organization of having a military command structure, military uniforms, and military culture. Either designate a uniform or get rid of the uniform. Having five different options of "equivalency" is not a uniform; it's work apparel.

shuman14

Quote from: TheSkyHornet on August 28, 2020, 05:36:32 pmThis is all really a senior member problem. The Cadet Program has a uniform for cadets. I think some seniors really need to get over themselves in whining about what they are allowed to wear vs. what they want to wear. There's way too much leeway in this organization of having a military command structure, military uniforms, and military culture. Either designate a uniform or get rid of the uniform. Having five different options of "equivalency" is not a uniform; it's work apparel.

Where is the "CLAP" icon when you need it.
Joseph J. Clune
Lieutenant Colonel, Military Police

USMCR: 1990 - 1992                           USAR: 1993 - 1998, 2000 - 2003, 2005 - Present     CAP: National Patron 2013 - 2014, SMWOG 2020 - Present
INARNG: 1992 - 1993, 1998 - 2000      Active Army: 2003 - 2005                                       USCGAux: 2004 - Present