Undeserved domination?

[SARMedTech]

Here's a real wrench for the works: when you are only fixed wing capable, as we are, you dont have Air SAR, you have Air Search. In an organization like CAP, with no rotor wing assets, planes and pilots dont rescue, they search, locate and point out what and who needs to be rescued. A valuable asset to be sure, but as it stands, our air component isnt rescuing anyone. They are assisting the ground teams by locating what or who needs to be "rescued" or "found" and then moving along. Unless there are some CAP Parajumper Officers out there in an elite ultra secret unit I havent heard about. So its not ALL about the planes, baby.

Also, if the argument is that we are the AIR patrol because we are tied to the AIR Force, that doesnt really track either. The AF has pararescue jumpers, helos, EMS assets, weapons and on and on and on....Its a logical falacy that because we are tied to the AF we are tied to planes. Doesnt wash no matter how much some died in the wool pilots want it to. I have nothing against pilots and its true that without them CAP would exist, if for no other reason but our historical development. But our planes dont go in and get people from plane crashes. Our planes dont go out and shut off ELTs. People in boot leather do. Its time that CAP recognized and diversified based on some simple facts. If we are modeling the AF, then we ought to truly model them and not limit ourselves. As it stands right now, we are not modeling the AF, we are modeling PART of the AF.

[Dragoon]

Several of our squadrons have strong track records of running good gt training exercises using their own money, so that isn't the issue.  It is our Wing Director ES who cannot get funding for ground team training.  If he can't get the pilots in charge to kick loose of a little money, I certainly can't.  This isn't defeatist, it is just stating a fact of life. 

Just because he can't doesn't mean you can't.

Has he proven to the Wing Commander that this additional training actually adds any value to the Wing?  Perhaps he's not a very good salesman - and perhaps you would be.

You have to show that this expenditure would actually help the Wing.  You have to make the connections between higher quality training and some operational end that matters to the Wing CC.  Not just "if you give us money, someday we'll get more missions."  That's just speculation.

You'd be much better off training up a unit or two, then doing a demo.  Work it with both Wing Staff AND some local sheriff type who might be interested in using CAP.  If he bites and you get some calls, then you can say "You see?  And we could do this statewide with just a little funding."

The "pilots in charge" are answering to a couple of bosses, including a Region Commander and some state government folks.  If none of those bosses are clamoring for increased GT capabilities, then it makes sense that it isn't high on the list of priorities.

If you think it should be higher on the list, you need to sell it.

As to who runs CAP, I don't really care whether they are a pilot or a ground team guy.  That isn't really my point.  I know quite a few CAP units that have non-pilot commanders and quite a few other non-pilots in positions of authority.  It is probably pretty rare to see a non-pilot Wing Commander, but I don't have a problem with that. 
 

I've met a fair number of non-pilot Wing Commanders.  At least 1/4, probably closer to a 1/3.

[Dragoon]

Here's a real wrench for the works: when you are only fixed wing capable, as we are, you dont have Air SAR, you have Air Search. In an organization like CAP, with no rotor wing assets, planes and pilots dont rescue, they search, locate and point out what and who needs to be rescued. A valuable asset to be sure, but as it stands, our air component isnt rescuing anyone.

Point taken, but not really relevant to the current discussion, which is about the primacy of aviation in CAP priorities.  Even if it's just fixed wing, it is still the capability that we bring to the table.  Even if planes don't rescue, or fight fires, or deliver babies, or whatever, they are still the capability we bring to the table..  Regardless of what you might like it to be, in CAP it IS all about the planes, baby.

Also, if the argument is that we are the AIR patrol because we are tied to the AIR Force, that doesnt really track either. The AF has pararescue jumpers, helos, EMS assets, weapons and on and on and on....Its a logical falacy that because we are tied to the AF we are tied to planes.

It ain't an argument- more of an observation.  USAF is primarily concerned with airplanes (and spacecraft, but for now we'll lump 'em together).  Those other ground based things you mention are extremely small, percentage wise.  In fact, I'd wager that a larger percentage of USAF personnel are tied up in aerospace and aerospace-related activities than in CAP!

We aren't limited to aviation because USAF makes us.  It's just the way it plays out.  It's their primary focus, they oversee us, therefore it becomes the focus of their oversight, and therefore it becomes OUR focus.

It will only change if either

1.  USAF determines that our ground assets are incapable of performing the missions USAF provides to CAP.  And so far, that ain't happening.

2.  CAP gets another sponser who provides lots of bucks but wants us to have a larger non-aviation operational force.  Money talks.  So far, this hasn't happened either.


USAF is happy with the "domination" of CAP by aviation because they too are "dominated" by aviation.  And they pay the bills.

[Al Sayre]

If you include ELT hunts in Ground category (although we do sometmes use air assets), then I'm pretty sure the USAF is fairly happy with us.  In my wing, we've run 6 or 7 in the last month, with an average turn off time of about 3 hours from notification and an average cost/mission of under $30.00.   I just finished up the paperwork from our "Save"  a couple of weeks ago, and the whole mission was less than $2000.00 

If that doesn't make them smile when considering the alternatives, I don't know what will...

[Eclipse]

If you include ELT hunts in Ground category (although we do sometmes use air assets), then I'm pretty sure the USAF is fairly happy with us.  In my wing, we've run 6 or 7 in the last month, with an average turn off time of about 3 hours from notification and an average cost/mission of under $30.00.   I just finished up the paperwork from our "Save"  a couple of weeks ago, and the whole mission was less than $2000.00 

If that doesn't make them smile when considering the alternatives, I don't know what will...

And this, ladies and gentlebugs, is the real reason we are still around...

[SARMedTech]

It still seems to me that if you lined up everything we do, there is more done on the ground than in the air. It really doesnt matter to me that that may well be that case, but the "primacy" of our aero missions is mostly the holding of the "if I cant fly, I dont wanna play" crowd, unless you wanna convince someone that everytime we go out to turn off an ELT, a plane should be flying overhead.  Nah. Just doesnt wash. You can call a penny a quarter but its still a penny.

[SARPilotNY]

I am sure if we looked at all the stats around the Nation, the following would hold true most of the time:
Most ELTs are located by ground resources at night, day and in bad weather.
Most missing aircraft are found by ground resources at night, bad weather and even half of the time during the day.
Almost all the training dollars go to support air activities.

Even when an aircraft isolates an ELT to an airport, the frequently asked for a UDF team to turn it off.

CAP & the USAF gets more bang for the buck with UDF & GTs, but as the name implies....

BTW, I still want somebody to explain that "AIR" Search and Rescue?

[SARMedTech]

I am sure if we looked at all the stats around the Nation, the following would hold true most of the time:
Most ELTs are located by ground resources at night, day and in bad weather.
Most missing aircraft are found by ground resources at night, bad weather and even half of the time during the day.
Almost all the training dollars go to support air activities.

Even when an aircraft isolates an ELT to an airport, the frequently asked for a UDF team to turn it off.

CAP & the USAF gets more bang for the buck with UDF & GTs, but as the name implies....

BTW, I still want somebody to explain that "AIR" Search and Rescue?

I agree...air search makes sense but as I said since we only fixed wing a/c our pilots can really affect a rescue, but they are still a valuable part of any search operation, they just dont do the rescue part, thats all.

[ZigZag911]

I may be missing something here; when we plan SAREXes, more often than not we are working on air/ground coordination, damage assessment, and similar procedures that generally involve both elements.

In budgetting for these operations, we normally include a sum of money to fund operating GT vehicles (ordinarily CAP vans).

Certainly more funds go into air ops, because air ops are inherently more expensive.

And, as an IC and experienced UDF hand, I can tell you that while we can work an ELT with ground resources only, it is exponentially simpler when we can launch an aircrew to find that target.

[SARMedTech]

All I am saying is that our fix wing capability allows for air searches, but not air SARs, since fixed wing aircraft (at least those that we have) cannot actually perform a rescue, ie removing someone from a crash sight. Thats all Im saying, not that they planes and those who fly them are insignificant.

[Dragoon]

One other point to remember on the topic of "all the money goes to the planes."

Most Wings don't spend their own money on SAR training.  They spend Air Force money.  This is because most Wings don't have enough State money or Dues money to pay for much beyond the Wing HQ building.

So....why not spend Air Force money on Ground SAR.

We can, and we do.

But....

Take a look at what Air Force money can be spent on.

Fuel and lubricants.
Commercial Commo expenses (like long distance bills)
Aircraft Maintenance

There is an option for paying per diem (lodging and food) but if you read CAPR 173-3 you'll see how this is actively discouraged for training activities.


It's real clear from this that the focus of USAF training money is going to go to airplanes.  Fact of life.

So if you want to do some high speed ground training, and you want Wing to pony up for things like moulage kits, campground rental, rapelling gear.....  You've got a problem.   USAF isn't going to pay for any of that stuff.

It may not be a "pilot centric" Wing Commander who's getting in the way of your training funds - it may just be that there ARE no training funds to be spent for Ground Stuff outside of gas for the vans.

[wingnut]

If anybody cares

The USAF is going back to the AIR Commando program, they will have over 20,000 combat ground troops.

Sooooo how about a CAP ranger program in every state

[ZigZag911]

If anybody cares

The USAF is going back to the AIR Commando program, they will have over 20,000 combat ground troops.

Sooooo how about a CAP ranger program in every state

Where is there a connection here? 

CAP does not field combat forces!

[RiverAux]

I think he was referencing the fact that even though the AF, like CAP, is primarily an air-focused organization that it still has some important duties on the ground. 

I'm not sure those numbers would be right as that would be a very significant percentage of the AF though.

[Dragoon]

My guess is that if USAF did become more ground focused, that culture would leak over to us as well. But unless that happens, it's still gonna be about zipper suited sun gods...  :-)

I'm also not sure about those figures. The term "Air Commando" seems to include all the special ops aircrews.  I couldn't find an article about adding "2000 ground combat troops."  The vast majority of ground based Air Commands seem to be forward air controller types.  In other words, they may be on the ground, but they are still primarily aviation support assets.

It would be neat to see what an Army-based "CAP" would consist of.  I can imagine an ES capability based around Ground Search and truck transport.  Imagine units of volunteers with HMMWVS or other 4WD transports that they use in support of everything from DR to NG support.

[SARMedTech]

My guess is that if USAF did become more ground focused, that culture would leak over to us as well. But unless that happens, it's still gonna be about zipper suited sun gods...  :-)

I'm also not sure about those figures. The term "Air Commando" seems to include all the special ops aircrews.  I couldn't find an article about adding "2000 ground combat troops."  The vast majority of ground based Air Commands seem to be forward air controller types.  In other words, they may be on the ground, but they are still primarily aviation support assets.

It would be neat to see what an Army-based "CAP" would consist of.  I can imagine an ES capability based around Ground Search and truck transport.  Imagine units of volunteers with HMMWVS or other 4WD transports that they use in support of everything from DR to NG support.

I have always thought we should have hum-v's, but do you think they will give them to us as gifts on the day hell freezes over or just use the day hell freezes over as a phase in start date. And for the record, I am for having every ground team vehicle having an M-1 carbine or two in it. Anyone ever had shots zing around you as your trudge through a farm field?  Not like we would shoot back...Im just saying.

[SarDragon]

Hum-vees are maintenance hogs, just like the 6x6s before them. That's why we can't have them as corp vehicles. A unit in Maine that had a plane and a 6x6 actually spent more maintenance money per year on the truck.

[Dragoon]

Anyone ever had shots zing around you as your trudge through a farm field? 

Nope.  Not in 30 years.

As a matter of fact, I'm not aware of a single incident in the last 30 years of CAP where someone has been injured by hostile gunfire.  Or even engaged.

Sure I've hear the "friend of a friend of a friend" third hand stories, but never ever a peep out of National, Region or Wing.

If folks shot at us, somebody would have gotten hit.  The whole country can't be entirely comprised of poor marksman - this is the land of the NRA after all...

[aveighter]

Take a deep cleansing breath there Admiral Seng, exhale slowly.  Seems like you are in the grips of some serious angst too.  However, I have been to Oklahoma so I understand your pain.

[RogueLeader]

Take a deep cleansing breath there Admiral Seng, exhale slowly.  Seems like you are in the grips of some serious angst too.  However, I have been to Oklahoma so I understand your pain.