Did I read the newly revised uniform manual correctly? They have either introduced wings for aircrew (non-observer/pilot) or perhaps it was always the case and only just noticed it. Would this be for any qualified aircrew member like a scanner?
Quote from: Billy009 on July 02, 2014, 07:57:42 PM
Did I read the newly revised uniform manual correctly? They have either introduced wings for aircrew (non-observer/pilot) or perhaps it was always the case and only just noticed it. Would this be for any qualified aircrew member like a scanner?
No, there are new wings but 35-6 has not yet been modified
I don't think CAPR 35-6 has been updated with the new rating yet, but that would include mission scanner, aerial photographer and any other aircrew-specific position not a pilot or observer codified in the reg.
And they are not available at Vanguard yet.
Not yet
details and NHQ/DO guidance for wear
http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2649/kw/aircrew%20badge/session/L3RpbWUvMTQwNDM0NTEwMS9zaWQvR0tvNHNqWWw%3D (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2649/kw/aircrew%20badge/session/L3RpbWUvMTQwNDM0NTEwMS9zaWQvR0tvNHNqWWw%3D)
Okay....now here's a quandary.
Being an MO is a prereq for being a GFSO and GFMC.....so for the last three years I have been logging my SO and MC flights as Observer time.
I recently just passed my 200 hours and got my Master Observer Wings.
So here is the question.
Do I have to go back and recalcuate my flight hours and split them up between MO, SO and MC times and put my Observer wings back on and then apply for the Senior AC wings?
Or do I keep my Master Observer Wings.....but I am now also eligible for Senior AC wings?
Also....a question for anyone on the NUC.......and AC badge team....what about the GFMC position? Do where do those hours count towards?
new manual only allows for wear of one set of CAP wings at a time.
Quote from: Garp on July 03, 2014, 12:18:44 AM
new manual only allows for wear of one set of CAP wings at a time.
Not the point....but does bring up another question. Wing Precedence....if you are an MP, and MO and and an MS.....your left seat time counts for one set of wings, your right seat time counts for another and your back seat time for a third.
Is one set of wings required to be worn over another? i.e. if you are an MP/MO/AP and you decide to wear wings.....does it HAVE TO be pilot wings....or is it wearer's choice.
For that matter, who "certifies" the time, and who is going to OK the backlog of aircrew
who never tracked anything?
I can point to missions, and maybe even sorties, because those counted towards something,
but never gave a though to flight hours.
Common sense would indicate hobbs time would be the delimiter, and using that might actually
be possible to recreate a fair amount of the information needed.
Oh I got my log.
And that's another thing EServices should track.
The question is how is the time counted?
My CAP Log ($13 from Vanguard) has a column for Observer and a column for Scanner.
So the question is.....Do my GFSO flights count toward Scanner or Observer? What do my GFMC flights count as?
For Pilots all you have to do is keep track of your missions....the rest is just based on number of flight hours (CAP, Military, GA, Commercial it does not matter) and time as a CAP Pilot.
Edited: Just looked at 35-6 again......to be a CAP command pilot.....you only need 5 flights in a CAP aircaft (assuming you got the 2000 hours from somewhere else).
sounds like a Knowledgebase question
Quote from: lordmonar on July 03, 2014, 12:30:30 AM
Quote from: Garp on July 03, 2014, 12:18:44 AM
new manual only allows for wear of one set of CAP wings at a time.
Not the point....but does bring up another question. Wing Precedence....if you are an MP, and MO and and an MS.....your left seat time counts for one set of wings, your right seat time counts for another and your back seat time for a third.
Is one set of wings required to be worn over another? i.e. if you are an MP/MO/AP and you decide to wear wings.....does it HAVE TO be pilot wings....or is it wearer's choice.
Manual just says, "When more than one CAP aviation badge is authorized, only one will be worn." Looks like wearer's preference.
Quote from: Garp on July 03, 2014, 12:50:42 AM
sounds like a Knowledgebase question
I've known pilots (no star, no star/wreath) who ended up with Senior or Master Observer wings. It was a crapshoot. One said "pilot outranks Observer, regardless of level." Another said "star outranks no star." Unless and until somebody flips that coin officially, looks like wearers choice.
(Unrelated but perhaps interesting side note - Canadian WWI ace Billy Bishop was an observer before he was a pilot. His role in WWII was essentially that of "revered elder" and often presented pilot wings to graduates. At least once he appeared to present wings to observer graduates and wire his observer wings. Nobody argued with him.)
Just asked KB about where my GFMC hours count toward and if there is a precedence to the wings.
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on July 03, 2014, 01:06:30 AM"pilot outranks Observer, regardless of level."
Hmm...let's all put money in the pool as to who said
that.
Just as there is no precedence with the GTM badge, there's no precede with wing.
You wear what you feel like wearing that you are qualified to wear.
I'll be happy enough to throw a few buckos at VG for the A/C basics, but I'm not going to bother
tracking flight hours for the upgrades.
Hopefully this'll help some of you. I inquired with Vanguard on the AC insignia while reading up on Mission Scanner yesterday. As a new guy Mission Scanner sounds interesting to me.
QuoteDear Mr. Hawthorne,
Thank you for your e-mail. We currently have the miniature BASIC AIR CREW wings (CAP0752AB) and regular size BASIC AIR CREW wings (CAP0752AC) available for purchase over the phone. We are working on putting them on the website and should have them up shortly, but until then, you may purchase them from one of our customer service representatives at 1-800-221-1264. We are currently in development of the embroidered wings and the SENIOR and MASTER ratings.
CINDY DEJESUS
CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE
1172 AZALEA GARDEN ROAD, NORFOLK, VA 23502-5612
P| (800) 221-1264 X 256 • F| (757) 857-0222
WWW.VANGUARDMIL.COM (http://www.vanguardmil.com) | SIGN UP FOR OUR EMAIL LIST
I see no mention of the hotstamp for leather nametags though. Someone might follow up and inquire on their status of getting the hotstamp made.
Got my answers from KB.
On the subject of hours....GFMC (because it is right seat) counts towards Observer and my GFSO hours count toward AC.
On the subject of precedence of wings.....they said users choice.
And I wonder if they will be ' earned for life', such as the GT Badges. Will a formerly qualified Scanner/Observer be able to wear them? Or will they have to be removed when currency falls by the wayside?
Why would they be treated differently?
Quote from: Eclipse on July 03, 2014, 01:16:56 AM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on July 03, 2014, 01:06:30 AM"pilot outranks Observer, regardless of level."
Hmm...let's all put money in the pool as to who said that.
Just as there is no precedence with the GTM badge, there's no precede with wing.
You wear what you feel like wearing that you are qualified to wear.
I'll be happy enough to throw a few buckos at VG for the A/C basics, but I'm not going to bother
tracking flight hours for the upgrades.
Just to support what Eclipse said, when I train MOs, I make it very clear to them that they are in charge of the mission, not the pilot. The pilot has the final say when it comes to aircraft and aircrew safety, but the MO is in command of the mission sortie. I've known too many pilots who try to take on too many duties, and they just end up getting task saturated. I was on one sortie as a MO many years ago with a pilot who would just not cooperate and decided to go off task because he didn't agree with the AOBD in where we should be looking. I ended up aborting the sortie because the pilot just would not fall into line. The pilot 'outranking' the MO is poppycock.
Anyway, pleasant slight sidetrack to the actual intent of the post and thread. It's true that the pilot wings will always be PREFERRED to the MO wings to a pilot. I may or may not have enough hours to qualify for Senior Observer wings, but I stopped logging my Observer hours after I earned my pilot wings. It doesn't matter to me anymore. Stars and wreaths on aircrew badges simply denote experience, not other qualifications like it does on the GTM or IC badges.
Quote from: Panzerbjorn on July 04, 2014, 02:25:17 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on July 03, 2014, 01:16:56 AM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on July 03, 2014, 01:06:30 AM"pilot outranks Observer, regardless of level."
Hmm...let's all put money in the pool as to who said that.
Just as there is no precedence with the GTM badge, there's no precede with wing.
You wear what you feel like wearing that you are qualified to wear.
I'll be happy enough to throw a few buckos at VG for the A/C basics, but I'm not going to bother
tracking flight hours for the upgrades.
Just to support what Eclipse said, when I train MOs, I make it very clear to them that they are in charge of the mission, not the pilot. The pilot has the final say when it comes to aircraft and aircrew safety, but the MO is in command of the mission sortie. I've known too many pilots who try to take on too many duties, and they just end up getting task saturated. I was on one sortie as a MO many years ago with a pilot who would just not cooperate and decided to go off task because he didn't agree with the AOBD in where we should be looking. I ended up aborting the sortie because the pilot just would not fall into line. The pilot 'outranking' the MO is poppycock.
Anyway, pleasant slight sidetrack to the actual intent of the post and thread. It's true that the pilot wings will always be PREFERRED to the MO wings to a pilot. I may or may not have enough hours to qualify for Senior Observer wings, but I stopped logging my Observer hours after I earned my pilot wings. It doesn't matter to me anymore. Stars and wreaths on aircrew badges simply denote experience, not other qualifications like it does on the GTM or IC badges.
You "experts" that are saying that the MO is in charge of the mission might want to study up on CRM, Cockpit Resource Management, before you start making such bold and sweaping statements.
Because if you're up there having your little tantrums with the pilot, how much searching are you getting done?
The division of responcibility needs to be settled on the ground before you even walk out to the plane.
If you can't settle it in the briefing room you sure aren't going to do it in the plane.
Not to sidetrack to thread too much, but I was always taught that the MO was MISSION Commander and the MP was AIRCRAFT commander. The MART only states the MO "MAY" be mission CC, so PHall is right about pre-sortie communications. I'm an MO trainee on paper, but my training has been so spread out that if I were to be able to finish my task sign-offs this weekend, there's no way I would try to insist on being mission CC.
(For the record, I plan on starting all over my MO tasks just so I can actually be competent on the job.)
Quote from: PHall on July 04, 2014, 02:58:08 PMYou "experts" that are saying that the MO is in charge of the mission might want to study up on CRM, Cockpit Resource Management, before you start making such bold and sweaping (sic) statements.
Because if you're up there having your little tantrums with the pilot, how much searching are you getting done?
And you might want to review the curriculum,
What's interesting is that the practice is logical, efficient, and increases mission efficacy at no cost other then the pilot's
ego, which should be sufficiently charged already, you know, being a pilot.
Odd that the further West you go, the more you hear people whining about something which will likely be even more clearly codified in the next rev
of the ES curriculum.
There are no tantrums when adults are acting as such.
Everyone has their role, the Pilot's is flying the aircraft. That's it.
Quote from: Eclipse on July 04, 2014, 03:48:03 PM
Quote from: PHall on July 04, 2014, 02:58:08 PMYou "experts" that are saying that the MO is in charge of the mission might want to study up on CRM, Cockpit Resource Management, before you start making such bold and sweaping (sic) statements.
Because if you're up there having your little tantrums with the pilot, how much searching are you getting done?
And you might want to review the curriculum,
What's interesting is that the practice is logical, efficient, and increases mission efficacy at no cost other then the pilot's
ego, which should be sufficiently charged already, you know, being a pilot.
Odd that the further West you go, the more you hear people whining about something which will likely be even more clearly codified in the next rev
of the ES curriculum.
There are no tantrums when adults are acting as such.
Everyone has their role, the Pilot's is flying the aircraft. That's it.
I've witnessed airborne tantrums more then once. And if you looked at it, both sides were at fault at least 90% of the time.
Which is why I say you need to work out the "Rules of Engagement" on the ground before you even leave the briefing room.
No use in taking a battle of egos airborne if you don't have to. Plus the AOBD is available to either fix the egos or to replace the offending idiot.
Fair enough.
However if everyone was trained and operated consistently, there'd be no room for misunderstandings.
Before "attitude adjustment" I can't tell you how many times we had MOs acting as "co-pilot", pilots telling
MOs to "sit quietly and not touch anything", and aircrews briefing photo runs without the Scanners.
It still happens occasionally but much less frequently.
Quote from: PHall on July 04, 2014, 02:58:08 PM
Quote from: Panzerbjorn on July 04, 2014, 02:25:17 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on July 03, 2014, 01:16:56 AM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on July 03, 2014, 01:06:30 AM"pilot outranks Observer, regardless of level."
Hmm...let's all put money in the pool as to who said that.
Just as there is no precedence with the GTM badge, there's no precede with wing.
You wear what you feel like wearing that you are qualified to wear.
I'll be happy enough to throw a few buckos at VG for the A/C basics, but I'm not going to bother
tracking flight hours for the upgrades.
Just to support what Eclipse said, when I train MOs, I make it very clear to them that they are in charge of the mission, not the pilot. The pilot has the final say when it comes to aircraft and aircrew safety, but the MO is in command of the mission sortie. I've known too many pilots who try to take on too many duties, and they just end up getting task saturated. I was on one sortie as a MO many years ago with a pilot who would just not cooperate and decided to go off task because he didn't agree with the AOBD in where we should be looking. I ended up aborting the sortie because the pilot just would not fall into line. The pilot 'outranking' the MO is poppycock.
Anyway, pleasant slight sidetrack to the actual intent of the post and thread. It's true that the pilot wings will always be PREFERRED to the MO wings to a pilot. I may or may not have enough hours to qualify for Senior Observer wings, but I stopped logging my Observer hours after I earned my pilot wings. It doesn't matter to me anymore. Stars and wreaths on aircrew badges simply denote experience, not other qualifications like it does on the GTM or IC badges.
You "experts" that are saying that the MO is in charge of the mission might want to study up on CRM, Cockpit Resource Management, before you start making such bold and sweaping statements.
Because if you're up there having your little tantrums with the pilot, how much searching are you getting done?
The division of responcibility needs to be settled on the ground before you even walk out to the plane.
If you can't settle it in the briefing room you sure aren't going to do it in the plane.
You may really want to get to know me better and my experience before you snort in derision and think I have nothing to contribute to the conversation. IJS.
As it so happened, on the ground everything was planned out and was fine. It wasn't until we were up in the air when the pilot decided he had his own agenda, and he didn't fly another sortie that SAREX. There was no tantrum involved. He wasn't going to go by the playbook, so I aborted us and we RTB'd instead of getting into an argument up in the air which would have solved nothing. My point is that there are MOs who would have just sat there and let the pilot take over like that because either they're the pilot or they're higher ranking.
Many lessons have been learned both then and since then. But the concept stays the same. The MO is calling the shots when it's mission related.
Quote from: Panzerbjorn on July 04, 2014, 02:25:17 PMI was on one sortie as a MO many years ago with a pilot who would just not cooperate and decided to go off task because he didn't agree with the AOBD in where we should be looking.
I just caught that after a re-read.
You have to love the arrogance.
Planning spends time with intel, creates tasks, floats them through OSC, AOBD creates and briefs sorties, and then
after all that, a pilot "knows better" and just decides to "turn left", while the whole time the rest of the
ICS is assuming he's doing as he is told and moving on with the rest of the plans.
"No more sorties that day..." is where I would
start with the disciplinary action and remedial training.
Disagreeing with the course of action is fine, to a point, but once you've been briefed and released, you
execute the plan, not just fly around "searchamyfyin'"
I always taught MPs, MOs, & MS that the pilot was in charge until they reach the search area, then the MO directs things until leaving the search area. The MP, of course, always had the last word when it came to safety and the feasability of what MO wants.
The only group that would more commonly have issues with that were MP trainees who were retired airline captains who often played old tapes wherein they were always in charge. Not always, of course, but a higher than average percentage than non-airline types.
It's the pilots' airplane, it's the observers mission. Somewhere all that has to balance. They're all in it together.
Well....let's see what the task guide says.
QuoteP-2007 1-MAR-04
P-2007
DISCUSS MISSION OBSERVER DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
CONDITIONS
You are a Mission Observer trainee and must discuss observer duties and responsibilities.
OBJECTIVES
Discuss Observer duties and responsibilities.
TRAINING AND EVALUATION
Training Outline
1. As a Mission Observer trainee, understanding your duties and responsibilities is essential. The mission observer has a key role in CAP missions, and has expanded duties that mainly pertain to assisting the mission pilot. This assistance may be in the planning phase, handling radio communications, assisting in navigation, and crew management (i.e., mission commander). The proficient observer makes it possible for the pilot to perform his duties with a greater degree of accuracy and safety by assuming these aspects of the workload.
2. The Observer's primary role while actually in a search area is that of scanner.
3. General duties and responsibilities include:
a. Depending on conditions, you may report with the mission pilot for briefing. Wear appropriate clothes for a mission.
b. Assist in planning the mission. The observer may act as mission commander for the sortie.
c. Assist in avoiding collisions and obstacles during taxiing.
d. Assist in setting up and operating aircraft and CAP radios.
e. Assist in setting up and operating aircraft navigational equipment (e.g., VORs and GPS).
f. Assist enforcing the sterile cockpit rules.
g. Maintain situational awareness at all times.
h. Assist in monitoring fuel status.
i. Monitor the electronic search devices aboard the aircraft and advise the pilot when making course corrections in response to ELT signals.
j. Keep mission base and/or high bird appraised of status.
k. Coordinate scanner assignments and ensure proper breaks for the scanners (including yourself). Monitor crew for fatigue and dehydration (ensure the crew drinks plenty of fluids).
l. Maintain a chronological flight log of all observations of note, including precise locations, sketches andany other noteworthy information.
m. Depending on conditions, report with the mission pilot for debriefing immediately upon return to mission base. The applicable portions on the reverse of CAPF 104 should be completed prior to debrief.
n. Keep track of assigned supplies and equipment.
4. Once team members have been briefed on the mission and accomplished the necessary planning, observers determine that all necessary equipment is aboard the airplane. Checklists help ensure that all essential equipment is included, and vary according to geographic location, climate, and terrain of the search area. Items on the observer's checklist should include CAP membership
and specialty qualification cards, current charts and maps of the search area, flashlights,notebook and pencils, binoculars, and survival gear (prohibited items, such as firearms, should be listed too, to ensure none is included). A camera may be included to assist in describing the location and condition of the search objective or survivors. Unnecessary items or personal belongings should be left behind. The mission observer also assists the pilot in ensuring that all equipment aboard the search aircraft is properly stowed. An unsecured item can injure the crew or damage the aircraft in turbulence.
5. Once airborne, the observer provides navigation and communication assistance, allowing the pilot to precisely fly the aircraft with a greater degree of safety. The observer also assists in enforcing "sterile cockpit" rules when necessary. In flight, particularly the transit phase, the observer maintains situational awareness in order to help ensure crew safety.
6. The mission observer divides and assigns scanning responsibilities during her mission observer briefing, and ensures each scanner performs their assigned duty during flight. She monitors the duration of scanner activity, and enables the scanners to rest in order to minimize fatigue.
7. Observer Log. The observer must become proficient in using an in-flight navigational log. A complete chronological log should be maintained from take-off until landing, and should include all events and sightings. Skill in maintaining the log requires training and experience. Remember, proficiency and confidence are gained through practice and application. It is important to log the geographical
location of the search aircraft at the time of all events and sightings (as a habit, always log the Hobbs time each time you make a report or record an event or sighting). This information is the basis of CAP Form 104, which is passed back to the incident commander and general staff after the debriefing and becomes a part of the total information that is the basis for his subsequent actions and reports. Good logs give the staff a better picture of how the mission is progressing. If sketches or maps are made to compliment a sighting, note this and attach them to the log. The log and all maps and sketches will be attached to the CAPF 104.
While I will agree with you.....we should be teaching our crews that the Pilot is just a driver and the Observer is "in charge" of the search. That is not how the task guide reads.
The Observer is a scanner who assists the pilot. End of story....next argument.
I was always taught that the MO was the person in charge of everything but flying the plane, like radios, navigation, looking out the window, in order to let the pilot do his "pilot s***". The pilot's sole responsibility was to pilot the aircraft.
Quote from: Garibaldi on July 05, 2014, 02:55:19 AM
I was always taught that the MO was the person in charge of everything but flying the plane, like radios, navigation, looking out the window, in order to let the pilot do his "pilot s***". The pilot's sole responsibility was to pilot the aircraft.
What does the Task Guide say? The task guide is what we're evaluated on. It is the standard we are taught to.
It is what you're evaluated against when you take a check ride.
Where did the 'Aircrew Wings' topic go? ;)
We got our answer from KB....and now we are just doing random association. :)
Quote from: lordmonar on July 05, 2014, 02:51:18 AM]
While I will agree with you.....we should be teaching our crews that the Pilot is just a driver and the Observer is "in charge" of the search. That is not how the task guide reads.
It literally >is< how the task guide reads (twice).
"Training Outline
1. As a Mission Observer trainee, understanding your duties and responsibilities is essential. The mission observer has a key role in CAP missions, and has expanded duties that mainly pertain to assisting the mission pilot. This assistance may be in the planning phase, handling radio communications, assisting in navigation, and crew management (i.e., mission commander). The proficient observer makes it possible for the pilot to perform his duties with a greater degree of accuracy and safety by assuming these aspects of the workload.""b. Assist in planning the mission. The observer may act as mission commander for the sortie."Quote from: lordmonar on July 05, 2014, 02:51:18 AM]
The Observer is a scanner who assists the pilot. End of story....next argument.
2. The Observer's primary role while actually in a search area is that of scanner.You don't get to divide the sentence to make your point.
This reinforces the "Mission Commander" idea:
6. The mission observer divides and assigns scanning responsibilities during her mission observer briefing, and ensures each scanner performs their assigned duty during flight. She monitors the duration of scanner activity, and enables the scanners to rest in order to minimize fatigue.The problem with even this text is it clearly doesn't even recognize that aircrews do much of anything but "look out the window" for stuff.
it doesn't even mention the DF equipment, and suggests a camera "might" be useful. So another place where the curriculum is lacking as a practical guide to
operations, but the fact remains, even just based on good pilot practices and safety, that the pilot is a bus driver, nothing more, nothing less, and
the function of the mission itself is in the hands or other people in the aircraft.
Yep.....please note the "MAY" in that sentence. And the first mention of the term "Mission Commander" is so buried in the SQTR that it is not clear (in my mind anyways) if the MO is always the Mission Commander of simply may be the mission commander.
Also look at the MP SQTR.....and the MO SQTR......both of them show that the MO is not a mandatory position.
So you can see where the disconnect is.
The SQTR needs to be completely re-written and the training standard for it changed to show with out a doubt that the PRIMARY DUTY of the MO is to be the Mission Commander.
..and thats why I wrote it the way I did. They're all in it together. They've got to agree on who's doing what or the mission objective will suffer.
The Aircrew Wings "should" be easier for cadets to earn than Observer Wings?
Quote from: GroundHawg on July 06, 2014, 01:29:03 PM
The Aircrew Wings "should" be easier for cadets to earn than Observer Wings?
Yes.....because it is easy to earn for anyone.
Quote from: lordmonar on July 06, 2014, 05:59:58 PM
Quote from: GroundHawg on July 06, 2014, 01:29:03 PM
The Aircrew Wings "should" be easier for cadets to earn than Observer Wings?
Yes.....because it is easy to earn for anyone.
If the cadet is 18 years old or older.
Which of the Air Crew positions is the most straight forward to earn?
Quote from: BSH on July 07, 2014, 06:00:15 PM
Which of the Air Crew positions is the most straight forward to earn?
Mission Scanner.
It's a prerequisite for all the others.
Quote from: JeffDG on July 07, 2014, 06:10:07 PM
Quote from: BSH on July 07, 2014, 06:00:15 PM
Which of the Air Crew positions is the most straight forward to earn?
Mission Scanner.
It's a prerequisite for all the others.
And unfortunately seen as just a "stepping stone" to Mission Observer. I know quite a few Scanners who
like remaining Scanners without the additional hoo-ha of what goes with being in the right seat.
Nothing wrong with that, and call it what it is. It is a stepping stone, but it's also a place one can stay and serve.
Quote from: a2capt on July 07, 2014, 07:44:13 PM
Nothing wrong with that, and call it what it is. It is a stepping stone, but it's also a place one can stay and serve.
It's incorrect to call it a stepping stone. For some, it's the square hole/square peg. I knew a Scanner who could spot a dime in the woods at 1500'. Add any other tasks to her workload, and she was as hosed up as a $3 bill...She was a "victom" of the mindset that you must become a MO and couldn't stay as a MS. She got her wings, and ended up spending her time in the backseat, with very good results...
MS is an initial and valuable qualification, no more or less then any other, it's only recently
that the AP and others have come to being, with most not really being done yet, if ever,
and the majority of the "work" in the airplane is still done from the rear seat.
I don't know why people downplay the accomplishments of others, especially by spouting 1/2-truths.
For anyone that is curious what the full-size metal wings look like. Basically, they are observer wings without an O in cast.
Picture attached
[attachment deleted by admin]
Or Navy Aircrew wings without the anchor and made in silver vs. gold...
[attachment deleted by admin]
Quote from: LSThiker on July 07, 2014, 11:04:50 PM
For anyone that is curious what the full-size metal wings look like. Basically, they are observer wings without an O in cast.
Still wished they could have worked the CAP tri-prop in there somewhere.
You know, make it distinctive at low light and at-a-distance. :P
Quote from: Panache on July 08, 2014, 04:00:35 AM
Quote from: LSThiker on July 07, 2014, 11:04:50 PM
For anyone that is curious what the full-size metal wings look like. Basically, they are observer wings without an O in cast.
Still wished they could have worked the CAP tri-prop in there somewhere.
You know, make it distinctive at low light and at-a-distance. :P
Still wish they would have used the MO slick wings as the basic aircrew, senior as MO, and master as AOBD...but alas, we're stuck with this...
I wanted to become an MO for awhile, because if the role needed to be filled, I can do it. I have done a sortie or 2, and I actually dont like being in the right seat. It is cool to learn how to run Navigation and work the Glass Cockpit. I just dont like talking on the Radio (Even though im a MRO) keeping up with all of the hoo haa. Give me my Camera and I will take pictures and be happy.
I am more of a "Ground Pounder" but I learn AC stuf incase the slot needs to be filled.
Quote from: Devil Doc on July 08, 2014, 11:55:34 AM
I wanted to become an MO for awhile, because if the role needed to be filled, I can do it. I have done a sortie or 2, and I actually dont like being in the right seat. It is cool to learn how to run Navigation and work the Glass Cockpit. I just dont like talking on the Radio (Even though im a MRO) keeping up with all of the hoo haa. Give me my Camera and I will take pictures and be happy.
I am more of a "Ground Pounder" but I learn AC stuf incase the slot needs to be filled.
It's a ctually good to get it if you want to get more into the mission management aspect as well. Strike that, it's required if you want to do that. Sure you can be a GBD, but you'll top out at that. Even if you don't want a management role, it's a good thing to have some perspective on what goes on with your air searchers while you're on the ground.
Quote from: THRAWN on July 08, 2014, 12:03:07 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on July 08, 2014, 11:55:34 AM
I wanted to become an MO for awhile, because if the role needed to be filled, I can do it. I have done a sortie or 2, and I actually dont like being in the right seat. It is cool to learn how to run Navigation and work the Glass Cockpit. I just dont like talking on the Radio (Even though im a MRO) keeping up with all of the hoo haa. Give me my Camera and I will take pictures and be happy.
I am more of a "Ground Pounder" but I learn AC stuf incase the slot needs to be filled.
It's a ctually good to get it if you want to get more into the mission management aspect as well. Strike that, it's required if you want to do that. Sure you can be a GBD, but you'll top out at that. Even if you don't want a management role, it's a good thing to have some perspective on what goes on with your air searchers while you're on the ground.
And vice versa, the pilots and aircrew should take a break from flying and do some ground work every now and again. It would be good to know the GT perspective in the air.
Quote from: GroundHawg on July 08, 2014, 10:04:38 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on July 08, 2014, 12:03:07 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on July 08, 2014, 11:55:34 AM
I wanted to become an MO for awhile, because if the role needed to be filled, I can do it. I have done a sortie or 2, and I actually dont like being in the right seat. It is cool to learn how to run Navigation and work the Glass Cockpit. I just dont like talking on the Radio (Even though im a MRO) keeping up with all of the hoo haa. Give me my Camera and I will take pictures and be happy.
I am more of a "Ground Pounder" but I learn AC stuf incase the slot needs to be filled.
It's a ctually good to get it if you want to get more into the mission management aspect as well. Strike that, it's required if you want to do that. Sure you can be a GBD, but you'll top out at that. Even if you don't want a management role, it's a good thing to have some perspective on what goes on with your air searchers while you're on the ground.
And vice versa, the pilots and aircrew should take a break from flying and do some ground work every now and again. It would be good to know the GT perspective in the air.
Agreed. Once upon a.time in NJ we did just that. During our GSAR Schools we would have time set aside for GTM trainees to get airborne and for the aircrews to get their boots dirty. It worked well to make well rounded ES teams.
Quote from: THRAWN on July 08, 2014, 10:28:01 PM
Quote from: GroundHawg on July 08, 2014, 10:04:38 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on July 08, 2014, 12:03:07 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on July 08, 2014, 11:55:34 AM
I wanted to become an MO for awhile, because if the role needed to be filled, I can do it. I have done a sortie or 2, and I actually dont like being in the right seat. It is cool to learn how to run Navigation and work the Glass Cockpit. I just dont like talking on the Radio (Even though im a MRO) keeping up with all of the hoo haa. Give me my Camera and I will take pictures and be happy.
I am more of a "Ground Pounder" but I learn AC stuf incase the slot needs to be filled.
It's a ctually good to get it if you want to get more into the mission management aspect as well. Strike that, it's required if you want to do that. Sure you can be a GBD, but you'll top out at that. Even if you don't want a management role, it's a good thing to have some perspective on what goes on with your air searchers while you're on the ground.
And vice versa, the pilots and aircrew should take a break from flying and do some ground work every now and again. It would be good to know the GT perspective in the air.
Agreed. Once upon a.time in NJ we did just that. During our GSAR Schools we would have time set aside for GTM trainees to get airborne and for the aircrews to get their boots dirty. It worked well to make well rounded ES teams.
That is what the prevailing opinion is in my unit. We are trying to get the aircrews in the van for a sortie, and any interested GTMs up in the plane, provided they are 18 and up. The younger cadets already get their flying in ;)
I wish they would have revived the old "half-wing" that CAP Observers wore back in the day for Scanner.
(http://www.b24bestweb.com/images/Wings/Wings-CivilAirPatrolObserver.JPG)
Quote from: CyBorg on July 09, 2014, 05:00:49 PM
I wish they would have revived the old "half-wing" that CAP Observers wore back in the day for Scanner.
(http://www.b24bestweb.com/images/Wings/Wings-CivilAirPatrolObserver.JPG)
Didn't that later become the Stewardess badge? (I know, I know ...
not politically correct. Nowadays it would be "flight attendant.")
Jack
Airborne Service Attendant
Aeronautical Customer Service Associate.
Why not call them what they call themselves, Flight Attendant.
Last time I saw the stewardess - ahem - flight attendant badge awarded was back in the late 1970s WIWAC.
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on July 10, 2014, 05:04:44 PM
Last time I saw the stewardess - ahem - flight attendant badge awarded was back in the late 1970s WIWAC.
Last time I actually saw somebody wearing one was 1970. She replaced it with pilot wings.
The "Stewardess Badge" was rare and not easy to earn. They could only be awarded to female cadets who graduated from the Special Activity that was set up with....I think it was Eastern Airlines. Meanwhile, women who were actually employed as "Stewardesses" with various carriers were not eligible for the badge.
There were three Stewardess Schools. One was Eastern Airlines, one was Delta Airlines and I forget the third, but it was out west somewhere. The Swewardess School wings were made only in full size, no miniature wings.
Quote from: THRAWN on July 08, 2014, 11:23:46 AM
Quote from: Panache on July 08, 2014, 04:00:35 AM
Quote from: LSThiker on July 07, 2014, 11:04:50 PM
For anyone that is curious what the full-size metal wings look like. Basically, they are observer wings without an O in cast.
Still wished they could have worked the CAP tri-prop in there somewhere.
You know, make it distinctive at low light and at-a-distance. :P
Still wish they would have used the MO slick wings as the basic aircrew, senior as MO, and master as AOBD...but alas, we're stuck with this...
Your idea is in conflict with other CAP wings and USAF wings, as you have each level awarded for different ratings. The star means "same rating as no star, but with more experience." The star with wreath means "same rating as the basic wing, but with a lot more experience."
Just received my AC wings from Vanguard. So, if anyone's interested in what they actually look like, here they are. (Oops, didn't notice someone uploaded pic up there already...)
(https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/l/t1.0-9/10464114_10152576524632497_6709415896864843981_n.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/t1.0-9/10376856_10152576524642497_4291252145561804915_n.jpg)
I ordered mine today. Just a heads up, they don't have the embroidered wings for BDUs yet. The person I spoke with thought about 2-3 weeks before they are ready, but keep in mind that was a guestimate.
So, nice and shiny, but what's the hurry?
There's no way to authorize their wear, nor is anyone authorized to wear them, nor any criteria for their wear.
It's fairly safe to assume MS as a minimum, but no guarantee.
35-6 hasn't been updated for 12 years, is there one in draft?
From the Knowledge Base today:
Air Crew Insignia
Published 06/27/2014 06:04 AM | Updated 07/09/2014 02:43 PM | Answer ID: 2649
In the new CAPM 39-1 it shows a "Air Crew Insignia" in Attachment 7, pg 139. What are the qualifications to earn/wear this insignia?
Below is the criteria for the Aviation badge. See CAPM 39-1 CAP Uniform Manual 26 June 2014, page 139 to see the badge.
Once the following criteria has been met, a CAPF 2a must also be completed to make you eligible to wear the badge once all of the requirements as listed below are complete. The approval authority process requires the Aircrew Badge be submitted via CAPF 2a through the chain of command up to the Wing Commander for approval.
The Air crew badge is an aeronautical rating in three levels and may be earned by CAP Cadet and senior members who are qualified to perform specialized airborne tasks such as:
CAP Aircrew Rating
Mission Scanner (MS)
Aerial Digital Imaging System Operator (ADIS)
Airborne Photographer (AP)
ARCHER Operator (ARCHOPR)
ARCHER Trac Technician (ARCHTRK)
Geospatial Information Interoperability Exploitation Portable Operator (GIIEP)
Surrogate Unmanned Aerial System Green Flag Sensor Operator (GFSO)
Highbird Radio Operator (HRO)
CAP Senior Aircrew Rating: (basic badge with star)
1) Meet CAP aircrew rating requirements.
2) Have been an active flying CAP mission scanner for 3 years (this service need not be continuous).
3) Have a minimum of 100 hours certified flying time as CAP MS, ADIS, AP, ARCHOPR, ARCHTRK, GIIEP, GFSO or HRO.
4) Qualified as an ADIS, AP, ARCHOPR, ARCHTRK, GIIEP, GFSO or HRO
CAP Master Aircrew Rating: (basic badge with star and wreath)
1) Meet requirements for CAP senior aircrew rating.
2) Have been an active CAP mission scanner for 5 years (this service need not be continuous).
3) Have a minimum of 200 hours certified flying time as a CAP MS, ADIS, AP, ARCHOPR, ARCHTRK, GIIEP, GFSO or HRO.
4) Have a minimum of 20 sorties as a CAP ADIS, AP, ARCHOPR, ARCHTRK, GIIEP, GFSO or HRO on actual missions.
Ah....but as Eclipse is sure to tell your KB is not an authoritative source for any sort of information. I might as well not exist.
:)
Yes I know that Knowledge base is informational only. The question of update along with the recent change to the criteria to the Find ribbon in R60-3 has been sent to NHQ.
Quote from: lordmonar on July 15, 2014, 01:22:18 AM
Ah....but as Eclipse is sure to tell your KB is not an authoritative source for any sort of information. I might as well not exist.
It's not, but we all knew that. It does, however, illustrate nicely why "SME"s should not be
interrupting ahead of the regs when answering KB inquiries.
The above doesn't quote any relevent regulation about award criteria, because it can't. Nor does it even adhere to the current process for awarding
aeronautical and ES badges, which is that they are done in eServices.
I checked earlier, and the A/C badge is not one of the choices in OPS Quals.
The correct answer, of course, starts with "Pending an update to 35-6..."
Wow they really went out of their way in the "lets put some originality into these" category
Well, they have both an "A" and a "C", so there's that...
Wheeew... .I give kudos to the creative design team who was assembled to make this happen. The countless hours must have been mind numbing.
"MS Paint" by Free Love Forum (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hxx2KcPWWZg#)
Quote from: Flying Pig on July 15, 2014, 04:31:47 AM
Wheeew... .I give kudos to the creative design team who was assembled to make this happen. The countless hours must have been mind numbing.
#1: "How can we signify that the wearer is certified to be air crew."
...
...
#2: "How about in the disc... we put the letters 'A' and 'C'?"
#1: "It's just crazy enough to work!"
Quote from: Panache on July 15, 2014, 06:04:38 AM
Quote from: Flying Pig on July 15, 2014, 04:31:47 AM
Wheeew... .I give kudos to the creative design team who was assembled to make this happen. The countless hours must have been mind numbing.
#1: "How can we signify that the wearer is certified to be air crew."
...
...
#2: "How about in the disc... we put the letters 'A' and 'C'?"
#1: "It's just crazy enough to work!"
I blame the Navy. :D
Nothing would be cooler than to have aircrew wings and an NRA marksmanship badge. So what exactly qualifies someone as "aircrew"? That wasn't a position that existed when I was active. So are these "Scanner Wings"?
Yes
Quote from: Flying Pig on July 15, 2014, 12:32:00 PM
Nothing would be cooler than to have aircrew wings and an NRA marksmanship badge. So what exactly qualifies someone as "aircrew"? That wasn't a position that existed when I was active. So are these "Scanner Wings"?
Essentially, yes. Scanner, Airborne Photographer, ADIS, GIIEP operator...
Quote from: lordmonar on July 15, 2014, 12:38:32 PM
Yes
So you agree that AC wings and an NRA marksmanship badge would qualify as Dual Cool? >:D
If by chance the KB statement is even close to the actual final language of the regulation..... the wings look like they will only apply to current a/c members, not anyone who had or lets lapse a currency.
"CAP Cadet and senior members who are qualified to perform"
Quote from: Flying Pig on July 15, 2014, 12:52:55 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on July 15, 2014, 12:38:32 PM
Yes
So you agree that AC wings and an NRA marksmanship badge would qualify as Dual Cool? >:D
Add a Model Rocketry Badge and my SDF MEMS badge...it'd be like the 4 horsemen...
It's funny, but this whole idea and thread reminds me of Dane Cook's skit about the gift giving on Oprah...."You get a killer whale, and you get a killer whale and..."
Quote from: capmaj on July 15, 2014, 04:14:19 PM
If by chance the KB statement is even close to the actual final language of the regulation..... the wings look like they will only apply to current a/c members, not anyone who had or lets lapse a currency.
"CAP Cadet and senior members who are qualified to perform"
If so, that will be a lead-balloon (pun intended).
Soon, I see these wings being awarded after cadet O-Rides >:D
For being "A" Cadet? I can totally see it.
Quote from: Flying Pig on July 15, 2014, 12:52:55 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on July 15, 2014, 12:38:32 PM
Yes
So you agree that AC wings and an NRA marksmanship badge would qualify as Dual Cool? >:D
Yes the air crew wings are for scanners and such
I don't think we need an NRA badge for seniors
I think the new wings look great !
No they look horrid. Just wings with an AC in the middle. A true lack of creativity.
Quote from: Caboose on July 15, 2014, 06:27:17 PM
I think the new wings look great !
No they look horrid.
That is your first post? You want to stick with that?
Quote from: Caboose on July 15, 2014, 06:27:17 PM
I think the new wings look great !
No they look horrid. Just wings with an AC in the middle. A true lack of creativity.
From the picture they look much like Navy enlisted aircrew wings - maybe the point was to keep from confusing them with pilot's wings? I dunno.
Quote from: SunDog on July 15, 2014, 08:10:34 PM
Quote from: Caboose on July 15, 2014, 06:27:17 PM
I think the new wings look great !
No they look horrid. Just wings with an AC in the middle. A true lack of creativity.
From the picture they look much like Navy enlisted aircrew wings - maybe the point was to keep from confusing them with pilot's wings? I dunno.
Except they're silver while all Navy wings are gold.
Quote from: PHall on July 15, 2014, 08:12:29 PM
Quote from: SunDog on July 15, 2014, 08:10:34 PM
Quote from: Caboose on July 15, 2014, 06:27:17 PM
I think the new wings look great !
No they look horrid. Just wings with an AC in the middle. A true lack of creativity.
From the picture they look much like Navy enlisted aircrew wings - maybe the point was to keep from confusing them with pilot's wings? I dunno.
Except they're silver while all Navy wings are gold.
Except for Combat Aircrew and the enlisted Air Warfare specialist.
Quote from: THRAWN on July 15, 2014, 08:27:31 PM
Quote from: PHall on July 15, 2014, 08:12:29 PM
Quote from: SunDog on July 15, 2014, 08:10:34 PM
Quote from: Caboose on July 15, 2014, 06:27:17 PM
I think the new wings look great !
No they look horrid. Just wings with an AC in the middle. A true lack of creativity.
From the picture they look much like Navy enlisted aircrew wings - maybe the point was to keep from confusing them with pilot's wings? I dunno.
Except they're silver while all Navy wings are gold.
Except for Combat Aircrew and the enlisted Air Warfare specialist.
Neither of which are "wings". And isn't the Air Warfare Specialist badge an "qualification badge", i.e. shows your level of training?
Beacuase to call them wings would be saying that the Surface Warfare and the Submarine Warfare badges are also wings. Which they are not.
You do know what wings look like, right? They have feathers.
The Navy Air Warfare Specialist badge does not denote an aeronautical rating. It can (could) be earned by anyone in the right assignment circumstance, regardless of rating, and is not referred to as "wings" by the Navy folks, even though they have wings as a part of the badge.
Quote from: PHall on July 15, 2014, 10:46:21 PM
Neither of which are "wings". And isn't the Air Warfare Specialist badge an "qualification badge", i.e. shows your level of training?
Beacuase to call them wings would be saying that the Surface Warfare and the Submarine Warfare badges are also wings. Which they are not.
don't they jokingly call them "Water Wings"? :)
Quote from: PHall on July 15, 2014, 10:46:21 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on July 15, 2014, 08:27:31 PM
Quote from: PHall on July 15, 2014, 08:12:29 PM
Quote from: SunDog on July 15, 2014, 08:10:34 PM
Quote from: Caboose on July 15, 2014, 06:27:17 PM
I think the new wings look great !
No they look horrid. Just wings with an AC in the middle. A true lack of creativity.
From the picture they look much like Navy enlisted aircrew wings - maybe the point was to keep from confusing them with pilot's wings? I dunno.
Except they're silver while all Navy wings are gold.
Except for Combat Aircrew and the enlisted Air Warfare specialist.
Neither of which are "wings". And isn't the Air Warfare Specialist badge an "qualification badge", i.e. shows your level of training?
Beacuase to call them wings would be saying that the Surface Warfare and the Submarine Warfare badges are also wings. Which they are not.
True...and especially since Combat Aircrew Wings are now strictly a USMC Decoration.
While I'd like to ask the guy who submitted this design why, I do cheer the badge and wonder how it will impact on the future number of observers.
Every dixie cup wearing Cracker Jack looking squid that I have ever known has called them wings. Must be some kind of east coast airedale thing.... ;D
Quote from: bioluminous on July 14, 2014, 07:19:33 PM
(https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/l/t1.0-9/10464114_10152576524632497_6709415896864843981_n.jpg)
Everybody on the plane! We're going to Atlantic City!
Quote from: Panache on July 16, 2014, 04:35:17 AM
Quote from: bioluminous on July 14, 2014, 07:19:33 PM
(https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/l/t1.0-9/10464114_10152576524632497_6709415896864843981_n.jpg)
Everybody on the plane! We're going to Atlantic City!
Ah, crap(s)!
Quote from: Panache on July 16, 2014, 04:35:17 AM
Quote from: bioluminous on July 14, 2014, 07:19:33 PM
(https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/l/t1.0-9/10464114_10152576524632497_6709415896864843981_n.jpg)
Everybody on the plane! We're going to Atlantic City!
At this angle, they look like an advertisement or promo piece from the '50s for AC Delco parts....
They don't look bad but I kinda wish they had the tri-prop/triangle on them like the other CAP Aviation Badges. :-\
My proposal...
(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z165/Xoxotl/CAP/ACDCWings.png)
Quote from: Panache on July 18, 2014, 08:46:16 AM
My proposal...
(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z165/Xoxotl/CAP/ACDCWings.png)
Dirty Deeds...Done Dirt Cheap! One of my favourite bands.
However, if you're going to use them as an example, you should use the insignia of their Australian homeland as a model (half-wings):
(http://militarywings.weebly.com/uploads/2/2/6/8/22688322/5744834_orig.jpg)
Australian Army Aviation Observer half-wing
(http://militaria-sales.com.au/images/RAAF-N-Brevet-1955.jpg)
Navigator half-wing, RAAF
No example from the RAN as they use full wings for all their aircrew.
Again, I know people don't like half-wings, but there is precedent in CAP for their use.