Flight Officer revamp -- what if?

[Storm Chaser]

^ ^ You've characterized the "Great Paradox" quite nicely.  NHQ wants CAP to have its cake and eat it too,
grade without responsibility or authority, anyone can have any job they want regardless of their training
or experience, retention and "not sad" is more important then maintaining good order, etc., etc.

What you wind up is the paragraph above.

The simple matter of fact is that you can't fix this untenable situation with piecemeal solutions
that randomly raise the bar on certain people, create unnecessary sub classes, or by changing the
color of the pins.  That's effort to no results.

My Goodness, what a disfunctional organization.  Yet, between all the cake-eating and unqualified people doing any job they want in the midst of an unfixable and untenable situation, it's amazing that we were able to produce any results at all.

Like the 44 lives saved, over 30,000 cadet orientation flights, 1,200 hours flown at the request of the AF during air defense exercises (out of over 95,000 hours flown), 142 disaster relief missions, and over $300,000 in flight and academic scholarships awarded to cadets. ( CAP Report to Congress 2013)

Perhaps all the hard-working members in the units did not get the word about the Great Paradox and stubbornly insisted on producing results despite the incredible disfunction you see at every turn.


Maybe it's just me, but while it is always approptiate to discuss ways to improve our professiona development and, yes, even our uniforms, we should not lose track of the fact that uniforms and PD are just tools to help us get our missions done - saving lives and property, conducting an outstanding cadet program, and educating our members and the public about the aerospace world.

Keep things in perspective.

Well said, Ned.

[supertigerCH]

Bravo!  Thanks for the re-focus Ned.


Although everyone was making a lot of good points as well... I was having a bit of a hard time trying to pull this thread back on topic.   

[Eclipse]

^ ^ You've characterized the "Great Paradox" quite nicely.  NHQ wants CAP to have its cake and eat it too,
grade without responsibility or authority, anyone can have any job they want regardless of their training
or experience, retention and "not sad" is more important then maintaining good order, etc., etc.

What you wind up is the paragraph above.

The simple matter of fact is that you can't fix this untenable situation with piecemeal solutions
that randomly raise the bar on certain people, create unnecessary sub classes, or by changing the
color of the pins.  That's effort to no results.

My Goodness, what a disfunctional organization.  Yet, between all the cake-eating and unqualified people doing any job they want in the midst of an unfixable and untenable situation, it's amazing that we were able to produce any results at all.

Like the 44 lives saved, over 30,000 cadet orientation flights, 1,200 hours flown at the request of the AF during air defense exercises (out of over 95,000 hours flown), 142 disaster relief missions, and over $300,000 in flight and academic scholarships awarded to cadets. ( CAP Report to Congress 2013)

Perhaps all the hard-working members in the units did not get the word about the Great Paradox and stubbornly insisted on producing results despite the incredible disfunction you see at every turn.


Maybe it's just me, but while it is always approptiate to discuss ways to improve our professiona development and, yes, even our uniforms, we should not lose track of the fact that uniforms and PD are just tools to help us get our missions done - saving lives and property, conducting an outstanding cadet program, and educating our members and the public about the aerospace world.

Keep things in perspective.

Yes, let's.

The success are smaller each year, and the trendlines are down, yet instead of accepting and addressing it,
and building on that success, status quo is accepted. Each year a smaller pool of people works harder then the
last to just keep the needle at zero.

Why is it that a fully functional organization seems to be mutually exclusive from the operational successes?
This what CAP could do if these silly baseline issue were properly addressed, closed once and for all, and
never discussed again?

Do Unit CC's get to point to mission success when they fail their SUI?
"Hey, we don't know where the money is, but we sure flew a lot of hours..."

Of course not.  Anecdotal success based as much on happenstance as any plan is something to
be thankful for, but certainly not something to fall back on as validation of "The Plan".

PD and uniforms are "just tools"?  Then why can't they be the best, sharpest, most appropriate
and properly aligned tools available?

I love Harbor Freight, but why shop there when you could have Snap On for the same money?

[MHC5096]

What we would be most likely to be confused with (and this is a stretch) is US CBP insignia.  They use military-style rank insignia (but not titles) and it would not surprise me if they use extant Air Force insignia since the colour of blue is so close as to be almost irrelevant.

One of their lower GS grades wears a warrant officer-type insignia.

Look closely at the shoulder marks of this CBP officer.



I am always tempted to call CBP by their military grade insignia equivalents when I pull into customs: "Mr/Ms," "Lieutenant," "Captain," etc.

And (shock horror gasp! ) they also use metal grade insignia, when they are not military...

The insignia used by CBP-OFO is the USN/USCG style WO1 bar. It is worn by journeyman level (GS-12) CBPOs. The First Lieutenant insignia (CBP Enforcement Officer) and Captain insignia (CBP Canine Supervisor) are also GS-12s. For protocol purposes GS-12 is the equivalent of a Major/Lieutenant Commander.

[MSG Mac]

Im really NOT trying to derail this but I have to ask......  Has CAP determined that there will be specific NCO and officer duties?
[/quote]

An NCO can hold any position inn CAP except Commander.

[Flying Pig]

Im really NOT trying to derail this but I have to ask......  Has CAP determined that there will be specific NCO and officer duties?

An NCO can hold any position inn CAP except Commander.
[/quote]

Wheeeww.... my gosh, then how have we lasted this long?

[Storm Chaser]

I would be in favor of having an enlisted program in CAP; one where new members can join as Airmen and work their way up through the NCO grades. But I do have a problem with the way the current program was implemented. As it stands now, officers and NCO PD is one and the same. NCOs can practically hold any duty position. There are no NCO-specific duties or skills. And other that the grade insignia, there's really no distinction in training or capabilities. How does that benefit CAP?

For an enlisted or NCO program to be effective, we need to define what the role of these NCO will be. We need to develop appropriate training and PD that focuses on that NCO role. And there has to be a way for non-prior military members to join as enlisted and eventually promote to NCO. This program doesn't exist yet. All we have is a new insignia and the ability to promote them. We've even created Senior Enlisted Advisor positions at different levels of the organization that meet no real purpose, as CAP doesn't have a considerable enlisted membership.

Whatever the goal was with this program, it's clear that the cart was put before the horse.

[lordmonar]

All that is being worked on now.  We are just at the end of the first phase.   Part of phase I I is to develop NCO specific roles and PD

[Storm Chaser]

All that is being worked on now.  We are just at the end of the first phase.   Part of phase I I is to develop NCO specific roles and PD

I assumed that much. However, I and many others believe that that should've happened first.

[Flying Pig]

If there was a reason for NCOs in CAP, we wouldn't still be trying to figure out how and where they will fit.  (and yes... although I am no longer an active member, I believe my past dedication to CAP and its mission allows me to use the word "we" )

[Eclipse]

If there was a reason for NCOs in CAP, we wouldn't still be trying to figure out how and where they will fit.

Can't get any more clear then that.

In successful organizations, form follows function.  Only in government does function follow form.

[supertigerCH]

in terms of the new NCO stripes that CAP is starting to use (with propellers on them instead of stars)... i think the rank patched would have looked a bit better if (for Staff Sergeant & Tech Sergeant) the blue above the "CAP"  rose up to a point... rather than just being curved.

however i'm way off topic... and to be honest i'm just glad that we have a new patch that looks nice & actually matches the uniform for a change.

[AlphaSigOU]

in terms of the new NCO stripes that CAP is starting to use (with propellers on them instead of stars)... i think the rank patched would have looked a bit better if (for Staff Sergeant & Tech Sergeant) the blue above the "CAP"  rose up to a point... rather than just being curved.

however i'm way off topic... and to be honest i'm just glad that we have a new patch that looks nice & actually matches the uniform for a change.

The original design of the CAP NCO stripes for SSgt and TSgt had the blue V above the stripes running straight instead of curved as it is today. It would have looked awkward and possibly led to confusion with the senior NCO grades.

[Panache]

I and other have made the point before - trading one irrelevant set of grade insignia and levels
for a different one, doesn't solve the problem, it just rearranges it.

I and others disagree. Cyborg's proposal is complementary to yours. Permanent Warrant Officer grades to signify PD and progression in the senior program and temporary Officer grades based on duty position. The latter would have authority, but not the former.

I still think this is the best route to take for our organization, but I also realize the chance of it happening is practically nil.

[supertigerCH]

"The original design of the CAP NCO stripes for SSgt and TSgt had the blue V above the stripes running straight instead of curved as it is today. It would have looked awkward and possibly led to confusion with the senior NCO grades."


Well yeah... if the blue V was straight instead of curved.  I can see where that would not look so good.  What I was envisioning was sort of a blue V that was still in the shape of the blue on master sergeant stripes (without the top stripes of course).  For me, I don't see how anyone could confuse a rank without stripes on the top with a rank that did have stripes on the top... but yeah who knows?

Any chance of this thread ever getting back to the original topic?  lol...

[PHall]

Having seen the "new" stripes in person at the Vanguard store at the National Conference this past weekend, all I can say is that they look worse in person then they do in pictures.

[lordmonar]

Having worn them......I got to say they actually looked better then I thought.

So as they say.   YMMV.

[AlphaSigOU]

Should have been a little clearer in my last post... the 'diamond' shaped blue field without stripes at top like those for the senior NCO grades would look awkward. My bad.

[supertigerCH]

@ AlphaSig,

Oh okay... I see what you mean now.

This NCO stripe issue... is one of those things that just comes down to personal taste.  What looks good to some people, doesn't to others.  Oh well, it's okay... this is not a critical issue.  Although I think they could have looked better (as I described)... the ones they have now authorized look more than good enough.  They look professional enough to do the job.

I think the majority of CAP members are glad the NCO option exists, even if they themselves don't take part in it.  Just my overall impression.


Anyway, although I expressed that they could be better... I will still have no problem wearing the new stripes.  At least they look good enough.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I just looked at them on VG's site.

Really, I think having the "CAP" on them is a bit redundant and detracts from the overall attractiveness of the insignia.

If it would have simply had the full-colour triangle/prop in the centre...a little more work, maybe, but could not be mistaken for the AF.



Of course, it would likely not meet the criteria for "distinctiveness" for someone viewing a satellite image of a hi-res zoom-in on a CAP NCO's arm...