At the risk of turning this into a uniform thread, which I am not trying to do...

If the AUX ON/OFF mentality were truly a reality, then some things would have to change.


One line of this nameplate would have to change, or we would have to wear grey tape over it unless on an AFAM.


This shield would have to be changed...oh, sorry, it was changed.


This seal would have to be changed.


...and we could only use this bloody awful triangle thingy.

AFI10-2701
Chapter 1heading sentence five.
When performing Air Force-assigned programs and missions, CAP assets function as an auxiliary of the Air Force.

AFI10-2701 1.1
Capabilities. CAP conducts three primary programs: emergency services and civil support, aero-space education, and a cadet program. CAP may conduct emergency service and civil support activities as a corporation or when approved and assigned by the SECAF (or the designee), as an auxiliary of the Air Force.  As a general rule, Aerospace Education and Cadet Program activities are not AFAMs.

AFI10-2701 1.2
CAP status as an Auxiliary of the Air Force.  Title 10, USC 9442 identifies CAP as an auxiliary of the Air Force when carrying out a mission assigned by the SECAF to provide services to any department or agency in any branch of the Federal government, including the Air Force. CAP is deemed to be an instrumentality of the United States while carrying out missions assigned by the Secretary.

AFI10-2701 table 2.1 note 3.
Federal Agencies.  In accordance with Title 10, United States Code 9442 (a), CAP may only support Federal agencies in its status as the Air Force Auxiliary.

http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a3_5/publication/afi10-2701/afi10-2701.pdf

Quote from: CyBorg on May 12, 2014, 08:39:17 PM
At the risk of turning this into a uniform thread, which I am not trying to do...

If the AUX ON/OFF mentality were truly a reality, then some things would have to change.

CyBorg, with all due respect, the regs that 4fHoward just posted, namely:

Title 10, USC 9442 identifies CAP as an auxiliary of the Air Force when carrying out a mission assigned by the SECAF to provide services to any department or agency in any branch of the Federal government, including the Air Force.

seems to completely disagree with your position on this matter. And has CAP been on a trend of removing USAF AUX markings from things, namely, airplanes?
Not trying to be difficult here, but the regs seem really, really clear. Listen, I don't like it either. I feel that we are probably in "AUX ON" status (for lack of a better word) enough of the time to retain our USAF AUX markings on all our stuff. But I'm not going to hide under a rock of ignorance either.

I'm proud to be a CAP member, and even more proud that we are the ONLY agency to ever be used as an AUX to the AF, and only one of a few agencies that gets to really "play inside the military community" without having to actually sell one's soul to the govt thru enlistment/commission. We get a lot of the fun, with only a limited about of BS. Being an auxiliary/nonprofit hybrid gives CAP an amazing ability to have a diversity of things to do.

Quote from: 4fhoward on May 12, 2014, 09:03:12 PM

AFI10-2701 1.2
CAP status as an Auxiliary of the Air Force.  Title 10, USC 9442 identifies CAP as an auxiliary of the Air Force when carrying out a mission assigned by the SECAF to provide services to any department or agency in any branch of the Federal government, including the Air Force. CAP is deemed to be an instrumentality of the United States while carrying out missions assigned by the Secretary.

If you prefer primary sources:

Title 10 US Code § 9442 states in pertinent part:

Status as volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force

(a) VOLUNTEER CIVILIAN AUXILIARY.—The Civil Air Patrol is a volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force when the services of the Civil Air
Patrol are used by any department or agency in any branch of the Federal Government.

The section goes on to state that CAP is only an instrumentality of the Federal government when performing missions assigned by the Secretary of the Air Force.

If there is any additional clarification or contradiction in the USC, I didn't see it. Nor am I lawyer and I have never played one on TV, but I am sitting in a Holiday Inn Express at this very instant!

I was more concerned with the squiggle symbol § I looked all over for that thing.

Quote from: 4fhoward on May 12, 2014, 09:32:55 PM
I was more concerned with the squiggle symbol § I looked all over for that thing.

It's the HIEE (Holiday Inn Express Effect)!

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on May 12, 2014, 09:11:06 PM
And has CAP been on a trend of removing USAF AUX markings from things, namely, airplanes? Not trying to be difficult here, but the regs seem really, really clear. Listen, I don't like it either. I feel that we are probably in "AUX ON" status (for lack of a better word) enough of the time to retain our USAF AUX markings on all our stuff. But I'm not going to hide under a rock of ignorance either.

I'm proud to be a CAP member, and even more proud that we are the ONLY agency to ever be used as an AUX to the AF, and only one of a few agencies that gets to really "play inside the military community" without having to actually sell one's soul and dignity to the govt thru enlistment/commission. We get a lot of the fun, with only a limited about of BS. Being an auxiliary/nonprofit hybrid gives CAP an amazing ability to have a diversity of things to do.

It disgusts me that we have been moving further from the Air Force ever since about the late '90s, and I see no logical point in removing the AF markings from our aircraft or the command shield.  But that's just an old fart like me talking.

I see a real dichotomy bordering on a schizoid mentality within our organisation:

We are very happy to take Air Force funding, but we don't like them "interfering" with what we do.

I would wager that the AF currently values the Air Force section of MARS more than they do us, pertaining to their actual operations.

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on May 12, 2014, 09:11:06 PM
I'm proud to be a CAP member, and even more proud that we are the ONLY agency to ever be used as an AUX to the AF, and only one of a few agencies that gets to really "play inside the military community" without having to actually sell one's soul and dignity to the govt thru enlistment/commission. We get a lot of the fun, with only a limited about of BS. Being an auxiliary/nonprofit hybrid gives CAP an amazing ability to have a diversity of things to do. (emphasis mine)

I assure you that I haven't sold my "soul and dignity" and neither have the millions of members that serve in our military and defend our freedom and way of life.

Quote from: CyBorg on May 12, 2014, 09:39:02 PM
I would wager that the AF currently values the Air Force section of MARS more than they do us, pertaining to their actual operations.

Tomorrow, I'm running a CAP mission in support of the Air Force. I feel that they value us enough. I've had nothing but support from the Air Force while performing CAP duties. In fact, we do many missions in support of the Air Force and they've always been appreciative of what we do.

Quote from: CyBorg on May 12, 2014, 09:39:02 PM
I would wager that the AF currently values the Air Force section of MARS more than they do us, pertaining to their actual operations.

Keep in mind that all MARS sections are now, by law, an auxiliary to their branch of service.

QuoteIt disgusts me that we have been moving further from the Air Force ever since about the late '90s, and I see no logical point in removing the AF markings from our aircraft or the command shield.  But that's just an old fart like me talking.

I agree 100% with you on this matter. But I sometimes wonder if we confuse the Air Force's apparent lack of appreciation with how they actually feel about us.

The Coast Guard doesn't need the CG AUX. They could even get by without their very confused reserve program (well, kinda....). But they appreciate the CG AUX enough to continue funding them. Money = Appreciation. The CG AUX, in return, every year presents a hourly total to the CG and says, "you gave us this much funding, and we gave you this many man-hours. If you give us more, we will give you more." And the Commandant of the CG looks at the 4,000,000 man hours each year and says, "Wow, that small amount of funding was worth it."

This is why I'm shocked CAP doesn't seem to care about people logging hours.

The other issue is that CAP is so small, and the AF is so big. Any active duty support we get is going to small compared to the overall organization of the air force. Whereas the CG AUX has a full time active duty liason at the tune of about 3-4 per state (most are Warrent Officers, and their sole job is managing CG AUX affairs), USAF seems to have centralized the majority of their reps at the national level (instead of the field level). Mission Differences also account for this lack of touchy-feely arrangement between CAP and USAF.

SAR is a big thing in the active duty CG world, so an auxiliary that also does SAR seems normal. Active duty CG is has about as much of a combat mindset as does it's auxiliary. The active duty USAF major missions are not super related to CAP's main missions, so the connection is not nearly as clear in the minds of Active Duty airmen.

Heck, the AD CG recruits are taught some classes in boot camp under CG AUX instructors.


My point is, let's not be "mad" at USAF for neglecting us, per se.......and let's also not be so quick to assume that they don't appreciate us. The day they drastically reduce our funding is the day I will think they really don't appreciate us. CAP Natl HQ, on the otherhand.....now they seem to not appreciate us....

QuoteI assure you that I haven't sold my "soul and dignity" and neither have the millions of members that serve in our military and defend our freedom and way of life.

Chill didn't mean it offensively. My only point was, you sign the contract and wish to remain in, they OWN you. A lot of the stress put on military personnel has NOTHING to do with combat related stuff. The majority of suicides are by people who have never seen combat. I've seen war hardened combat experienced marines join the graveyard shift CG SAR station and not be able to cut it. There is so much red-tape political BS. Being able to handle a gun and combat situation doesn't automatically garuntee you will be prepared to handle all aspects of the military.

People who sign a contract and then have to be babysat and dragged through the military are not "heros" to me, just because they signed paperwork. You can join the military and actually be a burden to your country and the tax payer. When you sign the contact, you are offering to go and serve as a hero. But you're not a hero until you've proved yourself through your attitude and service performance. Anyone can be forcibly drafted and then whine and drag their feet through their military commitment. I respect only those who back up their hero-talk with their hero actions and hero attitudes. Having said this, I've been satisfied to know that the majority of the CG are honest, self-sacrificing people. I'll be charitable and assume the same is true for the other branches.

QuoteI feel that they value us enough. I've had nothing but support from the Air Force while performing CAP duties. In fact, we do many missions in support of the Air Force and they've always been appreciative of what we do.

I agree wholly. They wouldn't fund us Just because.

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on May 12, 2014, 09:11:06 PM

Quote from: CyBorg on May 12, 2014, 08:39:17 PM
At the risk of turning this into a uniform thread, which I am not trying to do...

If the AUX ON/OFF mentality were truly a reality, then some things would have to change.

CyBorg, with all due respect, the regs that 4fHoward just posted, namely:

Title 10, USC 9442 identifies CAP as an auxiliary of the Air Force when carrying out a mission assigned by the SECAF to provide services to any department or agency in any branch of the Federal government, including the Air Force.

SECAF assigned missions.....like ES, CP and AE.   Those are SECAF assigned missions....and we do them 24-7.

A AFAM is a mission symbol.....and tells you who pays for it and when FICA and FTPA come into play.

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on May 12, 2014, 10:28:41 PM
Chill didn't mean it offensively.

Maybe not, but words have meaning and what you said was inappropriate, especially coming from a CAP member.

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on May 12, 2014, 10:28:41 PM
My only point was, you sign the contract and wish to remain in, they OWN you. A lot of the stress put on military personnel has NOTHING to do with combat related stuff. The majority of suicides are by people who have never seen combat. I've seen war hardened combat experienced marines join the graveyard shift CG SAR station and not be able to cut it. There is so much red-tape political BS. Being able to handle a gun and combat situation doesn't automatically garuntee you will be prepared to handle all aspects of the military.

People who sign a contract and then have to be babysat and dragged through the military are not "heros" to me, just because they signed paperwork. You can join the military and actually be a burden to your country and the tax payer. When you sign the contact, you are offering to go and serve as a hero. But you're not a hero until you've proved yourself through your attitude and service performance. Having said this, I've been satisfied to know that the majority of the CG are honest, self-sacrificing people. I'll be charitable and assume the same is true for the other branches.

Unless you've served in the U.S. Military, your opinions about the sacrifices that ALL our service men and women do for our country are inconsequential. That said, you are entitled to them thanks to those same sacrifices, which guarantee your freedom of speech. Have a good day.

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on May 12, 2014, 10:28:41 PM

People who sign a contract and then half to be babysat and dragged through the military are not "heros" to me, just because they signed paperwork. You can join the military an actually be a burden to your country and the tax payer. Having said this, I've been satisfied to know that the majority of the CG are honest, self-sacrificing people. I'll be charitable and assume the same is true for the other branches.

This is the biggest problem I have with people who "didn't realize what they were getting into" when they enlisted around 2003. It was in the news that military members were deserting and such because they were "lied to" by recruiters. That moonbat mom who led protests because her son was "lied to" and died because "Bush lied"...what was her name...anyway, that.

EXCUSE ME, but the whole purpose of the military is to fight! Did you think the military was going to send you to a park to pick flowers? Anyone with half a brain in their head knows that the military is all about fighting. Just because there isn't a conflict going on when you sit down with a recruiter, doesn't mean one won't pop up.

When I decided to enlist back in July 1986, it was at the height of the Cold War. I knew instinctively that I could be sent to Europe to fight against the Warsaw Pact, or I could be one of the (un)lucky ones who managed to sit it out Stateside and get wiped out by a nuclear missile. Or, I could not enlist, sit at home or in a college classroom in Atlanta and still get killed by a nuke. No conflicts were going on at the time, but all the same, I tried, failed (wimped out), and was discharged a month after I got to Fort Jackson for basic. When I look back at it, at the time Saddam Hussein decided to invade Kuwait, it would have been right at the time I would have gotten out. They were freezing leaves and discharges to mobilize more troops in 1990.

All I'm saying is that you have to be some kind of low speed high drag genius to enlist in the military and expect to do your 4 years and not get deployed somewhere. I sure as heck didn't. Yes, it would have paid for college, I would have had an experience to tell my grandkids about someday, I may even have gotten married. But, at the end of the day, when we were handed our M-16s and taught how to use it, reality kicked in. "Hey, I am expected to pick one of these things up and use it someday, even thought I'm not Infantry." Otherwise, they wouldn't bother teaching a file clerk how to shoot, communicate, move.

Anyone who says they joined the military not expecting to fight at some point is deluding themselves.

QuoteThis is the biggest problem I have with people who "didn't realize what they were getting into" when they enlisted around 2003. It was in the news that military members were deserting and such because they were "lied to" by recruiters. That moonbat mom who led protests because her son was "lied to" and died because "Bush lied"...what was her name...anyway, that.

EXCUSE ME, but the whole purpose of the military is to fight! Did you think the military was going to send you to a park to pick flowers? Anyone with half a brain in their head knows that the military is all about fighting. Just because there isn't a conflict going on when you sit down with a recruiter, doesn't mean one won't pop up.

OMG. SO. True.

And the CG is even worse for this (I would imagine), because they are so un-military as certain places, that it lulls junior members into thinking "this is how the whole CG is."

I knew a 18 year E-3 that was always saying, "If I knew the CG was going to make me learn stuff, I'd have just gone to college."

I've heard a 28 year old E-3 say, "I don't want to be a law enforcement officer because I don't feel I can handle a sketchy situation."

To me, "military" should mean two things:

1) a potentionally dangerous work enviroment. Which a lot of the military really isn't, anyways.

2) You're going to be uncomfortable doing hardwork as a patriot for your country.

That fat $31,000 TAKE-HOME paycheck the CG hands out to it's 18 year old E-3's is for something. It's compensation for you being uncomfortable and not having much of a say about it.

Again, my respect for the hardworking military man exceeds my normal respect for a hardworking civilian. But don't sit on my nickel with your entitlement attitude and whine about how you are some great hero if your actions don't reflect your talk. Especially if you've risked litterally nothing. Honor and respect is earned.

QuoteAnyone who says they joined the military not expecting to fight at some point is deluding themselves.

Except the CG. It's not historically happened in many years. But it could.

At an airshow last summer, people thanked me for my service. I explained what we actually were, and used that as a recruiting opportunity. Managed to recruit at least five people that day. I was also asked for autographs and people wanted to take pictures of  their kids with me, which was cute. The other cadets and I felt like celebrities.

Quote from: lordmonar on May 12, 2014, 10:42:18 PM

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on May 12, 2014, 09:11:06 PM

Quote from: CyBorg on May 12, 2014, 08:39:17 PM
At the risk of turning this into a uniform thread, which I am not trying to do...

If the AUX ON/OFF mentality were truly a reality, then some things would have to change.

CyBorg, with all due respect, the regs that 4fHoward just posted, namely:

Title 10, USC 9442 identifies CAP as an auxiliary of the Air Force when carrying out a mission assigned by the SECAF to provide services to any department or agency in any branch of the Federal government, including the Air Force.

SECAF assigned missions.....like ES, CP and AE.   Those are SECAF assigned missions....and we do them 24-7.

A AFAM is a mission symbol.....and tells you who pays for it and when FICA and FTPA come into play.

Nope, ES, CP and AE are Congressionally assigned missions, not assigned by SECAF.

Back to the topic.

I was traveling to a CAP event by air.  I was wearing my service uniform; yes I did have approval, during the flight to and from the event.
On the way to the event a father and son sitting next to me asked me about the uniform and the Air Force.  I explained what the uniform and hat CAP was.  The flight attendant who was a former marine stopped to talk me.  On the connecting flight I sat next to a really nice lady whose husband had been in the Air Force.  She introduced by to a cargo plane I had never heard of.

On the way home, I was standing in line at the TSA check in.  The line was long and winded back and forth.  A TSA agent stepped up to me and asked me to come with him.  He opened a scanner and processed me by myself.  He then thanked me for me service. I was unable to explain about CAP because he moved on. On the connecting flight home I had two different people thank me for my service.  I polity said you're welcome and hurried to catch my flight.


I have been on Peterson Air Force base; I had a lot of Air Force personnel ask me if I was from Canada.  The CAP on the epaulets was confusing people.

I still think the people at my work think I'm active duty Air Force

QuoteAt an airshow last summer, people thanked me for my service. I explained what we actually were, and used that as a recruiting opportunity. Managed to recruit at least five people that day.

First impressions, and well-worded, concise responses can lead to recruitment. Perfect. Love it. 

QuoteI have been on Peterson Air Force base; I had a lot of Air Force personnel ask me if I was from Canada.  The CAP on the epaulets was confusing people.

Canada? Heh.. That's awesome. 

Quote from: lordmonar on May 12, 2014, 10:42:18 PM

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on May 12, 2014, 09:11:06 PM

Quote from: CyBorg on May 12, 2014, 08:39:17 PM
At the risk of turning this into a uniform thread, which I am not trying to do...

If the AUX ON/OFF mentality were truly a reality, then some things would have to change.

CyBorg, with all due respect, the regs that 4fHoward just posted, namely:

Title 10, USC 9442 identifies CAP as an auxiliary of the Air Force when carrying out a mission assigned by the SECAF to provide services to any department or agency in any branch of the Federal government, including the Air Force.

SECAF assigned missions.....like ES, CP and AE.   Those are SECAF assigned missions....and we do them 24-7.

A AFAM is a mission symbol.....and tells you who pays for it and when FICA and FTPA come into play.

Actually, if you were to look at 36 USC § 40302, you would find that the Department of the Air Force support (presumably through the actions of the Secretary) only makes up 1 of 5 (or 6 if you count the two subparts of the first mission separately):

The purposes of the corporation are as follows:
(1) To provide an organization to—
(A) encourage and aid citizens of the United States in contributing their efforts, services, and resources in developing aviation
and in maintaining air supremacy; and
(B) encourage and develop by example the voluntary contribution of private citizens to the public welfare.
(2) To provide aviation education and training especially to its senior and cadet members.
(3) To encourage and foster civil aviation in local communities.
(4) To provide an organization of private citizens with adequate facilities to assist in
meeting local and national emergencies.
(5) To assist the Department of the Air Force in fulfilling its noncombat programs
and missions.

This seems to support Jeff's contention:

Quote from: JeffDG on May 12, 2014, 11:34:01 PM

Quote from: lordmonar on May 12, 2014, 10:42:18 PM

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on May 12, 2014, 09:11:06 PM

Quote from: CyBorg on May 12, 2014, 08:39:17 PM
At the risk of turning this into a uniform thread, which I am not trying to do...

If the AUX ON/OFF mentality were truly a reality, then some things would have to change.

CyBorg, with all due respect, the regs that 4fHoward just posted, namely:

Title 10, USC 9442 identifies CAP as an auxiliary of the Air Force when carrying out a mission assigned by the SECAF to provide services to any department or agency in any branch of the Federal government, including the Air Force.

SECAF assigned missions.....like ES, CP and AE.   Those are SECAF assigned missions....and we do them 24-7.

A AFAM is a mission symbol.....and tells you who pays for it and when FICA and FTPA come into play.

Nope, ES, CP and AE are Congressionally assigned missions, not assigned by SECAF.

Again, there may be (thousands of) legal nuance(s) and/or case law that is beyond a (or my) lay reading of the acts of Congress, but the legislation seems to support the model of limited auxilliary status.

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on May 12, 2014, 10:28:41 PM
The Coast Guard doesn't need the CG AUX.

Well, you seem to be forgetting the huge number of tasks that the CG is assigned to carry out, at least one of which could not be done without the Aux.  I suppose the CG could print up a few boating safety brochures, check a few life jackets every now and again, and do the annual accident report and say that their recreational boating safety obligations are taken care of.  But, they wouldn't have a real boating safety program without the Aux. 

And I'm not saying that there aren't other things that the Aux helps the CG do that couldn't be done about as well without them. 

Boating safety may not be the CG's highest priority, but it is still something they're mandated to do.