Rank insignia on the service coat

[NorCal21]

I'm not talking about the nearly mythical salute troll, but a CAP member going about their business responsibly and wearing the uniform properly.  The wailing and gnashing of teeth on this issue is all out of proportion to the incidence of actual incidents.

What you do you mean "nearly mythical?" Its a well documented problem in CAP.

No. It isn't.

Not even a little.

Yes. It is.

I can pull media reports for you. CAP even posted a letter to the membership about the moron in KS I think it was demanding a Salute by an SP. The letter documented very well the situation.

[NorCal21]

Again, as an outsider looking in, I see part of the problem is that CAP does not work as closely with the USAF as the USCGAux does with the USCG.

Maybe, if I could suggest, that CAP find a way to work closer with the USAF. For example, marry up with local USAFR and AFNG units and provide them support, even if its just moral support by bringing cookies to their drills.

I think the closer you get the USAF and the more value you provide to their existing missions the more accepting of you they will be and the closer alignment will help the uniform issue correct itself.

1) How so?

2) Many organizations associated with the AF do this. 

3) We are already close,  the uniform issue will correct itself when members adhere to the regs(especially uniform wear), ditch any belief in entitlement, and focus on what can be provided to the AF rather than what the AF should provide us.

1. AUXCHEF program is a prime example. Nearly every single Coast Guard installation has CGAUX members with official orders stationed onboard performing duties such as radio operations, lead dentist (at AIRSTA Clearwater), flight crew on C-130's and Jayhawks. Or that the congressionally mandated mission of the Coast Guard for boating safety has been handed over primarily to the CGAUX? The USCG works hand-in-hand training CGAUX members for boat crew operations on their fast boats as well. You would be hard pressed to walk onto any USCG installation and not find an auxiliarist directly augmenting the active duty personnel.

This may happen in CAP, but it would be a great exception rather than anything close to common.

2. He's not talking about many organizations. He's talking about this could become a core mission for CAP; although, again with #1 it would be nice to see the USAF begin working with CAP to get members authorized, certified and trained to directly augment the AF. There was a time when we USED to do that. Only been 60-70 years now.

3. How can you say CAP and the USAF are already close when better than 3/4 of the AF don't know CAP exists or has the complete wrong idea of who we are? I guess you can say CAP is close to the USAF if you're doing so as a matter of perspective versus comparison with other auxiliaries and their parent organizations.

[NorCal21]

Why can't people get it into their thick skulls that we are CIVILIANS who are afforded the PRIVILEGE of wearing a military-style uniform?

The concept of "privilege" is lost on a significant sector of our population where everything is "deserved".

There's also the issue of being handed something with no knowledge of what it represents, and earning something you have a clue about.

Not to mention stewardship of your organization vs. personal desires.

I think you're 100% correct here; although, I wouldn't limit it to CAP. This unfortunately tends to be the way our society acts with most things. Everyone today expects things rather than having to earn them. With the attitude being so prevalent in society its understandable that some of it would show up in CAP.

[abdsp51]

3. How can you say CAP and the USAF are already close when better than 3/4 of the AF don't know CAP exists or has the complete wrong idea of who we are? I guess you can say CAP is close to the USAF if you're doing so as a matter of perspective versus comparison with other auxiliaries and their parent organizations.

How can I say that, ok how about this. Every group commander upon being appointed is deeply briefed on what the organization is and what we do and given a tour of the AFRCC.  And you are telling me that 250,000 people know nothing about us I will chalk it up to most generally don't care.   Also all the units I have been a member of have had a real close working relationship with the AF.  Also I can also say that I have gotten nothing but support in a CAP capacity from the AF simply by asking. 

Sorry but you are off base on your assessment in this regards,  there is a close relationship and if there is not one in your area you need to take the steps to correct it.   

[Eclipse]

Comparing an organization with a limited mission (CGAux), but one which is focused on augmentation, to an organisation with a broad mission (CAP) that is not focused on augmentation and then using that as justification for an assertion that CAP's relationship with the USAF isn't "close" isn't fair or indicates a misunderstanding of the role and mission of both organizations.

The CGAux's sole role and mission is specifically augmentation and extension of the USCG.  CAP has a lot more on their plate then
direct augmentation, and the majority of it is nearly independent of USAF involvement.

[NorCal21]

How can I say that, ok how about this. Every group commander upon being appointed is deeply briefed on what the organization is and what we do and given a tour of the AFRCC.  And you are telling me that 250,000 people know nothing about us I will chalk it up to most generally don't care.   Also all the units I have been a member of have had a real close working relationship with the AF.  Also I can also say that I have gotten nothing but support in a CAP capacity from the AF simply by asking. 

Sorry but you are off base on your assessment in this regards,  there is a close relationship and if there is not one in your area you need to take the steps to correct it.   

Still completely disagree. Without doubt the CGAUX and multiple SDFs have a significantly greater relationship with their parent service. Than again maybe its because those auxiliaries work directly with their parent services as their mission.

CAP does not. CAP isn't even the AF Auxiliary except when under official mission orders. This creates an atmosphere of separation.

I didn't say 3/4 don't know anything. I said it was a mixture of don't know, don't care or are uninformed. Don't misquote me please. And yes, just because a group commander gets a briefing doesn't mean anything for this discussion. OK, so we know a couple hundred to thousand AF personnel know based on that comment. I've met many AF who didn't know what CAP was or didn't know its mission if they had heard of it.

Also, your personal experience of your units having close relationships is your experience. I think one can look through even the threads here on CAPTalk to see that its not a common experience. My experience is that in five years, across five states with six squadrons not one had a relationship with the AF other than what's standard with CAP for inspections and whatnot. When I was a cadet I was with two squadrons over three years in one state and never saw a relationship with the AF.

So you can't tell me that MY assessment is wrong simply because it doesn't jive with your experience. I won't say not one person, but at the very least the vast majority of CAP members on this board would agree that there could be a markedly better relationship with the AF. I mean come on dude... people here are constantly calling for there to be awareness classes or courses of some type for AF personnel. You don't get that because CAP has a close relationship with the AF. Maybe the organization does, but the individual units do not in large numbers.

[NorCal21]

Comparing an organization with a limited mission (CGAux), but one which is focused on augmentation, to an organisation with a broad mission (CAP) that is not focused on augmentation and then using that as justification for an assertion that CAP's relationship with the USAF isn't "close" isn't fair or indicates a misunderstanding of the role and mission of both organizations.

The CGAux's sole role and mission is specifically augmentation and extension of the USCG.  CAP has a lot more on their plate then
direct augmentation, and the majority of it is nearly independent of USAF involvement.

Well you DID notice that I made the caveat that I was speaking relatively versus as a comparison right?

As I stated in my last post, CAP as an organization may be close with the AF but most individual units are not. My comments referring to the relationship between CAP and USAF are from a unit level perspective.

And your last sentence is my point. The majority of CAP work is independent of involvement with the USAF. This is why there's not a very close relationship. I didn't make a comment one way or another as to whether it was good or bad that its not a close relationship. I just said its not close, and that's because much of CAP work isn't with the AF. Saying CAP isn't a direct augmentee while the CGAUX is doesn't disprove my point. It simply explains the reason behind the reality of my point.

[abdsp51]

How can I say that, ok how about this. Every group commander upon being appointed is deeply briefed on what the organization is and what we do and given a tour of the AFRCC.  And you are telling me that 250,000 people know nothing about us I will chalk it up to most generally don't care.   Also all the units I have been a member of have had a real close working relationship with the AF.  Also I can also say that I have gotten nothing but support in a CAP capacity from the AF simply by asking. 

Sorry but you are off base on your assessment in this regards,  there is a close relationship and if there is not one in your area you need to take the steps to correct it.   

Still completely disagree. Without doubt the CGAUX and multiple SDFs have a significantly greater relationship with their parent service. Than again maybe its because those auxiliaries work directly with their parent services as their mission.

CAP does not. CAP isn't even the AF Auxiliary except when under official mission orders. This creates an atmosphere of separation.

I didn't say 3/4 don't know anything. I said it was a mixture of don't know, don't care or are uninformed. Don't misquote me please. And yes, just because a group commander gets a briefing doesn't mean anything for this discussion. OK, so we know a couple hundred to thousand AF personnel know based on that comment. I've met many AF who didn't know what CAP was or didn't know its mission if they had heard of it.

Also, your personal experience of your units having close relationships is your experience. I think one can look through even the threads here on CAPTalk to see that its not a common experience. My experience is that in five years, across five states with six squadrons not one had a relationship with the AF other than what's standard with CAP for inspections and whatnot. When I was a cadet I was with two squadrons over three years in one state and never saw a relationship with the AF. 

So you can't tell me that MY assessment is wrong simply because it doesn't jive with your experience. I won't say not one person, but at the very least the vast majority of CAP members on this board would agree that there could be a markedly better relationship with the AF. I mean come on dude... people here are constantly calling for there to be awareness classes or courses of some type for AF personnel. You don't get that because CAP has a close relationship with the AF. Maybe the organization does, but the individual units do not in large numbers.

There was no misquote.  And yes you did say 3/4 do not know anything do we need to capture said quote and put it in big bold letters for you to comprehend?  And if units do not have a close relationship with the USAF that is on them to do not the AF.  It is not the USAF's job to educate it's members on us, it is our job as the organization. Members who were trying to brow beat it to death were given proper forums to discuss and introduce such ideas.  Face it if you want a better relationship with Ma blue for your unit get off your rear and keyboard and do something about it.  It is upto you and your unit's leadership to forge and maintain the relationship you claim does not exist. 

[Eclipse]

CAP does not. CAP isn't even the AF Auxiliary except when under official mission orders.

Incorrect and another wive's tale.  CAP is always an auxiliary of the USAF.

And seriously, now we're bringing in SDF's to the conversation.

[Eclipse]

I'm not talking about the nearly mythical salute troll, but a CAP member going about their business responsibly and wearing the uniform properly.  The wailing and gnashing of teeth on this issue is all out of proportion to the incidence of actual incidents.

What you do you mean "nearly mythical?" Its a well documented problem in CAP.

No. It isn't.

Not even a little.

Yes. It is.

I can pull media reports for you. CAP even posted a letter to the membership about the moron in KS I think it was demanding a Salute by an SP. The letter documented very well the situation.

Anecdotal reports are not "documented evidence" in the way this infers, which would be a systemic or endemic issue, which it isn't.
Every organization has bozos, including our beloved parent service.  Trying to extrapolate their behavior into trends serves nothing except agendas.

And in at least a few of the cases I've been either involved in or peripherally aware, >all< parties were at fault, because everyone involved decided they were going to "give somebody some learning", to the detriment of all involved.

[Shuman 14]

You'll run the risk of looking dumb like the Indiana Guard Reserve which wears ACUs but with black patrol caps.

I know quite a few IGR members as I live in Indiana. I've seen them in the black patrol cap, it doesn't look dumb at all, in fact it looks very professional and is a simple, yet very clear way to tell a SDF member from an Army Soldier.

BTW, they only wear the Black patrol cap in garrison, when conducting field problems they wear ACU pattern patrol caps or boonie caps.

I'll just chalk it up as a difference of opinion. Black patrol cap is for instructors. There's no need for the difference in garrison.

How long ago was that? In my 23+ plus years of service I've never seen an Army instructor wear anything but the issued patrol cap or beret... except Drill Sergeants on the trail... who of course wear a Campaign Cover. 

[Shuman 14]

3. How can you say CAP and the USAF are already close when better than 3/4 of the AF don't know CAP exists or has the complete wrong idea of who we are? I guess you can say CAP is close to the USAF if you're doing so as a matter of perspective versus comparison with other auxiliaries and their parent organizations.

How can I say that, ok how about this. Every group commander upon being appointed is deeply briefed on what the organization is and what we do and given a tour of the AFRCC.  And you are telling me that 250,000 people know nothing about us I will chalk it up to most generally don't care.   Also all the units I have been a member of have had a real close working relationship with the AF.  Also I can also say that I have gotten nothing but support in a CAP capacity from the AF simply by asking. 

Sorry but you are off base on your assessment in this regards,  there is a close relationship and if there is not one in your area you need to take the steps to correct it.   

If that IS the case, can you tell me how many direct augmentation missions the CAP conducts with the USAF each year? 

[abdsp51]

If that IS the case, can you tell me how many direct augmentation missions the CAP conducts with the USAF each year? 

No I can't that's above my grade, we can be the auxiliary and not directly augment the USAF it happens daily. We do not have to directly augment  the USAF to have a close relationship.  Again the relationship is close and with any relationship can be better.  If a local unit is suffering from a poor relationship they need to look at it find, out why, and fix it and not rely on the USAF to do so. 

[Eclipse]

If that IS the case, can you tell me how many direct augmentation missions the CAP conducts with the USAF each year?

Define augmentation - depending on your vector, every CAP mission and SAREx could be considered augmentation since we are either
performing a direct mission of the parent service or preparing for one.  Then there's the Green Flag Exercises,  Counter Drug missions (another mission of the parent service).

Does augmentation require physically standing next to someone in a similar uniform?

[Tim Medeiros]

CAP isn't even the AF Auxiliary except when under official mission orders.

And US Code disagrees

(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.

[Ned]

If that IS the case, can you tell me how many direct augmentation missions the CAP conducts with the USAF each year? 

Well, if it helps, just last year I was invited to visit Tyndal and was briefed by the 3-star AFNORTH commander on his use of CAP.  He showed me their Air Tasking Order (ATO) for the day, and CAP made up the majority of the sorties.  He said that was typical.

He claimed that we were "critical" to his operations.

But I suppose he could have been wrong about that.

[Shuman 14]

If that IS the case, can you tell me how many direct augmentation missions the CAP conducts with the USAF each year?

Define augmentation - depending on your vector, every CAP mission and SAREx could be considered augmentation since we are either
performing a direct mission of the parent service or preparing for one.  Then there's the Green Flag Exercises,  Counter Drug missions (another mission of the parent service).

Does augmentation require physically standing next to someone in a similar uniform?

No, but how about orders signed by an approving official from the USAF? If the USAF has to approve it before it can be done, then it's clearly an augmentation.

[Eclipse]

No, but how about orders signed by an approving official from the USAF? If the USAF has to approve it before it can be done, then it's clearly an augmentation.

Then just about everything in CAP is "augmentation" - certainly anything that involves money.

[Shuman 14]

If that IS the case, can you tell me how many direct augmentation missions the CAP conducts with the USAF each year? 

Well, if it helps, just last year I was invited to visit Tyndal and was briefed by the 3-star AFNORTH commander on his use of CAP.  He showed me their Air Tasking Order (ATO) for the day, and CAP made up the majority of the sorties.  He said that was typical.

He claimed that we were "critical" to his operations.

But I suppose he could have been wrong about that.

No, that's how it SHOULD work, where every commander understands the role and the value added of the CAP to his/her mission.

So my question really is, in the above situation, is that the norm or the exception.

Based on my limited experience with CAP and on what I've read on this forum and over at Military.com, I sadly must say it appears to be the exception.

I truly hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am. 

[Shuman 14]

No, but how about orders signed by an approving official from the USAF? If the USAF has to approve it before it can be done, then it's clearly an augmentation.

Then just about everything in CAP is "augmentation" - certainly anything that involves money.

Well if that is the case, then I stand corrected.