Units with no proximate "USAF Culture" Present

[Major Carrales]

We have been talking professional development and image and many people have brought up experiences at USAF installations.  I am well aware of many units that have close ties to our USAF installations and that are situated in areas steeped in USAF tradition due to proximate USAF bases and or other military units.

But...

What if your unit is miles from such installations and exists in a military vacuum lacking even many prior service types.  One has to admit that there is no natural USAF/military culture present.  Thus, all that would be known is the manual and attempts to follow through.

How is that mitigated?  What can be done to mentor those that likely will likely have no mentor?  Done one run the risk of forming a "corporate" squadron?

What say you...

[Dragoon]

The only logical answer is that CAP training needs to cover everything needed to operate.  We cannot depend on having prior service types in a unit, or having a "military culture" in the community.

The fact is, more and more of our members have zero military service.  This became really apparent in the 80s, as the draft-age folks got too old, and CAP suffered what some jokingly call "the invasion of the mommies (or daddies)."  Seniors joined because their kids were in, not because they were trying to get back to their own military roots.

We ain't likely to have a huge standing military or a draft any time soon, so we have to accept the fact that most CAP leaders in the future won't have much military service.

So....CAP needs to spell it out in it's publications.  If you want senior members to salute, you have to teach it - and 10 minutes at Level 1 won't cut it.  You need mandatory classes in rank recognition, wear of the uniform, processing military correspondence, etc, if you want people to do these things.  Don't just assume that someone at the squadron will square everyone away.

And...CAP might also want to analyze what is truly do-able.  Now that half our seniors have no clue how to salute, is it worth our time to teach and enforce this custom, or do like CGAUX and eliminate the custom so we can use that training time for something more operationally minded.

We only have so many hours to train, and it ain't many.  We need to set firm but realistic standards, spell out what is required and then demand folks meet them.  And it may be that the "realistic" part precludes doing some "military" stuff that doesn't end up high on the priorities list.

[Eclipse]

And if its not happening at the unit, Group or wing should intervene to place leaders or advisors in place that can assist.

I know!  How about an NCO core to advise the commanders?!?!?  (sorry)

Seriously, though.  I deal with this issue all the time, and many unit CC's think they are doing their members a favor.  That is until those membersm especially cadets, have to interact with units or activities that have the culture and they are at a disadvantage, to say the least.

I've also found that the "embrace and extend" concept works very well.

Rather than constantly fight with the 1%'ers who will argue with every change, just start working your plan, and eventually they will come around or quit.

I am amazed at how man y members I have who said they could care less about ribbons and grade, who now are getting their bllues together because they see the rest of us doing it.

[carnold1836]

Really there isn't to many places in this country that you can't find at least some kind of military influence with in a 30 mile radius. If it's not a large base like Ft. Riley, KS or Naval Station San Diego, or Camp Lejeun, NC or Randolph AFB, TX, there are plenty of National Guard units all over the place as well as Naval Air Stations not to mention recruiting offices. Contact some of these folks they might not even know you are there. And even if they aren't Air Force, they can still help with some of the military bearing you are looking for.

[DogCollar]

We only have so many hours to train, and it ain't many.  We need to set firm but realistic standards, spell out what is required and then demand folks meet them.  And it may be that the "realistic" part precludes doing some "military" stuff that doesn't end up high on the priorities list.

Demand that folks meet standards and expectations?  Or.....what?  I agree that there is some need to re-educate on the military-like procedures and protocols within the confines of CAP.  However, I also believe that those who come to CAP from non-military backgrounds bring gifts and talents that are needed that enhance the culture of CAP more than detracts from it.  Why does CAP have to be "Either this Or that?"

[mikeylikey]

Call your State Director and see who is an AF reservist in your area.  There may be one! 

[Eclipse]

We only have so many hours to train, and it ain't many.  We need to set firm but realistic standards, spell out what is required and then demand folks meet them.  And it may be that the "realistic" part precludes doing some "military" stuff that doesn't end up high on the priorities list.

Demand that folks meet standards and expectations?  Or.....what?  I agree that there is some need to re-educate on the military-like procedures and protocols within the confines of CAP.  However, I also believe that those who come to CAP from non-military backgrounds bring gifts and talents that are needed that enhance the culture of CAP more than detracts from it.  Why does CAP have to be "Either this Or that?"

Sorry, I understand your point, but do not agree, even a little.

We have rules, standards, and policies, and that includes our paramilitary structure which is in place for a number of good reasons, not the least of which is that during real ES missions, people will tend to follow directions as told versus filtering with their opinion (safety issues aside).

WHAT and WHO we are should be made clear during the initial conversations, people either buy the whole package or they don't.

Yes, that reduces our potential pool of recruits, yes, some peopel with that magical "something" to contribute will be left by the wayside.

But even pre-school t-ball teams have requirements for participation, why shoudl we be any less?

The all-inclusive mentality is one of the problems with CAP.

[davedove]

Demand that folks meet standards and expectations?  Or.....what?  I agree that there is some need to re-educate on the military-like procedures and protocols within the confines of CAP.  However, I also believe that those who come to CAP from non-military backgrounds bring gifts and talents that are needed that enhance the culture of CAP more than detracts from it.  Why does CAP have to be "Either this Or that?"

That's right.  If CAP were meant to be composed of only military folks, prior service would have been a requirement.

In my experience, however, those who do not have military backgrounds want to do the military aspects of CAP service properly, but they just don't know how, and it's not really something you can learn from a book.  You have to have someone demonstrate the proper way to do things.  They want to learn, but it may take them a while because they didn't have it pounded into their head during basic training (I find it amazing.  It's been over 15 years since I've worn the Army uniform, but I still remember most of that stuff.)

As far as the threads question, if the local squadron doesn't have the exposure, it's up to Group and Wing to take up the slack.  It helps, of course, if the members of the Squadron want it.

[flyguy06]

I agree with eclipse. Everyone is not sutied for CAP. Its not a bad thing. it just is what it is. We have standards and we should follow them. If its not for you then that sfine. there is something out there for you.

To the comment made about there not being too many plaaces in the country wher ether eisnt a military base. My Sauqdron meets in the basement of a Baptist church in the inner city. The closets base is probably 20 miles away. But how will that help us?

And to  the comment about the National Guard. Well, they only meet once a month  on the weekends and they are very busy doing theior own thing since their time is limited as well. So, how can an Army Guard unit help us?

[DogCollar]

Eclipse...
ES missions from this time forward will be following the NIMS Incident Command structure.  It is based on the command structure of "civilian" emergency services...NOT the military.  This is done so that a mission that draws upon multiple agencies will have a single command structure.  It is to help communcation and hopefully ensure that the person with the most skill, training, and experience will be in command.  Miliatry structure will have nothing to do with it.  The people "offering" their opinion, even if they are Chariman of the Joint Chief of Staff, or a gung-ho NCO with 25 years experience leading combat troops will be told to get lost by the incident commander, who may be a "volunteer" firefighter with extensive training and experience in Incident Command.  

Yes, we have a military culture to CAP.  I'm not in denial about that.  Yet, we are civilian volunteers who are putting on the uniform and performing the missions.  

You know, this is essentially the identity question that keeps popping up on this board.  The tension between being both the USAF-AUX and a volunteer corporate entity seems to raise the level of anxiety among many of us.  However, I can live with that tension.  It is a major part of modern life, this living with identity questions, and I don' forsee it being resolved in the near future, for better or for worse.

All that philosophizing aside, I suppose we will have to shake cyber-hands and agree to disagree.

[Dragoon]

We only have so many hours to train, and it ain't many.  We need to set firm but realistic standards, spell out what is required and then demand folks meet them.  And it may be that the "realistic" part precludes doing some "military" stuff that doesn't end up high on the priorities list.

Demand that folks meet standards and expectations?  Or.....what?  I agree that there is some need to re-educate on the military-like procedures and protocols within the confines of CAP.  However, I also believe that those who come to CAP from non-military backgrounds bring gifts and talents that are needed that enhance the culture of CAP more than detracts from it.  Why does CAP have to be "Either this Or that?"

Yup.  Demand. Absolutely.

But note the whole quote - first we decide what we will require from members.  We make sure it's reasonable, necessary and fully documented (three things CAP ain't always good at.)  Then we demand compliance, or kick folks out.


After all, if the standards are reasonable  and necessary, then why have members who won't comply?  And if it's fully documented (so everyone can read it), then there's simply no excuse for not complying.  Kick 'em out.

But.....reasonable is the key.  If we are going to salute, for example, we should require it.  If aren't going to require it, we should officially state that is it optional (or not required).  Same thing for drill and ceremonies, pre operations checks on vans, uniform wear, senior member supervision of cadets, etc.

I mixed customs and courtesies with operational stuff for a reason - it all requires training, and we only get so long to train?  Which is more important to CAP - teaching seniors to march or teaching them to inspect the van?  If you only had an hour, which would you do first?


We have to ask these kind of hard questions in order to set truly reasonable standards.  And they simply won't be the same as active duty USAF - we just don't have the training time.

It ain't about being "military"  - it's about accomplishing the mission(s).

But once they are set - a CAP officer should meet those standards or turn in his ID card.

[Hawk200]

Yes, we have a military culture to CAP.  I'm not in denial about that.  Yet, we are civilian volunteers who are putting on the uniform and performing the missions.  

The key there is "putting on the uniform". By putting on the uniform, you agree to be part of its culture. It is the exact same thing whether you get paid for it or not. Military service is irrelevant.

Try volunteering at a volunteer fire department. If you don't follow the guidelines, you won't stay. That includes receiving their training and uniforms.

Some years ago IBM was known for its white collar shirts. They required their personnel to wear them. Do you think they would let you get away with wearing what ever you wanted?

I drive pizza for a living. I've been sent home on an occasion or two to get my nametag. Some people have been sent home to shave. Uniformity. Again.

Some Guard and Reserve personnel are operating under NIMS on certain occasions, when their mission calls for it. By your reasoning, they don't have to wear a uniform, or be concerned with the military structure.

Do you see where it falls apart? It was mentioned on another thread that our uniforms are considered "poser/pretenderism". Now if you're wearing a uniform, and someone asks you how you salute, or march, and your response is "I don't know", how credible do you think you're going to be?

[Eclipse]

I'm not sure how NIMS or not contradicts our paramilitary structure.

We've got two field assets - aircrews & ground teams - both continue to function in a paramilitary command structure regardless of who / how they receive their taskings.

As to the split personality, that doesn't relieve the issue either - whether you choose to wear service dress or a golf shirt, you are still bound by most courtesies, hold appointed grade, and must follow ALL the regs.

The mentality of "I wear a golf shirt and don't want to play Army" is what gets us in trouble because it allows the perception of a split personality to exist.

Misison type, funding, customer, or which uniform you wear doesn't make us any more or less paramilitary.

[Hawk200]

I mixed customs and courtesies with operational stuff for a reason - it all requires training, and we only get so long to train?  Which is more important to CAP - teaching seniors to march or teaching them to inspect the van?  If you only had an hour, which would you do first?

I like this scenario. It emphasizes the priorities at any given time. To me, it points out that maybe we need to break down the training into initial and follow on. You shouldn't be teaching a senior to salute in the field, and they don't need to learn to inspect a van in "OTS".

We have to ask these kind of hard questions in order to set truly reasonable standards.  And they simply won't be the same as active duty USAF - we just don't have the training time.

Agreed. There is certainly basic knowledge that is expected of all officers by the public in general. We need to quantify that, integrate it into our initial training, and teach it properly.

But once they are set - a CAP officer should meet those standards or turn in his ID card.

Interesting point. I don't recall an "oath" of any type when I initially joined, or when I rejoined, but out of curiousity, how many would not have joined if one were required? If there had been oath that you would follow all regulations and such, would you have walked away?

My thoughts and experiences are that if someone is unwilling to follow military structure and all it entails, that person is probably not going be reliable under any kind of structure.

Besides, NIMS isn't used to run our meetings, our cadet program, our pilot proficiency flights, our glider encampments, our USAF familiarization courses, or any internal program. Ditching paramilitary structure because it doesn't comply with NIMS strikes me as throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[MIKE]

What about the Oath of Application on the back of the CAPF 12?

[Hawk200]

What about the Oath of Application on the back of the CAPF 12?

You know, I've read that, but I never really thought of it as a hard oath. It's not like we require a whole lot of compliance with it, and I've never seen anyone decide not to submit an application because of it. To me, it was nothing new, and was stuff I was complying with anyway. I was just wearing a different uniform.

Maybe we should start making people a little more firmly aware of it when they sign up.

[Al Sayre]

Maybe we should stand them (Officers and Cadets) up in front of the meeting, have them raise their right hand and "swear in" before submitting their application, and then have a nice little welcome aboard ceremony after... I don't see anything that says we can't, and it might make more of an impression than: "Here sign this and give me your check"... YMMV

[DNall]

Demand that folks meet standards and expectations?  Or.....what?  I agree that there is some need to re-educate on the military-like procedures and protocols within the confines of CAP.  However, I also believe that those who come to CAP from non-military backgrounds bring gifts and talents that are needed that enhance the culture of CAP more than detracts from it.  Why does CAP have to be "Either this Or that?"

Cause we are this & not that. Doctors bring a great skill to the military when they sign up & the military couldn't function with out them there. Yet, those doctors are militarized to function within the culture. CAP is part of the military culture and must function with, thru, beside, representing, etc the military. If you have a teacher or houswife or accountant that brings excellent outside skill to the table, by all means bring them in, teach tem some absic military skills & how to become part of the military culture. It's not for everyone, but most people are willing to accept the challnge & hardship to gain the recognition & acceptance.

[BillB]

I have never seen a time or place where Seniors need to march. They do need to know how to fall in, salute, and basic facing movements, but that's about the extent. The problem comes up with the multitude of uniforms that seniors can wear. You can have ten seniors at a meeting and no two will be in the same uniform. Perhaps at a Senior Squadron meeting this would be acceptable, but when cadets see seniors in these uniforms, often obsolete phased out golf shirts and brown pants or blue jeans, what image does this present?  Commanders are afraid to correct senior members for fear they will drop from the program. The question is do they contribute enough to offset their ignoring requlations?

[Major Carrales]

I have run into people who's all purpose answer is "its in the regs" and who's first response is to ridicule when the initial person did not follow/interpret it correctly or to his liking.

It's not hard to imagine a well meaning "group" in a somewhat isolated town starting a CAP unit and being sent a "Unit Start Up kit" having little or no help from anyone.  If that Unit is kept in isolation and is fed lines like  "Its all in the regs, Dummy!" how can you expect anything resembling proper procedure.

Or, if this Unit gets off the ground and is not in an area or has personnel versed in USAF customs and military courtesy, how can you expect them to maintain the desired level of those items.

Guard and Reservists are not likely to take an active role in that unit.

[flyguy06]

I for one can tell you that I joined CAP for the military aspect. If it werent for that part, I probably would not be a member. I am not as interested in ES as I am leadership development and flying cadets on orientation flights. So, yes, I wear only the ,ilitary style uniforms. I have never worn the blue shirt/grey panys combo, so when all that stuff about the coporate uniform changes came out, I basically ignored it cause it didnt apply to me.

I agree with posters that have CAP has changed. I remember when I joined CAP in 1984 it was toatally military. Commanders were genarally ex military pilots. Those days do seem to be going away. We do have more leaders that have no military background and are leading CAP in a different direction that when I joined. It may affect my membership, it may not. Thats a decision I have to make. As well as the person who doesnt want to be military. They have to realize that CAP is a auxillary of the USAF and we use the USAF as a model for our organization. That means uniforms, saluting, and traditional military customs and curteousies.

[Hawk200]

I have run into people who's all purpose answer is "its in the regs" and who's first response is to ridicule when the initial person did not follow/interpret it correctly or to his liking.

A far too common action. I always knew why we followed regs, but I never really knew how to explain it. I asked a friend, who was formerly an AETC instructor, how he would explain it. He gave me a lot of insight.

It's not hard to imagine a well meaning "group" in a somewhat isolated town starting a CAP unit and being sent a "Unit Start Up kit" having little or no help from anyone.  If that Unit is kept in isolation and is fed lines like  "Its all in the regs, Dummy!" how can you expect anything resembling proper procedure.

I know you probably stated this as a hypothetical scenario, but I would imagine that it's also a fact, and has happened numerous times.

Or, if this Unit gets off the ground and is not in an area or has personnel versed in USAF customs and military courtesy, how can you expect them to maintain the desired level of those items.

Good point. You can't, not honestly.

Guard and Reservists are not likely to take an active role in that unit.

Agreed, and with all fairness to them, they don't have any responsibility to do so. An assigned Reservist is one thing, but that would be a difficult load to carry.

I'm starting to think that programs similar to the Iowa plan might be the way to go. It's formal training in residence, and would put forth much of what those folks need in a "bubble" environment.

[DNall]

I have never seen a time or place where Seniors need to march. They do need to know how to fall in, salute, and basic facing movements, but that's about the extent. The problem comes up with the multitude of uniforms that seniors can wear. You can have ten seniors at a meeting and no two will be in the same uniform. Perhaps at a Senior Squadron meeting this would be acceptable, but when cadets see seniors in these uniforms, often obsolete phased out golf shirts and brown pants or blue jeans, what image does this present?  Commanders are afraid to correct senior members for fear they will drop from the program. The question is do they contribute enough to offset their ignoring requlations?

March up & get your diploma in front of a hundred cadets, that'd be a good time to make a flank/column turn & not fall on your butt, salute smartly, about face & mach back to your chair, again w/o falling on butt. Anything beyond basic individual drill would be for instructional purposes & mostly for cadet programs officers, they need to know it all.

In this respect, I'm of th onpinion that with several regs, the uniform reg in particular, it should go into excusioating detail to explain exactly what is expected with the assumption you got no prior-service, corrective-culture, or outside help, just what's in the book.

[RiverAux]

The mentality of "I wear a golf shirt and don't want to play Army" is what gets us in trouble because it allows the perception of a split personality to exist.

I think that hit it right on the head.  So long as we allow a civilian "uniform" to be worn we will not be able to maintain any sort of military culture.  How do I know how to address a senior member I've never seen before who is wearing a golf shirt?  Is he a Col or a 2nd Lt?  So, I'll be referring to him by first name more than likely, and it goes on from there.

I don't know that you need to be near a base, but I know it has helped with our cadet program as we have a fairly reliable stream of folks in their 20s from the base helping with the cadet program and that definetely helps keep up standards on that end. 

[SAR-EMT1]

If I may, let me pose a question to the membership:
Does your unit have a Reservist assigned? Currently or in the recent past.
How has that individual made an impact?

[Major Carrales]

If I may, let me pose a question to the membership:
Does your unit have a Reservist assigned? Currently or in the recent past.
How has that individual made an impact?

USAF personnel or Reservists attached to our unit...I don't know what you are talking about.

About ten years ago there was a USAF Major attached to our Group.  I saw him once at a SARex we had but never again.

The last CAP-USAF person I saw was a Lt Col who came down to observe the Texas Wing DSAR graded exercise.

[RiverAux]

As far as I know Reservists are assigned at Wing level and don't have a particular unit they're supposed to be visiting.  They tend to hit a lot of them and fill in where needed as role players for SAREXs, etc.  The State Director sort of uses them as eyes and ears.  But, even then they aren't enough of a part of a unit to be any better in this than the IG does when doing inspections. 

[afgeo4]

We only have so many hours to train, and it ain't many.  We need to set firm but realistic standards, spell out what is required and then demand folks meet them.  And it may be that the "realistic" part precludes doing some "military" stuff that doesn't end up high on the priorities list.

Demand that folks meet standards and expectations?  Or.....what?  I agree that there is some need to re-educate on the military-like procedures and protocols within the confines of CAP.  However, I also believe that those who come to CAP from non-military backgrounds bring gifts and talents that are needed that enhance the culture of CAP more than detracts from it.  Why does CAP have to be "Either this Or that?"

Demand they meet standards and expectations or let them take a walk. Unit commanders are responsible for their members. If there are members who don't meet standards, they aren't allowed to be members. I believe that's what the background checks and regulations regarding age, legal problems and citizenship are for too. Simply put, we cannot afford to keep people who refuse to meet standards and expectations of the Civil Air Patrol. They don't just drag themselves down, they take everyone around them with them.

[afgeo4]

If I may, let me pose a question to the membership:
Does your unit have a Reservist assigned? Currently or in the recent past.
How has that individual made an impact?

USAF personnel or Reservists attached to our unit...I don't know what you are talking about.

About ten years ago there was a USAF Major attached to our Group.  I saw him once at a SARex we had but never again.

The last CAP-USAF person I saw was a Lt Col who came down to observe the Texas Wing DSAR graded exercise.

Ok, I think I know what he's talking about. Officially, the USAFR has an AFSC for enlisted personnel to be attached to squadrons and/or groups of CAP as liaisons. I don't now if it was ever used, but I do know it isn't used any longer. It's still in the regs, but no reservist will be granted the switch. The Air Force just can't afford to lose Airmen and NCOs to CAP and still pay them for drills. These reservists switch to this AFSC and report to CAP-USAF OIC for the Wing.

[DogCollar]

Gee Whiz!!  I knew I was going to start conversation.....I didn't expect all this!!  Good job!

For the record...
(1)  NIMS compliance will determine if CAP will be allowed by FEMA and Homeland Security to undertake ES missions.  I forsee a day when inland SAR will be directed by executive agencies of the US Govt (FAA, HS, etc...) and not USAF.  That being said, I look at the present CAP ES qualifications, and it doesn't yet appear to be NIMS compliant.  I could be wrong about this...but there appears to be essential training missing.

(2)  Please remember, that in my previous posts, I NEVER said that CAP should "ditch" it's military culture or alliance!!  Rather, what I was trying to say is that the tension between corporate CAP and USAF-Aux status doesn't bother me.  I can see a role for both "personalities."

(3)  My mistake was in overreacting to the word demand.  In my line of work "demanding" someone to behave or comply with my expectations is verboten!  I can educate, persuade, cajole.  For overreacting, I apologize.

(4)  I have no problems with the notion that joining CAP there are rules, customs, and expectations that members should follow.  Yet, I think there should be more to a members service!  I think that those who come to CAP from non-military backgrounds should be trained in the customs, traditions and expectations, but they should also be respected for what they bring to the table and are willing to offer...the pilot, the doctor, the nurse, the CPA, the teacher, the mechanic, the lawyer, the house wife who is an expert in multi-tasking, the firefighter, the police officer, etc...all bring skills and (hopefully) will to the table.  By all means, train in military customs and traditions...most will gladly comply (I know that I do), but don't expect us to act like citizen soldiers, when what we want to be is citizen servants.

[Dragoon]

I have run into people who's all purpose answer is "its in the regs" and who's first response is to ridicule when the initial person did not follow/interpret it correctly or to his liking.

It's not hard to imagine a well meaning "group" in a somewhat isolated town starting a CAP unit and being sent a "Unit Start Up kit" having little or no help from anyone.  If that Unit is kept in isolation and is fed lines like  "Its all in the regs, Dummy!" how can you expect anything resembling proper procedure.

Or, if this Unit gets off the ground and is not in an area or has personnel versed in USAF customs and military courtesy, how can you expect them to maintain the desired level of those items.

Guard and Reservists are not likely to take an active role in that unit.

What is the desired level of customs and courtesy?  Is it a realistic level?

GIVEN

1.  Many of our members have zero military background.

2.  At least some CAP units will be started with a bare minimum of trained CAP leaders to guide them.

3.  Group and Wing oversight will be limited because those folks may have to travel long distances to visit units without reimbursement (and in the evenings).  So you can't expect a whole lot of handholding.

4.  It is hard to train certain things without lots and lots of hands on training (see #2 and #3 above)

5.  Even with the proper experienced trainers available, we don't really have a lot of training time available, and we've got a LOT to get done in that time.


....how "military" can we really expect CAP members to be?

We have to set a reasonable standard, based on the #1 to #5 above, or we are doomed to failure.

And it ain't gonna be the USAF active duty standard - that would require a consistent supply of miracles.

Or...we try to could change #1 - #5 , but I doubt it.  They seem be constants in the CAP universe.

What we can do is simplify what we require (fewer uniforms, less mandatory customs and courtesies, less paperwork), and then write much clearer guidance so that even someone with no experience can read it and know what to do.

The reason that "it's all in the regs" doesn't work today is because (1) it's a lie and (2) even when it IS in the regs, it's often written rather poorly.

[DogCollar]

What we can do is simplify what we require (fewer uniforms, less mandatory customs and courtesies, less paperwork), and then write much clearer guidance so that even someone with no experience can read it and know what to do.

The reason that "it's all in the regs" doesn't work today is because (1) it's a lie and (2) even when it IS in the regs, it's often written rather poorly.

I concur with your posting.  Clarity in what presently exists as essential will be more productive than adding momre essentials.

[Eclipse]

What we can do is simplify what we require (fewer uniforms, less mandatory customs and courtesies, less paperwork), and then write much clearer guidance so that even someone with no experience can read it and know what to do.

The reason that "it's all in the regs" doesn't work today is because (1) it's a lie and (2) even when it IS in the regs, it's often written rather poorly.

TOTAL BS. - Change the test so everyone gets an "A".

You don't lower the bar because people won't do what they are supposed to, you suggest alternative service elsewhere.

[Hawk200]

The reason that "it's all in the regs" doesn't work today is because (1) it's a lie and (2) even when it IS in the regs, it's often written rather poorly.

True. It certainly isn't "all in the regs". There are people in my unit that believe its cheating to use blousing straps with BDU's, or still don't believe that you're supposed to wear a hat when outside. The reg really isn't particularly clear.

[Hawk200]

What we can do is simplify what we require (fewer uniforms, less mandatory customs and courtesies, less paperwork), and then write much clearer guidance so that even someone with no experience can read it and know what to do.

The reason that "it's all in the regs" doesn't work today is because (1) it's a lie and (2) even when it IS in the regs, it's often written rather poorly.

TOTAL BS. - Change the test so everyone gets an "A".

You don't lower the bar because people won't do what they are supposed to, you suggest alternative service elsewhere.

How is simplifying the uniforms "changing the test" ? And how is clarifying the regs lowering the bar?

"Gee, that one senior member doesn't know the various placements of insignia on our twenty three different uniforms. They need to find someplace else to go." {/sarcasm}

I think there is somthing seriously wrong with an outlook when making it easier to understand a reg is considered distasteful. Even military regs spell things out, and most of the things not in there you will have learned in boot or tech school.

Oh, yeah, that's right. CAP doesn't do initial training for seniors. (Unless you think the Level 1 course really does teach new CAP members everything they need to know.)

[sandman]

....By all means, train in military customs and traditions...most will gladly comply (I know that I do), but don't expect us to act like citizen soldiers, when what we want to be is citizen servants.

Again I ask, Why Civil Air Patrol? Why become part of a (para) military organization? I salute those that do and thank you for your service, but if not acting like citizen soldiers, what is the purpose?

There are many fine organizations around to satisfy a persons altruistic needs.

Those who don't foster the military culture of CAP will dilute it. CAP will continue on the path it is currently on, entropy takes effect without continued introduction of military like structure, and CAP becomes no more.

[Hawk200]

By all means, train in military customs and traditions...most will gladly comply (I know that I do), but don't expect us to act like citizen soldiers, when what we want to be is citizen servants.

Gets me thinking, the Air Guard refers to itself as "Citizen Airmen", and the Army Guard as "Citizen Soldiers".

Maybe I'm just not thinking ahead enough, but would it really be a stretch to call ourselves "Citizen Airmen"? We'd certainly be more so than the Air Guard, we're for more "citizen" than they are. Or maybe "Volunteer Airmen"?

[DogCollar]

....By all means, train in military customs and traditions...most will gladly comply (I know that I do), but don't expect us to act like citizen soldiers, when what we want to be is citizen servants.

Again I ask, Why Civil Air Patrol? Why become part of a (para) military organization? I salute those that do and thank you for your service, but if not acting like citizen soldiers, what is the purpose?

There are many fine organizations around to satisfy a persons altruistic needs.

Those who don't foster the military culture of CAP will dilute it. CAP will continue on the path it is currently on, entropy takes effect without continued introduction of military like structure, and CAP becomes no more.

A "Soldier" is someone who trains to and actually bears arms for the defense on ones country.  We are not charged to fight but rather to "serve" the nations other needs.  Thus I use the term Citizen Servants.

I beg of you to remember...I have not called for denying, denigrating, degrading or disemboweling the military customs and traditions from CAP!!  They add rather than detract.  I have never said that we should be like the volunteer rescue squad, or the boy scout troop.  I believe that we have an important role to play as the USAF-Aux. 

What I have said and will continue to say, is that CAP has duality to it that I personally can live with.  I would hazard a guess that most who come from non-military backgrounds also are able to live with the tension of dual indentities.

I have already apologized for overreacting to the word demand I will do so again if it moves the discussion along.

[sandman]

....By all means, train in military customs and traditions...most will gladly comply (I know that I do), but don't expect us to act like citizen soldiers, when what we want to be is citizen servants.

Again I ask, Why Civil Air Patrol? Why become part of a (para) military organization? I salute those that do and thank you for your service, but if not acting like citizen soldiers, what is the purpose?

There are many fine organizations around to satisfy a persons altruistic needs.

Those who don't foster the military culture of CAP will dilute it. CAP will continue on the path it is currently on, entropy takes effect without continued introduction of military like structure, and CAP becomes no more.

A "Soldier" is someone who trains to and actually bears arms for the defense on ones country.  We are not charged to fight but rather to "serve" the nations other needs.  Thus I use the term Citizen Servants.

I beg of you to remember...I have not called for denying, denigrating, degrading or disemboweling the military customs and traditions from CAP!!  They add rather than detract.  I have never said that we should be like the volunteer rescue squad, or the boy scout troop.  I believe that we have an important role to play as the USAF-Aux. 

What I have said and will continue to say, is that CAP has duality to it that I personally can live with.  I would hazard a guess that most who come from non-military backgrounds also are able to live with the tension of dual indentities.

I have already apologized for overreacting to the word demand I will do so again if it moves the discussion along.

Fair enough, I agree with your observation and definition . Soldiers are individuals serving in the profession of arms for compensation. Therefore, you are correct to disagree with the term "soldier" as applied to CAP.

Maybe we can work on an appropriate term for the volunteers of CAP. I'm not happy with the term "servant" as it carries a negative modern day connotation.

[Dragoon]

What we can do is simplify what we require (fewer uniforms, less mandatory customs and courtesies, less paperwork), and then write much clearer guidance so that even someone with no experience can read it and know what to do.

The reason that "it's all in the regs" doesn't work today is because (1) it's a lie and (2) even when it IS in the regs, it's often written rather poorly.

TOTAL BS. - Change the test so everyone gets an "A".

You don't lower the bar because people won't do what they are supposed to, you suggest alternative service elsewhere.

That depends on what people are "supposed to do."  We could decide that every pilot is "supposed" to fly 200 hours a year for CAP.  But that would be stupid and we'd lose most of our pilots.

We could decide all our ground team leaders are "supposed" to be EMTs.  But that would be stupid adn we'd lose most of our GTLs.

We could decide that all our CAP officers are "supposed" to meet USAF active duty height and weight standards.  But that would be stupid and we'd lost half the posters on this forum!


There's a big difference between "lowering the bar" and "setting the bar where it needs to be in order to accomplish the mission critical tasks."

Asking too much is as much poor leadership as asking too little.  Standards must be reasonable and attainable.

To demand otherwise is just putting on rose colored glasses and denying reality.

[DogCollar]

How about "Citizen Responders?"  Nah...

"Citizen Flunky's?"...."Citizen Watches?"...."Citizen Kanes?"

Gosh...I really am having trouble thinking of a good phrase.  

[Al Sayre]

Citizens And Payers

[Major Carrales]

"Citizen Auxiliarists"

[sandman]

"Citizen Auxiliarists"

Almost there

How to denote our status as members of the AF family in such a succinct sound bite though?

[sandman]

We have been talking professional development and image and many people have brought up experiences at USAF installations.  I am well aware of many units that have close ties to our USAF installations and that are situated in areas steeped in USAF tradition due to proximate USAF bases and or other military units.

But...

What if your unit is miles from such installations and exists in a military vacuum lacking even many prior service types.  One has to admit that there is no natural USAF/military culture present.  Thus, all that would be known is the manual and attempts to follow through.

How is that mitigated?  What can be done to mentor those that likely will likely have no mentor?  Done one run the risk of forming a "corporate" squadron?

What say you...

Can the lack of military training be mitigated through current technology? If I were to start a new flight or squadron and had no military background or members with military experience, how would I know how to salute properly?

What if the manual was available online or via CD ROM with video files on how to execute military customs and courtesies properly? Views from different angles of the salute, for example, would be properly executed with close ups of hand position etc. performed by an active or reserve drill instructor. This could be expanded to include formations, marching, and how to properly perform an awards ceremony among others.

Most people have some idea of how to "act" military, even if their only perspective is from TV and movies. I would imagine those same people have the general intelligence to adapt from example the methods on how to conduct D&C when presented in video format.

To look at the photos and illustrations in a manual, a 2-D static display, does not give enough information to properly conduct D&C.

[Al Sayre]

Let's get R. Lee Ermy on the job!  The OPSEC breifing was mildly amusing.

[sandman]

Met him a couple of times, Great to see him talk to the troops in the hospital.

[Hawk200]

Can the lack of military training be mitigated through current technology? If I were to start a new flight or squadron and had no military background or members with military experience, how would I know how to salute properly?

What if the manual was available online or via CD ROM with video files on how to execute military customs and courtesies properly? Views from different angles of the salute, for example, would be properly executed with close ups of hand position etc. performed by an active or reserve drill instructor. This could be expanded to include formations, marching, and how to properly perform an awards ceremony among others.

Thinks that make you go: "Hey, that's a great idea!". This would be so easy to do, it's almost funny. Video CD, or DVD (or for the less technologically advanced: VCR) would be an ideal method of training. Might not be the same as having an in-person instructor, but it would teach a lot.

Most people have some idea of how to "act" military, even if their only perspective is from TV and movies. I would imagine those same people have the general intelligence to adapt from example the methods on how to conduct D&C when presented in video format.

I can't stand a lot of "military" movies. Half of them leave me on a slow boil when I see sheer idiocy portrayed as military. A lot of what is shown is absolute ignorance. Incorrect uniforms, salutes that look like a three year old taught them, and just a complete lack of bearing, not to mention how most actors wear uniforms as just regular clothes.

Although, a lot of the people that did learn "military" from movies, might be easily reachable with a video that's properly done.

To look at the photos and illustrations in a manual, a 2-D static display, does not give enough information to properly conduct D&C.

Which goes back to the subject mentioned earlier: It's not "all in the regs".

[SAR-EMT1]

"Citizen Auxiliarists"

Almost there

How to denote our status as members of the AF family in such a succinct sound bite though?

Had a retired O-4 sum it up this way: A CAP Officer / AF Auxiliarist is:
"A highly trained and motivated member of a professional organization staffed by volunteers. "   I used that on another thread too, its somewhat consice but seems a bit long for me. Feel free to chop it down a bit.

[Major Carrales]

"Citizen Auxiliarists"

Almost there

How to denote our status as members of the AF family in such a succinct sound bite though?

Citizen Aviators?  Citizen Supplementarians?  Citizen Air Patrolers?

The only term that seem to sound correct is "Citizen Airmen."  We may have to realize that there is no quick soundbite for what we are.

[Hawk200]

Citizen Aviators?  Citizen Supplementarians?  Citizen Air Patrolers?

The only term that seem to sound correct is "Citizen Airmen."  We may have to realize that there is no quick soundbite for what we are.

Maybe a catch phrase? "Volunteer Airmen performing Missions for America" ?

[Major Carrales]

Citizen Aviators?  Citizen Supplementarians?  Citizen Air Patrolers?

The only term that seem to sound correct is "Citizen Airmen."  We may have to realize that there is no quick soundbite for what we are.

Maybe a catch phrase? "Volunteer Airmen performing Missions for America" ?

How about this...
Civil Air Patrol: Flying High, Saving Lives and Educating The Future

[MIKE]

I wouldn't use Flying High for an organization that gets DDR funds. 

[Major Carrales]

I wouldn't use Flying High for an organization that gets DDR funds. 

Noted...

How about this...

Civil Air Patrol: Saving Lives and Educating The Future

[sandman]

"Citizen Auxiliarists"

Almost there

How to denote our status as members of the AF family in such a succinct sound bite though?

Citizen Aviators?  Citizen Supplementarians?  Citizen Air Patrolers?

The only term that seem to sound correct is "Citizen Airmen."  We may have to realize that there is no quick soundbite for what we are.

Difficult to say....
Perhaps Ted had the answer already: "Civil Airman" or "Civil Airmen"

Ted? Can we usurp the term?

[Hawk200]

Difficult to say....
Perhaps Ted had the answer already: "Civil Airman" or "Civil Airmen"

Ted? Can we usurp the term?

Isn't anybody with a pilots license considered a "civil Airmen"? Not criticizing, just asking.

[sandman]

Maybe:

"Air Auxiliarists"

"Auxiliary Airmen"

"AF Auxmen" (AF as in "aflac"; see Aflac Duck)

"Volunteer Airmen"

...thinking, thinking.......

[Hawk200]

"Auxiliary Airmen"

I kind of like it...

[Major Carrales]

Difficult to say....
Perhaps Ted had the answer already: "Civil Airman" or "Civil Airmen"

Ted? Can we usurp the term?

Isn't anybody with a pilots license considered a "civil Airmen"? Not criticizing, just asking.

I would call such a person a "Civil Aviator,"  he term "Airman" suggests a link to the USAF that can be traced back to the days of Hoyt Vandenberg (originally to set USAF personnel aside from US Army Personnel), if I am not mistaken.  Using the word "Civilian" or "Civil" would modify the term to cover basically what CAP is.  That would also include USCGAux members.

[Hawk200]

I would call such a person a "Civil Aviator,"  he term "Airman" suggests a link to the USAF that can be traced back to the days of Hoyt Vandenberg (originally to set USAF personnel aside from US Army Personnel), if I am not mistaken.  Using the word "Civilian" or "Civil" would modify the term to cover basically what CAP is.  That would also include USCGAux members.

I know the FAA publishes an "Airman's Information Manual". They don't say "Civil" in front of it, but the term "airmen" is not limited to Air Force use.

Type "airman" into the FAA's website search box and see what you get. Link:  http://www.faa.gov/

When applied to military members, "Airman" could be an Air Force member (in general, not counting grade), a rank bracket within the Air Force (Airman Basic thru Senior Airman), or an enlisted rank bracket in the Navy that covers sailors within an aviation related field. Even in the military, "airman" is a pretty broad term.