Quote from: Major Carrales on January 12, 2007, 08:26:54 AM

Quote from: Dragoon on January 11, 2007, 07:28:52 PM

CAP Lt Col:: Nothing, really.  I'm just flying some orientation rides for cadets every couple of months. I'm real busy with other things right now."

USAF Lt Col::  "Wow...I'd hate to see your second lieutenants.  That's a nice rack of 18 ribbons, though..."

CAP Lt Col:: "If you think that this rack is impressive, you should see the certificate my school gave me for being TEACHER of the YEAR."

USAF Lt Col::  "Huh...?"

CAP Lt Col:: "Yeah...this is my 19th Year teaching.  I forgot to tell you that I teach 7th Grade Math.  I'm also active in my Lodge and coach my daughter's softball team."

USAF Lt Col::  "Really?"

CAP Lt Col:: "What's more...after a full day of teaching, coaching, taking care of the family issues I get a call from AFRCC to track down an ELT at 3:00 am.  Then I get home just in time to shower, get dressed and teach another day."

USAF Lt Col::  "And your point is?  I don't understand."

CAP Lt Col:: "I didn't think you would."

Point is CAP and USAF are not similar.  A CAP Officer is a volunteer that does quite a lot actually, with little or no resources and much less funding and no pay.  A USAF officer is a professional Airman (Vandenberg's words) that makes the Defense of his nation his work.

Non-Prior Military CAP officers can't fully understand the "USAF lifestyle angle" which is full time Defense of Civilians and career USAF officers can't fully grasp the "CAP Lifestyle angle"(lest, of course, they are in CAP dating back before their USAF service) which is  part time Civil Defense.

You are absolutely right.  Which is why, given the choice, I would only use some sort of CAP - specific grade system.

We ain't real USAF officers, and they ain't real CAP officers.  For al the reasons you mention above.

Let's stop trying to put little "apple" insignia on the oranges.  It's just confusing the grocer.

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on January 12, 2007, 04:23:10 AM

While it may seem that way, I think everybody has got at least one idea on how to improve CAP.  I like, for example, Dragoon's plan of making everybody Flight Officers, but I don't think that idea will last as long as a snowball in Hell with the membership unless the AF throws us a bone, like REAL warrants.

I thought about the idea of yo-yo officers, wearing LTC rank for your command tour and dropping back to F/O afterwards, but that also sounds like a real tough sell.

I would agree that these are both virtually impossible sells given the current governence structure.  I still think they are the right way to go, but my experience with CAP decision making is that folks will protect their right to keep what they have to the death, regardless of whether it's good for the organization.

But I'll keep plugging away. Some day, I expect CAP to undergo some kind of major reset (probably because of some internal crisis).  And that's when folks might actually be ready for a fresh approach.

The warrant officer issue is dead, dead, dead, in the Air Force.  And any idea that it will allow warrants for CAP will also be DOA.  And it all has to do with flying status.  Under DoD regulations a warrant officer MUST be allowed to apply for any pilot training school offered by the members service branch - getting the idea?

Several attempts in the Air Force to bring back warrants for certain highly skilled positions, truly deserving of the benefits of a warrant commisson, have been immediately run through the office shredder at HQ USAF.

Quote from: Dragoon on January 12, 2007, 02:46:56 PM
Let's stop trying to put little "apple" insignia on the oranges.  It's just confusing the grocer.

You can keep the rank structure as it is, it could look and be called like the USAF...but one mustn't think it mean anything to any agency outside of CAP.  USAF included.  To anyone and everyone else it is best a term of address.  No CAP it should refect your professional development.

Love it for what it is, not hate it for what it is not!

Quote from: Chief Chiafos on January 12, 2007, 05:39:08 PM
The warrant officer issue is dead, dead, dead, in the Air Force.  And any idea that it will allow warrants for CAP will also be DOA.  And it all has to do with flying status.  Under DoD regulations a warrant officer MUST be allowed to apply for any pilot training school offered by the members service branch - getting the idea?

Several attempts in the Air Force to bring back warrants for certain highly skilled positions, truly deserving of the benefits of a warrant commisson, have been immediately run through the office shredder at HQ USAF.

Why would it be dead here?  CAP is not the USAF and has totally different needs.   On that issue I will agree with Dragoon.  The DoD does not really apply to this. 

The main issues of this debate are that the traditional Officer Rank system is circumnavigated by current CAP practices that promote new persons of outstanding professional skills to ranks like CAPT and MAJOR when they have little or no CAP experience. 

Example: If a teacher joins CAP "cold turkey" and has a Masters/Doctorate and years of experience they become a field grade officer.  Now, would it not make more sense to promote them to a WO grade...especially if they never intend to rise to command of the unit or go to higher echelon?

CAP needs a rank structure that does several things 1) indicate Professional Development, 2) reward volunteer service (an abstract "paygrade", 3) a possible reflect command structure and 4) reflect the history/tradition of CAP.

The latter being the reason it resembles the USAF/USAAF.  The prior three are the true issue.

Warrant Officer status for those that do not seek to rise above the Squadron Level is a viable alternative to 1st Lt's commanding Captains and Majors.  NCOs who's job it is to "standardize" military bearing at the Squadron Level with an NCO Command structure via group and wing is the only viable way to institute NCOs (especially if it is going to be exclusionary to prior service members).

As for Warrant Officers being a dead issue...one could say the same for CAP NCO's.  Respectfully, the issue of NCOs in CAP is just as DOA since there really is not pressing need for it.

I know this (CAP-NCO) is a subject close to your heart but don't knock a WO program proposal because of it.  I submit that offering a WO program would solve the current flaw people see with a non-prior service person not becoming an NCO.

One should not have NCOs if there is no enlisted Airmen (I mean a rank structure that begins with four chevrons?  It is a bit disingenuous,)  It also stands to reason that it make no sense to have Airmen that can never become an NCO.  Thus, make these would be Airmen some sort of WO?  Voila!!!  Now you just circumnavigated the issue, kept a basic officer corps drive CAP with NCO safeguards (all prior service) and unit level people serving as WOs. 

Neat and pretty...

Comments?

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on January 12, 2007, 02:35:09 PM

What I mean by real warrants is exactly that.  The Air Force does not currently avail itself of the authority of the service secretary to appoint warrant officers.  IF we were to abandon the use of commissioned grades, and at the same time create higher standards for CAP officer membership, one of the alternatives is to award everyone warrant rank.  Backicng that up with an appointment as an Air Force warrant officer would give the USAF direct control of the officer appointment process, expanded supervisory authority over CAP, and at the same time create a vehicle by which serious mission augmentation could take place.

DNall pointed out that the AF does not issue warrants because they would count against their authorized officer totals, but I THINK that consideration would only apply to officers on the payroll.

That makes sense, Kach.....I guess it would make our seniors subect to the UCMJ (which could clog the wheels of military justice for decades to come!)

Quote from: Chief Chiafos on January 12, 2007, 05:39:08 PM
The warrant officer issue is dead, dead, dead, in the Air Force.  And any idea that it will allow warrants for CAP will also be DOA.  And it all has to do with flying status.  Under DoD regulations a warrant officer MUST be allowed to apply for any pilot training school offered by the members service branch - getting the idea?

Several attempts in the Air Force to bring back warrants for certain highly skilled positions, truly deserving of the benefits of a warrant commisson, have been immediately run through the office shredder at HQ USAF.

Chief:  understanding that the WO issue is a non-starter for USAF active/reserve/guard. nevertheless, the DOD requirement that WOs be allowed to apply for any pilot program would have little real impact in CAP.....you've seen enough of our folks (seniors) to realize that only a microscopically small percentage would have the remotest chance of qualifying for any USAF pilot training.

I may have missed something here...

Are y'all under the impression that I am speaking about making CAP personnel USAF Warrant Officer?

I would not support that even for CAP pilots.  I was talking about WOs for Members that want to work at the squadron level only getting such a rank to maintian CAP grade structure.

Quote from: Chief Chiafos on January 12, 2007, 05:39:08 PM
The warrant officer issue is dead, dead, dead, in the Air Force.  And any idea that it will allow warrants for CAP will also be DOA.  And it all has to do with flying status.  Under DoD regulations a warrant officer MUST be allowed to apply for any pilot training school offered by the members service branch - getting the idea?

Several attempts in the Air Force to bring back warrants for certain highly skilled positions, truly deserving of the benefits of a warrant commisson, have been immediately run through the office shredder at HQ USAF.

I do not understand this, Chief.

The Army has LOTS of warrants who are not pilots... criminal investigators, physicians assistants, maintenance types, admin types, all can qualify for warrants in their career field, but since their career field is not aviation, they never get to see the flight line at "Mother Rucker."

And, can't anybody already apply for pilot school?  It doesn't mean that they will accept you.

I'd apply, but I think that they've got their quota of 57-year old pilots.  Besides, I don't wanna go to the Middle East.  The desert air is bad for my complexion.  Can I get right into the Thunderbirds after flight school?  That would be way cool!

Warrant officers are the "third rail" of the USAF, anyone touching it is immediately electrocuted.  Why? It all has to do with commissioned officers, and commissioned officers only, being pilots.  The Air Force says that its NCO supergrades (E-8s & E-9s) can function as well, even better than, WOs.  In some respects this is true.  Yes, CAP is not the Air Force and it would matter little if WOs were allowed in CAP - But... perception is everything, and the Air Force will not tolerate WOs, even in its own auxiliary.  Irrational? Yes.  Can it be changed? No.

Quote from: jayleswo on January 11, 2007, 08:12:26 PM
Chappie, yes you read it correctly. Again, the idea is to tie commissioned officer grades to level of responsibility, not just training, even for professional/chaplain appointments. A squadron Chaplain has less responsibility than a Wing chaplain for example. Not that a chaplain doesn't have a lot of responsibility - they are one of the few, aside from unit commanders physicians/nurses and attorneys that are awarded officer grade in recognition of this. It make sense too in light of the fact that CAP Chaplain's can augment USAF performing chaplain duties.

But there should be a limit to the maximum grade. Maybe it should be Major not Captain, and someone more familiar with the Chaplain program could probably do a better job fleshing this oput than I could. But if you are no longer Wing Chaplain and just serving at the squadron, you'd take a bust to 1st Lt. Interested in your thoughts.

-- John

John, sorry about the delay in the response to your post.  I have busy and I was also awaiting information from one of my USAF Chaplain buddies.  So here are my thoughts....

As others have observed in this thread, CAP and USAF, while they have similar grade/ranks are different in the ways they promote.  CAP promotes on the basis of professional development and time in grade.  The USAF promotes on the basis of professional development and duty performance.  For example in the USAF Chaplain Service (in addition to professional development requirements), 1st Lt. and Captains serve on installation staffs; Majors serve as Senior Program Chaplains, Installation Chaplains, on the Resource Board, instructors at Chaplain Service Institute (Maxwell AFB); Lt. Colonels serve on MajComm Staff, field operating agencies, direct reporting units, or Wing Chaplains; Colonels serve the Joint Chiefs, Office of the Secretary Defense, USAF HQ or a Command Chaplain; the Brig. and Major Generals serve as the Deputy Chief and Chief of USAF Chaplain Service.  As USAF Chaplains promote, there are fewer and fewer duty positions.  Promotion rates drop dramatically.

Currently the CAP does not promote solely on the duty performance, but on professional development requirements and time-in-grade.  It has always irked me that the chaplains in CAP are not required to attain anything higher than Level 1 and completion of the 221A to promote.  They can be promoted for time-in-grade.  It has been my personal philosophy that what is good for the CAP Senior Member is good for the CAP Chaplain as well.  That is why I have pursued all levels of professional/ES training – receiving the GRW as well as the Master rating in 3 specialty tracks and a Mission Chaplain rating. During my years of membership, it has been my privilege to have served at all levels of CAP (except at National...though I have served on the NSC Staff). 

Based on the suggestion offered of tying rank to performance, if my CAP rank were based as that of an active or reserve USAF Chaplain, my CAP career would be over and I could retire as a Lt.Col. and go on my merry way wearing my "been there-done that" t-shirt.  That would be unless a National Commander would select me to serve as the National Chief of CAP Chaplain Service, which would put an eagle on my shoulder.    (Not gonna happen)

But regressing....now that I had attained the rank of Lt. Col. having hypothetically served as a Wing, or Region Chaplain and desiring to return to local squadron or to the Group and  share the wealth of knowledge and experience that I had gained throughout the year, you suggest that I take the "bust to 1st Lt.".  Hmmmmm...don't think so.

Since the CAP is a civilian/volunteer organization, the only recognition received by its members for their investment of time, talent, and money to participate in the various activities/missions as well as pursue their professional development is the certificates, ribbons, and rank.  To tie rank solely to duty performance/assignment would be a disservice – not only to the individual member but to the organization as a whole. 

I have seen many squadrons (including the one I attend) benefit greatly from individuals who have served at the higher levels of CAP return to actively participate.  Having experienced life first-hand at the higher levels of CAP (and reading the war stories/observations in this forum as well as other CAP-related forums), I consider it a relief at times to have returned to the local squadron and serve a newly appointed squadron commander, to teach Moral Leadership to the cadets and Core Values to the Senior Members, to counsel when needed and serve the needs of the local squadron...and all this having had more training and experience than when I first joined. 

Now I realize that with the silver oak leaf on an epaulet and a buck-fifty onecan get a cup of coffee at Denny's...but in the volunteer organization of CAP, the recognition from the rank of Lt. Col.  (based on training and years of service) goes a long way.  Frankly, since the USAF does not often recognize who CAP is, why does it concern me if the hypothetical conversation takes place between a CAP Lt. Col. and a USAF Lt. Col.?   Their mission and our mission are not the same.  However, it is funny to see the looks of airmen on an active AFB, when they see a 73 year old 1st Lt. 

Since the CAP is a civilian/volunteer organization, I agree with others who have posted here, where would be the motivation/incentive for our members to pursue their professional development and accept opportunities for performing duties of higher responsibility if they know that once they attained it, they would be asked to return to square one?  I can't see applying the example of the Wing Chaplain reverting to 1st Lt. upon returning to a local squadron to a Wing/Region Commander or Vice Commander should they desire to serve at the grassroots.   

Membership retention is a major problem in CAP.   Those who have served at higher levels of responsibility in CAP and attain a rank do not have an option of retiring to keep their highest rank earned do those who serve in the military.  While they may love to serve in CAP, to require them to "take the bust to 1st Lt" because they desire to still contribute to the organization by taking a duty assignment within the local squadron once their tenure of Wing/Region/National service is over, in all likelihood would see them leave rather than remain.

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on January 12, 2007, 09:12:25 PM
I'd apply, but I think that they've got their quota of 57-year old pilots. 

33, agre waivers granted less than 1% of the time, accepted by teh board to an even lesser degree - basically no one's ever heard of it happening unless some state is paying for your slot cause you got connections or something.

Quote from: Dragoon on January 12, 2007, 02:46:56 PM

Quote from: Major Carrales on January 12, 2007, 08:26:54 AM
CAP Lt Col:: Nothing, really.  I'm just flying some orientation rides for cadets every couple of months. I'm real busy with other things right now."

USAF Lt Col::  "Wow...I'd hate to see your second lieutenants.  That's a nice rack of 18 ribbons, though..."

CAP Lt Col:: "If you think that this rack is impressive, you should see the certificate my school gave me for being TEACHER of the YEAR."

USAF Lt Col::  "Huh...?"

CAP Lt Col:: "Yeah...this is my 19th Year teaching.  I forgot to tell you that I teach 7th Grade Math.  I'm also active in my Lodge and coach my daughter's softball team."

USAF Lt Col::  "Really?"

CAP Lt Col:: "What's more...after a full day of teaching, coaching, taking care of the family issues I get a call from AFRCC to track down an ELT at 3:00 am.  Then I get home just in time to shower, get dressed and teach another day."

USAF Lt Col::  "And your point is?  I don't understand."

CAP Lt Col:: "I didn't think you would."

Point is CAP and USAF are not similar.  A CAP Officer is a volunteer that does quite a lot actually, with little or no resources and much less funding and no pay.  A USAF officer is a professional Airman (Vandenberg's words) that makes the Defense of his nation his work.

Non-Prior Military CAP officers can't fully understand the "USAF lifestyle angle" which is full time Defense of Civilians and career USAF officers can't fully grasp the "CAP Lifestyle angle"(lest, of course, they are in CAP dating back before their USAF service) which is  part time Civil Defense.

AF LtCol: Oh yeah, I got called away from my son's graduation to drop bombs on Afghan for a couple months last year, otherwise it's a pretty standard 8-5 job. You should see my son in the reserves though. He's a teacher too you know, he teaches in the day, comes home coaches baseball, got a ski boat, great little family. Then a wknd a month he puts on his AF suit & every few years he's called on to use that training.

Lets just think about this a little:
- CAP member spends a monthly average of 13-20hrs, Gurard/Reserve 16-20.

- You want to get promoted in CAP you have to do correspondence course, weekend training sessions (SLS/CLC), or longer in-res programs (RSC/NSC), plus advance in your specialty; Guard/res you do the SAME correspondence courses, wknd training sessions, and/or slightly longer in-res courses, and you have to keep current & advance in your specialty.

- Besides PME, the factors in promotion are duty prfomance & TIG, same for both, but AF puts more emphasis on duty performance/evaluation & has a more structured set of rules to cover TIG.

- Nature of the work? We both work hard to serve our country in our designated specialties. Less than 4% of the AF are rated pilots, and most of them aren't the trigger pulling kind. The ONLY real difference in CAP & in exchange for a paycheck the reseerves can be forced to duty & shipped overseas for months at a time. Everything else is attitude.

We're more alike than we are different. There's a few narrow items from the AF world don't work well in the unique environment of CAP, but if you try to work with them rather than doing everything your own way you tend to find more of the AF-way works in CAP than doesn't, and what doesn't is pretty easy to solve. You'll find a few cases where you can do it the AF-way or some other way just as easy & neiter way is better than the other. In that case it's best to do it the AF way so they understand it & the oversight is as quick & cheap as possible so we can all get back to work.

Dennis, you are making a great case for the USAFR.  Any CAP member that wants to join the USAFR and meets the criteria should do so immediately.

CAP is a different animal with different people and with persons of different ages and circumstance.  Mostly people who want to serve domestically for their community, state and nation.  There is a limit to what they can do as CAP officers and likely aren't in the Reserve for reason.  They serve without pay.

CAP Lt Col "That's good...I do my part for my nation as you do.  But its different work.  God Bless all you do and may He keep you safe.  You may have no respect for my position, but I hold you in the highest regard.   I am what I am...you are what you are.  I cannot be judged on the same scale as you...nor you I."

USAF Lt Col- "So long as you are the best CAP Officer you can be I respect that." 

CAP Lt Col "Thank you, Sir.  I will be just that."

See that's not the thing though. You understand the National Guard's dual-personality.... Well, then there's the reserves, they do the combat mission, CAP does the domestic non-combat mission, SDFs do the state/local mission. That's where we are, between SDF & Reserve. If I'm not mistaken, that's about where you slotted us in your spectrum.

Problem:
We can't stay what we are now, that thing is dying. The missions of CAP are virtually gone in two years & depending on how things work w/ NIMS we may be blocked form working for state & local as well. Plus the budget is gone as soon as we aren't bringing a priority return to the AF. That means the planes, radios, etc are all gone - either taken away or can't be operated or replaced. We got a choice of: 1) doing nothing & being dissolved as obsolete just like SAC after the cold war; 2) be cut off from the AF & their money, try to go it alone w/ no govt affiliation, have to sell planes each year to fund operations for a couple years till they run out & we close down; 3) have everything taken away from us & boot in the rear on the way out the door; or, 4) evolve to do a range of AF missions that make us necessary to them (to the tune of our budget).

Process:
I'm NOT in any way trying to make CAP into the military. I'm looking at the relationship SDFs have with the guard, the relationship CGAux has with the CG, how the guard/res works versus active duty, what similarities each of these have that make their operational function possible, & what are those operational functions, how do those functions compare against the list of things CAP is in a position to help with... from that where do we want to end up. Now look at the systemic problems that hold CAP down. How can those be addressed in a way that aligns & supports where we need to end up to survive.

solution:
What a lot of people have come up with from different directions is what we're talking about here. Professional standards, training, etc... a place somewhere between SDF & reserve, scaled from AF to our level of responsibility, adapted to our unique circumstance of not being paid & having limited time all spread out, and difficult geography to deal with. The problem the AF, FEMA, & the rest of the emergency response community has with us is not that we're idiots per se & has nothing to do with being paid or not. It has to do with not knowing how to do the job we claim to be able to do, not being able to lead or manage sufficient to the responsibilities placed in front of us, and not doing what we're told by those appointed over us. That's the stuff we have to fix, and just saying so doesn't mean anything, this is how you show them it's getting fixed & prove to them when it's there is according to a scale they can read. Otherwise you might as well be speaking martian.

DNall all I have to say is Bravo, Bravo. (Standing and applauding)

I agree with what you are saying.

If we DON"T CHANGE and soon. We won't have CAP at ALL!!

People do you get it now!!!!

I want to thank DNall, Kack, and the others who opened my eyes to what is happening or will happen, soon.

I have to agree, at least in principle, with what's being said here.

There must be change.

Some of the suggestions for change that I've seen are, however, somewhat ... drastic ... and that's why they're getting ripped by others, in my never-to-be-humble opinion.

And for the record ... no, I don't have a proposal for change.  That doesn't mean I can't comment on those I see.

And I will.

Jack

Quote from: ColonelJack on January 15, 2007, 01:51:02 PM
I have to agree, at least in principle, with what's being said here.

There must be change.

Some of the suggestions for change that I've seen are, however, somewhat ... drastic ... and that's why they're getting ripped by others, in my never-to-be-humble opinion.

And for the record ... no, I don't have a proposal for change.  That doesn't mean I can't comment on those I see.

And I will.

Jack

Jack:

I don't see these changes as all that drastic.

We are talking about improving the quality of our officers, so that when a CAP captain or major, or lieutenant colonel speaks at a meeting planning for disasters, he or she has some credibility with the others at the table.  Automatic credibility, not the credibility that is granted to a single person based on having worked together over the years, but credibility based on the rank they wear.

We are talking about increased requirements on our ES folks (forced on us by outside agencies) such that the days of folks having a full "Dance Card" in the form of multiple 101-card qualifications is ending.  The time requirements to maintain proficiency in ONE area will fill up the volunteered time that is given to us.  We have to plan for that.

And, although it hasn't come up very much because we've been talking about other things, we are planning for ways to actually reduce the administrative burden on local unit commanders.  CAP will tell you they have reduced paperwork.  They have.  They made the reporting requirements into electronic formats.  You still have the workload, but it isn't "Paperwork."  That isn't progress.

If the goal is credibility at the table, consider this:

If you show up at a meeting as a CAP Lt Col, at least one guy in the room is going to be thinking "is this guy really deserving of those oak leaves."

So you end up having to justify it by taking Squadron Officer's School and ACSC, which really aren't geared towards training you to be an effective CAP leader.  But you do it so you have "credibility"

Now, suppose you show up as a CAP "Flight Officer".  Some weird grade no one used but CAP (or even no grade at all)

No one is going to be thinking "is this guy really deserving of that grade?"  Any more than you would think that of a Fire Chief.  Because it's clear that the grade is specific to CAP.

The element of competition and "proving your worthiness for your grade" is effectively dead, and now you can just focus on doing your job.

Another means to the same end, but without piling on USAF requirements that don't quite fit.


Do we need better training for our members and leaders?  You bet!  Is the best use of their time to try to train them to be USAF officers?.......I dunno. 

Quote from: DNall on January 15, 2007, 05:26:58 AM
- Nature of the work? We both work hard to serve our country in our designated specialties. Less than 4% of the AF are rated pilots, and most of them aren't the trigger pulling kind. The ONLY real difference in CAP & in exchange for a paycheck the reseerves can be forced to duty & shipped overseas for months at a time. Everything else is attitude.

You really  believe there are no differences in the scope and responsibility of the work?

Remember you've got CAP Lt Col's acting as assistant testing officers in squadrons with 5 active cadets.

Quote from: Dragoon on January 16, 2007, 02:46:39 PM

Quote from: DNall on January 15, 2007, 05:26:58 AM
- Nature of the work? We both work hard to serve our country in our designated specialties. Less than 4% of the AF are rated pilots, and most of them aren't the trigger pulling kind. The ONLY real difference in CAP & in exchange for a paycheck the reseerves can be forced to duty & shipped overseas for months at a time. Everything else is attitude.

You really  believe there are no differences in the scope and responsibility of the work?

Remember you've got CAP Lt Col's acting as assistant testing officers in squadrons with 5 active cadets.

Yes, that situation does happen.  That doesn't mean it shuld be the norm, not does it mean that we should have a LtCol in that duty who is "Being all he can be."

I don't know for sure where you get the references to Squadron Officer School and AF training.  That won't work for us.  We do things different.  The first thing we throw out the door on a mission is unit integrity.  Our units, unlike the USAF, are nothing more than training bases.  We establish a task force organization under an IC for every mission.  We don't rotate units in and out of a mission like the AF, we rotate individuals.  our logistics is completely different as well.  Nobody in the USAF his to buy fuel, then file a 108 form for reimbursement when they bomb places ending in "--stan."

We DO need a tougher, more challenging program of officer training.  DNall wants to take the USAF model of officer training, gut it of all the stuff not pertaining to us, and stuff it with information we can use.  Bake it for 3 hours at 350 degrees, baste frequently, and serve with a pineapple garnish.

I think he's on to something, and we owe it to our organization to follow it up.

(I just made up the part about the garnish.  He never said that.)