Gen Vazquez's Statement on CAP Part of USAF Total Force

[AALTIS]

This morning a video of Gen Vazquez was posted on Facebook announcing CAP is now officially part of the USAF's total force.  Any thoughts on how this might change things down the road for CAP?


This is the link to the CAP Facebook page with the video
https://www.facebook.com/capnhq

[Shuman 14]

Hopefully good things on the horizon for CAP.  :clap:

[sarmed1]

Does this mean AUX on?  (Again)..... or is it just fluff. Because this isn't the first time I have heard CAP billed as part of the "total force" concept.

MK

[TheSkyHornet]

 :clap:

I had commented on this just recently, on these forums in fact, that I wanted to see CAP recognized as an official Air Force component, even if the Auxiliary component, not just a civilian contracted link.

Really looking forward to seeing what comes from this. It's a morale-booster, definitely.

[Capt Thompson]

This is a great nod from the Air Force! I doubt it will change much about our normal activities, but finally validates that we are a member of the team and not the forgotten step child.

[CAPs1]

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1984/may-jun/overby.html

Only 30 years in the making.
Note the sources.

[TheSkyHornet]

Perhaps we won't be wearing Air Force "style" uniforms anymore 

[Panache]

Well, we've been officially instructed to put "U.S. Air Force Auxiliary" in our signature blocks now.  I can't imagine that that directive came down without being signed-off by Big Blue first.

[Capt Thompson]

They will be Air Force uniforms while performing AFAM's, and Air Force Style the rest of the time? lol

[CAPs1]

Gen. Vazquez:"...I congratulate the 57,000 volunteers now called 'Airmen...."

Really, now they are airmen?

[Panache]

Gen. Vazquez:"...I congratulate the 57,000 volunteers now called 'Airmen...."

Really, now they are airmen?

"Airman" is a generic term for anybody who's in the Air Force.  Much like anybody who's in the Army is a Soldier, or anybody who's in the Navy is a Sailor.

It's an improvement over "Hey, you, CAP-guy!"

[CAPs1]

 
CAP members are still volunteers

[Panache]

CAP members are still volunteers

True.  Doesn't mean we can't be volunteers and Airmen at the same time.

[winterg]

I served on Active Duty as an Airman and I am very happy that my fellow members of CAP have been titled Airmen as well. We need to make sure we live up to the title.

[TheSkyHornet]

CAP members are still volunteers

True.  Doesn't mean we can't be volunteers and Airmen at the same time.

+1

CAP members are also required to undergo training and currency. We may have a different training requirement than Active Duty Air Force, but as the Air Force Aux, we're supporting their mission through our training standards. We just don't require the combat capabilities and preparedness that they do.

[CAPs1]

In deference to USAF Active Duty Airmen past, present and future, CAP members remain volunteers, not airmen.

There is an abyss between the two. 

[winterg]

In deference to USAF Active Duty Airmen past, present and future, CAP members remain volunteers, not airmen.

There is an abyss between the two.

As a former AD Airman, I don't believe there is an "abyss" between the two. We fall within the AF TO&E. We wear uniforms that link us to the Air Force.  We perform missions given to us by the Air Force.  We are funded by the Air Force. We are a part of the Air Force family and the act of the Air Force being willing to use the moniker of Airmen where we are concerned is a mark of the respect Ma Blue has for us and what we bring to the table.

[TheSkyHornet]

An airman has historically been any member of a U.S. Air Force component since 1947.

CAP is recognized as part of that component. And the Air Force Chief of Staff has just formally stated that CAP members are airmen, serving in support of Air Force missions.

This is nit-picking semantics.

[CAPs1]

Since you will agree that you don't speak for all active duty, retired USAF folks, I'll leave it at that.

Now everyone go out and get the same gear USAF folks have. Cuz, you know, we are airmen.

Congrats on the recognition CAP.

[TheSkyHornet]

Since you will agree that you don't speak for all active duty, retired USAF folks, I'll leave it at that.

Now everyone go out and get the same gear USAF folks have. Cuz, you know, we are airmen.

Congrats on the recognition CAP.

Because every Air Force airman has the same gear as one another...

You possess what is necessary for your job. That's how CAP works. There's no need for a Public Affairs Officer to have a flight suit unless he/she is a CAP Pilot. Just like there's no need for a Navy sailor to have a flight suit if he/she isn't an air crewman.

[CAPs1]

veiled reference to ABUs, etc.
Will simplify, going forward.

Appreciate your effort to do the same, or maybe stating the obvious comes easier to you.
Not worth the time, certainly not for me. Thx
Regards.

[goblin]

Absolutely need ABUs

[winterg]

We should make an updated version of this classic.

[LGM30GMCC]

In deference to USAF Active Duty Airmen past, present and future, CAP members remain volunteers, not airmen.

There is an abyss between the two.

As an Active Duty USAF Capt I appreciate the deference...however....

General Vasquez can tell me as a CAP member that I am a part of the total force. I can have a reaction like yours if I wish...

Brigadier General Paul H. Guemmer of the Holm Center told me as both a CAP member, and USAF officer, that General Welsh signed new doctrine this week (I checked and didn't see it posted yet, but hey) that CAP, as the Auxiliary, is now included in the definition of "Total Force" and are therefore "Airman."

Therefore, my Chief of Staff has directed me as a USAF Captain that CAP members are Airman.

Frankly, it is irrelevant what you think, or deference you think you are giving. Your refusal to refer to CAP members as "Airman" is equivalent to refusing to refer to our AF civilian personnel  as "Airman." Therefore, you are denigrating my fellow Airman by trying to exclude them from the Total Force of which I am a part in two different capacities.

If you wish to show extra deference to the Commissioned and Enlisted members of the Total Force I can understand, but please do so in a manner that is not disrespectful of the rest of the Total Force.

[CAPs1]

Might not have taken this seriously if your rant would've afforded you a drink at the local CAP drinking hole.
But it doesn't. And is as relevant to me as my thoughts are to you.

As I mentioned in PM, best wishes. This is a just cause.
Regards.

[ColonelJack]

In deference to USAF Active Duty Airmen past, present and future, CAP members remain volunteers, not airmen.

There is an abyss between the two.

I'm guessing that this announcement is causing you some significant degree of heartburn, and you'd rather the Air Force and CAP maintain some distance between themselves.

If the word is given by Gen. Vazquez then your reaction is one of two justified ones (the other being "YAY!  We're on the team!").  But this announcement came from Gen. Guemmer, an active-duty AF general officer, and refers to a directive signed by the Chief of Staff and the Secretary of the Air Force (or other highest-level AF official).  That means that it's official.  We in CAP are now considered "Airmen" along with everybody else on the team.  We're not the red-headed stepchild any more.

Having been active-duty AF (albeit a LONG time ago), I accept the accolade with gratitude.  If there is an abyss, it's been greatly reduced.

Jack

[CAPs1]

Dear Col,
Thank you for the thoughtful post. I won't feed the frenzy, if avoidable.
Given the enormity in difference in the mission, risk and sacrifice our Airmen face, it seemed to lessen or dilute their service.

If this recognition will bring about other, more substantive changes, I welcome them and would find them more galvanizing than being called an 'Airman'. But I cannot bring myself to equating service members' commitment, mission and sacrifice with the dedication, albeit valuable, of a volunteer force which is what CAP is until regs are amended.
Regards

[TheSkyHornet]

Seeing as how this seems to have an implication as to your opinion of the abyss between the Air Force and CAP, with CAP being recognized now as a component of the Air Force and CAP members being "Airmen," what is it that you would like to see come of this recognition, aside from it just being sentimental and a formal redress of CAP standing?

Is there something that could be changed in CAP to make the members worthy of holding the "Airman" title, or is that something that should strictly be applied to the Air Force only, as a military title?

I'm being specific to the term as a military reference, as many individuals, including myself, are already considered airmen according to the Federal Aviation Administration, which is obviously not so much linked with the military respect of the word.

[CAPs1]

Thanks.
CAP standing is the same unless CAPR 39-2 has changed. Members are still volunteers.
'Airman' applies to aviators and members of USAF. Not all members of the volunteer organization.

More authoritative and experienced contributors have discussed how formal recognition should/could bring about changes in missions, funding, education opportunities, and access, as I recall. I remain hopeful this is on the horizon.

[TheSkyHornet]

Thanks.
CAP standing is the same unless CAPR 39-2 has changed. Members are still volunteers.
'Airman' applies to aviators and members of USAF. Not all members of the volunteer organization.

I would say at this point we all agree that the Air Force and CAP have discussed this topic, and they have taken their stance on the subject. Whether we agree or don't agree with that stance, they far outrank us on that issue, and our opinions of it won't necessarily stand in the way of their vision for both the military component and volunteer corps of the Air Force mission.

More authoritative and experienced contributors have discussed how formal recognition should/could bring about changes in missions, funding, education opportunities, and access, as I recall. I remain hopeful this is on the horizon.

What's good is that this forum is filled with people from all walks of CAP, from lower-ranking cadets to squadron activities officers to CAP recruiting directors. There's a lot of communication and a lot of ideas/concerns flowing around to be brought to the attention of those with a lot more power in managing CAP overall, especially in setting policies. With some of these individuals on this very forum, it's a way for us lower-level guys/gals to express our desires for CAP as well as our own visions, which they can take home with them to discuss with the higher-ups. We won't always get our way since it's hard for us to see the big picture sometimes, but as I always say, the first step to bringing attention to any subject is addressing it with others, especially those with the ability to take it further than we might be able to on our own.

I'm not sure what we're going to see come from the Welsh-Vazquez discussion and subsequent announcement, but I hope it's for the benefit of CAP across the board in support of the Air Force, as intended.

[CAPs1]

I'm not sure what we're going to see come from the Welsh-Vazquez discussion and subsequent announcement, but I hope it's for the benefit of CAP across the board in support of the Air Force, as intended.

Agreed. Thanks for the chance to clarify.
Regards.

[FW]

It's always good to hear we are part of the "total force".  It's even better when it's an official statement coming from the CSAF.   Please understand, though, it will not change our status as members in any way.  Our service to our communities will remain the same.  Our budget will be the same.  Our uniforms will be a topic of discussion on CAP Talk; as usual.  Recruitment and retention will not change due to this statement.  I, for one, however will smile a little broader when wearing the uniform.  I appreciate the words...

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

+1

[Flying Pig]

I believe the key phrase from the national commander was "although this wont change much in how CAP does business......" 

[dwb]

CAP Talk complains that USAF never shows us any love.

USAF shows us some love.

CAP Talk complains about USAF showing us love.

[DoubleSecret]

It depends how members approach it.  Some people get a title and think about what it brings to them.  Others get a title and think about what it enables them to do for others.

The distilled essence of the whole thing is this:  CAP is here to help Big Blue.  If we're going around with chips on our shoulders about minutiae (salutes and medals and bling and ooh, maybe a CAC, oh my!) during interactions with Big Blue, that's not helping.  If we're bringing quiet professionalism to those interactions, that's helping.  The quiet helps (if you're awesome, you don't have to tell people you're awesome) and the professionalism helps.

Followup:

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/615251/civil-air-patrol-joins-total-force-airmen.aspx

[TheSkyHornet]

It depends how members approach it.  Some people get a title and think about what it brings to them.  Others get a title and think about what it enables them to do for others.

The distilled essence of the whole thing is this:  CAP is here to help Big Blue.  If we're going around with chips on our shoulders about minutiae (salutes and medals and bling and ooh, maybe a CAC, oh my!) during interactions with Big Blue, that's not helping.  If we're bringing quiet professionalism to those interactions, that's helping.  The quiet helps (if you're awesome, you don't have to tell people you're awesome) and the professionalism helps.

Agree completely.

But bear in mind that the recognition does add that extra motivation, which improves retention, making it easier to conduct that mission.
I don't agree with wearing a uniform to get the attention at all. And you do have people in CAP who think they have earned something just because the book says they do. Although, this move by USAF-NCC does add that extra push to keep things being pushed along.

+1 for the use for the word "minutiae" 

[Capt Thompson]

On the one hand, it's business as usual, but with our heads a little higher, and a little more pride in our eyes....

On the other, it's a wakeup call. When you look in the mirror, do you see an American Airman? When you go about your normal day to day routine, do you exemplify the Core Values? Hopefully, with the added sense of pride in CAP, comes an added sense in pride to our members in representing CAP. Maybe this change will cause a few more members to straighten their ribbons, or iron their uniform, and want to be worthy of the title American Airman.

[Flying Pig]

CAP Talk complains that USAF never shows us any love.

USAF shows us some love.

CAP Talk complains about USAF showing us love.

I never understood why CAP members got so uptight about feeling "neglected" by the USAF.   Again, the National CCs comments prove its nothing more than feel good lip service.  I didnt say it, he did.  The man said it himself, "this wont change anything about how CAP operates.  But jump up and down and high five each other if you want.  Ive always thought CAP was and has always been treated pretty well.  Ive held most positions to include Sq. CC, Ive been a CD/Mission Pilot, flew a few hundred hours on CD and other CAP missions, flown missions at LE counter drug courses as a CAP pilot... and never once worried about whether or not the USAF appreciated me.  Sometimes I read comments and wonder how many of you really do get out beyond the uniform discussions. 

[Luis R. Ramos]

What did you expect?

Its the UNIFORMITY of CAPTalk!




Hey, did that count as "Turning this thread into an UNIFORM issue?

[JC004]

We should make an updated version of this classic.
...

National did.  It's their social media banner now:

[goblin]

WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- When conducting missions for the Air Force as the official Air Force auxiliary, the Civil Air Patrol is now included in the Air Force's definition of the total force. CAP has provided 74 years of support to emergency services, aerospace education and cadet programs.

I think we are all ignoring the first part of that. When activated on USAF missions, CAP is part of the total force. Not 24/7/365

[CAPDCCMOM]

Definately a proud day for CAP.  :clap: Maybe, now that we are "Total Force", we can get some more funding from the Air Force. I just hope that people will continue to remember that we are "Appointed Officers", not "Commissioned Officers". It is even more inportatnt that we live up to the best Standards of the Civil Air Patrol. We must wear uniforms properly, and with pride.

I will now get off the soap box and stop preaching to the choir.

[CAPDCCMOM]

Important I meant, Sorry

[Angus]

I'd like to know what we'll get out of this.  Personally I'm hoping for some more missions so we can show how much we're capable of. 

[goblin]

I'd like to know what we'll get out of this.  Personally I'm hoping for some more missions so we can show how much we're capable of.

Such as?

[insertcallsignhere]

Definately a proud day for CAP.  :clap: Maybe, now that we are "Total Force", we can get some more funding from the Air Force. I just hope that people will continue to remember that we are "Appointed Officers", not "Commissioned Officers". It is even more inportatnt that we live up to the best Standards of the Civil Air Patrol. We must wear uniforms properly, and with pride.

I will now get off the soap box and stop preaching to the choir.

Why more funding from the Air Force? What do you want more funding for? I'm not being snarky I'm seriously curious. What don't you have that you want? Congress gave us more money than we asked for this year.

And by the way, the USAF doesn't fund us directly, "CAP receives funding through a cooperative agreement with the USAF. A cooperative agreement is like a grant." FYI.

[lordmonar]

CAP Talk complains that USAF never shows us any love.

USAF shows us some love.

CAP Talk complains about USAF showing us love.

+ 100000000000

This is why CAPTALK is a bad word with a lot of CAP and USAF members!

Geeze guys!   

The next time someone out there asks "Why doesn't the USAF like us"........think about it......."Why don't we like ourselves"? should be the more pertinent question.

The USAF is letting us be on their team.  We may be third string back-up red shirts......but we are good enough to be on the team and earn our sports letter!

Let's be happy.  Let us, instead of complaining and grousing, urge our peers and subordinates to be truly worthy of getting on the team!

END OF RANT.

[winterg]

Just Posted to af.mil

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/615251/civil-air-patrol-joins-total-force-airmen.aspx

[goblin]

Just Posted to af.mil

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/615251/civil-air-patrol-joins-total-force-airmen.aspx

Already referenced on this topic twice.

[winterg]

Just Posted to af.mil
http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/615251/civil-air-patrol-joins-total-force-airmen.aspx

Already referenced on this topic twice.

Looks like I missed a few posts trying to follow on my phone.  Disregard!

[RiverAux]

Although this change in itself won't cause any immediate, massive changes, if this posture is maintained over the long term I think it can be beneficial.  There are some distinct intangible benefits to being included as part of the team -- I think one reason the USCG and their Aux are so close is that the Aux has always been part of the team and viewed as such at all levels, including the top.  You rarely see any sort of general statements made by the CG Commandant about the big picture at the CG that don't at least mention the Aux. 

All that being said, its just a good first step.

Hopefully this will lead to resolutions to some of those minor irritations of CAP/USAF interactions such as base access and perhaps drive some serious talk about other ways that CAP can be a more significant part of the team. 

[RRLE]

There are some distinct intangible benefits to being included as part of the team -- I think one reason the USCG and their Aux are so close is that the Aux has always been part of the team and viewed as such at all levels, including the top.  You rarely see any sort of general statements made by the CG Commandant about the big picture at the CG that don't at least mention the Aux.

The Aux and the USCG are not that close, feel good statements or not. You have posted on Aux forums that the close relationship really only exists between Aux units and USCG units in close proximity and then only if the USCG wants them. The Aux has been included in these same "total force", "one force" statements for more than a decade. It hasn't changed the Aux one iota. In fact, despite claims in this thread that it is a membership boost, Aux membership has been declining for years, despite all the "feel good" statements. Nor has the USCG cash support to the Aux increased. It has actually decreased. The USCG has even tried to dump missions on the Aux without funds and told the Aux to find the funds from private industry.

When I read the opening post and knowing the Aux history, my reaction was BOHICA. But I wish you luck anyway.

[sarmed1]

Based on the above CG vs Aux relationship thought.  In the USAF/CAP arrangement, I would envision this being more to the USAF benefit per say; in so much that it makes the avenue more widely known and perhaps encouraged to improve cost savings by "turfing" needs to the "Aux" vs AD/Res component.  (it was there before, but this makes it more well know as an option)

Like mentioned it likely wont change the day to day CAP operation (maybe a better "line" to the powers that be in USAF co-located CAP units would be the top end benefit)

I dont envision (anytime soon) any change to the oversight structure, uniforms (yeah I know) or any other lean toward a more "similar-ness" to the USAF.

time will tell, but I do look forward to the possibilities

MK

[NIN]

CAP Talk complains that USAF never shows us any love.

USAF shows us some love.

CAP Talk complains about USAF showing us love.

It's it terrible that I want to say I <3 you?

[Cadet CJS]

So I've been doing a lot of searching and reading since I first saw the announcement but I cant find what I'm looking for. What will change? I understand those doing SAR missions for the USAF will now be called Airman. But what beyond that? For the Cadets? And operations at a squadron level?

[Panache]

CAP Talk complains that USAF never shows us any love.

USAF shows us some love.

CAP Talk complains about USAF showing us love.

Heh.  True.  But it's not just on CAP Talk.  There's some serious in-fighting right now on some of the CAP Facebook groups as well over this announcement.

So I've been doing a lot of searching and reading since I first saw the announcement but I cant find what I'm looking for. What will change?

Effectively nothing, at least for now.  This is simply an acknowledgement from the Air Force that we're "part of the team".  Nothing more.  Any changes that will happen will be very subtle, probably more to do with us interacting with the Air Force bureaucracy on the National level which will have little if any impact to the local units.

[RiverAux]

The Aux and the USCG are not that close, feel good statements or not. You have posted on Aux forums that the close relationship really only exists between Aux units and USCG units in close proximity and then only if the USCG wants them. The Aux has been included in these same "total force", "one force" statements for more than a decade.

There is a difference between whether a local CG unit needs or desires Aux support (which can vary wildly) and the general relationship between the CG and the Aux. 

In my own experience at a flotilla more than 2 hours from the nearest CG unit we get much more attention and respect from the Coast Guard than I do in my CAP unit which is in a town with a major Air Force base.  Now, maybe that would be different if the AFB actually had some measure of responsibility for us as does the CG unit. 

[Storm Chaser]

This is based on specific locations and individual experiences. I've seen quite the opposite in my AOR. We have a great relationship with the Air Force and support them in many ways.

The same can be said of the USCGAux. There are units that are active and work closely with the USCG. And there are others that get together to talk about boats and not much else. Unfortunately, where you are and which unit you belong to makes a different in these two organizations.

[THRAWN]

Meh. Nothing new here. Big blue likes us again and we are on the big team...for now...

[RiverAux]

This is based on specific locations and individual experiences. I've seen quite the opposite in my AOR. We have a great relationship with the Air Force and support them in many ways.

I was citing my specific experience, but I think it goes beyond just relationships between specific units.  Since the CG has direct control over almost everything of any significance relating to the Aux they take a much greater interest in and responsibility for the Aux.  It is undeniable that at all levels the CG Aux has a closer relationship with the CG than CAP does with the AF.  A big part of that is structural differences between the two organizations.

Would the CG Aux be as isolated and generally ignored as CAP has been by the AF if they were as independent of AF control as CAP is?  Probably so. 

This total force thing is good in a generic way for CAP and may possibly lead to a few specific improvements in the relationship, I don't think there is a chance of CAP ever getting as close to the AF as the CG Aux is to the CG until such time as the federal laws relating to CAP are changed such that the AF actually totally controls CAP.  I'm not sure that would actually be a good thing since it seems that the real growth in our missions is more likely to come based on our relationships with state and local agencies rather than being closer to the AF. 

[TarRiverRat]

When I was in the CG Auxiliary I had a great relationship with the Active side, but I had to seek out those relationships.  My flotilla did a great service on Lake Gaston, but they seemed to only want to do Lake Gaston and seemed like more of a boating club.  Lot of older gentleman and a few older ladies that were quite satisfied to putter around the lake.  A few of us younger ones went out and trained with the Active and got invited to work on Cutters, aircraft, and did radio watches on bases.  They loved it when we did radio watches.  We would bring chili for everyone and the ones that was supposed to work may be able to get a pass to go home and visit family.  We all wore the same uniform no matter weight or grooming.  Our uniforms and insignia had Auxiliary or the letter "A" on them.  If we were staff officers for the flotilla, our insignia looked like a 2Lt bar with a red "A".  We would wear that with the flotilla and for Auxiliary events.  If we worked at the bases or on the different CG facilities, we would wear the USCG Auxiliary Member pin instead.  I always figured it was so we would not look like officers while walking around base.  I enjoyed my time with the Auxiliary, but I missed CAP and wanted to come back.  My dad was USAAC / USAAF during WWII and I wanted to come back to the Auxiliary of the US Air Force for that reason.  I have mixed feeling about being called an Airmen.  If the General says that is what we are then so be it.  I have no problem being called a Volunteer Airman. 

[ZigZag911]

We should all stop looking for concrete "benefits" from this change in status.

We should also stop being so cynical about it.

Let's look at it for what it appears to be: recognition by the Air Force of CAP's decades of service.

Think of it as an early 75th anniversary gift!

[Panache]

Let's look at it for what it appears to be: recognition by the Air Force of CAP's decades of service.

^^ This.

I've always considered myself a "CAP Airman".  Nothing has changed.

[Eaker Guy]

Let's look at it for what it appears to be: recognition by the Air Force of CAP's decades of service.

^^ This.

I've always considered myself a "CAP Airman".  Nothing has changed.

+1

[PHall]

The "Usual Suspects" here will always find the dark side of the USAF - CAP relationship.
It's all they know how to do...

[radioconsult]

It is my understanding that this will change our CAP ID cards from something that is currently useless for base access at most bases, to a form with the biometric information that will meet the requirements for base access, maybe not a CAC card but something better than what we have now. Actually this was something that was brought up by the General himself  at our annual Wing banquet where he was the keynote speaker.

[Storm Chaser]

That was already possible even without this announcement. The main issue preventing us from having more suitable ID cards is cost.

[abdsp51]

It is my understanding that this will change our CAP ID cards from something that is currently useless for base access at most bases, to a form with the biometric information that will meet the requirements for base access, maybe not a CAC card but something better than what we have now. Actually this was something that was brought up by the General himself  at our annual Wing banquet where he was the keynote speaker.

Base access is really only an issue for folks that don't want to play by the rules.  Simply being CAP does not grant access.  All of the instalations I have been at have been relatively CAP friendly when it came to access.  Problem lies with people who feel simply because a CAPR and an AFI that applies to only a small section of the AF are the key to the city. 

[TarRiverRat]

I have never had any problems getting access to an Air Force Base using my CAP card.  I was always polite and gave them the info they needed and was granted access.  If they told me no this time, I would say thank you and move on.  I would not make an issue of it and they appreciated it.  I only had a few times where the base guard would ask what is CAP and I would explain it.  He would make a phone call to verify and they would grant me access.  I would only go to the base if I really needed something that I was allowed to have from clothing sales, which is very rare now these days due to weight standards for me at this time.

[Fubar]

Maybe more folks in the AF will know about us now, assuming the "Total Force" concept is taught internally.

That seems like a good thing to me.

[Brit_in_CAP]

CAP Talk complains that USAF never shows us any love.

USAF shows us some love.

CAP Talk complains about USAF showing us love.

:clap: :clap:

[TheSkyHornet]

This is based on specific locations and individual experiences. I've seen quite the opposite in my AOR. We have a great relationship with the Air Force and support them in many ways.

The same can be said of the USCGAux. There are units that are active and work closely with the USCG. And there are others that get together to talk about boats and not much else. Unfortunately, where you are and which unit you belong to makes a different in these two organizations.

Very true. Many CAP units and USCG Aux units are on indefinite standby, as in they conduct their own preparedness exercises but really don't get the...opportunity, if that's a correct way of putting it...to go on live missions. Now, in reality, we hope no live mission ever comes up because we don't want to see anyone get hurt, but conducting a live mission is part of that rationale behind of lot of people opining as to whether or not CAP and USCG Aux are always on standby or are mission ready and active.

The subject of the "Airman" status came up at our meeting yesterday, as I'm sure it's something to be discussed at every CAP meeting at least once since the press release. We had a few people who said they favor the comments from Maj Gen Vazquez, and some people who said they do not want to refer to CAP as airmen because we don't get DD 214s after leaving CAP. I think this argument has become too in-depth over semantics.

Are we the United States Air Force Auxiliary or not? Yes, we are. Embrace your standing with the Air Force. Wear the uniform proudly. And carry yourself to represent the CAP Core Values.

[NIN]

I prefer this guy's take:

"We're not Watusi. We're not Spartans. We're Americans. With capital 'A', huh?"

That kind of "capital A"

[TheSkyHornet]

I prefer this guy's take:

"We're not Watusi. We're not Spartans. We're Americans. With capital 'A', huh?"

That kind of "capital A"

[Flying Pig]

As a veteran, should i choose to rejoin in the future I dont see myself ever referring to myself as a CAP Airman.  Im simply a member of Civil Air Patrol.   "Airman" is a title specific to people who are serving in the military.   Is it semantics?  A little bit.  But as a former Marine I believe titles have purposes.  Being a CAP Airman I think goes a bit father than what CAP is doing.  We arent deploying, we come and go at our pleasure.  There is never a time when CAP may have to calculate acceptable losses.  Airman is a term that embodies responsibilities and a lifestyle we do not have to deal with.    Just my thoughts.  Granted, if the USAF wants to call us "Airmen" then its their title to award I guess.

[Capt Thompson]

There is never a time when CAP may have to calculate acceptable losses.  Airman is a term that embodies responsibilities and a lifestyle we do not have to deal with.

65 "Members," including Cadets, lost during WWII while performing missions for the Army Air Corps definitely earned the title "Airmen." A big part of this title the Air Force has bestowed on us is a recognition for every member who has served over the past 74 years, and the sacrifices many have made.

[THRAWN]

"Airman" is a title specific to people who are serving in the military.

Wrong. The FAA issues Airmen certifications, makes frequent reference to "civil airmen" and I'm pretty sure they're not the military...

[Flying Pig]

"Airman" is a title specific to people who are serving in the military.

Wrong. The FAA issues Airmen certifications, makes frequent reference to "civil airmen" and I'm pretty sure they're not the military...

Really?  That the correlation you drew?  Not even the same context of the word.  "Airman" is a title the USAF uses to denote members serving in that branch, like Soldier, Sailor, Marine, Coast Guardsman.  I really thought one would understand I was referring to titles used in the military context. 

[Flying Pig]

There is never a time when CAP may have to calculate acceptable losses.  Airman is a term that embodies responsibilities and a lifestyle we do not have to deal with.

65 "Members," including Cadets, lost during WWII while performing missions for the Army Air Corps definitely earned the title "Airmen." A big part of this title the Air Force has bestowed on us is a recognition for every member who has served over the past 74 years, and the sacrifices many have made.

Then I stand corrected on "never".  Yes, there have been CAP members who hung it out there in combat.  I sorta chuckle when I think about what if CAP was connected to the Marines Corps :clap:.  You could all be Marines.  Interesting to look back in time.   You are all now Airmen, and should I ever rejoin, I imagine I could claim the title as well.

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=14187.0

[Devil Doc]

I am Just a GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE

I am a CAP Member...

I am a FATHER

I am a VETERAN....

I am the UNITED STATES..

[LSThiker]

This thread is a sad example why CAPTalk has many negative comments in the "real" CAP world.

The only opinion that matters in this Airmen vs non-Airmen argument has already spoken on the issue.  He has the authority to make the decision and has already made the decision.

"Civil Air Patrol's increased exposure has a direct impact on attracting youth interest in STEM-based activities which are skills necessary to develop the innovative Airmen our Air Force needs," said Chief of Staff General Mark A. Welsh III. "We proudly welcome the Air Force auxiliary by extending our badge of honor as Airmen."

Whether or not you feel CAP should be called airmen, Airmen, or not airmen is irrelevant. 

[Eaker Guy]

There is never a time when CAP may have to calculate acceptable losses.  Airman is a term that embodies responsibilities and a lifestyle we do not have to deal with.

65 "Members," including Cadets, lost during WWII while performing missions for the Army Air Corps definitely earned the title "Airmen." A big part of this title the Air Force has bestowed on us is a recognition for every member who has served over the past 74 years, and the sacrifices many have made.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[Flying Pig]

So you are comfortable claiming a title based on what others did before you? Well,  Congrats Airman. In doing more research, it appears the USAF pretty much calls anyone and everyone associated with the Air Force an Airman.  I didnt realize it was used as such a generic description.

[LSThiker]

So you are comfortable claiming a title based on what others did before you? Well,  Congrats Airman. In doing more research, it appears the USAF pretty much calls anyone and everyone associated with the Air Force an Airman.  I didnt realize it was used as such a generic description.

My opinion on this is not what you think it is. Probably quite different to what you think my opinion is. Regardless, my opinion is irrelevant. The relevant opinion has already spoken on this issue and made a decision.

Also, his decision was based not only on the things that were done in the past, but also the things that CAP continues to do today and will do in the future.

[winterg]

So you are comfortable claiming a title based on what others did before you? Well,  Congrats Airman. In doing more research, it appears the USAF pretty much calls anyone and everyone associated with the Air Force an Airman.  I didnt realize it was used as such a generic description.

The civilian employees that work for the Air Force are termed Airmen.  I don't know why it would be such a hot topic for CAP to be included.

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/587718/civilian-airmen-serve-their-country-deploy-with-military-teammates.aspx

[THRAWN]

So you are comfortable claiming a title based on what others did before you? Well,  Congrats Airman. In doing more research, it appears the USAF pretty much calls anyone and everyone associated with the Air Force an Airman.  I didnt realize it was used as such a generic description.

The civilian employees that work for the Air Force are termed Airmen.  I don't know why it would be such a hot topic for CAP to be included.

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/587718/civilian-airmen-serve-their-country-deploy-with-military-teammates.aspx

As are the Civilian Marines

https://marinecorpsconceptsandprograms.com/programs/manpower/civilian-marines

[THRAWN]

I am Just a GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE

I am a CAP Member...

I am a FATHER

I am a VETERAN....

I am the UNITED STATES..

Nice but are you a TGE (TYPICAL government employee)?

[Panache]

So you are comfortable claiming a title based on what others did before you? Well,  Congrats Airman.

I'm not "claiming" anything.  This was a decision by the Air Force as to how they would want to refer to me.

[Devil Doc]

I am Just a GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE

I am a CAP Member...

I am a FATHER

I am a VETERAN....

I am the UNITED STATES..

Nice but are you a TGE (TYPICAL government employee)?

Typical Government Employee? As in work hard, understaffed, and do Quality work for the people of the United States?

[TheSkyHornet]

Has this thread really gone on this long and in this direction... 

Now we're sulking over government jobs  :clap: #Derail #TotalForce

[Brit_in_CAP]

Let's look at it for what it appears to be: recognition by the Air Force of CAP's decades of service.

Think of it as an early 75th anniversary gift!

:clap: :clap:

[SarDragon]

[whatevah]

Locked.