I think cadets and senior members who hold high leadership positions like Cadet Commander or Squadron Commander; (or even flight sergeant cough cough) should get little badges to display on their blues showing their leadership position, like in most of the armed forces.
Well, squadron commanders do have their own little badge.
(http://www.vanguardmil.com/store/images/CAP8446.jpg)
Texas wing has a 39-1 supplement that allows cadet commanders to wear a forest green cord as a recognition of their important position.
Badges? We don't need no stinking badges! If you have to ask who's in charge, it isn't you!
I spent 8 years in the Infantry and learned that badges and patches only buy you the benefit of the doubt for a very short time. Please.....no more badges.
When my dad was a cadet in the 70's they had patches like that for the fatigues.
Quote from: skippytim on March 13, 2008, 06:17:39 AM
I think cadets and senior members who hold high leadership positions like Cadet Commander or Squadron Commander; (or even flight sergeant cough cough) should get little badges to display on their blues showing their leadership position, like in most of the armed forces.
So what are the requirments for being a Flight Sergeant in CAP?
Quote from: JThemann on March 13, 2008, 11:38:50 AM
Quote from: skippytim on March 13, 2008, 06:17:39 AM
I think cadets and senior members who hold high leadership positions like Cadet Commander or Squadron Commander; (or even flight sergeant cough cough) should get little badges to display on their blues showing their leadership position, like in most of the armed forces.
So what are the requirments for being a Flight Sergeant in CAP?
Essentially it's just being more knowledgable than a basic cadet and less experienced than a Flight Commander. If you have a Cadet who's bright, has leadership skills, is on his/her way to becoming a Cadet Officer, guess who your Flight Sergeant should be? If you have more than one Cadet like that, first count yourself lucky, and second rotate that position around a bit every now and then so your other bright Cadets can gain that experience.
So your looking for the leadership position badges from the 70s to come back?
Quote from: Psicorp on March 13, 2008, 01:04:56 PM
Quote from: JThemann on March 13, 2008, 11:38:50 AM
Quote from: skippytim on March 13, 2008, 06:17:39 AM
I think cadets and senior members who hold high leadership positions like Cadet Commander or Squadron Commander; (or even flight sergeant cough cough) should get little badges to display on their blues showing their leadership position, like in most of the armed forces.
So what are the requirments for being a Flight Sergeant in CAP?
Essentially it's just being more knowledgable than a basic cadet and less experienced than a Flight Commander. If you have a Cadet who's bright, has leadership skills, is on his/her way to becoming a Cadet Officer, guess who your Flight Sergeant should be? If you have more than one Cadet like that, first count yourself lucky, and second rotate that position around a bit every now and then so your other bright Cadets can gain that experience.
So we should give a badge to someone based on.......what?
Quote from: JThemann on March 13, 2008, 01:36:46 PM
Quote from: Psicorp on March 13, 2008, 01:04:56 PM
Quote from: JThemann on March 13, 2008, 11:38:50 AM
Quote from: skippytim on March 13, 2008, 06:17:39 AM
I think cadets and senior members who hold high leadership positions like Cadet Commander or Squadron Commander; (or even flight sergeant cough cough) should get little badges to display on their blues showing their leadership position, like in most of the armed forces.
So what are the requirments for being a Flight Sergeant in CAP?
Essentially it's just being more knowledgable than a basic cadet and less experienced than a Flight Commander. If you have a Cadet who's bright, has leadership skills, is on his/her way to becoming a Cadet Officer, guess who your Flight Sergeant should be? If you have more than one Cadet like that, first count yourself lucky, and second rotate that position around a bit every now and then so your other bright Cadets can gain that experience.
So we should give a badge to someone based on.......what?
Based on your Squadron's policy. If your squadron has (or institutes) a policy that Cadet leadership positions be designated on the body of the Cadet in that position, then your Cadet Flight Sargeant should have a badge. If your squadron doesn't have such a policy (and/or doesn't want one), then there would be no badges to give out. Commander's discretion can be a wonderful thing.
Now that I think about this a little more, WIWAC, at encampment one year we used position indicators. IIRC, NIN was the one who implemented them and IIRC, they were something along these lines.
They were worn 1/2 inch above the nameplate on blues. In BDUs we had color coded hats.
From left to right:
1) Flight Sergeant
2) Flight Commander
3) Squadron Commander
4) XO and DC
5) Cadet Commander
I may be off on the number of stripes and such. I don't remember them adding too much clarification for the basic cadets, by the end of the first day they were supposed to know their chain of command anyway...
Quote from: skippytim on March 13, 2008, 06:17:39 AM
bla bla bla... like in most of the armed forces.
Really???? Like who? The Air force, Navy and Coast Guard have Command Badges, all the branches have special rank insignia for the first sergeant/command master chief/command chief/command sergeant major/etc. The Navy and Coast Guard even have a badge for the CMC saying what echelon they are the CMC for. But I have never seen a badge for LPO, LCPO, Flight Sergeant, Flight Commander, DIVO, Department Head, etc, etc.
More importantly if your cadets don't know that you are the flight sergeant you should be fired.
Exhibit A:
(http://www.cadetstuff.org/images/knowles_03.jpg)
Holy Crap......lets do this (bring back those badges) and we can finally get rid of CAP Rank altogether! yay.......woo-hoo! I love it >:D
Quote from: JThemann on March 13, 2008, 11:38:50 AM
Quote from: skippytim on March 13, 2008, 06:17:39 AM
I think cadets and senior members who hold high leadership positions like Cadet Commander or Squadron Commander; (or even flight sergeant cough cough) should get little badges to display on their blues showing their leadership position, like in most of the armed forces.
So what are the requirments for being a Flight Sergeant in CAP?
Same as squadron commander lol. Willing and able to do the job.
Quote from: skippytim on March 13, 2008, 06:17:39 AM
I think cadets and senior members who hold high leadership positions like Cadet Commander or Squadron Commander; (or even flight sergeant cough cough) should get little badges to display on their blues showing their leadership position, like in most of the armed forces.
This doesn't sound like a practical thing to do, more like a desire for bling. People in your unit should know those in leadership positions. Such badges would indicate these positions outside the unit, in which case it's not really necessary.
I'm imagining that you're a flight sergeant? If you need a badge to show your position, you're not doing your job properly. A badge doesn't give you any more authority, or provide any additional benefit. It would simply be one more thing to buy.
I still have my Color Guard badge in the "big box o' patches and stuff". Probably got tossed in when they were discontinued.
It was more hassle than it was worth, making sure they got turned back in when a person rotated out of position, etc.
This patch seems to have been used by Civil Air Patrol over 20 years ago...
(http://www.incountry.us/cappatches/HELPID/flightcc.jpg)
...But sorry, no solid details on it.
Here's the Texas Wing suppliment stating the Forest Green shoulder cord for cadet commanders...
http://www.incountry.us/cappatches/library/39-1sup_tx030125.pdf (http://www.incountry.us/cappatches/library/39-1sup_tx030125.pdf)
I like it and think it's a good idea. Not like my wing that has a "Quarterly Cadet Drill Down Winner" shoulder cord - ew!
-Ace
Quote from: Flying Pig on March 13, 2008, 08:12:07 AM
Badges? We don't need no stinking badges! If you have to ask who's in charge, it isn't you!
...
Nice. :)
Quote from: mikeylikey on March 13, 2008, 03:07:23 PM
Holy Crap......lets do this (bring back those badges) and we can finally get rid of CAP Rank altogether! yay.......woo-hoo! I love it >:D
Not on your life!
I got to wear those miserable things WIWAC, and they were worse than worthless. We had more of them stuffed in a box with broken pins than we had cadets actually wearing them. I think the pins were made out of pot metal, as fragile as they were. On top of that, they tarnished easily, and the plating lasted through about four polishing evolutions.
No thank you.
Quote from: alamrcn on March 13, 2008, 09:29:21 PM
This patch seems to have been used by Civil Air Patrol over 20 years ago...
(http://www.incountry.us/cappatches/HELPID/flightcc.jpg)
...But sorry, no solid details on it.
I never saw it used anywhere I was ever a member, nor does it appear in any of my copies of CAPM 39-1, so let's take it back before 1964, or call it a local mod subject to a supplement.
^ That looks like something produced for maybe an Encampment??
Temporary badges for encampment make some sense as everyone is working under a brand new command structure and it helps ensure everyone knows who is doing what. But for regular everyday use I don't think so.
Quote from: SarDragon on March 13, 2008, 11:20:05 PM
I never saw it used anywhere I was ever a member, nor does it appear in any of my copies of CAPM 39-1, so let's take it back before 1964, or call it a local mod subject to a supplement.
Ya, could be any or all of the above. I've seen the thing three times now, not including appearances on eBay. And every time it has been in with a group of CAP stuff.
Lee Ragan noted something similar in his 1986 insignia catalog for Squadron Commanders, but don't know if this is realted.
-Ace
This isn't the Army, we don't have leadership badges/indicators. Only the CC badge (and cord for C/CC in this wg), nothing else is appropriate.
Your cadet commander should be the squadron representative to the wing CAC anyway and is thus eligible for the cord and ribbon.
Quote from: nesagsar on March 14, 2008, 06:58:28 PM
Your cadet commander should be the squadron representative to the wing CAC anyway and is thus eligible for the cord and ribbon.
uhh, no. Nothing says you have to have a C/CC at all. If you do, nothing says they have to be the CAC rep. CAC is more like a 1Sgt system to advocate for cadets around the side of the adult chain of command. You put a person there that can make the meetings & is capable of that advocacy. We try to make sure our C/CC or 1Sgt are either the primary or alt rep, but we're not going to be tied down if they can't do it. Also, my wing has Gps, big ones. Our reps are to the Gp level, the Gps then have A rep each to the Wg level.
Quote from: DNall on March 14, 2008, 06:51:14 PM
This isn't the Army, we don't have leadership badges/indicators. Only the CC badge (and cord for C/CC in this wg), nothing else is appropriate.
The Army doesn't have leadership badges. About the only soldier you'll see in a unit that has something specific is the First Sergeant. Above that level, a Command Sergeant Major. No one else has any real kind of "indicator".
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 14, 2008, 08:46:31 PM
Quote from: DNall on March 14, 2008, 06:51:14 PM
This isn't the Army, we don't have leadership badges/indicators. Only the CC badge (and cord for C/CC in this wg), nothing else is appropriate.
The Army doesn't have leadership badges. About the only soldier you'll see in a unit that has something specific is the First Sergeant. Above that level, a Command Sergeant Major. No one else has any real kind of "indicator".
i was talking about (670-1 Ch28) badge background trimming & leadership loops. The AF doesn't do such things, and I don't think they are in any way necessary within either CAP or AF, or the Army either for that matter.
My group had a huge terrirtory but only 2 squadrons in it. We figured it wouldnt be nescessary to have group level CAC's.
Quote from: nesagsar on March 15, 2008, 02:27:40 AM
My group had a huge terrirtory but only 2 squadrons in it. We figured it wouldnt be nescessary to have group level CAC's.
From looking at your pic, it looks like you are from ILWG. I just looked
here (http://www.ilcap.org/wing_areas.htm), and don't see any groups with just two squadrons in them. That page appears to be fairly up-to-date, since I recognize a name or two in specific positions.
I havent been a member of CAP since 2005. Some of the groups have been rearranged since then I think.
Quote from: DNall on March 14, 2008, 10:32:14 PM
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 14, 2008, 08:46:31 PM
Quote from: DNall on March 14, 2008, 06:51:14 PM
This isn't the Army, we don't have leadership badges/indicators. Only the CC badge (and cord for C/CC in this wg), nothing else is appropriate.
The Army doesn't have leadership badges. About the only soldier you'll see in a unit that has something specific is the First Sergeant. Above that level, a Command Sergeant Major. No one else has any real kind of "indicator".
i was talking about (670-1 Ch28) badge background trimming & leadership loops. The AF doesn't do such things, and I don't think they are in any way necessary within either CAP or AF, or the Army either for that matter.
Background trimming has nothing to do with leadership positions. Those items are "authorized for organizations designated (by structure, equipment, and mission) "Airborne" or "Air Assault" by HQDA. Qualified personnel are authorized to wear the background trimming with the Parachutist or Air Assault badge."
Leadership loops do indicate leadership position, but they are rarely worn (most likely because current uniforms don't really accommodate the wear.) Even in my earliest time in the Army Guard back in the late '90's, early 00's, I've never seen them worn. That includes active duty periods, TDY's, and AT's, all time periods on Active Army installations.
When drawing parallels to the military, we need to consider the reality of what the military is doing. Making a statement of "This isn't the Army" isn't really appropriate when the practice referenced isn't really all that common.
When it comes to the OP's suggestions, let's just make the statement "It's not necessary or appropriate", and avoid drawing references to the other branch practices that aren't practical anyway. I don't know about others, but from my viewpoint, the OP is more about the bling than they are about any practical use. I think the OP believes that a badge will provide more authority or credibility that it actually will.
Well that's kind of my point actually. People look at what they THINK other services are doing & make an inference that CAP needs to do that because it results in more self-important crap (on the uniform or otherwise). When what we should be doing is following the AF example moderately adapted to our unique situation. Hence, there is no need for anything like a leadership designator.
Quote from: MIKE on March 13, 2008, 02:50:46 PM
Exhibit A:
(http://www.cadetstuff.org/images/knowles_03.jpg)
We had them in our squadron supply back in the late 60's. We tried them out but, as someone pointed out, the prongs broke off easily. IIRC, they were worn on the left epaulet. There weren't any for cadet officer positions - we wore shoulder boards. Also, they weren't useable on the 1505 summer uniforms (nothing to put them on - no epaulet). No one was particularly enamored of them back then - can't see them being brought back. They just weren't practicle.
Quote from: nesagsar on March 15, 2008, 02:27:40 AM
My group had a huge terrirtory but only 2 squadrons in it. We figured it wouldnt be nescessary to have group level CAC's.
Isn't minimum levels for Group status 5 squadrons?
Perhaps he meant only 2 squadrons
with cadets?
Quote from: Pylon on March 16, 2008, 05:13:32 AM
Quote from: nesagsar on March 15, 2008, 02:27:40 AM
My group had a huge terrirtory but only 2 squadrons in it. We figured it wouldnt be nescessary to have group level CAC's.
Isn't minimum levels for Group status 5 squadrons?
Perhaps he meant only 2 squadrons with cadets?
No, just two squadrons. Both were composite squadrons. That probably explains why they rearranged them though.
Groups can have fewer than 5 squadrons if for example geography makes it necessary. It's not a hard fast rule, just a strong suggestion.
For example, I was a group commander over 3 squadrons. The one squadron was in the group for some odd political reasons and just never got moved. The other two were separated by the chesapeake bay from the rest of the wing. Interesting fact: one of the squadron commanders that worked for me back then is now a member of the NEC.
What we did in Basic is I think something that can be done at encampment if needed. Blue nametags that are worn on blue shirts with "Dorm Chief" and "Element Leader" were issued and worn above existing name tags. They were also worn above nametape on BDU's. Centered, about 1/2 inch above tape. It wasn't pretty, but it did the job.
Our advanced training squadron wore armbands with Star Trek TOS style rank braid on it for flight sergeant and flight commander.
Quote from: nesagsar on March 18, 2008, 02:41:01 AM
Our advanced training squadron wore armbands with Star Trek TOS style rank braid on it for flight sergeant and flight commander.
That probably looked really out of place. I like Star Trek too, but I've also realized it's
entertainment not reality. It doesn't have any place being mixed with any kind of uniform.
I hate to say it, but if are going to continue to misuse grade so taht we can't depend on the ranking senior (or cadet) being the guy in charge, it does kind of make sense to have some sort of badge of current authority. Something you only wear while in the job.
The reason this isn't done much in the Real Military is that, unlike in CAP, Lt Col's don't work for Capt's.
Quote from: Dragoon on March 18, 2008, 03:29:18 PM
I hate to say it, but if are going to continue to misuse grade so taht we can't depend on the ranking senior (or cadet) being the guy in charge, it does kind of make sense to have some sort of badge of current authority. Something you only wear while in the job.
There's already a Squadron Commander badge. It identifies the person in charge,
just like the Air Force does it. We do have a number of parallels to the Air Force, why not take note of the similarities?
So many people want to mirror the military, but they get hung up on the differences or in pointing out "We're not the military (or the Air Force)!".
Quote from: Dragoon on March 18, 2008, 03:29:18 PMThe reason this isn't done much in the Real Military is that, unlike in CAP, Lt Col's don't work for Capt's.
Which is really a moot point anyway. Positional grade is pretty meaningless when many members lack the integrity to obey the orders they volunteered to accept in the first place. They're not going to obey when someone outranks them anyway, and will find a way to justify their disobediance.
Quote from: Dragoon on March 18, 2008, 03:29:18 PM
I hate to say it, but if are going to continue to misuse grade so taht we can't depend on the ranking senior (or cadet) being the guy in charge, it does kind of make sense to have some sort of badge of current authority. Something you only wear while in the job.
The reason this isn't done much in the Real Military is that, unlike in CAP, Lt Col's don't work for Capt's.
You mean like my Sq. where I am the junior guy!! I have a fleet of Majors and LTC's.
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 18, 2008, 03:45:26 PM
Quote from: Dragoon on March 18, 2008, 03:29:18 PM
I hate to say it, but if are going to continue to misuse grade so taht we can't depend on the ranking senior (or cadet) being the guy in charge, it does kind of make sense to have some sort of badge of current authority. Something you only wear while in the job.
There's already a Squadron Commander badge. It identifies the person in charge, just like the Air Force does it. We do have a number of parallels to the Air Force, why not take note of the similarities?
So many people want to mirror the military, but they get hung up on the differences or in pointing out "We're not the military (or the Air Force)!".
Quote from: Dragoon on March 18, 2008, 03:29:18 PMThe reason this isn't done much in the Real Military is that, unlike in CAP, Lt Col's don't work for Capt's.
Which is really a moot point anyway. Positional grade is pretty meaningless when many members lack the integrity to obey the orders they volunteered to accept in the first place. They're not going to obey when someone outranks them anyway, and will find a way to justify their disobediance.
Couple decent points in there. I would also mention that grade is not always a good indicator of leadership position. My S3 is a good example. His authority comes from being S3, not cause he's a Major. He's also one of the more junior aviators in the unit. If he goes on a mission, a WO is going to be in charge. You can't just walk up on the highest ranking person & assume they're in charge. That might be a pretty fair guess, but it's not really all that accurate. A whole lot of the time in the military you'll see some senior officers around, and then find they are actually there to observe & that they may be from a completely unrelated branch with really no ability to lead the ongoing operation. It's really not that unusual. I do understand your point, and CAP really doesn't do a good job with grade, but it really isn't so universally meaningful as you're making it out to be either.
Let me also just say on this badge issue... within your own unit where everyone knows everyone else & their job(s), there is no purpose to identifiers. At a mission you should have ID badges with job titles on them, that's what we do & it's quite effective. In other situations, say an encampment or airshow, you're bringing units & sub-units together & telling them who their leadership & chain of command are, probably have it posted as well. The basic cadet in Foxtrot flight doesn't need to know who the Alpha Flt Sgt is. He needs to stay in his lane & do his job. In other words, there's no use for any of this.
Quote from: DNall on March 19, 2008, 04:13:46 AM
Let me also just say on this badge issue... within your own unit where everyone knows everyone else & their job(s), there is no purpose to identifiers. At a mission you should have ID badges with job titles on them, that's what we do & it's quite effective. In other situations, say an encampment or airshow, you're bringing units & sub-units together & telling them who their leadership & chain of command are, probably have it posted as well. The basic cadet in Foxtrot flight doesn't need to know who the Alpha Flt Sgt is. He needs to stay in his lane & do his job. In other words, there's no use for any of this.
Pretty much the way I view it too. Keeping those details in mind, I think it was clear the the OP was more concerned about bling than anything legitimately useful.
Quote from: DNall on March 19, 2008, 04:13:46 AMCouple decent points in there. I would also mention that grade is not always a good indicator of leadership position. My S3 is a good example. His authority comes from being S3, not cause he's a Major. He's also one of the more junior aviators in the unit. If he goes on a mission, a WO is going to be in charge. You can't just walk up on the highest ranking person & assume they're in charge. That might be a pretty fair guess, but it's not really all that accurate. A whole lot of the time in the military you'll see some senior officers around, and then find they are actually there to observe & that they may be from a completely unrelated branch with really no ability to lead the ongoing operation. It's really not that unusual. I do understand your point, and CAP really doesn't do a good job with grade, but it really isn't so universally meaningful as you're making it out to be either.
Yeah, Army aviation can be a weird entity, and not a good indication of what's "normal." Talk to your infantry, artillery and armor brethren about how rank works most everywhere else.
And yeah, sometimes the ranking guy is just observing - but by his grade he has the authority, by UCMJ to step in if things are going awry. He could be in charge at a moments notice.
And that S3 major of yours can pull rank any time on a WO, even in flight, if that WO is screwing up the battalion mission. To do otherwise would be dereliction of duty. Don't mistake technical leadership (i.e. PIC) with command authority. You can defer to a technical expert at any time, but you're still the ranking guy.
In USAF, occasionally you let the major lead a flight with an 05 in the mix. But outside of small, short duration activities like that, you're not going to see a major directly supervising the work of Lt Cols. If that was the case, they'd promote him a few times first! :-)
Quote from: Dragoon on March 19, 2008, 06:01:53 PM
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 18, 2008, 03:45:26 PM
I hate to say it, but if are going to continue to misuse grade so taht we can't depend on the ranking senior (or cadet) being the guy in charge, it does kind of make sense to have some sort of badge of current authority. Something you only wear while in the job.
There's already a Squadron Commander badge. It identifies the person in charge, just like the Air Force does it. We do have a number of parallels to the Air Force, why not take note of the similarities?
The Squadron Commander's Badge is a very good start. There are other key positions that could warrant a similar indicator. Cadet Commanders (who may not be the ranking cadet), perhaps vice/deputy commanders. Group Commanders are not clearly identified as seperate from Squadron Commanders.
Such a system would designate authority (if I walk into a unit, I can figure out who the boss is very quickly) AND reward those folks who are doing the tough jobs. You know, like grade ought to do, but doesn't.
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 18, 2008, 03:45:26 PM
Quote from: Dragoon on March 18, 2008, 03:29:18 PMThe reason this isn't done much in the Real Military is that, unlike in CAP, Lt Col's don't work for Capt's.
Which is really a moot point anyway. Positional grade is pretty meaningless when many members lack the integrity to obey the orders they volunteered to accept in the first place. They're not going to obey when someone outranks them anyway, and will find a way to justify their disobediance.
That may be a problem in some places, but is one that should be FIXED, not just allowed to exist. One way to do it is to reinforce the importance of leadership positions. By clearly identifying the folks who really run things (commanders and key staffers) we send a message to all members about who's in charge and important - and it ain't the no-job Lt Col.
I guess I'd rather see rewards for those in the tough command and staff jobs rather than rewards basically for achieving PD levels. It's NICE to have Level IV - but it's much more important to be a good Wing Operations Officer.
One small step in larger war.
Group Commanders do in fact have a distinctive badge, basic sqdn CC badge with a star.
Quote from: Dragoon on March 19, 2008, 06:06:17 PM
And yeah, sometimes the ranking guy is just observing - but by his grade he has the authority, by UCMJ to step in if things are going awry. He could be in charge at a moments notice.
And that S3 major of yours can pull rank any time on a WO, even in flight, if that WO is screwing up the battalion mission. To do otherwise would be dereliction of duty. Don't mistake technical leadership (i.e. PIC) with command authority. You can defer to a technical expert at any time, but you're still the ranking guy.
There has been more than a few officers that got themselves in hot water by pulling there rank. I've already heard of many officers that have been riding in a Blackhawk that got themselves in trouble thinking that there rank allows them to call shots. The only place any officer can really be certain that his rank is absolute is within his own chain of command. Outside it, he or she needs to just maintain their observer status.
Quote from: Dragoon on March 19, 2008, 06:11:40 PM
Such a system would designate authority
Authority is designated through personnel actions and assignments, not by a badge.
Quote from: Dragoon on March 19, 2008, 06:11:40 PM
(if I walk into a unit, I can figure out who the boss is very quickly)
The only person you need to be seeing when you walk into a unit for the first time is the commander. He or she has the badge. Even if they're not wearing it, they're still the squadron commander. Anyone elses position in the unit isn't of any consequence to you.
Quote from: Dragoon on March 19, 2008, 06:11:40 PMThat may be a problem in some places, but is one that should be FIXED, not just allowed to exist. One way to do it is to reinforce the importance of leadership positions. By clearly identifying the folks who really run things (commanders and key staffers) we send a message to all members about who's in charge and important - and it ain't the no-job Lt Col.
And you think bling is the answer to that? Kind of a backwards viewpoint when leadership is designated by a badge instead of a badge denoting leadership. For the true leaders, a badge is completely meaningless anyway, why make them buy something? Or are you planning on dipping into your wallet to subsidize issue of such jewelry?
Quote from: Dragoon on March 19, 2008, 06:11:40 PMI guess I'd rather see rewards for those in the tough command and staff jobs rather than rewards basically for achieving PD levels. It's NICE to have Level IV - but it's much more important to be a good Wing Operations Officer.
There already are such things. As for wing assignments, not everyone has a chance at those. Requiring wing staffing is a dead end concept, for numerous reasons.
Quote from: Dragoon on March 19, 2008, 06:11:40 PMOne small step in larger war.
What "war" would that be?
I'm sorry, but my military experience is your boss tells you the chain of command for a task & that's what it is. IE - rank over grade. To be completely technical, it's the grade (UCMJ authority) of your boss that matters, not what you or the other guy are wearing.
I came over from infantry. I know that they do a better job of associating rank with grade, but that's no where near universal, certainly not beyond the Army, not down through the AF to CAP. What matters is the Wg CC designating this person IC & that person GBD & this other person GTL. It doesn't matter what any of their grades are, and certainly the LtCol GBD cannot assume command from the IC when they don't like the orders they are given. They can complain to the Wg/CC, but that's it.
The same is true of my S3 Major when he's assigned to fly 2nd ship CP/G with a WO as flight lead. It's the rank (not grade) of my Bn cdr ordering that action that matters, not what anyone is wearing.
The only authority that exists is the Commander in Chief. Everything else is delegated & designated to individuals with task/purpose & limits to their authority. I understand that grade serves as authority within a very narrow confine, but don't take that so far as to take authority to delegate away from higher.
Now, all that said, I do agree that the military does a better job of associating grade with rank because of their promotion system that requires people to keep moving or go away & that recognized continued training as part of advancement. You well know that I favor bringing such lessons over to CAP with some adaptation. Just don't read too much into it for now is all I'm saying.
Certainly we don't have need of more bling that is not following the mil example & is not practically necessary.
This kind of action is seen a lot in the operations sections for AF officers. I see it over in space and missiles all the time. The commander can often be a Lieutenant with a Captain on their crew. This usually happens because they were a crossflow from another career field, or they had an assignment in a different section of the career field. You don't see problems very often. The commander is the commander because of experience in the section and time working in the job. It seems as the key is always mutual respect.
Quote from: adamblank on March 20, 2008, 05:18:20 AM
It seems as the key is always mutual respect.
Absolutely right on point. W
hen I was a 1Lt, Active Duty, I had a Captain assigned to my branch to work for me. I treated him with respect and politely asked him to do certain tasks - he politely agreed to do them. I didn't make a point of being in charge - and he didn't create a situation where it was necessary. Years later as a Lt Col, I ran a team in the Pentagon. It was not unusual to get reserve officers assigned to the team for their two weeks of duty - and many of them were O-6s. Not a big deal as we were always especially polite to each other and made sure we didn't create a problem.
There was never a problem (outside of one really brain dead O-6 that I had to order to NEVER answer a phone again) as we both knew which of us would spend the rest of their tour inventoring reams of paper to make sure each ream had exactly 500 sheets of paper. ;)
Quote from: nesagsar on March 16, 2008, 06:00:26 AM
Quote from: Pylon on March 16, 2008, 05:13:32 AM
Quote from: nesagsar on March 15, 2008, 02:27:40 AM
My group had a huge terrirtory but only 2 squadrons in it. We figured it wouldnt be nescessary to have group level CAC's.
Isn't minimum levels for Group status 5 squadrons?
Perhaps he meant only 2 squadrons with cadets?
No, just two squadrons. Both were composite squadrons. That probably explains why they rearranged them though.
I can back this up. As late as 2003 ILWG had within its boundaries two particular groups that only had two squadrons. One covered the mattoon unit and the savoy unit. The location of the other im not sure of. Then again, as late as the start of 2008 ILWG had several squadrons with just 5 members on the books, thats not even enough for a flight.
The current reorganization took place just last year for the simple fact that the Wing hadn't done anything to its structure since the early 90's.
Seems to be working very well so far. We've cut the fat and have an effective network nowadays.
If I remember correctly the other group was Peoria and Bloomington.