SFO ->Capt

[Becks]

I think I read somewhere that time in as a SFO can allow for that member to be promoted to Capt when they turn 21.  Does anyone know the TiG as SFO required for this?

[AlphaSigOU]

Reference: CAPR 35-3

Minimum TIG and promotion requirement for flight officers:

SM to FO = completion of Level 1 and 3 months TIG as a SM.

FO to TFO = technician rating and 6 months TIG as an FO

TFO to SFO = completion of Level II and 12 months as TFO.

At 21 the flight officer grades convert to the following officer grades, commensurate with appropriate senior member training completion:

FO = 2d Lt (complete Level I/CPPT)

TFO = 1st Lt (complete Technician rating in any specialty)

SFO = Capt (complete requirements of Level II (COP), which are SLS attendance, tech rating and AFAIDL 13)

Former cadets who have earned the following milestone awards and who are under 21 are directly appointed to the following flight officer grades:

Wright Brothers = none (start as SM and earn FO after 3 months)

Mitchell = FO (2d Lt at 21)

Earhart/Eaker = TFO (1st Lt at 21)

Spaatz = SFO (Capt at 21)

Level 1 training is waived for those former cadets who have earned the Mitchell Award or higher and have less than 2 years' break in membership. CPPT is not waived.

Hope this helps.

<-- former TFO way back when I went from cadet to the dark side... never mind I had a 17-year break in membership! 

[Becks]

So is that to say that if I were to say, be promoted to SFO tomorrow, and then turned 21 in two days I would be a Capt even with almost no TiG as SFO?

[AlphaSigOU]

So is that to say that if I were to say, be promoted to SFO tomorrow, and then turned 21 in two days I would be a Capt even with almost no TiG as SFO?

Only if you have completed all senior training requirements. If you have completed all requirements for Level II (SLS, AFAIDL 13, tech rating) and you were an FO or a TFO, you'd be awarded Captain when you turned 21. Only ones who get Capt with a free pass are Spaatzen. Even then, they must complete Level II and Level III requirements, plus 3 years TIG for promotion to Major.

[Becks]

Thank you for the explanation lieutenant. 

[AlphaSigOU]

Thank you for the explanation lieutenant. 

No problem at all... glad to help.

[MIKE]

So is that to say that if I were to say, be promoted to SFO tomorrow, and then turned 21 in two days I would be a Capt even with almost no TiG as SFO?

Negative... You would be a 1st Lt.  You would need 18 months TIG as an SFO to be promoted to Capt at 21 since you don't have Spaatz.  See CAPR 35-5 Fig. 2.

[Becks]

ahh ok, its was that 18 months number that I was originally looking for.

[MIKE]

ahh ok, its was that 18 months number that I was originally looking for.

The thing to remember is that time in grade as a flight officer is not equal to that of the equivalent officer grade at 21, but you can use your TIG as a flight officer toward promotion after 21 if it's not equal before then.

[BillB]

To answer your question on time in grade, How did you get SFO in the first place? Did you get it because of an Earhart? What qualifications have you met, for 2Lt and 1Lt as well as Capt? Eighteen months as an SFO does not mean you get initial appointment as Capt at age 21. Keep in mind National has no record of flight officer grades, you're only listed as a senior member. So a form 2 getting there showing 18 months as a senior member would only get you 2Lt as initial appointment

[MIKE]

BillB, go look at CAPR 35-5 Figure 2.  It is on page 5 of the regulation.

[BlackKnight]

...

[JaL5597]

This is a timely topic because we have a similar problem developing in my squadron.

Consider:

An Earhart cadet transfers to senior membership, 11 months before turning 21. 
He qualifies for the grade of TFO because of his Earhart.

While a TFO, he progresses in specialty tracks and completes senior training through level II.

11 months later he's 21.  The regs require that his grade be changed to 1Lt. (There's no option to stay TFO for one more month to get promoted to SFO.)

Now at this point the regs (CAPR 35-5 Figure 2) say the TIG requirement for Captain are "18 months as 1Lt or SFO".   So credit for the 11 months TIG as an "Earhart TFO" are completely lost.  At age 21 the TIG clock resets and he needs 18 more months just like any newly minted 1Lt. He's at exactly the same place TIG-wise as an Earhart cadet who leaves CAP at say, age 17, goes to college, the returns to CAP at age 21 to claim 1Lt grade.  

It appears that former Earhart cadets who stay active in our program (and in this case holding down sqdn staff duty positions) are shortchanged on time-in-grade because they effectively get no credit for it.

The only way I see to work this system is to encourage Earhart cadets to transfer to TFO status immediately upon turning 18 if they don't think they're in line to get their Spaatz before turning 21.  As a Deputy Commander in a composite squadron, that's not a message I want to convey. Good cadet officers are rare enough as it is. The last thing we need is to be "ejecting" our best leadership cadets out of the cadet program before their time. 
 
Or am I missing something?

The way I read it you should be able to combind the 1st Lt and SFO time in grade.  There should be no reason to peanilize the person for their turning 21. 

If I was in the position of losing TIG over turning 21 I would be really pissed.

But thats just me.

[MIKE]

Key words:

12 months as 2d Lt or TFO
(or combination thereof)

18 months as 1st Lt or SFO
(or combination thereof)

Emphasis mine.

[ZigZag911]

  At age 21 the TIG clock resets and he needs 18 more months just like any newly minted 1Lt.

The intent of the reg seems to be that whether one becomes an FO by 'special appointment' (recognizing cadet milestone awards earned) or 'duty performance' (becoming senior while under 21 without a Mitchell or better), the TIG served in the flight officer grades counts toward promotion in the 'commissioned' grades.

In other words, no reason to 're-set the clock'.

[arajca]

The TIG as TFO counts toward 2d Lt, not 1st lt. TIG as SFO counts toward 1st Lt. So, for the TFO, the clock does reset at 21.

Kind of like who TIG as 2d Lt doesn't count toward Capt.

Also, in the given scenario, at 21 the TFO would become a 2d Lt, not 1st Lt, until the CAPF 2 is submitted with his Earhart promotion to 1st Lt. At which time, the clock resets to 1st Lt - Capt time.

True, it is unfair in this scenario, but this scenario is an exception to the norm. We can argue the 'intent' of the regs all day long, but in the end, what is in black and white is the reg. And the reg says TIG as a TFo counts toward 1st Lt, not Capt.

[lordmonar]

Okay...I don't understand something.......a Spaatz Cadet is equal to a SFO and automatically gets Capt at 21.

but an regular SFO (minimum of 21 months TIS) is only a 1st Lt at 21?

Also...it appears you get no credit for being an FO at all.

Is it possible that figure 2 is wrong?

That the TIG requirement for 1st Lt should read 12 months as 2d Lt or FO (or combination thereof) and captain should read 18 months as 1st Lt or TFO (or combination thereof).

So....turn 21 before completing SFO only requires extra time in grade before catching up to those who complete SFO while still under 21.

The way it is now....you have Spaatz=SFO=Capt vs.  12 months TIG as TFO=SFO=1st Lt.

This also raises the problem with Earhart=TFO=1st Lt.

So...we are penalizing our non-prior cadet FO's.  An ex Earhart is under a normal SFO but once they both turn 21 they are now the same rank.

[Becks]

See this is my current problem with the transition ranks.  Is it a good idea they made them? Perhaps.  But they seem to have left alot of grey areas regarding them, leaving many members, myself included confused on issues such as this.  It just seems like the transition ranks were quickly cobbled together with not alot of thought behind them on NHQ's part.

[lordmonar]

See this is my current problem with the transition ranks.  Is it a good idea they made them? Perhaps.  But they seem to have left alot of grey areas regarding them, leaving many members, myself included confused on issues such as this.  It just seems like the transition ranks were quickly cobbled together with not alot of thought behind them on NHQ's part.

I agree....it is obvious that no one really analyzed the rules as the wrote them, and that leaves us trying to work through them out in the field.

Was the intent of the reg to make all SFO's Captain or 1st Lt?  If the latter, why do Spaatz Cadets get to jump up to Capt?

[ZigZag911]

The TIG as TFO counts toward 2d Lt, not 1st lt. TIG as SFO counts toward 1st Lt. So, for the TFO, the clock does reset at 21.

Kind of like who TIG as 2d Lt doesn't count toward Capt.

Also, in the given scenario, at 21 the TFO would become a 2d Lt, not 1st Lt, until the CAPF 2 is submitted with his Earhart promotion to 1st Lt. At which time, the clock resets to 1st Lt - Capt time.

True, it is unfair in this scenario, but this scenario is an exception to the norm. We can argue the 'intent' of the regs all day long, but in the end, what is in black and white is the reg. And the reg says TIG as a TFo counts toward 1st Lt, not Capt.

Have another look at the table shown under paragraph 11b, Section B, of CAPR 35-5. Under the column 'time in grade' for promotion to 1 Lt is says '12 months as 2 lt or TFO or combination thereof'; for promotion to Captain it states '18 months as 1 Lt or SFO or combination thereof'.

[ZigZag911]

Okay...I don't understand something.......a Spaatz Cadet is equal to a SFO and automatically gets Capt at 21.

but an regular SFO (minimum of 21 months TIS) is only a 1st Lt at 21?

Here, I think, we have recognition of the 'time in grade', training and experience gained as a cadet officer in the process of becoming a Spaatz (C/Col)

[lordmonar]

Okay...I don't understand something.......a Spaatz Cadet is equal to a SFO and automatically gets Capt at 21.

but an regular SFO (minimum of 21 months TIS) is only a 1st Lt at 21?

Here, I think, we have recognition of the 'time in grade', training and experience gained as a cadet officer in the process of becoming a Spaatz (C/Col)

I can see that to a point.....but it just does not make sense.  Two 20 year olds.  One just got his Spaatz and he crosses over to the gray....and is promoted to SFO.  the other one joins CAP at 18.  In two years he makes SFO the day the ex-cadet makes spaatz and crosses over.  One year later at 21, the spaatz-en SFO puts on Capt and the other guy has 6 more months to wait.

I don't know.....it just does not sound quite right to me.

You are either being unfair to the spaatz-en by forcing him down to a lower rank.....or to the non-spaatz-en SFO by holding him back 6 months.

Maybe we should create a new FO rank called Chief Flight Officer (CFO) and reserve it for ex-spaatz-ens only.  Then the reg would make more sense.

[arajca]

For the Spaatz receipient, they are not getting Capt for being SFO, but for being Spaatzen. The fact that they are SFO is entirely irrelevent for the purposes of promotion.

Keep in mind that the Spaatz getting Capt is at the commander's discretion. The commander could just give them 1st Lt for getting the Spaatz.

[BillB]

You have forgotten one thing.  How long was the Spaatz cadet in CAP. Sure both at 20 years old may be SFO, The one that joined at 18 has been in CAP two-three years, the Spaatz cadet probably a MINIMUM of five years. The SFO that holds the Spaatz has been through more of the program than the SFO that joined at 18. So looking at two seniors that hold SFO is comparing oranges and apples.

[ZigZag911]

Here, I think, we have recognition of the 'time in grade', training and experience gained as a cadet officer in the process of becoming a Spaatz (C/Col)
[/quote]

I can see that to a point.....but it just does not make sense.  Two 20 year olds.  One just got his Spaatz and he crosses over to the gray....and is promoted to SFO.  the other one joins CAP at 18.  In two years he makes SFO the day the ex-cadet makes spaatz and crosses over.  One year later at 21, the spaatz-en SFO puts on Capt and the other guy has 6 more months to wait.

I don't know.....it just does not sound quite right to me.

You are either being unfair to the spaatz-en by forcing him down to a lower rank.....or to the non-spaatz-en SFO by holding him back 6 months.

Maybe we should create a new FO rank called Chief Flight Officer (CFO) and reserve it for ex-spaatz-ens only.  Then the reg would make more sense.
[/quote]

That might not be a bad ides (Chief Flight Officer), but the point is that whule the non-Spaatz joined as senior at 18 (and even if a cadet, obviously did not get as far as Mitchell), the other probably had 4 or more years cadet service prior to 'putting on the gray', much of it as a cadet officer.

[BlackKnight]

...

[arajca]

I hope someone at NHQ is browsing this board.  Meanwhile, I see it the way arajca does. We can argue intent all day long, but the black & white print in the regs rule. 

It's about time someone else sees intent vs. regs like me.

Of course perhaps we're looking at this the wrong way.  The TFO/SFO time in grade snafu is really not that big a deal compared to the CAP "professional promotions" such as the elementary school teacher who walks into CAP and picks up gold oak leaves by virtue of her "AE" teaching license (but can't tell a Cessna from a Lear), or the state legislator who never comes to meetings but automatically gets major because we hope he'll vote money for the wing.

The major disconnect with "professional promotions" is - based on my experience - most don't contribute their skills to CAP. I know of a few educators who got Capt immediately, but aren't serving as AEO or even doing AE classes. The reg requires them to be serving in an "aerospace education position at any level of CAP", but many unit commanders ignore that part. The reg (CAPR 35-5) requires similar service for all professional promotions except for Health Service personnel and Legal personnel.

[Hammer]

The major disconnect with "professional promotions" is - based on my experience - most don't contribute their skills to CAP. I know of a few educators who got Capt immediately, but aren't serving as AEO or even doing AE classes. The reg requires them to be serving in an "aerospace education position at any level of CAP", but many unit commanders ignore that part. The reg (CAPR 35-5) requires similar service for all professional promotions except for Health Service personnel and Legal personnel.

In my Squadron, the Sq/CC won't promote Military Personnel to the CAP-Equivilent of their rank.  Nor will he promote people to the rank of 1st Lt or above.

[arajca]

It's commander's discretion. I know several military oficers who have joined CAP because it is cheaper to fly our a/c than the local aeroclub a/c. They came straight out an said they do not want to serve in any staff position or do ES or o-flights. Some unit commanders have said fine, here's your (insert grade insignia). While others, with a more CAP centered view, have said fine, here's your CAP cutouts. I know one squadron with two a/c that puts non-contributing pilots on the bottom of the a/c use list.

[Becks]

Slight update on this.  It looks like Sept 7 (updated my membership from cadet to senior back on Dec 7) I will be eligable to be promoted to TFO(6 months TiG as FO and tech rating).  Now to get SFO it seems to say it is required to to have 12 months TiG as TFO and complete level 2.  Well lucky me...my bithday is August 10...so I will hit 21 one month prior to being eligable to make SFO...yay.   

[MIKE]

You still need to have 18 months TIG as an SFO and/or 1st Lt to be eligible for Capt though.

[Becks]

You still need to have 18 months TIG as an SFO and/or 1st Lt to be eligible for Capt though.

I know sir, I just found it rather ironic that like the previously mentioned member in the thread, I too would miss getting SFO by 1 month as well.

[BillB]

I don't remember seeing where a senior can't earn SFO? Or where the Flight Officer grades are for 18-21 year olds only.  Am I wrong?

[Pylon]

I don't remember seeing where a senior can't earn SFO? Or where the Flight Officer grades are for 18-21 year olds only.  Am I wrong?

Under CAPR 35-5, Section A (General Provisions), subsection 1-b states:

b. Flight Officer Grades. Senior members who are ineligible for officer grade because of the minimum age criteria (21 years) may qualify for appointment or promotion to flight officer grades as outlined in section F.

Clearly, the Flight Officer grades, as indicated by the statement making the provisions for such grades, are intended for those senior members who are not yet eligible for commissioned officer grade (aka: under 21).

Moving right on, this is the more applicable regulation here from CAPR 35-5, Section G (Flight Officer Grades), subsection 30 states:

SECTION G - FLIGHT OFFICER GRADES
30. General. Only senior members under 21 years of age will be appointed to or promoted to the flight officer grades.

I think that makes it very clear. 

[BillB]

It makes it very clear, but it doesn't answer the question, or at least part of the question. If SM Jones is apointed a FO at 18 and by age 21 has SFO, but not the time in grade, what's to prevent him from staying a SFO until he completes the time in grade as SFO? Where does it say he has to be promoted to 1Lt at age 21, or if you'll pardon the expression "be commissioned" at age 21?

[SarDragon]

It makes it very clear, but it doesn't answer the question, or at least part of the question. If SM Jones is apointed a FO at 18 and by age 21 has SFO, but not the time in grade, what's to prevent him from staying a SFO until he completes the time in grade as SFO? Where does it say he has to be promoted to 1Lt at age 21, or if you'll pardon the expression "be commissioned" at age 21?

FOs of all ilk become SMWOG upon turning 21, until the requisite Form 2 is sent through the chain.

30. General. Only senior members under 21 years of age will be appointed to or promoted to the flight officer grades. This category is designed as a transition for cadets transferring to senior member status and for those senior members who are otherwise eligible for CAP officer grade except that they have not yet reached the minimum age of 21. Upon reaching age 21, the member will be appointed to an appropriate officer grade or will be classified as a senior member without grade until he or she is eligible for promotion to officer grade. NOTE: See figure 2.

Promotion | Minimum           |
To        | Skill Level       | Time-In-Grade
          |                   |
2d Lt     | Level 1           | 6 months as senior member
1st Lt    | Tech Rating       | 12 months as 2d Lt or TFO 
          | (Specialty Track) |(or combination thereof)
Captain   | Level II          | 18 months as 1st Lt or SFO
                              |(or combination thereof)

[All emphasis mine]

The first bold text answers your Qs. The second bold text amplifies my initial statement. Looks pretty clear to me. YMMV.

[BillB]

Dave....You're 100% correct.  What I was thinking was the original FO/Warrent Officer program.  In that a senior member could be appointed Warrent Officer, title later changed to Flight Officer when USAF dropped the Warrent grades. And, the time in grade requirement included cadet time, not just senior member time in grade, but there was also a training requirement, other than level 1 and CPPT.

[ZigZag911]

And if I may throw my two cents worth in, we ought to return to something like that system.....require the AFIADL CAP Officer Course for 'commissioned' grades.....which should be a requirement (earned 2 LT or better) prior to appointment as squadron commander, Capt or above for group commander