Scanner as an Interim position

[Always Ready]

Their badges are broken up by specific aviation related jobs, with the aircrew badge being a sort of "catch all". Seniority with each badge is determined by hours and/or years of service (I'm not sure exactly how that works, but it is experience-based).

Ok, lets make an "enlisted aircrew" wing for us. MPs and MOs still get to keep their respective wings, but MSs/Photographers/ARCHER folks/etc get their own set. Mirroring the AF, he "officer" positions of MP and MO still have their distinctive wings, while the "enlisted" positions get their own wings. The same rules we use for MO Senior and Master wings would apply to our "enlisted aircrew" wings.

Thoughts?

[Hawk200]

To make it more distinctive and to show that this is a CAP only badge, go back to the traditional drooped wings

CAP aircrew badges are CAP only badges. Just like every other badge CAP awards. Nobody else wears them. We may have some similar or based on other ones, but they are unique to us.

The current style is what we went to because the old ones just didn't look right. Many people felt that the droop wings weren't very professional looking.

[N Harmon]

Ok, lets make an "enlisted aircrew" wing for us. MPs and MOs still get to keep their respective wings, but MSs/Photographers/ARCHER folks/etc get their own set. Mirroring the AF, he "officer" positions of MP and MO still have their distinctive wings, while the "enlisted" positions get their own wings. The same rules we use for MO Senior and Master wings would apply to our "enlisted aircrew" wings.

Thoughts?

I think you're missing that the Air Force has an "officer aircrew" badge, and that in CAP there are no officer and enlisted aircrew positions. You could theoretically have a Lt Col as scanner with a SMSgt as MP and a 2nd Lt  as Observer.

[jayleswo]

Hey! I have an idea! Let's just leave everything the way it is now ok? I don't know why we have to re-hash this every few months, but we do. IMHO awarding wings for Scanner is setting the bar way too low. Two missions with a few hours flight time and some studying and mentoring? Do we give the GT badge to UDF qualified members next? Do you know how long it took me to earn Observer wings back in the early 80's? Back when we had CAPM 50-5 and CAPR 50-15 things were harder than they are now. Let's stop letting standards down so everyone can have more unnecessary bling.

/rant

[flyboy53]

I guess I can see both sides, but I also agree that the system should be left alone. I earned my observer rating in 1972, went through requalification five years ago and finally earned senior observer. What I had to do originally is a lot different than what observers do now and that's a good thing. You need the scanner position because there's so much to learn that it needs to be done gradually in steps. I also know that years ago while serving in the Alaskan Air Command, I was trained as a mission essential aircrew member/scanner on HC-130s and HH-3s and I wasn't given wings. I would rather a scanner go all the way and earn the wings, you're only increasing your skill and value as an aircrew member. Besides, I can attest that I've spent a lot of time in the in the back seat these days because I fly with a lot of "senior" pilots who would rather have another pilot in the right seat. I also think of my wife who originally didn't like to fly and yet completed observer training and now loves to fly. It's kind of nice having something like that in common with your wife.

[Always Ready]

Ok, lets make an "enlisted aircrew" wing for us. MPs and MOs still get to keep their respective wings, but MSs/Photographers/ARCHER folks/etc get their own set. Mirroring the AF, he "officer" positions of MP and MO still have their distinctive wings, while the "enlisted" positions get their own wings. The same rules we use for MO Senior and Master wings would apply to our "enlisted aircrew" wings.

Thoughts?

I think you're missing that the Air Force has an "officer aircrew" badge, and that in CAP there are no officer and enlisted aircrew positions. You could theoretically have a Lt Col as scanner with a SMSgt as MP and a 2nd Lt  as Observer.

No I didn't miss that. I used the words "officer" and "enlisted" just as a form of context. Having generic aircrew wings for all of our folks who work hard in the backseat is akin to the USAF enlisted aircrew badge. Make sense now?

[Hawk200]

No I didn't miss that. I used the words "officer" and "enlisted" just as a form of context. Having generic aircrew wings for all of our folks who work hard in the backseat is akin to the USAF enlisted aircrew badge.

No, it's not. Let's not draw paralells that don't exist. And there are more than a few Air Force enlisted aircrew members that would have some issues with the assumption that their wings are "generic".

[Always Ready]

No I didn't miss that. I used the words "officer" and "enlisted" just as a form of context. Having generic aircrew wings for all of our folks who work hard in the backseat is akin to the USAF enlisted aircrew badge.

And there are more than a few Air Force enlisted aircrew members that would have some issues with the assumption that their wings are "generic".

And where did I say that they have a generic badge??? I said CAP needs to have a generic (I'm using this term very loosely) aircrew badge for the folks in the backseat. I never said that the USAF enlisted aircrew badge was generic. And to cover my butt, I didn't say the USAF officer aircrew badge is generic either. Trust me...I have friends who would kick my butt if I did.

But, I'll drop the subject. Adiós!

ETA: The comparison is that *most* enlisted aircrew positions don't have a separate badge for their different specialties. For example, boom operators don't have a different badge than loadmasters. They share a common badge. CAP needs to do the same thing.

[N Harmon]

No I didn't miss that. I used the words "officer" and "enlisted" just as a form of context. Having generic aircrew wings for all of our folks who work hard in the backseat is akin to the USAF enlisted aircrew badge. Make sense now?

I'm not familiar enough with the differences between the enlisted aircrew and officer aircrew wings in the real Air Force to say that CAP's should be akin to one or the other. But aside from that, I think we're on the same page.

[Short Field]

Part of the funding the wing gets from national is based on the number of qualified  Mission Pilots and Mission Observers within the wing.  Mission Pilots who are also Mission Observers are counted twice.   Mission Observer Wings are an incentive for Mission Scanners to get qualified in the front seat.  More Mission Observers, more Wing money.  What is the downside??

[RiverAux]

What is the downside??

Quality vs quantity.  Not everyone has the capability in the first place (a minority, but it exists) or if they do have the capability not everyone is able to fly Observer often enough (which takes more than the minimum requirements to keep the qualification) in order to truly perform well as an Observer.

The absolute last reason we should encourage people to become Observers is to obtain funding and really it shouldn't even enter the equation.  That just sends the message that we really don't care about developing high quality crewmembers.   

[Hawk200]

The absolute last reason we should encourage people to become Observers is to obtain funding and really it shouldn't even enter the equation.  That just sends the message that we really don't care about developing high quality crewmembers.

I have to agree. Quantity for the sake of funding isn't right.

Now if they used the funding for regular training of the aircrews, I might have fewer issues with it.

[Eclipse]

Part of the funding the wing gets from national is based on the number of qualified  Mission Pilots and Mission Observers within the wing.  Mission Pilots who are also Mission Observers are counted twice.   

Cite please.

[arajca]

Another issue preventing some scanners from moving forward is the attitude of some pilots that they will only fly with another pilot or someone they personally trained in the right seat. I'd like to say this was a rare occurance, but it happens frequently enough that demobilizing those pilots from exercises and missions is not feasible.

[PHall]

No I didn't miss that. I used the words "officer" and "enlisted" just as a form of context. Having generic aircrew wings for all of our folks who work hard in the backseat is akin to the USAF enlisted aircrew badge. Make sense now?

I'm not familiar enough with the differences between the enlisted aircrew and officer aircrew wings in the real Air Force to say that CAP's should be akin to one or the other. But aside from that, I think we're on the same page.

Short story on the differences, Officer Wings (Pilot, Navigator, Officer Aircrew) have a shield in the center of wings while Enlisted Aircrew Wings are round in the middle.

[RiverAux]

Part of the funding the wing gets from national is based on the number of qualified  Mission Pilots and Mission Observers within the wing.  Mission Pilots who are also Mission Observers are counted twice.   

Cite please.

Don't know a current citation, but I too have seen it in an official document at some point in the recent past. 

[Eclipse]

Part of the funding the wing gets from national is based on the number of qualified  Mission Pilots and Mission Observers within the wing.  Mission Pilots who are also Mission Observers are counted twice.   

Cite please.

Don't know a current citation, but I too have seen it in an official document at some point in the recent past.

I'm aware of funding appropriations and equipment being issued based on number of pilots and hours flown, but I can't imagine why having more Observers would matter, and if they are double-counting MPs who are also MO's, that sounds like an FW&A issue.

[lordmonar]

I don't understand the issue now.

MS's don't get any wings because the are considered an entry level position to MO or MP.

National gives money out based on how many MO's and MP's you have.

No one is or has suggested that we somehow encourage more people to get MO or MP qualifications just for funding.   

No one....especially Short Field....is suggesting we sacrafice quality just to get more "qualified" MOs and the funding that comes with it.

But the facts remain....National doles out money and equipment based on numbers. 

[Short Field]

The absolute last reason we should encourage people to become Observers is to obtain funding and really it shouldn't even enter the equation.  That just sends the message that we really don't care about developing high quality crewmembers.   

The reason we need to encourage people to become Observers is to increase the NUMBER of people who know what is going on in the airplane on a mission and can help take some of the load off the MP so the mission is flown more effectively and more SAFELY.   Scanners do a key job - but EVERY Mission Pilot and Observer is ALSO a SCANNER.  They get wings for having a SECOND aircrew rating. 

Providing good training is hard - but no excuse to not provide it.  And Hell has a special place reserved for people who sign-off people who can't do the job.   

[RiverAux]

EVERY Mission Pilot and Observer is ALSO a SCANNER

Correction:  EVERY Mission Pilot and Observer HAS BEEN BUT IS NOT NECESSARILY NOW, a SCANNER.