Newer Member- Ground Team and Medic Badges Question

[BuckeyeDEJ]

You still do not sound logical.

Having insignias for specific specialties separate the specialties as they are, on their own. The ES Patch gathers all in its own cocoon, as Emergency Services.

If you don't like that aviators get their own badges, or that ground team members, ICs, medics and others have their own, then maybe we do away with all of them and only authorize one badge. Either that, or the silver badges remain and every other 101 specialty gets a blanket badge.

It's a moot point in the long run. The specialty tracks are slowly being rewritten to embrace ops quals, as they should be. Maybe in the long run, the ES patch goes away (it's going to, anyway), as well as the insipid specialty-track shields, and our members are authorized to wear specialty badges that correlate both to specialty and ops quals... because both exist together in harmony, as they probably should.

[Eclipse]

I think you'd get a lot more push back on losing the PD badges then adding either a generic or a few
more ES badges.

There are a lot of member who never have, nor ever will do anything in ops, and their specialties
are unrelated to ops in anyway, most of them, actually.

[JC004]

It's a moot point in the long run. The specialty tracks are slowly being rewritten to embrace ops quals, as they should be. Maybe in the long run, the ES patch goes away (it's going to, anyway), as well as the insipid specialty-track shields, and our members are authorized to wear specialty badges that correlate both to specialty and ops quals... because both exist together in harmony, as they probably should.

Cadets don't have specialty tracks.

[DakRadz]

It's a moot point in the long run. The specialty tracks are slowly being rewritten to embrace ops quals, as they should be. Maybe in the long run, the ES patch goes away (it's going to, anyway), as well as the insipid specialty-track shields, and our members are authorized to wear specialty badges that correlate both to specialty and ops quals... because both exist together in harmony, as they probably should.

Since our parent service has badges for everything, are you insinuating a similar badge or simply deleting all of the specialty track insignia period?

Now, I for one wouldn't mind a redesign. The shields... Safety, ES, and I think Comms are the only decent looking ones. Non-MS paint badges would be nice

1st Lt Raduenz

[biomed441]

Now, I for one wouldn't mind a redesign. The shields... Safety, ES, and I think Comms are the only decent looking ones. Non-MS paint badges would be nice

Agreed. Even if we didn't work a re-design, just stamp the design into the metal, mirror finish. 

[PHall]

It's a moot point in the long run. The specialty tracks are slowly being rewritten to embrace ops quals, as they should be. Maybe in the long run, the ES patch goes away (it's going to, anyway), as well as the insipid specialty-track shields, and our members are authorized to wear specialty badges that correlate both to specialty and ops quals... because both exist together in harmony, as they probably should.

Since our parent service has badges for everything, are you insinuating a similar badge or simply deleting all of the specialty track insignia period?

Now, I for one wouldn't mind a redesign. The shields... Safety, ES, and I think Comms are the only decent looking ones. Non-MS paint badges would be nice

1st Lt Raduenz

If you're talking about the Occupational Badges, yes almost everyone in the Air Force has one, but, they are not required to be worn.
Highly encouraged yes, but not required to be worn.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I think you'd get a lot more push back on losing the PD badges then adding either a generic or a few
more ES badges.

There are a lot of member who never have, nor ever will do anything in ops, and their specialties
are unrelated to ops in anyway, most of them, actually.

I would contend that anyone who works in logistics, in cadet programs or in the chaplaincy are indirectly contributing to emergency services — they supply the mission, they train the labor and they counsel grieving people. While they're not directly involved, they're supporting the overall mission.

In public affairs, you can't get past the tech rating without being qualified as a PIO, so the public affairs badge with a star or star and wreath shows emergency services qualification. And maybe if we ever ditch those painted clip-art badges for something professional, the basic badge in every specialty within reason (or in every major field — do we need badges for EVERY little niche, when larger areas of expertise would do?) would be for those who don't incorporate ops into their work. Some may never get past that, and if they don't, they'll likely never be a FGO, for what that's worth.

Cadets don't have specialty tracks.

No, but I wore a communications badge as a cadet in the 1980s. I'm sure regulations would/could be written around how cadets would qualify for the same insignia as adult members.

[Eclipse]

I would contend that anyone who works in logistics, in cadet programs or in the chaplaincy are indirectly contributing to emergency services — they supply the mission, they train the labor and they counsel grieving people. While they're not directly involved, they're supporting the overall mission.

Anyone?  No.  The above looks nice on a t-shirt, but does work out in the practical math of CAP.  There are far too many "cadet" units that actually take bizarre pride in not being involved in OPS whatsoever.

This is akin to senior flights that want nothing to do with "kids".

[JC004]

Anyone?  No.  The above looks nice on a t-shirt, but does work out in the practical math of CAP.  There are far too many "cadet" units that actually take bizarre pride in not being involved in OPS whatsoever.

This is nonsense.  Sadly, some people think that way, but it is nonsense.  What does CAP have over, say, JROTC and such?  You, as a 13 year old, can do actual operational missions for the United States Air Force.  You can save someone's life.  You build character and leadership ability when you participate in operational missions.  Placing service before self, practically, makes a difference in the individual. 

They learn discipline, teamwork, appreciation of the outdoors, fitness... 

They go on to become our firefighters, EMTs, and the like. 

I put qualified cadets on any mission I can get for them.  Save a life, or win a wing cadet competition title?  The choice is clear to me.

[Eclipse]

Preaching to the choir, brotha.  I think ES should be incorporated into the CP, maybe at Phase II or III
as a core component in the same way camping and fieldcraft are in Boy Scouts and similar organizations,
if only for the self-sufficiency and confidence it builds, but that takes work, effort, knowledge and initiative.

Much better to "just have the kids drill again tonight".

[Alaric]

Anyone?  No.  The above looks nice on a t-shirt, but does work out in the practical math of CAP.  There are far too many "cadet" units that actually take bizarre pride in not being involved in OPS whatsoever.

This is nonsense.  Sadly, some people think that way, but it is nonsense.  What does CAP have over, say, JROTC and such?  You, as a 13 year old, can do actual operational missions for the United States Air Force.  You can save someone's life.  You build character and leadership ability when you participate in operational missions.  Placing service before self, practically, makes a difference in the individual. 

They learn discipline, teamwork, appreciation of the outdoors, fitness... 

They go on to become our firefighters, EMTs, and the like. 

I put qualified cadets on any mission I can get for them.  Save a life, or win a wing cadet competition title?  The choice is clear to me.

We have a three pronged mission, there is no reason that everyone has to be equally involved with everything.   

[Eclipse]

We have a three pronged mission, there is no reason that everyone has to be equally involved with everything.

Agreed.  Everyone.

Squadrons on the whole, however, should be accomplishing all three missions, and finding the people necessary
when they have some who want to specialize.

Yes, the current system allows it, though more through negligence then design, no there's no strategic plan for who does what.

That doesn't change the fact that when a unit chooses to ignore one or more of the missions, then their entire AOR loses
that capability, and these days not only is there no overlap, there's such a shortage of units that this generally means
that an entire village, city, or even county goes without whatever capability the unit CC has decided "ain't his bag"
(while still reaping the ancillary benefits of the organizaiton as a whole being involved).

[Майор Хаткевич]

Preaching to the choir, brotha.  I think ES should be incorporated into the CP, maybe at Phase II or III
as a core component in the same way camping and fieldcraft are in Boy Scouts and similar organizations,
if only for the self-sufficiency and confidence it builds, but that takes work, effort, knowledge and initiative.

Much better to "just have the kids drill again tonight".

Not a fan of mandatory ES for cadets. The CP, as you know, has tons of stuff to do besides drill, so I'd rather cadets focus on CP opportunities, and do ES if they want.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I would contend that anyone who works in logistics, in cadet programs or in the chaplaincy are indirectly contributing to emergency services — they supply the mission, they train the labor and they counsel grieving people. While they're not directly involved, they're supporting the overall mission.

Anyone?  No.  The above looks nice on a t-shirt, but does work out in the practical math of CAP.  There are far too many "cadet" units that actually take bizarre pride in not being involved in OPS whatsoever.

This is akin to senior flights that want nothing to do with "kids".

No disagreement here. But I'd say in the grand scheme of things, once you get to the 20,000-foot view and away from the turf wars and fiefdoms of local squadrons and even groups, you see they all contribute.

It angers me that some senior units are snobby about "kids." It also rankles me when we have people so slavishly devoted to "the children" that they forsake not only what CAP does, but drop any propriety and become denmothers/denfathers talking about "my kids" or "my cadets." Those people deserve a punch in the face.

It also annoys me when people are so focused on emergency services that they only see cadets as ground-team assets. When squadrons with airplanes don't play nice with other units' pilots because they don't want those others using "their" airplane. When cadets in one squadron are taught something wrong and another unit's cadets are taught something else wrong, and both (and others) meet at a cadet encampment and don't speak the same language.

The overarching issue is that we don't always keep our eyes on the ball. We're an organization guided by rules and regulations, but for many, when it's convenient to bend or break them, bend and break indeed. And there are some who just enjoy having troops and being able to tell them what to do (those people also deserve a punch in the face, especially when they wind up on wing staff in a key position and don't do anything except for friends).

Either the Core Values mean something or they don't. And if they don't, in the grand scheme, we need to ask: Why are we here?

To steer back to the topic, even though we have too many of those ugly shield badges, we don't have unnecessary or irrelevant specialty tracks — though the tracks appeal to the CAP mission in different ways. Does an aerospace education officer need a 101-card signoff to advance in the AE track? No. But AE is a separate mission from emergency services. Should a public affairs officer be a qualified PIO to get senior level? If not, why?

Do we need the ES boy-scout patch to aggrandize those who might feel left out? Obviously not, since it's on its way to its demise. But we don't need 200 badges to replace it, either.