CAP Talk

Historically and currently what does the CAP NCO wear?

Do they go through the PD programs and earn the level ribbons?

What hat device do they wear?

What positions are they able to hold? Can they become Squadron Commanders?

If they so choose at a later time can they transfer to being an officer?

Are CAP NCO's able to wear the Corporate Uniforms? If so, what rank do they wear on it if any?

Historically and currently what does the CAP NCO wear?
Standard USAF bright stripes on all uniform varients

Do they go through the PD programs and earn the level ribbons?
Yes.

What hat device do they wear?
Same device for all senior members, but they wear the enlisted flight cap (dark blue braid)

What positions are they able to hold? Can they become Squadron Commanders?
Any and all.  Yes.
(Note, there is an question as to what would happen in the event a CAP NCO was appointed a Wing CC)

If they so choose at a later time can they transfer to being an officer?
Yes, however the clock starts at zero regardless of time in, with them being eligible for any NCO-equivelent bumps.

Are CAP NCO's able to wear the Corporate Uniforms? If so, what rank do they wear on it if any?
Yes.  Standard USAF bright stripes.

You have/had to hold an NCO rank in the military.  You wear the AF equivelant service dress rank on the sleeves of your BDUs.  If you were an E5 in the Army, you would wear AF Staff Sergeant rank in CAP.

Clarification - you can  go through the senior member PD levels and get the awards, but your grade will never change unless you're still in the military and get promoted, at which time you can get a bump in your CAP NCO grade.

Wasn't there a thing where CAP NCO's can't get level 5 because you need to be a Major to go to NSC and that's a requirement for it? Or something like that?

CAP NCO's also wear "CAP" cutouts.

Also the blank CAP gray epaulets were designed for senior member NCO's to have their grade embroidered on as an alternative, even though the USAF doesn't do this anymore for NCOs, CAP regulations to my knowledge still allow it as an option though many just go with the sleeve insignia.

(That's what those blank gray epaulets are for, NOT for SMWOG).

CAP NCOs can complete Level V. According to CAPR 50-17, Attch 2, any Armed Forces Senior NCO Academy can be used as equivalent for NSC.

In addition, Chiefs are eligible to attend NSC. Two Chiefs attended the 2009 college, with great success (one was a member of my seminar), and one returned on staff in 2010.

Also - I believe that regardless of your Armed Forces NCO grade, National still lists you as an SMWOG.

^  True.  The Great Confuser is not set up to show NCO grades.

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on December 31, 2010, 10:12:38 PM
^  True.  The Great Confuser is not set up to show NCO grades.

I don't understand this in the slightest. Same with FO grades. If it can track cadet grades (didn't used to, now it does), why can't it track the other SM grades?

I'm sure it could, but they have chosen not to do it.  No explanation has ever been provided that I'm aware of. 

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on December 31, 2010, 10:12:38 PM
^  True.  The Great Confuser is not set up to show NCO grades.

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on December 31, 2010, 10:14:35 PM
I don't understand this in the slightest. Same with FO grades. If it can track cadet grades (didn't used to, now it does), why can't it track the other SM grades?

Quote from: RiverAux on December 31, 2010, 10:17:28 PM
I'm sure it could, but they have chosen not to do it.  No explanation has ever been provided that I'm aware of.

eServices shows NCO grades for senior members.  It has for at least a year.

Well... it has been way more than a year since I had an NCO in a unit.  I didn't know about the change.

"you need to be a Major to go to NSC and that's a requirement for it? "

If an NCO's completed military leadership training (NCO Academy, etc) that counts.  In my squadron a SMSgt and myself are complete through NSC.

Regarding FO tracking - the promotion chain needs to be changed first, since the Form 2 currently never leaves the unit.

Quote from: SarDragon on January 01, 2011, 02:00:49 AM
Regarding FO tracking - the promotion chain needs to be changed first, since the Form 2 currently never leaves the unit.

The Form 2 never leaves the unit for 2Lt and 1Lt either, but NHQ manages to track those.

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on January 01, 2011, 02:10:19 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on January 01, 2011, 02:00:49 AM
Regarding FO tracking - the promotion chain needs to be changed first, since the Form 2 currently never leaves the unit.

The Form 2 never leaves the unit for 2Lt and 1Lt either, but NHQ manages to track those.

If you sign the form 2 and put it in the folder without sending it to NHQ, the member will never get promoted.

Quote from: Eclipse on January 01, 2011, 02:13:28 AM

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on January 01, 2011, 02:10:19 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on January 01, 2011, 02:00:49 AM
Regarding FO tracking - the promotion chain needs to be changed first, since the Form 2 currently never leaves the unit.

The Form 2 never leaves the unit for 2Lt and 1Lt either, but NHQ manages to track those.

If you sign the form 2 and put it in the folder without sending it to NHQ, the member will never get promoted.

My understanding was that there was some button-clicking action by the CC in eServices that takes care of this.

I am surprised that ma blue would allow us to wear USAF enlisted rank on corporate uniforms.
I would be interested to see how that looks.

Quote from: Eclipse on January 01, 2011, 02:13:28 AM

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on January 01, 2011, 02:10:19 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on January 01, 2011, 02:00:49 AM
Regarding FO tracking - the promotion chain needs to be changed first, since the Form 2 currently never leaves the unit.

The Form 2 never leaves the unit for 2Lt and 1Lt either, but NHQ manages to track those.

If you sign the form 2 and put it in the folder without sending it to NHQ, the member will never get promoted.

Quote from: CAPR 35-51-5. Promoting Authority (see figure 1):
h. Flight Officer and NCO Grades. The squadron commander is the promoting authority for members assigned to his or her unit for these grades. NOTE: Flight officer grades are not recorded at National Headquarters.

I was referring only to Lt's - you have to send the F2 to NHQ unless you are doing duty promotions online.

Quote from: MSgt Van on January 01, 2011, 01:57:59 AM
"you need to be a Major to go to NSC and that's a requirement for it? "

If an NCO's completed military leadership training (NCO Academy, etc) that counts.  In my squadron a SMSgt and myself are complete through NSC.

The '09 NSC had two chief master sergeants in attendance, so that requirement can be waived for senior NCOs.

Quote from: spacecommand on December 31, 2010, 07:46:43 PM
CAP NCO's also wear "CAP" cutouts.

Also the blank CAP gray epaulets were designed for senior member NCO's to have their grade embroidered on as an alternative, even though the USAF doesn't do this anymore for NCOs, CAP regulations to my knowledge still allow it as an option though many just go with the sleeve insignia.

(That's what those blank gray epaulets are for, NOT for SMWOG).

This is another example of where 39-1 needs a major correction. The grey shoulder sleves were approved by the Air Force to distinguish CAP from the rest of the force. Because the Top 3 enlisted ranks were created to replace warrant officers as an enlisted management level, those ranks were permitted to be worn as shoulder sleve rank on everything except BDUs and dress jackets. Most senior NCOs these days, however, prefer the sleve rank.

Anyway, the blank shoulder sleves were intended for CAP SMWOG and could be worn on the dress jacket by NCOs. You don't embroider rank on them, because there are gray sleves with the proper NCO rank on them for the top three. For everyone else, you do what we used to do in the Air Force and that is place the metal pin-on rank there. If worn, however, there's no real need of CAP cutouts.

Furthermore, CAP senior member NCOs shouldn't be wearing CAP on the lapels of dress jackets when the Air Force required the "U.S." When the Air Force went back to the circled "U.S.," the CAP should have gotten permission to do the same, especially when all CAP NCOs are prior military enlisted.

Quote from: flyboy1 on January 02, 2011, 01:39:55 PM
Anyway, the blank shoulder sleves were intended for CAP SMWOG

Cite please?

Quote from: CAP Producer on January 02, 2011, 01:59:36 PM

Quote from: flyboy1 on January 02, 2011, 01:39:55 PM
Anyway, the blank shoulder sleves were intended for CAP SMWOG

Cite please?

Both the Knowledgebase and Vanguard refer to those sleeves as for NCO's.  That will not be enough for some people here.

Since there is no mention of the sleeves in any form whatsoever in any CAP regulation, nor diagram or image, it is questionable how  anyone could support their wear one way or another.

Quote from: flyboy1 on January 02, 2011, 01:39:55 PM

The grey shoulder sleves were approved by the Air Force to distinguish CAP from the rest of the force. Because the Top 3 enlisted ranks were created to replace warrant officers as an enlisted management level, those ranks were permitted to be worn as shoulder sleve rank on everything except BDUs and dress jackets. Most senior NCOs these days, however, prefer the sleve rank.

Anyway, the blank shoulder sleves were intended for CAP SMWOG and could be worn on the dress jacket by NCOs. You don't embroider rank on them, because there are gray sleves with the proper NCO rank on them for the top three. For everyone else, you do what we used to do in the Air Force and that is place the metal pin-on rank there. If worn, however, there's no real need of CAP cutouts.

Furthermore, CAP senior member NCOs shouldn't be wearing CAP on the lapels of dress jackets when the Air Force required the "U.S." When the Air Force went back to the circled "U.S.," the CAP should have gotten permission to do the same, especially when all CAP NCOs are prior military enlisted.

1.  "Berry Boards" were adopted to distinguish CAP members, and many say this was more "punishment" because prior to berry boards, CAP wore metal rank insignia on the service jacket.  Berry colored sleeves were later changed to Gray, which was around the same time they changed to the New Style USAF uniform if I recall.

2. In regards to the USAF, effective Oct 1. 2006, shoulder boards are no longer worn by senior  NCOs (MSgts, SMSgts, and CMSgts).  However USAF uniform changes do not immediately reflect CAP uniform changes. So, in regards to CAP, nothing in 39-1 or the accompanied ICL's indicate "PIN ON" rank.  It only says "embroidered".  39-1 page 18.

3. Citation where it says the blank epaulets were intended for SMWOG.  Even if you can cite they were "intended for",  it does not prove they are for SMWOG.  However I can't find anything that says  they were even intended for.  39-1 states sleeves displaying "grade insignia" a SMWOG has no grade to display.  I think some of the blame goes to vanguard as well.  For a long time their description for it.  I noticed they had recently changed their description to say for NCO pin on rank, which is still incorrect, because 39-1 says embroidered not pin on.

4. Again what the USAF does with their uniform does not immediately nor does it always reflect onto how CAP wears the Uniform.  So just because the USAF wears "US" cutouts on their uniforms, does not mean NCOs in CAP have to as well.  Historically speaking, CAP cutouts were always worn on the USAF style uniform by everyone before the switch to the new style uniform.  Cadets today continue to wear CAP cutouts as well on the USAF uniform (both old and new style).

Quote from: AdAstra on December 31, 2010, 08:27:50 PM
CAP NCOs can complete Level V. According to CAPR 50-17, Attch 2, any Armed Forces Senior NCO Academy can be used as equivalent for NSC.

In addition, Chiefs are eligible to attend NSC. Two Chiefs attended the 2009 college, with great success (one was a member of my seminar), and one returned on staff in 2010.

That is if you ever went to a SNCO academy.

If you are a CAP SSgt....you will always be a CAP SSgt.....and will never be able to go to NSC.   One of the many problems with the CAP NCO program.

Effectively, Pat, there is no NCO "Program" in CAP.

NCO rank is given as a courtesy to former NCO's who, for whatever reason, choose not to become officers.  Some NCO's seem to think that going from SMSgt to 2nd Lt. is a DEmotion. 

Incidentally, I was an Army SSG (E-6) when I picked up a gold bar.  I didn't think it was a demotion.  I was, in fact, feeling pretty darned good about finishing OCS.

When an NCO finishes OCS, the Army gets one of the best Officers it will ever have. I had a butter bar for a PL for a year before I deployed to Iraq, he was an over payed private. He didn't have a tactical cell in his body, he couldn't read a map, he didn't even know how to use a compass.

Just a few weeks before we deployed we got a new PL, he was a prior E-6 11-B. We felt a huge weight lifted off of our shoulders. He felt that it was a bit of a demotion, but he didn't do it for the extra pay, he told us he did it for other soldiers, he knew that we needed someone for a PL that wasn't still a private. He was the best officer I ever met.

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on January 03, 2011, 04:37:36 PM
Effectively, Pat, there is no NCO "Program" in CAP.

NCO rank is given as a courtesy to former NCO's who, for whatever reason, choose not to become officers.  Some NCO's seem to think that going from SMSgt to 2nd Lt. is a DEmotion. 

Incidentally, I was an Army SSG (E-6) when I picked up a gold bar.  I didn't think it was a demotion.  I was, in fact, feeling pretty darned good about finishing OCS.

There is also no contingent of enlisted for an NCO to be concerned about regarding their health, welfare, and training.  Nationwide there
are probably less than 100 total (my wing has two).

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on January 03, 2011, 04:37:36 PM
Effectively, Pat, there is no NCO "Program" in CAP.

NCO rank is given as a courtesy to former NCO's who, for whatever reason, choose not to become officers.  Some NCO's seem to think that going from SMSgt to 2nd Lt. is a DEmotion. 

Incidentally, I was an Army SSG (E-6) when I picked up a gold bar.  I didn't think it was a demotion.  I was, in fact, feeling pretty darned good about finishing OCS.

I am with you there.  That is the OTHER problem with the CAP NCO "Program".

I am a retired USAF MSgt....and I see the CAP NCO program as a GOB Club.....this is not to say that the individuals in the NCO program are not good people and do good work....just that it is a closed, dead end program that does not really benifit CAP in any significant way.

Quote from: Eclipse on January 03, 2011, 05:15:00 PM
There is also no contingent of enlisted for an NCO to be concerned about regarding their health, welfare, and training. 

Unless you count the thousands of SMWOGs.

WOG's, for the most part are in training to be officers.  They are not in the same boat as enlisted that have to learn a skill under the training guidance of a seasoned NCO.

Quote from: Ned on January 03, 2011, 07:07:55 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on January 03, 2011, 05:15:00 PM
There is also no contingent of enlisted for an NCO to be concerned about regarding their health, welfare, and training. 

Unless you count the thousands of SMWOGs.

As John says, not  the same thing, either in intention or practical reality..

Quote from: Eclipse on January 03, 2011, 09:29:14 PM
As John says, not  the same thing, either in intention or practical reality..

Really?  No one has to be concerned with the health, welfare, and training of the SMWOGs??

Good to know.   ::)

Why wouldn't a good NCO be a resource for all the non-officers in the unit (inlcuding cadets)?

Maybe that would be a good point, make a temporary grade position of 1st SGT for one SM in each unit. When you are appointed as 1st SGT, you put that rank on, when you are done with that position, you  put your officer rank back on. Same idea with group and wing and national, have a Command CMSGT at group wing and region levels, and a CMSGT of CAP at national level. Their jobs will be the same as they would be in the USAF.

Quote from: Ned on January 03, 2011, 09:31:59 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on January 03, 2011, 09:29:14 PM
As John says, not  the same thing, either in intention or practical reality..

Really?  No one has to be concerned with the health, welfare, and training of the SMWOGs??

Good to know.   ::)

PDO, CDS, CC? That is their job.

QuoteWhy wouldn't a good NCO be a resource for all the non-officers in the unit (inlcuding cadets)?

Why wouldn't a CAP officer? What is so special about stripes that only those wearing them can be such a resource?

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on January 03, 2011, 09:37:05 PM
Maybe that would be a good point, make a temporary grade position of 1st SGT for one SM in each unit. When you are appointed as 1st SGT, you put that rank on, when you are done with that position, you  put your officer rank back on. Same idea with group and wing and national, have a Command CMSGT at group wing and region levels, and a CMSGT of CAP at national level. Their jobs will be the same as they would be in the USAF.

Get ready for screams of protest from NCO's if you do not appoint a military (or former) NCO to that role. Appointing someone who, may be a great CAP officer, has never served as a military NCO, will cause NCOs to have litters of kittens sideways.

Quote from: arajca on January 03, 2011, 09:37:53 PM
  What is so special about stripes that only those wearing them can be such a resource?

Obviously CAP has successfully existed for a while without NCOs in every (or even most units).

But what is so special about officer insiginia that "only those wearing them can be an effective resource?"

The point is that military systems have existed for a couple of thousand years at this point, and universally employ both officers and NCOs within the organization.  Both are important and have their roles to play within the system.

Sure, you might be able to make a system work without NCOs, but why would you if you don't have to?  Think how much better it could work if we actually employed them in their natural functions.

For most of our history, CAP has used NCOs to fill key roles in our units.  If a casual observer were to spend much time reading CAPTalk, she/he might conclude that a lot of people don't think CAP in general (and CAP local units in particular) function as well today as they did "in the old days".

When we had more NCOs.

Out of curiosity, how many NCOs do we have nationwide?  I see one in my wing.

The last time numbers were given by NHQ it was about 50 (Fifty) in the entire country. 

Quote from: Ned on January 03, 2011, 09:31:59 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on January 03, 2011, 09:29:14 PM
As John says, not  the same thing, either in intention or practical reality..

Really?  No one has to be concerned with the health, welfare, and training of the SMWOGs??

Good to know.   ::)

Why wouldn't a good NCO be a resource for all the non-officers in the unit (inlcuding cadets)?

Because while they may not be officers (yet), but they are also not enlisted.  They are simply "new", and most will be officers in less than a year.  Further, from a duty and expectation standpoint they are equal to everyone else in the room, unlike the typical enlisted person, regardless of service.

Being an NCO does not give you special powers with cadets.  Their experience and ability is a huge factor in their value to CAP, but the stripes have nothing to do with it.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on January 03, 2011, 09:37:05 PM
Maybe that would be a good point, make a temporary grade position of 1st SGT for one SM in each unit. When you are appointed as 1st SGT, you put that rank on, when you are done with that position, you  put your officer rank back on. Same idea with group and wing and national, have a Command CMSGT at group wing and region levels, and a CMSGT of CAP at national level. Their jobs will be the same as they would be in the USAF.

I already suggested a similar program.

Shot down for a solution looking for a problem.

My ideas was to make the NCO corps a specialty track that anyone could do and anyone could advance in.

MSgt would require a Master Level in the specialty Track.
Squadrons would be allowed 1 First Sgt
Group could appoint SMSgts and wings appoint CMSgts with one CMSgt being appointed Command Chief.  Region and National would also have command chiefs.

Their duties would would be to act as the Uniform Police and Military D&C Czars.

They would be barred from command positions and from other staff positions and from acting as IC/OSC/PSC on the ES side so as not to confuse the chain of command. 

If not actively serving in an NCO slot they would revert to an officer rank.

Rank progression would be as follows.

Level I  - Technician Trainee....SrA (reverts to 2d Lt)
Level I  - Completed Technician SSgt (reverts to 1st Lt)
Level II - Completed Senior TSgt (Reverts to Capt)
Level III - Completed Master MSgt (Reverts to Major).
Level IV - Working at Group level or higher SMSgt
Level V - Working at Wing Level or higher CMSgt

They would have to complete all the promotion requirements for the officer rank before they could wear the NCO rank stated.

Once they have successfully completed a tour (2years?) at group/wing/region then their rank would be permanent if they continue to do NCO duties at a lower level (so yes you can have a CMSgt First Sergeant at the squadron level).

Prior Service NCO's of course can get a leg up and wear their rank they earned with the caveat that they must complete the appropriate CAP PD in a reasonable time frame (this is an idea that I think should be applied to any and all advanced promotion) and they remain working in an NCO billet.

This is a basic frame work.....so don't tear me up too much.  If anyone is intrested in exploring this idea, it would be kind of intresting to see where we could go with it.

As it is now.....CAP NCO's have no job to do, no way to progress in a meaningful manner, and exists in a way that blurs the chain of command lines.

If........IF, a viable NCO corps is a wanted goal....a viable program could be built.

Quote from: RiverAux on January 03, 2011, 10:17:45 PM
The last time numbers were given by NHQ it was about 50 (Fifty) in the entire country.

but there are a whole lot more former NCO's wearing officer ranks then Eservices says.

A lot of us opted for one reason or another to just follow the normal CAP rank structure.

If a viable CAP NCO corps were to be implemented.......then you would see a lot more NCO's.

As it is now....most of CAP NCO's do it just to be different IMHO......as NCO's they don't really have a defined place in CAP.  (again not a bash on those who choose to be CAP NCOs).

Quote from: Eclipse on January 03, 2011, 10:47:04 PM
[Because while they may not be officers (yet), but they are also not enlisted.  They are simply "new", and most will be officers in less than a year. 

While I certainly agree that no one is serving in CAP under a contract of enlistment, I don't see how that is relevent to the topic at hand.

Of course (most) SMWOGs are new folks.  But I'm sure you would agree with me that the traditional role of the NCO is to deal with new folks.  Watching out for their "health, welfare, training" (as someone pointed out earlier in the thread.)

QuoteFurther, from a duty and expectation standpoint they are equal to everyone else in the room, unlike the typical enlisted person, regardless of service.

Just like every other member of CAP, with the exception of commanders, who are the only people in CAP with any sort of authority to begin with.

QuoteBeing an NCO does not give you special powers with cadets.  Their experience and ability is a huge factor in their value to CAP, but the stripes have nothing to do with it.

"Special powers"?  Where did that come from?

Everyone with "experience and ability" can be a resource for our cadets.  And in a very real sense, NCO's stripes have everything to do with that, since that is usually how they got their "abiltity and experience."

I think the most important thing about an NCO is to lead as one.

I think a cadet could learn A LOT from a SM NCO who knows how to LEAD AS AN NCO. This is easily attained with a simple manual about leading as an NCO, just using an AFMAN would do just fine. No need to write a new one.

Quote from: lordmonar on January 03, 2011, 11:31:56 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on January 03, 2011, 10:17:45 PM
The last time numbers were given by NHQ it was about 50 (Fifty) in the entire country.

but there are a whole lot more former NCO's wearing officer ranks then Eservices says.

The question was how many NCOs we have now not how many current or former military NCOs that could potentially be CAP NCOs under our current requirements.   

LordM, good start...first reasonable, detailed proposal I've seen about this....at one point, there was an NCO working group at National, led by CAP Command CMSGT...anyone hear any results from that?

No results from the "working group" that I've heard from.  BTW; the chairman of the group is our current National CV. 

In any event, it's good to revisit this "discussion" on CAP NCO's and a possible NCO program in CAP.  However, there are good reasons why the old NCO program died years ago.  If a new one is developed, it would have to take in consideration the simple fact that, as civilians, our grade structure has no corelation to Air Force grade; except for title and insignia. 

IMHO, prior military NCO's who insist on wearing chevrons denotes a failure, on our part, to educate them on our history (we haven't had a non military CAP NCO for about 30 years), culture and, grade structure.  To me, there is no reason for CAP to create another class of membership simply to do so.   

Quote from: FW on January 05, 2011, 04:35:41 AM
However, there are good reasons why the old NCO program died years ago.

And those good reasons are?

Two things I see:

1. You must be at least a first lieutenant to be a squadron commander; if you are a CAP EM of any stripe, you automatically become at least a first lieutenant if you accept command of a squadron.

2. The Air Force has eliminated shoulder marks ("epaulets") for all enlisted grades. Stripes are worn on every EM's sleeves, regardless if they're an airman or a chief.

Quote from: FW on January 05, 2011, 04:35:41 AM
No results from the "working group" that I've heard from.  BTW; the chairman of the group is our current National CV. 

In any event, it's good to revisit this "discussion" on CAP NCO's and a possible NCO program in CAP.  However, there are good reasons why the old NCO program died years ago.  If a new one is developed, it would have to take in consideration the simple fact that, as civilians, our grade structure has no corelation to Air Force grade; except for title and insignia. 

IMHO, prior military NCO's who insist on wearing chevrons denotes a failure, on our part, to educate them on our history (we haven't had a non military CAP NCO for about 30 years), culture and, grade structure.  To me, there is no reason for CAP to create another class of membership simply to do so.

From a history standpoint, that's incorrect. There have been enlisted people in the CAP from it's inception. The ranks went away because of abuse. I know because I was a CAP technical sergeant when that happened.

NCOs do not denote a failure in the program. Instead, it would give our program more diversity and more options on how that individual would want to proceed with their training, participation and professional development.

With those ranks, there would be greater oportunities for senior members who do not want to achieve leadership positions. There would be fewer chiefs and more followers. Without those ranks, there has been a gradual dumbing down of the requirements to get promoted to include gross examples of cheating and politicing.

The lack of options produced only one path of upward mobility, which is why it hasn't been embrased now because CAP leadership knows that implementation would mean stronger standards for officers.

Also, I was a career Air Force SNCO. If the CAP program were properly developed, it wouldn't be that difficult to correlate it to the Air Force grade structure. That is why it's appropriate, for now, that only prior military NCOs be in the top ranks. Those same SNCOs, however, would be the appropriate mentors to ensure that the program proceed properly.

If those same SNCOs effectively mentored and developed a program as it should be, I believe the end result would be something with greater prestige than the current CAP officer program. One of the problems, however, is correlating NCO PME, which takes longer than things like SLS' and CLCs.

I might even consider giving up my silver oak leaves and returning to my former enlisted rank.

Quote from: flyboy1 on January 05, 2011, 11:44:48 AM
From a history standpoint, that's incorrect. There have been enlisted people in the CAP from it's inception. The ranks went away because of abuse. I know because I was a CAP technical sergeant when that happened.

As I said, there hasn't been a non military CAP NCO for the last 30 years; which is about when the the program died because of abuse and, the perceived treatment differences between CAP officers and NCO's by the general membership and our external "customers".

QuoteNCOs do not denote a failure in the program. Instead, it would give our program more diversity and more options on how that individual would want to proceed with their training, participation and professional development.

I never said NCO's denote a failure in the program.  I said it is a failure of the membership to educate military NCO's about our history, grade system and culture; a culture where an NCO grade is superfluous to our current system.   

QuoteWith those ranks, there would be greater opportunities for senior members who do not want to achieve leadership positions. There would be fewer chiefs and more followers. Without those ranks, there has been a gradual dumbing down of the requirements to get promoted to include gross examples of cheating and politicking.

The lack of options produced only one path of upward mobility, which is why it hasn't been embraced now because CAP leadership knows that implementation would mean stronger standards for officers.

Also, I was a career Air Force SNCO. If the CAP program were properly developed, it wouldn't be that difficult to correlate it to the Air Force grade structure. That is why it's appropriate, for now, that only prior military NCOs be in the top ranks. Those same SNCOs, however, would be the appropriate mentors to ensure that the program proceed properly.

If those same SNCOs effectively mentored and developed a program as it should be, I believe the end result would be something with greater prestige than the current CAP officer program. One of the problems, however, is correlating NCO PME, which takes longer than things like SLS' and CLCs.

I might even consider giving up my silver oak leaves and returning to my former enlisted rank.

I agree, if an NCO program can be developed which is effective and avoids the problems of the past, I'm for it.  However, I think your next to last paragraph points out the basic problem.  I don't think "prestige" is what we are looking for.  I think the goal is effective management of our programs and great leadership for CAP.   IMHO, it is improving CAP which is the most important point of our discussion.

QuoteNCOs do not denote a failure in the program. Instead, it would give our program more diversity and more options on how that individual would want to proceed with their training, participation and professional development.

It really doesn't give them any options that they don't have other than what grade insignia is on their uniform. 

Quote
With those ranks, there would be greater oportunities for senior members who do not want to achieve leadership positions.

There are no requirements that any senior member take on any leadership position now so just what opportunities would be presented to them? 

QuoteWithout those ranks, there has been a gradual dumbing down of the requirements to get promoted to include gross examples of cheating and politicing.

Huh?  What does that have to do with NCOs?  Are you saying that NCOs would never be involved in cheating or "politics"  How does creating an NCO program have any impact on that? 

QuoteThere would be fewer chiefs and more followers.

Despite the fact that almost all CAP senior members are officers, there are very few real leaders.  Like with any volunteer organization a small number of people do the majority of the work.  That would not change unless you're saying that if we create an NCO program that the NCOs won't be doing any leading?  Thats just the opposite of what we need which is more people willing to take on leadership roles of one kind or another. 

I would probably be in favor of an NCO program but only if it was coupled with a radical restructuring of all CAP regulations regarding promotions including elimination of ALL special and skills-related appointments (including former military officers).  If every single CAP adult had to start as an Airman and work their way through the system, I'd be for it. 

NCOs are so rare, in all my CAP time (9.3 years) I've seen exactly one. The Wing logistics officer (not sure he's it's still the same one), and at a few past wing conferences, the paper for the door was even prefixed with a C/CMSgt as if whoever was making those up figured "this can't be right, that has to be a cadet, here, let me fix that.." totally disregarding that it says "Wing Logisitics Officer" under the title.

Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on January 05, 2011, 06:11:41 AM
Two things I see:

1. You must be at least a first lieutenant to be a squadron commander; if you are a CAP EM of any stripe, you automatically become at least a first lieutenant if you accept command of a squadron.

2. The Air Force has eliminated shoulder marks ("epaulets") for all enlisted grades. Stripes are worn on every EM's sleeves, regardless if they're an airman or a chief.

Absolutely concur w. #1, would extend requirement to include that deputies must be at least 2 Lt.

As for #2, if the shoulder marks (or some variation on them) were available, this might be a good way to distinguish CAP NCOs from USAF.

Finally, I must agree with Col. Weiss: we need to determine the purpose of a CAP NCO corps (specialty track?) before going forward.

Quote from: ZigZag911 on January 05, 2011, 07:35:32 PM

Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on January 05, 2011, 06:11:41 AM
Two things I see:

1. You must be at least a first lieutenant to be a squadron commander; if you are a CAP EM of any stripe, you automatically become at least a first lieutenant if you accept command of a squadron.

2. The Air Force has eliminated shoulder marks ("epaulets") for all enlisted grades. Stripes are worn on every EM's sleeves, regardless if they're an airman or a chief.

Absolutely concur w. #1, would extend requirement to include that deputies must be at least 2 Lt.

As for #2, if the shoulder marks (or some variation on them) were available, this might be a good way to distinguish CAP NCOs from USAF.

Finally, I must agree with Col. Weiss: we need to determine the purpose of a CAP NCO corps (specialty track?) before going forward.

On No. 1: Hard to just agree with that. It's actually in regulation. :)

As for CAP NCO specialty tracks: Many of the current specialty tracks may be adopted. For instance, the Air Force has career paths for both officers and enlisted in public affairs -- and there's no reason we couldn't do the same for CAP officers and enlisted. Some tracks won't translate for enlisted personnel, and some quals and specialties won't be open to enlisted personnel (enlisted wouldn't be pilots and probably not observers, for instance, nor would they do the organizational excellence track).

Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on January 06, 2011, 07:13:28 AM

Quote from: ZigZag911 on January 05, 2011, 07:35:32 PM

Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on January 05, 2011, 06:11:41 AM
Two things I see:

1. You must be at least a first lieutenant to be a squadron commander; if you are a CAP EM of any stripe, you automatically become at least a first lieutenant if you accept command of a squadron.

2. The Air Force has eliminated shoulder marks ("epaulets") for all enlisted grades. Stripes are worn on every EM's sleeves, regardless if they're an airman or a chief.

Absolutely concur w. #1, would extend requirement to include that deputies must be at least 2 Lt.

As for #2, if the shoulder marks (or some variation on them) were available, this might be a good way to distinguish CAP NCOs from USAF.

Finally, I must agree with Col. Weiss: we need to determine the purpose of a CAP NCO corps (specialty track?) before going forward.

On No. 1: Hard to just agree with that. It's actually in regulation. :)

and there's no reason we couldn't do the same for CAP officers and enlisted.

Except for the fact that we have tracks that haven't been updated in a decade, and that's just a single track.

Quote from: MSgt Van on January 01, 2011, 01:57:59 AM
"you need to be a Major to go to NSC and that's a requirement for it? "

If an NCO's completed military leadership training (NCO Academy, etc) that counts.  In my squadron a SMSgt and myself are complete through NSC.

Does the Coast Guard's Chief Petty Officer's Academy count for this as well? 

Quote from: PaulR on January 07, 2011, 04:46:36 AM

Quote from: MSgt Van on January 01, 2011, 01:57:59 AM
"you need to be a Major to go to NSC and that's a requirement for it? "

If an NCO's completed military leadership training (NCO Academy, etc) that counts.  In my squadron a SMSgt and myself are complete through NSC.

Does the Coast Guard's Chief Petty Officer's Academy count for this as well?

CAPR 50-17 Attachment 2 states "Any US Armed Forces Senior NCO Academy, resident or correspondence" can be accepted as Equivalent to National Staff College.

I would think the CPO Academy would be included in that reference

Very likely, I used Navy LMET for ECI 113 Credit.  Cll NHQ, and you may need to email them the course description from the ACE guide.  Your Education Office should have it.

Thank you!   :D

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on January 01, 2011, 02:17:35 AM

Quote from: Eclipse on January 01, 2011, 02:13:28 AM
If you sign the form 2 and put it in the folder without sending it to NHQ, the member will never get promoted.

My understanding was that there was some button-clicking action by the CC in eServices that takes care of this.

Eclipse is incorrect. The ranks of O-2 and O-1 are approved by the squadron commander, and O-3 and O-4 is approved by group commander by using the eServices Duty Promotion system. There's no need to fill out the forms, or send them to NHQ.

Us Personnel Officers just go into eServices, on the right side click Membership and then click Promotions. Enter your member ID and we are shown all your info. At the bottom it shows the requirements for promotion and next to each there's either a green check mark, or a red "x." If all are green I can click submit member for promotion and an approval goes to the appropriate person.

Many squadrons are no longer using F2s for duty promotions, duty position changes and so on. No need. Its all listed in eServices now.

Anyway, the one issue I've seen is that CAP does't recognize an NCO that was an E-4. When I asked about the program recently, I got an email from Ms Parker stating that NCOs would be excepted from E-5 and above. That's completely arbitrary and makes no sense.

I wouldn't mind forgoing my officer rank and going back to stripes. Even though some have said people only do it to be different I disagree. Some might, but I earned my stripes. I felt funny putting on officer ranks both in CAP and the CGAUX. Granted, to be an officer in both organizations requires nothing near what it does in the military, but its still an officer rank nonetheless. I am proud of my stripes. I would make the change except for the money already invested in my current rank, and having officer uniforms.

Quote from: SoCalMarine on June 19, 2011, 11:23:05 AM
Anyway, the one issue I've seen is that CAP does't recognize an NCO that was an E-4. When I asked about the program recently, I got an email from Ms Parker stating that NCOs would be excepted from E-5 and above. That's completely arbitrary and makes no sense.

I wouldn't mind forgoing my officer rank and going back to stripes. Even though some have said people only do it to be different I disagree. Some might, but I earned my stripes. I felt funny putting on officer ranks both in CAP and the CGAUX. Granted, to be an officer in both organizations requires nothing near what it does in the military, but its still an officer rank nonetheless. I am proud of my stripes. I would make the change except for the money already invested in my current rank, and having officer uniforms.

As you should be, but let me ask, are you proud of your Marine Corporal stripes or your Civil Air Patrol Senior Airman stripes?  Having been a Marine Sgt myself, no offense to anyone....I could care less about CAP stripes.  Notice I didnt say AF stripes.  Walking around in your CAP uniform with your CAP stripes isnt the same thing as walking around with your Marine Cpl Stripes as Im sure your aware.  The reasoning makes total sense because in the Air Force (which CAP is an auxiliary of) you are not an NCO until you hit SSgt/E5.   I have a friend of mine who was a Cpl/E4 in the Marines and moved over to the Air Guard.  Now he's sporting his nice new, non-NCO SrAmn stripes.
Considering the AF signs off on everything uniform related that CAP does, I would venture to guess that the Air Force decided that you needed to be an E5, not because CAP doesnt respect other branches.
As far as the officer ranks, this has been discussed MANY times.  Again, people are taking common symbols and attaching a meaning to them that doesnt apply.  Prior military people seem to have the hardest time with this. You are a Civil Air Patrol officer.  Not an Air Force or CG officer.  No more than my Sheriff's Lieutenant at work is a butter bar in the military. People don't walk around calling him a new guy.  The Sheriff wears 4 stars on her collar.  I dont think she walks around thinking shes a General.  Exact same concept in CAP.  All we did was adopt military symbols for our own purposes.  Just like Law Enforcement, just like Fire Departments, etc.

So the first step in your transition to CAP is to completely remove any correlation you have to thinking you are  acting like a wannabe being a military officer.

Quote from: Flying Pig on June 19, 2011, 04:17:20 PM
...
No more than my Sheriff's Lieutenant at work is a butter bar in the military. People don't walk around calling him a new guy.  The Sheriff wears 4 stars on her collar.  I dont think she walks around thinking shes a General.
...

Interestingly, I'm finding it weird to go back to the stripes thing with the sheriff's department... Just sort of got used to shiny things and my immediate supervisors having shiny things rather than stripes.

Quote from: Flying Pig on June 19, 2011, 04:17:20 PM
As you should be, but let me ask, are you proud of your Marine Corporal stripes or your Civil Air Patrol Senior Airman stripes?  Having been a Marine Sgt myself, no offense to anyone....I could care less about CAP stripes.  Notice I didnt say AF stripes.  Walking around in your CAP uniform with your CAP stripes isnt the same thing as walking around with your Marine Cpl Stripes as Im sure your aware.

To just correct one thing first, I wasn't just a corporal. I was only pointing out that an E-4 isn't accepted as an NCO.

I also find it odd that CAP would say no to another branch's E-4 which IS an NCO when the manual simply states NCO and not a particular pay grade. It doesn't state it has to be an AF NCO. Also, according to the KB answer "CAP NCO rank from prior military service" (Link (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=657&p_created=1037891632&p_sid=yHcY_Vwk&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_srch=1&p_lva=657&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9MTY0MiwxNjQyJnBfcHJvZHM9JnBfY2F0cz0wJnBfcHY9JnBfY3Y9JnBfc2VhcmNoX3R5cGU9YW5zd2Vycy5zZWFyY2hfbmwmcF9wYWdlPTEmcF9zZWFyY2hfdGV4dD1jYXAgbmNv&p_li=&p_topview=1)) updated on March 16, 2011... a person is asking what he would wear because he left the Army as an E-4. CAP answered he'd wear the current USAF E-4 equivalent of SrA.

So, there seems to be a disconnect between what the manual says, what the KB people are saying and what Ms Parker is saying up at National. I may have to email this comment back to her in reply to her email to me stating only E-5.


Anyway, back to your question. Yes, I realize there is a difference. The thing is that while CAP enlisted ranks are not the same thing, they are this organization's equivalent. However, for me personally, maintaining stripes regardless of the organization is important if given the option. Just like any other organization or company that would give me a position based on my education and military time and rank. Its hard to put into words, but CAP's equivalent for my Marine Corps rank is available and I should have taken it. We all know that the enlisted culture is entirely different than that of the officer side. If more members were to take their enlisted equivalent with CAP I think you'd have one heck of a training cadre available. Just my opinion.

Quote from: SoCalMarine on June 19, 2011, 06:35:21 PM
If more members were to take their enlisted equivalent with CAP I think you'd have one heck of a training cadre available. Just my opinion.

Every time NCOs come up it comes down to this: What's stopping them from doing it with officer rank?


At the last SAREX we had, not one but two full bird colonels taking out the trash while I, a mere captain made sure the aircraft were ready to return to home base while a 1st Lt prepared their departure releases, rank doesn't mean a whole lot when there is a job to do.

There is a disconnect between reality and CAP NCO program.

There is no program.

There is nothing for the NCO's to do.
There is no way that a CAP NCO can progress.
There is no program for them to be a training cadre in.

I know this thread is long.....and several of us (I am a retired MSgt) have suggested ways a CAP NCO program could be used.
But in the end it is just a solution looking for a problem.

Right now....CAP NCO's are simply another clique in CAP that just muddle the already muddled CAP rank system.

To Re-hash the old thread about my suggestion.

1) CAP enlisted (not just NCOs) would be open to everyone, not just former military personnel.
2) CAP enlisted corps would be the USAF uniform, drill and customs and courtisies (german national socialists circa 1931-1945 :) does that avoid Godwin's Law?)
3) They would progress up CAP PD level just like officers.
4) They would wear their enlisted stripes only while assigned to the enlisted specality track and only when assigned to the enlisted duty assignements.
5) They will be forbidden to hold ANY.....ANY other leadership position that would place them above officers...except in their duties as military training.
6) They would revert to officer ranks if they leave their enlisted duty assignment.
7) E-9 would be restricted to just one individual per wing/region/NHQ.
8) They would be the military training cadre for cadet, senior and composite squadrons.

Bacically....
Level I+3months= Amn
A1C+Technicain in enlisted specialty track+6months=A1C
Level II (tecnicain rateing in enlisted specialty track)+9 month=SrA
Level III (must have senior rateing in enlisted specialty track)+18 months=SSgt
Level IV (must have master rateing in enlisted specialty track)+3 years=Tsgt
Level V (must have master rateing in enlisted specialty track) +4 years=MSgt
SMSgt Appointment to group SNO position (limit 1 per group) or wing SMSgt position
    (limited to 3% of the size of the wing). (i.e. 100 members in the wing...only 3 SMSgts (to include any SMSgt assigned to groups)
CMSgt Appointed as wing or region command cheif. (i.e. one per wing/region)
CAP Command Chief.....one.  Allowed to have a staff of upto 8 addtional CMSgts/SMSgts.
Squadrons allowed to appoint one first sergeant.

The only thing left to do is to develope the enllisted specialty track...which would be heavey on dril and ceremonies,
customes and coutsies, uniform wear, instructor development, and general leadership skills.

Former military personnel would be able to jump rank (just as officers do) but SMSgt and CMSgt would be limited to MSgt
(just as generals and Cols are limited to Lt Col).
Former military personnel who wish to progress higher in enlisted rank would have to completed all the requirments...with only TIG being waived.
No one can be appointed to SMSgt or CMSgt without being Level V......unless they held that rank as while in the military and
they would have one year/level to chatch up or they will be removed from the position.

If no enlisted personnel is eligible to hold the postion then it can be filled by a lower ranking position but he/she cannot be awarded the
rank nor hold the title "command chief" he would be refered to as the senior enlisted advisor.

Okay...

I think that basically covers all the bases.

It gives the NCO's a job....(military training)
It gives them a progression system.
It builds in a check to the ego monsters and title climbers.
It is a temporary rank....that is if you no longer want to be a military training expert then you will take off the stripes and become the appropriate officer based on your PD level, TIG and TIS.

Quote from: lordmonar on June 19, 2011, 08:06:04 PM
To Re-hash the old thread about my suggestion.

100% in agreement man! Write it up, send it up and lets get it done. Just ignore the naysayers who'll say it'll never work and never try. They are just people who are evidence of self-fulfilling prophesies.

Quote from: lordmonar on June 19, 2011, 08:06:04 PM
5) They will be forbidden to hold ANY.....ANY other leadership position that would place them above officers...except in their duties as military training.

You have a lot of good ideas but the whole thing falls apart right here.

This would restrict enlisted from having any position in ES higher than GT, FLM, MSA, or MRO unless your entire team consists of enlisted or cadets.

Lordmonar, I really like that idea! I think it could work really well - sometimes I think I would be more comfortable as an NCO than as an officer, if that program existed and was run properly, and I'm sure there are other SMs who feel the same way.

I have a few supplementary questions about your NCO PD program.

Would your NCOs be permitted to attain ratings in other specialty tracks?  CP and AE spring to mind, but just about any job that could be filled by a current SMWOG or 2nd Lt could also be filled by a CAP enlisted, which really means any squadron level staff position short of CD(C or S) or maybe PD.  As such, it seems that any CAP enlisted would also have the opportunity to attain tech rating in just about any specialty track (Chaplaincy, PD, OE and IG aside).

In the end, I can agree that CAP NCOs don't really jive in a primarily civilian organization.  The split-leadership dynamic that works well in the military to divide responsibilities between command and personnel management would really just muddy the waters for civilians who would rather see an unambiguous chain of authority starting with them

Quote from: davidsinn on June 19, 2011, 08:43:46 PM

Quote from: lordmonar on June 19, 2011, 08:06:04 PM
5) They will be forbidden to hold ANY.....ANY other leadership position that would place them above officers...except in their duties as military training.

You have a lot of good ideas but the whole thing falls apart right here.

This would restrict enlisted from having any position in ES higher than GT, FLM, MSA, or MRO unless your entire team consists of enlisted or cadets.

Yep.  They could be MO and MS as well.

Quote from: BGNightfall on June 19, 2011, 09:07:07 PM
I have a few supplementary questions about your NCO PD program.

Would your NCOs be permitted to attain ratings in other specialty tracks?  CP and AE spring to mind, but just about any job that could be filled by a current SMWOG or 2nd Lt could also be filled by a CAP enlisted, which really means any squadron level staff position short of CD(C or S) or maybe PD.  As such, it seems that any CAP enlisted would also have the opportunity to attain tech rating in just about any specialty track (Chaplaincy, PD, OE and IG aside).

In the end, I can agree that CAP NCOs don't really jive in a primarily civilian organization.  The split-leadership dynamic that works well in the military to divide responsibilities between command and personnel management would really just muddy the waters for civilians who would rather see an unambiguous chain of authority starting with them

with the stipulation that they could not hold down the primary duty position....i.e they could not be wing director of CP...but could be an assitant.  They could hold down most of the squadron jobs.....but not any of the "deputy commander" jobs.  A CAP NCO who was also the "logistics officer" would simply be the Logicistics NCO.

So long as the CAP NCO was primarily in the Enlisted Specalty Track and assigned to one of the Enlisted Jobs (call them First Sergeant, Military Training NCO, and Assitant Military Training) then I see why they could not also be personnel, logistics, adminstration, etc.

I don't think they could be Chaplain...as that is a whole other ball of wax right there.....but for the most part there is no other job that they could not be work towards.  So long as they are not in "authority" over officers.

A comments/questions/ponderables:

2) Would be the "USAF uniform, drill and customs and courtisies" what? Keep in mind most non-military people have a Hollywierd interpretation of what "military" means. Do you REALLY want those folks being the "experts"?
4) Is "enlisted" a separate specialty track or are certain specialty tracks designated as "enlisted" and others as "officer"?
5) What if no one wants to be an officer in a unit? Or if the only officer cannot be the unit commander due to time limitations?
6) So, enlisted is a reverse brevet. Instead of being a promotion, it's a demotion. Or is being an officer a demotion?
7) Clarify - only one E-9 per wing or higher HQ, correct? Would they have a set term?

Would units be required to have ncos? What if no one in a unit wants to be an nco?

Since nco stripes are sewn on the sleeve, who pays for the replacement uniforms when they are done? Or kicked up/down to become officers?

They enlisted corps would be the gurus of dress and apperance, the would be the drill tsar, and saluting police.....be use those fun terms.

They would become experts as they progressed up the specialty track....just like cadets start small and move up.

The "enlisted specialty track" would be just like the any other specialty track.....a course of study, duty performance and examinations.

No need to have the positions....no need for anyone to be in the positions.  Much the same way if you don't have a logistics officer, or admin officer.  Not a good way of doing buisness......but it is not a show stopper.

A squadron full of training NCOs...with no one to train would be intresting....I don't foresee such a situation really happeing.  What you you do if you had a squadron full of people who wanted to be pilots and nothing else?

Yes.....the enlisted rank would be temporary.....as long as you are holding down the job you keep your stripes.  Loose the job....loose the stripes.  As officer rank does not really mean anything in the military way of thinking......it is six of one and half dozen of the other whether it is a demotion or a promotion when you leave the enlisted corps.

Only one E-9 per wing......I would accept a term limit similar to what we have as wing commander.

As for who pays for the uniform replacement........who replaces them now?  It would be a lot more expensive anyways as enlisted wear a different service coat then officers do.  If you don't want to pay for new uniforms.....don't quit or get fired. :)

Lordmonar is spot on here.

Yet rather than fire questions back and forth maybe I can make it a bit simpler. CAP NCOs and officers would work the same way that they would in the military. NCOs have a purpose in the military, and officers do as well. NCOs would be the trainers, teachers, drill instructors and general hands-on personnel. Officers would be the policy wonks, the paper pushers, the people who take responsibility for the squadron with regards to actions, appearance and legal.

Not that hard really. All we have to do is take care of some small issues which Lordmonar has already done with saying an NCO in ES would just be the assistant; however, its not unheard of in the military to have a person filling a billet that normally would go to a much higher rank. I've seen corporals in SNCO billets and some SNCOs in officer billets.

Take for instance the JIC for Deepwater Horizon. The USCG PIO was a PO1 and the assistant PIO was a LCDR. Why? Because the PO1 had considerably more experience, and she was able to direct the commander as to what to do. Officers aren't so stuck on themselves that they don't recognize how to follow someone with more knowledge... generally speaking.

While this is one of the more realistic implementations for a CAP "enlisted" program, it still looks like a solution looking for a problem.  Would there be benefits to the organization?  Yes.  Would those benefits offset the implementation costs?  Maybe. 

I still find myself confronted with the big question of "Why do we need more CAP NCOs?"  Or, more appropriately, why do we need to re-adopt what amounts to a military class system within our organization?  In an organization where officers and enlisted would be equally technically adept at a given task, and all other things being equal, why would anybody choose to start out in a position of inferiority while simultaneously having to adhere to even more strict standards of appearance and conduct?  On the squadron level, this would still leave the most senior MSgt in the squadron subordinate to the newest 18 year-old Flight Officer in every aspect except military drill, which that Flight Officer is in no way required to submit to. 

SoCalMarine pointed out an example of an officer allowing the NCO with superior proficiency to take the lead, and while that is admirable, the reality of the military system is that he was under no obligation to do so.  In most cases, within the military system that PO1 would have been fully equipped to handle every aspect of the Public Information office, and the management of the manpower involved, while leaving the over-all accountability for the PIO mission to the Officer In Charge. 

I can very much appreciate pride in military service, past or present, and the desire to represent this in all of life's aspects.  That is exactly what the current CAP NCO grades allow for.  In fact, under the current system a CAP NCO is the same as any other CAP senior member with the exception of the uniform worn (with the exception of corporate officers, obviously).

Oh...I completely agree.

CAP has done just fine for the last 30 years with out a real enlisted corps.

I just came up with this plan as a part of a thought exercise when the pervious CAP "Command Chief" was trying to drum up an NCO corps.

So....this is only a "if you absolutely have to have an NCO corps......this is how I would do it."

Of course, my previous argument really only stands if CAP NCOs bother to participate in the PD program at all and attain the same level of proficiency as their officer (who also do not hold a commission but are not non-commissioned) counterparts. 

Therefore I would comment to any CAP members who are currently or are considering becoming NCOs that they should certainly participate in the CAP PD program.  While it may not benefit the uniform they wear in the form of promotions, it certainly speaks to the same professionalism that tends to make a dedicated NCO corps in our organization desirable.  Also it would defray the arguments that certain members on this board make about CAP NCOs wanting to be special or different and not play by the rules.

The failure of the "NCO Program" reflects a failure of the leadership in general.

Oh, I don't know about that. 

Right now the "program" exists solely as an ego boost for former military NCOs who feel that it is demeaning to be considered a CAP officer.  And so long as it is restricted to former military NCOs it will never amount to anything useful as a "program".  Without changing that provision it certainly isn't worth our leaders time to come up with broader goals for having NCOs in the first place as it just isn't worth it for the 50-100 NCOs we have right now. 

However, if they felt it worthwhile to really expand it beyond PS NCOs, then spending any leadership time on it might be justified. 

Quote from: RiverAux on August 28, 2011, 04:41:55 PM
Oh, I don't know about that. 

Right now the "program" exists solely as an ego boost for former military NCOs who feel that it is demeaning to be considered a CAP officer.  And so long as it is restricted to former military NCOs it will never amount to anything useful as a "program".  Without changing that provision it certainly isn't worth our leaders time to come up with broader goals for having NCOs in the first place as it just isn't worth it for the 50-100 NCOs we have right now. 

However, if they felt it worthwhile to really expand it beyond PS NCOs, then spending any leadership time on it might be justified.

The only ego that is being boosted is the one that belongs to a certain Retired CMSgt.
Somebody want to explain to me just what are the duties of the CAP Command Chief and why do we have one?

Quote from: PHall on August 28, 2011, 04:55:42 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on August 28, 2011, 04:41:55 PM
Oh, I don't know about that. 

Right now the "program" exists solely as an ego boost for former military NCOs who feel that it is demeaning to be considered a CAP officer.  And so long as it is restricted to former military NCOs it will never amount to anything useful as a "program".  Without changing that provision it certainly isn't worth our leaders time to come up with broader goals for having NCOs in the first place as it just isn't worth it for the 50-100 NCOs we have right now. 

However, if they felt it worthwhile to really expand it beyond PS NCOs, then spending any leadership time on it might be justified.

The only ego that is being boosted is the one that belongs to a certain Retired CMSgt.
Somebody want to explain to me just what are the duties of the CAP Command Chief and why do we have one?

How can you explain something that makes no sense?

Even the newest SM 2nd LT. can do more than that chief, its a waste of time for CAP. It does not make any sense to even have a "command chief".

Quote from: NCRblues on August 28, 2011, 04:58:22 PM
Even the newest SM 2nd LT. can do more than that chief[.]

Like what?

Quote from: PHall on August 28, 2011, 04:55:42 PM
The only ego that is being boosted is the one that belongs to a certain Retired CMSgt.
Somebody want to explain to me just what are the duties of the CAP Command Chief and why do we have one?

CAPP 20

Quote
Responsibilities include:
• Travel on behalf of CAP, as funding allows, to (for example);
o Military Functions
o National Cadet Activities
o Region Conferences
o The National Staff College Graduation
• Encourage the recruitment of Chiefs and NCOs for CAP membership by annual attendance at;
o Region Conferences
o Winter and Summer National Board meetings, as travel budgets allow
• Serve as a representative of the National Commander, as requested
• Review Air Force, CAP-USAF, and CAP Wing Instructions and policies, provide input and recommend changes for those instructions and policies affecting CAP members
• Encourage recognition of deserving CAP NCO members during annual functions
• Encourage NCO mentorship of cadets and junior officer CAP members
• Serve on award and recognition selection committees
• Serve as a member of the CAP Uniform Team
• Promote a strong safety and Operational Risk Management program within CAP
• Perform all other duties as assigned

Why we have one...I have no idea.

When I was at NSC they gave the TOPS a standing ovation(they were students like me) I was like for what, did I miss something....I have come across some that wont address you by your grade but they sure as heck want to be called Chief.  I DO BELIEVE THAT THEY CAN BE EFFECTIVE MEMEBERS AND MOST ARE. Why do we need a Command Chief. If we had a viable and productive NCO program I could see why.

It looks like the purpose is to be a face for National.  I don't really understand.  I'm also confused how this works: "Encourage the recruitment of Chiefs and NCOs for CAP membership by annual attendance at [CAP conferences]."  The rest sounds totally random and the responsibility of commanders or staff officers.

Quote from: Ned on August 28, 2011, 05:09:09 PM

Quote from: NCRblues on August 28, 2011, 04:58:22 PM
Even the newest SM 2nd LT. can do more than that chief[.]

Like what?

oh, like command a squadron and so forth and so on

Quote from: NCRblues on August 28, 2011, 07:37:16 PM

Quote from: Ned on August 28, 2011, 05:09:09 PM

Quote from: NCRblues on August 28, 2011, 04:58:22 PM
Even the newest SM 2nd LT. can do more than that chief[.]

Like what?

oh, like command a squadron and so forth and so on

Cite please. Please show where an NCO can't command a unit.

Quote from: PHall on August 28, 2011, 11:33:21 PM

Quote from: NCRblues on August 28, 2011, 07:37:16 PM

Quote from: Ned on August 28, 2011, 05:09:09 PM

Quote from: NCRblues on August 28, 2011, 04:58:22 PM
Even the newest SM 2nd LT. can do more than that chief[.]

Like what?

oh, like command a squadron and so forth and so on

Cite please. Please show where an NCO can't command a unit.

Please show where one can? It would be absurd for an NCO to hold command over an entire unit of officers.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on August 28, 2011, 04:26:50 PM
The failure of the "NCO Program" reflects a failure of the leadership in general.

What program.  There is no program.  There is only the rule that allows former NCOs to wear their NCO ransk.

The is no "Program" to fail.

If it was integrated better, forcing SMs to hold NCO ranks, than officer ranks would make it viable. Since SMs promote less, either speed up progression through NCO, or have only a few.

Plus don't senior squadrons end up with a bunch of officers?
I don't know, but I would think they would.


If only a NCO was available, I would think they could command. I'd rather an experienced NCO running the show, than an officer who may or may not run the squadron correctly.
Depending the NCO can become 1st LT.

As is known to many, I support reintegrating both NCO and warrant officer ranks, not that it will ever happen.

However, one thing I am curious about is that page 101 of 39-1 shows Airman through CMSgt as valid CAP ranks, when Amn through SrA are not(?).

To wear stripes on CAP uniform, one must have been minimum of E-5 in the Active, Guard or Reserve Forces (not sure about SDF), correct, or not? 

To my knowledge, a CAP member cannot wear Airman, Airman First Class or Senior Airman stripes as they are not noncommissioned officers.

Quote from: Extremepredjudice on August 29, 2011, 02:12:06 AM
Plus don't senior squadrons end up with a bunch of officers?
I don't know, but I would think they would.

I was a member of a flying club senior squadron which had a couple of LtCol's and Majors on "command" staff and a lot of second lieutenants who never promoted beyond that, because they weren't interested in PD, just wanted to fly.

Cyborg.

The reg on NCO promotion is out of date.

When the USAF did away with the E-4 NCO CAP did not update its regulations to reflect reality.

The inital aim of the reg was to allow former NCO's who did not want to become officers to remain NCOs.

Former NON-NCO enlisted had to become officers.

The regulation did not address current serving enlisted personnel at all.



Said it before....will say it again.......CAP does not need NCO it only makes things that much more compleicated.

As Pat explained, the reg is behind reality.

In the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Army, E-4s are (USN & USMC), or can be (Army) NCOs. If they choose to be CAP NCOs, they should be able to wear appropriate rank insignia. Currently, they can't, because of the confusion in the reg.

There's no reason to have an NCO program since in my opinion the current "officer program" is a joke. Before you pull out the flame throwers keep in mind this opinion is based on my experiences at my squadron. I've got several Lt Col's on the roster. They're useless.  The PD program?  Too many "gimme" promotions, not enough (ok, almost none) based on proven performance.

I truly hope my observations don't apply to your organization. 

So tighten up the officer program and recreate the NCO program for those who don't qualify as officers.

Quote from: Extremepredjudice on August 29, 2011, 02:12:06 AM
If only a NCO was available, I would think they could command. I'd rather an experienced NCO running the show, than an officer who may or may not run the squadron correctly.

What makes you think just because a person was an NCO in the military, they could run the squadron correctly? 

Quote from: Short Field on August 29, 2011, 04:52:01 PM

Quote from: Extremepredjudice on August 29, 2011, 02:12:06 AM
If only a NCO was available, I would think they could command. I'd rather an experienced NCO running the show, than an officer who may or may not run the squadron correctly.

What makes you think just because a person was an NCO in the military, they could run the squadron correctly?

Senior NCOs (E-7 to E-9) probably have enough leadership skills to run the average squadron. They have likely supervised larger work centers, etc., and certainly understand chain of command, C&C, uniforms, etc., so all they really need is some good CAP indoctrination, and the same group of dedicated, competent staff that officer commanders depend on. I can point out several AD NCOs who appear to have successfully commanded CAP units, including a few members of CT, so it's not unheard of. They just happen to have been CAP officers, instead of CAP NCOs.

Quote from: CyBorg on August 29, 2011, 02:36:05 AM
To wear stripes on CAP uniform, one must have been minimum of E-5 in the Active, Guard or Reserve Forces (not sure about SDF), correct, or not? 

SDF, absolutely not. Can I cite that? No. But absolutely not.

Since SDF do not fall into active duty military, Reserve, or National Guard, the do not qualify for CAP NCO grades.

Quote from: CAPR 35-5, Chapter 6, Para 6-2a.The CAP grade granted will be equivalent to the grade held in the active duty military, Reserve, or National Guard.

Since the reg capitalizes Reserve and National Guard, they are not the generic terms, but indicate specific organizations.

Quote from: CyBorg on August 29, 2011, 02:36:05 AMTo wear stripes on CAP uniform, one must have been minimum of E-5 in the Active, Guard or Reserve Forces (not sure about SDF), correct, or not?

Where does it say E-5? Certainly not in CAPR 35-5.

Quote6-2. Eligibility requirements.
a. Only those CAP members who are military or ex-military NCOs and do not wish to be considered for CAP officer grades may be appointed to a CAP NCO grade under provisions of this section. The CAP grade granted will be equivalent to the grade held in the active duty military, Reserve, or National Guard.
b. The member must also have completed Level I of the Senior Member Professional Development Program.
6-3. Procedures. Members who meet the eligibility requirement outlined above may assume a CAP NCO grade equivalent to their military grade upon presentation of documentation to the unit commander (a copy of DD Form 214, military identification card, or promotion order showing the grade requested is considered sufficient). The CAPF 2 will be annotated to reflect the NCO grade authorized and forward this form to National Headquarters for recording. Forms may be submitted by e-mail, fax or U.S. Postal Service as outlined in paragraph 1-8c(1) above. The member is authorized to wear the grade on the CAP uniform as soon as verification of the military NCO grade is received.

As noted elsewhere, members of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Army, can be NCOs at E-4.

Quote from: SarDragon on August 30, 2011, 04:46:50 AM

Quote from: CyBorg on August 29, 2011, 02:36:05 AMTo wear stripes on CAP uniform, one must have been minimum of E-5 in the Active, Guard or Reserve Forces (not sure about SDF), correct, or not?

Where does it say E-5? Certainly not in CAPR 35-5.

Quote6-2. Eligibility requirements.
a. Only those CAP members who are military or ex-military NCOs and do not wish to be considered for CAP officer grades may be appointed to a CAP NCO grade under provisions of this section. The CAP grade granted will be equivalent to the grade held in the active duty military, Reserve, or National Guard.
b. The member must also have completed Level I of the Senior Member Professional Development Program.
6-3. Procedures. Members who meet the eligibility requirement outlined above may assume a CAP NCO grade equivalent to their military grade upon presentation of documentation to the unit commander (a copy of DD Form 214, military identification card, or promotion order showing the grade requested is considered sufficient). The CAPF 2 will be annotated to reflect the NCO grade authorized and forward this form to National Headquarters for recording. Forms may be submitted by e-mail, fax or U.S. Postal Service as outlined in paragraph 1-8c(1) above. The member is authorized to wear the grade on the CAP uniform as soon as verification of the military NCO grade is received.

As noted elsewhere, members of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Army, can be NCOs at E-4.

CAPR 35-5 lists the CAP NCO grades in 1-3c:

Quotec. CAP NCO grades are:
    (1) Chief Master Sergeant (CMSgt)
    (2) Senior Master Sergeant (SMSgt)
    (3) Master Sergeant (MSgt)
    (4) Technical Sergeant (TSgt)
    (5) Staff Sergeant (SSgt)

Note that none of those are equivalent to E-4.

This is interesting.  Where did I previously see a CAP "Sergeant" (senior airman) listed?  That stood out to me because it was different than the Air Force. 

Quote from: JC004 on August 30, 2011, 01:33:13 PM
This is interesting.  Where did I previously see a CAP "Sergeant" (senior airman) listed?  That stood out to me because it was different than the Air Force.

I too. That's the basis of this entire argument in the latter half of the thread, I believe.

Quote from: DakRadz on August 30, 2011, 02:13:37 PM

Quote from: JC004 on August 30, 2011, 01:33:13 PM
This is interesting.  Where did I previously see a CAP "Sergeant" (senior airman) listed?  That stood out to me because it was different than the Air Force.

I too. That's the basis of this entire argument in the latter half of the thread, I believe.

On the Form 2.  Says Sgt, TSgt, MSgt...  Omits the first "S" from SSgt, which I think is a typo that should've, could've, been fixed long ago.

The previous edition of  CAPR 35-5 listed Sergeant (E-4). 

Quote from: MIKE on August 30, 2011, 03:17:38 PM
The previous edition of  CAPR 35-5 listed Sergeant (E-4).

That is where I saw it, then.  I would have noticed a typo.

Quote from: MIKE on August 30, 2011, 03:17:38 PM
The previous edition of  CAPR 35-5 listed Sergeant (E-4).

Wouldn't it have also shown the E-1 through E-4 (SrA) with the blue star, and E-4 (Sgt) and up with the silver star, in keeping with the insignia of that era?

Quote from: SarDragon on August 30, 2011, 04:46:50 AM

As noted elsewhere, members of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Army, can be NCOs at E-4.

E-4 in the Coast Guard is also considered an NCO. (If you count them :))

Quote from: Ford73Diesel on August 31, 2011, 12:38:29 AM
E-4 in the Coast Guard is also considered an NCO. (If you count them :))

Why would we not count our fifth Armed Service?

After all, we have to salute USCG commissioned and warrant officers...no reason to not extend courtesy to CG NCO's. ;D

Quote from: arajca on August 30, 2011, 03:47:30 AM
Since SDF do not fall into active duty military, Reserve, or National Guard, the do not qualify for CAP NCO grades.

WRONG!!!

State Defense or Guard forces originated with the National Guard Act of 1916. The Militia Act of 1917 authorized the Secretary of War to begin equipping them. Then in 1940, the Congress amended the National Defense Act of 1920, giving each state the right to organize a reserve of the National Guard when the National Guard was federalized. The current statutory authority is Title 32, Section 109 of U.S. Code.

There are now 19 divisions in just as many states with some like California actually having a State Guard Air Detachment that reports to the ANG.

Members of the State Guard generally have to meet the same promotion requirements as their National Guard counterparts. If the National Guard of a given state recognizes the rank structure of its SDF, you can bet that rank is recognized by the CAP. I know that in New York State, it is and has been.

Quote from: flyboy1 on August 31, 2011, 01:52:19 AM
Members of the State Guard generally have to meet the same promotion requirements as their National Guard counterparts.

Absolutely wrong.  As someone who follows SDFs pretty closely and who strongly supports the concept, I'm not aware of a single SDF that has the same promotion requirements as the National Guard.  There are quite a few that would appoint you to an officer or NCO rank based on civilian experience and education without any formal military training.  There are several that have less rigorous professional development systems than CAP.  On the other hand there are a couple with apparently strong system that CAP could learn from, but they are the exception. 

QuoteIf the National Guard of a given state recognizes the rank structure of its SDF, you can bet that rank is recognized by the CAP. I know that in New York State, it is and has been.

Well, SDF rank is real military rank, but it isn't recognized as such in CAP regulations.  They pretty specifically refer to active duty, Reserve, and National Guard service when discussing CAP NCO promotions.  And the regs are even more specific about CAP recognizing SDF officer ranks when looking at CAP special appointments. 

Keep in mind I'm not saying that SDF officers shouldn't be saluted as they are real military officers -- CAP just doesn't recognize them as being worthy of a CAP special appointment.  Frankly, I'd have to agree with that given the wide variation in the quality of training in SDFs across the country. 

Quote from: CyBorg on August 31, 2011, 12:44:13 AM

Quote from: Ford73Diesel on August 31, 2011, 12:38:29 AM
E-4 in the Coast Guard is also considered an NCO. (If you count them :) )

Why would we not count our fifth Armed Service?

After all, we have to salute USCG commissioned and warrant officers...no reason to not extend courtesy to CG NCO's. ;D

Apologies. A gross error on my part.  :(

Quote from: RiverAux on August 31, 2011, 02:12:42 AM
CAP just doesn't recognize them as being worthy of a CAP special appointment.  Frankly, I'd have to agree with that given the wide variation in the quality of training in SDFs across the country.

Though to be fair, I don't think we should be giving special appointments to former military officers or anyone else for that matter.  But, within the context of our current system I wouldn't be in favor of recognizing SDF ranks for those purposes. 

Quote from: SarDragon on August 31, 2011, 02:25:18 AM

Quote from: CyBorg on August 31, 2011, 12:44:13 AM

Quote from: Ford73Diesel on August 31, 2011, 12:38:29 AM
E-4 in the Coast Guard is also considered an NCO. (If you count them :) )

Why would we not count our fifth Armed Service?

After all, we have to salute USCG commissioned and warrant officers...no reason to not extend courtesy to CG NCO's. ;D

Apologies. A gross error on my part.  :(

No problems. As a Coastie, trust me- we are more than used to it. I've come to expect people to forget the CG. But that is another topic...

Quote from: Ford73Diesel on August 31, 2011, 03:42:57 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on August 31, 2011, 02:25:18 AM

Quote from: CyBorg on August 31, 2011, 12:44:13 AM

Quote from: Ford73Diesel on August 31, 2011, 12:38:29 AM
E-4 in the Coast Guard is also considered an NCO. (If you count them :) )

Why would we not count our fifth Armed Service?

After all, we have to salute USCG commissioned and warrant officers...no reason to not extend courtesy to CG NCO's. ;D

Apologies. A gross error on my part.  :(

No problems. As a Coastie, trust me- we are more than used to it. I've come to expect people to forget the CG. But that is another topic...

Whats coast guard? >:D

At least you aren't coastie auxillary. :)

Cadet, perhaps you should stop while you're behind. Just here on CT there are several dual CAP/CGAux members.

Unless there was some sort of unexplained joke to the second part? But seriously.

Quote from: DakRadz on August 31, 2011, 05:00:43 AM
Cadet, perhaps you should stop while you're behind. Just here on CT there are several dual CAP/CGAux members.

Unless there was some sort of unexplained joke to the second part? But seriously.

Props to the "quit while behind."

Even so, if it's an unexplained joke, as a former CG Auxiliarist, I don't think I want to know the "explanation."

Not to mention the lead moderator is a very active Auxiliarist.  Another case of open mouth, insert foot?

Quote from: Extremepredjudice on August 31, 2011, 04:48:13 AM

Whats coast guard? >:D

At least you aren't coastie auxillary. :)

How do you know I'm not a auxilarist?

I get that the first part may be a joke, but don't you dare slam the Aux. They do a major service to the CG, from directly augmenting cutters (rare but has happened), standing radio watches at small boat stations, even teaching some classes at enlisted boot camp. They are very much considered part of the team and even can partake in some military benefits like MWR stuff and so on. They save the CG a lot of money. I've only worked with them a handful of times because my unit does not have any attached to it, but they got me through some boat crew TCT quickly, which could have been a lot worse if the auxie didn't make it somewhat interesting....

http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2011/02/shipmate-of-the-week-aux-betty-riddle/ (http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2011/02/shipmate-of-the-week-aux-betty-riddle/)

Jeez guys.  He put the happy face on the post so it was obviously meant as a joke.

He didn't put a smiley face behind the second part. But yeah I think in a second review that it was a joke.

But to answer his first question of "what's coast guard"- It is the nucleus around which the other branches form during times of war.

I wasn't sure which thread to post this, but this one had the most recent activity regarding CAP NCO's. I like the stripes sported by this CAP NCO at this most recent AFSA (50th) anniversary (of course General Schwartz was there, as well as a few others)!

Well....it looks like we got new stripes......now are going to get an NCO program?

Quote from: lordmonar on August 31, 2011, 07:46:57 PM
Well....it looks like we got new stripes......now are going to get an NCO program?

Maybe new stripes, maybe not. It sure would be nice to have a viable NCO program. I personally like the CAP modified stripes (heck, I might switch to stripes...but there's plenty of conversation threads on that) She also sported these stripes:

Just as an aside, to the cadet (or any cadet) busting on USCG Auxiliary members, note this: Part of my job, as US Coast Guard Auxiliarist, is to screen young men and women applying to the USCG Academy....I visit with you, and send my recommendation to the admissions office, hence the title "Academy Admissions Partner". Be careful, you never know to whom you are speaking.

 :o

Eh?? Well... Those aren't what I thought CAP NCOs wore. Aaaaaand uniform thread. 8)

Also, during Georgia Academy Day, the two USCG LTs were standing side by side with the AAPs from the Aux. Very much respect for each other and handling their own area.
I also met one of Adm Thad Allen's USCGA classmates.

Quote from: DakRadz on August 31, 2011, 08:17:50 PM
:o   Aaaaaand uniform thread. 8)

You'll get over it....

Quote from: sandman on August 31, 2011, 07:53:18 PM

Quote from: lordmonar on August 31, 2011, 07:46:57 PM
Well....it looks like we got new stripes......now are going to get an NCO program?

Maybe new stripes, maybe not. It sure would be nice to have a viable NCO program. I personally like the CAP modified stripes (heck, I might switch to stripes...but there's plenty of conversation threads on that) She also sported these stripes:

Great now we have SNCOs making up their own uniform. 39-1 says wear standard AF stripes.

Those 2 uniforms worn on the same day?

The NCO "program" (i guess is what we will call it) makes little sense as it is, now we have 2 sets of stripes?

A quote from a friend (the First Lieutenant in the picture with the Chief Master Sergeant) From Facebook entry:

QuoteThat afternoon, General Carr briefed the new CAP NCO program with Chief Walpus sporting the new CAP NCO Chief Master Sergeant chevrons. No implementation date has been set for the program.

So I wouldn't put too much effort in trying to interpret the CAP regulations regarding uniforms....NHQ probably is nowhere near ready to release an updated version....

Quote from: sandman on August 31, 2011, 10:29:29 PM
A quote from a friend (the First Lieutenant in the picture with the Chief Master Sergeant) From Facebook entry:

QuoteThat afternoon, General Carr briefed the new CAP NCO program with Chief Walpus sporting the new CAP NCO Chief Master Sergeant chevrons. No implementation date has been set for the program.

So I wouldn't put too much effort in trying to interpret the CAP regulations regarding uniforms....NHQ probably is nowhere near ready to release an updated version....

Uh huh....and this does not violate the 2 year ban on unifrom changes how? When did the NB or NEC vote on this one?

Creed of the Noncommissioned Officer

No man is more professional than I. I am a
Noncommissioned Officer, a leader of men. As a
Noncommissioned Officer, I realize that I am a member of a
time honored corps, which is known as "The Backbone of the
Army."

I am proud of the Corps of Noncommissioned Officers
and will at all times conduct myself so as to bring credit
upon the Corps, the Military Service and my country
regardless of the situation in which I find myself. I will
not use my grade or position to attain pleasure, profit, or
personal safety.

Competence is my watch-word. My two basic
responsibilities will always be uppermost in my mind--
accomplishment of my mission and the welfare of my men. I
will strive to remain tactically and technically
proficient. I am aware of my role as a Noncommissioned
Officer. I will fulfill my responsibilities inherent in
that role. All soldiers are entitled to outstanding
leadership; I will provide that leadership. I know my
soldiers and I will always place their needs above my own.

I will communicate consistently with my men and never leave
them uninformed. I will be fair and impartial when
recommending both rewards and punishment.
Officers of my unit will have maximum time to
accomplish their duties; they will not have to accomplish
mine. I will earn their respect and confidence as well as
that of my soldiers. I will be loyal to those with whom I
serve; seniors, peers and subordinates alike. I will
exercise initiative by taking appropriate action in the
absence of orders. I will not compromise my integrity, nor
my moral courage. I will not forget, nor will I allow my
comrades to forget that we are professionals,
Noncommissioned Officers, leaders of men.

Quote from: NCRblues on August 31, 2011, 09:50:56 PM
Those 2 uniforms worn on the same day?

Not quite in one day. Here is the full PAO release from facebook:

QuoteAuthor: 1Lt Nancy Kerr, Senior Member,
Dates: July 23-27, 2011.
Picture by: 1Lt Nancy Kerr
Signed: 1Lt Nancy Kerr, PAO, Lackland Cadet Squadron, SWR-TX-007
Total number of pictures attached: 14 pics.
July 23-27, 2011, the Air Force Sergeant's Associations (AFSA) Professional Airmen's Conference, was held at the Grand Hyatt Hotel, in San Antonio, Texas. This year over 1200 attendees from around the world attended the AFSA conference. AFSA celebrated their 50th Anniversary of the AFSA. Senior Member 1st Lt Nancy Kerr, accepted the challenge to solicit volunteers in the San Antonio area to assist in manning the Civil Air Patrol booth for the Recruiting and Retention CAP National Headquarters (NHQs) office, located at Maxwell AFB, Alabama.

CAP recently established a relationship with the AFSA and AFSA is sponsoring a new National Level Cadet award this year, in addition to what they have done at the unit level in the past. AFSA is a non-profit organization and promotes and protects the quality-of-life benefits of Air Force personnel and their families worldwide. AFSA was founded in 1961 and has over 110,000 personnel and consist of active, retired and veteran members.

The Civil Air Patrol booth provided informational brochures and passed out airplanes to attendees at the conference.

Day 1-Saturday, 23 Jul 11: The CAP National Command Chief, Retired Air Force Chief Master Sergeant, Lou Walpus, 1st Lt Nancy Kerr, Cadet 2d Lt Alliayah Thomas and her parents assisted with setting up the booth display. Maj Robert Howard, the Lackland Cadet Squadron Commander helped man the booth with Chief Walpus and Lt Kerr. AFSA's theme was "biker" night.
Day 2-Sunday, 24 Jul 11: Cadet SSgt Andrew Staufer and his mother, Senior Member Regina Staufer volunteered their time in manning the booth with Lt Nancy Kerr. Cadet SSgt Staufer possible recruited a new Cadet in CAP in the near future for the Lackland Cadet Squadron.
Day 3-Monday, 25 Jul 11: CAP's Vice Commander, Brigadier General Charles L. Carr, arrived at the booth and thanked Lt Kerr for volunteering her time manning the booth and spearheading this project for the CAP National HQ's office. General Carr "coined" Cadet SSgt Stauffer, Lt Kerr and Lt Col Joyce Sean Habina. Cadet SSgt Staufer commented that the General's coin was the first CAP coin he had ever received. Gen Carr commented, "children" today want to know that people are concerned about them. But, getting good grades in school is the most important thing." That afternoon, General Carr briefed the new CAP NCO program with Chief Walpus sporting the new CAP NCO Chief Master Sergeant chevrons. No implementation date has been set for the program.

The conference was interesting and motivating. It was exciting to meet those who have an interest in CAP and have a connection with the sergeants in the military.

Cpl Rob Engelbrecht, US Army, from Tomball Texas, with the Helping A Hero.Org, was injured when his vehicle was struck by an IED explosive. He suffered injuries in the blast to his left leg, face, and body and has traumatic brain injury that has impacted his short term memory. His injuries to the discs in his back require him to be in a wheelchair 95% of the time.
Earlier this year, Cpl Engelbrecht was presented with a fully adapted handicapped accessible home through the Helping a Hero.Org. Lt Kerr attended the AFSA's 50th Anniversary Gala on 27 July with Cpl Engelbrecht, and other wounded heros.

Former Cadet Lt Col Aaron Hanes, from the South Baldwin County Cadet Squadron, stopped by to visit General Carr. While a cadet from 2009-2010, Aaron Hanes was the Vice Chairman of the NCAC committee. He is in the process of transferring from the Cadet Program to the Senior Member program with CAP in Orange Beach, Alabama.

Retired Chief Curtis Gist stopped by the CAP booth. He spent 4 years on active duty and served in the reserves for a total of 37 years from 1959 to 1991. During his last 4 years, Mr. Gist worked with a CAP unit and stated he was part of the foundation that wrote the criteria for the Air Force Sergeants Association award. He currently lives in Wheatland, Missouri.

Day 4-Tuesday, 26 Jul 11: Lt Col Joyce Sean Habina, Lt Kerr, and Cadet SSgt Stauffer manned the booth providing valuable CAP information to the conference attendees.

Day 5-Wednesday, 27 Jul 11: While arriving for the last shift, The Dallas Cowboy Football team arrived at the Grand Hyatt Hotel for their two weeks of practice at the Alamo Dome in San Antonio, Texas. Lt Nancy Kerr, Capt Lorrie Tetlow and Cadet SSgt Andrew Stauffer manned the booth. Lt Kerr attended the AFSA gala that night which provided closure for the AFSA conference. At the Gala, Secretary of the Air Force, Washington DC, Mr. Mike Donley, along with Air Force Chief of Staff , 4-star, General Norty Schwartz, who spoke about the future of the Air Force, and Air Force Assistant Vice Chief of Staff, 3-star, Lt Gen Richard Newton III were present for AFSA's 50th Anniversary celebration.

Special thanks to all the volunteers that manned the CAP booth.....your time away from work and home is appreciated!

Props to Lieutenant Kerr for a nice PAO release!

^ it is  nice ..but..

My question still stands, how does "new chevrons" not violate the ban on uniform modifications? Also, when did the NB or the NEC vote on it?

Quote from: NCRblues on August 31, 2011, 10:33:31 PM

Quote from: sandman on August 31, 2011, 10:29:29 PM
A quote from a friend (the First Lieutenant in the picture with the Chief Master Sergeant) From Facebook entry:

QuoteThat afternoon, General Carr briefed the new CAP NCO program with Chief Walpus sporting the new CAP NCO Chief Master Sergeant chevrons. No implementation date has been set for the program.

So I wouldn't put too much effort in trying to interpret the CAP regulations regarding uniforms....NHQ probably is nowhere near ready to release an updated version....

Uh huh....and this does not violate the 2 year ban on unifrom changes how? When did the NB or NEC vote on this one?

Well to be fair........it is not a change....it is simply a uniform change in the test phase.   One would expect when the program gets more mature and they are ready to push it to the NB/NEC for a vote.....it will be after the 2 year ban.

Quote from: lordmonar on August 31, 2011, 11:39:30 PM

Quote from: NCRblues on August 31, 2011, 10:33:31 PM

Quote from: sandman on August 31, 2011, 10:29:29 PM
A quote from a friend (the First Lieutenant in the picture with the Chief Master Sergeant) From Facebook entry:

QuoteThat afternoon, General Carr briefed the new CAP NCO program with Chief Walpus sporting the new CAP NCO Chief Master Sergeant chevrons. No implementation date has been set for the program.

So I wouldn't put too much effort in trying to interpret the CAP regulations regarding uniforms....NHQ probably is nowhere near ready to release an updated version....

Uh huh....and this does not violate the 2 year ban on unifrom changes how? When did the NB or NEC vote on this one?

Well to be fair........it is not a change....it is simply a uniform change in the test phase.   One would expect when the program gets more mature and they are ready to push it to the NB/NEC for a vote.....it will be after the 2 year ban.

But, it does not say its in a "test phase"... it says "sporting the new CAP NCO Chief Master Sergeant chevrons"....

Even if there were some allowance in our regulations for uniform testing, a new chevron style is hardly something that needs wear testing. 

Quote from: NCRblues on August 31, 2011, 11:41:52 PM
But, it does not say its in a "test phase"... it says "sporting the new CAP NCO Chief Master Sergeant chevrons"....

If it helps, she was wearing the standard 39-1 chevrons two weeks ago in Louisville.

Quote from: RiverAux on September 01, 2011, 12:31:49 AM
Even if there were some allowance in our regulations for uniform testing, a new chevron style is hardly something that needs wear testing.

Well, someone can tell them to drop the CAP from the stripes anyway.  Doesn't look right, and will look even funnier on a SSgt or TSgt.

Quote from: SarDragon on August 29, 2011, 10:35:57 PM
Senior NCOs (E-7 to E-9) probably have enough leadership skills to run the average squadron.

How about the E-5s?

Not saying an individual would not have the skills, but a blanket assumption is just wrong.  I had too many E-7s work for mr that that had problems pouring liquid out of boots...

Quote from: Short Field on September 01, 2011, 01:04:12 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on August 29, 2011, 10:35:57 PM
Senior NCOs (E-7 to E-9) probably have enough leadership skills to run the average squadron.

How about the E-5s?

Not saying an individual would not have the skills, but a blanket assumption is just wrong.  I had too many E-7s work for that that had problems pouring liquid out of boots...

I certainly agree. It would certainly be helpful if there existed a screening process for command positions...especially at the squadron level.

With a command screening/selection process in place, it might not matter if the squadron leader wears stripes or bars. That being said, it would be interestingly uncomfortable for a SM officer acting as a subordinate to a SM NCO in command....awkward. Maybe the SM's of the unit agree to all be "enlisted".....but then that would necessitate a viable NCO program with advancement opportunities...not...holding...breath...

Finally, I realize that this is a volunteer organization. Officer and NCO corps "professionalism" is not definable by any current means, so, lowest common denominator is that volunteers are as "professional" as they want to be, like Boy Scout/Girl Scout leaders....there does not seem to be the corporate standard that the military has if only because, in my opinion, it cannot be enforced....

OY!  I hope the program isn't based on the only current job position published (the one I posted). 

That said, I'm open to the idea.  I have mixed feelings because it would require a lot of changes to the PD program.

Quote from: JC004 on September 01, 2011, 01:23:16 AM
OY!  I hope the program isn't based on the only current job position published (the one I posted). 

That said, I'm open to the idea.  I have mixed feelings because it would require a lot of changes to the PD program.

I say bring it on!

Shake it up from the top down / bottom up!

Quote from: MIKE on September 01, 2011, 12:59:34 AM
Well, someone can tell them to drop the CAP from the stripes anyway.  Doesn't look right, and will look even funnier on a SSgt or TSgt.

I think it looks great!

So, sew on the "CAP" cloth cut-outs in a relative position above the E-2 through E-6 stripes.....Vanguard needs to sell more cloth cut-outs  ;D

...just putting it out there

Quote from: sandman on September 01, 2011, 01:33:52 AM

Quote from: MIKE on September 01, 2011, 12:59:34 AM
Well, someone can tell them to drop the CAP from the stripes anyway.  Doesn't look right, and will look even funnier on a SSgt or TSgt.

I think it looks great!

So, sew on the "CAP" cloth cut-outs in a relative position above the E-2 through E-6 stripes.....Vanguard needs to sell more cloth cut-outs  ;D

...just putting it out there

E-4 to E-6.... We are talking about NCOs.......... which by the way, if its about NCOs, an E-4 in the Air Force isn't an NCO position but in the USMC and Army it is... (Talking about CPL, not SPC) Whats the regs for that?

Quote from: Ozzy on September 01, 2011, 02:21:19 AM
E-4 to E-6.... We are talking about NCOs.......... which by the way, if its about NCOs, an E-4 in the Air Force isn't an NCO position but in the USMC and Army it is... (Talking about CPL, not SPC) Whats the regs for that?

Okay, granted. NCO's.

It just seems better to have a program available for neophytes to an "enlisted world" of CAP. Participating, yet learning, without too much responsibility (Like having a new 2ndLt, or, multiple Majors and LtCol's sitting around looking important, or SMWOG...or whatever, you get the point....hopefully).

And is the CMSgt wearing the soon-to-be-deep-sixed CSU, or is the flash just extraordinarily bright, making the AF blue shirt look lighter?

It's hard to see, but I think that is the AF shirt.

It looks like the same material as the cadets shirt, which would be the AF shirt.

IF we get NCO grades back, we should just K.I.S.S.

I remember an ancient ('60s era) book on Armed Forces insignia which included CAP enlisted/NCO, Warrant, and Officer grades.

It listed:

One stripe - Airman
Two stripes - Airman First Class
Three stripes - Sergeant
Three stripes/rocker - Staff Sergeant
Three stripes/two rockers - Technical Sergeant
Three stripes/three rockers - Master Sergeant

The book was in B/W so I don't know what colour the stripes were, but if we were to re-adopt them (with the prop device), silver-grey on AF Shade 84, that would look close to the AF, but different enough to be (the word I hate) "distinctive."

Quote from: Short Field on September 01, 2011, 01:04:12 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on August 29, 2011, 10:35:57 PM
Senior NCOs (E-7 to E-9) probably have enough leadership skills to run the average squadron.

How about the E-5s?

Not saying an individual would not have the skills, but a blanket assumption is just wrong.  I had too many E-7s work for mr that that had problems pouring liquid out of boots...

I don't think there is an expectation for people at the E-4 to E-6 level to have all the leadership skills needed to be a squadron commander. The AF requires at least an E-6 to be commander of an overseas unit, and that is only with the approval of the base commander. I was in that position as an E-6, and was, for a variety of reasons, over my head in the job. The fact that I had a good staff, and a small unit kept me out of trouble for the five months I was commander.

My own inadequacies aside, I think that it would take an exceptional junior NCO, with prior CAP experience, to be an effective squadron commander.

I do agree with the comment about E-7s and boots, and that's why they are merely E-7s, and not Gunnery Sergeants, Master Sergeants, Chief Petty Officers, etc.

 :) "The book was in B/W so I don't know what colour the stripes were" :)

Sorry, but I have to say it: It is spelled color here! ha!

Quote from: SarDragon on September 01, 2011, 06:26:52 AM

Quote from: Short Field on September 01, 2011, 01:04:12 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on August 29, 2011, 10:35:57 PM
Senior NCOs (E-7 to E-9) probably have enough leadership skills to run the average squadron.

How about the E-5s?

Not saying an individual would not have the skills, but a blanket assumption is just wrong.  I had too many E-7s work for mr that that had problems pouring liquid out of boots...

I don't think there is an expectation for people at the E-4 to E-6 level to have all the leadership skills needed to be a squadron commander. The AF requires at least an E-6 to be commander of an overseas unit, and that is only with the approval of the base commander. I was in that position as an E-6, and was, for a variety of reasons, over my head in the job. The fact that I had a good staff, and a small unit kept me out of trouble for the five months I was commander.

My own inadequacies aside, I think that it would take an exceptional junior NCO, with prior CAP experience, to be an effective squadron commander.

I do agree with the comment about E-7s and boots, and that's why they are merely E-7s, and not Gunnery Sergeants, Master Sergeants, Chief Petty Officers, etc.

A CPO is an E-7...Or are you saying they're not bright enough for the honor of being called a Navy Chief?

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 01, 2011, 11:29:52 AM
:) "The book was in B/W so I don't know what colour the stripes were" :)

Sorry, but I have to say it: It is spelled color here! ha!

By custom, not law. :P  Noah Webster's mangling revision of the English language had no force of law, and he didn't follow his line of thinking to its logical conclusion; or else we would not have the spellings of through, enough, etc.  Dancing With The Stars hottie Julianne Hough would automatically be Julianne Huff.

I live a hop, skip and jump from the Canadian border, have friends/relatives there, and friends in the UK and Australia - I preferred their way, so I adopted it when I was in high school about thirty years ago.  I also read a lot of British/Irish literature.  It drove my teachers crazy in high school. >:D

Thread digression over. ;D

Those stripes in the picture are not distinctive enough!!!  They should have put the triangle thingy in the middle not the CAP.  So why dont rest of the enlisted wear the chevrons with the prop.  It would have made more sense to keep the star in the middle and place a prop above to denote the position.  I dont have a prop on my grade insignia.

Quote from: eaker.cadet on September 01, 2011, 03:38:41 PM
Those stripes in the picture are not distinctive enough!!!  They should have put the triangle thingy in the middle not the CAP. 

And they need to be red to make RM happy.  >:D

HAAAAAAA

Quote from: CyBorg on September 01, 2011, 04:22:44 AM
IF we get NCO grades back, we should just K.I.S.S.

I remember an ancient ('60s era) book on Armed Forces insignia which included CAP enlisted/NCO, Warrant, and Officer grades.

It listed:

One stripe - Airman
Two stripes - Airman First Class
Three stripes - Sergeant
Three stripes/rocker - Staff Sergeant
Three stripes/two rockers - Technical Sergeant
Three stripes/three rockers - Master Sergeant

The book was in B/W so I don't know what colour the stripes were, but if we were to re-adopt them (with the prop device), silver-grey on AF Shade 84, that would look close to the AF, but different enough to be (the word I hate) "distinctive."

The stripes used at that time for CAP senior member "enlisted" grades were standard USAF stripes.  No distinctive CAP marks or colors.

Quote from: CyBorg on September 01, 2011, 03:19:03 PMBy custom, not law. :P  Noah Webster's mangling revision of the English language had no force of law, and he didn't follow his line of thinking to its logical conclusion; or else we would not have the spellings of through, enough, etc.  Dancing With The Stars hottie Julianne Hough would automatically be Julianne Huff.

Would that not be Julian Huf?  :)

Looks like the stripes with prop and CAP is a way to get RM to forget about getting their same NCO grade in CAP. Why not just leave the stripes the way they have been since 1947.

Quote from: Ozzy on September 01, 2011, 02:21:19 AM

Quote from: sandman on September 01, 2011, 01:33:52 AM

Quote from: MIKE on September 01, 2011, 12:59:34 AM
Well, someone can tell them to drop the CAP from the stripes anyway.  Doesn't look right, and will look even funnier on a SSgt or TSgt.

I think it looks great!

So, sew on the "CAP" cloth cut-outs in a relative position above the E-2 through E-6 stripes.....Vanguard needs to sell more cloth cut-outs  ;D

...just putting it out there

E-4 to E-6.... We are talking about NCOs.......... which by the way, if its about NCOs, an E-4 in the Air Force isn't an NCO position but in the USMC and Army it is... (Talking about CPL, not SPC) Whats the regs for that?

Just FYI, updated regs no longer authorize E-4 to retain NCO grade in CAP. Only E-5 through E-9 are now authorized, bringing the grades in line with those of the Air Force - SSgt, TSgt, MSgt, SMSgt and CMSgt.

I personally think the new chevrons are nice. I think they should just move the CAP lettering into the prop graphic (perhaps in background) and authorize removal of CAP cutouts on collars since the chevrons will be quite distinctive. Then authorize CAP enlisted to wear the USAF enlisted U.S. pins on service coats.

Quote from: BillB on September 01, 2011, 06:27:00 PM
Looks like the stripes with prop and CAP is a way to get RM to forget about getting their same NCO grade in CAP. Why not just leave the stripes the way they have been since 1947.

Next point: if the USAF stripes are to remain for NCO's, what in the name of all the worlds should stop CAP Officers from getting blue shoulder marks with "CAP," blue nameplates and hard rank back?  It's been shown that some dipstick can still troll for salutes with grey epaulettes so the colour doesn't matter! >:(

It would NOT affect how CAP operates, and would heal some old wounds.

Case in point: the Canadian Government recently completed undoing the unpopular unification of their armed forces that took place in 1968.  It was a slow process to be sure:

early 1970's - Maritime Command (navy) gets its rank titles back (instead of having ships commanded by colonels).

mid '80s - Maritime Command and Air Command get their distinctive dark blue and blue-grey uniforms back (instead of all wearing green with only cap/collar dogs identifying the "element" a troop belongs to).

Last year - Maritime Command gets the Royal Navy "curl" back in their officer insignia.

This year:
http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/v2/nr-sp/index-eng.asp?id=12014

My point?  Defence Minister Peter MacKay says the restoration will have no impact on the way they do things, seconded by Lieutenant-General Andre Deschamps, head of the RCAF.

Can anyone logically, without conjecture, say why this...

(http://www.incountry.us/cappatches/RANK-OFC/thumbs/~Capt-5E.jpg)

is "better" than this...

(http://www.incountry.us/cappatches/RANK-OFC/thumbs/~Capt-3E.jpg)

but is not allowed, when the stripes, no different to the USAF, and certainly not (gagging) "distinctive" ARE?

Quote from: davidsinn on September 01, 2011, 02:59:06 PM

Quote from: SarDragon on September 01, 2011, 06:26:52 AM

Quote from: Short Field on September 01, 2011, 01:04:12 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on August 29, 2011, 10:35:57 PM
Senior NCOs (E-7 to E-9) probably have enough leadership skills to run the average squadron.

How about the E-5s?

Not saying an individual would not have the skills, but a blanket assumption is just wrong.  I had too many E-7s work for mr that that had problems pouring liquid out of boots...

I don't think there is an expectation for people at the E-4 to E-6 level to have all the leadership skills needed to be a squadron commander. The AF requires at least an E-6 to be commander of an overseas unit, and that is only with the approval of the base commander. I was in that position as an E-6, and was, for a variety of reasons, over my head in the job. The fact that I had a good staff, and a small unit kept me out of trouble for the five months I was commander.

My own inadequacies aside, I think that it would take an exceptional junior NCO, with prior CAP experience, to be an effective squadron commander.

I do agree with the comment about E-7s and boots, and that's why they are merely E-7s, and not Gunnery Sergeants, Master Sergeants, Chief Petty Officers, etc.

A CPO is an E-7...Or are you saying they're not bright enough for the honor of being called a Navy Chief?

To refer to someone wearing a Chief's uniform as only an E-7 is a deserved insult. That means they managed to kiss enough ass to get promoted, without actually having the desired leadership qualities. It happens. I knew three in the second half of my career, and never once called them Chief, or referred to them as such. IMHO, and the opinion of others, they were E-6s drawing E-7 pay.

The only reason I can say a distinctive difference for officer vs enlisted distinctiveness regarding insignia is the sheer amount of power an officer has in the US Military.

A 2d Lt on G-series orders can, potentially, take a stripe from all the way up to a MSgt, fine them half-months pay for 2 months (quite a bit of money), all without trial.

A MSgt cannot be on g-series orders and cannot so much as take a stripe from an Amn. Only an officer can administer NJP. While most 2d Lts will never have the need or opportunity to exercise that much power, it still is inherently there. Keep in mind, EVERY officer is appointed, eventually, by the president of the United States. A commission carries with it tremendous authority and responsibility.

Do not get me wrong. This has nothing to do with one being 'better' or 'more important' than another. Or one being more deserving of respect. Any 2d Lt who doesn't respect SNCOs has a serious attitude problem and needs to reevaluate their position in life. But the simple fact is, officer rank insignia represents a much greater level of power than an approximate equivalent (O-5[ish] vs E-8[ish]) (in terms of service-length)

*Note: I use power here meaning more legal authority, not referent power, or moral authority or whatnot.

But it just doesn't work that way in CAP. At all.

Quote from: SarDragon on September 02, 2011, 01:36:28 AM

Quote from: davidsinn on September 01, 2011, 02:59:06 PM

Quote from: SarDragon on September 01, 2011, 06:26:52 AM

Quote from: Short Field on September 01, 2011, 01:04:12 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on August 29, 2011, 10:35:57 PM
Senior NCOs (E-7 to E-9) probably have enough leadership skills to run the average squadron.

How about the E-5s?

Not saying an individual would not have the skills, but a blanket assumption is just wrong.  I had too many E-7s work for mr that that had problems pouring liquid out of boots...

I don't think there is an expectation for people at the E-4 to E-6 level to have all the leadership skills needed to be a squadron commander. The AF requires at least an E-6 to be commander of an overseas unit, and that is only with the approval of the base commander. I was in that position as an E-6, and was, for a variety of reasons, over my head in the job. The fact that I had a good staff, and a small unit kept me out of trouble for the five months I was commander.

My own inadequacies aside, I think that it would take an exceptional junior NCO, with prior CAP experience, to be an effective squadron commander.

I do agree with the comment about E-7s and boots, and that's why they are merely E-7s, and not Gunnery Sergeants, Master Sergeants, Chief Petty Officers, etc.

A CPO is an E-7...Or are you saying they're not bright enough for the honor of being called a Navy Chief?

To refer to someone wearing a Chief's uniform as only an E-7 is a deserved insult. That means they managed to kiss enough ass to get promoted, without actually having the desired leadership qualities. It happens. I knew three in the second half of my career, and never once called them Chief, or referred to them as such. IMHO, and the opinion of others, they were E-6s drawing E-7 pay.

Only 3?  I can think of quite a few E-7's that probably would have been booted if it hadn't been for the hard working PO1's and PO2's doing their jobs for them...

Guess I got lucky. I did work for a few awesome Chief on my last three tours.

Quote from: CyBorg on September 01, 2011, 07:55:08 PM
Can anyone logically, without conjecture, say why this...

(http://www.incountry.us/cappatches/RANK-OFC/thumbs/~Capt-5E.jpg)

is "better" than this...

(http://www.incountry.us/cappatches/RANK-OFC/thumbs/~Capt-3E.jpg)

but is not allowed, when the stripes, no different to the USAF, and certainly not (gagging) "distinctive" ARE?

The gray ones are on top?

Currently, the only adults wearing USAF stripes are active or former military, so that is likely the first reason, with the real reason being that
this affects so few people it is not a comparative issue in terms of our uniforms.

Otherwise, I have been steering clear of this last round of discussion because it is pointless. 

Repeating now, in its current form as a fully volunteer organization with no caste-like separation of the "doers" from the "managers", and where slick-sleeves can command squadrons, while Colonels empty trash cans after meetings (helped one do just that after the Eval), there can never be an NCO system in CAP that is anything but an indicator of longevity and professional development, and therefore the time and effort to implement one would be a waste, as well as a fundamental misunderstanding of the NCO / Officer relationship.

Quote from: sandman on August 31, 2011, 07:24:38 PM
I wasn't sure which thread to post this, but this one had the most recent activity regarding CAP NCO's. I like the stripes sported by this CAP NCO at this most recent AFSA (50th) anniversary (of course General Schwartz was there, as well as a few others)!

Not intending to turn it into a uniform thread, but I don't like the "font" of the "CAP" on the stripes, it could look better, although I have to admit that the TriProp actually looks OK.

I find it a bit annoying that it has "CAP" on the stripes and on the collar. How many times do you need to put "CAP" on the uniform? Yeesh.

My suggestion: The stripes, as they are configured, but in the same grey collar as the officer's epaulets on blues and grey/whites. Eliminate the "C.A.P." collar brass, it doesn't need to appear on the uniform four times.

Of course, just to make it easy and "unbusy" the other uniforms a bit, eliminate "CAP" cloth cutouts on the BDU for SMWOG and CAP NCO's. Of course, for aesthetic purposes, the utilities would look best with a blue version.

That's the aesthetics addressed. As has been pointed out before, the validity of an NCO program must be determined first. If they have no purpose, then there is little point in creating such a grade bracket in the first place.

Quote from: SarDragon on September 02, 2011, 06:18:11 AM
But it just doesn't work that way in CAP. At all.

Nor did it ever - not with blue, sickening maroon or slightly-better grey epaulettes.  Nor do the nearly-identical-to-their-parent-service insignia worn by NSCC officers or ACA officers.

Nor do CAP NCO's now, or did they ever, have the authority that real-world military NCO's have.

My Army-veteran dad told me "We listened to butter bar six-month-wonder second looies because we had to...we listened to SFC's, Master Sergeants and above all the First Sergeant because they really ran things."

A CAP NCO has never had that kind of "pull."

Back when we had active duty (later retired) USAF NCOs as LNCOs for the wings (before this silly "state director" title came into use) many, if not most of them were highly respected throughout the wings they served.

They were in fact (if not in actual rank) the wing command master chief, at least in terms of their impact, influence, and example.

Agreed. I worked downstairs from the MEWG LO office for a while, and they were great people. Smokey Burgess was the LNCO, and he was sharp.

I remember having an AD Major as LO and an AFRES SMSgt as LNCO.

They actually went around the squadrons and visited.

Those were the days...

Quote from: ZigZag911 on September 03, 2011, 09:19:59 PM
Back when we had active duty (later retired) USAF NCOs as LNCOs for the wings (before this silly "state director" title came into use) many, if not most of them were highly respected throughout the wings they served.

They were in fact (if not in actual rank) the wing command master chief, at least in terms of their impact, influence, and example.

Um...

A large number if not all, the State Directors are current or recent military, and all the CAP-RAPs, by design, are Reservists, and occasionally a Guardsman.  Ours is a Lt. Col., and the three most active RAPs are a Lt. Col., Major, and MSgt, respectively.  They regularly visit all the unit in the state, oversee the property and vehicles, and proctor the Evals.  I'm not sure what more you could want, nor what difference having someone on AD would make to the situation.  They wouldn't be any more (or less) in the chain than an SD is.

I joined CAP near the beginning of the transition, and the first encampment I had any planning involvement in still dealt with the old program.  The gentlemen who was serving as the LNCO was so disconnected and abrupt in his dealings with me and others that we all thought he was AD and had gotten stuck with helping CAP as ADY.  It wasn't until the next year when the State Directors came into play that we found out he was full-time assigned to CAP and just not all that interested in being proactive.

Thankfully the SD we have had since then rocks, and is a strong, pro-active advocate of the program.  I know the others in my Region that I have met or dealt with, personally, have all had similar traits.

Certainly in my wing, anyway, the SD transition was something sorely needed.

I personally believe that the SD's should be much more involved in the operational aspects of the respective wings, and treated as partners instead of
afterthoughts, but that is a command prerogative of the respective Wing CC, and whether or not they are AD isn't going to make any difference in that respect.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2011, 01:26:39 AM

Quote from: ZigZag911 on September 03, 2011, 09:19:59 PM
Back when we had active duty (later retired) USAF NCOs as LNCOs for the wings (before this silly "state director" title came into use) many, if not most of them were highly respected throughout the wings they served.

They were in fact (if not in actual rank) the wing command master chief, at least in terms of their impact, influence, and example.

Um...

A large number if not all, the State Directors are current or recent military, and all the CAP-RAPs, by design, are Reservists, and occasionally a Guardsman.  Ours is a Lt. Col., and the three most active RAPs are a Lt. Col., Major, and MSgt, respectively.  They regularly visit all the unit in the state, oversee the property and vehicles, and proctor the Evals.  I'm not sure what more you could want, nor what difference having someone on AD would make to the situation.  They wouldn't be any more (or less) in the chain than an SD is.

I joined CAP near the beginning of the transition, and the first encampment I had any planning involvement in still dealt with the old program.  The gentlemen who was serving as the LNCO was so disconnected and abrupt in his dealings with me and others that we all thought he was AD and had gotten stuck with helping CAP as ADY.  It wasn't until the next year when the State Directors came into play that we found out he was full-time assigned to CAP and just not all that interested in being proactive.

Thankfully the SD we have had since then rocks, and is a strong, pro-active advocate of the program.  I know the others in my Region that I have met or dealt with, personally, have all had similar traits.

Certainly in my wing, anyway, the SD transition was something sorely needed.

I personally believe that the SD's should be much more involved in the operational aspects of the respective wings, and treated as partners instead of
afterthoughts, but that is a command prerogative of the respective Wing CC, and whether or not they are AD isn't going to make any difference in that respect.

Bob, the State Directors are all Retired military. It's a requirement to get the job.

Are we underlings allowed to invite the SD to things like SAREXs? They may or may not take up on it, but as long as we're allowed, I don't think it hurt to say "Mr. X, as you may already know [because they approved it], X squadron will be hosting an AF funded SAREX on Y date and I wanted to take a moment to personally invite you to join us at mission base." (unless, of course, you royally screw something up, but as long as your incident staff is good nothing too bad should happen...)

Quote from: PHall on September 04, 2011, 01:37:20 AMBob, the State Directors are all Retired military. It's a requirement to get the job.

No, it is not.  Ours is a reservist Lt. Col.

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on September 04, 2011, 01:42:08 AM
Are we underlings allowed to invite the SD to things like SAREXs? They may or may not take up on it, but as long as we're allowed, I don't think it hurt to say "Mr. X, as you may already know [because they approved it], X squadron will be hosting an AF funded SAREX on Y date and I wanted to take a moment to personally invite you to join us at mission base." (unless, of course, you royally screw something up, but as long as your incident staff is good nothing too bad should happen...)

Always, and they like to be included, but just as an FYI, if it is AF funded, more times than not the SD or a CAP-RAP will be attending as a matter of oversight.

Quote from: PHall on September 04, 2011, 01:37:20 AM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2011, 01:26:39 AM

Quote from: ZigZag911 on September 03, 2011, 09:19:59 PM
Back when we had active duty (later retired) USAF NCOs as LNCOs for the wings (before this silly "state director" title came into use) many, if not most of them were highly respected throughout the wings they served.

They were in fact (if not in actual rank) the wing command master chief, at least in terms of their impact, influence, and example.

Um...

A large number if not all, the State Directors are current or recent military, and all the CAP-RAPs, by design, are Reservists, and occasionally a Guardsman.  Ours is a Lt. Col., and the three most active RAPs are a Lt. Col., Major, and MSgt, respectively.  They regularly visit all the unit in the state, oversee the property and vehicles, and proctor the Evals.  I'm not sure what more you could want, nor what difference having someone on AD would make to the situation.  They wouldn't be any more (or less) in the chain than an SD is.

I joined CAP near the beginning of the transition, and the first encampment I had any planning involvement in still dealt with the old program.  The gentlemen who was serving as the LNCO was so disconnected and abrupt in his dealings with me and others that we all thought he was AD and had gotten stuck with helping CAP as ADY.  It wasn't until the next year when the State Directors came into play that we found out he was full-time assigned to CAP and just not all that interested in being proactive.

Thankfully the SD we have had since then rocks, and is a strong, pro-active advocate of the program.  I know the others in my Region that I have met or dealt with, personally, have all had similar traits.

Certainly in my wing, anyway, the SD transition was something sorely needed.

I personally believe that the SD's should be much more involved in the operational aspects of the respective wings, and treated as partners instead of
afterthoughts, but that is a command prerogative of the respective Wing CC, and whether or not they are AD isn't going to make any difference in that respect.

Bob, the State Directors are all Retired military. It's a requirement to get the job.

If thats the case, how is it that my SD is a Major in the Air National Gaurd?

Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2011, 01:46:16 AM

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on September 04, 2011, 01:42:08 AM
Are we underlings allowed to invite the SD to things like SAREXs? They may or may not take up on it, but as long as we're allowed, I don't think it hurt to say "Mr. X, as you may already know [because they approved it], X squadron will be hosting an AF funded SAREX on Y date and I wanted to take a moment to personally invite you to join us at mission base." (unless, of course, you royally screw something up, but as long as your incident staff is good nothing too bad should happen...)

Always, and they like to be included, but just as an FYI, if it is AF funded, more times than not the SD or a CAP-RAP will be attending as a matter of oversight.

Hm. I've been at 6 exercises this year, all AF funded (and one I was the project officer on) and didn't see a single SD or CAP-RAP.

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on September 04, 2011, 01:48:43 AM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2011, 01:46:16 AM

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on September 04, 2011, 01:42:08 AM
Are we underlings allowed to invite the SD to things like SAREXs? They may or may not take up on it, but as long as we're allowed, I don't think it hurt to say "Mr. X, as you may already know [because they approved it], X squadron will be hosting an AF funded SAREX on Y date and I wanted to take a moment to personally invite you to join us at mission base." (unless, of course, you royally screw something up, but as long as your incident staff is good nothing too bad should happen...)

Always, and they like to be included, but just as an FYI, if it is AF funded, more times than not the SD or a CAP-RAP will be attending as a matter of oversight.

Hm. I've been at 6 exercises this year, all AF funded (and one I was the project officer on) and didn't see a single SD or CAP-RAP.

Actually, this isn't entirely true. I did see several of them at the eval (obviously).

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on September 04, 2011, 01:48:43 AMHm. I've been at 6 exercises this year, all AF funded (and one I was the project officer on) and didn't see a single SD or CAP-RAP.

You saw them last week, right? (asked and answered above).
I have no response to the above other than I know that he and they are traveling all over the wing all the time.  It could also be a timing issue,
they are required to be at encampments, larger exercises, and evals, and ours have spent most of the summer moving around the region.
Ours were involved in the OHWG, KYWG, and INWG evals nearly consecutively.

Our wing and region tend to pile up activities in the same weekend, and I know that killed them this year.  Johnson, National Flight Academy, Summer Encampment, our Eval, national boards, King of the Rock, and a few smaller activities basically locked them up since about June on.

Anything that has USAF funding crossed the SD's desk for approval.

I applied to the CAP-RAP program. I was told that I didnt have enough experience. I have 6 years in CAP and 12 in the military with 4 of those with the USAF. I just kinda laughed and said thank you Sir.

In my 6 years with CAP, all in Kentucky Wing, both as a cadet and sm, I have never once seen a single representative of the CAP-RAP ever. Ive done multiple encampments and 9 special activities, and countless SAREX's, never once.

And back to the topic, I dont see how having NCO ranks serves any pupose whatsoever. I would eliminate the option all together, if you want to join CAP, you can participate in CAP ranks or not at all. Your service is greatly appreciated, you can still wear all your bling and your education will earn you a pass on certain CAP course requirements, but you will be a CAP officer if you serve with us.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2011, 01:44:51 AM

Quote from: PHall on September 04, 2011, 01:37:20 AMBob, the State Directors are all Retired military. It's a requirement to get the job.

No, it is not.  Ours is a reservist Lt. Col.

Is he the State Director or the RAP Coordinator?

Quote from: AFI10-2701, 29 JULY 2005, Para 3.1.1.3. Liaison to CAP Wings.
CAP-USAF operates liaison offices at each wing with an Air Force Civil Service Employee assigned as the State Director. The State Directors provide advice, assistance and Air Force oversight to the CAP wing commander, staff and groups and squadrons within the wing.

Quote from: PHall on September 04, 2011, 04:19:21 AM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2011, 01:44:51 AM

Quote from: PHall on September 04, 2011, 01:37:20 AMBob, the State Directors are all Retired military. It's a requirement to get the job.

No, it is not.  Ours is a reservist Lt. Col.

Is he the State Director or the RAP Coordinator?

SD

Quote from: PHall on September 04, 2011, 04:19:21 AM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2011, 01:44:51 AM

Quote from: PHall on September 04, 2011, 01:37:20 AMBob, the State Directors are all Retired military. It's a requirement to get the job.

No, it is not.  Ours is a reservist Lt. Col.

Is he the State Director or the RAP Coordinator?

Quote from: AFI10-2701, 29 JULY 2005, Para 3.1.1.3. Liaison to CAP Wings.
CAP-USAF operates liaison offices at each wing with an Air Force Civil Service Employee assigned as the State Director. The State Directors provide advice, assistance and Air Force oversight to the CAP wing commander, staff and groups and squadrons within the wing.

Is there anything to preclude one from being an Air Force Civil Service Employee as well as an Air Force Reserve Officer or NCO?

No.

The current state director for NY is a former ANG Major C-130 driver and former United Airlines pilot turned AFR Major.

"I don't see how having NCO ranks serves any purpose whatsoever... if you want to join CAP, you can participate in CAP ranks or not at all."

CAP NCOs are a participating the CAP ranks as provided for in the regulations and obviously a lot more then a few folks in much higher pay grades think that allowing for them is the right thing to do.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 05, 2011, 12:48:00 AM
"I don't see how having NCO ranks serves any purpose whatsoever... if you want to join CAP, you can participate in CAP ranks or not at all."

CAP NCOs are a participating the CAP ranks as provided for in the regulations and obviously a lot more then a few folks in much higher pay grades think that allowing for them is the right thing to do.

Or there are so few that it's not worth the headaches that'll come from moving them to officer status.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 05, 2011, 12:48:00 AM
"I don't see how having NCO ranks serves any purpose whatsoever... if you want to join CAP, you can participate in CAP ranks or not at all."

CAP NCOs are a participating the CAP ranks as provided for in the regulations and obviously a lot more then a few folks in much higher pay grades think that allowing for them is the right thing to do.

And they are entitled to their opinion. Just like I am entitled to mine. Regardless of "paygrade", I assume you were talking about military which I am a lowly E6, I think CAP Senior Member NCO's had a time and place and that time has passed and there isnt a real place for them any longer. CAP needs to move with the cheese sometimes, and this is one of them.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 05, 2011, 12:48:00 AM
"I don't see how having NCO ranks serves any purpose whatsoever... if you want to join CAP, you can participate in CAP ranks or not at all."

CAP NCOs are a participating the CAP ranks as provided for in the regulations and obviously a lot more then a few folks in much higher pay grades think that allowing for them is the right thing to do.

Again in a language we can understand, please?

Quote from: GroundHawg on September 05, 2011, 03:22:28 AM

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 05, 2011, 12:48:00 AM
"I don't see how having NCO ranks serves any purpose whatsoever... if you want to join CAP, you can participate in CAP ranks or not at all."

CAP NCOs are a participating the CAP ranks as provided for in the regulations and obviously a lot more then a few folks in much higher pay grades think that allowing for them is the right thing to do.

And they are entitled to their opinion. Just like I am entitled to mine. Regardless of "paygrade", I assume you were talking about military which I am a lowly E6, I think CAP Senior Member NCO's had a time and place and that time has passed and there isnt a real place for them any longer. CAP needs to move with the cheese sometimes, and this is one of them.

I disagree. I sometimes wonder that the argument here is so vocal because people are afraid that the program will be adopted and it will cause the leadership to impose higher standards upon existing officers. At the very least, a formal CAP senior member NCO program would give senior members another participation option.

If former NCOs can make the program work and do it in such a way that it draws the approval of the AF, than why not give it a shot and see what happens.

Properly trained NCOs have their role as mid-level supervisors or managers, especially when mentoring cadet NCOs and cadet officers.  If you have a cadet with intentions of joining the military, how else would you really prepare him or her for the role of an NCO. It works for AFJROTC.

"Or there are so few that it's not worth the headaches that'll come from moving them to officer status".

The reality is that if the "brass" really wanted the NCO's gone it could be done with the stroke of a pen, but obviously the powers to be want it the way it is.

NCO's have received the real-time leadership skills needed to command and inspire troops. Yes there are dud NCOs just like there are dud officers and dawdling old men as senior CAP officers, but by and far, an NCO brings a lot more to the table then most.

I was a "real" officer and "real" NCO and in my humble opinion, the NCO is the backbone of the military and should be embraced and utilized by the CAP. :clap:

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 05, 2011, 01:58:37 PMThe reality is that if the "brass" really wanted the NCO's gone it could be done with the stroke of a pen, but obviously the powers to be want it the way it is.

There isn't anything to abolish. The current situation is simply an honorary acknowledgement of service in another organization for those so inclined.

There is no enlisted / NCO program in CAP.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 05, 2011, 01:58:37 PM
...the NCO is the backbone of the military...

Yes it is, and that statement is irrelevant to CAP in its current form. 

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 05, 2011, 01:58:37 PM
...and should be embraced and utilized by the CAP.

Please provide specific examples.  Also, your personal experience in CAP will help us.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 05, 2011, 01:58:37 PMI was a "real" officer and "real" NCO and in my humble opinion, the NCO is the backbone of the military and should be embraced and utilized by the CAP. :clap:

And if CAP had "enlisted" troops for the NCO's to lead that would be true. But we don't, so what would you use the NCO's for that couldn't be handled by any other member?

Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2011, 01:26:39 AM

Quote from: ZigZag911 on September 03, 2011, 09:19:59 PM
Back when we had active duty (later retired) USAF NCOs as LNCOs for the wings (before this silly "state director" title came into use) many, if not most of them were highly respected throughout the wings they served.

They were in fact (if not in actual rank) the wing command master chief, at least in terms of their impact, influence, and example.

Um...

A large number if not all, the State Directors are current or recent military, and all the CAP-RAPs, by design, are Reservists, and occasionally a Guardsman.  Ours is a Lt. Col., and the three most active RAPs are a Lt. Col., Major, and MSgt, respectively.  They regularly visit all the unit in the state, oversee the property and vehicles, and proctor the Evals.  I'm not sure what more you could want, nor what difference having someone on AD would make to the situation.  They wouldn't be any more (or less) in the chain than an SD is.

I joined CAP near the beginning of the transition, and the first encampment I had any planning involvement in still dealt with the old program.  The gentlemen who was serving as the LNCO was so disconnected and abrupt in his dealings with me and others that we all thought he was AD and had gotten stuck with helping CAP as ADY.  It wasn't until the next year when the State Directors came into play that we found out he was full-time assigned to CAP and just not all that interested in being proactive.

Thankfully the SD we have had since then rocks, and is a strong, pro-active advocate of the program.  I know the others in my Region that I have met or dealt with, personally, have all had similar traits.

Certainly in my wing, anyway, the SD transition was something sorely needed.

I personally believe that the SD's should be much more involved in the operational aspects of the respective wings, and treated as partners instead of
afterthoughts, but that is a command prerogative of the respective Wing CC, and whether or not they are AD isn't going to make any difference in that respect.

Bob, I know of the LNCO of which you speak and believe me he had a few people wondering about him and about a lot more things than the way he dealt with people(aye-yai-yai!).

The reality of it isn't what they are called or whether they are AD, Retired, or Civil Service who are also reservists. It's having a talented and dynamic individual in the position which we are lucky to have had. I was in when we had the AD LO/LNCO and we had some real good people who helped us  a lot.

I have no heartburn with the SD concept. I just feel they should be allowed to wear their uniforms when dealing with CAP business. It looks a little weird to me to have the guy representing the AF at encampments and EVALs wearing khakis and polo or suit and tie instead of dress blues or a flight suit.

"And if CAP had "enlisted" troops for the NCO's to lead that would be true. But we don't, so what would you use the NCO's for that couldn't be handled by any other member?"

You are correct, but why do we need military rank/grades at all? Why not have Member 1st class, 2nd class, etc? Get rid of the AF uniforms as well and just have corp. uniforms with "ranks" that look nothing like the military. Hummm, maybe there is some NCO chevron envy going on?  :)

Not saying it should be that way, so no flaming please...

Bottom line: NCO's are here and not likely that they will be going away as the "brass" want them here. So as it stand now, until the AF & CAP changes the regs, we have NCOs.

"Please provide specific examples.  Also, your personal experience in CAP will help us".

I do not post my ribbons or badges here for a reason, but; starting in 1973I have been in the Army, Army Nat' Guard, USCG Aux and now the CAP. I have 30+ years of service. Nuff said.

Complaining about the regs here has the same effect as taking a hammer to your cell phone when it is not working... If you feel NCO ranks are wrong, make positive efforts to help change it.

And to this thread, I say G'day!

A few things (though you said you left...)

1) The quote tags are there for a reason, please use them.  They allow people to easily cycle back to the thread quoted.  This insures context.

2) Who is "The Brass" you keep referring to? 

3) Barring change, members from other services may well continue to wear their stripes earned in that other service, that doesn't make them part of a CAP NCO program.

4) You didn't answer the question.  Since you appear to be a strong advocate for the creation of a CAP enlisted and NCO structure, what, specifically would those people do which is in keeping with the intention and point of an enlisted corps.

5) The fact that you may have carried a CAP ID card in your wallet since 1973, does not indicate what, if anything, you've actually done.  There are members in my wing who have been empty shirts for 1/2 that time.

6) No one is "complaining about the regs", since there aren't any to complain about.  The only thing "the regs" grant, is what is worn on the member's uniform.  There's no delineation of authority, no progression, and nothing special in "the regs" about wearing stripes instead of epaulet sleeves.
If an experienced E-7 wants to spend his CAP career saluting Flight Officers over some misunderstanding about how CAP works, so be it, but that's pretty much the start and end of CAP NCO's today.

Eclipse, as I stated, g'day, however, one more comment: is it possible that you could make your comments without the sarcasm and bating remarks so as to keep them on the good side of professional?

P.S.: You appear to have read the words but missed what I said.  I was off on my senior trip with the army in late '72, early '73.

The elephant in the room is the fact that CAP officer grades are equally as "meaningless" as some of you purport the NCO grades to be.

CAP officer grades confer no additional authority, no gravitas, and serve solely as an indicator of progression in PD program, or of certain achievements outside of CAP, or of holding certain positions within the organization.  Period.  It has been frequently observed that slick-sleeve SMs or 2LTs command units with LTCs working for them.  QED.

So just as CAP NCOs don't hold that AD NCO power, neither do officers.  Therefore, shall we eliminate the officer grades?  The same argument holds true for officers as well as NCOs.

Authority in CAP is essentially based on unit cohesion and position, and not on rank.  I train and perform missions with the same group of people; based on their performance we follow ones who deserve to be followed.  The IC I work with most frequently is a captain; he has natural leadership qualities and lots of experience, so even though we are theoretically peers, I hop to when he says "go".  We have some doofusses (doofi?) wearing silver bottle caps that I wouldn't follow through the chow line, let alone on a mission - and unlike the active duty military, that doofuss can't compel me to do anything.

So again, I say that CAP officer grades are as meaningless as some say CAP NCO grades are/would be.  Would you do away with them, too, or are you all too wed to the shiny stuff on your shoulders? 

   

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 05, 2011, 08:23:09 PMP.S.: You appear to have read the words but missed what I said.  I was off on my senior trip with the army in late '72, early '73.

You appear to be dodging or ignoring the question.

Quote from: AirDX on September 05, 2011, 08:39:52 PMSo again, I say that CAP officer grades are as meaningless as some say CAP NCO grades are/would be.  Would you do away with them, too, or are you all too wed to the shiny stuff on your shoulders? 

I would have no issue with that whatsoever, though it may be hard to maintain the paramilitary structure without some semblance of a grade progression.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 08:43:52 PM


I would have no issue with that whatsoever, though it may be hard to maintain the paramilitary structure without some semblance of a grade progression.

Quite true.  So since we need some sort of grade structure (I agree wholeheartedly with that), and we are an auxiliary of the USAF, why don't we mirror the active force? 

There also seems to be a myth here that NCOs are macho leaders of men, Sgt. Rock-like in their abilities to lead men into the jaws of death while caring for them like a mother.

In combat arms, that is, or should be, the case.  However, the vast bulk of NCOs E5-E7 I work with in my day-to-day work as an Air Force civilian are technicians.  Maybe they have ancillary duties chasing after people's paperwork, getting them to PT tests, etc., but I don't see the argument you all are making.  This is not to belittle anyone - these people are highly skilled and very dedicated.

Officers are theoretically managers - but most CAP positions do not involve managing anything.  Two of my CAP positions are personnel officer and PDO.  I don't manage much in either position, I push paperwork around and do what I can for the people in the unit.  When I look in the active force, the kind of work I do in a unit as personnel or PDO is most akin to what I see an AD MSgt doing.

I have my ideas about what a CAP grade structure should look like, but there have been a bunch of them written about on here, pointless to write another one.

But, if the brass has decided we will implement an NCO structure, I welcome it as the right way to be.

That brings us back to the argument against NCO's - NCO's are ground-level leaders of men, not managers.

Managers are about process and administration, not wrench-turning.  And and that still doesn't address the "problem" of the lack of the enlisted / officer
caste system in CAP.

The argument against officer grades won't bring us closer to needing NCO's, it'll just raise more questions about the need for grade at all.

We should never try to ignore or downplay our USAF lineage, but anyone doing an organizational structure analysis of CAP would be hard-pressed
to find any "need" for grade for CAP members in an operational conversation.

One suggestion might be to leave our grade, which is purely ceremonial, for ceremonial situations, and remove it altogether from duty uniforms.
Just be polite to your fellow members and call everyone "sir".  Authority would continue to stem from staff posting, and day-to-day interactions
would become a lot less complicated.

Those who, for whatever reason, seem to disdain the grade structure could pretty much ignore it in most situations, and just do their jobs, and
the rest of us can salute each other at the banquet.

Lack of grade insignia on uniforms might clear that that situation up once and for all, since there could never be any "confusion" about our status.
Without grade on your shoulder, members would be forced to actually perform in order to garner the respect many seem to draw purely from their accouterments.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 09:29:57 PM
One suggestion might be to leave our grade, which is purely ceremonial, for ceremonial situations, and remove it altogether from duty uniforms.
Just be polite to your fellow members and call everyone "sir".  Authority would continue to stem from staff posting, and day-to-day interactions
would become a lot less complicated.

Isn't that what's happening de facto with most folks wearing the polo shirt?

Don't mistake what I say, I'm not against a grade structure, in fact I'm strongly against the absence of a grade structure.

Quote
That brings us back to the argument against NCO's - NCO's are ground-level leaders of men, not managers.

No, not what I said.  Most I deal with day-to-day are technicians, and then supervisors at higher grade.  Even our first shirt in the AOC looks and performs duties a lot more like a manager than Sgt. Rock.  Sorry.  Just a manager of people.

Combat arms in the Army or Marines, or USAF SOF/SFS are something else - different creatures entirely.  Not all NCOs, just like not all officers are equal across the services in terms of duties/responsibilities.

Quote from: AirDX on September 05, 2011, 09:45:55 PM
Isn't that what's happening de facto with most folks wearing the polo shirt?

Sorta, but not all the way.  Those members may wish to not play the full game themselves, but they are still surrounded by most members who do,
along with the expectation of courtesies, salutes, etc., which in itself causes bad feelings and misunderstandings.  it shouldn't, but if you come into
CAP thinking which shirt you're wearing dictates your behavior, you're already against the curve in regards to dealing with other members, especially
those in authority.  having people with different opinions of what a paramilitary structure means, is not good for that paramilitary structure.

It might not need to be said, but not all those who wear the golf shirt on occasion fall into this group, either.

No one has yet provided a single objective, mission-centric advantage to reinstating the enlisted corps to CAP, and I don't just mean this thread, I mean ever.  We hear a lot of subjective buzz-words, but nothing actionable.  Those in favor of a legit NCO corps in CAP provide about the same level of detail that those who champion the CAC do - lot's of pamphlet-based rhetoric, and very little in terms of 1-sentence bullet points.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 04, 2011, 01:26:39 AM

Um...

A large number if not all, the State Directors are current or recent military, and all the CAP-RAPs, by design, are Reservists, and occasionally a Guardsman.  Ours is a Lt. Col., and the three most active RAPs are a Lt. Col., Major, and MSgt, respectively.  They regularly visit all the unit in the state, oversee the property and vehicles, and proctor the Evals.  I'm not sure what more you could want, nor what difference having someone on AD would make to the situation.  They wouldn't be any more (or less) in the chain than an SD is.

Retirees are fine; however, I don't believe prior military service is required to apply for SD...in practice, they might all be, but I'd like to see it put in writing as a job prerequisite.

I'd like to see the SDs back in uniforms and addressed by grade.

I'd like to see Asst SDs who are retired senior NCOs, in uniforms, addressed by their grades.

I think it would be a positive thing in terms of teaching and reinforcing core values, military courtesies, and strengthening to CAP's relationship with USAF to have full time professionals such as these visible to the membership,  in addition to the outstanding contributions of the CAP RAP reservists.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 10:10:19 PM
No one has yet provided a single objective, mission-centric advantage to reinstating the enlisted corps to CAP, and I don't just mean this thread, I mean ever. 

Laying aside the excellent point that this is a rhetorical false dilemma because no one has ever needed to justify the officer corps of CAP with a "single objective, mission-centric reason" either, the direct reply is that of course we have.  You just don't happen to agree, so you continue to ignore it and pretend not to see it.

I could put 1200 CAP NCOs to work tomorrow by assigning one to each cadet and composite unit to serve as Leadership Officers.  Essentially by definituion, NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment.  And since every single cadet must develop their followership and  leadership skills initially as an airman and cadet NCO, senior member NCOs could and would provide outstanding and needed support.

Of course, we have a terrific CP without significant numbers of CAP NCOs, so I can't claim that CAP NCOs are crucial. 

But our CP would be measurably better if we had one or two experienced NCOs at each cadet and composite unit.

But even more importantly, the program is in our current regulations and I have heard both the last and the current national commander specifically support having a vibrant and successful CAP NCO program.  As a staff guys and as a CAP officers, our job is to figure out how to make the program more successful and help it benefit CAP.

And I think that covers both you and me.

Wouldn't you agree?

Quote from: Ned on September 05, 2011, 10:54:06 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 10:10:19 PM
No one has yet provided a single objective, mission-centric advantage to reinstating the enlisted corps to CAP, and I don't just mean this thread, I mean ever. 

Laying aside the excellent point that this is a rhetorical false dilemma because no one has ever needed to justify the officer corps of CAP with a "single objective, mission-centric reason" either, the direct reply is that of course we have.  You just don't happen to agree, so you continue to ignore it and pretend not to see it.

I could put 1200 CAP NCOs to work tomorrow by assigning one to each cadet and composite unit to serve as Leadership Officers.  Essentially by definituion, NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment.  And since every single cadet must develop their followership and  leadership skills initially as an airman and cadet NCO, senior member NCOs could and would provide outstanding and needed support.

Of course, we have a terrific CP without significant numbers of CAP NCOs, so I can't claim that CAP NCOs are crucial. 

But our CP would be measurably better if we had one or two experienced NCOs at each cadet and composite unit.

But even more importantly, the program is in our current regulations and I have heard both the last and the current national commander specifically support having a vibrant and successful CAP NCO program.  As a staff guys and as a CAP officers, our job is to figure out how to make the program more successful and help it benefit CAP.

And I think that covers both you and me.

Wouldn't you agree?

Ill keep my opinion to myself over this argument, but i would like to point out one thing.

I think we need to be careful with blanket statements like "NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment". That's not always the case....

Take for instance the AF. You can enlist as e-3 with some community college "art history" classes. If you don't get into trouble, and do well on your EPR and your PT test (and maybe brown nose a little) you can make e-4 six months early with Senior Airman Below the zone. You get deployed a few times, earn yourself a AFAM, take the Ssgt test and BAM a 4 year (or a little less) Ssgt wonder. Now, he/she is an NCO, but with considerable less experience mentoring than most civilians expect.

If CAP proudly says all NCO's have vast experiences, we could start running into problems when young Ssgt is made cadet mentor just because he/she joins and places stripes on his/her sleeve...

Anywho, just my one half of one cent worth of opinion.

I have stated on a number of occasions that in many cases our paramilitary accouterments are more of an impediment than an advantage
in our context.  However the existence of the officer grade structure doesn't need to be justified because it already "is", and further, when all are officers, at least there is no misunderstanding about the enlisted / officer relationship, which, in the military, establishes two separate and distinct groups  of people, by both responsibility and benefits, and they are decidedly not equal.

Further, the majority of jobs in CAP are, in fact, white-collar professional jobs, and are appropriate for officer grades (though I think we all would agree that in its current implementation, with no billeting of jobs and limitation of grade, we have far too many field grade officers in company grade jobs).

Quote from: Ned on September 05, 2011, 10:54:06 PMWouldn't you agree?

No.
Unless you are arguing that their effectiveness within CAP would somehow be dependant on their status as a CAP NCO.  You could absolutely put those guys to work, and the vast majority would be a positive influence, however it would be because of their experience and ability, not because of the insignia on their sleeve, just like every other member in CAP.

No one has said we don't need the NCO's as members, just that to try and initiate the NCO relationship in CAP, especially among senior members, is not necessary and likely counterproductive.

Does their experience and ability come with the patches?

And to NCR's point above, not all NCO's are created equal.  Give me some Naval Petty Officers, or others involved basic training, and they will have direct, hands-on experience with shaping young people from scratch (though they'd need to be monitored for the level).  But take an administrative E-5 who's job has been overseeing a headquarters unit processing Tri-care forms, and they aren't likely to be much use in helping 12 year olds march, they might be great getting PD on its feet in a struggling unit, but that's not an NCO-specific role in CAP.

Why?  Because there are no grade specific roles in CAP, especially on the senior side.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 11:08:17 PM
However the existence of the officer grade structure doesn't need to be justified because it already "is",

Yes, just like the CAP enlisted grades which have been around since WWII.  Neither "pre-dates" the other.  And just like in every single military organization in the history of the world since the Roman Legions.

QuoteFurther, the majority of jobs in CAP are, in fact, white-collar professional jobs, and are appropriate for officer grades

I am close to agreeing here.  Most of what CAP officers currently do is officer-type stuff.  Call it 60/40, but close enough.  But there is not exactly a shortage of "NCO business, either.

QuoteUnless you are arguing that their effectiveness within CAP would somehow be dependant on their status as a CAP NCO. 

Exactly.  I have made that precise point each time we have had this discussion.  (Please refer to my previous comments about you ignoring these answers simply because you do not agree.)

CAP NCOs could serve as terrific Leadership Officers and mentors in CP because of their NCO status, rather than despite it.  I don't want to repeat the whole "officers lead like officers; NCOs lead like NCOs" thing.  But as much as you disagree, it is true.  They are distincltly different and cadets would greatly benefit by having role models and mentors in both leadership styles.

QuoteNo one has said we don't need the NCO's as members, just that to try and initiate the NCO relationship in CAP, especially among senior members, is not necessary and likely counterproductive.

Maybe - just maybe - Gill Robb Wilson and Carl Spaatz didn't get it wrong when they included NCOs in CAP's structure nearly 70 years ago.  Maybe Gens Courter and Carr have a point when they gave direction to strengthen our existing NCO program.

QuoteDoes their experience and ability come with the patches?

Yeah, pretty much.  As others have pointed out, it might be as little as four years of full-time experience, including deployments and a lot of leadership schools.  But that is going to be four years more experience in a military environment than the average new CAP member.

But practically speaking, we don't have a lot of "shake and bake" below the zone SSgts, simply because outstanding below the zone leaders normally are still working full time in the service.  Our average time in service for a CAP NCO appears to be considerably greater than than four years.

QuoteAnd to NCR's point above, not all NCO's are created equal.

Well, there you got me, Bob.  I can only agree that not every former NCO would be suitable as a CAP member.  That's why we have Unit Membership Boards and seasoned unit commanders who make the final call on every CAP volunteer.

But I will happily wager that the average NCO applicant will stand head and shoulders above the average civilian applicant when it comes to practical leadership experience in a military environment.

After all, Uncle Sammy has already vetted the NCO's background and invested thousands of dollars in training that NCO.  And we get to leverage off of that.

Win-win.

Quote from: Ned on September 06, 2011, 12:00:15 AM
Maybe - just maybe - Gill Robb Wilson and Carl Spaatz didn't get it wrong when they included NCOs in CAP's structure nearly 70 years ago.  Maybe Gens Courter and Carr have a point when they gave direction to strengthen our existing NCO program.

Yes, but we also had enlisted personnel for those NCOs to lead. 

QuoteCAP NCOs could serve as terrific Leadership Officers and mentors in CP because of their NCO status, rather than despite it.  I don't want to repeat the whole "officers lead like officers; NCOs lead like NCOs" thing.  But as much as you disagree, it is true.  They are distincltly different and cadets would greatly benefit by having role models and mentors in both leadership styles.

They are exactly the same people no matter what is on their collar and sleeve.  I really doubt that a former NCO is going to be teaching cadets differently just because they have stripes on their sleeves rather than brass on their collar. 

The simple fact is that most former NCOs obviously don't WANT to be CAP NCOs or they would be.  While we have no idea how many former NCOs are in CAP, I'm pretty confident that it is probably in the low thousands and only 50-100 of them have chosen to be CAP NCOs. 

Even if we gave CAP NCOs the specific job of working with cadets, I don't see any reason to think that this would all of a sudden change the percentage of members who prefer to be NCOs rather than officers. 

CAP is going to have to come up with a better reason for an NCO corps than that that if we really expect it to ever expand beyond the minuscule number of people in it right now. 

Quote from: Ned on September 06, 2011, 12:00:15 AM
Maybe Gens Courter and Carr have a point when they gave direction to strengthen our existing NCO program.

What program?

What we have now is prior/current military NCOs wearing stripes on a CAP uniform. There is not a unique role for them. There is nothing they can do with stripes that they can't do with brass on their collar. They can't even promote unless Uncle Sam promotes them first.

Ned, you're missing sidestepping my point.

People who are, or were, military NCO's have the experience, mentality, and skill set that we look for in new members.  We want them, we need them, and we should be recruiting them.

They just don't need to wear their stripes in order to use those hard-won skills, nor is there anyway for them to serve in the normal role as an NCO, since there is no enlisted corps for them to care for the "health and welfare" of.  If part of this plan is to build an enlisted corps, that's bad idea 1a,
since, again, there is no separation of duties or personnel in a volunteer organization, and CAP is twp decades past the membership numbers and staffing to even consider dividing responsibilities based on grade.

Wilson and Spaatz may have had an opinion regarding CAP NCO's, however they also served in slightly different times, and with a membership that was comprised most certainly of more current and former military, especially in the first decade of CAP.  Others down the road saw the lack of need for the additional layers, as well as the total absence of the enlisted / officer separation in a volunteer organization and wisely removed those grades from the program.

Further, the days of Wilson and Spaatz were during the period when the USAF had direct oversight and command and control of CAP, without the corporate firewall we have today.

We need the NCO's at all levels of the organization, however an NCO program cannot exist within CAP as anything but ceremonial grade, and since that
ceremonial grade would potentially draw a line between the two classes of members in the same way as it does in the military, it would be counterproductive to implement.

Actually Bob, you don't need your Oak Leaves to do your job either. Really, the only CAP members who "need" officers grade would be the Corperate Officers (Wing Commanders and above). Everything else could be handled by "members". The CG Aux has proved that system can work.

Quote from: PHall on September 06, 2011, 01:10:16 AM
Actually Bob, you don't need your Oak Leaves to do your job either. Really, the only CAP members who "need" officers grade would be the Corperate Officers (Wing Commanders and above). Everything else could be handled by "members". The CG Aux has proved that system can work.

I've already said exactly that in this thread.

The corporate officers aren't any different - their authority stems from their board appointments, etc., not their grade.  When their term is over, they
come back to the wing or a local unit and fall into formation with everyone else.  My wing has at least 4 full Colonels who now have no more authority in the program than anyone else.  It is what it is, but we don't need to make the situation worse by subdividing the existing situation even further and more needlessly.

Quote from: NCRblues on September 05, 2011, 11:06:32 PM

Quote from: Ned on September 05, 2011, 10:54:06 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 10:10:19 PM
No one has yet provided a single objective, mission-centric advantage to reinstating the enlisted corps to CAP, and I don't just mean this thread, I mean ever. 

Laying aside the excellent point that this is a rhetorical false dilemma because no one has ever needed to justify the officer corps of CAP with a "single objective, mission-centric reason" either, the direct reply is that of course we have.  You just don't happen to agree, so you continue to ignore it and pretend not to see it.

I could put 1200 CAP NCOs to work tomorrow by assigning one to each cadet and composite unit to serve as Leadership Officers.  Essentially by definituion, NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment.  And since every single cadet must develop their followership and  leadership skills initially as an airman and cadet NCO, senior member NCOs could and would provide outstanding and needed support.

Of course, we have a terrific CP without significant numbers of CAP NCOs, so I can't claim that CAP NCOs are crucial. 

But our CP would be measurably better if we had one or two experienced NCOs at each cadet and composite unit.

But even more importantly, the program is in our current regulations and I have heard both the last and the current national commander specifically support having a vibrant and successful CAP NCO program.  As a staff guys and as a CAP officers, our job is to figure out how to make the program more successful and help it benefit CAP.

And I think that covers both you and me.

Wouldn't you agree?

Ill keep my opinion to myself over this argument, but i would like to point out one thing.

I think we need to be careful with blanket statements like "NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment". That's not always the case....

Take for instance the AF. You can enlist as e-3 with some community college "art history" classes. If you don't get into trouble, and do well on your EPR and your PT test (and maybe brown nose a little) you can make e-4 six months early with Senior Airman Below the zone. You get deployed a few times, earn yourself a AFAM, take the Ssgt test and BAM a 4 year (or a little less) Ssgt wonder. Now, he/she is an NCO, but with considerable less experience mentoring than most civilians expect.

If CAP proudly says all NCO's have vast experiences, we could start running into problems when young Ssgt is made cadet mentor just because he/she joins and places stripes on his/her sleeve...

Anywho, just my one half of one cent worth of opinion.

And just what Air Force are you talking about? It certaining isn't ours. A person enlisting as an E-3 may put on E-4 below the zone in 12 months, maybe, if they're lucky. That doesn't mean their NCOs and it doesn't mean that they're any closer to E-5 because in the grand scheme of things, they're competing with a whole host of others who are senior to them in terms of time in service, grade, and even unique to their career fields.

Also, by that point, that airman has gone through at least one and possibly two levels of PME...not to mention technical and follow-in traing, which are far more intensive than some cadets will ever experience. I know that I did, because I had to complete the Air Force Supervisor's Course.

And, for the record, I don't know how many times in my AF career, did I find ex-CAP or JROTC cadets who hit a brick wall after intant E-3 and sat there for a while until they had the time in grade and service to compete with the others in their specific career field. I even met a few that never got above E-5. The one thing about instant E-3s that was common was that when they arrived in the field, they were expected to have the technical skills commensorate with their grade and it was always a disappointment when they didn't

Get your facts straight!

"leaders in a military environment". That's not always the case....Take for instance the AF. You can enlist as e-3 with some community college "art history" classes. If you don't get into trouble, and do well on your EPR and your PT test (and maybe brown nose a little) you can make e-4 six months early with Senior Airman Below the zone. You get deployed a few times, earn yourself a AFAM, take the Ssgt test and BAM a 4 year (or a little less) Ssgt wonder. Now, he/she is an NCO, but with considerable less experience mentoring than most civilians expect".

Sounds to me like you would be getting a good NCO with 1 or 2 combat tours. But of course YOU have to add the "brown nose" part don't you?   

Quote from: flyboy1 on September 06, 2011, 02:40:45 AM

Quote from: NCRblues on September 05, 2011, 11:06:32 PM

Quote from: Ned on September 05, 2011, 10:54:06 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 10:10:19 PM
No one has yet provided a single objective, mission-centric advantage to reinstating the enlisted corps to CAP, and I don't just mean this thread, I mean ever. 

Laying aside the excellent point that this is a rhetorical false dilemma because no one has ever needed to justify the officer corps of CAP with a "single objective, mission-centric reason" either, the direct reply is that of course we have.  You just don't happen to agree, so you continue to ignore it and pretend not to see it.

I could put 1200 CAP NCOs to work tomorrow by assigning one to each cadet and composite unit to serve as Leadership Officers.  Essentially by definituion, NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment.  And since every single cadet must develop their followership and  leadership skills initially as an airman and cadet NCO, senior member NCOs could and would provide outstanding and needed support.

Of course, we have a terrific CP without significant numbers of CAP NCOs, so I can't claim that CAP NCOs are crucial. 

But our CP would be measurably better if we had one or two experienced NCOs at each cadet and composite unit.

But even more importantly, the program is in our current regulations and I have heard both the last and the current national commander specifically support having a vibrant and successful CAP NCO program.  As a staff guys and as a CAP officers, our job is to figure out how to make the program more successful and help it benefit CAP.

And I think that covers both you and me.

Wouldn't you agree?

Ill keep my opinion to myself over this argument, but i would like to point out one thing.

I think we need to be careful with blanket statements like "NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment". That's not always the case....

Take for instance the AF. You can enlist as e-3 with some community college "art history" classes. If you don't get into trouble, and do well on your EPR and your PT test (and maybe brown nose a little) you can make e-4 six months early with Senior Airman Below the zone. You get deployed a few times, earn yourself a AFAM, take the Ssgt test and BAM a 4 year (or a little less) Ssgt wonder. Now, he/she is an NCO, but with considerable less experience mentoring than most civilians expect.

If CAP proudly says all NCO's have vast experiences, we could start running into problems when young Ssgt is made cadet mentor just because he/she joins and places stripes on his/her sleeve...

Anywho, just my one half of one cent worth of opinion.

And just what Air Force are you talking about? It certaining isn't ours. A person enlisting as an E-3 may put on E-4 below the zone in 12 months, maybe, if they're lucky. That doesn't mean their NCOs and it doesn't mean that they're any closer to E-5 because in the grand scheme of things, they're competing with a whole host of others who are senior to them in terms of time in service, grade, and even unique to their career fields.

Also, by that point, that airman has gone through at least one and possibly two levels of PME...not to mention technical and follow-in traing, which are far more intensive than some cadets will ever experience. I know that I did, because I had to complete the Air Force Supervisor's Course.

And, for the record, I don't know how many times in my AF career, did I find ex-CAP or JROTC cadets who hit a brick wall after intant E-3 and sat there for a while until they had the time in grade and service to compete with the others in their specific career field. I even met a few that never got above E-5. The one thing about instant E-3s that was common was that when they arrived in the field, they were expected to have the technical skills commensorate with their grade and it was always a disappointment when they didn't

Get your facts straight!

Please get your facts straight too! There is no way to get E4 in under a year.
If you come in as a E3 and you're a real fast burner and haven't ticked off your Commander you might get E4 in 15 months.
That's if your Commander puts you in for a BTZ promotion and your Wing Commander approves it.
Both of which can be some pretty big ifs. The usual TIG to go from E3 to E4 is about 30 months.

Quote from: flyboy1 on September 06, 2011, 02:40:45 AM

Quote from: NCRblues on September 05, 2011, 11:06:32 PM

Quote from: Ned on September 05, 2011, 10:54:06 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 10:10:19 PM
No one has yet provided a single objective, mission-centric advantage to reinstating the enlisted corps to CAP, and I don't just mean this thread, I mean ever. 

Laying aside the excellent point that this is a rhetorical false dilemma because no one has ever needed to justify the officer corps of CAP with a "single objective, mission-centric reason" either, the direct reply is that of course we have.  You just don't happen to agree, so you continue to ignore it and pretend not to see it.

I could put 1200 CAP NCOs to work tomorrow by assigning one to each cadet and composite unit to serve as Leadership Officers.  Essentially by definituion, NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment.  And since every single cadet must develop their followership and  leadership skills initially as an airman and cadet NCO, senior member NCOs could and would provide outstanding and needed support.

Of course, we have a terrific CP without significant numbers of CAP NCOs, so I can't claim that CAP NCOs are crucial. 

But our CP would be measurably better if we had one or two experienced NCOs at each cadet and composite unit.

But even more importantly, the program is in our current regulations and I have heard both the last and the current national commander specifically support having a vibrant and successful CAP NCO program.  As a staff guys and as a CAP officers, our job is to figure out how to make the program more successful and help it benefit CAP.

And I think that covers both you and me.

Wouldn't you agree?

Ill keep my opinion to myself over this argument, but i would like to point out one thing.

I think we need to be careful with blanket statements like "NCOs have years of experience mentoring and developing junior leaders in a military environment". That's not always the case....

Take for instance the AF. You can enlist as e-3 with some community college "art history" classes. If you don't get into trouble, and do well on your EPR and your PT test (and maybe brown nose a little) you can make e-4 six months early with Senior Airman Below the zone. You get deployed a few times, earn yourself a AFAM, take the Ssgt test and BAM a 4 year (or a little less) Ssgt wonder. Now, he/she is an NCO, but with considerable less experience mentoring than most civilians expect.

If CAP proudly says all NCO's have vast experiences, we could start running into problems when young Ssgt is made cadet mentor just because he/she joins and places stripes on his/her sleeve...

Anywho, just my one half of one cent worth of opinion.

And just what Air Force are you talking about? It certaining isn't ours. A person enlisting as an E-3 may put on E-4 below the zone in 12 months, maybe, if they're lucky. That doesn't mean their NCOs and it doesn't mean that they're any closer to E-5 because in the grand scheme of things, they're competing with a whole host of others who are senior to them in terms of time in service, grade, and even unique to their career fields.

Also, by that point, that airman has gone through at least one and possibly two levels of PME...not to mention technical and follow-in traing, which are far more intensive than some cadets will ever experience. I know that I did, because I had to complete the Air Force Supervisor's Course.

And, for the record, I don't know how many times in my AF career, did I find ex-CAP or JROTC cadets who hit a brick wall after intant E-3 and sat there for a while until they had the time in grade and service to compete with the others in their specific career field. I even met a few that never got above E-5. The one thing about instant E-3s that was common was that when they arrived in the field, they were expected to have the technical skills commensorate with their grade and it was always a disappointment when they didn't

Get your facts straight!

Please get your facts straight, i said e-5 in 4 (or a little less) years..... That's how i made e-5 in my first contract. With deployments (points) , my AFAM (more points) , Senior Airman below the zone ( you can test 6 months early for Ssgt) and my outstanding test score i got e-5 well before those that joined the same times as me....

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 06, 2011, 02:51:53 AM
"leaders in a military environment". That's not always the case....Take for instance the AF. You can enlist as e-3 with some community college "art history" classes. If you don't get into trouble, and do well on your EPR and your PT test (and maybe brown nose a little) you can make e-4 six months early with Senior Airman Below the zone. You get deployed a few times, earn yourself a AFAM, take the Ssgt test and BAM a 4 year (or a little less) Ssgt wonder. Now, he/she is an NCO, but with considerable less experience mentoring than most civilians expect".

Sounds to me like you would be getting a good NCO with 1 or 2 combat tours. But of course YOU have to add the "brown nose" part don't you?   

Deployment does not = combat tour, nor does it = supervisor and leadership abilities. My first "deployment" was with the 332nd EMG to joint base Balad to fill in for a admin troop who took  his finger off in a paper shredder. Didn't see any combat that deployment, nor any leadership or supervisory positions....

Quote from: Eclipse on September 06, 2011, 12:42:38 AM
Ned, you're missing sidestepping my point.

Well, one of us is, that's for sure.

QuotePeople who are, or were, military NCO's have the experience, mentality, and skill set that we look for in new members.  We want them, we need them, and we should be recruiting them.

OK, I think we agree so far.

QuoteThey just don't need to wear their stripes in order to use those hard-won skills, nor is there anyway for them to serve in the normal role as an NCO, since there is no enlisted corps for them to care for the "health and welfare" of.

Aha!  I think I have found where we differ.  Mostly because you continue to deliberately ignore what I have said repeatedly on this point.

First, NCOs do indeed need to have stripes on their sleeves to act like NCOs and model NCO leadership styles.  Folks wearing captain bars need to act and lead like mature company-grade officers.  And folks wearing MSgt stripes need to act and lead like a senior noncommissioned officer.  The two roles and styles are completely different.  Former RM NCOs who choose to become CAP officers must lead and act like officers in officer roles if they are to be successful in CAP. 

I think we have a few AD E-5s on this board who are also CAP lieutenants.  Let's ask them if their leadership behaviors are the same when they wear stripes versus bars.

Second, we have nearly 30,000 or so cadets, SMWOGs, and junior NCOs that CAP NCOs can and should look out for.  Which I think we agree is one of the crucial roles of an NCO.

QuoteWilson and Spaatz may have had an opinion regarding CAP NCO's, however they also served in slightly different times, and with a membership that was comprised most certainly of more current and former military, especially in the first decade of CAP.

I'll let the historians chime in here, but I was taught that the whole point of CAP in the early days was that it was composed entirely of civilians, since the military types were desparetly needed elsewhere.

And further, the fundamental nature of the military - including the AF - has not changed significantly since WIlson and Spaatz helped create the CAP.  The notion of officer, enlisted, and NCO roles remains very much the same today.

 

QuoteWe need the NCO's at all levels of the organization, however an NCO program cannot exist within CAP as anything but ceremonial grade, and since that
ceremonial grade would potentially draw a line between the two classes of members in the same way as it does in the military, it would be counterproductive to implement.

As others have pointed out, NCO grade is no more or less "ceremonial" than our officer grade.  (Actually, probably less since it indicates hundreds if not thousands of additional hours of leadership and technical training than required even of senior CAP officers like you and me.)

And CAP NCOs exist today, just as they have for nearly 70 years.  The regulation is clear as to their existence.  As officers, our job is to employ the special talents and skills of all of our volunteers at every level, including our NCOs.

"Deployment does not = combat tour, nor does it = supervisor and leadership abilities. My first "deployment" was with the 332nd EMG to joint base Balad to fill in for a admin troop who took  his finger off in a paper shredder. Didn't see any combat that deployment, nor any leadership or supervisory positions...."

You will have to excuse me on that as in my "MOS" any "deployment" was a combat tour (combat arms). I was never a REMF.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 06, 2011, 03:57:26 AM
"Deployment does not = combat tour, nor does it = supervisor and leadership abilities. My first "deployment" was with the 332nd EMG to joint base Balad to fill in for a admin troop who took  his finger off in a paper shredder. Didn't see any combat that deployment, nor any leadership or supervisory positions...."

You will have to excuse me on that as in my "MOS" any "deployment" was a combat tour (combat arms). I was never a REMF.

Is there such a thing as a REMF anymore?  Most casualties have been in the combat support branches.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 09:29:57 PM
One suggestion might be to leave our grade, which is purely ceremonial, for ceremonial situations, and remove it altogether from duty uniforms.

That's the way the CGAUX does it in the main (if you're around military personnel you're supposed to take off your rank office whatever brass and put on the "Member" insignia), except that they don't just restrict it to ceremonies...but it confused the heck out of me.  It works for them but no way would I want to see "Squadron Commander," "Vice Squadron Commander," "Squadron Staff Officer - Safety," etc. brought in for us.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 08:41:50 PM

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 05, 2011, 08:23:09 PMP.S.: You appear to have read the words but missed what I said.  I was off on my senior trip with the army in late '72, early '73.

You appear to be dodging or ignoring the question.

It would be nice to know how long in each branch and the type of service instead of grouping them all together.   

Quote from: PHall on September 06, 2011, 03:09:56 AM

Quote from: flyboy1 on September 06, 2011, 02:40:45 AM

Quote from: NCRblues on September 05, 2011, 11:06:32 PM

Quote from: Ned on September 05, 2011, 10:54:06 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 05, 2011, 10:10:19 PM
No one has yet provided a single objective, mission-centric advantage to reinstating the enlisted corps to CAP, and I don't just mean this thread, I mean ever. 

I came in as a slick sleave, made E-4 BTZ in 22 months; E-5 at 4.5 years; E-6 at 7 and E-7 at 15 years, which is where I stayed until retiremet.

"Please get your facts straight too! There is no way to get E4 in under a year.
If you come in as a E3 and you're a real fast burner and haven't ticked off your Commander you might get E4 in 15 months.
That's if your Commander puts you in for a BTZ promotion and your Wing Commander approves it.
Both of which can be some pretty big ifs. The usual TIG to go from E3 to E4 is about 30 months."

This has not been my experience in the last 5 years in the Air Force Reserves. Active duty may be different.

In my unit in the USAFR, there are no e3's. Im not joking, being dramatic, or BS'ing in any way. Your first drill home from basic and tech school, your paperwork for E4 is submitted and you are promoted next drill weekend, some get it at tech school if they know someone at the unit.  You make E5 as soon as you have time in grade, ALS, CBT's and your 5 level. E6 is where it begins to become competitive, but even then, there is NO leadership training other than coorespondence.  Noone in my unit that has only served in the USAF (Chiefs included) has any idea what a NCO is.

"You will have to excuse me on that as in my "MOS" any "deployment" was a combat tour (combat arms). I was never a REMF"

"Is there such a thing as a REMF anymore?  Most casualties have been in the combat support branches"

Anymore? Ha ha! Wold that include Vietnam?

One 3 yr tour Reg army
One 3 yr tour Reserves
One year USCG AUX
One year SDF
30+ years govt' service as civ employee
Now CAP

Quote from: GroundHawg on September 06, 2011, 08:54:17 PM

"Please get your facts straight too! There is no way to get E4 in under a year.
If you come in as a E3 and you're a real fast burner and haven't ticked off your Commander you might get E4 in 15 months.
That's if your Commander puts you in for a BTZ promotion and your Wing Commander approves it.
Both of which can be some pretty big ifs. The usual TIG to go from E3 to E4 is about 30 months."

This has not been my experience in the last 5 years in the Air Force Reserves. Active duty may be different.

In my unit in the USAFR, there are no e3's. Im not joking, being dramatic, or BS'ing in any way. Your first drill home from basic and tech school, your paperwork for E4 is submitted and you are promoted next drill weekend, some get it at tech school if they know someone at the unit.  You make E5 as soon as you have time in grade, ALS, CBT's and your 5 level. E6 is where it begins to become competitive, but even then, there is NO leadership training other than coorespondence.  Noone in my unit that has only served in the USAF (Chiefs included) has any idea what a NCO is.

Officially throwing the BS flag on this one. I was in the USAFR for 18 years and even the USAFR had to follow the TIG requirements. Even for Unit Vacancy promotions.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 07, 2011, 12:35:52 AM
Now CAP

Yes.  Now CAP.  For how long?

As you are probably realizing, little of your prior service is really relevant in a practical way to CAP's unique structure and self-inflicted challenges, which is the point several of have been trying to make. 

http://tinyurl.com/3tddxgy

Quote from: PHall on September 07, 2011, 01:04:30 AM

Quote from: GroundHawg on September 06, 2011, 08:54:17 PM

"Please get your facts straight too! There is no way to get E4 in under a year.
If you come in as a E3 and you're a real fast burner and haven't ticked off your Commander you might get E4 in 15 months.
That's if your Commander puts you in for a BTZ promotion and your Wing Commander approves it.
Both of which can be some pretty big ifs. The usual TIG to go from E3 to E4 is about 30 months."

This has not been my experience in the last 5 years in the Air Force Reserves. Active duty may be different.

In my unit in the USAFR, there are no e3's. Im not joking, being dramatic, or BS'ing in any way. Your first drill home from basic and tech school, your paperwork for E4 is submitted and you are promoted next drill weekend, some get it at tech school if they know someone at the unit.  You make E5 as soon as you have time in grade, ALS, CBT's and your 5 level. E6 is where it begins to become competitive, but even then, there is NO leadership training other than coorespondence.  Noone in my unit that has only served in the USAF (Chiefs included) has any idea what a NCO is.

Officially throwing the BS flag on this one. I was in the USAFR for 18 years and even the USAFR had to follow the TIG requirements. Even for Unit Vacancy promotions.

It really shames me to say this, but its true.

Graduation day from tech school ( i was the rope for my team 6) one of the airman shows up in dress blues with e4 on. My mouth hit the floor. He told me the same story as above, and i did not believe him. I went to my chief instructor, and he said yes its true. This airman had a new CAC card with e4 on it and everything. Very shocking for me (on AD) to see a reservist who went through basic with me get promoted for nothing....

Quote from: NCRblues on September 07, 2011, 01:21:35 AM

Quote from: PHall on September 07, 2011, 01:04:30 AM

Quote from: GroundHawg on September 06, 2011, 08:54:17 PM

"Please get your facts straight too! There is no way to get E4 in under a year.
If you come in as a E3 and you're a real fast burner and haven't ticked off your Commander you might get E4 in 15 months.
That's if your Commander puts you in for a BTZ promotion and your Wing Commander approves it.
Both of which can be some pretty big ifs. The usual TIG to go from E3 to E4 is about 30 months."

This has not been my experience in the last 5 years in the Air Force Reserves. Active duty may be different.

In my unit in the USAFR, there are no e3's. Im not joking, being dramatic, or BS'ing in any way. Your first drill home from basic and tech school, your paperwork for E4 is submitted and you are promoted next drill weekend, some get it at tech school if they know someone at the unit.  You make E5 as soon as you have time in grade, ALS, CBT's and your 5 level. E6 is where it begins to become competitive, but even then, there is NO leadership training other than coorespondence.  Noone in my unit that has only served in the USAF (Chiefs included) has any idea what a NCO is.

Officially throwing the BS flag on this one. I was in the USAFR for 18 years and even the USAFR had to follow the TIG requirements. Even for Unit Vacancy promotions.

It really shames me to say this, but its true.

Graduation day from tech school ( i was the rope for my team 6) one of the airman shows up in dress blues with e4 on. My mouth hit the floor. He told me the same story as above, and i did not believe him. I went to my chief instructor, and he said yes its true. This airman had a new CAC card with e4 on it and everything. Very shocking for me (on AD) to see a reservist who went through basic with me get promoted for nothing....

I would be asking to see that guy's enlistment contract, because I can't think of any enlistment bonus program that gives you E-4 out of Tech School.
Now a somebody cross-training to another AFSC, that's another matter...

Quote from: PHall on September 07, 2011, 02:30:46 AM

Quote from: NCRblues on September 07, 2011, 01:21:35 AM

Quote from: PHall on September 07, 2011, 01:04:30 AM

Quote from: GroundHawg on September 06, 2011, 08:54:17 PM

"Please get your facts straight too! There is no way to get E4 in under a year.
If you come in as a E3 and you're a real fast burner and haven't ticked off your Commander you might get E4 in 15 months.
That's if your Commander puts you in for a BTZ promotion and your Wing Commander approves it.
Both of which can be some pretty big ifs. The usual TIG to go from E3 to E4 is about 30 months."

This has not been my experience in the last 5 years in the Air Force Reserves. Active duty may be different.

In my unit in the USAFR, there are no e3's. Im not joking, being dramatic, or BS'ing in any way. Your first drill home from basic and tech school, your paperwork for E4 is submitted and you are promoted next drill weekend, some get it at tech school if they know someone at the unit.  You make E5 as soon as you have time in grade, ALS, CBT's and your 5 level. E6 is where it begins to become competitive, but even then, there is NO leadership training other than coorespondence.  Noone in my unit that has only served in the USAF (Chiefs included) has any idea what a NCO is.

Officially throwing the BS flag on this one. I was in the USAFR for 18 years and even the USAFR had to follow the TIG requirements. Even for Unit Vacancy promotions.

It really shames me to say this, but its true.

Graduation day from tech school ( i was the rope for my team 6) one of the airman shows up in dress blues with e4 on. My mouth hit the floor. He told me the same story as above, and i did not believe him. I went to my chief instructor, and he said yes its true. This airman had a new CAC card with e4 on it and everything. Very shocking for me (on AD) to see a reservist who went through basic with me get promoted for nothing....

I would be asking to see that guy's enlistment contract, because I can't think of any enlistment bonus program that gives you E-4 out of Tech School.
Now a somebody cross-training to another AFSC, that's another matter...

Unfortunately, as an e-3 student tech school leader i didn't think i had the power to do more than i did. Needless to say, I was just as shocked as I think you are....

he was a fresh out of basic (331st wolfpack, flight 435) airman, put on e3 at the end of basic like myself, showed up to tech graduation with e4....

The Canoe Club has had a program for a long time where, at the end of tech school, you could promote to E-4 if you obligated for two more years (six total), and attended an advanced tech school. If you failed the tech school, you kept E-4, but lost out on any kool orders you might have had.

In my own case, I eschewed the advanced rank because I was unwilling to obligate for the extra two years. I entered as an E-2, made E-3 six months later, and became an E-4 368 days after I came on AD. It took me 14 months to put on E-5, after that, due to funding issued. I had to wait for the new fiscal year before I could get paid for E-5.
It's not quite that easy these days, but E-4 out of tech school is still available if you give them the extra two years. TIG is waived in most cases.

Quote from: SarDragon on September 07, 2011, 04:45:31 AM
The Canoe Club has had a program for a long time where, at the end of tech school, you could promote to E-4 if you obligated for two more years (six total), and attended an advanced tech school. If you failed the tech school, you kept E-4, but lost out on any kool orders you might have had.

In my own case, I eschewed the advanced rank because I was unwilling to obligate for the extra two years. I entered as an E-2, made E-3 six months later, and became an E-4 368 days after I came on AD. It took me 14 months to put on E-5, after that, due to funding issued. I had to wait for the new fiscal year before I could get paid for E-5.
It's not quite that easy these days, but E-4 out of tech school is still available if you give them the extra two years. TIG is waived in most cases.

That's the Navy Dave, AF rules are vastly different.

Oh, I'm very aware of that. I worked at an AF PMEL for 10 months, and saw the AF system. Was not impressed.

"As you are probably realizing, little of your prior service is really relevant in a practical way to CAP's unique structure"

I beg to differ! I bring to the table the leadership and professionalism I devolved as an NCO and while the CAP is a different progran, these skills do relate. 

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 08, 2011, 03:23:45 PM
"As you are probably realizing, little of your prior service is really relevant in a practical way to CAP's unique structure"

I beg to differ! I bring to the table the leadership and professionalism I devolved as an NCO and while the CAP is a different progran, these skills do relate.

Those are traits more so than skills. 

What sort of thing did you do in the military?

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 08, 2011, 03:23:45 PM
"As you are probably realizing, little of your prior service is really relevant in a practical way to CAP's unique structure"

I beg to differ! I bring to the table the leadership and professionalism I devolved as an NCO and while the CAP is a different progran, these skills do relate.

In what CAP capacity, and for how long?

Leadership and professionalism are pamphlet words.  What are you doing in CAP, that is in any way directly benefited by your NCO tenure that is somehow "unique"?

Quote from: JC004 on September 08, 2011, 03:31:26 PM

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 08, 2011, 03:23:45 PM
"As you are probably realizing, little of your prior service is really relevant in a practical way to CAP's unique structure"

I beg to differ! I bring to the table the leadership and professionalism I devolved as an NCO and while the CAP is a different progran, these skills do relate.

Those are traits more so than skills. 

It's not often I disagree with you, but on this I must.

Leadership is a skill (a learned proficiency) and not a trait (an inherent characteristic).

Indeed, one that we spend a whole lot of time teaching to our cadets (and a little time teaching to our seniors) to increase their proficiency in this critical area.  Some would say that the whole point of the cadet program is to teach leadership.

I welcome former NCOs with open arms, and value their proven leadership skills.
In most cases.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 08, 2011, 04:19:19 PM

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 08, 2011, 03:23:45 PM
"As you are probably realizing, little of your prior service is really relevant in a practical way to CAP's unique structure"

I beg to differ! I bring to the table the leadership and professionalism I devolved as an NCO and while the CAP is a different progran, these skills do relate.

In what CAP capacity, and for how long?

Leadership and professionalism are pamphlet words.  What are you doing in CAP, that is in any way directly benefited by your NCO tenure that is somehow "unique"?

Well....you are the one who keeps saying "unique".  What is unique about CAP?

Leadership and management are almost a universal skill.....that is.....proficiancy in leadership in say Mc Donalds can translate into leadership in CAP.  The ins and out of making hamburgers, ordering product and paying bills may not help you in promoting cadets, manageing tests, and keeping inventory.....but the people skills the hard to teach skills definatly do translate.

I was a 22 year electronics technican for the USAF.....that's what I "did" for the the USAF.........but what I was really doing was leading my people, team, workcenter in doing electronics.

What leadership skills that I learned in the USAF translate directly to CAP's "unique" structure?

Menotrship
Organisation
Time Management
Resource Managment
Problem Solving
Stratigic Planning
Tactical Planning
Training
Counseling
Profession of Arms
Professional Ethics

These are all skills I learned and used in the USAF......tell me they are not needed in CAP?

First, I wasn't asking you...

Second, the point missed here is not that the skills aren't worthy or needed, just that they don't evaporate because a member can't sew on a CAP-version of stripes, any more than a military general loses his ability to lead just because the highest CAP grade he can wear is a cluster.

Okay.

But if we take that rank is a fiction anyway......where's the damage of allowing them to sew on their stripes?

Quote from: lordmonar on September 08, 2011, 06:16:04 PM
Okay.

But if we take that rank is a fiction anyway......where's the damage of allowing them to sew on their stripes?

That's not what we're talking about here - they're just sewing things on today, whatever.  They aren't functioning any more NCO's in a CAP context than if they sewed their stripes on an ARC golf shirt.

This thread is about the move to actually ramp up an NCO corps within the senior member structure, which is a fruitless endeavor fraught with potential peril, again, a fully-volunteer organization with no seperation of duties, can't properly support a grade structure which inherently creates two classes of members, the shooters and the pointers.

What peril?

There is no difference now between the real shooters and the real pointer vs the all the other guys wearing silver oak leaves.....why should another useless rank bring more peril?

Having said all that.

If you go back to what I said before about the NCO program (or lack there of)....I agree that as is...there is no "need" for an NCO program.  Until/unless this supposed new program discribes what the duties of the NCO's would be...it will simply remain a clique of former NCO's being different.

Not to say that CAP NCO's aren't hard working, or not bringing something to the fight......it is what it is.

But..with that in mind.....where is the peril?
Tommorrow I can trade my major leaves for MSgt Stripes.....no one is going to die, no mission will be jepordised, no laws broken, no ethics compromised, no civilian confused......where is the peril?

YAY!  PERIL!

The peril is the same paradigm of misunderstanding that we have today with the officer grades, only worse, since you will
have a whole class of members who, by their very design are subordinate to another whole class, and that doesn't even include
those who will try to use it to their advantage by insinuating they are "above" the duties normally assigned to enlisted personnel.

Is an NCO who is a CAP pilot allowed to eat in the O-Club on base with the rest of his equal volunteer aircrew?
Would they fall-in differently in formation because they are NCO's vs. Officers?
What about NCO's serving as unit/group/wing CC's?  The situation of SMWOG CC's is bad enough, let alone the paradigm of a
wing or group CC, E-5, having to salute flight officers at an encampment or similar activity.
How about a whole class of members who feel they bear no responsibility for any of the planning or higher level jobs
because, by design, their class of membership is "doer" vs. "planner".  Awesome - we can add "I'm just here to teach drill" to the pile of "I'm just here to fly". T-Shirts.
Etc., etc.   All to no end.

The bottom line, is that this fulfills no need, serves no mission, incurs (minor) expense, and has the potential for bad feelings among
members.

Rather than constantly having to say "why not?", someone needs to say "why?"  The only attempt at any justification was the insinuation that NCO's would somehow enhance our cadet program through their NCO force power, which only works if and when they are wearing their stripes.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 08, 2011, 07:38:01 PM
The peril is the same paradigm of misunderstanding that we have today with the officer grades, only worse, since you will
have a whole class of members who, by their very design are subordinate to another whole class, and that doesn't even include
those who will try to use it to their advantage by insinuating they are "above" the duties normally assigned to enlisted personnel.

Is an NCO who is a CAP pilot allowed to eat in the O-Club on base with the rest of his equal volunteer aircrew?

No....not unless AD NCO's could.

QuoteWould they fall-in differently in formation because they are NCO's vs. Officers?

No

QuoteWhat about NCO's serving as unit/group/wing CC's?

Easy fix...make minimun ranks for these positions....which we should have any ways. :)

QuoteThe situation of SMWOG CC's is bad enough, let alone the paradigm of a  wing or group CC, E-5, having to salute flight officers at an encampment or similar activity.

No different then the CMSAF having to salute some brand new Army WO-1 right out of WO school.

QuoteHow about a whole class of members who feel they bear no responsibility for any of the planning or higher level jobs
because, by design, their class of membership is "doer" vs. "planner".

As opposed to all the Level 5 Lt Cols we have now that do nothing but show up for SAREX's and O-rides?

QuoteAwesome - we can add "I'm just here to teach drill" to the pile of "I'm just here to fly". T-Shirts. Etc., etc.   All to no end.

You keep bringing that subject up.  The AD cook....is there just took.  The AD cop is there to patrol the base.  The AD pilot is there to fly.  You should not be expecting everyone to be everything in CAP.  I got a SM (2d Lt) who is our vehicle guy.  That's all he does, that is all he wants to do.  I got several SMs (2d Lts and 1st Lts) who only want to do admin and supply.  I got a Lt Col who only does Character Development.  Nothing wrong with these officers and no one should ever questions their dedication to the program that they also don't want to be observes, GTLs, Comm, CP, AE and the other 700 jobs we have to do in CAP.

[quoteThe bottom line, is that this fulfills no need, serves no mission, incurs (minor) expense, and has the potential for bad feelings among members.[/quote]  So.....the only "perils" is that is incurs (minor) expenses and may create bad feelings.  I think I can live with that. ;)

QuoteRather than constantly having to say "why not?", someone needs to say "why?"  The only attempt at any justification was the insinuation that NCO's would somehow enhance our cadet program through their NCO force power, which only works if and when they are wearing their stripes.

Like anything.....there are good sides and bad sides to any incentive program.  An NCO may be more approachable to cadets and new SM then some Lt Col or Capt.  As most people who are veterans were enlisted....they are more familiar and comfortable with dealing with NCO's then with an officer....that could translate into more effective education and training to cadets and new members.
Some perspective CAP members don't feel comfortable putting on officer ranks.....offering the NCO option may generate more recruitment.

It is different because CAP is different, and the majority of people have no clue why an NCO is different than an officer.

You're suggesting the very separation of duties and grade requirements that are literally impossible in our understaffed reality of today's CAP.

I would argue that an E-8 or 9 is as capable, if not more so, than an O6 to be a Wing CC, since CAP is really run more like a small squad, etc., than
at the strategic level a wing should be, so we grow or accept a capable Senior NCO and then tell him he can never command anything because "NCO's aren't commanders"?

Or worse, we bump him from E-9 to O-6 the weekend he is appointed as Wing CC?  What's the point of that.

As to members reluctant to put on Officer grade?  They need to get over themselves and have a conversation with someone who actually
understands how CAP works and move on.  Most of that comes from wives tales and fundamental misinformation.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 08, 2011, 08:27:40 PM
It is different because CAP is different, and the majority of people have no clue why an NCO is different than an officer.

CAP is slightly different, but it shouldn't be.  If more people had a clue how and why an NCO is different than an officer, then CAP wouldn't be different at all.  One of those "chicken and egg" things, I guess.

QuoteYou're suggesting the very separation of duties and grade requirements that are literally impossible in our understaffed reality of today's CAP.

You may be the prisoner of your own experience here.  Pat is pointing out that in his CAP reality, many members tend to be fairly specialized in task and training.  Mission pilots being a good example.  Stereotypical admin or finance types being another.

I spend a lot of time with the CP contingent.  The great majority of whom spend most of their time doing CP (and the necessary supporting tasks.)

It would be nice if we all were trained and resourced to do all possible jobs at all levels, but for all practical purposes most CAP members are indeed specialized in a duty and serve in an roughly appropriate grade for their duties.

QuoteI would argue that an E-8 or 9 is as capable, if not more so, than an O6 to be a Wing CC, since CAP is really run more like a small squad, etc., than
at the strategic level a wing should be, so we grow or accept a capable Senior NCO and then tell him he can never command anything because "NCO's aren't commanders"?

Actually, I kind of agree with you here.  Not because the average E-8 or E-9 isn't as capable as most CAP O5 and O6s, but because our O5s and O6s are drastically undertrained and resourced to lead at the strategic level they are called upon to do.

QuoteAs to members reluctant to put on Officer grade?  They need to get over themselves and have a conversation with someone who actually understands how CAP works and move on.  Most of that comes from wives tales and fundamental misinformation.

Or maybe the members eager to put on Officer grade with nothing more than a GED, a weekend at Level 1, and a Technician rating need to "get over themselves" and have a conversation with someone who actually understands how CAP and the military work and move on.

Just sayin'.

What Ned Said!  ;D

My bottom line take away is......there is no need for CAP to have an NCO corps...but equally there is no reason can't have NCOs.

Given some fore thought and a some good experince dedicated inital cadre we could build an NCO program that actually improves the overall leadership and managment of CAP.

"What sort of thing did you do in the military?"

Field Radioman (Now called Operator & Maintainer).
Military Police
NCOIC of Intelligence Section
NCOIC Communications Section.
and lastly, Special Agent (Criminal Investigator)

In the USCG AUX I was a boatman.

I was crossed trained as a Chaparral Missile Crewman and and Medic.  The missile was a volunteer deal after Vietnam as the MOS could not get up to needed strength, so I trained in the evenings after my regular duty so they could have a crew if the "[Filter Subversion]" hit the fan.

The medic thing was just on a lark. We were on a German base and they did the MP stuff at the gates and I had time to kill so I took some classes and took the test. The old man thought it was a good idea as we only had a medic on station and he was not required to be there 24/7 so we had to call the locals for emergencies or transport for about 20  miles to our main station.

I personally would like to see more NCOs in CAP. I would like to see them take the lead in CP by serving as DCCs and Leadership Officer slots. I really think that having NCOs as advisers would turn the CAC program at all levels into a real winner because the NCOs are used to serving as "senior enlisted advisors. Training and advising are what they do.


In ES, rank is irrelevant for the most part. People at a mission don't look at rank for much. They look at qualifications and attitude. There isn't the hard separation of officers and "other ranks" in the military of today like you might have seen 40 or 50 years ago. Clubs are "consolidated" and there is less sense of different "classes" when talking about Officers vs. NCOs. Look at an aircrew in grabbing a bite to eat while their C-130 or C-17 is being refueled. You will see a bunch of people who work together everyday and act like it.

I have seen some of the people in CAP who make it to Major or Lt Col. How they did it is beyond me. How they continue to function in the program is beyond me as well. Now I realize that it's not a hard and fast rule, but I'm willing to bet that when I see an NCO in CAP that is wearing E-8 or E-9 stripes that this individual has got something on the ball. In this day and age in the RM, a E-5 or E-6 has more than likely had more PD and leadership training than  most CAP officers who aren't prior military let alone an E-8 or E-9. Most people in CAP will recognize this and treat the NCOs with the appropriate amount of respect. If they don't, I have met few senior NCOs who were reluctant to respectfully tell a junior officer to "go pound sand" when it was appropriate.

Plus, when a person works their way up in the enlisted ranks to senior NCO grade, many of them see it as a step DOWN to go to a junior officer rank and when you are an E-9, even Lt Col is sort of considered  a "junior" officer. These guys are used to dealing with O-6 and up. They are NCOs through and through and that's the way they want it. They don't see themselves as an "under" class nor are they treated like it in the RM.

Ol' Fido- I agree 100% with what you just said.

The separation is not what it used to be (although I can't say that for sure, because I was not alive 40 or 50 years ago) The caste system in the military between officers and enlisted does not need to exist in CAP.

I think it is silly to say "Being an NCO in the military has nothing to do with CAP." How does serving in the military not aid in serving in a paramilitary auxiliary  organization? Sure it does not make you an expert, but I'm betting they (ex-military) can pick up the differences fast.  Running a military based cadet program helps if you have military (or former) members. YMMV If they want to have stripes on their sleeve, let them.

Quote from: ol'fido on September 09, 2011, 12:04:34 AM
In ES, rank is irrelevant for the most part.

One proposal floating around here on CAPTalk (http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=1425.msg20479#msg20479) is to base CAP rank on ES qualifications so that there is at least some correlation between rank and responsibility.  Its certainly not perfect, but gets us closer to it than any other proposal on the table.  One of the big complaints about that system is that it obviously emphasizes ES over CP (and I suppose AE, but that is such a non-factor in real CAP life that it hardly counts). 

QuoteI personally would like to see more NCOs in CAP. I would like to see them take the lead in CP by serving as DCCs and Leadership Officer slots.

Now, perhaps we could address the complaint about ES-based rank by explicitly making the leadership of the cadet program into a field primarily dominated by NCOs both by guiding former NCOs to the cadet program as well as making it possible to put non-prior service folks into CAP NCO ranks for those who just want to work with cadets.  If you think about it, the cadet program is primarily a training program and in the military most of the training is actually done by NCOs.  This wouldn't necessarily preclude CAP officers who got rank through their ES qualifications from participating in the cadet program just that they would probably represent a much smaller percentage of the adult leaders of cadets than they do now (nearly 100%). 

After all this chat about NCOs, I went to our sqd meeting tonight and formally request my NCO rank.

Sewing the chevrons this week and will be wearing by next meeting! :clap:

Quote from: Eclipse on September 08, 2011, 07:38:01 PM
The peril is the same paradigm of misunderstanding that we have today with the officer grades, only worse, since you will
have a whole class of members who, by their very design are subordinate to another whole class, and that doesn't even include
those who will try to use it to their advantage by insinuating they are "above" the duties normally assigned to enlisted personnel.

Is an NCO who is a CAP pilot allowed to eat in the O-Club on base with the rest of his equal volunteer aircrew?
Would they fall-in differently in formation because they are NCO's vs. Officers?
What about NCO's serving as unit/group/wing CC's?  The situation of SMWOG CC's is bad enough, let alone the paradigm of a
wing or group CC, E-5, having to salute flight officers at an encampment or similar activity.
How about a whole class of members who feel they bear no responsibility for any of the planning or higher level jobs
because, by design, their class of membership is "doer" vs. "planner".  Awesome - we can add "I'm just here to teach drill" to the pile of "I'm just here to fly". T-Shirts.
Etc., etc.   All to no end.

The bottom line, is that this fulfills no need, serves no mission, incurs (minor) expense, and has the potential for bad feelings among
members.

Rather than constantly having to say "why not?", someone needs to say "why?"  The only attempt at any justification was the insinuation that NCO's would somehow enhance our cadet program through their NCO force power, which only works if and when they are wearing their stripes.

QuoteIs an NCO who is a CAP pilot allowed to eat in the O-Club on base with the rest of his equal volunteer aircrew?

I wanted to chime in a bit and examine this. I would propose that a CAP member who is a pilot should remain in an officer grade while qualified for and performing that mission for CAP. I would propose that other members in such officer jobs, such as commander, chaplain, doctor, nurse, etc. be required to wear an officer grade when performing that duty and wearing skill badges reflecting that position.

On the other hand, members in support roles, such as administration, ground team membership/leadership, even incident command should be allowed to choose either officer or enlisted (provided a viable enlisted program is developed).

And in my perfect world, I would abolish the cadet officer ranks. That would make passing the Spaatz exam a requirement for cadet E-9....and why not? Earning the Spaatz ribbon allows enlistment at the E-3 rank. That being said, I would allow cadets enrolled in the ROTC (not JROTC) earn cadet officer ranks. That's just my view of how it should be!

The qualification for E-3 is earned with Mitchell, not Spaatz.

I have to agree with the nay-sayers to the extent that if there is no enlisted force there is little need for an NCO corps in so much the same "skill set" you bring as an NCO doesnt change if you have to wear bars instead of stripes.

The only way I see to rectify that is to create and enisted force.  I am of the opinion (and I am not alone I am sure) that the officer system in CAP is a little out of tune with the actual preception of military officer education and to some extent ability (on a side note I have failed to see for the past 18 years how a 4 year college experience suddenly makes you a "leader", but I digress )

I think that CAP coud change this some to meet both expectations..... an adaptation of a proposal I saw once before here somewhere.
Level 1, 2 & 3 change from 2Lt, 1Lt and Capt to SSgt, TSgt and MSgt for those without mission specialty appointment criteria (pilots, nurses, doctors, lawyers, chaplains etc etc)  those with special appointments go the company grade officer path instead.   Commanders (at whatever level you choose) could appoint members to the appropriate company grade slots if they need to become the pointer.  (squadron commanders, deputies, group/wing staffers etc etc.  I am sure there could also be some tie into the mission specialties... director level mission skills could also end up as company grade officers....ground branch, air branch etc etc.  This creates the doer and pointer breakdown that unoffically exists within the organization.  It gives a little more justification to an NCO program as well as a promotion ability for them thats not tied to remaining an active military participant.

Level 4 & 5 remain primarily field grade appointments; but by leavinig open the SMSgt and CMSgt open the progression path for either existing military appointed NCOS's or those rare folks that dont take up the command, group wing staff positions but want to go the whole game of CAP's senior development program.

mk

Quote from: Eclipse on September 09, 2011, 01:23:17 PM
The qualification for E-3 is earned with Mitchell, not Spaatz.

....and I should have my argument more clear for you, I apologize, but that's not what I said nor my point friend. Yes, everyone understands that the Mitchell is the minimal cadet achievement to earn RM E-3. You are advanced to E-3 just the same with a Spaatz.

Because this is a "CAP NCO" thread I was trying to justify a valid CAP NCO program for cadets as well as senior members.

In my opinion, it seems that the cadet program just blows through the enlisted ranks without pause as to the contributions that a well trained NCO has for "deck plate" (USN term) leadership.

Reading through the achievement books and proctoring advancement tests gave me a perspective as to what form of leadership CAP is attempting to inculcate into cadet minds while at the same time understanding, to a certain degree, how pre-adolescent and adolescent minds behave.

Having been a non-commissioned officer myself decades ago, I recognize the leadership style promulgated through the CAP cadet program paired with the learning styles of teens is simply more conducive to a NCO Corps structure. Many say that to be a good officer, one needs to first be an enlisted member (go mustangs!). There are many more subtleties that could be said here, but I would digress too far from the main point. After all, this is just an exercise in thought and my opinion.

So, in my opinion, in a "stroke-of-the-pen" move, CAP should shift the cadet rank program to an all NCO corps system. The only changes to the achievement material and tests would be a change in a few key words such as "officer" to read "non-commissioned officer".

Quote from: sandman on September 09, 2011, 04:28:19 PM
Because this is a "CAP NCO" thread I was trying to justify a valid CAP NCO program for cadets as well as senior members.

I have Good News for you!  CAP has an outstanding cadet NCO program.  It is found in Phases I and II of our existing program.

QuoteIn my opinion, it seems that the cadet program just blows through the enlisted ranks without pause as to the contributions that a well trained NCO has for "deck plate" (USN term) leadership.

I think I hear your point, but the reality is that relatively few cadets (~ 15%) receive their Mitchell Awards and become cadet officers in any event.  The great majority of cadets "top out" as cadet NCOs and receive the appropriate training.

(We can and should do better in moving more cadets into the officer ranks to take advantage of the training and leadership experiences available in P-II and P-IV.)

QuoteHaving been a non-commissioned officer myself decades ago, ( . . .) Many say that to be a good officer, one needs to first be an enlisted member (go mustangs!).

Then it sounds like you agree with our doctrine - we do require all cadets to progress through the NCO ranks before becoming cadet officers.  CAP's CP is unique in that regard among mainstream youth leadership programs like the Young Marines and the USAC.

QuoteSo, in my opinion, in a "stroke-of-the-pen" move, CAP should shift the cadet rank program to an all NCO corps system. The only changes to the achievement material and tests would be a change in a few key words such as "officer" to read "non-commissioned officer".

I think you greatly underestimate the complexity and effort required to completely redo our successful leadership curricula, which was created and implemented as comprehensive progression from airman through cadet colonel and the Spaatz Award.  We have invested thousands of dollars and countless hours in creating materials appropriate both for NCO and officer leadership styles.  One of the strengths of our program is that cadets who stick with it and complete the program are taught and expected to perform as leaders from the element level through squadron cadet command and beyond.

But more importantly, I don't think you have yet articulated the "why" of your proposal.  What benefit do we gain by lopping off the last half of the program?  How does restricting our training add value to a proven and successful program?

QuoteI have Good News for you!  CAP has an outstanding cadet NCO program.  It is found in Phases I and II of our existing program.

What a swell guy, thanks for the the enlightenment Ned.

QuoteWhat benefit do we gain by lopping off the last half of the program?  How does restricting our training add value to a proven and successful program?

I am not advocating "lopping off" any part of the program nor suggesting any restrictions per se. I suggested keeping the didactic curriculum intact from Curry through Spaatz with only minor verbiage mods.

QuoteWe can and should do better in moving more cadets into the officer ranks to take advantage of the training and leadership experiences available....

Fine. Then let CAP shift to an "all officer" cadet program. Teens like to be the boss and officer "bling" is attractive (a better sense of self-esteem or self-actualization....right SM's?) so cadets may stay in the program longer if they are not initially addressed and treated like....well...cadets.

I don't understand where you are going with this.

If you are suggesting that the military change their rules on when they award extra grade.....they can do that at any time.

If you suggesting that we eliminate all officer ranks and restructure when a cadet actually promotes as they complete their achievment and milestones....that is a lot more then a simple change in the verbage.

I have encountered what I think is a misperception of what a Cadet NCO is supposed to be when former military trie to apply Active Duty standards onto the cadets.

Remember that they are only cadets.

Quote from: lordmonar on September 09, 2011, 05:45:19 PM
I have encountered what I think is a misperception of what a Cadet NCO is supposed to be when former military trie to apply Active Duty standards onto the cadets.

Remember that they are only cadets.

Also, unlike the military, the 'enlisted/nco' path is not a separate path from the 'officer' path. The 'enlisted/nco' path is a feeder to the 'officer' path. All cadet officers have progressed through the NCO ranks, VERY unlike the military were only a statistically insignificant few officers have even done part of the nco ranks. Too many of the CAP NCO's forget this, or worse actively discourage cadets from progressing beyond C/CMSgt, and work hard at imparting the "NCO = Godlike being, Officer = dirt" attitude.

We have too many 'career cadet chiefs' because they have the mistaken idea that in CAP a cadet chief carries the same weight as a military chief (E-9, pick your flavor).

LT/CPT/Maj,

First, thank you for your service.  It is genuinely appreciated.

(And BTW, quite an "edit" there.)

Quote from: sandman on September 09, 2011, 04:51:59 PM
I am not advocating "lopping off" any part of the program nor suggesting any restrictions per se. I suggested keeping the didactic curriculum intact from Curry through Spaatz with only minor verbiage mods.

OK, maybe I misunderstood you when you wrote:

QuoteSo, in my opinion, in a "stroke-of-the-pen" move, CAP should shift the cadet rank program to an all NCO corps system.

But my questions remain:  How does your change add value to our current program?  What benefit does this change provide?

QuoteFine. Then let CAP shift to an "all officer" cadet program. Teens like to be the boss and officer "bling" is attractive (a better sense of self-esteem or self-actualization....right SM's?) so cadets may stay in the program longer if they are not initially addressed and treated like....well...cadets.

My sense is that there may be some sarcasm in here, because otherwise I am having a hard time following you.  I didn't think you were suggesting that we eliminate our "followership phase" (P-I), or were you?

None of the research in retention I have seen would indicated that "officer bling" is a significant factor in retaining cadets; indeed I would expect much higher retention rates if that were the case.  It bears repeating that only about 15% of our cadets earn the Mitchell.

Our retention, as bad as it is, seems about on line with other youth programs in our demographic.  Part of it is that teens simply move on to other activities at that stage in their life.  And of course, part of it is that we need to do a better job at improving the "Tuesday night experience."  Units with meetings that suck ("uh, the instructor didn't show again, so drill around the parking lot.") have sucky retention rates. Units with dynamic, "hands-on" activities and interesting classes and events have much better retention rates.

Go figure.

But nothing I've seen relates any retention factors as to whether we have an "all NCO" or even an "all officer" cadet program.

Ned, et al,
Gentlemen, Fair enough. I concede your point.

Quote from: NedNone of the research in retention I have seen would indicated that "officer bling" is a significant factor in retaining cadets; indeed I would expect much higher retention rates if that were the case.  It bears repeating that only about 15% of our cadets earn the Mitchell.

Again, fair enough. I submit that there is a great paucity in that area of research, but so be it.

Quote from: Nedretention, as bad as it is, seems about on line with other youth programs in our demographic.  Part of it is that teens simply move on to other activities at that stage in their life.

I concur completely. It partially bears to the fact that the CAP program does not offer youth the experiences they need/want/desire. Most likely the way youth are raised these days shares "blame", and then throw in the mix current technologies of virtual reality, IM, texting, lack of parenting, laws preventing punishment, etc, etc, etc. I blame Nintendo...

Quote from: NedBut my questions remain:  How does your change add value to our current program?  What benefit does this change provide?

Good questions. How does having a senior member NCO program add value?

I suppose in my altered reality of CAP with my narrowed permutations of the cadet program, I believed that providing a more tangible reward for completing the advancement programs such as sewing on large stripes to BDU and dress blue sleeves would be in line with winning a trophy at a sports event. The logic, if there is any to be had, follows that something hard to earn is more cherished than something that is quickly passed by...one test and you pin on the next rank.

Then again, as alluded to previously, this generation of youth (and adults for that matter) are suckled by the instant satisfaction of this age. Which in reality, is probably the root cause for floundering youth programs such as CAP.

Quote from: sandman on September 10, 2011, 12:29:36 AM
How does having a senior member NCO program add value?

In at least a couple of ways:

1.  As I have mentioned a couple of times before, NCOs lead and act like NCOs; officers lead and act like officers.  As a fellow Army guy, I hope you would agree.  Since many - if not most - of our cadets are NCOs, it follows that they would benefit from role models who act and lead like NCOs for at least the P-II portion of the program.  (Yes, we have a terrific cadet program now that functions without NCO role-models; but think how much better it could be if we had a high-speed NCO or two in every cadet and composite unit.)

2.  Restoring the full role of NCOs to CAP (similar to our original status) will help make CAP a more functional military/paramilitary (pick one for the later argument) operation.  Every military organization since the Romans has operated with both officers and NCOs.  There is a reason for that.  Sure, we have been able to meet mission for a lot of years without a full NCO component, but again, think how much more effective we can be.

QuoteI suppose in my altered reality of CAP with my narrowed permutations of the cadet program, I believed that providing a more tangible reward for completing the advancement programs such as sewing on large stripes to BDU and dress blue sleeves would be in line with winning a trophy at a sports event.

You know that we used to do exactly that, right?  I spent a significant amount of time sewing stripes onto my uniforms WIWAC.  Learned to sew fairly well between that and wing patches.  I'm not sure we noticed any signficant change one way or another when we adopted the USAF pin-ons for enlisted ranks.

Ned,
Fair enough. Already conceded to your point(s).

A vitalized SM NCO Corps would certainly be beneficial. I recant suggestions of altering the cadet program.

Would we need to have something like the AF system of apprentice, journeyman, etc., modifying our current PD structure?

Quote from: JC004 on September 10, 2011, 03:17:36 AM
Would we need to have something like the AF system of apprentice, journeyman, etc., modifying our current PD structure?

We already do.  Technician, Senior, Master ratings.

Re-instituting a CAP SM NCO component program may help the cadet program and, Ned has made a good argument for it. However, is it worth the use of our limited resources to develop and implement and, maintain another PD program?  I'm not sure. 

There were non prior military CAP SM NCO's when I was a cadet.  They served as supply officers and basic tac officers for cadet basic (Curry) flights.  These senior members were former cadets under the age of 21.  To my knowledge, there wasn't a formal NCO training or PD program for these membrers.  All the former military members were officers in my squadron (and group).  The CAP NCO's were good at what they did and, seemed to haze train cadets in their own special way... Let's just say things were different back then.  (There were also over 75,000 members in CAP)

In a time when funding is in question and, membership numbers have been stuck at about 60,000 members for the last 20 or so years, I think we need to ask how a "vital NCO program" will help change these numbers for the better. 

(BTW; shouldn't we be calling the program a "Sergeants Track" as, all grades in CAP are NON commissioned.)? ;)

Quote from: FW on September 10, 2011, 02:52:39 PM
In a time when funding is in question and, membership numbers have been stuck at about 60,000 members for the last 20 or so years, I think we need to ask how a "vital NCO program" will help change these numbers for the better. 

I've got no problem with spending a little time and resources examining whether or not we need the "program" as it now stands.  We should do that periodically for just about everything. 

And if its decided that we want to keep NCOs but give them some real purpose, I'm fine with that.  If we want to see if that does anything to bring in new members or increase the value of the existing members that is ok by me.  However, I wouldn't go all out developing a major PD program just for NCOs.  Lets first see if we can find a real use for the NCOs we have now at the ranks they have now . If that works, lets expand it.  If it doesn't move the needle on anything, get rid of the NCO ranks entirely and simplify some CAP regulations for a change.

When I went on AD in the AF, I was a CAP SSgt. being a former cadet under 21. Made for interesting barracks inspections when hanging uniform shirts wore e-3 and at the end with the civilian clothing was a uniform short with SSgt stripes. Most NCOs at that time were former cadets under age 21 or former military. the NCO grades were promotable and awarded by the Squadron Commander. So it can be said the CAP NCO's were in a strong position to train cadets and assist senior members in their duty assignments. It was a win-win program for cadets and seniors. On reaching age 21, the majority of the NCOs transferred to officer status.

Quote from: AirDX on September 10, 2011, 09:46:18 AM

Quote from: JC004 on September 10, 2011, 03:17:36 AM
Would we need to have something like the AF system of apprentice, journeyman, etc., modifying our current PD structure?

We already do.  Technician, Senior, Master ratings.

So it would be the same PD for a different program?  I am trying to understand how this is supposed to work since there doesn't seem to be a comprehensive proposal anywhere.

Wow is all I can say :o :o :o :o :o  This seems to be such a "hot topic"... >:D

Frankly retired/former military NCO's (and also officers) are not flocking to join Civil Air Patrol.  I highly doubt that any changes in any program(s) is going to change that.

Also for those senior members that have elected to wear their NCO grade, are they complaining about anything involving the current program which warrants change ???

There's a finite amount of volunteer time and CAP money available.  This is a "non issue" involving a small group of volunteer personnel that only seems to be an issue here on CAPTALK.
RM

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on September 11, 2011, 02:28:45 PM
Wow is all I can say :o :o :o :o :o  This seems to be such a "hot topic"... >:D

Frankly retired/former military NCO's (and also officers) are not flocking to join Civil Air Patrol.  I highly doubt that any changes in any program(s) is going to change that.

No here in Vegas.  We run about 40-50% veterain.

QuoteAlso for those senior members that have elected to wear their NCO grade, are they complaining about anything involving the current program which warrants change ???

No way to progress....if you choose the NCO path and are an E-5 you stay a SSgt forever.
No real "mission"......what exactly are the NCO's to do.
No National Tracking....until very recently EServices did not even track NCO ranks.

QuoteThere's a finite amount of volunteer time and CAP money available.  This is a "non issue" involving a small group of volunteer personnel that only seems to be an issue here on CAPTALK.

Volunteers are the ones following this up......and no one is spending any money.

1. What are NCOs to do: Pretty much anything any other senior member does in CAP like fly airplanes, lead ground teams, serve on squadron staffs, etc. Except for wing command and up, there really is no grade specific jobs that I can think of. Simply because we think of some jobs as being an officer slot such as squadron command or group command doesn't mean that we have to have officer's fill the slot's.

Most of the people I know in CAP who know what they are doing don't care about the next guys rank. They only care about "Does this person have the quals and know what they are doing." The people who fret and dither about "Well, he's just a First Lieutenant.( heck, the guy that ran the USAFs special operations in the Korean War was a Master Sergeant. )We can't have him doing so and so." are the ones that worry about the piss ants while the elephants are stomping them to death.

2. How do they progress?: They don't through CAP. But if the RM promotes them, they are probably more deserving and have worked harder at it than they would have for a CAP officer promotion. If they are retired, then they probably don't care about it too much. Kind of like those "Captains for Life" we talk about so much on here. Besides, three or four officer promotions in CAP and they are most likely done anyway. If I was to change anything, I would have a transition program that would allow NCOs to switch over to the officer grades based on their NCO rank IF THEY SO DESIRE. Let them do the all the PD levels as NCOs if they want. That's what waivers are for.

A lot of former or current NCOs probably like the ability to be an officer in CAP. Look at our current National CC. OTOH, a lot of these guys probably like the "NCO Mindset" and want to keep that going in CAP. If it's not costing us anything, who cares? Let the NCO program go on like it is.

Quote from: lordmonar on September 08, 2011, 08:04:23 PM
An NCO may be more approachable to cadets and new SM then some Lt Col or Capt.  As most people who are veterans were enlisted....they are more familiar and comfortable with dealing with NCO's then with an officer....that could translate into more effective education and training to cadets and new members.
Some perspective CAP members don't feel comfortable putting on officer ranks.....offering the NCO option may generate more recruitment.

Then someone has a problem they need to get over fairly fast.

Quote from: ol'fido on September 11, 2011, 11:19:50 PM
1. What are NCOs to do: Pretty much anything any other senior member does in CAP like fly airplanes, lead ground teams, serve on squadron staffs, etc. Except for wing command and up, there really is no grade specific jobs that I can think of. Simply because we think of some jobs as being an officer slot such as squadron command or group command doesn't mean that we have to have officer's fill the slot's.

Most of the people I know in CAP who know what they are doing don't care about the next guys rank. They only care about "Does this person have the quals and know what they are doing." The people who fret and dither about "Well, he's just a First Lieutenant.( heck, the guy that ran the USAFs special operations in the Korean War was a Master Sergeant. )We can't have him doing so and so." are the ones that worry about the piss ants while the elephants are stomping them to death.

2. How do they progress?: They don't through CAP. But if the RM promotes them, they are probably more deserving and have worked harder at it than they would have for a CAP officer promotion. If they are retired, then they probably don't care about it too much. Kind of like those "Captains for Life" we talk about so much on here. Besides, three or four officer promotions in CAP and they are most likely done anyway. If I was to change anything, I would have a transition program that would allow NCOs to switch over to the officer grades based on their NCO rank IF THEY SO DESIRE. Let them do the all the PD levels as NCOs if they want. That's what waivers are for.

A lot of former or current NCOs probably like the ability to be an officer in CAP. Look at our current National CC. OTOH, a lot of these guys probably like the "NCO Mindset" and want to keep that going in CAP. If it's not costing us anything, who cares? Let the NCO program go on like it is.

If things are the same, what is the point?

Can some people help me understand how this should work? 

An example:  What would be the difference between a junior NCO working in logistics, a senior NCO working in logistics, and an officer working in logistics?

How would we change our leadership and management training?  Would we need airman/junior NCO/senior NCO/officer training for all these different things?

The fact is: Its a non-issue except in the minds of some who just don't like it for one reason or another.

These reasons run from "they just do not think its necessary"  or maybe "NCO chevron envy"? ;).

But the bottom line is, as I have pointed out, people in a much "higher pay grade" think that it is necessary, period. Not going to get into a silly on-line debate with some who seem to want to be negative for its own sake. 

Please feel free to walk up to a CAP NCO and tell him your thoughts as to why they are "just wanting to be different" or in useless grade, etc.

Thank you.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 12, 2011, 06:07:04 PM
Please feel free to walk up to a CAP NCO and tell him your thoughts as to why they are "just wanting to be different" or in useless grade, etc.

Since they are so few and far between, this is not something most of us can do.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 12, 2011, 06:07:04 PM
But the bottom line is, as I have pointed out, people in a much "higher pay grade" think that it is necessary, period. Not going to get into a silly on-line debate with some who seem to want to be negative for its own sake. 

Then here's a suggestion - don't.
Last I checked, CAPTalk participation was not a requirement for membership. However if you choose to participate, calling said participation "silly" would seem to be somewhat mentally circular.

Your repeated comments about "the brass", and "higher pay grades", etc., etc., would appear to many that you really don't "get" CAP.

Our appointed leaders certainly don't need rank-and-file membership approval to take actions that are within their constitutional authority, but they do need the benevolence and comprehensive understanding of the membership to actually make those actions function, else they are left with a situation where instead of making things "better", as intended, they cause additional fractures in already broken structures.  Hard-inserting NCO's into the existing structure of CAP, without a full reboot of the grade structure and some practical way to separate duties and status, will just further confuse things, and if nothing else, we all know that military NCO's are nothing if not "sure" of their place in the universe.  Drop them into CAP, where their stripes will make them no more "enlisted^®" (from a duty perspective), then a Major is an "Officer^®", and you'll leave them floundering to figure what the heck our deal is.  Floundering members who joined an organization with an assumption of some functioning structure are generally referred to as "Ex- members".

Further, it is, frankly, "easier" (in the Grande CAP Scheme^®) to be an enlisted airman than an officer from the the perspective of self-initiation.
When you consider the veritable lack of management training provided to CAP members, you risk having an entire cadre of members who will simply wait to be led, and only do exactly what they are told, which is 180^°off of what we need in a volunteer organization with inconsistent leadership.
Lord knows we have some members who need to be "dial-ed down" in their "enthusiasm", but for the most part, it is only those self-starters in CAP who get things done, no matter which mission or niche they choose.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 12, 2011, 06:07:04 PMPlease feel free to walk up to a CAP NCO and tell him your thoughts as to why they are "just wanting to be different" or in useless grade, etc.

Already have, which includes any number considering which way to go within CAP where I strongly recommended they take the "standard" officer track.
Of course I didn't adopt a confrontational attitude about it.
In more cases than not, the respective commander thought it would be "neat", with no consideration for the long-term ramifications for the member.
Once they better understood CAP, the response was to accept the officer appointments and move on.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 12, 2011, 06:07:04 PM
The fact is: Its a non-issue except in the minds of some who just don't like it for one reason or another.

These reasons run from "they just do not think its necessary"  or maybe "NCO chevron envy"? ;).

But the bottom line is, as I have pointed out, people in a much "higher pay grade" think that it is necessary, period. Not going to get into a silly on-line debate with some who seem to want to be negative for its own sake. 

Please feel free to walk up to a CAP NCO and tell him your thoughts as to why they are "just wanting to be different" or in useless grade, etc.

Thank you.

Done that been there.  Told that same exact thing to the pervious Cheif Master Sergeant of the CAP.

"Your repeated comments about "the brass", and "higher pay grades", etc., etc., would appear to many that you really don't "get" CAP."

I "get" the CAP just fine. The use of "brass and/or higher pay grades" is figurative rather then literal, except in cases of USAF oversite, approval and legal review, etc. But you knew that. 

After reviewing a lot of your posts, it is you I don't get. You seem to like confrontation and use your bating remarks as a means to that end.

We can agree to disagree.

You still haven't answered the question about the CAP experience you have that informs your opinion.

This thread has far outlived its usefulness.

Quote from: AirDX on September 13, 2011, 01:37:21 AM
This thread has far outlived its usefulness.

must...resist...lock button...finger-twitch.

15 pages, actively following, and I still don't see full answers to the basics I asked about a few posts ago...  I think they're pretty important questions.

Quote from: JC004 on September 12, 2011, 02:56:25 PM
An example:  What would be the difference between a junior NCO working in logistics, a senior NCO working in logistics, and an officer working in logistics?

I can't really speak to logistics, but if we had a mature CAP enlisted/NCO structure in CP, at the squadron I would expect to see SSgts and Tsgts working more or less directly with the troops; directly monitoring training and mentoring the cadet instructors for things like D & C, and acting as instrucors.  I would normally expect senior NCOs (MSgt +) to do things like training schedules, coordinate and rehearse instructors, mentor both the junior NCOs and the cadet staff, conduct CP-related professional development for the senior member side, and also serve in additional duties for the unit as a whole (things like unit First Sergeant, Personnel and Admin NCO, etc.).

At the group, wing, and region level I would expect senior NCOs to work as SMEs in CP.  I would probably see them working on CI and SAV teams, maintaining associated records and providing administrative support, directly coordinating with their counterparts at lower and higher levels, planning CP activities at their level, producing reports and maintaining electronic data, and mentoring and training NCOs at lower echelons.

At things like encampments, NCOs would provide valuble support on the tactical staff, liaisoning with host facilities, as well as serving as  logisticians and administrators. 

And at all levels, NCOs - like all SMs - would be eligible for the dreaded "similar and related duties as reguired."  8)

Remember, this is a vision for a mature and self-generating enlisted structure, NOT what we have today.  Today, our NCOs come to us pre-trained in leadership and organizatoinal skills by Uncle Sam and all we have to add are the CAP-specific skills.

QuoteHow would we change our leadership and management training?  Would we need airman/junior NCO/senior NCO/officer training for all these different things?

As currently configured, no.  As I pointed out, the advantage of NCOs is that they come to us pre-screened and substantially pre-trained.  They would need pretty much the same training the rest of us gets.

But if (and that is a big if) we ever moved to a fully integrated enlisted strucutre, I would expect to see substantial changes in the PD structure with training appropriate for airmen, NCOs, and officers established.

I would say to be necessary, let alone effective, you'd need a CAP with at least twice as many members.  In most units there'd be no "troops" to interact with.

Also, nearly all the duties you are assigning to NCO's are literally administrative and management in nature - appropriate as-is today for officers.

I could see, to some extent, a way to make this work with NCO's as the small-squad leaders of those who have no interest in anything but "doing" - flying,
GT, and other hands-on operational specialties with no interest in command or admin, but since we are probably a decade away from having that many members, not really much point to the discussion.

We are also ignoring the fact that commanders and officers join and stay in CAP specifically to "do", not to admin and manage.  The same people who
run the units also serve as drill instructors for cadets because that's what they want to do, or ES ground work, radios, flying, etc.  Separate them even more from the doing than they are today (by all the time-wasting, check-boxing), and you will eventually level out to an all NCO-CAP, with few officers in the mix at the unit level.

You'll also likely have a leaderless mid-section as those who are happy enough to lead as long as they can "do" quit or drop to the NCO's so they can continue to "do".

You mean to tell me that everyone doesn't wear a stack of hats? Blastphemy!

Some days I think it would be nice to just be a SAR guy and coordinate a squadron color guard. Then I think about how bored I would be...

Quote from: Eclipse on September 13, 2011, 06:09:48 PM
I would say to be necessary, let alone effective, you'd need a CAP with at least twice as many members.  In most units there'd be no "troops" to interact with.

Interestingly, in most military and paramilitary situations, when the unit is relatively small it is the enlisted structure that predominates rather than the officers.

The modern CAP is a little unusual in that regard.

CAP is unusual in a lot of ways, to your example, many of our Wings are smaller than USAF units, and in the real world
would probably not be a "wing", nor have 35% of the manpower as field-grade officers.

And I wouldn't necessarily disagree that with a full reboot it might not make more sense to artificially suppress the grades down to the company level for those who choose not to move out of the unit, and in turn create an enlisted corps, those sprinkling in Warrant Officers might have a better spin.

But that means we have to instill and enforce the "up or out", the lack of which is really at the corps of a lot of the issues with the CAP grade structure.
In a perfect world, you wouldn't get the grade unless you're willing to move "up", and when there's no more "up", it's either stay lateral or go "out".
No more full Colonels coming back to run squadrons or be a unit Asst. Admin officer.  We all know why that won't work in the volunteer paradigm.

Another speed bump - the circular nature of CAP's command and staff structure.

We have members who are triple+ billeted all over the echelon map - the Wing PDO is also a Unit LG (in three different units across two different groups), Region Historian, Group CPO, commander of the annual cadet competition, and PIC of the SLS/CLC.  I've argued for years that this causes more trouble than it is worth, but without an "up or out" career path, and considering the staffing issues we have, it is what it is.

It's bad enough that we have Captains commanding Lt. Colonels in a lot of cases, now we're going to add NCO's to that list?  How ridiculous will it be
to a military NCO when the Wing CC "reports" to an E-5 to receive an award, or has to discipline a general officer?  Or do we limit the ability of the NCOs to do those jobs, in which case we take people who are otherwise acknowledged as capable leaders and project managers and tell them "no, you can't do that because you are an NCO".

And before anyone repeats the mantra of "Well, our current system is already broken, so what difference does it make?", I'd say:

A) You don't fix something by creating additional fractures.
B) If it doesn't make any difference, then it doesn't make any difference, and we should leave things as-is.

MY only problem with the CAP NCO program is the lack of the ability to promote. A retired AD Captain joins CAP and after training and TIG he can promote to Major. A retired E-5 joins CAP as an E-5, takes the same training earns Masters ratings in a couple of PD area and he is still not able to promote. What is the logic behind this? If CAP wants a strong NCO program, there has to be a way for NCOs to promote. We're talking CAP grades here which have nothing to do with the RM, so why not allow NCOs to promote to higher CAP NCO grades????

Eclipse....you keep pointing to the strange phenonomn of Lt's commanding Cols and then stretch the analogy that it would apply to NCO's.

Becasue one part of CAP is broken does not mean that this new proposed part of CAP would be broken too.

One......most people who opt for NCO stripes....would not want to command.....see NED's post on leadership styles.
Two......I agree it is silly that LT's and maybe E-5s are commadning.......so we simply add and enforce hard rank requirments for command and live with the consequence of units that don't have the right rank (they don't have to fold....they would just need a get well plan and some leadership assitance).

Quote from: Ned on September 13, 2011, 05:47:43 PM

Quote from: JC004 on September 12, 2011, 02:56:25 PM
An example:  What would be the difference between a junior NCO working in logistics, a senior NCO working in logistics, and an officer working in logistics?

I can't really speak to logistics, but if we had a mature CAP enlisted/NCO structure in CP, at the squadron I would expect to see SSgts and Tsgts working more or less directly with the troops; directly monitoring training and mentoring the cadet instructors for things like D & C, and acting as instrucors.  I would normally expect senior NCOs (MSgt +) to do things like training schedules, coordinate and rehearse instructors, mentor both the junior NCOs and the cadet staff, conduct CP-related professional development for the senior member side, and also serve in additional duties for the unit as a whole (things like unit First Sergeant, Personnel and Admin NCO, etc.).

At the group, wing, and region level I would expect senior NCOs to work as SMEs in CP.  I would probably see them working on CI and SAV teams, maintaining associated records and providing administrative support, directly coordinating with their counterparts at lower and higher levels, planning CP activities at their level, producing reports and maintaining electronic data, and mentoring and training NCOs at lower echelons.

At things like encampments, NCOs would provide valuble support on the tactical staff, liaisoning with host facilities, as well as serving as  logisticians and administrators. 

And at all levels, NCOs - like all SMs - would be eligible for the dreaded "similar and related duties as reguired."  8)

Remember, this is a vision for a mature and self-generating enlisted structure, NOT what we have today.  Today, our NCOs come to us pre-trained in leadership and organizatoinal skills by Uncle Sam and all we have to add are the CAP-specific skills.

QuoteHow would we change our leadership and management training?  Would we need airman/junior NCO/senior NCO/officer training for all these different things?

As currently configured, no.  As I pointed out, the advantage of NCOs is that they come to us pre-screened and substantially pre-trained.  They would need pretty much the same training the rest of us gets.

But if (and that is a big if) we ever moved to a fully integrated enlisted strucutre, I would expect to see substantial changes in the PD structure with training appropriate for airmen, NCOs, and officers established.

....Hey Mods, where's that "Like" button again on this thing?

QuoteCaptain, US Army (Active Duty)
LT, US Merchant Marine
Major, Civil Air Patrol
Academy Admissions Partner (LT), USCG Auxiliary
LT, US Naval Sea Cadets
Admiral (NE)

Your uniform budget must be obscene.

Now for some "soap boxing":

1. My SSG chevrons came at a much higher price in training, responsibility and developing leadership skills/experience (And in some ways, mean more then my WO status in the real military). They took three regular and one Nat' Guard years and a lot of training to earn. You can be a CAP 1st LT in 6 months.

My military ribbons/pins were required more of me to earn vs. my CAP ribbons. I finished level 1 training in a day, thereby earning a ribbon vs. having to finishing army basic training in the early 70's to earn my first ribbon/medal. (national defense). Not trying to discount or disrespect CAP awards, but they are apples and oranges. (One exception is the CAP EMT pin which is harder to earn then my expert medic award).

2.  As to what I can do? There is very little that I can't do and if called upon to serve in those areas actually requiring shinny ranks, I will reconsider accepting a "commission" (Actually "appointments" for both officers and NCOs is the correct terminology and have the same legal effect).

My point, the USAF/our HQ determined that there shall be NCO grades and we must accept it. It is what it is.

Off my soap box and the smoking lamp is on!

P.S.: we NCOs do not spend our days saluting officers.

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on September 14, 2011, 09:52:17 PM

QuoteCaptain, US Army (Active Duty)
LT, US Merchant Marine
Major, Civil Air Patrol
Academy Admissions Partner (LT), USCG Auxiliary
LT, US Naval Sea Cadets
Admiral (NE)

Your uniform budget must be obscene.

You're payin' for it...
Taxes

I am so new to the Civil Air Patrol that the first six pages of this thread were written before the date I officially became a member.  I was recruited by a Senior Member 2Lt, a Cadet Major, and a Cadet 1Lt at an expo in a shopping center parking lot.  As we were looking at their display, my wife mentioned that I was an Air Force retiree.  The Senior Member asked my rank and seemed excited that I'd been a senior NCO and told me that in six months I could be a Second Lieutenant.  I laughed and told him I used to train Second Lieutenants. 

I joined with my step-grandson as a way of providing something his blind father cannot always provide.    Our first meeting happened to be a Change of Command, so the Group Commander was there as well and both she and the newly appointed commander talked with me at length.  The recruiter had apparently told them of my remark and both commented that I could come in at my Air Force rank.

Folks, I retired from active duty in 1989 after serving for almost 28 years.  You do the math.  I'm older by far than any other member in my unit and probably rate at least in the top ten percent oldest CAP-wide.   When I retired it was as a Chief Master Sergeant and I was proud of those stripes.  I worked hard for them, I served well for them, and I'd like to think I honored them and still do honor them.

I have not yet determined which way I will go.  I have been appointed as the Deputy Commander for Cadets, a position I will not take lightly.  The butter bar or that massive set of Chief's stripes are equally well suited for the job.  At my age, I'm not worried about earning promotions, so my emphasis will be in leaving my mark on what I've already perceived as a pretty sharp group of motivated CAP Cadets.   I've seen at least one thing that disturbs me and that is while my little unit has 13 Senior Members on the books, I've been to every meeting since 3 Aug, there are still three SM's I have not met and one other has only been to one meeting, and yet these four are Officers.  I realize that the CAP is a volunteer organization, but to volunteer and not show up for nearly two months doesn't bode well with me.

I want to thank you all for the input you've made in this thread.   Over the next few months, my commander and I will discuss which way we think is best.   The only military base anywhere near my home closed this past spring and I already miss the guard at the gate saluting and saying, "Welcome aboard, Chief."

Quote from: Jim McNamara on September 22, 2011, 05:58:12 PM
I am so new to the Civil Air Patrol that the first six pages of this thread were written before the date I officially became a member.  I was recruited by a Senior Member 2Lt, a Cadet Major, and a Cadet 1Lt at an expo in a shopping center parking lot.  As we were looking at their display, my wife mentioned that I was an Air Force retiree.  The Senior Member asked my rank and seemed excited that I'd been a senior NCO and told me that in six months I could be a Second Lieutenant.  I laughed and told him I used to train Second Lieutenants. 

I joined with my step-grandson as a way of providing something his blind father cannot always provide.    Our first meeting happened to be a Change of Command, so the Group Commander was there as well and both she and the newly appointed commander talked with me at length.  The recruiter had apparently told them of my remark and both commented that I could come in at my Air Force rank.

Folks, I retired from active duty in 1989 after serving for almost 28 years.  You do the math.  I'm older by far than any other member in my unit and probably rate at least in the top ten percent oldest CAP-wide.   When I retired it was as a Chief Master Sergeant and I was proud of those stripes.  I worked hard for them, I served well for them, and I'd like to think I honored them and still do honor them.

I have not yet determined which way I will go.  I have been appointed as the Deputy Commander for Cadets, a position I will not take lightly.  The butter bar or that massive set of Chief's stripes are equally well suited for the job.  At my age, I'm not worried about earning promotions, so my emphasis will be in leaving my mark on what I've already perceived as a pretty sharp group of motivated CAP Cadets.   I've seen at least one thing that disturbs me and that is while my little unit has 13 Senior Members on the books, I've been to every meeting since 3 Aug, there are still three SM's I have not met and one other has only been to one meeting, and yet these four are Officers.  I realize that the CAP is a volunteer organization, but to volunteer and not show up for nearly two months doesn't bode well with me.

I want to thank you all for the input you've made in this thread.   Over the next few months, my commander and I will discuss which way we think is best.   The only military base anywhere near my home closed this past spring and I already miss the guard at the gate saluting and saying, "Welcome aboard, Chief."

Welcome to CAP!

not to be rude, you have just peaked my interest, but why would an SP/MP salute a chief?

Quote from: Jim McNamara on September 22, 2011, 05:58:12 PM
I am so new to the Civil Air Patrol that the first six pages of this thread were written before the date I officially became a member.  I was recruited by a Senior Member 2Lt, a Cadet Major, and a Cadet 1Lt at an expo in a shopping center parking lot.  As we were looking at their display, my wife mentioned that I was an Air Force retiree.  The Senior Member asked my rank and seemed excited that I'd been a senior NCO and told me that in six months I could be a Second Lieutenant.  I laughed and told him I used to train Second Lieutenants. 

I joined with my step-grandson as a way of providing something his blind father cannot always provide.    Our first meeting happened to be a Change of Command, so the Group Commander was there as well and both she and the newly appointed commander talked with me at length.  The recruiter had apparently told them of my remark and both commented that I could come in at my Air Force rank.

Folks, I retired from active duty in 1989 after serving for almost 28 years.  You do the math.  I'm older by far than any other member in my unit and probably rate at least in the top ten percent oldest CAP-wide.   When I retired it was as a Chief Master Sergeant and I was proud of those stripes.  I worked hard for them, I served well for them, and I'd like to think I honored them and still do honor them.

I have not yet determined which way I will go.  I have been appointed as the Deputy Commander for Cadets, a position I will not take lightly.  The butter bar or that massive set of Chief's stripes are equally well suited for the job.  At my age, I'm not worried about earning promotions, so my emphasis will be in leaving my mark on what I've already perceived as a pretty sharp group of motivated CAP Cadets.   I've seen at least one thing that disturbs me and that is while my little unit has 13 Senior Members on the books, I've been to every meeting since 3 Aug, there are still three SM's I have not met and one other has only been to one meeting, and yet these four are Officers.  I realize that the CAP is a volunteer organization, but to volunteer and not show up for nearly two months doesn't bode well with me.

I want to thank you all for the input you've made in this thread.   Over the next few months, my commander and I will discuss which way we think is best.   The only military base anywhere near my home closed this past spring and I already miss the guard at the gate saluting and saying, "Welcome aboard, Chief."

Just to let you know, as a CMSgt, you are eligible for promotion to Capt. (See CAPR 35-5 para 3-5)

Quote from: Jim McNamara on September 22, 2011, 05:58:12 PMI have been appointed as the Deputy Commander for Cadets, a position I will not take lightly.

Welcome to CAP.

More important than your grade is why you have been appointed a CD before your ID is dry.  As you've noticed it's likely due to the fact that only a couple of the 13 seniors bother to show up. Might as well work on cutting that dead wood loose as a DAY-2 initiative.

My advice would be to accept the railroad tracks and then not think to much about it from there.  By the time you renew your membership you'll understand why many of us will say that.

Chief, I obviously recommend the NCO chevrons as railroad tracks have no more authority, privilege etc., and folks know right away you know of what you speak, you walk the walk and talk the talk.

Your chevrons came from hard work and knowledge. You can always take an appointment (not a commission in the CAP) if you decide to change your mind at a latter date. You were assigned a great gig because of your knowledge and experience, as was I.

Just about anyone can become an officer in the CAP, but to be an CAP NCO, you had to have been a real NCO

CMSgt MacNamara, let me echo what others have said: welcome to CAP, and were you a member of my unit, I would advise you to wear those stripes it took so much time and effort to earn.  I see Air Force Senior/Chief MSgts, Army/Marine Master Sergeants, and Coast Guard/Navy Chiefs and think "wow."

I have often said that I think CAP should have a warrant officer track for boring guys like me who just want to be a specialist in one field, but also to reward those with long service, such as yourself.

(And, yes, I know the Air Force doesn't have them!)

Quite frankly, a significant indicator of a failing unit is placing a brand new member in a major position of responsibility such as this.  In fact, I would strongly advise you NOT to take this position both for your sake, the squadron's sake, and the cadets.  Your enthusiasm is obviously needed and welcome, but you're going to have enough on your hands trying to figure CAP out for the next 6 months to a year without trying to run a squadron cadet program. 

No reflection on you, but I'd say that anyone in the world who just joined CAP even if they had a Phd in youth leadership development and a 30 year military career capped by winning the best darn soldier/airman/sailor ever award.  Have them work the program for a year and they'd probably be a great fit for the job.

I wouldn't be terribly worried about the number of senior members in your unit unless you're a flying unit -- in which case you're woefully undermanned.  If you're a cadet squadron or a composite squadron that is really a cadet unit in disguise, 13 senior members is actually a great number.  Many cadet units run with only a few seniors. 

^ Or, step up and turn a failing unit around. You're retired, highly motivated, and have been around the block a couple of times. Sounds like a good fit.

If I had a vote (and I obviously don't), I'd say to keep the stripes. I've got a retired NCO who went back and forth on the issue, and decided to keep his stripes. He's working on two specialty tracks and closing in on Level III, so it's not like he's shirking. He just feels that he worked hard to earn those stripes, and they mean more to him than railroad tracks.

CMSgt McNamara,

Welcome aboard, and thank you for serving again!

I would advocate for wearing your hard earned stripes. The visual impact alone would be impressive!

Try it out for the first year or so...you can always request the captain's bars if you feel the situation warranted it.

v/r

MAJ C.

It is good to see some good positive feedback here chief and not all that negative stuff that seems to come from the few usual suspects. :clap:

And speaking of NCO chevrons, I heard that the CAP is getting a distinctive 3-prop design?

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 24, 2011, 01:56:44 AM
And speaking of NCO chevrons, I heard that the CAP is getting a distinctive 3-prop design?

What, scamguard figured out yet another way to make more money off of us?

I can see them charging $10 plus for a set of stripes. It's not like they will be a high demand item....

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 24, 2011, 01:56:44 AM
And speaking of NCO chevrons, I heard that the CAP is getting a distinctive 3-prop design?

Where did this rumor start? Please cite your source.

Wow...  My "source" was a photo of a female NCO with a 3-prop design and it was soemwhere on this fourm...

That was the CCMSgt/CAP, and they are likely one-offs.

That, IMHO, in no way indicates that the rest of the organization will be getting similar insignia.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 24, 2011, 02:10:08 AM
Wow...  My "source" was a photo of a female NCO with a 3-prop design and it was soemwhere on this fourm...

Wow?  Asking to cite a source is now asking too much?

How about, I don't know, linking to the photo.

Eclipse, suprise us all: Bring something positive to the table.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 24, 2011, 02:27:57 AM

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 24, 2011, 02:10:08 AM
Wow...  My "source" was a photo of a female NCO with a 3-prop design and it was soemwhere on this fourm...

Wow?  Asking to cite a source is now asking too much?

How about, I don't know, linking to the photo.

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=11978.msg248404#msg248404

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 24, 2011, 04:53:58 AM
Eclipse, suprise us all: Bring something positive to the table.

He just asked for a simple cite. Get over it.

And a one off picture, that looks like a photoshop job, is not exactly a trusted source.

Quote from: PHall on September 24, 2011, 05:19:36 AM

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 24, 2011, 04:53:58 AM
Eclipse, suprise us all: Bring something positive to the table.

He just asked for a simple cite. Get over it.

And a one off picture, that looks like a photoshop job, is not exactly a trusted source.

Now that's not very nice.

The photo was not photo-shopped at all. I have access to the original source photo...better yet, call the CMSgt yourself... >:(

So it's not shopped. It's definitely not an authorized wear item.

Quote from: usafaux2004 on September 24, 2011, 06:25:00 AM
So it's not shopped. It's definitely not an authorized wear item.

(...Heavy Sigh...)

I understand what you mean.

But something about Major General Carr (Then BG Carr), CAP National Commander, standing there in the photo makes it seem a little less taboo...

Quote from: sandman on September 24, 2011, 06:29:43 AM

Quote from: usafaux2004 on September 24, 2011, 06:25:00 AM
So it's not shopped. It's definitely not an authorized wear item.

But something about Major General Carr (Then BG Carr), CAP National Commander, standing there in the photo makes it seem a little less taboo...

...yes well that makes it all perfectly legit doesnt it; I have used that argument before in other contexts and have pretty much gotten beat down so I am gonna have to call BS on this one then.

mk

I love how things morph on this forum.

Geeze......Hardshell was repeating a rumor.......a rumor that was started right here on this very thread.....and everyone is talking like he said that the stripes were already authorised and he was going out and buying them right now.

Everyone give it a rest.... :o

Quote from: sarmed1 on September 24, 2011, 12:29:34 PM

Quote from: sandman on September 24, 2011, 06:29:43 AM

Quote from: usafaux2004 on September 24, 2011, 06:25:00 AM
So it's not shopped. It's definitely not an authorized wear item.

But something about Major General Carr (Then BG Carr), CAP National Commander, standing there in the photo makes it seem a little less taboo...

...yes well that makes it all perfectly legit doesnt it; I have used that argument before in other contexts and have pretty much gotten beat down so I am gonna have to call BS on this one then.

mk

All,

You can call it as you like.

The main point of this sub-thread and the photo I posted was to point out that CMSgt Walpus was wearing a set of CMSgt stripes that could potentially be introduced to CAP.

As SarDragon pointed out, it was probably a "one-off" set produced by Vanguard (Having been to the offices in Carlsbad, CA many times, I know that they have done this more than once).

CMSgt Walpus was photographed with a cadet and Brig Gen Charles Carr (now Maj Gen Carr, CAP National Commander) at the recent Air Force Sergeant's Association (AFSA) Professional Airman's Conference on 23 to 27 July 2011 at the Grand Hyatt Hotel, San Antonio, Texas.

I know the cadet and the CAP PAO officer.

So, to be clear...the photograph of the CAO CMSgt stripes worn by CMSgt Walpus was not photo-shopped.

Brig Gen Carr and CMSgt Walpus gave a briefing discussing changes under development for the CAP NCO program. However, specifics were not delineated nor was a solid implementation date given.

So, in typical "military" fashion: Stand-by to stand-by.....

And...thank you to all the RM NCO's and CAP NCO's currently serving as volunteers in this program. Your contribution is appreciated by this former NCO and current RM officer....

I still wish there was a program in place for NCOs to promote and for those to join the NCO Core!  Thats my .02 not to open a can of worms.

Quote from: Nolan Teel on September 24, 2011, 02:52:59 PM
I still wish there was a program in place for NCOs to promote and for those to join the NCO Core!  Thats my .02 not to open a can of worms.

That would be NCO Corps. An apple has a core...

Personally I would love to see an NCO corps, I know I would drop my butter bar for some stripes, even if I have to start at the bottom.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on September 24, 2011, 06:18:37 PM
Personally I would love to see an NCO corps, I know I would drop my butter bar for some stripes, even if I have to start at the bottom.

And what would the NCO Corps do that you couldn't do as an "officer"?  This is an answer looking for a question.

Quote from: PHall on September 24, 2011, 06:22:53 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on September 24, 2011, 06:18:37 PM
Personally I would love to see an NCO corps, I know I would drop my butter bar for some stripes, even if I have to start at the bottom.

And what would the NCO Corps do that you couldn't do as an "officer"?  This is an answer looking for a question.

That sounds more like a question looking for an answer, and yes I do get the intended effect, however if you need to ask the question then you don't have the answer at all.

An NCO leads differently than an officer does, point blank, they just do. If you have someone who knows how to lead as an NCO teaching cadet NCOs then you have cadet NCOs leading as NCOs, not everyone trying to lead as the chief,lets face it, that is how cadets are taught as things are now, were we to have an NCO corps, that could change and cadets would have the knowledge of two vastly different types of leadership.

oh here we go again....  ::)

here is the argument so far

"whew, were ganna get a revitalized NCO corp"

"ok, and what does an NCO do in CAP?"

"well they....uh...they lead different"

"oh they do? Different from the hundreds if no thousands who are former NCO's or current NCO's wearing officer grade in cap right now"

"well...a CAP NCO could do amazing things for the CP"

"a CAP officer can do amazing things for CP..."

back and forth..no end in sight....  ::)

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on September 24, 2011, 06:29:44 PM

Quote from: PHall on September 24, 2011, 06:22:53 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on September 24, 2011, 06:18:37 PM
Personally I would love to see an NCO corps, I know I would drop my butter bar for some stripes, even if I have to start at the bottom.

And what would the NCO Corps do that you couldn't do as an "officer"?  This is an answer looking for a question.

That sounds more like a question looking for an answer, and yes I do get the intended effect, however if you need to ask the question then you don't have the answer at all.

An NCO leads differently than an officer does, point blank, they just do. If you have someone who knows how to lead as an NCO teaching cadet NCOs then you have cadet NCOs leading as NCOs, not everyone trying to lead as the chief,lets face it, that is how cadets are taught as things are now, were we to have an NCO corps, that could change and cadets would have the knowledge of two vastly different types of leadership.

A problem with most CAP NCOs I have seen is they completely discount, if not outrightly mock, the cadet officer part of the program. That is the single biggest issue - they try to equate the cadet enlisted progression with the military enlisted progression, where E-9 is the end. Unlike the military, E-9 is not even halfway through, but convincing some CAP NCOs of that is a lost cause because "they're REAL NCOs" and know better.

Quote from: NCRblues on September 24, 2011, 08:21:31 PM"well...a CAP NCO could do amazing things for the CP"

"a CAP officer can do amazing things for CP..."

..and the argument is implying that "I won't do it because I have not got the stripes". Okay, fine. Stand aside. Someone else will, in the case.

Ok, what is the NCO corps?
WIKI definition:
The non-commissioned officer corps is often referred to as "the backbone" of the armed services, as they are the primary and most visible leaders for most military personnel. Additionally, they are the leaders primarily responsible for executing a military organization's mission and for training military personnel so they are prepared to execute their missions. NCO training and education typically includes leadership and management as well as service-specific and combat training.
(Just edit out the combat training for CAP, and you have what we really could benefit from.)

"I am a Noncommissioned Officer in the United States Air Force. I hold allegiance to my country, devotion to duty, and personal integrity above all. I wear my rank of authority with dignity, I promote the highest standards of conduct, appearance, and performance by setting the example. I seek no favors because of my rank. I am devoted to the concept of service rather than personal gain. I uphold the traditions of noncommissioned officers who precede me. I manage resources under my control with astute efficiency, and lead the way with the highest level of competence. I always strive to merit the respect of my fellow noncommissioned officers and of all with whom I come in contact."

That is the Air Force NCO creed, it portrays a different leadership style than that of the Commissioned Officer. To me and many others there is a difference of leadership style than that of Commissioned Officers, in that Commissioned Officers lead in a manner of, do as I say and get it done.
While NCOs lead with more of a style of do as I project and LET'S get the job done together. NCOs would lead by by example and lead from within those they are appointed over while an officer leads from the rear saying get it done.

An officer tells an NCO a job needs to get done, and gives them the time schedule that they have to meet. The NCO then goes to his subordinates and tells them what needs done, and actually assists in completing the job ensuring everyone is safe and efficient about the job.

Also, what is an NCOs primary responsibility and duty?
Training.
I know, Officers in CAP can do all of the training, but what are we trying to mirror and what are we trying to give to the cadets? We are mirroring the Air Force, and we are trying to give the cadets a military type setting and training, that can be done more efficiently with an NCO corps.

Quote from: a2capt on September 24, 2011, 09:30:42 PM

Quote from: NCRblues on September 24, 2011, 08:21:31 PM"well...a CAP NCO could do amazing things for the CP"

"a CAP officer can do amazing things for CP..."

..and the argument is implying that "I won't do it because I have not got the stripes". Okay, fine. Stand aside. Someone else will, in the case.

What do you mean? I don't get what you are saying. Are you implying that some CAP officers aren't doing their jobs because they are being forced to be officers instead of NCOs? If so, I don't see where you are getting that from. I would love to be an NCO in CAP, but I will gladly do my job as an officer.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on September 24, 2011, 09:34:21 PM
I know, Officers in CAP can do all of the training, but what are we trying to mirror and what are we trying to give to the cadets? We are mirroring the Air Force, and we are trying to give the cadets a military type setting and training, that can be done more efficiently with an NCO corps.

Quote from: a2capt on September 24, 2011, 09:30:42 PM

Quote from: NCRblues on September 24, 2011, 08:21:31 PM"well...a CAP NCO could do amazing things for the CP"

"a CAP officer can do amazing things for CP..."

..and the argument is implying that "I won't do it because I have not got the stripes". Okay, fine. Stand aside. Someone else will, in the case.

What do you mean? I don't get what you are saying. Are you implying that some CAP officers aren't doing their jobs because they are being forced to be officers instead of NCOs? If so, I don't see where you are getting that from. I would love to be an NCO in CAP, but I will gladly do my job as an officer.

What i was saying is, one of the arguments tossed out here as to why we need an NCO corp in cap so bad is, NCO's would be great for the CP. The other half of that argument is, well, CAP officers can be just as good for the CP...

Kinda hard to have an NCO Corps if there are no enlisted folk for them to lead.

Cadets are not "enlisted" folk. They are "cadets", i.e. Officers in Training.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on September 24, 2011, 09:34:21 PM
Also, what is an NCOs primary responsibility and duty?
Training.

I always thought it was mid-level management, ensuring that the policies and procedures directed by the officer corps were carried out.

Quote from: arajca on September 24, 2011, 08:43:40 PM
A problem with most CAP NCOs I have seen is they completely discount, if not outrightly mock, the cadet officer part of the program. That is the single biggest issue - they try to equate the cadet enlisted progression with the military enlisted progression, where E-9 is the end. Unlike the military, E-9 is not even halfway through, but convincing some CAP NCOs of that is a lost cause because "they're REAL NCOs" and know better.

That is a fairly large indictment of the NCO Corps within CAP.

Are you sure you're only citing one specific instance or are you able to argue that this alleged problem is rampant within the CAP NCO Corps?

If that is "the single biggest issue", are there other issues that you find to be a problem that, collectively, may pose an equally "biggest issue"?

If you're right, then the CAP NCO Corps should not be allowed to continue, especially in connection to CAP cadets....

Quote from: jimmydeanno on September 24, 2011, 10:05:31 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on September 24, 2011, 09:34:21 PM
Also, what is an NCOs primary responsibility and duty?
Training.

I always thought it was mid-level management, ensuring that the policies and procedures directed by the officer corps were carried out.

That's part of it. Recall what the reasons were for the military to add the E-8 and E-9 pay-grades. Wasn't a large part of it to facilitate disbanding the warrant officer program? The AF was the only service to follow through with that plan however.

Any history buffs recall the rank of Private First Class-specialist second class (and subsequent grades) used up through the late 40's?

Quote from: jimmydeanno on September 24, 2011, 10:05:31 PMI always thought it was mid-level management, ensuring that the policies and procedures directed by the officer corps were carried out.

We're all officers (by designation), and most are NCO's (by actual duty).  Not much to mid-manage.

Quote from: sandman on September 24, 2011, 10:14:40 PM

Quote from: arajca on September 24, 2011, 08:43:40 PM
A problem with most CAP NCOs I have seen is they completely discount, if not outrightly mock, the cadet officer part of the program. That is the single biggest issue - they try to equate the cadet enlisted progression with the military enlisted progression, where E-9 is the end. Unlike the military, E-9 is not even halfway through, but convincing some CAP NCOs of that is a lost cause because "they're REAL NCOs" and know better.

That is a fairly large indictment of the NCO Corps within CAP.

Are you sure you're only citing one specific instance or are you able to argue that this alleged problem is rampant within the CAP NCO Corps?

If that is "the single biggest issue", are there other issues that you find to be a problem that, collectively, may pose an equally "biggest issue"?

If you're right, then the CAP NCO Corps should not be allowed to continue, especially in connection to CAP cadets...

I have seen this as well - total lack of understanding of the way the cadet structure works, encouraging cadets to remain Chiefs.  Obviously this
is something which can be managed, but it's simply unnecessary.  Those people who join CAP who happen to be NCOs in another service, can bring their skills and abilities to the table regardless of their insignia, same as everyone else.

There is little specific to the cadet program that a military NCO can do "better" than anyone else with a similar understanding of the program.

Quote from: sandman on September 24, 2011, 10:14:40 PM

Quote from: arajca on September 24, 2011, 08:43:40 PM
A problem with most CAP NCOs I have seen is they completely discount, if not outrightly mock, the cadet officer part of the program. That is the single biggest issue - they try to equate the cadet enlisted progression with the military enlisted progression, where E-9 is the end. Unlike the military, E-9 is not even halfway through, but convincing some CAP NCOs of that is a lost cause because "they're REAL NCOs" and know better.

That is a fairly large indictment of the NCO Corps within CAP.

Are you sure you're only citing one specific instance or are you able to argue that this alleged problem is rampant within the CAP NCO Corps?

If that is "the single biggest issue", are there other issues that you find to be a problem that, collectively, may pose an equally "biggest issue"?

If you're right, then the CAP NCO Corps should not be allowed to continue, especially in connection to CAP cadets....

That is the biggest issue I can find in regards to cadets, which is the primary arguement being made for a CAP NCO corps.

Perhaps I should have said "met" instead of "seen" since this relates to MY experiences with CAP NCOs, which, admittedly, is not a huge number. 4-5 out what 50, 75 throughout CAP? Another issue, unrelated to cadets is the habit of some that I have met who will insist that their stripes mean other members need to consider them to be a Lt Col. Then there is the insistance of some THAT I HAVE MET that they are superior to CAP officers, despite only being in CAP for a few months and having completed Level 1.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 24, 2011, 10:39:02 PM
I have seen this as well - total lack of understanding of the way the cadet structure works, encouraging cadets to remain Chiefs.  Obviously this
is something which can be managed, but it's simply unnecessary.  Those people who join CAP who happen to be NCOs in another service, can bring their skills and abilities to the table regardless of their insignia, same as everyone else.

Lack of understanding of how the cadet program works? That's too bad.

Could reflect against the training of senior members brought into the program.

I would resubmit that a fundamental change of the CAP Cadet program to an "all NCO" corps would be beneficial....However, there are just too many of you haters out there to bring up the subject ever again...

Quote from: Eclipse on September 24, 2011, 10:39:02 PM
There is little specific to the cadet program that a military NCO can do "better" than anyone else with a similar understanding of the program.

I don't disagree at all. I just subscribe to the thought that a viable (vice "static") SM NCO Corps would offer "fun" options for adults to participate in CAP. Kinda like a box of ice cream, many volunteers enjoy plain vanilla, some might enjoy chocolate, others...just plain nuts...(you know who you are....)

Quote from: sandman on September 24, 2011, 10:55:40 PMCould reflect against the training of senior members brought into the program.

I agree, which works against the idea that a military NCO will automatically be "better" by nature of his stripes, any more than we can expect
a successful comapny commander to be a good Squadron CC just because he's an Army Captain.

Quote from: sandman on September 24, 2011, 10:55:40 PM
I would resubmit that a fundamental change of the CAP Cadet program to an "all NCO" corps would be beneficial....However, there are just too many of you haters out there to bring up the subject ever again...

Us haters?  Good luck with the Spaatz Association.

Andrew nailed it.

Grade has no connection to responsibility in CAP, yet we want to introduce a new class of membership that believes it does coming in the door?

Quote from: arajca on September 24, 2011, 10:50:31 PM
That is the biggest issue I can find in regards to cadets, which is the primary arguement being made for a CAP NCO corps.

Perhaps I should have said "met" instead of "seen" since this relates to MY experiences with CAP NCOs, which, admittedly, is not a huge number. 4-5 out what 50, 75 throughout CAP?

I understand what you mean (met vs seen) and that is somewhat tragic.

Quote from: arajca on September 24, 2011, 10:50:31 PM
Another issue, unrelated to cadets is the habit of some that I have met who will insist that their stripes mean other members need to consider them to be a Lt Col. Then there is the insistance of some THAT I HAVE MET that they are superior to CAP officers, despite only being in CAP for a few months and having completed Level 1.

Again, tragic.

On one hand, some CAP NCO's are "superior" to CAP officers in relation to understanding the military, how to march, individual and small team training, etc, etc. Now, you "nutty ice cream" types don't need to start spoutin' your immaculate knowledge of CAP Regs....Officers "outrank" NCO's, respect/disrespect, etc, etc.

An interesting speculation on my part is as follows: SM's who choose to wear the NCO stripes understand that they are superior to CAP officers, but that person shouldn't insist on that type of recognition ("insist that their stripes mean....Lt Col"). Sooooo, again, I say that there is a high probability of paucity in senior member training in regards to CAP vs Real Military (assumptions contrasted with reality of an all-volunteer volunteer program with inconsistent application of CAP enculturation /  indoctrination)

Spaatz Association?
Earn Spaatz = promote to C/CMSgt
everybody's happy....

Quote from: sandman on September 24, 2011, 11:24:32 PM

Quote from: arajca on September 24, 2011, 10:50:31 PM
Another issue, unrelated to cadets is the habit of some that I have met who will insist that their stripes mean other members need to consider them to be a Lt Col. Then there is the insistance of some THAT I HAVE MET that they are superior to CAP officers, despite only being in CAP for a few months and having completed Level 1.

Again, tragic.

On one hand, some CAP NCO's are "superior" to CAP officers in relation to understanding the military, how to march, individual and small team training, etc, etc. Now, you "nutty ice cream" types don't need to start spoutin' your immaculate knowledge of CAP Regs....Officers "outrank" NCO's, respect/disrespect, etc, etc.

You might want to qualify that since many more NCOs are CAP officers than are CAP NCOs.

QuoteAn interesting speculation on my part is as follows: SM's who choose to wear the NCO stripes understand that they are superior to CAP officers, but that person shouldn't insist on that type of recognition ("insist that their stripes mean....Lt Col"). Sooooo, again, I say that there is a high probability of paucity in senior member training in regards to CAP vs Real Military (assumptions contrasted with reality of an all-volunteer volunteer program with inconsistent application of CAP enculturation /  indoctrination)

Again with the erroneous assertion that CAP NCOs are automatically superior to CAP officers.

Here's a slightly different point of view: Stripes = ego trip.

Quote from: arajca on September 24, 2011, 11:31:20 PM
You might want to qualify that since many more NCOs are CAP officers than are CAP NCOs.

Agreed, for certain forum members. But the statement stays as the former was implied.

Quote from: arajca on September 24, 2011, 11:31:20 PM
Here's a slightly different point of view: Stripes = ego trip.

Agreed. That was what I was implying!

Also, by the same vein, what about the real Colonels and Generals who have to take a "demotion" to be in CAP.  Rarely do they even care, let alone make an issue of it. 

Why are they different?

Quote from: sandman on September 24, 2011, 10:26:56 PM
That's part of it. Recall what the reasons were for the military to add the E-8 and E-9 pay-grades. Wasn't a large part of it to facilitate disbanding the warrant officer program? The AF was the only service to follow through with that plan however.

One of the silliest decisions the AF has ever made.

http://www.usawoa.org/downloads/AFA_1191tween.pdf

The AF of that era couldn't get past the concept that all warrants = WWII Flight Officers.

Quote from: sandman on September 24, 2011, 10:26:56 PM
Any history buffs recall the rank of Private First Class-specialist second class (and subsequent grades) used up through the late 40's?

My dad was one of the earliest Army Specialists...back when the grades went up to SP9.

(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSgVPdQzUEdCAAJJzyMin3MElhuuqxADQXfMueGZvB1gWl5QgbvCA)

He was an SP4.  I still have his old Ike jacket with 4th Armored Division crest and the early-type SP4 shields.  This one with 2nd Armored crest is almost identical to my dad's.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTwbJMM7VhlsE4vVOmiPY8eosrkCjEl5thFDBIaaNktnVxjfyh-)

He said at that time Specialists were to be kind of like enlisted-level warrant officers, Specialists in a given field (he was a radio repairman) and there weren't supposed to be that many of them, except in technical MOS.  Of course, now Specialists are the rule, not the exception...being promoted Corporal is the exception!

I've always thought we're top-heavy with sergeants.

The British, Aussies and New Zealanders (and Canada pre-1968) have two levels of air force sergeant: Sergeant and Flight Sergeant.

(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS1VvAU5onSl9CObWcHPDSH8FClQfnLn3GTQfXilkQv4muie4Ig2A)
(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQi2vqQKST7rCo41bFoCxV8wdxmMetKtYirmT_Hl7ZDLMs_Ygud)

A Flight Sergeant with them is the equivalent of a USAF Master Sergeant.

I think we have way too many Sergeants...I wouldn't mind reverting to diagrams I saw in an old book called Insignia Of The Armed Forces (which had CAP):

Airman - one stripe
Airman First Class - two stripes
Sergeant - three stripes
Staff Sergeant - three stripes/one rocker
Technical Sergeant - three stripes/two rockers
Master Sergeant - three stripes/three rockers

Quote from: Eclipse on September 24, 2011, 11:45:07 PM
Also, by the same vein, what about the real Colonels and Generals who have to take a "demotion" to be in CAP.  Rarely do they even care, let alone make an issue of it. 

Why are they different?

Help me understand the relevance...

Other than that, maybe these retired high ranking people no longer need to play "one-upmanship" game that may be prevalent within CAP. It could be implied that they understand the CAP program in the context of it's volunteer/civilian/"Boy-Scout like"/para-military existence where "rank" is only relative within the context of the program; independent of federal/state law (ya don't get paid for it and you're not entitled to a salute...unless you're wearing your MoH).

CyBorg:

Here is a link you've probably seen:

http://www.tioh.hqda.pentagon.mil/UniformedServices/Insignia_Rank/enlisted_history.aspx

This one is where I snipped my previous photo (saw the stripes IRL at the Fort Sam Houston museum):

http://users.skynet.be/jeeper/chevrons.html

I worked for a SP-5 when I first joined the California National Guard (HHC 1/185th Armor Bn)!

My dad was a Spec-4 doing telephone technician work.  That would be more appropriate to CAP than NCO in at least it would indicate someone
with limited interest beyond a specific duty.

I don't think the Specialists were intended to be "mini-NCO's".

Quote from: sandman on September 25, 2011, 12:02:05 AM

Quote from: Eclipse on September 24, 2011, 11:45:07 PM
Also, by the same vein, what about the real Colonels and Generals who have to take a "demotion" to be in CAP.  Rarely do they even care, let alone make an issue of it. 

Why are they different?

Help me understand the relevance...

Other than that, maybe these retired high ranking people no longer need to play "one-upmanship" game that may be prevalent within CAP. It could be implied that they understand the CAP program in the context of it's volunteer/civilian/"Boy-Scout like"/para-military existence where "rank" is only relative within the context of the program; independent of federal/state law (ya don't get paid for it and you're not entitled to a salute...unless you're wearing your MoH).

It's the same exact argument on the other side of the pyramid.  We have no more need for stars then we do stripes.
What we need are people with ability, proven or otherwise, wiling to help and absent the egos related to some other service.

You're a rocking NCO or capable general officer?  Show me.
I've personally had "challenges" with both.

Eclipse: So how do you really feel about CAP NCOs?:) And now the CAP is "Boy Scout like"?

CyBorg: I was a SP-5. As your a history buff you may know this: The Army never actually filled the SP-8 or 9 positions, they only existed "on the books".

Tick-tock where is the lock clock??

Quote from: NCRblues on September 25, 2011, 12:22:07 AM
Tick-tock where is the lock clock??

The thread is still useful, and relevant.

Quote from: sandman on September 25, 2011, 12:35:47 AM

Quote from: NCRblues on September 25, 2011, 12:22:07 AM
Tick-tock where is the lock clock??

The thread is still useful, and relevant.

Agreed, and I'm still trying to figure out which direction to go when I respond, as a 20 year Navy NCO, and 35 year CAP officer.

Quote from: sandman on September 24, 2011, 11:24:32 PM
An interesting speculation on my part is as follows: SM's who choose to wear the NCO stripes understand that they are superior to CAP officers, but that person shouldn't insist on that type of recognition ("insist that their stripes mean....Lt Col").

An interesting speculation on my part is as follows:  I was superior to NCOs when I was on active duty and nothing has changed since I started wearing CAP rank.   ;) Guess that comes from having multiple E9s in multiple services working for you... 

If my ability to project my leadership skills and have the respect of my fellow members depended on the type and color of cloth I wear on my shirt, then my juju would be pretty weak.

Fact: NCO ranks are provided for in CAP regs as approved by the USAF and it appears they will not be going away anytime soon.

I leave you to debating the pros/cons of this fact endlessly with this last thought:

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 25, 2011, 04:32:36 PM
Fact: NCO ranks are provided for in CAP regs as approved by the USAF and it appears they will not be going away CAP allows members who are, or have been, NCO's in a separate military service, to wear equivalent grade stripes in lieu of accepting officer grade appointment, however there is currently no "NCO Program"in CAP, nor any separation of duties, and that isn't going to change any time soon

Fixed that for you...

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 25, 2011, 04:32:36 PM
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein Narcotics Anonymous (1981)

That one, too.

Eclipse, You sir, are some piece of work.

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 25, 2011, 08:46:13 PM
Eclipse, You sir, are some piece of work.

Compliments will get you nowhere.

Quote from: Eclipse on September 25, 2011, 08:47:06 PM

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on September 25, 2011, 08:46:13 PM
Eclipse, You sir, are some piece of work.

Compliments will get you nowhere.

Indeed. Keep thinking that ;)

Quote from: Hawk200 on September 02, 2011, 04:37:33 PM

Quote from: sandman on August 31, 2011, 07:24:38 PM
I wasn't sure which thread to post this, but this one had the most recent activity regarding CAP NCO's. I like the stripes sported by this CAP NCO at this most recent AFSA (50th) anniversary (of course General Schwartz was there, as well as a few others)!

Not intending to turn it into a uniform thread, but I don't like the "font" of the "CAP" on the stripes, it could look better, although I have to admit that the TriProp actually looks OK.

I find it a bit annoying that it has "CAP" on the stripes and on the collar. How many times do you need to put "CAP" on the uniform? Yeesh.

My suggestion: The stripes, as they are configured, but in the same grey collar as the officer's epaulets on blues and grey/whites. Eliminate the "C.A.P." collar brass, it doesn't need to appear on the uniform four times.

Of course, just to make it easy and "unbusy" the other uniforms a bit, eliminate "CAP" cloth cutouts on the BDU for SMWOG and CAP NCO's. Of course, for aesthetic purposes, the utilities would look best with a blue version.

That's the aesthetics addressed. As has been pointed out before, the validity of an NCO program must be determined first. If they have no purpose, then there is little point in creating such a grade bracket in the first place.

The "CAP" in the first-sergeant diamond space is totally unnecessary. I'd also say, to be heraldically correct, the propeller needs to be in blue against a white triangle within the round space -- to echo our WWII roundel, just as the Air Force does with the blue disc, the white star and the meatball in the middle. If anything, change the blue to silver gray to match the officer epaulets (and hence, the propeller to gray). With the change in the middle, and/or the gray color, there's no need for "CAP" anywhere else. Especially if you have first sergeants or command chiefs, where do you put the "CAP"? Let's keep it consistent.

Or we leave well enough alone and leave the stripes as-is, instead focusing on a blank gray shoulder mark.

Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on September 25, 2011, 11:19:04 PM
The "CAP" in the first-sergeant diamond space is totally unnecessary. I'd also say, to be heraldically correct, the propeller needs to be in blue against a white triangle within the round space -- to echo our WWII roundel, just as the Air Force does with the blue disc, the white star and the meatball in the middle. If anything, change the blue to silver gray to match the officer epaulets (and hence, the propeller to gray). With the change in the middle, and/or the gray color, there's no need for "CAP" anywhere else. Especially if you have first sergeants or command chiefs, where do you put the "CAP"? Let's keep it consistent.

Or we leave well enough alone and leave the stripes as-is, instead focusing on a blank gray shoulder mark.

If CAP is to have its own stripes, that's what I was thinking.

Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on September 25, 2011, 11:19:04 PM

Quote from: Hawk200 on September 02, 2011, 04:37:33 PM

Quote from: sandman on August 31, 2011, 07:24:38 PM
I wasn't sure which thread to post this, but this one had the most recent activity regarding CAP NCO's. I like the stripes sported by this CAP NCO at this most recent AFSA (50th) anniversary (of course General Schwartz was there, as well as a few others)!

Not intending to turn it into a uniform thread, but I don't like the "font" of the "CAP" on the stripes, it could look better, although I have to admit that the TriProp actually looks OK.

I find it a bit annoying that it has "CAP" on the stripes and on the collar. How many times do you need to put "CAP" on the uniform? Yeesh.

My suggestion: The stripes, as they are configured, but in the same grey collar as the officer's epaulets on blues and grey/whites. Eliminate the "C.A.P." collar brass, it doesn't need to appear on the uniform four times.

Of course, just to make it easy and "unbusy" the other uniforms a bit, eliminate "CAP" cloth cutouts on the BDU for SMWOG and CAP NCO's. Of course, for aesthetic purposes, the utilities would look best with a blue version.

That's the aesthetics addressed. As has been pointed out before, the validity of an NCO program must be determined first. If they have no purpose, then there is little point in creating such a grade bracket in the first place.

The "CAP" in the first-sergeant diamond space is totally unnecessary. I'd also say, to be heraldically correct, the propeller needs to be in blue against a white triangle within the round space -- to echo our WWII roundel, just as the Air Force does with the blue disc, the white star and the meatball in the middle. If anything, change the blue to silver gray to match the officer epaulets (and hence, the propeller to gray). With the change in the middle, and/or the gray color, there's no need for "CAP" anywhere else. Especially if you have first sergeants or command chiefs, where do you put the "CAP"? Let's keep it consistent.

Or we leave well enough alone and leave the stripes as-is, instead focusing on a blank gray shoulder mark.

If you're talking about wearing standard blue stripes, and then a blank shoulder mark, then no. The uniform needs to be simpler,  that would be busier. For something simple, change the color. Grey background Air Force pattern stripes would be easiest. Since it's only a thread color change, it would be easy. Grey stripes, grey nametag (which is three line and says Civil Air Patrol would be pretty obviously different) and done.

CAP NCOs have been wearing the standard Army/Air Force stripes since 1943. Why this sudden change? Did the USAF mandate a change, or is this somebodys idea that WE need to change? Since the standard USAF stripes are aloso worn with the CAP collar cutouts is there really a need to change?

Well.....at this point....there is no change.  There is only one instance of the command chief wearing a test stripes.

Lots of speculation....no information.

Quote from: BillB on September 28, 2011, 02:57:16 PM
CAP NCOs have been wearing the standard Army/Air Force stripes since 1943. Why this sudden change? Did the USAF mandate a change, or is this somebodys idea that WE need to change? Since the standard USAF stripes are aloso worn with the CAP collar cutouts is there really a need to change?

I suggest the change to a grey stripe to eliminate collar cutouts (I dislike them). If someone sees a CAP NCO wearing grey stripes and a grey nametag and confuse them with someone who is active duty, it's just simple ignorance.

While Army Guard previously, I was assigned to an Airborne unit, and had a unit tab that said "Airborne." I had people ask me if I was in the Air Force. I understand that there are people that are that unfamiliar with uniform insignia, but a simple, maybe somewhat subtle change to a different color, should be plenty enough to tell any familiar with military uniform that a CAP NCO would not be Air  Force.

After attending Warrior Leader Course, I'm beginning to think that there might be a place for NCOs. NCOs generally train crews, teams, and individuals. Beginning to think that maybe that there might be place for them. Of course, there would have to be notable differences in their career paths in CAP. Otherwise, making a differentiation would be pointless.

Quote from: Hawk200 on September 28, 2011, 06:25:12 PM
I suggest the change to a grey stripe to eliminate collar cutouts (I dislike them). If someone sees a CAP NCO wearing grey stripes and a grey nametag and confuse them with someone who is active duty, it's just simple ignorance.

It is at least equally ignorant, if not illiterate, to confuse someone who was wearing the BLUE CAP shoulder marks and BLUE three-line nameplate with someone who is in the AF, especially since many SDF Air Wings wear a virtually unaltered uniform that the AF doesn't raise a peep about!  Some say that the AF doesn't have control over that...like heck!  It's their uniform, and they could forbid SDF's from wearing it and/or make them modify it, just as they have with us. >:(

Texas State Guard CCMSgt Harold L. Higgins, Jr.
(http://www.txsg.state.tx.us/command/images/ccms_higgins.png)

No "low-light/at-a-distance" felgercarb with them.

Not to mention SDF's who wear unaltered (except for state tape replacing "U.S. Army") ACU's, or State Naval Militia wearing virtually unaltered Navy/CG/Marine uniforms.

Well.....it is harder for the USAF to put the squeeze on the SDF's then it is for them to put the squeeze on CAP.

On that note......even with the whole low light at a distance thing........there is no real reason why CAP can't be using the real USAF rank (ie loose the gray) if we simply put a CAP patch on the sholder.

Quote from: CyBorg on September 28, 2011, 07:11:40 PM

Quote from: Hawk200 on September 28, 2011, 06:25:12 PM
I suggest the change to a grey stripe to eliminate collar cutouts (I dislike them). If someone sees a CAP NCO wearing grey stripes and a grey nametag and confuse them with someone who is active duty, it's just simple ignorance.

It is at least equally ignorant, if not illiterate, to confuse someone who was wearing the BLUE CAP shoulder marks and BLUE three-line nameplate with someone who is in the AF, especially since many SDF Air Wings wear a virtually unaltered uniform that the AF doesn't raise a peep about!  Some say that the AF doesn't have control over that...like heck!  It's their uniform, and they could forbid SDF's from wearing it and/or make them modify it, just as they have with us. >:(

Texas State Guard CCMSgt Harold L. Higgins, Jr.
(http://www.txsg.state.tx.us/command/images/ccms_higgins.png)

No "low-light/at-a-distance" felgercarb with them.

Not to mention SDF's who wear unaltered (except for state tape replacing "U.S. Army") ACU's, or State Naval Militia wearing virtually unaltered Navy/CG/Marine uniforms.

I agree that it's not fair, but it really isn't any of our business when you really think about it. We're responsible for our house, not the SDF's.

I think that we need to deal with the Air Force in a mature manner, start acting like we're part of them, and lose the corporate mentality. We can have a corporate side for the finances, but that's all there needs to be. Seems like there is a lot of "Oh, yeah, we like that, so we'll do it," but there is also a lot of "Oh, we don't like such and such, and we're a corporation, so we're not gonna do it." That mentality needs to die.

I think that we should have some distinctions with our uniform; nothing against the Air Force, but we do have unique missions being performed by volunteers, and I feel that we should possess some of our own identity. However, the distinctions shouldn't look ridiculous. We can be distinctive, and still maintain the spirit of a clean professional uniform that the Air Force possesses.

Back to the topic on hand: I'm starting to think that there is a place for NCOs in CAP. But, that place needs to be defined very specifically, along with criteria for them. I don't think it's a bad idea for prior military NCOs to promote, at least they aren't stuck in a one rank dead end. It needs to be spelled out, with clear delineation of duties for each rank bracket.

For those who don't know: SDF are a type of military unit under the state's military departments and the DOD even has an office that works with the SDF's. Some state units have guns and some don't, but all have the legal authority to carry firearms and act as a state military force. While SDFs do not come under the UCMJ, they do come under state military laws and regulations while on drills.

They also have physical requirements that very state to state but at the least your MD has to approve you for service at no risk to yourself. (Doc has to sign your enlistment forms). Also, all that I know of have mandatory age limits to serve (64 as I recall).

In WA they wear the same ACU and other army uniforms with the only difference being a state name or a red name tag when in other army uniforms. They are also authorized to attend real military training and draw state funded military pay at their rank when called into service when authorized by the state. And the ranks are "real".

The down side is that I was soooooooooo bored in the SDF as we did even less then the CAP. A few call outs for flooding but the boy scouts had more of a defined mission...

Volunteers are motivated by a number of reasons.  One of those positive things to do is promote and recognize your membership for reaching certain milestones.  Our Current professional Development program leaves a lot to be desired and really isn't that difficult to achieve.  I've been back in CAP for two years and am just waiting to finish the required time for my Master Specialty Track rating to complete level 4.  Which means the only thing I have to do is be active and just wait for TIG for Lieutenant Colonel.   

I think if we had an enlisted rank structure we could actually measure progress and achievements in a more timely manner keeping the members actively engaged in their professional development as opposed to the Six month Second Lieutenant for life.  My squadron has personnel that are only interested in Emergency Services and not Specialty tracks.  We have members that have been Second Lieutenants for greater then 5 years with no desire to advance and that's okay.  However, it would be nice periodically promote/recognize someone for their service and dedication to the organization for something that may not warrant an award or decoration.  Or Promote someone for ES Qualification like A1C or SrA for MRO, GTM, MSA, MS among others.  SSGT, TSGT for CUL, GTL, MO, PIO just as examples Similar promotions can be be devised for our other core missions and essential staff functions as well.   Our Current Level 3 or 4 should be the basic minimum to become a CAP officer and our PD system expanded for senior officers.  I would find that while promotion is not an objective for some people that they can still occasionally be surprised by the recognition.  It's another tool in the toolbox to encourage member retention.  If I were emperor of the world...things would be different.