Main Menu

SM Rank

Started by Rachel F, July 01, 2012, 03:08:49 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

The CyBorg is destroyed

Actually, I've never heard of a case where it isn't required to address a WO as "sir"/"ma'am."

I didn't run into a lot of them, as the AF (inexplicably) doesn't have them any more, nor does CAP.  I'd trade in my Captain's bars for CWO-3 in a heartbeat to be just a specialist in one thing.  This is a good article on the subject:

http://www.usawoa.org/downloads/AFA_1191tween.pdf

I don't know why the Air Force had such a problem with them, especially considering that a good chunk of aircrew in WWII were Flight Officers:



When I would see them, I certainly didn't take the time to look for the name to say "Good afternoon, Mister Jones."  I popped a salute and said "Good afternoon, Sir/Good Evening, Ma'am."  Anyway, they look like lieutenants until you get close enough to see the little squares on their hardware. 8)

I find the title of this thread a bit puzzling, since "SMWOG," "SM," etc., is not a rank.  I do not see why CAP insists on keeping this anachronistic title.
Exiled from GLR-MI-011

lordmonar

#41
http://www.usawoa.org/woheritage/wo_prog_other_svc.htm

And here.

http://www.usawoa.org/woheritage/wo_prog_other_svc.htm

Here is quick explanation.

Basically they said that they did not really need them and SNCO's better filled that role.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

The CyBorg is destroyed

I read the article, too, and it just seemed to me that the AF didn't want to take the time to figure out what to do with warrants, so they canned them, despite the fact that the other four armed services seem to do just fine with them.  I knew a CG recruiter who was a Chief Petty Officer and he "warranted."  A former supervisor of mine, a "mustang," went up to MSgt and then got an officer's commission...he said "if Warrant Officer grade had been available I'd have gone for that...it was really weird being an old guy, Vietnam service (and shineola loads of ribbons), wearing second looie bars that young fresh-out-of-OTS/AF Academy officers were wearing."

We're, as far as I can tell, the only nation to grant commissioned status to its (Chief) Warrant Officers...in other countries they occupy a tier in between SNCO's and commissioned officers, and do a lot in terms of leadership (and, as new recruits find out, discipline).  You don't salute them but you do call them "Sir" or "Ma'am."

http://www.defence.gov.au/news/raafnews/editions/4514/topstories/story10.htm

I wish we could find another name for "Senior Member"....the RAF has started using "Student Officer" instead of "Officer Cadet," and it sounds a lot better.
Exiled from GLR-MI-011

lordmonar

Well....to be honest....they were not JUST FINE with them....but the WO's were able to define their positions and change their role in a way that they found that they could use them.

If the Army had not gotten helocopters in the 50's they may not have kept WO's.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

RogueLeader

Quote from: lordmonar on July 12, 2012, 08:35:29 PM
Well....to be honest....they were not JUST FINE with them....but the WO's were able to define their positions and change their role in a way that they found that they could use them.

If the Army had not gotten helicopters in the 50's they may not have kept WO's.

Still have some ;) in the Engineers.  Just saying. . .
WYWG DP

GRW 3340

lordmonar

Quote from: RogueLeader on July 12, 2012, 08:46:55 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on July 12, 2012, 08:35:29 PM
Well....to be honest....they were not JUST FINE with them....but the WO's were able to define their positions and change their role in a way that they found that they could use them.

If the Army had not gotten helicopters in the 50's they may not have kept WO's.

Still have some ;) in the Engineers.  Just saying. . .
and comm and intel and medical and 42 other techncal specialties.....I was just wondering if they did not have the nitch in the aviation branch...would the Army have kept them everywhere else.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

RogueLeader

Quote from: lordmonar on July 12, 2012, 08:52:25 PM
Quote from: RogueLeader on July 12, 2012, 08:46:55 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on July 12, 2012, 08:35:29 PM
Well....to be honest....they were not JUST FINE with them....but the WO's were able to define their positions and change their role in a way that they found that they could use them.

If the Army had not gotten helicopters in the 50's they may not have kept WO's.

Still have some ;) in the Engineers.  Just saying. . .
and comm and intel and medical and 42 other techncal specialties.....I was just wondering if they did not have the nitch in the aviation branch...would the Army have kept them everywhere else.

Roger.  Hard to tell.  They still have plenty of good use left.
WYWG DP

GRW 3340

lordmonar

Well.....if you don't mind a little O bashing.......from a SNCO perspective I could see a lot of use of the WO ranks in the USAF too......bascially it would eliminate all the Junior Officer jobs in all the support specialties.....which would cause the problem of how you grow good company grade officers if they don't have meaningful jobs as Lt's and Capts.

PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

The CyBorg is destroyed

My dad told me that warrants were quite common when he was in, both in the active and National Guard sides.

He said that the guy who ran the motor pool when he was in Germany was a CWO...and once asked a six-month-wonder butterbar looie "What are you doing in MY motor pool, son?!"
Exiled from GLR-MI-011

SarDragon

Quote from: Private Investigator on July 12, 2012, 08:26:11 AM
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on July 12, 2012, 04:20:51 AMA warrant officer is a "mister," a "miss" or a "mrs." in the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, and was so in the Air Force and in CAP.

In USN or USCG it is Mister, but in the Army or the Marines; it is Chief Smith, Chief Warrant Officer Smith or in Marine Infantry, Gunner Smith (which will be hard to explain to a non Marine, but it is a cool title, I had a pit bull I named "Gunner" when I was at Camp Lejeune)   8)

The Canoe Club got away from the "Mister" thing for O-x officers when I was still on active duty. Its use was reserved for warrant officers.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

Angus

To me the issue I see getting back to the original topic comes down to training.  We all do our best to teach our cadets the differences in the Senior Member Structure, but if they don't always see a certain type of Senior Member in this case a SMWOG they don't always know what to do.  I ran into this when I joined CAP and the cadets had no clue what to call me. 


Also my guess is the OP who is a young woman might look like she could be a cadet which could cause some confusion when looking quick.  Although  the "CAP" cloth cutouts should have also alievated this. 
Maj. Richard J. Walsh, Jr.
Director Education & Training MAWG 
 Gill Robb Wilson #4030

MSG Mac

One of the reasons given for the Air Forces elimination of the WO Corps was that in 1959 the grades of E-8 and E-9 were established. The Super NCO's were to "relieve" junior officers of thier administrative duties which were to be taken by the new SMSgts and CMSGTs. Therefore WO's would be eliminated by attrition as they retired. The other services were supposed to follow suit, but obviously found an excuse to keep them.
Michael P. McEleney
Lt Col CAP
MSG USA (Retired)
50 Year Member

SarDragon

The structures of the others services lends themselves to having warrant officers. For instance, the Navy uses them as division officers. (next echelon below department, and above work center)
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

Woodsy

Florida Wing Operating Instruction 12-03, dated 28 March 2012 states the following: 


FO NOTE 2: When addressing a flight
officer, he/she is "Mr.," "Miss" or
"Mrs.," not "Flight Officer."


http://www.flwg.us/systems/file_download.ashx?pg=618&ver=7

Critical AOA

E1 through E9, WO-1through WO-4 and O-1 through O-10 for a total of 23 different grades. Does any organization really need that many?
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."   - George Bernard Shaw

SarDragon

I guess so. It hasn't changed in over 50 years, and probably over a hundred before they added E-8 and 9. It's all based on skill levels and experience.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

Майор Хаткевич

Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on July 19, 2012, 11:50:50 PM
E1 through E9, WO-1through WO-4 and O-1 through O-10 for a total of 23 different grades. Does any organization really need that many?

To be fair, a lot of it is also "Pay" motivated.

E1-E9
O1-O10
WO1-WO4

They aren't interconnected, but all designate skill, time, and pay.

BillB

There must have been other changes in the past 50 years. a USAF E-3 used to have one stripe, now has two.
Gil Robb Wilson # 19
Gil Robb Wilson # 104

bosshawk

At least in the Army, there is a CWO-5, so that adds one.
Paul M. Reed
Col, USA(ret)
Former CAP Lt Col
Wilson #2777

SarDragon

Quote from: usafaux2004 on July 20, 2012, 12:27:46 AM
Quote from: David Vandenbroeck on July 19, 2012, 11:50:50 PM
E1 through E9, WO-1through WO-4 and O-1 through O-10 for a total of 23 different grades. Does any organization really need that many?

To be fair, a lot of it is also "Pay" motivated.

E1-E9
O1-O10
WO1-WO4

They aren't interconnected, but all designate skill, time, and pay.

Ah, but they are, at least in the Canoe Club.

E-6 and E-7 may go LDO, to O-1
E-7 thru E-9 are the entry point to WO
Warrants may also go LDO
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret