Air Force "credit" for achievement as a CAP senior member

[RiverAux]

As we all know, CAP cadets who earn the Mitchell have the opportunity to join most of the military at a higher pay grade than they would otherwise.  There are similar opportunities associated with achievement in other organizations. 

One of the prime arguments made here for having cadets 18-21 years old is to allow those who join late to finish their Mitchell.  Now, some will want the Mitchell to just have it, but some say here that many are trying to get it for the advanced rank after joining the military. 

For those serious about ending the cadet program at age 18 (or completion of high school, whichever comes later), it may be helpful if there was alternative way for these youths to earn military "credit" in CAP outside of the cadet program.

There is precedent for this.  The Coast Guard will give E2 to those members of the Coast Guard Auxiliary who earn the boatcrew member qualification and E3 to those who earn the coxswain qualification regardless of age.  While the CG Aux doesn't have a cadet program, it does allow those as young as 17 to join as full members so this benefit is available to them as well as to anyone still young enough to enlist.

So, if we end the cadet program early, but still want to provide an alternative for younger seniors to get some "credit" from the military for CAP service what CAP achievements would be appropriate?

The CG Aux boatcrewmember qualification isn't terribly difficult and I would say that it is probably equivalent to earning the CAP Observer rating.  The coxswain is more difficult and does involve some testing that has been known to be difficult.  I'd say that it probably would be equivalent to Mission Pilot or Ground Team Leader. 

Another alternative is to link a senior member PD level to the Mitchell.  Actually this has already been done -- CAP will make former cadets who have earned the Mitchell into CAP 2nd Lts after they turn 21.  However, even if you do the PD program the standard way (no special promotions or appointments) it is way too easy to get to be a CAP 2nd Lt. for me really say they've learned as much as a Mitchell cadet.  I'd say give them E3 credit for completing CAP Level II and becoming a Captain. 

Obviously the Air Force would have to approve this idea and we'd also want to try to get the other military services to go along. 

The only thing that is probably missing from the formula is that we would probably want to develop a military customs and courtesy and drill course of some kind for senior members wanting to go this route so that they would have more grounding in those areas (so that they would do better at boot camp) than our normal senior members. 

Thoughts?

[Ned]

For those serious about ending the cadet program at age 18 (or completion of high school, whichever comes later), it may be helpful if there was alternative way for these youths to earn military "credit" in CAP outside of the cadet program.

If it is helpful, there is absolutely no chance that there will be any changes to the upper age limit of our cadet program in the forseeable future.

As in zero, nada, zip, zilch.

So all those 17 and 18 year olds looking for advanced grade in the USAG upon enlistment can still join our successful cadet program and earn the Mitchell award.

[coudano]

there are other paths to e-3 in the usaf
besides the mitchell award

[flyboy53]

There are three answers to this.

First, require a cadet to transition to senior status once they join the military, and that includes the Reseves or NG, period.

Second, at one point the old senior member Certificate of Proficiency was acceptable documentation to join the military with advanced rank -- I know because it was offered to me when I joined and I later saw it in the Reg when I was a recruiter. Therefore, the criteria for the Davis Award, as it is now called, should be revised for Air Force certification to allow advanced rank. Which also means, horors, that senior members may need to bone up and comply with Air Force standards.

Third, yes an individual can achieve advanced rank by joining the Air Force without CAP credit. Usually, that entitlement is for critically needed or bonus-awarding career fields, or for enlisting to serve out the full military service obligation.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Flyboy hit on an important point.  Our current SM training program is WAY below the standards of the military.  A lot of the people running around with gold and silver bars in CAP can't properly return a salute and could not execute an "About face" on a bet.

Why we allow SM officers who are that clueless to be in charge of cadets is way beyond me, but that is a whole 'nother issue.

[DBlair]

Flyboy hit on an important point.  Our current SM training program is WAY below the standards of the military.  A lot of the people running around with gold and silver bars in CAP can't properly return a salute and could not execute an "About face" on a bet.

Why we allow SM officers who are that clueless to be in charge of cadets is way beyond me, but that is a whole 'nother issue.

Agreed.

[JeffDG]

If it is helpful, there is absolutely no chance that there will be any changes to the upper age limit of our cadet program in the forseeable future.

As in zero, nada, zip, zilch.

Due respect, sir...but if this board were restricted to topics that has a chance of actually occurring, it would be pretty sparse pickings.

[RiverAux]

Second, at one point the old senior member Certificate of Proficiency was acceptable documentation to join the military with advanced rank -- I know because it was offered to me when I joined and I later saw it in the Reg when I was a recruiter.

Interesting, so this proposal wouldn't be breaking any new ground.

Which also means, horors, that senior members may need to bone up and comply with Air Force standards.

I don't see that this necessarily follows.  Are you saying that the old COP produced much, much better CAP officers than our current program? 

Keep in mind that we're talking about advanced enlisted rank and this is not about CAP officers being equal to AF officers.  So, the comparison is about equivalency between CAP senior members and CAP cadets with the Mitchell.

One thing I'd add to the PD-based proposal I made in the initial post is that the senior member should also have to have earned the Yeager Award (since AE is such a big part of the cadet program up to the Mitchell).

[RiverAux]

If it is helpful, there is absolutely no chance that there will be any changes to the upper age limit of our cadet program in the forseeable future.

Very likely true, but this thread does work without the assumption that the 18-21 cadet program will die.  It might still be to the AF's advantage to make some changes to give credit for CAP senior members.   Though, given that the AF is currently cutting back its manpower, initiating new recruiting incentives probably isn't high on their priority list.

[ol'fido]

Forgive my ignorance but I seem to recall that one of the reasons that we have the 60-day TIG requirement for the Mitchell is that the AF didn't want to make E-3s out of cadets that had burned through the program in 5-6 months. They wanted to give that E-3 to cadets that had BTDT somewhat in the cadet program not to cadets who were real good at standardized tests and could run a mile(at that time)in about 8 minutes.

Beyond that I feel that the reason the AF(and the other services give some credit) for the Mitchell is not the specific knowledge that is conveyed by the tests, but it shows that the cadet is:

a.)Adaptable to military life.


b.)Is trainable.

c.) Has the drive and gumption to succeed  and is not enlisting just to get  out the house.

JMHO.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

I think USAF is smart enough and knows CAP well enough at the levels to make this kind of decision to know that CAP senior members aren't as fluent in the military ways as the cadets become as a whole population. If you think about it, the cadet program is designed around more of a military lifestyle and training  than the SM side. For cadet promotions cadets have to learn about aerospace education, for SM's this is optional. Cadets leadership manuals go a little more in depth than the SM program does so far as I have seen. There is more drill for the cadets, many SM's don't know D&C, and some don't even know the proper time place and circumstances for rendering courtesies the way the cadets do. Yes, our training does go over saluting and things of the sort a good bit, but how often is it really practiced by the SM's? If the USAF were to even consider allowing a promotion going into AD after being a SM we would have to become a lot more strict on the SM programs.

[RiverAux]

Which is why I suggested that there would probably need to be some sort of extra training for those wishing to go this route. 

But, keep in mind that the military gives similar credit for achievements in totally non-military organizations like the Boy Scouts. 

Also, recall that the USCG Aux is even "less military" than the CAP senior member program when it comes to ranks, and C&C and yet their achievements in the boatcrew program are recognized by the USCG. 

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Which is why I suggested that there would probably need to be some sort of extra training for those wishing to go this route. 

But, keep in mind that the military gives similar credit for achievements in totally non-military organizations like the Boy Scouts. 

Also, recall that the USCG Aux is even "less military" than the CAP senior member program when it comes to ranks, and C&C and yet their achievements in the boatcrew program are recognized by the USCG.

The reasoning that I can see behind the boy scout promotion is because they provide survival training as well as first aid among many other things that are a necessity in the military.

USCG recognizes CGAux because their boatcrew program teaches knowledge that is critical in the USCG, note that no other branch of the military acknowledges CGAux training.

[JohnKachenmeister]

And the CG and its Aux work pretty much hand-in-glove anyway.  A CG Auxie coxswain has to meet the same standards as a "Gold Side" coxswain, I think.

[JohnKachenmeister]

^ We can and should have a similar relationship with Big Mama Blue, but then we come back to our embarrassingly-low SM training standards.

[RiverAux]

^ We can and should have a similar relationship with Big Mama Blue, but then we come back to our embarrassingly-low SM training standards.

Actually we don't since the proposal is to make senior members with the same basic skill set as a Mitchell cadet, not someone that is already in the military. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

Not the first time I shot out a point that missed.

Proposal:  USAF grant advanced enlisted rank to CAP SM's with some recognized award level acting as the functional equivalent of the Mitchell Award for cadets.

Example:  USCG grants advanced rank to Auxies who complete certain training.

My Argument:  USCG and Auxie standards for boat crew and coxswain are identical.  So an Auxie transitioning to gold side has already completed certain USCG training, and therefore is entitled to a little higher grade.  In CAP, our SM training is so low with respect to basic military skills, that there is no comparison between CAP and USCG Aux. on this issue.

My follow-on argument:  IF CAP were to increase the basic military skills among SM's to something approximating the AF through a more rigorous training program, we MIGHT be in a better position to justify the proposal.

[RiverAux]

My Argument:  USCG and Auxie standards for boat crew and coxswain are identical.  So an Auxie transitioning to gold side has already completed certain USCG training, and therefore is entitled to a little higher grade.  In CAP, our SM training is so low with respect to basic military skills, that there is no comparison between CAP and USCG Aux. on this issue.

You're sorting of mixing your apples and oranges there.  Yes, the CG Aux boatcrew program is very close to the CG (there are some differences) but at the same time CG Aux members have even less training and military knowledge than even CAP senior members. 

[flyboy53]

Second, at one point the old senior member Certificate of Proficiency was acceptable documentation to join the military with advanced rank -- I know because it was offered to me when I joined and I later saw it in the Reg when I was a recruiter.

Interesting, so this proposal wouldn't be breaking any new ground.

Which also means, horors, that senior members may need to bone up and comply with Air Force standards.

I don't see that this necessarily follows.  Are you saying that the old COP produced much, much better CAP officers than our current program? 

Keep in mind that we're talking about advanced enlisted rank and this is not about CAP officers being equal to AF officers.  So, the comparison is about equivalency between CAP senior members and CAP cadets with the Mitchell.

One thing I'd add to the PD-based proposal I made in the initial post is that the senior member should also have to have earned the Yeager Award (since AE is such a big part of the cadet program up to the Mitchell).

I'm saying that we've watered down or dumbed down standards. The old Certificate of Proficiency or completion of Level II required a senior member to complete ECI/AFLDI-13, which by the way, with the exception of some CAP-exclusive material, is the same course that an ANG or AFRES enlisted person has to complete for commissioning from the field. The appropriate substitutes for this course includes things like the Command NCO Academy.

Instead of learning the material and learning how to take an AF Correspondence Course, we bow down to those who can't complete it and create a seminar program that takes longer.

We need to return to more intense standards reflecting personal self-discipline and leadership. Otherwise senior members more increasingly become the but of jokes from some cadets who are aware that they are held to a higher standard.

Also, I STRONGLY AGREE that senior members complete the Yeager. How can a senior member properly mentor cadets on AE subjects if they don't have a clue what a cadet has to do.

[AirDX]

^ We can and should have a similar relationship with Big Mama Blue, but then we come back to our embarrassingly-low SM training standards.

The problem as I see it is that the CG operates equipment very similar to that available to CGAux members.  I don't see any skills (other than the training already done by a cadet in acquiring a Mitchell) in CAP SM training that are directly applicable to active AF needs.  The tasks a cox'n performs for his rating strike me as very similar in nature to the tasks a CAP mission pilot performs for his rating.  Those tasks are then very similar to what the AD cox'n does.  But what a CAP mission pilot does is not at all like what an active duty USAF pilot does.  If the USAF operated a lot of C182s, there might be something there.  There's not.   

Maybe as related to specific career fields, i.e. a Master-rated CAP IT officer might get advanced placement if enlisting in the matching USAF career field, or perhaps GTL-qualified personnel enlisting in the security forces.  Someone who's been around long enough to be a GTL yet is young enough to go to AD was probably at least a Mitchell cadet, anyway.

For my money, if someone is just coming out of high school, and wants advanced grade in the service, report to your local community college for 3 semesters.  45 college credits will do them a lot more good down the road than CAP.