Numbered Air Force?

[SAR-EMT1]

I was sitting here in an exhaustion induced vegitative state and a question hit me like a thunderbolt... ok maybe not.

Considering that the Air Force has been using numbered "Air Forces"  for some time now, would it make sense to designate CAP as a Numbered Air Force under the Command of AETC? (Or 1st AF etc )

Resons might include...

- with 50,000 + members we have the manpower required for the designation
(Yeah I know that maybe only 20-30  are active )

- We have confirmed mission objectives (CP, AE, ES )

- We have an assimilated MAJGEN /CC

-We have a Nationwide presence

-------------

My reason for asking this is two fold...

One, at present, by functioning as a DRU of AETC/AU we (CAP) does not enjoy much notice from Joe Airman, if he knows we exist... By achieving a designation as a numbered Air Force we increase our visibility from the average crowd
(and potential recruits) PLUS we might get extra notice from Washington.

Two, by having designation as a numbered Air Force we might be able to define (for ourselves and others) our missions better, and might aid in strengthening the lines of communication and understanding.

I DONT know how viable such an idea might be.
(Corporate considerations be darned)
---------------------------

To a lesser extent

- Why do we still use the "Region " designation?
Is there something better out there ?

- What status exactly does CAPNHQ/ CAP-USAF hold in regard to relations with the  AETC/AU  /CC  and how often do they communicate with each other?

[DNall]

AETC/AU is where AFROTC/AFJROTC are located, professional development, all training (everyone in AF passes thru), only people flying light aircraft close to the GA class, they're the primary source of AE from AF, domestically oriented & operating, presence on more bases across the country than anyone else....

The only other legit competitor you could reassign CAP to would be 1AF, which would still lose you a whole lot of necessary resources.

As a separate numbered AF you encapsulate yourself off from everyone else, & you cut the close link for a lot of resources we rely on...

So, we're a DRU to XOH; ADCON is AETC, delegated to AU, executed by CAP-USAF; OPCON by 1AF, delegation varies by mission. I'm open minded, but there's really not another option out there that has more potential for CAP, in or out of the AF, including ANG

[JayT]

I was sitting here in an exhaustion induced vegitative state and a question hit me like a thunderbolt... ok maybe not.

Considering that the Air Force has been using numbered "Air Forces"  for some time now, would it make sense to designate CAP as a Numbered Air Force under the Command of AETC? (Or 1st AF etc )

Resons might include...

- with 50,000 + members we have the manpower required for the designation
(Yeah I know that maybe only 20-30  are active )

- We have confirmed mission objectives (CP, AE, ES )

- We have an assimilated MAJGEN /CC

-We have a Nationwide presence

-------------

My reason for asking this is two fold...

One, at present, by functioning as a DRU of AETC/AU we (CAP) does not enjoy much notice from Joe Airman, if he knows we exist... By achieving a designation as a numbered Air Force we increase our visibility from the average crowd
(and potential recruits) PLUS we might get extra notice from Washington.

Two, by having designation as a numbered Air Force we might be able to define (for ourselves and others) our missions better, and might aid in strengthening the lines of communication and understanding.

I DONT know how viable such an idea might be.
(Corporate considerations be darned)
---------------------------

To a lesser extent

- Why do we still use the "Region " designation?
Is there something better out there ?

- What status exactly does CAPNHQ/ CAP-USAF hold in regard to relations with the  AETC/AU  /CC  and how often do they communicate with each other?

We use the Region designation because it's...a good representation of what it is. It's a group of several wings in a geographic location. What else would you use? Rather then North East Region, would you prefer........4451 SAR Task Force?

What would be the benefits of radically changing the organization, and the organization of the Air Force itself?

You also say that "by having designation as a numbered Air Force we might be able to define (for ourselves and others) our missions better, and might aid in strengthening the lines of communication and understanding.'

To me it seems like that is another case of 'results before action.' Changing the name of the organization, or designating it whatnot will not really change anything. Maybe if we change underlying problems, we can one day take a more active part in the day to day operations of the Air Force.

[SAR-EMT1]

Sorry, Im really not talking about a change in our organization or anythinfg of that nature.

Just a change in title or in designation.

For example the Air Force considers us a DRU under AETC(delegated to AU)
They sometimes think of us as the Auxilliary.

All Im asking is if it would make more sense to think of us as
" 99th Air Force" - Auxilliary. Or something else.

The Region question was similar, I know that  "Region" describes it pretty well.
I just was curious as to what term the AF uses in place of "Region" these days and wondered if such a term should apply to us.

These questions just relate to us alligning ourselves closer to the current AF CoC structure nomenclature.

The term "Region" disappeared from the USAF varnicular about the same time as Hard rank on Flightsuits.
Well, we are changing to cloth rank, so i didnt know if now was the time to change our terms.  - tongue in cheek, lets avoid a uniform discussion-

[jimmydeanno]

The Region question was similar, I know that  "Region" describes it pretty well.
I just was curious as to what term the AF uses in place of "Region" these days and wondered if such a term should apply to us.

The AF has the following:

Flight
Squadron
Group
Wing
Numbered Air Force
Major Command

That wouldn't work for us because we are set up geographically and not divided by mission.  Region does a great job of explaining what it covers.

If you look at say the 27th Intelligence Wing, there are squadrons in that wing in multiple geographic locations.

I think region works the best for us as a descriptor.

[SAR-EMT1]

OK, that leads to another question. Why isnt CAP listed as a MAJCOM under AETC?

I know its not usually set up that way. I guess my point is to ask if We are organized as effectively as possible at the "levels above Wing"
Is there anything that should be changed in order to increase effective communication. ?

What relationships does Courter have with CAP-USAF, the Executive Director, and the AU/CC and vice versa? Does she teleconfrence them on a daily basis? Or does the Air Force just "Call us when they need us? "

The /CC is appointed by the BOG and confirmed by SECAF, but how often does CC/ CAP and CC/ CAP-USAF talk to SECAF ?

[JayT]

OK, that leads to another question. Why isnt CAP listed as a MAJCOM under AETC?

I know its not usually set up that way. I guess my point is to ask if We are organized as effectively as possible at the "levels above Wing"
Is there anything that should be changed in order to increase effective communication. ?

What relationships does Courter have with CAP-USAF, the Executive Director, and the AU/CC and vice versa? Does she teleconfrence them on a daily basis? Or does the Air Force just "Call us when they need us? "

The /CC is appointed by the BOG and confirmed by SECAF, but how often does CC/ CAP and CC/ CAP-USAF talk to SECAF ?

Why do we need to be listed as a MAJCOM again?

[CAP Producer]

OK, that leads to another question. Why isnt CAP listed as a MAJCOM under AETC?

I know its not usually set up that way. I guess my point is to ask if We are organized as effectively as possible at the "levels above Wing"
Is there anything that should be changed in order to increase effective communication. ?

What relationships does Courter have with CAP-USAF, the Executive Director, and the AU/CC and vice versa? Does she teleconfrence them on a daily basis? Or does the Air Force just "Call us when they need us? "

The /CC is appointed by the BOG and confirmed by SECAF, but how often does CC/ CAP and CC/ CAP-USAF talk to SECAF ?

Why do we need to be listed as a MAJCOM again?

It appears that in the February 2008 Issue of Airman Magazine (www.af.mil/news/airman), Page 11 we are listed directly after PACAF under "organizattions" So I guess that big brother blue considers us a MAJCOM.

YMMV.

[DNall]

Because AETC is a MAJCOM, and MAJCOMS don't answer to other MAJCOMS.

Again, we are not under AETC. We are under the XO of the Air Force, specifically the XOH. They deal with the strategic long-term side & no one ever hears about them. Our administrative (day-to-day) control is delegated to AETC & by them to AU. That is based on the synergy of resources I mentioned in my first post. Our operational control is delegated to 1AF. That is based on the synergy of dif missions we participate in all falling under their mandate.

That's how the AF chooses to manage & oversee CAP. There really isn't a better way for that to be done. Our designation problems are at the low end of the spectrum based on unit size & scope, not so much at the national level.

The CAP-USAF/CC & staff are in constant contact with NHQ, including CAP/CC. That's their jobs. The AU/CC is a tab bit busy with bigger concerns, but does address CAP issues on a semi-regular basis. AETC isn't usually very involved unless it's a big deal.

[mynetdude]

For example the Air Force considers us a DRU under AETC(delegated to AU)
They sometimes think of us as the Auxilliary.

Um, aren't we the auxilliary or at least aren't they already thinking of us as the auxilliary? I'm not sure about the term "sometimes" because the red tri-prop with blue triangle in a circle has the Civil Air Patrol - U.S. Air Force Aux plastered all over it so I think they ALWAYS think of us as the Auxilliary?

[JayT]

For example the Air Force considers us a DRU under AETC(delegated to AU)
They sometimes think of us as the Auxilliary.

Um, aren't we the auxilliary or at least aren't they already thinking of us as the auxilliary? I'm not sure about the term "sometimes" because the red tri-prop with blue triangle in a circle has the Civil Air Patrol - U.S. Air Force Aux plastered all over it so I think they ALWAYS think of us as the Auxilliary?

They didn't design that patch, we did.

Also, it really doesn't matter what 'they' 'think.' It matters what 'we' 'are.' We're not the full time Auxiliary.

[mynetdude]

For example the Air Force considers us a DRU under AETC(delegated to AU)
They sometimes think of us as the Auxilliary.

Um, aren't we the auxilliary or at least aren't they already thinking of us as the auxilliary? I'm not sure about the term "sometimes" because the red tri-prop with blue triangle in a circle has the Civil Air Patrol - U.S. Air Force Aux plastered all over it so I think they ALWAYS think of us as the Auxilliary?

They didn't design that patch, we did.

Also, it really doesn't matter what 'they' 'think.' It matters what 'we' 'are.' We're not the full time Auxiliary.

Ok stupid question... if we are not the full time aux then what are we? If we aren't the Aux then why not change the patch/emblem? Because if what we ARE matters, then that should be reflected on everything people see.

[mikeylikey]

^ the name of the game is "Civil Air Patrol".  Not US Air Force Auxiliary.  It should have been removed from everything when we lost full time auxiliary status.  If you read the board proposals in the other thread, they are not going back to the patch with "US Air Force Auxiliary", as it may be a legal issue.  I am fine with the patches saying "Civil Air Patrol".  That is what we really are.

[mynetdude]

^ the name of the game is "Civil Air Patrol".  Not US Air Force Auxiliary.  It should have been removed from everything when we lost full time auxiliary status.  If you read the board proposals in the other thread, they are not going back to the patch with "US Air Force Auxiliary", as it may be a legal issue.  I am fine with the patches saying "Civil Air Patrol".  That is what we really are.

Couldn't agree more, since we are not a full time USAF Aux anyhow, and when we need to be Aux we don't have to prominently display "USAF Aux" just because we are doing it for the day or a few hours or a few weeks.

So, like you I agree that I am perfectly happy with Civil Air Patrol since like you said it is who we are.   I don't expect the NB to go back to the USAF Aux unless somehow the legal burdens were no longer a burden and the folks higher up were to look past that (not in reality) then it would be something else to consider.

But to have Civil Air Patrol/USAF Aux kind of makes you go... so we are the Civil Air Patrol and we are the USAF Aux???  We don't have to be the USAF Aux just to go look for ELTs right? Obviously we are working for the USAF when AFRCC gives us a call to go find it of course assuming that doesn't make us the Aux in that situation?

[JayT]

For example the Air Force considers us a DRU under AETC(delegated to AU)
They sometimes think of us as the Auxilliary.

Um, aren't we the auxilliary or at least aren't they already thinking of us as the auxilliary? I'm not sure about the term "sometimes" because the red tri-prop with blue triangle in a circle has the Civil Air Patrol - U.S. Air Force Aux plastered all over it so I think they ALWAYS think of us as the Auxilliary?

They didn't design that patch, we did.

Also, it really doesn't matter what 'they' 'think.' It matters what 'we' 'are.' We're not the full time Auxiliary.

Ok stupid question... if we are not the full time aux then what are we? If we aren't the Aux then why not change the patch/emblem? Because if what we ARE matters, then that should be reflected on everything people see.

We're Civil Air Patrol Inc, a volunteer NFP organization. For certain missions, we have Air Force Auxiliary status. For those missions, to get certain benefits, we're the Auxiliary. The rest of the time, for certain reasons, we're a NFP who can enter into agreements with other government organizations to preform services.

We ARE Civil Air Patrol, and we ARE the Air Force Auxiliary. When we go looking for an ELT, we're the Auxiliary. When we're flying counter drug missions, we're the Civil Air Patrol. When we're flying ROTC cadets in O-flights, we're the the Auxiliary. Normal weekly meetings, we're the Civil Air Patrol.

[SJFedor]

  We don't have to be the USAF Aux just to go look for ELTs right? Obviously we are working for the USAF when AFRCC gives us a call to go find it of course assuming that doesn't make us the Aux in that situation?

Nope. AFRCC can just as easily hand an ELT search off to a local Sheriff's department, local SAR team, or any other agency. It's just that we have it worked so that we fall under their umbrella of protection (FECA/FTCA) when we're doing work for them.

As much as it saddens me to say it, we're becoming more and more of a contractor for the USAF then anything else. When they need services that we offer, they "hire" us for the job.

[mikeylikey]

As much as it saddens me to say it, we're becoming more and more of a contractor for the USAF then anything else. When they need services that we offer, they "hire" us for the job.

You Sir are exactly right.  Those in leadership abut 10 years ago really screwed all of us over.  We could have become the "Official" AF Auxiliary, but the Corporate leadership wanted none of that, and we are stuck here now in sort of a legal limbo. 

We should remove all reference to "Air Force Auxiliary".  Face it, we are in all intents a contract corporation much more like blackwater.  We (the Corporation) is paid for services under a contract, and we are given certain benefits that most Government contractors are given when performing their duties.

I heard that the leadership at the time wanted to get rid of full time Auxiliary status so we could "legally" perform Counter Drug operations.  Well, if that was the case, it WAS NOT WORTH IT!

We need to become the full time AF Auxiliary, and I am sorry to say, loose the Corporate side alltogether.  Let the AF take complete control, and get rid of everything corporate.  If that means we loose some missions (like CD) so be it. 

[mynetdude]

  We don't have to be the USAF Aux just to go look for ELTs right? Obviously we are working for the USAF when AFRCC gives us a call to go find it of course assuming that doesn't make us the Aux in that situation?

Nope. AFRCC can just as easily hand an ELT search off to a local Sheriff's department, local SAR team, or any other agency. It's just that we have it worked so that we fall under their umbrella of protection (FECA/FTCA) when we're doing work for them.

As much as it saddens me to say it, we're becoming more and more of a contractor for the USAF then anything else. When they need services that we offer, they "hire" us for the job.

I realize what you're saying as far as we are becoming more of a contractor for the USAF when we are needed.  In many states AFAIK the law places responsibility on the sherrif's department or other SAR agencies to take responsibility in responding to SAR calls.  These people could in turn call us for assistance since that is our speciality and that is what we train for.

I haven't been in CAP very long, but from reading the regs (and considering there have been changes since the 1940s) I'm sure NHQ and the higher ups in the higher branches of military have agreed that we should be the contractors for legal reasons I am sure.  If CAP were to be the first responders I'm sure there would have to be different laws/regulations set in place to allow it.

I'm going adrift here... sorry but I have to

I have seen and talked to people of fire departments who are all purely volunteer and receive county funding and monies from insurance companies.  I understand and realize that the local VFD is not the same thing as CAP... they are not a military branch or utilize the military functions/services like we can.

But the fact they go through rigorous training like paid fire fighters have to go through, not substandard they get to roll their firetrucks on a first response call from the 911 dispatch, I am sure these guys have to meet a response quota or the county will not call their station for response or allow it.

What I'm saying is, we have cadets and I realize that alone has some legal issues and burdens which prevent us from doing certain things, and I don't see how CAP can't be utilized like a local VFD and activate on a first responder basis; sure that means our training will have to be stepped up and meet certain quotas and so on maybe its worth it.

[RiverAux]

Fellas, we've been doing counter drug missions as AFAMs for 20 years.....

[mynetdude]

As much as it saddens me to say it, we're becoming more and more of a contractor for the USAF then anything else. When they need services that we offer, they "hire" us for the job.

You Sir are exactly right.  Those in leadership abut 10 years ago really screwed all of us over.  We could have become the "Official" AF Auxiliary, but the Corporate leadership wanted none of that, and we are stuck here now in sort of a legal limbo. 

We should remove all reference to "Air Force Auxiliary".  Face it, we are in all intents a contract corporation much more like blackwater.  We (the Corporation) is paid for services under a contract, and we are given certain benefits that most Government contractors are given when performing their duties.

I heard that the leadership at the time wanted to get rid of full time Auxiliary status so we could "legally" perform Counter Drug operations.  Well, if that was the case, it WAS NOT WORTH IT!

We need to become the full time AF Auxiliary, and I am sorry to say, loose the Corporate side alltogether.  Let the AF take complete control, and get rid of everything corporate.  If that means we loose some missions (like CD) so be it. 

Besides, not very many squadrons get to participate in CD... thats a small niche so losing CD isn't a huge loss.  I haven't seen our squadron do CD before, though we do have a couple of members CD eligible.

[JayT]

  We don't have to be the USAF Aux just to go look for ELTs right? Obviously we are working for the USAF when AFRCC gives us a call to go find it of course assuming that doesn't make us the Aux in that situation?

Nope. AFRCC can just as easily hand an ELT search off to a local Sheriff's department, local SAR team, or any other agency. It's just that we have it worked so that we fall under their umbrella of protection (FECA/FTCA) when we're doing work for them.

As much as it saddens me to say it, we're becoming more and more of a contractor for the USAF then anything else. When they need services that we offer, they "hire" us for the job.

I realize what you're saying as far as we are becoming more of a contractor for the USAF when we are needed.  In many states AFAIK the law places responsibility on the sherrif's department or other SAR agencies to take responsibility in responding to SAR calls.  These people could in turn call us for assistance since that is our speciality and that is what we train for.

I haven't been in CAP very long, but from reading the regs (and considering there have been changes since the 1940s) I'm sure NHQ and the higher ups in the higher branches of military have agreed that we should be the contractors for legal reasons I am sure.  If CAP were to be the first responders I'm sure there would have to be different laws/regulations set in place to allow it.

I'm going adrift here... sorry but I have to

I have seen and talked to people of fire departments who are all purely volunteer and receive county funding and monies from insurance companies.  I understand and realize that the local VFD is not the same thing as CAP... they are not a military branch or utilize the military functions/services like we can.

But the fact they go through rigorous training like paid fire fighters have to go through, not substandard they get to roll their firetrucks on a first response call from the 911 dispatch, I am sure these guys have to meet a response quota or the county will not call their station for response or allow it.

What I'm saying is, we have cadets and I realize that alone has some legal issues and burdens which prevent us from doing certain things, and I don't see how CAP can't be utilized like a local VFD and activate on a first responder basis; sure that means our training will have to be stepped up and meet certain quotas and so on maybe its worth it.

First Responder to what?

[RiverAux]

Besides, not very many squadrons get to participate in CD... thats a small niche so losing CD isn't a huge loss.

Again, we've doing CD as AF missions right now and have been since the very start.  Heck, we were still the "full time" Auxiliary back when we started doing them. 

By the way, our Wing shares the wealth and every flying unit has the chance to participate in CD ops. 

[mynetdude]

I heard about something about wings get paid a good chunk for CD flights and the squadrons get a piece of it.

Sorry if I am assuming wrong, but only been in 16 months I'm not allowed to participate on CD for another 7 months to even be considered to be eligible.  It just doesn't seem like many (at least in my area) are participating in CD... I will have to ask my commander about this.

[RiverAux]

No, we get reimbursed the same rates for CD missions as all our other missions.  We don't get paid for anything. 

[mikeylikey]

Besides, not very many squadrons get to participate in CD... thats a small niche so losing CD isn't a huge loss.

Again, we've doing CD as AF missions right now and have been since the very start.  Heck, we were still the "full time" Auxiliary back when we started doing them. 

By the way, our Wing shares the wealth and every flying unit has the chance to participate in CD ops. 

Yes, and no.  Did you miss the whole debate when we were told to remove the "AF AUX" from our planes because of the CD missions?  Did you miss that Wings can do CD as a non-AF assigned Mission, but rather work for the state, thus no affiliation with the AF? 

It is very complicated, and if you go back two years here, you can re-read what everyone's take on the matter was.

[JayT]

I heard about something about wings get paid a good chunk for CD flights and the squadrons get a piece of it.

Sorry if I am assuming wrong, but only been in 16 months I'm not allowed to participate on CD for another 7 months to even be considered to be eligible.  It just doesn't seem like many (at least in my area) are participating in CD... I will have to ask my commander about this.

It's not suppose to be a high profile thing.

[DNall]

CD happens for both state & federal. When flying for DEA/Customs/USFS it's as an AFAM & we are AFAux. That's done within the bounds of Posse Comitatus. Same as Navy P3s tracking drug runners trying to make it into the US. Do HLS missions for 1AF as well that play on that gray line. There are limits on asst to LE in all those cases. Less limits, or rather less oversight of the limits, when flying for states, but that's not nearly as much of the work.

What does that have to do with being a numbered AF? If anything, being a nbumbered AF would preclude us working for 1AF, at least in some ways.

[mynetdude]

  We don't have to be the USAF Aux just to go look for ELTs right? Obviously we are working for the USAF when AFRCC gives us a call to go find it of course assuming that doesn't make us the Aux in that situation?

Nope. AFRCC can just as easily hand an ELT search off to a local Sheriff's department, local SAR team, or any other agency. It's just that we have it worked so that we fall under their umbrella of protection (FECA/FTCA) when we're doing work for them.

As much as it saddens me to say it, we're becoming more and more of a contractor for the USAF then anything else. When they need services that we offer, they "hire" us for the job.

I realize what you're saying as far as we are becoming more of a contractor for the USAF when we are needed.  In many states AFAIK the law places responsibility on the sherrif's department or other SAR agencies to take responsibility in responding to SAR calls.  These people could in turn call us for assistance since that is our speciality and that is what we train for.

I haven't been in CAP very long, but from reading the regs (and considering there have been changes since the 1940s) I'm sure NHQ and the higher ups in the higher branches of military have agreed that we should be the contractors for legal reasons I am sure.  If CAP were to be the first responders I'm sure there would have to be different laws/regulations set in place to allow it.

I'm going adrift here... sorry but I have to

I have seen and talked to people of fire departments who are all purely volunteer and receive county funding and monies from insurance companies.  I understand and realize that the local VFD is not the same thing as CAP... they are not a military branch or utilize the military functions/services like we can.

But the fact they go through rigorous training like paid fire fighters have to go through, not substandard they get to roll their firetrucks on a first response call from the 911 dispatch, I am sure these guys have to meet a response quota or the county will not call their station for response or allow it.

What I'm saying is, we have cadets and I realize that alone has some legal issues and burdens which prevent us from doing certain things, and I don't see how CAP can't be utilized like a local VFD and activate on a first responder basis; sure that means our training will have to be stepped up and meet certain quotas and so on maybe its worth it.

First Responder to what?

Good question, but I kind of thought this was obvious? First responder to downed aircraft or ELTs? immediate recon support, etc. AFAIK we are typically called first, but that isn't always the case at least where I am at.  In many Oregon counties the sherrif gets the call when an ELT is tracked by AFRCC and AFRCC alerts OEM then OEM goes down the list of who to call first as required by law.  What if CAP could be called first instead of the sherrif? Wouldn't that save taxpayer dollars and decrease spending and potentially give CAP slightly more funding?

[JayT]

Yeah, but good luck going up against the Shrieff Department in terms of funding wars.

[mynetdude]

Yeah, but good luck going up against the Shrieff Department in terms of funding wars.

can't disagree with you there, I have a senior member from another squadron in our wing thinks he can win it with the sherrif's department in his area.  I have heard the opposite for MANY counties here in Oregon, the sherrif don't want nothing to do with CAP in some counties or want their help for that matter.

I still don't exactly understand, why waste tax dollars finding an errant ELT when CAP can have all the fun doing it and the AF pays for it? The deputy is paid, we are not, he is on the clock when looking for these ELTs... it makes no sense.

It would be one thing if we found a downed aircraft from an ELT find and then to call the deputy out to take over and start a rescue plan then it would be worth the tax dollars to save on the man hours.

[bosshawk]

First of all: may I remind you that this thread has strayed a long way from the title: Numbered AF.  Remember, we are not in the AF, we are not of the AF and we are not from the AF: that makes us outside the AF.  We are a "sometime" auxilliary and there is absolutely no chance that the AF would even give this whole subject more than about 20 seconds thought.

Second: if you have questions about CD, either ask your unit commander, ask the Wing CD Officer, read CAPR60-6 or PM me.  By my title, you will notice that I am a Wing CDO and have been very active in the program for about 13 years.  In the last six or eight posts, I have seen the usual misconceptions, mis-truths and misinformation that seems to pervade CAP.

[SAR-EMT1]

As much as it saddens me to say it, we're becoming more and more of a contractor for the USAF then anything else. When they need services that we offer, they "hire" us for the job.

You Sir are exactly right.  Those in leadership abut 10 years ago really screwed all of us over.  We could have become the "Official" AF Auxiliary, but the Corporate leadership wanted none of that, and we are stuck here now in sort of a legal limbo. 

We should remove all reference to "Air Force Auxiliary".  Face it, we are in all intents a contract corporation much more like blackwater.  We (the Corporation) is paid for services under a contract, and we are given certain benefits that most Government contractors are given when performing their duties.

I heard that the leadership at the time wanted to get rid of full time Auxiliary status so we could "legally" perform Counter Drug operations.  Well, if that was the case, it WAS NOT WORTH IT!

We need to become the full time AF Auxiliary, and I am sorry to say, loose the Corporate side alltogether.  Let the AF take complete control, and get rid of everything corporate.  If that means we loose some missions (like CD) so be it. 

         AMEN!

[mikeylikey]

^ Let me apologize for the grammatical error above "We (the Corporation) is paid".  Wow.....I can't believe I let that one get past my double check!  Sorry everyone!

[BlueLakes1]

Besides, not very many squadrons get to participate in CD... thats a small niche so losing CD isn't a huge loss.  I haven't seen our squadron do CD before, though we do have a couple of members CD eligible.

Over 50% of my wing's total flying hours in FY07 were directly related to CD, either A-3 or A-4 mission symbol flying. While it might not mean much to your wing, it means an awful lot to others.

[bosshawk]

Just to try to put CD in perspective: CAWG has either the biggest or second biggest CD program in CAP, depending on whose numbers you believe.  We flew about 30 percent of all CAWGs flying hours on CD last year: about 2300 hours.  We have over 300 people cleared for CD: probably more than some Wings have in their entire membership.  Not an insignificant program!!!!!!!!!!!

[mynetdude]

I know we're going off topic here,

And I didn't mean to make untrue statements about CAP in general as far as CD goes. I don't know a lot about CD yet as much as I'd like to but I'm not even eligible so I can only know about it from reading the regulations.

Sure other wings are much better than others and demand for CD is probably higher in other wings especially where there is a higher population. We only have 412 seniors and 240 cadets in this wing according to Eservices, how many of them are active? maybe 50%? I don't have a way of knowing those numbers so 50% is an awfully big guess.

I'm curious to know what the total numbers are in each wing just for the fun of it.

Now, to be on topic, there has been suggestions that if going to a numbered Air Force some of the missions could change, what about CD? (I'd like to know more in depth) sure the Navy P3 orions are out there looking the USCG are also tasked for drug traffiking issues on US waters (I'm not sure about waters beyond US control or how the Navy P3s and the USCG compare as they seem to do similar stuff).

With all the name changes we've had USAF Aux, Civil Air Patrol, US Civil Air Patrol (and we still have/use the name USAF Aux on the tails of our fleets and patches). Heck, when I went out on a cadet activity escorting cadets to one of the vans to obtained containerized water to put out a live fire left behind by another citizen... some people walked by and asked what "branch of service" we were from and the cadets replied "Air Force" I didn't question it because I had thought we were a part of the air force all the time to some degree but that doesn't even seem like the case except during taskings the AF wants us to do. 

My point is, why change again, add more confusion or complexity? Its complex enough, some people have to actually put some thought into it that are not regularly involved with CAP or know much about it as to whether we are significantly or not significantly part of the USAF which is why if you'll note when you do fundraisers the regulations say that the unit commander should use strong discretion when wearing appropriate uniform as you want to make sure the USAF has no involvement in your unit's fundrasising so going numbered air force could hamper that too.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

We ARE Civil Air Patrol, and we ARE the Air Force Auxiliary. When we go looking for an ELT, we're the Auxiliary. When we're flying counter drug missions, we're the Civil Air Patrol. When we're flying ROTC cadets in O-flights, we're the the Auxiliary. Normal weekly meetings, we're the Civil Air Patrol.

Whoa there... isn't the cadet program an AFAM? We're Civil Air Patrol, the auxiliary we always were before, when we're training cadets.

Honestly, I don't think I've done much in CAP that wouldn't be considered outside the lines of the auxiliary. Huh.

[DNall]

I swear I don't understand how people still have trouble with this. The ONLY thing that technical aux or not status has anything to do with is legal liability. The AF told Congress they don't think they ought to pay for lawsuits for things CAP does during times when AF has no supervision or authority to tell them not to. Simple as that, and there is absolutely nothing whatsoever more to it. Congress, AF, fed agencies, & everyone else see us same as they always have. Nothing has ever changed about that, least of all our affiliation with the AF.

[SarDragon]

AFAM refers to having an Air Force assigned mission number for a specific event, like a search or training mission. It does not refer to the three missions of CAP - CP, ES, and AE.

[JayT]

We ARE Civil Air Patrol, and we ARE the Air Force Auxiliary. When we go looking for an ELT, we're the Auxiliary. When we're flying counter drug missions, we're the Civil Air Patrol. When we're flying ROTC cadets in O-flights, we're the the Auxiliary. Normal weekly meetings, we're the Civil Air Patrol.

Whoa there... isn't the cadet program an AFAM? We're Civil Air Patrol, the auxiliary we always were before, when we're training cadets.

Honestly, I don't think I've done much in CAP that wouldn't be considered outside the lines of the auxiliary. Huh.

Nope, it's one of our three missions, but its the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program, not the Air Force Auxiliary Cadet Program.

[FW]

I'm getting a pain in my neck over reading this thread  

But I'm going to share my 2 cents worth anyway.  

1.  We are still "Civil Air Patrol" an official auxiliary of the United States Air Force.      The Corporate Charter and Corporate Seal have not changed.  Only the "command patch" has gone through some changes and, don't be too surprised if the pre-2006 patch is reconsidered.

2.   Please don't confuse being the "auxiliary" with being a "legal instrumentality of the Air Force" for insurance purposes.  As the auxiliary, we are privileged to wear AF style uniforms and get Air Force support for ALL our missions (with SECAF approval)  This is why we have free uniforms for cadets, cadet O'flights, mandays for encampments, etc.

3.  The legislation of 2000 (revamping of the "supply bill") has put CAP under the governance of the Board of Governors.  And, the SECAF  has more say in our operations thanks to the Cooperative Agreement and Statement of Work.  These 2 documents "legalize" our status which, I've been told many times, up until 2000 was not.

4.  I'm going to take a couple of Advil and call it a day.  

[afgeo4]

Simply... CAP isn't the Air Force. It is not a unit within the USAF.

The unit discussed is CAP-USAF which is a true USAF unit staffed with USAF personnel performing a USAF mission. It just so happens that this mission is to be liaisons to CAP. The Civil Air Patrol isn't CAP-USAF though and is not and will not be a unit in the branch. It is a civilian organization which technically doesn't answer to anyone above the National Commander. We are strategically tasked by the office of the Secretary of the Air Force (actually, one of the undersecretaries). We may be tactically tasked by various USAF units such as AFRCC, 1st AF, AETC, and AFNSEP, but simply aren't one of them. That's why we can't be a MAJCOM or a numbered air force or anything else in the USAF.