Why aren't Region commanders Brigadiers?

[RVT]

I may be opening a can of worms with this - but its been nagging me for awhile, so I'll ask.

Their present rank made sense when the National Commander was a 1 star.  But when the National commander position went to a 2 star, why didn't Region commanders move up as well?

They command wings led by full Colonels.  Their deputy commanders can be full colonels.  Often they have several full Colonels on staff as well (mine has six).  And they report to a Major General.

I'm curious.  Why?  And if theres a good reason why not, why does the National Commander need to have two stars?

[lordmonar]

Short answer.....because.

Long answer.....the politics needed to bump the National CC up to two stars was long and arduous...and a lot of people think unnecessary.

Moving to bump the regional commanders to one star positions would create a lot of back lash in the CAP hater community.

I for one think it makes a lot of sense...as you point out the National CC is two stars and the wing commanders are Bird Colenels....it only makes sense that the regional CC's should be on stars....but it ain't gonna happen soon.

[High Speed Low Drag]

I have to admit that I have often wondered the same thing.  I think it should be like that.

   Just remembered I wrote a post about that.   http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=9521.msg172635#msg172635

[raivo]

Yes, logically speaking, if the National Commander is a two-star and the wing commanders are full-birds, then region commanders should be one-stars. Practically speaking, it doesn't make a difference. We survived long enough with the National Commander being the only upper-echelon commander above full-bird, which brings me to this question:

why does the National Commander need to have two stars?

He doesn't. Just keep in mind who was National Commander when the two-star "promotion" happened.

[lordmonar]

Maj General Bowling?

[FW]

  The reason there is a "2 star" at the top of the command chain is in the way we handled our affairs after the attacks on the World Trade Center and, the months which followed.  The CSAF and SECAF were so impressed, we were awarded the privilege of the current grades. However, because CAP members rarely "retire", the privilege was not extended down to Region Commanders; insuring there would not be 100's of stars wandering around the CAP (and AF) universe.

Anyway, they weren't offering a pay raise with the promotion....

[Flying Pig]

It has nothing to do with 9/11.  We've had Maj General since I was a cadet. It was started with Eugene Harwell.

[RiverAux]

I think that just based on membership numbers (in addition to the other reasons named), a star for region commanders would be appropriate.  They command somewhere between 3000-9000 people depending on the region.  And given the overall CAP membership two stars for the national commander is more than appropriate, if not possibly a little on the low side. 

On the other hand, CAP region commanders have very little authority to do much of anything.  Its not like they are really commanding all those people on a day to day basis in an operational sense and for the most part don't really command them administratively either.  So, Colonel might be ok. 

[High Speed Low Drag]

  The reason there is a "2 star" at the top of the command chain is in the way we handled our affairs after the attacks on the World Trade Center and, the months which followed.  The CSAF and SECAF were so impressed, we were awarded the privilege of the current grades. However, because CAP members rarely "retire", the privilege was not extended down to Region Commanders; insuring there would not be 100's of stars wandering around the CAP (and AF) universe.

Anyway, they weren't offering a pay raise with the promotion....

That's why I think Region Commanders should be temporary BGs.  When they step down, they revert to their permanent grade of Col.  Unlike Nat/CC, Region Commanders haven't been elected by the NB, so the rank is only temp.  While they are in office, they are clearly in command, but once removed, they go back to general membership.  Fo the bling people, the NEC badge can be a permanent badge showing their service.

[FW]

It has nothing to do with 9/11.  We've had Maj General since I was a cadet. It was started with Eugene Harwell.

Maj General Harwell was the reason we ended up with Maroon epaulets.  His "promotion" was not sanctified by the Air Force and, was never recognized as such.  You see, Robert, the Air Force has total control of our grades.

Believe it or not, the reasons behind our current grade structure; I've stated above.  It has everything to do with our professionalism during that period in our history.  It is also the main reason Maj Gen Bowling was elected and installed to our "Hall of Honor".

Remember, gentlemen, CAP grade has no relevance to the Military's.  Colonels are corporate officers (but, for very few exceptions).  There is really no higher grade than that of a corporate officer in CAP except for the National Commander and National Vice Commander who also serve as members of the Board of Governors.

Oh, and former NEC members (and NB members) already have the privilege of wearing their respective badges as "bling".
Now back to our conversation...

[Eclipse]

It has nothing to do with 9/11.  We've had Maj General since I was a cadet. It was started with by Eugene Harwell.

Heh - fixed that fer 'ya...

General(s) Barry, (Aug 1990-Aug 1993), Anderson, (Aug 1993-Aug 1996), Bergman (Aug 1996-Mar 1998), and Bobick (Mar 1998-Aug 2001), were (and still are), Brigadiers.

[FW]

^and until 2002, Bowling had 1 star as CAP/cc.

[raivo]

Apparently I have my National Commanders mixed up...

Sorry, I'm getting old, my memory's not what it used to be. :x

[arajca]

IIRC, Harwell's promotion plan was to give the region cc's one star, until the AF's head exploded when he got his second star.

I believe this was addressed at a recent NB or NEC meeting since the proposal had been tabled in 1999/2000 to be brought back in 2009/2010 for action. It died without a second.

[Cecil DP]

Don't forget that the Air Force has control of CAP General Grades. Even if CAP proposed BG for Region Commanders, the AF could shoot it down, if the BofG doesn't beat them to it. I think we should instead be considering Colonel for those who attain the Wilson Award and are active members.

[Al Sayre]

We need to put it to them in a more practical manner.

"If you make the CAP Region CC's 1 stars, just think of all the rubber chicken dinners you can avoid by sending them instead..." 

[Flying Pig]

So basically we want a symbol to denote that you are a region commander. We have that.  A ribbon and a Badge.  Since the star really means nothing other than to denote your position in CAP and it goes away after your done, then really who cares. 

[SARDOC]

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/army/l/blchancommand.htm

Check out the link above.  If you want to make it comparable ...maybe the National Commander should have at least three stars.  The Region commanders should have one star.   
I know it's not important as far as pay is concerned, but it's emblematic of their authority and experience.  Just food for thought.

[PHall]

Of course, there's another question. Do we really need Regions? What purpose do they serve today?

[FlyTiger77]

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/army/l/blchancommand.htm

Check out the link above.  If you want to make it comparable ...maybe the National Commander should have at least three stars.  The Region commanders should have one star.   
I know it's not important as far as pay is concerned, but it's emblematic of their authority and experience.  Just food for thought.

I find it interesting to note that you chose an Army-centric reference to justify a change in the grade structure of the USAF Auxiliary.

Personally, harking back to a comment I have made before, grade in CAP means what grade in CAP means and comparison between that and the military is problematic at best.

[spacecommand]

Maj General Harwell was the reason we ended up with Maroon epaulets.  His "promotion" was not sanctified by the Air Force and, was never recognized as such.  You see, Robert, the Air Force has total control of our grades.

Might be an old debate but...

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=7453.0

[FW]

^ I must disagree with my distinguished friend, BG Anderson.  The reason the Air Force wanted us to be more "distinctive" in our appearance was directly caused by the Harwell "promotion".
NOTE: the promotion was "official" because it had the blessing of the SECAF-MIR however, the CSAF was not consulted in this and refused to recognize it. Hence, the Air Force insistence we become "more distinctive" in our appearance.  The change to gray epaulets was made only after BG Barry agreed not to wear the Maj Gen stars. 

Now back to our previous topic...

[SarDragon]

Of course, there's another question. Do we really need Regions? What purpose do they serve today?

Span of control.

[jimmydeanno]

What purpose do they serve today?

an increase in membership dues...

[flyboy53]

O.K., so in another string, there's a proposal to tighten up promotion requirements and make achievement of the Wilson Award as part of the criteria for lieutenant colonel; which really isn't all that bad of an idea. It would give a whole new meaning to that achievement and probably calm all those "too many chiefs" complainers.

Making region commanders brigadier generals isn't a bad idea either, given their span of control. Why doesn't someone float this proposal to the National CC and take it to the CASAF? Would these ranks be temporary until completion of the tour of duty just like wing commanders and national commanders?

But lets do one thing at a time. There aren't enough numbers (members) in this organization to justify three stars for a national commander and the same justification may apply to region commanders.

[RVT]

O.K., so in another string, there's a proposal to tighten up promotion requirements and make achievement of the Wilson Award as part of the criteria for lieutenant colonel; which really isn't all that bad of an idea. It would give a whole new meaning to that achievement and probably calm all those "too many chiefs" complainers.

Making region commanders brigadier generals isn't a bad idea either, given their span of control. Why doesn't someone float this proposal to the National CC and take it to the CASAF? Would these ranks be temporary until completion of the tour of duty just like wing commanders and national commanders?

But lets do one thing at a time. There aren't enough numbers (members) in this organization to justify three stars for a national commander and the same justification may apply to region commanders.

Yes, Yes, and Maybe.   CAP will never have the justification for a 3 Star.  And all promotions above Major (Even LTC now it seems) are temporary at first, it would have to follow the same rules.  The reason to make Region commanders temporary O7's is to give  each level of command a rank, Region commanders are the only level that doesn't follow that rule.  We even offer easy promotions to Major for Group commanders to make the bottom end of that work.

[FW]

Making region commanders brigadier generals isn't a bad idea either, given their span of control. Why doesn't someone float this proposal to the National CC and take it to the CASAF? Would these ranks be temporary until completion of the tour of duty just like wing commanders and national commanders?

Do you really think the idea hasn't been submitted to the CSAF before?  I personally know of 3 times this proposal was made.  All 3 times the request was blown out of the sky (I would say water but.... )

I'm still trying to grasp the "significance" of such a change in our grade structure.  Region Commanders don't deal with state AG's, they don't deal with the pentagon and, other than for administrative purposes, have no operational mission.  They are a logistics link between the national commander and the wings and, a hoarder of cats  wing commanders.  They are members of the NEC and have a nice shiny gold badge to wear.  I can assure you, the grade will not be "temporary" if granted.  Except for a few special times, all our grade becomes "permanent".  IMHO, the grade is not of significance  however, the discussion does make an interesting read.

[TCMajor]

I am seeing a constant tread that the Region really does not do anything command like.  So, I think that an addition of an actual  command (mission) responsibility would have to come along with such a move. Such as, if you have a regional issue like the Gulf Oil incident then the Regional Commander would be on the hot seat for providing a cohesive regional response to the situation.  I would also think that a reduction/realignment in the number and makeup of regions would certainly be in order.  As there is no pay or cost involved, it simply becomes a question of: Does this position warrant a 1-star in command.  All aspects of the position have to be taken into consideration; span of control, true command authority, size and complexity of the Area of Responsibility.  Not to throw in those crazy CG(aux) guys, but I believe they have 1-stars at District.  Which is relatively the same concept as our region.  Yes, I know they call them something else, not Admirals but it is an example.  Sorry guys, but they really are the only organization that is even remotely similar to us.  It also would not hurt if it took a long time, relatively, to rise to that level, say maybe 15 to 20 years maybe more.  That way we possibly could keep the population of former 1-stars low.  And, yes I will say it, there should be a selection board that the Air Force participates in and has a significant say in the selection.  Just my 2-cents. 

[RiverAux]

Regional headquarters just don't have the manpower assigned to them to be able to really run a large ongoing mission themselves.  Heck, they may not even have an IC. 

At best, all they can really do is coordinate getting resources from other states to the states that need them. 

[High Speed Low Drag]

I am seeing a constant tread that the Region really does not do anything command like.  So, I think that an addition of an actual  command (mission) responsibility would have to come along with such a move. Such as, if you have a regional issue like the Gulf Oil incident then the Regional Commander would be on the hot seat for providing a cohesive regional response to the situation.  I would also think that a reduction/realignment in the number and makeup of regions would certainly be in order.  As there is no pay or cost involved, it simply becomes a question of: Does this position warrant a 1-star in command.  All aspects of the position have to be taken into consideration; span of control, true command authority, size and complexity of the Area of Responsibility.  Not to throw in those crazy CG(aux) guys, but I believe they have 1-stars at District.  Which is relatively the same concept as our region.  Yes, I know they call them something else, not Admirals but it is an example.  Sorry guys, but they really are the only organization that is even remotely similar to us.  It also would not hurt if it took a long time, relatively, to rise to that level, say maybe 15 to 20 years maybe more.  That way we possibly could keep the population of former 1-stars low.  And, yes I will say it, there should be a selection board that the Air Force participates in and has a significant say in the selection.  Just my 2-cents.

I think that Region Commanders should have command authority when incidents occur that span more than one wing (hurricane, oil spill, etc).  It makes operational sense.  Why can they not do that - why can they not have operational missions utilizing the various wings' resources under their control?  Instead of having multiple wings running their own ops & trying to coordinate them.  Seems like common sense to me. 

And they still don't have to have large staffs - a Region Commander can pick someone from whatever wing to be IC, or X or Y.  Pull the people you need for your incident staff, but do it under a Region Commander's jurisdiction, not a wings.

[SJFedor]

I am seeing a constant tread that the Region really does not do anything command like.  So, I think that an addition of an actual  command (mission) responsibility would have to come along with such a move. Such as, if you have a regional issue like the Gulf Oil incident then the Regional Commander would be on the hot seat for providing a cohesive regional response to the situation.  I would also think that a reduction/realignment in the number and makeup of regions would certainly be in order.  As there is no pay or cost involved, it simply becomes a question of: Does this position warrant a 1-star in command.  All aspects of the position have to be taken into consideration; span of control, true command authority, size and complexity of the Area of Responsibility.  Not to throw in those crazy CG(aux) guys, but I believe they have 1-stars at District.  Which is relatively the same concept as our region.  Yes, I know they call them something else, not Admirals but it is an example.  Sorry guys, but they really are the only organization that is even remotely similar to us.  It also would not hurt if it took a long time, relatively, to rise to that level, say maybe 15 to 20 years maybe more.  That way we possibly could keep the population of former 1-stars low.  And, yes I will say it, there should be a selection board that the Air Force participates in and has a significant say in the selection.  Just my 2-cents.

I think that Region Commanders should have command authority when incidents occur that span more than one wing (hurricane, oil spill, etc).  It makes operational sense.  Why can they not do that - why can they not have operational missions utilizing the various wings' resources under their control?  Instead of having multiple wings running their own ops & trying to coordinate them.  Seems like common sense to me. 

And they still don't have to have large staffs - a Region Commander can pick someone from whatever wing to be IC, or X or Y.  Pull the people you need for your incident staff, but do it under a Region Commander's jurisdiction, not a wings.

Not all Region Commanders are IC's. And IC's have corporate officer-like responsabilty and authority (that's why the Wing/CC needs to approve their qualification). They can authorize aircrews to cross state boundaries to prosecute missions, they can request additional resources from other wings (request, not take) and they always have the NOC to call if they have a big need. And if it's a large, multi-state mission, typically the NOC does all the coordinating, and there typically is one IC-1 at the top running the show.

Don't forget, most of the missions we do are not done under the wing's jurisdiction, but rather 1AF or whomever the requesting agency is. It's their world, we just dance in it. However it is typical that whichever wing geographically falls into where the party is, they typically run the show.

[flyboy53]

Making region commanders brigadier generals isn't a bad idea either, given their span of control. Why doesn't someone float this proposal to the National CC and take it to the CASAF? Would these ranks be temporary until completion of the tour of duty just like wing commanders and national commanders?

Do you really think the idea hasn't been submitted to the CSAF before?  I personally know of 3 times this proposal was made.  All 3 times the request was blown out of the sky (I would say water but.... )

I'm still trying to grasp the "significance" of such a change in our grade structure.  Region Commanders don't deal with state AG's, they don't deal with the pentagon and, other than for administrative purposes, have no operational mission.  They are a logistics link between the national commander and the wings and, a hoarder of cats  wing commanders.  They are members of the NEC and have a nice shiny gold badge to wear.  I can assure you, the grade will not be "temporary" if granted.  Except for a few special times, all our grade becomes "permanent".  IMHO, the grade is not of significance  however, the discussion does make an interesting read.

Unfortunately, I am aware that it has been submitted many times to CSAF.  Each time, however, I was certain that the reason was more political than functional. I'm just as certain that that isn't what drives such suggestions now.

[ZigZag911]

But lets do one thing at a time. There aren't enough numbers (members) in this organization to justify three stars for a national commander and the same justification may apply to region commanders.

CGAUX, which is much smaller than CAP, has a 3 star national CC, and, I believe,  two 2 stars and a handful of 1 stars in command or national staff slots.

[RiverAux]

But lets do one thing at a time. There aren't enough numbers (members) in this organization to justify three stars for a national commander and the same justification may apply to region commanders.

CGAUX, which is much smaller than CAP, has a 3 star national CC, and, I believe,  two 2 stars and a handful of 1 stars in command or national staff slots.

Keep in mind that while they may have a star they do not have ranks.  It is merely a representation of their office. 

[Eclipse]

But lets do one thing at a time. There aren't enough numbers (members) in this organization to justify three stars for a national commander and the same justification may apply to region commanders.

CGAUX, which is much smaller than CAP, has a 3 star national CC, and, I believe,  two 2 stars and a handful of 1 stars in command or national staff slots.

Wiki says the USCGAux Commander is a Commodore, which is at best 1-star.

[SJFedor]

But lets do one thing at a time. There aren't enough numbers (members) in this organization to justify three stars for a national commander and the same justification may apply to region commanders.

CGAUX, which is much smaller than CAP, has a 3 star national CC, and, I believe,  two 2 stars and a handful of 1 stars in command or national staff slots.

Wiki says the USCGAux Commander is a Commodore, which is at best 1-star.

Also from the Wiki:

While Auxiliarists wear military style rank insignia, they do not use military titles. For example, a Flotilla Commander (FC) wears insignia similar to a USCG Lieutenant, but is never referred to as "Lieutenant." The title most commonly used in official correspondence and reports is "Auxiliarist", and its abbreviations (e.g., AUX J. Smith).  Exceptions to this rule are elected or appointed Commodores, who wear one to three stars depending on their office, and are the only Auxiliarists who use a military style title ("Commodore") before their name.

[RiverAux]

And also keep in mind that CG Aux members generally don't wear their office insignia when working around the CG (not supposed to at all, but sometimes local CG commanders make exceptions).  In other words, there is very little potential for CG members having any grief over the office insignia worn by CG Aux. 

[SARDOC]

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/army/l/blchancommand.htm

Check out the link above.  If you want to make it comparable ...maybe the National Commander should have at least three stars.  The Region commanders should have one star.   
I know it's not important as far as pay is concerned, but it's emblematic of their authority and experience.  Just food for thought.

I find it interesting to note that you chose an Army-centric reference to justify a change in the grade structure of the USAF Auxiliary.

Personally, harking back to a comment I have made before, grade in CAP means what grade in CAP means and comparison between that and the military is problematic at best.

I did choose an Army Centric reference because that was the only one I could find that referenced personnel levels with the same military type grade structure that is inflicted upon us by the USAF and NHQ.

CAP grade structure is relevant only to CAP so CAP should be able to dictate how it's used...but we can't the USAF (aka. THE MILITARY)has the ultimate decision over our MILITARY type grade structure.  Thus the Army reference.  If we are going to use that system we should use the grades for what they represent in that system.

I personally don't really care I was just trying to provide information to generate discussion.  I don't care what rank structure we use...even if we adopted something similar to the Coast Guard Auxiliary..without all the fancy grade insignia.  The Mission is what is important.  However we have members who continue to volunteer with this organization for the recognition that is associated with promotion with increasing levels of responsibilities and/or authority.

thanks

[MIKE]

And also keep in mind that CG Aux members generally don't wear their office insignia when working around the CG (not supposed to at all, but sometimes local CG commanders make exceptions).  In other words, there is very little potential for CG members having any grief over the office insignia worn by CG Aux.

That's not what the AUXMAN says. "A.9. ... Auxiliarists, when working as crew on a Coast Guard vessel, shall wear only the member device (Auxiliary emblem) as collar insignia."

[FW]

Unfortunately, I am aware that it has been submitted many times to CSAF.  Each time, however, I was certain that the reason was more political than functional. I'm just as certain that that isn't what drives such suggestions now.

My dear CT colleague, everything done at the national level in CAP is political.  However, as far as our discussion is concerned; you are right on the money. 

[RVT]

That's not what the AUXMAN says. "A.9. ... Auxiliarists, when working as crew on a Coast Guard vessel, shall wear only the member device (Auxiliary emblem) as collar insignia."

We don't argue about CAP uniforms enough we have to argue about Coast Guard ones now?

[PHall]

That's not what the AUXMAN says. "A.9. ... Auxiliarists, when working as crew on a Coast Guard vessel, shall wear only the member device (Auxiliary emblem) as collar insignia."

We don't argue about CAP uniforms enough we have to argue about Coast Guard ones now?

Variety, keeps this place from getting dull.

[ZigZag911]

CGAUX National Commodore wears 3 star insignia...they can call it anything they choose, it's their organization, but that's the insignia of a USN/USCG vice admiral (USAF lt general).

[RiverAux]

CGAUX National Commodore wears 3 star insignia...they can call it anything they choose, it's their organization, but that's the insignia of a USN/USCG vice admiral (USAF lt general).

Its the modified insignia unlike CAP grade insignia.

[lordmonar]

CGAUX National Commodore wears 3 star insignia...they can call it anything they choose, it's their organization, but that's the insignia of a USN/USCG vice admiral (USAF lt general).

Its the modified insignia unlike CAP grade insignia.

Ours are modified!

We wear rank on gray sleeves, we wear rank on blue cloth and we wear rank in plastic.....only one place do we wear "real" USAF rank.....hard rank on the BBDU covers.

[RiverAux]

The background has been modified, not the appearance of the actual insignia. 

[lordmonar]

The background has been modified, not the appearance of the actual insignia.

Splitting hairs......CGAU only ads an A.  Six of one/half dozen of the other.

[RVT]

CGAUX National Commodore wears 3 star insignia...they can call it anything they choose, it's their organization, but that's the insignia of a USN/USCG vice admiral (USAF lt general).

Its the modified insignia unlike CAP grade insignia.

Ours are modified!

We wear rank on gray sleeves, we wear rank on blue cloth and we wear rank in plastic.....only one place do we wear "real" USAF rank.....hard rank on the BBDU covers.

We do?  I didn't think we wore hard rank on anything.

[lordmonar]

CGAUX National Commodore wears 3 star insignia...they can call it anything they choose, it's their organization, but that's the insignia of a USN/USCG vice admiral (USAF lt general).

Its the modified insignia unlike CAP grade insignia.

Ours are modified!

We wear rank on gray sleeves, we wear rank on blue cloth and we wear rank in plastic.....only one place do we wear "real" USAF rank.....hard rank on the BBDU covers.

We do?  I didn't think we wore hard rank on anything.

b. Changes to the CAP Field Uniform, Utility Uniform and CAP flight suit:
(1) Grade Insignia on Blue BDU cap. Effective 31 August 2005, cadet and senior member officers who choose to wear the dark blue field uniform with the blue BDU cap may wear the ultramarine blue embroidered grade insignia centered ½ inch above the visor. Grade insignia is not authorized on any of the CAP baseball caps. The wear of grade insignia on the blue BDU cap is not authorized for cadets or senior members who do not hold an officer grade. Effective 29 June 2006, metal grade insignia was also approved for wear on the blue BDU cap.

[RiverAux]

The background has been modified, not the appearance of the actual insignia.

Splitting hairs......CGAU only ads an A.  Six of one/half dozen of the other.

Different collor stripes on the epalets too.  Silver vs gold. 

[lordmonar]

The background has been modified, not the appearance of the actual insignia.

Splitting hairs......CGAU only ads an A.  Six of one/half dozen of the other.

Different collor stripes on the epalets too.  Silver vs gold.

So you too change the back ground....like I said six of one/half dozen of the other.

[ZigZag911]

OK, it's not identical to USN/USCG, but then neither is ours...and the number of stripes or stars says "3 star" loud & clear?

[MSG Mac]

What do the previous eleven responses have to do with the subject at hand-The appointment of Region Commanders to the grade of Brigadier General?

[bosshawk]

Nothing: but that is how CT works.  Almost everything degenerates into a uniform discussion.

[TCMajor]

 

[SarDragon]

Boss, give him time. He's only made 20 posts, and hasn't quite seen the light yet.

[gratuitous edit - 3900th post]

[JC004]

This topic is still popping up?  The way I see it: let 'em earn it.  If the organization starts growing and expanding under the leadership of the NEC, maybe let 'em have it.  Otherwise, what we DON'T need is the additional politics that will come out of people scrambling to get up to region level just so they can be called "General."  We don't need any more politics.  We don't really need any more generals either.  But, if it HAD to be that way, I'd say let 'em EARN it and make it a temporary grade.  There.

[Wildblueflyer]

Can you imagine the uniform threads we would have if Region Commanders were Generals?  In the RM, Flag Officers can wear individualized uniforms.   

[Gunner C]

Not anymore.

[BillB]

In RM, only Chiefs of Staff can wear individualized uniforms. But from photos, none seem to be, just wearing authorized flag grade uniforms, insignia.

[MIKE]

Boss, give him time. He's only made 20 posts, and hasn't quite seen the light yet.

[gratuitous edit - 3900th post]

Smurf.   

[ZigZag911]

Rather than multiply our number of generals, why don't we adopt RAF rank of "Air Commodore" for Region CCs?

We'd need to invent a rank insignia, but there would be no heartburn about generals' flags (wouldn't be generals!), general officer scrambled eggs on hats (ditto), and would clearly be defined as temporary grade while holding office as region commander (revert to O-6 afterward)...but would out rank colonel (O-6).

[bosshawk]

OH, right: just what we need, more confusion about grade(or is it rank?).  IMHO, we have some Wing and Region CCs who have no clue as to how to act like a Colonel: just imagine what it might be like if they wore a star.

[ZigZag911]

Ah, but that's the point of Air Comm -- they won't get a star!

[TCMajor]

Wow this keeps going back to uniforms.  How about we take all the guys that thought the triangle thingy was a good idea and make them wear it as rank.  j/k, maybe.  Make them Rear Commodores (lower half).     Really, lets try and get back on topic.  I think the original question had merit for valid discussion, but the real tread may have run its course.

[arajca]

Quick Summary:
Q: Why aren't Region Commanders Brigadiers?

A: AF said no. Repeatedly.

Q: Why don't we ask again?

A: It was brought up last year, but the NB felt the relationship between the AF and CAP was not at an appropriate level to ask.

Now, back the uniforms...

[TCMajor]

lmao...pass the malt beverage 

[Gunner C]

A: It was brought up last year, but the NB felt the relationship between the AF and CAP was not at an appropriate level to ask.

Now that's an understatement.

[arajca]

A: It was brought up last year, but the NB felt the relationship between the AF and CAP was not at an appropriate level to ask.

Now that's an understatement.

I said it was a Quick Summary.

[RVT]

I said it was a Quick Summary.

But enough.  It answered the question I started this thread with, and was really all I was looking for.

[bosshawk]

Aren't you glad you asked?  Now back to the regularly scheduled uniform posts.

[NavLT]

I think that Region Commanders should have command authority when incidents occur that span more than one wing (hurricane, oil spill, etc).  It makes operational sense.  Why can they not do that - why can they not have operational missions utilizing the various wings' resources under their control?  Instead of having multiple wings running their own ops & trying to coordinate them.  Seems like common sense to me. 

And they still don't have to have large staffs - a Region Commander can pick someone from whatever wing to be IC, or X or Y.  Pull the people you need for your incident staff, but do it under a Region Commander's jurisdiction, not a wings.

I guess the question I have is why don't they put some more meat into the region?  The argument about IC 1 and IC 2 being more controlled would seem to fit that the IC2 or IC 1 would be a region appointment and a region resource.  When the statement is made about wing and region commanders not being ICs...I can only say why not?  I don't see them putting a non-aviator in command of an Air Craft Carrier.....and for the non-pilots in CAP you don't have to be a pilot to be an IC just Air Crew qualified.

v/rLtJ

[davidsinn]

I think that Region Commanders should have command authority when incidents occur that span more than one wing (hurricane, oil spill, etc).  It makes operational sense.  Why can they not do that - why can they not have operational missions utilizing the various wings' resources under their control?  Instead of having multiple wings running their own ops & trying to coordinate them.  Seems like common sense to me. 

And they still don't have to have large staffs - a Region Commander can pick someone from whatever wing to be IC, or X or Y.  Pull the people you need for your incident staff, but do it under a Region Commander's jurisdiction, not a wings.

I guess the question I have is why don't they put some more meat into the region?  The argument about IC 1 and IC 2 being more controlled would seem to fit that the IC2 or IC 1 would be a region appointment and a region resource.  When the statement is made about wing and region commanders not being ICs...I can only say why not?  I don't see them putting a non-aviator in command of an Air Craft Carrier.....and for the non-pilots in CAP you don't have to be a pilot to be an IC just Air Crew qualified.

v/rLtJ

It takes years and a lot of work to become an IC. I've been in four years and I just started working on GBD and MS this last weekend. I still need to pick up ICS400 somewhere along the line.

[bosshawk]

Re: NAVlt's post about why aren't Wing and Region CCs ICs: I can vouch for the PAC Region and CAWG CC not being current Mission Pilots and certainly not ICs.  In fact, CAWG doesn't have a MPS in the top four positions in the Wing(CC,CV, CofS, DO).  Think about that for awhile.