Should we reclassify "senior members without grade" as "Airman"?

[RiverAux]

CAP has the odd situation of having a paramilitary grade structure in which new members technically have no grade at all.  They are usually referred to as "senior members without grade" in various CAP publications, but this is not actually a grade itself (ref CAPR 35-5 1-3 and 1-4).  For the vast majority of new senior members, they are in this status for a period of months before getting an officer or NCO grade.

Interestingly, the CAP uniform manual does use the term "Airman" to apply to uniformed CAP members who are not Officers or cadets (CAPM 39-1 1-3b).  Obviously, the CAP uniform manual isn't the controlling authority on the issue of our grade system, but does provides some guidance that SMWOG are to be treated as Airman. 

I propose that current senior members without grade be reclassifed and given the grade of Airman and that all new CAP members start with the grade of Airman.  I chose Airman (equivalent to an E-2 in the AF system) rather than Airman Basic (E-1) for the sake of simplicity. 

I will say up front that I recognize that this is a fairly minor issue, so no need to harp on that in any comments. 

I cannot see any negatives to this proposal and in my opinion the fact that there would be some small positives to it makes it worth doing when we have a chance.   While a minor issue, it does impact a significant portion of our members (maybe 20% of adults are SWMOG at any one time based on my Wing's numbers).

Problem 1 
The most obvious issue with this is that it starts the new member out in a weird limbo where they're in an organization where everybody has a grade except them.  It leads to the question we have discussed before about whether they are CAP officers for purposes of saluting, etc.  see http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=6379.0 if you want to talk about this issue in particular.

Problem 2 
There are those who do not wish to have an officer grade because of a personal preference or who do not qualify for CAP officer grade based on the lack of a high school diploma or NCO grade because of a lack of prior military NCO service.  Based on the join dates of SMWOG in my Wing, it looks like as many as 23% of those with that grade have held it for 3+ years and presumably either don't want or don't qualify for another grade.  If 20% of CAP members are SMWOG and 23% of them are at that grade permanently this means that about 5% of CAP adults (about 1,500 people) may be permanent "Airmen".  This is  almost 15x the number in the CAP "NCO program".

Problem 3
I think this would also help us solve the minor confusion problems that can pop up when trying to explain SMWOG status to folks in the military or other organizations.  Even the new guys in systems with ranks have some sort of rank assigned to them.   

Problem 4
A common rip on CAP is that we are all officers with no one to lead.  While we would still obviously be very top-heavy with officers, it would provide some balance to the system. 

Problem 5
If you look in e-services now we actually put "SM" (meaning "Senior Member") as their grade.  Using this as a grade doesn't make sense as it is the same term that is used to describe CAP's adult members in general and is partly responsible for the confusion that outsiders have. 

Alternative Change:
It has been suggested before that we rename senior members without grade "Officer Candidates".  While this describes what most of new senior members actually are, it does not address the problems above as it still leaves the member in limbo with no real recognized grade.  It was my impression, and I could be wrong, that even Officer Candidates in various military programs have a real grade of some type if for no other reason than for payroll purposes.  In recognition of this past proposal, I'm including it as an option in the poll though I'm not recommending it. 

How much of a problem would this be to implement?
It would require a change to 35-1 which would have to be approved by the normal regulation change process.  And as it involves a change in the CAP grade system, it would need to be approved by the Air Force.  I can't forsee any reason the AF would object to this. 

Once this is done, actual implementation would take no more than a few mouse clicks to make the change in e-services.  Eventually, there would need to be various minor changes in other regulations as they are updated so as to reflect the new terminology.  No big deal.   

[Eclipse]

No.

[JohnKachenmeister]

The "Grade" of "Senior Member" is no good.  Nobody knows what it is, including folk in CAP.  Also...

If adults are senior members, are cadets junior members?  Sounds stupid, but a lot of stupid media types keep calling the cadet program the "CAP Junior Cadets."

You can be a senior member at 18.  An 18 year old is not a senior anything, unless you are talking high school.

How can the most junior adult members of our organization be called "Senior" members?  Are they over 65?

What happens when several cadets get together, and one outranks the others and is refered to as the "Senior cadet?"  How can he be a cadet and a senior at the same time?  Or, how can he be the "Senior Junior Cadet?"

I would prefer "Officer Candidate," but I fully understand that not all SMWOG's want to accept officer rank.  "Airman" I don't think works, either, since we really don't have an enlisted structure.  Also, do cadets salute an airman and call him "Sir?"

For purposes of discussion, how about "Officer Trainee," abbreviated "OT?"  The member can train to be either a commissioned officer, flight officer, or non-commissioned officer, so it is reasonably accurate.  It does not contain the commission-bound implications of the term "Officer Candidate."  Would this work for y'all?

[Eclipse]

"Senior Member Without Grade" is not a "grade", it is a status.

As a SMWOG you are a Senior Member, period.

"Officer Trainee, candidate, whatever" doesn't work either for the same reason as if you're not interested in accepting grade, then you're not a trainee for anything either. Members cannot train to be flight officers or NCO's - that status is based on age or another service.

[JohnKachenmeister]

"Senior Member Without Grade" is not a "grade", it is a status.

As a SMWOG you are a Senior Member, period.

"Officer Trainee, candidate, whatever" doesn't work either for the same reason as if you're not interested in accepting grade, then you're not a trainee for anything either. Members cannot train to be flight officers or NCO's - that status is based on age or another service.

That's why I put "Grade" in "Quotes."

But... OF COURSE you have to train to be a CAP NCO or CAP flight officer.  That's why we have the 6-month SM-to-Grade provision.  Do you think we do things so close to the military's way of doing things that a sergeant can immediately transition into CAP from, say, the Marines?

[IceNine]

This thread makes angels cry   

[Flying Pig]

"Airman"?  Do you mean like "Marine" "Sailor" "Soldier" or "Coast Guardsman"?  I would have a big issue with it and I think the USAF Airman would also.
What is the problem you are trying to fix actually?  Leave it alone.  Were fine.   Again, were back to trying to make CAP something its not. 

[EMT-83]

We would have Cadet Senior Airman and a senior Airman?

[Flying Pig]

Senior Member Airman Without Grade = SMAWG

C'mon....say it with me!

[ZigZag911]

I think we need to address other anomalies first, especially the status of RM O-6 and flag officers joining CAP...currently many retired officers belonging to CAP prefer to hold the status of SMWOG rather than accept 'demotion' to lieutenant colonel.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Why do we make a further differentiation between cadets and adult members by throwing the word "senior" around? Used to be, there were members and cadets. (And frankly, I'm not ready for the old folks' home or for a Golden Buckeye Card, so I'm not a "senior.")

I'm a major, abbreviated Maj. There are cadet majors (C/Maj). But I'm not a senior major. There's no such thing as a S/Maj. I'm a major, period.

Someone above said there'd be a cadet senior airman and a senior Airman. Nope. There'd be a cadet senior airman and an airman, period. Or possibly a cadet senior airman and an adult wearing three stripes as a senior airman. The difference? One has "cadet" in his grade," while the other wears the regular grade and has different training and experience.

"Officer candidate" is disingenuous. Not everyone's going to be an officer, and frankly, not every one of them should be to begin with. I'm quite fine with calling them airmen, whether as a grade or as a generic term.

On a slightly different topic, to address ZigZag... As for O-6s and higher not accepting lieutenant colonel's grade? So be it. They can use their retired grade and wear their military uniforms when appropriate. They've earned that right.

[Nathan]

Why not just make all new senior members Flight Officers?

That way, if they choose to move on and become regular officers, they can. If they choose not to, then they can stick around as a flight officer, and maybe even become a higher-ranking flight officer, but still be a flight officer all along.

Might help with some of the continuity issues when dealing with 18 year old SM's.

[RiverAux]

"Airman"?  Do you mean like "Marine" "Sailor" "Soldier" or "Coast Guardsman"? 

No, I mean the rank "Airman" used by the Air Force. 

What is the problem you are trying to fix actually?

Well, I know that this is your favorite comment to make in response to almost any proposal put forward on this board, so I'll refer you to the 5 specific problems referred to in my original post (they were placed in bold so that they would be sort of obvious).  Please don't say that I haven't actually described any problems with the current system.  They may not be big ones (as I also noted), but they are there.

Again, were back to trying to make CAP something its not.

How does assigning an actual grade to new adult members of CAP or adults who don't want to or can't be officers or NCOs make us something we are not? 

[Flying Pig]

"Airman"?  Do you mean like "Marine" "Sailor" "Soldier" or "Coast Guardsman"? 

No, I mean the rank "Airman" used by the Air Force. 

What is the problem you are trying to fix actually?

Well, I know that this is your favorite comment to make in response to almost any proposal put forward on this board, so I'll refer you to the 5 specific problems referred to in my original post (they were placed in bold so that they would be sort of obvious).  Please don't say that I haven't actually described any problems with the current system.  They may not be big ones (as I also noted), but they are there.

Again, were back to trying to make CAP something its not.

How does assigning an actual grade to new adult members of CAP or adults who don't want to or can't be officers or NCOs make us something we are not?

You offer some of the most complex solutions to some of the most meaningless situations.  I would hardly classify this as a problem by any means.  Titles?  Really?  Thats what this is about?  So again, what is the issue with how it is now?

Edited for politeness.

[RiverAux]

Titles?  Really?  Thats what this is about?

Well, yes. 

So again, what is the issue with how it is now?

If you'd like to discuss the specifics of any of the problems I outlined, I'm up for that.   

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Titles?  Really?  Thats what this is about?

Well, yes. 

So again, what is the issue with how it is now?

If you'd like to discuss the specifics of any of the problems I outlined, I'm up for that.

As long as I've been around CAP, it's been a niggling issue — what do we do with new senior adult regular members who are in limbo for the first six months and will rely solely on duty-performance promotions to get out of titular purgatory?

We call them "Mr.," "Mrs." and "Miss," like we would for flight officers, but their membership cards say "SM." That's not a grade. They're closer to being airmen basic (airman basics?) than anything. Because everyone comes in as a SMWOG, then are promoted either to EM, flight officer or officer grades, it's clear that this is the absolute bottom rung of the grade ladder, so an instant pin-on of flight officer bars is questionable to me.

We call them SMs because we're not willing to make ABs out of them, since our bloated infrastructure spoils everyone to expect to become at least butterbars right off the bat. But it would be infinitely more efficient to call them ABs than SMs.

And then the next step is, since we have such a bloated officer corps already, how do we create and sustain an enlisted corps? (Maybe three-year memberships for officers, one-year hitches for EMs, for one thing?) Seems there was a push at the national level to redevelop the enlisted corps, which is a Darned. Fine. Idea. whose time has come.

Anyway, there's another thought to stir this mess up.

[Spike]

Change the current term "Senior Member" to Officer, and allow new adult members joining cap to be called "Senior Member".

Problem solved. 

Honestly, I introduce all the Senior Members in my squadron to others as "this is Lt so and so" or these are "the Officer/s in charge of something".

No need to reinvent terms when we have terms we can just "shuffle around"??!?!?!

[Flying Pig]

So this is what you guys do at meetings?  Sit around and discuss your titles and how confusing they are to each other?

[Spike]

So this is what you guys do at meetings?  Sit around and discuss your titles and how confusing they are to each other?

No I eat donuts, drink coffee and critique Cadets drill movements even though I don't have any idea how to actually perform drill myself.  I also show up 30 minutes late, never salute anyone (nor return salutes) use my CAP membership to get discounts at Wendy's and McDonald's.  I then leave 20 minutes before the end of a meeting since I don't care for all that "military custom stuff".  I also never show up to help out at unit fundraisers, never attend weekend activities, keep as far away from Cadets as possible and sit in my flight suite week after week.  Not to mention, I talk trash on people I don't even know at Wing and Group Headquarters, never progressed past Level 1 in 10 years as a Senior Member and always (always) wait until my membership expires to renew.

SERIOUSLY.... I am kidding.  HOWEVER, I have met Senior Members like this before.  Have you??

[Camas]

never salute anyone (nor return salutes)

Very well put - and so true. My favorite is the new member who goes up to a senior officer - never met him or her before - and addresses him or her by first name like they know each other. Not sure that was covered in Level One now, was it?

[Rotorhead]

Sounds to me like a solution in search of a real problem.

[wuzafuzz]

I guess I don't care one way or another.  Can't they just be members?  If they must have a title and are embarassed to be officers, make them flight officers.  Next item.

[Ricochet13]

This thread makes angels cry   

Agree!

[RiverAux]

Okay, up to this point there were 39 votes cast (6 for Airman, 8 for Officer Candidate, and 25 for stay the same).  I suspect that most of the folks who voted for stay the same were really just apathetic about it rather than REALLY liking having SMWOG.  So, I added three more options and reset the vote count to try to figure out how many are really opposed to the idea as compared to those who just don't care. 

[Thom]

I just voted for Officer Candidate, but not because I really like the title.  I just happen to think, having recently been one myself, the whole Senior Member (With Out Grade (sometimes...)) thing is confusing, a mouthful, annoying, and not terribly informative in general.

I don't care for going down the Enlisted CAP path and having Airmen and Officers, without having a real NCO Corps and path, and I just don't think we have the need or the time to do all the work needed to do it right.

But, Officer Candidate is also a mouthful.  We need some cool word for Almost-An Officer, I'm sure there is one out there somewhere.  The only other things that come to mind are just as much a mouthful, like Acting 2d Lt, or Provisional Officer.

But I know that SMWOG is just clunky.

Thom Hamilton

[RiverAux]

By the way, does anyone have an argument for why using the term "Senior Member Without Grade" and "SM" for their "rank" is a good way to deal with new senior members and those who don't want to be officers or NCOs?  If there is a pro-SMWOG argument, I sure would like to hear it. 

[wuzafuzz]

How about Third Lieutenant?   

Make all Senior Members officers.  Just tell everyone that's the program instead of offering the buffet option.  If they don't qualify for Second Lieutenant then make them CAP Warrant Officers or Flight Officers.  I know AF doesn't have Warrant Officers any more; they don't have Flight Officers either.  We can obviously do our own thing within limits. 

Heck, the Air Force would probably fall all over themselves to say "yes" if we propose grades that aren't confused with the real military.  (As long as they are identifiable from 100' away...at night  )

[RiverAux]

If you want your opinion registered, you will need to vote again as all the prior votes were wiped out when I reset the poll options.  Sorry about that. 

[IceNine]

By the way, does anyone have an argument for why using the term "Senior Member Without Grade" and "SM" for their "rank" is a good way to deal with new senior members and those who don't want to be officers or NCOs?  If there is a pro-SMWOG argument, I sure would like to hear it.

What problem does this actually address?  You are yet to provide any reasoning worth consideration that would let me believe the hours of deliberation and money spent re-writing the affected regulations would fix Anything

[Short Field]

Most of our SMWOGs disappear when it comes time to renew their membership.  Most people get promoted at the end of six months.   

I took a quick check and outside of newbies who were active, the SMWOGs on our squadron rolls never show up for meetings or actiivities but keep renewing.  I think one of them only uses CAP so that his membership card gets him on-base so he can use the golf course.  One of the others renews her membership in honor of her father who was a active CAP member.  She has been to two meetings in three years.

[IceNine]

How would calling them something else change that?

If they are going a whole renewal period without a promotion there is something broken.  Last I checked it only takes 6 months and just a little more than respiration and gravitational attraction to make 2Lt if the system is working.

[Eclipse]

What problem does this actually address?

Lack of interestng informercials in River's broadcast area between about 0700 and 0730 Saturday morning?   

[MIKE]

If they are going a whole renewal period without a promotion there is something broken.  Last I checked it only takes 6 months and just a little more than respiration and gravitational attraction to make 2Lt if the system is working.

Like the unit, or CAP as a whole...

Simple... They stopped showing up within six months of joining or abouts.  Rarely have I seen someone formally resign when they "quit", they just stop showing up and fail to renew at the end of their membership year.

[RiverAux]

By the way, does anyone have an argument for why using the term "Senior Member Without Grade" and "SM" for their "rank" is a good way to deal with new senior members and those who don't want to be officers or NCOs?  If there is a pro-SMWOG argument, I sure would like to hear it.

What problem does this actually address?  You are yet to provide any reasoning worth consideration that would let me believe the hours of deliberation and money spent re-writing the affected regulations would fix Anything

So, you don't have any pro-SMWOG argument?  I ask since that is the question that your post was in response to.  I get it that some people don't think the problems I describe are actually problems.  Thats fine.  But, there should also be some justification for our current system, don't you think?

Lack of interestng informercials in River's broadcast area between about 0700 and 0730 Saturday morning?

Thats about right. 

Most of our SMWOGs disappear when it comes time to renew their membership.  Most people get promoted at the end of six months.   

I took a quick check and outside of newbies who were active, the SMWOGs on our squadron rolls never show up for meetings or actiivities but keep renewing.  I think one of them only uses CAP so that his membership card gets him on-base so he can use the golf course.  One of the others renews her membership in honor of her father who was a active CAP member.  She has been to two meetings in three years.

Well, if you want to start discussing who is an "active" member, I bet you can find a lot more examples of inactive Lt. Cols than inactive "permanent" SMWOG in your Wing. 

But, lets assume that some percentage of our permanent SMWOG are inactive.  How does that impact what we call them?  If anything, giving them an absoultely bottom of the rung grade sort of reinforces their lack of status in CAP. 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I'd rather we keep the status quo than try to inflate the status to "officer candidate" (not every one of them will be an officer, folks, so this doesn't work).

No one in the Air Force doesn't have grade. They have grade of some sort -- whether they're E-1 airmen basic (airman basics?) or the E-5s of Officer Training School.

If you are starting somewhere, with absolutely no knowledge or training, you're an E-1, an airman basic, bottom rung with nowhere to go but up. CAP's problem with all this is the expectation that everyone's an officer, which is a ridiculous problem that never has been reined in. (Six months' membership and a cakewalk gets you butterbars in CAP. If only the OTS folks had it that easy!) That makes cadets the de facto enlisted grunts, which is also disingenuous. But I digress. If you have no grade in CAP, you're an SM, but... well, we know the limbo THAT is.

Airman Basic for six months isn't a bad thing. ABs still outrank cadets. They're not in limbo in the system -- they have a name and identity, something to hang their hat on and motivate them, whether they assume butterbars or (wouldn't THIS be nice?) progress through CAP's enlisted system. I think if you're a shoo-in for a pilot or other technical promotion, "officer candidate" may fit, but that should be the only time.

Not everyone is officer material, and not everyone should be one. Boy, that'd go a long way to improving our professionalism.

[Short Field]

Well, if you want to start discussing who is an "active" member, I bet you can find a lot more examples of inactive Lt. Cols than inactive "permanent" SMWOG in your Wing. 

But, lets assume that some percentage of our permanent SMWOG are inactive.  How does that impact what we call them?  If anything, giving them an absoultely bottom of the rung grade sort of reinforces their lack of status in CAP.

Unless they came in with Lt Col from the military, they spent a lot of active time in CAP and progressed well.   If they were Lt Cols from the military, most of them wouldn't pay dues year after year just to be called "Lt Col".  You don't have to worry about calling the "permanent" SMWOG anything - you never see them again. 

I use to be an AIRMAN (after my promotion from AIRMAN BASIC) and didn't feel it reinforced my lack of status in the USAF.  I was pretty proud of that one stripe.

[Airrace]

I would say no changes. Leave it as is!

[AirDX]

SMWOG is just fine the way it is.  I'm a SMWOG right now - I just reupped after an 18 year absence.  What I'm not is any kind of "candidate" or "trainee".  I'm a highly trained aviation professional who needs to complete the new Level I material to be promoted to Captain again.

Neither am I an airman basic.  I left the Army after my two years as an E-3, so long ago it hurts to remember, and so long ago it's pretty much irrelevant, IMHO. But I am not an AB.

Leave well enough alone - this another solution looking for a problem.

[Gunner C]

So there's a rather large faction in CAP that wants SMs without grade and SMs with grade that doesn't mean anything. 

SM w/o grade is a huge misnomer.  Everyone has grade, it's just that we have a lowest grade - SM.  WIWAC the SM enlisted ranks started with SM, then went to airman, then airman first class, etc.

Non-pilots started out as enlisted, learned a skill, progressed, etc.  It worked out great!  Some became officers, some didn't.  When a person became a 2d Lt, it was a big deal.  Can someone point out the problem here?  (Perhaps it is that rank/grade meant something in CAP back then, but means nothing now.  Maybe that correlates with CAP being an institution that was much more respected by USAF back then than it is now.)

I think those who voted "I don't care" were being more honest than some.

[Eclipse]

So there's a rather large faction in CAP that wants SMs without grade and SMs with grade that doesn't mean anything. 

Nope.  There isn't. 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

So there's a rather large faction in CAP that wants SMs without grade and SMs with grade that doesn't mean anything. 

Nope.  There isn't.

+1

If anything, second lieutenant in CAP is absolutely throwaway. HQ AU A4/6 Course 13 should be mandatory before officer grade is given to ANY CAP member up for a duty-performance promotion. That would add some credibility.

SMWOG is just fine the way it is.  I'm a SMWOG right now - I just reupped after an 18 year absence.  What I'm not is any kind of "candidate" or "trainee".  I'm a highly trained aviation professional who needs to complete the new Level I material to be promoted to Captain again.

Neither am I an airman basic.  I left the Army after my two years as an E-3, so long ago it hurts to remember, and so long ago it's pretty much irrelevant, IMHO. But I am not an AB.

Leave well enough alone - this another solution looking for a problem.

No, you are not an airman basic. Unfortunately, before you can wear your railroad tracks again, you have to do Level I all over again. So what's your nomenclature? Your grade as a captain is suspended due to a membership lapse and training currency. So you're a suspended captain.

[MSgt Van]

Heck no.

[Polecat]

So this is what you guys do at meetings?  Sit around and discuss your titles and how confusing they are to each other?

No I eat donuts, drink coffee and critique Cadets drill movements even though I don't have any idea how to actually perform drill myself.  I also show up 30 minutes late, never salute anyone (nor return salutes) use my CAP membership to get discounts at Wendy's and McDonald's.  I then leave 20 minutes before the end of a meeting since I don't care for all that "military custom stuff".  I also never show up to help out at unit fundraisers, never attend weekend activities, keep as far away from Cadets as possible and sit in my flight suite week after week.  Not to mention, I talk trash on people I don't even know at Wing and Group Headquarters, never progressed past Level 1 in 10 years as a Senior Member and always (always) wait until my membership expires to renew.

SERIOUSLY.... I am kidding.  HOWEVER, I have met Senior Members like this before.  Have you??

You just described my former sqd CC, DCC, heck 6 out of 7 senior members (with and without grade) from that sqd. Wow. It's kinda VERYscary and sad how often this happens. Ugh. 

Back on topic. I voted for I don't care because I didn't see and option I like. What do they call officer canidates in OCS? If that isn't something crazy I think that would be an idea. But whatever, it doesn't matter to me much anyway.

[Hawk200]

I don't really see any better option. I did actually end up with a person confused about "Senior Members". She thought it was a senior citizen reference.

I don't think "airman" fits. As pointed out, "Officer Candidate" might not be accurate if the member has prior military experience as an NCO and wishes to go that route.

Our organization really doesn't really have anything that really seems to fit. "Plebe" doesn't work, and I certainly wouldn't want to use it. "Cadet" doesn't work for obvious reasons.

Not sure what works. Don't have any other ideas either. What did they call them in the beginning?

[AirDX]

I don't really see any better option. I did actually end up with a person confused about "Senior Members". She thought it was a senior citizen reference.

I don't think "airman" fits. As pointed out, "Officer Candidate" might not be accurate if the member has prior military experience as an NCO and wishes to go that route.

Our organization really doesn't really have anything that really seems to fit. "Plebe" doesn't work, and I certainly wouldn't want to use it. "Cadet" doesn't work for obvious reasons.

Not sure what works. Don't have any other ideas either. What did they call them in the beginning?

Sounds like any potential choice is just as awkward as SMWOG.  Unless we overhaul our entire grade structure as has been suggested elsewhere on this board, SMWOG is as good as anything else.

Not to be a thread hijacker, but I'd like to see us all (except commanders, who would be breveted during the time they are commanders, and prior service commisioned officers) be put in a Flight Officer scheme.  The rank structure would be OURS, and there wouldn't be any issue with officers, warrant officers, NCOs, etc. being "insulted" by us.

[Hawk200]

Not to be a thread hijacker, but I'd like to see us all (except commanders, who would be breveted during the time they are commanders, and prior service commisioned officers) be put in a Flight Officer scheme.  The rank structure would be OURS, and there wouldn't be any issue with officers, warrant officers, NCOs, etc. being "insulted" by us.

Just a heads up, that has been suggested here before, and it tends to get ugly. How about we now talk about it? It's one of those subjects where there's never any clear winner.

[lordmonar]

Not to be a thread hijacker, but I'd like to see us all (except commanders, who would be breveted during the time they are commanders, and prior service commisioned officers) be put in a Flight Officer scheme.  The rank structure would be OURS, and there wouldn't be any issue with officers, warrant officers, NCOs, etc. being "insulted" by us.

Just a heads up, that has been suggested here before, and it tends to get ugly. How about we now talk about it? It's one of those subjects where there's never any clear winner.

I agree with that.
Everyone is a Flight Officer based on your PD level of competion.  You come in as an Flight Officer Trainee and become FO-1 when your finish your Level 1.

No special promotions for anything...I don't care if you are a retired 4 star you join as an FOT untl you finish level 1 and then you re just an FO-1.

Ranks is awarded based on your positon in the organisations.

National CC is  a 2 start
Vice CC is a one start
National Staff is Col

Regional CC is 1 star
Vice is Col
Staff is Lt Col

Wing CC is Col
Vice is Lt col
Staff is Maj
Group CCC is Lt Col
Vice is Major
Staff is Capt

Squadron CC is Major
Vice is Capt
Staff is 1st Lt

There are NO 2nd Lts.  Assitanct anything officers at any level do not get rank.  So if you are on the National Director of CP's staff you would be just a FO-4 or FO-5 working for a Col.

Ranks would be worn only while in the postion.  So the National CC goes back to being a FO-5 once he or she leave the job of National CC.

Some ES postions  (IC, PAO, PSC, OSC, AOBD, GOBD) would carry rank with them so that they better interface with the media and outside agencies. (an IC as a Lt Col is more impressive then and IC who is just an FO-3 or FO-4).  Once ther rating expires then off comes the rank.

Finally we have to have hard and fast requirements for each level of leadership.  Create a level of PD for each level of involvment.  Level-1 basic member, Leve 2 squadron staff, Level 3 squadron leaderhip/group staff.  Level 4 group leadeship/wing staff.  level 5  wing leadership/regeional staff.  level 6 regional leadership/national staff.  level 7 for national leadership.

This would cfreate mmore grades FOT to FO-7 but then it will make our ranks mean something.

Okay rant done.

[Spike]

Maybe we eliminate rank titles altogether and just go with position titles.  We all wear the CAP uniforms with the "CAP" cutouts on them and drive on.

Instead of "Hi I am "Capt Jason Blah, Squadron Commander", it would be "Hi I am Jason Blah, Squadron Commander".

Simple right??

Seriously in an organization where a Lt Col takes orders from a 1st Lt who is the Squadron Commander, we can easily get rid of rank.  Then we know....Wing Commander gives orders to Group Commanders who give orders to Squadron Commanders who give order to Squadron Members.  SIMPLE!

We then leave the Cadet program alone, but still require all Cadets to express proper customs and courtesies to Senior Members, even though there is no rank.

I don't like the idea, but throw it out there anyway!!!!!

[Major Carrales]

Maybe we eliminate rank titles altogether and just go with position titles.  We all wear the CAP uniforms with the "CAP" cutouts on them and drive on.

Instead of "Hi I am "Capt Jason Blah, Squadron Commander", it would be "Hi I am Jason Blah, Squadron Commander".

Simple right??

Seriously in an organization where a Lt Col takes orders from a 1st Lt who is the Squadron Commander, we can easily get rid of rank.  Then we know....Wing Commander gives orders to Group Commanders who give orders to Squadron Commanders who give order to Squadron Members.  SIMPLE!

We then leave the Cadet program alone, but still require all Cadets to express proper customs and courtesies to Senior Members, even though there is no rank.

I don't like the idea, but throw it out there anyway!!!!!

You know, while were at it lets just do this...

National Commander= Pope
National Vice Commander= Metropolitan Extraordinary and Bishop Plenipotentiary 
Region Commander= Cardinal Bishops & Archbishops
Wing Commander= Bishops
Group Commander= Monsignors
Squadron Commander= Reverend Father
Flight Commander= Deacon

Hummm... you know what, let's just leave it like it is.  (I hope this illustrates the point of how pointless this type of discussion actually is)

[Hawk200]

Maybe I should go find Pandora and tell her she lost another box.

[AirDX]

I like things in the vein of lordmonar above - except I'd restrict officer grade even further:

Wing Co: COL
Vice Wing Co: LTC
Group Co: LTC
Vice Group Co: MAJ
Squadron Co: MAJ
Deputy Co(s): CPT
Flight Co: CPT

Ain't no LTs, brother.  The above get the rank pinned on at the change of command ceremony.  The outgoing CO gets the command service ribbon, and reverts to permanent rank

Exception: Former and current commissioned officers of the US military may wear their rank (I'm not sure what to do with BG and above, I'll admit).

The rest of the membership falls into a series of Flight Officer ranks based on training level.

New members enter as Junior Flight Officers (I don't like the word trainee, doesn't fit a lot of new folks).

On completion of Level I plus ECI 13 (or whatever it's called nowadays) they become Flight Officers.

Technical Flight Officers upon Level II
Master Flight Officers upon Level III
Senior Flight Officers upon Level IV
Chief Flight Officers upon Level V

At the same time, do away with the ribbons for Levels I-IV.  Too many folks running around looking like Audie Murphy.  Let's leave that to the regular AF.

Prior or current enlisted (E-1 to E-9) may wear their rank, as may prior or current warrant officers.

Consider the thread semi-hijacked.

[AirDX]

(I hope this illustrates the point of how pointless this type of discussion actually is)

I wouldn't consider any reasonable discussion of an issue to be pointless.

[FARRIER]

So there's a rather large faction in CAP that wants SMs without grade and SMs with grade that doesn't mean anything. 

SM w/o grade is a huge misnomer.  Everyone has grade, it's just that we have a lowest grade - SM.  WIWAC the SM enlisted ranks started with SM, then went to airman, then airman first class, etc.

Non-pilots started out as enlisted, learned a skill, progressed, etc.  It worked out great!  Some became officers, some didn't.  When a person became a 2d Lt, it was a big deal.  Can someone point out the problem here?  (Perhaps it is that rank/grade meant something in CAP back then, but means nothing now.  Maybe that correlates with CAP being an institution that was much more respected by USAF back then than it is now.)

I think those who voted "I don't care" were being more honest than some.

I came into CAP as a cadet after this had been stopped. Respectfully, leave it as it is for now.

[wuzafuzz]

Instead of all this reorganizing, why not just change the insignia for rank?  Keep titles they way they are so you don't have to mess with the membership databases.

Or...

Keep the current Flight Officer grades and make Warrant Officers above those.  Since the Air Force uses neither, there shouldn't be too much heartburn over our using them.  Let commanders be "officers" but only when serving as a commander, similar to the CG Aux roles.

No automatic grade for former military officers or NCO's.  Be in CAP and go with the CAP program. 

Or...

Leave it the way it is, warts and all.

[wuzafuzz]

One more thought:

Do CG Aux, ACA officers, and Sea Cadet Officers spend this much time worrying about rank/grade?  There will always be some folks who think it's lousy we wear officer insignia, but do we change everything as a result?  There are also people who are offended when the sky is blue or I share my evil conservative politics.   :angel:

I'd hazard a guess our members/officers are as well trained as some SDF officers.  Not all, but some.

Sure, there is room for us to improve.  I especially like the idea of improving our introductory training.  When it's all said and done, the AF says we can wear the insignia.  If that's not adequate authority for some, nothing will please them.

Eric OUT.

[brasda91]

By the way, does anyone have an argument for why using the term "Senior Member Without Grade" and "SM" for their "rank" is a good way to deal with new senior members and those who don't want to be officers or NCOs?  If there is a pro-SMWOG argument, I sure would like to hear it.

We have some Senior Members with out grade, some NCO's and some with grade.  We are in the Senior Member program.

We have some Cadets without grade, some NCO's and some with grade (Cadet Officers).  They are in the Cadet Program.

You have to have the discipline to know when to use the term Senior Member and when to say Adult member.  When dealing with prospective members, I try to use the term Adult "member" or "Program".  Once they join and begin Level I training then use the term Senior Member.

[Spike]

One more thought:

Do CG Aux, ACA officers, and Sea Cadet Officers spend this much time worrying about rank/grade? 
Eric OUT.

ACA Officers just slap on rank insignia, no worry about Federal Laws or what the "Army might think".  They get away with it because they have one "tiny" uniform item that can hardly be seen to make their Army Uniforms "distinctive".

That is why I don't understand why CAP uniforms have to look like a freaking clown costume for the AF. 

[heliodoc]

CAP does fine by itself creating the clown suits and again remember the smurf suit.

Grant you, I really do not know the history behind it NOR do I care

I am sure there is plenty of AF personnel wondering WTF with CAP and all its bling and worries about its uniform

I am also sure that the AF is looking at how we perform and also we we wear the uni

BUT CAP does fine inventing it own clown suits and grade/ rank issues

Many CAPers who worry this much about unis probably do not have enough to do

We just need the clown shoes to go with the clown costume(s)

And the CAP world worried about HWSRN... a clown also  You get what U PAY for!!!!

[AirAux]

As of today, all SMWOG will be derisively called "Doolies" to reflect our relationship with the AF and the USAFA.  This will motivate all to become 2Lt's as soon as possible.  That pretty much wraps up the flyby Mav..

[flyguy06]

Why not start a CAP Officer Candidate school similar to what the State Defense Force do? That way new members wil have the rank of Officer Candidate until they complete OCS which then they can be 2nd LT's

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Why not start a CAP Officer Candidate school similar to what the State Defense Force do? That way new members wil have the rank of Officer Candidate until they complete OCS which then they can be 2nd LT's

If anything, we need to winnow down the bloated ranks of officers. CAP has people wearing officer rank who, under any other circumstance, would not. Officer candidate status is fine for aviators and special appointments, but for the run-of-the-mill member, it shouldn't be. How do we deal with the bloat?

— Fitness reports that assess competence and capability.

— Professional development that does more than paperwhip at the lowest levels. It isn't until LEVEL 2 that a senior member faces his/her first challenge and learning opportunity. Never mind testing. SLS should have a test at the end for passage, like HQ AU A4/6 Course 13. But Course 13 should be required before officer grade is ever issued. After all, it's the "CAP Officer Course," so why should you already be one before you take the darned thing?

— Initial training that requires basic competency in CAP history, some relevant ground work (could be two tracks, aviation and ground teams?), basic drill and ceremonies and customs and courtesies, uniform wear, interpersonal relations/CPPT, what it means to be a follower and leader, and what discipline in a military environment's all about. And a few other things, probably. More substantial than the open-book Level 1.

I've run out of steam. Feel free to pile on.

[DrJbdm]

ACA Officers earn their rank, they have a good program that makes you work for the responsibility of being an officer. You first have to be selected to attend OCS, then you have to attend up to three - one week OCS phases plus complete a reading list.

  Not everyone gets to become an officer. Those who are not officers are called Instructor, it's a two tiered system. Sea Cadets have the same thing except they do not require an OCS. But in most cases you have to serve one year as an instructor and for admin purposes you have the rank of Chief Petty Officer while in the Instructor ranks. Many people in the Sea Cadets never go thru the process to become an Officer.

   In order to become an officer you have to complete an Officer/Midshipman exam, kinda like our ECI but not as involved. It's still a pretty good gate keeper as many people lack the ability to study for and then pass a closed book exam. Once you are an officer in the Sea Cadets, you can only advance once there is a position created, in other words you can only have so many Lt. Commanders or so many Lt's running around. You can have as many ensigns as you wish and a few more Lt (JG) but anything above that and the amount of open billets decreases significantly. The highest rank earnable in the Sea Cadets is Lt. Commander. 

   It would be like CAP limiting the amount of people in a Wing or a Group who can be major and then even further limiting that number who can be Lt. Col.  Has to be an open position before you can be promoted. And you would be promoted based upon competitive process.   

     I still think CAP should tie rank in with AFIADL PME courses and require those for promotion, no waivers except for being appointed as Wing Commander or above. For instance:

ECI-13 plus level 2 = 2nd LT

Senior lever in tech rating plus TIG = 1st Lt

Squadron Officer School plus level 3 = Major

Air Command and Staff College plus level 4 = Lt. Col
 
Not sure what to do with Captain, but I am sure some more tasks can be created to earn that grade. The point is, we should have to EARN the grade, not have it given to us for hanging around long enoug

[Thom]

Given the sheer weight of momentum and tradition, I doubt there is any real likelihood of getting such radical changes to the CAP Officer rank and promotion structures anytime soon.

Not that I disagree with the sentiment.  When I got my recent promotion I was congratulated in front of the Squadron at our regular meeting, where I thanked everyone and told them how honored I was to receive these ButterBars in thanks for the hard labor I went through filling out the Form for my Mission-Related Skills Promotion.  Hardly the same gravitas as someone who has just finished OCS or ROTC.

Thom Hamilton

[MSgt Van]

Hardly the same gravitas as someone who has just finished OCS or ROTC.

That would be like comparing apples to hand grenades for sure...

[flyguy06]

Why not start a CAP Officer Candidate school similar to what the State Defense Force do? That way new members wil have the rank of Officer Candidate until they complete OCS which then they can be 2nd LT's

If anything, we need to winnow down the bloated ranks of officers. CAP has people wearing officer rank who, under any other circumstance, would not. Officer candidate status is fine for aviators and special appointments, but for the run-of-the-mill member, it shouldn't be. How do we deal with the bloat?

— Fitness reports that assess competence and capability.

— Professional development that does more than paperwhip at the lowest levels. It isn't until LEVEL 2 that a senior member faces his/her first challenge and learning opportunity. Never mind testing. SLS should have a test at the end for passage, like HQ AU A4/6 Course 13. But Course 13 should be required before officer grade is ever issued. After all, it's the "CAP Officer Course," so why should you already be one before you take the darned thing?

— Initial training that requires basic competency in CAP history, some relevant ground work (could be two tracks, aviation and ground teams?), basic drill and ceremonies and customs and courtesies, uniform wear, interpersonal relations/CPPT, what it means to be a follower and leader, and what discipline in a military environment's all about. And a few other things, probably. More substantial than the open-book Level 1.

I've run out of steam. Feel free to pile on.

I didnt say you had to have the same standard as themilitary. You dont have to have Fitness reports or any of that. But we doneed an oficer basic training course that teaches customs and curteousies, rank structure, leadership skills and formations. I know people are supposed to do that in Level 1, but i fear most people pencil whip that and dont really learn anything in it

[flyguy06]

ACA Officers earn their rank, they have a good program that makes you work for the responsibility of being an officer. You first have to be selected to attend OCS, then you have to attend up to three - one week OCS phases plus complete a reading list.

  Not everyone gets to become an officer. Those who are not officers are called Instructor, it's a two tiered system. Sea Cadets have the same thing except they do not require an OCS. But in most cases you have to serve one year as an instructor and for admin purposes you have the rank of Chief Petty Officer while in the Instructor ranks. Many people in the Sea Cadets never go thru the process to become an Officer.

   In order to become an officer you have to complete an Officer/Midshipman exam, kinda like our ECI but not as involved. It's still a pretty good gate keeper as many people lack the ability to study for and then pass a closed book exam. Once you are an officer in the Sea Cadets, you can only advance once there is a position created, in other words you can only have so many Lt. Commanders or so many Lt's running around. You can have as many ensigns as you wish and a few more Lt (JG) but anything above that and the amount of open billets decreases significantly. The highest rank earnable in the Sea Cadets is Lt. Commander. 

   It would be like CAP limiting the amount of people in a Wing or a Group who can be major and then even further limiting that number who can be Lt. Col.  Has to be an open position before you can be promoted. And you would be promoted based upon competitive process.   

     I still think CAP should tie rank in with AFIADL PME courses and require those for promotion, no waivers except for being appointed as Wing Commander or above. For instance:

ECI-13 plus level 2 = 2nd LT

Senior lever in tech rating plus TIG = 1st Lt

Squadron Officer School plus level 3 = Major

Air Command and Staff College plus level 4 = Lt. Col
 
Not sure what to do with Captain, but I am sure some more tasks can be created to earn that grade. The point is, we should have to EARN the grade, not have it given to us for hanging around long enoug

CAP needs a program similar to this except I disagree with limiting the amount of Majors, Lt Col's etc. Its a volunteer organization and youhave people thatmay want to sty for 20 or more years and that is fine.

But CAP definantly needs a standardized program that  intiates new members to a standard across the nation.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

There would be ABSOLUETLY NO SHAME in bringing new members in as airmen. Why do some of us have such a hesitation on this? All chiefs, no Indians makes CAP a dull organization (or one with power struggles it could otherwise avoid).

[RiverAux]

In a vain attempt to bring the topic back on point, I note that with the revised questions and greater poll participation, we now see that real opposition to my proposal (or the Officer Candidate proposal) isn't that strong.   In fact, there appears to be an even split between Airman, O Candidate, and "I really like SMWOG" with the largest group of folks who don't care what we do or think that it is a slight problem, but probably not worth addressing.

What that says to me is that if someone really wanted to push for Airman or Officer Candidate the next time the reg is up for review that it would probably be generally accepted by most CAP members.

Of course, finding a NB member willing to put the proposal up and fight for it might be hard.     

[Major Carrales]

(I hope this illustrates the point of how pointless this type of discussion actually is)

I wouldn't consider any reasonable discussion of an issue to be pointless.

It is here...if you have a real change worth discussing you would submit it up the chain of command instead of hoping it gains traction here.

[Rotorhead]

There would be ABSOLUETLY NO SHAME in bringing new members in as airmen. Why do some of us have such a hesitation on this?

Because what we have now works just fine.

This organization sees enough change for the sake of change as it is already.

[flyguy06]

So, how do we get the ball rolling?

[AirDX]

Seems like the one thread on consensus in all the above is to beef up requirements for promotion.

I'd certainly agree tha ECI 13 should be required before promotion to 2LT, and other PME/CAP Levels before further promotion.

Maybe that needs to be the starting point for change, rather than an enormous reorganization of the entire grade structure.

How about...

Open the Flight Officer/TFO/SFO ranks to all ages.  Unless an individual completes PME, there they stay.  And there's nothing wrong with that.

Then... require ECI 13 for promotion to 2LT (or above with mission related skills). 

[Major Carrales]

Then... require ECI 13 for promotion to 2LT (or above with mission related skills).

A suggestion made by me and various other at this and other CAP forums since 2005.  Propose it an run it up the chain.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

OK, then, let me throw this out there...

We revert to the old Air Force warrant officer insignia, and ditch the hard-to-read, incomprehensible CAP flight officer bars. There's five grades, if I remember right, though only one Airman ever wore CWO5.

The Navy's warrant officer bars may be easier to read (with the darker blue), in the (likely) event the Air Force-spec bars aren't available. Gray epaulets could be made quickly with the bars embroidered (versus the much-misunderstood stripes FOs wear now).

How it could work:

WO1: New members, post-Level 1 and CPPT, issued no earlier than six months after member joins. Mitchell Award recipients transitioning before age 21.
CWO2: Technician level in specialty track. Earhart Award recipients transitioning before age 21.
CWO3: Senior level in specialty track, Level 2 completion. Eaker Award recipients transitioning before age 21.
CWO4: Spaatz Award recipients transitioning before age 21 (there won't be many).

To second lieutenant: HQ AU A4/6 Course 13 would become mandatory before a duty-performance promotion would be authorized.

Incidentally... "Officer Candidate"?!: That's the Army terminology. Pretty sure the Air Force calls them "officer trainees."

[Al Sayre]

Before everyone jumps on the ECI-13 band wagon; I'd suggest that the course be updated, made easier to obtain, and printed in a legible document...

[wuzafuzz]

Before everyone jumps on the ECI-13 band wagon; I'd suggest that the course be updated, made easier to obtain, and printed in a legible document...

^ +1000   :clap:

Fortunately, this is reportedly in the works.  ETA between 2010 - 2020??? 

[DrJbdm]

   Made easier to obtain? it's not a hard test now. it's simply a closed book test with out-dated material. But seeing how the current model actually has a benefit of college credit hours attached if you pass, it makes it a good deal.

  The new on-line version will be an open book test, correctable to 100%. what that really means is that it is impossible to fail the test. If you take it and make a 52% you simply review the answers you had wrong and poof, it's now a 100%. That my friends is not how you learn. Nor is that a gate keeper of any sort. You have simply cheapened the exam. Look at what they did with the Yeager award. Now everyone has it, it's no longer the study for and pass exam it used to be, it doesn't mean anything anymore since they made it online, open book.

    Keep it a closed book, proctored exam that allows you to fail and you have now made it worth something. If you cannot pass the exam, then you have no right to think you should be a CAP Officer. It's not that hard of an exam to begin with. I studied for a couple of hours over two days and I scored in the 90th percentile.

[Al Sayre]

I don't have any problem with it being a proctored exam, I'd just like to see it updated, so simple to procure that even the newest member can order it (Like "click here to order course, click here to order exam and viola! It shows up at your squadron in a week or two.) and printed so that you can actually read it.  I know when I received my course material it looked like it was xeroxed from a bad mimeograph copy of a bad photcopy of a book... 

[DrJbdm]

I agree that the course material needs to be of much higher quality. I would still like to see the exam administered thru ADIADL but with an easier way of ordering the exam.

[DrJbdm]

Probably the easiest way of doing the course is to send the material over the web, allow the member reasonable time to review the course and study the material and then order the exam to be sent to the testing officer. It still needs a hard time limit with a waiting period between terms just as the ECI-13 course is set up.

[flyguy06]

Not anpother online or correspndence course. We ned to have something where people physcially go somewhere.

Firstof all, not everyone is computer lit like the great folks on here. Secondly, not everyone will take the time to do correspondence courses. We need something where people are mandated to come.

[Thom]

Not anpother online or correspndence course. We ned to have something where people physcially go somewhere.

Firstof all, not everyone is computer lit like the great folks on here. Secondly, not everyone will take the time to do correspondence courses. We need something where people are mandated to come.

Isn't that the point of SLS and CLC?  That they force interaction with other CAP members face to face for imparting those lessons?

Also, about not everyone being computer literate?  Not much we can do for them, it isn't just CAP that is headed Online.  I'm a professional Computer Nerd with enough alphabet soup after my name to make a decent lunch (mmmm, soup...) but I don't like being so beholden to computers for every facet of modern life, but you know what?  That's the way it is and will be.

With the new FRO process you can't even release a flight unless both the MP and the FRO are computer literate and have access to an Internet-connected computer!  (Well, there is the fallback to HF to get the NOC to do it!     )

I'm not trying to defend the Open Book testing we are using currently for Distance Learning, but trying to roll back the clock isn't going to work either.

Thom Hamilton

[DrJbdm]

Well, SLS and CLC was a big joke, those two courses need to be completely redesigned. I learned nothing from those courses, it covers nothing more then level 1 did.

  Open book testing does nothing for our members either. It cheapens the whole experience of earning a passing grade.

   As for computers, they are here to stay and we will one day be unable to do much in CAP without them. What do we do with those members who are not computer lit? I don't know, but their usefullness is about done. Maybe it will be a good oppurtunity to either become computer lit and be able to serve or leave CAP. We can not continue to try and fit both types of members in the org anymore.

[RiverAux]

topic?

[DrJbdm]

I say we classify SMWOG as either Instructors or as Airman. The term Senior Member has to go bye bye.

Now back to our regular hijacked topic! 

[Spike]

The term Senior Member has to go bye bye.

Why??

[RiverAux]

I say we classify SMWOG as either Instructors or as Airman.

Instructors?  Is that the word you meant to write?  Can't think of many of the typical SMWOG who do any instructing. 

[STG3, USN]

I think the term Senior Member is fitting and I also think Airman just doesnt really make since. Officer Candidate would work to I guess.

[Stonewall]

We ned to have something where people physcially go somewhere.

Why did you have to bring Ned into this? 

[Cecil DP]

I think the term Senior Member is fitting and I also think Airman just doesnt really make since. Officer Candidate would work to I guess.

Senior Member has worked for several decades. The term Officer Candidate assumes that the individual wants to be or will be appointed as an officer in the near future. Airman assumes it's unlikely he'll ever become an officer.

[RiverAux]

The term Officer Candidate assumes that the individual wants to be or will be appointed as an officer in the near future.

Well, although I don't like that option, it is true that almost all SMWOGs become an officer if they stay in CAP (see my first post) under our current system.

Airman assumes it's unlikely he'll ever become an officer.

Do we assume that an Air Force Airman won't ever be promoted?  Airman is just a grade.  Because we make folks 2nd Lt. that doesn't mean that we expect them to stay there.   

[flyguy06]

Not anpother online or correspndence course. We ned to have something where people physcially go somewhere.

Firstof all, not everyone is computer lit like the great folks on here. Secondly, not everyone will take the time to do correspondence courses. We need something where people are mandated to come.

Isn't that the point of SLS and CLC?  That they force interaction with other CAP members face to face for imparting those lessons?

Also, about not everyone being computer literate?  Not much we can do for them, it isn't just CAP that is headed Online.  I'm a professional Computer Nerd with enough alphabet soup after my name to make a decent lunch (mmmm, soup...) but I don't like being so beholden to computers for every facet of modern life, but you know what?  That's the way it is and will be.

With the new FRO process you can't even release a flight unless both the MP and the FRO are computer literate and have access to an Internet-connected computer!  (Well, there is the fallback to HF to get the NOC to do it!     )

I'm not trying to defend the Open Book testing we are using currently for Distance Learning, but trying to roll back the clock isn't going to work either.

Thom Hamilton

Well, I guess acording to you then, CAP has become an elitest organization. Only people who are computer lit or who canafford computers may participate. I remember when the OPSEC requirement came out. Most of my cadets come from homes that do not have computers. so luckily we have a senior member who is a network admin guy and he was able to let us use his computers at his job. Otherwise  they would have been lost.


As for SLS and CLC. They are more death by power point classes.

[Major Carrales]

Not anpother online or correspndence course. We ned to have something where people physcially go somewhere.

Firstof all, not everyone is computer lit like the great folks on here. Secondly, not everyone will take the time to do correspondence courses. We need something where people are mandated to come.

Isn't that the point of SLS and CLC?  That they force interaction with other CAP members face to face for imparting those lessons?

Also, about not everyone being computer literate?  Not much we can do for them, it isn't just CAP that is headed Online.  I'm a professional Computer Nerd with enough alphabet soup after my name to make a decent lunch (mmmm, soup...) but I don't like being so beholden to computers for every facet of modern life, but you know what?  That's the way it is and will be.

With the new FRO process you can't even release a flight unless both the MP and the FRO are computer literate and have access to an Internet-connected computer!  (Well, there is the fallback to HF to get the NOC to do it!     )

I'm not trying to defend the Open Book testing we are using currently for Distance Learning, but trying to roll back the clock isn't going to work either.

Thom Hamilton

Well, I guess according to you then, CAP has become an elitist organization. Only people who are computer lit or who can afford computers may participate. I remember when the OPSEC requirement came out. Most of my cadets come from homes that do not have computers. so luckily we have a senior member who is a network admin guy and he was able to let us use his computers at his job. Otherwise  they would have been lost.


As for SLS and CLC. They are more death by power point classes.

At our unit we offer wireless internet and laptops, there are plenty of public areas where internet access is a "side effect" of having the right to check out a book.

Its not an "elitist" anything, it is the current trend in education, business and the like.  If CAPNHQ is going to mandate on-line training they had better take into account the realities of computer access. (which currently is not unrealistic to get done)

Also, in a neighboring unit there is a fellow well into his 80s writing code and on the edge of the STATE of the ART, so the idea that a person is to OLD to use computers (or even be guided by some who is computer literate) is disingenuous at best and at worse a "piss poor" excuse. (sorry, but that is just the truth, if a person can fly an aircraft or organize a ground team, it is not out of the scope of reality to expect them to learn how to log in to e-services and enter data or click through an online test)

It can be done, if the will to do it is there

[Thom]

Also, about not everyone being computer literate?  Not much we can do for them, it isn't just CAP that is headed Online.  I'm a professional Computer Nerd with enough alphabet soup after my name to make a decent lunch (mmmm, soup...) but I don't like being so beholden to computers for every facet of modern life, but you know what?  That's the way it is and will be.

With the new FRO process you can't even release a flight unless both the MP and the FRO are computer literate and have access to an Internet-connected computer!  (Well, there is the fallback to HF to get the NOC to do it!     )

Thom Hamilton

Well, I guess acording to you then, CAP has become an elitest organization. Only people who are computer lit or who canafford computers may participate. I remember when the OPSEC requirement came out. Most of my cadets come from homes that do not have computers. so luckily we have a senior member who is a network admin guy and he was able to let us use his computers at his job. Otherwise  they would have been lost.

OK, we are into serious thread drift here, but why not:

I don't think I said that CAP was becoming an Elitest Organization, I said that CAP was following the general trend.  More and more of our lives are being spent Online, the .Gov is providing more and more of their services to the citizenry Online, and children are now growing up (at least in Urban and Suburban areas...) without EVER being disconnected from the Internet.  I believe I even said I'm not comfortable with the level of reliance we are placing on computers and networks for all aspects of modern life, but I accept that the trend is towards more Online existence in most facets of American life.

We can fight the current, or ride it.

As Major Carrales points out, Internet access should be available at most Squadron/Wing facilities, and virtually all Public Libraries.  I understand that there are lots of Rural and/or Less Fortunate families who will not have computers and Internet Access at home, but we need to find a solution to let those members use some other access to complete their tasks, NOT hold back the rest of the organization.

Perfect Example:  The Digital Broadcast TV Transition.  We cut off a couple million viewers of old-fashioned NTSC Broadcast Analog TV because we simply couldn't wait any longer to transition everyone else.  We provided coupons for Converter Boxes for those who didn't have new Digital TVs, but we didn't keep a legacy Analog system around just because 2% of the users couldn't or wouldn't make a change, while 98% were ready to move ahead.

Thom Hamilton

[BillB]

It's to the point that tax supported public schools are requireing students to have computers, normally laptops. So the vast majority of cadets have grown up with computers available at home, school or public libraries. In CAP a laptop is furnished to every Squadron., and surplus computers from various governmental agencies are available.
The Cadet Advisory Council from year to year tries to reinvent itself. This is due to not knowing what previous Councils have done. I obtained 15 laptops for the CAC. One for each Group Chairperson and one for each of the Wing CAC officers that they would pass on to the new CAC Reps when their term ended. Last I heard those 15 laptops were stored in the Wing DCPs closet. But the point was, the computer has uses that CAP havn't considered as yet. The question is not are members computer literate, or how do we get rural area members onto the internet, but rather the bigger picture or how can computers affect day-to-day Squadron activities.

[jimmydeanno]

As Major Carrales points out, Internet access should be available at most Squadron/Wing facilities, and virtually all Public Libraries.  I understand that there are lots of Rural and/or Less Fortunate families who will not have computers and Internet Access at home, but we need to find a solution to let those members use some other access to complete their tasks, NOT hold back the rest of the organization.

My local McDonald's, Pizza Parlour, Car Dealership, etc all have free wi-fi.  The library in my town (not city, town) has free wi-fi.  Sitting in the state operated park&ride I can pick up 5-8 free wi-fi signals (not someone's residence).

I don't have a single cadet in my unit that doesn't have an e-mail address registered with us, nor a senior.

The internet is all around us.