What is Civil Air Patrol's mission?

[RiverAux]

However, how does something like VSAF fit into Civil Air Patrol's mission?  Is that Emergency Services?   Is that Aerospace Education?

I already quoted the law earlier, but it it fits exactly into one of the purposes for which Congress chartered us -- noncombat missions of the AF.  It is actually one of the missions that we should have been doing more of all along, but haven't. 

[Pylon]

I already quoted the law earlier, but it it fits exactly into one of the purposes for which Congress chartered us -- noncombat missions of the AF.  It is actually one of the missions that we should have been doing more of all along, but haven't. 

Quoting law is great, and perhaps legally it is a purpose for CAP.  I wasn't arguing that we could or couldn't do VSAF or other missions.  I am asking how do we define our mission and purpose as an organization?   

Let me put it this way, when a prospective member asks "What does Civil Air Patrol do?", I'm not going to start spouting off our three public mission names, names of programs, some excerpts from public law and a few extra fringe missions we've tacked on.    How do we define what our organization's purpose is?

[JohnKachenmeister]

properly registered 406 beacons allow AFRCC to process false alarms by contacting the owner of the beacon directly.

GPS enabled 406 beacons allow AFRCC to contact the local authorities directly and tell them exactly where the beacon is.  

Those beacons with out GPS availability will still require some "search"

121.5 will still be around as legacy, but satellites wont be listening for them.  

with that small number of missions can we justify our multi million dollar SAR budget

I wouldn't be so sure.  We have already had 406 false alerts with no personal registration.  I am also not sure that the 406's will take over from the 121.5 ELT's real soon in the GA community.  We will lose the 121.5 false alarms, but we are still going to be in the SAR business, which is where we should be.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I already quoted the law earlier, but it it fits exactly into one of the purposes for which Congress chartered us -- noncombat missions of the AF.  It is actually one of the missions that we should have been doing more of all along, but haven't. 

Quoting law is great, and perhaps legally it is a purpose for CAP.  I wasn't arguing that we could or couldn't do VSAF or other missions.  I am asking how do we define our mission and purpose as an organization?   

Let me put it this way, when a prospective member asks "What does Civil Air Patrol do?", I'm not going to start spouting off our three public mission names, names of programs, some excerpts from public law and a few extra fringe missions we've tacked on.    How do we define what our organization's purpose is?

How about:  "The United States Air Force Auxiliary?" 

[AlphaSigOU]

How about:  "The United States Air Force Auxiliary?" 

Well said, Maj. K! Last time I checked it's still inscribed on our seal.

[M.S.]

Well said, Maj. K! Last time I checked it's still inscribed on our seal.

not well said at all.  that doesn't say what we do.

How about:  "The United States Air Force Auxiliary?"

"Hi, I'm interested in CAP.  What do y'all do?"

"We're the UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AUXILIARY!!"

"Uh, that's great.  Uhm, so what types of things does your typical member do?"

"Oh, well, uh let's see... we have a Cadet Program and we have aircraft... and around here we fly cadets for orientation flights and we prepare for disaster relief, air and ground search but the we're 7th on the state's list of people to call, we also have CAP missions like border patrol, aerial damage assessment, this VSAF program where we work on AF bases, counterdrug work and homeland defense..."

"COOL!"

"...yeah, but not in this region...

"oh"

"...actually, the vast majority of our squadron's members support our internal structure of bureaucracy, like professional development, safety, finance, admin, personnel, logistics...  some of them fly, but if you're not a pilot, we do need good paperwork and support people"

[RiverAux]

How do we define what our organization's purpose is?

When you're talking about recruiting and public affairs you should focus on what your unit is actually doing.  If your're in a senior squadron you obviously wouldn't be talking about the cadet program.  If your unit isn't doing any homeland defense or counterdrug work then obviously you would leave those out. 

CAP does different missions in different areas depending on the needs of the AF and our other partners at the local and state levels.  It has to be that way. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

Somebody was engaged in some self-loathing last week and said:

"We do the jobs that Air Force cannot or will not do."

As their Auxiliary, that is absolutely correct.

We serve the AF by providing a light-plane resource to the Air Force for SAR or any other missions that the AF needs us for.  When we are not serving the AF, we are free to provide light air support to local and state agencies.  If they are too stupid or too mired in local politics to use this resource it is not our problem and not the problem of the Air Force.

We also manage a cadet program that has grown out of the wartime necessity of providing pre-induction military and aviation training to offset the aircrew losses we were suffering in World War II.

We provide a community presence for the Air Force, and are mandated to provide educational programs to enlighten Americans regarding the benefits of aviation and air power.

Yes, some of our members are involved in support missions.  We, like every other military organization, has a tooth-to-tail ratio of operators backed up by support personnel.  In the Air Forceit is something like 1:7, the Army is 1:5, and the Marines have the best, about 1:3, but a lot of their support is provided by the Navy.

As the AF Auxiliary we stand ready to perform any non-combat mission that the AF chooses to assign to us.  It looks like we might be picking up a base support/augmentation mission.

So... what was your point, M.S.?

[RiverAux]

I was reading some old CAP News recently and we're at about the 10 year anniversary of NJ wing chaplains providing chaplain support on an AF base. 

[mikeylikey]

^ In uniform right?? 

[DNall]

I am asking how do we define our mission and purpose as an organization?   

Let me put it this way, when a prospective member asks "What does Civil Air Patrol do?", I'm not going to start spouting off our three public mission names, names of programs, some excerpts from public law and a few extra fringe missions we've tacked on.    How do we define what our organization's purpose is?

I sympathize hardily with your question. CAP has failed to adapt to a changing world now for going on 30 years. There's always been enough base left in the center though to keep our members satisfied. That's changing now & what we've seen is a whole lot of mission creep into piss ant or fringe stuff. Obviously we lack a whole ton of focus, and that is a leadership issue in a mighty way.

I'd answer your question by saying we exist to support the Air Force, either directly or in service to the public on their behalf (that includes non-AF missions, considering we're using highly AF subsidized resources to complete them). It seems pretty simple to me. Toss out mission statements, regs, laws, etc. It boils down to the AF takes millions out of their warfighting budget every single year to invest in this program. They aren't doing that out of charity, they expect a return. So step back & look at those missions from their perspective.

Cadet programs was founded in WWII to create a pool of aerospace minded leaders qualified to enter the military. Since that time, the military competes against high tech, high paying, etc jobs for the best & brightest of each generation. CAP attracts some of those brightest kids, inspires them with aviation, & indoctrinates them as disciplined leaders in a military environment, and instills a very strong sense of service above self. It isn't about how many people go to the military, it's about the quality of the ones that do.

AE has a dual role. Directed at youth (internally & externally), it's a second line effort to accomplish the same things as the cadet program. Directed at adults (internally & externally), it creates aerospace advocates among the taxpaying/voting public. At least since the gulf war the public is sold on the need for a strong air/space force & investment in mil technologies. As a result, our AE program isn't a strong focus, because it isn't currently a real strong need. That may be changing as budgets shift more to ground forces, including tech investment there. As that need fluctuates, the attention given to our AE program will fluctuate with it.

And ES. The AF is really only responsible to provide AFRCC, not all the stuff we do. States are responsible for inland SaR, disaster response, etc. The problem is some states can afford to have the kinds of resources we bring to the table on constant standby, and some cannot. The fed govt doesn't want to assume those responsibilities (or expense) from the states, but it does have an obligation to make sure the state can get the minimum stuff to do the job w/o detracting from real military readiness. That's where CAP comes in.


You want a simple answer? We're part of the total AF team & everything we do is in support of that team. You want something more concrete that tells people what they can expect to be doing? I can't easily give you that. But, what's a typical day in the AF like? Well that's going to depend highly on your job/unit/station.

You want something like a vision? I'd say we need to get fully up to speed with FEMA training standards. Our ES folks should be training like they're volunteer firemen or part of a serious rescue organization, and that includes a serious need for EMTs & the like.

What I'd like to see us put out there as a resource is a highspeed combined air/grd/tactical command & control team. We should be able to do a lot more serious search, a little bit of actual rescue, and all kinds of assessment, interpretation, communications, etc. If you have a resource that isn't needed, then you're going to spend a lot of time looking around for something to do. Whereas, if you make yourself essential then you can stick to a common skill set & focused mission.

Overall, I think it does require bold national leadership. And, yes of course that does require a large group of leaders at every level. The person at the top can really only give direction & guidance. All the actual change has to occur down the chain, and that's where people have to step up. I really think CAP could be a great thing. I think we're at a point in our history where we either have to step up or fade on out of relevance. We really do a very horrible job of training leaders though, particularly on the adult side. That's not to say we don't have some good people, but it wasn't any CAp training that made them that way. I really think that has to be a major focus of any response effort.

[sparks]

I have struggled with this question for many years too. Flying occasional ELT/missing missions the odd state support effort provided an obvious partial answer. The more complicated piece of the puzzle surrounds cadets. They're wonderful kids who are great to work with but don't fit into the concept of an actual emergency responder. EMT's aren't cadets nor are volunteer fire departments. Fitting them into that mission and tackling he public perception of "boy scouts in military uniforms"  is a big challenge.

Next, as noted by others, CAP is local. The wing and groups are around to help squadrons do their job and insure success. In another string a map of the Texas wing was dispayed to show the extensive distance the wing covers. Most units don't get beyond their group and may never interact with any other squadron. The nature of their community and funding will dictate the mission they adopt. If it's an inner city unit ES searches will probably receive less emphasis. 

The Air Force has closed many bases in the North and interior of the country so the announced VSAF program won't be in effect for those areas.

ELTs and missing aircraft searches will still need to be done. There are a lot of older ELTs out there that will still be broadcasting false signals. That mission won't be going away completely, we'll get fewer satellite hit and will be tasked to search without that first clue.

The answer is to do what the community requires within the guidelines of NHQ. Not much of an answer but it seems to be what is being done and what works.

[JohnKachenmeister]

^ In uniform right?? 

Right!  CAP Chaplains have been supporting the AF for a while.  Funerals, Sunday services, the whole spectrum of Chaplain support.

[John Bryan]

couple random things:

* Chaplains unlike the rest of CAP "officers" meet the same educational and training standard as AF Chaplains. Most CAP Wing Commanders are not equal to AF O-6's.

* Someone brought up CERT teams....so again why be in CAP just join the CERT team...the one in my county does not charge dues and when they sent members to LA and MS after Katerina they were given hotels and federal credit cards  and earned per diem.

* Cadets are a great assest. I think we need to get past the idea of all cadets being childern or "KIDS"......The federal park rangers near where I live get along great with the 16 and 17 yr old life guards in the park. I have never heard a park ranger, fire fighter or paramedic ask a life guard how old they are......I think we make the cadets a bigger issue then those outside CAP but thats because many people in CAP would love to get ride of them. I don't know about your state but here in Indiana you can be a state certified EMS First Responder at 14. Maybe the Indiana EMS Commission and our law makers feel different then the poster who questioned the use of cadets.

[John Bryan]

By the way...the orginal question is the one CAP needs to consider....who are we and why are we here?

I think we need to have a long range plan. If we had focused on U-boats as our long term reason to be then we would have been gone years ago. Like the U-Boats....ELTs are going away for the most part and some day the war will be over and HLS will be old news.....we need to address the needs of today but also plan for the next 10, 25 and 50 years.

[DNall]

regarding cadets versus ES... some folks are under the false belief that our ES mission is all important. The govt provides those resources to the community through us, but they absolutely do not have to do so. What we bring to the table, even under the very best of circumstances with lots of reform, is still not close to being worth the money spent to aquire & maintain those resources. Likewise, it would be ludicrous to purchase & maintain those resources for cadet transportation, o-flights, flt training, etc. It takes all those resource demands in one package to make CAP a worthwile investment, and even at that it regularly spawns debate about our worth. If you seperated the cadet program from CAP, there would absolutely not be a CAP, not a funded one anyway.

Cadets don't have to participate in ES at all, and ES focused members don't have to deal with cadets if they don't want to. BUT, the two things do have to co-exist in CAP. That said, I understand there are restrictions on cadets in some ES situations/roles, both real & legal, and that's legitmate. However, there are also a lot of roles they need to fill for us to get our job done.

I know this is a bit off topic, but I just want to make clear that we HAVE to keep some of our mission diversity in place or we aren't worth the investment the govt makes in us.

[FW]

My point in starting the thread was to perhaps point out that our missions are becoming quite varied and we seem eager to take on just about any type of work.  Isn't it better to have a "scope of work" for Civil Air Patrol to define "this is what we do and this is why we're here"?   Things that fall outside that scope might be nice additions when we have spare time or resources, but don't take center stage over our primary focus.  But what is our primary focus evolving to?  Can we create a concise statement of what CAP's missions are supposed to be in today's terms?

In my opinion, we can't get any more consise than: Cadet Programs, Emergancy Services and Aerospace Education.

However, if you would like a consise description of what we are doing in each of these missions, look at our strategic plan, and business plan (yes, we do have them).  These corporate documents give us a view of where we are and where we're going.  It also descibes our secondary activites such as DDR and "Wreaths Accross America", etc.
And yes, they are reviewed and updated.

[Michael]

It does seem that the term "emergency services" could be broadened a little bit to something to the effect of "community service". 

The last lines of the Cadet Oath are "service to my community, state, and nation".

Nearly all of my squadron's functions are supporting some other organization in an event where a semi-military force is needed.