Air Branch Director

[Storm Chaser]

I have no issue with any cadet with a certain level of maturity working with me in Air Ops and getting the training.  Just understand that the chances of you actually getting to use that training before becoming a Senior Member is slim to none.

I think the problem is how we train and qualify in CAP. For example, under ICS we can have planners assigned to the Planning Section. We can also have units under this section. However, there are no curriculums or qualifications in CAP for those specialties, only for the Planning Section Chief. The same goes for the Ground and Air Operations Branches. The Branch Directors can and should have personnel assisting who are not branch directors. In fact,  we can use Mission Staff Assistants to fill those roles. Unfortunately, many think MSAs are there just for admin and anyone wanting to work operations is either in the field or air or pursuing Branch Director or Section Chief qualifications. Personally, I like assigning experienced MSAs to different staff officers to assist with operations, logistics, safety, etc. Experienced cadets can fill those roles very well.

[JeffDG]

As a cadet in CAP you are absolutely not liable, nor would you be held responsible for any direction you give at any level.

That is absolutely correct and the reason I would be hesitant to approve a cadet Branch Director in my AOR.

Can you provide a citation for the assertion that a cadet, of the age of majority, would not be held liable for direction given?

I know my wing had a Cadet GBD at one of our SAREVALs one year.  He did an absolutely fantastic job of directing ground operations, and received an Outstanding grade for his efforts from the USAF Evaluation Team.

ES is completely rank-agnostic.  A second lieutenant can give a lieutenant colonel an order, and expect it to be carried out.  Same with a cadet.

Put the best person you have into the position, regardless of their rank or member type.

[Flying Pig]

Can you cite where CADETS in CAP are authorized to make command decisions over Senior Members?  We arent discussing out ranking.  We are discussion cadet programs directing senior members.  not going to happen and you are a complete fool should you choose to take direction from a cadet in the area of ES.   Age of majority has no bearing.  There is no aspect of CAP where cadets are in command over senior members.  Nor should there ever be a place in CAP where cadets are in position to make decisions regarding real world missions regardless of severity.  Can you show me where CAP cadet ever operate without the direct input and supervision of Seniors?

[JeffDG]

Can you cite where CADETS in CAP are authorized to make command decisions over Senior Members?  Age of majority has no bearing.  There is no aspect of CAP where cadets are in command over senior members.

Nothing in CAPR 60-3 says anything about "Cadets cannot command senior members", nor in any other regulation for that matter.   The only analog is that all cadet grades are subordinate to senior grades, but again, ES is grade-agnostic, so that's wholly irrelevant.

If a cadet GBD tells a Senior Member GTL what needs to be done, that cadet has the full authority of their position as Ground Branch Director, delegated from the IC via the OSC to issue such directives.

Are you claiming that a cadet MP is not the Pilot-in-Command of an aircraft that he is flying?  Since they are prohibited cadet passengers, that means that they are explicitly in command of the senior members aboard.

[Flying Pig]

Well shoot.... I went back to clarify... but regardless, Ill address it.

Senior Members in CAP will ALWAYS be responsible for the actions of cadets regardless of age or position.

[JeffDG]

Well shoot.... I went back to clarify... but regardless, Ill address it.

Senior Members in CAP will ALWAYS be responsible for the actions of cadets regardless of age or position.

So, a cadet MP flying with a non-pilot observer and non-pilot scanner...who's the Pilot in Command?  Who is legally responsible for the safety of the flight?  I have a hint for you, it's in 14 CFR Part 91.

[Flying Pig]

Can you cite where CADETS in CAP are authorized to make command decisions over Senior Members?  Age of majority has no bearing.  There is no aspect of CAP where cadets are in command over senior members.

Are you claiming that a cadet MP is not the Pilot-in-Command of an aircraft that he is flying?  Since they are prohibited cadet passengers, that means that they are explicitly in command of the senior members aboard.

Apples and Oranges.  They are in command of the safe operation of the aircraft.  The Mission Pilot is not in "Command" of the Observer or the Scanner. 

[JeffDG]

Well shoot.... I went back to clarify... but regardless, Ill address it.

Senior Members in CAP will ALWAYS be responsible for the actions of cadets regardless of age or position.

I'll take your lack of citation of the relevant regulation as a "No, I can't cite anything, but I'll use proof by repeated assertion."

[Flying Pig]

Well shoot.... I went back to clarify... but regardless, Ill address it.

Senior Members in CAP will ALWAYS be responsible for the actions of cadets regardless of age or position.

So, a cadet MP flying with a non-pilot observer and non-pilot scanner...who's the Pilot in Command?  Who is legally responsible for the safety of the flight?  I have a hint for you, it's in 14 CFR Part 91.

If you want to discuss, thats fine.  If you are going to start getting sarcastic we are done. 

[Flying Pig]

You were so quick to come back with an insult you didnt even wait for my response. 

[JeffDG]

Can you cite where CADETS in CAP are authorized to make command decisions over Senior Members?  Age of majority has no bearing.  There is no aspect of CAP where cadets are in command over senior members.

Are you claiming that a cadet MP is not the Pilot-in-Command of an aircraft that he is flying?  Since they are prohibited cadet passengers, that means that they are explicitly in command of the senior members aboard.

Apples and Oranges.  They are in command of the safe operation of the aircraft.  The Mission Pilot is not in "Command" of the Observer or the Scanner.

You asked for a situation where a cadet was in command of senior members, I've provided a citation (14 CFR Part 91.3(a)).  I've yet to see your cite that seniors are never commanded by cadets, and my situation directly contradicts that assertion.

[Alaric]

Can you cite where CADETS in CAP are authorized to make command decisions over Senior Members?  Age of majority has no bearing.  There is no aspect of CAP where cadets are in command over senior members.

Are you claiming that a cadet MP is not the Pilot-in-Command of an aircraft that he is flying?  Since they are prohibited cadet passengers, that means that they are explicitly in command of the senior members aboard.

Apples and Oranges.  They are in command of the safe operation of the aircraft.  The Mission Pilot is not in "Command" of the Observer or the Scanner.

On an ES mission the Observer is "in command" vis a vis the mission; the pilot is in command of safety of flight, and the scanner/AP is the tip of the spear

[JeffDG]

Well shoot.... I went back to clarify... but regardless, Ill address it.

Senior Members in CAP will ALWAYS be responsible for the actions of cadets regardless of age or position.

So, a cadet MP flying with a non-pilot observer and non-pilot scanner...who's the Pilot in Command?  Who is legally responsible for the safety of the flight?  I have a hint for you, it's in 14 CFR Part 91.

If you want to discuss, thats fine.  If you are going to start getting sarcastic we are done.

Again, that's clearly lacking in a citation to applicable regulations supporting your assertion.

[JeffDG]

Can you cite where CADETS in CAP are authorized to make command decisions over Senior Members?  Age of majority has no bearing.  There is no aspect of CAP where cadets are in command over senior members.

Are you claiming that a cadet MP is not the Pilot-in-Command of an aircraft that he is flying?  Since they are prohibited cadet passengers, that means that they are explicitly in command of the senior members aboard.

Apples and Oranges.  They are in command of the safe operation of the aircraft.  The Mission Pilot is not in "Command" of the Observer or the Scanner.

On an ES mission the Observer is "in command" vis a vis the mission; the pilot is in command of safety of flight, and the scanner/AP is the tip of the spear

The pilot is, by federal law, in command of the aircraft.

Anyway, then an MO who's a cadet...is he similarly in command of the mission?

Does anyone have an actual regulation that says "Cadets may never command senior members?"

[Storm Chaser]

As a cadet in CAP you are absolutely not liable, nor would you be held responsible for any direction you give at any level.

That is absolutely correct and the reason I would be hesitant to approve a cadet Branch Director in my AOR.

Can you provide a citation for the assertion that a cadet, of the age of majority, would not be held liable for direction given?

I know my wing had a Cadet GBD at one of our SAREVALs one year.  He did an absolutely fantastic job of directing ground operations, and received an Outstanding grade for his efforts from the USAF Evaluation Team.

ES is completely rank-agnostic.  A second lieutenant can give a lieutenant colonel an order, and expect it to be carried out.  Same with a cadet.

Put the best person you have into the position, regardless of their rank or member type.

If you read my post carefully you'll see I used the word "hesitant" not "opposed". As with anything, we can't (and I didn't) generalize. There are cadets who are very mature, well trained, and may be able to perform in these functions. Those are not the majority. Being able to qualify in these specialties and having the knowledge, experience, leadership, and being able to perform under pressure are not the same thing. An exercise or SAREVAL is not the same as a REDCAP SAR mission were lives are at stake.

Now, if a cadet in an ES or mission leadership position doesn't need direct senior member supervision, then explain why we still need a senior member in a ground team with a cadet GTL? After all, cadets over 18 are required to go through Cadet Protection training, are they not? Yet, we still require a senior member. Why? The same applies to aircrews; a senior member must be in the airplane.

ES may be "rank-agnostic", but it's not membership type agnostic as you claim. Besides, the issue is not that they can't do the job if properly trained, but that more often than not, they won't have the necessary experience to do it. This is more so for AOBD than GBD since a cadet may have several years and sorties of ground team experience before turning 18. In contrast, a cadet can't be a MO until after they turn 18.

[Alaric]

Can you cite where CADETS in CAP are authorized to make command decisions over Senior Members?  Age of majority has no bearing.  There is no aspect of CAP where cadets are in command over senior members.

Are you claiming that a cadet MP is not the Pilot-in-Command of an aircraft that he is flying?  Since they are prohibited cadet passengers, that means that they are explicitly in command of the senior members aboard.

Apples and Oranges.  They are in command of the safe operation of the aircraft.  The Mission Pilot is not in "Command" of the Observer or the Scanner.

On an ES mission the Observer is "in command" vis a vis the mission; the pilot is in command of safety of flight, and the scanner/AP is the tip of the spear

The pilot is, by federal law, in command of the aircraft.

Anyway, then an MO who's a cadet...is he similarly in command of the mission?

Does anyone have an actual regulation that says "Cadets may never command senior members?"

First, I am not part of your argument about cadets commanding seniors, I was giving input on ES mission roles based on the NESA training. 

Second, I believe that cadets may command seniors in the field based on this from the national website


http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/emergency_services/operations_support/cadets_in_emergency_services.cfm


•A qualified senior member must directly supervise cadets less than 18 years of age. Cadets 18 years of age and older can be qualified to serve as ground team leaders, mission pilots, and several other positions of authority traditionally considered adult qualifications in accordance with applicable SQTRs, but cadet protection policies must be followed. If adult members are assigned to a team in a subordinate position to a cadet, the adult member may exercise command authority if necessary to avoid extreme risks endangering the team.
•Only cadets 18 years of age and older, who hold a valid CAPF 101, Specialty Qualification Card are authorized to fly on aircraft involved in the performance of emergency services operations. Any cadet may be flown directly to and from a mission base when needed to perform mission duties, provided the pilot-in-command is at least a qualified mission transport pilot.
•Adult leaders shall not subject cadets to known threats of violence. We cannot assume that parents of cadets understand and expect that their cadets could be exposed to health risks that are sometimes taken for granted during disasters nor can we expect that minors (including cadets under 18) can fully appreciate those risks. Cadets under 18 shall not be exposed to conditions in which their health is jeopardized by exposure to decomposing bodies and hazardous materials. Nor, absent parental permission, may they be exposed to widespread suffering. That does not exclude cadets from qualifying and serving in specialties with a potential for exposure, but rather requires adult leaders to be cognizant of the dangers associated with the missions being undertaken and taking appropriate action to protect all members, especially cadets.
•The requesting agency sets the scope of CAP's response, subject to any restrictions set by the Air Force authority for Air Force-Assigned Missions. Our customers tell us what assistance they need. Our customers may have minimum age restrictions. CAP shall honor those restrictions. That does not mean that CAP adult officers should discourage use of our cadets especially when discussing our capabilities with external customers. A requesting agency's minimum age restriction or specific guidance may require that we utilize these younger members in supporting roles at their home units or in safe areas away from the forward operating location in order to comply with the agency's needs, or in limited circumstances to preclude cadets from participating.
•Cadets under the age of 18 are not provided the same benefits for Air Force- Assigned Missions as adult members. Additional information is available in paragraph 1-22, CAPR 900-5, The CAP Insurance/Benefits Program, Sections D and E, and through the NHQ CAP/GC.

[Flying Pig]

Nowhere did I ever say it can't happen.  You added that to add drama to the discussion. However a cadet will never be held liable in CAP for decisions in a legal sense nor do cadets operate outside the direction and supervision of seniors.  There will always be a senior member who was ultimately responsible for that cadets participation. Have you ever been to an activity where cadets are present and where cadets act completely separate of seniors with no supervision?

[JeffDG]

Nowhere did I ever say it can't happen.

Really?

Can you cite where CADETS in CAP are authorized to make command decisions over Senior Members?

And I've cited circumstances where that is explicitly authorized, as well as implicitly authorized.

However a cadet will never be held liable in CAP for decisions in a legal sense

And I've asked, and you've failed to provide, a citation for that assertion.

<<Editted to add>>
In fact, if a cadet MP prangs an airplane, will it be the Senior member observer who is subject to legal action by the FAA?  Will that Observer have to undergo an 44709 ride with the FAA, or will the cadet MP who was the PIC for the flight be subject to liability in the legal sense for his/her decisions as PIC?

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

So oddly enough we establish a minimum age for GBD (18) but none for AOBD. So lets go to the regulations.

CAPR 60-3 1-10 para e
Use of qualified CAP cadets is encouraged as much as possible on appropriate missions. Cadets should be trained in the various functions of mission operations and support as permitted. Cadets qualify no differently than adult members in emergency services qualifications, and can be properly utilized in age-appropriate scenarios. Additional guidance for employing cadets on missions can be found on the NHQ CAP/DOS website.

So cadets qualify for ES positions "no differently than adults" So far so good.

Assuming the reference to the NHQ CAP/DOS website is this http://www.capmembers.com/emergency_services/operations_support/cadets-in-emergency-services/
A qualified senior member must directly supervise cadets less than 18 years of age. Cadets 18 years of age and older can be qualified to serve as ground team leaders, mission pilots, and several other positions of authority traditionally considered adult qualifications in accordance with applicable SQTRs, but cadet protection policies must be followed. If adult members are assigned to a team in a subordinate position to a cadet, the adult member may exercise command authority if necessary to avoid extreme risks endangering the team.

So the theoretical cadet AOBD can qualify and have senior members subordinate to him.

So should a cadet be authorized thru the wing ES staff to qualify as AOBD and I, as an IC, select him (or her) for my staff I would expect the air crews to follow their orders exactly the same as if the AOBD was 25, 55, 75 or 105. That would include the option to decline a tasking if they feel it is unsafe.

Personally I suspect the number of cadets that would get there would be few and far between. I'm thinking 19 to 20 and wearing diamonds (plural), enough PIC time to qual as a MP.

[JeffDG]

So oddly enough we establish a minimum age for GBD (18) but none for AOBD. So lets go to the regulations.

While there is no explicit minimum age for an AOBD, there is an effective minimum age of 18.  Prerequisites for AOBD are either MP or MO, both of have a prerequisite of MS, which as a prerequisite age of 18.