Old CAP aircraft tails USAF AUX --> Civil Air Patrol

[usafcap1]

Last weekend I was at Mission scanner training and I got an opportunity to fly in a Cessna 206 and I looked at the tail while performing a pre-flight inspection and I noticed that the tail used to say USAF AUX. How come all the aircrafts in CAP say Civil Air Patrol the tail and not USAF AUX? If we are truly the USAF Auxiliary it should say this, right?

Thank you.

[Al Sayre]

Old issue.  It was removed due to some questions related to Posse Comitatus involving some of our corporate missions.

[lordmonar]

That changed back in the Pineda Years.

As I understand it....it was removed in attempt to open up more support for law enforcement missions.

No missions came from it, it generated a lot of angst from the rank and file, and Pineda turned out to be a "less then stellar" example of leadership.

I guess it is best to just leave it alone at this point...instead of spending more money to fix it.

YMMV.

Al beat me to it.

[RiverAux]

Yeah, still trying to figure out why it was okay for National Guard helicopters marked with US Army were ok to fly drug missions while in state status while CAP planes marked with USAF-AUX were not (despite the exception from posse comitatus relating to counterdrug work). 

[PHall]

The reason given was that the aircraft are not used for AF missions all of the time.
It's that Aux On/Aux Off thing...

[RiverAux]

You mean like National Guard helicopters?  Air National Guard planes?  If there is an issue (which there isn't) it would be that the planes are used for non-AF stuff, not that they were marked as AF Aux. 

[LSThiker]

You mean like National Guard helicopters?  Air National Guard planes?  If there is an issue (which there isn't) it would be that the planes are used for non-AF stuff, not that they were marked as AF Aux.

Completely different between the Guard and CAP.  CAP is its own corporation with a distinct chain of command.  Although we like to draw pretty little lines on the CoC charts that make perfect sense, that is not an accurate representation for the military.  A unit can actually have three CoC (TACCON, OPCON, ADCON).  That is, one unit may have a higher unit that has tactical control, another higher unit that has operational control, and another unit that has administrative control.  My unit in Iraq was like this.  We had ADCON back to our stateside unit as well as to the MEDCOM in theater, TACCON to an MP unit on our base, and OPCON to a higher medical unit that was in theater.

This is one area that I struggled with in ACSC was the differences in OPCON, TACCON, and ADCOM. 

Anyway, Guard units always have a line to their parent services through the NGB even when they are on Title 32 status.   

Special Operations Units are constantly like this.  They have one line to SOCOM, one line to their UCC, and one to another unit they may be supporting.   

[PHall]

You mean like National Guard helicopters?  Air National Guard planes?  If there is an issue (which there isn't) it would be that the planes are used for non-AF stuff, not that they were marked as AF Aux.

Dude, I said that that was the reason given. I didn't say if it was right or wrong.

[RiverAux]

Completely different between the Guard and CAP.

Nope, exactly the same.  In regards to counterdrug both organizations were flying aircraft with "federal" markings and it was perfectly fine because the activities being carried out by both organizations were perfectly fine under posse comitatus.  Had nothing at all to do with chain of command. 

[LSThiker]

Completely different between the Guard and CAP.

Nope, exactly the same.  In regards to counterdrug both organizations were flying aircraft with "federal" markings and it was perfectly fine because the activities being carried out by both organizations were perfectly fine under posse comitatus.  Had nothing at all to do with chain of command.

No the Guard and CAP are different in this regard.  The Guard is always owned by the NGB, a federal bureau under the DoD, but the units are under control of the governor while in Title 32 status.  The aircraft are owned by the federal government and are sent to the National Guard.  The state does not own those helicopters.  This is spelled out in Title 32 of the CFR.  Therefore, the National Guard and its associated equipment, whether it is helicopters or airplanes, are always US Army or US Air Force, even when they are Title 32.  This is why they are authorized to the use of US Army/Air Force on the uniform and the equipment. 

CAP is not always US Air Force Auxiliary.  We are only the Auxiliary when used by a federal agency or department.  If the state uses CAP, then we are not the US Air Force Auxiliary, we are just Civil Air Patrol, Inc.  Therefore, the Air Force can dictate that they do not want US Air Force Auxiliary to be used if we are not in an Auxiliary status.   

[RiverAux]

You are correct in the details, but wrong in the application.  The AF Aux was taken off because of concerns related to CAP's participation in the counterdrug program, not anything having to do with other non-AF missions flown by CAP. 

[LSThiker]

You are correct in the details, but wrong in the application.  The AF Aux was taken off because of concerns related to CAP's participation in the counterdrug program, not anything having to do with other non-AF missions flown by CAP.

I remember this and thought the same thing that it did not make sense.  However, after becoming more familiar with the upper workings of the military and the various controls of units, it makes sense to me, as I explained in the above.

The Air Force can dictate what they want and do not want.  If they were not comfortable with CAP flying CD missions with USAF Auxiliary, then either it comes off or we do not fly aircraft with USAF Auxiliary.  Even if they are comfortable with us flying other non-AFAMs with USAF Auxiliary.  They have sole say in our use of "USAF Auxiliary".

While there are military aircraft flying with US Army/US Air Force written on their aircraft, those pilots and those aircraft are still US Army/US Air Force regardless of whether they fly on the state's dime (Title 32) or federal dime (Title 10).  As such, they are required to leave those designators on their aircraft. 

While it may not seem logical, it is the Air Force's call when it comes to CAP.

[lordmonar]

Also remember that sometimes the USAF is not always logical nor consistent.

What AETC and CAP-USAF get told to do is vastly different then what the NGB gets told to do.