Flight Officer Advanced Promotions

[PhoenixRisen]

According to CAPR 35-5, there are advanced flight officer promotions allowed for former Cadets (in the event you transfer to senior membership before you turn 21).  (i.e. Mitchell > FO, Earhart > TFO, Spaatz > SFO)  If one were to do this, you would also be advanced to your proper "commissioned" officer rank upon turning 21 (2d Lt, 1st Lt or Capt).

What about those who join as a flight officer without former cadet experience?  Do their accomplishments within the FO program equate to advanced promotion (i.e. FO > 2dLt, TFO > 1st Lt, SFO > Capt)?  Or is the former cadet experience required for that?

CAPR 35-5 only mentions it for former cadets -- but after seeing this (from the KYWG website), I just wanted to verify:

The benefit for you in participating in the Flight Officer Program is that on your 21st birthday, you are eligable to be promoted to 2nd Leiutenant if you achieved Flight Officer, First Leiutenant if you acheived Technical Flight Officer, and to Captain if you achieved Senior Flight Officer!

Thanks!

[Hill CAP]

I would see it the same for everyone as long as you meet the requirements for the promotion.

However all promotions are at the desecration of the unit commander and are not guaranteed.

[SJFedor]

How you described it is how it should be, not how it is.

FO = 2d Lt as long as you have at least 6 months in.
TFO +12 months TIG as FO or 2d Lt = 1st Lt
SFO +18 months TIG as SFO or 1st Lt = Capt.


CAPR 35-5, Figure 2, describes how it works.

[ßτε]

TFO +12 months TIG as FO or 2d Lt = 1st Lt

Should be

TFO +12 months TIG as TFO or 2d Lt = 1st Lt

[USADOD]

I say we mix it up, and replace the FO grades with U.S. Army Warrant Officer Grades.

Hooah

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

I say we mix it up, and replace the FO grades with U.S. Army Warrant Officer Grades.

Hooah

WIWAC I held the grade of C/WO for a few months

[SJFedor]

TFO +12 months TIG as FO or 2d Lt = 1st Lt

Should be

TFO +12 months TIG as TFO or 2d Lt = 1st Lt

Whoops. Forgot that T. 

[PhoenixRisen]

How you described it is how it should be, not how it is.

FO = 2d Lt as long as you have at least 6 months in.
TFO +12 months TIG as FO or 2d Lt = 1st Lt
SFO +18 months TIG as SFO or 1st Lt = Capt.


CAPR 35-5, Figure 2, describes how it works.

Sweet, I missed that. Tthanks!

[Cecil DP]

How you described it is how it should be, not how it is.

FO = 2d Lt as long as you have at least 6 months in.
TFO +12 months TIG as FO or 2d Lt = 1st Lt
SFO +18 months TIG as SFO or 1st Lt = Capt.


CAPR 35-5, Figure 2, describes how it works.

Also need the complete the appropriate PD Training

[Gunner C]

I say we mix it up, and replace the FO grades with U.S. Army Warrant Officer Grades.

Hooah

Actually, FOs replaced warrant officer grades.  I was a CAP CWO many, MANY years ago.  IMO, we need to go back to that.  In fact, IMO, most officers should be WOs.  The only folks who need to be Lts and above are those in the chain of command, former commanders who are staff officers at group and higher, and "special branch" officers (MDs, chaplains, etc).  Return to tying authority to rank/grade.

But that's another thread.

[Cecil DP]

The Air Force dismantled the WO program in 1959 with the last of them retiring in the late 70's. The last CAP WO's went out in 1983 when the new(old new) PD program was established and the grade was dropped. The fact that most of those who were wearing the grade were in the 18-21 years old age group was a key irritant to those RM in all branches who actually were former career NCO's with a minimum TIS of 10 years. There is nothing wrong with following the CG Aux example of serving in agrade only as long as you were in a position which calls for it, and then reverting to your permenant grade. IE Wing Commander is a Col during his tenure, but has only completed Level III, he reverts to Major upon his stepping down. Prior to the end of WWII, it wasn't uncommon for an officer to serve in a Three or four star billet and revert back to Maj Gen upon being relieved. For instance GA MacArthur dropped from 4 stars to 2 when he retired as Chief of Staff of the Army in the 1930's

[Spike]

^ The Army has the program...."High School to Flight School" (I should say mostly National Guard), where you will see a 20 year old (maybe younger) walking around with WO bars.

I doubt the CAP got rid of Warrant Officers, because the military didn't like it.

In fact, I was a Cadet Flight Officer, with gold pip when I received my Mitchell.  Shortly thereafter, they eliminated it. 

I was going to ask "what is a Flight Officer"......as I have only run into 3 my entire time in CAP. 
1 was absolutely awesome.....running a Squadron, the other two were "overage cadets without a place to be", and acted like it.

[Gunner C]

The Air Force dismantled the WO program in 1959 with the last of them retiring in the late 70's. The last CAP WO's went out in 1983 when the new(old new) PD program was established and the grade was dropped. The fact that most of those who were wearing the grade were in the 18-21 years old age group was a key irritant to those RM in all branches who actually were former career NCO's with a minimum TIS of 10 years. There is nothing wrong with following the CG Aux example of serving in agrade only as long as you were in a position which calls for it, and then reverting to your permenant grade. IE Wing Commander is a Col during his tenure, but has only completed Level III, he reverts to Major upon his stepping down. Prior to the end of WWII, it wasn't uncommon for an officer to serve in a Three or four star billet and revert back to Maj Gen upon being relieved. For instance GA MacArthur dropped from 4 stars to 2 when he retired as Chief of Staff of the Army in the 1930's

USAF warrant officers remained until the 1980s, it's just that they didn't bring on any new ones after the late 1950s when the NCO supergrades (E-8 and E-9) came into effect.  The new NCO grades were used as excuses to turn WO billets into company grade billets, thus, more pilots.

There is a growing faction in the AF to bring them back, tho still not large enough to make it happen.  The new laws of the 1980s for WOs gave them commissions, thus equal authority with their company grade counterparts.  WOs no longer are appointed with the wave of the "magic wand" - in the Army they all attend Ft Rucker, with the exception of SF warrant officers, who attend the Warrant Officer Candidate School at the Army JFK Center at Ft Bragg.  There are a total of three career schools after the warrant officer basic course between W-2 and W-5.

Most CAP officers are technical specialists and we would do well to have a system of Limited Duty Officers, like the sea services. 

[BillB]

The complaint I hear about the Flight Officer program involves the FO insignia. The comment that it looks like AFROTC grades rather than a CAP FO grade. As such CAP light Officers are looked down on by any CAP member wearing bars or oak leaves. CAP officers consider Flight officer grades as as an extension of the cadet program in many cases. Unless an 18-21 year old cadet is trying to earn the Spaatz, cadets in this age group more often became inactive or just don't attempt to progress. Why turn senior and be considered a  "super cadet"?

[Gunner C]

I'd offer the following:

• Change the insignia back to AF WO bars.
• Change the grades from three to five; add Chief Flight Officer and Master Flight Officer
• Open it up to all pilots and observers, with the initial grade being FO
• Exempt only the following:  Chaplains (if they want to serve as anything but chaplains, revert them to FOs), MDs (same as chaplains), current and former military officers, and former cadet officers (if they refuse command, if they are senior, revert them to FOs)
• When an officer finishes command, they move to the staff at next higher headquarters
• Whoever is senior in the unit becomes the commander.  If they refuse command, they either revert to FO.

[RiverAux]

The complaint I hear about the Flight Officer program involves the FO insignia. The comment that it looks like AFROTC grades rather than a CAP FO grade.

I doubt it is that it looks like AFROTC grade, its just that they don't look like anything the average person is going to recognize, especially when there are only a handful of them in any one wing, much less at the average squadron.  I don't care what insignia you put on them, most CAP senior members and probably most cadets will probably not see enough of them in their career to be able to really recognize any insignia, whether WO or FO. 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

...from the KYWG website...

The benefit for you in participating in the Flight Officer Program is that on your 21st birthday, you are eligable to be promoted to 2nd Leiutenant if you achieved Flight Officer, First Leiutenant if you acheived Technical Flight Officer, and to Captain if you achieved Senior Flight Officer!

"Leiutenant"? Looks like a lieutenant or a former one somewhere needs remedial spelling help!

[BrandonKea]

I think we should just leave it alone now as is. It works out well in that there's three grades that correspond to the officer grades, and it's pretty clear how they correspond. The other realistic (IMHO better) option is have 18-21 y/o SM's just be SMWOG's and don't even bother with flight officer grades...

[adamblank]

As opposed to a major overhaul, I think we should just focus on making them equally recognized senior members of the program.  These two small items I think would be a step in the right direction for our FO program:

1) Grade tracked in Eservices (especially with CAP NCO and cadet grades tracked).  It would also lead to less confusion when the respective FO turns 21.

2) All uniform items available to the FOs (i.e. plastic insignia).

[BrandonKea]

As opposed to a major overhaul, I think we should just focus on making them equally recognized senior members of the program.  These two small items I think would be a step in the right direction for our FO program:

1) Grade tracked in Eservices (especially with CAP NCO and cadet grades tracked).  It would also lead to less confusion when the respective FO turns 21.

2) All uniform items available to the FOs (i.e. plastic insignia).

I agree with point 1. If we can track ALL the cadet grades, we can track FO, TFO, and SFO.

It would be dumb to make insignia for something as temporary as the flight officer grades, IMHO.

[RiverAux]

It would be dumb to make insignia for something as temporary as the flight officer grades, IMHO.

Well, we make insignia for all sorts of grades where members only hold them for a matter of months.  For example, all the cadet enlisted and 2nd Lts. 

[BrandonKea]

It would be dumb to make insignia for something as temporary as the flight officer grades, IMHO.

Well, we make insignia for all sorts of grades where members only hold them for a matter of months.  For example, all the cadet enlisted and 2nd Lts. 

There's a much much higher quantity of Cadet Enlisted and 2d Lt's than there are Flight Officers though.

[Hawk200]

It would be dumb to make insignia for something as temporary as the flight officer grades, IMHO.

Well, we make insignia for all sorts of grades where members only hold them for a matter of months.  For example, all the cadet enlisted and 2nd Lts. 

There's a much much higher quantity of Cadet Enlisted and 2d Lt's than there are Flight Officers though.

Flight officers spend more time in most of their grades than an average cadet. A member joining as a senior at 18 who progressed normally could wear TFO for over two years (hypothetically, more like a little under considering how long some paperwork takes to get processed).

Second, for most ranks, everything is temporary. Deleting rank for the reasoning of "temporary" makes little sense.

It's a little inappropriate to have a rank without an insignia. This ain't the the Navy.

[BrandonKea]

It would be dumb to make insignia for something as temporary as the flight officer grades, IMHO.

Well, we make insignia for all sorts of grades where members only hold them for a matter of months.  For example, all the cadet enlisted and 2nd Lts. 

There's a much much higher quantity of Cadet Enlisted and 2d Lt's than there are Flight Officers though.

Flight officers spend more time in most of their grades than an average cadet. A member joining as a senior at 18 who progressed normally could wear TFO for over two years (hypothetically, more like a little under considering how long some paperwork takes to get processed).

Second, for most ranks, everything is temporary. Deleting rank for the reasoning of "temporary" makes little sense.

It's a little inappropriate to have a rank without an insignia. This ain't the the Navy.

You're right, Flight Officers will spend a lot of time in their grade, but there aren't enough Flight Officers to make the argument to have Vanguard design, produce, stock and ship all sorts of other inisgnia.

And yes, most grade IS temporary, but again, there's a quantity issue here.


...did I mention quantity...

[Spike]

It would be dumb to make insignia for something as temporary as the flight officer grades, IMHO.

It is dumb that they are not being made.  They need to make FO insignia that coresponds to every other grade insignia produced (plastic encased etc.)

Why cant new Senior Members start at the same page no matter what age?  I don't care if you are 80 or 18....if you join as a new member then you spend 6 months as a SMWOG, then are eligible for 2nd Lt.  As far as the reasoning that we can't do that because of insurance issues (vans etc.) is ridiculous.  If that were the case the easiest way to remedy that would be to write the regulations to prohibit anyone NOT 21 from driving vans....etc. 

[BrandonKea]

It would be dumb to make insignia for something as temporary as the flight officer grades, IMHO.

It is dumb that they are not being made.  They need to make FO insignia that coresponds to every other grade insignia produced (plastic encased etc.)

Why cant new Senior Members start at the same page no matter what age?  I don't care if you are 80 or 18....if you join as a new member then you spend 6 months as a SMWOG, then are eligible for 2nd Lt.  As far as the reasoning that we can't do that because of insurance issues (vans etc.) is ridiculous.  If that were the case the easiest way to remedy that would be to write the regulations to prohibit anyone NOT 21 from driving vans....etc.

IIRC the Air Force did not want 18 year olds as CAP Officers...

[Spike]

^ Really.  Can you provide a source for this.....because it seems awfully untrue. 

[BillB]

When you get down to it, every grade in CAP from Cadet airman up except MGen is temporary. The person can be promoted to next higher grade. If the problem is the FO stripes on the epaulet sleeves, change them to something more recognizable.

[Major Carrales]

IIRC the Air Force did not want 18 year olds as CAP Officers...

I find that idea to be balderdash.  18 year olds, for the purpose of CAP, are adults.  I believe that they should become 2d Lts...applying USAF standards to CAP this occasion is without logical standing.

They don't want 18 year old Lts, ridiculous.  Give us Congressional Commissions as Auxiliarists and I might subscribe to the idea...but as it stands now I think it is ridiculous since CAP is a totally different animal that the USAF.

[BrandonKea]

IIRC the Air Force did not want 18 year olds as CAP Officers...

I find that idea to be balderdash.  18 year olds, for the purpose of CAP, are adults.  I believe that they should become 2d Lts...applying USAF standards to CAP this occasion is without logical standing.

They don't want 18 year old Lts, ridiculous.  Give us Congressional Commissions as Auxiliarists and I might subscribe to the idea...but as it stands now I think it is ridiculous since CAP is a totally different animal that the USAF.

I don't know of a citation for this, but (and bring out the dogs), it's just what I've heard.)

The CAP is totally different than the USAF, but that doesn't mean we don't listen to what they say.

[BrandonKea]

Also, remember 18 year olds can also be Cadets. So they're not always adults in the eyes of CAP.

[Major Carrales]

My above statements are, of course, mere opinions on the matter.  Still, I expect the USAF to be consistant in their policy towards CAP.

[ßτε]

My guess is that they don't want 21 year old majors rather than not wanting 18 year old lieutenants.

[Major Carrales]

My guess is that they don't want 21 year old majors rather than not wanting 18 year old lieutenants.

Either a CAP Adult member (not Adult member that chooses to remain a CADET, voluntarily, that is a choice to remain in a diminuative role) is a valued asset...or they are not.  That is what I mean by consistancy.

If it is such a "shame" to have a 21 year old Major, then 1) Keep them at 2d Lt until they are 21, 2) deny membership as a SENIOR until such time as they are 21.

Flight Officers, in my experience in my area, are often treated poorly (even less than Cadet Officers) or with the usual "what the heck are you supposed to be?" attitude.  This was the case with a dear friend of mine, of who had served in CAP as a cadet for a considerable time (years enough to Mitchell) and treated like a schmuck by a 2d Lt who had been in CAP 9 months because he was a TFO and the CAP Officer in question would not recognize his Ground Team Leader Qual as "REAL."

In a world where some CAP Officers have never seen a CSU nor identify it as a CAP uniform, it is the case that the Flight Officer is not what it is intended to be.

[SJFedor]

Flight Officers, in my experience in my area, are often treated poorly (even less than Cadet Officers) or with the usual "what the heck are you supposed to be?" attitude.  This was the case with a dear friend of mine, of who had served in CAP as a cadet for a considerable time (years enough to Mitchell) and treated like a schmuck by a 2d Lt who had been in CAP 9 months.

That was my experience with some members as I went through the FO grades. However, once I turned 21 and went from SFO to insta-Captain, it shut them up in short order 

[Major Carrales]

Flight Officers, in my experience in my area, are often treated poorly (even less than Cadet Officers) or with the usual "what the heck are you supposed to be?" attitude.  This was the case with a dear friend of mine, of who had served in CAP as a cadet for a considerable time (years enough to Mitchell) and treated like a schmuck by a 2d Lt who had been in CAP 9 months.

That was my experience with some members as I went through the FO grades. However, once I turned 21 and went from SFO to insta-Captain, it shut them up in short order 

Yes, but I have a fundamental problem with a whole group of CAP members (adults and likely the best trained...in terms of CAP Knowledge and Objectives...group of new SENIOR MEMBERS) having to be treated like "second class citizen" types and people accepting it as a common practice.

[BrandonKea]

I never had any problems with being treated poorly as a TFO, but I was well established as a Cadet Officer and had been treated as [darn] close to a Senior Member as anyone else I knew.

[SJFedor]

Flight Officers, in my experience in my area, are often treated poorly (even less than Cadet Officers) or with the usual "what the heck are you supposed to be?" attitude.  This was the case with a dear friend of mine, of who had served in CAP as a cadet for a considerable time (years enough to Mitchell) and treated like a schmuck by a 2d Lt who had been in CAP 9 months.

That was my experience with some members as I went through the FO grades. However, once I turned 21 and went from SFO to insta-Captain, it shut them up in short order 

Yes, but I have a fundamental problem with a whole group of CAP members (adults and likely the best trained...in terms of CAP Knowledge and Objectives...group of new SENIOR MEMBERS) having to be treated like "second class citizen" types and people accepting it as a common practice.

Oh I fully concur. I hated having the 7-months-in 2d Lt talk down to me like I didn't know what I was doing, when I was wearing 13 ribbons, a set of wings and a GTL badge.

But, I just saluted and executed. Nothing else I could really do. Was it a bit demoralizing? Absolutely. But the people who gave me my orders were people who were not only familiar with my grade structure (because I oriented them to it), but were familiar with myself personally and had trust in me. The only people I really ever had problems with were the new people, the people on power trips, and those who had chronic cranial/rectal inversions.

[Major Carrales]

I never had any problems with being treated poorly as a TFO, but I was well established as a Cadet Officer and had been treated as [darn] close to a Senior Member as anyone else I knew.

That was a testiment to your service to CAP.  But what if you had moved to my Area? 

We should be celebrating our people that are FLIGHT OFFICERS because of thier training and dedication to CAP.  They have used the CADET PROGRAM as "CAPROTC."  We occasionally have these discussions about why CADETS don't transfer over to SENIOR...hummm, I think I have a new argument for the debate.

[BrandonKea]

I never had any problems with being treated poorly as a TFO, but I was well established as a Cadet Officer and had been treated as [darn] close to a Senior Member as anyone else I knew.

That was a testiment to your service to CAP.  But what if you had moved to my Area? 

We should be celebrating our people that are FLIGHT OFFICERS because of thier training and dedication to CAP.  They have used the CADET PROGRAM as "CAPROTC."  We occasionally have these discussions about why CADETS don't transfer over to SENIOR...hummm, I think I have a new argument for the debate.

Well and you also have the fact that not every FO was once a CAP Cadet.

Had I moved to your area, I would not have been afraid to respectfully assert my knowledge and skills in my AOR. Being treated poorly as a FO is a reflection on the people treating FO's poorly, but at some point, you have to stand up and do something about it.

[Major Carrales]

Flight Officers, in my experience in my area, are often treated poorly (even less than Cadet Officers) or with the usual "what the heck are you supposed to be?" attitude.  This was the case with a dear friend of mine, of who had served in CAP as a cadet for a considerable time (years enough to Mitchell) and treated like a schmuck by a 2d Lt who had been in CAP 9 months.

That was my experience with some members as I went through the FO grades. However, once I turned 21 and went from SFO to insta-Captain, it shut them up in short order 

Yes, but I have a fundamental problem with a whole group of CAP members (adults and likely the best trained...in terms of CAP Knowledge and Objectives...group of new SENIOR MEMBERS) having to be treated like "second class citizen" types and people accepting it as a common practice.

Oh I fully concur. I hated having the 7-months-in 2d Lt talk down to me like I didn't know what I was doing, when I was wearing 13 ribbons, a set of wings and a GTL badge.

But, I just saluted and executed. Nothing else I could really do. Was it a bit demoralizing? Absolutely. But the people who gave me my orders were people who were not only familiar with my grade structure (because I oriented them to it), but were familiar with myself personally and had trust in me. The only people I really ever had problems with were the new people, the people on power trips, and those who had chronic cranial/rectal inversions.

Not every CAP Officer is like me, and you.  I will not allow FLIGHT OFFICERS to be marginalized.

I say, just make them brevet 2d Lts with the possibility of advanced promotion when they turn 21.  Get rid of these "grey areas."  As I said, we should be celebrating these CAP members...not marginalizing them.

[Major Carrales]

I never had any problems with being treated poorly as a TFO, but I was well established as a Cadet Officer and had been treated as [darn] close to a Senior Member as anyone else I knew.

That was a testiment to your service to CAP.  But what if you had moved to my Area? 

We should be celebrating our people that are FLIGHT OFFICERS because of thier training and dedication to CAP.  They have used the CADET PROGRAM as "CAPROTC."  We occasionally have these discussions about why CADETS don't transfer over to SENIOR...hummm, I think I have a new argument for the debate.

Well and you also have the fact that not every FO was once a CAP Cadet.

Had I moved to your area, I would not have been afraid to respectfully assert my knowledge and skills in my AOR. Being treated poorly as a FO is a reflection on the people treating FO's poorly, but at some point, you have to stand up and do something about it.

Believe me, "standing up" to an IC at a mission is likely lead to you "standing up" in the line to join the USCGAux as an ex-CAP member.  There is not a real way to stand up to such a person at a mission without conduct unbecoming a CAP Officer.  We have to change the culture or get rid of the titles of Flight Officer altogether.

[SJFedor]

I never had any problems with being treated poorly as a TFO, but I was well established as a Cadet Officer and had been treated as [darn] close to a Senior Member as anyone else I knew.

That was a testiment to your service to CAP.  But what if you had moved to my Area? 

We should be celebrating our people that are FLIGHT OFFICERS because of thier training and dedication to CAP.  They have used the CADET PROGRAM as "CAPROTC."  We occasionally have these discussions about why CADETS don't transfer over to SENIOR...hummm, I think I have a new argument for the debate.

Well and you also have the fact that not every FO was once a CAP Cadet.

Had I moved to your area, I would not have been afraid to respectfully assert my knowledge and skills in my AOR. Being treated poorly as a FO is a reflection on the people treating FO's poorly, but at some point, you have to stand up and do something about it.

Believe me, "standing up" to an IC at a mission is likely lead to you "standing up" in the line to join the USCGAux as an ex-CAP member.  There is not a real way to stand up to such a person at a mission without conduct unbecoming a CAP Officer.  We have to change the culture or get rid of the titles of Flight Officer altogether.

Most IC's i've encountered care less about the grade on your shoulder and more about what's on your 101.

[Major Carrales]

I never had any problems with being treated poorly as a TFO, but I was well established as a Cadet Officer and had been treated as [darn] close to a Senior Member as anyone else I knew.

That was a testiment to your service to CAP.  But what if you had moved to my Area? 

We should be celebrating our people that are FLIGHT OFFICERS because of thier training and dedication to CAP.  They have used the CADET PROGRAM as "CAPROTC."  We occasionally have these discussions about why CADETS don't transfer over to SENIOR...hummm, I think I have a new argument for the debate.

Well and you also have the fact that not every FO was once a CAP Cadet.

Had I moved to your area, I would not have been afraid to respectfully assert my knowledge and skills in my AOR. Being treated poorly as a FO is a reflection on the people treating FO's poorly, but at some point, you have to stand up and do something about it.

Believe me, "standing up" to an IC at a mission is likely lead to you "standing up" in the line to join the USCGAux as an ex-CAP member.  There is not a real way to stand up to such a person at a mission without conduct unbecoming a CAP Officer.  We have to change the culture or get rid of the titles of Flight Officer altogether.

Most IC's i've encountered care less about the grade on your shoulder and more about what's on your 101.

We can only hope so.

[Hawk200]

IIRC the Air Force did not want 18 year olds as CAP Officers...

I find that idea to be balderdash.  18 year olds, for the purpose of CAP, are adults.  I believe that they should become 2d Lts...applying USAF standards to CAP this occasion is without logical standing.

They don't want 18 year old Lts, ridiculous.  Give us Congressional Commissions as Auxiliarists and I might subscribe to the idea...but as it stands now I think it is ridiculous since CAP is a totally different animal that the USAF.

According to AFI's 36-2011 and 36-2013, an individual must be at least 17 to enlist. The commisioning programs are a minumum of 4 years. By Air Force reasoning, a person must be a minimum of 21 to even achieve a commision.

Anyone normally below that age would be a commisioning program cadet, not an officer, and not eligible to wield the authority of a commision.

Keep in mind that the even though society considers an 18 year old adult, the military requires such an adult to complete additional training. Just becoming an adult does not entitle them to something that someone who had enlisted is not.

Flight officer insignia is comparable to commisioning program insignia. Probably best to maintain the similarities.

[Major Carrales]

IIRC the Air Force did not want 18 year olds as CAP Officers...

I find that idea to be balderdash.  18 year olds, for the purpose of CAP, are adults.  I believe that they should become 2d Lts...applying USAF standards to CAP this occasion is without logical standing.

They don't want 18 year old Lts, ridiculous.  Give us Congressional Commissions as Auxiliarists and I might subscribe to the idea...but as it stands now I think it is ridiculous since CAP is a totally different animal that the USAF.

According to AFI's 36-2011 and 36-2013, an individual must be at least 17 to enlist. The commisioning programs are a minumum of 4 years. By Air Force reasoning, a person must be a minimum of 21 to even achieve a commision.

Anyone normally below that age would be a commisioning program cadet, not an officer, and not eligible to wield the authority of a commision.

Keep in mind that the even though society considers an 18 year old adult, the military requires such an adult to complete additional training. Just becoming an adult does not entitle them to something that someone who had enlisted is not.

Flight officer insignia is comparable to commisioning program insignia. Probably best to maintain the similarities.

Hawk, I cannot accept that.  The rules and regulations that govern the USAF do not govern us per se.  Yes, I know there is a practice to take a look at USAF instructions when CAP regs are ambiguous...however, those REGS have little standing in CAP...save those that have been CAP-i-fided like the Drill and Ceremonies manual.

I am against the practice for two reasons...

1) A SENIOR MEMBER's Level I is not equal to USAF Officer Training and the idea of not allowing a member to have equal standing because they do not conform to some notion that works in the USAF because of the situations you mention is disingenuous.

2) Flight Officers are in some cases treated as "second class citizenry" due to what amounts to ignorance (in the true definition of the term) of CAP Officers.

Fix these issues to where they can be reconciled in my mind with something more, or I cannot let these opinions on Flight Officer grade go.   

I'm off to bed...I will look forward to the replies and discussion tomorrow.

[Hawk200]

Flight Officers, in my experience in my area, are often treated poorly (even less than Cadet Officers) or with the usual "what the heck are you supposed to be?" attitude.  This was the case with a dear friend of mine, of who had served in CAP as a cadet for a considerable time (years enough to Mitchell) and treated like a schmuck by a 2d Lt who had been in CAP 9 months.

That was my experience with some members as I went through the FO grades. However, once I turned 21 and went from SFO to insta-Captain, it shut them up in short order 

Yes, but I have a fundamental problem with a whole group of CAP members (adults and likely the best trained...in terms of CAP Knowledge and Objectives...group of new SENIOR MEMBERS) having to be treated like "second class citizen" types and people accepting it as a common practice.

To be blunt, anyone accepting that behaviour is part of the problem. Any ranking senior should be dealing with that. It is inherently wrong to adjust a rank bracket because they allow injustice to take place.

[Spike]

IIRC the Air Force did not want 18 year olds as CAP Officers...

I find that idea to be balderdash.  18 year olds, for the purpose of CAP, are adults.  I believe that they should become 2d Lts...applying USAF standards to CAP this occasion is without logical standing.

They don't want 18 year old Lts, ridiculous.  Give us Congressional Commissions as Auxiliarists and I might subscribe to the idea...but as it stands now I think it is ridiculous since CAP is a totally different animal that the USAF.

According to AFI's 36-2011 and 36-2013, an individual must be at least 17 to enlist. The commisioning programs are a minumum of 4 years. By Air Force reasoning, a person must be a minimum of 21 to even achieve a commision.

Anyone normally below that age would be a commisioning program cadet, not an officer, and not eligible to wield the authority of a commision.

Keep in mind that the even though society considers an 18 year old adult, the military requires such an adult to complete additional training. Just becoming an adult does not entitle them to something that someone who had enlisted is not.

Flight officer insignia is comparable to commisioning program insignia. Probably best to maintain the similarities.

Funny......OCS/OTS programs are not 4 years in length.  Direct Commissions are not 4 years in length.  I have met a 19 year old Lt in the AF......I know of a few 18 year old Warrant Officers in the Army, and I met a WW2 Sailor who was an Ensign at 18 also.  Then there is the "Early Commissioning Program" in Army ROTC.....2 years to a Reserve Commission.  So you can see 18, 19, 20 year old Lt's.

The  military absolutely considers an 18 year old an adult.  If they did not, then they would have "Juvenile" sentences in courts-martial cases.   

CAP is not the Air Force as many like to point out here! 

By the way...Commission has two "S's" in it.  Usually Capitalized as well.     

[Hawk200]

Then let me point out another reality. What do you think the behaviour of the majority of 18 year old lieutenants would be? Not the most becoming of an officer. If you want to point a common innappropriate practice, then you have to acknowledge the negatives as well. Both of which the Air Force would consider if we requested permission to appoint 18 year olds as lieutenants.

Basically, we're not going to win. The Air Force does control certain aspects of things in CAP, especially when it comes to their uniforms. We have to respect that.

[BrandonKea]

Basically, we're not going to win. The Air Force does control certain aspects of things in CAP, especially when it comes to their uniforms. We have to respect that.

+1

Now, as for Flight Officers being treated poorly, get out there and fix it people! Treat them how you'd want to be treated, and call people on it who don't.

[adamblank]

I think one way to break the "sub-officer" culture for the FOs is to make sure they have all of the same insignia and recognition as it seems the rest of the CAP corps has.  It can only add to the "Who is that?" mentality if they can't wear appropriate insignia.

[BrandonKea]

I think one way to break the "sub-officer" culture for the FOs is to make sure they have all of the same insignia and recognition as it seems the rest of the CAP corps has.  It can only add to the "Who is that?" mentality if they can't wear appropriate insignia.

Touche. Show me a cost-effective way to do it and I'll get behind it.

[Hawk200]

Funny......OCS/OTS programs are not 4 years in length.  Direct Commissions are not 4 years in length.  I have met a 19 year old Lt in the AF......I know of a few 18 year old Warrant Officers in the Army, and I met a WW2 Sailor who was an Ensign at 18 also.  Then there is the "Early Commissioning Program" in Army ROTC.....2 years to a Reserve Commission.  So you can see 18, 19, 20 year old Lt's.

You've met a 19 year old Air Force Lieutentant? I'd like that individual's name and a method in which I can contact them. I don't buy it.

Second, Army and Navy programs are completely irrelevant. Each branch sets it's own age requirements. Air Force requirements are specified in AFI's 36-2011 and 36-2013. You can argue all you wish, the Air Force doesn't care. Their regulations are the final word on the matter.

The  military absolutely considers an 18 year old an adult.  If they did not, then they would have "Juvenile" sentences in courts-martial cases.

I made no dispute of that. The point is irrelevant. Why did you even post it?

CAP is not the Air Force as many like to point out here!

But they control many aspects of our organization. You can argue with them all you want, it's pretty pointless.

By the way...Commission has two "S's" in it.  Usually Capitalized as well.

So, you dispute my statements because of typo? Flimsy argument. In twenty years of service, I've also never seen it stated that "commission" is required to be capitalized. Not certain why you would bother using it as point of debate.

[Hawk200]

Now, as for Flight Officers being treated poorly, get out there and fix it people! Treat them how you'd want to be treated, and call people on it who don't.

Agreed.

[ZigZag911]

Here's my solution: have everyone (and I mean everyone, except prior military) work from SM up through the FO grades....pretty much how the senior program worked WIWAC....would tkae 3 to 5 years to make 2 Lt (which should be minimum required earned grade for sqdn CC)...consequently we'd have people with some actual experience in CAP serving as commissioned officers and commanders.

[Gunner C]

I don't think that most of you get it.  FOs will always be treated as post-graduate cadets if all you have are FOs who are 18-21.  If FOs became a niche like they used to be in WW2 and in the 1950s (technical specialist officers) then you'd have something.  Have everyone start as a FO - just that simple.  If along the way someone decides that they would like to command, then they get a direct appointment to the grade appropriate to the level of command.  Then, if they want to keep it, then they serve at the appropriate staff level for the grade after that.

In the military WOs consider themselves pretty much the same grade (WOs don't exchange salutes, address each other by their first names, etc).  This tradition would be work well in CAP - seems to me that it would be a perfect fit:

• FOs would no longer be pseudo-officers and would be recognized along with their peers (right now they really don't have any peers)
• They'd have career progression through 5 grades just like the present officer system
• It would return the concept of "rank has authority" to CAP

Tell me where the downside is.

[Spike]

Then let me point out another reality. What do you think the behaviour of the majority of 18 year old lieutenants would be? Not the most becoming of an officer. If you want to point a common innappropriate practice, then you have to acknowledge the negatives as well. Both of which the Air Force would consider if we requested permission to appoint 18 year olds as lieutenants.

Don't make assumptions.  You may have been a poorly behaved 18 year old, most I know are not.  What negatives of having 18 year old CAP (CAP....CAP....CAP) 2nd Lt's do you have in mind??  Seriously......what do you have against an 18, 19 or 20 year old person??

Don't forget this is CAP!  It is by no means the Air Force.  Don't bring Air Force rules and regulations into the debate.....because frankly, some of us here are tired of having them thrown at us, when we legally don't have to follow the vast majority of them.  There are less than 8 actual Air Force documents we follow.  One being the Drill and Ceremonies Publication.  We follow many more DoD publications related to our Charter (mostly at the National Headquarters level) than we do Air Force specific publications.

You've met a 19 year old Air Force Lieutentant? I'd like that individual's name and a method in which I can contact them. I don't buy it.

Umm....Here it is for you in black and white

You are required to be a US citizen at least 18 years of age at the time of commissioning and not have reached age 34 by the initial selection board convening date. Navigator and pilot applicants must be commissioned and enter flying training before age 30. All other applicants should be commissioned before age 35.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/holmcenter/OTS/BOT/botapply.asp

The  military absolutely considers an 18 year old an adult.  If they did not, then they would have "Juvenile" sentences in courts-martial cases.

I made no dispute of that. The point is irrelevant. Why did you even post it?

Because you said.....

Keep in mind that the even though society considers an 18 year old adult, the military requires such an adult to complete additional training. Just becoming an adult does not entitle them to something that someone who had enlisted is not.

Which is the same as saying.... the military does not consider an 18 year old an adult unless they go through some type of "adult training". 

CAP is not the Air Force as many like to point out here!

But they control many aspects of our organization. You can argue with them all you want, it's pretty pointless.

Actually they control far less than you would believe.  Since 2000, they basically provide very little oversight and support than they did pre-2000.

By the way...Commission has two "S's" in it.  Usually Capitalized as well.

So, you dispute my statements because of typo? Flimsy argument. In twenty years of service, I've also never seen it stated that "commission" is required to be capitalized. Not certain why you would bother using it as point of debate.

I never once said I dispute or take counterpoint to your statements because of your misspelled words.  I was pointing out that you should press the spell check button.  Most 18 year old people can at least do that.  In fact, to say that I only make argument with you because of typos, means you have no basis for rebuttal and can not think of any better backings for your point of personal view.

/burned/

[Spike]

I think one way to break the "sub-officer" culture for the FOs is to make sure they have all of the same insignia and recognition as it seems the rest of the CAP corps has.  It can only add to the "Who is that?" mentality if they can't wear appropriate insignia.

Touche. Show me a cost-effective way to do it and I'll get behind it.

Let me think.......Vanguard makes changes to molds/ patterns daily.  I think cost effectiveness has no material relevance in the matter. 

[Hawk200]

Don't make assumptions.  You may have been a poorly behaved 18 year old, most I know are not.

You direct me to avoid assumptions, but you make one yourself. Not a very compelling to call someone on something and do it yourself. I was well behaved, the result of being the son of a cop.

What negatives of having 18 year old CAP (CAP....CAP....CAP) 2nd Lt's do you have in mind??

They've been pointed out.

Seriously......what do you have against an 18, 19 or 20 year old person??

Nothing at all. I am curious how you seem to have skipped the experience. I was on once, over half my life ago. The one thing I learned is that most people change more between the ages of 18 and about 22 than any other time. They're forming their own identities separate of the family they grew up with.

Don't forget this is CAP!  It is by no means the Air Force.  Don't bring Air Force rules and regulations into the debate.....because frankly, some of us here are tired of having them thrown at us, when we legally don't have to follow the vast majority of them.  There are less than 8 actual Air Force documents we follow.  One being the Drill and Ceremonies Publication.  We follow many more DoD publications related to our Charter (mostly at the National Headquarters level) than we do Air Force specific publications.

And something you apparently keep forgetting is that the Air Force still controls many aspects of CAP.

Second, the issue was concerning ages of personnel receiving commissions in the Air Force. You seem to be conveniently forgetting that point so that you can lambast me with your opinion on another subject.

You are required to be a US citizen at least 18 years of age at the time of commissioning and not have reached age 34 by the initial selection board convening date. Navigator and pilot applicants must be commissioned and enter flying training before age 30. All other applicants should be commissioned before age 35.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/holmcenter/OTS/BOT/botapply.asp[/quote]

And you point that out under a commissioning program requirement. Now show me multiple examples of teenage officers, and I'll consider a similar concept for our members.

Also, someone going through a commissioning program is going to have a very intense maturing experience. The 18 year old off the street is not. And before you ask again, I used to be that age. I now know full well that most people are not prepared for such responsbilities at that age.

Keep in mind that the even though society considers an 18 year old adult, the military requires such an adult to complete additional training. Just becoming an adult does not entitle them to something that someone who had enlisted is not.

Which is the same as saying.... the military does not consider an 18 year old an adult unless they go through some type of "adult training".

No, it is not the same, so your statement is a lie. My point, if you had read it instead of simply getting angry, was that the military requires an 18 year old adult to receive additional training to receive a commission. An 18 year cannot walk of the street and receive a commission immediately. It doesn't happen. Programs are required to be completed.

CAP is not the Air Force as many like to point out here!

But they control many aspects of our organization. You can argue with them all you want, it's pretty pointless.

Actually they control far less than you would believe.  Since 2000, they basically provide very little oversight and support than they did pre-2000.

By the way...Commission has two "S's" in it.  Usually Capitalized as well.

So, you dispute my statements because of typo? Flimsy argument. In twenty years of service, I've also never seen it stated that "commission" is required to be capitalized. Not certain why you would bother using it as point of debate.

I never once said I dispute or take counterpoint to your statements because of your misspelled words.  I was pointing out that you should press the spell check button.  Most 18 year old people can at least do that.  In fact, to say that I only make argument with you because of typos, means you have no basis for rebuttal and can not think of any better backings for your point of personal view.

/burned/

Burned? I addressed that as an endpoint after replying to yours. But I'm guessing you don't care to argue logically. You think I should simply accept your viewpoint, because it's yours, without respect to my own experiences or logic. You have distinctly failed to convince me.

[BrandonKea]

/burned/

Seriously? All your credibility just went right out the window.

This has gotten so far out of hand, just like every discussion-turned-argument about flight officers grades. If you want to fix something, write a proposal and send it through your chain of command. Complaining on CT is not going to fix anything.

[Always Ready]

Whoa! I came in late on this one. But I'm still going to say a few things.

Insignia problem: How many Brigadier Generals and Major Generals are there in CAP? I don't know and I don't feel like looking it up. But I would assume that there are more FOs than 1 and 2 star Generals in CAP. Then why don't they make all the different types of insignia for FOs? Well according to the person I talked to at Vanguard, NHQ tells them what to make. Requests for grade insignia (like plastic covered) need to be made through NHQ, not Vanguard. For once Vanguard isn't the problem. (While I've gotten to the point I don't care about grade insignia anymore, I may go through official channels this summer to see if I can get this to happen.)

Tracking FO grades by NHQ: See this thread (linky) For those of you who hate to read my rants, here's the short story: NHQ doesn't think there is enough people in the FO grades to track at the National level. If you have a problem with this, use your chain of command to recommend that they change this.

FO Program complaints: If you really want to do something about this, use your chain of command to request NHQ to change the policy. Be professional about it and don't make your proposal look like a *insert word that rhymes with 'witching'* session.

I'm currently a TFO. (If you want to know what I think of the FO program read my previous posts or PM me.) I've been in three different units in three different wings as a FO. I've been with my current unit for eight months. Some people treat me like I am still a cadet officer and some people treat me like they treat every other adult. Most of the pilots don't know what to think of me. My SQ/CC treats me like everyone else (and he's over triple my age). Another person, my parents' age, thinks I should have stayed a cadet, and treats me like a cadet. The cadets think I am the AE god

Here's my advice to FOs who are having problems with people: Act like an adult! Go to all the meetings, do your job, progress in the PD stuff, and learn some tact. If you do all of these things, people will take care of you. What I mean is, you will have less problems during your stint as a FO. Certain problems will not go away anytime soon. Try to stay positive and don't get burnt out on CAP.

[USADOD]

Be nice people.

[BrandonKea]

I think Always Ready about summed it up...  :clap:

[USADOD]

Here's my advice to FOs who are having problems with people: Act like an adult! Go to all the meetings, do your job, progress in the PD stuff, and learn some tact. If you do all of these things, people will take care of you. What I mean is, you will have less problems during your stint as a FO. Certain problems will not go away anytime soon. Try to stay positive and don't get burnt out on CAP.

Agreed.

[Hawk200]

Tracking FO grades by NHQ: See this thread (linky) For those of you who hate to read my rants, here's the short story: NHQ doesn't think there is enough people in the FO grades to track at the National level. If you have a problem with this, use your chain of command to recommend that they change this.

I'm curious as to how many Spaatz recipients we have opposed to Flight Officers. I've met a couple dozen FO's (of various grades). I've only met a handful of cadet Colonels.

[Always Ready]

Tracking FO grades by NHQ: See this thread (linky) For those of you who hate to read my rants, here's the short story: NHQ doesn't think there is enough people in the FO grades to track at the National level. If you have a problem with this, use your chain of command to recommend that they change this.

I'm curious as to how many Spaatz recipients we have opposed to Flight Officers. I've met a couple dozen FO's (of various grades). I've only met a handful of cadet Colonels.

Good question. In my experience, I find that there about as many current Spaatz Cadets as there are FOs, usually less though. But, it doesn't really matter since it is a Cadet promotion. They track all Cadet and Senior promotions (including NCO grades) in eServices except Flight Officers.

A better question to ask would be, "How many SM NCOs are there in CAP compared to FOs?" A friend of mine is a CAP SM NCO and I have met maybe two others.

[BrandonKea]

Tracking FO grades by NHQ: See this thread (linky) For those of you who hate to read my rants, here's the short story: NHQ doesn't think there is enough people in the FO grades to track at the National level. If you have a problem with this, use your chain of command to recommend that they change this.

I'm curious as to how many Spaatz recipients we have opposed to Flight Officers. I've met a couple dozen FO's (of various grades). I've only met a handful of cadet Colonels.

Good question. In my experience, I find that there about as many current Spaatz Cadets as there are FOs, usually less though. But, it doesn't really matter since it is a Cadet promotion. They track all Cadet and Senior promotions (including NCO grades) in eServices except Flight Officers.

A better question to ask would be, "How many SM NCOs are there in CAP compared to FOs?" A friend of mine is a CAP SM NCO and I have met maybe two others.

I'll be honest, I've never seen a CAP SM NCO, I've met 3 to 4 active C/Col's, and I think I've met 5 FO's of varying degrees in my years...

[jimmydeanno]

Hawk,

In regards to commissioning into the AF before 21, it is very feasable, although probably extremely rare.

16 year old going to college, joins ROTC (no commitment until last two years), finishes BA in 3 years would commission at 19.

That's not even some odd program like high school to flight school, etc.

[Bobble]

As illustrated, individuals who are between the age of 18 and 21 and have not participated in the CAP Cadet Program are eligible to be awarded FO status -


CAPR 35-5 21 AUGUST 2008 17

SECTION G - FLIGHT OFFICER GRADES

7-1. General. Only senior members under 21 years of age will be appointed to or promoted to the flight officer grades. This category is designed as a transition for cadets transferring to senior member status and for those senior members who are otherwise eligible for CAP officer grade except that they have not yet reached the minimum age of 21. Upon reaching age 21, the member will be appointed to an appropriate officer grade or will be classified as a senior member without grade until he or she is eligible for promotion to officer grade.


Please note the use of the word "elegible" and the phrasing "...appointed or promoted to the flight officer grades."  It appears that many cadets are under the mistaken impression that the award of FO status, after reaching the age of 18 and changing to "Senior" status, is 'automatic' if they so desire. See below -


CAPR 35-5 21 AUGUST 2008 17

SECTION G - FLIGHT OFFICER GRADES

7-4. Promotion Eligibility Requirements.

a. General.

(3) Leadership qualities. Individuals recommended for promotion to flight officer grade must be occupying positions of supervision or leadership within the unit.


Note the use of the word "must".  It is the Squadron Commander's decision as to whether or not the individual should receive FO/TFO/SFO.  Sadly, there are some (certainly not all) cadets in my squadron who are finishing or who have finished their time in the Cadet Program to the age of 18 with a whimper instead of a bang, to put it nicely.  For those individuals, I have suggested they request a transfer to a Senior Squadron, where their new Commanding Officer can evaluate their performance and determine if the award of FO grade is indeed appropriate.  They certainly wouldn't be awarded it where they are now.

I currently have a TFO as part of my senior staff.  He does a fantastic job, and he is treated with the same respect and courtesy as any other Senior Member.  As the CO, one of my jobs is to make sure that we have no issues in this regard.

As the saying goes - 'Lead, follow, or get the heck out of the way.'

[Spike]

Hawk,

Most of us here were 18 at one time.  Your experiences are vastly different than mine and others.  Don't assume that because "you know" from experience because you you were 18, that everyone acts like you, or has the same experiences.

I have met both a 39 year old 2nd Lt, and a 19 year old AIR FORCE SECOND LIEUTENANT.  How much clearer can we all make it for you.  Just because you have never run into one, does not mean they do not exist. 

You have yet to answer the question on what the negatives there would be by having an 18 year old CAP 2nd Lt.  If you say relationships with Cadets, don't even bother posting a reply, as those are so far and few between. 

Can you grasp the concept that CAP is not the Air Force??  We have no Commissions, no UCMJ, etc.  CAP rank insignia is (and I really hate to say it publicly) meaningless.  Especially when most missions are driven and controlled by people who progressed further in training than others.  Rank has very little to do in CAP.  That is why a 2nd Lt can command a Squadron full of Lt Col's. 

I now know how you think, and pity those that are volunteers with you.

PLEASE PRESS THE SPELL CHECK BUTTON!!!