Suspending squadrons because Wing failed to do SUIs???

[JohnKachenmeister]

JC,

You seem to have forgotten CAP already has a "support staff", they reside at your National Headquarters, and both you and the Air Force pays from them.

Why do you "need" an IG system, other than for an out-of-touch leadership team that in the absence of the UCMJ and statutory authority needs a "strong stick" to cower its fellow club members into submission by the treat of removal.

Let us compare and contrast.

While the CAP types like to say they are "the USAF Auxiliary", a REAL legal auxiliary does exist (see 14 USC 821) in the USCG Auxiliary.

Funny, they don't have an IG system. If there is a violation of law (remember, since the Auxiliary is a part of the Coast Guard, the regulations and training requirements are only USCG, not watered down CAP regs.) said violation is investigated by the Coast Guard IG. So... if false or spurious charges are brought up (a'la Pineda), it is most likely the accuser rather than the accused will find themselves under a very legal microscope.

Perhaps this may be why while the CG Auxiliary has only about 35, 000 members (compared to the 30,000 adult members in CAP) they are able to save about 3,500 to 4,500 lives every year (again to CAP's 20 to 40, less than half if you take out the high numbers from Alaska)

Seem if you want to push paper and wear rank, CAP is the place to be.

However, if you are more mission focused and truly want to make a difference in your community, then perhaps the CGA is where real operational work gets done.

Think about this before you answer me, and discover the truth in your heart and in your organization.

OK, Old Timer, I'll take on your angry and misinformed opinions.

1.  The CG Aux is organized completely differently from the AF Aux.  In 1948, Congress, in its infinite "Wisdom," decided that CAP could be an asset of both the USAF and state and local govts, and non-govt organizations.  To facilitate this, the CAP was reorganized as a public corporation, so that it could enter into contracts at the state level.

2.  The USAF is ultimately responsible for inspecting CAP.  The AF uses trained CAP IG's (trained at the USAF IG school, by the way) to accomplish this mission under their supervision.  We have IG's to make sure that USAF money and USAF assets are adequately protected.

3.  Yes, the CG Aux claims more lives saved.  So what?  Consider the nature of their saves to ours.  We look for lost and missing aircraft.  Aircraft crashes are almost always fatal.  When aircraft and the Granite Planet collide, flesh and blood stands very little chance.  The sea is far more forgiving.

Now go back under your bridge.

[DakRadz]

Perhaps this may be why while the CG Auxiliary has only about 35, 000 members (compared to the 30,000 adult members in CAP) they are able to save about 3,500 to 4,500 lives every year (again to CAP's 20 to 40, less than half if you take out the high numbers from Alaska)

3.  Yes, the CG Aux claims more lives saved.  So what?  Consider the nature of their saves to ours.  We look for lost and missing aircraft.  Aircraft crashes are almost always fatal.  When aircraft and the Granite Planet collide, flesh and blood stands very little chance.  The sea is far more forgiving.

Now go back under your bridge.

Agreed with Lt. Col. K- all those saves include drunken rednecks (personal experience, not stereotyping), crazy college kids on spring break, and a plethora of others who- wait for it!- *generally aren't capable of piloting a plane/allowed a PPL*
Some states (Georgia, for one, and has major waterways!) don't even require a boater's license- just crank it up and grab a six-pack, we can credit the CGAUX with a save today!!!

[DBlair]

Perhaps this may be why while the CG Auxiliary has only about 35, 000 members (compared to the 30,000 adult members in CAP) they are able to save about 3,500 to 4,500 lives every year (again to CAP's 20 to 40, less than half if you take out the high numbers from Alaska)

3.  Yes, the CG Aux claims more lives saved.  So what?  Consider the nature of their saves to ours.  We look for lost and missing aircraft.  Aircraft crashes are almost always fatal.  When aircraft and the Granite Planet collide, flesh and blood stands very little chance.  The sea is far more forgiving.

Now go back under your bridge.

Agreed with Lt. Col. K- all those saves include drunken rednecks (personal experience, not stereotyping), crazy college kids on spring break, and a plethora of others who- wait for it!- *generally aren't capable of piloting a plane/allowed a PPL*
Some states (Georgia, for one, and has major waterways!) don't even require a boater's license- just crank it up and grab a six-pack, we can credit the CGAUX with a save today!!!

Well, beyond this... CAP is called out when there are such aircraft crashes, which happen far less often than boater incidents. The CGAux doesn't just get called out in the same way, but in many cases is already out doing patrols and happens to come across (via chance, radio, etc.) boaters needing assistance. Additionally, as already mentioned, CAP gets called out to look for a crash- which by definition has a high fatality rate. CGAux saves don't often result from some huge incident like a crash, thereby promoting a higher rate of survival.

My CGAux Flotilla counts an extremely high number of saves each year, but then again this is Tampa Bay, Florida, and it seems everyone in this area has a boat or knows someone with one. There are far fewer aircraft out there and pilots don't fly as often as boaters go boating. Not to mention that pilots are highly trained, compared to minimal (if any) boater training. These also factor in the total saves for CAP vs. CGAux.

To be honest, I've been involved with both CAP and CGAux, including ES operations, and to compare the saves between the two are like comparing apples and oranges and not a fair comparison. Each has their own mission and set of applicable factors.

I have to say... Wow, this has been one heck of a thread derail. lol