Here is the agenda for the Nov. meeting:
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/NEC_2011_11_agenda_59A934047FB52.pdf (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/NEC_2011_11_agenda_59A934047FB52.pdf)
My general opinion of the agenda -- A waste of thousands of dollars of CAP money. There is no need for this meeting based on the generally meaningless items on the agenda.
Agenda Item 6 -- Make the Deputy Chief of Chaplains a "temporary" Colonel while in office and then revert back to Lt. Col. Interesting that they are justifying this in part because CAP has more Chaplains than the Air Force. Strenuously apposed by the CAP Chief of Staff since we don't do that for any other national staff jobs.
Item 9 -- Approval of the triangle thingy as an alternative symbol. This was sent to a committee at the spring meeting. Interesting that it is partially being justified on the basis of CAP's other symbols being too military and unfriendly to a civilian audience.
Direction to committee:
QuoteFOLLOW-ON ACTION: The National Commander named the following members to serve on the committee: Col Hayden/NER; Col Guimond; Major Soloman; Ms. DeBardelaben; Mr. Salvador; Col Gloyd, USAF; Col Karton/GLR; a representative from NCAC. The following guidance was provided to the committee: (1) it needs to consider the different usages and to apply a more mandatory usage document and note there may be some alternatives. We may say ―official seal‖ or ―emblem‖ or we may say ―triangle/propeller‖ or ―command patch,‖ but stated more clearly. When it comes to things like business cards, etc. we need to be clear that there may be two ways of doing it. Perhaps also we could say ―based on the positions that people have or who they may be interacting with.‖ (2) In addition to the issues of mandatory use and what categories are appropriate, the committee needs to try to come up with the fewest possible variations, and what iteration of the red 3-bladed propeller will be used to represent CAP, which can be made exciting. But the red 3-bladed propeller is the common theme in all the things being considered, which should be the center piece of the discussion in the committee and how do we use it to represent CAP. Committee to report back to the November 2011 meeting of the NEC.
A style guide is nice, but I'm not thrilled about some people getting to use some symbols but not others.
This meeting is a vast waste of time and money. A couple wings just had the wing C.I. postponed because of a lack of funds to send out the Inspection teams, but we can sure pay for this huh?
Wonderful.
I am guessing that the triangle thingy symbol was designed by Radioman. He is the one always pontificating against anyone thinking CAP is connectd to the military. In fact, I'm sure RM will advocate that symbol be embroidered on the front and back of all uniforms...8" across on the front and 16" across on the back!
No reason in the world why this meeting couldn't be conducted by either a conference call or by one of the on-line meeting services.
The triangle thingy..."too military".... ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)..."bosh," as my sainted grandmother used to say.
What would this purported "civilian audience" thought of this, I wonder:
(http://www.caphistory.org/images/museum_store/poster.jpg)
(http://www.caphistory.org/galleries/CAP%20categories/World%20War%20II/WWII%20Subchasers/images/CAP_104_177.jpg)
note the little "BOMBS LOADED" sign
(http://www.caphistory.org/galleries/CAP%20categories/Post-War/CAP%20Airplanes/images/CAP_Steketee_L16B.jpg)
note the "U.S. AIR FORCE" on the tail
CAP has more chaplains than the Air Force? This is the first I've heard of it...are they counting ANG and AFRES "skypilots" too? Not to mention that our chaplains can be called upon to assist AF chaplains...
Smokey: I thought of RM too. >:D Just make sure that those triangle thingies are bright, scarlet red.
If the powers-that-be make the bloody silly triangle thingy replace the current "MAJCOM" shield, that will be a calculated act of...OK, I'm stopping there, but it was bad enough that we had to replace the one with "U.S. AIR FORCE AUXILIARY" on the scroll underneath.
We have more chaplains because the 32 hour graduate degree requirement can be waived in CAP (though those that receive waivers are not eligible to augment AF chaplains). I'm assuming it cannot be waived in the AF.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on October 27, 2011, 01:06:38 PM
We have more chaplains because the 32 hour graduate degree requirement can be waived in CAP (though those that receive waivers are not eligible to augment AF chaplains). I'm assuming it cannot be waived in the AF.
Correct on both observations.
I don't know one way or the other.....but CAP may have more "fully qualified' chaplains because we don't have any quotas.
The USAF only has so many CH slots....there are only a few chaplains per base....and
CAP has as many as we have bodies.
Quote from: lordmonar on October 28, 2011, 07:36:25 PM
I don't know one way or the other.....but CAP may have more "fully qualified' chaplains because we don't have any quotas.
The USAF only has so many CH slots....there are only a few chaplains per base....and
CAP has as many as we have bodies.
Beat me to it.
" Item 9 -- Approval of the triangle thingy as an alternative symbol. This was sent to a committee at the spring meeting. Interesting that it is partially being justified on the basis of CAP's other symbols being too military and unfriendly to a civilian audience. "
IMHO: The triangle thing looks ridiculous. WHY does anyone think that CAP's other symbols look too military and unfriendly to a civilian audience?
What are we trying to do to ourselves? Does anybody in CAP/USAF want this kind of change? Is taxpayer money being used for this meeting?
Quote from: billford1 on October 30, 2011, 09:16:43 PM
What are we trying to do to ourselves? Does anybody in CAP/USAF want this kind of change?
If that's the case, it could be another example of the AF keeping us at arm's length.
It could also be the corporatists' desire to be as "un-military type" as possible...remember we are the
CIVIL Air Patrol. >:D
Quote from: CyBorg on October 30, 2011, 09:25:21 PM
remember we are the CIVIL Air Patrol. >:D
(http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/4310/branchtape.png)
Quote from: CyBorg on October 30, 2011, 09:25:21 PM
...remember we are the CIVIL Air Patrol. >:D
Did RM hack your account?? :o
:P
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on October 30, 2011, 09:38:07 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on October 30, 2011, 09:25:21 PM
remember we are the CIVIL Air Patrol. >:D
(http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/4310/branchtape.png)
Posting offensive stuff like that should be a bannable offense ;)
Hey, it's got no triangle on it ;-)
/me ducks and hides
My question is, since when is a military-like symbol unfriendly to the civilian populace? Most people I know seem to be supportive of our military. Besides, like it or not, we are a military auxiliary.
Or...where do we stop? Clearly our uniforms (even corporate varieties) are military-like.
I had to read through it about 3-5 times, but I see what they're going for is akin to what the Army did with their star logo....then again they have ended up putting that as a uniform insignia too. Eek!
At least it says it's optional....for now.
NEC approves some additional funded missions
Quote[NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS – Civil Air Patrol's National Executive Committee has authorized a limited number of additional types of missions after reviewing priorities for the use of reduced federal funds during the continuing federal budget uncertainty. The NEC was able to do this because CAP has received some additional federal funding, but the amount is insufficient to go back to normal operations at this time.
With the approval of Maj. Gen. Chuck Car, national commander, the following missions are now authorized:
•Air Force Rescue Coordination Center-approved missions.
•Air Force-approved disaster relief missions.
•Some Air Force-funded training and check ride missions.
•Maintenance "A9" sorties.
•Air Force homeland security missions.
•Other Air Force-approved missions.
•Air Force-approved "B" missions funded by other agencies or by members.
•Corporate "C" missions.
Reduced funding is also affecting the Air Force and other Department of Defense agencies. The situation will likely continue until Congress and President Barack Obama approve the final Fiscal Year 2012 DoD Appropriations Bill.
I'm getting really tired of people throwing the "Civil" part of our name as the focus of where our organization should be heading.
Sure we're civilians serving in a Walter Mitty-type of capacity, but the name Civil Air Patrol only exists because we were first organized under the Office of Civil Defense. An executive order in mid-war that transferred us under the Army Air Forces changed all of that, followed by the two federal laws that were passed after the war.
I am just so tired about how bipolar this organization has become. When are we going to start being unifed in purpose.
I wonder who much different things might be if we were organized like the Coast Guard Auxiliary was. They certainly don't have an identity crisis and they know where they fit in the grand scheme of things.
Besides, put a CAP Crest and the letters "O.P.S" on that red badge, and you have a piece of CAP History...the Owner Pilot Service.
Anyone have results of the NEC meeting??
Did they approve the triangle thingy or did common sense prevail?