OK....Now that the issue of who is leading the organization is over (These aren't the droids you're looking for ) what will happen to our relationship with our parent the Air Force.
Will we move closer and become more a member of the family ??
Or will they shy away from us as the red headed step child that got expelled from school?
Discus.
very little change.
Quote from: RiverAux on October 03, 2007, 08:57:22 PM
very little change.
For now. Remember this flight schedule is subject to change.
It's hard to tell. How does the AF feel about the way CAP handled the situation? Maybe they will recognize our abilities, and support us better.
I think it is a step in the right direction of moving closer. It shows that CAP took the matter seriously and it was handled and the person wasn't slapped on the wrist.
USAF likes people who follow regulations and hold its personnel accountable for them.
When CAP members talk about moving closer to the Air Force I'm never quite sure what they mean. Talk to six members and you will get six different answers. So, what do you mean by moving closer to the Air Force? If it means spending more money/resources on CAP I don't see it happening
What I meant by being closer is being the Aux of the AF and not a corporation that is more interested in doing it's "own" thing. It seemed under TP there was a push tobe independant of the AF rather than part of the whole force package. The corporation seemed to thumb it's nose at the AF and say "we're going to do our own thing and you can't stop us."
This was evidenced by the removal of AF AUX from the tails of the planes, the change in the command patch, etc. Some will say that was due to possee commitatus, but we needn't have worried about that if we were doing the AF thing and not our own gig. Besides, Air Natl Guard does some of the kind of things CAP does and they haven't had to remove the AF markings or change thier uniforms patches.
My prediction:
We will continue to be an independant not for proffitt corp
We will not be the full time auxiliary of the Air force
We will build closer working relationships, and a better command relationship
Thats what I see
Theory: It would depend on the view of the USAF members on the BoG. I think (I don't know for sure) that they would be the reporting entities to the AF so what they take away from this defines the light the we are shown in. If they decide that we did a good job of handling the situation, acted professional throughout, and believe that we will take steps to prevent this in the future, I think that we will form a stronger business relationship with the mother-force.
I've been a member of CAP for....well a long time. I sometimes get the impression that some of the posters here think that there was some sort of golden age in which CAP and the Air Force were almost one. In my experience the Air Force has always held CAP at arms length.
Some will point to times in the past when the AF provided airlift and facilities much more often than they do now. I think the reason that happened was because the AF had many more facilities and aircraft back then and they weren't involved in a shooting war. Since I joined CAP Calif. has lost 7 Air Force bases alone. If the AF today had the same number of facilities and aircraft today I'm sure we would be receiving more support. As for the good ole days, anyone remember when the only corporate vehicles we had were worn out DRMO rejects that sucked up money like there was no tomorrow? Corporate aircraft were scarce and most searches were done with member owned A/C? And NHQ was staffed by AF personnel and all of the program directors were AF officers? And in many respects NHQ was less efficient and much less responsive than it is now.
The AF has always held CAP at a distance in my experience. While I would also like a closer relationship I think we need to look at it in the perspective of time and not fall into the trap of convincing ourselves that things used to be so much better. And even referring to CAP as the "Aux" is a relatively new phenomenon in CAP history.
And why would the Air Force not be excited about someone else providing us with missions (and paying for them) to sharpen our skills and raise our public image? I don't see us being overworked with AF only missions. ;D
I've been around a long time, too, and what PA Guy says about USAF holding us at arrm's length is quite true....some of the distance is our own doing, but some of it is simply the fact that our day to day mission is really so different from theirs.
Quote from: Short Field on October 04, 2007, 03:31:10 AM
And why would the Air Force not be excited about someone else providing us with missions (and paying for them) to sharpen our skills and raise our public image? I don't see us being overworked with AF only missions. ;D
That's the way I see it. As long as CAP is still available for the AF to use when needed, they won't care if we take other missions, and in fact will promote it as CAP can bring in outside funds. Every dollar CAP brings in from outside is one more dollar to be used for CAP's benefit that the AF doesn't have to cough up.
As long as CAP isn't doing things to discredit the AF, it's a win-win for everyone.