Does anyone have a rule-of-thumb or some sort of personal criteria they use when determining whether a member should be transferred to a HHQ unit?

Many members hold HHQ or even NHQ roles while remaining assigned to a lower level unit. eServices accesses are tied to duty assignment level, so any member with a duty at the HHQ will have the HHQ access they need, but conversely, a member assigned to a HHQ can still have a duty position in a lower level unit, too. Logistically, keeping members at the lowest reasonable level simplifies personnel management, but it ultimately seems fairly arbitrary where a member is assigned. 

So, what are your thoughts on when/why a member should be transferred to a HHQ unit? Is there ever an operational advantage to transferring a member to a HHQ if they're active at both the local and HHQ levels? Are there any Group/Wing/Region HQs that have a local policy on transfers? There doesn't seem to be any official guidance (at least that I've found), so I'd like to hear some different opinions.

I kinda wondered where you went sir. Congrats on the retirement. I hope you got a nice retirement party!

I am also retiring on December 1, 2026 which will be 20 years for me. I am saddened by how things turned out for me in the end but I did some pretty awesome things over the years and a new chapter of my life has opened up so it is time to move on.

A number of things you mentioned on uniforms are nuances that the general public may or may not take notice or care about but for those of us "in the know" can really grind our gears. But, proper uniform wear is one of my biggest pet peeves. During my 3 command tours, my uniform inspections were known to be brutal. Of course, I didn't haze my people but I held them to the standards (within professional reason, based upon their grade and availability of components) and I demonstrated the standards as the commander. Commanders need to demonstrate and enforce the standards.

Back to your primary topic as to the future of ES in the organization, I don't know where that will lead but it seems like we need to find the new niche that will be a focus for the next decade and strive for excellence in that area. I believe a more agile approach that meets the ever-changing needs of the public would be beneficial - trying to stick to the past needs that are rarely - if ever - actually called upon seems like an unnecessary challenge.

Quote from: NIN on November 20, 2025, 03:48:40 PM

I like the fact it's using the AUX tab, and the only difference, so far, is the color.

Will this allow the wear of up to four badges like the OCP uniform?

Many on this forum know me, but for those that don't, I retired from CAP earlier in 2025 after 38 years in the program, with my first five being as a cadet. I had always been involved in ES and considered it an equal effort of mine along with cadet programs. At the time of my retirement I had been a qualified observer, IC, ground branch director, along with many other boxes checked on my 101 card.

For 30 years while continuously serving in CAP, I've spent three decades in the military (active and guard), was a volunteer firefighter/EMT, police officer, and have years working with and around emergency managers at all levels. For the past couple of years, I've been a Guard Emergency Liaison Officer (GELO) as part of my duties in the Air National Guard.

All that to simply say, I wasn't the most-ES guy in the room, but I was fairly qualified with a lot of real-world experience.

I retired from CAP for a number of reasons, none of which was because I was bitter toward the organization or any one thing "finished me". Simply, I needed to detach myself because it was a self-inflicting wound as I couldn't seem to say "no" and I really needed to focus on work and family. To put it simply, I still love and support CAP.

On to my topic: Credibility is Currency in ES

Is CAP a credible SAR organization? Is our credibility worth anything? If so, how much?

What ES functions do we excel at other than flying?

If you talked to a police chief, fire chief, or emergency director, is CAP on their go-to list of organizations to call when someone needs finding or an airplane is known to have crashed and they need people on the ground to locate it?

I still follow a lot of CAP social media (albeit mostly gone) and to this day scratch my head when I see certain images of our members involved in ES. The question I ask is, "Do we lose credibility by our appearance alone?"

Let me clarify that I'm mostly referring to all things ES on the ground, not Air Operations. So include UDF, GT, Mission Base, Comms, etc., does our overall, broad appearance, cause us to lose credibility?

EXAMPLE: Earlier this week I saw a picture of a group of members, cadets and seniors, out in the field posing for a picture after completing some ground team training. I won't post the picture, but you've all seen it hundreds of times.

PICTURE THIS: 15 members, 11 cadets and 4 seniors, OCPs, ABUs, BBDUs, and a senior with the polo/gray pant combo. You've got cadets aged 12 through 20 and seniors aged 25 through 60; all shapes and sizes. You've got a couple cadets with over-sized ABUs and ill-fitting patrol caps, a couple of cadets in OCPs, seniors are a mixed bag, but no one is actually wearing their uniforms incorrectly. Individually, they mostly seem to look decent.

Then dissect it one by one and then as a group and here's what I found:
- Missing rank on OCPs.
- Sunglasses resting on patrol cap.
- Three didn't blouse their boots.
- No one has anything matching as far as individual equipment.
- Some wearing reflective vests, some not.
- Half the reflective vests are too big (on cadets).
- Of those wearing them, none of the vests are the same style/color.
- Boot laces hanging loose.
- Civilian cold weather clothing mixed in.
- Water: canteens, Nalgene bottles, disposable bottles, CamelBaks, etc.
- Of the individual equipment displayed, most is clearly not of professional grade, i.e., toy-looking compasses and whistles, dollar store first aid kits, etc.

I get it, safety first! Keep them warm! Keep them safe! No question about it and not arguing that aspect of it. But what are we trying to accomplish? Where do we strike the balance of "professional" or "liability"?

Are we using ES as sort of field craft and life skills educational program? Which would be cool in my opinion. Or are we selling our organization as a viable and respected resource to be called upon to support missing person searches, communities devastated by natural disasters, or even spending a couple of days looking for an overdue airplane in a national forest? What exactly are we trying to do?

Now that I have spent a few years working with emergency managers across my state and looking at it from a perspective as a lead agency, I ask myself, would I want the team, as described above, to show up to support my emergency operation? Specifically, missing person or aircraft missions.

Or, should CAP focus only on Points of Distribution (PODs), food banks, CERT-type operations, etc.?

I know many squadrons all over the country who simply don't get involved in ES, but there's always one or two, maybe three, cadets who go to HMRS or NESA every year, and then return to their units, never applying what they learn. Is it worth it?

I bought a hat and had my rank and name directly embroidered onto the cap by a local embroidery shop.

Now unless the new 39-1 regulation ICL allowing OCP's is changed, these will be phased out in 3 years.

I'm in OCP's now, so it turned out to really be a waste of my money.

The Vanguard AUX tab is pretty poor... at least the first version, dont know if an improvement is in the works.  The one shown (minus the silver border) is a more accurate color version to the ones the USAF was using up until earlier this year.

Even without the border, the letters are just too huge and "Aux" just doesn't make any sense.  Either use Air Force Auxiliary or don't.

Quote from: RiverAux on November 22, 2025, 06:40:24 PMThe Aux patch looks ridiculous. 

That's not the current version, eliminate the white border.

The Aux patch looks ridiculous. 

Quote from: GroundHawg on November 21, 2025, 04:41:47 PM

Quote from: NIN on November 20, 2025, 03:48:40 PM

That is beautiful!!! Authorize those for cadet wear and then we could have entire squadrons in one big beautiful blue utility uniform!!!

I'd be willing to support this.