FO, TFO, SFO, and SM

[Spiritsoar]

35-5 only discusses how you get appointed to the various grades.
It doesn't talk about the "authority relationships".

Arguably there aren't any, anyway...  so we're talking basically about rendering customs and courtesies here.  Do you suppose a 2d Lt would salute a SFO?


I don't think any CAP regulation actually defines this clearly.
However generally speaking, a CAP Officer 'commissioned' (2LT-MG)
would outrank any "un-commissioned" (SMWOG & FO-SFO)
and any non-commissioned (SSgt-CMSgt)

This seemed like an easy corollary to Active Duty, until I realized that the Air Force is the only service that doesn't use Warrant Officers.  But if they did, that seems to be what FOs are.  They fall above enlisted, below officers, and are rendered salutes.  The fact that they probably know more about CAP than a 2d Lt fits right in, because in the Army a WO3 probably knows a ton more than a 2LT, but still salutes one.  SM reminds me of when we would get Officer Cadets in to do orientations with us AD.  Us enlisted rendered salutes to get them used to it, but they really had no idea what life in the real military was like, and followed around the officers getting the hang of things. 

[Spaceman3750]

Since warrant officers are highly-experienced NCOs/SMEs that have been promoted, I don't really think FO vs. WO is a fair comparison, and I discourage it at every turn.

[SAR-EMT1]

OT's and Cadets don't fit anywhere in the chain of command.

AFROTC cadets are enlisted members of the Air Force Reserve serving without pay, until they comission... 
(Kidding). I don't think that means they're part of that CoC. Not to say that I can't be corrected...

Only the ones on a scholarship. It is possible to complete the program and never see a dime (or CAC card )

[SAR-EMT1]

Since warrant officers are highly-experienced NCOs/SMEs that have been promoted, I don't really think FO vs. WO is a fair comparison, and I discourage it at every turn.

Except the 19 year olds at Rucker that are learning to fly the crashhawk ...

And the 20 year olds at the same location who are serving as IP's / CFI's

Personally I have always ENCOURAGED the comparison using exactly this example.
Because even active duty doesn't allow you to commission until you are 21. (At least that was the case when I was in )

[Eclipse]

There is no correlation whatsoever between FO and WO.  Further, I would not point to most CAP FO's as knowing more than the average CAP 2D Lt.

In most cases they are either new members under 21, or newly transitioned cadets who believe they know something, but in a high percentage have no clue how CAP actually works beyond the small window they personally experienced.

[lordmonar]

Since warrant officers are highly-experienced NCOs/SMEs that have been promoted, I don't really think FO vs. WO is a fair comparison, and I discourage it at every turn.

That goes for all CAP rank.....so the argument is invalid.

[lordmonar]

Since warrant officers are highly-experienced NCOs/SMEs that have been promoted, I don't really think FO vs. WO is a fair comparison, and I discourage it at every turn.

Except the 19 year olds at Rucker that are learning to fly the crashhawk ...

And the 20 year olds at the same location who are serving as IP's / CFI's

Personally I have always ENCOURAGED the comparison using exactly this example.
Because even active duty doesn't allow you to commission until you are 21. (At least that was the case when I was in )

according to the USAF web site....you only have to be 17 to go to OTS.
http://www.airforce.com/contact-us/faq/eligibility/#what-cut-off-age

[Ned]

There is no correlation whatsoever between FO and WO.  Further, I would not point to most CAP FO's as knowing more than the average CAP 2D Lt.

In most cases they are either new members under 21, or newly transitioned cadets who believe they know something, but in a high percentage have no clue how CAP actually works beyond the small window they personally experienced.

Well, there certainly is a historical connection.  I have been around long encough to have served with many senior member CAP warrant officers.  Then, as now, it was used as an officer rank for senior members under the age of 21, including (but not limited to) former cadet officers.

After the traditional lag period following the AF discontinuing the WO grades, CAP invented the FO system that tracked our old WO system pretty closely.

And as an aside, even in the rare circumstance of that newly transitioned former cadet that knows little beyond the cadet program, you still have an asset that knows more about the CP than most seniors ever will.

Which is a shame considering that CP is the largest single component of CAP.

But since the CP has to endure our fair share of seniors who nothing about it, so I suppose the reverse observation is fair.   

[SAR-EMT1]

Since warrant officers are highly-experienced NCOs/SMEs that have been promoted, I don't really think FO vs. WO is a fair comparison, and I discourage it at every turn.

Except the 19 year olds at Rucker that are learning to fly the crashhawk ...

And the 20 year olds at the same location who are serving as IP's / CFI's

Personally I have always ENCOURAGED the comparison using exactly this example.
Because even active duty doesn't allow you to commission until you are 21. (At least that was the case when I was in )

according to the USAF web site....you only have to be 17 to go to OTS.
http://www.airforce.com/contact-us/faq/eligibility/#what-cut-off-age

How is this possible ? The USAF requires a BA or BS to be COMPLETED prior to OTS.
Same as every branch of the service (even the Army )


http://www.afoats.af.mil/ots/BOT/botapply.asp

Eligibility Requirements
"To apply for OTS, you are required to be a graduate of a regionally accredited college or university who is available to depart for training within 365 days.

[DBlair]

Since warrant officers are highly-experienced NCOs/SMEs that have been promoted, I don't really think FO vs. WO is a fair comparison, and I discourage it at every turn.

Except the 19 year olds at Rucker that are learning to fly the crashhawk ...

And the 20 year olds at the same location who are serving as IP's / CFI's

Personally I have always ENCOURAGED the comparison using exactly this example.
Because even active duty doesn't allow you to commission until you are 21. (At least that was the case when I was in )

according to the USAF web site....you only have to be 17 to go to OTS.
http://www.airforce.com/contact-us/faq/eligibility/#what-cut-off-age

How is this possible ? The USAF requires a BA or BS to be COMPLETED prior to OTS.
Same as every branch of the service (even the Army )

I believe that by law the minimum age to commission in any branch is 21, but I believe there are various opportunities to attend earlier and then upon graduation from college, they receive their commission. I'm not sure of how each branch handles this, but an example of this would be the Marines having the PLC program where Officer Candidates attend 2 segments of OCS, split over the summer break during college, starting either Freshman or Sophomore year which could potentially make the candidate 17 or 18 years old.

[bosshawk]

In my experience with the military, the rules for commissioning change with the times: depends a lot on how many Lts they need.  Right now, the rules are tight, so a degree and age 21 seem to rule.

I happened to be commissioned in the Army when I was one week away from my 21st birthday: didn't seem to be a problem at that time.  I was only 51 when I retired after 30 yrs(they extended me 30 days past my commissioning anniversary for some strange reason.

IMHO, the comparison between Army Warrants and FO. TFO, etc in CAP is a bit off a stretch, but you guys go right ahead with the comparison.  In the Military Intelligence field where I spent most of my time, the Warrants were my right hands  I also flew with Warrants and they were great.  In fact, most of the IPs and SIPs were Warrants in the Army.

[SARDOC]

In reference to the Over 21 to be commissioned.  When I search I can only find a maximum age but not a minimum age.  The logical assumption that after 4 years of college one would be 21 or 22 years old...But I don't know that there is actually a rule against it.  Not one that I can find anyway.

The OTS referenced above says that one must be at least 17 toApply not graduate.  I would take that as definitive proof that one can be commissioned earlier than 21.  I can't find supporting documents either way.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Since warrant officers are highly-experienced NCOs/SMEs that have been promoted, I don't really think FO vs. WO is a fair comparison, and I discourage it at every turn.

With the exception of Army Aviation, which takes pipeliners off civvy street.

However, by the time they've made it through Fort Rucker, they are quite worthy of a salute and address as "Sir/Ma'am."  My ex-brother-in-law (E-6) tried to do WO School and Army Aviation back in the early '80s and he washed-out.

The Navy has a "Flying Warrant Officer" billet whereby CWO's can qualify to fly helos, E-2's, etc.

The comparison made of SM to Officer Cadet is really more apropos to the Canadians...they have a grade called Officer Cadet, where they are known as "subordinate officers" and are not entitled to a salute, but are learning to be officers.

However, the RCN has a semi-joking term for their Naval Cadets, "quarter-inch Admirals, referring to the 1/4" gold braid around their cuff and the attitude that some apparently have of 'you DO owe me a salute'."

Officer Cadets from the three Canadian services (though two are Army)...I think they are broadly more like our SM's would be except they are, of course, Real Military.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officer_Cadet

[SarDragon]

Slightly OT, but the "Flying Warrant Officer" program sounds like the olde LDO aviator program from back in the '80s. Wonder how long this program will end up lasting. It's almost six years old. I don't think LDO Aviator lasted that long. The biggest hassles revolved around the non-flying duties.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

It's still going.

http://www.navyflyingcwo.org/

Back on topic (hopefully!), I think that the FO ranks should be just for new members under 21...say a cadet with at least a Mitchell can go over to the officer side right away, as a 2nd LT.

Then again, and I'm in the unpopular minority here (what else is new!) I support stopping the cadet programme at 18.  At 18 they're adults, they have to go through CPPT, so why not treat them as what they are?

My first squadron produced a Spaatz cadet, and she stayed a cadet as long as she could and then came in as a Captain...she didn't much like it.

I would wholeheartedly support renaming the odious "SMWOG," "SM" etc. with "Officer Cadet," "Officer Trainee," or "Officer Candidate."

[GroundHawg]

Since warrant officers are highly-experienced NCOs/SMEs that have been promoted, I don't really think FO vs. WO is a fair comparison, and I discourage it at every turn.

Except the 19 year olds at Rucker that are learning to fly the crashhawk ...

And the 20 year olds at the same location who are serving as IP's / CFI's

Personally I have always ENCOURAGED the comparison using exactly this example.
Because even active duty doesn't allow you to commission until you are 21. (At least that was the case when I was in )

according to the USAF web site....you only have to be 17 to go to OTS.
http://www.airforce.com/contact-us/faq/eligibility/#what-cut-off-age

How is this possible ? The USAF requires a BA or BS to be COMPLETED prior to OTS.
Same as every branch of the service (even the Army )


http://www.afoats.af.mil/ots/BOT/botapply.asp

Eligibility Requirements
"To apply for OTS, you are required to be a graduate of a regionally accredited college or university who is available to depart for training within 365 days.

Two ways I can think of. Lots of our local high schools now have a college prep program in which when you graduate HS, you also graduate from a local university with an associates degree, and a few hard chargers have completed their BA within a year, and I thought I heard of one getting their BA at the same time as their HS diploma.
The second is that there is another local school that goes year round and is highly advanced. These kids graduate around the age of 15 and start college and university then, graduating around 18-19 years old.
http://www.covingtonlatin.org/default.aspx

Its highly unlikely but I guess its possible

[lordmonar]

How about this.

Every SM 21 or not starts as Flight Officer...from day one to six months....they are not SMWOG, or Officer Candidate, or SM....they are Flight officers.
Level I plus six months gets them TFO....TFO, Tech rateing plus 1 year gets them SFO...SFO 1 year and age 21 gets you 2d Lt.

Pros.....it makes the FO ranks part of the officer progression.  It eliminates the "FO's are just old cadets" syndrom.  It eliminats the wordy SMWOR designation and places them within a specif place in the chain of command.  It will low the number of high ranking officers.  1st Lt becomes the old Capt, Capt is major and major is LT Col.  We can make Lt Col a much harder rank to get (like actually get your Level V).....thus reducing a lot of the top heavy units.

Cons....change for change sake.  Changing all the regulations and training material to get it on line.
Develping all the uniform rule and items that have been over looked for so long because there are only a handful of FO's. 

[Eclipse]

^ I would sign this if it included a restriction on advanced grade within at least the first year or membership, regardless of
what you bring to the table.

[lordmonar]

^ I would sign this if it included a restriction on advanced grade within at least the first year or membership, regardless of
what you bring to the table.

That is a differnt argument....but I would go with advance grade is always level I plus six months before getting promoted.  That would solidify the idea that everyone.......even the retired Major General.....had to be a CAP FO before moving on.

[tsrup]

If you were going to do anything I would say get rid of the FO ranks all together.  Having been one I see no reason why they existed in the first place.  You get a 3 year SFO with a mission specialty and experience outranked by a new member with 6 months and level one just because they are a little bit older? 

It doesn't make sense, and anyone that encountered me when I was a FO was just confused anyways.


I mean I cannot see one logical argument that would qualify a 21 year old more than an 18 year old for cap officer ranks in our program.  None.