Old Vs New Wings

Way back when I first got my observer wings as a cadet in the early 80's the pewter style wings were worn by everyone.  Some wore the old droopy wings and some wore the newer style straight winged wings.  I have sets of both straight and droopy winged wings from back in the day.  So I ordered a new set and received them in today's mail.  CAPM 39-1 4.2.5.3.3.1.  calls for shiny metallic badges.  The new ones are certainly shiny metallic, but then so are my old school wings with the proper care.  Now my question is are the cracker jack wings mandatory or can one still wear the older wings?

CAPM 39-1, Attachment 7 (Page 140) shows you the wings you can wear (with pictures):
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/M391_E6F33EAAEC28A.pdf

I could be wrong (wouldn't be the first time) that you can wear the wings with the silver oxide finish so long as they are brightly polished so as to be "shiny metal". That said, I think that the intent is to only allow the mirror finish, not the silver oxide finish. Yet another one of those areas that is just vague enough to allow for confusion without being so vague that it actually gets fixed.

Way back when I first got my observer wings as a cadet in the early 80's the

I'm a bit curious, since I was a cadet in the early 80s and was told then that cadets weren't permitted to earn MO wings. It was the major factor in why I turned SM on going to college at age 18, since the old regs specifically stated that cadets (age not listed, then) were not allowed to fly on operational missions, while senior members (age not specified) could. So even as an age 18 cadet, I was not allowed to train as MO, but as an 18 year old senior I was.

Do you have paperwork authorizing your wings from then? How ever did you manage it?

Thanks
Spam

Amended: how did you sign up for/test for the then-required ARM training per CAPM 50-15 and CAPM 50-5? I completed the GRM, but as a cadet wasn't allowed to enroll in ARM.

Amended again:  I looked it up in the old (1983) M50-15, just to see if I was nuts, and there it is on p.56 (Attachment 2); you must "Be an active Senior Member".  Ref: http://www.cap-es.net/zips/CAPR%2050-15%2015%20April%201983.pdf

I could be wrong (wouldn't be the first time) that you can wear the wings with the silver oxide finish so long as they are brightly polished so as to be "shiny metal". That said, I think that the intent is to only allow the mirror finish, not the silver oxide finish. Yet another one of those areas that is just vague enough to allow for confusion without being so vague that it actually gets fixed.

Also in CAPM 39-1:

Badges will be bullion, or shiny, metallic and must match in material.

Come on, guys...

Also in CAPM 39-1:

Badges will be bullion, or shiny, metallic and must match in material.

Come on, guys...

Yes, and as many people can tell you, silver oxide can be polished to be shiny. I agree that the intent is to disallow the silver oxide, it's just poorly worded.

Amended again:  I looked it up in the old (1983) M50-15, just to see if I was nuts, and there it is on p.56 (Attachment 2); you must "Be an active Senior Member".  Ref: http://www.cap-es.net/zips/CAPR%2050-15%2015%20April%201983.pdf
[/quote]

79-82 The requirement was for 10 hrs of logged observer time and there was no requirement to be a Senior Member

I didn't figure the droopy wings would still fly, but polished up my silver oxide set is very "Shiny"!

Why would you want to wear an item that requires periodic/frequent maintenance (polishing), when the new shiny ones require nothing? My shiny MO wings have the same sheen as when I bought them 10 years ago.

When I was a cadet our wing had several cadet Mission Pilots and Mission Observers.  We were allowed to have CAP Driver Licenses to drive other cadets around in the CAP Vans.  The good old days.
The cadet Mission Pilots and Mission Observers did fly actual SAR missions. 

When I was a cadet our wing had several cadet Mission Pilots and Mission Observers.  We were allowed to have CAP Driver Licenses to drive other cadets around in the CAP Vans.  The good old days.
The cadet Mission Pilots and Mission Observers did fly actual SAR missions. 

Would you guys at least call them by the proper name?

Mission Observer is an ES Qualification.  The wings are called Basic Observer, Senior Observer and Master Observer.
Totally separate subjects.

Would you guys at least call them by the proper name?

Mission Observer is an ES Qualification.  The wings are called Basic Observer, Senior Observer and Master Observer.
Totally separate subjects.

FTFY   

Some wore the old droopy wings and some wore the newer style straight winged wings.

I still wish they had left the Observer wings the way they were.  You can't tell pilot, observer for for that matter Glider wings apart from more than about 4 feet.

Some wore the old droopy wings and some wore the newer style straight winged wings.

I still wish they had left the Observer wings the way they were.  You can't tell pilot, observer for for that matter Glider wings apart from more than about 4 feet.

That's pretty standard for military aviation badges. Try identifying Naval Aviators from NFOs from across the room. I can't tell most Air Force badges (C2 vs. Intel) or Navy badges (SWO vs. Sub) apart from a far-away distance.

The cadet Mission Pilots and Mission Observers did fly actual SAR missions. 

Not to sidetrack a perfectly good uniform thread, but this is still possible today for cadets over 18. Cadet pilots have some restrictions (can’t carry other cadets) but other than that this is still “legal”.

The cadet Mission Pilots and Mission Observers did fly actual SAR missions. 

Not to sidetrack a perfectly good uniform thread, but this is still possible today for cadets over 18. Cadet pilots have some restrictions (can’t carry other cadets) but other than that this is still “legal”.

Oh, as it should be, no argument there. For twenty years or so (from 2001 back to the 1983 revision, apparently) cadets weren't allowed. I'm pleased that motivated cadets now are considered to be the adults that they are at age 18, in terms of ES training.

Thanks for the interesting sidebar, Mr. Bodie. I trained under the old M50-5 as well.  You might want to scan that paperwork in and get your chain of command to officially post/endorse it in eServices/Ops Quals/Aircrew to document your decoration (even if the rating is expired, the decoration would not, if you have the paperwork).  Wear with pride!

Cheers
Spam

I'm pleased that motivated cadets now are considered to be the adults that they are at age 18, in terms of ES training.

With the exception of aircrew sorties, all cadets have the same supervisory and CPT requirements regardless of age.

There may be a few forms NHQ allows them to sign for themselves, but beyond that they aren't considered adults for ES.

I'm pleased that motivated cadets now are considered to be the adults that they are at age 18, in terms of ES training.

With the exception of aircrew sorties, all cadets have the same supervisory and CPT requirements regardless of age.

There may be a few forms NHQ allows them to sign for themselves, but beyond that they aren't considered adults for ES.

Yes, they are - by the rest of CAP in terms of CPP. As of 2018 they're mandatory reporters also. See:


CAPR 60-2 CADET PROTECTION PROGRAM 1 MARCH 2018
ATTACHMENT 2.
"Requirement: Complete Cadet Protection Basic Course
Due Date: Within 60 days of joining CAP or turning 18. Training must be refreshed every 48 months.
Responsible Office: All adult members (cadets and seniors age 18+)" [emphasis added]


So, I think I did state, "training". Actual ops, also. If my 20 year old cadet officer son, GTL rated, is tasked to deploy a team he will do so in command of that team, but with an active member "commissar" present only to ensure adherence to cadet protection policies. He is in tactical command, period. Same if someone met the MP, MO, or CUL requirements at 18+. I can't speak for Mr. Bodie here, but when I earned my MO wings at age 19, I certainly was treated as an adult and fully qualified officer (and I'd hope that we all would extend that respect to current members).


We must trust these (and any) qualifications as valid. If the member doesn't meet the standards, then we may suspend and take other action with the SET qual individual who trained/reviewed their performance - young age or old age. But, in a CPP sense they are indeed adults they are at 18, and still subject to monitoring (as are we all).


(Side note to Ned to get with Moose... time to revise the April 2010 advisory letter to reflect the new terms. That letter is advisory not directive but it is helpful and needs a little tweaking to be consistent with the new pubs).


R/S
Spam


PS for readers, the term "Commissar" is only a joke from me. You wont find it anywhere in CAP pubs, directive (like R60-2) or advisory (like the Cadets in ES letter). 

But, in a CPP sense they are indeed adults they are at 18, and still subject to monitoring (as are we all).

No, they are required to have supervision, not "monitoring", and as I'm sure you know, that is not "new".
Cadets over 18 have been required to take CPT training for a long as I can remember.

Off-handed references to cadets over 18 being "adult members" doesn't jive with the reality of their place in the CAP universe.

"Tactical Command" as a GTL?  Maybe, sorta, arguably, but the Senior member(s) there are >always<, 100% of the time
actually in authority of that / those cadets. The team(s) don't exist without them, and nothing happens if they aren't there.
(Except of course for the uber-rare all-cadet aircrew loophole).

An 18 year old cadet cannot drive the van with the team in it, nor even go out to the plane with another senior member
1-on-1.  By the regs they need to be at least observed as they go out to the aircraft, and then after the sortie.

A cadet UDF'er can't go on a standard team of 2, ever, which increases the complexity of manning teams.
ICS cadets can't be in a closed-door meeting 1-on-1 with with the IC, or anyone else for that matter.  Hardly an "adult".

The only loophole that exists is during aircrew sorties (because apparently bad things can't happen during those, I guess?)

No one said, or even insinuated, cadet ES quals aren't "valid", of course they are. Nor is there any less respect for cadets involved
in ES, but the reality of the current state of the program, despite random rhetoric to the contrary, is that if it says "cadet" on the ID card,
then the member requires extra attention to supervision and protection issues that are not a factor with actual adults.

And because I can hear Ned in the wings...of course..."Experienced CAP leaders can manage these issues in ways that minimize disruption
and make good use of our excellent cadet resources...".

That doesn't change the current situation, which I, for one, would love to see fixed.

Hey Eclipse...

Don't you find it delicious that a thread that started over uniforms has now turned into a discussion of operations?

Sort of a reverse of the usual mandatory uniform content requirement, huh?

 
- Spam