My Photo

About This Site

  • CAPblog is an unofficial journal of the Civil Air Patrol, the United States Air Force Auxiliary.

    The opinions published here are those of the individual authors and visitors to this site. They are not the views of the Civil Air Patrol, or the United States Air Force.

    About "DATA"

Search CAPblog

Blogs I Read


« WTF Happened to CivilAirPortal? | Main | Ground Team Training Sir! »

November 03, 2006



Hi Six,

I checked it out this morning, but it looks like they didn't have the personnel available to run it like they did for the NB. They seemed to have only two fixed cameras and the mic system was mediocre, so sometimes it was VERY hard to tell what was going on.
A live-operator camera that could pan to the speaker and to the slides that weren't available to post electronically (like Col. Hodgkins') would have helped a LOT. Better sound would have been nice, too - there was a lot of room noise competing with the speaker's voices.

73 DE Hartley


Listening to/watching it now (at 2019z). The audio is horrible. It sounds like the presenters are mic'd to some PA speakers, but that audio is not being fed directly into the camera (only using camera mic to pickup the sound in the room.) thus all of the background and ambient noise in the room is being picked up too.

I applaud the effort though! This is definitely a step in the right direction. Hopefully this delivery gets better the more we do it.


The NEC just adopted the new ID card style command patch as the offical insignia. The command patch we are all currently wearing on our flight suits will be phased out...

No more USAF scrolled on the bottom.


It's also interesting to note the amount of "online breaks" that were ordered during the NEC. In effect, it turns the meeting into a closed session...

Midway Six


I am now convinced that the NEC has lost their minds.

I don't usually say stuff like that. I usually try to season my comments about people better...

But I am shocked.

Here I am packing up to spend my weekend on a SAREX, and this is the crap I have to contend with?


I'm disgusted.


Isn't the patch a AF uniform item? It is worn on the flight suit... as such, the AF should have the final say.


CAP/USAF was sitting at the table when this happened... Not to throw fuel on the fire, but the NEC's discussion on who will host the next meeting's cocktail party took longer than the entire proceeding on the insignia change.

I watched both happen on the web broadcast...


CAP-USAF isn't there to give AF opinion on uniforms. I don't think AF could even justify a decision to stop a move from it saying AF Aux to CAP, even if they wanted to, which I couldn't comment on.


I've also become increasingly disenchanted with the "old boy" network that is rampant throughout the various levels of the organization. New blood is really needed at all levels from Wing on up. It's a shame that we don't better embrace the relationship with Air Force - it's critical. No one knows who CAP is, everyone knows the Air Force. The Air Force Auxiliary a saleable item. The organization needs and really thrives on that relationship. It’s been mentioned before but the Coast Guard understands this I disagree with the change to the command patch...but it's only one of many recent decisions I disagree with.

That said, if you object, run it up your chain of command. There should be a concerted effort to do so. And make sure you propose a solution - don't just whine (ie. here's what I object to, this is why, and here's what we should do instead).

The organization is what the membership makes it...or allows it to be.


The writing is on the wall folks......Tony Pineda wants to separate CAP from the Air Force. At first I thought the uniform stuff was possibly an effort to bring the group of those outside the grooming/ht/wt standards(no insult intended) into the AF fold. Ah...not so's all part of the grand scheme me thinks.

Let's look at what has happened during his reign as chief monarch. He removed "United States Air Force Auxiliary" from his letterhead leaving on Civil Air Patrol. He brought out the Pineda corporate uniform, and has encouraged folks to wear it as I have heard instead of the AF Blues. He had "USAF AUX" removed from the tails of our aircraft, and now he removed Air Force Auxiliary from our command patch.

He has fired the Vice Commander, fired 7 of the 8 Region Commanders and I've lost count of the number of Wing Commanders given the ax. He tried to get the ByLaws changed so that he could remain monarch for double the time or longer. Does this sound like we are getting closer to the Air Force? Or becoming a separate organization?

My crystal ball is hazy but I'd be willing the bet all my CAP paychecks the following is in the works:

Eliminate wear of the blue AF uniform...only the corporate would be worn.

Eliminate green flights suits...only the blue ones with the CAP command patch remain.

Elimate BDUs to be replaced soley by the blue utility uniform.

I would not be suprised to see four stars worn by Pineda on the corporate uniform. Since the AF doesn't control the corporate uniform, he could say...."as the CEO of the CAP corporation I can signify my position by wearing 4 stars on the corporate uniform."

I see us performing fewer missions for the AF as they become pissed off at the arrogant attitude of CAP.

I see these things because TP wants total dictorial control. The AF is an impedement to his control and the further he can get away from them, the greater his authority and control. Maybe it's due to his early formative years and the nature of the system he grew up under. I see many similarities.



Scary things are in the future for CAP...



You MAY be right. I pray your wrong.

Regardless, for the sake of argument (and/or consideration) what if:

1) ... this is NOT a grand MG Pineda-led conspiracy to unilaterally divorce the USAF ...

2) ... that this is actually being led by the USAF through CAP-USAF as a result of the actions of the Congress a few years ago...

3) ... that MG Pineda is actually looking out for the interests of the volunteer membership as opposed to the cold bureaucracy of the USAF/DoD and the indifferent "pork barrel" politics of Congress ...

4)... that MG Pineda and his staff see the "writing on the wall" (or have been explicitly briefed-in by the USAF) and --to quote Dylan-- "times they are a'changin" ...

5) ... that MG Pineda is not a power-hungry wannabe-dictator but rather an honest person seeking to make the best of a difficult (perhaps no-win) situation ...

6) ... that the DoD/USAF are not above criticism for arrogance, power-hunger, dishonesty (or simply a self-beneficial lack of candor) ...

The same signs and symptoms can be read in different ways. Maybe CAP members shouldn't AUTOMATICALLY and thoughtlessly "eat our own" and turn our disdain and rancor toward politicians who demoted us to the "sometimes" auxiliary of the USAF and the blue-suiters and simply "suits" in the Pentagon who either, like sheep went along with the political clowns, or encouraged and support these actions and --themselves-- seek a divorce FROM the USAF side of the house.

I mean, the SAME USAF (professionals) inadvertently bombed the Chinese embassy in Sarajevo and a group of seemingly hostile group of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, and straffed a elementary school in New Jersey with 20mm cannon fire. They are not above criticism and/or suspicion in this or other matters.

Maybe the real clowns reside along the Potomac in both a white marble and a 5-sided building.

Let's stop blaming CAP and our Commander FIRST and really consider the possibility that things aren't as we are allowing (or convincing) ourselves to believe.



I see your point and originally I was hoping that was the case. reasoning is...after 9-11 (and the congressional deal of sometimes Aux) the AF gave us stuff (command patch) promoted the Natl CC to Maj Gen, etc.

Another part that leads me to my conclusion was the wholesale slaughter of Region and Wing commanders. Even before when we ticked off the AF , none of that occurred. At first I thought it might be a needed house cleaning and a push by the AF in some problem areas, but can it be that 7 of the 8 region commanders were screwing up and untold wing CCs that bad???

I kept hoping things would get better but as I see it ----if you are a Region or Wing CC you are and endangered species.


"Blessed are the peacemakers," Skypilot. I agree. The facts are what they are, but they lend themselves to various interpretations as to the motives of the people involved. I persoanlly think that these cosmetic changes ARE being directed by the USAF. I just don't know why.


This is the part that is so personally disturbing. I am partially of both Smokeys opinion and Skypilots. That level of cognitive disonance is most frustrating.

A mission is defined by it's objectives and altho, as John alludes, there seems to be some grand scheme at work it is veiled to the point of incomprehensibility.

Leadership must share the plan and vision with us such that we can define the mission and get on with it or move on to other arenas in which we may better serve our nation in her time of great need.

Which is now, by the way.


More than 2,000 years ago the elites of Rome sought (and frankly succeeded) in pacifying the "masses" by giving them relatively meaningless "stuff" whilst at once taking away freedoms and rights. This has been referred to as "bread and circuses." Give the peasants cheap or free bread to eat and exciting spectacles to watch and they will ignore the powerplays occuring above them.

I see a CAP analog in Smokey's description of the post-9/11 USAF-CAP (apparent) relationship. He wrote, "... after 9-11 (and the congressional deal of sometimes Aux) the AF gave us stuff (command patch) promoted the Natl CC to Maj Gen, etc ..."

The USAF "gave" CAP a new patch (whoopteedoo!!) and our Nat'l Commander a second star. Cost to USAF absolutely ZERO.

In exchange they've taken away our full-time auxiliary status, the US from some (just wait folks, it'll be ALL uni's before long ... just watch) of our uniforms, USAF Auxiliary off of our air planes and treat us EVEN MORE like peasants or 2nd class citizens.

I see the USAF's conduct post-9/11 as being quite similar to the Dutch trading the native Americans $24.00 and some trinkets for New York.

We too have been bought, just with stars and patches. Any dollars, we spend out of our own pockets.

The USAF only treats CAP decently (and then only marginally and I say begrudgingly) when they need us for something such as an 0200L ELT. In reality they need us like a ostrich needs a G-String and they prove it daily.

We are slave labor to the blue-suiters.

Now MG Pineda may be a patsy for the USAF, but I really think the sell-out is happening above his paygrade. This is the USAF giving us lip service, bread and circuses to keep us motivated (and our $$$ coming in and through their budget) post 9/11. They never sought to really utilize us respectfully and as a peer, they merely sought use us ... and they have and are succeeding at that.


I can speak to a coupl eof the issues you raise:
"2) ... that this is actually being led by the USAF through CAP-USAF as a result of the actions of the Congress a few years ago...

3) ... that MG Pineda is actually looking out for the interests of the volunteer membership as opposed to the cold bureaucracy of the USAF/DoD and the indifferent "pork barrel" politics of Congress ..."
What came out of committee in 2000 is VERY differnt than what was passed, what was passed was not implemented as Congress intended, ans what was implemented didn't solve ANY of the problems that prompted congress to consider the issue in the first place. A lot of people are unhappy about the situation, & I'd look for some changes back the other direction.

As far as pork barrel & earmarks, you understand that's how CAP has been funded for most of our life, right? A handful of congressmen care about CAP & trade other things to get us funded better or worse depending on priorities.


As far as problems with the AF, Auxiliary doesn't mean SaR agency. It means we do things for the AF (anything, as long as it's non-combat & domestic) that save money which is redirected to combat forces. We also do AE to educate the public to support a strong Air & Space force (ie the AF budget), and run a cadet program designed to develop & indoctrinate prime candidates for recruitment. That's all CAP exists for & all it should be doing. I realize we're capable of doing other things, but that time/effort/money is better spent on missions that serve our purpose. People are supposed to join & serve in CAP because they want to help their country by helping the AF. If there's an identity crisis, it's that this isn't universally understood.

The AF has since 9/11 asked CAP to stand up & professionalize if they want to play in the big leagues. MG Pineda & the NHQ staff have spoken in varrious places talking about the total-CAP member & they've reworked our professional development courses (drop in the bucket if you ask me). I understand the intent, but the vision isn't being explained & frankly it should be because most of the force out here would go much further much faster if just given the opportunity, and especially if you show them the light at the end of the tunnel.

A Friend

Either way, one thing is clear: Maj Gen Pineda urgently needs to clearly articulate to CAP members why these apparent changes are taking place. No disrespect, but if Maj Gen Pineda fails to communicate why CAP is seemingly moving away from USAF, then he is failing CAP as a leader. General, if you are reading this, please communicate this to your troops so as to protect morale.


It takes an act of Congress to remove CAP as the AF Aux. The AF wanted that in the 90s and Congress said NO. When the Congressional inquiry created the BOG, it was to promote a better relationship with the AF and CAP.
The new command patch removes the USAF AUX from the patch so CAP may perform missions under Posse Comitatus. We are prohibited from using equipment marked that way (vehicles and aircraft)and that is why it is being removed from the tails of aircraft and the decals on vehicles will be changed.
We all wish Skypilot was correct in the previous e-mail. But from the talk about what all happened in Reno, your "what ifs" are 100% incorrect. We need a different procedure to select our NEC members. Why can't we use the AF process for selecting general officers? You apply and go before a board, they evaluate and recommend to the next higher authority and only a certain group will be allowed to serve beyond Wing CC. The board should be made up of past National Commanders, BOG members, and the USAF since the National CC and CV will also come from this group and the AF approves their stars. The same group will determine the fate of any commander above Wing CC if there is any misconduct. That eliminates the "good old boy" selection process and makes removals honest. It makes those people much more accountable for their actions.



I've also heard comments that the removal of "USAF Aux" is related to Posse Comitatus. However, it doesn't wash. The simple fact is that none of our current and future missions are at odds with the Posse Comitatus Act - unless one believes we will begin participating in the surveillance, pursuit, or apprehension of subjects. That's simply not going to happen. If this truly is the reason behind the change, then the simple fact that our leadership is so misinformed/ignorant on this subject would illustrate another significant reason why change is needed at the leadership levels of the organization.

In addition, as I mentioned earlier, from a sales standpoint, marketing ourselves as the Air Force Auxilary provides significantly more credibility with government agencies than does the Civil Air Patrol - which no one has ever heard of (right, wrong, or other). The Air Force relationship is also absolutely critical as it pertains to the other 2/3rd's of our mission - cadet programs and aerospace education.



The position of the AF has always been that CAP does stupid crap from time to time & AF doesn't have the authority from Congress to do anything about it. They've repeatedly asked for that authority & when they've been frustrated enough they've tried to justify it by saying give us these powers or take CAP off our back. They've never actually attempted to move CAP out as the Auxiliary in any way shape or form. If you look at the 2000 law that changed our auxiliary status. It was prompted by just such a series of situations. The initial AF request was considered in committee & what they sent to the floor was a provision stating AF would appoint all Wg/Reg/Nat CCs but they turned down the AF request for more oversight authority. That provision was rejected on teh floor & the law that passed was created in under an hour with no study or consultation with either the AF or anyone form CAP. You can search around a bit & find the transcripts from the floor debate if you really want to.

The general feeling now is that the change accomplished exactly non of the things that caused congress to get involved in the first place. The BoG has not swung a big stick & put the org straight & informally compliant w/ AF. Also many additional legal issues have developed & AF still has no control. Several in congress are not happy about the situation. It was better off before the change frankly, and that was unacceptable. There's already been discussion on posse Comitatus & coverage for volunteer medical folks in federal orgs (ex CAP). Some things are going to happen over the next couple years. It really would be better for everyone though if CAP & AF took the initiative & left congress to screw up something else.

The comments to this entry are closed.


Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter


    CAP News Online

    Air Force Link

    Tip Jar

    Come And Pay?

    Tip Jar