Squadron Call sign Change

[I don't exist]

We’re looking to change our squadron call sign to better align with our heritage, but the base call sign manager says our choice isn’t legal based on AFI 33-217.

We want to use CHETR XX (pronounced Cheater). 

33-217 has been rescinded according to the e-pubs website, but the call sign manager says that he has to still apply it because the Air Force level call sign manager still uses it.

Anybody got experience dealing with this?

[Chuck17]

When I was a part of a standup we had to deal with this too. 

I’d ask him who the AF level CS manager is and where they work... Elevation around obstruction is an avenue of approach. 

Then let me know. I might know a guy...

Chuck

Edited December 30, 2022 by Chuck17

[brabus]

What if you just start flying with it? If that feels “too scary,” then we also try to keep up a call sign list with the local center...though it’s never completely up to date. In 12 years, multiple MAJCOMs/countries/states, I’ve never seen callsigns go anywhere beyond the local FAA (or equivalent) rep, and half the time it’s just done and nobody at any level cares or says anything. Obviously don’t be an idiot and use a questionable call sign that could be viewed negatively/as offensive.

Edited June 29, 2019 by brabus

[Danger41]

Radio callsign only or also the name/patch of the squadron? I ask based on your heritage part.

[I don't exist]

1 hour ago, Danger41 said:

Radio callsign only or also the name/patch of the squadron? I ask based on your heritage part.

The new callsign is based on the patch and an unofficial motto from yesteryear.

[I don't exist]

2 hours ago, brabus said:

What if you just start flying with it? If that feels “too scary,” then we also try to keep up a call sign list with the local center...though it’s never completely up to date. In 12 years, multiple MAJCOMs/countries/states, I’ve never seen callsigns go anywhere beyond the local FAA (or equivalent) rep, and half the time it’s just done and nobody at any level cares or says anything. Obviously don’t be an idiot and use a questionable call sign that could be viewed negatively/as offensive.

We thought about doing this, and decided it would be better to use official channels to get it on the approved list.

[I don't exist]

2 hours ago, Chuck17 said:

When I was a part of C-17 standup in AK we had to deal with this too. 

I’d ask him who the AF level CS manager is and where they work... Elevation around obstruction is an avenue of approach. 

Then let me know. I might know a guy...

Chuck

When I got the no from the local guy, I contacted the Air Force level call sign manager. I hope to hear back on Monday.

[SocialD]

40 minutes ago, I don't exist said:

We thought about doing this, and decided it would be better to use official channels to get it on the approved list.

I'm with Brabus on this one, that's how we've always operated.  In this type of thing, you can never go wrong by following "the process."  Sadly this is almost never efficient and often an extremely painful experience.  We've recently added numerous callsigns for our local and XC flying.  Then we followed up with going through the process of making it official.  Guess what, the world kept spinning and anarchy did not take over.  The old bossman has already told us to not blindly follow ridiculous rules...do what makes sense then work on getting it changed (note: the latter being an important step).  I'd say this falls squarely into one of these situations.  This is especially true in this case since the manager seems to be following an reg that is no longer applicable.  This change will not harm anyone and if it's truly based off heritage, it seems like a no-brainer.   I mean some bases use the pilots callsign as their flying callsign...it's not like we're redesigning an arrival/departure procedure.

I get there are some battles not worth fighting for, but this seems like an easy kill that can only help with espirit-de-corps. 

[jazzdude]

If it's for locals only, you can do an LOA between the wing, local AF ATC, and the ARTCC. just can't duplicate anything on the master call sign list or being used within the ARTCC already. That also allows you to use abbreviations in your callsign.

[I don't exist]

33 minutes ago, SocialD said:

I'm with Brabus on this one, that's how we've always operated.  In this type of thing, you can never go wrong by following "the process."  Sadly this is almost never efficient and often an extremely painful experience.  We've recently added numerous callsigns for our local and XC flying.  Then we followed up with going through the process of making it official.  Guess what, the world kept spinning and anarchy did not take over.  The old bossman has already told us to not blindly follow ridiculous rules...do what makes sense then work on getting it changed (note: the latter being an important step).  I'd say this falls squarely into one of these situations.  This is especially true in this case since the manager seems to be following an reg that is no longer applicable.  This change will not harm anyone and if it's truly based off heritage, it seems like a no-brainer.   I mean some bases use the pilots callsign as their flying callsign...it's not like we're redesigning an arrival/departure procedure.

I get there are some battles not worth fighting for, but this seems like an easy kill that can only help with espirit-de-corps. 

To me, it’s worth fighting for.

18 minutes ago, jazzdude said:

If it's for locals only, you can do an LOA between the wing, local AF ATC, and the ARTCC. just can't duplicate anything on the master call sign list or being used within the ARTCC already. That also allows you to use abbreviations in your callsign.

We’re a tenant unit, and have to keep our host happy. The callsign manager is in the host wing.

[ImNotARobot]

In the late 2000s at Yokota, the 5 AF/CC would occasionally fly the Herk. Probably still does.

The Sq/CC is always KANTO01, and the NAF CC didn't want to use that, so he chose SHOGUN01. After he returned from flying under SHOGUN, Japanese ATC already had multiple calls to the base, confused because the SHOGUN callsign he arbitrarily chose was listed as a diplomatic callsign, normally with Japanese government officials aboard. Everything went back to KANTO after that IIRC.

[matmacwc]

For locals, we could just make them up. Dude flew with FURLO last government shutdown.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[viper154]

Ya I would say to file whatever you want, baseops and tower aren't going to care. Just file the paperwork/PMR with the callsign assigned to the line. Found it much easier to do this and no one cared. We flew under several different call signs in my old plane depending on the profile that day. Found it so much easier to just file whatever made sense for that day. Getting the paperwork through the official channels was a asspain, and that was for callsigns that were already approved. I would probably do as people advised above, do the unofficial way while you let the official way play out. let your CC know Incase it comes up and he not blindsided, and hopefully he has a sack and if there is pushback can say you are awaiting the official change. 

[dream big]

7 hours ago, I don't exist said:

We’re looking to change our squadron call sign to better align with our heritage, but the base call sign manager says our choice isn’t legal based on AFI 33-217.

We want to use CHETR XX (pronounced Cheater). 

33-217 has been rescinded according to the e-pubs website, but the call sign manager says that he has to still apply it because the Air Force level call sign manager still uses it.

Anybody got experience dealing with this?

Of course there is an AFI on callsigns and a random nonner enforcing it..

Aren’t these the kind of irrelevant regulations the SECAF and CSAF told us to get rid of?

[Scooter14]

Of course there is an AFI on callsigns and a random nonner enforcing it..
Aren’t these the kind of irrelevant regulations the SECAF and CSAF told us to get rid of?

Let me get this straight...

So what you are telling me is that the Air Force wants us to get rid of irrelevant AFIs, but since every AFI is critically important to the bureaucrat nonner that wrote it, then those AFIs can’t be irrelevant and we can’t get rid of them?

You got it!

That’s some catch...

It’s the best there is!

[jazzdude]

IIRC, the AFI referenced applies only to the static callsign list (ex: AF1, RCH, EVAC, etc, i.e. callsigns good pretty much anywhere or for a specific purpose). For locals, it doesn't really matter what callsign you use, so long as there aren't duplicate callsigns flying in the same center at the same time. An LOA with the ARTCC helps deconflict all of the units flying locals within that center.

That's what I did when I worked callsigns at UPT-added a bunch of local callsigns through coordination with centers and the other squadrons within the centers, and added a couple cross country callsigns to the static list following AFI guidance.

It's a bit of a pain, but much less so than checking in with ATC only to discover a different unit/aircraft shares that callsign and if already on freq.

[magnetfreezer]

Callsign info is rolled into AFI 17-210 now :https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/saf_cn/publication/afi17-210/afi17-210.pdf (page 21)

[HuggyU2]

Prior to late 2014, if you heard a flight of two with the callsign HUGGY in the Western US, you can be assured that flight lead did all of the paperwork, coordination and such to make it happen.  Absolutely!.  No way he would just file that every time he went cross country without having run it through the AFI wickets.  

[I don't exist]

7 hours ago, magnetfreezer said:

Callsign info is rolled into AFI 17-210 now :https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/saf_cn/publication/afi17-210/afi17-210.pdf (page 21)

Well crap.

[Danger41]

Can we at least learn the squadron and the history you’re referencing?

[I don't exist]

29 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

Can we at least learn the squadron and the history you’re referencing?

327 Airlift Squadron (AFRC)

Our patch is a hand holding five twos of spades. Originally, we were the 2nd Combat Cargo Squadron, the cards represented the five flights of the squadron. In the game of spades, after the jokers, the two of spades is the highest trump card, therefore the five flights represented by the cards were Winners.

Fast forward to when our unit was stationed at Willow Grove, an unofficial motto emerged around the patch, "if you can't win...cheat!"

[Tonka]

On 6/29/2019 at 4:01 PM, Scooter14 said:

So what you are telling me is that the Air Force wants us to get rid of irrelevant AFIs, but since every AFI is critically important to the bureaucrat nonner that wrote it, then those AFIs can’t be irrelevant and we can’t get rid of them?

You got it!

That’s some catch...

It’s the best there is!

 

"Break rules and go fast... but don't break MY rules"

[Genghis John]

File it til it sticks. The Air Force VCL is always out of date and no one references it. 

[I don't exist]

3 minutes ago, ROCK 10 said:

^^True Dat^^ 

As for Heritage, our C/S was ROCK XX, even used is overseas. 

Here's a few 'un-official' patches from 15+ years ago,  Enjoy!

    

Unfortunately, Rock is used by the Wg/CC here at Little Rock.

[Kenny Powers]

16 minutes ago, I don't exist said:

Unfortunately, Rock is used by the Wg/CC here at Little Rock.

That would make me use it x 69.

I bet you dont park in the WG/CC parking spot either.

Edited July 1, 2019 by Kenny Powers