Opinions on NB uniform proposals

[jimmydeanno]

^
Maj Corrales,

I'm confused about your proposal.  You state "fusing the purpose of the membership and red service ribbons."  I can't seem to get my head around how an award to denote completion of level 1 and time in service correlate.  Could you expand the reasoning behind this?

[swamprat86]

Also, the membership ribbon is a senior award whereas the red service can be earned by cadets and seniors.

[Major Carrales]

^
Maj Carrales,

I'm confused about your proposal.  You state "fusing the purpose of the membership and red service ribbons."  I can't seem to get my head around how an award to denote completion of level 1 and time in service correlate.  Could you expand the reasoning behind this?

My proposal was once part of the larger thread on reducing the number of ribbons.  It was a compromise to a suggestion that the membership ribbon and the red service ribbons be both removed.

The idea is the basic membership, represented by the completeion of Level 1, would stand in place of the basic award.  Upon completetion of two years, a device would be placed on that ribbon (be it an hour glass...as per USAF...or the current prop and triangle), at 5 years it one would add the double prop and triangle, 10 the tripple, 15 the quadruple and the numerals at 20 plus.  How that was done coudl be debatable.

Thus, the ribbons number would be reduced, but longevity would still be recognized.  It was one of the few "compromise" suggestions made.

[Major Carrales]

Also, the membership ribbon is a senior award whereas the red service can be earned by cadets and seniors.

The might I suggest that their Curry Ribbon serve this purpose until they are seniors, at which time their devices would transfer to the red service ribbon.  After all, they have to remove the Curry anyway (unless it is their highest cadet ribbon...i.e. Cadet Airman for Life)

Again, this matter related to an attempt to solve an issue in a long dormant thread that might even have been at Civil Air Portal.

[cnitas]

I say keep the red service ribbon, but change it to a 'longevity' ribbon.
Up the initial requirement to 5 years service to indicate 'long service'. 

I don't particularly like the 'adding devices to unrelated ribbons' concept.

[Hawk200]

In the interest of everyone getting something, I'd say keep the Red Service, but start treating it like it would be a combination of an Air Force Longevity ribbon, and the AF Good Conduct medal. Do two years and keep your nose clean, and you'll get one.

I have always thought that fusing the purpose of the Membership and Red Service ribbon was the best course of action.  Instead of a RED SERVICE ribbon, some longevity device on the membership ribbon would be called for. 

I, historically speaking, do realize the RED, BLUE, GREEN (etc) ribbons were once authorized and the Red Service ribbon is likely an hommage to those early CAP awards.

The Green Service started out with award for a minimum number of hours of service. The Red Service replaced it once earned for addtional hours. The Blue Service then replaced the Red. The three could not be worn at the same time. The original Blue Service was for an approximate period of two years. It has always puzzled me that the Red Service was the designation chosen, when the old Blue Service had essentially the same criteria as the current Red.

In a way, the Red Service was a continuation, but in a way it wasn't. Maybe create something new with aspects of all three of the original "Service" ribbons as a "Good Conduct Medal" type of award as a homage to the original three. I think it would be fitting.

All my old CAP uniform and decs manuals are at home, and I doubt that there is anything on the web that rivals the specific criteria that the actual old pubs have in them. If someone else has the old Civil Air Patrol Officer manual (Dated 1944 I think) and the old 1949 Officer manual, those criteria can be found in there.

As for adding attachments to a Membership ribobn to denote longevity, I think that's a no-go. It's not appropriate to affix a device that has a different meaning than the original ribbon.  If we start that, what else would get confused? It would be a case of "This ribbon means this, unless it has this, then it means such and such". Too confusing. Membership is a PD ribbon, Red Service is a longevity. The concepts are different.

[Major Carrales]

As for adding attachments to a Membership ribobn to denote longevity, I think that's a no-go. It's not appropriate to affix a device that has a different meaning than the original ribbon.  If we start that, what else would get confused? It would be a case of "This ribbon means this, unless it has this, then it means such and such". Too confusing. Membership is a PD ribbon, Red Service is a longevity. The concepts are different.

Remember, the proposed concept of divices on the membership ribbon was wrought out the of idea that ribbons needed to be reduced.  So long as that is not the case, the both ribbosn should remain, unchanged.

I will tell you this, with the way squadron membership attrition goes, two years can be a long time.  Of the members we have seen, both the most active and the least, two years is a significant milstone.  Lots of people have "life" conflicts that take them away from CAP.  2 years is about  right even for the cadets that "stick with it," for more than just the intial charm of CAP.

Not to mention 2 years is about the time that one complete a good level of their Spec Track and other training (this includes CD that requires a two year waiting period for most).

I say leave the ribbon at two years.  Most people that complete that go on in CAP to long service.

[Phillip]

Let me just mention that...while AD USAF guys wear cloth name patch with just their names and wings on them (plus squadron mascot, multi-colors and sometiems cool slogans) everyone is supposed to have a standard leather one with name, rank and USAF on it.

So....so long as we stick with the leather name patch we should keep rank and CAP on it....just to keep in line with the "standard" USAF rules.

Now...given that...if we allowed cloth name patches...how would they be controlled?  Would we let wings decide on color and what needs to be on them?  Would we make them simpley silver on black?   I thought the general consensus was to keep the uniform...uniform.

See, I was unaware that USAF aircrew still had the leather tags.  I was under the impression that they had been completely phased out.  Thanks for the additional info.

I would hope that should cloth tags make their way to CAP, that they are
1) an optional item for aircrews,
2) only incorporate the badges currently authorized for the leather tags, and
3) are standardized meaning no variations from wing to wing. 

I like sliver/black but would suspect that, if approved, the background color would likely match what ever color replaces ultramarine blue.

[Hook]

See, I was unaware that USAF aircrew still had the leather tags.  I was under the impression that they had been completely phased out.  Thanks for the additional info.

Active duty stopped using leather nametags in the early 90s ( a couple of years after switching to subdued rank from the plastic coated rank).  Current USAF guidance is cloth nametags - AFI 36-2903 section 3.2.5.2.

"Nametags. Cloth nametags for FDU/DFDU and Nomex™ style flight jackets will be 2X4 inches in size, and worn over the left breast pocket. As a minimum, Aeronautical badge or Space badge (if awarded) are mandatory and nametags will contain individual's name and grade (grade is only mandatory for enlisted personnel). Embroidered badges will be silver (white) in color. In the case of subdued nametags, embroidered badges will be black or dark blue in color. MAJCOM supplements to this instruction will standardize nametags (i.e., background/border colors, squadron logos, naming convention, etc). Nametags for Leather A-2 Flying Jacket will be 2 x 4 inches, brown or black leather, simulated leather. Emboss with silver wings/badges, first and last name, grade, and USAF."

[jimmydeanno]

And I thought we had uniformity issues...

USAF:
grade or no grade...
what color should I make it...
should I or shouldn't I put a badge on there...
which MAJCOM am I in to find further guidance...

CAP:
BBDU or BDU?
Ultramarine or Navy Blue?
Which badges should I put on my nametag?
Which wing am I in?
Can I wear this beret?

[Hawk200]

Remember, the proposed concept of divices on the membership ribbon was wrought out the of idea that ribbons needed to be reduced.  So long as that is not the case, the both ribbosn should remain, unchanged.

Yes, the idea in general is to reduce. My proposal is to have a single ribbon with devices to indicate progression through Pro Dev, instead of having four separate ribbons. Going from four to one is most certainly a reduction. Keeping the Wilson intact with all it's present criteria, and having another ribbon for the lower levels would mean going from five ribbons to two. Still a reduction.

I will tell you this, with the way squadron membership attrition goes, two years can be a long time.  Of the members we have seen, both the most active and the least, two years is a significant milstone.  Lots of people have "life" conflicts that take them away from CAP.  2 years is about  right even for the cadets that "stick with it," for more than just the intial charm of CAP.

Not to mention 2 years is about the time that one complete a good level of their Spec Track and other training (this includes CD that requires a two year waiting period for most).

Agreed on all counts, wholeheartedly. Which means that the Red Service concept is a significant award. Before we drifted, the idea was to maintain it as a medal, and treat it like a medal in the same manner as an Air Force good conduct. With current criteria intact, it is suitable.

Adding a stipulation that you have to keep your nose clean would just add a little more motivation for people to do the right thing. What I would suggest as disqualifiers would be issues that wouldn't be considered "good" conduct, and would fall short of outright termination. It would be adding some criteria to the basic award, not completely changing the original concept behind it.

I say leave the ribbon at two years.  Most people that complete that go on in CAP to long service.

Agreed, completely. I would support that without any reservation.

As far as reduction goes, the above ideas reduce six ribbons to three. It's a start. But all those mini-medals for every single ribbon really is too much. It would be a little easier if the Mess Dress uniform allowed the same option as Service Dress: "Medals: Wear all or some". But at present, that's not an option.

I would hope that should cloth tags make their way to CAP, that they are
1) an optional item for aircrews,
2) only incorporate the badges currently authorized for the leather tags, and

Agreed.

3) are standardized meaning no variations from wing to wing. 

This is where I disagree. If you're not going to have any variation, then there is really no point in having cloth. The purpose of cloth nametags is to have the variation, in the first place.

Now, addressing the variations themselves, that's where we need some hard rules. In the interest of wing Esprit de Corps, I'd say allow each wing to have a standard nametag design. Use the now phased out wing patches as a basis for each wing nametag. Require a supplement to 39-1 that addresses only the nametag criteria be filed at National. If National doesn't have such a supp from the wing on file, then that wing doesn't get to wear a cloth nametag until they send one in.

Maybe some allowances for special teams would be appropriate, but not just for special activities. There would be little reason to create a nametag for somthing like an encampment or an airshow.

Since we're on the subject, was there anything in the new NB agenda on cloth nametags? I read through it, but don't recall anything on them.