About those shield-shaped specialty badges...

[BuckeyeDEJ]

From another thread today...

On the issue with the sheilds and the CP, AE, crests.....IMHO they should all be changed to USAF style specailty badges and worn in the same manner.  i.e. you get to choose two (or one with any wings) over the ribbons and no where else.

I'm a little divided on this one. Part of me thinks that it might be OK if the design was right, but I imagine they would follow the concept of the Ground Team badges (with the leafy looking unbalanced wreath on it), and I never really liked that one. On the upside, cloth versions for BDU's would be a lot cheaper having less materials to make it.

On the other hand, I'm beginning to think that that we really don't need them. I try to read 39-1 every couple of months so that I remember them, but most of them use some kind of quill or lightning bolt, while others don't seem to make any applicable sense at all. Not much point to a badge if no one remembers what it is.

Do we really need all those goofy enamel badges, with their inconsistent and multiple wear locations? No. A nice, shiny silver, over-the-ribbons badge would do just fine, with three levels that correspond to expertise. Everyone would still get one, but they would have more meaning and be less confusing.

They could be patterned after the Air Force's badges, without awkwardly ripping off Army jump wings (like the IC badge does) and without the use of letters (how many people think we're built for speed because we have a "GT" badge?). We'd need to bring in the professional designers out here in the field to put something really nice together (and I know they're out there!).

Quickly, some possible examples:
Emergency Services badge: master level would be for anyone in a command staff position in ICS, senior for section chiefs, etc., and basic for ground team members, with a little leeway to the next level for senior people in their positions.
Communications badge: Would take in radio comms, IT and public affairs, embracing existing specialty tracks.
Personnel management badge: Would take in administration, personnel, professional development, etc., embracing existing specialty tracks.
Organizational management badge: Would include finance, legal (non-legal officer), logistics, etc., embracing existing specialty tracks.
Etc., etc. I couldn't imagine there'd be more than eight or nine, but that's a nice ballpark figure.

Someone please feel free to fill in some other blanks I'm missing (and I know there's a few — this is an on-the-fly post).

[arajca]

Would you advocate for duty position badges like the AF?

Also remember, some of the "inconsistent and multiple wear locations" is based on gender based topographical diferences.

Although the AF has "groups" of badges, each career field has their own badge. Which total far more than what CAP has.

[High Speed Low Drag]

Cadet Programs??

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Cadet Programs??

There has to be a place for cadet programs in a consolidated badge. That one isn't as ugly as the stained-glass-looking aerospace education badge, but it's smallish and not really easy to read at a distance. Suggestions?

Would you advocate for duty position badges like the AF?

Also remember, some of the "inconsistent and multiple wear locations" is based on gender based topographical diferences.

Although the AF has "groups" of badges, each career field has their own badge. Which total far more than what CAP has.

I would advocate for something along the Air Force's lines, but much simpler. While I know there are gender-based badge position issues, one position per gender should be enough. Wanna wear more than one, go join the Scouts and wear a sash.

[Hawk200]

Although the AF has "groups" of badges, each career field has their own badge.

No, they do not. You've got it backwards, there are badges that cover groups of AFSC's, each and every career field does not have it's own badge.

To draw a couple paralells, Safety and Operations both wear an "Operations Support" badge. Admin, Training and Personnel all wear the "Manpower and Personnel" badge.

Outside of the paralells to CAP, there is "Force Protection" which covers all Security Forces, and OSI. Every enlisted medical person wears the same badge, doesn't matter if they're Medical Logistics, Dental assistant, or IDMT. I don't know the exact numbers, but it wouldn't surprise me if over 50% of the Air Force enlisted corps wears a maintenance badge. I was a telephone guy, and I wore the same badge as the guys on the flightline working on F-16's.

The only time a career field will have a badge to itself is if there is only a single AFSC in the group. Generally, any given badge in the Air Force may account for a dozen or so AFSC's. To give each one it's own unique badge would be cost prohibitive, and would cause so much confusion that it would be completely unworkable.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I support AF-style badges instead of the myriad of shields we now have.

I have two, Administration (master) and Safety (tech), plus Observer wings, but I only wear the Admin one, since that is my highest rating.

Some off-the-cuff badge consolidations:

Administration, Finance, Historian and Personnel (maybe Public Affairs too, but that's a reach).

Safety and Emergency Services.

Professional Development, Recruiting and maybe Cadet Programs.

Operations and Inspector.

Just a thought.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Maybe we should take a cue from the A-staff organization. Southeast Region's staff is organized that way, and it seems to work out just fine. The badges could be organized along the same lines, generally.

(For the record, incidentally: I'm a master in PA and a tech in comms and cadet programs, but I only wear my PA badge.)

[Hawk200]

Some off-the-cuff badge consolidations:

Administration, Finance, Historian and Personnel (maybe Public Affairs too, but that's a reach).

That might work.

Safety and Emergency Services.

I would put Ops, ES, and Safety in one basket. All somewhat related.

Professional Development, Recruiting and maybe Cadet Programs.

Don't know about recruiting, but the others, yes. One is tracking senior training, the other cadets.

Operations and Inspector.

I would have to disagree on that one. Operations and Inspector are different worlds. One is functional, the other investigative (in many ways). It might be wise for an Inspector not to have one, from the stuff I've been reading the Inspector "cannot be beloved" (a quote from Louis the 14th, King of France upon appointing inspector positions).

It's a start.

[flyboy53]

On the AF side, public affairs and historian have separate badges, but I believe it would be excellent to merge the two under one badge because of the similar function. I really liked the idea of a mission support badge that was promoted on CAP Talk some time ago. It had such great potential.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

On the AF side, public affairs and historian have separate badges, but I believe it would be excellent to merge the two under one badge because of the similar function. I really liked the idea of a mission support badge that was promoted on CAP Talk some time ago. It had such great potential.

Public affairs is much closer to communications than to administration. It shares Internet responsibilities with IT (the technoogy side is IT, the content and appearance side is PA). Like radio communications, it's another method of distributing information. It's better to lump PA/marketing (including recruiting and history) with communications.

[RiverAux]

Get rid of all the specialty track badges.  We got along without them for 50+ years.  Don't really see much need for any of the rest either.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Get rid of all the specialty track badges.  We got along without them for 50+ years.  Don't really see much need for any of the rest either.

Including aircrew wings?

On that note, I do believe that a Mission Scanner should have a half-wing.

[lordmonar]

Get rid of all the specialty track badges.  We got along without them for 50+ years.  Don't really see much need for any of the rest either.

I whole heartedly disagree!  We use this sort of bling to bring pride to the very valuable contribuiton every specialty brings to completeing our missions.

I agree that CAP has gone over board in the way we display them....but I don't think loosing them all together would be the way to go.

As CyBorg pointed out....there is no WAY IN GOD'S GREEN EARTH you will pry the wings off our pilot's breasts.

[Major Carrales]

Yet another proposal designed to abrogate a member purchase of an existing item.  I will not support this unless the older badges could be worn concurrently with the new ones (yes, I know it will double or triple the number of badges, but perhaps some well placed hyperbole might serve to show the reasoned CAPTALKER the somewhat moot nature of the proposal)

I am not, at this time, going to favor anything that is going to cause more member money to be wasted based on some aesthetic paradigm.

Either do away with the badges altogether over time by stopping the ability to earn one while allowing those that have one to continue wearing them until they retire...(as is done with the obsolete ribbons by some) or leave it alone.

[lordmonar]

I would support that sort of replacement by attrition plan.

Once the new badges were developed you allow the old badges to be worn until the person retired or upgraded his Specialty Track Rateing.

Stop selling the old ones so when they wore out members would be required to replace them.   You will still see the old ones running around but in time they would disappear...ala the T-43 (?) ES patch vice the Pluto ES Patch.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I can agree with Sparky on a phase-out date. But we have too many of those badges to even recognize them anymore. I'm OK with consolidating into major fields of expertise instead of having badges for every little thing from character development to finance to garbage engineering.

Finding a good way to consolidate them all and make sense of it won't be hard to do, but it's a matter of organizing.

[Major Carrales]

I can agree with Sparky on a phase-out date. But we have too many of those badges to even recognize them anymore. I'm OK with consolidating into major fields of expertise instead of having badges for every little thing from character development to finance to garbage engineering.

Finding a good way to consolidate them all and make sense of it won't be hard to do, but it's a matter of organizing.

Do the phase out thing, and you ave a supporter in me.

[RiverAux]

Get rid of all the specialty track badges.  We got along without them for 50+ years.  Don't really see much need for any of the rest either.

Including aircrew wings?

I could live with that, though there is a pretty strong heritage link to them unlike with all the specialty badges (which is what the thread is focused on).  The phased out approach is fine with me. 

[Hawk200]

Get rid of all the specialty track badges.  We got along without them for 50+ years.  Don't really see much need for any of the rest either.

Including aircrew wings?

Aircrew wings are not a specialty track badge. Different abilities being represented.

Now starting to think we don't need specialty track badges at all. About to go take mine off all my uniforms.

[flyboy53]

Get rid of all the specialty track badges.  We got along without them for 50+ years.  Don't really see much need for any of the rest either.

Including aircrew wings?

Aircrew wings are not a specialty track badge. Different abilities being represented.

Now starting to think we don't need specialty track badges at all. About to go take mine off all my uniforms.

I did that a while ago. I don't want to wear badges that looks like they were prizes out of a Cracker Jack box.

[High Speed Low Drag]

I agree with those on the board - consolidate specialty track badges into a few as has been suggested, phase in as suggested.  Leave Qual badges alone, and add the half-wing for scanner. 

My 2 cents:  Cadet Programs Badge, Mission Support Badge (incl Admin, Logistics, Finance, IT, Personnel, Prof Develop, Public Affairs, Recruiter, History, Inspector) , Mission Operations Badge (Including Emer Serv, Comm, Ops, Safety), and Aerospace Education Badge.  Four badges representing our three missions.  Legal, Medical, Chaplain, Incident Commander have Qualification badges, so they are represented in that manner.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

On second thought, how about this — and it mirrors the A-staff (at least, as used in Southeast Region)...

Manpower (A-1) badge: Administration, personnel, professional development, chaplain support

Operations (A-3) badge: Operations, emergency services, CISM, counterdrug, stan/eval, safety (includes IC and GT badges)

Logistics (A-4) badge: Logistics (to include supply, transportation, maintenance), finance

Plans and programs (A-5) badge: Aerospace education, cadet programs, DDR, inspector general

Communications (A-6) badge: Radio communications, IT, public affairs/marketing/recruiting

The center of what *could* be each specialty badge is a funny little icon above each part of the tree on this page (though just putting the CAP prop-and-triangle on the Air Force insignia isn't quite going to be enough): http://sercap.us/organization.html

The five badges detailed above would replace ALL the shield badges currently in use, plus a couple of others. It might be concievable to break out aerospace education, professional development and cadet programs under an "education" badge, but I can't see many other departures from this.

[ol'fido]

Not really in to long winded replies to these threads but here goes:

Before we change or eliminate badges we have to decide what we want them to signify. Do we want them to reflect a career field(such as they are in CAP) or do we want them to reflect training in a specialty field of our personal interest. For instance, if I am a logistics officer by duty position but want to have my specialty track as PAO which badge do I wear? The one one that reflects my job or my training? Over a long CAP career a member may have more than one job. In 30 some odd years in CAP, I have held every staff position in a squadron there is except chaplain/ MLO, legal, and medical.

Do we want to make them required for wear like a name tag or optional like a ribbon or a set of wings?

Personally,  I am for leaving the chaplain, GT, various medical, and legal specialty badges alone.

I would make the various specialty track badges have a more uniform and professional looking design. Something different from what we have. Enamel badges look kind of chintzy. I like the SER  A-staff designs but those are still enamel type designs. Perhaps a variation on th AF style badges with a more rounded laurel leaf design, but with care not to duplicate any AF career badges in design.

I think that with this being a volunteer organization and people volunteering because some aspect of the  program may interest them more than the staff position to which they are assigned.

I know there are those who will say that when you join CAP you must subordinate your interests to the needs of the organization but people stay because they find something they are interested in  and want to pursue regardless of the staff position they are pigeon holed into. If we don't let people pursue these interests, we are going to have a lot of inactive or one-year members. So, let the badge indicate the specialty the member is actively seeking to advance in.

The comm badge started this trend and was followed by the ES and safety badges. Then we jumped into the AE and CP badges and finally the reast of them. All of these will have to go away and be replaced by a uniform specialty track badge. Wear one onor two only.

The only other change to our various assorted badges is to eliminate the mission scanner  qual and make the mission scanner quals entry level observer quals and bump the old observer quals up to senior observer requirements. All that  other like ARCHER, CD, check pilot, staneval would just be endorsements on your quals without a specific aeronautical badge.

If this post is screwed up , the scroll button on this page is jacked up.

[flyboy53]

Not really in to long winded replies to these threads but here goes....Do we want to make them required for wear like a name tag or optional like a ribbon or a set of wings?...I would make the various specialty track badges have a more uniform and professional looking design....The comm badge started this trend and was followed by the ES and safety badges. Then we jumped into the AE and CP badges and finally the reast of them. All of these will have to go away and be replaced by a uniform specialty track badge. Wear one onor two only.

Agree!!!!! When you're teaching AE to a cadet, a set of wings has more credibility than a Cracker Jack Box toy badge. Besides, especially in that case, AE members get that badge (a minature version) as a benefit of membership. They don't have to earn it like the AEO does.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I would make the various specialty track badges have a more uniform and professional looking design. Something different from what we have. Enamel badges look kind of chintzy. I like the SER  A-staff designs but those are still enamel type designs. Perhaps a variation on th AF style badges with a more rounded laurel leaf design, but with care not to duplicate any AF career badges in design.

Actually, those ARE the Air Force designs with the wreaths removed and the prop-and-triangle added. Oh, and someone colored them, probably to embellish them a little more. (If CAP adopts the Air Force concept, the first thing that needs to go is the globe, since unlike them, we don't have global reach.)

If we're limited to only one (if we wear an aviation badge, it's mandatory), but have earned more than one, each member should be allowed to choose for himself/herself. An example in the current climate: I'm allowed to wear three, but I'm not going to puke enamel badges all over my uniform, so I only wear one -- and depending on what I'm doing, I might swap the PA badge for the comms badge (I don't wear that CP badge because it's smallish and unsightly.

[High Speed Low Drag]

IMHO - we should consolidate track badges into a few, but leave them down on the pocket.  Leave the area above ribbons for qualification badges.

I don't consider CP Badge unsightly, I wear mine with pride.

[flyboy53]

Actually, those ARE the Air Force designs with the wreaths removed and the prop-and-triangle added. Oh, and someone colored them, probably to embellish them a little more. (If CAP adopts the Air Force concept, the first thing that needs to go is the globe, since unlike them, we don't have global reach.)

Since when? Very few, if any of the CAP badges, are Air Force designs. The wings, yes, maybe, because some where along the way they were desinged by the Institute of Heraldry. I distinctly remember one of the National Historians once taking credit for the speciality badges....and the problem is that they don't really look that professional.

[Thom]

Actually, those ARE the Air Force designs with the wreaths removed and the prop-and-triangle added. Oh, and someone colored them, probably to embellish them a little more. (If CAP adopts the Air Force concept, the first thing that needs to go is the globe, since unlike them, we don't have global reach.)

Since when? Very few, if any of the CAP badges, are Air Force designs. The wings, yes, maybe, because some where along the way they were desinged by the Institute of Heraldry. I distinctly remember one of the National Historians once taking credit for the speciality badges....and the problem is that they don't really look that professional.

I believe BuckeyeDEJ was referring to the SouthEast Region images which are used on SER's large and AWESOME organizational chart.  They break things down into a structure which is named after, and 'iconned' with images pulled from the USAF badges for those service areas.

Thom

[Lt Oliv]

Manpower Badge?

Consolidating Historian with Personnel?

Mission Support?

Let's face it. There are a few specialty tracks that can disappear. There is no reason why Personnel and Admin are separate tracks now. I do not believe we need one person to requisition forms for the personnel officer.

Combine Admin and Personnel, call it the Admin Track.

Admin is not "mission support" it is exactly what it says, administration. "Mission Support" sounds like the Admin Officer is the designated doughnut retriever.

"Manpower," aside from being politically incorrect, is a pretty lame name for an operational duty section.

And why does Admin need a badge exactly?

When I was in the Navy, enlisted personnel had specialty marks (which were included in their rank insignia) and officers only had staff corps insignia and warfare badges. The admin officer might be mistaken for a regular person when walking on base.

Consolidate and eliminate certain specialty tracks.

Get rid of the badges altogether.

That much bling makes us look like tricked out security guards more than anything else.

[teesquared]

IMHO, the shield shaped badges we have now work just fine. Let's leave them alone.

[flyboy53]

The sad thing is that for all the posts generated here on this subject, in the end, it won't make any difference what the membership thinks. The real solution here is if you don't like the badge, don't wear it. I don't...and not because I already have Air Force badges to wear.

I realize that there are those who believe the badges are great and that's fine. For me, however, they look too much like prizes out of a Cracker Jack box. I was really excited a few months ago when another string generated some really cool looking badges, but the likelyhood of ever seeing some of those is pretty moot.

You know, on active duty, there are a lot of rated officers that leave flying status and go to desk jobs. Then they qualify for a speciality badge but won't wear it because their wings are more important to them. We can do the same...then Vanguard will be upset because they manufactured a lot of badges that nobody will buy. That's how you get the message across.