NHQ Uniform Committee

[jeders]

I think we should definitely retool corporates to match AF uniforms more rather than retooling AF style to match corporate. Other than that, just keep it simple. Corporate and AF-style should have a 1 to 1 relationship, one corporate style for each AF-style. As far as changing the color of tapes, changing to the color of the BBDUs would look better, but short of that leave them how they are. And most importantly, end Vanguards monopoly on CAP uniforms. It hurts our wallets and our uniformity since they never have what we need.

[JohnKachenmeister]

We need to start looking ahead, not around.

By that I mean that the folowing uniforms are going away:

1.  The current AF service dress blue... to be replaced by the Hap Arnold Heritage uniform.

2.  The BDU... to be replaced by the ABU.

So making small but costly changes to CURRENT uniforms is sort of like putting a fresh coat of paint on the Titanic.

[ColonelJack]

I don't know if my opinions will even count, since I'm not currently a member.  But I am retired, and I will be rejoining soon.

So here's my two kopecks:

1.  Ask the Air Force to let all members wear their uniform.  (Yeah, I know, so not going to happen.)

2.  Leave the AF style uniform alone for now, and work with them to construct the CAP version of the new service coat as soon as it comes out.

3.  For corporate service uniforms, replace the silver sleeve braid with blue; leave the rest of it alone.  Ditch the aviator grays.  Agree on one design of golf/polo shirt and one shade of slacks -- I liked the idea of khaki rather than gray.

4.  As far as bling goes, it wouldn't hurt to cut down on the number of badges out there.  Former squadron and group CCs should be allowed to wear the command badge below the nameplate; this makes the command service ribbon superfluous.  

5.  Utility uniforms -- no wing patches on sleeves.  Other than that, leave 'em alone.  Work with AF for transition to the ABU when it becomes available.

And that's the end.

Jack

[davedove]

I have a couple of thoughts.

1)  Remove the grooming restrictions for the corporate uniform.  If you are going to have a corporate uniform, it should be open to all.

2)  Standardize the insignia between the US Style and the Corporate uniforms.  The field uniforms do this, as do the flight uniforms.  This WAS true for the service uniforms until the introduction of the corporate service uniform.

[ricecakecm]

Allow cloth embroidered nametags on flight suits as an option.

As far as color schemes for them, either go with a USAF "standard" of blue background, yellow border, white wings/text or allow each wing to designate a color scheme.

[ddelaney103]

Allow cloth embroidered nametags on flight suits as an option.

As far as color schemes for them, either go with a USAF "standard" of blue background, yellow border, white wings/text or allow each wing to designate a color scheme.

I'd go with a gray background and the "circle, triangle and prop" in the corner.  Having a different one for each wing would be a mess of a dozen here and a dozen there, all harshing on our uniformity.

[0]

One thing I would like to see happen.  Not sure if this would have to happen through a Uniform Change or from another direction.  Cadets who transition to Senior are authorized to wear some of the Cadet Awards they recieved.  Also JROTC cadets are authorized to wear upto 3 ribbons with their CAP uniform, but once they've left the JROTC program they can't wear them any more.  I'd like to see it change that people who completed JROTC (like myself) can wear 3 of our old JROTC ribbons. 

[JayT]

One thing I would like to see happen.  Not sure if this would have to happen through a Uniform Change or from another direction.  Cadets who transition to Senior are authorized to wear some of the Cadet Awards they recieved.  Also JROTC cadets are authorized to wear upto 3 ribbons with their CAP uniform, but once they've left the JROTC program they can't wear them any more.  I'd like to see it change that people who completed JROTC (like myself) can wear 3 of our old JROTC ribbons. 

Why?

I put mine in my shadow box with the rest of my JROTC junk.

[0]

There are a few I'd like to wear again.  These are the one I worked hard to get. They weren't handed out like candy in the unit I was a part of.

[JayT]

There are a few I'd like to wear again.  These are the one I worked hard to get. They weren't handed out like candy in the unit I was a part of.

Nore did mine.

But do we really need forty year old SMs wearing JROTC ribbons? 'Cause thats whats gonna end up happening.

[0]

There are a few I'd like to wear again.  These are the one I worked hard to get. They weren't handed out like candy in the unit I was a part of.

Nore did mine.

But do we really need forty year old SMs wearing JROTC ribbons? 'Cause thats whats gonna end up happening.

But the same could be said of them wearing Cadet Ribbons from CAP. 

[link]

how about a compromise?  how about maybe telling former Cadets that they can't wear any of their cadet awards and that all the work they put in as Cadets while worthwhile can't be represented any more by their ribbons?

[Dragoon]

Three issues related to cost

1.  Establish in 39-1 a default Phase In/Phase Out period for uniform items. I'd recommend 3 years or so.  That way, the NB can worry about changes, but WE don't have to worry about having to buy new stuff every 6 months!

2. Tackle the fact that most cadets are breaking the rules and wearing civilian outerwear.    Get USAF to agree that cadets can wear civilian outer garments with uniforms.  This seems to be acceptable in JROTC land. 

3.  Establish a low cost navy blue  or black windbreaker that is wearable with all corporate uniforms.  It should be long enough to cover the BDU shirt.  It would go a long way towards low-cost uniformity.  If it was cheap enough, it could allow us to greatly reduce civilian outerwear for seniors.  Taken with #2 above, it could increase uniformity for ALL our members.

[star1151]

Since I've avoided buying any other uniform precisely because of everything that's being said in this thread, my only suggestions are a women's golf shirt design and standard gray pants (men's and women's, or allowed to be altered to fit those of us who can't buy anything off the rack).

[ddelaney103]

2. Tackle the fact that most cadets are breaking the rules and wearing civilian outerwear.    Get USAF to agree that cadets can wear civilian outer garments with uniforms.  This seems to be acceptable in JROTC land. 

Alternately, authorize Cadets to wear the field jacket with service uniforms (but not Service Dress or Semi-formal).  It's a little British looking, but at least we'd be more likely to get uniformity than if we demand expensive outerwear.

[0]

Three issues related to cost

1.  Establish in 39-1 a default Phase In/Phase Out period for uniform items. I'd recommend 3 years or so.  That way, the NB can worry about changes, but WE don't have to worry about having to buy new stuff every 6 months!

2. Tackle the fact that most cadets are breaking the rules and wearing civilian outerwear.    Get USAF to agree that cadets can wear civilian outer garments with uniforms.  This seems to be acceptable in JROTC land. 

3.  Establish a low cost navy blue  or black windbreaker that is wearable with all corporate uniforms.  It should be long enough to cover the BDU shirt.  It would go a long way towards low-cost uniformity.  If it was cheap enough, it could allow us to greatly reduce civilian outerwear for seniors.  Taken with #2 above, it could increase uniformity for ALL our members.

The civilian outerwear isn't supposed to be acceptable in JROTC land either but it happens.  I know when I was in JROTC land the only compromise we had was that we could wear sneakers instead of boots with BDUs. 

[riffraff]

Here's my perspective as a not-yet-30-day member.

There are simply far too many uniform combinations available. Combine with the fact that there are two distinct groups of SMs -- those who meet height/weight/grooming to wear the USAF uniforms and those who do not.

There are really only two paths to go down:
1. Exclude everyone/anyone not meeting the USAF height/weight/grooming requirements. This is extremely unlikely.
2. Develop uniforms that are USAF inspired but not subject to USAF height/weight/grooming standards.

Eliminate everything except for 3 basic uniforms
1. Dress uniform
2. Field uniform
3. Flying uniform

Dress uniform
- white aviator shirt with blue CAP shoulderboards
- blue service trousers
- black shoes
- flight cap or round cap

Field uniform
- BBDU trousers and jacket
- BBDU cap (center any nadging vertically. It looks silly perched on the visor)
- Black boots

Flying uniform
- blue nomex or cotton flight suit (and not that POS blue cotton thing VG sells)
- flight cap
- black boots
- blue CWU-style jacket or A-2 jacket

Options for the dress uniform could include a windbreaker style jacket. Personally I would like to see an Ike-style jacket. The waist-length design is functional and practical. The style pretty much mimics the upper part of a service dress jacket so those with the need to hang their 'bling' would have a place to put everything.

Streamline the whole array of rank badging. Pick one style to be worn on everything. I think blue rank slides with embroidered grade and embroidered CAP on them would work for the dress uniform and also on whatever dress jacket is ultimately used.

Field/flight uniforms should go with embroidered on navy blue and use the same for the name and CAP tapes.

[LtCol White]

You have to remember that USAF will NOT authorize anything for wear with the Service uniform that isn't a USAF item or that conflicts with USAF regulation. Its not even remotely a topic for discussion. They've made this clear many times.

[RocketPropelled]

Since everyone else is chiming in, here's my take:

I'm not even going to address the Air Force-style uniforms. That's between CAP and the USAF, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.  I'm just glad I was a cadet during the maroon-epaulet days, and leave it at that.

But the Corporate Uniform combinations are positively mind-boggling in potential complexity, and I'll speak to what I see the most of at meetings and field events.  When you have a batch of new members, I'd rather recommend something like THIS than what we have now:

FIELD UNIFORM
The BBDU is a winner, and it wouldn't kill CAP Officer-types to standardize on it all around.
No, we're not stabbing the Air Force in the back by NOT wearing woodland.  Wear instructions, insignia placement, etc., can remain the same as the woodland version (once CAP decided whether military badges will go or stay on the blue uniform).  But it surely would deal with any "green vs. blue" sentiments at play.  One field force, one uniform.  Phase it in over two years or so, and move on.
If NHQ wanted to standardize with navy nametapes/insignia instead of the ultramarine, that'd be an attractive option, but obviously we can live with what we have until the next shift in ABU comes around.  Look, no height/weight restrictions!

FLYING/UTILITY UNIFORM
Blue Not-Quite-Flight-Suit
Keep it, it works.  This is the only combo where full-color-on-navy grade insignia is authorized, as I recall, and it looks decent (better than the plastic-encased, anyway).  The NotQuiteFlightSuit is relatively inexpensive (the price of an embroidered Vanguard polo!), and putting the patches on is pretty straightforward.  You can tuck it into a small bag, and get suited up quicker than Clark Kent in a phone booth.  And, no height/weight restrictions.

EVERYTHING ELSE (NOT DRESSY)
Golf Shirt Combination
The shirt can use some tweaking.  
And when I say "tweaking," with so many other good options in quality, construction, and durability, the current polyester shirt is simply ridiculous.  
The thin material of the shirt looks cheap, and the cut of the shirt leaves much to be desired.  (1982 called, they want their fancy leisure shirt back.)  When I wear the "short sleeve polo," the sleeve goes down well past my elbows, and has a horrific shape to it.  Good-looking people don't even look good in this thing.  If I'm gonna get dinged $30 bucks for a polo shirt, I want something like a 5.11 brand polo that I can wash forever, beat the living heck out of, and it'll still hold up.  Vanguard's probably not listening, because the wholesale price on the blue shirt they have now is probably about $5, with the rest going to profit margin.
(If NHQ were serious about serving the membership, and not just keeping Vanguard happy, they'd issue a spec for a standard shirt color (navy blue) and set a standard seal sewing pattern and size, and let members get shirts built elsewhere.  I know for the $40 I dropped on my last Vanguard polo, I could have a great-looking, functional, and professional shirt made at almost any mall embroidery kiosk.)  
I'm just sayin', I think if we had a decent shirt to start with, a lot of the negative image of the polo would go away.  Plus, I'd authorize a long-sleeve polo for all seasons.  

....and the pants:
Since there's not a standard for the "gray dress pants," despite the specs put forth in 39-1, I'd recommend some sort of change. (As I recall, there was no greater logic to the decision to use gray pants, other than "everyone already has a pair in their closet."  The only exception is that most of our "aviator gray" uniform is derived from the standard basic IACE uniform for all countries, and even that isn't very standard.)  In the 21st century, I'd hazard a guess that more folks have khaki pants in their closet than gray slacks.

For meetings, flying, mission base, glad-handing at airshows, et cetera, a perfectly fine uniform would be a decent polo shirt and a clean pair of khakis (including, say, even "tactical khakis" -- a lot of law enforcement types go this way, and it looks good.).

Did I mention yet that there are no height/weight restrictions on these combinations?  You can look as good as you want in these.  It's often not the uniform that looks bad, honestly, it's the person wearing it.  If a uniform is sized properly, constructed of quality material, and worn according to instructions, generally speaking, it'll look good.  If something is badly tailored, if it's dirty, if it's the wrong size for the body type, or made of substandard materials, no matter who wears it, it'll generally look bad.

DRESS WEAR
For a Corporate uniform, I'm okay with the white aviator shirt combo with grey epaulets and the AF blue pants (since I just orphaned the "gray slacks" thing above).  ONE set of epaulets for everything from windbreakers to short sleeve to long sleeve to service dress (if we want to go with pin-on epaulets instead of embroidered, that's cool too, but make ONE standard set!).

[SOAPBOX]
(Folks, I've lost about 100 pounds since rejoining CAP a few years ago.  I've gone from wearing a XXL BBDU to teetering between a Medium and Large.  And I can tell you, it's not the weight that makes a uniform look bad, as much as it is the cut, the style, and the bearing of the wearer.)
[/SOAPBOX]

I have all the currently authorized combinations in my closet, except for the newest Corporate Dress Uniform (the coat version and the blue-epaulet version).  Perhaps we can save the Air Force versions for big public events (banquets, awards ceremonies, events with the actual Air Force), and concentrate more on making things actually UNIFORM most of the time.

Some of this is local commanders' prerogative -- my standard senior squadron is a quality outfit, but there's no standard "uniform of the day." At any given meeting, we'll see members in golf shirts, white/gray aviator uniforms, short sleeve CDU, full Air Force style service, dress, green flightsuits, and woodland BDUs.

We still get the job done, though.  We just don't look like we shopped at the same place.

[MIKE]

I dunno about these uniform threads...