Cheat sheet for sewing BDU patches

[Maj Ballard]

I put together this cheat sheet for my new cadets. Gives a graphical representation of how to sew patches on BDUs. (Does not include collar insignia for senior members or cadet officers.) Several parents have said it was very helpful. Just wanted to share.

[Hawk200]

Simple and basic. I would ditch the Wing patch, they're going away soon.

It's good to leave out the collar insignia, it would be a while before a new cadet would even need to know that, and they will learn it by the time the would be putting them on anyway.

[JoeTomasone]

Simple and basic. I would ditch the Wing patch, they're going away soon.

It's good to leave out the collar insignia, it would be a while before a new cadet would even need to know that, and they will learn it by the time the would be putting them on anyway.

Not all Wings are getting rid of the Wing patches.  National made them optional and FL Wing, for example, is mandating them on BDUs. 

[DC]

This is great, I have had several new cadets take their BDUs to an alterations shop for their patches and come to a meeting with the Wing patch tilted severely and way too low... This should put an end to that! Thanks for sharing.

[Kal]

Not all Wings are getting rid of the Wing patches.  National made them optional and FL Wing, for example, is mandating them on BDUs. 

Washington wing also.

[SarDragon]

And CAWG.

[mikeylikey]

^ and PAWG, unless you are a Ranger, then you wear the Hawk Mountain School Patch in place of the wing patch.  That is to make sure those of us who have not been to HAWK stand out from those that did.  Don't want to be mistaken for a CAP Ranger....

[Hawk200]

Simple and basic. I would ditch the Wing patch, they're going away soon.

It's good to leave out the collar insignia, it would be a while before a new cadet would even need to know that, and they will learn it by the time the would be putting them on anyway.

Not all Wings are getting rid of the Wing patches.  National made them optional and FL Wing, for example, is mandating them on BDUs. 

Not really an issue, the wing patches are going away soon enough.

Now if you want to spend the money on something that a wing has mandated in direct contradiction to the National published policy, that's up to you. I wouldn't.

[SarDragon]

Well, I've seen a lot of uniform items in the military be labeled optional, but have seen them prescribed for uniformity in a specific situation, so there is precedent. If my wing CC sez it's not optional, I salute and execute. No big deal. IMHO, it's not a battle worth fighting.

[mynetdude]

Simple and basic. I would ditch the Wing patch, they're going away soon.

It's good to leave out the collar insignia, it would be a while before a new cadet would even need to know that, and they will learn it by the time the would be putting them on anyway.

Not all Wings are getting rid of the Wing patches.  National made them optional and FL Wing, for example, is mandating them on BDUs. 

Not really an issue, the wing patches are going away soon enough.

Now if you want to spend the money on something that a wing has mandated in direct contradiction to the National published policy, that's up to you. I wouldn't.

Wing regulations supersedes NHQ regulations if it does not interfere with the regulation. That being said: if NHQ says its optional but wing says it is required then the requirement is the most authoritative, etc.  If NHQ said that the U.S. Civil Air Patrol was no longer allowed and a wing says it is then that would be an interference of NHQ regulations.

I agree, why do I need to spend money on something that isn't required by NHQ except you don't have a choice if wing tells you otherwise.  ORWG doesn't require it, I took mine off I got tired of the bright white flashy all over my BDU from the wing patch.  the ultramarine blue tapes are fine, I can live with that they aren't horribly bright along with my cloth grade insignia's but having a majorly WHITE patch with some blue and a tiny bit of red is overkill.

Though if I could ever get my feet corrected I'd love to go to HAWK

[JoeTomasone]

Wing regulations supersedes NHQ regulations if it does not interfere with the regulation. That being said: if NHQ says its optional but wing says it is required then the requirement is the most authoritative, etc.  If NHQ said that the U.S. Civil Air Patrol was no longer allowed and a wing says it is then that would be an interference of NHQ regulations.

And here is the relevant policy change to CAPM 39-1; emphasis mine:

2. Changes to the AF-style uniforms:
a. Removal of Wing/Region/National Patch. Effective 15 March 2006,
Wing/Region/National patches are no longer worn on the AF-style light blue shirt/blouse
or any AF-style blue outer garments (light weight jacket, pullover sweater, all weather
coat, etc.) Wing/Region/National patches are now optional on BDUs, flight suits, CAP
field and utility uniforms. Wing patches must be removed from AF-style garments by
1 August 2006.

[Gunner C]

Wing regulations supersedes NHQ regulations if it does not interfere with the regulation. That being said: if NHQ says its optional but wing says it is required then the requirement is the most authoritative, etc.  If NHQ said that the U.S. Civil Air Patrol was no longer allowed and a wing says it is then that would be an interference of NHQ regulations.

And here is the relevant policy change to CAPM 39-1; emphasis mine:

2. Changes to the AF-style uniforms:
a. Removal of Wing/Region/National Patch. Effective 15 March 2006,
Wing/Region/National patches are no longer worn on the AF-style light blue shirt/blouse
or any AF-style blue outer garments (light weight jacket, pullover sweater, all weather
coat, etc.) Wing/Region/National patches are now optional on BDUs, flight suits, CAP
field and utility uniforms. Wing patches must be removed from AF-style garments by
1 August 2006.

I attempted to take my wing patch off but there was some sort of glue applied to the backside of the patch that had been ironed into the sleeve.  I put it back on - otherwise, my BDU shirt is unuseable.  Nuts - I'd like to comply, but I'd also like to not buy another set of BDUs.

[Hawk200]

I attempted to take my wing patch off but there was some sort of glue applied to the backside of the patch that had been ironed into the sleeve.  I put it back on - otherwise, my BDU shirt is unuseable.  Nuts - I'd like to comply, but I'd also like to not buy another set of BDUs.

That's the "sealant" to keep the patch from unraveling. Best method to remove it is to put a paper towel over it, and then hold an iron to it for a few seconds. The towel should absorb most of it, and the rest should peel off.

[Gunner C]

I attempted to take my wing patch off but there was some sort of glue applied to the backside of the patch that had been ironed into the sleeve.  I put it back on - otherwise, my BDU shirt is unuseable.  Nuts - I'd like to comply, but I'd also like to not buy another set of BDUs.

That's the "sealant" to keep the patch from unraveling. Best method to remove it is to put a paper towel over it, and then hold an iron to it for a few seconds. The towel should absorb most of it, and the rest should peel off.

That's great!  I'll give it a whorl.  Hopefully it'll work.

[mikeylikey]

So aren't BDU's considered an AF style garment?  So really wing patches should have been taken off of them everywhere in 2006?  Right??

Why even publish a directive that can just be ignored by your Wing King?  Why waste the paper.  Also, Wing Commanders need less of an influence on uniforms.  I also believe that if a Wing Commander wanted to make a change it should have to go to NHQ for approval, and if it involved anything on AF style, it should have to go to CAP-USAF for approval.

[Maj Ballard]

So aren't BDU's considered an AF style garment?  So really wing patches should have been taken off of them everywhere in 2006?  Right??

Why even publish a directive that can just be ignored by your Wing King?  Why waste the paper.  Also, Wing Commanders need less of an influence on uniforms.  I also believe that if a Wing Commander wanted to make a change it should have to go to NHQ for approval, and if it involved anything on AF style, it should have to go to CAP-USAF for approval.

The changes to 39-1 specify that wing patches were removed from all BLUE Air Force style garments. They are optional on BDUs. The sentence that follows the BDU sentence is confusing, but in light of the rest of the paragraph, I think it's clear that WPs on BDUs is optional, as written.

Here is the FLWG policy letter regarding wing patches:

http://flwg.us/WPL_06-02_Patch_Policy.pdf

Pay no attention to those typos.

[JoeTomasone]

And to add to Captain B's answer, the Wing Commander cannot publish policy that contradicts National's policy.   So he/she could not mandate wear of the wing patch on the blues since the policy was to explicitly remove them.   Since wear on the BDUs is now optional, the Wing Commander can indeed require it. 

[Hawk200]

And to add to Captain B's answer, the Wing Commander cannot publish policy that contradicts National's policy.   So he/she could not mandate wear of the wing patch on the blues since the policy was to explicitly remove them.   Since wear on the BDUs is now optional, the Wing Commander can indeed require it. 

The policy letter says "Wear of the wing patch on BDUs is optional."

It does not say "Wear of the wing patch on BDUs is optional, unless your commander feels like making it mandatory.

Merriam-Webster defines "optional" as "involving an option : not compulsory". Take note of the "not compulsory".

Officially, wing kings can only supplement National policy or publication if National permits it. In other cases, wing commanders are permitted to authorize items within certain guidelines. 39-1 is inclusive (meaning that you are only permitted what's in the manual), and has examples of what a wing CC may authorize. Policy letters are the same way. Anything else isn't permitted.

What it boils down to is certain Wing Kings overstepping their bounds. Then again, they're just following TP's example. Wing commanders are a link in the chain of command, not an absolute head with carte blanche.

When it comes to optional , a wing commander cannot "indeed" require anything.

Of course, if you don't comply, there are  probably more than a few commanders that would happily boot you out the door, waving their "authority" for all to see, and making an example of you to discourage others from growing a spine. Even if they were dead wrong.

[mikeylikey]

Me personally I like the PAWG Wing Patch.  It is very historical, one of the first in the country.  I was said to see the Wing King tell Hawk MTN peeps to remove it to put on the Hawk patch.  Some things we need to preserve, others we don't.  Historical references to our past are good things to preserve, while the HAWK Patch as far as I am concerned is not.  It can easily be worn in its proper place like all the other Cadet Special Activity Patches.

[PHall]

And to add to Captain B's answer, the Wing Commander cannot publish policy that contradicts National's policy.   So he/she could not mandate wear of the wing patch on the blues since the policy was to explicitly remove them.   Since wear on the BDUs is now optional, the Wing Commander can indeed require it. 

The policy letter says "Wear of the wing patch on BDUs is optional."

It does not say "Wear of the wing patch on BDUs is optional, unless your commander feels like making it mandatory.

Merriam-Webster defines "optional" as "involving an option : not compulsory". Take note of the "not compulsory".

Officially, wing kings can only supplement National policy or publication if National permits it. In other cases, wing commanders are permitted to authorize items within certain guidelines. 39-1 is inclusive (meaning that you are only permitted what's in the manual), and has examples of what a wing CC may authorize. Policy letters are the same way. Anything else isn't permitted.

What it boils down to is certain Wing Kings overstepping their bounds. Then again, they're just following TP's example. Wing commanders are a link in the chain of command, not an absolute head with carte blanche.

When it comes to optional , a wing commander cannot "indeed" require anything.

Of course, if you don't comply, there are  probably more than a few commanders that would happily boot you out the door, waving their "authority" for all to see, and making an example of you to discourage others from growing a spine. Even if they were dead wrong.

You know, I asked my then Wing Commander that question. She said that the then National Commander (aka he who shall not be named) told the National Board that it was to be at the Wing Commander's option. I said "that's not what was published. The letter said optional, period.
She said she would check into it. Never got an answer because other events happened before she could give me an answer.

I'd really be interested to hear what Brig Gen Courter's view on this is. But I don't think any of us here on CAPTalk has an appointment to see her anytime soon.