How distinctive is "distinctive" to the Air Force?

[skymaster]

From repeated readings of the AF regulations in relation to "distinctiveness" of uniforms for organisations that are authorised to wear variations of the AF uniform, I was wondering how "distinctive" the USAF needs for uniform items to be to be allowed for wear by persons in organisations other than the acive duty AF. It comes to mind that, several years ago, when CAP requested permission to return to the wear of metal grade insignia on the shoulder straps of the service coat, with CAP cutouts on the lapels instead of U.S. (in the manner that we had from the 1950s through the late 1980s) as an AF Auxiliary, we apparently were told that to do so was not distinctive enough, keeping us stuck in grey epaulets on all service dress uniform combos. (Except for the short period were authorised the double-breasted blue Corporate Service Uniform). Well,in Georgia the GA DOD recently had a change-of-command of Adjutant Generals. The outgoing AG always wore the regular U.S. Army uniform fully conforming to the AR 670-series regulations. As it is traditional for the state Adjutant General to alternate between a green-suited Army National Guard officer, and a blue-suited Air National Guard officer, it was suprising that the uniform for the incoming AG, General Butterworth, was a bit "different" to say the least. For a dress uniform (as shown in the photo below)



he wears a blue service coat much like an AF officer except that to be "distinctive" enough from the AF, he wears "GA" cutouts in place of the U.S., and he wears different, State of Georgia buttons in place of the "Hap Arnold" buttons. For a utility uniform, instead of the Airman Battle Uniform, he actually wears the Army Combat Uniform, with black-on-ACU digital nameplates, a GEORGIA branch tape, and the Georgia State Defense Force patch on his shoulder, and subdued metal Air Force pilot wings on his chest.
     Before being appointed to the Adjutant General post by Governor Deal, he was a state legislator, and before that he was a Delta Airlines pilot, and an Air National Guard B-1B pilot in the grade of Captain. Upon selection as Adjutant General, the National Guard Bureau promoted him to the regular grade of Major. The Governor of Georgia chose to commission him as a 3-star Lieutenant General in the organised militia of the State of Georgia. As his predecessor was only a 2-star Major General in the Georgia Army National Guard, he voluntarily chooses to only wear 2 stars (even though technically he is actually a 3-star General). His assistant AG for the Army National Guard is actually a retired Army Colonel who the state commissioned as a Brigadier General in the state's organised militia effective upon his appointment by the Governor to the post, and wears a similarly distinctive Army uniform with different buttons and golden "GA" cutouts in place of the "U.S.", and also wears the Georgia State Defense Force uniform as a utility uniform.
     I do not begrudge any person in the service of their nation (or even their state) wearing a uniform as similar to their parent service as possible, but it leads one to wonder if the Air Force has somewhat relaxed the level of distinctiveness required to tell those in active Air Force service from other blue-suited organisations also authorised to wear a variant of the Air Force uniform. General Butterworth's uniform is apparently distinctive enough with different cutouts and similar (but not Hap Arnold-style) buttons to meet the AF's standards of distinctiveness for a dress uniform (much like the old 1980s and before CAP uniform). While the State of Georgia has had a historical habit of having a minimal level of distinction in uniforms from our active duty counterparts (as seen below in the distinctive pilot wings authorised for pilots in the Air Division of the Georgia State Defense Corps in 1940 which became the Air Patrol formed as a branch of the GSDC in 1941, prior to the Air Patrol becoming the Georgia Wing CAP in December of that same year), apparently these were all distinctive enough to pass muster with our parent service.



I am just wondering if perhaps, just maybe, if we could just let the Air Force see that yes, your predecessors did consider these examples distinctive enough to tell the difference between the active AF and other organisations, and wonder if they would at least consider the possibilty of allowing a similar level of distinctiveness.

[Eclipse]

The USAF is probably peripherally aware and not interested in the least.

[Ned]

I think the short answer is that the "distinctiveness" requirement you speak of is found in AFI 10-2701 that governs CAP, and not in any AFI or other instructions that govern the uniforms of the State Defense Forces authorized by the US Consitution and various federal and state laws.

Kind of an "apples and oranges" thing.  I admit it seems logical to suppose that the SDF and CAP uniforms should be governed by the same rules, but they are not.  Mostly because the staff officers who wrote the CAP-related AFI were not thinking about SDF uniforms when they wrote and staffed it.

As I have mentioned in several other threads, there is no reason that CAP could not request a return to metal grade and CAP cutouts.  But we would need to prepare a formal request for us to do so, and as part of that packet we would need to explain why the change is needed.

And I just don't think "We think it looks better" or "we want to go back to the way we looked 25 years ago" is going to be perceived as sufficient justification to change the AFI and our regulations.

[Eclipse]

As I have mentioned in several other threads, there is no reason that CAP could not request a return to metal grade and CAP cutouts. 

This should never, ever, even be whispered within range of the USAF, ever again.

We have far more pressing uniform issues then metal grade.  That ship has passed and should be left out to sea.

[MSG Mac]

The reason he wears GA, rather than US cutouts is that he's probably not "Federally Recognized" as a Major General. But holds that grade in the Georgia National Guard as the adjutant General. I just checked the internet. One hurdle Butterworth will face will be that of rank. He left the Georgia Air National Guard as a captain. Deal has jumped him six spots — to lieutenant general, a three-star grade. Butterworth says that, in Georgia, he'll wear the uniform of a major general — with two stars. blogs.ajc.com/.../09/...of-general-turmoil-for-georgias-national-guard

[JoeTomasone]

I have always heard (and read, IIRC) that the test of "distinctive" is that the uniform can be determined to be a CAP uniform at a distance and in low light - presumably so that AD folks can tell that customs & courtesies are not required.     Hence the grey epaulettes, blue nametapes/insignia, no grade insignia on the flight cap, etc.   Basically, the grade insignia is different enough to tell us apart from AD.   

[Luis R. Ramos]

Sky-

As posted by MSG the reason that he wears "GA" ad not "US" is that he was appointed to that grade by the state Governor and is not "Federally recognized."

I ran a quick check for the National Guards of Puerto Rico, New York, and Connecticut Adjutant Generals. All wear "US" cutouts. In the case of PR, is Colonel Juan Medina. For Indiana, the Assistant Adj Gen, Air is Brigadier General Jeffrey Hauser. In the case of Connecticut, is Major General Thaddeus Martin.

So it appears that Air Force and other regulations do not require distinctions among Air Force, National Guards, and Reserve components unless their officers are not Federally recognized.

In short, if General Butterworth had decided to use his Air Force rank when he was active Air Force as Adjutant General, he could wear his US cutouts. There is a reason he chose not to do so, and I am not going to speculate on it.

Flyer

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

This is a personal pet peeve of mine, as most CT'ers know.  The logical fallacies in AFI 10-2701 are big enough to fly a C-5 through.  "Low-light/at-a-distance" are highly subjective and not quantifiable.

Usually it is interpreted as "make it grey."

If someone is close enough to see grade insignia and cannot read "CAP" on the rank slide, of whatever colour, I suggest a visit to the base opthalmologist.

The cadet forces in Canada, Australia, the UK and New Zealand apparently give their membership more credit than CAP/the AF give ours.

Using Australia as an example:


Group Captain (Colonel equivalent) Ken Gividen, Australian Air Force Cadets


Air Vice-Marshal (Major-General equivalent) Gavin Davies, CSC, Deputy Commander Royal Australian Air Force

The only difference in the uniforms is the shoulder flashes.  GPCAPT Gividen has "Australian Air Force Cadets" and AVM Davies has "Australia."


Rank slides, Australian Air Force Cadets


Rank slides, Royal Australian Air Force

The only difference is the title on the epaulette..."AAFC" v. "Australia."

It is very similar in the UK, Canada and New Zealand.

I know, I know..."they're not us."

To quote Billy Joel, "it's a matter of trust."

This should never, ever, even be whispered within range of the USAF, ever again.

Why?  Are you afraid that even asking the question will cause a revert to berry boards?

I think the short answer is that the "distinctiveness" requirement you speak of is found in AFI 10-2701 that governs CAP, and not in any AFI or other instructions that govern the uniforms of the State Defense Forces authorized by the US Consitution and various federal and state laws.

Are there such USAF regulations?  That's a sincere question, Colonel.  It seems that, from what I know of SDF's (I almost joined one), they take their uniform rules from the National Guard regs of their various states.

Keep in mind, also, that, outside their State of commissioning, SDF officers are no more "entitled" to a salute than we are, though I would do so as a courtesy.  Their commissions are not recognised outside their State.

As I have mentioned in several other threads, there is no reason that CAP could not request a return to metal grade and CAP cutouts.  But we would need to prepare a formal request for us to do so, and as part of that packet we would need to explain why the change is needed.

And I just don't think "We think it looks better" or "we want to go back to the way we looked 25 years ago" is going to be perceived as sufficient justification to change the AFI and our regulations.

Isn't the fact that "we have done enough penance for members who are long gone from CAP," and just asking why we are still being punished for the sins of the past enough?

The USCG doesn't force their Auxiliary to take such measures, other than silver sleeve lace and the "A" on metal office devices...which they have had for a looooong time.

The USNSCC doesn't force their personnel to do so.  A couple of years ago I ran into a USNSCC Ensign wearing BDU's, subdued metal grade insignia and subdued nametapes.  The Ensign and I talked a bit about uniforms of NSCC v. CAP and he said he could not understand why the Air Force was making us do what we have to do.

The ACU does not make their personnel do so.

So why is is just US?

[Ned]

This is a personal pet peeve of mine, as most CT'ers know.  The logical fallacies in AFI 10-2701 are big enough to fly a C-5 through.  "Low-light/at-a-distance" are highly subjective and not quantifiable.

Usually it is interpreted as "make it grey."

We've talked about this before, of course.  And I suspect the essense of the communication problem is that neither you nor I wrote AFI 10-2701, nor were we asked to comment on the draft.

Because it is an AF AFI, binding only on AF personnel. 

And there is no known, practical way I am aware of for us to influence it.

Sure, I can mention the issue to the various AF-affiliated members of the BoG and even to key folks in CAP-USAF.  (Actually, I have already done so on several occaisons.)

But until we can present a case that grey rank slides somehow impede our ability to perform our assigned missions, it is always going to come across as an esthetic issue.  And no one is in any hurry to change an otherwise functional AFI over a difference in opinion about what would look "better" or "more professional."

I think the short answer is that the "distinctiveness" requirement you speak of is found in AFI 10-2701 that governs CAP, and not in any AFI or other instructions that govern the uniforms of the State Defense Forces authorized by the US Consitution and various federal and state laws.

Are there such USAF regulations?  That's a sincere question, Colonel.  It seems that, from what I know of SDF's (I almost joined one), they take their uniform rules from the National Guard regs of their various states.

Honestly, I am fairly sure there are, at least for the Army side,  But I can't point you to them.  I suspect if you look at the various SDF uniform manuals, they will have some sort of citation in them.  For example, I'm pretty sure the Army version requires the red nameplates that are worn fairly universally on the SDF Class A uniforms.

But I am most assuredly not an SDF uniform wonk.  I have trouble keeping track of CAP's uniform issues.

Keep in mind, also, that, outside their State of commissioning, SDF officers are no more "entitled" to a salute than we are, though I would do so as a courtesy.  Their commissions are not recognised outside their State.

Leaving the salute issue aside, state commissioned officers are indeed "recognized" outside their respective states.  The US Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause requires states to recognize the executive officers of other states.  As a practical matter, states can send SDF members to other states for duty as California did by sending some of their CSMR folks to help out after Katrina.  Not to mention the whole TAG thing discussed above.

[Concerning requesting hard rank and blue shoulder marks from the AF,] Isn't the fact that "we have done enough penance for members who are long gone from CAP," and just asking why we are still being punished for the sins of the past enough?

As we have discussed before, there is literally no one still in the Air Force that can even remember when we wore metal grade and blue shoulder marks.  Accordingly, it is just wierd to talk about "penance" or "punishment."  The staff folks who write the AFIs certainly don't think of it that way.  They - being the good staff officers that they are -- will ask "well, if it is working now, why should we change it?"

And the answer will need to be better than "because we want to go back to the way it was 25 years ago when we looked cooler."

So why is is just US?

Because we are the only auxiliary the AF has.  They are responsible for us, and have acted honorably and been supportive of us for many, many decades.

[Duke Dillio]

Isn't the fact that "we have done enough penance for members who are long gone from CAP," and just asking why we are still being punished for the sins of the past enough?

I have heard off-hadn there is still a former national commander running around who used to close down the base O-club on Maxwell. 

[Ned]

I have heard off-hadn there is still a former national commander running around who used to close down the base O-club on Maxwell.

I am not sure I understand your point.  Over the years, I have been in the club at Maxwell several times at closing time.  (They close rather early, BTW).

Did I do something wrong?

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

We've talked about this before, of course.  And I suspect the essense of the communication problem is that neither you nor I wrote AFI 10-2701, nor were we asked to comment on the draft.

I think so many people were just relieved to get rid of the berry boards that there wasn't an issue made of it.

Because it is an AF AFI, binding only on AF personnel. 

Isn't it binding on us, since we have to wear the prescribed uniforms?

And there is no known, practical way I am aware of for us to influence it.

Some have suggested sending it up the chain...which would be useless, because there are so many people in CAP (and on this board) who don't think we should even wear the USAF uniform at all that it would very likely get halted before it got too far.

Sure, I can mention the issue to the various AF-affiliated members of the BoG and even to key folks in CAP-USAF.  (Actually, I have already done so on several occaisons.)

Sir, I'm not trying to place any onus on you.  However, I am curious as to what the response of CAP-USAF has been when you've asked.

Honestly, I am fairly sure there are, at least for the Army side,  But I can't point you to them.  I suspect if you look at the various SDF uniform manuals, they will have some sort of citation in them.  For example, I'm pretty sure the Army version requires the red nameplates that are worn fairly universally on the SDF Class A uniforms.

That's probably true on the Army side, and since there are so few naval (Ohio, New York)/air (Texas, though Indiana used to have one) units it does not get a lot of notice.

However, many years ago I did see an SDF Air First Lieutenant wearing the short-sleeve dress...the only thing distinguishing him was it had his state name on his blue nameplate.  I was able to see this because he was wearing the lightweight jacket open (unzipped completely).

Leaving the salute issue aside, state commissioned officers are indeed "recognized" outside their respective states.  The US Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause requires states to recognize the executive officers of other states.  As a practical matter, states can send SDF members to other states for duty as California did by sending some of their CSMR folks to help out after Katrina.  Not to mention the whole TAG thing discussed above.

This is a mystery to me...I had thought that the "full-faith-and-credit-clause" only applied to ARNG/ANG commissioned/warrant officers because their commissions are given full Federal recognition, whereas the SDF commissions are only granted by a State Governor through the Adjutant General.  Ya, vell.

As we have discussed before, there is literally no one still in the Air Force that can even remember when we wore metal grade and blue shoulder marks.

That surprises me, given that the staff of CAP-USAF are bound to have access to many old photographs of CAP personnel(?).

Accordingly, it is just wierd to talk about "penance" or "punishment."  The staff folks who write the AFIs certainly don't think of it that way.  They - being the good staff officers that they are -- will ask "well, if it is working now, why should we change it?"

I use that terminology because the berry boards were indeed a punitive measure...that happened just before I joined, and I remember being told by several high-ranking CAP officers why they were instituted, including one who was a friend of then-national CC General Anderson and spent a lot of time at Maxwell.

So why is is just US?

I guess the gist of that question was why we are alone among service auxiliaries/cadet forces in having to comply with this...why the AF sees the need for it when the CG, Navy and Army do not.

I have heard off-hadn there is still a former national commander running around who used to close down the base O-club on Maxwell. 

Major General Ernie Harwell?

[Eclipse]

My point was that with all the challenges CAP and the USAF have on their plate right now, every conversation and request needs to be mission-focused and driven, there is no time
for nonsense.

If you want to discuss uniform requests which seek to reduce and unify the members' closet (i.e. providing a uniform instead of a "selection"), that's one thing, but to be
asking for cosmetic changes that would feed egos but literally make no difference to anyone, including and especially the membership, no.  Just no.

I stand by my assertions that the current state of the uniform is, in fact, detrimental to mission and spirit, since we don't actually have a "uniform" in the textbook sense of the word,
but until there's writing on the wall that things can actually be "fixed", these discussions aren't even interesting coffee-house fodder anymore.

What we need is one variant of each uniform, and that needs to be 100% mission driven and focused.  Not what someone else wears, not what is best for other services, but
what is singularly best for the membership and the mission.  Two of everything isn't.

Metal grade isn't even on that radar.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

If you want to discuss uniform requests which seek to reduce and unify the members' closet (i.e. providing a uniform instead of a "selection"), that's one thing, but to be
asking for cosmetic changes that would feed egos but literally make no difference to anyone, including and especially the membership, no.  Just no.

Agreed, and of course, as you know, we had one of those.

I stand by my assertions that the current state of the uniform is, in fact, detrimental to mission and spirit, since we don't actually have a "uniform" in the textbook sense of the word, but until there's writing on the wall that things can actually be "fixed", these discussions aren't even interesting coffee-house fodder anymore.

Agreed again, but getting agreement on what that "uniform" should be is about like getting Washington to get anything done.

[Eclipse]

In this context, the CSU made things worse, since it increased the size of the closet.  It served a purpose, and was certainly a better
alternative then the whites in regards to a uniform look, but it wasn't really a solution.

And then of course it was handled badly, end-to-end, from implementation to retirement.

[Ned]

Because it is an AF AFI, binding only on AF personnel. 

Isn't it binding on us, since we have to wear the prescribed uniforms?

Come on, think it through. 

Think of it this way, if you were at your meeting and decided to wear blue grade slides, you could not be courts-martialed for violating the AFI.  Because as a CAP member, you are not bound to obey AFIs.  Just as AF folks are not bound to obey CAPRs.

But the AFI is binding on the AF personnel who control our uniforms.  So I suppose it works out the same in the long run.

Leaving the salute issue aside, state commissioned officers are indeed "recognized" outside their respective states. 

This is a mystery to me...I had thought that the "full-faith-and-credit-clause" only applied to ARNG/ANG commissioned/warrant officers because their commissions are given full Federal recognition, whereas the SDF commissions are only granted by a State Governor through the Adjutant General.  Ya, vell.

Not that strange.  An LAPD officer can certainly travel to New York and perform their LAPD duties as required.  Sure, they may not exercise the powers of a New York police officer, but their status as a California officer does not evaporate when they hit the state line.

And as a side note, when I was a Guard officer, I received an actual paper Federal Commission to hang on the wall.  I also received various state commissions.  There sometimes can be a difference between a state grade and an officers "federally-recognized" grade (kinda like that federal captain / state LTG picutred above), but that doesn't mean that the state officer is not still an officer in a military force recognized by federal law.  The Fed-rec stuff only relates to the internal workings of the DoD.

I use that terminology because the berry boards were indeed a punitive measure...that happened just before I joined, and I remember being told by several high-ranking CAP officers why they were instituted, including one who was a friend of then-national CC General Anderson and spent a lot of time at Maxwell.

Well, as long as you heard the gossip from a reliable source, it must be true.    

It is only "punitive" by self-definition.  The AF needed it to be distinctive.  For you and others, anything distinctive is "punitive." 

Since our very first shoulder insignia were on flaming red shoulder straps, unless the AAF was trying to "punish" the heroic volunteer pilots who were risking their lives to defend the nation against armed Nazis, it is pretty hard to imagine how wearing maroon shoulder marks was "punitive."

[johnnyb47]

This thread got me to thinking so I looked up the history of our rank insignia.
I came across this:
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/104939401/CIVIL-AIR-PATROL-UNIFORM-INSIGNIA-SINCE-1941--4th-EDITION

I'm sure others have seen it (a CAP member WROTE it) but I thought it was interesting and relatively relevant.
I'll have to track down a copy and buy it for the coffee table.

[RiverAux]

Is it still the case that JROTC uniforms look more Air Forcey than ours?  If so, I still can't take any  need for "distinctiveness" seriously. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Is it still the case that JROTC uniforms look more Air Forcey than ours?  If so, I still can't take any  need for "distinctiveness" seriously.

They do, as do, of course, our cadet uniforms.  I suppose that is because there is no danger in a JROTC cadet trolling for a salute from a military member.

Think of it this way, if you were at your meeting and decided to wear blue grade slides, you could not be courts-martialed for violating the AFI.  Because as a CAP member, you are not bound to obey AFIs.  Just as AF folks are not bound to obey CAPRs.

Perhaps not.  But if I were to do something that stupid, my squadron CC would probably give me a well-deserved punt in the posterior...to say nothing of if there were any AF personnel dropping in that night.

And as a side note, when I was a Guard officer, I received an actual paper Federal Commission to hang on the wall.  I also received various state commissions.  There sometimes can be a difference between a state grade and an officers "federally-recognized" grade (kinda like that federal captain / state LTG picutred above), but that doesn't mean that the state officer is not still an officer in a military force recognized by federal law.  The Fed-rec stuff only relates to the internal workings of the DoD.

Scwewy (Elmer Fudd voice).

The only other instance where I've heard of that (and this is a bad one) is the WWII SS.

A member could be an SS-Mann (Private) in the Allgemeine-SS and an Obersturmbannfuehrer (Lieutenant Colonel) in the Waffen-SS.

Well, as long as you heard the gossip from a reliable source, it must be true.    

Gossip, in most cases, tends to vary and increase in sensationalism depending on who is telling it.  The stories I heard back in 1993 had a consistent thread: General Harwell and CAP officers trolling for salutes.  I heard very, very little variation.  The CAP officer in question was my first Squadron CC, a former Cadet (not sure how far up the ladder he went as a cadet), who later became a Wing CC, who finally landed a Region spot before retiring as a full Colonel with quite a rack of awards, including a Gill Robb Wilson.  He was indeed personal friends with General Anderson and once told me WRT the issue of metal grade/blue epaulettes that the General said "You will never get them back."

So, no, it's not primary information and would likely be dismissed as hearsay in a court of law, but as circumstantial evidence it would have at least some validity, I believe.  In any case, this officer was someone I respected (and still do, though I haven't seen him in about 15 years) quite a lot.

For you and others, anything distinctive is "punitive." 

Again it depends on an objective definition of "distinctive."  The pre-berry boards uniforms had CAP cutouts on the lapels, the same blue nameplates that cadets wear now and "CAP" embroidered on the blue shoulder marks.  All of those were "distinctions," because the Air Force did not have them.  I also believe that buttons with the CAP crest, if not mandatory (?), were in widespread use at that time.

I am willing to allow that it was indeed a series of remarkable coincidences: hearsay about a General self-promoting, hearsay about CAP officers trolling for salutes, and the almost concurrent call from the Air Force for "distinctive" insignia, resulting in first maroon shoulder loops, and then the infamous epaulettes.

Since our very first shoulder insignia were on flaming red shoulder straps, unless the AAF was trying to "punish" the heroic volunteer pilots who were risking their lives to defend the nation against armed Nazis, it is pretty hard to imagine how wearing maroon shoulder marks was "punitive."

I never said anything about our AAF/CAP predecessors, who of course had the red backing from NCO insignia and red epaulettes removed in 1946.

[LGM30GMCC]

A few things...

JROTC is part of AFOATS, they have MUCH tighter restrictions on their senior leadership. Every single one of their senior officers is either a retired NCO or Officer. NONE of them are off the street volunteers so while quality still varies, the USAF KNOWS the baseline training they have. Hell, they are still helping pay for them through retirement pay.

RCAC, RAC, AACF and similar organization's officers are COMMISSIONED OFFICERS IN THEIR MINISTRY OF DEFENSE. They are required to go through a much more strictly controlled training process and there is a wait list to try to become an officer. They are also paid members so the tools at the disposal of the forces to ensure proper compliance are a lot bigger.

The CGAUX is 40% the size of the entire CG. They have a closer relationship to their parent service as a result of this much greater size proportion. For a similar proportion/notice CAP would need approximately 300,000 members, or be equivalent in size to the entire active duty component of the USAF.

The majority of the USAF is unaware of the State Defense Force's existence. There's enough confusion between Guard/Active Duty you mix in SDF and most folks would have no idea what you're talking about. I'd likely pop an SDF officer a salute if I saw them since I have no idea what the rules are, but based on the qualifications listed for that GA SDF 2 Star having an equivalent level of military training to an AD Captain...he better be [darn] fine at his job or he's going to get some eye rolls behind closed doors.

As much as I would like to see CAP closer to the USAF the VAST MAJORITY of our members, and perception of them needs to be that our officers behave and act like USAF officers. Right now I would argue most don't. For many this is a lack of training/understanding, for others it's just sloppiness. Clean up the act first, part of which means not worrying about what color rank slides we have.

I thought the CSU was a nice idea, up to the point of the parts that SCREAMED wannabe at me. The Hard rank on it, the silver sleeve braid, etc. It just screamed childish 'You can't stop me from doing this so I'm going to do it!' I thought it wasn't bad (though still hated the braid) when it was swapped to the rank slides. However, by then it was dragged through the muck with its creator.

I can tell you quite a few AF officers look at these things as 'I EARNED my bars and am expected and have to behave a certain way.' There are those who begrudingly accept that lawyers, doctors, and chaplains earn theirs a different way (though there are comments that doctors/lawyers/chaplains aren't 'real' officers). However, as soon as a CAP member starts acting like an ass, and not getting smacked up longside the head for it, we start to lose credibility.

As officers some of us get pissed enough at some of our bad apples, but we have a mechanism to smack them, and generally someone does. In CAP this frequently doesn't happen and because we are so few the bad apples stick out a whole lot more in people's memory.

If we want to 'look' less distinctive, we need to ACT less distinctive first.

[abdsp51]

I would like to add that I did inquire to NHQ about any memo etc for the change for the change being punitive in nature.  The response I got was the "berry boards" came about to provide distinctiveness as request by the AF in 1990.  Nothing punitive is mentioned or hinted at. 

And AFJROTC has very distinct uniform items that separate them from MA blue in most aspects so I don't think some AFJROTC is going to be able to troll for salutes to long before his ASI deals with him. 

[ZigZag911]

You're not going to find anything in writing from an Air Force source describing the berry boards as punitive.

I assure you, however, as someone who was a long time member even then, with some highly placed sources of information, that they were, largely due to a National CC making himself a  CAP major general  (or, more accurately, convincing the National Board to do so) without USAF approval.

The AF folks at that funny five sided building in DC were decidedly not amused!

[MSG Mac]

The same guy who told someone he wasn't selected to command a squadron because " There has never been (insert a negative adjective to describe a person whose ancestry dates back to the Niger River basin) and as far as he was concerned there never would be."

[jacob]

I think the short answer is that the "distinctiveness" requirement you speak of is found in AFI 10-2701 that governs CAP, and not in any AFI or other instructions that govern the uniforms of the State Defense Forces authorized by the US Consitution and various federal and state laws.

Are there such USAF regulations?  That's a sincere question, Colonel.  It seems that, from what I know of SDF's (I almost joined one), they take their uniform rules from the National Guard regs of their various states.

Honestly, I am fairly sure there are, at least for the Army side,  But I can't point you to them.  I suspect if you look at the various SDF uniform manuals, they will have some sort of citation in them.  For example, I'm pretty sure the Army version requires the red nameplates that are worn fairly universally on the SDF Class A uniforms.

But I am most assuredly not an SDF uniform wonk.  I have trouble keeping track of CAP's uniform issues.

For those who are interested in State Defense Force (SDF) uniforms, the two pertinent federal regulations are AR 670-1 (Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia) and NGR 10-4 (National Guard Interaction with State Defense Forces).

Paragraph c (page 316)of section 30–8 (Wear of a uniform similar to the Army uniform) of AR 670-1 (dated February 2005) reads:

State defense forces (SDF) may adopt the Army service and BDU uniforms, provided all service uniform buttons, cap devices, and other insignia differ significantly from that prescribed for wear by members of the U.S. Army. State insignia will not include "United States," "U.S.," "U.S. Army," or the Great Seal of the United States. Personnel of the SDF may wear a State-designed SDF distinguishing badge or insignia centered on the left pocket flap. The red nametape or nameplate will include the full title of the SDF (for example, "Texas State Guard"). The utility uniforms will contain a State SDF tape in lieu of "U.S. Army" over the left breast pocket. States wishing to adopt the Army service and utility uniforms will register with the Chief, National Guard Bureau.

Paragraph 2-2.d (page 1) of NGR 10-4 (dated November 2011) reads:

Members of SDFs are not authorized to wear the uniforms of any of the armed forces of the United States except Army uniforms as authorized and modified under AR 670-1.

[flyboy53]

I suspect what is happening here is that you have a Georgia State Defense Forces officer who has been appointed as the Adjutant General and, as such, he is wearing the uniform of the state defense forces until he's federally recognized.

Otherwise, this officer would be out of uniform Air Force-wise because any state adjutant general is actually serving at the very least a Title 32 active duty tour.

In the meanetime, I scanned the Georgia National Guard website and find this very interesting.

[skymaster]

For those who are interested in State Defense Force (SDF) uniforms, the two pertinent federal regulations are AR 670-1 (Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia) and NGR 10-4 (National Guard Interaction with State Defense Forces).

Paragraph c (page 316)of section 30–8 (Wear of a uniform similar to the Army uniform) of AR 670-1 (dated February 2005) reads:

State defense forces (SDF) may adopt the Army service and BDU uniforms, provided all service uniform buttons, cap devices, and other insignia differ significantly from that prescribed for wear by members of the U.S. Army. State insignia will not include "United States," "U.S.," "U.S. Army," or the Great Seal of the United States. Personnel of the SDF may wear a State-designed SDF distinguishing badge or insignia centered on the left pocket flap. The red nametape or nameplate will include the full title of the SDF (for example, "Texas State Guard"). The utility uniforms will contain a State SDF tape in lieu of "U.S. Army" over the left breast pocket. States wishing to adopt the Army service and utility uniforms will register with the Chief, National Guard Bureau.

Paragraph 2-2.d (page 1) of NGR 10-4 (dated November 2011) reads:

Members of SDFs are not authorized to wear the uniforms of any of the armed forces of the United States except Army uniforms as authorized and modified under AR 670-1.
[/quote]

Different individual states interpret and implement this regulation in various ways. Texas is a prime example, with their Texas State Guard uniform. The Texas military uniform worn by most of the Texas State Guard is similar to US Army's "ACU" military uniforms, though with different markings; the Maritime Regiment's uniform is similar to the Marine's MARPAT Digital Desert uniform. Air units wear a Texas variation of the U.S. Air Force uniform. (And their variation of the AF uniform, like the current GA Adjutant General's uniform, is MUCH closer in resemblance to the active AF uniform than anything CAP is currently authorised to wear. Apparently TX cutouts and different buttons are distinctive enough for members of their Air Component to not raise the ire of Ma Blue).

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

(And their variation of the AF uniform, like the current GA Adjutant General's uniform, is MUCH closer in resemblance to the active AF uniform than anything CAP is currently authorised to wear. Apparently TX cutouts and different buttons are distinctive enough for members of their Air Component to not raise the ire of Ma Blue).

That's what gets me...especially with all the Air Force installations in Texas.

Colonel Lee, God bless him, would probably say that it's because the Air Force has direct control over how we wear their uniform and they're not concerned with how the TXSDF AW wears it...I just do not understand it, especially given that the TXSDF AW, due to their support function to the TXANG, interact MUCH closer with Air Force units than we do.

One would think Ma Blue's ire would be raised just as much by an overweight TXSDF AW troop walking around Ellington ANGB or especially Lackland AFB (bad example for the new trainee Airmen) wearing their uniform with modifications a lot less visible than ours have to be as by a "fat or fuzzy" CAP officer doing the same.

Maybe they really don't care.

[PHall]

(And their variation of the AF uniform, like the current GA Adjutant General's uniform, is MUCH closer in resemblance to the active AF uniform than anything CAP is currently authorised to wear. Apparently TX cutouts and different buttons are distinctive enough for members of their Air Component to not raise the ire of Ma Blue).

That's what gets me...especially with all the Air Force installations in Texas.

Colonel Lee, God bless him, would probably say that it's because the Air Force has direct control over how we wear their uniform and they're not concerned with how the TXSDF AW wears it...I just do not understand it, especially given that the TXSDF AW, due to their support function to the TXANG, interact MUCH closer with Air Force units than we do.

One would think Ma Blue's ire would be raised just as much by an overweight TXSDF AW troop walking around Ellington ANGB or especially Lackland AFB (bad example for the new trainee Airmen) wearing their uniform with modifications a lot less visible than ours have to be as by a "fat or fuzzy" CAP officer doing the same.

Maybe they really don't care.

Cyborg, have you ever seen anybody from the TXSDF Air Wing? 
I know that the California State Military Reserve members have to meet weight and grooming standards just to be a member.
And I suspect that the same rules apply there too.

So, you got anything else?

[skymaster]

(And their variation of the AF uniform, like the current GA Adjutant General's uniform, is MUCH closer in resemblance to the active AF uniform than anything CAP is currently authorised to wear. Apparently TX cutouts and different buttons are distinctive enough for members of their Air Component to not raise the ire of Ma Blue).
[/quote]

That's what gets me...especially with all the Air Force installations in Texas.

Colonel Lee, God bless him, would probably say that it's because the Air Force has direct control over how we wear their uniform and they're not concerned with how the TXSDF AW wears it...I just do not understand it, especially given that the TXSDF AW, due to their support function to the TXANG, interact MUCH closer with Air Force units than we do.

One would think Ma Blue's ire would be raised just as much by an overweight TXSDF AW troop walking around Ellington ANGB or especially Lackland AFB (bad example for the new trainee Airmen) wearing their uniform with modifications a lot less visible than ours have to be as by a "fat or fuzzy" CAP officer doing the same.

Maybe they really don't care.
[/quote]

Cyborg, have you ever seen anybody from the TXSDF Air Wing? 
I know that the California State Military Reserve members have to meet weight and grooming standards just to be a member.
And I suspect that the same rules apply there too.

So, you got anything else?
[/quote]



Based on the photo above, taken at a recent swearing-in ceremony for the Sheppard Detachment of one of the Texas State Guard Air Wings, I would guess that Ma Blue also doesn't have a problem with their wear of a utility uniform very close in appearance to theirs, either.  In fact, other than the blue-on-ABU "TEXAS STATE GUARD" branch tape in place of the U.S. AIR FORCE branch tape, it is exactly the same. 

[Eclipse]

Cyborg, have you ever seen anybody from the TXSDF Air Wing? 
I know that the California State Military Reserve members have to meet weight and grooming standards just to be a member.
And I suspect that the same rules apply there too.

So, you got anything else?

So is that it?  Height / weight / grooming?  Nothing about being confused with the military?  How about mission needs?

Because if that's it, then let's own that, accept that likely the majority of the membership will >never< meet military
standards, and move on with an actual "uniform".

And for the record, there's plenty of SDF's and similar non-military organizations whose members wear military variants
and there's no attention to height/weight.

This discussion begins and ends with someone indicating what the real issues are, and then accepting the consequences
of those statements. CAP & the USAF has been dancing around the truth for 20 years or more, to no one's benefit.

The simple fact of the matter is that the service branches have neither the will, nor the resources, to fight the court battles required
to make these other organizations cease and desist.  It would be protracted, expensive, and alienate a lot of people, to
no advantage to anyone.  The USAF can direct CAP any way it wants to, so it does, as is their right and authority.

[lordmonar]

I think it has to do with "does anyone care" syndrom.

a) there is a USC that controls wear of military uniforms.
b) No one really knows that SDF's exists.

We in CAP get a hard time about it (at least here on the internet) because we actuallly have a CAP-USAF function and 15 or so years ago we screwed the pooch and got spanked for it.

In the last 15 years we have not been very good boys and girls.....ergo we are slow in getting back to where we were before the Barry Boards.

The SDF's don't fall under any federal service and so you would have to have a major foul up for the services to decide to have a talk with a Governor so he can take care of his problem children.......and this has happened in the past IIRC UT SDF was disbanded because they were turning into a neo-nazi organisation (Godwin's Law does not apply).

The federal government does not go after military fakers all that aggressively anyway.......I don't see them going toe to toe with a state govenor about it.

On the CAP side of things.

I do beleive though....that since MGen Carr was elected we have been pretty good at keeping our organisation in the clear and with the governance changes we are on a better path to getting in a position to ask to be more "Air Force" like......if that is what our organisation wants.

Rumor has it....the National Uniform Committee is almost ready to relase the new changes to 39-1 to be sent up to USAF for approval.   Who knows....maybe we are going to get lest distinctive soon.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Cyborg, have you ever seen anybody from the TXSDF Air Wing? 
I know that the California State Military Reserve members have to meet weight and grooming standards just to be a member.
And I suspect that the same rules apply there too.

So, you got anything else?

Question 1: No.  I haven't been to Texas in decades.  I have, however, seen SDF's from a few other states.  I had one actively recruiting me.

CASMR may well require H/W/G standards, but I have seen SDF personnel from other states who would not meet their standards.

Question 2: I know you do not approve of CAP looking more like the AF, and you did not approve of the CSU.  Even when I suggested replacing the white aviator shirt with a blue, civilian one, you went down the road of "it'll piss the AF off," without knowing that for sure.  I know you will never agree with my stances, and I do not agree with yours. 

However, I question why you waited to comment on this topic until I commented.  I cannot speak for the entire membership of CAP, but I do know that there are a lot of people in CAP (especially those who were around during the berry boards days) who see a huge double standard WRT the way we are treated with the AF uniform viz. the way they seemingly look the other way on other organisations who wear their uniform, including their own membership.  I remember when I was in the ANG there were personnel on my own base who would not have met CAP H/W standards, let alone AF...but that was many years ago.

If you wish to advocate for the status quo, that is your right.  I choose not to.  That is my right.

Eclipse, I think I know what you're getting at about having a uniform for the entire membership.  I agree with you in many ways.  However, I do not think it will ever happen.  We came close to that with the CSU, and look what happened.  There are plenty within CAP who say "we already have that...make everyone wear the aviator greys," and there are probably an equal amount of people who say "that uniform stinks."

So I think it's a "never the twain shall meet" issue.

[PHall]

Cyborg, I don't know where you got the thought in your head that I don't want CAP to be closer to the Air Force, but you're dead wrong.
I have no problems with the CAP Air Force style uniforms either. As a matter of fact, I wish they could look more like the Air Force.

I do have problems with wearing the Wing Patch and the Reverse Flag patches on the BDU. The Army wears patches on the shoulders, the Air Force doesn't.

The biggest problem I had with the CSU is the way it came about. As in a "under-the-table, backroom deal".

The attitudes of a few folks who wore the uniform out here in CAWG didn't help my opinion of it either.

But like you said, you have your opinion and I have mine. And I shall leave it at that.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

PHall - PM sent.

Rumor has it....the National Uniform Committee is almost ready to relase the new changes to 39-1 to be sent up to USAF for approval.   Who knows....maybe we are going to get lest distinctive soon.

Perhaps, but the possibility also exists that the new 39-1 will only serve to codify the status quo, though hopefully it would clear up confusion/loopholes.

[lordmonar]

PHall - PM sent.

Rumor has it....the National Uniform Committee is almost ready to relase the new changes to 39-1 to be sent up to USAF for approval.   Who knows....maybe we are going to get lest distinctive soon.

Perhaps, but the possibility also exists that the new 39-1 will only serve to codify the status quo, though hopefully it would clear up confusion/loopholes.

At least that is a step in the right direction.  We can't prove to the USAF that we can follow the regs when the regs are so poorly written.

[abdsp51]

We can get closer by having a clear cut language uniform manual and enforcement of it. 

[Storm Chaser]

Just like almost everyone here, I used to hate (or dislike) some of the "distinctiveness" of the CAP uniform. I remember the blue epaulet ranks and even got to wear the maroon ones. I never understood the cloth insignias with blue background on BDUs; and even less, the grey epaulets on the blue service dress coat. For a long time, I wished our CAP uniforms would look more like Air Force uniforms. After all, we are the official U.S. Air Force Auxiliary.

But now I get it. There are just too many members that can't follow the rules and do all sort of crazy things with their uniforms. I just came from a wing conference and was amazed with some of the things I saw coming from ranking and/or experienced individuals. The same thing happens with field/utility uniforms (BDUs, flight suits, etc.). It is no wonder why the Air Force doesn't want us to look more like them.

I am currently in the Air Force Reserve and have seen my share of Reservists who seem lax with the uniform. But the things that I see in CAP, which are far worse, make me wonder if we wouldn't be better off without the Air Force-style uniform. And while I do like wearing my Air Force-style uniforms, I agree with Eclipse that it would be better if we had just one of each type of uniform as opposed to two or more.

[flyboy53]

Just like almost everyone here, I used to hate (or dislike) some of the "distinctiveness" of the CAP uniform. I remember the blue epaulet ranks and even got to wear the maroon ones. I never understood the cloth insignias with blue background on BDUs; and even less, the grey epaulets on the blue service dress coat. For a long time, I wished our CAP uniforms would look more like Air Force uniforms. After all, we are the official U.S. Air Force Auxiliary.

But now I get it. There are just too many members that can't follow the rules and do all sort of crazy things with their uniforms. I just came from a wing conference and was amazed with some of the things I saw coming from ranking and/or experienced individuals. The same thing happens with field/utility uniforms (BDUs, flight suits, etc.). It is no wonder why the Air Force doesn't want us to look more like them.

I am currently in the Air Force Reserve and have seen my share of Reservists who seem lax with the uniform. But the things that I see in CAP, which are far worse, make me wonder if we wouldn't be better off without the Air Force-style uniform. And while I do like wearing my Air Force-style uniforms, I agree with Eclipse that it would be better if we had just one of each type of uniform as opposed to two or more.

Don't kid yourself. The reason why we wear gray shoulder marks isn't so much about standards as it is about the politics at the Air Staff level, and issues from the past where certain senior CAP officers took certain liberities in an Air Force-looking uniform. You can go on ANY Air Force/AFRES/or ANG base and see infractions or what I will chose to call exceptions to policy in terms of Air Force uniform standards. Certainly, uniform standards in the Civil Air Patrol can be interesting at times, but that has more to do with cost, lack of availability and geographically separated distance from those points where uniform standards are strongly enforced.

Don't believe me, travel to a remote Air Force installation sometime.

Finally, as an Air Force Reservist who seems to be equipped to point out uniform infractions, it is your responsbility to point out those infractions to the individual involved in order to correct them -- not to get on a soap box in this environment.

[Storm Chaser]

Don't kid yourself.

Don't worry; I won't.

You can go on ANY Air Force/AFRES/or ANG base and see infractions or what I will chose to call exceptions to policy in terms of Air Force uniform standards...  Don't believe me, travel to a remote Air Force installation sometime.

As an aircrew member, I travel quite a bit and have been to many bases CONUS and OCONUS. The uniforms infractions in the Air Force are minor (e.g. wearing a jacket open, as opposed to zippered; rolling flight suits sleeves outward, as opposed to inwards; wearing sunglasses on head or around neck, etc.) when compared to the ones I've seen in CAP (e.g. wearing green flight suit jacket with blues; wearing metal rank on CAP uniforms, wearing insignias on the wrong place or more than the maximum allowed, combining uniform items, etc.).

Certainly, uniform standards in the Civil Air Patrol can be interesting at times, but that has more to do with cost, lack of availability and geographically separated distance from those points where uniform standards are strongly enforced.

While some uniform infractions can be attributed to "cost" and "lack of availability", many of the ones I've seen throughout the years may be attributed to either an attitude of "I don't care" or one of "look at me and all my shinny things".

Finally, as an Air Force Reservist who seems to be equipped to point out uniform infractions, it is your responsbility to point out those infractions to the individual involved in order to correct them -- not to get on a soap box in this environment.

I am very aware of my responsibilities as an Air Force and CAP officer, thank you very much. Unfortunately, not everyone is.

Your comments almost sound as if you're trying to justify why CAP members don't wear their uniforms right. I hope not since you should also be aware of your responsibilities, especially since you were quick to point out mine. Cheers!

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

...even got to wear the maroon ones.

Oh, man, I'm sorry for you...that's when I came in...we had a few of the blue epaulettes in our squadron supplies.  I should have bought them as collectors' items.

I never understood the cloth insignias with blue background on BDUs; and even less, the grey epaulets on the blue service dress coat. For a long time, I wished our CAP uniforms would look more like Air Force uniforms. After all, we are the official U.S. Air Force Auxiliary.

I thought the grey epaulettes were worlds better than the berry boards but still a reminder of the many being kicked for the past actions of the few.

But now I get it. There are just too many members that can't follow the rules and do all sort of crazy things with their uniforms. I just came from a wing conference and was amazed with some of the things I saw coming from ranking and/or experienced individuals. The same thing happens with field/utility uniforms (BDUs, flight suits, etc.). It is no wonder why the Air Force doesn't want us to look more like them.

What were some of the infractions you witnessed?  I rarely, if ever, have seen anything egregious at a Wing/Region Conference, mostly because the ones I've attended had a fairly substantial Air Force presence (one was attended by an AFRES Brigadier General).

I am currently in the Air Force Reserve and have seen my share of Reservists who seem lax with the uniform.

I saw a few in the Air National Guard too.  I remember seeing SNCO's, a few of whom were AGR, who would no way have passed AF H/W tests of the time, let alone CAP.  I also remember seeing plain-green field jackets being worn with BDU's (OK, that may have been authorised, but I don't see the reason for it).

But the things that I see in CAP, which are far worse, make me wonder if we wouldn't be better off without the Air Force-style uniform. And while I do like wearing my Air Force-style uniforms, I agree with Eclipse that it would be better if we had just one of each type of uniform as opposed to two or more.

Again, I wonder what you're seeing, because I'm sure not, at least not as widespread as you indicate.

I have seen one person wearing metal rank on the lightweight jacket...and that was almost ten years ago.

I have seen the blue lightweight jacket worn with the G/W...once.

I have seen, to the best of my memory, the green flight jacket worn with the G/W...twice in almost 20 years.

I'm not excusing those infractions.  I'm just saying I haven't seen them all over the place.

I wouldn't be opposed to Eclipse's "one uniform" idea...as long as it's not the G/W blazer setup.  I am not giving any reasons other than I hate it.  I know a lot of people like the idea of it, but I have never met one person who actually likes the look of it...all the "likes" I have personally found have to do with it being cheap, easy to get and the perception of not having to meet AF standards, C&C's, etc.

Don't kid yourself. The reason why we wear gray shoulder marks isn't so much about standards as it is about the politics at the Air Staff level, and issues from the past where certain senior CAP officers took certain liberities in an Air Force-looking uniform.

Which you will find no official confirmation of, but that's been hashed out here already.

And, those liberties can be taken/abused regardless of the uniform or the colour of the epaulettes.

Finally, as an Air Force Reservist who seems to be equipped to point out uniform infractions, it is your responsbility to point out those infractions to the individual involved in order to correct them -- not to get on a soap box in this environment.

I have politely pointed out, as a CAP member, uniform violations to AIR FORCE personnel (what are they going to do, kick me out for it?).  The vast majority of them fell under the "Whoops, I wasn't thinking, thanks" category; i.e., pocket flap unbuttoned.  Usually someone of good character will take it in the spirit in which it is meant (I try to phrase it as a "question," as Alex Trebek might say, "Excuse me, but is that regulation?").

[JoeTomasone]

Usually someone of good character will take it in the spirit in which it is meant (I try to phrase it as a "question," as Alex Trebek might say, "Excuse me, but is that regulation?").

That doesn't work when the person being questioned doesn't care.   Take this example, when asked about enforcing the requirement to wear insignia, nametapes, etc on the BDU Field Jacket:

I agree, that the regulation provides for the proper arrangement of insignia and nametapes on the field jacket. However, in general, you can wear any outergarment over your uniform, provided it is in good taste and appropriate for the weather. If it was cold out, and a cadet was wearing a field jacket with no nametapes, no insignia, etc, I wouldn't make them take it off or say anything about the missing items.

I was at a Squadron meeting recently where a Cadet had on BDUs with not a thing on them - no grade insignia, nametape, nothing - as if they were just taken off the rack at AAFES.   No one said a word about it.   WIWAC, I would have been sent home from the meeting and told not to wear the uniform again until it was in compliance.  Today?  I can only assume that we don't want to discourage members or bruise their sensitive constitutions... 


As long as we have people who look the other way and don't hold each other accountable, and as long as we have Commanders who will not act, we will have people who do not comply with regulations, uniform or otherwise, intentionally or not.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

^^Actually, Major, I was talking about the very few times I have asked an Air Force member about a potential uniform infraction, but point taken.

[flyboy53]

I never said I was justifying uniform infractions by CAP members. As a former group commander (and now wing staff officer), however, I am aware of the situations that allow it to occur whether accidential or intended, and I chose to correct those situations appropriately when they arise -- to the point of actually personally buying things if necessary.

The other side of this whole argument isn't so much about uniform violations, but instead about how the Air Force perceives the Civil Air Patrol. We are, afterall, the Air Force's civiliam auxiliary. As such, for years and years, there has been a push and shove about how CAP officers are perceived. In some very wonderful situations, a CAP officer is granted the same respect as a military officer -- complete with the salute, addressing in rank, and other general courtesies. In most other instances, however, we are just civilians who get to wear an Air Force uniform and are generally to be bothered with until we are really needed.

Although I can't confirm it, I wondered if the cloth rank insignia was a sort of allignment along the lines of the other civilian aspects of the Air Force. In my corner of the world, you rarely see civilian DoD firefighters and DoD Police wearing metal rank insignia anymore.

As for the gray shoulder loops, they're certainly better than the maroon ones, and I embrace them because I am aware that OTS cadets used to wear black and silver ones (and may still do) that almost made them look like airline pilots. The same is said of the Academy and ROTC insignia. Face it, we wear rank insignia that makes us distinctive in the eyes of the Air Force; which in a way, is a good thing because we're recognized for who we are. Remember the Air Force extended the CAP a great privilege by allowing the senior members to wear U.S. on their collars and we wear that silver metal name plate without CAP-USAF Auxiliary on the top. So, in my eyes, we are accepted for who we are.

As for the sniping about CAP uniform standards; you're not going to convince me it's strictly a CAP issue. I'm retired Air Force. I know better. Any military insignia collector can find examples of interesting Air Force uniforms and what was worn on them unofficially. As far as standards; recently I flew on an orientaion flight on an Air Force Reserve C-130 with an aeromedical crew in training. One of the med techs (a master sergeant) was grossly overweight. In my era of the Air Force Reserve, he would have been red-lined, counseled or reprimanded, and sent home. Insted, he were there, in training and the senior ranking Air Force Reserve officer (a lieutenant colonel) said nothing. He was a GROSS example of an Air Force NCO, but was there getting paid. Later on that same day, I saw sloppy unkempt airmen going in and out of the BX at the same base. Don't tell me that it is strictly a CAP issue.

The only thing that can be done in those circumstances, is to go to the individual and note the uniform problem with him or her and do it respectfully. Remember, he or she is a volunteer who may be serving his or her country in this organization, but at a very limited income level.

Respect goes a lot farther in seeking a correction to a problem than sniping about standards.

[JoeTomasone]

^^Actually, Major, I was talking about the very few times I have asked an Air Force member about a potential uniform infraction, but point taken.

The problem is obviously not limited to any one group.   However, those under UCMJ face a harsher reality should they choose to ignore a suggestion/order to fix themselves up.   Yes, in CAP we should treat our members with respect, but we should also expect them to wear the uniform they CHOSE to wear correctly (read: respectfully).   

[Polarbear]

I think the main point is that members need to have the intestinal fortitude to point out when something is not right, especially while in the public's eye. As a current serving member of the US Army I have seen my fair share of infractions among seasoned professionals and raw recruits alike. Some don't know, some don't care, but typically both continue to be an issue when no one says anything.

As for CAP being a volunteer organization its going to be hard to maintain standards for a myriad of reasons ranging from not knowing, to "having not signed up for this." In both cases as with the military its a leadership issue and its on the leader to make followers want to adhere to a standard rather than beat them over the head with it. I usually make the point that its about details, and that mindset will train you for bigger and better things ie. ES-Operations. You master the easy steps like uniforms, and you will succeed at every other aspect of the program.

As my final point, the military leans heavily on NCOs to maintain standards. Its always been a point of pride amongst the NCO corps that as a Captain I don't have to go chasing 100+ personnel around and worrying over specific details. That frees me up to conduct the planning process that officers are suppose to be doing. CAP doesn't have an NCO corps in the traditional since due to most members joining as some sort of commissioned officer. As a result I find myself relaying heavily on the Cadets who do begin as lower enlisted and promote into NCO positions. I never faulted a Cadet NCO for correcting a Senior Member, and find that those type of interactions lead to increased cooperation and learning between levels of the program as long as they are professional and taken the right way.

Bottom-line for me is that you get out what you put in. If you want to act like a slug, then you will be treated as one. If you want to be an example for others and wear the uniform properly, then the perception will be different. If you don't know, then find a mentor; but if you don't ask the question then you won't learn. A mistake means that you are trying to learn, but I don't have time for blatant disregard for standards.

Ignore the rules and you just won't get called for anything cool or important, my two cents.   

[abdsp51]

However, those under UCMJ face a harsher reality should they choose to ignore a suggestion/order to fix themselves up.

the most that will happen is a butt chewing or paperwork and that will depend heavily on the individuals CoC.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

The other side of this whole argument isn't so much about uniform violations, but instead about how the Air Force perceives the Civil Air Patrol. We are, afterall, the Air Force's civiliam auxiliary. As such, for years and years, there has been a push and shove about how CAP officers are perceived. In some very wonderful situations, a CAP officer is granted the same respect as a military officer -- complete with the salute, addressing in rank, and other general courtesies.

Except that, as has been pointed out many times, outside of CAP-USAF and higher echelons, much of the Air Force does not even know who we are.

We are not entitled to salutes, customs & courtesies, etc.  Your experience may be different, but rarely have I been accorded such things by an AF member.  It happens much more with members of other services, especially the Army National Guard.  No, I'm not in it for salutes or "good afternoon, Captain," but it seems odd to me that in my experience such "respect" is accorded us more by other services and not by members of our parent service.

As for the gray shoulder loops, they're certainly better than the maroon ones, and I embrace them because I am aware that OTS cadets used to wear black and silver ones (and may still do) that almost made them look like airline pilots. The same is said of the Academy and ROTC insignia. Face it, we wear rank insignia that makes us distinctive in the eyes of the Air Force; which in a way, is a good thing because we're recognized for who we are. Remember the Air Force extended the CAP a great privilege by allowing the senior members to wear U.S. on their collars and we wear that silver metal name plate without CAP-USAF Auxiliary on the top. So, in my eyes, we are accepted for who we are.

Actually, I have long supported us moving to ROTC/OTS/Academy type shoulder marks.


SMWOG


Flight Officer


Technical Flight Officer


Senior Flight Officer


2nd Lieutenant


First Lieutenant


Captain


Major


Lieutenant Colonel



There would be zero confusion with military officers' rank insignia, and it is something already used by another section of the Air Force.

I also would have rather had hard rank/blue CAP epaulettes back rather than U.S. collar brass.  I also don't think adopting the brushed silver nameplate with "Civil Air Patrol" as used on the former CSU would be a bad idea.  Yes, I know that makes me a heretic.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

I could live with the shoulder marks below. Granted they are more Navy heritage than AF but silver on blue is decidedly AF.

One question. How do they translate to the flight suits, BDUs and even the name plate for the blazer?

[abdsp51]

The ROTC/OTS boards are atrocious.  We need to get our membership to wear the uniforms they wear properly before we go asking for niceities back or how things used to be.  Outside of members not liking the color we need to work with what he have first and foremost.  Whatever the reasons were for the loss of hard rank, blue slides, blue nameplates etc.  It happened and we need to work with what we have now.  We need to put out  a clear cut uniform manual and enforce it and show we can do that before asking for anything back that was removed or making the major changes. 

[JoeTomasone]

The other side of this whole argument isn't so much about uniform violations, but instead about how the Air Force perceives the Civil Air Patrol. We are, afterall, the Air Force's civiliam auxiliary. As such, for years and years, there has been a push and shove about how CAP officers are perceived. In some very wonderful situations, a CAP officer is granted the same respect as a military officer -- complete with the salute, addressing in rank, and other general courtesies.

Except that, as has been pointed out many times, outside of CAP-USAF and higher echelons, much of the Air Force does not even know who we are.

We are not entitled to salutes, customs & courtesies, etc.  Your experience may be different, but rarely have I been accorded such things by an AF member.  It happens much more with members of other services, especially the Army National Guard.  No, I'm not in it for salutes or "good afternoon, Captain," but it seems odd to me that in my experience such "respect" is accorded us more by other services and not by members of our parent service.

Generally speaking, USAF folks fall into one of three categories:

1. Knows about CAP and that customs and courtesies are not required.   In my experience, they tend to voluntarily follow customs and courtesies based on their perception of you and your value to the AF team - i.e. how much respect you have earned.

2. Knows about CAP and does NOT know that customs and courtesies are not required, and therefore renders them.

3. Has no clue who CAP is and renders customs and courtesies "just in case".


Other branches in my experience tend to fall under category 3.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I would add another.

4. Knows who we are only from all the rumour, innuendo and stories - "oh, hell, this 'major' is going to try to make me salute him...I don't want to put up with that" - and avoids the CAP member.

[Polarbear]

This conversation has taken a number of side roads, so what is the issue? Folks want a new uniform, folks want to move to a more USAF related uniform or folks want members of the military to see them is equals?

The thing that everyone needs to remember is that CAP is not part of the military and will never be. Its against our charter and not what the organization was set up to be.

One of the reasons I'm proud to be part of CAP is that the mission(s) is non-combat related but I keep coming across members that want to turn it into some sort of para-military militia. It took along time to convince leaders on my installation that CAP was not just some other JROTC, has legitimate mission, and has capabilities that is can offer to support state and federal agencies. A lot of this negative attitude comes from members who portray themselves as actual military officers. Just based on the different training we receive in CAP, this is obviously not the case (we have different mission and skill sets). This is especially not a good attitude now that everything is on the chopping block budge wise. I have seen government programs canceled just because the people running them couldn't get along with others.

Really two things have to become apparent to everyone very quickly:

1. We have a set of rules to adhere to which includes a unique uniform standard which will remain until adjusted by the proper authorities.

2. We have to be on our best behaviors or things will be cut back in a big a way. We took a building from a CAP squadron that wouldn't follow base rules or play nice with others, ie. doing to proper safety and fire inspections. It sucked hurting my organization like that, but there is a real world and I have no sympathy for anyone who can't follow the rules.

So this conversation can go on about rank and uniforms and such, but I think were missing the point and barely scratching the surface of a larger issue.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

The thing that everyone needs to remember is that CAP is not part of the military and will never be. Its against our charter and not what the organization was set up to be.

I am not saying that.  However, we are "part of" the Air Force, or at least we were until the silly "AUXON/OFF" days.

One of the reasons I'm proud to be part of CAP is that the mission(s) is non-combat related but I keep coming across members that want to turn it into some sort of para-military militia.

What do you mean?  Do these members want us to take up arms?  We cannot do that...period.

A lot of this negative attitude comes from members who portray themselves as actual military officers.

How do they do that?  When I introduce myself in a CAP context it's "Good morning/afternoon/evening, I'm Captain Cyrus Borg."  If I introduce someone else, it's "I would like you to meet Lieutenant/Sergeant/Cadet Bloggins."

Do you mean those who troll for salutes they are not entitled to?  I have never personally witnessed that, and while one incident is too many, there are far fewer instances of that than many would have us believe.

This is especially not a good attitude now that everything is on the chopping block budge wise. I have seen government programs canceled just because the people running them couldn't get along with others.

It certainly appears to be a time to "put up or shut up" regarding our continued status.  However, I believe it would take an Act of Congress to disband us.

Really two things have to become apparent to everyone very quickly:

1. We have a set of rules to adhere to which includes a unique uniform standard which will remain until adjusted by the proper authorities.

2. We have to be on our best behaviors or things will be cut back in a big a way. We took a building from a CAP squadron that wouldn't follow base rules or play nice with others, ie. doing to proper safety and fire inspections. It sucked hurting my organization like that, but there is a real world and I have no sympathy for anyone who can't follow the rules.

So this conversation can go on about rank and uniforms and such, but I think were missing the point and barely scratching the surface of a larger issue.

I am inherently suspicious of sweeping generalisations; i.e. "everyone knows," "everyone must."

I can say that in 20 years of CAP involvement I have only seen a handful of the kind of bad-actors you describe.   Again, one is too many, but it is not endemic.

[SarDragon]

FWIW, from here:

Types of Paramilitaries
Depending on context, paramilitaries can include:
Youth cadet organizations with no wartime role, e.g. India's National Cadet Corps

So CAP could be construed as a paramilitary organization. YMMV.

[JoeTomasone]

Let's also keep in mind that for every moron out trolling for salutes that there are thousands who aren't; for every member wearing the uniform improperly, there are thousands hundreds dozens some who aren't.   

CAP is not easily defined in terms of being a military/paramilitary/civilian.   We have aspects of each.   We are not under UCMJ, but wear USAF uniforms on USAF bases, but are unarmed.   That in itself is almost too confused to process properly.   Therefore, we will always have to deal with being the red-headed stepchild to USAF, no matter if we are the perfect Auxiliary made up of all former AD AF or a bunch of Bad News Bears who can't spell "uniform", much less wear it properly.   

Quite frankly, I don't care terribly much what we wear on the uniform -- or, for that matter, what uniform we wear -- as long as we are identifiable as the USAF's Auxiliary (i.e. looking like our parent service) while not being confused FOR them (because that just makes a mess of things in many different ways).   I'm proud to wear the USAF-style uniforms - and I'll be honest, it is absolutely one of the "perks", if you will, of serving.   We shouldn't be ashamed to wear the uniform, however we should be mindful that it is, indeed, a privilege and treat it as such.    The more we dress, act, and carry ourselves like our USAF brethren, the more we will be trusted, respected, and the better we will be treated. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Therefore, we will always have to deal with being the red-headed stepchild to USAF, no matter if we are the perfect Auxiliary made up of all former AD AF or a bunch of Bad News Bears who can't spell "uniform", much less wear it properly.   

Major, I respectfully disagree...we do NOT have to be a "red-headed stepchild."

A lot of that, as I have said before, can be ameliorated through EDUCATION.  The Air Force teaches new recruits NOTHING about us at BMT, and I would wager at a new Airman's first duty station, so s/he doesn't know Juliet Sierra about these civilians wearing the uniform looking kind of like theirs.

Quite frankly, I don't care terribly much what we wear on the uniform -- or, for that matter, what uniform we wear -- as long as we are identifiable as the USAF's Auxiliary (i.e. looking like our parent service) while not being confused FOR them (because that just makes a mess of things in many different ways).   I'm proud to wear the USAF-style uniforms - and I'll be honest, it is absolutely one of the "perks", if you will, of serving.   We shouldn't be ashamed to wear the uniform, however we should be mindful that it is, indeed, a privilege and treat it as such.    The more we dress, act, and carry ourselves like our USAF brethren, the more we will be trusted, respected, and the better we will be treated.

Well-said, but then we come to the dichotomy of "as long as we are identifiable as the USAF's Auxiliary." 

We are identifiable in the modified AF uniform - which not everyone can wear.

We are not identifiable in the grey/white/blazer/polo setups, except for the small lettering on the grey nameplate.

There are also the twin, and in my opinion insurmountable, challenges of reconciling those who want a uniform that all can wear showing our AF heritage, and those who say "we shouldn't have any connection to the AF, so just shut-up and wear the G/W."

[abdsp51]

Therefore, we will always have to deal with being the red-headed stepchild to USAF, no matter if we are the perfect Auxiliary made up of all former AD AF or a bunch of Bad News Bears who can't spell "uniform", much less wear it properly.   

Major, I respectfully disagree...we do NOT have to be a "red-headed stepchild."

A lot of that, as I have said before, can be ameliorated through EDUCATION.  The Air Force teaches new recruits NOTHING about us at BMT, and I would wager at a new Airman's first duty station, so s/he doesn't know Juliet Sierra about these civilians wearing the uniform looking kind of like theirs.

Again there is much more critical information and training to be done in BMT than teaching about us, and it is not the Air Force's responsibility at any level to educate Airmen about us.  And I can tell there are far more Airmen down in the trenches that know about us by word of mouth than by any class that can be taught.  I suggest that if you really want people to know you coordinate with local commanders and present a briefing at their commanders calls and or arrange some time at FTAC. 

[Tim Medeiros]

The Air Force teaches new recruits NOTHING about us at BMT, and I would wager at a new Airman's first duty station, so s/he doesn't know Juliet Sierra about these civilians wearing the uniform looking kind of like theirs.

Considering I highly doubt you've been to BMT in the last decade, at least, I'd LOVE to know just when you expect brand new trainees to learn about CAP?  Considering the pace of information learned there, when I went 2 years ago, was on par with drinking from a fire hose, I'd be surprised if any trainees actually remembered we had an Auxiliary.  Also, how would you relate it to key skills that every enlisted Airman needs to know?  Sorry, but knowledge about CAP isn't critical to my success as an Airman.


As for learning about us at our first duty station, that would be better.  Though most of what is said in FTAC goes in one ear and out the other, and if there are handouts, they (at best) get filed away somewhere in the back closet of your dorm, at worst they hit the dumpster on the way out for the day.  I'd rather see a briefing about CAP happen during my commanders call, or an enlisted/airmen all call.  At least at that point I'm generally more receptive to information because it's from people in my actual chain of command, and I know they are generally looking out for me and my EPR.


Also, just so you know, there is at least one career field whose CDCs mention CAP so someone does learn about us 

[flyboy53]

The Air Force teaches new recruits NOTHING about us at BMT, and I would wager at a new Airman's first duty station, so s/he doesn't know Juliet Sierra about these civilians wearing the uniform looking kind of like theirs.

Considering I highly doubt you've been to BMT in the last decade, at least, I'd LOVE to know just when you expect brand new trainees to learn about CAP?  Considering the pace of information learned there, when I went 2 years ago, was on par with drinking from a fire hose, I'd be surprised if any trainees actually remembered we had an Auxiliary.  Also, how would you relate it to key skills that every enlisted Airman needs to know?  Sorry, but knowledge about CAP isn't critical to my success as an Airman.


As for learning about us at our first duty station, that would be better.  Though most of what is said in FTAC goes in one ear and out the other, and if there are handouts, they (at best) get filed away somewhere in the back closet of your dorm, at worst they hit the dumpster on the way out for the day.  I'd rather see a briefing about CAP happen during my commanders call, or an enlisted/airmen all call.  At least at that point I'm generally more receptive to information because it's from people in my actual chain of command, and I know they are generally looking out for me and my EPR.


Also, just so you know, there is at least one career field whose CDCs mention CAP so someone does learn about us 

Why just BMT and which CDCs?

Why not make CAP part of any history and traditions portion of professional military training, whether it be leadership school, OTS, NCO Academy, ACSC, AF ROTC, AF Academy -- what have you, OR part of any Air Force orientation done by the Air Force/AFRES/ANG Recruiting Service.

The problem is (from the inside) that the Air Force is a pretty big organization, and most of us either got wrapped up in our duties or in the history and tradions of the command or unit we were part of. Yet how many Air Force people -- who would probably be impressed -- know that the first two Air Medals went to a CAP aircrew. How many people know the CAP's wartime record or the things we do today. Knowledge is power and in this case, it would build a different level of respect of the organization.

You know, years ago, CAP was involved in signing up veterans for the VA and/or recruiting. That's where a prospective airman would learn more about the CAP -- first impressions at the recruiting station, helping the recruiter. Ever wonder how many people you could recruit into the CAP from a recruiting office who may or may not be qualified for military service?

Also, you know the Air Force Association serves the CAP well by including the "command" in the annual almanac, yet I never see any reference to the CAP in anything put out by the AF Sergeants Association. That's just one aspect of the "best kept secret" problem the CAP has PR wise with the Air Force rank and file.

[lordmonar]

The Air Force teaches new recruits NOTHING about us at BMT, and I would wager at a new Airman's first duty station, so s/he doesn't know Juliet Sierra about these civilians wearing the uniform looking kind of like theirs.

Considering I highly doubt you've been to BMT in the last decade, at least, I'd LOVE to know just when you expect brand new trainees to learn about CAP?  Considering the pace of information learned there, when I went 2 years ago, was on par with drinking from a fire hose, I'd be surprised if any trainees actually remembered we had an Auxiliary.  Also, how would you relate it to key skills that every enlisted Airman needs to know?  Sorry, but knowledge about CAP isn't critical to my success as an Airman.

Neither are all the names of the MAJCOMS and what a number air force is  or what your rights as a renter are, or the thousand of other things that they make you learn at BMTS.

Yes they are busy....I know I sure was.......but it would be nice to have a half page in the BMTS study guide and maybe a whole page in the Professional Development Guide....maybe rate a question on WAPS testing.

No one is saying that BMTS/OCS/AFA/ROTC trainees need to be able to pass level one......but they should be told that we exist.

As for learning about us at our first duty station, that would be better.  Though most of what is said in FTAC goes in one ear and out the other, and if there are handouts, they (at best) get filed away somewhere in the back closet of your dorm, at worst they hit the dumpster on the way out for the day.  I'd rather see a briefing about CAP happen during my commanders call, or an enlisted/airmen all call.  At least at that point I'm generally more receptive to information because it's from people in my actual chain of command, and I know they are generally looking out for me and my EPR.


Also, just so you know, there is at least one career field whose CDCs mention CAP so someone does learn about us 

I agree with you here.....in fact I think that If I Were God For A Day (IIWGFAD) there would be a CAP unit on each and every USAF installation.  That CAP's existance would be breifed at new commers breifings, FTAC and commander's call.

That it would part ALS, NCOA, and SNCOA.

I think that CAP's uniform regulation should just be a chapter in AFI 36-2903 so everyone knows that we are part of the Air Force.

But as always YMMV.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

it is not the Air Force's responsibility at any level to educate Airmen about us.

Why?  Airmen are educated about the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve.  It would take not one whit away from yet another half-hour session of folding underwear and socks for an MTI to cover it in an evening dayroom briefing, if they still do those.

And I can tell there are far more Airmen down in the trenches that know about us by word of mouth than by any class that can be taught.

That is the problem.  Sometimes that "in the trench" knowledge only extends to exaggerated rumours about CAP; i.e., "those fat guys who'll try to make you salute them."  It is inexcusable that an MTI would tell his/her charges "if you encounter a CAP person, ignore them."  I read that in the AFT; once I find a link I will provide it.

Considering I highly doubt you've been to BMT in the last decade, at least, I'd LOVE to know just when you expect brand new trainees to learn about CAP?

No, it has been much longer than that, you are correct.

As I said above, it could be covered in an end-of-day briefing by the MTI.  It would have been far more useful than my MTI regaling us with his stories of how he was the Joe Friday, Dirty Harry and (more likely) Frank Drebin combined of AF Security Police.

How would you relate it to key skills that every enlisted Airman needs to know?  Sorry, but knowledge about CAP isn't critical to my success as an Airman.

Indeed.  How is knowledge of any of the Air Force's history detrimental to any Airman's foundational knowledge?

As for learning about us at our first duty station, that would be better.  Though most of what is said in FTAC goes in one ear and out the other, and if there are handouts, they (at best) get filed away somewhere in the back closet of your dorm, at worst they hit the dumpster on the way out for the day.  I'd rather see a briefing about CAP happen during my commanders call, or an enlisted/airmen all call.  At least at that point I'm generally more receptive to information because it's from people in my actual chain of command, and I know they are generally looking out for me and my EPR.

No problem at all with that.

Yes they are busy....I know I sure was.......but it would be nice to have a half page in the BMTS study guide and maybe a whole page in the Professional Development Guide....maybe rate a question on WAPS testing.

No one is saying that BMTS/OCS/AFA/ROTC trainees need to be able to pass level one......but they should be told that we exist.

:clap: :clap: Bottom line. :clap: :clap:

I agree with you here.....in fact I think that If I Were God For A Day (IIWGFAD) there would be a CAP unit on each and every USAF installation.  That CAP's existance would be breifed at new commers breifings, FTAC and commander's call.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

I think that CAP's uniform regulation should just be a chapter in AFI 36-2903 so everyone knows that we are part of the Air Force.

And it would eliminate a LOT of the confusion that currently happens, which has not been beneficial to either us or the AF.

[abdsp51]

They are taught about the Reserve and the ANG because those two components make up the "Total Force Concept".  And I would like for you to cite a valid source of just what the Airmen in the trenches know about CAP outside of a Times article which is not nor ever will be an official source for the AF. 

At the end of the day it is not the AF's responsibility to brief or teach the AD, Reserve, or ANG components about us.  If you think the AF should know more then you need to take a more active role in doing so within your area.  I am always telling people about us and what we do, both in my own section and out on base.  And if I had the opportunity to say something at CC Call I would.  And again it would surprise you just how much someone in the trenches knows. 

[lordmonar]

They are taught about the Reserve and the ANG because those two components make up the "Total Force Concept".  And I would like for you to cite a valid source of just what the Airmen in the trenches know about CAP outside of a Times article which is not nor ever will be an official source for the AF. 

At the end of the day it is not the AF's responsibility to brief or teach the AD, Reserve, or ANG components about us.  If you think the AF should know more then you need to take a more active role in doing so within your area.  I am always telling people about us and what we do, both in my own section and out on base.  And if I had the opportunity to say something at CC Call I would.  And again it would surprise you just how much someone in the trenches knows.

Yes....the "Total Force"  AD/Reserves/ANG/AUX.........see simple....when they teach the RES/ANG part they add one more paragraph for the USAF AUX.

I was in the trenches for 22 years.....never once.....not ever.....heard anything about CAP...heard about MARS, the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, the Aero Club, the Computer Club, the Rod and Gun Club, lots of things I heard about..........not once about CAP.

It is part of the "red headed step child" syndrom.  Not that the USAF is against us.....like I said.....most of them don't know we exists.  It is not a conspiricy or anything.....it is simple ignorance.   So CAP-USAF has to push it to get it included at least a blerb in the BMTS and PD guides.

Me going to all the commander's calls I can will not help educate the airman at some base that does not have a squadron.   Now some of this is CAP''s fault.....yes we need to do a much better job of expanding the number of squadrons and keeping those squadrons afloat....this means more work at the wing and group levels.   Just like I said that every USAF installation should have CAP squadron....that means each wing commander with a vacant base should be at the base commander's officer starting the ball rolling to get one there.

There are lots of little steps we all need to make this happen........but that does not releive the USAF of their responsiblity to at least acknowledge us officall in USAF basic training and PD guides.

[ZigZag911]

At the end of the day it is not the AF's responsibility to brief or teach the AD, Reserve, or ANG components about us. 

In other words we are the orphan children of Ma Blue?

Either we're part of them or we're not...is knowledge of CAP critical to the AF mission? Of course not.

Then again, is knowledge about AF history really critical???

I would argue that it is, and that somehow, somewhere, between the history of the USAF and the total force concept, we fit in, and need to be mentioned...not in great detail, but the recruits and officer candidates should learn something about us.

[SarDragon]

They are taught about the Reserve and the ANG because those two components make up the "Total Force Concept".  And I would like for you to cite a valid source of just what the Airmen in the trenches know about CAP outside of a Times article which is not nor ever will be an official source for the AF. 

At the end of the day it is not the AF's responsibility to brief or teach the AD, Reserve, or ANG components about us.  If you think the AF should know more then you need to take a more active role in doing so within your area.  I am always telling people about us and what we do, both in my own section and out on base.  And if I had the opportunity to say something at CC Call I would.  And again it would surprise you just how much someone in the trenches knows.

Yes....the "Total Force"  AD/Reserves/ANG/AUX.........see simple....when they teach the RES/ANG part they add one more paragraph for the USAF AUX.

I was in the trenches for 22 years.....never once.....not ever.....heard anything about CAP...heard about MARS, the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, the Aero Club, the Computer Club, the Rod and Gun Club, lots of things I heard about..........not once about CAP.

It is part of the "red headed step child" syndrom.  Not that the USAF is against us.....like I said.....most of them don't know we exists.  It is not a conspiricy or anything.....it is simple ignorance.   So CAP-USAF has to push it to get it included at least a blerb in the BMTS and PD guides.

Me going to all the commander's calls I can will not help educate the airman at some base that does not have a squadron.   Now some of this is CAP''s fault.....yes we need to do a much better job of expanding the number of squadrons and keeping those squadrons afloat....this means more work at the wing and group levels.   Just like I said that every USAF installation should have CAP squadron....that means each wing commander with a vacant base should be at the base commander's officer starting the ball rolling to get one there.

There are lots of little steps we all need to make this happen........but that does not releive the USAF of their responsiblity to at least acknowledge us officall in USAF basic training and PD guides.

I gotta say, though, that I got back into CAP after seeing an ad on the base TV broadcast in Misawa, Japan, mentioning when and where the meetings were.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

They are taught about the Reserve and the ANG because those two components make up the "Total Force Concept".

I was in the ANG.  It could be argued that we are more directly tied to the AF than the ANG because the ANG answers to their State unless placed under Federal control.

And I would like for you to cite a valid source of just what the Airmen in the trenches know about CAP outside of a Times article which is not nor ever will be an official source for the AF. 

That is a self-contradictory statement.  If it were from "official" sources, it would not be "knowledge in the trenches."  I can tell you that I have personally heard/witnessed barely (and sometimes not-so-barely) concealed remarks about CAP from Air Force personnel (mostly having to do with being "wannabes" and/or "poseurs"), mostly from young junior Airmen.  Most of the "warm fuzzies" I have personally experienced tend to come from officers and senior NCO's.  I'm just talking about the occasional "thanks for what you do," which gives me a buzz more than an actual salute does.

My point is: Very little is actually known about what we are officially, and our relationship to the Air Force.

At the end of the day it is not the AF's responsibility to brief or teach the AD, Reserve, or ANG components about us.

You still haven't said why.  As long as we have a connection to the Air Force, and wear their uniform, it is beneficial to all concerned for them to have at least a basic knowledge of us.

If you think the AF should know more then you need to take a more active role in doing so within your area.

Gee, that would be real cool...if there were any active bases in my area.  The closest one, according to MapQuest, would be about six hours' driving time away, in another state, and that's gas money I don't have.  I also think it's a violation of regs to directly contact the military without going through the LO/State Director staff.

This is a quick-and-dirty cut and paste from AFI 10-2701, the Air Force instruction about us.

GENERAL OVERVIEW AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The Civil Air Patrol (CAP) is a Federally chartered non-profit corporation that may be utilized as a civilian volunteer auxiliary of the Air Force. The Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) can employ the services of CAP in lieu of or to supplement Air Force resources to fulfill the non-combat programs and missions of the Air Force. Such services may include Air Force-assigned missions (AFAMs) in support of homeland security operations, consequence management, support to civilian law enforcement, and other civil support. Certain CAP cadet and aerospace educational programs may also be approved and assigned as Air Force non-combat missions. When performing Air Force-assigned programs and missions, CAP
assets function as an auxiliary of the Air Force.

CAP Status as an Auxiliary of the Air Force.
Title 10, USC § 9442 identifies CAP as an auxiliary of the Air Force when carrying out a mission assigned by the SECAF to provide services to any department or agency in any branch of the Federal government, including the Air Force. CAP is deemed to be an instrumentality of the United States while carrying out missions assigned by the Secretary.

Status of CAP Personnel.
CAP is not a military service and its members are not subject to the UCMJ. CAP members voluntarily perform Air Force-assigned missions. CAP membership does not confer upon an individual any of the rights, privileges, prerogatives or benefits of military personnel, active, reserve, or retired. While CAP is not a military service, it uses an Air Force-style grade structure and its members may wear Air Force-style uniforms when authorized. Air Force protocol requirements do not apply to CAP members.

CAP Grade.
CAP uses military style grade for its membership at the discretion and approval of the Air Force. CAP officer or noncommissioned officer grade does not confer commissioned or
noncommissioned officer status. CAP personnel have no authority over members of the armed forces. CAP members who are active, reserve, and retired members of the armed forces will be treated according to their CAP status when acting in a CAP capacity. The Air Force has authority over the CAP grade structure.

Actions on Military Installations.
When on military Installations or other government facilities, CAP personnel will adhere to the regulations and policies of the Installation or facility. Installation or facility commanders may remove or bar entry of individual CAP members in accordance with established procedures.

Air Education and Training Command (AETC).
AETC will have the principal MAJCOM-level responsibility for policy, resource advocacy, and oversight of Air Force support to CAP.

AIR FORCE USE OF THE CIVIL AIR PATROL
The Air Force may utilize CAP units and personnel in fulfilling selected non-combat programs and missions of the Air Force. Missions assigned by the Secretary of the Air Force, or the designee, to the CAP must be identified and referred to as AFAMs in advance of mission execution. AFAMs may supportnon-combat programs and organizational functions.

Use of CAP by Air Force Commanders.
CAP is a cost effective force multiplier. Air Force commanders are encouraged to request that CAP conduct missions that are within CAP's capability to perform. Commanders must ensure funds are available to reimburse CAP for requested services before the mission is approved.

Installation Support.
To carry out AFAMs, it is important that CAP personnel have access to adequate facilities and services. At their discretion and expense, Air Force Installation commanders may per-
mit CAP to use Installation services and facilities. Long-term support may include designated CAP use of facilities and services. Short-term support may include temporary billeting, messing, and ground transportation for CAP activities.

Use of Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES) Facilities.
In accordance with AFJI34-210 (AR 60-20) Army and Air Force Exchange Service Operating Policies, Chapter 2-9, Paragraph(c)(4), CAP personnel, while participating in an AFAM, or official function on a military Installation and occupying government quarters, are entitled to the use of AAFES facilities and services if approved by the installation commander.

Grade Structure.
CAP uses a military style grade structure for both its Senior Members and Cadet Members. CAP grades for both their cadet and senior members have no military standing, carry no authority over members of the Armed Forces, nor warrant the customs and courtesies afforded military members. Appointment and promotion follows guidelines contained within CAP regulations.

That is directly from an AFI.  How hard would it be to cobble together a short handout/page in training manual/lecture about us based solely on this?

[lordmonar]

They are taught about the Reserve and the ANG because those two components make up the "Total Force Concept".  And I would like for you to cite a valid source of just what the Airmen in the trenches know about CAP outside of a Times article which is not nor ever will be an official source for the AF. 

At the end of the day it is not the AF's responsibility to brief or teach the AD, Reserve, or ANG components about us.  If you think the AF should know more then you need to take a more active role in doing so within your area.  I am always telling people about us and what we do, both in my own section and out on base.  And if I had the opportunity to say something at CC Call I would.  And again it would surprise you just how much someone in the trenches knows.

Yes....the "Total Force"  AD/Reserves/ANG/AUX.........see simple....when they teach the RES/ANG part they add one more paragraph for the USAF AUX.

I was in the trenches for 22 years.....never once.....not ever.....heard anything about CAP...heard about MARS, the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, the Aero Club, the Computer Club, the Rod and Gun Club, lots of things I heard about..........not once about CAP.

It is part of the "red headed step child" syndrom.  Not that the USAF is against us.....like I said.....most of them don't know we exists.  It is not a conspiricy or anything.....it is simple ignorance.   So CAP-USAF has to push it to get it included at least a blerb in the BMTS and PD guides.

Me going to all the commander's calls I can will not help educate the airman at some base that does not have a squadron.   Now some of this is CAP''s fault.....yes we need to do a much better job of expanding the number of squadrons and keeping those squadrons afloat....this means more work at the wing and group levels.   Just like I said that every USAF installation should have CAP squadron....that means each wing commander with a vacant base should be at the base commander's officer starting the ball rolling to get one there.

There are lots of little steps we all need to make this happen........but that does not releive the USAF of their responsiblity to at least acknowledge us officall in USAF basic training and PD guides.

I gotta say, though, that I got back into CAP after seeing an ad on the base TV broadcast in Misawa, Japan, mentioning when and where the meetings were.

Yeah....I started those up when I was CC there too.....but people still had to be educated about who we were everytime I asked for base support for something.

[JoeTomasone]

The base near me, theoretically, knows CAP well.   There is a Squadron on base, we support their large airshow every year (and are involved in the planning meetings), and we have Wing Staff meetings there periodically.   In all, there's an excellent working relationship.

However, I'd say that 20% of the time I go on base, the SF guard at the gate has no idea what CAP is, and has to call someone over to validate that the CAP ID card is valid for entry.   This despite an MOU signed by the Base Commander providing for just such access.   When we bring an oversized vehicle on to the base, we have to go through a separate gate.  I have yet to find ONE person there that hasn't had to make a phone call to verify the ID - because NO ONE at that gate ever seems to know about CAP.

Unless a massive -- and I mean MASSIVE -- educational effort is made, I don't see how we will rise from the shadows any time soon.  And quite frankly, I'm sure that no one in a position to make such an effort thinks that there's anything that needs fixing.  They have more important things to do, I'm sure.

[abdsp51]

Cyborg, please point out the benefit to implementing something that I guarantee you will be dumped.  We are the Aux yes and I will point out one thing in all of your AFI copy and paste Installation commander's discretion.  And trust me at Travis the relationship there was awesome, here at Tucson we are working at making it better. 

Most average 18-20 is not going to care about CAP unless they were in it before or are in it.  Your average new airman is looking at chasing one of three things and I will not mention those here. 

Again BMT and really neither PD is the place for it you want the word out CC calls and FTAC is going to be the best way to go and relying on the AF to provide anything is like waiting for the golden goose.

[Stonewall]

I have not followed this thread, but thought I'd add that I've pulled security details for this guy on more than one occasion. 

[Walkman]

I love being able to wear the AF-style uni's. I also don't mind being distinctive. I think the service dress looks pretty good with the gray epaulets. I wouldn't mind having hard rank on gray vs. the embroidered just because I've seen several epps start to fade and not look great. But other than that, I like how things look.

I'm also on board with feeling like those that can't wear AF style should have something better for full service dress. We had Wing Conference this weekend and there are a number of MIWG members that wore the blazer combo in the evening and I think they should have something with which they could display their awards and accomplishments in a more formal uniform the same way those that wear the Blues can.

Honestly, though, the only "distinctive" uniform I wish was less so, is the BDUs. I know I've heard all the grumbling from AD folks about the ABU and I'm not looking to open a new pointless debate on the subject, but I'd wear it in the heart beat. The other AF-style options allow for a closer visual association with our parent service while still showing some CAP-ness than the BDUs.

[Storm Chaser]

It is inexcusable that an MTI would tell his/her charges "if you encounter a CAP person, ignore them."

Why? CAP is not part of the Armed Forces or even one of the Uniformed Services. CAP officers are not commissioned either. We are a civilian organization that happens to wear military-style uniforms and military-style ranks.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

It is inexcusable that an MTI would tell his/her charges "if you encounter a CAP person, ignore them."

Why? CAP is not part of the Armed Forces or even one of the Uniformed Services. CAP officers are not commissioned either. We are a civilian organization that happens to wear military-style uniforms and military-style ranks.

For one thing, it's bloody rude and unprofessional.

[NCRblues]

In the current climate of AF BMT, I doubt a mention of CAP is even near anyone's radar in the training group. With the ongoing sex scandal centered around my BMTS 331st wolf pack, and the budget crunch, plus a redue of how BMT is run and overseen i really doubt anyone is going to listen to us complain that airman have no clue who we are.

As long as base commanders know, and as long as AF units at Wing level and above know, who cares what the A1C on the gate thinks.

[Storm Chaser]

It is inexcusable that an MTI would tell his/her charges "if you encounter a CAP person, ignore them."

Why? CAP is not part of the Armed Forces or even one of the Uniformed Services. CAP officers are not commissioned either. We are a civilian organization that happens to wear military-style uniforms and military-style ranks.

For one thing, it's bloody rude and unprofessional.

Really? I beg to differ. The requirements to become a commissioned officer and a CAP officer are not even close. And as I said before, CAP officers are NOT commissioned. Should military members salute non-commissioned officers? At least they have actual UCMJ authority.

Members of the military are also not required to salute officers (lieutenants and above) of the Police Department, Fire Department and other similar agencies. Why would it be considered "rude" not to salute CAP officers, who are, regardless of CAP rank, civilians?

[Garibaldi]

It is inexcusable that an MTI would tell his/her charges "if you encounter a CAP person, ignore them."

Why? CAP is not part of the Armed Forces or even one of the Uniformed Services. CAP officers are not commissioned either. We are a civilian organization that happens to wear military-style uniforms and military-style ranks.

For one thing, it's bloody rude and unprofessional.

Really? I beg to differ. The requirements to become a commissioned officer and a CAP officer are not even close. And as I said before, CAP officers are NOT commissioned. Should military members salute non-commissioned officers? At least they have actual UCMJ authority.

Members of the military are also not required to salute officers (lieutenants and above) of the Police Department, Fire Department and other similar agencies. Why would it be considered "rude" not to salute CAP officers, who are, regardless of CAP rank, civilians?

Military members saluting CAP officers is a COURTESY. We are civilians and as such, military NCOs and junior grade officers are not REQUIRED to salute CAP officers. Most of the military men and women I've encountered have saluted me because they recognize the grade insignia and may or may not "know" we aren't real military. Last encampment, a group of Marine privates and lance corporals walked right past me and didn't even acknowledge me, although I did say "Good morning, Marines" as they passed by. Other NCOs notice the difference in uniform and either ignore us or acknowledge (at least me) with a not and a good morning/afternoon.

We are required to salute all officers of superior grade, regardless of service branch. We are not required to salute officers of fire or police departments. Funny that I was just thinking that while watching an episode of Adam-12 not 15 minutes ago.

As far as it's being rude and unprofessional, that's an opinion.

[Storm Chaser]

@Garibaldi:

Exactly my point. Well said.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Great Bog in Devon...

You ASSUMED I meant SALUTING by "not ignoring."  I DID NOT!

ALL I meant was maybe something like a simple GREETING, i.e., "good afternoon," "good morning," etc.

I did NOT mean said Airman had to snap a salute!  I know that is not required, though it is required that we salute them.

Think a little broader for crying out loud.

And, yes, I think to not do so is rude, just on the grounds of interpersonal communication.  It's nothing to do with rank/grade, perceived, actual or otherwise.

[Storm Chaser]

Everyone, regardless of rank, service or status deserves a greeting. I greet Airmen and NCOs while in my CAP uniform all the time and usually get a greeting back. I also greet civilians as I walk by. We're not in disagreement on that. We all deserve the courtesy of a verbal greeting or nod. What we were saying, and I think you also acknowledged, is that any courtesy and respect we receive does not derive from our CAP status. The Air Force recognizes our great contributions by supporting us, funding some of our missions and allowing us to wear their uniform, albeit with distinctive insignias. I think thanks plenty. Cheers!

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

THANK YOU.

That is exactly what I was trying to get across.

[abdsp51]

Sorry I don't neccesarily greet every one every time I see someone.  If I am running into the BX or somewhere on base I want to get in and out and sorry I am not going to go out of my way to say hi or which ever greeting would be applicable.  Now if the door is held or me or someone steps to the side I tell them thank you.  Sorry but during my duty day if I am on the go I want to get to where I am going and get out, I do not have the time to greet every last person I come across.   

And I still do not buy that an MTI told trainees to ignore CAP.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

[Tim Medeiros]

For those that wanted to know what CDC CAP was mentioned, we're in the Emergency Management CDCs, we've got about 2 pages in there.