Uniforms: Why the problems?

[Rotorhead]

As a returning CAP member (I was in back in the early 90s) I am amazed to see that we're STILL arguing about uniform styles, colors, insignia, and so on.

What is the big deal here? Why is this organization unable to settle on a reasonable variety of uniforms (blues, bdu's, corporate), stick with one official style (colors, etc.) for each, and choose one way the rank insignia will be worn?

All the debate--and subsequent changes--serves to accomplish is to waste time and resources.

[Flying Pig]

Back in the 90's life was good.  We had blues and fatigues. That was pretty much it.  Memories of a simpler time.

[JoeTomasone]

I think a lot of it boils down to:


1.  We have members who are not interested in the military aspects of CAP and therefore don't want military-style uniforms (hence the polo shirt and blazer).

2.  We have AF-style uniforms, for which you must meet weight/grooming standards.  Makes sense since we are the USAF Auxiliary.

3.  We have members who don't meet said requirements, and thus need alternatives that serve the same purpose (field work, flying, "office" work).  


Then we have to make the USAF-style different somehow so that USAF personnel won't confuse us with USAF personnel.   Then we have to conform with their changes.   Then we get plain old wacky ideas (reverse US flag).  

Our CAP distinctive uniforms, of course, are subject to the whim of the CC/National Board, who can't seem to settle on anything for too long (Civil Air Patrol/U.S. Civil Air Patrol; 2 or 3 line nameplate, USAF grade on the Corporate instead of grey, etc).

I think we debate it a lot here as there is simply a lot to debate, but the genesis of the debate lies upstairs at the National level, at CAP-USAF, and in the USAF itself.

As for me, it's not a terrible issue since I:

1.  Meet the requirements for and wear the USAF-style uniform.

2.  Don't rush out and buy anything new that is required until I am sure it won't be changed (no U.S. Civil Air Patrol nametapes here!).

3.  Have a great tailor shop near the local base - so I can buy stuff on base and have it worked on all within a few miles of each other.    And, of course, Vanguard, from which I order things well enough in advance of my needing them to work out any kinks (hey, I'm a 1st. Lt - time to order Major grade insignia!).


In fact, my biggest uniform challenge is making sure that when I visit one of our Squadrons that I am in their UOD.  

To be honest, I'd be in favor of simplifying it some if only to make 39-1 get under 18 pounds.      That's the only reg that I hear people say they don't bother to read (?!?!?!) because it's "too big".   

[sarflyer]

All well said guys!

I see it as people with an opinion but don't realize the AF has the final say on what we wear.  They are a stingy group! 

[JoeTomasone]

All well said guys!

I see it as people with an opinion but don't realize the AF has the final say on what we wear.  They are a stingy group! 

They have a degree of oversight on the USAF-style uniform wear and some lesser degree of input on the CAP distinctive IIRC.     From what I have read, their input seems mostly designed to keep our USAF-style uniforms different enough from AD so that they don't get confused.  I also believe that they have to approve USAF items on CAP-distinctive uniforms (such as the blue USAF epaulet grade on the Corporate uniform).   Mind you, this is all from memory of things I wasn't terribly interested in to begin with and may be wildly inaccurate. 

[Rotorhead]

All well said guys!

I see it as people with an opinion but don't realize the AF has the final say on what we wear.  They are a stingy group! 

They have a degree of oversight on the USAF-style uniform wear and some lesser degree of input on the CAP distinctive IIRC.     From what I have read, their input seems mostly designed to keep our USAF-style uniforms different enough from AD so that they don't get confused.  I also believe that they have to approve USAF items on CAP-distinctive uniforms (such as the blue USAF epaulet grade on the Corporate uniform).   Mind you, this is all from memory of things I wasn't terribly interested in to begin with and may be wildly inaccurate. 

None of this explains the ridiculous numbers and varieties of uniforms and routine changes in insignia and so on.

What I'm asking is, can't they just pick some standards and stick with 'em?

[JoeTomasone]

None of this explains the ridiculous numbers and varieties of uniforms and routine changes in insignia and so on.

What I'm asking is, can't they just pick some standards and stick with 'em?

Obviously not, so the next question is: WHY not?


USAF changes their uniforms periodically for different reasons, and so we must follow, within reason.

We identify needs (bogus or not) and make changes based on them.

And, sometimes, we just plain old get nutty and make changes that aren't needed at all.

I find that reading the minutes of the Board meeting discussing these matters can be instructional at times.


Now the changes that SHOULD be made never seem to be.  I've sent suggestions up through channels and have yet to see them get beyond Wing.   For example - it is contrary to 39-1 to wear more than one of the following:  two-way radio, pager, cell phone.   This obviously has safety implications (a GTL can carry one or the other, but not both?!) as well as being ludicrous in a modern world.    I passed this one up and......

Yet they found time to implement and rescind "U.S. Civil Air Patrol". 

[blackrain]

Part of the problem (and it will only get worse) stems from both the Army and Air Force getting rid of the Woodland BDUs. It actually wouldn't be too hard to modify my Army ACUs for CAP use. (Try getting National to approve THAT )Just a matter of putting Velcro on the right name tapes and other insignia.

I've actually had a number of discussions (and we are in agreement) with my AF counterparts on why both the Army and Air Force couldn't settle on one pattern and put the corresponding services insignia on them. It would sure save everyone a lot of money. Especially the taxpayers

[JoeTomasone]

Because the Army is the smartest of the services and knows what's best.

USAF, too.

Navy also, come to think of it.