Flight cap with blue utility jumpsuit?

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

OK, I'm sorry if this topic has been addressed before and feel free to whack me if it has.

Is the blue flight cap authorised to be worn with the blue utility jumpsuit?  Not the blue CAP Nomex flight suit, but the blue flight suit-type utility uniform.

I have looked on 39-1 and every search I can think of with "flight cap" and "blue utility jumpsuit" but nothing definitive.

All I have found is that the baseball cap is authorised, but no headgear is required.

The opinions I ask of my colleagues are about 50/50...the ones that say it can be worn cite the fact that it can be worn with two other CAP-distinctive uniforms, the CSU and the blue flight suit.

Thank you.

[Eclipse]

All I have found is that the baseball cap is authorised, but no headgear is required.

There's your answer.  The flight cap was not worn with the smurf suits, either.

Baseball cap or no cap, but not the flight cap.

[vento]

I always thought that the flight cap is an AF style uniform item and therefore only authorized to be worn with USAF style uniforms, not the corporate equivalents. Excluding the TPU of course which is an exception in many levels and is being phased out.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Eclipse: Believe it or not, I saw a handful of people wear the flight cap with the smurf suit (incorrectly, as you state).

Vento: The CAP blue flight suit is also corporate/CAP distinctive and allows the flight cap.

[spacecommand]

I say no.

Just because the flight cap is authorized for one corporate doesn't mean it is authorized for another corporate uniform combination.  Do your colleagues that cite it can be worn with the CSU or blue flight suit also wear the flight cap on the corporate white/gray combination and golf shirt as well?

For the blue flight suit it specifically states "Flight cap or CAP baseball cap for both male and female."

For the utility uniform it doesn't:
"Headgear is not required, but the CAP baseball cap may be worn."

[SARDOC]

I would have to say NO as well.  The regulation does not allow for it.  That being said, I do think that it would look good with it and Heck, I'd be okay with allowing it with the White/Gray combo as well.  That would allow for some type of headgear while outdoors to allow for proper military customs and courtesies in keeping with our military heritage.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

FWIW, I was already on the "no" side and have never worn the flight cap with the blue utility jumpsuit.  Like I told Eclipse, though, I did see it worn with the old smurf suit.

I could get an old, obsolete or foreign one off Evilbay and wear it with no insignia (j/k). 

http://tinyurl.com/luftwaffecap

http://tinyurl.com/oldAFcap

http://tinyurl.com/BAFCAP

Or this may cause a stir...

http://tinyurl.com/russhat

Spacecommand: Not a lot of our squadron wears the white/grey/golf shirt and when they do I've never seen any kind of headgear.

[andysum15]

I understood the utility suit to be based on the flight suit so how do you tell the difference from a distance. So why not wear the flight hat.

[tsrup]

I understood the utility suit to be based on the flight suit so how do you tell the difference from a distance. So why not wear the flight hat.

Because the reg says no.

[tsrup]

I would have to say NO as well.  The regulation does not allow for it.  That being said, I do think that it would look good with it and Heck, I'd be okay with allowing it with the White/Gray combo as well.  That would allow for some type of headgear while outdoors to allow for proper military customs and courtesies in keeping with our military heritage.

Proper customs and courtesies are not dependent on headwear, at least not in CAP.

[andysum15]

I still find it strange even after 6 years saluting without a hat on. Never happens in the British forces or Cadet forces.

[Eclipse]

I still find it strange even after 6 years saluting without a hat on. Never happens in the British forces or Cadet forces.

Are your superior officers and commander(s) less due the respect because they aren't wearing a hat? To paraphrase many, "You salute the grade, not the hat..."

[SARDOC]

I still find it strange even after 6 years saluting without a hat on. Never happens in the British forces or Cadet forces.

Are your superior officers and commander(s) less due the respect because they aren't wearing a hat? To paraphrase many, "You salute the grade, not the hat..."

The Officers are still due the respect.  I find it strange as well saluting without headgear because of my years in actual military service...old habits die hard.  Besides, in the Uniform regulations the only uniform I can find that requires wearing of headgear is the Honor Guard uniform.  Just an idiosyncrasy I think.

[RiverAux]

Still trying to figure out what the heck the jumpsuit is for in the first place.  Maybe its what our CAP mechanics used to wear while working on the aircraft in the old days.

[Spaceman3750]

Still trying to figure out what the heck the jumpsuit is for in the first place.  Maybe its what our CAP mechanics used to wear while working on the aircraft in the old days.

We used to have an SM that kept one in his vehicle with his SAR gear to throw on if he got a call while he was out.

[ol'fido]

The only time I ever wore the smurf suit was at the 1981 ILWG flight encampment and we also wore the flight caps with them. Ball caps and no cap at all were also allowed(not for cadets). In those days at FE the power students wore the smurf suit, glider students wore the pickle suits, and balloon students got to wear civvies. I don't know if we were out of uniform or if they changed the reg later, but the blue flight caps were worn with the smurf suit. Also, strangely enough, the glider students were required to wear the old seat pack style parachutes. I don't know how those would have worked out at glider altitudes. BAIL OUT! COUNT TO FOUR AND PULL THE CORD!! 1...2...3...THUD!!!!!

[Eclipse]

Still trying to figure out what the heck the jumpsuit is for in the first place.  Maybe its what our CAP mechanics used to wear while working on the aircraft in the old days.

It serves the same purpose as a flight suit, and costs 1/3rd as much.

[RiverAux]

That may be the case, but there is still no need for a uniform of different design since all-cotton flight suits are easily and cheaply available.  Therefore it can go. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

That may be the case, but there is still no need for a uniform of different design since all-cotton flight suits are easily and cheaply available.  Therefore it can go.

If you can point me to a dark blue all-cotton "flight suit" that is comparably priced, of better quality than the Rothco crap and is compliant with 39-1, please do so.

[Eclipse]

I'd go with that if the flight suits were treated like a tanker suit, etc., IOWs for anytime one needs a quick uniform.

As it stands, flight suits are for flying, and the utility suit is for anything, including GT / UDF.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I'd go with that if the flight suits were treated like a tanker suit, etc., IOWs for anytime one needs a quick uniform.

As it stands, flight suits are for flying, and the utility suit is for anything, including GT / UDF.

Agreed.

The utility suit is my preferred uniform for the winter months, unless another UOD is prescribed.  It's easy to do layers underneath it, and it still looks good.

[Slim]

That may be the case, but there is still no need for a uniform of different design since all-cotton flight suits are easily and cheaply available.  Therefore it can go.

If you can point me to a dark blue all-cotton "flight suit" that is comparably priced, of better quality than the Rothco crap and is compliant with 39-1, please do so.

Here you go.

This is the Atlanco/Tru-Spec version.  In the beginning, Vanguard was selling the Rothco version, then switched to Tru-Spec; they also raised the price about $10.  I bought one from them at that time, I'm guessing about 2003-2004.  That one, while still serviceable, was getting a little old, so I ordered another one from Vanguard.  What I got was the same Rothco crap, at the price of the Tru-Spec version.  Then, they refused to accept the return because what they advertise (the picture on the website still shows the Tru-Spec version) isn't what they're delivering.

I found that site through a search, and bought one from them about a year ago.  Very good quality, heavy poly/cotton twill, same as my original.  Still looks new after moderate wear and washing.  Only issue I had with it is that I had to resew the waist velcro after a few months (had to do this with my original too).

[Eclipse]

Looks like the nametag is in the right place, unlike the Rothco which I have to move...

[SARDOC]

I got the ROTHCO Version and immediately sent it back the Vendor...Wow I couldn't wear something that looks that bad in public...and I'm not usually picky but the thread count was so low you could see daylight through it not to mention all of the imperfections and poor workmanship.

[N Harmon]

I ordered another one from Vanguard.  What I got was the same Rothco crap, at the price of the Tru-Spec version.  Then, they refused to accept the return because what they advertise (the picture on the website still shows the Tru-Spec version) isn't what they're delivering.

Wow, that is ridiculous. I think Vanguard's refusal to accept the return was completely out of line with their return policy:

Returns/Refunds - If you're not satisfied with your purchase, return it in good condition within 15 days for refund or exchange. Please call or email for authorization to return merchandise. We cannot accept returns or refunds on custom or personalized orders unless it is to correct a mistake on Vanguard's part. We also cannot accept returns for "Clearance" items.

You were not satisfied, so they should accept the return. Did you pay by credit card? If so you should have requested a chargeback from the card company because the merchant did not send you what you ordered and refused to make it right.

At the very least you might consider submitting your story up the chain so when it comes time for CAP to renegotiate its contract with Vanguard, they can use it to get a better arrangement.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Thank you, Slim.  Looks good, seems sturdy and isn't overpriced.

[Slim]

Looks like the nametag is in the right place, unlike the Rothco which I have to move...

It is, but...

The velcro patch is actually about 2"x3".  When I got it, I cut that piece off and replaced it with a piece that is 2"x4", then used the smaller patch of pile for the flag patch on the left sleeve.

I ordered another one from Vanguard.  What I got was the same Rothco crap, at the price of the Tru-Spec version.  Then, they refused to accept the return because what they advertise (the picture on the website still shows the Tru-Spec version) isn't what they're delivering.

Wow, that is ridiculous. I think Vanguard's refusal to accept the return was completely out of line with their return policy:

Returns/Refunds - If you're not satisfied with your purchase, return it in good condition within 15 days for refund or exchange. Please call or email for authorization to return merchandise. We cannot accept returns or refunds on custom or personalized orders unless it is to correct a mistake on Vanguard's part. We also cannot accept returns for "Clearance" items.

You were not satisfied, so they should accept the return. Did you pay by credit card? If so you should have requested a chargeback from the card company because the merchant did not send you what you ordered and refused to make it right.

At the very least you might consider submitting your story up the chain so when it comes time for CAP to renegotiate its contract with Vanguard, they can use it to get a better arrangement.

It was almost a year ago.  At the time, I was so irked with the way the "customer service" rep treated me that I didn't want to deal with going any further.  I've not been shy about sharing my displeasure with VG, or my praise for that matter.  And I got my money back by selling it to someone who was willing to sacrifice the lighter weight for better quality.