CAP Talk

General Discussion => Uniforms & Awards => Topic started by: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 06:25:47 PM

Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 06:25:47 PM
NHQ finally published the CAPM 39-1 draft for comments:

https://www.capnhq.gov/Documents/CAPM_39-1_Draft_for_comments_(2013-12-31).pdf
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 06:28:52 PM
"Please note, image work on this document is not complete in several places. Work on imagery will
continue while this document is out for feedback from the field."


The lighting on the "new" photos is terrible, as expected when yo take pictures in a banquet hall.

Please go to Vanguard, get some mannequins and properly light and stage the photos.

Also, there's a few "new" diagrams which are actually worse the the old ones, or feature horribly mis-matched
or inappropriate graphic elements.

Please redraw all of them.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 06:33:26 PM
Weigh-ins encouraged.

Golf shirt no longer equal to service uniform.

More time spent talking about when not to wear a uniform then when to wear it.

No mention of ABUs, however Chapter 7 "not used" which is where it would probably go.

Canonizes terms "Class A", etc.

Features a "National Paid Staff" rocker?  so staff are wearing uniforms now?

Features the "new" NCO insignia.

Changes tapes on BBDU to dark blue - still has metal grade on hat (why?)

RADMON, NEAT, and Member 200 patches retired.

Cadet first Sgt diamond now approved.

Clarified NRA badge.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: 4fhoward on December 31, 2013, 06:35:15 PM
Any guesses how long this thread will end up being?

My guess is 22 pages.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 06:40:41 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 06:33:26 PM
No mention of ABUs, however Chapter 7 "not used" which is where it would probably go.

Chapter 7 in the AFMAN is the Physical Fitness Uniform.

Look at the Utility Uniform chapter. 5.1.1, for example.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 06:42:11 PM
Command badge can now be worn by "Graduated Commanders" as well as active.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 06:46:02 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 06:42:11 PM
Command badge can now be worn by "Graduated Commanders" as well as active.

Actually mandatory on USAF-style.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ranviper on December 31, 2013, 06:46:55 PM
1.1.2.1 COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. This
publication is the sole source for wear instructions and authorized items for various
uniform combinations as prescribed within. Variation from this publication at not
authorized.
Items not listed in this publication are not authorized for wear with uniforms.
Local commanders do not have the authority to waive grooming and appearance
standards.

1.1.2.2 The Commander, CAP-USAF, with the approval of Headquarters USAF,
prescribes the wear of the USAF-style uniforms, as well as the insignia, badges, and
devices worn on these uniforms.
1.1.2.3 CAP prescribes the wear policy and the use of CAP emblems, insignia, and badges
on the Corporate-style uniforms.

I like this. Now anyone in uniform HAS to comply. Though we may all disagree on what uniform to use, at least now everyone has to wear them properly.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 06:47:43 PM
That is the same verbiage as before.  No change there.

Everyone always had to comply.  CCs have never had the authority to to waive grooming.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 06:47:50 PM
Board administrators getting ready for the CAPTALK server bursting into flame....

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/Fire_fighters_practice_with_spraying_equipment,_March_1981.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ranviper on December 31, 2013, 06:53:20 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 06:47:43 PM
That is the same verbiage as before.  No change there.

Everyone always had to comply.  CCs have never had the authority to to waive grooming.

Understood, but the hope is with a revised document, the CC's will re-read the standards and adhere to them. Too many events have I been too where I have seen either very large, very hairy, or very large AND hairy members in USAF style uniforms.

I meet the height and weight requirements, but I prefer to keep my beard, so I voluntarily wear BBDU's, and I think the larger and more furry members should have no shame in voluntarily wearing it either.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 07:01:35 PM
Am I reading this right...a navy blue beret is authorized for anyone?   (6.2.5, page 91)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:05:04 PM
Removed American flag patch from BDUs (attachement 9)
QuoteEliminated American Flag Patch
on BDUs and Blue Field
Uniform
1 Jan 2017

Attachemnt 7 shows "aircrew" wings? is that new? I couldn't find other mention of it in a search...
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 07:05:36 PM
Trade in your white iPhone:
Quote6.3.1.3 Handheld Electronic Devices. Handheld electronic devices are small electronic
equipment such as cellular phones (personal or official), MP3 or similar players, radio, or
hands-free devices (e.g. Bluetooth). Handheld electronic devices will be plain black,
silver, dark blue, or gray
. Holster and other storage devices used to carry handheld
electronic devices will be plain black, silver, dark blue, or gray. One handheld electronic
device may be attached to a belt/waistband on either side, clipped to a purse, or carried in
the left hand.
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:05:48 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 07:01:35 PM
Am I reading this right...a navy blue beret is authorized for anyone?   (6.2.5, page 91)

Negative. Blue Berets may be worn by those completing NBB (9.2.3, page 108 ) or otherwise authorized by the wing commander (9.4.1.6, page 109).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:09:47 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:05:48 PM

Quote from: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 07:01:35 PM
Am I reading this right...a navy blue beret is authorized for anyone?   (6.2.5, page 91)

Negative. Blue Berets may be worn by those completing NBB or otherwise authorized by the wing commander (9.4.1.6, page 109).

Confusing. The first reference almost reads as though everyone os allowed to wear it:
Quote6.2.5 Beret. Navy blue. Position headband straight across the forehead, one inch above the eyebrows. Drape the top over the right ear and the stiffener. Adjust ribbon for comfort, tie in a knot, and tuck inside or cut-off. Appropriate flight cap device will be worn unless worn due to Blue Beret attendance, in which case the member will wear the Blue Beret, beret device.

But then your cite say differently...
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:10:08 PM

Quote from: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:05:04 PM
Removed American flag patch from BDUs (attachement 9)
QuoteEliminated American Flag Patch
on BDUs and Blue Field
Uniform
1 Jan 2017

Attachemnt 7 shows "aircrew" wings? is that new? I couldn't find other mention of it in a search...

My only guess is that other aircrew members (scanners, airborne photographers, etc.) may be getting wings. That would still need to be approved in CAPR 35-6.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:15:50 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:10:08 PM
My only guess is that other aircrew members (scanners, airborne photographers, etc.) may be getting wings. That would still need to be approved in CAPR 35-6.

SIDEBAR:
That would be nice, especially for AP. I'm still a trainee, but seeing that it's not an easy rating to be proficient in and its making up a bulk of our missions I think it is deserved.

Back to 39-1 Draft...

It looks like a few of the photos are from the current reg with heads cropped out.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 07:18:17 PM
It would be nice if they'd authorize something other than the ball-cap for the aviator uniform.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:18:47 PM
Looks like the right shoulder flag is being replaced with optional activity patch

Quote5.1.2.3.3 Right Sleeve. One full color, special activity patch as authorized by Attachment 4 may be sewn to the coat on the right sleeve ½ inch below the shoulder seam.

(edit for typo.)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: tsrup on December 31, 2013, 07:20:29 PM
I noticed that the US flag patch will no longer be authorized on the BDU.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 07:24:13 PM
(regarding wear of cloth occupation badges on BBDU), page 78-79.

Quote
5.2.1.4.6
Aviation and Occupational Badges
(CAP only)
Two Aviation or Occupational badges embroidered in silver on light blue may be worn sewn to the shirt ½ inch above the "Civil Air Patrol tape over the left breast pocket. The second badge will be centered ½ inch above the first badge. Chaplain and CAP aviation badges are mandatory and will always be worn in the highest position. Not more than a combined total of two of these badges will be worn on the wearer's left. When more than one CAP aviation badge is authorized, only one will be worn. If chaplain badge is worn, it is worn in the higher position. Occupational badges (excluding chaplain) are optional. All light silver on dark blue insignia will have 1/8 inch of blue showing at the widest and tallest point of the insignia.

Emphasis mine.  Contradiction?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on December 31, 2013, 07:25:36 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 07:01:35 PM
Am I reading this right...a navy blue beret is authorized for anyone?   (6.2.5, page 91)


Quote from: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:09:47 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:05:48 PM

Quote from: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 07:01:35 PM
Am I reading this right...a navy blue beret is authorized for anyone?   (6.2.5, page 91)

Negative. Blue Berets may be worn by those completing NBB or otherwise authorized by the wing commander (9.4.1.6, page 109).

Confusing. The first reference almost reads as though everyone os allowed to wear it:
Quote6.2.5 Beret. Navy blue. Position headband straight across the forehead, one inch above the eyebrows. Drape the top over the right ear and the stiffener. Adjust ribbon for comfort, tie in a knot, and tuck inside or cut-off. Appropriate flight cap device will be worn unless worn due to Blue Beret attendance, in which case the member will wear the Blue Beret, beret device.

But then your cite say differently...

One is how to wear. The other is who can wear, and when.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 07:26:08 PM
Some dark blue probably slipped in via editing (the intent is that eventually the BBDU & ABU will have the same dark blue nametags and other insigina)

Caught a good one:

Pg 137, Figure A5-4. The cadet collar insignia is shown with cut outs. Cadets have worn cadet enlisted grade insignia without CAP cutouts for several years now.

ETA: Also, Figure A5-6.  Shows male cadet cap device as either cloth or metal. That cap device hasn't been cloth for, geez, 20+ years now?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 07:27:13 PM
Blue BDU - Black undershirt now required.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:28:39 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 07:26:08 PM
Pg 137, Figure A5-4. The cadet collar insignia is shown with cut outs. Cadets have worn cadet enlisted grade insignia without CAP cutouts for several years now.

That looks like the exact same artwork from the current reg. Kinda' hard to comment on new images if most of them aren't even included in this draft.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:30:25 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 07:27:13 PM
Blue BDU - Black undershirt now required.

And the photo shows a white shirt...
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on December 31, 2013, 07:31:00 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 06:33:26 PM
Weigh-ins encouraged.

Golf shirt no longer equal to service uniform.

More time spent talking about when not to wear a uniform then when to wear it.

No mention of ABUs, however Chapter 7 "not used" which is where it would probably go.

Canonizes terms "Class A", etc.

Features a "National Paid Staff" rocker?  so staff are wearing uniforms now?

Features the "new" NCO insignia.

Changes tapes on BBDU to dark blue - still has metal grade on hat (why?)

RADMON, NEAT, and Member 200 patches retired.

Cadet first Sgt diamond now approved.

Clarified NRA badge.

Cool, But with "Weigh Ins" There going to be a Gray area for Scales that are not Calibrated? Example: "Scale at homes says I Weigh xxx, but this scale says xxx"
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 07:32:09 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on December 31, 2013, 07:31:00 PM
Cool, But with "Weigh Ins" There going to be a Gray area for Scales that are not Calibrated? Example: "Scale at homes says I Weigh xxx, but this scale says xxx"

The E-4 Mafia is strong in you....
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 07:33:22 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on December 31, 2013, 07:31:00 PM
Cool, But with "Weigh Ins" There going to be a Gray area for Scales that are not Calibrated? Example: "Scale at homes says I Weigh xxx, but this scale says xxx"
Specifically says no particularly calibrated scale needed.  Repeat weigh-in must be at least 30 days later, and not authorized USAF style until you pass.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 07:36:53 PM
The feedback on the new manual is not the place to recommend this particular policy change, but I'm going to float it here and see what people think.

CAP cadets in the grade of C/Amn to C/CMSgt have not worn cut outs for several years on their uniforms.

Yet we require them to purchase & wear two cutouts on their uniform when they're a C/AB, and then they wouldn't wear a CAP cutout again until they become a cadet officer.

Considering our 1st year and subsequent retention rates, etc, this is kind of silly.  More that 75% of our cadets don't make it to the Mitchell, so they'd wear CAP cutouts only a few times as a C/AB and then never again.

We've made a change to the "SM w/o Grade" flight cap so that they can purchase and wear the "officer" flight cap to avoid buying a 2nd flight cap after six months.  Why not reduce the cost for new cadets a little?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:37:22 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on December 31, 2013, 07:31:00 PM
Cool, But with "Weigh Ins" There going to be a Gray area for Scales that are not Calibrated? Example: "Scale at homes says I Weigh xxx, but this scale says xxx"

Quote1.2.1.6 Weigh-ins may occur on any commercially available scale and no specific scale is required to be purchased.

This could get sticky. My wife was in a weight-loss competition at her gym a couple of years ago and there was a difference of 3-5 pounds between the two scales.

I'm right on the line below H/W, sometimes (like during the holidays  ;D) I nudge over a pound or two on my scale. I also weigh myself in the morning before I eat anything. I've noticed that I can gain several pounds during the day after meals then be back to normal in the next morning.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 07:43:30 PM
Seriously, no one "on the line" is going to have an issue, and in my opinion tie should always go to the runner.

Just the prospect of weigh-ins will be enough to fix 1/2 the issues.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 07:44:32 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 07:36:53 PM
The feedback on the new manual is not the place to recommend this particular policy change, but I'm going to float it here and see what people think.

CAP cadets in the grade of C/Amn to C/CMSgt have not worn cut outs for several years on their uniforms.

Yet we require them to purchase & wear two cutouts on their uniform when they're a C/AB, and then they wouldn't wear a CAP cutout again until they become a cadet officer.

Considering our 1st year and subsequent retention rates, etc, this is kind of silly.  More that 75% of our cadets don't make it to the Mitchell, so they'd wear CAP cutouts only a few times as a C/AB and then never again.

We've made a change to the "SM w/o Grade" flight cap so that they can purchase and wear the "officer" flight cap to avoid buying a 2nd flight cap after six months.  Why not reduce the cost for new cadets a little?

I don't disagree, but we're still making SMWOG wear cutouts, right?

I know a lot of units just have loaner pins for this reason.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 07:44:39 PM
Quote from: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:37:22 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on December 31, 2013, 07:31:00 PM
Cool, But with "Weigh Ins" There going to be a Gray area for Scales that are not Calibrated? Example: "Scale at homes says I Weigh xxx, but this scale says xxx"

Quote1.2.1.6 Weigh-ins may occur on any commercially available scale and no specific scale is required to be purchased.

This could get sticky. My wife was in a weight-loss competition at her gym a couple of years ago and there was a difference of 3-5 pounds between the two scales.

I'm right on the line below H/W, sometimes (like during the holidays  ;D) I nudge over a pound or two on my scale. I also weigh myself in the morning before I eat anything. I've noticed that I can gain several pounds during the day after meals then be back to normal in the next morning.

If you got on the scale in your uniform and you were a pound over, I might be inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt.

If you were 5lbs over, probably not.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 07:45:53 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 07:44:32 PM
I don't disagree, but we're still making SMWOG wear cutouts, right?

I know a lot of units just have loaner pins for this reason.

Are we? Didn't I read something about blank shoulder marks?

You make a good point about loaner cutouts.

Still:  what is really wrong with a newbie having a slick collar?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:45:57 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 07:43:30 PM
Just the prospect of weigh-ins will be enough to fix 1/2 the issues.

Agreed.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 07:46:58 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 07:44:39 PMIf you got on the scale in your uniform and you were a pound over, I might be inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt.

If you were 5lbs over, probably not.

Yep.  Want to argue the point? Bring your own scale from home and we'll use yours for everyone next time.

1Lbs?  Take off your 500 ribbons, wallet, massive janitor keys and ego.  That should be enough.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 07:47:27 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 07:45:53 PM
Still:  what is really wrong with a newbie having a slick collar?

Nothing, really.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 07:50:44 PM
6.1.9.2.1 - Metal grade insignia authorized with the blue USAF topcoat as long as it's pinned onto a gray epaulette sleeve for SM Officers and NCO's.

6.2.12.2 - "Officers will center rank on the front of the [Blue BDU] cap.  Officers and cadet officers will wear embroidered grade insignia on dark blue material."   Seems to contradict an earlier section that said SM officers can wear metal pin-on rank insignia on the Blue BDU cap.

6.2.12.4 - No rank/grade insignia authorized for blue boonie cap.

8.2.3 - People wearing the green flight suit are still stuck with plastic-encased rank insignia, without the option for embroidered insignia.



Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:51:35 PM
The wording on specialty track badges is a bit confusing. Are we now going to be allowed to wear three (3) specialty track badges?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Ned on December 31, 2013, 07:54:06 PM
It is certainly normal for a person's weight to vary by a couple of pounds during a given day.  That's just human nature, I guess.

And like everyone else, I have experienced slight differences between scales.  And for most adults, even a +/- 1% accuracy difference between scales could result in another couple of pounds difference in scales sitting side by side.

But the policy decision was to go with "any commercially available scale" and not require standaridized calibration procedures so that commanders and members could have an reasonably inexpensive and easy to administer system to allow members to wear the correct uniform.

And not get tied around the axle on calibration technicalities or require the purchase of expensive scales used in doctors' offices and health clubs.

The flip side of that is that about half the time, some members a couple of pounds under the limit might have to wear the corporates for a month and the other half of the time some members a couple of pounds over the limit might be approved to wear the USAF-style until the next weigh-in.

Restated, we are accepting a slightly larger good faith margin of error in lieu of fighting about calibration certificates for expensive scales.

(And BTW, the weigh-in language was directly prompted by discussions here on CT.  Give yourselves a hand.)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:55:26 PM
I'm surprised that the Incident Commander badge still ranks lower than the Observer badge. Even the Air Force have given equal standing to some non-aeronautical badges, such as the Space and Cyberspace badges.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:03:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:51:35 PM
The wording on specialty track badges is a bit confusing. Are we now going to be allowed to wear three (3) specialty track badges?

Four (4) as far as I can tell, at least with the G/W's.


4.1.9.4.3.2 - (page 54) "CAP Service Specialty Track Badges, Model Rocketry, and NRA Marksmanship Badges (refer to Attachment 4). Wear of these badges is optional. CAP service badges will only be worn by officers and NCOs. Model rocketry and NRA marksmanship badges will only be worn by cadets. The total number of badges worn will not exceed four, to include the above - mentioned aviation and occupational badges. The first badge will be centered on the lower portion of the wearer's left pocket, between the left and right edges and bottom of flap and pocket.

The second badge will be worn in the corresponding location on the wearer's right pocket. If a third badge is authorized, it will be centered ½ inch above the nametag. CAP service badges, if worn, are always worn on the left, with only one being worn. Model rocketry badge will only be worn on the wearer's left pocket. Marksmanship badge is worn centered on the top edge of the left pocket flap. Only one
marksmanship badge may be worn. The National Commander's Staff Badge will always be worn on the wearer's right side. The CAP Senior Advisory Group, Command Council, National Board or National
Executive Committee will always be worn on the left side."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on December 31, 2013, 08:07:15 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 06:28:52 PMThe lighting on the "new" photos is terrible, as expected when yo take pictures in a banquet hall.
Sigh. totally called it. Yellow hotel lighting just sucks. The blue is almost black. Cutting off heads is a good idea, puts the focus on what's supposed to be there.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 08:07:51 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:03:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:51:35 PM
The wording on specialty track badges is a bit confusing. Are we now going to be allowed to wear three (3) specialty track badges?

Four (4) as far as I can tell, at least with the G/W's.

It looks like four TOTAL bades, including aviation and specialty badges.

QuoteThe total number of badges worn will not exceed four, to include the above-mentioned aviation and occupational badges.

So, one could wear Pilot Wings, GTL Badge, Command Badge and 1 Specialty track badge. Or, GTM badge and 3 Specialty track badges. Does that sound right?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on December 31, 2013, 08:20:10 PM
Doesn't have one of those honked up file names. Is this because it's a direct post? Is this actually linked from the draft pages?


Is the NRA badge the correct badge?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on December 31, 2013, 08:22:23 PM
Understood, Weigh-Ins are done in Uniform? I am glad they finally but that reg in there, but... Will the SC and WC follow suite?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 08:26:34 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on December 31, 2013, 08:22:23 PM
Understood, Weigh-Ins are done in Uniform?

I really don't want to see you in your skivvies. :)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:28:35 PM
Thoughts:

Disappointed that you still can't wear the flight cap or military ribbons with the G/Ws.

Noticed that when ties are mentioned, all it says is "The tie will be either blue polyester or silk, herringbone twill."  So, does this mean it doesn't have to be "AF-Blue", and I can go out and get a 3rd-party navy blue tie that is actually long enough for me?

It now specifically says you can't wear cargo pants with the G/Ws.  Good.

Quote from: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 08:07:51 PM
It looks like four TOTAL bades, including aviation and specialty badges.

QuoteThe total number of badges worn will not exceed four, to include the above-mentioned aviation and occupational badges.

So, one could wear Pilot Wings, GTL Badge, Command Badge and 1 Specialty track badge. Or, GTM badge and 3 Specialty track badges. Does that sound right?

Yeah, further down (4.2.5.3.3) when describing the G/W's, it specifically says that the command pin doesn't count as one of the four.  So that would lead me to believe that wings and "occupational qualification" badges count.

Noticed that the blue "CAP" embroidered cut-outs are no longer required with the majority of USAF and the one or two Corporate-style jacket you can wear rank insignia with.  (Still required with the Gortex jacket).

As mentioned before, it seems that the namestapes and embroidered rank insignia for the BBDUs and blue flight uniform has been changed to a dark blue (navy?) background, with white lettering on the tapes.  Woodland camo BDUs keep the ultramarine background, probably to prevent everybody from going out and spending money on changing things on a uniform that will probably go into phase-out.

SMWOG's who wear the G/W's or BBDUS simply don't wear any sort of grade insignia.  Apparently if wearing AF-Blues, officer-trainees will wear blank gray CAP rank epaulettes while NCO-trainees will wear "plain" blue shirts.  Both (officer and NCO "trainees") will wear white embroidered CAP cut-outs on ultramarine background when wearing woodland BDUs.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 08:29:12 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 07:50:44 PM
8.2.3 - People wearing the green flight suit are still stuck with plastic-encased rank insignia, without the option for embroidered insignia.

It was determined that going to the USAF and asking for changes to the USAF-style FDU was not a good idea at this time.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 08:30:43 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:28:35 PM
Thoughts:

Disappointed that you still can't wear the flight cap or military ribbons with the G/Ws.


You shouldn't wear military ribbons on non-military clothing. Simple as that. G/Ws are not a military uniform.  More or less the same goes for the flight cap. You're mixing military and civilian clothing. (seriously)

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 08:34:26 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:28:35 PM
Apparently if wearing AF-Blues, officer-trainees will wear blank gray CAP rank epaulettes while NCO-trainees will wear "plain" blue shirts.

Where did you find that? I was looking for that earlier after NIN's comment and couldn't find it. I actually made that mistake when I first joined. I read the regs wrong and saw that there was a blank gray rank slide from Vanguard and ordered it for my Class B's and then found out it was meant for NCOs.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on December 31, 2013, 08:34:59 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:28:35 PM
Thoughts:


Yeah, further down (4.2.5.3.3) when describing the G/W's, it specifically says that the command pin doesn't count as one of the four.  So that would lead me to believe that wings and "occupational qualification" badges count.

Noticed that the blue "CAP" embroidered cut-outs are no longer required with the majority of USAF and the one or two Corporate-style jacket you can wear rank insignia with.  (Still required with the Gortex jacket).

As mentioned before, it seems that the namestapes and embroidered rank insignia for the BBDUs and blue flight uniform has been changed to a dark blue (navy?) background, with white lettering on the tapes.  Woodland camo BDUs keep the ultramarine background, probably to prevent everybody from going out and spending money on changing things on a uniform that will probably go into phase-out.

SMWOG's who wear the G/W's or BBDUS simply don't wear any sort of grade insignia.  Apparently if wearing AF-Blues, officer-trainees will wear blank gray CAP rank epaulettes while NCO-trainees will wear "plain" blue shirts.  Both (officer and NCO "trainees") will wear white embroidered CAP cut-outs on ultramarine background when wearing woodland BDUs.
[/quote]

I actually wore no rank on my BDUs for awhile, I dont wear alot of Fru Fru Badges/Patches on my BDU. Im not big into rank either.  I was told I had to sow on the "Butter Bar", Per my SC stated "You want to be an good example for cadets" So... Its on there now.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:35:34 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 08:30:43 PM
You shouldn't wear military ribbons on non-military clothing. Simple as that. G/Ws are not a military uniform.  More or less the same goes for the flight cap. You're mixing military and civilian clothing. (seriously)

Understood, Colonel.  Still disappointed, none the less.   :-\
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:36:44 PM
Quote from: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 08:34:26 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:28:35 PM
Apparently if wearing AF-Blues, officer-trainees will wear blank gray CAP rank epaulettes while NCO-trainees will wear "plain" blue shirts.

Where did you find that? I was looking for that earlier after NIN's comment and couldn't find it. I actually made that mistake when I first joined. I read the regs wrong and saw that there was a blank gray rank slide from Vanguard and ordered it for my Class B's and then found out it was meant for NCOs.

Section 1.4, page 12.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:42:32 PM
Quote
1.4
Adults without Grade.
Adult individuals without grade will wear the dress uniform for the grade structure they are pursuing. Unit commanders will monitor new individualsto ensure they comply with
the requirements of this paragraph.

1.4.1
Adult individuals without Grade pursuing officer promotion will wear the USAF-style (except Mess Dress which is not authorized for individuals members without grade) or
Corporate-style uniform as for Officers without any grade insignia.

For example, these individuals will wear the officer-style service coat, with sleeve braid, officer style flight cap, US collar insignia, and gray epaulets without grade insignia.
On USAF-style Utility Uniforms (BDU), these individuals will wear light silver embroidered CAP insignia on blue cloth centered 1 inch from the bottom edge on both sides of the collar. On the
Corporate-style Field Uniform, no collar insignia or grade insignia on the hat will be worn. On the Aviator Combination Uniform, no grade insignia or collar devices will be worn.

1.4.2
Adult individuals without Grade pursuing NCO promotions based on prior military services will wear the USAF-style uniform (except Mess Dress which is not authorized for
individuals without grade) and Corporate uniforms as for NCOs without wearing any grade insignia.

For example, these individuals will wear the service coat without epaulets, flight cap with blue braid, CAP collar insignia, and no epaulets. On USAF-style Utility Uniforms (
BDU), these individuals will wear white embroidered CAP insignia on ultramarine blue cloth centered 1 inch from the bottom edge on both sides of the collar. On the Corporate-
style Field Uniform, no collar insignia or grade insignia on the hat will be worn. On the Aviator Combination Uniform, no grade insignia or collar devices will be worn.

Apparently I misread.  NCO-candidates wearing AF-blues will wear the CAP cut-outs.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 08:43:45 PM
Grade on the dark blue flight suit is already dark blue cloth.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: A.Member on December 31, 2013, 08:45:43 PM
Only skimmed through it.

The one area that stands out as still needing attention is that of cold weather outer wear for BDUs.  I realize that 2/3rds of the country probably doesn't care about this all that much.  But the other 1/3rd care about it a lot. 

There is not a good, true cold weather outer garment solution for wear with BDUs.  The field jacket is not adequate for real cold weather climates in the North and they're not very readily available.  Gore-Tex jacket is too lightweight.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 08:47:16 PM
Black Fleece for wear with Corporate-style working uniforms.

Tactical pants now explicitly authorized with golf shirt.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 08:53:03 PM
Why does it take 3 years to remove a patch?  30 days from approval ought to be plenty.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 08:56:18 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 08:53:03 PM
Why does it take 3 years to remove a patch?  30 days from approval ought to be plenty.

Maybe that will tie into the ABU transition?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: A.Member on December 31, 2013, 08:59:59 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 08:53:03 PM
Why does it take 3 years to remove a patch?  30 days from approval ought to be plenty.
Don't know but, in addition to those already mentioned, it seems the ARCHER patch should be retired at this point as well.

Also, clarification is needed on the wear of a unit patch on the right shoulder of the USAF-style flight suit.  The statement at the end of 8.2.4.5 seems to be in conflict with Attachment 4 it references: 

Quote8.2.4.5 Right Sleeve. An authorized patch contained as outlined in Attachment 4 regulation may be worn, except organizational patches for groups, squadrons or flights are not approved for wear.

Attachment 4 indicates allow of unit patches on the right sleeve of the flight suit.

Allowing for wear of the unit patch makes complete sense but clarification between the two is needed.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 09:01:38 PM
5.2.1.3.1.1 - "When wearing the blue BDU cap, officers will wear metal, or embroidered rank insignia on dark blue cloth, centered ½ inch above the visor. "
--
6.2.12.2 - "Officers will center rank on the front of the [blue BDU] cap.  Officers and cadet officers will wear embroidered grade insignia on dark blue material."   

These two sections seem to contradict each other slightly, in so much that 5.2.1.3.1.1 said SM officers can wear metal pin-on rank insignia on the Blue BDU cap, and 6.2.12.2 implies they can't.

For the record, this is a non-issue for me personally, since I'm in PAWG.  Orange ballcaps for everyone!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ranviper on December 31, 2013, 09:07:05 PM
Quote from: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:30:25 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 07:27:13 PM
Blue BDU - Black undershirt now required.

And the photo shows a white shirt...

None of the photos are final yet. It will probably be replaced.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 09:12:23 PM
I got the impression that the photos were like the credits at the beginning of Monty Python's the Holy Grail. Completed at great expense, and at the last minute. ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on December 31, 2013, 09:14:09 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 09:12:23 PM
I got the impression that the photos were like the credits at the beginning of Monty Python's the Holy Grail. Completed at great expense, and at the last minute. ;)

But where are the llamas?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 09:15:27 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 09:14:09 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 09:12:23 PM
I got the impression that the photos were like the credits at the beginning of Monty Python's the Holy Grail. Completed at great expense, and at the last minute. ;)

But where are the llamas?

With the møøse
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 09:16:10 PM
Quote from: 4fhoward on December 31, 2013, 06:35:15 PM
Any guesses how long this thread will end up being?

My guess is 22 pages.

By tomorrow at noon
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 09:22:46 PM
Quote from: a2capt on December 31, 2013, 08:07:15 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 06:28:52 PMThe lighting on the "new" photos is terrible, as expected when yo take pictures in a banquet hall.
Sigh. totally called it. Yellow hotel lighting just sucks. The blue is almost black. Cutting off heads is a good idea, puts the focus on what's supposed to be there.

Wow - I will accept that it's nit-picking since the they indicate in two different places the photos are being worked on,
but seriously, what they have is just terrible.

Bad posture, crooked insignia, crooked nametags,  inconsistent hand position, ill-fitting uniforms or without proper shirt under the jacket,
improperly placed insignia, bad gig lines, blurry.

Again, understood these are not the finals, and probably why they aren't done, but all of this needs to be addressed.

And this whole issue is completely unnecessary if they would use diagrams instead of photos.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 09:27:32 PM
Hydro packs, canteen belts, and similar prohibited from dress uniforms - pretty common at most encampments.

Patches done after approval have to meet USAF guidelines.

Guard ribbons not authorized.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: BillB on December 31, 2013, 09:29:08 PM
Since tomorrow is a holiday, does that mean the Draft ICL won't be out till Thursday

OK people that's a joke, don't flame me for it.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: CAPAPRN on December 31, 2013, 09:30:54 PM
Check out the section on headgear. States the Blue Beret should be worn with appropriate device UNLESS earned at Blue Beret, when it will be worn with Blue Beret patch. But, they are not listing this as a change or describing what uniforms it can be worn with. Why would anyone be wearing a Blue Beret who hasn't gone to blue beret???
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 09:32:58 PM
You can call the blazer anything you like, but it's not a "service uniform".
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 09:35:57 PM
Quote from: CAPAPRN on December 31, 2013, 09:30:54 PMWhy would anyone be wearing a Blue Beret who hasn't gone to blue beret???

We've got wings who think it's a good idea to wear a beret for GTMs.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 09:47:34 PM
MBU still required for all members, short sleeve blues or aviator whites for all seniors.

Still the prohibition regarding mandating anything but blues for cadets unless issued.

Canonizes NESA MAS flight uniform (shorts).

HMRS grads can wear grade insignia on orange ball cap (why?).

Specifies white cord for NCC competition teams or acting as CG.

Still can't use bayonets (darn).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 09:52:02 PM
Have to submit respective orders for military aviation badges (not just "I said so.")

Cadets can now short-stack to their highest achievement.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on December 31, 2013, 09:56:54 PM
Looks like Sq CCs can't establish unit caps either.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 10:00:33 PM
Unit and Group CC badges still contain the incorrect MAJCOM and the HAP Arnold wings
which are no longer approved for CAP use.

Hopefully the aircrew wings are a "work in progress" "AC" in the center is kind of a Navy thing.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Grumpy on December 31, 2013, 10:01:08 PM
"Cadets can now short-stack to their highest achievement"

Good thing, dang kids have more ribbons than the old guy.   

Just kidding, just kidding   ;D
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Grumpy on December 31, 2013, 10:06:07 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 10:00:33 PM
Unit and Group CC badges still contain the incorrect MAJCOM and the HAP Arnold wings
which are no longer approved for CAP use.

Hopefully the aircrew wings are a "work in progress" "AC" in the center is kind of a Navy thing.

I think it's a great idea.  Those photographers have to work just as hard as the observers to qualify for flight crew.  Too bad the scanners can't get wings or maybe just have the AC wings apply to them as well.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on December 31, 2013, 10:10:26 PM
On an aside, it's interesting that they put an online comment submission application in the eServices announcement. I guess that means when someone points out a misspelled word or gramatical error, it doesn't need to go through the chain of command.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 10:11:55 PM
Presumably anyone not an MO or MP would wear these, which I also support, a lot
of missions thee days are focused on the back seat crew.

I'm just hoping that the wings get better before they are done.  The CGAux a/c wings are nice.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 10:26:25 PM
This is what we should have for the graphics, not photos.

Simple to fix and update, no personalities, very clear and easy to use:

(http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/1733/tgjf.jpg)

Chuck Corway (Alphasigu) had the idea with help from others locally.
They are exactly what this manual needs.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JoeTomasone on December 31, 2013, 10:40:47 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 07:27:13 PM
Blue BDU - Black undershirt now required.

One section permits brown for the woodland BDU (5.1.2.1), but permits only black in two others (5.1.2.4, 6.4.6.1.2.1).

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ranviper on December 31, 2013, 10:45:33 PM
I like the black fleece idea. Similar to the sage green fleece I had in the Army with velcro name tapes and rank, except in black. Nice. Vanguard needs to get the dark blue name tapes for the BBDU's and perhaps with velcro for the fleeces as soon as this thing goes live, I wanna order them right away. haha.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 10:47:27 PM
Quote from: CAPAPRN on December 31, 2013, 09:30:54 PMWhy would anyone be wearing a Blue Beret who hasn't gone to blue beret???

Blue Beret doesn't have a lock on the hat. ....
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on December 31, 2013, 10:48:05 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 09:32:58 PM
You can call the blazer anything you like, but it's not a "service uniform".

No, it is not, and we are still not given anything to wear with the G/W kit for cold weather (pullover jumper)...or a hat other than the goofy baseball cap which is more appropriate for polos than a "dressy" uniform.

Still, much of what I predicted - no deviation from the status quo - is in place.  I had hoped I would be wrong.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JoeTomasone on December 31, 2013, 10:48:12 PM
We also finally do not have to hunt down blue belts with open black buckles for the BDUs anymore - or pay Vanguard's high price for them; we can use the black Army web or rigger's belt.

5.1.2.6 Belt and Buckle. Dark blue or black, 1 ¼-inch woven cotton web, solid or woven
elastic belt with black metal tip end and plain (open faced) black buckle. Black tip may
extend up to 1 inch beyond the buckle, facing to the wearer's left (men) or facing wearer's
right or left (women). A black, one-piece rigger style, nylon, web belt (1 ¾ inch
wide) may be worn
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Mitchell 1969 on December 31, 2013, 11:04:34 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 08:30:43 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:28:35 PM
Thoughts:

Disappointed that you still can't wear the flight cap or military ribbons with the G/Ws.


You shouldn't wear military ribbons on non-military clothing. Simple as that. G/Ws are not a military uniform.  More or less the same goes for the flight cap. You're mixing military and civilian clothing. (seriously)

Cops wear military ribbons all over the country. As do VFW color guards, bikers in leather vests and lotsa others. In fact, a few years ago, a Secretary of Defense actually encouraged the practice of wearing military ribbons/medals on civilian clothes.

One of these days.....CAP will find itself explaining why a MOH holder can't wear the ribbon simply because his shirt is white. And the explanation will sound silly.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 11:06:24 PM
Doesn't make it right,  Bernie.  We are specifically told that mixing military and civilian is supposed to be verboten. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 11:08:28 PM
And none of those organizations is beholden to a military service.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on December 31, 2013, 11:09:29 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 11:06:24 PM
Doesn't make it right,  Bernie.  We are specifically told that mixing military and civilian is supposed to be verboten.

Then why is the military flight cap allowed with the blue civilian flight suit?

Why is the blue Air Force tie allowed with the civilian G/W kit?

Why is the blue Air Force cardigan sweater allowed with civilian "corporate" kit?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 11:18:16 PM
You can wear the flight cap with the blue flight suit? Since when? 

The AF tie,  well it's a blue tie.  ;) if it had Hap Arnold wings on it,  different matter. 

I agree, mixing the sweater and G/W seems to run counter.  Then again,  some components of the uniform are specifically allowed for wear with civilian clothes. Not sure if that is one.  ;)

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 11:21:07 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 11:18:16 PM
You can wear the flight cap with the blue flight suit? Since when? 

Forever, going back to the light blue nomex (not the smurf).

It's currently approved for the dark blue nomex, haven't checked on the draft.

Edit: checked, no longer approved.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 11:22:59 PM
Too bad you can't wear foreign civilian decorations on any uniform...I'd love to see people try to figure out what this one is:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/ACM_ribbon.png)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 11:24:28 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 11:22:59 PM
Too bad you can't wear foreign civilian decorations on any uniform...I'd love to see people try to figure out what this one is:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/ACM_ribbon.png)

French Crayola Theater?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 11:24:38 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 11:21:07 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 11:18:16 PM
You can wear the flight cap with the blue flight suit? Since when? 

Forever, going back to the light blue nomex (not the smurf).

It's currently approved for the dark blue nomex, haven't checked on the draft.
Only headgear approved for the corp flight suit is...the Baseball Cap.

But at least they removed the useless distinction between the blue flightsuit and the utility coveralls...now it's a flight suit in either nomex or poly-cotton.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 11:25:10 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 11:24:28 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on December 31, 2013, 11:22:59 PM
Too bad you can't wear foreign civilian decorations on any uniform...I'd love to see people try to figure out what this one is:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/ACM_ribbon.png)

French Crayola Theater?
Alberta Centennial Medal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta_Centennial_Medal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta_Centennial_Medal)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on December 31, 2013, 11:48:06 PM
It is beyond me that a baseball cap is still regarded as being appropriate for a non-work uniform like the G/W kit.

Etymologically speaking, a baseball cap is any cap you can wear while playing baseball.

Also...authorised or not, I remember seeing the flight cap quite frequently with the smurf suit.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on December 31, 2013, 11:56:04 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on December 31, 2013, 11:48:06 PM
Also...authorised or not, I remember seeing the flight cap quite frequently with the smurf suit.

WIWAC , that was the case.  That went away at some point in the 1990s.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 01, 2014, 12:21:24 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on December 31, 2013, 11:48:06 PM
It is beyond me that a baseball cap is still regarded as being appropriate for a non-work uniform like the G/W kit.

It really isn't, and the clear intention is no hat a t all with the G/W.  The ball cap is a compromise for those people
who insist on a hat, or wear a dress uniform on a flight line, etc.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: skymaster on January 01, 2014, 12:46:59 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 10:00:33 PM
Unit and Group CC badges still contain the incorrect MAJCOM and the HAP Arnold wings
which are no longer approved for CAP use.

As luck would have it, I discussed this very matter (along with several other related questions about 39-1) with Susie Parker at our Wing Conference a few years ago, where she was participating in a Q & A roundtable about CAP Personnel matters. Per her, the reason for that MAJCOM and Hap Arnold wing design not being changed, was that that specific  design was the one that had already been approved all the way up the chain, up through CAP-USAF, Air University, AETC, and the Air Staff, because the Air Staff wanted it to be sufficiently distinctive in design from the active duty Commander's device. Since it had been approved as sufficiently distinctive enough by the Air Staff, everyone else in the chain felt it was better to just leave it as it is, because a change of any kind in the approved design would have to go ALL the way up the chain again for approval by all echelons that approved the original design.

As an aside, a friend of mine who is a legal officer on the Air Force side explained it this way, and it makes sense: the new Command emblem that has "Civil Air Patrol" in the scrollwork, and no "US" on the shield is an emblem that Civil Air Patrol, as a private nonprofit corporation, has exclusive rights to. The old Command emblem, with the "U.S. Air Force Auxiliary" scrollwork, however, does not enjoy quite the same level of exclusivity, as the Institute of Heraldry and the Air Force hold certain reserved rights in that area, since the words "U.S. Air Force" are used upon it. Also, not to put too fine a point on it, since the AF does have some legal rights in this area, they can exercise those rights by saying "this is what we consider the emblem of the Air Force Auxiliary to be". All one has to do is look at the wording on the plaque in front of the CAP plane on display in front of First Air Force HQ at Tyndall AF, to see that the AF considers our name to be the "Air Force Auxiliary (AF AUX), better known as Civil Air Patrol (CAP)".

(http://i.imgur.com/vt6tDi7.jpg)

And, as far as the AF Public Affairs people are concerned, they still think that the old  "U.S. Air Force Auxiliary" Command Emblem is current, because they are still using it in recent news releases, and it is still the one in their PAO graphics kit. I am not saying that is right or wrong, merely that that is a still very recent practice by Ma Blue.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: skymaster on January 01, 2014, 01:23:18 AM
For reference, this is the banner provided by AF Public Affairs for use with CAP related news in AF publications, that was in use as recently as a few weeks ago.

(http://i.imgur.com/hoL8CnM.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 01, 2014, 01:24:01 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 09:27:32 PM
Guard ribbons not authorized.


Guard ribbons have never been authorized.  No change here.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: MSG Mac on January 01, 2014, 01:28:55 AM
  Let's get rid of the Wing patches.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: RogueLeader on January 01, 2014, 01:36:32 AM
Quote from: MSG Mac on January 01, 2014, 01:28:55 AM
  Let's get rid of the Wing patches.

At least they aren't mandatory again.
but yes, lets model the AF as closely as possible.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 01, 2014, 02:00:31 AM
In attachment 4, they have the NCSA patches for Right shoulder or Left/Right pocket.  However, there is not anywhere I see that limits the NCSA patch to 1.  I have a feeling I am going to see a cadet walking around with an NCSA patch on the right shoulder, left pocket, and right pocket.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 01, 2014, 02:27:04 AM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 08:30:43 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:28:35 PM
Thoughts:

Disappointed that you still can't wear the flight cap or military ribbons with the G/Ws.


You shouldn't wear military ribbons on non-military clothing. Simple as that. G/Ws are not a military uniform.  More or less the same goes for the flight cap. You're mixing military and civilian clothing. (seriously)

Then why do the Service's have regulations to cover wearing their decorations on Civilian clothing?  ???
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 01, 2014, 02:38:20 AM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on December 31, 2013, 11:04:34 PM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 08:30:43 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:28:35 PM
Thoughts:

Disappointed that you still can't wear the flight cap or military ribbons with the G/Ws.


You shouldn't wear military ribbons on non-military clothing. Simple as that. G/Ws are not a military uniform.  More or less the same goes for the flight cap. You're mixing military and civilian clothing. (seriously)

Cops wear military ribbons all over the country. As do VFW color guards, bikers in leather vests and lotsa others. In fact, a few years ago, a Secretary of Defense actually encouraged the practice of wearing military ribbons/medals on civilian clothes.

One of these days.....CAP will find itself explaining why a MOH holder can't wear the ribbon simply because his shirt is white. And the explanation will sound silly.

Or a CAP member who is awarded an Air Medal... and can't wear it on G/Ws.  :-\

(Yes I know that hasn't happened in a long while... but it could happen.)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 01, 2014, 02:51:42 AM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 08:30:43 PM
You shouldn't wear military ribbons on non-military clothing. Simple as that. G/Ws are not a military uniform.  More or less the same goes for the flight cap. You're mixing military and civilian clothing. (seriously)

For those wondering.  The only thing I see is that it says medals and not ribbons, but realistically not a problem.  Unless that is the actual reason.  We do not wear medals (except the Mess Dress).

Quote from: AR 670-1
30–6. Wear of medals on civilian clothes
Retired personnel and former members of the Army (as described above) may wear all categories of medals described in this regulation on appropriate civilian clothing. This includes clothes designed for veteran and patriotic organizations on Veteran's Day, Memorial Day, and Armed Forces Day, as well as at formal occasions of ceremony and social functions of a military nature. Personnel may wear either full-size or miniature medals. Personnel who wear medals on civilian clothes should place the medals on the clothing in approximately the same location and in the same manner as for the Army uniform, so they look similar to medals worn on the Army uniform.

Quote from: AFI 36-2903
11.8. Placement of Medals on Civilian Dress Coat or Jacket.
11.8.1. Civilian Evening Dress (men). Wear miniature medals parallel to the ground on wearer's left side of coat or jacket and align the top of the suspension medal of the top row with (not above) the top of the pocket.
11.8.2. Civilian Black Tie. Wear miniature medals parallel to the ground on wearer's left side of coat or jacket and center the holding bar of the bottom row of medals immediately above the pocket.
11.8.3. Wear of miniature medals is designed for a mounting bar.
11.8.4. Do not wear pocket-handkerchief, when wearing medals above the left pocket. 11.8.5. The Medal of Honor is worn in regular-size only, from the neckband ribbon.
11.8.5.1. Place the ribbon around the neck outside the shirt collar and inside the coat or jacket collar.
11.8.5.2. Wear authorized foreign neck decorations beneath the Medal of Honor.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: sarmed1 on January 01, 2014, 02:54:19 AM
Interesting: 12232 minimum basic corporate.....it says only authorized for those not meeting weight standards? Are they meaning that everyone else must wear usaf? (And the "only" was bold faced)

I know it was mentioned somewhere here but couldn't find brown tshirts with bdu's only black?
Black fleece only with bbdu?...seems kind of unfair unless they plan to go with sage only come abu's and don't want to have to worry about a phase out issue
No rain gear for fdu? Even in the usaf gortex is ok with fdu as a rain gear option. Guess flight crew only come out in fair weather......

I continue to disagree with the "weight" issue.  The usaf eliminated the max weight standard years ago and instead uses the reasonable appearance in uniform standard.  Since the 39-1 puts accountability for standard enforcement on commanders I think it would be the "reasonable appearance" standard would be easier and more user friendly than weigh-ins.

MK
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Fubar on January 01, 2014, 03:46:59 AM
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 01, 2014, 02:54:19 AMI continue to disagree with the "weight" issue.  The usaf eliminated the max weight standard years ago and instead uses the reasonable appearance in uniform standard.  Since the 39-1 puts accountability for standard enforcement on commanders I think it would be the "reasonable appearance" standard would be easier and more user friendly than weigh-ins.

Although against regulation, essentially most commanders are using a "reasonable appearance" standard and failing so badly at it - the regulation now includes a suggestion to perform weigh-ins.

But don't worry, it's just a suggestion, so that SQ/CC who's a tad hefty won't even think of bringing a scale to the squadron.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LGM30GMCC on January 01, 2014, 04:00:39 AM
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 01, 2014, 02:54:19 AM
Interesting: 12232 minimum basic corporate.....it says only authorized for those not meeting weight standards? Are they meaning that everyone else must wear usaf? (And the "only" was bold faced)

I know it was mentioned somewhere here but couldn't find brown tshirts with bdu's only black?
Black fleece only with bbdu?...seems kind of unfair unless they plan to go with sage only come abu's and don't want to have to worry about a phase out issue
No rain gear for fdu? Even in the usaf gortex is ok with fdu as a rain gear option. Guess flight crew only come out in fair weather......

I continue to disagree with the "weight" issue.  The usaf eliminated the max weight standard years ago and instead uses the reasonable appearance in uniform standard.  Since the 39-1 puts accountability for standard enforcement on commanders I think it would be the "reasonable appearance" standard would be easier and more user friendly than weigh-ins.

MK

The USAF does have max weight or h/w BMI measurements, they just aren't in the uniform reg. They are in the regs to get in the USAF, and a waist measure, or BMI, that if you fail it 4 times in 1 calendar year automatically requires a board to review whether you are retained in the USAF at all.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 01, 2014, 04:42:19 AM
Yup, and since we don't use any kind of metric for determining whether you can continue to serve (Pay NHQ money annually), the only thing we have is "can you wear this uniform, or that one, here's how you can tell."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: James Shaw on January 01, 2014, 04:48:37 AM
Quote from: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:05:04 PM
Removed American flag patch from BDUs (attachement 9)
QuoteEliminated American Flag Patch
on BDUs and Blue Field
Uniform
1 Jan 2017

Attachemnt 7 shows "aircrew" wings? is that new? I couldn't find other mention of it in a search...

Yes this is new
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 01, 2014, 04:52:53 AM
Quote from: capsafety on January 01, 2014, 04:48:37 AM
Quote from: Walkman on December 31, 2013, 07:05:04 PM
Removed American flag patch from BDUs (attachement 9)
QuoteEliminated American Flag Patch
on BDUs and Blue Field
Uniform
1 Jan 2017

Attachemnt 7 shows "aircrew" wings? is that new? I couldn't find other mention of it in a search...

Yes this is new

It will be interesting to see what the requirements are for it and if there will be a retroactive component.  For example, if it is awarded to Mission Scanners, will those that were qualified in the past be eligible.  I guess we will just have to wait and find out.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 01, 2014, 04:53:34 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on December 31, 2013, 11:48:06 PM
It is beyond me that a baseball cap is still regarded as being appropriate for a non-work uniform like the G/W kit.

Etymologically speaking, a baseball cap is any cap you can wear while playing baseball.

Quite frankly, wearing a baseball cap with anything other than shorts and a t-shirt makes one look like a tool.  I guess that's what they want with those who wear the G/W's.

Also, if they're going to continue to make us suffer with the "Civil Air Patrol" baseball cap, I wish they would actually give us a specific description of what it looks like so at least we're uniform.  6.2.11 is maddeningly vague and Vanguard has a couple different caps for sale.

6.2.11 CAP Baseball Cap. Wing and region commanders may prescribe color, unit designation, and/or emblem to be on the baseball cap. Appropriate civilian headgear may be worn during inclement weather. No rank insignia may be worn on this cap, and no emblems (clouds, darts, etc.) may be worn on the cap visor.

"Appropriate civilian headgear"?  So, fedoras are still a-okay!

Quote from: Fubar on January 01, 2014, 03:46:59 AM
But don't worry, it's just a suggestion, so that SQ/CC who's a tad hefty won't even think of bringing a scale to the squadron.

Or anybody in Wing staff or above....

Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 08:30:43 PM
You shouldn't wear military ribbons on non-military clothing. Simple as that.

I earned them just as much as the guy who's a little younger and/or thinner than I am.

Quote from: CyBorg on December 31, 2013, 10:48:05 PM
No, it is not, and we are still not given anything to wear with the G/W kit for cold weather (pullover jumper)...or a hat other than the goofy baseball cap which is more appropriate for polos than a "dressy" uniform.

Yes, I was disappointed by this as well.  There are several sections devoted for cold-weather outerwear with the AF-blues, but pretty much nothing on the G/W's (the aquamarine blue windbreaker?  Really?).

Quote from: CyBorg on December 31, 2013, 10:48:05 PM
Still, much of what I predicted - no deviation from the status quo - is in place.  I had hoped I would be wrong.

If I was a cynical* person, I would guess this is because the people writing it don't have to wear the G/W's with the rest of us plebes, so it just wasn't given the same amount of thought.

(* read: realistic)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 01, 2014, 04:58:53 AM
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 01, 2014, 02:54:19 AM
I continue to disagree with the "weight" issue. 

The only thing I disagree with CAP's weight standards is that it does not allow for those that are simply "over weight" but have low BMI or low body fat percentages.  Granted this probably does not happen very often (okay almost never for CAP).  If a purely muscular person were to join and was "over weight" common sense would say that a commander should not have a problem with letting that person wear the USAF uniform.  However, we know there will be someone out there at some point in time that may actually say "no" to a person like that.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SARDOC on January 01, 2014, 05:58:35 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:55:26 PM
I'm surprised that the Incident Commander badge still ranks lower than the Observer badge. Even the Air Force have given equal standing to some non-aeronautical badges, such as the Space and Cyberspace badges.

I know that when I was Navy and I suspect the Air Force is the same way....The Aviation Badge almost always goes on top.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: sarmed1 on January 01, 2014, 06:00:46 AM
Quote from: LGM30GMCC on January 01, 2014, 04:00:39 AM
...

The USAF does have max weight or h/w BMI measurements, they just aren't in the uniform reg. They are in the regs to get in the USAF, and a waist measure, or BMI, that if you fail it 4 times in 1 calendar year automatically requires a board to review whether you are retained in the USAF at all.
Its the same min/max that all the services have for entry, but there are technically no weight standards enforced in regards to uniform wear.  The girth measurement is part of your pt test, but as long as long as you are under 39" for males and 37" (I think) for females you're a pass regardless of weight (over that and you can still pass on a body fat percent via tape test)

Despite being weighed in for both pt tests and physical exams i haven't met anyone yet that has been counseled or otherwise been put into any kind of weight management programs

MK
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 01, 2014, 08:23:05 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 01, 2014, 04:53:34 AM
Quite frankly, wearing a baseball cap with anything other than shorts and a t-shirt makes one look like a tool.  I guess that's what they want with those who wear the G/W's.

This 39-1 only reinforces the two-tier uniform hierarchy.

The vast, vast majority of people I have known through almost 20 years of CAP have only worn the G/W kit because of height/weight/grooming issues, or they don't want to be bothered with the regs that go with the Air Force uniform.

I have never personally met or spoken to anyone who believes the grey/white to be an attractive uniform and are enthusiastic about its design, cut or colour.  I'm not saying those members do not exist, but I have never met them.  Most (not all) members I know wear it somewhat begrudgingly.

It seems National does not want us to have a "distinctive" uniform that actually looks good and says aviation when you see it.  I don't mean military aviation necessarily, but who looks at the G/W and thinks, "that person belongs to an aviation organisation" without reading the fine print on the nameplate?

Quote from: Panache on January 01, 2014, 04:53:34 AM
Also, if they're going to continue to make us suffer with the "Civil Air Patrol" baseball cap, I wish they would actually give us a specific description of what it looks like so at least we're uniform.  6.2.11 is maddeningly vague and Vanguard has a couple different caps for sale.

The ones that Vanguard have, quite honestly, in my very biased and unobjective opinion, in two words, suck vacuum.

One could easily take the plain blue "ball cap" they sell, stick a CAP crest (anything from the current command shield to one of the ancient, obsolete ones) on it and have, broadly speaking, a "Civil Air Patrol baseball cap."  Or, there are the ones on Evilbay - garish as anything, but they fit the broadest definition of a "Civil Air Patrol baseball cap."

Although, semantically, strictly speaking, a "baseball cap" must be one that is worn while playing baseball, which is not one of our three mandated missions.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 01, 2014, 08:26:26 AM
Quote from: SARDOC on January 01, 2014, 05:58:35 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:55:26 PM
I'm surprised that the Incident Commander badge still ranks lower than the Observer badge. Even the Air Force have given equal standing to some non-aeronautical badges, such as the Space and Cyberspace badges.

I know that when I was Navy and I suspect the Air Force is the same way....The Aviation Badge almost always goes on top.

Only one badge goes above an aviation badge, chaplain's insignia!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 01, 2014, 08:27:26 AM
Quote from: PHall on January 01, 2014, 08:26:26 AM
Only one badge goes above an aviation badge, chaplain's insignia!

Because they answer to a "higher" authority... 8)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 01, 2014, 03:54:19 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 01, 2014, 02:27:04 AM
Then why do the Service's have regulations to cover wearing their decorations on Civilian clothing?  ???

IIRC, you wear a lapel pin on civvies, not the actual decoration.

I have a little representation of the Army Achievement Medal that is not the actual ribbon or medal.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 01, 2014, 04:20:56 PM
Quote from: Panache on December 31, 2013, 08:03:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:51:35 PM
The wording on specialty track badges is a bit confusing. Are we now going to be allowed to wear three (3) specialty track badges?

Four (4) as far as I can tell, at least with the G/W's.


4.1.9.4.3.2 - (page 54) "CAP Service Specialty Track Badges, Model Rocketry, and NRA Marksmanship Badges (refer to Attachment 4). Wear of these badges is optional. CAP service badges will only be worn by officers and NCOs. Model rocketry and NRA marksmanship badges will only be worn by cadets. The total number of badges worn will not exceed four, to include the above - mentioned aviation and occupational badges. The first badge will be centered on the lower portion of the wearer's left pocket, between the left and right edges and bottom of flap and pocket.

The second badge will be worn in the corresponding location on the wearer's right pocket. If a third badge is authorized, it will be centered ½ inch above the name tag. CAP service badges, if worn, are always worn on the left, with only one being worn. Model rocketry badge will only be worn on the wearer's left pocket. Marksmanship badge is worn centered on the top edge of the left pocket flap. Only one
marksmanship badge may be worn. The National Commander's Staff Badge will always be worn on the wearer's right side. The CAP Senior Advisory Group, Command Council, National Board or National
Executive Committee will always be worn on the left side." (emphasis mine)

The text refers to a third authorized badge, which suggest it could be a specialty track badge since the other badges mentioned in this sections are given specific placements on the uniform. Attachment 4 seems to contradict this and current policy, as it only mentions LP (left pocket) for placement of specialty track badges. They need to clarify and/or correct this contradiction.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 01, 2014, 04:35:57 PM
Quote from: CAPR 39-1 Draft
5.1.2.3 Accoutrements. The total number of badges and patches worn will not exceed eight. The Commander Insignia, rank insignia, cloth name tape, and "Civil Air Patrol" tape do not count against this total. (emphasis mine)

Eclipse is going to love that... Sorry, I couldn't resist!  >:D

Attachment 4 seems to have left out the Safety Patch, even though there's still an image of it on page 150.

They finally removed the embroidered CAP cutouts from the field jacket epaulet (a welcome change); page 135.

I don't like that they're referencing to the Ground Team and Incident Commander Badges as "occupational badges", as they're not; they're operational specialty badges.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 04:59:15 PM
Hmm, spent two hours digesting this and so far, I like.  I have submitted two change requests to national already as well.  :)  Here they are:

9.6.1.1 - bans wear of boots with service dress uniform.  This should read "bloused boots with service dress uniform" as boots are authorized in the service dress uniform in 6.4.1.4/6.4.2.4

10.2.4 - the word worn is missing ...may be permanently "worn"...

Only two out of 151 pages, not bad!

A lot of reserved room for ABUs to be dropped in.  Including outerwear/covers/etc.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 05:02:42 PM
Hmm, anyone else notice this?   :o

1.4.1
Adult individuals without Grade pursuing officer promotion will wear the USAF-style (except Mess Dress which is not authorized for individuals members without grade) or
Corporate-style uniform as for Officers without any grade insignia.

For example, these individuals will wear the officer-style service coat, with sleeve braid, officer style flight cap, US collar insignia, and gray epaulets without grade insignia.
On USAF-style Utility Uniforms (BDU), these individuals will wear light silver embroidered CAP insignia on blue cloth centered 1 inch from the bottom edge on both sides of the collar. On the
Corporate-style Field Uniform, no collar insignia or grade insignia on the hat will be worn. On the Aviator Combination Uniform, no grade insignia or collar devices will be worn.

1.4.2
Adult individuals without Grade pursuing NCO promotions based on prior military services will wear the USAF-style uniform (except Mess Dress which is not authorized for
individuals without grade) and Corporate uniforms as for NCOs without wearing any grade insignia.

For example, these individuals will wear the service coat without epaulets, flight cap with blue braid, CAP collar insignia, and no epaulets. On USAF-style Utility Uniforms (
BDU), these individuals will wear white embroidered CAP insignia on ultramarine blue cloth centered 1 inch from the bottom edge on both sides of the collar. On the Corporate-
style Field Uniform, no collar insignia or grade insignia on the hat will be worn. On the Aviator Combination Uniform, no grade insignia or collar devices will be worn.

So, will officers have silver/dark blue devices and NCOs have white/ultramarine?  Or is this just a goof up/peek at the new standard for ABUs.  :-\ ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 01, 2014, 05:10:04 PM
Quote from: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 05:02:42 PM
So, will officers have silver/dark blue devices and NCOs have white/ultramarine?  Or is this just a goof up/peek at the new standard for ABUs.  :-\ ;)

It's probably a "goof up". You should submit a comment.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 01, 2014, 05:22:19 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 01, 2014, 05:10:04 PM
Quote from: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 05:02:42 PM
So, will officers have silver/dark blue devices and NCOs have white/ultramarine?  Or is this just a goof up/peek at the new standard for ABUs.  :-\ ;)

It's probably a "goof up". You should submit a comment.

Yes, thats true.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 05:23:50 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 01, 2014, 05:10:04 PM
Quote from: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 05:02:42 PM
So, will officers have silver/dark blue devices and NCOs have white/ultramarine?  Or is this just a goof up/peek at the new standard for ABUs.  :-\ ;)

It's probably a "goof up". You should submit a comment.

Already done.   ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 01, 2014, 05:27:03 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 01, 2014, 03:54:19 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 01, 2014, 02:27:04 AM
Then why do the Service's have regulations to cover wearing their decorations on Civilian clothing?  ???

IIRC, you wear a lapel pin on civvies, not the actual decoration.

I have a little representation of the Army Achievement Medal that is not the actual ribbon or medal.

NIN, this is not true.  Read the AR670-1 quote I posted on page 6.  It states that retired and former Army may wear either miniature or full-size medals on a civilian dress coat.  You wear them in about the same location as you would on a military uniform.

The lapel pin is a hold-over from the past.  In fact, I have seen some Army medal sets that have excluded the lapel pin.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 01, 2014, 05:28:53 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 01, 2014, 05:27:03 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 01, 2014, 03:54:19 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 01, 2014, 02:27:04 AM
Then why do the Service's have regulations to cover wearing their decorations on Civilian clothing?  ???

IIRC, you wear a lapel pin on civvies, not the actual decoration.

I have a little representation of the Army Achievement Medal that is not the actual ribbon or medal.

NIN, this is not true.  Read the AR670-1 quote I posted on page 6.  It states that retired and former Army may wear either miniature or full-size medals on a civilian dress coat.  You wear them in about the same location as you would on a military uniform.

The lapel pin is a hold-over from the past.  In fact, I have seen some Army medal sets that have excluded the lapel pin.

my apologies, I didn't read that fully.

Hmm. Changes my thinking a bit.

However, I will say that I think "big mother blue" may have something to say about "military decorations worn on the CAP-distinctive uniforms."  Remember, they did kill the TPU, too. :)

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 01, 2014, 05:30:28 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 10:26:25 PM
This is what we should have for the graphics, not photos.

Simple to fix and update, no personalities, very clear and easy to use:

(http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/1733/tgjf.jpg)

Chuck Corway (AlphaSigOU) had the idea with help from others locally.
They are exactly what this manual needs.


I worked with Lt Col Preston Perrenot of Nevada Wing on improved uniform illustrations a few years back. I haven't been in touch with him in a while, but will try to get in touch with him and see if we can get these illustrations incorporated. But it's going to be an uphill battle...

Attached are a couple of illustrations we worked on. Please be aware that these comply with the current CAPM 39-1 and not the 39-1 up for comment and review.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 01, 2014, 05:32:59 PM
Just hope the comments on this are not like that Governance Survey ..

Where we basically never head squat about it again, despite all the promises that that wouldn't be the case, yet it was, because all we got was gaffed off until the actual governance change happened, at which point the "survey" became moot in their eyes.

Over all, my general impression of this new draft/format is "Looks like they took the 10 ton hammer approach".

Yes, lose the photos of people. Just use graphic examples. Just make them a little more scale/realistic than those of the insignia on the BDU are. All that needs to say is "centered", an inch back from the leading edge. Many people get hung up trying to accomplish how it looks and find it's not possible, so they come up with all kinds of interpretations. The cut in the diagram isn't even the same. The insignia is a lot larger and the surface area is a lot smaller.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: brent.teal on January 01, 2014, 05:34:09 PM
I am wondering why they will allow a boonie style cap for the blue BDU but not for the af-style BDU?  I am thinking of outside activities not normal wear of course.  When I lived in Texas as a cadet we did wear them, though probably against regs.   

I do like the illustration.  It may need some work but its an improvement over the pictures.  At a minimum get some Mannequins and take details close ups. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 05:40:32 PM
OK, point of discussion:

11.2.1 Precedence. The general order of precedence for wear of awards is 1) US Federal
Awards, 2) CAP Awards, 3) JROTC/ROTC awards, and 4) Foreign Awards.

But then why this:

e.g. 4.1.1.3.5 - If a military aviation badge (aeronautical, space or cyberspace) is worn, it will be
worn in the second position.

SO.....if the ribbons/medals take precedent, why doesn't the wings/occupational devices?  This has bugged me for a while.   ???
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 01, 2014, 05:40:40 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 01, 2014, 05:28:53 PMHowever, I will say that I think "big mother blue" may have something to say about "military decorations worn on the CAP-distinctive uniforms."  Remember, they did kill the TPU, too. :)

From what little I've gleaned about the TPU debacle (the rest apparently is stlll classified TOP SECRET/FRD/NOFORN/REL TO GOBN) Ma Blue had some agita over the U.S. cutouts and grade insignia on the right side of the flight cap, and removing those little bugaboos kept her (temporarily)happy. Apparently after HWSRN was removed from office a wholesale purge of the former regime was in order, and the TPU was but one of the victims put up against the wall to face a firing squad. Somebody at echelons above reality will probably want to clarify the real reason but other than word from official channels, we may have to be satisfied with the official version.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 01, 2014, 05:42:39 PM
Quote from: brent.teal on January 01, 2014, 05:34:09 PM
I am wondering why they will allow a boonie style cap for the blue BDU but not for the af-style BDU?  I am thinking of outside activities not normal wear of course.  When I lived in Texas as a cadet we did wear them, though probably against regs.   

I do like the illustration.  It may need some work but its an improvement over the pictures.  At a minimum get some Mannequins and take details close ups.

Ma Blue sez nix on boonie hat with BDU. It's been brought up the chain of command several times but turned down every time.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 01, 2014, 05:48:29 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 01, 2014, 05:30:28 PM
I worked with Lt Col Preston Perrenot of Nevada Wing on improved uniform illustrations a few years back. I haven't been in touch with him in a while, but will try to get in touch with him and see if we can get these illustrations incorporated. But it's going to be an uphill battle...

Attached are a couple of illustrations we worked on. Please be aware that these comply with the current CAPM 39-1 and not the 39-1 up for comment and review.

These are pretty nice! Definitely much better than the new pictures they've taken so far. But I concur with you about the uphill battle. Since they already started taking the pictures, and it seems they're trying to emulate AFI 36-2903, I doubt they'll go in this direction. It's a shame. The quality of the pictures taken (to include the poses, uniform wear, etc.) don't even begin to match those on AFI 36-2903. I think illustrations of this quality is the way to go. I wish they would at least improve the quality of the current illustrations, which are very poor to say the least.

(edited to remove Eclipse post with image to avoid confusion, as my reply referred to image attachments posted by AlphaSigOU)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 01, 2014, 05:53:25 PM
Quote from: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 05:40:32 PMe.g. 4.1.1.3.5 - If a military aviation badge (aeronautical, space or cyberspace) is worn, it will be worn in the second position.
Because those are not for our service. You can be an Air Force pilot all you want. But your not flying our birds without being 5/91'ed.

On the ribbons, it would be kind of hard to say that anything earned RM is outranked by auxiliary service. Since ribbons are not duty designating devices. Though one might argue wings are the same way, but no.

Quote from: brent.teal on January 01, 2014, 05:34:09 PMI am wondering why they will allow a boonie style cap for the blue BDU but not for the af-style BDU?
Something about rangers, instructors, SNCOs, reserved for, and all that kind of stuff. ;)

Forget it.

Personal opinion: I think that hat looks as dopey as the beret, just a lot sloppier.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 01, 2014, 06:00:13 PM
Some of the illustrations in 39-1 date back to the 70s!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: tribalelder on January 01, 2014, 06:00:37 PM
CONTENT
Good ideas-
Weigh in procedure
Dark blue tapes and insignia backgrounds on utility uniforms
Fleece outerwear
Knit cap
Winter headgear

Not convinced-
Boots to be required w/ BBDU

New reg 151 pages, up from 130. Have we grown 16% since last 39-1 ?  Maybe our aggregate weight is up 16% since then.






Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: brent.teal on January 01, 2014, 06:12:59 PM
Any idea what this black watch cap is?  They don't even have an place holder for a picture for it. 
If we can't wear a boonie hat with BDU's how about a tilly hat.(http://media.backwoods.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/650x650/4d0c9eba7576d384ac829d4b2a95984a/t/i/tilley_ltm6_khakiolive.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: BillB on January 01, 2014, 06:16:20 PM
To bad that CAP is not following up with the concept of a professional NCO corp. Since 1947 USAF was happy with CAP NCOs wearing standard USAF stripes, now CAP comes up with a new version meaning the NCO has to buy several new sets of stripes. And the retired CMSgt can no longer wear his NCO Mess Dress, because CAP prohibits it. Twqenty years ago USAF got rid of the ultramarine blue, but CAP clings to it but requires navy blue for the BDU. Why not go to navy blue for all insigna background and patches (name and CAP on BDUs) And there is mass confusion on the beret, it seems to indicate all cadets can wear it, not just Blue Beret cadets. But whatever I think means nothing to the powers that be.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 01, 2014, 06:18:34 PM
Quote from: brent.teal on January 01, 2014, 06:12:59 PM
Any idea what this black watch cap is?  They don't even have an place holder for a picture for it. 

Black stocking cap.  Typically made of black fleece.  Look up Army Black Watch cap.

Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 01, 2014, 06:00:13 PM
Some of the illustrations in 39-1 date back to the 70s!

I happened to be going through the AFI 36-2903 and noticed that a number of the general illustrations in the draft 39-1 are the same as the USAF uniform regulations.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 06:19:08 PM
Quote from: a2capt on January 01, 2014, 05:53:25 PM
Quote from: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 05:40:32 PMe.g. 4.1.1.3.5 - If a military aviation badge (aeronautical, space or cyberspace) is worn, it will be worn in the second position.
Because those are not for our service. You can be an Air Force pilot all you want. But your not flying our birds without being 5/91'ed.

On the ribbons, it would be kind of hard to say that anything earned RM is outranked by auxiliary service. Since ribbons are not duty designating devices. Though one might argue wings are the same way, but no.

As wings are awarded for life, they are both duty and award.  Rules of Precedence are not based on current ability or standing, they are based on overall precedence, period.  Just because you are wearing CAP Master MP wings, doesn't mean you are current or could/should fly any of "our birds" either, especially if a pilot is medically disqualified to fly.  That doesn't change the order either. 

Now, a better argument against my point would be that current aeronautical goes above the past aeronautical.   >:D ;)  But I don't agree with that either.  LOL

Simple rule, USAF is above CAP in everything (as our parent service should be).  So, why are the wings the only exception?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 01, 2014, 06:32:09 PM
Quote from: JoeTomasone on December 31, 2013, 10:48:12 PM
We also finally do not have to hunt down blue belts with open black buckles for the BDUs anymore - or pay Vanguard's high price for them; we can use the black Army web or rigger's belt.

5.1.2.6 Belt and Buckle. Dark blue or black, 1 ¼-inch woven cotton web, solid or woven
elastic belt with black metal tip end and plain (open faced) black buckle. Black tip may
extend up to 1 inch beyond the buckle, facing to the wearer's left (men) or facing wearer's
right or left (women). A black, one-piece rigger style, nylon, web belt (1 ¾ inch
wide) may be worn

I wore my Rigger Style Black Belt Anyway, before the New Regs  :P, Glad I was Right  ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 01, 2014, 06:41:21 PM
Quote from: BillB on January 01, 2014, 06:16:20 PM
Twqenty years ago USAF got rid of the ultramarine blue, but CAP clings to it but requires navy blue for the BDU. Why not go to navy blue for all insigna background and patches (name and CAP on BDUs)

Personal wild guess:  because when (if) ABU's are announced, it will also be announced that woodland-pattern BDUs are to be phased out, and there's no point on having everybody spend time and money getting tapes and insignia replaced on a uniform which will be phased out soon.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 01, 2014, 07:13:37 PM
BTW, to make assembling a canonical reference (or discussing a change) easier:

Call out the reference to the paragraph. All the paragraphs have a wonderful numbering schema. Lets use it. :)

Identify the type of issue:
T = Typo, F = formatting error, G = grammatical error, I =  inconsistency (ie. one para says dark blue, another referring to the same insignia says ultramarine) or P = Policy.

Then call out the issue.

Like so:

"Para 1.2.3.4.  Tattoo & Body Marking.  (T)  "There shall be no no tattoos on the hands."  The word "no" is repeated twice."

or

"Para 4.5.6.7.  (F) Paragraph is at the same level as 4.5.6.6 and 4.5.6.8, but it is not indented the same amount"

When determining an inconsistency, be specific what you mean.  Watch your pronoun usage and such.  Some words (especially "it" and "this")  can cause confusion as to the specific elements you're referring to.

So you might say "Para 10.1.1.1.  (I) Suggests wear of Guard ribbons is ok, but para 10.2.3.4 specifically says it is not allowed." or even "Para 10.1.1.1. Awards.  (I) States in part: "The wear of National Guard & Reserve decorations is authorized," however, para 10.2.3.4 and the footnote on Table 10-2 says "the wear of National Guard awards is prohibited."  Which is it?"

That way we're always sure we're referring to the same things in our discussion.
(and you can bet that the NUC are looking at this thread and building their own list of "oopsies")


Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 01, 2014, 08:07:50 PM
Quote from: BillB on January 01, 2014, 06:16:20 PMTwqenty years ago USAF got rid of the ultramarine blue, but CAP clings to it but requires navy blue for the BDU. Why not go to navy blue for all insigna background and patches (name and CAP on BDUs)
Because the Big V still has inventory to sell. ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 01, 2014, 10:43:42 PM
ALCON,  something to remember as well is that this is the draft publication and not the final product.  This is a huge improvement over what we have had.  But let's provide solid feedback via the channels provided so that we can have an awesome finished product. 

Some things that I like:

Including a fleece for wear
Including a watch cap
Making the Golf shirt not a service equal
Authorizing tac pants
Clear guidance on the 1st Sgt Diamond for cadets

Things I don't like

Graphics need work major
Language should be a bit more clear cut
Not allowing Sq CCs to authorize Sq hats


All in all this draft is better than what we currently have, and there is room for improvement.  But when we provide feedback lets be constructive about it. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 01, 2014, 10:51:48 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 01, 2014, 06:41:21 PM
Quote from: BillB on January 01, 2014, 06:16:20 PM
Twqenty years ago USAF got rid of the ultramarine blue, but CAP clings to it but requires navy blue for the BDU. Why not go to navy blue for all insigna background and patches (name and CAP on BDUs)

Personal wild guess:  because when (if) ABU's are announced, it will also be announced that woodland-pattern BDUs are to be phased out, and there's no point on having everybody spend time and money getting tapes and insignia replaced on a uniform which will be phased out soon.
From what I heard at the National Convention, this is accurate. Since the field uniform will not be going away, it make sense to change it now, rather than wait until the ABU gets approved.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: BHartman007 on January 02, 2014, 12:22:01 AM
I just had a conversation with a lovely gentleman (read that: I quoted a reg, and he called me names) about when it's required to wear a uniform. He maintained he did not have to wear one, because he didn't work with cadets. I sited the current (2005 version) 39-1, which says in table 1-1 members will wear a uniform when attending local functions. He cited the new draft, in section 1.2.3.1, saying that's not required, which it seems not to be. Wearing uniforms to meetings isn't listed in the "optional wear" section, either, leading me to think there's an omission somewhere.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 02, 2014, 12:30:30 AM
Let him quote the draft all he wants it is not regulatory until it's signed and published.  Until the most current is what he has to abide by.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: BHartman007 on January 02, 2014, 12:36:35 AM
I don't mean to ask who was right in the argument, but whether the new one has purposefully or accidentally left out the requirement that a uniform be worn.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: RiverAux on January 02, 2014, 12:51:13 AM
Well, considering that it basically reverts back to the pre-2005 rules I sort of suspect that it was intentional.  Though for the life of me I can't imagine why they would want to do it. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 02, 2014, 01:47:07 AM
Quote from: Papabird on January 01, 2014, 05:40:32 PM
OK, point of discussion:

11.2.1 Precedence. The general order of precedence for wear of awards is 1) US Federal
Awards, 2) CAP Awards, 3) JROTC/ROTC awards, and 4) Foreign Awards.

But then why this:

e.g. 4.1.1.3.5 - If a military aviation badge (aeronautical, space or cyberspace) is worn, it will be
worn in the second position.

SO.....if the ribbons/medals take precedent, why doesn't the wings/occupational devices?  This has bugged me for a while.   ???

When wearing the AF-style uniform, CAP aeronautical ratings and specialty badges take precedence over US military aviation ratings and badges. In the olden days of CAP, US military aeronautical ratings were worn a half-inch over the right pocket of the blues.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JoeTomasone on January 02, 2014, 03:16:16 AM
Just realized this and sent a comment in... 

Quote from: Comment
Language on when the uniform may be worn accidentally eliminates wear during normal CAP activities.

Uniform Wear Required (1.2.3):

Working with cadets
Flying in a CAP aircraft
Conducting business under a CAP mission number
Attending a military or civilian event representing CAP
Touring Washington DC, as part of a CAP activity or conducting CAP business in the National Capitol Area


Wear Optional (1.2.4):

When traveling in an official capacity on commercial air, in CONUS.


Neither required nor optional, and therefore not authorized ("COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. This publication is the sole source for wear instructions and authorized items for various uniform combinations as prescribed within. Variation from this publication (is) not authorized."):

Unit Meetings
Wing/Region/National Conferences
When operating CAP Vehicles
Airshows
Meetings with local, State, or Federal Governments
Etc...

Suggest moving 1.2.4.2 to 1.2.4.3 and inserting a new 1.2.4.2 as follows: "During normal CAP activities, when attending CAP events, and when conducting CAP business except as required or prohibited elsewhere in this Manual."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 02, 2014, 03:34:01 AM
Can someone please explain to me why NHQ would not want to mandate wearing a uniform to all
CAP activities, including meetings?  Is it that hard?

Or for that matter why you join a paramilitary organization and then do mental hoops to avoid
putting on a shirt with a collar?  Or diety help you, a ((*gag*)) tie?  "I have to wear a tie
8 hours a day and I'm not wearing one off hours!" "The tie is a tool for the man to keep me in servitude!"

The former is what 6th graders say when they don't want to do something, and the latter is
first-year college students on full ride government grants.

My personal experience, in CAP and similar organizations, is that you can draw a line from lack of
proper uniforms straight through to proper execution and attention to other details.

Blowing off the uniform is a malaise that infects the squadron and eventually kills it.

Yeah, yeah, you're a trapeze artist and can't get out of your leotard in time to change your clothes
because you have to drive 4 hours each way, uphill, in the snow, in TXWG, and in the summer
all that melting snow makes it too humid to wear long pants.

Fine, handle the exceptions on a per-activity basis and require advanced approval.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: BHartman007 on January 02, 2014, 03:35:54 AM
Quote from: JoeTomasone on January 02, 2014, 03:16:16 AM
Just realized this and sent a comment in... 

Quote from: Comment
Language on when the uniform may be worn accidentally eliminates wear during normal CAP activities.

Uniform Wear Required (1.2.3):

Working with cadets
Flying in a CAP aircraft
Conducting business under a CAP mission number
Attending a military or civilian event representing CAP
Touring Washington DC, as part of a CAP activity or conducting CAP business in the National Capitol Area


Wear Optional (1.2.4):

When traveling in an official capacity on commercial air, in CONUS.


Neither required nor optional, and therefore not authorized ("COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. This publication is the sole source for wear instructions and authorized items for various uniform combinations as prescribed within. Variation from this publication (is) not authorized."):

Unit Meetings
Wing/Region/National Conferences
When operating CAP Vehicles
Airshows
Meetings with local, State, or Federal Governments
Etc...

Suggest moving 1.2.4.2 to 1.2.4.3 and inserting a new 1.2.4.2 as follows: "During normal CAP activities, when attending CAP events, and when conducting CAP business except as required or prohibited elsewhere in this Manual."

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: jbell on January 02, 2014, 03:37:10 AM
I know I'm potentially opening a can of worms.

In an effort to create a unified look across CAP, why not adopt one service dress uniform and one "BDU" uniform?

It seems like entirely too many resources (time, energy, etc.) are spent (read: wasted) fussing about a issues that could be solved with one sharp uniform style.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 02, 2014, 03:39:03 AM
It's a can opened, emptied, crushed, recycled, and returned to the mine 10x's over.

The answer is 42.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: jbell on January 02, 2014, 03:50:07 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 02, 2014, 03:39:03 AM
It's a can opened, emptied, crushed, recycled, and returned to the mine 10x's over.

The answer is 42.


I'm too new to know the history (funny given my position). Why hasn't it caught on?

As a side note. The USCG Auxiliary doesn't have weight standards. They seem to have a healthy approach to the subject.

"The Auxiliary does not have a weight standards program, but all members should set the goal to strive to meet the same standards as the active duty. Auxiliary members are encouraged to eat a balanced diet and maintain a medically recommended weight level that is conducive to a long and healthy life. Auxiliarists who wear the Auxiliary uniform shall ensure that it fits properly and presents a trim, military appearance. The uniform should be tailored if an Auxiliarist loses or gains weight. Any Auxiliarist who has difficulty maintaining a properly fitted uniform, shall wear the Auxiliary Blue Blazer outfit as appropriate." Source - http://www.uscg.mil/directives/cim/16000-16999/CIM_16790_1G.pdf (http://www.uscg.mil/directives/cim/16000-16999/CIM_16790_1G.pdf)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 02, 2014, 03:56:09 AM
Quote from: jbell on January 02, 2014, 03:50:07 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 02, 2014, 03:39:03 AM
It's a can opened, emptied, crushed, recycled, and returned to the mine 10x's over.

The answer is 42.


I'm too new to know the history (funny given my position). Why hasn't it caught on?

As a side note. The USCG Auxiliary doesn't have weight standards. They seem to have a healthy approach to the subject.

"The Auxiliary does not have a weight standards program, but all members should set the goal to strive to meet the same standards as the active duty. Auxiliary members are encouraged to eat a balanced diet and maintain a medically recommended weight level that is conducive to a long and healthy life. Auxiliarists who wear the Auxiliary uniform shall ensure that it fits properly and presents a trim, military appearance. The uniform should be tailored if an Auxiliarist loses or gains weight. Any Auxiliarist who has difficulty maintaining a properly fitted uniform, shall wear the Auxiliary Blue Blazer outfit as appropriate." Source - http://www.uscg.mil/directives/cim/16000-16999/CIM_16790_1G.pdf (http://www.uscg.mil/directives/cim/16000-16999/CIM_16790_1G.pdf)

We are not the USCGAux so therefore their policy is irrelevant.  A single uniform as Eclipse has said has been addressed, argued over, squashed and then reopened.   
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 02, 2014, 03:56:43 AM
^ This.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 02, 2014, 03:59:24 AM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 02, 2014, 01:47:07 AM
When wearing the AF-style uniform, CAP aeronautical ratings and specialty badges take precedence over US military aviation ratings and badges. In the olden days of CAP, US military aeronautical ratings were worn a half-inch over the right pocket of the blues.

I get the history, but then why not invert the ribbons?  Same rules/logic should apply, right?  Not that I think the Senior Recruiter Ribbon should be higher than a Legion of Merit/Silver Star/ANAF Cross/etc.   Just making a point, that it should be the same either way, at least logically.  Back in the olden days, did CAP wear military ribbons?  I don't know.

Also, in the new draft, is the order of precedence with "occupational" badges set?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: fokkerfrenzy on January 02, 2014, 04:07:19 AM
Am I missing something?  Did they remove some of the specific wording for SM without rank?  Can someone help clarify wear of grade insignia for SM, please?  It seems like it was addressed, but I guess I'm just not getting my head around it.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 02, 2014, 04:16:05 AM
Seniors with out grade pursuing the NCO ranks.

Quote1.4.2 Adult individuals without Grade pursuing NCO promotions based on prior military services will wear the USAF-style uniform (except Mess Dress which is not authorized for individuals without grade) and Corporate uniforms as for NCOs without wearing any grade insignia. For example, these individuals will wear the service coat without epaulets, flight cap with blue braid, CAP collar insignia, and no epaulets. On USAF-style Utility Uniforms (BDU), these individuals will wear white embroidered CAP insignia on ultramarine blue cloth centered 1 inch from the bottom edge on both sides of the collar. On the Corporate-style Field Uniform, no collar insignia or grade insignia on the hat will be worn. On the Aviator Combination Uniform, no grade insignia or collar devices will be worn.

Seniors with our out grade pursuing the officer ranks.

Quote1.4.1 Adult individuals without Grade pursuing officer promotion will wear the USAF-style (except Mess Dress which is not authorized for individuals members without grade) or Corporate-style uniform as for Officers without any grade insignia. For example, these individuals will wear the officer-style service coat, with sleeve braid, officer style flight cap, US collar insignia, and gray epaulets without grade insignia. On USAF-style Utility Uniforms (BDU), these individuals will wear light silver embroidered CAP insignia on blue cloth centered 1 inch from the bottom edge on both sides of the collar. On the Corporate-style Field Uniform, no collar insignia or grade insignia on the hat will be worn. On the Aviator Combination Uniform, no grade insignia or collar devices will be worn.

So....SMWOG (officers)....where everthing just like a 2d Lt or FO......just with the blank rank slides.

SMWOG (enlisted)....where everything just like a SSgt......just no stripes.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: fokkerfrenzy on January 02, 2014, 04:27:26 AM
So no lapel insignia insignia on long and short sleve, just these with no grade pinned on?

http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-grey-epaulet-enlisted-senior-member-unisex-p-7207.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-grey-epaulet-enlisted-senior-member-unisex-p-7207.html)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 02, 2014, 04:42:34 AM
Quote from: fokkerfrenzy on January 02, 2014, 04:27:26 AM
So no lapel insignia insignia on long and short sleve, just these with no grade pinned on?

http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-grey-epaulet-enlisted-senior-member-unisex-p-7207.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-grey-epaulet-enlisted-senior-member-unisex-p-7207.html)
Yep....no cut outs.

The only ones who use CAP Cut outs are C/AB's, Cadet Officers on service coat, and CAP NCO's on service coats.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 02, 2014, 04:46:54 AM
Quote from: fokkerfrenzy on January 02, 2014, 04:27:26 AM
So no lapel insignia insignia on long and short sleve, just these with no grade pinned on?

http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-grey-epaulet-enlisted-senior-member-unisex-p-7207.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-grey-epaulet-enlisted-senior-member-unisex-p-7207.html)

That's what I read it as, yes.

Just to make it more confusing, as I read it in 1.4.1, the "blank" slides are only worn on the AF-blue uniform.  No blank rank slides are worn on the white Aviator-style shirt.  "On the Aviator Combination Uniform, no grade insignia or collar devices will be worn."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 02, 2014, 04:49:34 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 02, 2014, 04:42:34 AM
Quote from: fokkerfrenzy on January 02, 2014, 04:27:26 AM
So no lapel insignia insignia on long and short sleve, just these with no grade pinned on?

http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-grey-epaulet-enlisted-senior-member-unisex-p-7207.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-grey-epaulet-enlisted-senior-member-unisex-p-7207.html)
Yep....no cut outs.

The only ones who use CAP Cut outs are C/AB's, Cadet Officers on service coat, and CAP NCO's on service coats.

...but both officer-candidates and NCO-candidates wear embroidered CAP "cut-outs" on woodland-pattern BDUs.

"On USAF-style Utility Uniforms (BDU), these individuals will wear light silver embroidered CAP insignia on blue cloth centered 1 inch from the bottom edge on both sides of the collar."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JoeTomasone on January 02, 2014, 05:13:24 AM

I commented on this and recommended that for SMWOG they simply wear no insignia, slides, or anything at all since 99.9% of them will not be SMWOG for very long; why make them buy/sew and then throw away in 2 months on average?


Quote from: Panache on January 02, 2014, 04:46:54 AM
Quote from: fokkerfrenzy on January 02, 2014, 04:27:26 AM
So no lapel insignia insignia on long and short sleve, just these with no grade pinned on?

http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-grey-epaulet-enlisted-senior-member-unisex-p-7207.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-grey-epaulet-enlisted-senior-member-unisex-p-7207.html)

That's what I read it as, yes.

Just to make it more confusing, as I read it in 1.4.1, the "blank" slides are only worn on the AF-blue uniform.  No blank rank slides are worn on the white Aviator-style shirt.  "On the Aviator Combination Uniform, no grade insignia or collar devices will be worn."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 02, 2014, 05:27:30 AM
Quote from: JoeTomasone on January 02, 2014, 05:13:24 AM
I commented on this and recommended that for SMWOG they simply wear no insignia, slides, or anything at all since 99.9% of them will not be SMWOG for very long; why make them buy/sew and then throw away in 2 months on average?

I think it actually makes sense to have officer-candidate SMWOG to wear blank gray rank slides.  The squadron can keep a set or two handy to loan out for the six months or so it takes for the SM to get promoted to 2nd Lt.  They're easy-on, easy-off.  Although I don't see the logic in applying this to AF-blues and not the white Aviator shirt.  That just promotes confusion.

Now, on the field uniforms (Woodland BDUs), this is a different story, as this requires them to be sewn on (and off) in a short period, especially if it take a couple of months for the new member to even get a set.  It should be noted that the embroidered "CAP" insignia for SMWOGs are only required on woodland BDUs, and not blue BDUs.  I suspect this is because it's a holdover from requirements given to us by Ma Blue and NHQ/NUC doesn't see the point on spending effort on changing it when woodland BDUs are going to be phased out anyway.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JoeTomasone on January 02, 2014, 05:44:35 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 02, 2014, 05:27:30 AM
It should be noted that the embroidered "CAP" insignia for SMWOGs are only required on woodland BDUs, and not blue BDUs.  I suspect this is because it's a holdover from requirements given to us by Ma Blue and NHQ/NUC doesn't see the point on spending effort on changing it when woodland BDUs are going to be phased out anyway.

USAF should be all for it - helps differentiate CAP members from USAF personnel even more - nothing on the collars = easy no salute!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 02, 2014, 06:52:23 AM
Quote from: JoeTomasone on January 02, 2014, 05:44:35 AM
USAF should be all for it - helps differentiate CAP members from USAF personnel even more - nothing on the collars = easy no salute!

You would think.  (/shrug)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Mitchell 1969 on January 02, 2014, 07:09:38 AM
Quote from: NIN on December 31, 2013, 11:06:24 PM
Doesn't make it right,  Bernie.  We are specifically told that mixing military and civilian is supposed to be verboten.

Sure. Nobody wants to see somebody wearing a uniform shirt with Levi's, or cowboy boots with BDUs. But I can't see the evil in allowing the wear of earned military ribbons on a military styled uniform, or even on a civilian suit. Just my opinion.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Mitchell 1969 on January 02, 2014, 07:36:21 AM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 01, 2014, 05:30:28 PM

I worked with Lt Col Preston Perrenot of Nevada Wing on improved uniform illustrations a few years back. I haven't been in touch with him in a while, but will try to get in touch with him and see if we can get these illustrations incorporated. But it's going to be an uphill battle...

Attached are a couple of illustrations we worked on. Please be aware that these comply with the current CAPM 39-1 and not the 39-1 up for comment and review.

I REALLY like those illustrations. Clearer than line drawings and they beat any photographs I've seen.

But a point of correction, in case they get updated - the cap with the visor is called a "service cap," not a "garrison cap" as illustrated. (Garrison cap is the flight cap.)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on January 02, 2014, 08:28:20 AM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 01, 2014, 06:00:13 PM
Some of the illustrations in 39-1 date back to the 70s!

Try the '60s. The ones for grade insignia on shirt collars go back that far.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 02, 2014, 02:59:40 PM
You dudes are slacking. This thread only has 10 pages.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 02, 2014, 03:04:37 PM
At least we've kept it on topic, which is extremely rare on this Board.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 02, 2014, 03:08:32 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 02, 2014, 03:04:37 PM
At least we've kept it on topic, which is extremely rare on this Board.

(http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2013/020/0/7/challenge_accepted_meme__s_by_wzf-d5s2yje.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 02, 2014, 03:10:47 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 02, 2014, 03:04:37 PM
At least we've kept it on topic, which is extremely rare on this Board.

Yeah, not bad, actually.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: UH60guy on January 02, 2014, 03:20:25 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 31, 2013, 06:28:52 PM
"Please note, image work on this document is not complete in several places. Work on imagery will
continue while this document is out for feedback from the field."


The lighting on the "new" photos is terrible, as expected when yo take pictures in a banquet hall.

Please go to Vanguard, get some mannequins and properly light and stage the photos.

Also, there's a few "new" diagrams which are actually worse the the old ones, or feature horribly mis-matched
or inappropriate graphic elements.

Please redraw all of them.

Sorry, just got to the thread after 10 pages. I agree, the photos are terrible. And, as you would find in a conference, several seem to violate the regulations.

Page 32. Cadet in the picture is treading the line very closely with ribbons going over the notch in the collar, violating para 4.1.7.4.3. Retake the photo with someone with fewer ribbons to be clearly below the notch.

Page 33. Find a cadet who didn't just pull his uniform out of a duffel bag. It needs to look neat for the photo that will be the example. This one is wrinkled.

Page 36, top left, command badge does not appear parallel to name badge.

Page 36, bottom left, nametape is not parallel with pocket welt.

Page 44, bottom left. This uniform does not properly fit the cadet. Note the "X" in the fabric created from the bottom button on a uniform that is too tight.

Page 53, right picture. Blue shirt is puffed up, needs to be straight.

Page 57, military creases are visible in the shirt (the two parallel vertical creases either side of the buttons). Military creases are prohibited per para 4.1.1.4, 4.1.2.4, 4.1.3.1.3, 4.1.3.2.3, 4.1.4.3, 4.1.7.5, and so on.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 02, 2014, 03:23:02 PM
Interesting find and it fits the description from the draft reg.

http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/rothco-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black?gclid=CLKghqvk37sCFUho7Aod7lIAEA (http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/rothco-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black?gclid=CLKghqvk37sCFUho7Aod7lIAEA)

I might pick one up just because $35.00 isn't bad for a coat like this. 

Any photoshop experts out there care to add the tapes & grade?  :)
(http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/files/9739-rotcho-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 02, 2014, 03:34:27 PM
Quote from: UH60guy on January 02, 2014, 03:20:25 PM
Page 57, military creases are visible in the shirt (the two parallel vertical creases either side of the buttons). Military creases are prohibited per para 4.1.1.4, 4.1.2.4, 4.1.3.1.3, 4.1.3.2.3, 4.1.4.3, 4.1.7.5, and so on.

I don't disagree with the intent of the above, but I thought the female USAF blouses have a seam that runs down the front that makes it look like a crease.  I looked at the AFI and the pic it shows of a female shirt shows the seam at the top of the right shoulder.
http://www.afpc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-130509-049.pdf (http://www.afpc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-130509-049.pdf)
(added link)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: UH60guy on January 02, 2014, 03:41:25 PM
You might be right there, I can't tell from the photo. It looks like you can also see an undershirt, making it harder to determine if that's a seam or a military crease. Regardless, photos that will be an example for all to follow need to be completely perfect and unambiguous.

One more reason I agree with Eclipse that there should be no photos whatsoever, but line diagrams that clearly show everything. If people can't follow those, then Wings can take their own photos for supplements or pamphlets. The regulation- the core document that everything stems from- needs to be absolute and not left to interpretation of a photo.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 02, 2014, 03:51:21 PM
Quote from: UH60guy on January 02, 2014, 03:41:25 PM
You might be right there, I can't tell from the photo. It looks like you can also see an undershirt, making it harder to determine if that's a seam or a military crease. Regardless, photos that will be an example for all to follow need to be completely perfect and unambiguous.

One more reason I agree with Eclipse that there should be no photos whatsoever, but line diagrams that clearly show everything. If people can't follow those, then Wings can take their own photos for supplements or pamphlets. The regulation- the core document that everything stems from- needs to be absolute and not left to interpretation of a photo.

100% agree, line drawings are the way to go, but that craft seems to be already be underway.   :'(
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 02, 2014, 03:56:49 PM
It's a seam as it's the older style "princess cut" female shirt.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: UH60guy on January 02, 2014, 04:04:12 PM
I can tell they're seams in the central picture, I think I failed to mention I was looking at the left picture. I just can't tell on that one. But if they're seams, then I withdraw that particular criticism.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: tribalelder on January 02, 2014, 04:08:49 PM
Quote from: Papabird on January 02, 2014, 03:23:02 PM
Interesting find and it fits the description from the draft reg.

http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/rothco-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black?gclid=CLKghqvk37sCFUho7Aod7lIAEA (http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/rothco-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black?gclid=CLKghqvk37sCFUho7Aod7lIAEA)

I might pick one up just because $35.00 isn't bad for a coat like this. 

Any photoshop experts out there care to add the tapes & grade?  :)
(http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/files/9739-rotcho-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black.jpg)



Good find !

Now it just needs

1) dark blue Velcro- or

2). cover that black Velcro in total w/required insignia- might need a border larger than 1/8 inch! (Tied for preferred option 2)

3). OR ALLOW BLACK Velcro, since a black Velcro product is already available and most of the Velcro is going to be obscured by required insignia ANYWAY (my preferred option 1)

4). or sew the required insignia and have no Velcro or no exposed Velcro (tied for preferred option 2)

We don't need that type of opsec.  If our client/customer agencies need that type of opsec, the missions should probably be serviced in plain clothes, or perhaps by others.

IC can set UOD. Perhaps 'appropriate civilian attire' should be available as a choice when such is requested by client/customer agency.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 02, 2014, 04:47:44 PM
Quote from: tribalelder on January 02, 2014, 04:08:49 PM
Quote from: Papabird on January 02, 2014, 03:23:02 PM
Interesting find and it fits the description from the draft reg.

http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/rothco-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black?gclid=CLKghqvk37sCFUho7Aod7lIAEA (http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/rothco-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black?gclid=CLKghqvk37sCFUho7Aod7lIAEA)

I might pick one up just because $35.00 isn't bad for a coat like this. 

Any photoshop experts out there care to add the tapes & grade?  :)

(pic cut for brevity)

Good find !

Now it just needs

1) dark blue Velcro- or

2). cover that black Velcro in total w/required insignia- might need a border larger than 1/8 inch! (Tied for preferred option 2)

3). OR ALLOW BLACK Velcro, since a black Velcro product is already available and most of the Velcro is going to be obscured by required insignia ANYWAY (my preferred option 1)

4). or sew the required insignia and have no Velcro or no exposed Velcro (tied for preferred option 2)

We don't need that type of opsec.  If our client/customer agencies need that type of opsec, the missions should probably be serviced in plain clothes, or perhaps by others.

IC can set UOD. Perhaps 'appropriate civilian attire' should be available as a choice when such is requested by client/customer agency.
Ref 6.1.13.1.3: Dark blue name tape with white letters worn on right breast, dark blue Civil Air Patrol tape with white letters worn on left breast; grade insignia (pin on for NCOs and cadet NCOs/Airmen, embroidered for officers and cadet officers) on dark blue background worn on velcro patch above nametape on right breast. Para also specifies size of dark blue grade square as 2"x2".

Now, if they would include a black Goretex, ECWCS-style coat as well, that would be great. (Ned, any chance of this happening?)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 02, 2014, 04:59:18 PM
Regarding t-shirts worn with bdus and field uniforms:
Many activities and encampments issue black t-shirts with a large logo on the back. Will these still be authorized? By reading the manual, it appears not. Or this up to the wing commander?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 02, 2014, 05:07:25 PM
Quote from: UH60guy on January 02, 2014, 04:04:12 PM
I can tell they're seams in the central picture, I think I failed to mention I was looking at the left picture. I just can't tell on that one. But if they're seams, then I withdraw that particular criticism.

It's a seam on that photo.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: THRAWN on January 02, 2014, 05:12:16 PM
My 2 cents on the draft....

1.   There is no need to design and produce a new set of badges for members of CAP aircrews. Current designs would suffice for the purpose of designating individuals as aircrew with no additional cost to the member or the organization. It is my proposal that the current Observer style aviation badge be redesignated "CAP Aircrew Badge". This would enable one badge to encompass all non-pilot aircrew specialties. The Basic badge would be authorized for scanners, aerial photographers, and all other non-pilot and non-observer crew duties. The senior badge would be authorized for Observers. The Master badge would be authorized for members who are qualified Air Operations Branch Directors. Using this method, there would be no need to design, cast or produce a new style insignia in the various versions (full, mini, cloth, and leather nametag). Organizationally, only a change to existing regs would be necessary, with negligible funding impact. The cost to members would be minimal.

2.   Members who are also members of the National Guard or who have received state service awards should be permitted to display those awards on their CAP uniforms. It is my recommendation that the current rule be changed to read as follows: "Members who are also current or former members of the National Guard (Air or Army) or who have received state service awards from a state's Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, or equivalent, are permitted to wear those awards in the following manner: 1. Member may wear the highest award in the order of precedence for each of the states served 2. Members receiving awards from multiple states will use the date of the award to determine precedence on their CAP uniform.  3. National Guard awards will be placed between federal awards (if applicable) and CAP awards in the order of precedence." I further recommend that members who have been awarded federal awards be permitted to wear the highest award in the order of precedence, as well as NG awards as described above, on the corporate aviator shirt.

3.   Section 1.2.3.1 omits many times when a uniform is required. Recommend changing to read "...during approved and scheduled unit meetings, professional development courses, CAP activities as covered in other regulations."

4.   Section 1.2.2.3.2 should be amended to read "Minimum Corporate-style Uniform: The minimum basic CAP Corporate-style uniform is the Aviator Shirt Combination with short sleeve shirt or blouse as appropriate. This uniform is only for officers, NCOs, and cadets aged 18 and older who do not meet WEIGHT OR GROOMING STANDARDS TO WEAR THE AF BLUE UNIFORM. THIS UNIFORM COMBINATION IS ALSO AN APPROVED OPTION FOR OFFICERS AND NCOS WHO CHOSE TO NOT WEAR THE AF BLUE UNIFORM." Recommended change in CAPS.

5.   Weigh-ins. This section should be deleted and changed to read "Documentation of compliance with established weight requirements will be provided upon request of the unit commander. Weigh-ins will be conducted by the member's physician or healthcare provider." This entire section opens up the possibility of targeting of members by commanders and using the scale as a weapon. It also will alienate many highly qualified and respected members who may perceive the weigh-ins as insulting to them personally. Members will leave over this as it is written.

6.   NCO insignia should be altered in the following manner: 1. Remove the CAP from the insignia. It's already on the uniform in several places, making this redundant and unnecessary. 2. The background should be ultramarine, chevrons in white. This will clearly indicate that this is a CAP NCO, not a USAF NCO. 3. The center prop should be recolored from white to red as a nod to the Civil Defense style insignia of the past.

7.   The phase out dates listed in Attachment 9 are too long. All insignia being passed out, including the US flag patch, should be changed to read "No longer authorized and must be removed within 120 days of approval of this manual."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 02, 2014, 05:28:36 PM
1.  There is no additional costs to members....because it is optional.  It is not like someone has to change their badges.   Second Major non-concure on changing the way we issue the basic, senior, master badges based on ES level.  Keep the current system.

2.  Non-concure.....we got enough problems with all the ribbons as it is.  The USAF does not allow state ribbons while on AD orders....let's keep it simple.

3.  1.2.3.1 is setting said policy.....I think if we just leave this to the unit commanders and activity directors I think we are fine.

4.  Your suggested wording is contraditory.   "this is only for....." and follow it up with "This uniform combination is also approved option".....confusing.....what are you trying to say?

5. Nope......this gives the commander direct control over the verification process.   Otherwise I will have to have my members spend $75 on a co-pay to verify his weight.....vice buying a squadron scale and doing it when ever the commander deems it necessary.

6.  Sort of agree.....but not going to happen.

7.  Why?   
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Patterson on January 02, 2014, 05:32:28 PM
Too many pages!!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 02, 2014, 05:34:47 PM
In my opinion, the fleece jacket should be navy blue instead of black since it's to be worn with the CAP Field Uniform, the CAP Flight Duty Uniform and the CAP Knit Polo Shirt combination only, all of which are navy blue.

Black would make sense if it was authorized for other uniforms, such as BDUs. Unfortunately, it's not. Navy blue would make this jacket more consistent with the other CAP uniforms.

I also recommend changing the color of the CAP light weight ultramarine blue jacket to navy blue. As it stands, it looks a bit silly with current corporate-style uniforms.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 02, 2014, 05:38:13 PM
The black is fleece is commercially available. A navy blue version is not.

On a different note, I sent in the following comment:

Para 10.7.20 authorizes the CPR patch, however, Attachment 4 specifies the ARC CPR Instructor patch and does not mention the CPR patch.

Para 13.2.2 does not specify any feedback to the submitter. Suggest requiring commanders to update the submitter and lower chain of the status of the change submission. While this is a good idea, I know from experience this seldom happens and as the submitter, attempting follow up is difficult at best.

Also require action in a timely manner, i.e. approve/reject within 30 days of receipt of the submission by each level of command up to the NUC chair. This would demonstrate to the submitter that their idea is at least being considered and not being left until everyone forgets about it.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Brad on January 02, 2014, 05:42:56 PM
11 pages in 2 days.

(http://cdn.alltheragefaces.com/img/faces/jpg/obama-not-bad.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on January 02, 2014, 05:54:19 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on January 02, 2014, 05:12:16 PM
5.   Weigh-ins. This section should be deleted and changed to read "Documentation of compliance with established weight requirements will be provided upon request of the unit commander. Weigh-ins will be conducted by the member's physician or healthcare provider." This entire section opens up the possibility of targeting of members by commanders and using the scale as a weapon. It also will alienate many highly qualified and respected members who may perceive the weigh-ins as insulting to them personally. Members will leave over this as it is written.


Using the scale as a weapon? Only for those who are already breaking the rules - knowingly.



Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on January 02, 2014, 05:55:34 PM
Quote from: Brad on January 02, 2014, 05:42:56 PM
11 pages in 2 days.

(http://cdn.alltheragefaces.com/img/faces/jpg/obama-not-bad.jpg)


Only 5 pages for me.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: N Harmon on January 02, 2014, 06:12:36 PM
Quote5.1.2.3.6 Aviation (CAP, USAF or other service Aeronautical, Space, Cyberspace) and Occupational Badges (CAP and USAF). Two Aviation or Occupational badges embroidered in silver on light blue may be worn sewn to the shirt ½ inch above the "Civil Air Patrol tape over the left breast pocket. The second badge will be centered ½ inch above the first badge. Chaplain and CAP aviation badges are mandatory and will always be worn in the highest position[...]Occupational badges (excluding chaplain) are optional.

(emphasis mine)

So if you've been awarded an aviation badge and a ground team badge then you are required to wear the aviation badge on the BDUs, but the ground team badge is optional? That seems odd to me. Similar wording in the section about BBDUs as well.

Also, it appears that you will be allowed to wear Ground Team and EMT badges simultaneously, assuming you've not been awarded an aviation or chaplain badge.

EDIT: Similar wording for service dress uniforms as well.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Brad on January 02, 2014, 06:33:16 PM
Quote from: N Harmon on January 02, 2014, 06:12:36 PM
Quote5.1.2.3.6 Aviation (CAP, USAF or other service Aeronautical, Space, Cyberspace) and Occupational Badges (CAP and USAF). Two Aviation or Occupational badges embroidered in silver on light blue may be worn sewn to the shirt ½ inch above the "Civil Air Patrol tape over the left breast pocket. The second badge will be centered ½ inch above the first badge. Chaplain and CAP aviation badges are mandatory and will always be worn in the highest position[...]Occupational badges (excluding chaplain) are optional.

(emphasis mine)

So if you've been awarded an aviation badge and a ground team badge then you are required to wear the aviation badge on the BDUs, but the ground team badge is optional? That seems odd to me. Similar wording in the section about BBDUs as well.

Also, it appears that you will be allowed to wear Ground Team and EMT badges simultaneously, assuming you've not been awarded an aviation or chaplain badge.

EDIT: Similar wording for service dress uniforms as well.

Well considering that we are the Air Force Auxiliary, which is a primarily aviation-based service, the emphasis on aviation badges is understandable.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on January 02, 2014, 06:37:56 PM
Quote from: Brad on January 02, 2014, 06:33:16 PM
Quote from: N Harmon on January 02, 2014, 06:12:36 PM
Quote5.1.2.3.6 Aviation (CAP, USAF or other service Aeronautical, Space, Cyberspace) and Occupational Badges (CAP and USAF). Two Aviation or Occupational badges embroidered in silver on light blue may be worn sewn to the shirt ½ inch above the "Civil Air Patrol tape over the left breast pocket. The second badge will be centered ½ inch above the first badge. Chaplain and CAP aviation badges are mandatory and will always be worn in the highest position[...]Occupational badges (excluding chaplain) are optional.

(emphasis mine)

So if you've been awarded an aviation badge and a ground team badge then you are required to wear the aviation badge on the BDUs, but the ground team badge is optional? That seems odd to me. Similar wording in the section about BBDUs as well.

Also, it appears that you will be allowed to wear Ground Team and EMT badges simultaneously, assuming you've not been awarded an aviation or chaplain badge.

EDIT: Similar wording for service dress uniforms as well.

Well considering that we are the Air Force Auxiliary, which is a primarily aviation-based service, the emphasis on aviation badges is understandable.


We have a lot more "ground pounders" than pilots.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: tsrup on January 02, 2014, 06:39:00 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 04:59:18 PM
Regarding t-shirts worn with bdus and field uniforms:
Many activities and encampments issue black t-shirts with a large logo on the back. Will these still be authorized? By reading the manual, it appears not. Or this up to the wing commander?


Large logos on the shirt backs were never authorized to begin with, it was just something that was done anyways.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on January 02, 2014, 06:39:34 PM
Quote from: tsrup on January 02, 2014, 06:39:00 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 04:59:18 PM
Regarding t-shirts worn with bdus and field uniforms:
Many activities and encampments issue black t-shirts with a large logo on the back. Will these still be authorized? By reading the manual, it appears not. Or this up to the wing commander?


Large logos on the shirt backs were never authorized to begin with, it was just something that was done anyways.


+1. They can do anything they want...just not a shirt meant to be worn with B/BDUs.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 02, 2014, 06:46:55 PM
Quote from: N Harmon on January 02, 2014, 06:12:36 PM
QuoteChaplain and CAP aviation badges are mandatory and will always be worn in the highest position[...]Occupational badges (excluding chaplain) are optional.

(emphasis mine)

So if you've been awarded an aviation badge and a ground team badge then you are required to wear the aviation badge on the BDUs, but the ground team badge is optional? That seems odd to me. Similar wording in the section about BBDUs as well.

Considering this is the rule in the USAF, it is not surprising for us. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 02, 2014, 07:07:31 PM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on January 02, 2014, 06:37:56 PM
Quote from: Brad on January 02, 2014, 06:33:16 PM
Quote from: N Harmon on January 02, 2014, 06:12:36 PM
Quote5.1.2.3.6 Aviation (CAP, USAF or other service Aeronautical, Space, Cyberspace) and Occupational Badges (CAP and USAF). Two Aviation or Occupational badges embroidered in silver on light blue may be worn sewn to the shirt ½ inch above the "Civil Air Patrol tape over the left breast pocket. The second badge will be centered ½ inch above the first badge. Chaplain and CAP aviation badges are mandatory and will always be worn in the highest position[...]Occupational badges (excluding chaplain) are optional.

(emphasis mine)

So if you've been awarded an aviation badge and a ground team badge then you are required to wear the aviation badge on the BDUs, but the ground team badge is optional? That seems odd to me. Similar wording in the section about BBDUs as well.

Also, it appears that you will be allowed to wear Ground Team and EMT badges simultaneously, assuming you've not been awarded an aviation or chaplain badge.

EDIT: Similar wording for service dress uniforms as well.

Well considering that we are the Air Force Auxiliary, which is a primarily aviation-based service, the emphasis on aviation badges is understandable.


We have a lot more "ground pounders" than pilots.
So does the USAF.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 02, 2014, 07:08:15 PM
A few things I am still unclear on.

6.2.5.  If the beret is only intended for wear by BB participants, it needs to say so in all instances mentioning the beret, or else we have another loophole.  I know that some Wings have authorised berets in certain circumstances.  I believe a CT person said some time ago that INWG authorises it for Ground Teams with the flight cap device.

6.2.6 and 6.2.7.  This is my own ignorance coming into play.  What is the difference between the "blue winter cap" and "black watch cap?"  I know what a black watch cap is (think Radar O'Reilly, except in black) as I have had one for several years that I wear in winter with civvies (and occasionally with BBDU's) and like very much, but the image of a blue winter cap is evading me, especially since it is authorised to be worn with Mess Dress.

6.2.11.  What a "CAP baseball cap" is really needs to be clarified, as I have already listed some examples where this is wide-open for individual interpretation.

I do like the clarifications about tattoos and body piercings!  I have neither, but occasionally it has been an issue, mostly with cadets.  Personally, I think my body has enough holes in it without adding more...but whatever turns your prop.

6.3.1.6.  I'm afraid we could be leaving ourselves open to "religious hairstyles" problems; i.e., a Hasidic Jewish member.  Is he restricted from wearing the USAF uniform?

6.4.6.  Are we going to have undergarment checks now?! :o

8.2.3.2.  Why are we still restricted to horrible-looking plastic encased grade on the green flight bag?  Dark blue (as on CFDU) would look much better.

10.4.3.  I'm not a medic, but I know several Physician Assistants, and my personal opinion is they should be authorised the Medical Badge.  I'd say so for Nurse Practitioners too, but they have the Nurse's Badge to wear.  PA's don't have anything to wear, and they do a very hard job.

11.1.1.2 and 11.1.1.3.  It's still silly to not authorise CAP ribbons/badges on the blazer.  However, do I notice that more than one miniature medal can now be worn on the blazer?

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 02, 2014, 07:10:58 PM
Will comments submitted online be viewable by the vast unwashed masses general membership?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 02, 2014, 07:22:15 PM
6.2.5.  The beret is NOT only intended for BB participants.  It is still one of the items a wing commander can authorise under 9.4

6.2.6 and 6.2.7.  The blue winter cap is the Elmer Fudd Cap.

6.3.1.6.....nope we are not.....we are letting NHQ deal with it and they are going to follow USAF rules......so if they say no...then no he can't wear the USAF style uniform.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 02, 2014, 07:22:50 PM
Quote from: N Harmon on January 02, 2014, 06:12:36 PM
Also, it appears that you will be allowed to wear Ground Team and EMT badges simultaneously, assuming you've not been awarded an aviation or chaplain badge.

EDIT: Similar wording for service dress uniforms as well.

That is my reading as well.  :)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 02, 2014, 07:23:43 PM

Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 05:38:13 PM
The black is fleece is commercially available. A navy blue version is not.

(http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/files/products/9/9980-ecwcs-foliage-black-polar-fleece-jacket-liner.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 02, 2014, 07:26:06 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 07:10:58 PM
Will comments submitted online be viewable by the vast unwashed masses general membership?
While I doubt it, it would be a good idea.  Otherwise they will get tons of duplicates, but they still may anyway.  :)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: C/Cool on January 02, 2014, 07:30:58 PM
Does anyone have any idea of when this will actually be implemented? I know it has taken a long time to put together and this is CAP so it won't be anytime soon.

Thanks.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 02, 2014, 07:32:19 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 02, 2014, 07:08:15 PM
A few things I am still unclear on.

6.2.5.  If the beret is only intended for wear by BB participants, it needs to say so in all instances mentioning the beret, or else we have another loophole.  I know that some Wings have authorised berets in certain circumstances.  I believe a CT person said some time ago that INWG authorises it for Ground Teams with the flight cap device.
While NBB participants are the most common wearers, it is not restricted to nor only intended for them. I believe, I could be wrong, the idea of having the beret authorized would be to distinguish specific groups that are considered special by the wing commander.

Quote6.2.6 and 6.2.7.  This is my own ignorance coming into play.  What is the difference between the "blue winter cap" and "black watch cap?"  I know what a black watch cap is (think Radar O'Reilly, except in black) as I have had one for several years that I wear in winter with civvies (and occasionally with BBDU's) and like very much, but the image of a blue winter cap is evading me, especially since it is authorised to be worn with Mess Dress.
The blue winter hat is basically a bomber hat in blue. Like this (http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=air+force+winter+blue+hat&id=895A0925459052EB2F6425C65FF801FFA7721DDB&FORM=IQFRBA#view=detail&id=895A0925459052EB2F6425C65FF801FFA7721DDB&selectedIndex=0).

Quote6.2.11.  What a "CAP baseball cap" is really needs to be clarified, as I have already listed some examples where this is wide-open for individual interpretation.
You're not the only one.

Quote6.3.1.6.  I'm afraid we could be leaving ourselves open to "religious hairstyles" problems; i.e., a Hasidic Jewish member.  Is he restricted from wearing the USAF uniform?
Hair styles are not covered under this section. Since the grooming standards are taken from the AF, what does the AF say about it?

Quote8.2.3.2.  Why are we still restricted to horrible-looking plastic encased grade on the green flight bag?  Dark blue (as on CFDU) would look much better.
Vanguard can still get them. There was a discussion at an NB meeting a couple years ago when Vanguard reported they were having trouble finding a decent supplier, however, at the last minute, Vanguard reportedly found a good supplier and the issue was dropped. Probably one of the few times we actually point to Vanguard being a direct cause of us using a particular uniform item.

Quote10.4.3.  I'm not a medic, but I know several Physician Assistants, and my personal opinion is they should be authorised the Medical Badge.  I'd say so for Nurse Practitioners too, but they have the Nurse's Badge to wear.  PA's don't have anything to wear, and they do a very hard job.
this would need to be addressed through the National Medical Officer and the Health Service regs, not the uniform regs.

Quote11.1.1.2 and 11.1.1.3.  It's still silly to not authorise CAP ribbons/badges on the blazer.  However, do I notice that more than one miniature medal can now be worn on the blazer?
You are incorrect - 4.2.1.4 covers the wear of miniature medals on the corporate semi-formal uniform. It states only one shall be worn. The pluralization of the term in 11.1.1.3 a grammatical issue, not a authorization.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 02, 2014, 07:35:22 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 02, 2014, 07:23:43 PM

Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 05:38:13 PM
The black is fleece is commercially available. A navy blue version is not.

(http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/files/products/9/9980-ecwcs-foliage-black-polar-fleece-jacket-liner.jpg)
The picture appears to be blue, but the item description says it's black. Description (http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/9980-ecwcs-foliage-black-polar-fleece-jacket-liner)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on January 02, 2014, 07:38:33 PM
Regarding Arajca's comments CPR patch-

Current CAPM 39-1 allows wear of any kind of CPR patch, either by American Red Cross, American Heart Association or the National Safety Council by word (note says "any nationally recognized..." on table 6-4) and by words "one type of CPR patch" by figure 6-20 featuring ARC CPR Instructor.

The draft 39-1 seems to imply that any CPR patch may be worn no matter from which agency (10.7.20) and Table 4 seems to imply that the only patch that can be worn is the ARC CPR Instructor, not the AHA or the NSC. In other words it is inconsistent. Add "one type..."

Flyer

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: wacapgh on January 02, 2014, 07:40:20 PM
Quote from: tsrup on January 02, 2014, 06:39:00 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 04:59:18 PM
Regarding t-shirts worn with bdus and field uniforms:
Many activities and encampments issue black t-shirts with a large logo on the back. Will these still be authorized? By reading the manual, it appears not. Or this up to the wing commander?


Large logos on the shirt backs were never authorized to begin with, it was just something that was done anyways.

From the current 39-3:
"Table 2-3
12 Undergarments Mandatory. All appropriate underwear will be worn.
(Undershirts) Brown or black. Either V-neck, U-neck, crew neck or athletic style
without pockets. Black or brown turtlenecks, dickeys, or thermal
undershirts without pockets may also be worn. EXCEPTION:
members may wear white thermal undershirts even if exposed at neck.
Unit commanders may prescribe color, unit designation, and cloth or
silk screen emblem, to be worn on left side of chest not to exceed 5
inches in diameter." [Italics added]

It has not been authorized for the last 8+ years, as the current 39-1 is dated 23 MARCH 2005
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 02, 2014, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 07:35:22 PM
The picture appears to be blue, but the item description says it's black. Description (http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/9980-ecwcs-foliage-black-polar-fleece-jacket-liner)

You're correct; I should've checked more closely before posting.

Now, the question is if NHQ intends for this fleece jacket to be procured commercially or through "official" channels, i.e. Vanguard. There are many commercial sources for fleece jackets (including blue ones), but don't necessarily match the official Air Force sage green fleece jacket design and/or specifications. If NHQ's intention is for this jacket to mimic it's Air Force counterpart in appearance, then any commercial availability is going to be limited. On the other hand, if they're flexible in the overall design and appearance (unlikely since tapes and grade insignias are part of this jacket), then that would open additional commercial sources.

(edited for grammar)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: kratclif on January 02, 2014, 08:06:59 PM
The current (2005) 39-1 authorizes wear of "AFRCC SAR School Patches", however the new draft appears to only authorize the AFRCC SAR Management Course patch. I don't know if there is a BISC patch or not, but the Inland SAR Planning Course has a patch (which wouldn't seem to be allowed under the draft manual). I wonder if this was just an oversight or if it was intentional?

Also, I didn't find anything in the draft regarding NASAR patches. The current 39-1 authorizes wear of "NASAR Qualification Patches", whatever those are (NASAR doesn't have qualifications; they have certifications and they have courses. There is a circular NASAR patch, and the SARTECH certification is worn as a rocker above the patch). I have yet to see anyone wear a NASAR patch on a CAP uniform though.

Kevin
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 02, 2014, 08:13:17 PM
There is a BISC patch.

Perhaps you should send a comment on the Inland school.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 02, 2014, 09:56:15 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 07:32:19 PM
Quote10.4.3.  I'm not a medic, but I know several Physician Assistants, and my personal opinion is they should be authorised the Medical Badge.  I'd say so for Nurse Practitioners too, but they have the Nurse's Badge to wear.  PA's don't have anything to wear, and they do a very hard job.
this would need to be addressed through the National Medical Officer and the Health Service regs, not the uniform regs.

Yup.  And for the last 6.5 years, HSOs have been waiting for a specialty track.  NB approved the creation for it on 2006.  Then it was supposedly finalized on 23 April 2011 according to CAP Knowledgebase and awaiting approval.  As for badges, probably a lot longer than 6.5 years.  This has been long overdue for all HSOs.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: nmkaufman0 on January 02, 2014, 10:10:42 PM
Mine didn't load correctly.  :-[ can somebody tell me if we are wearing ABUs or BDUs? By the way, has anybody ever wondered why we don't wear DBUs or DBDUs?
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 02, 2014, 10:18:17 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 02, 2014, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 07:35:22 PM
The picture appears to be blue, but the item description says it's black. Description (http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/9980-ecwcs-foliage-black-polar-fleece-jacket-liner)

You're correct; I should've checked more closely before posting.

Now, the question is if NHQ intends for this fleece jacket to be procured commercially or through "official" channels, i.e. Vanguard. There are many commercial sources for fleece jackets (including blue ones), but don't necessarily match the official Air Force sage green fleece jacket design and/or specifications. If NHQ's intention is for this jacket to mimic it's Air Force counterpart in appearance, then any commercial availability is going to be limited. On the other hand, if they're flexible in the overall design and appearance (unlikely since tapes and grade insignias are part of this jacket), then that would open additional commercial sources.

(edited for grammar)

I just reread the corresponding section and 6.1.13.1.2 had the answer to my question:

"Fleece will be acquired commercially, and will be similar in design and construction to the USAF-style Sage Green Fleece. Members will wear fleeces that only have a very small or no manufacturer's emblem that is externally visible."

It's been a long week. I guess I need more coffee.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 02, 2014, 10:18:59 PM
Quote from: nmkaufman0 on January 02, 2014, 10:10:42 PM
Mine didn't load correctly.  :-[ can somebody tell me if we are wearing ABUs or BDUs? By the way, has anybody ever wondered why we don't wear DBUs or DBDUs?

We aren't and no.

Updated Adobe reader (make sure to uncheck the MCaFee junkware) and dump IE for Chrome.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: kd8gua on January 02, 2014, 11:10:09 PM
So I've written about 8 pages of comments so far in a Word document. Many of the issues are general formatting issues (singular vs plural, articles, etc.), but there are some things I just wrap my head around...

1. Mandatory wear of Command Badge by all current and former CCs under Col. Some CCs don't even wear the badge now. Does NHQ expect former CCs to rush out and buy this insignia if their command ended prior to the creation of the badge?

2. Ban on photosensitive (ie. "Transitions") lenses in formation. People spend a lot of money for prescription glasses, and some people require these lenses due to sensitivity to bright sunlight. Will CAP buy new glasses for cadets at Encampment (like Ma Blue does for Basic Training)?

3. Transition to dark blue insignia for BBDU. I know this is in preparation for ABU, but either way it is an unnecessary change. Ultramarine and white has served CAP for years with no problems. Vanguard claims it costs too much to stock ultramarine cloth. Tell that to any other nametape/embroidery company. Perhaps if they stopped producing junk no one buys... Also, the colors of the Air Force are Ultramarine and Gold, often complimented by White. The insignia in these colors allows us to wear the colors of Ma Blue and show our support for our parent organization.

Read the dark blue insignia carefully:
- Dark blue and white for name and CAP tapes
- Dark blue and silver for badges
- Dark blue and undefined for SM Officer insignia (either silver/gold or white/yellow)
- Dark blue and full color for Cadet Officers (silver or white?)

4. Expenses for SMWOG. Glad the flight cap issue has been resolved, but there's no reason to wear blank CAP epaulets. Their intended purpose was for pin-on NCO insignia. This is an unnecessary purchase for SMWOG, when most of these members wearing Blues will be in Cadet/Composite units, which should have a host of metal CAP cutouts dating back years to when cadets wore one chevron/one cutout.

5. Compliance for all wing and unit patches with USAF Heraldry Guidelines. Most Wing patches and many unit patches will have to be redone. And guess what? Under those guidelines, they must feature the colors Gold and Ultramarine. Why have dark blue and ultramarine blue on a uniform. Talk about clown suiting the whole uniform!

6. Cadet officers wearing cadet shoulder marks on the lightweight Blues jacket. Metal pin on insignia is just fine. This rule makes too much work for cadets who promote often. They must either modify the jacket epaulets to allow the shoulder marks to slide on and off, or the cadet must modify the shoulder marks and cut the bottom open and add Velcro.

7. Sleeve crease on the Blues shirt. The only reference is in the Honor Guard section. Ma Blue creases at the back edge of the epaulet, where the material naturally allows for a crease. CAP has maintained this more difficult standard of "centered on epaulet."

And some things to clarify from others here:

Looks like boots with Blues are authorized in many places. They are only not authorized for the Honor Guard uniform.

The blue winter hat looks like a Russian hat known as an Ushanka. Does this mean if someone finds a dark blue commercially available Ushanka, they can wear that? I can only assume CAP cadets will wind up looking something like this:

(http://www.ushanka.us/blog/images/ushanka3.10.11b.jpg)

In general, a lot of the manual leaves a lot to be desired, and creates more confusion than clarity on a number of issues. My 8 pages of comments may grow to 10 before I finally submit the whole thing.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 02, 2014, 11:48:40 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on January 02, 2014, 08:13:17 PM
There is a BISC patch.

Perhaps you should send a comment on the Inland school.

I believe BISC replaced SMC. Most SMC references searched on Google redirect to BISC. In addition, Ops Quals list this achievement as "SMC/BISC - AFRCC SAR Management Course".

If that's the case, then I agree that the reference on this draft should be updated/corrected. As Eclipse noted, BISC does have it's own patch.

If the Inland SAR Planning Course, which is a week-long, also have a patch (haven't seen it yet), I don't see why it shouldn't be authorized for wear as well.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ProdigalJim on January 03, 2014, 12:06:09 AM
^^^^

It does. We all got to buy one during the school. Whereas the BISC patch follows AF heraldry, the Inland SAR School patch is large, round, and light blue, with a big gull flying over the water to pluck someone to safety. It's a pretty patch and I'm proud to have earned one but it's not really "AF-looking" if you ask me.
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 12:14:03 AM
Quote from: ProdigalJim on January 03, 2014, 12:06:09 AM
^^^^

It does. We all got to buy one during the school. Whereas the BISC patch follows AF heraldry, the Inland SAR School patch is large, round, and light blue, with a big gull flying over the water to pluck someone to safety. It's a pretty patch and I'm proud to have earned one but it's not really "AF-looking" if you ask me.

Are you referring to the National Search and Rescue School Patch? Does it have the course name and/or the word graduate on it?

I believe the National SAR School is run by the U.S. Coast Guard (although the staff is joint Coast Guard/Air Force), which would explain why their patch doesn't meet the Air Force heraldry.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ProdigalJim on January 03, 2014, 12:26:27 AM
The National Inland SAR Planning Course; the five-day "graduate" level course that follows BISC.

Both BISC and this course are taught by AFRCC types, attached to the school which yes, is run by the Coast Guard. I guess they nod to their AF side with the BISC patch and the CG side with Inland SAR.

While BISC has a rocker that says "graduate," the Inland SAR patch is just a school patch. I'll try to put up an image later when I get home.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SARDOC on January 03, 2014, 12:52:41 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 12:14:03 AM
Quote from: ProdigalJim on January 03, 2014, 12:06:09 AM
^^^^

It does. We all got to buy one during the school. Whereas the BISC patch follows AF heraldry, the Inland SAR School patch is large, round, and light blue, with a big gull flying over the water to pluck someone to safety. It's a pretty patch and I'm proud to have earned one but it's not really "AF-looking" if you ask me.

Are you referring to the National Search and Rescue School Patch? Does it have the course name and/or the word graduate on it?

I believe the National SAR School is run by the U.S. Coast Guard (although the staff is joint Coast Guard/Air Force), which would explain why their patch doesn't meet the Air Force heraldry.

The National SAR School is a Joint USAF/USCG Command.  The patch being described is the National SAR School patch.  There is no patch specific to the Inland SAR Planner's Course.  The Inland SAR Planner's Course is just one on the classes taught by the National SAR School.  Completion of the Inland SAR Planner's Course, means you are a graduate of the National SAR School.  I can see why that would be misinterpreted as the National SAR School Patch being the Inland SAR Planner's Course patch though.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 01:00:45 AM
I've seen the National SAR School patch; just didn't know if there was a separate patch for Inland SAR Planning Course graduates, as this school offers other courses. Now, the question is whether this patch is authorized or not. The current CAPM 39-1 draft makes no mention of it.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SARDOC on January 03, 2014, 01:07:49 AM
I see that another change found in the new draft is that the EMT series badges have become a permanent award.  It specifically states current or previously certified will be allowed the badge.   However, the CPR patch is only for those currently certified.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Pylon on January 03, 2014, 01:19:20 AM
As of 01 JAN, this is the first time in 6+ years that I am not a voting member of the National Uniform Committee (or its predecessor, the NHQ Uniform Team) and can freely comment again on CAPM 39-1 and uniform related issues.  I am extremely proud that we pushed the draft through to completion.  Is it perfect?   No, and no human endeavor is. But keep readily in mind that a lot of work by some very dedicated volunteers went into rewriting this from the ground up.  Also keep in mind that the whole idea of the public comment period is for these types of errors, oversights, ambiguities, or even formatting issues to be discovered (crowd-sourced, if you will) so that the product can be improved.

The new version of CAPM 39-1 may not be perfect in everyone's eyes (face it: we will never, ever reach 100% consensus on any CAP uniform issue ever, in the history or future of the organization), but it is a pretty good improvement from where we were and a much needed step forward.  Be thorough and know your time spent reviewing and your well-thought comments will be appreciated, but also keep in mind that real people wrote this, poured hours and days and weeks and months of their time into this, and that we should also be appreciative and respectful of their efforts in preparing this for us and for the organization.


Be thorough but tactful in your commentary, please.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 03, 2014, 01:52:24 AM
Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 04:59:18 PM
Regarding t-shirts worn with bdus and field uniforms:
Many activities and encampments issue black t-shirts with a large logo on the back. Will these still be authorized? By reading the manual, it appears not. Or this up to the wing commander?

I don't have it with me, but I seem to recall a section stating that shirts with logos were okay as long as the logo was covered completely by the BDU blouse.

EDIT:  I'm wrong.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 03, 2014, 01:59:23 AM
Now that CAPM 39-1 is under review and comment, I would like to propose the wear of cloth name patches in addition to the leather name patch on the USAF-style FDU and CAP CFDU. They are currently prohibited by the regulation, and if I remember correctly a cloth name patch was approved by the NB/NEC but was apparently pigeonholed into a quiet death some years ago. So don't put me in stocks or tar and feather me for bringing up a heretical uniform subject... :)

You will notice that this proposal standardizes the name patch format across the board. The current name patch format was originally designed for the green bag when it was allowed for those who did not meet weight and grooming standards (and wore no grade insignia on the shoulders).

I welcome any comments on this proposal on CAPTalk.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 03, 2014, 02:13:35 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 02, 2014, 11:10:09 PM
3. Transition to dark blue insignia for BBDU. I know this is in preparation for ABU, but either way it is an unnecessary change. Ultramarine and white has served CAP for years with no problems.

I disagree.  I think the dark (navy?) blue is aesthetically better and nicer on the Blue BDU's.  I'm happy for this change.

Quote
Read the dark blue insignia carefully:
- Dark blue and white for name and CAP tapes
- Dark blue and silver for badges
- Dark blue and undefined for SM Officer insignia (either silver/gold or white/yellow)
- Dark blue and full color for Cadet Officers (silver or white?)

I'm assuming these variations are just things that slipped through on the first draft, and will be ironed out.

Quote
4. Expenses for SMWOG. Glad the flight cap issue has been resolved, but there's no reason to wear blank CAP epaulets. Their intended purpose was for pin-on NCO insignia. This is an unnecessary purchase for SMWOG, when most of these members wearing Blues will be in Cadet/Composite units, which should have a host of metal CAP cutouts dating back years to when cadets wore one chevron/one cutout.

It's not unreasonable for the local squadron to have a set or three of "loaner" blank rank slides for new SMWOG.  They only cost a couple of bucks.  I don't see this being an issue.

Quote
5. Compliance for all wing and unit patches with USAF Heraldry Guidelines. Most Wing patches and many unit patches will have to be redone. And guess what? Under those guidelines, they must feature the colors Gold and Ultramarine. Why have dark blue and ultramarine blue on a uniform. Talk about clown suiting the whole uniform!

I completely missed the section in the draft 39-1 that said that everybody would have to redesign their patches.  Could you point me to it?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ProdigalJim on January 03, 2014, 02:21:08 AM
Quote from: SARDOC on January 03, 2014, 12:52:41 AM
The patch being described is the National SAR School patch.  There is no patch specific to the Inland SAR Planner's Course.  The Inland SAR Planner's Course is just one on the classes taught by the National SAR School.  Completion of the Inland SAR Planner's Course, means you are a graduate of the National SAR School.  I can see why that would be misinterpreted as the National SAR School Patch being the Inland SAR Planner's Course patch though.

Yup. They told us, "you can buy this patch and wear it, now that you've finished this course." And yet, the patch, as you say, is not specific to the SAR Planner's Course. Here's what it looks like:

(http://www.uscg.mil/HQ/cg1/tracenyorktown/Ops/SAR/images/logo.gif)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: kd8gua on January 03, 2014, 02:33:25 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 03, 2014, 02:13:35 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 02, 2014, 11:10:09 PM
3. Transition to dark blue insignia for BBDU. I know this is in preparation for ABU, but either way it is an unnecessary change. Ultramarine and white has served CAP for years with no problems.

I disagree.  I think the dark (navy?) blue is aesthetically better and nicer on the Blue BDU's.  I'm happy for this change.

Quote
Read the dark blue insignia carefully:
- Dark blue and white for name and CAP tapes
- Dark blue and silver for badges
- Dark blue and undefined for SM Officer insignia (either silver/gold or white/yellow)
- Dark blue and full color for Cadet Officers (silver or white?)

I'm assuming these variations are just things that slipped through on the first draft, and will be ironed out.

Quote
4. Expenses for SMWOG. Glad the flight cap issue has been resolved, but there's no reason to wear blank CAP epaulets. Their intended purpose was for pin-on NCO insignia. This is an unnecessary purchase for SMWOG, when most of these members wearing Blues will be in Cadet/Composite units, which should have a host of metal CAP cutouts dating back years to when cadets wore one chevron/one cutout.

It's not unreasonable for the local squadron to have a set or three of "loaner" blank rank slides for new SMWOG.  They only cost a couple of bucks.  I don't see this being an issue.

Quote
5. Compliance for all wing and unit patches with USAF Heraldry Guidelines. Most Wing patches and many unit patches will have to be redone. And guess what? Under those guidelines, they must feature the colors Gold and Ultramarine. Why have dark blue and ultramarine blue on a uniform. Talk about clown suiting the whole uniform!

I completely missed the section in the draft 39-1 that said that everybody would have to redesign their patches.  Could you point me to it?

2.8.3 - Wing Commanders must ensure all wing/unit patches follow USAF Heraldry Guidelines. That means shield shaped wing patches and circular squadron patches, and use of gold borders and ultramarine within the design.

The rules for blank CAP epaulets and Command Badges seem to be fueled only by poorly selling stock at Vanguard.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 03, 2014, 02:40:34 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 03, 2014, 02:33:25 AM
2.8.3 - Wing Commanders must ensure all wing/unit patches follow USAF Heraldry Guidelines. That means shield shaped wing patches and circular squadron patches, and use of gold borders and ultramarine within the design.

Aaaaah.  Thanks.  Hmmm.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 02:45:52 AM
Does anyone know what happened to table 6-5 from the old manual ? I don't see it in the new one.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 03, 2014, 02:49:58 AM
In regards to the wing and unit patches that is for all new patches, not for those that are already in place.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 03, 2014, 02:53:02 AM
Quote from: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 02:45:52 AM
Does anyone know what happened to table 6-5 from the old manual ? I don't see it in the new one.

Page 120:

"11.2.1.1  -  US Awards. Federal awards awarded by competent authority may be worn on USAF-style uniforms in accordance with instructions contained in AFI 36-2903. National Guard awards will not be worn."

I take that as we will follow whatever guidelines that are in AFI 36-2903 for ribbon wear, so that table is no longer needed.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 02:58:07 AM
Thanks, I went through the AF manual and it is about as clear as the Army one, clear as mud:)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 03, 2014, 02:59:30 AM
Quote from: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 02:58:07 AM
Thanks, I went through the AF manual and it is about as clear as the Army one, clear as mud:)

I believe that what you're looking for is here (http://www.afpc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-130509-049.pdf).  Go to page 144. (Section 11.3)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: kd8gua on January 03, 2014, 03:00:53 AM
I know that most of the tables from the 2005 edition just copied the same information under each specific header, but it was extremely convenient to be able to reference a table at a glance for uniform and insignia wear. I know there aren't any tables in 36-2903, but does the 39-1 have to follow the 36-2903? Seems like tables would be helpful to the wide age range of CAP members.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 03, 2014, 03:07:46 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 03, 2014, 03:00:53 AM
I know that most of the tables from the 2005 edition just copied the same information under each specific header, but it was extremely convenient to be able to reference a table at a glance for uniform and insignia wear. I know there aren't any tables in 36-2903, but does the 39-1 have to follow the 36-2903? Seems like tables would be helpful to the wide age range of CAP members.

I guess they thought that "refer to 36-2903" would be better than putting a table in 39-1, and having to update 39-1 (or issuing an IICL) whenever Ma Blue changed 36-2903. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 03:13:44 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 03, 2014, 02:59:30 AM
Quote from: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 02:58:07 AM
Thanks, I went through the AF manual and it is about as clear as the Army one, clear as mud:)

I believe that what you're looking for is here (http://www.afpc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-130509-049.pdf).  Go to page 144. (Section 11.3)

Thanks, but actually no, looked it over doesn't answer the question, in table 6-5 it states badges from sister services allowed to be worn in a simple list. The new reg doesn't do anything but point at the Big Blue Reg, sorta like " go ask dad" then Dad tells you to " go ask Mom"
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 03, 2014, 03:18:37 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 03, 2014, 02:33:25 AM
The rules for blank CAP epaulets and Command Badges seem to be fueled only by poorly selling stock at Vanguard.

Actually the proposal for continued wearing of the command badge after leaving squadron commander has been around ever since the command badge was created (August 2003 {CAPMart days}).  Also, the wear of the command insignia is mandatory in the USAF, so again no surprise that it finally became mandatory in CAP.  Sorry, no Vanguard conspiracy on this. 

Quote from: AFI 36-2903Air Force Command Insignia: Current commander center 1/2 inch above nametag; graduated commander center 1/2 inch below nametag. If duty badges are worn with the command insignia (graduated commander), center the duty badge 1/2 inch below command insignia. AF Command insignia is mandatory.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 03:21:04 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 02, 2014, 11:10:09 PM
7. Sleeve crease on the Blues shirt. The only reference is in the Honor Guard section. Ma Blue creases at the back edge of the epaulet, where the material naturally allows for a crease. CAP has maintained this more difficult standard of "centered on epaulet."

Actually Ma Blue's manual says nothing about where the crease should be and in the absence of any guidance the crease goes where it falls naturally. "Centered on the epaulet" made sense when we had a wing patch on the sleeve - the natural crease would have divided the patch asymmetrically. When the wing patch was removed, the "centered on the epaulet" language remained, or at least that's my theory.

The verbiage in the draft's honor guard section about the crease being centered on the epaulet is probably an oversight.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 03, 2014, 03:22:44 AM
Quote from: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 03:13:44 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 03, 2014, 02:59:30 AM
Quote from: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 02:58:07 AM
Thanks, I went through the AF manual and it is about as clear as the Army one, clear as mud:)

I believe that what you're looking for is here (http://www.afpc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-130509-049.pdf).  Go to page 144. (Section 11.3)

Thanks, but actually no, looked it over doesn't answer the question, in table 6-5 it states badges from sister services allowed to be worn in a simple list. The new reg doesn't do anything but point at the Big Blue Reg, sorta like " go ask dad" then Dad tells you to " go ask Mom"


11.3. Non-Air Force Service Awards. ANG members wear state decorations when serving in state status, but not while on federal active duty.
11.3.1. Wear other military service department awards not included in paragraph 11.5 below in the order the awarding Service prescribes.
11.3.2. Air Force awards take precedence over equal awards from other Services.
11.3.3. Wear awards for wars, campaigns and expeditions in the order earned.
11.3.4. The Army Valorous Unit and Meritorious Unit Commendation awards are larger than Air Force ribbons. When members wear these awards (Army version) with their Air Force ribbons, they must purchase ribbons that are the same size as their Air Force ribbons.


I read this as "everything by the other branches are allowed, except National Guard."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 03, 2014, 03:30:15 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 02, 2014, 11:10:09 PM
5. Compliance for all wing and unit patches with USAF Heraldry Guidelines. Most Wing patches and many unit patches will have to be redone. And guess what? Under those guidelines, they must feature the colors Gold and Ultramarine. Why have dark blue and ultramarine blue on a uniform. Talk about clown suiting the whole uniform!

Might want to reread that again and quote correctly.  It does not say patches will need to be redesigned:

Quote2.8.3 The wing commander is the approval authority for organizational patches worn by subordinate units within the wing and will ensure that new patches meet the intent of the USAF heraldic guidelines published by the Air Force Historical Research Agency and the CAP National Historian Program.

and

Quote10.7.8 Organizational Patch. Emblem approved by the wing commander for wear by subordinate unit (group, squadron, flight) personnel. Patches designed after the date of this manual will meet the intent of the USAF heraldic guidelines published by the Air Force Historical Research Agency.

It does not say:
Quote from: kd8gua on January 03, 2014, 02:33:25 AM
2.8.3 - Wing Commanders must ensure all wing/unit patches follow USAF Heraldry Guidelines. That means shield shaped wing patches and circular squadron patches, and use of gold borders and ultramarine within the design.

Therefore, depending on how the regulations are written on the CAP National Historian Program this might be different.  However, according to this they are only required to meet those guidelines if you redesign the patch.

Quote
7. Sleeve crease on the Blues shirt. The only reference is in the Honor Guard section. Ma Blue creases at the back edge of the epaulet, where the material naturally allows for a crease. CAP has maintained this more difficult standard of "centered on epaulet."

Actually that requirement came only with the publishing of the current CAPM39-1 (2005).  The previous 1997 edition never once stated where the crease should be.  Therefore, I wore it where the crease naturally fell on all the shirts I bought.  That would be behind my epaulet.  Removing this requirement was a good and the correct thing to do.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: kd8gua on January 03, 2014, 04:01:23 AM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 03, 2014, 03:30:15 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 02, 2014, 11:10:09 PM
5. Compliance for all wing and unit patches with USAF Heraldry Guidelines. Most Wing patches and many unit patches will have to be redone. And guess what? Under those guidelines, they must feature the colors Gold and Ultramarine. Why have dark blue and ultramarine blue on a uniform. Talk about clown suiting the whole uniform!

Might want to reread that again and quote correctly.  It does not say patches will need to be redesigned:

Quote2.8.3 The wing commander is the approval authority for organizational patches worn by subordinate units within the wing and will ensure that new patches meet the intent of the USAF heraldic guidelines published by the Air Force Historical Research Agency and the CAP National Historian Program.

and

Quote10.7.8 Organizational Patch. Emblem approved by the wing commander for wear by subordinate unit (group, squadron, flight) personnel. Patches designed after the date of this manual will meet the intent of the USAF heraldic guidelines published by the Air Force Historical Research Agency.

It does not say:
Quote from: kd8gua on January 03, 2014, 02:33:25 AM
2.8.3 - Wing Commanders must ensure all wing/unit patches follow USAF Heraldry Guidelines. That means shield shaped wing patches and circular squadron patches, and use of gold borders and ultramarine within the design.

Therefore, depending on how the regulations are written on the CAP National Historian Program this might be different.  However, according to this they are only required to meet those guidelines if you redesign the patch.

Quote
7. Sleeve crease on the Blues shirt. The only reference is in the Honor Guard section. Ma Blue creases at the back edge of the epaulet, where the material naturally allows for a crease. CAP has maintained this more difficult standard of "centered on epaulet."

Actually that requirement came only with the publishing of the current CAPM39-1 (2005).  The previous 1997 edition never once stated where the crease should be.  Therefore, I wore it where the crease naturally fell on all the shirts I bought.  That would be behind my epaulet.  Removing this requirement was a good and the correct thing to do.

The "new patches only" portion was an oversight on my part. Good catch. I hope the Honor Guard section is an oversight!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 03, 2014, 04:01:42 AM
Quote from: arajca on January 02, 2014, 07:10:58 PMWill comments submitted online be viewable by the vast unwashed massesgeneral membership?
If that's anything like the governance study comments, even if "they" say so, don't hold your breath on it. Though OTOH, there's probably more comments in this thread right here than any where else, period. These are visible.
Quote from: Papabird on January 02, 2014, 03:23:02 PMInteresting find and it fits the description from the draft reg.http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/rothco-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black (http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/rothco-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black?gclid=CLKghqvk37sCFUho7Aod7lIAEA)I might pick one up just because $35.00 isn't bad for a coat like this.
It's Rothco.. $35 is too much.


On the whole heraldry, patch design, and the historian guidelines.. If their intention is to force everyone into a redesign phase.. I see it as nothing more than a historian program gone amok. Beating the "Look at the power I have" drum. I'm not happy with any of it. As a "from here on out going forward" thing, I'd see a lot less problem with it, and I don't mean "until reordering", I mean leave everyones stuff alone. It hasn't caused problems in 70+ years, channel that energy somewhere else.
This is really for the other thread anyway.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: unmlobo on January 03, 2014, 04:24:54 AM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 03, 2014, 01:59:23 AM
Now that CAPM 39-1 is under review and comment, I would like to propose the wear of cloth name patches in addition to the leather name patch on the USAF-style FDU and CAP CFDU. They are currently prohibited by the regulation, and if I remember correctly a cloth name patch was approved by the NB/NEC but was apparently pigeonholed into a quiet death some years ago. So don't put me in stocks or tar and feather me for bringing up a heretical uniform subject... :)

You will notice that this proposal standardizes the name patch format across the board. The current name patch format was originally designed for the green bag when it was allowed for those who did not meet weight and grooming standards (and wore no grade insignia on the shoulders).

I welcome any comments on this proposal on CAPTalk.

I like this proposal and it would be more in line with Big Blue plus it does look nicer than the leather one IMHO.  However, I am curious why you feel that military badges should not be worn on them?  If they are okay by the 39-1 on uniforms then why not the Aircrew Name-tags?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 04:39:27 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 03, 2014, 03:22:44 AM
Quote from: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 03:13:44 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 03, 2014, 02:59:30 AM
Quote from: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 02:58:07 AM
Thanks, I went through the AF manual and it is about as clear as the Army one, clear as mud:)

I believe that what you're looking for is here (http://www.afpc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-130509-049.pdf).  Go to page 144. (Section 11.3)

Thanks, but actually no, looked it over doesn't answer the question, in table 6-5 it states badges from sister services allowed to be worn in a simple list. The new reg doesn't do anything but point at the Big Blue Reg, sorta like " go ask dad" then Dad tells you to " go ask Mom"


11.3. Non-Air Force Service Awards. ANG members wear state decorations when serving in state status, but not while on federal active duty.
11.3.1. Wear other military service department awards not included in paragraph 11.5 below in the order the awarding Service prescribes.
11.3.2. Air Force awards take precedence over equal awards from other Services.
11.3.3. Wear awards for wars, campaigns and expeditions in the order earned.
11.3.4. The Army Valorous Unit and Meritorious Unit Commendation awards are larger than Air Force ribbons. When members wear these awards (Army version) with their Air Force ribbons, they must purchase ribbons that are the same size as their Air Force ribbons.


I read this as "everything by the other branches are allowed, except National Guard."

Having come from the big green Weenie I and many others have a special kind of hate for AR 670-1 which seems to have been written by 1000 lawyers and 500 preschool children.  Whenever something is written that can be interpreted in more than one way it will be. If I go with how you read it then army CAB's, EIB's, AirAssualt wings ect are now permitted. I don't think it will be worked out that way but it could be interpreted that way. I know it's asking for much, but I would like to see one regulation written in such a way that there is no grey area or area that can be stretched to fit all meanings.

Also in my view which may be wrong I think 11.3 deals with ribbons and such not badges.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 03, 2014, 04:39:58 AM
Quote from: unmlobo on January 03, 2014, 04:24:54 AM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 03, 2014, 01:59:23 AM
Now that CAPM 39-1 is under review and comment, I would like to propose the wear of cloth name patches in addition to the leather name patch on the USAF-style FDU and CAP CFDU. They are currently prohibited by the regulation, and if I remember correctly a cloth name patch was approved by the NB/NEC but was apparently pigeonholed into a quiet death some years ago. So don't put me in stocks or tar and feather me for bringing up a heretical uniform subject... :)

You will notice that this proposal standardizes the name patch format across the board. The current name patch format was originally designed for the green bag when it was allowed for those who did not meet weight and grooming standards (and wore no grade insignia on the shoulders).

I welcome any comments on this proposal on CAPTalk.

I like this proposal and it would be more in line with Big Blue plus it does look nicer than the leather one IMHO.  However, I am curious why you feel that military badges should not be worn on them?  If they are okay by the 39-1 on uniforms then why not the Aircrew Name-tags?

Because the current 39-1 only allows CAP aeronautical ratings and specialty badges on the flight suit patch. Normally, I wouldn't have a problem with military wings and specialty badges on the name patch but this might give the proposal a fighting chance. Plus two wings (one military and one CAP) just looks clunky. I'd rather see one or the other, not both.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 03, 2014, 04:48:33 AM
Quote from: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 04:39:27 AM
Having come from the big green Weenie I and many others have a special kind of hate for AR 670-1 which seems to have been written by 1000 lawyers and 500 preschool children.

In crayon.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 03, 2014, 11:22:10 AM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 03, 2014, 01:59:23 AM
Now that CAPM 39-1 is under review and comment, I would like to propose the wear of cloth name patches in addition to the leather name patch on the USAF-style FDU and CAP CFDU. They are currently prohibited by the regulation, and if I remember correctly a cloth name patch was approved by the NB/NEC but was apparently pigeonholed into a quiet death some years ago. So don't put me in stocks or tar and feather me for bringing up a heretical uniform subject... :)

You will notice that this proposal standardizes the name patch format across the board. The current name patch format was originally designed for the green bag when it was allowed for those who did not meet weight and grooming standards (and wore no grade insignia on the shoulders).

I welcome any comments on this proposal on CAPTalk.

The NUC (and more specifically the rewrite committee) were told that suggesting FDU changes to the USAF was not preferred at this moment.

Thus, you will see, no changes to flight uniforms.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 03, 2014, 12:49:18 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 03, 2014, 11:22:10 AM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 03, 2014, 01:59:23 AM
Now that CAPM 39-1 is under review and comment, I would like to propose the wear of cloth name patches in addition to the leather name patch on the USAF-style FDU and CAP CFDU. They are currently prohibited by the regulation, and if I remember correctly a cloth name patch was approved by the NB/NEC but was apparently pigeonholed into a quiet death some years ago. So don't put me in stocks or tar and feather me for bringing up a heretical uniform subject... :)

You will notice that this proposal standardizes the name patch format across the board. The current name patch format was originally designed for the green bag when it was allowed for those who did not meet weight and grooming standards (and wore no grade insignia on the shoulders).

I welcome any comments on this proposal on CAPTalk.

The NUC (and more specifically the rewrite committee) were told that suggesting FDU changes to the USAF was not preferred at this moment.

Thus, you will see, no changes to flight uniforms.

Oh well... at least we tried... :(
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Patterson on January 03, 2014, 01:40:09 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 03, 2014, 11:22:10 AM
The NUC (and more specifically the rewrite committee) were told that suggesting FDU changes to the USAF was not preferred at this moment.

Thus, you will see, no changes to flight uniforms.

Isn't this the right time to bring all "wanted changes to the Air Force style uniforms" to the Air Force.  Like submitting a six page list of wants with reasons (perhaps handed in with the CAP NCO proposal request). Asking for permission to wear embroidered grade insignia instead of plastic encased insignia on the Flightsuit seems minor compared to seeking permission to redesign NCO grade insignia.

This whole thing is a piecemeal mess!!  Instead of consolidation and streamlining, we get added bling and options of accessories that serve a very small percentage of the general membership. 

I'm sorry, but I absolutely dislike the regulation as written, disagree with the style and format and strongly believe that this project has veered off target. 

What about cost??  Not a single person in 14 pages of posts have stated the bottom line issue that impacts every single member.  It seems apparent that the uniform committee has been influenced by the special interest cliques within the organization.  Why would we allow Wing Commanders (who change every four years) the opportunity to dictate what type/color/design of hats, cords, accessories, etc are to be worn by members in their Wing?  Even after this draft regulation is published, each Wing will continue to do its own thing, continuing to keep the uniformed masses of the organization essentially non-uniform! 
EXAMPLE: Pennsylvania Wing orange ball caps will be worn by those members wearing BDUs, yet should they leave their wing to attend activities they must purchase the BDU cover so they are within current regulation.  How silly is that practice?  Shame on those leaders that continue that and similar practices.

It's time to write down exactly what will be worn by ALL members, instead what has been presented is a guidance that further increases member costs, continues elitist practices and allows deviation from a standard based on the principle of "I'm the leader and I can make changes because I can" ideology.

Sorry to be so negative, but I really expected a much better product than what has been drafted.  (Also, it wasn't cool to hold off on releasing the draft on the basis of "we need to take pictures", since some photos are either rehashed monstrosities or cut and pasted items from prior works). 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 02:31:09 PM
With regard to:

10.3.2 Military aviation badges (to include USAF air, space and cyberspace badges) may be worn when appropriate orders granted by competent military authority are present in the member's CAP personnel record.

Anyone know if a DD214 would suffice to document appropriate orders? In the current manual, military aviation badges are required to be "awarded in writing by competent authority" which is documented on my DD214. 10.3.2 of the new manual appears to impose a new records-keeping requirement, and I haven't been able to find any guidance on where this will be stored.

CAPR 10-2 addresses personnel records, but seems limited to CAPFs filed in one's paper record, and there doesn't seem to be an e-services capability to upload documents that would constitute "appropriate orders."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 03, 2014, 02:34:33 PM
Quote from: Patterson on January 03, 2014, 01:40:09 PM
Isn't this the right time to bring all "wanted changes to the Air Force style uniforms" to the Air Force.  Like submitting a six page list of wants with reasons (perhaps handed in with the CAP NCO proposal request). Asking for permission to wear embroidered grade insignia instead of plastic encased insignia on the Flightsuit seems minor compared to seeking permission to redesign NCO grade insignia.

When CAP-USAF says "Now isn't the right time to ask for changes to flight uniforms," I bet they *might* know what they're talking about.  Call me crazy.

I agree: when you're already asking for a half-dozen uniform changes, why not a few more, right?  But I'm guessing that things like NCO stripes were coordinated 10-12 months ago or more (heck, some enterprising colonel at HAF may have created those insignia 5 years ago, for all we know!) and HAF was like "OK, got your current proposals and the ABU package from last year. No more uniform items for now."

QuoteThis whole thing is a piecemeal mess!!  Instead of consolidation and streamlining, we get added bling and options of accessories that serve a very small percentage of the general membership. 

Could you be more specific about "options of accessories that serve a very small percentage of the general membership"?  I know the commander's badge is one item, likely, but are there others?

QuoteI'm sorry, but I absolutely dislike the regulation as written, disagree with the style and format and strongly believe that this project has veered off target. 

Considering that its style & format is designed to mirror the corresponding AFMAN, what style & format would you suggest?

Quote
What about cost??  Not a single person in 14 pages of posts have stated the bottom line issue that impacts every single member.  It seems apparent that the uniform committee has been influenced by the special interest cliques within the organization.  Why would we allow Wing Commanders (who change every four years) the opportunity to dictate what type/color/design of hats, cords, accessories, etc are to be worn by members in their Wing?  Even after this draft regulation is published, each Wing will continue to do its own thing, continuing to keep the uniformed masses of the organization essentially non-uniform!

"If Andrew gets to get up, we'll all get up, it'll be anarchy!"

What special interest cliques are you referring to? 

And I hate to break it to you, but wing commanders have had pretty much the same latitude in terms of the accessories they could authorize and specify for years.  Example: cords. For academics, drill team, color guard, etc.   

So yeah, when you get 10 cadets from across the region together, its probably going to be "corducopia" of colors.

"So, Timmy, what exactly is a blaze orange cord for?"

"Outstanding Honorable Excellence in Safety Guard Honor Patrol Aerospace, sir!"

"Thats so moto. I'm about to faint I'm so motivated by that!"

But a wing commander could come in and says "OK, no more wing patches. They were optional, and in this wing we're no longer going to opt for them wing wide."  OMG, $4.00, right down the tubes.   Thats *always* been that way.

QuoteEXAMPLE: Pennsylvania Wing orange ball caps will be worn by those members wearing BDUs, yet should they leave their wing to attend activities they must purchase the BDU cover so they are within current regulation.  How silly is that practice?  Shame on those leaders that continue that and similar practices.

Been like that for years.   Honestly, while I got that squadrons could have their own ball caps (for YEARS) my cadets still had BDU caps for encampments and whatever.   Personally, I subscribed to the KISS principal and just kept my troopers in BDU caps, but I've seen it done other ways.   The BDU cap is the "basic" part of the uniform.  A locally specified ball cap is the "add on". Why would you only possess the "add on"?


QuoteSorry to be so negative, but I really expected a much better product than what has been drafted.  (Also, it wasn't cool to hold off on releasing the draft on the basis of "we need to take pictures", since some photos are either rehashed monstrosities or cut and pasted items from prior works).

Can't disagree with you about the photos.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 02:36:37 PM
Quote from: Patterson on January 03, 2014, 01:40:09 PM
It's time to write down exactly what will be worn by ALL members, instead what has been presented is a guidance that further increases member costs, continues elitist practices and allows deviation from a standard based on the principle of "I'm the leader and I can make changes because I can" ideology.

In my reading the uniform requirements seem pretty clear. I haven't found anything that will increase cost for me or my cadets, and I appreciate the new-to-CAP-but-true-to-AFI 36-2903 format. Though I think we should switch to the AF directives system entirely and call this document an instruction, not a manual.

Overall, I think this draft is a very positive improvement.
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 03:09:57 PM
Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 02:31:09 PM
With regard to:

10.3.2 Military aviation badges (to include USAF air, space and cyberspace badges) may be worn when appropriate orders granted by competent military authority are present in the member's CAP personnel record.

Anyone know if a DD214 would suffice to document appropriate orders? In the current manual, military aviation badges are required to be "awarded in writing by competent authority" which is documented on my DD214. 10.3.2 of the new manual appears to impose a new records-keeping requirement, and I haven't been able to find any guidance on where this will be stored.

CAPR 10-2 addresses personnel records, but seems limited to CAPFs filed in one's paper record, and there doesn't seem to be an e-services capability to upload documents that would constitute "appropriate orders."

"[A]ppropriate orders" may be a copy of your aeronautical orders or DD214 documenting your aeronautical rating. Your unit personnel record should have a copy of this document. If your unit doesn't keep hardcopy personnel records (they should since eServices can't document all your personnel training and achievements at the moment), then you should still have a copy available in your own personal record to document your rating if/when needed.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ranviper on January 03, 2014, 03:36:33 PM
For those complaining about cost... This is a para-military organization, and you're a volunteer. If you want to participate, you need to follow the rules, and the rules require us to look professional. To look professional, one must spend money on the proper equipment. This is what has been decided by both the USAF and CAP by professionals. If you don't like it, many of the events allow you to wear civies as an alternative. Its like a job. Lots of jobs require you wear a suit and tie, but they don't give the suits and ties to you - it's your own responsibility to buy them. Same with a lot of military uniform stuff. I had to buy my dress blues in the Army after they phased out class a's. I'll sound like a bag, but IMHO suck it up.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 03, 2014, 03:54:15 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 03, 2014, 03:22:44 AM
Quote from: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 03:13:44 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 03, 2014, 02:59:30 AM
Quote from: DennisH on January 03, 2014, 02:58:07 AM
Thanks, I went through the AF manual and it is about as clear as the Army one, clear as mud:)

I believe that what you're looking for is here (http://www.afpc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-130509-049.pdf).  Go to page 144. (Section 11.3)

Thanks, but actually no, looked it over doesn't answer the question, in table 6-5 it states badges from sister services allowed to be worn in a simple list. The new reg doesn't do anything but point at the Big Blue Reg, sorta like " go ask dad" then Dad tells you to " go ask Mom"


11.3. Non-Air Force Service Awards. ANG members wear state decorations when serving in state status, but not while on federal active duty.
11.3.1. Wear other military service department awards not included in paragraph 11.5 below in the order the awarding Service prescribes.
11.3.2. Air Force awards take precedence over equal awards from other Services.
11.3.3. Wear awards for wars, campaigns and expeditions in the order earned.
11.3.4. The Army Valorous Unit and Meritorious Unit Commendation awards are larger than Air Force ribbons. When members wear these awards (Army version) with their Air Force ribbons, they must purchase ribbons that are the same size as their Air Force ribbons.


I read this as "everything by the other branches are allowed, except National Guard."

So, your saying that NAVY Warefare Pins can be worn now? :)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 03, 2014, 03:57:48 PM
Hmm, I just realized this:

4.1.5.4.4.1 ... "The second badge will be centered ½ inch above the first badge." in relation to this, "If a military aviation badge (aeronautical, space or cyberspace) is worn, it will be worn in the second position." (emphasis mine)

Uh, am I reading this to say that military aviation goes in the second position, which is ABOVE the CAP wings?  If so, then what about this:

"Chaplain and CAP aviation badges are mandatory and will always be worn in the highest position."

I think the top "second" should be changed to first, but ???
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 04:07:11 PM
Quote from: Papabird on January 03, 2014, 03:57:48 PM
Hmm, I just realized this:

4.1.5.4.4.1 ... "The second badge will be centered ½ inch above the first badge." in relation to this, "If a military aviation badge (aeronautical, space or cyberspace) is worn, it will be worn in the second position." (emphasis mine)

Uh, am I reading this to say that military aviation goes in the second position, which is ABOVE the CAP wings?  If so, then what about this:

"Chaplain and CAP aviation badges are mandatory and will always be worn in the highest position."

I think the top "second" should be changed to first, but ???

That's not what they mean. One is referring to the number of badges (i.e. second badge) and the other to the position or placement (i.e. second position). Perhaps a better way to express it would be "bottom" or "lower" position. That said, the intend is still clear; only two badges above the ribbons can be worn, CAP chaplain/CAP aviation goes on top, and two non-aviation badges may also be worn.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: UH60guy on January 03, 2014, 04:07:41 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 03:09:57 PM
Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 02:31:09 PM
With regard to:

10.3.2 Military aviation badges (to include USAF air, space and cyberspace badges) may be worn when appropriate orders granted by competent military authority are present in the member's CAP personnel record.

Anyone know if a DD214 would suffice to document appropriate orders? In the current manual, military aviation badges are required to be "awarded in writing by competent authority" which is documented on my DD214. 10.3.2 of the new manual appears to impose a new records-keeping requirement, and I haven't been able to find any guidance on where this will be stored.

CAPR 10-2 addresses personnel records, but seems limited to CAPFs filed in one's paper record, and there doesn't seem to be an e-services capability to upload documents that would constitute "appropriate orders."

"[A]ppropriate orders" may be a copy of your aeronautical orders or DD214 documenting your aeronautical rating. Your unit personnel record should have a copy of this document. If your unit doesn't keep hardcopy personnel records (they should since eServices can't document all your personnel training and achievements at the moment), then you should still have a copy available in your own personal record to document your rating if/when needed.

It'll work sir- but be aware it says "competent" military authority, so the Navy guys are out of luck. BOOM, squid slam.  ;D

On that note, here's a question I've been wondering about- do USCG aviators fall under competent "military" authorities as part of the Dept. of Homeland Security?
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 04:11:46 PM
Quote from: UH60guy on January 03, 2014, 04:07:41 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 03:09:57 PM
Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 02:31:09 PM
With regard to:

10.3.2 Military aviation badges (to include USAF air, space and cyberspace badges) may be worn when appropriate orders granted by competent military authority are present in the member's CAP personnel record.

Anyone know if a DD214 would suffice to document appropriate orders? In the current manual, military aviation badges are required to be "awarded in writing by competent authority" which is documented on my DD214. 10.3.2 of the new manual appears to impose a new records-keeping requirement, and I haven't been able to find any guidance on where this will be stored.

CAPR 10-2 addresses personnel records, but seems limited to CAPFs filed in one's paper record, and there doesn't seem to be an e-services capability to upload documents that would constitute "appropriate orders."

"[A]ppropriate orders" may be a copy of your aeronautical orders or DD214 documenting your aeronautical rating. Your unit personnel record should have a copy of this document. If your unit doesn't keep hardcopy personnel records (they should since eServices can't document all your personnel training and achievements at the moment), then you should still have a copy available in your own personal record to document your rating if/when needed.

It'll work sir- but be aware it says "competent" military authority, so the Navy guys are out of luck. BOOM, squid slam.  ;D

On that note, here's a question I've been wondering about- do USCG aviators fall under competent "military" authorities as part of the Dept. of Homeland Security?

Yes, they do. Their aeronautical ratings are recognized by the Navy and they are part of the U.S. Armed Forces, just not the Department of Defense. In times of war, they may be placed under the Department of the Navy.

(edited for grammar)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Hawk200 on January 03, 2014, 04:14:48 PM
Quote from: UH60guy on January 03, 2014, 04:07:41 PM
On that note, here's a question I've been wondering about- do USCG aviators fall under competent "military" authorities as part of the Dept. of Homeland Security?
Coasties are generally considered military. How they report is rather unusual. They do answer to the Navy on some aspects, DHS in others, and still others to FEMA (that I've heard.)  Had a Coastie in AF weather school that told me much of this.

Considering that there were Coasties in Iraq, and that it is possible for some Coasties to attend SEAL training, and be operational with the Navy, I'd consider them very much military.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 04:17:11 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 04:11:46 PM

Quote from: UH60guy on January 03, 2014, 04:07:41 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 03:09:57 PM
Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 02:31:09 PM
With regard to:

10.3.2 Military aviation badges (to include USAF air, space and cyberspace badges) may be worn when appropriate orders granted by competent military authority are present in the member's CAP personnel record.

Anyone know if a DD214 would suffice to document appropriate orders? In the current manual, military aviation badges are required to be "awarded in writing by competent authority" which is documented on my DD214. 10.3.2 of the new manual appears to impose a new records-keeping requirement, and I haven't been able to find any guidance on where this will be stored.

CAPR 10-2 addresses personnel records, but seems limited to CAPFs filed in one's paper record, and there doesn't seem to be an e-services capability to upload documents that would constitute "appropriate orders."

"[A]ppropriate orders" may be a copy of your aeronautical orders or DD214 documenting your aeronautical rating. Your unit personnel record should have a copy of this document. If your unit doesn't keep hardcopy personnel records (they should since eServices can't document all your personnel training and achievements at the moment), then you should still have a copy available in your own personal record to document your rating if/when needed.

It'll work sir- but be aware it says "competent" military authority, so the Navy guys are out of luck. BOOM, squid slam.  ;D

On that note, here's a question I've been wondering about- do USCG aviators fall under competent "military" authorities as part of the Dept. of Homeland Security?

Yes, they do. They're aeronautical ratings are recognized by the Navy and they are part of the U.S. Armed Forces, just not the Department of Defense. In times of war, they may be placed under the Department of the Navy.

USCG aviators are Naval Aviators - they wear wings of gold authorized by competent authority (i.e. the Navy)... ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 04:20:19 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 03, 2014, 03:54:15 PM
So, your saying that NAVY Warefare Pins can be worn now? :)

The AFI 36-2904 authorizes other service aviation badges only (no non-aviation other service badges). See section 10 (of AFI 36-2903).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 03, 2014, 04:48:49 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 04:11:46 PM
Yes, they do. They're aeronautical ratings are recognized by the Navy and they are part of the U.S. Armed Forces, just not the Department of Defense. In times of war, they may be placed under the Department of the Navy.

Correct.  The USCG is considered "at all times an armed service of the United States," one of the five such entities.

They are not always under DoD, but their members are always subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. 

So are their Auxiliarists, when the Commandant USCG directs them to be called into the Temporary Reserve - something that does not happen with CAP.

You do salute their commissioned and warrant officers.

Their Aircrew wear the same "wings of gold" that Navy and Marine Aviators do and they go through the Naval Aviation training syllabus at NAS Pensacola.

One thing I'm curious about is if NOAA Commissioned Corps aviation wings are allowed.  They are a uniformed service (like the USPHS), wear uniforms almost identical to the Navy and the aviation wings are very similar, though not identical.

(http://www.noaacorps.noaa.gov/art/insig/wings.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 03, 2014, 04:50:13 PM
Whats this "Dark Blue Windbreaker"?  They have no photo and Vanguard does not carry such a product.  It sounds the same as the ultramarine windbreaker just in a darker color.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 04:56:04 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 03, 2014, 04:48:49 PM

One thing I'm curious about is if NOAA Commissioned Corps aviation wings are allowed.  They are a uniformed service (like the USPHS), wear uniforms almost identical to the Navy and the aviation wings are very similar, though not identical.

(http://www.noaacorps.noaa.gov/art/insig/wings.jpg)

Interesting question. The CAPM 39-1 (and the new draft) states "military aviation badges", but the AFI 36-2903 states "Aeronautical badges of other US services." NOAA isn't military; I'm not sure whether "US Services" implies military or includes other government agencies.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 03, 2014, 05:06:45 PM
Quote from: VNY on January 03, 2014, 04:50:13 PM
Whats this "Dark Blue Windbreaker"?  They have no photo and Vanguard does not carry such a product.  It sounds the same as the ultramarine windbreaker just in a darker color.

I'm betting that's what it is, or going to be, but it hasn't been manufactured yet...maybe when VG runs out of stock of the ultramarine jacket?

Maybe it will roughly look something like this Belgian Air Force jacket, if not in cut, then in shade of blue.

(http://www.candcms.co.uk/images/products/belgian%20blue%20bomber%20jacket.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 03, 2014, 05:48:44 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 04:07:11 PM
Quote from: Papabird on January 03, 2014, 03:57:48 PM
Hmm, I just realized this:

4.1.5.4.4.1 ... "The second badge will be centered ½ inch above the first badge." in relation to this, "If a military aviation badge (aeronautical, space or cyberspace) is worn, it will be worn in the second position." (emphasis mine)

Uh, am I reading this to say that military aviation goes in the second position, which is ABOVE the CAP wings?  If so, then what about this:

"Chaplain and CAP aviation badges are mandatory and will always be worn in the highest position."

I think the top "second" should be changed to first, but ???

That's not what they mean. One is referring to the number of badges (i.e. second badge) and the other to the position or placement (i.e. second position). Perhaps a better way to express it would be "bottom" or "lower" position. That said, the intend is still clear; only two badges above the ribbons can be worn, CAP chaplain/CAP aviation goes on top, and two non-aviation badges may also be worn.

Agreed it is not what they mean.  :) They need to change to either of the suggestions above.  Submitted.  ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 05:59:23 PM

Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 04:56:04 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 03, 2014, 04:48:49 PM

One thing I'm curious about is if NOAA Commissioned Corps aviation wings are allowed.  They are a uniformed service (like the USPHS), wear uniforms almost identical to the Navy and the aviation wings are very similar, though not identical.

(http://www.noaacorps.noaa.gov/art/insig/wings.jpg)

Interesting question. The CAPM 39-1 (and the new draft) states "military aviation badges", but the AFI 36-2903 states "Aeronautical badges of other US services." NOAA isn't military; I'm not sure whether "US Services" implies military or includes other government agencies.

NOAA Officer Corps are part of the seven U.S. Uniformed Services, but not part of the five U.S. Armed Forces. They are commissioned officers, but they're not part of the military. My interpretation is that anywhere CAPM 39-1 references "military services" it is referring to the five Armed Services: Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard. These services are always subject to the UCMJ. In contrast, the NOAA and PHS Commissioned Corps, which are noncombatant, are only subject to the UCMJ when "militarized" by the president.

While the current draft uses the term "other service" when referring to aeronautical badges, I believe the intent is "military" service. This, however, should be clarified to avoid confusion as it is not specifically stated as such.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 06:07:38 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 05:59:23 PM
While the current draft uses the term "other service" when referring to aeronautical badges, I believe the intent is "military" service. This, however, should be clarified to avoid confusion as it is not specifically stated as such.

Other way around. The AFI 36-2903 uses the term other services; the draft CAPM 39-1 uses the term "military".
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 06:28:55 PM

Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 06:07:38 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 05:59:23 PM
While the current draft uses the term "other service" when referring to aeronautical badges, I believe the intent is "military" service. This, however, should be clarified to avoid confusion as it is not specifically stated as such.

Other way around. The AFI 36-2903 uses the term other services; the draft CAPM 39-1 uses the term "military".

Actually...

Quote from: CAPM 39-1 Draft4.1.5.4.4.1 Aviation (CAP, USAF or other service Aeronautical, Space, Cyberspace)... (emphasis mine)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 06:55:24 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 06:28:55 PM

Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 06:07:38 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 03, 2014, 05:59:23 PM
While the current draft uses the term "other service" when referring to aeronautical badges, I believe the intent is "military" service. This, however, should be clarified to avoid confusion as it is not specifically stated as such.

Other way around. The AFI 36-2903 uses the term other services; the draft CAPM 39-1 uses the term "military".

Actually...

Quote from: CAPM 39-1 Draft4.1.5.4.4.1 Aviation (CAP, USAF or other service Aeronautical, Space, Cyberspace)... (emphasis mine)

You have to look in the appropriate section, Section 10 - Badges and Specialty Insignia.

10.3.2 Military aviation badges (to include USAF air, space and cyberspace badges) may be worn when appropriate orders granted by competent military authority are present in the member's CAP personnel record.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 03, 2014, 07:09:49 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 03, 2014, 05:06:45 PM
Quote from: VNY on January 03, 2014, 04:50:13 PM
Whats this "Dark Blue Windbreaker"?  They have no photo and Vanguard does not carry such a product.  It sounds the same as the ultramarine windbreaker just in a darker color.

I'm betting that's what it is, or going to be, but it hasn't been manufactured yet...maybe when VG runs out of stock of the ultramarine jacket?
One difference is they say the Ultramarine jacket currently in use is OK to wear over civilian clothing - whereas the new "Dark Blue" jacket will not be.   Possibly so that we will be able to keep using the current style jacket as "Leisure Wear" once the new item is available.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 03, 2014, 07:34:44 PM
So?.... does this mean the FMF Pin is now authorized? we are the "Military" we have the best SF hands down :)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 03, 2014, 07:50:05 PM
Is the FMF pin authorized for wear on an Air Force uniform in the AFMAN? That's really sort of the guiding principle for "can I or can't I" with other services badges.

That's not 100 percent because national headquarters has authorized a few things that don't seem to be meeting that standard
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 03, 2014, 08:41:46 PM
I have emailed wing Several Times, to try to get Approval, No Answer...
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 03, 2014, 08:54:01 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 03, 2014, 08:41:46 PM
I have emailed wing Several Times, to try to get Approval, No Answer...

Wing doesn't have that authority. 

39-1 directs members to contact NHQ.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 09:01:48 PM
The AFI 36-2903 doesn't allow any other (non-USAF) military badges to be worn on the Air Force uniform except for aeronautical badges awarded by other services.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 03, 2014, 09:04:11 PM
Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 09:01:48 PM
The AFI 36-2903 doesn't allow any other (non-USAF) military badges to be worn on the Air Force uniform except for aeronautical badges awarded by other services.

There ya go! ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 03, 2014, 09:04:26 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 03, 2014, 08:41:46 PM
I have emailed wing Several Times, to try to get Approval, No Answer...
Having dealt with a similar issue (surface warfare and submariner badges) the answer from NHQ was if they are aviation/aeronautical badges ok, if not, not ok.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 03, 2014, 09:29:49 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 03, 2014, 09:04:26 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 03, 2014, 08:41:46 PM
I have emailed wing Several Times, to try to get Approval, No Answer...
Having dealt with a similar issue (surface warfare and submariner badges) the answer from NHQ was if they are aviation/aeronautical badges ok, if not, not ok.

And you'll still have people wearing various and sundry badges of the other military services on the CAP USAF-style uniform... Jump wings (Army style, not Navy-style) are considered by the USAF as an aeronautical rating,
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 03, 2014, 09:41:40 PM
Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 09:01:48 PM
The AFI 36-2903 doesn't allow any other (non-USAF) military badges to be worn on the Air Force uniform except for aeronautical badges awarded by other services.
There are some execptions.....but they don't apply to anyone in CAP......No JTACs or SF Rangers here :).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 09:43:35 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 03, 2014, 09:29:49 PM
And you'll still have people wearing various and sundry badges of the other military services on the CAP USAF-style uniform... Jump wings (Army style, not Navy-style) are considered by the USAF as an aeronautical rating,

Not according to AFI 36-2903

10.2. Chaplain, Aeronautical, Space and Cyberspace Badges. Aeronautical, space and
cyberspace badges are worn above occupational and miscellaneous badges, but not above the
chaplain badge (if authorized, chaplain badge is worn in the highest position). When more than
one aeronautical, space or cyberspace badge is worn, the second badge becomes optional. Note:
The parachutist badge is not considered an aeronautical badge however it does take precedence
over other occupational badges.
(emphasis mine)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 03, 2014, 09:47:12 PM
I stand corrected.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 09:53:59 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 03, 2014, 09:41:40 PM
There are some execptions.....but they don't apply to anyone in CAP......No JTACs or SF Rangers here :).

Exceptions in the USAF? C'mon, there has to be a written policy somewhere ;-)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 03, 2014, 10:44:54 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 03, 2014, 09:41:40 PM
Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 09:01:48 PM
The AFI 36-2903 doesn't allow any other (non-USAF) military badges to be worn on the Air Force uniform except for aeronautical badges awarded by other services.
There are some execptions.....but they don't apply to anyone in CAP......No JTACs or SF Rangers here :).

I meant I tried, NHQ and Wing, Tried to use Chain of Command First. Now wait an Darn Minute, what does it matter if they are JTACS or SF Rangers? They get to wear there stuff? What makes them so special?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: teesquared on January 03, 2014, 10:49:40 PM
What about wings from Ground Observer Corps, which used to be another USAF Auxiliary back in the 50's?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 03, 2014, 11:07:47 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 03, 2014, 03:30:15 AM
Quote
7. Sleeve crease on the Blues shirt. The only reference is in the Honor Guard section. Ma Blue creases at the back edge of the epaulet, where the material naturally allows for a crease. CAP has maintained this more difficult standard of "centered on epaulet."

Actually that requirement came only with the publishing of the current CAPM39-1 (2005).  The previous 1997 edition never once stated where the crease should be.  Therefore, I wore it where the crease naturally fell on all the shirts I bought.  That would be behind my epaulet.  Removing this requirement was a good and the correct thing to do.

I always told my cadets "if the USAF had wanted you to crease that shirt in the middle of the epaulet, they wouldn't have spent millions of dollars telling the manufacturer to put the crease on the back edge."

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: MSG Mac on January 03, 2014, 11:16:42 PM
Quote from: teesquared on January 03, 2014, 10:49:40 PM
What about wings from Ground Observer Corps, which used to be another USAF Auxiliary back in the 50's?

If I recall, they observed with binoculars.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 03, 2014, 11:21:24 PM
Quote from: a2capt on January 03, 2014, 04:01:42 AM
On the whole heraldry, patch design, and the historian guidelines.. If their intention is to force everyone into a redesign phase.. I see it as nothing more than a historian program gone amok. Beating the "Look at the power I have" drum. I'm not happy with any of it. As a "from here on out going forward" thing, I'd see a lot less problem with it, and I don't mean "until reordering", I mean leave everyones stuff alone. It hasn't caused problems in 70+ years, channel that energy somewhere else.
This is really for the other thread anyway. [/font]

BTW, this got lost in the din, but its an example of why we need to be a little more cautious when quoting and complaining about aspects of the draft.

using the para 2.8.3 example, it was stated by a poster early on "5. Compliance for all wing and unit patches with USAF Heraldry Guidelines. Most Wing patches and many unit patches will have to be redone. And guess what? Under those guidelines, they must feature the colors Gold and Ultramarine. Why have dark blue and ultramarine blue on a uniform. Talk about clown suiting the whole uniform!"
and then requoted a few posts later
"2.8.3 - Wing Commanders must ensure all wing/unit patches follow USAF Heraldry Guidelines. That means shield shaped wing patches and circular squadron patches, and use of gold borders and ultramarine within the design."

but thats not really what 2.8.3 says.

So we've managed to mis-quote the paragraph in our zeal to make a point. Which causes others to go off on bogus info and not look it up and read it themselves.

So if you're going to discuss it, be accurate in your characterization of the text:

Quote"2.8.3 The wing commander is the approval authority for organizational patches worn by subordinate units within the wing and will ensure that new patches meet the intent of the USAF heraldic guidelines published by the Air Force Historical Research Agency and the CAP National Historian Program. Patches approved for wear will be full color and not "subdued" in their composition." 
Emphasis mine.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 03, 2014, 11:59:42 PM
Bye-bye dog bowls:

"6.2.10.1 The BDU cap will be composed of a cloth woodland camouflage print, and the back half of the baseball style cap may be plastic mesh. The BDU cap will rest squarely on the head with the bottom of the cap parallel with the ground. The brim of the cap will face forward. Cap may not be pushed, rolled, folded or tucked in (e.g. ranger fold)."

Applies to both camo and blue field.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 04, 2014, 12:17:17 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 03, 2014, 11:59:42 PM
Bye-bye dog bowls:

"6.2.10.1 The BDU cap will be composed of a cloth woodland camouflage print, and the back half of the baseball style cap may be plastic mesh. The BDU cap will rest squarely on the head with the bottom of the cap parallel with the ground. The brim of the cap will face forward. Cap may not be pushed, rolled, folded or tucked in (e.g. ranger fold)."

Applies to both camo and blue field.
that was in the last 39-1........only command influence is going to stop it.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 04, 2014, 12:21:48 AM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 03, 2014, 10:44:54 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 03, 2014, 09:41:40 PM
Quote from: Lt Col Tim Day on January 03, 2014, 09:01:48 PM
The AFI 36-2903 doesn't allow any other (non-USAF) military badges to be worn on the Air Force uniform except for aeronautical badges awarded by other services.
There are some execptions.....but they don't apply to anyone in CAP......No JTACs or SF Rangers here :).

I meant I tried, NHQ and Wing, Tried to use Chain of Command First. Now wait an Darn Minute, what does it matter if they are JTACS or SF Rangers? They get to wear there stuff? What makes them so special?
The explanation I was told.....since they are embeded with the army........and the army plays those "My Jonson is bigger then your Johnson" by the bling they wear (Air Assault, Combat patch, CIB, EIB, etc) then the USAF guys assigned to army units get to wear "army" bling while they are assigned to those units.

Which really tickled my funny bone when the bling haters here on CAPTALK talked about how bling was not important to "real professionals".  :)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 04, 2014, 12:33:40 AM
Understandable, but...

If people understood what it takes to get an Navy Warfare Qualification, they would think twice that it is not that important. My impression is this, if it is an "Military" qualification you should be able to wear it. We are "Not" AF,USN, USA, USCG, and USMC. We are the Civil Air Patrol, on that matter we don't have to follow the guidelines of the AF, I know why we do, (they are letting us wear the Uniform) but I digress...

Oh well, Atleast I can wear my Military Ribbons, Which tells a lot just by themselves.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 04, 2014, 12:35:54 AM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 04, 2014, 12:33:40 AM
Understandable, but...

If people understood what it takes to get an Navy Warfare Qualification, they would think twice that it is not that important. My impression is this, if it is an "Military" qualification you should be able to wear it. We are "Not" AF,USN, USA, USCG, and USMC. We are the Civil Air Patrol, on that matter we don't have to follow the guidelines of the AF, I know why we do, (they are letting us wear the Uniform) but I digress...

Oh well, Atleast I can wear my Military Ribbons, Which tells a lot just by themselves.

It takes a lot to get a Ranger Tab, too. You don't get to wear it on the Air Force uniform. 

(yes, yes, TACPs, CCTs, blah, blah, blah...)

And while you're right, we're not the AF, we are wearing their uniform and we take the basis of the guidelines from them. 



Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 12:46:05 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 04, 2014, 12:21:48 AM
Which really tickled my funny bone when the bling haters here on CAPTALK talked about how bling was not important to "real professionals".  :)
Yeah, this guy's not a "real professional" at all...no bling at all...
(http://media.dma.mil/2013/Apr/25/2000017325/260/200/0/130425-F-ZZ000-003.JPG)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: kd8gua on January 04, 2014, 01:01:00 AM
I saw my oversight RE: Wing/Unit patch heraldry guidelines and have since rescinded my position on that. I merely did not see the word "new."

On another aspect in regards to BDU headgear. Obviously we know boonie hats are still not allowed, but did anyone else notice that the standard Patrol-style cap is no longer authorized either? 6.2.10.1 specifically mentions baseball style BDU caps but not patrol-style. However, in 6.2.12.1, the patrol cap is specifically mentioned as the only style for BBDU.

In my wing, every surplus store has tons of new, used, and surplus BDUs, and they all carry the patrol cap. I don't think I've ever seen a BDU baseball cap for sale in a surplus store...
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 04, 2014, 01:03:09 AM
Quote from: NIN on January 04, 2014, 12:35:54 AM
It takes a lot to get a Ranger Tab, too. You don't get to wear it on the Air Force uniform. 

(yes, yes, TACPs, CCTs, blah, blah, blah...)

And while you're right, we're not the AF, we are wearing their uniform and we take the basis of the guidelines from them.

actually as of the updates to 36-2903 you can wear a ranger tab. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 04, 2014, 01:09:20 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 04, 2014, 01:03:09 AM
actually as of the updates to 36-2903 you can wear a ranger tab.

Cite?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 04, 2014, 01:10:55 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 04, 2014, 01:01:00 AM
I saw my oversight RE: Wing/Unit patch heraldry guidelines and have since rescinded my position on that. I merely did not see the word "new."

On another aspect in regards to BDU headgear. Obviously we know boonie hats are still not allowed, but did anyone else notice that the standard Patrol-style cap is no longer authorized either? 6.2.10.1 specifically mentions baseball style BDU caps but not patrol-style. However, in 6.2.12.1, the patrol cap is specifically mentioned as the only style for BBDU.

In my wing, every surplus store has tons of new, used, and surplus BDUs, and they all carry the patrol cap. I don't think I've ever seen a BDU baseball cap for sale in a surplus store...

I'm scratching my head over this. I believe this to be an editing error.

It munges together the description for the "patrol cap" and the camouflage mesh baseball cap. 




Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 04, 2014, 03:04:49 AM
Quote from: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 12:46:05 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 04, 2014, 12:21:48 AM
Which really tickled my funny bone when the bling haters here on CAPTALK talked about how bling was not important to "real professionals".  :)
Yeah, this guy's not a "real professional" at all...no bling at all...
(http://media.dma.mil/2013/Apr/25/2000017325/260/200/0/130425-F-ZZ000-003.JPG)

Not a field uniform.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 04, 2014, 03:39:30 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 04, 2014, 01:03:09 AM
Quote from: NIN on January 04, 2014, 12:35:54 AM
It takes a lot to get a Ranger Tab, too. You don't get to wear it on the Air Force uniform. 

(yes, yes, TACPs, CCTs, blah, blah, blah...)

And while you're right, we're not the AF, we are wearing their uniform and we take the basis of the guidelines from them.

actually as of the updates to 36-2903 you can wear a ranger tab.


Yeah, if you're assigned to an Army unit and have completed the Ranger Qualification Course.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 04, 2014, 03:40:07 AM
Quote from: NIN on January 04, 2014, 01:10:55 AMI'm scratching my head over this. I believe this to be an editing error.
It munges together the description for the "patrol cap" and the camouflage mesh baseball cap.
I sure hope that's an oversight, otherwise it's another "lets make members spend money" movement that's counter productive and wasteful.  There's nothing wrong with the BDU hats I've got now, and I hate cheesy baseball caps. Blech.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 04, 2014, 03:41:24 AM
Quote from: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 12:46:05 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 04, 2014, 12:21:48 AM
Which really tickled my funny bone when the bling haters here on CAPTALK talked about how bling was not important to "real professionals".  :)
Yeah, this guy's not a "real professional" at all...no bling at all...
(http://media.dma.mil/2013/Apr/25/2000017325/260/200/0/130425-F-ZZ000-003.JPG)


You're comparing apples and watermelons here.

The US military seems to have gone bling crazy over the past 30 years or so.
Most other countries haven't.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 04, 2014, 05:27:47 AM
Quote from: PHall on January 04, 2014, 03:41:24 AM
The US military seems to have gone bling crazy over the past 30 years or so.
Most other countries haven't.

So true...oh, wait...

(http://images.plus613.net/images/29900/www_plus613_com_skoreyabig.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 04, 2014, 05:33:51 AM
Those double as deflectors.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: TarRiverRat on January 04, 2014, 05:50:34 AM

Quote from: AFI 36-2903

Air Force Command Insignia: Current commander center 1/2 inch above nametag; graduated commander center 1/2 inch below nametag. If duty badges are worn with the command insignia (graduated commander), center the duty badge 1/2 inch below command insignia. AF Command insignia is mandatory.

*********

Just to get it straight in my head, does this mean that the badge will go on the flap of the pocket on the aviator shirts for the graduated commander?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 04, 2014, 05:58:48 AM
Quote from: TarRiverRat on January 04, 2014, 05:50:34 AM

Quote from: AFI 36-2903

Air Force Command Insignia: Current commander center 1/2 inch above nametag; graduated commander center 1/2 inch below nametag. If duty badges are worn with the command insignia (graduated commander), center the duty badge 1/2 inch below command insignia. AF Command insignia is mandatory.

*********

Just to get it straight in my head, does this mean that the badge will go on the flap of the pocket on the aviator shirts for the graduated commander?
This means nothing for CAP.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 04, 2014, 06:12:47 AM
Quote from: TarRiverRat on January 04, 2014, 05:50:34 AMQuote from: AFI 36-2903
That's nice. Too bad that's not our manual.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on January 04, 2014, 06:20:41 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 04, 2014, 05:27:47 AM
(http://images.plus613.net/images/29900/www_plus613_com_skoreyabig.jpg)



Lame 'Shop job.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:24:12 AM
Quote from: TarRiverRat on January 04, 2014, 05:50:34 AM
Just to get it straight in my head, does this mean that the badge will go on the flap of the pocket on the aviator shirts for the graduated commander?

Yes it does.  However, the appropriate reference is:

Quote from: CAPM39-1 DraftCurrent commanders wear the appropriate command pin centered on the wearer's right side, centered 1⁄2 inch above the name tag. If a specialty track or service badge is worn on the wearer's right side above the name tag, center badge 1⁄2 inch above the command insignia. If member is a graduated commander, place command insignia 1⁄2 inch below the nametag and centered.
.

Oddly though, the badge is mandatory for the USAF-style BDUs and Service Dress, but optional for the CAP Distinctive BDU and Service Dress.  I think they should just make it mandatory for both.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 04, 2014, 06:58:39 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on January 04, 2014, 06:20:41 AMLame 'Shop job.
Not that one. This is the fake:
(http://i.imgur.com/wRGFo7w.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on January 04, 2014, 07:00:31 AM
Oops. Scrood the pooch.  ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: TarRiverRat on January 04, 2014, 07:40:54 AM
Thanks LSThiker.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 07:46:38 AM
Quote from: a2capt on January 04, 2014, 06:58:39 AM
Not that one. This is the fake:

So we know who is not traveling to North Korea any time soon :)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 04, 2014, 08:14:21 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 04, 2014, 01:01:00 AM
I saw my oversight RE: Wing/Unit patch heraldry guidelines and have since rescinded my position on that. I merely did not see the word "new."

On another aspect in regards to BDU headgear. Obviously we know boonie hats are still not allowed, but did anyone else notice that the standard Patrol-style cap is no longer authorized either? 6.2.10.1 specifically mentions baseball style BDU caps but not patrol-style. However, in 6.2.12.1, the patrol cap is specifically mentioned as the only style for BBDU.

In my wing, every surplus store has tons of new, used, and surplus BDUs, and they all carry the patrol cap. I don't think I've ever seen a BDU baseball cap for sale in a surplus store...

5.1.2.8 Headgear. - Headgear. - Wear of headgear is mandatory. Either the BDU Cap, the CAP Baseball Cap or the Black Watch cap (when in a cold weather environment), may be worn.

6.2.10 - BDU Cap. Will only be worn with the Battle Dress Uniform. For placement of appropriate insignia, see figure A5-8.
6.2.10.1 - The BDU cap will be composed of a cloth woodland camouflage print, and the back half of the baseball style cap may be plastic mesh. The BDU cap will rest squarely on the head with the bottom of the cap parallel with the ground. The brim of the cap will face forward. Cap may not be pushed, rolled, folded or tucked in (e.g. ranger fold).


Huh.  Good catch.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 04, 2014, 08:17:15 AM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 07:46:38 AM
Quote from: a2capt on January 04, 2014, 06:58:39 AM
Not that one. This is the fake:

So we know who is not traveling to North Korea any time soon :)

Well, not unless you love dogs (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/kim-jong-executed-uncle-feeding-pack-starving-dogs-article-1.1565299).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 04, 2014, 10:44:51 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 04, 2014, 05:27:47 AM
Quote from: PHall on January 04, 2014, 03:41:24 AM
The US military seems to have gone bling crazy over the past 30 years or so.
Most other countries haven't.

So true...oh, wait...

(http://images.plus613.net/images/29900/www_plus613_com_skoreyabig.jpg)


I guess you missed that first word. Most.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: wuzafuzz on January 04, 2014, 01:15:27 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 04, 2014, 08:14:21 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 04, 2014, 01:01:00 AM
I saw my oversight RE: Wing/Unit patch heraldry guidelines and have since rescinded my position on that. I merely did not see the word "new."

On another aspect in regards to BDU headgear. Obviously we know boonie hats are still not allowed, but did anyone else notice that the standard Patrol-style cap is no longer authorized either? 6.2.10.1 specifically mentions baseball style BDU caps but not patrol-style. However, in 6.2.12.1, the patrol cap is specifically mentioned as the only style for BBDU.

In my wing, every surplus store has tons of new, used, and surplus BDUs, and they all carry the patrol cap. I don't think I've ever seen a BDU baseball cap for sale in a surplus store...

5.1.2.8 Headgear. - Headgear. - Wear of headgear is mandatory. Either the BDU Cap, the CAP Baseball Cap or the Black Watch cap (when in a cold weather environment), may be worn.

6.2.10 - BDU Cap. Will only be worn with the Battle Dress Uniform. For placement of appropriate insignia, see figure A5-8.
6.2.10.1 - The BDU cap will be composed of a cloth woodland camouflage print, and the back half of the baseball style cap may be plastic mesh. The BDU cap will rest squarely on the head with the bottom of the cap parallel with the ground. The brim of the cap will face forward. Cap may not be pushed, rolled, folded or tucked in (e.g. ranger fold).


Huh.  Good catch.

I think the patrol cap is safe.  Baseball style caps with mesh backing are permitted, but not required.

"...the back half of the baseball style cap may be plastic mesh."


Edit: fixed typo
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 04, 2014, 01:48:49 PM
Quote from: wuzafuzz on January 04, 2014, 01:15:27 PM
I think the patrol cap is safe.  Baseball style caps with mesh backing are permitted, but not required.

"...the back half of the baseball style cap may be plastic mesh."


Edit: fixed typo

I don't think so much it is an issue of "safe," its that the camouflage baseball cap != BDU cap.

What is being described is the BDU cap. You want to have a camouflage baseball cap? Hey, fine, define it.

But a "BDU cap" is this:
(http://ep.yimg.com/ay/yhst-11776803730611/propper-9503-patrol-cap-60c40p-woodland-4.gif)
Not this:
(http://www.365airsoftshop.com/userfiles/combat%20Baseball%20Cap-Woodland%20Camo%201(1).jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 03:52:12 PM
Quote from: PHall on January 04, 2014, 03:41:24 AM
Quote from: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 12:46:05 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 04, 2014, 12:21:48 AM
Which really tickled my funny bone when the bling haters here on CAPTALK talked about how bling was not important to "real professionals".  :)
Yeah, this guy's not a "real professional" at all...no bling at all...
(http://media.dma.mil/2013/Apr/25/2000017325/260/200/0/130425-F-ZZ000-003.JPG)


You're comparing apples and watermelons here.

The US military seems to have gone bling crazy over the past 30 years or so.
Most other countries haven't.
But he has command authority over US military personnel, lots of 'em.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 04, 2014, 04:37:31 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 03:52:12 PM
Quote from: PHall on January 04, 2014, 03:41:24 AM
Quote from: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 12:46:05 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 04, 2014, 12:21:48 AM
Which really tickled my funny bone when the bling haters here on CAPTALK talked about how bling was not important to "real professionals".  :)
Yeah, this guy's not a "real professional" at all...no bling at all...
(http://media.dma.mil/2013/Apr/25/2000017325/260/200/0/130425-F-ZZ000-003.JPG)


You're comparing apples and watermelons here.

The US military seems to have gone bling crazy over the past 30 years or so.
Most other countries haven't.
But he has command authority over US military personnel, lots of 'em.

So what's your point? ???     Never questioned his professionalism or his authority.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 04:46:31 PM
Someone else made a point that you had to have bling to have respect.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 04, 2014, 04:50:02 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 03:52:12 PM
Quote from: PHall on January 04, 2014, 03:41:24 AM
Quote from: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 12:46:05 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 04, 2014, 12:21:48 AM
Which really tickled my funny bone when the bling haters here on CAPTALK talked about how bling was not important to "real professionals".  :)
Yeah, this guy's not a "real professional" at all...no bling at all...
(http://media.dma.mil/2013/Apr/25/2000017325/260/200/0/130425-F-ZZ000-003.JPG)


You're comparing apples and watermelons here.

The US military seems to have gone bling crazy over the past 30 years or so.
Most other countries haven't.
But he has command authority over US military personnel, lots of 'em.

The bling he does have is quite significant, though...the picture isn't clear enough for me to recognise his bottom three, but the top one (just below his wings) is the Canadian Order of Military Merit, and the Queen/Governor-General doesn't give those out just for showing up.

We have gone bling-crazy in the U.S.

A new Airman out of Lackland potentially can have as much bling than this Canadian Lieutenant (leff-tenant)-General:

1. Air Force Training Ribbon
2. NDSM
3. Air Force Marksmanship Ribbon
4. BMT HonGrad

In my view, we have cheapened the value of our ribbons by turning too many of them into "fog-a-mirror" awards for just showing up.

My dad, when he got out of the Army in 1959, had the Army GCM and Sharpshooter's badge with "Rifle" bar, and that's it.

Having said that, though, I think it is abject stupidity that we cannot wear CAP miniature medals (not just one) on the blazer, since that's all they're going to let us have for the G/W kit. >:(

Ideally, for formal occasions, the rules should be the same as for mess dress: miniature medals and the silver bullion embroidered wings.

And for crying out loud, get rid of the pocket protector!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 04, 2014, 04:56:54 PM
I've always thought that the "Membership Ribbon" was silly.  If I'm there and in a uniform, I"m obviously a member.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 04, 2014, 04:58:21 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 04, 2014, 04:56:54 PM
I've always thought that the "Membership Ribbon" was silly.  If I'm there and in a uniform, I"m obviously a member.

That's our "fog-a-mirror" ribbon.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: skymaster on January 04, 2014, 04:58:54 PM
Quote from: Papabird on January 02, 2014, 03:23:02 PM
Interesting find and it fits the description from the draft reg.

http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/rothco-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black?gclid=CLKghqvk37sCFUho7Aod7lIAEA (http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/rothco-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black?gclid=CLKghqvk37sCFUho7Aod7lIAEA)

I might pick one up just because $35.00 isn't bad for a coat like this. 

Any photoshop experts out there care to add the tapes & grade?  :)
(http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/files/9739-rotcho-generation-3-ecwcs-fleece-jacket-black.jpg)

Here is an alternate photo of the black fleece jacket, that might be more appropriate if the intent is to display the item individually, rather than as part of a larger cold-weather ensemble.

(http://i.imgur.com/44wx6T1.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: DennisH on January 04, 2014, 05:11:44 PM
This pretty much says it all.

"A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon"

Napoleon Bonaparte


Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 05:32:10 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 04, 2014, 04:58:21 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 04, 2014, 04:56:54 PM
I've always thought that the "Membership Ribbon" was silly.  If I'm there and in a uniform, I"m obviously a member.

That's our "fog-a-mirror" ribbon.

Off topic, but we have plenty of "fog-a-mirror" ribbons.  For seniors:

Membership ribbon is not necessary
Leadership ribbon is not necessary since we pretty much have badges for all of the specialties.
Scott A. Crossfield is redundant with the Master AE badge
Command Service ribbon if it stays that "graduated commanders" can continue to wear the command insignia.

Even then I am not too big on the different devices for the commander's commendation.  If I had received an Commendation Medal, it does not matter whether my commander recommended me or a 4-star general.  They are worn in the same fashion.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 04, 2014, 06:03:24 PM
I'm semi-with you on this, but you're not accounting for all the possibilities, not to mention that those lower-end service
and PD ribbons tend to mean a lot to members in their first few years.

Also, saying a decoration is equivalent to a badge assumes the member wears the respective badge, and
vice-versa.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:14:01 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 04, 2014, 06:03:24 PM
I'm semi-with you on this, but you're not accounting for all the possibilities, not to mention that those lower-end service
and PD ribbons tend to mean a lot to members in their first few years.

Also, saying a decoration is equivalent to a badge assumes the member wears the respective badge, and
vice-versa.

That is very true.  People tend to work harder for ribbons their first few years.  I understand that the membership award is like or somewhat like in principle to the Army Service ribbon or the Air Force BMT ribbon.   Maybe 1 PD ribbon with different devices, but that discussion is for a different thread and does not deal with the draft CAPM39-1.   

A ribbon is equivalent to a badge when they are awarded for the same things and they are worn on the same uniforms.  They represent the same thing (e.g. silver star on the leadership ribbon means the star/wreath on a person's badge).  While I understand that people are not required to wear the badge or ribbon, that is a choice for them.  Having three silver stars on the leadership ribbon and three badges with a star/wreath is saying exactly the same thing (that member has at least 3 master ratings).  But again, not exactly related to the draft CAPM39-1.

Sorry for the off-topic posts.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LATORRECA on January 04, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
I do have a question Why we are removing the US Flag from the Cammies (BDU's).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 04, 2014, 06:26:19 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:14:01 PMHaving three silver stars on the leadership ribbon and three badges with a star/wreath is saying exactly the same thing (that member has at least 3 master ratings).  But again, not exactly related to the draft CAPM39-1.

I don't think it's that far off from the topic, which has slowed anyway.

A lot of members don't wear more then one badge, I, for one, wouldn't be caught dead with more then one PD badge, but
I've got a SSM in terms of PD.   Also, in terms of attachments, I generally factor in multiple awards more heavily when I'm reading a
rack - doing something at least twice usually says something about the service.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 04, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
I do have a question Why we are removing the US Flag from the Cammies (BDU's).

Does the USAF wear them?  Are they really necessary?  For the vast majority of our member, do we even wear a uniform outside of the US?

  And it is just BDUs and not cammies.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 04, 2014, 06:28:28 PM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 04, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
I do have a question Why we are removing the US Flag from the Cammies (BDU's).

A lot of members felt it was in appropriate for a service that never leaves the CONUS, and it's
implementation was questionable, with the legend being that a former national commander
was mistaken for a member of a foreign military service.

With that said, it's been on the flight suit for decades and no one is suggesting we remove it there.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 04, 2014, 06:38:36 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 04, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
I do have a question Why we are removing the US Flag from the Cammies (BDU's).

Does the USAF wear them?  Are they really necessary?  For the vast majority of our member, do we even wear a uniform outside of the US?

  And it is just BDUs and not cammies.

Plus, the flag wear (right shoulder, on BDUs) was not something the USAF did on their BDUs.  That is something the Army did, however.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 04, 2014, 06:43:44 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 04, 2014, 06:38:36 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 04, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
I do have a question Why we are removing the US Flag from the Cammies (BDU's).

Does the USAF wear them?  Are they really necessary?  For the vast majority of our member, do we even wear a uniform outside of the US?

  And it is just BDUs and not cammies.

Plus, the flag wear (right shoulder, on BDUs) was not something the USAF did on their BDUs.  That is something the Army did, however.

We started wearing the flag on our BDU's right after a now former National Commander was mistaken for a General Officer from Mexico during the Hurricane Katrina recovery.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:47:06 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 04, 2014, 06:38:36 PM
Plus, the flag wear (right shoulder, on BDUs) was not something the USAF did on their BDUs.  That is something the Army did, however.

Yes because sewing a full-color US flag on a tactical uniform was a smart idea.  That was at least one advantage to going to ACUs, I could pull that flag off and replace it with a subdued flag.  Of course, it is not like the ACUs really help blend in with northern America vegetation.   ::)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 04, 2014, 06:49:36 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 04, 2014, 06:38:36 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 04, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
I do have a question Why we are removing the US Flag from the Cammies (BDU's).

Does the USAF wear them?  Are they really necessary?  For the vast majority of our member, do we even wear a uniform outside of the US?

  And it is just BDUs and not cammies.

Plus, the flag wear (right shoulder, on BDUs) was not something the USAF did on their BDUs.  That is something the Army did, however.
Actually.......when I deployed to Bosnia during the SFOR mission....we wore flags on right (IIRC) shoulders.....I got a picture of it at home....I'll check.

This by the way is when the Army started wearing the flag all the time....they just never bothered to take it off once the rotated back to the U.S.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:54:49 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 04, 2014, 06:49:36 PMActually.......when I deployed to Bosnia during the SFOR mission....we wore flags on right (IIRC) shoulders.....I got a picture of it at home....I'll check.

This by the way is when the Army started wearing the flag all the time....they just never bothered to take it off once the rotated back to the U.S.

If you spend time outside the US in a "peacekeeping mission" (Bosnia), I agree.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Mitchell 1969 on January 04, 2014, 07:37:20 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 04, 2014, 08:14:21 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 04, 2014, 01:01:00 AM
I saw my oversight RE: Wing/Unit patch heraldry guidelines and have since rescinded my position on that. I merely did not see the word "new."

On another aspect in regards to BDU headgear. Obviously we know boonie hats are still not allowed, but did anyone else notice that the standard Patrol-style cap is no longer authorized either? 6.2.10.1 specifically mentions baseball style BDU caps but not patrol-style. However, in 6.2.12.1, the patrol cap is specifically mentioned as the only style for BBDU.

In my wing, every surplus store has tons of new, used, and surplus BDUs, and they all carry the patrol cap. I don't think I've ever seen a BDU baseball cap for sale in a surplus store...

5.1.2.8 Headgear. - Headgear. - Wear of headgear is mandatory. Either the BDU Cap, the CAP Baseball Cap or the Black Watch cap (when in a cold weather environment), may be worn.

6.2.10 - BDU Cap. Will only be worn with the Battle Dress Uniform. For placement of appropriate insignia, see figure A5-8.
6.2.10.1 - The BDU cap will be composed of a cloth woodland camouflage print, and the back half of the baseball style cap may be plastic mesh. The BDU cap will rest squarely on the head with the bottom of the cap parallel with the ground. The brim of the cap will face forward. Cap may not be pushed, rolled, folded or tucked in (e.g. ranger fold).


Huh.  Good catch.

Wonder why they capitalized "CAP Baseball Cap" and "Black Watch Cap?"

"CAP baseball cap" works. As does "black watch cap."  Which will also do away with somebody trying to wear his grandad's cap that he wore while in the Black Watch.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Mitchell 1969 on January 04, 2014, 07:38:52 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:24:12 AM
Quote from: TarRiverRat on January 04, 2014, 05:50:34 AM
Just to get it straight in my head, does this mean that the badge will go on the flap of the pocket on the aviator shirts for the graduated commander?

Yes it does.  However, the appropriate reference is:

Quote from: CAPM39-1 DraftCurrent commanders wear the appropriate command pin centered on the wearer's right side, centered 1⁄2 inch above the name tag. If a specialty track or service badge is worn on the wearer's right side above the name tag, center badge 1⁄2 inch above the command insignia. If member is a graduated commander, place command insignia 1⁄2 inch below the nametag and centered.
.

Oddly though, the badge is mandatory for the USAF-style BDUs and Service Dress, but optional for the CAP Distinctive BDU and Service Dress.  I think they should just make it mandatory for both.

Is it a "badge" or a "pin?" Why references using both terms?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on January 04, 2014, 07:49:50 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 04, 2014, 06:28:28 PM
A lot of members felt it was in appropriate for a service that never leaves the CONUS,
I think members of HIWG and PRWG might disagree that CAP is "a service that never leaves the CONUS"
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 04, 2014, 07:59:24 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 04, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
I do have a question Why we are removing the US Flag from the Cammies (BDU's).
Does the USAF wear them?  Are they really necessary?  For the vast majority of our member, do we even wear a uniform outside of the US?

If I am not mistaken, that uniform cannot be worn outside of the US anyway, so the flag is not needed.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 04, 2014, 08:26:04 PM
Quote from: VNY on January 04, 2014, 07:59:24 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 04, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
I do have a question Why we are removing the US Flag from the Cammies (BDU's).
Does the USAF wear them?  Are they really necessary?  For the vast majority of our member, do we even wear a uniform outside of the US?

If I am not mistaken, that uniform cannot be worn outside of the US anyway, so the flag is not needed.

But the uniform can be worn outside the US.  There are units overseas.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 04, 2014, 10:38:56 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 04, 2014, 08:26:04 PM
Quote from: VNY on January 04, 2014, 07:59:24 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 04, 2014, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 04, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
I do have a question Why we are removing the US Flag from the Cammies (BDU's).
Does the USAF wear them?  Are they really necessary?  For the vast majority of our member, do we even wear a uniform outside of the US?

If I am not mistaken, that uniform cannot be worn outside of the US anyway, so the flag is not needed.

But the uniform can be worn outside the US.  There are units overseas.

Generally, only within the installation and at the authorization of the hosting base commander. The individual country's status of forces agreement (SOFA) also governs whether US military uniforms may be worn outside the installation (most do not).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LATORRECA on January 05, 2014, 12:31:07 AM
   Now when I was a member of the CAP at the PRWNG from 1994-1997 and back in Florida on 2002-03, We never used because wasn't a requirement. However, I thing is a nice touch to promote patriotism among others (taking about the civilians).
   The Boyscouts, Army Cadet Corps, other Youth and or Rescue organizations used it, so why not us. I believed it promote patriotism. We are not a Military service, using a full colored flag in a camouflage uniform make sense because we are not trying to hide or camouflage from no one, to the contrary we want to be visible and anything colorful helps. To removed it just to put another patch is not a good idea.
   This new order was needed but the problem is not the regulation the problem lies inside the CAP, the individuals which pick and choose what orders to follow. No real repercussions will take place if we do not follow it or decide to modified it.
  We do this volunteering work because we are patriots and if the flag bother you then you are in the wrong place.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 05, 2014, 12:57:13 AM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 05, 2014, 12:31:07 AM
  We do this volunteering work because we are patriots and if the flag bother you then you are in the wrong place.

You realize that only the Army wears a US flag on their BDUs?  The USAF, our parent organization does not even wear the US Flag. So I guess the Marines, Navy, and Air Force are not patriots?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 05, 2014, 01:11:59 AM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 05, 2014, 12:31:07 AMWe do this volunteering work because we are patriots and if the flag bother you then you are in the wrong place.

I think it was just removed to make space for something else.  US Flags are still on flight clothing.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 05, 2014, 01:45:33 AM
Quote from: VNY on January 05, 2014, 01:11:59 AM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 05, 2014, 12:31:07 AMWe do this volunteering work because we are patriots and if the flag bother you then you are in the wrong place.

I think it was just removed to make space for something else.  US Flags are still on flight clothing.

The flag has been on the flight suits since the 70's IIRC.   About the same time as the Military Airlift Command in the Air Force started wearing them.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 05, 2014, 02:04:35 AM
Quote from: PHall on January 05, 2014, 01:45:33 AM
Quote from: VNY on January 05, 2014, 01:11:59 AM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 05, 2014, 12:31:07 AMWe do this volunteering work because we are patriots and if the flag bother you then you are in the wrong place.

I think it was just removed to make space for something else.  US Flags are still on flight clothing.

The flag has been on the flight suits since the 70's IIRC.   About the same time as the Military Airlift Command in the Air Force started wearing them.

So keeping them on flight suits and removing them from BDU brings us more in line with USAF uniforms.  Perish the thought!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 05, 2014, 02:27:28 AM

Quote from: LATORRECA on January 05, 2014, 12:31:07 AM
We do this volunteering work because we are patriots and if the flag bother you then you are in the wrong place.

Are you serious? As someone who have been wearing the uniform for over 25 years, including 17 years in the United States Air Force (active duty, guard and reserve), I take offense with your comment. Since only the Army wears the reverse American flag on their combat uniform, are you saying that all other brave men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces are not patriots? We don't need to wear the reverse American flag on our BDUs to show our patriotism in Civil Air Patrol.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 05, 2014, 02:35:02 AM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 05, 2014, 12:31:07 AM
We do this volunteering work because we are patriots and if the flag bother you then you are in the wrong place.

Wearing a flag does not make (or unmake) a patriot.

We wear them on the flight suits in the manner of the USAF.  We are taking them off B/BDU's in the manner of the USAF.  Nothing more, nothing less.

As Storm Chaser stated, only the Army wears the flag on field uniforms.  The Marines, Navy and Coast Guard generally do not, except on flight suits (I think).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AngelWings on January 05, 2014, 02:39:02 AM
I'm happy the flag patch is going, but I'm not happy for the new patches that are going on the uniform. I was hoping to see a pull towards the basics. No flag, no wing, and no NCSA/activity patches. That way we would be going more in line with peer organizations and the USAF. Oh well, the point I've learned in my nearly 4 years of CAP is that we don't always get what we want, and you're a bigger person for not griping.

As for patriotism, I feel to see how the flag is going to make a member more or less of a patriot. Patriotism is about actions, not clothing accessories.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 05, 2014, 02:40:16 AM
Post to 20 Pages, First Post to 20 Pages?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 05, 2014, 02:41:40 AM
It doesn't make you an Patriot because you wear the Flag. Ive always wondered why CAP wore the Flag.... Since its an Army Thing. I don't think any other branch wears it, even on the flight suit.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 05, 2014, 03:11:39 AM
Quote from: AngelWings on January 05, 2014, 02:39:02 AM
I'm happy the flag patch is going, but I'm not happy for the new patches that are going on the uniform. I was hoping to see a pull towards the basics. No flag, no wing, and no NCSA/activity patches. That way we would be going more in line with peer organizations and the USAF. Oh well, the point I've learned in my nearly 4 years of CAP is that we don't always get what we want, and you're a bigger person for not griping.

As for patriotism, I feel to see how the flag is going to make a member more or less of a patriot. Patriotism is about actions, not clothing accessories.
Ah.....but that's the cool part......if you want a sterile uniform.....it is easier now......Wing Patchs, Activity Patches, Squadron Patches, the ES, Comm, etc patches......are all optional.   Either your squadron commander or your wing commander controls them.......so now it is much easier for YOU to influence your local commander to write the local supplement/OI not allowing them.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 03:46:22 AM
Key thing to remember that 39-1 has said minimum requirements to be worn on uniforms.  The min requirements were tapes. grade insignia and the US flag everything else was optional unless dictated in a supplement.  If you want a minimal approach you would have flipped back in the 90s when a wing patch was suppose to be on all uniforms.

Key thing I saw that I like is that the service cap no longer requires Wing CC approval for wear for cadet officers.  I do think that there should be an included picture of the blue winter cap.  And reenforce customs and courtesies for those wearing the corp uniforms.  Including the riggers belt was a great move as they are readily available and cheap to obtain and hold up better than the regular elastic or woven BDU belts.

At least they have provided more clear guidance on SMWOG uniform wear for the different tracks,  now if they can just include somewhere that FOs are considered officers.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Pylon on January 05, 2014, 04:06:59 AM
Quote from: LATORRECA on January 05, 2014, 12:31:07 AM
  We do this volunteering work because we are patriots and if the flag bother you then you are in the wrong place.


The flag doesn't bother me at all.  I'm a United States Marine and we don't wear flags on any of our uniforms.  I hope that doesn't categorize me as someone whose not a patriot.  The Air Force doesn't wear them either. Adding flags on CAP BDU's were a recent, spur-of-the-moment addition to our uniforms that has been reversed only a few years later.  This move reduces cost to members over the long-term, reduces steps to set up our uniform, reduces clutter on our uniforms, and is not a decision based in patriotism (or lack thereof).  Suggesting that's how the decision was made is unnecessarily politicizing this.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 05, 2014, 04:56:30 AM
If I had my "druthers" about the B/BDU's, I would have them the way the Air Force used to:

Collar: grade insignia
Right pocket, top: Nametape
Left pocket, top: CIVIL AIR PATROL tape
Right pocket, centred: CAP command crest shield (as worn on flight suits)
Left pocket, centred: Wing/squadron patch
Left breast: Aeronautical/GT/etc ratings
Right breast: Other earned qualification badges; i.e., as the Air Force did for Civil Engineers (Prime BEEF) - OPTIONAL
Sleeves: Grade insignia for CAP NCO's
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ranviper on January 05, 2014, 05:10:22 AM
Despite how much I hate ABU's, I do think as the Air Force Auxiliary we should replace the air force style BDU's with ABU's, because BDU's are no longer "air force style" - the air force doesn't use them. And, keep it simple, have the badging ALSO be the same as the parent organization, but simply change the nametapes to "set us apart" so folks don't get confused. And yes, keep the bbdu for those that don't meet the h/w requirements. Simple. If the idea is to be a civilian part of the USAF, and the uniforms are supposed to match, why is the only one anything like the air force uniforms the dress uniforms? lol
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: kd8gua on January 05, 2014, 05:24:59 AM
Quote from: ranviper on January 05, 2014, 05:10:22 AM
Despite how much I hate ABU's, I do think as the Air Force Auxiliary we should replace the air force style BDU's with ABU's, because BDU's are no longer "air force style" - the air force doesn't use them. And, keep it simple, have the badging ALSO be the same as the parent organization, but simply change the nametapes to "set us apart" so folks don't get confused. And yes, keep the bbdu for those that don't meet the h/w requirements. Simple. If the idea is to be a civilian part of the USAF, and the uniforms are supposed to match, why is the only one anything like the air force uniforms the dress uniforms? lol
... Because DoD doesn't authorize CAP to wear ABUs. When/If DoD authorizes the wear of ABUs by us, then we can discuss that aspect. Until then, we are not authorized ABUs, so that shouldn't even be a matter of discussion in this topic.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 05, 2014, 05:32:13 AM
Plus...in many ways we have (unfortunately) been moving away from the Air Force over the past 20 years.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: winterg on January 05, 2014, 06:44:25 AM
First, to all the members who have worked diligently on this project so far, thank you for your hard work.  I have been following the discussion here with interest and I hope some of the excellent suggestions I have seen in this thread are considered by those responsible before the final draft.

I would like to see our uniform move towards a cleaner appearance with less options for individuals and locales to make changes to it.  The last time I was on AD in the USAF was 1995 and I am not as familiar with the current uniform setup as others, though I am perusing AFI 36-2903 in an attempt to not stick my foot in my mouth.

It looks like the current ABU doesn't include Wing or Squadron patches.  Somebody please correct me if I missed where these organizational patches are authorized.  While removing all patches outside of name tapes, rank and duty badges would make for very "clean" uniforms, I believe some organizational patches do serve a place in CAP for team-building and esprit de corps.

When I wore BDU's in the AF we wore squadron, wing and MAJCOM patches.  (Except for a brief debacle where we wore the leather aircrew badge on our BDU's *shudder*)  The MAJCOM patch was worn on the right pocket and the squadron DISC was worn above the nametape on the right breast.  The left pocket was either a badge (firefighter, SP, missle, etc) or the group/wing patch.  With rare exceptions the only thing worn on the sleeves was rank.

Would this be such a bad idea?  It would put us in line with AF usage (even if not current) and take some of the unneeded patches off.

1. Nametapes/rank as normal.
2. Squadron patch above nametape on right breast.
3. Wing Patch on left pocket.
4. Right pocket ONE (that's it, just one) patch that is at wearers discretion.  An NCSA, group, special activity, CPR, or any of the other plethora of authorized patches.
5. Duty Badges. (See below)

The AF has 5 classes of duty badges according to 5.1.2.2.1.  Chaplain, Aeronautical, Space, Cyberspace, and Occupational.  The new 30-1 draft breaks up our badges into Occupational and Specialty track.  Aren't these really the same thing?  Isn't a specialty track your CAP "occupation?"  Same thing with a Commander's Service Badge.  When they served as CC, that was their occupation. 

Limit badges on the BBDU/BDU/ABU (Chaplain, Aeronautical, Occupational) to a total of two above the CAP tape on the left breast using the established rules.

As far as the new 39-1 being organized to mirror the USAF counterpart, I love it.  That should be the new standard for all CAP publications.  It can never hurt us to align more with our parent organization.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 05, 2014, 09:20:11 AM
Quote from: winterg on January 05, 2014, 06:44:25 AM
It looks like the current ABU doesn't include Wing or Squadron patches. 

As of this point, we are not authorized to wear ABUs, nor are they authorized in the draft 39-1, so the point is moot.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ranviper on January 05, 2014, 02:05:18 PM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 05, 2014, 05:24:59 AM
... Because DoD doesn't authorize CAP to wear ABUs. When/If DoD authorizes the wear of ABUs by us, then we can discuss that aspect. Until then, we are not authorized ABUs, so that shouldn't even be a matter of discussion in this topic.

Allowed or not, this is what they should have pursued from the beginning. This was my only point. I don't even like ABU's, but I do like looking the way we were originally intended too.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 05, 2014, 02:43:21 PM
Quote from: ranviper on January 05, 2014, 02:05:18 PM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 05, 2014, 05:24:59 AM
... Because DoD doesn't authorize CAP to wear ABUs. When/If DoD authorizes the wear of ABUs by us, then we can discuss that aspect. Until then, we are not authorized ABUs, so that shouldn't even be a matter of discussion in this topic.

Allowed or not, this is what they should have pursued from the beginning. This was my only point. I don't even like ABU's, but I do like looking the way we were originally intended too.

Don't think the discussions haven't been had for a lot longer than you think.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: RiverAux on January 05, 2014, 03:35:15 PM
I wonder why they put the AF weight standards in the height-weight chart.  Is there any need for CAP members to see them?  I also wonder if those are actually the current AF standards for enlistment. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: DrKem on January 05, 2014, 03:57:57 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on January 05, 2014, 03:35:15 PM
I wonder why they put the AF weight standards in the height-weight chart.  Is there any need for CAP members to see them?  I also wonder if those are actually the current AF standards for enlistment.

As far as I can tell, they are the current USAF standards.  I don't think that the Air Force offers any weight reduction programs for recruits.  I suspect that they are in the CAP regulations as an incentive to attain/maintain those standards.  From a health perspective, I would encourage everyone to reach towards that goal.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 05, 2014, 03:59:08 PM
Quote from: ranviper on January 05, 2014, 02:05:18 PM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 05, 2014, 05:24:59 AM
... Because DoD doesn't authorize CAP to wear ABUs. When/If DoD authorizes the wear of ABUs by us, then we can discuss that aspect. Until then, we are not authorized ABUs, so that shouldn't even be a matter of discussion in this topic.

Allowed or not, this is what they should have pursued from the beginning. This was my only point. I don't even like ABU's, but I do like looking the way we were originally intended too.
According to the information presented at the Nat Conf, the request has been submitted. This is also why there a couple of reserved sections/chapters in the draft 39-1. The proposal presented essentially applied the bdu decoration plan to the abu with the exception of dark blue backgrounds on the tapes and badges. This is thought to meet the "distinctive in low light" standard.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AngelWings on January 05, 2014, 04:21:43 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 05, 2014, 03:11:39 AM
Quote from: AngelWings on January 05, 2014, 02:39:02 AM
I'm happy the flag patch is going, but I'm not happy for the new patches that are going on the uniform. I was hoping to see a pull towards the basics. No flag, no wing, and no NCSA/activity patches. That way we would be going more in line with peer organizations and the USAF. Oh well, the point I've learned in my nearly 4 years of CAP is that we don't always get what we want, and you're a bigger person for not griping.

As for patriotism, I feel to see how the flag is going to make a member more or less of a patriot. Patriotism is about actions, not clothing accessories.
Ah.....but that's the cool part......if you want a sterile uniform.....it is easier now......Wing Patches, Activity Patches, Squadron Patches, the ES, Comm, etc patches......are all optional.   Either your squadron commander or your wing commander controls them.......so now it is much easier for YOU to influence your local commander to write the local supplement/OI not allowing them.
I didn't catch that, but that is great news. So, maybe the changes aren't so bad considering.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: winterg on January 05, 2014, 04:42:19 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 05, 2014, 09:20:11 AM
Quote from: winterg on January 05, 2014, 06:44:25 AM
It looks like the current ABU doesn't include Wing or Squadron patches. 
As of this point, we are not authorized to wear ABUs, nor are they authorized in the draft 39-1, so the point is moot.

I disagree sir that we should not be influenced by the current USAF uniform standard regardless of whether we are approved to wear it or not.  As it stands, our current uniform as well as that proposed by the new draft does not mirror the USAF in its configuation.  My point was that our ideal should be to match our parent organization as closely as allowed.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 05:45:52 PM
The only H/W requirements that the AF has is for those entering into the AF.  There are no H/W once you are in and have completed BMT and Tech School. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: RiverAux on January 05, 2014, 06:41:38 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 05:45:52 PM
The only H/W requirements that the AF has is for those entering into the AF.  There are no H/W once you are in and have completed BMT and Tech School.
Understood and thats why I phrased my post the way I did.  Are those the requirements presented in the CAP chart? 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 05, 2014, 07:28:27 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on January 05, 2014, 06:41:38 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 05:45:52 PM
The only H/W requirements that the AF has is for those entering into the AF.  There are no H/W once you are in and have completed BMT and Tech School.
Understood and thats why I phrased my post the way I did.  Are those the requirements presented in the CAP chart?

No.  Here is the males H/W chart for the Air Force:

http://www.airforce.com/height-weight/ (http://www.airforce.com/height-weight/)

Was corrected, the chart is for all members regardless of age and gender.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on January 05, 2014, 08:10:47 PM
You should have added that the CAP chart is more liberal than the AF chart in the AF column, and that the AF chart makes no mention of gender. The CAP numbers are AF plus 10%.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: RiverAux on January 05, 2014, 08:17:22 PM
So, it appears that the CAP folks got a little lazy and used the AF chart that was in existence in the early 1980s when we adopted the height/weight standards.

That being the case, they should remove the AF information from this chart OR take the modern AF standards and add 10% (which looks like it would actually be more restrictive than the old ones). 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 09:32:25 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 05, 2014, 07:28:27 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on January 05, 2014, 06:41:38 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 05:45:52 PM
The only H/W requirements that the AF has is for those entering into the AF.  There are no H/W once you are in and have completed BMT and Tech School.
Understood and thats why I phrased my post the way I did.  Are those the requirements presented in the CAP chart?

No.  Here is the males H/W chart for the Air Force:

http://www.airforce.com/height-weight/ (http://www.airforce.com/height-weight/)

Was corrected, the chart is for all members regardless of age and gender.

Check again says all applicants,  not those already in.  There are no H/W for AF members once they have completed BMT and Tech School. 

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 05, 2014, 10:33:16 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 09:32:25 PM
Check again says all applicants,  not those already in.  There are no H/W for AF members once they have completed BMT and Tech School.

True, should have been applicants and not members. 

Odd enough that the USAF has no weight requirements but does have a BMI and percent body fat standard.  So do you think CAP should get rid of weight requirements and go with BMI and percent body fat standards?  Neither of those are any more complicated (in terms of knowledge) than weighing a person.  I have taped enough Soldiers that I know taping is not hard or complicated.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 10:43:44 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 05, 2014, 10:33:16 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 09:32:25 PM
Check again says all applicants,  not those already in.  There are no H/W for AF members once they have completed BMT and Tech School.

True, should have been applicants and not members. 

Odd enough that the USAF has no weight requirements but does have a BMI and percent body fat standard.  So do you think CAP should get rid of weight requirements and go with BMI and percent body fat standards?  Neither of those are any more complicated (in terms of knowledge) than weighing a person.  I have taped enough Soldiers that I know taping is not hard or complicated.

Where are you getting your info?  Because BMI for the AF only comes into play when you flop your PT test because of the waist measurement.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 06, 2014, 12:51:41 AM
I think the USAF is happy with the standards we have now.....they would just like us to enforce them (if they care about them at all).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on January 06, 2014, 01:10:37 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 06, 2014, 12:51:41 AM
I think the USAF is happy with the standards we have now.....they would just like us to enforce them (if they care about them at all).

+ 1000!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 06, 2014, 01:13:17 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 10:43:44 PM
Where are you getting your info?  Because BMI for the AF only comes into play when you flop your PT test because of the waist measurement.

Oh I am fully aware of the 39" waist line measurement as apart of the PT test. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: HGjunkie on January 06, 2014, 01:17:52 PM
I submited the following:
QuoteChapter 11 of the Draft section 11.1.1.1.2 specifies that cadets may remove all but the highest CP award or achievement to cut down on the amount of ribbons worn. For Cadet Officers who have gone to COS and have achieved a milestone past the Mitchell, they will be unable to wear the silver star for COS Completion until they become a senior member in accordance with CAPR 39-3: "Senior members who remove the Mitchell ribbon in order to wear the highest cadet program ribbon earned may move the silver star denoting Cadet Officer School from the Mitchell ribbon to the highest cadet program ribbon earned."
There should be an inclusion to either the uniform manual or R39-3 to clarify if cadets past the Mitchell award who choose to short-stack their ribbons can wear the silver star for COS attendance or not.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Brad on January 06, 2014, 05:24:16 PM
Found one in the giant table in Attachment 4. Left and right shoulders are reversed! The (now optional until 2017) American flag is specified for wear on "LS", the left shoulder, in the attachment, but 5.1.2.3.2 says an optional wing/region/national patch can go there. In fact look at that whole section of the table, the American flag patch is listed as LS but it's always been worn on the right shoulder, and the wing/region/national patches are supposed to be on the left shoulder, but it's backwards!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 06, 2014, 05:37:45 PM
Quote from: Brad on January 06, 2014, 05:24:16 PM
Found one in the giant table in Attachment 4. Left and right shoulders are reversed! The (now optional until 2017) American flag is specified for wear on "LS", the left shoulder, in the attachment, but 5.1.2.3.2 says an optional wing/region/national patch can go there. In fact look at that whole section of the table, the American flag patch is listed as LS but it's always been worn on the right shoulder, and the wing/region/national patches are supposed to be on the left shoulder, but it's backwards!

Flight suits only.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Brad on January 06, 2014, 06:29:26 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 06, 2014, 05:37:45 PM
Quote from: Brad on January 06, 2014, 05:24:16 PM
Found one in the giant table in Attachment 4. Left and right shoulders are reversed! The (now optional until 2017) American flag is specified for wear on "LS", the left shoulder, in the attachment, but 5.1.2.3.2 says an optional wing/region/national patch can go there. In fact look at that whole section of the table, the American flag patch is listed as LS but it's always been worn on the right shoulder, and the wing/region/national patches are supposed to be on the left shoulder, but it's backwards!

Flight suits only.

Doh! You're right, just remembered that "FDU" = Flight Duty Uniform and not "Field Dress Uniform", aka BDU lol. Yea idk where that one came from either, just used to seeing "Flight suit" and not "FDU"
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 06, 2014, 06:47:39 PM
I think they're trying to get the pilots to dress properly for general meetings...
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: sarmed1 on January 06, 2014, 07:45:49 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 06, 2014, 01:13:17 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 05, 2014, 10:43:44 PM
Where are you getting your info?  Because BMI for the AF only comes into play when you flop your PT test because of the waist measurement.

Oh I am fully aware of the 39" waist line measurement as apart of the PT test.

updated by ICL in Oct 2013;  I dont have it in front of me; but basically if 39" or over (for males; not sure of the female...think its 37")  will use a BMI tape test...must be under 17% I think (for males) and I think 24% for females.  it spells out then what parts are measured, think its like neck, waist and wrist...

mk
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 06, 2014, 07:48:07 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 06, 2014, 06:47:39 PM
I think they're trying to get the pilots to dress properly for general meetings...

Would that include pilots in senior squadrons who don't wear anything but the leather nameplate? >:D
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 06, 2014, 07:53:57 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 06, 2014, 07:48:07 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 06, 2014, 06:47:39 PM
I think they're trying to get the pilots to dress properly for general meetings...

Would that include pilots in senior squadrons who don't wear anything but the leather nameplate? >:D

How does one attach a leather nameplate to bare skin?  >:D
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 06, 2014, 07:54:50 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 06, 2014, 07:53:57 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 06, 2014, 07:48:07 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 06, 2014, 06:47:39 PM
I think they're trying to get the pilots to dress properly for general meetings...

Would that include pilots in senior squadrons who don't wear anything but the leather nameplate? >:D

How does one attach a leather nameplate to bare skin?  >:D

Rim shot.  You got me on that one.

I would assume Krazy-Glue?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 06, 2014, 07:57:05 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 06, 2014, 07:54:50 PM
Rim shot.  You got me on that one.

I would assume Krazy-Glue?

Hmmm.  I guess cadet protection only applies to cadets and not seniors.  Let the senior member hazing begin.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 06, 2014, 08:09:16 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 06, 2014, 07:57:05 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 06, 2014, 07:54:50 PM
Rim shot.  You got me on that one.

I would assume Krazy-Glue?

Hmmm.  I guess cadet protection only applies to cadets and not seniors.  Let the senior member hazing begin.
Begin? When has it ever stopped?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 06, 2014, 09:48:54 PM
Quote from: arajca on January 06, 2014, 08:09:16 PM
Begin? When has it ever stopped?

"The senior member hazing will continue until morale improves"
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: jeders on January 06, 2014, 11:34:06 PM
One thing that I really like about the draft manual is the greatly increased detail in regards to flight suits. I know that the plastic encased insignia has been mentioned, but I didn't see anything about the attachment method mentioned yet, so I thought I'd throw this out there.

Quote8.2.4.6.1Officer Rank Insignia. Officer rank insignia will be sewn directly to the FDU using OD or clear plastic thread.

So no more velcro rank on the flight suit.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 07, 2014, 12:17:52 AM
Quote from: sarmed1 on January 06, 2014, 07:45:49 PM
updated by ICL in Oct 2013;  I dont have it in front of me; but basically if 39" or over (for males; not sure of the female...think its 37")  will use a BMI tape test...must be under 17% I think (for males) and I think 24% for females.  it spells out then what parts are measured, think its like neck, waist and wrist...

18 percent, which if I remember correctly, the DoD does not allow anything less for the services.  For females, it is 26%.  For males, the tape is waist, which is not the hips, and neck.  For females it is neck, waist, hips for USAF.  The army once also measured the wrist, but that was eliminated recently.

The BMI is limited to 25 regardless of gender or age.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 07, 2014, 12:21:31 AM
Quote from: jeders on January 06, 2014, 11:34:06 PMSo no more velcro rank on the flight suit.
Isn't that text the same way in the current revision, and people just do the velcro .. because? .. Hmmm.. s'pose I could look.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: paul83814 on January 07, 2014, 12:47:17 AM
Quote from: a2capt on January 07, 2014, 12:21:31 AM
Quote from: jeders on January 06, 2014, 11:34:06 PMSo no more velcro rank on the flight suit.
Isn't that text the same way in the current revision, and people just do the velcro .. because? .. Hmmm.. s'pose I could look.

Looks like attachment method is not currently specified:


64 CAPM 39-1   23 MARCH 2005
 
Table 2-4.  Men's and Women's Flight Suit

1 Flight Suit Green NOMEX.  Flight crew members electing to wear this flight suit
must meet the weight and grooming standards.  Worn with the badges
and devices described in Figure 2-19.

Figure 2-19.  Men's and Women's Green Flight Suit and Green Flight Jacket
(Flight Crews Only)
NOTES:
1. Grade Insignia: Senior members will wear regular size plastic encased grade insignia centered
horizontally on top of each shoulder with bottom edge of insignia placed 1/2 inch from shoulder
seam.   General officers will center plastic grade insignia on shoulder.   CAP cutouts will not be
worn.  Cadets do not wear insignia or cutouts.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 07, 2014, 03:12:40 PM
Just needs a little clarification... Bada bing!

Quote8.2.4.6   Attaching Accoutrements
8.2.4.6.1   Officer Rank Insignia. Officer rank insignia will be sewn directly to the FDU using OD (black or dark blue on CFDU) or clear plastic thread.
8.2.4.6.2   Nametag. FDU nametag will be attached using hook and loop fastener (i.e. Velcro). A 2 x 4 inch piece of OD green loop tape (black or dark blue on CFDU) will be sewn to the FDU/CFDU using OD green thread (black or dark blue on CFDU).
8.2.4.6.3   CAP Command Patch. The command patch may be attaching using hook and loop fastener or sewn directly to the FDU/CFDU. If hook and loop is used, a piece of OD green loop tape (black or dark blue on CFDU) cut to the shape of the command patch will be sewn to the FDU using OD green thread. If the command patch is sewn directly to the FDU/CFDU, use thread that matches the patch and remove hook tape from back of patch.
8.2.4.6.4   Emergency Services Patch. The ES Patch may be attaching using hook and loop fastener or sewn directly to the FDU/CFDU. If hook and loop is used, a piece of OD green loop tape (black or dark blue on CFDU) cut to the shape of the emergency services patch will be sewn to the FDU/CFDU using OD green thread (black or dark blue on CFDU). If the emergency services patch is sewn directly to the FDU, use thread that matches the patch and remove hook tape from back of patch.
8.2.4.6.5   Sleeve Patches. Sleeve patches may be attached using hook and loop fastener or sewn directly to the FDU. If hook a loop is used, a 3 ½ x 3 ½ (or 4 x 4) inch square piece of OD green loop (black or dark blue on CFDU) tape will be sewn to each sleeve using OD green thread. Hook tape will be attached to the back of patches and will not be visible beyond the edges of the patch. If patches are sewn directly to the FDU, use thread that matches the patch.

I added 4" x 4" since that's generally a standard size of Velcro strip that's commonly available. Many people put the velcro on the plastic encased grade as a cheap and dirty - and unauthorized - method of attaching it to the uniform.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 07, 2014, 06:00:08 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 07, 2014, 03:12:40 PM
I added 4" x 4" since that's generally a standard size of Velcro strip that's commonly available. Many people put the velcro on the plastic encased grade as a cheap and dirty - and unauthorized - method of attaching it to the uniform.

Not to mention ugly (I tried it myself) since it looks like one is sprouting towers from each shoulder.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 07, 2014, 06:17:58 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 07, 2014, 06:00:08 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 07, 2014, 03:12:40 PM
I added 4" x 4" since that's generally a standard size of Velcro strip that's commonly available. Many people put the velcro on the plastic encased grade as a cheap and dirty - and unauthorized - method of attaching it to the uniform.

Not to mention ugly (I tried it myself) since it looks like one is sprouting towers from each shoulder.

after losing *just one* plastic encased Lt Col (and finding it later stuck to an article of clothing in my closet) on velcro, I gave up and sewed them straight on.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 07, 2014, 06:19:09 PM
You dont have to wear the rank on the shoulders of the Green Flight suit. Your rank is on the Name Patch that is Velcro. Why would you want to wear the rank on your shoulder?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 07, 2014, 06:25:17 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 07, 2014, 06:19:09 PM
You dont have to wear the rank on the shoulders of the Green Flight suit. Your rank is on the Name Patch that is Velcro. Why would you want to wear the rank on your shoulder?

Fig 2-19: "Grade Insignia: Senior members will wear regular size plastic encased grade insignia centered horizontally on top of each shoulder with bottom edge of insignia placed 1/2 inch from shoulder seam."

Table 6-1, Line 14

IOW, yes you DO have to wear the rank on the shoulders of the green flight suit.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 07, 2014, 06:25:45 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 07, 2014, 06:19:09 PM
You dont have to wear the rank on the shoulders of the Green Flight suit. Your rank is on the Name Patch that is Velcro. Why would you want to wear the rank on your shoulder?

Yes you do.

Because the name patch rank is a leftover from the days when the green bag could be worn by those who didn't meet weight and grooming standards.Those who didn't meet the standard could not wear the grade insignia but could display the grade title (LT COL CAP) on the name patch. Perhaps in a future revision to 39-1 (the PTB doesn't want changes to the name badge right now) that could get changed... but don't hold your breath!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 07, 2014, 06:32:20 PM
So there not going my Air Force Regs on the FlightSuit  then, AirForce does not wear the rank on there Shoulders. They really want a "Tacky" Plastic encased Rank on our flightsuits? The plastic gets dirty, cracks, and looses its luster after an year, then you have to change it every time. Why have they made this Mando? Looks like im going to wait till after the Ball, to get more Tayloring Done.




Still appalled at an Tacky Plastic Encased Rank, Cant it be Cloth Rank? lol
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: THRAWN on January 07, 2014, 06:35:33 PM
Been like this for years. Never had to replace my insignia aside from the one time I got caught on a seatbelt...

Quote from: Devil Doc on January 07, 2014, 06:32:20 PM
So there not going my Air Force Regs on the FlightSuit  then, AirForce does not wear the rank on there Shoulders. They really want a "Tacky" Plastic encased Rank on our flightsuits? The plastic gets dirty, cracks, and looses its luster after an year, then you have to change it every time. Why have they made this Mando? Looks like im going to wait till after the Ball, to get more Tayloring Done.




Still appalled at an Tacky Plastic Encased Rank, Cant it be Cloth Rank? lol
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 07, 2014, 06:37:53 PM
Im not saying everybodies rank does this. It sucks for people who change ranks, Ill wait till I get 1 Leuy, in 2 months, before i wear the flightsuit again. Maybe not?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JK657 on January 07, 2014, 06:44:47 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 07, 2014, 06:32:20 PM
So there not going my Air Force Regs on the FlightSuit  then, AirForce does not wear the rank on there Shoulders.

Air Force Officers wear their rank on their shoulders on the flight suit
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: MHC5096 on January 07, 2014, 06:48:24 PM
Correct. Only enlisted aircrew have the bare shoulders on the FDU.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 07, 2014, 07:14:39 PM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 07, 2014, 06:32:20 PM
So there not going my Air Force Regs on the FlightSuit  then, AirForce does not wear the rank on there Shoulders. They really want a "Tacky" Plastic encased Rank on our flightsuits? The plastic gets dirty, cracks, and looses its luster after an year, then you have to change it every time. Why have they made this Mando? Looks like im going to wait till after the Ball, to get more Tayloring Done.




Still appalled at an Tacky Plastic Encased Rank, Cant it be Cloth Rank? lol

So  you mean that AFMAN 36-2903, para 8.4.1 and 8.4.2 are WRONG?

No, certainly you don't mean that. What you mean is "I didn't bother to look at the manual I appeared to be quoting."

See here:

Quote8.4.2. Rank Insignia (O-1 through O-6). Wear subdued cloth rank insignia on each shoulder of the FDU/DFDU and flight jackets (plastic covered rank insignia is not authorized). Rank will be sewn-on 5/8 inches from the shoulder seam, centered on the shoulder.

Yes, the USAF wears rank on their flight suit. On the shoulders.

Difference: subdued cloth vs bright in plastic.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 07, 2014, 08:24:30 PM
Plastic-encased grade has always been mandatory on the flight suit (by always, at least the last two decades).

Velcro looks cheesy, and no one changes their grade that often.  A fast-tracker making Lt Col in the minimum 10 years
will have 1, 1.5, 3, and 4-year intervals between changes, and will most likely need to replace the suit itself at least once.

Any standard consumer machine can sew the plastic, and certainly your nice lady on the corner can.

Nothing warms the heart more then people who pay $150 for a lunch run whining about a few bucks for insignia.

If you don't like the plastic, get a blue flight suit - it looks way sharper then the green anyway, and a lot more
distinctive, and it uses color-matched grade.

Say what you will about the lack of a proper corporate dress uniform, assuming the changes in the draft stick,
members wearing corporate field and flight uniforms are going to look a heck of a lot more "put together" then
the USAF ABU (which I still say may not happen).

The Blue field and flight uniforms will be wearing color-matched tapes and insignia, unlike the presumed ABUs
which will still be "colorful".
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 07, 2014, 08:46:51 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 07, 2014, 06:17:58 PM
after losing *just one* plastic encased Lt Col (and finding it later stuck to an article of clothing in my closet) on velcro, I gave up and sewed them straight on.

I took a leather punch/awl (available on Swiss Army and Boy Scout knives), poked several holes in mine, got some clear thread from Hobby Lobby and had mine on in under half an hour.

On my blue bag I wear the dark-blue insignia and like it much better.

As for not wearing the rank at all...the sole senior squadron I was a member of had a lot of people who didn't like uniforms, period.  Quite a few of them wore nothing but flight suits (including to meetings) with nothing but the leather nameplate.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 07, 2014, 09:11:24 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 07, 2014, 08:46:51 PMgot some clear thread from Hobby Lobby and had mine on in under half an hour.

I've found 2lb-test fishing line works better for this.  Actual clear "thread" is to stretchy for my liking, but either will work.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 07, 2014, 09:27:19 PM
I blasted properly spaced holes in it with the laser cutter, then just used the sewing machine by hand, turning the wheel and moving it. Worked great. :)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 08, 2014, 02:13:26 AM
My Bad Guys, Jeez, I was always around Enlisted, And never noticed the Rank on the Flight Suit. Now, come to think of it, I do remember seeing it, just never knew what it was. (Never got close to Officers)  ;) . So, We do wear them on the Flight suit, Gotcha, Looks like Big V gunna get another order.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 08, 2014, 02:15:21 AM
Quote from: Devil Doc on January 08, 2014, 02:13:26 AM
My Bad Guys, Jeez, I was always around Enlisted, And never noticed the Rank on the Flight Suit. Now, come to think of it, I do remember seeing it, just never knew what it was. (Never got close to Officers)  ;) . So, We do wear them on the Flight suit, Gotcha, Looks like Big V gunna get another order.

The Air Force wears subdued grade insignia on the flight suits vs full color on Navy/Marine Corps flight suits.

I guess the subdued insignia worked, you didn't see it.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Devil Doc on January 08, 2014, 02:16:44 AM
So, I;ve seen many wear the Flight suit without the Rank on the Shoulders, the only time i,ve seen it, is when Members were wearing the Blue Flight suit. I;m sorry I was Wrong, I'm human. Now, does that make it right no, but what do you do when, So So squadron, dosn't wear there's?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 08, 2014, 02:55:47 AM
Wear yours properly and let the others look like goobers.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 08, 2014, 06:20:55 AM
Finally had some time tonight to read thru the draft completely and this thread.

Three things I'm gonna point out:

1. I completely disagree with the prohibition of wearing military awards and badges on the Corporate uniform. Regardless of the reasons given its just wrong and a slap in the face to those who served honorably but now in their later years have put on a few pounds. Wrong... just plan wrong.

2. With the complete adoption of USAF uniform regulations into the draft, there are going to be a few "butt hurt" veterans who have for years worn certain badges (ie the EIB, CIB, EMB, CMB, etc.) completely within CAP regulations and now have to take them off. Another slap in the face.

3. The commander CAP-USAF seems to be the sole ultimate authority of what is and what isn't authorized as a CAP uniform. Now when it comes to the USAF-style uniform and cadet uniforms, that should be completely within his/her purview of responsibility. For Corporate uniform, not so much. They are not USAF uniforms and the input and control should remain solely within CAP.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 08, 2014, 07:01:33 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 08, 2014, 06:20:55 AM
2. With the complete adoption of USAF uniform regulations into the draft, there are going to be a few "butt hurt" veterans who have for years worn certain badges (ie the EIB, CIB, EMB, CMB, etc.) completely within CAP regulations and now have to take them off. Another slap in the face.

Being prior-service Army and having earned a CMB (first Gulf War), I feel I can comment on this.

I'm fine with that.

Basically, if we're going to wear the AF uniform, then we should abide by the AF regulations for wear of that uniform.  If the AF doesn't allow their own, active-duty airmen and officers to wear these devices (if they somehow earned them), then we should't wear them either.

Now, should I think we should be authorized?  Sure, but that's a gripe at Ma Blue, and not the CAP leadership.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 08, 2014, 07:28:15 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 08, 2014, 07:01:33 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 08, 2014, 06:20:55 AM
2. With the complete adoption of USAF uniform regulations into the draft, there are going to be a few "butt hurt" veterans who have for years worn certain badges (ie the EIB, CIB, EMB, CMB, etc.) completely within CAP regulations and now have to take them off. Another slap in the face.

Being prior-service Army and having earned a CMB (first Gulf War), I feel I can comment on this.

I'm fine with that.

Basically, if we're going to wear the AF uniform, then we should abide by the AF regulations for wear of that uniform.  If the AF doesn't allow their own, active-duty airmen and officers to wear these devices (if they somehow earned them), then we should't wear them either.

Now, should I think we should be authorized?  Sure, but that's a gripe at Ma Blue, and not the CAP leadership.

You doubt that AF members have earned these badges?  I can tell you there are a quite a few of my fellow brother/sister blue berets who have earned those badges and did so with honor.  And I personally know two of them who have earned the Ranger tab as well.  Plus not to mention plenty of blue berets have been combat patched for their service and accomplishment of the mission, including myself.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 08, 2014, 07:39:07 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 08, 2014, 06:20:55 AM
The commander CAP-USAF seems to be the sole ultimate authority of what is and what isn't authorized as a CAP uniform. Now when it comes to the USAF-style uniform and cadet uniforms, that should be completely within his/her purview of responsibility. For Corporate uniform, not so much. They are not USAF uniforms and the input and control should remain solely within CAP.

I believe it used to be that way, until the debacle with the CSU.  We were never given a reason for its demise.  The "conventional wisdom" is that the Air Force didn't like it, but there is no official evidence to support that.  My personal opinion is that those Higher Up wanted to attempt to wipe the slate of anything that had to do with the Era of the Self-Appointed Generalissimo.  That left a bad taste in a lot of members' mouths, mine included.

After that, and I'm referring from memory to then-National CC General Courter's PowerPoint on the subject, CAP-USAF demanded/asked/was granted virtually the same authority over "corporate" uniforms as the AF uniforms.

I would NEVER impugn Gen. Courter's character.  By virtually all accounts (I haven't had the pleasure of meeting her), she's nice, approachable, smart and did a hell of a job walking into the rat's nest of her predecessor.  It is very unlikely that her preference killed the CSU, because her official picture on the CAP website had her wearing it for a long time.

Her PowerPoint said that "the corporate uniforms do not exist to provide a military-looking alternative."  I would say she was saying what she was told by CAP-USAF.

Since then, the message from Those Up The Food Chain has been clear on "corporate" uniforms, reflected in the draft of the New and Improved 39-1.

1.  Thou shalt not make any substantial modifications to the current "corporate" uniforms.
2.  Thou shalt not criticise or attempt to change the status quo.
3.  Thou shalt not make suggestions such as a hat or different service coat.
4.  Thou shalt really, really not mention the colour blue, even if it is a completely civilian garment.
5.  The Whole of the Law shalt be summed up in the AFI undefinable standard of "low light/at-a-distance."
6.  Thou shalt not say the "corporate" uniform is anything other than attractive and professional-looking, and reeketh of aviation history.
7.  Thou shalt not compare the "corporate" uniform to that of a Realtor or a mall security person.
8.  Thou shalt never be permitted to wear CAP blingage on the "blazer," much less MILITARY blingage.
9.  Grey is the way, and thou shalt not criticise it.
10.The New and Improved 39-1 is The Final Word, and once it is finalised, thou shalt not mutter anything about uniform changes ever again.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 08, 2014, 09:09:10 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 08, 2014, 07:28:15 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 08, 2014, 07:01:33 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 08, 2014, 06:20:55 AM
2. With the complete adoption of USAF uniform regulations into the draft, there are going to be a few "butt hurt" veterans who have for years worn certain badges (ie the EIB, CIB, EMB, CMB, etc.) completely within CAP regulations and now have to take them off. Another slap in the face.

Being prior-service Army and having earned a CMB (first Gulf War), I feel I can comment on this.

I'm fine with that.

Basically, if we're going to wear the AF uniform, then we should abide by the AF regulations for wear of that uniform.  If the AF doesn't allow their own, active-duty airmen and officers to wear these devices (if they somehow earned them), then we should't wear them either.

Now, should I think we should be authorized?  Sure, but that's a gripe at Ma Blue, and not the CAP leadership.

You doubt that AF members have earned these badges?  I can tell you there are a quite a few of my fellow brother/sister blue berets who have earned those badges and did so with honor.  And I personally know two of them who have earned the Ranger tab as well.  Plus not to mention plenty of blue berets have been combat patched for their service and accomplishment of the mission, including myself.

You totally misread what I said.

I never doubted that anybody in the Air Force earned those badges.  On the contrary, I'm aware that there are those who have earned them.

My point was:  If the Air Force doesn't allow their own active-duty and reserve Airmen and officers who have earned the badges to wear them on their uniforms, then why should CAP members who choose to wear the AF-blue uniform be allowed to wear them?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 08, 2014, 09:17:40 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 08, 2014, 07:39:07 AM
1.  Thou shalt not make any substantial modifications to the current "corporate" uniforms.
2.  Thou shalt not criticise or attempt to change the status quo.
3.  Thou shalt not make suggestions such as a hat or different service coat.
4.  Thou shalt really, really not mention the colour blue, even if it is a completely civilian garment.
5.  The Whole of the Law shalt be summed up in the AFI undefinable standard of "low light/at-a-distance."
6.  Thou shalt not say the "corporate" uniform is anything other than attractive and professional-looking, and reeketh of aviation history.
7.  Thou shalt not compare the "corporate" uniform to that of a Realtor or a mall security person.
8.  Thou shalt never be permitted to wear CAP blingage on the "blazer," much less MILITARY blingage.
9.  Grey is the way, and thou shalt not criticise it.
10.The New and Improved 39-1 is The Final Word, and once it is finalised, thou shalt not mutter anything about uniform changes ever again.

Can we get these etched on some stone tablets, to go?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 08, 2014, 09:48:26 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 08, 2014, 09:17:40 AMCan we get these etched on some stone tablets, to go?
I think there were more someplace .. I think they got lost somewhere in the threads..
Mel Brooks as Moses (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YX-gqRdK_8#ws)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JK657 on January 08, 2014, 08:57:11 PM
As this thread seems to lose its steam I just had a quick observation. After all this time I and probably most of us assumed the release of 39-1 proposed revisions would have led to a record breaking discussion here on CAPTALK.

I think that due to the quality work done by NIN and the other members of the uniform committee on this document the gripes, complaints, etc are pretty minor. Of course there are some changes and areas to improve, but overall, well done!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: RiverAux on January 08, 2014, 09:17:40 PM
It made it in the top 10 threads (based on # of replies). 

Though if discussion had remained focused only on actual mistakes in the draft, we would have had many fewer pages.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Papabird on January 08, 2014, 10:08:46 PM
Quote from: JK657 on January 08, 2014, 08:57:11 PM
I think that due to the quality work done by NIN and the other members of the uniform committee on this document the gripes, complaints, etc are pretty minor. Of course there are some changes and areas to improve, but overall, well done!

Here here!  Good discussions here, but all in all, I say bravo!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 08, 2014, 10:09:57 PM
Quote from: JK657 on January 08, 2014, 08:57:11 PM
I think that due to the quality work done by NIN and the other members of the uniform committee on this document the gripes, complaints, etc are pretty minor. Of course there are some changes and areas to improve, but overall, well done!

I'm not a member of the uniform committee, FYI. I have a little "pre-knowledge" but thats about it.

My uniform ideas would probably make people crazy.

Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 10:34:08 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 08, 2014, 10:09:57 PM
My uniform ideas would probably make people crazy.

Let's hear them! :)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: A.Member on January 08, 2014, 10:43:27 PM
I saw a couple references throughout this thread that I'm hoping someone can shed some light on:

Berets and orange hats:  Up until discussion here, I thought this was simply an oversight/error in wording in that these were only authorized during the special activities to which they are traditionally associated - ie National Blue Beret and Hawk Mountain.   

However, in reading here am I correct to understand that all PA Wing is authorized wear of the orange hat all the time?  Likewise, there are a couple Wings wear berets as regular headgear as well?   

If this is correct, can some provide me with some of the insight/justsification behind this?   If so, why is it allowed to continue?   Is it one of these instances where no one any longer recalls but it's been that way for so long that it's "just the way we've always done it"?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 10:59:16 PM

Quote from: A.Member on January 08, 2014, 10:43:27 PM
I saw a couple references throughout this thread that I'm hoping someone can shed some light on:

Berets and orange hats:  Up until discussion here, I thought this was simply an oversight/error in wording in that these were only authorized during the special activities to which they are traditionally associated - ie National Blue Beret and Hawk Mountain.   

However, in reading here am I correct to understand that all PA Wing is authorized wear of the orange hat all the time?  Likewise, there are a couple Wings wear berets as regular headgear as well?   

If this is correct, can some provide me with some of the insight/justsification behind this?   If so, why is it allowed to continue?   Is it one of these instances where no one any longer recalls but it's been that way for so long that it's "just the way we've always done it"?

Under the current CAPM 39-1, wing commanders can authorized a baseball cap and/or blue beret for wear within their wings. In PAWG, they have a supplement authorizing the orange baseball cap. Other wings (PRWG comes to mind) have authorized the blue beret for special purposes. The ICL dated 12 March 2012 authorized all NBB graduates to wear the blue beret outside the activity. The new CAPM 39-1 draft have included that changed.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: A.Member on January 08, 2014, 11:18:17 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 10:59:16 PM

Quote from: A.Member on January 08, 2014, 10:43:27 PM
I saw a couple references throughout this thread that I'm hoping someone can shed some light on:

Berets and orange hats:  Up until discussion here, I thought this was simply an oversight/error in wording in that these were only authorized during the special activities to which they are traditionally associated - ie National Blue Beret and Hawk Mountain.   

However, in reading here am I correct to understand that all PA Wing is authorized wear of the orange hat all the time?  Likewise, there are a couple Wings wear berets as regular headgear as well?   

If this is correct, can some provide me with some of the insight/justsification behind this?   If so, why is it allowed to continue?   Is it one of these instances where no one any longer recalls but it's been that way for so long that it's "just the way we've always done it"?

Under the current CAPM 39-1, wing commanders can authorized a baseball cap and/or blue beret for wear within their wings. In PAWG, they have a supplement authorizing the orange baseball cap. Other wings (PRWG comes to mind) have authorized the blue beret for special purposes. The ICL dated 12 March 2012 authorized all NBB graduates to wear the blue beret outside the activity. The new CAPM 39-1 draft have included that changed.
OK, that explains the beret, I guess (although it's silly for regular wear IMO).   

However, it is still problematic for the orange hat, which now seems on a path to be codified in this latest draft.  A supplement allows for the wear of something that is authorized as optional or provides additional clarification within the regulation.   It doesn't allow authorization of something that is otherwise prohibited - ie. a Wing CC can't go an authorize a polka-dot t-shirts as the Wing uniform.  Thus, I'm not sure how the orange hat was ever allowed.

Anyway, I'm not in either of those Wings, so I have more important things to be concerned with.  However, you'd think National would resolve this by putting the word "uniform" back in the uniform regulation.  I was just curious as to how it came to be.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 08, 2014, 11:19:04 PM
Quote from: A.Member on January 08, 2014, 10:43:27 PMHowever, in reading here am I correct to understand that all PA Wing is authorized wear of the orange hat all the time?

Not "authorized", required - that's part of the heartburn with members not so inclined.


Quote from: A.Member on January 08, 2014, 10:43:27 PM
Likewise, there are a couple Wings wear berets as regular headgear as well?
INWG authorizes them for GTs.  I'm not aware of any wings that authroize the beret as the standard field uniform hat.
Considering berets aren't supposed to be worn in the field, that wouldn't be a very good idea.
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 11:34:28 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 08, 2014, 11:19:04 PM
INWG authorizes them for GTs.

PRWG authorizes them for graduates of their Wing GT School.

As a side note, FLWG has a supplement that prohibits the blue beret, even for NBB graduates, at military installations within the wing.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: A.Member on January 08, 2014, 11:39:53 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 08, 2014, 11:19:04 PM
Considering berets aren't supposed to be worn in the field, that wouldn't be a very good idea.
Stong concur...that's why I thought it was kind of silly.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 08, 2014, 11:40:29 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 11:34:28 PM
As a side note, FLWG has a supplement that prohibits the blue beret, even for NBB graduates, at military installations within the wing.

If the headgear is OK / appropriate to wear elsewhere, it's appropriate to wear on a military base,
and if you're embarrassed to wear it in front of dad, then you probably shouldn't wear it at all.

It's the CAP equivalent of a girl walking out the front door in jeans and a t-shirt and then changing into
something her parents would hate in the car.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 11:43:10 PM
^ Agree.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 08, 2014, 11:47:20 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 08, 2014, 06:20:55 AMI completely disagree with the prohibition of wearing military awards and badges on the Corporate uniform. Regardless of the reasons given its just wrong and a slap in the face to those who served honorably but now in their later years have put on a few pounds. Wrong... just plan wrong.

As someone who has never in my life been outside the HW standards and has always been able to wear blue - I still agree with you.  I can imagine no possible harm from allowing this.  I do not understand the logic at all.

Nor do I understand the limitations now imposed on the blue uniform.  I myself have only airborne wings and so again, the new CAP regulations do not affect me, but this is where we should look to the CG Aux.  I did not earn my airborne wings in the Coast Guard and so if I was reserve could not wear them, but on an AUX uniform they are allowed.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 08, 2014, 11:50:52 PM
Quote from: A.Member on January 08, 2014, 11:18:17 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 10:59:16 PM

Quote from: A.Member on January 08, 2014, 10:43:27 PM
I saw a couple references throughout this thread that I'm hoping someone can shed some light on:

Berets and orange hats:  Up until discussion here, I thought this was simply an oversight/error in wording in that these were only authorized during the special activities to which they are traditionally associated - ie National Blue Beret and Hawk Mountain.   

However, in reading here am I correct to understand that all PA Wing is authorized wear of the orange hat all the time?  Likewise, there are a couple Wings wear berets as regular headgear as well?   

If this is correct, can some provide me with some of the insight/justsification behind this?   If so, why is it allowed to continue?   Is it one of these instances where no one any longer recalls but it's been that way for so long that it's "just the way we've always done it"?

Under the current CAPM 39-1, wing commanders can authorized a baseball cap and/or blue beret for wear within their wings. In PAWG, they have a supplement authorizing the orange baseball cap. Other wings (PRWG comes to mind) have authorized the blue beret for special purposes. The ICL dated 12 March 2012 authorized all NBB graduates to wear the blue beret outside the activity. The new CAPM 39-1 draft have included that changed.
OK, that explains the beret, I guess (although it's silly for regular wear IMO).   

However, it is still problematic for the orange hat, which now seems on a path to be codified in this latest draft.  A supplement allows for the wear of something that is authorized as optional or provides additional clarification within the regulation.   It doesn't allow authorization of something that is otherwise prohibited - ie. a Wing CC can't go an authorize a polka-dot t-shirts as the Wing uniform.  Thus, I'm not sure how the orange hat was ever allowed.

Anyway, I'm not in either of those Wings, so I have more important things to be concerned with.  However, you'd think National would resolve this by putting the word "uniform" back in the uniform regulation.  I was just curious as to how it came to be.
Please show me in either the current or draft manual that says commanders cannot dictate the color of the hat?

Hold on tight....it doesn't.......even in the big USAF...in the BDU/fatigue days.....squadron commanders could authorise any color hat they wanted.

So.....again......orange base ball hat....okay.  Orange T-shirt......not okay...old or new regulation....because the T-shirt color is dictated to only  few colors. 
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 09, 2014, 12:09:13 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on January 08, 2014, 11:50:52 PM
So.....again......orange base ball hat....okay.  Orange T-shirt......not okay...old or new regulation....because the T-shirt color is dictated to only  few colors.

Actually, the current CAPM 39-1, Table 2-3, Line 12, page 63 seems to allow unit commanders to prescribe the color of t-shirts, if I'm reading it correctly. Unless the color refers to the emblem on the t-shirt (it's not written very clearly). That said, the PAWG supplement authorizing the orange t-shirt refers to this table/line.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 12:32:33 AM
Quote from: VNY on January 08, 2014, 11:47:20 PM
Nor do I understand the limitations now imposed on the blue uniform. 

Now imposed?

Nothing's changed recently on the USAF-style blues, nor does much look to change in the draft.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: kd8gua on January 09, 2014, 12:43:27 AM
I completely forgot about this gem:

The CAWG Ground Team uniform is still completely absent from 39-1. You would think there would be some mention of it, since the manual states many times over how the only things local CC's can change are hat colors and whatnot. A bright orange shirt with some patches and blue utility pants isn't mentioned once.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 12:48:14 AM
Wing CC's are still free to request a supplement to fit their wing's specific needs.

The "local commanders" verbiage is what can be changed without a nationally approved supp.

Frankly, there's no reason any of this local stuff should be in the regulations - if wing CCs think it's important,
then they should be burdened with properly maintaining the supplements.  Then if a new wing CC comes in
and has had "enough" of something, he can simply not renew them under his name when he re-ups everything else,
and no need for action by the NUC or anyone else in changing the national regs.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on January 09, 2014, 12:52:21 AM
Hmmm. It seems that many people who never bothered to read the current CAPM 39-1 are now reading the proposed 39-1... and are shocked!

:o

Flyer
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 01:06:52 AM
Quote from: flyer333555 on January 09, 2014, 12:52:21 AM
Hmmm. It seems that many people who never bothered to read the current CAPM 39-1 are now reading the proposed 39-1... and are shocked!

"Ducks shall wear long pants."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 09, 2014, 01:31:32 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on January 09, 2014, 12:43:27 AM
I completely forgot about this gem:

The CAWG Ground Team uniform is still completely absent from 39-1. You would think there would be some mention of it, since the manual states many times over how the only things local CC's can change are hat colors and whatnot. A bright orange shirt with some patches and blue utility pants isn't mentioned once.


Why would something that only applies to ONE wing be in the national regulation?

That's what Wing Supplements are for.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 09, 2014, 01:45:02 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 10:34:08 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 08, 2014, 10:09:57 PM
My uniform ideas would probably make people crazy.

Let's hear them! :)

No offence to anyone concerned, but what's the point?

NHQ and CAP-USAF's position on anything but the status quo has hardened ever since the CSU debacle.

I had a complete on-paper proposal for very slight modifications to the "corporate" uniform but there is no reason to send them through the chain just to end up in someone's CS file.

Anyway, my uniform ideas have caused enough heartburn here.

Quote from: VNY on January 08, 2014, 11:47:20 PM
...this is where we should look to the CG Aux.

As a former Auxiliarist (thinking of going back) it's apples and oranges.

The CGAUX has a much, much, much closer and less adversarial relationship with its parent service regarding uniform issues.  Never once during my years in the CGAUX did I hear anything serious about junking the CG uniform entirely.  You may be surprised at the number of people in CAP today who would have us do that, except for the cadets.  I remember a Lt Col in a senior squadron telling me, "We shouldn't be wearing the Air Force uniform at all.  We have our own uniforms."

Nor do I remember any apocryphal stories of CGAUX personnel trolling for salutes.  Remember, even the National Commodore of the CGAUX has to render a salute to the newest warrant officer/ensign.

I can be sarky and say the big difference is one auxiliary's parent service likes and appreciates them, and the other feels like they have to keep theirs on a short leash, at least regarding uniforms.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 01:57:29 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 09, 2014, 01:45:02 AM
Nor do I remember any apocryphal stories of CGAUX personnel trolling for salutes.  Remember, even the National Commodore of the CGAUX has to render a salute to the newest warrant officer/ensign.

Well that's silly, too.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:14:40 AM
Cyborg, why are you so adamant about changing the G/W?  Why are you so insistent on having a hat for it?  Why are you so insistent on us mirroring a foreign country's uniform so much? 

Outside of the G/W being grey what is your solid beef with it?  You have some major heartburn about this but you have not taken any steps to fix what you feel is wrong. 

Please if you feel this bad about it submit your recommendations for changes up the chain, and please let's keep the CSU dead. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 09, 2014, 02:31:10 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:14:40 AM
Cyborg, why are you so adamant about changing the G/W?

I am not.  I have no power to do so, and, as I said I formulated a proposal to change it but abandoned it because the chances are extremely good that it would end up in someone's CS file along the way.  In fact, I have one and wear it as well as I can, despite not liking it.

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:14:40 AM
Why are you so insistent on having a hat for it? 

Outside, I feel very strange saluting and returning salutes uncovered.

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:14:40 AM
Why are you so insistent on us mirroring a foreign country's uniform so much? 

Where have I said I wanted us to adopt a foreign uniform?  Do you mean pictures I have posted purely for illustrations of headgear and different cuts/colours?  My ideas were to make it closer to a civilian, airline uniform, using items readily available at civilian sources like Sporty's Pilot Shop.

Or do you mean just because I have suggested a beret as a possible headgear?

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:14:40 AM
Outside of the G/W being grey what is your solid beef with it? 

It is monochromatic.  It does not reflect either the heritage of CAP, nor have much to do with aviation in general (civilian as well as military).  It does not have a proper service coat where one's earned CAP awards can be worn.  Nor are the powers that be likely to allow such awards to be worn on the blazer.

My main suggestions would have been either a light- or dark-blue civilian uniform shirt to replace the white one.  No replacement of the grey trousers, no changes to the shoulder marks or nameplate.

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:14:40 AM
You have some major heartburn about this but you have not taken any steps to fix what you feel is wrong. 

Thank you for your diagnosis, Herr Doktor.  However, I assure you I am quite serene.  When I do have heartburn, it's an occasional Tums to take care of it.

I have talked to people a lot further up the food chain than I about my suggested changes and, to a man/woman, they have said, "they (meaning CAP and CAP-USAF) will never go for it, especially in the aftermath of the CSU."

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:14:40 AM
Please if you feel this bad about it submit your recommendations for changes up the chain, and please let's keep the CSU dead.

Given the feedback I have received it would be illogical and a waste of effort to do so, and I have never suggested bringing back the CSU.  I am not an idealist.

Now, sir, I would ask you:

IF you support the status quo with the G/W so much, why is that?

Do you actually consider it an attractive uniform, or is it the "convenience" aspect that appeals to you?

Why are you AGAINST having headgear for it?

Incidentally...I think CT has an option to ignore a user.  If my posts irritate you, I suggest you use it.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 02:42:25 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 09, 2014, 02:31:10 AMI think CT has an option to ignore a user.

Doesn't work.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:47:52 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 09, 2014, 02:31:10 AM
Given the feedback I have received it would be illogical and a waste of effort to do so, and I have never suggested bringing back the CSU.  I am not an idealist.

Now, sir, I would ask you:

IF you support the status quo with the G/W so much, why is that?

Do you actually consider it an attractive uniform, or is it the "convenience" aspect that appeals to you?

Why are you AGAINST having headgear for it?

Incidentally...I think CT has an option to ignore a user.  If my posts irritate you, I suggest you use it.

1) I have no issues with the uniform and I don't look at it for attractiveness.  It's a prescribed and authorized uniform and it works for it's purpose.

2) Not every uniform requires headgear and change for the sake of change is not worthwhile.

3) Your posts do not irritate me.  I do think that you need to quit beating a dead horse on some issues.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Fubar on January 09, 2014, 02:49:55 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 02:42:25 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 09, 2014, 02:31:10 AMI think CT has an option to ignore a user.

Doesn't work.

Tap, tap, is this thing on? (If you can see this, then I guess the ignore option didn't work for you)  ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 09, 2014, 03:54:06 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 09, 2014, 01:45:02 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 10:34:08 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 08, 2014, 10:09:57 PM
My uniform ideas would probably make people crazy.

Let's hear them! :)

No offence to anyone concerned, but what's the point?

NHQ and CAP-USAF's position on anything but the status quo has hardened ever since the CSU debacle.

I had a complete on-paper proposal for very slight modifications to the "corporate" uniform but there is no reason to send them through the chain just to end up in someone's CS file.


How do you really feel about CAP uniform policies?  >:D
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 09, 2014, 04:48:38 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 10:34:08 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 08, 2014, 10:09:57 PM
My uniform ideas would probably make people crazy.

Let's hear them! :)

Seconded.

BTW, what are your thoughts on khaki?  8)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 09, 2014, 04:59:55 AM
Quote from: VNY on January 08, 2014, 11:47:20 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 08, 2014, 06:20:55 AMI completely disagree with the prohibition of wearing military awards and badges on the Corporate uniform. Regardless of the reasons given its just wrong and a slap in the face to those who served honorably but now in their later years have put on a few pounds. Wrong... just plan wrong.

As someone who has never in my life been outside the HW standards and has always been able to wear blue - I still agree with you.  I can imagine no possible harm from allowing this.  I do not understand the logic at all.

Nor do I understand the limitations now imposed on the blue uniform.  I myself have only airborne wings and so again, the new CAP regulations do not affect me, but this is where we should look to the CG Aux.  I did not earn my airborne wings in the Coast Guard and so if I was reserve could not wear them, but on an AUX uniform they are allowed.

I also like the fact the USCGAux limits you to two badges: one above the ribbons, and one on the pocket flap. Members choice of which two earned badges to wear.

My only two badges are a German GAFET and an Expert Badge with pistol bar so I only wear the shooting badge.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 09, 2014, 05:04:58 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 01:57:29 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 09, 2014, 01:45:02 AM
Nor do I remember any apocryphal stories of CGAUX personnel trolling for salutes.  Remember, even the National Commodore of the CGAUX has to render a salute to the newest warrant officer/ensign.

Well that's silly, too.

No it's not. It a matter of respect, we are the volunteers without rank, they are the paid professional officers, makes perfect sense to me.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 05:10:40 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 09, 2014, 05:04:58 AM
No it's not. It a matter of respect, we are the volunteers without rank, they are the paid professional officers, makes perfect sense to me.

"We"?

The assumption that our service, in its context, is secondary, or less, is both misguided and false.

It is different, plain and simple.  Exchanging salutes, as a sign of mutual respect, is appropriate.  If that's too much to ask,
then perhaps it's time both parties got over themselves, because neither understands the question.

Our members serve honorably, and generally at their own expense and during their off hours and vacations, in an organization
that the United States Congress has chartered and funds which is authorized to appoint those same members to grades
which have a military analog.  That isn't "higher or lower" it simply is.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 09, 2014, 05:35:02 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:14:40 AM
Cyborg, why are you so adamant about changing the G/W?  Why are you so insistent on having a hat for it?

I'm a supporter of a hat for the G/Ws as well.  Why?  Because you look like a tool in a button-down oxford shirt and gray slacks while wearing a baseball cap.  And some days the weather just demands headgear.

Also, as for the "white" part of "Gray & Whites"... well... white is boring.  I'm not a fan of white shirts in general.  I kinda like Cyborg's "royal blue pilot shirt" idea.  I think it looks spiffy.  (/shrug)

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:14:40 AM
Please if you feel this bad about it submit your recommendations for changes up the chain, and please let's keep the CSU dead.

Never having worn the CSU, what exactly was wrong/bad about it, other than the taint of His Royal Majesty?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 09, 2014, 05:37:04 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 09, 2014, 05:04:58 AM
No it's not. It a matter of respect, we are the volunteers without rank, they are the paid professional officers, makes perfect sense to me.

Having worked in Army Medical, I can tell you some stories about some so-called "professional" officers...
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:08:07 PM
Last time I checked a uniform had it's purpose and flashy wasn't one of them.  Not every uniform needs a hat and if the membership has an issue with the uniform there is the process to recommend changes.  So far the only folks I have heard orseen have an issue with the G/W are those who choose to not abide by H/W and grooming and self defeat themselves when it comes to it.  And IMO the only reason I have heard for change is just to change.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 09, 2014, 02:50:08 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 08, 2014, 11:40:29 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 11:34:28 PM
As a side note, FLWG has a supplement that prohibits the blue beret, even for NBB graduates, at military installations within the wing.

If the headgear is OK / appropriate to wear elsewhere, it's appropriate to wear on a military base,
and if you're embarrassed to wear it in front of dad, then you probably shouldn't wear it at all.

It's the CAP equivalent of a girl walking out the front door in jeans and a t-shirt and then changing into
something her parents would hate in the car.

If I remember correctly this rule was imposed so as not to confuse CAPers with Security Forces, who wear the blue beret.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 09, 2014, 03:39:07 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 09, 2014, 02:50:08 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 08, 2014, 11:40:29 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 11:34:28 PM
As a side note, FLWG has a supplement that prohibits the blue beret, even for NBB graduates, at military installations within the wing.

If the headgear is OK / appropriate to wear elsewhere, it's appropriate to wear on a military base,
and if you're embarrassed to wear it in front of dad, then you probably shouldn't wear it at all.

It's the CAP equivalent of a girl walking out the front door in jeans and a t-shirt and then changing into
something her parents would hate in the car.

If I remember correctly this rule was imposed so as not to confuse CAPers with Security Forces, who wear the blue beret.

I can see how a 16 year old cadet wearing BDUs could be confused with Air Force Security Forces personnel... Wait! What?  ???

This policy applies to ALL military installations (last I check only the Air Force uses blue berets). TACP airmen wear black berets, but no one's ever been concerned that they may be confused with Army soldiers.

Besides, since the Air Force HAS (mostly likely) authorized CAP to wear the blue beret with BDUs and the blue beret has been in use for at least a couple of decades, I'm not sure where the concern comes from. Besides, Florida is not the only wing with military installations, yet no such restriction exists (that I'm aware of) in the other wings. I'm with Eclipse on this. Either the beret is appropriate for wear or it's not.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ranviper on January 09, 2014, 04:04:13 PM
I will say I'm amazed at how much arguing, debate, frustration, and disappointment can come from a simple disagreement on uniforms. I mean, did y'all join CAP to wear BDU's and boots or to learn about cool stuff like aerospace, and get the opportunity to fly? I joined because I love flying. They want me to wear neon pink, whatever, I get to fly, so I could care less. They are working diligently to make everyone happy, including the USAF, whose gracious enough to let anyone outside of their weight standards (+10%) wear a version of their uniform. Be happy and serve your community!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 04:25:11 PM
^ It shows what happens when a baseline, important, but ultimately simple issue is subject to politics, compromise, and fiefdoms.

Everyone suffers and the purpose is self-defeated.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Private Investigator on January 09, 2014, 04:27:03 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 09, 2014, 04:48:38 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 10:34:08 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 08, 2014, 10:09:57 PM
My uniform ideas would probably make people crazy.

Let's hear them! :)

Seconded.

BTW, what are your thoughts on khaki?  8)

I like khaki  :clap:
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 09, 2014, 04:30:43 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:08:07 PM
Last time I checked a uniform had it's purpose and flashy wasn't one of them.  Not every uniform needs a hat and if the membership has an issue with the uniform there is the process to recommend changes.  So far the only folks I have heard orseen have an issue with the G/W are those who choose to not abide by H/W and grooming and self defeat themselves when it comes to it.  And IMO the only reason I have heard for change is just to change.

So... the only folks you've heard or seen who have an issue with the G/Ws are those who actually wear the G/Ws?

:o

Thank you for playing.  Please come again.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 04:31:17 PM
One only needs to look to the Apple Corps, Microsoft Militia, Target SRS (Special Retail Services), Best Buy Brigade, or the Walmart World Legion to see
the respect khaki commands.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 09, 2014, 04:50:17 PM
Time for a beer... or three or four! :D
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 09, 2014, 04:58:57 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 04:31:17 PM
One only needs to look to the Apple Corps, Microsoft Militia, Target SRS (Special Retail Services), Best Buy Brigade, or the Walmart World Legion to see
the respect khaki commands.

Well put! :clap:
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 09, 2014, 05:05:36 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 04:31:17 PM
One only needs to look to the Apple Corps, Microsoft Militia, Target SRS (Special Retail Services), Best Buy Brigade, or the Walmart World Legion to see
the respect khaki commands.

(looks around)

Where's my Blue Apron BDUs?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 09, 2014, 05:17:26 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 09, 2014, 03:39:07 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 09, 2014, 02:50:08 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 08, 2014, 11:40:29 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 11:34:28 PM
As a side note, FLWG has a supplement that prohibits the blue beret, even for NBB graduates, at military installations within the wing.

If the headgear is OK / appropriate to wear elsewhere, it's appropriate to wear on a military base,
and if you're embarrassed to wear it in front of dad, then you probably shouldn't wear it at all.

It's the CAP equivalent of a girl walking out the front door in jeans and a t-shirt and then changing into
something her parents would hate in the car.

If I remember correctly this rule was imposed so as not to confuse CAPers with Security Forces, who wear the blue beret.

I can see how a 16 year old cadet wearing BDUs could be confused with Air Force Security Forces personnel... Wait! What?  ???

This policy applies to ALL military installations (last I check only the Air Force uses blue berets). TACP airmen wear black berets, but no one's ever been concerned that they may be confused with Army soldiers.

Besides, since the Air Force HAS (mostly likely) authorized CAP to wear the blue beret with BDUs and the blue beret has been in use for at least a couple of decades, I'm not sure where the concern comes from. Besides, Florida is not the only wing with military installations, yet no such restriction exists (that I'm aware of) in the other wings. I'm with Eclipse on this. Either the beret is appropriate for wear or it's not.

The local rule may have been imposed by the wing commander; the current SF beret now has a distinctive 'DEFENSOR FORTIS' (Defender of the Force) beret flash. Some SF personnel tend to get agita over anyone other than them wearing their blue beret.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AlphaSigOU on January 09, 2014, 05:18:12 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 09, 2014, 05:05:36 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 04:31:17 PM
One only needs to look to the Apple Corps, Microsoft Militia, Target SRS (Special Retail Services), Best Buy Brigade, or the Walmart World Legion to see
the respect khaki commands.

(looks around)

Where's my Blue Apron BDUs?

And my blue chef's hat... :D
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 05:48:05 PM
Quote from: Panache link=topic=18336.msg334012#msg334012 d te=1389285043
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:08:07 PM
Last time I checked a uniform had it's purpose and flashy wasn't one of them.  Not every uniform needs a hat and if the membership has an issue with the uniform there is the process to recommend changes.  So far the only folks I have heard orseen have an issue with the G/W are those who choose to not abide by H/W and grooming and self defeat themselves when it comes to it.  And IMO the only reason I have heard for change is just to change.

So... the only folks you've heard or seen who have an issue with the G/Ws are those who actually wear the G/Ws?

:o

Thank you for playing.  Please come again.

Go back and read the entire post and don't try to twist it.   There is nothing wrong with the G/W.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 05:53:53 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 05:48:05 PMThere is nothing wrong with the G/W.

You mean besides the fact that it's incomplete, right?

It also treats the members who wear it as a different class.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 09, 2014, 07:12:08 PM
Without knowing exactly what all the requirements/limitations imposed by the Air Force are, it's hard to come up with an acceptable alternative. For example, how distinctive from the Air Force uniform does our CAP corporate uniform have to be?

Unfortunately, clearly defining these parameters is not the only obstacle. There are two distinct schools of thought about what this uniform should look like. I'm not talking about specific colors or details. I'm talking about those members who want the uniform to be more military looking and on par with the Air Force-style uniform. And those other members who want the uniform to be less military looking and more easily accessible through commercial sources. Those are the same members who oppose clearly defined and uniformed trousers (even if gray), in favor for the more vague and commercially accessible definition in CAPM 39-1.

Until these two groups can be reconciled, I think the status quo will probably prevail.  I agree with Eclipse that in order to avoid treating some of our members as a separate class, any corporate uniform need to be complete and on par with the Air Force-style uniform, regardless of color chosen.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on January 09, 2014, 07:19:19 PM
There shouldn't be any talk of what the G/WS look like. Want to go minimal? Grade and nameplate. But I should have the option of wearing my badges and ribbons (I do). A hat brings it more inline with the blues. A service coat would actually make it a service uniform for more formal events like ceremonies, encampments, conferences, etc.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 09, 2014, 07:36:11 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 09, 2014, 01:45:02 AM
As a former Auxiliarist (thinking of going back) it's apples and oranges.

The CGAUX has a much, much, much closer and less adversarial relationship with its parent service regarding uniform issues.  Never once during my years in the CGAUX did I hear anything serious about junking the CG uniform entirely.  You may be surprised at the number of people in CAP today who would have us do that, except for the cadets.  I remember a Lt Col in a senior squadron telling me, "We shouldn't be wearing the Air Force uniform at all.  We have our own uniforms."

Nor do I remember any apocryphal stories of CGAUX personnel trolling for salutes.  Remember, even the National Commodore of the CGAUX has to render a salute to the newest warrant officer/ensign.

I can be sarky and say the big difference is one auxiliary's parent service likes and appreciates them, and the other feels like they have to keep theirs on a short leash, at least regarding uniforms.

The AUX has an option that CAP does not - we can wear an insignia that designates us as an AUX member, but does not imply any sort of military rank.  It would be like us having grey slide ons that have the CAP seal on them instead of a grade insignia, and stating that anyone going on a military installation had to wear that instead of the regular ones.

On anything other than Blues I don't see how its an issue, it looks different enough already.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 09, 2014, 07:38:14 PM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on January 09, 2014, 07:19:19 PM
There shouldn't be any talk of what the G/WS look like. Want to go minimal? Grade and nameplate. But I should have the option of wearing my badges and ribbons (I do). A hat brings it more inline with the blues. A service coat would actually make it a service uniform for more formal events like ceremonies, encampments, conferences, etc.

A service coat to go with the G/W is certainly needed.  You could even bring back the old one - nobody is going to be confused if you are wearing grey pants with it.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 09, 2014, 07:40:35 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 09, 2014, 05:17:26 PMThe local rule may have been imposed by the wing commander; the current SF beret now has a distinctive 'DEFENSOR FORTIS' (Defender of the Force) beret flash. Some SF personnel tend to get agita over anyone other than them wearing their blue beret.

As someone who wore a Green Beret for 12 years I can tell you all it is good for is getting you sunburned on the left side of your head.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: 4fhoward on January 09, 2014, 09:57:44 PM
QuoteA service coat to go with the G/W is certainly needed.  You could even bring back the old one - nobody is going to be confused if you are wearing grey pants with it.

Do you mean this one. >:D
http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/uploads//post-448-1169213357.jpg (http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/uploads//post-448-1169213357.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 09, 2014, 10:56:53 PM
Quote from: 4fhoward on January 09, 2014, 09:57:44 PM
QuoteA service coat to go with the G/W is certainly needed.  You could even bring back the old one - nobody is going to be confused if you are wearing grey pants with it.

Do you mean this one. >:D
http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/uploads//post-448-1169213357.jpg (http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/uploads//post-448-1169213357.jpg)

No, but that one is even better.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: 4fhoward on January 09, 2014, 11:00:50 PM
QuoteNo, but that one is even better.

I totally agree, pink and greens, to me are a sharp looking uniform, and it has history to boot.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on January 09, 2014, 11:34:41 PM
Quote from: 4fhoward on January 09, 2014, 11:00:50 PM
QuoteNo, but that one is even better.
I totally agree, pink and greens, to me are a sharp looking uniform, and it has history to boot.

We don't want to make members buy a new pair of pants that doesn't go with anything else, so it would be "Pinks & Greys".

The mere fact that the new 39-1 calls the Blazer a "Corporate Service Dress" is a pretty good indication they are not even considering an actual corporate service uniform.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Paul Creed III on January 10, 2014, 01:52:30 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 09, 2014, 03:39:07 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on January 09, 2014, 02:50:08 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 08, 2014, 11:40:29 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 08, 2014, 11:34:28 PM
As a side note, FLWG has a supplement that prohibits the blue beret, even for NBB graduates, at military installations within the wing.

If the headgear is OK / appropriate to wear elsewhere, it's appropriate to wear on a military base,
and if you're embarrassed to wear it in front of dad, then you probably shouldn't wear it at all.

It's the CAP equivalent of a girl walking out the front door in jeans and a t-shirt and then changing into
something her parents would hate in the car.

If I remember correctly this rule was imposed so as not to confuse CAPers with Security Forces, who wear the blue beret.

I can see how a 16 year old cadet wearing BDUs could be confused with Air Force Security Forces personnel... Wait! What?  ???

This policy applies to ALL military installations (last I check only the Air Force uses blue berets). TACP airmen wear black berets, but no one's ever been concerned that they may be confused with Army soldiers.

Besides, since the Air Force HAS (mostly likely) authorized CAP to wear the blue beret with BDUs and the blue beret has been in use for at least a couple of decades, I'm not sure where the concern comes from. Besides, Florida is not the only wing with military installations, yet no such restriction exists (that I'm aware of) in the other wings. I'm with Eclipse on this. Either the beret is appropriate for wear or it's not.

Security Forces at my squadron's host installation has requested that we do not wear the blue beret either.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 02:50:20 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 05:10:40 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 09, 2014, 05:04:58 AM
No it's not. It a matter of respect, we are the volunteers without rank, they are the paid professional officers, makes perfect sense to me.

"We"?

The assumption that our service, in its context, is secondary, or less, is both misguided and false.

It is different, plain and simple.  Exchanging salutes, as a sign of mutual respect, is appropriate.  If that's too much to ask,
then perhaps it's time both parties got over themselves, because neither understands the question.

Our members serve honorably, and generally at their own expense and during their off hours and vacations, in an organization
that the United States Congress has chartered and funds which is authorized to appoint those same members to grades
which have a military analog.  That isn't "higher or lower" it simply is.

I was talking "we" in the context of the USCGAux, not CAP.

In the the USCGAux, the only "rank" we have is Auxiliarist, it's lower than an Seaman Recruit (E-1), it's the reason we only wear a Member Device when we augment the Coast Guard.

Yes our service is honorable, but so is the service of a Private, an Airman, or Seaman... but we all know our place in the pecking order; ours is at the very bottom.

I really think that's one of the differences in the thinking between CAP and the USCGAux, CAP members wear pseudo rank and like to think they are "separate and equal" from the USAF, but they're not. Auxies know we are at the bottom and happily serve there at "generally at our own expense and during our off hours and vacations." :-/
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 02:53:34 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 09, 2014, 05:37:04 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 09, 2014, 05:04:58 AM
No it's not. It a matter of respect, we are the volunteers without rank, they are the paid professional officers, makes perfect sense to me.

Having worked in Army Medical, I can tell you some stories about some so-called "professional" officers...

Oh I hear your brother, seen some 90 day wonder Captains in an Army hospital too.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 02:58:05 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 09, 2014, 04:30:43 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:08:07 PM
Last time I checked a uniform had it's purpose and flashy wasn't one of them.  Not every uniform needs a hat and if the membership has an issue with the uniform there is the process to recommend changes.  So far the only folks I have heard orseen have an issue with the G/W are those who choose to not abide by H/W and grooming and self defeat themselves when it comes to it.  And IMO the only reason I have heard for change is just to change.

So... the only folks you've heard or seen who have an issue with the G/Ws are those who actually wear the G/Ws?

:o

Thank you for playing.  Please come again.

Snicker, snicker.  :P
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 02:59:39 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 04:31:17 PM
One only needs to look to the Apple Corps, Microsoft Militia, Target SRS (Special Retail Services), Best Buy Brigade, or the Walmart World Legion to see
the respect khaki commands.

::)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 03:01:39 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 05:48:05 PM
Quote from: Panache link=topic=18336.msg334012#msg334012 d te=1389285043
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:08:07 PM
Last time I checked a uniform had it's purpose and flashy wasn't one of them.  Not every uniform needs a hat and if the membership has an issue with the uniform there is the process to recommend changes.  So far the only folks I have heard orseen have an issue with the G/W are those who choose to not abide by H/W and grooming and self defeat themselves when it comes to it.  And IMO the only reason I have heard for change is just to change.

So... the only folks you've heard or seen who have an issue with the G/Ws are those who actually wear the G/Ws?

:o

Thank you for playing.  Please come again.

Go back and read the entire post and don't try to twist it.   There is nothing wrong with the G/W.

If you're color blind.  ::)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 03:02:34 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 09, 2014, 05:53:53 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 05:48:05 PMThere is nothing wrong with the G/W.

You mean besides the fact that it's incomplete, right?

It also treats the members who wear it as a different class.

Bingo!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 03:03:59 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 09, 2014, 07:12:08 PM
Without knowing exactly what all the requirements/limitations imposed by the Air Force are, it's hard to come up with an acceptable alternative. For example, how distinctive from the Air Force uniform does our CAP corporate uniform have to be?

Unfortunately, clearly defining these parameters is not the only obstacle. There are two distinct schools of thought about what this uniform should look like. I'm not talking about specific colors or details. I'm talking about those members who want the uniform to be more military looking and on par with the Air Force-style uniform. And those other members who want the uniform to be less military looking and more easily accessible through commercial sources. Those are the same members who oppose clearly defined and uniformed trousers (even if gray), in favor for the more vague and commercially accessible definition in CAPM 39-1.

Until these two groups can be reconciled, I think the status quo will probably prevail.  I agree with Eclipse that in order to avoid treating some of our members as a separate class, any corporate uniform need to be complete and on par with the Air Force-style uniform, regardless of color chosen.

Well said.  :clap:
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Spaceman3750 on January 10, 2014, 03:08:54 AM
I've never felt like wearing G/Ws put me in a separate class, and I don't feel that anyone else I interact with has treated me that way. Either I get the job done or I don't and people treat me accordingly (and some are nice to me anyways even when I don't, like Eclipse :P ).

I like my BBDUs. I get to wear the boots that I like and I don't get dirty looks when I miss a shave (or a week's worth, like at NESA  :angel: ).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 10, 2014, 03:12:41 AM
If you have no use for a formal uniform, the G/W's are fine.

If you have a need for a formal dress uniform, to stand with your peers, or worse your subordinates,
the G/W is completely lacking.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Spaceman3750 on January 10, 2014, 03:14:00 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 10, 2014, 03:12:41 AM
If you have no use for a formal uniform, the G/W's are fine.

If you have a need for a formal dress uniform, to stand with your peers, or worse your subordinates,
the G/W is completely lacking.

Fair enough.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 03:23:48 AM
Quote from: VNY on January 09, 2014, 07:38:14 PM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on January 09, 2014, 07:19:19 PM
There shouldn't be any talk of what the G/WS look like. Want to go minimal? Grade and nameplate. But I should have the option of wearing my badges and ribbons (I do). A hat brings it more inline with the blues. A service coat would actually make it a service uniform for more formal events like ceremonies, encampments, conferences, etc.

A service coat to go with the G/W is certainly needed.  You could even bring back the old one - nobody is going to be confused if you are wearing grey pants with it.

Here's an idea if it "has" to be grey. Has anyone has seen the movie Corionalus, based on the play by Shakespeare?

They set Rome in modern time and here are some pictures of the "modern" Roman Service uniform:

(http://l.yimg.com/ea/img/-/120507/corionalus_17qecg2-17qecg5.jpg)

(http://www.richardcrouse.ca//wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Coriolanus_Ralphx666.jpg)

(http://blackfilm.com/web/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Coriolanus-11.jpg)

(http://www.hbodefined.in/uploads/may13/poster/coriolanus.jpg)

White shirt, blue tie, grey trousers and tunic.

(http://img2-1.timeinc.net/ew/i/2011/12/06/CORIOLANUS_320.jpg)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-k4FhNjysSc4/ThyCat5v1zI/AAAAAAAABSg/GmFVY_fHJHo/s1600/coriolanus%2Bfilm.jpg)

Ladies cut and young cadet sizes too.

(http://images.zap2it.com/moviephotos/AllPhotos/108174/108174_bj/coriolanus.jpg)

All weather coat.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 03:26:03 AM
Quote from: 4fhoward on January 09, 2014, 11:00:50 PM
QuoteNo, but that one is even better.

I totally agree, pink and greens, to me are a sharp looking uniform, and it has history to boot.

The "pink" is khaki BTW.  ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 10, 2014, 03:55:01 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 03:23:48 AM
Here's an idea if it "has" to be grey. Has anyone has seen the movie Corionalus, based on the play by Shakespeare?

They set Rome in modern time and here are some pictures of the "modern" Roman Service uniform:

I watched this last week. I had a tough time with the dialog. (I admit to not being a gigantic fan of Sir William's diction and prose)

Interesting film, however.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 10, 2014, 04:49:50 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 03:23:48 AM
Here's an idea if it "has" to be grey. Has anyone has seen the movie Corionalus, based on the play by Shakespeare?

Although I know you were being somewhat sarcastic, but an Air Force style officer coat in grey would look nice for a corporate service dress.  Set it up the same way as well.  As far as the hat, I do not what to use.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 10, 2014, 04:53:02 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:08:07 PM
Last time I checked a uniform had it's purpose and flashy wasn't one of them.  Not every uniform needs a hat and if the membership has an issue with the uniform there is the process to recommend changes.  So far the only folks I have heard orseen have an issue with the G/W are those who choose to not abide by H/W and grooming and self defeat themselves when it comes to it.  And IMO the only reason I have heard for change is just to change.

(adopting John McLaughlin voice - cut me some slack, I used to work at a PBS station)

ISSUE ONE:
I am not here to get into a urinating contest with you, only to provide a hopefully-reasonable rebuttal.

ISSUE TWO:
Who said anything about "flashy?"  Is it, in your mind, that anything but the status quo would be "flashy?"  All I am talking about is adding a bit of colour, headgear (see Issue Three) and bringing the "aviator kit" in line as closely as possible with the Air Force equivalent.  At present, it is not.

ISSUE THREE:
To the best of my knowledge, the G/W kit and polo shirt are the only options without headgear.  I don't see a problem with the polo shirt, as that is intended to be informal.  However, the G/W kit is supposed to be a direct equivalent to the Air Force S/S blue uniform, which does have a hat.

Or maybe I'm just remembering many, many moons ago coming out of the dining hall at Lackland AFB uncovered and incurring the wrath of an MTI standing immediately outside, and then my own MTI once he found out.

ISSUE FOUR:
One can "choose" not to abide by grooming standards.  I sometimes have a beard, and when I do, I wear the G/W kit - clean and pressed, with everything in its proper place.  However, some members' religious preferences dictate they have a beard, Hasidic Jews and Sikhs among them.  I would say the Amish, but that is irrelevant since they will not join a quasi-military organisation.

ISSUE FIVE:
Not everyone "chooses" to abide by the H/W standards, for several reasons (not an exhaustive list):
1. Thyroid issues
2. Side effects of medication
3. Heredity

And for some with those conditions, all the diet and exercise in the world won't slim them down.  There is a big difference between those and the ones who eat too many Big Macs and never get off the sofa (except to find the TV changer) who don't have such a condition.

ISSUE SIX:
"Change for just the sake of change?"  I think not.  The "changes" most people have put forth are simply to provide an alternative uniform that is equivalent to the service dress - and the aviator kit, in its current configuration, is not.

ISSUE SEVEN:
A process to recommend changes...when there has been a moratorium on uniform changes for the past several years and a new-draft 39-1 is in process of being published with virtually no changes to "corporate" uniforms?  Do you, or anyone else, really believe that such a proposal would get any further than a Group Commander's CS file?

So, my conclusion is that the semi-formal/formal uniforms are not created equal.

There is an equivalent to BDU - the blue BBDU, which in fact I wear (and like).

There is an analogue to the flight suit - the blue bag, which I also wear (and like).

There is no direct equivalent to the service dress in any of its forms.

Theses submitted and nailed to the church door.

Bye-BYE!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 10, 2014, 05:03:54 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 10, 2014, 04:53:02 AM
ISSUE THREE:
To the best of my knowledge, the G/W kit and polo shirt are the only options without headgear.  I don't see a problem with the polo shirt, as that is intended to be informal.  However, the G/W kit is supposed to be a direct equivalent to the Air Force S/S blue uniform, which does have a hat.

I do not know why but for some reason the blue BDUs do not require a hat:

QuoteHeadgear is not required but the CAP baseball cap is authorized.

I wish they would simply mandate it though. 

However, I will say, it the corporate uniform had a truly equal USAF service dress, I would probably ditch the USAF coat and simply own just the corporate uniforms.  I do not know why, but I simply find them to be more comfortable. 

Or that maybe because I wore BDUs in the Army, I am just more uptight about them :-) jk
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:14:34 AM
Cyborg, don't try and twist what I have said.  I have never ever had an issue with someone who has had a legitimate medical issue, and I am well aware of the part genetics can play.  So that argument is moot.  As I said those that CHOOSE TO. 

At least you have finally provided more meat to your ideas and thoughts. 

Issue Three: Again not every uniform requires a hat, and simply because the G/W is an equivalent does mean it needs a hat.

Issue Two: Hey grey is a color.

Issue Seven: Yes I do believe the process can work and if you do not submit your ideas you do not give it the chance to.

Griping about the issues and not doing anything to attempt change does no one any good.  If you feel that strongly then submit your ideas.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 05:22:09 AM
Quote from: NIN on January 10, 2014, 03:55:01 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 03:23:48 AM
Here's an idea if it "has" to be grey. Has anyone has seen the movie Corionalus, based on the play by Shakespeare?

They set Rome in modern time and here are some pictures of the "modern" Roman Service uniform:

I watched this last week. I had a tough time with the dialog. (I admit to not being a gigantic fan of Sir William's diction and prose)

Interesting film, however.

I was unfamiliar with the play until I saw the movie. I liked it. I might suggest using the subtitles it does help to follow the dialog.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 10, 2014, 05:23:08 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 05:22:09 AM
I was unfamiliar with the play until I saw the movie. I liked it. I might suggest using the subtitles it does help to follow the dialog.

I'll give that a try.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:26:05 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 05:48:05 PM
Quote from: Panache link=topic=18336.msg334012#msg334012 d te=1389285043
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 02:08:07 PM
Last time I checked a uniform had it's purpose and flashy wasn't one of them.  Not every uniform needs a hat and if the membership has an issue with the uniform there is the process to recommend changes.  So far the only folks I have heard orseen have an issue with the G/W are those who choose to not abide by H/W and grooming and self defeat themselves when it comes to it.  And IMO the only reason I have heard for change is just to change.

So... the only folks you've heard or seen who have an issue with the G/Ws are those who actually wear the G/Ws?

:o

Thank you for playing.  Please come again.

Go back and read the entire post and don't try to twist it.

I'm not trying to "twist" anything.  I quoted your exact and complete post back to you.

But that's okay, really.  Even though your reply was dripping with elitism, it demonstrates the point we've been trying to make well.  "Hey fatties and furries, it's your own fault you have to wear the G/Ws, so shut up and be glad you even have something.  Remember your place and don't think you can have nice things like the rest of us."

As mentioned by Eclipse and others, I think the big problem is that the height/weight standards aren't equally enforced across the upper echelons of the organization, so they pretty much don't have to bother with the G/Ws.  Out of sight, out of mind, right?  So despite widespread grumbling about the G/Ws, NHQ made no efforts to actually address the concerns of the people who wear it.

Question:  While I agree that changing the background color on the tapes and grade to "dark blue" is an improvement with the BBDUs, do you really think it would have happened if ABUs weren't in the future and the Powers That Be™ thought that ultramarine blue with the ABUs were ugly?

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 09, 2014, 05:48:05 PM
There is nothing wrong with the G/W.

Many people disagree with your opinion.  And if there's nothing wrong with it, I assume you're okay with CAP ditching the AF-blues and making everybody wear it?  If not, why?

Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 09, 2014, 07:12:08 PM
I agree with Eclipse that in order to avoid treating some of our members as a separate class, any corporate uniform need to be complete and on par with the Air Force-style uniform, regardless of color chosen.

^ This.  If they want it to be white-and-gray, hey, that's cool.  My biggest issue is that it's a half-measure.  Separate-but-equal is fine if it actually was equal.

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on January 10, 2014, 03:08:54 AM
I like my BBDUs. I get to wear the boots that I like and I don't get dirty looks when I miss a shave (or a week's worth, like at NESA  :angel: ).

I have to agree.  I prefer my BBDUs, and would wear them even if I had the option of regular BDUs.  I think they're far more sharp-looking and more in line with our mission.  And, quite frankly, I think the ABUs (especially with all the CAP bling on it) are flat-out ugly.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:28:53 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 03:23:48 AM
Here's an idea if it "has" to be grey. Has anyone has seen the movie Corionalus, based on the play by Shakespeare?

They set Rome in modern time and here are some pictures of the "modern" Roman Service uniform:

I can see the next version of the 39-1:  "Those assigned to NHQ will be authorized to wear uniform cloaks in Praetorian purple."

I will say though:  the design of those wings he's wearing are sweet.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:31:15 AM
Panache if you read the that post you will see that I said choose to.  Do I need to go back and highlight it for you?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 05:33:23 AM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 10, 2014, 04:49:50 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 03:23:48 AM
Here's an idea if it "has" to be grey. Has anyone has seen the movie Corionalus, based on the play by Shakespeare?

Although I know you were being somewhat sarcastic, but an Air Force style officer coat in grey would look nice for a corporate service dress.  Set it up the same way as well.  As far as the hat, I do not know what to use.

Actually I wasn't being sarcastic at all. I thought the uniform looked very sharp in the movie.

Then I noticed the tie was blue and the shirt white and I naturally thought "CAP" G/W uniform. (Now that was sarcastic.  ;))

Seriously this could be the answer if the trousers/pants are all "uniform" and match the tunic/coat. Which means all the off-the-shelf greys slacks will have to go.

As to the hat, was never a fan of a beret, even in the movie, so how about a matching grey flight cap and/or combination cap?

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:35:02 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:14:34 AM
Issue Three: Again not every uniform requires a hat, and simply because the G/W is an equivalent does mean it needs a hat.

Exactly!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:37:02 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:31:15 AM
Panache if you read the that post you will see that I said choose to.  Do I need to go back and highlight it for you?

So, I can now wear the AF-blues even though I don't make height-weight?

(http://www.mytinyphone.com/uploads/users/anaverry/173700.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 05:37:57 AM
QuoteMany people disagree with your opinion.  And if there's nothing wrong with it, I assume you're okay with CAP ditching the AF-blues and making everybody wear it?  If not, why?

Insert knife and twist!  :clap:
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:39:51 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:37:02 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:31:15 AM
Panache if you read the that post you will see that I said choose to.  Do I need to go back and highlight it for you?

So, I can now wear the AF-blues even though I don't make height-weight?

(http://www.mytinyphone.com/uploads/users/anaverry/173700.jpg)

No that is not what I said.  But nice way to try and twist as usual.  Just like you doubt AF members earn Army badges and decs.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:41:25 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 05:33:23 AM
Actually I wasn't being sarcastic at all. I thought the uniform looked very sharp in the movie.

Yeah, but he was wearing what was essentially a custom-made-and-tailored uniform prop.  Unless we have an accessible commercial source we could purchase these from, the point is moot.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 05:42:57 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:28:53 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 03:23:48 AM
Here's an idea if it "has" to be grey. Has anyone has seen the movie Corionalus, based on the play by Shakespeare?

They set Rome in modern time and here are some pictures of the "modern" Roman Service uniform:

I can see the next version of the 39-1:  "Those assigned to NHQ will be authorized to wear uniform cloaks in Praetorian purple."

I will say though:  the design of those wings he's wearing are sweet.

Then liner will be in purple with the outer shell in matching grey.  ;)

I actually have the Army's Officer Cape... it is pretty cool to wear to formal events.


And I agree, Roman Jump Wings are pretty sweet.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:45:17 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:39:51 AM
No that is not what I said.  But nice way to try and twist as usual.  Just like you doubt AF members earn Army badges and decs.

Wait.  What?

Where did I say I doubt AF members earn Army badges and devices?  Can you please quote me on that, because I never said any such thing.

Oh, and you never did answer the two questions I posited to you.  I'll repeat them for your convenience.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 10, 2014, 05:50:37 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:41:25 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 05:33:23 AM
Actually I wasn't being sarcastic at all. I thought the uniform looked very sharp in the movie.

Yeah, but he was wearing what was essentially a custom-made-and-tailored uniform prop.  Unless we have an accessible commercial source we could purchase these from, the point is moot.

If there is a market and a profit to be made... CAP could easily find a manufacturer. If Roman Service Dress was adopted as the Class A uniform for CAP G/W, I bet you Scamguard will have in their next webpage update.  ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:52:28 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 05:50:37 AM
If there is a market and a profit to be made... CAP could easily find a manufacturer. If Roman Service Dress was adopted as the Class A uniform for CAP G/W, I bet you Scamguard will have in their next webpage update.  ;)

Only if they come with togas.

Then we can officially call the next Group holiday gathering a toga party.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:55:03 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 08, 2014, 07:01:33 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 08, 2014, 06:20:55 AM
2. With the complete adoption of USAF uniform regulations into the draft, there are going to be a few "butt hurt" veterans who have for years worn certain badges (ie the EIB, CIB, EMB, CMB, etc.) completely within CAP regulations and now have to take them off. Another slap in the face.

Being prior-service Army and having earned a CMB (first Gulf War), I feel I can comment on this.

I'm fine with that.

Basically, if we're going to wear the AF uniform, then we should abide by the AF regulations for wear of that uniform.  If the AF doesn't allow their own, active-duty airmen and officers to wear these devices (if they somehow earned them), then we should't wear them either.

Now, should I think we should be authorized?  Sure, but that's a gripe at Ma Blue, and not the CAP leadership.

Here you go. 

1.  Do I think it would happen can't say who knows what HHQ thinks half the time with anything.

2. If NHQ decided to scrap the AF style completely and go to the G/W and BBDU for all that's what I would wear.  But they haven't and I do not believe they will.  And I wouldn't gripe about not having a hat or service dress coat to go with it.  But from everything I have seen those who complain the most about the G/W are those who consciously choose to not abide by H/W and grooming, I say again CHOOSE TO. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:55:43 AM
"Major Blutarsky would like to speak about the Character Development program...."

(http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/article/119/1194150/13-movie-parties-we-wish-we-attended-20110913050427568.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 06:00:19 AM
Poor attempt at deflection.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 06:07:55 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:55:03 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 08, 2014, 07:01:33 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 08, 2014, 06:20:55 AM
2. With the complete adoption of USAF uniform regulations into the draft, there are going to be a few "butt hurt" veterans who have for years worn certain badges (ie the EIB, CIB, EMB, CMB, etc.) completely within CAP regulations and now have to take them off. Another slap in the face.

Being prior-service Army and having earned a CMB (first Gulf War), I feel I can comment on this.

I'm fine with that.

Basically, if we're going to wear the AF uniform, then we should abide by the AF regulations for wear of that uniform.  If the AF doesn't allow their own, active-duty airmen and officers to wear these devices (if they somehow earned them), then we should't wear them either.

Now, should I think we should be authorized?  Sure, but that's a gripe at Ma Blue, and not the CAP leadership.

And like I pointed out before, you drastically misread what I said.  My "if they somehow earned them" was not meant as "Air Force can't earn them" but as, well, if they somehow earned them.  You know, like if they went to the appropriate Army school and.... earned them.  I meant exactly what I typed.

You, on the other hand, twistedinterpreted that into "AF can't earn Army badges".  I never said that.  I never implied that.

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:55:03 AM
1.  Do I think it would happen can't say who knows what HHQ thinks half the time with anything.
Fair enough.  I will agree that they work in mysterious ways.

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:55:03 AM
2. If NHQ decided to scrap the AF style completely and go to the G/W and BBDU for all that's what I would wear.  But they haven't and I do not believe they will.  And I wouldn't gripe about not having a hat or service dress coat to go with it.  But from everything I have seen those who complain the most about the G/W are those who consciously choose to not abide by H/W and grooming, I say again CHOOSE TO.

And I counter you wouldn't complain about not having a hat or service dress coat because you have an option of a kit that does.  So it's simply not important to you.

Immediately out of Basic Training and AIT, when I was in the prime of my physical condition, I had to get tape-tested because I failed height/weight.  I'm a big guy with a stocky broad-shouldered build.  I wear size 13-wide boots for cripe's sake.  While I won't lie and say that the years and too much time of riding a desk hasn't taken their toll, getting into the height-weight standards simply are not an option for me.  In my case, the cliche is actually the truth:  I am big-boned.

I'm perfectly okay that the Air Force doesn't want a lumbering goober like me walking around in their uniform.  All I'm asking for is something equally dignified.

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 06:00:19 AM
Poor attempt at deflection.

I wasn't talking to you.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 06:13:12 AM
Heck, they don't even make AF-blue uniforms in my size....
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 06:17:55 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 06:07:55 AM
Being prior-service Army and having earned a CMB (first Gulf War), I feel I can comment on this.

I'm fine with that.

Basically, if we're going to wear the AF uniform, then we should abide by the AF regulations for wear of that uniform.  If the AF doesn't allow their own, active-duty airmen and officers to wear these devices (if they somehow earned them), then we should't wear them either.

Now, should I think we should be authorized?  Sure, but that's a gripe at Ma Blue, and not the CAP leadership.

I perceived it as stated as you should know perception is and will be reality.  And even if i didn't have the option of the AF style I still wouldn't gripe about not having a hat.  Or feeling sub par or second class.  A wise woman once said "No one can make you feel inferior, if you do not allow it."

I have never treated anyone who only had the option of G/W as inferior or second class, period.  And I never will, unlike some I do not discriminate based on the uniform someone can or can not wear. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 06:28:14 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 06:17:55 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 06:07:55 AM
Being prior-service Army and having earned a CMB (first Gulf War), I feel I can comment on this.

I'm fine with that.

Basically, if we're going to wear the AF uniform, then we should abide by the AF regulations for wear of that uniform.  If the AF doesn't allow their own, active-duty airmen and officers to wear these devices (if they somehow earned them), then we should't wear them either.

Now, should I think we should be authorized?  Sure, but that's a gripe at Ma Blue, and not the CAP leadership.

I perceived it as stated as you should know perception is and will be reality.

I can assure you that was not my intent.  I know somebody who is prior AF who earned an Army badge (my step-brother, in fact, who was the smarter of us as he chose AF blue instead of Army green like myself) so I knew it was possible.  I'll chalk this up to a simple misunderstanding.

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 06:17:55 AM
I have never treated anyone who only had the option of G/W as inferior or second class, period.  And I never will, unlike some I do not discriminate based on the uniform someone can or can not wear.

And that reflects positively upon your character, sir.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 06:46:41 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 06:28:14 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 06:17:55 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 06:07:55 AM
Being prior-service Army and having earned a CMB (first Gulf War), I feel I can comment on this.

I'm fine with that.

Basically, if we're going to wear the AF uniform, then we should abide by the AF regulations for wear of that uniform.  If the AF doesn't allow their own, active-duty airmen and officers to wear these devices (if they somehow earned them), then we should't wear them either.

Now, should I think we should be authorized?  Sure, but that's a gripe at Ma Blue, and not the CAP leadership.

I perceived it as stated as you should know perception is and will be reality.

I can assure you that was not my intent.  I know somebody who is prior AF who earned an Army badge (my step-brother, in fact, who was the smarter of us as he chose AF blue instead of Army green like myself) so I knew it was possible.  I'll chalk this up to a simple misunderstanding.

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 06:17:55 AM
I have never treated anyone who only had the option of G/W as inferior or second class, period.  And I never will, unlike some I do not discriminate based on the uniform someone can or can not wear.

And that reflects positively upon your character, sir.

I can agree to that.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: JeffDG on January 10, 2014, 02:27:11 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:52:28 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 05:50:37 AM
If there is a market and a profit to be made... CAP could easily find a manufacturer. If Roman Service Dress was adopted as the Class A uniform for CAP G/W, I bet you Scamguard will have in their next webpage update.  ;)

Only if they come with togas.

Then we can officially call the next Group holiday gathering a toga party.
Members of the BoG will be authorized red, right?
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 10, 2014, 03:39:59 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 10, 2014, 04:53:02 AM
ISSUE SEVEN:
A process to recommend changes...when there has been a moratorium on uniform changes for the past several years and a new-draft 39-1 is in process of being published with virtually no changes to "corporate" uniforms?  Do you, or anyone else, really believe that such a proposal would get any further than a Group Commander's CS file?

Theses submitted and nailed to the church door.

Bye-BYE!

So you believe that the process in place to recommend uniform changes doesn't work, so you choose not to follow that process and post your gripes recommendations here instead...

Hmm... Have you actually followed the process in its entirety to know whether it really works or not? And how do you know that the system doesn't work just because your particular ideas were not incorporated?

Look, I believe the new CAPM 39-1, while not perfect, is a step in the right direction. Do we still need uniform improvements, especially regarding corporate uniforms? Absolutely! But gripping about it over and over here in CT is not going to make those changes happen any faster.

Perhaps you should take these issues/suggestions and "nail" them to the door at NHQ. Maybe that will catch their attention. >:D

(Edited for grammar)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 10, 2014, 03:50:04 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 10, 2014, 03:39:59 PM
Perhaps you should take these issues/suggestions and "nail" them to the door at NHQ. Maybe that will catch their attention. >:D

Or, at the very least, give a SP an interesting story for his buddies about the guy he arrested.

(disclaimer: yes, I get the Martin Luther reference.)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 10, 2014, 04:04:58 PM

Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 06:07:55 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 05:55:03 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 08, 2014, 07:01:33 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 08, 2014, 06:20:55 AM
2. With the complete adoption of USAF uniform regulations into the draft, there are going to be a few "butt hurt" veterans who have for years worn certain badges (ie the EIB, CIB, EMB, CMB, etc.) completely within CAP regulations and now have to take them off. Another slap in the face.

Being prior-service Army and having earned a CMB (first Gulf War), I feel I can comment on this.

I'm fine with that.

Basically, if we're going to wear the AF uniform, then we should abide by the AF regulations for wear of that uniform.  If the AF doesn't allow their own, active-duty airmen and officers to wear these devices (if they somehow earned them), then we should't wear them either.

Now, should I think we should be authorized?  Sure, but that's a gripe at Ma Blue, and not the CAP leadership.

And like I pointed out before, you drastically misread what I said.  My "if they somehow earned them" was not meant as "Air Force can't earn them" but as, well, if they somehow earned them.  You know, like if they went to the appropriate Army school and.... earned them.  I meant exactly what I typed.

That's exactly what I understood when I read the original post. No confusion here.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 10, 2014, 04:10:03 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 10, 2014, 03:39:59 PM
So you believe that the process in place to recommend uniform changes doesn't work, so you choose not to follow that process and post your gripes recommendations here instead...

Hmm... Have you actually followed the process in its entirety to know whether it really works or not? And how do you know that the system doesn't work just because your particular ideas were not incorporated?

There is no "process". Suggesting that the average member can submit a recommendation through 4-6+ echelons of approval is simply not
reasonable if every echelon has the authority to say "no" and disregard.  The most hyper-engaged "commander of the year" doesn't have time for
this sort of thing, let alone the typical put-upon, short handed CC.

Seriously, unless you're assigned at the Wing or higher, or happen to participate in an activity that has coincidental access to
someone at Region or National, the odds of most "though the chain" suggestions being taken seriously approaches zero.

That also presupposes the idea or issue hasn't already been considered by NHQ.  There's very little new under the sun and the folks at NHQ
are not dumb, just busy and with their own priorities.  Odds are anything the average unit-level Captain has "come up with" has already been
considered by a Colonel at Region or higher.

Now that there isn't even a requirement that new regs be posted for comment (recently changed), CAPTalk is one of the only ways to have a
direct voice, even if that voice can be summarily ignored as well.  Not only do we have a BOG member who regularly participates here, but Maj Gen Carr
has indicated he comes here as well, and we know the lurker count is higher most days then the logged-in members, so just because we don't get a
"CONSIDER IT DONE!" response from user CAPFLT001, doesn't mean our comments aren't being considered.

Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 10, 2014, 03:39:59 PMLook, I believe the new CAPM 39-1, while not perfect, is a step in the right direction.
Yes, a step - one which is 10 years in the making, and doesn't do much more then shake out the crumbs.  The format change not withstanding,
all of this should have been done last decade.

Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 10, 2014, 03:39:59 PM
Do we still need uniform improvements, especially regarding corporate uniforms? Absolutely! But gripping about it over and over here in CT is not going to make those changes happen any faster.

I agree to a certain extent, especially once one's ideas have been communicated, but not griping about it isn't going to get things changed, either.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 10, 2014, 04:24:30 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on January 10, 2014, 04:10:03 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 10, 2014, 03:39:59 PM
So you believe that the process in place to recommend uniform changes doesn't work, so you choose not to follow that process and post your gripes recommendations here instead...

Hmm... Have you actually followed the process in its entirety to know whether it really works or not? And how do you know that the system doesn't work just because your particular ideas were not incorporated?

There is no "process". Suggesting that the average member can submit a recommendation through 4-6+ echelons of approval is simply not
reasonable if every echelon has the authority to say "no" and disregard.  The most hyper-engaged "commander of the year" doesn't have time for
this sort of thing, let alone the typical put-upon, short handed CC.

Seriously, unless you're assigned at the Wing or higher, or happen to participate in an activity that has coincidental access to
someone at Region or National, the odds of most "though the chain" suggestions being taken seriously approaches zero.

That also presupposes the idea or issue hasn't already been considered by NHQ.  There's very little new under the sun and the folks at NHQ
are not dumb, just busy and with their own priorities.  Odds are anything the average unit-level Captain has "come up with" has already been
considered by a Colonel at Region or higher.

Now that there isn't even a requirement that new regs be posted for comment (recently changed), CAPTalk is one of the only ways to have a
direct voice, even if that voice can be summarily ignored as well.  Not only do we have a BOG member who regularly participates here, but Maj Gen Carr
has indicated he comes here as well, and we know the lurker count is higher most days then the logged-in members, so just because we don't get a
"CONSIDER IT DONE!" response from user CAPFLT001, doesn't mean out comments aren't being considered."

Point taken.

I still believe that a well written, thought out point, discussed with objectivity has better chances of being considered than just plain ol' gripping about how bad things are, how they'll never be fixed, how blah, blah, GOBN, nobody ever listens to me, I'm just going back to the CGAux where everything is better... You get my point.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 10, 2014, 04:36:02 PM
^ I do and agree.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Private Investigator on January 10, 2014, 07:52:23 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 03:23:48 AM
White shirt, blue tie, grey trousers and tunic.

(http://img2-1.timeinc.net/ew/i/2011/12/06/CORIOLANUS_320.jpg)

Besides the uniform issues, a CPPT issue   ???
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Private Investigator on January 10, 2014, 07:57:29 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 05:55:43 AM
"Major Blutarsky would like to speak about the Character Development program...."

(http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/article/119/1194150/13-movie-parties-we-wish-we-attended-20110913050427568.jpg)

Those are not 'square knots'! And the 'hospital corners' is not at the proper 90 degrees   ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 10, 2014, 09:41:13 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 10, 2014, 04:24:30 PM
I still believe that a well written, thought out point, discussed with objectivity has better chances of being considered than just plain ol' gripping about how bad things are, how they'll never be fixed, how blah, blah, GOBN, nobody ever listens to me, I'm just going back to the CGAux where everything is better... You get my point.

There is a fine line between "gripping" and making a point, this is true.

However, as someone with backgrounds in technical writing, psychology, sociology and logic/IT, I do believe I know the difference.

Just grousing about it, to me, would be saying things like:

1. I ain't doin' another thing in CAP until the Air Force gives us back our rightful metal ranks and blue shoulder marks!  It's been 20 years +, after all!

2. I'm gonna make my OWN changes to the corporate uniforms, wear them and if someone tells me I can't...well, I'm a volunteer and you can't do that to me!

3. I paid good money for that CSU (actually, I didn't have a full one - illustrative purposes only) and just TRY and tell me I can't still wear it!

4. The next time some stupid greenhorn E-1 young enough to be my grandchild fresh out of Lackland gripes to their first shirt about some CAP "officer" wearing MY uniform wrong...

5. The next time I'm on an AFB/ANGB/ARB and some fat, pigheaded SMSgt who looks like an overstuffed blue sausage tells ME that I'M out of height/weight standards, he'll get my Captain's bars in his face!

None of those would be acceptable or constructive and would quite possibly result in a justified, deserved 2B for the member (not to mention "attitude adjustment" from base Security Police in the case of Example No. 5! :o)

I believe Eclipse to be 100% right in his assessment of the "process"...it simply does not exist, not least in the way you seem to think, Storm Chaser, and I mean that as respectfully as I can make it on an Internet forum.

It galls me that the Air Force took away our metal grade and blue shoulder marks, but there's ze-ro (said in tone of the late Ray Combs) I or anyone in CAP can do about it.

It is indeed a burr under my saddle (©Col. Sherman T. Potter) that we were never given an explanation as to why the CSU was taken away, but I know we are not going to get one, especially this long after the fact.

Those two fall under the "things I cannot change" part of the Serenity Prayer I say nearly every morning.

I don't know if you have any experience with flowcharting, but I had to have an entire semester of it in college along with writing pseudocode.  I have done a very basic flowchart on the possible outcomes of forwarding uniform recommendations up the chain.  If I had dedicated software, I'd do it on that and post it here.

The draft of 39-1 just released tells me that the status quo is entrenched, all NHQ/NUC really did was shore up some needed clarifications and close some very large loopholes.  Therefore, it would be illogical and a waste of time to try to change their collective minds.

After all, what does the opinion of Captain Joe Schmo from Idaho (actually, I have never been to Idaho) matter, especially since said Captain is not in a position of authority or schmoozing with those who do "got the power?"  I have only met two National Commanders (the late General Paul Bergman and another Generalissimo) long enough to shake hands in my entire career in CAP.

This is stated as respectfully as I can make it, but of course sometimes that does not come across well on an Internet forum.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 10, 2014, 09:44:38 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 06:28:14 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 06:17:55 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 10, 2014, 06:07:55 AM
Being prior-service Army and having earned a CMB (first Gulf War), I feel I can comment on this.

I'm fine with that.

Basically, if we're going to wear the AF uniform, then we should abide by the AF regulations for wear of that uniform.  If the AF doesn't allow their own, active-duty airmen and officers to wear these devices (if they somehow earned them), then we should't wear them either.

Now, should I think we should be authorized?  Sure, but that's a gripe at Ma Blue, and not the CAP leadership.

I perceived it as stated as you should know perception is and will be reality.

I can assure you that was not my intent.  I know somebody who is prior AF who earned an Army badge (my step-brother, in fact, who was the smarter of us as he chose AF blue instead of Army green like myself) so I knew it was possible.  I'll chalk this up to a simple misunderstanding.

Quote from: abdsp51 on January 10, 2014, 06:17:55 AM
I have never treated anyone who only had the option of G/W as inferior or second class, period.  And I never will, unlike some I do not discriminate based on the uniform someone can or can not wear.

And that reflects positively upon your character, sir.

I agree as well.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shawn W. on January 11, 2014, 12:34:54 AM
QuoteThe feedback on the new manual is not the place to recommend this particular policy change, but I'm going to float it here and see what people think.

CAP cadets in the grade of C/Amn to C/CMSgt have not worn cut outs for several years on their uniforms.

Yet we require them to purchase & wear two cutouts on their uniform when they're a C/AB, and then they wouldn't wear a CAP cutout again until they become a cadet officer.

Considering our 1st year and subsequent retention rates, etc, this is kind of silly.  More that 75% of our cadets don't make it to the Mitchell, so they'd wear CAP cutouts only a few times as a C/AB and then never again.

We've made a change to the "SM w/o Grade" flight cap so that they can purchase and wear the "officer" flight cap to avoid buying a 2nd flight cap after six months.  Why not reduce the cost for new cadets a little?

That's Solvable. As the Squadron Logistics Officer, I simply made CAP Cutouts part of a uniform item list that our squadron has approved to be standard issue from the squadron. And, once they pass their first test, they must turn in their Cut Outs in order to recieve thier C/Amn collar insignia. therefore then, the cadets do not have ot buy their own CAP Cutouts.


Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 11, 2014, 03:22:17 AM
^ A good solution.

Also, considering the myriad factors that result in our first-year churn, I don't believe having to buy cutouts has ever been in the top 10.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Pulsar on January 12, 2014, 02:42:36 AM
Question:
Quote3.2.3.1 The intent is for pinned-up hair to be styled in a manner that prevents loose ends
from extending upward on the head. For example, when using a clip or hairpins, hair will
not present the appearance of a "rooster tail"; when hair is in a bun, all loose ends must be
tucked in and secured; when hairstyle based on a ponytail is used, it must be pulled all the
way through the elastic band and may hang naturally downward and not extending below
the bottom of the collar
. As with all hairstyles, a neat and professional image is essential.

Does this mean if a female has short enough hair that she can put in a ponytail (being above the bottom of the collar) and it still be in regulation?
Explain please...
Thanks
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on January 12, 2014, 02:51:39 AM
A pony tail that doesn't hang onto the collar is no different than the usual bun seen on many girls. The style MUST allow proper wear of the headgear, though.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 13, 2014, 01:04:56 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 11, 2014, 03:22:17 AM
^ A good solution.

Also, considering the myriad factors that result in our first-year churn, I don't believe having to buy cutouts has ever been in the top 10.

I agree: good solution.

Cutouts are certainly not in the top ten as far as retention goes,  but when you consider our first year retention,  that's a whole bunch of cutouts that get worn 5-6 times and never again.  .  What a waste.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 13, 2014, 01:14:31 AM
We operate on a turn in your existing ones for your next ones, too.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 14, 2014, 02:02:16 AM
Personally, I believe that SMWOG should be allowed to wear metal cutouts (on BDU's) and have the same "turn them back in" opportunity that others have mentioned they do with their cadets.

Unless they're NCO's, the vast majority of them are going to be sewing on 2nd Lt in six months anyway, so it's a bit of an annoyance to have to put on the cloth BDU's and just take them off again.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 14, 2014, 04:23:37 AM
I wonder how long before we see the next draft.

Not a complaint or "hurry up!" comment... just genuinely curious.  I know they probably have to sort through a ton of comments & suggestions that were submitted via eServices, and I imagine they want to finish up the artwork.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 14, 2014, 04:31:12 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 14, 2014, 04:23:37 AM
I wonder how long before we see the next draft.

Not a complaint or "hurry up!" comment... just genuinely curious.  I know they probably have to sort through a ton of comments & suggestions that were submitted via eServices, and I imagine they want to finish up the artwork.

Word is there were "several hundred" comments.

And the artwork. :)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 14, 2014, 04:32:02 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 14, 2014, 04:23:37 AMI wonder how long before we see the next draft.
Oh come on, it only took them the latter half of 10 years, and I certainly got the impression that this was shoved out due to the "this year" comment. Now they have a whole lot more time again.  8)


"were"? Is the comment period closed?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 14, 2014, 04:32:37 AM
Quote from: Private Investigator on January 10, 2014, 07:52:23 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 10, 2014, 03:23:48 AM
White shirt, blue tie, grey trousers and tunic.

(http://img2-1.timeinc.net/ew/i/2011/12/06/CORIOLANUS_320.jpg)

Besides the uniform issues, a CPPT issue   ???

CPPT?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 14, 2014, 04:33:25 AM
Not us. Matters not.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 14, 2014, 04:40:43 AM
Quote from: a2capt on January 14, 2014, 04:32:02 AM
Quote from: Panache on January 14, 2014, 04:23:37 AMI wonder how long before we see the next draft.
Oh come on, it only took them the latter half of 10 years, and I certainly got the impression that this was shoved out due to the "this year" comment. Now they have a whole lot more time again.  8)


"were"? Is the comment period closed?

BTW, saying it took "10 years" to create the new 39-1 is like saying it took George Lucas 16 years to make the Phantom Menace.

Its not like someone instantly set about working on the new 39-1 the minute the old one was released like he was Gutenberg or something.

I may have misspoke.  There ARE several hundred comments (so far). Not sure if I know when the comment period closes.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 14, 2014, 05:05:23 AM
Quote from: NIN on January 14, 2014, 04:40:43 AM
There ARE several hundred comments (so far).

Yikes!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 14, 2014, 06:19:53 AM
I said the latter half of 10 years.. and that jives with the whole "endless moratorium" turned into Infinite Change Letter chain.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 14, 2014, 11:57:27 AM
Quote from: a2capt on January 14, 2014, 06:19:53 AM
I said the latter half of 10 years.. and that jives with the whole "endless moratorium" turned into Infinite Change Letter chain.

You're right, you did say the latter half of 10 years. Somebody else  said 10 years earlier, as if it was the entire period.

:)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: RiverAux on January 14, 2014, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: NIN on January 14, 2014, 04:40:43 AM
I may have misspoke.  There ARE several hundred comments (so far). Not sure if I know when the comment period closes.

If its anything like this thread, at least half of them aren't simply pointing out mistakes, its making entirely new recommendations, which I doubt will go far. 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 14, 2014, 12:18:24 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on January 14, 2014, 12:03:48 PM

If its anything like this thread, at least half of them aren't simply pointing out mistakes, its making entirely new recommendations, which I doubt will go far.

To a point, I think you are correct . The broader policy implications of a lot of the suggestions are likely beyond the scope of the 39-1 rewrite.

So a comment that says that the graphics for collar insignia is messed up, sure, that's going to get handled. The comment that suggest we do away with the entire grey and white uniform will likely go in the "later" pile.

I do think that comments that point to larger inconsistentencies may very well get addressed. Maybe not in this draft, or even the final 39-1 that. comes out from the draft, but it could certainly raise the awareness and put the issue on the table for any subsequent changes.

If the majority of the comments are suggesting, say, that there be some sort of headgear for the Aviator uniform, then perhaps the NUC will examine the alternatives in greater depth. Now may not be the time for that in order to get the uniform manual out the door.

I have to give Colonel Griffith credit as chair of the rewrite committee. I can imagine there have been a number of false starts over the last 6 or 8 years, and as we know from here on CAP Talk, uniforms are a divisive issue. Everybody wears one, everybody has an opinion about them. Not everybody is in agreement as to how they should be executed. So you can imagine that even in a small group, it's hard to reach a consensus. You have factions arguing for their party lines, and people who would, even inadvertently, derail the process with a lot of distracting information. It must have taken a very focused group to get this far.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 14, 2014, 04:07:42 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 14, 2014, 04:23:37 AM
I wonder how long before we see the next draft.

Not a complaint or "hurry up!" comment... just genuinely curious.  I know they probably have to sort through a ton of comments & suggestions that were submitted via eServices, and I imagine they want to finish up the artwork.

What makes you think there will be another draft put out for comment?

No, the next time you see this regulation it will be when it's released.
Title: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on January 14, 2014, 04:42:29 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 14, 2014, 02:02:16 AM
Personally, I believe that SMWOG should be allowed to wear metal cutouts (on BDU's) and have the same "turn them back in" opportunity that others have mentioned they do with their cadets.

Unless they're NCO's, the vast majority of them are going to be sewing on 2nd Lt in six months anyway, so it's a bit of an annoyance to have to put on the cloth BDU's and just take them off again.

I don't necessarily disagree with your point, but how do you then differentiate between a new young SM and a new older cadet? On the service uniform, you have the gray name tag, but the only differentiator on the BDU is the embroidered CAP cutouts.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 14, 2014, 05:09:30 PM
Quote from: PHall on January 14, 2014, 04:07:42 PMNo, the next time you see this regulation it will be when it's released.
What makes you think there won't be another draft?
They have put out double drafts in the "we don't even have to put a draft out, era", so it would not be without precedent.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on January 15, 2014, 12:00:58 AM
Quote from: a2capt on January 14, 2014, 05:09:30 PM
Quote from: PHall on January 14, 2014, 04:07:42 PMNo, the next time you see this regulation it will be when it's released.
What makes you think there won't be another draft?
They have put out double drafts in the "we don't even have to put a draft out, era", so it would not be without precedent.

Who knows how many "drafts" this will go through before a "permanent" one is reached?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 15, 2014, 12:31:35 AM
Quote from: a2capt on January 14, 2014, 05:09:30 PM
Quote from: PHall on January 14, 2014, 04:07:42 PMNo, the next time you see this regulation it will be when it's released.
What makes you think there won't be another draft?
They have put out double drafts in the "we don't even have to put a draft out, era", so it would not be without precedent.

I suspect there will not be many more drafts. The press is on to get this out to the membership.

We've had our bite at the apple, STS.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: umpirecali on January 15, 2014, 02:13:33 PM
I saw where the new silver on navy insignia was discussed on the blue BDU. I read the first 10 pages and the later couple so I don't know if this has been mentioned before but VG now has the new insignia in stock.

http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-senior-grade-cloth-insignia-first-lieutenant-navy-blue-p-7192.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-senior-grade-cloth-insignia-first-lieutenant-navy-blue-p-7192.html)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 15, 2014, 02:28:43 PM
Quote from: umpirecali on January 15, 2014, 02:13:33 PM
I saw where the new silver on navy insignia was discussed on the blue BDU. I read the first 10 pages and the later couple so I don't know if this has been mentioned before but VG now has the new insignia in stock.

http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-senior-grade-cloth-insignia-first-lieutenant-navy-blue-p-7192.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-senior-grade-cloth-insignia-first-lieutenant-navy-blue-p-7192.html)

Those aren't new.

They have been approved for a number of years for wear on dark blue flight and jumpsuits.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 15, 2014, 04:54:53 PM
It should be reinforced that the draft is still exactly that, a draft, so don't go swapping out your ultramarine tapes and grade on your BBDUs with navy until it gets approved.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: skymaster on January 15, 2014, 05:28:35 PM
Quote from: umpirecali on January 15, 2014, 02:13:33 PM
I saw where the new silver on navy insignia was discussed on the blue BDU. I read the first 10 pages and the later couple so I don't know if this has been mentioned before but VG now has the new insignia in stock.

http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-senior-grade-cloth-insignia-first-lieutenant-navy-blue-p-7192.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-senior-grade-cloth-insignia-first-lieutenant-navy-blue-p-7192.html)

Actually, that is NOT the proposed insignia for the ABU field uniforms. The current navy blue background insignia uses a white thread to represent silver coloured insignia; the proposed ABU (and eventually, other field uniform combo tape colour) replaces the white thread with silver, which actually looks grey when embroidered. It is the same exact navy blue and grey colour that Vanguard makes for the U.S. Navy for name and branch tapes for senior enlisted on the USN Coverall uniform, but with the branch insignia in an Army/AF pattern rather than a Navy/Marines/Coast Guard pattern.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 15, 2014, 10:53:28 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 15, 2014, 04:54:53 PM
It should be reinforced that the draft is still exactly that, a draft, so don't go swapping out your ultramarine tapes and grade on your BBDUs with navy until it gets approved.

I wore a rigger belt this weekend. Don't tell anybody!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on January 15, 2014, 10:55:30 PM
Slippery slope!!! ZOMG!!!!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: lordmonar on January 16, 2014, 01:43:23 AM
Quote from: NIN on January 15, 2014, 10:53:28 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 15, 2014, 04:54:53 PM
It should be reinforced that the draft is still exactly that, a draft, so don't go swapping out your ultramarine tapes and grade on your BBDUs with navy until it gets approved.

I wore a rigger belt this weekend. Don't tell anybody!
I've worn a rigger's belt for the last 10 years......no one really cares.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on January 16, 2014, 05:07:48 AM
Quote from: NIN on January 15, 2014, 10:53:28 PM
Quote from: Panache on January 15, 2014, 04:54:53 PM
It should be reinforced that the draft is still exactly that, a draft, so don't go swapping out your ultramarine tapes and grade on your BBDUs with navy until it gets approved.

I wore a rigger belt this weekend. Don't tell anybody!

BURN THE WITCH!
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on January 16, 2014, 10:46:26 AM
Oh, totally. My shirt never came off, therefore I didn't have the opportunity to flex my pecs and show off my stylish rigger belt
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: KarlIceman on January 17, 2014, 08:05:11 PM
    What about the FLEECE that is mentioned in the 39-1 Draft.    Only a BLACK one will be authorized and ONLY FOR USE WITH THE BBDU's.
The military changed from black to green and up until the issuance of their new cold weather coat wear fleece as both an outer garment and a liner for the field jacket.  If CAP is going to a BLACK fleece whats wrong with allowing those of us in regular BDUs wear it as well? :-\ 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 17, 2014, 11:56:47 PM
Quote from: KarlIceman on January 17, 2014, 08:05:11 PM
    What about the FLEECE that is mentioned in the 39-1 Draft.    Only a BLACK one will be authorized and ONLY FOR USE WITH THE BBDU's.
The military changed from black to green and up until the issuance of their new cold weather coat wear fleece as both an outer garment and a liner for the field jacket.  If CAP is going to a BLACK fleece whats wrong with allowing those of us in regular BDUs wear it as well? :-\
IMHO, the black fleece is a civilian item, not military. Authorizing it for the bdu would involve mixing civilian and military clothing and is not permitted. Additional, I think (bad habit), you'll see a fleece authorized with the abu when/if it gets approved.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: HGjunkie on January 18, 2014, 12:30:47 AM
Why not something like this for the BDU? It's the same style ECWCS fleece:

(http://www.militaryuniformsupply.com/files/2079_black_tru_spec_fleece_jacket_liner_generation_iii.jpg)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: arajca on January 18, 2014, 02:16:32 AM
Because it is a CIVILIAN fleece, not a military fleece. That is the one that will be authorized for wear the the field uniform.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: PHall on January 18, 2014, 02:58:52 AM
Quote from: arajca on January 18, 2014, 02:16:32 AM
Because it is a CIVILIAN fleece, not a military fleece. That is the one that will be authorized for wear the the field uniform.


Didn't know that CIVILIAN fleece had the velcro for the name tape, branch tape and your grade insignia...
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Paul Creed III on January 18, 2014, 03:03:57 AM
I contacted MilitaryUniformSupply.com about the Tru-Spec version of the black fleece and it comes with the Velcro for the branch tape, name tape, and insignia tab not actually attached to the fleece - the customer attaches the Velcro themselves.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: sarmed1 on January 18, 2014, 03:05:05 AM
Quote from: KarlIceman on January 17, 2014, 08:05:11 PM
    What about the FLEECE that is mentioned in the 39-1 Draft.    Only a BLACK one will be authorized and ONLY FOR USE WITH THE BBDU's.
The military changed from black to green and up until the issuance of their new cold weather coat wear fleece as both an outer garment and a liner for the field jacket.  If CAP is going to a BLACK fleece whats wrong with allowing those of us in regular BDUs wear it as well? :-\

I mentioned this one a few pages ago.  IMHO its becuase of the impending change to ABU's.  Black is no longer authorized with ABU's in the USAF. So, not that everyone runs out gets a black fleece, then BAM, a year later, the switch to ABU's and everyone now needs to go out and by a green one. 

Just a guess, but we'll see

until then, where on under your goretex as a liner, and be warm and dry.

mk
mk
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on January 18, 2014, 03:39:39 AM
You can wear that same civilian fleece today, sans insignia, without any needed changes to the regs.

In fact, nothing says you can't put your name on it, too.

Any civilian outerwear is a pretty big lane.

I wear a TAC-BU shirt as a light jacket with my last name on a black nametape all the time with the
golf shirt, Blue Field, even the whites once in a while.  Looks sharp and perfectly within the lane.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on January 18, 2014, 05:36:13 AM
Quote from: Paul Creed III on January 18, 2014, 03:03:57 AM
I contacted MilitaryUniformSupply.com about the Tru-Spec version of the black fleece and it comes with the Velcro for the branch tape, name tape, and insignia tab not actually attached to the fleece - the customer attaches the Velcro themselves.

Check the reviews online about that.  The ones I read regarding the black fleece were less than marginal.  It feel apart easily and was a cheap knockoff according to most.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: AngelWings on January 18, 2014, 02:01:48 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on January 18, 2014, 05:36:13 AM
Quote from: Paul Creed III on January 18, 2014, 03:03:57 AM
I contacted MilitaryUniformSupply.com about the Tru-Spec version of the black fleece and it comes with the Velcro for the branch tape, name tape, and insignia tab not actually attached to the fleece - the customer attaches the Velcro themselves.

Check the reviews online about that.  The ones I read regarding the black fleece were less than marginal.  It feel apart easily and was a cheap knockoff according to most.
It is very cheap. In my first year of owning the sage green Tru-Spec one, I managed to rip apart the sewing on the cuff, the waist band, and the zipper wore out within 6 months. It's poorly designed.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Shuman 14 on January 19, 2014, 02:45:42 AM
I'd like to point out the USCG has a blue Gortex coat and a blue fleece liner that would look fine with the BBDU uniform and wouldn't look completely out of place with either BDUs or ABUs either.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: 68w20 on January 19, 2014, 06:21:37 AM
Quote from: shuman14 on January 19, 2014, 02:45:42 AM
I'd like to point out the USCG has a blue Gortex coat

http://tinyurl.com/ldfuaro (http://tinyurl.com/ldfuaro)

$329.99 from bdu.com

Quote from: shuman14 on January 19, 2014, 02:45:42 AM
and a blue fleece liner that would look fine with the BBDU uniform and wouldn't look completely out of place with either BDUs or ABUs either.

http://tinyurl.com/lzqsptp (http://tinyurl.com/lzqsptp)

$86.99 on eBay

http://tinyurl.com/mpecx8r (http://tinyurl.com/mpecx8r)

Or $36.49 on Amazon.  Thanks for the helpful heads up.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on February 02, 2014, 08:39:23 AM
Well, it's now been two months since the draft 39-1 has been released....
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on February 02, 2014, 08:46:14 AM
Quote from: Panache on February 02, 2014, 08:39:23 AM
Well, it's now been two months since the draft 39-1 has been released....

Thirty two days does not two months make. The release date was 12/31/13.

Patience, grasshopper.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on February 02, 2014, 08:54:30 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on February 02, 2014, 08:46:14 AM
Quote from: Panache on February 02, 2014, 08:39:23 AM
Well, it's now been two months since the draft 39-1 has been released....

Thirty two days does not two months make. The release date was 12/31/13.

My dog says it's been seven and a half months...
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: GroundHawg on February 02, 2014, 02:12:54 PM
I wear one of these daily in OD. I'm thinking this in black would be really nice with the BBDU.

http://www.condoroutdoor.com/601_fleece_jacket.aspx (http://www.condoroutdoor.com/601_fleece_jacket.aspx)

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on February 02, 2014, 08:54:01 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on February 02, 2014, 08:46:14 AM
Quote from: Panache on February 02, 2014, 08:39:23 AM
Well, it's now been two months since the draft 39-1 has been released....

Thirty two days does not two months make. The release date was 12/31/13.

Patience, grasshopper.

After all the feedback they've received (I know I submitted several), I hope they issue a second draft soon so that we can wrap up this process and finally get our new uniform manual (in my opinion this should be an instruction or regulation, not a manual). I hope this second draft have all the pictures/graphics, so that we can review and comment on those as well.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ol'fido on February 02, 2014, 11:08:26 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on February 02, 2014, 08:54:01 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on February 02, 2014, 08:46:14 AM
Quote from: Panache on February 02, 2014, 08:39:23 AM
Well, it's now been two months since the draft 39-1 has been released....

Thirty two days does not two months make. The release date was 12/31/13.

Patience, grasshopper.

After all the feedback they've received (I know I submitted several), I hope they issue a second draft soon so that we can wrap up this process and finally get our new uniform manual (in my opinion this should be an instruction or regulation, not a manual). I hope this second draft have all the pictures/graphics, so that we can review and comment on those as well.
I think having it as a manual is just fine. I, however, am a traditionalist. I like the old style of manual and reg writing. This AF style with the 1.2.3.4. stuff looks just goofy to me.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on February 03, 2014, 12:08:55 AM
I think I liked the style you mentioned as well. I think it was easier to read than the new way. The 1.2.3.4 way looks unbalanced, and well, sort of... goofy.

:P

Flyer
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: VNY on February 03, 2014, 01:17:51 AM
Quote from: GroundHawg on February 02, 2014, 02:12:54 PMI wear one of these daily in OD. I'm thinking this in black would be really nice with the BBDU.
http://www.condoroutdoor.com/601_fleece_jacket.aspx (http://www.condoroutdoor.com/601_fleece_jacket.aspx)

I`m surprised nobody has mentioned this - but on the majority of the potential "black fleeces" I've seen there are pockets right where the manual says to sew on insignia.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on February 03, 2014, 04:03:27 AM
Quote from: Panache on February 02, 2014, 08:54:30 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on February 02, 2014, 08:46:14 AM
Quote from: Panache on February 02, 2014, 08:39:23 AM
Well, it's now been two months since the draft 39-1 has been released....

Thirty two days does not two months make. The release date was 12/31/13.

My dog says it's been seven and a half months...

That first version was not an "official" draft, and was not formally presented for comment.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on February 03, 2014, 05:02:07 AM
Not formally, no. Just a big juicy link smack in your face on eServices.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Panache on February 03, 2014, 10:32:47 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on February 03, 2014, 04:03:27 AM
That first version was not an "official" draft, and was not formally presented for comment.

QuoteCAPM 39-1, Uniforms, Draft for Comment
QuoteThe draft CAPM 39-1 is available for comment as promised.

NHQ disagrees with your assessment.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: ralovick on February 03, 2014, 11:22:59 AM
I would like to suggest that we return to wearing CAP on the left collar as it was before 2005.

This would be in recognition of our heritage of being originally attached to the Army Air Corps / Army Air Forces. The Army wears the Insignia of branch on the left collar and would also serve to trigger a discussion of our heritage.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on February 03, 2014, 02:17:34 PM
Quote from: ralovick on February 03, 2014, 11:22:59 AM
I would like to suggest that we return to wearing CAP on the left collar as it was before 2005.

This would be in recognition of our heritage of being originally attached to the Army Air Corps / Army Air Forces. The Army wears the Insignia of branch on the left collar and would also serve to trigger a discussion of our heritage.

Good try on that comment.  By the way, the Army does not wear the branch insignia on the left collar any more.  In fact, since the ACUs were created, the Army does not wear branch insignia.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: HGjunkie on February 03, 2014, 02:25:14 PM
Quote from: ralovick on February 03, 2014, 11:22:59 AM
I would like to suggest that we return to wearing CAP on the left collar as it was before 2005.

This would be in recognition of our heritage of being originally attached to the Army Air Corps / Army Air Forces. The Army wears the Insignia of branch on the left collar and would also serve to trigger a discussion of our heritage.

If that were to happen, then the positioning of the insignia would have to change to the slanted style instead of straight and parallel.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on February 03, 2014, 02:37:32 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on February 03, 2014, 02:17:34 PM
Good try on that comment.  By the way, the Army does not wear the branch insignia on the left collar any more.  In fact, since the ACUs were created, the Army does not wear branch insignia.

The wing patch speaks back to that Army Air Corps heritage, anyway.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on February 03, 2014, 02:43:21 PM
Quote from: NIN on February 03, 2014, 02:37:32 PM
The wing patch speaks back to that Army Air Corps heritage, anyway.

True.  And our US Flag  ;D
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Storm Chaser on February 03, 2014, 03:38:29 PM

Quote from: LSThiker on February 03, 2014, 02:43:21 PM
Quote from: NIN on February 03, 2014, 02:37:32 PM
The wing patch speaks back to that Army Air Corps heritage, anyway.

True.  And our US Flag  ;D

The wing patch has several decades of history within CAP; the reversed U.S. flag patch doesn't.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on February 03, 2014, 05:12:33 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on February 03, 2014, 03:38:29 PM
The wing patch has several decades of history within CAP; the reversed U.S. flag patch doesn't.

Yep.  The reverse flag is 7 years young, and not in keeping with the CONUS USAF uniform wear of the last 7-10 years.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: LSThiker on February 03, 2014, 05:32:13 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on February 03, 2014, 03:38:29 PM
The wing patch has several decades of history within CAP; the reversed U.S. flag patch doesn't.

Yes I know.  The  ;D was supposed to represent a snarky comment about the US flag patch.  I was fully around when the US flag came into existence for our uniforms and have hated it since.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Eclipse on February 03, 2014, 05:36:08 PM
Wait...we're supposed to have a US Flag on our uniforms?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: UH60guy on February 03, 2014, 09:42:11 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on February 03, 2014, 05:36:08 PM
Wait...we're supposed to have a US Flag on our uniforms?

It's the only way to tell this CAP apart from the Canadian Air Pirates.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: BuckeyeDEJ on February 03, 2014, 11:59:51 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on December 31, 2013, 07:55:26 PM
I'm surprised that the Incident Commander badge still ranks lower than the Observer badge. Even the Air Force have given equal standing to some non-aeronautical badges, such as the Space and Cyberspace badges.
Easy. The aviation badges come first. Think of it in terms of altitude. God's at a much higher altitude than we are, so the chaplain's cross has precedence over aviation ratings. An IC doesn't fly. The Air Force's space badge replaces the astronaut wings, if I remember right, and is spread to several other spaceflight-related specialties. Cyberspace, I'm not familiar with.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on February 04, 2014, 12:42:50 AM
Quote from: Panache on February 03, 2014, 10:32:47 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on February 03, 2014, 04:03:27 AM
That first version was not an "official" draft, and was not formally presented for comment.

QuoteCAPM 39-1, Uniforms, Draft for Comment
QuoteThe draft CAPM 39-1 is available for comment as promised.

NHQ disagrees with your assessment.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here, since two of of the quotes aren't tagged, but I'll give it a shot.

The first "draft" hit the streets a while back, in what was a limited release. Comments were accepted. On 31 December 2013, the "official" draft was posted for comment in eServices, as noted in the screen grab above. That's also when this thread started.

What's your point and what end is served by arguing this any further? The comment period was one month. When those comments get reviewed and incorporated, and the graphics are done, it will be released.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on February 04, 2014, 02:30:05 AM
Quote from: UH60guy on February 03, 2014, 09:42:11 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on February 03, 2014, 05:36:08 PM
Wait...we're supposed to have a US Flag on our uniforms?

It's the only way to tell this CAP apart from the Canadian Air Pirates.

(http://www.eaa.org/bitsandpieces/images/rcaf_ensign_230.jpg) ;)
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 01:58:21 AM
Greetings All, I haven't posted in this forum for almost four years, but I just wanted to chime in on this topic.  I'll share some of my input in later posts, but I just wanted to share my experience in submitting my input.

I shared my thoughts with the board and received an email from the committee chairman thanking me for my input, and he told me that they received over 1050 comments.  I'm grateful that they have put together this new draft and I'm eager to see it's issue.  There are obviously some corrections needed for typos, grammar, disagreements, etc.  After thorough review, my opinion of this draft is that it is very well put together, it matches the AFI 36-2903 superbly, and after some edits and new graphics/photos, this will be a wonderfully written manual for our members and especially for the commanders that are responsible for enforcing it.

In the past, I've submitted input for various draft publications, and I never received responses from my IN TURN Memos or letters.  I suspect my input never reached the intended audience.  I can appreciate the need for the chain of command, but in this volunteer organization, there is a definite black hole when it comes to administration.  I'm pleased that the board invited direct input, but I don't know how they will sort through over 1050 individual comments.

Oh, by the way, my individual comment was a 27 page report.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 02:23:39 AM
Many of the uniforms have several different names.  It is important to establish the correct name for each uniform and be consistent throughout the manual.  The following are the correct names (according to this draft) followed by examples of other variations used to describe the same uniform:

    1.   Corporate Field Uniform, not Corporate Style Field Uniform, CAP Field Uniform, CAP Blue Field Uniform, Blue Field Uniform. (IMHO this should be called "Corporate Battle Dress Uniform (CBDU)" since it is equivalent to USAF style Battle Dress Uniform (BDU), and this would be more in line with other similar naming, ie. CFDU, Corporate Service Dress, etc.)

    2.   Corporate Flight Duty Uniform (CFDU), not Flight Suit, CAP Flight Duty Uniform, Corporate Style Flight Duty Uniform.

    3.   Corporate Working Uniform, not Knit Polo Shirt Combination, CAP Corporate Working Uniform. (IMHO this is the wrong name for this uniform.  The term "Working Uniform" conjures the idea of something like laboring outdoors.  I would rather see a name like Corporate Casual Uniform or Corporate Informal Uniform, like USAF.)

    4.   Corporate Aviator Shirt Uniform, not Aviator Shirt Uniform, Corporate Service Uniform, Aviator Shirt Combination (IMHO this should be called "Corporate Service Uniform" since it is equivalent to USAF Service Uniform.)

Putting "CAP" in the name of any corporate uniform is a bit superfluous.  Just refer to all of the non-USAF uniforms as "Corporate _________", i.e. Corporate Flight Duty Uniform, Corporate Field Uniform, etc.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 02:55:09 AM
I recommend that the senior member NCO's should wear the USAF enlisted-style "US" letters with circles on the lapels of the service dress uniforms.  Especially considering that the new NCO chevron rank patches will have CAP lettering on them.  This will only be okay once the new rank patches are available, otherwise there would be no way to differentiate USAF NCOs from CAP NCOs.

This will more accurately reflect the current USAF uniform for enlisted personnel, and be more standardized with the CAP senior member officer uniforms which have the "US" insignia (aka cutouts) on the lapels of the service dress uniforms. 

With this method, only cadets would wear CAP cutout insignia on the lapels of the service dress uniforms.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: Grumpy on February 17, 2014, 03:02:02 AM
You could always go back to the old "CAPC" for the cadets cut outs.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 03:15:08 AM
Why is CAP still using bullion badges on the Mess Dress Uniform?  I realize that they're optional, but the USAF phased out their bullion badges over thirty years ago.  I keep expecting CAP to follow suit, but CAP keeps adding more bullion badges (i.e. ground teams badges, service badges etc.). 

All badges worn must match in material.  Unfortunately, not all badges are available in bullion.  I have never been to a formal event where I did not see someone get this this wrong. 

I think CAP should phase out bullion badges on the Mess Dress Uniform in order to prevent these uniform violations, to match the USAF standard, and as a cost saving measure for members and our Vanguard vendor (except for the fact that there is probably a bit of inventory in stock already).  Perhaps a three year phase-out date would be a good solution.

Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 03:29:51 AM
I believe we should phase out the old-style service coat.  The USAF introduced the current service coat over 20 years ago.

There's no shortage of the current coat, especially considering that cadets may wear either the officer version (with epaulets) or the enlisted version (without epaulets).  I have NEVER seen a cadet wear the old style service with matching trousers (color shade and material).  The old trousers are a bit harder to find nowadays too. 

There are difference in the wear of the semi-formal dress old-style vs. new-style,  i.e. bow tie vs regular , blue herringbone tie.  This is a bit more complicated for members to identify and for commanders to have to remember for enforcement.

Probably most importantly, eliminating these old-style coats would remove a lot of text from the manual and make it easier for cadets to remember all of the nuances of wearing these uniforms.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 03:57:39 AM
Figure A5-8 depicts the rank insignia on the BDU Cap, but it is a copy of the ABU cap illustration from AFI 36-2903.  It  does not properly depict the embroidered rank insignia (cloth patch).  Furthermore, this figure shows the insignia centered on the cap instead of 1/2" above the visor.  Some folks, especially newbies, don't really understand that the 1/2" measurement is supposed to measured from the edge of the rank, not the edge of the cloth patch.

IMHO, I think that the rank insignia and chaplain badge worn on the BDU cap and field uniform cap should be worn centered, like the USAF has worn theirs for decades (if not longer).  It is difficult to sew them 1/2" above the visor and it looks too low compared to how our USAF parent organization wears theirs on their ABU caps (and formerly on their BDU caps).  I don't know about anyone else, but the thread on the back side of the grade insignia patch on my BDU caps rub my forehead and irritate my skin.

Furthermore, I think cadets should have the option to wear metal or cloth rank insignia on the BDU cap and field uniform cap, and they should have the option to wear metal or cloth insignia on the collars of the BDU and field uniform.

Lastly, I think chaplains should be allowed to wear metal or cloth insignia on the BDU cap and field uniform cap.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 04:02:10 AM
Why require a member to wait 30 days to weigh-in again?  If the member loses the weight sooner than 30 days, they should be allowed to weigh in as soon as possible to get back into the uniform.  30 days seems an arbitrary number.  Someone could be seven or eight pounds over, and lose the weight without risk to health.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 05:46:28 AM
There seems to be too little information regarding how Senior Members without grade wear the different uniforms.  I find this subject to be incomplete, confusing, and not consistent enough to make sense.  Correct me if I get this wrong, and please cite your support, which means don't just tell me how you interpret it or what you think the intent was, rather tell me what you the manual clearly states and where to find it. 

Senior Members Without Grade that are pursing officer promotion wear
Service Dress Uniform - blank epaulet sleeve and US insignia on lapel
Blue Service Uniform - no guidance is given
BDU - embroidered CAP cutouts on ultramarine blue cloth worn on collars
Corporate Field Uniform - no insignia at all on collar
Corporate Aviator Shirt Uniform - no insignia at all on collar, no guidance is given for epaulets
Outergarments - no guidance is given

Senior Members Without Grade that are pursing NCO promotion wear
Service Dress Uniform - CAP cutout insignia on lapel, no epaulet
Blue Service Uniform - no guidance is given
BDU - embroidered CAP cutouts on ultramarine blue cloth worn on collars
Corporate Field Uniform - no insignia at all on collar
Corporate Aviator Shirt Uniform - no insignia at all on collar, no guidance is given for epaulets
Outergarments - no guidance is given

Wouldn't it much simpler to just have Senior Members without grade that are pursuing officer promotion wear the blank epaulet on every shirt and coat with epaulet flaps (i.e. Blue Service Uniform, Corporate Aviator Shirt Uniform, All Weather Coat, etc.).  They would never have to own a pair of CAP cutouts.  Also, wouldn't it be easier to interpret the manual and enforce if the method of wear were alike among similar uniforms (i.e. BDU and Corporate Field Uniform).  It should be worn the same on both.

Senior Members without grade that are pursuing a NCO promotion wear embroidered CAP insignia on the collar of the BDU.  Their NCO promotion will happen as soon as they finish Level 1.  So why are we making them sew patches on the collar that will come off shortly afterwards.  How about changing this to no insignia at all.  The uniform is distinguishable enough that the member would not be confused with an active duty Airman Basic nor with a CAP C/AB, since the cadet will have metal CAP cutouts.

I really don't see a need for the CAP cutout insignia on any uniform for senior members.  I think we're having a hard time letting go of the CAP cutout for senior members, since we spent 60 years wearing it on the collar.  It's time to just consider that insignia to represent C/AB.  As far as the NCO service dress, they should wear the US lapel insignia with the circles. 

So, the end result of this long post:  No seniors members should ever wear the CAP cutouts on the collar of any uniform (metal or cloth).  Senior Member without grade pursuing officer promotion should wear the blank epaulet on any garment that has an epaulet.  Have I forgotten anything or any uniform?  Is there anyway this would not work? 
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:08:45 AM
This manual says in several places that graduated commanders wear the commander insignia pin 1/2" below the name tag or name tap.  This is fine on some uniforms.  However, this doesn't really work on uniforms with a pocket flap.  It also does not agree with how the USAF wears their command insignia pin on their uniforms.

Anytime there is not a pocket flap, the command insignia pin should be located 1/2 " below the name tag, i.e. on service coat, mess dress, or women's service uniform blouse, women's white aviatohttp://captalk.net/Themes/classic/images/bbc/bold.gifr overblouse.

However, if there is a pocket  flap with a button, the command insignia pin should be located centered between the name tag and the button of the pocket flap, i.e. men's service uniform shirt, white aviator shirt.

Lastly, if there is a pocket  flap without a button, the command insignia pin should be located centered between the nametape and the bottom of the pocket flap, i.e. BDU, Corporate Field Uniform.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:12:12 AM
4.1.5.4.3
4.1.5.5.2.3
4.1.7.4.3
11.1.1.1.1
These paragraphs state that ribbons, badges, and devices worn by adult
members (officers and NCOs) must fall below the top notch of the collar on the service coat or the bottom tip (front edge) of the collar of shirts/blouses worn as outergarments.  This is rule is not found in AFI 36-2903, so I don't think CAP should have this rule either.  The only thing in AFI 36-2903 that is relevant is 11.1.5 that says that the lapel of the service coat may cover a portion of the ribbons.  If CAP is going to have this rule, it needs to apply to all members to include cadets.  I recommend eliminating this rule altogether.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:13:27 AM
4.1.5.4.4.2
4.1.9.4.3.2
4.1.10.4.3.2
4.2.5.3.3.2
There are disagreements in these paragraphs.  One sentence states, "CAP service badges, if worn, are always worn on the left."  Another Sentence says, "The National Commander's Staff Badge will always be worn on the wearer's right side."  The National Commander's Staff badge is a service badge, so these sentences disagree with each other.  Additionally, the last sentence says, "The CAP Senior Advisory Group, Command Council, National Board or National Executive Committee will always be worn on the left side." These are all service badges, so it is redundant to explain that they are worn on left, since the earlier sentence stated that service badges are always worn on the left.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:30:34 AM
6.1.1.4 cadet officer rank on pullover sweater
6.1.2.2.3 cadet officer rank on cardigan sweater
6.1.3.2.2 cadet officer rank insignia on lightweight blue jacket
6.1.9.2.2 cadet officer rank insignia on topcoat
These paragraphs use the term "shoulder mark".  I know this term is also used in AFI 36-2903, but I'm embarrassed to say, "I have no idea what a shoulder mark is".  This doesn't tell the reader if the rank is supposed to pinned directly onto the epaulet flap, or if it is supposed to be pinned onto a blue epaulet sleeve.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:33:59 AM
AFI 36-2903 and CAPM 39-1 DRAFT now use the term "rank insignia" instead of "grade insignia".  There are still several instances of the use of the term "grade insignia" which should be changed to "rank insignia". 

I actually disagree with the term "rank insignia", and I still believe it should be called "grade insignia".  I realize CAP is following the example set by AFI 36-2903, but I think the authors of that manual got it wrong.  Insignia can not tell me someone's rank when compared to others with the same grade. 

This is same old dilemma, "What is the difference between grade and rank?"  Well, thanks to AFI 36-2903 and CAPM 39-1 DRAFT, we can no longer explain that grade is a major step in the promotion structure while rank is the seniority among those within the same grade.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:39:43 AM
4.1.7.4.4.2  Badges on the Female Service Dress Uniform
The location of the Service Badges described in the last two sentences of this paragraph is misleading.  It seems that the badges are supposed to be worn over the name tag, and towards to lapel, but it also states that some are worn on the wearer's right and some will always be worn on the left side.  This needs some clarification.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:43:41 AM
4.1.7.11
4.1.8.11
These paragraphs do not allow women to wear combat boots with the service dress uniform.  This is unfair to women, considering that men may wear the combat boots with the service dress uniform and blue service uniform.  Furthermore, this is not consistent with AFI 36-2903, Paragraphs 6.4.2.9 and 6.4.3 which allow women to wear combat boots without design and can only be worn while wearing slacks.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:45:21 AM
4.2.5.3.3.3
This paragraph states, "If a specialty track or service badge is worn on the wearer's right side above the name tag..."  The words "or service badge" should be deleted, because Paragraph 4.2.5.3.3.2 states that, "CAP service badges, if worn, are always worn on the left, with only one being worn."
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:45:59 AM
6.1
4.1.9.11
4.1.10.12
The "Wool Pullover Sweater" was phased out by the USAF.  CAP should also phase it out and replace it with the new 50/50 Acrylic Wool Pullover Sweater.  I recommend changing this text to "50/50 Acrylic Wool Pullover Sweater."  This phase should also be listed in the Attachment 9.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:47:01 AM
4.2.3.2.2
The last sentence states, "...if the blazer has no pocket."  However, 4.2.3.1 states that the blazer shall have...a left breast pocket."  I recommend deleting the reference to alignment of the nametag to ½ inch above the CAP crest or service badge.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:51:04 AM
4.2.5.3.3.3
4.2.6.3.3.3
These paragraphs state that, "Command insignia is worn only by officers." 

Can someone tell if there is a regulation that requires commanders to be officers.  May a NCO serve as squadron commander or group commander and retain their NCO rank.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: SarDragon on February 17, 2014, 06:58:17 AM
Just as a matter of curiosity, are you going to post all 27 pages here? At this point, I think it's just preaching to the choir, since there's nothing any of us can do any more.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:02:20 AM
5.1.2.9
The all weather coat is not listed as an option for the BDU.  It was previously authorized with the BDU (both in CAP and USAF).  It should still be authorized for the BDU, so it should be listed in this paragraph.

Someone earlier in this topic mentioned that there wasn't a good outergarment to wear with the BDU in cold weather.  I regularly wore the all weather coat, thermal underwear, earmuffs, scarfs, and gloves with my USAF BDU when I was in an extremely cold environement. 

Many folks in CAP and USAF never knew that you could wear the all weather coat with the BDUs.  I was even called out occasionally by Captains and Majors in USAF when I wore the all weather coat with my USAF uniform.  I had to carry a copy of the AFI 36-2903 in my coat pocket just to prove that I was allowed to wear the coat with the BDU.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:18:00 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on February 17, 2014, 06:58:17 AM
Just as a matter of curiosity, are you going to post all 27 pages here? At this point, I think it's just preaching to the choir, since there's nothing any of us can do any more.

No, Sir.  I don't want to bore you all with all 27 pages since so many of those were filled with examples of typos, disagreements, grammar, punctuation, etc.  I'm merely posting some of my ideas that I had that I felt strongly about. 

I don't really expect anything written here, by anyone, at anytime to influence the final version of CAPM 39-1, but I do think we can share our thoughts.  I put a lot of thought, effort, and time into my review of the manual.  I welcome any civilized feedback regarding my ideas, especially if anyone thinks my ideas are wrong.  It's possible that I may have misunderstood the text or one of the ideas doesn't work for some reason; some reason other than you just don't like it.

Lastly, as I said before, I haven't posted in a few years, so I guess I'm catching up in one night.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:20:52 AM
6.1.8 Blue Flight Jacket
This paragraph says that the only items worn on the blue flight jacket are the nametag, CAP command patch, and rank insignia.  No other badges or patches will be worn on this jacket. The previous manual allowed the member the option to wear the same patches as worn on the blue flight suit, i.e. shoulder patches.  I recommend that the same patches as worn on the green flight jacket be approved on the blue flight jacket, for the purposes of uniformity between equivalent USAF and CAP uniforms, and for easier comprehension of these uniforms.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:26:00 AM
6.1.10.2.1 NCO Rank Insignia on BDU Field Jacket (women)
There are three size choices listed here for CAP NCO patches; 3, 3 ½, or 4 inch.  As a cost savings measure for our vendor (Vanguard), I recommend narrowing the option by eliminating the 3 inch option.  This is the only uniform listed in this manual that is authorized to have the 3 inch size option, so it makes sense to eliminate the option.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:47:15 AM
8.2.4.1
The FDU is a USAF-style uniform.  This draft allows US and foreign military badges authorized by AFI 36-2903 to be worn on all other USAF-style uniforms.  Why are they not authorized on  the FDU?  AFI 36-2903 10.4.9. allows aeronautical badges of other US services (not foreign though).
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:49:11 AM
8.2.4.1
This paragraph says that on the FDU name tag, wings will be to the right, which means that occupational badge is worn to the left (when badges are placed side by side on the nametag). But then the paragraph later says that the command insignia pin is worn on the right rather than an occupational badge.  does anyone know what is correct?  This is a disagreement that should be corrected.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:51:40 AM
8.2.6.2 Flight Jacket
This paragraph says that it is mandatory to wear US Flag or other approved left sleeve patch on the flight jacket.  As I understand it, the US Flag patch is the only patch approved for the left sleeve of the flight jacket.

Is there another patch that is approved on the left sleeve of the flight jacket?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:52:50 AM
9.6.1.1
This paragraph about the Honor Guard Uniform says that, "Items such as...boots with the service dress uniform...are not permitted."  Combat boots are already approved for wear with the service dress uniform.   

Is this paragraph trying to indicate that combat boots may not be worn with the Honor Guard Uniform?
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:53:28 AM
9.6.4.11
This paragraph says that the Honor Guard Uniform can include the "overcoat."  Paragraph 9.6.1.4 says that USAF Honor Guard Uniforms procured by any means are prohibited.  The USAF overcoat is specific to USAF Honor Guard, Chaplains, Band, and Flight Attendants.  Therefore, I think the author probably intended to mean topcoat and not overcoat.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:55:36 AM
10.8.3
This paragraph restricts the First Sergeant Diamond to be worn only by C/MSgt, S/SMSgt, and C/CMSgt.  Is there a regulation that restricts the First Sergeant to those grades?   Isn't it possible for a C/SSgt or C/TSgt to be appointed to the position of First Sergeant. There is a First Sergeant Diamond Insignia (available from Vanguard) that I thought was for wear by C/SSgt or C/TSgt that are appointed as First Sergeant.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 07:59:29 AM
ATTACHEMENT 9 and SUMMARY OF CHANGES
The following items were in the previous CAPM 39-1, but are not in the current draft.  These items should be listed as phased out or establish a future phase out date, and/or listed in the Summary of Changes.
    1.   Ultramarine Blue tapes and badges on the Corporate Field Uniform: "CIVIL AIR PATROL" tape, "NAME" tape, rank insignia, aeronautical ratings, occupational badges, command insignia pin, etc.  (Replaced with dark blue tapes and badges.)
    2.   100% Wool Pullover Sweater (replaced with 50/50 Acrylic Wool Pullover Sweater).
    3.   Scarf, White or Gray, with the Service Dress Uniform (Class A) and Blue Service Uniform LS/SS (Class B).  (Black scarf is approved).
    4.   Scarf, Gray, with the Battle Dress Uniform (BDU). (Black scarf is approved).
    5.   Mittens.
    6.   Gloves, Gray.
    7.   Dark Blue Earmuffs
    8.   Raincoat.
    9.   Floppy Bow.
  10.   Wigs and Hairpieces.
  11.   Not really a phase out, but the tie length was changed since the last manual.
  12.   Brown T-Shirt with the Battle Dress Uniform.
  13.   White T-Shirt and Brown T-Shirt with the Flight Duty Uniform.
  14.   White T-Shirt with the Corporate Field Uniform
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: a2capt on February 17, 2014, 09:42:03 AM
It's almost pointless to debate/discuss it, since the comment period is closed.

You can also use one post for all of that.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: TarRiverRat on February 17, 2014, 11:02:34 AM
Quote from: pierson777 on February 17, 2014, 06:33:59 AM
This is same old dilemma, "What is the difference between grade and rank?"  Well, thanks to AFI 36-2903 and CAPM 39-1 DRAFT, we can no longer explain that grade is a major step in the promotion structure while rank is the seniority among those within the same grade.

This is one that I never really understood.  I grew up as a War Against Northern Aggression reenactor and rank was always what the person was such as General, Major, Captain, etc.  Until I got into CAP, I never really new about the grade part.  Even my dad, if asked what he was in WWII, he would say his "rank" was Sgt. in the Army Air Force.  He never used the term Grade.  When I read diaries from the CW they also use the term Rank and not Grade.  Just an observation.  Does not really matter and I am not going to lose sleep over the term Rank and Grade.
Title: Re: It's finally here!
Post by: NIN on February 17, 2014, 01:59:24 PM
You know, maybe just attaching a copy of your 27 page long document would go a lot further? I can't believe you just posted 3 pages of short posts.