NEW Georgia Wing patch

[skymaster]

For those of you who might not have heard, the Georgia Wing patch has been redesigned to conform more closely to AF standards for wing-level emblems.  What do all of you think of the new design? http://www.gawg.cap.gov/picts/ga_wing/Georgia_Wing_Emblem_large.jpg

[DC]

Kinda boring, IMHO. Glad it's the right shape for a wing though. They could have been much more creative with the elements on the shield, instead of just slapping the state flag on there and calling it a day.

[BillB]

It's a modified Confederate National Flag.

[lordmonar]

In what way could they have been more creative?

I think it is a very good patch.  Simple, to the point and no frills.

It does not have a bunch of symbology that no one knows or cares about.

I remember when we redesigned the NVWG patch....we got the same critisim....."you just took the state flag and add a CAP triangle".

It's a good patch.

[skymaster]

It's a modified Confederate National Flag.

Probably because the Georgia state flag (shown here) IS patterned closely after the first Confederate National Flag: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Georgia_%28U.S._state%29.svg

[Rowan]

It's okay, I suppose.  I like it better than the former one.

Does anyone know when the new wing patches will be available from Vanguard?  Cadets going to encampment will need these on their BDUs.

[AirAux]

No, they won't need them for encampment.  Encampment commanders do not have the authority to require the wearing of the Wing patch..   

[manfredvonrichthofen]

So I take it that every Wing will have to change their Wing Patch to conform to the shield pattern, understandable. However does this mean that all squadrons will have to change their Squadron Patch to conform to the squadron patch as well, even those that have been around for more than 20 years?

[EMT-83]

No one is required to change anything.

[RiverAux]

So I take it that every Wing will have to change their Wing Patch to conform to the shield pattern, understandable. However does this mean that all squadrons will have to change their Squadron Patch to conform to the squadron patch as well, even those that have been around for more than 20 years?

There is a small group here that advocates for establishing such standards for CAP patches, but just about everyone in favor of that is in favor of grandfathering in existing patches and only imposing such requirements on new patches or if an existing patch is going to be significantly changed. 

[Eclipse]

^Exactly. 

My wing did it right.  They put a freeze on existing insignia that did not conform to the guidelines, and notified the respective commanders that they
may continue to wear and use the existing non-compliant insignia, but may not order anything further with that insignia (no coins, patches, signs, etc.).

At such time that a new order becomes necessary, the unit must redesign their insignia to be compliant and get that insignia properly approved before
spending any money.

"Old" doesn't mean "good", especially when you consider that anything designed before the mid-90's was probably hand-drawn and the only
spec sheets are scans of scans.

[Major Carrales]

When Wing pays for Squadron patches, I will support such nonsense.  CAP is local with its local traditions, not everything "new" is good.  I freak out on how many people want to consign tradition to the crapper.

[Eclipse]

This is not about "tradition", but even if it were, it doesn't have to go out the window.  It is about setting and mandating a standard - one that
helps us look professional and "bigger than we are" through the use of a few simple rules and structures.

The military and corporations update their logos all the time without completely disavowing tradition, the USAF's new(er) Hap Arnold logo
updated the insignia without losing the lineage.

For every well-done but outdated unit patch that has some real history and weight, their are ten that feature combatant aircraft or other images that
have no connection with, or are inappropriate for use with CAP.  Some, read by those who understand Heraldry, mean something the artist did not intend, are such multi-generational sub copies that any detail was lost long ago, or simply look terrible and busy.

Wrong is wrong, and the actual cost to fix wrong is zero.  A new insignia can be designed for no cost if you ask the right people, and can be used day-1 on letterhead, sign-age, websites, etc., for nothing.  Then, once you need more patches, the cost is a wash since you had to order them anyway.  No decent patch vendor these days charges for setup.

[Major Carrales]

There is no "wrong" until this is in a regulation somewhere.  And to expect that everyone will get the "freebies" you describe is disingenuous at best.

Most squadron patches I have seen have featured some local art connected to some local tradition and history.  They have been designed against a round background (due to the cost) and approved by Wing Commanders.

[Eclipse]

A roundel is fine, and would not need to be updated if the only issue is the shape.

As to the "freebies", if you're seriously implying that not every wing had a few members good enough with Photoshop or Illustrator to
design a decent patch, then you are pretending just to make the argument.

[Major Carrales]

A roundel is fine, and would not need to be updated if the only issue is the shape.

As to the "freebies", if you're seriously implying that not every wing had a few members good enough with Photoshop or Illustrator to
design a decent patch, then you are pretending just to make the argument.

I have those skills, I took it to mean that some company would simply let you "set up" without a fee.

[RiverAux]

There is no "wrong" until this is in a regulation somewhere. 

Apparently it is in the reg where Eclipse is at (and a few other wings) so there isn't a problem.

[Major Carrales]

There is no "wrong" until this is in a regulation somewhere. 

Apparently it is in the reg where Eclipse is at (and a few other wings) so there isn't a problem.

Well then, keep that stuff out of my Wing.  It will not find a supporter in me, unless they agree to pay to replace everything.  "Change" for "change's sake" is from whence inefficiency and waste are nursed.  Suckling from the bosom of good intentions, yet yielding only sour milk!!!

[Eclipse]

I have those skills, I took it to mean that some company would simply let you "set up" without a fee.

That is what I meant, but I also meant that most decent patch vendors charge little to nothing these days for
setup.  I know my vendor has no setup charge and they can be used by anyone in the know universe.

There is no "wrong" until this is in a regulation somewhere. 

Apparently it is in the reg where Eclipse is at (and a few other wings) so there isn't a problem.

Yep, though a properly approved supplement.

Well then, keep that stuff out of my Wing.  It will not find a supporter in me, unless they agree to pay to replace everything.  "Change" for "change's sake" is from whence inefficiency and waste are nursed.

I agree, that isn't what this is.  This is fixing something that was implemented incorrectly from day one.

It should be a national mandate.

[Major Carrales]

It should be a national mandate.

An when they agree to pay everyone's set up fee to replace long time patches, I will be on board with it.  If you think that is ridiculous or smacks of the ludicrous, why is it OK to burden SQUADRONS with this expense and not WING or NATIONAL?  WASTE is WASTE at any level....much more at the squadron were 1) the rubber hits the road and 2) money comes most from member pockets.