wear of the flight suit

[DNall]

Yeah mike's got that one. If & when 39-1 is explicit & not contradictory, then it is the law. If it is vague &/or contradictory or open to reasonable interpretation, then the AF standard should be looked to for guidance. HOWEVER, this should NOT be abused to put more crap on your uniform so you can look cool. Keep it in the lines & try to look as good as your reasonably can in a uniform that represents CAP & the AF, that's all I ask.

[Chaplaindon]

1.   IAW CAPM 39-1, can CAP members wear any other outerwear over the USAF flight suit besides the sage green USAF flight jacket?

MA-1, CWU-45/P or CWU-36/P.

2.   Since the current issue USAF flight jacket(s) --there are several permutations based upon weight and warmth-- is/are made of Nomex aramid cloth and thus costs somewhere around $150-200 new (depending upon source) ---according to "The Gospel According to St. Uniform" (CAPM 39-1) can a member legally wear the identical appearing MILSPEC nylon version of the jacket (which is MUCH less costly)?

The MA-1 pictured in CAPM 39-1 is nylon.  Nylon knockoff versions of the CWU-45/P are also out there.  I don't think MA-1's are issue anymore either, yet they have been authorized with the USAF style bag.

3.   According to the explicit provisions of the same "Gospel" may a CAP member --legally-- wear anything on her/his head --besides the USAF flight cap or, maybe, a baseball cap (if approved by WG or RG CC) while wearing the green bag?

Per Table 2-4. Flight cap or CAP baseball cap.

Thanks, Mike for the clarification --as quoted-- now I ask about (a) an additional outer garment --"outerwear"-- and (b) an article of headgear.

Following that legalistic logic, per CAPM 39-1 --regardless of potential usefulness or safety considerations a CAP member wearing the USAF green Nomex flight suit is thus forbidden to wear (a) the USAF or another flight crew survival vest (b) a flotation vest --both are garments and neither is provided for in CAPM 39-1-- or (c) a noise suppressive communications headset or flight helmet.

Similarly, I am most certain that there is no relief or provision in CAPM 39-1 to allow wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) IAW blood-borne pathogens training with any of our CAP distinctive or USAF uniforms.

Let's see what NHQ (or the USAF) would think of the sort of nonsensical nitpicking uniform enforcement as would --by the LETTER of the manual forbid the wearing of safety apparel. But if you live by "the letter of the law" IAW the explicit provisions of CAPM 39-1 you can come to no other conclusions. Safety isn't allowed for in uniform.

That is absolute nonsense ---LITERALLY.

If you would ban a chaplain's badge on the flight suit name patch concurrent with their "wings" because CAPM 39-1 does not specifically allow them in writing, you must likewise agree to ban flight helmets, flotation and survival vests. To such lunacy, I say, "get your prop spinner out of your baggage door!"

If we can allow for safety considerations --outside of CAPM 39-1-- (IF we can ) then 39-1 isn't absolutely authoritative as to what members can wear in uniform. Some variations must be tolerated unless gloves, masks, goggles and Mae West vests are also forbidden.

I say to everyone, quit playing "gotcha" with trivial uniform infractions (or variations in nomenclature) --it may seem like fun or good sport for 14 y/o cadets but it is childish and Quixotic beyond that age-- and focus on using common sense as it will foster teamwork, mission accomplishment and safety. This isn't a game.

In short, grow up.

[shorning]

Ooooo...barracks lawyering!

Following that legalistic logic, per CAPM 39-1 --regardless of potential usefulness or safety considerations a CAP member wearing the USAF green Nomex flight suit is thus forbidden to wear (a) the USAF or another flight crew survival vest (b) a flotation vest --both are garments and neither is provided for in CAPM 39-1-- or (c) a noise suppressive communications headset or flight helmet.

The survival vest, flotation vest, and headsets/helmets are not garments.  They are equipment.  There is a difference.

In short, grow up.

Nice lecture, but what you're doing is known as quibbling...

[MIKE]

The other stuff could easily be covered by the 60-series.  It wasn't until the last revision of AFI 36-2903 that the Flight Duty Uniform was in the USAF uniform instructions... because it was being worn as a "uniform" instead of as PPE... In the USAF and other services you will find the life support equipment and PPE in other directives, and not in uniform regs.

Also.. Don't be a jerk Chaplaindon... I'd expect better from a chaplain.    Points to Global Moderator beneath username.

[RiverAux]

Chaplain, you brought up the issue of chaplain insignia so deal with the fact that people addressed your concerns.  If you don't want to hear people's opinions then don't visit a talk board. 

[Hawk200]

I can actually see some points as far as Chaplaindon's post goes.

A lot of folks are so hot on nitpicking uniform items that the mission falls by the wayside. There seems to be more questioning the character of people that wear something different in a minor manner.

Does this mean that I'll let the guy that shows up in tan boots with his BDU's get away with it? No it does not. But if he shows up with a Gore Tex, what's the harm? Black fleece? I wore mine in an aircraft (privately owned, not CAP) last weekend. Took it off when we got out of the plane.

Another point of contention: There is far too much of "We're not the Air Force so we don't accept any of the guidance in their regs!" in this little corporatized auxiliary of the Air Force. I think that's wrong. Maybe if we started looking at their guidance, they might consider babysitting us less. Might let us go out places without chaperones.

[shorning]

A lot of folks are so hot on nitpicking uniform items that the mission falls by the wayside. There seems to be more questioning the character of people that wear something different in a minor manner.

Don't confuse what happens here in the sterile world of an internet forum with what occurs in the real world.  Here we have the time to discuss and nitpick the details of an issue.  That doesn't mean the mission is going to fall by the wayside.  It's not like we're taking time out of a mission to post on the forum.  I'm guessing most people are posting in their free time.

And yes, I will question the character of some one I don't know if they tell me they "aren't following the rules" or "doing what they want" (I'm not implying that is what Chaplaindon is doing.  It's just a point of discussion).  The image one presents here is the only way most of us know them.  How many people on this forum have you ever met in person.  IIRC, there is only one that I've met.  And I've know him years before there were CAP forums.

[Hawk200]

Don't confuse what happens here in the sterile world of an internet forum with what occurs in the real world.

I am talking about the real world here. I'm talking about the time when a wing weenie made a big stink about an OLC being upside down, and talking sh** about it to others. Was I wrong? Yes. Does it give people justice to engage in character assassination? You tell me.

I'm talking about another character that actually pulled out a ruler to measure my specialty badge on my BDU's. He was disappointed to find that it was exactly one-half inch.

I'm not confusing the two at all. The reality is far more annoying than the "internet forum".

[DNall]

No doubt. For sure people should not be going off on theri own & making up what they want. The fact is the reg is written for crap & it's literally impossible to understand what the standard is in some cases. The record of the org that backs that up is one of not thinking anything thru & in turn causing problems on the ground that frustrate & drive off members who see the issues as an example of CAP not having its crap together - that does effect mission performance. Those issues also at times make us look bad in front of and as reps of the AF, which also hurts mission taskings, funding, & resource support.

Is arguing about minor uniform issues that don't change anything eitehr way about stupid, yeah of course, but if you just got time on your hands & nothing else to discuss, then it really doesn't hurt anyone either & is very typical of what you'll see from active troops of every service in their own uniform discussion areas. If you don't want to see time wasted on uniform discussions, just choose not to read the threads.

On the other hand, some of the uniform discussions that occur also have an undertone that deals with programs & organization that result in a uniform item. Those are much more valid, and you have to be careful not to cut that discussion short just cause it deals with uniforms.

[shorning]

I'm not confusing the two at all. The reality is far more annoying than the "internet forum".

I'm not sure why you have "internet forum" in quotes like that, but that's what CAP Talk is:  an internet forum.

You're taking a handful of incidents and making it sound like a rampant problem.  I've never seen the problem to the degree you describe as a matter of routine.  I've been in 6 wings, 5 regions, 9 squadrons and a handful of other assignments.  In the "short" time I've been in CAP, the only time I had anyone pull a ruler on me was as a cadet.  To me, it sounds like the exception rather than the rule. 

YMMV...

[flyguy06]

A verbal order outweighs a written order. SO, even if the Regs say one thing, if the Chief of Chaplains told him to do something else, that verbal order overrides regulations.

[shorning]

A verbal order outweighs a written order. SO, even if the Regs say one thing, if the Chief of Chaplains told him to do something else, that verbal order overrides regulations.

The Chief of Chaplains wouldn't be in the chain-of-command...

[lordmonar]

A verbal order outweighs a written order. SO, even if the Regs say one thing, if the Chief of Chaplains told him to do something else, that verbal order overrides regulations.

The Chief of Chaplains wouldn't be in the chain-of-command...

Would be in the chaplains chain of command.  Chaplains are like lawers....they have a convoluted chain of command that does not follow the normal squadron, group, wing, region logic other squadrons follow.

Kind of like working for AIA....Their chain of command is more like a "net" of command!

[shorning]

A verbal order outweighs a written order. SO, even if the Regs say one thing, if the Chief of Chaplains told him to do something else, that verbal order overrides regulations.

The Chief of Chaplains wouldn't be in the chain-of-command...

Would be in the chaplains chain of command.  Chaplains are like lawers....they have a convoluted chain of command that does not follow the normal squadron, group, wing, region logic other squadrons follow.

Kind of like working for AIA....Their chain of command is more like a "net" of command!

Yes, but it wouldn't include something like uniform wear.  It's more ADCON versus OPCON.

[DNall]

You know I never would have questioned this issue if I saw it. I think it's appropriate to wear for mission/CISM chaplains, and if there is an issue with that then please add it to the list of things to be clarified in the next update. In the meantime I can't see the reg as concrete enough to flat out restrict it.

Far as chain of command, are CAP chaplains ever under the AF chief of chaplains? Even when filling in on base (where flight suit would not be the most appropriate uniform) wouldn't they be under the base commander or something? I mean hell if I know, just guessing here. Anyway, such a verbal order would apply only to the times when under that person's command & only if that uniform were necessary.

[shorning]

Far as chain of command, are CAP chaplains ever under the AF chief of chaplains?

Um...CAP has it's own Chief of Chaplains.  However, "Chief of Chaplains" was brought up twice.  First, talking about how to wear the badge.  Second, when talking about wearing the device on the hat.

Put like lordmonar said, it's different structure.  While assigned to the base, Air Force chaplains also answer to the Chaplains Service.  CAP chaplains on base would be more like "visiting clergy".

[RiverAux]

A verbal order outweighs a written order. SO, even if the Regs say one thing, if the Chief of Chaplains told him to do something else, that verbal order overrides regulations.

By this logic a verbal order from MG Pineda to fly CAP airplanes at 100' MSL despite what CAPR 60-1 says would be perfectly ok?  Nope.  No verbal order can override a CAP regulation unless the regulation itself gives someone in the chain of command some discretion on the issue. 

[Hawk200]

I'm not sure why you have "internet forum" in quotes like that, but that's what CAP Talk is:  an internet forum.

You're taking a handful of incidents and making it sound like a rampant problem.  I've never seen the problem to the degree you describe as a matter of routine.  I've been in 6 wings, 5 regions, 9 squadrons and a handful of other assignments.  In the "short" time I've been in CAP, the only time I had anyone pull a ruler on me was as a cadet.  To me, it sounds like the exception rather than the rule. 

Now that I look at it, I don't know why I quoted either. A matter of perception of the concept of "forum", perhaps. In the past, a forum has always been a physical entity, not a virtual one. But, times change. It wasn't  intended as insulting or degrading.

To be fair, there are many things I've never seen, but I know those things to happen. I find it hard to believe that you've only dealt with one uniform fanatic. I envy your good fortune. Wish I had the same luck.

[lordmonar]

A verbal order outweighs a written order. SO, even if the Regs say one thing, if the Chief of Chaplains told him to do something else, that verbal order overrides regulations.

By this logic a verbal order from MG Pineda to fly CAP airplanes at 100' MSL despite what CAPR 60-1 says would be perfectly ok?  Nope.  No verbal order can override a CAP regulation unless the regulation itself gives someone in the chain of command some discretion on the issue. 

Actually...yes...all regulations are written orders form the commanding general....ergo...if MG Pineda says to do it....CAPR 60-1 is superseded.   I have argued this many time.  The top dog does not answer to us nor to the regulations.  If you regional commander or wing commander tried to issue the same order...that would be a different story.  But the National Commander is the issuing authority for all regulations/manuals/pamphlets and therefore he has the power to contermand those orders.

[Eclipse]

I'm not sure that is true - we are a corporation, therefore CAPFLT001 does not have authority without their consent.

Uniform directives have to be approved by the BOG and the USAF (if its their  combo).