Bring back the Royal Blue Flight suit

[dogboy]

In the Pacific Region, according to the supplement to CAPR 60-1, the nomex flight suit is the "approved" uniform for flight activities in the region.

However, neither the sage  or dark blue flight suits in CAPR 39-1 provide visibility for searchers. Day-glo or at least Royal Blue provide that visibility. In the Pacific Region, as the recent Steve Fossett search shows,  we fly over some of the most rugged and deserted landscapes in America. If you were downed, wouldn't you want that slight margin of visibility that a bright colored flight suit would provide over sage or dark blue?

I assume that dark blue replaced Royal Blue because it was more "professional" in appearance. IMHO, we actually look more professional when we wear outfits suited to our missions. If we wear nomex that we have to pay for ourselves, shouldn't we have a suit that might actually save our life?

[Hawk200]

Blue is pretty much blue, regardless of shade, and the shades we wear aren't common in nature. If it's really an issue, include an orange vest in the survival kits. If the crew isn't in any condition to put them on, the color of their flightsuit probably isn't going make any difference.

I wear the green flightsuit, but if there was a vote, I would definitely vote against the Royal blue suit. It has just never looked right to me.

And we've had other people that think that we should replace all our field uniforms for visibility purposes. If you're wearing an orange vest like you should, it shouldn't be an issue.

[BillB]

Royal blue or dark blue or sage, from 1200 feet makes no difference unless in direct sunlight. And I've only seen one plane crash where the plane was in direct sunlight and not hidden by trees. You could be in an orange flight suit in the fall when tree leaves were changing color and not be seen.

[jeders]

Royal blue or dark blue or sage, from 1200 feet makes no difference unless in direct sunlight. And I've only seen one plane crash where the plane was in direct sunlight and not hidden by trees. You could be in an orange flight suit in the fall when tree leaves were changing color and not be seen.

Even in direct sunlight it won't necessarily help.

[mikeylikey]

Can't you just find something that color to stow with your gear, if you happened to go down??

[isuhawkeye]

With this logic we should go back to the blaze orange flight suit.

[pixelwonk]

With this logic we should go back to the blaze orange flight suit.

that's hot

[CFI_Ed]

With this logic we should go back to the blaze orange flight suit.

I've still got my old one

[JohnKachenmeister]

In the Pacific Region, according to the supplement to CAPR 60-1, the nomex flight suit is the "approved" uniform for flight activities in the region.

However, neither the sage  or dark blue flight suits in CAPR 39-1 provide visibility for searchers. Day-glo or at least Royal Blue provide that visibility. In the Pacific Region, as the recent Steve Fossett search shows,  we fly over some of the most rugged and deserted landscapes in America. If you were downed, wouldn't you want that slight margin of visibility that a bright colored flight suit would provide over sage or dark blue?

I assume that dark blue replaced Royal Blue because it was more "professional" in appearance. IMHO, we actually look more professional when we wear outfits suited to our missions. If we wear nomex that we have to pay for ourselves, shouldn't we have a suit that might actually save our life?

This is really dumb.

From 1000 feet everybody looks the same.  

If you go down you have smoke, flares, mirrors, and ground panels.  If they can't see you with all that, how is a light blue flight suit gonna help?

Discuss something rational.

[Smokey]

CAWG has authorized the blaze orange flightsuit.   A member of my squadron has one and it wears it everytime .

From CAWG 39-1 supplement:

Table 4-5 Line 1. (Added) Flight Suit. In the interest of safety, the orange NOMEX flight suit is authorized for wear in California as an alternative to the royal blue or dark blue flight suit. This garment will be worn with the same badges and devices prescribed for the AF-style flight suit.

[MIKE]

^ 

[O-Rex]

Space-mom says: "Don't leave home without a high-viz flightsuit and a survival radio."

[Hawk200]

CAWG has authorized the blaze orange flightsuit.   A member of my squadron has one and it wears it everytime .

From CAWG 39-1 supplement:

Table 4-5 Line 1. (Added) Flight Suit. In the interest of safety, the orange NOMEX flight suit is authorized for wear in California as an alternative to the royal blue or dark blue flight suit. This garment will be worn with the same badges and devices prescribed for the AF-style flight suit.

Sounds like something California would do. Do they still have the 11-1 out there too, or did someone kill that thing yet?

[SarDragon]

11-1?

[Flying Pig]

Like this.....minus the Jayhawk

[Hawk200]

11-1?

It was a manual that CAWG produced for "clarification" on policies, administrative practices, uniforms and safety. Problem with it was that the wing (or someone at the wing) was telling members that it superseded all the National pubs.

Ran into a guy out there wearing metal rank insignia on his BDU's (he was a senior). Mentioned it to him, and he told me that the allowance was in the CAWGM 11-1, and that it took precedence over CAPM 39-1. Don't know if it was in the manual or not, but I could never seem to get a hold of one of them. No one I ever knew seemed to have a copy. My commander had seen it, but didn't have a copy of her own.

[Psicorp]

Yet another example of why CA is a strange state 

[ddelaney103]

Are there any examples where CAP lost a crew because they were wearing sage or dk blue instead of royal blue or orange?

Heck, are there any examples where we lost a crew because they weren't wearing aramid fiber?

Safety is one of the twin prods we use to justify things in CAP (the other is "Cadet Protection").  If something is markedly safer and actually saves lives in practice, it should be mandatory.  Often we allow individualism in the name of safety, like boonies.

[SarDragon]

OK, now I grok the 11-1 reference. I just consulted my copy, and see nothing related to uniforms in it. The manual is titled "California Wing Administrative Procedures", available here, and is an amplification of NHQ paperwork procedures.

Uniform items are addressed in the CAWG supplement to CAPM 39-1.

DON'T SHOOT ME, I'M ONLY THE MESSENGER!

I have presented information, not opinions as to its correctness or validity. If you disagree, take your dogpile elsewhere.

[Hawk200]

OK, now I grok the 11-1 reference. I just consulted my copy, and see nothing related to uniforms in it. The manual is titled "California Wing Administrative Procedures", available here, and is an amplification of NHQ paperwork procedures.

Uniform items are addressed in the CAWG supplement to CAPM 39-1.

DON'T SHOOT ME, I'M ONLY THE MESSENGER!

I have presented information, not opinions as to its correctness or validity. If you disagree, take your dogpile elsewhere.

I've seen the current one, and it has been modified since I was last in Cal Wing. A few additions ago, it did have info on uniforms. At the time I questioned a fellow senior on his uniform, it apparently had a conflicting practice. The current one does not.

And just because it doesn't now, doesn't mean it didn't. Second, there's really no reason to get excited about it. Things change. I still think it's unnecessary to produce a "clarification" manual that draws all of its content from National pubs. The 11-1 doesn't seem to reference any pubs at all, just parrots them.