About those shield-shaped specialty badges...

[High Speed Low Drag]

I agree with those on the board - consolidate specialty track badges into a few as has been suggested, phase in as suggested.  Leave Qual badges alone, and add the half-wing for scanner. 

My 2 cents:  Cadet Programs Badge, Mission Support Badge (incl Admin, Logistics, Finance, IT, Personnel, Prof Develop, Public Affairs, Recruiter, History, Inspector) , Mission Operations Badge (Including Emer Serv, Comm, Ops, Safety), and Aerospace Education Badge.  Four badges representing our three missions.  Legal, Medical, Chaplain, Incident Commander have Qualification badges, so they are represented in that manner.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

On second thought, how about this — and it mirrors the A-staff (at least, as used in Southeast Region)...

Manpower (A-1) badge: Administration, personnel, professional development, chaplain support

Operations (A-3) badge: Operations, emergency services, CISM, counterdrug, stan/eval, safety (includes IC and GT badges)

Logistics (A-4) badge: Logistics (to include supply, transportation, maintenance), finance

Plans and programs (A-5) badge: Aerospace education, cadet programs, DDR, inspector general

Communications (A-6) badge: Radio communications, IT, public affairs/marketing/recruiting

The center of what *could* be each specialty badge is a funny little icon above each part of the tree on this page (though just putting the CAP prop-and-triangle on the Air Force insignia isn't quite going to be enough): http://sercap.us/organization.html

The five badges detailed above would replace ALL the shield badges currently in use, plus a couple of others. It might be concievable to break out aerospace education, professional development and cadet programs under an "education" badge, but I can't see many other departures from this.

[ol'fido]

Not really in to long winded replies to these threads but here goes:

Before we change or eliminate badges we have to decide what we want them to signify. Do we want them to reflect a career field(such as they are in CAP) or do we want them to reflect training in a specialty field of our personal interest. For instance, if I am a logistics officer by duty position but want to have my specialty track as PAO which badge do I wear? The one one that reflects my job or my training? Over a long CAP career a member may have more than one job. In 30 some odd years in CAP, I have held every staff position in a squadron there is except chaplain/ MLO, legal, and medical.

Do we want to make them required for wear like a name tag or optional like a ribbon or a set of wings?

Personally,  I am for leaving the chaplain, GT, various medical, and legal specialty badges alone.

I would make the various specialty track badges have a more uniform and professional looking design. Something different from what we have. Enamel badges look kind of chintzy. I like the SER  A-staff designs but those are still enamel type designs. Perhaps a variation on th AF style badges with a more rounded laurel leaf design, but with care not to duplicate any AF career badges in design.

I think that with this being a volunteer organization and people volunteering because some aspect of the  program may interest them more than the staff position to which they are assigned.

I know there are those who will say that when you join CAP you must subordinate your interests to the needs of the organization but people stay because they find something they are interested in  and want to pursue regardless of the staff position they are pigeon holed into. If we don't let people pursue these interests, we are going to have a lot of inactive or one-year members. So, let the badge indicate the specialty the member is actively seeking to advance in.

The comm badge started this trend and was followed by the ES and safety badges. Then we jumped into the AE and CP badges and finally the reast of them. All of these will have to go away and be replaced by a uniform specialty track badge. Wear one onor two only.

The only other change to our various assorted badges is to eliminate the mission scanner  qual and make the mission scanner quals entry level observer quals and bump the old observer quals up to senior observer requirements. All that  other like ARCHER, CD, check pilot, staneval would just be endorsements on your quals without a specific aeronautical badge.

If this post is screwed up , the scroll button on this page is jacked up.

[flyboy53]

Not really in to long winded replies to these threads but here goes....Do we want to make them required for wear like a name tag or optional like a ribbon or a set of wings?...I would make the various specialty track badges have a more uniform and professional looking design....The comm badge started this trend and was followed by the ES and safety badges. Then we jumped into the AE and CP badges and finally the reast of them. All of these will have to go away and be replaced by a uniform specialty track badge. Wear one onor two only.

Agree!!!!! When you're teaching AE to a cadet, a set of wings has more credibility than a Cracker Jack Box toy badge. Besides, especially in that case, AE members get that badge (a minature version) as a benefit of membership. They don't have to earn it like the AEO does.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I would make the various specialty track badges have a more uniform and professional looking design. Something different from what we have. Enamel badges look kind of chintzy. I like the SER  A-staff designs but those are still enamel type designs. Perhaps a variation on th AF style badges with a more rounded laurel leaf design, but with care not to duplicate any AF career badges in design.

Actually, those ARE the Air Force designs with the wreaths removed and the prop-and-triangle added. Oh, and someone colored them, probably to embellish them a little more. (If CAP adopts the Air Force concept, the first thing that needs to go is the globe, since unlike them, we don't have global reach.)

If we're limited to only one (if we wear an aviation badge, it's mandatory), but have earned more than one, each member should be allowed to choose for himself/herself. An example in the current climate: I'm allowed to wear three, but I'm not going to puke enamel badges all over my uniform, so I only wear one -- and depending on what I'm doing, I might swap the PA badge for the comms badge (I don't wear that CP badge because it's smallish and unsightly.

[High Speed Low Drag]

IMHO - we should consolidate track badges into a few, but leave them down on the pocket.  Leave the area above ribbons for qualification badges.

I don't consider CP Badge unsightly, I wear mine with pride.

[flyboy53]

Actually, those ARE the Air Force designs with the wreaths removed and the prop-and-triangle added. Oh, and someone colored them, probably to embellish them a little more. (If CAP adopts the Air Force concept, the first thing that needs to go is the globe, since unlike them, we don't have global reach.)

Since when? Very few, if any of the CAP badges, are Air Force designs. The wings, yes, maybe, because some where along the way they were desinged by the Institute of Heraldry. I distinctly remember one of the National Historians once taking credit for the speciality badges....and the problem is that they don't really look that professional.

[Thom]

Actually, those ARE the Air Force designs with the wreaths removed and the prop-and-triangle added. Oh, and someone colored them, probably to embellish them a little more. (If CAP adopts the Air Force concept, the first thing that needs to go is the globe, since unlike them, we don't have global reach.)

Since when? Very few, if any of the CAP badges, are Air Force designs. The wings, yes, maybe, because some where along the way they were desinged by the Institute of Heraldry. I distinctly remember one of the National Historians once taking credit for the speciality badges....and the problem is that they don't really look that professional.

I believe BuckeyeDEJ was referring to the SouthEast Region images which are used on SER's large and AWESOME organizational chart.  They break things down into a structure which is named after, and 'iconned' with images pulled from the USAF badges for those service areas.

Thom

[Lt Oliv]

Manpower Badge?

Consolidating Historian with Personnel?

Mission Support?

Let's face it. There are a few specialty tracks that can disappear. There is no reason why Personnel and Admin are separate tracks now. I do not believe we need one person to requisition forms for the personnel officer.

Combine Admin and Personnel, call it the Admin Track.

Admin is not "mission support" it is exactly what it says, administration. "Mission Support" sounds like the Admin Officer is the designated doughnut retriever.

"Manpower," aside from being politically incorrect, is a pretty lame name for an operational duty section.

And why does Admin need a badge exactly?

When I was in the Navy, enlisted personnel had specialty marks (which were included in their rank insignia) and officers only had staff corps insignia and warfare badges. The admin officer might be mistaken for a regular person when walking on base.

Consolidate and eliminate certain specialty tracks.

Get rid of the badges altogether.

That much bling makes us look like tricked out security guards more than anything else.

[teesquared]

IMHO, the shield shaped badges we have now work just fine. Let's leave them alone.

[flyboy53]

The sad thing is that for all the posts generated here on this subject, in the end, it won't make any difference what the membership thinks. The real solution here is if you don't like the badge, don't wear it. I don't...and not because I already have Air Force badges to wear.

I realize that there are those who believe the badges are great and that's fine. For me, however, they look too much like prizes out of a Cracker Jack box. I was really excited a few months ago when another string generated some really cool looking badges, but the likelyhood of ever seeing some of those is pretty moot.

You know, on active duty, there are a lot of rated officers that leave flying status and go to desk jobs. Then they qualify for a speciality badge but won't wear it because their wings are more important to them. We can do the same...then Vanguard will be upset because they manufactured a lot of badges that nobody will buy. That's how you get the message across.