In senior squadrons, I have noticed a lack of uniform wear. Should seniors be required to wear a uniform to meetings?
The Senior squadron here wears the polo combo. Not what I would consider a 'Uniform', but I guess it's better then civvies. Personally I think they should wear one of the other alternate uniforms, such as the gray/white aviator combo or the new corporate uni.
What do the regs say?
That should be the answer...
Now that being said, should a squdron have a standard uniform? ie, all golf shirt, or all corporate gray or TPU.
What would be the best way to make all seniors 'uniform'? Understanding that a number of seniors do not meet weight and/or grooming for AF blues/ BDUs. Should a standard corporate be in order?
Seniors should be strongly encouraged to wear a regulation uniform at meetings. Requiring them to sounds good, but it never really turns out that way. The example set by Command Staff sets the tone for the unit. Since change starts at the top, if the command staff isn't wearing them, who'd expect the rank 'n file to either?
At times when it's been logistically difficult for me to arrive in a regular AF uniform, I've worn grey slacks during the day and brought along the the golf shirt to change when I arrived.
It's not my favorite uniform but for meetings it's a relatively simple solution.
OT: Just curious, your sig says CAP-USAF. Are you a CAPRAP? What have been your experiences in the role?
Yes.
Quote from: tedda on March 16, 2007, 09:34:38 PM
OT: Just curious, your sig says CAP-USAF. Are you a CAPRAP? What have been your experiences in the role?
I'm thinking not Tedd, as this page (http://du.edu/~coshell/main.html) seems to reveal... I think the young LT should update his sig.
Yes.
Per 39-1, Chapter 1, Table 1-1, members will wear a uniform:
Quotewhen engaged in normal duties as a CAP member or attending local, wing/region, or national CAP functions (see note 1).
...NOTES:
1. The National Commander and other commanders may specify the wear of a particular uniform type for the purpose of achieving a uniform appearance at squadron, group, wing, region, and national functions. However, all commanders must be mindful of the objective of attaining a neatly uniformed appearance at a minimum of personal expense to the individual member and will consequently refrain from imposing unreasonable uniform requirements.
They need to at least be wearing the minimum uniform, which is described in 39-1, 1-5.
^ If you're not in uniform, you are wrong. As cited by A.Member.
A significant number of our members come directly from work. That imposes quite a burden. In my job I work till 1930 and meeting start at 1900. I show up in scrubs but at least I'm there. ( the following is tounge in cheek now if national would approve navy blue scrubs for HSO's...) . One meeting a month the Squadron commander requests all attending to were a uniform. Most do unless they work.
Come on! Wearing a costume to the party is half the fun ;)
If it weren't why would there be so many uniform threads-hey, I like that: threads, about...."threads."
Gee, I crack myself up. :D
Quote from: flyerthom on March 17, 2007, 02:18:14 AM
A significant number of our members come directly from work. That imposes quite a burden. In my job I work till 1930 and meeting start at 1900. I show up in scrubs but at least I'm there. ( the following is tounge in cheek now if national would approve navy blue scrubs for HSO's...) . One meeting a month the Squadron commander requests all attending to were a uniform. Most do unless they work.
That's a poor excuse.
Quite a burden? Honestly, how long does it take to change? 5 min. max? Put your uniform in the car in the morning and bring it with you to work. Change once you arrive at the meeting or before you leave work. You're already at least a half hour late, what's another 5 minutes? It's not hard.
I can understand the are some rare occasions were a member might need an exception but it certainly shouldn't be the norm. Wear is not listed as "optional". IMO, that's a lazy approach by your squadron and if the CC is not interested in addressing the problem then Group should step in and assist.
Just my $.02.
Quote from: O-Rex on March 17, 2007, 02:54:29 AM
If it weren't why would there be so many uniform threads-hey, I like that: threads, about...."threads."
Ugh. :) ;D
Thank you all who remarked on my signature. I have changed it, as no, I am not part of CAP-USAF. It amazes me, though, that in the year or so that I have been using that signature on e-mails, nobody had caught it (including my squadron commander). :-\ However, now that I have been shown the difference between CAP and CAP-USAF, I won't continue.
In my defense, I find it confusing that on all CAP publications, the two are synonymous. Only USAF pages differentiate.
Thank you all.
yes, they should usually
Personally, I think folks get a little too wrapped up in uniforms. Now up front, I'll admit: there are times and occasions where I think they are appropriate, such as in my current capacity (which, hey; ends in about 4 hours.)
I've worn a uniform of some sort my whole life; AF, Scouts, CAP to name three biggees. There's a time and place, as I alluded to before, where one's focus should be on the clothes.....and then there's a time where that's not so.
Problem is, how much focus is TOO much focus?
We'll never agree on how much is too much or too little, so, I usually sit by and watch the "hardkewls" and the "airplane club members" go at each other like the Montagues and Capulets.
What ever comes of it? One side mocks the other, names, nastiness, and utter stupidity.
Why, I predict a nasty comment in this thread about somebody/something in about 10.....9.....8....7.....
Quote from: 2nd LT Fairchild on March 16, 2007, 09:34:08 PM
What do the regs say?
That should be the answer...
Now that being said, should a squdron have a standard uniform? ie, all golf shirt, or all corporate gray or TPU.
What would be the best way to make all seniors 'uniform'? Understanding that a number of seniors do not meet weight and/or grooming for AF blues/ BDUs. Should a standard corporate be in order?
I always thought that the TPU addressed that question perfectly. Just about every member can wear the uniform and it is a decent looking one. If actual uniformity is your goal, the TPU/BBDU can be the answer.
Quote from: IronRangerMN on March 30, 2007, 11:26:29 PM
everyone does PT for the overall picture of all of them. Gets them to look past gettin there uniform right and then they help the rest of their team.
As may be, but PT is supposed to be a normal part of the cadet program, and never used as a form of punishment, IAW CAPR 52-10.
I believe it is in the best interest for them to wear the same uniforms.
If the issue is "Golf Shirt" wearing senior squadrons...
It should be pointed out that the "golf shirt" combination is a uniform...or, I could be wrong? :-\
Just a personal per peeve... the golf shirt was designed & sold as a novelty item NOT a uniform, but a bunch of people started wearing it in lieu of a uniform (breaking regs) and that presented an insurance/liability problem for the org, at the same time some people were trying to get it adopted as an official uniform for glider instructors... so it was adopted, but never should have been & IMO it is inappropriate for wear when conducting business as an officer. Just my personal view though. I have no problem with people wearing the other corporate style uniforms. I don't like some details of them, but they are on the whole appropriate.
As for the overall conversation here, I think everyone understands there is & should be a one-to-one relationship between the corporate-style alternative uniforms & the official AF-style uniforms. A UOD should ALWAYS be posted for the day or duty & you should not participate unless you are in it. I'd rather have you not there than setting a bad example. And if you think your authority isn't defined by your image then you're wrong.
As to putting all officers (remember we dropped SM) in a corp-style to achieve "uniformity," that's very short sighted. You have to understand that the goal is NOT to build a connection & sense of team with the person next to you, but to demonstate solidarity with our parent organization, the AF. The official uniform of CAP is & has always been the AF-style. The Corporate-STYLE uniforms are formally descibed as alternative uniforms. You can't be an alternative when you are the primary. That's not to say there is anything wrong with people wearing those uniforms, but the prefered thing is to go with AF-style if you can, and if you can't for some reason that's why there is an alternative.
Quote from: IronRangerMN on March 30, 2007, 11:26:29 PM
Why is being a senior member such an excuse? Thats the example that must be made by the higher ups. Otherwise they are hipocrits and I would probably not listen to the orders recieved from them.
And you would be out of line, cadet. It's not for *you* to decide whether you would listen to their orders or not. If you are given an order which is not illegal, not against regulation, and doesn't put anyone's life, limb or property at risk, then if you don't follow the order, you've committed insubordination, and an example should be made of your impudent backside.
Procedural note: When you 'insert' yourself in an adult discussion, be mindful of the tone you take, what you say, and when or if you say it. We're not your parents. We don't find everything that you say to be 'cute' or admirable. We don't have to tolerate every audacious thing that comes out of your mouth, or streams from your fingertips, or 'grin and bear it.' It would seem that you have very little, if any philosophical background from which to speak on this issue.. Take care, young one. The ice is thin under your feet....
Regards,
Don't be so hard on him, he makes a very fair point. Any leader that thinks they can lead because their position grants them authority is on the path to failure. You very much do require the trust & respect of your subordinates. Certainly you can stand over them & instruct each individual task for them to do as you directly supervise, and they'll do what they're told, but that's rather useless to get anything done. You absolutely must earn the faith of your subordinates, & sell them on a vision they have to choose to take ownership of, and then you have to take care of them all the way thru.
If you think you can lead successfully without setting the right example or without asking for your people's follow you, then you will fail virtually every time. That's absolute historical fact.
So the kid gets a little uppity calls us SMs out, asks what makes us think we're of such a better class that we can get away without setting the example we demand of our subordinates, and that the outside world demands as their expectation of a professional standard. Disrespectful, maybe even a bit out of line, but you don't think it deserves a straight answer? You don't think that point needs to be reinforced on our officers? I certainly do.
Quote from: afgeo4 on March 31, 2007, 03:36:01 PM
Quote from: 2nd LT Fairchild on March 16, 2007, 09:34:08 PM
What do the regs say?
That should be the answer...
Now that being said, should a squdron have a standard uniform? ie, all golf shirt, or all corporate gray or TPU.
What would be the best way to make all seniors 'uniform'? Understanding that a number of seniors do not meet weight and/or grooming for AF blues/ BDUs. Should a standard corporate be in order?
I always thought that the TPU addressed that question perfectly. Just about every member can wear the uniform and it is a decent looking one. If actual uniformity is your goal, the TPU/BBDU can be the answer.
George, you've done it again. What about those of us who can't wear the TPU? You still haven't addressed that question.
Seems I have been quoted a couple of times, but the main point has not been addressed yet, perhaps I was not clear in my question...
My main concern is being "uniform" at meetings... We have some who are not in weight regs.. thus the AFU is out. We have some like myself who prefer to maintain a well trimmed goatee and mustache, thus the TPU and AFU is out. We have some who wear the Grays such as me, some who wear Polo, some who wear AFU, and one in flight suit as he usually comes in from the plane.
So what would be the best policy? Continue to let people wear whatever they want or go with the lowest common denominator?
At this point we have been trying to match the cadets on UotD, BDU nights, PT night, Blues Night. Would the first point of order be to just have one standard uniform. Period? For Officers? Since we are not doing the same type of activities as the cadets, that would warrent the OotD difference.
Then winnow down to say to TPU and Greys? or AFU and Grays as it used to be?
Do we mandate all shave so everyone is in the TPU?
I also think the cadet was semi out of line, perhaps just in the phrasiology of his statement. What I think he was trying to convey was on, just needs to learn to phrase the question better...
Just a couple of weeks ago the cadet commander and cadet XO of our squadron presented the same question of uniforms for officers to us.
ETA: I think the TPU put a variable in, that causes more problems than fixes in terms of 'uniform'.
I think it is a hopeless task to try to require a specific uniform for any activity in CAP given all the options available and the requirements that keep some people from wearing some uniforms.
Unfortunately, the lowest common denomiator of the uniform that everyone can wear is either the golf shirt or gray pant/white shirt combo or BBDUs. From what I can tell, those who can wear the AF-style, usually will wear the AF style and will probably not want to spend extra money so that they can be "uniform" with people unwilling to meet the AF-style guidelines.
The "lowest common denominator" is what the regs already call for -- the minimum basic service uniform (for those who can wear AF) or the aviator shirt and blue trousers (corporate, meets grooming) and aviator shirt/golf shirt and grey trousers (those who don't meet grooming). I'm kind of lost as to the substance of the discussion here.
To the cadet who "called out" senior members -- I have to agree with Lt. Col. Boyd on this one, though DNall has a valid point as well. (Once again, no, I'm not running for office.) Col. Boyd is right in pointing out that cadets simply don't call out officers. It is out of line, way out of line. But the youngster raises a question that should be answered, as Dennis asserts. It's all in how you ask the question, though, that will get you the answer you seek.
Jack
Quote from: SarDragon on April 01, 2007, 08:19:08 AM
Quote from: afgeo4 on March 31, 2007, 03:36:01 PM
Quote from: 2nd LT Fairchild on March 16, 2007, 09:34:08 PM
What do the regs say?
That should be the answer...
Now that being said, should a squdron have a standard uniform? ie, all golf shirt, or all corporate gray or TPU.
What would be the best way to make all seniors 'uniform'? Understanding that a number of seniors do not meet weight and/or grooming for AF blues/ BDUs. Should a standard corporate be in order?
I always thought that the TPU addressed that question perfectly. Just about every member can wear the uniform and it is a decent looking one. If actual uniformity is your goal, the TPU/BBDU can be the answer.
George, you've done it again. What about those of us who can't wear the TPU? You still haven't addressed that question.
Why can't you wear the TPU?
Quote from: DNall on March 31, 2007, 07:16:01 PM
Just a personal per peeve... the golf shirt was designed & sold as a novelty item NOT a uniform, but a bunch of people started wearing it in lieu of a uniform (breaking regs) and that presented an insurance/liability problem for the org, at the same time some people were trying to get it adopted as an official uniform for glider instructors... so it was adopted, but never should have been & IMO it is inappropriate for wear when conducting business as an officer. Just my personal view though. I have no problem with people wearing the other corporate style uniforms. I don't like some details of them, but they are on the whole appropriate.
Just about every major service organization, police, fire, and public service agency has a golf shirt uniform at some level of their members or agents, including ALL the major 3- and 4-letter agencies and the Red Cross.
Depending on the activity, it is completely appropriate.
Quote from: Eclipse on April 01, 2007, 04:57:03 PM
Why can't you wear the TPU?
Because he has a beard.
It has worked. I'm off this site forever.
Thanks to anyone that has answered questions or I have gotten good information from. This site does provide a knowledge base for a lot of questions anyone could have. Fly safe and good luck everyone. :)
Quote from: IronRangerMN on March 31, 2007, 05:28:44 PM
Its not a puishment, but a gift from the gods so that they may build muscle and endurance. When you constantly train, strength is a very nice thing to have. Endurance keeps you walking. But we do PT other than for inspection. Heck, its usually not because of inspection. Its just to get exercise. At least until we can get our obsticle course up and running. That was a long winter. ;)
Thanks for clarifying that, didn't want to see folks getting the wrong impression of your squadron!
Have fun everyone
Quote from: IronRangerMN on April 01, 2007, 09:09:10 PM
You don't want a load of fatigued cadets, do you?
Only when it's time to send them to their racks!
Quote from: SarDragon on April 01, 2007, 08:19:08 AM
Quote from: afgeo4 on March 31, 2007, 03:36:01 PM
Quote from: 2nd LT Fairchild on March 16, 2007, 09:34:08 PM
What do the regs say?
That should be the answer...
Now that being said, should a squdron have a standard uniform? ie, all golf shirt, or all corporate gray or TPU.
What would be the best way to make all seniors 'uniform'? Understanding that a number of seniors do not meet weight and/or grooming for AF blues/ BDUs. Should a standard corporate be in order?
I always thought that the TPU addressed that question perfectly. Just about every member can wear the uniform and it is a decent looking one. If actual uniformity is your goal, the TPU/BBDU can be the answer.
George, you've done it again. What about those of us who can't wear the TPU? You still haven't addressed that question.
The problem isn't the uniform. The problem is that we, as members, aren't uniform. We aren't required to meet one standard. That's why we can't come up with one uniform to wear. If we made our members meet at least grooming standards we wouldn't have such issues. And why shouldn't we? Why shouldn't our members have a neat, professional, well-groomed appearance? What government agency allows for 3 foot beards gone haywire, 40" afros and nails as long as rifles? Maybe, just maybe if you aren't willing to shave in the morning, you aren't willing to do more taxing tasks? Or maybe you think you're too cool for school now that you're past 40? Well... this organization isn't for everyone and I think it shouldn't be.
Capt. I partially agree with you. But define neatly groomed.. I beleive my goatee is neatly groomed at less than an 1/8th inch and well trimmed. If you would like to see a photo of it let me know. Personally because of my facial structure I look better with some facial hair. That being said..
Physically I am unable to do a number of tasks due to athritis in most of my joints. Meaning I cannot run and I cannot do a sit and reach.. as a matter of fact getting off the floor is tough. I can do pushups and situps... I am on the border in terms of weight. I am 5-9 at 195# just in the 10% zone. But I will not wear the AF unless I am at AF weight. (Plus shave)
Now I think the issue is that we are volunteers and we pay to play. As volunteers the thought is that I am DONATING my time and giving TO CAP. Thus I beleive why the alternate uniform came to be. I agree with having an alternate. But....
The main issue is having so many variables, having SMs wearing multiple styles at meeetings and also not wearing the AFU properly when worn.
Sometimes, I think CAP SMs need only 2 uniforms.. One for AF compliance and the other for grooming and weight non compliance. Not 4.. TPU is weight non compliance only. And polo..
How about they drop 2 of the 3 alternatives.. iw TPU, Grey, Polo, then just one AF compliant and one non compliant. Period.
One thought, go just to polo for the non compliant.. This means if you wantto wear a y uniform you MUST be compliant.. None of this lookalike fatboy unshven uniform.
The problem now is we have uniforms that are sooooo close, why bother wearing the AF?
Still my issue is at meetings you have 5-6 different uniforms being worn at a meeting.
Quote from: 2nd LT Fairchild on April 03, 2007, 10:03:28 AM
Now I think the issue is that we are volunteers and we pay to play. As volunteers the thought is that I am DONATING my time and giving TO CAP. Thus I beleive why the alternate uniform came to be. I agree with having an alternate.
I sympathize with a lot of your points, but I just wnat to contrast you on this one.
You give your time & money right? You dues are what like $75 a year? The AF spends literally 10 times that for every single member every single year. The total contribution by all members, sponsors, grants, state funds, etc... all other sources beside the AF, accounts for less than 10% of funds expended by CAP each year. And that's just direct appropriations, and does not consider the cost of CAP-USAF or any of the facilities or surplus supplies they make avail to us throughout the year. You break that annual appropriation down to a per active ES operator basis & it gets ridiculous very fast.
I know I spend a lot more than $75/yr on CAP, more than $750, and I know we could find a really good use for three times the federal funds every year, but I really think a lot of people tend to lose perspective on things. For everything we do as individuals, the AF does a whole lot more & we owe them for that. I'd use the word fealty, but not everyone would agree with that.
Quote from: afgeo4 on April 03, 2007, 01:53:00 AMThe problem isn't the uniform. The problem is that we, as members, aren't uniform. We aren't required to meet one standard. That's why we can't come up with one uniform to wear.
That's a good point. How many squadrons have a uniform of the day for officers? Probably not many. I know the one nearest me does not. In fact, most of the seniors wear the golf shirt uniform, which (if I'm not mistaken) is a novelty uniform that does not allow for insurance coverage.
Quote from: afgeo4 on April 03, 2007, 01:53:00 AMIf we made our members meet at least grooming standards we wouldn't have such issues. And why shouldn't we? Why shouldn't our members have a neat, professional, well-groomed appearance?
There's no reason why members shouldn't be neat, professional, and well-groomed. The problem is there isin't (or doesn't seem to be) much punishment for officers who are habitually out of uniform regs, be it for improper grooming or weight.
Quote from: afgeo4 on April 03, 2007, 01:53:00 AMWhat government agency allows for 3 foot beards gone haywire, 40" afros and nails as long as rifles? Maybe, just maybe if you aren't willing to shave in the morning, you aren't willing to do more taxing tasks? Or maybe you think you're too cool for school now that you're past 40? Well... this organization isn't for everyone and I think it shouldn't be.
I agree. Even though CAP members are volunteers, there are rules and regulations set forth by both the Air Force and CAP that must be followed by everyone. Some of these rules are designed to be exclusive, such as weight and grooming rules. If it were not for the CAP distinctive uniforms, the weight and grooming rules for CAP would be exclusive.
Quote from: 12211985 on April 04, 2007, 03:07:39 AM
Quote from: afgeo4 on April 03, 2007, 01:53:00 AMThe problem isn't the uniform. The problem is that we, as members, aren't uniform. We aren't required to meet one standard. That's why we can't come up with one uniform to wear.
That's a good point. How many squadrons have a uniform of the day for officers? Probably not many. I know the one nearest me does not. In fact, most of the seniors wear the golf shirt uniform, which (if I'm not mistaken) is a novelty uniform that does not allow for insurance coverage.
You are mistaken. The Golf Shirt Uniform is "a uniform" as described in CAPM 39-1, and does meet the requirements for insurance coverage.
Quote from: Al Sayre on April 04, 2007, 03:14:00 AMYou are mistaken. The Golf Shirt Uniform is "a uniform" as described in CAPM 39-1, and does meet the requirements for insurance coverage.
I stand corrected. Thanks for the clarification, sir.
Just my $ 0.02, our senior squadron commander recommends that uniforms are worn, but does not require it. She usually wears the golf shirt, and has a good reason. If you wear the AF style uniform, then you should also wear the proper AF outerwear, and so you should by the proper AF coat, which means you buy another coat, even though it is not as warm as the one the normally wear. Just more money to the "Come And Pay" cause.
Ever since she had to walk three miles out from forced landing, she makes the point that you should be warm and ready to walk in the weather you may land in. If that means your favorite, warm coat, wear the darn coat.
Personally, I'd rather donate the money spent on multiple uniforms to the squadron to pay for unfunded training flights, spend it on a camel pack, hand held radio, or other gear required for a mission. Plus, you can always find a composite squadron with a cadet whose family can't afford the basic 24 hour pack gear.
With cadets, it is very different. Uniforms should be warn, since they are required too, plus the markings on your collar mean more when cadets are around.
Remember, we are here to save lives and help teens, not to play "Air Force". If you want to play "Air Force", go all the way, enlist.
2LT Schwab
I'd check your perspective there. We aren't & never have been a SaR agency. We are an AF Agency that happens to do SOME search & no rescue.
I don't know if you've ever actually saved anybody's life, I have & it isn't that big a deal. We do SaR ONLY because & to the extent Congress has tasked AF with backing up states that don't have the resources to do it for themselves. We ALSO do a whole lot of other ES work that has nothing to do with SaR. Plus besides SaR there's AE & CP, and CP is equally important to ES.
Regs state you need to be in a uniform at all CAP activities, and that includes meetings - it specificially says meetings in the reg. I'm understanding in some cases as long as it isn't habitual.
Quote from: DNall on April 04, 2007, 05:24:14 PM
I'd check your perspective there. We aren't & never have been a SaR agency. We are an AF Agency that happens to do SOME search & no rescue.
I don't know if you've ever actually saved anybody's life, I have & it isn't that big a deal. We do SaR ONLY because & to the extent Congress has tasked AF with backing up states that don't have the resources to do it for themselves. We ALSO do a whole lot of other ES work that has nothing to do with SaR. Plus besides SaR there's AE & CP, and CP is equally important to ES.
I stand corrected. I guess in my squadron, I hear more about ES then the others, but you are correct, AE and CP blades are of equal size on the emblem. I do not have a "save", so I have to take your word on how big a deal it is or is not.
Over lunch I was thinking about this, and I do have to say, a uniform does bring a sense of unity to the group, and does help people work with a more team attitude, and looks to the public that we know what we are doing.
I guess I vented about the problem of people how are much more eager to wear the uniform then they are to do the work. I have become jaded by people in general who are glad to tell me what they can/could do, but don't ever seem get around to doing it.
For me, the uniform does not give value to member; its the member who gives value to the uniform, regardless of where and when they wear it.
I guess I am took discussion a bit off topic, sorry about that.
No, it's okay. The original point was pretty well done with...
Quote from: sschwab on April 04, 2007, 07:34:14 PM
a uniform does bring a sense of unity to the group, and does help people work with a more team attitude, and looks to the public that we know what we are doing.
That's the main point of it. It also symbolicly promotes a sense or unity with the AF, so we don't forget who's boss & who's really paying for all this (greater than 10 times per every member what you pay per year).
QuoteI guess I vented about the problem of people how are much more eager to wear the uniform then they are to do the work. I have become jaded by people in general who are glad to tell me what they can/could do, but don't ever seem get around to doing it.
People get that impression sometimes, but it tends not to be related. While you obviously joined cause someone sold you on helping save people, people join for other reasons too. Some want to help kids succeed in life, others are heere cause they want to help the AF. Most people are some combination of those or probably a half dozen other things. That foundation attitude is generally what dictates their views on what the org should be like & the uniform policy that flows from that. Wherever someone lands in that specturm, they'll be aiding in the missions to an equal percentage with anyone else.
QuoteFor me, the uniform does not give value to member; its the member who gives value to the uniform, regardless of where and when they wear it.
Certainly our members bring a lot to the table. However, connecting across the line to our parent organization causes that assembly of members to be greater than the sum of their parts. Much greater in our case cause we steal credibility from our affiliation and public perceptions.
Anyway, you're required by reg to wear a uniform. That's for insurance reasons, but there are psychological & philosophical reasons as well that greatly impact capability & performance that dictate if & how well we can get the job done.
Quote from: DNall on April 04, 2007, 05:24:14 PM
I'd check your perspective there. We aren't & never have been a SaR agency. We are an AF Agency that happens to do SOME search & no rescue.
I don't know if you've ever actually saved anybody's life, I have & it isn't that big a deal. We do SaR ONLY because & to the extent Congress has tasked AF with backing up states that don't have the resources to do it for themselves. We ALSO do a whole lot of other ES work that has nothing to do with SaR. Plus besides SaR there's AE & CP, and CP is equally important to ES.
Regs state you need to be in a uniform at all CAP activities, and that includes meetings - it specificially says meetings in the reg. I'm understanding in some cases as long as it isn't habitual.
I would suggest you re-read the material in the study guide for the ECI-13 test. CAP was not founded as a CP organization. And yes, we do have "rescues" quite frequently...53 last year to be exact. (CP is very important, for the record.)
I would not wish to be the person that you "saved"...it would be unfortunate to be a "no big deal". I'm quite sure that he/she thinks it is. As far as I am concerned, saving
one person justifies all of my time and monetary contributions to CAP.
Just a friendly side note, AFIADL13 is THE most outdated course in all of CAP. Not that it matters so much, but if you're going to pick from the couple dozen refs that could have told you that.
I do know that CAP was not founded as & is not now a CP agency. Neither was it founded as or is it now a SaR agency. We were actually doing CP before SaR if you're curious, again not that it matters. What I said was SaR is one part of many things we do in ES, and quite well balanced nationally (which may or may not be the case in your little area). ES is balanced equally with CP, and to a lesser extent with AE. The fact of the matter is the org would today & at numerous points in history be shut down w/o every part of that equation going for it.
And by the way, the little girl I did CPR on in HS came out just fine. It was before I joined CAP, I was a police explorer on a call actually. I'm sure it means a lot more to her then it does to me. I'm glad she got helped, I'm glad I was able to help, but it doesn't matter to me that it was "me" that did the saving. To ME, it's just something that happened, like how I had lunch this afternoon or got a speeding ticket once. What we do in CAP is search for people, and if we ever find one that needs rescuing then we're not trained for or allowed to do that, we have to call people in. It's good stuff & worthy of a save, but if you want to be a hero you're in the wrong place.
What CAP exists for, from adoption by the AAF till now, is to support the AF. We do that in many different ways. One of those happens to be taking care of the AF's responsibility for Air SaR support to states that don't have the resources to do it for themselves. We're lucky that we're able to help people, and that may be what draws you to the organization, but the mission is there because it takes it off the plate so the AF can focus on more important things, and that is why I'm here. It's not my place to question your motivations, but I would from time to time try to pull you back to earth to get some perspective on the full range of things we do & why we as an organization (not you personally) do them. That ultimately is what your units should be focused on. When you get tunnel vision on things that are important to YOU, & your unit starts to track off in that direction, then restoring perspective is called for. That's all I was trying to do, respectfully.