New van markings

[Becks]

Has anyone else revieved the new marking for the vans.  We had two show up at the squadron the other day, and it appears we are switching to the new CAP MAJCOM on vans too.... *gag*
Anyone know if this change is immediate or is there a time frame to swap out the stickers?

[Pylon]

Has anyone else revieved the new marking for the vans.  We had two show up at the squadron the other day, and it appears we are switching to the new CAP MAJCOM on vans too.... *gag*
Anyone know if this change is immediate or is there a time frame to swap out the stickers?

Yeah, just found out about it today when two big "Civil Air Patrol - U.S." cartoon-color MAJCOM patches on adhesive showed up in my commander's hands.  My favorite part of it is "NHQ's Preferred Method of Removal" (direct quote) involves using a "hairdryer" to remove the old CAP seal.

This is ridiculous.  What a waste of money, what a solution in search of a problem, and what a poor image change.  Our vans look very professional as they are now.

In addition, I find it more amusing that NHQ required addition of the orange roof triangles and new roof numbering, but couldn't find any funds for those decals.  Now, when certain National leaders want to switch out the CAP seal for the CAP MAJCOM patch on the doors, suddenly they have funding to immediately send out professionally-printed 3M-brand decals to every van in the fleet.   

I have not seen any supporting documentation for this, meaning that the current CAPR 77-1 requiring the current CAP seals is in full effect.  I will not change any decals without a valid directive to the contrary. 

I find it funny that they would send out these new decals with no notice, no official memo, and no reasoning.  Talk about poor communications to the field!   

[RiverAux]

I have not seen any supporting documentation for this, meaning that the current CAPR 77-1 requiring the current CAP seals is in full effect.  I will not change any decals without a valid directive to the contrary. 

Well, you would have it you would have bothered to check the national web site which has had a policy letter approving these changes posted for several months.

I find it more amusing that NHQ required addition of the orange roof triangles and new roof numbering, but couldn't find any funds for those decals.

That is because you're supposed to paint the markings on the roof not use a decal.  Obviously there is too much other junk on our roofs to be able to use a decal. 

I find it funny that they would send out these new decals with no notice, no official memo, and no reasoning.  Talk about poor communications to the field!

I hate to be snide, but I fund it funny that people keep saying that they are putting our requirements that aren't backed by appropriate regulations or policy letters when they there for all to see in the place we're supposed to go for our regulations. 

[Pylon]

I have not seen any supporting documentation for this, meaning that the current CAPR 77-1 requiring the current CAP seals is in full effect.  I will not change any decals without a valid directive to the contrary. 

Well, you would have it you would have bothered to check the national web site which has had a policy letter approving these changes posted for several months.

I find it more amusing that NHQ required addition of the orange roof triangles and new roof numbering, but couldn't find any funds for those decals.

That is because you're supposed to paint the markings on the roof not use a decal.  Obviously there is too much other junk on our roofs to be able to use a decal. 

I find it funny that they would send out these new decals with no notice, no official memo, and no reasoning.  Talk about poor communications to the field!

I hate to be snide, but I fund it funny that people keep saying that they are putting our requirements that aren't backed by appropriate regulations or policy letters when they there for all to see in the place we're supposed to go for our regulations. 

"Not to be snide, but..."

I have bothered to check NHQ's website for something about this.  I consider myself fairly "in the loop" about many things in CAP, and am an extremely active member of the organization.  But if I haven't noticed it, and neither have many other of my more active colleages, how can one expect the rest of the organization to find out properly?   The point is NHQ's communication is disjointed to the membership, whether or not one agrees or disagrees with the changes themselves.  Sometimes an email comes out and gets sent to the whole membership... sometimes an email comes out and gets mailed just to Wing commanders, only some of which forward on to their subordinates.  Sometimes a policy letter is drafted and posted to the NHQ website with no other notification to the field.  Sometimes a written reg is updated and posted online to a different page.  Sometimes...  see my point?

Now, let's look at the National website page for Policy Letters.  Hmm... no mention of the vehicle decal there.

Let's look at the CAP Publications Bulletein page, which should alert astute CAP members of changes to any CAP policy, codified as policy letter or regulation or manual.  Nope, nothing there either.  And that page says it's up to date as of 7 December 2006.

Perhaps it's still listed on the Regulations for Ratification page?  Ah, nope, nothing there either.

Well, NHQ has been trying to keep us in the loop more by posting these types of updates to the new NationalCommander.com website.  Let's look there: http://nationalcommander.com/commander_updates    -- Nope, nothing there either.

The CAP Knowledgebase is also a handy place to get new information and updates.  I mean, they have other recent news like the 20 November 2006 uniform updates.  Hey, they mention the new CAP MAJCOM patch with a photo!  Oh, but no metion at all about new decals for the vehicles or any changes to CAPR 77-1.

So, if I can't find it after all that.... how should the membership be expected to know about these things?   

Still think the new decal looks tacky, too.  And that's my personal opinion as a graphics designer.

[mawr]

Pylon, you need to work on your research techniques.   
Go here: http://level2.cap.gov/visitors/member_services/publications/policy_letters.cfm (your link is broken) and look at the fifth item marked "CAP Vehicle Marking Instructions"

For those who are lazy: http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2006_09_Vehicle_Roof_Marking_Instructions.pdf

[Pylon]

Pylon, you need to work on your research techniques.   
Go here: http://level2.cap.gov/visitors/member_services/publications/policy_letters.cfm (your link is broken) and look at the fifth item marked "CAP Vehicle Marking Instructions"

For those who are lazy: http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2006_09_Vehicle_Roof_Marking_Instructions.pdf

No, no... I saw that policy letter.  That has nothing to do with what we're discussing here.  That policy letter authorized the roof triangles and roof numbering for fleet vehicles.

I was pointing out that CAP has supplied all units with vans with the non-official "Civil Air Patrol" shield for replacement of the CAP seal on the doors of all vehicles.  Since NHQ's various websites are still distributing the original "US Air Force Auxiliary" command patch, I can only find a photo of it as it appears on our new membership cards:



That shield is what was sent to all units with a van assigned.  This has nothing to do with roof numbering and triangles.

Anybody else have more information on the new door insignia for the fleet?

[mawr]

I apologize. I'm totally off the mark.

On to the "correct topic".  I have seen in writing (website that is) where the change was approved but I have not been able to find the source.  I might just as well dreamed it. 

I first noticed the change on PowerPoint slides from the Comm Managers meeting at the National Conference.  I started doing a little digging and, at that time, found that the emblem had been changed and I seem to recall the reasoning was stated as well.  But since then, I have not found that source again.

[Pylon]

I apologize. I'm totally off the mark.

On to the "correct topic".  I have seen in writing (website that is) where the change was approved but I have not been able to find the source.  I might just as well dreamed it. 

I first noticed the change on PowerPoint slides from the Comm Managers meeting at the National Conference.  I started doing a little digging and, at that time, found that the emblem had been changed and I seem to recall the reasoning was stated as well.  But since then, I have not found that source again.

I haven't been able to find it in writing anywhere yet.  Assistance?  Links?

Also, here's a quick mock-up I did of the decals that NHQ sent to the unit to be applied to the van:

[RiverAux]

Okay, my mistake --- I ASSummed it was part of the roof marking policy.  Since it isn't, I'm fully in agreement with you and I wouldn't change a darned thing. 

The bigger question in my mind is why we wouldn't use the same deal on our van doors as we put on the doors of the airplane?