speciality badges for BDUS

[CAPLAW]

Would CAP Members like to have speaciality badges for BDUS?

Example I.G, P.D, AD, MLO for wear above CAP STRIP.

[Pylon]

Would CAP Members like to have speaciality badges for BDUS?

Example I.G, P.D, AD, MLO for wear above CAP STRIP.

My personal opinion is that the specialty badges should have originally been made in line with the Air Force's style of AFSC badges.   Not only would we stand-out less amongst our peers, but it would be simple and easy to wear the same badges, in the same place, on both BDUs and Blues.  Badges for each specialty area with appropriate, but distinct-from-USAF, symbology surrounded by laurel leaves would have made (and still make) the most sense to me.

But, I'm also of the opinion that we need to stop monkeying around with our uniforms for a while to allow members' pocketbooks to recover from this past year's stack of policy letters and mandatory changes.  *shrug*

[MIKE]

There was a rather lengthy topic on this subject over on CivilAirPortal.  It started with simply wanting to redesign the existing badges to look more Air Forcey in both appearance and manner of wear.  I know I suggested grouping some into functional areas rather than having so many badges.  Then it devolved/evolved into unique badges for all kinds of similar ES specialties.

[Psicorp]

What gets me is the big contrast between the Safety patch, CISM patch, and the Communications patch, which all look professional and actually look good on the BDUs...and then we have the cartoony Pluto E.S. patch (who came up with that abortion thing?).     

As far as badgery goes, I'm of the belief that what goes on the BDUs should be mission oriented.  Just because you're a technician in the PAO specialty tract doesn't mean you're qualified to be a Mission PAO, that should have a badge.  Same with MLO, very different from being a Mission Chaplain.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Would CAP Members like to have speaciality badges for BDUS?

Example I.G, P.D, AD, MLO for wear above CAP STRIP.

Let me think about this.

OK, That's enough.

NO!

We got enough crap on the BDU's.  We already look like NASCAR drivers with all our sponsor logos on.

[JohnKachenmeister]

What gets me is the big contrast between the Safety patch, CISM patch, and the Communications patch, which all look professional and actually look good on the BDUs...and then we have the cartoony Pluto E.S. patch (who came up with that abortion thing?). 

Disney Studios.  Back in the 40's and 50's it was cool, and matched the designation of the L-19 "Bird Dog" aircraft we were getting from surplus.    

Quote tag - MIKE

[Hawk200]

Would CAP Members like to have speaciality badges for BDUS?

Example I.G, P.D, AD, MLO for wear above CAP STRIP.

No. That's where I'm wearing my military badges right now.

What need is there for them on BDU's?

[lordmonar]

My personal opinion is that the specialty badges should have originally been made in line with the Air Force's style of AFSC badges.   Not only would we stand-out less amongst our peers, but it would be simple and easy to wear the same badges, in the same place, on both BDUs and Blues.  Badges for each specialty area with appropriate, but distinct-from-USAF, symbology surrounded by laurel leaves would have made (and still make) the most sense to me.

I agree...however...our CAP specialty badges are actually older than USAF AFSC specialty badges.  When CAP made their badges, the USAF only had a hand full of specialty badges.

But, I'm also of the opinion that we need to stop monkeying around with our uniforms for a while to allow members' pocketbooks to recover from this past year's stack of policy letters and mandatory changes.  *shrug*

Well seeing as how specialty badges are optional...we don't need to worry.  And what mandaroty changes are we talking about?  Putting rank on both collars, removing wing patch, putting on the US flag and putting the rank on the BDU CAP.  Were there any other manditory changes for the BDU in the last 4 years that I missed?

[Pylon]

Well seeing as how specialty badges are optional...we don't need to worry.  And what mandaroty changes are we talking about?  Putting rank on both collars, removing wing patch, putting on the US flag and putting the rank on the BDU CAP.  Were there any other manditory changes for the BDU in the last 4 years that I missed?

Yep, that's (count 'em) 1... 2... 3... 4.... four mandatory changes to the CAP uniform, footed at the cost of every member who wears those particular uniforms, all within the period of about a year.

I won't count all the optional changes and new creations and the subsequent litany of changes to the new creations, as the early-adopters bear the burden of that cost for wanting to be early-adopters.  That's a choice. 

But as for four (4) mandatory changes to some of the most common uniforms in wear in the organization within about a one year period (and issued rather disjointly, and not even to coincide with the new CAPM 39-1 in March) is about 3 changes too many for a volunteer organization.  Heck, even the USAF has the common courtesy to release to its paid members its changes in large groups (when the Uniform Board publish their changes) - not one change at a time, every two months.  Not everybody has deep pockets.  

[RiverAux]

BDUs should be considered field uniforms and should have the absolute minimum number of patches and badges on them.  Name, CAP tape, and rank should be about it.  Anything more than that should be on there for a specific purpose related to the reason you're wearing the field uniform.  For example, a paramedic badge. 

I see no reason to have somebody in the IG specialty have their badge on their BDU. 

[MIKE]

All I'd add would be the white on blue cloth badges and wings if you rate 'em.  I don't think we need the pocket patches, ES patches, wing patches or flag patches.

[lordmonar]

But as for four (4) mandatory changes to some of the most common uniforms in wear in the organization within about a one year period (and issued rather disjointly, and not even to coincide with the new CAPM 39-1 in March) is about 3 changes too many for a volunteer organization.  Heck, even the USAF has the common courtesy to release to its paid members its changes in large groups (when the Uniform Board publish their changes) - not one change at a time, every two months.  Not everybody has deep pockets.

Oh come on!  How much did those changes cost us?  The flag was what $3, the rank was $3 each and the removing the wing patch cost nothing but time!

Are you saying that there are really adult members out there that can't afford nine dollars!

Don't pull the the "it costs too much" card, it's just not true!

As for dropping them one at a time instead of all at once...well the USAF does it that way because they only meant once a year to discuss uniform issues.  Maybe we could do this but what difference does it make?  That you have to go out every six month and do something to your uniform or that once a year you have to do a lot to your uniform.

[RiverAux]

I think the biggest part of the frustration isn't the cost it is the fact that they seemingly come out at random times throughout the year.  None of these changes are in any way of such emergency importance that they couldn't wait a few months as part of an annual update to 39-1. 

Since the March 2005 issue of 39-1 there have been SEVEN uniform policy letters.  You'll not convince me that this is an efficient way of doing business. 

[lordmonar]

I think the biggest part of the frustration isn't the cost it is the fact that they seemingly come out at random times throughout the year.  None of these changes are in any way of such emergency importance that they couldn't wait a few months as part of an annual update to 39-1. 

When was 39-1 ever updated annually!

Also...while the changes came out "randomly" (after every NB and as soon as USAF approved them) it is not like they made everyone go out that day and make the changes.  Heck...the US flag is still not mandatory IIRC (April 07?). 

[RiverAux]

Never said it was updated annually, but except for extraordinary circumstances I believe that is what should be the minimum amount of time between any regulation changes. 

[Major_Chuck]

In my most humble of opinions.  No.  We shouldn't have numerous specialty insignia for the Field Uniforms.  That is what we seem to have the service uniforms for.

I am not trying to minimalize the importance of being qualified in one or more specialities.  Lets not clutter up another uniform with multiple patches.  If you are a pilot or observer, wear the wings.  If you are a comm officer, wear the badge.  Lets keep the uniform clean and well, uniform. 

[Hawk200]

BDUs should be considered field uniforms and should have the absolute minimum number of patches and badges on them. 

I wore BDU's to work every day (with exception of special occasions) for ten years while active duty Air Force. Not once out of those ten years did I ever go to the field. I was maintenance.

The idea that BDU's are only used as a field uniform by the military is inaccurate. Quite possibly, it's simply another uniform myth. The original designs of the BDU were designated as a Battle Dress Utility. It's a utility uniform. Don't pigeonhole it.

[RiverAux]

The idea that BDU's are only used as a field uniform by the military is inaccurate.

Did I SAY that they are only used as a field uniform by the military? 

No, I said they SHOULD be considered only field uniforms. 

[Hawk200]

The idea that BDU's are only used as a field uniform by the military is inaccurate.

Did I SAY that they are only used as a field uniform by the military? 

No you didn't. But there are people that believe that they only used in that manner. Thanks to Hollywood, a major portion of Americans believe that military personnel wear service dress all the time.

No, I said they SHOULD be considered only field uniforms. 

Out of curiousity, why? I'm not being challenging here, I'm legitimately curious. It's a practical, comfortable uniform. Why restrict it to only the field?

[MIKE]

2-1. c. The battle dress uniform (camouflage fatigue uniform) is worn when it is impractical or
inappropriate to wear the service uniforms.

[Hawk200]

2-1. c. The battle dress uniform (camouflage fatigue uniform) is worn when it is impractical or inappropriate to wear the service uniforms.

Ok, so when is it considered "impractical or inappropriate to wear the service uniforms" ? And since this is taken from a pub, I'd like an answer from a pub.

[RiverAux]

Thanks Mike. 

The main reason I don't like all the badges and do-hickies on the BDU is the fact that we're putting full-color badges on a camoflage uniform.  Granted, we're already putting the bright blue name tapes on it and we have no real need to be camoflaged, but it just looks stupid. 

The military services don't have that problem and can get away with putting more stuff on theirs without making it look idiotic. 

[Hawk200]

Thanks Mike. 

The main reason I don't like all the badges and do-hickies on the BDU is the fact that we're putting full-color badges on a camoflage uniform.  Granted, we're already putting the bright blue name tapes on it and we have no real need to be camoflaged, but it just looks stupid. 

The military services don't have that problem and can get away with putting more stuff on theirs without making it look idiotic. 

Is that pretty much the reason why you prefer to see it only in the field? If it is, I can fully understand that reasoning. And you're right, the military can add subbdued items, and it doesn't stand out in the same glaring manner as ours.

I pretty much wear BDU's for the comfort factor. Went to a tech school in '05, and had to wear blues almost everyday for about four months. I hated it. I have a lot of respect for the offices that only wear blues. That takes a lot of tolerance.

[RiverAux]

No argument from me on the comfort factor.  They are my preferred uniform.  However, even if they are to be worn around the office or in "non-field" circumstances, they should still be outfitted for the field.  In other words, no need to display your entire CAP/military history on them. 

[Hawk200]

The main reason I don't like all the badges and do-hickies on the BDU is the fact that we're putting full-color badges on a camoflage uniform.  Granted, we're already putting the bright blue name tapes on it and we have no real need to be camoflaged, but it just looks stupid. 

The military services don't have that problem and can get away with putting more stuff on theirs without making it look idiotic. 

Just had an intriguing thought based on this. Instead of bright colors, maybe we should consider "semi-subdued".

That would mean instead of bright red, white, royal blue, bright yellow; we start using medium red or maroon, grays instead of white, navy blue instead of royal, darker yellows or tan instead of bright yellow.

The colors should not be utilized to produce subdued patches like the Army or Air Force, but just to tone them down a bit. We have to wear orange vests for field work, so patches that aren't as "loud" is a moot point. If you can't see someone for the vest, a patch isn't gonna make one bit of difference.

[RiverAux]

DNall came up with some very nice looking nametape options along this line over on CAPportal before it went kaput.  The ones I liked best were a dark blue background (matching the CAP blue BDUS) with white letters.  Obviously distinctive from the AF and looked good on either BDU or BBDUs.

[Hawk200]

No argument from me on the comfort factor.  They are my preferred uniform.  However, even if they are to be worn around the office or in "non-field" circumstances, they should still be outfitted for the field.  In other words, no need to display your entire CAP/military history on them. 

I understand now. The Air Force used to wear a bunch of patches, but from what I've read lately, they are being discussed for deletion. Some will tell you that "Yes, patches are going away!", others will say "Oh no, patches are here to stay!".

Active duty I was the one that took six months to get all the local unit patches put on my BDU's. Two reasons, one didn't like them, two I did all the sewing on my uniforms.

But I think you have swayed my thinking as far as "no need to display your entire CAP/military history on them". I tend to wear the minimum anyway, with an Air Force badge (subdued) on it. Simple, not busy.

[Hawk200]

DNall came up with some very nice looking nametape options along this line over on CAPportal before it went kaput.  The ones I liked best were a dark blue background (matching the CAP blue BDUS) with white letters.  Obviously distinctive from the AF and looked good on either BDU or BBDUs.

I'll second that. With the addition that dark blue nametapes would most likely look pretty good on the ABU. May have to sew up another "concept" uniform consisting of an ABU with navy accoutrements. (not that I would get to wear it anytime soon. )

[DNall]

If I could just pop in here, I got a lot going on so I can't stay long, but... Yes I think all badges worn on the blues should be worn (embroidered) in exactly the same place on BDUs just for consistency if nothing else. Some of it is about recognizing the hard working people in CAP that focus their time on things other than ES, but mostly it's about a toned down professional appearance.

Hence a secondary part of the effort over on the portal was to redesign some of the badges in this transition to be more consistent with the AF but still distinctive. The gist of that was AF style wreath on operational jobs (ES fields, CP & AE), & AF sized shield w/o wreath (like med badges) for non-op jobs; the centers were full-color enamel. Some of those designs were pretty swett. I can put them back up if you like, but that's not the point.

I think the nametape thread was actually over here, pretty sure actually. I'd personally prefer white on OD everything for BDUs (on dark blue for BBDU), and take off ALL patches. A medium sort of gray or silver on OD/Dark blue was mentioned by someone in that thread & I have to admit that seems to look real nice also.

Then put on spec badges under the same rules as blues. tighten those rules up so you can't wear tons of crap - one wings & one ops spec badge over pocket, one non-op badge on tape-side, CC badge over/under name-side... meaning no choice to wear Observer, GT, AND IC. If observer is active on your card you have to wear it & pick one of GT/IC, if no current flt rating then you can wear two ops badges up, NONE down that's just for non-op techs. If no two mission badges then you can move up w/ the non-op badges, but only one can be worn at any time. CC badge is the ONLY thing that goes on the name side. That's on the fly & would need some de-bugging, but you get what I'm going for right? It gets what is really needed on the uniform & then encourages a streamlined professional appearance. I know this exceeds the AF rules on the subject, but they don't tend to earn 12 badges in their career then sit at home with them laid out trying to figure out which accessory to wear today. CAP doesn't have the corrective culture to keep that in the lines, so you have to write it down.

Oh also, we spent some time in a related thread talking about reworking the specialty ratings to a FOUR track system, with apprentice underneath that's about like the current tech rating & gets NO badge. Then add content over what's currently master & average teh other three together. That concept also included specialty track managers at Wing to track & oversee trainining in thier specialty.

I could go for semi-subdued on the patches, in addition to cutting many of them off in favor of smaller more professional (less boy scout jamboree looking) embroidered badges, and just outright cutting most everything beyond that. All this is a blancing act, but I think we're all looking for much the same thing, even if the details are still up for grabs to a degree.

[floridacyclist]

What gets me is the big contrast between the Safety patch, CISM patch, and the Communications patch, which all look professional and actually look good on the BDUs...

We're watching you

If you need to talk.....just let us know

But in the meantime, we're watching you

PS My wife said that if I try to make her wear one of those patches with the big eye on it (we're both CISM-trained), she'll give me a critical incident....with a baseball bat.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Is that an eye?  Or an 8-ball?

[floridacyclist]

I'm quite sure that is an eye. You can see the eyelid and the brow is about where the dove's wing would be.

I doubt I would ever wear that patch anyway; even if I were called out on a CISD (especially if it was non-CAP), I would wear the polo shirt to avoid any effects that grade insignia and other blingage might have.

Besides, I think the patch is spooky and would require me to remove my comm badge, which I feel was much harder earned.

Just remember.....we're watching you

[DNall]

I'm gonna need some CISM counselling after that. Sounds like your wife might as well - honey, put down teh bat & lets talk okay. Okay okay I'm backing away from teh sewing machine...