Flying in shorts with golf shirt

[RiverAux]

Hmm, how many planes have crashed or had accidents because of heat stress on the pilot and crew?  I won't argue that it doesn't get hot, but if people are going to start throwing out ORM, lets see some facts and statistics just like what is usually demanded of those favoring NOMEX all the time. 

[Al Sayre]

I don't know if you are going to find a lot of crash data, but I can bet that you can find a lot of pilots who will admit to feeling wiped out after a 3-4 hour sortie at 1000' in 100 deg plus heat.  We should have all seen or heard the info about fatigue being equal to drinking and driving, and heat will definitely contribute to fatigue.  ORM tells us to mitigate the hazards with the greatest probability.  This is one that we can help mitigate.  We can also (possibly) plan for shorter sorties 2 hrs. vs 4 hrs. etc.

[Spaceman3750]

Heat exhaustion might be the high risk in an aircraft, but heat stroke is often the high risk for a ground team and that guarantees you a trip to the hospital and an accident report. We GTs are pretty wiped out after a 4 hour sortie in 100F heat too.

That said, I wouldn't go into any sort of brush in shorts and a T shirt for anything - I want the protection long sleeves/pants provides and will trade off being darn hot for avoiding tearing my extremities up and sunburn.

[RADIOMAN015]

Golf shirts with shorts -- wow, that would really push the envelope with the military wanna bees in their green flight suits (a few in our units even bought the new green boots) flying around in those little, red, white, & blue planes, performing Missions for America!

Remember you really didn't join CAP to be comfortable did you

I'm not sure as the PAO I would take pictures of SM's in golf shirts with shorts, BUT historically the USAF even had a shorts for a uniform (although the socks kind of negated the meaning of shorts), SO the golf shirt with shorts would be fine for me.

RM

[HGjunkie]

Golf shirts with shorts -- wow, that would really push the envelope with the military wanna bees in their green flight suits (a few in our units even bought the new green boots) flying around in those little, red, white, & blue planes, performing Missions for America!

They're not wannabes.

[JC004]

...
I'm not sure as the PAO I would take pictures of SM's in golf shirts with shorts, BUT historically the USAF even had a shorts for a uniform (although the socks kind of negated the meaning of shorts), SO the golf shirt with shorts would be fine for me.

RM

But you will notice that they DON'T have such a uniform.

Of course the military hasn't been operating in any hot environments in recent years, so I guess it wouldn't even be necessary.

[dbaran]

Let's see...

If I fly at NESA as a MP/MS/MO, I can wear a T-shirt and shorts ("official NESA flying uniform")
If I fly at a SAREX in CA, I have to wear a NOMEX flight suit.
If I fly a certain CD mission in CA, I can't wear anything with a CAP logo, which ... um...includes the NOMEX flight suit with the CAP logo sewn onto it.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Let's see...

If I fly at NESA as a MP/MS/MO, I can wear a T-shirt and shorts ("official NESA flying uniform")
If I fly at a SAREX in CA, I have to wear a NOMEX flight suit.
If I fly a certain CD mission in CA, I can't wear anything with a CAP logo, which ... um...includes the NOMEX flight suit with the CAP logo sewn onto it.

Because the CAPs plastered all over the plane aren't enough? Lol.

[PHall]

Let's see...

If I fly at NESA as a MP/MS/MO, I can wear a T-shirt and shorts ("official NESA flying uniform")
If I fly at a SAREX in CA, I have to wear a NOMEX flight suit.
If I fly a certain CD mission in CA, I can't wear anything with a CAP logo, which ... um...includes the NOMEX flight suit with the CAP logo sewn onto it.

Because the CAPs plastered all over the plane aren't enough? Lol.

No, it's because the "customer" has requested that we not wear any CAP insignia, that's why.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I get that. I'm saying that the labels on the aircraft are...more noticeable.

[HGjunkie]

I get that. I'm saying that the labels on the aircraft are...more noticeable.

Nahhhhhhhhhhhhhh... 

[PHall]

I get that. I'm saying that the labels on the aircraft are...more noticeable.

That has been pointed out, but, they still don't want us in uniform while flying for them.
And since they're paying us to fly, we do as they ask. It is a reasonable request.

[SARDOC]

Let's see...

If I fly at NESA as a MP/MS/MO, I can wear a T-shirt and shorts ("official NESA flying uniform")
If I fly at a SAREX in CA, I have to wear a NOMEX flight suit.
If I fly a certain CD mission in CA, I can't wear anything with a CAP logo, which ... um...includes the NOMEX flight suit with the CAP logo sewn onto it.

Because the CAPs plastered all over the plane aren't enough? Lol.

I've heard my wing utilizes rental aircraft for the CD missions to avoid that very issue.  I don't know for a fact because I've never done it.

[Eclipse]

I get that. I'm saying that the labels on the aircraft are...more noticeable.

That has been pointed out, but, they still don't want us in uniform while flying for them.
And since they're paying us to fly, we do as they ask. It is a reasonable request.

And just because the aircraft is easily identifiable doesn't mean the aircrew needs to be.
I agree, reasonable.

[bosshawk]

Having spent 15 years flying CD missions in CA, I can assure you that the markings on the aircraft have only a minor role in whether or not our customer wants or doesn't want CAP out in public.  The real issue has to do with our access to facilities(buildings) where the customer is not known by their real association.  Therefore, they ask us to wear civilian clothes and not identify ourselves to anyone outside the building.  Of course, on occasions we use vans with the CAP markings, but that is only incidental.  Wearing flight suits is a dead give away to our affiliation.  Doesn't always seem to make sense, but that is the way it is.

Having worked for an organization that excelled in covert operations, I just about had a fit when I first started flying for CAP.  I finally just shrugged my shoulders and moved on.

[Майор Хаткевич]

That's what I don't get. If someone at the airport is monitoring who comes and goes, it doesn't really matter if you get out of the car naked/as a clown/in a business suit. Once you get into a CAP airplane, it becomes quite obvious who you are.

The rental aircraft make sense, but then defeats the purpose of using our craft at a more economical rate I suppose.

I don't want this to become a discussion of what our CD people do and don't, but I guess I'm just not seeing where CAP anything on an outfit matters when most (all by now?) CAP Corp craft are covered in decals like a Christmas tree.

[FW]

When it comes to what a "customer" wants; it's their dime and, we allow it.   Uniforms are optional in some cases while flying.  As long as you have permission from the proper authority and, have a current membership card with you, wear whatever you want....(see what can happen when you start making exceptions)

[RVT]

When it comes to what a "customer" wants; it's their dime and, we allow it.   Uniforms are optional in some cases while flying.  As long as you have permission from the proper authority and, have a current membership card with you, wear whatever you want....(see what can happen when you start making exceptions)

It could always be something as simple as changing your clothes is a lot easier than changing the way the airplane is painted.  Or did anybody think of that?

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

I get that. I'm saying that the labels on the aircraft are...more noticeable.

That has been pointed out, but, they still don't want us in uniform while flying for them.
And since they're paying us to fly, we do as they ask. It is a reasonable request.

Not sure that "they" are actually paying us for this mission...

[bosshawk]

I guess that I have to repeat what I previously stated: it has nothing to do with the airplane and its markings.  The issue that I was addressing was CAP's use of buildings, owned by the customer, that are not known to be owned by that customer. Those buildings are not on the airport and are some distance from the airports.  Some of your are correct, we could change into flight suits or blue/gray or Speedos at the airport and it wouldn't make any difference.  However, one of CAWG's missions is along the Mexican border and comfortable clothes are a BIG DEAL  The crews appreciate getting the chance to wear something other than a uniform, when they fly 3 to 3.5 hrs at 1000 AGL in that torrid weather.

By the way, whether or not the customer is paying for the flight has nothing to do with this discussion.  In fact, in most cases, they don't pay: the money comes out of the appropriated funds from Congress.

If someone wants to sit at the airport and write down tail numbers and record that they were CAP airplanes, so be it.  Only the uniform Nazis care.