CAP 'U.S' Command Patches

[O-Rex]

Here's an interesting one from the YGBSM Department: We have been through four CAP Command patches for flight/utility uniforms in the past 6 (?) years: Round seal patch that we had for years, the 'Aux-on' patch, the 'Aux-off with U.S' patch with a wear-out date of March (?) in favor of the latest 'Aux-off without U.S.'

As the voice of discontent, I semi-jokingly told someone I was going to zap the darned white U.S. with a blue sharpie.

I actually found a med blue sharpie and did it.  I would've loved to post a pic, but I think we have found that more often than not, the lighting doesn't do the subject justice. 

The blue was not an exact match, so I only traced over the US, and you know, it doesn't look that bad; don't think anyone standing outside your 'personal space' will notice.  You have to hold it at different angles while you do it, since the lettering is a bit raised.

Granted, I already have the new patches (an FYI for the benefit of those thinking "Dude, just buy the blasted things & be done with it..") but between CAP Command and Florida Wing patches, I have more freakin' obsolete 'collector' patches than I know what to do with.

I love CAPTalkers because they are bold risk-takers    Anyway, anyone out there also willing to give it a go, try this and chime in?

This is just for fun, REMEMBER that neither O-Rex nor CAPTalk officially sanctions the unauthorized modification and/or defacement of CAP insignia   :angel:

[IceNine]

I've seen similar things done in the past

We had a member a few years ago that got promoted to 1Lt and used silver fingernail polish and changed the butterbars.

He wore it like that for well over a year before anyone noticed.

The only issue I could see is spacing doesn't "deleting" the text make the whole thing look skewed to one side?

[davidsinn]

I've seen similar things done in the past

We had a member a few years ago that got promoted to 1Lt and used silver fingernail polish and changed the butterbars.

He wore it like that for well over a year before anyone noticed.

The only issue I could see is spacing doesn't "deleting" the text make the whole thing look skewed to one side?

It's the command patch with the US in the field of the patch.

[Eclipse]

...it doesn't look that bad; don't think anyone standing outside your 'personal space' will notice.  You have to hold it at different angles while you do it, since the lettering is a bit raised...

Yes, it does, and yes, they will.  Photoshop doesn't work in the wet world.
Please don't try this at home folks.

Just buy the right patch...

[heliodoc]

After that little goat___

NHQ CAP ougght to have taken the loss and supplied the entire nation with new patches

[O-Rex]

After that little goat___

NHQ CAP ougght to have taken the loss and supplied the entire nation with new patches

FYI: if NHQ or Wing wants to change a patch that is currently stocked by VG, they are required to buy out existing stocks, which is why you want a long lead time to make the new patch mandatory.

[lordmonar]

Heck...that is the same solution NHQ has to all the "US" command patches on the aircraft and vans.  The sent out a roll of blue tape to each wing.

Back in the day on active duty (It was a Tuesday) we used to fill in the stars of our SrA stripes with a sharpie instead of going out and buying new Sgt Stripes.

[ZigZag911]

I've seen similar things done in the past

We had a member a few years ago that got promoted to 1Lt and used silver fingernail polish and changed the butterbars.

He wore it like that for well over a year before anyone noticed.

The only issue I could see is spacing doesn't "deleting" the text make the whole thing look skewed to one side?

When I became a lt col I forgot to get a new rank device for my blazer nametag....an occasion arose when I needed to wear the blazer combo unexpectedly, so I took some silver spray paint and "promoted" my major's leaf!

Passed muster fine (I think it was a talk to a civic group)

I have since invested in the proper insignia.

[heliodoc]

Desperate times call for desperate measures, eh, ZigZag??

[O-Rex]

Desperate times call for desperate measures, eh, ZigZag??

Getting the new patches was no big deal, except for the one on the A-2 jacket, the original of which was sewn to a leather backing-that one got a bit pricey...

[Major Carrales]

Anyone see my photo of "Faux nametapes?"

[img alt=]http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=49[/img]

For emergency and instructional use only.

[Mustang]

You couldn't Photoshop a t-shirt on at the same time??

[LTC Don]

Uh, whut is dis command patch thing you speak of? 

After re-joining back in '06, I started hearing about this 'command patch', then I finally got to see it.  I have to admit, it is pretty sharp looking, but I found myself scratching my head a bit at the notion of it being called a 'command patch', when in reality, it's just an organizational patch that replaced the original organizational patch, the corporate seal worn on flight suits.

Air Force pilots all belong to, well, the Air Force, but they don't wear the Dept. of the Air Force seal on their suits, they wear the overhead command they are attached to over the right breast, such as Air Combat Command, or Air Mobility Command.  Now, I don't know the procedures now, but they 'used' to wear their 'Wing' patch on one shoulder, then their lowest echelon, their assigned unit/squadron on the opposite shoulder. Moving that over to our side, it is a geographic command structure such as Middle East Region (right breast), North Carolina Wing (left shoulder), Raleigh-Wake Composite Squadron (right shoulder).  I know we don't do that process and never have but perhaps we should have.  I could really see taking the current faux command patch and putting each region in the scroll, that would be more organizationally sound when compared to what the Air Force does.

So, I'm a bit confused how this 'command patch' thing got started when it really isn't a 'command patch' but just a corporate seal replacement.  Or was all this drama hashed out ad nauseum when if was first discussed/implemented.......

Cheers,

[heliodoc]

Yep Sir,

More of CAP's ideas of what command patches are...the whole thing is silly and the fretting over it is more silly

Maybe its more of CAP's "culture of awareness" of itself.  THERE is a difference between command patches and corporate seals.  Did not SLS, CLC, UCC courses teach anybody anything??

CAP  .....  Confusion Amongst People

[Eclipse]

This is worn on the flight suit and jumpsuit, as well as being the badge for vehicles and aircraft.
It is the only version currently approved, all others have been sundowned.

It was brought into play at a time when there was serious discussion about CAP becoming a MAJCOM
in and of itself.

[heliodoc]

A 501c(3) organization becoming a MAJCOM in the DoD?? >:

I must not have been around...

A 501c(3) a MAJCOM  Where is that urinalysis cup when one needs it

[Nick]

Really, that's something I could get behind.  I know we've hashed through all this plenty of times before, but... The reserve component has AFRC.  The guard component has the NGB (not really a MAJCOM -- it's Air Staff, but close enough).  CAP can be the auxiliary component -- move CAP-USAF up to HAF/A3 so you don't have to make the CAP-USAF/CC a 3 or 4-star general and draw dotted lines connecting to 1 AF and AU for the respective programs.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Whether it's a MAJCOM, a DRU or a standalone agency, the emblem is on the right breast.

CAP isn't a direct reporting agency, but it's a standalone organization that reports within the Air Force hierarchy. I'm sure that other elements of the Holm Center would wear their agency emblem on flight suits (and to draw a parallel to ROTC, OTS, et al., the USAFA emblem is worn on flight suits more than 5,000 feet above Annapolis and West Point). It is wholly appropriate for CAP to wear its organizational emblem where it's authorized.

If we remove the flag, we could mandate a wing or region patch on that side, just like Big Blue. On the other shoulder, which we now leave to member discretion, a squadron or group emblem could be placed.

Now to fix the ambiguity that allows some to wear the emergency services patch in that odd spot below the breast zipper.... surprised Big Blue didn't say "uh-uh, don't crap up our flight suit like you did the BDUs." LOL!

[Nick]

Yeah, I'm not even questioning that.  A shield is a shield ... every organization above group level has one, and I'm hardly concerned with CAP's (in fact, I was glad when they made it and dropped the seal from the flight suit). 

Side response -- Just to be clear, though, ROTC and OTS wears the AETC patch.  USAFA wears theirs because it's a DRU.

I've also thought about the wing patch in lieu of an American flag.  Depending on where you go in the AF, the rules are different -- AETC and (I believe) ACC wears the wing patch, AMC wears the flag... it's MAJCOM guided.  It would be more advantageous for us (not to mention more consistent with the AF-style uniform and BDUs) if we would wear a wing patch on the left sleeve.  I agree 100%.

And yeah, every time I see the ES patch on the pocket I can't help but think Navy.

[Mustang]

CAP isn't a direct reporting agency, but it's a standalone organization that reports within the Air Force hierarchy. I'm sure that other elements of the Holm Center would wear their agency emblem on flight suits (and to draw a parallel to ROTC, OTS, et al., the USAFA emblem is worn on flight suits more than 5,000 feet above Annapolis and West Point). It is wholly appropriate for CAP to wear its organizational emblem where it's authorized.

Um, CAP doesn't report to anyone in the Air Force hierarchy, nor is it an element of the Holm Center, as you imply.  These statements are both true about CAP-USAF, however, though CAP doesn't report to CAP-USAF, either. If we were, we'd wear an Air Education and Training Command patch on the right breast, as the CAP-USAF folks do.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

CAP doesn't report to anyone in the Air Force hierarchy, nor is it an element of the Holm Center, as you imply.  These statements are both true about CAP-USAF, however, though CAP doesn't report to CAP-USAF, either. If we were, we'd wear an Air Education and Training Command patch on the right breast, as the CAP-USAF folks do.

I stand corrected. But inasmuch that we're part of the Air Force family (albeit the redheaded stepchild sometimes), we report within the hierarchy somewhere... 1AF, AU, wherever.

They put us (through CAP-USAF) under the Holm Center because of the cadet program I'm sure. But it's not like CAP-USAF has cadets.

[Spike]

Could members just wear the CAP Command Shield instead of a Wing Patch??  More in line with AF?

[Hawk200]

Could members just wear the CAP Command Shield instead of a Wing Patch??  More in line with AF?

Command Shield is mandatory on flightsuits (right side of chest). Wing patch is an optional patch for the right arm. Two different patches and placements for them.

The Air Force wears command patch on right chest, wing/optional patch on left arm, unit patch on right arm.

[PHall]

Could members just wear the CAP Command Shield instead of a Wing Patch??  More in line with AF?

Command Shield is mandatory on flightsuits (right side of chest). Wing patch is an optional patch for the right arm. Two different patches and placements for them.

The Air Force wears command patch on right chest, wing/optional patch on left arm, unit patch on right arm.

That's the way ACC does it. Other MAJCOM's such as AMC, USAFE and PACAF have different rules.
It's governed by each MAJCOM's Supplement to AFI 36-2903.

[DC]

For what it's worth, AETC does it as Hawk described. While CAP may not technically fall under the AETC umbrella, following their standard makes much more sense than going with AMC or PACAF's, or any other MAJCOM's policy.

[PHall]

For what it's worth, AETC does it as Hawk described. While CAP may not technically fall under the AETC umbrella, following their standard makes much more sense than going with AMC or PACAF's, or any other MAJCOM's policy.

We don't need to follow their policy, we have our own, it's in the 39-1.

[Spike]

^ I was just thinking instead of 52 wing Patches, we ALL could have one patch. 

[LTC Don]

For what it's worth, AETC does it as Hawk described. While CAP may not technically fall under the AETC umbrella, following their standard makes much more sense than going with AMC or PACAF's, or any other MAJCOM's policy.

We don't need to follow their policy, we have our own, it's in the 39-1.

I agree with DC's sentiments.  I think we should be following what AETC does and our 39-1 should parallel that; it just 'makes sense' from a pilot/flightsuit perspective although I understand CAP isn't about 'making sense'.

Respectively speaking, the flightsuit patch order should be Region, Wing, and Unit. I believe that would actually look pretty cool. 

The 52-wing thing does have validity though; that's a lot of patches.  Another perfectly acceptable alternative is to have the region shield on the chest, unit patch and american flag on opposite shoulders and be done with it.  The point being this 'faux' cap command patch becomes a region patch with the region name in the scroll which would make it a proper command patch in the same spirit of what the Air Force does.

Cheers,

[BillB]

When "He whose name we don't mention" was Florida Wing CC, he adopted the National shield with an arc of FLORIDA above it. The idea was that each wing would go to that patch with the wing name above the seal. That would standize the patch and it's placement on the flight suit. But other Wings never followed up on that.

[RiverAux]

Sure we are not an AF MAJCOM, but for all practical purposes we might as well be. We're probably larger than many of them. 

[DC]

When "He whose name we don't mention" was Florida Wing CC, he adopted the National shield with an arc of FLORIDA above it. The idea was that each wing would go to that patch with the wing name above the seal. That would standize the patch and it's placement on the flight suit. But other Wings never followed up on that.

Thank god, I hated that patch. Soooooo glad to be rid of it.

I still think we should keep the current MAJCOM patch on the chest, stick the wing patch on the left shoulder, and have the option of wearing a unit or other optional patch on the right shoulder.

Keeping a generic CAP shield patch on the front makes more sense to me that going to individual region patches. Regions aren't all that important in an operational sense anyway, and if we are interacting with other agencies it would behoove us to have 'CIVIL AIR PATROL' clearly marked.

Wing patch on the left, in line with AF policy, and lets people know where you are from. Same argument with the flag patch as on BDUs, I seriously doubt we are ever going to need to be obviously marked as American, as we don't operate outside of the US on any kind of regular (or irregular) basis. Right shoulder is open if you have a unit patch, or it could be left open for applicable activity patches, like the NESA MAS or something...

And, while we're on the subject of flight suits, we need to move into the 21st century and drop the leather nametapes and plastic insignia, and adopt embroidered cloth for both.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

When "He whose name we don't mention" was Florida Wing CC, he adopted the National shield with an arc of FLORIDA above it. The idea was that each wing would go to that patch with the wing name above the seal. That would standize the patch and it's placement on the flight suit. But other Wings never followed up on that.

Thank goodness they didn't. And the original concept, which was to use the World War II-era disc with the two-letter state postal abbreviation where the "U.S." was back in the day, was misinterpreted by HWSRN and another couple of folks. (I know this because I recently talked to the guy who proposed changing the patch at that time, who said they went off in a different direction.) One patch, with a subtle variation for each of the 52 wings.

Now Florida has a wing patch that says nearly nothing about Florida, unless someone takes the time to explain it to you. And then you're both scratching your heads. (Bring back the friendly gator!)

[PhoenixRisen]

And the original concept, which was to use the World War II-era disc with the two-letter state postal abbreviation where the "U.S." was back in the day, was misinterpreted by HWSRN and another couple of folks. (I know this because I recently talked to the guy who proposed changing the patch at that time, who said they went off in a different direction.) One patch, with a subtle variation for each of the 52 wings.

I definitely wouldn't mind that... especially being in CAWG (never particularly cared for our patch...).

[Major Carrales]

You couldn't Photoshop a t-shirt on at the same time??

The purpose of the picture was to show the faux nametapes, not display a regulation uniform.  You will also note that one sleeve is rolled up and one is down.  I am wearing a BDU top with unseen pajama pants, last time I looked that was not a CAP uniform.  I am wearing the V neck from having worn my blues after the meeting and before bed.  I had a brainstorm to see if something would work.  Since I am not in uniform, it is not an issue.  I snapped a photo.

You know, I was so excited to post up a new learning tool for new cadets I forgot just how hateful many of you can be en re uniforms.   Please, next time, read the "context" of the posting before spouting off.  Y'all really got to work on that!

[O-Rex]

When "He whose name we don't mention" was Florida Wing CC, he adopted the National shield with an arc of FLORIDA above it. The idea was that each wing would go to that patch with the wing name above the seal. That would standize the patch and it's placement on the flight suit. But other Wings never followed up on that.

Thank goodness they didn't. And the original concept, which was to use the World War II-era disc with the two-letter state postal abbreviation where the "U.S." was back in the day, was misinterpreted by HWSRN and another couple of folks. (I know this because I recently talked to the guy who proposed changing the patch at that time, who said they went off in a different direction.) One patch, with a subtle variation for each of the 52 wings.

Now Florida has a wing patch that says nearly nothing about Florida, unless someone takes the time to explain it to you. And then you're both scratching your heads. (Bring back the friendly gator!)

I heard that story from the same source.

I too noted that there was nothing really "Floridian" about then new wing patch, but all-in-all, it's not bad-looking: I can live with it.

[RiverAux]

I did a little research and CAP does have more personnel than at least three AF major commands - Space (43K), Special Ops (16K), PAC AF Comm (39K).  Couldn't find figures for Global Strike Command. 

So, we're at least as big as a Command.  But, of probably more relevance is the fact that both AFROTC and AFJROTC, our friends at the Holms Center, both have huge numbers of folks and they have the same sort of shield-shaped patch that we do. 

So, maybe we shouldn't call it a command patch, but using it as the CAP emblem as we do certainly seems appropriate and in line with what our equivalents are have. 

[LTC Don]

So, maybe we shouldn't call it a command patch, but using it as the CAP emblem as we do certainly seems appropriate and in line with what our equivalents are have.

As much as I like the CAP Emblem for it's simplicity, and not to read into what you are saying, but I could get behind officially replacing the CAP Emblem with the newer and more appropriate looking 'command patch' thingy. 

I think the thing that bugs me the most is that this 'command patch' was designed and implemented with it being plastered on the vans and corporate aircraft, and even being shown on our national website, yet CAPR 900-2 was never amended to include it's design nor usage.  Apparently, it just 'appeared'.  Indeed, CAPR 900-2 hasn't been amended in six years now. http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/u_082503081227.pdf  Am I missing something are is there another document that specifies design/usage criteria for emblems/logos? Are regulations becoming just optional documents?


Cheers,

[Climbnsink]

We have been through four CAP Command patches for flight/utility uniforms in the past 6 (?) years

Golf shirt. 

[RiverAux]

As much as I like the CAP Emblem for it's simplicity, and not to read into what you are saying, but I could get behind officially replacing the CAP Emblem with the newer and more appropriate looking 'command patch' thingy. 

What are you talking about?  While the design has changed slightly several times, the patch pictured earlier in the thread is still the "command patch". 

[MSgt Van]

Back in the day on active duty (It was a Tuesday) we used to fill in the stars of our SrA stripes with a sharpie instead of going out and buying new Sgt Stripes.

And some jerk like me would come along and remove the "faux Sgt" stripes...

[LTC Don]

As much as I like the CAP Emblem for it's simplicity, and not to read into what you are saying, but I could get behind officially replacing the CAP Emblem with the newer and more appropriate looking 'command patch' thingy. 

What are you talking about?  While the design has changed slightly several times, the patch pictured earlier in the thread is still the "command patch".

Sure.  As a replacement for the Corporate Seal on the flightsuit, it is "The Command Patch" since it represents the whole organization, but it is not a MAJCOM patch.  A MAJCOM patch in our vernacular would be a region-level patch. My Major Command is Middle East Region, not Civil Air Patrol.  So I don't how this shield became known as a MAJCOM patch, but somebody got their terminology crossed. 

[RiverAux]

So, your argument is that since CAP is not an AF MAJCOM we should not use that term for this patch but that we SHOULD use the term "command patch" to represent CAP region patches even though no one has ever used the term "major command" in reference to a CAP region and that no such level of organization exists in CAP? 

Two wrongs don't make a right.

[Mustang]

Seems to me that CAP regions are the equivalent of numbered air forces. YMMV.

[LTC Don]

So, your argument is that since CAP is not an AF MAJCOM we should not use that term for this patch but that we SHOULD use the term "command patch" to represent CAP region patches even though no one has ever used the term "major command" in reference to a CAP region and that no such level of organization exists in CAP? 

Two wrongs don't make a right.

CAP's relationship with the Air Force and whether it is or isn't an AF MAJCOM is not at issue here; the CAP definition of a CAP MAJCOM and how it is represented as an emblem on the uniform is.  I believe the nomenclature of calling the shield referenced above a MAJCOM patch is incorrect when studying the CAP command echelon structure.

Hopefully, most CAP members know the CAP command echelon structure: CAP (overhead organization) > Region > Wing > Group (where applicable) > Unit > Flight (where applicable).  I don't believe though that it has ever been thought through very well as to how that structure is (or should be) represented on the uniform (more specifically the flightsuit but also the BDUs).  Region staff used to wear a simple rocker on the left shoulder, don't know if they still do.

CAP's command structure has always been geographically based whereas the Air Force's structure has always been operationally/capability based (with a big dose of politics thrown in at times). 

Air Force Command Structure: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/usaf/index.html

Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_structure_and_hierarchy_of_the_United_States_Air_Force  and: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Air_Force (has a pretty nice structure list about halfway down).

This statement defining an Air Force MAJCOM caught my attention:
"A major subdivision of the Air Force, the Major Command (MAJCOM) is directly subordinate to HQ USAF or the Air Staff. MAJCOM headquarters are management headquarters for a major segment of the AF and thus have the full range of functional staff."

Which could be easily edited to read: "A major subdivision of Civil Air Patrol, the Major Command (MAJCOM) is directly subordinate to National HQ Civil Air Patrol. MAJCOM headquarters are management headquarters for a major segment of CAP and thus have the full range of functional staff." 

In our case then, the CAP MAJCOMs would be the eight Region commands.

Wheather or not any of the above is palatable is fine; it'll be a really hard sell for me to accept the 'command patch' as a 'MAJCOM' patch.


Cheers,

[Hawk200]

Wheather or not any of the above is palatable is fine; it'll be a really hard sell for me to accept the 'command patch' as a 'MAJCOM' patch.

I'd have to agree. We call it the "Command Patch" not the "MAJCOM" patch. It may look like one, but the organizational set up of CAP doesn't include "MAJor COMmand"'s.

We have our own distinctive organization, let's not confuse our own people with inappropriate and inaccurate terminologies. As the people on the outside, it looks like we're wannabes.

Personally, I don't even care for it. I liked the seal. It was distinctive, and a lot easier to cut the Velcro to shape.

[RiverAux]

Don, you seem to be the one trying to introduce AF terminology into the CAP regs.

the CAP definition of a CAP MAJCOM and how it is represented as an emblem on the uniform is.

There is no such thing as a CAP MAJCOM. 

[Mustang]

CAP's command structure has always been geographically based whereas the Air Force's structure has always been operationally/capability based (with a big dose of politics thrown in at times). 

Always?  What about the Air National Guard?

[Nick]

Always?  What about the Air National Guard?

Yep, always.  Air National Guard units are organized geographically at the state level as part of their state's defense force.  But, mobilize them to the Federal level and they become gained by their functional MAJCOM (typically ACC or AMC, with a few AETC units mixed in).

[Hawk200]

Yep, always.  Air National Guard units are organized geographically at the state level as part of their state's defense force.  But, mobilize them to the Federal level and they become gained by their functional MAJCOM (typically ACC or AMC, with a few AETC units mixed in).

Pretty much the same with the Army Guard as well. I believe that the Air Guard wears their organizational insignia (MAJCOM, Wing and unit patches) at all times. Someone more in the know could probably answer that.

When I mobilized, I had to change my patch, and then change back when I returned. It's a bit annoying, especially when there's confusion as to when exactly you can wear your home patch.

On another note, the link to awards and decs is a slick idea, Mclarty. Mind if I borrow that idea? Don't have a link to anything yet, but wanted to show the courtesy of asking.

[Nick]

Pretty much the same with the Army Guard as well. I believe that the Air Guard wears their organizational insignia (MAJCOM, Wing and unit patches) at all times. Someone more in the know could probably answer that.

That's affirm.  There were murmurs that the guard was going to start wearing the ANG patch when the reserve started wearing the AFRC patch, but as of yet that hasn't happened -- it becomes much less significant as the ABUs are phased in except for the flyers.

On another note, the link to awards and decs is a slick idea, Mclarty. Mind if I borrow that idea? Don't have a link to anything yet, but wanted to show the courtesy of asking.

More than welcome to.  I try to keep my sig line relatively unobtrusive, so I figured the bling wasn't really significant unless someone REALLY wanted to see it.

[ol'fido]

How about we just call it the "CAP shield patch" and then just call it a day.

[Hawk200]

How about we just call it the "CAP shield patch" and then just call it a day.

How about we call the "CAP command patch" like it says in CAPM 39-1? After all, that is the official uniform manual for our organization.

Be a lot easier than making up several different terms, and then having the confusion caused by different people from different areas.

How many people know the story of the tower of Babel? Or of the saying that Americans and English are a people separated by a common language?

Why do we have people so stuck on having to have their own terms for things instead of just using what's out there?

[Eclipse]

Which term is made up?

NHQ referred to it as a MAJCOM patch from day one.

[Hawk200]

Which term is made up?

NHQ referred to it as a MAJCOM patch from day one.

The term didn't make it into the manual. Page 126 of 39-1 says "CAP Command Patch". Nothing else is appropriate.

It may look like a MAJCOM patch, but it's not one, no matter how much some wannabe wants it to be.

Still amazes me how many folks here want to say "We're not the Air Force!"; but want to copy the Air Force, it's terminology, and want the "cred" associated with it. That's not "wannabeism", it's hypocrisy.

Stick to terminology that's in the pubs. If someone at NHQ called it a "MAJCOM patch", then it sounds like there's a wannabee at NHQ.

Arguing to use a clearly inaccurate and inappropriate term doesn't serve any purpose.

[Nick]

Which term is made up?

NHQ referred to it as a MAJCOM patch from day one.

The term didn't make it into the manual. Page 126 of 39-1 says "CAP Command Patch". Nothing else is appropriate.

It may look like a MAJCOM patch, but it's not one, no matter how much some wannabe wants it to be.

Still amazes me how many folks here want to say "We're not the Air Force!"; but want to copy the Air Force, it's terminology, and want the "cred" associated with it. That's not "wannabeism", it's hypocrisy.

Stick to terminology that's in the pubs. If someone at NHQ called it a "MAJCOM patch", then it sounds like there's a wannabee at NHQ.

Arguing to use a clearly inaccurate and inappropriate term doesn't serve any purpose.

Guys.  Seriously.  The Air Force doesn't even call it a MAJCOM patch.  It's a shield.  It's used at every level in the chain from group level up.  Go read here: http://www.afhra.af.mil/documents/hgc3/index.asp

[Hawk200]

Guys.  Seriously.  The Air Force doesn't even call it a MAJCOM patch.  It's a shield.

They did when I was active, but that's been a decade. However, Air Force heraldry isn't really the issue. Some people in CAP are calling it a "MAJCOM patch", and the term is inaccurate, inappropriate, and doesn't match pub.

We have too much of "but everybody knows that!" (when not everyone does) to justify using terms that we don't have published or defined in CAP publications. Allowing it to continue to when it's obviously wrong is a problem.

I remember one time when I referred to a CAP tape as a "branch tape". I had a comment (or maybe three) that "That's not in my 39-1!". So it seems like there's a lot of E.B.M. (Everyone But Me) here when it comes to using standard terminology. If it's not a big deal, why are people getting called on using non standard terminology?

You can never go wrong by using terminology that is defined and published in CAP regulation, manual, pamphlet, etc. If a pub contradicts another, then there's a continuity issue that needs to be dealt with. If it's a case of supplemental terminolgy, no real issue as long as the people you're dealing with know of the additional pub.

The simple answer is: go by official CAP publications. Saves time.

[Nick]

The simple answer is: go by official CAP publications. Saves time.

Okay then.  It's the CAP Command Patch.  Hopefully this concludes our broadcast day.

[heliodoc]

Capt McLarty

You know this is CAPTalk....this will NEVER conclude its broadcast day

Until its PROVEN.......CAP is NOT a MAJCOM its a 501 (c) 3 with everyones interpretations of command patch, command shield

Let's REALLY get the AF version on MAJCOM and REALLY see if CAP is a "MAJCOM"

[Nick]

Until its PROVEN.......CAP is NOT a MAJCOM its a 501 (c) 3 with everyones interpretations of command patch, command shield

Let's REALLY get the AF version on MAJCOM and REALLY see if CAP is a "MAJCOM"

And people wonder why in 3 years I've made 187 posts.

[Hawk200]

That's exactly what he wants, Mac.