https://www.reddit.com/r/AirForce/comments/94kfdw/any_way_to_clean_grease_off_of_boots_the_uniform/
(https://s8.postimg.cc/pdjrarad1/boots.jpg)
Of course in a CAP context it will be Venti Mochas and chili sauce, but
that's no easier to clean.
Those commenting are indicating the "fix" is two sets of boots, which obviously isn't
reasonable for growing cadet feet, or even for adult members who have to buy
their own uniforms, especially when the only reason to have suede is aesthetics and affectation,
since they serve no mission-based purpose for CAP.
Soap and water will take that out. Will need some elbow grease, time and patience. Now if said airman is workig in a field where he/she is expected to encounter such things (grease, staining fluids etc) they should be issued the green leather boots.
Airman, but are we talking about an Air Force Airman in this thread, or Cadet Airman?
That photo is precisely one of the reasons why we rail against those boots being used in CAP.
Because that kind of grease is totally relevant to the CAP environment.
If you don't want to fall into the way of doing things that your parent service uses, I question if you shouldn't leave the AIR FORCE AUXILIARY and find something more in line with what you actually want to do.
People holding on to those stupid black boots are contributing to CAP not being taken seriously by the AF. Not at the top of the list but definitely on that list.
Ok! Lets advocate use of all the parent service does. When are you going to give me the 9 mm? And when are we going to get fighters? After all, the parent service uses them.
It is as silly to argue "we will should not use black boots because the parent service does not use them" as it is silly to say "we will use weapons since the parent service uses them."
Well, the sage boots are going away anyways, and I doubt they'll be in high enough volume to ever get selected for any kind of uniform after that point.
If we did swap, I don't see that kind of use (and that can actually be cleaned out anyways if you know what you're doing... and we'd likely teach that instead of boot shining) causing much of an issue with CAP. We've already got distinctive tapes etc.
If we went to coyote with the AF, that wouldn't be too bad honestly.
I think though that there is a perception of being able to change between the corporate uniforms and usaf style uniforms that may be a hurdle to changing that... whether that's actually an issue is something we'd have to research. How many members have both corporate FDU/Utilities AND USAF style FDU/Utilities and how often do they swap between the two? That's really the only demographic that would need to have both types since I doubt we'd go to coyote for the corporate.
We'll have to see what happens when we make the next uniform change. Its gotta come faster than the last one because of issues stated in another thread that's now defunct. Maybe I'll open another discussion on that because I do have some access to stuff like that to compare.
Quote from: Jester on August 04, 2018, 06:46:52 PM
Because that kind of grease is totally relevant to the CAP environment.
If you don't want to fall into the way of doing things that your parent service uses, I question if you shouldn't leave the AIR FORCE AUXILIARY and find something more in line with what you actually want to do.
People holding on to those stupid black boots are contributing to CAP not being taken seriously by the AF. Not at the top of the list but definitely on that list.
Actually the Air Force likes having us in black boots because it fulfills one of the requirements in AFI 10-2701 in that it makes us distinguishable in low light conditions from Air Force personnel.
Cost and nationwide availability of black vs green boots is a factor too.
Quote from: Jester on August 04, 2018, 06:46:52 PMPeople holding on to those stupid black boots are contributing to CAP not being taken seriously by the AF. Not at the top of the list but definitely on that list.
I will buy you a steak if you can prove this is on the list of reasons the USAF "doesn't take CAP seriously"
(which isn't actually a thing).
Pro tip: It's not - no one cares, especially the USAF.
Now, a 60-lbs over senior member in ABUs and black boots, yes, that's a thing.
But it's
not because of the boots.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 04, 2018, 07:14:38 PM
Quote from: Jester on August 04, 2018, 06:46:52 PMPeople holding on to those stupid black boots are contributing to CAP not being taken seriously by the AF. Not at the top of the list but definitely on that list.
I will buy you a steak if you can prove this is on the list of reasons the USAF "doesn't take CAP seriously"
(which isn't actually a thing).
Pro tip: It's not - no one cares, especially the USAF.
Now, a 60-lbs over senior member in ABUs and black boots, yes, that's a thing.
But it's not because of the boots.
I've gotten some looks on base like "who the heck are these guys?" but they usually quickly subside. I don't think the color of the boots is really an issue. I've got some really comfy boots in both colors so it's no skin off my nose to wear either one. That's not everyone though.
Quote from: PHall on August 04, 2018, 07:08:25 PM
Actually the Air Force likes having us in black boots because it fulfills one of the requirements in AFI 10-2701 in that it makes us distinguishable in low light conditions from Air Force personnel.
^^^ Dittos. At our Squadron's Eval last summer, the AF person in charge was introducing himself and his crew. He made a point during his presentation, that at any time during the day, one of our members had a question, .. "just look for someone in the green boots, thats us".
So yes, the AF does like to have the distinction. Its a very practical thing, so they know who the civilian volunteers are.
Quote from: etodd on August 04, 2018, 09:04:30 PM
Quote from: PHall on August 04, 2018, 07:08:25 PM
Actually the Air Force likes having us in black boots because it fulfills one of the requirements in AFI 10-2701 in that it makes us distinguishable in low light conditions from Air Force personnel.
^^^ Dittos. At our Squadron's Eval last summer, the AF person in charge was introducing himself and his crew. He made a point during his presentation, that at any time during the day, one of our members had a question, .. "just look for someone in the green boots, thats us".
So yes, the AF does like to have the distinction. Its a very practical thing, so they know who the civilian volunteers are.
But, to be accurate, when "...the AF person in charge..." uses a reference to a a uniform identifier, that is not sufficient proof that "...the AF does like the distinction." (Unless "...the AF guy in charge..." happened to be the USAF COS).
(Over the last 50 years I've heard hundreds of instances where the personal utterances of USAF people, ranging from E-1 to O-8, were transmogrified by CAP people into becoming USAF sacred writ. It doesn't work that way).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on August 04, 2018, 10:16:27 PM
(Over the last 50 years I've heard hundreds of instances where the personal utterances of USAF people, ranging from E-1 to O-8, were transmogrified by CAP people into becoming USAF sacred writ. It doesn't work that way).
+1
Out of all the comment Eclipse's comment about obese SM is the one makes the most sense.
Over weight SM make us look bad; however, obese Service members too get the stink eye. You seen the look other service member give to those in uniform which clearly are overweight. The less we do it the less we get pick to be harrassed.
I wear tan boots every day of the week for been in the USMC and when I see an AF and Army sm wearing OCP is no way to distinguish them from far away. If the AF likes to having us in black booths then so bit, we are distinguishable from far and they know we are CAP members as "volunteers" let me said it again as "volunteers".
There are so many thing we can worry about than the stupid black boots post, I think this is the fifth time, since I joined this forum (2008), so please stop the thread about black boots. We are using them that's the bottom line . Suck it up, butter cup.
The only think, I would like to see us changing is the ugly ABUs to BDUs or OCPs with Black boots. That's my only grieve, I know it can be a long, long time before the decision is made to change. So, I will wait patiently.[emoji52]
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Quote from: Eclipse on August 04, 2018, 10:30:55 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on August 04, 2018, 10:16:27 PM
(Over the last 50 years I've heard hundreds of instances where the personal utterances of USAF people, ranging from E-1 to O-8, were transmogrified by CAP people into becoming USAF sacred writ. It doesn't work that way).
+1
Yes, I get it. You two REALLY want those green boots. ;)
Quote from: Jester on August 04, 2018, 06:46:52 PMIf you don't want to fall into the way of doing things that your parent service uses, I question if you shouldn't leave the AIR FORCE AUXILIARY and find something more in line with what you actually want to do.
We really need to stop using the term
parent service when discussing the USAF. First from a nit-picking standpoint, CAP is older than the USAF, which makes us being their child impossible (insert your own joke about the south here if you wish). We are an independent organization born out of the Civil Defense Department, which itself is no longer around (I suppose the Department of Homeland Security is the closest government agency analogous to the old CD).
Second, it implies an affinity from the
entire USAF that simply isn't there. CAP was assigned to the USAF (like the Army Air Corps before it) and I'm not sure the USAF had a choice (I'd like to think they did). The vast majority of the USAF doesn't know who we are and I don't take that personally because there is no reason for them to. Unless you are a controller at the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center, work in CAP-USAF, or are in one of the handful of positions in the 1AF that deals with CAP assisting with UAVs, AD/Reserve/Guard/Civilian airmen have no idea who we are. That hardly makes them a parent (nor does it make them CAP haters... no strawman arguments please).
Throughout the Total Force™ marketing blitz, the Air Force was always extremely clear that CAP is
an auxiliary of the Air Force
when conducting missions requested by the Air Force. I don't think the USAF leadership was was trying to harp on we're an auxiliary only under limited circumstances (I suspect it's more of a legal thing), but it again shows we should not be linking our entire identity to an organization that has a very specific relationship with us.
Instead, we should focus on what makes sense for us as a non-profit corporate that has the honor and privilege of serving as an auxiliary for one of our armed branches of the military. We should be proud of the work that we do for the AFRCC and 1AF and base our decisions on how we can serve our USAF partners best. I don't just mean uniforms, but also training, equipment purchases, technology initiatives, you name it. It's because I like serving the Air Force in areas that they need it that I want us to make smart uniform decisions, not in spite of the Air Force, which means suggesting I move to a different organization is off the mark.
Quote from: Fubar on August 05, 2018, 08:50:00 PM
Quote from: Jester on August 04, 2018, 06:46:52 PMIf you don't want to fall into the way of doing things that your parent service uses, I question if you shouldn't leave the AIR FORCE AUXILIARY and find something more in line with what you actually want to do.
We really need to stop using the term parent service when discussing the USAF. First from a nit-picking standpoint, CAP is older than the USAF, which makes us being their child impossible (insert your own joke about the south here if you wish). We are an independent organization born out of the Civil Defense Department, which itself is no longer around (I suppose the Department of Homeland Security is the closest government agency analogous to the old CD).
Second, it implies an affinity from the entire USAF that simply isn't there. CAP was assigned to the USAF (like the Army Air Corps before it) and I'm not sure the USAF had a choice (I'd like to think they did). The vast majority of the USAF doesn't know who we are and I don't take that personally because there is no reason for them to. Unless you are a controller at the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center, work in CAP-USAF, or are in one of the handful of positions in the 1AF that deals with CAP assisting with UAVs, AD/Reserve/Guard/Civilian airmen have no idea who we are. That hardly makes them a parent (nor does it make them CAP haters... no strawman arguments please).
Throughout the Total Force™ marketing blitz, the Air Force was always extremely clear that CAP is an auxiliary of the Air Force when conducting missions requested by the Air Force. I don't think the USAF leadership was was trying to harp on we're an auxiliary only under limited circumstances (I suspect it's more of a legal thing), but it again shows we should not be linking our entire identity to an organization that has a very specific relationship with us.
Instead, we should focus on what makes sense for us as a non-profit corporate that has the honor and privilege of serving as an auxiliary for one of our armed branches of the military. We should be proud of the work that we do for the AFRCC and 1AF and base our decisions on how we can serve our USAF partners best. I don't just mean uniforms, but also training, equipment purchases, technology initiatives, you name it. It's because I like serving the Air Force in areas that they need it that I want us to make smart uniform decisions, not in spite of the Air Force, which means suggesting I move to a different organization is off the mark.
Fantastic post. Very well said. Thanks. Reminds me of how our Squadron here in the last couple years has spent many more hours on Army projects and FEMA projects, than we have for the Air Force.
The Air Force may equip us and manage us ... but our services are for sale to many other governmental organizations. Its a very good thing. :)
Quote from: Fubar on August 05, 2018, 08:50:00 PM
Quote from: Jester on August 04, 2018, 06:46:52 PMIf you don't want to fall into the way of doing things that your parent service uses, I question if you shouldn't leave the AIR FORCE AUXILIARY and find something more in line with what you actually want to do.
We really need to stop using the term parent service when discussing the USAF. First from a nit-picking standpoint, CAP is older than the USAF, which makes us being their child impossible (insert your own joke about the south here if you wish). We are an independent organization born out of the Civil Defense Department, which itself is no longer around (I suppose the Department of Homeland Security is the closest government agency analogous to the old CD).
Second, it implies an affinity from the entire USAF that simply isn't there. CAP was assigned to the USAF (like the Army Air Corps before it) and I'm not sure the USAF had a choice (I'd like to think they did). The vast majority of the USAF doesn't know who we are and I don't take that personally because there is no reason for them to. Unless you are a controller at the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center, work in CAP-USAF, or are in one of the handful of positions in the 1AF that deals with CAP assisting with UAVs, AD/Reserve/Guard/Civilian airmen have no idea who we are. That hardly makes them a parent (nor does it make them CAP haters... no strawman arguments please).
Throughout the Total Force[emoji769] marketing blitz, the Air Force was always extremely clear that CAP is an auxiliary of the Air Force when conducting missions requested by the Air Force. I don't think the USAF leadership was was trying to harp on we're an auxiliary only under limited circumstances (I suspect it's more of a legal thing), but it again shows we should not be linking our entire identity to an organization that has a very specific relationship with us.
Instead, we should focus on what makes sense for us as a non-profit corporate that has the honor and privilege of serving as an auxiliary for one of our armed branches of the military. We should be proud of the work that we do for the AFRCC and 1AF and base our decisions on how we can serve our USAF partners best. I don't just mean uniforms, but also training, equipment purchases, technology initiatives, you name it. It's because I like serving the Air Force in areas that they need it that I want us to make smart uniform decisions, not in spite of the Air Force, which means suggesting I move to a different organization is off the mark.
[emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji106][emoji106]
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Quote from: Fubar on August 05, 2018, 08:50:00 PM
Instead, we should focus on what makes sense for us as a non-profit corporate that has the honor and privilege of serving as an auxiliary for one of our armed branches of the military. We should be proud of the work that we do for the AFRCC and 1AF and base our decisions on how we can serve our USAF partners best. I don't just mean uniforms, but also training, equipment purchases, technology initiatives, you name it. It's because I like serving the Air Force in areas that they need it that I want us to make smart uniform decisions, not in spite of the Air Force, which means suggesting I move to a different organization is off the mark.
Pay attention to our largest, best customer? Shocking idea.
/sarcasm off/
Great post.