What would you want to do with CAP uniforms?

Started by Hawk200, November 08, 2006, 06:52:08 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

A.Member

#40
Quote from: DNall on November 10, 2006, 04:11:41 AM
A.Member: I sympathize with your positions. I'd like to see most of that as well. However, some are unrealistic. For one, we're not actually named the AF Aux, we are named CAP & tasked to act as auxiliary to the AF. Congress would have to pass something authorizing us to do business as (dba) USAF Aux & whatever varrious forms of that, and that would ONLY happen if AF takes control & we're restored to their chan of command in one form or another, which is distinctly possible.
I understand that we are only sometimes the USAF Aux. but that is another wishlist thread! ;)  We should always be the USAF Aux. and I'd like to see Congress change that.  Of course, I'd like to see Congress change a lot of other things too, like the amount the government takes from each of my paychecks, but I'll just have to add that to the list.  :) 

I'm content with nametapes either way - of my changes, that is one that I'd be the most willing to compromise on.  Although I think one could draw some parallels between the NG and CAP, and the NG always wears a USAF nametape, even when operating in Title 32 status.  Given that, maybe a  USAF AUX nametape isn't so absurd?
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

lordmonar

Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 03:54:15 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:22:01 AM
You can't fly missions with out pilots.
And you can't fly if you can't fit in the airplane.  As a practical matter, you also limit the useful load, especially on a 172, to the point that you may lose a scanner.  That negatively impacts the mission. 

But we also have more missions than just flying.  We have the cadet program - officers have an obligation to lead by example. 
 
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:22:01 AMYou can't run squadrons without people.  The Air Force can say shape up or ship out because they are being paid to be within standards.  You can't do that to a volunteer organization.
Why not?  Have you taken the AFIADL 13 course yet?  What does it say about an officer's responsibilities when it comes to health and fitness?  We are a volunteer organization.  That doesn't mean we don't have standards. 

Pilots don't grow on trees.  Pilots with time and money to devote to a volunteer organization are even rarer.  If you got a great CFI with 1000+ hours willing to be your O-flight pilots....but has hair to his shoulder and a gotee....do you say...sorry but you'll just look silly in uniform....or do you sign him up, slap a blue flight suit on him and get your cadets into the air?

I have not taken the AFIADL 13 course yet...what does it say about health and fitness?

We do have standards.....but do we have standards just for the hell of them or do we have standards for a purpose?  The USAF does not want our larger and hairier Officers to reflect badly on them....so we put them in corporates so everyone is happy.  We get the time, energy, skills, money and fellowship of some very great people, the Air Force now only has to worry about the fat slobs on active duty, guard and reserves.  The only bad side is that we now have to deal with the "multi"form phenomenon.

I know for a fact...that if you required that everyone in CAP to fall into USAF fitness standards that two squadrons here in Las Vegas will fold due to no leadership.

Granted....weight does become an issue while flying....so maybe (just maybe) I would entertain weight limits on air crew, but not on the other 85% (this is just an out of my butt statistic don't flame me) of the membership.

So....here we are....do we stand up hard weight standards so everyone can be USAF and accept that we WILL have squadrons close and run the risk of failing at our three missions....or do we accept the fact that we need to have corporate uniforms (just not 18 different versions  ;D) and keep these good people, man our squadrons and accomplish our mission.

YMMV
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

lordmonar

Quote from: DNall on November 10, 2006, 04:11:41 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:19:02 AM
And this is a prime example why I want to switch to BBDU's...if we slavishly follow the USAF on this we will have to change our uniforms every 15 years or so.   With every service dumping the BDU, they are going to get scarce and/or expensive soon.  Now is the time to transition to a uniform that will be our own and still be professional.
There is not "our own" !!! We're either part of the AF family or we're not. From before Napoleon was born, before Rome was first inhabited, uniforms have always & still very much are intentionally & thoughtfully designed as major psychological symbols of  relationships. Relationships between individuals, branches, orgs, whatever, and are a decent meassure of the strength or weakness of those relationships. If the AF changes to kilts, we'll follow suit a couple years later (and hope they come to tehir senses in the meantime). If your lookng for the other side of the practical coin you're trying to state, within a few years after the ABUs are standard they'll be avail from surplus & for cheap purchase, just like BDUs were when they were standard.

Oh I understand what you mean....I disagree with some of your reasoning and some of your assumptions.

First....we are and will remain a member of the Air Force, whether we wear the USAF uniform or not.  I understand you fear that the "corporate" side of CAP is trying to tear us away from the USAF....I don't really see that, but that is not the point.  Relationships are built on mutual missions.  I have been in the USAF for 20+ years....and we have a large family, that includes AD, NG, AFR, DOD Civilians, Contractors, and other people who do not wear any uniforms.

I would really like to see the AF back off their restrictions for the USAF uniform.  I understand where they are coming from and I do think that being in a USAF uniform would make us more of a family member.

However.....I see the multitude of uniforms at a mission base and I think of the relationship we have with all of our partners.  What do they think of us?  Nine different CAP members at a mission base and they can all be withing standards but each wearing a different uniform....not good IMHO.

So....what can we do?  The USAF will not back off its position so to solve the problem of the multi-forms we eliminate those uniforms that can't be worn by everyone.

That is me....a problem solver.   What are our liabilities if we go this way?

1.  We could loose those people who joint so they can play Air Force.
2.  We could create a mind sit where we are not so closely related to the Air Force.
3.  We could give the USAF the impression we don't want to be part of them.

What are our possible benefits?

1.  We present a more professional image to the outside world (including our USAF parent service).
2.  We reduce the clothing closets by 90%
3.  We can maintain the standards easier because there are less uniform combinations to remember.

So...the only question is.....do the benefits out weigh the liabilities?
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

SarDragon

Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 03:16:32 AM
What would I do?

Corporate:
Drop it!

Seriously, why do we need a corporate uniform?  Answer:  Simply put, it's because we have far too many very overweight, out-of-shape members (I know, round is a shape but anyway...).  The corporate uniform is a crutch.  This is a problem in our organization whether anyone wants to admit it or not.  Adhere to the weight standards or go on hiatus until the issue is corrected. 
[various parts redacted]

Right! Do that and CAP will lose many skilled, talented, and experienced members, including myself. But I'm not overweight. I still meet AD AF weight standards. I have facial hair.

To tar us all with the same brush is unfair at best, and implementation of your idea would reduce SM numbers by at least 33%.

Find a better way to improve CAP than driving out a significant portion of our operating forces.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

davedove

Quote from: DNall on November 10, 2006, 04:11:41 AM
You don't think there's enough private citizens out there able to join & get qual'd to be mission pilots & GTLs that DO meet the ht/wt/grooming requirements?

I know I haven't been a member very long, but it seems to me that WOULD be the problem.  If there were plenty of members available, the standards never would have been relaxed for membership.
David W. Dove, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander for Seniors
Personnel/PD/Asst. Testing Officer
Ground Team Leader
Frederick Composite Squadron
MER-MD-003

LtCol White

Why is it that so many people don't get it that when we talk about CAP needing to mend the relationship with USAF and move closer that creating NON-USAF uniforms and/or dropping the USAF ones is the complete opposite? The farther that CAP moves away from USAF, the closer it is to death. People, you need to really examine the relationship and the history of the problems. If you dont wanna be part of an organization that is closely associated with USAF, then go join one of the other volunteer groups out there. CAP is purposely closely associated with USAF. Its supposed to be and was founded to be. It SHOULD be.

Uniforms are a key to this. As stated numerous times, we should have one each of the USAF uniforms and one each of the Corporate ones. Period, end of story. We ARE a military organization first. Like it or not. Not a social club. We have a job to do and it should be done with the same pride and professionalism as USAF does with their missions. Perception and image are a major part of this. Having the 2 styles of uniforms is INCLUSIVE and not EXCLUSIVE. Everyone should be afforded the opportunity to participate and have a uniform that is distinct, identifiable, and professional. We dont need golf shirts, khakis, white shirts, etc.... 2 styles including one for each function. Thats all.


LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

A.Member

#46
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AM
Pilots don't grow on trees.  Pilots with time and money to devote to a volunteer organization are even rarer.  If you got a great CFI with 1000+ hours willing to be your O-flight pilots....but has hair to his shoulder and a gotee....do you say...sorry but you'll just look silly in uniform....or do you sign him up, slap a blue flight suit on him and get your cadets into the air?
Holding a CFI rating is not a requirement to perform o-flights.  Nonetheless, our squadron, for example, isn't just looking for just any CFI (or pilot) to join.  We've tried that and it doesn't work.    We want the right person - not someone looking for a flying club.  That said, I'd tell them that we'd love to have them and believe there experience would be an asset but that there are certain expectations around the image we are trying to present.  Does having facial hair or locks down to your knees mean that a person is not capable?  Of course not.  But that's also not the image the organization wants to project.  A person should be willing to put service before self.  We're not a flying club.

Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AMI have not taken the AFIADL 13 course yet...what does it say about health and fitness?
You're a Capt. but haven't reviewed the professional development course that is required to make Capt.?  You may want to consider doing so.

Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AMWe do have standards.....but do we have standards just for the hell of them or do we have standards for a purpose? 
I think you answered your own question.  They definitely exist for a purpose.

Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AM
I know for a fact...that if you required that everyone in CAP to fall into USAF fitness standards that two squadrons here in Las Vegas will fold due to no leadership.
And?... I guess I'm from the faction of quality vs. quantity.  If we want to be treated as a professional organization, then we should look and act like one - uniform.

Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AMGranted....weight does become an issue while flying....so maybe (just maybe) I would entertain weight limits on air crew, but not on the other 85% (this is just an out of my butt statistic don't flame me) of the membership.
As indicated earlier, it's more than that.  It's also serving as an example for our cadets.

Side note: I've noticed that a number of particpants on this site have these little figures in their signatures.  These figures really do look like many of our members - round.  Kind of ironic...or maybe not?   :-\  ;)
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

Hawk200

So, out of curiosity, how many people are willing to just put up their suggestions on what they would do with the uniforms?

That was the idea. It wasn't to come in here and slam someone elses opinion. Some folks may have some bad ideas, but they're entitled to them.

Just write down your suggestion and put it in the box, please.

If anyone would like, I'll happily start a thread on "Blues vs. Corporates" so this thread can get back on track.

lordmonar

Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 02:55:05 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AM
Pilots don't grow on trees.  Pilots with time and money to devote to a volunteer organization are even rarer.  If you got a great CFI with 1000+ hours willing to be your O-flight pilots....but has hair to his shoulder and a gotee....do you say...sorry but you'll just look silly in uniform....or do you sign him up, slap a blue flight suit on him and get your cadets into the air?
Holding a CFI rating is not a requirement to perform o-flights.  Nonetheless, our squadron, for example, isn't just looking for just any CFI (or pilot) to join.  We've tried that and it doesn't work.    We want the right person - not someone looking for a flying club.  That said, I'd tell them that we'd love to have them and believe there experience would be an asset but that there are certain expectations around the image we are trying to present.  Does having facial hair or locks down to your knees mean that a person is not capable?  Of course not.  But that's also not the image the organization wants to project.  A person should be willing to put service before self.  We're not a flying club.

My point being....if the option is long haired CFI or nothing....do you go with nothing?  That is not fulfilling your CP mission.  This has nothing to do with being a flying club and they are putting service before self....this is an individual who wants to work, wants to do some part for the organisation...but you would turn them out because of weight and grooming issues.  

The USAF can demand those standards be met because they are paying for them.  CAP can't afford to.

Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 02:55:05 PM
You're a Capt. but haven't reviewed the professional development course that is required to make Capt.?  You may want to consider doing so.

Ah...asumptions....asumptions.....I am also a MSgt in the USAF and have the NCO Academy and SNCO Academy credited to me....ergo Course 13 is not required.

I also have not been to SLS too.....are you going to make an assumption about that too?  There are several ways to make Capt with out going up the standard line.

Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 02:55:05 PMAnd?... I guess I'm from the faction of quality vs. quantity.  If we want to be treated as a professional organization, then we should look and act like one - uniform.

Okay...so be it.  What you are forgetting is your mission is NOT to look professional.  Your mission is to complete your ES, AE and CP requirements.  You can't do that with out people.  And I don't know where we would find them if we required USAF weight and grooming standards.

And while we are raising CAP standards to make ourselves more professional....why not require college degrees to be an officer too?  How many people will we loose then?

I understand your point of view...and I would really wish we lived in a world where we could do that....but lets face it.  Our target audience for membership are generally not withing USAF standards.   We simply could not survive cutting off 30 percent of membership and maybe another 10 percent just because they see it as unfair.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

LtCol White

Patrick, I agree with you. Thus my comments on the 2 styles of uniforms. One for those who meet the USAF standards for wearing the USAF uniform and one for those members who do not. This accomplishes the INCLUSION mission and eliminates the EXCLUSION. It also works to satisify USAF that their standads are being met for wear of the USAF uniform. But we dont need 15 different styles of corp uniforms. Each USAF uniform should have one corporate counterpart.

But again, we need to enforce our own regulations. This is one of USAF's biggest gripes that we do not do this.
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

TankerT

Quote from: LtCol White on November 10, 2006, 05:33:02 PM
But again, we need to enforce our own regulations. This is one of USAF's biggest gripes that we do not do this.

Ding ding ding... if I had a choice... I would suggest a regulation banning uniform design discussions until we can get our poop in a group and wear what have correctly.

/Insert Snappy Comment Here

arajca

Back to the topic:

While not necessarily a uniform item, I'd recommend an orange hard hat for ES missions instead of the white helmet liner. The major reason is a standard hard hat meets ANSI standards and OSHA requirements. The helmet liner does not. Orange is for visibility and relatively easy ID of CAP members. Usually, the only folks wearing orange hard hats are street dept workers and they're usually around their equipment.

LtCol White

Either orange or white would make sense on the helmets. You're right. The helmet liners were not designed for safety and provide no protection from falling objects.
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

A.Member

lordmonar:

Out of respect for Hawk200's topic, I've started a new thread and responded to your comments here:
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=1019.new#new
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

Slim

Quote from: SarDragon on November 10, 2006, 08:29:24 AM
Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 03:16:32 AM
What would I do?

Corporate:
Drop it!

Seriously, why do we need a corporate uniform?  Answer:  Simply put, it's because we have far too many very overweight, out-of-shape members (I know, round is a shape but anyway...).  The corporate uniform is a crutch.  This is a problem in our organization whether anyone wants to admit it or not.  Adhere to the weight standards or go on hiatus until the issue is corrected. 
[various parts redacted]

Right! Do that and CAP will lose many skilled, talented, and experienced members, including myself. But I'm not overweight. I still meet AD AF weight standards. I have facial hair.

To tar us all with the same brush is unfair at best, and implementation of your idea would reduce SM numbers by at least 33%.

Find a better way to improve CAP than driving out a significant portion of our operating forces.

Here we go again.  Actually, here we don't.  I don't know how Dave feels about the this, but I know that I've spewed forth my opinion on it many times-here and elsewhere.  I'm not even going to bother trying to debate this anymore.

Sorry, this buzz-cutted, overweight senior has had way too many success stories over the years to believe that I can't make a contribution.  If I could have been a lean-mean fightin' machine, I woulda signed on the line.  I couldn't, so I continue to serve in the best way I can.


Slim

ELTHunter

I just had a bit of an epiphany.  I don;t think it's having Corporate uniforms that drive us further from the USAF.  It's continually trying to make Corporate uniforms LOOK like the USAF uniform that drives a wedge between us.  They say no metal rank on the blues uniform, so what do we do, we poke them in the eye be designing a blue Corporate uniform that look a lot like a USAF uniform.  Maybe it's double breasted, but do you think Grandma knows the difference?  Or we approve a white shirt and blue pants uniform WITH blue name tag AND blue epaulets AND metal rank that looks REALLY like the USAF.

What I'd suggest is for folks that can't wear a USAF style uniform due to weight & grooming standards be self-disciplined enough to NOT wear them anyway.  If you want to really look like you're in the military, diet, exercise, etc., etc.
Maj. Tim Waddell, CAP
SER-TN-170
Deputy Commander of Cadets
Emergency Services Officer

Hawk200

On the original topic, does anyone have anything else new to add? Or should I start working on the compiled list?

Keep in mind, I'm going to put anything I consider a serious suggestion in the list, whether I like it or not. (And no, the 'shakos' aren't going to be added, I can't honestly believe that was serious.)

I'll try to put the most popular ones first (ones which received seconds or suggestions of the same thing).

MIKE


  • Fix CAPM 39-1 and CAPR 39-3.
  • Get rid of the Group CC badge, instead have the one badge and mirror USAF standards for wear.  Add cloth version for BDU/Field Uniform
  • C/AB insignia - Shield as on existing cadet chevrons with no stripes, and cadet grade on both collars of service uniforms.
  • Get patches off the BDU/Field Uniform.  Keep it simple, tapes, grade and cloth badges and wings only.
  • Cloth Model Rocketry badge that looks like the metal badge for the left pocket of the BDU/Field Uniform.
  • Awards and Decs that are similar to those of the USAF such as Achievement and Commendation Medals, and generally clean up/out all the bling.
  • Combine the Corporate Uniform (TPU) and CAP Distinctive Uniforms, taking the good from each and throwing out the bad.
  • ABUs eventually.
  • Get realistic about minimum basic uniforms and required clothing bag items for seniors/cadets.
  • Phase out/change plan that is less of a burden on members.  New stuff must meet standards, older stuff has longer wear out dates.
Mike Johnston

Hawk200

I'm guessing that noone else has any ideas. I've got most of the list together, and I will post in a new thread tomorrow if anyone is interested.

DNall

Let me think what I got...
1) Blank epaulet slides (gray w/ CAP, no grade) for SM w/o grade - now called Officer Candidate. Sewn on cutouts or other Officer Candidate device for BDU/BBDU.

2) C/ enlisted on BDUs back to grade on one side for logistics & cost reasons, C/Officers keep grade on both sides of utils. Allow C/Officer blue sewn on grade on flight suit, just like adult officers are allowed to do (as soon as I see that policy letter).

3) think about changing gray slides to black (like AFROTC/AFAcad/OTS) at some point in the future - put that out to AF & tell them we'd like them to offer stuff like that when we deserve it. Call it a stepping stone to blue if you like, but frankly they'll never ever offer us blue regardless of the relationship, so this is a good compromise.

4) talked in another thread about pitching AF to write an AFI explaining a simplified proceedure for CAP members on AFAMs to be recommended for AF decorations that are already awardable to civilians, and to consider if an interpretation of our status on AFAM (under military orders) might make us elgible for certain other decorations (humanitarian service for instance).

5) white dark blue tapes (grade/badges too) that match BBDUs for both BBDU & BDU. We have a rare opportunity coming soon where we will be in BDUs & the AF will be in ABUs. We're using ultramarine blue now because that's what the CAP & AF had on OD fatigues before BDUs. When they get mostly changed over, we can do some things much closer to the AF & have a fair expectation of it carrying over to ABUs when we change over also.

6) Ask AF to ask congress to allow us to dba Air Force Auxiliary, so we can put the command patch back & put USAF Aux on BDUs - hey we can dream right.

7) De-authorize the old style service coat for cadets. I know there's a ton of them around, but dear lord those were phased out a long time ago, are we going to wait till the fourth generation of service coat to get rid of them? Set a date & get on with it.

8 ) consider dumping the golf shirt, at least for wear outside the Sq (ie flying or on missions.

9) consider gray BDU or EMT style pants w/ aviator shirt for field work. (I would have prefered that over the BBDU in the first place).

10) require nomex (green or blue) for flying.

11) require UOD to be stated for all activities (including meetings), give a chart in the reg to show what Corporate-style uniforms correspond to what AF-style, and a chart explaining what UOD is appropriate to what situation/time of year. There shouldn't be options, and corporate uniforms should be worn to the same quality standards as AF-style.

12) Agree on:
a) Fix regs!!!!!!! Provide MORE detail than AF regs because we have no local culture to correct problems due to open interpretation. Look at the culturally accepted standard in the AF that exceeds their reg, and explain to members in clear terms as if they have no frame of reference how to mimic that. After stating the requirements, give a set of recommendations that cover things like garters & blousing that are not required methods to attain the desired appearance, but are recommended. Look to our many prior service NCOs for guidance on writing this.

b) CC's badge. mirror AF wear standards (ie for past commanders & on BDUs)

c) drop patches off BDUs (that includes the flag)

d) model rocketry that matches the metal. Actually, it might be worthwhile to combine the extremely similar program that exists in AFJROTC & combine the badges with it.

e) agree on awards bling. clean up the awards process ot make it less political & create a matrix of awards that make sense. Badges too. We get too many for too little (and they look like cartoons). Make the tracks four level - apprentice underneath matches the current tech rating & no badge. Tech then does make you an expert & we're able to take the material from senior/master along w/ new & advanced stuff (including outside sources like FEMA & AFIADL) to remake the Senior/Master ratings. Add a specialty track manager for each track at the Wing level to manage all personnel assigned & training in the field (mentors & curriculum)... basically professionalize the specialty tracks. Consider adding mission aspects to the more boaring tracks (ie admin/personnel relates to MSA at the bottom & Admin Section Chief at the top - basically follow the model already established in the comm track). Got some badge redesigns in the works to be sent up - rentention, professional standard, mutual respect w/ AF kinda thing.


Gees, that's all I can think of for now. Some of it crosses beyond just uniforms to take in the meaning of an item, but that's key also.