Military badges on CAP uniforms?

[Prospector]

Hi Folks,

Another confusing question regarding the CAP uniforms. In CAPM 39-1 (latest downloaded from CAP National website) there appears to be conflicting messages regarding the wear of military badges / wings on CAP uniforms. At the end of paragraph 6-7 it states that, "US Military badges are not authorized for wear on any of the CAP distinctive uniforms."

However, table 6-5 clearly shows that many military badges / wings are authorized for wear on "CAP Service Uniforms and BDUs."

So here is my question: When wearing the new double-breasted CAP corporate uniform jacket, is it allowable to wear U.S. Army permanently awarded (with orders) aeronautical wings or not? If not, is it allowable on the CAP Air Force Style uniform jacket?

When answering, if you could point me to the regs / change letter etc. that you are referencing for your response that would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

[Eclipse]

"CAP Service uniforms and BDU's" are not Corporate Distinctive uniforms.

A number of military badges and ribbons are approved for wear on the USAF-Style uniforms (i.e. Service Dress, Mess Dress, blue short-sleeve), and the Camo BDU's.

Military badges and insignia are not currently approved on any of the corporate combos - Aviator whites, (new) corporate service uniform, or blue BDUs.

Its clear in 39-1.

[Prospector]

Its clear in 39-1.

If it was clear in 39-1 I wouldn't have asked the question.

So, are you saying that if you wear regular BDUs (not blue) you CAN wear your military wings, but you can't on the Corporate issued dress uniforms? Aren't all the CAP uniforms "CAP distinctive" and not regulation U.S. Air Force - including the AF "Style" one?

What twit authorized this. If the AF allows CAP to wear the badges on the CAP AF "style" uniforms - then why would CAP say we couldn't do the same on their uniforms?

When is the new 39-1 coming out and who do we direct change requests to?

Thanks!

[Eclipse]

Its clear in 39-1.

If it was clear in 39-1 I wouldn't have asked the question.

So, are you saying that if you wear regular BDUs (not blue) you CAN wear your military wings, but you can't on the Corporate issued dress uniforms?

When is the new 39-1 coming out and who do we direct change requests to?

Thanks!

That is correct, with the caveat that any military badge worn on a CAP uniform must be approved for wear on the similar USAF uniform.  As an example, the CIB is approved for wear for both the USAF and CAP, the CAB is not.

To my knowledge there is no pending revision to 39-1 in the works, though there have been several working committees in the last couple of years.

Suggestions for changes should be sent through your chain of command, unless a document is posted for comment in which case you can send the comments direct.

This particular issue has been a point of contention and discussion for a long time in CAP, with no apparent interest in the change at the national level.

[Prospector]

Sorry, I updated my earlier response at the same time you were posting. Modified some text.

[Eclipse]

6-7. US Military Badges. CAP members may wear only the US military badges authorized for wear
on the US Air Force uniform when earned through qualification and awarded by competent authority for
service performed in any branch of the Armed Forces of the United States or its allies. The military
badges authorized for wear on the CAP uniform and BDU are listed in Table 6-5. Before wearing any
badge not listed in this table, contact National Headquarters/LMM for clarification. US Military badges
are not authorized for wear on any of the CAP distinctive uniforms.

The CSU is considered a distinctive uniform.

[Prospector]

The CSU is considered a distinctive uniform.

I understand - I guess my confusion is the definition of what is a "CAP Distinctive" uniform. The CAP AF style and Corporate uniforms are BOTH CAP Distinctive.

What I mean is that both of these styles of uniforms are distinctive to CAP alone. Neither the AF or anyone else wears these particular uniforms. So why differentiate between the two and what is worn on them??

Personally, I think there would be a lot less hassle and confusion and really help the general membership solidify their identity if CAP only had one set of uniforms.

End of rant...

[Eclipse]

In our context there is a difference, but to the general public there is very little difference between the
way we wear blues and BDU's and the way the USAF does.

Distinctive in this case means the corporate combinations which do not require adherence to weight standards or grooming rules (with the exception of the CSU).

[heliodoc]

Prospector....

IT would be nice to have one set of uniforms..

That's  TOO practical for this organization

[Rotorhead]

Prospector....

IT would be nice to have one set of uniforms..

That's  TOO practical for this organization

I suspect many people would not want that in reality.

USAF style= no fat and fuzzy. That eliminates blues and BDUs, unless you're going to start mandating weight & grooming standards for all senior members.

Practicality in ES field work eliminates white & greys, the CSU (or TPU), the flight suit (can't really wear it on ground searches), and obviously, the mess dress..as well as the holy grail of senior members, the polo shirt combo.

That would leave only the Blue BDUs (or, possibly, the Blue jumpsuit) as a uniform that every member could wear on any occasion.

Now, does having "just one uniform" sound like something you'd like?

[Eclipse]

The ACA, CGAux, and Sea Cadets, for starters, have all somehow managed to look like their parent service, regardless of weight, etc., without too much issue.

I don't understand why we haven't been able to do the same.

[Rotorhead]

The ACA, CGAux, and Sea Cadets, for starters, have all somehow managed to look like their parent service, regardless of weight, etc., without too much issue.

I don't understand why we haven't been able to do the same.

Because the USAF doesn't want it that way.

[PHall]

What twit authorized this. If the AF allows CAP to wear the badges on the CAP AF "style" uniforms - then why would CAP say we couldn't do the same on their uniforms?

The "twit" you are referring to is the Commander, CAP-USAF who get's their marching orders from the Director of the Holm Center and the Commander of Air Education and Training Command.

The Air Force has stated in multiple places (AFI 10-2701 being one) that they retain exclusive control over the AF style uniform. Period.

[Spike]

Actually to follow regulation, there are no new corporate uniforms.  The Change letters were rescinded because the Regs were not updated in the time frame mandated.  In fact, everyone wearing them is in violation of NHQ Policy.

But, HQ makes the rules, and can decide to break them if they want I suppose!

[Spike]

What twit authorized this. If the AF allows CAP to wear the badges on the CAP AF "style" uniforms - then why would CAP say we couldn't do the same on their uniforms?

The "twit" you are referring to is the Commander, CAP-USAF who get's their marching orders from the Director of the Holm Center and the Commander of Air Education and Training Command.

The Air Force has stated in multiple places (AFI 10-2701 being one) that they retain exclusive control over the AF style uniform. Period.

He was referring to the Person who has control over the corporate uniforms.  Not CAP-USAF!

[Prospector]

He was referring to the Person who has control over the corporate uniforms.  Not CAP-USAF!

Precisely. I'm not trying to be disrespectful to anyone in particular, just to the idea that we have two separate uniform sets for one organization. I think CAP so far is the only organization that I have been involved with that has 2 separate but equal uniforms. No one has answered this "elephant in the room" question yet - that of why there are two different uniforms for the organization? Is there some operational need for us to have 2 sets?

I could see that the choices of uniforms before the new Corporate dress was implemented was tilted strongly towards the AF style quite frankly because the only other alternative - the Blazer Combo was it. But now that we have a Corporate uniform that is distinctive and very professional looking, why not get rid of the AF style altogether.

That would satisfy all of us quite well I think for Dress Uniform options.

As far as the Air Force having control over CAP now, I thought that the new Board of Governors mandated by Congress was the supreme governing body for CAP and what they say goes. Am I wrong?

[RiverAux]

The ACA, CGAux, and Sea Cadets, for starters, have all somehow managed to look like their parent service, regardless of weight, etc., without too much issue.

Correction : The ACA does not have a "parent service".  To my knowledge they haven't yet developed any official relationship with the Army that would put them in the same sort of relationship CAP or CG Aux has with their parent services. 

Yes, they have had various official contacts and so far the Army hasn't gone after them for what they've been doing (in my opinion they should have), but they're not an auxiliary (or anything else) of the Army. 

Maybe something has changed recently.

[Eclipse]

As far as the Air Force having control over CAP now, I thought that the new Board of Governors mandated by Congress was the supreme governing body for CAP and what they say goes. Am I wrong?

Yes.

As to the uniform issue, I'm just going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you don't believe you're the first person to ever raise the question.  How and why we got to where we are today is a product of a couple of decades of action by both CAP and the USAF.

As I and others have pointed out on a number of occasions, we don't really have that many more combos than other military services, and beyond these boards, no one really pays the issue a lot of attention.

Its not a slight against us, an indication of our relationship with the USAF, or a part of the conspiracy to separate us from brother blue.

I think a lot of us would be fine dumping the whites and blazer for the CSU and moving on with our lives, but the the small minority of members with beard gets their skivvies bunched and we're right back where we started.

[lordmonar]

Actually to follow regulation, there are no new corporate uniforms.  The Change letters were rescinded because the Regs were not updated in the time frame mandated.  In fact, everyone wearing them is in violation of NHQ Policy.

But, HQ makes the rules, and can decide to break them if they want I suppose!

Now you are begining to see how it works.

[Prospector]

Ok, bringing us (and me  )back to the original line of questioning -

It seems to me that 39-1 needs a new revision that covers in depth the new corporate dress uniform. Since the new dress uniform is in fact a dress uniform and not an informal blazer / slacks combo like before, it seems like common sense would dictate that whatever the AF allows worn on the CAP AF "style" dress uniform should at least be allowed on the new corporate dress uniform.

If someone here is on one of the national uniform committees, please take this into consideration as an official suggestion.

Thanks!

[Larry Mangum]

Ok, bringing us (and me  )back to the original line of questioning -

It seems to me that 39-1 needs a new revision that covers in depth the new corporate dress uniform. Since the new dress uniform is in fact a dress uniform and not an informal blazer / slacks combo like before, it seems like common sense would dictate that whatever the AF allows worn on the CAP AF "style" dress uniform should at least be allowed on the new corporate dress uniform.

If someone here is on one of the national uniform committees, please take this into consideration as an official suggestion.

Thanks!

It is my understanding that the uniform committee, wrapped up its work and submitted its recommendations to the powers that be. Wither that means we will see a new 39-1 is anyones guess though.

[RiverAux]

It seems to me that 39-1 needs a new revision that covers in depth the new corporate dress uniform

Probably the one thing that everyone on CAPTalk would agree on. 

[Prospector]

It is my understanding that the uniform committee, wrapped up its work and submitted its recommendations to the powers that be. Wither that means we will see a new 39-1 is anyones guess though.

Thanks for the response. All we can do is air what's on our minds and hopefully stay constructive while doing so. I think we can all agree that in all of these discussions all we want is for CAP to be the best and most professional organization posssible.

Thanks everyone for taking part in the discussion.

[winterg]

Personally, I think there would be a lot less hassle and confusion and really help the general membership solidify their identity if CAP only had one set of uniforms.

It should be easy.  If you're fat and/or fuzzy -> you don't get a uniform.  You get a blazer.  Problem solved.

[Eclipse]

Personally, I think there would be a lot less hassle and confusion and really help the general membership solidify their identity if CAP only had one set of uniforms.

It should be easy.  If you're fat and/or fuzzy -> you don't get a uniform.  You get a blazer.  Problem solved.

Awesome solution - will that be camo or blue for field use?

[winterg]

Personally, I think there would be a lot less hassle and confusion and really help the general membership solidify their identity if CAP only had one set of uniforms.

It should be easy.  If you're fat and/or fuzzy -> you don't get a uniform.  You get a blazer.  Problem solved.

Awesome solution - will that be camo or blue for field use?

Maybe we should stay in BDU's after everyone else has left them and keep em as a CAP uniform.  I think the availability argument is bunk. 

I've argued this before that a large portion of the problem would solve itself if we created a better environment of health conscientious adult membership

[Short Field]

 :clap: :clap: :clap: And if they smoke, are overweight, have long hair, or don't shave - just 2B them......  We also need to meet the same level of quality in our ranks as the USAF, so if a 2Lt or above doesn't have a BA or BS, then they don't get to be a CAP officer.

[Eclipse]

What we need is some acceptance by Big Bro Blue that our demographic is Joe Average, and Joe's gittin
a little heavy.  We also need the same allowances that the military is now giving for physicals - ability
vs. ht/wt.  Right now we're actually being held to a higher general standard than the USAF is for the same uniform.

Perhaps the compromise that we could all wear the ABU's and flight suits but reserve the blues for those in weight and the CSU for those that aren't - the fuzzies can just shave if it comes down to that being the only reason to keep the whites around.

That would get us most of the way to a more uniform look.

[SarDragon]

No one has answered this "elephant in the room" question yet - that of why there are two different uniforms for the organization? Is there some operational need for us to have 2 sets?

In a word, yes.

The AF has established specific criteria for wearing their uniforms. You must meet the weight and grooming standards.

We have more than a few members who, for whatever reasons, don't meet those standards. They need something to wear to participate, so we have the corporate/CAP distinctive uniforms - Blazer, CSU, aviator combination, golf shirt, and BBDUs.

Until such time as the AF decides differently on their rules, or CAP ditches the AF uniforms totally, this is what we have to work with.

[winterg]

:clap: :clap: :clap: And if they smoke, are overweight, have long hair, or don't shave - just 2B them......  We also need to meet the same level of quality in our ranks as the USAF, so if a 2Lt or above doesn't have a BA or BS, then they don't get to be a CAP officer.

If you don't want to take the argument seriously, fine.  Nowhere in my statement did I propose this.  I never said to get rid of anybody, I never said anything about education standards for rank.  Do we need to raise overall standards? You bet your sweet [explitive deleted]!

But now that you mention it....

If you do not have a college degree, maybe you should be wearing stripes.

[JohnKachenmeister]

No one has answered this "elephant in the room" question yet - that of why there are two different uniforms for the organization? Is there some operational need for us to have 2 sets?

In a word, yes.

The AF has established specific criteria for wearing their uniforms. You must meet the weight and grooming standards.

We have more than a few members who, for whatever reasons, don't meet those standards. They need something to wear to participate, so we have the corporate/CAP distinctive uniforms - Blazer, CSU, aviator combination, golf shirt, and BBDUs.

Until such time as the AF decides differently on their rules, or CAP ditches the AF uniforms totally, this is what we have to work with.

Actually, the weight standards was CAP shooting itself in the foot.  The AF just gave them the loaded gun.

The CAP height/weight standards were written by CAP in response to the AF telling us to improve our uniform image with regard to fat guys.  The standard was written at 10 percent over basic training entry weight.  No allowance for body fat and no modifications since it was written.

I do not know why body fat considerations were not written into the regulation.  In the Army, after a body fat determination, my weight of 216-220 was legal.  In CAP I top out at 199 to be legal.

[jimmydeanno]

...And if they smoke, are overweight, have long hair, or don't shave - just 2B them......

Not sure if this is sarcastic or not, but our Comm Officer of the Year last year was an overweight, long haired guy with a beard - I think he smokes too...

[Rotorhead]

Personally, I think there would be a lot less hassle and confusion and really help the general membership solidify their identity if CAP only had one set of uniforms.

It should be easy.  If you're fat and/or fuzzy -> you don't get a uniform.  You get a blazer.  Problem solved.

People are gonna look pretty odd wearing blazers while DFing in the mountains.

[winterg]

Personally, I think there would be a lot less hassle and confusion and really help the general membership solidify their identity if CAP only had one set of uniforms.

It should be easy.  If you're fat and/or fuzzy -> you don't get a uniform.  You get a blazer.  Problem solved.

People are gonna look pretty odd wearing blazers while DFing in the mountains.

Then look two messages after the one you quoted where we discuss a field uniform for all.

[Rotorhead]

Personally, I think there would be a lot less hassle and confusion and really help the general membership solidify their identity if CAP only had one set of uniforms.

It should be easy.  If you're fat and/or fuzzy -> you don't get a uniform.  You get a blazer.  Problem solved.

People are gonna look pretty odd wearing blazers while DFing in the mountains.

Then look two messages after the one you quoted where we discuss a field uniform for all.

You mean, like the post I made on the first page of the thread suggesting the same thing?

[ricks]

:clap: :clap: :clap: And if they smoke, are overweight, have long hair, or don't shave - just 2B them......  We also need to meet the same level of quality in our ranks as the USAF, so if a 2Lt or above doesn't have a BA or BS, then they don't get to be a CAP officer.

If you don't want to take the argument seriously, fine.  Nowhere in my statement did I propose this.  I never said to get rid of anybody, I never said anything about education standards for rank.  Do we need to raise overall standards? You bet your sweet [explitive deleted]!

But now that you mention it....

If you do not have a college degree, maybe you should be wearing stripes.

Really? First off the NCO Corps is laden with degreed individuals. I take issue with your statement. Second, perhaps we can have a promotion structure that relates to our mission. Oh wait, we do. Working through a specialty track is the way to get promoted. As you progress in your specialty, you gain rank. Pretty smart in my book. We focus on three missions. You can obtain rank by following specialty tracks in any of those three missions. It is good that we promote based on the missions we are apart of not on unrelated degrees. If we have an awesome A&P mechanic sans degree should he not be able to be maint. officer and attain rank? We are top heavy to be sure. However, we do not have the manpower to have an administrative officer overseeing enlisted workers.  I would like to see promotions based on the current system and augmented with some sort of peer review or promotion board.

BTW. If you really want to be all high-speed military and require degrees I guess you better have CAP funded schooling to attain those degrees. That is what the RM does.

I think we are in a drift.

[winterg]

Take issue with it all you want.  The bootom line is that our method of handing out rank like like a gumball machine needs a serious overhaul.  And it would not need CAP funded schooling.  And yes, I know we are in a drift.  Surprises it hasn't been locked yet.

[Eclipse]

To be clear there is no direct connection between grade and the mission, or a member's duties.

You could be the CDC and also the finance officer, never get a CPO rating and use the Finance Master to progress to Lt. Col.  These days, thanks to WBP, there's not a whole lot for FM's to do, and simple job performance is all that's really required to get to Master.

Same would be for ES, etc.

Were we really mission-focused for progression, there would be a mandate that your staff postings required progression in the related specialty.

[ricks]

To be clear there is no direct connection between grade and the mission, or a member's duties.

You could be the CDC and also the finance officer, never get a CPO rating and use the Finance Master to progress to Lt. Col.  These days, thanks to WBP, there's not a whole lot for FM's to do, and simple job performance is all that's really required to get to Master.

Same would be for ES, etc.

Were we really mission-focused for progression, there would be a mandate that your staff postings required progression in the related specialty.

I like that except for the logistics of it. At least in my squadron, there is quite a bit of turnover in staff positions with some folks wearing multiple hats. I know the argument will be related to retention and that is true. We are working to fix the retention and slow the turnover. However, we have had unforseen changes in leadership as volunteer organizations do, totaly out of our control. Looking at it from a national view, it would be a nightmare to implement, in my opinion.

[Eclipse]

To be clear there is no direct connection between grade and the mission, or a member's duties.

You could be the CDC and also the finance officer, never get a CPO rating and use the Finance Master to progress to Lt. Col.  These days, thanks to WBP, there's not a whole lot for FM's to do, and simple job performance is all that's really required to get to Master.

Same would be for ES, etc.

Were we really mission-focused for progression, there would be a mandate that your staff postings required progression in the related specialty.

I like that except for the logistics of it. At least in my squadron, there is quite a bit of turnover in staff positions with some folks wearing multiple hats. I know the argument will be related to retention and that is true. We are working to fix the retention and slow the turnover. However, we have had unforseen changes in leadership as volunteer organizations do, totaly out of our control. Looking at it from a national view, it would be a nightmare to implement, in my opinion.

I agree, and this comes back to the volunteer paradigm - military services and even to some extent private corporations can simply tell someone to do something, and require they complete the requisite training.

We're forever stuck in the "ask me nicely" mode, with a "You're lucky I showed up at all" response.  Unless NHQ is willing to accept the attrition which would come with raising expectations across the board, and consider billeting members, it will continue this way.

[ricks]

To be clear there is no direct connection between grade and the mission, or a member's duties.

You could be the CDC and also the finance officer, never get a CPO rating and use the Finance Master to progress to Lt. Col.  These days, thanks to WBP, there's not a whole lot for FM's to do, and simple job performance is all that's really required to get to Master.

Same would be for ES, etc.

Were we really mission-focused for progression, there would be a mandate that your staff postings required progression in the related specialty.

I like that except for the logistics of it. At least in my squadron, there is quite a bit of turnover in staff positions with some folks wearing multiple hats. I know the argument will be related to retention and that is true. We are working to fix the retention and slow the turnover. However, we have had unforseen changes in leadership as volunteer organizations do, totaly out of our control. Looking at it from a national view, it would be a nightmare to implement, in my opinion.

I agree, and this comes back to the volunteer paradigm - military services and even to some extent private corporations can simply tell someone to do something, and require they complete the requisite training.

We're forever stuck in the "ask me nicely" mode, with a "You're lucky I showed up at all" response.  Unless NHQ is willing to accept the attrition which would come with raising expectations across the board, and consider billeting members, it will continue this way.

I iam sure that that would be a cold day. CAP has given emphasis on one benefit we provide to our customers, ES speaking, we provide many warm and somewhat trained bodies in a hurry, for free or really cheap. Now, personally, I don't think that is all we have to give, but that is the emphasis and has been for years. What you are saying kind of makes us contractors. I don't know that the ES world has the elastic economy to support that.

[Prospector]

Wow, lots of discussion since I was on yesterday. 

The discussion seems to have wandered around a bit. Even though I am a fairly new member, I trully believe that CAP has a distinct place in the overall military - civil service complex. But in all of these discussions we have to have a context to maintain focus. CAP is what it is and nothing more or less. CAP is an all-volunteer civilian paramilitary non-profit service organization - period.

We are not the active AF, the Air Guard, AF Reserve, State Militia, State Defense Force, or anything else. We have a unique identity (albeit somewhat blurry at times).

If we keep this truth in view at all times a lot of the frustrations being voiced will disappear. I see CAP as the place where anyone with or without military experience, or with or without the qualifications or desire to actually be in the military can serve their community and country.

I personally see that CAP as an organization has a very good working skills and promotions system. A person's rank in CAP are not designed to be a direct reflection on their command ability as much as they are in the active military. The progression is actually very similar to the military model overall - it takes skills advancement, time in service, and time in grade to promote.

If you look closely at the current regs, a Senior Member who successfully completes every requirement on time beginning on day one of their membership will take a minimum of 10 years to promote from SM to LtCol. And, you cannot promote any further to Col or Gen without actually taking on a national, region, or wing command assignment. Pretty high committment level for a civilian volunteer if you ask me. Most other non-profit service organizations just hand you a "command" for showing up and being elected by the membership.

In terms of uniforms, having just one set of CAP distinctive dress uniforms and ditching the AF style ones actually benefits CAP members and encourages them to maintain grooming standards and general common sense hygiene. One thing that CAP has is the ability to say, "This is our dress uniform - if you want to wear it, just shave the beard and meet our other physical fitness / weight requirements. If you don't want to wear it, or can't meet the requirements, that's fine too, no harm, no foul. You can wear no uniform at all. As long as you are willing to actually participate according to your own abilities or limitations, we have a place for you - it just might not be representing us officially in uniform."

Where  CAP shoots itself in the foot (as someone earlier suggested) is in letting the AF define or pressure them into some uniform requirements that discourages volunteers who are otherwise technically qualified from participating. Remember, all of us pay to serve, we don't get paid to serve.

Whether or not you agree with how the new corporate dress uniform came to be, it really is the right direction to go for CAP. We can still maintain our close relationship with the AF while just having our own uniforms and our own standards. Of course, we should have some professional standards, and believe me, at least on paper, CAP is one of the better defined organizations out there.

So, bottom line is - CAP is what CAP is. If you can't accept CAP's organizational identity as it is, then maybe you would be better served by joining any one of the military organizations previously listed. Remember, CAP is not for perfect people, it is a place for regular people with aviation interests to contribute to our community and nation in a very meaningful way.

Most of us have "been there and done that" in terms of regular military. CAP is very good for those of us who like to wear military uniforms and to participate in a "military setting" without all the extra baggage of real military life. CAP is sort of a middle ground or stepping stone (depending on which direction you are heading) between otherwise boring civilian service organizations, and combat prepared regular troops.

Ok, I think I've started to ramble a bit so I'll stop for now.

[SilverEagle2]

In terms of uniforms, having just one set of CAP distinctive dress uniforms and ditching the AF style ones actually benefits CAP members

Negative. Having one set of "equivalent" uniforms for each AF style is good for CAP. The problem is that people keep attempting to add more combos with arbitrary requirements for W&G.

Honestly, the AF combos are our heritage and should remain so. However, those that cannot/choose not to adhere to the W&G standards should be allowed to wear any corporate equivalent. This eliminates any problems for wear and reduces the needs for other, not necessary combinations.

Disconnect from the AF heritage and watch your numbers decline. Cadet's will not want to join, parents will not get exposed, and the next generation of Seniors will wither away.

So in summary, stop campaigning to have the United States Air Force Auxiliary to stop wearing the United States Air Force uniforms. It would be disastrous to CAP.

It is a privilege to be allowed to wear the AF uniforms and we should do so with pride and dignity as we serve.

Then again, in reality, the above is only my opinion to which I am entitled to. And yes, I am a former Cadet.

[Prospector]

Negative. Having one set of "equivalent" uniforms for each AF style is good for CAP. The problem is that people keep attempting to add more combos with arbitrary requirements for W&G.

The problem with your answer (as I see it) is that your interpretation of the definition of "uniform" is off just a tad. To be uniform is to present a cohesive and non-interpretive and constant design. Having multiple "equivalents" of a "uniform" is not uniformity. One dress uniform design is enough, which design to agree upon is the question.

Honestly, the AF combos are our heritage and should remain so. However, those that cannot/choose not to adhere to the W&G standards should be allowed to wear any corporate equivalent. This eliminates any problems for wear and reduces the needs for other, not necessary combinations.

The uniform itself is not the end all of the CAP's heritage. Since CAP's inception we have had a uniquely distinctive uniform. We have never worn the active-duty Air Force uniform without CAP distinctive identification.

Disconnect from the AF heritage and watch your numbers decline. Cadet's will not want to join, parents will not get exposed, and the next generation of Seniors will wither away.

Agreed - however, for Senior Members staying with the Air Force style uniform does not equate to "keeping our heritage" as you have stated. Heritage is more than a uniform.

So in summary, stop campaigning to have the United States Air Force Auxiliary to stop wearing the United States Air Force uniforms. It would be disastrous to CAP.

It is a privilege to be allowed to wear the AF uniforms and we should do so with pride and dignity as we serve.

Agreed - however I believe your view of the CAP identity is a little off. CAP is not entirely the Air Force Auxiliary. We are a separate corporate organization that, as needed, is contracted by the Air Force for missions. When acting in this capacity for the Air Force, and only when acting in this capacity, are those members who are specifically involved in the mission considered to be acting as the Air Force Auxiliary.

I know this is a fine line and members can approve or disapprove of this relationship, but that is the truth of it as it now stands. When not specifically involved in an AFEM, members are not AF Aux, they are CAP.

This fact does not diminish the CAP in any way, it merely points out the limitations of our role as the Air Force Auxiliary today. The CAP of today (at least legally speaking) is 90% Corporate and 10% AF Aux. Do I like it this way - no. I believe that CAP should be designated as the Air Force Auxiliary the same as the Coast Guard Aux is, or even more like the Public Health Commission Corps is. And, I think we should (just my limited opinion and going out on a limb here) be under the auspices of Homeland Security, similar to the Coast Guard and the Border Patrol - and not the Air Force.

Again, this is all just unofficial opinion and cooler talk and everyone here is entitled to be able to speak their mind.

[jeancalvinus]

While I would like to wear my awards from the service, I understand why CAP makes one meet grooming and height/ weight standards for the wear of the AF style, and then rewards that with the allowance of wearing military awards. It just looks more professional.

I for one am too stubborn to shave my beard, so although I have a nice fruit salad from my days in the service, it shall remain in the drawer, collecting dust.

[Eclipse]

While I would like to wear my awards from the service, I understand why CAP makes one meet grooming and height/ weight standards for the wear of the AF style, and then rewards that with the allowance of wearing military awards. It just looks more professional.

I for one am too stubborn to shave my beard, so although I have a nice fruit salad from my days in the service, it shall remain in the drawer, collecting dust.

There is no "reward / punishment" situation regarding the grooming standards or what you can wear on your uniform (or can't).

[lordmonar]

Let's just suppose for a moment.......

Let's say that starting 1 Jan 2010 no senior member can wear the USAF style uniforms.  Everyone has to go to the CSU/Polo/BBDU/Blue Flight Suit.  Cadets retain the USAF style uniforms and adopt the ABU in 2011.

Let's say there is a mass exodus of members because they can't wear the USAF uniforms anymore.   

I think I would count CAP lucky to have rid ourselves of people with questionable motives.

Don't get me wrong......if I were God For A Day....I would force the USAF to let everyone (even the fat and fuzzy) wear USAF style uniforms and ditch all the corporate uniforms except the polo combo......but I joined CAP to work with Cadets, do ES missions for my city, state and nation (I seem to remember that phrase somewhere)...spread the good word of how Aerospace power makes all our lives better and to hang out with some cool people who feel the same.

If your dedication to our three missions is based on whether or not you get to wear AF Blues or not......I won't spend a lot of time crying over your exit.

[Eclipse]

If your dedication to our three missions is based on whether or not you get to wear AF Blues or not......I won't spend a lot of time crying over your exit.

+1

[Short Field]

 :clap:  :clap:  :clap:

[bosshawk]

Hooah!!!!!

[MSgt Van]

 :clap:
Friggin' A...

[JohnKachenmeister]

I think that the solution is within reach, but too many people at NHQ are unable to see it.

My solution:

The TPU is OK as a uniform for officers.  One can quibble about the double-breasted style and the stupid-ugly silver braid, but overall it is OK.  If it were the ONLY uniform for officers, I could live with it, and our stance would be that as the AF Aux we wear a "Modified" USAF uniform.

But... (There's ALWAYS a "But" it seems)...  I have EARNED certain awards on active duty.  Service on active duty is something that I have done that not all CAP members have done.  Recognizing that service on a "Modified" AF uniform is a GOOD thing, in spite of the anti-military attitude of the NLO. 

If the regulation were written to permit ALL earned awards on the TPU, I would support scrapping the AF uniform for officers, and finally and again placing CAP in a UNIform.

I know some of the guardhouse lawyers will try to say it is illegal to wear ribbons and badges on the TPU, but that is pure bunk.  Police and fire departments routinely wear military awards on their dress uniforms, and as a Legionaire I can wear my ribbon rack on my hat without the "Ribbon Police" coming to take me away to a Kamp.

[arajca]

People keep quoting Army, Navy, etc regs to prevent wearing of military awards on the CAP uniforms. I have sent, a few times, a request up the chain to have CAP officially request authorization from the Army, Navy, etc to wear their awards on the CAP uniform. I have never heard any results. Perhaps others could send similar suggestions up their chains to see if they can get somewhere with it.

[SilverEagle2]

however I believe your view of the CAP identity is a little off

I am a second generation CAP member both Cadet and Senior. You are an admitted new member. I perhaps have a more traditional and historical view of the CAP identity that perhaps does not equate to your recent indoctrination.

I think I would count CAP lucky to have rid ourselves of people with questionable motives.

I did not imply that there would be a mass exodus of current members. I simply stated that a good draw of cadets that eventually become good seniors would dwindle. Your statement seems to infer a generalization that seniors that want to wear the USAF combos have questionable motives. While I agree there are a few, they are not the rule.

If your dedication to our three missions is based on whether or not you get to wear AF Blues or not

I believe that well groomed, correct uniform wearing seniors, enhances all three missions. Unfortunately, mass dilution over the years has created a significant rift between the Cadet Programs and the Senior Professional Development programs. Ever hear a cadet say, "I'll never be a senior." Unfortunate.

I am a Scout Master as well, and I can tell you that some of the more effective units are ones that have and abide by a strict uniform policy. While the scouts do not have the challenges of W&G limitations, there is strong cohesion amongst the  scouts and the leaders because they are in the same uniforms.

Now back on topic...

I am a proponent of the USAF combos as is probably obvious. However, I also know that it is unrealistic for me to expect all senior officers fitting inside the W&G model. That is why I agree with a single alternative to the USAF combos to provide the needed alternatives for those that are outside of the W&G envelope. Problem is that we have to many alternatives and this is a contributor to the dilution. I still feel that the one alternative idea is "uniform" and provides the needed structure to continue the Uniformed Traditions of CAP. We are a uniformed organization and one that is sponsored and allowed the USAF combo. There can be no argument that this is a huge draw to cadets. It instills a desire for discipline,  common goals, and camaraderie amongst them and others within the organization. Why then would you limit it only to cadets. Are we the seniors a different organization?

Some of the best things that are parts of our Sponsor Service are inherently brought into CAP simply through the use of the USAF uniforms. Would you want that to end once you become a senior? Yes, I know there is more to CAP service than the uniform, but it is a large part of it.

I agree, military awards should be allowed on the CSU and Aviator combos. You earned them and then after or even during your active service you participate in another Uniformed Volunteer Service, you should be allowed to wear on ALL combos of that service if authorized on one.

Police and fire departments routinely wear military awards on their dress uniforms

Keep in mind though, these are not considered civilian organizations, volunteer or not. We are.

[Eclipse]

Police and fire departments routinely wear military awards on their dress uniforms

Keep in mind though, these are not considered civilian organizations, volunteer or not. We are.

?

These are "civil" authorities, versus military, which is the only relevance to this discussion.  I'd also be willing to bet that many departments that allow the wear of military ribbons on their uniforms are doing so out of respect and lack of "looking it up" and would find they are in a gray area at best, if not in violation of the law.

[SilverEagle2]

Fair enough.

[lordmonar]

The base problem as has been stated is that there are just too many uniforms.

Having two sets of uniform rules for one group of members lessens our professionalism.

Even if everyone was 100% correct in their uniform wear we still look like a motley crew to outsiders.

Option one is to get with the USAF and work out a way to get everyone in USAF uniforms.  If we can't come to a compromise on that....

Option two is to get everyone (officers) into the same corporate uniforms.

Wether we can or can't wear military badges or decorations on CSUs is a secondary issue.

I am a 22 year USAF veteran and I don't wear my USAF blingage on my CAP uniforms.....there is just too much.

I do wear my USAF medals with my CAP medals on my mess dress though. 

Long and short of it is....we need to get uniformed.  That is one set of uniforms for everyone.  No special cases, no exceptions, no compromise.

Then we present a "unified" presentation to our cadets, our other members and our customers.

And I still stand with my comments that if a members dedication to the program is tied in with what uniform they are allowed to wear then we probably can do with out that person.

[Spike]

HEY.....you can wear your earned military decorations and awards on the CSU.  However there are only three days when it is allowed by Army/Navy/Air Force policy.  Those would be three national holidays.......can anyone name them?

So to answer the question, yes you can wear the awards, but only on certain days.  So is there really a point to wearing them??

I understand the sacrifices made by members of the Uniformed Services, I too have made sacrifices and been awarded decorations.  However, CAP is not a Uniformed Service.  We must follow strict guidelines and US Code regarding civilian wearing of decorations, on a civilian suit.  PERIOD.

It sucks, yes, but until it changes, follow the rules.  It will change, I have no doubt, but lets not get too emotional in here over it. 

[SilverEagle2]

And I still stand with my comments that if a members dedication to the program is tied in with what uniform they are allowed to wear then we probably can do with out that person.

Agreed Sir.

[Eclipse]

I am a 22 year USAF veteran and I don't wear my USAF blingage on my CAP uniforms.....there is just too much.

There's another side road to this as well - members who wear only their military ribbons, which is just as wrong, or worse, than not being allowed to wear them on the corporates.

Some tell me they just don't feel like taking the time and already had the rack put together, some say they can't figure out the "complicated order", and my favorites "These are the only 'real' ones, so that's all I'm going to wear." (Well thank you very much, your holiness...)

The ability to wear some decorations from prior or other service is a nice to have, but if your rack doesn't have anything CAP on it, that defeats the whole purpose, because prior service ribbons don't mean a heck of a lot in a CAP context.  They don't tell me anything about what you can do or have done in CAP, which as a commander, is my primary reason for reading your rack to start with.

[Pylon]

I am a 22 year USAF veteran and I don't wear my USAF blingage on my CAP uniforms.....there is just too much.

There's another side road to this as well - members who wear only their military ribbons, which is just as wrong, or worse, than not being allowed to wear them on the corporates.

Some tell me they just don't feel like taking the time and already had the rack put together, some say they can't figure out the "complicated order", and my favorites "These are the only 'real' ones, so that's all I'm going to wear." (Well thank you very much, your holiness...)

The ability to wear some decorations from prior or other service is a nice to have, but if your rack doesn't have anything CAP on it, that defeats the whole purpose, because prior service ribbons don't mean a heck of a lot in a CAP context.  They don't tell me anything about what you can do or have done in CAP, which as a commander, is my primary reason for reading your rack to start with.

How is wearing only military decorations any different than people like me who never wear any ribbons, CAP or otherwise, unless we have to (i/e: when service dress is expected)?   

[lordmonar]

HEY.....you can wear your earned military decorations and awards on the CSU.  However there are only three days when it is allowed by Army/Navy/Air Force policy.  Those would be three national holidays.......can anyone name them?

So to answer the question, yes you can wear the awards, but only on certain days.  So is there really a point to wearing them??

I understand the sacrifices made by members of the Uniformed Services, I too have made sacrifices and been awarded decorations.  However, CAP is not a Uniformed Service.  We must follow strict guidelines and US Code regarding civilian wearing of decorations, on a civilian suit.  PERIOD.

It sucks, yes, but until it changes, follow the rules.  It will change, I have no doubt, but lets not get too emotional in here over it.

But CAP regulations say you can't.   So it may be legal by USC but not by CAP.

[Eclipse]

How is wearing only military decorations any different than people like me who never wear any ribbons, CAP or otherwise, unless we have to (i/e: when service dress is expected)?

Not wearing any says you're either not impressed or can't be bothered.  As has been pointed out, its a USAF tradition for officers not to wear their ribbons on their blue shirts, so, whatever.

Wearing only military ribbons means (to me) that you want everyone to know you were in the military, but can't be bothered to respect the service you're currently in.  You've taken the time to show off your jelly beans, but not the jelly beans that matter where you are standing.

Given the choice I'd prefer they either be worn correctly (i.e. integrated into a proper combined rack), or not worn at all.

Which has nothing to do with respect or appreciation for prior service, so let's not go there.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Ribbons can be a PITA, but I wear them all.  Especially after my mess kit got peed in by the NLO. 

[Spike]

The ability to wear some decorations from prior or other service is a nice to have, but if your rack doesn't have anything CAP on it, that defeats the whole purpose, because prior service ribbons don't mean a heck of a lot in a CAP context.  They don't tell me anything about what you can do or have done in CAP, which as a commander, is my primary reason for reading your rack to start with.

Really........what about those members that do not wear ribbons at all?  So you base you decisions on who is a great CAP member by number of ribbons??  Or do you base it on how many Commendations they have?  Do you get happy when you see a lifesaving ribbon??

What ribbons should I be wearing to impress you?

I could be the most awesome person in CAP, but according to you, I mean nothing in CAP if I don't have a CAP Ribbon Rack that is impressive. 

Not wearing any says you're either not impressed or can't be bothered.  As has been pointed out, its a USAF tradition for officers not to wear their ribbons on their blue shirts, so, whatever.

Wearing only military ribbons means (to me) that you want everyone to know you were in the military, but can't be bothered to respect the service you're currently in.  You've taken the time to show off your jelly beans, but not the jelly beans that matter where you are standing.

Given the choice I'd prefer they either be worn correctly (i.e. integrated into a proper combined rack), or not worn at all.

That is a lot to take in.  First, by not wearing ribbons we just became "not impressed".  Impressed in what??  Or we "can't be bothered"........bothered by who?? 

Wearing military ribbons with or without CAP ribbons is a right and privilege granted to a person by the United States Government and the Air Force/ CAP.  They earned that right through service.  To say "just wear CAP ribbons" is wrong.  I know 3 Captains, and 2 Lt's in CAP that ONLY HAD military ribbons to wear, because they joined without having been in CAP before!  After 6 months they got their first CAP ribbon.  So to you, they should not wear their military ribbons?

This is one of the reasons why I love the POLO.  I don't have to deal with people looking at my achievements, and judging me based on bling.  All I have to worry about is doing my job in CAP.   

[Eclipse]

I could be the most awesome person in CAP, but according to you, I mean nothing in CAP if I don't have a CAP Ribbon Rack that is impressive.

That's not even remotely what I said...   

[Spike]

I could be the most awesome person in CAP, but according to you, I mean nothing in CAP if I don't have a CAP Ribbon Rack that is impressive.

That's not even remotely what I said...   

Ummm......you said.....

They don't tell me anything about what you can do or have done in CAP, which as a commander, is my primary reason for reading your rack to start with.

Which equates to worth.  "Can do"= WORTH.  "Have done"= WORTH

You said it, I just replied to it. 

[heliodoc]

You know I don't even wear my ribbons.

Being a former Mitchell and Earhart cadet in the late 70's and early 80's I wore 'em for awhile the only thing I really ever wore was a PJOC patch from 1979.......The only two things other than a solo encampment were USAFA Survival School and PJOC.  Those were the things I was after.  I then later went into the US Army, where you needed to put em for inspection.

Second time around for CAP........so I choose to NOT wear the confetti.  Does that bother anyone that I know?  NO.  Sure must bother some here.

I accomplished a lot in the last 5 yrs in CAP and I'll have to say...I got too much going on now prepping for MP checkrides and a transition to another aircraft.  So yes, in a sense I can't be bothered and the folks I hang with who are in CAP know what I have done in my CAP jacket and how I have helped them get a training ground established with the ARNG in my locale....  Is there a CAP ribbon for moving and shaking with the facility managers and getting cadets on task for their SQTR's??   Probably not....

So what??

I generally am not impressed with confetti strung up all the way to the shoulder.  It s about those individuals who "gots" all that confetti is going to operate with cadets and seniors..

CAP confetti?  Colorful!   Generally, not useful for other than clutter

[Eclipse]

I could be the most awesome person in CAP, but according to you, I mean nothing in CAP if I don't have a CAP Ribbon Rack that is impressive.

That's not even remotely what I said...   

Ummm......you said.....

They don't tell me anything about what you can do or have done in CAP, which as a commander, is my primary reason for reading your rack to start with.

Which equates to worth.  "Can do"= WORTH.  "Have done"= WORTH

You said it, I just replied to it.

Please don't type words for me, I'm fully capable of saying exactly what I mean, and I already have.
The fact that you choose to interpret what I said as above, speaks volumes...

[Spike]

^ Those are acceptable assumptions by most intelligent people.  You typed it, don't make it like I am the person in the wrong here.

You said as Commander you look at the rack first.  Why??  So you can make assumptions about a person before even getting to know them.  That is a bad way to operate.  You know it, I know it and everyone else knows it.

I would never judge you based on what you may or may not be wearing. 

[Eclipse]

^ Those are acceptable assumptions by most intelligent people.  You typed it, don't make it like I am the person in the wrong here.

You said as Commander you look at the rack first.  Why??  So you can make assumptions about a person before even getting to know them.  That is a bad way to operate.  You know it, I know it and everyone else knows it.

I would never judge you based on what you may or may not be wearing.

Spike, just stop please, you're just making stuff up.

What I said, was that the only reason I look at a CAP rack is to see what you've done or can do in CAP.
If you only wear military badges, it tells me nothing about your CAP history, so its irrelevant in our context.

Now please knock off trying to make an issue where there isn't any.

[JohnKachenmeister]

A uniform is a symbolic resume.

I can tell what a person has done and is qualified to do, his position in the organization with regard to rank, and his significant acomplishments.

There is nothing wrong with checking out and making assessments based on awards/badges/decorations.

The purpose of uniform insignia was originally exactly that... to show what a person is capable of doing and what he has done in the past.  When things get fluid on a battlefield, and a new commander steps up in the heat of battle, there is not time to submit to him a written resume of your background.

And, most commanders found it useful to know if they were giving orders to the bugler or to the chaplain.

[Spike]

^ On a battlefield, insignia of rank is different than ribbons.  Apples and Oranges.

[Short Field]

I do wear my USAF medals with my CAP medals on my mess dress though. 

  When I saw Lordmonar wearing his CAP Mess Dress, he looked like a Central American Dictator!    

[lordmonar]

I do wear my USAF medals with my CAP medals on my mess dress though. 

  When I saw Lordmonar wearing his CAP Mess Dress, he looked like a Central American Dictator!    

That would be El Jeffe to you! 

[Cecil DP]

I do wear my USAF medals with my CAP medals on my mess dress though. 

  When I saw Lordmonar wearing his CAP Mess Dress, he looked like a Central American Dictator!    

That would be El Jeffe to you! 

Must be rich, those things cost a fortune

[JohnKachenmeister]

^ On a battlefield, insignia of rank is different than ribbons.  Apples and Oranges.

Not originally.

[Hawk200]

That would be El Jeffe to you! 

If didn't know better, I'd say someone's been playing Mafia Wars.

You know they can't see you, John? Right? 

[Prospector]

Wow, again I take a few days off and the discussion grows leaps and bounds  :clap:

Of course some very good replies and some not so good...shall I say...baiting..going on. 

There are a few on this thread that know what the crux of the whole issue is here - here is what the discussion is NOT about:

1. This is not a discussion about whether or not prior military service is to be respected or not. It is a given that it should and is in CAP. If you don't respect prior service then please leave CAP.

2. This is not about whether uniform A, B, or C is the "best". It is about the meaning of UNIFORM and UNIFORMITY. Having multiple dress or other types of uniforms IS NOT UNIFORM. As earlier stated, the wearing of a uniform properly goes a long way in promoting professionalism. Wearing lots of different uniforms (even if worn properly individually) does not present uniformity or a cohesive organizational image.

3. This is not a discussion of Cadets versus Seniors. We are all CAP and each member should be afforded proper respect for who they are and what they are doing in CAP.

4. This is not about which regs, DoD, Army, Navy, or whatever is best for CAP members. CAP regs are for CAP members. If CAP regs are off base, then it should be brought to CAP National and let them do the research with CAP-USAF and modify the regs accordingly.

Whether you like it or not, CAP is a paramilitary uniformed service - albeit we are a volunteer civilian one and not regular military or civil-service.

My only complaint is that there are too many "if you want to" holes in the current regs, and I hafve to agree that it is very odd and disingenuous to prior military service members for them to not be able to wear the same awards and decs on the CSU as the AF Style allows. To have different rules for this for each "style" of uniform does seem a bit like discrimination and an unequal application of the system.

Again, both the CSU and the AF Style uniforms are CAP uniforms and NOT regular AF. As CAP uniforms we should be allowed to wear the same bling on each. I'd be happy to settle on either style, but keeping them both doesn't work for me.

Can someone please tell me what the problem would be with just having one set of each type of uniform? 1 Dress, 1 BDU type, 1 informal (Polo type), 1 Flight Suit. Do we REALLY need multiple "equivalents" of everything?

And to those people who say that you cannot wear your prior service stuff on civies better get new copies of the regs. Due to some very fine efforts of the VA and their recent promotion called the Veterans Pride Initiative (http://www1.va.gov/veteranspride/) just about all of the services now allow honorably discharged veterans to wear their bling on civies on national patriotic holidays and other suitable military type occassions. Almost all veterans organizations (VFW, American Legion, DAV, etc.) now allow members to wear their bling while participating in organization events.

I for one am very tired of "false humility" and the "60's liberal hippie" mentality that discourages vets from wearing their rightfully earned stuff. If you are a vet, wear your "stuff" proudly and tell the "military-uneducated" where to get off.
 
Ok, End of today's rant...