BDU Sock Color

[majdomke]

Some of the issues that drive me nuts regarding uniform inspections are: pants not hemmed, no nametag, forgotten hats, missing insignias, you name it. I've only rarely noticed the wrong socks and that's only been in the blues. I had one cadet come in with his cub scout belt in his blues. Took me a few double-takes to figure that one out. WIWAC we had fingernail and hand inspection. Works well for females who leave bright nail polish on and makes the males learn how to clean under the nails.

[heliodoc]

Page 2 on socks??

Solving CAP's sock problems one page at a time........ .

[Hawk200]

Page 2 on socks??

Solving CAP's sock problems one page at a time........ .

Hasn't stuck to just socks, covering some other issues too.

Should we discuss the best set of long nose pliers for you?

[PaulR]

The 39-1 reference says it all. We don't vote on compliance with a pub.

White socks are pretty inexpensive, too. I'm kinda surprised that you have cadets that don't have any.

And I am surprised that white socks are authorized with the BDU uniform.  I do agree that regs are made to be followed but there are some times when nonsensical   regs needs to be re-explored.   

Military grade boot socks are made in green and black.   They are made in a manner which protectes the foot, ankle, and lower leg from friction caused by the boot.  White socks do not do this and will allow the formation of blisters.  Not only that, but they are visually distracting.  Socks are not always out of sight.  The bloused BDU trouser does have a nack of riding up the leg a little, while sitting.

Sure, I could aways wear the black boot socks but simply overlooking an ill-conceived regulation is not doing anyone any good.

[Hawk200]

And I am surprised that white socks are authorized with the BDU uniform.

White socks have been allowed by the Air Force with utilities for a long time. It's only recently that they've included the "must be covered by black socks" so white doesn't show.

Military grade boot socks are made in green and black.

There are even better boot socks made in a myriad of colors. Tan, brown, sage, foliage, gray, just to name a few. Most of them are aftermarket like UnderArmor, Fox River, and a few others. The Army currently allows socks in tan, green or black for wear with utility uniforms.

They are made in a manner which protectes the foot, ankle, and lower leg from friction caused by the boot.

There are more than a few boot socks made in white as well, and some people might have reason to wear them.Saw a doctor yesterday that told me I shouldn't be wearing any colored socks. Apparently, they're causing problems with the foot fungus I picked up somewhere on my deployment. So, there are some legitimate reasons to wear them.

White socks do not do this and will allow the formation of blisters.

You're assuming that every white sock is made of the same material. They're not.  I've got a few "Smart Wool" sock pairs that have plenty of padding in the same areas. The socks are marketed to runners, but they have the same configuration of all the fancy boot socks I own.

Second, even if they don't have padding, it's not really an issue during regular meetings. I've worn the common white cotton athletic socks with boots before during my days as active Air Force, and never had a problem with blisters. If someone is getting blisters within three hours, there's another problem entirely.

Not only that, but they are visually distracting.  Socks are not always out of sight.  The bloused BDU trouser does have a nack of riding up the leg a little, while sitting. Sure, I could aways wear the black boot socks but simply overlooking an ill-conceived regulation is not doing anyone any good.

They're only distracting if you choose to be distracted by them. If they're white, then they meet the requirements of the publication. You're imposing personal preferences, not the regulatory direction of a publication.

But, there is a way that you can freely mandate that only black boot socks be worn in your unit. You can supply the socks.

[Eclipse]

Black or white, whatever.  The reg is clear, and we're not in the Army, so that's irrelevant.

You can find decent-quality socks suitable for most general CAP use at Wal*Mart.  I won't wear anything but socks from the MCSS that are clearly designed for boots, but in the end the most important thing is they are padded and long enough to cover the calf past the top of the boot to avoid chafing, etc. 

The last squadron I visited there was one cadet in blues - when he sat down I noticed he was wearing white anklets.   

[Hawk200]

Black or white, whatever.  The reg is clear, and we're not in the Army, so that's irrelevant.

Point taken. I mentioned the Army only to show other examples available.

The last squadron I visited there was one cadet in blues - when he sat down I noticed he was wearing white anklets.   

That's just wrong.

[ol'fido]

First, it was shirt tucking and now it's sock color. We continue to worry about the ants while the elephants are stomping us to death.

[Eclipse]

First, it was shirt tucking and now it's sock color. We continue to worry about the ants while the elephants are stomping us to death.

So now every discussion on this board has to be earth-shattering and org-changing to meet your criteria for posting?

[Pumbaa]

What color undi's can we wear???

Can I were thong?  Or do I have to wear boxers?

[DC]

What color undi's can we wear???

Can I were thong?  Or do I have to wear boxers?

Thank you. Someone has to point out the ridiculousness of arguing about socks.

[Gunner C]

What color undi's can we wear???

Can I were thong?  Or do I have to wear boxers?

If I can't see it, I don't care.

[DC]

What color undi's can we wear???

Can I were thong?  Or do I have to wear boxers?

If I can't see it, I don't care.

Precisely, and unless they've recently invented x-ray goggles, you can't see through boot leather.

Who cares if someone is wearing green, brown, pink, black, whatever colored socks, as long as they aren't going to kill their feet by wearing them (ankle socks, for instance).

Don't we have better things to worry about?

[RedFox24]

First, it was shirt tucking and now it's sock color. We continue to worry about the ants while the elephants are stomping us to death.

So now every discussion on this board has to be earth-shattering and org-changing to meet your criteria for posting?

org changing or earth shattering...........wow now that would be fun to read.

So long as we dont discuss the color of the lint in my navel during a CAP activity, I could care less, at that point you are going to far...................

[Eclipse]

As was pointed out earlier but apparently missed, we're talking about cadets here.

Cadets are inspected regularly and judged on their adherence to regulations.

[mmouw]

I would have to say what gets the job done is what is important. I have never been called out on the color of my socks in any uniform inspection I have been through in the Air Force. I also can say that I have never looked for the color of the cadets socks when doing a uniform inspection on BDUs. I have on blues because the uniform is usually what we present ourselves to the public in. That and you can't get by with white socks in blues because as soon as you sit down, your secret is out.

Until reading these posts, I had thought green socks were authorized for wear with the BDUs. I have been wearing them for a few years now because of extra padding in them. I know there are black socks like them but I wear green because they are not as hot. There are times when the reg has not been updated in some time (39-1), and there have been improvements on what was authorized for wear when written. Now don't get me wrong, there are common sense issues that should be handled at the lowest level possible. Showing up with some addition to the uniform because it looks cool is not what I am talking about. The comfort and safety of our people is what we should be thinking about, not what color of sock they have on when we are out looking for that downed aircraft. If we have kittens about the color of the socks our ground teams are wearing and that results in blisters that limits our abilities to perform our duties, that is the real issue.

I have been a cadet guy since I joined CAP some 18 years ago. I do think it is important to hold everyone accountable for uniform wear. I also think that when there is a question about an item like this, the chain of command is how it should be handled. Making a suggestion to the uniform committee is something that should take place when we have these issues.

[IceNine]

I have been a cadet guy since I joined CAP some 18 years ago. I do think it is important to hold everyone accountable for uniform wear.

You just summed up in one sentence the volunteer mentality.

39-1 gets ignored today.  Tomorrow its 60-1.

Holding people accountable for the simple things,  Leads to a compliance mentality.

Not pointing out simple things leads to "no one ever told me that"

[DC]

I have been a cadet guy since I joined CAP some 18 years ago. I do think it is important to hold everyone accountable for uniform wear.

You just summed up in one sentence the volunteer mentality.

39-1 gets ignored today.  Tomorrow its 60-1.

Holding people accountable for the simple things,  Leads to a compliance mentality.

Not pointing out simple things leads to "no one ever told me that"

Did you actually read what you quoted? He said he does believe everyone should be held accountable for uniform wear.

[IceNine]

Nope, I missed the n't

And went with the theme of the post.

I suppose I could modify to one of the other lines in the same post that proves my point

[Major Carrales]

39-1 gets ignored today.  Tomorrow its 60-1.

I would say that the above is a rather disingenuous assumption and assumes a culture of laziness among CAP aviators. This added to the fact that CAPM 39-1 is so seldom updated and many times out of date due to a litany of CAP policy letters whereas CAPR 60-1 is updated regularly to be in line with CAP policy in the field...I might say that CAPM 39-1 is inferior to CAPR 60-1 and CAPR 60-3. ( a point presented here for the purpose of debate)

I find it hard to believe that something like wearing a crew neck is quite the same as flying without the authority of a Flight Release.

Many of the mundane uniform issues are not really of considerable issue.  For example, CAPM 39-1 states that appropriate undergarments should be worn with all uniforms.  Does this mean that we should inspect everyone for this?  Make a public display of the activity and examples of those that fail it?  However, an Aircraft inspection as called for by CAPR 60-1 or other policy is clearly necessary and whose finding must be acted on.

All right, Devil's Advocacy aside...convince me that checking people's underwear is as important as preventing in flight issues that might result in the soiling of the prior.