Another hat idea

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

A possible source for headgear for the G/W combo?

http://www.baylyhats.com/search.php?cat=4&subcat=87&title=Military_Headwear#

The one I would particularly favour is the USA Cadet Style:



Again...worn without insignia, it's a civilian hat.

[Angus]

Why do we need to add to that uniform?  It's fine the way it is. 

[Abby.L]

I'd say to make it optional. There are no "Dress" covers(a CAP approved ball cap is allowed, however) for the G/W, and there really should be, as it is the alternative to AF Blues. Just my two cents.

[arajca]

If this does get adopted, or submitted for adoption, require the senior flight cap device. The device ain't that expensive and helps maintain parity with the service uniform.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Why do we need to add to that uniform?  It's fine the way it is.

Yes...it's colourless and has no real way to perform customs and courtesies outside.  Quite fine.  Of course, I acknowledge that there are those who choose that uniform precisely because there are very little standards for it, and because you can largely get out of C&C's.

I'd say to make it optional. There are no "Dress" covers(a CAP approved ball cap is allowed, however) for the G/W, and there really should be, as it is the alternative to AF Blues. Just my two cents.

Very true, since the CSU was taken from us, we don't have any real alternative, and that's my point.

Of course, 39-1 is clear as mud on what a "CAP approved ball cap" is, which looks GOOFY with what is supposed to be a semidress uniform anyway.

If this does get adopted, or submitted for adoption, require the senior flight cap device. The device ain't that expensive and helps maintain parity with the service uniform.

I doubt it will ever get submitted, because somewhere along the line the corporatists will reject/suppress it.  That's why I suggest - no insignia, makes it a civilian hat.

[Abby.L]

Why do we need to add to that uniform?  It's fine the way it is.

Yes...it's colourless and has no real way to perform customs and courtesies outside.  Quite fine.  Of course, I acknowledge that there are those who choose that uniform precisely because there are very little standards for it, and because you can largely get out of C&C's.

I'd say to make it optional. There are no "Dress" covers(a CAP approved ball cap is allowed, however) for the G/W, and there really should be, as it is the alternative to AF Blues. Just my two cents.

Very true, since the CSU was taken from us, we don't have any real alternative, and that's my point.

Of course, 39-1 is clear as mud on what a "CAP approved ball cap" is, which looks GOOFY with what is supposed to be a semidress uniform anyway.

If this does get adopted, or submitted for adoption, require the senior flight cap device. The device ain't that expensive and helps maintain parity with the service uniform.

I doubt it will ever get submitted, because somewhere along the line the corporatists will reject/suppress it.  That's why I suggest - no insignia, makes it a civilian hat.

As I said, make it optional. As for the civilian aspect; How many commanders would really let someone get away with something that looks that military? It would be like putting on a 1940's USAAF officer's cap... It would have a distinct military aire to it. All you'd be doing is trying to get away with something military-looking by passing it off for civilian.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

As I said, make it optional. As for the civilian aspect; How many commanders would really let someone get away with something that looks that military? It would be like putting on a 1940's USAAF officer's cap... It would have a distinct military aire to it. All you'd be doing is trying to get away with something military-looking by passing it off for civilian.

Yes, make it optional.

And, indeed, despite appearances, without military designation it is a civilian cap, though maybe a beret comes closer to that (and we know what CT'ers generally think of those).

But how much more "military" would it look than this off-the-shelf, completely non-military, airline pilot's cap?



I just don't get the idea of wearing a "CAP ball cap" (which is undefined anyway) with what is supposed to be a "dressier" uniform.

[Sgt. Fischer]

A possible source for headgear for the G/W combo?

http://www.baylyhats.com/search.php?cat=4&subcat=87&title=Military_Headwear#

The one I would particularly favour is the USA Cadet Style:



Again...worn without insignia, it's a civilian hat.

Well, they already have those hats. but, they're for SM's only.

[Abby.L]

The hat would actually be closer to the General Grade flight(Garrison) cap. 2dLt through Colonel have the same flight cap, composed of blue and silver rhombuses(Think of what any SM cap looks like). However, the General Grade cap has a solid silver trim, similar to this. I'm not sure where this cap is based out of(USAFA? WP?), but it would still be pretty distinct. If anything, we could adopt a plain, dark trimmed garrison cap, so that the RM doesn't even THINK that a CAP SM in G/W is really in the military.

MODIFIED to show examples.

General Grade AF: http://www.bernardcap.com/caps/images/23933DL.jpg

2dLt-Col: http://www.bernardcap.com/caps/images/23932DL.jpg

Enlisted: http://www.bernardcap.com/caps/images/23931DL.jpg

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I THINK the example I posted is black with silver piping.

Another possibility: the West Point garrison cap.



Bernard Cap lists this one as "foreign military"...whatever that means.



This one's out of left field, but I found it on Evilbay.  It's a garrison cap from the Bulgarian Air Force; looks like grey with light blue piping.


This kind is from the Royal Military College of Canada (like our West Point), though of course the badge would have to go and the buttons could be replaced with CAP buttons.


This one's more like you're suggesting...but we'd have to get authorisation from the Navy.


What I'm aiming for is something that would cause a minimum of fuss with "wearing military with civilian clothes," even though the WP grey cap could come close to that.

[Nathan]

I just don't get why a hat is needed at all. If it's raining or the sun is in your eyes, then a flight cap won't help anyway, so people who get to wear the baseball caps are better off anyway.

[Abby.L]

I just don't get why a hat is needed at all. If it's raining or the sun is in your eyes, then a flight cap won't help anyway, so people who get to wear the baseball caps are better off anyway.

I think it really comes down to the fact that the G/W is a dress(Or, as close as we could come to it), and there is no cap that is associated with it. It's the equivalent to the AF short/long-sleeve blues, and they're required to have a cap, regardless of if it's flight or service that's chosen. Also, one could argue the idea of uniformity. When a group of people in G/W are with a group of people with AF Blues, it's rather noticable that the G/W's have no cap on. While a minor problem to us, people on the outside might be questioning that.

Just my two cents. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I think it really comes down to the fact that the G/W is a dress(Or, as close as we could come to it), and there is no cap that is associated with it. It's the equivalent to the AF short/long-sleeve blues, and they're required to have a cap, regardless of if it's flight or service that's chosen. Also, one could argue the idea of uniformity. When a group of people in G/W are with a group of people with AF Blues, it's rather noticable that the G/W's have no cap on. While a minor problem to us, people on the outside might be questioning that.

Just my two cents. 

Correctimundo.

That was one thing that was potentially solved by the CSU...but we got our knuckles rapped over that.

I wear both the AF blue and the G/W...but I really feel odd outside without a hat on, and even odder saluting/returning salutes outside without one.

It's nothing to do with keeping the sun out of your eyes.

I think the people who say "no hat!" do so because the G/W uniform is, frankly, about as non-uniform as you can get.  The only specs are white shirt, grey trousers, black belt...and that's it.  No shades (grey and white aren't colours, anyway), cut or manufacturer.  The only "uniformity" is the CAP insignia.  A lot of these same people get irritated when suggestions are made to make the G/W more of a true "uniform."

This is why I say that many styles of hat, without insignia, are civilian hats and wearable with the grey/white.

[Nathan]

I think the whole "getting a hat" thing is attempting to side-step the reason that the G/W combo exists in the first place. The USAF doesn't seem to be comfortable with the idea that anyone look remotely like the military when they are outside of weight or grooming standards. That's all there is to it.

So when you try to say, "We should be uniform with the guys in blues", you're saying, "We should look like the guys in blues", which is saying, "We should look like the guys in the military uniforms."

And the fact that the G/W uniform isn't a blues uniform obviously doesn't matter, as demonstrated by the CSU. If the USAF is worried about people who LOOK like the military being associated with the military, then you see the problem with taking any steps toward uniformity with the guys who look like the military, right?

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I think the whole "getting a hat" thing is attempting to side-step the reason that the G/W combo exists in the first place. The USAF doesn't seem to be comfortable with the idea that anyone look remotely like the military when they are outside of weight or grooming standards. That's all there is to it.

So when you try to say, "We should be uniform with the guys in blues", you're saying, "We should look like the guys in blues", which is saying, "We should look like the guys in the military uniforms."

And the fact that the G/W uniform isn't a blues uniform obviously doesn't matter, as demonstrated by the CSU. If the USAF is worried about people who LOOK like the military being associated with the military, then you see the problem with taking any steps toward uniformity with the guys who look like the military, right?

Your logic is flawed, committing the fallacy of hasty generalisation.

CAP, not the Air Force, kiboshed the CSU.  The AF was OK with it after we made the modifications they asked.

There is absolutely NO proof that the AF is "worried" about the G/W looking "too military."  If that were the case, it would still look like it did pre-1995: no ribbons, no rank, no epaulettes, only the blazer nameplate.  I remember that.

I believe that the vast majority of uniform "worries" is a holdover from the berry boards days.  If the AF indeed had that kind of problem, we wouldn't be allowed to wear their uniform at all.

Anyway, the G/W already looks like some military services, the German Bundeswehr among them.



Remove the grey service coat and you have a white shirt, dark grey trousers and grey rank slides.  I've seen them.

[Pylon]

Another "Hat" Idea...   

[Sgt. Fischer]

Another "Hat" Idea...   

My commander almost made me wear one of those...   

[Extremepredjudice]

Another "Hat" Idea...   

My commander almost made me wear one of those...   

1st world problems...

[PHall]

CyBorg, what is with this hat fixation of yours?

Seriously dude, you're starting to get a bit creepy.

[Nathan]

I think the whole "getting a hat" thing is attempting to side-step the reason that the G/W combo exists in the first place. The USAF doesn't seem to be comfortable with the idea that anyone look remotely like the military when they are outside of weight or grooming standards. That's all there is to it.

So when you try to say, "We should be uniform with the guys in blues", you're saying, "We should look like the guys in blues", which is saying, "We should look like the guys in the military uniforms."

And the fact that the G/W uniform isn't a blues uniform obviously doesn't matter, as demonstrated by the CSU. If the USAF is worried about people who LOOK like the military being associated with the military, then you see the problem with taking any steps toward uniformity with the guys who look like the military, right?

Your logic is flawed, committing the fallacy of hasty generalisation.

CAP, not the Air Force, kiboshed the CSU.  The AF was OK with it after we made the modifications they asked.

I made no such "hasty generalisation [sic]." I never said that the USAF nixed the CSU. What I did assert was that the USAF did not allow people who were out of their uniform standards to wear the military uniform, because they don't want people to mistake an overweight or bearded individual for a military officer.

That's all the information you really need. You assert that G/W wearers should be "uniform" with those who wear the military clothes. If the USAF wanted people outside of military standards to look more like the guys in the USAF uniform, then they would have authorized it for everyone. They have not, which is why the G/W combo exists. It is SUPPOSED to look civilian, and making it look more military demonstrates that the whole point of the uniform is going over your head.

If I had my way, everyone would be in a corporate uniform, cadets included, BTW. But that's neither here nor there. My point is that by trying to make the civilian uniform look more military, you're defeating the whole point of the uniform's existence. It's a CAP uniform, regardless of whether or not it has a hat. Why can't you be proud of that?

Anyway, the G/W already looks like some military services, the German Bundeswehr among them.

I'm sure there is a big concern right now at USAF HQ that overweight CAP members are being mistaken for German federal defense force members by the civilian population.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

What I did assert was that the USAF did not allow people who were out of their uniform standards to wear the military uniform, because they don't want people to mistake an overweight or bearded individual for a military officer.
...
If I had my way, everyone would be in a corporate uniform, cadets included, BTW.

Based on what? I've seen references to making the CAP AF based uniform distinctive from the AF uniform. I've never seen disparaging remarks about our heavy or hairy members.

By your reasoning the BBDU should have no cover, yet it does. When in the G/W or BBDU we render the same C&C as the those in the AF style. Some of us in the G/W feel a bit odd outdoors w/out cover. And no, a baseball cap with a dress uniform does not cut it.

So, you want us all in corporate uniforms that have no possible military look. Golf shirts for all?

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

CyBorg, what is with this hat fixation of yours?

Seriously dude, you're starting to get a bit creepy.

I've been called worse than "creepy,"  but honestly I don't find anything amiss about making suggestions for a piece of cloth on the head.  I know I'm not the only CAP member who feels this way.  I certainly didn't mean to create offence.

My "fixation," if there is one, is to be in line with what General Courter said in her PowerPoint: standardise the G/W uniforms (and I know she didn't say anything about a hat).  Right now, they are anything BUT "uniform," and truth be told I see too many people wearing them in a slovenly manner.

And, if anything, I would like to see NHQ clarify what sort of hat is/isn't allowed.  Right now all the regs say is the "CAP baseball cap."  That can mean anything from the ones Vanguard sells to ones you find on Evilbay.



Something like that would be far better with the polo shirt.

That's all the information you really need. You assert that G/W wearers should be "uniform" with those who wear the military clothes.

I'd first prefer that they be uniform with each other.  There are so many different cuts of the shirt and trousers, not to mention shades of grey, that it is not uniform, and that's got nertz (® Major Frank Burns) to do with looking like the USAF.  And, yes, I would like the blazer to be replaced with something more like airline crew wear.



Disclaimer: I am not advocating or discouraging sleeve rings.

It is SUPPOSED to look civilian, and making it look more military demonstrates that the whole point of the uniform is going over your head.

If it is going over my head, then, I wonder, why was the change made in 1994-95 to allow a uniform with rank and devices?  The previous one had neither, except for the blazer nameplate.

If I had my way, everyone would be in a corporate uniform, cadets included, BTW. But that's neither here nor there.

Why?

My point is that by trying to make the civilian uniform look more military, you're defeating the whole point of the uniform's existence. It's a CAP uniform, regardless of whether or not it has a hat. Why can't you be proud of that?

It's not that I'm not proud of a CAP uniform, even though I cannot understand why it has to be so colourless.  I just don't get it.  THAT may well be going over my head.

If my purpose in advocating a hat is solely to make it more "military," then...

http://www.airlineuniforms.net/hat.htm

I would be quite happy with any of these styles, even if the blasted thing has to be grey.  The flight cap/beret are suggestions.  No more, no less.

And, as I said to PHall, I meant no offence.

I'm sure there is a big concern right now at USAF HQ that overweight CAP members are being mistaken for German federal defense force members by the civilian population.

I'm not sure how much the AF is concerned with us, period.

Or if they are concerned with their uniforms to that extent...I don't think they'd be so good with SDF air personnel wearing them with far, far less mods than we do.

Again, all this is just my opinion.  I'm certainly not foolish enough to believe that CAP would actually adopt anything other than the status quo.