Authorization of NCSA patches in place of the wing patch.

[Cadet David Derasmo]

     Are NCSA patches authorized to be worn in place of the wing patch? All I could find on the matter was that it was based on individual wing approval. Couldn't find anything specific in 39-1 on the matter. Thank you for your time.

[SarDragon]

No.

See CAPM 39-1, Table6-4, Item 16, for original placement, which was on the right shoulder of Flight Suits, BDUs, Utility Uniforms and Field Uniforms.

Then look at the ICL, dated 12 March 2012, to see the new authorized location.

[arajca]

IIRC, this was discussed by echelons above reality. Rumor says it MAY be in the new CAPM 39-1, but until hell freezes over 39-1 comes out, it is not authorized.

[LSThiker]

No.

See CAPM 39-1, Table6-4, Item 16, for original placement, which was on the right shoulder of Flight Suits, BDUs, Utility Uniforms and Field Uniforms.

Then look at the ICL, dated 12 March 2012, to see the new authorized location.

SarDragon, actually, it is bit confusing in the ICL:

Optional right shoulder patches worn on the BDUs and field uniforms. Those
patches removed to wear the reverse American flag on the right shoulder of these uniforms are
now authorized to be worn on the left shoulder or centered on the lower portion of the left pocket
if the Wing patch has been authorized as a mandatory item by the commander concerned.

The way I read this is that NCSA patches are now on the left shoulder unless a wing patch is authorized, then it is left pocket.

[SarDragon]

I guess you get to take your pick, then. I'm a pocket kinda guy myself. YMMV. Tempus fugit. Notary Sojac. *Batteries Not Included

[Eclipse]

Or simply leave them off and look like a professional...

[Storm Chaser]

Or simply leave them off and look like a professional...

So, wearing authorized patches correctly, in accordance with current regulations and policies, does not look "professional"? Is than an opinion or fact?

[jeders]

Or simply leave them off and look like a professional...

So, wearing authorized patches correctly, in accordance with current regulations and policies, does not look "professional"? Is than an opinion or fact?

No, wearing a thousand patches, not from units or schools, but activities, makes you look non-uniform when standing with others, and thus less professional.

[a2capt]

How so? There is a place for an activity patch. It is a specified location. It's about as different as a group of people from different units.

Wearing patches in all the wrong places, making up placement, that would be a problem.

[Storm Chaser]

Or simply leave them off and look like a professional...

So, wearing authorized patches correctly, in accordance with current regulations and policies, does not look "professional"? Is than an opinion or fact?

No, wearing a thousand patches, not from units or schools, but activities, makes you look non-uniform when standing with others, and thus less professional.

Well, lucky for us, no one is allowed to wear "a thousand patches" on their uniforms. Only one NCSA patch can be worn at any given time. Only one patch can be worn on the left shoulder. Only one patch can be worn on the left pocket. You get my point...

So, going back to my question, when you say it looks "less professional", is that an opinion or a fact?

[Eclipse]

So, going back to my question, when you say it looks "less professional", is that an opinion or a fact?

Fact.

A member wearing all the authorized patches makes a NASCAR driver looks subdued.

[Storm Chaser]

So, going back to my question, when you say it looks "less professional", is that an opinion or a fact?

Fact.

Wrong answer. Please try again.

A member wearing all the authorized patches makes a NASCAR driver looks subdued.

We're not supposed to be subdued, are we? If we were, then our patches would be designed that way.

Sorry to call you out on this, but just because you feel strongly about something, it doesn't make it a fact. You seem to forget that from time to time.

If CAP wants to make patches more subdued, they can certainly do that (I understand that there may be limitations imposed by the Air Force). If they want to limit the number of patches worn, they can do that as well.

The Air Force has a limit of four badges on the service uniform and removed some patches from their ABUs. The Army allows many more insignias. Would you say the Army looks "less professional" than the Air Force because of that? I hope not.

Personally, I could do with less colors on the BDU. I would prefer we wore a different utility uniform (non-camouflage) all together. But those are my opinions. We have to be careful not to let arrogance confuse opinions with facts.

[Hawk200]

So, going back to my question, when you say it looks "less professional", is that an opinion or a fact?

Fact.

Wrong answer. Please try again.

A member wearing all the authorized patches makes a NASCAR driver looks subdued.

We're not supposed to be subdued, are we? If we were, then our patches would be designed that way.

Sorry to call you out on this, but just because you feel strongly about something, it doesn't make it a fact. You seem to forget that from time to time.

If CAP wants to make patches more subdued, they can certainly do that (I understand that there may be limitations imposed by the Air Force). If they want to limit the number of patches worn, they can do that as well.

Either you seriously missed the point, or intentionally did so. How many NASCAR drivers wear subdued patches? I've never seen one.

The point wasn't subdued vs. vivid, but the relative appearance. Bit of a stretch when it comes to NASCAR uniforms looking subdued relatively, but less color certainly wouldn't hurt CAP's image. Right now, the only legal way to look more subdued is to wear fewer patches. I only wear the minimums, personally, and the only other insignia I wear (other than the minimum required) are subdued and allowed to be.

[Eclipse]

The fact that something is "authorized" or "a part of our history", doesn't make it look less ridiculous or more professional.

[Storm Chaser]

The fact that something is "authorized" or "a part of our history", doesn't make it look less ridiculous or more professional.

That may be so, but it doesn't change the fact that your "facts" are just opinions.

[a2capt]

We're not supposed to be subdued, are we? If we were, then our patches would be designed that way.

[Storm Chaser]

Right now, the only legal way to look more subdued is to wear fewer patches. I only wear the minimums, personally, and the only other insignia I wear (other than the minimum required) are subdued and allowed to be.

And you can certainly do that. But I don't believe that a cadet that chooses to wear an NCSA patch looks "ridiculous" or "less professional". It may be someone's opinion, but it's not a fact.

[Storm Chaser]

We're not supposed to be subdued, are we? If we were, then our patches would be designed that way.

And as usual, an OP asks a question and the thread is highjacked. If you don't like wearing patches, then don't. But don't say that someone looks "ridiculous" or "less professional" because they choose to wear an authorized patch.

[Eclipse]

...But don't say that someone looks "ridiculous" or "less professional" because they choose to wear an authorized patch.

We're not talking about "an" authorized patch, the point you're missing is wearing >all< of them, which seems to be a "thing" for
many members, especially cadets, and usually in inverse proportion to what they've actually "done" in a real-world context.

The ultramarine blue tapes are bad enough, then you add an NCSA, unit insignia, wing patch, SAR dog, throw in a tab
for good measure, top it off with a dog-bowled orange hat, or pancake, and you have the makings of a NASCAR driver.

This is the credibility-killing uniform equivalent of putting a huge spoiler wing on a Saturn sedan.

[Storm Chaser]

Eclipse, this particular discussion started when you said:

Or simply leave them off and look like a professional...

I reread the previous posts and none of then said anything about wearing all the patches at once. The closest post was about wearing both the wing patch and an NCSA patch. Regardless, you didn't present your point as an opinion, which would've been a valid one, but as fact. I simply disagree.

We can argue all day long and accomplish nothing, but I simply don't have time for that. So here's my last post on this thread. I respect you and acknowledge your accomplishments. I think you're knowledgable and experienced and a great asset to CAP. I agree with many (actually most) of your points, but sometimes I just wish you could respectfully disagree with others, without automatically assuming that you're right and they're wrong. Opinions, while valid, are not facts.

Have a good day.