With the sudden, but expected demise of the CSU, a large discussion has been brought up about CAP vs USAF uniforms once again. Obviously the CSU blurred the lines and made some waves that did not go over well. However, the CSU was a good idea.
I would like to pose a new topic on a... well... old topic: A CAP-distinctive uniform. Too many people seem to think that the white/gray combo isn't good because, well, gray pants come in many different forms, from cargo to khaki, wool to denim, so there is no uniformity.
Here are some questions for discussion:
Should CAP-distinctive be for ALL members, or just seniors?
Should CAP-distinctive uniforms be of a military nature or a business nature (ie. service coat cut vs. blazer cut)?
What standards should be adhered to?
Will headgear be worn (flight cap, service cap, baseball cap, beanie with propellor)?
Should this CAP-distinctive uniform be the ONLY "dress" uniform, or should golf shirts/white grays still be authorized?
Should "dress" and "utility" uniforms be abolished and one "all-purpose" uniform be created?
I'd like to hear any and all ideas. I have some amateur ability to draw things on the computer and color them, if people would like to verbalize ideas I may be able to put them into a visual perspective.
we don't need another CAP distinctive uniform. We need less of them.
Edit: Halleluja, the call has been answered. (I just noticed the TPU's going away!)
Please, don't.
Here Eclipse, allow me...
So, what is your opinion of President Obama?
Catholics versus Protestants, wha'cha think?
Did Pavel A. Chekov ever command a Starship in the Federation Star Fleet?
George W. Bush, best President in 50 years...what say you?
Orthodox versus Reformed Jews, which do you prefer?
More or less CAP uniforms...(I hear pantaloons are in this year)?
Cat or Dogs...which taste better?
There, that should kill this baby pretty fast. Care to join me in killing this? (yeah, I know I'm being a schmuck, but we don't need another UNIFORM thread.)
Quote from: kd8gua on November 09, 2009, 01:20:04 AM
With the sudden, but expected demise of the CSU, a large discussion has been brought up about CAP vs USAF uniforms once again. Obviously the CSU blurred the lines and made some waves that did not go over well. However, the CSU was a good idea.
I would like to pose a new topic on a... well... old topic: A CAP-distinctive uniform. Too many people seem to think that the white/gray combo isn't good because, well, gray pants come in many different forms, from cargo to khaki, wool to denim, so there is no uniformity.
Here are some questions for discussion:
Should CAP-distinctive be for ALL members, or just seniors?
Should CAP-distinctive uniforms be of a military nature or a business nature (ie. service coat cut vs. blazer cut)?
What standards should be adhered to?
Will headgear be worn (flight cap, service cap, baseball cap, beanie with propellor)?
Should this CAP-distinctive uniform be the ONLY "dress" uniform, or should golf shirts/white grays still be authorized?
Should "dress" and "utility" uniforms be abolished and one "all-purpose" uniform be created?
I'd like to hear any and all ideas. I have some amateur ability to draw things on the computer and color them, if people would like to verbalize ideas I may be able to put them into a visual perspective.
Here are my two cents...
1) The distinctive uniform should be restricted to senior members as long as Ma Blue continues to supply uniforms to our cadets.
2) These uniforms should be of a more military nature to reflect our status as the USAF Auxiliary. Sure, we're technically only an auxiliary when prosecuting AFAMs, but the general public is not aware of that distinction.
3) Standards should be the same as we currently have; weight and grooming for the AF threads and no such restrictions for the corporates. That said, it should be expected that either uniform will be worn properly or not at all.
4) I'd like to see a blue flight cap with the gray and whites. Yes, the colors won't match but that doesn't stop us from wearing them with sage green flight suits.
5) The golf shirt combo is working/casual attire, NOT a dress uniform.
6) There is still a need for utility uniforms.
With the demise of the CSU, I'd like to see an honest effort to standardize the gray and whites with the addition of a flight cap.
Please not another uniform thread.
Quote from: Major Carrales on November 09, 2009, 01:34:44 AM
Did Pavel A. Chekov ever command a Starship in the Federation Star Fleet?
LMAO! ;D
DN
Quote from: Major Carrales on November 09, 2009, 01:34:44 AM
Here Eclipse, allow me...
So, what is your opinion of President Obama?
Catholics versus Protestants, wha'cha think?
Did Pavel A. Chekov ever command a Starship in the Federation Star Fleet?
George W. Bush, best President in 50 years...what say you?
Orthodox versus Reformed Jews, which do you prefer?
More or less CAP uniforms...(I hear pantaloons are in this year)?
Cat or Dogs...which taste better?
There, that should kill this baby pretty fast. Care to join me in killing this? (yeah, I know I'm being a schmuck, but we don't need another UNIFORM thread.)
You know Maj C, I think we have suspended people for less. If you or anyone else would like a vacation from the forums, arrangements can be made.
Dont worry this will topic be back again and again. Yes I'm laughing like the rest on this forum with nothing else to do.
Quote from: MIKE on November 09, 2009, 02:26:49 AM
Quote from: Major Carrales on November 09, 2009, 01:34:44 AM
Here Eclipse, allow me...
So, what is your opinion of President Obama?
Catholics versus Protestants, wha'cha think?
Did Pavel A. Chekov ever command a Starship in the Federation Star Fleet?
George W. Bush, best President in 50 years...what say you?
Orthodox versus Reformed Jews, which do you prefer?
More or less CAP uniforms...(I hear pantaloons are in this year)?
Cat or Dogs...which taste better?
There, that should kill this baby pretty fast. Care to join me in killing this? (yeah, I know I'm being a schmuck, but we don't need another UNIFORM thread.)
You know Maj C, I think we have suspended people for less. If you or anyone else would like a vacation from the forums, arrangements can be made.
No, I'm good. At least my point was made. I think we can carry on without the vacation.
Quote from: billford1 on November 09, 2009, 02:27:27 AMI have seen maybe 6 members in our wing with the $360.00 CSU jacket. I wouldn't buy it at that price. I bought the blue slacks before they amended the CSU uniform criteria to include grooming standards.
Where did you get the idea that the corporate service jacket is $360? Its always been about $170 at VG (single source), which is not all that more that the $150 or so I spent on my USAF service coat.
And before you can make statements that appear to marginalize the CSU, you have to tell us
how many of the other people at these gathering were wearing services coats of any kind.
My experience locally has been that a number of "mid-career" CAP members were transitioning
to the CSU, especially more than a few former cadets, in recognition that they may not be
17 forever.
VG should be able to provide NHQ, and any member who asks, exactly how many of those coats
they sold, and if the number is into 5 digits, seriously reconsider this idea.
Just change the epaulets and move on.
If it's $150 I would maybe buy it. I think it looks great. I modified my post after I saw how the thread has gone off in the weeds. I really think the gray & white aviator or Blazer uniform should never be forced on any Cadet. I say away with the gray.
Quote from: Eclipse on November 09, 2009, 02:45:32 AM
Quote from: billford1 on November 09, 2009, 02:27:27 AMI have seen maybe 6 members in our wing with the $360.00 CSU jacket. I wouldn't buy it at that price. I bought the blue slacks before they amended the CSU uniform criteria to include grooming standards.
Where did you get the idea that the corporate service jacket is $360? Its always been about $170 at VG (single source), which is not all that more that the $150 or so I spent on my USAF service coat.
And before you can make statements that appear to marginalize the CSU, you have to tell us
how many of the other people at these gathering were wearing services coats of any kind.
My experience locally has been that a number of "mid-career" CAP members were transitioning
to the CSU, especially more than a few former cadets, in recognition that they may not be
17 forever.
VG should be able to provide NHQ, and any member who asks, exactly how many of those coats
they sold, and if the number is into 5 digits, seriously reconsider this idea.
Just change the epaulets and move on.
If they changed the epaulets (or even just added a metal CAP cutout to them) and it was permitted for those who didn't meet grooming standards, I'd be behind that. Blue pants, gray pants, doesn't matter to me.
Here's my contribution:
- Keep all of the CSU components, including the sweaters, jackets, service jacket, etc.
- Change the nameplate and epaulets to the grey, same as worn on the AF style uniform, on both the white shirt and service jacket, and all outerwear (sweater, windbreaker, all weather coat, etc.)
- Change the sleeve braid on the service coat to a medium grey to match the epaulets and nameplate.
- Ditch the grey/white combo with the standard five year phaseout date
That should eliminate the concerns Ma Blue had with the current incarnation of the CSU, allow those members currently in the grey/white combo to wear them out, and give people time to start acquiring the components of the new uniform.
Amend the grooming standards for the CSU to the following:
- Allow neatly trimmed facial hair not to exceed 1/2 inch in bulk
- Hair must be neat/clean and not fall below the bottom edge of the collar or below the top of the opening in the ear.
Regarding the cost of the jacket, I looked at Vanguard earlier, and the price ranges anywhere from $176 to $194 dollars (rounded up). Add in another $45 for pants to match, however much it costs for tailoring and sleeve braid application (one member I know paid almost as much for tailoring as he did for the jacket), and you could very easily be upwards of $300. And that's not figuring in the cost of the nameplate, ribbons, badges, etc. A few years back, I had come into some extra money and was considering buying the complete CSU. By the time I added everything up, and considered the options and usage, that $500 was better spend on a suit, a sport jacket, a couple of shirts and ties at Men's Wearhouse.
BTW (and maybe this is better suited for the other thread), I understand that CAP has to buy out current inventories of discontinued items at Vanguard. Anyone know where that money's going to come from? It sure won't be appropriated funds.
Quote from: Slim on November 09, 2009, 05:55:09 AM
BTW (and maybe this is better suited for the other thread), I understand that CAP has to buy out current inventories of discontinued items at Vanguard. Anyone know where that money's going to come from? It sure won't be appropriated funds.
It would most likely come out of the CAP profits from all the other things they sell. I doubt that VG ever actually has more than 20-30 coats in stock at any one time. [/list]
Hunter Orange Beret.
Lime Green Unitard with Hot pink tutu.
Cowboy boots.
Edit.......RED Cowboy Boots! ;D
Quote from: lordmonar on November 09, 2009, 07:17:58 AM
Hunter Orange Beret.
Lime Green Unitard with Hot pink tutu.
Cowboy boots.
Um...are watching me...right...um...now?
Quote from: lordmonar on November 09, 2009, 07:17:58 AM
Hunter Orange Beret.
Lime Green Unitard with Hot pink tutu.
Cowboy boots.
That has WIN written all over it.
You must be on the same visionary team that designed the failed "bermuda shorts, tall athletic socks, and tucked-in polo" flying uniform. ;)
Quote from: Pylon on November 09, 2009, 07:41:58 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 09, 2009, 07:17:58 AM
Hunter Orange Beret.
Lime Green Unitard with Hot pink tutu.
Cowboy boots.
That has WIN written all over it.
You must be on the same visionary team that designed the failed "bermuda shorts, tall athletic socks, and tucked-in polo" flying uniform. ;)
"All I ask is a TALL HAT and a STAR to STEER her by." ;)
eh well you know we could go back to the OD uniform... it WAS kind of a field uniform and dress uniform in one... and we should still have the designs.... AND its not used anymore! Except for Hollywood of course...
I offered an option for a distinctive field uniform here (http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=3896.0). >:D
Why design any thing new and approve it, they will just vote to do away with it in 4-5 years.
You can go here: http://www.gievesandhawkesmilitary.com/home.html
At one Saville Row , London-- Gieves and Hawkes does bespoke (customized) uniforms. Prepare to pay thousands. BUT, they have a picture book that you can see the uniforms that they made for Mussolini before WW2, Prince Edward in the 30s and Peron in the 50s. You can get anything you want. I own a couple of their uniforms myself... they are part of my WW2 collection Air Corps Pinks and Greens.
I even own a bit of G and H for my CAP uniform. Check out the Regimental Ties.
I checked out the site. 500 pounds($800) for a waistcoat!! Must be nice to be rich.
Let's just get rid of all uniforms in CAP. Here's what it will do for us:
- Everyone will save money by not purchasing uniforms
- It will free up huge amounts of time for the BOG, NEC, and BOG at meetings
- No one will end up buying uniforms that go bad quicker than lottery tickets
- Everyone will be uniformly ununiform
I'm sick of it. This organization's leadership couldn't find its wallet with two hands and a flashlight.
Quote from: Gunner C on November 10, 2009, 06:50:01 AM
Let's just get rid of all uniforms in CAP. Here's what it will do for us:
- Everyone will save money by not purchasing uniforms
- It will free up huge amounts of time for the BOG, NEC, and BOG at meetings
- No one will end up buying uniforms that go bad quicker than lottery tickets
- Everyone will be uniformly ununiform
I'm sick of it. This organization's leadership couldn't find its wallet with two hands and a flashlight.
I hope that was sarcasm. A uniform of some sort is necessary for organizations like CAP, and fire departments and police forces and a whole host of such people.
See what happens and how far we get when some CAP pilots show up in flip-flops, an AC-DC tee shirt and a pair of shorts that were once dress blues.
What is called for here is a serious accounting of NB, NEC and CAPNHQ policy making. I seriously think this is form of WAKE-UP call for us all.
Quote from: Gunner C on November 10, 2009, 06:50:01 AM
I'm sick of it. This organization's leadership couldn't find its wallet with two hands and a flashlight.
They've done a good job at finding mine!
You want a service uniform, specific to CAP, that is tied into our military association and shows a relationship with the AF, isn't used by any service currently and wouldn't be confused with a real military officer?
Here you go:
(http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/archives/images/Gen_Merrill_McPeak_1993sm.jpg)
Change the undershirt to white.
CAP insignia on the lapel.
Single breasted coat looks way better than double-breasted in larger sizes, as well as looks good on people with smaller frames.
Single breasted coat looks good on females.
Color matches USAF uniforms in style and feel, but the sleeve braids to denote grade remove the AF lookalike concept, especially with the CAP insignia.
No service coat nametag to save cost and increase formality of uniform.
On the white undershirt, epaulet sleeves change to blue w/ "CAP" embroidered on.
Blue two-line nameplate on white shirt: "Civil Air Patrol" and "Last Name"
For formal wear, use the AF enlisted style mess dress with sleeve braids like service coat.
There, was that hard?
That would be a good idea to be distinctive enough.......... I think when it is all said and done we wil be wearing just polos and shorts and we will most likely change our name to the LIBERAL AIR PATROL >:D
JimmyDeanno;
I was thinking the same thing last night. The MacPeak looked too Airline for the Air Force to like it much. For CAP - Airline is fine. It also has a little military, civil authority (police and fire), and Air Force style cues going for it. The silver braid is too much but then MacPeak was a 3 star and he would have a lot more braid on his than I would on mine. The MacPeak is a good idea.
Guner C: I like your proposal, except that I would add one more bullet. It would free up countless hours of CAPtalk posting and a whole lot of computer space if nobody has a time or place to argue about CAP uniforms.
Quote from: Smithsonia on November 10, 2009, 05:35:30 PM.... but then MacPeak was a 3 star and he would have a lot more braid on his than I would on mine.
Uh, pardon me, but
McPeak was a what?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrill_A._McPeak
I think we need to be including a little more history on the Air Force, too.
As an aside, CAP is already making some of the same mistakes the Air Force did on it's uniforms.
For the love of GOD................I have had enough ith CAP uniforms.........I am wearing my superman tee-shirt to the squadron instead of the green bag ;D ;D
Quote from: Major Carrales on November 10, 2009, 09:00:16 AM
What is called for here is a serious accounting of NB, NEC and CAPNHQ policy making. I seriously think this is form of WAKE-UP call for us all.
Yeah, like that is going to happen. >:D
When our senior leadership has decided self importance trumps self respect and, ethics and core values are just empty words, it should be more than a wake up call.
In the next few days, we're going to get more information about what went on during the closed sessions. My sources tell me some things were decided which may prove more embarassing than this uniform issue.
In my over 30 years as an active member; I can't remember a time when I've been so disapointed in our leadership. I can only hope
they will get a "slap in the face", come to their collective senses and get us back on track.
let me guess, we are going to start doing clean up on highways and park cars at sporting events
Quote from: Smithsonia on November 10, 2009, 05:35:30 PM
The silver braid is too much but then MacPeak was a 3 star and he would have a lot more braid on his than I would on mine. The MacPeak is a good idea.
Wide 2 inch ring equals 1 Star, each successive 1 inch ring equals one additional star= 4 stars
Possibility of what it could look like.
The grey stripes would be silver, with a bit of texture and dimension with a thin stitching that made two offset bands around each stripe.
The CAP Circle, Prop and Triangle would be two tone silver bullion looking to match the bands. Yet another differentiator to the jacket/look.
(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c66/CaptSmithCap/POSSIBLE_INSIGNIA.jpg)
In all honesty, I think that it could be a really good looking uniform that everyone could wear without requiring too much expense on the already existing members.
When you think about it...
Those who wear the AF style uniforms would only need to:
a) buy a white aviator shirt.
b) remove the epaulets from their service coats.
c) have the bands sewn on.
Those who have the CSU would
a) buy the new service coat
b) have the bands sewn on
Those who have the grey and white, well, they'd have the most expense, but if the goal is a uniform that everyone is in and has the same rules applied in terms of awards and decorations wear, etc - this could be it.
^^^ I just threw up in my mouth a little. Too hard to change when promoted. Looks too much like the Navy. I vote no.
My vote is put the CAP cutouts on the current service coat with the current gray slides but the CSU metal name plate with a uniform white aviator shirt.
Distinctive enough for the AF, since the only thing AF related is the buttons, heck, change those to prop and triangle and let everyone wear it.
Uniform, easy to convert to, and looks good next to the cadets.
How about a CAP distinctive Ghillie Suit, assembled entirely of Post-It notes, so that we can hide in our offices from crazy paper-pushers trying to inflict new uniforms on the membership?
Just a thought.....
Major Lord
I smella dead horse
Why add another uniform or change from what exists? The grey/white combination looks smart. All that should be done is find a shade of grey that works best and make that uniform.
that would make sense ;D
As noted other times in other places, just take a set of grade slide with you when you go shopping for trousers, and get a pair that matches. I get mine from Sears - the FlexSlax line. The mail order folks at Haband also carry a color that is really close. This ain't rocket surgery here.
Quote from: Angus on November 10, 2009, 09:18:47 PM
Why add another uniform or change from what exists? The grey/white combination looks smart. All that should be done is find a shade of grey that works best and make that uniform.
Because the uniform does not fulfill the
mission.
1) Its not uniform. (by design)
2) It has no acceptable formal option (the blazer is not the formal extension of the whites, its a separate uniform).
3) It treats those who wear it as a second class, and looks ridiculous in formal settings because it has no
headgear or jacket, and does not allow for the wear of ribbons or badges on a coat.
Quote from: SarDragon on November 10, 2009, 09:37:47 PM
As noted other times in other places, just take a set of grade slide with you when you go shopping for trousers, and get a pair that matches. I get mine from Sears - the FlexSlax line. The mail order folks at Haband also carry a color that is really close. This ain't rocket surgery here.
"Close" is what we have today because there is no specification as there is with military clothing.
"Close" ≠ "uniform".
The idea behind the whites was to allow members to put together a uniform mostly from what they had in their closets already at minimal expense, even the aviator shirt owing to the "Air" in CAP. In most cases the same pants can be worn with the golf shirt as the whites.
If you're going to specify a color, it defeats the above, so you might as well "own" it and design a gray
service-dress style uniform and spread around the pain.
A dark-gray double-breasted coat with the CAP epaulets would solve this question once and for all.
Why double-breasted? Single-breasted looks much better on everyone.
Quote from: Angus on November 10, 2009, 09:59:44 PM
Why double-breasted? Single-breasted looks much better on everyone.
Aaaaaa-greeed.
Any tailor will tell you that single-breasted is more flattering on a variety of body types. Double breasted on larger people makes them look like boxes, and certainly isn't flattering for our female members.
Quote from: Eclipse on November 10, 2009, 09:41:07 PM
Quote from: Angus on November 10, 2009, 09:18:47 PM
Why add another uniform or change from what exists? The grey/white combination looks smart. All that should be done is find a shade of grey that works best and make that uniform.
Because the uniform does not fulfill the mission.
1) Its not uniform. (by design)
2) It has no acceptable formal option (the blazer is not the formal extension of the whites, its a separate uniform).
3) It treats those who wear it as a second class, and looks ridiculous in formal settings because it has no
headgear or jacket, and does not allow for the wear of ribbons or badges on a coat.
1. If we found a supplier that provided us a single shade of gray....it would be.
2. The Blazer is perfectly acceptable as a formal (i.e. mess dress)
3. If
EVERYONE wore it, there would be no second class citezens. As for wearing ribbons and such...there are already military rules on how to wear mini-medals on civilian clothing.
^ Correct on all points, but defeating the original intent of the whites (AFAIK).
As to #2 - the blazer is not a military-style formal dress, its not even a uniform, its just a jacket with a crest on it (or worse, a *gag* pocket protector) and we are a military auxiliary.
It you are not going to allow everyone to show off their achievements and decorations, you should not allow anyone to show them off.
Quote from: Eclipse on November 10, 2009, 11:23:50 PM
^ Correct on all points, but defeating the original intent of the whites (AFAIK).
As to #2 - the blazer is not a military-style formal dress, its not even a uniform, its just a jacket with a crest on it (or worse, a *gag* pocket protector) and we are a military auxiliary.
It you are not going to allow everyone to show off their achievements and decorations, you should not allow anyone to show them off.
???
I'm confused.....My point is that we should all be in the same uniform....so if we are a formal function, you and everyone else, will be in the blazer.
If you want to show your achievement and decorations....we can write rules on how to wear them in that "uniform". Everyone will wear them the same.
Everyone.....same.....uniform.......that is my point....always has been.
The purpose of the whites was a compromise between those allowed to wear the USAF stle and those not allowed. It had the effect of creating a second class/us vs them mentality withing CAP.
The two uniform sets do not promote unity and esprit de corps.....hence my efforts to move CAP to a single UNIFORM set that tries to make both the CAP members and the USAF happy.
There is no second class member; I don't know where you are getting this idea from. You must allow people to treat you like second class if you feel like you are. I guess those leadership positions that wear the white and grays are second class according to you. The national commander must be second class because I have seen her in them, plus several region and wing kings must be as well.
^^^
Nobody is, or should be, a "second-class member" based on what uniform they wear.
When I first joined CAP (berry boards era), everyone in my first squadron wore the AF-type uniform. I didn't encounter grey/white until my first Wing functions.
I was then in a senior squadron (flying unit) where I was the only one who wore the AF-type uniform, and some looked askance at me for doing so.
In my current unit, you can find about any CAP uniform combination under the sun.
Even though I don't personally like the grey/white or polo combinations, I know many do, and I'd rather somebody be in those uniforms and do the job at hand rather than try to look like Curtis LeMay and just be window dressing.
But, to flog this dead horse a little more: >:D
Institute an "Ike" type jacket, kind of retro-looking, plus the AF doesn't have it and hasn't for a long time. Blue shoulder marks with embroidered "CAP," blue three-line nameplate, no commissioning stripe, CAP lapel insignia, current CAP "overseas" patch on left shoulder.
Available to all members, regardless of lack of svelteness or facial fuzz status.
OK, dead horse, go back to decomposing.
Returning you to our regularly scheduled insanity...
My vote:
(http://captainsweatpants.hostoi.com/captain_sweatpants.jpg)
Captain Sweatpants
Sorry, won't work. The AF owns star designs. >:D Can't have fat boys going around wearing AF stars. The AF also owns T-shirts. That will be shot down. As far as sweat pants, I believe the AF also used sweat pants at one time for PT. Nope - they must own that, too.
Socks, buttons, ties, zippers, belts, hats, baseball caps, sneakers, jock straps, boxers, and shoe laces. All too much like the AF uniform, especially if you're fat. Better come up with something else.
As disclosed on another thread, the AF didn't have the eggs to come out and tell us to our faces that they're pissed that we have anything that's blue and it makes them look bad. These thumb-suckers need to man-up and tell us to our faces what the real deal is. If they'd do that, then we could deal with it. But no, these panty-waist pencil pushers don't have the testicles to say "hey, that's our uniform (BTW, thanks for taking all of those missions you're taking off our hands). Say it to my face, don't go into "executive session" and tell a bunch of CAP colonels that they have to change. IMO, the new CAP-USAF command structure speaks out of both sides of their collective mouths.
Quote from: NCRblues on November 11, 2009, 01:02:57 AM
There is no second class member; I don't know where you are getting this idea from. You must allow people to treat you like second class if you feel like you are. I guess those leadership positions that wear the white and grays are second class according to you. The national commander must be second class because I have seen her in them, plus several region and wing kings must be as well.
Please read the text and not your inferences.
So you're saying that there's no reason at all for those who can't wear their grade, ribbons, pins, or badges of office to formal and ceremonial occasions to feel "different"?
The only reward CAP gives its members is bling (beyond the altrusitic satisfaction). Some can wear it some can't.
Why?
Quote from: Gunner C on November 11, 2009, 05:08:25 AM
As disclosed on another thread, the AF didn't have the eggs to come out and tell us to our faces that they're pissed that we have anything that's blue and it makes them look bad. These thumb-suckers need to man-up and tell us to our faces what the real deal is. If they'd do that, then we could deal with it. But no, these panty-waist pencil pushers don't have the testicles to say "hey, that's our uniform (BTW, thanks for taking all of those missions you're taking off our hands). Say it to my face, don't go into "executive session" and tell a bunch of CAP colonels that they have to change. IMO, the new CAP-USAF command structure speaks out of both sides of their collective mouths.
I think you're probably trying to be satirical, and I'm just as frustrated with this latest uniform bullcrackie as the next one, but I don't think that insulting the AF is the best approach. You don't know who may be lurking on this board, and also remember that the public probably doesn't think much of us slagging our parent service.
Remember, there are three ways to do things: the right way, the wrong way and the military/government way.
I am going to wait until I see something in writing, officially mandating this before I believe that it's a done deal and not open to further revision (no offence intended to those who broke the news). Even if it's yet another ICL, then I'll go on that.
$0.02 offered.
No, I was being pretty straight forward. That's more than CAP-USAF has been with us. They're supposed to be honest brokers but they've been doing this in the shadows. Believe me, this didn't happen Wednesday prior to the NEC. IOW, identify the problem, identify possible solutions, choose the best one, and fix it. Stop the PC whispering.
There will be thousands of SMs like me who won't soon trust CAP-USAF again. They've broken a trust.
Quote from: Gunner C on November 11, 2009, 05:47:47 AM
No, I was being pretty straight forward. That's more than CAP-USAF has been with us. They're supposed to be honest brokers but they've been doing this in the shadows. Believe me, this didn't happen Wednesday prior to the NEC.
There will be thousands of SMs like me who won't soon trust CAP-USAF again. They've broken a trust.
Well, if you're so offended by MY Air Force, then why are you still here?
Because it's MY Civil Air Patrol. It was here, frankly, before the AF was.
CAP, the Greatest American Heroes, we need a uniform like this:
(http://www.bradybunchshrine.com/gah/gahtallflag.jpg)
Stitch on epaulets and berry boards, it's perfect!
Plus, a pretty spiffy theme song! ;D
Quote from: Gunner C on November 11, 2009, 07:01:15 AM
Because it's MY Civil Air Patrol. It was here, frankly, before the AF was.
:clap: :clap: :clap:
Quote from: NCRblues on November 11, 2009, 01:02:57 AM
There is no second class member; I don't know where you are getting this idea from. You must allow people to treat you like second class if you feel like you are. I guess those leadership positions that wear the white and grays are second class according to you. The national commander must be second class because I have seen her in them, plus several region and wing kings must be as well.
Just because you don't think it is real does not mean it does not exist. I see it all the time within CAP. Just look at this thread and you can see it in the way people talk about those who must or choose to wear corporate uniforms. Just mention the polo shirt flying club and you will see it. Suggest for 2 seconds that we eliminate the USAF style uniforms and you will see the ususall suspects who MUST have their USAF style unifroms or they will quit CAP.
Lets keep it simple and make everyones life that much easier... Get rid of all Uniforms in CAP but the Polo Shirts and Blue BDUS. If you are on a ground team you wear blue BDUs everyone else put the polo on, I mean after all isnt that what everyones wearing these days? At least in Dallas it is.
Quote from: Nolan Teel on November 11, 2009, 09:09:21 AM
Lets keep it simple and make everyones life that much easier... Get rid of all Uniforms in CAP but the Polo Shirts and Blue BDUS. If you are on a ground team you wear blue BDUs everyone else put the polo on, I mean after all isnt that what everyones wearing these days? At least in Dallas it is.
You need a flight suit and something more formal to wear to the awards ceremony....but I agree.
No flight suit needed, just wear the polo shirts and for a formal uniform, take that suit out of the closet!
Like I said before, I understand your points lordmonar; just disagree with having away with AF Uniforms. I guess joining the Air force security forces right out of high school then going AFOSI has given me the mentality that you can't give me a title unless I allow it, but I understand not everyone see's it this way. I see people every day ( and work with a few) that need those things in their life to feel important, be it a gun and badge, or AF blues in cap, or even simply bling on a shirt. Am I one of those that would walk away from CAP if the AF blues went away, no, because I love cap and I have since I was a cadet airman. I just don't believe that forcing all members to a corporate uniform will serve us well. Just IMHO.
So why won't people on the board work out a proposal to simplify CAP uniforms, address all the issues regarding lack of ribbons for the corporate uniform, etc, and submit them up the chain through their wings? I'm sure we have members from most if not all wings, why not try to push the top using a grassroots movement?
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 11, 2009, 12:45:52 PM
So why won't people on the board work out a proposal to simplify CAP uniforms, address all the issues regarding lack of ribbons for the corporate uniform, etc, and submit them up the chain through their wings? I'm sure we have members from most if not all wings, why not try to push the top using a grassroots movement?
I'd be all for that. I've seen similar proposals with BDUs a number of times - at least designing them. Never seen a grassroots effort to push proposals up the chain in every wing.
Quote from: jacob on November 11, 2009, 01:06:29 PM
I'd be all for that. I've seen similar proposals with BDUs a number of times - at least designing them. Never seen a grassroots effort to push proposals up the chain in every wing.
Well maybe it's time to start. They may not listen, but they will know that people support change.
If one person in each wing can agree to do this, and ask more local members to do it, at least 2-3 other people, you are already looking at 200+ proposals at wing level.
Quote from: Nolan Teel on November 11, 2009, 09:09:21 AM
Lets keep it simple and make everyones life that much easier... Get rid of all Uniforms in CAP but the Polo Shirts and Blue BDUS. If you are on a ground team you wear blue BDUs everyone else put the polo on, I mean after all isnt that what everyones wearing these days? At least in Dallas it is.
And what about those members who are here for Aerospace Education? Not everyone does Emergency Services, I've got a few memebers in my Squadron who don't want anything to do with ES.
Quote from: Angus on November 11, 2009, 01:48:29 PM
And what about those members who are here for Aerospace Education?
The golf shirt or BDU's fits that need perfectly.
Quote from: Nolan Teel on November 11, 2009, 09:09:21 AM
Lets keep it simple and make everyones life that much easier... Get rid of all Uniforms in CAP but the Polo Shirts and Blue BDUS. If you are on a ground team you wear blue BDUs everyone else put the polo on, I mean after all isnt that what everyones wearing these days? At least in Dallas it is.
Why is this still being suggested? Its just as self centered as someone suggesting that we get rid of corporate uniforms and get in shape.
Quote from: Fuzzy on November 11, 2009, 06:45:30 PM
Quote from: Nolan Teel on November 11, 2009, 09:09:21 AM
Lets keep it simple and make everyones life that much easier... Get rid of all Uniforms in CAP but the Polo Shirts and Blue BDUS. If you are on a ground team you wear blue BDUs everyone else put the polo on, I mean after all isnt that what everyones wearing these days? At least in Dallas it is.
Why is this still being suggested? Its just as self centered as someone suggesting that we get rid of corporate uniforms and get in shape.
1) A lot of people here don't realize there is a search button which will show them mile-high pics of dead stallions out back.
2) The USAF vs. corporate uniform issue is a divisive situation which has been unresolved for a decade and most of us would like to see it closed once and for all. If the USAF will not relax restrictions on weight and grooming, then the only alternative is to go corporate-only, which for 90% of the membership
is a more workable option. Why?
A - Only a small percentage of the membership interacts regularly with the military in any way where having a similar uniform helps the situation.
B - An organization which professes equal opportunity in all things and which lives and dies by the benevolence and wallets of its members should never give even the hint of discrimination or favoritism in any way, shape, or form.
C - Corporate dress based on commercial variations of clothing provides a virtually unlimited supply channel for our membership versus the limited sources today. In a situation where we have to "pay to play", the choices should not be limited either artificially or organically.
D - 100% of the membership can wear the corporate combinations today without having to make lifestyle compromises or changes that may or may not be possible, thus giving us a "uniform" appearance. Not possible with the USAF combinations.
E - No one can show with any supporting evidence that a move to corporate only uniforms for seniors members would concern the USAF in the least. If anything, they would likely sigh in relief as to never having to have the discussion(s) again, and we could all move away from this continuous bickering about 1/2 truths and assumptions and actually start living and dying by our mission performance.
My personal reaction to "E" would be "Hm...bummer. I really liked the affliation and good feelings that came with the USAF blue. Oh well, that was then, this is now."
Quote from: Eclipse on November 11, 2009, 07:07:38 PM[G]o corporate-only, which for 90% of the membership
is a more workable option.
Bob,
I know you are a CP supporter, and that you were talking about seniors here. (I think).
But lest anyone reading this be mislead, remember that cadets represent some 40% of our membership, and when you add in the seniors who primarily work with and/or support the cadet program, you are talking about the majority of our membership.
And there is no serious movement to forcibly deprive cadets of the honor and responsibility of wearing USAF style uniforms in the USAF Auxiliary.
Ned Lee
National Cadet Advisor
(Cool job, crummy job title)
Quote from: Ned on November 11, 2009, 08:55:15 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on November 11, 2009, 07:07:38 PM[G]o corporate-only, which for 90% of the membership
is a more workable option.
Bob,
I know you are a CP supporter, and that you were talking about seniors here. (I think).
I am not referring to cadet uniforms in this thread. My comments are strictly regarding senior uniforms.
Maybe I'm missing something here, but it has been my experience that CP SMs are expected to wear the same uniforms that the cadets wear. It was certainly that way back when we had no corporate uniforms, other than the blazer. Even today, it's strongly suggested.
I think having CP SMs dressed in a significantly different manner than the cadets they are mentoring would set a poor example, and be a detriment to our purposes.
After doing some searching and Photoshopping, here is my $0.02 on the subject:
The BDU's are fine. I don't see a need to go to ABU or anything else at the current time.
As far as an alternate to Blues as a Corporate Service Uniform, here are my results.
(http://i37.tinypic.com/nwxxk5.jpg)
This is a readily available police hat. The style oddly enough is called "Air Force Style." It is a dark navy blue. For Field Grade Officers the hat shown could suffice. Company Grade officers could wear the cap with silver chin strap and silver oak leaves (instead of Clouds and Lightning). General grade would wear the same, with the expanded number of oak leaves on the visor.
The male version of the service cap would be the only authorized version (for males and females), unless VG or another supplier would take on the task of making matching color Female Service Caps. Flight caps would also have to be custom made, unless the ones used by Navy JROTC are close enough in color. The small version SM flight cap device would be authorized for the flight cap.
(http://i34.tinypic.com/34j4qcz.jpg)
The jacket is from the Fechheimer Brothers' Flying Cross line of public safety uniforms. These jackets are a very dark navy blue. None of the pockets are real, just scalloped flaps. On this jacket, you see the following:
-Standard gray CAP slides.
-Standard gray CAP Nameplate.
-CAP lapel cutouts.
-Optional use of CAP Wing/Region/National Patch (Overseas used for illustrative purposes)
-White Aviator shirt (already used for the TPU and white/gray combo)
-USAF Blue tie (Women may wear CAP floppy bow tie or tie tab)
-CAP ONLY ribbons.
-No sleeve braids.
-Rules for wear of badges and ribbons (again, CAP only) follow those currently in the 39-1 for USAF style.
-Would be authorized for wear by all seniors regardless of height/weight standards. Modified grooming standards, including the idea for neatly trimmed beards, would be authorized for this uniform.
There are matching Trousers available for this style coat. However, a uniform shade of Gray would most likely be acceptable with this coat as well, thus making this coat a "Class A" version of the Gray/White.
On this uniform, if not wearing the Coat, rules pertaining to current wear of the Aviator shirt for the Gray/White combo apply.
Comments?
Quote from: SarDragon on November 11, 2009, 09:52:00 PM
I think having CP SMs dressed in a significantly different manner than the cadets they are mentoring would set a poor example, and be a detriment to our purposes.
Um, what?
I can't speak for what happens in your area, but in these parts whites and the golf shirt are worn by at least 50% of the seniors involved in CP. Many have no other option.
I don't disagree with your comment from a ideology perspective, but its not the practical reality of the program. Its is, however, a big part of my assertion that the CSU solves a big problem.
The CP side of the house tends to be much more steeped in pomp and circumstance, utilizes military facilities more often, and in general requires more military bearing and attention than the OPS or AE side, and as such, the need for more formal attire comes up a lot more in that arena than others.
Quote from: kd8gua on November 11, 2009, 09:53:37 PM
The male version of the service cap would be the only authorized version (for males and females), unless VG or another supplier would take on the task of making matching color Female Service Caps.
Many female members I've spoken with quite dislike the design of the female service cap. I can't say I disagree with them - luckily as a male, I'll never have the pleasure of wearing one. I don't think a male-style only service cap would be seen as a loss :)
Quote from: kd8gua on November 11, 2009, 09:53:37 PM
-CAP lapel cutouts.
While I agree that something needs to go on the lapels, I think CAP cutouts are redundant as they already appear on the grey slides. Maybe this would be different enough to be able to wear US cutouts? If not, perhaps something close to the old Army Air Corps wing and prop insignia.
I think a dark blue jacket would go well with standardized grey pants. Would the AF blue tie be close enough in shade to look right?
Quote from: jacob on November 11, 2009, 10:07:48 PM
I think a dark blue jacket would go well with standardized grey pants. Would the AF blue tie be close enough in shade to look right?
CAP cutouts could be a little redundant, you are right. I strayed away from the US cutouts since this isn't an actual RM uniform. The AAC Wing/prop would be acceptable too I think.
As far as ties go, the options would be either AF blue or black. The jacket I based this off of was used about 20 years ago as the basis for the Ohio State University Marching Band's uniforms. With the OSUMB military style uniform, a black tie and white dress shirt are worn. However, newer versions of the OSU uniform are such a dark shade of blue they appear black. So from a distance black on blue doesn't conflict as much. I stayed with AF blue because the tie is much darker than the 1620 or 1625 shades for the service coats, and would probably be very close to the Flying Cross jacket.
Quote from: jacob on November 11, 2009, 10:07:48 PMI think a dark blue jacket would go well with standardized grey pants. Would the AF blue tie be close enough in shade to look right?
Imagine how it would look with matching, dark navy pants.
The jacket looks good (better than I thought, actually). What I do see as a problem is a cost factor. That jacket is upwards of $200 (probably more), may or may not have a badge tab sewn in or on, above the left pocket. Matching trousers are about $60-70 each. If cost savings are a consideration, this won't do.
Another plus is that this combo would be readily available from local sources too. As long as you know the style and shade of coat/pants, any public safety uniform shop can order them, just need to have the proper buttons available from Vanguard. The good news is that most of those places include tailoring in the purchase price.
And no, the Air Force blue tie wouldn't work, the shades aren't even close to matching. But ties that do match are also readily available.
The jacket, as produced, comes with cross-stitched epaulets and a badge tab. The cross stitching would have to be removed to allow for full size sleeves to fit, unless metal rank was used (but that's another can of worms). IF, and this is a big IF, metal rank was used, then CAP cutouts would be mandatory.
The badge tab looks like it is sewn at the top and bottom (so the badge does not actually go through the jacket material itself) and could probably be easily removed at the time of re-buttoning.
I have ideas like everyone else but I simply do not think we can accomplish anything here. If this is a move on CAP's part to get along with the Uniform Board, they themselves can't design a new USAF Dress Uniform. But simply nothing will be done without their blessing, present powers or clics that be, and perhaps Vanguard. There was no real trouble before General Merrill Anthony "Tony" McPeak and our own versions of him some better known than others. We have been lucky. I've seen grade insignia proposals that would make us into the Argintine Air Force that have been proposed. Sad thing to me is loss of the Aviator shirt and blue pants. It was a hard sell in the poor photos provided by National HQ but looked good on members I have seen wear it in real life, much to my surprise. It was something positive lost.
Sorry to take your time
Looks good!
- Take the "CAP" off the slides (there's already CAP on the lapel - redundancy is not your friend).
- No patches: we've already gone that route and back. Most CAP wing patches aren't that professional looking and the region/national arc just looks bad.
Quote from: Gunner C on November 12, 2009, 03:29:12 AM
Take the "CAP" off the slides (there's already CAP on the lapel - redundancy is not your friend).
I would leave the "CAP" on the slides and remove the cutouts, for the following reasons:
- The grey slides with the "CAP" already exist - removing the "CAP" would necessitate creation of a new item.
- The "CAP" should go with the rank. Having it embroidered on the slides eliminates placement issues - it's in the same spot for everyone, every time..
That does leave the question of what to put in their place though.
Another option is something I've seen a state defense force do: they wear the regular Army issue slides, and then pin the state abbreviation cutout onto the slide and through the epaulette. The added advantage is it keeps the slide in place. I still think the existing grey slides are the best option though, for the reasons noted above.
I do think the grey slides could do with an overhaul though - make them look more like Army or Air Force slides (a little longer, and a little flatter). But that's different issue.
Let's call this the "CAP Grey Service Uniform" or GSU for lack of anything else right now. With this, we'd have several possible combinations:
- Combination 1: Jacket
- Combination 2: Long sleeved shirt w/tie
- Combination 3: Short sleeved shirt w/o tie (wearing a tie w/a SS shirt makes one look like a used car salesman IMO)
- Combination 4: Golf shirt using same pants and belt
I think the GSU concept has merit: it presents a professional appearance, pays homage to our WW2 paramilitary past, and keeps the AF's hands off of our stuff.
I did notice, even placing the insignia, that there was an overkill of silver CAP.
Here are some other options:
(http://i35.tinypic.com/14iq61c.jpg)
US insignia in place of CAP. I personally feel this isn't kosher, as this uniform isn't a US military uniform.
(http://i38.tinypic.com/10ye1ol.jpg)
Wing and Prop USAAC insignia. Used on the cadet enlisted flight cap device and formerly used on the CAP Cadet Encampment patch, so historically accurate. However, as a lapel insignia, is used to denote USAAC veterans' descendants enrolled in the USAFA.
(http://i35.tinypic.com/nvvafp.jpg)
Removal of CAP epaulets and using metal grade in place. CAP cutouts on lapels. This theorhetically can open up another can of worms like with the TPU. I however don't think the USAF would be as opposed to metal grade on this uniform as they seemed to be with the CSU.
These look great, but look too similar to the old AF coats. I'm thinking metal grade is out for CAP.
Historically, the USAAC insignia would be on the lower part of the lapel with CAP in its present location. IMO, we would probably be able to have either "US" on the lapel with slides or "CAP" on the lapel with metal grade insignia. But having "US" and metal rank would get the big axe.
Frankly, the largest obstacle to anything like this would be the membership. After being burned on the TPU, selling the GSU would be difficult. No one would be willing to shell out big bucks for something that might be vetoed within a couple of years. We would need assurances and by-in by the AF, to include the SECAF and the chief of staff.
Gunner,
Would you be looking for grey slacks with the GSU combinations, or matching navy blue pants for the GSU variants.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 12, 2009, 04:38:45 AM
These look great, but look too similar to the old AF coats. I'm thinking metal grade is out for CAP.
The color and fabrics are key. There's dozens of police departments that use this cut with no problem. I think this is far enough away from the former AF four-button uniform.
Quote from: kd8gua on November 12, 2009, 04:44:55 AM
Gunner,
Would you be looking for grey slacks with the GSU combinations, or matching navy blue pants for the GSU variants.
Grey pants. Two color grey uniforms are too much like the current German AF uniform. A single color would give a professional appearance and would be very versitile.
Oddly enough the color of that coat is "LAPD Blue" at least that's what the caption said from the website. I have seen a few of these coats in person hiding in a corner of the OSU Marching Band's uniform room, and the color is much darker than AF 1620.
Just throwing it out there, but looking at the coat have you considered black CAP slides with black pants? Its probably a little too out of nowhere though. And you would have to change the gray pants on the short sleeve combo, but nobody ever bought the same shade anyway.
Could look sharp though.
Personally, I kinda like Gunner C's suggestion, the GSU. Even like the 4 different combinations he suggested. I normally wear the white/gray, but if that uniform were selected, I'd jump on it. Only problem would be the cost. Also, would there be another version for the females or would they wear the male jacket?
But I'd also want to make sure that if we went to something like this, that NEC wouldn't come back in a couple years and get rid of it. Make them have to buy it back.
(http://i38.tinypic.com/2rfy4pl.jpg)
This is a picture showing the OSU Marching Band take on the Flying Cross style uniform coat. The coats pictured are just slightly (maybe 2-5 shades) darker than the dark blue that the coat in my Photo-shopped creations should be. Am I suggesting gloves, spats, white belts and feathers and a multitude of patches and stripes? No way. The coat I wore in the OSU band had the four scalloped pockets and fully useable epaulets (sleeves could be slid all the way on without having the very end of the strap cross stitched). We wore black ties with this coat.
While on the subject of ill-fitting uniforms, the member of the directing staff in the center is a female, wearing a US Navy double breasted male service coat and male service cap. This shows how double breasted coats do not look right on everyone (ie. the CSU). OSU band rules dictate all long hair must be placed in a bun that would fit in the crown of the cap. I prefer the USAF rules for females wearing male service caps, which state a bun placed below the line at which the cap is placed.
To answer the question about female coats:
This jacket I used as an example is listed as a unisex jacket. There are seperate female styles available, but the ones I have seen require epaulets to be added for an extra fee (again, more cash the end user must shell out)
There could even be a 5th combination to replace the mess dress: Bow tie, no name tag, and miniature medals.
These uniform ideas look sharp!
I like this way better than the grey/white (who came up with that combination, incidentally...it was there in a slightly different form when I first joined back in '93, so obviously it pre-dates my CAP membership?).
I will go out on a limb and say that it isn't necessarily the hard rank that the AF has a problem with...it is wearing it with a uniform partly composed of their uniform items (rank slides, service coat in the same shade of blue, flight cap) that they have issues with.
I personally don't see a problem with hard rank with this combination. It does not look overly AF, and other than the nameplate, the words "Air Force" don't appear anywhere. But, if that won't fly (ouch) then have blue rank slides in the same shade of blue, with CAP embroidered on them.
Or, another possibility would be a different shade of blue, like used in the RAF/Commonwealth, or Luftwaffe (with more grey), or other NATO countries.
I would really prefer a combination blue/grey rather than just grey.
$0.02 offered.
Man, I hate to admit this but I really like kd8gua's uniform design ;D. It looks very professional; someone should run this one up their chain of command.
How About:
(http://www.depts.ttu.edu/communications/news/stories/images/bandtogether.jpg)
The Goin" Band From CAPperLand :o :o
Sorry, with the thought of Band unforms being tossed about, I could not help but let my Double T interject a little humor.
All kidding aside, some of the ideas put forth here are really good. The most interesting is a return to the 50's style "silvertans", if that won't set the Navy off on us.
I've said it on this board, the old Portal, and other boards that I think it's time we change our culture, and rethink our relationship to Ma Blue to one similar to the USMC relationship to the Navy. That is, a separate culture, with distinctive uniforms and traditions, but still part of the USAF overall command structure.
I know, never gonna happen, and the die hard blue suiter's here are going to scream bloody murder, but that's my nickle's worth of opinion. Our OWN uniform, that everone can wear, commonsense grooming standards and training to national ICS compliance and real funding for pilot and first responder training, without all this mucking about on uniform issues, GA8/Archer systems and Vanguard kickbacks will go a long way towards earning the respect of our Air Force patrons.
I like the look of this as well, but in the other thread I'm thinking we'll still go on to see if we can salvage the grays as they are already here, thus easier to work with.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 12, 2009, 02:15:53 PM
I like the look of this as well, but in the other thread I'm thinking we'll still go on to see if we can salvage the grays as they are already here, thus easier to work with.
True, if we are going to keep the grays, we've AT LEAST got to standardize the fabric and shade.
Hi!
I think CAP should wear the Dickies brand navy blue work uniform like the ground crews for the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds wear.
It's available at most department stores (including Wal-Mart) and when worn with black oxfords and a white t-shirt presents quite a professional image.
I just can't decide if it would be better w/ribbons and insignia as a class B or name tapes like a fatigue. Maybe one each?
Just my idea.
Quote from: capparent on November 12, 2009, 03:40:02 PM
Hi!
I think CAP should wear the Dickies brand navy blue work uniform like the ground crews for the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds wear.
It's available at most department stores (including Wal-Mart) and when worn with black oxfords and a white t-shirt presents quite a professional image.
I just can't decide if it would be better w/ribbons and insignia as a class B or name tapes like a fatigue. Maybe one each?
Just my idea.
I see what you're saying (I think), but we already have the blue BDU-cut work uniform, as well as a blue flight-suit-styled utility jumpsuit.
I don't think wearing ribbons on such a uniform would look good, although the Young Marines wear their ribbons on Marine camouflage.
And the Young Marine uniforms look atrocious!
If you guys are interested in my ideas, I can very easily whip up a female coat and possibly alternative NCO insignia so as to avoid confusion with cadet NCOs and USAF NCO insignia.
Can't do it right now, I'm on lunch at work, but you should see something by this evening.
While I don't think the grey slides are the best things in the world, I would prefer them over metal grade on any service coat for the updated grey and whites. This will keep it looking more uniform as compared to the AF service coat.
What about US cutouts on the top of the lapel, and the Wing and Prop USAAC insignia in their historical location on the lower part of the lapel? I'm not 100% sure how I feel about that myself, just throwing it out there.
Here are some more uniforms, including NCO and female versions:
Male NCO Coat:
(http://i37.tinypic.com/671gk9.jpg)
Female Officer Coat with CAP epaulets:
(http://i37.tinypic.com/2ilhm5x.jpg)
Female Officer Coat with metal grade:
(http://i37.tinypic.com/6dx0yu.jpg)
Female NCO Coat:
(http://i35.tinypic.com/112fwqq.jpg)
Male/Female Visor Cap for General Grades (or possibly just Major and up):
(http://i34.tinypic.com/5zf8me.jpg)
Quote from: kd8gua on November 13, 2009, 03:40:07 AM
Great job! Not bad for a quick draw.
Thoughts:
NCO stuff looks good. Here's an alternate design for stripes: white on medium or dark grey with red in the middle, just like the original USAAC WW2 roundel. I'll post a possible style variation that I doodled a while back (below). On the hat, please no army scrambled eggs. Use clouds, lightning bolts, and arrows. Or we could just get rid of the darned thing - just have a single flight cap (also grey) for males and females, like the AF does. Certainly no silver chin strap. It just runs the price up (once again more army than AF.)
(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=66)
The female uniforms look like the navy female uniform cut. Unless a woman has the figure of someone who runs 10 miles a week, it's not going to be very flattering. The men's longer coat will hide a man's "full figure". (On me the problems are I'm two axe-handles wide). Do they have anything that's longer and not so form-fitting for our women members?
While y'all are reinventing the uniforms for the band on the Titanic, have any of you taken a few minutes to write to your Congressman and ask that the cut to CAP's federal budget be restored?
Just asking.
Yep. Satisfy your curiosity?
Now back to your regularly scheduled uniform thread.
I think I still like this:
(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c66/CaptSmithCap/POSSIBLE_UNIFORM.jpg)
The perfect merger between our AF Auxiliary side and our corporate side. Most members already have the majority of the items that would go to it and its disctinctive enough.
Get rid of both the AF style and the corporate and voila, everyone in one uniform that looks professional.
I'd still prefer this:
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 13, 2009, 01:47:57 PM
The Colonial Fleet Dress Uniform only costs $199
(http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a302/USAFAUX2004/AdamaCAPCol.jpg)
Hm...the metal grade still might look like we are trying to be real officers.
(http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a302/USAFAUX2004/AdamaCAPColgray.jpg)
There! The good ol' gray slides.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 07:07:32 PM
I think I still like this:
(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c66/CaptSmithCap/POSSIBLE_UNIFORM.jpg)
The perfect merger between our AF Auxiliary side and our corporate side. Most members already have the majority of the items that would go to it and its disctinctive enough.
Get rid of both the AF style and the corporate and voila, everyone in one uniform that looks professional.
And still based on Air Force uniform components. Probably not the best way to go.
That, and it looks even more like an airline uniform. There's a reason the AF didn't go with sleeve rank. Sleeve rank like that is also more expensive to sew on.
It may look nice, but copying unused AF designs isn't the way.
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 13, 2009, 07:36:41 PM
And still based on Air Force uniform components. Probably not the best way to go.
That was the whole point. Existing uniform components. Using the AF style uniform would still give us the tie in to the AF as their Auxiliary - maintaining the association. The shirt changes to white, no epaults. The enlisted service coat is cheaper by about $80. Nothing about it says, "That guy is in the Air Force."
Plus, Vanguard already stocks (at least right now) larger sizes for the pants, white shirt and other components (flight cap, etc). All the female components are already in place, and single breasted looks a heck of a lot better on a wider variety of body types...
QuoteThat, and it looks even more like an airline uniform. There's a reason the AF didn't go with sleeve rank. Sleeve rank like that is also more expensive to sew on.
Also another perfect reason behind it. The AF uniform components maintain the AF association and the "airline" portions give us our "corporate" look at the same time. Merging the two sides of our organization, which has always been a challenge. It embraces the diversity rather than creating a division between the two. Plus, the ribbons, etc imply that you're not an airline pilot...
The sleeve insignia might be slightly more expensive, but you aren't buying epaulet sleeves, you aren't spending the $80.00 for the coat in the first place, you already have the majority of the components regardless of what you wear now, etc.
I can't imagine that the stripes and the alteration would be more than $30 per promotion.[/quote]
QuoteIt may look nice, but copying unused AF designs isn't the way to go.
If they don't want it, why can't we use it for everyone?
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 08:08:52 PMThat was the whole point. Existing uniform components. Using the AF style uniform would still give us the tie in to the AF as their Auxiliary - maintaining the association. The shirt changes to white, no epaults. The enlisted service coat is cheaper by about $80. Nothing about it says, "That guy is in the Air Force."
Using Air Force components
doesn't say "That guy is in the Air Force"? I don't see the logic.
Second, people would have to buy an enlisted coat. If they already have an officer one, then they are now spending money on another one, and losing the use of an existing one.
The Air Force uses the white shirt for enlisted members as a semi-formal uniform. Hence the basic uniform concept is already in use.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 08:08:52 PMAlso another perfect reason behind it. The AF uniform components maintain the AF association and the "airline" portions give us our "corporate" look at the same time. Merging the two sides of our organization, which has always been a challenge. It embraces the diversity rather than creating a division between the two. Plus, the ribbons, etc imply that you're not an airline pilot...
We have one organization, not two. We may have different status' on missions, but we're still one entity. Corporatizing is part of our problem.
Adding ribbons doesn't alter the fact that it does look airline. Having a set of wings adds to the concept. It's the Civil Air Patrol, not the Civil Airline Patrol.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 08:08:52 PMThe sleeve insignia might be slightly more expensive, but you aren't buying epaulet sleeves, you aren't spending the $80.00 for the coat in the first place, you already have the majority of the components regardless of what you wear now, etc.
I can't imagine that the stripes and the alteration would be more than $30 per promotion.
The sleeve insignia is more expensive, no "might" about it. It was also one of the reasons that the concept was not adopted by the Air Force. As to the specific cost, I don't know it, but someone here does, they'll chime in.
Additionally, I highly doubt that there are tailors local to every CAP unit that would know how to properly sew them. A lot of them don't get the single sleeve braid we have on our coats right. I had to hand sew mine myself (which took a lot of time) because the cleaners
on base didn't get it right.
As to the coat, it will cost to replace the one you have. That's an expenditure. It's not cheaper to replace something you already have with something else.
Sleeve stripes were a non-starter for the Air Force. With coats, people felt that it looked like a Coast Guard style; with the stripes on epaulet sleeves, people were thought to be old USAFA cadets. I was active AF when McPeak changed it, I heard these thoughts expressed many times over first hand.
It didn't work then, it doesn't work now just because a few years have gone by.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 08:08:52 PMIf they don't want it, why can't we use it for everyone?
The concept is still the Air Force's. It doesn't become public domain because someone feels like using it. It's also not original.
If you're going to design something new, then make it something
new, not something taken from Air Force history. A lot of these designs in this thread are either using variants of Air Force uniforms, police uniforms, or suggesting something based on science fiction (I'll accept that those are mostly tongue in cheek, but with some you never know).
The CSU was actually uniform in design and components. If the grey tags and epaulets had been used just like on the blues variations, we may have been able to keep it.
Then again, it's doubtful many or even any of the suggestions presented here would ever be adopted. I imagine that the Air Force would accept small but noteable changes, not drastic ones.
An important point is whether the members can say "That looks sharp." Many people underestimate the importance of that. It's probably the reason the CSU was so popular. Heck, I know of members who passed on the AF uniforms to wear the CSU because it looked sharp (I asked them).
The sleeve stripe grade made me think of the USCG, not USAF or CAP.
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 13, 2009, 08:39:03 PMUsing Air Force components doesn't say "That guy is in the Air Force"? I don't see the logic.
It's distinctive enough that the two people standing next to each other wouldn't be confused for being in the same organization. That was my point. The same colors and jacket design would imply a relationship, which is another point.
QuoteSecond, people would have to buy an enlisted coat. If they already have an officer one, then they are now spending money on another one, and losing the use of an existing one.
Negative. Removing the epaulets from the officer coat makes it an enlisted one. Minimal cost in alteration. My tailor told me he'd do it for a whopping $12.00.
QuoteThe Air Force uses the white shirt for enlisted members as a semi-formal uniform. Hence the basic uniform concept is already in use.
This is where the nametag, sleeve braids and CAP emblem come in. Distinctive enough...
Quote from: hawk200
We have one organization, not two. We may have different status' on missions, but we're still one entity. Corporatizing is part of our problem.
Adding ribbons doesn't alter the fact that it does look airline. Having a set of wings adds to the concept. It's the Civil Air Patrol, not the Civil Airline Patrol.
We have two faces of our one organization that have been separated over the years, even more so in our uniform types. We have a distinctive "AF Style" uniform and a distinctive "Corporate" uniform. We have Air Force missions and we have corporate missions. We have "AF Funding" and we have "Corporate funding" - so really, we operate as though we are two separate organizations. Having a single uniform that incorporates both sides, I think, is a good thing.
Also, I don't think "corporatizing" is our problem, if anything being too "Air Force" is our problem. It put us in a situation where we expect to be handed money every year, completely ignoring our fiduciary responsibility to keep our organization fiscally sound. If we have a $5 million drop in appropriated funds, we need to start scraping the bottom of the barrel for money to do anything. If anything, we need to start acting like a corporation that depends on a non-steady revenue stream and look for alternate funding options to pad our bank account enough so we don't go bankrupt. But, that's a whole other topic all together.
You're seeing an increase of corporate missions, etc, which is good, IMO. But again, two different sides of our corporation trying to play nicely together. But right now, you can see a visible differentiation.
But as you said, we are the
Civil Air Patrol, not the
Air Force Air Patrol.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 08:08:52 PMThe sleeve insignia is more expensive, no "might" about it. It was also one of the reasons that the concept was not adopted by the Air Force. As to the specific cost, I don't know it, but someone here does, they'll chime in.
I had to pay $100.00 for my soccer uniform to play adult indoor coed soccer for 6 months. My brother-in-law had to spend $240.00 putting his daughters into brownie uniforms that they'll grow out of in the next year. Sometimes, things are just part of playing the game.
My wife just spent $500.00 on her new AF Mess Dress and another $600.00 for the other uniforms. I don't think that ~$30.00-$50.00 (considering the number of lifetime Captains we have...) is all that unreasonable.
QuoteAdditionally, I highly doubt that there are tailors local to every CAP unit that would know how to properly sew them. A lot of them don't get the single sleeve braid we have on our coats right. I had to hand sew mine myself (which took a lot of time) because the cleaners on base didn't get it right.
The great thing about that is if they do it wrong, you don't have to pay for them to fix it. Give them a picture, show them where you want it, it'll be fine. People aren't as dumb as they may appear...
QuoteAs to the coat, it will cost to replace the one you have. That's an expenditure. It's not cheaper to replace something you already have with something else.
Again, I wouldn't have to replace it. It would cost me $12.00 to convert it. I'm pretty handy with the sewing machine (I do all my own BDUs and such), I could probably do all my own alteration work for free...including the sewing of the sleeve braids...
QuoteSleeve stripes were a non-starter for the Air Force. With coats, people felt that it looked like a Coast Guard style; with the stripes on epaulet sleeves, people were thought to be old USAFA cadets. I was active AF when McPeak changed it, I heard these thoughts expressed many times over first hand.
So the Air Force didn't want to wear them. We aren't the Air Force, and apparently they don't want us to look identical to them anyway. Police departments use sleeve braids, fire departments use sleeve braids, the Navy uses sleeve braids, the Coast Guard uses sleeve braids, airlines use sleeve braids, a lot of European countries use sleeve braids, and on, and on...insignia on the shoulder for the AF uniform is an Army tradition anyway...
QuoteIt didn't work then, it doesn't work now just because a few years have gone by.
...for the Air Force...
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 08:08:52 PMThe concept is still the Air Force's. It doesn't become public domain because someone feels like using it. It's also not original.
If you're going to design something new, then make it something new, not something taken from Air Force history. A lot of these designs in this thread are either using variants of Air Force uniforms, police uniforms, or suggesting something based on science fiction (I'll accept that those are mostly tongue in cheek, but with some you never know).
The CSU was actually uniform in design and components.
It wasn't all that original either. It used the white shirt (which is in the design above), it used AF style pants (in the design above), it used the AF flight cap (in the design above), it used the belt (in the design above), it used the shoes (in the design above), it used the tie (in the design above) and it used the jacked, only made it double-breasted.
It appears to me that the contention was the way we displayed our rank. So, if you're going to have a uniform that is "almost" an Air Force uniform and switch it to grey sleeves so it's "almost" the Air Force style uniform we wear now, why not merge the two and change the thing causing the contention - the way we wear our rank on it. Which is what is accomplished above.
QuoteThen again, it's doubtful many or even any of the suggestions presented here would ever be adopted. I imagine that the Air Force would accept small but noteable changes, not drastic ones.
Very true, but you never know. But the first step in developing a new uniform for everyone would be to get the Air Force to buy into it so that later down the road we didn't get the TPU fiasco again...
Quote from: Gunner C on November 12, 2009, 05:20:29 AM
There could even be a 5th combination to replace the mess dress: Bow tie, no name tag, and miniature medals.
I think there might be a public health problem with just wearing a bow tie to a dining function. Pants, shirts and shoes might be a good idea.
;D
Really, though, this is a dead horse. Consolidate the blazer and "white and grays" and there should be a sufficient scheme of parallel uniforms to the Air Force combinations.
I can't believe that there is a member in all of CAP that would purposely want to offend any Air Force Officer.
Wearing the Air Force Uniform is a privilege. Sometimes taken to the extreme by those that are a little (lot) (very) over weight, but there are many of those in the Air Force too. Why do you suppose they sell 44 Short Air Force Dress Slacks at the BX near me... that however is not my point.
The Air Force should come to a definitive stance on what is TOO CLOSE TO THEIR UNIFORM and therefore offensive to them... and what is not. Just put it to them straight up. Then once we have an answer we should be cleared to avoid the pitfalls and make a uniform to our liking. Of course they passed approval on the CSU then seemingly withdrew approval. However, this time we've conducted ourselves with respect to the Air Force. If it ever happens again then we are servile suck ups.
If we point out that our own uniform (new CSU) will lead to fewer of our members wearing the Air Force Dress Blues and causing offense then I am sure the Air Force can be pacified in this case. Which it seems to me was the reason for the CSU versus the Sport Coat combo last time.
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on November 13, 2009, 09:20:24 PM
Really, though, this is a dead horse. Consolidate the blazer and "white and grays" and there should be a sufficient scheme of parallel uniforms to the Air Force combinations.
The only problem with that is Blazer is a seperate uniform to Gray and White. It isn't "Gray/White with dress blazer." As such it has a whole seperate section (albeit small) in the 39-1. Not to mention the subtle changes in text in regards to the pants. In the blazer section it specifies dress-style gray pants (ie. no demin type materials) whereas the Gray/White section does not get as specific about the style of gray pants.
Quote from: Gunner C on November 13, 2009, 04:14:50 AM
On the hat, please no army scrambled eggs. Use clouds, lightning bolts, and arrows. Or we could just get rid of the darned thing - just have a single flight cap (also grey) for males and females, like the AF does. Certainly no silver chin strap. It just runs the price up (once again more army than AF.)
The female uniforms look like the navy female uniform cut. Unless a woman has the figure of someone who runs 10 miles a week, it's not going to be very flattering. The men's longer coat will hide a man's "full figure". (On me the problems are I'm two axe-handles wide). Do they have anything that's longer and not so form-fitting for our women members?
As far as service caps, Pershing caps, or however you name them, in a mass produced market, the "Farts and Darts" is not readily available, and that's what I took into consideration when choosing "Scrambled Eggs". The two most mass produced cap visors, aside from blank, are "Scrambled Eggs," and something I'm just going to call "flaming bugles," used on Fire Dept caps. The silver chin strap comes standard on a lot of these style caps. Oddly enough, at the end of the day, whether the hat is a black Delta Airlines hat, a USAF blue hat, or a navy blue police hat, the prices are all the same: between $40 and $50 for a standard cap, and typically $20 more for the embroidered visor, often with the silver strap thrown in.
It also appears to me that the public safety uniform manufacturers do not take into consideration that not all women have the same measurements, and as such tighter fitting uniform styles like the one I posted do not look right on every woman. The simplest solution I've seen is that the men's coat I posted is available in less form fitting unisex styles too. I haven't seen too many pages with prices, but, if a company is mass producing basic S,M,L,XL, etc with the associated Short, Reg, and Long sleeve lengths, the price should be considerably lower. It's like going to The Men's Warehouse and getting fitted for a blazer and spending oodles of money, or going to Wal Mart and buying the Large:Long blazer for $50. At the end of the day, both coats achieved the same purpose. Sure one may not have "hung to all the curves" just right, but it still gave the wearer a professional appearance.
As far as the sleeve rank proposal goes: The USAF wouldn't approve of it because of what I could almost consider "inappropriate" use of their uniform. We would be starting with USAF NCO jackets and adding silver bands of varying widths to emulate a Navy-like rank insignia system. The USAF already canned this idea for themselves, so I don't know why they would allow CAP to use it on a USAF style uniform.
The only way sleeve stripes could at all possibly work is if Vanguard started making USAF NCO-style Blazers (which, the NCO coat already does look 99% like a blazer) with CAP buttons, in a non USAF shade of blue (therefore not having to contain the DoD Certification label) with the same shade of trousers. Personally I still think one could get away with a unified shade of gray for pants and blue for the coat - whether my own proposal for a coat or the sleeve stripe style. At this point, you have what amounts to a blazer with prop buttons. Now you can go hog-wild and put ribbons, badges, nameplates and all that good stuff on it.
The hard part is the sleeve stripes. First, most alteration shops are not going to carry the correct silver braid. So this would amount to either the individuals having to buy their own braid, at roughly $4.00 a yard for silver 1/4" and 1/2" braid, or squadrons, wings, etc. having to buy industrial size rolls to dispense to individual members as they promote. Then for each promotion, more braid needs to be purchased. Now, I don't have any abilities with a sewing machine, all of my BDU patches are hand sewn, but I have tried sewing braid to sleeves before by hand, and it's extremely difficult, especially if you're not opening the sleeve seams to wrap the braid under. So, for each promotion, you're looking at $4.00 for braid and probably around $20.00 for a tailor/seamstress.
The current CAP epaulets are just under $8.00. One thing that is being left out about sleeve stripes on the coat, what sort of insignia is going to be worn on the white shirt? Almost universally epaulets are worn for officers on their shirts under their uniform coats. This means that not only would members have to invest in custom tailoring for their coat, they still need to buy the gray slides for shirts because I'm not too sure Capt. Kangaroo (bad joke, I know) is going to want to parade around in a long sleeve dark color coat in the middle of summer just so he is properly wearing rank insignia. With the current setup on the Blues, anyone wearing the service coat, who only has, say, one pair of slides (on the aforementioned coat they are wearing) and who feels it too warm, too formal, etc. to wear the service coat, can remove said slides from the coat and place them on the shirt in 2 minutes tops. This saves members who are short on cash the cost of extra slides that will eventually no longer be necessary.
In the end, I think sleeve stripes are a little too much hassle and cost to be affective. The CAP slides have their purpose, whether they are gray which matches a Gray/White combo just fine, blue, which would look better on USAF style uniforms, or Maroon... Okay, well... the Berry Boards really had no purpose, but that's another story.
Quote from: Smithsonia on November 13, 2009, 09:55:33 PM
I can't believe that there is a member in all of CAP that would purposely want to offend any Air Force Officer.
Wearing the Air Force Uniform is a privilege. Sometimes taken to the extreme by those that are a little (lot) (very) over weight, but there are many of those in the Air Force too. Why do you suppose they sell 44 Short Air Force Dress Slacks at the BX near me... that however is not my point.
The Air Force should come to a definitive stance on what is TOO CLOSE TO THEIR UNIFORM and therefore offensive to them... and what is not. Just put it to them straight up. Then once we have an answer we should be cleared to avoid the pitfalls and make a uniform to our liking. Of course they passed approval on the CSU then seemingly withdrew approval. However, this time we've conducted ourselves with respect to the Air Force. If it ever happens again then we are servile suck ups.
If we point out that our own uniform (new CSU) will lead to fewer of our members wearing the Air Force Dress Blues and causing offense then I am sure the Air Force can be pacified in this case. Which it seems to me was the reason for the CSU versus the Sport Coat combo last time.
What you say makes sense. I've seen AF SNCO's who are clearly out of CAP's weight limits, not to mention the AF's, but again that's another matter.
I don't want to purposely offend anyone in the AF either, but right now I'm unsure as to what, uniform-wise,
wouldn't offend them. And, to be honest, when the CSU first came out, I saw the blue epaulettes, hard rank and (then) U.S. collar brass and thought "uh-oh."
This may sound callous and I don't mean it to, but with a lot of these designs being put forth, there are
no Air Force components being used, unlike the CSU, which did. With that being the case, then how
can they actually squelch any CAP-distinctive which uses no AF components whatsoever?
Maybe I'm misinformed, but they have no copyright on every shade of blue in the book, nor on hard rank, which, as has been pointed out, is used by a lot of police and fire services, as well as the Customs and Border Protection Service. When I pull into US Customs from Canada I see shoulder brass that looks like warrant officers, majors and lieutenant colonels, but they're not (I asked).
As long as there is no violation of U.S.C., Stolen Valor, state laws about impersonating law enforcement (which can all be checked by CAP's legal beagles), what would be the obstacles in place, as long as it is clear to all that it is a CAP uniform?
Also: how did grey come into the picture to begin with? I first joined CAP in '93, and it obviously pre-dates me, but I see nothing in CAP's uniform history to establish grey. I'm not trying to be a smart Alec; I'm just asking.
Another thing that seems goofy about this is the Air Force (or CAP take your choice) wanted our uniforms simplified. SEE HERE: http://www.uniforms-4u.com/c-air-force-uniforms-1077.aspx
The Air Force has 17 combinations on their dress uniform guide. And this doesn't include duty uniforms, flight suits, specialty uniforms, or configurations for tropical wear, sweaters, etc. Those are just the straight from the gate dress uniforms. Our uniform choices are far less.
I am not arguing for more choices just pointing out the paradox.
ALSO - Be aware that Gray (as in a full gray dress uniform) is usually not an American uniform. I would imagine that is a reaction to the Confederate States Grays followed by the Gray German uniforms of WW1 and WW2. Gray has never been a generally accepted American military uniform in the last 150 years except at West Point, at least that I can find in a quick search. Now that the Army has abandoned greens -- greens are now available and greens and khakis were our first uniform during WW2. But I am not arguing for that just giving another option.
Easy answer: Take the uniform decisions out of CAP's hands and let the Air Force Uniform Board and the Air Force Uniform Office at Wright-Patt run it all.
How do you like that?
Quote from: Smithsonia on November 13, 2009, 11:54:26 PM
Be aware that Gray (as in a full gray dress uniform) is usually not an American uniform. I would imagine that is a reaction to the Confederate States Grays followed by the Gray German uniforms of WW1 and WW2. Gray has never been a generally accepted American military uniform in the last 150 years except at West Point, at least that I can find in a quick search. Now that the Army has abandoned greens -- greens are now available and greens and khakis were our first uniform during WW2. But I am not arguing for that just giving another option.
The blazer combination is actually the IACE "uniform," if I remember correctly. So that's why we have it as it is. The white-and-gray appears to be an offshoot of the blazer combination. So there's why we have the gray.
Green, however, isn't a color generally associated with aviation. The
ground is green.
Mostly been staying out of this one. Kinda been watching where the thread was going. I think we have a lot of good ideas out there to replace the CSU and/or the grays/whites. Why and how the CSU went or is going away is irrelevant. It's going away. Let's move on.
I still like the idea of the old khaki uniforms myself. We could get supplies from the same outfit that is supplying the Navy. I don't see the fact that they are wearing it should deter us. The shirts might need to be altered depending on whether we wanted collar rank insignia or to stick to the shoulder slides. Although, if we went that direction I would change the slides and nametags to blue. Continue to use the AF flight and service caps as well as ties and various other accessories. The black leather flight jacket would look good with this combination as well as the blue nylon AF jacket. With the khaki uniform as the base, the AF shlouldn't have a herd of small farm animals about the use of these items.
I would keep the BBDUs and the Navy flight suit/utility uniform.
The golf shirt would also be retained and worn with the tan uniform trousers or civilian khakis or BDU/5.11 type trousers.
I like the idea of a uniform that looks like a uniform and the grays and whites/ blazer doesn't do that although that's what I'm wearing this weekend for CLC.
olefido: My guess is that it would probably be best to use NO USAF items for a CAP distinctive uniform.
For a flight cap, I would go with tan with dark blue piping.
Tan jacket with blue CAP distinctive rank slides.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMIt's distinctive enough that the two people standing next to each other wouldn't be confused for being in the same organization. That was my point. The same colors and jacket design would imply a relationship, which is another point.
I maybe misunderstanding this, but it seems that you want the appearance of association, but enough separation to claim independance. Essentially, the ability to thumb a nose at the Air Force and say "This isn't your uniform, we'll do what we want."
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMRemoving the epaulets from the officer coat makes it an enlisted one. Minimal cost in alteration. My tailor told me he'd do it for a whopping $12.00.
Still requiring a modification, and an outlay. Just because it can be done, doesn't mean it should. Even if it is only 12 bucks.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMThis is where the nametag, sleeve braids and CAP emblem come in. Distinctive enough...
No, it's not. Claiming it is doesn't make it so. The Air Force made it clear what differences are
required for CAP to wear their uniform. We do not have the authority to go modifying their uniform, and then claiming "Oh, it's distinctive enough." It's not our place, and that's the same thing HWSRN did, and created all kinds of hassles. We are not an autonomous organization, we need to stop trying to act, or even think like one.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMWe have two faces of our one organization that have been separated over the years, even more so in our uniform types. We have a distinctive "AF Style" uniform and a distinctive "Corporate" uniform. We have Air Force missions and we have corporate missions. We have "AF Funding" and we have "Corporate funding" - so really, we operate as though we are two separate organizations. Having a single uniform that incorporates both sides, I think, is a good thing.
We have different pots of money and different rules for different things, that doesn't make us two separate organizations. There is plenty of precedent in the military; a pot of money for airplane parts, another for toilet paper. It doesn't give separate faces to them.
Right now, there is no requirement to be in a corporate uniform for corporate missions, or to be in an Air Force variant for Air Force missions. If there ever is, then we will be a truly schizophrenic entity.
The only way to resolve that problem is either elimination of Air Force missions, or to eliminate corporate ones. If we're to be performing both there will always be two sets of rules.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMAlso, I don't think "corporatizing" is our problem, if anything being too "Air Force" is our problem. It put us in a situation where we expect to be handed money every year, completely ignoring our fiduciary responsibility to keep our organization fiscally sound. If we have a $5 million drop in appropriated funds, we need to start scraping the bottom of the barrel for money to do anything. If anything, we need to start acting like a corporation that depends on a non-steady revenue stream and look for alternate funding options to pad our bank account enough so we don't go bankrupt. But, that's a whole other topic all together.
Being an Air Force Auxiliary doesn't preclude us from doing missions for compensation. It also doesn't exclude units and wings from doing their own fundraisers. We do that now, and have been since I joined in '94, well before the corporate stuff came in.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMYou're seeing an increase of corporate missions, etc, which is good, IMO. But again, two different sides of our corporation trying to play nicely together. But right now, you can see a visible differentiation.
Two sets of rules will always exist with the different kinds of missions. We don't have different "sides", the same chain of command is in effect whether the mission is corporate or military. We still have National HQ, Regions, Wings, Groups and Squadrons.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMBut as you said, we are the Civil Air Patrol, not the Air Force Air Patrol.
Not what I said at all. Your statement is an outright lie.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 08:08:52 PMI had to pay $100.00 for my soccer uniform to play adult indoor coed soccer for 6 months. My brother-in-law had to spend $240.00 putting his daughters into brownie uniforms that they'll grow out of in the next year. Sometimes, things are just part of playing the game.
Your soccer league and your BIL's daughter Brownie uniforms are completely irrelevant to the situation. I'm not forcing you into those acqusitions, nor am I altering those uniforms requiring you to make additional purchases.
You are however advocating a change that would require me to do so.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMMy wife just spent $500.00 on her new AF Mess Dress and another $600.00 for the other uniforms. I don't think that ~$30.00-$50.00 (considering the number of lifetime Captains we have...) is all that unreasonable.
Again, just as irrelevant as soccer and Brownie uniforms. Unless your wife is an officer, that's not even a required uniform.
To you, $30 to $50 isn't unreasonable. The thing is you're not the measuring stick for CAP in general. You have to account for
everyone that the change affects.
Besides, we just eliminated a uniform. How do you think another is gonna go over? Both to the Air Force, and the members.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMThe great thing about that is if they do it wrong, you don't have to pay for them to fix it. Give them a picture, show them where you want it, it'll be fine.
I didn't pay them to fix it, I took it home and did it myself. They had a few pictures, done from different angles, and instructions. And still did it wrong.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMAgain, I wouldn't have to replace it. It would cost me $12.00 to convert it. I'm pretty handy with the sewing machine (I do all my own BDUs and such), I could probably do all my own alteration work for free...including the sewing of the sleeve braids...
That works out well for you, but not everyone has the abilities. I've done all my stuff by hand since I can't really get the hang of a sewing machine. It turns out well because many people don't believe I did it by hand. But neither you nor I can expect others to do the same thing.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMSo the Air Force didn't want to wear them. We aren't the Air Force, and apparently they don't want us to look identical to them anyway. Police departments use sleeve braids, fire departments use sleeve braids, the Navy uses sleeve braids, the Coast Guard uses sleeve braids, airlines use sleeve braids, a lot of European countries use sleeve braids, and on, and on...insignia on the shoulder for the AF uniform is an Army tradition anyway...
So you want to jump on the traditions of police, fire, Navy, Coast Guard, airlines, and a lot of European countries instead? That's simply trading one tradition for another. Still nothing original. But the desire to avoid the Air Force way is telling.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PM...for the Air Force...
Once again, the nose thumbing (or the appearance of it) at the Air Force.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMIt wasn't all that original either. It used the white shirt (...), it used AF style pants (...), it used the AF flight cap (...), it used the belt (...), it used the shoes (in the design above), it used the tie (...) and it used the jacked, only made it double-breasted.
It appears to me that the contention was the way we displayed our rank. So, if you're going to have a uniform that is "almost" an Air Force uniform and switch it to grey sleeves so it's "almost" the Air Force style uniform we wear now, why not merge the two and change the thing causing the contention - the way we wear our rank on it. Which is what is accomplished above.
True on the CSU, but I'm fairly convinced that it was how it was "revealed" that was the issue, and not wholly the rank. First worn to an Armed Services Committee hearing when no one ever knew anything about it. I
It was like a child being told not to do something, and doing something slightly different that was
technically not forbidden, but was still within the spirit of the original admonition. Hard rank on the service coat was denied, so a new service coat was created that had it; but it was a "corporate" coat, so the Air Force didn't have a "say" in it.
Considering the CSU used so many AF components, and allegedly drew the Air Force's ire, why do you think this concept won't do the same? Sleeve rank and a white shirt are even more minor than the CSU, and presents a design even closer to the AF standard uniform.
As the the gray slides, they were obviously approved by the AF. Otherwise, we would have had yet another uniform fiasco.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on November 13, 2009, 09:12:31 PMBut the first step in developing a new uniform for everyone would be to get the Air Force to buy into it so that later down the road we didn't get the TPU fiasco again...
I think the first step would be to try to repair some ties with the Air Force, and quit trying to blow them off or separate ourselves from them. All of our dark times in history are a direct result of doing so. We all know those times. Everthing was a backlash to something stupid that CAP members did. Trying to design a new uniform is a very obvious example of this.
Quote from: Smithsonia on November 13, 2009, 11:54:26 PMThe Air Force has 17 combinations on their dress uniform guide.
How are you seeing 17 combinations?
Quote from: Flint on November 10, 2009, 09:18:47 PM
Why add another uniform or change from what exists? The grey/white combination looks smart. All that should be done is find a shade of grey that works best and make that uniform.
Add a gray jacket cut in the same style as the blue service jacket and use the gray slides and it's done. simple easy and quickly.
I'll be glad if we just stay with what we've got and forgo another uniform mess. The CSU looked nice for those who were eligible and could afford it. I've identified with the looking like a team mindset but I hope we don't end up with a gray uniform that will make us look like Bus Drivers. I'd say stay with the AF uniforms and make sure that no cadets are affected by the by the gray uniforms we wear that look dysfunctional. I just work to get the best looking dress gray slacks I can get my hands on. They may be the wrong shade but they look good.
More on Silver-Tans
http://usafflagranks.com/usaf_summer_service_dress_coat.html
Note the reference to fit guidelines for "waist 36 and up and portly sizes"
Just some historical reference to the discussion
We might as well set the Wayback Machine for 1965, our Smurf Blue nametape came from that era.
Just some historical reference to the discussion
http://www.scribd.com/doc/1420657/US-Air-Force-History20of20USAF20Uniforms
It's very obvious that yours is the only sensible proposal. Let's review the issues:
1. uniform is needed for those who do not meet weight standards (and perhaps grooming standards.
2. uniform has to be more dressy than the current white aviator shirt/ gray slacks combination and more military than the polo shirt or blazer uniforms. In short, the uniform must have a dress jacket.
3. uniform must not resemble air force blue uniform too closely.
4. uniform must be readily available and affordable.
These requirements make ideas of reviving "silver-tans" or obsolete uniforms impossible. They are produced only as expensive reproductions.
In contrast the Fechheimer 38800 is a distinctive color (LAPD blue is almost black). Readily available and relatively inexpensive (about $140). The minor changes required (regular epaulets, no badge tab, CAP or Hap Arnold buttons could be member-done or perhaps the manufacturer would do it. Obviously, gray epaulet slides are the appropriate grade insignia, to match those wearing Air Force style uniforms.
Why is that "obvious"?
Quote from: Gunner C on November 14, 2009, 10:47:48 PM
Why is that "obvious"?
I would not necessarily use the term "obvious," but I think what PhotogPilot is trying to do in the supporting statements to the argument is the following:
Cost considerations
Trying not to PO the Air Force
Using extant grey rank slides
All of these have merit; however, I don't think that hard rank should be ruled out for a uniform that is clearly not an Air Force uniform. Again I refer to where I have said that the system of bars, leaves, eagles and stars are not proprietary to the AF.
Having said that, I believe a CAP-distinctive uniform should not use any Air Force items, which is where I believe the CSU got in trouble, especially given that the originator of that uniform design apparently (?) showed up at a function wearing it with no prior notification.
Here is the new CAP Distinctive Uniform
http://www.angelfire.com/nd/bluebanana/CAPUniform.jpg
Pickee no showee
Quote from: Pumbaa on November 15, 2009, 10:07:48 PM
Pickee no showee
Cut and paste the address. Angelfire doesn't like hotlinking.
I just saw the pic he was referring to. Trust me, it's a good thing the link doesn't work. Throwing camoflague into the mix won't help things. I remember having to wear the OD green fatigues as a field uniform. I also remember the upheaval when we finally got permission to wear the jungle fatigues, then the camoflague BDUs.
Quote from: LtCol057 on November 15, 2009, 11:32:11 PM
I just saw the pic he was referring to. Trust me, it's a good thing the link doesn't work. Throwing camoflague into the mix won't help things. I remember having to wear the OD green fatigues as a field uniform. I also remember the upheaval when we finally got permission to wear the jungle fatigues, then the camoflague BDUs.
And, while a challenging time, it was a 'natural' progression of uniform transition. This current upheaval is the result of pure politics and ego stroking. Yes, the pic definitely has a healthy dose of sarcasm built in.
Hope all is well at Tar River ;D
Cheers,
Quote from: chadderby on November 15, 2009, 09:36:03 PM
Here is the new CAP Distinctive Uniform
http://www.angelfire.com/nd/bluebanana/CAPUniform.jpg
Where's the reflective belt? >:D
Quote from: dogboy on November 14, 2009, 10:35:18 PM
It's very obvious that yours is the only sensible proposal. Let's review the issues:
1. uniform is needed for those who do not meet weight standards (and perhaps grooming standards.
That right there is a major problem in our thought process.
We need a unfirom that
everyone will wear not just those who don't meet USAF weight and grooming standards.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 16, 2009, 07:22:17 PM
Quote from: dogboy on November 14, 2009, 10:35:18 PM
It's very obvious that yours is the only sensible proposal. Let's review the issues:
1. uniform is needed for those who do not meet weight standards (and perhaps grooming standards.
That right there is a major problem in our thought process.
We need a unfirom that everyone will wear not just those who don't meet USAF weight and grooming standards.
Right, instead of thinking of it as a uniform for the "fat and fuzzies", consider it a uniform that the entire membership can wear.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 16, 2009, 07:22:17 PM
Quote from: dogboy on November 14, 2009, 10:35:18 PM
It's very obvious that yours is the only sensible proposal. Let's review the issues:
1. uniform is needed for those who do not meet weight standards (and perhaps grooming standards.
That right there is a major problem in our thought process.
We need a unfirom that everyone will wear not just those who don't meet USAF weight and grooming standards.
One everybody CAN wear or WILL wear?
Quote from: RogueLeader on November 16, 2009, 08:24:14 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 16, 2009, 07:22:17 PM
Quote from: dogboy on November 14, 2009, 10:35:18 PM
It's very obvious that yours is the only sensible proposal. Let's review the issues:
1. uniform is needed for those who do not meet weight standards (and perhaps grooming standards.
That right there is a major problem in our thought process.
We need a unfirom that everyone will wear not just those who don't meet USAF weight and grooming standards.
One everybody CAN wear or WILL wear?
WILL!
Quote from: lordmonar on November 16, 2009, 08:43:20 PM
Quote from: RogueLeader on November 16, 2009, 08:24:14 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 16, 2009, 07:22:17 PM
Quote from: dogboy on November 14, 2009, 10:35:18 PM
It's very obvious that yours is the only sensible proposal. Let's review the issues:
1. uniform is needed for those who do not meet weight standards (and perhaps grooming standards.
That right there is a major problem in our thought process.
We need a unfirom that everyone will wear not just those who don't meet USAF weight and grooming standards.
One everybody CAN wear or WILL wear?
WILL!
Just don't make it a guayabara shirt or a Mr Furley jumpsuit. I
CAN'T wear those!
Most of us WON'T wear one. Buy-in by the entire membership is key.
I like the "LAPD Blue" color jacket. I think the unifrom done by kd8 lloks great. Having said that, here is a copy of a post that I did on another thread before I knew this one was in existance. Some of what I said below is not acurate for this thread.
KUDOS to the committee!!! I need a uniform that looks good and I loved the CSU. I am very disappointed that it was ripped from us. I am proud of my awards and my qualifications and would strongly oppose any proposal that would strip the "military-style" away from what we are wearing. From reading the board, I've seen a lot of suggestions and thoughts thrown out, but I haven't seen the codified guidelines. Here are my thoughts for guidelines:
*** Note this would be for the non-USAF uniform only. Those that want to wear the USAF-style should still do so. *****
1 – The uniform should be extremely cost-effective. SMs are already paying a lot up-front in costs, we should try to keep this cost down. One of the ways to do this is to use as much "off-the-rack" as possible, with possible multiple suppliers.
2 – The uniform should be CAP distinctive, but military-style.
3 – The uniform should be flexible. There should be one "base set" of service uniforms – just like everything builds on the basic light blue shirt / dark blue pants for USAF. For us, multiple uniform combos should spawn from the basic white/grays.
Now for some thoughts to the committee.
I would really like to explore the black trousers ** LAPD Blue ** idea. With all the gray on the white shirt, gray slacks "wash-out" the person wearing the uniform even more. The black trousers would serve to add contrast to the ensemble. Also, with the Army doing away with the black trousers and going all blue (see below), black will be distinctive.
Tried to put pic in, couldn't figure out how to do it.
And since anyone wearing epaulette sleeves on the Army uniform will have stripe down the trousers, we will avoid further conflict.
I would like to see the Army black windbreaker become the designated jacket for the combo, with the requisite gray epaulette sleeves. Ditto the commando sweater.
I agree with a cap/hat. If we use the black trousers, then the US Navy's new black flight cap with the CAP SM eagle will go nicely with it . (Again, off the rack = lower costs).
Service Coat – Now that will be the hard one. I definitely think we should incorporate one, since the corporate service coat died. Wide open for ideas about that. *** I like the coat kd8 did in this thread
Black pants, white shirt, black tie....
Hmmmm.. Oh yeah I wore that when I was working as a busboy in a restaurant when I was 16...
Bus driver, bus boy... there will be no winning here...
Black trousers with the aviator shirt instead of gray sounds great. Throw in the windbreaker. No hat thanks.
Not to be too much of a wet blanket here, but part of the problem we face every time we go down the path of designing a single professional CAP uniform that looks good on all of our senior members is the fact that it is simply impossible to come up with such a thing.
Really. I submit that no other organization in the world has such a diverse set of members, missions, and working conditions that we have here in CAP.
We're talking about a professional-looking uniform that can work for members:
- 18 to 100 years of age.
- 85 to 385 pounds.
- with the widest possible range of disabilities from canes to wheelchairs.
- Widely varying facial and head hair.
- in climatic areas ranging from Alaska to Puerto Rico (which drives outergarments and footwear).
- and occaisonal formal events.
Even assuming we have other CAP-specific uniforms for field work and flying, it remains a daunting challenge.
I can't think of another uniformed organization in the world that has such variety, unless you count crew uniforms at McDonalds which I suspect will not pass the "professional appearance" test.
There is a lot of good faith effort going on here, but it is as ultimately futile as inventing a perpetual motion machine.
The AF has about the same number of uniform combinations that we do, and so does every other military service. And they don't have anything approaching the diversity in membership that we do.
But feel free to prove me wrong . . . . . 8)
Comprehensive list there, Ned :) And yes, I agree it is impossible to design a uniform that will look good on everyone. But we can sure do a better job than the current situation!
Quote from: vento on November 16, 2009, 05:14:54 PM
Quote from: chadderby on November 15, 2009, 09:36:03 PM
Here is the new CAP Distinctive Uniform
http://www.angelfire.com/nd/bluebanana/CAPUniform.jpg
Where's the reflective belt? >:D
I'm sorry, that just won't do.
There's no boonie hat.
Ned is right in many ways. We simply cannot design a uniform that is going to please everyone, regardless of body shape or hirsuteness.
I hope we can at least come up with some sort of compromise, one that all our membership and the Air Force can at least be OK with.
Sorry for the dual post - my bad.
we should look at wearing buisness clothes or polos at this point :-[
Ned is right in many ways. We simply cannot design a uniform that is going to please everyone, regardless of body shape or hirsuteness.
Some want to look as "military" as possible, and others don't want to look "military" at all.
I hope we can at least come up with some sort of compromise, one that all our membership and the Air Force can at least be OK with.
Sometimes I think we should have done what Canada tried to do, unify their service branches into one and all branches and ranks wore the same dark green uniform and rank insignia. A good idea, but very unpopular (they went back to separate uniforms), and would be moreso here (imagine what the Marines would say).
Quote from: CyBorg on November 15, 2009, 05:08:38 AM
Quote from: Gunner C on November 14, 2009, 10:47:48 PM
Why is that "obvious"?
I would not necessarily use the term "obvious," but I think what PhotogPilot is trying to do in the supporting statements to the argument is the following:
Cost considerations
Trying not to PO the Air Force
Using extant grey rank slides
All of these have merit; however, I don't think that hard rank should be ruled out for a uniform that is clearly not an Air Force uniform. Again I refer to where I have said that the system of bars, leaves, eagles and stars are not proprietary to the AF.
Having said that, I believe a CAP-distinctive uniform should not use any Air Force items, which is where I believe the CSU got in trouble, especially given that the originator of that uniform design apparently (?) showed up at a function wearing it with no prior notification.
I don't know if I was trying to put forth ANY argument, just an interesting footnote.
While I appreciate the consideration everyone here has put into their ideas and suggestions, I believe this may be a very futile exercise. The hardcore blue suiters will not accept any ides that take us away from AF blues. The corporate only crowd will scoff at any "military looking" uniform.
If we go khaki or tan, the Navy will complain. If we go anything blue the AF gripes. The Army has the corner on green (although they have abandoned the uniform). Blue and Black? Nope, USMC. Gray? Lawsuits a comin' from the Commerative Air Force.
Also, anything proposed here will ultimately wind up in the "thanks, when your phone dont ring, you'll know its us" file from NHQ.
Sorry, I'm frustrated, and venting somewhat. I like the CSU, it's uniform, it's a UNIFORM, and it looks good. Change the slides to gray, lose the metal rank, allow neat beards and reasonable hair length and be done with it. They're throwing out the baby with the bath water.
OK, Pineda was a jerk, we all hate him, the AF hates him, we get that. The TPU, CSU, call it what you will was poorly conceived, for the wrong reasons, maybe so, maybe not.
I wish I was a 174 pound 19 year old airman basic at Lackland. I'm not, I'm 51 years old, and overweight. I wear WHATEVER uniform I'm allowed, and wear it correctly.
I've been following this since the news broke here. All the discussion is awesome. If you don't mind a board noob putting in his two cents...
I've discussed this topic with the SMs at my unit and included some of the ideas here and they agree that some of them would be good ideas. First, before I even mentioned the discussion here, one of my compatriots suggested that we should be allowed to wear the BBDU pants and boots with the polo. So great minds think alike. That definitely should be included in any proposal to the top brass.
I think we should keep the navy blue options -BBDU, flight suit, utility- as they are. They actually are pretty decent.
When it comes to the polo shirt, keep the shirt, and make the option of BBDUs and boots for field work, or black pants/black shoes for other times. Or the gray standard that I mention below.
I personally like the idea of going for a CAP corporate uniform for anyone, F&F or not, that goes back to our beginnings. The khaki or silvertan or whatever you want to call it, with:
- a gray tie, gray rank sleeves, gray nametag, and gray flight cap with blue, silver, black or khaki piping, or gray or khaki service hat.
- or use the AF blue tie, rank sleeves, nametag, and flight cap with current silver piping, or blue service hat.
- or, black tie, black rank sleeves, black nametag, and khaki flight cap with black or silver piping, or khaki service hat. I'd say a black service hat but that might look a bit wrong.
- or a blue tie, blue rank sleeves, blue nametag, and a khaki flight cap with blue piping, or khaki service hat.
- or really throw back to the red rank sleeves, black nametag, black tie and a khaki flight cap with red piping.
For outerwear with a khaki uniform, the current blue windbreakers, trench coats, sweaters, etc. or black or khaki variations of these. This uniform would be available in short or long sleeve variations, and would be for use in place of the AF Blues for those who can't or don't want to wear those. CAP badges, ribbons, etc. only allowed. For the "Class A" version, a khaki or blue single breasted service jacket with whatever color combination above matching the "Class B".
If the khaki/silvertan uniform isn't worth working out, then I agree with going to a standard gray pant with the gray/whites, and allowing for a gray flight cap. I think a black service jacket would look smart with this combination. These standard gray pants could also be used with the polo, as mentioned above.
Any current AF option available now would stay the same.
I think these would be CAP Corporate distinctive without POing the AF, and yet still military enough for everyone to feel comfortable in.
At least those are the thoughts I've been having about all this. YMMV.
Quote from: Dracosbane on November 17, 2009, 05:29:13 AMI think we should keep the navy blue options -BBDU, flight suit, utility- as they are. They actually are pretty decent.
That would look too much like law enforcement or EMS.
Quote from: flyguy06 on November 18, 2009, 04:35:16 PM
Quote from: Dracosbane on November 17, 2009, 05:29:13 AMI think we should keep the navy blue options -BBDU, flight suit, utility- as they are. They actually are pretty decent.
That would look too much like law enforcement or EMS.
At some point we are just going to have to bite that bullet!
No matter what way we go we are going to find that someone already beat us there. OD green...taken, BDU camo....taken. Navy Blue....Taken. Black....taken. Tan....taken. Desert BDU (all three variants)...taken. MARPAT....Taken. Dark Blue....taken. ACU....taken. ABU....taken. Gray....taken.
So....we are going to look like someone else.....live with it.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 18, 2009, 05:17:44 PM
So....we are going to look like someone else.....live with it.
+1 - in fact, that's kinda the
point...
Quote from: lordmonar on November 18, 2009, 05:17:44 PM
At some point we are just going to have to bite that bullet!
No matter what way we go we are going to find that someone already beat us there. OD green...taken, BDU camo....taken. Navy Blue....Taken. Black....taken. Tan....taken. Desert BDU (all three variants)...taken. MARPAT....Taken. Dark Blue....taken. ACU....taken. ABU....taken. Gray....taken.
So....we are going to look like someone else.....live with it.
Point taken, but we are not going to look like someone else with ultramarine and/or navy blue "CIVIL AIR PATROL" tapes and attendant insignia clearly displayed.
Most police and ES people that I have seen wear black, not dark blue, for "tactical" uniforms, and most of those are clearly marked with "POLICE." Some police wear woodland BDU's and subdued insignia when they are doing things like raiding pot fields.
There is nothing original under the sun.
I have long wondered why we need
any kind of camouflage, whether it be the woodland BDU or the ABU. We do not need to avoid being seen, after all. I think the BBDU is very good for us.
However, standard OD green BDU's and maybe tan for summer/hot weather would be possible. If anything, our blue insignia would stand out even clearer. Just a hypothesis.
Failing that, we could always go to sky-blue camouflage...our blue insignia would really blend in with that, though it would make us look like walking Sukhoi-27's.
http://www.galaxyarmynavy.com/item-8882.asp
For those who really like grey, I would be good with solid-grey BDU's and a grey utility jumpsuit (which would make us look like the Imperials in
Star Wars to some...).
http://www.galaxyarmynavy.com/item-8882.asp
My point is, anything that is clearly marked as Civil Air Patrol (whether dress, BDU or utility) is going to be
Civil Air Patrol. We can only do so much as to how others perceive us.
The problem with the current gray trouser corporate uniform is that it is too informal. The corporate uniform needs a jacket and hat. I think this is the most sensible alternative that has been offered on this thread. Grey rank slides on a dark blue police style coat. Relatively inexpensive and easily obtained. No doubt matching flight caps could be obtained easily.
Quote from: kd8gua on November 11, 2009, 09:53:37 PM
As far as an alternate to Blues as a Corporate Service Uniform, here are my results.
(http://i37.tinypic.com/nwxxk5.jpg)
This is a readily available police hat.
(http://i34.tinypic.com/34j4qcz.jpg)
The jacket is from the Fechheimer Brothers' Flying Cross line of public safety uniforms. These jackets are a very dark navy blue. None of the pockets are real, just scalloped flaps. On this jacket, you see the following:
-Standard gray CAP slides.
-Standard gray CAP Nameplate.
-CAP lapel cutouts.
-Optional use of CAP Wing/Region/National Patch (Overseas used for illustrative purposes)
-White Aviator shirt (already used for the TPU and white/gray combo)
-USAF Blue tie (Women may wear CAP floppy bow tie or tie tab)
-CAP ONLY ribbons.
-No sleeve braids.
-Rules for wear of badges and ribbons (again, CAP only) follow those currently in the 39-1 for USAF style.
-Would be authorized for wear by all seniors regardless of height/weight standards. Modified grooming standards, including the idea for neatly trimmed beards, would be authorized for this uniform.
There are matching Trousers available for this style coat. However, a uniform shade of Gray would most likely be acceptable with this coat as well, thus making this coat a "Class A" version of the Gray/White.
On this uniform, if not wearing the Coat, rules pertaining to current wear of the Aviator shirt for the Gray/White combo apply.
Comments?
Quote from: dogboy on November 20, 2009, 02:17:36 AM
The problem with the current gray trouser corporate uniform is that it is too informal. The corporate uniform needs a jacket and hat. I think this is the most sensible alternative that has been offered on this thread. Grey rank slides on a dark blue police style coat. Relatively inexpensive and easily obtained. No doubt matching flight caps could be obtained easily.
Quote from: kd8gua on November 11, 2009, 09:53:37 PM
As far as an alternate to Blues as a Corporate Service Uniform, here are my results.
(http://i37.tinypic.com/nwxxk5.jpg)
This is a readily available police hat.
(http://i34.tinypic.com/34j4qcz.jpg)
The jacket is from the Fechheimer Brothers' Flying Cross line of public safety uniforms. These jackets are a very dark navy blue. None of the pockets are real, just scalloped flaps. On this jacket, you see the following:
-Standard gray CAP slides.
-Standard gray CAP Nameplate.
-CAP lapel cutouts.
-Optional use of CAP Wing/Region/National Patch (Overseas used for illustrative purposes)
-White Aviator shirt (already used for the TPU and white/gray combo)
-USAF Blue tie (Women may wear CAP floppy bow tie or tie tab)
-CAP ONLY ribbons.
-No sleeve braids.
-Rules for wear of badges and ribbons (again, CAP only) follow those currently in the 39-1 for USAF style.
-Would be authorized for wear by all seniors regardless of height/weight standards. Modified grooming standards, including the idea for neatly trimmed beards, would be authorized for this uniform.
There are matching Trousers available for this style coat. However, a uniform shade of Gray would most likely be acceptable with this coat as well, thus making this coat a "Class A" version of the Gray/White.
On this uniform, if not wearing the Coat, rules pertaining to current wear of the Aviator shirt for the Gray/White combo apply.
Comments?
Nix the patch, add CAP Buttons and you have one heck of a sharp looking uniform. Bravo!
That uniform most likely would not be approved because it looks even more like an AF uniform than the CSU.
Make the jacket black and keep the trousers grey and you pretty much have what is being discussed in the side group. Black jackets, servicecaps, and garrison/flight caps are readily available. Once we have come to a concensous on the details, a formal proposal will be written up and posted here.
Quote from: arajca on November 20, 2009, 04:32:49 AM
That uniform most likely would not be approved because it looks even more like an AF uniform than the CSU.
Make the jacket black and keep the trousers grey and you pretty much have what is being discussed in the side group. Black jackets, servicecaps, and garrison/flight caps are readily available. Once we have come to a concensous on the details, a formal proposal will be written up and posted here.
But if it doesn't use any Air Force uniform items, why is their approval necessary? As I've said, they don't own the copyright on blue uniforms.
What was the 'official' line given for killing the CSU - the AF objected to it. So replacing it with a uniform that looks even closer to the AF uniforms would cause more problems.
Quote from: arajca on November 20, 2009, 05:50:46 AM
What was the 'official' line given for killing the CSU - the AF objected to it. So replacing it with a uniform that looks even closer to the AF uniforms would cause more problems.
If that's the standard we're looking at, then we won't have a new one until we design something with a plaid shirt, jeans, and a hunting vest! The AF is neither stupid nor unreasonable. This uniform is sharp, military in its cut, and ISN"T AN AF UNIFORM! If anyone mistakes you for an AF officer then he's on the way to the hospital for an eye test.
You UNIFORM guys need to get a LIFE, Or maybe take up Comic book collecting.
Quote from: wingnut55 on November 20, 2009, 06:38:51 AM
You UNIFORM guys need to get a LIFE, Or maybe take up Comic book collecting.
Well, if that isn't the biggest insult I've seen on CAP Talk, it's one of the top five.
Designing a new distinctive uniform isn't something for losers. For many of us, it ties us to nearly 68 years of tradition which some don't want to be part of. I can't understand why some folks want to deny that.
I wore a green beret for 18.5 years. If they got rid of it, I still would have stayed in SF. But it tied me to a long line of folks going back to the early 1950s. I met the "father" of SF (Col Aaron Bank) and the general (Gen William Yarborough) who wore a green beret in front of JFK before it was authorized. Neither of them knew me from Adam's house cat. But that green felt headgear (and what it stood for) bound us together and both of the conversations were like we were old friends. There is a bond between folks who wear the same uniform. Having a single uniform would unite us all in many ways.
But then, there's a portion of CAP who doesn't think that's valuable. I think it's unfortunate, but that's just life.
Quote from: cap235629 on November 20, 2009, 03:05:44 AM
Quote from: dogboy on November 20, 2009, 02:17:36 AM
The problem with the current gray trouser corporate uniform is that it is too informal. The corporate uniform needs a jacket and hat. I think this is the most sensible alternative that has been offered on this thread. Grey rank slides on a dark blue police style coat. Relatively inexpensive and easily obtained. No doubt matching flight caps could be obtained easily.
Quote from: kd8gua on November 11, 2009, 09:53:37 PM
As far as an alternate to Blues as a Corporate Service Uniform, here are my results.
(http://i37.tinypic.com/nwxxk5.jpg)
This is a readily available police hat.
(http://i34.tinypic.com/34j4qcz.jpg)
The jacket is from the Fechheimer Brothers' Flying Cross line of public safety uniforms. These jackets are a very dark navy blue. None of the pockets are real, just scalloped flaps. On this jacket, you see the following:
-Standard gray CAP slides.
-Standard gray CAP Nameplate.
-CAP lapel cutouts.
-Optional use of CAP Wing/Region/National Patch (Overseas used for illustrative purposes)
-White Aviator shirt (already used for the TPU and white/gray combo)
-USAF Blue tie (Women may wear CAP floppy bow tie or tie tab)
-CAP ONLY ribbons.
-No sleeve braids.
-Rules for wear of badges and ribbons (again, CAP only) follow those currently in the 39-1 for USAF style.
-Would be authorized for wear by all seniors regardless of height/weight standards. Modified grooming standards, including the idea for neatly trimmed beards, would be authorized for this uniform.
There are matching Trousers available for this style coat. However, a uniform shade of Gray would most likely be acceptable with this coat as well, thus making this coat a "Class A" version of the Gray/White.
On this uniform, if not wearing the Coat, rules pertaining to current wear of the Aviator shirt for the Gray/White combo apply.
Comments?
Nix the patch, add CAP Buttons and you have one heck of a sharp looking uniform. Bravo!
I'm on the fence about the wing patch. It is a very old tradition, so perhaps we should stay we that, even if they are a pain to attach and keep up with. They might not seem to be so important, but I found myself constantly wondering where people were from during a region-level activity not long ago.
I like the coat, especially the bright buttons. I DO NOT like the grey slides. We need to keep the metal grades along with the CAP cutouts on the lapel. The grey slides with the CAP cutouts are redundant, and therefore not necessary.
In actuality, going to this coat setup takes us back to the old, USAF 4-button style coat. And, I do not have a problem with that.
The underlying white shirt/blue pants combination needs to have the old, original blue slides with the embroidered CAP in them.......in other words, if we move to a totally different shade of blue, then we need to ditch the grey slides, which were a compromise to the hideous maroon slides, which we were forced to go to because OUR blue grade slides were 'taken away' from us.
I am all for getting our uniform back to where it should have never left, pre-1990-ish, except for perhaps better fabrics, fit and finish.
Cheers,
If we're going for a distinctive CAP gray service dress, I think we should go with hard rank on the shoulders , maybe move the CAP cutouts from the lapels to the same relative position as the shoulder marks. Gray shoulder marks on service dress should stay on the blue AF-style - IMHO it has no place on the proposed gray service dress.
And before someone pipes up with "Oh, my God...we're gonna wind up hacking off the RealAirForce wearing hard rank!" please remember this is a distinctive CAP uniform, with a distinctive cut that is different from AF blue. So the AF shouldn't have conniption fits over fat-and-fuzzy civilians besmirching the 'fightin' fit' look of today's Air Force if we wear a distinctive uniform.
Folks, we are actually more in-line with Ma Blue then we think. What we are experiencing is the same thing that the AF went through a couple of years ago. I have included an excerpt from the article posted on "The Air Force Times" in May, 2007. If you were to change the names of the leaders to CAP leaders, and change "Air Force" to "Civil Air Patrol," it could have been an article written about us.
TWO-THIRDS OF THOSE SURVEYED PREFER CURRENT UNIFORM
With field tests nearing, many airmen are still cold to the Air Force's latest old-school revamp to its service dress uniform, according to an informal Air Force Times survey.
...Ever-changing uniform
New uniforms tend to define Air Force leaders. McPeak is synonymous with the present-day business suit look. Tight collars go hand in hand with Billy Mitchell, the World War I pilot widely considered the father of the Air Force. The history-revisited look, provided it isn't altered, may be forever associated with Moseley.
"Every time we get a new chief of staff, we're reinventing ourselves," said retired Maj. Joe Kelley. "These changes, sometimes they seem like whims."
This is where Booth, [New York ANG who loathes the current uniform, which debuted during former Chief of Staff Gen. Merrill McPeak's tenure]. a supporter of the new coat, sides with many of the suit's critics. He wants the vintage style cemented once and for all.
"If you see a Marine, everyone in the world knows that's a U.S. Marine. We can't just be hell-bent on changing the uniform for the sake of change," Booth said. "We need to find something and stick with it."
(Link to entire story: http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/05/airforce_dressuniform_070527/ )
All that to say this – We are all tired of uniform changes; we all desire stability. IMHO, we are at the stage now where if we, the membership, take the initiative to design a corporate uniform that reflects the membership and then we act decisively to institute it, we may very well get the stability of uniform we desperately need. If you think it is a waste of time, fine. You don't have to participate, but please do not deride those of us that are working for that stability. If you have comments, please make them constructive comments. We are supposed to be on the same team, the CAP team. Let's act like the professionals we are supposed to be.
Uniforms are branding elements. We should find a combination that works and leave it alone. If the uniform works then the next Air Force General that has a problem and changes it -- has his/her own career to worry about. As in, the Coke executives that had the new Coke/old Coke fiasco of the 80s. (Yes I know in the long run more Coke product was sold but that wasn't because of the original executives mess ups)
Think what would happen to a Marine Commandant that changed the Corps uniform.(In this I mean the Class A and Dress TUNIC)
By understanding and applying the elements of brand management - the uniform speaks for itself and has it's own push back. In this way the uniform has its own institutional power. In this way the uniform doesn't need a popular vote, a personal opinion, a CapTalk thread... it can carry its own water. It would have its own gravity.
If the Salvation Army, the Red Cross, the Marine Corps, Coca Cola can adhere to the basic rules of branding then CAP can also. Whatever is picked -- quit picking at it.
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on November 20, 2009, 03:44:46 PM
All that to say this – We are all tired of uniform changes; we all desire stability. IMHO, we are at the stage now where if we, the membership, take the initiative to design a corporate uniform that reflects the membership and then we act decisively to institute it, we may very well get the stability of uniform we desperately need.
Stability would be achieved if the National Board and the National Executive Committee had the bat taken from their hands, if the National Commander didn't have free reign to institute changes without oversight (or at least by doing end-runs around protocol), and if CAP did one of two things:
-- Institute a CAP Uniform Board that meets every year (or every two) to approve or disapprove proposals from the field, like the Air Force Uniform Board. The board's recommendations would then be approved or disapproved by the National Board or the NEC.
-- Grant the Air Force Uniform Board authority over CAP uniforms, through HQ CAP/USAF.
The latter idea won't happen because the Air Force generally couldn't care less about our "civilian combinations." But if the board had oversight over CAP uniforms, you can bet all those silly shields you can wear in three different places on the blues would have been stillborn. You can also make an educated wager that the CSU would have never happened, and if the National Commander at the time threw it out there as he did, he would have had his hand smacked for overreaching.
Smithsonia said our uniforms are branding elements. I laughed a little, because outside of the Air Force uniform, our uniforms are as inconsistent and change as much as the slogan that comes out of NHQ/PA. (The last good one was "Eyes Of The Home Skies." Can anyone tell us what the current slogan is? What it was before that? And before that?) Fact is, we rely on the Air Force uniform for our identity, not the golf shirt or the blue BDU. And that's not a bad thing. We're the Eyes of the Home Skies, not the eyes of the country club!
Last point... the idea of a gray uniform is not new in American history. Seems we had this thing called the Civil War, back in, oh, say, 1861-65. One side wore blue while the other wore gray. The blue side won. We're Civil Air Patrol, not Civil War Patrol, and we're not reenacting anything. The whites-and-grays are fine with the blue blazer, since if you wear the blazer, you're wearing the white shirt and gray pants anyway. That should be quite enough. If you want to change anything, change the gray pants to khaki, and then maybe you can have your blue shoulder marks on the white shirt.
Holy cow, I ranted. </rant>
And this is one reason why I cited the example of Canada earlier. Up until 1968, their uniforms were identical to the Royal Air Force, Royal Navy and British Army with a "Canada" shoulder flash.
http://mpmuseum.org/index3.html
In 1968, their Defence Minister, Paul Hellyer (Trudeau government), was so zealous to "save money" and "give the uniform a Canadian identity" (meaning: remove as many British/monarchical references as possible to pacify Quebec) that he simply did not give a rat's butt about the "branding" and "traditions" that have correctly been raised here. So he did away with the RCAF, RCN and CdnArmy and put everyone in a dark-green uniform (rumoured to be cut from the same cloth as Toronto gas station attendants!)...the only way one could tell branch-of-service was cap and collar badges, and everyone wore the same Army rank.
http://mpmuseum.org/index3.html
It was very, very unpopular, and a lot of top Generals and former Admirals and Air Marshals resigned.
Eventually they got back modified versions of the old unis.
http://131.137.250.232/netpub/server.np?site=cmsimages&catalog=photos&original=55359
My point in citing a foreign example? Branding does matter, and uniforms contribute a heck of a lot to esprit de corps. When these troops' unis were taken away and another one was forced on them, morale went into the toilet.
OK, CAP is not military, but we have military roots, even predating the Air Force.
If we are going to have a distinctive uniform, it should incorporate those roots while being distinctive. The diagrams contributed here based on the "police blue" model are good...and, honestly, we cannot worry ourselves to death that anything blue without grey epaulettes is automatically going to tick off the AF. But neither should we do what the previous occupant of the two-star office did and just say "here's the uniform" without even talking to the AF beforehand.
It's a balancing act, and it will take some work.
NOTE: Edited to remove duplicate links...sorry...
High Speed Low Drag sent me some photos of a possible short sleeve shirt only version of this dress, both with black uniform pants and LAPD blue, which is the same color as the jacket and hat displayed.
(http://i49.tinypic.com/333wflt.gif)
Black pants and flight cap.
(http://i46.tinypic.com/f03hfo.gif)
LAPD Blue pants and flight cap (I personally think this looks sharp).
Notice he included an alternate to the service cap I proposed, which would be the new Navy flight cap.
I've also been working on cadet versions of the corporate uniform, nothing in pictures yet though.
Has anyone considered any other styles of service coat for females? There aren't many to choose from. The coat I used is labeled as Unisex, so it can be fit to both genders.
As far as CAP cutouts vs. epaulets, keep in mind that up until either 1995 or 1997, senior members were only authorized CAP cutouts, no US cutouts. So yes, CAP cutouts were everywhere.
I'm very willing to make wing/region/national patches an option, much like on the BDUs. Wear them if you have them, but no need to go out of your way.
As far as epaulets, gray is logical to keep the price down for seniors. However, I believe matching dark blue epaulets (possibly even just USAF blue with CAP embroidered) would look better.
The LAPD Blue looks sharp.
However, I would say to NOT use USAF blue epaulettes with "CAP" embroidered on them, since the shade is USAF blue and would possibly cause more issues. CAP epaulettes in LAPDB would be better.
Yes, that would be extra expense, but it was extra expense back in '95 when we went from the berry boards/blue nameplate to the grey boards/nameplate. Maybe some sort of exchange could be worked with National - turn in your grey boards/plate and receive new LAPDB boards/plate (and pigs might fly, but you get the idea).
Noted.
As an aside: Are we considering this uniform for seniors only, or also cadets? I'm in process of doing cadet versions, and just want to know if I should continue or not.
Quote from: kd8gua on November 20, 2009, 10:40:54 PM
Noted.
As an aside: Are we considering this uniform for seniors only, or also cadets? I'm in process of doing cadet versions, and just want to know if I should continue or not.
I think it's important to keep cadets in AF uniforms - easier/cheaper to procure, ties them directly to the AF tradition, no one is worried about cadets being mistaken AF generals or CG admirals. ;D
Will we all have to look like a creepy ice cream man?
Only if you stand around smiling like him :)
Quote from: CyBorg on November 20, 2009, 06:37:05 PM
And this is one reason why I cited the example of Canada earlier. Up until 1968, their uniforms were identical to the Royal Air Force, Royal Navy and British Army with a "Canada" shoulder flash.
http://mpmuseum.org/rcnofficers.html
http://mpmuseum.org/postbattledress1.html
http://mpmuseum.org/rcafww2uniforms1.html
In 1968, their Defence Minister, Paul Hellyer (Trudeau government), was so zealous to "save money" and "give the uniform a Canadian identity" (meaning: remove as many British/monarchical references as possible to pacify Quebec) that he simply did not give a rat's butt about the "branding" and "traditions" that have correctly been raised here. So he did away with the RCAF, RCN and CdnArmy and put everyone in a dark-green uniform (rumoured to be cut from the same cloth as Toronto gas station attendants!)...the only way one could tell branch-of-service was cap and collar badges, and everyone wore the same Army rank.
http://mpmuseum.org/securservice.html
It was very, very unpopular, and a lot of top Generals and former Admirals and Air Marshals resigned.
Eventually they got back modified versions of the old unis.
http://mpmuseum.org/securservice2.html
My point in citing a foreign example? Branding does matter, and uniforms contribute a heck of a lot to esprit de corps. When these troops' unis were taken away and another one was forced on them, morale went into the toilet.
OK, CAP is not military, but we have military roots, even predating the Air Force.
If we are going to have a distinctive uniform, it should incorporate those roots while being distinctive. The diagrams contributed here based on the "police blue" model are good...and, honestly, we cannot worry ourselves to death that anything blue without grey epaulettes is automatically going to tick off the AF. But neither should we do what the previous occupant of the two-star office did and just say "here's the uniform" without even talking to the AF beforehand.
It's a balancing act, and it will take some work.
NOTE: Edited to remove duplicate links...sorry...
Edited to note my stupidity in use of the quote function...
Quote from: Gunner C on November 20, 2009, 10:45:20 PM
Quote from: kd8gua on November 20, 2009, 10:40:54 PM
Noted.
As an aside: Are we considering this uniform for seniors only, or also cadets? I'm in process of doing cadet versions, and just want to know if I should continue or not.
I think it's important to keep cadets in AF uniforms - easier/cheaper to procure, ties them directly to the AF tradition, no one is worried about cadets being mistaken AF generals or CG admirals. ;D
Cadets over 18 who do not meet h/w requirements cannot wear the AF uniform. So including a cadet version makes sense.
(WHOA...what am I saying!!! Make Sense???)
Basic working design for CT-UNI group
[smg id=67]
Here's the latest:
(http://i50.tinypic.com/n2y77m.jpg)
Senior member version with LAPD blue CAP embroidered epaulets and CAP cutouts (US optional pending more opinions for or against)
LAPD Blue nameplate in lieu of gray for seniors.
Wing/Region/National patch shown in place (optional)
For 18+ cadets who do not meet H/W requirements for USAF uniform:
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2uiw2z6.jpg)
Cadet Airmen: Self explanatory, follows setup of Old-Style Blues coat.
(http://i46.tinypic.com/30iyi9u.jpg)
Cadet Officers: Also follows the setup of Old-Style Blues.
I think the gray pants with the gray sleeve braid looks sharp.
I know some will push for blue pants with the combo, but really this is the only way you avoid re-inventing the TPU. Besides it doesn't look bad at all.
Its good that its simple. Add a jacket not a whole uniform, and mabey standardise the shade of gray by haveing a list of designated suppliers.
Quote from: arajca on November 20, 2009, 11:12:50 PM
Basic working design for CT-UNI group
[smg id=67]
Wow, I kinda like this. Reminds me of the pinks and greens. A couple of thoughts:
- Have darker pants. The lighter grey will wash out with the white shirt.
- Get rid of the "CAP" on the slides. We only needed that on them when we were using the blue AF shirt. If we go to the "Grey Service Uniform" then we won't have to have anything that distinguishes CAP officers from AF officers.
I can't see the earlier pictures or the latest ones, just a blank box with a red X.
I post my pictures to TinyPic. Is anyone else having viewing trouble?
no problem what so ever
Remind me why we wouldn't want to use our existing gray slides for this fictional uniform? I can't think of any reason why they couldn't be used for both types of uniforms and provide at least some visual linkage amongst all CAP members?
To some members, the gray slides are unnecessary since this isn't a USAF style uniform. Personally I believe the gray slides and nameplate are fine.
Quote from: arajca on November 20, 2009, 11:12:50 PM
Basic working design for CT-UNI group
[smg id=67]
THIS!!!!
Only maybe a black tie? Blue seems out of place...
The grey slides and nameplate are being used for two reasons:
1. Many members already have them - saves money
2. Shared element with AF uniforms
The CAP cutouts are used for now - we'd REALLY like to have the US cutouts instead, if possible.
A black tie make a harsh transition. The dark blue makes a softer transition. We compared the two and decided on the dark blue.
[smg id=68]
Besides, the blue tie is already used with the aviator shirt uniform. Using what we already have again.
Either way it looks sharp. I cross posted this in the other gray's thread.
Quote from: kd8gua on November 21, 2009, 12:10:31 AM
I post my pictures to TinyPic. Is anyone else having viewing trouble?
No. See if you can put them in the Gallery them embed the image from there. That's what I did.
Quote from: arajca on November 21, 2009, 12:44:10 AM
The grey slides and nameplate are being used for two reasons:
1. Many members already have them - saves money
2. Shared element with AF uniforms
The CAP cutouts are used for now - we'd REALLY like to have the US cutouts instead, if possible.
A black tie make a harsh transition. The dark blue makes a softer transition. We compared the two and decided on the dark blue.
You could have a 5-year wear out period for the "CAP" embroidered slides with the plain grey replacing them. As people get promoted, they'll have to buy the new ones anyway. Have a corresponding 5-year wear out for the AF uniform. They would go away by attrition. If we go 100% GSU, then we won't need to have CAP on our shoulders and the "US" on the lapel won't be an AF uniform deconfliction problem.
The best of all worlds would be hard rank on the jacket and slides on the shirt.
Why do people fixate on metal grade?
Interesting take on the idea arajca.
Couple points:
-It appears neither black, nor USAF blue ties will work with the LAPD blue coat. A new matching tie would have to be added.
-The gray pants look surprisingly nice. I threw that idea around a little at first, but wasn't sure. Now the trick would be a uniform shade of pants, either gray or LAPD Blue.
-Not sure about the Gray Commission Stripe. Is a Commission Stripe even necessary? We aren't exactly Commissioned Officers. It also throws in more tailoring/expense, plus the cost of stripe too.
Good ideas though. I'm surprised we all are agreeing, and agreeing to disagree on things. Let's keep this up!
Can't do blue pants with black coat, that is the Army's realm now. I like the gray.
Quote from: kd8gua on November 21, 2009, 01:09:50 AM
Interesting take on the idea arajca.
Couple points:
-It appears neither black, nor USAF blue ties will work with the LAPD blue coat. A new matching tie would have to be added.
-The gray pants look surprisingly nice. I threw that idea around a little at first, but wasn't sure. Now the trick would be a uniform shade of pants, either gray or LAPD Blue.
-Not sure about the Gray Commission Stripe. Is a Commission Stripe even necessary? We aren't exactly Commissioned Officers. It also throws in more tailoring/expense, plus the cost of stripe too.
Good ideas though. I'm surprised we all are agreeing, and agreeing to disagree on things. Let's keep this up!
I don't know where LAPD Blue came from. The coat I put up is black.
The reason that I suggested the LAPD Blue pants or black pants is that when the gray slacks are worn without the jacket, the person wearing the uniform looks washed out. (See original grays pic in the unifrom mini-poster from national.)
Regarding the black coat - its ok, without the gray commisioning stripe. I agree with the others regarding tailoring expense, etc. (And the black uniform coat does remind me of the Nazi's SS coat) Sorry, but that was the first thing that came to mind.
I have to confess, I really prefer the LAPD Blue pants w/ the LAPD Blue jacket as option.. I think Blue is important to signify our ties to the AF. Seniors should be able to continue to wear the AF unifrom (which I think should still be an option), but no matter which uniform a SM is wearing, it will have blue in it. Ironically, my police uniform is LAPD blue (top & bottom). I tried on both black pants and blue pants with the white shirt. The LAPD Blue just seems more aviationly (yes, my word) than black.
And for those of you that would say "but we aren't police," no, we aren't. But with the jacket decked out the way kd8gua has it, there would be no mistaking that. Especially if we retaing the gray slides, of which I am in favor of. No police have jacket layouts (and most departments except east coast have done away with dress jackets altogether) that would look even close to our jacket layout. We should stay away from hard rank b/c almost all LE wears hard rank on their uniform.
I don't disagree with the washed out point, but we are trying to keep costs down. Most folks who wear the CSU that do not meet h/w already have grey pants. I've dropped over $250 outfitting my CSU (I was able to do the tailoring myself). I can get the black service coat for less than $100 from many police shops. That's the only additional expense with the black coat.
I'm not suggesting dumping the AF uniforms for those who can wear them. Now, if the new service uniform looks sharper than the AF uniform and more seniors, esp. those who meet the h/w, wear it by choice, that's another story. When we start seeing activites with more than half the seniors wearing the new service uniform (if approved), then we can seriously start discussing dropping the AF service uniforms FOR SENIORS.
Those who suggest dropping the grey epaulet sleeves for the AF uniforms need to consider what would replace them. And that the replacement will REQUIRE AF approval.
My personal preference is for charcoal grey, not medium. Charcoal grey is more uniform (no pun intended) among clothing manufacturers.
Quote from: arajca on November 21, 2009, 03:19:06 AM
I don't disagree with the washed out point, but we are trying to keep costs down. Most folks who wear the CSU that do not meet h/w already have grey pants. I've dropped over $250 outfitting my CSU (I was able to do the tailoring myself). I can get the black service coat for less than $100 from many police shops. That's the only additional expense with the black coat.
We can compromise if we go with a darker- gray pants. (like the charcoal you suggest) That would still go good with the LAPD Blue coat. Then, only need to buy the LAPD Blue coat at about the same expense.
Quote from: arajca on November 21, 2009, 03:19:06 AMI'm not suggesting dumping the AF uniforms for those who can wear them. Now, if the new service uniform looks sharper than the AF uniform and more seniors, esp. those who meet the h/w, wear it by choice, that's another story. When we start seeing activites with more than half the seniors wearing the new service uniform (if approved), then we can seriously start discussing dropping the AF service uniforms FOR SENIORS.
I agree 100%. Words cannot express how strongly I agree with you.
Quote from: arajca on November 21, 2009, 03:19:06 AMThose who suggest dropping the grey epaulet sleeves for the AF uniforms need to consider what would replace them. And that the replacement will REQUIRE AF approval.
My personal preference is for charcoal grey, not medium. Charcoal grey is more uniform (no pun intended) among clothing manufacturers.
The gray slides would also keep costs down (multiple uses), as well as provide continuity from top to bottom. Also, with the charcoal gray pants, we could still incorporate the black flight cap (which as since is now being massed produced for Navy will be low cost.) If jacket is worn, then the service hat (as depicted by kd8jua) would be worn, not the flight cap.
Thoughts? ka8gua - could you photoshop some charcoal gray pants w/ the service coat?
SM Slide gray would make more sense.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 21, 2009, 01:32:25 AM
Can't do blue pants with black coat, that is the Army's realm now. I like the gray.
Actually, the coat is blue and the pants are lighter blue (faded). The old horse soldiers used to put their blouses under their saddles. The pants would fade to a lighter blue, thus you have the two colors. General officers' pants are the dark blue - they didn't have to go out on horses and be uncomfortable.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 21, 2009, 01:06:03 AM
Why do people fixate on metal grade?
Maybe because we once had it, and we lost it for reasons known better to others than I (it happened just prior to my joining CAP).
I would also ask: outside of reasons of convenience, why are people fixated on grey? It is not normally a shade associated with aviators, and it has no precedent in the CAP history of "pinks and greens," khaki/silvertan and blue.
Quote from: kd8gua on November 21, 2009, 01:09:50 AM
Interesting take on the idea arajca.
Couple points:
-It appears neither black, nor USAF blue ties will work with the LAPD blue coat. A new matching tie would have to be added.
-The gray pants look surprisingly nice. I threw that idea around a little at first, but wasn't sure. Now the trick would be a uniform shade of pants, either gray or LAPD Blue.
-Not sure about the Gray Commission Stripe. Is a Commission Stripe even necessary? We aren't exactly Commissioned Officers. It also throws in more tailoring/expense, plus the cost of stripe too.
Good ideas though. I'm surprised we all are agreeing, and agreeing to disagree on things. Let's keep this up!
It's not a commissioning stripe, it's an officer stripe. Warrant officers wore them before they were commissioned. Making things up just complicates things.
Quote from: arajca on November 21, 2009, 02:05:20 AM
Quote from: kd8gua on November 21, 2009, 01:09:50 AM
Interesting take on the idea arajca.
Couple points:
-It appears neither black, nor USAF blue ties will work with the LAPD blue coat. A new matching tie would have to be added.
-The gray pants look surprisingly nice. I threw that idea around a little at first, but wasn't sure. Now the trick would be a uniform shade of pants, either gray or LAPD Blue.
-Not sure about the Gray Commission Stripe. Is a Commission Stripe even necessary? We aren't exactly Commissioned Officers. It also throws in more tailoring/expense, plus the cost of stripe too.
Good ideas though. I'm surprised we all are agreeing, and agreeing to disagree on things. Let's keep this up!
I don't know where LAPD Blue came from. The coat I put up is black.
After thinking about it, the problem with black is that the color shows off EVERY piece of lint, dander, and whatnot that touches it. Consider dark charcoal and a lighter charcoal or just a dark charcoal uniform.
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on November 21, 2009, 02:17:08 AM
Regarding the black coat - its ok, without the gray commisioning stripe. I agree with the others regarding tailoring expense, etc. (And the black uniform coat does remind me of the Nazi's SS coat) Sorry, but that was the first thing that came to mind.
I have to confess, I really prefer the LAPD Blue pants w/ the LAPD Blue jacket as option.. I think Blue is important to signify our ties to the AF. Seniors should be able to continue to wear the AF unifrom (which I think should still be an option), but no matter which uniform a SM is wearing, it will have blue in it. Ironically, my police uniform is LAPD blue (top & bottom). I tried on both black pants and blue pants with the white shirt. The LAPD Blue just seems more aviationly (yes, my word) than black.
The black brings SS/Gestapo associations for me too. I don't want us looking like Major Hochstettler on "Hogan's Heroes" (though the Luftwaffe uniform blue is kind of nice).
I am also in the corner of those who support blue, as long as it's not AF blue. Most air forces (and associated nonmilitary aviation organisations) the world over wear some sort of blue.
I don't agree that we have to stay away from hard rank just because of law enforcement using it. Most police officers I've seen who are lieutenants, captains and above, their rank insignia is a lot smaller than mil-spec and is often just gold or silver. Some wear it embroidered on epaulettes, like the Customs and Border Protection officers.
Black tops reminded me of the USMC, not the SS. But to each his own, even if I did grow up in Europe.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 21, 2009, 04:32:39 AM
Black tops reminded me of the USMC, not the SS. But to each his own, even if I did grow up in Europe.
It would have reminded me of the Marines if there were a high collar (oops, now I've opened a can of worms!).
Black and grey also remind me of the Imperials in "Star Wars."
Quote from: CyBorg on November 21, 2009, 04:36:00 AM
Black and grey also remind me of the Imperials in "Star Wars."
Come to the Dark Side!
Quote from: CyBorg on November 21, 2009, 04:15:41 AM
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 21, 2009, 01:06:03 AM
Why do people fixate on metal grade?
Maybe because we once had it, and we lost it for reasons known better to others than I (it happened just prior to my joining CAP).
Yes, we did have it some time ago. Some folks prefer it.
I still have my olde stuff, but don't really care if we go back to it or not, since I've gotten promoted since the last time we were allowed to wear it.
Quote from: CyBorg on November 21, 2009, 04:28:49 AM
I don't agree that we have to stay away from hard rank just because of law enforcement using it. Most police officers I've seen who are lieutenants, captains and above, their rank insignia is a lot smaller than mil-spec and is often just gold or silver. Some wear it embroidered on epaulettes, like the Customs and Border Protection officers.
I know my collar bars are about 1/2 mil-spec, which is typical of police rank (and 99% of fire departments use bugles to denote collar rank). However, all of the hard rank that I have seen on police dress jackets are full-size. (Fire typically uses sleeve braid to denote rank on dress jackets)
I am not opposed to hard rank, just trying to eliminate potential AF objections. Moreover, I think that the gray slides would also help "balance" the jacket to the gray pants as well as make the jacket more "CAP-distinctive."
As far as a tie goes, we cold use the standard tie that matches the coat (LAPD Blue) or a gray tie to match the pants. I am still opposed to the sleeve braid. Think it is added "bling" that detracts from the look.
Since I can't figure out how to insert pics, I'll email them to kd8gua to illustrate what I am talking about.
Here are some ideas for pants:
LAPD Blue Pants:
[smg id=70]
Heather Gray Pants:
[smg id=69]
Castillo Gray Pants:
[smg id=71]
Quote from: kd8gua on November 21, 2009, 06:30:58 PM
Here are some ideas for pants:
For this style uniform (I guess, specifically, the style of coat), IMO, the matching top and pants are better than a two-shade combo.
Anybody looked at USMA(West Point) gray uniform trousers as a more "uniformy" style of pants. Although, they do have the black stripe down the side.
Without the gray pants you might as well keep the TPU. Sure its not double breasted and doesn't use almost as much USAF stuff as the regular uniform, but its still a bluish coat with blue pants.
I think if your designing a dress up form of the grays it doesn't make sense to have to change pants just to put on a service coat.
Quote from: Fuzzy on November 22, 2009, 05:30:33 AM
Without the gray pants you might as well keep the TPU. Sure its not double breasted and doesn't use almost as much USAF stuff as the regular uniform, but its still a bluish coat with blue pants.
I think if your designing a dress up form of the grays it doesn't make sense to have to change pants just to put on a service coat.
Again, the Air Force does not hold a monopoly on all shades of blue.
The CSU uses Air Force trousers, Air Force rank slides, an Air Force tie, Air Force headdress, and a service coat using the same cloth as the Air Force uniform.
We can become too paranoid over the issue of blue and hard rank. Neither are the exclusive preserve of the Air Force.
Quote from: CyBorg on November 22, 2009, 05:43:54 AM
Quote from: Fuzzy on November 22, 2009, 05:30:33 AM
Without the gray pants you might as well keep the TPU. Sure its not double breasted and doesn't use almost as much USAF stuff as the regular uniform, but its still a bluish coat with blue pants.
I think if your designing a dress up form of the grays it doesn't make sense to have to change pants just to put on a service coat.
Again, the Air Force does not hold a monopoly on all shades of blue.
:::snip:::
Yep, that's true. But if we don't want the AF to come back a couple of years later then we'd better steer clear of blue. Keeping with the greys and adding to them is the only way for us to own it.
Quote from: High Speed Low DragI know my collar bars are about 1/2 mil-spec, which is typical of police rank (and 99% of fire departments use bugles to denote collar rank). However, all of the hard rank that I have seen on police dress jackets are full-size. (Fire typically uses sleeve braid to denote rank on dress jackets)
I am not opposed to hard rank, just trying to eliminate potential AF objections. Moreover, I think that the gray slides would also help "balance" the jacket to the gray pants as well as make the jacket more "CAP-distinctive."
As far as a tie goes, we cold use the standard tie that matches the coat (LAPD Blue) or a gray tie to match the pants. I am still opposed to the sleeve braid. Think it is added "bling" that detracts from the look.
I grew up next to a fire station. The firefighters there used silver and gold firehose nozzles to indicate rank. A lot of police officers used to stop in to see the firefighters for various reasons, so I saw a lot of their rank as well. The Corporals and Sergeants wore gold metal chevrons on the collar; I don't remember any sleeve cloth stripes. At that time they wore dark blue shirts and kind of postman blue trousers. The firefighters wore medium blue shirts and dark blue trousers.
I say that to illustrate how there are several combinations of blue that are completely unrelated to the Air Force.
For that matter, the AF itself has used several different shades of blue over the years.
I think we're overreacting if we automatically say "it has to be grey" to avoid ticking off an E-1 fresh out of Lackland who hasn't done his/her homework. If it's OK with CAP-USAF, then it will have to be OK with the AF in general.
However, I am in agreement with you about sleeve braid. I don't think it's needed on the AF-type uniform for that matter...it's a commissioning stripe, and we are not commissioned.
Quote from: Gunner C on November 22, 2009, 05:52:55 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on November 22, 2009, 05:43:54 AM
Quote from: Fuzzy on November 22, 2009, 05:30:33 AM
Without the gray pants you might as well keep the TPU. Sure its not double breasted and doesn't use almost as much USAF stuff as the regular uniform, but its still a bluish coat with blue pants.
I think if your designing a dress up form of the grays it doesn't make sense to have to change pants just to put on a service coat.
Again, the Air Force does not hold a monopoly on all shades of blue.
:::snip:::
Yep, that's true. But if we don't want the AF to come back a couple of years later then we'd better steer clear of blue. Keeping with the greys and adding to them is the only way for us to own it.
That, I think, is overreacting.
The way the CSU was "introduced" had a great deal to do with the problems with it. If we work with CAP-USAF on this, the outcome will be different.
Quote from: CyBorg on November 22, 2009, 06:02:43 AM
Quote from: Gunner C on November 22, 2009, 05:52:55 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on November 22, 2009, 05:43:54 AM
Quote from: Fuzzy on November 22, 2009, 05:30:33 AM
Without the gray pants you might as well keep the TPU. Sure its not double breasted and doesn't use almost as much USAF stuff as the regular uniform, but its still a bluish coat with blue pants.
I think if your designing a dress up form of the grays it doesn't make sense to have to change pants just to put on a service coat.
Again, the Air Force does not hold a monopoly on all shades of blue.
:::snip:::
Yep, that's true. But if we don't want the AF to come back a couple of years later then we'd better steer clear of blue. Keeping with the greys and adding to them is the only way for us to own it.
That, I think, is overreacting.
The way the CSU was "introduced" had a great deal to do with the problems with it. If we work with CAP-USAF on this, the outcome will be different.
That is based on speculation and assumption. At this point the motives, meanings and machinations of CAP-USAF are unknown.
I find it odd that people proceed without knowing the full story and adopt speculations as facts. For all you and me and we all know, the CSU was killed out of an attempt by the NEC to pacify "membership outrages" against the original adoption of that uniform.
Unless I have missed it (which is possible since I have ben away from CAPTALK as few days), I would need to see documented evidence of CAP-USAF on this matter. And "hearsay" is not such documentation.
Major Carrales:
Everything on this thread is based at least in part on assumption, speculation and suggestion.
We do not indeed have any kind of documentation, other than the feed from NEC, and that Vanguard has removed the CSU service coat from their site. I said on another post that we won't know what to do without an ICL.
What I am trying to get across here is that some (not all) CAP members seem to be snakebitten by anything to do with the colour blue; like "it's gotta be grey! we can't have blue! blue will tick the AF off! blue will be a repeat of the CSU!"
What I was also trying to say that the outcome is much more likely to be good if we work with, and not against, CAP-USAF. There is absolutely no way we can predict how every member of the active AF, Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve would react to any potential uniform design.
Quote from: CyBorg on November 22, 2009, 05:59:37 AM
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag link=topic=9282.msg168888#msg168888/quote]
However, I am in agreement with you about sleeve braid. I don't think it's needed on the AF-type uniform for that matter...it's a commissioning stripe, and we are not commissioned.
Once again . . . They are braids for officers. It has
NOTHING to do with a commission.
Quote from: kd8gua on November 20, 2009, 11:53:21 PM
Here's the latest:
(http://i50.tinypic.com/n2y77m.jpg)
Senior member version with LAPD blue CAP embroidered epaulets and CAP cutouts (US optional pending more opinions for or against)
LAPD Blue nameplate in lieu of gray for seniors.
Wing/Region/National patch shown in place (optional)
For 18+ cadets who do not meet H/W requirements for USAF uniform:
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2uiw2z6.jpg)
Cadet Airmen: Self explanatory, follows setup of Old-Style Blues coat.
(http://i46.tinypic.com/30iyi9u.jpg)
Cadet Officers: Also follows the setup of Old-Style Blues.
The goal should be to get us all into as close a uniform as possible. I like the direction, but there is still some work to be done.
1. Again, the grey slides are redundant with regards to the CAP, if we have CAP cutouts on the lapel. STAY with metal grade insignia and nothing else on the epaulet; keep it simple.
2. Standardize nameplates. There is no valid reason to have differing nameplates between cadet and senior members. Up until the maroon epaulet debacle, seniors and cadets did wear the same nameplate. Lets get us back to where we need to be. I firmly believe, in this instance, that the cadet and senior namplates in LAPDB should be standardized. This only works with using LAPDB slides with embroidered CAP for use on the white shirt for senior member rank.
3. Again, with standardization, if the goal is to develop a organizational-level uniform, then both cadets and senior members should transition to the LAPDB uniform over the long term, and move away from the Air Force uniform, BUT, using their standards for wear/placement of devices/ribbons/badges, etc. Just because the Air Force gives cadets one new uniform is not enough of a valid reason to stay with that program. If you are truly commited to fix our 'branding' problem, then this is the way to go. There is nothing to say that units can't apply for grants to ramp up uniform purchasing/issue programs for their cadets.
4. Adopting LAPDB fixes a lot of issues. Black pants and jackets are not acceptable in this instance and should not be considered.
Can we get a closeup of the bright buttons. Is this the old style CAP crest, or a simplified prop/triangle button like the original-style buttons (which I like better for simplicity).
Cheers,
LTC Don,
For the buttons, I am using Vanguard's CAP crest buttons. A quick search through the Waterbury Button Company's website (they by the way seemingly have the monopoly on buttons - every style dating back to at least the Civil War) shows that both the triangle and prop version, as well as the USAF style CAP crest are available, and in one of a dozen finishes and sizes.
Triangle and prop:
http://www.waterburybutton.com/cart/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=0&idproduct=21339
Full crest:
http://www.waterburybutton.com/cart/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=0&idproduct=21881
Not to be the wet blanket for this party, but, how do you guys plan to get this approved?
Do you have several National Board members who are willing to sponsor this new uniform?
Will these sponsors be able to get your proposal through the approval process?
A no answer to either of the above two questions means that this will probably be a "pipe dream" exercise.
A lot of thought and work for nothing...
Quote from: kd8gua on November 22, 2009, 06:26:08 PM.... the triangle and prop version, ..., and in one of a dozen finishes and sizes.
Triangle and prop:
http://www.waterburybutton.com/cart/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=0&idproduct=21339
Nice. Now I know where to get them for those historical uniforms I want to put together.
Quote from: PHall on November 22, 2009, 06:53:25 PM
Not to be the wet blanket for this party, but, how do you guys plan to get this approved?
Do you have several National Board members who are willing to sponsor this new uniform?
Will these sponsors be able to get your proposal through the approval process?
A no answer to either of the above two questions means that this will probably be a "pipe dream" exercise.
A lot of thought and work for nothing...
PHall, first I believe that all of our Wing Kings are on the NB. Second, that is what the purpose of this discussion is - to come up with something that has the support of members from across the country, to get ideas from them, and then once everyone is more or less on the same page, move the thing forward. Heck, even if only half of us send the proposal up through the chain (and keep the cross communication going), it will gain support at higher levels.
Now, I know CAP is not a democracy – yet it is. We, the membership, may not have “a vote” to elect our leaders, but we are still a force to be reckoned with; CAP exists through its membership. As has been pointed out oh-so many times, we are NOT the military, we are a public corporation. This board is trying to organize a truly "grass-roots" campaign. That, after all, is what the country's civic process is based on. Any support would be truly helpful.
At worst, even if it goes nowhere, those that pushed for the proposal, can say "At least I stepped up and tried!"
Quote from: PHall on November 22, 2009, 06:53:25 PM
Not to be the wet blanket for this party, but, how do you guys plan to get this approved?
Do you have several National Board members who are willing to sponsor this new uniform?
Will these sponsors be able to get your proposal through the approval process?
A no answer to either of the above two questions means that this will probably be a "pipe dream" exercise.
A lot of thought and work for nothing...
Let them have their fun. About as much effort went into the uniform committee thread a while back with no apparent results. But, if you expect actual results from anything proposed on CAPTalk, you're deluding yourself. Its the fun of talking about what might be that keeps people going.
Ho-hum...what can I say. All I know is that the movement at present is to reduce uniforms, not add more. Unless one planned to remove all USAF style uniforms and replace them with the one presented here (of which I am in awe) I don't see this as getting adopted.
I can appreciate the "exercise" nature of this thread...when I once tried something similar I was summarily "dog-piled..." I must point out that when one goes off "half-cocked" without the full explanation, facts and the like, the result can only be heartbreak.
Moving cadets into these uniforms will not be easy. In a world where the service coats and other shirts, pants etc cost over 300 bucks I can without reservation say that most cadets will never own these things. Unless you plan to have a cadet corps made up of Richie Rich, Scrooge McDuck's nephews and Thurston Howell IV.
Most Cadets, you will find, wear a supplied uniform from the USAF and a smattering of surplus store fodder (unless their unit, like ours, has come into a supply of BDUs et al). In our unit, aside from the uniforms from the program, are used items that I've found at thrift stores or the like and only a fraction of a percent of cadets have ever bought their uniforms new.
Sparky,
The only cadets that the proposed uniform would effect are those over 18 who do not meet H/W. They no longer have a uniform to wear other than the gray/white just like those senior members who do not meet H/W. Prior to the edict from above, they had the option to wear the CSU
So be it. I will, however, point you all to the words above demanding support from those in POWER. All the Wing Kings horses and all the Wing King's men can propose Mana from heaven on CAPTALK and it will go nowhere without support.
Quote from: Major Carrales on November 23, 2009, 01:04:45 AM
So be it. I will, however, point you all to the words above demanding support from those in POWER. All the Wing Kings horses and all the Wing King's men can propose Mana from heaven on CAPTALK and it will go nowhere without support.
Very true statement(s) about political support. But it certainly doesn't stop there either. The very reason this situation has come about is due to the ease at which major changes/additions/deletions happens to basic uniform platforms, causing the membership a bucketful of money, along with stress and frustration.
As mentioned before, there has to be firm documentation establishing procedures for creating and resolving uniform issues. Whether this needs to be a regulatory issue or a Constitutional issue is unknown. From a stable 'branding' standpoint, I would almost say it needs to be a Constitutional component. Once a uniform 'platform' is established, it cannot be deleted or changed or modified with the exception of badges/devices without a change/amendment to the Constitution. The other major component of accepting a uniform platform is the uniform's anticipated lifespan. How long will the supplier and/or fabric manufacturer maintain fabric stocks/colors. Should CAP decide to change a color shade, will the manufacturer do it? These are but some of the other ancillary issues surrounding a uniform adoption well beyond just designing one.
In terms of moving to a one-uniform environment, the cadet issue is a real one. Just what would the cost be for a basic LAPDB cadet uniform be IF CAP were to stop the Air Force cadet uniform program?
For the rank and file membership, uniforms are the single biggest investment they make. By the time a member buys a set of BDUs/hat/boots/belt, a set of white/greys, a set of USAF style with service coat, a sport jacket to with the white/greys, and on and on.....it is quite an investment made just to have someone arbitrarily delete a platform, trashing that member's investment....it sounds worse than the stock market.
Cheers,
Quote from: Nolan Teel on November 11, 2009, 09:09:21 AM
Lets keep it simple and make everyones life that much easier... Get rid of all Uniforms in CAP but the Polo Shirts and Blue BDUS. If you are on a ground team you wear blue BDUs everyone else put the polo on, I mean after all isnt that what everyones wearing these days? At least in Dallas it is.
Mr. Teel: In another message, I reall reading your statement that, in Texas, people predominately wear the polo shirt. Believe me, that is hardly the case when one collectively looks at other areas. Sure, there are usually some SM who wear the polo during meetings and missions, however, the overwhelming majority of those with whom I have served (including as a full-time CAP staffer), wear the military style versions of our uniforms.
I feel that a distinctive uniform will enable us to adhere to the military heritage of our organization yet enable the wonderful volunteers who do the most work to enjoy that sense of "belonging" that they deserve.
Quote from: rmcmanus on November 23, 2009, 03:45:20 PM
I feel that a distinctive uniform will enable us to adhere to the military heritage of our organization yet enable the wonderful volunteers who do the most work to enjoy that sense of "belonging" that they deserve.
+1. Completely agree. No matter it's origins, the CSU performed that function very well.
LTC Don – Thank you for a thoughtful response and great ideas. Would you be willing to head up an effort to get that done? To the board – I think we all know that we need support to get this done. Maj. Carrales – are you willing to help get the support needed? From your other posts, it seems that you are in favor of the uniform, but seem to be discouraged about the possibility of making it happen and I can understand why (with the past political climate). But whose responsibility is it to change that climate?
CAPTalk is not the end of itself. CAPTalk is just a bunch of electrons that are stored on magnetic disks. These electrons are formed into words and sentences expressing the thoughts and opinions, good and negative, of CAP members from across the U.S & abroad. Yes, we may be a bunch of CAPTalkers, CadetStuffOrgers, etc. If all the action that members ever take is to only post on CAPTalk, then you are right, CAPTalk is just a bunch of electrons stored on magnetic disks – an empty shell, a joke. But if members take action and talk to other members, talk to their supervisors, and share the ideas that are expressed here on CAPTalk – then CAPTalk is what it is meant to be – a gigantic forum where CAP members from across the nation can share ideas and these ideas can take shape into action.
CAP was formed by people that talked about the need for a way for non-military personnel could serve their country in the face of WWII. These people formed their own state’s version of CAP across the country. Then, people proposed a new program.
“…. The program’s objective was to organize civilian aviation personnel so that their efforts could best be used in what loomed on the horizon as an all-out war effort. It was from this second step that Civil Air Patrol came into being. As with any program of such magnitude, there were varying opinions, and much thought and effort were spent before a workable program could be devised. Some highly responsible men believed military use should be made of civilian “know-how.” Others, equally responsible, believed that civil aviation should be curtailed in time of war, as in Europe.” –CAPP 50-5
Aren’t we glad that the second group’s opinions didn’t win? Why wasn’t civil aviation essentially grounded for the war? Many people, from across the country, communicated amongst each other, talked with their compatriots, talked with their superiors, who talked with people in charge. And looked what happened – from all of that “talk,” CAP came into existence. These people talked AND took action.
Now I know that uniforms do not have the same importance, the same sense of urgency, as an impending war. But, at the same time, CAP is in the process of re-defining itself. We no longer have the importance in SAR that we used to; our ES missions are overlapped by so many other groups that used to not exist. CAP is at a crossroads and we need to be working on re-defining ourselves into a workable plan to prevent CAP from eventually being relegated to the history books. “Branding” is just one of those dimensions.
Today is a market-driven visual society. When we “market” (recruit) for CAP, do we rely on the spoken word, or do we make glitzy videos with cool music? Do we stick to printed flyers or do we try and get on TV? Do we want uniforms that look like they were thrown together or do we want professional uniforms that look good? And uniforms are important – as LTC Don pointed out, uniforms are the single biggest investment a member will make.
We owe it to ourselves to start talking about them now, to start working on them now, to take action NOW. If not now, when?
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on November 23, 2009, 05:09:53 PM
Maj. Carrales – are you willing to help get the support needed? From your other posts, it seems that you are in favor of the uniform, but seem to be discouraged about the possibility of making it happen and I can understand why (with the past political climate). But whose responsibility is it to change that climate?
At this point I am trepidations in matters of uniforms. I have trouble with the concept of creating a uniform and having the membership spend a collective hundreds of thousands of dollars on it only to have it vaporize on what seems to be a whim.
I did not buy any element of the CSU, nor was I going too until I deemed a suitable passage of time had passed to allow for the idea of permanence. I then, believe it or not, in October entertained the idea because years had passed and then, lo and behold, GONE in an instant.
If a structure can be put into place that would insure that this occurrence cannot happen again then you will have my support. However, if the continued infighting between various elements of CAP governance and blatant disregard for membership provided funds for ambiguous, arbitrary or otherwise unknown reasons...what would anyone have me do?
As for changing the "political climate" of CAP, no one person can reasonably change the effective climate of any area outside of their own sphere of influence. We do our part in "the trenches" where our squadrons implement CAP's missions. Often times the photos of those at levels high and distant change and the unit goes on.
All I know is that for the price of all the CSU uniform items, I suspect a CAP compliant radio, headset, field pack or other useful item could have been purchased with member supplied funding. And, no, this was not the fault of those that purchased it. They were purchasing a CAP approved item, much as anyone purchasing a USAF Style uniform would have done. There was no warning, there was no official preparation. And, above all, there has been so satisfactory explanation as to why this was done. Only speculations and the murmuring of rumors that should better metaphorically line a birdcage than the metaphorical wall of validity.
I too am leary of any major new uniforms.
We need to move to get all our seniors into the same uniform first. Once that happens we can then look at making major changes to that uniform.
I would for the mid run, stick with the aviator and grays. Make minor changes to them to allow for ribbons, and military insignia (wings, military ribbons etc). Then move everyone to that uniform.
Five years down the road we can empanel a comittee to take input from the field, Suppliers and the USAF to design a new uniform that fills the need that the CSU filled until recently.
A new uniform right now will not be a smart idea. It will get shot down simply because "we just did away with a unfirom".
In the short run....we can find a supplier for gray slacks to be the perfered shade/material.
Get all the SM's out of the USAF style unfiorms into the white and grays/BBDUs and move on.
I would propose that we axe the blue flight suits and go with green flight suits with out any rank on the sholder. That way we can keep the USAF surpluss as supply for Nomex flight suits and save a lot of cash.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 23, 2009, 07:42:46 PM
I would propose that we axe the blue flight suits and go with green flight suits with out any rank on the sholder. That way we can keep the USAF surpluss as supply for Nomex flight suits and save a lot of cash.
We had that. AF took that option away. One reason we now have the dark blue fight suits.
Quote from: arajca on November 23, 2009, 11:08:38 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 23, 2009, 07:42:46 PM
I would propose that we axe the blue flight suits and go with green flight suits with out any rank on the sholder. That way we can keep the USAF surpluss as supply for Nomex flight suits and save a lot of cash.
We had that. AF took that option away. One reason we now have the dark blue fight suits.
Maybe it is time to revisit the issue.
If we remove the rank from the shoulder the USAF will be hard pressed to justify not letting all our members from wearing the green flight suit. Here at Nellis you see all sorts of civilains wearing flight suits that at 100 feet look just like active duty.
By pushing the uniformity, cost and safety issues and backing off the rank we could probably come up with a nice compromise.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 23, 2009, 07:42:46 PMI would propose that we axe the blue flight suits and go with green flight suits with out any rank on the sholder.
I remember putting forth this idea a year and a half ago and got a resounding "Hell, NO! I'm not giving up my rank insignia for anyone fat and fuzzy! Not
my fault they won't lose weight or shave!"
I think it's a good idea. Green nomex can be found a lot cheaper used than any other color. No more sewing PITA rank on the shoulder.
However, Vanguard would have kittens since they recently "found" a source.
While I'm thinking of it, I'm still looking for a set of subdued flightsuit rank (all ranks). Anyone know where I can find some?
The latest ideas, put on a model by High Speed Low Drag:
Gray pants, white Aviator shirt, LAPD Blue tie:
[smg id=73]
Gray pants, white shirt, tie, and coat:
[smg id=74]
A chart showing the differences in color between black, LAPD blue, and USAF Shade 1620.
[smg id=75]
Quote from: lordmonar on November 23, 2009, 07:42:46 PM
Get all the SM's out of the USAF style unfiorms into the white and grays/BBDUs and move on.
Why do you believe that we have to be out of the AF-style uniforms? Isn't that another overreaction to what went down with the CSU?
As long as the Air Force authorises us to have that uniform, with the modifications they find suitable, those who can/will shouldn't have that taken away from us by CAP.
Again, I ask, why does it have to be grey/white, except for reasons of convenience?
To me grey, grey everywhere will make us look like the old East German Air Force, or, as I said before, the Empire in "Star Wars."
http://tinyurl.com/imperialgrey
A bit pricey.
If it has to be grey, we might as well buy old East German tunics without insignia and put CAP stuff on them. $45 a pop here:
http://tinyurl.com/GDRGREY
All right, there's the "we've already got it" argument. However, we also "already had" the berry boards, and once we were allowed to get the grey epaulettes, look how fast those disappeared.
I think the idea is to get ALL SMs in the same uniform. This will not happen with a modified AF uniform.
Personally, I'd just like to be able to wear something that looks more like the service dress uniform than the blazer.
Quote from: SarDragon on November 24, 2009, 04:37:54 AM
Personally, I'd just like to be able to wear something that looks more like the service dress uniform than the blazer.
You can do that tomorrow Dave, all you gotta do is shave. ;-)
Quote from: CyBorg on November 24, 2009, 04:20:56 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 23, 2009, 07:42:46 PM
Get all the SM's out of the USAF style uniforms into the white and grays/BBDUs and move on.
Why do you believe that we have to be out of the AF-style uniforms? Isn't that another overreaction to what went down with the CSU?
Uniform....we can't be uniform until we got one and only one uniform.
Quote from: CyBorg on November 24, 2009, 04:20:56 AM
As long as the Air Force authorizes us to have that uniform, with the modifications they find suitable, those who can/will shouldn't have that taken away from us by CAP.
So you wish to perpetuate the two class system we currently have. And you wish to perpetuate the unprofessional image we present our customers when we show up to a mission base in 8 different uniform combinations.
Quote from: CyBorg on November 24, 2009, 04:20:56 AM
Again, I ask, why does it have to be grey/white, except for reasons of convenience?
As I said before....we go with the gray and whites in the short run....once we get everyone uniform we can look at a new uniform.
Except for a very small percentage of people, the "two class" system is a result of the choices people have made not to meet the weight or grooming standard, but thats another debate.
Quote from: RiverAux on November 24, 2009, 01:27:31 PM
Except for a very small percentage of people, the "two class" system is a result of the choices people have made not to meet the weight or grooming standard, but thats another debate.
<_<.
Most folks who wear it around here are either wearing it due to medical conditions, or prior vets who may also have a medical condition due to their service.
What is the percentage of SM that don't meet the standard to wear the AF uniform? As I see it CAP doesn't need a new uniform, but rather eliminate several of the so called corporate uniforms. The polo shirt and grey pants is not a uniform, it's something you were to play golf in. Most squadrons have a supply of surplus AF uniforms that could issue blue pants to seniors meaning they only need to purtchase the white aviator shirt. Wear that with grey slides and you have a standard uniform for seniors. You'll never get all seniors in the same uniform. You'll always have SM in the AF uniform or something else called a corporate uniform or different versions of the corporate uniform. Or those to lazy to put on a uniform correctly that wearr the flight suit when the nearest corporate aircraft is 50 miles away. Pick one of the existing CAP uniforms plus the AF uniform and you just about have standardized uniforms for seniors.
As I understand it, the whole idea is to "narrow" down the uniform choices. My personal opinion for dress / service uniforms: 1 - AF Style 2 - Corporate-Style (with corporate-style being what the modified white/grays.) I think the polo shirt has been abused and would personally do-away with it. (I know it has its place, the problem is when people show up everywhere with it) I also think that we need to do away with the mess-dress.
So - In Garrick's world, SMs would wear either the AF-style or the white/grays. The corp service coat would be the style proposed here. Formal events would be a uniform w/ service coat and service hat or appropriate business attire. My hope would be that after a few years of the corporate-style, we could do away with the AF-style and have only the corporate-style. But that would only be possible if the new corporate style was sharp, cost effective, and appealed to those that wore the AF-style.
Also, in Garrick’s world, all SMs would wear the BBDUs. As we have to (or should as we should save the issue BDUs for the cadets) buy our own BDUs, we can buy the BBDUs. They are going to be in production for a long time (LE uses), look professional, and are visually different.
{ Tried to post images here, failed miserably }
But that is my whole point.
Choice or not.......we have members in two different sets of unfiorms. Corporates and USAF style.
The USAF will not allow some of our members (20-40% is my guess) to wear the USAF style. Another 10% or so do not wish to wear USAF style uniforms for one reason or another.
So long as we have two uniform choices we will always look like a motley crew IMHO. We need to eliminate on of those uniform choices.
My personal preference is to come to some sort of agreement with the USAF to get everyone into an USAF style uniform. But that is just not going to happen.
Another option is to force those who don't meet USAF standards out of CAP. However loosing 30-50% of our members will seriously hurt our ability to do the mission.
The only viable option IMHO is to move everyone into some sort of corporate uniform and do away with the USAF style uniforms. We may loose some members over this move, but I feel that we could afford to loose these people because they are in CAP for the play acting and not the mission. (this is only directed to those who say they will quit CAP if they can't wear their USAF style uniforms....not to those who simply pefer the USAF unfiorms....such as myself)
Of course one final option is keep the status quo and talke the hit that comes from not having a single uniform.
I don't really care which uniform we go with (before the NEC I thought we would eliminate the gray and whites and go CSUs) but we really need to get everyone into one set of uniforms.
Order:
1. Original Grays (What we have now)
2. Modified Grays (charcoal gray pants) w/flight cap Modified Grays (charcoal gray pants) w/ solid black tie & flight cap
3. Grays Service Coat (LAPD Blue) w/ Flight Cap Grays Service Coat (LAPD Blue) w/ Service Hat
1. (http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=81)
2. (http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=85)(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=86)
*** Above pics edited to include black belt at suggestion of CAPTalk members ***
3. (http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=82)(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=84)
For comparison of colors on monitors (color on your monitor may differ from actual color, but able to discern color diferences in this sample)
(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=77)
YEAH - Finally figured out how to post images!!!! Thanks to kd8ga for handling this for me in the past.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 24, 2009, 04:54:20 PM
But that is my whole point.
The only viable option IMHO is to move everyone into some sort of corporate uniform and do away with the USAF style uniforms. We may loose some members over this move, but I feel that we could afford to loose these people because they are in CAP for the play acting and not the mission. (this is only directed to those who say they will quit CAP if they can't wear their USAF style uniforms....not to those who simply pefer the USAF unfiorms....such as myself)
Thank you lordmonar. That is how I feel, but I couldn't figure out how to not upset those that have stated "Give me my AF-style uniform or give me death!" But you have a very valid point and I agree. But to do that, we HAVE to have a military-style uniform. And unless the AF forces the issue by yanking the AF-style from the seniors, this will be a very hard sell, which is why I suggested we go to dual unifroms first, then over time possibly phase out the AF style. But during that time, this uniform would give those that CAN'T wear the AF-Style a uniform they can be proud to be in.
I do think that the cadets need to maintain the AF unifrom - period. All the senior members that have the AF-style uniforms would be able to donate them to the cadet programs.
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on November 24, 2009, 05:20:59 PM
Order:
1. Original Grays (What we have now)
2. Modified Grays (charcoal gray pants) w/flight cap Modified Grays (charcoal gray pants) w/ solid black tie & flight cap
3. Grays Service Coat (LAPD Blue) w/ Flight Cap Grays Service Coat (LAPD Blue) w/ Service Hat
I'm not digging the blue belt on gray pants...
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 24, 2009, 06:05:47 PMI'm not digging the blue belt on gray pants...
OK. What do you recommend?
Right now the regs say "Any type black belt with conservative buckle."
The above uniform would fulfill the need for 100% of the membership, is reasonable, military in cut yet clearly distinctive from the USAF, and very sharp. It also allows for a transition by those already wearing the whites at little to no cost.
Smarty-pants comments about its chances aside, I would support adoption.
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on November 24, 2009, 06:19:49 PM
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 24, 2009, 06:05:47 PMI'm not digging the blue belt on gray pants...
OK. What do you recommend?
Right now the regs say "Any type black belt with conservative buckle."
I'm not sure if there are charcoal gray belts, but that or a black would be better than blue.
Blue looks good on blue pants, not gray. In fact, I've compared it with some pants I have, and it's a horrid combination IMO.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 24, 2009, 06:38:03 PM
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on November 24, 2009, 06:19:49 PM
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on November 24, 2009, 06:05:47 PMI'm not digging the blue belt on gray pants...
OK. What do you recommend?
Right now the regs say "Any type black belt with conservative buckle."
I'm not sure if there are charcoal gray belts, but that or a black would be better than blue.
Blue looks good on blue pants, not gray. In fact, I've compared it with some pants I have, and it's a horrid combination IMO.
Vanguard stocks black belts with silver hardware in their Navy section.
Take the grey rank slides off and put pin on rank and it would look good.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 24, 2009, 04:54:20 PMWe may loose some members over this move, but I feel that we could afford to loose these people because they are in CAP for the play acting and not the mission.
I have a polo, and wear it on occasion for the simple fact that it's inexpensive and easy. But I wouldn't hang around for the simple fact that I'm not going to buy any more uniforms. As for "acting", I've been doing the "real" acting for 21 years. I'm not, and haven't been, "playing" when it comes to CAP. Maybe once I'm done with the military, I'll try the State Guard. I'm sure that I can pass on some military experience there.
There's a certain irony that those with CSUs feel wronged by it's elimination, but would support eliminating another and forcing other members to buy something else. Why is it good for the goose, but not the gander?
But I guess that it's more important to have a self contained organization. No one to answer to, no one telling the corporation how to dress. There's a bigger problem here, and it's not the uniform.
The black belt with silver hardware would look good. - Great idea guys. I'll update the pics
*** Pics posted earlier today have been edited to include the black belt recommended in the above listed posts ****
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 24, 2009, 07:16:41 PM
There's a certain irony that those with CSUs feel wronged by it's elimination, but would support eliminating another and forcing other members to buy something else. Why is it good for the goose, but not the gander?
Thats exactly what has been bugging me.
Quote from: RiverAux on November 24, 2009, 09:12:01 PM
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 24, 2009, 07:16:41 PM
There's a certain irony that those with CSUs feel wronged by it's elimination, but would support eliminating another and forcing other members to buy something else. Why is it good for the goose, but not the gander?
Thats exactly what has been bugging me.
The elimination of the CSU and the expansion of the Gray/Whites was not necessarily about the "wronging" of CAP members, it highlighted the issue of uniform availability for SMs who do not meet H/W. Which is why we are working so hard to create a uniform equitable to the AF-style. I do happen to think that we do need to go to one uniform – but that can be planned well enough in advance so the SMs wearing the AF-style uniform will "wear-out" those uniforms and plan on purchasing CAP uniforms instead of AF uniforms to replace them.
That is why in my earlier posts, I suggested we have a dual uniform for now while working towards just one uniform. It is to help prevent "forcing" SMs to have to pony up a large amount of money when they have uniforms that aren't worn out.
But we do need to move the SMs away from AF-Style if we hope to be able to decreasing all of the uniform issues of the past few years.
Quote from: RiverAux on November 24, 2009, 09:12:01 PM
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 24, 2009, 07:16:41 PM
There's a certain irony that those with CSUs feel wronged by it's elimination, but would support eliminating another and forcing other members to buy something else. Why is it good for the goose, but not the gander?
Thats exactly what has been bugging me.
First, no one is "forced" to buy anything - most members aren't aware or acknowledge the 39-1 requirement for all seniors to have a version of the service dress.
This has nothing to do with sticking it to anyone, and raising the issue just muddies the effort.
This is about once and for all stabilizing and standardizing our dress so its actually "uniform" while meeting the mission requirements for 100% of the membership (which neither the USAF nor the corporates do today).
Quote from: RiverAux on November 24, 2009, 09:12:01 PM
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 24, 2009, 07:16:41 PM
There's a certain irony that those with CSUs feel wronged by it's elimination, but would support eliminating another and forcing other members to buy something else. Why is it good for the goose, but not the gander?
Thats exactly what has been bugging me.
The point I am trying to move to is a single uniform.
Right now there are people with only USAF style, CSU style, Gray and whites or the Polo and nothing else.
Any move we make to go to a single uniform will force some to buy new uniforms. Sorry....that is just the way it is.
To mitigate that situation I suggest we go with the lowest cost solution for the "new" uniform. The gray and white uniform fits this bill. Those with CSUs only have to buy new pants, those in the Polo catagory only have to buy a shirt. It is the USAF style wearers who have to foot the biggest bill.
But we are only looking at around $50 for slacks and aviator shirt. Not a huge cost compared to some of the suggestions on this thread.
So, I'm going to ask this question out of wonder. I am not trying to be rude or battle your uniform "opinions". Some of you speak as if there IS going to be a new uniform. Where did you get this idea from? Is this based in some obscure fact or rumor, or is this just an exercise here on cap talk? Like I said just wondering.
Quote from: NCRblues on November 24, 2009, 09:28:38 PM
So, I'm going to ask this question out of wonder. I am not trying to be rude or battle your uniform "opinions". Some of you speak as if there IS going to be a new uniform. Where did you get this idea from? Is this based in some obscure fact or rumor, or is this just an exercise here on cap talk? Like I said just wondering.
I have pointed this fact out several times. Assumption and speculations is a great exercise, however, we should not proceed as if this were "real world."
My suggestion on standardized gray pants through coordination, which has met some resistance, is something that can be done. I say let us begin there.
Quote from: BillB on November 24, 2009, 01:50:16 PM
What is the percentage of SM that don't meet the standard to wear the AF uniform? As I see it CAP doesn't need a new uniform, but rather eliminate several of the so called corporate uniforms. The polo shirt and grey pants is not a uniform, it's something you were to play golf in. Most squadrons have a supply of surplus AF uniforms that could issue blue pants to seniors meaning they only need to purtchase the white aviator shirt. Wear that with grey slides and you have a standard uniform for seniors. You'll never get all seniors in the same uniform. You'll always have SM in the AF uniform or something else called a corporate uniform or different versions of the corporate uniform. Or those to lazy to put on a uniform correctly that wearr the flight suit when the nearest corporate aircraft is 50 miles away. Pick one of the existing CAP uniforms plus the AF uniform and you just about have standardized uniforms for seniors.
On this poll: http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=8907.msg160668#msg160668
The percentage of overweight members is around 48%; not a scientific poll but it's a sample of over 100 members. That's pretty substantial.
Moving every senior member to a single corporate uniform is a good idea, one whose time may be at hand.
It ought to be done gradually; from what I understand, NB won't consider any uniform changes till 2011 -- which gives those interested plenty of time to coordinate a reasonable presentation of their proposal.
Personally, I like the three gray "combinations" - tieless, with tie, with jacket.
Is there a commercial source for the gray jacket, flight cap & service cap?
IF this idea can win approval, we ought to allow a fairly long 'phase out' for USAF style uniform, precisely to avoid the sudden shock that accompanied doing away with CSU.
I am suggesting 5 years. Granted not all blues would be worn out by then, but they will have had a reasonable service life.
Yes, this could mean keeping the two track uniform system till 2018 or 2019...but it will achieve the goal of FINALLY getting CAP seniors back in a single uniform
Quote from: ZigZag911 on November 24, 2009, 11:52:30 PM
Is there a commercial source for the gray jacket, flight cap & service cap?
The black flight cap is in use by the Navy for thier new unifrom, the jacket and service hat are LAPD Blue and readily available from public safety suppliers.
If you guys want, I'll develop a cost list
I like the general idea of making the Aviator Uniform more like a Service Uniform and also the ideas of adding the following outergarments:
- Black "Class A" Jacket with CAP 25/36 Ligne Buttons (silver) with a WWII style shoulder patch.
- Army Black Windbreaker (the same one formerly authorized with the CSU)
- Army Black, or "commando" Sweater
- Army Black All-Weather Coat
- Black web belt with the silver buckle and tip
IMHO, black on gray looks sharp, especially if you throw in a West Point style stripe down the leg on a set of nice Garbadine Poly Twill Trousers.
If any of you have the black windbreaker or sweater, throw a set of the grey epaulets on it and put it on (over your current white and gray combo) and take a picture. I am curious if it looks any good in real life.
Matt Brewer, Maj, CAP
Quote from: sfdefender on November 25, 2009, 01:03:46 AM
I like the general idea of making the Aviator Uniform more like a Service Uniform and also the ideas of adding the following outergarments:
- Black "Class A" Jacket with CAP 25/36 Ligne Buttons (silver) with a WWII style shoulder patch.
- Army Black Windbreaker (the same one formerly authorized with the CSU)
- Army Black, or "commando" Sweater
- Army Black All-Weather Coat
- Black web belt with the silver buckle and tip
IMHO, black on gray looks sharp, especially if you throw in a West Point style stripe down the leg on a set of nice Garbadine Poly Twill Trousers.
If any of you have the black windbreaker or sweater, throw a set of the grey epaulets on it and put it on (over your current white and gray combo) and take a picture. I am curious if it looks any good in real life.
Since you asked...
[smg id=87]
A side group is looking at pretty much what you describe - without the wing patch. I am authoring the proposal. once it's ready, I'll post it here.
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on November 25, 2009, 12:34:37 AM
Quote from: ZigZag911 on November 24, 2009, 11:52:30 PM
Is there a commercial source for the gray jacket, flight cap & service cap?
The black flight cap is in use by the Navy for thier new unifrom, the jacket and service hat are LAPD Blue and readily available from public safety suppliers.
If you guys want, I'll develop a cost list
That hat really sux, and the fabric doesn't match much of anything we're already wearing.
I know a lot of folks who read this thread think it's some kind of pipe dream that we could design a uniform here and even get it considered by the NB. I was talking to the boss last night, and it appears that there is at least some interest in what we are coming up with on here. Based on the number of replies in the "Captalk Members in Command" thread, I would guesstimate that we have a fair number of folks who have the horsepower to get a uniform suggestion/submission straight to our respective National Board members without jumping any chain of command.
Therefore, I would make the following proposal:
Let's see if we can come up with 3 complete service dress uniform combinations (with estimated costs) to replace both the CSU and the Blazer uniform (or keep either or both of them in the mix if that is what folks here want) that would be acceptable to us here on CAPtalk. We can do this by poll:
1.) Put up the pics of however many folks come up with, and vote for the top 3.
2.) Take these back to our squadrons and get our squadron members to vote on their preferences (ranking).
3.) Then we as squadron commanders & wing staff officers submit the 3 choices with the members rankings to our Wing CC's to take to the winter boards.
We already know that uniforms are going to be a hot topic, this way the general membership will at least have some input. We will need to move quickly to get this done
Quote from: Al Sayre on November 25, 2009, 02:10:32 PM
Therefore, I would make the following proposal:
Let's see if we can come up with 3 complete service dress uniform combinations (with estimated costs) to replace both the CSU and the Blazer uniform (or keep either or both of them in the mix if that is what folks here want) that would be acceptable to us here on CAPtalk. We can do this by poll:
1.) Put up the pics of however many folks come up with, and vote for the top 3.
2.) Take these back to our squadrons and get our squadron members to vote on their preferences (ranking).
3.) Then we as squadron commanders & wing staff officers submit the 3 choices with the members rankings to our Wing CC's to take to the winter boards.
We already know that uniforms are going to be a hot topic, this way the general membership will at least have some input. We will need to move quickly to get this done
I've read the entire thread here and tried to stay out of the conversation as long as I could. I believe if you are going to take something like this to the membership, you need a "none of the above" option. While I agree that there is a percentage of the membership that sees uniforms as a major issue, there are also members that have had enough of new uniforms, uniform modifications, etc.
In this climate of budget cuts and other challenges, CAP leadership needs to stay focused on the core mission of emergency services, cadet programs, and aerospace education and not what uniform we wear to perform those missions. Personally, I believe another round of uniform debate will seriously harm our relationship with the Air Force. Can we perform our mission with the Air Force uniform options and corporate equivalents? Absolutely.
I have on my Nomex. Possibly I need asbestos. Ready for flame.
Quote from: FlyingTerp on November 25, 2009, 02:48:01 PM
I've read the entire thread here and tried to stay out of the conversation as long as I could. I believe if you are going to take something like this to the membership, you need a "none of the above" option. While I agree that there is a percentage of the membership that sees uniforms as a major issue, there are also members that have had enough of new uniforms, uniform modifications, etc.
:clap:
Quote from: FlyingTerp on November 25, 2009, 02:48:01 PM
I've read the entire thread here and tried to stay out of the conversation as long as I could. I believe if you are going to take something like this to the membership, you need a "none of the above" option. While I agree that there is a percentage of the membership that sees uniforms as a major issue, there are also members that have had enough of new uniforms, uniform modifications, etc.
The majority of the membership is not involved in this conversation, and is fairly well disinterested in the issue beyond being provided uniform options which fulfill the mission in 100% of the situations, which are consistent with our place in the universe, and non-exclusionary to a large percentage of those involved.
Like every other conversation that raises the bar on our performance expectations, external identity, or mission scope, it will take strong, visionary leaders willing to chart a course (with input) and stay on it, including accepting the potential for membership attrition because of hurt feelings and flat toes.
Quote from: sfdefender on November 25, 2009, 01:03:46 AM- Army Black Windbreaker (the same one formerly authorized with the CSU)
- Army Black Sweater
- Army Black All-Weather Coat
^^^ Those are present on the Blues, so an equivalent on the Grays makes sense
Quote from: Al Sayre on November 25, 2009, 02:10:32 PM
Based on the number of replies in the "Captalk Members in Command" thread, I would guesstimate that we have a fair number of folks who have the horsepower to get a uniform suggestion/submission straight to our respective National Board members without jumping any chain of command.
You're assuming that those NB members are really interested in hearing yet another uniform idea coming to them.
Not an assumption. They aren't a whole lot happier about the uniform mess than the rest of us. Here is an opportunity for us to do something constructive, in the open with the backing of enough of the general membership to get some traction. I'm fine with none of the above or keep what we've got as options, but we need to strike while the iron is hot. The Wing Commanders are listening to the howls of disapproval on the CSU action. Here is an opportunity for those of us on CAPTalk to "put up or shut up". We can keep griping about how unfair the decision was and why we don't like it, or we can say "OK, we're all unhappy, but here is what we are doing about it". If we don't move these proposals forward in a unified manner, they will never be considered, and we'll end up with another fait acompli which is what started this whole uproar in the first place. YMMV
I think in the end they might just end up leaving things alone as they are discovering all the headaches and complaints. I've said it on other posts. After 3 1/2 years what's the point of this. Does someone have a good explanation that they are willing to publish. Did NB really elect to table the discussion until 2011?
Quote from: billford1 on November 26, 2009, 06:48:58 AM
I think in the end they might just end up leaving things alone as they are discovering all the headaches and complaints. I've said it on other posts. After 3 1/2 years what's the point of this. Does someone have a good explanation that they are willing to publish. Did NB really elect to table the discussion until 2011?
It depends on what you mean by "leaving things alone." I doubt that they'll rescind their decision to do away with (or at least modify) the CSU.
Quote from: Al Sayre on November 25, 2009, 05:59:35 PM
Not an assumption. They aren't a whole lot happier about the uniform mess than the rest of us. Here is an opportunity for us to do something constructive, in the open with the backing of enough of the general membership to get some traction. I'm fine with none of the above or keep what we've got as options, but we need to strike while the iron is hot. The Wing Commanders are listening to the howls of disapproval on the CSU action. Here is an opportunity for those of us on CAPTalk to "put up or shut up". We can keep griping about how unfair the decision was and why we don't like it, or we can say "OK, we're all unhappy, but here is what we are doing about it". If we don't move these proposals forward in a unified manner, they will never be considered, and we'll end up with another fait acompli which is what started this whole uproar in the first place. YMMV
Why don't we just not make ANY changes to uniforms for a 3 to 5 year period, unless it can be proven that the supply of that specific type uniform is no longer available?? IF you don't meet the AF uniform wear standards than you wear the grey/whites and the blue suit coat on the formal side. Most CAP members aren't loosing any sleep over this!!!
Many of the proposals including the use of other military services clothing (e.g. Army black jacket/coat), hats etc again will require specific AF (and most likely the other services involved) approval under the provision of AFI 10-2701 para 1.3.4 .
RM
Let's not design any new uniforms, uniform items, or devices. HAving gone through literally dozens of uniforms over the years, They come in, last 3 years and a new and improved uniform is developed. We've had Guaybara shirts (white and blue), Polo shirts, (white, blue, and red), US CAP tapes (lasted 6 months), Organizational ties (red, blue, and grey). CAP Mess dress badges, replaced by USAF Auxiliary badges, and reverted back to the original.
STOP, STOP, STOP!!!!!!!
We're beginning to look like the Uniform of the month club.
OK, let the flames begin.
First, leave the AF-style uniforms alone, except for one change: the brushed silver nameplate with "Civil Air Patrol" that was designed for the CSU. I don't see any harm in wearing that on the AF service coat, and they would probably be pleased to have something else to distinguish CAP.
The CSU is gone, so let's move on from there.
Eliminate all polo-type uniforms and blazers.
For utility/work dress: BBDU's and/or blue utility jumpsuit, with A2 or blue flight jacket as outerwear.
For more formal occasions: current grey/whites, modified with actual uniform grey trousers
(suggestion: http://www.stationhouse.com/uniforms/liberty/twill_trousers.htm)
Blue AF tie with CAP tie bar
Pullover dark-blue (not AF blue) sweater, with grey epaulettes and grey CAP nameplate
(suggestion: http://www.galaxyarmynavy.com/item-6343.asp)
Cautiously suggesting modified CSU service coat with grey rank slides and no sleeve braid.
Headdress...for informal the current CAP blue ball/BBDU caps would be fine; but for more formal, I don't know...probably something new would have to be created.
Other than that, all of these options use currently existing and available uniforms.
Quote from: CyBorg on November 30, 2009, 07:36:29 PMFirst, leave the AF-style uniforms alone, except for one change: the brushed silver nameplate with "Civil Air Patrol" that was designed for the CSU.
That I would support. On the old style service coats, we wore a tag that had the CAP designator on it, don't know why we didn't with the new one.
I would suggest moving the "Civil Air Patrol" script to below the name. On top, it looks wierd to me. Maybe it's just me.
Hawk200 -
Is this something like what you had in mind?
(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=88)
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on November 30, 2009, 08:35:08 PM
Hawk200 -
Is this something like what you had in mind?
(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=88)
Yup. I wouldn't have a problem with it, I'd go buy one without any complaint if it was mandated.
Maybe it's just me, but with CAP on top, it just looks funny.
Quote from: Cecil DP on November 28, 2009, 04:40:48 AM
Let's not design any new uniforms, uniform items, or devices. HAving gone through literally dozens of uniforms over the years, They come in, last 3 years and a new and improved uniform is developed. We've had Guaybara shirts (white and blue), Polo shirts, (white, blue, and red), US CAP tapes (lasted 6 months), Organizational ties (red, blue, and grey). CAP Mess dress badges, replaced by USAF Auxiliary badges, and reverted back to the original.
???
We haven't had anything but the dark blue golf shirt for at least 8 years, the US CAP Tapes have been on the uniform since 2006 and don't sundown until Mar 2010.
With the exception of the CSU (which itself is three years old), there hasn't been a significant change in the uniform inventory in about a decade. Everything else has been tweaks, with plenty of lead time to let those who are less "excited" about change wait for things to settle out.
I'm not in favor of unexpected change, either, but let's not characterize this as something it's not. Anyone referencing Guaybera shirts or berry boards is just looking to dredge up history no longer relevant to the current leadership (USAF or CAP).
I realize I'm really running the risk of getting flamed here, but I think the efforts to design another corporate uniform will not be successful. Reading between the lines of the PowerPoint presentation, it appears to me that the Air Force is saying the uniform for CAP is the Air Force uniform. They want an option for those who don't or can't wear the AF uniform, but not a military-type option. This suggests that no military-type uniform will be approved by the Air Force, regardless of its color, style, or insignia.
If CAP is serious about becoming a more uniform organization, it should focus on those uniforms over which it has some control: the corporate varieties. We currently have five separate CAP-distinctive uniforms: grey/white with blazer, BBDU, blue flight suit, blue utility uniform, and the polo combination. While the motivation behind each of these uniforms was good, it has created a total lack of identity for CAP.
Because of this, I think the best way to streamline our uniform closet is to eliminate CAP corporate uniforms, except for two:
Dress/Casual wear: Grey/White combination with blazer for dress wear (worn on occasions where blues or mess dress are worn)
Casual/Field wear: Polo/Grey with option for grey BDU pants for field wear (worn on occasions where BDUs or flight suits are worn) - firefighters, police, and EMTs wear similar clothing for their work, and I think it would work fine for CAP
I would propose a long phaseout period (Dec 2012) for all other remaining uniforms.
Of course, I realize that some members have purchased the other uniforms, but the long phaseout period should allow them to get plenty of wear out of them before switching to another alternative. Plus, it preserves the two most common CAP-distinctive uniforms in the current closet. Most members I've seen who do not wear the AF uniform wear either the grey/white or the polo combination. I've seen very few members wearing BBDUs (only two in three years) or the blue flight suit or utility uniform (none in three years). There will always be some members who cannot or choose not to wear the AF uniform. Also, there will always be members who will wear nothing but the AF uniform. Creating another corporate uniform will not correct this, and will only create less uniformity and make us less identifiable as an organization. This idea would bring us closer to uniformity while having functional, low-cost alternatives to the AF uniform.
Quote from: BrianH76 on December 01, 2009, 11:25:32 AM
I realize I'm really running the risk of getting flamed here, but I think the efforts to design another corporate uniform will not be successful. Reading between the lines of the PowerPoint presentation, it appears to me that the Air Force is saying the uniform for CAP is the Air Force uniform. They want an option for those who don't or can't wear the AF uniform, but not a military-type option. This suggests that no military-type uniform will be approved by the Air Force, regardless of its color, style, or insignia.
I think you nailed it there.
Quote from: BrianH76 on December 01, 2009, 11:25:32 AM
Because of this, I think the best way to streamline our uniform closet is to eliminate CAP corporate uniforms, except for two:
Dress/Casual wear: Grey/White combination with blazer for dress wear (worn on occasions where blues or mess dress are worn)
Casual/Field wear: Polo/Grey with option for grey BDU pants for field wear (worn on occasions where BDUs or flight suits are worn) - firefighters, police, and EMTs wear similar clothing for their work, and I think it would work fine for CAP
Close, but not quite. The dark blue polo is not what we should be wearing for real ground team work. Keep BBDU's for those who can't wear woodland BDU's. Those with beards or who prefer the boonie cap will thank you.
Quote from: BrianH76 on December 01, 2009, 11:25:32 AM
I realize I'm really running the risk of getting flamed here, but I think the efforts to design another corporate uniform will not be successful. Reading between the lines of the PowerPoint presentation, it appears to me that the Air Force is saying the uniform for CAP is the Air Force uniform. They want an option for those who don't or can't wear the AF uniform, but not a military-type option. This suggests that no military-type uniform will be approved by the Air Force, regardless of its color, style, or insignia.
No flames here, just honest disagreement (in part). ;D
As for BBDU's and the utility jumpsuit, I wear both, and I see the BBDU's around quite frequently. I strenuously disagree with eliminating those.
If anything, I would eliminate the polo uniform entirely and keep the grey/white. Members cannot wear ribbons and/or devices that they have earned on the polos, nor do they show rank.
I think that any corporate uniform that uses
any distinctive USAF items (including, but not limited to, the USAF flight cap) is going to be vetoed...which was the gist of the problem with the CSU.
I think that anything using metal rank will be vetoed.
As for "military-style"...that can cover a wide variety of styles, including the current grey/white (shoulder epaulettes, chest candy).
I believe that the Prime Directive will be to clearly, visibly and publicly run it by CAP-USAF and secure USAF approval before
any kind of ICL is issued, before any pictures are released or any possible items go on sale.
Quote from: CyBorg on December 01, 2009, 04:21:32 PM
Quote from: BrianH76 on December 01, 2009, 11:25:32 AM
I realize I'm really running the risk of getting flamed here, but I think the efforts to design another corporate uniform will not be successful. Reading between the lines of the PowerPoint presentation, it appears to me that the Air Force is saying the uniform for CAP is the Air Force uniform. They want an option for those who don't or can't wear the AF uniform, but not a military-type option. This suggests that no military-type uniform will be approved by the Air Force, regardless of its color, style, or insignia.
No flames here, just honest disagreement (in part). ;D
As for BBDU's and the utility jumpsuit, I wear both, and I see the BBDU's around quite frequently. I strenuously disagree with eliminating those.
If anything, I would eliminate the polo uniform entirely and keep the grey/white. Members cannot wear ribbons and/or devices that they have earned on the polos, nor do they show rank.
I think that any corporate uniform that uses any distinctive USAF items (including, but not limited to, the USAF flight cap) is going to be vetoed...which was the gist of the problem with the CSU.
I think that anything using metal rank will be vetoed.
As for "military-style"...that can cover a wide variety of styles, including the current grey/white (shoulder epaulettes, chest candy).
I believe that the Prime Directive will be to clearly, visibly and publicly run it by CAP-USAF and secure USAF approval before any kind of ICL is issued, before any pictures are released or any possible items go on sale.
But why do that? That would make sense, remember this Come And Pay after all.
Quote from: wuzafuzz on December 01, 2009, 12:31:10 PM
Close, but not quite. The dark blue polo is not what we should be wearing for real ground team work. Keep BBDU's for those who can't wear woodland BDU's. Those with beards or who prefer the boonie cap will thank you.
Quote from: CyBorg on December 01, 2009, 04:21:32 PM
As for BBDU's and the utility jumpsuit, I wear both, and I see the BBDU's around quite frequently. I strenuously disagree with eliminating those.
If anything, I would eliminate the polo uniform entirely and keep the grey/white. Members cannot wear ribbons and/or devices that they have earned on the polos, nor do they show rank.
My idea of using a modified polo combination as a field uniform was because so many members already have it and because it is a low maintenance uniform. I think not having to worry about sewing rank, patches, etc. on as a plus. Since other emergency services organizations use something similar, I thought we could adapt it for field use as well by allowing use of grey BDU trousers as an option.
However, I could also see making
either the BBDU or blue utility uniform the choice for field use. That way, you could wear rank, etc. and still reduce the CAP-distinctive closet to one dress/casual uniform and one field uniform.
But let's reduce the closet while using what we've already got, what the AF has already approved of, and what's proven to work instead of rolling out another new and expensive uniform.
Quote from: BrianH76 on December 01, 2009, 05:22:01 PM
My idea of using a modified polo combination as a field uniform was because so many members already have it and because it is a low maintenance uniform. I think not having to worry about sewing rank, patches, etc. on as a plus. Since other emergency services organizations use something similar, I thought we could adapt it for field use as well by allowing use of grey BDU trousers as an option.
You've never been camping have you? Wearing a polo in the woods is a huge mistake. The agencies you refer do do not spend overnights in the field like we do. The ones that do wear a BDU style uniform. I'm indifferent to the polo but do not take away my BBDU.
Quote from: davidsinn on December 01, 2009, 05:37:24 PM
Quote from: BrianH76 on December 01, 2009, 05:22:01 PM
My idea of using a modified polo combination as a field uniform was because so many members already have it and because it is a low maintenance uniform. I think not having to worry about sewing rank, patches, etc. on as a plus. Since other emergency services organizations use something similar, I thought we could adapt it for field use as well by allowing use of grey BDU trousers as an option.
You've never been camping have you? Wearing a polo in the woods is a huge mistake. The agencies you refer do do not spend overnights in the field like we do. The ones that do wear a BDU style uniform. I'm indifferent to the polo but do not take away my BBDU.
In addition most agencies that use a polo are either doing it at a POD or at a Base.
Two issues -- some people do prefer to wear NOMEX for safety reasons, and in some places it is required, so there needs to be some option for corporate versions of that. I also agree regarding that the polo is not appropriate for real field use. Personally, the AF might look at the BBDU as more of a police-style than military style uniform due to the solid blue coloration even though the design of the uniform is clearly military.
OK - Have completed the female variants. (Only after many hours of photoshop and many beverages)
(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=100)(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=97)(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=96)
(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=98)(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=99)
I did them a couple of different ways - One difference is on the top row is either a long tie vs. a cross-tie. And a round service cap vs. female service cap.
All items here are off-the-shelf except for the female service cap. That would need to be custom made (at I don't know what cost). However, I included it becuse the female focus group I polled stated that they would prefer the female service cap. But, as the focus group was small, their views may not be indicative of all females.
And, to refresh everyone's memory- here are the male versions. Also, for comparison sake, I took the CAP Cutouts off the female, left them on the male. It would be the same final form, but I wanted the "Cut-outs vs. no-cutouts).
(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=86)(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=82)(http://captalk.net/MGalleryItem.php?id=84)
Next item to do - I will try and put together an estimated cost list for the uniform items.
Thanks for your hard work. I hope the hangover(s) weren't too bad >:D
I'm opposed to the grey slacks. I believe we need to be in all-blue (understanding the shade is now LAPD blue), but I understand the logic of wanting to stay in grey slacks so the heartburn is manageable.
I'm also very opposed to having the cutouts with the grey slides, as there is no logic there (needless redundancy). If the cutouts stay, then we need to go to metal grade on the epaulets. If the cutouts go, then my heartburn on staying with the grey slides is much less.
Ultimately, I would absolutely love to see the membership in an all-blue (LAPD-blue) service dress (which would give CAP the latitude to address height/weight/grooming standards as it relates to one uniform for all), and then be able to delete the white/grey combo (and also the deletion of the blue blazer).
Cheers,
i just thought of some thing what about woodland bdus and the navy polo shirt and boots and a black t shirt
http://www.armytimes.com/xml/news/2008/08/army_newblueuniform_082008w/081908at_ClassB_male.JPG
how about the blues tucked into boots look?
Quote from: Cadet Dan on January 06, 2010, 04:02:33 AM
http://www.armytimes.com/xml/news/2008/08/army_newblueuniform_082008w/081908at_ClassB_male.JPG
how about the blues tucked into boots look?
First of all, if it involves the Air Force blue trousers, we won't be able to use those for a CAP-distinctive uniform.
Second, even if it doesn't, the Soldier in the picture is a paratrooper. The tucked-in trousers are an Airborne tradition (I had a friend in the 101st), as is the maroon beret (worldwide) and I don't think our colleagues in Army Airborne would appreciate us appropriating something which is "theirs."
I had considered the possibility of us using a grey beret with an enamelled CAP crest many years ago until I discovered that Air Force Special Ops Weather Technicians use it.
What cyborg said, but also Air Force Security Forces Elite gate guards wear dress blues with pants tucked in to black combat boots with white laces. I think the Air Force would have a small problem with this.
Quote from: Cadet Dan on January 06, 2010, 04:02:33 AM
http://www.armytimes.com/xml/news/2008/08/army_newblueuniform_082008w/081908at_ClassB_male.JPG
how about the blues tucked into boots look?
As stated above, for Army troops, it's limited to certain qualifications such as paratroopers and Air Assault types.
For the Air Force, bloused blues is usually associated with combat jobs, or something related to it in training or function. None of which CAP has. There is no precedent for us.
Quote from: CyBorg on January 06, 2010, 04:20:26 AM
Quote from: Cadet Dan on January 06, 2010, 04:02:33 AM
http://www.armytimes.com/xml/news/2008/08/army_newblueuniform_082008w/081908at_ClassB_male.JPG
how about the blues tucked into boots look?
First of all, if it involves the Air Force blue trousers, we won't be able to use those for a CAP-distinctive uniform.
Second, even if it doesn't, the Soldier in the picture is a paratrooper. The tucked-in trousers are an Airborne tradition (I had a friend in the 101st), as is the maroon beret (worldwide) and I don't think our colleagues in Army Airborne would appreciate us appropriating something which is "theirs."
I had considered the possibility of us using a grey beret with an enamelled CAP crest many years ago until I discovered that Air Force Special Ops Weather Technicians use it.
Sorry to bust your bubble, but he is NOT a paratrooper. HE is AIR ASSAULT. Air Assault wear the black beret, while Airborne wear the marron beret. Only Airborne, Ranger, Special Forces, and Air Assault Units are authorized to blouse pants into boots.
I have to do it, and it does not look that good IMHO.
Quote from: NCRblues on January 06, 2010, 05:37:31 AM
What cyborg said, but also Air Force Security Forces Elite gate guards wear dress blues with pants tucked in to black combat boots with white laces. I think the Air Force would have a small problem with this.
Ooooooooo. Eeeeeelite! >:D
Quote from: RogueLeader on January 06, 2010, 02:19:29 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 06, 2010, 04:20:26 AM
Quote from: Cadet Dan on January 06, 2010, 04:02:33 AM
http://www.armytimes.com/xml/news/2008/08/army_newblueuniform_082008w/081908at_ClassB_male.JPG
how about the blues tucked into boots look?
First of all, if it involves the Air Force blue trousers, we won't be able to use those for a CAP-distinctive uniform.
Second, even if it doesn't, the Soldier in the picture is a paratrooper. The tucked-in trousers are an Airborne tradition (I had a friend in the 101st), as is the maroon beret (worldwide) and I don't think our colleagues in Army Airborne would appreciate us appropriating something which is "theirs."
I had considered the possibility of us using a grey beret with an enamelled CAP crest many years ago until I discovered that Air Force Special Ops Weather Technicians use it.
Sorry to bust your bubble, but he is NOT a paratrooper. HE is AIR ASSAULT. Air Assault wear the black beret, while Airborne wear the marron beret. Only Airborne, Ranger, Special Forces, and Air Assault Units are authorized to blouse pants into boots.
I have to do it, and it does not look that good IMHO.
I thought it looked ok when I was enlisted. But when I became an officer, that mohair stripe down the leg goofed it up, It kinda drooped on the outside. I thought it was a pain.
Quote from: Gunner C on January 06, 2010, 05:27:56 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on January 06, 2010, 05:37:31 AM
What cyborg said, but also Air Force Security Forces Elite gate guards wear dress blues with pants tucked in to black combat boots with white laces. I think the Air Force would have a small problem with this.
Ooooooooo. Eeeeeelite! >:D
Hey I didn't name them....just saying what the Air Force calls them.
Quote from: RogueLeader on January 06, 2010, 02:19:29 PM
Sorry to bust your bubble, but he is NOT a paratrooper. HE is AIR ASSAULT. Air Assault wear the black beret, while Airborne wear the marron beret. Only Airborne, Ranger, Special Forces, and Air Assault Units are authorized to blouse pants into boots.
OK, first off: I was not in the Army, so I am not well-informed about the distinctions you make above, between Airborne, Air Assault, etc.
Also, my friend (sadly deceased) in the 101st Airborne wore a maroon beret, bloused trousers and a parachutist's qualification badge.
As well, I have seen, either in person or in pictures, troops from Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Germany and others who wore maroon berets, and they all had one thing in common: they jumped out of/were carried into battle by fixed- and/or rotary-wing aircraft.
So I see maroon beret and think "parachute," as in the UK's "Red Devils" Parachute Regiment. I know what the Air Assault badge looks like, but the picture provided wasn't close or detailed enough to see that.
And, as I understand it, almost everyone in the Army - Active, Guard and Reserve - now wears the black beret, which was quite a controversial move, since, unlike many other armed forces, berets in the US armed forces denote special status (like Rangers and Green Berets).
So, the problem here is one of nomenclature, and it shouldn't be a problem, since I was going on the information I had available at the time.
My contribution to the drift:
Army Military Police are also allowed to blouse their pants if actively engaged in law enforcement duties in the class B uniform
8)
Quote from: CyBorg on January 07, 2010, 06:25:24 AM
Quote from: RogueLeader on January 06, 2010, 02:19:29 PM
Sorry to bust your bubble, but he is NOT a paratrooper. HE is AIR ASSAULT. Air Assault wear the black beret, while Airborne wear the marron beret. Only Airborne, Ranger, Special Forces, and Air Assault Units are authorized to blouse pants into boots.
Quote from: CyBorg on January 07, 2010, 06:25:24 AM
Quote from: RogueLeader on January 06, 2010, 02:19:29 PM
Sorry to bust your bubble, but he is NOT a paratrooper. HE is AIR ASSAULT. Air Assault wear the black beret, while Airborne wear the marron beret. Only Airborne, Ranger, Special Forces, and Air Assault Units are authorized to blouse pants into boots.
OK, first off: I was not in the Army, so I am not well-informed about the distinctions you make above, between Airborne, Air Assault, etc.
Also, my friend (sadly deceased) in the 101st Airborne wore a maroon beret, bloused trousers and a parachutist's qualification badge.
As well, I have seen, either in person or in pictures, troops from Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Germany and others who wore maroon berets, and they all had one thing in common: they jumped out of/were carried into battle by fixed- and/or rotary-wing aircraft.
So I see maroon beret and think "parachute," as in the UK's "Red Devils" Parachute Regiment. I know what the Air Assault badge looks like, but the picture provided wasn't close or detailed enough to see that.
And, as I understand it, almost everyone in the Army - Active, Guard and Reserve - now wears the black beret, which was quite a controversial move, since, unlike many other armed forces, berets in the US armed forces denote special status (like Rangers and Green Berets).
So, the problem here is one of nomenclature, and it shouldn't be a problem, since I was going on the information I had available at the time.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to come off as I did. the 101st wears the black beret (My brother is in it right now) I don't know why he's wearing the maroon beret, I honestly thought it was black, until I zoomed in close enough. It mught be that caertain units are authorized the maroon ones. I'll have to do some research.
My bad.
Quote from: RogueLeader on January 07, 2010, 01:01:00 PMIt mught be that caertain units are authorized the maroon ones.
A little excerpt from Army Regulation 670-1: "Maroon beret. All personnel assigned to airborne units whose primary missions are airborne operations wear the maroon beret. The airborne designation for a unit is found in the unit modification table of organization and equipment (MTOE)."
There are other personnel authorized maroon, but it's an additional 9 lines of info. The above criteria is sufficient to show the primary purpose of the headgear.
As to tucking trousers, 670-1 has this: "Only soldiers authorized to wear the tan, green, or maroon berets, those assigned to Air Assault coded positions and MPs performing MP duties may wear bloused (tucked-in or by the use of blousing rubbers/bands) trousers with black leather combat boots."
That pretty much shows the intent of that manner of wear. It's pretty much something combat or duty related. We don't have anyone that jumps out of airplanes/helicopters, performs Special Operations related to combat, or law enforcement. Blousing service trousers with boots for CAP is a non starter. I know people think it looks cool(and it is, kinda); but it signifies things, it's not done for the sake of appearance.
Quote from: Hawk200 on January 07, 2010, 05:54:39 PMbut it signifies things, it's not done for the sake of appearance.
I disagree. It signifies something AND it looks cool. It is part of the concept of eliteism....in the good sense of the word. By giving special badges, uniforms, hair cuts, language to a group you develop a sense of specialness that helps develop esprit de corps.
The military has used this in may ways over the centuries. It is almost never simply a practical issue. Usually it may have started out as a practical change....such as calvary boots for those who ride horses instead of walking boots for the infantry. Or distinctive uniforms to identify different units on the smokey battle field. But in modern times these sort of "practical" concerns are almost always overshadowed by "tradition" or "unit cohesion" issues.
Quote from: RogueLeader on January 07, 2010, 01:01:00 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on January 07, 2010, 06:25:24 AM
Quote from: RogueLeader on January 06, 2010, 02:19:29 PM
Sorry to bust your bubble, but he is NOT a paratrooper. HE is AIR ASSAULT. Air Assault wear the black beret, while Airborne wear the marron beret. Only Airborne, Ranger, Special Forces, and Air Assault Units are authorized to blouse pants into boots.
OK, first off: I was not in the Army, so I am not well-informed about the distinctions you make above, between Airborne, Air Assault, etc.
Also, my friend (sadly deceased) in the 101st Airborne wore a maroon beret, bloused trousers and a parachutist's qualification badge.
As well, I have seen, either in person or in pictures, troops from Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Germany and others who wore maroon berets, and they all had one thing in common: they jumped out of/were carried into battle by fixed- and/or rotary-wing aircraft.
So I see maroon beret and think "parachute," as in the UK's "Red Devils" Parachute Regiment. I know what the Air Assault badge looks like, but the picture provided wasn't close or detailed enough to see that.
And, as I understand it, almost everyone in the Army - Active, Guard and Reserve - now wears the black beret, which was quite a controversial move, since, unlike many other armed forces, berets in the US armed forces denote special status (like Rangers and Green Berets).
So, the problem here is one of nomenclature, and it shouldn't be a problem, since I was going on the information I had available at the time.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to come off as I did. the 101st wears the black beret (My brother is in it right now) I don't know why he's wearing the maroon beret, I honestly thought it was black, until I zoomed in close enough. It mught be that caertain units are authorized the maroon ones. I'll have to do some research.
My bad.
IIRC, the 101st has some folks on jump status. Their pathfinder company comes to mind. There's not many, but there are some.
Major C. from the first page you are funny except for the cats and dogs.
Lord Monar cowboy boots? I think that would look silly.
Seriously, IIRC at PJOC the Pararescueman bloused their blues
over their ;) Corcoran Jump Boots.
For those that meet weight and appearance
Air Force Blues
Woodland BDUs
Those that don't meet the standard
Sport Coat/Dark Blue Slacks/White Shirt Combination
Dark Blue BDUs
Quote from: Senior on January 07, 2010, 11:19:16 PM
Major C. from the first page you are funny except for the cats and dogs.
That part was meant more to be absurd than funny. ;)
In the interim, I think what would be a good compromise is to authorise solid grey BDU pants for the white/grey uniform.
When they're well-tended, they can look good.
Of course, we could always adopt current German Army dress trousers.
Quote from: RogueLeader on January 07, 2010, 01:01:00 PM
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to come off as I did. the 101st wears the black beret (My brother is in it right now) I don't know why he's wearing the maroon beret, I honestly thought it was black, until I zoomed in close enough. It mught be that caertain units are authorized the maroon ones. I'll have to do some research.
My bad.
Just for informational purposes, everyone in the US Army now except: 82nd Airborne (Maroon), Rangers (Tan) and US Special Forces (Green) wears the black beret now. Air Assault units have no distinctive headgear. I wore a maroon beret for years, then the regular cap until 2002 when the units in Germany finally got our shipment of black berets and Army blue flashes.
With regard merely to field uniforms, wouldn't it suit (search team) members to have a practical, durable, and user friendly type of uniform? I mean, the BDU uniform has had its uses as more than mere camouflage. Depending on how they are worn and different accessories that are available for use (covers, gloves, scarves, undershirts, polypros, boot types, sock types), they may be cooler in the summer, warmer in the winter, and are certainly easier to standardize than any other field type. In extreme distress, they can be used in survival situations as more than merely clothing.
There ARE better uniforms now...the Army DCU, ACU and now the USAF ABU. But, apparently, there is resistance to improving the field uniform for whatever reason. I'll wear my old BDU's and green zoombags as long as they'll let me, and then I'll fly in whatever comes next. J
Just kinda seems like we're getting away from the purpose of the organization which, if I remember, was to serve the community...including locating and rescuing downed pilots...even in challenging weather environments. If we can have a better uniform to do that with...just seems like logic would dictate that we use it. But...you know...whatever...
Quote from: MacGriffyn on January 26, 2010, 04:23:38 PM
Just kinda seems like we're getting away from the purpose of the organization which, if I remember, was to serve the community...including locating and rescuing downed pilots...even in challenging weather environments.
That is certainly
one of our missions. And an important one.
But most CAP members participate primarily in one of the other missions. That tends to have a significant impact on our set of uniforms, and our unique mix of missions, members, and environments is what drives our unique set of uniforms.
Form follows function.
Quote from: MacGriffyn on January 26, 2010, 04:23:38 PM
[Just for informational purposes, everyone in the US Army now except: 82nd Airborne (Maroon), Rangers (Tan) and US Special Forces (Green) wears the black beret now. Air Assault units have no distinctive headgear. I wore a maroon beret for years, then the regular cap until 2002 when the units in Germany finally got our shipment of black berets and Army blue flashes.
18th Airborne Corps, 20th ENG BDE as well as some other Airborne units in Italy and Alaska wear the marron as well.27th EN BN, 20th ENG BDE beret (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=32137800&l=4716f60aef&id=184803904)