ABU uniform for Civil Air Patrol

[NIN]

Well... I hate to get back to the topic, but it looks like CAP is NOT going to switch to ABU after all. In fact, we are going to go away from a USAF style uniform altogether to comply with new DoD regulations about control of supply of digital uniforms.

A source or cite would be helpful. (ie. The DoD reg mentioned). This seems a tad nebulous.

[Cap'n]

While I was getting uniform supplies issued, I heard from a few people that we may be getting them in 4 years or so. I really doubt that's going to happen though.

[titanII]

Well... I hate to get back to the topic, but it looks like CAP is NOT going to switch to ABU after all. In fact, we are going to go away from a USAF style uniform altogether to comply with new DoD regulations about control of supply of digital uniforms.

A source or cite would be helpful

I can't speak for afgeo4, but I think that was just his prediction

[AngelWings]

I think we are getting ABU's sooner than you think. Why? It is as simple as we are an auxillary to the US Air Force. They are going to miss their BDU's so much that they are going to make us wear ABU's so we can suffer with them 

[Phillip]

Well... I hate to get back to the topic, but it looks like CAP is NOT going to switch to ABU after all. In fact, we are going to go away from a USAF style uniform altogether to comply with new DoD regulations about control of supply of digital uniforms.

That's quite a leap there, since the eServices announcement only dealt with the ABU and not any other uniform.  Besides, the reasoning behind that decision is in question (at least here at CAP Talk).

[afgeo4]

I don't think it's such a leap. It is in accordance with the following: https://www.capnhq.gov/news/news28Dec11.htm

"DoD policy prevents the transfer, donation, and sale of digitized camouflage pattern uniforms to anyone outside the USAF with very few exceptions. Unfortunately Civil Air Patrol is not one of the exceptions. This prohibition is necessary to protect the unique technologies used in developing the uniform.

The National Board has placed a hold on all uniform changes pending a review of the entire CAP uniform structure. This review is ongoing by the CAP National Uniform Committee and a draft report will be presented to the Summer National Board Meeting in Baltimore in August 2012. The presentation will be available online via web stream but all CAP members are encouraged to attend."

The whole thing about a review of the entire CAP uniform structure means there is enough evidence that the current uniform structure isn't working to warrant a review. The outcome of the review is unknown, but given NHQ's stance on the DoD policy, I think it's safe to assume the end result will not be a USAF style uniform, at least not for the field. It might be something completely new. It might be a switch to either the BDU or the Blue Field Uniform for everyone or it might be to leave things as they are and request the Air Force to no longer consider the BDU a "USAF style uniform." Since it isn't. We will see.

[afgeo4]

I think we are getting ABU's sooner than you think. Why? It is as simple as we are an auxillary to the US Air Force. They are going to miss their BDU's so much that they are going to make us wear ABU's so we can suffer with them 

We are only an Auxiliary of the Air Force during assigned missions with orders. Given that, we are a non-profit civilian corporation about 99.999% of the time. Since most of our operations do take place in field uniforms and since the VAST majority of those operations are not as the USAF Auxiliary, it is more logical to assume that we will not receive ABUs any time soon, especially given the DoD's stance on us being a civilian non-profit, which excludes us from their policy.

By the way, using Air Force JROTC as an example doesn't work either. The JROTC is a regular part of the actual Air Force and are covered by the DoD policy. We are not.

[lordmonar]

No.....we are always the USAF Auxillary.

We are only a instrument of the government and covered by FECA and FTCA during Air Forced Assigned missions.

AFJROTC is NOT part of the regular air force.....it is part of the school.  The instructors are school employees.  The only thing that the USAF does is recommend instructors, control the curricumn and provide uniforms.

Now AFROTC is a differen matter.

[Ned]

The whole thing about a review of the entire CAP uniform structure means there is enough evidence that the current uniform structure isn't working to warrant a review.

No.  Nothing about a review of the uniform structure should be taken as "evidence that the current uniform structure isn't working."

Because we review and update the uniform regulations regularly.  Just as we have done for the last 60 years or so.  Even successful programs should be reviewed and updated periodically.

Obviously, our current uniforms "work" by almost any conceivable definition.  Missions are accomplished.  Membership is up.  IOW, even if we made no changes, we could continue to do our jobs as volunteer professionals.

Could we improve our uniforms?  Of course.  And even if no changes are made, the regulation itself badly needs updating.  Our leaders have tasked the National Uniform Committee to review our uniforms and suggest any needed changes.  There have been previous Uniform Committees, and I am confident that there will be many future Uniform Committees long after you and I are gone. 

I wish future NUC members the same joy and inner satisfaction I have received.   


Ned Lee
Member, National Uniform Committee

[afgeo4]

No.....we are always the USAF Auxillary.

We are only a instrument of the government and covered by FECA and Torp Protection during Air Forced Assigned missions.

AFJROTC is NOT part of the regular air force.....it is part of the school.  The instructors are school employees.  The only thing that the USAF does is recommend instructors, control the curricumn and provide uniforms.

Now AFROTC is a differen matter.

NOT true. Please look up Public Law 106-398 passed in October 2000 where the Congress provides that, "The Civil Air Patrol is a volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force when the services of the Civil Air Patrol are used by any department or agency in any branch of the federal government."

As a matter of procedure, funding and authorization, branches of the federal government must make the request for CAP via the Air Force and the Air Force then issues us orders for the missions. Thus, we are only the official Air Force Auxiliary when used by a department or agency in any branch of the federal government and issued orders to do so by the Air Force. At all other times, we operate as the Civil Air Patrol, a non-profit corporation.

[Eclipse]

"DoD policy prevents the transfer, donation, and sale of digitized camouflage pattern uniforms to anyone outside the USAF with very few exceptions.

Does it prevent the sale / transfer of uniform items from the DOD to "other", or is it supposing that it prevents the sale / transfer from / between anyone,
regardless of their civilian status or being a retail manufacturer or sale?

Because if it is the latter, then there are hundred of sources violating this prohibition.

If it's the former, then it's fairly irrelevant to CAP because we never got field uniforms from the USAF, anyway.

[afgeo4]

The whole thing about a review of the entire CAP uniform structure means there is enough evidence that the current uniform structure isn't working to warrant a review.

No.  Nothing about a review of the uniform structure should be taken as "evidence that the current uniform structure isn't working."

Because we review and update the uniform regulations regularly.  Just as we have done for the last 60 years or so.  Even successful programs should be reviewed and updated periodically.

Obviously, our current uniforms "work" by almost any conceivable definition.  Missions are accomplished.  Membership is up.  IOW, even if we made no changes, we could continue to do our jobs as volunteer professionals.

Could we improve our uniforms?  Of course.  And even if no changes are made, the regulation itself badly needs updating.  Our leaders have tasked the National Uniform Committee to review our uniforms and suggest any needed changes.  There have been previous Uniform Committees, and I am confident that there will be many future Uniform Committees long after you and I are gone. 

I wish future NUC members the same joy and inner satisfaction I have received.   


Ned Lee
Member, National Uniform Committee

Sir, I hate to say it, but I think there may be a HUGE disparity between what you see at those NHQ meetings and what most of us see at the squadrons.

1. I don't know about the regular reviews of the uniform structure, because we are still working with a CAP uniform regulation that is decades old with less than a handful of tiny ICL changes, many of which were made in the last 5 years and only exist to rescind each other.

2. I understand that while there may be discussions and/or partial reviews of particular uniform items, as it may happen during a uniform review board, but full organizational uniform structure reviews are something that do not and should not happen often. In my understanding, the review planned will be a top to bottom review of the SYSTEM of uniforms and not any particular uniform items. At least that's what the statement in eServices says.

[afgeo4]

"DoD policy prevents the transfer, donation, and sale of digitized camouflage pattern uniforms to anyone outside the USAF with very few exceptions.

Does it prevent the sale / transfer of uniform items from the DOD to "other", or is it supposing that it prevents the sale / transfer from / between anyone,
regardless of their civilian status or being a retail manufacturer or sale?

Because if it is the latter, then there are hundred of sources violating this prohibition.

If it's the former, then it's fairly irrelevant to CAP because we never got field uniforms from the USAF, anyway.

In my personal opinion, it is a recent policy that will restrict the distribution of such uniform items, period. There is a huge increase in the availability of "U.S. style" uniforms abroad and many have the same IR features and I think the DoD will restrict both, the distribution to civilians and the transfer/sale from the DoD to other groups/agencies. For example, the DHS heavily restricts the availability of the current Coast Guard operational dress uniforms and one cannot purchase them through civilian outlets. They have Coast Guard emblems on them to aid in the verification, similar to what the USMC and Navy have on theirs. Those uniforms are also not allowed to be sold by Coast Guard members. They are to be turned in or destroyed in accordance with USCG regulations. I believe the entire DoD is moving toward the same type of policies.

Now... that's my personal opinion and I do not claim to be "in the know" or anything, but I think it is a logical one based on the development of uniforms clearly marked with official, trademarked logos and on the fact that more and more we see the enemy wearing uniforms like ours and using them to attack us. The Marines were the first ones with such policies. Their MARPAT uniforms cannot be sold anywhere. The only thing you will find is replicas without the USMC prints in it. Now the Navy and Coast Guard have their logos in their uniforms too and restrict their sales to civilians. Seems like it is now being adapted for the entire DoD. Makes sense to me. The problem is that we are technically civilians.

[lordmonar]

George,

In my 22 years with the USAF (86-08)....the utility uniform went through 3 major changes and the blues went through two major changes.

There is an office at the Pentagon that does nothing but discuss unifroms....and there was a major propsal for yet another change to the blues.....and it was only put on hold because of the war and the fiasco of the MC Peak uniform.

Organsations should ALWAYS be reviewing their policies, image, logos, buisness model, processes, market, everything.

Reviewing does not mean you have to change a thing....but it means you have to be looking to see where improvements can be made.  If you don't the next company/organisation/country will and they will surpass you.

Now.....UNIFORMS are a touchy subject.  We got three major uniforms available to senior members....and it is like poltical parties.  Each uniform camp hates the other two.

The majority of CAP I think (CT and CS not withstanding) don't care one way or the other.  I personally are in the fourth camp "I don't care what we ware.....so long as everyone looks the same!"

If nothing else...as Ned said...we need to update the regulation and make some clarfications on some topics (like CAP NCO's in the aviator shirt).  We need to "unify" the uniform rules....so that wear instuctions are as identical as possible (such as no military badges on whites and grays....but white and grays get to wear more badges then on USAF blues).

YMMV

[Eclipse]

The majority of CAP I think (CT and CS not withstanding) don't care one way or the other.

I think the truth is that the majority of members have the same frustrations expressed here, they just have no real avenue to express their frustrations,
so they move on...

[rustyjeeper]

The majority of CAP I think (CT and CS not withstanding) don't care one way or the other.

I think the truth is that the majority of members have the same frustrations expressed here, they just have no real avenue to express their frustrations,
so they move on...

+1 almost
except we dont move on we keep bringing it up whenever we can find a way to work it into a posting- because it is a way to release frustration

[Ned]

Sir, I hate to say it, but I think there may be a HUGE disparity between what you see at those NHQ meetings and what most of us see at the squadrons.

Is that really surprising? 

While after over 30 years at the squadron level, I hope I have some idea of what goes on on Tuesday nights, I don't pretend to know exactly what is going on in each unit.  Or any unit for that matter.

It does seem like the reverse is also likely to be true.  I think it would be very difficult for anyone working primarily at the local level to know what is going on at the National level, at least in any detail.  We try (with varying levels of success) to be as open and transparent as possible, but there is a lot going on at any one time.

So, yeah, I would expect a bit of a disparity between what I see going on and what the average member sees.  Nothing evil in that, it is just sort the nature of a complex national organization.

1. I don't know about the regular reviews of the uniform structure, because we are still working with a CAP uniform regulation that is decades old with less than a handful of tiny ICL changes, many of which were made in the last 5 years and only exist to rescind each other.

Like I said, I agree that the regulation badly needs updating, even if we never made another uniform change. 

I'm sure there are some uniform wonks out there who can tell us when every single change or update has been made to our uniform regulations.  But my point is that - in the big scheme of things - CAP regularly and periodically reviews and updates our uniforms and supporting regulations.  While we may be a little overdue, it is a leap to suggest that we are doing so now because anyone in particular thinks our uniforms "don't work."  It is just as logical to suggest that we have gone on for so long without a uniform update simply because our uniforms are fine as they are and do not need to change with the times.

2. I understand that while there may be discussions and/or partial reviews of particular uniform items, as it may happen during a uniform review board, but full organizational uniform structure reviews are something that do not and should not happen often. In my understanding, the review planned will be a top to bottom review of the SYSTEM of uniforms and not any particular uniform items.

Again, while I agree that the NUC was asked to review all of our uniforms, that is nothing really unusual or out of the mainstream.  Any periodic review should be comprehensive and not some sort of a piecemeal review.  Again, one could argue that piecemeal reviews of just one uniform may be the cause of the current angst over things like the CSU.

The NB has tasked the NUC to study our uniforms and to make recommendations.  Not because the sky is falling, the AF hates us, or any other particular reason.  But because it has probably been too long since our last comprehensive review and regulation update.

If it helps, I was in the room when the purpose of the committee was discussed and when the vote to establish the committee was taken.  I (along with a very distinguished group of CAP officers) was appointed to the committee, and have attended all the committee meetings permitted by my schedule.

The NUC will submit our recommendations to the NB next summer, and our volunteer leaders will then take such actions that they - in their collective wisdom - believe are necessary.

The very nature of committees being what they are (speaking both of the NUC and the NB), I would not normally expect to see major or surprising changes to our existing uniform scheme.

But I've been wrong before . . .

[afgeo4]

George,

In my 22 years with the USAF (86-08)....the utility uniform went through 3 major changes and the blues went through two major changes.

There is an office at the Pentagon that does nothing but discuss unifroms....and there was a major propsal for yet another change to the blues.....and it was only put on hold because of the war and the fiasco of the MC Peak uniform.

Organsations should ALWAYS be reviewing their policies, image, logos, buisness model, processes, market, everything.

Reviewing does not mean you have to change a thing....but it means you have to be looking to see where improvements can be made.  If you don't the next company/organisation/country will and they will surpass you.

Now.....UNIFORMS are a touchy subject.  We got three major uniforms available to senior members....and it is like poltical parties.  Each uniform camp hates the other two.

The majority of CAP I think (CT and CS not withstanding) don't care one way or the other.  I personally are in the fourth camp "I don't care what we ware.....so long as everyone looks the same!"

If nothing else...as Ned said...we need to update the regulation and make some clarfications on some topics (like CAP NCO's in the aviator shirt).  We need to "unify" the uniform rules....so that wear instuctions are as identical as possible (such as no military badges on whites and grays....but white and grays get to wear more badges then on USAF blues).

YMMV

Well the problem is that CAP does not schedule regular uniform boards and they do not update their uniforms regularly, thus we still used the decades old regulations.

However, the point is that NHQ is saying they want a "review of the entire CAP uniform structure" and not of CAP uniforms. That is a BIG distinction as I see it. That's a strategic review vs. a tactical one. Those should not be regular. Those require much thought, time and wisdom or they can end up destroying an organization.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that we need to change our uniforms and our regs and that we need a regular uniform board to address items that were forgotten, mistakes that were made and possible improvements that are suggested. I also agree that uniforms are a big problem for CAP and that they are often the source of a lot of frustration and disagreement and may even cause a difference in philosophy among our members and I think that is a REAL problem. Our identity is at stake. That's why a review such as the one being proposed is I think a good idea and probably will result in some changes.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I think the truth is that the majority of members have the same frustrations expressed here, they just have no real avenue to express their frustrations,
so they move on...

Yes...imagine what it would have been like during the berry boards era.

But Eclipse is right.  In my own unit the feeling is very much that we don't know what to do uniform-wise much of the time because of the antediluvian 39-1 and the myriad of ICL's.  Some in my unit wear G/W's when they could, and would like to, wear the AF blues but don't because they just consider the G/W's to be the path of least resistance in terms of 39-1 compliance, because there are very little restrictions/specifications on that particular order of dress.

There is also a feeling that we (the membership) are not listened to in uniform matters because NHQ is still in the same mindset they have been in ever since the berry board era...they killed a popular uniform (CSU) with an "I cannot tell you, you have no need to know" attitude toward the membership and a fear that (cue Mr Bill voice) "Oh, noooooo!  The Air Force will be mad if we try to change this!"

To that end, as I've said, I have a complete, drawn up proposal for a uniform to gradually replace the G/W with off-the-rack civilian items and ZERO AF content, but I haven't forwarded it up the chain because the mindset mentioned above would kill it before it even drew breath.

[AngelWings]

I think we are getting ABU's sooner than you think. Why? It is as simple as we are an auxillary to the US Air Force. They are going to miss their BDU's so much that they are going to make us wear ABU's so we can suffer with them 

We are only an Auxiliary of the Air Force during assigned missions with orders. Given that, we are a non-profit civilian corporation about 99.999% of the time. Since most of our operations do take place in field uniforms and since the VAST majority of those operations are not as the USAF Auxiliary, it is more logical to assume that we will not receive ABUs any time soon, especially given the DoD's stance on us being a civilian non-profit, which excludes us from their policy.

By the way, using Air Force JROTC as an example doesn't work either. The JROTC is a regular part of the actual Air Force and are covered by the DoD policy. We are not.

Heh, guess someone had a rough night that left their humor nonexsistant.