Scanner Wings

[afgeo4]

What's unprofessional looking?

I don't particularly like the red prop on AF wings idea, neither did anyone else, that's why it got dropped. The above redesigns came next. A CAP specific shield that we have a long tradition with surronded by AF-style wings, what exactly is wrong with that?

And far as AF telling what the wings are. First of all you could be a CAP member that used to be an AF pilot, and that would be meaningful to them. Second, the tarmac is not alaways in the picture, you could just as easily be walking thru base before or after landing, at a meeting or activity. The only reason they care about CAP being distinctive is so their people can tell immediately that they don't need to take anything we say as an order, that & international/federal law, plus not wanting their warfighters to feel insulted that some guy w/a PPL gets wings that look like the ones he had to work two years for.

Are you suggesting that Air Force officers don't know who to take orders from and who not to? That they can't tell a CAP uniform from a regular USAF one? That they don't know their chain of command?

Wings aren't for recognition of orders; they're for recognition of flight duty status. They were created to distinguish rated personnel from non-rated... the pilots in the Army from the ground pounders. It's still what they're there for, nothing more, nothing less. Our aircrew are no less aircrew than theirs... we just use different aircraft and perform different missions. Remember, different isn't better or worse, it's just different.

[afgeo4]

I always did like your design, Dennis.  I think the color center seal does two things:

1.  Makes it very clear who's who... you don't have to get up-close-and-personal to differentiate the wings, and...

2.  Is sufficiently different from the USAF so that Big Mother Blue will find them acceptable.

I also REALLY like the idea of Astronaut wings, but I'm here near The Cape, and the space program is an important cultural feature of Brevard County society.

They won't find them any more acceptable than all metal ones because when transferred to leather flight patch, they will once again be monotone. If the Air Force will sign off on that, it'll sign off on all metal wings.

By the way, I always felt that all metal career field badges were better than color ones we use today in CAP anyway. Why not create a movement toward all metal instead of the other way around?

[DNall]

What's unprofessional looking?

I don't particularly like the red prop on AF wings idea, neither did anyone else, that's why it got dropped. The above redesigns came next. A CAP specific shield that we have a long tradition with surronded by AF-style wings, what exactly is wrong with that?

And far as AF telling what the wings are. First of all you could be a CAP member that used to be an AF pilot, and that would be meaningful to them. Second, the tarmac is not alaways in the picture, you could just as easily be walking thru base before or after landing, at a meeting or activity. The only reason they care about CAP being distinctive is so their people can tell immediately that they don't need to take anything we say as an order, that & international/federal law, plus not wanting their warfighters to feel insulted that some guy w/a PPL gets wings that look like the ones he had to work two years for.

Are you suggesting that Air Force officers don't know who to take orders from and who not to? That they can't tell a CAP uniform from a regular USAF one? That they don't know their chain of command?

Wings aren't for recognition of orders; they're for recognition of flight duty status. They were created to distinguish rated personnel from non-rated... the pilots in the Army from the ground pounders. It's still what they're there for, nothing more, nothing less. Our aircrew are no less aircrew than theirs... we just use different aircraft and perform different missions. Remember, different isn't better or worse, it's just different.

The distinctive part of our uniform in general are about making sure real mil doesn't mix us up w/ legal officers & still they make mistakes sometimes cause they aren't looking for differences. The issue w/ wings is there end. They don't want us wearing something that could get mixed up w/ theirs. Remember they have to approve this. We can't just make stuff up & hope they learn to deal with it. It's their call & they'll make their decisions w/ their own bias & own views about CAP. We have to be tactful & play their game so we can be on the smae team w/o pissing them off.

By the way, I always felt that all metal career field badges were better than color ones we use today in CAP anyway. Why not create a movement toward all metal instead of the other way around?

Only way they went to all those badges is they're the same stock metal item w/ just dif painted faces. If they tried to make a seperate metal design for each, even drill & tap, it would be excessively expensive, maybe prohibatively so. Otherwise I agree with you.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I always did like your design, Dennis.  I think the color center seal does two things:

1.  Makes it very clear who's who... you don't have to get up-close-and-personal to differentiate the wings, and...

2.  Is sufficiently different from the USAF so that Big Mother Blue will find them acceptable.

I also REALLY like the idea of Astronaut wings, but I'm here near The Cape, and the space program is an important cultural feature of Brevard County society.

They won't find them any more acceptable than all metal ones because when transferred to leather flight patch, they will once again be monotone. If the Air Force will sign off on that, it'll sign off on all metal wings.

By the way, I always felt that all metal career field badges were better than color ones we use today in CAP anyway. Why not create a movement toward all metal instead of the other way around?

The wing design is different, and closer to the USAF wings.  As such, some obvious differentiation is called for.  On the leather name badge, name, rank, and "CAP" are pretty prominent under the wings.

[BillB]

You're beating a dead horse. CAP has tried at least twice to get the USAF style wings with CAP center section design and been turned down twice by USAF. Your design in all metal at first glace resembles to closely the USAF wings. Modifying the current style CAP wings using the center part design probably would get USAF approval. Since the wings are worn on the USAF style uniform, USAF gives approval. Unless of course your design is for the corporate uniform ONLY.

[DNall]

hence the color. Actually the plan before was color on the leather name patches as well, or more likely to have embroidered ones that way. You can't mistake a full color center

[Guardrail]

hence the color. Actually the plan before was color on the leather name patches as well, or more likely to have embroidered ones that way. You can't mistake a full color center

I know... how about the same wings we have now, but with full color centers like the kind in these wings:



I think that would be a nice return to CAP's heritage.  Plus, it would be very distinctive and the Air Force would likely approve it.

For Aircrew, maybe a blue "A" could be inscribed in the center.  For navigator, "N" etc.   

[MIKE]

I would rather keep what we have now.  I do not care for the enameled wings.

[JohnKachenmeister]

hence the color. Actually the plan before was color on the leather name patches as well, or more likely to have embroidered ones that way. You can't mistake a full color center

I know... how about the same wings we have now, but with full color centers like the kind in these wings:



I think that would be a nice return to CAP's heritage.  Plus, it would be very distinctive and the Air Force would likely approve it.

For Aircrew, maybe a blue "A" could be inscribed in the center.  For navigator, "N" etc.   

I actually saw a guy who rated those wings, back in 1966.  He was an Air Force Lt Col., and had been a CAP pilot in World War II.  He was the USAF advisor to the National Flight Encampment at Elmyra, NY in 1966.  He wore his CAP WWII wings on the right side of his AF uniform.  He was there on the flight line to bid us goodbye after graduation, and I'll never forget the "What the H---?" look the C-47 crew chief gave him.  The crew chief was way too respectful to challenge the Lt. Col., however.

[afgeo4]

Ok, so I understand many of us are very eager to change the wings, but can someone tell me why?  What's wrong with the basic design of our current wings?  Why don't we just add a scanner wing?

[shorning]

...and the Air Force would likely approve it. 

What leads you to that conclusion?  Why do you think the Air Force would approve that design over another?

[BillB]

The Air Force has already approved the 1940's CAP wings. So there is no need to go back and get approval again.

[DNall]

I think that would be a nice return to CAP's heritage.  Plus, it would be very distinctive and the Air Force would likely approve it.

For Aircrew, maybe a blue "A" could be inscribed in the center.  For navigator, "N" etc.

How does that help align with the professional image of the AF & encourage both parties to see each other as part of the same team meeting shared risks as aviators to accomplish missions of the AF?

Ok, so I understand many of us are very eager to change the wings, but can someone tell me why?  What's wrong with the basic design of our current wings?  Why don't we just add a scanner wing?

Just answered that.

The Air Force has already approved the 1940's CAP wings. So there is no need to go back and get approval again.

Again, because something was once approved does not mean it is now. Past items not in the current version of 39-1 are NOT approved by the AF & CAP cannot freely put them back w/o going back to AF. Between reg changes are approved individually, regs are approved as a package (if there's changes requiring additional approval). Things that get left out are at that point de-authorized by AF. I'd also caution you that they do care what you put on their uniform & they aren't willing to approve a lot of things that were once authorized.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Ok, so I understand many of us are very eager to change the wings, but can someone tell me why?  What's wrong with the basic design of our current wings?  Why don't we just add a scanner wing?

George:

While I like Dennis' designs, there is also nothing wrong wih your suggestion. 

Developing a scanner wing based on the design of the solo badge is probably appropriate, since "Scanner" is a training qualification for folks enroute to the "Observer" rating.

Personally, I think we should break out the "Observer" qualification into two categories:

1.  Observer/Navigator.  The O/N rating would be the "Assistant Pilot" that we have now.  He would ride front right, handle the comm and the nav. as well as engage the target using the Mk-1 eyeball.

2.  Technical Observer.  The TO would be the expert on the wizard hardware, ARCHER, FLIR, Radiological monitoring, etc.

If it were mine to do, I'd re-design the pilot wing to be our current wing design with a shield center and the CAP symbol on the shield.  The O/N wings would be our current pilot wing, and the TO wing would be our current observer wing.  I'm sure we could come up with a design for the scanner badge.

[Hawk200]

I see the posts about reinstating the original pilots wings, but there is a major reason why they were done away with.

I collect various military insignia, and actually have an original set of CAP pilot wings in my collection. I've shown them to people not familiar with CAP, and some fellow members. The first thing that a large majority have said is "They look like a Nazi badge."

I'm sure that wasn't the only reason why they were done away with, but it is a very compelling one. CAP and the Air Force had no desire to use an insignia reminding people of the atrocities that occurred in Germany in that time period.

[BillB]

The orignal CAP wings were called the luftwaffe wings by members at the time.  It wasn't until after World War II that the change was made to the droop wings. I still have my luftwaffe wings from when I was a cadet.

[SAR-EMT1]

 My humble take on things:
1)STAY AWAY FROM ENAMEL.
2) Keep current obsever/nav wing design (ae- non color), same shape etc...
3)  Add a 'P' or a 'T' to the observer wing to signify "payload" / "technical" specialist. An 'S' for scanner and just leave the badge as is or add an 'O' or 'N' for the basic level observer/navigator

If we end up being a test bed for the new Air Force Ray gun, add the insignia from StarFleet or just add a "G" to the observer wings for Gunner. 

[Monty]

My humble take on things:
1)STAY AWAY FROM ENAMEL.
2) Keep current obsever/nav wing design (ae- non color), same shape etc...
3)  Add a 'P' or a 'T' to the observer wing to signify "payload" / "technical" specialist. An 'S' for scanner and just leave the badge as is or add an 'O' or 'N' for the basic level observer/navigator

If we end up being a test bed for the new Air Force Ray gun, add the insignia from StarFleet or just add a "G" to the observer wings for Gunner. 

or "B" for ballast.   

[DNall]

What the hell? ^  

Anyway... the cheap way, which is what they'll actually do, is one set of molds for astronaut, pilot, & nav/obs that has a blank shield to which you apply paint & clear coat - EXACTLY like the current spec badges. I'm sure I could remake the aircrew design I have above to fit that shield also rather than the enlisted aircrew style, but I do like it the way it's drawn above.

The only reason wings would be created that cover scanner is if the scanner & observer track is tossed & two new tracks created; the first one (aircrew) covering scanner thru observer, that makes scanner not a training rating & on the same set of wing w/ observer; the second covering a whole new track for the on-scene command & control function & advanced function & gear.

John, I appreciate what you're saying, but the people that train for the advanced gear & functions need to FIRST have the basic aircrew (scanner thru observer) skills & need to have some experience proving they are the senior people we need in the forefront.

The main reason to change the other wings is part of revamping the overall program. Going closer to the AF style is about a joint accpetance as team mebers w/ shared risks as aviators working to a shared mission-set. Sounds nice on the justification part of the document anyway right. I jus think it looks better personally. Our current wings look more like the Army.

[Monty]

What the hell? ^ 

Ballast....as in "something heavy, as bags of sand, placed in the car of a balloon for control of altitude and, less often, of attitude, or placed in an aircraft to control the position of the center of gravity."

I'm trying to think of creative ways to get scanner wings for our badge lovers out there!

(Obviously I'm kidding)

Though......that is EXACTLY how I started my scanner training awhile ago.  "Monty, we need you in the back for weight and balance reasons.  The front seats are VERY full.  Busy?"