The "Final Word" (?) on ABUs

[ColonelJack]

In a Facebook posting, Georgia Wing Commander Col. Rick Greenwood says that Maj. Gen. Carr has let the Command Council know that CAP is not going to be pursuing the Air Force for permission to wear ABUs.

The reason given was the fact that the services are working on a single utility uniform across all branches, and that would make ABUs obsolete.  Rather than burden the membership with uniforms that they'll only be able to use for a short while, Gen. Carr is going to wait and see what comes out of the utility uniform discussions.

According to Col. Greenwood, BDUs (and, of course, BBDUs) will remain the utility uniform of CAP for the foreseeable future.

Jack

[NIN]

Darn good thing I didn't spend much money on the ones I have hanging in my wall locker.

[Eclipse]

The reason given was the fact that the services are working on a single utility uniform across all branches, and that would make ABUs obsolete.  Rather than burden the membership with uniforms that they'll only be able to use for a short while, Gen. Carr is going to wait and see what comes out of the utility uniform discussions.

Wha?  No, way.

Lordmonar - I am actually in Las Vegas right now if you would like to buy me that steak...

[NIN]

Lordmonar - I am actually in Las Vegas right now if you would like to buy me that steak...

Serendipity is an interesting animal.

[SAREXinNY]

Makes sense (for once).  Why don't they start the necessary preliminary paperwork, so that when that single utility uniform is introduced we can immediately jump on board?  Always being 2-5 years behind the curve seems unnecessary.

[Walkman]

I saw similar info posted on Facebook from CAWG. Honestly, I was kinda' bummed about it. Oh well, the mission still needs to be accomplished.

[Luis R. Ramos]

But knowing how the system works...

Knowing that "change is the way of life..."

Our boss says "no way."

Yet it may change in the future...

Nin, do not throw that out yet...

Flyer

[winterg]

I heard at my squadron that we can wear the new all service utility uniform. Where can I buy these?   


Seriously, though.  It would make good sense.  Whether it actually happens in our lifetimes is another thing entirely.  I see it like the new F-35 JSF.  A single multi-role strike fighter for all the branches with branch specific configurations as necessary.  When it comes down to it, the only reason I believe we have multiple branches of military still is ego.  I wonder what (if any) the cost savings would be with only one US military service instead of separate branches like we have now.  There's still a lot of life left in BDU's.

[Luis R. Ramos]

One solution for all does not fit every time. I remember the F-111. While I have never been in the service so I all I can say about this is more like what I read, this was supposed to be used by both the Air Force and the Navy. After this airplane was accepted, it was found the modifications needed by the Navy increased the cost beyond initial projections, and eventually it was not deployed in aircraft carriers. For instance, landing gear had to be strengthened for carrier ops, and there were other problems with other structural components as well. I do not recall exactly... Can someone closer to this aircraft remind us what were the problems?

Flyer

[a2capt]

The only thing that does not "solve" is that BDUs are simply not as plentiful as they once were.

Sure, everyone has to buy their stuff sometime, but it was good while we were using the same thing as the Air Force, so getting them was a lot more flexible. 

As for "waiting to see what they come up with", I see that happening .. two and a half "national commanders from now".

[SarDragon]

I'm not necessarily closer, but perhaps older and having it more in my current event arena back then.

The major issue, on both sides of the fence, was weight, with the Navy version having more problems. Each service ad specific requirements, which were occasionally at odds with each other. As you stated, the Navy version need stronger parts in many areas, to survive the stresses of cat launches and arrested landings. This ultimately ate into the functionality so much that it was cancelled for naval use. With the additional Navy mission requirements out of the way, the AF ended up with a functional platform.

The Wikipedia article has more detail and references.

[RiverAux]

Seems to me that the easiest thing to do would just be to request blanket approval for CAP to begin wear of whatever BUD-equivalent approved by the Air Force starting two years after the AF starts wearing it along with a blanket statement saying that the BDU would be phased out 5 years after CAP begins wearing the replacement.   Needs some wordsmithing, but it would solve the situation.  Not a big fan of even waiting 2 years for CAP to begin wearing the new uniform but they always claim supply shortages....

[A.Member]

In a Facebook posting, Georgia Wing Commander Col. Rick Greenwood says that Maj. Gen. Carr has let the Command Council know that CAP is not going to be pursuing the Air Force for permission to wear ABUs.

The reason given was the fact that the services are working on a single utility uniform across all branches, and that would make ABUs obsolete.  Rather than burden the membership with uniforms that they'll only be able to use for a short while, Gen. Carr is going to wait and see what comes out of the utility uniform discussions.

According to Col. Greenwood, BDUs (and, of course, BBDUs) will remain the utility uniform of CAP for the foreseeable future.

Jack

Doesn't bother me a ton but the reason cited is very weak.  There will always be a new mousetrap right around the corner... 

Also, why the contradiction to the presentation in Denver several months ago?  Was that done without the CC's knowledge/approval?  Was this a legit thread:
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=17800.0

[lordmonar]

The reason given was the fact that the services are working on a single utility uniform across all branches, and that would make ABUs obsolete.  Rather than burden the membership with uniforms that they'll only be able to use for a short while, Gen. Carr is going to wait and see what comes out of the utility uniform discussions.

Wha?  No, way.

Lordmonar - I am actually in Las Vegas right now if you would like to buy me that steak...

Still not convinced that they are going to change.
Hagel just announced force cuts....still can't see them spending money on this while cutting 40K troops.

[LSThiker]

Still not convinced that they are going to change.
Hagel just announced force cuts....still can't see them spending money on this while cutting 40K troops.

I can.  The military has been criticized since day 1 on the development of branch specific uniforms as well as the ineffective camouflage patterns used in the ACUs and ABUs.  In addition, if the military spends $4 million dollars (number was thrown out, not a real figure) on developing a new combat uniform while being able to save $10 million over the next ten years having one specific uniform for all branches, then the upfront cost is worth it. 

[Eclipse]

The reason given was the fact that the services are working on a single utility uniform across all branches, and that would make ABUs obsolete.  Rather than burden the membership with uniforms that they'll only be able to use for a short while, Gen. Carr is going to wait and see what comes out of the utility uniform discussions.

Wha?  No, way.

Lordmonar - I am actually in Las Vegas right now if you would like to buy me that steak...

Still not convinced that they are going to change.
Hagel just announced force cuts....still can't see them spending money on this while cutting 40K troops.

Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle - don't care who else is gittin' what, CAP ain't grittin' ABU's.

[SarDragon]

Still not convinced that they are going to change.
Hagel just announced force cuts....still can't see them spending money on this while cutting 40K troops.

I can.  The military has been criticized since day 1 on the development of branch specific uniforms as well as the ineffective camouflage patterns used in the ACUs and ABUs.  In addition, if the military spends $4 million dollars (number was thrown out, not a real figure) on developing a new combat uniform while being able to save $10 million over the next ten years having one specific uniform for all branches, then the upfront cost is worth it.

There is not now, nor will there ever be, a universally effective camouflage pattern. This has been proven over the last 20 years  where our war-fighters have been doing their business. Backgrounds and locations differ. The needs of the services differ. The Navy certainly doesn't need green uniforms of any flavor for most of their operations. (I'll give attention to the NWU naysayers when they can show conclusive evidence that folks in a man overboard situation are in any more danger than folks in the old uniforms.)

[LSThiker]

There is not now, nor will there ever be, a universally effective camouflage pattern.

Of course not.  That is why the ACUs were such a stupid decision.

This has been proven over the last 20 years  where our war-fighters have been doing their business. Backgrounds and locations differ. The needs of the services differ. The Navy certainly doesn't need green uniforms of any flavor for most of their operations. (I'll give attention to the NWU naysayers when they can show conclusive evidence that folks in a man overboard situation are in any more danger than folks in the old uniforms.)

While the needs of the services may differ, that does not mean the uniforms need to differ.  The Marines and the Army were doing essentially the same mission in Iraq.  Why do you need to have two different uniforms?  Most of the Air Force I saw in Iraq were wearing the ACUs so why did they need a branch specific uniforms?  Even the Navy were wearing ACUs where I worked.  If you never leave the ship or just work on the flight line, does it really matter whether you wear green, tan, blue, or pink?  No.  So why not use the uniform that is being mass produced for the combat missions. 

Branch specific uniforms was a bad idea and a waste of money on ineffective combat patterns.  Going back to a single US uniform, especially for non-combat US taskings, makes more sense.  When the time comes to needing a desert uniform, produce it.  Need a snow uniform?  Produce it then.  Need a jungle uniform? Produce it then.  I would rather spend money on developing a camo pattern for specific for North Korea, another for Iran, another for Russia, another for Vietnam, another for Japan, etc and having those on file ready for mass production when needed.   

[Stonewall]

Son of a...

I have 12 sets of ABUs and was hoping to sell at least 6 to make some extra cash.  Oh well, they'll continue to go to waste.

[SarDragon]

Branch specific uniforms was a bad idea and a waste of money on ineffective combat patterns.  Going back to a single US uniform, especially for non-combat US taskings, makes more sense.  When the time comes to needing a desert uniform, produce it.  Need a snow uniform?  Produce it then.  Need a jungle uniform? Produce it then.  I would rather spend money on developing a camo pattern for specific for North Korea, another for Iran, another for Russia, another for Vietnam, another for Japan, etc and having those on file ready for mass production when needed.

Really?

Now we're talking economy of scale, and storage costs.

You can't magically spit out uniforms on short notice. There's always lead time involved. If you try to produce ahead of time, how many do you make? What size distributions? Producing for the entire service is cheaper than for a smaller segment. Once produced, where do you store them until they are needed? Maybe a basic economics refresher is in order.

[PHall]

One solution for all does not fit every time. I remember the F-111. While I have never been in the service so I all I can say about this is more like what I read, this was supposed to be used by both the Air Force and the Navy. After this airplane was accepted, it was found the modifications needed by the Navy increased the cost beyond initial projections, and eventually it was not deployed in aircraft carriers. For instance, landing gear had to be strengthened for carrier ops, and there were other problems with other structural components as well. I do not recall exactly... Can someone closer to this aircraft remind us what were the problems?

Flyer

The F-111 turned out to be a pretty sucessful long range strike aircraft. It could do Mach 1.5 at 500 feet AGL in any weather.
The development of the Navy F-111B model did have some good. For example, the longer wings and heavy duty landing gear ended up being used on the FB-111A Medium Bomber used by SAC (redesignated F-111G in later years.).
The main problems with the F-111's was the TF-30 turbofan engines which were also used on the F-14A.
There was a series of engine intake redesigns in an attempt to solve this engines airflow problems.
There was also problems with the early avionics systems which were mostly fixed when technology finally caught up to what the designers wanted.

[Shuman 14]

Seems to me that the easiest thing to do would just be to request blanket approval for CAP to begin wear of whatever BUD-equivalent approved by the Air Force starting two years after the AF starts wearing it along with a blanket statement saying that the BDU would be phased out 5 years after CAP begins wearing the replacement.   Needs some wordsmithing, but it would solve the situation.  Not a big fan of even waiting 2 years for CAP to begin wearing the new uniform but they always claim supply shortages....

Concur, a reasonable and logical approach.

[LSThiker]

Really?

Now we're talking economy of scale, and storage costs.

You can't magically spit out uniforms on short notice. There's always lead time involved. If you try to produce ahead of time, how many do you make? What size distributions? Producing for the entire service is cheaper than for a smaller segment. Once produced, where do you store them until they are needed? Maybe a basic economics refresher is in order.

I said, produce when needed.  Will there be a lag time, sure of course.  However, we should be spending money on developing proper patterns now rather trying to find a universal pattern.  Do you know why we went to the Persian Gulf War wearing a uniform designed in 1962?  When there is a will (aka money) there is a way.  The US designed the P-51 in 1940 with the first prototype built 102 after the contract was signed.  We introduced it in combat in 1942. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

So does this mean that woodland BDU's are going to be "CAP-distinctive?"

I would just as soon go to solid OD BDU's...reminiscent of the old "pickle suits," and could not be confused with the AF or any other military service.

[LSThiker]

So does this mean that woodland BDU's are going to be "CAP-distinctive?"

I would just as soon go to solid OD BDU's...reminiscent of the old "pickle suits," and could not be confused with the AF or any other military service.

I doubt the USAF will, at least in the short-term future, ever allow us to call BDUs "CAP-distinctive".  But who knows?

[Panache]

When it comes down to it, the only reason I believe we have multiple branches of military still is ego.  I wonder what (if any) the cost savings would be with only one US military service instead of separate branches like we have now. 

The Civil Air Patrol: The United States Army Air Force Naval Marine Guard Auxiliary.

I would just as soon go to solid OD BDU's...reminiscent of the old "pickle suits," and could not be confused with the AF or any other military service.

Ugh, I sincerely hope not.  I hated wearing those when I was a cadet.

[Al Sayre]

It would make economic sense to go to a common "field uniform" for personnel not actually engaged in combat action.  Then have say half a dozen different camoflauge schemes for personnel deployed to specific areas.  Joe the Cook or the Motor Pool Sgt at Somewhere Base in the U.S. really have no need for camo, but do have a need for a working uniform besides the service uniform or their organizational issue (cooks whites or coveralls).  That would be where a common uniform cost savings would be recognized.  Pickle suits for everyone!

[LSThiker]

When it comes down to it, the only reason I believe we have multiple branches of military still is ego.  I wonder what (if any) the cost savings would be with only one US military service instead of separate branches like we have now. 

The medical departments from across the DoD have already done the analysis on this.  It was determined a long time ago that having a single medical department would be cost saving.  That is, one base, one training school, one curriculum, etc.  Then each department would have its own specific training requirements (i.e. naval medicine, aeromedicine, NBC, etc).  It has been known as going purple.  Obviously it has not been fully implemented, but it usually gets brought up a few times a year.  In some cases, we have already seen some movement towards it at Ft Sam Houston.  It makes sense as do we really need three schools teaching EMT skills, teaching LPN tasks, laboratory tasks?  No.  So for the areas that are different, teach those separately. 

[NIN]

BTW, for the conspiracy theorists out there:

The ABU proposal that was shown last year was what went forward from CAP (via the uniform committee) thru CAP-USAF to the Air Staff over a year ago (I believe). Call it "what CAP & CAP-USAF wanted".  And it has been there ever since, pending in front of the Air Staff, awaiting changes to the DoD logistics memo or whatever.

In the interim, as we all know, the services have been directed to move to a common/joint uniform.

As the likelihood of that becomes higher, the need to move to what will be a dead end uniform becomes lower.

Its as simple as that.

(I really wish they'd settle on the rough-out tan boots.. I have 3 pr..)

[NIN]

Nin, do not throw that out yet...

I spent $30 on 3 pairs of trousers (new with tags) and a shirt.  I'm not out a bunch at the moment and it doesn't hurt to leave them hanging in my wall locker.

[NIN]

Seems to me that the easiest thing to do would just be to request blanket approval for CAP to begin wear of whatever BUD-equivalent approved by the Air Force starting two years after the AF starts wearing it along with a blanket statement saying that the BDU would be phased out 5 years after CAP begins wearing the replacement.   Needs some wordsmithing, but it would solve the situation.  Not a big fan of even waiting 2 years for CAP to begin wearing the new uniform but they always claim supply shortages....

Concur, a reasonable and logical approach.

If CAP's uniform manual was actually a supplement to the USAF instruction (ie. "The USAF utility uniform is modified as follows..") then it might be easier. 

But HAF would have to be on board with whatever changes they made to the AFI being an immediate trickle to CAP (with appropriate adjustments to wearout dates, phase ins, etc), especially if they wrote CAP into the instruction.

[NIN]

The only thing that does not "solve" is that BDUs are simply not as plentiful for free as they once were.

Sure, everyone has to buy their stuff sometime, but it was good while we were using the same thing as the Air Force, so getting them was a lot more flexible. 

As for "waiting to see what they come up with", I see that happening .. two and a half "national commanders from now".

FTFY.

Lets face it:  It is NICE to equip your people with utility uniforms from "free" stashes that came from units/bases/DRMO.

Like the FCU program, however, its never been a guaranteed thing.

And the fact remains that it is the member's ultimate responsibility (not the unit, the wing, or CAP as a whole) to equip him or herself with the correct uniform.

BITD (it was a Tuesday that year), I bought short-sleeve blues (cap, shirt, belt, trousers & shoes) and fatigues (cap, shirt, trousers and combat boots) for $120* at AAFES.  There was no "squadron issue" of those uniforms. My unit had a stash of field jackets with velcro over the nametape area, but that was it for "unit issue."  It was understood that you bought your first set of uniforms.

(* Yes, $120! My parents gave me a blank check to take to the Clothing Sales Store at the base.  I had NO idea how to write out a check at 14. LOL.)

[Майор Хаткевич]

I had NO idea how to write out a check at 14. LOL.)

What's a check? Is it that booklet my bank gave me to use for a few days while my Debit card was mailed to me? Interesting story, had my Debit damaged due to some wallet damage. Took it to chase...they printed a new one AT THE BRANCH.

[Storm Chaser]

(* Yes, $120! My parents gave me a blank check to take to the Clothing Sales Store at the base.  I had NO idea how to write out a check at 14. LOL.)

$120!? Your parents must've been rich. BITD, all my initial uniforms were used, including the green OD fatigues and blue service uniform. I got lucky and my squadron had some to give me. I did had to buy others, as I grew older, as well as all the required insignias.

[a2capt]

Actually, no, I left the "for free" part out of my statement. With BDUs being a current uniform item, there is a hearty marketplace and competition for them to be made to the spec.

That means that you have a reasonable expectation of what you are getting and how it will perform, as opposed to the varied shades, construction quality and durability of crap like Rothco BBDUs. Of course, you get what you pay for, but you have options. The options now are fewer than they would be if we had moved to the current uniform option of the Air Force.

That strong demand has largely gone away. With BDUs probably having less draw than BSA uniform items .. and I don't know what others see in their parts, but I still have yet to see a squared away, sharp looking BSA uniform. Just leaving out the who part about prepping it, they look -awful- from a quality and construction angle.

[Eclipse]

Actually, I have to disagree on the BSA uniforms, if you buy the proper parts they look good, though
sewing on the wick-away fabric of the summer shirt is a challenge.

One issue I've seen in my son's troop is parents just go and buy "green' pants instead of the actual BSA pants, etc,
because of cost, and most leaders don't say anything.

Also, the gluing of patches makes my eyes water with both pain and sadness.

[Stonewall]

You know I can't visit an ABU thread without suggesting my one uniform for all suggestion...

[NIN]

$120!? Your parents must've been rich. BITD, all my initial uniforms were used, including the green OD fatigues and blue service uniform. I got lucky and my squadron had some to give me. I did had to buy others, as I grew older, as well as all the required insignias.

Ha! Yeah, what I didn't know.

But then, encampment cost $45 for a week, too.

[HGjunkie]

Just put everyone in zoom bags and be done with it already. 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I wonder what (if any) the cost savings would be with only one US military service instead of separate branches like we have now.

Canada tried that in 1968...the Canadian Army, Royal Canadian Navy and Royal Canadian Air Force were all merged into one service, the "Canadian Armed Forces," all wearing the same green uniform.  The RCAF and RCN lost their distinctive British-derived ranks (Squadron Leader, Lieutenant-Commander) and all adopted army rank.



The only way you could tell which "element" one belonged to was by cap and collar badges.

You had colonels commanding naval vessels, and former RCAF groundcrew had to go to sea to fix "naval" helicopters. 

Morale went into the toilet and several very high-ranking officers retired, went to other Commonwealth countries...or were fired for speaking out against unification, most notable being Admiral William Landymore.



Over the years unification was gradually undone.  Now there are separate services again, with distinctive uniforms.



The RCN got its ranks back and the Army got its "pips and crowns" back.  The RCAF will probably follow suit and again there will be flight sergeants, pilot officers and group captains.

Some benefits came from unification...like a common basic training system at one location.

Can you imagine if we tried that here, especially with the Marines?!

I have thought that there is too much duplication with our services.  Examples:

Why do the Marines need their own "air force?"  They're considered Naval Aviators and could fly in Navy squadrons doing the exact same missions they do now.

Why is there both an Air Force Reserve and an Air National Guard?  WIWANG, we often joked about why a State Governor needed a wing of F-16's.

Why does each branch have to have its own "special forces?"  There could be one, integrated force with troops from all five services (indeed, Canada does that with its Joint Task Force 2).

Why do there have to be separate service academies?  Officers could have a common training system and go to their chosen services once graduated.

And then there is all the varying administrivia generated by five different services...

[winterg]

It isn't always the best example because the unique position tbey are in as well as much smaller size,  but the IDF makes a single military with ground, air, and water arms function. So it is possible. But I can see open insurection when you start messing with the heritage of specific branches with long and proud histories.

[SarDragon]

FWIW, there is an increasing trend for joint training. Weather guessers, PMEL, and IIRC, some flight training is joint, and I'm sure there are others.

[Wolfhound63]

So does this mean that woodland BDU's are going to be "CAP-distinctive?"

I would just as soon go to solid OD BDU's...reminiscent of the old "pickle suits," and could not be confused with the AF or any other military service.

Is confusion why CAP put shoulder slides on the uniform coat which I've never seen before since they were introduced in the US military to be worn exclusively on shirts under the coat.

The slides are distinct but they look strange on the coat itself.

The coat should have a more elegant device.

Even the mess dress shoulder boards, or gray shoulder loops with metal rank would look better on the service coat if the air force will never give back the metal rank because they don't want military personnel to mistake CAP officers for military.

[LSThiker]

Is confusion why CAP put shoulder slides on the uniform coat which I've never seen before since they were introduced in the US military to be worn exclusively on shirts under the coat.

The slides are distinct but they look strange on the coat itself.

The coat should have a more elegant device.

There are whole threads discussing this and it has been discussed for at least a decade on internet forums.  The bottom line is, CAP used to have metal rank, USAF got mad at CAP after some mistakes in 1990s, and the rest is history.

[a2capt]

There are whole threads discussing this and it has been discussed for at least a decade on internet forums.  The bottom line is, CAP used to have metal rank, USAF got mad at CAP after some mistakes in 1990s, and the rest is history.

..and yes something happened, that's clear. But these stories themselves are somewhat hard to qualify, too. But obviously, something came into play with the ridiculous base colored insignia.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

There are whole threads discussing this and it has been discussed for at least a decade on internet forums.  The bottom line is, CAP used to have metal rank, USAF got mad at CAP after some mistakes in 1990s, and the rest is history.

..and yes something happened, that's clear. But these stories themselves are somewhat hard to qualify, too. But obviously, something came into play with the ridiculous base colored insignia.

It was a transgression at a very high level in CAP that we are still carrying the cross for.

[LSThiker]

There are whole threads discussing this and it has been discussed for at least a decade on internet forums.  The bottom line is, CAP used to have metal rank, USAF got mad at CAP after some mistakes in 1990s, and the rest is history.

..and yes something happened, that's clear. But these stories themselves are somewhat hard to qualify, too. But obviously, something came into play with the ridiculous base colored insignia.

True, it is difficult to separate rumor from truth after so many years.  Has any one ever asked?  I mean, ask the people that were involved and not a "I heard from someone that said he was there".  Does any know if the CAP-USAF commander and/or the National CC are still alive?  Perhaps an interesting oral history project.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

There are whole threads discussing this and it has been discussed for at least a decade on internet forums.  The bottom line is, CAP used to have metal rank, USAF got mad at CAP after some mistakes in 1990s, and the rest is history.

..and yes something happened, that's clear. But these stories themselves are somewhat hard to qualify, too. But obviously, something came into play with the ridiculous base colored insignia.

True, it is difficult to separate rumor from truth after so many years.  Has any one ever asked?  I mean, ask the people that were involved and not a "I heard from someone that said he was there".  Does any know if the CAP-USAF commander and/or the National CC are still alive?  Perhaps an interesting oral history project.

The National Commander in question is still living, I think.

Do a search on both CT and your favourite search engine on "Harwell self-promotion," and you will find almost overkill information and opinion.

[JK657]

There are whole threads discussing this and it has been discussed for at least a decade on internet forums.  The bottom line is, CAP used to have metal rank, USAF got mad at CAP after some mistakes in 1990s, and the rest is history.

..and yes something happened, that's clear. But these stories themselves are somewhat hard to qualify, too. But obviously, something came into play with the ridiculous base colored insignia.

True, it is difficult to separate rumor from truth after so many years.  Has any one ever asked?  I mean, ask the people that were involved and not a "I heard from someone that said he was there".  Does any know if the CAP-USAF commander and/or the National CC are still alive?  Perhaps an interesting oral history project.

The National Commander in question is still living, I think.

Do a search on both CT and your favourite search engine on "Harwell self-promotion," and you will find almost overkill information and opinion.

I used my favorite search engine as you recommended. I found only one link and that was to a CT discussion in which the OP attempted to dispel the rumor that the Harwell incident was related to the maroon epaulettes

[a2capt]

https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Acaptalk.net+Harwell ..
But open a new thread to dive into that.

[Ratatouille]

Makes sense (for once).  Why don't they start the necessary preliminary paperwork, so that when that single utility uniform is introduced we can immediately jump on board?  Always being 2-5 years behind the curve seems unnecessary.

Not going to happen, and even if it did, it would be impossible to enforce. Let's say such an agreement was made, it is now Winter 2020, at least one new President, at least 2 SecDefs, 2+ SecAFs, a bunch of CSAF's, etc, etc:

DOD Lawyer, who knows nothing about CAP: Congrats Mr. CEO of UniCorp, after $50 mil in research, we have picked your DigiKewl pattern for all branches. Here is $100 mil for an exclusive license for your patents, allowing DOD to make uniforms for any member of the USAF, USA, USN, USMC, USCG, Guards, NOAA, and PHS. Remember, the license is exclusive and DigiKewl includes all those Top Secret IR fibers, so no selling this to anyone but us!

CEO: Cachink! You picked the least effective pattern, but I got _paid_, so I don't care!

[Contract paperwork goes through 50 layers of approval at DOD, Congress, etc, etc.]

2002, another CAP/CC later, maybe a SecDef, etc, etc:
CAP/CC: Hi Col CAP-USAF/CC, can we get the Digitals now?

CAP-USAF: Um, I'll check, I guess. *rings up Pentagon 6 months later*

Pentagon: I'll check, I guess. (To DOD Lawyer): Hey, can you check on this?

Lawyer (after waiting a month to get a copy of the contract): Well, the contract makes no mention of CAP, so we can't give them uniforms without violating the contract and getting sued for $100 million.

Pentagon: Sorry CAP-USAF, not going to happen.

CAP-USAF: Sorry CAP/CC, not going to happen, the contract doesn't allow to give uniforms to anyone except [uniformed services per the US Code]

CAP/CC: But I can totally buy the Digitals from Joe's House of Military Knockoffs, or my cousin who works in Supply at McGuire!

CAP-USAF: Well, the regs say they have to be USAF certified to be worn by CAP, so no go on the Knockoffs, as for your cousin, hold on while I call my buddy over at OSI about that.

CAP/CC: How about a waiver or something?

CAP-USAF: Fine, I'll ask. *calls Pentagon*

Pentagon: Lawyer, check up on this!

Lawyer: Um, that would require re-negotiating the contract. It will take months of negotiations, and will need to be approved by 50 levels of approval. And all our negotiators are busy negotiating for the X-45 Super Duper Strike Eagle Super Attack Fighter-Bomber, so CAP can GTFO.

Pentagon: CAP-USAF, you can tell CAP to GTFO with their "Digitals".
[End scene]

[MIKE]

From what I have seen... the Army is considering camos other than MultiCam/OCP... because they don't want to pay the $24.8 million in licensing fees to Crye.  The Army already owns the rights to MultiCam's predecessor pattern which they are considering modifying... Or using MARPAT or AOR patterns, or a combination of same.

[Eclipse]

A couple of things.

Every piece of clothing, equipment, and service for the military and every government agency
end-to-end should be manufactured by an American company within CONUS.

It's ludicrous that a company can copyright a camo pattern.  That alone should be enough to disqualify the vendor.

If the DOD, or anyone else, says "no CCU for you", then our Leaders should say "Thank you we will
pursue other options for our members to insure a commercially available pattern is inexpensively accessible to all the members."

And then...

Move.

On.

CAP has absolutely no mission-served use for camouflage in any flavor.  None.  In fact it is a determent and safety issue
in the field, and divisive in the barracks.

Anything else is affectation or affinity, which should not be the prime motivators of the selection of a uniform.

[GroundHawg]

You know I can't visit an ABU thread without suggesting my one uniform for all suggestion...

I have incorporated this into my nightly prayers.

[NIN]

Anything else is affectation or affinity, which should not be the prime motivators of the selection of a uniform.

Except that pesky Air Force affiliation...

[Storm Chaser]

Anything else is affectation or affinity, which should not be the prime motivators of the selection of a uniform.

Except that pesky Air Force affiliation...

We don't have to wear an Air Force uniform to be affiliated to the Air Force. In fact, nearly half (?) of our membership don't. And of those who do, half (or more) of the times they're wearing a uniform that hasn't been worn by the Air Force in years.

Since many of our active and contributing members can't wear the Air Force-style uniform under current regulations, the only reasonable courses of action are:

          a. For the Air Force to relax their weight and grooming standards for CAP members, or;
          b. For CAP to come up with a professional looking corporate uniform that can meet both our operational and organizational needs.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Since many of our active and contributing members can't wear the Air Force-style uniform under current regulations, the only reasonable courses of action are:

          a. For the Air Force to relax their weight and grooming standards for CAP members, or;
          b. For CAP to come up with a professional looking corporate uniform that can meet both our operational and organizational needs.

a.  And pigs might fly outta my....
b.  We've been told we have one: the blazer kit.  We just need to keep repeating it to ourselves until all the membership of CAP truly believes it.

[Storm Chaser]

b.  We've been told we have one: the blazer kit.  We just need to keep repeating it to ourselves until all the membership of CAP truly believes it.

I meant a SINGLE corporate uniform for ALL members. The blazer is not it unless it replaces the service dress uniform for everyone.

[Spaceman3750]

b.  We've been told we have one: the blazer kit.  We just need to keep repeating it to ourselves until all the membership of CAP truly believes it.

I meant a SINGLE corporate uniform for ALL members. The blazer is not it unless it replaces the service dress uniform for everyone.

I understand the desire for uniformity, but this argument sounds more and more like "I can't have it so nobody can" (AF uniform) every time I hear it. And that's coming from a guy that's required to wear corporates.

[Panache]

Pentagon: CAP-USAF, you can tell CAP to GTFO with their "Digitals".
[End scene]

Yeah, but they forgot to get Skynet's input on this.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

b.  We've been told we have one: the blazer kit.  We just need to keep repeating it to ourselves until all the membership of CAP truly believes it.

I meant a SINGLE corporate uniform for ALL members. The blazer is not it unless it replaces the service dress uniform for everyone.

May the sun, moon, stars and dark side of the Force never make that scenario (blazers for all) come true.

I knew what you meant.  Sarcasm doesn't come across well online.

[Storm Chaser]

b.  We've been told we have one: the blazer kit.  We just need to keep repeating it to ourselves until all the membership of CAP truly believes it.

I meant a SINGLE corporate uniform for ALL members. The blazer is not it unless it replaces the service dress uniform for everyone.

I understand the desire for uniformity, but this argument sounds more and more like "I can't have it so nobody can" (AF uniform) every time I hear it. And that's coming from a guy that's required to wear corporates.

Since I can wear the AF-style uniform and in fact is the uniform I wear 90% of the time (I wear the polo shirt occasionally), I guess that argument doesn't really apply to me.

[Shuman 14]

A couple of things.

Every piece of clothing, equipment, and service for the military and every government agency
end-to-end should be manufactured by an American company within CONUS.

It's ludicrous that a company can copyright a camo pattern.  That alone should be enough to disqualify the vendor.

If the DOD, or anyone else, says "no CCU for you", then our Leaders should say "Thank you we will
pursue other options for our members to insure a commercially available pattern is inexpensively accessible to all the members."

And then...

Move.

On.

CAP has absolutely no mission-served use for camouflage in any flavor.  None.  In fact it is a determent and safety issue
in the field, and divisive in the barracks.

Anything else is affectation or affinity, which should not be the prime motivators of the selection of a uniform.

I agree. CAP should just do away with BDUs and make the BBDUs the sole authorized field uniform for seniors and cadets.

With a long phase out period of course. 

[NIN]

I agree. CAP should just do away with BDUs and make the BBDUs the sole authorized field uniform for seniors and cadets.

With a long phase out period of course. 

Never mind the cadets who joined the Air Force's cadet program....

[Panache]

I agree. CAP should just do away with BDUs and make the BBDUs the sole authorized field uniform for seniors and cadets.

With a long phase out period of course. 

Never mind the cadets who joined the Air Force's cadet program....

Are the cadets, at this point, using the Air Force's current utility uniform?

[NIN]

I agree. CAP should just do away with BDUs and make the BBDUs the sole authorized field uniform for seniors and cadets.

With a long phase out period of course. 

Never mind the cadets who joined the Air Force's cadet program....

Are the cadets, at this point, using the Air Force's current utility uniform?

At the moment, no.

But at least they're wearing a uniform that was an Air Force uniform for the majority of the time it was authorized by CAP. (small steps, I suppose)

BBDUs were Air Force uniform, right? Oh, wait.

[Storm Chaser]

I agree. CAP should just do away with BDUs and make the BBDUs the sole authorized field uniform for seniors and cadets.

With a long phase out period of course. 

Never mind the cadets who joined the Air Force's cadet program....

With all due respect, I thought they joined the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Programs. The Air Force's cadet program for those under 18 is called the AFJROTC. It's director is not a civilian volunteer, but an active duty Air Force colonel (O-6).

[NIN]

With all due respect, I thought they joined the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Programs. The Air Force's cadet program for those under 18 is called the AFJROTC. It's director is not a civilian volunteer, but an active duty Air Force colonel (O-6).

Right. That is an important differentiator to most 12 or 13 year old prospective cadets.

Especially the ones that don't have AFJROTC available to them.

They come in to squadron meetings all the time:  "Oh, I thought this was the cadet program with a Active Duty Air Force Colonel in charge that is run as a curricular activity in school. Come on, mom, lets go. I want a real cadet program..."

You saw the membership charts that were posted, right?  I could be wrong, but I think if you continued to remove the perceived military aspects (especially a "military uniform") from the cadet program, I think you'd see the cadet membership numbers go south even further.

[BillB]

AFJROTC is not run at your local high school by an active duty O6. Rather the AFJROTC Director or what ever title is a retired O5 or O6, normalkly with a retired E6 or E7. And the two ASFJROTC staff are normally paid by the School Board, not the Air Force. At a University, the head of the AFROTC Department is an active duty O6 with a staff of active duty instructors O4 and O5's.

[NIN]

I also think the bigger point is that if AF JROTC is similar to  AJROTC in numbers, then JROTC is only available two less than 5 percent of high school students, unlike a community based program what does not rely on a specific school district.

Getting back to the point at hand, while I understand the desire to move away from Woodland BDUs since the Air Force does not wear them anymore, moving to blue BDUs at least for today is really pretty much a non-starter. Now you have zero service affinity in that uniform. I hate to say it, but one of the things that hooks cadets is the visual.  If you don't have people in what appears to be a military uniform, then people want to know what exactly is going on. Thankfully for the moment, most people don't understand that the Air Force is really in ABU, or at least they don't understand the concept of uniforms that have been phased out.

The other side of the coin is, at least with woodland BDUs, we do have a bit of a stash of them. It is dwindling quickly, but if we were to transition to  blue BDUs pretty much 100 percent of the membership would have to buy them, and there would be no such thing really as squadrons supply

[Storm Chaser]

You're nitpicking now. Civil Air Patrol is the official civilian Auxiliary of the Air Force, but we're not the Air Force. CAP Cadet Programs is not the Air Force's cadet program no matter how you put it. The Air Force has several cadet programs. We offer another one as the Air Force Auxiliary. If all we can offer our cadets is our relationship with the Air Force, then our CP is doomed. Fortunately, CAP still has a lot more to offer these young men and women than that.

[Panache]

The other side of the coin is, at least with woodland BDUs, we do have a bit of a stash of them. It is dwindling quickly, but if we were to transition to  blue BDUs pretty much 100 percent of the membership would have to buy them, and there would be no such thing really as squadrons supply

I assume you mean 100% of the cadet membership?

[Eclipse]

This idea of "squadron supply" for cadets is much more of a drag on change then a real influence on a cadet's cost.

Yes, it's nice to occasionally be able to issue something to a member instead of them writing a check,
but most units don't ever have access to that, certainly not in my wing, and not to the extent where they should influence
the decision of uniform for the entire organization.

A reasonable compromise would be putting the cadets in USAF blues and ABUs or CCUs and have the entirety of the adult membership
in a different, standard uniform.  One with less options, but that still allows for the display of plumage.

That actually would bring a uniform appearance to the organization.

Or moving to single field uniform and flight uniforms, the military appearance of which is apparently an issue in some wings, but leaving
the dress uniforms as-is, would provide us a uniform appearance externally, while solving the divisive issues of multi-patterns.

And in all this, the first thing is mandatory weigh-ins before you are authorized to wear anything USAF-Style.  I'd say once-a-year is reasonable.

[Storm Chaser]

^ I'd say that's very reasonable.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Would stop some SMs from calling FOs cadets.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

My first unit had a few dual-status CAP/JROTC cadets.

They liked participating in both...but at least a couple of them that I knew, if they had to make a choice, would pick AFJROTC. 

[Eclipse]

but at least a couple of them that I knew, if they had to make a choice, would pick AFJROTC. 

Of course they would - lower expectations, generally done during school hours, sometimes instead of something harder (depends on the school).

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

but at least a couple of them that I knew, if they had to make a choice, would pick AFJROTC. 

Of course they would - lower expectations, generally done during school hours, sometimes instead of something harder (depends on the school).

Lower expectations?  Indeed?

That's a genuine question, since I know very, very, very little about AFJROTC except the Air Force seems to like them a lot better than they do us.

[Storm Chaser]

I had a cadet that no matter what we did to help him, he could not pass all the requirements for Achievement 1. It took him over a year to promote to C/Amn. He was, however, a C/Maj in AFJROTC.

[FW]

I'm not too familiar with the inner workings of AFJROTC either, however I do know CAP offers so much more. Yes, they have better access to uniforms, but there is no comparison when it comes to challenge, activities, and preparation for a better future.

IMHO, there would be no hesitation IF one had to make a choice.

[lordmonar]

but at least a couple of them that I knew, if they had to make a choice, would pick AFJROTC. 

Of course they would - lower expectations, generally done during school hours, sometimes instead of something harder (depends on the school).

Lower expectations?  Indeed?

That's a genuine question, since I know very, very, very little about AFJROTC except the Air Force seems to like them a lot better than they do us.

I was AFJROTC in the 80's......so I may be dated...but I have seen a lot of JROTC programs since then.....but there is no requirement in AFJROTC to actually do anything.

Sure you go to class every day, you wear your uniform once a week, you have homework (I did anyway) and we took tests and things....but rank was optional, leadership was optional, there was no concept of "advancing your training".    A lot of people took ROTC because it was an EASY A, or they did not want to take "study hall" or another elective like that.

Not to say that that JROTC does not produce good leaders or is a bad program.....but CAP does have some advantages over JROTC.

YMMV

[ColonelJack]

Two of the three public high schools in our county have AFJROTC.  I've seen some of the cadets out in public.

Hoo, brother.  I saw a cadet major in a store not too long ago and his uniform was so jacked-up wrong, I don't even know where to start pointing things out.  Some of the cadets in those school units are also cadets in our CAP squadron, and it's very, very easy to tell which is which.  The ones in our unit look like they know what they're doing. 

Way back in high school (back when dirt was so new it still had the price tag on it), I was in Army JROTC.  Our Senior Enlisted Instructor ran that place with an iron fist inside a velvet glove.  We were squared away on the two days per week we wore our uniforms or we were expected to go to the supply room and change back into our civilian clothes.  No nonsense from 1SG Burke (rest his soul). 

Jack

[LSThiker]

I went to a few Mardi Gras parades this year since I happened to be in the area.  I saw about a dozen JROTC units from around the metro area walking in the parade.  All but one were terrible.  They were out of step, no hats, uniforms unkept, shoes unshined, no command voice, "marching" as though they were strutting their stuff, and barely knew the manual of arms.  The only good one was an all-female platoon with proper uniforms, in step, good command voice, etc.  However, unfortunately, there was not a single CAP unit despite there being about a half-dozen units around (learned this afterwards as I was curious and looked it up). 

Anyway, while it is easy to knock on JROTC units, which have been true so far, let us not forget criticizing us.  I am sure there are plenty of people that look at CAP cadets and have the same thoughts.  No discipline, uniforms unkept, kids just running around the woods playing Army, wearing blue and bright patches on their uniforms, etc.  As I am sure there are a number of good CAP units with crisp uniforms and sharp cadets, there are probably a number of JROTC units the same way. 

[antdetroitwallyball]

You saw the membership charts that were posted, right?  I could be wrong, but I think if you continued to remove the perceived military aspects (especially a "military uniform") from the cadet program, I think you'd see the cadet membership numbers go south even further.

This is true. While I'm not entirely "comfortable" with the whole idea/message (don't read into this, I'm just refering to it from a philosophical level...) of cadets looking "military," I entirely agree with the notion that that aspect is a big draw to prosective cadets. 13+ year olds see our cadets working at events, and want to join. The military-esque uniform is a big draw for them. From my adult perspective, the whole thing almost seems ridiculous ---- I mean, why dress kids up in military uniforms if they are not in the military??? ---- but the cohesiveness and the distinctiveness that the camo uniform single handedly brings to the cadet program warrents its continued use. You put our cadets in blue BDUs and membership will drop. I don't like why, but it just will.

That's a genuine question, since I know very, very, very little about AFJROTC except the Air Force seems to like them a lot better than they do us.

I'm sorry if I'm looking at it too black-and-white, but JROTC too me smells way, way too much like a recruitment tool in disguise. And I despise current military recruitment practices. The enlisted ranks of the USCG alone are CHOCK FULL of well-educated people who were literally promised the world by lying recruiters. Additionally, there are many enlisted people in the military who have NO BUSINESS being in the military. They lack basic social/life skills and situational awareness. And a lot of this could have been very apparent to a recruiter at the point of a simple interview, etc. CAP at least maintains some distance from USAF in this regard with its cadet program.

I'm not too familiar with the inner workings of AFJROTC either

I may be just ignorant here, but what exactly does JROTC cadets do? I get the whole Drill/Ceremony part and "leadership training," but what else do they do besides that? Do they have encampment based activities, or any real aerospace education outside of that which directly pertains to the airforce? At a surface level, it would seem that the CAP cadet program might offer a bit more in the way of things to do.............but maybe I just don't know what I'm talking about here...

[pierson777]

what exactly does JROTC cadets do? I get the whole Drill/Ceremony part and "leadership training," but what else do they do besides that? Do they have encampment based activities, or any real aerospace education outside of that which directly pertains to the airforce? At a surface level, it would seem that the CAP cadet program might offer a bit more in the way of things to do.............but maybe I just don't know what I'm talking about here...

I'll try to answer these questions, but keep in mind I was in AFJROTC '87-'91.  My AFJROTC unit in Denton, TX had approximatley 140 cadets.  Yes, we did have summer encampments called "Leadership School".  I had the rare opportunity to complete it three times (Lackland AFB, Barkesdale AFB, and Dyess AFB).  I never agreed with the name "Leadership School."  The first two that I attended I would call "Discipline School".  The last one was more similar to CAP's Cadet Officer School. 

For aerospace activities outside the classroom, we had an active model rocketry program (extra curricular activity) and we had field trips once per semester.  We went AFB fighter squadrons, aircraft testing and manufacturing facilities that manufactured military aircraft, FAA and USAF ATC facilities, aerospace/NASA symposiums, etc.   

Additional "out of the classrooms activities" included orienteering team, drill team, and color guard. 

My general observation which I made then, and which I still believe is true today is that the average CAP cadet is usually more dedicated to his cadet program as compared to the average AFJROTC cadet to his.  However, the average AFJROTC cadet is typically better versed in military customs and courtesies, uniform wear, drill and ceremonies, USAF structure and history, and aerospace knowledge, etc.  This is simply because they are exposed to it five days a week and wear their uniform one entire day at school.  They have regular daily homework, reports, and exams too.  That said, there are more cadets in AFJROTC that do very little else outside of the class simply because they can get away with doing the minimum.  You can't really do much or progress in CAP with that kind of attitude as a CAP cadet.

[Panache]

I'm sorry if I'm looking at it too black-and-white, but JROTC too me smells way, way too much like a recruitment tool in disguise.

There's no "disguise" about it.  JROTC is a recruiting tool.  They're pretty up-front about that particular aspect of it.

Just the name alone should give it away: Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps.

[Papabird]

I'll try to answer these questions, but keep in mind I was in AFJROTC '87-'91.  My AFJROTC unit in Denton, TX had approximatley 140 cadets.  Yes, we did have summer encampments called "Leadership School".  I had the rare opportunity to complete it three times (Lackland AFB, Barkesdale AFB, and Dyess AFB).  I never agreed with the name "Leadership School."  The first two that I attended I would call "Discipline School".  The last one was more similar to CAP's Cadet Officer School. 

For aerospace activities outside the classroom, we had an active model rocketry program (extra curricular activity) and we had field trips once per semester.  We went AFB fighter squadrons, aircraft testing and manufacturing facilities that manufactured military aircraft, FAA and USAF ATC facilities, aerospace/NASA symposiums, etc.   

Additional "out of the classrooms activities" included orienteering team, drill team, and color guard. 

My general observation which I made then, and which I still believe is true today is that the average CAP cadet is usually more dedicated to his cadet program as compared to the average AFJROTC cadet to his.  However, the average AFJROTC cadet is typically better versed in military customs and courtesies, uniform wear, drill and ceremonies, USAF structure and history, and aerospace knowledge, etc.  This is simply because they are exposed to it five days a week and wear their uniform one entire day at school.  They have regular daily homework, reports, and exams too.  That said, there are more cadets in AFJROTC that do very little else outside of the class simply because they can get away with doing the minimum.  You can't really do much or progress in CAP with that kind of attitude as a CAP cadet.

I was in AFJROTC and CAP during that same time frame. (87-91) (Bolingbrook HS IL-091 AFJROTC & Shorty Powers Comp Squad (11189 now IL189).  These are completely different programs and each have the pros & cons.

First observation, cadets get out of it what they put into it.  That is universal.  I knew cadets in either one that were "high speed" and those that couldn't find their 4th point with a flashlight and two hands.   I have seen the second become the first in both.

Second observation, each unit makes their own flavor.  I got a lot of navigator training in JROTC because my ASI (Aerospace Sci Inst.) was a navigator for 30 years.  In CAP we had more high level Aerospace, nothing as in depth, but a lot more cockpit time. 

Third, each can lead to recruitment, but neither are mandatory.  Of course there is a lot more focus on military in ROTC, because there is no ES mission.  But it is the same for a CAP unit that doesn't do much / any ES and is a cadet squadron.  Just saying.

I loved both, but I can only join one now (not a HS student anymore & didn't retire from the USAF).

[Laplace]

I went to a few Mardi Gras parades this year since I happened to be in the area.  I saw about a dozen JROTC units from around the metro area walking in the parade.   

However, unfortunately, there was not a single CAP unit despite there being about a half-dozen units around (learned this afterwards as I was curious and looked it up). 

I know one of our Composite Squadrons in the New Orleans area was set to march in the Atlas parade, but the parade was cancelled at the last moment due to funding issues.   Sad, because these cadets do look sharp.

Hope you had a good time!

[Eclipse]

What kind of "funding" is needed to march in a parade?

[antdetroitwallyball]

There's no "disguise" about it.  JROTC is a recruiting tool.  They're pretty up-front about that particular aspect of it.

Just the name alone should give it away: Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps.

So its literally the militarization/indoctrination of children whose mind's may not yet fully have a healthy understanding of why we have militaries (unhealthy: "I wanna join to kill terrorists b/c big guns make me look tactikewl." Healthy: "Militaries are a sad reality after thousands of years of existance, mankind still has not managed to work out disagreements peacefully. People who serve are heros, but their work should be understood as 'necessary' and not 'kewl').

I'm not trying to be disrespectfull to the fine former servicemen/women who lead these programs; I'm sure they mean well 100%. I just personally disagree with the whole message it sends. And that's just my opinion, and no one will change it.

[Eclipse]

^ Sorry, a of of what the military does, especially the USAF, is "cool", no way around it.  And depending on the field you're interested in,
there's no better / faster / cheaper way to get training and experience.

It is what it is, but to assert that it is about the "militarization of youth" seems somewhat slanted at best, not to mention naive.

Then there's the issue that the average couch-groove riding, Twitspacing, video-game slacker could use a little discipline and "militarization".

NOW GET OFF MY LAWN!

[Майор Хаткевич]

Pft. Most cadets at that level (non commission track cadets), spend more time on BFx/COD than militarization through a cadet program.

[SunDog]

No offense taken - your point of view seems reasoned; I do have close blood (my son) in harms way, and I don't like it.  They got him young, just like me; but he's capable, and the need for his military skills is real, so very real.

War is bad. Regarding the current state of human evolution, war is often better than the alternative.  Good guys (smarter ones, anyway) don't put down their weapons first.  The nasty reality is we need young people willing to fight.

Military recruiting services glamorize the military, for sure. They'd be incompetent if they didn't;  it's rational to understand your audience, in order to reach them.  17 - 18 year olds perceive differently, but they do perceive.  And they can't be children forever. We need artists, engineers, nurses, teachers, etc.  And we need Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines.

You're right; many, even most, have a naive perception going in -  but we do need them, and probably will for some time to come.  If it helps at all, most kids who put on boots will never hear a shot fired in anger, or witness truly gruesome carnage.

[antdetroitwallyball]

they got him young, just like me; but he's capable, and the need for his military skills is real, so very real.

And like it or not, our freedoms depend on your son's willingness to fight. The military might be right for him, and he might be right for the military. There is nothing wrong with this.

Military recruiting services glamorize the military, for sure.

And this is really just the point where I take issue. It was apparent to me that you actually took the time to read my post slowly and truly understand what I was getting at instead of just randomly flaming me. I appreciate that a lot.

^ Sorry, a of of what the military does, especially the USAF, is "cool", no way around it.  And depending on the field you're interested in,
there's no better / faster / cheaper way to get training and experience.

When Call of Duty Black Ops was released, you had army recruiters showing up to do recruiting. That is wrong, in my humble opinion. I'm not saying that what JROTC does is bad, I'm just saying that the military has a known tendency to "go low" in terms of recruitment practices.

[Panache]