New Command Patch

[JohnKachenmeister]

One thing to think about:

IF the original US Air Force Aux. MAJCOM patch had never happened, and we had replaced the old round seal with the new MAJCOM patch in the first place, would anybody be crying?

It isn't the patch.  Its the direction that CAP looks like its headed that we don't like.  The patch is just the visible manifestation of the disease.

[ELTHunter]

Looks like they could have just gone with the Overseas CAP Emblem, it says the same thing, just a different shape, and they would not have had to create another patch after all.  Go figure.

[ELTHunter]

One thing to think about:

IF the original US Air Force Aux. MAJCOM patch had never happened, and we had replaced the old round seal with the new MAJCOM patch in the first place, would anybody be crying?

It isn't the patch.  Its the direction that CAP looks like its headed that we don't like.  The patch is just the visible manifestation of the disease.

Agreed!

[lordmonar]

One thing to think about:

IF the original US Air Force Aux. MAJCOM patch had never happened, and we had replaced the old round seal with the new MAJCOM patch in the first place, would anybody be crying?

It isn't the patch.  Its the direction that CAP looks like its headed that we don't like.  The patch is just the visible manifestation of the disease.

You know John I keep hearing that from the doom and gloomers and I have debated this issue....I just don't see us moving anywhere.

I know the fear you have...but have ever said no to an USAF mission?  Have we ever said...no we would rather work with these guys over hear instead of the USAF?

No....we have made some mostly cosmetic changes that MAY...I say again MAY...allow us to do some more LE type missions.

We have a single wing that is greatly increasing its affiliation with the local national guard but are they turning away USAF missions?

Again...no.

Like DNall keeps saying congress made us the USAF-AUX.  We will continue to be the USAF-AUX no matter what our patches, aircraft or vehicles say.  AND we will always be the Civil Air Patrol.

[RiverAux]

No....we have made some mostly cosmetic changes that MAY...I say again MAY...allow us to do some more LE type missions.

And that was prompted by a change the AF made to its own regulations that doesn't make any sense in the first place and wasn't something we dreamed up on our own.

[lordmonar]

No....we have made some mostly cosmetic changes that MAY...I say again MAY...allow us to do some more LE type missions.

And that was prompted by a change the AF made to its own regulations that doesn't make any sense in the first place and wasn't something we dreamed up on our own.

Ergo I go back to my fall back position....It seems to me that it is the USAF that has been pushing us away for years!  The maroon shoulder marks, the gray shoulder marks, their refusal to approve Gortex.  They were the ones who unilaterally cut our budget with out even a "sorry guys...but we got to buy airplanes".  It was because of lobbying on our part we were able to get congress to fully fund us.

[RiverAux]

their refusal to approve Gortex

When did they refuse an official request from CAP to wear this item?  I'm not saying that they didn't, just that I'm not aware of it. 

I don't feel that the AF itself has been pushing us away.  Most of our "problems" with the AF seem to have their basis in the AF legal department rather than any real agenda on the part of the AF as a whole.  I'll eat a new Command Patch if it wasn't the lawyers who insisted on the change to the AF regulation that led to the new command patch and related changes to CAP procedures. 

[A.Member]

It isn't the patch.  Its the direction that CAP looks like its headed that we don't like.  The patch is just the visible manifestation of the disease.

That's exactly right - without question.  What did the old patch say on it? (rhetorical) 

No one complained when the change from the "seal" to a "command patch" was made because it was perceived as a logical step.  The latest change is not perceived that way at all.  It's quite the opposite actually - or at least there is enough substantial debate about it to warrant much further scrutiny.

But it's not really about a patch per se (none of it is..or should be anyway).  It's about what it stands for and what we as an organization stand for and the direction we appear to be headed.  I could be wrong but everyone I talk to (and that's quite a few people) view these changes (removal of USAF Aux. from aircraft, patches, etc.) in a strongly negative way.  This really needs to communicated up the chain.

[A.Member]

The maroon shoulder marks, the gray shoulder marks...

In all fairness, we (CAP) brought these upon ourselves (primarily the result of some inept leadership and one CAP/CC inparticular).

[Psicorp]

One thing to think about:

IF the original US Air Force Aux. MAJCOM patch had never happened, and we had replaced the old round seal with the new MAJCOM patch in the first place, would anybody be crying?

It isn't the patch.  Its the direction that CAP looks like its headed that we don't like.  The patch is just the visible manifestation of the disease.

You know John I keep hearing that from the doom and gloomers and I have debated this issue....I just don't see us moving anywhere.

That's more the problem I see than anything else...all these changes and we're NOT moving anywhere.  We're not even circling the wagons.   

[A.Member]

You know John I keep hearing that from the doom and gloomers and I have debated this issue....I just don't see us moving anywhere.

That's more the problem I see than anything else...all these changes and we're NOT moving anywhere.  We're not even circling the wagons.   

Thus my suggestion in post #17 in this thread.