Why the dislike for the Wing patch?

[carnold1836]

First I want to say I am glad the wing patch came off of the blues. However, why does it seem that most people have a great deal of dislike for it on the BDUs? Same goes with sqdn or group patch. I can see people's dislike of the ES patch, personally I like the T-34 over the dog any day if I had to wear one and I do.

Just curious, no flames please, I bruise easy. 

[mmouw]

I think that most everyone wants our BDUs to look more Air Force like and they think no patches. The AF BDUs have up to three patches that could potentially be worn. That doesn't include badges. I think that on CAP BDUs, if you have blue and white on it screams for more. Once you have seen what they look like with the patches, it looks bare with out.

[RiverAux]

Unit patches are a fine, longstanding military tradition and I think they're fine for BDUs.  Didn't like them on the blues at all though. 

Its odd that we're getting rid of probably the most justifiable patch on the uniform and keeping a bunch of others that REALLY clutter things up.

[Major_Chuck]

I'm really okay with the Wing patch being on the BDU's or any other field uniform.  However I did not like them on the Blues at all.

The problem I have with patches on BDU's is that they should be either subdued on the camo ones or blue/white on the blue field uniform.  The whole Ronald McDonald Mickey Mouse Club look of multi colors is tacky.

[Pylon]

I have a Wing patch on my BDUs now.

But if I buy a new set of BDUs, I probably won't sew one on.  Why?  One less thing for me to buy, one less thing to try and get sewn on right.  I'm all for simplicity when it comes to our uniforms.  I understand the wing patches have a long history within our organization.  It's nothing against the wing patches themselves. In fact, if I didn't have to put the flag on, I wouldn't sew that on either.  I'd much prefer the 'slick sleeves' look.

I volunteer for this, and buy my uniforms out of my own pocket, so in my opinion I'd much rather opt for less whenever practical.  Heck, I don't even wear wings or badges on my BDUs.

[DogCollar]

I have a Wing patch on my BDUs now.

But if I buy a new set of BDUs, I probably won't sew one on.  Why?  One less thing for me to buy, one less thing to try and get sewn on right.  I'm all for simplicity when it comes to our uniforms.  I understand the wing patches have a long history within our organization.  It's nothing against the wing patches themselves. In fact, if I didn't have to put the flag on, I wouldn't sew that on either.  I'd much prefer the 'slick sleeves' look.

I volunteer for this, and buy my uniforms out of my own pocket, so in my opinion I'd much rather opt for less whenever practical.  Heck, I don't even wear wings or badges on my BDUs.

I agree 100%.  Simple, clean, classic...more "uniformity", less distinctiveness.  Just my opinion.

[LtCol White]

The blues look much better without the wing patch. The prob most have with patches on the BDU's is the rainbow of colors that is created. Combine this with members who fill every blank space with some sort of patch on their BDU's and you get a cluttered, cartoon look that isnt very professional.  Patches shoudl really be limited to Wing, Group, Squadron patches.

Our image is a big part of our relationship that needs mending with USAF. Appearance is a HUGE part of this. In this case, less is more. If our uniforms follow closer to USAF guidelines, this will help.

Having USAF's response to seeing CAP personnel on base  as "WTF is that?" when they see a walking patch display does not promote professional image.

[A.Member]

First I want to say I am glad the wing patch came off of the blues. However, why does it seem that most people have a great deal of dislike for it on the BDUs? Same goes with sqdn or group patch. I can see people's dislike of the ES patch, personally I like the T-34 over the dog any day if I had to wear one and I do.

Just curious, no flames please, I bruise easy. 

Well, to be frank, I don't like the "Boy Scouts" look.  I'm not interested in having a ton patches plastered all over my shirts - especially when they are every color in the rainbow.  As other posters have stated, it looks tacky.

As soon as the requirement for a Wing patch was rescinded, I removed it from my BDU's.  IMO, aside from the name tapes and rank, the only thing that should be worn on the BDU's are the specialty badges.  If our patches were subdued, I might be open to wearing one or two - but they're not.

[fyrfitrmedic]

 Like I said in another thread - simplicity is its own elegance.

It's not just the wing patch; it's the whole array of garish and gaudy patches that violate any heraldic sensibilities and make the CAP uniform look too much like a BSA uniform run amok.

[JohnKachenmeister]

My problem:

"Do as I say, not as I do."

If you want to develop a squadron or group patch, most wings require, as they should, that you meet USAF heraldry standards.

Do ANY of the wing patches, however, meet USAF heraldry standards?  There might be one or two, maybe.  I don't think so, though.

[MIKE]

Rather than have wings or units require wear of an optional patch, it would have been better just to phase them out over time.

[DNall]

The reason they were cut back is we've been functionng as 52 seperate little CAPs & no one could tell a Wing CC what to do cause they elect everyone above them in the chain & have total authority over their state & its distinctive set of laws. Well, that got way out of control. CAP is a national organization. We have no choice but to recognize states beause of varriable state laws, but that doesn't mean we need to encourage or tolerate sectarian thinking by having unneeded patches that just cost people money.

I think you'll find the biggest complaint it that bright full-color anything looks incredibly stupid, childish, & unprofessional on BDUs, and more is worse than less. If they were subdued to semi-subdued to very understated & worn according the current AF system then people would be more accepting, not happy, but accepting. As it is it just looks clownish & damages everything from recruiting & retention to credibility on missions - the broader profrssional image issue does anyway & this is a big part of a key factor in it.

[flight dispatcher]

My 2 cents:

I see nothing wrong with the Wing Patch on the AF BDU's or BBDU's. Nothing wrong with showing pride in which Wing you belong to.

[Hawk200]

The reason they were cut back is we've been functionng as 52 seperate little CAPs...

To me it seems like replacing the wing patch with a flag would have made this a little clearer, but they didn't. They removed wing patches and added the flag in a different place. If the mandate had been to remove the wing patch, and place the flag in the same position, it probably would have been a little more accepted.

Plus, you could just use flightsuit flag stock, instead of using a flag configuration that is now heavily associated with the Army. When the Air Force wore flags on BDUs/DCUs it was traditionally worn on the left shoulder anyway(at least it was when I was active AF).

I think you'll find the biggest complaint it that bright full-color anything looks incredibly stupid, childish, & unprofessional on BDUs, and more is worse than less. If they were subdued to semi-subdued to very understated & worn according the current AF system then people would be more accepting, not happy, but accepting. As it is it just looks clownish & damages everything from recruiting & retention to credibility on missions - the broader profrssional image issue does anyway & this is a big part of a key factor in it.

I've thought about this, and it makes sense to me. Seems like we should focus on producing patches with semi-subdued colors. Instead of red, use maroon. Instead of white, use tan or a mocha color, even gray if suitable. For blue colors, use navy blue. Bright greens should be replaced with something more the color of pine. Use darker yellows, burnt yellow or darker golds. Even orange colors can be darkened a good bit. And of course, our nametapes and badges could use white on navy blue colors.

And no, I'm not a fashion designer, I just have greater color differentiation than most people. Can be a little annoying at times.

[Major Carrales]

In texas the Wing Patch is required on the BDUs. 

In any case, many of you who are making the case for subdued patches et al miss the point.  Who are we hiding from?  Plus, some are saying that the "wings" discussed in another thread should not be metallic for fear of confusion with the USAF, yet the diametric opposite is being argued for here?

I would be willing to make the case that the colored patches are a heritage item from WWII and the 1950s.

Just leave it as it is and move on.

[floridacyclist]

I think that the only reason they are asking for more subdued colors is that bright cartoony colors look...well dumb on camouflaged cloth. I like the one person's suggestion that all patches be designed with this in mind and use colors that complement the uniform rather than clashing with it, ie muted reds and blues, greys instead of whites, darker greens etc.

[davedove]

I will agree that the bright patches do look bad on the camouflage uniform.  But I also agree with Major Carrales - Who are we hiding from?  The camouflage pattern makes absolutely no sense for our missions.  We are not trying to hide from an enemy; we are trying to find people, and being seen makes that easier.  Hence, we put a bright orange vest on over the camouflage.  Something is just not right about that.

[Hawk200]

For those that ask "Who are we hiding from?" the answer is "Noone". The point you folks are missing is that we are discussing appearance of the uniform. People desire a professional appearance, not a cartoonish one. Hard to be taken seriously with that many colors on your uniform.

Besides, it's a moot point. If you're doing any operations, especially in the woods, you need to have on an orange vest for safety reasons. An orange vest is a practical piece of equipment, and negates any subdued or semi-subdued patches. Arguing against patches being toned down under the  "Who are we hiding from?" argument is a point with little practical foundation to it.

Something else to consider as to putting a vest on over utilities. Army and Air Force gate guards wear a bright vest over BDUs all the time. Air Force personnel doing recovery of a downed aircraft in CONUS wear orange vests as well. Not like it's never done.

If it's dark, or in the woods, wear your vest. You should have one anyway. Unless someone has a problem with being safe in a practical manner?

[Monty]

I had just completed a 20-min draft of a response and then, well....thought to myself, "why?"

Simon Needsabadge  and Johnnie Hatesthebling won't care anyway.

So....Wing Patch:  On...off...makes no difference to me, my CAP service, or anyone else's.

Next?

[DNall]

The reason they were cut back is we've been functionng as 52 seperate little CAPs...

To me it seems like replacing the wing patch with a flag would have made this a little clearer, but they didn't. They removed wing patches and added the flag in a different place. If the mandate had been to remove the wing patch, and place the flag in the same position, it probably would have been a little more accepted.

Plus, you could just use flightsuit flag stock, instead of using a flag configuration that is now heavily associated with the Army. When the Air Force wore flags on BDUs/DCUs it was traditionally worn on the left shoulder anyway(at least it was when I was active AF).

I think you'll find the biggest complaint it that bright full-color anything looks incredibly stupid, childish, & unprofessional on BDUs, and more is worse than less. If they were subdued to semi-subdued to very understated & worn according the current AF system then people would be more accepting, not happy, but accepting. As it is it just looks clownish & damages everything from recruiting & retention to credibility on missions - the broader profrssional image issue does anyway & this is a big part of a key factor in it.

I've thought about this, and it makes sense to me. Seems like we should focus on producing patches with semi-subdued colors. Instead of red, use maroon. Instead of white, use tan or a mocha color, even gray if suitable. For blue colors, use navy blue. Bright greens should be replaced with something more the color of pine. Use darker yellows, burnt yellow or darker golds. Even orange colors can be darkened a good bit. And of course, our nametapes and badges could use white on navy blue colors.

And no, I'm not a fashion designer, I just have greater color differentiation than most people. Can be a little annoying at times.

Right! I'd prefer white on OD tapes & even a little more semi-subdued then that, BUT I don't think AF would approve of that as it is, so compromise & I'm with ya 100%. The flag for Wing path and back on the correct shoulder, especially so we can use standardized patches, is a great idea too. I was just for removing it & every other unnecessary thing, but I could go for that.

Far as who are we hiding from... you know I'm taking SOS right now. I'm in the Profession of Arms section. There it talks about how over 60% of AF officers do not have a job that directly relates to combat or direct combat support, & only about 4-6% are pilots. YET, we all need a "warrior" attitude of mission-centric, driven, shared objectives, team player, attitude or the AF will literally fall apart, that they have to be extra vigilant about this in the AF because the majority of people are not paid to fight. Pretty straight forward right?

So here I am looking at CAP, the corporate movement, people thinking we don't really work for the AF, that they are merely one of many customers & their vision doesn't have anything to do with our objectives. You have lots of CAP members acting like this is a flying club or the boy scouts, and just all around not taking CAP seriously as solemn committment of duty to serve, protect, defend, & in fact build the American way of life. Whatever, term it how you see it.

So then I look back & the retarded looking BDUs we have to wear & ask myself, where's the picture of solidarity? Where's the thing that inspires & encourages people to think like they're part of the team & be driven to the greater stategic mission we share w/ our parent service? Where's the dedication to something greater than the little tactical situation of your local unit? What are we hiding from you ask? How about the place in people's brains & the kind of people in society that don't want to put their lives & fortunes at risk to serve this cause we share with the AF. How's that for an answer? Little idealistic? Sure maybe, but what's wrong with that? We need some psychological ploys to help people understand what this is all about.