I just became a new Senior Member to support the squadron my son joined and will have to get a uniform. CAPP 50-4 states that grey cargo pants are allowed with the polo shirt and 39-1 states that civilian tactical pants are allowed which I interpret to mean cargo pants as well. 50-4 is the newer publication and I am dangerously assuming that the later publication has precedence even though both appear to have the same intent. Has anything I've missed changed that? I was the first to ever inquire about this at my squadron, so am seeking other inputs on it.
My second question is whether anyone has identified a brand/style that is the correct grey. From perusing the forum, it appears that some feel the Propper charcoal grey is correct while the grey is too light. Does anyone have any experience with the colors of the Tru-Spec or 5-11 products as an alternative supplier?
Thanks in advance and apologies if this was answered previously and I was unable to find it.
What's the difference between "cargo pants" and "tactical pants"? If it's got gray side pocket and
looks reasonable, no one will car.
There is no official supplier, color, spec, or style beyond what you see in the reg, so again, dealer's choice.
"Some feel" a lot of things. "Some felt" that the original wording of the pre-2014 39-1 needed to specify
tactical pants in order for them to be worn. It didn't, but there you are.
There's also the reality of "you know it when you see it", and since Propper, Tru-Spec, and 5.11 all look essentially
the same, it's safe to assume that is at least the model.
I just bought a bunch of Tru-Spec on Amazon for both CAP and general wear, no issues with the sizing, appearance or utility.
Also, CAPTalk is a useful source for general information or opinion, but your best answer is locally with your Squadron CC
or Wing's practices. Despite the apooplxy it would cause here, if everyone in your unit is buying them from "Dave down the street..."
and Dave's tend to be darker in shade but fit the style and utility, go to Dave's.
The corporate uniform is intentionally vague (though many of us wish it weren't) to allow for people to shop their closets
before shopping a store, and use normal retail channels as sources. You can't use words like "medium" and expect one answer.
Based on the spec:
"5.2.2.4. Trousers/Slacks. Medium Gray (solid color). Wool, polyester/wool blend,
polyester/cotton or cotton trousers. Either slim, straight leg or loose fit, with or without pleat or cuffs is
allowed. Commercially available "tactical" slacks and "chinos" medium gray slacks with or without cuffs
are approved for optional wear. Shorts are not authorized. "
Just about anything other then Gray jeans could be worn. "Chinos" (had to look those up) don't even have side
pockets, they are just causal pants.
(https://s7.landsend.com/is/image/LandsEnd/481586_AG17_HB_VR3?fmt=jpeg)
https://www.landsend.com/products/mens-traditional-fit-5-pocket-freighter-pants/id_307547?sku_0=::VR3
Thanks for both replies! Perhaps a smart approach might be to try to match the color of the slacks the other Seniors are wearing with the Aviator shirt and the polo by trial and error. I'll get both shades and then use the one that doesn't match as well for other purposes.
Elcipse,
Sorry, I forgot to ask, but which color Tru-Spec did you get?
Thanks!
Quote from: BoxGranch on June 09, 2017, 03:49:33 PM
I just became a new Senior Member to support the squadron my son joined and will have to get a uniform. CAPP 50-4 states that grey cargo pants are allowed with the polo shirt and 39-1 states that civilian tactical pants are allowed which I interpret to mean cargo pants as well. 50-4 is the newer publication and I am dangerously assuming that the later publication has precedence even though both appear to have the same intent. Has anything I've missed changed that? I was the first to ever inquire about this at my squadron, so am seeking other inputs on it.
My second question is whether anyone has identified a brand/style that is the correct grey. From perusing the forum, it appears that some feel the Propper charcoal grey is correct while the grey is too light. Does anyone have any experience with the colors of the Tru-Spec or 5-11 products as an alternative supplier?
Thanks in advance and apologies if this was answered previously and I was unable to find it.
Please remember that per regulation the minimum required corporate uniform is the aviator shirt and grey pants
This is what I ordered: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00CLRBQSU/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s03?ie=UTF8&th=1
(http://s17.postimg.org/qaby1bczz/tacpants.jpg)
My cost was $39.99, including the nice man who throws them at my front door.
Though the last time I ordered them (pre-Amazon Prime like 10 years ago), was alomost certainly from BDU.com
http://tacticalgear.com/propper-poly-cotton-ripstop-bdu-pants-gray
(http://assets.cat5.com/images/catalog/products/3/3/4/0/0-650-propper-poly-cotton-ripstop-bdu-pants-gray.jpg)
Thanks for the info on the Tru-Specs!
In regard to this:
"Please remember that per regulation the minimum required corporate uniform is the aviator shirt and grey pants"
CAPP 50-4 states that:
"3. Proper wear of the CAP Corporate Working Uniform.
CAP has a lot of uniforms, all of which serve specific purposes: "business" meetings, formal
occasions like banquets; field training and flight activities. The simplest uniform to wear is the
CAP Corporate Working Uniform, or "golf shirt." (See CAPM 39-1, CAP Uniform Manual, for
more information). As you gain rank and responsibility, you will end up acquiring different
uniforms for different occasions. "
Is it in error to first start with the Corporate Working Uniform as the first buy and then add the Dress, Aviator Shirt Style and Utility as needed? That would be an easy conclusion to reach from that paragraph. Money is not exactly overflowing here, so being able to defer expenditures would be helpful. I know some do not have these issues, and not intending to start a whine, but we cut off cable TV to cover bills like braces for my son and I am having to postpone other needs.
Thanks again!
Quote from: BoxGranch on June 09, 2017, 05:21:46 PM
Thanks for the info on the Tru-Specs!
In regard to this:
"Please remember that per regulation the minimum required corporate uniform is the aviator shirt and grey pants"
CAPP 50-4 states that:
"3. Proper wear of the CAP Corporate Working Uniform.
CAP has a lot of uniforms, all of which serve specific purposes: "business" meetings, formal
occasions like banquets; field training and flight activities. The simplest uniform to wear is the
CAP Corporate Working Uniform, or "golf shirt." (See CAPM 39-1, CAP Uniform Manual, for
more information). As you gain rank and responsibility, you will end up acquiring different
uniforms for different occasions. "
Is it in error to first start with the Corporate Working Uniform as the first buy and then add the Dress, Aviator Shirt Style and Utility as needed? That would be an easy conclusion to reach from that paragraph. Money is not exactly overflowing here, so being able to defer expenditures would be helpful. I know some do not have these issues, and not intending to start a whine, but we cut off cable TV to cover bills like braces for my son and I am having to postpone other needs.
Thanks again!
CAPM 39-1
1.2. Wear of the CAP Uniform.
1.2.1. Individual members will obtain and maintain for wear either of the minimum basic uniforms
described here. These combinations meet the requirements of most CAP events. A commander may
require cadets to wear other optional uniform items only if the purchase is voluntary (such as requiring a
specific uniform for participation in a National Cadet Special Activity) or if the uniform is supplied
without expense to the cadet.
1.2.1.1. Minimum USAF-style Uniform: The minimum basic USAF-style uniform is the
Blue Service Uniform (Class B) with short sleeve shirt (male) or blouse (female) as appropriate. Cadets
authorized to wear the USAF-style uniform are required to maintain this uniform.
1.2.1.2. Minimum Corporate-style Uniform: The minimum basic CAP Corporate-style
uniform is the Aviator Shirt Uniform with short sleeve shirt or blouse as appropriate. Cadets aged 18 and
older who meet weight standards for wear of the USAF-style uniform must maintain the USAF-style
Class B uniform as noted in the previous paragraph.
Thank you for the post on CAPP 39-1. The information in 50-4 seems to be saying something else and it is newer. I will let my squadron make the decision and if they require that I have to have uniforms before being able to afford them, I will have to postpone being a Senior Member.
Please note the subtle difference between "simplest uniform to wear is the
CAP Corporate Working Uniform, or "golf shirt." " and the "minimum required uniform"
Quote from: BoxGranch on June 09, 2017, 05:31:48 PM
Thank you for the post on CAPP 39-1. The information in 50-4 seems to be saying something else and it is newer. I will let my squadron make the decision and if they require that I have to have uniforms before being able to afford them, I will have to postpone being a Senior Member.
Its not CAPP its CAPM
CAPR = CAP Regulation
CAPP = CAP Pamphlet
CAPM = CAP Manual
Also from CAPM 39-1
1.1.2. Oversight.
1.1.2.1. COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. This publication
is the sole source for wear instructions and authorized items for various uniform combinations as
prescribed within. Variation from this publication is not authorized. Items not listed in this publication
are not authorized for wear with uniforms. Local commanders do not have the authority to waive
grooming and appearance standards.
The paragraph you cite is CAPP 50-4 just speaks about a uniform's proper wear, not what uniform is required. It states the working uniform is simplest, and whereas that is true, also does not speak to requirements
Quote from: BoxGranch on June 09, 2017, 04:22:07 PM
Thanks for both replies! Perhaps a smart approach might be to try to match the color of the slacks the other Seniors are wearing with the Aviator shirt and the polo by trial and error. I'll get both shades and then use the one that doesn't match as well for other purposes.
Be advised, the tactical pants
and aviator shirt is not allowed, the grey pants would have to be, for lack of a better term, dressy. Per 39-1:
Quote4.2.5. Men's Aviator Shirt Uniform. (Figure 4.16)
4.2.5.5. Trousers. Medium gray (solid color). Wool, polyester‐wool blend or polyester‐cotton trousers will be worn and either slim, straight leg or loose fit with or without pleats or cuffs are allowed. 100% cotton, tactical, chinos cotton twill weave trousers, jeans or casual trousers are not authorized with this uniform combination.
For the polo:
Quote5.2.2. CAP Corporate Working Uniform. (Figure 5.3)
5.2.2.4. Trousers/Slacks. Medium Gray (solid color). Wool, polyester/wool blend, polyester/cotton or cotton trousers. Either slim, straight leg or loose fit, with or without pleat or cuffs is allowed. Commercially available "tactical" slacks and "chinos" medium gray slacks with or without cuffs are approved for optional wear. Shorts are not authorized.
Just thought to clarify it :-)
Quote from: BoxGranch on June 09, 2017, 05:31:48 PM
Thank you for the post on CAPP 39-1. The information in 50-4 seems to be saying something else and it is newer. I will let my squadron make the decision and if they require that I have to have uniforms before being able to afford them, I will have to postpone being a Senior Member.
It's a nuance a lot of people miss.
Aviator whites or USAF blues are required for all, the golf shirt is one
option, which itself has the option of
dress pants or tactical pants.
As mentioned Pamphlets are advisory / non-directive. They might indicate a best practice, but that's as far as it goes.
Regs and Manuals prescribe action and are directive.
As you've probably already seen from your squadron, and will see from reading things here, local custom usually dictates
"general practice", and it's best to go with the local flow, with the caveat that if you get involved with activities
outside the squadron or wing, those practices may conflict with what the regs say, so you it's best to be informed.
Here's what they end up looking like:
(http://i.imgur.com/x5lFGMv.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/ql8Pna6.jpg)
Never blouse those again.
Ever.
Thank you all. I will defer to my squadron and if I need to, I will postpone serving as a Senior Member until I have the funds to acquire the correct uniform. Thank you for the distinction between CAPM and CAPP. My bottom line here is simply trying to put back in since my son is a Cadet Member. The squadron felt I have things to offer and encouraged me to become a Senior Member. They were unfamiliar with the cargo pants being used with the polo which was the only reason I asked here. Again, thanks all.
Quote from: BoxGranch on June 09, 2017, 07:16:44 PM
I will postpone serving as a Senior Member until I have the funds to acquire the correct uniform.
I wouldn't go that far, or take it that way, especially if there's a financial issue. If your unit CC is fine with the
UOD being the golf shirt, or your wearing it, then it's his call.
It's more of an issue of realizing that at some point some activity or another may call for the whites as the
only approved UOD, in which case it's not cricket to say "You can't make me." Otherwise, jump in and start servifying.
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on June 09, 2017, 06:45:45 PM
Here's what they end up looking like:
(http://i.imgur.com/x5lFGMv.jpg)
Perfect. Just pull the pants outside the boots. And for this uniform, footwear is a gray area as well. I wear shoes, not boots. Just make sure they are black and not tennis shoes.
Quote from: Lord of the North on June 09, 2017, 05:38:25 PM
Please note the subtle difference between "simplest uniform to wear is the
CAP Corporate Working Uniform, or "golf shirt." " and the "minimum required uniform"
Yes. I bought the "minimum required uniform" just so no one could ever fuss. Its been in my closet, still in the plastic, for well over a year. Its required to be owned, not necessarily ever worn. LOL
BoxGranch,
Imagine there was a law in our country where every citizen over the age of 21 had to own a Hawaiian shirt, but the law also stated nobody was allowed to check in your closet to see if you actually had one. That's kind of where we're at with our regulation that requires all members to own at least the minimum basic uniform (either the USAF-style blues or the aviator shirt uniform). Yes, by regulation, you are required to have an aviator shirt hanging in your closet. Yet there is no mechanism to determine if you are in compliance and really no consequences if you are not in compliance. The only thing I can think of if is some misguided activity director disallows the polo shirt uniform from an activity or training, you won't be able to attend unless you have the required uniform (that has never happened to me, but it certainly could).
It's an ethical question for you alone to answer. Everyone seems to have the rules they're willing bend or break, speeding on the highway, showing up for work a few minutes late and not telling your boss, or exaggerating on a resume. This is a rule that is widely broken in CAP, it's up to you to decide if you want to be one of them.
My recommendation, purchase regular grey pants (not tactical pants) and the polo shirt. Down the road when you can afford it, pick up the white aviator shirt (or even better, ask around your squadron/group/wing and see if someone has one you can have). Your pants can be worn with both shirts, saving you at least one purchase.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 06:48:56 PM
Never blouse those again.
Ever.
They are meant to be bloused. Thus they will be bloused.
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on June 09, 2017, 08:37:29 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 06:48:56 PM
Never blouse those again.
Ever.
They are meant to be bloused. Thus they will be bloused.
No they aren't, and boots aren't required, so where would an idea like that come from?
Did you buy BDU pants with ties on the bottom?
Looks ridiculous.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 08:56:50 PM
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on June 09, 2017, 08:37:29 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 06:48:56 PM
Never blouse those again.
Ever.
They are meant to be bloused. Thus they will be bloused.
No they aren't, and boots aren't required, so where would an idea like that come from?
Did you buy BDU pants with ties on the bottom?
Looks ridiculous.
Like you're a fashion expert or something? >:D
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 08:56:50 PM
Looks ridiculous.
Agree. It's downright mockworthy.
Thanks all, didn't mean to start a dispute over anything.
The idea of the grey slacks being usable with both shirts is a good one, particularly with using Land's End or the like which can be had for less than the Vanguard one. I normally wear Tru-Spec cargo pants, so the thought of adding another color was what jumped out of me. I usually wear OD for Scouting and I was sure my wife might like an alternative color in my usual dress code (JOKE, I think she has finally given up on my dress).
I understood the eventual need to have the other uniforms, I was simply hoping to be able to postpone spending the money. This is just a bad moment with a lot of other stuff piling on. That is not meant to be a whine, simply a reality. Braces for my son, a bunch of Scouing and now CAP stuff for my son, car repairs, the A/C died in the house, bla, bla, bla etc.
Thanks again!
Quote from: BoxGranch on June 09, 2017, 09:20:14 PM
Thanks all, didn't mean to start a dispute over anything.
Nah, just Friday on CT, also I know Майор Хаткевич personally and hazing is not secured.
Quote from: BoxGranch on June 09, 2017, 09:20:14 PM
Thanks all, didn't mean to start a dispute over anything.
The idea of the grey slacks being usable with both shirts is a good one, particularly with using Land's End or the like which can be had for less than the Vanguard one. I normally wear Tru-Spec cargo pants, so the thought of adding another color was what jumped out of me. I usually wear OD for Scouting and I was sure my wife might like an alternative color in my usual dress code (JOKE, I think she has finally given up on my dress).
I understood the eventual need to have the other uniforms, I was simply hoping to be able to postpone spending the money. This is just a bad moment with a lot of other stuff piling on. That is not meant to be a whine, simply a reality. Braces for my son, a bunch of Scouing and now CAP stuff for my son, car repairs, the A/C died in the house, bla, bla, bla etc.
Thanks again!
Hi, BoxGranch:
One more quote from 39-1:
"1.2.4. When to Wear a CAP Uniform.
1.2.4.2. Members are normally
required [emphasis added] to wear a CAP uniform (either USAF- or
Corporate-style) when working with cadets, when flying in a CAP aircraft (Corporate or member owned
aircraft used in a CAP flight activity), or when conducting business under a CAP mission number (A, B,
or C). Region commanders, wing commanders, and activity directors may stipulate appropriate civilian
clothes while traveling to and from events by ground, or during events not involving flight where it is
appropriate to wear civilian clothes".
My observation on that:
Many CAP members participate without wearing a uniform outside the above stated requirement. You don't have to wear ANY uniform unless working with cadets, flying, or working on a mission/activity with a specified uniform. So, that leaves many areas of CAP where we'd benefit from your available time and talent without taking much of your treasure. What could you do? Well, think of local level support not directly working with cadets: IT, Admin, and Logistics support, for a start. As you gain breathing room, add inexpensive gray dress trousers first, then the shirts, then grow into working with cadets/training at missions/etc.
You're not the only one on a budget; with three cadets - braces, college... LIFE - I'm in the same boat with watching the expenses. Don't let the uniform issue be the thing that keeps you from joining.
On the grays:
I wear exactly the same config as Major Hatkevitch in his pic (bloused, too, as my Propper grays are designed for it) when I'm working ES. When I'm at a normal meeting, I wear the same polo with inexpensive gray dress trousers and black loafers. When I have something to do that I should dress a bit for, I wear the white aviator shirt, which I just finally added after all these years.
I hope you'll join us.
V/r
Spam
PS, take the fake uniform fundamentalist crap with a grain of salt. The irony of Eclipse harassing someone for blousing gray trousers isn't lost on me - this, from Eclipse, the guy who here on CT openly advocates letting people wear civilian sports outerwear with USAF style uniforms. Ah, hypocrisy, thy name is... Eclipse.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 09:33:44 PM
Quote from: BoxGranch on June 09, 2017, 09:20:14 PM
Thanks all, didn't mean to start a dispute over anything.
Nah, just Friday on CT, also I know Майор Хаткевич personally and hazing is not secured.
Indeed. And yes, grey bdu pants. Bloused. >:D
Quote from: Spam on June 09, 2017, 10:42:27 PM
PS, take the fake uniform fundamentalist crap with a grain of salt. The irony of Eclipse harassing someone for blousing gray trousers isn't lost on me - this, from Eclipse, the guy who here on CT openly advocates letting people wear civilian sports outerwear with USAF style uniforms. Ah, hypocrisy, thy name is... Eclipse.
Yeah, OK, save it for your PTA meetings when someone brings creamer you don't like.
Show me any reference anywhere in a CAP publication that this practice is authorized, encouraged, or even suggested.
That is a grade-A, "wannabe asking for a wedgie" appearance.
For the most part, the golf shirt combo is an office / ICP uniform. If you
need bloused pants, you should be in
a FIELD uniform.
Also, quite literally the entirety of CAP,
including national headquarters disagrees with your ridiculous stance that cadets
should be barred from participation for not having regulation outerwear, not to mention the self-conflicting REGULATIONS that bar the
requirement of wearing anything but that which is issued.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 03:55:26 PM
What's the difference between "cargo pants" and "tactical pants"? If it's got gray side pocket and
looks reasonable, no one will car.
There actually is a difference, but it's mostly in the eyes of the manufacturers. The side pockets on cargo pants are usually "billowed," to allow for greater capacity. Whereas, tactical pants usually have the external pockets more flush to the leg, or even inside the trouser leg. A bit less capacity but looks nicer. And, as stated, noddy cares (except purchasing agents looking to buy "something less military").
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on June 10, 2017, 12:44:13 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 03:55:26 PM
What's the difference between "cargo pants" and "tactical pants"? If it's got gray side pocket and
looks reasonable, no one will car.
There actually is a difference, but it's mostly in the eyes of the manufacturers. The side pockets on cargo pants are usually "billowed," to allow for greater capacity. Whereas, tactical pants usually have the external pockets more flush to the leg, or even inside the trouser leg. A bit less capacity but looks nicer. And, as stated, noddy cares (except purchasing agents looking to buy "something less military").
Tactical Pants cost more because they're cool.
Quote from: PHall on June 10, 2017, 12:55:10 AM
Tactical Pants cost more because they're cool.
They are Tactikewl.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 10, 2017, 12:03:05 AM
Quote from: Spam on June 09, 2017, 10:42:27 PM
PS, take the fake uniform fundamentalist crap with a grain of salt. The irony of Eclipse harassing someone for blousing gray trousers isn't lost on me - this, from Eclipse, the guy who here on CT openly advocates letting people wear civilian sports outerwear with USAF style uniforms. Ah, hypocrisy, thy name is... Eclipse.
Yeah, OK, save it for your PTA meetings when someone brings creamer you don't like.
Show me any reference anywhere in a CAP publication that this practice is authorized, encouraged, or even suggested.
That is a grade-A, "wannabe asking for a wedgie" appearance.
For the most part, the golf shirt combo is an office / ICP uniform. If you need bloused pants, you should be in
a FIELD uniform.
Also, quite literally the entirety of CAP, including national headquarters disagrees with your ridiculous stance that cadets
should be barred from participation for not having regulation outerwear, not to mention the self-conflicting REGULATIONS that bar the
requirement of wearing anything but that which is issued.
Yeah, typical. Cite regs when you want, push logical fallacies without citations when you want... resort to ridicule at any time. Weak ego again, sir.
Standing in a CP area with mud up to my ankles as I'm performing GBD tasks - I'm wearing boots, and I'm blousing to keep the cuffs out of the mud, and its within regs. You can stuff your bull crap opinions, your fallacious arguments, and your selective choosing of when you pull your righteous expert card and give other people crap, and when you then choose to selectively ignore the uniform regs. Repeating: hypocrite.
I think the OP's question has been answered. Done here.
Out.
Always nice to see you making an argument personal when your idea(s) fails on merit or fact.
Pretending reality doesn't apply or exist is a nice touch as well.
Your consistency in that is always appreciated.
(http://www.tuscaloosacap.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/S1-500x375.jpg)
Photo does not count.
Not one there is wearing cargo or tactical pants. Four out of five are aircrew. They do not walk the Earth, like us groundpounders.
QuoteFrom CAPM 39-1:
5.2.2.4. Trousers/Slacks. Medium Gray (solid color).... Commercially available "tactical" slacks and "chinos" medium gray slacks with or without cuffs are approved for optional wear...
CAPM 39-1 allows us to use tactical pants with the blue Polo. Tactical pants are not authorized with the white Aviator shirt. All the gray tactical that I have bought do have tie tabs at the bottom. So if I get my Polo, I will blouse it into the boots. If only because there is nothing more horrible than having the tie tabs at the slack bottom slapping around. And to prevent any tick from getting inside my leg.
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on June 11, 2017, 06:54:58 PM
Photo does not count.
Not one there is wearing cargo or tactical pants. Four out of five are aircrew. They do not walk the Earth, like us groundpounders.
QuoteFrom CAPM 39-1:
5.2.2.4. Trousers/Slacks. Medium Gray (solid color).... Commercially available "tactical" slacks and "chinos" medium gray slacks with or without cuffs are approved for optional wear...
CAPM 39-1 allows us to use tactical pants with the blue Polo. Tactical pants are not authorized with the white Aviator shirt. All the gray tactical that I have bought do have tie tabs at the bottom. So if I get my Polo, I will blouse it into the boots. If only because there is nothing more horrible than having the tie tabs at the slack bottom slapping around. And to prevent any tick from getting inside my leg.
How do you know the sixth person isn't aircrew?
The version of the golf shirt that he is wearing (Silk Screened) had no provision for embroidered names and wings.
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on June 11, 2017, 06:54:58 PMAll the gray tactical that I have bought do have tie tabs at the bottom.
Please provide a link or source for review.
Tactical pants do not have blousing tabs, they are intended to be hemmed and worn outside boots or with normal shoes.
BDU pants do.
The gent on the right is clearly wearing tac pants, as evidence by the hook on the right-hand side, and the flat pockets.
(The gent in the middle is wearing improper footwear).
Quote from: Eclipse on June 11, 2017, 08:52:59 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on June 11, 2017, 06:54:58 PMAll the gray tactical that I have bought do have tie tabs at the bottom.
Please provide a link or source for review.
Tactical pants do not have blousing tabs, they are intended to be hemmed and worn outside boots or with normal shoes.
BDU pants do.
The gent on the right is clearly wearing tac pants, as evidence by the hook on the right-hand side, and the flat pockets.
(The gent in the middle is wearing improper footwear).
^^^^^this. I probably own 15 or so "tacticool" pants for work and not a single pair came with blousing tabs
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 06:48:56 PM
Never blouse those again.
Ever.
I think it actually looks pretty good in my opinion. To each his/her own.
Quote
How do you know the sixth person isn't aircrew?
You are right, I do not know. I was making a guess.
But if he is aircrew, then more fuel to my post.
Which I will repost with the premise you opened. That is, all six are aircrew.
The photo does not count as argument against "blousing pants when wearing Polos." Since all are aircrew, they most probably do not know about the needs for ground crew to blouse their pants into the boots.
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on June 11, 2017, 09:48:24 PM
Quote
How do you know the sixth person isn't aircrew?
You are right, I do not know. I was making a guess.
But if he is aircrew, then more fuel to my post.
Which I will repost with the premise you opened. That is, all six are aircrew.
The photo does not count as argument against "blousing pants when wearing Polos." Since all are aircrew, they most probably do not know about the needs for ground crew to blouse their pants into the boots.
Why do ground teams need to blouse their pants?
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on June 11, 2017, 09:48:24 PM
Quote
How do you know the sixth person isn't aircrew?
You are right, I do not know. I was making a guess.
But if he is aircrew, then more fuel to my post.
Which I will repost with the premise you opened. That is, all six are aircrew.
The photo does not count as argument against "blousing pants when wearing Polos." Since all are aircrew, they most probably do not know about the needs for ground crew to blouse their pants into the boots.
No one has picked out the 'brown' hiking shoes, brown belt on the fellow in the middle of the photo. When you're the boss, you can do as you like. ;)
Quote from: etodd on June 12, 2017, 02:23:23 AM
No one has picked out the 'brown' hiking shoes, brown belt on the fellow in the middle of the photo.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 11, 2017, 08:52:59 PM
(The gent in the middle is wearing improper footwear).
Quote from: Eclipse on June 12, 2017, 02:42:05 AM
Quote from: etodd on June 12, 2017, 02:23:23 AM
No one has picked out the 'brown' hiking shoes, brown belt on the fellow in the middle of the photo.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 11, 2017, 08:52:59 PM
(The gent in the middle is wearing improper footwear).
Ah. Missed it. He flew in that day to see how the mission was going. The boss can do what he wants, and wear what he wants. The perks of office.
Quote from: etodd on June 12, 2017, 02:58:05 AM
Ah. Missed it. He flew in that day to see how the mission was going. The boss can do what he wants, and wear what he wants. The perks of office.
Boss? The NHQ/CV isn't in the chain of Command for anyone buy HQ staff, and stars, especially, should set the proper example.
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on June 09, 2017, 06:45:45 PM
Here's what they end up looking like:
(http://i.imgur.com/x5lFGMv.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/ql8Pna6.jpg)
A for enthusiasm, but an F for compliance. The polo combination uniform is not intended nor specified to be bloused, regardless of the pants worn. If wearing grey BDU pants, then get them pressed and cut the blousing straps out. Using the excuse that it's OK to blouse a non-blouse uniform just because the pants happen to have blousing straps is a goober move causing the respect-o-meter to take a serious hit.
Quote from: LTC Don on June 12, 2017, 11:41:28 AM
A for enthusiasm, but an F for compliance. The polo combination uniform is not intended nor specified to be bloused, regardless of the pants worn. If wearing grey BDU pants, then get them pressed and cut the blousing straps out. Using the excuse that it's OK to blouse a non-blouse uniform just because the pants happen to have blousing straps is a goober move causing the respect-o-meter to take a serious hit.
I'll do it - cite please.
BDU pants come LONG. Even with straps removed, they'd need quite a bit of alteration.
That said, I've only worn it twice - the time I took pictures, and the time I didn't have enough time to go home, shave and get into BBDUs/Aviator setup time.
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on June 12, 2017, 02:51:53 PM
Quote from: LTC Don on June 12, 2017, 11:41:28 AM
A for enthusiasm, but an F for compliance. The polo combination uniform is not intended nor specified to be bloused, regardless of the pants worn. If wearing grey BDU pants, then get them pressed and cut the blousing straps out. Using the excuse that it's OK to blouse a non-blouse uniform just because the pants happen to have blousing straps is a goober move causing the respect-o-meter to take a serious hit.
I'll do it - cite please.
BDU pants come LONG. Even with straps removed, they'd need quite a bit of alteration.
That said, I've only worn it twice - the time I took pictures, and the time I didn't have enough time to go home, shave and get into BBDUs/Aviator setup time.
I'd like to see the cite too, but, I have worn this combo a number of times and didn't need to blouse them. Cost me a whole 5 bucks to have the alterations lady at the cleaners shorten them.
LTC Don, the polo combination's real name is the Corporate Working Uniform. Changed with the last revision of the 39-1. This is a work uniform now, not a "business" uniform.
Is someone keeping a spreadsheet on how many prospective members CT has run off over the years?
It's also not a field uniform, and you can't cite a negative, which is the point - no where in the regs can you find any comment
or suggestion that these are supposed to be BDU pants, or that they should be bloused.
I've said before that there's nothing wrong with wearing this occasionally for being on a Ground team, but if you're in an environment
that actually requires bloused trousers, you should be in a real field uniform.
If you find yourself standing in ankle-deep water, or with the risk of critters running up your legs in this uniform, something went wrong, either
"force majeure", or more likely your planning.
Nowhere in the regs can you find they are not to be worn by ground teams. or at least I did not find it. And every now and then I read the regs that concern me again!
What is the use of having a work uniform if you cannot take it to the field?!! What is the use of using this uniform as a ground team if it cannot be bloused? Because as a Ground Team Member you may end with critters. Otherwise just state it is for UDF and not for GTMs.
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on June 11, 2017, 06:54:58 PM
So if I get my Polo, I will blouse it into the boots.
Blousing a polo into your boots would look awfully strange, don't you think?
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on June 12, 2017, 04:35:08 PM
Nowhere in the regs can you find they are not to be worn by ground teams. or at least I did not find it. And every now and then I read the regs that concern me again!
What is the use of having a work uniform if you cannot take it to the field?!! What is the use of using this uniform as a ground team if it cannot be bloused? Because as a Ground Team Member you may end with critters. Otherwise just state it is for UDF and not for GTMs.
We do have uniforms which mitigate these issues...
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on June 12, 2017, 04:35:08 PM
Nowhere in the regs can you find they are not to be worn by ground teams. or at least I did not find it. And every now and then I read the regs that concern me again!
What is the use of having a work uniform if you cannot take it to the field?!! What is the use of using this uniform as a ground team if it cannot be bloused? Because as a Ground Team Member you may end with critters. Otherwise just state it is for UDF and not for GTMs.
Being a "work" uniform simply means it's not formal like the whites or blues, it doesn't necessarily mean it's appropriate for
general field use,
other then in a pinch, same goes for what used to be referred to as "utilities" before they designated the dark blue, non-Nomex CFDU as a FDU.
CAP has plenty of "work" situations that have nothing to do with ES - PT nights, AEX days, working a (dry) flight line, encampments, and of course
the ICP at a mission where these days just about every other agency is going to be in a golf shirt.
The argument as been made (though frankly it's a little silly), that the BDU is required equipment "on your person" for a Ground Team, so
if you prescribe to that, you'd have to carry one with you regardless of what you are wearing.
At the last eval we had a gent who was basically roused from bed to lead a GT - he did not expect to be in the field at all as he was there to fly and and already
xported an aircraft that AM. All he had was the golf shirt / Tac pants, so he made due, but had he expected to be in the field BDU / ABU / CFU would have been the
more appropriate uniform.
Quote
Blousing a polo into your boots would look awfully strange, don't you think?
So if I get my Polo
uniform, I will blouse
pants it into the boots.
;)
Reposted in an expanded way for the benefit of the gentlemen who cannot read between lines...
>:D
Quote from: etodd on June 10, 2017, 02:23:34 AM
(http://www.tuscaloosacap.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/S1-500x375.jpg)
So, which shade of the pants shown above is "medium gray?"
I would say that shown by the gents in number 3 and 5 positions since they are in the "middle" of the gray scale shown by all the gents in the photo. Thus that is "medium" gray...
Quote from: chuckmilam on June 12, 2017, 05:03:47 PM
Quote from: etodd on June 10, 2017, 02:23:34 AM
(http://www.tuscaloosacap.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/S1-500x375.jpg)
So, which shade of the pants shown above is "medium gray?"
Yes.
Quote from: chuckmilam on June 12, 2017, 05:03:47 PMSo, which shade of the pants shown above is "medium gray?"
I'm reading between the lines here a bit, but you appear to be requesting a specification where CAP intentionally didn't create one. All of the gentlemen pictured are wearing pants that fall into the vague description of "medium grey" as designed.
I know this rubs the OCD/strict military folks the wrong way, but it's working as intended.
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on June 12, 2017, 04:53:34 PM
Quote
Blousing a polo into your boots would look awfully strange, don't you think?
So if I get my Polo uniform, I will blouse pants it into the boots.
;)
Reposted in an expanded way for the benefit of the gentlemen who cannot read between lines...
>:D
Hey, in a world where the polo uniform is ES gear and we blouse our cargo pants, can't be sure of anything someone says [emoji48]
No one in this thread has advocating blousing cargo pants.
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on June 09, 2017, 08:37:29 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 06:48:56 PM
Never blouse those again.
Ever.
They are meant to be bloused. Thus they will be bloused.
They will also be dorkier than dorky.
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on June 13, 2017, 02:24:49 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on June 13, 2017, 05:57:33 AM
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on June 09, 2017, 08:37:29 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 09, 2017, 06:48:56 PM
Never blouse those again.
Ever.
They are meant to be bloused. Thus they will be bloused.
They will also be dorkier than dorky.
YMMV I suppose.
Have it your way. It won't be dorkier than dorky.
But everybody will still be laughing about it.
No worse than BDUs w.o tops.
Quote from: Fubar on June 12, 2017, 11:11:28 PM
I know this rubs the OCD/strict military folks the wrong way, but it's working as intended.
I see your point, but if I may raise another: This ambiguity leads to conflict when certain folks go out of their way to ensure their interpretation of "medium gray" is the right one.
My suggestion: if "medium gray" is intended to be a range of shades [of gray ;) ], then specify it as such--and publish reasonable examples of acceptable shades in the next version of the regulation.
Define "reasonable"...
You can't use subjective terms to try and objectively define something - that's the problem.
It's pretty much the same issue with all the corporate combinations, between lack of a standard,
lack of a standard supplier, not to mention improper care, most mission bases and activities are
a rainbow of "blue". Heck, I've seen brand-new CFUs that look purple until they have been washed ten times,
which in CAP use could be a year or two.
The USAF combos aren't much better - with no standardization of garment life, nor supplier, CAP has thrice-issued
ABUs that are basically just a faded blend of something called "colors", many times mis-matched between
top and bottom, some that come out of the factory more pink then green, and the ones VG sells look like
they are done on an inkjet in someone's basement. Zero uniformity. (same issue with BDUs).
There's a reason the military and government agencies publish standards and select certain suppliers, and
those reasons aren't on NHQ's list, for some legitimate reasons and some less so.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 14, 2017, 01:10:50 PM
You can't use subjective terms to try and objectively define something - that's the problem.
Fair enough. How about codifying that "medium gray" is in fact a range of shades, rather than a specific color?
Quote from: chuckmilam on June 14, 2017, 12:49:52 PM
This ambiguity leads to conflict when certain folks go out of their way to ensure their interpretation of "medium gray" is the right one.
Can we somehow uninvite those picky folks to SAREXs and actual Missions? That can be a big downer when folks are trying to get real work done, and someone is fussing about the color of their pants.
Quote from: etodd on June 14, 2017, 02:32:02 PM
Can we somehow uninvite those picky folks to SAREXs and actual Missions? That can be a big downer when folks are trying to get real work done, and someone is fussing about the color of their pants.
Welcome to CAP, you must be new here. /s ;)
Here (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/ci/fattach/get/204/0/filename/Med_gray-chart.htm)'s what the Knowledge Base has to say about it. Good luck.
Quote from: SarDragon on June 14, 2017, 09:14:56 PM
Here (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/ci/fattach/get/204/0/filename/Med_gray-chart.htm)'s what the Knowledge Base has to say about it. Good luck.
If you want to go to the paint store and get PMS "Cool Gray 9 C", that seems to be the closest match. Spray paint your pants.
Its also Hex code #7f7f7f, for anyone wanting to PhotoShop their online photos to get the correct medium gray. >:D
If you read the publication from beginning to end, it actually becomes easier to understand.
To explain, lets look at other uniforms which
may or
must have bloused pants (all emphasis mine):
USAF-style BDU's (
Blousing required)
Quote5.1.1.5. Trousers. Cotton and nylon twill or rip stop cotton camouflage pattern (woodland green) with button front closure, strap ankle adjustment, and six pockets. Material of shirt and trousers must match. Blouse trousers over combat boots. Tucking the BDU trousers into the boot is optional. Whether tucked in or bloused, the trouser must be evenly bloused (gathered in and draped loosely) over the top of the combat boot and must present a bloused appearance. Material of shirt and trousers must match.
Blue BDU (
Blousing optional)
Quote5.2.1.5. Trousers. Cotton and nylon twill or rip stop cotton blue with button front closure, strap ankle adjustment, and six pockets. Trousers may be bloused over boots. If not bloused, drawstring in the hem should be removed. Material of shirt and trousers must match.
CWU (
Blousing not allowed, no mention of being authorized)
Quote5.2.2.4. Trousers/Slacks. Medium Gray (solid color). Wool, polyester/wool blend, polyester/cotton or cotton trousers. Either slim, straight leg or loose fit, with or without pleat or cuffs is allowed. Commercially available "tactical" slacks and "chinos" medium gray slacks with or without cuffs are approved for optional wear. Shorts are not authorized.
You can actually draw a few other conclusions by reading the document in its entirety. The term "slacks" is ONLY used to refer a dress style pant; BDU-style pants are never referred to a slacks.
Also, at no point in CAPM 39-1 are "slacks" of any sort ever allowed to bloused.
Is that as black and white as saying "Do not blouse slacks?" No, but it also never says "Do not draw sharpie hearts on your blouse."
Generally, manuals and regulations follow the principle that if it says you can, you can. Otherwise you can't.
And as senior members, we all agree in our membership oath to follow all regulations, even if they may not be as tacticool as we'd like.
PS. Nice CAR technique with the cell phone.
I'll throw my two cents in on the Medium Grey debate, too, just for the heck of it.
I think it's vague for a reason, namely, ease of compliance. As other's have said, it's to allow someone to easily acquire the needed items locally.
I was personally able to put together the whole CSU (sans accouterments) entirely from items I already owned.
Along with the ease and low expense of acquisition comes a third advantage: fit. By allowing a variety of commercially available pants, I believe people are more likely to find a set that fits them properly. How many of us have seen a member squeezed into a Blues uniform that was only a close-enough fit? Contrast that to members wearing well-fitted CWU, and who looks more professional?
There was a picture posted of several SMs, all wearing obviously different colored pants. While their outfits are not perfectly alike, do they accomplish the mission of a uniform?
Is it visually symbolic of their shared membership in our organisation? Does it inspire comradery among our fellow members? Does it visually demonstrate their individual commitment to our organisation by following our rules and regulations?
I say yes.
/2cents
I've tried both shades of gray offered by Propper and both miss the mark. Their charcoal gray is too dark and their light gray is too light. 5.11's storm gray nailed it but they don't offer fat kid sizes.
Quote from: Mustang on June 20, 2017, 11:12:59 AM
5.11's storm gray nailed it but they don't offer fat kid sizes.
5.11 Stryke in Storm Gray is my current favorite for this combo, and they go up to a 54" waist. (Hoping I didn't just make this awkward.) :-\
Quote from: chuckmilam on June 20, 2017, 02:57:08 PM
Quote from: Mustang on June 20, 2017, 11:12:59 AM
5.11's storm gray nailed it but they don't offer fat kid sizes.
5.11 Stryke in Storm Gray is my current favorite for this combo, and they go up to a 54" waist. (Hoping I didn't just make this awkward.) :-\
Those look nice but they are stupidly expensive
Watch for the sales. 15-25% off happens usually once or twice a year, and every so often (maybe every 2-3 years) you'll see a "buy 2, get one free" deal.
Quote from: Mustang on June 20, 2017, 11:12:59 AM
I've tried both shades of gray offered by Propper and both miss the mark. Their charcoal gray is too dark and their light gray is too light. 5.11's storm gray nailed it but they don't offer fat kid sizes.
I have to eat my words here, looks like 5.11 has expanded their available sizes on a number of their pant styles.
Quote from: Mustang on June 20, 2017, 09:42:45 PM
Quote from: Mustang on June 20, 2017, 11:12:59 AM
I've tried both shades of gray offered by Propper and both miss the mark. Their charcoal gray is too dark and their light gray is too light. 5.11's storm gray nailed it but they don't offer fat kid sizes.
I have to eat my words here, looks like 5.11 has expanded their available sizes on a number of their pant styles.
Don't eat too many words.......that's how you end up wearing the larger sizes........ >:D >:D >:D
Just saw this on VG:
CIVIL AIR PATROL UNIFORM: GREY TROUSER (TACTICAL) (https://www.vanguardmil.com/products/civil-air-patrol-uniform-grey-trouser-tactical-male?variant=45851806671)
Pretty pricey @ $60 + shipping! Tru Spec sells them on their own website for $49.95 and there's some on amazon for less than that.
But at least now we have an official sanctioned color and brand!
Quote from: vorteks on August 10, 2017, 06:58:14 PM
Just saw this on VG:
CIVIL AIR PATROL UNIFORM: GREY TROUSER (TACTICAL) (https://www.vanguardmil.com/products/civil-air-patrol-uniform-grey-trouser-tactical-male?variant=45851806671)
Pretty pricey @ $60 + shipping! Tru Spec sells them on their own website for $49.95 and there's some on amazon for less than that.
But at least now we have an official sanctioned color and brand!
Unhemmed - interesting. Does make for a more precise fit.
Quote from: vorteks on August 10, 2017, 06:58:14 PM
Just saw this on VG:
CIVIL AIR PATROL UNIFORM: GREY TROUSER (TACTICAL) (https://www.vanguardmil.com/products/civil-air-patrol-uniform-grey-trouser-tactical-male?variant=45851806671)
Pretty pricey @ $60 + shipping! Tru Spec sells them on their own website for $49.95 and there's some on amazon for less than that.
But at least now we have an official sanctioned color and brand!
Hmmm, I bought this exact pair at a local surplus store on sale for $30 a while back, and I didn't have to hem them myself! Nice try VG.
Quote from: Paul Creed III on August 10, 2017, 07:33:49 PM
Unhemmed - interesting. Does make for a more precise fit.
It also means getting away with keeping less inventory on hand.