Speaking of no bueno...

[NIN]

In putting together a set of BDUs finally. My evil plan to avoid BDUs with the expectation that ABUs would be approved has failed.

(The Air Staff still has a chance: Once the Pentagon finds out I have a set of complete BDUs, you can expect them to green light ABUs within hours.  Kind of like lighting up a cigarette in a restaurant used to be the way to get your food to show up..)

So I've gotten insignia over the last few weeks from Spur Nametags and Vanguard.

I have to say, comparing the insignia, I am pretty disappointed with the quality of Vanguard's embroidered items.  The observer wings look terrible, and the GT badge isn't even representative of the metal insignia. The nametapes are now coming on fabric instead of web (I just looked in 39-1, and there is no real specification in 39-1 for one way or the other, so thats fine) which is a big improvement, but if you see the attached pic with observer wings (VG) and my crew wings (Spur) side by side, the quality difference isn't just obvious, it's painfully obvious.

What measures of quality control does CAP exercise over Vanguard's "product"?  Because, frankly, I am almost not willing to take the time to setup and stitch on that GT badge, I think it looks that bad.

[a2capt]

What? Really?
At least that GT badge has some sharp areas visible. They've improved. Somewhat.

A lot of what I've seen looks like melted cookie dough. Just blobs of thread.

[NIN]

What? Really?
At least that GT badge has some sharp areas visible. They've improved. Somewhat.

A lot of what I've seen looks like melted cookie dough. Just blobs of thread.

The Lt Cols are distinctly different in their embroidery fill, and the observer wings are just... meh.

I don't very much like the look of the wreath on the embroidered badge. It doesn't look like the metal badge at all.

[Stonewall]

Yeah, Darin, I was sorely disappointed when I got my order in earlier in the year.  I thought I posted about it but I couldn't find anything.

GTM badges just suck and observer is weak at best.  I was thinking about going full on military badges instead of CAP just because I think vanguard's look crappy.  And the name tapes, totally lame.

[Garibaldi]

What? Really?
At least that GT badge has some sharp areas visible. They've improved. Somewhat.

A lot of what I've seen looks like melted cookie dough. Just blobs of thread.

The Lt Cols are distinctly different in their embroidery fill, and the observer wings are just... meh.

I don't very much like the look of the wreath on the embroidered badge. It doesn't look like the metal badge at all.

To quote a popular internet meme...


DO. NOT. WANT.

[NIN]

Someone might make a killing on selling "new old stock" insignia from the Bookstore if they happened to have some.

Until a C&D showed up in the mail.

[a2capt]

Can't say I've not had that idea myself ...

[NIN]

Happened to find an old (pre-Vanguard) GTM badge just now.

So I compared them.

The Bookstore-vintage GTM badge is just a shade under an inch wide. The VG-produced GTL badge is almost exactly 1 1/4" wide.  The metal badge is more like 1 1/8"

[TexasCadet]

The Vanguard one looks better. The other one doesn't have the star.

[NIN]

The Vanguard one looks better. The other one doesn't have the star.

The other one doesn't have a star because its a Ground Team Member badge, not a Ground Team Leader badge.

Compare the Vanguard one to the metal badge, you'll see that it doesn't even look much like the badge.

The letters are mis-proportioned. The wreath isn't the same. The points of the triangle are completely missing. The circle is more oval vertically, etc.

[TexasCadet]

The Vanguard one looks better. The other one doesn't have the star.

The other one doesn't have a star because its a Ground Team Member badge, not a Ground Team Leader badge.

Compare the Vanguard one to the metal badge, you'll see that it doesn't even look much like the badge.

The letters are mis-proportioned. The wreath isn't the same. The points of the triangle are completely missing. The circle is more oval vertically, etc.

Ah, good point. My mistake.

[Luis R. Ramos]

I think that you are over - critical. You are not going to get an exact copy, however I may be wrong.

Now your comparison of the Bookstore GT and Vanguard GTL badges, you can see that in Vanguard's badge the wreath looks much, much better than the old Bookstore's wreath. I also remember some of the GT badges I had from the Bookstore, where the letters were not readable.

Flyer

[Stonewall]

I remember when the GTM badges came out and I thought it was silly and atypical to have letters on any type of qualification badge.  It would be like putting WX on an Air Force weather badge, AA on an Army Air Assault badge, or EMT on the EMT badge.

Either way, I don't think the good colonel is being too critical.  It's not hard to get badge right.  The military has some pretty detailed embroidered badges and they all closely resemble their dress uniform counterparts.

[PHall]

The Bookstore's badges are much better. Scamguard seems to have had a computer malfunction that has screwed up the proportions of the badge.
And yet they seem to have no trouble at all making "correct" insignia for the armed forces...

[SarDragon]

Maybe, just maybe, what's getting made and sold now was actually approved by someone as an "improvement" over the previous product. Maybe.

[gruntmp]

Anybody ask Spur if they could make the badges?

Just a thought!

[a2capt]

Anybody ask Spur if they could make the badges?
Just a thought!

Old news ...

From the National Headquarters Civil Air Patrol United States Air Force Auxiliary, we don't have the "exclusive right to name, insignia, copyrights, emblems, badges, marks and words" the corporation adopts. 


So, we no longer offer C.A.P. items. 

Please direct any and all questions or comments to the Civil Air Patrol Headquarters.

[Shuman 14]

I'll just throw this out there but there are lots of local embroidery shops that can make anything you like if given a copy of the desired badge (ie clip art) in the proper dimensions.

The trick most likely will be getting the fabric and threads in the correct colors.

I'm also guessing that there is a CAP regulation against "homemade insignia" which this would violate but if you're truly unhappy with scamguard this might be the only way around them.

[NIN]

I think that you are over - critical. You are not going to get an exact copy, however I may be wrong.

I might be over critical.

But then again, I'd expect the insignia sold to me to reflect the reality of what it represents and that it conforms to certain standards as it pertains to quality control, heraldic accuracy, etc.

Many, many years ago, my CAP unit in Michigan had a patch that had an F-15 on it.  The patch had be re-made over the years, and without using the original artwork, and in such a way that by the last "generation" of the patch, the F-15 looked more like an F-14 with an asymmetrical wing sweep condition.  It was really heinous. So much so that people would say "What is that thing?" and we'd go "F-15".. and they'd say "Really? Whoa."

Now, I submit to you, that is a unit patch, where you might find some opportunities for variance and difference.  But badges?  Come on, there are specific standards for this stuff. Joe Blow and his Janome sewing machine are not really up to snuff here. Especially if the source sewing files aren't too accurate.


There were certain things that I did not buy, nor did my squadron buy and stock, from the Hock Shop when it was in operation due to the fact that Tom sourced some of his stuff from Taiwan and sometimes it was kind of crappy.  Then again, some of his stuff was really good from Taiwan.  But it was truly hit or miss.  Too often, much was lost in translation.

And the Hock Shop was not the SOLE supplier of a particular kind and type of insignia for a particular organization.

It would be one thing if CAP was sending out "Hey, cut that out!" letters to outfits that were manufacturing crummy insignia that was of low quality, looked terrible, didn't hold up, etc. 

But CAP is not doing it due to quality control.  We're not even enforcing those standards on "our only guys." 


Maybe I'm a stickler for detail.   Maybe I'd like to wear the badge that I was authorized, not something else.

I picked up insignia (flight suit nametags, mostly) in Korea that were well made and accurate. I had a couple made that were downright crappy and after a couple wearings, found better shops to do the work that had insignia that was much, much closer to correct.

(top to bottom in the attached photo: Spur Nametags custom white-on-ultramarine a week old, AAFES-purchased subdued [quite likely Ira Green] from the late 1980s, Korean-made flightsuit nametag circa 1987 and Wings Aviation [Daleville, AL] produced black leather flightsuit nametag, circa 1994, for reference)

The Armed Services have heraldic standards that the manufacturers are QA'd against.  Matter of fact, I believe The Institute of Heraldry under the Department of the Army is responsible for ALL DoD Heraldic items and such.

http://www.tioh.hqda.pentagon.mil/

Wouldn't it be nice if we could have our heraldic items and emblems actually reviewed, approved and formally developed by experts in that field who do it for all the other uniformed services?

Now your comparison of the Bookstore GT and Vanguard GTL badges, you can see that in Vanguard's badge the wreath looks much, much better than the old Bookstore's wreath. I also remember some of the GT badges I had from the Bookstore, where the letters were not readable.

I agree: the wreath is actually _a_wreath_  with leaves and such, and the embroidery is nice and crisp. But its not the type of wreath that is supposed to be there, nor does it look like the badge. AT ALL.   

What if the South Carolina wing patches started being made with a really accurately depicted and lovingly embroidered elm tree on them?  I mean, if it was actually, you know, nicely embroidered?  Would that be OK?

How about South Dakota's patch, if they did a really nice job of representing George, Thomas & Teddy, but old Abe wound up clean shaven?

Oh, wait, bad example. Why?

Because the Vanguard patch is ALREADY looking pretty meh.
Then again, thats not without precendent:

These poor guys can't seem to get a break:

or even:


Oh, thats supposed to be the outline of the STATE. Hahahaha. I thought it was a rectangle.

Getting back to the GTL badge:

Never mind all the other issues:

• the ovalness of the circle
• the total truncation of the triangle
• the elongation of the letters GT
• the change to the overall shape.

Where do you draw the line? Is there a line drawn?  Do we just keep getting "adjusted/modified by the vendor for their convenience" insignia and its OK?

[Garibaldi]

*snip*

The top SDWG patch looks like the cover of The Beatles' Revolver album.

[NIN]

The top SDWG patch looks like the cover of The Beatles' Revolver album.

<Keanu Reeves>
"Whoa!"
</Keanu Reeves>

[Private Investigator]

*snip*

The top SDWG patch looks like the cover of The Beatles' Revolver album.

RODL   :clap:

[Майор Хаткевич]

They started making the nametapes out of the "grade" cloth once the national conference announced the proposed new tape colors. The word apparently was "VG has a lot of ultramarine left over".

So I'm guessing we're seeing them using up the grade cloth to cut down on all the supplies, and tapes made the most sense.

[winterg]

Too bad Vanguard can't get the badges from the same place the Hock Shop (R.I.P.) used to.  At least theirs was better proportioned.   I'm sure I'll be recycling mine from there for a while.

As for the name tapes, I switched to fabric ones years ago when we changed to those at the sheriff's department I worked at the time.  Huge improvement.  They retain their color better and don't curl.  Much more professional looking.

[Eclipse]

I would say there are. Everything incorrect in both versions is nearly the same.

Considering that VG's badges used to look muddy and all of a sudden (relatively speaking) they are very tight and clear, looks to
me like the same setup source.

Scratch that - a closer look in Photoshop shows they aren't really that close, beyond probably using similar software for an embroidery system.

[winterg]

I don't think so for a few little details I have noticed.  On the Hock Shop version, the star is a litter fatter, the triangle is not cut off and the lettering is not elongated.  Again, still not perfect, but a little better than the current Vanguard version and a LOT better than the old Vanguard "blob" version. *shudder*

[SAREXinNY]

As a new member last year I was shocked and appalled by the poor quality of the GTM badge I received.  It makes us look unprofessional to say the least.

[Terry W.]

It really is nothing new that Vanguard blows. I am not sure when, but a few years back they appeared to take over as the primary vendor to AAFES and the MCSS. The quality of insignia is atrocious at best, ribbons fall apart, paint chips on insignia or paint just running. It really is frustrating. I remember when AAFES used to carry more IRA green stuff and I consider their stuff better quality. Some of the stores on certain posts carry the IRA Green stuff and it seems like stores that carried only Vanguard are starting to carry more of IRA Green as well now. I am hoping it shifts back that way.

[NIN]

Just need a wing patch and I'm done...

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Garibaldi]

Kinda makes me not want to be a GBD because I'd have to get a MGTM badge and replace my good SGTM with krep.

[winterg]

Just need a wing patch and I'm done...

Looks great.  Too bad they clarified the rules for badge placement and I can't wear my GT badge and my USAF Maintenance badge.

[dwb]

You don't need a Wing patch...

[a2capt]

You don't need a Wing patch...

Not every Wing has made it optional or removed it. There are many supplements that retained it for use on *BDUs, and flight uniforms.

[PHall]

You don't need a Wing patch...

Please convince the California Wing Commander about that.

[jayleswo]

You don't need a Wing patch...

Please convince the California Wing Commander about that.

Well, interestingly, the current CAWG Supplement to CAPM 39-1 (dated 15 NOV 2011) does not contain any verbiage requiring the wear of the CAWG patch on field uniforms (except for the CAWG GT uniform). It amends table 6-4 to describe placement of the CAWG patch but that's all. The NHQ ICL dated 12 MAR 2012 para 2.a. would appear to supersede the requirement for mandatory wear of the Wing patch. I know that's not the intent so an update to the CAWG Supplement to clarify that, perhaps after the new 39-1 is published, might be a good idea.

[PHall]

You don't need a Wing patch...

Please convince the California Wing Commander about that.

Well, interestingly, the current CAWG Supplement to CAPM 39-1 (dated 15 NOV 2011) does not contain any verbiage requiring the wear of the CAWG patch on field uniforms (except for the CAWG GT uniform). It amends table 6-4 to describe placement of the CAWG patch but that's all. The NHQ ICL dated 12 MAR 2012 para 2.a. would appear to supersede the requirement for mandatory wear of the Wing patch. I know that's not the intent so an update to the CAWG Supplement to clarify that, perhaps after the new 39-1 is published, might be a good idea.

The CAWG Supplement to CAPM 39-1 has NEVER had anything about the wing patch being required.
But every Wing Commander since National made it "optional" has said that it is required.
Matter of fact, Virginia Nelson get pretty upset with me for even asking that question.

[jayleswo]

The CAWG Supplement to CAPM 39-1 has NEVER had anything about the wing patch being required.
<snip>

Actually, not true. The CAWG Supplement dated 1 APR 2006, and signed by Col Virginia Nelson did specifically state in Fig 6-14 (added) which uniforms the CAWG patch was required on. "The patch will be worn on the optional Ground Team uniform, BDU, Field Uniform, CAP Utility Uniform and all flight suits." I can PM you the pdf if you like. My point was, since the current supplement does not contain that verbiage, one might incorrectly infer that it is not required. I don't think that is the case, but would be good to clarify that by revising the supplement if it is.

[PHall]

The CAWG Supplement to CAPM 39-1 has NEVER had anything about the wing patch being required.
<snip>

Actually, not true. The CAWG Supplement dated 1 APR 2006, and signed by Col Virginia Nelson did specifically state in Fig 6-14 (added) which uniforms the CAWG patch was required on. "The patch will be worn on the optional Ground Team uniform, BDU, Field Uniform, CAP Utility Uniform and all flight suits." I can PM you the pdf if you like. My point was, since the current supplement does not contain that verbiage, one might incorrectly infer that it is not required. I don't think that is the case, but would be good to clarify that by revising the supplement if it is.

The current supplement seems to have been written to govern the wearing of the CAWG Ground Team Uniform.
Everything else seems to have been an afterthought.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Anybody ask Spur if they could make the badges?
Just a thought!

Old news ...

From the National Headquarters Civil Air Patrol United States Air Force Auxiliary, we don't have the "exclusive right to name, insignia, copyrights, emblems, badges, marks and words" the corporation adopts. 


So, we no longer offer C.A.P. items. 

Please direct any and all questions or comments to the Civil Air Patrol Headquarters.

I wondered how long it would be before that lot got a C&DOE.

I am wondering, and I may have posted this before, forgive me if I have, what this bunch is:

http://www.1800nametape.com/chrc.htm

I Binged it (I do not use Google much) and could not find a lot.

My first thought was of the former Generalissimo's little band, but it does not seem the same.

[a2capt]

Nah..
CHRC isn't the Generalissimo's Merry Men.

CHRC is a "Minutemen" like vigilante acting bunch that wants to deal with illegals in the southwest, themselves.

With Spur putting all these sections for various groups in there, it's certainly cheapening their own image.

[Eclipse]

"Involuntarily dissolved"
http://www.wysk.com/index/texas/houston/b6lj64n/civil-homeland-response-corp/profile

[MSG Mac]

The CAWG Supplement to CAPM 39-1 has NEVER had anything about the wing patch being required.
<snip>

Actually, not true. The CAWG Supplement dated 1 APR 2006, and signed by Col Virginia Nelson did specifically state in Fig 6-14 (added) which uniforms the CAWG patch was required on. "The patch will be worn on the optional Ground Team uniform, BDU, Field Uniform, CAP Utility Uniform and all flight suits." I can PM you the pdf if you like. My point was, since the current supplement does not contain that verbiage, one might incorrectly infer that it is not required. I don't think that is the case, but would be good to clarify that by revising the supplement if it is.

A new update supersedes the previous supplement, if the later one doesn't contain the verbiage about wearing the Wing Patch on BDUs then the requirement no longer exists.

[NIN]

My wing does not say one way or the other. However, tribal knowledge says that we do. Since I just stitched on a wing patch...

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Nah..
CHRC isn't the Generalissimo's Merry Men.

CHRC is a "Minutemen" like vigilante acting bunch that wants to deal with illegals in the southwest, themselves.

With Spur putting all these sections for various groups in there, it's certainly cheapening their own image.

And, according to their insignia mockups, they had CADETS.

Scary to think what those young people were being taught.

[TexasCadet]

Nah..
CHRC isn't the Generalissimo's Merry Men.

CHRC is a "Minutemen" like vigilante acting bunch that wants to deal with illegals in the southwest, themselves.

With Spur putting all these sections for various groups in there, it's certainly cheapening their own image.

Speaking of Spur, check this stuff out. http://www.1800nametape.com/safety.htm Go down a little ways. Forget safety vests, we need reflective name tapes!

[Eclipse]

That stuff seems like a great idea, until you see that it wrecks every photo that uses a flash.

We had a unit up this way that did their patch in retro-reflective thread.  In addition to making them about $9 each,
you can't find one of their people from that era without a piece of the sun shooting off of their patch.

[TexasCadet]

But it's in the name of SAFETY.

[Panache]

Why, just wearing your uniform to your weekly meeting would keep your safety currency up to date!

[gruntmp]

Those name tapes will be just the thing when CAP adopts the surplus FR Multicams!!! 

[Garibaldi]

But it's in the name of SAFETY.

FOR SAFETY!!!

[LSThiker]

Makes me miss The Hock Shop.  I still have my Master GTM from the Hock sewn on.  Has any one ever tried their own embroidering with any success?

[Майор Хаткевич]

Makes me miss The Hock Shop.  I still have my Master GTM from the Hock sewn on.  Has any one ever tried their own embroidering with any success?

I still see Hock stuff too. Anytime someone has a wing patch on, if it's yellow instead of Orange, I know where they got it.

[arajca]

Makes me miss The Hock Shop.  I still have my Master GTM from the Hock sewn on.  Has any one ever tried their own embroidering with any success?

I've got a file for my master PDO I put on my golf shirt. I haven't had one made for any of the badges.