New Corporate Uniform

Started by mikeylikey, March 07, 2006, 09:22:30 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

smj58501

I was hoping they would authorize a nice pair of grey walking shorts for wear with the golf shirt, for those hot summer days in the cockpit. Definitely would be more comfortable. Plus, you could shut down, post flight, close out the paperwork, and still hit the links for a quick 9 on your way home. I guess there is always hope.... :P
Sean M. Johnson
Lt Col, CAP
Chief of Staff
ND Wing CAP

Matt

Quote from: smj58501 on March 09, 2006, 06:36:39 PM
[...] still hit the links for a quick 9 on your way home. I guess there is always hope.... :P

On the inverse... there is always Golden Tee on the computer in the nice, relaxing air conditioning  ;)
<a href=mailto:mkopp@ncr.cap.gov> Matthew Kopp</a>, Maj, CAP
Director of Information Technology
<a href=https://www.ncrcap.us.org> North Central Region</a>

Major_Chuck

Okay.  New Uniform

1.  Headgear:  Grey Pith Helmt (see Postal Office Issue)

2.  Yellow Scarf w/CAP shield.

3. White Aviator Shirt

4.  Blue Shorts

5.  Black Knee High Socks

6.  Black (plain - no design) low quarters

Chuck Cranford
SGT, TNCO VA OCS
Virginia Army National Guard

dwb

With all due respect Maj Cranford, if this new uniform of yours doesn't include a sash for all my mini-medals and patches, then I'm just not interested in hearing about it...

pixelwonk

#24
Quote from: justin_bailey on March 09, 2006, 08:55:05 PM
With all due respect Maj Cranford, if this new uniform of yours doesn't include a sash for all my mini-medals and patches, then I'm just not interested in hearing about it...

And I'd like to see a powderhorn with shoulder strap, because everybody knows powderhorns rock.


No... make that really rock.

BillB

Powerhorns are not authorized.  Maybe they will go back to Sam Browne belts so seniors can wear their swords
Gil Robb Wilson # 19
Gil Robb Wilson # 104

Pylon

Research shows that uniforms for men that involve shorts of any kind do not work.



:-X
Michael F. Kieloch, Maj, CAP

Smitty

What are they going to do about Flight Officers wearing this uniform?
Former TFO, CAP
Mitchell #51,062
Juris Doctor Candidate, Touro Law Center

dwb

Silly goose, nobody cares about Flight Officers!  Onward with the willy-nilly uniform changes, I say!

Major_Chuck

Quote from: justin_bailey on March 09, 2006, 08:55:05 PM
With all due respect Maj Cranford, if this new uniform of yours doesn't include a sash for all my mini-medals and patches, then I'm just not interested in hearing about it...

Mini-medal and doo-dad sash was approved by committee vote with a show of fingers.  Above uniform combination is for field.  Sash approved for after dinner wear and parades.

Chuck Cranford
SGT, TNCO VA OCS
Virginia Army National Guard

Major_Chuck

Quote from: Pylon on March 09, 2006, 09:43:44 PM
Research shows that uniforms for men that involve shorts of any kind do not work.



:-X


Arrrrrggghhhhhhh........NO SHORTS!  Please, I beg for forgiveness on this one.
Chuck Cranford
SGT, TNCO VA OCS
Virginia Army National Guard

alexalvarez

Hey don't forget a pocket protector for the uniform with shorts.
Ch, Lt. Col., Alex Alvarez
Alamo Composite Squadron, Bexar County Squadron, San Antonio, Texas
Group V Chaplain
Mitchell 1967, Earhart 1967, C/ Lt. Col. 1969
Fifty Year Member 2014

Eclipse

I don't understand the tie issue.

The regimental tie (red/blue stripe) has not been authorized for wear with the Aviator whites for over two years - they went out with the black name tags.

Has this really not gotten out to the 4-corners or am I missing something?

"That Others May Zoom"

dwb

Quote from: Eclipse on March 10, 2006, 08:31:47 AMThe regimental tie (red/blue stripe) has not been authorized for wear with the Aviator whites for over two years - they went out with the black name tags.

You're thinking of the tie with the logo embroidered on it, and only one stripe.  That wasn't called the regimental tie, it was something else (and the name escapes me at the moment).

The candy stripe tie has been authorized all along.  You can see it in the most recent uniform manual (Figure 4-1 on page 74, and Table 4-1 on page 80)

(edited: looking at my 1997 uniform manual, it says: "Navy blue, maroon, or regimental CAP tie".  The maroon one had a blue stripe and some type of logo embroidered on it, and it's gone now.)

Eclipse

No, I had it correct.  The regimental tie is the blue / red stripe.  There were also maroon and blues ties, respectively, which featured an embroidered logo in the center. 

I see where the confusion lies.

The "Blazer" uniform is not the same as the "Aviator Shirt with Epaulets".

The regimental tie is still authorized with the blazer uniform as you indicate.

However, 39-1 clearly indicates that the Aviator whites are a seperate combination, through photos and tables.

Page 74 features a photo of the whites, and indicates:

"3. Tie/Tab: USAF blue tie (males) or CAP blue ties/floppy bow are authorized. Mandatory with long
sleeve shirt..."


Page 83, Figure 4-3 indicates:

"USAF blue tie or CAP blue floppy bow must be worn with long sleeved
version, optional with short-sleeved version. Any other style or color
tie/floppy bow (including Regimental and ties with CAP Crest) is not
authorized.
CAP blue floppy bow is available only from CAPMart..."

For quick ref, 39-1 is here:
http://level2.cap.gov/documents/u_082203102943.pdf

"That Others May Zoom"

dwb

You are correct, sir!  That's odd, I wonder why they wrote it that way.

PACAPSM

#36
.

shorning

Personally I don't think a shirt is enough of a distinction.  I know my fellow airmen won't understand that a white shirt indicates the USAF auxiliary.  Instead what you'll get is, "Why is that [insert officer grade here] wearing a white shirt?" or "Why does that [insert officer grade here] wearing the white shirt have a beard?"  I'm sure there will be other, more derogatory comments that I'm not going to address here.

So what's wrong with the corporate uniform we have now?  Does the new one really bring us that closer to the AF?  Why not just throw everyone back into blues?  I mean if we want to "play" Air Force, let's play it all the way.  Our "distinctive" item can be our skivvies.  Do we really think this will make the AF take us more seriously?  Or is that something we are telling ourselves to stroke out egos? 

Additionally, if you want to be a real stickler for the regulations, this new uniform will force our AF members out of corporate uniforms.  You see, my uniform regulation (AFI36-2903) says that I won't mix military and civilian items (or at least AFI36-2903, Table 1.3).  Everything about this new combo is military except the shirt.  It doesn't matter that CAP says it's okay.

All the recent uniform changes make me question the judgment of those chosen to lead our organization.  Aren't there more pressing issues to worry about?  Perhaps if "they" (the NEC/NB) would take the time to explain their logic to the general membership we'd have a better understanding of why this is such an important issue.  Silly me, I was focusing on other things.  I think they are looking for solutions to problems that don't exist. 

Perhaps it's time to hang up the spurs.  We'll see...

arajca

Let's take a slightly different tack on this:
Presuming the high mucky-mucks in the AF have approved (or at least not disapproved) this combination, it could be a possibility that the AF is willing to let CAP move closer to the family, while keeping some distance due to the physique of some of our members. I'll be the first to admit I don't know the AF uniforms regs, I am somewhat familiar with the CAP regs (some say I'm a-retentive about it ;D).

As for the future service dress coat, it will be hard to get one that is more like a business suit than the AF's three button suit coat with epaulets. About the only differences between a suit coat and the AF service dress coat is the lower pockets and epaulets. Personally, I would like to see a CAP service dress coat based on the old AF four pocket service dress coat (similar to the US Army's and many fire/police class A's) or a fire/police six button coat with service cap. I'll probably put this whole thing in writing sooner or later complete with pictures and graphics. One thing I won't change is the current specialty track badges - not that I think they are the greatest design around.

Quote from: shorningAll the recent uniform changes make me question the judgment of those chosen to lead our organization.  Aren't there more pressing issues to worry about?  Perhaps if "they" (the NEC/NB) would take the time to explain their logic to the general membership we'd have a better understanding of why this is such an important issue.  Silly me, I was focusing on other things.  I think they are looking for solutions to problems that don't exist.
I also think we have far more pressing things to worry about as a organization than what clothes we wear, such as the general perception that CAP "doesn't play well with others."

Major_Chuck

I really don't know about this new uniform combination.  I like the current aviator uniform.  I like the grey epaulets (especially since I have been around long enough to remember the ugly maroon ones).

I have to agree with the comment about mixing military and civilian uniform parts as well as someone on active duty not knowing a thing about CAP and then seeing one of our officers wearing this new 'CAP Distinctive' blue/white uniform.

I am hoping that someone on the AF side of the house will see the confusion and future complaints headed their way and be proactive now and put the breaks on it. 

What would be wrong with the blue epaulet sleeves on the white shirt with grey slacks? 

Okay, something positive:  Removing wing patches from the Air Force style uniform.  YES! 



Chuck Cranford
SGT, TNCO VA OCS
Virginia Army National Guard