Acceptable Encampment Identifiers

[Ned]

First....who exactly did I criticize?? 

No one by name, of course.  That's part of the fun of this kind of internet chatter.

You did say that the use of colored baseball hats -- perfectly legitimate if appropriate approvals are granted and more importantly used by several large wings every year -- were "laughable", did you not?

That was your word - "laughable", right?

It kinda sounded to me like you were criticizing (ridiculing, actually) the wings that legitimately use colored baseball hats.

If you meant "laughable" in a kind way or as a form of constructive criticism, I misinterpreted your post and apologize.

Why not support a fellow members right to express their opinions here, instead of bashing them and "sharpshooting" them....Mr Lee.

-Tim Baker   

Fair question. 

And the answer is that I do support CAP Talkers that express positive ideas and constructive criticism of the organization or it's members.  And especially when they do so while displaying the CAP Core Value of Respect.

But far too often in this forum, we see posts that are so negative that they amount to bashing.

There is certainly nothing wrong with answering the OP with responses like "Under the current 39-1, it looks like you could use colored baseball hats (with appropriate approvals),  shoulder cords, or some sort of ID card or badge temporarily clipped to the uniform."  Or even "you could simply have the staff wear black t-shirts and the basics wear brown."

But the group never seems to let it go at that.  We will inevitably see posts like the ones in this thread where posters demean the actions of others as "silly", "laughable," or worse.

Most made by people who feel they are anonymous.

And this is just a thread about encampments.  Many other threads are far worse.

Your post was by no means the worst, which is why I responded to your comments with a little smiley humor, tempered by a response intended for you and others about attempting to support our commanders rather than telling them that the reasoned exercise of their discretion is "laughable."


Ned Lee

(And for Bob, I agree that t-shirt colors other than black and brown are always improper for BDUs at encampment and that grade is not authorized for baseball hats at any time.)

[Eclipse]

Nathan, I think you are still missing the point of span of control.

While a Commander is, in fact, personally responsible for those under his command, it is a practical impossibility to know the whereabouts of every single person at any given moment (see "Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle" for more detail).

The real command responsibility is insuring that the chain is fully functional to support the commander's ultimate, personal, responsibility.

A flight sergeant, for example, should not be tasked with getting "all the basics" back in barracks.  That exceeds the authority of the flight sergeant, and completely breaks the chain of command.  It also creates a situation where previous directives from those cadets' actual commanders is circumvented, and/or potentially sets up flight CC's to not know where there people actually are - a bad day for everyone.

Obviously the directive should have been passed down the chain as appropriate.  Not only it it the correct way to do it, learning to give and receive clear, succinct directives in a "stressful*" environment is part of the encampment experience.

The regular military has everyone dressed the same way, and the last time I looked, are able to command and control troops on a scale significantly higher than CAP generally deals with, and in environments somewhat more challenging.

All without having different colors overtly apparent to anyone, along with subdued grade and other insignia (and clothing that blends into the background by design).

Why?  Because the men are taught from day one that you only listen to the person you're told to listen to, and that doesn't change until it officially changes.  CAP could learn from that.

Ned, as always you are the font of simple, elegant solutions - black for one set of participants, brown for another - fills the perceived need and doesn't violate anyone's regs or dignity, and in most cases pulls uniforms from the cadets' closets.  Absolutely brilliant, and one would have to ask why this is not the answer...

*Stressful in the context of an encampment, not in the context of BMT or combat, etc.

[Ned]

Ned, as always you are the font of simple, elegant solutions - black for one set of participants, brown for another - fills the perceived need and doesn't violate anyone's regs or dignity, and in most cases pulls uniforms from the cadets' closets.  Absolutely brilliant, and one would have to ask why this is not the answer...

Thanks for the kind words, but that was Tim's idea.  I'm the one that suggested that underwear color was probably not the best way to tell staff from others.  Or at least I didn't want to be the one to explain that to Mom.

And having been an Army guy for a couple of decades, I should point out that at the platoon/flight level the NCO is actually in the chain of command.  And also the concept of colored baseball caps was in all probability drawn from our USAF partners.  I recall that USAF units supporting flight operations often used very colorful caps to tell who was in what unit.  Also the Army also uses some obvious visual identifiers ranging from drill sergeant's headgear to colorful MP brassards to help tell who has authority in a given situation.

Other RM examples include "farts and darts" on field grade service caps, stripes on service uniform trousers for officers, and WWII era stripes on the back of officers' helmets. 

This is all about supporting what a commander needs to accomplish a given mission.  You and I may disagree with a commander's choice about what she/he "needs", but as long as they have the responsibility for the mission and are acting within regulations, our job is to support them in their choices.

And not sit on the sidelines offering unsolicited advice about what is "needed" or not.

[Timbo]

Thanks for the kind words, but that was Tim's idea. 

Thanks Ned!  Actually, I was going to borrow your underwear idea.

I have been in Encampments that have used colored (t-shirt, hats, arm bands etc), and some that have used nothing.  They have ranged from 200+ to 96.  Both ran effectively, with the proper staff, and more importantly the proper Commander. 

I think the use of colored items, unique identifiers and whatever else that can be thought of are sometimes throwbacks a few decades, and no one has decided to make any changes.  I hate to reference PAWG, but I have been in PAWG for 12 years, while I was only in Missouri Wing for 2, but the use of an Orange Hat evolved from the Ranger-types trying to be distinctive to something that is Wing wide now (and spreading across the country like a virus), and the excuse the past three Wing Commanders have given to keeping it around was "it has always been that way, I am not going to change it".

I think an Encampment can be as effectively run without all the colored items as it could be with them included.

BTW....one unique item that I hated to see go away in the army was the wearing of Branch Insignia on the ACU when they made the move.  It sure was easier to tell who was a "cool Combat Guy", and who was a "nerdy Finance Officer".  Maybe that is what is actually going on with wearing of distinctive items at Encampments.  People want the recognition of what position they hold.  They don't want to be mistaken for Comm or Logistics, or the mess staff, they want everyone to see that they are cool line staff, or echelon staff.  (Don't tell me that it can not be a reason, remember there is a post here trying to find out if we can wear military awards, awarded when the posters were not even born yet!)

[Eclipse]

Ned, as always you are the font of simple, elegant solutions - black for one set of participants, brown for another - fills the perceived need and doesn't violate anyone's regs or dignity, and in most cases pulls uniforms from the cadets' closets.  Absolutely brilliant, and one would have to ask why this is not the answer...

Thanks for the kind words, but that was Tim's idea.  I'm the one that suggested that underwear color was probably not the best way to tell staff from others.  Or at least I didn't want to be the one to explain that to Mom.

OK, please pass the kudos to him next time you see him.   

And having been an Army guy for a couple of decades, I should point out that at the platoon/flight level the NCO is actually in the chain of command.  [/quote]

Yes, absolutely, but not for "all the basic cadets" - the impression I got from Nathan's post was that he was told to go and tell all the basics, his flight and others to get in the barracks.  A chain no-no in my book.

I'd expect an FS to be corralling his own people, but not someone else's.

[SWASH]

Ned, as always you are the font of simple, elegant solutions - black for one set of participants, brown for another - fills the perceived need and doesn't violate anyone's regs or dignity, and in most cases pulls uniforms from the cadets' closets.  Absolutely brilliant, and one would have to ask why this is not the answer...

Thanks for the kind words, but that was Tim's idea.  I'm the one that suggested that underwear color was probably not the best way to tell staff from others.  Or at least I didn't want to be the one to explain that to Mom.

OK, please pass the kudos to him next time you see him.   

And having been an Army guy for a couple of decades, I should point out that at the platoon/flight level the NCO is actually in the chain of command. 

Yes, absolutely, but not for "all the basic cadets" - the impression I got from Nathan's post was that he was told to go and tell all the basics, his flight and others to get in the barracks.  A chain no-no in my book.

I'd expect an FS to be corralling his own people, but not someone else's.
[/quote]

I'm guessing Nathan was using the sentence "all the basic cadets" as all of his basic cadets, as in all of the basics in his flight.

I too have been to encampments with staff hats of a million different colors for every single position, staff hats of all the same color, and no staff hats at all.  Honestly when I was a basic I did not need to see a million different colors to know who was what, in fact I didn't even care because all I listend to was my FS, FC, and First Shirt.  The encampment I went to with no staff hats was a smaller one with basicly no support staff, and that worked out fine because the basics only had to listen to two people, the FS and FC.  It's all up to the Encampment CC and what he wants to do.

And thank you Eclipse for the shirt clarification.  So by what the manual says the encampments that prohibit black shirts for basics and do not provide brown ones are wrong?

[Eclipse]

And thank you Eclipse for the shirt clarification.  So by what the manual says the encampments that prohibit black shirts for basics and do not provide brown ones are wrong?

That would be another case where people are making up rules locally.

In fact, 39-1 says quite the opposite in that Commanders are only allowed to require a specific uniform item, beyond the basic cadet uniform, if the item is issued to the cadets.

So to prohibit an approved shirt color, but not provide the color you require, would be a clear violation of 39-1.

Which brings us back to the issue of requiring BDU's at encampments, which in and of itself is a violation of the same regulation.  The rules say yo can prescribe a uniform of the day, but you can't deny a cadet participation if they don't have what you prescribe. (that same prohibition doesn't apply to seniors, so don't bother going there).

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Ah, the former cadets come out....

When I was a cadet officer, helping lead (or leading) large encampments, I didn't deal much directly with flight members, at least not on a formal basis. I dealt with squadron and flight commanders.

And remember: The senior may not remember, but the junior never forgets.

We never had colored hats. My diamonds were enough. My XO's diamonds, too. Squadron commanders were, at the very least, cadet first lieutenants. Flight commanders were FOs, 2nd Lts or 1st Lts, occasionally a captain if squadron commanders held higher rank.

I can see some disrepancy on the flight level with flight sergeants. Maybe in an ideal situation, if squadrons get colored hats, they should have some code on the hats for flight sergeants, like FS or something.

[Nathan]

Nathan, I think you are still missing the point of span of control.

I'm not entirely sure we're disagreeing as much as you think we're disagreeing, Eclipse.

While a Commander is, in fact, personally responsible for those under his command, it is a practical impossibility to know the whereabouts of every single person at any given moment (see "Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle" for more detail).

I'm a chemistry guy. I agree here.

The regular military has everyone dressed the same way, and the last time I looked, are able to command and control troops on a scale significantly higher than CAP generally deals with, and in environments somewhat more challenging.

All without having different colors overtly apparent to anyone, along with subdued grade and other insignia (and clothing that blends into the background by design).

Why?  Because the men are taught from day one that you only listen to the person you're told to listen to, and that doesn't change until it officially changes.  CAP could learn from that.

Which is where I think we might disagree (I think...), because you're making the comparison between two completely different groups. The first are adults who have been through weeks of training and indoctrination (sometimes longer), who are for the most part completely standardized in training, with commanders who have had years and years of experience, and in addition to them, as you said, doing this EVERY DAY. The second group is consisted mainly of cadets who may have only been in CAP for a few months before attending encampment, may never have left home for more than a few hours before, with completely inconsistent training between units, and with cadets who wear a uniform for 2.5 hours a week.

So we can't expect the chain of command to work QUITE the same way. Even the immediate leaders, the C/NCO's, could have been in for only a little over a year (in some circumstances, less), and even the highest ranking cadets are likely not to have been in for more than five or six years. The cadets are going to need MUCH more direct oversight and hands-on manegement than a military unit will, because the military unit does what it does every day. Everyone knows their place. Today, they are doing something, and in a month from today, they will likely be doing the same thing, with the same people in charge.

Encampment is nothing like that. The commanders are not only supposed to train the basics, but train the staff below them, and be trained by the staff above them. It takes place over a week, with daily activities differing, with staff the cadets may never have met before. The goal of encampment is training for the entire cadet corps and most of the senior corps. In order to ensure that this training is effective, a commander oftentimes has to let his/her people do their jobs, but not necessarily trust them 100% for getting the job done alone. That's not part of good training. So we need to know who goes where, and belongs to whom, in order to ensure that our people are getting the job done right.

And colored hats help.

[jimmydeanno]

The regular military has everyone dressed the same way, and the last time I looked, are able to command and control troops on a scale significantly higher than CAP generally deals with, and in environments somewhat more challenging.

All without having different colors overtly apparent to anyone, along with subdued grade and other insignia (and clothing that blends into the background by design).

Not to add fuel to this, but in military training environments they do indeed have differentiators, from smokey the bear hats to cords.  My wife's AF tech school had "ropes" who wore a red, yellow or green cord on all of their uniforms, including BDUs. 

[Eclipse]

The regular military has everyone dressed the same way, and the last time I looked, are able to command and control troops on a scale significantly higher than CAP generally deals with, and in environments somewhat more challenging.

All without having different colors overtly apparent to anyone, along with subdued grade and other insignia (and clothing that blends into the background by design).

Not to add fuel to this, but in military training environments they do indeed have differentiators, from smokey the bear hats to cords.  My wife's AF tech school had "ropes" who wore a red, yellow or green cord on all of their uniforms, including BDUs.

Apples and oranges...

A: Whatever they are wearing is approved by HQ for wear.

B: They are most likely consistent across bases and identifiers.

C: Whatever is worn in that environment is not worn during normal operations (i.e. Smokey hats in combat, etc.)

However all three above are part of the argument against them in CAP encampments, because we have such an issue with adherence to regulations at local units.

Though A: should be enough...