http://www.capchannel.com/live_web_stream
Is anyone watching that can give a play by play? I can't listen while at work. :'(
Quote from: sjtrupp on March 02, 2007, 03:52:50 PM
Is anyone watching that can give a play by play? I can't listen while at work. :'(
The region and wing commanders are speaking about which specific contributions they're placing inside the CAP time capsule, which will be opened 65 years from now.
Arizona joked about putting Dan Levich in... that's funny
My stream just stopped a couple of minutes ago for no apparent reason... >:(
Quote from: Al Sayre on March 02, 2007, 04:21:11 PM
My stream just stopped a couple of minutes ago for no apparent reason... >:(
Me also.
Dooooh. Lunch break until 1.
Hmm... I'm getting an error about not being a valid link for the stream, anyone else?
It appears that it's up and running again.
If it hangs, go back and click the link again.
Been there -- done that. It was working, then once the lunch ended, it hung up and I can't seem to make it actually work... It keeps giving me an error about server may not be there or proxy may not be set up correctly (of which I have no proxy server here)
With the camera having Amy in the shot the whole time TP must be going nuts!
Quote from: msmjr2003 on March 02, 2007, 03:54:10 PMThe region and wing commanders are speaking about which specific contributions they're placing inside the CAP time capsule, which will be opened 65 years from now.
Missed the intro to the "time capsule" portion but the whole thing seemed rather lame. I actually felt kind of embarrassed for a couple of the commanders. On the other hand, others were very presentable. It certainly helped to illustrate some of the disparities that are often discussed here.
One good item to note is that the MAJCOM on the background still has USAF Aux. in the scroll. ;)
Feed doesn't work. I get the following.
Windows Media Player cannot play the file because the specified protocol is not supported. In the Open URL dialog, try opening the file using a different transport protocol (for example, "mms:").
TP is wearing the TP double breasted uniform with metal rank insignia
I got that also. But i right clicked and hit open in new window and that worked for some reason.
Its award time right now.
Quote from: Chris Jacobs on March 02, 2007, 06:46:23 PM
Its award time right now.
And evidently everyone there needs to go through a course on customs and courtesies - including our National Commander. It's obvious that a couple of the awardees didn't have the faintest idea as to what to do when reporting. Ugh.
...but now I'm just being a nit (and I don't want to do that).
does any one else just have a blue screen with the national board written on it.
Quote from: A.Member on March 02, 2007, 06:55:16 PM
Quote from: Chris Jacobs on March 02, 2007, 06:46:23 PM
Its award time right now.
And evidently everyone there needs to go through a course on customs and courtesies - including our National Commander. It's obvious that a couple of the awardees didn't have the faintest idea as to what to do when reporting. Ugh.
...but now I'm just being a nit (and I don't want to do that).
The did change it.
Quote from: Interim Change Letter dated 20 Nov 2006Para 4:
4. The new Corporate Uniform has been well received and more and more members
are wearing these combinations. The recent NEC clarified the policy concerning
customs and courtesies when wearing this uniform. Members wearing the Corporate
Service Coat or the white aviator shirt and blue pants/skirt combination should observe
the same customs and courtesies as members wearing the Air Force-style uniform.
Members will stand at attention for the National Anthem and the presentation of the
colors and will salute superior officers as necessary. Additionally, the NEC also
clarified that the Air Force inverted V tie-tab will be the authorized tie worn by female
members with these combinations instead of the originally approved CAP floppy bow.
Quote from: Chris Jacobs on March 02, 2007, 06:59:25 PM
does any one else just have a blue screen with the national board written on it.
Yep.
Quote from: arajca on March 02, 2007, 07:01:59 PM
The did change it.
Quote from: Interim Change Letter dated 20 Nov 2006Para 4:
4. The new Corporate Uniform has been well received and more and more members
are wearing these combinations. The recent NEC clarified the policy concerning
customs and courtesies when wearing this uniform. Members wearing the Corporate
Service Coat or the white aviator shirt and blue pants/skirt combination should observe
the same customs and courtesies as members wearing the Air Force-style uniform.
Members will stand at attention for the National Anthem and the presentation of the
colors and will salute superior officers as necessary. Additionally, the NEC also
clarified that the Air Force inverted V tie-tab will be the authorized tie worn by female
members with these combinations instead of the originally approved CAP floppy bow.
Looks like I obviously need a refresher as well. I've never seen that letter (perhaps, in part, because I'm obviously in partial denial over the silly TPU anyway ;) )
However, there were still a couple of awardees that obviously had no idea what to do, regardless of uniform.
Man, this is boring. A lecture on paralimentar procedures at the pase of a snail.
Holy Crap, TP just said 13 items (whole agenda) to be done in 2.5 hours. Quick pro/cons... already started. This should be interesting.
Finally, Item 1.
Pineda wins his exam amendment defeat - good job Tony
Okay item 5... AFIADL testing, applies to PME only (SOS, ACSC, AWC; not stuff like safety, instructor, etc).... and it fails. Expect we'll see new rules on TCO soon though.
6... school enrichment program plan 2007-12 approval. That passed
7... possible additional terms for Wg/CCs. Oplan requesting sectret ballot & pointing out same kind of thing got shot down last time, asked for non-member to address on the issue & was shot down right away. SER talking in favor... supposedly they can't find one person to be Wg CC in some state. Broke for discussion, & audio cut, I don't know if that passed or not.
NOTE: SDIS slides inbound from ALWG, will pause to review those when they come in.
Quote from: DNall on March 02, 2007, 07:40:09 PM
Okay item 5... AFIADL testing, applies to PME only (SOS, ACSC, AWC; not stuff like safety, instructor, etc).... and it fails.
That vote kind of surprised me. It made sense to pass it.
Levitch is DYING to be able to extend Wing and Region Commander terms!
The next step is the lifetime National CC role - just watch... but it will happen off the books!
Quote from: FlyGuy1986 on March 02, 2007, 07:45:35 PM
Levitch is DYING to be able to extend Wing and Region Commander terms!
I hope this goes down with another defeat...we'll find out shortly...
SECRET Ballot means ballot stuffing... it is a day one trick... I see that Levitch and the guy that asked for the secret ballot are firmly in TP's camp!
By the way boys and girls - I TOLD YOU SO!
This IG thing is going to get shot down too!
I TOLD YOU SO
Gees, enough with the editorializing.
What exactly is Item #6 (School Enrichment) anyway?
Side note, good thing we added a DDR track (#4)! ::)
What was the outcome of the Commander Terms - I lost audio. Did they report or are the secret votes announced later?
Wait for it - wait for it....
Here comes the legal guy....
This one goes down hard!
Ray (FlyGuy1986), Knock it off... First warning.
DDR is an extra duty coordination position, I don't know that a spoecialty track is really useful.
School enrichment is the five year stategic plan for the middle school program.
Considering IG item now. (complaint notification to person charged).
Did anyone hear the vote on agenda item 7? The sound (not the video) was cut out during the vote. Thanks.
Geez...I have to say, a couple people really speaking out of their rears here (ex. the guy attempting to make some analogy to SOX - he's an IG!?! :o ). A lot of rambling.
Guess #8 is postponed anyway.
BTW, who is the guy in the "old" corporate uniform who keeps speaking at the micorphone in the foreground?
Who's that younger looking guy talking at the head podium?
Quote from: msmjr2003 on March 02, 2007, 08:10:36 PM
Who's that younger looking guy talking at the head podium?
The Col.? Wasn't he the Nat. IG?
Quote from: A.Member on March 02, 2007, 08:12:22 PM
Quote from: msmjr2003 on March 02, 2007, 08:10:36 PM
Who's that younger looking guy talking at the head podium?
The Col.? Wasn't he the Nat. IG?
Yeah, the full-bird. Wow, he is a younger fella in contrast to many others.... Wonder if he's a rising star (wow, that could have multiple meanings.) :)
I believe the guy in the "old" corporate uniform is Col. Applebaum, Pennsylvania CC and the sponsor of the term extension and IG proposals.
Quote from: A.Member on March 02, 2007, 08:03:07 PM
A lot of rambling.
Being posponed to Aug, because the Mmbrshp action cmte is working on a rewrite that will be ready then & should address this.
Orange trianges on vans is up now. & they come off.
Orange triangles no longer required on roof of vehicles
10 is withdrawn, whatever that was. Sat's stuff (old business). Gees man, I've hot-shotted meetings like that before when I wanted to get out & we weren't doing anything meaningful, but that was a bit of a slam.
Doing safety investigation thing from last time. This is getting pushed as not currently workable.
They really need to work on the mics for the people making statements and asking questions. Very difficult to even hear their position.
The Gen. must have somewhere to go...quite a finish. Not cool.
So, does anyone know the outcome of #7?
Just kind of slammed that guy at the end........
TP sure is fast to shut folks down
Quote from: LtCol White on March 02, 2007, 08:30:29 PM
TP sure is fast to shut folks down
Yeah, straight out of "How to Win Friends and Influence People"...or not.
He did that a couple of times. Did you catch the "Sit down!" comment earlier? Wonder what that was about.
Apparently, Fidel Castro is not sick. He's at the board meeting. >:D
;D >:D
All of the comments seemed directed at Oplan, the Austalian sounding guy. It was like a battle of accents.
No I didn't hear what happened with 7, the Audio ws cut for the informal discussion & didn't get turned back on in time for the vote.
Levitch is VERY CLOSE to TP... wait for it boys...
Ray Hayden
I guess he will be replaced by the end of next week.
Why in the heck did TP move E.Parker to National Staff while HE was under investigation???
Ask yourself boys.... be real and ask yourselves...
Quote from: DNall on March 02, 2007, 08:40:15 PM
All of the comments seemed directed at Oplan, the Austalian sounding guy.
Agreed. There is obviously some issue there between the two...or at least in one direction. Who is Oplan?
Quote from: A.Member on March 02, 2007, 08:45:40 PM
Quote from: DNall on March 02, 2007, 08:40:15 PM
All of the comments seemed directed at Oplan, the Austalian sounding guy.
Agreed. There is obviously some issue there between the two...or at least in one direction.
Wonder if he will be taken away late tonight in one of those blacked out CAP Vans after the region party. ::)
he's the one that put up that list of constitutional houskeeping changes that was floated over at CAPBlog (http://capblog.typepad.com/capblog/2007/02/lazy_friday.html#more) & only one of which made the cut for the meeting.
I sort of wish they posted parts of the web stream afterwards instead of only doing the live show. Break it up into small bits for each agenda item so that you could view what was important to you.
That would be nice, have them archived that way, and it would be nice if they left the mikes on during open discussion like they have done off & on before.
Quote from: A.Member on March 02, 2007, 07:41:48 PM
Quote from: DNall on March 02, 2007, 07:40:09 PM
Okay item 5... AFIADL testing, applies to PME only (SOS, ACSC, AWC; not stuff like safety, instructor, etc).... and it fails.
That vote kind of surprised me. It made sense to pass it.
Would not matter because the USAF did not back it.
I thought USAF were the ones getting all huffy about testing security in the first place. Did I miss something?
CAP was huffy trying to prevent AF from being huffy, and that wa spretty effective. The exact policy spelled out here was shot down for logistics reasons. The alt was some extra careful rules for TCOs (two people proctor these tests), and I thnk you'll see something along those lines eventually.
Agenda Item #7 Passed; now it goes before the BOG for approval (change of constitution & Bylaws.
Quote from: CAPOfficer on March 03, 2007, 04:28:29 AM
Agenda Item #7 Passed; now it goes before the BOG for approval (change of constitution & Bylaws.
What a crock.
Quote from: SarDragon on March 03, 2007, 12:21:27 AM
I thought USAF were the ones getting all huffy about testing security in the first place. Did I miss something?
In the proposed agenda that went out a couple of weeks ago....the USAF did not concur with the proposed changes to AFDLI testing procedures. My guess is that they do not want to drop the additional burden of the testing on to the base testing offices.
Either way.....it is up to the USAF to dectate how we take those tests...not CAP. Even if the measure passed....the USAF would/could just ignore it.
Does anyone think there is a hope the BOG won't go along with changing CAP constitution to allow extending command terms?
They've tended to defer to NB on matters that concern member preference, and hesitated to mak eC*B changes w/o the NB weighing in first.... so I think they'll go along, and if the don't like it much there my put sme discussion in the record that it shouldn't be used much.
okay, I missed the intro, but why is the NB getting a presentation about Ghana? Don't we have enough to deal with close to home?
<<Am scratching my head on this one. I would suspect that they (Ghana) will be expanding their IACE participation (?)
Anyone else see TPU ver 2.0? :D
Okay, after the guy from Ghana finished talking, he gave MG Pineda a traditional warriors outfit which he put on over his TPU. Everyone laughed a bit and he said,
"You laugh...another uniform change coming later".
Also heard him joking earlier about Vanguard being in the lobby with "fashion by Tony" to sell.
So, he has got a sense of humor about the TPU issue.
anyone else catch what was said about the change of command stuff? it was before the first break and a question from one of the NB members if I understood correctly
An interesting factoid - over 17,000 members were watching the feed. There probably were some non-members in this number, but I think it shows a great deal of interest by the rank and file in the goings-on of the NB.
He was joking about not having his bodyguards with him... :)
US Civil Air Patrol???? TP is talking about using that on press releases and on BDU name tape. BAD IDEA. We already have enough problems with out identy.
Some of the existing tapes don't fit as is now.
Jeez, they're clapping for it. No one had any issues except phasing it in.
So, we're more or less changing the name of our organization with only about 5 minutes discussion.
Lets see how they vote on it.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 06:41:02 PM
US Civil Air Patrol???? TP is talking about using that on press releases and on BDU name tape. BAD IDEA. We already have enough problems with out identy.
US Civil Air Patrol, looks like it would be a long phase in...someone suggested that it be rather a phase out of the old ones by proxy and attrition.
In theory a Uniform change away from BDUs would mitigate the extra expense.
Next item is for the Vice Commander to keep the Brig Gen rank upon leaving office and new BDUs transitioning to CAP.
Life membership for subchasers is a good idea and is up.
I think most of the sub-chasers would be close to the 50 year mark now. Don't you get a life membership with 50 years?
Assuming they stayed in CAP the entire time.
Quote from: mashcraft on March 03, 2007, 06:53:40 PM
I think most of the sub-chasers would be close to the 50 year mark now. Don't you get a life membership with 50 years?
I wonder if they mean for all subchasers...even those that had not maintained their membership?
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 06:41:02 PM
US Civil Air Patrol???? TP is talking about using that on press releases and on BDU name tape. BAD IDEA. We already have enough problems with out identy.
I missed that. What was the justifaction for it?
What I heard was that he (TP) believes it makes us look and work as one team. I guess we weren't a team before.
He didn't really provide a rational justification. He said something about there being a CAP in Brazil using our seal, and then said having "US" in our name would distringuish us as the United State's CAP.
I could go for US Air Force Auxiliary, but not US Civil Air Patrol. It makes us sound like some of the crazy groups that pretend they're affililiated with DHS or a state government but which are actually private militia organizations. Just doesn't sound credible and throws out a lot of name recognition that we have now.
Jeez, it passed. :'(
I have 10 letters in my last name and it barely fits above my BDU pocket. Count the letters on that bad boy! I still like the CIVIL AIR PATROL tape.
(Old school fellow)
I just looked at mine and if you stuck 2 letters and 2 periods there would be about 1/8" left over on each side.
Is it still going on?
yep. Our Chief Master Sergeant is speaking about the NCO Initiative.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 07:44:06 PM
yep. Our Chief Master Sergeant is speaking about the NCO Initiative.
He is laying out the framework for an NCO corps.
NCOs for the commanders to consolidate all the leadership training, military skills, uniform and drill/ceremonies and take it off the Wing CCs. Other NCOs will serve as Squadron and Group version of the same.
He's asking for Region Commanders to start the process. There is no apparatus for promotion. It is not practical to creat CAP NCOs from CAP.
Can CAP advance its NCOs? The answer is no...at this time. It would be difficult to create them...in the future...who knows.
Hoo-RAH!!!
The IG is giving a rundown of his work.
More proof that TP hates being the AF Aux and wants to move away from it as far as possible. As CAP he can have his designer clothes (yuck) and his kingdom. As AF Aux he is not grand pubar.
Looks like it just like having an enlisted advisor in each unit.
Interesting, he's not interested in making it possible for NCOs to advance in CAP. Maybe in the future.
Hard to tell if BG Courter is wearing the AF or TPU as my color feed isn't great, but I think it is the AF uniform. As someone who has been on the ragged edge of being legally able to wear the uniform myself, she doesn't seem as if she would meet the weight regulations.
My feed isn't much clearer, but Gen. Courter is wearing AF blues.
There are a couple of fellows there (can't identify them) who certainly shouldn't be in AF, due to weight ... but they are. Pot bellies in an AF uniform just doesn't cut it.
Gen. Courter's okay.
Jack
Earlier this morning I caught the tail end of a talk someone was giving that seemed to indicate that a redesign of the CAP webpage is in the offing. :)
Whoo.. came close to everybody having to wear orange baseball hats with BDUs....
The Border Patrol Ribbon is up for a vote...or is it not? Some Robert's Rules stuff...the motion was defeated.
Incident Commander Badge is up for discussion...committee recommends it and it is motioned.
Remarks...Is this only for a person serving as IC or is it like an Aeronautial rating worn for life. An Amendment to keep it on like a ground team badge. Vote on the amentment...passes. Returns to a vote on the Amended notion...it passes.
Spec Insignia on the leater name tag,...up for discussion. No comments...motion passes. Motion and second...no comments. Motion passes! Thank you.
Bronze Star on Curry ribbon for O-FLight. Committee recommends nixing it.
Spec Track Badge for DDR...
Wear of CAC ribbon to Senior Members who serve as advisor. Continuance of wear as a senior... Committee recommends approval for Cadets becoming senior, bit not for Active Senior Advisors. Comment: Miniture Medal? Is this retro Active? They would say yes. If you were a cadet in "1902" you would get it. Motion...passes.
PAO change the Peyton Award criteria and create Region PAO from a Wing for national consideration. Provides for Wing and Region of Squadron and Group PAOs. Comment: Every other award goes through the region...recommend we vote no! Recommend starnadrization of all awards. Motion fails...
Move an authorization "Of the Year Awards" be consistant routed through Region then National... seconded. Comments? Move to table for discussion. Postponed and sent to committee...seconded. Motion to send to committee...Passes.
Cadet NCO grades...wear of insignia on both sides of service uniform. Mandataor wear date March 2008. Motion passes!
Command patach to change design on Distinctive Uniforms for use of USAF style flight jacket. 1 March 2008 mandatory wear date. Comments... Motion Passes.
Summer uniform...next board. Tuck in shirt?
Historian's report...
59th National Board meeting...Start 1948.
What's my role...? CAP Pin Up!
When talking about a proposed border patrol ribbon it was to have similar requirements for Air SAR ribbon, including an option to earn it via ground sorties. Instead of a border patrol ribbon, they're going to incorporate it into a Homeland Security Ribbon instead...
I wonder what sort of ground border patrol or HLS missions we're doing?
Looks like ICs will get a little badge. Once they earn it, they can wear it forever.
You'll now be able to wear specialty insignia other than aviation badges on your leather name badges on flight suits.
DDR Specialty Badge approved.
Does it sometimes seem to you that some folks in the room just don't know what's going on? :D
Jack
Cadet CAC members that become seniors get to keep wearing the CAC ribbon when they turn senior. Effective retroactively. Senior advisors won't get a CAC ribbon.
^ Looks like I will be adding another ribbon.
But are you shooting for "over the shoulder" too, Mike?
Jack
Quote from: MIKE on March 03, 2007, 08:53:33 PM
^ Looks like I will be adding another ribbon.
Me too.
Cadet NCOs will wear grade on both collars of blue shirts and service dress.
New Command Patch passed for AF uniforms.
Talk about a summer uniform with a tuck-in shirt. Not discussed in detail. Not sure what that is.
Quote from: ColonelJack on March 03, 2007, 08:54:06 PM
But are you shooting for "over the shoulder" too, Mike?
No, only 10 ribbons now... plus clasps and a Basic GT badge.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 08:59:14 PM
Talk about a summer uniform with a tuck-in shirt. Not discussed in detail. Not sure what that is.
Apparently the design is still in committee, so nothing on this now. Said it will probably be the next meeting.
I could've told them the proposal to rescind the "no ribbons or badges above the lapel notch" wouldn't have flown ... that was at AF's request in the first place. Add in CAP ribbons to military awards and you've got "South American Dictator" all over your blouse.
Jack
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 08:57:26 PM
Cadet NCOs will wear grade on both collars of blue shirts and service dress.
1 March 08 mandatory wear date IIRC. It didn't specify NCOs only did it? ??? Waiting for the letter.
Quote from: arajca on March 03, 2007, 08:58:27 PM
New Command Patch passed for AF uniforms.
1 March 08 mandatory wear date also IIRC.
Of course the historian spent most of his time talking about what CAP did in WWII and issues associated with that. Guess we haven't done much since
Evidently looking at having a national Civil Air Patrol monument/memorial. Pentagon-shaped glass and steel dedicated to line-of-duty deaths. Its nice to see that they're going to recognize everyone, and not just WWII deaths.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 08:37:59 PM
Whoo.. came close to everybody having to wear orange baseball hats with BDUs....
You speak of this as if calamity was averted :)
Quote from: fyrfitrmedic on March 03, 2007, 09:10:14 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 08:37:59 PM
Whoo.. came close to everybody having to wear orange baseball hats with BDUs....
You speak of this as if calamity was averted :)
Exactly.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 09:09:48 PM
Of course the historian spent most of his time talking about what CAP did in WWII and issues associated with that. Guess we haven't done much since
Evidently looking at having a national Civil Air Patrol monument/memorial. Pentagon-shaped glass and steel dedicated to line-of-duty deaths. Its nice to see that they're going to recognize everyone, and not just WWII deaths.
Come on...we spend a lot of time talking about the American Revolution, Civil War and WWII, would you apply the same logic?
Not saying it wasn't important, but we've had 60 years of history since then. Who is out there making sure that CAP's accomplishments in the 1970s are remembered through documents or photos?
The region and wing commanders ponied up the money for the monument. SER put up $1000.00. The rest put up $100.00 ea, starting with TP.
Looks like safety has gotten better than last year. Huge drop in aircraft incidents, injuries, and significant drop in vehicle mishaps.
Near Space? Curious...I think this is cool. Project Mogul stuff!!!
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 08:59:14 PM
Talk about a summer uniform with a tuck-in shirt. Not discussed in detail. Not sure what that is.
Guayaberas for everyone! Montgomery, AL to be renamed Little Havana! Viva la revolucion!
You don't tuck those in...
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 04:19:46 PM
Okay, after the guy from Ghana finished talking, he gave MG Pineda a traditional warriors outfit which he put on over his TPU. Everyone laughed a bit and he said,
"You laugh...another uniform change coming later".
Also heard him joking earlier about Vanguard being in the lobby with "fashion by Tony" to sell.
So, he has got a sense of humor about the TPU issue.
Problem is, it isn't funny. Not even a little.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 09:45:58 PM
You don't tuck those in...
What do you wanna bet it's golf shirt on top, BBDU on bottom?
Quote from: DNall on March 03, 2007, 10:00:29 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 09:45:58 PM
You don't tuck those in...
What do you wanna bet it's golf shirt on top, BBDU on bottom?
They said it was a "fatigue-type uniform" so we'll have to wait and see.
Why in the world do we need another one? Isn't two enough?
Quote from: Major Carrales on March 03, 2007, 09:37:22 PM
Near Space? Curious...I think this is cool. Project Mogul stuff!!!
That project looks like something that totally rocks! http://www.capnspace.org/ (http://www.capnspace.org/)
Now, I just need to figure out how to do that where I live.
Quote from: baronet68 on March 03, 2007, 10:46:17 PM
Quote from: Major Carrales on March 03, 2007, 09:37:22 PM
Near Space? Curious...I think this is cool. Project Mogul stuff!!!
That project looks like something that totally rocks! http://www.capnspace.org/ (http://www.capnspace.org/)
Now, I just need to figure out how to do that where I live.
I want in on that. Imagine that...launching a ballon and having a UDF team a part of it to locate it.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 10:08:22 PM
Why in the world do we need another one? Isn't two enough?
Never! We always have room for more uniforms, right? ::)
Why are we as an organization so preoccupied with uniforms? It would be interesting to see numbers of uniform items that were proposed/passed over the years versus some of the other stuff. We could be updating some of the other existing publications that have been unchanged for years... Or creating some that we really need but haven't got... but instead we'll be adding more change letters to CAPM 39-1 for more ugly badges.
I like uniforms as much as the next guy... but at some point you just gotta say enough.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 08:51:33 PM
Cadet CAC members that become seniors get to keep wearing the CAC ribbon when they turn senior. Effective retroactively. Senior advisors won't get a CAC ribbon.
Heh... guess I fall under that category! Was wing rep (red deodorant string - ahem, shoulder cord) to the old Florida Wing Group 15 WIWAC, and am currently Texas Wing CAC senior advisor.
More blingage fit for a Mexican general... And I just spent some moolah on Ultrathins! ;D (Read: it can wait.)
Quote from: MIKE on March 03, 2007, 11:11:45 PM
Why are we as an organization so preoccupied with uniforms?
Because it's easier than critical thinking about real changes to training, organization, and the like. :(
Holy smokes! I didn't listen today and that's probably a good thing or I would've likely busted my laptop. All these significant changes without broader feedback from the membership and virtually no discussion are appalling.
If this meeting had happened 4 months earlier, they would have at least one less member today. Too much b.s. at too many levels. The organization doesn't have a focus and it's priorities are very screwed up. Yet, it's full speed forward. As someone commented on earlier, half the people there don't seem to have a clue as to what is going on. It's really unfortunate. I'm disappointed and upset. >:(
Well, their grasp of Robert Rules of Order leaves a lot to be desired. To be fair, I was watching and part of the time I wasn't entirely sure what they were voting on.
I tell you, that US Civil Air Patrol thing is almost enough to make me WANT to be a Wing Commander just so I could speak and vote against stuff like that.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 07:54:07 PM
Hard to tell if BG Courter is wearing the AF or TPU as my color feed isn't great, but I think it is the AF uniform. As someone who has been on the ragged edge of being legally able to wear the uniform myself, she doesn't seem as if she would meet the weight regulations.
The General attended a function at my unit back in October (during which she promoted me and several others). She was in AF Blues and she looked well within AF standards.
Quote from: MIKE on March 03, 2007, 08:53:33 PM
^ Looks like I will be adding another ribbon.
:D Me too, sir...at least that's one expense I
don't mind paying.
Someone please bring back the "1505" uniform with "C-A-P" cutouts, black nameplate and "hershey bar!"
Those were the days!
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 07:54:07 PM
Hard to tell if BG Courter is wearing the AF or TPU as my color feed isn't great, but I think it is the AF uniform. As someone who has been on the ragged edge of being legally able to wear the uniform myself, she doesn't seem as if she would meet the weight regulations.
Speaking as someone who knows BG Courter personally (and, heh, back in the day when she was a Captain helped her with some of the good "gouge" on uniform issues), I can say that she's within weight standards if she's wearing the AF uniform.
I know her that well.
Can't wait to find out when the "phase out date" is for the old Civil Air Patrol tapes. I shall be wearing mine until the very last day.
That's just a flat out stupid change. Grrrrr.
They were talking about an actual wear out phase out... but I'm not sure if that is the actual result.
Quote from: arajca on March 03, 2007, 08:58:27 PM
New Command Patch passed for AF uniforms.
I didnt get to watch today because we had a SAREX. What is the new design of this?
Quote from: LtCol White on March 04, 2007, 01:44:20 AM
Quote from: arajca on March 03, 2007, 08:58:27 PM
New Command Patch passed for AF uniforms.
I didnt get to watch today because we had a SAREX. What is the new design of this?
(http://www.civilairpatrolstore.com/store/images/CMD%20NEW.jpg)
I'll defer to those who know BG Coulter on her uniform.
And just to be clear, the new command patch wear for AF flight suit and jacket was already approved by the AF and this vote just made it official.
The "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" tape for BDUs has not gone before the Air Force yet. Hopefully they will save us from ourselves (again) and not approve us to wear a name that actually isn't ours on our uniforms.
Females who choose to wear the TPU don't have a women's version of the TPU service dress jacket - yet.
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on March 04, 2007, 03:24:54 AM
Females who choose to wear the TPU don't have a women's version of the TPU service dress jacket - yet.
::cringe:: I think you just gave them a new idea.
Quote from: SKYKING607 on March 04, 2007, 01:05:25 AM
Someone please bring back the "1505" uniform with "C-A-P" cutouts, black nameplate and "hershey bar!"
Those were the days!
I loved 1505's
Quote from: NIN on March 04, 2007, 01:07:57 AM
Can't wait to find out when the "phase out date" is for the old Civil Air Patrol tapes. I shall be wearing mine until the very last day.
That's just a flat out stupid change. Grrrrr.
They talked about it for a while. I THINK they said 2008, but I could be wrong. Originally they were talking about just making the new ones the only ones that could be purchased and let uniform attrition solve the problem, but then someone brought up that some people may not get new uniforms for 15 years.
A thought on a practical thing the NB could authorize in uniforms...after it was freaking cold one day and we were doing a preflight, I realized...there are no gloves authorized with the flight suit. Maybe they would care to authorize the NOMEX gloves in green and maybe something else.
And where can I see this cool warrior costume that we will all be wearing soon?
Actually it looked sort of like one of those things Clint Eastwood wore in very old westerns. Can't think of the name of those Mexican-type overshirts.
Had an African pattern on it with sort of vertical stripes.
COOOOL. I propose that mini-medals be authorized on that uniform. I figure if I buy like 16 of those things at $6.25, I should get some use out of them.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 11:58:38 PM
Well, their grasp of Robert Rules of Order leaves a lot to be desired. To be fair, I was watching and part of the time I wasn't entirely sure what they were voting on.
I tell you, that US Civil Air Patrol thing is almost enough to make me WANT to be a Wing Commander just so I could speak and vote against stuff like that.
Right, second. ;D
The thing with roberts rules is intentional. One of the reasons it's used is so the participants can control the meeting & the crowd doesn't necessarily know what's going on till it's over. It's ashame the Wg/CCs don't seem to be more comfortable with it, and the legal officer explaining some of the rules earlier was just wrong about a couple major items.
Why so much with the uniforms?1) Cause members can leave at the drop of hat & things will be done that leadership thinks will placate them, but leadership is out of touch so they may just as likely piss them off (like we saw today).
2) Cause we don't control our own fate. There are major problems swirling around that desperately have to be solved, but many times that requires AF or Congress to act and we don't have the power to make that happen. There is a whole range of stuff at our level, but it's tedious work that sucks to do & would be hard on membership. Rather than man up & take care of that, they act out in areas where they have wide ability to change meaningless things.
3) AF relationship... I don't think CAP acts in an effort to effect the relationship. What they do is not think things thru & make irresponsible moves that don't make sense & have side effects which they either didn't anticipate or were conscieted enough not to care able. There's valid things we should do that are desigend to standardize our system, to bring things into line with our parent, & to create a professional appearance to the public, but most of the things we actually do are just immature acting out on the part of people that should be above that.
Quote from: JC004 on March 04, 2007, 04:13:07 AM
realized...there are no gloves authorized with the flight suit. Maybe they would care to authorize the NOMEX gloves in green and maybe something else.
Nomex gloves are authorized safety gear. I believe required in California IIRC. Otherwise the flight suit is a utility uniform & the same black liners worn with BDUs are fine to wear. [/pyschologist hat]
US CAP tapes:
And by the way if they HAD to change it, could they have at least made it US CAP, rather than that whole long mess. 53k members X 1.5 tapes per member X $2.50 = $200,000 cost to membership. Freaking idiots.
Some good things that came up:
Super safety stats improvements (mentioned earlier).
Consoldated aircraft maintenance (which I don't know much about) has saved over $400,000 so far and its not used in but a handful of spots. Evidently it saves about 25% on C172 maintenance and about 50% on C182 maintenance. One good thing is that the AF pays for fuel to fly the plane to whoever got the contract for routine maintenance.
Actually, the uniform voting portion was probably only about 45 minutes total of the time today. They did vote down a few things.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 04, 2007, 04:51:55 AM
Consoldated aircraft maintenance (which I don't know much about) has saved over $400,000 so far and its not used in but a handful of spots. Evidently it saves about 25% on C172 maintenance and about 50% on C182 maintenance. One good thing is that the AF pays for fuel to fly the plane to whoever got the contract for routine maintenance.
It actually cost more money & debatablly more down time. Obviously it costs more to move a plane to the maint than to do it locally, not so mch in the AF where you are talking about stationing the resources next to each other & providing replacements for remote units. What this program actually does is shift the travel cost to the AF & only account for the savings in actual maint costs. That in turn leads congress to believe they are spending less on CAP than they are, and accounts for the spending for that travel as an AFAM just as if it had been SaR. It's misleading is what it is, but it gives Wgs better control over their fleets & that increases accountability. I'm not saying it's bad, just don';t read anything into the numbers.
Quote from: SKYKING607 on March 04, 2007, 01:05:25 AM
Someone please bring back the "1505" uniform with "C-A-P" cutouts, black nameplate and "hershey bar!"
Those were the days!
You said it!!!
Quote from: RiverAux on March 04, 2007, 03:59:07 AM
Quote from: NIN on March 04, 2007, 01:07:57 AM
Can't wait to find out when the "phase out date" is for the old Civil Air Patrol tapes. I shall be wearing mine until the very last day.
That's just a flat out stupid change. Grrrrr.
They talked about it for a while. I THINK they said 2008, but I could be wrong. Originally they were talking about just making the new ones the only ones that could be purchased and let uniform attrition solve the problem, but then someone brought up that some people may not get new uniforms for 15 years.
I think they settled on 3 years, which would be 2010.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 08:51:33 PM
Cadet CAC members that become seniors get to keep wearing the CAC ribbon when they turn senior. Effective retroactively. Senior advisors won't get a CAC ribbon.
What a shame. I have no proof that I was ever on CAC. But I was. I really was. 40 years ago! ;)
Quote from: SarDragon on March 04, 2007, 07:24:12 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 08:51:33 PM
Cadet CAC members that become seniors get to keep wearing the CAC ribbon when they turn senior. Effective retroactively. Senior advisors won't get a CAC ribbon.
What a shame. I have no proof that I was ever on CAC. But I was. I really was. 40 years ago! ;)
Doesn't mean a CAPF 2A can't be signed by your commander, awarding you the CAC ribbon for past service. It's retroactive, after all.
Quote from: ZigZag911 on March 04, 2007, 05:46:52 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on March 04, 2007, 03:59:07 AM
Quote from: NIN on March 04, 2007, 01:07:57 AM
Can't wait to find out when the "phase out date" is for the old Civil Air Patrol tapes. I shall be wearing mine until the very last day.
That's just a flat out stupid change. Grrrrr.
They talked about it for a while. I THINK they said 2008, but I could be wrong. Originally they were talking about just making the new ones the only ones that could be purchased and let uniform attrition solve the problem, but then someone brought up that some people may not get new uniforms for 15 years.
I think they settled on 3 years, which would be 2010.
What do you wanna bet BDUs dry up & we're switching to ABUs within a year of that date with new tapes.
Somebody asked about ABUs, but the person who answered wasn't close enough to the mike for me to understand what their reply was.
It was the CAP-USAF/CC. He was taking about the mandatory wear date for the USAF, but I couldn't hear if he gave a date for CAP.
ABU (per CAP/USAF CC)- Not yet decided by USAF if CAP will wear them or not. Transition will be over next few years, with first priorities to overseas USAF personnel. It won't be a practical question for us for a while.
Quote from: JCJ on March 04, 2007, 03:14:54 PM
ABU (per CAP/USAF CC)- Not yet decided by USAF if CAP will wear them or not. Transition will be over next few years, with first priorities to overseas USAF personnel. It won't be a practical question for us for a while.
My prediction is CAP won't see them for at least 5 years, if ever. I'd be less surprised to see us go to an all-Blue BDU organization.
Quote from: Mustang on March 04, 2007, 05:30:12 PM
Quote from: JCJ on March 04, 2007, 03:14:54 PM
ABU (per CAP/USAF CC)- Not yet decided by USAF if CAP will wear them or not. Transition will be over next few years, with first priorities to overseas USAF personnel. It won't be a practical question for us for a while.
My prediction is CAP won't see them for at least 5 years, if ever. I'd be less surprised to see us go to an all-Blue BDU organization.
Though it has not & will not soon be formally stated, it is an absolute certainty that CAP will where the same uniforms as the AF, strictly because surplus availability keeps costs down & making CAP accessible to people of all backgrounds is a major priority. The date on the other hand is very much up in the air. When the AF is fully transitioned including the guard & reserve, and when enough surplus has built up, then CAP will get an initial wear date.
I would predict though that when we move to that uniform the tapes will change. Personally I think white on OD tapes would look the most professional (ABU tapes are tigerstripe), but dark blue is an option as well, either way I think we'll move to ditch the glow in the dark girl scoutness we've made BDUs into. Just guessing though, it may actually be the same as moving from ODs to BDUS, in which we had to beg so hard to get teh uniform we didn't want to press our luck with the tapes.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 04, 2007, 03:59:07 AM
They talked about it for a while. I THINK they said 2008, but I could be wrong. Originally they were talking about just making the new ones the only ones that could be purchased and let uniform attrition solve the problem, but then someone brought up that some people may not get new uniforms for 15 years.
15 years... Hmmmm, unfortunately my BDUs don't wear that well, but you can bet that if that was the rule I'd buy every last CIVIL AIR PATROL nametape I could get my hands on and keep wearing them
ad infinitum.
Lets hope our friends at the Five-Sided Puzzle Palace save us from ourselves.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 07:07:45 PM
He didn't really provide a rational justification. He said something about there being a CAP in Brazil using our seal, and then said having "US" in our name would distringuish us as the United State's CAP.
Please tell me you are joking! We need the U.S. added because we are so frequently deploying outside the country? Pathetic.
It wasn't a real coherent argument so I may have misintrepreted his intent, but from everything I've seen it is clear to me that MG Pineda wants to make us the US Civil Air Patrol.
Frankly, if they want to officially change the name, I can live with it. I think its a bit silly and throws out 65 years of history, but I could deal with it.
However, I just can't stand the way they are doing this through the backdoor without following our own regulations and the Constitution of the organization. If they would stand up and be men about their intentions, I could respect that.
Quote from: DNall on March 04, 2007, 04:41:49 AM
AF relationship... I don't think CAP acts in an effort to effect the relationship. What they do is not think things thru & make irresponsible moves that don't make sense & have side effects which they either didn't anticipate or were conscieted enough not to care able. There's valid things we should do that are desigend to standardize our system, to bring things into line with our parent, & to create a professional appearance to the public, but most of the things we actually do are just immature acting out on the part of people that should be above that...
US CAP tapes:
And by the way if they HAD to change it, could they have at least made it US CAP, rather than that whole long mess. 53k members X 1.5 tapes per member X $2.50 = $200,000 cost to membership. Freaking idiots.
I couldn't agree more. Leadership issues within the organization have never been more apparent then this last year or so. The very basic concpet that the organization is
nothing without a strong tie to the USAF is seemingly lost upon them. It's what brings in and retains members. It's that association that gives any shot us real missions. It gives us some legitmacy. We will never attract those with true leadership skills to the organization so long as we have amateurs driving the boat. I truly don't understand why there is such little decent among the Wing Commanders, although I'll certainly voice my displeasure to mine. The absurdity demonstrated over the past couple days emphasizes why an immediate change in leadership is needed.
Quote from: DNall on March 04, 2007, 07:09:10 PM
Quote from: Mustang on March 04, 2007, 05:30:12 PM
Quote from: JCJ on March 04, 2007, 03:14:54 PM
ABU (per CAP/USAF CC)- Not yet decided by USAF if CAP will wear them or not. Transition will be over next few years, with first priorities to overseas USAF personnel. It won't be a practical question for us for a while.
My prediction is CAP won't see them for at least 5 years, if ever. I'd be less surprised to see us go to an all-Blue BDU organization.
Though it has not & will not soon be formally stated, it is an absolute certainty that CAP will where the same uniforms as the AF, strictly because surplus availability keeps costs down & making CAP accessible to people of all backgrounds is a major priority. The date on the other hand is very much up in the air. When the AF is fully transitioned including the guard & reserve, and when enough surplus has built up, then CAP will get an initial wear date.
I would predict though that when we move to that uniform the tapes will change. Personally I think white on OD tapes would look the most professional (ABU tapes are tigerstripe), but dark blue is an option as well, either way I think we'll move to ditch the glow in the dark girl scoutness we've made BDUs into. Just guessing though, it may actually be the same as moving from ODs to BDUS, in which we had to beg so hard to get teh uniform we didn't want to press our luck with the tapes.
Perhaps when the time comes to have this discussion seriously with USAF, the leadership will be different and approach it in a manner more amenable to USAF.
I don't think this was mentioned, but the Uniform Committee had received a proposal to allow all CAP members to wear orange t-shirts with BDUs. I think with the Majcom patch on the front and something else on the back. They recommended against it and it didn't go anywhere.
Quote from: LtCol White on March 04, 2007, 11:37:26 PM
Quote from: DNall on March 04, 2007, 07:09:10 PM
Quote from: Mustang on March 04, 2007, 05:30:12 PM
Quote from: JCJ on March 04, 2007, 03:14:54 PM
ABU (per CAP/USAF CC)- Not yet decided by USAF if CAP will wear them or not. Transition will be over next few years, with first priorities to overseas USAF personnel. It won't be a practical question for us for a while.
My prediction is CAP won't see them for at least 5 years, if ever. I'd be less surprised to see us go to an all-Blue BDU organization.
Though it has not & will not soon be formally stated, it is an absolute certainty that CAP will where the same uniforms as the AF, strictly because surplus availability keeps costs down & making CAP accessible to people of all backgrounds is a major priority. The date on the other hand is very much up in the air. When the AF is fully transitioned including the guard & reserve, and when enough surplus has built up, then CAP will get an initial wear date.
I would predict though that when we move to that uniform the tapes will change. Personally I think white on OD tapes would look the most professional (ABU tapes are tigerstripe), but dark blue is an option as well, either way I think we'll move to ditch the glow in the dark girl scoutness we've made BDUs into. Just guessing though, it may actually be the same as moving from ODs to BDUS, in which we had to beg so hard to get teh uniform we didn't want to press our luck with the tapes.
Perhaps when the time comes to have this discussion seriously with USAF, the leadership will be different and approach it in a manner more amenable to USAF.
I'm starting to think again that Congress should step in to put CAP into reorganization recievership under AF for a period of 3-5 years & let a decent organization come out the back side of that, rather than continuing to witness behavior that came out the backside of something else.
Quote from: Mustang on March 04, 2007, 05:30:12 PM
...I'd be less surprised to see us go to an all-Blue BDU organization.
Hooray!!
Quote from: DNall on March 05, 2007, 01:02:18 AM
I'm starting to think again that Congress should step in to put CAP into reorganization recievership under AF for a period of 3-5 years & let a decent organization come out the back side of that, rather than continuing to witness behavior that came out the backside of something else.
I'd back that...but I don't see that happening.
Oh it may happen, it's just very dangerous to ask.
Quote from: DNall on March 05, 2007, 03:41:02 AM
Oh it may happen, it's just very dangerous to ask.
Given the direction I've seen of late, it couldn't be worse. The thing is, I'm not o sure CAP-USAF is in "our" camp either.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 03, 2007, 04:19:46 PM
Okay, after the guy from Ghana finished talking, he gave MG Pineda a traditional warriors outfit which he put on over his TPU. Everyone laughed a bit and he said,
"You laugh...another uniform change coming later".
Also heard him joking earlier about Vanguard being in the lobby with "fashion by Tony" to sell.
So, he has got a sense of humor about the TPU issue.
Actually, I don't find this funny. I wish I would've seen it first hand so I could judge for myself. However, assuming this happened as described, I find it very disturbing that a "leader" apparently recognizes that there are concerns about the number of uniform changes, yet, continues to move forward full steam ahead without addressing any of those concerns. That represents inept leadership at even the most basic level.
The question now is, how do we get a bunch of sheep come up with a two-thirds vote. >:D
By "our" do you mean CAP, membership, or leadership... cause I know how they feel about some of the people & things that have been happening. It doesn't matter though, if Congress orders AF to take charge of CAP & fix it in a 3-5 year period, then they'll do it. They've been fighting for increased control forever, that's what the 2000 changes were about was their attempt to grab more control & Congress going another way.
Quote from: DNall on March 05, 2007, 04:38:59 AM
By "our" do you mean CAP, membership, or leadership...
The impression I get is that our leadership has CAP-USAF's support.
I merely wish to say that I support our being back as the USAF-Aux
FULL TIME and if we as an organization need to be given to USAF total control for a time so that to happen; so be it.
I do not intend for that statment to be an attack on anyone, however I do not support our corporate identity at all, nor anything to do with it, or anything suggesting a move away from the Air Force.
I think the great overwhelming majority of members would agree with that statement. It's a little harder to stick to your principles when you're a corporate officer voting to reliquish power over your own area of influence to a higher command that will have the national interests always ahead of your organization's. That's why I say it should be temporary for reorg purposes & then handed back to CAP with a new governance structure that can still stand up for the long-term when the AF wants to cut us in half to pay for a new missile fin or something.
Quote from: DNall on March 05, 2007, 01:02:18 AM
Quote from: LtCol White on March 04, 2007, 11:37:26 PM
Quote from: DNall on March 04, 2007, 07:09:10 PM
Quote from: Mustang on March 04, 2007, 05:30:12 PM
Quote from: JCJ on March 04, 2007, 03:14:54 PM
ABU (per CAP/USAF CC)- Not yet decided by USAF if CAP will wear them or not. Transition will be over next few years, with first priorities to overseas USAF personnel. It won't be a practical question for us for a while.
My prediction is CAP won't see them for at least 5 years, if ever. I'd be less surprised to see us go to an all-Blue BDU organization.
Though it has not & will not soon be formally stated, it is an absolute certainty that CAP will where the same uniforms as the AF, strictly because surplus availability keeps costs down & making CAP accessible to people of all backgrounds is a major priority. The date on the other hand is very much up in the air. When the AF is fully transitioned including the guard & reserve, and when enough surplus has built up, then CAP will get an initial wear date.
I would predict though that when we move to that uniform the tapes will change. Personally I think white on OD tapes would look the most professional (ABU tapes are tigerstripe), but dark blue is an option as well, either way I think we'll move to ditch the glow in the dark girl scoutness we've made BDUs into. Just guessing though, it may actually be the same as moving from ODs to BDUS, in which we had to beg so hard to get teh uniform we didn't want to press our luck with the tapes.
Perhaps when the time comes to have this discussion seriously with USAF, the leadership will be different and approach it in a manner more amenable to USAF.
I'm starting to think again that Congress should step in to put CAP into reorganization recievership under AF for a period of 3-5 years & let a decent organization come out the back side of that, rather than continuing to witness behavior that came out the backside of something else.
I agree strongly
It seems to me that the main topics pursued at the winter board meeting were:
1) changing the terms for national, region and wing commanders
2) a whole bunch more minuscule uniform matters
As for the second, I have to agree with whoever (I think it was the 2000 GAO study) said that a board of directors of a national organizationought not be getting mired in such trivia....they should set policy and assign others to put it into effect.
As for the first one -- when the amendment to the US Constitution was passed in the late 40s limiting Presidents to two terms, (following FDR's election to four terms, although he barely began the last one when he died), the language of the amendment specifically EXCLUDED the incumbent of the day, Harry S Truman (who could have run for and served as many terms as he could get elected!).
In that same spirit, perhaps this change in term limits ought to EXCLUDE current office holders...their terms would end as normal. The change would apply, let's say, to those entering CAP office on or after 1 January 2008.
I agree that uniform issues should not be decided by the NB.....as they should not decide any regulation issue. NHQ "airstaff" should write the regulations and the National Commander signs them and puts them into effect. One of the problems with CAP is that it is too democratic. Sure they should get input from the field on how to do buisness. But basically the guys at the top should give us our marching orders and we should salute and move on.
Quote from: lordmonar on March 05, 2007, 05:53:44 PM
I agree that uniform issues should not be decided by the NB.....as they should not decide any regulation issue. NHQ "airstaff" should write the regulations and the National Commander signs them and puts them into effect. One of the problems with CAP is that it is too democratic. Sure they should get input from the field on how to do buisness. But basically the guys at the top should give us our marching orders and we should salute and move on.
We ought to take a page from the armed forces (most recently, I believe, the Navy).
When they want to make sweeping uniform changes, they have a process:
1) survey the troops, get some input
2) field test options to see if they work
3) get recommendations to the brass, who DECIDE!
Quote from: lordmonar on March 05, 2007, 05:53:44 PM
I agree that uniform issues should not be decided by the NB.....as they should not decide any regulation issue. NHQ "airstaff" should write the regulations and the National Commander signs them and puts them into effect. One of the problems with CAP is that it is too democratic. Sure they should get input from the field on how to do buisness. But basically the guys at the top should give us our marching orders and we should salute and move on.
I got no problem with that if you make the Nat/CC fully accountable up the chain for his actions, and put the selection authority the BoG (confirmed by AF).
Quote from: DNall on March 05, 2007, 08:07:49 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on March 05, 2007, 05:53:44 PM
I agree that uniform issues should not be decided by the NB.....as they should not decide any regulation issue. NHQ "airstaff" should write the regulations and the National Commander signs them and puts them into effect. One of the problems with CAP is that it is too democratic. Sure they should get input from the field on how to do buisness. But basically the guys at the top should give us our marching orders and we should salute and move on.
I got no problem with that if you make the Nat/CC fully accountable up the chain for his actions, and put the selection authority the BoG (confirmed by AF).
Concure.
P.S.
Hell just called...the cows are coming home and some flying pigs are looking at the heating system at this time. >:D
Quote from: lordmonar on March 05, 2007, 08:12:33 PM
Hell just called...the cows are coming home and some flying pigs are looking at the heating system at this time. >:D
You mean cause we agreed on something? I think you'd be suprised. We talk a lot about a few fundamental differences, but beyond that I'm sure we have more in common than not.
Quote from: SKYKING607 on March 04, 2007, 01:05:25 AM
Someone please bring back the "1505" uniform with "C-A-P" cutouts, black nameplate and "hershey bar!"
Those were the days!
That was the best uniform EVER!
Even better once we went to the Hershey bar and got rid of the Pepsi-Cola patch.
So to summerize (while we await, and wait, and wait for the actual memos):
New rules issued for Testing Officers
A School enrichment program approved
DDR Track and DDR specialty badge approved
Orange triangles eliminated
Civil Air Patrol changed to U.S. Civil Air Patrol
CAC ribbons can be worn by SM Officers who earned them as cadets, not authorized for advisors.
Cadet NCOs will wear grade insignia on both sides of service coat, mandatory wear date of March 2008
HLS ribbon approved
IC badge approved, worn forever once earned
New MAJCOM patch for AF uniforms, Corporate MAJCOM plus little U.S. letters.
Did I miss anything?
Quote from: Psicorp on March 07, 2007, 03:15:05 PM
So to summerize (while we await, and wait, and wait for the actual memos):
New rules issued for Testing Officers
A School enrichment program approved
DDR Track and DDR specialty badge approved
Orange triangles eliminated
Civil Air Patrol changed to U.S. Civil Air Patrol
CAC ribbons can be worn by SM Officers who earned them as cadets, not authorized for advisors.
Cadet NCOs will wear grade insignia on both sides of service coat, mandatory wear date of March 2008
HLS ribbon approved
IC badge approved, worn forever once earned
New MAJCOM patch for AF uniforms, Corporate MAJCOM plus little U.S. letters.
Did I miss anything?
Looks fairly good, except the first item -- my understanding was the proposed rules for TCOs and testing were shot down like a rookie MiG.
And Civil Air Patrol changed to U.S. Civil Air Patrol only insofar as our BDU nametapes and press releases. Not as the organizations actual name, as far as I can tell.
Mandatory wear dates set for new MAJCOM patch and the CAP tapes.
Quote from: Psicorp on March 07, 2007, 03:15:05 PM
Cadet NCOs will wear grade insignia on both sides of service coat, mandatory wear date of March 2008
Just on the Service Dress jacket or all blues?
Quote from: Hammer on March 08, 2007, 01:35:30 AM
Quote from: Psicorp on March 07, 2007, 03:15:05 PM
Cadet NCOs will wear grade insignia on both sides of service coat, mandatory wear date of March 2008
Just on the Service Dress jacket or all blues?
I'm assuming they were referring to all forms of the blues. (That makes sense to me, anyways, as it wouldn't just to change it on the Svs. Dress, BDU's, and not the blue service uniform.)
What's the offical name for blues? Yeah it's all versions of blues. Cutouts only for basics & C/officer service coats, and of course the new corporate alternative service coat.
Quote from: DNall on March 08, 2007, 04:09:22 AM
What's the offical name for blues?
Service Uniform
Quote from: PhoenixCadet on March 08, 2007, 03:19:11 AM
Quote from: Hammer on March 08, 2007, 01:35:30 AM
Quote from: Psicorp on March 07, 2007, 03:15:05 PM
Cadet NCOs will wear grade insignia on both sides of service coat, mandatory wear date of March 2008
Just on the Service Dress jacket or all blues?
I'm assuming they were referring to all forms of the blues. (That makes sense to me, anyways, as it wouldn't just to change it on the Svs. Dress, BDU's, and not the blue service uniform.)
I just started phasing out the CAP cutouts with my own troops. Had a handful of cadet promotions last night -- just removed their CAP cutout and replaced with appropriate grade insignia. Hope to have everyone phased in within six months this way.
The good news is the squadron is going to get a nice supply of cutouts for incoming recruits! :)
Quote from: Pylon on March 07, 2007, 04:33:59 PMMandatory wear dates set for new MAJCOM patch and the CAP tapes.
March '08 was it?
Quote from: msmjr2003 on March 08, 2007, 04:14:01 PM
Quote from: Pylon on March 07, 2007, 04:33:59 PMMandatory wear dates set for new MAJCOM patch and the CAP tapes.
March '08 was it?
March '08 for the MAJCOM (depending on supply, i'm sure). The USCAP tapes are 2010, not sure that's written in stone though. But then, what is around here?
>>I just started phasing out the CAP cutouts with my own troops. Had a handful of cadet promotions last night -- just removed their CAP cutout and replaced with appropriate grade insignia.
Actually, everyone should wait until a policy letter or reg change is published before implementing any of the decisions made at the NB meeting. We've all seen things change after the fact and you need regulatory authority beforehand.
Quote from: jayleswo on March 08, 2007, 06:59:58 PM
>>I just started phasing out the CAP cutouts with my own troops. Had a handful of cadet promotions last night -- just removed their CAP cutout and replaced with appropriate grade insignia.
Actually, everyone should wait until a policy letter or reg change is published before implementing any of the decisions made at the NB meeting. We've all seen things change after the fact and you need regulatory authority beforehand.
By regulation once the NB make the decision it is regulatory.
Quote from: lordmonar on March 08, 2007, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: jayleswo on March 08, 2007, 06:59:58 PM
>>I just started phasing out the CAP cutouts with my own troops. Had a handful of cadet promotions last night -- just removed their CAP cutout and replaced with appropriate grade insignia.
Actually, everyone should wait until a policy letter or reg change is published before implementing any of the decisions made at the NB meeting. We've all seen things change after the fact and you need regulatory authority beforehand.
By regulation once the NB make the decision it is regulatory.
At least until the next NB meeting.
Quote from: lordmonar on March 08, 2007, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: jayleswo on March 08, 2007, 06:59:58 PM
>>I just started phasing out the CAP cutouts with my own troops. Had a handful of cadet promotions last night -- just removed their CAP cutout and replaced with appropriate grade insignia.
Actually, everyone should wait until a policy letter or reg change is published before implementing any of the decisions made at the NB meeting. We've all seen things change after the fact and you need regulatory authority beforehand.
By regulation once the NB make the decision it is regulatory.
Yes but we haven't been officially informed of their decision. The cadet grade issue has a phase in date, so you can slow that down for logistics to catch up.
The branch tapes & stuff liek that, I can't tell you if that requires AF approval or not, I assume it does, and that could take months. I can't tell you exactly what the policy is on everything just cause I saw the results on the stream. You are techically legal if you start doing stuff right after the board votes on it (if they are the final approval) and you are techincally right to wait for publication too. No big deal.
And some of those decisions need approval from the AF and even then they need to be put into a regulation or policy letter.
Attached is an unofficial listing of agenda and other board actions that took place during the recent National Board meeting in DC. The official, detailed minutes are under development and will be sent out in draft copy soon. As is our practice, these draft minutes will be approved at the next meeting of the NB.
We hope you find this executive summary helpful.
Mark H. Richardson, III
Senior Director
Hq CAP, Maxwell AFB, AL
Provision for Mid-Term Elections
- Amended to remove National CC from item as C&BL allows that in the event of absence or incapacity of the National Commander, the National Vice CC shall exercise any and all authority reserved to the National CC until . . .
- Further amended to state this would be a 6-month term; re-election would be required at next summer NB
- Passed. Requires review by C&BL committee, then to BoG for final approval.
CAP-USAF Designated "Non-Voting" Member
- Passed. Requires review by C&BL committee, then to BoG for final approval.
Drug Demand Reduction Program Specialty Track
- Passed
Air Force Testing
- Amended to apply to only military PME courses
- Failed
School Enrichment Program Strategic Plan
- Passed
Wing and Region Commander Terms
- Vote by secret ballot
- Passed. Requires review by C&BL committee, then to BoG for final approval.
Change to CAPR 123-2, Complaints
- Discussion noted the Adverse Personnel Actions group is reviewing issue
- CAP/IG gave full discussion of current processes and procedures in place
- Postponed to Aug 07 NB
CAP Vehicle Roof Markings
- Agenda item to repeal earlier decision to mandate orange triangle on roofs of CAP vehicles
- Passed
Defining and Quantifying CAP Mishap Definitions
- CAP-USAF/CC withdrew this item
Old Business
Application of Safety Privilege to CAP Flight Operations
- National Safety Officer discussed difference between Air Force process that conducts two separate investigations and CAP that conducts one
- National Safety Officer and CAP-USAF/SE will continue discussions
New Business
Add "US" to "Civil Air Patrol" on BDU tape
- 3 year phase in (mandatory wear date of 1 Mar 2010)
- New "US Civil Air Patrol" tapes to be sold by Vanguard as soon as production will allow and only new style to be sold
- CAP-USAF concurs
- Passed
Amend CAPR 35-5, "CAP Officer and NCO Appointments and Promotions" allow CAP/CV to retain grade of Brigadier General. Remove reference to "temporary" grade for CV, but not retroactive.
- Will require staffing for CAP-USAF approval
- Passed
Life Memberships for all Coastal Patrol Base members
- Passed
Membership eligibility for non-US citizens, specifically relating to the School Program
- Interim report due by Aug 07 NB
Reports
Deputy Chiefs of Staff presented updates on significant results since inception of DCS structure and highlighted High Interest Topics
Briefed status of Consolidated Aircraft Maintenance Program and items of general interest
Other Briefings with Decision Points
Briefed proposed flow-chart detailing process for changes to C&BL with resolution to submit to BoG
- Passed
Uniform
1. Orange T-shirt with BDU for wear at all times. An approved exception for wear at some specific activities already exists.
- Failed due to no Second
2. Orange baseball cap, allow wear of metal rank
- Postponed indefinitely
3. Rescind uniform requirement to keep ribbons below top notch of service coat
- Failed
4. Create a Border Patrol Ribbon
- Failed
5. Create an Incident Commander badge (once earned, may always retain)
- Passed
6. Leather name tag - allow wear of specialty insignia besides aviation badge
- Passed
7. Bestow recognition on those that fly O-Flights
- Failed due to no motion
8. Create DDR specialty badge
- Passed
9. Wear of the Cadet Advisory Council ribbon
a) Authorize cadets earning the CAC ribbon to continue to wear ribbon as senior member
- Passed, with retroactive status
b) Authorize senior members serving as advisors to CAC, for at least one term, to earn the CAC ribbon -
- Failed
10. Create new PA award to recognize Region PAO of the Year
- Failed
11. Cadet NCO grade - allow wear on both collars
- CAP-USAF/CC concurs
- Passed
12. New Command Patch - allow wear on AF-style flight suit
- CAP-USAF/CC concurs
- Passed
Thanks for posting that, sardak!
Question:
Is a CAP-USAF/CC concur the same as AF approval?
Quote from: Psicorp on March 10, 2007, 08:06:35 AM
Thanks for posting that, sardak!
Question:
Is a CAP-USAF/CC concur the same as AF approval?
No, absolutey no relation. HOWEVER, CAP-USAF doesn't EVER state their own opinion, they are not allowed to. Anything they say publicly has been researched & generally represents the prominant view in the AF. That does NOT mean that when a proposal goes up to AU or AETC CC that it won't go down in flames. CAP-USAF statements are dramatically limited legally, and what they do say you should take as guidance, not the rule of law. Actually uinderstanding where people stand? That goes on off mic.
sardak:
Do you know why there is little to no discussion around most of the items put forth for vote, particularly when some of those items do not appear to have been listed as agenda items (ex. nametapes)?
In addition, why are all these uniform changes being presented for final vote without any prior feedback/input from the membership?
It appears that a lot of items are being slammed through with very little discussion or forethought. Our polls here are certainly not scientific by any means but they certainly seem to be indictive of widespread disapproval of numerous recent decisions and a significant disconnect between the general membership and NHQ (including NB and BOG).
Quote from: DNall on March 10, 2007, 08:55:44 AM
Quote from: Psicorp on March 10, 2007, 08:06:35 AM
Thanks for posting that, sardak!
Question:
Is a CAP-USAF/CC concur the same as AF approval?
No, absolutey no relation. HOWEVER, CAP-USAF doesn't EVER state their own opinion, they are not allowed to. Anything they say publicly has been researched & generally represents the prominant view in the AF. That does NOT mean that when a proposal goes up to AU or AETC CC that it won't go down in flames. CAP-USAF statements are dramatically limited legally, and what they do say you should take as guidance, not the rule of law. Actually uinderstanding where people stand? That goes on off mic.
From what I've seen, the concur/no coment/nonconcur by CAP-USAF basically relates to big items that will almost guarentee the AF killing the proposal. Similar to running an idea by you immediate supervisor for their opinion before sending it up to the big boss.
So, the grade on both sides on service uniforms still says Cadet NCOs only? Must be forgetting about C/Amn-C/SrA. ??? C/AB is a given.
Good questions - no answers. I was just passing along information I received, through channels, from NHQ. I wasn't the author, nor was I there. I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express once.
Mike
Quote from: sardak on March 10, 2007, 08:50:06 PM
Good questions - no answers. I was just passing along information I received, through channels, from NHQ. I wasn't the author, nor was I there. I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express once.
Mike
Well, perhaps then you can assist with passing along info in the other direction as well. :)
Quote from: MIKE on March 10, 2007, 04:24:16 PM
So, the grade on both sides on service uniforms still says Cadet NCOs only? Must be forgetting about C/Amn-C/SrA. ??? C/AB is a given.
Bad writing, you know what they meant. saying enlisted even when appropriate hasn't fully penetrated the vernacular for various reasons.
Quote from: CAPM 39-11-3. a. Officer: As used in this publication, includes senior member grades flight officer through major
general and cadet grades second lieutenant through colonel.
b. Airman: Unless otherwise specified, includes all other uniformed members both senior and
cadet.
Quote from: A.Member on March 10, 2007, 02:47:13 PM
sardak:
Do you know why there is little to no discussion around most of the items put forth for vote, particularly when some of those items do not appear to have been listed as agenda items (ex. nametapes)?
In addition, why are all these uniform changes being presented for final vote without any prior feedback/input from the membership?
You know...I have searched and searched the rules and regs, and the Constition and By-Laws....and no where does it say anything has to have any feed back from the membership. Are you under the impression that CAP is a democracy?
I mean if we are...I vote for pink Tutus and Orange Boonie hats!
Quote from: MIKE on March 10, 2007, 10:30:15 PM
Quote from: CAPM 39-11-3. a. Officer: As used in this publication, includes senior member grades flight officer through major
general and cadet grades second lieutenant through colonel.
b. Airman: Unless otherwise specified, includes all other uniformed members both senior and cadet.
That's bad writing too.
Quote from: lordmonar on March 08, 2007, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: jayleswo on March 08, 2007, 06:59:58 PM
>>I just started phasing out the CAP cutouts with my own troops. Had a handful of cadet promotions last night -- just removed their CAP cutout and replaced with appropriate grade insignia.
Actually, everyone should wait until a policy letter or reg change is published before implementing any of the decisions made at the NB meeting. We've all seen things change after the fact and you need regulatory authority beforehand.
By regulation once the NB make the decision it is regulatory.
I guess I'm a little confused. Does that mean members can, today, go ahead and order "US Civil Air Patrol" nametapes and begin wearing them?
Or does it have to go through more channels first?
Quote from: CAP428 on March 11, 2007, 04:56:44 AM
I guess I'm a little confused. Does that mean members can, today, go ahead and order "US Civil Air Patrol" nametapes and begin wearing them?
Or does it have to go through more channels first?
It's a little ubcleaer. It would seem to require AF approval, but it wasn't presented as such at NB, but like everything else it was rushed thru.
Quote from: CAP428 on March 11, 2007, 04:56:44 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on March 08, 2007, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: jayleswo on March 08, 2007, 06:59:58 PM
>>I just started phasing out the CAP cutouts with my own troops. Had a handful of cadet promotions last night -- just removed their CAP cutout and replaced with appropriate grade insignia.
Actually, everyone should wait until a policy letter or reg change is published before implementing any of the decisions made at the NB meeting. We've all seen things change after the fact and you need regulatory authority beforehand.
By regulation once the NB make the decision it is regulatory.
I guess I'm a little confused. Does that mean members can, today, go ahead and order "US Civil Air Patrol" nametapes and begin wearing them?
Or does it have to go through more channels first?
In this case no...because all uniform decisions must be first blessed by the USAF. So once USAF-CAP sends this item up to Air Staff and they sign off on it, NHQ
should send out a policy letter changing 39-1 and give us instructions on when to were them.
So at this point....just stand by.
But on all other items not requiring either USAF or BoG action...once the NB votes it is in effect.
Nothing is official until it is in a policy letter or regulation.
That's the old verbal versus written order thing. The policy is valid when approved by the NB. When you have it in writing you can't disobey anymore w/o penalty (theoretically).
Quote from: lordmonar on March 10, 2007, 10:43:34 PM
Quote from: A.Member on March 10, 2007, 02:47:13 PM
sardak:
Do you know why there is little to no discussion around most of the items put forth for vote, particularly when some of those items do not appear to have been listed as agenda items (ex. nametapes)?
In addition, why are all these uniform changes being presented for final vote without any prior feedback/input from the membership?
You know...I have searched and searched the rules and regs, and the Constition and By-Laws....and no where does it say anything has to have any feed back from the membership. Are you under the impression that CAP is a democracy?
Nope, not under that impression at all. But I do know it's a volunteer organization. And I also know that when the greater membership is not happy, the organization will struggle. That is the case today.
National has noted concern over the recent and significant decline in membership. If they're truly interested in addressing such concerns they'd be wise to listen to what the membership is saying. That doesn't make it a democracy and it doesn't mean they're bound to all the membership's wishes. I'm sure you'd agree that the "real" Air Force (or any of the services) are also not democracies. Yet, even they do trial wears and solicit feedback on issues such as uniform changes, often times incorporating that feedback into their decisions. It's simply what good leadership does!
At the very least, they should reaise questions and discuss the changes amongst themselves, especially when topics didn't seem to appear on published agendas (this also did not seem to occur).
So, really, your point is moot.
A democracy is 2 wolfs and a lamb deciding what to eat for dinner...
A republic is 2 wolfs and an ARMED sheep deciding what to eat for dinner...
The semi-official March 2007 National Board Executive Summary from the desk of a senior staffer at NHQ. It's really nothing new, and it looks like someone may have already posted text from this, but here it is nonetheless.
Quote
To all:
Attached is an unofficial listing of agenda and other board actions that took place during the recent National Board meeting in DC. The official, detailed minutes are under development and will be sent out in draft copy soon. As is our practice, these draft minutes will be approved at the next meeting of the NB.
We hope you find this executive summary helpful.
WING ADMINISTRATORS: Please make distribution throughout your Wing consistent with your Wing Commander's direction.
<<NB Mar 07 Executive Summary.doc>>
Mark H. Richardson, III
Senior Director
Hq CAP, Maxwell AFB, AL
334-953-5341
DSN 493-5341
Quote from: A.Member on March 11, 2007, 02:26:54 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on March 10, 2007, 10:43:34 PM
You know...I have searched and searched the rules and regs, and the Constition and By-Laws....and no where does it say anything has to have any feed back from the membership. Are you under the impression that CAP is a democracy?
Nope, not under that impression at all. But I do know it's a volunteer organization. And I also know that when the greater membership is not happy, the organization will struggle. That is the case today.
National has noted concern over the recent and significant decline in membership. If they're truly interested in addressing such concerns they'd be wise to listen to what the membership is saying. That doesn't make it a democracy and it doesn't mean they're bound to all the membership's wishes. I'm sure you'd agree that the "real" Air Force (or any of the services) are also not democracies. Yet, even they do trial wears and solicit feedback on issues such as uniform changes, often times incorporating that feedback into their decisions. It's simply what good leadership does!
At the very least, they should reaise questions and discuss the changes amongst themselves, especially when topics didn't seem to appear on published agendas (this also did not seem to occur).
Most all these uniform changes have been prompted by member interest, or at least aimed at member morale. We're out here complaining about the volume & nature, when that's reflective of the extent of the membership problem they're admitting to.
The vehicle for member input are the national committees, including the uniform committee. Those people generally are quite responsive, at least early in the process. They probably will not discuss anything with you, but they will mostly acknowledge getting it. They'll then propose the better of those idea to the board... those are the ones we don't see any lead time on cause they were considered for some time in cmte, or may have been brought up to the cmte that wknd & argued out at length before proposed or not. NB moves fairly quickly on most of those because they've already been very well considered (in theory).
Now that said, certainly National should work to be seen listening to & caring about member input. That doesn't mean they need to let members run the org or care what they think. They just need to explain a user-friendly apolitical way to suggest ideas & feel like they've been heard. Then amongst 53k members there's almost always going to be a one or two with the same idea as you, just find that one, credit him with the suggestion, and make the proposal. Then write a story about how little nobody from nowhere with no connections followed this system & got it done at the top, cause we care - you know those 'how a bill becomes a law' things. It's not that difficult. I mean your congressman doesn't care what you think, but they got a constituent services staffer so it looks like they do.
Quote from: DNall on March 11, 2007, 06:49:44 PM
Most all these uniform changes have been prompted by member interest, or at least aimed at member morale. We're out here complaining about the volume & nature, when that's reflective of the extent of the membership problem they're admitting to.
Sorry, but I have to give you the b.s. flag on that one. I've seen absolutely
no evidence of such an outcry from the membership on most of these items - especially as it relates to the creation of the TPU, modification of the MAJCOM patch, and the modification of the nametapes...among others.
Quote from: DNall on March 11, 2007, 06:49:44 PMThe vehicle for member input are the national committees, including the uniform committee. Those people generally are quite responsive, at least early in the process. They probably will not discuss anything with you, but they will mostly acknowledge getting it. They'll then propose the better of those idea to the board... those are the ones we don't see any lead time on cause they were considered for some time in cmte, or may have been brought up to the cmte that wknd & argued out at length before proposed or not. NB moves fairly quickly on most of those because they've already been very well considered (in theory).
Ah, the infamous "uniform committee". USAF has one. CAP? Well...do you know who sits on it? Have you ever seen minutes from such a committee? I have not. The simple requirement for a change is that it be run up to National and approved by the the National Commander, National Board, and/or NHQ. If you can find any minutes around such a committee or even discussions around these proposals prior to a vote, let me know. I've looked in e-Services and can find no evidence of this. As such, I'm obviously much more of a skeptic in this area. I'm certainly open to being enlightENed though. Nonetheless, it's irrellevant. When have you ever seen feedback solicited from the membership? That's the real point here.
If I recall correctly, you're taking SOS. On the topic of leadership and communication what do they say? They'll tell you take of your people. Find out what their requirements are and be sensitive to their needs. They'll also tell you that information must flow continously through the organization and the communication is a two-way process. You must listen to what your people have to say and always look for good ideas that can flow up the chain. Feedback is critical. When people are distracted by these other issues, they do not give their jobs full attention and as a result the mission suffers. That is the point and I don't see that out of National these days.
Cmte meetings aren't public nor are cmte memberships, some of them are, but by no means all. There's a cmte for everything. That's the extent of member input. A cmte vote is meaningless other than it recommends or not something to the NB who makes up their minds anyway based on the executive summary. That's how all corporations & govt agencies everywhere work.
The TPU & tapes were pitched as part of an effort to solidify a national organization & come in close with AF... allow larger members to wear an AF looking uniform, more uniform with the blues than white/gray w/ blazer, etc... That doesn't mean I'm buying it, but they say they're trying to make everyone feel part of a committed national para-military org.
The majcom along with changing the tail markings was/is about dodging an AFI so as to push the limits of PCA to do LE missions w/o needing the consent of the AF first (who just does a legal check to ensure it's legit by PCA anyway, but apparently that takes too much off the table for some tastes).
Quote from: DNall on March 12, 2007, 01:03:48 AMThe TPU & tapes were pitched as part of an effort to solidify a national organization & come in close with AF... allow larger members to wear an AF looking uniform, more uniform with the blues than white/gray w/ blazer, etc... That doesn't mean I'm buying it, but they say they're trying to make everyone feel part of a committed national para-military org.
The majcom along with changing the tail markings was/is about dodging an AFI so as to push the limits of PCA to do LE missions w/o needing the consent of the AF first (who just does a legal check to ensure it's legit by PCA anyway, but apparently that takes too much off the table for some tastes).
At best, I'd say that's highly speculative on your part. None of those changes has officially been explained that way.
Quote from: A.Member on March 12, 2007, 01:33:34 AM
Quote from: DNall on March 12, 2007, 01:03:48 AMThe TPU & tapes were pitched as part of an effort to solidify a national organization & come in close with AF... allow larger members to wear an AF looking uniform, more uniform with the blues than white/gray w/ blazer, etc... That doesn't mean I'm buying it, but they say they're trying to make everyone feel part of a committed national para-military org.
The majcom along with changing the tail markings was/is about dodging an AFI so as to push the limits of PCA to do LE missions w/o needing the consent of the AF first (who just does a legal check to ensure it's legit by PCA anyway, but apparently that takes too much off the table for some tastes).
At best, I'd say that's highly speculative on your part. None of those changes has officially been explained that way.
Hellz Bellz! NOTHING is ever "Officially explained!"
That's the pitches that were given on the webstream in the cases I stated.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on March 12, 2007, 01:39:36 AM
Hellz Bellz! NOTHING is ever "Officially explained!"
And there in is part of the problem (see previous post with comments in reference to communication being two way). This becomes much more important in a volunteer organization.
Compare and contrast this with the approach of USAF (my emphasis added):
http://www.afmc.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123025305
QuoteThe members of the June RIE determined such a repository would facilitate managing the data that would be maintained and archived for future boards. Part of that system would allow uniform board members to log in to an automated "virtual board" to participate electronically. The virtual board also would allow Airmen in the field to provide input to the uniform board, without having to wait for major commands to ask for their input, and without having to go through the Innovative Development through Employee Awareness, or IDEA program.
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123020472
QuoteBased on feedback received during visits with Airmen across the Air Force, the Air Force Uniform Board is reviewing several concepts that Airmen have suggested regarding the appearance of the service dress uniform....
...The Air Force began exploring these ideas by producing several prototypes that reflect a combination of ideas that have been gleaned from comments, suggestions and informal surveys conducted over the past several years.
A more formal survey soon will provide additional opportunities for Airmen to provide feedback and comments.
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123023298
http://newsblaze.com/story/20070111094111tsop.nb/topstory.html
http://stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=36437&archive=true
QuoteAfter hearing a planeload of complaints about the "bus driver" look of the Air Force's dress blue uniform, Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley has launched a project to find out what airmen might like to wear instead...
...The Air Force has set up a special e-mail address for Stripes readers to comment on the new dress uniform prototypes: uniformfeedback@pentagon.af.mil
Air Force officials welcome all comments, but say they would particularly like to know the following:
1. Do you even want a change in the dress uniform, or should the service leave it as it is?
2. Please comment about each prototype (Hap Arnold and Billy Mitchell) in as much detail as possible. What do you like about each design, and what do you dislike?
3. Prototypes aside, what details or features would you like to see in a dress uniform that are not in today's version? (Examples might be a silver stripe on the pants leg, a kick pleat in the women's skirt, etc.)
4. Overall, what kind of Air Force dress uniform would you be proud to wear? One that reflects the service's heritage? Something futuristic? Something with a plain, simple, and streamlined appearance?
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=36609&archive=true
QuoteThe Air Force is unveiling initial prototypes for airmen to critique, as well as circulating a detailed survey that should go out to selected airmen early this summer, according to Uniform Board members.
The board also plans to open a Web site for comments.
Meanwhile, the Air Force has an e-mail address for informal feedback on its new dress uniform: uniformfeedback@pentagon.af.mil.
Air Force officials have received more than 1,200 comments, spokeswoman Jennifer Bentley said.
Brig. Gen. Robert Allardice, deputy chief of staff for manpower and personnel and the general officer leading the project, "is very pleased" with the reaction, Bentley said.
"We hope they keep coming."
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123042938
QuoteThe new service coat has gone through several prototypes, with officials recently deciding which version will be released for field testing.
"We talked extensively to Airmen, both in the field and through the Air Force Uniform Board process, and this is something they've repeatedly asked for," General Allardice said. "We want a service dress that clearly represents our pride as Airmen and history as a service, and we want to make sure we get it right. That's one of the reasons we're referring to the proposal as the Heritage Jacket...
Once feedback has been received from the Heritage Jacket wear test, Air Force leaders will make a final decision on the new coat...
Have you ever seen National ask for member feedback on anything?! Some changes seem to speak more to someone's need for a personal legacy than it does an actual demand from membership. It certainly helps explain organizational effectiveness.
Just my $.02.
Quote from: sardak on March 10, 2007, 04:11:47 AM
Life Memberships for all Coastal Patrol Base members
- Passed
Wasn't this redundant? Don't all 50-year members get made into life members now. Big stretch too, since there are only a handfull of these folks around - in or out of the program. How about something more drastic, like all Wing/Region Commanders get life membership?
Not to be biligerant, but is a certain Maj Gen coughing up $60 a year? hmmm...
- Ace
Quote from: A.Member on March 12, 2007, 02:45:47 AM
Have you ever seen National ask for member feedback on anything?! Some changes seem to speak more to someone's need for a personal legacy than it does an actual demand from membership. It certainly helps explain organizational effectiveness.
Actually, there was a "comment coupon" of sorts published in CAP News (1992?) for members to mail back with input on the imminant change away from the Maroon epaulte sleeves / shoulder marks to another style or color (not blue). If they really did listen to the membership, then that is why we have the Grey colored sleeves. That's the only time in my recollection, other than a membership-wide design contest for the National Cadet Special Activity patches.
Otherwise, I absolutely agree on the "legacy" thing!!!!
- Ace
Fifty year members get membership with no annual dues. However it has to be fifty years of CONTINOUS membership. Take a break in membership and the fity years you were a dues paying member don't count. So many members take a break after burning out on projects or duty assignments and let membership drop. So if you were a member for firty years and dropped out for two years and come back for another ten years, only those ten years count towards the fifty. National Board says they will lose to much money by dropping the word continous from the regulation.
BillB, I have to ask; however, it has nothing to do with the topic of discussion. Your signature block shows two Gill Robb Wilson Awards, do you actually have two or is one the old National Commander's Citation Award and the other the Gill Robb Wilson? Either way, how did you acquire two? Curiosity got the better of me.
I got the first (#19) which was a step to the National Commanders Citation under the late 1960's eaqrly 70's program. After I earned the National Commanders Commanders Citation. CAP changed the requirements for the Gil Robb Wilson. So I completed the new requirements and got the second Gil Robb Wilson (#124). According to National, there are or were five people in CAP that are eligible to wear BOTH the National Commanders Citation AND Gil Robb Wilson, meaning they earned a second Gil Robb Wilson award. Normally, if earned, the National Commanders Citation is worn in place of Gil Robb Wilson except for those five that earned under both different programs
Quote from: BillB on March 14, 2007, 04:44:08 PM
Fifty year members get membership with no annual dues. However it has to be fifty years of CONTINOUS membership. Take a break in membership and the fity years you were a dues paying member don't count. So many members take a break after burning out on projects or duty assignments and let membership drop. So if you were a member for firty years and dropped out for two years and come back for another ten years, only those ten years count towards the fifty. National Board says they will lose to much money by dropping the word continous from the regulation.
That sounds like a cop-out on NHQ's part.
Seriously, how many people actually
make it to 50 years' total service?
Quote from: fyrfitrmedic on March 15, 2007, 01:05:42 AM
Quote from: BillB on March 14, 2007, 04:44:08 PM
Fifty year members get membership with no annual dues. However it has to be fifty years of CONTINOUS membership. Take a break in membership and the fity years you were a dues paying member don't count. So many members take a break after burning out on projects or duty assignments and let membership drop. So if you were a member for firty years and dropped out for two years and come back for another ten years, only those ten years count towards the fifty. National Board says they will lose to much money by dropping the word continous from the regulation.
That sounds like a cop-out on NHQ's part.
Seriously, how many people actually make it to 50 years' total service?
To be honest, how many people want to put up with the BS for 50 years? I know several that are at 55 plus years.
Quote from: CAP Safety Dude on March 15, 2007, 01:18:43 AM
Quote from: fyrfitrmedic on March 15, 2007, 01:05:42 AM
Quote from: BillB on March 14, 2007, 04:44:08 PM
Fifty year members get membership with no annual dues. However it has to be fifty years of CONTINOUS membership. Take a break in membership and the fity years you were a dues paying member don't count. So many members take a break after burning out on projects or duty assignments and let membership drop. So if you were a member for firty years and dropped out for two years and come back for another ten years, only those ten years count towards the fifty. National Board says they will lose to much money by dropping the word continous from the regulation.
That sounds like a cop-out on NHQ's part.
Seriously, how many people actually make it to 50 years' total service?
To be honest, how many people want to put up with the BS for 50 years? I know several that are at 55 plus years.
I know a few myself. How much of a drain can they -really- put on NHQ?
Hell, they can't even be bothered to send out more than one copy of
Volunteer per family, and I've had a different address than other family/CAP members for a while.
Quote from: fyrfitrmedic on March 15, 2007, 02:54:00 AM
Hell, they can't even be bothered to send out more than one copy of Volunteer per family, and I've had a different address than other family/CAP members for a while.
A bit off-topic...
That makes me chuckle a bit. At a time when many other publications are moving to electronic formats, what do we do? Create a nice glossy magazine for distribution to all members.
Don't get me wrong, generally speaking it is done nicely and I do prefer hardcopy...but c'mon. We somehow survived 65 years without it. Maybe it'd be better to just keep the downloadable version on the website (although I'm sure far fewer would make the effort to read it). We always seem to talk about needing money, yet, we come up with this? I don't know what it costs to publish
Volunteer but if we've got enough money for this, perhaps National has enough money to pay for all our patches for the uniform changes they want to implement?
The Volunteer was possibly the best thing (other than the lives saved) that CAP probably did in all of 2006. There is usually at least one or two articles each issue that really make me feel good about being in CAP. Never got that feeling from the boring old CAP News.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 15, 2007, 03:18:15 AM
The Volunteer was possibly the best thing (other than the lives saved) that CAP probably did in all of 2006. There is usually at least one or two articles each issue that really make me feel good about being in CAP. Never got that feeling from the boring old CAP News.
I agree. Volunteer is done very nicely. That wasn't really my point.
I think they could have come up with a better name for it then Volunteer. that just sounds too cheesy. But I agree, it's a very well put together magazine. beats the old CAP news hands down.
Kind of way off topic but I'll toss my opinion of the Volunteer out here anyways.
Great publication. Informative but focused too heavily on Cadets and the Cadet Program. Lacks some balance but that is my two cents.