ABU Wear Test

[goblin]

If the uniform is the deciding factor then there is something wrong with that. That person is self serving rather than serving a greater purpose.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Again, what is wrong with having a self-serving person in the organization if they are working to meet the goals?

We could argue that if you are employed by X company, because you are getting paid, your goals are also self-serving. Should I get rid of you since you are self-serving?

Monetary gains can be equal to other motivators in volunteer organizations.

[goblin]

I guess I have an unrealistic view that people would be in this program to serve its missions and not to play Air Force on Facebook.

YMMV

[Luis R. Ramos]

So you are saying that if you are in CAP to "play Air Force," you are not able to do the three missions? That it is mutually exclusive?!!!

Again, some may be in to play Air Force. Others are not. But it is in the organization's best interest not to dismiss those that are working to achieve the goals of the organization no matter what their motivation.

[goblin]

I'm saying if you need the uniform and the "status" to want to serve this program than your priorities are in the wrong order.

[sarmed1]

I think a more accurate description would be there are people here because of the para-military aspect of the organization and sometimes specifically the near direct affiliation to the USAF.  Either because of previous military service or the fact that the had desired to serve and were ineligible for some reason.  Loss of a military-esque uniform brings the organization down to a level they see no more military than the boy scouts or local fire dept; which could equally use their talent or support rather than CAP if they eliminate the USAF style uniform.  As a USAF member I dont see that as "playing" Air Force

mk

[Fubar]

Clearly we have people in this organization who find looking military a huge draw, otherwise they wouldn't be wearing our USAF-style uniforms against the height & weight regulations (if they didn't care, they wouldn't mind wearing the corporate uniforms). Based on photos posted from national gatherings, a fair amount of those folks are at the higher echelons of our organization. To be at that level, I think it's safe to assume they're actively contributing to our organization. How many of them would quit if we standardized on one corporate uniform?

[Nuke52]

You'd loose the folks who are in this organization to look like they're in the military...

Good!
Is that really a member you want in the program?  One who is only interested in playing military and would quit if he/she couldn't?

If the uniform is the deciding factor then there is something wrong with that. That person is self serving rather than serving a greater purpose.

I guess I have an unrealistic view that people would be in this program to serve its missions and not to play Air Force on Facebook.
YMMV

I'm saying if you need the uniform and the "status" to want to serve this program than your priorities are in the wrong order.

Methinks thou doth protest too much...

[kwe1009]

Everyone joins any organization (including CAP) for their own reasons.  We may see some of those reasons as good and others as bad.  As long as the member is servicing and doing a good job then I really don't care why they joined. 

Many people join the military because they want to serve their country and many join simply for financial reasons (money for college).  Is one person serving better because of the reason they joined?  Of course not!  The reason someone joins has nothing to do with how well they are serving or how valuable they are to the organization. 

We all joined for different reasons and we should not be quick to judge others because their reason is not as noble as others.

[Garibaldi]

Ta heck with this ABU/BBDU/BDU business. I went a'Goodwilling today and found a practically brand-new OG-107 poly-cotton shirt. Seriously, looks brand new, no fading or patch detritus. I also found a blue Wooly-Pully that I didn't buy. If its there tomorrow I may purchase it.

*Hums while sewing patches on...*

[Storm Chaser]

I think we spend too much time talking about uniforms.

[Holding Pattern]

I think we spend too much time talking about uniforms.

Wholehearted agreement, with the caveat that this is one of the few threads where it is actually on topic.

[vesryn]

So I'm reasonably sure that either this thread is dead or the following has already been restated.

The NER Commander recently came to RCLS and answered questions about the ABU deployment.

#notoffical

This test was official and allowed per the BoG and National Commander.

"Wear testing" but they can't even get matching color boots?  Hmmm...

Wearing different boots was intentional. It is still unknown whether we will switch to the green/tan boots or stick with the leather boots, though the draft chapter of CAPM 39-1 is currently written with black leather boots.

And why are we even talking about it again? The decision was made several years ago BY CAP to take ABUs off the table. It is a non-issue. It is a dead horse. It has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS A DEAD HORSE!!!

Certainly not a dead horse.  As stated before, the BoG already has a (pretty much) complete section of CAPM 39-1 ready. All that is necessary for deployment is AF approval.

So I'm seeing that wing patches wouldn't be worn. Is this correct, or just part of the many types of tests they're running with regards to color of insignia, boots, and such?

There will be no patches on the ABU uniform, just like the AF. Only the name tape and CAP tape.

Like any uniform change, if this does go through, they will have a lengthy phase in date. You'll have a few years to pick up what you need, they aren't going to change to a new uniform and make you switch in a month.

(If the AF approves the change) there will be a 5 year phase in beginning in March 1st of 2016.

I stopped reading the tread after page 6, so sorry If I didn't answer your question.

Oh, and the summer NCSA applications should be up on January 9th. There will be 3 glider academies this year, down from 4.

As usual, all this information is subject to change without notice. None of this is set in stone.

[abdsp51]

So I'm reasonably sure that either this thread is dead or the following has already been restated.

The NER Commander recently came to RCLS and answered questions about the ABU deployment.

#notoffical

This test was official and allowed per the BoG and National Commander.

"Wear testing" but they can't even get matching color boots?  Hmmm...

Wearing different boots was intentional. It is still unknown whether we will switch to the green/tan boots or stick with the leather boots, though the draft chapter of CAPM 39-1 is currently written with black leather boots.

And why are we even talking about it again? The decision was made several years ago BY CAP to take ABUs off the table. It is a non-issue. It is a dead horse. It has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS A DEAD HORSE!!!

Certainly not a dead horse.  As stated before, the BoG already has a (pretty much) complete section of CAPM 39-1 ready. All that is necessary for deployment is AF approval.

So I'm seeing that wing patches wouldn't be worn. Is this correct, or just part of the many types of tests they're running with regards to color of insignia, boots, and such?

There will be no patches on the ABU uniform, just like the AF. Only the name tape and CAP tape.

Like any uniform change, if this does go through, they will have a lengthy phase in date. You'll have a few years to pick up what you need, they aren't going to change to a new uniform and make you switch in a month.

(If the AF approves the change) there will be a 5 year phase in beginning in March 1st of 2016.

I stopped reading the tread after page 6, so sorry If I didn't answer your question.

Oh, and the summer NCSA applications should be up on January 9th. There will be 3 glider academies this year, down from 4.

As usual, all this information is subject to change without notice. None of this is set in stone.

Not up to the AF it is DoD approval that is required. 

[Storm Chaser]

So I'm reasonably sure that either this thread is dead or the following has already been restated.

The NER Commander recently came to RCLS and answered questions about the ABU deployment.

#notoffical

This test was official and allowed per the BoG and National Commander.

"Wear testing" but they can't even get matching color boots?  Hmmm...

Wearing different boots was intentional. It is still unknown whether we will switch to the green/tan boots or stick with the leather boots, though the draft chapter of CAPM 39-1 is currently written with black leather boots.

And why are we even talking about it again? The decision was made several years ago BY CAP to take ABUs off the table. It is a non-issue. It is a dead horse. It has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS A DEAD HORSE!!!

Certainly not a dead horse.  As stated before, the BoG already has a (pretty much) complete section of CAPM 39-1 ready. All that is necessary for deployment is AF approval.

So I'm seeing that wing patches wouldn't be worn. Is this correct, or just part of the many types of tests they're running with regards to color of insignia, boots, and such?

There will be no patches on the ABU uniform, just like the AF. Only the name tape and CAP tape.

Like any uniform change, if this does go through, they will have a lengthy phase in date. You'll have a few years to pick up what you need, they aren't going to change to a new uniform and make you switch in a month.

(If the AF approves the change) there will be a 5 year phase in beginning in March 1st of 2016.

I stopped reading the tread after page 6, so sorry If I didn't answer your question.

Oh, and the summer NCSA applications should be up on January 9th. There will be 3 glider academies this year, down from 4.

As usual, all this information is subject to change without notice. None of this is set in stone.

Not up to the AF it is DoD approval that is required.

Not according to AFI 10-2701, Para. 1.3.2 and 1.3.3, which clearly states that the CAP-USAF/CC is the approval authority for CAP's Air Force-style uniforms.

[vesryn]

And why are we even talking about it again? The decision was made several years ago BY CAP to take ABUs off the table. It is a non-issue. It is a dead horse. It has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS A DEAD HORSE!!!

Certainly not a dead horse.  As stated before, the BoG already has a (pretty much) complete section of CAPM 39-1 ready. All that is necessary for deployment is AF approval.

Like any uniform change, if this does go through, they will have a lengthy phase in date. You'll have a few years to pick up what you need, they aren't going to change to a new uniform and make you switch in a month.

(If the AF approves the change) there will be a 5 year phase in beginning in March 1st of 2016.

I stopped reading the tread after page 6, so sorry If I didn't answer your question.

Not up to the AF it is DoD approval that is required.

Not according to AFI 10-2701, Para. 1.3.2 and 1.3.3, which clearly states that the CAP-USAF/CC is the approval authority for CAP's Air Force-style uniforms.

Agreed. http://www.cap-ny153.org/CAP%20Org%20Chart.jpg <-- Here's a simplified version of the structure of CAP. CAP-USAF is the only obstacle towards ABU deployment at this stage.

[lordmonar]

abdsp51 may be referring to the supposed DOD memorandum that says ABUs, ACUs and other IR technology uniforms can't be sold or given to non DOD personnel with out their authorizations.

It was pointed out that when this was first brought to our attention that it is a BS road block as they sell the stupid things online and at surplus stores to anyone with the money.   

One would speculate that if DOD was really hot about that....then they would have shut down those sources a long time ago.
In fact my first set of ABUs were purchased direct from the manufacturer before they were available at AAFES.....so it was a non-enforced policy from day one as far as the ABUs were concerned.

[Storm Chaser]

And why are we even talking about it again? The decision was made several years ago BY CAP to take ABUs off the table. It is a non-issue. It is a dead horse. It has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS A DEAD HORSE!!!

Certainly not a dead horse.  As stated before, the BoG already has a (pretty much) complete section of CAPM 39-1 ready. All that is necessary for deployment is AF approval.

Like any uniform change, if this does go through, they will have a lengthy phase in date. You'll have a few years to pick up what you need, they aren't going to change to a new uniform and make you switch in a month.

(If the AF approves the change) there will be a 5 year phase in beginning in March 1st of 2016.

I stopped reading the tread after page 6, so sorry If I didn't answer your question.

Not up to the AF it is DoD approval that is required.

Not according to AFI 10-2701, Para. 1.3.2 and 1.3.3, which clearly states that the CAP-USAF/CC is the approval authority for CAP's Air Force-style uniforms.

Agreed. http://www.cap-ny153.org/CAP%20Org%20Chart.jpg <-- Here's a simplified version of the structure of CAP. CAP-USAF is the only obstacle towards ABU deployment at this stage.

That org chart is outdated. We no longer have Wing Liaison Offices. The current version of AFI 10-2701 was published on 31 July 2014.

[TheSkyHornet]

And why are we even talking about it again? The decision was made several years ago BY CAP to take ABUs off the table. It is a non-issue. It is a dead horse. It has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS A DEAD HORSE!!!

Certainly not a dead horse.  As stated before, the BoG already has a (pretty much) complete section of CAPM 39-1 ready. All that is necessary for deployment is AF approval.

Like any uniform change, if this does go through, they will have a lengthy phase in date. You'll have a few years to pick up what you need, they aren't going to change to a new uniform and make you switch in a month.

(If the AF approves the change) there will be a 5 year phase in beginning in March 1st of 2016.

I stopped reading the tread after page 6, so sorry If I didn't answer your question.

Not up to the AF it is DoD approval that is required.

Not according to AFI 10-2701, Para. 1.3.2 and 1.3.3, which clearly states that the CAP-USAF/CC is the approval authority for CAP's Air Force-style uniforms.

Agreed. http://www.cap-ny153.org/CAP%20Org%20Chart.jpg <-- Here's a simplified version of the structure of CAP. CAP-USAF is the only obstacle towards ABU deployment at this stage.

That org chart is outdated. We no longer have Wing Liaison Offices. The current version of AFI 10-2701 was published on 31 July 2014.

Twice in this thread, two outdated references were linked.

Use current information, folks. This is how bad gouge gets spread and we end up with clueless, incompetent leaders who spend time arguing over what's true and what's not true.

[Ned]

As stated before, the BoG already has a (pretty much) complete section of CAPM 39-1 ready. All that is necessary for deployment is AF approval.

I'm pretty sure you mean the NUC (National Uniform Committee) and not the BoG (Board of Governors).  As a fairly recent member of both, I can tell you that the NUC does in fact have a chapter ready to be approved and perhaps more importantly, the BoG does not do uniforms.  They do policy.

abdsp51 may be referring to the supposed DOD memorandum that says ABUs, ACUs and other IR technology uniforms can't be sold or given to non DOD personnel with out their authorizations.

Hmmm.  Less "supposed" that real.  I've seen it several times, and had it in hand when discussing this very issue with the CAP-USAF commander.

It was pointed out that when this was first brought to our attention that it is a BS road block as they sell the stupid things online and at surplus stores to anyone with the money.   

One would speculate that if DOD was really hot about that....then they would have shut down those sources a long time ago.

I think you may be overstating that a bit for effect, perhaps.  Because the issue isn't what the DoD does or fails to do to enforce it's policies.  The point is that they (DoD) do in fact have a policy that prohibits ABU use by CAP.  In my view we were inadvertently left of the list of authorized users, but nonetheless it exists.  (FWIW, every AF general I've spoken to on this privately shares my belief that we were simply inadvertently left off the list.)

But our AF colleagues correctly believe that their hands are tied until and unless we get a change / exemption to the existing DoD policy,  IOW, they cannot issue a written authorization for CAP to go to ABU that directly conflicts with an existing (and perhaps less-than-vigorously enforced) DoD policy.

Now, after speaking with multiple AF general officers on this, the consensus is that the AF is generally OK with CAP wearing ABU, and they are likely to support any request we make to DoD (through channels) for a change / exemption to the policy.  But CAP actually has to put together a request and send it forward through the AF to DoD. 

Which, for a variety of reasons, has not yet happened.

Maybe now it will go forward.  We will all just have to wait and see.

In the meantime we will continue to go in circles on this issue on CT, because there will never, ever, ever be a consensus amongst the membership on what looks "better," "more professional," or is more respectful of our diverse membership.

As you may have noticed, opinions on uniforms are often strongly held and passionately defended.  I have yet to see anyone post something to the effect of "Hey, now that I've seen your argument, I've changed my mind."  But I have seen lots of people offended and ticked off by comments made in the "all USAF" vs. "all corporate" wars.

But all means keep posting.  Maybe someone will change their mind someday.  In the meantime, the rest of us will continue to focus on our missions - what we do -- rather than what we wear.

Ned Lee
Former Member, CAP BoG
Former Member, NUC