ABU Wear Test

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

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.

When I was in CAP, my primary motivation was to continue service to support the Air Force since I was involuntarily separated from the Air National Guard (honourably) due to medical reasons.

Secondarily, my interest was in CP.  I had a tumultuous, unsafe childhood and had a huge motivation to provide a "safe place" for young people where they would not be bullied, hazed, etc.

I never "played Air Force on Facebook," but as I said in earlier posts my first and best unit (sigh  ) wore the AF-type uniform only, even though it was with berry boards at first, and BDU's, and wore them correctly, and observed customs and courtesies.  So in a way it felt like my old ANG unit except for not getting paid, no UCMJ, no small arms, no being nearby F-4's/F-16's taking off, and I was an officer (all right, there were other differences, but I don't feel like listing them all here).

Over the years it gutted me to see the Air Force connections thinned out (Colonel Lee, I know you have higher-up connections to those in the Air Force who do support CAP, but I'm talking way down the food chain) - no more LO's, no more LNCO's, much more base access restrictions (in my experience), the silly, apocryphal "CAP Major tries to make Airman Snuffy salute and chews him out when he doesn't" stories, and, lastly, the uniform issues.

Since I cannot be in CAP, I have thought of getting re-involved with the AFA (after all, they did give me a free year's membership back in 1995 for the local chapter naming me CAP Senior Member of the Year), but outside of the excellent magazine, it's just not the same...plus, AFA encourages its members to join CAP (or at least used to).

[TarRiverRat]

I for one would not have a problem if we went to ABUs or any AF authorized uniform if all of CAP members could wear it.  I just have a problem when it discriminates against a group of members just because they are unable to meet the weight standards. I plan to continue to wear the uniform that I am allowed and do the best job for CAP that I can.  It would just be nice if we could all wear the same thing.

[TheSkyHornet]

I for one would not have a problem if we went to ABUs or any AF authorized uniform if all of CAP members could wear it.  I just have a problem when it discriminates against a group of members just because they are unable to meet the weight standards. I plan to continue to wear the uniform that I am allowed and do the best job for CAP that I can.  It would just be nice if we could all wear the same thing.

It's a military uniform. It's not that it reflects our ability to perform in CAP; it's the fact that the public's perception of someone seen in a military-esque outfit might not look fit to serve in the military. Most people know nothing of CAP, or USAF Aux, or any of that. They see a "soldier" and think "Gosh, he's fat...old...walking with a cane... etc." It doesn't reflect on CAP. It reflects on the DoD and subsequent branches.

It's a very subjective topic and will never have a clear answer aside from what we're dictated as policy. But the varying opinions will always exist.

[Fixedwing]

Issue One:  Speaking of dead horses: why are we wearing ANY form of cammies?  We do search and rescue in cammies, what?  Are we hiding from someone?  Instead of buying more uniforms (and enriching Vanguard) why not go with the blue field uniform?  It is CAP distinctive, most people already have one and it is well suited for the purpose.  The last exercise I went on half the people showed up in the blue field uniform anyway.  I cannot think of a single good reason to make people spend good money on another uniform, esp one that makes no sense.  Oh, and new boots too.

No horse is so dead that it can't take another whack

Issue Two: If CAP is "wear testing ABUs, a) why bother they've been worn by the AF for years already, b) "wear test" them with people like GTMs, not a couple of guys from headquarters.  What are  they testing for?  Reinforced seats?

[PHall]

Issue One:  Speaking of dead horses: why are we wearing ANY form of cammies?  We do search and rescue in cammies, what?  Are we hiding from someone?  Instead of buying more uniforms (and enriching Vanguard) why not go with the blue field uniform?  It is CAP distinctive, most people already have one and it is well suited for the purpose.  The last exercise I went on half the people showed up in the blue field uniform anyway.  I cannot think of a single good reason to make people spend good money on another uniform, esp one that makes no sense.  Oh, and new boots too.

No horse is so dead that it can't take another whack

Issue Two: If CAP is "wear testing ABUs, a) why bother they've been worn by the AF for years already, b) "wear test" them with people like GTMs, not a couple of guys from headquarters.  What are  they testing for?  Reinforced seats?

They were testing stuff like the different color name/branch tapes and such to make sure it's distinctive enough. As per the regs.

[Garibaldi]

Issue One:  Speaking of dead horses: why are we wearing ANY form of cammies?  We do search and rescue in cammies, what?  Are we hiding from someone?  Instead of buying more uniforms (and enriching Vanguard) why not go with the blue field uniform?  It is CAP distinctive, most people already have one and it is well suited for the purpose.

Last time I checked, that isn't true. It is about 30-70 (BBDU v. BDU) that I've seen, and that's being generous. We wear the camoflage BDU because it was authorized as our uniform in the early 90s, as the Air Force transitioned to them in the early to mid 80s and stopped wearing and issuing the OG-107 pickle suits. We also have hi-visibility packs and vests to wear in the woods.

The last exercise I went on half the people showed up in the blue field uniform anyway.

Where was this? Most of the missions I've been on, most of the people wore the polo combo, and they were all either pilots or in the IC. The ground teams all wore BDUs. But, in any given geographical area, your mileage may vary.

I cannot think of a single good reason to make people spend good money on another uniform, esp one that makes no sense.  Oh, and new boots too.

Agreed. For the most part. But, if it IS approved, we would most likely retain the black boots that ALL MEMBERS HAVE ALREADY.

No horse is so dead that it can't take another whack

Debatable.

Issue Two: If CAP is "wear testing ABUs, a) why bother they've been worn by the AF for years already, b) "wear test" them with people like GTMs, not a couple of guys from headquarters.  What are  they testing for?  Reinforced seats?

If you read up, you can see that they were looking for things like suitability, distinctiveness from the AF ABU (patches, boots, etc.), durability, and so on. I agree that they should have given them to GTs for field testing, but since we can't depend on a mission every day, it's kind of a moot point. We wear the uniforms once a week, and on weekend activities, which require either the blues, BDUs or even civilian attire. Perhaps they should have given them to people at an encampment to wear for the week, then taken them back at the conclusion of the activity. Just my opinion. Again, YMMV.

[Meridius]

I am prior service military and I wore the BDU for 10 years.  I am interested in the ABU to look more like our Air Force brethren.  I am concerned that the ABU will be phased out in favor of the multi-cam and that all DoD will wear.  I will, follow the guidelines from headquarters to the letter, like any good soldier, sailor, or airman would/should do.

Patches:  The BDUs we wear today has way too many patches.  Patches above the pocket, on each pocket, on each sleeve.  The Air Force does not allow for patches on the pockets or sleeves, only name tape, rank, and occupational badges and wings.  Fine.  I get it and makes the uniform look sterile.  However, we are not a standing military armed force.  We are, among other things, an Emergency Services oriented organization.  With that said, we provide volunteer services to the Air Force, DoD, State, and local governments upon approval of Wing with assigned mission numbers. 

My point is:  our customers need to know who we are especially when we interact at the local level.  We need to display both our military heritage as well as our volunteer skills such as SAR, Disaster Assistance, etc.  For this sake, one or two mission oriented patches on the pockets should be allowed with strict guidelines to keep us from looking like clowns in the Air Force uniform.  Therefore, our ES operations and uniforms should  be distinct for that purpose.   For example, a retooled emergency services patch (i.e. no white background; subdue it to blue, grean, tan, whatever) and/or the applicable SAR patch from NESA, Hawk, etc, como, safety, however, absolutely no sleeve and the myriad other examples of patches that I have seen (army combat patch included).

If we beat the proverbial "dead horse," this is the argument that should be focused.  It is a given we are changing uniforms at some point in the future. 

[sarmed1]

... We need to display both our military heritage as well as our volunteer skills such as SAR, Disaster Assistance, etc.  For this sake, one or two mission oriented patches on the pockets should be allowed with strict guidelines to keep us from looking like clowns in the Air Force uniform.  Therefore, our ES operations and uniforms should  be distinct for that purpose. ....

As a professional Emergency Services guy....  Its the guys with all of the patches that we worry about (abstractly speaking).  If you need extra patches to show to the folks running the show to prove that you know what you are doing there is an issue.  Usually it means that there wasnt any kind of pre-incident communication.  To me that means that you are showing up as an afterthought, and they wernt expecting you to bring anything to the table other than a warm body anyway.  If the right kind of coordination was done ahead of time, they know what you can and cant do and there is no "need to prove it" when you get there.

I am kind of partial to the idea of 2 separate uniforms.  DoD style for day to day military-esque things (ie cadet programs) and the BBDU for ES operations. Yes its an extra expense but if ES is what you want to do consider it part of your "gear".  There is less heartache over what goes with the BBDU as far as outerwear, boots, hats, field equipment or grooming standards.  Everyone looks the same when out and about providing a service to the customer.  There is (theoretically) less of a chance of "airsoft seal team" in appearance when it comes to field gear.  (seriously who wants to mix misc green/tan/brown camo and blue)

just a thought
MK

[TheSkyHornet]

... We need to display both our military heritage as well as our volunteer skills such as SAR, Disaster Assistance, etc.  For this sake, one or two mission oriented patches on the pockets should be allowed with strict guidelines to keep us from looking like clowns in the Air Force uniform.  Therefore, our ES operations and uniforms should  be distinct for that purpose. ....

As a professional Emergency Services guy....  Its the guys with all of the patches that we worry about (abstractly speaking).  If you need extra patches to show to the folks running the show to prove that you know what you are doing there is an issue.  Usually it means that there wasnt any kind of pre-incident communication.  To me that means that you are showing up as an afterthought, and they wernt expecting you to bring anything to the table other than a warm body anyway.  If the right kind of coordination was done ahead of time, they know what you can and cant do and there is no "need to prove it" when you get there.

I am kind of partial to the idea of 2 separate uniforms.  DoD style for day to day military-esque things (ie cadet programs) and the BBDU for ES operations. Yes its an extra expense but if ES is what you want to do consider it part of your "gear".  There is less heartache over what goes with the BBDU as far as outerwear, boots, hats, field equipment or grooming standards.  Everyone looks the same when out and about providing a service to the customer.  There is (theoretically) less of a chance of "airsoft seal team" in appearance when it comes to field gear.  (seriously who wants to mix misc green/tan/brown camo and blue)

just a thought
MK

I made that point on here a while ago and got chewed out heavy for it.

I'm not a fan of wearing your resume all over your uniform. It's one thing to have a ribbon rack, unit insignia, and grade, but to have this flood of patches everywhere is overkill. I think it makes the uniform look like a Boy Scouts funfest and gives off the impression that the more patches you have, the better CAP member you are. Which just isn't true. Many qualifications doesn't mean you perform any of them superb.

Your team leaders know your skills because you're on their team. You wouldn't be on the ground team without the qualification. Wearing it on your sleeve doesn't symbolize anything. Sure, we could break this down into every single patch/badge one wears from wings to ES to SUPTFC. I see way too may cadets especially trying to rack build, and uniform build with patches, and they don't retain information nor do they really care once they're qualified. I compare it to getting a Ranger tab and serving on a medical ward.

Personally, though, I agree with having a ground team uniform separate from your standard BDUs. As far as the patches go, the public, law enforcement, whomever, have no idea what those patches mean and they don't really care. They just want to know that whoever is on the team can do the job they're there to do.

We represent the military, whether anyone feels that we're Airmen or not. The public sees a uniform, and they immediately think military. You can spend all day trying to explain to them what CAP is. But they see a camouflage uniform and patches everywhere, and all pretty and colorful, and it starts to look like a camouflage clown suit.

I know this will light some fires and probably throw shack my way. It's not meant to be offensive or demeaning, but I'd like to see a working uniform be used more for working and less for showing off. Let the dress uniform be flashy. Let the working uniform look sharp and get dirty when it needs to. That's its purpose.

[goblin]

^this

[TarRiverRat]

I am kind of partial to the idea of 2 separate uniforms.  DoD style for day to day military-esque things (ie cadet programs) and the BBDU for ES operations. Yes its an extra expense but if ES is what you want to do consider it part of your "gear".  There is less heartache over what goes with the BBDU as far as outerwear, boots, hats, field equipment or grooming standards.  Everyone looks the same when out and about providing a service to the customer.  There is (theoretically) less of a chance of "airsoft seal team" in appearance when it comes to field gear.  (seriously who wants to mix misc green/tan/brown camo and blue)

just a thought
MK

I like this idea.

[JeffDG]

I'm not a fan of wearing your resume all over your uniform. It's one thing to have a ribbon rack, unit insignia, and grade, but to have this flood of patches everywhere is overkill. I think it makes the uniform look like a Boy Scouts funfest and gives off the impression that the more patches you have, the better CAP member you are. Which just isn't true. Many qualifications doesn't mean you perform any of them superb.

Really, your "resume" ES wise is your CAPF 101 card.  That's where your credentials are listed.

You could have been a GBD 10 years ago and never been involved in Ground Ops since, but you can wear your Master GT badge, but your 101 won't show it because you're not current.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Then comparing a resume with the 101 is null. A resume is a list of what you know, what you do now, and what you did before if it is relevant.

[LSThiker]

I'm not a fan of wearing your resume all over your uniform. It's one thing to have a ribbon rack, unit insignia, and grade, but to have this flood of patches everywhere is overkill. I think it makes the uniform look like a Boy Scouts funfest and gives off the impression that the more patches you have, the better CAP member you are. Which just isn't true. Many qualifications doesn't mean you perform any of them superb.

True, more patches one has does not mean your are superb or a better CAP member.  That is true for not only CAP but also the military.  Just because a Soldier has 4 skill badges, three tabs, and two pocket badges on his ACUs, does not mean he/she is a better Soldier.  Just means he has more training, of which it does not mean he is excellent in any of those trainings either.


I agree that the number of patches we have on our BDU/BBDUs is a bit much.  I could go for eliminating the vast majority of them.  Keep the badges, sure why not. 

Or at least, redesigning them to be simple, professional, and of the least number of colors.  For example, redesign the ES patch to something similar to the communications patch (but obviously red).  Safety and CISM could be similar to the communications patch as well.  Redesign the cartoonish looking patches (e.g. NBB and model rocketry) and make them look more professional and current.  Make all NCSA patches of the same design (roundel vs shield).  Only have one placement (left breast pocket) for these patches and wearer must choose only 1.  I know, I know, history.  And money.  I get that.  Over all, you get only 3 spots for qualifications (two badges and one breast pocket patch).  As far as mandatory patches:  name tape, CAP tape, command insignia pin.   

[TarRiverRat]

I wish we could use the command insignia pin instead of the bird splat that Vanguard has.  When I got it, it looked awful.  I still have not placed it on my BBDUs as of yet.  Right now I only have my grade, wing patch, name, and Civil Air Patrol tape on my BBDU.

[TheSkyHornet]

I'm not a fan of wearing your resume all over your uniform. It's one thing to have a ribbon rack, unit insignia, and grade, but to have this flood of patches everywhere is overkill. I think it makes the uniform look like a Boy Scouts funfest and gives off the impression that the more patches you have, the better CAP member you are. Which just isn't true. Many qualifications doesn't mean you perform any of them superb.

True, more patches one has does not mean your are superb or a better CAP member.  That is true for not only CAP but also the military.  Just because a Soldier has 4 skill badges, three tabs, and two pocket badges on his ACUs, does not mean he/she is a better Soldier.  Just means he has more training, of which it does not mean he is excellent in any of those trainings either.


I agree that the number of patches we have on our BDU/BBDUs is a bit much.  I could go for eliminating the vast majority of them.  Keep the badges, sure why not. 

Or at least, redesigning them to be simple, professional, and of the least number of colors.  For example, redesign the ES patch to something similar to the communications patch (but obviously red).  Safety and CISM could be similar to the communications patch as well.  Redesign the cartoonish looking patches (e.g. NBB and model rocketry) and make them look more professional and current.  Make all NCSA patches of the same design (roundel vs shield).  Only have one placement (left breast pocket) for these patches and wearer must choose only 1.  I know, I know, history.  And money.  I get that.  Over all, you get only 3 spots for qualifications (two badges and one breast pocket patch).  As far as mandatory patches:  name tape, CAP tape, command insignia pin.

Love it.

I'd like to see patches that blend in better (subdued). I think the utility uniform we have stands out a lot (and that's not a joke on camouflage; it's very colorful)

[ironputts]

How is the wear test going?

[Garibaldi]

How is the wear test going?

Probably won't know for a while. The NUC has to take all results, collate the data and present their findings. I'd say at least a year before we know.

[Holding Pattern]

How is the wear test going?

Uniforms are being sent for review due to spontaneous combustion noted by wearers when people are discussing uniform regulations around them.

[Raikkonen]

We might as well commence the ABU rodeo. We haven't had one here in a while. Lol

I would even happily give up my beret if it meant CAP dropped all patches when switching to ABU. Rank, tapes, & badges only.

Or you could just give it up regardless.

Nobody is happy with the lack of patches. It's on the the ABUs biggest complaints.

No kidding?  That crap got expensive when it came time to get new uniforms.  Rank x 2, Name, USAF, MAJCOM Patch, Wing patch, Squadron Patch, Specialty Badges, Missile if you had it...  I was delighted when they announced the ABU wouldn't have all of that.  Big waste of money for both the Air Force and the individual.