Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 16, 2018, 08:31:59 AM
Home Help Login Register

CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

 on: Today at 07:57:06 AM 
Started by Hawk200 - Last post by hfriday
Basically, eliminate the pocket badges(which is different in placement for females), and replace them with designs more akin to Air Force occupational badges?

Yeah, that's the general idea. I know the prevailing wind here seems to be against going more USAF-style, but if we are going to have USAF-style uniforms, we should be more aligned with them in general, not less.

Probably the biggest issue with CAP uniforms is there's just so much stuff on them - I've heard criticism that we look like "NASCAR drivers," not the USAF Auxiliary, and it's not an illegitimate complaint.

 on: Today at 06:21:57 AM 
Started by Hawk200 - Last post by Hawk200
The only change I would like to see is to be able to wear the blue cloth rank insignia on the flight suit. Otherwise everything else is fine with me.

Allow blue cloth rank on flightsuits, or just cloth rank? Blue would stand out, just wondering if you are more interested in lower maintenance cloth rather than the plastic rank insignia.

 on: Today at 06:20:22 AM 
Started by Hawk200 - Last post by Hawk200
Personally, I'd like to see the big pocket badges for technician, senior, and master ratings go away in favor of a smaller badge over the nametape, like the GT and aircrew badges.

As a veteran myself, I'd prefer to keep the ABU, if only because I find it comfortable and don't like looking during a SAR mission like I got lost looking for the 19th hole. The fact that I have so darn much MONEY tied up in my two ABUs is certainly another reason to want to keep them in circulation.

Basically, eliminate the pocket badges(which is different in placement for females), and replace them with designs more akin to Air Force occupational badges?

 on: Today at 06:17:36 AM 
Started by Hawk200 - Last post by Hawk200
A real service jacket for the corporate uniforms, not a security guard jacket.

Coat only, or a new Corporate Uniform design? I didn't care for HWSRN's coat design, but I had to admit it was actually uniform.

Right now, three people could wear the blazer combo, be completely within the manual, but with three different color variations of "blue" and "gray."

 on: Today at 06:14:09 AM 
Started by Hawk200 - Last post by Hawk200
Replace GTM badges with Ground Forces badge or expand to cover more than just SAR based ground teams.

Add Incident staff badge.

BTW, both of these have been sent up already. Not which black hole they got sucked into since there no requirement for higher levels to update submitters on status of suggestions/ideas.

Noted. We'd have to come up with criteria and designs, but that can be worked on later.

 on: Today at 06:12:45 AM 
Started by Hawk200 - Last post by Hawk200
Hawk, the reality is that threads like these are pointless, because there is too much broken with the multiform
to have any coherent basis to start.

There isn't a single garment, insignia, or wear policy which isn't literally defective, and that doesn't include
or address when people willfully disobey or ignore the regs, and when leaders fail to enforce them.

The same things have been broken for 20 years, countless hours have been spent both solicited and unsolicited
providing corrections to typos and omissions, as well as suggesting reasonable fixes for more "complex" problems,
and for the most part they are largely ignored.

If you don't choose to do something, it would be pointless. There are people in CAP that would like to see things cleaned up. Uniforms is just a single area, there are others.

I think if members got more involved, started pushing useful ideas, and then following up, positive change can happen. We want to be professional, and if we dedicate ourselves to that, we can be viewed as professionals. But, we should focus on developing our professionalism, and let the view of it came as it may.

 on: Today at 06:12:04 AM 
Started by etodd - Last post by JacobAnn
Congratulations!  An instrument rating significantly expands your flying horizon.

 on: Today at 06:05:17 AM 
Started by Hawk200 - Last post by Hawk200
I'll bite. I had an idea recently based on a new trinket I was given at work. All of us who have served in the military were given an American flag citation bar (like an enamel ribbon) with our service and veteran on it. For instance, mine has USMC Veteran.
I think some sort of CAP ribbon for members who have served in the military should be available, one that they can wear on corporate uniforms or in lieu of wearing military ribbons on USAF style uniforms. My idea would be for a new ribbon design, not service specific. Call it the CAP Military Service Award or something like that. It would greatly reduce the amount of clutter for many of us (with my CAP and mil ribbons together I have 19 as a 2ndLt) and provide a little something to recognize the service of our members who wear corporate uniforms. Thoughts?
You mentioned that you had something with "USMC" on it. Are you looking for just one ribbon, but maybe a device that indicates branch perhaps? There are ribbons for various things that have a specific designation "bar" (for lack of a better term.) Maybe attachments that have the service, or is that beyond what you're thinking?

 on: Today at 05:52:41 AM 
Started by Hawk200 - Last post by Hawk200
Hey, I proposed this idea for ALL members back in 2007. Identical cut to ACU/OCP, but distinctive and functional. Problem solved, problem staying solved.

But again, I think all AF uniforms for all CAP members should be authorized, regardless of size, weight, and facial hair.

I'll add this to the list, but there is only one problem: What do we call this? It needs a name/designation. ("Stonewall Utility?")

 on: Yesterday at 11:48:06 PM 
Started by OldGuy - Last post by MSG Mac
I heard from an Individual who works at the Pentagon that the SECAF would be asked for her resignation due to the loss of the F 22s and her lack of support for Space Command.

People reading AF Times again.

While I get the idea that people in the chain are "responsible," its not like the SECAF can exactly control the mx flow of the F-22s at Tyndall.  If the bird can't fly, its not like you can take it out of the path of the hurricane.

"No, no, we got a one-time authorization from SECAF to fly these out.."

"But it doesn't have engines."

"Glider tow?"

 No, got this from a friend who works at the secretarial level at the Pentagon.

{ed. quote fix}

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.053 seconds with 15 queries.