(I can just hear the moaning now -- "Not another corporate uniform thread!")
I'd like to ask the following question of the general assembly:
For those of you who don't like/object to/downright despise the Corporate Blue Service Uniform (known to some as the "TPU"), what precisely is your objection to it?
I'm interested.
Jack
The cost.
Dr. Dave
- Mixing military insignia/uniform items with "civilian clothing." (As defined by CAP-USAF/CC.)
- Quasi-militaryness of uniform.
- It's for fat (but well groomed) members who want to look military. See second point.
- It's fugly.
- It's not USAF style.
- Did I mention it's fugly?
My objections:
1. The whole uniform looks more "Navy" than "Air Force."
2. Lose the silver braid.
3. Its for fat guys, and fat guys look WORSE in double-breasted.
1. No forethought into female version
2. No wear-test period to gain membership feedback
3. Double-breasted is very difficult to pull off well, IMHO.
4. The garish silver sleeve braid is way over the top, for me.
5. Requires it's own nameplate, own rank devices, and all sorts of other unique (read: more cost) items.
6. Did I mention double-breasted jackets look poor on many men?
7. What's with the silver banding on the service cap, too? Garish and tacky.
I do think it's a good start in a direction for a good set of corporate uniforms that should eventually become the sole corporate equivalent to the Air Force uniforms. It's got some improvement to undergo.
Quote from: DrDave on June 11, 2007, 11:48:37 AM
The cost.
Fair enough. But an AF officer's blouse has a similar cost, does it not? And for those who can't wear the AF blouse, it's the same amount of money (more or less) to get a uniform look.
Jack
Quote from: MIKE on June 11, 2007, 11:59:23 AM
- Mixing military insignia/uniform items with "civilian clothing." (As defined by CAP-USAF/CC.)
And yet the CAP-USAF/CC has said he doesn't have a problem with the uniform.
Quote
- Quasi-militaryness of uniform.
Those of us who don't meet "military" specifications can't have a military-style uniform?
Quote
- It's for fat (but well groomed) members who want to look military. See second point.
And the problem here is ... ? I'm one who can't lose enough weight to look "military" -- well, not without bariatric surgery, anyway -- so I can't look like I belong too?
Quote
A matter of taste.
Quote
Except for the double-breasted style -- which
is military -- it's almost exactly like a USAF uniform.
Quote
- Did I mention it's fugly?
Yes, you did. ;D
Remember, I am not trying to pick a fight or anything. I'm seriously interested in what people think. If I am out of line in my replies, let me know.
Jack
Tags - MIKE
My biggest beef with the TPU is the use of the plain AF blue shoulder marks. With the Navy-style coat, the uniform is plenty distinctive, but without it, it looks just a bit too similar to the AF uniform.
The sad thing is I know there are people out there who bought the TPU (the white shirt and pants part of it anyway) just so they could look more like Air Force officers.
Ascetically, the silver braid is a bit much, IMHO.
Quote from: Pylon on June 11, 2007, 12:49:07 PM
1. No forethought into female version
True, but the version I saw on Gen. Courter doesn't look bad at all. Very flattering, in fact. (Not that she needs to be flattered or anything.)
Quote
2. No wear-test period to gain membership feedback
And I would like to have seen this as well. It would've made the introduction of the uniform a
lot smoother.
Quote
3. Double-breasted is very difficult to pull off well, IMHO.
I'll upload a photo of me in the uniform and let you be the judge. I think I pull it off quite well, but I'd like your thoughts on the matter.
Quote
4. The garish silver sleeve braid is way over the top, for me.
Agreed. Regular sleeve braid to distinguish officers from NCOs would be better.
Quote
5. Requires it's own nameplate, own rank devices, and all sorts of other unique (read: more cost) items.
Again, I agree. But these items could have been realized before the uniform was authorized, so those who wanted it could have known in advance of the total cost -- unlike the first release, in which all AF-style insignia was okay, to the current, with (as you say) its own stuff.
Quote
6. Did I mention double-breasted jackets look poor on many men?
Yes, you did. ;D
Quote
7. What's with the silver banding on the service cap, too? Garish and tacky.
The CGAux uses the same thing on their combination cover. Doesn't look tacky there, in my never-to-be-humble opinion. We might think it looks garish on the AF service cap because they've never had anything but the black leather strap, I suppose.
Quote
I do think it's a good start in a direction for a good set of corporate uniforms that should eventually become the sole corporate equivalent to the Air Force uniforms. It's got some improvement to undergo.
And I fully agree with you! But the constant condemnation of the whole idea rather grates on me (you couldn't tell, could you?). I am interested in why people feel the way they do.
Jack
Quote from: JarakMaldon on June 11, 2007, 01:17:11 PM
My biggest beef with the TPU is the use of the plain AF blue shoulder marks. With the Navy-style coat, the uniform is plenty distinctive, but without it, it looks just a bit too similar to the AF uniform.
I think that should be fixed as well. If nothing else, authorize pinning CAP cutouts to the blue shoulder marks, and require it.
Quote
The sad thing is I know there are people out there who bought the TPU (the white shirt and pants part of it anyway) just so they could look more like Air Force officers.
I know a few who are the same way in the AF uniform. It doesn't make the corporate uniform bad; it makes the members who feel that way look silly, though.
Quote
Ascetically, the silver braid is a bit much, IMHO.
Agreed. Regular braid would be better.
Jack
Quote from: ColonelJack on June 11, 2007, 01:10:55 PM
Quote from: MIKE on June 11, 2007, 11:59:23 AM
- Mixing military insignia/uniform items with "civilian clothing." (As defined by CAP-USAF/CC.)
And yet the CAP-USAF/CC has said he doesn't have a problem with the uniform.
Excuse me if I am wrong for I am young and naive...but,
Doesn't the mixing of civilian and military wear pertain to complete military uniforms? What makes the military uniform, not the specific garments, but the insignia placed on those garments. Without the insignia it is just a business suit, so...since the TPU is not a military uniform, and has insignia marking it as such, the civilian clothing with it doesn't pertain...so...the CAP-USAF/CC wouldn't really have anything to say...right?
This is coming out of left field, so please feel free to shoot it down without mercy...
What if the new medium gray Army Service Uniform shirt if it took the place of the white aviator? I don't pretend to be a fashion designer, but would it look good paired up with shade 1625?
(http://www.marlowwhite.com/army/uniforms/images/army-gray-shirt-med.jpg)
Again, left field.
^^ Ummmm NO! Not only do MOST members of the army hate that shirt, but it would look terrible paired with the AF shade. It needs to be a darker shade than what the AF has or it will look bad.
sidenote......a lot of us when hearing of the Army blues becoming the everday dress were happy, then to hear we would need a gray shirt.....kinda ruined it!
I don't mind the uniform at all, and think it's an important step to create a military style uniform for the members.
What I don't like:
1) You have to meet AF grooming standards to wear it. Why create a corporate uniform, then exclude a segment of your membership from wearing it?
2) The uniform has it's own unique rank insignia. The insignia should be standardized across the board for all uniforms. If you're going to use the grey slides for some uniforms, use it for all of them. This also goes for nametags and other items.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on June 11, 2007, 01:26:51 PM
Doesn't the mixing of civilian and military wear pertain to complete military uniforms? What makes the military uniform, not the specific garments, but the insignia placed on those garments. Without the insignia it is just a business suit, so...since the TPU is not a military uniform, and has insignia marking it as such, the civilian clothing with it doesn't pertain...so...the CAP-USAF/CC wouldn't really have anything to say...right?
Some of the military uniform regulations specifically state what uniform components may be worn with civilian clothing. Example: You can wear the windbreaker or all weather coat without insignia, but other distinctive parts are prohibited.
I think a corporate service dress is a great idea, but I've got one major issue:
It should match, as closely as USAF will allow, the wear policies of the CAP/USAF Service Dress.
Same nametags
Same grade insignia.
The only differences should be those mandated by the Air Force (like no military ribbons, and probably no U.S. cutouts)
By making the uniforms as similar as humanly possible
1. We increase uniformity
2. We decrease confusion (how many folks are gonna put the wrong insignia on the wrong coat?)
3. We decrease cost - fewer stuff for members to buy (some of us do plan on buying both suits) and larger production runs of insignia at Vanguard, which should lower price.
The Corporate Service Dress as a way to bring our members together - great idea. As a "end run" around USAF to wear pin-on rank - bad idea.
(and yeah, the sleeve braid has got to go!)
I don't really have any objections to the TPU, for the most part it is a sharp looking uniform. I wish we had a "uni" form that everyone wore regardless of what grooming standards, weight standards, or whatever else.
I personally don't like the stigma that many of the uniforms recieve. "That one is for the big people," "That uniform is for the hairy people," "This one is for people who are skinny and shaven."
NEW MEMBER> "Great, I'm glad I joined CAP, what uniform should I order..."
US> "Well, you're too fat to wear this one, so we're going to make you wear this one and make you stick out. Then when people ask why you are wearing it, we'll say, 'because he's too fat to wear this one.'"
I don't care if someone weighs 400 pounds, has a beard and is wearing a "military looking" uniform as long as it is worn correctly and fits right and the person made the effort to look presentable.
I think it is important for our mission to be what people remember us for, and removing or elimintating 9 out of 10 different uniforms would help that. I really don't care what uniform CAP tells me to wear, if they want to ditch the AF style and just say TPU, fine, as long as I look like the guy next to me. All these different colors, variations, styles, insignia, etc. make us look like 10 different organizations than one with the same mission.
My specific reasons for not like the TPU are as follows:
1 Too many uniforms already
2 Nonstandard Insignia
a) nameplate
b) epaulets
c) etc.
3 Shade of Blue
-very close to AF
-not easy to distinguish
4 Divides the corporate wearers
a) Fuzzies
b) Non-Fuzzies
My only objection to the TPU is that the aviator shirt / gray pants combo still exists.
Okay, I too have a dislike for the silver braid (blue braid would look better) and I think the blue epaulets should have been the Cadet Officer style with CAP embroidery.
The few members I've seen wear it have looked pretty spiffy. The lack of fore thought in having a female version ready at the same time as the men's either says we don't have enough women on the NB or that there wasn't much consultation going on at all.
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 11, 2007, 03:54:23 PM
My specific reasons for not like the TPU are as follows:
1 Too many uniforms already
How many is too many? By my count, we have three uniforms for "dress" use -- AF blues, Corporate blues, and aviation greys. (I'm not addressing field uniforms or flight suits here because ... well, because I'm not. It's not the topic of this thread.) As someone has said, one for the fit, one for the fat, one for the fuzzy. Maybe I'm alone in not seeing this as exactly a problem. And before anyone says "Blazer," that's what you wear over the aviation greys.
Quote
2 Nonstandard Insignia
a) nameplate
b) epaulets
c) etc.
There we agree -- but it could've been addressed
before the uniform was introduced, not changed as time went along. A little forethought would've gone a long way. That said, I don't necessarily think the same grade insignia should be used on every uniform. The Navy/Coast Guard doesn't -- they have sleeve stripes, shoulder boards, and collar insignia depending on the combination you're wearing. CGAux is the same way. Train the people what to wear on what uniform and you solve the non-standard insignia issue.
Quote
3 Shade of Blue
-very close to AF
-not easy to distinguish
The shade of blue shouldn't be an issue. It's
supposed to resemble an AF uniform while at the same time not actually
be one, and be readily distinguishable. From the front, the double-breasted nature of the blouse is the dead giveaway; from sides or back, the silver braid on the sleeves. (See? I knew it had some purpose.)
Quote
4 Divides the corporate wearers
a) Fuzzies
b) Non-Fuzzies
The AF blues/aviation greys already did that; all we added with corporate blues was a military uniform that those who are vertically challenged can wear, if they ain't fuzzy.
Jack
Quote from: Psicorp on June 11, 2007, 05:11:21 PM
My only objection to the TPU is that the aviator shirt / gray pants combo still exists.
But that's the way it should be! NHQ has to decide one of two things -- either those who don't meet grooming standards (the fuzzies) can wear the corporate blues or they can't. If they can, the aviation greys can go away. But if the decision stands as is -- the fuzzies can't wear the blues -- then the aviation greys
must remain as a third dress uniform combination for those who want to wear facial hair.
Quote
Okay, I too have a dislike for the silver braid (blue braid would look better) and I think the blue epaulets should have been the Cadet Officer style with CAP embroidery.
I think I've stumbled on a reason for the silver braid -- distinguishing the corporate blues at a glance from AF no matter the angle you're approaching the officer. But I agree that blue braid would look better (and fie to those who say no braid at all -- we have to have
something to distinguish officers from NCOs.) And I do agree that the blue epaulets need CAP embroidered onto them.
Quote
The few members I've seen wear it have looked pretty spiffy. The lack of fore thought in having a female version ready at the same time as the men's either says we don't have enough women on the NB or that there wasn't much consultation going on at all.
Probably no consultation on this issue. Most of us didn't see the female version until General Courter wore one (quite nicely, I might add), but I understand at least one Region Commander had the ladies' edition on as early as last summer. They were there if you knew who to ask, I suppose.
Jack
Quote from: ColonelJack on June 11, 2007, 08:43:48 PM
(and fie to those who say no braid at all -- we have to have something to distinguish officers from NCOs.)
other than the obvious grade insignia...?
Why do the blue epaulets need to have "CAP" embroidered on them? Why give vanguard more money? As it is now......we can order those from AAFES at a cheaper price and not pay huge shipping charges!
What really is the reason? Everyone says they would like to have them......why?
We already have a nameplate that says "Civil Air Patrol".....and "CAP" cutouts and silver braid and no military ribbons! I can tell the difference between a CAP Officer and an AF Officer.
Please fill me in!!
I don't like it.
It's ugly.
I'm not allowed to wear it anyway cuz I'm a "fuzzy".
I am Fuzzy and Fat... I am the 2nd class citizen of CAP.. I am looked down on because I don't wear the AF wannabee uniform....
So there.
ANd yes I am stink'n mad.
Quote from: SarDragon on June 12, 2007, 12:42:57 AM
I'm not allowed to wear it anyway cuz I'm a "fuzzy".
That's funny, because I fit the standards for the Air Force-style uniforms, but I can't wear the TPU either. In fact, from what I can tell, I'm specifically prohibited from wearing by my employer.
Quote from: mikeylikey on June 11, 2007, 10:53:04 PM
Why do the blue epaulets need to have "CAP" embroidered on them? Why give vanguard more money? As it is now......we can order those from AAFES at a cheaper price and not pay huge shipping charges!
What really is the reason? Everyone says they would like to have them......why?
We already have a nameplate that says "Civil Air Patrol".....and "CAP" cutouts and silver braid and no military ribbons! I can tell the difference between a CAP Officer and an AF Officer.
Please fill me in!!
Why do the gray epaulets have "CAP" cutouts on them? It just doesn't make sense for every other epaulet to have it but the TPU and putting it on might nudge us a little closer to getting rid of the gray sleeves, maybe...one day.
Quote from: Psicorp on June 12, 2007, 12:09:14 PM
Why do the gray epaulets have "CAP" cutouts on them? It just doesn't make sense for every other epaulet to have it but the TPU and putting it on might nudge us a little closer to getting rid of the gray sleeves, maybe...one day.
Once upon a time, CAP SM's wore blue shoulder slides. The only difference between the CAP slide and the AF slide was the "CAP" embriodered on the CAP slides. Then came the berry boards. To save costs and comply with AF requirements, the only change was the color of the slide material. When the grey slides were introduced, they made the same change - from marroon materials to grey. The embriodery pattern remained the same.
Quote from: shorning on June 12, 2007, 03:25:39 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on June 12, 2007, 12:42:57 AM
I'm not allowed to wear it anyway cuz I'm a "fuzzy".
That's funny, because I fit the standards for the Air Force-style uniforms, but I can't wear the TPU either. In fact, from what I can tell, I'm specifically prohibited from wearing by my employer.
I'll need an AFI cite for this one...
Quote from: ddelaney103 on June 12, 2007, 01:48:02 PM
I'll need an AFI cite for this one...
AFI 36-2903, Table 1.3 (page 9) "Do not wear in civilian attire. For example: grade insignia, cap devices, badges and other U.S. or Air Force insignia, distinctive buttons, etc"
Also, Note 6. (page 10) : "Officers and Enlisted: Do not wear or mix unique uniform items with civilian clothes. These items are those unique to the uniform. They include grade insignia, cap devices, badges and other U. S. or Air Force insignia, such as items with the "Wing and Star" design, and so forth."
I see I was beaten to it but...
Quote from: ddelaney103 on June 12, 2007, 01:48:02 PM
I'll need an AFI cite for this one...
Sure, but you should know this already:
Quote from: 36-2903, Table 1.3, Note 6Officers and Enlisted: Do not wear or mix unique uniform items with civilian clothes.
These items are those unique to the uniform. They include grade insignia, cap devices,
badges and other U. S. or Air Force insignia, such as items with the "Wing and Star"
design, and so forth. Exception: Tie tacs and lapel pins when wearing business attire
authorized.
Emphasis mine. I don't see an exception for CAP. We can pretend that the components aren't really Air Force it's, but we'd be lying to ourselves.
Too slow, shorning.... ;)
Quote from: Hawk200 on June 12, 2007, 04:46:55 PM
Too slow, shorning.... ;)
I think I covered that already. ::)
I know, we need to create another level of uniform.
We have:
1) A uniform for those who meet the AF weight and grooming standards, the AF blues.
2) A uniform for those who meet the grooming standards, but not weight, the corporate uniform.
3) A uniform for those who don't meet either standard, the white/grey combo.
We need:
4) A uniform for those who meet the weight standard, but not the grooming. ;D
But that's not even close to the spirit of the regs.
Under that logic, you couldn't wear any CAP uniform except the golf shirt as the rest of them have restricted items (buttons, grade insignia, etc.)
^^ Agreed! Is there a section in that AF reg that says something like "The SECAF can authorize certain groups to wear distinctive AF and US devices? The army has a page that says that in thier reg......I thought the AF did as well!
Quote from: shorning on June 12, 2007, 04:52:54 PM
Quote from: Hawk200 on June 12, 2007, 04:46:55 PM
Too slow, shorning.... ;)
I think I covered that already. ::)
Just poking a little fun, wasn't meant to be taken seriously. My apologies.
Quote from: ddelaney103 on June 12, 2007, 05:09:35 PM
But that's not even close to the spirit of the regs.
Under that logic, you couldn't wear any CAP uniform except the golf shirt as the rest of them have restricted items (buttons, grade insignia, etc.)
Now you're on to something!
But seriously, I don't have an issue with the clothing items we wear as part of our uniforms. However, there is a subtle (yet distinct in my mind) difference between that and wearing Air Force shoulder marks.
^^ Why stop at the blue marks......you can then say the "US" cutouts, and blue sleeve braid...etc.
Quote from: mikeylikey on June 12, 2007, 10:41:37 PM
^^ Why stop at the blue marks......you can then say the "US" cutouts, and blue sleeve braid...etc.
That was one example. And it depends on which uniform we're talking about. Right now the discussion is all over the place. There is a whole other argument for Air Force style uniforms.
If we're talking about the white/blue uniforms, I still say that the AFI prohibits members of the Air Force from wearing it.
Quote from: mikeylikeyWhy do the blue epaulets need to have "CAP" embroidered on them? Why give vanguard more money? As it is now......we can order those from AAFES at a cheaper price and not pay huge shipping charges!
What really is the reason? Everyone says they would like to have them......why?
We already have a nameplate that says "Civil Air Patrol".....and "CAP" cutouts and silver braid and no military ribbons! I can tell the difference between a CAP Officer and an AF Officer.
The 2-line silver nametag, silver braid, different coat style, etc. are all well and good for the option of wearing the coat, but without a coat on, the distinction blurs.
A white shirt looks awfully close to a light blue shirt in the sunlight, and a blue 2-line nametag can escape ones attention. To someone who doesn't know any better, Joe CAP Lt Col in his coatless TPU can easily be confused for a AF Lt Col in a coatless service uniform.
Quote from: shorningIf we're talking about the white/blue uniforms, I still say that the AFI prohibits members of the Air Force from wearing it.
Concur.
Yeah, sticking with gray epaulets all around would make things easier.
1. Easier to ID that we're not USAF.
2. (More important) Easier to ID that we ARE CAP (the importance of branding, dontcha know)
3. Less to buy, less to stock. Less $$$ out of my pockets.
As to the objections to the TPU based on 36-2903, I'm going to quote from AFI 10-2701,
Organization and Function of the Civil Air PatrolQuote1.3. Status of CAP Personnel. CAP is not a military service and its members are not subject to the UCMJ. CAP members voluntarily perform Air Force-assigned missions. CAP membership does not confer upon an individual any of the rights, privileges, prerogatives or benefits of military personnel, active, reserve, or retired. While CAP is not a military service, it uses an Air Force-style grade structure and its members may wear Air Force-style uniforms when authorized. Air Force protocol requirements do not apply to CAP members.
1.3.1. CAP Grade. CAP uses military style grade for its membership at the discretion and approval of the Air Force. CAP officer or noncommissioned officer grade does not confer commissioned or noncommissioned officer status. CAP personnel have no authority over members of the armed forces. CAP members who are active, reserve, and retired members of the armed forces will be treated according to their CAP status when acting in a CAP capacity. The Air Force has authority over the CAP grade structure.
1.3.2. Uniform Wear and Personal Appearance. CAP members are authorized to wear CAP or Air
Force-style uniforms in accordance with CAP regulations (civilian clothing may be worn when specific missions dictate). The Air Force controls the configuration of the Air Force-style uniform worn by CAP members.
1.3.3. Grooming Standards. CAP members that choose to wear the Air Force-style uniform must
maintain weight, appearance, and grooming standards comparable to the Air Force. Variations in these standards are subject to Air Force approval. CAP ensures that all members wearing Air
Force-style uniforms adhere to these standards. CAP senior members who do not meet these standards are restricted from wearing the Air Force-style uniform but are not barred from membership or active participation in CAP. In these circumstances the senior members may only wear authorized CAP uniforms, or civilian attire as appropriate.
1.3.4. CAP Distinctive Uniforms and Insignia. The emblems, insignia, and badges of the CAP Air
Force-style uniform will clearly identify an individual as a CAP member at a distance and in low-light conditions. The Air Force must approve changes to the CAP Air Force-style uniform. CAP distinctive uniforms must be sufficiently different from U.S. Armed Forces uniforms so that confusion will not occur.
The two things I take out of this (bolded above) is the AF understands AD types are wearing CAP uniforms and the CAP distinctive has to be different from U.S. Armed Forces uniforms (which menas we can have beards and look like NOAA/PHS, but I digress...)
The AF took a chop on the TPU - we know this because they made changes (grade on cover and lapel brass). Therefore, the AF considers the TPU and sub uniforms "OK."
Hopefully that will clear things up...
Quote from: ddelaney103 on June 13, 2007, 06:30:09 PM
Therefore, the AF considers the TPU and sub uniforms "OK."
"We approve" and "we don't care" are two very separate statements.
I don't expect that we'll agree on this issue. While we have similar background, we're approaching this from differing perspectives. In the end, it's just like everything else in life: you've got to go with what your conscience will allow.
Quote from: shorning on June 14, 2007, 07:25:46 AM
"We approve" and "we don't care" are two very separate statements.
No argument here. But ... extrapolating from that point ... "we don't care" does mean "we do not disapprove," because the disapproval is not stated. Therefore it can be reasonably argued that approval is implied.
Quote
I don't expect that we'll agree on this issue. While we have similar background, we're approaching this from differing perspectives. In the end, it's just like everything else in life: you've got to go with what your conscience will allow.
Again, I agree. I didn't start this thread to try to get everyone to agree. I was most interested in the objections to the uniform. I've learned a lot over these few days.
That being said, I still think the corporate dress blue uniform is a viable alternative for those who wish a military-style appearance but don't qualify for the USAF uniform. Some wish to complain about having to buy CAP cutouts after buying US cutouts ... having to buy a new nameplate because someone wants "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" on it ... these are small potatoes. They're not
that expensive. I will go out on a limb and say that the main problem with these is the inconvenience, not the expense -- twenty bucks fixes it, and that even includes shipping. (Well, most of the shipping, anyway.)
I appreciate the input and hope it continues. Thanks, friends!
Jack
Quote from: ColonelJack on June 14, 2007, 03:18:04 PM
Quote from: shorning on June 14, 2007, 07:25:46 AM
"We approve" and "we don't care" are two very separate statements.
No argument here. But ... extrapolating from that point ... "we don't care" does mean "we do not disapprove," because the disapproval is not stated. Therefore it can be reasonably argued that approval is implied.
Quote
I don't expect that we'll agree on this issue. While we have similar background, we're approaching this from differing perspectives. In the end, it's just like everything else in life: you've got to go with what your conscience will allow.
Again, I agree. I didn't start this thread to try to get everyone to agree. I was most interested in the objections to the uniform. I've learned a lot over these few days.
That being said, I still think the corporate dress blue uniform is a viable alternative for those who wish a military-style appearance but don't qualify for the USAF uniform. Some wish to complain about having to buy CAP cutouts after buying US cutouts ... having to buy a new nameplate because someone wants "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" on it ... these are small potatoes. They're not that expensive. I will go out on a limb and say that the main problem with these is the inconvenience, not the expense -- twenty bucks fixes it, and that even includes shipping. (Well, most of the shipping, anyway.)
I appreciate the input and hope it continues. Thanks, friends!
Jack
Jack:
I pretty much agree with you, that the TPU is a good idea, basicly. However, like much of what happens in CAP, the best of ideas is fouled up by poor execution. The General's intent (If I may be so presumptuous to speculate) was to get all of the guys on the team into the same jersey, to the extent that the Air Force would allow. But then we had to go and make a double-breasted atrocity with silver cuff braid.
One of the guys on another thread came up with a great idea: Have an AF-blue CAP uniform, with sewn-on gray epaulets and matching cuff braid, but use the 4-button and 4-pocket design that the Army uses and the Air Force used to use.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on June 14, 2007, 06:39:03 PM
One of the guys on another thread came up with a great idea: Have an AF-blue CAP uniform, with sewn-on gray epaulets and matching cuff braid, but use the 4-button and 4-pocket design that the Army uses and the Air Force used to use.
It's a great idea, but I wouldn't jump on it too quick. It seems like some people higher up in the Air Force want to got
back to that four pocket design(if it's made in polyester mix, I'm golden, still got my old one :D.) I always believed history repeated itself, I never thought I would see so many examples.
Then again, the Army just made the Dress Blue it's service uniform. Air Force may have to pick another color. But even with a lot of badges and such that the Air Force has, the uniform is still pretty plain compared to other services.
Quote from: Hawk200 Then again, the Army just made the Dress Blue it's service uniform. Air Force may have to pick another color. But even with a lot of badges and such that the Air Force has, the uniform is still pretty plain compared to other services.
The new AF service coat, or the "Hap Arnold Heritage Coat," is intended to be good old Shade 1620, so we can all keep our pants on (literately). The Army Dress Blue (or now, Army Service Uniform) coat is almost black, isn't it? I don't think there will be too much confusion between Army and AF, especially with the old-school shoulder strap rank the Army uses for officers.
Of course, the HA Coat isn't final yet. I really don't see the belt lasting through the wear test phase. If that is the case, they may as well call it the "we're going back to the coat we had before General McPeak came around" coat.
IMO, I think that if the AF went with the lapel style the Army currently uses, then allowed officers to wear the Prop and Wings with the US pins, Army branch style, it would be cool. The AF makes it a big deal now that all officers from all commissioning sources are awarded the Prop and Wings as a milestone toward officership, but then they go away when you get your gold bars, never to be worn again. Personally, I would like to keep them on. After all, it is a heritage item. The AF just went back to the enlisted circle-US, so why not?
Now, if they AF did that, then perhaps the CAP could wear the Tri-Prop in that place.
...way ahead of myself here? :)
Quote from: JarakMaldon on June 14, 2007, 10:18:34 PM
The Army Dress Blue (or now, Army Service Uniform) coat is almost black, isn't it? I don't think there will be too much confusion between Army and AF, especially with the old-school shoulder strap rank the Army uses for officers.
No, it's a dark blue alright, but nowhere near black.
QuoteOf course, the HA Coat isn't final yet. I really don't see the belt lasting through the wear test phase. If that is the case, they may as well call it the "we're going back to the coat we had before General McPeak came around" coat.
The coat looked OK, but there was a lot of negative reaction to it, especially some of the extensive tailoring that would be required. There may be a case of the old coat coming back. It will still be similar enough to the ASU that some people might get confused. Then again, there are people that don't know the difference between a deputy and a fireman either. Two uniforms of the same color may be interesting.
The CAP prop and wings lapel insignia was all silver. The USAAF/USAF prop and wings were silver prop, gold wings. I think Army aviation still wears the gold and silver prop and wings as their branch insignia.
Quote from: BillB on June 14, 2007, 11:25:17 PM
The CAP prop and wings lapel insignia was all silver. The USAAF/USAF prop and wings were silver prop, gold wings. I think Army aviation still wears the gold and silver prop and wings as their branch insignia.
You are, as always, correct, Bill.
Plus the Army Aviation branch device uses the Army pilot/aircrew wing design.
Off original topic: I like the Class As better than the ASU... Preferably with the earlier khaki shirt instead of the mint green one. Could go back to ODs but with matching trousers and black or brown tie... Khaki shirts and trousers for summer Class B.
Always liked the self-belted service uniforms... like the AF test uniform for this reason, but it still needs work... I just don't like the ASU as a service uniform. I would have basically just done the existing greens or the earlier ODs in black with matching trousers. Probably would look like something worn by the SS, but I do not like the two-tone striped look for a service uniform.
Back on topic: The corporate service dress however looks horrid... I thought it looked ok without the jacket, headgear and outerwear when it first came out though. Except for the fact that it was basically the AF service uniform with a different shirt and nametag
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on June 14, 2007, 11:32:02 PM
Quote from: BillB on June 14, 2007, 11:25:17 PM
The CAP prop and wings lapel insignia was all silver. The USAAF/USAF prop and wings were silver prop, gold wings. I think Army aviation still wears the gold and silver prop and wings as their branch insignia.
You are, as always, correct, Bill.
Plus the Army Aviation branch device uses the Army pilot/aircrew wing design.
IIRC USAFA and AFROTC use both versions depending on wiether or not a relative served in the USAAF or not.
There is a slight difference between the Army and Air Force Prop and Wings.
(http://www.tioh.hqda.pentagon.mil/Graphics/AviationBC.gif)
US Army Aviation Branch Insignia.
(http://www.paradestore.com/images/AFCollarDevice909TN.jpg)
AFROTC / USAFA / OTS Prop and Wings.
If you meet the following criteria, you can wear a version of this device that has a silver prop and gold wings.
Quote from: AFROTCI 36-200810.4.1.3. Cadet officers are authorized to wear gold/silver combination "Prop & Wings" (gold wings and silver propeller) if a relative was a member of the Army Air Corps, if a parent has at least 20 years of military service, if a parent died in the line of duty, or if a parent participated in active combat as a member of any U.S. military service.
There also is an all-silver version of the Army Aviation Branch insignia. These were accidentally given to some cadets back at my ROTC Det and replaced with the AF version later.
Quote from: Hawk200Two uniforms of the same color may be interesting.
How close are they, though? The new HA coat is going to be the same shade of blue as the current AF SDU. Here is a pic of an AF SDU, worn by a CAP Cadet, up against the coat that will be the ASU coat, worn by a USACC cadet:
Link.
Quote from: JarakMaldon on June 15, 2007, 03:35:04 AM
Quote from: Hawk200Two uniforms of the same color may be interesting.
How close are they, though? The new HA coat is going to be the same shade of blue as the current AF SDU. Here is a pic of an AF SDU, worn by a CAP Cadet, up against the coat that will be the ASU coat, worn by a USACC cadet:
Link.
As I pointed out earlier, there are people that don't recognize the variations. It's easy for us, we're used to the minor details that differentiate the uniforms. The simple stuff for us can be pretty complex to the unititiated.
In that photo, there are people that would look at it, and think that the only one that is from a different service is the one in whites. They'd probably also think that the female is wearing the white topped cover just because she's a female(which I can understand, when I first joined the Air Force, females wore a white topped cover). It's crazy, but it is fact. There are people that don't know the differences.
Ok, so why is there no sweater/cardigan authorized? What are we supposed to wear when it's cold? Why is the only piece of outerwear authorized an Army officers lightweight jacket? What is one supposed to wear over the service coat in inclement weather? Why the Army lightweight jacket? Blue and black looks pretty bad. Even the tan navy/marine version would look better.
We need a pullover sweater authorized. We need someone to tell us why black lightweight jacket. We need an overcoat/all-weather coat. Also, what do CAP NCOs wear in TPU style? What about flight officers?
Quote from: afgeo4 on June 18, 2007, 06:07:04 AM
Ok, so why is there no sweater/cardigan authorized? What are we supposed to wear when it's cold? Why is the only piece of outerwear authorized an Army officers lightweight jacket? What is one supposed to wear over the service coat in inclement weather? Why the Army lightweight jacket? Blue and black looks pretty bad. Even the tan navy/marine version would look better.
We need a pullover sweater authorized. We need someone to tell us why black lightweight jacket. We need an overcoat/all-weather coat. Also, what do CAP NCOs wear in TPU style? What about flight officers?
I think the issue is trying NOT to wear USAF stuff with the uniform (beyond the hat), while not inventing too many custom items. Hence the Army windbreaker - it's not USAF, and it's commercially available.
While a sweater might be OK, many Army folks use the windbreaker indoors like a sweater. In fact, the Pentagon we used to call the windbreaker "Pentagon Battle Dress" since durn near everyone wore it all day long.
For really cold days, the black leather jacket is authorized. Works great if you just have the aviator shirt on.
But yeah, if you want something to wear over the blouse, you need some kind of long raincoat.
Outerwear has never been CAP's strength - probably comes from having a National HQ down south where it's warm....
^ I was under the impression that we can wear whatever outerwear we wanted with the TPU....as in raincoat/AF sweater etc. Am I incorrect?
You are incorrect. Unlike the CAP distinctive uniforms, nowhere does it state that civilian outerwear is authorized for the Corporate Uniform combos.
Its a good start moving in the right direction for a non-usaf uniform option but the present iteration is tacky and cartoonish.
Quote from: Dragoon on June 18, 2007, 12:55:13 PM
Quote from: afgeo4 on June 18, 2007, 06:07:04 AM
Ok, so why is there no sweater/cardigan authorized? What are we supposed to wear when it's cold? Why is the only piece of outerwear authorized an Army officers lightweight jacket? What is one supposed to wear over the service coat in inclement weather? Why the Army lightweight jacket? Blue and black looks pretty bad. Even the tan navy/marine version would look better.
We need a pullover sweater authorized. We need someone to tell us why black lightweight jacket. We need an overcoat/all-weather coat. Also, what do CAP NCOs wear in TPU style? What about flight officers?
I think the issue is trying NOT to wear USAF stuff with the uniform (beyond the hat), while not inventing too many custom items. Hence the Army windbreaker - it's not USAF, and it's commercially available.
While a sweater might be OK, many Army folks use the windbreaker indoors like a sweater. In fact, the Pentagon we used to call the windbreaker "Pentagon Battle Dress" since durn near everyone wore it all day long.
For really cold days, the black leather jacket is authorized. Works great if you just have the aviator shirt on.
But yeah, if you want something to wear over the blouse, you need some kind of long raincoat.
Outerwear has never been CAP's strength - probably comes from having a National HQ down south where it's warm....
1. From my service in the military... if you are indoors and plan to stay indoors, remove the outerwear (it's called that for a reason).
2. The leather jacket is far too expensive of a frill for most members.
3. If you're authorizing Army outerwear, just authorize all of it. Say you can wear the lightweight jacket, the all-weather coat, and the raincoat. All black, all officers. All worn the same way with metal grade insignia and CAP cutouts on epaulets. That's all. It's simple.
If it's true that NHQ doesn't think about their members' health and safety because they're in the south then I think they should all be fired.
Quote from: afgeo4 on June 18, 2007, 06:27:59 PM
1. From my service in the military... if you are indoors and plan to stay indoors, remove the outerwear (it's called that for a reason).
That's not in line with current AF guidance (as an example), let alone common practice.
Quote from: shorning on June 18, 2007, 09:21:00 PM
Quote from: afgeo4 on June 18, 2007, 06:27:59 PM
1. From my service in the military... if you are indoors and plan to stay indoors, remove the outerwear (it's called that for a reason).
That's not in line with current AF guidance (as an example), let alone common practice.
Not sure what you use as "current AF guidance", but I used the MTI yelling that at every trainee in 1WOT at BMT (Lackland AFB). Oddly enough, it was exactly what other MTIs were yelling about at their respective trainees as well.
This and the custom of removing your headgear indoors come from the old-fashioned chivalry in practice in europe and the US up to the middle of 20th century. Gentlemen removed their headgear upon entering a building while everyone removed their outerwear to show that they respect you, their host, and will stay for dinner or meeting or whatever. Remember, military officers were always considered the benchmark of gentlemanship while military enlisted men were in those days often simple folk and were groomed by their senior enlisted and officers to become gentlemen.
Quote from: afgeo4 on June 30, 2007, 04:43:23 PM
Quote from: shorning on June 18, 2007, 09:21:00 PM
Quote from: afgeo4 on June 18, 2007, 06:27:59 PM
1. From my service in the military... if you are indoors and plan to stay indoors, remove the outerwear (it's called that for a reason).
That's not in line with current AF guidance (as an example), let alone common practice.
Not sure what you use as "current AF guidance", but I used the MTI yelling that at every trainee in 1WOT at BMT (Lackland AFB). Oddly enough, it was exactly what other MTIs were yelling about at their respective trainees as well.
This and the custom of removing your headgear indoors come from the old-fashioned chivalry in practice in europe and the US up to the middle of 20th century. Gentlemen removed their headgear upon entering a building while everyone removed their outerwear to show that they respect you, their host, and will stay for dinner or meeting or whatever. Remember, military officers were always considered the benchmark of gentlemanship while military enlisted men were in those days often simple folk and were groomed by their senior enlisted and officers to become gentlemen.
MSgt Horning is currently serving on Active Duty in the Air Force which probably makes him pretty well versed on what the "current AF guidance" is.
Quote from: JarakMaldon on June 11, 2007, 01:17:11 PMThe sad thing is I know there are people out there who bought the TPU (the white shirt and pants part of it anyway) just so they could look more like Air Force officers.
The really sad thing is that the Air Force
still won't allow CAP officers to wear blue nametags and shoulder marks with the Air Force uniform.
The CAP corporate service dress uniform, although unnecessary, is an attempt by CAP to show the Air Force just how much the Air Force Auxiliary want's to look like its parent military service. Every Air Force uniform item not authorized for wear on the Air Force uniform for CAP is authorized on the CAP corporate service dress uniform.
Hell, Coast Guard Auxiliarists are allowed to wear Coast Guard uniforms with
beards and while being
overweight, but CAP can't be allowed to do the same with Air Force uniforms? Come on! Air Force uniforms are of the same prestige as Coast Guard uniforms, yet somehow the Air Force is reluctant to be as flexible as the Coast Guard when it comes to allowing overweight and bearded members of their auxiliary to wear their uniforms.
I used to think that the Air Force was just reluctant to allow CAP to look more like the Air Force and for CAP personnel to have more authority because of problems within CAP. Now I think that the Air Force just downright hates its own auxiliary and wishes it were never created. Maybe it's because of the present national commander, I don't know. But something does not seem right about all this. CAP has been given plenty of opportunities to prove itself, and it just seems like the Air Force is turning a blind eye to its own auxiliary.
I think a lot of it has to do with CAP-USAF and its lack of oversight to CAP. These are the folks who are the bridge between CAP and the Air Force, and I must say it is a pretty rickedy bridge. I'm not going to speculate, but there is a lot of work to be done on both sides of the fence.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 07:15:23 PM
Quote from: JarakMaldon on June 11, 2007, 01:17:11 PMThe sad thing is I know there are people out there who bought the TPU (the white shirt and pants part of it anyway) just so they could look more like Air Force officers.
The really sad thing is that the Air Force still won't allow CAP officers to wear blue nametags and shoulder marks with the Air Force uniform.
The CAP corporate service dress uniform, although unnecessary, is an attempt by CAP to show the Air Force just how much the Air Force Auxiliary want's to look like its parent military service. Every Air Force uniform item not authorized for wear on the Air Force uniform for CAP is authorized on the CAP corporate service dress uniform.
Hell, Coast Guard Auxiliarists are allowed to wear Coast Guard uniforms with beards and while being overweight, but CAP can't be allowed to do the same with Air Force uniforms? Come on! Air Force uniforms are of the same prestige as Coast Guard uniforms, yet somehow the Air Force is reluctant to be as flexible as the Coast Guard when it comes to allowing overweight and bearded members of their auxiliary to wear their uniforms.
I used to think that the Air Force was just reluctant to allow CAP to look more like the Air Force and for CAP personnel to have more authority because of problems within CAP. Now I think that the Air Force just downright hates its own auxiliary and wishes it were never created. Maybe it's because of the present national commander, I don't know. But something does not seem right about all this. CAP has been given plenty of opportunities to prove itself, and it just seems like the Air Force is turning a blind eye to its own auxiliary.
I think a lot of it has to do with CAP-USAF and its lack of oversight to CAP. These are the folks who are the bridge between CAP and the Air Force, and I must say it is a pretty rickedy bridge. I'm not going to speculate, but there is a lot of work to be done on both sides of the fence.
You couldn't be more wrong.
The Air Force does not "Hate" us, and they are happy to have us as mission partners. Yes, they have had some problems with individuals, some with stars on their shoulders (Sometimes more stars than appropriate), but overall they know we are a great resource for lots of reasons.
Most AF guys don't even KNOW what our uniform is supposed to look like. You might recall a post I made about being accused of wearing "Outdated" items on my flight suit. Most AF guys simply assume that we wear the AF uniform with special insignia, and that our uniform changes when the Air Force changes theirs.
And once again ... the Coast Guard Auxiliary does not wear the same uniform as the Coast Guard. The buttons and braid on the CGAux uniform are silver, while those on the CG are gold. The braid on the combination cap is also silver, right down to the scrambled eggs on the visor. And therein lies the major gulf between CG and CGAux -- if CGAux had to wear gold instead of silver, there wouldn't be any overweight or bearded people in that uniform.
I know, it's a minor difference to us, but an obvious difference to anyone -- and everyone -- else.
CAP's uniform, conversely, is identical to the Air Force uniform -- except that we wear gray epaulet sleeves instead of hard metal rank. And that's the only visible difference until you get real up-close and personal ... and sometimes even then it's not that noticeably different.
Jack
No, that is incorrect. The Coast Guard Auxiliary
does wear the same
basic uniforms as the Coast Guard. The only difference is the use of silver instead of gold for braids, scrambled eggs, etc. Like CAP, but more distinctive.
Here's a modest proposal for CAP:
- Change the buttons on the AF service dress coat to distinctive CAP buttons (same ones as the ones on the CAP corporate service dress coat).
- Change the sleeve braid on the AF service dress coat/mess dress coat to gray.
- Keep the gray epaulets and nametags for wear on the AF blue service shirts.
- Remove the "U.S." cutouts from the AF service dress coat and replace them with "CAP" cutouts.
- Place a blue "A" on all metal CAP officer grade insignia, for wear on the epaulet sleeve of the AF blue service dress coat and on all appropriate outergarments. For the blue windbreaker, wear "CAP" cutouts on the top of the epaulet sleeve above the grade insignia.
- Place a blue "A" on all embroidered CAP officer grade insignia
- Change the clouds and darts on the AF service cap to gray for CAP.
- Change the color of the leg stripe and shoulder boards on the CAP mess dress from blue to gray.
How about that? It would make CAP more distinctive from the Air Force, just as the Coast Guard Auxiliary is from the Coast Guard.
^^ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
I would rather spend NO MORE MONEY! I can go to AAFES and get what I need off the rack for most things. I can then "trade" with fellow members to get my distinctive insignia upon promotions.
Quote from: mikeylikey on June 30, 2007, 09:31:10 PM
^^ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
I would rather spend NO MORE MONEY! I can go to AAFES and get what I need off the rack for most things. I can then "trade" with fellow members to get my distinctive insignia upon promotions.
Believe me, it would be expensive in the beginning, but way more cost-effective in the long run. I'll even submit to you that it would probably be less expensive than the cost of the new CAP corporate service dress uniform.
If it is less expensive and allowed.......perhaps.
The Bookstore used to sell CAP distinctive buttons for the old style service dress back in the day... They were like the AF buttons but with the CAP crest. The even older tri-prop buttons were a bit more obvious.
I'm inclined to agree with Smitty :o The Auxiliary uniforms seem a lot less distinctive then their CAP equivalent. The distinctiveness is there... It's just less obvious. If you squint just a little when looking at me in trops... particularly in my windbreaker... You'd think I was an Ensign.
I wish CAP and the USAF could take a page from the SDFs and the like... particularly with the USAF style uniform. Appropriately distinctive... but not glaringly obvious.
^ Agreed! Why can they do it......the American Cadet Aliance.....but not CAP. Looking at an ACA Officer and an Active Duty Officer there is very little difference, just a tape that says "Army Cadets, Navy Cadets, Marince Cadets".
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 09:22:31 PM
- Change the buttons on the AF service dress coat to distinctive CAP buttons (same ones as the ones on the CAP corporate service dress coat).
Works for me. I changed the buttons on my service coats the last time I was in.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 09:22:31 PM
- Change the sleeve braid on the AF service dress coat/mess dress coat to gray.
Don't care for it. Second, you would
need Air Force approval to do that, after all, it's an
Air Force uniform. I don't think they would give it. Don't want to change my braid either.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 09:22:31 PM
- Keep the gray epaulets and nametags for wear on the AF blue service shirts.
I got no problem with it. I think it would be better to use the grey across the board. Even on the TPU "Lite".
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 09:22:31 PM
- Remove the "U.S." cutouts from the AF service dress coat and replace them with "CAP" cutouts.
If this would give us standard hard metal rank, I wouldn't mind. It would be consistant between the two separate service coats.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 09:22:31 PM
- Place a blue "A" on all metal CAP officer grade insignia, for wear on the epaulet sleeve of the AF blue service dress coat and on all appropriate outergarments.
No real reason to do so. A nametag with "Civil Air Patrol" and "United States Air Force Auxiliary" on it points that out well enough. And the nametags are far larger than our AF counterparts, so they're pretty obvious.
Also, no need to commision new rank insignia. It's just not necessary. We can use existing insignia a lot more easily.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 09:22:31 PM
- For the blue windbreaker, wear "CAP" cutouts on the top of the epaulet sleeve above the grade insignia.
Works for me.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 09:22:31 PM
- Place a blue "A" on all embroidered CAP officer grade insignia
Same as above. Besides, we know we're "Auxiliary". And we do not work with the Air Force in the same manner as CG Auxiliarists work with the CG. No reason to emulate them.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 09:22:31 PM
- Change the clouds and darts on the AF service cap to gray for CAP.
As mentioned above, it's an
Air Force uniform. Would require AF approval. There are existing service hats that work just fine for us, why make something new? I can buy a hat in an AF military clothing. I don't want to have to mail order it.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 09:22:31 PM- Change the color of the leg stripe and shoulder boards on the CAP mess dress from blue to gray.
Air Force uniforms again. Besides, I think a grey stripe would look a bit garish. Our dark blue stripe on the Mess Dress jackets looks better anyway.
Besides, there is already a major difference between our jacket and the Air Force. The Air Force wears
silver stripes on jackets and shoulder boards, ours is dark
blue. It's pretty distinctive already. Gray may just look like a faded silver, you would end up defeating the purpose with such an arbitrary change.
I think it is time someone asked some pretty strong questions to Col Hodgkins as to why the Air Force is so against CAP officers wearing blue nametags and shoulder marks. The members of CAP deserve to know!
After all, if they can wear blue sleeve braids and the blue stripe on the mess dress pants, why can't they wear blue nametags and epaulets? Doesn't make sense to me.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 11:52:07 PM
After all, if they can wear blue sleeve braids and the blue stripe on the mess dress pants, why can't they wear blue nametags and epaulets? Doesn't make sense to me.
As I pointed out, the blue braid on the mess dress differs from the Air Force practice of wearing
silver braid. The two are distinctly different.
There is no braid on the mess dress pants. None. It is not attached later for officers, that is a panel that is integral to the pants, they're manufactured that way. Air Force enlisted wear the same mess dress pants as the officers. And CAP members wear it too.
There is no mention of pants braid in either the AFI or CAPM 39-1.
As I posted on another thread, I think this would be the way to go for the service coat as well as the TPU coat. Also use the same blue eps on both combo shirts. You could drop the silver nametag in favor of the old type blue one on the coats and even drop US and put CAP on both. This would create greater similarity between the 2 combos so that it would be obvious that both were the same org.
(http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa65/LtColWhite/IMG_2346.jpg)
Quote from: LtCol White on July 01, 2007, 01:01:25 AM
You could drop the silver nametag in favor of the old type blue one on the coats and even drop US and put CAP on both. This would create greater similarity between the 2 combos so that it would be obvious that both were the same org.
I wouldn't drop the silver nametag on the coats. That old blue one looked tacky on that style of service dress. Presently, there are two variations on the silver nametag: One with just name, the other with name and "Civil Air Patrol". Just pick one.
Although, if you go with one having "Civil Air Patrol" on it, put it below the name. For some reason, above the name just looks wierd to me, like it's out of balance or something.
The gray sleeve braid MIGHT go over, IF you had a sewn-on gray epaulet with metal rank.
Somebody once sugested that CAP officers buy the AF enlisted uniform, along with a "CAP Officer Conversion Kit" consisting of gray sleeve braid and gray epaulets.
You would pin on your rank, and pin a "CAP" cutout halfway between the rank device and the button.
With "CAP" on the epaulet, the US could stay on the lapel.
Quote from: Hawk200 on July 01, 2007, 01:09:03 AM
Quote from: LtCol White on July 01, 2007, 01:01:25 AM
You could drop the silver nametag in favor of the old type blue one on the coats and even drop US and put CAP on both. This would create greater similarity between the 2 combos so that it would be obvious that both were the same org.
I wouldn't drop the silver nametag on the coats. That old blue one looked tacky on that style of service dress. Presently, there are two variations on the silver nametag: One with just name, the other with name and "Civil Air Patrol". Just pick one.
Although, if you go with one having "Civil Air Patrol" on it, put it below the name. For some reason, above the name just looks wierd to me, like it's out of balance or something.
Again, just throwing out ideas to make it a little different without looking garish.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 01, 2007, 01:15:39 AM
The gray sleeve braid MIGHT go over, IF you had a sewn-on gray epaulet with metal rank.
Somebody once sugested that CAP officers buy the AF enlisted uniform, along with a "CAP Officer Conversion Kit" consisting of gray sleeve braid and gray epaulets.
You would pin on your rank, and pin a "CAP" cutout halfway between the rank device and the button.
With "CAP" on the epaulet, the US could stay on the lapel.
I think we need to attempt to get rid of the gray on the USAF uniforms if possible. I think if presented properly to USAF, they might be amenable to it. The photo I posted above is clearly distinct to CAP, doesn't have increased costs to the membership, but still looks very professional.
The gray eps should be kept only for the white/gray combo uniform.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 11:52:07 PM
I think it is time someone asked some pretty strong questions to Col Hodgkins as to why the Air Force is so against CAP officers wearing blue nametags and shoulder marks.
Have at it, Sport.
Here's the link to his email and phone number (http://www.cap.gov/visitors/about/national_headquarters/hq_contacts.cfm)(near the top of the list).
Be sure to remind him that you are a taxpayer and pay his salary!
(If you actually do this, please let him know that you are not a current member.)
Let us know how it goes. ::)
Quote from: Ned on July 01, 2007, 01:22:12 AM
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 11:52:07 PM
I think it is time someone asked some pretty strong questions to Col Hodgkins as to why the Air Force is so against CAP officers wearing blue nametags and shoulder marks.
Have at it, Sport.
Here's the link to his email and phone number (http://www.cap.gov/visitors/about/national_headquarters/hq_contacts.cfm)(about halfway down the list).
Be sure to remind him that you are a taxpayer and pay his salary!
Let us know how it goes. ::)
Thats not the way to mend fences and improve a relationship by asking "what's your problem"
Quote from: LtCol White on July 01, 2007, 01:17:44 AM
Quote from: Hawk200 on July 01, 2007, 01:09:03 AM
Quote from: LtCol White on July 01, 2007, 01:01:25 AM
You could drop the silver nametag in favor of the old type blue one on the coats and even drop US and put CAP on both. This would create greater similarity between the 2 combos so that it would be obvious that both were the same org.
I wouldn't drop the silver nametag on the coats. That old blue one looked tacky on that style of service dress. Presently, there are two variations on the silver nametag: One with just name, the other with name and "Civil Air Patrol". Just pick one.
Although, if you go with one having "Civil Air Patrol" on it, put it below the name. For some reason, above the name just looks wierd to me, like it's out of balance or something.
Again, just throwing out ideas to make it a little different without looking garish.
Nothing wrong with batting the idea back and forth. I apologize if I gave you a different impression.
The configuration of the silver with the CAP on it just looks wrong to me. I can't really explain it. I just look at it, and it looks strange. I do agree that we should pick one nametag for both coats. It would look better overall.
Quote from: LtCol White on July 01, 2007, 01:20:14 AM
The gray eps should be kept only for the white/gray combo uniform.
Personally, I don't mind the grey epaulets. I think they look fine on blue shirts, as well as white ones. It would be easier overall.
Think of this dialog:
Unit commander: "Mr Smith, I'm putting in your promo to 2LT"
SMWOG: "OK, uh.., what do color epaulets do I get?"
Unit commander: "Well, you're wearing that white and grey outfit, so you would need grey epaulets."
SMWOG: "Oh, OK. I'll get some"
Now if you go with one color, you get this:
Unit commander: "Mr Smith, I'm putting in your promo to 2LT"
SMWOG: "OK, I'll order some epaulets."
One thing that puzzles me is that cadet officers still wear blue. With seniors in grey, and cadets wearing blue, the cadets look closer to AF officers than seniors do.
I think we would be fine having Blue and Gray for the 2 combinations. Its not that hard to figure out which one u would wear based on the uniform you wear. It any part of it is blue, wear blue. If any part of it is gray, wear gray.
ALL members should be educated as to uniform regulations anyway. Thats part of the problem and why we are where we are with our uniforms now. Commanders don't educate and enforce the regulations.
Quote from: LtCol White on July 01, 2007, 01:56:51 AMALL members should be educated as to uniform regulations anyway. Thats part of the problem and why we are where we are with our uniforms now. Commanders don't educate and enforce the regulations.
Pretty much gotta agree with that one. It's not a problem in my unit, the commander sends people to me for their Level 1/CPPT, and I tell them about uniforms while they're with me.
Quote from: Hawk200 on July 01, 2007, 02:11:51 AM
Quote from: LtCol White on July 01, 2007, 01:56:51 AMALL members should be educated as to uniform regulations anyway. Thats part of the problem and why we are where we are with our uniforms now. Commanders don't educate and enforce the regulations.
Pretty much gotta agree with that one. It's not a problem in my unit, the commander sends people to me for their Level 1/CPPT, and I tell them about uniforms while they're with me.
Agreed. But what we need is more of this. It is a commander's job to see that his troops are educated in and obey the regulations. We don't have to like all of them but we do have to follow them. If we show USAF that we are educating our folks and enforcing our regulations, THAT will have a huge effect on the relationship.
Remember, USAF is LOVES people who follow regs.
Colonel White, what is that last ribbon on your rack?
Quote from: Ned on July 01, 2007, 01:22:12 AM
Quote from: 12211985 on June 30, 2007, 11:52:07 PM
I think it is time someone asked some pretty strong questions to Col Hodgkins as to why the Air Force is so against CAP officers wearing blue nametags and shoulder marks.
Have at it, Sport.
Here's the link to his email and phone number (http://www.cap.gov/visitors/about/national_headquarters/hq_contacts.cfm)(near the top of the list).
Be sure to remind him that you are a taxpayer and pay his salary!
(If you actually do this, please let him know that you are not a current member.)
Let us know how it goes. ::)
What? Do you think I'm stupid? Come on, get real Lt Col Lee! He's not going to waste the time listening to a former member, even one with 9 years of service. Did that last jab at me make you feel better?
Too bad Col Hodgkins is not a member of this board. That's all I'm going to say.
Quote from: 12211985 on July 01, 2007, 05:01:56 AM
Too bad Col Hodgkins is not a member of this board. That's all I'm going to say.
Truth is, you have no idea who is reading these posts nor do you have any idea who is exactally
who here.
Quote from: Major Carrales on July 01, 2007, 05:20:54 AMTruth is, you have no idea who is reading these posts nor do you have any idea who is exactally who here.
True, but nobody knows exactly who
I am, either!
Quote from: Major Carrales on July 01, 2007, 05:20:54 AM
Quote from: 12211985 on July 01, 2007, 05:01:56 AM
Too bad Col Hodgkins is not a member of this board. That's all I'm going to say.
Truth is, you have no idea who is reading these posts nor do you have any idea who is exactally who here.
I think I am me?? In fact I know I am me.....no one else is me but me!
Seriously.......I like the Colonels suggestion of bringing back the blue slides. It is time some at NHQ re-presents it. Oh wait.......the AF will most likely say, "What are you kidding......just wear your new double breasted outfit".
I would not mind going back to world war 2 dress.......as in everthing similar, except the epaulet sleeves are a different color than the jacket. It would not be hard at all. Vanguard could even sell the conversion kits!
Quote from: 12211985 on July 01, 2007, 05:22:54 AM
True, but nobody knows exactly who I am, either!
You know better than that, sir. ;)
Quote from: Ned on July 01, 2007, 05:44:42 AM
Quote from: 12211985 on July 01, 2007, 05:22:54 AM
True, but nobody knows exactly who I am, either!
You know better than that, sir. ;)
Having some of that 'cadet brew' you've cooked up over at the house, eh?
Yes, you and I both know what I'm talking about. ;)
Quote from: mikeylikey on July 01, 2007, 05:39:35 AM
I think I am me?? In fact I know I am me.....no one else is me but me!
I'm gonna tell you you something profound...this thing you have said here, it the only thing you can ever be truely sure off.
We can throw a lot of ideas around, but in the end we have two types of changes:
- Changes we can make ourselves
- Changes we have to ask "Mother may I" to big blue
In the spirit of "One Team, One Fight, One Epaulet" we should move the TPU uniform to gray epaulets. It minimizes variants ("so I wear the gray epaulets with the white shirt, right?" "Well, that depends on your pants...") it increases uniformity and reduces expenses. It's also the only change we can do with only some hand waving from the NB/NEC.
Here's my take on this, and I'm sure some of you may disagree.
CAP isn't the Air Force. We were CAP before the Air Force even was the Air Force. We are volunteers, and in another time we would be called "Militia." (Before the ultra-right armed gangs hijacked the term) We are the ONLY military auxiliary force that saw actual combat, and one of only two military auxiliaries from World War II that survived to the present day.
We serve for the sheer honor and pleasure of service. We accept the community recognition as our sole reward.
We understand that our contribution to national defense is either peripheral (Taking duties such as SAR that would otherwise tie up Air Force resources and divert them from warfighting); or delayed, in that the benefits of the cadet training program will be realized years into the future.
I, personally, am pretty darned proud to be a CAP officer. I was an RLO (Real, Live, Officer) and was actually paid to do what I do. But now I do it out of love of country and for the honor of service. As such, I DESERVE a special insignia.
Those gray epaulets are just fine with me.
Quote from: 12211985 on July 01, 2007, 04:24:26 AM
Colonel White, what is that last ribbon on your rack?
It is the GA NG Humanitarian Service award. We rec'd those in response to a snow and ice storm when we transported doctors and nurses back and forth from work and home as well as medical supplies from the warehouses to the hospitals. We were able to keep 4 atlanta hospitals running at normal capacity. GA National Guard awarded all of us this ribbon.
^ Cool!
I thought state awards weren't supposed to be authorized regardless?
I know I can't wear my state awards on AD.......even though I was NG before I transitioned to AD through rotc.
Once again, Kach said it best....we're CAP officers, let's take some pride in who we are, what we do, and our distinctive gray epaulets that tell folks who we are!
Wear of state ribbons from the National Guard on the CAP uniform (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=610&p_created=1033653641&p_sid=OOBlvwFi&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PWRmbHQmcF9ncmlkc29ydD0mcF9yb3dfY250PTM4MyZwX3Byb2RzPSZwX2NhdHM9MCZwX3B2PSZwX2N2PSZwX3NlYXJjaF90eXBlPWFuc3dlcnMuc2VhcmNoX25sJnBfcGFnZT0xJnBfc2VhcmNoX3RleHQ9c3RhdGUgYXdhcmRz&p_li=&p_topview=1)
Come one, folks, these are "rackbuilders," not actual wear. In theory, a person could build one heck of a rack for their shadowbox and still comply with CAP regs when they wear their uniform.
Quote from: MIKE on July 01, 2007, 04:43:51 PM
I thought state awards weren't supposed to be authorized regardless?
These were awared FOR CAP duty performance to 50 CAP members . Not earned as a NG members.
Quote from: LtCol White on July 01, 2007, 05:27:21 PM
Quote from: MIKE on July 01, 2007, 04:43:51 PM
I thought state awards weren't supposed to be authorized regardless?
These were awared FOR CAP duty performance to 50 CAP members . Not earned as a NG members.
Personally, I got the impression that the allowance for state decs was removed for simple envy. I remember reading a statement somewhere (may have been Civil Air Portal) that many people had the impression that State decs were handed out with far more ease than Federal awards, and therefore Guard members would have far more ribbons than their active duty counterparts.
Ironically, it takes a lot more to get a good many of the State decs than Federal versions. Most Guard people will choose the Federal award. In 18 years of service, I have been awarded fifteen Federal awards/decorations. In that time, I've only ever received one state dec.
To be fair, there are a lot of state decs that have no real Federal counterpart.
In some states you can get a PT ribbon, and some have ribbons for things like "enlisted excellence" that are kinda like, and kind not, the Good Conduct Ribbon.
Not to mention the things like the Drill Attendence Ribbon (with clasps) [Look Ma, no Article 15s for missing drill!], and various Federal Mobilization ribbons, etc.
So, yeah, I'm kinda with you on the "outstanding performance ribbons" as they are pretty similar to their Federal counterparts and sometimes Guard members get to choose whether they want the Fed or state dec. But some of them are pure "gimmees".
Ned Lee
Cal ARNG, ret.
I suspect that it is an oversight. After all, if we're allowing the wear of JROTC and ROTC ribbons there is no logical reason to not allow the wear of state decorations.
^^ Only while a member of JROTC and ROTC though, right? As soon as you leave that program or recieve a commission you have to take the ribbons off right?
Correct. Ribbons are removed when no longer participating in JROTC/ROTC.
Quote from: RiverAux on July 01, 2007, 10:21:44 PM
I suspect that it is an oversight. After all, if we're allowing the wear of JROTC and ROTC ribbons there is no logical reason to not allow the wear of state decorations.
I agree with RiverAux. The 39-1 says that all decorations allowed for wear on the Air Force uniform are allowed for wear on the CAP uniform. However, for some reason, state National Guard decorations don't fall into that category. Sounds like the 39-1 is contradicting itself.
State awards are not authorized on the USAF uniform, except when assigned to the ANG. Guardsmen on extended federal active duty have to remove their state ribbons. (I think its active duty periods of 30 days or more, but I'm not sure.)
It MAY be an exception if the state award was given to the member for CAP duty. You will have to call the venerable Ms. Parker on that one.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 02, 2007, 02:33:52 AM
State awards are not authorized on the USAF uniform, except when assigned to the ANG. Guardsmen on extended federal active duty have to remove their state ribbons. (I think its active duty periods of 30 days or more, but I'm not sure.)
AFI 36-2903 says: "Air National Guard (ANG) members wear state decorations when serving in state status but not while on federal active duty."
However, the supplement to AFI 36-2903 published by the Federal level National Guard Bureau states: "ANG personnel on federal active duty status (Title 10) for a period of 179 days or less may wear State awards/decorations."
Then you get to CAPM 39-1, which has one little phrase: "Military service ribbons may be worn on the CAP AF-style uniform provided they were awarded in writing by competent military authority."
The one state dec I recieved was signed off by my company commander, who could have awarded any number of other decorations to me. A company commander, in the grade of captain, who was recognized by the Federal government as a commisioned officer of the United States military.
The way I see it, it was certainly signed off by
competent military authority.
Well, if that isin't proof that the 39-1 contradicts itself, I don't know what is. Bravo, Hawk200.
Quote from: Hawk200 on July 02, 2007, 05:28:00 AM
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 02, 2007, 02:33:52 AM
State awards are not authorized on the USAF uniform, except when assigned to the ANG. Guardsmen on extended federal active duty have to remove their state ribbons. (I think its active duty periods of 30 days or more, but I'm not sure.)
AFI 36-2903 says: "Air National Guard (ANG) members wear state decorations when serving in state status but not while on federal active duty."
However, the supplement to AFI 36-2903 published by the Federal level National Guard Bureau states: "ANG personnel on federal active duty status (Title 10) for a period of 179 days or less may wear State awards/decorations."
Then you get to CAPM 39-1, which has one little phrase: "Military service ribbons may be worn on the CAP AF-style uniform provided they were awarded in writing by competent military authority."
The one state dec I recieved was signed off by my company commander, who could have awarded any number of other decorations to me. A company commander, in the grade of captain, who was recognized by the Federal government as a commisioned officer of the United States military.
The way I see it, it was certainly signed off by competent military authority.
Some nice barracks lawyering, there - but it doesn't wash.
The AF says no, but the NGB cuts some slack and says basically "you don't have to rearrange your ribbon rack every time you get orders - just on extended active duty." Now, this is probably an illegal supp - supp's can make things more restrictive than the reg, but not less restrictive, but I'm not the JAG.
However, dig far enough into "competent military authority" and I think you'll find a Title 10 requirement somewhere.
By the way, both publications cited are AIR FORCE instructions, so somebody at the AF had to approve them, they're just contradictory. I guess CAP has this problem in our DNA as well.
How about CAP modify its regulations to specifically allow the wear of state awards earned by National Guard members? I don't think the AF would have any problem with that -- after all if an Air NG person on active duty for less than 6 months can keep wearing them, why would they care if a CAP member wears them the 5 days a year or so they are in their blues?
There was another thread a while back about some award made to CAP members that the NatCom authorized, and that some members objected to.
Personally (And Ms. Parker may disagree with me on this, but that won't be the first time), I think that a state National Guard is, in fact, "Competent military authority" and an award, state or federal, made by the state National Guard to a CAP member for CAP service can be worn.
A state award made to a CAP member for service in the National Guard, cannot be worn.
This is NOT the only contradiction in 39-1.
Quote from: RiverAux on July 02, 2007, 01:09:28 PM
By the way, both publications cited are AIR FORCE instructions, so somebody at the AF had to approve them, they're just contradictory. I guess CAP has this problem in our DNA as well.
How about CAP modify its regulations to specifically allow the wear of state awards earned by National Guard members? I don't think the AF would have any problem with that -- after all if an Air NG person on active duty for less than 6 months can keep wearing them, why would they care if a CAP member wears them the 5 days a year or so they are in their blues?
Having done a little more research, I can find no _current_ ANG supp to 36-2903 ( AFI 36-2903/ANGSUP1 is listed as rescinded). AFI 36-2903 is the only authority on uniforms for the AF/ANG/AFR. A state can supp the AFI, but it must be more restrictive, not less.
Quote from: ddelaney103 on July 02, 2007, 12:04:10 PM
However, dig far enough into "competent military authority" and I think you'll find a Title 10 requirement somewhere.
So you're telling me that a National Guard officer isn't competent military authority? And you talk about "barracks lawyering"?
The phrase is taken at face value. Nothing read into it. We'll just address the 39-1 phrase: "Military service ribbons may be worn on the CAP AF-style uniform provided they were awarded in writing by competent military authority."
That pretty much says that if it's officially awarded its legal. It doesn't mention that an officer has to meet a Civil Air Patrol definition of "competent military authority".
Beginning to think that the cases of envy aren't so far fetched.
Hmmm...let's think this one through.
"Competent Military Authority"
If that's all the guidance we had, then as long as you aren't incompetent, and you're "military" (which I guess means you wear a uniform and know how to salute" and you're an "authority", then you can award ribbons to CAP members.
So.....the commandant of some 8th grade military academy could issue you a "perfect attendance ribbon" that you can now wear for the rest of your CAP life!
Obviously, this ain't the intent. So let's look at the entire paragraph in 39-1 for some clues.
QuoteMilitary service ribbons may be worn on the CAP AF-style uniform
provided they were awarded in writing by competent military authority. Awards of the Air Force,
Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard will be worn in the order prescribed by the awarding
service, subject to the following: In all cases of relative priority, Air Force awards will take precedence./
It's not too much of a stretch to assume second sentence is related to the first one.
So when they say "military service" they probably mean "U.S. Air Force, Army, Navy, Marine Corps or Coast Guard."
And when they say "Competent military authority" they probably mean "an authority in the U.S. Air Force, Army, Navy, Marine Corps or Coast Guard who, according to that organization's rules, has the authority to issue the award."
Based on that minor leap of logic, sounds like state awards don't quite make the cut. This would limit things to awards spelled out in the regulations of those services, awarded in accordance with those regs.
Better wording would definitely help clear this up. Plus the issue of what to do when a State gives a military-style award to CAP members for their service. From a Wing to State relationship angle, it wouldn't be polite not to wear the thing.
See also: CAPR 39-3 (http://level2.cap.gov/documents/u_082203104145.pdf)
Quote from: Hawk200 on July 02, 2007, 05:25:06 PM
Quote from: ddelaney103 on July 02, 2007, 12:04:10 PM
However, dig far enough into "competent military authority" and I think you'll find a Title 10 requirement somewhere.
So you're telling me that a National Guard officer isn't competent military authority? And you talk about "barracks lawyering"?
For federal purposes? Maybe yes, maybe no. Depends on what authority he/she is operating under.
It is possible to be a state officer without having federal power. For example, a MDNG NCO on state active duty orders would be expected to carry out the orders of an officer of the MD Defense Force.
It is entirely possible for a state officer, even the TAG, to not have federal authority. Remember, the gov can appoint anyone they want and in some states it's an elected position.
Our previous TAG was a LTG (MD) and MG (US), IIRC.
Quote from: Dragoon on July 02, 2007, 05:55:41 PM
Hmmm...let's think this one through.
"Competent Military Authority"
If that's all the guidance we had, then as long as you aren't incompetent, and you're "military" (which I guess means you wear a uniform and know how to salute" and you're an "authority", then you can award ribbons to CAP members.
So.....the commandant of some 8th grade military academy could issue you a "perfect attendance ribbon" that you can now wear for the rest of your CAP life!
Obviously, this ain't the intent. So let's look at the entire paragraph in 39-1 for some clues.
Obviously, it's not. And the hypothetical you propose is actually rather ridiculous.
QuoteQuoteMilitary service ribbons may be worn on the CAP AF-style uniform
provided they were awarded in writing by competent military authority. Awards of the Air Force,
Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard will be worn in the order prescribed by the awarding
service, subject to the following: In all cases of relative priority, Air Force awards will take precedence./
It's not too much of a stretch to assume second sentence is related to the first one.
So when they say "military service" they probably mean "U.S. Air Force, Army, Navy, Marine Corps or Coast Guard."
And when they say "Competent military authority" they probably mean "an authority in the U.S. Air Force, Army, Navy, Marine Corps or Coast Guard who, according to that organization's rules, has the authority to issue the award."
Based on that minor leap of logic, sounds like state awards don't quite make the cut. This would limit things to awards spelled out in the regulations of those services, awarded in accordance with those regs.
So the Army National Guard is
not a military service? I might draw that impression from your statement. The officer that awarded me the single state dec I have was a commissioned officer in the Army National Guard. By your reasoning, he didn't have the authority. He also awarded a Federal medal, about 20 seconds after he signed my state decoration. Did he not have the authority to do that as well?
Or is there a viewpoint that only the Active component is true military service? I'm sure that most of the Guard and Reservists deployed around the world would have some issues with that.
Since we aren't talking about why we object to the TPU anymore. Lock.
I assume my part of the blame for this topic drift.