Cloth Specialty Track Badges - Anyone?

[jb512]

Put an oval wreath around our specialty badges as the real AF does, make them occupational, and let people wear them in that place on BUDs.

Problem solved.

[DNall]

Again, while I certainly agree that it looks much better, the wreath is an operational designator. It implies that the specialty is combatant (big dif btwn that & an infantryman) and supports the operational mission of the AF. Thereby, it is not really appropriate for use on CAP badges.

Likewise, the globe used on many AF occupational badges indicates the global application of the specialty in support of the AF mission.

The AF reviewed and approved the current CAP specialty badges. There's a reason they don't have a wreath or globe like the AF versions, but rather use the same foundation shield as medical & a few other badges. That is appropriate per AF heraldry. I know I proposed specialty badges with wreaths & globes thru my Wg CC back over 10 years ago before we had the current ones and they were not approved, but they sure did look cool.

If you want to get rid of the cartoon crap and come up with something more professional/appropriate, that's great. I can tell you that's been proposed a few times, including by me. It does have to stick to the design rules though.

Anyway, embroidered for utilities I'm on board with.

[wuzafuzz]

Why not wear vests at mission base with your ICS position title?  Lots of other organizations do that, they are highly visible, they can be shared as needed, and they don't have to come from Vanguard.  If you don't like vests you could have laminated ID badges with clips, which would still be more visible than small cloth badges, can be shared as needed, and you can make a pile of them on the cheap.

It does seem odd that a few operation ratings earn badges and others don't. Why is there a Ground Team Member badge but nothing for Mission Information Officer, or Communications Unit Leader, etc?  I don't care about the bling, but the apparent inconsistency does make me wonder.

[Pylon]

Again, while I certainly agree that it looks much better, the wreath is an operational designator. It implies that the specialty is combatant (big dif btwn that & an infantryman) and supports the operational mission of the AF. Thereby, it is not really appropriate for use on CAP badges.

The laurel leaves wreath is already used on CAP badges... legal and ground team badges both have them.   The IC badge shamelessly rips off the Army furled feathers wreath even though an IC, just by nature of being in their position, doesn't actually move through the air in any capacity.   Face it, you can take just about any heraldry out there and with enough crafty wording and stretching, make it sound applicable;  CAP does it all the time.

Don't think we should rip off the AF heraldry by using the laurel wreath?  Fine - how about an oak leaf wreath?  Whatever style of "leaf" we go with, the point of the matter is that our specialty badges would make sense styled as AFSC badges.  Everybody in CAP has a specialty (well, anybody who has been in longer than a month or two), so everyone's specialty or specialties should be reflected on their uniforms just like the AF does.  It's a point of pride, shows where your skills lie, and may even encourage continued development in each person's respective specialties.

The "Pluto Patch" is older than most of us here, and many many of our squadrons.  It is as much a part of ES as anything, even being an older design than the current CAP Pilots wings.  Asking to remove it because it is unprofessional in your opinion is akin to asking the 101st Airborne to remove the "screaming eagle" or the USAF to get rid of the stylized "HAP Arnold" insignia it currently employs because it is driven by tradition.

Actually it's not an old patch; it's not older than my squadron and not older than me.  The Pluto patch came on the scene as a new patch in the late 90's as a "replacement" for the oval airplane ES patch.  However, CAP never set a phase-out date for the oval version and so two patches continue in co-existence for the same purpose.  They're both useless in my opinion.

The unprofessional look is not akin to what you describe.  The 101st's patch is worn in the same manner and placement as other distinctive unit patches the Army wears, and is worn in the same colors as similiar patches - it conforms to the Army's standard.  The ES patches aren't similar to anything the AF wears, don't say all that much about the wearer (the wearer could have just GES and MSA, or have every qualification in ES short of MC), and the design just looks silly.

It does have to stick to the design rules though.

Nah, I really don't think CAP does have to stick to the design rules.  Again, look at the IC badge that got passed.  Nobody cared that we were using the feathers from the military airborne wings for a CAP IC badge and that the justification for such was strained and thinly veiled at best. 

Whether or not somebody is actually holding CAP badges to some set of standards I agree, though, that the design still should be appropriate and not usurp prestige from military badges - the IC badge definitely crosses into that territory.

Change the laurel leaves to another type of wreath (oak leaves may be a good choice - nobody really using them now), put a small tri-prop triangle at the base of the wreath and plop our existing specialty badges into it.  Drop the enamel for the metal versions and get them embroidered for utilities.  Authorize them to be added to the ASNPs for flight suits and call it a day.

[Hawk200]

Actually it's not an old patch; it's not older than my squadron and not older than me.  The Pluto patch came on the scene as a new patch in the late 90's as a "replacement" for the oval airplane ES patch.  However, CAP never set a phase-out date for the oval version and so two patches continue in co-existence for the same purpose.  They're both useless in my opinion.

The Pluto patch design dates back to WW2. The Patch we have today is just modernized a bit, and has the script added. I've even seen an old WW2 patch worn on BDU's. By strict interpretation, it's probably not authorized, even though it looks better. The current one is just too big.

As far as being useless, don't know. I don't really see a purpose to them. If you have an ES qual badge, I don't see the need to wear the patch.

I could get on board with a General ES badge(worn above ribbons and BDU tapes), but only allow it's wear if you don't have one of the other ES quals. I don't see the point of getting two badges for the same thing, for example: a GT member only wears a GT badge, an observer only wears their wings. We got enough bling, we don't need double awards.

As for specialty track badges, I don't really see a necessity for it. Those tracks don't even matter on a mission, because during a mission, you're not working your track, instead you're using ES quals. It's just more things to buy, and more things to get wrong.

[lordmonar]

Hawk....no one ever said that specialty tracks (and their badges) has anything to do with a mission.  It has to do with taking pride in what you do.  There are a lot of people who wear BDUs but never go to mission bases.  Why can't they show their pride in accomplishing their specialty tracks?

The USAF learned this lesson 15 years ago when they gave all AFSCs their own badge. 

[Hawk200]

Hawk....no one ever said that specialty tracks (and their badges) has anything to do with a mission.  It has to do with taking pride in what you do.  There are a lot of people who wear BDUs but never go to mission bases.  Why can't they show their pride in accomplishing their specialty tracks?

The USAF learned this lesson 15 years ago when they gave all AFSCs their own badge. 

They can, there are specialty badges for wear with blues and coroprate dress uniforms. It's really lame if you have to have a badge on your BDU's to take pride in a track. That's not pride in your job, it's pride in bling.

I was in the Air Force 15 years ago when the other badges were introduced. It wasn't about allowing people to show pride, it was about some people getting badges when others didn't. I was in one of the fields that had one prior to the McPeak overhaul and had more than a few people that were rude about it. Told them that it wasn't up to me, and I wasn't going to listen to their complaints, if they wanted one for their field, then they knew how to propose it. That was my experience with it, YMMV.

Current and prior military in CAP have this same problem on occasion. Military guy comes in with badges and ribbons, and some of the members will talk garbage. It's called "envy".

[Lancer]

They can, there are specialty badges for wear with blues and coroprate dress uniforms. It's really lame if you have to have a badge on your BDU's to take pride in a track. That's not pride in your job, it's pride in bling.

So it's lame to have some pride in what you do? Anyone who does a job simply to wear a symbol or badge is what's lame.

I'm looking at this from the logical standpoint of, 'if it's good for one uniform, it's good for the other', and it seems that's where the different starts, with specialty track badges.

Does a pilot need to have wings on his uniform in order to fly a plane? I'm sure the answer is no, but if you told all the pilots in CAP they couldn't wear their wings on their BDU's/Flight Suit's anymore, I'm sure you'd cause a firestorm of bellyaching about it.

Current and prior military in CAP have this same problem on occasion. Military guy comes in with badges and ribbons, and some of the members will talk garbage. It's called "envy".

If a non-military CAP member has to be envious of someone with military service under their belt, they have bigger problems than are apparent. At this point, I'd *love* to bring an experienced member of the military into my cadet squadron, and the last thing I'm going to be concerned with is if my cadets flock to admire this person over me in my position of deputy commander. My role is to make the cadet experience the best it can be for my cadets and I'm not going to let something like envy get in the way, I'd probably be admiring this person as much as the cadets are.

[DNall]

Again, while I certainly agree that it looks much better, the wreath is an operational designator. It implies that the specialty is combatant (big dif btwn that & an infantryman) and supports the operational mission of the AF. Thereby, it is not really appropriate for use on CAP badges.

The laurel leaves wreath is already used on CAP badges... legal and ground team badges both have them.   The IC badge shamelessly rips off the Army furled feathers wreath even though an IC, just by nature of being in their position, doesn't actually move through the air in any capacity.   Face it, you can take just about any heraldry out there and with enough crafty wording and stretching, make it sound applicable;  CAP does it all the time.

Don't think we should rip off the AF heraldry by using the laurel wreath?  Fine - how about an oak leaf wreath?  Whatever style of "leaf" we go with, the point of the matter is that our specialty badges would make sense styled as AFSC badges.  Everybody in CAP has a specialty (well, anybody who has been in longer than a month or two), so everyone's specialty or specialties should be reflected on their uniforms just like the AF does.  It's a point of pride, shows where your skills lie, and may even encourage continued development in each person's respective specialties.

I agree that the specialties should be designated on the utility uniforms.

I don't agree that they should have an operational wreath. Even if you're going to STRETCH the "operational" designation to a CAP specific version that means ES operational, then still most of the specialties have no requirement to ever participate in that aspect. If that were the case, admin/personnel specialty tracks would involve qual as MSA on the low end and FASC on the high end. I personally think that's a very appropriate change to several specialty tracks, but now you're talking about a lot of revision, not just adding already approved embroidered badges.

If you do want to put a wreath around badges I really think it should be the AF style one. That includes updating the GT badge to that style.

It does have to stick to the design rules though.

Nah, I really don't think CAP does have to stick to the design rules.  Again, look at the IC badge that got passed.  Nobody cared that we were using the feathers from the military airborne wings for a CAP IC badge and that the justification for such was strained and thinly veiled at best. 

Whether or not somebody is actually holding CAP badges to some set of standards I agree, though, that the design still should be appropriate and not usurp prestige from military badges - the IC badge definitely crosses into that territory.

Change the laurel leaves to another type of wreath (oak leaves may be a good choice - nobody really using them now), put a small tri-prop triangle at the base of the wreath and plop our existing specialty badges into it.  Drop the enamel for the metal versions and get them embroidered for utilities.  Authorize them to be added to the ASNPs for flight suits and call it a day.

This is the same thing we talked about a while back on patches. There are AF heraldry rules that CAP doesn't for the most part follow & a whole lot of us think we should. It's not that the AF is all supreme and we must do everything just like them. That's not the case at all. It's a matter of things need to be organized in a logical well structured manner that makes sense. The AF provides a good established guide for that, and support for us if we want to follow it. That's a lot better than running off in whatever direction we feel like at the time.

I could go with GT style wreaths on everything, but I really do like the AF style wreaths also. Whatever the AF will let fly is the deal. The IC badge is jacked up, that's obvious. I appreciate the hard work Maj Shaw & the others have done on some of this stuff, but I'm disappointed a lot of times with their diverging from the set rules & not working with AF institute of heraldry or pushing the board to adopt those rules for patches & such.

[Hawk200]

They can, there are specialty badges for wear with blues and coroprate dress uniforms. It's really lame if you have to have a badge on your BDU's to take pride in a track. That's not pride in your job, it's pride in bling.

So it's lame to have some pride in what you do? Anyone who does a job simply to wear a symbol or badge is what's lame.

That was my point, as well. Apologies for not being clear on it.

I have known people that went to do certain things just for the badge. If they do the job well, then they earned the badge. I think it's the wrong reason to do a job, but earned is earned, regardless of reasons.

I'm looking at this from the logical standpoint of, 'if it's good for one uniform, it's good for the other', and it seems that's where the different starts, with specialty track badges.

I understand your point, although I don't necessarily agree. We should be working in BDU's, not decorating them. I've come to this conclusion after reading a lot here on this board. At this point in time, I don't see a valid reason to make cloth versions of specialty tracks. Put the ES qual stuff on the work uniforms, and save the bling for the dress clothes.

Does a pilot need to have wings on his uniform in order to fly a plane? I'm sure the answer is no, but if you told all the pilots in CAP they couldn't wear their wings on their BDU's/Flight Suit's anymore, I'm sure you'd cause a firestorm of bellyaching about it.

I imagine there would be loads of unkind words and thoughts. But those are existing badges, the nature of this thread was creating new ones. Those badges show what the person can do in the field, which is what the uniforms are designed for.

Current and prior military in CAP have this same problem on occasion. Military guy comes in with badges and ribbons, and some of the members will talk garbage. It's called "envy".

If a non-military CAP member has to be envious of someone with military service under their belt, they have bigger problems than are apparent. At this point, I'd *love* to bring an experienced member of the military into my cadet squadron, and the last thing I'm going to be concerned with is if my cadets flock to admire this person over me in my position of deputy commander. My role is to make the cadet experience the best it can be for my cadets and I'm not going to let something like envy get in the way, I'd probably be admiring this person as much as the cadets are.

I can appreciate the respect, but some of what borders on "hero" worship is a little out there. So far, I've gotten the cadets in my unit to stop going "Wow!" when someone mentions that I crew on Blackhawks. It's a job. For me, it's the greatest thing in the world, but it's still a job.

I was well recieved in my unit when I joined, but there was a few people that showed out the first time I showed up in blues, complete with decorations, badges and wings. One individual referred to my decorations as "ostentatious". I was a little annoyed by that, but in the long run decided not to let it get to me. But it was there.

I'm sure a few people here remember the thread of the Army guy that asked about what he was allowed to wear, and related that he was told by a few fellow members not to wear things "for a while".  Why would he be told that if the items he earned were authorized on our uniforms? Seems like simple envy again.

I've always thought that you do your work in BDU's, and do your styling and officer work in blues(or equivalent). That's why blues have ribbons and other badges for it, and the BDU does not. Why go too fancy with BDU's/flightsuits in the first place?

[lordmonar]

Hawk....no one ever said that specialty tracks (and their badges) has anything to do with a mission.  It has to do with taking pride in what you do.  There are a lot of people who wear BDUs but never go to mission bases.  Why can't they show their pride in accomplishing their specialty tracks?

The USAF learned this lesson 15 years ago when they gave all AFSCs their own badge. 

They can, there are specialty badges for wear with blues and coroprate dress uniforms. It's really lame if you have to have a badge on your BDU's to take pride in a track. That's not pride in your job, it's pride in bling.

I was in the Air Force 15 years ago when the other badges were introduced. It wasn't about allowing people to show pride, it was about some people getting badges when others didn't. I was in one of the fields that had one prior to the McPeak overhaul and had more than a few people that were rude about it. Told them that it wasn't up to me, and I wasn't going to listen to their complaints, if they wanted one for their field, then they knew how to propose it. That was my experience with it, YMMV.

Current and prior military in CAP have this same problem on occasion. Military guy comes in with badges and ribbons, and some of the members will talk garbage. It's called "envy".

Equality is a good thing....why should Cops and air craft maintainers get badges and no one else?

As for showing pride...okay...there is a little bling love in there...I admit it......but it still goes back to the statement of equality....why should GTMs get a badge but not an admin or PAO guy?  Is this envy?  Okay maybe it is.....but is envy a good enough reason NOT to give other people a badge?

[Hawk200]

Equality is a good thing....why should Cops and air craft maintainers get badges and no one else?

As for showing pride...okay...there is a little bling love in there...I admit it......but it still goes back to the statement of equality....why should GTMs get a badge but not an admin or PAO guy?  Is this envy?  Okay maybe it is.....but is envy a good enough reason NOT to give other people a badge?

I wouldn't say envy is a reason not to give a badge. Not where I'm coming from at all. I just don't see the point of creating a new item. And yes, it is creating a new item, as cloth specialty badges do not currently exist.

If it's such an issue to some people that don't have an embroidered badge for their BDU's, then there's a problem somewhere. Neither of the two specialty tracks I have worked for the last six years of CAP have badges. It's never been an issue to me. Everyone in the unit knew exactly what I was. Anyone outside the unit isn't relevant.

Also, there's complaints of uniformity issues. What's it going to look like if there are even more things to wear? At what point will it be literal pot luck to get your uniform right? I think everyone here knows someone that still wears an outdated patch of some kind. Why contribute to that mess?

For now, let's get our uniforms straight and aligned before we start bothering with new stuff.

[DNall]

I've always thought that you do your work in BDU's, and do your styling and officer work in blues(or equivalent). That's why blues have ribbons and other badges for it, and the BDU does not. Why go too fancy with BDU's/flightsuits in the first place?

You've seen lots of people in ACUs with 4 badges stacked up, just like I have. That's over the top.

The AF limits it to two badges over the branch tape, and if you have wings then those are required to be one of them. I'm all for following that rule. All we're talking about is adding more options to wear in those same slots. I don't see how that effects uniformity or is in any way ostentatious. I think it's standard to what the AF does; for very similar reasons to why they do it; and, much less "over the top" than what the Army does.

[Hawk200]

I've always thought that you do your work in BDU's, and do your styling and officer work in blues(or equivalent). That's why blues have ribbons and other badges for it, and the BDU does not. Why go too fancy with BDU's/flightsuits in the first place?

You've seen lots of people in ACUs with 4 badges stacked up, just like I have. That's over the top.

Agreed, it's a lot. But that is how the Amry chooses to do it. Five badges is a bunch. Personally, I don't see why there should be more than three.

The AF limits it to two badges over the branch tape, and if you have wings then those are required to be one of them. I'm all for following that rule. All we're talking about is adding more options to wear in those same slots. I don't see how that effects uniformity or is in any way ostentatious. I think it's standard to what the AF does; for very similar reasons to why they do it; and, much less "over the top" than what the Army does.

I don't mind a third, positioned on the pocket flap. I've seen a third badge on the pocket, and I think it looks stupid. But getting that for our utility uniforms would require AF approval, or the Air Force doing it in the first place on theirs.

I am hoping that CAP doesn't take the same stance as the Air Force, and disallow other service badges. It's not very sincere for CAP to attempt to recruit military personnel from branches other that the Air Force, and then tell them they can't wear what they earned. We could use any current or former military in good standing, allowing those other service badges would go a long way.

For the time being though, we need to get our uniforms straightened out. Be consistant across the board, it makes it simpler for all members. This thing of "You wear that badge here on this uniform, but there on that one.." shows a serious lack of well thought out policy. Phase out the older badges prior to allowing the new ones. The transition will be far easier.

[Eclipse]

I am hoping that CAP doesn't take the same stance as the Air Force, and disallow other service badges. It's not very sincere for CAP to attempt to recruit military personnel from branches other that the Air Force, and then tell them they can't wear what they earned. We could use any current or former military in good standing, allowing those other service badges would go a long way.

We are recruiting people with military experience for their knowledge and abilities, not their badges.  The fact that members can wear anything from their military career is a "nice to have" unique to CAP, and we should accept it for what it is and move on - try wearing your air assault wings on your ARC or CERT golf shirt and see how long that lasts.  The ARC, especially, is an organization with a much higher ops tempo than CAP and much stricter expectations.  You play their game or go home.

For the time being though, we need to get our uniforms straightened out. Be consistent across the board, it makes it simpler for all members. This thing of "You wear that badge here on this uniform, but there on that one.." shows a serious lack of well thought out policy.

What badges are moving around?  Of badges allowed on multiple uniform styles I can't think of any that move around.

[jb512]

Geeze.  Just let people wear their badges on their uniforms, no matter what color it may be.

There's no reason why an admin person who will only be an admin person their entire CAP membership can't wear that patch on their BDUs if they happen to show up somewhere to help out.  Limit the number, but open it up to everyone.

[Eclipse]

Wear would they "show up to help out"?

They can't even walk into a mission base as "only an admin person", so what does "only an admin person" even need BDU's for to start with?

[jb512]

Wear would they "show up to help out"?

They can't even walk into a mission base as "only an admin person", so what does "only an admin person" even need BDU's for to start with?

Maybe a wrong choice of words.  If an admin person goes to an encampment as admin, or a mission as admin, etc., then they could have that badge on their BDU. 

How could any person in any capacity not need BDUs?  They are a basic utility uniform for people who meet the AF requirements.

[Eclipse]

BDU's are first and foremost a field uniform, they are not the "basic" uniform for members, that is the aviator whites (which, btw, contrary to popular belief, are required for all senior members, especially if they don't wear service dress).  If your only function in CAP is as an admin person, you have no reason to go through the expense and hassle of configuring BDUs, and would be better served sticking with the golf shirt.

...and before anyone takes violent exception to the above statement:

1-5. Uniform Combinations. Various combinations of CAP uniforms are authorized in order to allow
for various climatic conditions, availability of uniforms, etc., but no member is obligated to equip
himself/herself with all or even a major part of the combinations described in this publication. Members
will equip themselves with the basic uniform. The minimum basic uniforms for male and female cadets
and senior members, which will satisfy most occasions, are listed below. Members may obtain and wear
the additional uniform items authorized in this publication on an optional basis. Uniform clothing may
be altered to improve fit. However, alterations must not change the intended appearance of garment as
designed. It is the member's personal responsibility to equip himself/herself with a proper uniform.
Commanders may assist if they have the capability, through use of unit funds and/or donations or by
acquiring surplus uniforms. Cadets are required to have the minimum basic uniform. A commander
may require cadets to wear other optional uniform items only if the purchase is voluntary or if the
uniform is supplied without expense to the cadet. The omission of a specific item or appearance standard
does not automatically permit its wear.

a. Minimum Basic Service Uniform. Male: Short-sleeve, light blue shirt; dark blue trousers; blue
belt/silver buckle, blue flight cap; black shoes, and socks. Insignia: CAP nameplate, shoulder patch,
collar/lapel insignia, embroidered epaulet sleeve, and flight cap emblem. Female: Short-sleeve light
blue blouse; Dark blue skirt or slacks; flight cap; neutral nylon hose; black shoes; black handbag.
Insignia: CAP nameplate, shoulder patch, collar/lapel insignia, embroidered epaulet sleeve, and flight
cap emblem.

b. CAP Distinctive Basic Uniform (senior members only). Male: Short-sleeve, white aviator shirt;
gray trousers; black belt; black shoes and socks. Insignia: CAP nameplate, embroidered epaulet sleeve.
Female: Short-sleeve, white aviator shirt; gray slacks or skirt; plain black shoes. Insignia: CAP
nameplate, embroidered epaulet sleeve.

So if you choose "only" the basic uniform, its the whites, not a golf shirt as the minimum.

[jb512]

Once again, the literal wording has been taken as the meaning of the reply.

BDUs are a "basic" field uniform for those meeting the weight/grooming standards.

Let's see what you come up with now...