Reducing ribbons: A proposal

[DNall]

ahh found it with the handy search function...

2.3. Handgun Orientation Training. Handgun orientation training may be conducted for United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) Cadets, Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) officer accessions, and possibly Civil Air Patrol (CAP) personnel. This training consists of classroom instruction in general firearms safety, basic operation, and marksmanship fundamentals. After completion of classroom training, students participate in a live-fire session by completing phase II (evaluation) of the handgun Air Force Qualification Course (AFQC). Trainees earn the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR) if they achieve an expert score. This program does not qualify an individual for armed duty. If qualification is required, personnel must meet the full objectives and requirements in AFMAN 36-2227 for the handgun AFQC training program.

[ZigZag911]

Leave the ribbons alone:

1) some people actually EARNED them!
2) what would we -- or the National Board, for that matter --have left to talk about without them?!?

Not saying anyone did not earn them....just want to clear up some of the redundant bling.

Understood, perhaps was not clear....I can see reducing the specialty track badges ,some other badges/patches, all lanyards....agree that cadet officers don't need their Phase 1 & 2 achievement ribbons....

I really like DNall's suggestion for a CAP Recognition ribbon, something that can be awarded by squadron or group CCs directly.

[RiverAux]

I wouldn't have any major heartburn over the original proposal, but as I don't wear any ribbons, it wouldn't matter to me much.  However, I do strongly support making it easier for CAP members to earn AF awards (after approval by CAP-USAF or whatever structure is set up) for actions in which the AF award is appropriate. 

I do see it as a little inconsistent to have an ribbon for one specialty track achievement -- the proper solution being to eliminate that one rather than the typical CAP response which might be to give ribbons to all of the specialty tracks...

[Major Carrales]

This is an example of something doesn't need fixing.

Instead, why not a topic on what would best be the design of a revamped National Webpage? 

Or, a discussion of what an Incident Commander needs to know to do the job?

Instead y'all put all sorts of energy into reduing the number of ribbons?

Someone said it right, "wear all, some or none."  I just don't see where a thread like this gets us but a potential flame war.

[Major Carrales]

And now, Don't y'all take offense.  I don't see it as all that much a deal.

[DNall]

^ thank you, thank you, I'm pleased to be here today to speak to you on behalf of those desiring a professional non-poser looking uniform. Those interested in sharing philosophical & symbolic elements with our parent mainly so it makes sense across the lines, but also for the practical aspect that it breeds. Those that want to take care of our people in the field with lower cost more meaningful items that help improve retention & relationships. Those that want to aid our members serving in the military, and those who think you might be able to recruit a few more cadets if they think they can earn real mil ribbons they can keep when they enlist.

On behalf of these engaged masses refusing to hide thier heads in the sand, but who insist, as our core values tell us we must, on being involved in wider discussions to take responsibility for & try to improve the big picture regardless of our current place int eh world, I say simply, Joe, seems like everyone is cool, calm, & collected. Seems like the website is fine & ICs know what they're doing. If you want to discuss it thoug there are threads out tehre already for those topics.

[Major Carrales]

Dennis,

I like your proposal to align it with the USAF.  But, I dont think it will fly.

I don't know why people have such a fit over the ribbons.  Many have shown in this thread that they are proud they have earned some of this.

I just say leave it as it is...

[Major Carrales]

SOS over here says it's a core values violations to keep your head down & just do your job, rather than being up & involved in bigger disucssions outside your little patch of dirt, and that it dooms the org to failure if you act like that.

WOW!!!  Ribbon and unifrom discussion constitutes "bigger disucssions outside [my] little patch of dirt"

Just kidding...

In anycase, there has been so much incredulous talk about how lots was wasted during the life stream en re uniforms and now many of the same that lambasted the ideas (or at leasted commented) are trying to support more uniform meshgas here.

The national website is fine, ICs knwo their jobs as they exist today, & there's threads for that stuff already.

I imagine then that I shall not read any commentary on these issues from you in the future then?

[DNall]

You mean you don't think AF would approve it? They aren't actually granting anything. These were created by Pres/Congress/AF to be awarded to both mil & civilians, and they are given to civilians all the time. The issue is the recommendation process is complex & the SAF has to approve every request, all of which have to be processed by Air Staff. That's crazy, especially considering the amount of work we do in uniform at AF orders. What this does is spell out & streamline that process to standardize w/ the ay AF does it. They are still in total control over the process, only now it's less work for the people at the top that are busy with things other than CAP.

Or if you mean in general that the whole matrix wouldn't be approved... well I don't know. It's not easy to take away bling in this org, but if there's a payoff & it makes sense (and is cheap) then I don't think it's so out of reach. Who would have thought a coupe years ago that we'd have a corporate service dress using real AF grade slides?

You wanna talk about the website or ICs, there's other threads. NIMS is a concern but not nearly as big for mission staff as the operational specialties. I don;t think there's anything really wrong with the website, but apparently a new appearance (not function) is in the works - who cares. eServices is jacked, especially everything related to ES & the fractured training format. That loses us members & needs to be fixed. They got a full-time staff that does nothing but that, and still no joy. You want to talk about putting a strong leader over them to make it get fixed, or you want someone fired? Like I said, other threads.

[Major Carrales]

These changes, while I think logical (as you mention established bythe President, Congress, USAF et al) I don't think it will happen.  Look at the reaction to the US CIVIL AIR PATROL Nametape...

Such a move would only be another uniform change requiring more purchases and negating the value and purchase of the ribbons and racks.  Plus, is one now, after having been awarded the existing ribbons in the fanfare and pomp of the CAP meeting sometimes by loved ones or dignatries, merely to disguard it as a worthless piece of fabric?

Allowing one to wear these out would defeat the purpose of Ribbon reduction.

I say leave it as it is...it is not a major problem. 

Yes, those other things are other thread's subjects...but the time in those other threads outlining criteria for ICs or new WEBSITE ideas for National woudl better yeild a proposal for a mission related issue.  This is only creating undo and unneeded debate on issues that do not warrant this level of disussion.

[Robert Hartigan]

If you work on a project that is not necessary and no one else believes in I bet you can get a ribbon? :angel:

[DNall]

Anyway, the ribbons have been changed a few times in hour history. We still have the Falcon & upside down GRW approved from the last change, there were cartoons off before that, and plastic before that. It's part of evolution.

I'm not looking to create a bunch of new ribbons. The ones we have now would still be used, even if the names are changed in some cases. There are four new ones & 18 being cut - pick which four to reuse as the new awards. Your total cost for a standard rack might be 5-10 bucks. The bulk of the change is to consolidate frivolous stuff. I'll make a chart with pix if it helps.

[SAR-EMT1]

Interested on a proposal to allow us to have the AF ribbons available for issue to CAP. It would be nice to put the Training Ribbon on my rack when I complete SOS. - And Id be fine with taking off- recruiter, encampment, etc. for the privilege.   
Id cut my rack to- Level 1, Level 3, Yeager, Lifesaving and the AF Training Ribbon
I don't need extraneous bling -recruiter, encampment- to feel important, but Id be proud to show off the ones that mean something- Yeager, Lifesaving Training etc..

[DNall]

Okay, here's the chart of what I proposed: CHART

The ribbons that used to cover the new awards are as best as possible selected to be similiar in appearance to the equiv AF decoration. Don't read too much into that though, it's just an example.

Note, I don't care what the deal is with recruiting. I agree it should be the same ribbon. There's good logic to it being hte same standard. The only issue is it should be quite easy for cadets to earn the initial award. On the other hand I really think adults should be out doing presentations & such, and over a period of years should recruit lots of people. Whatever the standard, that's up to yall, just so it's the same ribbon.

[Hammer]

Kinda like the days when they started the AF NCO PME ribbon.  Originally, NCO's had a choice to go in person or by correspondence so they offered a ribbon to encourage in person PME.  Nowadays, in residence PME is mandatory so, except for the Reserve and Guard and a few AD types who got waivers, everyone gets the ribbon.

Can Military Officers still take SOS, ACSC, and AWC via correspondence?

[Hawk200]

Can Military Officers still take SOS, ACSC, and AWC via correspondence?

Yes. Those are available from the AFIADL website: http://www.maxwell.af.mil/au/afiadl/

Click on "Catalogs", then "Professional Military Education (PME)".

[Hawk200]

This is an example of something doesn't need fixing.

Instead, why not a topic on what would best be the design of a revamped National Webpage? 

Or, a discussion of what an Incident Commander needs to know to do the job?

Instead y'all put all sorts of energy into reduing the number of ribbons?

Someone said it right, "wear all, some or none."  I just don't see where a thread like this gets us but a potential flame war.

I must say, Major, that I'm a little confused. When suggestions are made to add something else to our uniforms, you oppose it with the argument of "Don't make anything more that I have to buy." But when a suggestion that would actually reduce what you have to buy, you oppose that as well.

Do you wish to have less or not? Your responses are less than consistent. And addressing issues on the operations of CAP, the National Webpage isn't anything that would really provide any effect to our missions. Not to mention, it wasn't applicable to this thread. It does apply somewhere, but not here.

As far "flame wars", calling anything presented by someone else an "example of something that doesn't need fixing" is instigating the very war that you claim to want to  avoid.

And when it comes to professional appearance, if it is wanted, something must be sacrificed, changes must be accepted. To call for change, and then balk when they are suggested is very disengenuous.

[BillB]

Can Military Officers still take SOS, ACSC, and AWC via correspondence?

You may find that as a CAP Officer you are eligible to take a course that a military officer can't due to grade requirements.  For example, a CAP Captain can take SOS where a USAF 2 Lt can't.  I've seen cases where a CAP officer who was also an AD USAF officer could take a course that he was not eligible for as a USAF officer. But after completing it as a CAP officer, the certificate of completion was placed in his USAF personal  file as well as the CAP file.

[DNall]

So No reax on the CHART yet? That's suprising, I spent a few minutes on that & thought it was a good representation to push forward into does that matrix seem logic & benefitial, and what else if anything needs to be on the list. Is there a place for campaign medals (05 huricane season for instance), that kinda thing.

FYI, I don't want to speak for Mike, but I believe he had a similiar idea about utilizing AF decs where possible & filling in the rest w/ CAP decs as appropriate... however he wanted to redesign a lot of ribbons to be recognizably similiar to the AF equiv, but still clearly distinctive. Example:

[DNall]

Can Military Officers still take SOS, ACSC, and AWC via correspondence?

You may find that as a CAP Officer you are eligible to take a course that a military officer can't due to grade requirements.  For example, a CAP Captain can take SOS where a USAF 2 Lt can't.  I've seen cases where a CAP officer who was also an AD USAF officer could take a course that he was not eligible for as a USAF officer. But after completing it as a CAP officer, the certificate of completion was placed in his USAF personal  file as well as the CAP file.

Which is really good advice for a cadet going officer to stay on as a SM. You have ACSC & AWC done, and bonus points in your evals for helping out w/ CAP... that all looks real good to a promotion board. Makes you look, motivated, dedicated, well educated, on top of your game. You do your job competently outside of that & you should be in great shape.