USAF Style Versus CAP Distinctive

Started by Chaplaindon, March 22, 2007, 05:27:48 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Chaplaindon

After pondering the addition of "U.S." to the BDU/BBDU namestrip, I would like to proffer a possible REAL rationale behind the move.

I suspect the real motive has to do with the new corporate service dress coat. Recently direction came down to replace the "U.S." cutouts with "CAP" ones instead.

By making us the "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" (if only in the BDU/BBDU) it may help leverage the reinstatement of the "U.S." cutouts.

Rev. Don Brown, Ch., Lt Col, CAP (Ret.)
Former Deputy Director for CISM at CAP/HQ
Gill Robb Wilson Award # 1660
ACS-Chaplain, VFC, IPFC, DSO, NSO, USCG Auxiliary
AUXOP

Psicorp

Quote from: Chaplaindon on March 22, 2007, 05:27:48 PM
After pondering the addition of "U.S." to the BDU/BBDU namestrip, I would like to proffer a possible REAL rationale behind the move.

I suspect the real motive has to do with the new corporate service dress coat. Recently direction came down to replace the "U.S." cutouts with "CAP" ones instead.

By making us the "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" (if only in the BDU/BBDU) it may help leverage the reinstatement of the "U.S." cutouts.

Hmm...not sure I buy that.  From what I remember, the change from the U.S. cutouts to CAP cutouts on the TPU coat was someone (or lots of someones) talking about it shortly after the TPU was rolled out.  Personally, I think the PTU coat should have CAP cutouts...it's a corporate coat not a military coat and should have Corporate badges/devices only.

I'm more willing to believe that the change to "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" was to head off a push to change to "U.S.A.F Aux." or something similar.   There are essentially two mindsets within CAP, those who want to be more AF Auxy and those who want to have more of an independent corporate identity.    It's really hard to be both at the same time.

Ponder a moment, if you would, on what CAP would look like if we went totally in the "independent corporate identity" direction.   No need for a military rank structure, we could have President and CEO, Vice President,  Regional Directors, State Directors, Group Managers, Unit Leaders/Supervisors, and still have the Board.  There wouldn't be a need for uniforms, suit and tie or slacks and a golf shirt for everyone.   I'm enough of a corporate drone at my regular paying job...don't want to be one as a volunteer too.   
Jamie Kahler, Capt., CAP
(C/Lt Col, ret.)
CC
GLR-MI-257

LtCol White

Quote from: Psicorp on March 22, 2007, 05:50:47 PM
Quote from: Chaplaindon on March 22, 2007, 05:27:48 PM
After pondering the addition of "U.S." to the BDU/BBDU namestrip, I would like to proffer a possible REAL rationale behind the move.

I suspect the real motive has to do with the new corporate service dress coat. Recently direction came down to replace the "U.S." cutouts with "CAP" ones instead.

By making us the "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" (if only in the BDU/BBDU) it may help leverage the reinstatement of the "U.S." cutouts.

Hmm...not sure I buy that.  From what I remember, the change from the U.S. cutouts to CAP cutouts on the TPU coat was someone (or lots of someones) talking about it shortly after the TPU was rolled out.  Personally, I think the PTU coat should have CAP cutouts...it's a corporate coat not a military coat and should have Corporate badges/devices only.

I'm more willing to believe that the change to "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" was to head off a push to change to "U.S.A.F Aux." or something similar.   There are essentially two mindsets within CAP, those who want to be more AF Auxy and those who want to have more of an independent corporate identity.    It's really hard to be both at the same time.

Ponder a moment, if you would, on what CAP would look like if we went totally in the "independent corporate identity" direction.   No need for a military rank structure, we could have President and CEO, Vice President,  Regional Directors, State Directors, Group Managers, Unit Leaders/Supervisors, and still have the Board.  There wouldn't be a need for uniforms, suit and tie or slacks and a golf shirt for everyone.   I'm enough of a corporate drone at my regular paying job...don't want to be one as a volunteer too.   

As long as there is metal rank on the TPU, I can assure you that there wont be US on the collar. If the uniform is too confusing to USAF personnel, then USAF will step in and protest.
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

ColonelJack

There's absolutely nothing wrong with CAP cutouts on the corporate service coat.  We wore them for years on the AF coat, remember?  Nobody made a stink about wanting US cutouts there, so we shouldn't expect such on our very own uniforms.  At least, that's how I see it.

Jack
Jack Bagley, Ed. D.
Lt. Col., CAP (now inactive)
Gill Robb Wilson Award No. 1366, 29 Nov 1991
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
Honorary Admiral, Navy of the Republic of Molossia

LtCol White

I think they are very appropriate on the TPU. I never minded wearing them on the USAF coat
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

DNall

I think  I understood that to be a geneva convention required change, or at least that's what the AF said when some other general got pissed & made a stink about it. Or at least that's what I've been told. I can for absolutely sure say that there is no chance the US cutouts come back on that coat.

However, I do think it comes from the same logic that created that coat & cut the wing patches.... that is to eleminate sectarian thinking & unify CAP under one chain of command at the national level. I think that's ultimately about power grabbing, I mean once you're the Nat CC what else can you grab but by consolidation. But, I still think it's a good idea to squash the little punk empires below & come together as one standardized unified team. I mean how are you going to accomplish that with the AF or create your own corporate identity until you get your own house in order.

lordmonar

Quote from: DNall on March 22, 2007, 06:38:24 PM
I think  I understood that to be a geneva convention required change, or at least that's what the AF said when some other general got pissed & made a stink about it. Or at least that's what I've been told. I can for absolutely sure say that there is no chance the US cutouts come back on that coat.

However, I do think it comes from the same logic that created that coat & cut the wing patches.... that is to eleminate sectarian thinking & unify CAP under one chain of command at the national level. I think that's ultimately about power grabbing, I mean once you're the Nat CC what else can you grab but by consolidation. But, I still think it's a good idea to squash the little punk empires below & come together as one standardized unified team. I mean how are you going to accomplish that with the AF or create your own corporate identity until you get your own house in order.

You absolutly right!  So let's all switch to the Corporate uniform and build a unified team!
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

LtCol White

Quote from: lordmonar on March 22, 2007, 07:03:27 PM
Quote from: DNall on March 22, 2007, 06:38:24 PM
I think  I understood that to be a geneva convention required change, or at least that's what the AF said when some other general got pissed & made a stink about it. Or at least that's what I've been told. I can for absolutely sure say that there is no chance the US cutouts come back on that coat.

However, I do think it comes from the same logic that created that coat & cut the wing patches.... that is to eleminate sectarian thinking & unify CAP under one chain of command at the national level. I think that's ultimately about power grabbing, I mean once you're the Nat CC what else can you grab but by consolidation. But, I still think it's a good idea to squash the little punk empires below & come together as one standardized unified team. I mean how are you going to accomplish that with the AF or create your own corporate identity until you get your own house in order.

You absolutly right!  So let's all switch to the Corporate uniform and build a unified team!


NO !!!! You just dont seem to ever get the point of why it is important to keep the USAF uniform. If you don't want to wear it fine. Don't. To move everyone to it only moves us farther from USAF when we should be moving closer.
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

lordmonar

Quote from: LtCol White on March 22, 2007, 07:09:11 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on March 22, 2007, 07:03:27 PM
Quote from: DNall on March 22, 2007, 06:38:24 PM
I think  I understood that to be a geneva convention required change, or at least that's what the AF said when some other general got pissed & made a stink about it. Or at least that's what I've been told. I can for absolutely sure say that there is no chance the US cutouts come back on that coat.

However, I do think it comes from the same logic that created that coat & cut the wing patches.... that is to eleminate sectarian thinking & unify CAP under one chain of command at the national level. I think that's ultimately about power grabbing, I mean once you're the Nat CC what else can you grab but by consolidation. But, I still think it's a good idea to squash the little punk empires below & come together as one standardized unified team. I mean how are you going to accomplish that with the AF or create your own corporate identity until you get your own house in order.

You absolutly right!  So let's all switch to the Corporate uniform and build a unified team!


NO !!!! You just dont seem to ever get the point of why it is important to keep the USAF uniform. If you don't want to wear it fine. Don't. To move everyone to it only moves us farther from USAF when we should be moving closer.

And to not move us all to the same uniform is to keep us a non-professional mish-mash organisations in th eyes of everyone else!
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

DrJbdm

So, lets switch everyone to AF style uniforms and deny membership to all those who can't or won't meet the weight or grooming standards when making application to CAP.

  I absolutely believe that if we got rid of the USAF uniforms, we would take a huge symbolic leap away from the USAF. Lets be very careful with how we create perception, because in the minds of most people, perception is reality. If we did a whole move away from AF uniforms in favor of Corporate uniforms then the perception of most people would be that we did not want to be associated with the USAF. Thats a very dangerous perception!

  The issue we have is with the amount of corporate uniforms, not AF uniforms. There's an easy fix. Get rid of the white/greys, blazers, and the polo shirts. Those uniforms are not military in nature and clash with the AF style uniforms. if we will not mandate weight and grooming standards for membership, then we need to create symmetry within our uniforms.

  The TPU goes well when placed next to blues, BBDU's goes ok, when placed next to BDU's. although I think AF could lighten up on the weight standard for BDU's. I know my unit has a VERY over weight female Officer and she wears BDU's although she is way outside the limit. It really doesn't look that bad. So get rid of the BBDU's and wear only BDU's...after all AF is phasing out of those now. In the future we would have those members who meet the weight standard wear the new ABU and those who can't meet the weight standard should wear the BDU's. For the long hairs out there, sorry guys, visit a barber.

  All across this nation Police Departments and Fire Departments everywhere require their volunteer or auxiliary officers & members to maintain a grooming standard, I think CAP can do the same thing.


lordmonar

Well there you are!

We either kick out the long hair, over weight members.....and the take over the jobs that they are currently doing, or we pressure the USAF to back off on these standards.

It is as simple as that.

I highly disagree with the sentiment that a switch to 100% corporate uniforms would hurt our relationship with the USAF or our credibility with outside agencies.

It would simplifiy uniform matters, increase our uniformity and improve our professional image.

The one alternitive I have not suggested.......We switch to USAF uniforms and ignore the USAF's protests about our out of regs personnel.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

LtCol White

Quote from: lordmonar on March 22, 2007, 08:20:11 PM
Quote from: LtCol White on March 22, 2007, 07:09:11 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on March 22, 2007, 07:03:27 PM
Quote from: DNall on March 22, 2007, 06:38:24 PM
I think  I understood that to be a geneva convention required change, or at least that's what the AF said when some other general got pissed & made a stink about it. Or at least that's what I've been told. I can for absolutely sure say that there is no chance the US cutouts come back on that coat.

However, I do think it comes from the same logic that created that coat & cut the wing patches.... that is to eleminate sectarian thinking & unify CAP under one chain of command at the national level. I think that's ultimately about power grabbing, I mean once you're the Nat CC what else can you grab but by consolidation. But, I still think it's a good idea to squash the little punk empires below & come together as one standardized unified team. I mean how are you going to accomplish that with the AF or create your own corporate identity until you get your own house in order.

You absolutly right!  So let's all switch to the Corporate uniform and build a unified team!


NO !!!! You just dont seem to ever get the point of why it is important to keep the USAF uniform. If you don't want to wear it fine. Don't. To move everyone to it only moves us farther from USAF when we should be moving closer.

And to not move us all to the same uniform is to keep us a non-professional mish-mash organisations in th eyes of everyone else!

NO, you're missing the point. We have always had ONE alternative uniform. That was for anyone who did not meet standards to wear the USAF one. And that is how is SHOULD be again with emphasis on wearing of the USAF one and NOT the corporate one.
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

LtCol White

Quote from: lordmonar on March 22, 2007, 09:42:17 PM
Well there you are!

We either kick out the long hair, over weight members.....and the take over the jobs that they are currently doing, or we pressure the USAF to back off on these standards.

It is as simple as that.

I highly disagree with the sentiment that a switch to 100% corporate uniforms would hurt our relationship with the USAF or our credibility with outside agencies.

It would simplifiy uniform matters, increase our uniformity and improve our professional image.

The one alternitive I have not suggested.......We switch to USAF uniforms and ignore the USAF's protests about our out of regs personnel.
]

With all due respect, you apparently have not been around CAP very long to understand why this is important.
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

lordmonar

Quote from: LtCol White on March 22, 2007, 10:03:13 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on March 22, 2007, 09:42:17 PM
Well there you are!

We either kick out the long hair, over weight members.....and the take over the jobs that they are currently doing, or we pressure the USAF to back off on these standards.

It is as simple as that.

I highly disagree with the sentiment that a switch to 100% corporate uniforms would hurt our relationship with the USAF or our credibility with outside agencies.

It would simplifiy uniform matters, increase our uniformity and improve our professional image.

The one alternitive I have not suggested.......We switch to USAF uniforms and ignore the USAF's protests about our out of regs personnel.
]

With all due respect, you apparently have not been around CAP very long to understand why this is important.


I've been around to know that the USAF has been slowly pushing us away on the uniform issue for a long time now sir.  I have been with the USAF long enough to know that 90% of the rank and file of the USAF do not know about us.  And the few that do are split between those who think we are posers because we wear USAF uniforms.

Sir,  I know we have a problem with USAF relations.....But we also have a problem with local agency relations.  It makes no difference what the USAF thinks of us...if the local/state DR/SAR coordinators think we are unprofessional.

On the subject of uniformity...we are un-professional.  We have 8-9 different authorised uniform combinations that make no sense to outsiders what they mean.

Now I agree....that my preference would be all USAF uniforms....for all the reasons you mentioned.  But that would mean one of the following must happen:

1. We force out all those who don't meet USAF standards (plus 10%).
2. We get the USAF to back off on their standards.
3. We ignore the standards.

Number 3....is right out.....that would really be a road block to CAP/USAF relations.
Number 2....I can't talk for the Air Force but I don't really understand why they have such a hang up on this.
Number 1....This is the only really viable option....but could CAP still function if we did this?  I know of at least 3 three squadrons that would take a 50% drop in leadership not to mention the loss of leadership at regional and national levels.

So....again with the focus of fixing our image with our primary customer (local ES cooridinators).....we can all move to corporates, eliminate the polo shirt and the gray/white combos.  That means we are down to only three possible uniform combinations.  TPUs, Flight Suits (blue) and BBDUs.  Desk Weenies, flies and feild types.

Would the USAF think this was an attempt to get away from them?  Not if you tell them why.  Not if you still talk to them and listen to them about issues they are concerned about.  At the street level we don't see the USAF.  We see mission numbers and we see IC's that are wearing State Police Uniforms or Fire Department uniforms.

The USAF does not IMHO really care what we look like so long as we don't bring discredit on them (hence why they don't like big fat long haired bearded SMs wearing the USAF uniform).  They obviously don't have too much problem with BBDU and Blue Flight Suits....because they have never said anything about those.  They had a couple of misgivings about the TPU....but we WORKED with them and corrected it.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

LTC_Gadget

Quote from: DNall on March 22, 2007, 06:38:24 PM
I mean once you're the Nat CC what else can you grab but by consolidation. 

Remember though, that not all National Commanders have had delusions of grandeur, godhood, "what's in it for me," or "Hail, me" attitudes.  There have been quite a few, I've met some, and at least one that I know personally who really *did* put the good of the mission and the organization first, and worked with the AF for the good of both.  Unfortunately, it may be a rarer trait than it needs to be at that level. Yep, JMO..

V/R,
John Boyd, LtCol, CAP
Mitchell and Earhart unnumbered, yada, yada
The older I get, the more I learn.  The more I learn, the more I find left yet to learn.

JohnKachenmeister

Quote from: lordmonar on March 22, 2007, 10:48:41 PM
Quote from: LtCol White on March 22, 2007, 10:03:13 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on March 22, 2007, 09:42:17 PM
Well there you are!

We either kick out the long hair, over weight members.....and the take over the jobs that they are currently doing, or we pressure the USAF to back off on these standards.

It is as simple as that.

I highly disagree with the sentiment that a switch to 100% corporate uniforms would hurt our relationship with the USAF or our credibility with outside agencies.

It would simplifiy uniform matters, increase our uniformity and improve our professional image.

The one alternitive I have not suggested.......We switch to USAF uniforms and ignore the USAF's protests about our out of regs personnel.
]

With all due respect, you apparently have not been around CAP very long to understand why this is important.


I've been around to know that the USAF has been slowly pushing us away on the uniform issue for a long time now sir.  I have been with the USAF long enough to know that 90% of the rank and file of the USAF do not know about us.  And the few that do are split between those who think we are posers because we wear USAF uniforms.

Sir,  I know we have a problem with USAF relations.....But we also have a problem with local agency relations.  It makes no difference what the USAF thinks of us...if the local/state DR/SAR coordinators think we are unprofessional.

On the subject of uniformity...we are un-professional.  We have 8-9 different authorised uniform combinations that make no sense to outsiders what they mean.

Now I agree....that my preference would be all USAF uniforms....for all the reasons you mentioned.  But that would mean one of the following must happen:

1. We force out all those who don't meet USAF standards (plus 10%).
2. We get the USAF to back off on their standards.
3. We ignore the standards.

Number 3....is right out.....that would really be a road block to CAP/USAF relations.
Number 2....I can't talk for the Air Force but I don't really understand why they have such a hang up on this.
Number 1....This is the only really viable option....but could CAP still function if we did this?  I know of at least 3 three squadrons that would take a 50% drop in leadership not to mention the loss of leadership at regional and national levels.

So....again with the focus of fixing our image with our primary customer (local ES cooridinators).....we can all move to corporates, eliminate the polo shirt and the gray/white combos.  That means we are down to only three possible uniform combinations.  TPUs, Flight Suits (blue) and BBDUs.  Desk Weenies, flies and feild types.

Would the USAF think this was an attempt to get away from them?  Not if you tell them why.  Not if you still talk to them and listen to them about issues they are concerned about.  At the street level we don't see the USAF.  We see mission numbers and we see IC's that are wearing State Police Uniforms or Fire Department uniforms.

The USAF does not IMHO really care what we look like so long as we don't bring discredit on them (hence why they don't like big fat long haired bearded SMs wearing the USAF uniform).  They obviously don't have too much problem with BBDU and Blue Flight Suits....because they have never said anything about those.  They had a couple of misgivings about the TPU....but we WORKED with them and corrected it.

Lord M:

I think option 2 has a shot.

The present standards represent the basic training entry standards, and are not adjusted for body fat.

Using the approved USAF body fay computation rules, which are NOT hard to administer, and calculating in fudge factor of approximately 10 percent, I think a LOT of us seasoned fellows would stack up closer to USAF standards than by using the screening weight only.
Another former CAP officer

LTC_Gadget

Quote from: DrJbdm on March 22, 2007, 09:11:32 PM
So, lets switch everyone to AF style uniforms and deny membership to all those who can't or won't meet the weight [..] standards when making application to CAP.

The average age of an AF officer is around thirty.  The average age of a CAP officer is around 50. Try imposing the same weight and BMI standards on those two diverse groups and see how much sense that makes.  There were discussions long ago which considered that key difference and factored in the weight allowance difference.  If the AF didn't have its own problems, then why is is that they offer a 50 short service coat.  No way that physique meets standards either. 

The basic objectives of being in the military is that no matter what your job, you can pick up a weapon, run into combat, put yourself in harm's way, kill people and live to tell about it.  We're hardly on the same page.  Our pilots still have to pass flight physicals, and some of them resemble small-town donut-eating, speed-trap minding Buford T. Justices. 

I was born with one leg shorter than the other, and am missing one bone below the knee in one leg.  It didn't stop me from progressing in the cadet program, it didn't stop me from being a Ground Team Leader both as a cadet and as a senior member years ago.  But to the military, I was damaged goods because I don't have enough parts, and couldn't carry 100 pound pack at double- time.  There were many other jobs that probably never would have been called into combat that I could have performed, but I never got the chance.  The only thing slowing me down now is a bum knee which is arthritic as a leftover from twenty-one orthopedic surgeries in my childhood and teens.  But I *did my job.*  I never asked for allowances to be made.  I never put myself in a position for others to have to take care of me instead of the mission.  I insisted on the same from those around me.  So, now you're going to call me damaged goods as well??  Ever heard of the law of unintended consequences??  Thinkaboutit..

V/R,
John Boyd, LtCol, CAP
Mitchell and Earhart unnumbered, yada, yada
The older I get, the more I learn.  The more I learn, the more I find left yet to learn.

LtCol White

Quote from: lordmonar on March 22, 2007, 10:48:41 PM
Quote from: LtCol White on March 22, 2007, 10:03:13 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on March 22, 2007, 09:42:17 PM
Well there you are!

We either kick out the long hair, over weight members.....and the take over the jobs that they are currently doing, or we pressure the USAF to back off on these standards.

It is as simple as that.

I highly disagree with the sentiment that a switch to 100% corporate uniforms would hurt our relationship with the USAF or our credibility with outside agencies.

It would simplifiy uniform matters, increase our uniformity and improve our professional image.

The one alternitive I have not suggested.......We switch to USAF uniforms and ignore the USAF's protests about our out of regs personnel.
]

With all due respect, you apparently have not been around CAP very long to understand why this is important.


I've been around to know that the USAF has been slowly pushing us away on the uniform issue for a long time now sir.  I have been with the USAF long enough to know that 90% of the rank and file of the USAF do not know about us.  And the few that do are split between those who think we are posers because we wear USAF uniforms.

Sir,  I know we have a problem with USAF relations.....But we also have a problem with local agency relations.  It makes no difference what the USAF thinks of us...if the local/state DR/SAR coordinators think we are unprofessional.

On the subject of uniformity...we are un-professional.  We have 8-9 different authorised uniform combinations that make no sense to outsiders what they mean.

Now I agree....that my preference would be all USAF uniforms....for all the reasons you mentioned.  But that would mean one of the following must happen:

1. We force out all those who don't meet USAF standards (plus 10%).
2. We get the USAF to back off on their standards.
3. We ignore the standards.

Number 3....is right out.....that would really be a road block to CAP/USAF relations.
Number 2....I can't talk for the Air Force but I don't really understand why they have such a hang up on this.
Number 1....This is the only really viable option....but could CAP still function if we did this?  I know of at least 3 three squadrons that would take a 50% drop in leadership not to mention the loss of leadership at regional and national levels.

So....again with the focus of fixing our image with our primary customer (local ES cooridinators).....we can all move to corporates, eliminate the polo shirt and the gray/white combos.  That means we are down to only three possible uniform combinations.  TPUs, Flight Suits (blue) and BBDUs.  Desk Weenies, flies and feild types.

Would the USAF think this was an attempt to get away from them?  Not if you tell them why.  Not if you still talk to them and listen to them about issues they are concerned about.  At the street level we don't see the USAF.  We see mission numbers and we see IC's that are wearing State Police Uniforms or Fire Department uniforms.

The USAF does not IMHO really care what we look like so long as we don't bring discredit on them (hence why they don't like big fat long haired bearded SMs wearing the USAF uniform).  They obviously don't have too much problem with BBDU and Blue Flight Suits....because they have never said anything about those.  They had a couple of misgivings about the TPU....but we WORKED with them and corrected it.

That there are FAR too many uniforms I heartily agree with you. Clearly I prefer the USAF uniform. But I also do not think we should preclude those who do no meet standards from participating. This is the reason we should have the USAF block of uniforms for all who meet WHATEVER the standards are for that and the Corporate block equivalents for all those who do not meet the standards.  It should be a one for one match. Blues/TPU, BDU/BBDU, Flight suit/Blue Filght suit. There are enough similarities in these that it is clear that the organization is the same while satisfying USAF in the wearing of the USAF uniforms.

WITHOUT USAF THERE IS NO CAP. You can't tell USAF to "stuff it" and think that CAP will survive. It will be killed faster than an isurgent in Iraq.

The bad blood is not a USAF problem with CAP but is the result of the actions of certain individuals IN CAP over the years.

IF we professionalize the appearance as well as the actions and USAF see us enforcing regulations instead of finding ways around them, the relationship will repair itself. For this to happen, CAP has to be the one to take the first steps.

By leaving the USAF uniforms behind in favor of the corporate ones gives the impression that 1. we dont want to look like USAF anymore and 2. we cannot control our membership to the point of obeying USAF policy for that uniform.

What USAF really wants is compliance and performance. NOT problems.

Make NO mistake that USAF VERY much cares how we look in the USAF uniform. CAP F'd it up and CAP has to fix it.
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

MIKE

Mike Johnston

Al Sayre

Quote from: Chaplaindon on March 22, 2007, 05:27:48 PM
After pondering the addition of "U.S." to the BDU/BBDU namestrip, I would like to proffer a possible REAL rationale behind the move.

I suspect the real motive has to do with the new corporate service dress coat. Recently direction came down to replace the "U.S." cutouts with "CAP" ones instead.

By making us the "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" (if only in the BDU/BBDU) it may help leverage the reinstatement of the "U.S." cutouts.



Another possibility:  Someone at Vanguard screwed up and ordered 50,000 tapes that say U.S. Civil Air Patrol, and they were stuck with them so they went to the NB and said "Hey look at the cool idea we had..."
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787