CAP Height/Weight Standards for Uniform wear and BMI

[RiverAux]

Just for fun I ran a few of the height and weight standards that you must meet to wear the AF-style uniform as a CAP member and they all seemed to show that anyone that wouldn't meet the CAP height-weight standard would probably be classified as Obese under the BMI standards from the Centers for Disease Control http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/bmi/adult_BMI/english_bmi_calculator/bmi_calculator.htm.  Of course if you were at the maximum allowable weight for your height and could wear the AF-style uniform, you would still be in the "Overweight" category.   

The interesting thing is that even if you met the the Air Force level standards that they would put you in the "Overweight" category as well.  At least for my height, I would have to be 31 pounds lighter than the AF maximum to be in the "Normal" category. 

I'm not sure whether this means that the AF (as well as the CAP standards) may be too high or what is considered "Normal" on the BMI scale may be just a little bit too strict. 

[mikeylikey]

The whole thing is ridiculous!  I am always "busting" weight because I have more muscle than fat.  I think it is silly to play these weight games.  Off topic.......I stand each month at the PT test, and wait behind true "Fatties" that bust weight and the tape measurement.  It makes me sick.  That I am classified in the same group of these people in the military.  I have never NOT once gone withought busting weight standards. 

NOTE:  I am allowed to use the word Fattie and make these remarks because I was once fat.   

[RiverAux]

I assume you're in the military then?  If not, I've never heard of a CAP unit testing this monthly, if ever.

[star1151]

I think "normal" is a little too strict on the BMI charts.  I'm a size 8, most tell me to gain weight, yet I'm still considered overweight.  The whole muscle vs. fat thing.  I had a few friends in ROTC who didn't meet weight standards, but were still allowed in because of body fat %.

[Nomex Maximus]

*I* am built for comfort, not for speed.

I have been to AF bases lately and the AF officers really do look like stick figures. I suppose they are healthier than me, but they really don't look very good.

I prefer the blue uniformed women anyhow.

--NTM

[PHall]

Well, the Air Force has two ways to measure you. Weight and Percent of Body Fat.

There's the weight table, if you bust that then they get the measuring tape out and measure your neck and your waist. Subtract the neck measurement from the waist measurement and run the number through the Body Fat Table to get your percent body fat.

Usually the jocks/jockettes have no trouble making the body fat table.

And of course, CAP doesn't do the body fat thing. I guess they figure that +10% is enough to cover that.

[mikeylikey]

And of course, CAP doesn't do the body fat thing. I guess they figure that +10% is enough to cover that.

It really is not!  I barely make weight because of muscle.  So my options for CAP are, bust weight, don't wear an AF uniform, (yet join the AF and wear the AF uniform....) or wear my polo and pants.

I have to agree with a poster above about the "stick-figure" of some of our military folks.  Muscle is a good thing too!  I would rather a person be able to lift me up and carry me, than not be able to because he or she can't lift more than 100 pounds. 

Weight training should be a part of the military just as much as running is.

[star1151]

And of course, CAP doesn't do the body fat thing. I guess they figure that +10% is enough to cover that.

Don't know about that.  I was within AF standards when I first joined...I've dropped a dress size since then and weighed in over the (AF) weight standards this week.  If I keep working out, I'll be over the CAP limits!

[mikeylikey]

And of course, CAP doesn't do the body fat thing. I guess they figure that +10% is enough to cover that.

Don't know about that.  I was within AF standards when I first joined...I've dropped a dress size since then and weighed in over the (AF) weight standards this week.  If I keep working out, I'll be over the CAP limits!

Very easy to climb the weight ladder when not actually forcing the wieght inside through the mouth isn't it?  We need a better system!

[Nomex Maximus]

The impression I got from reading 39-1 was that the people who wrote it ( was it written at AF direction or was it written by CAP folk who THOUGHT they were writing what the AF wanted?) wanted us CAP people not to bring discredit upon the AF by being *fat* and  then being associated with them.

Rather rude of them when you stop to think about it. We are civilian volunteers, giving up lots of our own free time to help the AF do its job. We are here to help them. The AF should be happy to have us helping out, and should not be trying to hide their association with us simply because some of us are *fat*. 

Seems to me to be just one more example of how the military is failing to conform itself to modern American social values.

[star1151]

Seems to me to be just one more example of how the military is failing to conform itself to modern American social values.

<rolls eyes>

Right, because being overweight is a "social value".

What people are saying is that the AF accepts body fat %, which not CAP?

[mikeylikey]

I agree with NM...... I am a huge proponent of rewriting 39-1 (with AF guidance) to allow BF% for CAP members.  I say get rid of the 10% allowance, and allow fat percentage measurement.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I agree in large measure with Nomex and Mikey.  I was also always busting the "Screning weight" in the Army, and always made it through the body fat measurement.  I am now more than 10 percent over the AF screening weight, so I had to buy a new set of uniforms.

The weight standard was written by CAP, not the Air Force.  In the past, everyone wore the same uniform, even fatties.  Fuzzies were not a problem until the Vietnam era.  In my opinion, it was not well thought out, and should be revisited.

But... the problem with CAP making body fat a determination is the age of the force.  The military has one category, "Over 50."  They simply don't have to consider physiological changes beyond that.  We do.  We have people serving into their sixties through their eighties.  I don't know how to figure that, and I'm not sure anybody in CAP would know that either. 

And the Air Force medical people have better things to do.

(WARNING!  Radical Thought Alert!)  Why not follow the path originally blazed by He Who Shall Not Be Named and develop a Corporate bluesuit that is close to the AF style (the NEW one they're coming out with) but sufficiently different that we can slide it in under the Air Force's chubbiness-detecting radar, and put everybody into one uniform?

(DISCLAIMER REQUIRED BY MY LEGAL DEPARTMENT)  The foregoing question is rhetorical in nature, intended to spark discussion of possible solutions to a quandary identified by persons other than myself posting on an internet site.  The author makes no claims to inside knowledge, esoteric information, and fully realizes that there are, in fact, some valid reasons why the propsal identified above owuld not work and/or would not be acceptable to the general membership, persons in authority, the King of Norway, or other persons.  Your results may vary.  Not available in all areas.  Proposal subject to change, modification, or withdrawal without notice.  Cash value:  $.000000000000001, redeemable only at our Redemption Center in North Somalia.   

[Nomex Maximus]

Seems to me to be just one more example of how the military is failing to conform itself to modern American social values.

<rolls eyes>

Right, because being overweight is a "social value".

What people are saying is that the AF accepts body fat %, which not CAP?

Sorry, but telling us that we would bring discredit upon the AF because of our overweight appearrance is right up there with high school cheerleaders not wanting to associate with the fat unpopular girls.

If a person is willing to volunteer valuable and useful time and energy to CAP and thereby indirectly to the AF, then I think that person ought to be welcome to wear whatever color of approved uniform he or she wants to wear.

[ColonelJack]

(WARNING!  Radical Thought Alert!)  Why not follow the path originally blazed by He Who Shall Not Be Named and develop a Corporate bluesuit that is close to the AF style (the NEW one they're coming out with) but sufficiently different that we can slide it in under the Air Force's chubbiness-detecting radar, and put everybody into one uniform?

You kind of had me worried a second there, Kach ... until I read the parenthetical notation regarding the NEW AF blues.  I was going to scream, "We already have that!" but now I see what you were driving at. 

Oh, gee ... yet another uniform.     Just kidding.

Jack

[Grumpy]

I agree with NM...... I am a huge proponent of rewriting 39-1 (with AF guidance) to allow BF% for CAP members.  I say get rid of the 10% allowance, and allow fat percentage measurement.

Mikey, You want to rewrite 39-1?  Contact Nat'l.  Sunday morning General Courter was talking about all the regs that need to be rewritten and then she mentioned 39-1.  She smiled and asked if anyone wanted to take that one on.  Granted, she may have been kidding but then if you volunteered they might take you up on it.  You never know.  Then you could have the other side of the house grumbling about how you wrote the reg.

[mikeylikey]

I agree with NM...... I am a huge proponent of rewriting 39-1 (with AF guidance) to allow BF% for CAP members.  I say get rid of the 10% allowance, and allow fat percentage measurement.

Mikey, You want to rewrite 39-1?  Contact Nat'l.  Sunday morning General Courter was talking about all the regs that need to be rewritten and then she mentioned 39-1.  She smiled and asked if anyone wanted to take that one on.  Granted, she may have been kidding but then if you volunteered they might take you up on it.  You never know.  Then you could have the other side of the house grumbling about how you wrote the reg.

Wow......I along with 2 AF Officers (also CAP Officers), 3 cadets and one very astute photographer published a 4 page proposal to rewrite 39-1 over ONE YEAR AGO.  RESPONSE FROM NATIONAL: (exact wording) "Thank you for your groups interest in helping to update our regulations.  At this time we are seeking an outside agency to publish new versions of all of our material"........at this time, we believe that 39-1 is in no need of updating...uniform changes will be made through policy letter updates".  BALH BLAH BLAH.

So basically, we wanted to make the 39-1 follow the AF manual, in structure and function.  We would have had very nice photos, no Photoshopped crap pictures, clear and concise intructions and it would have been very decent.  Actually, those two AF Officers that I was working with, one wrote AF regulations, pamphlets in his past function, the other already had some nice work done.

I gave up.......NHQ wants volunteers, but when we volunteer, we are told to "GO AWAY".

So when do you think 39-1 will be updated?  When do you think those Policy letters will be added (BTW, each Interim Change Letter regarding Uniforms is VOID now, remember that whole 90 day add to the manual or it becomes no good clause??)

DONE

[Walkman]

Wow......I along with 2 AF Officers (also CAP Officers), 3 cadets and one very astute photographer published a 4 page proposal to rewrite 39-1 over ONE YEAR AGO.  RESPONSE FROM NATIONAL: (exact wording) "Thank you for your groups interest in helping to update our regulations.  At this time we are seeking an outside agency to publish new versions of all of our material"........at this time, we believe that 39-1 is in no need of updating...uniform changes will be made through policy letter updates".  BALH BLAH BLAH.

Maybe now that there's been a change of command at NHQ, your proposal would be better received. I know that I ran into a ton of frustration as a new SM trying to figure out the uniform reqs.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I agree with NM...... I am a huge proponent of rewriting 39-1 (with AF guidance) to allow BF% for CAP members.  I say get rid of the 10% allowance, and allow fat percentage measurement.

Mikey, You want to rewrite 39-1?  Contact Nat'l.  Sunday morning General Courter was talking about all the regs that need to be rewritten and then she mentioned 39-1.  She smiled and asked if anyone wanted to take that one on.  Granted, she may have been kidding but then if you volunteered they might take you up on it.  You never know.  Then you could have the other side of the house grumbling about how you wrote the reg.

Wow......I along with 2 AF Officers (also CAP Officers), 3 cadets and one very astute photographer published a 4 page proposal to rewrite 39-1 over ONE YEAR AGO.  RESPONSE FROM NATIONAL: (exact wording) "Thank you for your groups interest in helping to update our regulations.  At this time we are seeking an outside agency to publish new versions of all of our material"........at this time, we believe that 39-1 is in no need of updating...uniform changes will be made through policy letter updates".  BALH BLAH BLAH.

So basically, we wanted to make the 39-1 follow the AF manual, in structure and function.  We would have had very nice photos, no Photoshopped crap pictures, clear and concise intructions and it would have been very decent.  Actually, those two AF Officers that I was working with, one wrote AF regulations, pamphlets in his past function, the other already had some nice work done.

I gave up.......NHQ wants volunteers, but when we volunteer, we are told to "GO AWAY".

So when do you think 39-1 will be updated?  When do you think those Policy letters will be added (BTW, each Interim Change Letter regarding Uniforms is VOID now, remember that whole 90 day add to the manual or it becomes no good clause??)

DONE

Mikey:

I hate to belabor the obvious, but there have been some significant changes at NHQ since your proposal.  I would seriously urge you to write the National Commander a personal letter explaining that you and your team are willing to take on that task, and that some of the work has already been done.

I would, if I were writing the letter, explain the background of all the persons on your team, and request that you be permitted to submit a completely-rewitten 39-1 up for consideration.

What's the worst she can do?  Say "No?"

And please, Mikey, if you decide to recommend keeping the TPU, at least take that silly-looking silver braid and stick it in the porta-john of CAP history!

[JohnKachenmeister]

(WARNING!  Radical Thought Alert!)  Why not follow the path originally blazed by He Who Shall Not Be Named and develop a Corporate bluesuit that is close to the AF style (the NEW one they're coming out with) but sufficiently different that we can slide it in under the Air Force's chubbiness-detecting radar, and put everybody into one uniform?

You kind of had me worried a second there, Kach ... until I read the parenthetical notation regarding the NEW AF blues.  I was going to scream, "We already have that!" but now I see what you were driving at. 

Oh, gee ... yet another uniform.     Just kidding.

Jack

Jack:

The "New uniform" is gonna happen.  The AF is coming out shortly with the "Hap Arnold Heritage Uniform."  The question is, are we still gonna look like the Navy after the Air Force goes back to its uniform roots?

I came up with a plan for one on another thread, but Tedda refused to photoshop it for a looksee because he hates me and he is a part of the plot to get me.