I've seen loads of threads on the complaints from the various forums for CAP, and I'm a bit curious as to what most people might actually want to do with the CAP uniforms.
So, what would you do? For this thread, I would only have one suggestion: The Air Force blues and BDU's must remain. Those do belong to our mother service, and they would probably be offended (to put it mildly) if we wished to do away with the uniforms they allow us to wear.
Every thing else is fair game: suggest a badge or a patch, or do away with certain ones. Eliminate uniforms; propose one; or suggest one to replace another. What ideas would make things look better, or make them more practical for missions? What insignia could we wear to make our uniforms more appealing? The idea is to look at ideas in a similar manner as the Air Force uniform board would.
I'm doing this out of curiousity, pretty much seeing what people might want. I'll compile it into a numbered list (which won't necessarily be prioritized), and put it back up for all to see.
Hmm...some changes that come to mind are:
1) Create distinctive CAP SM Enlisted grade insignia and a progression chart comperable to the existing CAP SM Officer chart, with the same provisions for initial "appointments" based on the Active Duty pay grade for current or prior service. Allow for those who wish to be Enlisted rather than Officers to do so, regardless of whether they have prior service or not.
2) Choose one of the white aviator shirt combos and ditch the other. My personal preference is for the blue pants/white shirt combo to be "the" Blues aternate uniform.
3) Allow SM Officers to wear the ultramarine cloth grade insignia on BDU caps.
NOTHING! ;D except place a moratorium on all further changes. Yes, you may clap now. :clap:
No, I'm kidding...kind of. I'm a cadet so I don't have to deal with as many changes as Seniors [sorry, Officers] do but just hearing that there is a new policy change to a uniform makes my head hurt!
If we stay with just the USAF uniforms...then why change anything.
I would support a move to corporate uniforms only.
It gets us "uniformed" and we will not have to deal with any changes the USAF makes later on (BDUs to ABU).
As far as the USAF being offended? I don't think that would really happen. 90% of the rank of file of the USAF barely know we exist.
We really need to ask what CAP needs to get CAP's mission done in the best and most efficient manner.
I see all the different uniforms at a mission base as a problem for our organization. By going to one uniform for all members....we make ourselves into a more professional unit.
I would just want to simply things.
Why do Cadet Airman have rank on both sides of the their collars for the BDUs, but continue to wear rank on side and CAP cutouts on the other for the Blues?
Why are Officers limited to 2 badges on the Aviator shirt with Gray pants, but can have 4 with Blue pants or the Blues uniform.
Why do we have two different Recruiter's ribbons?
Why can't we have a simple standardized PT uniform?
Lots of questions and I know the answers to most of them, but that doesn't make it right. The rules should be simple and easy to implement. Currently, there are just too many "buts" and "ors" to allow everyone to know exactly what needs to be done. Changes to previous changes that still haven't been added to the manual.
On things that don't have to deal with simplifying things; I would like to see a standardized color for Scholastic Honor Cadets. Then each Wing could decide whether they wanted to implement the cord.
What would I want to do with CAP uniforms?
Not change them for a couple of years.
Despite all of the random issues there are with the way things are now, and things that may need correcting, I really think it would force National to think things all the way through if uniforms could only be changed once every few years - policy letters included.
Holy crap, who opened the can-o-worms? There's some good suggestions there. I have some views, & I'll try to be short & sweet about them, though there's several, give it a quick read though. I'll try to put up some pix.
1) SM w/o Grade - It's unacceptable that this grade should look EXACTLY the same as C/AB. I have a 17yo C/AB & an 18yo SM, how does someone else tell who the adult is in that picture for legal purposes? I'd like to chang SMWOG to Officer Candidate, and have a blank CAP slide (avail now from Vanguard) to mark it. Plus, poking holes in blues/aviator ruins the collar. We don't care about that when people transition to C/officer cause it's a couple years down the road & they'll grow out of the shirt in that time. Back to the sewn on CAP cutouts on both collars of BDU/BBDU - they'll be there for 6 months, that's adequate to do the sewing & longer than some of the FO grades that must be sewn now.
2) Badges. We had a proposal on the portal that was all done but the write up. I still need to get that taken care of & may have time now. The basis was professional appearance & wear standards following the AF, and recognition of key skills for retention & motivation purposes. It's a pretty good piece of work that just needs to be slammed together for formal presentation. It added a couple badges for unrecognized areas (IC, GBD/OSC/PSC); it changed the definitions of scanner & observer to account for the new tech systems & approach, creating aircrew/scanner & navigator/observer ratings; The senior rate for all wings stayed hour related, but the master rating became the badge for AOBD; all the wings were given a slick new look (aircrew/scanner added), and astronaut wings were added for NASA rated civilians in a specific AE plan that actually made lots of sense & was well received. Anyway, tweak badges according to that combined effort we put in over there.
3) Grade slides. Gray isn't so terrible, but black like that used by AFROTC would look a lot better - still w/ the CAP embroidered on it, and go to a blue nametag w/ that, either standardized w/ cadets or the standard one line AF version. That saves bucks. Obviously metal grade w/ CAP cutout on outterwear (service coat) would be most desirable along w/ this, but get the black slides first & go from there. I've also seen talk of an AFROTC-style shoulderboard for use w/ this, and I'm okay with that also.
NOTE: I do think the closeness of CAP uniforms to AF uniforms is one meassuring stick against which the quality of CAP personnel is in the AF view is indicated. According to that scale, I think we deserve gray right now, and I'd like to get on a professionalization track that deserves slightly harder to distinguish black slides in the future.
4) dump ultramarine blue on everything in favor of dark blue to match the shade of BBDUs. That'd look MUCH sharper. I'd recommend this transition occur w/ the move to ABUs out in the future.
5) Agree on a temp moratorium right now. Then add a reg for proposals direct from the field to a Wg uniform board, and from there OR the NEC to a BoG uniform board that will be equally staffed by AF officers – approval there will equal AF approval (AU/AETC/CSAF each appoint an officer to review & vote on their behalf [why are major AF general officers spending time on CAP uniform items anyway], NB, NEC, & NatCC each appoint an officer, CAP-USAF JA also a member, board elects their own internal officers to run mtgs). BoG uniform board can approve a change first for wear testing like the AF does, including a comment period, and THEN on the second time around can approve the change. Changes then are locked in for 5 years unless extenuating (legal) circumstances require a change sooner. Every effort will be made to keep CAP uniforms updated to the example provided by the AF.
6) Agree on ditch the two white aviator versions. Transition out the grays or get rid of the new style all together. I don't like the AF uniform w/ white shirt at all though, so maybe keep the gray slides/name w/ blue pants & corporate service coat as is.
7) Agree on 2 recruiter ribbons being stupid. You can have one ribbon w/ a standard for award to seniors & a standard for award to cadets. That would also allow you to carry over the ribbon from cadet to senior & earn new clasps by the adult standard. I'd like to take the other one & make it an recruiting assistance ribbon. When you join the military, you can get an extra stripe by referring a couple friends that go ahead & sign up. We could get a system where military recruiters could credit a CAP member by the same standards used there for referrals that ship, and a couple of those could equal a ribbon. It sets the foundation for a nice relationship.
8) Agree on full color grade on hat. May require "CAP" under/over it like you see w/ ranger tabs. This is a serious issue, cause when you de-blouse they can't have real mil enlisted troops thinking you can give them legal orders. Worth a look consideration in color.
9) Proceed w/ sewn on color grade for green flight suit, and possibly embroidered flight name patches.
OOK, I'm sure some of these suggestions will be controversial to the you purests, but you asked:
Approve a khaki or light gray BDU uniform for summer.
Approve light gray BDU or six pocket pants for wear with the blue golf shirt. It makes for a much cooler flight uniform in the summer months.
I actually kinda like the ultra marine background on embroidered tapes and rank insignia, but it doesn't go with the BBDU, so I'd change to a dark blue background.
Cloth name/aviation badge patch on flight suit.
Here's one for ya - a dark blue/black gore tex parka with both the BBDU and camo BDU. In violation of the regs, I wear my dark blue w/black Cabela's gore-tex parka with my camo BDU's in rainy weather. I really don't see the need in spending money on a camo gore-tex parka that I'm only going to wear a few times a year any way. And seeing how they aren't in regs any way, I may as well wear the blue. It actually doesn't look bad at all.
Approve black fleece for wear over BDU's like the Army does.
Adopt the no shine brown boots that are now allowed with the ABU.
And lastly.....approve the brown leather A-2 with the blue AF uniform as long as it has a CAP distinctive name patch on it. I mean, come on, what's so sacred about the brown A-2?
Quote from: ELThunter on November 09, 2006, 12:00:26 AM
OOK, I'm sure some of these suggestions will be controversial to the you purests, but you asked:
Approve a khaki or light gray BDU uniform for summer.
Approve light gray BDU or six pocket pants for wear with the blue golf shirt. It makes for a much cooler flight uniform in the summer months.
I actually kinda like the ultra marine background on embroidered tapes and rank insignia, but it doesn't go with the BBDU, so I'd change to a dark blue background.
Cloth name/aviation badge patch on flight suit.
Here's one for ya - a dark blue/black gore tex parka with both the BBDU and camo BDU. In violation of the regs, I wear my dark blue w/black Cabela's gore-tex parka with my camo BDU's in rainy weather. I really don't see the need in spending money on a camo gore-tex parka that I'm only going to wear a few times a year any way. And seeing how they aren't in regs any way, I may as well wear the blue. It actually doesn't look bad at all.
Approve black fleece for wear over BDU's like the Army does.
Adopt the no shine brown boots that are now allowed with the ABU.
And lastly.....approve the brown leather A-2 with the blue AF uniform as long as it has a CAP distinctive name patch on it. I mean, come on, what's so sacred about the brown A-2?
If we go to a dark blue back ground on the name tapes on the BBDU we would look like the coast guard. They may not appreciate that.
I have a yellow Columbia jacket that looks very professional with the BDU's and it is much more visable than the camo or black options.
I do like the idea of approving some gray BDU pants with the golf shirt. It would be practical and good looking.
Quote from: Chris Jacobs on November 09, 2006, 12:14:32 AM
I do like the idea of approving some gray BDU pants with the golf shirt. It would be practical and good looking.
I see a lot of aircrew guys wearing them, but according to our Wing LG, she called NHQ and they said they were not considered slacks, so they were not approved CAP uniforms...so wear them at your own risk of no insurance coverage in the event of an accident.
a LOT of wings require nomex for flying & that could very well be standardized nationally soon. I think the gray combo w/ aviator should be cut now that the alternate blue version is here, and that means going to blue slacks w/ the golf shirt, which means BBDU pants could be worn in the scenerio you're proposing.
I guess I am a purest in the sense you're saying, and I certainly disapprove of kahki BDUs for summer. They have summer & winter weight BDU & BBDUs. Wear the right one. This isn't a SAR organizaiton. It is an AF assistance organization that happens for the time being to be assigned a SaR mission, among other things, in assistance to the AF. That by no means says we'll always do that or that it will remain our primary focus. We exist to serve the AF first & foremost. Our uniforms should indicate that. And, the AF should act in the uniforms they control & the influence they have over corporate-styles to reinforce that organic relationship lest CAP continue drifting off into space.
I think dark blue tapes on BDU & BBDU would be fine, screw what the CG thinks, I don't work for them & niether do the AF people doing the approving.
We did have a goretex thread over at the portal at one point. It did recommend the CG-style blue goretex setup as optional for use w/ BBDU & other corporate combinations. It does look slick, but I wouldn't use it w/ BDUs, that looks dumb.
Quote from: Psicorp on November 08, 2006, 07:25:53 PM
Hmm...some changes that come to mind are:
1) Create distinctive CAP SM Enlisted grade insignia and a progression chart comperable to the existing CAP SM Officer chart, with the same provisions for initial "appointments" based on the Active Duty pay grade for current or prior service. Allow for those who wish to be Enlisted rather than Officers to do so, regardless of whether they have prior service or not.
2) Choose one of the white aviator shirt combos and ditch the other. My personal preference is for the blue pants/white shirt combo to be "the" Blues aternate uniform.
3) Allow SM Officers to wear the ultramarine cloth grade insignia on BDU caps.
I second this.
Shakos. I suggested these over on the Portal a while back. Blaze orange shako for the field uniform.
Definitely shakos.
Quote from: DNall on November 09, 2006, 12:33:39 AM
a LOT of wings require nomex for flying & that could very well be standardized nationally soon.
If they're going to make that a requirement, they should re-think the restriction on green flight suits for out-of-reg members, and go back to letting them (I say them, because I am in reg's, so it doesn't apply to me) wear them without rank, and possibly a different patch combo or some other feature that would help set them apart, and cut some loose from DRMO for us. I can't remember the last time I saw our Wing get flight suits from Dr. Moe. I wouldn't be in favor of making any member pay the prices that they charge for nomex flight suits.
Quote from: DNall on November 09, 2006, 12:33:39 AM
I certainly disapprove of khaki BDUs for summer. They have summer & winter weight BDU & BBDUs. Wear the right one.
Most hot weather precautions include wearing light colors, as I'm sure you're aware. Woodland camo and dark blue are, well, dark colors. If we're going to approve Corporate uniforms, then I don't see the problem.
Quote from: DNall on November 09, 2006, 12:33:39 AM
This isn't a SAR organization. It is an AF assistance organization that happens for the time being to be assigned a SaR mission, among other things, in assistance to the AF. That by no means says we'll always do that or that it will remain our primary focus. We exist to serve the AF first & foremost. Our uniforms should indicate that. And, the AF should act in the uniforms they control & the influence they have over corporate-styles to reinforce that organic relationship lest CAP continue drifting off into space.
I think dark blue tapes on BDU & BBDU would be fine, screw what the CG thinks, I don't work for them & neither do the AF people doing the approving.
The BBDU isn't an AF style uniform, so if you don't have a problem with it, why the problem with the khaki? At least there is a basis (safety and comfort in hot weather) for it? I don't see any basis for the BBDU other than it can't be mistaken for the AF.
We've got way too many uniform combinations. This is a problem but one we brought on ourselves by having a duel identity crisis and the need to have a complete set of uniforms for those who meet height/weight standards for "AF Style" and those who choose not to wear the AF Style Uniforms or choose not to meet those height weight standards.
I would stream line the uniform mix down to something reasonable. Flight suits would be an example. Everyone would wear sage green. If you did not meet the height/weight grooming standards then you would wear the uniform with only the CAP Majcom patch. Same thing with BDU's.
There was nothing wrong with the Aviator Uniform. The TPU wasn't necessary. If the sole reason for the TPU was to wear pin on rank you could have achieved that with the Aviator uniform and still had a distinct uniform.
Wear tests. There should be a wear test of any new uniform item and it should not be limited to those who work out of NHQ.
Berets. A heather grey beret should be an optional uniform item with the blue BDU and Aviator Uniform when worn in Garrison.
Blue Patrol Cap. Worn with Blue BDU's when in the field.
Quote from: CAP Sergeant on November 09, 2006, 12:59:40 AM
Shakos. I suggested these over on the Portal a while back. Blaze orange shako for the field uniform.
Definitely shakos.
With or without plume?
I'm quite aware of hot weather conditions, we mow the lawn here on Christmas & it's 500% humidity all the time. Kahki wouldn't help me at all. I don't really like the BBDU personally. The AF has big problem w/ putting anyone out of ht/wt/grooming in anything that looks like a military uniform, and they've voived that concern within the limits they're allowed.
Gray berets? What's the weather like over there?
Quote from: DNall on November 08, 2006, 11:29:18 PM
1) SM w/o Grade - It's unacceptable that this grade should look EXACTLY the same as C/AB. I have a 17yo C/AB & an 18yo SM, how does someone else tell who the adult is in that picture for legal purposes? I'd like to chang SMWOG to Officer Candidate, and have a blank CAP slide (avail now from Vanguard) to mark it. Plus, poking holes in blues/aviator ruins the collar. We don't care about that when people transition to C/officer cause it's a couple years down the road & they'll grow out of the shirt in that time. Back to the sewn on CAP cutouts on both collars of BDU/BBDU - they'll be there for 6 months, that's adequate to do the sewing & longer than some of the FO grades that must be sewn now.
I had an idea a while back I posted on CS that takes the other side of this issue... Grade insignia for C/AB.... Basically the shield that is on the existing chevrons.
My thinking now is we shouldn't be screwing with the current uniform... We should wait for something new, or at least change the way we change things and the phase in process.
I'm seeing what I was looking for, the basic ideas.
Overall, I see some ideas I like, and some I might not be so hot about, but whether I like it or not, I'm still gonna compile it all. I won't be censoring anything based on personal opinion (unless someone suggests pink tutu's, ideas like that will NOT be compiled for obvious reasons :) )
Keep 'em coming.
Quote from: sjtrupp on November 08, 2006, 08:48:51 PM
I would just want to simply things.
Why do Cadet Airman have rank on both sides of the their collars for the BDUs, but continue to wear rank on side and CAP cutouts on the other for the Blues?
Why are Officers limited to 2 badges on the Aviator shirt with Gray pants, but can have 4 with Blue pants or the Blues uniform.
Why do we have two different Recruiter's ribbons?
Why can't we have a simple standardized PT uniform?
Lots of questions and I know the answers to most of them, but that doesn't make it right. The rules should be simple and easy to implement. Currently, there are just too many "buts" and "ors" to allow everyone to know exactly what needs to be done. Changes to previous changes that still haven't been added to the manual.
On things that don't have to deal with simplifying things; I would like to see a standardized color for Scholastic Honor Cadets. Then each Wing could decide whether they wanted to implement the cord.
I pretty much was asking what people would want to see, so I'm addressing your questions for my personal clarification:
1.
Why do Cadet Airman have rank on both sides of the their collars for the BDUs, but continue to wear rank on side and CAP cutouts on the other for the Blues?What would you like to see? I might guess that you would like to see rank on both sides for all uniform variations. Am I right?
2.
Why are Officers limited to 2 badges on the Aviator shirt with Gray pants, but can have 4 with Blue pants or the Blues uniform.From what I found on page 76 of 39-1, the same badges are authorized on the white/grays as on the blues. The last line is the one that says only 2 badges may be worn (and seems to contradict the previous portions of the page). I'm assuming that you would like to see the same badges authorized on the aviator combo as on blues.
3.
Why do we have two different Recruiter's ribbons?Good question. Once again I'm assuming, but I imagine that you would like to see only one.
4.
Why can't we have a simple standardized PT uniform?Standardize the PT uniform. Check
5.
On things that don't have to deal with simplifying things; I would like to see a standardized color for Scholastic Honor Cadets. Then each Wing could decide whether they wanted to implement the cord.That is simplifying things, and that's the kind of idea I'm looking for. I imagine in 'officialese' we would say something like this: "Scholastic Honor Cadets will wear a cord of {insert color here}. Wing commanders will be the final authority for permission to wear."
I have thought about this a few times.
I prefer the AF style BDU's and Blues. No problems there. Now at the risk of sounding un-American, I would take away the US Flag, in my opinion it's an Army thing (also I know some Hawk Rangers that were not happy to remove their LL patches). However, I love the Flag and believe it looks good on the BDU's, but as I said we are AF Aux, not Army. :-\
I would most likely prefer rank on the sleeves as opposed to the lapel.
Back to the Flag. Since we are going to keep it regardless, I would take a special activities patch (like what was previously worn on the right shoulder) and allow it to be placed half an inch below the Flag.
:-\ Just some things I would do. Just sounding off.
Quote from: sjtrupp on November 08, 2006, 08:48:51 PM
I would just want to simply things.
Why do Cadet Airman have rank on both sides of the their collars for the BDUs, but continue to wear rank on side and CAP cutouts on the other for the Blues?
Why are Officers limited to 2 badges on the Aviator shirt with Gray pants, but can have 4 with Blue pants or the Blues uniform.
Why do we have two different Recruiter's ribbons?
Why can't we have a simple standardized PT uniform?
Lots of questions and I know the answers to most of them, but that doesn't make it right. The rules should be simple and easy to implement. Currently, there are just too many "buts" and "ors" to allow everyone to know exactly what needs to be done. Changes to previous changes that still haven't been added to the manual.
On things that don't have to deal with simplifying things; I would like to see a standardized color for Scholastic Honor Cadets. Then each Wing could decide whether they wanted to implement the cord.
Makes sense to me.
Quote from: ELThunter on November 09, 2006, 12:00:26 AM
OOK, I'm sure some of these suggestions will be controversial to the you purests, but you asked:
Approve a khaki or light gray BDU uniform for summer.
Approve light gray BDU or six pocket pants for wear with the blue golf shirt. It makes for a much cooler flight uniform in the summer months.
I actually kinda like the ultra marine background on embroidered tapes and rank insignia, but it doesn't go with the BBDU, so I'd change to a dark blue background.
Cloth name/aviation badge patch on flight suit.
Here's one for ya - a dark blue/black gore tex parka with both the BBDU and camo BDU. In violation of the regs, I wear my dark blue w/black Cabela's gore-tex parka with my camo BDU's in rainy weather. I really don't see the need in spending money on a camo gore-tex parka that I'm only going to wear a few times a year any way. And seeing how they aren't in regs any way, I may as well wear the blue. It actually doesn't look bad at all.
Approve black fleece for wear over BDU's like the Army does.
Adopt the no shine brown boots that are now allowed with the ABU.
And lastly.....approve the brown leather A-2 with the blue AF uniform as long as it has a CAP distinctive name patch on it. I mean, come on, what's so sacred about the brown A-2?
I second the kahki or grey BDU's for summer. I actually believe that either grey or khaki would be outstanding year round. We put on woodland BDUs and then the orange vest, are we playing paintball or participating in ES? Although I must say the woodland is one thing that attracted me to CAP, but the missions remain the same no matter what.
QuoteI would like to see a standardized color for Scholastic Honor Cadets. Then each Wing could decide whether they wanted to implement the cord.
I can see a cord cause it's removable & such, but I feel more comfortable with a ribbon that equates to a semester or year. I think we go a little crazy w/ cords already.
Quote1.Why do Cadet Airman have rank on both sides of the their collars for the BDUs, but continue to wear rank on side and CAP cutouts on the other for the Blues?
What would you like to see? I might guess that you would like to see rank on both sides for all uniform variations. Am I right?
That came along on my break, what was the point again? It's a logistic pain & costly. We still have to give them the cutouts up front & cycling one stripe was MUCH easier to keep stocks on hand than two. I don't know how much of it is THIS & how much is Vanguard sucking the big one, but I swear there's not one cadet in my Sq in correct uniform. It's beyond redicuous & I can't do anything about it.
Quote2. Why are Officers limited to 2 badges on the Aviator shirt with Gray pants, but can have 4 with Blue pants or the Blues uniform.
From what I found on page 76 of 39-1, the same badges are authorized on the white/grays as on the blues. The last line is the one that says only 2 badges may be worn (and seems to contradict the previous portions of the page). I'm assuming that you would like to see the same badges authorized on the aviator combo as on blues.
I think they were trying to say two above the pocket & meant to have the same standard as blues, but honestly we get badges so stinkin easy. Part of the badge proposal we had in the portal was to make the specialty rating tracks FOUR levels (apprentice on bottom) and only give the basic badge for the second level (tech = senior rating lite, new content/req's on the end of master). The other thing discussed as a system of rules to define what badges take priority & which ones can be worn in which places, so you can't have four tech ratings for instance, but could still wear four if you were really well rounded & had lots of experience.
Quote5. On things that don't have to deal with simplifying things; I would like to see a standardized color for Scholastic Honor Cadets. Then each Wing could decide whether they wanted to implement the cord.
That is simplifying things, and that's the kind of idea I'm looking for. I imagine in 'officialese' we would say something like this: "Scholastic Honor Cadets will wear a cord of {insert color here}. Wing commanders will be the final authority for permission to wear."
We don't go a little crazy w/ cords already? I'm more comfortable w/a ribbon & clasps for each semester/year. I see the logic, and I'm all for recognition of this one, but a little on the over-blingage to me.
Still looking for blank slide = officer candidate = no more SM w/o grade. No kidding, we can't have an adult in the same uniform as a basic cadet. That's a serious problem from a risk mgmt perspective. I know you're imagining the typical 50yo SM versus a 13yo kid, but there's another end to that spectrum.
OK, I have a headache...arrggghhhh......
Some of the changes suggested have already been sent to HQ USAF after the NB in Reno. The cloth name badges for flight suits, restoring rank to the BDU cap, and a few others I do not recall off hand.
We don't need to create anymore NEW uniform combos. We need to trim it all down and have the USAF side of the uniforms and then a comparable Corp side. Nothing else.
USAF - service uniform, Mess Dress, BDU, flight suit.
Corp - Service uniform (TPU), Blazer combo, BBDU, blue flight suit.
DNALL did some great work revamping the insignia over on portal and I definitely think that needs to go up the chain for review.
I'll be in the minority in saying this, but I am a big proponent of a UNIform. We have many outfits in CAP, but no UNIform.
I say have one UNIform that EVERYONE can wear. Stop being exclusionary. If that means no more USAF uniforms, so be it. Standardize on the poloshirt (getting rid of those grades while we're at it) or an aviator uniform.
And stop creating more EXCLUSIONARY aviator outfits! One step forward, two steps back.
Keeping the USAF heritage is crucial. Thus my suggestion of the only having one USAF and one Corp version of each for all
For the Cadet Rank. I don't care too much either way, except one rank and one cut out would more cost effective.
I prefer the cord, because it can be taken away. Get a ribbon, it's always there. They could just simply work hard for one semester for the ribbon, then drop their GPA later on.
One other thing I thought of would be to allow jeans with the Polo. I mean, it's not a "uniform" it's a polo shirt. Allowing jeans would make it a lot easier at times. I was a local escort for IACE one year, and there were times when we weren't in uniform, but it would have been nice to wear the polo with jeans.
Quote from: jkalemis on November 09, 2006, 03:12:17 PM
I'll be in the minority in saying this, but I am a big proponent of a UNIform. We have many outfits in CAP, but no UNIform.
I say have one UNIform that EVERYONE can wear. Stop being exclusionary. If that means no more USAF uniforms, so be it. Standardize on the poloshirt (getting rid of those grades while we're at it) or an aviator uniform.
And stop creating more EXCLUSIONARY aviator outfits! One step forward, two steps back.
The problem with this is CAP started out different than it is today. We started out attached to the AF & in their uniforms meeting their standards. Until about 15 years ago we've always been in the AF chain of command & part of them. We've been punished for defying them by being pushed back a bit & had our uniforms cut further away from theirs. We're supposed to be earning our way back into the AF family, not doing our own thing. If you want absolute uniformity, it has to be the AF uniform & people that can't meet that can't wear a uniform & if that means they can't participate then so be it. Since that's been determined not to be acceptable, we have corporate-style alternatives. You don't have a choice of leaving the AF behind they are our soul & CAP doesn't exist in any form w/o belonging to them. So basically, NO!
The point made earlier address the issue of too many uniforms. The issue is not actually that we have so many, it's people not wearing them appropriately. You don't have a choice of what uniform to wear, & should never have that choice. If it's flight you should wear the flight suit, sage if you meet req's/blue if you don't; if it's field you should wear BDU if you can or BBDU if you can't; Wear short sleeve blues/aviator w/o tie in warm months, long sleeve w/ tie in cold months; service dress/blazer for semi-formal business like events; mess dress/civilian formal wear for formal occasions. You should not remotely own every combo. That's retarded. You should own either a full set of blues (long/short sleeve/tie & service coat) or a full set of the aviator/blaze/TPU style, NEVER both. Same deal with BDU/BBDU/flt suits. The issue is getting people to wear the right thing at the event. When you go to an event, you should ONLY see a the two uniform variations possible for the nature of that event. A mission may be the rare exception where you might want staff in blues/aviator, GTs in BDU/BBDU, and flight crews in flt suits, but that clearly delineates who's doing what. Write good op plans, follow & enforce them, do your job, including wearing what's designated as appropriate for it.
Oh, and Polo, I would flat cut as an official uniform. You'd be free to buy & wear the thing playing golf or whatever, but a flying club we are not. The big issue with the alternate corporate servce dress or whatever we're calling it is it doesn't fit logically into this uniform system. They're called coporate-
STYLE uniforms & AF-
STYLE uniforms for a reason. The corporates should look like business attire that ID's a person as a member, NOT uniforms.
Ergo my earlier point. Thanks DNALL. :clap:
So far I've got a list of about 30 items, consolidated and showing when the same concept was voiced by a different person, or seconded.
The most popular ideas seem to be allowing rank on headgear of BDU's; navy blue accoutrements for both BDU's; unique insignia for SM NCO's; cloth nametags on flightsuits; BDU type or similar pants allowed for wear with polo shirts; and khaki or gray summer utilities.
I didn't intend to create a battleground here. I'm just looking for peoples ideas to see how many common ones there were.
Quote from: DNall on November 09, 2006, 07:41:45 PM
The big issue with the alternate corporate servce dress or whatever we're calling it is it doesn't fit logically into this uniform system. They're called coporate-STYLE uniforms & AF-STYLE uniforms for a reason. The corporates should look like business attire that ID's a person as a member, NOT uniforms.
The problem with that is the AF style uniform
IS as business suit with epaulets. The proper description would be a three button, mid-gore jacket. Add with epaulets for officers. You can't get any closer to a business suit than that.
That's the AF's call & they were going for a professional business look to tie in with their TQM & best practices for business approach to warfighting. It's still vry obviously a uniform.
The CAP corporate-style uniform in all our history up to 10 years ago been civilian attire w/ a nametag on it. No badges or epaulet slides. None of that. The first break came with the smurf suit coveralls that had cloth badges but couldn't be mistaken for a uniform from space (from which I do believe you could see it). Then we put grade slides & badges on the aviator & ditched the black blazer type nametag. All this has occured since AF control has been lifted off CAP. During that same time we've gone from metal grade & blue CAP grade slides (which we'd all like to get back to) to maroon & now to gray. More recently the country came out of 9/11 w/ HLS missions to spare, but rather than empower CAP, as was suggested, we spent billions to create things like CERT & Homeland Security Air Wings, and purchase light aircraft fleets for the Army & AF. What does that tell you about CAP since we've been moved out of the AF chain of command? What does it tell you about what we should do to fix this?
Precisely DNALL. As we stated very clearly on Portal the key move is to get back closer to USAF. Fix the marriage. We have a professionalism issue that needs to be addressed and corrected. Unforntuatley there have been too many YAHOO's out there playing USAF that have really pissed them off.
Many of you folks out there have not been in CAP long enough to see h ow things were v/s how they are today. We all lived through the problems that damaged the relationship and suffered the wrath of USAF.
The relationship HAS to be fixed. Having all these types of uniforms is not the answer. The biggest thing that USAF wants, and they have made it very clear, is for CAP to enforce its own regulations and hold its people accountable. USAF does, so why can't we?
I would switch to digitals. We are suposed to follow the air force and the Air Force has had digitals for over a year.
What would I do?
USAF Style:
Flight suits: no change...including the Majcom patch (stays as is)
Woodland BDUs: Change name tape to read "USAF AUX". Mandatory removal of Wing arm patch (currently optional wear). Remove American Flag arm patch - we're not affiliated with the Army. Eventually move to new digital USAF style ACU (several years down the road).
Blues: no change...matching blue epaulets would be nice but gray is fine.
USAF style should never lag more than a year or two behind current style.
Corporate:
Drop it!
Seriously, why do we need a corporate uniform? Answer: Simply put, it's because we have far too many very overweight, out-of-shape members (I know, round is a shape but anyway...). The corporate uniform is a crutch. This is a problem in our organization whether anyone wants to admit it or not. Adhere to the weight standards or go on hiatus until the issue is corrected.
Unfortunately, that is not likely to happen so...
TPU: Drop it. It's horrible for more reasons than I could list here. It never should've gotten off the ground. Go back to blazer, tie, and gray slacks. However, wear of this uniform should only be if a member doesn't meet weight guidelines. If you can't meet the standard, then you should look nothing remotely like it. The coat tie is a decent professional, corporate look.
Polo shirt: Drop it. You want to wear a polo shirt? Buy one from Vanguard and wear it on the golf course. It is not a professional look.
BDU: Same changes as USAF style.
Flight suits: Same changes (no change) as USAF style.
Quote from: connelly on November 10, 2006, 02:05:08 AM
I would switch to digitals. We are suposed to follow the air force and the Air Force has had digitals for over a year.
Strange.....except for the test/demo groups....I have not seen any of the ABUs around my base. Last I heard....they should be ready for issue in January, and then only in limited numbers. I expect by summer or fall next year they will be available for general purchase.
And this is a prime example why I want to switch to BBDU's...if we slavishly follow the USAF on this we will have to change our uniforms every 15 years or so. With every service dumping the BDU, they are going to get scarce and/or expensive soon. Now is the time to transition to a uniform that will be our own and still be professional.
Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 03:16:32 AM
Corporate:
Drop it!
Seriously, why do we need a corporate uniform? Answer: Simply put, it's because we have far too many very overweight, out-of-shape members (I know, round is a shape but anyway...). The corporate uniform is a crutch. This is a problem in our organization whether anyone wants to admit it or not. Adhere to the weight standards or go on hiatus until the issue is corrected.
You can't fly missions with out pilots. You can't run squadrons without people. The Air Force can say shape up or ship out because they are being paid to be within standards. You can't do that to a volunteer organisation.
Quote from: connelly on November 10, 2006, 02:05:08 AM
...the Air Force has had digitals for over a year.
No. There was some wear testing on the original design a year+ ago. That was scrapped for a new design which will go into production in the next couple months.
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123017545
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:22:01 AM
You can't fly missions with out pilots.
And you can't fly if you can't fit in the airplane. As a practical matter, you also limit the useful load, especially on a 172, to the point that you may lose a scanner. That negatively impacts the mission.
But we also have more missions than just flying. We have the cadet program - officers have an obligation to lead by example.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:22:01 AMYou can't run squadrons without people. The Air Force can say shape up or ship out because they are being paid to be within standards. You can't do that to a volunteer organisation.
Why not? Have you taken the AFIADL 13 course yet? What does it say about an officer's responsibilities when it comes to health and fitness? We are a volunteer organization. That doesn't mean we don't have standards.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:19:02 AM
And this is a prime example why I want to switch to BBDU's...if we slavishly follow the USAF on this we will have to change our uniforms every 15 years or so. With every service dumping the BDU, they are going to get scarce and/or expensive soon. Now is the time to transition to a uniform that will be our own and still be professional.
There is not "our own" !!! We're either part of the AF family or we're not. From before Napoleon was born, before Rome was first inhabited, uniforms have always & still very much are intentionally & thoughtfully designed as major psychological symbols of relationships. Relationships between individuals, branches, orgs, whatever, and are a decent meassure of the strength or weakness of those relationships. If the AF changes to kilts, we'll follow suit a couple years later (and hope they come to tehir senses in the meantime). If your lookng for the other side of the practical coin you're trying to state, within a few years after the ABUs are standard they'll be avail from surplus & for cheap purchase, just like BDUs were when they were standard.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:22:01 AM
You can't fly missions with out pilots. You can't run squadrons without people. The Air Force can say shape up or ship out because they are being paid to be within standards. You can't do that to a volunteer organisation.
You don't think there's enough private citizens out there able to join & get qual'd to be mission pilots & GTLs that DO meet the ht/wt/grooming requirements? There's a saying, "You can't reach second with your foot stuck on first." Do I really think we need to cut all these people? No, not really, but they should be in professional appeaing business attire that in no way resembles any kind of uniform - ie back to the aviator combo w/ the blazer nametag & no slides/badges. TPU obviously falls to that one also.
When you're flying, the weather & terrain don't care if you're getting a paycheck or not, and niether do I. We need to step up & meet a reasonable facsimile of AF standards for our grade or we need to find something else to do with our time - that by the way necessitates opening up lower grades on the enlisted or warrant side, which I think is entirely appropriate.
A.Member: I sympathize with your positions. I'd like to see most of that as well. However, some are unrealistic. For one, we're not actually named the AF Aux, we are named CAP & tasked to act as auxiliary to the AF. Congress would have to pass something authorizing us to do business as (dba) USAF Aux & whatever varrious forms of that, and that would ONLY happen if AF takes control & we're restored to their chan of command in one form or another, which is distinctly possible.
ABUs (digitals): will be fully fielded to the AF by 2009, CAP will pick them up within two years of that at the point there are surplusses avail & BDUs are not in sufficiant quantity. That's all there is to it.
Quote from: DNall on November 10, 2006, 04:11:41 AM
A.Member: I sympathize with your positions. I'd like to see most of that as well. However, some are unrealistic. For one, we're not actually named the AF Aux, we are named CAP & tasked to act as auxiliary to the AF. Congress would have to pass something authorizing us to do business as (dba) USAF Aux & whatever varrious forms of that, and that would ONLY happen if AF takes control & we're restored to their chan of command in one form or another, which is distinctly possible.
I understand that we are only sometimes the USAF Aux. but that is another wishlist thread! ;) We should always be the USAF Aux. and I'd like to see Congress change that. Of course, I'd like to see Congress change a lot of other things too, like the amount the government takes from each of my paychecks, but I'll just have to add that to the list. :)
I'm content with nametapes either way - of my changes, that is one that I'd be the most willing to compromise on. Although I think one could draw some parallels between the NG and CAP, and the NG always wears a USAF nametape, even when operating in Title 32 status. Given that, maybe a USAF AUX nametape isn't so absurd?
Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 03:54:15 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:22:01 AM
You can't fly missions with out pilots.
And you can't fly if you can't fit in the airplane. As a practical matter, you also limit the useful load, especially on a 172, to the point that you may lose a scanner. That negatively impacts the mission.
But we also have more missions than just flying. We have the cadet program - officers have an obligation to lead by example.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:22:01 AMYou can't run squadrons without people. The Air Force can say shape up or ship out because they are being paid to be within standards. You can't do that to a volunteer organization.
Why not? Have you taken the AFIADL 13 course yet? What does it say about an officer's responsibilities when it comes to health and fitness? We are a volunteer organization. That doesn't mean we don't have standards.
Pilots don't grow on trees. Pilots with time and money to devote to a volunteer organization are even rarer. If you got a great CFI with 1000+ hours willing to be your O-flight pilots....but has hair to his shoulder and a gotee....do you say...sorry but you'll just look silly in uniform....or do you sign him up, slap a blue flight suit on him and get your cadets into the air?
I have not taken the AFIADL 13 course yet...what does it say about health and fitness?
We do have standards.....but do we have standards just for the hell of them or do we have standards for a purpose? The USAF does not want our larger and hairier Officers to reflect badly on them....so we put them in corporates so everyone is happy. We get the time, energy, skills, money and fellowship of some very great people, the Air Force now only has to worry about the fat slobs on active duty, guard and reserves. The only bad side is that we now have to deal with the "multi"form phenomenon.
I know for a fact...that if you required that everyone in CAP to fall into USAF fitness standards that two squadrons here in Las Vegas will fold due to no leadership.
Granted....weight does become an issue while flying....so maybe (just maybe) I would entertain weight limits on air crew, but not on the other 85% (this is just an out of my butt statistic don't flame me) of the membership.
So....here we are....do we stand up hard weight standards so everyone can be USAF and accept that we WILL have squadrons close and run the risk of failing at our three missions....or do we accept the fact that we need to have corporate uniforms (just not 18 different versions ;D) and keep these good people, man our squadrons and accomplish our mission.
YMMV
Quote from: DNall on November 10, 2006, 04:11:41 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:19:02 AM
And this is a prime example why I want to switch to BBDU's...if we slavishly follow the USAF on this we will have to change our uniforms every 15 years or so. With every service dumping the BDU, they are going to get scarce and/or expensive soon. Now is the time to transition to a uniform that will be our own and still be professional.
There is not "our own" !!! We're either part of the AF family or we're not. From before Napoleon was born, before Rome was first inhabited, uniforms have always & still very much are intentionally & thoughtfully designed as major psychological symbols of relationships. Relationships between individuals, branches, orgs, whatever, and are a decent meassure of the strength or weakness of those relationships. If the AF changes to kilts, we'll follow suit a couple years later (and hope they come to tehir senses in the meantime). If your lookng for the other side of the practical coin you're trying to state, within a few years after the ABUs are standard they'll be avail from surplus & for cheap purchase, just like BDUs were when they were standard.
Oh I understand what you mean....I disagree with some of your reasoning and some of your assumptions.
First....we are and will remain a member of the Air Force, whether we wear the USAF uniform or not. I understand you fear that the "corporate" side of CAP is trying to tear us away from the USAF....I don't really see that, but that is not the point. Relationships are built on mutual missions. I have been in the USAF for 20+ years....and we have a large family, that includes AD, NG, AFR, DOD Civilians, Contractors, and other people who do not wear any uniforms.
I would really like to see the AF back off their restrictions for the USAF uniform. I understand where they are coming from and I do think that being in a USAF uniform would make us more of a family member.
However.....I see the multitude of uniforms at a mission base and I think of the relationship we have with all of our partners. What do they think of us? Nine different CAP members at a mission base and they can all be withing standards but each wearing a different uniform....not good IMHO.
So....what can we do? The USAF will not back off its position so to solve the problem of the multi-forms we eliminate those uniforms that can't be worn by everyone.
That is me....a problem solver. What are our liabilities if we go this way?
1. We could loose those people who joint so they can play Air Force.
2. We could create a mind sit where we are not so closely related to the Air Force.
3. We could give the USAF the impression we don't want to be part of them.
What are our possible benefits?
1. We present a more professional image to the outside world (including our USAF parent service).
2. We reduce the clothing closets by 90%
3. We can maintain the standards easier because there are less uniform combinations to remember.
So...the only question is.....do the benefits out weigh the liabilities?
Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 03:16:32 AM
What would I do?
Corporate:
Drop it!
Seriously, why do we need a corporate uniform? Answer: Simply put, it's because we have far too many very overweight, out-of-shape members (I know, round is a shape but anyway...). The corporate uniform is a crutch. This is a problem in our organization whether anyone wants to admit it or not. Adhere to the weight standards or go on hiatus until the issue is corrected.
[various parts redacted]
Right! Do that and CAP will lose many skilled, talented, and experienced members, including myself. But I'm not overweight. I still meet AD AF weight standards. I have facial hair.
To tar us all with the same brush is unfair at best, and implementation of your idea would reduce SM numbers by at least 33%.
Find a better way to improve CAP than driving out a significant portion of our operating forces.
Quote from: DNall on November 10, 2006, 04:11:41 AM
You don't think there's enough private citizens out there able to join & get qual'd to be mission pilots & GTLs that DO meet the ht/wt/grooming requirements?
I know I haven't been a member very long, but it seems to me that WOULD be the problem. If there were plenty of members available, the standards never would have been relaxed for membership.
Why is it that so many people don't get it that when we talk about CAP needing to mend the relationship with USAF and move closer that creating NON-USAF uniforms and/or dropping the USAF ones is the complete opposite? The farther that CAP moves away from USAF, the closer it is to death. People, you need to really examine the relationship and the history of the problems. If you dont wanna be part of an organization that is closely associated with USAF, then go join one of the other volunteer groups out there. CAP is purposely closely associated with USAF. Its supposed to be and was founded to be. It SHOULD be.
Uniforms are a key to this. As stated numerous times, we should have one each of the USAF uniforms and one each of the Corporate ones. Period, end of story. We ARE a military organization first. Like it or not. Not a social club. We have a job to do and it should be done with the same pride and professionalism as USAF does with their missions. Perception and image are a major part of this. Having the 2 styles of uniforms is INCLUSIVE and not EXCLUSIVE. Everyone should be afforded the opportunity to participate and have a uniform that is distinct, identifiable, and professional. We dont need golf shirts, khakis, white shirts, etc.... 2 styles including one for each function. Thats all.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AM
Pilots don't grow on trees. Pilots with time and money to devote to a volunteer organization are even rarer. If you got a great CFI with 1000+ hours willing to be your O-flight pilots....but has hair to his shoulder and a gotee....do you say...sorry but you'll just look silly in uniform....or do you sign him up, slap a blue flight suit on him and get your cadets into the air?
Holding a CFI rating is not a requirement to perform o-flights. Nonetheless, our squadron, for example, isn't just looking for just any CFI (or pilot) to join. We've tried that and it doesn't work. We want the right person - not someone looking for a flying club. That said, I'd tell them that we'd love to have them and believe there experience would be an asset but that there are certain expectations around the image we are trying to present. Does having facial hair or locks down to your knees mean that a person is not capable? Of course not. But that's also not the image the organization wants to project. A person should be willing to put service before self. We're not a flying club.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AMI have not taken the AFIADL 13 course yet...what does it say about health and fitness?
You're a Capt. but haven't reviewed the professional development course that is required to make Capt.? You may want to consider doing so.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AMWe do have standards.....but do we have standards just for the hell of them or do we have standards for a purpose?
I think you answered your own question. They definitely exist for a purpose.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AM
I know for a fact...that if you required that everyone in CAP to fall into USAF fitness standards that two squadrons here in Las Vegas will fold due to no leadership.
And?... I guess I'm from the faction of quality vs. quantity. If we want to be treated as a professional organization, then we should look and act like one - uniform.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AMGranted....weight does become an issue while flying....so maybe (just maybe) I would entertain weight limits on air crew, but not on the other 85% (this is just an out of my butt statistic don't flame me) of the membership.
As indicated earlier, it's more than that. It's also serving as an example for our cadets.
Side note: I've noticed that a number of particpants on this site have these little figures in their signatures. These figures really do look like many of our members - round. Kind of ironic...or maybe not? :-\ ;)
So, out of curiosity, how many people are willing to just put up their suggestions on what they would do with the uniforms?
That was the idea. It wasn't to come in here and slam someone elses opinion. Some folks may have some bad ideas, but they're entitled to them.
Just write down your suggestion and put it in the box, please.
If anyone would like, I'll happily start a thread on "Blues vs. Corporates" so this thread can get back on track.
Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 02:55:05 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AM
Pilots don't grow on trees. Pilots with time and money to devote to a volunteer organization are even rarer. If you got a great CFI with 1000+ hours willing to be your O-flight pilots....but has hair to his shoulder and a gotee....do you say...sorry but you'll just look silly in uniform....or do you sign him up, slap a blue flight suit on him and get your cadets into the air?
Holding a CFI rating is not a requirement to perform o-flights. Nonetheless, our squadron, for example, isn't just looking for just any CFI (or pilot) to join. We've tried that and it doesn't work. We want the right person - not someone looking for a flying club. That said, I'd tell them that we'd love to have them and believe there experience would be an asset but that there are certain expectations around the image we are trying to present. Does having facial hair or locks down to your knees mean that a person is not capable? Of course not. But that's also not the image the organization wants to project. A person should be willing to put service before self. We're not a flying club.
My point being....if the option is long haired CFI or nothing....do you go with nothing? That is not fulfilling your CP mission. This has nothing to do with being a flying club and they are putting service before self....this is an individual who wants to work, wants to do some part for the organisation...but you would turn them out because of weight and grooming issues.
The USAF can demand those standards be met because they are paying for them. CAP can't afford to.
Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 02:55:05 PM
You're a Capt. but haven't reviewed the professional development course that is required to make Capt.? You may want to consider doing so.
Ah...asumptions....asumptions.....I am also a MSgt in the USAF and have the NCO Academy and SNCO Academy credited to me....ergo Course 13 is not required.
I also have not been to SLS too.....are you going to make an assumption about that too? There are several ways to make Capt with out going up the standard line.
Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 02:55:05 PMAnd?... I guess I'm from the faction of quality vs. quantity. If we want to be treated as a professional organization, then we should look and act like one - uniform.
Okay...so be it. What you are forgetting is your mission is NOT to look professional. Your mission is to complete your ES, AE and CP requirements. You can't do that with out people. And I don't know where we would find them if we required USAF weight and grooming standards.
And while we are raising CAP standards to make ourselves more professional....why not require college degrees to be an officer too? How many people will we loose then?
I understand your point of view...and I would really wish we lived in a world where we could do that....but lets face it. Our target audience for membership are generally not withing USAF standards. We simply could not survive cutting off 30 percent of membership and maybe another 10 percent just because they see it as unfair.
Patrick, I agree with you. Thus my comments on the 2 styles of uniforms. One for those who meet the USAF standards for wearing the USAF uniform and one for those members who do not. This accomplishes the INCLUSION mission and eliminates the EXCLUSION. It also works to satisify USAF that their standads are being met for wear of the USAF uniform. But we dont need 15 different styles of corp uniforms. Each USAF uniform should have one corporate counterpart.
But again, we need to enforce our own regulations. This is one of USAF's biggest gripes that we do not do this.
Quote from: LtCol White on November 10, 2006, 05:33:02 PM
But again, we need to enforce our own regulations. This is one of USAF's biggest gripes that we do not do this.
Ding ding ding... if I had a choice... I would suggest a regulation banning uniform design discussions until we can get our poop in a group and wear what have correctly.
Back to the topic:
While not necessarily a uniform item, I'd recommend an orange hard hat for ES missions instead of the white helmet liner. The major reason is a standard hard hat meets ANSI standards and OSHA requirements. The helmet liner does not. Orange is for visibility and relatively easy ID of CAP members. Usually, the only folks wearing orange hard hats are street dept workers and they're usually around their equipment.
Either orange or white would make sense on the helmets. You're right. The helmet liners were not designed for safety and provide no protection from falling objects.
lordmonar:
Out of respect for Hawk200's topic, I've started a new thread and responded to your comments here:
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=1019.new#new
Quote from: SarDragon on November 10, 2006, 08:29:24 AM
Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 03:16:32 AM
What would I do?
Corporate:
Drop it!
Seriously, why do we need a corporate uniform? Answer: Simply put, it's because we have far too many very overweight, out-of-shape members (I know, round is a shape but anyway...). The corporate uniform is a crutch. This is a problem in our organization whether anyone wants to admit it or not. Adhere to the weight standards or go on hiatus until the issue is corrected.
[various parts redacted]
Right! Do that and CAP will lose many skilled, talented, and experienced members, including myself. But I'm not overweight. I still meet AD AF weight standards. I have facial hair.
To tar us all with the same brush is unfair at best, and implementation of your idea would reduce SM numbers by at least 33%.
Find a better way to improve CAP than driving out a significant portion of our operating forces.
Here we go again. Actually, here we don't. I don't know how Dave feels about the this, but I know that I've spewed forth my opinion on it many times-here and elsewhere. I'm not even going to bother trying to debate this anymore.
Sorry, this buzz-cutted, overweight senior has had way too many success stories over the years to believe that I can't make a contribution. If I could have been a lean-mean fightin' machine, I woulda signed on the line. I couldn't, so I continue to serve in the best way I can.
I just had a bit of an epiphany. I don;t think it's having Corporate uniforms that drive us further from the USAF. It's continually trying to make Corporate uniforms LOOK like the USAF uniform that drives a wedge between us. They say no metal rank on the blues uniform, so what do we do, we poke them in the eye be designing a blue Corporate uniform that look a lot like a USAF uniform. Maybe it's double breasted, but do you think Grandma knows the difference? Or we approve a white shirt and blue pants uniform WITH blue name tag AND blue epaulets AND metal rank that looks REALLY like the USAF.
What I'd suggest is for folks that can't wear a USAF style uniform due to weight & grooming standards be self-disciplined enough to NOT wear them anyway. If you want to really look like you're in the military, diet, exercise, etc., etc.
On the original topic, does anyone have anything else new to add? Or should I start working on the compiled list?
Keep in mind, I'm going to put anything I consider a serious suggestion in the list, whether I like it or not. (And no, the 'shakos' aren't going to be added, I can't honestly believe that was serious.)
I'll try to put the most popular ones first (ones which received seconds or suggestions of the same thing).
- Fix CAPM 39-1 and CAPR 39-3.
- Get rid of the Group CC badge, instead have the one badge and mirror USAF standards for wear. Add cloth version for BDU/Field Uniform
- C/AB insignia - Shield as on existing cadet chevrons with no stripes, and cadet grade on both collars of service uniforms.
- Get patches off the BDU/Field Uniform. Keep it simple, tapes, grade and cloth badges and wings only.
- Cloth Model Rocketry badge that looks like the metal badge for the left pocket of the BDU/Field Uniform.
- Awards and Decs that are similar to those of the USAF such as Achievement and Commendation Medals, and generally clean up/out all the bling.
- Combine the Corporate Uniform (TPU) and CAP Distinctive Uniforms, taking the good from each and throwing out the bad.
- ABUs eventually.
- Get realistic about minimum basic uniforms and required clothing bag items for seniors/cadets.
- Phase out/change plan that is less of a burden on members. New stuff must meet standards, older stuff has longer wear out dates.
I'm guessing that noone else has any ideas. I've got most of the list together, and I will post in a new thread tomorrow if anyone is interested.
Let me think what I got...
1) Blank epaulet slides (gray w/ CAP, no grade) for SM w/o grade - now called Officer Candidate. Sewn on cutouts or other Officer Candidate device for BDU/BBDU.
2) C/ enlisted on BDUs back to grade on one side for logistics & cost reasons, C/Officers keep grade on both sides of utils. Allow C/Officer blue sewn on grade on flight suit, just like adult officers are allowed to do (as soon as I see that policy letter).
3) think about changing gray slides to black (like AFROTC/AFAcad/OTS) at some point in the future - put that out to AF & tell them we'd like them to offer stuff like that when we deserve it. Call it a stepping stone to blue if you like, but frankly they'll never ever offer us blue regardless of the relationship, so this is a good compromise.
4) talked in another thread about pitching AF to write an AFI explaining a simplified proceedure for CAP members on AFAMs to be recommended for AF decorations that are already awardable to civilians, and to consider if an interpretation of our status on AFAM (under military orders) might make us elgible for certain other decorations (humanitarian service for instance).
5) white dark blue tapes (grade/badges too) that match BBDUs for both BBDU & BDU. We have a rare opportunity coming soon where we will be in BDUs & the AF will be in ABUs. We're using ultramarine blue now because that's what the CAP & AF had on OD fatigues before BDUs. When they get mostly changed over, we can do some things much closer to the AF & have a fair expectation of it carrying over to ABUs when we change over also.
6) Ask AF to ask congress to allow us to dba Air Force Auxiliary, so we can put the command patch back & put USAF Aux on BDUs - hey we can dream right.
7) De-authorize the old style service coat for cadets. I know there's a ton of them around, but dear lord those were phased out a long time ago, are we going to wait till the fourth generation of service coat to get rid of them? Set a date & get on with it.
8 ) consider dumping the golf shirt, at least for wear outside the Sq (ie flying or on missions.
9) consider gray BDU or EMT style pants w/ aviator shirt for field work. (I would have prefered that over the BBDU in the first place).
10) require nomex (green or blue) for flying.
11) require UOD to be stated for all activities (including meetings), give a chart in the reg to show what Corporate-style uniforms correspond to what AF-style, and a chart explaining what UOD is appropriate to what situation/time of year. There shouldn't be options, and corporate uniforms should be worn to the same quality standards as AF-style.
12) Agree on:
a) Fix regs!!!!!!! Provide MORE detail than AF regs because we have no local culture to correct problems due to open interpretation. Look at the culturally accepted standard in the AF that exceeds their reg, and explain to members in clear terms as if they have no frame of reference how to mimic that. After stating the requirements, give a set of recommendations that cover things like garters & blousing that are not required methods to attain the desired appearance, but are recommended. Look to our many prior service NCOs for guidance on writing this.
b) CC's badge. mirror AF wear standards (ie for past commanders & on BDUs)
c) drop patches off BDUs (that includes the flag)
d) model rocketry that matches the metal. Actually, it might be worthwhile to combine the extremely similar program that exists in AFJROTC & combine the badges with it.
e) agree on awards bling. clean up the awards process ot make it less political & create a matrix of awards that make sense. Badges too. We get too many for too little (and they look like cartoons). Make the tracks four level - apprentice underneath matches the current tech rating & no badge. Tech then does make you an expert & we're able to take the material from senior/master along w/ new & advanced stuff (including outside sources like FEMA & AFIADL) to remake the Senior/Master ratings. Add a specialty track manager for each track at the Wing level to manage all personnel assigned & training in the field (mentors & curriculum)... basically professionalize the specialty tracks. Consider adding mission aspects to the more boaring tracks (ie admin/personnel relates to MSA at the bottom & Admin Section Chief at the top - basically follow the model already established in the comm track). Got some badge redesigns in the works to be sent up - rentention, professional standard, mutual respect w/ AF kinda thing.
Gees, that's all I can think of for now. Some of it crosses beyond just uniforms to take in the meaning of an item, but that's key also.
Drop all corporate uniforms and have all members wear AF-style uniforms regardless of their weight. The CG Aux only wears CG-style uniforms and has no specific weight requirements (a general requirement to present a military appearance is generally ignored). So, an occassional Auxie is very obese and doesn't look good in the uniform -- the CG Aux has still ended up with a much closer relationship with the CG than CAP ever has had with the AF.
Overall, I think CAP (and the AF's image) is hurt much worse by having 20 different uniforms on display at every CAP event than it would be by having everyone in the same uniform even if it included overweight people.
I agree with DNall on his points 8, 11, and 12. Although I own one, the golf shirt never seemed to be appropriate to what we do as an organization. IMHO, it contributes to the "flying club" stigma. As for the uniform regs, they are a nightmare for a new member.
Let's see, what else can I come up with?
Remove metal grade insignia from the new corporate uniform (TPU, Corporate Blues, or whatever we're calling it now). While it may look nice, there is no reason (IMHO) that this uniform can't use the grey epaulet slides. At least this way, members wearing either uniform would look like they belong to the same organization.
Phase out the Blazer Combo, along with the White Aviator/Grey Slacks combo. Makes me think "cruise ship."
Quote from: ELThunter on November 11, 2006, 02:29:23 AM
I don;t think it's having Corporate uniforms that drive us further from the USAF. It's continually trying to make Corporate uniforms LOOK like the USAF uniform that drives a wedge between us.
I don't really agree. It's the way we conduct ourselves, not the clothing we wear that determines our relationship. Besides, CAP-USAF has been quoted as saying the Air Force has no objections to the uniform. I would hope that the AF would say something if they disapproved of something we were doing/have done, even if they had no "official" say in the matter.
http://capblog.typepad.com/capblog/2006/04/capusaf_cc_on_u.html
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 06:04:07 PM1) Blank epaulet slides (gray w/ CAP, no grade) for SM w/o grade - now called Officer Candidate. Sewn on cutouts or other Officer Candidate device for BDU/BBDU.
Non-concur on the blank slides for SMs. I like the
airman status of SM w/o grade vs. Officer Candidate. My read of CAPM 39-1 says that SMs w/o grade and SM NCOs should be wearing cloth cutouts on the BDU, while the Field Uniform remains undefined. I could see removing the metal CAP cutouts from the collars of the light blue shirts for SM and SM NCOs though.
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 06:04:07 PM2) C/ enlisted on BDUs back to grade on one side for logistics & cost reasons, C/Officers keep grade on both sides of utils. Allow C/Officer blue sewn on grade on flight suit, just like adult officers are allowed to do (as soon as I see that policy letter).
I like grade on both collars for all grades, and would extend it to the service uniforms. I'd even change the insignia for C/AB (see post above). Non-concur on the cadet officer cloth grade on bags. AFROTC doesn't do it, flight cap insignia is enough. Would like to see a return to requiring "CADET" on the ASNP. which also mirrors AFROTC policy.
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 06:04:07 PM
7) De-authorize the old style service coat for cadets. I know there's a ton of them around, but dear lord those were phased out a long time ago, are we going to wait till the fourth generation of service coat to get rid of them? Set a date & get on with it.
Concur... Sick of seeing ill-fitting old-style service coats worn with CUP/FCU issue 1625s. Service Dress isn't a required uniform either... I see no reason not to require the new style uniforms. I do think cadets should be restricted to the cheaper enlisted version without epaulets though.
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 06:04:07 PM
10) require nomex (green or blue) for flying.
Wing CC can do that already IIRC per CAPM 39-1. Have to deal with those that will challenge the need for Nomex in the type of aircraft CAP files though.
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 06:04:07 PM
11) require UOD to be stated for all activities (including meetings), give a chart in the reg to show what Corporate-style uniforms correspond to what AF-style, and a chart explaining what UOD is appropriate to what situation/time of year. There shouldn't be options, and corporate uniforms should be worn to the same quality standards as AF-style.
There is an equivalency table for the CAP distinctive uniforms in CAPM 39-1 already IIRC.
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 06:04:07 PM
c) drop patches off BDUs (that includes the flag)
That was implied. :)
What is the big deal with the reversed American Flag? So the US Army uses it, so does NASA. I'm proud to wear the flag, in what ever variation is mandated.
Am I worried that someone is going to confuse me with a soldier? I don't think so, "Civil Air Patrol" is plastered across my chest on a contrasting blue field.
Quote from: Phillip on November 19, 2006, 07:05:25 PM
Remove metal grade insignia from the new corporate uniform (TPU, Corporate Blues, or whatever we're calling it now).
Blasphemer. I think that is why TP created the TPU in the first place, which is why I said:
Quote from: ELThunter on November 11, 2006, 02:29:23 AM
I don;t think it's having Corporate uniforms that drive us further from the USAF. It's continually trying to make Corporate uniforms LOOK like the USAF uniform that drives a wedge between us.
[/quote]
After years of trying to get the USAF to let us put metal rank on the service uniforms and them saying no, TP thumbs his nose at them and comes out with the TPU.
Quote from: MIKE on November 19, 2006, 07:59:44 PM
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 06:04:07 PM1) Blank epaulet slides (gray w/ CAP, no grade) for SM w/o grade - now called Officer Candidate. Sewn on cutouts or other Officer Candidate device for BDU/BBDU.
Non-concur on the blank slides for SMs. I like the airman status of SM w/o grade vs. Officer Candidate. My read of CAPM 39-1 says that SMs w/o grade and SM NCOs should be wearing cloth cutouts on the BDU, while the Field Uniform remains undefined. I could see removing the metal CAP cutouts from the collars of the light blue shirts for SM and SM NCOs though.
First...
Quote39-1 Page 32 Note 2: CAP Lapel/Collar Insignia: Senior Member NCOs & Airmen as well as Senior Members without grade wear this device on both sides of the collar. cadet members without grade wear metal devices on both sides of the collar.
It does mean metal device on both sides for SMs w/o grade, exactly like C/AB. Same is true on Blues.
I'm not sure I know what you mean by Airman status. Does a cadet officer out rank a SM w/o grade? Is their adult supervision
legally negated by the 12yo C/2Lt? Any adult clearly must be distinguishable from a C/AB. I realize the circumstances under which this comes up are rare, given our average new SM is 40-50+ & our average new cadet is under 14, but like everything else it needs to be though all the way thru. As I've said before I do now have a 17yo C/AB that looks older than an 18yo SM w/o grade in my Sq. I think you can see how that can be confusing, especially to outsiders (even w/ military experience) on first glance. And how that confusion can in turn lead to legal problems. This one has to happen. You can debate the form, but it must be distinctive.
And personally, I have no problem with calling them officer candidates, cause that's exactly what they are, candidates to become officers after they satisfactorily complete the requirements & their commander endorses their appointment to 2Lt (or FO) and it is approved up the chain. I'd be well into the camp of saying those requirements aren't strong enough, but that doesn't change the status. In fact, I think it encourages the idea that initial officer req's/training should be more substantial.
QuoteQuote2) C/ enlisted on BDUs back to grade on one side for logistics & cost reasons, C/Officers keep grade on both sides of utils. Allow C/Officer blue sewn on grade on flight suit, just like adult officers are allowed to do (as soon as I see that policy letter).
I like grade on both collars for all grades, and would extend it to the service uniforms. I'd even change the insignia for C/AB (see post above). Non-concur on the cadet officer cloth grade on bags. AFROTC doesn't do it, flight cap insignia is enough. Would like to see a return to requiring "CADET" on the ASNP. which also mirrors AFROTC policy.
There are a lot of complaints on this one. It's a nightmare getting all cadets in the right grade & expensive to keep extra stocks on hand. The old way was cheaper & easier, & there's no gain to the current way. Far as C/AB, why do they need a new device? An AB in the AF has no such device. The current cutouts on both sides method is fine. As to the flight suit, it should say CADET, I wasn't aware there was an option on that. As far as grade on, I think they'd prefer that & what does it matter. AFROTC does things their way for a specific reason that doesn't relate to us. I think it's appropriate.
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 06:04:07 PMQuote
10) require nomex (green or blue) for flying.
Wing CC can do that already IIRC per CAPM 39-1. Have to deal with those that will challenge the need for Nomex in the type of aircraft CAP files though.
I was speaking to making it national policy. Let em cry. I don't plan to crash either, but there are planty of examples of members who have & were saved or not by the nomex. The simplest fact is if an in-flight fire occurs you can't pull over & stand out of the way to wait for the fire dept, you have to get down first & that may mean it gets a bit warm. Personally, I'd change the insurance provision to state no coverage exists unless all crew are in correct nomex uniform.
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 06:04:07 PMQuote
11) require UOD to be stated for all activities (including meetings), give a chart in the reg to show what Corporate-style uniforms correspond to what AF-style, and a chart explaining what UOD is appropriate to what situation/time of year. There shouldn't be options, and corporate uniforms should be worn to the same quality standards as AF-style.
There is an equivalency table for the CAP distinctive uniforms in CAPM 39-1 already IIRC.
There may be I don't know. New uniforms have been added since then though & they do make it a bit more confusing. I'm leaning harder on the other point, that it be required for UOD to be stated for everything & members must be in that uniform (via the equiv chart) or not allowed to participate/be covered by insurance.
Patches on BDU/BBDU...
I don't care for the flag being on there cause it's an Army thing. Not just that the Army does it, but they cut across the guard & to what amounts to their auxiliary w/ SDFs. As such, the flag on in that manner is an identifying feature for now of the Army. More than that though is our BDUs look stupid covered in 12 full color patches. It's best kept to a minimum. Beyond that, I'd argue for what's left to be on dark blue, and if they'd let us get away with white on OD when they move to ABUs then I'd do that too.
Oh and one last thing...
Agree we need to dump the grays & blazer combo or the blue corporates. Pick one or the other & stick with it. If necessary you can make a double brested no epaulet blazer w/ nametage & mini-wings lapel pin for the out of grooming crowd.
BIG BIG thing though. You MUST either go to gray epaulets on the blue corporate style OR you MUST embroider "CAP" on the blue AF officer slides. I've already seen the wrong slides put on the blue shirt a few times & that's going to
EXPLODE w/ the AF if it happens in the wrong place at the wrong time, which is just a matter of time. If nothing else gets done, this MUST MUST MUST get done!!!! Plus, it's a good stepping stone to swing that slippery slope the other way & get blue CAP slides back on blues one day, maybe, probably not, but it's good policy anyway.
I think it would be a good idea to put uniform of the day into the regulations. Of course, this can be done at all sorts of levels, but I think there has been an extreme reluctance to "force" people to wear specific uniforms most of the time, at least with senior members. Cadets always are told exactly what to wear.
Having a national regulation will give squadron commanders some "cover".
Quote from: RiverAux on November 19, 2006, 09:44:00 PM
I think it would be a good idea to put uniform of the day into the regulations. Of course, this can be done at all sorts of levels, but I think there has been an extreme reluctance to "force" people to wear specific uniforms most of the time, at least with senior members. Cadets always are told exactly what to wear.
Having a national regulation will give squadron commanders some "cover".
You want NHQ to develop a uniform of the day for the local squadrons? You've got to be kidding me!
Keep in mind, according to CAPM 39-1 (para 1-5), "no member is obligated to equip himself/herself with all or even a major part of the combinations", however: "members will equip themselves with the basic uniform" and "members may obtain and wear the additional uniform items authorized in this publication on an optional basis."
NHQ outlines the general CAP programs. While regions and wings refine that a bit, it's up to the local squadron to implement the program. The local commanders should set the uniform of the day as required based on their priorities. Come on...you shouldn't need NHQ to run your program for you... ::)
Not develop one, but standardize what uniforms are worn for what occassions.
Be honest, how often do you attend any CAP event where members only wear 2 uniform types of similar formaility (i.e, the AF-style and the corporate equivalent)? I bet the average number of uniform types I see at CAP events, including squadron meetings and wing commanders calls, falls between 3-6.
The fact that in general there is no UOD proves that the current system, leaving it entirely up to local commanders, is not working.
Quote from: RiverAux on November 19, 2006, 10:54:04 PM
Not develop one, but standardize what uniforms are worn for what occassions.
Again, that should be up to the local commanders. It's a "command responsibility" to set and enforce the standards. It's not an issue that should even be on NHQ's radar. I suggest the fix is at the squadron level instead of dumping a local problem on higher headquarters.
Around here I have seen a trend toward established UoD for some wing and region functions. Usually short sleeved shirt/blouse service uniform or eqivelent w/o tie/tab... Others have been less specific but said what not to wear... like no service dress, BDUs, Field Uniforms, bags or golf shirts. But I also see plenty of people who pay little attention to it and wear what they like.
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 09:37:55 PM
Quote from: MIKE on November 19, 2006, 07:59:44 PM
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 06:04:07 PM1) Blank epaulet slides (gray w/ CAP, no grade) for SM w/o grade - now called Officer Candidate. Sewn on cutouts or other Officer Candidate device for BDU/BBDU.
Non-concur on the blank slides for SMs. I like the airman status of SM w/o grade vs. Officer Candidate. My read of CAPM 39-1 says that SMs w/o grade and SM NCOs should be wearing cloth cutouts on the BDU, while the Field Uniform remains undefined. I could see removing the metal CAP cutouts from the collars of the light blue shirts for SM and SM NCOs though.
First...
Quote39-1 Page 32 Note 2: CAP Lapel/Collar Insignia: Senior Member NCOs & Airmen as well as Senior Members without grade wear this device on both sides of the collar. cadet members without grade wear metal devices on both sides of the collar.
It does mean metal device on both sides for SMs w/o grade, exactly like C/AB. Same is true on Blues.
You need to read the entire page. Also note the distinction between the seniors and cadet members without grade (C/AB).
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2006, 09:37:55 PM
I'm not sure I know what you mean by Airman status.
Quote from: CAPM 39-11-3. Definition of Terms:
a. Officer: As used in this publication, includes senior member grades flight officer through major
general and cadet grades second lieutenant through colonel.
b. Airman: Unless otherwise specified, includes all other uniformed members both senior and
cadet.
An SM w/o grade is basically CAP's Airman Basic and is evident in the USAF-style uniform when worn properly.
Hmmmmm.......... let's see what would I change about CAP uniforms?
1. Get rid of Ultramarine everything (it looks really goofy), and switch to Navy blue w/white or the colors used by the military and ROTC/JROTC. If they have them why can't we?
2. No BBDU's I'm not sure who came up with those but they really do look weird.
3. Blues, blues and only blues. No aviator, corperate, or polo uniforms.
4. Insignia for C/B, the sheild in the enlisted insignia perhaps?
5. For C/Officers, insignia should be one gold dot for 2ndLt, one silver for 1st, two silver for Capt, one gold diamond for Maj, one silver for LtCol, and two silver for Col.
6. Blue berets optional as Cadet headgear, worn on both uniforms. A CAP shield patch is worn on beret regardless of grade. NBB participants wear NBB patch on BDU's and a St. Albans Cross badge, similar to ES badges, on the right pocket of blues.
7. Change tape from Civil Air Patrol to USAF AUX on BDU's.
8. Get rid of all flashy colors from BDU wing/squadron/activity patches. and use the colors the military uses on theirs.
Quote from: A1Steaksauce on November 20, 2006, 01:23:23 AM
Hmmmmm.......... let's see what would I change about CAP uniforms?
1. Get rid of Ultramarine everything (it looks really goofy), and switch to Navy blue w/white or the colors used by the military and ROTC/JROTC. If they have them why can't we?
A darker blue would be great. The ultramarine color just doesn't look that great.
Quote from: A1Steaksauce on November 20, 2006, 01:23:23 AM
2. No BBDU's I'm not sure who came up with those but they really do look weird.
We need a corporate equivalent for the BDUs. They have to say to keep our dual corporate and USAF-style uniform structure
Quote from: A1Steaksauce on November 20, 2006, 01:23:23 AM
3. Blues, blues and only blues. No aviator, corperate, or polo uniforms.
Again. We need the corporate uniforms, and we need the members who wear them. I may agree with you, however, on the usefulness of the polo.
Quote from: A1Steaksauce on November 20, 2006, 01:23:23 AM
4. Insignia for C/B, the sheild in the enlisted insignia perhaps?
They already have the CAP cutout insignia. Why change what works just fine, for the sake of change, when we have plenty of other problems that need addressing first?
Quote from: A1Steaksauce on November 20, 2006, 01:23:23 AM
5. For C/Officers, insignia should be one gold dot for 2ndLt, one silver for 1st, two silver for Capt, one gold diamond for Maj, one silver for LtCol, and two silver for Col.
Another solution in search of a problem? Again, the system we have now works beautifully fine, is steeped in tradition, and there's no solid reason to consider changing the Cadet Officer insignia.
Quote from: A1Steaksauce on November 20, 2006, 01:23:23 AM
6. Blue berets optional as Cadet headgear, worn on both uniforms. A CAP shield patch is worn on beret regardless of grade. NBB participants wear NBB patch on BDU's and a St. Albans Cross badge, similar to ES badges, on the right pocket of blues.
NBB grads have recently been authorized to wear their earned berets under certain circumstances. Already done.
As for a badge for the blues, why? Badges show earned qualifications, not activity attendance. Nobody gets a blues badge for going to IACE or COS... but you
do get something else you can wear on your blues: the NCSA ribbon.
CAP likes the rule of no double-dipping for one activity/accomplishment anyways -- you go to an activity and you get one doo-dad. The NCSA ribbon covers it for NBB on your blues, and theres still the patch for BDUs.
Quote from: A1Steaksauce on November 20, 2006, 01:23:23 AM
7. Change tape from Civil Air Patrol to USAF AUX on BDU's.
Not going to happen, when they're taking USAF AUX
off of our aircraft, off of our MAJCOM patch, and other places. Face it, we're
Civil Air Patrol all the time (any time we're wearing our uniforms), and we're only sometimes the USAF Aux. So that won't happen
Quote from: A1Steaksauce on November 20, 2006, 01:23:23 AM
8. Get rid of all flashy colors from BDU wing/squadron/activity patches. and use the colors the military uses on theirs.
Not required to wear your unit patch, and nobody requires units to develop patches with bright colors in them. Your unit can design a patch in olive green and black if they want, and if they don't design one you like, you don't have to wear it. Same with wing and activity patches -- they're optional. Don't like the way they look on your uniform? Don't wear 'em. :)
Quote from: RiverAux on November 19, 2006, 06:26:36 PM
Drop all corporate uniforms and have all members wear AF-style uniforms regardless of their weight. The CG Aux only wears CG-style uniforms and has no specific weight requirements (a general requirement to present a military appearance is generally ignored). So, an occassional Auxie is very obese and doesn't look good in the uniform -- the CG Aux has still ended up with a much closer relationship with the CG than CAP ever has had with the AF.
Overall, I think CAP (and the AF's image) is hurt much worse by having 20 different uniforms on display at every CAP event than it would be by having everyone in the same uniform even if it included overweight people.
That covers the heavy folks. What about those of us with facial hair?
Quote from: SarDragon on November 20, 2006, 05:55:14 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on November 19, 2006, 06:26:36 PM
Drop all corporate uniforms and have all members wear AF-style uniforms regardless of their weight. The CG Aux only wears CG-style uniforms and has no specific weight requirements (a general requirement to present a military appearance is generally ignored). So, an occassional Auxie is very obese and doesn't look good in the uniform -- the CG Aux has still ended up with a much closer relationship with the CG than CAP ever has had with the AF.
Overall, I think CAP (and the AF's image) is hurt much worse by having 20 different uniforms on display at every CAP event than it would be by having everyone in the same uniform even if it included overweight people.
That covers the heavy folks. What about those of us with facial hair?
I say we dye you orange. Hey, it's just an idea. ;)
Well, that is a bit tougher. The CG Aux allows beards as long as they are "well groomed and neatly trimmed" and has some specifics laying this out.
But the CG has a more recent history of allowing facial hair so an argument can be made for it being traditional. The Air Force, so far as I know has never allowed beards so allowing them for CAP members in AF-style uniforms would actually be a break.
While looking in my CG Aux regs I was reminded that the CG has specific regulations about what uniforms can be worn in various situations. One interesting thing is that boatcrews and aircrews are supposed to all wear the same uniform and it is up to the Coxswain or Aircraft Commander to decide which of the available uniforms will be worn on that mission.
Quote from: RiverAux on November 19, 2006, 06:26:36 PM
Drop all corporate uniforms and have all members wear AF-style uniforms regardless of their weight. The CG Aux only wears CG-style uniforms and has no specific weight requirements (a general requirement to present a military appearance is generally ignored). So, an occassional Auxie is very obese and doesn't look good in the uniform -- the CG Aux has still ended up with a much closer relationship with the CG than CAP ever has had with the AF.
I'm certainly not an expert on the CG Aux. but it's my understanding that they also have an "alternate" uniform. Their manual refers to a "Blue Blazer outfit". From Section E. Auxiliary Unique Items, page 10-19 of their uniform manual (http://www.cgaux.info/g_ocx/publications/comdtinst/M16790.1F.pdf):
QuoteE.2. Blue Blazer Outfit:
The Blue Blazer may be single-breasted, two- or three-button, with civilian or
Auxiliary buttons, and with pockets (any kind). The Blue Blazer outfit is highly
recommended to be worn when an Auxiliarist in uniform does not present an
appearance in keeping with organizational standards of wear, or if the UDC does not
stock or have properly fitting sizes. (see Section C of this chapter) The Auxiliary
patch is sewn on the left breast pocket. Material is dark blue flannel, tropical
worsted, or similar commercial blend. The official blazer patch is round and
contains the Auxiliary logo with stars around it. The Auxiliary Blue Blazer outfit
may be substituted for all Auxiliary uniforms, except the Undress Blue Summer,
Working Blue, and OD uniforms. The Auxiliary Blue Blazer outfit may be
authorized by unit Commanding Officers for wear in office spaces while on duty at
Coast Guard units. Auxiliary Blue Blazer outfits are authorized as follows:
E.2.a. Women's Blue Blazer Outfit:
The Blue Blazer may be worn with white or gray dress slacks, white or gray skirts,
pleated or straight. Skirt and slacks are to be made of tropical worsted or polyester
blend. Dress slacks are full cut, straight hanging, and without cuffs. Neutral nylon
hose and plain unadorned black shoes with 1- to 2⅝-inch high heels complete the
outfit. Black socks may be worn with slacks.
The blouse is white, buttoned front, of simple design, without ruffles or
ornamentation. The blue tab tie is worn for normal occasions and the black tab tie
for formal occasions.
E.2.b. Men's Blue Blazer Outfit:
The Blue Blazer may be worn with white or gray dress trousers. They are to be
made of tropical worsted or polyester blend. The trousers are full cut, straight
hanging and without cuffs. Black socks and black dress shoes complete the outfit.
A white dress shirt and a dark blue necktie are worn for normal occasions, and black
bow tie for formal occasions.
Quote from: shorning on November 19, 2006, 11:31:19 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on November 19, 2006, 10:54:04 PM
Not develop one, but standardize what uniforms are worn for what occassions.
Again, that should be up to the local commanders. It's a "command responsibility" to set and enforce the standards. It's not an issue that should even be on NHQ's radar.
Agreed.
Never actually seen that one worn.....But, note that they haven't come up with alternate uniforms for field work comparable to the ODU.
Quote from: shorning on November 19, 2006, 10:26:02 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on November 19, 2006, 09:44:00 PM
I think it would be a good idea to put uniform of the day into the regulations. Of course, this can be done at all sorts of levels, but I think there has been an extreme reluctance to "force" people to wear specific uniforms most of the time, at least with senior members. Cadets always are told exactly what to wear.
Having a national regulation will give squadron commanders some "cover".
You want NHQ to develop a uniform of the day for the local squadrons? You've got to be kidding me!
Oh I can see it now...the TPU is now mandatory and is the only authorized uniform Sunday through Friday. On Saturday and Sunday BDUs may be worn if participating in mission or mission excersize...provided the TPU is brought along in case any stops are necessary...i.e. gas, dinner, etc. Flightsuits are authorized only if the TPU for all crew members fit in the cargo compartment.
*Jose' Hemanez quote* "oh i hope not."
Quote from: shorning on November 20, 2006, 07:00:44 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 20, 2006, 05:55:14 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on November 19, 2006, 06:26:36 PM
Drop all corporate uniforms and have all members wear AF-style uniforms regardless of their weight. The CG Aux only wears CG-style uniforms and has no specific weight requirements (a general requirement to present a military appearance is generally ignored). So, an occassional Auxie is very obese and doesn't look good in the uniform -- the CG Aux has still ended up with a much closer relationship with the CG than CAP ever has had with the AF.
Overall, I think CAP (and the AF's image) is hurt much worse by having 20 different uniforms on display at every CAP event than it would be by having everyone in the same uniform even if it included overweight people.
That covers the heavy folks. What about those of us with facial hair?
I say we dye you orange. Hey, it's just an idea. ;)
Well, it used to be red, so orange isn't that far away. Biggest problem is that they don't make beard dye in anything but shades of brown, and black.
But, changing the color doesn't change the basic issue - what uniform do I get to wear to make my contribution to CAP?
Quote from: SarDragon on November 20, 2006, 08:26:27 PM
Quote from: shorning on November 20, 2006, 07:00:44 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 20, 2006, 05:55:14 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on November 19, 2006, 06:26:36 PM
Drop all corporate uniforms and have all members wear AF-style uniforms regardless of their weight. The CG Aux only wears CG-style uniforms and has no specific weight requirements (a general requirement to present a military appearance is generally ignored). So, an occassional Auxie is very obese and doesn't look good in the uniform -- the CG Aux has still ended up with a much closer relationship with the CG than CAP ever has had with the AF.
Overall, I think CAP (and the AF's image) is hurt much worse by having 20 different uniforms on display at every CAP event than it would be by having everyone in the same uniform even if it included overweight people.
That covers the heavy folks. What about those of us with facial hair?
I say we dye you orange. Hey, it's just an idea. ;)
Well, it used to be red, so orange isn't that far away. Biggest problem is that they don't make beard dye in anything but shades of brown, and black.
But, changing the color doesn't change the basic issue - what uniform do I get to wear to make my contribution to CAP?
Sorry, I meant
you not your beard. Sorry for the confusion. ;)
In a few years I may open the Major Joe Ely Carrales, CAP Gallery of Obsolete CAP uniforms.
Honestly, we make too much of all this.
Quote from: Major Carrales on November 20, 2006, 10:36:04 PM
In a few years I may open the Major Joe Ely Carrales, CAP Gallery of Obsolete CAP uniforms.
Honestly, we make too much of all this.
That'll cost a dollar or two..... :)
Quote from: shorning on November 20, 2006, 10:28:46 PMSorry, I meant you not your beard. Sorry for the confusion. ;)
No dye necessary, I have more than enough orange clothing to cover myself from head to toe, with the exception of an orange ski mask. Never managed to find one of those.
Enough of the off-topic stuff.
I ask again - if we ditch the corporates and let the heavy guys wear AF-style uni's, what uniform do I get to wear to make my contribution to CAP?
Quote from: SarDragon on November 21, 2006, 02:46:20 AM
I ask again - if we ditch the corporates and let the heavy guys wear AF-style uni's, what uniform do I get to wear to make my contribution to CAP?
I assume RiverAux's plan would let you keep your wiskers... As long as they are well groomed.
Quote from: SarDragon on November 21, 2006, 02:46:20 AM
Quote from: shorning on November 20, 2006, 10:28:46 PMSorry, I meant you not your beard. Sorry for the confusion. ;)
No dye necessary, I have more than enough orange clothing to cover myself from head to toe, with the exception of an orange ski mask. Never managed to find one of those.
Enough of the off-topic stuff.
I ask again - if we ditch the corporates and let the heavy guys wear AF-style uni's, what uniform do I get to wear to make my contribution to CAP?
I don't know, but with all that orange, we can strap you to the roof of GT vehicles, just make a triangle with your arms!
Quote from: PhotogPilot on November 21, 2006, 07:12:45 PM
I don't know, but with all that orange, we can strap you to the roof of GT vehicles, just make a triangle with your arms!
:D :D :clap:
Hahaha!
The list is up: http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=1076.new#new
add embroidered version of ALL metal spec badges worn in the same places.
USAF will NEVER approve dropping the weight and grooming standards to allow all to wear the USAF uniform so you can completely forget about this idea. It will NEVER happen. NEVER I can assure you. Did i forget to mention NEVER?
Quote from: LtCol White on November 25, 2006, 05:29:02 PM
USAF will NEVER approve dropping the weight and grooming standards to allow all to wear the USAF uniform so you can completely forget about this idea. It will NEVER happen. NEVER I can assure you. Did i forget to mention NEVER?
In other words... it'll be a cold day with blizzard conditions in hell before Mother Blue ever relaxes the weight and grooming standards for CAP.
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on November 26, 2006, 04:00:27 AM
Quote from: LtCol White on November 25, 2006, 05:29:02 PM
USAF will NEVER approve dropping the weight and grooming standards to allow all to wear the USAF uniform so you can completely forget about this idea. It will NEVER happen. NEVER I can assure you. Did i forget to mention NEVER?
In other words... it'll be a cold day with blizzard conditions in hell before Mother Blue ever relaxes the weight and grooming standards for CAP.
Ergo...we drop the USAF uniforms go straight corporates and finally be uniformed!
Except that takes us further from the life-blood of the AF. You take us out of AF-style uniforms & in 5-10 years the majority of members will not think of the AF as our parent org, and the members that join to assist the AF won't be here, just the flying club that doesn't mind doing good things while practicing their hobby, as if that's a professional resuce expert staandard that people should stake the lives of their family on. It goes both ways too, don't underestimate the symboligy exploited to reinforce the traditional culture of us being part of the AF family. You take those uniforms away & you'll get the AF looking at us like any ohter contractor. That means we're dead in the first short budget year, not to mention we might die before that when they see us unable to deliver quality or return on the investment.
The degree to which CAP looks like the AF IS a measure of OUR desire to be on their team & THEIR willingness to admit they know us. The gravity of that relationship, moreso than mission performance, determines funding. If that relationship fails, CAP will be dissolved & our assets liquidated one way or another. IF CAP plays too many games, that's the fate. If CAP doesn't get its act together & evolve for the future, lead the way, demand accountability, etc that's the fate. At some point Congress needs to fix some things too, but in the meantime we need to be busting our butts to avoid that fate. Some folks want to argue uniform discussions are stupid & we should dedicate that energy to I guess running missions better or something. I'll argue that the form of the uniform in itself isn't such a big deal, but using the symbol to influence psychology both explicitly & implicitly is a very valid avenue to effect change. It's the reason AF uniforms look the way they do today, the reason for every uniform ever in time.
So NO, w're not dumping AF uniforms to get everyone in the same corporate style uniforms. Doing so means no more CAP & works counter to everything we need to be doing.
lordmonar why is it you are so opposed to the USAF uniform and want to dump it in favor of total corporates? All throughout the numerous threads here, you have seen us talk about how important it is to rebuild our relationship with USAF and move closer into the USAF family. Everything you propose does completely the opposite. Why exactly did you join CAP? If you have a problem with the USAF affiliation then I suggest you go join the boyscouts.
Actually, I understand where he's coming from. He thinks it'd be more militarily professional to have us all in the same uniforms at the same time regardless fo what those may be. I understand that logic, but I say at what cost then determine the loss of symbolic brotherhood that drives our relationship would be deadly, so no. I do think though that UOD rules should be tightened up so there will always be a designated uniform clearly stated for everything, and you must be in it or not participate. That in conjunction with a nice littel chart to show what corporate-STYLE uniform corresponds to what AF style, and keep that on a straight 1-to-1 basis, cut the rest. It's either that or cut all members that can't meet the ht/wt/grooming standards, and that isn't going to work out so well. I respect what he's saying, I just disagree with it & try to point out the potential consequences to be avoided.
Quote from: DNall on November 26, 2006, 06:05:05 PM
Actually, I understand where he's coming from. He thinks it'd be more militarily professional to have us all in the same uniforms at the same time regardless fo what those may be. I understand that logic, but I say at what cost then determine the loss of symbolic brotherhood that drives our relationship would be deadly, so no. I do think though that UOD rules should be tightened up so there will always be a designated uniform clearly stated for everything, and you must be in it or not participate. That in conjunction with a nice littel chart to show what corporate-STYLE uniform corresponds to what AF style, and keep that on a straight 1-to-1 basis, cut the rest. It's either that or cut all members that can't meet the ht/wt/grooming standards, and that isn't going to work out so well. I respect what he's saying, I just disagree with it & try to point out the potential consequences to be avoided.
To be straightforward, I really don't think that this only blues, or only corporates is the end all answer to "uniformity". Non CAP members could say that if one person is wearing blues, another wearing a flightsuit, with a third in BDU's, that would be an example of "non uniform". You can try to argue that, but to outsiders, anything other than the exact same thing is not "uniform."
Considering how many people out there in public don't know the difference between a deputy sherrif and a highway patrolman, I don't think consolidating to one uniform is really going to help at all.
And as far as a little chart showing which corporates correspond to the AF combinations, there already is one.
It would seem to me that most members wear the same UOD as far as the Air Force uniform side is considered. The problem comes with the multitude of corporate uniforms. A members shouldn't wear the flight suit to a regular meeting since no flying is involved, therefore he would be in blues or BDUs which ever the uniform of the day. But when you add the golf shirt, blazer, or any of the other authorized corporate uniforms worn on a members whim, you have the core of the problem of uniformity. Another of the problems is a Commander that doesn't enforce the unifom of the day and just lets members wear what style unifom they want from the flight suit, even if not authorized by regulation, to service coat. (class A to you old fogies)
If it were up to me, the standard non-airport or Mil Base meeting should be attended in short sleeve blues or the corporate equivalent with flight cap. Maybe, if the weather was a bit nippy, the long sleeve version. With or without ribbons (suit yourself).
This combination is not "too much to ask for." It is also based on the minimum standard dress for CAP.
Many people wear BDUs Woodland Camo to meetings...logically, that could be considered crazy unless your unit meets in a wooded area. Still, I have no peoblem with BDUs for regular meetings.
Many of my units aviators wear their flight suits to meetings...being that they have aircrew ratings, I too have no problem with that.
Truth is...I am just happy they are there. That they took some time from their busy lives to give to their CAP unit. UOD is precarious considering there are so many combos out there (and not everyone owns them all) that it might exclude them.
Now...which of you has a solution to these problems?
Yes there is a chart, but that's not my point. The AF-style uniforms are set with only one valid possibility being appropriate for given situations. Say that's short sleeve blues & that's what the opplan says. Say you got a handgul of members over here who don't meet the ht/wt/grooming requirements, do they wear white aviator w/gray slides & gray pants no hat, OR white shirt w/ blue slides & blue pants (whatever the hat rule is this week), OR do they wear a golf shirt w/ gray pants?
EVERYTHING that happens in CAP should require a UOD & you should not be allowed in the door unless you meet that requirement, & that means wearing the items correctly as well. There should NEVER be a choice of what to wear. The UOD should be stated & you should wear EXCATLY what you are required to wear w/ no thought involved at all. I lean a little bit toward requiring those that can wear the AF-style to do so, because corporate-style is NOT allowed to be worn in any less degree of perfection than the AF version (the 300lbs guy in a white aviator should be wearing garters). I favor programs that encourage people to meet the AF standards & promote health, fitness, & safety at least to the degree necessary to do our job in the field - that's a side issue though.
UOD is just mess dress (formal events), service dress (business events), SS/LS (depending on month/weather), or Utility. You don't get a choice. You don't get a choice. If UOD is utilities for your regular meeting, then you wear BDU/BBDU unless you are active flight crew (on your 101) and will be flying to/from/at that event in which case you should wear green/blue flt suit. It is true that you can buy both the AF-style & the corporate-style version of one UOD & then confuse yourself with an extra choice, but that is HIGHLY discouraged.
Maj, the standard UOD is SS (LS w/ tie if conditions warrant). Officers are discouraged from wearing ribbons except for formal occasions - you're not supposed to show subordinates how little experience you have as a junior officer or show them up when you have more of a stack. It's optional, but it's considered rude. If the working or environmental conditions warrant utilities then that is standard. Otherwise, most offices have a casual friday when they wear utilities (active flight crew wear flight suits unless conditions warrant BDUs). None of this should be problematic. The conditions should automatically determine the appropriate UOD in planning, and the member should have no choice to make in selecting what uiform to wear. Is it expensive to have a set of blues (LS/tie & SS) and a set of BDUs, sure but every CAP member will have that or the aviator & BBDU alternative within the first year. It costs a lot to be in CAP, I can't do anything abou thtat.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 05:32:31 AM
Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 03:54:15 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:22:01 AM
You can't fly missions with out pilots.
And you can't fly if you can't fit in the airplane. As a practical matter, you also limit the useful load, especially on a 172, to the point that you may lose a scanner. That negatively impacts the mission.
But we also have more missions than just flying. We have the cadet program - officers have an obligation to lead by example.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 10, 2006, 03:22:01 AM
So....here we are....do we stand up hard weight standards so everyone can be USAF and accept that we WILL have squadrons close and run the risk of failing at our three missions....or do we accept the fact that we need to have corporate uniforms (just not 18 different versions ;D) and keep these good people, man our squadrons and accomplish our mission.
YMMV
I agree,
AF uniforms for those who meet W/G standards and want to wear them.
a streamlined set of Corprate Uniforms for those who do not.
Frankly, I don't understand why every time uniforms are discussed,the weight issue and how CAP would be better off if all the "fat Guys" would eather shape up or get out keeps
comming up.
1. I don't give a rats six if I EVER wear a Uniform. I didn't join this organization to wear a uniform or to try to fool anyone that I'm in the Air Force! I was Recruted because I had a
skill that was sorely needed at the time.
95% of the time I wear the polo combo and wear the aviator shirt combo when necessary.Why, see#1.
If I believed it was in CAP best interest I would resign Today. IM STILL HERE. ;)
Quote from: DNall on November 26, 2006, 11:36:45 PM
...because corporate-style is NOT allowed to be worn in any less degree of perfection than the AF version (the 300lbs guy in a white aviator should be wearing garters).
I see this point and I have one question: How do you instill the same sense of pride in the corporate uniform as in the military uniforms?
I'm not being a smartass here, I would like to hear some legitimate ideas. I have tried to get people to take pride in whatever uniform they are wearing, but I honestly have no idea how to do it.
See I don't know that I have an answer for that. Maybe you can get away with being sloppy in the civilian world, assuming you have no ambition, but you can spot a sharp vetran by the way he wears a business suit. I see a lot of people toss on corporate style uniforms thinking they aren't held to the same standards, that's not the case & I'd like to encourage the culture to make that clear with members. You can't get people to take pride in uniforms though if they don't take pride in themselves, and if they don't feel an obligation to represent everything about the guy standing next to them w/o ever opening their months. The truth is the majority of people that see a CAP member, that's probably the only thing they will ever know about CAP & they'll judge the organization & everyone in it by that one view of one person's uniform.
I mentioned earlier the case of a family at mission base placing their trust in CAP to bring home thier loved ones. If they're looking around at people in golf shirts & slacks, not to mention untucked golf shirts, sloppy uniforms, & people that don't exactly carry themselves like they can take charge of the world... what confidence does that inspire? Perception is reality to the people seeing it. We are to others what they think we are based on teh image we present. We can choose to be lazy & be looked at as incompetent, or we can choose to create the illusion of a command presence & people will think we're AF trained experts in our field & nothing can stand against us - that may not be true, but you can sure use it to your advantage. All that's very certainly true of the public, but don't think it doesn't carry major wait with people in the AF too. It's basic human nature & everyone will respond to it whether they like it or not.
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 27, 2006, 02:31:29 AM
I see this point and I have one question: How do you instill the same sense of pride in the corporate uniform as in the military uniforms?
I'm not being a smartass here, I would like to hear some legitimate ideas. I have tried to get people to take pride in whatever uniform they are wearing, but I honestly have no idea how to do it.
Probably one of the best ways to instill pride in uniform wear: put up a sign in the restroom over the mirror:
TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT YOURSELF... YOU'RE SOMEONE'S IMPRESSION OF CIVIL AIR PATROL!Whether they take it to heart or not is up to the members.
I would also start a regular schedule of uniform wear classes to introduce new members and remind older members about the proper way to wear the uniform (both AF style and corporate). You'll be surprised to see some who will say 'I thought someone told me this was the correct way?'
As the admin and personnel officer of my squadron, it's my unofficial duty to gently correct my fellow members who may be wearing the uniform and/or insignia wrong. And they usually get it fixed.
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on November 27, 2006, 03:53:26 AMProbably one of the best ways to instill pride in uniform wear: put up a sign in the restroom over the mirror:
TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT YOURSELF... YOU'RE SOMEONE'S IMPRESSION OF CIVIL AIR PATROL!
Whether they take it to heart or not is up to the members.
I would also start a regular schedule of uniform wear classes to introduce new members and remind older members about the proper way to wear the uniform (both AF style and corporate). You'll be surprised to see some who will say 'I thought someone told me this was the correct way?'
As the admin and personnel officer of my squadron, it's my unofficial duty to gently correct my fellow members who may be wearing the uniform and/or insignia wrong. And they usually get it fixed.
I like the sign idea, but I think I'm going to take it a little further, put up a couple of mirrors with those signs on it.
And I really like the idea of regular classes. Shouldn't take much to do that.
I'm also a personnel officer, and one thing that I can't seem to get across is that the uniform is sacred. That there are men and women who have died in that uniform, and continue to do so. I think that if some of the folks understood that, my job woulkd be a lot easier.
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 27, 2006, 02:31:29 AM
Quote from: DNall on November 26, 2006, 11:36:45 PM
...because corporate-style is NOT allowed to be worn in any less degree of perfection than the AF version (the 300lbs guy in a white aviator should be wearing garters).
I see this point and I have one question: How do you instill the same sense of pride in the corporate uniform as in the military uniforms?
I'm not being a smartass here, I would like to hear some legitimate ideas. I have tried to get people to take pride in whatever uniform they are wearing, but I honestly have no idea how to do it.
It amazes me that some things which ought to be common sense are just lost on some folks. I can't think of any place that doesn't frown on sloppiness in uniform...whether is a Burger King uniform or the Presidential Honor Guard's.
The proper application of a Clue-By-Four (show the regs, demonstrate, and insist) should do the trick. It's not so much that neatness should be a recruiting tool, it's that your appearance will be considered evidence of how you do your job. Profession appearance = professional service in the eyes of most. And besides...if you can't take pride in looking professional, what can you take pride in??
But then again...there are those who couldn't get a clue if they smeared clue-musk all over themselves and walked onto a field full of clues during clue mating season.
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 27, 2006, 02:31:29 AM
I see this point and I have one question: How do you instill the same sense of pride in the corporate uniform as in the military uniforms?
I'm not being a smartass here, I would like to hear some legitimate ideas. I have tried to get people to take pride in whatever uniform they are wearing, but I honestly have no idea how to do it.
The very first thing to be done to instill pride in the uniform in others is to practice what we preach. Whatever uniform one of us chooses to wear, wear it as well as you can (even the polo shirt).
Make sure both you and the uniform are neat. Pay attention to grooming. I'm not saying that you have to meet AF standards, but be neat, wash and trim your hair (facial hair included). Do you best to make sure your uniform is ironed and looking good, and all uniform items are proper.
In other words, lead by example. You won't reach everyone, but you'll reach some, and they will in turn reach others.
Quote from: Psicorp on November 27, 2006, 05:03:53 PMIt amazes me that some things which ought to be common sense are just lost on some folks. I can't think of any place that doesn't frown on sloppiness in uniform...whether is a Burger King uniform or the Presidential Honor Guard's.
I work at a place that requires a "uniform". It's their hat and shirt, but my pants, belt, shoes. There is a standard on the pant's (or shorts) that there can't be any cargo pockets, and all pockets have to be internal pockets. In other words, the patch pockets like on the back of most jeans aren't appropriate.
However, we have some people that wear shorts with the wrong pockets, and nothing is done about it. We have a guy that weighs about 400 pounds that has seams ripped out on the sides of his pants (which is a nauseating sight), and the manager does nothing about it. A lot of corporate America doesn't understand the concept of "uniform".
So there are places that simply tolerate, or don't even acknowledge pure sloppiness. When you think about it, where are
our new people coming from?
Quote from: davedove on November 27, 2006, 05:13:07 PM
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 27, 2006, 02:31:29 AM
I see this point and I have one question: How do you instill the same sense of pride in the corporate uniform as in the military uniforms?
I'm not being a smartass here, I would like to hear some legitimate ideas. I have tried to get people to take pride in whatever uniform they are wearing, but I honestly have no idea how to do it.
The very first thing to be done to instill pride in the uniform in others is to practice what we preach. Whatever uniform one of us chooses to wear, wear it as well as you can (even the polo shirt).
Make sure both you and the uniform are neat. Pay attention to grooming. I'm not saying that you have to meet AF standards, but be neat, wash and trim your hair (facial hair included). Do you best to make sure your uniform is ironed and looking good, and all uniform items are proper.
In other words, lead by example. You won't reach everyone, but you'll reach some, and they will in turn reach others.
That's pretty much my standard operating method. It amazes me that, at times, our peer pressure culture doesn't respond to peer pressure.
And it can be difficult when you don't have regular exposure to some people to be the example. Some folks only show up once a month. And lately, I haven't spent much time around cadets. And probably won't be doing so in the future.
;D I especially like "clue-by-four," that just became part of my repitoire. The couple mirrors w/ that msg is a good idea. Those little 6x9 or whatever ones at walmart are like 3 bucks or something last ime I checked & laminating is cheap. The real issue is with the show-tell-enforce method, people tend not to enforce. That's for sure not how it works in the AF. If you show up for work there w/o a well pressed shirt, EVERYONE will say something, not just the boss, it's everyone's job before their regular job, just like safety.
Appearance = perception of competence (human nature even if they say they don't judge)
Pride in appearance = pride in self (you start to believe ^^ ur own hype & make it a reality) = esprit de corps = respect from above = trust = bigger time missions & gear (compexity & sensitivity).
These are cardinal rules of human nature that cannot be changed regardless of what an individual on any side of it might want.
Co-workers in the civilian world will tend to not speak up to a peer about appearance/attire issues, cause they are meek. The military tries to inspire boldness & leadership that do to a degree cross-over to culturally correcting peers. In the business world though you will tend to find the guy with a squared away appearance advancing much faster than that 400lbs buldging out the pants guy, cause that same human nature sub-conscious dynamic is at work.
No question you set the example, but that's not enough, you are required to enforce the culture & regs on everyone else.
My brother worked at an Automobile Dealership as a technician (he works at a different one now.)
He began his day with his uniform clean and presentable. And, while he was soiled by the toils of his shop stall...he maintained an almost professional auroa.
Other members of that team were consistantly sloppy...using thier uniforms as "rags" and going untucked...no belt...less than safe shoes and the like. And these men are paid.
Its a sign of the times. There are many that consider wearing a shirt that buttons a burden. All day with tee-shirts, shorts and flip-flops. CAP too has those that follow that "dress down" paradigm.
I findit hard to understand why men of 40 and 50 years ago went to ball games, even in the south, in hats, ties and shirts while people today are wearing what that group woudl have considered underwear.
There is an element of that that is filtered into CAP.
Something like this then? (chairforce.com)
(http://www.chairforce.com/easy-chair/awacker/toons/AWACker13.jpg)
or this
(http://www.chairforce.com/easy-chair/awacker/toons/AWACker15.jpg)
just avoid this
(http://www.chairforce.com/easy-chair/funny-photos/crazy-airmen/hires/usaf-disaster.jpg)
I'm wearing sandles right now, and a sweater w/ jeans, though it's usually a polo or t-shirt. I like being comfortable. When I put on a uniform, that's the light swtich truning on. I recognize the effort to create that appearance as a part of the process to earn my worthiness to serve. No one proves they are good enough or have some skill we owe you for, screw that. You owe your country service & owe respect & sacrifice to those who came before you & sacrificed (be that in war w/ the mil or just the generations of CAP past). If you want to be lazy & look like ass, I'd prefer you not be part of CAP, no matter what you bring to the table.
Quote from: A.Member on November 10, 2006, 02:55:05 PMAs indicated earlier, it's more than that. It's also serving as an example for our cadets.
Side note: I've noticed that a number of particpants on this site have these little figures in their signatures. These figures really do look like many of our members - round. Kind of ironic...or maybe not? :-\ ;)
I agree on setting the example for our cadets as a lean mean ES machine, but that is still an ideal to strive toward, not a prerequisite to join.
One of the most impressive members I've known was a paraplegic whose legs were useless....he walked on two metal crutches that clipped on to his arms. He was overweight, possibly due to the enforced immobility, but he was fit enough to drag himself out to the comm shack every Thurs night and was more than willing to spend time with any cadet teaching them the finer points of net operation. It would have been a shame to lose him to some regulation requiring that we be as perfect as a the professional military.
Quote from: Major Carrales on November 26, 2006, 10:29:21 PM
Truth is...I am just happy they are there. That they took some time from their busy lives to give to their CAP unit. UOD is precarious considering there are so many combos out there (and not everyone owns them all) that it might exclude them.
Now...which of you has a solution to these problems?
We have UODs at our Squadron: 1st meeting of the month is PT for cadets and Golf shirt for seniors. 2nd meeting is Blues or aviator combos for all since we have promotion boards. 3rd and 4th meetings are BDUs since we have ES training usually. Any months with 5th Thursdays is Open House and we ask that members wear a variety of uniforms so that folks can see the range. Cadets without uniforms are asked to wear white t-shirt/sweatshirt with bluejeans and seniors are encouraged to obtain a polo shirt as soon as possible which can be worn at any of the above meetings if they do not have the appropriate uniform.
Cut the choices back to a corporate and AF-style uniform for each need:
Basic Blues = whites/greys (I know a lot of in-shape seniors who like this one, especially non-vets)
Class A = Blazer combo
BDU = BBDU
Green flightsuit = Blue flightsuit
For those without uniforms, White shirt and jeans for cadets, and Polo Shirt combo for seniors. Seniors would be asked to wear the proper uniform if they have it rather than ducking out and grabbing the polo.
Grey epaulets for everything. They look OK and are just different enough to not look like we're impersonating the AF.
As for changes to be made, I definitely vote for navy Blue nametapes. Don't completely subdue all our patches (that would look like we're trying to play military), just tone them down a little.
Grey BDU pants allowed with polo for mission base/UDF ops. I have thought of that in order to have an extra semi-field-worthy uniform available for longer deployments, most of which do not involve any heavy bushwhacking. It would definitely be a lot more comfortable for sitting in a truck for 4 days. i often wear my dickies for this, but miss the extra pockets when I need them.
Flouresecent orange boonie/baseball hat and vest required for GT/FLM (with chin tied) operations, not for "garrison duties". Other flourescent colors allowed per Wing King (green would be better for states with lots of fall colors).
No-shine boots optional with BDUs. BBDUS retain black boots (brown would look dumb with blue)
Too late to do it, but I would replace BBDUs with solid OD. Khaki looks too much like desert fatigues or DMAT, and BBDUs look like SWAT or Paramedics, plus some DMATs wear them as well. Regular field gear would go better with OD too instead of us buying black MOLLE gear. Anything that we do with camo BDUs/ACUs would look OK with OD.
Am sure I'll think of more by the time I become the King.
Oh my God, he mentioned Class A's. Can we NOT have that discussion all over again :)
OMG He mentioned class A's, ban him now! :o :)