I have been told that the USAF will be going to the Billy Mitchell Heritage Uniform.
(http://www.stripes.com/06/may06/mitchell.jpg)
What do you think of it?
The high collar.......Huh? I know the Army used to wear them back in the day, but only the Marines have a historical background for the high collar.
Oh, and by the way, if your going to wear the belt, try tailoring the uniform first. Im going to have to give a thumbs down on this. Im all for the old Air Force jacket.
It looks stupid! Loose the belt, or at least make it black. Heck change the freaking color of the uniform to brown if your are "trying to go back to heritage". Also change the sleeve braid to black. It would stand out more that way. Also, don't wear full size awards. Come on?!?! Also return the Officer Branch insignia to the jacket (USAAF branch insignia). Finally get the Officer pant leg stripe back. If this truly is a heritage uniform, then freaking take the uniform of that time period and adopt it back.
The uniform is an Army uniform, so it should be called one. Many more people wore it than just Gen Mitchell.
Finally, in closing the Army is going back to wearing the Army Dress Blue Uniform full time. Blue is the Army's, AF.......get your own.
These photos are at least 2 years old, and represent some "test wear" at HQAF.
IOW, this is NOT the final form or configuration that the AF is considering for its uniforms.
IIRC, the "Hap Arnold" Heritage uniform was the preferred selection. I could be mistaken.
But before all y'all get wrapped around an axle or two about this uniform, breathe. Out with the bad air, in with the good...
This, too, shall pass.
Quote from: RogueLeader on December 15, 2007, 09:17:07 PM
I have been told that the USAF will be going to the Billy Mitchell Heritage Uniform.
(http://www.stripes.com/06/may06/mitchell.jpg)
What do you think of it?
The Hap Arnold is the choice and is being wear tested with planned wear in 2009. This is to POSSIBLY be a ceremonial and honor guard uniform.
Quote from: RogueLeader on December 15, 2007, 09:17:07 PM
I have been told that the USAF will be going to the Billy Mitchell Heritage Uniform.
(http://www.stripes.com/06/may06/mitchell.jpg)
What do you think of it?
You were told wrong. That uniform was a test uniform that didn't make it.
A modified version of the WWII style Hap Arnold uniform was the one that was selected.
The wear tests have just started and they plan to field it in 2009.
Source:AF Link
For those of you who have not yet seen it, the one on the right is the Hap Arnold heritage coat:
(http://www.afa.org/magazine/July2006/bluesuit07.jpg)
Jeez, is that collar wide enough? Looks like you can't even have more than 1 full row of ribbons be visible
Quote from: RiverAux on December 16, 2007, 04:21:07 AM
Jeez, is that collar wide enough? Looks like you can't even have more than 1 full row of ribbons be visible
That, my dear Sir, is a 1930s style cut. My grandpa has a suit for that era with that sort of lapel.
Can we start wearing those irregular ribbon bars to get around them?
Personally, I'm not a fan of having "pockets" that can't be used, which I assume would be the case with the upper pockets on this one.
Yeah, the chokers aren't something the Army's worn since World War I, really. The Navy and Marine Corps still wear them. But the Air Force?
The pockets on the "Hap Arnold" would be functional, just as they were on the old blues.
After Gen. Tony McPeak changed the blues in 1993, there was constant complaining that it didn't look "military" enough. Heck, it looks like an Air Force uniform to me, not a blue Army uni. This is backlash to the McPeak blues, but I'll bet you after wear tests, it won't look this retro -- probably more like the last pre-1993 uniform.
As modern as the Air Force's marketing wants to make the AF look, they want to go retro and complicate the blues again? I thought, personally, that the current uniform was the best interpretation yet of what the uniform philosophy is, though McPeak's idea of "less things to pin on" didn't take (maybe for good reason, given the idea of sleeve-braid officer rank).
It would be nice to have a pocket to line your nameplate up against....
If you want to see the latest and greatest (and have flash installed) try this:
http://www.airforcetimes.com/projects/flash/2007_03_16_afuniforms/
Quote from: Major Carrales on December 16, 2007, 04:29:39 AM
That, my dear Sir, is a 1930s style cut. My grandpa has a suit for that era with that sort of lapel.
Did he have a hat to go with it?
Quote from: NIN on December 16, 2007, 06:37:30 AM
Quote from: Major Carrales on December 16, 2007, 04:29:39 AM
That, my dear Sir, is a 1930s style cut. My grandpa has a suit for that era with that sort of lapel.
Did he have a hat to go with it?
No, but I do wear a fedora as part of my daily wardrobe.
You know, that belt seems likely to accentuate the waist of some of our folks.
Quote from: RiverAux on December 16, 2007, 02:32:30 PM
You know, that belt seems likely to accentuate the waist of some of our folks.
Or the lack of one. . . ;)
Quote from: Major Carrales on December 16, 2007, 07:29:16 AM
Quote from: NIN on December 16, 2007, 06:37:30 AM
Quote from: Major Carrales on December 16, 2007, 04:29:39 AM
That, my dear Sir, is a 1930s style cut. My grandpa has a suit for that era with that sort of lapel.
Did he have a hat to go with it?
No, but I do wear a fedora as part of my daily wardrobe.
Could you imagine an AF Blue shade 1625 Fedora with CAP insignia on it?
The belt looks ridiculous, not to mention completely without function.
Otherwise, generally OK.
According to the web site it looks like you will be allowed to stagger your ribbon placement to avoid the collar.
The last I heard, they were talking about doing away with the belt. The gals were complaining that with the new uniform, they'd have to change the tie to the tab every time they took the coat off.
Quote from: ddelaney103 on December 16, 2007, 05:02:50 AM
http://www.airforcetimes.com/projects/flash/2007_03_16_afuniforms/
So is this official now? I generally like it except for the belt. Looks more like what I wore in the 1980s. Definitely more "military".
Quote from: Dad2-4 on December 16, 2007, 04:31:31 PM
Quote from: ddelaney103 on December 16, 2007, 05:02:50 AM
http://www.airforcetimes.com/projects/flash/2007_03_16_afuniforms/
So is this official now? I generally like it except for the belt. Looks more like what I wore in the 1980s. Definitely more "military".
No specific date has been set for rollout of the new service dress uniform; I think it's still in the wear-test stage.
Quote from: Grumpy on December 16, 2007, 04:29:59 PM
The last I heard, they were talking about doing away with the belt. The gals were complaining that with the new uniform, they'd have to change the tie to the tab every time they took the coat off.
That's interesting, since the wear test hasn't even started yet.
Quote from: RiverAux on December 16, 2007, 04:24:24 PM
According to the web site it looks like you will be allowed to stagger your ribbon placement to avoid the collar.
You can do that now, even on a CAP uniform!
Call me crazy, but I like it. All false pockets, four buttons, and yes, I very much like the belt. Don't so much like the fact that it's a men's tie. Looks good, but I'd imagine tying a tie is pretty difficult.
Quote from: Grumpy on December 16, 2007, 04:29:59 PM
The last I heard, they were talking about doing away with the belt. The gals were complaining that with the new uniform, they'd have to change the tie to the tab every time they took the coat off.
I don't think so. The way I read is is the men's tie is always authorized, the tab is only authorized without the coat. You don't have to change the tie when you take the coat off.
Based on feedback, they modified the lapels so they aren't that big anymore. More modern style lapels now
Quote from: star1151 on December 16, 2007, 08:22:05 PM
Call me crazy, but I like it. All false pockets, four buttons, and yes, I very much like the belt. Don't so much like the fact that it's a men's tie. Looks good, but I'd imagine tying a tie is pretty difficult.
There's always the ubiquitous clip-on... ;D
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on December 16, 2007, 09:38:34 PM
Quote from: star1151 on December 16, 2007, 08:22:05 PM
Call me crazy, but I like it. All false pockets, four buttons, and yes, I very much like the belt. Don't so much like the fact that it's a men's tie. Looks good, but I'd imagine tying a tie is pretty difficult.
There's always the ubiquitous clip-on... ;D
I hear those are considered "tacky".
Quote from: star1151 on December 16, 2007, 09:39:45 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on December 16, 2007, 09:38:34 PM
Quote from: star1151 on December 16, 2007, 08:22:05 PM
Call me crazy, but I like it. All false pockets, four buttons, and yes, I very much like the belt. Don't so much like the fact that it's a men's tie. Looks good, but I'd imagine tying a tie is pretty difficult.
There's always the ubiquitous clip-on... ;D
I hear those are considered "tacky".
As a fashion statement, I'd agree... but there are times when you're in a rush and can't whip up a good four-in-hand or Windsor knot.
I don't mind the 'zipper tie', either. Unfortunately, they're not made in the dark blue USAF herringbone pattern.
Am I wrong or is the 'new' Hap Arnold uniform really just the old pre-McPeak service dress with a belt and different buttons? Seems a lot of work to get back to where they were in the first place. If they keep the belt, it needs to be wider. Since they're copying the WW2-era US Army officers uniform they might as well go with the same belt width.
There are some improvements - such as the bi-fold back (which you see on the back of the M-65 field jacket) which will make it easier for you to move.
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on December 16, 2007, 09:44:25 PM
Quote from: star1151 on December 16, 2007, 09:39:45 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on December 16, 2007, 09:38:34 PM
Quote from: star1151 on December 16, 2007, 08:22:05 PM
Call me crazy, but I like it. All false pockets, four buttons, and yes, I very much like the belt. Don't so much like the fact that it's a men's tie. Looks good, but I'd imagine tying a tie is pretty difficult.
There's always the ubiquitous clip-on... ;D
I hear those are considered "tacky".
As a fashion statement, I'd agree... but there are times when you're in a rush and can't whip up a good four-in-hand or Windsor knot.
Really?!? I can tie my tie in under 30 seconds. Clip on's are for lazy people. You can also tell who wears a clip-on, and they may loose some respect.
Some advice for those that take five minutes to tie their tie.......DO NOT completely untie your tie when removing your tie. simply slip the knot low enough to allow you to remove it from around your neck. Then when you go to put it back on, simply re-raise the knot.
When I see a person wearing clip-on I think to myself "gee he is lazy, or his dad didn't love him enough to teach him how to tie a tie". (Replace Dad with legal guardian, mother, step-father, brother, grandfather etc.)
Quote from: mikeylikey link=topic=3794.msg72991#msg72991
When I see a person wearing clip-on I think to myself "gee he is lazy, or his dad didn't love him enough to teach him how to tie a tie". (Replace Dad with legal guardian, mother, step-father, brother, grandfather etc.)
No one's ever taught me to tie a tie but if CAP goes to tie like that, I guess I'll have to beg someone to teach me. I guess no one loves me....
^ I will send you instructions in PDF format for a half and Windsor if you so desire.
After wearing a clip on for 29 years on the Sheriff's Dept., I see nothing wrong with it.
That would be excellent.
Of course, I will have nothing to practice on until it becomes mandatory for CAP...hopefully WAY out in the future somewhere. But on second thought, maybe it's one of those life skills that everyone needs to know.
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 16, 2007, 10:50:46 PM
Really?!? I can tie my tie in under 30 seconds. Clip on's are for lazy people. You can also tell who wears a clip-on, and they may loose some respect.
Some advice for those that take five minutes to tie their tie.......DO NOT completely untie your tie when removing your tie. simply slip the knot low enough to allow you to remove it from around your neck. Then when you go to put it back on, simply re-raise the knot.
When I see a person wearing clip-on I think to myself "gee he is lazy, or his dad didn't love him enough to teach him how to tie a tie". (Replace Dad with legal guardian, mother, step-father, brother, grandfather etc.)
You do know that star1151 is a female, right?
Do your daughters (if you have any) know how to tie a Windsor or Four-in-hand knot in a tie?
Fore everyone who needs to learn how to tie a tie here you go! IT is from SEXYTIE.COM
Read on to the next page for a good link for tying a tie!
edited per MOD request. My link was borderline "too sexy"! PM for link if interested.
Quote from: PHall on December 16, 2007, 11:11:48 PM
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 16, 2007, 10:50:46 PM
Really?!? I can tie my tie in under 30 seconds. Clip on's are for lazy people. You can also tell who wears a clip-on, and they may loose some respect.
Some advice for those that take five minutes to tie their tie.......DO NOT completely untie your tie when removing your tie. simply slip the knot low enough to allow you to remove it from around your neck. Then when you go to put it back on, simply re-raise the knot.
When I see a person wearing clip-on I think to myself "gee he is lazy, or his dad didn't love him enough to teach him how to tie a tie". (Replace Dad with legal guardian, mother, step-father, brother, grandfather etc.)
You do know that star1151 is a female, right?
Do your daughters (if you have any) know how to tie a Windsor or Four-in-hand knot in a tie?
I know! Also, why would a young girl need to know how to tie a tie? In fact, other than what the AF is proposing there are very few instances in corporate society and society in general that require a woman to wear a mans tie.
Mikey... Please find a more appropriate link and edit above.
Edit: It's borderline IMO.
Quote from: Grumpy on December 16, 2007, 11:07:19 PM
After wearing a clip on for 29 years on the Sheriff's Dept., I see nothing wrong with it.
That's also a safety feature - no sense in tying a rope around you neck and allowing a perp to get ahold of it.
Here is more politically correct guide to tying a tie. Learn How to Tie a Tie (http://www.tie-a-tie.net/)
I do know how to tie a tie... there are occasions where a clip-on is convenient. ;D
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 16, 2007, 11:16:22 PM
Also, why would a young girl need to know how to tie a tie? In fact, other than what the AF is proposing there are very few instances in corporate society and society in general that require a woman to wear a mans tie.
You've obviously never seen Paula Poundstone in concert.
;D
Jack
Quote from: ColonelJack on December 17, 2007, 02:21:05 AM
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 16, 2007, 11:16:22 PM
Also, why would a young girl need to know how to tie a tie? In fact, other than what the AF is proposing there are very few instances in corporate society and society in general that require a woman to wear a mans tie.
You've obviously never seen Paula Poundstone in concert.
;D
Jack
Got me there!
Back to the heritage jacket......has anyone seen one walking around yet at a local AFB??
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 17, 2007, 03:35:56 AM
Back to the heritage jacket......has anyone seen one walking around yet at a local AFB??
No. In fact, I asked an AF friend about it tonight, and he claimed to have never heard about it. But maybe he's just living under a rock.
Quote from: star1151 on December 17, 2007, 03:38:44 AM
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 17, 2007, 03:35:56 AM
Back to the heritage jacket......has anyone seen one walking around yet at a local AFB??
No. In fact, I asked an AF friend about it tonight, and he claimed to have never heard about it. But maybe he's just living under a rock.
Maybe it is a clear sign that uniforms are not tops on everyone's list.
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 17, 2007, 03:35:56 AM
Back to the heritage jacket......has anyone seen one walking around yet at a local AFB??
Considering that the wear test hasn't started yet, no, no one has seen it yet.
Best bet to see it would be in the DC area when the test starts next month.
Source = AF Link, AF Uniform Board Section
Quote from: Major Carrales on December 17, 2007, 03:45:11 AM
Quote from: star1151 on December 17, 2007, 03:38:44 AM
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 17, 2007, 03:35:56 AM
Back to the heritage jacket......has anyone seen one walking around yet at a local AFB??
No. In fact, I asked an AF friend about it tonight, and he claimed to have never heard about it. But maybe he's just living under a rock.
Maybe it is a clear sign that uniforms are not tops on everyone's list.
You're probably right.
do we have any idea will this be a ceremonial uniform or will it be the service dress? Also when might we see it for us? I'm thinking 2012 maybe?
Quote from: NERMA002 Safety on December 17, 2007, 07:55:24 PM
do we have any idea will this be a ceremonial uniform or will it be the service dress? Also when might we see it for us? I'm thinking 2012 maybe?
The jacket with tie and belt will replace the current Service Dress jacket.
The choker collar
may become the basis of a new ceremonial uniform. The USAF Band wears something like this.
Quote from: Grumpy on December 16, 2007, 11:07:19 PM
After wearing a clip on for 29 years on the Sheriff's Dept., I see nothing wrong with it.
No, nothing wrong with it. Ya kinda need it in LE as a neck cravat can work against you when a bad guy gets ahold of it! My tie has a velcro tab on the back....easy on, easy off, but looks like the "real thing" ;D
/r
LT
Quote from: ddelaney103 on December 17, 2007, 07:59:27 PM
Quote from: NERMA002 Safety on December 17, 2007, 07:55:24 PM
do we have any idea will this be a ceremonial uniform or will it be the service dress? Also when might we see it for us? I'm thinking 2012 maybe?
The jacket with tie and belt will replace the current Service Dress jacket.
The choker collar may become the basis of a new ceremonial uniform. The USAF Band wears something like this.
Well if they aren't gonna use it...I think it would look shard with a "Heritage" CAP patch on the shoulder.... now if they'd just let us start bombing subs again....
do we have a picture of this uniform without the high collar?
Quote from: NewWaveKiller on December 16, 2007, 03:16:13 AM
For those of you who have not yet seen it, the one on the right is the Hap Arnold heritage coat:
(http://www.afa.org/magazine/July2006/bluesuit07.jpg)
The above on the right is the Hap Arnold uniform. The latest I've seen has the traditional Air Corps branch insignia on the lapels.
As for me, I think that the Billy Mitchell uniform type might be a good candidate for a corporate mess dress uniform --> put medals on it and it would look much better than the present busboy uniform.
Ok, so for the high collar is it a seperate jacket or it the same one?
They are two separate jackets.
Option "A" on the left is the "Billy Mitchell Heritage Uniform" and is derived from this jacket:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Billy_Mitchell.jpg/200px-Billy_Mitchell.jpg)
Note the collar and medals. IMO, this jacket would not look good on most of our members and definitely wouldn't look good on members of the female persuasion - it's about as flattering as a double-breasted coat on someone who has some weight.
Option "B" on the right is the "Henry Hap Arnold Hertitage Uniform" and is derived from this jacket:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/021002-O-9999G-013.jpg/275px-021002-O-9999G-013.jpg)
Note the lapels and pockets. The style of this one, IMO, is better, however, teh huge lapels and huge pockets would look horrible on people of smaller stature. The belt will also over emphasize areas that most CAP members don't want to emphasize. People with a "larger frame" that still meet our requirements would have their mid-section pointed out.
Quote from: Gunner C on December 17, 2007, 09:04:22 PM
Quote from: NewWaveKiller on December 16, 2007, 03:16:13 AM
For those of you who have not yet seen it, the one on the right is the Hap Arnold heritage coat:
(http://www.afa.org/magazine/July2006/bluesuit07.jpg)
The above on the right is the Hap Arnold uniform. The latest I've seen has the traditional Air Corps branch insignia on the lapels.
Yes and no. The jacket slated for wear testing is based on that, but the lapels are a lot more modern. I can't find a full picture (though I did post a link to a flash presentation above) but this detail picture shows the lapels:
(http://www.airforcetimes.com/xml/news/2007/03/AFuniform031807/070316_newuniform_story_287.jpg)
So is it a pick and choose which one you want to wear? Or will it be this shall be worn at this time and that shall be worn at this time?
Quote from: NERMA002 Safety on December 17, 2007, 09:12:19 PM
So is it a pick and choose which one you want to wear? Or will it be this shall be worn at this time and that shall be worn at this time?
Again, there is only one uniform being wear tested - the "Hap Arnold" style jacket with belt with tie.
There is talk, but only talk, of adopting the choker collar "Billy Mitchell" style jacket as a ceremonial dress uniform.
Aside from General McPeak, was anyone really all that unhappy with the pre-McPeak service dress?
With the US Army heading for blue, we'll now have 4 of 5 branches of service wearing that color -- (USMC, US Army, USAF, USCG). Aside from different colored trousers, there won't be much to separate the US Army from USAF other than branch insignia. Pretty ironic that US Army aviation still wears the winged props and USAF doesn't!
^ The only difference will be the Army will wear shoulder straps denoting rank, the AF and MC will still be wearing pin on. I think I read somewhere that the "winged props" or Officer Branch Insignia will return to the Jacket of AF Officers. Don't forget the Army was the first to wear a blue uniform, they have had the modern version since the 1930's. It was just "too dressy" for everday wear.
Also, doesn't the Navy have a blue uniform? As well as the other two uniformed services??
True. Forgot about the Army's rank change.
And yes, one could argue that the USN winter uniform is really dark blue. If so, then 5 of 5 wearing blue -- at least in the winter.
What's next USAF now means US Armed Forces instead of US Air Force??
I thought the return of the "Wing and prop" was dropped.
If it IS going to return, then Lt Col White should be made aware that there were specific provisions for the CAP when the "Wing and prop" designated the Army Air Corps.
The Army Air Corps officer insignia had a gold pair of wings and a silver prop, but the CAP insignia was all silver.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 17, 2007, 09:09:50 PM
Note the collar and medals. IMO, this jacket would not look good on most of our members and definitely wouldn't look good on members of the female persuasion - it's about as flattering as a double-breasted coat on someone who has some weight.
I can't even begin to describe my feelings on how unflattering that uniform probably would be on most people.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on December 18, 2007, 02:27:28 AM
I thought the return of the "Wing and prop" was dropped.
I would like to see this on the uniform. All commissioning sources use the prop and wings now in some form or fashion as a token indicating compleation of a rite of passage (recognition, field training, etc.). I recall back in ROTC how much emphasis was given on the symbolism of the insignia when were were given it and how proud we should be to have it. Come commissioning day, however, it disappears forever... they even made us
give them back.
Quote from: JarakMaldon on December 18, 2007, 03:28:14 AM
Come commissioning day, however, it disappears forever... they even made us give them back.
Thats Awesome.....I mean SAD! That symbol is the history of the AF. To not bring it back while introducing a jacket that represents the "early" years would be a shame.
In fact I would go as far as saying bring back branch insignia for all officers. Pilots/Navs get the props, invent (or steal back from the Army) other insignia.
QUESTION......were these the "prop and wings" given to RTOC cadets at the end of Field Training (camp)? Didn't the AF Academy get all "pissy" saying theirs meant more than ROTC, and ROTC cadets don't deserve them. Or was it ROTC saying OTS doesn't deserve them??
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 17, 2007, 09:09:50 PM
They are two separate jackets.
Option "A" on the left is the "Billy Mitchell Heritage Uniform" and is derived from this jacket:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Billy_Mitchell.jpg/200px-Billy_Mitchell.jpg)
Note the collar and medals. IMO, this jacket would not look good on most of our members and definitely wouldn't look good on members of the female persuasion - it's about as flattering as a double-breasted coat on someone who has some weight.
Option "B" on the right is the "Henry Hap Arnold Hertitage Uniform" and is derived from this jacket:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/021002-O-9999G-013.jpg/275px-021002-O-9999G-013.jpg)
Note the lapels and pockets. The style of this one, IMO, is better, however, teh huge lapels and huge pockets would look horrible on people of smaller stature. The belt will also over emphasize areas that most CAP members don't want to emphasize. People with a "larger frame" that still meet our requirements would have their mid-section pointed out.
Two questions (unrelated to CAP Uniforms):
(1) What's the signifigance of the star above Gen Mitchell's pilot wings? I know he's already got his BGen stars on his epaulettes, but above his wings?
and
(2) What's the funny lookin' badge Gen Arnold has hanging below his ribbons?
???
Quote from: PhoenixCadet on December 18, 2007, 03:43:09 AMTwo questions (unrelated to CAP Uniforms):
(1) What's the signifigance of the star above Gen Mitchell's pilot wings? I know he's already got his BGen stars on his epaulettes, but above his wings?
and
(2) What's the funny lookin' badge Gen Arnold has hanging below his ribbons?
???
I'm guessing it's the senior pilot rating for Gen. Mitchell. I could be wrong. Back then, insignia for dress uniforms were hand made out of bullion, so it's possible Gen. Mitchell earned an advanced rating and added just the star above his wings.
The funny-looking badge Gen. Arnold's wearing on his pocket flap is the earliest of all U.S. pilot's wings - the Military Aviator badge. Most pilots who qualified as military aviators before WWI wore this badge.
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on December 18, 2007, 03:51:57 AM
he funny-looking badge Gen. Arnold's wearing on his pocket flap is the earliest of all U.S. pilot's wings - the Military Aviator badge. Most pilots who qualified as military aviators before WWI wore this badge.
So, I'm guessing then that they let him keep this even though he's got pilots wings above his ribbons?
I am guessing Arnold was wearing "ultra-thins" ribbons
Quote from: PhoenixCadet on December 18, 2007, 03:55:48 AM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on December 18, 2007, 03:51:57 AM
he funny-looking badge Gen. Arnold's wearing on his pocket flap is the earliest of all U.S. pilot's wings - the Military Aviator badge. Most pilots who qualified as military aviators before WWI wore this badge.
So, I'm guessing then that they let him keep this even though he's got pilots wings above his ribbons?
He's a Five Star, would
you tell him he can't wear them? I wouldn't. IIRC, a Gen has some wiggle room in uniform.
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 18, 2007, 03:58:29 AM
I am guessing Arnold was wearing "ultra-thins" ribbons
I'm not sure what the practice was before or even when ribbons as they are today developed; but I have seen some older pics of soliders where the ribbons seemed to be just that...ribbons that seemed to be sewed on.
My uncle had a sort of "ultra thin" looking type of ribbon, that was not as modern ones are.
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 18, 2007, 03:58:29 AM
I am guessing Arnold was wearing "ultra-thins" ribbons
Most likely his ribbons are sewn directly onto the uniform.
In days of old there were no such thing as UltraThins; ribbons were sewn directly onto the uniform.
There is an unwritten rule stating that general officers are free to design their own uniiforms; in reality the only thing GOs in the USAF wear a special blue jacket with embroidery modeled after the MA-1 jacket.
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 18, 2007, 03:33:57 AM
In fact I would go as far as saying bring back branch insignia for all officers. Pilots/Navs get the props, invent (or steal back from the Army) other insignia.
Heresy!!!! Not to mention you'd then have both US Army and USAF aviation officers wearing the same branch insignia. Then again, it might be a good start towards getting USAF merged back into the Army, where it belongs! >:D
Is it me, or does it look like they threw the belt on SMSGT Athnos's Billy Mitchell uniform as an afterthought?
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on December 18, 2007, 12:37:36 PM
In days of old there were no such thing as UltraThins; ribbons were sewn directly onto the uniform.
There is an unwritten rule stating that general officers are free to design their own uniiforms; in reality the only thing GOs in the USAF wear a special blue jacket with embroidery modeled after the MA-1 jacket.
There is a also a belt buckle with the Air Force coat of arms on it that generals wear.
In the past, I know that there were many generals that didn't wear nametags. I don't know if this practice has continued or not.
Quote from: Hawk200 on December 18, 2007, 05:16:19 PM
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on December 18, 2007, 12:37:36 PM
In days of old there were no such thing as UltraThins; ribbons were sewn directly onto the uniform.
There is an unwritten rule stating that general officers are free to design their own uniiforms; in reality the only thing GOs in the USAF wear a special blue jacket with embroidery modeled after the MA-1 jacket.
There is a also a belt buckle with the Air Force coat of arms on it that generals wear.
In the past, I know that there were many generals that didn't wear nametags. I don't know if this practice has continued or not.
There are two special belts.
They can wear a buckle with the "Hap Arnold" wing and star insignia on the standard blue web belt.
They can also wear a leather belt with dress buckle over their BDU, like a pistol belt.
Quote from: ddelaney103 on December 18, 2007, 05:22:03 PM
They can wear a buckle with the "Hap Arnold" wing and star insignia on the standard blue web belt.
They can also wear a leather belt with dress buckle over their BDU, like a pistol belt.
So it's a Hap Arnold now. It was the old "bird perching on a shield" when I was active duty.
I remember the leather pistol belt. There was a wing commander in Alaska that wore one,
all the time. Not sure why, but if in BDU's he had on that leather generals belt. I always figured it to be some kind of affectation. On a slimmer person, it might have looked OK. It made him look like a sausage squeezed in the middle.
Quote from: Hawk200 on December 18, 2007, 07:02:50 PM
Quote from: ddelaney103 on December 18, 2007, 05:22:03 PM
They can wear a buckle with the "Hap Arnold" wing and star insignia on the standard blue web belt.
They can also wear a leather belt with dress buckle over their BDU, like a pistol belt.
So it's a Hap Arnold now. It was the old "bird perching on a shield" when I was active duty.
I remember the leather pistol belt. There was a wing commander in Alaska that wore one, all the time. Not sure why, but if in BDU's he had on that leather generals belt. I always figured it to be some kind of affectation. On a slimmer person, it might have looked OK. It made him look like a sausage squeezed in the middle.
Interesting. Any photos out there of these belts in wear?
Couldn't find it actually being worn, but this is the buckle:
(http://www.vanguardmil.com/store/images/large/2522355_LRG.jpg)
Quote from: Pylon on December 18, 2007, 07:08:45 PM
Interesting. Any photos out there of these belts in wear?
For the blues buckle, don't know. It is referenced in 36-2903, pg 51(pub page, not PDF page), line 4:
"General officers may wear the "wing and star" design, shiny finish emblem and belt buckle."
Vanguard has one: http://www.vanguardmil.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4_286_288&products_id=5391.
It doesn't show anyone wearing it, and I imagine that it might be a little harder to find a pic, considering most generals that have public photos are either in full Service dress, BDU's or a flightsuit. I haven't seen many photos of AF generals wearing just a less than Full service as far as blues go.
As for the leather belt with BDU's, I hope not. As least I hope it's not a fat general, anyway.
Quote from: riffraff on December 18, 2007, 01:00:31 PM
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 18, 2007, 03:33:57 AM
In fact I would go as far as saying bring back branch insignia for all officers. Pilots/Navs get the props, invent (or steal back from the Army) other insignia.
Heresy!!!! Not to mention you'd then have both US Army and USAF aviation officers wearing the same branch insignia. Then again, it might be a good start towards getting USAF merged back into the Army, where it belongs! >:D
RiffRaff:
The Army insignia for the Aviation Branch is not the same insignia. The wing design uses the Army aviation badge as its model, and the AF wing-and-prop uses the Air Force wing.
Actually both are technically US Army designs and depict US Army wings (1920s Army Air Corps and post-1950 Army Aviation). Either way, they're so close in style that they're virtually indistinguishable until you're right on top of them.
I don't believe the winged prop was ever worn on the USAF blue uniform as a branch insignia. Not sure about the transition period, 1947-50.
Both are shown below. USAAF (upper) and Army Aviation (below). For those not familiar, they're about 1 inch across.
(http://www.stby.com/USAAFCollars.jpg)
Oh...you Air Force guys......
You can try and try all you want with your little blue collars.......
"Maybe you can be one of us"
Quote from: Flying Pig on December 19, 2007, 11:24:55 PM
Oh...you Air Force guys......
You can try and try all you want with your little blue collars.......
"Maybe you can be one of us"
Why change into something else when we're already
True Bluelol
I was just surfing the net looking at AF uniforms and ran across these pictures of the proposed Mitchell and Arnold uniforms. One of the photos shows the Mitchell uniform with and without the belt. I like it better without the belt. I even like the props under the US cut outs.
I'm not much of a computer dude so I hope this site works for you.
http://www.nonpartisanpundit.com/2006/05/new_air_force_u.html
Anyway, we're not the only ones struggling to come up with a uniform.
^ General Officers should have some set weight limit! Fit to fight lately?
I think whatever uniform the AF decides on will look great. I would prefer the Mitch over the Hap though.
Agreed. I think that belt pulls the coat up and makes it look frumpy (?).
I think I may be confused here. I don't like the choker collar. My neck has a tendency to hang over it. Comes with age.
They need to just take the current jacket, add some pockets to it, and maybe a belt.
Quote from: Grumpy on December 31, 2007, 07:17:26 AM
I think I may be confused here. I don't like the choker collar. My neck has a tendency to hang over it. Comes with age.
Lucky you, they're not going with the "Mitchell" stand-up collar style option. ;)
Oh good. It'll save the Turkey Gobbler effect then. ;D
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 31, 2007, 07:46:07 AM
They need to just take the current jacket, add some pockets to it, and maybe a belt.
If you look at the third photo down the uniform on the left has a belt and the one on the right does not.
The one on the left looks bunched up where the belt is while the one on the right hangs smoothly. If you wore the one with the belt you'd be like Capt. Picard on Star Trek, always pulling your blouse down.