Looking Like A Team

[ColonelJack]

I thought I'd go ahead and start the thread that Pylon mentioned in the Uniform Board posting.

It would seem to me to be a no-brainer as far as uniforms to wear to certain functions.  Each officer and cadet has a different economic story to tell, but if you're going to participate fully in CAP, your kit should include as a minimum:

1.  a service uniform (AF or corporate, properly set and with correct accoutrements), and
2.  a utility uniform (BDU or BBDU, with proper insignia)

Those involved in flying would have a flight suit; those who wish could add mess dress or golf shirt or whatever else you want (and can afford).  I am thinking mainly of the basic kit here.

From here, it's up to the IC to determine which uniform is appropriate.  Then the IC communicates that to the people he/she asks to show up for the event.

If you don't have what the IC wants in your kit, you should ask if what you do have would be acceptable, and if it isn't...well, use your own judgment here.  The idea is to not stick out like the proverbial sore thumb.

Thoughts?

Jack

[JohnKachenmeister]

Jack:

My thoughts on the basic kit are similar to yours, but...

I always recommend to new members that they buy the golf shirt as their initial uniform.  I do this because their rank (in most cases) is not effective for 6 months.  This means that they have to buy SM epaulets or sew "CAP" on both collars, then change it 6 months later.

This situation is worse for former officers, since they can put in to have their military rank awarded after the finish L-1 and CPPT.  By the time they get the SM stuff from Vanguard, they're promoted already.

Plus the golf shirt works in almost all situations, except very formal stuff.

After initial rank is awarded, every CAP officer should have:

1.  A set of blues or equivalent... shirt, flight cap, tie, pants, oxfords.  The jacket can be added when needed and when it can be afforded.

2.  A BDU or BBDU

If the officer intends to fly as a crewmember, the flight suit can be initially substituted for the BDU, but he should still get a BDU during his first year.

Yes, the IC/OIC of an exercise should designate the appropriate uniform, but with so many equivalent uniforms authorized, I'm not sure how to avoid the "NATO Conference" look to our activities.

Well, actually I DO know how to avoid that look, but the fix is way above my pay grade.

[riffraff]

The logical conclusion to the "one CAP team" discussion is to just go with the corporate uniforms for everyone -- ending the height/weight/grooming and dual-uniform-lines issues once and for all. CAP can have different uniforms and still be part of the Air Force team. The USMC is part of the US Navy and people seem to be okay with that.

I would agree that there should be some attempt to standardize what's worn at various functions. Unfortunately, the best that will be achieved is a mix of two styles (corporate vs USAF) for any particular setting unless the specified uniform is one of the CAP distinctives which leads right back to my opening statement.

It's ironic that the golf shirt (which I can't stand) is the only common denominator in an organization where there are two distinct uniform 'camps'.

[Dragoon]

First, I think it's a mistake that the minimum uniform is service, not utility.

It's been my experience that the vast majority of cadets and senior members can do almost everything a squadron needs to do in BDUs/BBDUs.   I've got seniors who haven't had a need for any kind of service suit in years.  The few times the might need 'em (Wing conferences, squadron awards dinners,etc), they can just wear a coat and tie.   

To keep costs down, I'd specifiy that utilities are required for all.  That would give us a standard we all could meet cheaply.  If uniformity is an issue, do it in utilities - because you'd know it's the suit everyone has.

Then, ICs/Project Officers/Commanders could decide when to allow the wear of anything else.

It's definitely how the active duty world is going - I haven't put on Class A's in several years except for official photos.

[riffraff]

I agree. Very little bang for the buck with service jackets when looking at it as $$'s-per-times-worn. Downside will be for those who ascribe to the theory of "it don't mean a thing if I can't wear my bling".   

[SStradley]

To look like the A Team we will all need Mini-14s.  However, that may violate the the 900 regs ... 

[dhon27]

I love it when a plan comes together....

[billford1]

My Squadron has occasional opportunities to serve on active SAR missions. When we do we often have contact with Law Enforcement and sometimes National Guard Personnel. We really don't help ourselves when we show up with several uniform types. Does anybody know if the weight and grooming standards have always been a factor that drove multiple uniform types like CAP has today? The Cadets look like a team; seniors usually don't.

[RiverAux]

I think it makes a lot of sense for the minimum uniform to be BDU/BBDU for both cadets and seniors.   Every single CAP mission can be done in them (except for those places that require Nomex flight suits).  Most cadets wear BDUs to most of their meetings anyway so it is more important that they have that uniform than the blues. 

That being said, I agree with the recommendation for new seniors to start with the golf shirt for the reasons stated.  I wouldn't make it a requirement though. 

[Dragoon]

If the minimum required uniform was BDUs/BBUs, every member could buy that when they join.  Keep the collar blank until you get your first promotion.   Simple, and no need for golf shirts.

[capchiro]

I hate to admit it, but if we are to be uniform, we will need to go to something everyone can wear and that will probably mean the BBDU.  I guess in the overall picture it would be okay.  I think it would look pretty good if everyone was in BBDU's, cadets and seniors, overweight and/or bearded.  We would at least look like a team instead of a herd.  I guess something similiar would be needed for dress or semidress.  I don't think tight white aviator shirts look good on overweight seniors, but I also don't know where you get reverse tailored or wider at the bottom than the top white shirts, so I don't know what to offer for dress uniform.. 

[Dragoon]

A compromise would be seniors in BBDU, cadets in BDU.   Lots of organizations put their cadets in different uniforms (like all the service academies, fer instance).

Wearing "warrior clothes" is part of the appeal of the cadet program.  Hopefully, our seniors have grown beyond such ego reinforcement.

But  some will play the cost card - claiming they can get real BDUs or ABUs cheaper or for free.

So if we end up in BDUs and BBDUS, at least we're down to 2 uniforms when we want to look alike, as opposed to the plethora 'o choices worn today.

[jimmydeanno]

Hopefully, our seniors have grown beyond such ego reinforcement

[Hawk200]

But  some will play the cost card - claiming they can get real BDUs or ABUs cheaper or for free.

And cheaper or free is a bad thing? I'll stick with cheaper or free. You want to open your wallet and buy me a set, I'll wear it. I spend my money, I want the most bang for the buck. I'm still using BDU's that were issued to me when I joined the Guard. You'd have me throw those away and buy new stuff because you don't like the military uniforms.

Besides, putting cadets in ABU, and seniors in blue isn't uniform at all. When you remove the association between the two, then the uniform concept fails.

[SStradley]

One suggestion to give us a more uniform appearance that has been made by several (me for one) members on Lt. Col. White's thread is to make the BDU the new corporate field uniform upon the adoption on the ABU, and phase out the BBDU.  This will give us a more uniform appearance with all members in a green military uniform. 

As to the cost in the long term I don't think good BDUs will cost any more than good BBDUs.  That the cops use the BBDU it does not fly long term.  1) Cops use several colors black, blue, brown, urban and woodland camo BDU. 2) Cops will be changing to the new "ACU" cut field uniforms because they also use body armor. 3) Cops will be changing to the new "digital camo styles" because they are new "high speed low drag" look.

So what do you'all think: 

ABU and BBDU or ABU and BDU and why?

[Hawk200]

One suggestion to give us a more uniform appearance that has been made by several (me for one) members on Lt. Col. White's thread is to make the BDU the new corporate field uniform upon the adoption on the ABU, and phase out the BBDU.  This will give us a more uniform appearance with all members in a green military uniform. 

As to the cost in the long term I don't think good BDUs will cost any more than good BBDUs.  That the cops use the BBDU it does not fly long term.  1) Cops use several colors black, blue, brown, urban and woodland camo BDU. 2) Cops will be changing to the new "ACU" cut field uniforms because they also use body armor. 3) Cops will be changing to the new "digital camo styles" because they are new "high speed low drag" look.

So what do you'all think: 

ABU and BBDU or ABU and BDU and why?

CAP is not going to be able to adopt the BDU as a corporate uniform "just because the Air Force is done with it". It would still be a military uniform design previously worn by the the Air Force, and as such they make the determination as to whether or not it's allowed. Civil Air Patrol, nor its members, have the option of adopting what they feel like.

Second, that would involve members going out to purchase in the off chance that it did actually get approved. Which would mean throwing away their BBDUs for something else. Not a cost saving measure. Those that have BBDUs, probably have many uniforms that are quite serviceable. They don't need the service life shortened by an unnecessary phase out.

[Eclipse]

CAP is not going to be able to adopt the BDU as a corporate uniform "just because the Air Force is done with it". It would still be a military uniform design previously worn by the the Air Force, and as such they make the determination as to whether or not it's allowed. Civil Air Patrol, nor its members, have the option of adopting what they feel like.

Once the US military, as a whole, phases out the woodland camo BDU, it will no longer be a "military uniform", at least as far as the United States is concerned.  That day, however, is a long way off - something like 2011 or 2012 I believe is the USAF phase-out, not sure on the other services.

Second, that would involve members going out to purchase in the off chance that it did actually get approved. Which would mean throwing away their BBDUs for something else. Not a cost saving measure. Those that have BBDUs, probably have many uniforms that are quite serviceable. They don't need the service life shortened by an unnecessary phase out.

I don't know why anyone would spend money in "anticipation" it might be approved, that's just a waste, although I personally know at least one member (who has more dollars than sense), who says he already owns a full set of ABU's, with what he believes is what will be the approved insignia, for the day they are approved.

I think we'd be better off going to a completely different tactical uniform, the SG-1 uniforms might be a good choice - dark gray BDU's with semi-subdued insignia.  If we all adopted a non-military uniform, we would eliminate overnight all the issues of grooming, etc., all look the same, and could wear whatever insignia we wanted (within some reason).

Bottom on "looking like a team"? Until you >ISSUE< uniforms at either no cost, or included in the registration fees, members will always have options, and some will choose to exercise those options.

[Hawk200]

CAP is not going to be able to adopt the BDU as a corporate uniform "just because the Air Force is done with it". It would still be a military uniform design previously worn by the the Air Force, and as such they make the determination as to whether or not it's allowed. Civil Air Patrol, nor its members, have the option of adopting what they feel like.

Once the US military, as a whole, phases out the woodland camo BDU, it will no longer be a "military uniform", at least as far as the United States is concerned.  That day, however, is a long way off - something like 2011 or 2012 I believe is the USAF phase-out, not sure on the other services.

Many people have wanted khakis for CAP. If it's no longer a military uniform, why aren't we wearing it now? Also, OD/jungle fatigues are no longer a military uniform, why aren't we wearing them?

Trying to keep woodland BDUs will be a sure sign of an organization that isn't moving forward. I seriously doubt that woodlands will remain as a coporate uniform. Besides, the Air Force isn't stupid, they'll know that if it got adopted as the "corporate" uniform, everyone is gonna want subdued insignia, and they'll tell us that they know.

I believe that the Air Force may have a little more pull on our corporate uniforms than their official policy of "We don't care." We need to be careful on what we try to do. "He who shall not be named" created his own uniform, and the appearance presented was of CAP as an autonomous organization. It didn't fly. Trying to adopt the woodland as corporate is going to be far more trouble than it's worth.

Something that most people don't seem to think about is the fact that the new utilities in use by the military aren't just about the camo. The uniforms are more practical, more comfortable, more useful than the BDU. Why do you want to wear outdated old-school uniform designs when the new stuff just works better? It's an example of people wanting the warrior look, even if they have to go with an old, broke down and tired design. They think it looks cool, but to outsiders it looks outdated. And looking "aged" doesn't exactly inspire confidence in people.

Second, that would involve members going out to purchase in the off chance that it did actually get approved. Which would mean throwing away their BBDUs for something else. Not a cost saving measure. Those that have BBDUs, probably have many uniforms that are quite serviceable. They don't need the service life shortened by an unnecessary phase out.

I don't know why anyone would spend money in "anticipation" it might be approved, that's just a waste, although I personally know at least one member (who has more dollars than sense), who says he already owns a full set of ABU's, with what he believes is what will be the approved insignia, for the day they are approved.

A perfect example of jumping the gun. Many people do it. There was a major in Alaska that went and bought the then new USAF service dress with the officer sleeve rank. She put gold stripes on the sleeve, citing the premise that the AF would follow the CG Aux practice at the time where they wore silver officer rank where the CG wore gold (or maybe it was the other way around). At the time, the AF was still testing the officer sleeve rank. So she showed up with an AF service coat, and gold sleeve rank. I'm betting you can easily imagine the reactions.

I think we'd be better off going to a completely different tactical uniform, the SG-1 uniforms might be a good choice - dark gray BDU's with semi-subdued insignia.  If we all adopted a non-military uniform, we would eliminate overnight all the issues of grooming, etc., all look the same, and could wear whatever insignia we wanted (within some reason).

Bottom on "looking like a team"? Until you >ISSUE< uniforms at either no cost, or included in the registration fees, members will always have options, and some will choose to exercise those options.

I don't see a need for dark colors at all, although I see your reasoning behind the SG-1 team uniform concept. I wouldn't go with the original designs, but there are outfits available that are drastically improved in both concept and function. 5.11 series clothing, and many of the associated "clones" are perfect examples.

Although many go for tactical and military looks, there are practical reasons for organizations with our missions to wear them. They have plenty of pockets for minor things, and they're usually designed to carry stuff such as backpaks and load bearing gear. They're designed to be part of an ensemble. Many of the early utility designs weren't so utilitarian.

[davedove]

the SG-1 uniforms might be a good choice

Do we get the zat guns too?

[SStradley]

the SG-1 uniforms might be a good choice

Do we get the zat guns too?

Just don't shoot me three times.