CAP Heraldry Standards?

[Private Investigator]

Not to resurrect a really old topic. So I wanted to start a new topic on what we know today.

My question is regarding Heraldry Standards for CAP specifically Squadron and Group patches. Remembering that in the Air Force, shield-shaped emblems are for groups and higher; squadrons use a disc.

So what about CAP?

Thanks for sharing ...

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

As I understand it, that's the way CAP runs things too.

Several squadrons I know of (mine included) have redesigned their crests to fit with the USAF style of a one-rocker-above/one-below a disc in the past couple of years.

I don't think my Group has a crest.

WRT Wing crests...the AF heraldry standards go out a window.  Some of the wings still have very goofy looking crests.  Redesign to the AF standard would be a BIG improvement.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

 

As I understand it, that's the way CAP runs things too.

Several squadrons I know of (mine included) have redesigned their crests to fit with the USAF style of a one-rocker-above/one-below a disc in the past couple of years.

I don't think my Group has a crest.

WRT Wing crests...the AF heraldry standards go out a window.  Some of the wings still have very goofy looking crests.  Redesign to the AF standard would be a BIG improvement.

I couldn't possibly agree more. Some wings have some out there wing patches. I think it should be thrown as a requirement that they all move to the standard shield and scroll within the next two years. They can still have their own emblem inside them, but a wing patch the shape of Kentucky with a horse head sticking out the top of it is a bit out there. I understand the Derby is really big in Kentucky, but what does it have to do with CAP? With is the other thing, it should have something to do with CAP.

[Patterson]

No redesign on patches!!  You lose some history in the process of converting a unique patch to "today's standards".

[manfredvonrichthofen]

How does making a patch meet a standard lose history? Not taking a bite at you, just really wondering.

[SamFranklin]

Even if every CAP unit patch were to get in line with the AF standards that do not apply to CAP, at great expense to volunteer members, what would that accomplish for CAP? Nothing.

Sometimes I think a lot of CAP members have a fetish for hyper-standardization. That sort of mindset is unhealthy for an organization because it chases innovation and creativity out.

[Pylon]

Even if every CAP unit patch were to get in line with the AF standards that do not apply to CAP, at great expense to volunteer members, what would that accomplish for CAP? Nothing.

Sometimes I think a lot of CAP members have a fetish for hyper-standardization. That sort of mindset is unhealthy for an organization because it chases innovation and creativity out.

I'm not so sure I buy your arguments.

Standardizing unit emblems would cause "Great expense to volunteer members"?    Wing and unit patches are optional; nobody needs to buy a new patch.   We don't pre-print letterhead anymore, so stationery doesn't cost to change.

Standardization of uniform items "chases innovation and creativity out"?  Well, if that's true then I guess CAP must be devoid of creativity and innovation since we've standardized our specialty badges, our ribbons, our ES/ICS forms, our PD curriculum, and a million other things. 

[Hawk200]

I can see points on both sides of the debate here. Yes, some "unique" history might be lost, but elements from the original can easily be incorporated into the new. I've redesigned a few patches to the Air Force style a number of times, and I've designed a few patches that are "Air Force style," too.

Although, if patches are redesigned, I think one thing that needs to be standardized is placement. This "wear it here if it's this, but wear it here if it's this," is inconsistent. Stick any organization designation patch in one spot, and be done.

I don't mind the idea of "Air Force styled" patches, it brings us closer.

If any one wants patches redesigned to an "Air Force style," send me a PM. I can knock one into a decent design in a week or three.

[RiverAux]

There is no existing national CAP standard.  Some Wings do have standards similar to the Air Force way of doing things. 

[manfredvonrichthofen]

There is no existing national CAP standard.  Some Wings do have standards similar to the Air Force way of doing things.

you might want to check into that... I'm pretty sure there has been a memorandum put out that all new patches must meet USAF heraldry specifications, it was put out along with templates for what that looks like.

Personally I think all patches should have to be changed.

[Ned]

Frankly, I have always been a little dissapointed that the Air Force never adopted our heraldry standards. 

After all, we have been around years longer than they have, and designed and adopted hundreds of patches, unit crests, etc. before the USAF was even born.

We have patches designed by Disney artists for our wartime role and patches worn by our members into combat.  Wing patches worn by our members for nearly 70 years.

It would be a shame to lose all that history just to conform to some new-fangled rules that have changed before and will undoubtedly change again.

Heck, The Institute of Heraldry (TIOH) itself didn't even exist until 1960.

It's not our fault they were late to the party.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Jedi Master Ned has a wicked sense of humour, to be sure...

[SarDragon]

FWIW, some wings do require wing patches, so for them, there would be an added expense to replace the patches.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[Майор Хаткевич]

FWIW, some wings do require wing patches, so for them, there would be an added expense to replace the patches.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

ILWG has re-done our wing patch. I haven't worn one since they became optional, but I do believe there was a gracious sundown period for the old design.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Ned-

It may be true that TIOH did not exist until 1960. But before TIOH took over, heraldry was maintained by the US Army Quartermaster Department for the US Army, the US Army Air Corps, the US Army Air Force, and then the US Air Force. In turn, they used those concepts and school of thought that were introduced by France and Great Britain.

If you visit West Point's Museum, they would tell you that their Minerva shield had to be redesigned, since initially it did not conform to Heraldry standards. I have copies of US Army regiments requesting Distinctive Unit Insignias addressed to the US Army Quartermaster where the DUI was approved or rejected based on classic Heraldric concepts. These requests are dated 1940.

Heraldry is not "USAF" or "CAP."

It is a concept that goes beyond that. It is a tradition just like the military salute. We always salute with our right hand, held at a certain angle, with the arm at a certain angle. No service modifies it. No nation itself, except Great Britain. Which to me, the Briton's way of saluting is more akin to the story of a knight opening the visor. But this is outside this topic.

Flyer

[RiverAux]

There is no existing national CAP standard.  Some Wings do have standards similar to the Air Force way of doing things.

you might want to check into that... I'm pretty sure there has been a memorandum put out that all new patches must meet USAF heraldry specifications, it was put out along with templates for what that looks like.

A memo (unless it is in the form of an ICL from the national commander (if they can still even do that under the new governance structure)) doesn't over ride the current regulation which leaves patch approval entirely in the hands of the wing commanders.  I strongly believe that CAP patches should meet USAF standards, but as of right now that is not nationally required. 

[Eeyore]

Simple solution, even thoughI don't believe this is a problem, mandate that all new patches meet heraldry standards and the traditional patches remain the same. If a squadron/group/wing/region decides to redesign their patch in the future, they meet the standards.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

No service modifies it. No nation itself, except Great Britain. Which to me, the Briton's way of saluting is more akin to the story of a knight opening the visor. But this is outside this topic.

Even then, the Royal Navy uses the same salute we do, as do the RAN, RNZN and RCN.


Prince Philip

All three Canadian services have used it since their forces were integrated in 1968.


Colonel David Cochrane, RCAF

And the French salute is totally different...



So "tradition" can be modified...it's valuable but not immutable.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Cyborg-

Did I not imply it was immutable? No. When I stated one nation appeared to be saluting with the hand reversed - although I alluded to Great Britain, it turned to be France. But at the same time, again, you point the things I pointed. The arm. The right arm, not the left. Hand to the brim or the eye.

Which goes to this.

CAP members complain about the CAP Heraldry Office in redesign of patches, etc...

But their decision follows USAF Heraldic standards...

Which follows US Army Heraldic standards (TIOH)...

Which follows US Army's Quartermaster standards...

Which follows Great Britain's (mostly) and France's (to a minor extent).

That is why there is no specific "CAP Heraldry standards" as Heraldry precedes CAP. By a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong stretch of years...

Flyer

[ol'fido]

FWIW, some wings do require wing patches, so for them, there would be an added expense to replace the patches.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

ILWG has re-done our wing patch. I haven't worn one since they became optional, but I do believe there was a gracious sundown period for the old design.

Yes, and most of the new guys love it and the old guys hate it. The patch was originally supposed to be the the wing HQ insignia and not the new wing patch. When we switched over with Scamguard, we had to buy up all the old patches which I am told mysteriously disappeared from wing HQ. There is a movement afoot to bring back the old patch which I whole heartedly agree with.

As for the AF following the Army Heraldry standards, I used to be a member of the 25th ID. I don't think the "Electric Strawberry" fits any kind of heraldry standard.