NHQ Uniform Committee

[cnitas]

Wow... I think my post just got dissed by the forum cop.

And to make this somewhat on topic....
I was kinda thinking that the fact that a navy SEAL cannot wear the badge in CAP was a little silly.  Perhaps the uniform committee should look into correcting this (and other badges)  Since the point had already been made, I was in essence seconding the motion in a somewhat humorous way...I thought.

[LtCol White]

Any badges worn on the USAF uniform have to be approved by USAF. If its not authorized for wear by USAF personnel on their service uniform, then they won't authorize if for CAP personnel.

I will have photos to post by the end of the week.

[cnitas]

You are right. 
I had assumed that it was authorized for the Air Force Uniform.  I just went and looked up afi36-2903 to see what can be worn...

The list includes:
CIB
CAB
CMB
Air Assult
Pathfinder
Parachute rigger
Scuba
even the ranger tab in specific instances.
But no Naval badges....  Inter-service rivalry at its best.
In the end it does not matter since prior service will wear what they want anyway.

That said, are you going to write in the Blue Beret and Ranger stuff that was voted on a while back?

[arajca]

In the end it does not matter since prior service will wear what they want anyway.

Not those who care about following the regs. I have a retired Navy E-8 who had been told he could wear his surface warfare badge along with his combat aircrew wings by a previous commander. When he transfered in, he asked if it was correct. My commander, former AF Capt, said he thought so, but would check with National. Susie Parker said the surface warfare badge was out, along with the submariner's badge another member earned. The E-8 simply said ok and the next meeting, the surface warfare badge was removed. The submariner hadn't put his on yet, so he left it off.

[ddelaney103]

You are right. 
I had assumed that it was authorized for the Air Force Uniform.  I just went and looked up afi36-2903 to see what can be worn...

The list includes:
CIB
CAB
CMB
Air Assult
Pathfinder
Parachute rigger
Scuba
even the ranger tab in specific instances.
But no Naval badges....  Inter-service rivalry at its best.
In the end it does not matter since prior service will wear what they want anyway.

That said, are you going to write in the Blue Beret and Ranger stuff that was voted on a while back?

Remember that there are a lot of AF types embedded into Army units: weather, tactical air control parties, airlift control parties.  It's much more likely for an Airman to have Army badges and still be in the AF than for an Airman to have Navy stuff.

Also, many of the badges (such as Ranger tabs) can only be worn while you are attached to an Army unit.  Once you're back in the mainstream AF, those badges come off.

Most prior service people don't wear "what they want" - usually only problem children who don't think rules apply to them.

[Hawk200]

Here in ILWG, my Group Commander is a former Combat SEAL and wears his badge proudly.

The manual says that only badges authorized on the AF uniform are permitted. So, officially, the SEAL badge would not be permitted, as well as many other ones from the various badges of service.

That being said, however, I think he ought to be able to wear it legally. There really is no reason that he shouldn't be able to. There are ways we should mirror the AF, but I also think that in some ways that we should make allowances for our many current and former military personnel to display their accomplishments on our uniform.

As to the original task of the thread, there's another thing. Delete the requirement for SMWOG and NCO's to wear the CAP cutouts on the collar of uniforms. It just isn't necessary. It's minor, but it would require one less thing for them to wear. And with stripes on the sleeve (for NCO's), it makes the uniform look a little busy.

[LtCol White]

Yes we will be reviewing everything to make sure that any changes to the USAF authorized list are also covered in the revision on 39-1.

We will also review past items that were approved and have had no action taken to further the approval for wear.

[Eclipse]

I think an appendix or similar with an FAQ or list of items commonly work but prohibited would be a good idea.

Its one thing to expect members to understand the regs and the fact that if its not authorized specifically, its not authorized at all, but another for members with no experience reading military-style regulations to figure things out.

I'm speaking of a simple list:

Something similar to this:

The following items are prohibited or restricted as indicated:

1) "boonie" - style hats are prohibited for all members.

2) Leather jackets will not be worn with any USAF-style uniform.

Etc., etc.,

I'd also suggest that contentious optional items such as berets have >explicit< instructions as to where they are allowed, and who may restrict their wear.

[Hawk200]

Its one thing to expect members to understand the regs and the fact that if its not authorized specifically, its not authorized at all, but another for members with no experience reading military-style regulations to figure things out.

I'm speaking of a simple list:

Something similar to this:

The following items are prohibited or restricted as indicated:

1) "boonie" - style hats are prohibited for all members.

2) Leather jackets will not be worn with any USAF-style uniform.

There's already a limitation very similar to that in place. Paragraph 1.1 says:

"COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY.  Any variation from this publication is not authorized.  Items not listed in this publication are not authorized for wear."

Considering lack of familiarity with military type pubs, maybe this statement needs to be repeated. Maybe once before each individual section, and make the entire statement in bold.  There's no reason to take up more room in a manual with long lists when you don't need to. I can see people trying to argue that something is allowed because it wasn't in the "forbidden" list.

With new members, I tell them to read the first chapter, and then each section that applies to the uniform they're wearing thoroughly before they even try to wear a uniform. I also tell them to not to be afraid to ask questions. I do get a lot of questions, and we usually don't have any problems.

[AlphaSigOU]

Practically every AFI is clearly marked in bold letters 'COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY!' on the cover page of each AFI. Perhaps CAP regs and manuals should begin to follow this precedent.

Back to the uniform discussion...

[Eclipse]

Practically every AFI is clearly marked in bold letters 'COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY!' on the cover page of each AFI. Perhaps CAP regs and manuals should begin to follow this precedent.

Back to the uniform discussion...

One would like to think that our senior members, especially, could be explained what this means and move on, however history tells us otherwise, and considering this is >our< manual, we shoudl take into account the hand-holding many of our members need.

Most of the rest of the world works on the principle of "if it doesn't say you >can't<, you can", whereas CAP, and the RealMilitary® works the opposite.

Rather than conintue to fight this, As I said, I think summary do's and don'ts pages are needed.

[Hawk200]

Rather than conintue to fight this, As I said, I think summary do's and don'ts pages are needed.

Or maybe just explain it. Could save a lot of paper.

[BillB]

If you had a list in the manual of items not authorized, someone will say my pink socks aren't listed so they must be authorized. Any list on non-authorized items would never be complete as new uniform items come out in all military services and CAP members would probably try to wear them as they were not listed in the unauthorized list.

[Hoodsie]

This has been mentioned before I concur with Cloth Name Tags and Cloth Rank for the AF Flight Suit.

The plastic encased rank is very much outdated.

[Eclipse]

This has been mentioned before I concur with Cloth Name Tags and Cloth Rank for the AF Flight Suit.

The plastic encased rank is very much outdated.

At least dark green / white, please.  Blue / white is fine on the blue suit, but looks weird on the green suit.

[mikeylikey]

Any badges worn on the USAF uniform have to be approved by USAF. If its not authorized for wear by USAF personnel on their service uniform, then they won't authorize if for CAP personnel.

I will have photos to post by the end of the week.

Then perhaps they can wear the badges on the Corporate Uniforms??  Possible change here!

[mikeylikey]

This has been mentioned before I concur with Cloth Name Tags and Cloth Rank for the AF Flight Suit.

The plastic encased rank is very much outdated.

At least dark green / white, please.  Blue / white is fine on the blue suit, but looks weird on the green suit.

Or off the shelf rank that the AF uses would work here.  We are already wearing a a patch that says "CAP" on the suit, and if we sew cloth rank on, color won't matter.  So lets go with the cheapest around.  Off the shelf at MCSS is like $1.50  (But the Vanguard lobbyists won't allow this I know!....in fact, I think they may be the group deciding our uniform changes anyway).

[Falshrmjgr]

If you want to move toward a more uniform appearance, then do the right thing and authorize the wear of military ribbons and badges awarded to members on ALL uniforms (within the scope of 39-1).

As a matter of fact, authorize the wear of NON-39-1 approved badges on the corporate uniforms.   SO if the aforementioned former SEAL wants to wear his budweiser badge, he CAN on the BBDU.

If you are worried about members having 20 rows of ribbons, then give them a choice:  wear military ribbons or CAP ribbons, but not both.

(Sorry, as a former grunt, I *expect* to see someone's 201 file on their uniform.  Former Marines, your mileage may differ) 

[Eclipse]

This has been mentioned before I concur with Cloth Name Tags and Cloth Rank for the AF Flight Suit.

The plastic encased rank is very much outdated.

At least dark green / white, please.  Blue / white is fine on the blue suit, but looks weird on the green suit.

Or off the shelf rank that the AF uses would work here.  We are already wearing a a patch that says "CAP" on the suit, and if we sew cloth rank on, color won't matter.  So lets go with the cheapest around.  Off the shelf at MCSS is like $1.50  (But the Vanguard lobbyists won't allow this I know!....in fact, I think they may be the group deciding our uniform changes anyway).

Unfortunately, off the shelf is subdued, something the USAF has historically denied us...

[ddelaney103]

This has been mentioned before I concur with Cloth Name Tags and Cloth Rank for the AF Flight Suit.

The plastic encased rank is very much outdated.

At least dark green / white, please.  Blue / white is fine on the blue suit, but looks weird on the green suit.

Or off the shelf rank that the AF uses would work here.  We are already wearing a a patch that says "CAP" on the suit, and if we sew cloth rank on, color won't matter.  So lets go with the cheapest around.  Off the shelf at MCSS is like $1.50  (But the Vanguard lobbyists won't allow this I know!....in fact, I think they may be the group deciding our uniform changes anyway).

Unfortunately, off the shelf is subdued, something the USAF has historically denied us...

Also, subdued is a compromise b/w identification and maintaining concealment.  Since we don't need to go tactical, the insignia should be visible.