NHQ Uniform Committee

[RiverAux]

thp, are you talking about having cadets wear the Blue BDUs or the blue utility uniform?  They are two different things and that is why everyone is confused. 

Either way, the question stands as to why they would need either.

[PhoenixRisen]

I understand, I'm just saying, if they want it go for it. But it could be used by senior members who don't fit the height/weight standards, and can't afford nomex.

Roger.  I understand that - I just didn't get that from your original post.

[NEBoom]

Could I take a moment to review what we have so far?
<with snippage>
1.  AF Blues:

- Switch from gray to blue epaulet sleeves, with "CAP" identified.

2.  TPU:

- Switch from hard rank to blue epaulet sleeve, same as AF coat.
- Shirt to have same blue epaulet with "CAP."

A question.  I understand that if the AF says no to the blue shoulder marks, "plan B" is to offer to switch from the silver nameplate to the blue three-line (or maybe two line) nameplate on the service coat.  If the AF still says no to the blue shoulder marks, what would "plan C" be then?

As I mentioned earlier, I think it would be great to get to go back to blue epaulets, but I'm still feeling skeptical that the AF will approve it...     Would probably be wise to have a fall-back position.

[mikeylikey]

Plan C......no change most likely.  Just a guess

Oh ya......get rid of yellow command scarves.  Who wears those anyway?  And the Regimental tie.  Pick a less obtrusive (<----right word??) design for the blazer combo.

[NEBoom]

Reading the ABU uniform page at AF Portal (which I would share with anyone if they ask), there will be no patches on the ABU's except for occupational badges and flight badges.  We should follow suit and make our Uniforms match AF. 

<snip>

I want to second this.  Let's quit patches "cold turkey" when we switch to the ABU.  I'd say let's allow some, like a unit (or even wing) emblem, but past history shows that if we allow any, we'll eventually end up with patches all over the uniform again.  Just MHO.

[Stonewall]

You know me, or maybe you don't, but am all for getting rid of patches.  I've been saying this for like, well, 20 years.  Except WIWAC for a while and I had a subdued wing patch made 

Yes, I think I've seen this mentioned more than a few times.

Benefits to no patches:

*Savings, as in the $green stuff$ (our number 1 mission, right)
*Fewer opportunities to mess up sewing jobs thus making us look less inept
*Less clutter
*More professional appearce, the whole less is more thing working for us

[BillB]

Lets see what new uniforms I'm going to have to buy.
Khaki fatigue uniforms $70
khaki pants $15
blue flight suit,  $120
Blue slides $8
white shirts $21
blue shirts $21
new cutouts $3
cloth grade insignia (sage) $1.50
cloth grade insignia (blue) $1.50
Blue Civil Air Patrol for BDU or ABU
Grey Civil Air Patrol for BDU or ABU
Blue name tape
Grey name tape

Anyone see the problem here? People are coming up with all kinds of NEW uniforms with all kinds of patches, insignia etc. May I ask what problems these solve? The big problem is CAP already has two many uniform variations listed in a 39-1, poorly written and was out of date before it was even published.  The Uniform Committee concept of a corporate uniform to match the Air Force uniform is a good idea. It will eliminate several uniforms or uniform variations. Make everyone go to the BBDU for a field uniform. Bad idea because you'll still have cadets, over a third of the membership in woodland BDUs. And you'll still ghave cadets in USAF blues, regardless of the multitude of uniforms seniors wear. So keep in mind these new uniforms you're suggesting will not match up with cadet uniforms, and how many seniors can afford to go out and buy the new uniforms that have been suggested?

[mikeylikey]

You know me, or maybe you don't, but am all for getting rid of patches.  I've been saying this for like, well, 20 years.  Except WIWAC for a while and I had a subdued wing patch made 

Yes, I think I've seen this mentioned more than a few times.

Benefits to no patches:

*Savings, as in the $green stuff$ (our number 1 mission, right)
*Fewer opportunities to mess up sewing jobs thus making us look less inept
*Less clutter
*More professional appearce, the whole less is more thing working for us

Agreed!  Patches are not an AF thing.  They have said "We are not the Army".  If we are going to wear their uniform, lets do it the way they do it regarding patches.  I saw a HAWK MTN Ranger walking around like a freaking neon billboard with everything on his uniform.  THEN when NHQ says move this patch here and that patch there, the Wing Kings say "No wear your Hawk MTN patch in place of the wing patch but in this position, and if you don't have one wear the wing patch there".  It gets insane how different we all look because no one can follow guidance from NHQ.

[Stonewall]

No matter what, in a major change, which may or may not occur, the masses may have to fork out some cash initially.  But I think, and I may be wrong here, the ultimate goal is to make friggin decision for once, and come up with a uniform standard and that's that.  

People are simply suggesting things which may be best suited for them, not the masses.  So of course, there will be a multitude of uniform variations seen in this discussion, but hopefully in the end, the powers that be will look at most of what we've suggested and fix what truly is broken.  My hope, regardless of what uniform changes occur, is that we get rid of at least 1/3 of the uniforms we have and the accouterments to go with them.

1 service dress uniform for all, that converts easily and cheaply to a "formal garb"
1 field/utility uniform for field work
1 flight uniform

As for cadets, I say they get the same field/utility uniform as seniors, but let them keep the AF blues option.  YMMV and probably does.

[Eclipse]

1 service dress uniform for all, that converts easily and cheaply to a "formal garb"
1 field/utility uniform for field work
1 flight uniform

I like the idea, but the only way the above happens is to abandon the USAF-Style uniforms for senior members, which I don't' see happening.

[Stonewall]

1 service dress uniform for all, that converts easily and cheaply to a "formal garb"
1 field/utility uniform for field work
1 flight uniform

I like the idea, but the only way the above happens is to abandon the USAF-Style uniforms for senior members, which I don't' see happening.

Don't see it happening either, nor do I want it to happen.  But at this point in time, I'm so frustrated with the lack of uniformity, that I'd throw my towel in and accept a non-AF uniform that looked cool and professional if we could all just look the same.  And you know me, I'm pro-military!

[Hawk200]

When it comes to the ABU, it's a clean slate for us. There's no current configuration for it. So money to make changes aren't an issue. It's not any different than buying a new uniform because your old one wore out.

The mandatory stuff is name/branch tapes, and rank insignia.

The only question left is what else do we want to put on it. And yes, other than the above, it is all wants.

How about these options?

A couple of badges above the branch tape. Maybe allow a third one centered on the left pocket (and I don't mean the pocket flap) like we've seen in a few Air Force photos. Show off the skills. As many or as little as you like, not to exceed three.

What else? A few people would like a commanders badge for utilities (and yes, I mean BDU's of the various colors). Kinda makes sense. A person doesn't shed their commander status just because they take off their blues or equivalent uniform. Do it like the Air Force, no real reason to do anything else.

Now, we got loads of patches and all kinds of places we've been putting them. Seems like we could use a unit patch (so people know who to complain to about you). Put it on the right pocket since that's where we put it now. Nothing new for the old timers.

Allow one additional patch (of the members choice) on the left pocket. This would include the specialty track patches, maybe the ES patch (which really needs to be reduced in sized), some of the SAR type schools (like Hawk Mountain), and other various and sundry things. Unless someone decides to put one of the aforementioned badges there. Either way, let the individual have one thing unique to them to put there.

We really don't need much else. Basic, simple and if you minimize patches, folks won't be running out to buy loads of them since they can't wear them all at once anyway.

And overall, it should literally be written in stone. Wing and reqion CCs supplementing 39-1 should require approval from a National Uniform board, with an approved copy maintained at NHQ. This would probably eliminate extraneous berets, wierd Honor Guard uniforms, and some seriously screwball uniform concepts. Some folks need to be kept honest.

[BrianH76]

If standardization between the AF-style uniform and the Corporate style uniform is really the overriding concern of folks, then there is a quick and easy solution that is virtually cost-free to all members.  Simply mandate the gray epaulet slides and gray nametag from the AF-style be work on the Corporate style uniform.  Just about every CAP member already has these items, so the cost would be very minor.  The AF may even be willing to consider allowing the U.S. lapel insignia, plain metal nametag, and blue sleeve braid if we do.  Other than a white shirt and an extra row of buttons, there would be no difference between the two uniforms.  Trying to adopt a new color of epaulet slides (which the AF is virtually certain to turn down; CAP-USAF/CC said there was "very little chance" of this happening), would mean all CAP members would have to buy new rank slides.

Some of the suggestions here make some sense.  Standardizing insignia placement between AF-style and corporate uniforms, adopting cold weather gear, and limiting cadet ribbons are ideas that are easy to implement, and of optional or no cost to the member.  Others, like khaki pants for the polo shirt option, make no sense and seem like change for change's sake (at least blue and gray has some status as AF colors). 

Again, I vote we leave the basics of the combinations alone and focus on updating CAPM 39-1.  Some of the suggestions here recommend making changes to or abolishing uniforms that are popular with many members.  We've had far too many uniform changes in the last few years, and there is no guarantee that this uniform committee process will not be reversed in a few years when someone with different preferences comes along.

v/r,

Brian C. Hughes, 2d Lt, CAP

[Dragoon]

I'm a big fan of the utility uniform - it's one that CAP really got right.

It's cheap.

We got all our pilots into it instead of the golf shirt.  Much more "military", blends better with other CAP uniforms, and meets all their needs.

Some folks prefer wearing shoes to boots when flying for better rudder control. And why you CAN wear shoes with BBDUS, it requires hemming and still looks kinda dorky.  You can wear shoes with the utility uniform.

A third of our pilots have gone on to invest in a blue nomex flight  suit later.  The utility uniform got 'em in cheap, and they upgraded later. 

For members who aren't groundpounders, the utility uniform pretty much meets all their needs.

[Dragoon]

The other issue, again is outerwear.  If you bury a golf shirt or field uniform under a red and black checked hunter's coat - it ain't a uniform any more.  You might as well just wear civilian clothes.

Remember, uniforms don't show if you put them under civilian coats.

For cadets - I think we need a formal waiver to allow them not to have to have field jackets and overcoats.  I think USAF might look favorably on it, as it lowers the cost of membership for these future potential recruits.

For seniors - we ought to look at mandating low cost outerwear with corporate uniforms.  Like a blue/black coaches-style windbreaker or something.  that would be long enough to cover the BBDU, and also be used with the other suits.  Just put a patch (or perhaps a leather flightsuit tag) on it and voila - lost cost uniformity.

Those that have the money could still buy black A-2's, or army windbreakers or whatever.  But this would provide a low cost option to get us all looking alike.

(also, mandate headgear for corporate uniforms - don't make it optional.  It would bring the corporate suits more in line with the USAF ones)

[tribalelder]

I meet fittest and grooming, but except for 2b proceedings and annual awards events, I avoid wearing blues anymore.

Blue utility uniform- While I'm a BBDU fan(mostly over shoes vs boots), I can see where the utility uniform makes a lot of sense-- like the smurfsuit of old.  Civilian outerwear means we already own outerwear appropriate for the weather in our respective areas.  Shoes mean lower costs and not packing extra shoes/boots to go from home to work direct to a meeting.  While I disliked the jumpsuit color and wished it was available in long sleeves, it was appropriate for everything but awards nights. When you needed long sleeves, put on an orange windbreaker.

We have a great uniform manual--for a cadet summer encampment parade ground.  My biggest squawk with the USAF uniforms are weather-related.  The winter outerwear (stocking cap and overshoes and parkas) provisions are gone from CAPM39-1.  

[tribalelder]

Dragoon's comment on windbreakers-

GREAT idea-instant uniform(ity).  Blue or black would work well, though I'd vote for red, orange or hi-viz green, with reflectorized CAP front and back.  (A little less like a police 'raid jacket')

The same hi-viz windbreaker could substitute for the GT orange vest, and at least the sleeves would be visible under the LBV, camelback/pack/field suspenders. Size it 'one up' and you'd wear warm civilian layers of clothing under it.

The leather name patch is also a great idea.

[Dragoon]

The reasons I recommended blue/black vs a high vis color  are for uniformity across purposes, saving money..

We already allow blue flight jackets with most corporate utility suits.  We allow black leather flight jackets with corporate flight gear and with white/grey and TPU combinations.  We allow black Army style outerwear with the TPU.

If we authorized, say a cheap black windbreaker, in a hip length (like coaches wear) it could be worn with BBDUs, utilities, flight suits, golf shirts, white and greys, and even TPUs.  So, one jacket covers all.  Or at least most.

An orange jacket, while useful in some situations, would not blend well with the other authorized outerwear, and would be really out of place with anything other than field/flight gear.

And with a little push, I'll be we could get USAF to buy off on it for cadets with green BDUs (though not for seniors).

The public tends to see us with our jackets on, at least in the upper half of the country. What we wear underneath really doesn't matter as much as the jacket does..

[Dragoon]

As an afterthought, we could just mandate the corporate suites be worn with any conservative, commercially available  black outer garment with no civilian patches or lables, and just affix some kind of CAP ID to it (like,ssay, the leather nametag and command patch).  That way, folks could buy whatever fits their local climate, but we'd still be uniform - everyone in black with the same patches.

Folks way up north would go with parkas.  Folks elsewhere would go with windbreakers.  It would be cheap, and provide some level of uniformity. Not as much as a standard item, but a heck of alot better than what we have now.

Plus, as an added cost savings, if members affixed the patches with velcro, they could reuse the garment for non-CAP purposes.  More savings.

[JayT]

You mean like............the leather jacket?

Or the blue flight jacket?