CAP Talk

Okay, I've been gone for about four years and I logged back in to see what was happening and the uniform debate still rages.  Now the much hated TPU is going away after a having a longer service life than General McPeak's blue admiral/airline pilot uniform of the 90's.

I am curious to know how much money was wasted developing the "corporate" uniform, what was invested in the uniform by Vanguard, and how many CAP members spent a good amount of money to purchase it?  Just curious.

BDU versus the Blueberry Field Uniform.  Best uniform option CAP came up with in addition to the blue polo and grey slacks.  Aviator shirt and gray slacks weren't bad either.

ABU's.  I don't foresee CAP ever being authorized to wear it.

Well.  I'll probably lurk around here for a while and throw in my two cents.

Chuck

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 03:12:28 AM
Okay, I've been gone for about four years and I logged back in to see what was happening and the uniform debate still rages.  Now the much hated TPU is going away after a having a longer service life than General McPeak's blue admiral/airline pilot uniform of the 90's.

Major, you are one of the few that "hates" the CSU.  There are a lot of people, myself included, who like it and harbour some hope that cooler heads will prevail and that it will be retained.

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 03:12:28 AM
I am curious to know how much money was wasted developing the "corporate" uniform, what was invested in the uniform by Vanguard, and how many CAP members spent a good amount of money to purchase it?  Just curious.

I can only speak for myself.  I already had parts of it because I have the AF blue uniform.  The only specific parts I shelled out for were the blue nameplate, brushed-silver "Civil Air Patrol" nameplate (which I will never be able to use now) and blue Captain's shoulder marks, oh, and paying a few bucks for a set of Captain's bars at my local Army-Navy.  The CSU got canned before I ever got to purchase the service dress coat.

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 03:12:28 AM
BDU versus the Blueberry Field Uniform.

I own, use and like the BBDU.  I would like to see CAP go to that since we really don't need camouflage.

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 03:12:28 AM
Best uniform option CAP came up with in addition to the blue polo and grey slacks.  Aviator shirt and gray slacks weren't bad either.

Both of which I think suck rocks, but at least the white/grey looks somewhat quasi-military aviation (look at old pictures of the East German Air Force - the grey is nearly identical).

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 03:12:28 AM
ABU's.  I don't foresee CAP ever being authorized to wear it.

Agreed, especially given the jumble of camouflage field uniforms now being thrown in the blender among the five services...not incidentally costing the taxpayer more money.

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 03:12:28 AM
Okay, I've been gone for about four years and I logged back in to see what was happening and the uniform debate still rages.  Now the much hated TPU is going away after a having a longer service life than General McPeak's blue admiral/airline pilot uniform of the 90's.

I am curious to know how much money was wasted developing the "corporate" uniform, what was invested in the uniform by Vanguard, and how many CAP members spent a good amount of money to purchase it?  Just curious.

I like the CSU as well, and I think you will be largely outnumbered everywhere in CAP. I wear Blues, but I still like the CSU. I think it is a good alternative for those who can't or don't want to wear Blues. I still have quarrels about anyone wanting to drop a professional uniform for those who can't wear Blues. I don't think the Lambda Lambda Lambda jacket is even decent as  a uniform option, the pocket protector available to that uniform is just not at all a good way to show someones progress. I also think dropping the CSU shows those who are overweight that they don't mean as much as those who can wear Blues,  everyone deserves a good looking uniform.

QuoteBDU versus the Blueberry Field Uniform.  Best uniform option CAP came up with in addition to the blue polo and grey slacks.  Aviator shirt and gray slacks weren't bad either.

ABU's.  I don't foresee CAP ever being authorized to wear it.

Well.  I'll probably lurk around here for a while and throw in my two cents.

Chuck

I don't think we should drop the BDU or decline any uniform that USAF approves for us to wear, whether it be the ABU, or MPU, or any other uniform that they approve. It shows me that there are some in CAP who hate that we are associated with the military. To keep in the traditions of CAP and our link with USAF we need to continue as we always have and move to the current uniform of USAF when they say go ahead. If you  don't want to wear the USAF style uniforms, then don't, if you don't want a relation to USAF, then leave CAP.

I don't know it this is a thread about "what uniforms I want" or is this a thead about "CAPTALK talks about uniforms too much".

Bottom line.

CAPTALK is where we talk about CAP........hence the name. :)

And uniforms seem to be important to a lot of peopl in CAP and especially to some on CAPTALK.

The debate still rages...because nothing has really changed.  The USAF started moving to ABUs six years ago....and CAP is still in limbo.
The CSU (formally the TPU) is dead......it is on its way out.....but there is no real fix for the fat and fuzzies.

Now if you wan personal opinons from some of us on this forum?

Well.......personally, I think it was an error to nix the CSU.  We should have take the silver braid off of it and then made it the only uniform option for seniors.
I think that we should eliminate the BDU option for seniors and go with the BBDU.
I think we need to just take off the rank from the shoulder of the flight suit and eliminate the blue flight suit.

That would solve 90% of all the arguments IMHO.

It get us seniors into a single uniform.
It make nice with the USAF who seem to think that there is a problem when their airman can't tell the difference between a CAP officer and a "real" officer.
It keeps us close to the USAF in appearance to maintain the identity that we are their auxillery.
It keeps the military look that we need/want.

The real driver of the "problem" is and always has been the USAF IMHO.

The USAF makes no effort to educate themselves on who and what CAP is.
The USAF is reluctantant to come out and openly state their opinion of the appearance of CAP (we get a lot of hearsay and inuendo).
The USAF seems IMHO to want it's cake and to eat it too.  They want to dictate uniforms but not anything else.

CAP does not help the situation with the wannabe's who troll for salutes, the PITAs who refuse to follow published regulations and wear the uniforms improperly, the leadersh who do what they want no matter what the USAF has stated.

We in CAP can do our part by:

1) Forcing our peers and subordinates to wear the uniforms properly.
2) Clearing communicating our wishes and desires for uniforms up the chain of command so the Wing CC's can take it up at the NB.
3) Stop looking at the uniforms from what you as an individual wants....but what is good for the organisation.  (we have a lot of heart burn over branding with the triangle thingy.....but no one worries about our branding when we have 9 different uniform combinations at a meeting/mission base).

All the BIG uniform issues are at root an Air Force issue and always have been.  The cause is their relatively recent desire to not have anyone fat or fuzzy in anything that looks like a current or former (BDU) AF uniform.  Hence we have corporate and AF style uniforms.  If there ever was an example of a solution without a real underlying problem, this is it. 

All CAP members should be in an Air Force style uniform.  Putting us all in corporate uniforms won't make a bit of difference to those who think that having an occasional CAP member demand a salute from a military member is a problem.  Those whackos are just as likely to do it if they were in a CAP corporate military style uniform as an AF style uniform.  I'm sure if we looked hard enough we could dig out a story about a CAP member in BBDUs demanding a salute.   Sure, those situations should not happen but they are so rare and don't really mean anything anyway, we should not base our whole uniform system on them.

How little of a problem would it be if all CAP members returned to being in AF style uniforms -- like we were for much of our history?  None at all.  We only have to look at the CG Aux.  They wear uniforms much closer to CG uniforms than CAP AF style uniforms are to actual AF uniforms.  CG Auxies are constantly encouraged and do go out and represent the CG to the general public way more than CAP represents the AF.  They're teaching classes, inspecting boats, and actually conducting on-the-water patrols and I'd say that the possibility of a bad press for the CG because of CG Aux actions is WAY higher than anything CAP could do that would make the AF look bad.  But, despite all that there actually are no real problems with their uniforms being almost identical.

If all CAP members were in AF style uniforms it would also have the added benefit of removing the ability of CAP leaders to come up with even more crazy ideas for uniform items than they do now and there would be at least some "adult" oversight since all uniform changes would have to go through the AF. 

Oh I agree with you River (yes the world is comming to an end! :)).......

I think the USAF has caused a lot of the uniform problems because of knee jerk reactions to what were actually isolated issues.

If I were God.....

I would work with the USAF to get all of us into the USAF style uniform.  I would tell the USAF that they have to accpet the thin and shaved as well as the fat and fuzzies.

I would tell CAP members that we will have to accept some differences from the USAF uniform to releive the fears that the USAF has about us embarrasing the USAF through mistake identity.

I think that bringing the wing patches back or putting a generic CAP patch on the shoulder of all CAP uniforms would do the trick.  I mean even the blindest, brain deadest airman at basic training could tell a real officer from a CAP officer when therer is a big blue CAP path on the shoulder of his ABUs.

I think the USAF needs to do their part to include CAP in their basic training curriculmn.  The Auxillary is part of the USAF and airman and new officers need to know who we are and what we look like.

And I agree.....that if we mirrored USAF rules (I have even proposed that we be a chapter in their uniform reg) we would give the USAF sole control of our uniforms and by extention give us the power of "The USAF does not want you wear oragne t-shirts and ranger tabs, or whistles and ascots, or pink tutus and 5 duty badges."

For senior/adult members -- Overall I'd like to see us ALL in the AF blue type uniforms with some better modifications to differentiate us more from the the typical AF uniform.  Also for the utility uniform I would go with the Blue BDU's and again do some additional modifications to better differentiate us from others.
For the AF blue uniforms I would go to a bright red name tag also with bright red shoulder boards.  Also for the class A service dress I would change the buttons to reflect those red prop triangle CAP emblem.  I would remove the one of US insignia's and have only US insignia and the other side a CAP insignia.   For the hat again I would go to a bright red hat.

For the utility uniform and flight uniforms it would be Blue again with red base ball type CAP and red name tags, with the same bright red base ball caps with NO rank and the cap would have the new triangle insignia on it.  I would also consider only having the rank display just above the individual's name on the uniform.

For the cadets again it would be the AF type uniform, which is already differentiated, except for the red name tag (versus blue) and I also would put all the cadets in blue bdu's.

I would also continue to allow the short/long golf shirts BUT these would be worn with the AF blue pants.

I think we would have to study what outer garments would be cost effective, I'd like to see something such as an all weather winter & than spring/fall/summer type jacket.

For the most part I think CAP needs to force the uniform issue even if it involves congress, especially IF we can make it distinctive enough and only use the blue uniforms (color & cut) used by the AF with everything else on the uniform VERY distinctive.
RM         

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 13, 2011, 04:51:22 PM
For senior/adult members -- Overall I'd like to see us ALL in the AF blue type uniforms with some better modifications to differentiate us more from the the typical AF uniform.  Also for the utility uniform I would go with the Blue BDU's and again do some additional modifications to better differentiate us from others.
For the AF blue uniforms I would go to a bright red name tag also with bright red shoulder boards.  Also for the class A service dress I would change the buttons to reflect those red prop triangle CAP emblem.  I would remove the one of US insignia's and have only US insignia and the other side a CAP insignia.   For the hat again I would go to a bright red hat.

For the utility uniform and flight uniforms it would be Blue again with red base ball type CAP and red name tags, with the same bright red base ball caps with NO rank and the cap would have the new triangle insignia on it.  I would also consider only having the rank display just above the individual's name on the uniform.

For the cadets again it would be the AF type uniform, which is already differentiated, except for the red name tag (versus blue) and I also would put all the cadets in blue bdu's.

I would also continue to allow the short/long golf shirts BUT these would be worn with the AF blue pants.

I think we would have to study what outer garments would be cost effective, I'd like to see something such as an all weather winter & than spring/fall/summer type jacket.

For the most part I think CAP needs to force the uniform issue even if it involves congress, especially IF we can make it distinctive enough and only use the blue uniforms (color & cut) used by the AF with everything else on the uniform VERY distinctive.
RM         

No, Just no! What's with the red obsession?  :o

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 13, 2011, 04:51:22 PM
For senior/adult members -- Overall I'd like to see us ALL in the AF blue type uniforms with some better modifications to differentiate us more from the the typical AF uniform.  Also for the utility uniform I would go with the Blue BDU's and again do some additional modifications to better differentiate us from others.
For the AF blue uniforms I would go to a bright red name tag also with bright red shoulder boards.  Also for the class A service dress I would change the buttons to reflect those red prop triangle CAP emblem.  I would remove the one of US insignia's and have only US insignia and the other side a CAP insignia.   For the hat again I would go to a bright red hat.

For the utility uniform and flight uniforms it would be Blue again with red base ball type CAP and red name tags, with the same bright red base ball caps with NO rank and the cap would have the new triangle insignia on it.  I would also consider only having the rank display just above the individual's name on the uniform.

For the cadets again it would be the AF type uniform, which is already differentiated, except for the red name tag (versus blue) and I also would put all the cadets in blue bdu's.

I would also continue to allow the short/long golf shirts BUT these would be worn with the AF blue pants.

I think we would have to study what outer garments would be cost effective, I'd like to see something such as an all weather winter & than spring/fall/summer type jacket.

For the most part I think CAP needs to force the uniform issue even if it involves congress, especially IF we can make it distinctive enough and only use the blue uniforms (color & cut) used by the AF with everything else on the uniform VERY distinctive.
RM         

From CAP(Civil Air Patrol) to ZAP(Zouave Air Patrol). >:D

_Redundant post_

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 13, 2011, 04:51:22 PMRM

Nothing really needs to change at all, except for a replacement for the CSU coat.  Or for that matter - DON'T replace it, wear it over the current  grey &white.  Tell me ANYBODY is going to mistake that for a military uniform.

It seems that rank insignia is at the core of what the AF has issues with when it comes to CAP.

Do you think that wearing McPeek or Navy type rank stripes with CAP uniforms would solve that issue?

Quote from: HGjunkie on March 13, 2011, 07:22:39 PM
_Redundant post_

Last time I looked at a cadet their rank is red., blue, & white.  Again change the name tags to a bright red, CAP to a bright red background with white lettering and this will be VERY good differentiation to the USAF as well as the general public that we are CIVIL Air Patrol!
:clap:
RM

I am for tropical shirts and grey 5.11 cargo pants!!!!!!!

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 13, 2011, 09:26:37 PM

Quote from: HGjunkie on March 13, 2011, 07:22:39 PM
_Redundant post_

Last time I looked at a cadet their rank is red., blue, & white.  Again change the name tags to a bright red, CAP to a bright red background with white lettering and this will be VERY good differentiation to the USAF as well as the general public that we are CIVIL Air Patrol!
:clap:
RM

No. The red you mentioned on the enlisted ranks is plenty on the uniform. I absolutely cannot stand the thought of my nameplate/tapes being some funky clown-red color instead of dark blue.

And I get it, you don't like the military uniforms.

I personally like the CSU uniform. I would wear it if they kept it around.

Quote from: caphistorian on March 13, 2011, 09:58:11 PM
I personally like the CSU uniform. I would wear it if they kept it around.

second

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 13, 2011, 04:51:22 PM
For senior/adult members -- Overall I'd like to see us ALL in the AF blue type uniforms with some better modifications to differentiate us more from the the typical AF uniform.  Also for the utility uniform I would go with the Blue BDU's and again do some additional modifications to better differentiate us from others.
For the AF blue uniforms I would go to a bright red name tag also with bright red shoulder boards.  Also for the class A service dress I would change the buttons to reflect those red prop triangle CAP emblem.  I would remove the one of US insignia's and have only US insignia and the other side a CAP insignia.   For the hat again I would go to a bright red hat.

For the utility uniform and flight uniforms it would be Blue again with red base ball type CAP and red name tags, with the same bright red base ball caps with NO rank and the cap would have the new triangle insignia on it.  I would also consider only having the rank display just above the individual's name on the uniform.

For the cadets again it would be the AF type uniform, which is already differentiated, except for the red name tag (versus blue) and I also would put all the cadets in blue bdu's.

I would also continue to allow the short/long golf shirts BUT these would be worn with the AF blue pants.

I think we would have to study what outer garments would be cost effective, I'd like to see something such as an all weather winter & than spring/fall/summer type jacket.

For the most part I think CAP needs to force the uniform issue even if it involves congress, especially IF we can make it distinctive enough and only use the blue uniforms (color & cut) used by the AF with everything else on the uniform VERY distinctive.
RM         

We get it YOU don't like the idea of being asociated with the military. Don't think of riddling our uniforms with clown makeup. Our shoulder marks do enough as they are already gray to differentiate us form USAF.

I have asked you this question before RM, and you never gave an answer. What do you have against military uniforms?

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 13, 2011, 10:04:10 PM

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 13, 2011, 04:51:22 PM
For senior/adult members -- Overall I'd like to see us ALL in the AF blue type uniforms with some better modifications to differentiate us more from the the typical AF uniform.  Also for the utility uniform I would go with the Blue BDU's and again do some additional modifications to better differentiate us from others.
For the AF blue uniforms I would go to a bright red name tag also with bright red shoulder boards.  Also for the class A service dress I would change the buttons to reflect those red prop triangle CAP emblem.  I would remove the one of US insignia's and have only US insignia and the other side a CAP insignia.   For the hat again I would go to a bright red hat.

For the utility uniform and flight uniforms it would be Blue again with red base ball type CAP and red name tags, with the same bright red base ball caps with NO rank and the cap would have the new triangle insignia on it.  I would also consider only having the rank display just above the individual's name on the uniform.

For the cadets again it would be the AF type uniform, which is already differentiated, except for the red name tag (versus blue) and I also would put all the cadets in blue bdu's.

I would also continue to allow the short/long golf shirts BUT these would be worn with the AF blue pants.

I think we would have to study what outer garments would be cost effective, I'd like to see something such as an all weather winter & than spring/fall/summer type jacket.

For the most part I think CAP needs to force the uniform issue even if it involves congress, especially IF we can make it distinctive enough and only use the blue uniforms (color & cut) used by the AF with everything else on the uniform VERY distinctive.
RM         

We get it YOU don't like the idea of being asociated with the military. Don't think of riddling our uniforms with clown makeup. Our shoulder marks do enough as they are already gray to differentiate us form USAF.

I have asked you this question before RM, and you never gave an answer. What do you have against military uniforms?

The next thing would be because we are the CiIVIL AIR PATROL, and that's getting old. Why is it that the uniform issue only came to a head because a certain former national commander thumbed his nose at the Air Force and tried to put people into a strange combination of Air Force band uniforms (ever see the two uniforms side by side) and Army uniform items. 

As far as the red thing, sure. Red and SILVER or grey are WWII official colors of the CAP, but red is now also used by state guard units especially with name plates and BDU name tapes.

By the way, blue BDUs mean special duty people in the Air Force...missile launch, transient maintenance, SF emergency service teams. Blue BDUs are also worn by a lot of civilian EMS teams, amd the Coast Guard Auxiliary.

The CAP uniform is distinctive enough. As far as putting the wing patches back on, you'd need to educate the masses about hearldry. In some instances, trying to change a wing patch to conform with the current acceptable standard (Air Force wing patches) only draws the same ire from the field, so it's kind of a lost cause.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 13, 2011, 10:04:10 PM

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 13, 2011, 04:51:22 PM
For senior/adult members -- Overall I'd like to see us ALL in the AF blue type uniforms with some better modifications to differentiate us more from the the typical AF uniform.  Also for the utility uniform I would go with the Blue BDU's and again do some additional modifications to better differentiate us from others.
For the AF blue uniforms I would go to a bright red name tag also with bright red shoulder boards.  Also for the class A service dress I would change the buttons to reflect those red prop triangle CAP emblem.  I would remove the one of US insignia's and have only US insignia and the other side a CAP insignia.   For the hat again I would go to a bright red hat.

For the utility uniform and flight uniforms it would be Blue again with red base ball type CAP and red name tags, with the same bright red base ball caps with NO rank and the cap would have the new triangle insignia on it.  I would also consider only having the rank display just above the individual's name on the uniform.

For the cadets again it would be the AF type uniform, which is already differentiated, except for the red name tag (versus blue) and I also would put all the cadets in blue bdu's.

I would also continue to allow the short/long golf shirts BUT these would be worn with the AF blue pants.

I think we would have to study what outer garments would be cost effective, I'd like to see something such as an all weather winter & than spring/fall/summer type jacket.

For the most part I think CAP needs to force the uniform issue even if it involves congress, especially IF we can make it distinctive enough and only use the blue uniforms (color & cut) used by the AF with everything else on the uniform VERY distinctive.
RM         

We get it YOU don't like the idea of being asociated with the military. Don't think of riddling our uniforms with clown makeup. Our shoulder marks do enough as they are already gray to differentiate us form USAF.

I have asked you this question before RM, and you never gave an answer. What do you have against military uniforms?

Is it the fact you're a Retired member of the Armed Forces and you can't stand the idea that a "civilian" can wear a uniform?

Get over it. Heck even AAFES wears ABU's when they're "downrange".

Not that we currently have the most remote chance of changing things, I am definitely against red additions to the uniform.  Heck, the grey is  already less than desirable.

Way back when I started with CAP I wore the AF style uniform with the burgundy epaulets and then we transitioned to the grey when I was a Captain.  Which I thought the grey and silver looked good on the AF Style uniform and still do.

I like the aviator uniform.  Personal opinion.

The CPU, I didn't like it for a number of reasons.  Probably because of the man pushing it was one.  Second it was just another added cost to members when we had multiple uniform combinations.    If you are going to introduce one, remove one. 

Anyways, all valid opinions and there is nothing easier to stir the pot then to bring up uniforms.

Chuck

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 11:49:09 PMThe CPU

The proper nomenclature is "CSU", as in "Corporate Service Uniform".  Refering to it as anything else is simply a backhanded
comment on HWSRN and a forehanded slap at people who continue to wear and an advocate its continued use.

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 11:49:09 PM
Second it was just another added cost to members when we had multiple uniform combinations.    If you are going to introduce one, remove one.

The CSU did not add a single dollar to anyone's budget unless they were inclined to wear it - the whites never changed, and
the CSU was not required, so I have no idea how you can characterize it as an "added cost to members".  It was no more an "added cost"
than a flight suit, golf shirt, or blazer, all of which are optional combinations after a member procure the required USAF blues or aviator whites.

With the CSU, all members had a military-style option, which allowed them to fulfill their missions while not looking like a member
of the city council next to others in blues.  If and when the CSU's sundown sticks, we will once again be back to a situation where
a significant population of our members is without a uniform which fulfills all of their mission requirements in a way which does not hold
them out as "different".

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 11:49:09 PM
Anyways, all valid opinions and there is nothing easier to stir the pot then to bring up uniforms.

Especially in regards to topics which already have a number of open threads.

Quote from: eaker.cadet on March 13, 2011, 10:03:40 PM

Quote from: caphistorian on March 13, 2011, 09:58:11 PM
I personally like the CSU uniform. I would wear it if they kept it around.

second

I would too, even though I meet AF standards.  I thought it looked nice except for the silver braid.

CSU my mistake.  To me it will always be the TPU for the obvious reason.  For the record, I know a lot of people in CAP that purchased the uniform or pieces of it to stay current.  So in effect it did add to peoples budgets, especially when the brass at the top of CAP were pushing it.

Yes there are a lot of topic threads on uniforms and I added to it.  Intentionally I must add.

Quote from: Eclipse on March 14, 2011, 12:03:59 AM

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 11:49:09 PMThe CPU

The proper nomenclature is "CSU", as in "Corporate Service Uniform".  Refering to it as anything else is simply a backhanded
comment on HWSRN and a forehanded slap at people who continue to wear and an advocate its continued use.

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 11:49:09 PM
Second it was just another added cost to members when we had multiple uniform combinations.    If you are going to introduce one, remove one.

The CSU did not add a single dollar to anyone's budget unless they were inclined to wear it - the whites never changed, and
the CSU was not required, so I have no idea how you can characterize it as an "added cost to members".  It was no more an "added cost"
than a flight suit, golf shirt, or blazer, all of which are optional combinations after a member procure the required USAF blues or aviator whites.

With the CSU, all members had a military-style option, which allowed them to fulfill their missions while not looking like a member
of the city council next to others in blues.  If and when the CSU's sundown sticks, we will once again be back to a situation where
a significant population of our members is without a uniform which fulfills all of their mission requirements in a way which does not hold
them out as "different".

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 13, 2011, 11:49:09 PM
Anyways, all valid opinions and there is nothing easier to stir the pot then to bring up uniforms.

Especially in regards to topics which already have a number of open threads.

Quote from: Major_Chuck on March 14, 2011, 12:48:31 AMYes there are a lot of topic threads on uniforms and I added to it.  Intentionally I must add.

Awesome.  Nothing better than making rehashed points into a new thread.

Really moves the dialog forward.

I like to "keep current" with uniforms, too, but that isn't the same as forcing people to spend money.  People do what they will - anyone wearing and
able to use the USAF style who went out and purposely bought the CSU "to keep current" has no business doing anything but thanking NHQ for offering another choice, they certainly have no room to complain about the money they spent, other than in the context that it will potentially be disallowed too early.

Slap this bad boy on everyones left shoulder, and suddenly we all are easily distinguished as CIVIL AIR PATROL. Imagine that.

(http://www.scripophily.com/webcart/vigs/civildefense2.jpg)

Coming up out of the eighties as a cadet, then senior member and wearing the blue epaulettes with the embroidered CAP on them was an honor because I felt I was doing something that mattered.  When the maroon scourge occurred, both the CAP executive leadership, but also the CAP-USAF leadership respect meter fell to zero with me.  Something was taken from me.  Oh yes, it was a pretty fair chunk of dignity. Over the course of a short period of time, we went from blue epaulettes, to maroon epaulettes, to grey epaulettes.  Why now does not matter.  What happened, happened, but the damage was never appropriately repaired.

Those wounds will never heal until our blue epaulettes are restored.  If the embroidered CAP was/is unsufficient to 'differentiate' us from the RM either from embarassment or whatever, then a prominent embroidered silver triangle and nice red tri-prop can be added above the grade insignia. That's all. End of story, life goes on.  Oh, and the blue nameplate gets restored as well.

The bottom line on the whole uniform issue is not the uniforms, but an issue of training.  We are not training our members to wear the uniform properly, to explain the heritage of the uniform and what it represents, etc. etc.  The old classroom based Level I didn't do a good job, and even now, the current Level I Foundations course does not do a good job either, as we keep having the same complaints come up over and over.

I've always found it odd that CAP expects a brand new member to get all they need, a 'foundation', if you will, in the course of an 8-hour course (back in the day), or an online course that takes a few hours sitting at a computer........boggles the mind.

The CSU should remain as an options as well.  It is a very good looking uniform for those members who do not meet USAF height/weight and grooming standards + 10% or just don't want to wear the USAF uniform.

::)


There.  I feel better.  :P



Cheers,

Quote from: Nilsog on March 14, 2011, 01:42:51 AM
Slap this bad boy on everyones left shoulder, and suddenly we all are easily distinguished as CIVIL AIR PATROL. Imagine that.

(http://www.scripophily.com/webcart/vigs/civildefense2.jpg)

TOTALLY AGREE! On the left sleeve of all uniforms. Put the wing patch on the right sleeve on field/BDU's/flight suits getting rid of the reverse flag on the BDU's. Put all seniors in BBDU's. All Seniors in AF Dress but with the white shirt instead of the blue shirt. The combination of the shoulder boards, patch on left shoulder and white shirt should eliminate any confusion allowing everyone to be in ONE uniform again.

Leave the cadet uniforms alone.

Quote from: LTC Don on March 14, 2011, 01:48:32 AM
Those wounds will never heal until our blue epaulettes are restored.

The Civil Air Patrol would be much better off as an organization if we focused on things which actually mattered, and actually occurred in the current century.

Few current members are even aware of the situation, and fewer still view it as anything but a blip on the radar.  Anyone viewing it as an "open would" needs to seriously re-evaluate their level of personal drama.

Quote from: LTC Don on March 14, 2011, 01:48:32 AMI've always found it odd that CAP expects a brand new member to get all they need, a 'foundation', if you will, in the course of an 8-hour course (back in the day), or an online course that takes a few hours sitting at a computer........boggles the mind.

The program's curriculum is very clear that Level 1 is the beginning of training, and strongly recommends the pairing of people with mentors. The biggest problem is the unwillingness to hurt anyone's feelings, so members are allowed to wallow in their own mistakes and misinterpretations for years, and then propagate those issues along with them.

Couple that regulations that conflict between each other and themselves, and a PAO directorate willing to continue to publish photographs of members
in incorrect / retired / inappropriate uniforms, and you see why we are where we are.

Ok, i have an idea....

How about we leave the uniforms alone, and focus on getting new missions for our dwindling SAR numbers...

Also we could leave the uniforms alone, and figure out who we are, and who we are going to be as an organization in an ever changing world.

We could also leave the uniforms alone and figure out our massive governance FUBAR.....

Just some crazy ideas....

^K

It will be a lot easier to figure all that out once we've finished figuring out who we're supposed to be.

I guess some have a problem figuring out who they are in CAP and what CAP is in the world.

Not ME.

CAP is the USAF Auxiliary, we take care of Cadet Programs, assisting our youth to grow up with core values, a sense of pride, and skills that they will need in order to succeed in the world, both civilian and military. All of this in a drug and alcohol free and abuse free environment.

As the USAF Auxiliary we also take care of about 95% of all inland search and rescue, both on the ground and in the air. We are also an all volunteer organization who during the Gulf Oil Disaster flew well over 1,000 hours to support the cleanup and the cordon of the oil by flying and taking photographs of the disaster area and efforts.

EDIT: NOT TO MENTION OUR WWII HISTORY, WITH COMBAT OPERATIONS.

We also teach, not only our Senior Membership and Cadets, but youth and adults in the community about air power and the need for it.

We as the USAF Aux must realize that were we not the USAF Aux, and were not in the uniforms, we would no longer exist in the capacity that we do. I hope you realize it, once we shed the uniform of the USAF, we will loose the Aux status, and we will also loose our funding from both Congress, also our organizational status, and funding from the USAF. We will barely exist if at all were these actions to take place.

What we are and what we do is incredible. We would be nothing were it not for Ma Blue. We are civilians who volunteer our time for our community state and nation, getting to wear the USAF uniforms with our own insignia is a privilege.

I don't care if some of you hate the uniforms or not, I don't care if you hate us being in the uniforms because you are retired military, I am a disabled vet who wears the USAF style uniforms proudly while I do my job for CAP and USAF. I DO (not don't) care if you hate the USAF style uniforms because you are too heavy, because when I am able, I try to talk to the right people and get them on my side allowing the overweight to wear the USAF style uniforms, why? Because you deserve it. If you are fuzzy, and not overweight, and you whine about the USAF uniforms, I really don't care. I think for SMs you should be in grooming standards just as all cadets are.

I don't mean to hurt anyone, or make anyone mad, this is my opinion, and whenever I can I will do my best to get everyone in the USAF style uniforms, with blue epaulets, and to be able to look good in them as well.

The only truly good and educational uniform topics on here are one where historical uniforms are pictured and discussed.  Topics on uniform "wish lists," possible changes and the like usually end in vitriol and banality.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 03:22:18 AM
I guess some have a problem figuring out who they are in CAP and what CAP is in the world.

I'm assuming this was aimed at me. I think you took my post wrong. What I meant was, it will be a lot easier for everyone to focus on other things when they stop crying about uniforms all the time and figure out that we are CAP, regardless of the colored thread we cover ourselves with. If USAF says we're to wear Pink trousers and white shirts with purple rank and tapes, how will that change what we do? Sure, thats a radical example, but the fact remains we are Civil Air Patrol, and the longer we cry about losing blue shoulder boards 20 years ago the more we're going to be perceived as big blubbering babies who want nothing more than to look like USAF wannabees.

Be glad we are permitted to wear the uniforms we are permitted to, wear them properly and with pride.

Quote from: Nilsog on March 14, 2011, 03:47:28 AM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 03:22:18 AM
I guess some have a problem figuring out who they are in CAP and what CAP is in the world.

I'm assuming this was aimed at me.

I am pretty sure it was not at all addressed to you.

Quote from: Nilsog on March 14, 2011, 01:42:51 AM
Slap this bad boy on everyones left shoulder, and suddenly we all are easily distinguished as CIVIL AIR PATROL. Imagine that.

(http://www.scripophily.com/webcart/vigs/civildefense2.jpg)

Now why do you want to steal the Overseas Squadrons "Wing" patch?

Quote from: Nilsog on March 14, 2011, 03:47:28 AM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 03:22:18 AM
I guess some have a problem figuring out who they are in CAP and what CAP is in the world.

I'm assuming this was aimed at me. I think you took my post wrong. What I meant was, it will be a lot easier for everyone to focus on other things when they stop crying about uniforms all the time and figure out that we are CAP, regardless of the colored thread we cover ourselves with. If USAF says we're to wear Pink trousers and white shirts with purple rank and tapes, how will that change what we do? Sure, thats a radical example, but the fact remains we are Civil Air Patrol, and the longer we cry about losing blue shoulder boards 20 years ago the more we're going to be perceived as big blubbering babies who want nothing more than to look like USAF wannabees.

Be glad we are permitted to wear the uniforms we are permitted to, wear them properly and with pride.

No Sir, this was not aimed at any one person. Only to state how I feel about the uniform wear, what I want to see, and what I try to advocate when I can. I guess you could say I was kind of aiming towards groups, but no individual. I have met quite a few CAP personnel who fit into one of these categories that I mentioned. Just because they are overweight, does not mean that I have any less respect for them. I have the most respect of any CAP personnel for one who is overweight, he gives of so much of his time and effort running our squadron's Comms and our morale leadership. He is overweight, he is not in the prime of his life, but he still tries to run around like a 19 year old marathon runner taking care of our cadets and our ground teams on the radios. This Captain is amazing. I have the most respect for him of anyone in my squadron, and I have a lot of respect for every one of our members, our CC is amazing, so are our AE Safety and PAO officers. However our assistant ESO (that's me) has a long way to go to measure up to them.

I want every CAP member to be able to wear the USAF style uniforms, that is all. Especially those who give so much to our Cadets and our organization.

Quote from: PHall on March 14, 2011, 03:55:36 AM
Now why do you want to steal the Overseas Squadrons "Wing" patch?

That is not the overseas wing patch.

And I offer my apologies for my previous post. Perhaps it was I who read wrong.

Quote from: Nilsog on March 14, 2011, 04:07:07 AM

Quote from: PHall on March 14, 2011, 03:55:36 AM
Now why do you want to steal the Overseas Squadrons "Wing" patch?

That is not the overseas wing patch.

And my apologies for my previous post.

No apologies necessary. I could have worded that better, and I am sure  that I could have worded it better the second time too.

I am not very eloquent and my vocabulary is rather obtuse. In the Army they used to sit and count the number of times *F word would come out of my mouth while giving a briefing to my team. I think they got to about 47 in less than 20 minutes.

Quote from: Nilsog on March 14, 2011, 04:07:07 AM

Quote from: PHall on March 14, 2011, 03:55:36 AM
Now why do you want to steal the Overseas Squadrons "Wing" patch?

That is not the overseas wing patch.

It sure looks like it to me.

Quote from: ß τ ε on March 14, 2011, 05:11:26 AM

Quote from: Nilsog on March 14, 2011, 04:07:07 AM

Quote from: PHall on March 14, 2011, 03:55:36 AM
Now why do you want to steal the Overseas Squadrons "Wing" patch?

That is not the overseas wing patch.

It sure looks like it to me.

That is similar is style the overseas wing patch, but I think that particular patch shown is an old WWII era patch.

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 14, 2011, 05:21:40 AM

Quote from: ß τ ε on March 14, 2011, 05:11:26 AM

Quote from: Nilsog on March 14, 2011, 04:07:07 AM

Quote from: PHall on March 14, 2011, 03:55:36 AM
Now why do you want to steal the Overseas Squadrons "Wing" patch?

That is not the overseas wing patch.

It sure looks like it to me.

That is similar is style the overseas wing patch, but I think that particular patch shown is an old WWII era patch.

Go check the Vanguard website. I realize they're not "offical", but they do have pictures.

CAP Emblem Patch, originally used during WWII:

(http://www.scripophily.com/webcart/vigs/civildefense2.jpg)

CAP Overseas Squadron Wing Patch:

(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/000000CAP0638Z.jpg)

Similar, but different. If anything, it was the original CAP patch. I don't see how wearing it could offend anyone, and would clearly distinguish us as Civil Air Patrol. Wear it on BDUs, Blues, Corporate. Solution presented.

Re: CAP Overseas Squadron Wing Patch

That's interesting. The one I have in my hand, and wore while in an O/S unit in the late '80s, has USAF in place of the US, and a white border, instead of the blue border shown above. A review of my uniform references reveals the US and blue border design in versions of CAPM 39-1 both before and after my time in the O/S unit. I'm wondering if they were made locally, and someone goofed the design. I just bought them from the on hand stock, and never got them from the Bookstore.

Major Harris - your experience with the same unit?

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 04:10:24 AM
I am not very eloquent and my vocabulary is rather obtuse. In the Army they used to sit and count the number of times *F word would come out of my mouth while giving a briefing to my team. I think they got to about 47 in less than 20 minutes.

47 in 20 minutes?  Was that when you were just starting out?   I've seen cadets who could do a better job of that.

I think that was the patch from way back in the day.

By the time I was CC for OS-113 we were using the blue with "US" that I bought from the BookStore/CAPMART.

I agree that we should wear this patch on all our uniforms.....it would go a long way to set ouselves apart from the USAF.

Quote from: lordmonar on March 14, 2011, 02:18:10 PM
I agree that we should wear this patch on all our uniforms.....it would go a long way to set ouselves apart from the USAF.

I agree, but not on all uniforms.  It is an absolute devil to get patches to look right on the AF blue shirt, and the material for that leaves very prominent holes.

Service coat, blue lightweight jacket, B/BDU's, things like that, I think would be good.

RM: I don't know what your fixation is with the colour red or perpetual reminders that "we are the CIVIL Air Patrol."  WRT the former - red looks absolutely atrocious with blue in a way that it didn't with tan/khaki/OD, and the latter....WE KNOW.  The "Civil" in our title comes from our background in the Office of Civilian Defence.  I doubt there is a serving member today who doesn't know we are the Civil Air Patrol.  Your opinion on having us all out of military-style uniforms is well-known.

I think the 500-pound-gorilla in the room is the one we've been dancing around for at least the past 15 years or so...to ask the USAF for a straight yes/no answer on this question:

DO YOU REALLY NEED US ANYMORE?

If the answer is "no, the world has changed a lot since 1941, you served a useful purpose that is no longer needed, and thank you," then we stand down one last time.

If the answer is "yes," then we quit messing about with the "AUX ON/OFF" status.  We are either the USAF Auxiliary or we are not, and that means returning to a military-style mode of operations, doing our three core missions and doing them right, not trying to just be a garden-variety ES organisation with airplanes, and quit messing about with anything that gets away with our mission as the USAF Auxiliary.

And how that relates to uniforms...?

We get everyone wearing an Air Force-type uniform, junk the polo shirts, junk the grey/whites, junk the blazers.  I don't see why it couldn't happen.  As has been mentioned, the USCG has no problem with their Auxiliary doing so, and the AF itself doesn't seem to have a problem with its older members not exactly being in fighting trim.

The AF needs to start educating its people about us.  It is inexcusable that MTI's are actually tellling recruits to "ignore us."  A huge reason why younger AF personnel are getting us confused is that they don't know who the hell we are!  And for those CAP members who "troll for salutes" (a small minority), disciplinary action ranging from verbal reprimand, to demotion, to 2B.

So how this relates to uniforms?

Blue uniform: CAP lapel cutouts for all members, CAP "overseas" crest on most uniforms, CAP brushed-silver two-line nameplate (like CSU) and return to blue nameplates and shoulder marks (with embroidered "CAP") for all members.

BDU, field, whatever: We go with what the Air Force has, with dark-blue (ditch the ultramarine) nametapes and grade.

This is, again, contingent on whether or not we remain a part of the Air Force.

Cyborg, someday you and I will meet, the clouds will part, and together we will fix CAP...

...or just have some high-quality coffee and whine and complain about all that is wrong with it, but either way...

...I am looking forward to it!

CHUCK!!!  Welcome back, my friend!!!

Jack

Quote from: CyBorg on March 14, 2011, 04:10:51 PMWe get everyone wearing an Air Force-type uniform, junk the polo shirts, junk the grey/whites, junk the blazers.  I don't see why it couldn't happen.  As has been mentioned, the USCG has no problem with their Auxiliary doing so, and the AF itself doesn't seem to have a problem with its older members not exactly being in fighting trim.

My boat crew looks like ZZ top.  Nobody has ever had a problem with it.  The Polo shirts and blazers still have a place, but not as a general purpose uniform  They are for when the MISSION requires a non-military appearance.

When I came back to CAP after a two decade plus break the first thing that jumped out at me was the complete second set of uniforms that existed.  My initial guess was that it was done in preparation for a transfer from the USAF to DHS that would result in USAF uniforms going away, but no.

I can't believe all the extra uniforms either. I have seen so many people wearing the polo, and most of them are not overweight or fuzzy. I can understand the desire for a uniform that does not give the military appearance, thought I can't quite figure out when that would help anything. I can't understand wanting a polo uniform for the PAO being on TV, I can't understand the polo while at a commercial airport, and nothing else comes to mind. The best I can figure is that it is a uniform for people who are too lazy to keep a military uniform in proper appearance and wear.

I think talking to USAF with a lot of respect and humility, we can get a lot, if not all of our uniform items back. Talking with USAF with a LOT of respect and humility we could get the ok to allow everyone wear the USAF style uniforms and get rid of the corporate uniforms all together. Granted, if it were to move to a point where everyone is wearing the USAF style uniforms, it would require everyone to be properly groomed. However I don't think it would matter much that everyone has to keep their hair cut and their face shaved. I can imagine that there are quite a few that will hate to shave their beards and cut off their pony tails. I just believe that getting everyone into USAF style uniforms would be a huge jump in self esteem for those who are overweight. I know I am beating a dead horse, and I have already said this a few times in this thread, but it really does pain me to see that there are some who don't have a good looking professional uniform.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 06:42:23 PM
I think talking to USAF with a lot of respect and humility, we can get a lot, if not all of our uniform items back. Talking with USAF with a LOT of respect and humility we could get the ok to allow everyone wear the USAF style uniforms and get rid of the corporate uniforms all together.

Doh. I feel so stupid.

I was speaking to the CAP-USAF commander and vice commander less than two weeks ago on this very issue.  If only I had thought to use a little more respect and humility, imagine where we would be today.

I'll have to give it another try.

Stay tuned.

Ned Lee

Ned
Why would the Commander and Vice Commander of CAP-USAF listen to you. You're only a LtColonel

Quote from: Ned on March 14, 2011, 08:21:59 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 06:42:23 PM
I think talking to USAF with a lot of respect and humility, we can get a lot, if not all of our uniform items back. Talking with USAF with a LOT of respect and humility we could get the ok to allow everyone wear the USAF style uniforms and get rid of the corporate uniforms all together.

Doh. I feel so stupid.

I was speaking to the CAP-USAF commander and vice commander less than two weeks ago on this very issue.  If only I had thought to use a little more respect and humility, imagine where we would be today.

I'll have to give it another try.

Stay tuned.

Ned Lee

Lemme know if I can help.  As someone from one of Her Majesty's Dominions, we're used to bowing before Royalty and showing proper deference... >:D

Quote from: Ned on March 14, 2011, 08:21:59 PM
Doh. I feel so stupid.
I was speaking to the CAP-USAF commander and vice commander less than two weeks ago on this very issue.  If only I had thought to use a little more respect and humility, imagine where we would be today.
I'll have to give it another try.
Stay tuned.
Ned Lee

ROTFLMAO!!!!    ;D

Quote from: BillB on March 14, 2011, 08:34:48 PM
Ned
Why would the Commander and Vice Commander of CAP-USAF listen to you. You're only a LtColonel

I'm certain through no fault of his own!  8)

Quote from: Ned on March 14, 2011, 08:21:59 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 06:42:23 PM
I think talking to USAF with a lot of respect and humility, we can get a lot, if not all of our uniform items back. Talking with USAF with a LOT of respect and humility we could get the ok to allow everyone wear the USAF style uniforms and get rid of the corporate uniforms all together.

Doh. I feel so stupid.

I was speaking to the CAP-USAF commander and vice commander less than two weeks ago on this very issue.  If only I had thought to use a little more respect and humility, imagine where we would be today.

I'll have to give it another try.

Stay tuned.

Ned Lee

If we got rid of the corporate uniforms then they would have to allow for beards and goatees on the Air Force uniforms and also do away with the weight standards. A William Riker style beard I think would be acceptable and also the goatee I have still looks good in uniform. In my opinion.

If we keep the grooming and weight standards then we have to have alternate uniforms.


(http://www.rankopedia.com/CandidatePix/16547.gif)

I am for having one uniform for all SM's.  For those quick to pass judgement, I do not loath the military nor usaf-style uniforms.  But considering the fact we have taken "USAFAUX" off everything (planes, emblems, and autos), I do not foresee expanding the usaf-style uniforms.  So if our future will not be a change in the military-style requirements, then lets pick one of the existing uniforms we have for everyone and move on. 

One uniform, so we can look, you know.... uniform.

Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on March 14, 2011, 08:46:35 PM
I am for having one uniform for all SM's.

( . . .)

One uniform, so we can look, you know.... uniform.

Yeah!  Just like the AF . . . . .oh, wait a minute, they have about the same number of uniform combinations as we do.

What do they know that we do not?

Perhaps the reason we have as many uniform combinations as we do is the same reason that the AF has as many uniform combinations as they do.

Simply because we need the uniforms we have to get our job done effectively and efficiently.  It is worth remembering that uniforms are only a tool that helps us get our job(s) done.  And again - just like our USAF colleagues - reasonable minds may well differ as to exactly how many different combinations we need, but it is safe to say that we will never, ever have complete consensus on the subject.

And thank God for that.  Otherwise we might spend most of our time talking about performing our missions, rather than how we are dressed when we are doing them.  Imagine what would happen to CAP-Talk if that ever occurred.

Quote from: Ned on March 14, 2011, 08:58:50 PM
Simply because we need the uniforms we have to get our job done effectively and efficiently.

Except that we don't, as evidenced by similar organizations such as the NSCC, USCGAux, ACA, and just about every SDF in the country.
There is no practical or operational reason for us to have two different classes of uniforms.

None.

Quote from: Eclipse on March 14, 2011, 09:14:17 PM

Quote from: Ned on March 14, 2011, 08:58:50 PM
Simply because we need the uniforms we have to get our job done effectively and efficiently.

Except that we don't, as evidenced by similar organizations such as the NSCC, USCGAux, ACA, and just about every SDF in the country.
There is no practical or operational reason for us to have two different classes of uniforms.

None.

If you made it so we Senior Members only had Air Force uniforms to wear and kept the grooming and weight standards then all the chubbys would have to leave CAP and the bearded guys would have to decide to leave or shave. Is that what you would want?

You might want to actually read what I wrote.

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 09:39:44 PM
If you made it so we Senior Members only had Air Force uniforms to wear and kept the grooming and weight standards then all the chubbys would have to leave CAP and the bearded guys would have to decide to leave or shave. Is that what you would want?

No, that is not what were saying, for the most part. EVERYBODY would be able to wear the USAF style uniforms, with no weight restrictions. Now about the fuzzy people, yes, that would mean they have to shave and have a haircut in regulation.

Quote from: Eclipse on March 14, 2011, 09:14:17 PM
There is no practical or operational reason for us to have two different classes of uniforms.

None.

Noted, but that is not a negation of the statement that we "need" uniforms for people who do not meet body mass/ grooming issues for the other uniforms.

IOW, the "need" in this instance is driven by other than "operational or practical" reasons.

Heck, we might even be able to accomplish most of our missions wearing a t-shirt and jeans.  That doesn't mean that we don't "need" uniforms to help us accomplish our missions more effectively and efficiently.

Uniforms are a tool.  And like a tool, sometimes you need the right tool for the right job.  Last time I went to Sears, they had a lot of different tools to get the job done effectively and efficiently.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 09:57:21 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 09:39:44 PM
If you made it so we Senior Members only had Air Force uniforms to wear and kept the grooming and weight standards then all the chubbys would have to leave CAP and the bearded guys would have to decide to leave or shave. Is that what you would want?

No, that is not what were saying, for the most part. EVERYBODY would be able to wear the USAF style uniforms, with no weight restrictions. Now about the fuzzy people, yes, that would mean they have to shave and have a haircut in regulation.

If overweight people can wear the uniforms why not go all the way and have neatly trimmed bearded guys with a short haircut also be allowed to wear them? If you're going to allow one I dont see why you cant allow the other? Or are we bearded guys going to have to wait until the 23rd Century before we can wear a uniform with a beard? ;)

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 10:03:35 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 09:57:21 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 09:39:44 PM
If you made it so we Senior Members only had Air Force uniforms to wear and kept the grooming and weight standards then all the chubbys would have to leave CAP and the bearded guys would have to decide to leave or shave. Is that what you would want?

No, that is not what were saying, for the most part. EVERYBODY would be able to wear the USAF style uniforms, with no weight restrictions. Now about the fuzzy people, yes, that would mean they have to shave and have a haircut in regulation.

If overweight people can wear the uniforms why not go all the way and have neatly trimmed bearded guys with a short haircut also be allowed to wear them? If you're going to allow one I dont see why you cant allow the other? Or are we bearded guys going to have to wait until the 23rd Century before we can wear a uniform with a beard? ;)

Every company, organization, and business has some sort of standards and everyone wanting to be a part of it must adhere to it.

Just because you want to have your goatee or beard doesn't mean that it fits into your organization's standards. I have full sleeve tattoos, and I do like to display them, but I know that CAP is not the place for them.

Were I to own my own company, I would have standards as well, no long hair, clean shaven, and no visible tattoos. This is the fact of business.

Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on March 14, 2011, 08:46:35 PM
But considering the fact we have taken "USAFAUX" off everything (planes, emblems, and autos), I do not foresee expanding the usaf-style uniforms.

We have not taken "USAF Aux" off everything.

(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/medium/000000CAP0962G_MED.jpg)

(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/medium/000000CAP0962E_MED.jpg)

(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/medium/000000CAP0599L_MED.jpg)

All of these are currently stocked by Vanguard.

Why we ever did away with this MAJCOM-style shield is beyond me.

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_oyMKvJ5G4n8/S1vatfzXotI/AAAAAAAAANg/ptDKID-fyO8/S240/Cap%2520Logo.jpg)

Also, take note of what I said about a conversation I believe we need to have with the Air Force - respectfully, but frankly, asking them if we are still needed anymore.  If we aren't, the conversation about anything to do with uniforms ends, because CAP will no longer exist.  If we are, then we continue the conversation.

As I've said before, I just can't figure why so many in this organisation champion a frankly colourless uniform design like grey and white.  Are they supposed to be the only "safe" hues available to us?

Quote from: JeffDG on March 14, 2011, 08:37:17 PM
Lemme know if I can help.  As someone from one of Her Majesty's Dominions, we're used to bowing before Royalty and showing proper deference... >:D

I think it would probably be easier to get an audience with Her Majesty The Queen or His Excellency the Governor-General of Canada than for anyone under the rank of Brigadier General (Lieutenant Colonel Lee excepted 8)) to get much of anything WRT CAP across the Air Force's collective desk.

Quote from: Ned on March 14, 2011, 09:57:55 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on March 14, 2011, 09:14:17 PM
There is no practical or operational reason for us to have two different classes of uniforms.

None.

Noted, but that is not a negation of the statement that we "need" uniforms for people who do not meet body mass/ grooming issues for the other uniforms.

Ned, you missed the point, which was there is no practical or operational need to separate our members because of weight standards.  None, nada.
It is an aesthetic decision made by the USAF, nothing more, and does not serve CAP well.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 10:11:35 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 10:03:35 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 09:57:21 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 09:39:44 PM
If you made it so we Senior Members only had Air Force uniforms to wear and kept the grooming and weight standards then all the chubbys would have to leave CAP and the bearded guys would have to decide to leave or shave. Is that what you would want?

No, that is not what were saying, for the most part. EVERYBODY would be able to wear the USAF style uniforms, with no weight restrictions. Now about the fuzzy people, yes, that would mean they have to shave and have a haircut in regulation.

If overweight people can wear the uniforms why not go all the way and have neatly trimmed bearded guys with a short haircut also be allowed to wear them? If you're going to allow one I dont see why you cant allow the other? Or are we bearded guys going to have to wait until the 23rd Century before we can wear a uniform with a beard? ;)

Every company, organization, and business has some sort of standards and everyone wanting to be a part of it must adhere to it.

Just because you want to have your goatee or beard doesn't mean that it fits into your organization's standards. I have full sleeve tattoos, and I do like to display them, but I know that CAP is not the place for them.

Were I to own my own company, I would have standards as well, no long hair, clean shaven, and no visible tattoos. This is the fact of business.

Thats B.S. Manfred if you're going to make weight allowances then make facial hair allowances too. We are making a standard by saying Civil War type long beards arent allowed but closely trimed ones are. Like the Riker picture I posted on page 3.

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 10:57:28 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 10:11:35 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 10:03:35 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 09:57:21 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 09:39:44 PM
If you made it so we Senior Members only had Air Force uniforms to wear and kept the grooming and weight standards then all the chubbys would have to leave CAP and the bearded guys would have to decide to leave or shave. Is that what you would want?

No, that is not what were saying, for the most part. EVERYBODY would be able to wear the USAF style uniforms, with no weight restrictions. Now about the fuzzy people, yes, that would mean they have to shave and have a haircut in regulation.

If overweight people can wear the uniforms why not go all the way and have neatly trimmed bearded guys with a short haircut also be allowed to wear them? If you're going to allow one I dont see why you cant allow the other? Or are we bearded guys going to have to wait until the 23rd Century before we can wear a uniform with a beard? ;)

Every company, organization, and business has some sort of standards and everyone wanting to be a part of it must adhere to it.

Just because you want to have your goatee or beard doesn't mean that it fits into your organization's standards. I have full sleeve tattoos, and I do like to display them, but I know that CAP is not the place for them.

Were I to own my own company, I would have standards as well, no long hair, clean shaven, and no visible tattoos. This is the fact of business.

Thats B.S. Manfred if you're going to make weight allowances then make facial hair allowances too. We are making a standard by saying Civil War type long beards arent allowed but closely trimed ones are. Like the Riker picture I posted on page 3.

USAF does not allow even short beards, so why would we when we are wearing their uniforms?

Military grooming with no weight standard is a reasonable compromise from where we are today.

Most people can easily control their hair and beard (I said most), and choose to have it in a style
less mainstream.  The vast majority of members do not wear a beard or have unreasonably long hair.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 11:04:04 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 10:57:28 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 10:11:35 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 10:03:35 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 09:57:21 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 09:39:44 PM
If you made it so we Senior Members only had Air Force uniforms to wear and kept the grooming and weight standards then all the chubbys would have to leave CAP and the bearded guys would have to decide to leave or shave. Is that what you would want?

No, that is not what were saying, for the most part. EVERYBODY would be able to wear the USAF style uniforms, with no weight restrictions. Now about the fuzzy people, yes, that would mean they have to shave and have a haircut in regulation.

If overweight people can wear the uniforms why not go all the way and have neatly trimmed bearded guys with a short haircut also be allowed to wear them? If you're going to allow one I dont see why you cant allow the other? Or are we bearded guys going to have to wait until the 23rd Century before we can wear a uniform with a beard? ;)

Every company, organization, and business has some sort of standards and everyone wanting to be a part of it must adhere to it.

Just because you want to have your goatee or beard doesn't mean that it fits into your organization's standards. I have full sleeve tattoos, and I do like to display them, but I know that CAP is not the place for them.

Were I to own my own company, I would have standards as well, no long hair, clean shaven, and no visible tattoos. This is the fact of business.

Thats B.S. Manfred if you're going to make weight allowances then make facial hair allowances too. We are making a standard by saying Civil War type long beards arent allowed but closely trimed ones are. Like the Riker picture I posted on page 3.

USAF does not allow even short beards, so why would we when we are wearing their uniforms?

Maybe we should make beards mandatory so there would be no mistaking that we are not Air Force officers.........

>:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D

Quote from: Eclipse on March 14, 2011, 10:56:12 PM

Quote from: Ned on March 14, 2011, 09:57:55 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on March 14, 2011, 09:14:17 PM
There is no practical or operational reason for us to have two different classes of uniforms.

None.

Noted, but that is not a negation of the statement that we "need" uniforms for people who do not meet body mass/ grooming issues for the other uniforms.

Ned, you missed the point, which was there is no practical or operational need to separate our members because of weight standards.  None, nada.
It is an aesthetic decision made by the USAF, nothing more, and does not serve CAP well.

No, I managed to figue that out that you were talking about the AF restrictions on the wearing of their uniforms.

Perhaps you missed my point:  the USAF's decision to hold everyone in their uniforms to the same weight and grooming standards (a "uniform standard", if you will  8) ) is a reasonable decisions, and one entirely within their discretion to make.  You or I may personally disagree, but it is clearly their decision to make.

That decision, along with operational concerns, costs for the membership, the special needs of the cadet program, and other factors drive the "need" for the uniform constellation we have.

Which was my point.  We have a bunch of uniforms, because we need a bunch of uniforms to do our job.  And that is exactly the same reason that the AF (and all the other services) have about the same number of uniform combinations as we do.

And, yes, I recognize that members of those services argue about what is "needed" or "appropriate" as much or more than we do.  I was an Army guy for a bunch of decades, and the debates about fatigues vs BDUs and - more recently - berets for all soldiers, were just as lengthy, detailed, and vitriolic as anything we see in the endless CAP Talk discussions on the CAP uniform.

And ulitmately, just as pointless.

Quote from: cap235629 on March 14, 2011, 11:06:28 PMMaybe we should make beards mandatory so there would be no mistaking that we are not Air Force officers.........

>:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D

I dont think Manfred can grow a mustache or a beard. Thats why he is against them ;)

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 11:18:12 PM

Quote from: cap235629 on March 14, 2011, 11:06:28 PMMaybe we should make beards mandatory so there would be no mistaking that we are not Air Force officers.........

>:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D

I dont think Manfred can grow a mustache or a beard. Thats why he is against them ;)

HA!  ;D Now that's funny lol. No, I can grow a decent spread of gnasty on my face, but I don't like it, I just think looks unprofessional. I have to shave every morning or else I will itch like crazy by 1500. I am just very particular about what presents a military image. I know that the Army Navy Marine Corps and yes, even the Air Force all have people who are overweight, and they sometimes don't do anything about it. Many times the Army will keep someone overweight because they are very valuable to the company that they are in, because no one there knows weapon systems and how to repair them as good as they do. But let that heavy guy come in without shaving and watch the feathers fly. They know that they have overweight personnel in their uniform, yet they won't let us have overweight personnel in their uniform. But no one has a full beard. If they have a shaving profile though, that is a different story, they still have to have a hair cut and their facial hair can't go past the length specified by their doctor, usually not more than 1/4 inch.

Then I want a "shaving profile" or "shaving waiver" since if I shave my neck two days in a row I get a red razor burn rash. I wouldnt be able to shave with a razor daily. Right now I shave Monday, Thurs, and Saturday to prevent razor burn.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2011, 09:57:21 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 14, 2011, 09:39:44 PM
If you made it so we Senior Members only had Air Force uniforms to wear and kept the grooming and weight standards then all the chubbys would have to leave CAP and the bearded guys would have to decide to leave or shave. Is that what you would want?

No, that is not what were saying, for the most part. EVERYBODY would be able to wear the USAF style uniforms, with no weight restrictions. Now about the fuzzy people, yes, that would mean they have to shave and have a haircut in regulation.

Why is that discrimination necessary? I could attempt to make the argument that a large number of those chubby folks have a choice, too, in their diet, eating habits, and exercise regimen.

I don't shave any more than I have to because it is a painful chore. I had a beard as much as possible in the Navy, until they were banned, and then shaved as little as I could get away with, to maintain a satisfactory appearance.

I do maintain a hairstyle that is military appearing, perhaps a tad long, because I realized that it looked better and presented a more professional appearance.

Quote from: caphistorian on March 13, 2011, 09:58:11 PM
I personally like the CSU uniform. I would wear it if they kept it around.

Me also (to keep it from being a "me too" post)

The CSU works, it looks good and professional.

Not every idea that HWSNBN was a bad one. Heck, I even liked the "US Civil Air Patrol" for the BDUs.

I shave every day and I too would end up with razor burn as well, but I use hydrogen peroxide after I shave and let it fizz up really good, rinse off and then use aftershave. Keeps me from getting razor burn, it is especially bad around my scars because I have to shave in three directions to get that area taken care of. Everybody has something that they don't like doing, or something that hurts or is time consuming, but we just have to take the effort and do those things that we don't like doing. Its a part of the excellence value.

Manfred, you didn't answer my question - Why is that discrimination necessary?

Quote from: SarDragon on March 15, 2011, 12:05:43 AM
Manfred, you didn't answer my question - Why is that discrimination necessary?

I did, professional image. And not allowing beards is not a discrimination, not allowing the overweight would be though. How is not allowing beards a discrimination?

Well I said the before and will say it again.

If our goal is to get everone into just one uniform.....which is still debatable.....the we have to work with the USAF and our members to work out a compromise.

Fact is.....the USAF unlike the USCG has a problem with the fat and fuzzies in "their" uniform.

Any attempt to fix the "problem" must include their input and approval.

Personally....I have a problem with the multi-forms we have today.  I see it as a broken (or bent) tool.

Would I like everyone to wear the USAF uniform with a patch, CAP Cut outs, 3-line name tag and hard rank?  Sure would!
Would I like everyone in the the CSU?  Sure would..


I don't care what uniform we pick.....but we need, IMHO, to pick one and get everyone into it.

The problem seems to be....IMHO....is that no one is really pursuing the issue.  I know that we had a lot of heart burn over the last 5-6 years over this due to bad leadership and they put this on the back burner......but I think now is a good time to actively start working with the USAF.....get some good ideas from the field....and move foward on this issue.

Most people on this board really think uniforms are a major issue?

wow...just...wow

I think CAP has a LOT of other problems that are much higher up on the list of things to do.

IMHO, if during this time of budget cuts and uncertainty about our future missions, we go to the AF and want to talk uniforms, we will be laughed out the door.

Quote from: NCRblues on March 15, 2011, 12:47:23 AM
Most people on this board really think uniforms are a major issue?

wow...just...wow

I think CAP has a LOT of other problems that are much higher up on the list of things to do.

IMHO, if during this time of budget cuts and uncertainty about our future missions, we go to the AF and want to talk uniforms, we will be laughed out the door.

Very true, uniforms really should take the back burner. We need to figure out how we are going to go about continuing an increase in training with a depleted budget. We still have a budget to work with, just nowhere near what it needs to be for us to continue to train and to increase our training abilities. More time in the field means more money, and we need to figure out where all of that money is going to come from, because the budget we have most likely won't sustain our air and ground ops throughout the entire year.

Quote from: NCRblues on March 15, 2011, 12:47:23 AM
Most people on this board really think uniforms are a major issue?

Its a big issue specifically because it isn't complicated yet continues to be a baseline issue CAP can't get straight, and could be fixed
with a few hours of attention from people with the right pen.

We need a simple, straightforward, all-inclusive set of uniforms that meet the mission requirements.

What we have looks like it was designed by a committee, which it was.

Like so many things in the universe, the issue itself isn't the real problem, its the seeming inability to fix things and move on.

Confused uniform expectations cause confused members, uncomfortable conversations, and wasted money, not to mention the
issues of appearance and professionalism when we show up with a baker's dozen of different looks.  Put together they
cause morale and incentive issues which then foster other issues forward.

While the USAF and CAP recognize, appropriately, the honor and privilege it is to be afforded the opportunity to
wear a US military uniform, they fail to recognize how counter productive it is for those not afforded the privilege, especially
when that group includes a more than fair share of CAP's most active contributers.

Quote from: NCRblues on March 15, 2011, 12:47:23 AM
Most people on this board really think uniforms are a major issue?

wow...just...wow

I think CAP has a LOT of other problems that are much higher up on the list of things to do.

IMHO, if during this time of budget cuts and uncertainty about our future missions, we go to the AF and want to talk uniforms, we will be laughed out the door.

Who said major?

As for being laughed out the door?  Why should that happen........they are still talking about uniforms while dealing with all these problems.

Quote from: lordmonar on March 15, 2011, 01:25:19 AM

Quote from: NCRblues on March 15, 2011, 12:47:23 AM
Most people on this board really think uniforms are a major issue?

wow...just...wow

I think CAP has a LOT of other problems that are much higher up on the list of things to do.

IMHO, if during this time of budget cuts and uncertainty about our future missions, we go to the AF and want to talk uniforms, we will be laughed out the door.

Who said major?

As for being laughed out the door?  Why should that happen........they are still talking about uniforms while dealing with all these problems.

Just noticed that - uniforms are a day-to-day operations discussion, that even the USAF is having for itself right now - the world doesn't come
to a crashing halt just because of budget issues, especially ones which don't actually cost the organization any money.  Win, lose, or draw, the
majority of the expense is shouldered by members.

If I could custom design a uniform for all it would be gray and in the style of the Battlestar Galactica uniforms while having a service cap with the CAP cap emblem. I like the way these uniforms close.

http://media.battlestarwiki.org/images/1/1c/TighDressUniformWater.JPG (http://media.battlestarwiki.org/images/1/1c/TighDressUniformWater.JPG)

With or without the medals sash thats not the important part.  But the color and the way it closes up is what I like. :)

Blue ones for those in the AF grooming/weight standards and gray ones for chubbys and fuzzies :)

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 15, 2011, 12:10:45 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on March 15, 2011, 12:05:43 AM
Manfred, you didn't answer my question - Why is that discrimination necessary?

I did, professional image. And not allowing beards is not a discrimination, not allowing the overweight would be though. How is not allowing beards a discrimination?

I made a choice, based on my well being. Yet the chubby people have made similar choices that are not good at all for their overall well being, and I'm the one who has to give up something.

My beard was well accepted when beards were permitted in the Navy. There is a variety of pictures of me on FB that show its current appearance. I don't have a ZZ Top, I don't have a Fu Manchu, I don't have any other long, strange, or radical beard. The amount of facial hair does not in any way inhibit my ability to do any assigned tasks. The same cannot be said for the chubby people.

For all my chubby friends out there, I'm not really trying to pick on y'all. I know that a couple of you have jobs that I'm not physically capable of performing, in spite of my skinniness. I'm just trying to point the inequities of the current rules.

Quote from: SarDragon on March 15, 2011, 02:25:53 AM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 15, 2011, 12:10:45 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on March 15, 2011, 12:05:43 AM
Manfred, you didn't answer my question - Why is that discrimination necessary?

I did, professional image. And not allowing beards is not a discrimination, not allowing the overweight would be though. How is not allowing beards a discrimination?

I made a choice, based on my well being. Yet the chubby people have made similar choices that are not good at all for their overall well being, and I'm the one who has to give up something.

My beard was well accepted when beards were permitted in the Navy. There is a variety of pictures of me on FB that show its current appearance. I don't have a ZZ Top, I don't have a Fu Manchu, I don't have any other long, strange, or radical beard. The amount of facial hair does not in any way inhibit my ability to do any assigned tasks. The same cannot be said for the chubby people.

For all my chubby friends out there, I'm not really trying to pick on y'all. I know that a couple of you have jobs that I'm not physically capable of performing, in spite of my skinniness. I'm just trying to point the inequities of the current rules.

So it is easier to loose weight than for you to shave once a week?

We've been down this road so many times that the rut has got to be deeper than the Mariannas Trench.

I'm done.

Quote from: CyBorg on March 14, 2011, 10:40:51 PM

Quote from: JeffDG on March 14, 2011, 08:37:17 PM
Lemme know if I can help.  As someone from one of Her Majesty's Dominions, we're used to bowing before Royalty and showing proper deference... >:D

I think it would probably be easier to get an audience with Her Majesty The Queen or His Excellency the Governor-General of Canada than for anyone under the rank of Brigadier General (Lieutenant Colonel Lee excepted 8)) to get much of anything WRT CAP across the Air Force's collective desk.

Not had the honour of meeting either Her Majesty, or His Excellency...but have had the honour of meeting the Lieutenant (which you [darn] well pronounce with the implied "f" sound) Governor of my Saskatchewan on several occasions...the amount of protocol drilled into our heads before those meetings was staggering.  Makes Dining in look like a trip to Hooters...don't want to imagine what you'd go through to meet Her Majesty herself.

Personally i hate the Blue Bdus. If CAP made cadets wear these then i would lose all respect for senior members. And then i would quit. That is all

Quote from: tatumrd on March 15, 2011, 04:25:56 PM
Personally i hate the Blue Bdus. If CAP made cadets wear these then i would lose all respect for senior members. And then i would quit. That is all

Outstanding attitude.

It seems to me that beards, goatees, overweight, disabled, male, female, young, old, etc fit perfectly within our organizations image.  It is what we are, a civil organization available to anyone who wants to help their communities.  We aren't the military and in most cases don't have a need to have anyone be 6'0", 170lbs, able to bench press 300, 32" waist, and able to run 1/2 marathons at a whim.

I've only seen a handful of people in CAP with beards and goatees, or ponytails, as they aren't all that popular in current cultural norms - so the amount of people with "ZZ Top" style beards are slim anyway, especially when considering the ones that are members of CAP.

The bigger issue I've seen (no pun intended) is that the uniforms we have for the people who don't fit the military mold have a hard time finding uniform parts that compliment their body styles, and look nice when they're worn.  Even the ones designed for them.  I can't tell you the number of times that I've seen larger members that have the largest size polo shirt on and it doesn't fit.  Is that the member's problem, or is it our problem for not thinking of our membership?

I really could care less if I wear an AF uniform and I "fit the mold."  I would rather be able to stand, side by side, with all the members that help me and our unit accomplish what we set out to do, without looking like we're in different organizations. 

Quote from: jimmydeanno on March 15, 2011, 04:37:02 PM
It seems to me that beards, goatees, overweight, disabled, male, female, young, old, etc fit perfectly within our organizations image. 

Absolutely true.

QuoteIt is what we are, a civil organization available to anyone who wants to help their communities.

As long as they want to do so in the context of CP, AE, and ES, of course.  ;)

QuoteWe aren't the military and in most cases don't have a need to have anyone be 6'0", 170lbs, able to bench press 300, 32" waist, and able to run 1/2 marathons at a whim.

Of course, we do have many military aspects to our program, and all of us are encouraged to be as healthy and fit as we can be.

Wouldn't you agree?

QuoteI can't tell you the number of times that I've seen larger members that have the largest size polo shirt on and it doesn't fit.  Is that the member's problem, or is it our problem for not thinking of our membership?

Well, since VG sells polos in XXXXL, which according to their size chart fits someone with a 22 inch neck, 60 inch chest, and a 54 inch waist, at some point it really is primarily the member's problem.

We cannot reasonably be expected to have uniforms that fit every human being on the planet regardless of disease or condition. 

Call it the "99.999% solution."

QuoteI would rather be able to stand, side by side, with all the members that help me and our unit accomplish what we set out to do, without looking like we're in different organizations.

So, when you see some folks from the USAF standing side by side, and one is wearing a flight suit, one ABUs, one in blues, and yet another in cook's whites, do you really say "Wow, an AF Guy and three other folks . . . "?

I didn't care for the way the CSU kinda spung up, with no seeming history on it. It was just worn one day to a Congressional hearing, but no one had seen anything of it prior.

I didn't like it initially, but at least it was uniform. Everyone had the same pants, the same shirt, the same jacket, the same everything. Using Air Force insignia by calling it Air Force "styled" seemed unethical to me. If it had used all the gray accoutrements that the blues used, I would have been far less resistant to it.

I also think that a third uniform was unnecessary, and having different grooming standards for it was a slap in the face to those with longer hair and beards. I don't think it would have been unreasonable to require a beard be trimmed to a reasonable length or hair be bound (I honestly could care less if someone had a pony tail, just keep it neat). Having the CSU and the blues and the blazer was stupid, and created a fracture as far as the membership was concerned.

Three different types of uniforms in the same class (as in "service" type of uniform) created problems. It was unnecessary, foolish, and looked a little selfish on someone's part.

Quote from: tatumrd on March 15, 2011, 04:25:56 PM
Personally i hate the Blue Bdus. If CAP made cadets wear these then i would lose all respect for senior members. And then i would quit. That is all

Careful there - cadet aged 18 or over and out of height/weight = BBDU.

Quote from: Ned on March 15, 2011, 05:11:07 PM
So, when you see some folks from the USAF standing side by side, and one is wearing a flight suit, one ABUs, one in blues, and yet another in cook's whites, do you really say "Wow, an AF Guy and three other folks . . . "?

In most cases they won't be standing in such a hodge podge at a formal event - it will be a sea of blue.

Quote from: Ned on March 15, 2011, 05:11:07 PM
Of course, we do have many military aspects to our program, and all of us are encouraged to be as healthy and fit as we can be.

Certainly I agree that we have "many military aspects."  However, none of them include having to run 1/2 mile in full battle rattle, chasing down the bad guy, etc.  The closest thing we have to a need for physical fitness are our ground team members (cadet program excluded).  However, along the lines of "everything to everyone" our core program and mission doesn't involve being a local chapter of "Curves."

So, without an operational need to have all of our members to be fit and trim, shaven, etc, there is not need to mandate that they all be or make our organization exclude those who are.  But, I think we agree here.

QuoteWell, since VG sells polos in XXXXL, which according to their size chart fits someone with a 22 inch neck, 60 inch chest, and a 54 inch waist, at some point it really is primarily the member's problem.

We cannot reasonably be expected to have uniforms that fit every human being on the planet regardless of disease or condition. 

Call it the "99.999% solution."

They have one shirt available in that size, and it's the screen-printed golf shirt.  You can't get an embroidered polo in that size, nor an aviator shirt, BBDUs, outergarments, etc.  So, for our larger members we have a golf shirt they can wear to encampment, while on a ground team, and the wing conference banquet.  Classy.

If uniforms are a tool to get the mission done, then does that mean that some of our members can't have the same tools as the rest of us?

Quote

QuoteI would rather be able to stand, side by side, with all the members that help me and our unit accomplish what we set out to do, without looking like we're in different organizations.

So, when you see some folks from the USAF standing side by side, and one is wearing a flight suit, one ABUs, one in blues, and yet another in cook's whites, do you really say "Wow, an AF Guy and three other folks . . . "?

Nope, but they also don't have (stateside) a blue flight suit and a green flight suit standing next to each other on the same flightline.  When they're at a banquet they don't have some wearing mess dress and some in a blazer.  I know people wonder if we are members of the same organization, because I've been asked - several times.

Red Cross members aren't wearing two "separate but equal" sets of uniforms, USCGAux isn't, Boy Scouts aren't, Girl Scouts aren't, VFW, Shriners, etc aren't.  What is operationally different about US that makes it so that we have to have two distinctive classes of uniforms?  Why do we have two sets of "tools" to get our mission done?

My point about being able to stand side by side was more about unity.  We don't have the luxury of being "the military" who is going to get their money regardless of what they wear.  They are "too big to fail" essentially, because no matter what they wear, they will be identified as "the military."  We are too unknown to be able to have such a diluted image.  Case in point, I was wearing my polo shirt, at a recruiting event, with other CAP members and was asked by one of them (fairly new) if I was also a member.

Quote from: Ned on March 15, 2011, 05:11:07 PMSo, when you see some folks from the USAF standing side by side, and one is wearing a flight suit, one ABUs, one in blues, and yet another in cook's whites, do you really say "Wow, an AF Guy and three other folks . . . "?

Nope....but when you got a flying squadron on anyday but monday.....all the fliers are in OD green Flight suits and all the Support people are in ABUs.

You don't have all the fliers on the weight managment program wearing blue flight suits and all the guys on shaving waivers in a polo shirt.

No one is saying that we have different uniforms because we have different jobs......we have different uniforms because some of our members don't meet the image of the USAF.

So be it....it is their uniform....so let's explore the options.

Quote from: tatumrd on March 15, 2011, 04:25:56 PM
Personally i hate the Blue Bdus. If CAP made cadets wear these then i would lose all respect for senior members. And then i would quit. That is all

They kinda of remind me of a SWAT uniform. Wear them with a black baseball cap and tactical sunglasses  8)

(http://earthhopenetwork.net/police_swat_team.jpg)

Quote from: jimmydeanno on March 15, 2011, 05:58:01 PM
They have one shirt available in that size, and it's the screen-printed golf shirt.  You can't get an embroidered polo in that size, nor an aviator shirt, BBDUs, outergarments, etc.  So, for our larger members we have a golf shirt they can wear to encampment, while on a ground team, and the wing conference banquet.  Classy.

Non-concur.

Maybe I'm not reading right, but it looks to me like VG offers XXXXL BBDUs, XXXXL Blue Field Uniforms (the jumpsuit-looking thingie), and a blue flight nomex suit in a 52L.  The largest aviatior shirt is a size 20, which as near as I can tell is equivalent to a XXXXL.

And that's just VG.  Van Huesen makes their short sleeve aviator's shirt in a size 22.  (Available here at PilotShop.com (http://www.pilotshop.com/van-heusen-pilot-shirts-aviator-mens-short-sleeve-c-118_197_287.html?page=3&sort=3a) for a nice $17.95 price.)

And of course all you really need is a simple white dress shirt for the blazer, and here's a nice one in size 22 at Dillards  (http://www.dillards.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=301&langId=-1&storeId=301&productId=500610527&N=1590144&searchUrl=%2Fendeca%2FEndecaStartServlet%3FN%3D1590144&R=02743157) for $65.00.

So, I'm thinking that well over 99.99% of our members can look professional in the VG polo, BBDU, & BFU all in XXXXL.  They can also score a size 20 aviator shirt at VG as well.  Or go to a (cheaper) commercial source for an aviator shirt up to a size 22.

QuoteIf uniforms are a tool to get the mission done, then does that mean that some of our members can't have the same tools as the rest of us?

That's a bit of hyperbole, isn't it?  After all, at this very moment there are dozens of members out there with casts on their legs or arms (or wear some other bulky medical appliance).  So, yes, due to medical conditions or just the extreme range of natural diversity, some tiny number of members will have limited or no uniform choices.

Like I said, we may have to be happy with the "99.9999 % solution."

As long as we wear something that is recognizeable to the general public as some sort of uniform, nothing else is very realistic.

QuoteRed Cross members aren't wearing two "separate but equal" sets of uniforms, USCGAux isn't, Boy Scouts aren't, Girl Scouts aren't, VFW, Shriners, etc aren't.  What is operationally different about US that makes it so that we have to have two distinctive classes of uniforms?  Why do we have two sets of "tools" to get our mission done?

I dunno.  But it is not our decision.  Absolutely no one who reads this forum can change that no matter how often we complain or whine about it.

Your beef isn't with us or anyone else here.  It sounds like you want to take it up with this guy:

(http://www.armybase.us/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/General-NORTON-A.-SCHWARTZ-Chief-of-Staff-of-the-U.S.-Air-Force.JPG)

Gen Norton Schwartz.

You can reach him here. (http://www.af.mil/information/csaf/index.asp).


(Darn, img tag stopped working - imagine a big picture of Gen Schwartz, the USAF Chief of Staff.)

(http://www.nationalveteransday.org/speakers/schwartz.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/74/Norton_A_Schwartz_2008_2.jpg/480px-Norton_A_Schwartz_2008_2.jpg)

Why can't anyone be happy that we (CAP) are still valuable enough to the USAF that they allow us (CAP) to wear their uniform? Yes, I would like to see everyone in it just like CGAux does, however, that is not the case. You think our restrictions are harsh? Think about this for a second, the Army Cadet Corps (CAP equivalent for the Army) won't even allow an adult to become a member unless they go (as an unpaid volunteer) to a school that is most likely not even in your state or even region, and you must be able to pass height weight and tape and a PT test. Now, I am a huge supporter of the U.S.Army, and yes I would be proud to be a member of the ACC, however I am extremely proud of what CAP does and is, and I am a very proud member of only the CAP.

There is no other organization like us, there is no one else who can stack up to what the CAP does. We may not go to war, but we educate the public, we raise cadets to become strong healthy independent adult leaders, and we save more lives than any other organization outside of a war zone than I can think of.

If things stay the way they are with the uniforms, and I can't see them changing much, if you want to wear the USAF style uniforms, shave and get to work on the weight loss if you can. If you don't like the USAF style uniforms, then don't wear them. There is no simpler way to put it. And if shaving repeatedly gives you razor burn, then be glad you only HAVE to shave ONCE a week.

Quote from: Ned on March 15, 2011, 08:42:27 PM
Your beef isn't with us or anyone else here.

You're right.  I have nothing against any of CAP's members in this regard.  Nor, do I have any beef with anyone here.

However, it does seem to me that the national level leadership, or even the BoG, could examine the role of uniforms in our organization and their importance as a marketing tool, as well as a tool to complete our mission.  If both sets of uniforms are "separate but equal" then it should be an easy decision to eliminate one set.

Other than showing a relationship to the Air Force with our Blues, what other purpose does wearing AF style uniforms serve?  There appears to be some sort of relationship issue, either way you slice it.

If we are "an official Auxiliary of the United States Air Force" then I don't understand how/why there is a need for a differentiation between our individual members based on how they look.  The Coast Guard appears to have no problem with subtle differences between their Auxiliarists and actual Coast Guard members.  They don't appear to have an issue with someone that is a bit portly with a beard standing next to one of their "legitimate CG members."   

If the Air Force is concerned about the image that we present while wearing "their uniform" then perhaps we should get all of our adult membership out of it and simply adopt the corporate style uniforms.  After all, they are equal to the Air Force style ones, so that means that we could still get the job done, right?  Then we wouldn't have to be worried about being confused for "Real Air Force" people, our members trolling for salutes, and we might just have a unified look for our members so that people just might think we're in the same organization as the guy we're standing next to.

I think that the AF style uniforms are an important tool for our cadets, in terms of marketability of our program.

Quote from: jimmydeanno on March 15, 2011, 09:57:05 PM
However, it does seem to me that the national level leadership, or even the BoG, could examine ( . . .)  If both sets of uniforms are "separate but equal" then it should be an easy decision to eliminate one set.

Decisions are always easy when you are not the person who has to make them . . . .  ::)

QuoteOther than showing a relationship to the Air Force with our Blues, what other purpose does wearing AF style uniforms serve? 

Great question.  What are your thoughts as to the answer? 

Do you honestly think the answer is "none" or, worse yet, some sort of bad faith on the part of our leadership who only seek to embarass our larger and differently-groomed members?

Really?

QuoteIf we are "an official Auxiliary of the United States Air Force" then I don't understand how/why there is a need for a differentiation between our individual members based on how they look. 

I get that.  You don't understand the USAF's decision.  You have successfully communicated that.

But you don't need to.  I don't need to.  It's not my decision or your decision to make.

I'm sorry if you feel that Gen Schwartz has not adequately briefed you on the USAF take on this issue.  It's not my job to explain his decision to you.  It would be impudent for me to even try.

That's why I referred you to him.

Ultimately, despite all the talk about "marketing issues," "discrimination against some of our members," and a vague sense of disunity caused by having more than a single uniform for all occasions, there is a genuine lack of data suggesting that an actual "problem" exists with our uniform set.  Let alone that arbitrarily discarding all the  USAF-style uniforms would "fix" anything.

Lot's of strong opinons on both sides, of course.

But not much else.

I think the uniform issue represents a lot personal biases that end up with a "he who shall scream the loudest type of mentality." It's from those personal biases that we become a hodge podge of different uniforms, largely because someone doesn't want the CAP in military uniforms or wants them in a uniform akin to that individual's former military service....so you end up with flag patches on right shoulder sleves, double breasted CSUs or efforts by some people to push for red insignia or name plates.

Everyone wants their cake and eat it, too. They want to wear their bling so you get thrust back and forth between arguments like no one's going to tell me to shave my beard or lose the weight so I design my own thing. Yet the weight thing actually becomes a safety issue and the beard thing is a personal choice thrust on the greater good of the membership.

I don't know how much the uniform plays in marketing. I can guess, however, that it has a substantial role....when you consider things like volunteer fire companies who take pride in their different uniform colors, which gives them a unique identity. Our's is in the grey shoulder rank and other distinctive insignia that at times past (like the orginal emblem turned overseas squadron insignia) is worn because it's the insignia registered with the International Red Cross and the Geneva Convention.

People push for things like the blue polo shirts or the blue BDUS and flight suits, and I aways chuckle because those are uniforms that you see around AF bases, but in areas like MWR, special duty aircrews, transient maintenance or missile operations...hence it's actually other Air Force uniforms but with distinctive insignia.

We are at a crossroads as an organization. Search and rescue is not accomplished to the scale it once was, things like DDR may be on the way out because of different attempts to legalize it, and we are off testing the waters in a lot of new areas. I do know that all these uniform things always come to a head, because people don't want to acknowledge the Air Force's role in this organization. However, the Air Force is very much in the background trying to decide if we really are the force multiplier that everyone says we are.

So, all the squabbling about uniforms is really a pretty moot point. Our future as an organization doesn't lend us to be just another SAR or ES organization because there are a lot of state or county agencies and sheriff's departments who are competing for the same turf. Our future pretty much depends on the relationship we forge with the Air Force and that's why there's all the walking on egg shells everytime someone pops off at an enlisted person over a salute.

Sorry, I'm long winded.....

Quote from: flyboy1 on March 15, 2011, 10:39:40 PM
I think the uniform issue represents a lot personal biases that end up with a "he who shall scream the loudest type of mentality." It's from those personal biases that we become a hodge podge of different uniforms, largely because someone doesn't want the CAP in military uniforms or wants them in a uniform akin to that individual's former military service....so you end up with flag patches on left shoulder sleves, double breasted CSUs or efforts by some people to push for red insignia or name plates.

Probably meant to say RIGHT :clap:

Quote from: jimmydeanno on March 15, 2011, 09:57:05 PM
If the Air Force is concerned about the image that we present while wearing "their uniform" then perhaps we should get all of our adult membership out of it and simply adopt the corporate style uniforms.  After all, they are equal to the Air Force style ones, so that means that we could still get the job done, right?  Then we wouldn't have to be worried about being confused for "Real Air Force" people, our members trolling for salutes, and we might just have a unified look for our members so that people just might think we're in the same organization as the guy we're standing next to.

I think that the AF style uniforms are an important tool for our cadets, in terms of marketability of our program.

Oh yeah, that really would fix the issue of trolling for salutes(sarcasm). The only way to fix the issue, is when it happens next, get rid of the guy and set an example, because I am sure it happens in corporate uniforms as well.

If we are being confused for "real Air Force", that is not our problem. In BDUs we have giant blue and white, not subdued, nametapes that clearly say CIVIL AIR PATROL, and bright colored patches, not subdued, if they can't see that from a fair distance, then they shouldn't be in the military. In blues, with the service jacket we have big gray epaulets that even say CAP on them, if they can't see that and figure out, well that isn't USAF, then they shouldn't be in the military. In blues without the service jacket we have the same epaulets and a gray nameplate, if they can't see that and figure out that it isn't Air Force, then they shouldn't be in the military.

No, we should not all transfer to BBDUs, then we would look like Police SWAT. That is an offense that could land your butt in jail. Personally I think we should wait until we all transition to whatever field uniform the USAF wants us in and then get rid of the BBDU for the BDU. That would work pretty well, unless everyone goes back to the BDU, which isn't likely.

Still, personal preference is to have everyone in USAF style uniforms regardless of weight.

I agree Flyboy1. :clap:

Quote from: ltdomke on March 15, 2011, 10:42:10 PM

Quote from: flyboy1 on March 15, 2011, 10:39:40 PM
I think the uniform issue represents a lot personal biases that end up with a "he who shall scream the loudest type of mentality." It's from those personal biases that we become a hodge podge of different uniforms, largely because someone doesn't want the CAP in military uniforms or wants them in a uniform akin to that individual's former military service....so you end up with flag patches on left shoulder sleves, double breasted CSUs or efforts by some people to push for red insignia or name plates.

Probably meant to say RIGHT :clap:

This is true....my military right...correction noted.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 15, 2011, 10:43:26 PM
No, we should not all transfer to BBDUs, then we would look like Police SWAT. That is an offense that could land your butt in jail.

My squadron has an O flight activity this weekend and since I have a goatee I'm wearing the BBDUs. Does that mean the local police is going to arrest me because they'll say I'm impersonating a SWAT officer? lol

I don't understand why you added that last sentence. I wrote what I wrote above and added the SWAT picture because the cadet said he would quit if all cadets had to wear the BBDUs. They don't look at all bad. Just different than those in woodland BDUs.

Quote from: BradM on March 15, 2011, 10:56:42 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 15, 2011, 10:43:26 PM
No, we should not all transfer to BBDUs, then we would look like Police SWAT. That is an offense that could land your butt in jail.

My squadron has an O flight activity this weekend and since I have a goatee I'm wearing the BBDUs. Does that mean the local police is going to arrest me because they'll say I'm impersonating a SWAT officer? lol

I don't understand why you added that last sentence. I wrote what I wrote above and added the SWAT picture because the cadet said he would quit if all cadets had to wear the BBDUs. They don't look at all bad. Just different than those in woodland BDUs.

I said it because that IS a color of SWAT. It doesn't matter what uniform you go with, there will always be someone somewhere saying that you look like someone else.

However, No, I don't think anyone would be arrested for the BBDU, Police at least are smart enough to read, and take in information through their eyes.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 15, 2011, 10:43:26 PM
[In BDUs we have giant blue and white, not subdued, nametapes that clearly say CIVIL AIR PATROL, and bright colored patches, not subdued, if they can't see that from a fair distance, then they shouldn't be in the military. In blues, with the service jacket we have big gray epaulets that even say CAP on them, if they can't see that and figure out, well that isn't USAF, then they shouldn't be in the military. In blues without the service jacket we have the same epaulets and a gray nameplate, if they can't see that and figure out that it isn't Air Force, then they shouldn't be in the military.

I've been making the point for years that CAP's BDUs have absolutely nothing on them to associate the wearer with the Air Force any more than it associated them with the Army or Marines (back when all were in BDUs).

Our AF-style uniforms are already incredibly distinctive such that anyone in the military should immediately be able to tell the difference. 

Therefore, there is no logical reason that all CAP members shouldn't be able to wear them. 

BBDUs give me a chance to wear blue while having a goatee so I like them. I also have a set of woodland BDUs and I'm keeping my Air Force uniform current so I can wear it at a moments notice. And I have my hair cut short. All I need to do is decide to go to the mustache and 15 minutes later I can wear all the AF uniforms for that event. Then start to regrow my goatee again. It looks good in one month and best at 2 months :) But I'd rather not shave it off again if I didnt have to.

I really enjoy it when people talk about forcing everyone over the BBDU because its not AF.

Oh wait yes it is... The blue bdu is used in missile wings and missile support wings.

After the stand up of global strike command, the nuclear capable bases have teams called T.R.F's ( tactical response teams), and C.R.F's (convoy response teams). Both of the teams are transported by helicopter and wear blue flight suits with SF insignia...

Even on some nonnuclear bases, bbdus are used. The fire department is authorized to wear them on incirlick AB turkey and several others.  Some SF E.S.T (read swat) use the bbdu.

At an air show this past year, one of our SM's had on the BBDU. A man approached him and asked him why he was wearing his nuke tactical response uniform outside the base. Turned out this man that approached him was a missile wing E-7 and had no clue who we were....

BBDU or bdu's. It does not matter, someone has had them before we did....

Quote from: Ned on March 15, 2011, 08:42:27 PM
http://www.uniformswarehouse.com/prostores/servlet/-strse-1212/EMT-Short-Sleeve-White/Detail

Here you go 5XL.  Its what I usually wear even though I don't even rate a single X, I'm just an L.

Sorry - quotes landed in the wrong place.  Point was you CAN get the aviator shirt that large, just not from Vanguard.

Quote from: Ned on March 15, 2011, 10:32:37 PM
Decisions are always easy when you are not the person who has to make them . . . .  ::)

So, does that mean that it's also easy to ignore when you are?  Ned,  my quote wasn't a dig at you, the NB, National Commander, or the BoG.  It just seems to me, and apparently thousands of others of our members, that our uniform situation is a giant mess.  As an organization, we can continue to ignore that it is a mess (like many other things), or it can be addressed.  There is no operational need to have two separate equivalents of all of our uniforms. I can not think of a single organization, other than ours, that have two separate chains of uniforms with the same operational purpose.

Quote

QuoteOther than showing a relationship to the Air Force with our Blues, what other purpose does wearing AF style uniforms serve? 

Great question.  What are your thoughts as to the answer? 

1) A visual representation of our association with the Air Force and visual representation of our heritage.

2) Marketing to youth (they like uniforms).

3) Potential cost savings and supply lines using an already existing uniform combination.

4) Perpetuation of our "military-esque" culture, which plays nicely into the whole "Auxiliary of the AF" thing.

5) Provide some sort of sense of legitimacy based on visual appearance.

However, none of that can truly be accomplished when a large portion of our membership can't wear them in the first place.  So, in one hand, we market (well, we don't really market, so I'll just use the word generically) ourselves as an organization in which a person of any "race, sex, age, color, religion, national origin or disability" can join. 

We do this, but then we segregate them based on weight and whether or not they have facial hair.  So, someone joins the Air Force Auxiliary, but then can't wear an Air Force style uniform.  Or, they are standing next to someone wearing an AF Style Uniform at a recruiting booth and someone asks, "Why aren't you wearing the same thing?" "Well, because they weigh too much to wear this one."  It's just bad business, really.

QuoteDo you honestly think the answer is "none" or, worse yet, some sort of bad faith on the part of our leadership who only seek to embarass our larger and differently-groomed members?

Really?

Nope.  I don't assume some sort of bad faith, and can appreciate the difficulty of the decision.  I don't think that any of the leadership intends to embarrass our membership, but I can speak from experience that in a room full of CAP members in Mess Dress, the CAP member wearing the blazer combo or the civilian attire often feels out of place.  I also know quite a few members who won't go to CAP functions that are more formal in nature because of it.

QuoteI get that.  You don't understand the USAF's decision.  You have successfully communicated that.

I'm not sure that the AF understands their decision  :o

But that doesn't mean that CAP simply has to sit back and take it.  I'd imagine the conversation could go something like this.

CAP - "AF, we'd like all of our members to be able to wear the AF style uniforms."

AF - "We don't want the members who are overweight or don't meet grooming standards to wear them."

CAP - "Ok, thanks for the decision." Followed by, "All CAP senior members wear the corporate uniforms."

Just because they say no doesn't mean that we need to wear AF style uniforms AND create a different set for those who aren't covered.

QuoteBut you don't need to.  I don't need to.  It's not my decision or your decision to make.

I don't really care why the General or his predecessors made the decision, because it is their decision to make.  Again, however, CAP doesn't/didn't have to take the route that it did.  So, it must have something to do with how the members that can wear the AF style uniform feel about the uniform itself, because from my perspective (as limited as it may be) it certainly isn't the most efficient, or beneficial avenue to take based on the AF's decision.

QuoteI'm sorry if you feel that Gen Schwartz has not adequately briefed you on the USAF take on this issue.  It's not my job to explain his decision to you.  It would be impudent for me to even try.

I wasn't asking you to, and I don't feel that way.  Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

Quote
there is a genuine lack of data suggesting that an actual "problem" exists with our uniform set.  Let alone that arbitrarily discarding all the  USAF-style uniforms would "fix" anything.

Kind of like that governance issue that we seem to be spending money on, eh?  I haven't seen any "real data" that shows that our governance model is bad - other than a large portion of our membership saying that "this looks really messed up."  So, what did you (The BoG) do?  Oh yeah, you decided to investigate it.

If our uniforms are truly a tool to get the mission done, then shouldn't we investigate the best tools to do it?  Perhaps, the organization could look at uniforms strategically and see how they play into marketing and public awareness, esprit de corps, retention, and even into our core values. 

Quote
Lot's of strong opinons on both sides, of course.

But not much else.

Apparently people care enough to bring it up routinely, try to create different uniform combinations, etc.  One of our former National Commanders even went so far as to create a whole different uniform.  Politics aside, it was adopted quickly because those that weren't able to wear the AF style uniform didn't have a uniform that made them feel like they were part of our organization.  People do feel as though they are discriminated against, they do feel that they are treated as second rate members, etc.  You have members on this board who have said those very things - yet you say that there isn't any data suggesting that there is a problem.

We'll send out a "polite letter" to the membership about some random internet post with no evidence to back it up, but when actual members repeatedly bring up the issue of us having so many darn uniforms, there is no reaction, whatsoever.

Jimmy,

maybe there is no reaction, because its over reaction...

So, in your CAP fantasy world, you say kill all the AF style uniforms and go corporate.

But what are you going to say to the members, when a vast majority of SM's cry out the same thing that was yelled when the CSU got killed? That cry will be "i spent a ton of money on this, now I'm being forced out of it, not fair".

( because i have spent A LOT of money on my AF style and i wont give it up just because you feel bad for those that wont shave)

So what will be your response to them? To bad, its better we tend  to the small minority of those who have facial hair, or those that are over weight?

Or, its not fair that the AF is making us do something I don't like?

Another question, other than you saying "the fat/fuzzies feel discriminated against" (which i do not believe anyway) do you have any evidence our uniforms don't work? and if so please share...

I think a lot of this aggro stems from the 800-pound-gorilla in the room I mentioned some time back.

It's not necessarily "trolling for salutes" that causes NHQ to "walk on eggshells," I think...it's the broader question of "what is our raison d'etre vis-a-vis the USAF," or do we even have one?  Was John McCain right back in 1994-95?

As has been pointed out, we do not have a monopoly on air SAR...many police agencies and fire departments do it, with helicopters carrying paramedics that can land at the crash site.

Attitudes toward drug use are changing in some quarters...which may eventually affect our DDR functions.

Aerospace education...I wonder if the Internet is rendering our AE approach obsolete.

Cadets...I think that is the only area where one could get near-unanimous approval from USAF on what we do, because it provides warm bodies through the gates of Lackland, and in many cases educated enough about the military that they get through BMT relatively easier than someone without that experience.  However, JROTC serves a similar function.

How does this relate to uniforms?  Identity.  Who we are.  What we are.  CAP as it stands today is very schizoid about that.

When I first joined in '93, I joined a unit that wore AF-only uniforms.  Period.  When I asked about the pictures of the Guyabera shirt and other stuff in the CAPMart catalogue, I was told "those are for members who don't meet weight/grooming requirements."  The implication was that if you did meet those requirements, you wore the USAF uniform...albeit with the recently-imposed scarlet letter berry boards.

It wasn't until later, when going to wing functions and interacting with other squadrons, that I even saw the other uniform styles, and then they were still very much a minority.  It wasn't until I moved and had an ill-fated membership in a flying club senior squadron where virtually everyone wore polos or flight suits (insignia optional) and the other members looked at me aghast when I showed up in my blues that I became aware of the uniform divide.

I don't know General Schwartz, have never met him and am not likely to do so.  However, I believe he probably has more pressing issues on his plate than CAP uniforms.

I don't know the exact reasons we got the blue shoulder marks and metal grade taken from us.  Of course, I've heard varying stories.  The one I don't buy is the semi-official "the AF wanted us to look more distinctive."  I've heard that for 18 years and it's still Bravo Sierra.  CAP cutouts on the lapels, three-line nameplate, embroidered "CAP" on the shoulder marks, different flight/service cap badges and (then) wing patches on virtually all garments, blue nametapes...those were quite distinctive.

But I do know that in an organisation like ours uniforms matter, again because of identity.

In Canada (hi, JeffDG!), when they unified their armed forces in 1968, took away the individual service uniforms (as well as naval and air force ranks) and forced everyone to wear a green uniform (you could only tell the service branch by the cap/collar badges), there was a big exodus of senior generals/admirals/air marshals who refused to wear the new uniform (they called it "Revolt Of The Admirals," detailed very well by author Jack Granatstein).  It wasn't until the mid-80s that distinctive (that word again) uniforms were re-introduced (and even then the "air force" didn't get its ranks back).  That was in an actual military service.

We are either a part of the Air Force or we are not.  If we are, we wear their uniforms.  If we aren't, we go completely "corporate," junk the rank structure, cadets and probably lose a chunk of our membership in the process (me for sure).

I think this is a question that needs to be addressed before stewing in our own juices any more about uniforms.

Personally I wish we could keep the CSU and just add the CAP Distinctive Epaulets and change the braid color on the sleeves. The members I have talked to about this have generally said the same thing. I would say atleast 90% of them like the uniform.

I like it for a couple of different reasons.

1) It is easier to find current shades of the uniform that match the AF pants.
2) Trying to get an AF jacket and pants that match right is difficult because of the age and availability. (The Colors/Shades that is). This is just been my experience and may not be common.

If CAP were to keep the CSU I would buy one asap.

Quote from: caphistorian on March 16, 2011, 11:10:13 AM
If CAP were to keep the CSU I would buy one asap.

I would add one minor change in the design if it were brought back.  Since it is tailor made for us, there is no reason it couldn't come with grey epaulettes already on it and use pin on hard rank.   Also change the sleeve braid from bright silver to the same grey as the slide on ranks - distinctive enough but it doesn't jump out at you as gaudy, and it would be a 2 color uniform instead of 3.   The existing uniforms would still be good until worn out as they wouldn't look all that different, it would be like the USAF adopting a new shade of something.

Quote from: RVT on March 16, 2011, 03:15:55 PM

Quote from: caphistorian on March 16, 2011, 11:10:13 AM
If CAP were to keep the CSU I would buy one asap.

I would add one minor change in the design if it were brought back.  Since it is tailor made for us, there is no reason it couldn't come with grey epaulettes already on it and use pin on hard rank.   Also change the sleeve braid from bright silver to the same grey as the slide on ranks - distinctive enough but it doesn't jump out at you as gaudy, and it would be a 2 color uniform instead of 3.   The existing uniforms would still be good until worn out as they wouldn't look all that different, it would be like the USAF adopting a new shade of something.

I think having two color uniforms looks a little off, I can imagine pretty well what it would look like that way, and I prefer the epaulets to stay blue and use the slide rank. I would also prefer to use a blue braid instead of using a gray one. I don't know about you, but I have noticed that VG is not very acute on colors. I am pretty sure that the regulations says that the 1st Lt and CAPT and LT Col and Col and General grades are supposed to be white, however most of the time I have noticed that they were made silver. So I would imagine that they would do the same to the braid and just try to pass it off so they don't have to stock another thing for us. Not to mention I have seen the silver braid on the service jacket and I have the blue braid on mine, and I prefer the less noticeable blue over the silver. Just my opinion.

Quote from: RVT on March 16, 2011, 03:15:55 PM...there is no reason it couldn't come with grey epaulettes already on it and use pin on hard rank.

What is the fixation with CAP members and metal grade insignia?

Quote from: Eclipse on March 16, 2011, 03:23:28 PM
What is the fixation with CAP members and metal grade insignia?

I would also ask: What is the fixation with CAP members and GREY?

Quote from: CyBorg on March 16, 2011, 03:33:50 PM

Quote from: Eclipse on March 16, 2011, 03:23:28 PM
What is the fixation with CAP members and metal grade insignia?

I would also ask: What is the fixation with CAP members and GREY?

I am not sure about everyone else, but I understand that it may be here to stay, so lets just deal with it and move out. I guess for some it would be it is as close to silver as they can get.

We have grey, we do not have metal rank.  Bob's question is still valid.

Quote from: NCRblues on March 16, 2011, 05:05:16 AM
So, in your CAP fantasy world, you say kill all the AF style uniforms and go corporate.

That's not what I'm saying.  My previous comments have been to examine the role of our uniforms in our organization and whether or not they meet our need, or are the most efficient, most logical method of meeting that need.

Uniforms play an important role in the visual identification of an organization.  So, if we have members at the same function, doing the same job, people aren't going to recognize instinctively that those members are part of the same organization.  Here's an excerpt from one company executive about having uniforms:

Quote
Why does everyone wear the same uniform?  The company's General Manager of Property and Procurement, Rhonda McSweeney, says uniforms are a stamp of a company culture, branding and professionalism, as well as employee satisfaction and egalitarianism.

"No-one is any different, we're all equal, and that goes for the office fit-outs too – we all occupy 10 square metres. Even our founder and Managing Director Skroo Turner.  But the uniforms are the most tangible aspect of the egalitarian culture. It helps convey professionalism."

McSweeney says the uniform also helps to reinforce the company's brand. "Our brand is well known and trusted. World brand consultancy Interbrand has ranked Flight Centre's brand recognition as 14th best in Australia", just behind Myer and Australia Post. "When you think of our brand equity and recognition, you cannot equate a tangible dollar value to uniforms. Ditto turnover and revenue – it would only be anecdotal and our Managing Director would cringe if anyone tried to quantify that. But we've had the uniform since inception and it's not just our brand, it's our culture. The GFC presented a challenge – it was a time of cost constraints, but not once did the subject of uniforms come up when we were looking to trim costs."

So having everyone in the same uniform is critical to their culture, branding, professionalism, satisfaction, sense of equality (in the sense that everyone is on the same team).  All things that I think that we [CAP] are also interested in.

Quote
"The mere fact of wearing a presentable uniform, especially one with our logo, has a big impact. Our survey suggested that merely wearing a uniform adds around 15 percent to the price that can be quoted."

It seems to me that brand recognition can also have an effect on our bottom line.

QuoteAnother franchise where uniforms matter is Domino's Pizza, whose Chief Operating Officer Andrew Rennie spent time in the military and therefore believes: "No matter what the uniform, there is a sense of pride, and what it stands for. In the military, a uniform is part of your kit and has to be treated with respect. It also links the organisation; it shows everyone is in the same team."

"At Domino's, we find wearing a uniform is a large return on investment as it creates a greater brand presence. Employees have a sense of pride when wearing the uniform and it enables Domino's to set a unified standard of dress nationally and internationally across our group."

That would lead me to believe that have more uniforms would:

Undermine the culture that CAP is professing to have.

Dilute our branding efforts.

Give a lesser sense of professionalism.

Reduce member satisfaction.

Reduce our member's sense of equality.

All of which, ultimately, could affect our organization's bottom line.

QuoteBut what are you going to say to the members, when a vast majority of SM's cry out the same thing that was yelled when the CSU got killed? That cry will be "i spent a ton of money on this, now I'm being forced out of it, not fair".

I imagine it might be roughly the same as "The Air Force has decided that our overweight members can't wear the AF uniforms anymore, so you have to wear this now."  Or maybe the, "The Air Force has switched uniforms, so we are too." Conversations.  Except this time it would be a decision that our organization made, instead of a "Don't blame us, we don't have a say in the matter."

Quote( because i have spent A LOT of money on my AF style and i wont give it up just because you feel bad for those that wont shave)

See, strong feeling towards the AF style uniform, from someone who wears it.  Unfortunately for you, if "the leadership" changed our uniforms you'd have to give it up, just like the CSU people have to give their up, just like those who bought a 4-button service coat had to give their up, just like people with the blueberry suit, guyabera, pickle suits, khakis, and potentially the bdus, had or are going to have to do.

I have a significant investment in my uniforms too, but I am at least open to the possibility that our uniform setup is a mess and could possibly be detrimental to the fulfillment of our mission.  In reality, it really has nothing to do with "those who won't shave, or those who won't lose weight.  It has to do with the importance of uniform solidarity and the success of our organization.

QuoteOr, its not fair that the AF is making us do something I don't like?

The Air Force isn't making us do anything, CAP is deciding to just go along with it.  They are an outside influence.  There is a desire for our members to wear the AF style uniforms.  The Air Force says we can, but with stipulations.  At that point, what is more important?  To have some of our members in one uniform and the rest in others, and yet a third for others?  Or is it more important to have solidarity and all of our members in a single set of uniforms?

QuoteAnother question, other than you saying "the fat/fuzzies feel discriminated against" (which i do not believe anyway)

You have disabled veterans on this board who are disappointed that they can't wear their military ribbons on the corporate uniform because they are overweight.  We have members who choose not to attend CAP social functions because they feel out of place.  I can only speak from my personal experience, but I get comments all the time about "how nice it must be to be able to wear the AF style uniform."  We have members on this board who actively work to lose weight so they can wear them.  My last squadron commander was thrilled when the CSU came out because, "[he] finally had a uniform he actually looked like a CAP member in."  So, while it may be anecdotal, in my experience - given the option - our members would prefer to all be in the same uniforms.

Quotedo you have any evidence our uniforms don't work? and if so please share...

Our uniforms work operationally because they are functional equivalents.  However, so would a suit and tie, and shorts and a t-shirt.  The intangible stuff is a bit difficult to get actual evidence on.  How do you measure "patriotism" or "esprit de corps"? 

Quote from: jimmydeanno on March 16, 2011, 03:01:10 AM
It just seems to me, and apparently thousands of others of our members, that our uniform situation is a giant mess. 

Well, we certainly spend a lot of time talking about it.

But what makes you say it is a "giant mess?"

Are there missions not being performed because of the clothes that some of us wear?

Are there cadets that refuse to join because not all seniors wear the same uniform?

Are there AE students who refuse to attend class because the clothes the teacher is wearing?

If so, I'm not seeing it.

Don't get me wrong.  We certainly need a new 39-1.  Way overdue, in fact.  And I'm glad I'm not on that committee - talk about a horrific and thankless job.  But the slight confusion and wide variety in the clothes we wear does not (or at least should not) affect how we perform our missions.

So, I'd go as far as "little mess," but I think it distorts and overstates things to call it a "giant mess." 

QuoteThere is no operational need to have two separate equivalents of all of our uniforms.

Yeah, we've already agreed on that.  But things other than "operational needs" drive our uniform requirements.  Things like member cost, external factors like our USAF colleagues, etc.

Quote

QuoteOther than showing a relationship to the Air Force with our Blues, what other purpose does wearing AF style uniforms serve? 

1) A visual representation of our association with the Air Force and visual representation of our heritage.

2) Marketing to youth (they like uniforms).

3) Potential cost savings and supply lines using an already existing uniform combination.

4) Perpetuation of our "military-esque" culture, which plays nicely into the whole "Auxiliary of the AF" thing.

5) Provide some sort of sense of legitimacy based on visual appearance.

Nicely done.

QuoteHowever, none of that can truly be accomplished when a large portion of our membership can't wear them in the first place. 

Forgive me for being a little dense, but every member through a 5XL apparently can wear our uniforms.

On a side note, what is your estimate of the percentage of our membership that is restricted to corporate uniforms based on existing size and grooming factors?  I'm not sure, but it would be an interesting factoid for this discussion.

QuoteSo, in one hand, we market (well, we don't really market, so I'll just use the word generically) ourselves as an organization in which a person of any "race, sex, age, color, religion, national origin or disability" can join. 

We do this, but then we segregate them based on weight and whether or not they have facial hair.  So, someone joins the Air Force Auxiliary, but then can't wear an Air Force style uniform.  Or, they are standing next to someone wearing an AF Style Uniform at a recruiting booth and someone asks, "Why aren't you wearing the same thing?" "Well, because they weigh too much to wear this one."  It's just bad business, really.

Yup, I  don't think anyone would have designed the current setup from scratch - because as with so many things in life - it is the result of experience and compromise.  It is rare when everyone is pleased with the result of a compromise.  But it lets us get our job done.

QuoteBut that doesn't mean that CAP simply has to sit back and take it.  I'd imagine the conversation could go something like this.

CAP - "AF, we'd like all of our members to be able to wear the AF style uniforms."

AF - "We don't want the members who are overweight or don't meet grooming standards to wear them."

CAP - "Ok, thanks for the decision." Followed by, "All CAP senior members wear the corporate uniforms."

Of course it could go that way.

Unless, of course, the CAP leaders in question actually respected their members and the heritage of the organization.

As others have pointed out, this "solution" would by definition result in the waste of several million dollars worth of uniforms purchased by our volunteers.  And result in untold millions in increased costs down the road as we move away from cheap USAF uniforms and the supply system as close as any military base.

Quote
I don't really care why the General or his predecessors made the decision, because it is their decision to make. 

And yet you keep publicly questioning it.  Odd for someone who doesn't care about it.

QuoteKind of like that governance issue that we seem to be spending money on, eh?  I haven't seen any "real data" that shows that our governance model is bad - other than a large portion of our membership saying that "this looks really messed up."  So, what did you (The BoG) do?  Oh yeah, you decided to investigate it.

Bit of a non-sequitor, but since you asked:  1) we haven't (yet) spent a dime on the governance study, 2) just because you haven't seen any data on governance doesn't mean the BoG hasn't, and 3) if the BoG doesn't see the need to get involved in uniforms, perhaps that may suggest that the issue is not yet one that affects the actual day-to-day work of our volunteers in the field.

QuoteIf our uniforms are truly a tool to get the mission done, then shouldn't we investigate the best tools to do it?  Perhaps, the organization could look at uniforms strategically and see how they play into marketing and public awareness, esprit de corps, retention, and even into our core values. 

Now, there you go.  That's a good idea.  Gather actual data to support your thesis that there is a "giant mess" that somehow affects the organization.  Even a simple survey of the membership would be a good place to start.  I'd be very interested in the results.

Quote

Quote
Lot's of strong opinions on both sides, of course.

But not much else.

Apparently people care enough to bring it up routinely, try to create different uniform combinations, etc.  One of our former National Commanders even went so far as to create a whole different uniform.  Politics aside, it was adopted quickly because those that weren't able to wear the AF style uniform didn't have a uniform that made them feel like they were part of our organization.  People do feel as though they are discriminated against, they do feel that they are treated as second rate members, etc.  You have members on this board who have said those very things - yet you say that there isn't any data suggesting that there is a problem.

We'll send out a "polite letter" to the membership about some random internet post with no evidence to back it up, but when actual members repeatedly bring up the issue of us having so many darn uniforms, there is no reaction, whatsoever.

I'm still having a little trouble connecting uniform issues to internet issues, but more importantly your premise is incorrect.  There is a national-level "reaction" to the concerns expressed by you and others.  A committee composed of volunteers like yourself have been charged with taking a fresh look at CAP uniforms and re-drafting the 39-1.  IIRC, their work is to be presented at the summer NBs.

Quote from: CyborgCadets...I think that is the only area where one could get near-unanimous approval from USAF on what we do, because it provides warm bodies through the gates of Lackland, and in many cases educated enough about the military that they get through BMT relatively easier than someone without that experience.  However, JROTC serves a similar function.

We are not a recruiting tool for the USAF.  The last time I checked, less than 20% of our cadets enter military service, and of those, most enter the Army.

But having said that, we are vastly more cost-efficient per accession to the USAF than is AFJROTC.  Something on the order of 5-1.  Mostly because JROTC has multiple paid employees at each unit, whereas CAP has volunteers.  But the AF tracks this kind of date pretty closely.  The whole JROTC program is being examined, and may be restructured or even eliminated in the current cost-cutting environment.  For the USAF, the CAP CP is a great bargain.

This thread has taken a pretty wild journey.  I don't have a dog in the hunt as far as a uniform type.  I do definitely like the CSU and would love to see it stay.  That said, the basic inequality still needs to be addressed.  There should be no difference to what military badges and awards you can wear between the Air Force style uniform and the CSU/Distinctive (white pilot shirt) uniform.  As far as I can see that is where the true inequality arrives on scene.  If you take two veterans in CAP stand them side by side, one in CSU and the other in AF type, I challenge you to determine the service resume of the veteran in the CSU without them telling you.  You can't, because they are forbidden from wearing their service history on their uniform by CAP.  None of the Air Force's sister services has issue with the diplaying of veterans awards on civilian clothing.  In fact, they encourage it.  If the Air Force does not want its service veterans wearing their service awards on civilian clothing, so be it.  Just make a new rule "military awards given in writing by competent military authority can be worn on CSU/Distinctive uniform IAW the awarding services permission and policies.  They will be displayed using CAP's order of precedence."  Well that is my two cents.  I will wear a potato sack if that is what CAP wants.  Just let me wear my resume when I am in a formal environment, wearing my dinner dress potato sack.   ;D

At Ned,
I have been buying a separate set of uniforms so I can wear my goatee for as long as I want to. I bought the Blue BDUs and the white aviator shirt (long and short) and grays slacks combo. And when I buy a flight suit I'll have to spend the $258.50 for the blue one instead of buying a cheaper used sage green one on eBay. But to me having my goatee for as long as I want to is worth having these alternate uniforms. I also have the woodland BDUs set up and the AF blues uniform. I wouldnt want the AF uniforms to be cancelled just because the overweight people and us fuzzy people can't wear them. If a special event comes up and I want to wear my AF blues I'll go back to just the mustache for the event then grow my goatee back starting the next day. Or, wait a month or two... But it would be great if the AF allowed nicely trimmed beards and goatees with their uniforms then I wouldnt have had to spend all this extra money for the second set of uniforms.

Quote from: Ned on March 16, 2011, 05:42:55 PMwhat other purpose does wearing AF style uniforms serve? 

QuoteHowever, none of that can truly be accomplished when a large portion of our membership can't wear them in the first place. 

QuoteForgive me for being a little dense, but every member through a 5XL apparently can wear our uniforms.

I thought we were talking about AF Style Uniforms.

QuoteOn a side note, what is your estimate of the percentage of our membership that is restricted to corporate uniforms based on existing size and grooming factors?  I'm not sure, but it would be an interesting factoid for this discussion.

I would estimate that 20-30%, if the representation I have at my local unit and other units I've been a member of hold true.  I would presume that we could probably capture a more accurate representation (minus facial hair), but grabbing the weight and height data we have in eServices. 

QuoteYup, I  don't think anyone would have designed the current setup from scratch - because as with so many things in life - it is the result of experience and compromise.  It is rare when everyone is pleased with the result of a compromise.  But it lets us get our job done.

I agree.  However, sometimes opportunities present themselves to take a different course without such a huge effect.  For example, if the Air Force says that we could switch to ABUs, we could approach the subject again.  Since the AF style uniform wearers would be in a situation to have to change uniforms again, anyway, we could opt to remain in BDUs and transition the BBDU wearers into it - or switch everyone into the BBDUs.  Either way would cost money for the member, if we decided to move over to the ABUs or move someone else into a different uniform.

QuoteAs others have pointed out, this "solution" would by definition result in the waste of several million dollars worth of uniforms purchased by our volunteers.

As will a switch to any new uniform adopted by the Air Force.  ABUs cost more than BDUs and I have three sets, a few pair of boots, etc.  So, I can see myself being out $600-$700 if we switch to ABUs.  So, if the majority of our members wear the AF Style Uniforms, isn't the cost greater to follow the Air Force than to put everyone in BDUs?

QuoteAnd result in untold millions in increased costs down the road as we move away from cheap USAF uniforms and the supply system as close as any military base.

As I noted above, AF Uniforms aren't exactly cheap.  Certainly not cheaper than our Aviator combination, unless we're talking about the hand-me-downs that many of our units rely on. Currently though, for a new member to outfit themselves with BDUs from Vanguard, it will cost them approximately $225.00. Also, how many of our units are within a reasonable driving distance to an Air Force Base?   

QuoteAnd yet you keep publicly questioning it.  Odd for someone who doesn't care about it.

I am not questioning the "Air Force's" decision.  What I am calling into question is the CAP leaderships decision to consistently pursue the path of separate but equal uniforms for its membership.

Quote2) just because you haven't seen any data on governance doesn't mean the BoG hasn't

How does one get data without a request for data?  That's all I'm talking about, getting data.  Unless the data is just a group of people saying "we think that our governance model is messed up, other successful non-profits don't have a model like ours, let's look into it because it appears to be a problem."  Which sounds coincidentally like our uniform debate occurring here.

I don't have the ability to see the national picture, but my experience in CAP so far from local to national level events has exposed me, frequently, to people talking about how "messed up" our uniform system is.

QuoteNow, there you go.  That's a good idea.  Gather actual data to support your thesis that there is a "giant mess" that somehow affects the organization.  Even a simple survey of the membership would be a good place to start.  I'd be very interested in the results.

Great, if only there were someone that had national level influence/access to get something like that done...  I'd be interested in the results too.  Locally, I have gathered my data and this is why I bring it up.

QuoteI'm still having a little trouble connecting uniform issues to internet issues, but more importantly your premise is incorrect.  There is a national-level "reaction" to the concerns expressed by you and others.  A committee composed of volunteers like yourself have been charged with taking a fresh look at CAP uniforms and re-drafting the 39-1.

So the issue has been identified and is being looked at already?  Weren't you just saying that it isn't a problem that requires attention, other than a rewrite of 39-1?

A thought experiment to ponder over lunch:

Suppose the USAF removed the height/weight standards for the wearing of USAF-style uniforms.

(a loud huzzah! was heard throughout the nation)

Now anyone can wear the blues and (for the sake of argument) ABUs.

What will we do for members who cannot wear the largest sizes the AF stocks?

(Quick research on aafes.com suggest that blues shirts top out at size 19 and ABUs at size 50.)

Now what?

Quote from: Ned on March 16, 2011, 06:49:59 PM
A thought experiment to ponder over lunch:

Suppose the USAF removed the height/weight standards for the wearing of USAF-style uniforms.

(a loud huzzah! was heard throughout the nation)

Now anyone can wear the blues and (for the sake of argument) ABUs.

And grooming standards?

(http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/28925_124768670883490_100000510722888_257377_6185479_n.jpg)

and

(http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/37934_169872106373146_100000510722888_532886_1374137_n.jpg)

I was told even my mustache here was too wide. I didnt like having to shorten it further. One of the reasons why I went back to the goatee :) This was the way I looked at the CA Wing Conference.

Quote from: BradM on March 16, 2011, 06:56:58 PM

Quote from: Ned on March 16, 2011, 06:49:59 PM
A thought experiment to ponder over lunch:

Suppose the USAF removed the height/weight standards for the wearing of USAF-style uniforms.

(a loud huzzah! was heard throughout the nation)

Now anyone can wear the blues and (for the sake of argument) ABUs.

And grooming standards?

(http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/28925_124768670883490_100000510722888_257377_6185479_n.jpg)

and

(http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/37934_169872106373146_100000510722888_532886_1374137_n.jpg)

I was told even my mustache here was too wide. I didnt like having to shorten it further. One of the reasons why I went back to the goatee :) This was the way I looked at the CA Wing Conference.

I have to say BradM, It just looks unprofessional, and unfitting to the uniform. I just don't think beards and goatees fit with the uniform. I am sorry about that, but it really is just how I feel.

So far as the mustache is concerned, yes, it is too wide. The best way to ensure that it is not too wide is to ensure that it is no wider than your mouth when it is closed.

Now listen here you young whippersnapper! ;) hehe We will just have to agree to disagree on this! :P

You're just not acostumed to seeing trimmed beards and goatees with the uniform. Look at Navy pics from the Royal Navy that I think SarDRagon posted before. It looks fine.

I think my mustache above is more like a Navy one with the extra 1/4 inch on each side.

Quote from: Ned on March 16, 2011, 06:49:59 PM
A thought experiment to ponder over lunch:

Suppose the USAF removed the height/weight standards for the wearing of USAF-style uniforms.

(a loud huzzah! was heard throughout the nation)

Now anyone can wear the blues and (for the sake of argument) ABUs.

What will we do for members who cannot wear the largest sizes the AF stocks?

(Quick research on aafes.com suggest that blues shirts top out at size 19 and ABUs at size 50.)

There are several manufacturers that will make custom sized uniforms.

This one for example, will make custom sized ABUs for $68.00 per item:

Quote from: http://www.militarysupplyhouse.com

We can make any size or shape ABU pant or shirt! ANY SIZE !!!
12X-Large, no problem.
email or call for information
(310) 704-9055
Matching top same prices.

Or, AAFES (er... The Exchange) offers fully custom sized uniforms.  It takes a bit longer, because they custom make it instead of sending a stock item to the store - but it is available.

Quote from: BradM on March 16, 2011, 07:05:39 PM
Now listen here you young whippersnapper! ;) hehe We will just have to agree to disagree on this! :P

Yes we will you old geezer! ;) I honestly do wish that beards and goatees in uniform wasn't such a hot spot for me, but it is and I don't even know where it stems from. But I do know that there are a few reasons that the military made the decision; a beard and a goatee will make it impossible for a promask to seal around your face, also if you are in the field, beards and goatees are perfect nests for insects and germs, and they are right next to your mouth and nose and they can get right inside without you knowing it. I know CAP has nothing to do with a promask, so that one doesn't apply to us in the slightest tiny little bit. However the hygiene reason does when we are in the field. However we are never in the field as long as the Army is, so we really don't have that issue either. Yet for some reason I just don't like them in uniforms. Now mustaches are another thing all together, I don't mind them at all. The only time I have ever not liked one was when I was an E-3 fresh out of basic and met my 1st SGT, I wanted to slap him repeatedly until his Hitler stache fell off!

^^Beards, goatees and other assorted facial fuzz are a naval tradition, particularly in the British Commonwealth, though not one that our USN and USCG seem to have adopted.

Air force traditions seem to have evolved from the first independent air force, the British Royal Air Force, though in our case we also inherited a lot of Army tradition...I haven't seen beards on RAF/Commonwealth or USAAC/AAF/USAF personnel.

I had a beard before joining CAP.  I chose to shave it off...but I'm not going to say that anyone else is less valuable to CAP because they choose not to shave theirs off.

I would be personally quite happy if the "aviator" uniform just added a dash of something except grey and white.

Van Heusen makes blue civilian aviator shirts.

(http://www.garffshirts.com/images/products/detail/KurtsPhotoShoot003.jpg)

I could easily imagine that with current CAP grey slides and nameplate...and the shade is completely different from the USAF.

I think I found a uniform I can wear with my goatee ;)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v347/Valeron/Marko_Ramius/soviethatlarge_crop.jpg)

BradM as Captain Marko Ramius

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v347/Valeron/Marko_Ramius/23998.jpg)

Quote from: CyBorg on March 16, 2011, 08:34:51 PM
^^Beards, goatees and other assorted facial fuzz are a naval tradition, particularly in the British Commonwealth, though not one that our USN and USCG seem to have adopted.

Air force traditions seem to have evolved from the first independent air force, the British Royal Air Force, though in our case we also inherited a lot of Army tradition...I haven't seen beards on RAF/Commonwealth or USAAC/AAF/USAF personnel.

I would be personally quite happy if the "aviator" uniform just added a dash of something except grey and white.

Van Heusen makes blue civilian aviator shirts.

I could easily imagine that with current CAP grey slides and nameplate...and the shade is completely different from the USAF.

I was at an air show at Pt Magu Naval Air Station last year and a modern day Luftwaffe pilot was there and he had a goatee. So in the current Germany's Air Force they allow facial hair. :)

I like the Van Heusen blue civilian aviator shirts.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 16, 2011, 07:14:20 PM

Quote from: BradM on March 16, 2011, 07:05:39 PM
Now listen here you young whippersnapper! ;) hehe We will just have to agree to disagree on this! :P

Yes we will you old geezer! ;) I honestly do wish that beards and goatees in uniform wasn't such a hot spot for me, but it is and I don't even know where it stems from. But I do know that there are a few reasons that the military made the decision; a beard and a goatee will make it impossible for a promask to seal around your face, also if you are in the field, beards and goatees are perfect nests for insects and germs, and they are right next to your mouth and nose and they can get right inside without you knowing it. I know CAP has nothing to do with a promask, so that one doesn't apply to us in the slightest tiny little bit. However the hygiene reason does when we are in the field. However we are never in the field as long as the Army is, so we really don't have that issue either. Yet for some reason I just don't like them in uniforms. Now mustaches are another thing all together, I don't mind them at all. The only time I have ever not liked one was when I was an E-3 fresh out of basic and met my 1st SGT, I wanted to slap him repeatedly until his Hitler stache fell off!

A bearded look in a military uniform

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v347/Valeron/Marko_Ramius/marko_ramius1.jpg)

For the record I've never had problems with bugs in my goatee LOL  ::)

OK, three mug shots.

D. Bowles, AT1, USN, Mar 1980; yes, I was on active duty.

(http://members.cox.net/dragnd/prof.jpg)

What I looked like right after I started participating with CAP again, Oct '99.
That was the "before" picture from the last time I shaved off the beard. The "after" will never be seen on the Internet.

(http://members.cox.net/dragnd/db_10-99.jpg)

Taken in 2003; I look about the same now, but the beard is all white now.

(http://members.cox.net/dragnd/Bowles.jpg)

Quote from: CyBorg on March 16, 2011, 08:34:51 PM
(http://www.garffshirts.com/images/products/detail/KurtsPhotoShoot003.jpg)

I could easily imagine that with current CAP grey slides and nameplate...and the shade is completely different from the USAF.

Even without, having an AF Blue shirt with the stripes instead of bars/leaves on the shoulder would be quite distinctive, and would actually reflect the dual military/corporate (like airline pilots with the stripes) nature of CAP.

Quote from: SarDragon on March 16, 2011, 09:15:47 PM
OK, three mug shots.

D. Bowles, AT1, USN, Mar 1980; yes, I was on active duty.

(http://members.cox.net/dragnd/prof.jpg)

Taken in 2003; I look about the same now, but the beard is all white now.

(http://members.cox.net/dragnd/Bowles.jpg)

These two pictures I think the beard would look fine in the Air Force uniform.

Well, the Navy certainly approved the top one until 1985.

Quote from: JeffDG on March 16, 2011, 09:17:33 PM
Even without, having an AF Blue shirt with the stripes instead of bars/leaves on the shoulder would be quite distinctive, and would actually reflect the dual military/corporate (like airline pilots with the stripes) nature of CAP.

Noted, Jeff, but the fact is that if the USAF issues it, they own it, and they're going to control what is done with it.

I've thought of the AF shirt with ROTC shoulder marks, but again USAF ownership comes into it.

I would be quite pleased with the Van Heusen blue shirt with off-the-shelf-from-Vanguard ROTC shoulder marks (with CAP cutouts pinned on) and CAP blue nameplate (I still have my old one).

(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/00000008410715.jpg)
Example: CAP Flight Officer

(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/00000008420200.jpg)
Example: CAP Captain

(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/00000008420500.jpg)
Example: CAP Colonel

The AF owns those, too (?), but they cannot be mistaken for USAF officer insignia.

Well it surely is less costly for an adult member to just utilize the white aviator shirt with grey pants.  No head gear or special outer wear requirement.   Even with Blue BDU's again there's no specific head gear or outer wear requirements, thus less cost.

Lets face it the AF uniforms are expensive for the average member to equip themselves with.  I personally see members with short sleeve blue uniforms wearing civilian coats, because the cost is very expensive for a military coat.  Some don't even have the appropriate blue head gear.

I just feel that IF CAP differentiated its' uniform a bit more (e.g. bright red colors for CAP, name tags, CAP designation), red epaulets etc, than the AF uniforms become more CAP specific and we are just using the AF supply chain for the color (blue) and  design/cut of the uniform.

Utility uniform wise, NOW is time to (start) transition EVERYONE to Blue BDU's and BLUE flight suits.  This will ensure a consistent mission look EVERYWHERE and less confusion with us as being the military.  I also would like to see us get the authority to wear the golf shirt (both short & long) with the Blue BDU pants.

On all of these uniforms the rank of the volunteer can just be placed above their name tape or tag, keeping everything off the shoulders or collars, further differentiating the uniform from the AF military uniform.

I personally have no issue with overweight personnel wearing this type of AF cut uniform but again the uniform has to fit them properly.  As far as beards, long hair etc goes, I personally no issue with that either.

BTW I  (and I suspect most other mature adults) didn't join CAP just so I/they can wear a military like uniform, I joined to participate & contribute to CAP's missions.    For me the ongoing uniform issues would not be a reason to leave CAP BUT it is a bizarre when compared with most other volunteer organizations that seem to have a consistent UNIFORM that easily and readily identifies the member to that organization.
RM   

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 16, 2011, 10:54:30 PM
Well it surely is less costly for an adult member to just utilize the white aviator shirt with grey pants.  No head gear or special outer wear requirement.   Even with Blue BDU's again there's no specific head gear or outer wear requirements, thus less cost.

It always comes down to money, doesn't it?

Not everyone in the organization is fixated on every last cent, and some people actually appreciate the attention to detail it takes to configure something
more complicated than a t-shirt.

I actually am very happy and feel honored that I will get to wear the Air Force uniform. I feel regret for not having served when I was younger and being in CAP is a way that I can serve at this late age of 47 and 9 months :) I just wish I didnt have to shave the goatee to a mini-mustache to wear it.

Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 16, 2011, 10:54:30 PM
Lets face it the AF uniforms are expensive for the average member to equip themselves with.  I personally see members with short sleeve blue uniforms wearing civilian coats, because the cost is very expensive for a military coat.  Some don't even have the appropriate blue head gear.

I don't know about any one else, but I have no idea how much I spent on my Blues, shirts x2, pants x2, service coat, and sold weather waistcoat, or my BDUs x3, but I also know I don't care how much I spent on them. No, I am not rich, not by a long shot. I am disabled and my family of five going on six lives off of that while my wife is in school. I am just proud that I can still serve even after the Army broke me. So, no, uniforms does not always come down to the amount of money. It comes down to, I am proud that I can still serve and I will wear the USAF style uniforms as long as I possibly can.

And so far as the red lipstick all over the uniform, I won't wear that, I will figure out what I have to do to never touch that uniform, yeah, I even mean the rank on the chest. As it is, I wear my uniform proudly, with all of my ribbons, my gray CAP rank, and my gray nameplate, and my badges. I wear it oh so proudly on a blue USAF style uniform, and on my woodland BDUs every week, and at every mission and every training op. Don't mess with something that so many of us are so proud of.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 17, 2011, 03:53:29 AMsold weather waistcoat

I'm guessing you meant "Cold weather waistcoat" but I'm still confused.

Quote from: CyBorg on March 16, 2011, 10:06:57 PM

Quote from: JeffDG on March 16, 2011, 09:17:33 PMEven without, having an AF Blue shirt with the stripes instead of bars/leaves on the shoulder would be quite distinctive, and would actually reflect the dual military/corporate (like airline pilots with the stripes) nature of CAP.

Noted, Jeff, but the fact is that if the USAF issues it, they own it, and they're going to control what is done with it.
I've thought of the AF shirt with ROTC shoulder marks, but again USAF ownership comes into it.

I would be quite pleased with the Van Heusen blue shirt with off-the-shelf-from-Vanguard ROTC shoulder marks (with CAP cutouts pinned on) and CAP blue nameplate (I still have my old one).

(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/00000008410715.jpg)Example: CAP Flight Officer

(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/00000008420200.jpg)Example: CAP Captain

(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/00000008420500.jpg)Example: CAP Colonel

The AF owns those, too (?), but they cannot be mistaken for USAF officer insignia.

If we went full McPeak with the grade insignia the USAF would probably be perfectly happy with the rest of the uniform being identical to active duty.  Confusion would be impossible.  A lot of airmen may have no idea what you are - but they won't think for a moment you are regular air force.

Radioman, your fixation with red eludes me.  Talk about GARISH.  It may have worked to an extent with the tan uniforms of long ago.  The Marines use it on their winter dress (greens) for chevrons.  But on BLUE it would be hideous.  It would look worse than the berry boards.  I would rather have those back.  The colours you suggest would make us look like a clone of the Salvation Army, no offence intended to those fine people. 

(http://store.salvationarmy.ca/images/clothing/summer_epaulets.jpg)

It would make us look no more "distinctive" than we do now, or even when we still had blue shoulder marks (yes, I know one of the Salvationist shoulder marks is blue, but I don't know their grade structure).

Also, switching to a blue civilian Van Heusen aviator shirt would have negligible cost differences to the current white.

Actually, I agree with you about BBDU's, flight/utility suits and jackets.  Why?  Because there is AIR FORCE precedent for them.

(http://www.historypreservation.com/hpassociates/images/b15c_mod_blue_thumb.jpg)

(http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/uploads//monthly_06_2008/post-214-1214339839.jpg)

Now, if we would get permission to wear the flight cap, et voila, nothing like what the USAF currently wears (for the most part)...and kinda retro Strategic Air Command looking.

Even what Canadian aircrews used to wear would look good for us:

(http://www.angiesoutdoors.com/military_surplus/canadian/flightsuit_large.jpg)

I also don't have a problem with limiting name/rank, etc. to a leather aircrew-type patch.  The USAF tried it in the early '90s.  It would save on expenses for cloth rank, nametapes, etc.

But one salient fact remains: there are always people, in the USAF and out, who are going to confuse us with someone else, because they choose to remain uninformed about who we are.  That is NOT our fault.

RVT: I've heard others say "go the Tony McPeak route too."  However, that raises the spectre that CG AUXies face...getting sleeve striping sewn on.  I would find it more sensible to have ROTC-type hard shoulder boards press-studded onto the shoulders of the AF enlisted coat (with old-style CAP buttons)...those are often more readily available (and cheaper) on places like Evilbay than the officer cut.

(http://www.armedforcesinsignia.com/data/shopcart7/image_db/8356900_MED.jpg)
(example for CAP 1st Lt)

Of course, someone will probably overcomplicate things and say "make 'em grey." ::)

Quote from: RVT on March 17, 2011, 05:27:01 AM
If we went full McPeak with the grade insignia the USAF would probably be perfectly happy with the rest of the uniform being identical to active duty.  Confusion would be impossible.  A lot of airmen may have no idea what you are - but they won't think for a moment you are regular air force.

Then they had better stay away from anywhere they might encounter naval officers or exchange officers from places like Canada.

Quote from: CyBorg on March 17, 2011, 06:44:07 AM
I've heard others say "go the Tony McPeak route too."  However, that raises the spectre that CG AUXies face...getting sleeve striping sewn on.  I would find it more sensible to have ROTC-type hard shoulder boards press-studded onto the shoulders of the AF enlisted coat (with old-style CAP buttons)...those are often more readily available (and cheaper) on places like Evilbay than the officer cut.

Interesting historical note:  When the USAF was being spun off from the Army, Gen. Spaatz actually suggested that CAP insignia be the sleeve stripes a la the Navy, but other top Army Air Corps officials (I suspect Gen. Arnold himself) shot the idea down.

Jack

Quote from: CyBorg on March 17, 2011, 06:44:07 AM
(http://www.armedforcesinsignia.com/data/shopcart7/image_db/8356900_MED.jpg)
(example for CAP 1st Lt)

Of course, someone will probably overcomplicate things and say "make 'em grey." ::)

Nope, they will say "make 'em red. :o

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 17, 2011, 02:01:05 PM

Quote from: CyBorg on March 17, 2011, 06:44:07 AM
(http://www.armedforcesinsignia.com/data/shopcart7/image_db/8356900_MED.jpg)
(example for CAP 1st Lt)

Of course, someone will probably overcomplicate things and say "make 'em grey." ::)

Nope, they will say "make 'em red. :o

Maroon

Quote from: JeffDG on March 17, 2011, 02:07:11 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 17, 2011, 02:01:05 PM

Quote from: CyBorg on March 17, 2011, 06:44:07 AM
(http://www.armedforcesinsignia.com/data/shopcart7/image_db/8356900_MED.jpg)
(example for CAP 1st Lt)

Of course, someone will probably overcomplicate things and say "make 'em grey." ::)

Nope, they will say "make 'em red. :o

Maroon

No, clown red.

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 17, 2011, 02:08:59 PM

Quote from: JeffDG on March 17, 2011, 02:07:11 PM

Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 17, 2011, 02:01:05 PM

Quote from: CyBorg on March 17, 2011, 06:44:07 AM
(http://www.armedforcesinsignia.com/data/shopcart7/image_db/8356900_MED.jpg)
(example for CAP 1st Lt)

Of course, someone will probably overcomplicate things and say "make 'em grey." ::)

Nope, they will say "make 'em red. :o

Maroon

No, clown red.

No, Scarlet Red

Quote from: JeffDG on March 17, 2011, 11:31:00 AM
Then they had better stay away from anywhere they might encounter naval officers or exchange officers from places like Canada.

Except, Jeff, that naval personnel almost invariably have gold striping of some kind:

(http://www.williamscully.ca/gallery2/d/59337-2/Canadian+Naval+Officer+Rank.jpg)

Also, Canadian personnel usually wear a national identifier:

(http://mpmuseum.org/securuniform/airdeu/airdeu2.jpg)

We would be more likely to be confused with our colleagues from the USCG AUX or airline personnel.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/USCGAUX_Service_Dress_Blue_%E2%80%93_Bravo.jpg)

But we wouldn't be confused with actual AF officers.

Please make it stop.

Quote from: Eclipse on March 17, 2011, 03:41:36 PM
Please make it stop.

Note the oddities that take place with unrestricted specuation and "pipe dreaming."  If given full reign...I'll bet we will end up in purple shirts and lime green pants (aka the Joker's henchmen).  I can't understand why people cannot be content with the prescribed uniforms we have instead of trying to create "new monstrosities."

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 17, 2011, 03:49:47 PM
~snippet~I'll bet we will end up in purple shirts~out of context~

No. Then we might be mistaken for Grapes, such as on USN carriers.

Quote from: DakRadz on March 17, 2011, 04:01:27 PM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 17, 2011, 03:49:47 PM
~snippet~I'll bet we will end up in purple shirts~out of context~

No. Then we might be mistaken for Grapes, such as on USN carriers.

Hilarious... ;D

And the beat goes on.  How about dress blues, tennis shoes and a light coat of oil?