Hello All!
I'm new to CAP Talk but not so much to Civil Air Patrol. I am a Flight Officer a couple weeks away from becoming 21 and a new Second Lieutenant. So I am eagerly preparing my uniforms and ordering the proper insignia for my BDU's as well as a set for ABU's. The problem is "on paper" I don't meet weight requirements, but I still fit in the same blues and BDU's I've worn for years and look well in. So I asked my commander if I could be issued an ABU and he said no without hesitation, and his reasoning was because I didn't make weight requirements.
Now with that said I've done the research and read over the CAPM-39-1 memorandum that was updated this last March, as well the ABU announcement that was put out in May; and nothing makes mentioned outside the part in regards to the Blue uniform for senior members being only for those who make weight. So, I don't know whether to discuss this further with my commander or just stick with BDU's until 2021 and make the switch the Blue BDU uniform which... honestly I don't favor very much.
Essentially I have everything for the ABU uniform with acceptation of the blouse piece, so I would hate to see it all go to waste. But if regulation dictates I don't wear ABU's, then I wont; I'd just like to see where it says that.
Thank You
FO Kitchen
Well, if you don't manage to get within weight standards by the time that switch rolls around, that may be what you'll have to do. Though, in all reality, we work more off an honor system in regards to weight standards, so unless it's obvious that you're grossly exceeding them, nobody's really going to pull a scale out and have you measured(Though it is within all possibilities).
That not going to say that you should disregard the core values to wear a schnazzy uniform, it's just saying that a few extra pounds probably would go unnoticed. ::)
There is no further discussion to have. USAF-Style uniforms are only authorized for those who meet height and weight according to 39-1,
that includes the "same blues and BDU's I've worn for years and look well in".
You're not authorized to wear those, either.
Regulations dictate you don't wear the BDU, Blues, or ABU if you don't meet the weight "on paper".
If you're outside of weight standards then you have no business in Dress Blues, BDUs, ABUs, or ANY other Air Force Uniform.
(http://i.imgur.com/aTm1xyq.png)
Fair enough everyone, thanks for the input.
Welcome to the fat boy's club! We have T-shirts, AND can wear them under our corporate uniforms!
Membership makes your CAP ID card fun and easy to use!
It's also mandatory for all members, including cadets 18 or over!
I continue to be amazed (not really) at the number of members that wear the AF style uniforms while not meeting the weight requirements. What is even more amazing is that members of CSAG and National Staff that don't comply are wearing them on a regular basis, and then wonder why there is a bad perception from the AF and other organizations. The integrity of those that don't meet the criteria to wear the AF style uniforms is flawed and in my opinion should disqualify them as members of CAP, as it goes against the core values and the oath of membership.
Quote from: CS on August 09, 2016, 05:10:28 PM
I continue to be amazed (not really) at the number of members that wear the AF style uniforms while not meeting the weight requirements. What is even more amazing is that members of CSAG and National Staff that don't comply are wearing them on a regular basis, and then wonder why there is a bad perception from the AF and other organizations. The integrity of those that don't meet the criteria to wear the AF style uniforms is flawed and in my opinion should disqualify them as members of CAP, as it goes against the core values and the oath of membership.
That's a pretty drastic stance. Time in and time out, termination (outside of dangerous/outrageous actions) is always understood to be a last resort. Now, if you get told not to, but you keep doing it? Then we start ramping up consequences.
I amazed that we continue to publish a weight standard table next to the Air Force maximum allowable weight since the Air Force quit having one like 10 years ago. Just call it the CAP weight standard.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: McLarty on August 09, 2016, 06:50:06 PM
I amazed that we continue to publish a weight standard table next to the Air Force maximum allowable weight since the Air Force quit having one like 10 years ago. Just call it the CAP weight standard.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Granted. But then people would probably ask where the numbers came from. How come 5'10" needs to be 213? Why not 215? 5'11" needs to be 219? Why not just round up to 220?
Etc.
All this talk of weight is making me hungry. Time for a slab of Dreamland ribs. Extra sauce please!
Anyone that wants to wear the AF style uniform is welcome to come over to the President's Challenge Group. :)
Transmitted via my R5 astromech.
Quote from: etodd on August 09, 2016, 06:56:19 PM
All this talk of weight is making me hungry. Time for a slab of Dreamland ribs. Extra sauce please!
Save me some banana pudding......
Quote from: McLarty on August 09, 2016, 06:50:06 PM
I amazed that we continue to publish a weight standard table next to the Air Force maximum allowable weight since the Air Force quit having one like 10 years ago. Just call it the CAP weight standard.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Weight standards suck period. I'm am under the maximum weight for my height. But I have a belly that looks like crap in blues. Even at work most the guys I work with are surprised of what my weight is and have told me they thought I was about 20 pounds more than I actually weigh. So if you tried to 2b me for wearing a uniform I technically can wear, we'd have a fight going.
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 09, 2016, 06:28:36 PM
Quote from: CS on August 09, 2016, 05:10:28 PM
I continue to be amazed (not really) at the number of members that wear the AF style uniforms while not meeting the weight requirements. What is even more amazing is that members of CSAG and National Staff that don't comply are wearing them on a regular basis, and then wonder why there is a bad perception from the AF and other organizations. The integrity of those that don't meet the criteria to wear the AF style uniforms is flawed and in my opinion should disqualify them as members of CAP, as it goes against the core values and the oath of membership.
That's a pretty drastic stance. Time in and time out, termination (outside of dangerous/outrageous actions) is always understood to be a last resort. Now, if you get told not to, but you keep doing it? Then we start ramping up consequences.
Partially agree, but by the time you get to be a national staffer or a member of CSAG and still look like a big blue sausage, you've ignored the issue long enough and need to be dealt with. It's unfortunate. There are way too many eagles that I've see that are always wearing the windbreaker indoors or using some other kind of fat kid trick to hide their disregard for one of the most visible forms of integrity. It really is and always has been unacceptable. Lose the weight, or wear the GW. Simple.
Quote from: stillamarine on August 09, 2016, 07:54:06 PM
Quote from: McLarty on August 09, 2016, 06:50:06 PM
I amazed that we continue to publish a weight standard table next to the Air Force maximum allowable weight since the Air Force quit having one like 10 years ago. Just call it the CAP weight standard.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Weight standards suck period. I'm am under the maximum weight for my height. But I have a belly that looks like crap in blues. Even at work most the guys I work with are surprised of what my weight is and have told me they thought I was about 20 pounds more than I actually weigh. So if you tried to 2b me for wearing a uniform I technically can wear, we'd have a fight going.
you meet the standard. If anyone challenges that, it's on them.
Quote from: McLarty on August 09, 2016, 06:50:06 PM
I amazed that we continue to publish a weight standard table next to the Air Force maximum allowable weight since the Air Force quit having one like 10 years ago. Just call it the CAP weight standard.
Or, considering how widely it is ignored at all levels of the organization, just eliminate it and move on.
SMKITCHEN is a prime example - it's clearly been ignored in his unit. Nothing about it is "new", yet he says he's
wearing BDUs today, and the only issue made was when he asked for a free set of ABUs.
Does it make him a more motivated member to now realize he has to buy new uniforms, or if he doesn't that his
CC isn't doing his job?
How does this benefit CAP?
Quote from: stillamarine on August 09, 2016, 07:54:06 PM
Weight standards suck period. I'm am under the maximum weight for my height. But I have a belly that looks like crap in blues. Even at work most the guys I work with are surprised of what my weight is and have told me they thought I was about 20 pounds more than I actually weigh. So if you tried to 2b me for wearing a uniform I technically can wear, we'd have a fight going.
This is why there should be annual weigh-ins for anyone who wants to wear USAF combos.
Not interested, no issue.
Want to? There's the scale.
But we've been informed on numerous occasions that an organization like CAP, which loans people complex aircraft on a daily
basis, manages a $25-50MM annual budget, and purports to be a protector of life and property, isn't capable of figuring out
a way to insure everyone complies with the standard.
I would hazard just the threat of a weigh-in would be enough to embarrass most perpetrators to not bother.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 09, 2016, 08:04:00 PM
Quote from: stillamarine on August 09, 2016, 07:54:06 PM
Weight standards suck period. I'm am under the maximum weight for my height. But I have a belly that looks like crap in blues. Even at work most the guys I work with are surprised of what my weight is and have told me they thought I was about 20 pounds more than I actually weigh. So if you tried to 2b me for wearing a uniform I technically can wear, we'd have a fight going.
This is why there should be annual weigh-ins for anyone who wants to wear USAF combos.
Not interested, no issue.
Want to? There's the scale.
But we've been informed on numerous occasions that an organization like CAP, which loans people complex aircraft on a daily
basis, manages a $25-50MM annual budget, and purports to be a protector of life and property, isn't capable of figuring out
a way to insure everyone complies with the standard.
I would hazard just the threat of a weigh-in would be enough to embarrass most perpetrators to not bother.
It really shouldn't be that hard. Have the conversation as part of level 1. If things start looking dicey...have a private convo.
I can't remember how many times I've been told, by well meaning and good officers that I might as well "wear it" as I can "pull it off", simply because it's an issue of apathy in terms of all the people who not only break the rules, but visibly are bulging at the seams.
Quote from: etodd on August 09, 2016, 06:56:19 PM
All this talk of weight is making me hungry. Time for a slab of Dreamland ribs. Extra sauce please!
Mmmmmmmmmm ribs.........
And therein lies the rub. We don't need Air Force uniforms if not all members can wear them. We need a uniform that is uniform throughout our organization. How can we play "Uniforms" if we ain't?????
Quote from: AirAux on August 09, 2016, 08:33:56 PM
And therein lies the rub. We don't need Air Force uniforms if not all members can wear them. We need a uniform that is uniform throughout our organization. How can we play "Uniforms" if we ain't?????
Good point!!!
(Ahem) Seam-bulging Field Grade that I am now...
Welcome to the club. I want to stress something POSITIVE for you, Sir. The good news is that your membership in our fat kid club is NOT permanent; when striking for a billet a few years ago, I hit the pavement and the gym and dropped thirty pounds in a few months, made weight, made tape (stupid procedure). It can be done. So, at age 21, you have a golden opportunity to apply yourself now to gain your goal to wear the BDUs, Blues, and ABUs legally: eat less/eat right, and exercise. Its very simple, and in my experience easier when you're younger.
On reassuming command last summer, I faced my self in the mirror (finding that a bigger mirror seemed called for) and was honest with myself: I needed to set the example and hang up the BDUs (blues were already dusty in the closet). I've since had the man to man private conversation with a couple of my officers and we've jointly hung up our USAF styles until (when and if) we earn our way out of the Club.
Do the right thing. It will be noticed. We've had our first instance of an overweight officer visiting our unit in new ABUs, and I could HEAR the eyeballs click as our cadets looked at him, and at my officers who publicly have shifted to G/Ws and polos. Don't think that cadets won't see and appreciate your integrity in upholding the regs and the Core Values - I've heard multiple comments already about fat ABU "posers" that I had to quash (even though I agreed)!
V/R
Spam
Quote from: AirAux on August 09, 2016, 08:33:56 PM
And therein lies the rub. We don't need Air Force uniforms if not all members can wear them. We need a uniform that is uniform throughout our organization. How can we play "Uniforms" if we ain't?????
+1 except for cadets
Quote from: Eclipse on August 09, 2016, 08:04:00 PM
Quote from: stillamarine on August 09, 2016, 07:54:06 PM
Weight standards suck period. I'm am under the maximum weight for my height. But I have a belly that looks like crap in blues. Even at work most the guys I work with are surprised of what my weight is and have told me they thought I was about 20 pounds more than I actually weigh. So if you tried to 2b me for wearing a uniform I technically can wear, we'd have a fight going.
This is why there should be annual weigh-ins for anyone who wants to wear USAF combos.
Not interested, no issue.
Want to? There's the scale.
But we've been informed on numerous occasions that an organization like CAP, which loans people complex aircraft on a daily
basis, manages a $25-50MM annual budget, and purports to be a protector of life and property, isn't capable of figuring out
a way to insure everyone complies with the standard.
I would hazard just the threat of a weigh-in would be enough to embarrass most perpetrators to not bother.
I loved it when doing a Weight & Balance for one of those expensive CAP airplanes and the other guy's weight in e-Service was a pound under the 39-1 H&W table. Reviewing the W&B before submitting it to WMIRS and getting the *cough* *cough* "I'm more like 255 not 205." Okay, Colonel which way do you want to play this? 1. You meet H&W standards and are allowed to wear that sausage casing you call an Air Force flight suit or, 2.We cancel because you are not in uniform? Do you have a polo shirt in the car?
Quote from: varitec on August 09, 2016, 09:04:51 PM
Quote from: AirAux on August 09, 2016, 08:33:56 PM
And therein lies the rub. We don't need Air Force uniforms if not all members can wear them. We need a uniform that is uniform throughout our organization. How can we play "Uniforms" if we ain't?????
+1 except for cadets
The same principles apply for everyone, cadets and seniors.
The current state of the multi-form isn't helping recruiting or esprit-de-corps - 5 possible field uniform combinations - 5.
And that situation will persist longer then most cadets who join in the next couple of years will actually be cadets, assuming there aren't
additional changes before 2021.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 09, 2016, 08:04:00 PM
This is why there should be annual weigh-ins for anyone who wants to wear USAF combos.
Not interested, no issue.
Want to? There's the scale.
Yeah, I agree. But I bet you good money 70% of CAP would just pencil-whip the weigh-in requirement unless it was required to be captured somewhere in eservices and have a two-man sign off or some crazy requirement.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
OK ... I'm the civilian, so I'll ask. If a person trying to join the military is well overweight and has a health condition that inhibits their ever being able to make it to limits, they get turned away. The military guys are ABLE to keep fit and wear the proper uniforms. Correct?
CAP is an inclusive civilian organization. Correct? We accept folks with diabetes, handicaps and many other conditions that the military turns down.
When you make folks with medical conditions feel 'unworthy' because they can't get all dressed up in formal blues for a rubber chicken dinner at a conference ....
IT GOES TO RETENTION ISSUES.
Yep. And that leads to the camp with the argument that we should do away with the AF uniform for senior members, leave it for cadets, and put all senior members exclusively in corporate uniforms.
Is it a bad idea? Not necessarily. Would we lose senior members if we did that? Probably. Would it be enough to hurt the organization? Doubtful.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: McLarty on August 09, 2016, 11:08:49 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 09, 2016, 08:04:00 PM
This is why there should be annual weigh-ins for anyone who wants to wear USAF combos.
Not interested, no issue.
Want to? There's the scale.
Yeah, I agree. But I bet you good money 70% of CAP would just pencil-whip the weigh-in requirement unless it was required to be captured somewhere in eservices and have a two-man sign off or some crazy requirement.
That's an integrity issue, but if you're right, and this is literally an unmanageable problem, then
the charts need to go, since in that case they simply become a beacon pointing the to the lack of credibility in CAP Commanders.
And make no mistake, this is an end-to-end command issue - there's no pressure to enforce, no ramifications for
failure to enforce, and in far too many cases those charged with enforcement are lacking credibility themselves.
Quote from: McLarty on August 10, 2016, 04:04:32 AM
Is it a bad idea? Not necessarily. Would we lose senior members if we did that? Probably. Would it be enough to hurt the organization? Doubtful.
Further to this, are members and commanders who would willingly violate such a clear, simple set of regulations any
loss to the organizaiton to begin with?
Quote from: Eclipse on August 10, 2016, 04:06:22 AM
And make no mistake, this is an end-to-end command issue - there's no pressure to enforce, no ramifications for failure to enforce, and in far too many cases those charged with enforcement are lacking credibility themselves.
I'm afraid that's true in many circumstances, not just in this subject. Some of it is lack of knowledge sharing (which in itself is a command issue), some is ignorance (a command and training issue), and some more is purely a "I don't think this is important enough to consume my volunteer cycles" attitude (yet another command issue). No matter how you add it up, it seems our accountability system is lacking and needs help.
I think Nin might have some ideas on how to improve this issue. :)
Quote from: Eclipse on August 10, 2016, 04:06:22 AM
Further to this, are members and commanders who would willingly violate such a clear, simple set of regulations any
loss to the organizaiton to begin with?
Absolutely not. It wouldn't hurt my feelings any (other than the money I just spent on ABUs), and it would help weed out those that really want to be here vs. those who want to play Air Force.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: McLarty on August 10, 2016, 04:13:48 AM
... it would help weed out those that really want to be here vs. those who want to play Air Force.
I don't mind those guys. They are always good for a chuckle. I just don't want them ignoring the fact that as a civilian organization we DO invite people with health issues to join, and they should NEVER make an issue with a health challenged person in regards to their weight, or make them feel bad about it, or exclude them from an activity due to not being able to wear a skinny uniform.
They may not be able to fly in a plane, but they can work the radios at Mission Base and many, many other needed and necessary jobs. CAP has a place for most anyone, of any shape, size and handicap.
.
Quote from: etodd on August 10, 2016, 04:43:09 AM
Quote from: McLarty on August 10, 2016, 04:13:48 AM
... it would help weed out those that really want to be here vs. those who want to play Air Force.
I don't mind those guys. They are always good for a chuckle. I just don't want them ignoring the fact that as a civilian organization we DO invite people with health issues to join, and they should NEVER make an issue with a health challenged person in regards to their weight, or make them feel bad about it, or exclude them from an activity due to not being able to wear a skinny uniform.
They may not be able to fly in a plane, but they can work the radios at Mission Base and many, many other needed and necessary jobs. CAP has a place for most anyone, of any shape, size and handicap.
.
Kinda the reason CAP was formed in 1941...
Quote from: etodd on August 10, 2016, 04:43:09 AM
Quote from: McLarty on August 10, 2016, 04:13:48 AM
... it would help weed out those that really want to be here vs. those who want to play Air Force.
I don't mind those guys. They are always good for a chuckle. I just don't want them ignoring the fact that as a civilian organization we DO invite people with health issues to join, and they should NEVER make an issue with a health challenged person in regards to their weight, or make them feel bad about it, or exclude them from an activity due to not being able to wear a skinny uniform.
They may not be able to fly in a plane, but they can work the radios at Mission Base and many, many other needed and necessary jobs. CAP has a place for most anyone, of any shape, size and handicap.
.
AF Uniforms are no limit to participation.
etodd- while "No polos" can be mandated, I have NEVER seen an activity say "AF Blues, don't dare show up in Grey and Whites"
Every AF uniform has an equivalent that can be worn by those who have exceeded weight or grooming allowances. And heck, formal events is usually a business suit/tux, instead of paying for Mess Dress.
There is no limit I am aware of if you choose not to wear or are unable to wear AF style uniforms. There may be a distinction, but hurt feelings or a hit to morale does not equal substantiated unequal treatment.
1st Lt Raduenz
Quote from: DakRadz on August 10, 2016, 05:19:31 PMThere may be a distinction, but hurt feelings or a hit to morale does not equal substantiated unequal treatment.
Agreed, but it is an issue in regards to retention. "Equal access to the work to be done with unequal access to recognition and the
esprit-de-corps a uniform and decorations provides" is a typical CAP "fix".
A "this is fine for them" attitude seems to prevail, while at the same time the "them" is doing the lion's share of the work.
The there's the credibility issues when members and commanders ignore the rules for the sake of being in the club.
Either the uniform matters or it doesn't, you can't have it both ways, and you certainly can't wave the "we're all in this together flag"
when clearly everyone isn't. That's not how the math on this works.
And all you need to do is look around at meetings to see who is already in ABUs to know where and how much the uniform "matters".
Agreed, Eclipse.
But I was specifically responding to etodd's statement, which appears to suggest members are precluded from participation due to what uniforms they are allowed to wear. If this is the case, something is wrong with that activity, not actual regulations (there may be an authorized exception I am not aware of, but unlikely)
I acknowledge that there may be a hit to morale for those who can't wear AF style. But that wasn't what I intended to address.
1st Lt Raduenz
Quote from: DakRadz on August 10, 2016, 05:19:31 PM
etodd- while "No polos" can be mandated, I have NEVER seen an activity say "AF Blues, don't dare show up in Grey and Whites"
Exactly. Blues or corporate equivalent.
a polo shirt and grey tactical pants has been touted as "the only uniform you ever need as a senior."
Which is NOT true.
Quote1.2.1.2. Minimum Corporate-style Uniform: The minimum basic CAP Corporate-style
uniform is the Aviator Shirt Uniform with short sleeve shirt or blouse as appropriate. <snip>
Y'all are getting into specifics .... when my post is more about 'attitudes'. Its a different subject altogether.
As I said earlier:
QuoteWe accept folks with diabetes, handicaps and many other health conditions that the military turns down.
When you make folks with medical conditions feel 'unworthy' ....
IT GOES TO RETENTION ISSUES.
Many of these threads where folks are being made to feel inferior because they are not losing weight to conform to standards .... are borderline 'bullying' in my view.
Quote from: etodd on August 10, 2016, 09:29:33 PM
Y'all are getting into specifics .... when my post is more about 'attitudes'. Its a different subject altogether.
As I said earlier:
QuoteWe accept folks with diabetes, handicaps and many other health conditions that the military turns down.
When you make folks with medical conditions feel 'unworthy' ....
IT GOES TO RETENTION ISSUES.
Many of these threads where folks are being made to feel inferior because they are not losing weight to conform to standards .... are borderline 'bullying' in my view.
Just about any organization you can join has rules. You don't want to follow the rules, suffer the consequences.
Works that way in CAP, the Elks, the Masons and even the VFW.
And it's not even close to being "bullying".
Quote from: PHall on August 10, 2016, 10:51:26 PM
Quote from: etodd on August 10, 2016, 09:29:33 PM
Y'all are getting into specifics .... when my post is more about 'attitudes'. Its a different subject altogether.
As I said earlier:
QuoteWe accept folks with diabetes, handicaps and many other health conditions that the military turns down.
When you make folks with medical conditions feel 'unworthy' ....
IT GOES TO RETENTION ISSUES.
Many of these threads where folks are being made to feel inferior because they are not losing weight to conform to standards .... are borderline 'bullying' in my view.
Just about any organization you can join has rules. You don't want to follow the rules, suffer the consequences.
Works that way in CAP, the Elks, the Masons and even the VFW.
And it's not even close to being "bullying".
Again ... you're talking RULES. I'm talking ATTITUDES.
Which does go to the retention issues CAP has. CAP could be such a huge organization now, even if recruitment stayed the same. but we kept more folks happy enough to stay with us instead of running away.
There is a balance in this somewhere ... and we haven't found it as an org.
.
Quote from: etodd on August 10, 2016, 09:29:33 PM
Many of these threads where folks are being made to feel inferior because they are not losing weight to conform to standards .... are borderline 'bullying' in my view.
You may want to clarify that. The only time someone has ever been told anything about that are those who willfully choose to wear a beard, long hair or be overweight.
I'll just stop here. I'm talking about one thing and others another thing. Apples and oranges. My topic for another thread one day. I'll leave this one alone now.
For me, it's quite simple. If I'm not allowed to look like a soldier, don't expect me to act like a soldier.
I'm quite content at this point in my life to act like a professional corporate pilot and look like one. I'm fine in my grey slacks and blue polo shirt. I wear the blue flight suit when I feel like wearing shorts and a t-shirt underneath. Finally, I get amused by members who take themselves way too seriously and forget we're flying Cessnas, not Vipers.
Personally, I like the idea of everyone being in ABUs. You're a whole lot easier to see from the air than you are in BDUs or even BBDUs.
Quote from: Panzerbjorn on August 11, 2016, 01:07:25 AM
For me, it's quite simple. If I'm not allowed to look like a soldier, don't expect me to act like a soldier.
I'm quite content at this point in my life to act like a professional corporate pilot and look like one. I'm fine in my grey slacks and blue polo shirt. I wear the blue flight suit when I feel like wearing shorts and a t-shirt underneath. Finally, I get amused by members who take themselves way too seriously and forget we're flying Cessnas, not Vipers.
Personally, I like the idea of everyone being in ABUs. You're a whole lot easier to see from the air than you are in BDUs or even BBDUs.
Yeah, but you're not looking for us. You're looking for the lost guys!
Quote from: PHall on August 11, 2016, 02:30:02 AM
Quote from: Panzerbjorn on August 11, 2016, 01:07:25 AM
For me, it's quite simple. If I'm not allowed to look like a soldier, don't expect me to act like a soldier.
I'm quite content at this point in my life to act like a professional corporate pilot and look like one. I'm fine in my grey slacks and blue polo shirt. I wear the blue flight suit when I feel like wearing shorts and a t-shirt underneath. Finally, I get amused by members who take themselves way too seriously and forget we're flying Cessnas, not Vipers.
Personally, I like the idea of everyone being in ABUs. You're a whole lot easier to see from the air than you are in BDUs or even BBDUs.
Yeah, but you're not looking for us. You're looking for the lost guys!
Yes, and when I find them, it makes it a whole lot easier to lead you to them if I can see you on the ground.
Quote from: etodd on August 11, 2016, 12:02:00 AM
I'll just stop here. I'm talking about one thing and others another thing. Apples and oranges. My topic for another thread one day. I'll leave this one alone now.
No, people got your perception, and try to point out that it's wrong.
Quote from: Robert Hartigan on August 09, 2016, 09:08:10 PM
I loved it when doing a Weight & Balance for one of those expensive CAP airplanes and the other guy's weight in e-Service was a pound under the 39-1 H&W table. Reviewing the W&B before submitting it to WMIRS and getting the *cough* *cough* "I'm more like 255 not 205." Okay, Colonel which way do you want to play this? 1. You meet H&W standards and are allowed to wear that sausage casing you call an Air Force flight suit or, 2.We cancel because you are not in uniform? Do you have a polo shirt in the car?
THIS! Right there!
I don't give a squirt about the ABU nor the BDU. I stopped wearing them when I retired from the AF. I don't wear my blues either. Not because I don't love the uniform, it is because I am too big. And it grinds my gears (Peter Griffin moment) when I see a Colonel walking around sporting .50 cal buttons and neck folds. You and I both know he is over the limit. And has been called on it. And nothing will ever happen.
So tell me integrity is alive and well in this organization. Because I will show you their 101 card, and then I will produce the weight and balance. One is within the standard, and the other shatters the glass ceiling!
And actually, I am not even peeved. Just don't sit there and lie to my face because I know they are full of it. And so does the room. So what does that say in regards to the rest of their credibility?
And FWIW, "sausage casing you call a flight suit" made me giggle. I am stealing that.
Weight tables are not always accurate. At 20, in the best shape of my life (maxed Army PT test each period for 3 years), I was 15 pounds over the weight limit and put on the "fat boy" program for extra PT based on a weight table. That went on for two weeks until my Battalion Surgeon looked at me and said "get, shouldn't be here." Never mind I passed tape and the vat. 25 years later, I've only gained 25 pounds.
My point is: at age 20 and age 47, I fail the weight tables as published for my body type. I am 12 pounds over the CAP limit. IF I was 50 or 75 pounds over this limit, then the "sausage casing" (how funny!) would definitely apply and maybe some scrutiny should be observed and applied. These tables tend to paint with a broad brush. I still can hike with 35 pounds for 12 miles, just not under 3 hour requirment anymore. I am getting older and my waist has expanded some, but I PREFER to wear the BDU in the field and plan to move to the ABU very soon. Remember, we are volunteers. Many of us are veterans.
Weight tables should be used as a guide not as a discriminary rule. If you are morbidly obese, then self discipline and common sense should dictate.
Quote from: Meridius on August 11, 2016, 01:38:15 PM
Weight tables should be used as a guide not as a discriminary rule.
Well they aren't, and whether it's 12 over, 20 over or 1 over, if you're over then USAF-styles are not an option for you.
"I look OK" isn't your call, it's part of the problem.
Quote from: Meridius on August 11, 2016, 01:38:15 PMRemember, we are volunteers. Many of us are veterans.
The former is true, I don't see how the latter is relevent to this discussion.
Lots of good points here. Let's see if I can sum up so we have a reference post for when this issue comes up again in the next 6-12 months (as it does every 6-12 months).
1. Corporate uniforms are for all seniors. I regularly wear my aviator shirt or polo. There ought to be no shame, no stigma, in anyone wearing corporate uniforms. If you think they're second-class uniforms for second-class citizens, then you are wrong.
2. We have weight standards because the USAF told us to. It is the price senior members pay to wear the uniform of our parent service.
3. The chart in 39-1 is formatted the way it is to show you that our weight standards are 10% over the (now defunct) USAF standards.
4. Weight charts are imperfect. No one argues otherwise. Be happy we're not taping people's waists, because that's an even more precarious (and intrusive) way to determine fitness. Weight charts are discriminatory against football players and powerlifters who are otherwise in good health. Such is life.
5. If you know you personally do not meet the weight standards, then the right thing to do is to wear corporate uniforms.
6. If you are a commander and you strongly suspect one of your people is wearing a USAF uniform when they shouldn't, you have an obligation to discuss it with them. Good leadership starts with you.
7. Voluntary or mandatory weigh-ins are probably not feasible. If we all followed rules 5 and 6 above, they would also be unnecessary.
8. Whatever uniform you wear, you ought to wear it well. Cadets, military brethren, ES mission partners, etc... they will respect a good uniform no matter which one it is. You can cut a sharp figure in an aviator shirt, and you can be slovenly in blues. Look sharp and take pride in your uniform.
Did I miss anything?
^-----
Yep, I meet the Air Force's new BMT standard, just not the CAPM 39-1 published table, which was my point.
Quote from: Meridius on August 11, 2016, 01:38:15 PM
Weight tables are not always accurate. At 20, in the best shape of my life (maxed Army PT test each period for 3 years), I was 15 pounds over the weight limit and put on the "fat boy" program for extra PT based on a weight table. That went on for two weeks until my Battalion Surgeon looked at me and said "get, shouldn't be here." Never mind I passed tape and the vat. 25 years later, I've only gained 25 pounds.
My point is: at age 20 and age 47, I fail the weight tables as published for my body type. I am 12 pounds over the CAP limit. IF I was 50 or 75 pounds over this limit, then the "sausage casing" (how funny!) would definitely apply and maybe some scrutiny should be observed and applied. These tables tend to paint with a broad brush. I still can hike with 35 pounds for 12 miles, just not under 3 hour requirment anymore. I am getting older and my waist has expanded some, but I PREFER to wear the BDU in the field and plan to move to the ABU very soon. Remember, we are volunteers. Many of us are veterans.
Weight tables should be used as a guide not as a discriminary rule. If you are morbidly obese, then self discipline and common sense should dictate.
Exception to the rule. If someone is a lifter and is 250lbs of muscle, they won't look like someone else who is 250lbs of fat.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/91/60/50/9160504fa9f22f6890bcd395371fb6e5.jpg)
^----- (both comments above)
Yep, I meet the Air Force's new BMT standard, just not the CAPM 39-1 published table, which was my point.
CAPM 39-1 should adopt Big Blue's standard with a 10% factor (or a max AC of 42.9") and be done with it. Seniors do not do PT, maybe that should be reconsidered as well. I know HMRS program requires it for advancement in grade.
Salient or not, the points made don't change the below, or make it "OK".
Quote from: Meridius on August 11, 2016, 01:38:15 PMI am 12 pounds over the CAP limit.
Quote from: Meridius on August 11, 2016, 01:38:15 PM
I am getting older and my waist has expanded some, but I PREFER to wear the BDU in the field and plan to move to the ABU very soon.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 09, 2016, 07:56:55 PM
Quote from: McLarty on August 09, 2016, 06:50:06 PM
I amazed that we continue to publish a weight standard table next to the Air Force maximum allowable weight since the Air Force quit having one like 10 years ago. Just call it the CAP weight standard.
Or, considering how widely it is ignored at all levels of the organization, just eliminate it and move on.
SMKITCHEN is a prime example - it's clearly been ignored in his unit. Nothing about it is "new", yet he says he's
wearing BDUs today, and the only issue made was when he asked for a free set of ABUs.
Does it make him a more motivated member to now realize he has to buy new uniforms, or if he doesn't that his
CC isn't doing his job?
How does this benefit CAP?
Hold on hold on... First off im not fat, I just said im over the weight requirement, and not by much I may add. I just recently transferred back into cap after being out for a couple years, prior to that I was a cadet (and I was issued uniform items). With that said when the Air Force sent out the ABU uniforms to the squadrons, our received a lot of Larger sizes, sized that wouldn't fit our cadets because a lot of them are younger. When I came back as a senior member I bought all my uniforms items (hundreds of dollars worth) at the time because they weren't readily available. I realize now after researching it more that, my request wasn't going to be approved regardless of me being ten pounds lighter or heavier. My Commander was doing his job and is very "by the book".
As I am reading down this discussion I'm seeing that there are many questions of senior leadership wearing USAF style uniforms and nobody questions them because of that very reason that they're senior leadership. I was ALWAYS taught that you set the standard that you implement, and by what I've seen in my experience in my state alone, the Standard is High and regulation is fallowed.
I posted this discussion to get feedback on where it says the criteria within regulation.
Quote from: Meridius on August 11, 2016, 02:19:44 PM
I know HMRS program requires it for advancement in grade.
Perhaps, but certainly not to keep it...
http://www.capranger.org/news/07%20expert%20ranger%20awards%20article.pdf (http://www.capranger.org/news/07%20expert%20ranger%20awards%20article.pdf)
Quote from: dwb on August 11, 2016, 02:06:25 PM
Lots of good points here. Let's see if I can sum up so we have a reference post for when this issue comes up again in the next 6-12 months (as it does every 6-12 months).
1. Corporate uniforms are for all seniors. I regularly wear my aviator shirt or polo. There ought to be no shame, no stigma, in anyone wearing corporate uniforms. If you think they're second-class uniforms for second-class citizens, then you are wrong.
2. We have weight standards because the USAF told us to. It is the price senior members pay to wear the uniform of our parent service.
3. The chart in 39-1 is formatted the way it is to show you that our weight standards are 10% over the (now defunct) USAF standards.
4. Weight charts are imperfect. No one argues otherwise. Be happy we're not taping people's waists, because that's an even more precarious (and intrusive) way to determine fitness. Weight charts are discriminatory against football players and powerlifters who are otherwise in good health. Such is life.
5. If you know you personally do not meet the weight standards, then the right thing to do is to wear corporate uniforms.
6. If you are a commander and you strongly suspect one of your people is wearing a USAF uniform when they shouldn't, you have an obligation to discuss it with them. Good leadership starts with you.
7. Voluntary or mandatory weigh-ins are probably not feasible. If we all followed rules 5 and 6 above, they would also be unnecessary.
8. Whatever uniform you wear, you ought to wear it well. Cadets, military brethren, ES mission partners, etc... they will respect a good uniform no matter which one it is. You can cut a sharp figure in an aviator shirt, and you can be slovenly in blues. Look sharp and take pride in your uniform.
Did I miss anything?
Good summation.
Perhaps 6.A: If you're a commander, you need to actually BE a leader, by being honest with yourself and hanging up your own USAF style uniforms if you're outside of height/weight. I'll confess, although I hung up blues years ago I fooled myself on BDUs until I took a command again last summer, then accepted reality and hung them up too. Gotta lead from the front, even if it protrudes now more than 30 years ago.
I've already seen our first obviously fat officer proudly sporting new ABUs (long hair, too)... but not in my chain of command!
R/S,
Spam
Quote from: SMKITCHEN on August 11, 2016, 02:31:04 PM
I posted this discussion to get feedback on where it says the criteria within regulation.
"Not much" is still over.
Being a cadet "issued uniforms" doesn't matter if you are over 18.
Your answer is CAPM 39-1
Quote from: SMKITCHEN on August 11, 2016, 02:31:04 PM
Hold on hold on... First off im not fat, I just said im over the weight requirement, and not by much I may add.
Quote from: SMKITCHEN on August 09, 2016, 03:12:43 PMThe problem is "on paper" I don't meet weight requirements, but I still fit in the same blues and BDU's I've worn for years and look well in.
Not going to pass any judgments, but the AF scale was relatively generous, and tapping on 10% TO that, and being over that, whether it's 5lbs or 20lbs, typically will mean that yes, you are overweight by medical, military, and appearance standards. Fit doesn't matter. I was at 255lbs, and could squeeze into my BDU top from my cadet days. That was still 40lbs+ over the limit for my height. Now my BDU top is where it belongs - a display(http://www.capvolunteernow.com/file.cfm/media/news/NHQblazich_B811700B3F17D.jpg)
The problem, at least "on paper" is that you seem to think the standard only applies to ABUs. Which leads to the point Eclipse was making about your local command priorities up until now: Quote from: SMKITCHEN on August 09, 2016, 03:12:43 PMSo, I don't know whether to discuss this further with my commander or just stick with BDU's until 2021 and make the switch the Blue BDU uniform which... honestly I don't favor very much.
If you're over, then you go to Blue BDUs NOW, not 5 years from now and keep wearing the BDUs. Those are the regs.
Quote from: dwb on August 11, 2016, 02:06:25 PM
Lots of good points here. Let's see if I can sum up so we have a reference post for when this issue comes up again in the next 6-12 months (as it does every 6-12 months).
1. ....There ought to be no shame, no stigma, in anyone wearing corporate uniforms. If you think they're second-class uniforms for second-class citizens, then you are wrong.
^^^ Thanks for that. Regs are what they are and should be followed. All of my posts have been about the 'attitudes' of some folks, that you mention in #1.
Quote from: etodd on August 11, 2016, 05:32:40 PM
Quote from: dwb on August 11, 2016, 02:06:25 PM
Lots of good points here. Let's see if I can sum up so we have a reference post for when this issue comes up again in the next 6-12 months (as it does every 6-12 months).
1. ....There ought to be no shame, no stigma, in anyone wearing corporate uniforms. If you think they're second-class uniforms for second-class citizens, then you are wrong.
^^^ Thanks for that. Regs are what they are and should be followed. All of my posts have been about the 'attitudes' of some folks, that you mention in #1.
Do you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 05:37:45 PM
Quote from: etodd on August 11, 2016, 05:32:40 PM
Quote from: dwb on August 11, 2016, 02:06:25 PM
Lots of good points here. Let's see if I can sum up so we have a reference post for when this issue comes up again in the next 6-12 months (as it does every 6-12 months).
1. ....There ought to be no shame, no stigma, in anyone wearing corporate uniforms. If you think they're second-class uniforms for second-class citizens, then you are wrong.
^^^ Thanks for that. Regs are what they are and should be followed. All of my posts have been about the 'attitudes' of some folks, that you mention in #1.
Do you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Me. It happens.
Three times at recent (within 1 year) events such as Commanders Calls, SAREXs etc. I've had portly Field Grade officers in blues or BDUs tighter than a bratwurst casing front on me and challenge me up for not wearing USAF style. More than a bit abrasively. Challengingly. No foul language, but a clear implication that as a Commander of a Cadet unit I was lacking.
The Alpha Male crap pisses me off, and I've given as good as I got from test pilots and patch wearers and operators in my career, so piddly little CAP small a Alphas don't bother me much. Usually...
In one case, where he had the temerity to do this in front of his own troops (his audience, to show off) I slowly and silently examined the impressive expanse of his girth, straining the tensile strength of the fabric, and stated "Well, I'm giving my buttons a rest until I lose some weight... how about you give yours a break too, (his name) before they burst and take someone's eyes out". I've had similar from officers within weight, but to take that from one of the largest creatures which ever slowly urged its vast uniformed bulk over the face of the protesting Earth was too much hypocrisy to take.
V/R
Spam
Quote from: Spam on August 11, 2016, 05:49:10 PM
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 05:37:45 PM
Quote from: etodd on August 11, 2016, 05:32:40 PM
Quote from: dwb on August 11, 2016, 02:06:25 PM
Lots of good points here. Let's see if I can sum up so we have a reference post for when this issue comes up again in the next 6-12 months (as it does every 6-12 months).
1. ....There ought to be no shame, no stigma, in anyone wearing corporate uniforms. If you think they're second-class uniforms for second-class citizens, then you are wrong.
^^^ Thanks for that. Regs are what they are and should be followed. All of my posts have been about the 'attitudes' of some folks, that you mention in #1.
Do you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Me. It happens.
Three times at recent (within 1 year) events such as Commanders Calls, SAREXs etc. I've had portly Field Grade officers in blues or BDUs tighter than a bratwurst casing front on me and challenge me up for not wearing USAF style. More than a bit abrasively. Challengingly. No foul language, but a clear implication that as a Commander of a Cadet unit I was lacking.
The Alpha Male crap pisses me off, and I've given as good as I got from test pilots and patch wearers and operators in my career, so piddly little CAP small a Alphas don't bother me much. Usually...
In one case, where he had the temerity to do this in front of his own troops (his audience, to show off) I slowly and silently examined the impressive expanse of his girth, straining the tensile strength of the fabric, and stated "Well, I'm giving my buttons a rest until I lose some weight... how about you give yours a break too, (his name) before they burst and take someone's eyes out". I've had similar from officers within weight, but to take that from one of the largest creatures which ever slowly urged its vast uniformed bulk over the face of the protesting Earth was too much hypocrisy to take.
V/R
Spam
Ridiculous to insinuate that just because you work with cadets that you should be in AF style. It presents a horrible image to cadets to wear the AF style in flagrant disregard to the regs. The most important thing with dealing with cadets is to wear the uniform, whichever it may be, properly and proudly. Show that the uniform is something to be respected and the organization it stands for.
Quote from: Spam on August 11, 2016, 05:49:10 PM
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 05:37:45 PM
Quote from: etodd on August 11, 2016, 05:32:40 PM
Quote from: dwb on August 11, 2016, 02:06:25 PM
Lots of good points here. Let's see if I can sum up so we have a reference post for when this issue comes up again in the next 6-12 months (as it does every 6-12 months).
1. ....There ought to be no shame, no stigma, in anyone wearing corporate uniforms. If you think they're second-class uniforms for second-class citizens, then you are wrong.
^^^ Thanks for that. Regs are what they are and should be followed. All of my posts have been about the 'attitudes' of some folks, that you mention in #1.
Do you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Me. It happens.
Three times at recent (within 1 year) events such as Commanders Calls, SAREXs etc. I've had portly Field Grade officers in blues or BDUs tighter than a bratwurst casing front on me and challenge me up for not wearing USAF style. More than a bit abrasively. Challengingly. No foul language, but a clear implication that as a Commander of a Cadet unit I was lacking.
The Alpha Male crap pisses me off, and I've given as good as I got from test pilots and patch wearers and operators in my career, so piddly little CAP small a Alphas don't bother me much. Usually...
In one case, where he had the temerity to do this in front of his own troops (his audience, to show off) I slowly and silently examined the impressive expanse of his girth, straining the tensile strength of the fabric, and stated "Well, I'm giving my buttons a rest until I lose some weight... how about you give yours a break too, (his name) before they burst and take someone's eyes out". I've had similar from officers within weight, but to take that from one of the largest creatures which ever slowly urged its vast uniformed bulk over the face of the protesting Earth was too much hypocrisy to take.
V/R
Spam
Yea, that sounds like some misguided individuals. I've never had anyone hassle me for wearing the corporate uniform. I have personally seen and encouraged those eligible to wear Blues, but never to the point of exclusion of corporate options.
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 03:38:31 PM
Not going to pass any judgments, but the AF scale was relatively generous, and tapping on 10%
It's fair, but I wouldn't say it's generous for some body types. At my physical peak, I was 5'8", 190 lbs, 32 inch waist, flat stomach, and could bench 300lbs. This would have placed me above the AF limits but it would have been waived due to my freakish proportions.
What does 5'7", 185-190lbs look like? It can look like Aaron Smith:
http://www.gettyimages.com/galleries/personality/11191134 (http://www.gettyimages.com/galleries/personality/11191134)
He could gain 25lbs or more and still look okay in a BDU.
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 05:37:45 PMDo you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Public shaming like Nelson from The Simpsons? Not really. But as a (relatively) thin guy, I have gotten numerous comments over the years about being in the aviator shirt instead of blues. I use it as a teachable moment, that corporates are for all seniors, and to try to put the kibosh on the "us vs. them" attitudes.
Quote from: dwb on August 11, 2016, 06:57:00 PM
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 05:37:45 PMDo you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Public shaming like Nelson from The Simpsons? Not really. But as a (relatively) thin guy, I have gotten numerous comments over the years about being in the aviator shirt instead of blues. I use it as a teachable moment, that corporates are for all seniors, and to try to put the kibosh on the "us vs. them" attitudes.
I knew a few guys like this. One was a decorated AD officer who flat out REFUSED to wear the AF style. His logic was simple: this is an Air Force uni and this (GW) is a CAP uni. Never saw him at a CAP event in a CAP role in anything other than the GW.
Quote from: THRAWN on August 11, 2016, 07:00:05 PM
Quote from: dwb on August 11, 2016, 06:57:00 PM
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 05:37:45 PMDo you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Public shaming like Nelson from The Simpsons? Not really. But as a (relatively) thin guy, I have gotten numerous comments over the years about being in the aviator shirt instead of blues. I use it as a teachable moment, that corporates are for all seniors, and to try to put the kibosh on the "us vs. them" attitudes.
I knew a few guys like this. One was a decorated AD officer who flat out REFUSED to wear the AF style. His logic was simple: this is an Air Force uni and this (GW) is a CAP uni. Never saw him at a CAP event in a CAP role in anything other than the GW.
I think I look good in gray, but then I was raised in Georgia. ;D
I know a guy who entered USAFA back in the mid 60s (from Alabama) whose grandma refused to come to his farewell party because she didn't want to see her grandbaby wearing that hated "Yankee blue uniform".
Cheers,
Spam
Quote from: dwb on August 11, 2016, 06:57:00 PM
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 05:37:45 PMDo you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Public shaming like Nelson from The Simpsons? Not really. But as a (relatively) thin guy, I have gotten numerous comments over the years about being in the aviator shirt instead of blues. I use it as a teachable moment, that corporates are for all seniors, and to try to put the kibosh on the "us vs. them" attitudes.
I had that as well when I started wearing the corporate uniforms. People would ask "why are you wearing the g/w and not the USAF-style uniform?" I admit that I wear the blues for more "formal" events (national conferences) and the G/W (and polo) for more day-to-day type events (meetings, driving, talking with the public, etc). I find the G/W more comfortable, easier and cheaper to maintain, and more corporate-appealing when talking with businesses.
I have just rejoined CAP after quite a few years. I don't think I had ever seen the corporate uniform until recently when there were a bunch of people who were attending RSC eating lunch at our local BX food court. I have to honestly say that I was upset seeing the facial hair and the several grossly overweight people wearing it. This didn't stop me from rejoining, however.
Quote from: GaryVC on August 11, 2016, 10:00:35 PMI don't think I had ever seen the corporate uniform until recently when there were a bunch of people who were attending RSC eating lunch at our local BX food court. I have to honestly say that I was upset seeing the facial hair and the several grossly overweight people wearing it.
You were upset these people were dressed properly?
Or upset these volunteers who were taking a week off their normal lives, on their own nickel and time, didn't fit your model?
Gary- I'm confused- why were you upset if they were wearing corporates?
1st Lt Raduenz
Quote from: GaryVC on August 11, 2016, 10:00:35 PM
I have just rejoined CAP after quite a few years. I don't think I had ever seen the corporate uniform until recently when there were a bunch of people who were attending RSC eating lunch at our local BX food court. I have to honestly say that I was upset seeing the facial hair and the several grossly overweight people wearing it. This didn't stop me from rejoining, however.
Glad you're not in my wing. That level of utter disrespect for people who are taking their own time and money to further their professional development which will only benefit CAP itself, would be met with an attitude of "Who the ____ do you think you are?"
To go along with the topic I thought I would post this for you to look over Not sure it will apply to CAP but it may at some point
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/careers/2016/08/07/military-fitness-standards-body-fat/87748588/ (http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/careers/2016/08/07/military-fitness-standards-body-fat/87748588/)
Quote from: Eclipse on August 11, 2016, 10:04:37 PM
Quote from: GaryVC on August 11, 2016, 10:00:35 PMI don't think I had ever seen the corporate uniform until recently when there were a bunch of people who were attending RSC eating lunch at our local BX food court. I have to honestly say that I was upset seeing the facial hair and the several grossly overweight people wearing it.
You were upset these people were dressed properly?
Or upset these volunteers who were taking a week off their normal lives, on their own nickel and time, didn't fit your model?
Why was I upset? Because frankly I thought that with their rank insignia they looked too much like active military. There were military members from all branches of the service present as well as foreign military.
Quote from: GaryVC on August 12, 2016, 01:39:01 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 11, 2016, 10:04:37 PM
Quote from: GaryVC on August 11, 2016, 10:00:35 PMI don't think I had ever seen the corporate uniform until recently when there were a bunch of people who were attending RSC eating lunch at our local BX food court. I have to honestly say that I was upset seeing the facial hair and the several grossly overweight people wearing it.
You were upset these people were dressed properly?
Or upset these volunteers who were taking a week off their normal lives, on their own nickel and time, didn't fit your model?
Why was I upset? Because frankly I thought that with their rank insignia they looked too much like active military. There were military members from all branches of the service present as well as foreign military.
In no way, shape, or form are you going to present a satisfactory argument. Better to just cut your lose and not post to this thread.
The completely different uniform works for those foreign officers whose lieutenants have generals stars and walk around for US training.
Other than that, I only see this heading to a nasty lock.
1st Lt Raduenz
Quote from: GaryVC on August 12, 2016, 01:39:01 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 11, 2016, 10:04:37 PM
Quote from: GaryVC on August 11, 2016, 10:00:35 PMI don't think I had ever seen the corporate uniform until recently when there were a bunch of people who were attending RSC eating lunch at our local BX food court. I have to honestly say that I was upset seeing the facial hair and the several grossly overweight people wearing it.
You were upset these people were dressed properly?
Or upset these volunteers who were taking a week off their normal lives, on their own nickel and time, didn't fit your model?
Why was I upset? Because frankly I thought that with their rank insignia they looked too much like active military. There were military members from all branches of the service present as well as foreign military.
Sooooo now we can't have rank insignia on the corporate uniform?
I was finishing high school as Viet Nam was ending. I went on to college, never joined the military, then got married, kids.
My father got a purple heart being wounded in Korea and was on disability for the rest of his life. Both my grandfathers served in WWII. Many others in my family have served. It just didn't work out for me.
With that kind of heritage .... I just cannot bring myself to wear a uniform I don't deserve to wear. No matter how much work I put into CAP, I'll always think of myself as a civilian volunteer and unworthy to wear a uniform. I feel it would dishonor my father's sacrifice.
JMHO, and only applies to me and no one else. I stand in awe of those who have served and have earned respect and more.
.
^^I understand where you're coming from. I had a draft card at the end of Vietnam and high school. My dad had been a Naval Aviation Cadet learning to fly F6F Hellcats at NAS Glenview when WW II ended. An uncle was a Marine aviator flying dive bombers in the Pacific Theater; another was a tank driver, fought in the Battle of the Bulge, became the National Commander of the American Legion during the Vietnam War; one was an ambulance driver who spent the last 18 months of the war in a German POW camp. My mom put pictures of me in my CAP blues in the photo album with their pictures. We know moms, but that's too much. I took the pictures out and gave her "the look".
However, I don't share your view on the CAP uniform. We wear our uniform with the understanding that it represents a different service to the country than that of our family members who came before us.
Mike
Quote from: dwb on August 11, 2016, 06:57:00 PM
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 05:37:45 PMDo you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Public shaming like Nelson from The Simpsons? Not really. But as a (relatively) thin guy, I have gotten numerous comments over the years about being in the aviator shirt instead of blues. I use it as a teachable moment, that corporates are for all seniors, and to try to put the kibosh on the "us vs. them" attitudes.
+1. I've fought for years the "fat and fuzzy" terminology. There is no us v them - or shouldn't be - and the G&W is often the affordable solution for many Senior Members. dwb and I exchanged emails on this recently, reflecting on the joys of "single money" when it came to being able to purchase A/F uniforms! As the CDC and now CDS I've encouraged my "financially challenged" Seniors to obtain the G&W rather than strain the available funds towards an A/F uniform. All things come in their good time.
I wore my G&W to the MER Conference this year and I did get a few comments but nothing close to shaming. Sadly, I also saw some far from regulation G&W and Blues, worn by people who know better.
Quote from: LSThiker on August 12, 2016, 01:57:44 AM
Quote from: GaryVC on August 12, 2016, 01:39:01 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 11, 2016, 10:04:37 PM
Quote from: GaryVC on August 11, 2016, 10:00:35 PMI don't think I had ever seen the corporate uniform until recently when there were a bunch of people who were attending RSC eating lunch at our local BX food court. I have to honestly say that I was upset seeing the facial hair and the several grossly overweight people wearing it.
You were upset these people were dressed properly?
Or upset these volunteers who were taking a week off their normal lives, on their own nickel and time, didn't fit your model?
Why was I upset? Because frankly I thought that with their rank insignia they looked too much like active military. There were military members from all branches of the service present as well as foreign military.
In no way, shape, or form are you going to present a satisfactory argument. Better to just cut your lose and not post to this thread.
Before someone at the conference asks the wing commander if this member represents the culture of NVWG.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 12, 2016, 03:40:15 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 12, 2016, 01:57:44 AM
Quote from: GaryVC on August 12, 2016, 01:39:01 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 11, 2016, 10:04:37 PM
Quote from: GaryVC on August 11, 2016, 10:00:35 PMI don't think I had ever seen the corporate uniform until recently when there were a bunch of people who were attending RSC eating lunch at our local BX food court. I have to honestly say that I was upset seeing the facial hair and the several grossly overweight people wearing it.
You were upset these people were dressed properly?
Or upset these volunteers who were taking a week off their normal lives, on their own nickel and time, didn't fit your model?
Why was I upset? Because frankly I thought that with their rank insignia they looked too much like active military. There were military members from all branches of the service present as well as foreign military.
In no way, shape, or form are you going to present a satisfactory argument. Better to just cut your lose and not post to this thread.
Before someone at the conference asks the wing commander if this member represents the culture of NVWG.
Sherley, no one would do that.
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 12, 2016, 06:50:38 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on August 12, 2016, 03:40:15 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 12, 2016, 01:57:44 AM
Quote from: GaryVC on August 12, 2016, 01:39:01 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 11, 2016, 10:04:37 PM
Quote from: GaryVC on August 11, 2016, 10:00:35 PMI don't think I had ever seen the corporate uniform until recently when there were a bunch of people who were attending RSC eating lunch at our local BX food court. I have to honestly say that I was upset seeing the facial hair and the several grossly overweight people wearing it.
You were upset these people were dressed properly?
Or upset these volunteers who were taking a week off their normal lives, on their own nickel and time, didn't fit your model?
Why was I upset? Because frankly I thought that with their rank insignia they looked too much like active military. There were military members from all branches of the service present as well as foreign military.
In no way, shape, or form are you going to present a satisfactory argument. Better to just cut your lose and not post to this thread.
Before someone at the conference asks the wing commander if this member represents the culture of NVWG.
Sherley, no one would do that.
Don't call him Sherley. 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)
I do not see a mechanism for a commander to force this issue.
We do not have a mandatory physical program with mandatory tests.
The PRT is how armed services conduct height/weight.
Point me to a reg (beyond the table in 39-1) where weigh-ins and height weight measurements are described.
If a commander told me to step on a scale I'd tell him where to go.
Quote from: USACAP on August 15, 2016, 06:15:40 PM
I do not see a mechanism for a commander to force this issue.
We do not have a mandatory physical program with mandatory tests.
The PRT is how armed services conduct height/weight.
Point me to a reg (beyond the table in 39-1) where weigh-ins and height weight measurements are described.
If a commander told me to step on a scale I'd tell him where to go.
That's absolutely your choice.
As is the commanders ability to question your eligibility to wear AF-style uniforms, and asking for proof of eligibility.
Quote from: USACAP on August 15, 2016, 06:15:40 PM
I do not see a mechanism for a commander to force this issue.
We do not have a mandatory physical program with mandatory tests.
Correct, however CAP has a non-optional standard.
Quote from: USACAP on August 15, 2016, 06:15:40 PM
Point me to a reg (beyond the table in 39-1) where weigh-ins and height weight measurements are described.
If a commander told me to step on a scale I'd tell him where to go.
That's like saying "point me to a reg besides 60-3 that prescribes rules for ES, or 52-16 for CP.
39-1 is the bible, non-optional, like it or not.
You seriously don't think CCs have the authority to force you to comply with clear regulations?
Your choice is comply or find other things to do with your evenings or weekends.
My point is that CAP has done a TERRIBLE job of writing these standards.
Gotta' be specific brother.
Quote from: USACAP on August 15, 2016, 06:51:35 PM
My point is that CAP has done a TERRIBLE job of writing these standards.
Gotta' be specific brother.
Hardly. They've done a lousy job of enforcing the written standard. It's simple, you must meet the weight/height requirements in 39-1 to wear the USAF style. Don't meet that standard? You wear the corporates.
Quote from: USACAP on August 15, 2016, 06:51:35 PM
My point is that CAP has done a TERRIBLE job of writing these standards.
Gotta' be specific brother.
How much more specific do you want then "this height = this weight?"
As Thrawn says, it's the enforcement that's lacked not the standard.
Some people want to force their point of view on something that is crystal clear. And when it does not fit, they say "it's lousily written!"
This tells me you guys really don't read the regs...
CAPM 39-1:
Quote
2.10. Commanders below Wing. In this context, region, wing, and group commanders act in this role for members of their headquarters units. Commanders may delegate these responsibilities to local activity directors for the duration of a particular activity.
2.10.1. Ensure that all members, individually and collectively, present a professional, well-groomed appearance, which will reflect credit upon CAP as the auxiliary of the United States Air Force. They will ensure all members are uniformed in accordance with the provisions of this manual, uniform violations are promptly corrected, and that members are regularly educated as to the proper wear of the uniform.
Edit: This is even more specific...
Quote
1.2.2. Wearing the USAF-style uniform is a privilege extended to CAP members who meet weight (see Attachment 2) and grooming standards (see paragraph 3.2). Commanders and activity directors are expected to enforce these standards and ensure that members wearing USAF-style uniforms understand these requirements, that members wearing USAF-style uniforms accept personal responsibility for meeting these requirements, and are expected to provide remedial education and counseling if required.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And the urinary competition continues...
Just a reminder - commanders have the responsibility to enforce the rule, and all the necessary authority.
For example, commanders may absolutely use a scale to help determine eligibility for USAF-style uniforms. I've conducted mandatory weigh-ins. It's no big deal if the members are informed ahead of time, and the weigh-in itself is conducted with dignity and privacy.
Human nature being what it is, even just the knowledge that a weigh-in is coming is normally sufficient "motivation" for members to make the right call on their uniform choices.
But NHQ wisely does not micro-manage how commanders enforce the existing rules. Just like NHQ does not mandate in-ranks uniform inspections for seniors. Commanders are free to do them, of course, but most use other methods to achieve compliance.
98% of the commanders in CAP are at the Squadron and Flight level. They already do a pretty good job at keeping the membership in line. Like anything in CAP, compliance could be better, however. We all need to support the unit commanders in uniform matters.
Has anyone considered that probably the quickest way to improve our relationship with the Air Force would be to get all senior members out of USAF-style uniforms?
It would also bring these interminable debates to an end!
I really don't get what the interminable debate is. There's a published uniform standard for all to see. Commanders have responsibility and authority to enforce it. Members have responsibility to comply with it. End of debate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: ZigZag911 on August 15, 2016, 09:07:38 PM
Has anyone considered that probably the quickest way to improve our relationship with the Air Force would be to get all senior members out of USAF-style uniforms?
You're assuming that this is an actual problem that significantly hampers our relationship with the AF.
Quote from: RiverAux on August 15, 2016, 09:20:10 PM
Quote from: ZigZag911 on August 15, 2016, 09:07:38 PM
Has anyone considered that probably the quickest way to improve our relationship with the Air Force would be to get all senior members out of USAF-style uniforms?
You're assuming that this is an actual problem that significantly hampers our relationship with the AF.
It's called "A solution looking for a problem."
Quote from: THRAWN on August 15, 2016, 06:56:40 PM
It's simple, you must meet the weight/height requirements in 39-1 to wear the USAF style. Don't meet that standard? You wear the corporates.
Sounds like a good excuse to go eat another slab of ribs. Extra sauce please! ;)
.
Quote from: etodd on August 16, 2016, 02:57:39 AM
Quote from: THRAWN on August 15, 2016, 06:56:40 PM
It's simple, you must meet the weight/height requirements in 39-1 to wear the USAF style. Don't meet that standard? You wear the corporates.
Sounds like a good excuse to go eat another slab of ribs. Extra sauce please! ;)
.
Might want to get corporates first.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/05/health/short-answers-to-hard-questions-about-weight-loss.htm
Tried the latest link, received this message...
Quote
Page Not Found
We're sorry, we seem to have lost this page,
but we don't want to lose you.
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 16, 2016, 03:04:16 AM
Quote from: etodd on August 16, 2016, 02:57:39 AM
Quote from: THRAWN on August 15, 2016, 06:56:40 PM
It's simple, you must meet the weight/height requirements in 39-1 to wear the USAF style. Don't meet that standard? You wear the corporates.
Sounds like a good excuse to go eat another slab of ribs. Extra sauce please! ;)
.
Might want to get corporates first.
Be careful of that sauce with a white shirt......
That is why the polo exists...
To hide the sauce!
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 05:37:45 PM
Do you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Not shaming, but I still meet US Army standards and I wear blue BDU's anyway, along with G/W's More than a few people have asked why.
Quote from: N6RVT on August 16, 2016, 01:46:37 PM
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 11, 2016, 05:37:45 PM
Do you have any proof of anyone "shaming" someone in corporates?
Not shaming, but I still meet US Army standards and I wear blue BDU's anyway, along with G/W's More than a few people have asked why.
Because the regulations say I can.
I've taken crap before from high ranking CAP officers about growing a beard and wearing corporates. More in my current wing than ever before anywhere else.
I wear my corporates reasonably often. Especially at encampment (BBDU) and when attending conferences. According to the chart, I'm at least 50 pounds under, and no one has ever said anything negative. Quite the opposite.
I like the corporates for travel because they wrinkle less and I can wear more comfortable shoes. Since most conferences are primarily indoors, the lack of headgear is not a big deal, even for bald guys like me.
I realize that not everyone has choices, but I fortunately do.
Plus I have a closet just full of uniforms. If you look in the back you can find my smurf suit and a guyabarra shirt. Or two.
Ned Lee
Former Member, NUC
Yeah I'm making the switch too but that's my biggest complaint. The lack of head gear
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: stillamarine on August 16, 2016, 04:31:12 PM
The lack of appropriate head gear
FTFY. It has "headgear" but it is a baseball cap :(
Quote from: LSThiker on August 16, 2016, 04:34:51 PM
Quote from: stillamarine on August 16, 2016, 04:31:12 PM
The lack of appropriate head gear
FTFY. It has "headgear" but it is a baseball cap :(
So...lack of headgear. >:D
Lol. Yeah that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: LSThiker on August 16, 2016, 04:34:51 PM
FTFY. It has "headgear" but it is a baseball cap :(
Baseball cap is the best, under headphones on those days when you are flying into the sun and the visors aren't enough.
JMHO
Quote from: etodd on August 16, 2016, 06:54:04 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 16, 2016, 04:34:51 PM
FTFY. It has "headgear" but it is a baseball cap :(
Baseball cap is the best, under headphones on those days when you are flying into the sun and the visors aren't enough.
JMHO
Yeah I like the idea of a ball cap with the bag. The blue bdu's have a hat available. Just not wearing a ball cap with G/W.
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 16, 2016, 04:43:28 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on August 16, 2016, 04:34:51 PM
Quote from: stillamarine on August 16, 2016, 04:31:12 PM
The lack of appropriate head gear
FTFY. It has "headgear" but it is a baseball cap :(
So...lack of headgear. >:D
+1! I wear the G&W a lot, especially if I have to drive an hour of so to the wing HQ but the lack of headgear is annoying.....and fixable!
Quote from: Brit_in_CAP on August 17, 2016, 12:31:40 PM
+1! I wear the G&W a lot, especially if I have to drive an hour of so to the wing HQ but the lack of headgear is annoying.....and fixable!
I was talking to the NUC chair on Saturday, and I mentioned that with the elimination of the beret and other funny hats with the ABUs, maybe we could use them with corporates.
Fortunately, I was out of reach, and he had nothing handy he could use as a projectile. >:D
I was talking with one of our cadets that just returned from Oshkosh and the Blue Beret's and this cadet said that HQ was looking into letting the Blue Beret be allowed to be used with the ABU's and maybe even the Blues. I know the cadets work very hard at EAA airventure and feel very honored to wear the beret. So hopefully for them and the senior members that give the time to work with them something could be worked out in time
Quote from: Lem on August 17, 2016, 05:16:39 PM
I was talking with one of our cadets that just returned from Oshkosh and the Blue Beret's and this cadet said that HQ was looking into letting the Blue Beret be allowed to be used with the ABU's and maybe even the Blues. I know the cadets work very hard at EAA airventure and feel very honored to wear the beret. So hopefully for them and the senior members that give the time to work with them something could be worked out in time
Or not.
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 17, 2016, 05:20:31 PM
Quote from: Lem on August 17, 2016, 05:16:39 PM
I was talking with one of our cadets that just returned from Oshkosh and the Blue Beret's and this cadet said that HQ was looking into letting the Blue Beret be allowed to be used with the ABU's and maybe even the Blues. I know the cadets work very hard at EAA airventure and feel very honored to wear the beret. So hopefully for them and the senior members that give the time to work with them something could be worked out in time
Or not.
Agreed. Especially in blues....the vast majority don't wear it properly and it will just look like crap with blues.
Quote from: Lem on August 17, 2016, 05:16:39 PM
I was talking with one of our cadets that just returned from Oshkosh and the Blue Beret's and this cadet said that HQ was looking into letting the Blue Beret be allowed to be used with the ABU's and maybe even the Blues. I know the cadets work very hard at EAA airventure and feel very honored to wear the beret. So hopefully for them and the senior members that give the time to work with them something could be worked out in time
I can say that I asked some folks about that at the conference, and the exclusion of beret's with ABUs was not an inadvertent omission, but an intentional exclusion.
Quote from: Lem on August 17, 2016, 05:16:39 PM
I was talking with one of our cadets that just returned from Oshkosh and the Blue Beret's and this cadet said that HQ was looking into letting the Blue Beret be allowed to be used with the ABU's and maybe even the Blues. I know the cadets work very hard at EAA airventure and feel very honored to wear the beret. So hopefully for them and the senior members that give the time to work with them something could be worked out in time
I would oppose that for multiple reasons.
1. Beret grads already get credit for the NCSA ribbon, and an optional patch on the BDUs. Do we need a third way to single out this one NCSA?
2. Berets are an organizational identifier. You wear the beret while you're serving in the unit. So, you wear the blue beret while at NBB, then take it off when you leave.
3. Uniforms should be, you know, uniform. How about we have everyone wear the same thing on their melon? I'm opposed to saucer caps for the same reason.
4. I want fewer star-bellied sneetch arms races, not more.
Authorize the beret but if you choose to wear it,you must pull all.CQ shifts,check ID cards at local events,park cars,and sign vistors in at CAP events. During down time,you must also stand and post.
Quote from: Lem on August 17, 2016, 05:16:39 PM
I was talking with one of our cadets that just returned from Oshkosh and the Blue Beret's and this cadet said that HQ was looking into letting the Blue Beret be allowed to be used with the ABU's and maybe even the Blues. I know the cadets work very hard at EAA airventure and feel very honored to wear the beret. So hopefully for them and the senior members that give the time to work with them something could be worked out in time
It is indeed a great activity, by all accounts, and we shouldn't take away anything from the efforts or accomplishments of those members. However, the days when CAP members could wear DoD community specific clothing - even in sincere tribute and fanboy adulation - are rapidly disappearing. From blue berets which could easily be taken as an attempt to mimic USAF security police, to "Ranger" tabs which imitate real Rangers, these days are gone. With todays heightened base security measures, we should all understand that CAP members need to hang up the beret, which we need to respect as unique to the professional USAF base security. Playing beret will get us more restrictions from our USAF customer, not less.
This is especially when we see OGW and non-grooming reg adherent members with the berets, the "ranger" tabs, etc. in USAF style uniforms, where we certainly look like posers and stolen valor types.
(Reminder to self: must tell my two new PJOC grads to shelve their maroon ball caps this week... that party's over as well).
V/R
Spam
Quote from: SMWOG on August 17, 2016, 06:13:42 PM
Authorize the beret but if you choose to wear it,you must pull all.CQ shifts,check ID cards at local events,park cars,and sign vistors in at CAP events. During down time,you must also stand and post.
"Do the interns get Glocks?"
"They share one"
- The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou
Quote from: Lem on August 17, 2016, 05:16:39 PM
I was talking with one of our cadets that just returned from Oshkosh and the Blue Beret's and this cadet said that HQ was looking into letting the Blue Beret be allowed to be used with the ABU's and maybe even the Blues. I know the cadets work very hard at EAA airventure and feel very honored to wear the beret. So hopefully for them and the senior members that give the time to work with them something could be worked out in time
No. There's an legitimate blue beret that one can actually earn. If they want it that badly they can go visit their local Air Force recruiter and he'll hook them up.
Air show help, while admirable in its own right, doesn't rate it and I don't care how many decades it's been going on. Give them a dark blue ball cap with a newly-renamed activity patch on it.
http://www.usafpolice.org/memorial.html (http://www.usafpolice.org/memorial.html)
The fact that it's just hunky dory to pirate the headgear of an active contingent of military personnel (who have lost people in combat, training, and in garrison) absolutely baffles me. Red ball caps are an issue with ABUs now because we don't want to jack RED HORSE and CATM guys, but a beret that's covered in the same chapter of 36-2903 as a distinctive uniform item is a-ok?
Quote from: Jester on August 17, 2016, 10:14:47 PM
The fact that it's just hunky dory to pirate the headgear of an active contingent of military personnel (who have lost people in combat, training, and in garrison) absolutely baffles me.
OK, I don't like the beret anymore then the next guy, but that's not fair.
CAP did not "pirate" the beret any more then the countless other organizations that wear one, plus, that's imbuing the hat with far too much weight, which the military basically kibosh-ed when they opened the wear up to most of the cadre, including ROTC and JROTC.
The weight is in the man, not the hat.
Meh, disagree. It wouldn't have been done with scarlet, tan, maroon, rifle green, black, grey, or pewter green berets, so why is it ok with dark blue? I wouldn't even have had an issue with it if it was a different shade of blue as long as it wasn't a SF or Safeside beret color.
Other entities do wear it as well, and they don't rate it either.
Quote from: Jester on August 17, 2016, 10:33:25 PM
Meh, disagree. It wouldn't have been done with scarlet, tan, maroon, rifle green, black, grey, or pewter green berets, so why is it ok with dark blue? I wouldn't even have had an issue with it if it was a different shade of blue as long as it wasn't a SF or Safeside beret color.
Other entities do wear it as well, and they don't rate it either.
Jester, the Air Force has had zero problems with Blue Beret "graduates" wearing their beret. The only restriction I have seen is that they don't wear it on an Air Force Installation so they won't be confused with Security Forces. And that may have been a local agreement.
If you really have a problem with CAP members wearing a beret then submit a change to CAPM 39-1 to change it so that they can't wear it.
But for now it's authorized for wear.
Quote
The fact that it's just hunky dory to pirate the headgear of an active contingent of military personnel...
Are you for real?
Then anyone can say that the US Military has pirated wear of uniform items worn by other military.
The US Army did not have paratroopers until after the British Army and the German Army had them. So by what right did the US Army "stole" the red beret from the British? >:(
The German
Heer Panzertruppen used black berets in the 1930's. So by what right the US Army "stole" the black berets from the Germans? >:(
European armies used trumpet calls before the United States Army even existed. So by what right the US Army "stole" the use of trumpet calls? In some, even the idea of ending the day with one used by others! Harumph! Makes me SO angry... >:(
Disclaimer: This post is a silly reply to a silly post. I do not really believe the US Army "stole" anything... But the very idea that one of our special activities using a beret equated to an act of piracy... ::)
Quote from: PHall on August 17, 2016, 10:41:51 PM
Quote from: Jester on August 17, 2016, 10:33:25 PM
Meh, disagree. It wouldn't have been done with scarlet, tan, maroon, rifle green, black, grey, or pewter green berets, so why is it ok with dark blue? I wouldn't even have had an issue with it if it was a different shade of blue as long as it wasn't a SF or Safeside beret color.
Other entities do wear it as well, and they don't rate it either.
Jester, the Air Force has had zero problems with Blue Beret "graduates" wearing their beret. The only restriction I have seen is that they don't wear it on an Air Force Installation so they won't be confused with Security Forces. And that may have been a local agreement.
If you really have a problem with CAP members wearing a beret then submit a change to CAPM 39-1 to change it so that they can't wear it.
But for now it's authorized for wear.
I'm not surprised at all that the AF has little regard for security forces. That's par for the course. They don't care until somebody dies, then they get to show face at the memorial, before going back to complaining about how long it takes to get through the gate.
And I'm working on it.
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on August 17, 2016, 10:48:58 PM
Quote
The fact that it's just hunky dory to pirate the headgear of an active contingent of military personnel...
Are you for real?
Then anyone can say that the US Military has pirated wear of uniform items worn by other military.
The US Army did not have paratroopers until after the British Army and the German Army had them. So by what right did the US Army "stole" the red beret from the British? >:(
The German Heer Panzertruppen used black berets in the 1930's. So by what right the US Army "stole" the black berets from the Germans? >:(
European armies used trumpet calls before the United States Army even existed. So by what right the US Army "stole" the use of trumpet calls? In some, even the idea of ending the day with one used by others! Harumph! Makes me SO angry... >:(
Disclaimer: This post is a silly reply to a silly post. I do not really believe the US Army "stole" anything... But the very idea that one of our special activities using a beret equated to an act of piracy... ::)
Sure thing. If the word "pirate" gets your knickers in a twist, change it to "misappropriate" or whatever.
And I don't see the correlation between military branches carrying on the tradition behind a type of headgear used to denote combat training and capabilities earned, and non-military personnel thinking it's ok to use denoting participation in a summer activity.
I wonder if British Paras look at Army Airborne units or PJs and think they don't share at least some of the traditions and history. I know that any time I see a CAP blue beret I see an insult to the name on my right wrist and all the others in the link of my previous post.
Quote from: Jester on August 17, 2016, 11:09:24 PM
I wonder if British Paras look at Army Airborne units or PJs and think they don't share at least some of the traditions and history. I know that any time I see a CAP blue beret I see an insult to the name on my right wrist and all the others in the link of my previous post.
Brother take a step back and chill out. You are making this way to personal than what it needs to be. I knew one of the people on that site and I have heard rumors about the circumstances surrounding a couple others.
Either way, it's a hat yes it's a hat that has significant meaning to many people myself included but at the end of the day it's a hat. It's currently allowed though not in ABU's and we are all forgetting it is also at the CC's discretion to allow wear of it.
There was a significant portion of the Army who were up in arms when they were told they had to start wearing black berets, and the Rangers (though possibly under duress as they had a gag order placed against them) adopted another color and they pressed on.
As PHall said if you don't like it then draft a sound proposal and upchannel.
Quote from: abdsp51 on August 17, 2016, 11:54:11 PMBrother take a step back and chill out. You are making this way to personal than what it needs to be.
+1
Quote from: Jester on August 17, 2016, 11:09:24 PM
Quote from: PHall on August 17, 2016, 10:41:51 PM
Quote from: Jester on August 17, 2016, 10:33:25 PM
Meh, disagree. It wouldn't have been done with scarlet, tan, maroon, rifle green, black, grey, or pewter green berets, so why is it ok with dark blue? I wouldn't even have had an issue with it if it was a different shade of blue as long as it wasn't a SF or Safeside beret color.
Other entities do wear it as well, and they don't rate it either.
Jester, the Air Force has had zero problems with Blue Beret "graduates" wearing their beret. The only restriction I have seen is that they don't wear it on an Air Force Installation so they won't be confused with Security Forces. And that may have been a local agreement.
If you really have a problem with CAP members wearing a beret then submit a change to CAPM 39-1 to change it so that they can't wear it.
But for now it's authorized for wear.
I'm not surprised at all that the AF has little regard for security forces. That's par for the course. They don't care until somebody dies, then they get to show face at the memorial, before going back to complaining about how long it takes to get through the gate.
And I'm working on it.
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on August 17, 2016, 10:48:58 PM
Quote
The fact that it's just hunky dory to pirate the headgear of an active contingent of military personnel...
Are you for real?
Then anyone can say that the US Military has pirated wear of uniform items worn by other military.
The US Army did not have paratroopers until after the British Army and the German Army had them. So by what right did the US Army "stole" the red beret from the British? >:(
The German Heer Panzertruppen used black berets in the 1930's. So by what right the US Army "stole" the black berets from the Germans? >:(
European armies used trumpet calls before the United States Army even existed. So by what right the US Army "stole" the use of trumpet calls? In some, even the idea of ending the day with one used by others! Harumph! Makes me SO angry... >:(
Disclaimer: This post is a silly reply to a silly post. I do not really believe the US Army "stole" anything... But the very idea that one of our special activities using a beret equated to an act of piracy... ::)
Sure thing. If the word "pirate" gets your knickers in a twist, change it to "misappropriate" or whatever.
And I don't see the correlation between military branches carrying on the tradition behind a type of headgear used to denote combat training and capabilities earned, and non-military personnel thinking it's ok to use denoting participation in a summer activity.
I wonder if British Paras look at Army Airborne units or PJs and think they don't share at least some of the traditions and history. I know that any time I see a CAP blue beret I see an insult to the name on my right wrist and all the others in the link of my previous post.
When I was a scout, we wore red berets to represent the leadership corps. I don't think we were insulting the military by wearing it
Quote from: Jester on August 17, 2016, 11:09:24 PM
Quote from: PHall on August 17, 2016, 10:41:51 PM
Quote from: Jester on August 17, 2016, 10:33:25 PM
Meh, disagree. It wouldn't have been done with scarlet, tan, maroon, rifle green, black, grey, or pewter green berets, so why is it ok with dark blue? I wouldn't even have had an issue with it if it was a different shade of blue as long as it wasn't a SF or Safeside beret color.
Other entities do wear it as well, and they don't rate it either.
Jester, the Air Force has had zero problems with Blue Beret "graduates" wearing their beret. The only restriction I have seen is that they don't wear it on an Air Force Installation so they won't be confused with Security Forces. And that may have been a local agreement.
If you really have a problem with CAP members wearing a beret then submit a change to CAPM 39-1 to change it so that they can't wear it.
But for now it's authorized for wear.
I'm not surprised at all that the AF has little regard for security forces. That's par for the course. They don't care until somebody dies, then they get to show face at the memorial, before going back to complaining about how long it takes to get through the gate.
And I'm working on it.
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on August 17, 2016, 10:48:58 PM
Quote
The fact that it's just hunky dory to pirate the headgear of an active contingent of military personnel...
Are you for real?
Then anyone can say that the US Military has pirated wear of uniform items worn by other military.
The US Army did not have paratroopers until after the British Army and the German Army had them. So by what right did the US Army "stole" the red beret from the British? >:(
The German Heer Panzertruppen used black berets in the 1930's. So by what right the US Army "stole" the black berets from the Germans? >:(
European armies used trumpet calls before the United States Army even existed. So by what right the US Army "stole" the use of trumpet calls? In some, even the idea of ending the day with one used by others! Harumph! Makes me SO angry... >:(
Disclaimer: This post is a silly reply to a silly post. I do not really believe the US Army "stole" anything... But the very idea that one of our special activities using a beret equated to an act of piracy... ::)
Sure thing. If the word "pirate" gets your knickers in a twist, change it to "misappropriate" or whatever.
And I don't see the correlation between military branches carrying on the tradition behind a type of headgear used to denote combat training and capabilities earned, and non-military personnel thinking it's ok to use denoting participation in a summer activity.
I wonder if British Paras look at Army Airborne units or PJs and think they don't share at least some of the traditions and history. I know that any time I see a CAP blue beret I see an insult to the name on my right wrist and all the others in the link of my previous post.
JROTC wears, black, red, white and tan berets. Doesn't seem to bother anyone else.
My own experience with berets is two fold.
Prior to being an air cadet, I was an army cadet in the UK briefly. British troops are serious about head gear and what it represents with history and meaning going back a couple of centuries (in some cases). Some look cool, other's silly, but they'll fight you for it. In the cadet forces, Every cadet unit is affiliated with a regiment of the regular or reserve forces. Only when cadets have satisfied training requirements do they get to wear the beret of their service. It was not meant as a poke in the eye, but rather a privlegde that could be removed if abused. Indeed, in the interim, I was issued with a US BDU pattern cap to cover my noggin that clashed horribly with my DPM combat uniform!
Many moons ago, my unit was affiliated with the British Paras and they wore the winged parachute emblem without the famous red beret (because cadete hadn't/couldn't been thrown from an airplane). Her Majesty the Queen, as Patron of the unit, directed that the unit should still have some connection to the air and ordered the wear of the sky blue beret of the Army Air Corps, which is still worn to this day. Shortly before I joined, the unit was attached to the cavalry and had a different badge but the color remained as part of the history of the unit. It's one of my most cherished possesions. Then after transferring to the air cadets and being dyed blue, I got a RAF beret with a cap badge identical to what the grown-ups wore. It is also cherished, even more so, but it was again not meant as a poke in the eye, but rather a privlegde that could be revoked if abused.
Quote from: Jester on August 17, 2016, 10:14:47 PM
Air show help, while admirable in its own right, doesn't rate it and I don't care how many decades it's been going on. Give them a dark blue ball cap with a newly-renamed activity patch on it.
Not sure how well this newly-renamed activity would go over...
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22086665/NHQcapnbb_15618C0D5ECA9.png)
Quote from: McLarty on August 18, 2016, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: Jester on August 17, 2016, 10:14:47 PM
Air show help, while admirable in its own right, doesn't rate it and I don't care how many decades it's been going on. Give them a dark blue ball cap with a newly-renamed activity patch on it.
Not sure how well this newly-renamed activity would go over...
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22086665/NHQcapnbb_15618C0D5ECA9.png)
No, no, no Nick. National Blaze Orange Boonie! >:D
OMG...
I feel like we just had this conversation, oh wait we did, on June 17th.
So, once again.
I have been to NBB a lot, love the activity and training, hate the beret. BUT...
The USAF and specifically the Secuirty Forces AFSC has ZERO repeat ZERO issue with any headgear that CAP does or does not wear!
Not only does the very very vast majority of SF have no idea who CAP even is, the ones that have an inkling of what CAP is do not care if someone wears a blue looking beret at all.
In a squadron of around 600 cops, I was the only CAP member. No one in my unit knew or cared at all about CAP, let alone headgear.
Another aspect, I have spoken directly, several times in fact, to the AF's "top cop" on this issue. I know you are all going to be shocked at this, but his first reaction was "what's caps?". His second reaction was "people really think we are wasting our time thinking or caring about what you all wear? (Insert laughter here)".
The beret gives no power to SF cops at all. None, zero, nada. Being on duty gives SF cops authorities like enforcement, Secuirty and detention/arrest, not the beret. An on duty SF member is a cop. An off duty SF member is just another Airman with no special powers. The dark blue beret isn't some massive power tool that commands absolute authority on AF bases, nor a red hat for CATM or red horse. It's just what you put on, nothing more or less.
Members of this origination need to stop trumpeting their presumed "will of the AF". Stop making the AF out to be the boogie man. They. Don't. Care.
NCRblues is 100% spot on. :clap: :clap: :clap:
QuoteFrom NCRBlues
Members of this origination need to stop trumpeting their presumed "will of the AF". Stop making the AF out to be the boogie man. They. Don't. Care.
Reminds me of a famous quote. I am not sure of the origin, nor of the context. I think it came from a cartoon, Pogo. It goes...
Quote
Have met the enemy, and it is us!
1. When we complain publicly about NHQ...
2. When we refuse to adhere to regulations, pamphlets, and manuals, be they crystal clear or muddy as swampy water...
3. When we complain about Ma Blue, access to bases, or misunderstandings about uniforms and/or policies...
Quote from: NCRblues on August 18, 2016, 04:15:56 PMMembers of this origination need to stop trumpeting their presumed "will of the AF". Stop making the AF out to be the boogie man. They. Don't. Care.
Except for boonies hats with BDUs. They do care and have repeated said NO!!!!!!!!
Quote from: arajca on August 18, 2016, 08:45:55 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on August 18, 2016, 04:15:56 PMMembers of this origination need to stop trumpeting their presumed "will of the AF". Stop making the AF out to be the boogie man. They. Don't. Care.
Except for boonies hats with BDUs. They do care and have repeated said NO!!!!!!!!
Cite please.
Other than stories of "well I heard from bob who spoke to Tim who spoke to Bonnie at cap-usaf and they said NO!" I have never ever seen something from CAP-USAF or the AF proper that said "omg, we should never let CAP have boonies"
Quote from: NCRblues on August 18, 2016, 09:19:39 PM
Quote from: arajca on August 18, 2016, 08:45:55 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on August 18, 2016, 04:15:56 PMMembers of this origination need to stop trumpeting their presumed "will of the AF". Stop making the AF out to be the boogie man. They. Don't. Care.
Except for boonies hats with BDUs. They do care and have repeated said NO!!!!!!!!
Cite please.
Other than stories of "well I heard from bob who spoke to Tim who spoke to Bonnie at cap-usaf and they said NO!" I have never ever seen something from CAP-USAF or the AF proper that said "omg, we should never let CAP have boonies"
How about the live streamed National Board meetings where CAP-USAF flatly said, "NO!"
Quote from: jeders on August 18, 2016, 09:53:41 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on August 18, 2016, 09:19:39 PM
Quote from: arajca on August 18, 2016, 08:45:55 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on August 18, 2016, 04:15:56 PMMembers of this origination need to stop trumpeting their presumed "will of the AF". Stop making the AF out to be the boogie man. They. Don't. Care.
Except for boonies hats with BDUs. They do care and have repeated said NO!!!!!!!!
Cite please.
Other than stories of "well I heard from bob who spoke to Tim who spoke to Bonnie at cap-usaf and they said NO!" I have never ever seen something from CAP-USAF or the AF proper that said "omg, we should never let CAP have boonies"
How about the live streamed National Board meetings where CAP-USAF flatly said, "NO!"
Well I didn't watch all of them but I watched a good portion I believe. I never saw it come up. Must have missed the one you saw.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: jeders on August 18, 2016, 09:53:41 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on August 18, 2016, 09:19:39 PM
Quote from: arajca on August 18, 2016, 08:45:55 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on August 18, 2016, 04:15:56 PMMembers of this origination need to stop trumpeting their presumed "will of the AF". Stop making the AF out to be the boogie man. They. Don't. Care.
Except for boonies hats with BDUs. They do care and have repeated said NO!!!!!!!!
Cite please.
Other than stories of "well I heard from bob who spoke to Tim who spoke to Bonnie at cap-usaf and they said NO!" I have never ever seen something from CAP-USAF or the AF proper that said "omg, we should never let CAP have boonies"
How about the live streamed National Board meetings where CAP-USAF flatly said, "NO!"
Yeah, which year did that happen? Because I watched many of them and I don't remember it being addressed.
So maybe give us a memory clue by saying which year it was brought up.
This thread is confusing. Since it started out as discussing weight standards, and has now progressed to hats, it begs the question:
Are you limited to a certain type of headgear/covering/hat based on your hat size? Meaning you cannot wear certain covers if you are a fat head? >:D
Quote from: jeders on August 18, 2016, 09:53:41 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on August 18, 2016, 09:19:39 PM
Quote from: arajca on August 18, 2016, 08:45:55 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on August 18, 2016, 04:15:56 PMMembers of this origination need to stop trumpeting their presumed "will of the AF". Stop making the AF out to be the boogie man. They. Don't. Care.
Except for boonies hats with BDUs. They do care and have repeated said NO!!!!!!!!
Cite please.
Other than stories of "well I heard from bob who spoke to Tim who spoke to Bonnie at cap-usaf and they said NO!" I have never ever seen something from CAP-USAF or the AF proper that said "omg, we should never let CAP have boonies"
How about the live streamed National Board meetings where CAP-USAF flatly said, "NO!"
Cite please?
Setting aside the fact that this isn't how items were conducted at NB/NEC meetings, I attended every NB meeting from 2004-2010, several of the years I attended as a sort of "aide" to Rex Glasgow. I have no personal recollection of anything even near this occurring.
I am currently reviewing the minutes of the NB meetings, I am up to 2007 and nothing yet.
This is a perfect example of what I stated earlier, CAP has done an amazing job down to the local level of making the big USAF the boogie man for every unpopular decision by any level.
We must stop this.
Quote from: NCRblues on August 19, 2016, 12:27:47 AM
I am currently reviewing the minutes of the NB meetings, I am up to 2007 and nothing yet.
You're one year short.
Feb / March 2008 NB Minutes, Page 41-43:
"This proposal was previously disapproved by the Air Staff; however, CAP-USAF
supports the proposal and will resubmit for Air Staff approval. Woodland camouflage or
blue is more likely to receive favorable consideration than orange. If the proposal is
approved, the request to Air Staff should be specific and limit wear to field condition
circumstances and not routine "in-garrison" wear. This would be consistent with USAF
regulations." And despite the fact that the motion was carried to request the gardening hats with the BDU,
by April "someone" had said "no" (again).
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/2008_04_01_uniforms_5479B9F312F3E.pdf
"2. Several other uniform proposals were approved but require the approval of the Air
Force before implementation. When this approval is received these items will be
announced. The items listed above will be incorporated into the next revision of CAPM 39-1."
Quote from: Eclipse on August 19, 2016, 12:47:49 AM
Feb / March 2008 NB Minutes, Page 41-43:
"This proposal was previously disapproved by the Air Staff; however, CAP-USAF
supports the proposal and will resubmit for Air Staff approval. "
"Air Staff". As the guy who knows little of these things except that everyone tells me all decisions have to be run the chain .... Do uniform decisions eventually wind up on some high ranking official's desk, who flips a coin to decide whether blue or brown? Or maybe his wife's favorite color? You may say they do 'in depth studies'. So a few folks sit around at lunch and look at some possible combinations and they vote?
Joking aside, it really would be interesting to see just how many times these things get run up the chain, back down the chain, then back up, etc. and how the eventual decision is actually made. Do they ever reveal the 'why we did it this way' ... or are we little guys just told what to wear and wonder if it really was a coin toss in the end?
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 01:47:52 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 19, 2016, 12:47:49 AM
Feb / March 2008 NB Minutes, Page 41-43:
"This proposal was previously disapproved by the Air Staff; however, CAP-USAF
supports the proposal and will resubmit for Air Staff approval. "
"Air Staff". As the guy who knows little of these things except that everyone tells me all decisions have to be run the chain .... Do uniform decisions eventually wind up on some high ranking official's desk, who flips a coin to decide whether blue or brown? Or maybe his wife's favorite color? You may say they do 'in depth studies'. So a few folks sit around at lunch and look at some possible combinations and they vote?
Joking aside, it really would be interesting to see just how many times these things get run up the chain, back down the chain, then back up, etc. and how the eventual decision is actually made. Do they ever reveal the 'why we did it this way' ... or are we little guys just told what to wear and wonder if it really was a coin toss in the end?
The "Air Staff" is the staff that works for the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force in the Pentagon. IIRC it has about 100ish people assigned.
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2016, 01:51:34 AM
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 01:47:52 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 19, 2016, 12:47:49 AM
Feb / March 2008 NB Minutes, Page 41-43:
"This proposal was previously disapproved by the Air Staff; however, CAP-USAF
supports the proposal and will resubmit for Air Staff approval. "
"Air Staff". As the guy who knows little of these things except that everyone tells me all decisions have to be run the chain .... Do uniform decisions eventually wind up on some high ranking official's desk, who flips a coin to decide whether blue or brown? Or maybe his wife's favorite color? You may say they do 'in depth studies'. So a few folks sit around at lunch and look at some possible combinations and they vote?
Joking aside, it really would be interesting to see just how many times these things get run up the chain, back down the chain, then back up, etc. and how the eventual decision is actually made. Do they ever reveal the 'why we did it this way' ... or are we little guys just told what to wear and wonder if it really was a coin toss in the end?
The "Air Staff" is the staff that works for the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force in the Pentagon. IIRC it has about 100ish people assigned.
I wonder how many of those 100 spend time on deciding uniform issues? Might be like the old saying about having too many cooks in the kitchen, if they have to get all 100 to agree.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 19, 2016, 12:47:49 AM
Quote from: NCRblues on August 19, 2016, 12:27:47 AM
I am currently reviewing the minutes of the NB meetings, I am up to 2007 and nothing yet.
You're one year short.
Feb / March 2008 NB Minutes, Page 41-43:
"This proposal was previously disapproved by the Air Staff; however, CAP-USAF
supports the proposal and will resubmit for Air Staff approval. Woodland camouflage or
blue is more likely to receive favorable consideration than orange. If the proposal is
approved, the request to Air Staff should be specific and limit wear to field condition
circumstances and not routine "in-garrison" wear. This would be consistent with USAF
regulations."
And despite the fact that the motion was carried to request the gardening hats with the BDU,
by April "someone" had said "no" (again).
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/2008_04_01_uniforms_5479B9F312F3E.pdf
"2. Several other uniform proposals were approved but require the approval of the Air
Force before implementation. When this approval is received these items will be
announced. The items listed above will be incorporated into the next revision of CAPM 39-1."
Ok, good cite.
I never stated the AF does not have approval over uniform items. Nor did I state that the AF never says no on items.
I simply stand by my saying that your avarage member has no real contact with the USAF in our "chain of command" and has no firsthand knowledge of what the AF does or does not want CAP to do/wear.
In the cite, it stated that CAP-USAF (our AF main supervisor) was supportive of this, so no one stood up at a national board meeting and said NO!! More than likely, this was turned down at levels above reason for "reasons".
Quote from: NCRblues on August 19, 2016, 01:57:27 AM
In the cite, it stated that CAP-USAF (our AF main supervisor) was supportive of this, so no one stood up at a national board meeting and said NO!! More than likely, this was turned down at levels above reason for "reasons".
Most likely, but seriously, you're a USAF Col watching the clock for retirement, a star (or two) says "no gardening hats for CAP...", why on earth would you
waste any time on pursuing it?
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 01:53:08 AM
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2016, 01:51:34 AM
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 01:47:52 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 19, 2016, 12:47:49 AM
Feb / March 2008 NB Minutes, Page 41-43:
"This proposal was previously disapproved by the Air Staff; however, CAP-USAF
supports the proposal and will resubmit for Air Staff approval. "
"Air Staff". As the guy who knows little of these things except that everyone tells me all decisions have to be run the chain .... Do uniform decisions eventually wind up on some high ranking official's desk, who flips a coin to decide whether blue or brown? Or maybe his wife's favorite color? You may say they do 'in depth studies'. So a few folks sit around at lunch and look at some possible combinations and they vote?
Joking aside, it really would be interesting to see just how many times these things get run up the chain, back down the chain, then back up, etc. and how the eventual decision is actually made. Do they ever reveal the 'why we did it this way' ... or are we little guys just told what to wear and wonder if it really was a coin toss in the end?
The "Air Staff" is the staff that works for the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force in the Pentagon. IIRC it has about 100ish people assigned.
I wonder how many of those 100 spend time on deciding uniform issues? Might be like the old saying about having too many cooks in the kitchen, if they have to get all 100 to agree.
You don't know how staffs work, do you. What they do is make up a staff package for the General.
They spell out the "problem", identify the issues and give the General a number of options to choose from. The General makes the final decision.
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2016, 03:02:20 AM
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 01:53:08 AM
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2016, 01:51:34 AM
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 01:47:52 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 19, 2016, 12:47:49 AM
Feb / March 2008 NB Minutes, Page 41-43:
"This proposal was previously disapproved by the Air Staff; however, CAP-USAF
supports the proposal and will resubmit for Air Staff approval. "
"Air Staff". As the guy who knows little of these things except that everyone tells me all decisions have to be run the chain .... Do uniform decisions eventually wind up on some high ranking official's desk, who flips a coin to decide whether blue or brown? Or maybe his wife's favorite color? You may say they do 'in depth studies'. So a few folks sit around at lunch and look at some possible combinations and they vote?
Joking aside, it really would be interesting to see just how many times these things get run up the chain, back down the chain, then back up, etc. and how the eventual decision is actually made. Do they ever reveal the 'why we did it this way' ... or are we little guys just told what to wear and wonder if it really was a coin toss in the end?
The "Air Staff" is the staff that works for the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force in the Pentagon. IIRC it has about 100ish people assigned.
I wonder how many of those 100 spend time on deciding uniform issues? Might be like the old saying about having too many cooks in the kitchen, if they have to get all 100 to agree.
You don't know how staffs work, do you. What they do is make up a staff package for the General.
They spell out the "problem", identify the issues and give the General a number of options to choose from. The General makes the final decision.
You didn't read all my posts above. When I said ... "Do uniform decisions eventually wind up on some high ranking official's desk, who flips a coin to decide whether blue or brown?" ....... I described what you just said about the General. LOL
.
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 03:25:30 AM
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2016, 03:02:20 AM
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 01:53:08 AM
Quote from: PHall on August 19, 2016, 01:51:34 AM
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 01:47:52 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on August 19, 2016, 12:47:49 AM
Feb / March 2008 NB Minutes, Page 41-43:
"This proposal was previously disapproved by the Air Staff; however, CAP-USAF
supports the proposal and will resubmit for Air Staff approval. "
"Air Staff". As the guy who knows little of these things except that everyone tells me all decisions have to be run the chain .... Do uniform decisions eventually wind up on some high ranking official's desk, who flips a coin to decide whether blue or brown? Or maybe his wife's favorite color? You may say they do 'in depth studies'. So a few folks sit around at lunch and look at some possible combinations and they vote?
Joking aside, it really would be interesting to see just how many times these things get run up the chain, back down the chain, then back up, etc. and how the eventual decision is actually made. Do they ever reveal the 'why we did it this way' ... or are we little guys just told what to wear and wonder if it really was a coin toss in the end?
The "Air Staff" is the staff that works for the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force in the Pentagon. IIRC it has about 100ish people assigned.
I wonder how many of those 100 spend time on deciding uniform issues? Might be like the old saying about having too many cooks in the kitchen, if they have to get all 100 to agree.
You don't know how staffs work, do you. What they do is make up a staff package for the General.
They spell out the "problem", identify the issues and give the General a number of options to choose from. The General makes the final decision.
You didn't read all my posts above. When I said ... "Do uniform decisions eventually wind up on some high ranking official's desk, who flips a coin to decide whether blue or brown?" ....... I described what you just said about the General. LOL
.
Yes, a General Officer will make a decision on CAP uniforms based on what's in the Staff Package.
The Air Force has reserved the right to control the CAP "Air Force style" uniforms.
JROTC wears, black, red, white and tan berets. Doesn't seem to bother anyone else.
[/quote]
And it really shouldn't, if there's any organization that falls under the HOLMS center that's as distinctly distinguishable from the Air Force as CAP then its the JROTC. Berets are just another form of cover for the uniform, the argument here is that berets should be strictly for Military units? I understand how berets in the air force are used to distinguish between Security Forces, Para rescue, and other special forces in the USAF but like it was mentioned in a previous thread, the Army issues berets to every private who graduates basic, and whether they continue to wear it is totally dependent on the commander of that regiment I believe. Just as is in CAP, its at the discretion of the CC, its been the same for decades so what's all of a sudden wrong with it now??
Quote from: SMKITCHEN on August 19, 2016, 01:07:04 PM
its been the same for decades so what's all of a sudden wrong with it now??
What the main "anti beret" argument has come down to is as follows.
#1. Why are we giving one NCSA that is a little over two weeks long multiple awards (NCSA credit, NCSA ribbon, NBB patch AND a hat)
#2. What at NBB sets those attendees aside/above other CAP members?
#3. Is the hassle of having one member out of your unit able to show up to functions wearing something less than stellar for field use?
My answers
#1. We shouldn't be. I believe that the beret should be phased out with the end of the BDU. As stated before, I have attended NBB several times and loved LOVED every minute of it... Except the beret.
#2. Nothing. Now, many CAP members believe NBB attendees "help out" at the air show then get to see it. Not true. NBB is an AFRCC mission with the main objective to locate, find and silence the large (and I mean large) number of ELTs that occur with the stringent and stressful landing rules. A side objective is support of the air show with aircraft ground marshaling. It is a very very busy two weeks with limited time to just "see the show".
#3. I don't know. That's a question for the commander at each echelon.
I use to be a huge supporter of the beret itself, and have since changed my mind.
My idea for it is such... Continue to call the activity NBB. Nothing wrong with the name. Continue to hand out the beret even, but make it a non wearable item. Put it in a shadow box and call it a day. (Same with ranger tabs and orange hats, stow em)
I hear what you mean about multiple awards for one event. With that said NCSA credit and the ribbon would be given regardless of whether this was NBB or Hawk Mountain, and a cadet or senior member forks out quite a bit for those events, and upon completion of any of these programs there really should be a credit and I guess a ribbon, we senior members get a ribbon just for passing phase 1 training, which doesn't take long at all.
I do however agree that a patch and beret does seem a bit over kill for one event, if it were any normal event. In my squadron we just had two members return from NBB, one for the first time and one for the second time. according to the one (who's a senior member) NBB is a real working environment, and all the members take part in a lot of hands on training, and earn my certifications that otherwise you may not learn unless you participate in every SAREX in your wing.
I feel like the patch is a given, and it marks that you completed that particular NCSA. The beret however could be seen as completion of one of the harder NCSA's? I don't know I've not attended one yet. I don't think it sets a particular member aside or make them seem more outstanding than somebody who didn't go to NBB.
I think ultimately we're either going to see the end of Berets in CAP, and start standardizing a core uniform style that every member has to wear (kinda like we have now but more strict) or the total opposite, Berets of different colors and meanings for different NCSA's, patches as far as the eye can see (until you hit your limit), and more distinctive insignia.
It doesn't really concern me that much, I just like to mentor and have a positive impact on people within the squadron and out in the community.
Quote from: SMKITCHEN on August 19, 2016, 06:33:38 PM
I hear what you mean about multiple awards for one event. With that said NCSA credit and the ribbon would be given regardless of whether this was NBB or Hawk Mountain, and a cadet or senior member forks out quite a bit for those events, and upon completion of any of these programs there really should be a credit and I guess a ribbon, we senior members get a ribbon just for passing phase 1 training, which doesn't take long at all.
Neither do cadet achievements, but every 2 months, for a year and half a cadet can earn a new ribbon.
Quote
I feel like the patch is a given, and it marks that you completed that particular NCSA. The beret however could be seen as completion of one of the harder NCSA's? I don't know I've not attended one yet. I don't think it sets a particular member aside or make them seem more outstanding than somebody who didn't go to NBB.
I thought Honor Guard Academy was pretty tough. Hours of PT, classes, and drill. Then some more PT, classes and drill. Two weeks of sweet sweet drill. And PT. and Classes.
But it certainly doesn't warrant a new hat.
I just came from this year's NBB, and frankly if we got rid of the hat, I think the activity would improve vastly. I have never met more unprofessional CAP Cadet Officers in my entire career until I went there and it was because they wanted the beret. I have my beret sitting up on my hat shelf, but I don't think I'll be wearing it much.
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 19, 2016, 06:57:26 PM
Quote from: SMKITCHEN on August 19, 2016, 06:33:38 PM
I hear what you mean about multiple awards for one event. With that said NCSA credit and the ribbon would be given regardless of whether this was NBB or Hawk Mountain, and a cadet or senior member forks out quite a bit for those events, and upon completion of any of these programs there really should be a credit and I guess a ribbon, we senior members get a ribbon just for passing phase 1 training, which doesn't take long at all.
Neither do cadet achievements, but every 2 months, for a year and half a cadet can earn a new ribbon.
Quote
I feel like the patch is a given, and it marks that you completed that particular NCSA. The beret however could be seen as completion of one of the harder NCSA's? I don't know I've not attended one yet. I don't think it sets a particular member aside or make them seem more outstanding than somebody who didn't go to NBB.
I thought Honor Guard Academy was pretty tough. Hours of PT, classes, and drill. Then some more PT, classes and drill. Two weeks of sweet sweet drill. And PT. and Classes.
But it certainly doesn't warrant a new hat.
I was a cadet, I realize the promotion process and the fact they get ribbons; its kind of common knowledge in CAP if your around cadets. I don't doubt that the Honor Guard academy is tough, that'd be my first choice if it were open to senior members, which it may be I don't know. I think the personal distinction of being a top driller, or top flight marshal, or proficient ground team member would be enough. I don't need a beret or hat, but I understand why there are some.
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 01:53:08 AMI wonder how many of those 100 spend time on deciding uniform issues? Might be like the old saying about having too many cooks in the kitchen, if they have to get all 100 to agree.
Very few. Specifically, the A1 (Personnel) functional area - which handles policy decisions on personnel, uniforms, manpower, and so on. CAP issues are just a drop in a bucket full of things A1 has to handle.
Quote from: raivo on August 19, 2016, 08:58:56 PM
Quote from: etodd on August 19, 2016, 01:53:08 AMI wonder how many of those 100 spend time on deciding uniform issues? Might be like the old saying about having too many cooks in the kitchen, if they have to get all 100 to agree.
Very few. Specifically, the A1 (Personnel) functional area - which handles policy decisions on personnel, uniforms, manpower, and so on. CAP issues are just a drop in a bucket full of things A1 has to handle.
Thats what I was thinking. In the corporate world that would be decisions made before lunch. Government taking months and years to make decisions amuse me. Every little thing that drags out ... adds to our trillions in debt.
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 19, 2016, 06:57:26 PM
I thought Honor Guard Academy was pretty tough. Hours of PT, classes, and drill. Then some more PT, classes and drill. Two weeks of sweet sweet drill. And PT. and Classes.
But it certainly doesn't warrant a new hat.
Just a new uniform? [emoji6] [emoji39]
1st Lt Raduenz
Quote from: DakRadz on August 22, 2016, 09:04:49 PM
Quote from: Капитан Хаткевич on August 19, 2016, 06:57:26 PM
I thought Honor Guard Academy was pretty tough. Hours of PT, classes, and drill. Then some more PT, classes and drill. Two weeks of sweet sweet drill. And PT. and Classes.
But it certainly doesn't warrant a new hat.
Just a new uniform? (https://s3.amazonaws.com/tapatalk-emoji/emoji6.png) (https://s3.amazonaws.com/tapatalk-emoji/emoji39.png)
1st Lt Raduenz
I said Honor Guard, not SuperDrillTeam(TM)