The wonderful World of covers.

[Thom]

The surnames that you ascribe to "Wales" up there is actually "Windsor-Mountbatten"

"Prince of Wales" is a title, not a name.

No, actually, in service to the various UK defense forces both Princes use Wales as their surname.

The original poster had it correct.

No Internets for you, today.


Thom

[titanII]

I immediately went to check Harry & William's name tapes, but... no dice   

[crisptheyounger]

I immediately went to check Harry & William's name tapes, but... no dice   

Try this image:

[spacecommand]

Funny cause the images fit the wonderful world of covers and no covers. 

[Al Sayre]

The surnames that you ascribe to "Wales" up there is actually "Windsor-Mountbatten"

"Prince of Wales" is a title, not a name.

No, actually, in service to the various UK defense forces both Princes use Wales as their surname.

The original poster had it correct.

No Internets for you, today.



Thom

Besides, it'd be pretty hard to put "Windsor-Mountbatten" on a name tape unless it wrapped into his armpit...

[titanII]

Besides, it'd be pretty hard to put "Windsor-Mountbatten" on a name tape unless it wrapped into his armpit...

Or the text could be really, really, really small  .

[PhoenixRisen]

There are no suppliments to the 39-1 listed on TXWG's site. Either the cadet was misinformed or the squadron has a "local" thing going on that shouldn't be happening.

I didn't see it posted after this, so here ya go:

http://www.txwgcap.org/pdfs/39-1%20supplement-rev2.pdf

Dated 21MAY2011 -- no mention to berets of any kind.

[Al Sayre]

Besides, it'd be pretty hard to put "Windsor-Mountbatten" on a name tape unless it wrapped into his armpit...

Or the text could be really, really, really small  .

I guess it would still be shorter than "Saxe-Coburg-Gotha-Mountbatten"...

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

The surnames that you ascribe to "Wales" up there is actually "Windsor-Mountbatten"

"Prince of Wales" is a title, not a name.

I know what the family name is.  I believe the Queen added "Mountbatten" after she married Prince Philip.  I remember when Lord Louis Mountbatten was assassinated by the Provisional IRA in 1979.  I was just coming into my teenage years but I still remember it.

I only know the Princes' service surnames the way everyone else on here has cited...by reading the various name badges on their uniforms.

I've always liked the flight ("wedge") caps that the RAF and Commonwealth use; in fact I have a Canadian-issue one in my collection.  A lot of other non-Commonwealth countries use a similar pattern (the Royal Norwegian Air Force, for one).

What's the thought on trying to adopt those as a (gach) "distinctive" headgear for the corporate uniform, of course with different badging and CAP buttons?

[DBlair]

This last week at our squadrons blues night we had a cadet from another wing come and visit this cadet that will remain nameless was sporting a black beret with there blues which is completely out of regs but then this cadet said to me that his wing (Texas) has the right to were these when complete with GES is anyone from Texas wing that can verify this? Thank you very much.

What you describe is something I've heard people in a few Wings casually discussing (in a wishful thinking manner) for ES, similar to the way a few Wings have ball caps of certain colors for ES/GT, but to my knowledge this beret idea never developed beyond wishful thinking. Also, I highly doubt that a black beret would be approved due to obvious U.S. Army-related uniform conflict.

[DBlair]

The surnames that you ascribe to "Wales" up there is actually "Windsor-Mountbatten"

"Prince of Wales" is a title, not a name.

No, actually, in service to the various UK defense forces both Princes use Wales as their surname.

The original poster had it correct.

No Internets for you, today.


Thom

They also used Wales as their surname throughout University and other such times when a surname would normally be used.

[lordmonar]

(i.e. a cadet/senior who says "my commander/wing/what ever says we can wear it" is a valid argument).

Was he from Indiana? We have a  supplement for GT qualified people to wear a blue beret with flight cap device or C/Officer rank while in an ES environment only.

A wing king's authority does not extend past his boundaries. What's legal in your home wing isn't necessarily legal someplace else.

Which is why it is really important to focus on what the publication says, not "so and so said I could wear it." The problem with "so and so said" is that it's a little too hard to verify. Many people think berets are "cool." Even to the point they will wear them, and claim that it's allowed to their locality.

It is all well and good for us here on CT to say "you have to focus on what the regs say".......but let's be completely honest....how many 12 year olds are reading the regs?  How many new SM's actually go to the source?  NO.....what happens is new people are told/shown how to do things.....and they rightly follow their lead.

It is good that we keep our peers in line and help them to find the right answer.......but it does zero good to jack up a cadet or SM for simply doing what he was told to do.

Fix what you can and report the rest up the chain of command.

[Hawk200]

It is all well and good for us here on CT to say "you have to focus on what the regs say".......but let's be completely honest....how many 12 year olds are reading the regs?  How many new SM's actually go to the source?  NO.....what happens is new people are told/shown how to do things.....and they rightly follow their lead.

It is good that we keep our peers in line and help them to find the right answer.......but it does zero good to jack up a cadet or SM for simply doing what he was told to do.

Fix what you can and report the rest up the chain of command.

Then I guess I've been doing the right thing by teaching all the cadets that I deal with to read the regs. On a regular basis, I provide new cadets with a mini CD that has just about all the pertinent regulations that they will deal with (as well as a few that they might not, but it never hurts to read). Every few months, I update the pubs on the  squadron computers, too.

No cadet in my squadron can use the excuse "Somebody told me." I've also had people tell me that cadets know those pubs. Pubs aren't just written for the high brass, they're written for everyone. If you're not teaching them these things, you're failing them.

Anyway, any member should know that unless it's in those pubs published by National, what they can do in their wing may not be allowed in another. That is something else that should be taught as well. Publications compliance is not a cafeteria process, you don't get to pick and choose the ones you like and leave the rest on the buffet.

I've got a few hip pocket classes that I keep on my thumbdrive as well as on my phone to teach these things when we have some dead time during a meeting.  Ten, fifteen, and twenty minute classes aren't that hard to create. These things should also be included in mentoring any new members.

[lordmonar]

Anyway, any member should know that unless it's in those pubs published by National, what they can do in their wing may not be allowed in another. That is something else that should be taught as well. Publications compliance is not a cafeteria process, you don't get to pick and choose the ones you like and leave the rest on the buffet.

I have to disagree.  First off....all commanders must have some latitude to deviate from the regulations as the situation call for.  Second off....chain of command.....Do you want each and every one of your orders questioned by every C/AB...."where's that in the regs?"
Third....regulation complaince is a enforced TOP DOWN!  I can only enforce the regulaitons at my level and below.  I can encourage my peers to be complaince....but I can't ENFORCE them at that level.  I....as I have said.....can and should report violations up my chain for them to enforce complaince. 

On that note if NHQ really wants us to enforce uniform regulations they would:
a) Write a reg that is clear and up to date.
b) Enforce the reg at their level
c) Stop the gross violations that take place at wing levels (PAWG and their ranger bling as the most obvious example....but there are many more).

So....like you I enforce the regulations at my level.  I send my new SMs and cadets to the regulations.  I DO violate the regulation when and where appropriate....but I use my good judgement, insure my chain of command is in the loop and make all attempts to stay or quickly return to regulation complaince.

So your squadron and my squadron are good......but I can do anything about what happens 20 miles away in Squadron X....and I certainly can't help what goes on in the next wing.

[titanII]

I DO violate the regulation when and where appropriate

Not that I disagree, but out of curiosity: could you give some examples where violating the regs would be appropriate?

[davidsinn]

I DO violate the regulation when and where appropriate

Not that I disagree, but out of curiosity: could you give some examples where violating the regs would be appropriate?

I can't speak for him but one thing that springs to mind is cold weather gear. There is no authorized gear for for extreme cold. The stuff we do have is not plentiful enough to go around.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

^^Captain Sinn brings up a good example - SAFETY.

Where safety is involved, that trumps any bit of 39-1 for me (disclosure: I was a safety officer for two squadrons for several years).

Our unit CC tells us that when it's sub-zero out he wants us to be dressed for it...it doesn't matter if you've got a hat that isn't regulation, if it's warm and keeps you from getting frostbitten ears, or boots that will keep your feet warm and dry, that is Job 1.

Lordmonar is on target as well about if NHQ wanted us to be as cut-and-dried as they say they do, they would write 39-MOICLTMNLS^* to reflect it.

Examples that make no sense to me:

Flight cap allowed with blue NOMEX bag, but not with utility bag.  ONLY difference is in fabric, and both cases involve mixing civilian (the AF does not wear blue NOMEX flight gear that I know of, but they DO wear blue jumpsuits - think missile boffins at Minot) and military clothing.

Ambiguity on Coast Guard Auxiliary ribbons on CAP uniform - CGAUX awards are awarded ultimately by the authorisation of the Chief Director Auxiliary (CHDIRAUX), who is an active-duty U.S. Coast Guard four-piston-ring Captain, and those even further up the food chain.  If that isn't "competent military authority," I don't know what is.

Authorisation for hard rank on the BBDU cap, but nowhere else.

And, of course, the whole "low-light/at-a-distance" Bravo Sierra.

^*39-Mass Of Interim Change Letters That Make No Logical Sense

[Eclipse]

Our unit CC tells us that when it's sub-zero out he wants us to be dressed for it...it doesn't matter if you've got a hat that isn't regulation, if it's warm and keeps you from getting frostbitten ears, or boots that will keep your feet warm and dry, that is Job 1.

That's only half of the argument and discussion - I've sat through enough of the "It's a safety issue." nonsense myself.

Yes, day-of, caught off-guard, or in a legit emergency, kill a squirrel and put it on your head, however in mid-summer when you are
trolling REI or Spec Ops Online,  see something "kewl", and have to make a "regs vs. kewl" decision, the regs win.  Period.

That's why the "safety" argument fails, because the number of times that CAP people ever encounter that situation is essentially
zero, and the the number of times they need to encounter that situation is supposed to be zero, and in almost all cases, any
situation that exceeds the capabilities of the uniforms we have been authorized, probably exceeds ORM and common sense, anyway.

This is M*A*S*H or Valley Forge.

[titanII]

This isn't M*A*S*H or Valley Forge.

FTFY 

[SarDragon]

This is isn't M*A*S*H or Valley Forge.

FTFY!