ABU uniform for Civil Air Patrol

[lordmonar]

that i have ever found.
Can you please point to where outside of a a "neat and professional appearance" the regs state a uniform must be ironed?

I never ironed my BDU's or OD's WIWOAD......I took them to the dry cleaners.

[Extremepredjudice]

/quote]Some don't want to polish or iron.

Okay this brings up an intersting question.
Boots should be polished and look good as should shoes. No argument there from me....
BUT

Uniforms should not have loose threads or be frayed and wrinkled.
CAP Regs specifically prohibit "military creases" and say NOTHING about ironing being required whatsoever that i have ever found.
Can you please point to where outside of a a "neat and professional appearance" the regs state a uniform must be ironed?

I can't always run out and dry clean my BDUs. An Iron is so much easier to carry.

If we don't iron, and can't dry clean, then we won't look professional. Besides, don't your units ever do inspections?

[NIN]

I can't always run out and dry clean my BDUs. An Iron is so much easier to carry.

If we don't iron, and can't dry clean, then we won't look professional. Besides, don't your units ever do inspections?

I missed the part where a lack of ironing for a combat / field uniform leads to unprofessionalism.

[abdsp51]

No combat ready unit ever passes inspection no inspection ready unit ever survives combat.

[rustyjeeper]

Someone asked, does my unit not do inspections. And the answer to that is yes it does. And the ironing was an issue recently. I questioned what regulation was violated specifically and no answer was provided to that. I am playing devil's advocate here since ironing was brought up.
Personally I dont iron other than to make pockets lay flat. If I did iron I would want military creases and double starch- that's just me.
I beleive in a professional appearance and as I said wrinkles and rumpled is not okay. But if certain types of creases are specifically disallowed and no requirement is listed in the regs for any kind of ironing aside from "neatness and professionalism". Without a unit commanders written policy dictating those specific requiremnets within the unit, it is not something for which I would accept a gig. It is time to update the uniforms and the regulations. Truth of the matter is that the military has gotten away from the old ways of shine and starch and some of us for whatever reason just cant accept that things change. Even our BDU's were not supposed to be ironed when worn in the 90's (except for the REMF's that had nothing better to do with their time) Why do some here insist on that NOT REQUIRED now when it is not a clear regulation?
As I stated previously I am a firm beleiver in a cared for uniform with pockets buttoned and laying flat as well as polish on boots. I think pride needs to be taken in the uniform by all. But I can be proud with no wrinkles and my iron safely tucked away until I get ABU's

[rustyjeeper]

No combat ready unit ever passes inspection no inspection ready unit ever survives combat.

+1
Well said and my preferance is for a productive use of time and effort! We might not be combat ready or even "troops" but we are mission prepared hopefully!

[NCRblues]

No combat ready unit ever passes inspection no inspection ready unit ever survives combat.

Disagree... Patton's 3rd army was ALWAYS in inspection order....and if my history degree is worth anything (debatable) than his army did VERY well in combat....

[rustyjeeper]

Patton's own uniform was not exactly regulation was it?
I am not saying his army was not effective
But as I recall history, unless mistaken I beleive he was releived of his command for some minor technicality or other wasnt he?
And I happen to like Patton's style but he could be a CSSOB

[abdsp51]

No combat ready unit ever passes inspection no inspection ready unit ever survives combat.

Disagree... Patton's 3rd army was ALWAYS in inspection order....and if my history degree is worth anything (debatable) than his army did VERY well in combat....

Ok one exception to the old saying.

[NCRblues]

But as I recall history, unless mistaken I beleive he was releived of his command for some minor technicality or other wasnt he?

Which time? 

[rustyjeeper]

But as I recall history, unless mistaken I beleive he was releived of his command for some minor technicality or other wasnt he?

Which time? 

good point

[abdsp51]

Well now that there is some insight, I say wait and see.  Honestly ABUs are way to expensive to come out of pocket on.

[Extremepredjudice]

No combat ready unit ever passes inspection no inspection ready unit ever survives combat.

Did I miss the memo that we are a combat unit? I was under the impression we were a group of volunteers. I've been wrong before...

Which are more professional, a group of people with BDUs that are wrinkly and boots that aren't polished. Or maybe ironed wrinkle-free BDUs, and polished boots.

Yes, it isn't in the regs. Does it really matter? Shouldn't we look our very very best? At encampment no one was polishing their boots, so (after I asked the TAC and flight staff) I took everyones boots and polished them to mirror finish. (or as close as I could[take care of your boots, people!])

It wasn't in the regs, but it sure made us look good. Better than all the other flights

Some of you guys are very selective on regs...

[rustyjeeper]

Some of you guys are very selective on regs...
[/quote]

Thank you, I take that as a compliment
and for the record ....
although I played devil's advocate it is for a reason. To demonstate that our regulations are woefully inedaquate concerning uniforms.
The intent is clear
"All commanders will 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."
However there is also clear indication in other publications prohibiting certain ironing practices. So each and every command has the authority to impose differing standards. This leads to an organization wheere one unit looks sharp and another not so sharp. We need to get on the same page. To me it seems as if the real military has gotten away from uniform maintenance to a large degree, at one time soldiers actually sewed their own patches on- imagine that, now it is peel and stick
I am hoping that whenever a change comes down the pike (and I hope not soon I like the BDU's) the regulations are updated well in advance and not to be released "in a short while" (which we all know likely means years).
And I am totally in agreement that CAP is not a combat unit, nor will it ever be one. We do have a role to play in support of the armed forces and we should look good but lets not get to hung up in creases and spit shines. A simple brush shine and a BLACK not raw leather boot is better than what we currently see on a regular basis.

[AngelWings]

I can't always run out and dry clean my BDUs. An Iron is so much easier to carry.

If we don't iron, and can't dry clean, then we won't look professional. Besides, don't your units ever do inspections?

I missed the part where a lack of ironing for a combat / field uniform leads to unprofessionalism.

I missed the part where looking like a pile of dogcrap leads to getting things done.

[PHall]

I can't always run out and dry clean my BDUs. An Iron is so much easier to carry.

If we don't iron, and can't dry clean, then we won't look professional. Besides, don't your units ever do inspections?

I missed the part where a lack of ironing for a combat / field uniform leads to unprofessionalism.

I missed the part where looking like a pile of dogcrap leads to getting things done.

According to your rules, all of the troops in Afghanistan must be unprofessional piles of dogcrap then.
But somehow they manage to get the job done...  Despite their unironed, wrinkled uniforms and dusty, dirty boots.

[Extremepredjudice]

I can't always run out and dry clean my BDUs. An Iron is so much easier to carry.

If we don't iron, and can't dry clean, then we won't look professional. Besides, don't your units ever do inspections?

I missed the part where a lack of ironing for a combat / field uniform leads to unprofessionalism.

I missed the part where looking like a pile of dogcrap leads to getting things done.

According to your rules, all of the troops in Afghanistan must be unprofessional piles of dogcrap then.
But somehow they manage to get the job done...  Despite their unironed, wrinkled uniforms and dusty, dirty boots.

Sir, I am talking about a professional volunteer SAR organization. Not the military.

Who wants to help/talk to a bunch of guys that look like crap?

I missed the part where we no longer care about how we represent ourselves. You are a representitive of CAP. Your uniform, your grooming, and your attitude all affect how we are viewed.

[NIN]

I missed the part where looking like a pile of dogcrap leads to getting things done.

Lets dispel a couple of myths, shall we?

** "Modern" utility/combat uniforms in the US Armed Forces are "no-iron" uniforms (well, unless you're an E-9 in the AF.. I've seen more E-9s with creases thru their stripes that I could cut myself on .. Old habits apparently die very hard when you're a senior NCO). Pull 'em out of the wash, hang them up. Done.

** If done correctly, when you wear a uniform like that, it does not "look like a pile of dogcrap" just because it does not get near an iron. (don't take almost 6 years of wearing ACUs from me: when I go to AUSA in DC, I see literally -thousands- of dudes in ACUs in one place, none of whom iron or press their ACUs and somehow, magically, none of them "look like dogcrap.")

** If you take a "wash and wear" uniform, wad it up, jam it into the corner of your b-hut or into the bottom of your duffel bag, wait 7-10 days, pull it out, put it on, and then try to go out into the mountains of Afghanistan with a ruck, weapon, radio, armor and helmet, your ability to "get things done" does not magically leak out of you like Superman's powers near kryptonite.

Why?  Because:

• With all that crap on, its hard to tell whether your uniform "looks like dogcrap or not";
• You *will* still "get things done," even if you "look like dogcrap" (there tends to be a lot of "hands-on leadership" that ensures that you will "get things done," and I'm pretty sure that apart from an E-5 or E-6 saying "hey, did you sleep in that uniform?" nobody is going to recognize any loss of efficiency in "getting things done" due to "looking like dogcrap");
• You might actually kneel/sit/lie in actual "dogcrap." Therefore, by extension, you may actually *look* like "dogcrap" when people see you post-kneeling/sitting/lying in "dogcrap."  Does said "dogcrap" obviate your abilities? Does it change your weapon zero?  Knowledge of grid coordinates?  Adjust your ability to call for fire?  No, it might cause your teammates to laugh & point, and perhaps say a foot or two further away than normal, but "looking like dogcrap" should not hinder your ability to "get things done" if you have the training and ability to "get things done."

** Just because someone "looks like dogcrap" does not mean they're not skilled, don't have abilities, and can't "get things done."   (this is the old "don't read a book by its cover" thing)

Seriously here for a minute, I think this is really the crux of the whole thing:

Is it just me, or is CAP unreasonably hung up on "form over function," especially within the cadet program?


I've been a unit commander in two wings, been a wing DCP, traveled around a little beyond that, and visited countless units in 28 years in CAP, and I was a cadet for almost 6 years too.

What I saw was a lot (and by "a lot" I mean almost a preponderance) of units that placed "looking good" over "doing good."

Units with a ton of emphasis on making sure everybody was in the same uniform, yet their cadet NCOs could not tell me who was in their element/flight, or where everybody was at a particular time (ie. basic NCO leadership).

Units that could not operate a recall roster/call tree, from top to bottom, yet found it more important to judge C/SSgt Smith on his ability to position his nametag on his own uniform as a factor of his upcoming promotion.

Really now: look at your own unit schedule. I bet you have 15 minutes in there EVERY week for uniform inspection, but in a MONTH, how much time do you devote to specific "NCO training?" (and by "NCO training" mean an actual "NCO-specific professional development training event for NCOs, not "Flight Drill".  "Flight Drill" != "NCO Training")

There is a lot of emphasis on this kabuki theater of "picture perfect uniform wear" and "near flawless drill execution" over actual literal hands-on leadership training, application of that training, day-to-day NCO and officer leadership (and by that I mean *appropriate* NCO & Officer leadership), and the accomplishment of the mission at hand. A mission that is not "razor sharp creases and well-starched work uniforms" (remember: BDUs are a work/field uniform, not a parade ground-quality uniform). 

Sure the mission gets done, but how many times have we heard of stories of a guy showing up to an event or activity in a "less than optimal uniform" and being sent packing?  Thats helpful for the activity and the guy.  Super.  Nice leadership there, guys.   (than again, how many times have you been to an event or activity where the activity director looks like 150lbs of chewed bubble gum, but if you looked like that, you'd be sent home.  Really creates a lot of "cognitive dissonance" in your belly, doesn't it?  Sort of sets up a "some people are so important they can ignore the standards."  And I *know* thats not in the leadership texts *anyplace*. Cadet or senior)

I guess my point here is that there is a LOT of situations where people are actually graded on how they look and not how they actually perform.  The sentence quoted above reinforces this: "I missed the part where looking like a pile of dogcrap leads to getting things done." 

I see this evidenced EVERY day here on CAP-Talk, in EVERY discussion that goes from "Subjects Alpha thru Tango" to "Subject Uniform." 

Example? Just a week or so ago:

Subject: "A CAP Pilot performed an excellent emergency landing on a Texas street. Dinged the plane, but walked away."
Eventual subject: "She was clearly doing something wrong with her aviating, because I saw a photo and it did not look like she was wearing the right uniform."

HOLY.DOG.CRAP. Really?  The intimation was that the pilot was clearly a gigantic screwup because she didn't appear to have a flight suit/polo shirt, etc on. 

Who are we kidding here, people?

There is a difference between "doing things correctly" and "overdoing things to the point of incorrect emphasis on the wrong message/lesson."

Years ago, I stopped doing inspections with a stitch gauge and instructed my cadet officers and NCOs to stop using them.

Why? Because my NCOs, cadet officers and adult officers should know enough about the uniform to be able to look at something and know its wrong.

A nameplate that's 1/32nd of an inch too far one way?

Yes, you are correct, that is NOT centered.  But when I stand back and look and the cadet's uniform looks correct, and from 2 1/2-3 ft away his/her nameplate looks right, does 1/32nd of an inch really matter? 

No. That's hair splitting and creating a standard that cannot always be met. By anybody.

(using my example above: Over the years, I saw that male cadets were frequently dinged for nameplate violations using a stitch gauge, but female cadets were not held to the same standards because it was far more difficult to actually stand in front of a female cadet and measure to that kind of standard without invoking a CPP violation or just basic "Bad Touch". So more often than not a female cadet's nameplate was eyeballed for correctness and they didn't get any kind of a nameplate gig except for really egregious misplacement.  Sauce for the goose, Mr. Savvik.  Why aren't we just eyeballing these things for everybody?  If I stand two cadets side by each and one has a nameplate placed with a micrometer and the other has one thats eyeballed, and is also correct, I doubt you can really tell the difference. More often than not, the problem with the cadet's uniform isn't that his nameplate is 1/16th of an inch off, its that his nameplate doesn't sit on the pocket, or, in the case of the female nameplate, its too far to one side or the other or its crooked. If its not crooked and it looks like its centered, then hey, its probably right.  Time to move on.)



You're probably thinking from my stitch gauge revelation: "Oh my god, Ninness, you must have had the absolute most slack unit in CAP"

Yeah, sure did.  Slack as hell.  Real bunch of dogcrap covered dirtbags.  Last unit I commanded, nary a stitch gauge in sight and we were Wing Squadron of Merit three times in 5 years and Region Squadron of Distinction once.  Yep. Thats a *really* slack unit. (and has since gone on to Region Squadron of Distinction again since the first 5 years I was commander)

You see, somehow in 28 years in CAP, I missed the part in the 52-16 and the leadership lab that says "Only a guy who doesn't look like 'dogcrap' can get things done in CAP."

Folks, step back and think about what you're saying for a minute. 

[rustyjeeper]

>Is it just me, or is CAP unreasonably hung up on "form over function," especially within the cadet program?
You see, somehow in 28 years in CAP, I missed the part in the 52-16 and the leadership lab that says "Only a guy who doesn't look like 'dogcrap' can get things done in CAP."<

I missed the part where looking like a pile of dogcrap leads to getting things done.

Lets dispel a couple of myths, shall we?

** "Modern" utility/combat uniforms in the US Armed Forces are "no-iron" uniforms (well, unless you're an E-9 in the AF.. I've seen more E-9s with creases thru their stripes that I could cut myself on .. Old habits apparently die very hard when you're a senior NCO). Pull 'em out of the wash, hang them up. Done.

** If done correctly, when you wear a uniform like that, it does not "look like a pile of dogcrap" just because it does not get near an iron. (don't take almost 6 years of wearing ACUs from me: when I go to AUSA in DC, I see literally -thousands- of dudes in ACUs in one place, none of whom iron or press their ACUs and somehow, magically, none of them "look like dogcrap.")

** If you take a "wash and wear" uniform, wad it up, jam it into the corner of your b-hut or into the bottom of your duffel bag, wait 7-10 days, pull it out, put it on, and then try to go out into the mountains of Afghanistan with a ruck, weapon, radio, armor and helmet, your ability to "get things done" does not magically leak out of you like Superman's powers near kryptonite.

Why?  Because:

• With all that crap on, its hard to tell whether your uniform "looks like dogcrap or not";
• You *will* still "get things done," even if you "look like dogcrap" (there tends to be a lot of "hands-on leadership" that ensures that you will "get things done," and I'm pretty sure that apart from an E-5 or E-6 saying "hey, did you sleep in that uniform?" nobody is going to recognize any loss of efficiency in "getting things done" due to "looking like dogcrap");
• You might actually kneel/sit/lie in actual "dogcrap." Therefore, by extension, you may actually *look* like "dogcrap" when people see you post-kneeling/sitting/lying in "dogcrap."  Does said "dogcrap" obviate your abilities? Does it change your weapon zero?  Knowledge of grid coordinates?  Adjust your ability to call for fire?  No, it might cause your teammates to laugh & point, and perhaps say a foot or two further away than normal, but "looking like dogcrap" should not hinder your ability to "get things done" if you have the training and ability to "get things done."

** Just because someone "looks like dogcrap" does not mean they're not skilled, don't have abilities, and can't "get things done."   (this is the old "don't read a book by its cover" thing)

Seriously here for a minute, I think this is really the crux of the whole thing:

Is it just me, or is CAP unreasonably hung up on "form over function," especially within the cadet program?


I've been a unit commander in two wings, been a wing DCP, traveled around a little beyond that, and visited countless units in 28 years in CAP, and I was a cadet for almost 6 years too.

What I saw was a lot (and by "a lot" I mean almost a preponderance) of units that placed "looking good" over "doing good."

Units with a ton of emphasis on making sure everybody was in the same uniform, yet their cadet NCOs could not tell me who was in their element/flight, or where everybody was at a particular time (ie. basic NCO leadership).

Units that could not operate a recall roster/call tree, from top to bottom, yet found it more important to judge C/SSgt Smith on his ability to position his nametag on his own uniform as a factor of his upcoming promotion.

Really now: look at your own unit schedule. I bet you have 15 minutes in there EVERY week for uniform inspection, but in a MONTH, how much time do you devote to specific "NCO training?" (and by "NCO training" mean an actual "NCO-specific professional development training event for NCOs, not "Flight Drill".  "Flight Drill" != "NCO Training")

There is a lot of emphasis on this kabuki theater of "picture perfect uniform wear" and "near flawless drill execution" over actual literal hands-on leadership training, application of that training, day-to-day NCO and officer leadership (and by that I mean *appropriate* NCO & Officer leadership), and the accomplishment of the mission at hand. A mission that is not "razor sharp creases and well-starched work uniforms" (remember: BDUs are a work/field uniform, not a parade ground-quality uniform). 

Sure the mission gets done, but how many times have we heard of stories of a guy showing up to an event or activity in a "less than optimal uniform" and being sent packing?  Thats helpful for the activity and the guy.  Super.  Nice leadership there, guys.   (than again, how many times have you been to an event or activity where the activity director looks like 150lbs of chewed bubble gum, but if you looked like that, you'd be sent home.  Really creates a lot of "cognitive dissonance" in your belly, doesn't it?  Sort of sets up a "some people are so important they can ignore the standards."  And I *know* thats not in the leadership texts *anyplace*. Cadet or senior)

I guess my point here is that there is a LOT of situations where people are actually graded on how they look and not how they actually perform.  The sentence quoted above reinforces this: "I missed the part where looking like a pile of dogcrap leads to getting things done." 

I see this evidenced EVERY day here on CAP-Talk, in EVERY discussion that goes from "Subjects Alpha thru Tango" to "Subject Uniform." 

Example? Just a week or so ago:

Subject: "A CAP Pilot performed an excellent emergency landing on a Texas street. Dinged the plane, but walked away."
Eventual subject: "She was clearly doing something wrong with her aviating, because I saw a photo and it did not look like she was wearing the right uniform."

HOLY.DOG.CRAP. Really?  The intimation was that the pilot was clearly a gigantic screwup because she didn't appear to have a flight suit/polo shirt, etc on. 

Who are we kidding here, people?

There is a difference between "doing things correctly" and "overdoing things to the point of incorrect emphasis on the wrong message/lesson."

Years ago, I stopped doing inspections with a stitch gauge and instructed my cadet officers and NCOs to stop using them.

Why? Because my NCOs, cadet officers and adult officers should know enough about the uniform to be able to look at something and know its wrong.

A nameplate that's 1/32nd of an inch too far one way?

Yes, you are correct, that is NOT centered.  But when I stand back and look and the cadet's uniform looks correct, and from 2 1/2-3 ft away his/her nameplate looks right, does 1/32nd of an inch really matter? 

No. That's hair splitting and creating a standard that cannot always be met. By anybody.

(using my example above: Over the years, I saw that male cadets were frequently dinged for nameplate violations using a stitch gauge, but female cadets were not held to the same standards because it was far more difficult to actually stand in front of a female cadet and measure to that kind of standard without invoking a CPP violation or just basic "Bad Touch". So more often than not a female cadet's nameplate was eyeballed for correctness and they didn't get any kind of a nameplate gig except for really egregious misplacement.  Sauce for the goose, Mr. Savvik.  Why aren't we just eyeballing these things for everybody?  If I stand two cadets side by each and one has a nameplate placed with a micrometer and the other has one thats eyeballed, and is also correct, I doubt you can really tell the difference. More often than not, the problem with the cadet's uniform isn't that his nameplate is 1/16th of an inch off, its that his nameplate doesn't sit on the pocket, or, in the case of the female nameplate, its too far to one side or the other or its crooked. If its not crooked and it looks like its centered, then hey, its probably right.  Time to move on.)



You're probably thinking from my stitch gauge revelation: "Oh my god, Ninness, you must have had the absolute most slack unit in CAP"

Yeah, sure did.  Slack as hell.  Real bunch of dogcrap covered dirtbags.  Last unit I commanded, nary a stitch gauge in sight and we were Wing Squadron of Merit three times in 5 years and Region Squadron of Distinction once.  Yep. Thats a *really* slack unit. (and has since gone on to Region Squadron of Distinction again since the first 5 years I was commander)

You see, somehow in 28 years in CAP, I missed the part in the 52-16 and the leadership lab that says "Only a guy who doesn't look like 'dogcrap' can get things done in CAP."

Folks, step back and think about what you're saying for a minute. 

Sir,
You have done an OUTSTANDING job of clearly identifying what is wrong with our organization in general as well as here at Captalk specifically. For a long time I lurked here, reading and wondering to myself just who some of these uniform and detail concerned chicken farmers were and why they had no lives--- to me it was much like watching Jerry Springer reruns. I entertained myself for several months listening and watching until I was no longer entertained by reading. Now I poke at the hornets nest on occasion when I think it may do some good and cause someone to just stop and think for a moment.
Your reply shows me that there are in fact some very good people here on Captalk,  and I thank you for the thought and effort which you put into your post, I agree completely with it! :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Now, if only others here will read it and think about what you said .........
I hope someday things change it has always been  "unreasonably hung up on "form over function," especially within the cadet program" that I can recall even way back in the late 70's and early 80's

[Spaceman3750]

I can't always run out and dry clean my BDUs. An Iron is so much easier to carry.

If we don't iron, and can't dry clean, then we won't look professional. Besides, don't your units ever do inspections?

I missed the part where a lack of ironing for a combat / field uniform leads to unprofessionalism.

I missed the part where looking like a pile of dogcrap leads to getting things done.

Are you even involved in SAR? I am, and as a GTL I know it is important for my teams to be presentable as we interface with the public; however, my BBDUs have NEVER been ironed, and my boots are NOT shiney (they've had two coats put on for protective purposes, that's it), yet I still manage to do my job every time. Presentable means a clean uniform (assuming we haven't just navigated through some mysterious swamp that popped up in IL) and in good repair with no unauthorized patches and you are wearing the correct uniform for your weight and grooming. Beyond that, any ironing will likely be covered up by gear or go to hell in the first hour of boots on the ground.