The New CAPM 39-1 Now Available

Started by MisterCD, June 26, 2014, 05:25:56 PM

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Eclipse

Quote from: lordmonar on June 28, 2014, 10:23:24 PM
Quote from: SARDOC on June 28, 2014, 09:29:18 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on June 28, 2014, 09:00:20 PM
Quote from: CyBorg on June 28, 2014, 02:58:09 PM
Quote from: NC Hokie on June 28, 2014, 01:27:38 AM
It's a lasting reminder of HWSRN.  Burn it with fire!

It seems to me that people are still giving him way too much power, almost 10 years after the fact.

I'm still wondering about if a commander who likes the polo shirt combination and makes it the de jure uniform of the unit can try to force people to buy it with THEIR money, even if they hate it.

My guess is NO.
Actually....yes.   The unit commander is free to set uniform policy for his unit.   "we wear the polo and greys here" is perfectly allowable.   Member X refuses to buy polos and greys.....then the commander is free to take administrative actions for not following policy and directives.....which could result in a 2b.

So.....the power is there.

BTW....this only counts for Adult Members....Cadets can't be forced to buy uniforms....even though we do make them.

I'd find it difficult to enforce a rule that isn't supported by Regulations.  The Regulation specifies the Minimum Basic Uniform, anything outside that is optional.
So.....cadets can go to encampment with just Blues?   
The power is there.....commanders can set the policy.   And we would have to follow said policy or be subject to 2b action....insubordination.

Now.....it would never go so far.  No one in their right mind would push it.

But the question is does the commander have the authority to tell members to buy XYZ uniform?   Yes they do.

Not for cadets, only for seniors.

A commander may only require the MBU, anything else has to be issued to mandate it if the member doesn't want
to spend the money.

(Assuming that hasn't changed in 39-1).

Agree a CC can set a UOD and compel the senior members to comply.

"That Others May Zoom"

lordmonar

Quote from: Eclipse on June 28, 2014, 10:28:12 PM

Not for cadets, only for seniors.

A commander may only require the MBU, anything else has to be issued to mandate it if the member doesn't want
to spend the money.

(Assuming that hasn't changed in 39-1).

Agree a CC can set a UOD and compel the senior members to comply.
So.....cadets can go to encampment with just blues?   >:D 8) >:D
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

SARDOC

Quote from: PHall on June 28, 2014, 10:19:27 PM
Quote from: SARDOC on June 28, 2014, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: CAPM39-18.1.2.3. The FDU and CFDU will have sleeves rolled down to the wrist when performing
aircrew duties in-flight. Sleeves may be rolled under if not performing in-flight duties; if rolled under the
sleeve will not end above the natural bend of the wrist when the wearer's arms are hanging naturally at
their side.

Does anyone know the rationale behind the In-Flight wear vs. Non-Flight wear, considering the CFDU isn't even required to be Nomex?

Flash fire protection in case of a crash.   Based on the assumption that any kind of covering is better then bare skin.

Than they should consider requiring Nomex, right?   Maybe a FlashHood? Respiratory Protection of some type...But than people will start with the Cost vs. necessity of Nomex or other requirements.

This just looks like it's an appearance of Safety...without actually being safer.

Checotah

Quote from: SARDOC on June 28, 2014, 10:35:02 PM
Quote from: PHall on June 28, 2014, 10:19:27 PM
Quote from: SARDOC on June 28, 2014, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: CAPM39-18.1.2.3. The FDU and CFDU will have sleeves rolled down to the wrist when performing
aircrew duties in-flight. Sleeves may be rolled under if not performing in-flight duties; if rolled under the
sleeve will not end above the natural bend of the wrist when the wearer's arms are hanging naturally at
their side.

Does anyone know the rationale behind the In-Flight wear vs. Non-Flight wear, considering the CFDU isn't even required to be Nomex?

Flash fire protection in case of a crash.   Based on the assumption that any kind of covering is better then bare skin.

Than they should consider requiring Nomex, right?   Maybe a FlashHood? Respiratory Protection of some type...But than people will start with the Cost vs. necessity of Nomex or other requirements.

This just looks like it's an appearance of Safety...without actually being safer.

I have to agree.  If it were truly a safety concern, Nomex flight suits would be required for all flights in CAP A/C.  As it is, the polo shirt combo may be worn, which certainly doesn't provide any protection for the arms. 

The "must be rolled down when performing flight duties" just doesn't make sense to me.  If the MP, MO, & MS all roll up their sleeves, who's going to enforce it?  This seems to me to be one of those "sounds good" (to someone, I guess), but fails in the practical day-to-day operation.
Fred Arnett
Lt. Col., CAP

lordmonar

If we were truly safety concerned....we would require flight helmets before we required NOMEX.

In a GA crash...most injuries and deaths are caused by BFT to the head then to fire.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Garp

Quote from: neummy on June 28, 2014, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: Panache on June 27, 2014, 04:07:06 AM
As CAP apparently couldn't care less about how those second-class members who have to wear the G/Ws ...

How does wearing the G/Ws make one a "second-class" member? I prefer not to wear the military-style uniforms. Am I supposed to be feeling bad about that?

agree...if members want to feel pathetic and excluded, I guess they will find a way.   I would tend to feel a lot more excluded in this organization over aircrew status than Air Force uniforms.

SarDragon

Quote from: antdetroitwallyball on June 28, 2014, 11:06:10 AMA bunch of yelling.

First of all, it isn't necessary to yell (big colored text). That immediately turns the readers off, and places you in a defensive position. Next, the tone of your posts is aggressive and, frankly, unfriendly, further alienating the readers. As a result, the responses you get are not going to very friendly, either. If you expect serious discourse, that's the tone you need to present.

As for your general questions, here's some commentary.

Change is inevitable, and sometimes the reasons do not seem necessary or sensible. Such is life. Questioning the changes is also inevitable. Something to keep in mind is that things that have "always been that way" for you, aren't necessarily that way for the rest of us. In looking back, I don't think there's a single uniform item still in use, other than accessories or insignia, that I wore as a cadet in 1964. The only SM uniform combination remaining without significant change is the blazer uniform.

Most changes have been because the AF changed their basic uniforms, and others have come due to changes in CAP internal programs. I have endured many of them over the years, and some came and went during periods of non-participation.

Getting all snarky because you don't like a particular change does nothing for you, or the organization. The same goes for your response to folks who disagree with you. Opinions are pretty well set for most people, and yelling at them isn't going to get anyone to change theirs.

Bottom line - Lighten up, Francis!
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

SARDOC

Quote from: Garp on June 28, 2014, 11:17:09 PM
Quote from: neummy on June 28, 2014, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: Panache on June 27, 2014, 04:07:06 AM
As CAP apparently couldn't care less about how those second-class members who have to wear the G/Ws ...

How does wearing the G/Ws make one a "second-class" member? I prefer not to wear the military-style uniforms. Am I supposed to be feeling bad about that?

agree...if members want to feel pathetic and excluded, I guess they will find a way.   I would tend to feel a lot more excluded in this organization over aircrew status than Air Force uniforms.

Aircrew is a choice.

Eclipse

Quote from: lordmonar on June 28, 2014, 10:30:19 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 28, 2014, 10:28:12 PM

Not for cadets, only for seniors.

A commander may only require the MBU, anything else has to be issued to mandate it if the member doesn't want
to spend the money.

(Assuming that hasn't changed in 39-1).

Agree a CC can set a UOD and compel the senior members to comply.
So.....cadets can go to encampment with just blues?   >:D 8) >:D

BY reg, yes.

That doublethink has existed since forever.

"That Others May Zoom"

PHall

Quote from: Eclipse on June 29, 2014, 12:09:47 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on June 28, 2014, 10:30:19 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 28, 2014, 10:28:12 PM

Not for cadets, only for seniors.

A commander may only require the MBU, anything else has to be issued to mandate it if the member doesn't want
to spend the money.

(Assuming that hasn't changed in 39-1).

Agree a CC can set a UOD and compel the senior members to comply.
So.....cadets can go to encampment with just blues?   >:D 8) >:D

BY reg, yes.

That doublethink has existed since forever.

Sure, if you think you can go a whole week with just 1 blue uniform and PT gear >:D.
After all, a cadet is just required to have one set blues, right?

Garp

Quote from: SARDOC on June 28, 2014, 11:31:55 PM
Quote from: Garp on June 28, 2014, 11:17:09 PM
Quote from: neummy on June 28, 2014, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: Panache on June 27, 2014, 04:07:06 AM
As CAP apparently couldn't care less about how those second-class members who have to wear the G/Ws ...

How does wearing the G/Ws make one a "second-class" member? I prefer not to wear the military-style uniforms. Am I supposed to be feeling bad about that?

agree...if members want to feel pathetic and excluded, I guess they will find a way.   I would tend to feel a lot more excluded in this organization over aircrew status than Air Force uniforms.

Aircrew is a choice.

Can't get to be a pilot without a medical...

Eclipse

Quote from: neummy on June 28, 2014, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: Panache on June 27, 2014, 04:07:06 AM
As CAP apparently couldn't care less about how those second-class members who have to wear the G/Ws ...

How does wearing the G/Ws make one a "second-class" member? I prefer not to wear the military-style uniforms. Am I supposed to be feeling bad about that?

You "prefer" , there's a difference between "choosing" and "not having a choice".

"That Others May Zoom"

SARDOC

Quote from: Garp on June 29, 2014, 01:00:53 AM
Quote from: SARDOC on June 28, 2014, 11:31:55 PM
Quote from: Garp on June 28, 2014, 11:17:09 PM
Quote from: neummy on June 28, 2014, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: Panache on June 27, 2014, 04:07:06 AM
As CAP apparently couldn't care less about how those second-class members who have to wear the G/Ws ...

How does wearing the G/Ws make one a "second-class" member? I prefer not to wear the military-style uniforms. Am I supposed to be feeling bad about that?

agree...if members want to feel pathetic and excluded, I guess they will find a way.   I would tend to feel a lot more excluded in this organization over aircrew status than Air Force uniforms.

Aircrew is a choice.

Can't get to be a pilot without a medical...


Correct...but you can still be an Observer, Aerial Photographer, Mission Scanner which are other Aircrew positions.

foo

Quote from: Eclipse on June 29, 2014, 01:03:52 AM
Quote from: neummy on June 28, 2014, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: Panache on June 27, 2014, 04:07:06 AM
As CAP apparently couldn't care less about how those second-class members who have to wear the G/Ws ...

How does wearing the G/Ws make one a "second-class" member? I prefer not to wear the military-style uniforms. Am I supposed to be feeling bad about that?

You "prefer" , there's a difference between "choosing" and "not having a choice".

That's obvious, but it doesn't answer the question.

JoeTomasone

Quote from: Eclipse on June 29, 2014, 12:09:47 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on June 28, 2014, 10:30:19 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 28, 2014, 10:28:12 PM

Not for cadets, only for seniors.

A commander may only require the MBU, anything else has to be issued to mandate it if the member doesn't want
to spend the money.

(Assuming that hasn't changed in 39-1).

Agree a CC can set a UOD and compel the senior members to comply.
So.....cadets can go to encampment with just blues?   >:D 8) >:D

BY reg, yes.

That doublethink has existed since forever.


Nope.  An activity commander can set the UOD to something besides the MBU as long as participation is optional, and going to Encampment is optional.   You can't force a cadet to buy BDUs to attend a Squadron meeting, however.   

Eclipse

Quote from: neummy on June 29, 2014, 01:30:41 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 29, 2014, 01:03:52 AM
Quote from: neummy on June 28, 2014, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: Panache on June 27, 2014, 04:07:06 AM
As CAP apparently couldn't care less about how those second-class members who have to wear the G/Ws ...

How does wearing the G/Ws make one a "second-class" member? I prefer not to wear the military-style uniforms. Am I supposed to be feeling bad about that?

You "prefer" , there's a difference between "choosing" and "not having a choice".

That's obvious, but it doesn't answer the question.

Yes, it does.

Those with the option to wear whatever combo they like, have the option.  If they choose to do some mental
gymnastics about why they don't want to wear the USAF-Style uniforms, whatever, that's their choice.

Those without the choice are left unable to display their plumage in the same way that those
who can wear the USAF styles do.  In fact, they pretty much can't wear them at all to formal
functions since the blazer doesn't allow it.

So Maj Fat and Fuzzy, who is the backbone of the wing, devotes 40 hours a week to CAP,
as well as being encampment staff and devoting his 2-weeks vacation every year to an NCSA
can't wear a "real" uniform to the banquets or PiRs, while Lt Twice A Year can do so whenever he please.

Or the good major is the commander of an even on a military base, and is forced to
wear the Realtor jacket while his subordinates all wear their brightest service dress.

And before you say "it shouldn't matter", maybe not, but it does, especially to newer guys with no choice,
especially since the rules are both arbitrary, and largely (pun intended) ignored by the very leadership
charged with enforcing them.

"That Others May Zoom"

Eclipse

Quote from: JoeTomasone on June 29, 2014, 01:39:09 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 29, 2014, 12:09:47 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on June 28, 2014, 10:30:19 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on June 28, 2014, 10:28:12 PM

Not for cadets, only for seniors.

A commander may only require the MBU, anything else has to be issued to mandate it if the member doesn't want
to spend the money.

(Assuming that hasn't changed in 39-1).

Agree a CC can set a UOD and compel the senior members to comply.
So.....cadets can go to encampment with just blues?   >:D 8) >:D

BY reg, yes.

That doublethink has existed since forever.


Nope.  An activity commander can set the UOD to something besides the MBU as long as participation is optional, and going to Encampment is optional.   You can't force a cadet to buy BDUs to attend a Squadron meeting, however.

Is it?  You could stretch the point to a cadet C/CMSgt who is being told "promote or be terminated" after a year with no
progression.  At that point encampment is decidedly >not< optional.

It's an unwinnable argument in either way since the regs are clear but the practice runs counter to them and no one cares to fix it.

The reg make no allowance for the concept of "optional" vs. "non-optional" activities, we've made that logical assertion in these discussions,
but tha doesn't mean it would stand a complaint filed by a mom who actually reads the reg and can't afford BDUs. It simply and clearly says the only uniform
a cadet can be compelled to wear is the MBU, unless the other uniform(s) or items are issued by CAP.

Frankly I'm glad it never came up while I was an encampment commander, but it was discussed every year.

"That Others May Zoom"

lordmonar

And that's my point.

We "make" cadets get BDUs for encampment and other things.....and it specifically says we can't....but we do.

We certainly can make SMs get other uniforms besides the MBU.

Not saying it is a smart thing to do so.....but the power and authority already exists.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

PHall

Quote from: lordmonar on June 29, 2014, 02:56:52 AM
And that's my point.

We "make" cadets get BDUs for encampment and other things.....and it specifically says we can't....but we do.

We certainly can make SMs get other uniforms besides the MBU.

Not saying it is a smart thing to do so.....but the power and authority already exists.


So Pat, do you own any other CAP uniforms in addition to the MBU?

And if you do, why?  Using your logic you don't need them since nobody can force you to buy or wear them.

Eclipse

^ You're not reading what is being typed.

We've both agreed that seniors can be compelled to wear whatever the Commander deems as UOD.

It's only cadets that have regulatory protection from that, a protection largely ignored.

"That Others May Zoom"