Looking at: http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/M39_1_atchs.pdf, I meet the AF standards for wearing the AF military type uniforms using the and not the CAP standard. HOWEVER, Interstingly though my physician tells me that he'd like to see me loose about 15 lbs :o.
Now folks I cannot imagine what I would look like in a AF style uniform if I were at the maximum weight allowed by the CAP modified standard as is listed in the table above. I don't think it would look very professional :-\
Perhaps CAP (as well as CAP-USAF) needs to reassess what members that are over the AF standard really look like when in a AF style uniform, but yet meet the CAP weight standard? :angel:
RM
How about no. The weight standards are stupid any way. They should be something that takes into account body fat as muscle is heavier per volume than fat.
Radio......Again you are stirring the pot with this issue. We all know you don't like any CAP Member wearing anything that even remotely resembles a military uniform.
Please, for the sake of everyones sanity......stop. We ALL know your position!!!!!
This is a properly formated link by the way for what you posted...... http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/M39_1_atchs.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/M39_1_atchs.pdf)
OR CLICK ME (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/M39_1_atchs.pdf)
You do understand that Air Force members are allowed to be heavier than what that table states right? They have alternate methods of measurement.
Quote from: Spike on March 14, 2010, 04:22:29 PM
Radio......Again you are stirring the pot with this issue. We all know you don't like any CAP Member wearing anything that even remotely resembles a military uniform.
Please, for the sake of everyones sanity......stop. We ALL know your position!!!!!
You do understand that Air Force members are allowed to be heavier than what that table states right? They have alternate methods of measurement.
Overall I do not believe the leadership in CAP is willing to take a tough enough stand on telling members wearing AF type uniforms that they do not meet the standard to wear those uniforms, especially when weight is involved.
The members wearing the AF type uniforms really don't feel they are doing anything wrong if they stretch the CAP standard a bit (a bit is in the eyes of the beholder). In fact they may even offer an apology that they are working on loosing the weight to get back into standards. (BTW I guess I must show it in my facial expression when I encounter them, I do not want to embarrass them, because I do know they are "dedicated" members). The challenge some of them have is they really don't have the funds to go out and buy all the "corporate" type uniforms. In alot of circumstances they were able to get the AF style uniforms for free or at a very low cost at thrift shops when compared with buying the alternative.
BTW if the AF has an alternative method for weight standards compliance, shouldn't CAP be adopting the same alternative measurement standard also?
Of course, I wouldn't dare mention the very marginal to unsatisfactory haircut/hairdo standards, that are also exhibited by senior members in AF style uniforms >:D.
Yes it is unforunate that some of you get offended when ever there's a discussion that the AF style uniform might just go away for senior members. I don't think it will, BUT get too many volunteers ignoring the standards and the USAF just might force the issues -- food for thought by everyone >:D
RM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 14, 2010, 05:18:34 PMBTW if the AF has an alternative method for weight standards compliance, shouldn't CAP be adopting the same alternative measurement standard also?
Sure, why not? Now, how many medical professionals are in your unit? Someone who is a nurse, maybe a dietician/nutritionist, or a doctor? Because body fat analysis is a task squarely within the realm of the medical profession. You may not have an issue with just anyone pawing you, but you're not touching me unless it's for a medical evaluation that you've been trained for.
Don't even start any argument to the effect of "Well, anyone can do the calculations". That's not even the issue. The point is that people don't need to be making such personal and private contact with anyone else, unless they are medically trained personnel with
valid reason to do so.
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 14, 2010, 05:18:34 PMOf course, I wouldn't dare mention the very marginal to unsatisfactory haircut/hairdo standards, that are also exhibited by senior members in AF style uniforms >:D.
An issue which there is truly no excuse for. I can understand someone being a few pounds over because of holiday indulgence, but a haircut is something that can fixed on any weekday. It can take a few weeks to lose five pounds, it doesn't to get hair chopped.
But, as to the original question: are weight standards too liberal? Don't know. Seen a few people that were within them, they looked fine. Body fat measurements would really only be useful in the case of a lot of your body builders that have extremely low body fat.
Most of the people I knew in the Air Force that were overweight and demanded body fat measurements failed them. If you're overweight and look like a chunky chicken, body fat calc is most likely not going to support your interests. It's smarter not to even try to wave that flag.
While the military has their own reasons for weight standards, it is very clear that the AF's only concern is with how CAP members look in uniform. That is always going to be very subjective. If CAP's standards were only 5 pounds over the AF, I'm sure someone would be this board talking about all the fat CAP members out there making the AF look bad.
As I've pointed out several times on this board, the weight standards that CAP members must adhere to in order to wear AF-style uniforms just happen to be almost the same as the break point between "Overweight" and "Obese" in various Body Mass Index systems. While I know this wasn't intentional as BMI and these categories hadn't been invented back when these standards went into effect, they seem to be a somewhat logical way to approach this issue. Or at least as logical as just adding 10% to the AF limits, which is how it was done.
So, as long as we have to have some system to judge worthiness to wear the AF style, our current system is good enough.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 14, 2010, 07:16:09 PM
While the military has their own reasons for weight standards, it is very clear that the AF's only concern is with how CAP members look in uniform. That is always going to be very subjective. If CAP's standards were only 5 pounds over the AF, I'm sure someone would be this board talking about all the fat CAP members out there making the AF look bad.
As I've pointed out several times on this board, the weight standards that CAP members must adhere to in order to wear AF-style uniforms just happen to be almost the same as the break point between "Overweight" and "Obese" in various Body Mass Index systems. While I know this wasn't intentional as BMI and these categories hadn't been invented back when these standards went into effect, they seem to be a somewhat logical way to approach this issue. Or at least as logical as just adding 10% to the AF limits, which is how it was done.
So, as long as we have to have some system to judge worthiness to wear the AF style, our current system is good enough.
Seems to be the simplest way.
If a person is 20 pounds over, but has the "Adonis" proportions, I wouldn't really worry about their weight. But the person with a waist measurement eight inches over their chest one is probably not going to meet standards.
On the military side, there are just some uniforms not generally available in some sizes. I remember being in a military clothing one time when a retiree came in. He asked the rep there if he could get Army officer pants in a size
48 waist, and got miffed when she told him no, he was probably going to have to get something like that custom tailored and it wasn't a common size. I don't think he heard me snicker at the question.
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 14, 2010, 08:26:03 PM
I don't think he heard me snicker at the question.
Good thing because you acted like an insulting jerk. That man you were snickering at gave this country 20 years of his life and EARNED the right to wear that uniform.
Quote from: cap235629 on March 15, 2010, 03:06:02 AMGood thing because you acted like an insulting jerk. That man you were snickering at gave this country 20 years of his life and EARNED the right to wear that uniform.
He may have served his country, but there's nothing amusing about that. My amusement was that he was mad about the fact that he couldn't get size 48 pants. Show me some readily available in that size.
I didn't insult his service in any way, shape or form. Glad he served, but I found it amusing that he thought he could buy a set of pants that size off the rack. The Army had weight standards too, and he was in a severe excess of them.
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 15, 2010, 03:42:06 AM
Quote from: cap235629 on March 15, 2010, 03:06:02 AMGood thing because you acted like an insulting jerk. That man you were snickering at gave this country 20 years of his life and EARNED the right to wear that uniform.
He may have served his country, but there's nothing amusing about that. My amusement was that he was mad about the fact that he couldn't get size 48 pants. Show me some readily available in that size.
I didn't insult his service in any way, shape or form. Glad he served, but I found it amusing that he thought he could buy a set of pants that size off the rack. The Army had weight standards too, and he was in a severe excess of them.
You insulted HIM. You made a snap judgment as to whether he meets weight standards when in fact he is NOT required to meet them and is ENTITLED by his status as a retiree to wear the uniform.
One of our cadets just received a pair of 48 trousers through the FCU program. I would love for anyone in our squadron to hear you snicker at him, you would promptly be shown the door.
Quote from: cap235629 on March 15, 2010, 03:53:19 AMYou insulted HIM. You made a snap judgment as to whether he meets weight standards when in fact he is NOT required to meet them and is ENTITLED by his status as a retiree to wear the uniform.
No, I did not. He may be entitled by his status to wear it, but it doesn't mean that it has to be made available in his size. And considering that he was probably 5'8" (shorter than me) with a size 48 waist, I know full well he wasn't even remotely close to Army weight standard. No "judgement" to be made, it was pretty cut and dried.
Quote from: cap235629 on March 15, 2010, 03:53:19 AMOne of our cadets just received a pair of 48 trousers through the FCU program. I would love for anyone in our squadron to hear you snicker at him, you would promptly be shown the door.
Cadets are a completely different issue. I have never laughed at a cadet overweight, and never will. A soldier, even retired, knows better. A few pounds overweight is one thing, but obese is another.
You can try to paint me with an evil brush all you wish, but I'm not going to stand still for it. Manufacturing a hypothetical situation, and then inserting me into it with your thoughts of what I'd do is simple fantasy on your part.
You don't like the fact that I hold military members to a standard, deal with it. I'm not changing. I'm not the only one who laughed it, and a retired soldier should have known better than to even ask. You want to be mad about something, find another scapegoat, I'm not gonna be it.
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 15, 2010, 04:14:56 AM
No, I did not. He may be entitled by his status to wear it, but it doesn't mean that it has to be made available in his size. And considering that he was probably 5'8" (shorter than me) with a size 48 waist, I know full well he wasn't even remotely close to Army weight standard. No "judgement" to be made, it was pretty cut and dried.
A retired Officer has earned the privilege to wear the uniform of their service at their pleasure. I don't care if the man was 500 pounds, how dare you judge him in any manner based on your "personal standards" for military members. Shame on you. Perhaps one day you will realize that a persons actions and merits outweigh how much they weigh.
I am guessing you are a skinny guy, because a heavy guy would hardly say what you did.
QuoteYou don't like the fact that I hold military members to a standard, deal with it. I'm not changing. I'm not the only one who laughed it, and a retired soldier should have known better than to even ask. You want to be mad about something, find another scapegoat, I'm not gonna be it.
Wow.....are you a currently serving military member? Have you served? Are you an elected official that has oversight of the Military?
You should be ashamed of youself. They absolutely make Army Officer pants (both Green and Blue) up to size 56. It may not be in local stock, but the AAFES clerk could have ordered it for him, so I really think you made the story up.
So you laughed, and others laughed. How dare you laugh at a person who served their country. We do not need people like you in CAP. I am glad you are not in my Squadron, I would ask you to take your "standards" and snide remarks some place else.
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 15, 2010, 04:14:56 AM
A soldier, even retired, knows better. A few pounds overweight is one thing, but obese is another.
Wow, just wow.
I know a SM who did time in the USMC and in the AF. He is overweight, but now is a very active member of CAP.
Do you know WHY he is overweight? While in the USMC, he was in a Humvee crash that left him with a damaged spine. Naturally, with age it became worse and even if he wanted to loose the weight via increased physical activity it's just impossible for him.
Who the hell are you to judge how or why someone is overweight? I'm overweight, and I'm young without any health issues. That's my problem and my fault. I'm working on my weight and I CAN loose it, but to judge anyone who served and potentially/most likely has a weight problem due to a health condition they inherited from their service is just complete crap.
Don't feed the trolls, people.
QuoteOverall I do not believe the leadership in CAP is willing to take a tough enough stand on telling members wearing AF type uniforms that they do not meet the standard to wear those uniforms, especially when weight is involved.
Why should they...even the Air Force turns a blind eye to it. Speaking strictly from the reserve side its more about how you look in the uniform. They ony time you get weighed is PT test and physical exam. The only time anyone says "bad" if you excede the "weight standard" is inital entry.
I have been in my current unit for 2 years now, there are at least 4 people that I can think of off the top of my head that look "huge" in uniform; they have been there since I came into the unit. No LOC, LOR or article 15. 1 is on the mandatory PT program...but because failing PT test, not because he is "fat.
QuoteBecause body fat analysis is a task squarely within the realm of the medical profession.
In the AF it would seem so; when I was on the Army side, anyone could tape you. Its not a complicated procedure...follow the directions; record the numbers, reference the chart=body fat percentage
I too would find it "funny" that anyone would become upset because they expect to find a size 48 in service dress on the rack.... not funny that they are overweight; funny that they think every hole in the wall MC just keeps everysize and item laying around in case the 1 in 100000 people want that one thing....get a grip.
mk
Quote from: sarmed1 on March 15, 2010, 11:40:53 AM
I have been in my current unit for 2 years now, there are at least 4 people that I can think of off the top of my head that look "huge" in uniform; they have been there since I came into the unit. No LOC, LOR or article 15. 1 is on the mandatory PT program...but because failing PT test, not because he is "fat.
QuoteBecause body fat analysis is a task squarely within the realm of the medical profession.
In the AF it would seem so; when I was on the Army side, anyone could tape you. Its not a complicated procedure...follow the directions; record the numbers, reference the chart=body fat percentage
I too would find it "funny" that anyone would become upset because they expect to find a size 48 in service dress on the rack.... not funny that they are overweight; funny that they think every hole in the wall MC just keeps everysize and item laying around in case the 1 in 100000 people want that one thing....get a grip.
mk
Mk
You have not been to clothing sales since you got those TSGT stripes for sew on?
You can EASILY find size 52 AF Blues Coats ON THE RACK these days.
Size 46 trousers, yep they are there.
Size 18 1/2 or 19" Collared shirts, present and correct.
As for ABUs (and Army ACUs for that matter, but they come in XXL) they come in up to size 50 in jackets and 46 in pants.
Times have changed from the days when my XXL BDUs were a "Custom Order". BTW the new ACU in XXL is a tent even on my big body, what does that tell you.
This is ALL obviously for the non-existent plus sized members of the force.
As for weight, I am over, but normally have taped under when BMI (Body Mass Index) was done.
People achieve the shape they need for the job they do, the military ( any branch!) is no exception to that rule.
Now if I we were out every morning for PT and Road Marches you would see a different military (example; how many "FAT" 11B do you see out there).
Platelet
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 14, 2010, 05:18:34 PM
Quote from: Spike on March 14, 2010, 04:22:29 PM
Yes it is unforunate that some of you get offended when ever there's a discussion that the AF style uniform might just go away for senior members.
What's unfortunate is that you dislike so much about CAP and keep coming here to tell us all about it.
Having them there and expecting them to be there are two differant things. I had to have my service coat custom ordered (and tailored) because they didnt have a size in stock to fit my shoulders, and I was well under weight and BMI standard. There is a huge variance in what you will find both by item type and size variation from one MCSS to the next.
mk
You know all this back and forth about RADIO's like or dislike of CAP is immaterial
In the last 10 years CAP has made ALOT of decisions that really are incoherent and really not even close to the RM in decision making
For those who want to defend the organization....fine
For those of us who left CAP and came back....no real change...just more griping about "standards" from an equally lame 39-1 that should have been ditched long ago....granted its all we got.....
I came back to CAP for the missions not the "rank" "grade" and bling one could accrue in CAP....'cuz al that Banana Dictator ribbons we get is the "thank you" we get. We all get it!
But the arguments about BMI, CSU's, etc just invite the "uniform" to go away. The AF can and hopefully cancel CAP's subscription to the uniform. Hopefully there could be enough AF Generals' reading this forum to see how Officers in CAP act wwith each other and put each other down for "opinions." The arguments presented here on this forum definitely screams a TOTALLY civilian uniform for CIVIL Air Patrol.
Time for CAPTalkers to grow up about this. Its time for 1) a NEW and yearly updated 39-1...NO ICL's..solid decisions only 2) Facing the FACT that this is a VOLUNTEER organization which many here Take waaaaaaaaaaay tooooooo seriously. 3) CAP will never be perfect and those folks who can not handle other folks perceived "negative" comments are just that. 4) Folks in CAP believing that everybody in CAP is paying attention to BMI is seriously mistaken and that if CAP is to be taken seriously...then CAP NHQ ought to be funding 52 weeks a year at a gym of one choice so we alllllllll look like fit and fighting machines.... Some of CAP's uniform wearing folks who have never served will wish they all had the opportunity to push away some Ft ( insert here) soil. Some folks have definite health issues and some CAPTalkers here think everyone here ought to slim and trim... How about some of you CAPTAlkers hump a load wherever. Some of the folks in CAP who don't "fit" the bill for uniforms....they are doing both operational and the not so glamorous CAP administrative stuff.
If one does not like some ones "emailed" opinions about good 'ol CAP...too bad. CAPTalkers need a dose of reality, there are waaaaaay tooo many threads regarding uniforms....indicating to me...there needs to be more to life....like me need a life so I would not respond to uniform and bling hunters. Good luck folks, when CAP gets the AF uniform pulled from them and quite possibly have to adopt to a civilian uniform.
Hopefully there will be an AF General that has got the guts to suggest to Congress or vice versa to say..... "It is time for a change, Senior boys and girls of CAP, we are eliminating the wear of AF uniform and requiring CAP to wear AF approved civilian wear." How will that set then with the membership, HUH? The mission counts more than the cloth one wears. Time for a COHERENT CAP and its regulations before anyone can spout off to one another without the real facts about uniform wear. Do Not tell about how good 39-1 is......an organization that can not keep up with uniform updates, especially in the day of Word Documents or whatever, shows how LAME the organization is in taking care of the AF uniform to begin with ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
Quote from: heliodoc on March 15, 2010, 05:00:59 PM
3) CAP will never be perfect
Both you and Radioman could afford to read that a few times.
People advocating the elimination of the AF style uniform don't think anything about the tradition behind it. The CAP has a great history and unfortunately our uniform is one of the few things left of that.
If you want a full civi uniform than maybe being a Scout Master is more your speed.
The argument about feeling discriminated against because you don't wear the right uniform is invalid. A good leader will be a good leader regardless of whether they wear blueDU's or BDU's. Just make sure they look sharp. A white aviator shirt is not an excuse to avoid the iron or look like a cave man. A beard can be a beard and still look professional. Not to say that non AF uniform wearers are soley to blame for unprofessional appearances, I have seen many blues that have looked absolutely terrible.
Our uniforms are our organization's identity. ALL OF THEM. And regardless of the uniform that's worn the rank is the same, respect should be given to all members of CAP. If there really is an issue of insubordination there are methods to deal with that in house rather than complaining on line and destroying one of the few traditions we have left. People are missing the forest for view of the trees.
^ As strong proponent of history in CAP, I agree 100%.
The military does not have a weight problem...we are fighting a war, there is no chance that our American Fighting Force is overweight...
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f252/signalwarrant/ArmyStrongHooooah.jpg)
YUP
There is one great argument right there >:D >:D >:D
So CAPers lookeee at allllll that uniform excitement at the volunteer level about uniforms is gettin' ya
That poor soldier may be the unit PSNCO, or the unit armorer ........ hehehe
So if RM has got a few Fats and no real fuzzies.......WTH is CAP so excited about????
But I myself have only gained 6 lbs since I left turnin wrenches on Hueys and Blackhawks....so I am not too excited or jumpy about Stonewalls photo........everybody has em
It's just funnier when CAP trips up over themselves worried about PT , BMI, and CAP fit to fight appearance standards
Get on yer treadmill CAPers, you too could be in pictures! >:D >:D >:D >:D :clap: :clap: :clap:
Quote from: tsrup on March 15, 2010, 06:25:51 PM
People advocating the elimination of the AF style uniform don't think anything about the tradition behind it. The CAP has a great history and unfortunately our uniform is one of the few things left of that.
Rupster:
Indeed. While I can't wear the AF-style blues because I suffer from CSES*, the fact that some of our members can is awesome and is a tremendous part of our history.
Was the soldier in the picture at boot camp? A reservist? Active duty? I think context is important.
*Can't Stop Eating Syndrome
Quote from: tdepp on March 16, 2010, 03:14:56 PMWas the soldier in the picture at boot camp? A reservist? Active duty? I think context is important.
He was deployed in Iraq and eating at a chow hall. He wouldn't have been allowed to show up to Basic Training like that.
Doesn't matter if he's a Reservist or Active Duty, he's deployed and
should be capable of performing at a combat level...notice the M-16 strapped over his shoulder?
We have a guy about that size in my Air Guard Squadron. We have girl in the same boat. When I was in the Army we had a dude like that too. I've even seen them in the Marine Corps...and of course the Navy. They make big uniforms like that for a reason...people need them.
C'mon Stonewall
You are expecting CAPTalkers to pay attention to detail...I have been retired for 5 yr=ears and detected that right off
CAPTalkers ......Ten HOOOOT Pay attention!!
How about comments about fat and fuzzies now??, huh??
Even large people have a mission in the RM. For all you CAP superstars wanting to be fit for the fight....Get on down to your recruiter ASAP, we need your "experience" and criticisms to size, fat and fuzzy........ NOW ..... ::to replace those in Theater!!! ::) ::) ::) ::) >:D >:D >:D >:D
Quote from: Stonewall on March 16, 2010, 04:10:42 PM
Quote from: tdepp on March 16, 2010, 03:14:56 PMWas the soldier in the picture at boot camp? A reservist? Active duty? I think context is important.
He was deployed in Iraq and eating at a chow hall. He wouldn't have been allowed to show up to Basic Training like that.
Doesn't matter if he's a Reservist or Active Duty, he's deployed and should be capable of performing at a combat level...notice the M-16 strapped over his shoulder?
We have a guy about that size in my Air Guard Squadron. We have girl in the same boat. When I was in the Army we had a dude like that too. I've even seen them in the Marine Corps...and of course the Navy. They make big uniforms like that for a reason...people need them.
BLASPHEMER!!!!! >:D But yes, the Navy of course.
Quote from: heliodoc on March 16, 2010, 04:18:09 PM
C'mon Stonewall
You are expecting CAPTalkers to pay attention to detail...I have been retired for 5 yr=ears and detected that right off
CAPTalkers ......Ten HOOOOT Pay attention!!
How about comments about fat and fuzzies now??, huh??
Even large people have a mission in the RM. For all you CAP superstars wanting to be fit for the fight....Get on down to your recruiter ASAP, we need your "experience" and criticisms to size, fat and fuzzy........ NOW ..... ::to replace those in Theater!!! ::) ::) ::) ::) >:D >:D >:D >:D
Again, I'm not military. Are these weight standards typically enforced in the military? What happens if someone is someone can't lose weight? Are they separated?
As to the large soldier in Iraq: He needs our thanks, not our derision. That's lots of context in my book.
Maybe with a little of Stonewalls' or others help here...
Some COULD be medical profiles, some could be near end of enlistment, maybe future enlist bars until weight is reduced, some maybe on the ever infamous Army fat boy program, any number of variables as dictated by the Commander or whomever.
As for enforcement its happening in some Guard units and probably most Active units. If somebody can not lose weight, they may be medical boarded out, out due to "non adaptability to military life" could be any number of Command and other decisions whether or not to keep the troop.
But CAPTalkers ought to keep quiet about fat boy in the chow hall ....he probably got 40/40 on the M16 M4 range. Hell, he could be one of my ol fat boy mechanic, Sluggo who could lift a 400 pound GE T700 engine off a Blackhawk nearly singlehandedly....
I enjoyed working with the fatboys in the aviation field of the Army......they could laugh at themselves!!!
CAPTalkers..........Take Note!!
That is a pretty famous photo. Yes, I know in the Marines, people were discharged all the time for being over weight. We had a Sgt with 8 yrs on who was discharged for being to fat.
When I was in the Army Reserves, I saw some hideously overweight soldiers and nothing was ever done to them. Of course, one in particular was an E7 with a 101st Airborne combat patch and the blue Special Forces patch on his current unit sleeve with the "Special Forces" and "Ranger" tab. He refused to wear the Reserve unit patch that he was actually a part of. ;D He earned both in Vietnam and his service stripes that practically touched the bottom of his chevrons. So nobody was going to tell him anything! I dont even know what he did. All I ever saw him do was drink coffee and talk about how weak the new army was.
Quote from: Flying Pig on March 16, 2010, 04:56:58 PM
That is a pretty famous photo. Yes, I know in the Marines, people were discharged all the time for being over weight. We had a Sgt with 8 yrs on who was discharged for being to fat.
When I was in the Army Reserves, I saw some hideously overweight soldiers and nothing was ever done to them. Of course, one in particular was an E7 with a 101st Airborne combat patch and the blue Special Forces patch on his current unit sleeve with the "Special Forces" and "Ranger" tab. He refused to wear the Reserve unit patch that he was actually a part of. ;D He earned both in Vietnam and his service stripes that practically touched the bottom of his chevrons. So nobody was going to tell him anything! I dont even know what he did. All I ever saw him do was drink coffee and talk about how weak the new army was.
So, what I'm gathering is that the weight requirements are not universally enforced in the military. And they are not universally enforced in CAP either.
So, the lawyer asked, why are the weight requirements in place if they're not enforced in the military? I'm guessing there is some correlation to weight and ability to slog through the battle field but I'm also guessing that there are some "large" individuals who can also do what needs to be done in physically difficult situations.
But we still have a remaining issue: this appears to be a sticking point to our mommy/daddy, the USAF, re the AF-style uniform. So, whether they actually enforce the requirements on their folks, they do seem to want to enforce them on CAP. On the other hand, I doubt there are too many fat fighter pilots either. ;)
Again, does our current crop of uniforms prevent us from doing what we need to do? I don't think so.
And this whole uniform debate is making my head swim. Some times it boils down to what I did in college--sniff the uniform article and say, "Yup, that's clean," put it on, and go to the activity. :P
Quote from: tsrup on March 15, 2010, 06:25:51 PM
People advocating the elimination of the AF style uniform don't think anything about the tradition behind it. The CAP has a great history and unfortunately our uniform is one of the few things left of that.
If you want a full civi uniform than maybe being a Scout Master is more your speed.
The argument about feeling discriminated against because you don't wear the right uniform is invalid. A good leader will be a good leader regardless of whether they wear blueDU's or BDU's. Just make sure they look sharp. A white aviator shirt is not an excuse to avoid the iron or look like a cave man. A beard can be a beard and still look professional. Not to say that non AF uniform wearers are soley to blame for unprofessional appearances, I have seen many blues that have looked absolutely terrible.
Our uniforms are our organization's identity. ALL OF THEM. And regardless of the uniform that's worn the rank is the same, respect should be given to all members of CAP. If there really is an issue of insubordination there are methods to deal with that in house rather than complaining on line and destroying one of the few traditions we have left. People are missing the forest for view of the trees.
While I agree that history is important.....and the second class citezen issue is not really that important......the issue in my view is as you said, organisational identity. Our uniforms identify us......the more uniforms we have the weaker the identity!
That is my issue.
I would love for the USAF to back off on their concerns about the fat and fuzzies. I would love for CAP to bite the bullet and force out the fat and fuzzies...and we can all go to the USAF unifrom.....but neither one of these will happen. I don't know why the USAF is so stuck on it....and CAP will fail due to the forcing out so many members to get everyone into compliance.
So......we have to look to a middle solution. Develope a single uniform that all senior members will wear that satisfies CAP's need to have a recognisable affiliation with the USAF and at the same time satisfies the USAF need to make sure the public and the USAF in general knows that we are NOT USAF officers.
The CSU has the potential of moving in that direction....but HWSNBN screwed the pooch for us on that issue. The Corporate gray and whites do not satisfy enough people because of the lack of a service coat and lack of quick identity with the USAF.
So...the more I think about it....the more I like the idea of just adding a hat to the corporates and adding the USAF service coat. The only thing that would need to be developed new would be the standardise the gray pants by color and material.
On the field uniform front....we can stick with the BBDUs, or even the BDUs (once the USAF switches to ABUs)...or even go a third route....go with Gray BDUs.
GBDU's have two advantage in my eyes. One it associated the color gray as being the AUXILLARY color. Gray will look better with the ACU/ABU field gear (as the OD and woodland becomes scares 10 years down the road). It is readily available. It is a good balance between a "combat uniform" and the mess we have with the BBDU and the full color patches.
We can use the USAF's sew on subdued rank, use blue on gray for the name tapes and use subdued gray tones for any patches (which we should loose to follow suit with the USAF).
So it is distinctly not a USAF uniform (except in full darkness)...but still give enough of that tactical look some of use want and look enough like the ABUs that people can draw the relationship between CAP and the USAF.
On the Flight suits it is even simpler......if we remove the rank from the shoulders the USAF (as I have been told) would have no problem with us wearing the green flight suit.
We keep the rank on the name tag.
This will allow us to use the surplus market for flight suits....If we go with a distinctive color we would have to pay full price for the Nomex!
Again......history is important. Everyone wants to be included in the unit and the uniform. Everyone wants to maintain the identity between CAP and the USAF intact.
We need to stop fighting each other over why this situation came about.....and look to solutions.
WOW Pat!!
CAP force out the fat and fuzzies???
HTH do you plan on doing that? Approaching the General at PAPA 1AF a get a request?
Forcing out the fat and fuzzies in CAP ??.........a KNOWN VOLUNTEER organization????
Really, Pat you gotta lighten up on that thar CAP uniform issue.....the future outcome.....could be one NONE of us would like!!!
I guess it boils down to this: the USAF is ok with us looking a little bit like them but just not too much like them. ;) Where that line is at is the issue.
Reminds me of the line from from the movie Stripes: Russell Ziskey (Harold Ramis):"I don't know what kind of soldier I'm gonna make, but I want you guys to know that if we ever get into really heavy combat... I'll be right behind you guys. Every step of the way."
Way behind us. ;D
And re the weight issue in the Military and CAP, there's this classic from Stripes: Dewey Oxburger (John Candy): "Well, my name's Dewey Oxburger. My friends call me Ox. I don't know if you've noticed, but I got a slight weight problem."
Quote from: tdepp on March 16, 2010, 05:23:33 PM
So, what I'm gathering is that the weight requirements are not universally enforced in the military. And they are not universally enforced in CAP either.
So, the lawyer asked, why are the weight requirements in place if they're not enforced in the military? I'm guessing there is some correlation to weight and ability to slog through the battle field but I'm also guessing that there are some "large" individuals who can also do what needs to be done in physically difficult situations.
But we still have a remaining issue: this appears to be a sticking point to our mommy/daddy, the USAF, re the AF-style uniform. So, whether they actually enforce the requirements on their folks, they do seem to want to enforce them on CAP. On the other hand, I doubt there are too many fat fighter pilots either. ;)
Again, does our current crop of uniforms prevent us from doing what we need to do? I don't think so.
And this whole uniform debate is making my head swim. Some times it boils down to what I did in college--sniff the uniform article and say, "Yup, that's clean," put it on, and go to the activity. :P
In the USAF....until very recently....the weight management program and the PT program....were commander run programs. That means the local commander had a lot of say in how well he was going to hold people to fire. The commander had the option to not take any adverse action against an individual based on mission requirements and other subjective issue.
So.....you would see a lot of fat people in the USAF simply because the USAF and the Squadron could not afford to loose the guy. The individual would be on the program.....doing his mandatory PT sessions with a PTL and loggin all his PT times as the program called for....he/she was getting his referral EPRs/OERs as the program calls for....he/she would be held back from promotion/PME/PCS as the program calls for.....but he would not be kicked out because the unit could not afford the hole that would create in the organisation. (Individuals kicked out are NOT replaced immediately....you would have to wait until that individual would normally be replaced for a new guy to come....and state side that could be 4-5 years!).
Not to mention the cost of training the replacement. Say a pilot who is overweight (and Yes there are a lot of those too!). That's cool $1M+ you are pouring down the drain.
Now...the program is supposed to be changing. It is now a base level function and many of these people slipping through the cracks will be looked at a lot more closely....but the bottom line will still be about mission affect.
And in one of my pet peeves about the USAF's attitude about CAP's fat and fuzzies......they don't force AD Airman who are out of standards into some sort of "fat suit".....why do they do that to CAP?
Quote from: lordmonar on March 16, 2010, 05:47:20 PM
While I agree that history is important.....and the second class citezen issue is not really that important......the issue in my view is as you said, organisational identity. Our uniforms identify us......the more uniforms we have the weaker the identity!
Why would you think that? the US Navy has more different uniform combinations than we could ever have, but no one fails to identify Naval personnel (okay maybe there are a few confused looks toward Aviation Working Greens).
We just need to have standard insignia
Use the CSU, but use grey epaulettes. Try and keep as many insignia items the same across the board. In the end it makes things more affordable to the member and increases the uniformity even across the the spectrum of uniforms we have.
Quote from: heliodoc on March 16, 2010, 05:53:36 PM
WOW Pat!!
CAP force out the fat and fuzzies???
HTH do you plan on doing that? Approaching the General at PAPA 1AF a get a request?
Forcing out the fat and fuzzies in CAP ??.........a KNOWN VOLUNTEER organization????
Really, Pat you gotta lighten up on that thar CAP uniform issue.....the future outcome.....could be one NONE of us would like!!!
I don't like it....I don't really want it to happen....I am only pointing out that those two options are the only way we can all get into USAF uniforms. Either the USAF backs down or CAP steps up.
Now....having said all that.....if the status quo remained.....the world would not come to end and no one will get bent out of shape.
But as with any good leader....when I point out a problem (CAP has too many uniforms) I offer a solution. I'm not married to my solution. I'm not going to quit over uniforms one way or the other. It is just a solution that IMHO fixes what I perceive as the major issues we have with uniforms.
Quote from: tdepp on March 16, 2010, 05:23:33 PM
So, what I'm gathering is that the weight requirements are not universally enforced in the military. And they are not universally enforced in CAP either.
The regs in the military are purely black and white. If you are overweight, they will give a chance to get fit, lose the weight and try again in, let's say 30 days, up to 6 months. There are regs in place that I can't quote at this time. Kicking someone out does not look good for a commnader.
"Colonel Tentpeg, I see you kicked out SrA Snowball for not making weight and failure to pass his PT test." Sort of shows the command's inability to maintain their troops.
As someone said above, it could be a medical issue and the guy is awaiting a medical review board. His doctor may have said
"stay away from PT for 5 months until you heal". Well, without PT and an excuse to get out of all things physical, you're going to pack on the weight.
I knew a guy in the Army that couldn't pass his PT test nor could he make weight. My guess is that he was at least 30 lbs over his maximum allowable weight. Thing is, they could have kicked him to the curb, but he was one of the few folks qualified to drive a bus. He stuck around for 2 years driving a bus until his enlistment expired. They did not allow him to reenlist.
Quote from: tdepp on March 16, 2010, 05:23:33 PMAs to the large soldier in Iraq: He needs our thanks, not our derision.
No. What someone should be doing, preferably the dude's squad leader, is monitoring his food consumption and PTing his butt 3 hours a day.
^
Patrick:
Thanks for the insights. As a volunteer organization, we don't want to lose us plus-sized folks because we need all the skills and people power we can get. And we're not the military and not paid. And we want people who can do the mission and be trusted. For that, I don't think size matters. But as to uniform wear, well, I can see the USAF's point. I think the AF-style uniform should be available to those who can meet the requirements. And I think a comparable CSU dress uniform should also be available for us of the round mound of sound frame.
I know these uniform discussions on CAPTalk go back for years and years. Obviously, the organization struggles with it. And will continue to struggle with it. Some of the CAPTalkers have proposed thoughtful solutions. I would like to see Gen. Courter take into account the memberships' thoughts.
Quote from: tsrup on March 16, 2010, 06:03:28 PMWhy would you think that? the US Navy has more different uniform combinations than we could ever have, but no one fails to identify Naval personnel (okay maybe there are a few confused looks toward Aviation Working Greens).
We just need to have standard insignia
Use the CSU, but use grey epaulettes. Try and keep as many insignia items the same across the board. In the end it makes things more affordable to the member and increases the uniformity even across the the spectrum of uniforms we have.
The Navy does not have one uniform for all the fat sailors and one uniform for the skinny ones. It has a summer set, a winter set, a Tuesday After the First New Moon of the Season set :D and when it is summer, winter, or the FNMOTS everyone wears the appropriate uniform.
Using the CSU with the gray epaulettes would seem like a viable option....but the USAF has already NIXED it.....so I did not want to chase that dog again.
But that would be an acceptional option if the USAF would buy off on it.
I have retired from the Army Guard, but I had multiple soldiers separated for not making weight (after all the mandatory training and counseling.)
And although one hestitates to think of such things, as a former company commander I noticed if a soldier is reluctant to deploy, the Army makes it rather difficult to "eat your way out of deployment", at least in part by vigorously using the counterincentives of additional physical training and counseling for overweight soldiers.
I would assume the same issues apply in theater, which might provide a possible background for the famous picture.
Ned Lee
Retired Army Guy
[deleted cuz someone else already answered the Q on the previous page]
Carry on.
Quote from: sarmed1 on March 15, 2010, 11:40:53 AMI too would find it "funny" that anyone would become upset because they expect to find a size 48 in service dress on the rack.... not funny that they are overweight; funny that they think every hole in the wall MC just keeps everysize and item laying around in case the 1 in 100000 people want that one thing....get a grip
That's the way I saw it. The store was an older one that was closing up because it was on one of those installations that had been BRAC'd. They were trying to sell everything they could so there'd be less to move. He'd been sent over from the the newer store to see if the old one
might have had his size in stock, but he apparently thought "might" equaled "will". He was pretty rude to the clerk about many of the things he wanted and couldn't find, including a patch for a unit that had stood down while he was still on active duty. That one still escapes me.
I remember our TI in Basic telling us that it was in our best interests to be very polite to
any civilian that worked on
any base. They have the know how to find your commander and enlighten them as to your behaviour. Maybe it's just that society's standards of conduct seem to be slipping that it's just not considered unacceptable to be rude to people from the get-go. Or maybe we're all being spoiled by an almost immediate satisfaction on things that we don't practice patience anymore.
Don't know, either way, the behaviour seemed wrong, and out of place from someone that had been retired for numerous years.
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on March 14, 2010, 04:09:21 PM
Looking at: http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/M39_1_atchs.pdf, I meet the AF standards for wearing the AF yada yada...
Don't feed the troll.
Although I agree we should endeavour to meet the weight standards I think it is more important to wear the uniform correctly. I have seen people in the military who are well within the weight limits and look terrible. Then there are those who are a little over the weight limit that look squared away.
Which is more important?
Quote from: andysum15 on March 18, 2010, 04:16:56 PM
Although I agree we should endeavour to meet the weight standards I think it is more important to wear the uniform correctly. I have seen people in the military who are well within the weight limits and look terrible. Then there are those who are a little over the weight limit that look squared away.
Which is more important?
Well....now you have asked an important question....the answer is neither!
What is important is the mission!
Uniforms are supposed to make it easier for us to do the mission.
Quote from: lordmonar on March 18, 2010, 06:11:59 PM
Quote from: andysum15 on March 18, 2010, 04:16:56 PM
Although I agree we should endeavour to meet the weight standards I think it is more important to wear the uniform correctly. I have seen people in the military who are well within the weight limits and look terrible. Then there are those who are a little over the weight limit that look squared away.
Which is more important?
Well....now you have asked an important question....the answer is neither!
What is important is the mission!
Uniforms are supposed to make it easier for us to do the mission.
Overweight CAP member wearing woodland BDUs rather than BBDUs coming upon a airplane crash: "Sir, finally, we found you! Are you ok?!"
Crashed pilot of small plane who has read CAPR 39-1: "No, I think my back is broken and I'm bleeding like a stuck pig. I probably have an hour to live. And you can't assist me."
CAP member: "Sir, why not? I'm a highly trained ground team leader with experience in first aid and communications! I can help save your life! I want to save your life because I am a selfless, dedicated volunteer!"
Crashed pilot: "Sorry, you can't touch me. You're out of regulation with your weight and you can't wear the camo BDUs. What if something happens to me while you're out of uniform? Plus, think of the indignity of being saved by someone who doesn't know which uniform to wear. I'll have to wait for someone wearing an appropriate uniform to save me. Just pray that skinny person in woodland camo BDUs gets here quickly,"
Todd
I see you are illustrating the knapsitions CAP is in very well by your astute storyline
You a PAO somewhere??
^^^
Err sorry Todd
Say your sig line...you are you are!!
Quote from: heliodoc on March 18, 2010, 07:56:42 PM
^^^
Err sorry Todd
Say your sig line...you are you are!!
Helio:
Yes I am, though only an assistant. But not only did I play a journalist on TV, I also was one BITD before I lowered my karma even further and started practicing law. ;D
Quote
Helio:
Yes I am, though only an assistant. But not only did I play a journalist on TV, I also was one BITD before I lowered my karma even further and started practicing law. ;D
Well, at least you're not selling used cars.
Or "serving" in Congress.
Lawyers still get
some respect, especially those who used to be journalists! ;D
Jack