http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/2012_03_12_Uniform_Manual_EDA9CCE9FE03A.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/2012_03_12_Uniform_Manual_EDA9CCE9FE03A.pdf)
Looks like a summary of previous ICLs. Hawk tabs and NBB now full time authorized.
Read it about 30 minutes ago, and decided it was a bit of really good information.... mostly informing us that nothing has been changed or clarified.
I'm so tired of stuff coming out and it is nothing new but they think it must be put out and it just serves to confuse people when talking about what ICL says what.
Glad they are ensuring everyone is informed, but they aren't making sure everyone is informed.
So now the tabs for rangers are authorized? Maybe now they will stop with all the other Hawk Mountain stuff on the uniform... At any rate, it looks like there has been a good attempt to group the changes together in a single ICL.
Interesting that it says only the tabs earned at HMRS may be worn - meaning that if you got your "ranger grade" locally you can't wear it.
Blue Berets are now fully authorized as well.
Quote from: superLt1995 on March 12, 2012, 03:20:30 PM
At any rate, it looks like there has been a good attempt to group the changes together in a single ICL.
Quite true; however, publication of a comprehenisive revision to CAPM 39-1 is still preferrable.
Quote from: FlyTiger77 on March 12, 2012, 03:26:11 PM
Quote from: superLt1995 on March 12, 2012, 03:20:30 PM
At any rate, it looks like there has been a good attempt to group the changes together in a single ICL.
Quite true; however, publication of a comprehenisive revision to CAPM 39-1 is still preferrable.
I totally agree.
Has anyone tried it? I am thinking about it.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 12, 2012, 03:32:21 PM
Quote from: FlyTiger77 on March 12, 2012, 03:26:11 PM
Quote from: superLt1995 on March 12, 2012, 03:20:30 PM
At any rate, it looks like there has been a good attempt to group the changes together in a single ICL.
Quite true; however, publication of a comprehenisive revision to CAPM 39-1 is still preferrable.
I totally agree.
Has anyone tried it? I am thinking about it.
Methinks that is squarely under NHQ's purview.
Quote from: FlyTiger77 on March 12, 2012, 03:36:00 PM
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 12, 2012, 03:32:21 PM
Quote from: FlyTiger77 on March 12, 2012, 03:26:11 PM
Quote from: superLt1995 on March 12, 2012, 03:20:30 PM
At any rate, it looks like there has been a good attempt to group the changes together in a single ICL.
Quite true; however, publication of a comprehenisive revision to CAPM 39-1 is still preferrable.
I totally agree.
Has anyone tried it? I am thinking about it.
Methinks that is squarely under NHQ's purview.
Right, but someone could make one and submit it for review and possible adoption.
That would be very nice if they did that (a revision of CAPM 39-1). I have been thinking about it seriously, just taking an entire summer and hunting down all the ICLs and grouping it together with CAPM 39-1, and adding CORRECT pictures in there maybe. Of course just an idea...
I would love to see an ICL and a manual that doesn't look like a photoshop collage. It looks awful when you can tell that they just added a bunch of uniform items on a uniform with photoshop. Not to mention if they are going to use members for the images, they could at least be standing at attention or parade rest.
Also, yes it may take a few extra pages to add in some wording that makes sense, but well worth it. I want clarification...
"Badges: up to two skill badges may be worn on the service jacket along with two specialty badges totaling four badges being worn on a uniform at a time."
Dang... that was hard!
Good grief, they do something to help the membership and all we do is whine about it. So it's not perfect or exactly what you wanted - as someone said in another thread, it works for 90% of the membership.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 12, 2012, 03:25:11 PM
Interesting that it says only the tabs earned at HMRS may be worn - meaning that if you got your "ranger grade" locally you can't wear it.
Blue Berets are now fully authorized as well.
I foresee a 30% drop off in CAPTalk uniform threads followed by a resurgence of new ABU topics.
I'm starting it... titled: "NEW ICL... LACK OF NEW INFORMATION SHOWS LIKELIHOOD OF NEW ABU UNIFORM TO COME TO CAP!!!"
Since ICL's by definition stale-date, regardless of whether they are incorporated into formal regulations or not, isn't it appropriate as an interim measure to create a new ICL? Obviousy, the preferred solution is to update the regulation, but National has more important things to do, like complaining about people circumventing the COC by approaching their congresscritter, creating diversity officers, flying the rainbow flag, and ensuring a safe environment free from the dangers of carrying out any actual missions?
Major Lord
The diagrams for sewing on collar insignia are incorrect, and the photo of the hat says 1/2" above the visor, but is clearly higher.
(http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/4045/391icl.jpg)
The allowance for wearing "other" in lieu of the Wing patch will prompt conversations, to be sure. I'd frankly just prefer that
they made them mandatory. Barring that, I'll probably throw the AFRCC patch there after we have the class next month. I still
prefer a cleaner look to the uniform and barring the flag, the only color from the front on mine now is white.
It would be interesting to know why we are still allowed to wear metal grade on the blue field cap - for starters, it hurts
your forehead unless you bend down the prongs.
The verbiage about the placement of the IC badge should end the discussion on that topic of wearing two specialty badges
or a specialty and an AFSC. One badge to rule them all.
As an aside, you would think that 5-6+ year old changes would have taken care of themselves, if only through attrition,
however, two weeks ago I saw a staffer wearing a wing patch on his blue shirt. K-SARAH-SARAH.
Also interesting to note that this ICL does not carry the verbiage about it being in effect until rescinded, etc.
Maybe they should remove the wording "Advanced Technologies" from the ARCHER patch? Thats about as accurate as asking if you want Beta or VHS.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 12, 2012, 03:32:21 PMHas anyone tried it? I am thinking about it.
I've got it all in Word format now, started it a while back. Got caught up in the photo mess, 'cause I wanted to actually use real photos and lose the 'shop jobs. So I've been "collecting" examples.
This combined ICL makes it easier now, too. It can be used as a checklist.
I just wanted to get rid of all the now-wrong information in the pages.
OTOH, I can see the whole "Why do you have 'MEDIC' on your uniform, if CAP has no 'medics', and pretty much only calls 911?" debate reliving itself.
Some people still wear the wing patches on Blues? Yikes, now that one I have never seen before. Really makes one wonder if people know how to read regulations these days. ::)
Looking at section 4 d. for DDR badge it appears the stars are wrong. Tech. should be bronze and senior should be silver.
Why don't we all make a new 39-1. Google docs allows several editing at once. It'd make it a smaller project instead of this giant project for one person.
Quote from: superLt1995 on March 12, 2012, 04:42:47 PM
Some people still wear the wing patches on Blues? Yikes, now that one I have never seen before. Really makes one wonder if people know how to read regulations these days. ::)
It happened to me when I first joined. It was 4.5 years ago, but I was putting together my Blues for the first time and looked at the uniform photos that came in the new member binder. It showed a patch on the sleeve, so I put one on.
I think that's the main problem. If you're new and the unit hasn't mentored you properly about uniforms, it's super easy to look through either 39-1 or the photos in the binder and make an error.
Still no reason as to why the flight cap cannot be worn with the blue utility suit when in everything but fabric they are identical to the blue NOMEX suit...it's like you get the flight cap as a "reward" for being able to shell out big bucks for a NOMEX zoom bag. ::)
Nor a purpose-designed headgear for the G/W, or authorisation for a pullover jumper for the G/W.
The ICL is a good start, and I like that it reduces the previous ICL's for CAM 39-1 into one supplement. Whoever put the blue beret on the demonstrator needs to be instructed on the proper wear of a military beret. The current image is setting people up for failure. Leaders who have not been to NBB or had to wear a beret in the real military will think this is how a beret should be worn. It should be displayed being worn correctly or provide a written description in lieu of an image.
Define "correctly" in regards to the beret - just because one service wears it "thusly", does not define how another service should wear it.
Besides don't they tell you how to wear your beret at NBB?
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on March 12, 2012, 07:32:12 PM
Besides don't they tell you how to wear your beret at NBB?
"Last year they showed it X way, but Y way looks kewler so I'm going to show you that way."
Quote from: Eclipse on March 12, 2012, 07:27:12 PM
Define "correctly" in regards to the beret - just because one service wears it "thusly", does not define how another service should wear it.
You raise a good point about the difference between how services wear the beret. The St Albin's cross pin being squarely over the left eye would be a good start. Both the AF and Army agree on the insignia and flash should be over the left eye. There is an attempt at having the excess draped over the right side, however it appears that the beret has been pulled to the side of the head and is not even acorss the forehead. The way it is displayed looks like no effort has been made in preparing or wearing the beret.
Don't get me wrong, I am thrilled that the beret is finally added to a formal publication, even if it is in an ICL. I think the example provided for everyone to see should have a professional standard expressed, rather than plopping it on some unsuspecting senior member's head and taking a picture.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 12, 2012, 07:44:48 PM
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on March 12, 2012, 07:32:12 PM
Besides don't they tell you how to wear your beret at NBB?
"Last year they showed it X way, but Y way looks kewler so I'm going to show you that way."
All the more reason for a quality standard to be established.
Does the smurf hat still fall under commander decision? Or will we now see squadron elites rocking their berets to every BDU meeting?
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 12, 2012, 07:56:24 PM
Does the smurf hat still fall under commander decision? Or will we now see squadron elites rocking their berets to every BDU meeting?
While this ICL will certainly end a number of arguments about whether or not the beret is authorized outside NBB, I would think that the local commander would still have authority to say that everyone will wear the same hat for uniformity purposes.
^ The key words here are may wear.
Quote from: jeders on March 12, 2012, 07:58:41 PM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 12, 2012, 07:56:24 PM
Does the smurf hat still fall under commander decision? Or will we now see squadron elites rocking their berets to every BDU meeting?
While this ICL will certainly end a number of arguments about whether or not the beret is authorized outside NBB, I would think that the local commander would still have authority to say that everyone will wear the same hat for uniformity purposes.
One would think so, but most of the arguments I heard were related to the "command authority" of the local/activity commander to control this matter.
Quote from: MIKE on March 12, 2012, 08:06:17 PM
^ The key words here are may wear.
But "may" gives explicit permission (the way I interpret it, it's the discretion of the member, not the commander) - can a local commander rescind that permission?
I spoke with NHQ this morning about the picture of the NBB.
I was informed "this is not the picture that will go into the new CAPR 39-1" (and yes I put an R in place of an M)
They basically needed a picture of one, grabbed the nearest blue beret (unshaped and unshaven) put a pin on it and put it on a random head. Boom, the picture you see.
National did say that commanders still have discretion over the wear of any cover at activities.
Wish they could put that into the ICL. I doubt they want every "backwoods" commander calling to confirm this.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 12, 2012, 08:07:39 PM
Quote from: MIKE on March 12, 2012, 08:06:17 PM
^ The key words here are may wear.
But "may" gives explicit permission (the way I interpret it, it's the discretion of the member, not the commander) - can a local commander rescind that permission?
May is quite different than shall, must or will. As such, as a commander I would interpret that as you
may not wear said beret or Ranger tab within the confines of this command. >:D
Quote from: MIKE on March 12, 2012, 08:16:12 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 12, 2012, 08:07:39 PM
Quote from: MIKE on March 12, 2012, 08:06:17 PM
^ The key words here are may wear.
But "may" gives explicit permission (the way I interpret it, it's the discretion of the member, not the commander) - can a local commander rescind that permission?
May is quite different than shall, must or will. As such, as a commander I would interpret that as you may not wear said beret or Ranger tab within the confines of this command. >:D
I'm not sure a local commander could outlaw the hawk tabs now... the beret yes, but the tabs are now like any other NCSA patch.
The regs are clear that a commander may prescribe and UOD for seniors, and anything issued for cadets.
Since the beret is not a standard item, it can be prohibited.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 12, 2012, 08:30:14 PM
The regs are clear that a commander may prescribe and UOD for seniors, and anything issued for cadets.
Since the beret is not a standard item, it can be prohibited.
That's no different than saying "SM Bagodoughnuts, you are forbidden from wearing your GTL badge because we want to be uniform and not everyone has one."
I'm not a fan of the beret, but I'm less a fan of commanders disallowing things authorized in regulation.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 12, 2012, 08:32:49 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on March 12, 2012, 08:30:14 PM
The regs are clear that a commander may prescribe and UOD for seniors, and anything issued for cadets.
Since the beret is not a standard item, it can be prohibited.
That's no different than saying "SM Bagodoughnuts, you are forbidden from wearing your GTL badge because we want to be uniform and not everyone has one."
I'm not a fan of the beret, but I'm less a fan of commanders disallowing things authorized in regulation.
Not quite. The GTL badge is attached to the uniform, whereas the beret is completely separate. I would say it is more like saying, "All members will wear the flight cap with their blues to ensure uniformity." That's my take on it anyway, YMMV. This also proves my earlier statement about the decrease in beret related threads may not decline as much as I thought, as the argument shall now clearly move to whether or not commanders can limit its wear.
It's very different, and generally for the purposes of uniformity.
I see it differently... That which is not required is optional. You may not be required to wear that which is optional, but a commander may also restrict the wear of optional items for purposes of uniformity, to include patches, badges etc.
Quote from: MIKE on March 12, 2012, 08:40:33 PM
I see it differently... That which is not required is optional. You may not be required to wear that which is optional, but a commander may also restrict the wear of optional items for purposes of uniformity, to include patches, badges etc.
Exactly - we do it with ribbons, cords, even jackets. Everyone in blues has to have a flight cap, but not everyone has a wheel cap, so you set the UOD as flight cap so everyone is uniform. (etc.)
Re: Wing Patchs>
Whose option as to whether to wearit. Mine or the Commanders? When this change first came out, it was immediately followed by many Wing Commanders deciding that the Wing patch was required as his option. If the intent is to ditch Wing Patches, just do it!!
Wait, so you all restrict your members on what APRROVED cap patches they can wear???
That's crazy... talk about taking your command a little over the top... I mean come on, they are authorized patches.
I'm all for commanders limiting what hat, or what style dress uniform for the day...but to limit what patches a SM puts on his or her uniform is crazy. They have earned it, a higher command than you says they can wear it....
Quote from: MSG Mac on March 12, 2012, 09:23:01 PM
Whose option as to whether to wearit. Mine or the Commanders?
It is optional at the member's discretion unless the wing, or lower, has a properly approved supplement to 39-1.
I've never personally understood why they were made optional. I can understand removing them from blues, but there was really no reason to change the field uniforms.
Whether the commander can rule against berets, why would you want to? It's an earned item just as a patch is. People pay good money to teavel to NBB and they deserve to wear their beret when they comlplete the. Course. If you hate the beret, think about something you do like and think how you would feel being told that you can't wear it even though the reg says that you can and you earned it. You may not like he beret and you may not like the ranger tabs, but they ate earned, and not all that easily either.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 12, 2012, 09:27:50 PM
Whether the commander can rule against berets, why would you want to?
Berets are inappropriate for field wear - everyone but our membership seems to understand that.
Given certain weather circumstances, a beret may be the least effective hat you can wear, but many members,
especially cadets, would rather spend a day in the ER treating frostbite on their ears than give up their beret.
Berets break the uniformity of group photographs.
The differential engendered by a beret, may be detrimental to training environments such as an encampment, etc.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 12, 2012, 07:27:12 PM
Define "correctly" in regards to the beret - just because one service wears it "thusly", does not define how another service should wear it.
Having seen quite a few berets worn by members of both the US Army and the US Air Force, I think I am safe in saying that neither wears theirs as depicted in the photo in the ICL. Now, if we are talking about the British Army and Air Force...
It would be unusual (but not beyond the realm of possibility) for CAP to consciously depart from the normal accepted practice of the US military, but I guess it could be done.
Quote from: NCRblues on March 12, 2012, 09:26:39 PM
Wait, so you all restrict your members on what APRROVED cap patches they can wear???
That's crazy... talk about taking your command a little over the top... I mean come on, they are authorized patches.
I'm all for commanders limiting what hat, or what style dress uniform for the day...but to limit what patches a SM puts on his or her uniform is crazy. They have earned it, a higher command than you says they can wear it....
+1
Local commanders don't get to countermand regulation because they don't like X.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 12, 2012, 09:47:23 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on March 12, 2012, 09:26:39 PM
Wait, so you all restrict your members on what APRROVED cap patches they can wear???
That's crazy... talk about taking your command a little over the top... I mean come on, they are authorized patches.
I'm all for commanders limiting what hat, or what style dress uniform for the day...but to limit what patches a SM puts on his or her uniform is crazy. They have earned it, a higher command than you says they can wear it....
+1
Local commanders don't get to countermand regulation because they don't like X.
Ah, but they can. Commanders can and do set the UOD for the activity. We see this stuff all the time, but perhaps don't realize it. A prominent example: The commander for COS sets the UOD as blues with no ribbons. Ribbons are fully authorized for those cadet officers, but the commander of the activity is directing that, for uniformity purposes, none of them will wear any at the activity on their blues shirts. Ribbons are no different than patches, tabs, headgear, etc. They're optional attachments to the uniform.
With all this talk about limiting patches:
Umm...maybe I'm taking things out of context here, but does that mean I can wear one of these on my flight suit/jacket right sleeve?
(http://thumbs3.ebaystatic.com/m/mddCJv5zOrwJHycFRezPijw/140.jpg)
That's just an example that I found in the Civil Air Patrol section on Evilbay. I don't actually own it.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 12, 2012, 09:47:23 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on March 12, 2012, 09:26:39 PM
Wait, so you all restrict your members on what APRROVED cap patches they can wear???
That's crazy... talk about taking your command a little over the top... I mean come on, they are authorized patches.
I'm all for commanders limiting what hat, or what style dress uniform for the day...but to limit what patches a SM puts on his or her uniform is crazy. They have earned it, a higher command than you says they can wear it....
+1
Local commanders don't get to countermand regulation because they don't like X.
If the wing/group/unit commander says no optional patches on the flight suit...then that is within his/her authority.
Just like head gear. 39-1 authorises patrol caps as well as ball caps for the BDU's and BBDU's.......so if your unit has ball caps....the unit commander can say....everyone will ball caps.....even though patrol caps are authorised.
Even though the blue beret is authorised...the unit command can say no berets.
Even though the ES patch/model rocketry/comm patches are authorised....the commander can mandate the squadron unit patch or nothing at all.
Is this a good idea? Maybe/maybe not.....but it up to the commander and his/her chain of command to determine.
Quote from: Pylon on March 12, 2012, 10:11:45 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 12, 2012, 09:47:23 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on March 12, 2012, 09:26:39 PM
Wait, so you all restrict your members on what APRROVED cap patches they can wear???
That's crazy... talk about taking your command a little over the top... I mean come on, they are authorized patches.
I'm all for commanders limiting what hat, or what style dress uniform for the day...but to limit what patches a SM puts on his or her uniform is crazy. They have earned it, a higher command than you says they can wear it....
+1
Local commanders don't get to countermand regulation because they don't like X.
Ah, but they can. Commanders can and do set the UOD for the activity. We see this stuff all the time, but perhaps don't realize it. A prominent example: The commander for COS sets the UOD as blues with no ribbons. Ribbons are fully authorized for those cadet officers, but the commander of the activity is directing that, for uniformity purposes, none of them will wear any at the activity on their blues shirts. Ribbons are no different than patches, tabs, headgear, etc. They're optional attachments to the uniform.
Uh, no...
A pilot who has GTL and wings on can not be made to take off his GTL badge on the BDUs because a random activity director or commander does not like GT things... sorry does not work that way. National, including everyone's boss, the national commander says I can wear those patches on my BDU's to all events.
Feel free to set the uniform of the day. Change the ribbons on or off, that's fine, but you can not force a member to rip off a patch that is sewn onto BDUs because you believe you are king of your little CAP country and that is setting a UNIFORM of the day....
What do you think makes patches a different class of optional uniform items that differentiates them from ribbons, cords, headgear and other optional appurtenances that commanders already regularly exercise authority over?
Quote from: Pylon on March 12, 2012, 10:54:20 PM
What do you think makes patches a different class of optional uniform items that differentiates them from ribbons, cords, headgear and other optional appurtenances that commanders already regularly exercise authority over?
Have you ever been told that you can't wear your wings? I doubt it, but if so, then that sucks, it really does. But it would be exactly what you are putting out, that if you got the wild hair to, you would tell everyone in your command that they can't wear their badges and awards. I just really hope you reconsider your stance on what everyone has worked to get, even your own wings are in jeopardy with that train of thought.
This isn't about opinions on whether or not it's nice to volunteers or whether or not it's "fair". It's about the regulation. What I'm saying is that the regulation gives commanders that discretion. I'm not advocating commanders to run around and say, "Nobody can wear their wings or activity patches in my unit!" but all optional uniform items have always fallen under the commander's purview to establish the acceptable uniform of the day. Fair or unfair, good idea or bad idea, the facts are still the same. You're confusing opinions with facts.
Quote from: Pylon on March 12, 2012, 10:54:20 PM
What do you think makes patches a different class of optional uniform items that differentiates them from ribbons, cords, headgear and other optional appurtenances that commanders already regularly exercise authority over?
Regularly exercise authority over?
Ribbons, sure a commander can say no ribbons tonight or this month, but why?
Cords, well only cadets wear them
Headgear, yup a commander can continue to hate NBB for ever and ever but the argument given time and time again on here is that NBB grads get a patch, and that patch should be enough. Now you're trying to tell me a commander can say "welcome back to NBB, you cant wear your beret. Also, by the way, I know NHQ and my boss's say you can wear the patch, but I don't like it so take it off"
I have never...ever seen ANYONE exercise authority over APPROVED patches in CAP. You would have to be out of your mind to do that. Crazy... first it was we hate the beret, but now that the beret is authorized you suddenly control the patch as well? No... I don't think so...this is just a line of BS because some people believe that the title squadron commander = god in my little world of cap.
I also see no place that it says "patches fall under commander uniform of the day purview" I must have missed that class in SLS/CLC/TLC/RSC/NSC/UCC and ALS and NCOA in the AF as well...
Quote from: NCRblues on March 12, 2012, 10:40:35 PMA pilot who has GTL and wings on can not be made to take off his GTL badge on the BDUs because a random activity director or commander does not like GT things... sorry does not work that way. National, including everyone's boss, the national commander says I can wear those patches on my BDU's to all events.
Really?
Because in CAWG, it has been asserted a number of times that Ground Team Members aren't allowed to wear their
grade. I'd say that tops the
"You can't make me." top ten.
Quote from: NCRblues on March 12, 2012, 11:12:03 PMNow you're trying to tell me a commander can say "welcome back to NBB, you cant wear your beret.
Yep.
See 39-1 Table 1-1
1. The National Commander and other commanders may specify the wear of a particular uniform type for the purpose of achieving a uniform appearance at squadron, group, wing, region, and national functions. However, all commanders must be mindful of the objective of attaining a neatly uniformed appearance at a minimum of personal expense to the individual member and will consequently refrain from imposing unreasonable uniform requirements.I've run across plenty of "issues" with uniforms in the last 12 years, and required plenty of on the spot changes to thing which were clearly not correct.
For things which were not authorized in my wing, but might be in the home wing, I never mandated any adjustments which required a needle and thread to fix, but for cadets from my wing, who were clearly misinterpreting another wing CC's local authority as being in effect here, changes were made at the gate.
Headgear is well within the authority of a commander, unit or activity.
Eclipse, I am not arguing headgear. I understand that commanders can set the headgear and uniform standard...
The United Socialist workers paradise know as California GT "uniform" is another debacle that CAP should have never walked into....
What I am arguing is the patches part. I do not believe that your purview as a local squadron commander goes so far as to limit a properly earned and placed patch.
I believe that a random local yokel commander telling (for instance) a GTL to take off the GTL badges is wrong and breaks this portion of the regulation you just linked - " will consequently refrain from imposing unreasonable uniform requirements."
Quote from: Eclipse on March 12, 2012, 11:33:32 PMBecause in CAWG, it has been asserted a number of times that Ground Team Members aren't allowed to wear their grade.
On the CalTrans look-alike uniform, yes. Grade can not be worn.
OK...say we've got Oldfart Composite Squadron 999, composed of Geritol Flight and Youngun Flight.
Lieutenant Colonel Jack Greybeard, CC Oldfart Composite Squadron 999, has a majority of members in Geritol Flight who can wear the AF uniform if they so desire, and a handful of members who cannot due to H/W and/or grooming restrictions.
Lt. Col. Greybeard himself cannot, because he's indulged in too many Big Macs over the years and he has a ZZ Top beard. He wishes he could, but regs are regs. Lt. Col. Greybeard thinks the regs are stupid, but he knows that he cannot change them.
But because he is angry that he cannot wear the AF uniform, he issues an order that ALL members of Geritol Flight, regardless of H/W or grooming standards, are to wear nothing but polo shirts and grey pants, grey/white aviators with ribbons for semidress and blazer for formal, and BBDU's only for utility uniform. The Lt. Col. says that anyone not a member of Youngun Flight showing up wearing AF blue or BDU's is out of uniform and repeated violations will result in 2B.
I know this is an extreme example but...yes or BS?
^ Sounds like an abuse of authority complaint to me.
Quote from: CyBorg on March 13, 2012, 12:29:52 AM
I know this is an extreme example but...yes or BS?
By regulation, yes.
Quote from: CyBorg on March 13, 2012, 12:29:52 AM
... he issues an order that ALL members of Geritol Flight, regardless of H/W or grooming standards, are to wear nothing but polo shirts and grey pants...
I know this is an extreme example but...yes or BS?
Actually it sounds like something that a CT regular has already ordered with little or no balking from members of his squadron.
Quote from: NCRblues on March 12, 2012, 11:52:57 PMI believe that a random local yokel commander telling (for instance) a GTL to take off the GTL badges is wrong and breaks this portion of the regulation you just linked - " will consequently refrain from imposing unreasonable uniform requirements."
Removing a badge is hardly "unreasonable".
I believe the spirit of that is to avoid imposing UOD's which cause an undue financial or other pressure on a member, limiting a banquet to only
members with Mess Dress, or an awards ceremony to only members with jackets, etc.
But there are already precedents where NHQ had limited or changed who can wear what they've "earned".
As an example, you earned the IC badge, but you can't wear your GTL badge, too. You earned your observer wings, but you can't wear them, and you
pilot wings and your military wings. (etc.)
There are members with 5 master ratings, and are limited to wearing only one badge.
I don't think this was ever about badges, but what have you.
Quote from: MIKE on March 12, 2012, 08:40:33 PM
I see it differently... That which is not required is optional. You may not be required to wear that which is optional, but a commander may also restrict the wear of optional items for purposes of uniformity, to include patches, badges etc.
Actually eclipse, the thread did take a turn for patches and badges
And I am not talking about forcing members to follow the pre outlined regulations about number of badges. I am talking about commanders forcing members to take off patches or badges that the member earned fair and have placed proper on the uniform.
For an example, a squadron commander saying to a member that because this is a cadet activity you must take off your GTL badge. Or a flying club commander demanding someone take off the GBD badge.
^this is wrong IMO, but some on here feel they have a right to do that.
I don't have any specific issues with this ICL, but.....
If the move to online regulations, manuals, forms, etc. was supposed to reduce the paper and make updating regulations easier and more streamlined, why do we issue ICLs instead of just going in a making the changes? It seems that when we had paper the changes came out regularly and without need for temporary changes(ICLs).
On the badges issue, I read the reg to say that if a commander wishes to dictate a particular uniform TYPE, he may do so. That means he can specify blues, BDUs, etc or their corporate equivalents for those not eligible to wear the AF unis. As long as the uniform itself is not in violation, I can't see where he has any other control. Plus, most CCs with half a lick of sense will not try to dictate that you can't wear "that badge" because I say so.
Because online regarding, etc still require National Board approval to change them according to our current governance model.
Uniform of the Day. I really do not have a problem with that. But ...
Quote from: jeders on March 13, 2012, 12:37:49 AM
Quote from: CyBorg on March 13, 2012, 12:29:52 AM
... he issues an order that ALL members of Geritol Flight, regardless of H/W or grooming standards, are to wear nothing but polo shirts and grey pants...
I know this is an extreme example but...yes or BS?
Actually it sounds like something that a CT regular has already ordered with little or no balking from members of his squadron.
I can guess who that may be...but I won't.
And to me the situation I concocted is a good recipe for a lot of potential members to
not join, and existing members to seek pastures new.
Asking a member not to wear a GT badge on blues/aviators, yes...but to remove it from B/BDU's where it's sewn on? Kooky.
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 12, 2012, 07:56:24 PM
Does the smurf hat still fall under commander decision? Or will we now see squadron elites rocking their berets to every BDU meeting?
Since when does the color of a blue beret look like papa smurf?
Also, I would love to see someone tell me take my patches off.
I find all this talk of uniformity kind of funny...
Since there is not one uniform all of our members can wear.
Yeah, that's half the fun!
Oh but then wait for it... You are going to get told... "Yes there is, everyone can wear the white and greys."
Quote from: RickFranz on March 13, 2012, 05:38:45 AM
I find all this talk of uniformity kind of funny...
Since there is not one uniform all of our members can wear.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 13, 2012, 06:06:37 AM
Oh but then wait for it... You are going to get told... "Yes there is, everyone can wear the white and greys."
Actually, there's been one around for over fifty years - the blazer.
Is it a great uniform? That's a matter of opinion. It's certainly the only formal one I can wear.
But, like it or not, it fits the bill that Rick presents.
Quote from: NCRblues on March 12, 2012, 10:40:35 PM
Quote from: Pylon on March 12, 2012, 10:11:45 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 12, 2012, 09:47:23 PM
Quote from: NCRblues on March 12, 2012, 09:26:39 PM
Wait, so you all restrict your members on what APRROVED cap patches they can wear???
That's crazy... talk about taking your command a little over the top... I mean come on, they are authorized patches.
I'm all for commanders limiting what hat, or what style dress uniform for the day...but to limit what patches a SM puts on his or her uniform is crazy. They have earned it, a higher command than you says they can wear it....
+1
Local commanders don't get to countermand regulation because they don't like X.
Ah, but they can. Commanders can and do set the UOD for the activity. We see this stuff all the time, but perhaps don't realize it. A prominent example: The commander for COS sets the UOD as blues with no ribbons. Ribbons are fully authorized for those cadet officers, but the commander of the activity is directing that, for uniformity purposes, none of them will wear any at the activity on their blues shirts. Ribbons are no different than patches, tabs, headgear, etc. They're optional attachments to the uniform.
Uh, no...
A pilot who has GTL and wings on can not be made to take off his GTL badge on the BDUs because a random activity director or commander does not like GT things... sorry does not work that way. National, including everyone's boss, the national commander says I can wear those patches on my BDU's to all events.
Feel free to set the uniform of the day. Change the ribbons on or off, that's fine, but you can not force a member to rip off a patch that is sewn onto BDUs because you believe you are king of your little CAP country and that is setting a UNIFORM of the day....
Like I said....did not think it was good thing or a bad thing....but it is completely within the authority of THE COMMANDER.
I am sorry it does work that way.
Now.....this is completely theoritical because no one would ever go this far....but it is within the scope of authority.
Period, simple, end of discussion.
Now...like all things......one may have the authority to do something....but that does not make it right.
Just like the thread about the make up assignment for missing the safety day.....That commander had all the authority to do what he did....but you can still take it up the chain of command if you beleive he is abusing that authority.
So....like I said......local command has the authority to make wear/don't wear calls over optional badges.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 13, 2012, 06:06:37 AM
Oh but then wait for it... You are going to get told... "Yes there is, everyone can wear the white and greys."
Of course. That's the direction some of our membership are subtly (and some not-so-subtly) "guiding" us into for the following "reasons:"
They're cheap (Depends on where you buy them).
They won't get us in trouble with the Air Force (A CAP member can try to blag a salute in that just as much as in blues).
They're easy to take care of (Sure and I've seen some of our membership who look like they've slept in theirs).
Quote from: SarDragon on March 13, 2012, 06:14:09 AM
Actually, there's been one around for over fifty years - the blazer.
The blazer and G/W don't even really fit the definition of "uniform." There are no actual stipulations on cut, colour or fabric.
Any white shirt, as long as it has epaulettes for your rank slides, will do.
Any grey trousers, except for BDU-type, will do.
Any single-breasted suit jacket will do.
One can walk into Goodwill, Salvation Army, St. Vince's, etc., and walk out with that combo.
It may be convenient and cheap, but it is not "uniform."
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 12, 2012, 03:25:11 PM
Interesting that it says only the tabs earned at HMRS may be worn - meaning that if you got your "ranger grade" locally you can't wear it.
Technically they all are "earned" or more appropriately awarded by HMRS. You cant just complete the requirements at your squadron for an R3 and slap the tab on....a ratings order has to be generated by the Stan/Eval section from HMRS.
Literal translation though I guess if you didnt go to "an activity" you cant wear it. That should be interesting; kind of like when there where places (legally) awarding GTL badges for advanced course completion without a cooresponding GTL 101......
mk
As far as authorizing of headgear by commanders it looksl like PA solved that problem.
QuoteTable 2-3, Item 6. Men's and Women's Battle Dress Uniforms
1. Added. When wearing the woodland BDU's, the only authorized headgear for all flights,
squadrons, and groups chartered under the Pennsylvania Wing is the orange baseball hat.
....there is an addition talking about HMRS staff and encampment/CLS specifc to those activites.....
also restricts to inside the wing boundries only unless approved by the wing commander where the activity takes place
now that supp was prior to this ICL (12/11), so I dont know if beret wear trumps that or not
mk
Quote from: SarDragon on March 13, 2012, 06:14:09 AM
Quote from: RickFranz on March 13, 2012, 05:38:45 AM
I find all this talk of uniformity kind of funny...
Since there is not one uniform all of our members can wear.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 13, 2012, 06:06:37 AM
Oh but then wait for it... You are going to get told... "Yes there is, everyone can wear the white and greys."
Actually, there's been one around for over fifty years - the blazer.
Is it a great uniform? That's a matter of opinion. It's certainly the only formal one I can wear.
But, like it or not, it fits the bill that Rick presents.
Cadets can not wear the blazer combo. That is why I said
all our members.
Actually...
CHAPTER 4 – CAP DISTINCTIVE UNIFORMS
4-1. General. Cadet members are authorized to wear the CAP utility uniform, field uniform, and blazer combinations as desired. All senior members, including those who do not meet the standards of wear for an Air Force style uniform for reasons of grooming or weight standards, may wear any of the CAP distinctive uniform combinations described in this chapter.
Emphasis mine.
Unless I am mistaken, Cadets can only wear the distinctive uniforms if they meet grooming standards, although seniors can continue to look as though they live out of shopping carts. So I don't think there is one Uniform that any member can wear. We also have a class of "members" who cannot wear any uniform......
Major Lord
Cadets must meet grooming regardless of uniform as long as they are cadets.
Quote from: Major Lord on March 13, 2012, 08:32:11 PM
We also have a class of "members" who cannot wear any uniform......
You lost me on that one.
Quote from: RickFranz on March 13, 2012, 07:45:16 PM
Cadets can not wear the blazer combo. That is why I said all our members.
Sorry - gotta disagree. Re: CAPM39-1 Para 4-2a:
Blazer Uniform: The CAP blazer combination is made up of several different items and may be worn by all members of CAP regardless of grade.
Why in the world waste any time consolidating multiple ICLs into a single ICL when it would have saved time and made things simpler just to revise the darn 39-1 itself. Its not like any of this stuff would be a big deal to incorporate. Task 1 NHQ member to spend 4 hours doing it and then route it through the darn approval process.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 13, 2012, 11:07:44 PM
Why in the world waste any time consolidating multiple ICLs into a single ICL when it would have saved time and made things simpler just to revise the darn 39-1 itself. Its not like any of this stuff would be a big deal to incorporate. Task 1 NHQ member to spend 4 hours doing it and then route it through the darn approval process.
Apparently it is already done and on Susie Parkers desk, but it has been placed on hold until the uniform committee can present its finale thoughts at this summers NB meeting....
Quote from: NCRblues on March 13, 2012, 11:13:45 PM
Apparently it is already done and on Susie Parkers desk, but it has been placed on hold until the uniform committee can present its finale thoughts at this summers NB meeting....
Forgive my all-pervasive rancour regarding uniforms in the wake of the CSU debacle, and no insolence is intended toward Sir Ned or any of the other august personages, but my own scepticism tells me that the thoughts of the NB are going to be not much more than reinforcing the status quo. Meaning: if you're not able/willing to wear the AF uniform, your CAP sartorial outlook is going to be Gandalf, Dorian, Earl, Gunship, etc.
Quote from: CyBorg on March 13, 2012, 11:35:29 PM
Forgive my all-pervasive rancour regarding uniforms in the wake of the CSU debacle, and no insolence is intended toward Sir Ned or any of the other august personages, but my own scepticism tells me that the thoughts of the NB are going to be not much more than reinforcing the status quo. Meaning: if you're not able/willing to wear the AF uniform, your CAP sartorial outlook is going to be Gandalf, Dorian, Earl, Gunship, etc.
Or not AF, not gray = "You shall not pass!!" --Gandalf
Quote from: RiverAux on March 13, 2012, 11:07:44 PM
Why in the world waste any time consolidating multiple ICLs into a single ICL when it would have saved time and made things simpler just to revise the darn 39-1 itself. Its not like any of this stuff would be a big deal to incorporate. Task 1 NHQ member to spend 4 hours doing it and then route it through the darn approval process.
Because an ICL is supposed to expire after a specific period
4. Interim Change Letters (ICL). Situations requiring immediate action due to a state of emergency, an unforeseen circumstance involving the preservation of life or property, or other contingencies that may require prompt action may result in an interim change letter being issued outlining immediate policies. ICLs may be issued by any level of command unless specifically limited or prohibited by the regulation or manual governing that subject matter. Issuance of policies by ICL is a temporary measure.
a. ICLs outlining immediate policies to be followed for a limited time will be issued with a stated expiration date. Such expiration dates shall not be more than 180 days from the date the letter was issued.
b. ICLs outlining immediate policies that are intended to become permanent shall be incorporated into an appropriate publication within 90 days of the date the letter was issued.
I love the "corporate" way of doing things. Scot Adams would love this outfit. We could have Dilbert in G/Ws, Wally in the Golf Shirt, and the pointy haired boss in the Blazer combo. >:D
Quote from: ol'fido on March 14, 2012, 12:42:51 AM
I love the "corporate" way of doing things. Scot Adams would love this outfit. We could have Dilbert in G/Ws, Wally in the Golf Shirt, and the pointy haired boss in the Blazer combo. >:D
Sorry, Dilbert & Co belong to AT&T. Scott Adams was an employee of Pacific Bell. And CAP already has their own comic strip, Smilin' Jack by Zack Mosley.
Quote from: PHall on March 14, 2012, 12:55:17 AM
Quote from: ol'fido on March 14, 2012, 12:42:51 AM
I love the "corporate" way of doing things. Scot Adams would love this outfit. We could have Dilbert in G/Ws, Wally in the Golf Shirt, and the pointy haired boss in the Blazer combo. >:D
Sorry, Dilbert & Co belong to AT&T. Scott Adams was an employee of Pacific Bell. And CAP already has their own comic strip, Smilin' Jack by Zack Mosley.
FUN KILLER >:( ;D
Quote from: MSG Mac on March 14, 2012, 12:15:51 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on March 13, 2012, 11:07:44 PM
Why in the world waste any time consolidating multiple ICLs into a single ICL when it would have saved time and made things simpler just to revise the darn 39-1 itself. Its not like any of this stuff would be a big deal to incorporate. Task 1 NHQ member to spend 4 hours doing it and then route it through the darn approval process.
Because an ICL is supposed to expire after a specific period
4. Interim Change Letters (ICL). Situations requiring immediate action due to a state of emergency, an unforeseen circumstance involving the preservation of life or property, or other contingencies that may require prompt action may result in an interim change letter being issued outlining immediate policies. ICLs may be issued by any level of command unless specifically limited or prohibited by the regulation or manual governing that subject matter. Issuance of policies by ICL is a temporary measure.
a. ICLs outlining immediate policies to be followed for a limited time will be issued with a stated expiration date. Such expiration dates shall not be more than 180 days from the date the letter was issued.
b. ICLs outlining immediate policies that are intended to become permanent shall be incorporated into an appropriate publication within 90 days of the date the letter was issued.
Oh, you just took the wrong path my friend.
1st. None of the uniform changes meet the standard for changes justifying an ICL in the first place:
QuoteSituations requiring immediate action due to a state of emergency, an unforeseen circumstance involving the preservation of life or property, or other contingencies that may require prompt action
and second, if you believe that the uniform changes fall in the "prompt action" clause, they still violated the regulation by not incorporating these into the regulation within 90 days which is what you're supposed to do for changes that are supposed to be permanent.
QuoteICLs outlining immediate policies that are intended to become permanent shall be incorporated into an appropriate publication within 90 days of the date the letter was issued.
The only course of action they should have taken was to change the manual.
Quote from: phirons on March 14, 2012, 12:02:59 AM
Or not AF, not gray = "You shall not pass!!" --Gandalf
Yes. "Blue" and "Balrog" both begin with the same letter. >:D
Oh, well, so we end up looking like a bunch of CSA re-enactors.
I don't know why we don't adopt starfleet uniforms. Or galactic empire uniforms.
The empire has a lot of grey ones, too!
And those cool LED ribbons >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
Quote from: phirons on March 14, 2012, 02:01:58 PM
And those cool LED ribbons >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
Seriously - an OLED display the size of a 3-line ribbon rack that can be connected to eServices. Updated it monthly and you're current.
Do the same with the badges - they could change to red when the currency drops, etc.
Quote from: phirons on March 14, 2012, 02:01:58 PM
And those cool LED ribbons >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
(http://www.wordiq.com/knowledge/images/thumb/5/5a/125px-ImpRADM2.jpg)
Major General
(http://www.wordiq.com/knowledge/images/thumb/9/99/125px-ImpBrigadier.jpg)
Brigadier General
(http://www.wordiq.com/knowledge/images/thumb/1/1e/125px-ImpColonel.jpg)
Colonel
(http://www.wordiq.com/knowledge/images/thumb/6/6a/125px-ImpLTCOL.jpg)
Lieutenant Colonel
(http://www.wordiq.com/knowledge/images/thumb/a/af/105px-ImpMajor.jpg)
Major
(http://www.wordiq.com/knowledge/images/thumb/c/ce/95px-ImpO-3.jpg)
Captain
(http://www.wordiq.com/knowledge/images/thumb/d/d9/65px-ImpLT.jpg)
First Lieutenant
(http://www.wordiq.com/knowledge/images/thumb/5/55/75px-Imp2Lt.jpg)
Second Lieutenant
(http://www.wordiq.com/knowledge/images/thumb/e/e1/50px-MIDN.jpg)
Senior Member Without Grade (please, rename this to Officer Candidate!)
(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060912145810/sw1mush/images/d/d5/Rank_empire_rb.png)
Senior Flight Officer
(http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060912183223/sw1mush/images/0/02/Rank_empire_yb.png)
Technical Flight Officer
(http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060912185811/sw1mush/images/b/b6/Rank_empire_bb.png)
Flight Officer
All right, of course I'm being facetious here. But a new rank insignia system would finally give us the
distinctiveness that those on the corporate side grouse about...not to mention that these could be pinned on any order of dress.
Also Rank Cylinders to replace ID and 101 cards!
(http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/cards/ccg/ranktarkin.jpg)
Quote from: Eclipse on March 14, 2012, 02:26:05 PM
Quote from: phirons on March 14, 2012, 02:01:58 PM
And those cool LED ribbons >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
Seriously - an OLED display the size of a 3-line ribbon rack that can be connected to eServices. Updated it monthly and you're current.
Do the same with the badges - they could change to red when the currency drops, etc.
You DO have a lot of free time, don't you?!?!?! :)
I live at the intersection of Boredom Drive and Broadband Way...
But then my feelings would get hurt be size I like the cloth ribbons and the metal badges...
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2012, 07:19:02 PM
But then my feelings would get hurt be size I like the cloth ribbons and the metal badges...
But ribbons that light up could also be used for "safety".
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2012, 07:19:02 PM
But then my feelings would get hurt be size I like the cloth ribbons and the metal badges...
It is the 21st century! Get with the times, bro. Digital ribbons are the way of the future!
Quote from: Eclipse on March 14, 2012, 02:26:05 PM
Quote from: phirons on March 14, 2012, 02:01:58 PM
And those cool LED ribbons >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
Seriously - an OLED display the size of a 3-line ribbon rack that can be connected to eServices. Updated it monthly and you're current.
Do the same with the badges - they could change to red when the currency drops, etc.
21st century Lite Brite? >:D
I wonder how much that would cost me to set up my rack and badges... What about $325?
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2012, 08:57:47 PM
I wonder how much that would cost me to set up my rack and badges... What about $325?
Initial cost. You have to keep buying batteries after that.
Solar?
Quote from: Eclipse on March 14, 2012, 09:15:05 PM
Solar?
We doughnut eaters don't go out in the sun enough for that >:D. The cadets, maybe, but there's no sunlight in front of the water cooler for the seniors.
Maybe we could get one of those fancy wireless power charging packs...
Where wld we hide the solar pannel? In the collar cutouts? Or would those be obsolete?
Oh I got it, if we are going this all out we will all wear turtle necks with only one logo on the left side and that could be the solar pannel.
And I call dibs on not wearing a red turtle neck!!!
Folks; lets get with it. This thread should have created 10 pages by now. You folks are really slipping.
Quote from: bosshawk on March 14, 2012, 09:34:58 PM
Folks; lets get with it. This thread should have created 10 pages by now. You folks are really slipping.
My apologies Sir,Care to make a statement that has nothing to do with the thread so that we can get on a tangent and derail the thread and then figure out a way to make the statement relative to uniforms? That seems to do it most of the time. >:D
ABU's should have been in this ICL. After all, they never explained the regulation preventing us from wearing them or whatever. >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2012, 09:27:45 PM
And I call dibs on not wearing a red turtle neck!!!
I thought as long as you're not the most junior officer in the red turtleneck you're fine?
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 14, 2012, 10:50:44 PM
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2012, 09:27:45 PM
And I call dibs on not wearing a red turtle neck!!!
I thought as long as you're not the most junior officer in the red turtleneck you're fine?
I dont care about rank... I just don't want to be in a red turtle neck period. It's just a bad omen!
Relevant: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ogG2p_ZUaaQ (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ogG2p_ZUaaQ) never mind.
ABUs will come if/when they come. At least all the ICLs were consolidated into one. And I believe that someone mentioned uniform agenda wasn't until later this year. And for the record the cylinders for the empire were code/security cylinders not rank cylinders.
Cite please...
Seriously, that was awesome!
Quote from: Eclipse on March 15, 2012, 12:48:16 AM
Cite please...
Seriously, that was awesome!
The Big Bang Theory - 'Lightsaber' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLeubk6q_zE#ws) ;D
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Code_cylinder (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Code_cylinder)
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Rank_insignia_of_the_Galactic_Empire/old_version (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Rank_insignia_of_the_Galactic_Empire/old_version)
Here ya go..
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 14, 2012, 10:50:44 PM
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 14, 2012, 09:27:45 PM
And I call dibs on not wearing a red turtle neck!!!
I thought as long as you're not the most junior officer in the red turtleneck you're fine?
I don't want to be a redshirt period! Unless you're a regular character, you are not safe wearing a redshirt.
Quote from: Spartan on March 15, 2012, 05:33:21 AM
I don't want to be a redshirt period! Unless you're a regular character, you are not safe wearing a redshirt.
I dunno ... even Scotty himself got zapped a couple of times (Nomad even killed him ... but then brought him back).
Red shirt = sacrifice in Starfleet!
Jack
Quote from: ColonelJack on March 15, 2012, 09:33:36 AMRed shirt = sacrifice in Starfleet!
Supposedly when they introduced the new red SF uniforms for the Star Trek 1 movie, William Shattner asked if the whole bridge crew was going to get killed off.
Which, if true, might just be the most memorable thing about ST1. Rule on Star Trek movies, only watch the even numbered ones.