I was wondering because my squadron commander told me that we will be getting ABU.
DCU - no.
ABU - no public information regarding any request to do so. It is not currently authorized for CAP.
DCU= Desert Camouflage Uniform. Why would we need or even want another outdated uniform that has been phased out and is designed to provide camo in the desert? It's the same thing has the BDU except in another camo pattern.
ABU= We are praying we get them soon when the next uniform board comes around in a few months.
Edited for accuracy.
Quote from: Littleguy on March 18, 2012, 01:55:10 PMABU= We are praying we get them soon when the next uniform board comes around in a few months.
We are?
Quote from: EMT-83 on March 18, 2012, 02:32:38 PM
Quote from: Littleguy on March 18, 2012, 01:55:10 PMABU= We are praying we get them soon when the next uniform board comes around in a few months.
We are?
I am. It'd be nice to look the "USAF Aux" part again. Plus, has a kid who doesn't have much room in a small but a medium fits like a trash bag, it'd be nice just to get a top that fits me the way I want. The same goes for the pants. Also, not having to polish boots, only needing to wash and wear (you can iron them lightly, but if you starch them, you ruin and discolor them from some AF article I read), having more pockets, and not being the black sheep on base when all of the ANG, ARNG, CG, and anyone else sounds great to me.
You may like not having to polish boots, but you won't like having to shell out for a new pair every two years to keep from looking like a dirt bag, once the green boots get good and dirty, there is no getting them clean again.
The uniform fabric also stays dirty once it gets in there. It is not all its cracked up to be. Will I wear it if we change? Yes, but I will not likely rush out and get them as soon as I find out about it. Not to mention I am going to scotch guard them with like three coats!
Quote from: Littleguy on March 18, 2012, 01:55:10 PM
DCU= Desert Combat Uniform.
Try this: DCU = Desert Camoflage Utility.
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 18, 2012, 03:14:16 PM
Quote from: Littleguy on March 18, 2012, 01:55:10 PM
DCU= Desert Combat Uniform.
Try this: DCU = Desert Camoflage Utility.
Now that I have my reference book up and am looking inside the label of one of my tri colors, we're both wrong. It is Desert Camouflage Uniform. Editing my post for accuracy.
Quote from: Hawk200 on March 18, 2012, 03:14:16 PM
Quote from: Littleguy on March 18, 2012, 01:55:10 PM
DCU= Desert Combat Uniform.
Try this: DCU = Desert Camoflage Utility.
It depends on what branch and what MOS... We in the Infantry call it Desert Combat Uniform.
Quote from: Littleguy on March 18, 2012, 02:40:01 PM
Quote from: EMT-83 on March 18, 2012, 02:32:38 PM
Quote from: Littleguy on March 18, 2012, 01:55:10 PMABU= We are praying we get them soon when the next uniform board comes around in a few months.
We are?
I am. It'd be nice to look the "USAF Aux" part again. Plus, has a kid who doesn't have much room in a small but a medium fits like a trash bag, it'd be nice just to get a top that fits me the way I want. The same goes for the pants. Also, not having to polish boots, only needing to wash and wear (you can iron them lightly, but if you starch them, you ruin and discolor them from some AF article I read), having more pockets, and not being the black sheep on base when all of the ANG, ARNG, CG, and anyone else sounds great to me.
And they cost more per set than the BDU ever did, and when you grow that's more money out the door for a new set of uniforms. And the discoloration came from observing the uniform through a NVD.
Its pretty sad that the US military has BDUs, ABUs. MARPATS, NWUs....whatever, that are pushing over $200 for one set and boots. When I was in from 93-00 a set of cammies was still almost $80! When I went to NCO school we had to buy 3 sets of BDUs brand new. As a young CPL I was flat broke for a month!! Ridiculous. If your in CAP.....just stick to military surplus store BDUs as long as you can! My brother is an F16 crew chief. The poor guy practically had to take a second out on his house to keep up with his torn knees and oil stains.
For cadets, wash and wear and not shining boots is unfortunate. Although, the US military doesnt do it anymore. Although Im not in CAP anymore, Im sure Id be the guy who presses out my ABUs. Im not worried about reflectivity from the starch through NVGs They actually look pretty nice is you just press them out even without starch. And those boots are about $80 if I recall.
Quote from: Flying Pig on March 18, 2012, 04:04:23 PM
Im sure Id be the guy who presses out my ABUs. Im not worried about reflectivity from the starch through NVGs
+1
I don't give a rat's furry hind end if someone can see me in NVG's where I'm only in CAP. I'd much rather look professional and squared away. I mean come on, really: consider which is more important to CAP, looking professional or not being seen in NVG's. ::)
You can look professional in ABUs without taking an iron to them. It was part of the AFs concept a while ago about getting back to the basics. And to a degree it's mx free but it's expensive to replace especially footwear.
I starch the crap out of my BDU's, but that's because they are not wash and wear designed. A uniform that doesn't need an iron to it to look pressed is a uniform I won't press. The BDU's need it. ABU's, not so much from what I've heard from my ANG friends. For what we do in CAP, we don't have to worry about ruining seude boots in aircraft fluids, having to worry about how well they'll do for a year of every day. I wear my tan boots (not with CAP) a lot, doing a bunch of crazy things, like running through mud, play fun games, work, and some more things with them on, and they have held up just fine. I can clean them off easily. Are the ABU boots that different?
I'm sure the ABU's will get the same price drop the ACU did when they first introduced. I remember when I was a little kid, around 2006-07, looking to buy a set, and they cost just as much as the ABU's do now. Now the ACU's aren't too bad price wise, and they're is a good amount of surplus too. I can see price being a definate factor for a lot of families (even mine) but if we allow them to be worn and phase them in slowly, we'll have them already in our organization and the families that more and more families will be able to purchase them has the price drops.
Do we really need ANOTHER thread about ABU's?
::)
Quote from: NCRblues on March 18, 2012, 06:12:49 PM
Do we really need ANOTHER thread about ABU's?
::)
As long as there are new people signing up and CCs putting out the we will get ABUs it will happen. Both the BDU and the ABU have good things and bad things about them. Now the question to be posed is should we receive ABUs are squadron caps going to still be allowed :)
I for one have always felt that I need a pencil/pen holder on each leg and forearm!!!!
Quote from: KERALA on March 18, 2012, 01:28:18 PM
I was wondering because my squadron commander told me that we will be getting ABU.
NO >:(
Quote from: NCRblues on March 18, 2012, 06:12:49 PM
Do we really need ANOTHER thread about ABU's?
::)
NO ;)
Quote from: abdsp51 on March 18, 2012, 06:21:39 PM
are squadron caps going to still be allowed :)
Do squadrons even do that? I know it's allowed in the regs but I've never seen it in done here in MAWG. (Granted, I've never actually been to another squadron's meeting, I've only seen other squadrons' cadets at Encampment, Conference, etc.)
All of PAWG for one. I saw it in MAWG once or twice back in the day, but I couldn't tell you what units did it.
We have squadron ball caps at our unit.
Quote from: SarDragon on March 19, 2012, 01:21:14 AM
We have squadron ball caps at our unit.
Could you upload a picture? I haven't seen one either.
National needs to send a message down going to EVERY squadron explaining the ABU situation. And really, Commanders would've had to not log into eServices for close to 3 whole weeks not to see the notification on the news feed.
Quote from: JerseyCadet on March 19, 2012, 01:47:36 AM
National needs to send a message down going to EVERY squadron explaining the ABU situation. And really, Commanders would've had to not log into eServices for close to 3 whole weeks not to see the notification on the news feed.
Some people may ignore the news feed
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on March 19, 2012, 02:09:05 AM
Some people may ignore the news feed
+1
I for one don't check it every time I go on eServices.
Seems cadets support ABUs, and SMs don't...
I'd like ABUs, but I think a long phase-in would be necessary
Quote from: JerseyCadet on March 19, 2012, 01:47:36 AM
National needs to send a message down going to EVERY squadron explaining the ABU situation. And really, Commanders would've had to not log into eServices for close to 3 whole weeks not to see the notification on the news feed.
Dear commanders,
ABUs are not authorized. We will let you know when they are. In the meantime, please tell your members to stop asking us and return to executing our three missions with their current uniform.
Signed,
NHQ
+1
Quote from: JerseyCadet on March 19, 2012, 01:47:36 AM
National needs to send a message down going to EVERY squadron explaining the ABU situation.
There is no ABU "situation" to explain.
They are not approved for CAP wear. The uniform that is approved is in plentiful supply with no indication that is going to change in the foreseeable future.
Just because the airsoft kids down the street wear them, doesn't mean they are a good idea for CAP. Cadet cash-flow issues notwithstanding, which would probably be made worse with ABU's, a lot of members who actually understand the question realize that camouflage is the worst choice possible
for a SAR organization, and we would be much better off with something that is the "uniform" for all, and more visible - light gray or the current blue
is a much better choice.
But if we go all blue, then how will we keep the cadets interested?
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 19, 2012, 04:19:11 AM
But if we go all blue, then how will we keep the cadets interested?
It's hard to argue the power a uniform can have for recruiting, but if the value of our organization is centered and based on that uniform, then we're pretty much sunk.
With a little thought, we could be
paramilitary without being military-military.
The mission should dictate the uniform. For formal wear a paramilitary cut and look fulfills the mission in ways that the Olympic Judge jacket never could, but for field situations the paramilitary camo does just the opposite - it provide some affinity at unit meetings, where a field uniform isn't really needed, and it makes us invisible in the field, where we need the more tactical clothing.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 19, 2012, 04:31:46 AM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 19, 2012, 04:19:11 AM
But if we go all blue, then how will we keep the cadets interested?
It's hard to argue the power a uniform can have for recruiting, but if the value of our organization is centered and based on that uniform, then we're pretty much sunk.
With a little thought, we could be paramilitary without being military-military.
The mission should dictate the uniform. For formal wear a paramilitary cut and look fulfills the mission in ways that the Olympic Judge jacket never could, but for field situations the paramilitary camo does just the opposite - it provide some affinity at unit meetings, where a field uniform isn't really needed, and it makes us invisible in the field, where we need the more tactical clothing.
I completely agree, and think that making the BBDU look like a uniform isn't hard, since it already is. But how well does that work in the field?
Why not just stick with the "tradition" of AF uniforms, but have a separate field uniform? CA already has a special uniform, so why not have a national ES uniform as well?
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on March 19, 2012, 02:38:09 AM
Seems cadets support ABUs, and SMs don't...
I'd like ABUs, but I think a long phase-in would be necessary
As a cadet in the early 80's, being able to wear BOTH of the Air Forces uniforms was an initial draw. That's a mind of a then 15 year old. Senior's hating ABU's, not this one. The tradition of wearing Mother Blue's uniforms has been hammered on like a dead horse. Some seniors cover their ears and play the I don't hear you game. My personal opinion, with the proposed RIF's right now, it will not be on their radar to okay it. We will be going all BBDU by necessity.
As a side opinion, tradition gets wizzed on these days, both for political and personal reasons.
Respectfully,
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 19, 2012, 05:17:12 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on March 19, 2012, 04:31:46 AM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 19, 2012, 04:19:11 AM
But if we go all blue, then how will we keep the cadets interested?
It's hard to argue the power a uniform can have for recruiting, but if the value of our organization is centered and based on that uniform, then we're pretty much sunk.
With a little thought, we could be paramilitary without being military-military.
The mission should dictate the uniform. For formal wear a paramilitary cut and look fulfills the mission in ways that the Olympic Judge jacket never could, but for field situations the paramilitary camo does just the opposite - it provide some affinity at unit meetings, where a field uniform isn't really needed, and it makes us invisible in the field, where we need the more tactical clothing.
I completely agree, and think that making the BBDU look like a uniform isn't hard, since it already is. But how well does that work in the field?
Why not just stick with the "tradition" of AF uniforms, but have a separate field uniform? CA already has a special uniform, so why not have a national ES uniform as well?
Because if they make me wear that CAWG monstrosity I'll think about finding somewhere else to play >:D.
Why not just solid OD green BDU's?
titanII:there was a unit in MAWG that required all of its cadets to wear the squadron caps instead of the cammies. Rather than what you would see for the ball caps from encampment, they looked something like this, only with a slightly darker shade, and it was required that cadets wear metal grade insignia on the front. http://blanksnapbacks.com/images/sky-trucker-hat.jpg (http://blanksnapbacks.com/images/sky-trucker-hat.jpg)
It's a split function -
The most efficient uniform for recruiting is one that is recognized as a military uniform because boys (and some girls) like to play Army.
The most effective uniform for field work is completely different...blaze orange would be great.
Two different functions, two different needs.
Two different uniform standards would seem to be indicated.
Quote from: Perez on March 19, 2012, 02:13:03 PM
titanII:there was a unit in MAWG that required all of its cadets to wear the squadron caps instead of the cammies. Rather than what you would see for the ball caps from encampment, they looked something like this, only with a slightly darker shade, and it was required that cadets wear metal grade insignia on the front. http://blanksnapbacks.com/images/sky-trucker-hat.jpg (http://blanksnapbacks.com/images/sky-trucker-hat.jpg)
Awesome, especially considering that the wear of grade insignia on ball caps is specifically and explicitly prohibited.
Quote from: bflynn on March 19, 2012, 02:22:37 PM
It's a split function -
The most efficient uniform for recruiting is one that is recognized as a military uniform because boys (and some girls) like to play Army.
The most effective uniform for field work is completely different...blaze orange would be great.
Two different functions, two different needs.
Two different uniform standards would seem to be indicated.
Someone recently mentioned member costs need to be a major factor in any uniform changes. So now our ground ES mission would require a 2nd set of uniforms. I wonder how the suggestion to eliminate the green flight suit for ES would go over.
Quote from: JerseyCadet on March 19, 2012, 01:47:36 AM
National needs to send a message down going to EVERY squadron explaining the ABU situation. And really, Commanders would've had to not log into eServices for close to 3 whole weeks not to see the notification on the news feed.
They did!
DoD policy prevents the transfer, donation, and sale of digitized camouflage pattern uniforms to anyone outside the USAF with very few exceptions. Unfortunately Civil Air Patrol is not one of the exceptions. This prohibition is necessary to protect the unique technologies used in developing the uniform.
The National Board has placed a hold on all uniform changes pending a review of the entire CAP uniform structure. This review is ongoing by the CAP National Uniform Committee and a draft report will be presented to the Summer National Board Meeting in Baltimore in August 2012. The presentation will be available online via web stream but all CAP members are encouraged to attend.
From the National News Feed Dec 28, 2011
Quote from: phirons on March 19, 2012, 05:01:05 PM
Quote from: bflynn on March 19, 2012, 02:22:37 PM
It's a split function -
The most efficient uniform for recruiting is one that is recognized as a military uniform because boys (and some girls) like to play Army.
The most effective uniform for field work is completely different...blaze orange would be great.
Two different functions, two different needs.
Two different uniform standards would seem to be indicated.
Someone recently mentioned member costs need to be a major factor in any uniform changes. So now our ground ES mission would require a 2nd set of uniforms. I wonder how the suggestion to eliminate the green flight suit for ES would go over.
I'm certainly not in favor of multiple uniforms. It's expensive enough getting just one as I know first hand.
Perhaps a modification of the uniforms? Require orange safety vests in the field? Change the top of the uniform to something else, an optional blue t-shirt maybe? Allow more variety of various equipment for a field exercise vs drill?
I know safety vests are already used, but I've also see ground teams not using them. Otherwise I think allowing variety will permit members to do what helps them in the field, rather than to be constantly worrying about uniform standards instead of operations. I've always believed that you never can choose "best" for someone else because you don't know them that well. They have to make their own choice of best.
Quote from: bflynn on March 19, 2012, 05:48:11 PM
I know safety vests are already usedrequired, but I've also see ground teams not using them.
Fixed that for ya. In the case of orange vests, this comes down to GTLs not knowing/enforcing the rules within there team and GBDs not enforcing the rules on GTLs.
As for camo vs anything else, we've beaten the horse to death so many times that it's not funny anymore. What works to make someone stand out in one part of the country makes them blend in somewhere else. And that includes orange. So since we are the AF Aux, even if only at certain times, let's just keep using their uniforms as a base. It seems to have worked well for the last 70 years, no reason to think it won't work in the future.
Quote from: jeders on March 19, 2012, 05:53:43 PM
As for camo vs anything else, we've beaten the horse to death so many times that it's not funny anymore.
In my experience, a symptom of unsolved problems are that they keep coming back around.
Quote from: bflynn on March 19, 2012, 05:55:20 PM
Quote from: jeders on March 19, 2012, 05:53:43 PM
As for camo vs anything else, we've beaten the horse to death so many times that it's not funny anymore.
In my experience, a symptom of unsolved problems are that they keep coming back around.
And in this case, the problem is that there is no one universal answer. So you just go with the best alternative, which in this case seems to be to switch to ABUs at the Air Force's convenience and maintain the outward appearance of being the AF Aux.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 19, 2012, 01:23:36 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on March 19, 2012, 01:21:14 AM
We have squadron ball caps at our unit.
Could you upload a picture? I haven't seen one either.
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=243807025629672&set=a.243805662296475.72179.243788755631499&type=3&theater (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=243807025629672&set=a.243805662296475.72179.243788755631499&type=3&theater)
Here you can see the pilot wearing a squadron ball cap for SQDN 87 and the cadets wearing the ball caps of SQDN 714.
Not exactly a photo that should have been posted at all.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 19, 2012, 07:42:49 PM
Not exactly a photo that should have been posted at all.
Do tell why...
I was down at the local army navy store today, buying a new BDU blouse, as I have lost 40 lbs :D :D :D.
Anyways, there were VERY few BDU blouses there....the guy said that the companies have ramped down production dramatically, and that they have to be bought online essentially...I got the only one in there that was medium regular.
A year ago when I was down there they had a ton, new and used....but now only a few used.
Pants are still plentiful.
But really, I've wondered, what is the big deal about giving it a 5 year phase in....by then we will all need new uniforms, BDU's will be gone, and ABU's will be just as cheap as BDU's are.
Problem solved.
I think the problem here is folks viewing surplus stores as a legitimate supply source instead of what it is - a convenient, military-themed thrift store. Saying "we need to switch because I can't find them at the surplus store" is about as silly as me telling my boss "I shouldn't have to wear slacks to work because I can't find any my size at Goodwill".
That said, I think we should switch because of the "total force" concept - we should look like our parent service.
Fair enough, I was wrong, and you're right.
Guess I was looking at it through the wrong lens.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 19, 2012, 08:39:06 PM...we should look like our parent service.
Or at least like we all came in the same car...
[/quote]
Awesome, especially considering that the wear of grade insignia on ball caps is specifically and explicitly prohibited.
[/quote]
I'm with you on that one. That's something a lot of past members have tried to address to no avail. Eventually wing sent a memo out and the insignia finally stopped. Thankfully I'm not with that unit anymore.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 19, 2012, 09:02:40 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 19, 2012, 08:39:06 PM...we should look like our parent service.
Or at least like we all came in the same car...
And if we get a field uniform, it will muddy one of our most public images.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 19, 2012, 02:31:56 PM
Quote from: Perez on March 19, 2012, 02:13:03 PM
titanII:there was a unit in MAWG that required all of its cadets to wear the squadron caps instead of the cammies. Rather than what you would see for the ball caps from encampment, they looked something like this, only with a slightly darker shade, and it was required that cadets wear metal grade insignia on the front. http://blanksnapbacks.com/images/sky-trucker-hat.jpg (http://blanksnapbacks.com/images/sky-trucker-hat.jpg)
Awesome, especially considering that the wear of grade insignia on ball caps is specifically and explicitly prohibited.
I'm with you on that one. That's something a lot of past members have tried to address to no avail. Eventually wing sent a memo out and the insignia finally stopped. Thankfully I'm not with that unit anymore.
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on March 19, 2012, 09:11:27 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on March 19, 2012, 09:02:40 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 19, 2012, 08:39:06 PM...we should look like our parent service.
Or at least like we all came in the same car...
And if we get a field uniform, it will muddy one of our most public images.
?
Quote from: Eclipse on March 19, 2012, 09:18:35 PM
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on March 19, 2012, 09:11:27 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on March 19, 2012, 09:02:40 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 19, 2012, 08:39:06 PM...we should look like our parent service.
Or at least like we all came in the same car...
And if we get a field uniform, it will muddy one of our most public images.
?
people suggested a new field uniform; was making rebuttal. Not directed at you.
No, I understand, but I don't understand what you said.
Quote from: Perez on March 19, 2012, 02:13:03 PM
titanII:there was a unit in MAWG that required all of its cadets to wear the squadron caps instead of the cammies. Rather than what you would see for the ball caps from encampment, they looked something like this, only with a slightly darker shade, and it was required that cadets wear metal grade insignia on the front. http://blanksnapbacks.com/images/sky-trucker-hat.jpg (http://blanksnapbacks.com/images/sky-trucker-hat.jpg)
that wouldnt have been Brockton would it have? I remember a unit in the 80's that had those horrendus things
Whenever the ABU is introduced for CAP I hope they retire one of the uniforms we now use even if not everyone is eligible to wear the ABU.
Quote from: billford1 on March 20, 2012, 01:00:03 AM
Whenever the ABU is introduced for CAP I hope they retire one of the uniforms we now use even if not everyone is eligible to wear the ABU.
IF it is introduced, it will slowly phase out BDUs which will be "running out".
IF.
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 20, 2012, 01:01:16 AM
Quote from: billford1 on March 20, 2012, 01:00:03 AM
Whenever the ABU is introduced for CAP I hope they retire one of the uniforms we now use even if not everyone is eligible to wear the ABU.
IF it is introduced, it will slowly phase out BDUs which will be "running out".
IF.
If that's the case the phase out will mean another uniform that will I'm sure look great but the BDU will be there for quite a while. I've seen GTs with four different uniforms. I'll get a bigger laugh to see five uniform types on a GT or any field activily.
Quote from: billford1 on March 20, 2012, 01:33:53 AM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 20, 2012, 01:01:16 AM
Quote from: billford1 on March 20, 2012, 01:00:03 AM
Whenever the ABU is introduced for CAP I hope they retire one of the uniforms we now use even if not everyone is eligible to wear the ABU.
IF it is introduced, it will slowly phase out BDUs which will be "running out".
IF.
If that's the case, and I'm sure you're right the phase out will mean another uniform that will I'm sure look great. I've seen GTs with four different uniforms. I'll get a bigger laugh to see five.
I know I've been out of the loop, but since when have flight suits and polos been allowed on ground teams?
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 20, 2012, 01:37:39 AM
Quote from: billford1 on March 20, 2012, 01:33:53 AM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 20, 2012, 01:01:16 AM
Quote from: billford1 on March 20, 2012, 01:00:03 AM
Whenever the ABU is introduced for CAP I hope they retire one of the uniforms we now use even if not everyone is eligible to wear the ABU.
IF it is introduced, it will slowly phase out BDUs which will be "running out".
IF.
If that's the case, and I'm sure you're right the phase out will mean another uniform that will I'm sure look great. I've seen GTs with four different uniforms. I'll get a bigger laugh to see five.
I know I've been out of the loop, but since when have flight suits and polos been allowed on ground teams?
They're not disallowed...
They've never not been.
Nothing says you have to wear BDUs, I wear my jumpsuit all the time, especially on low impact summer stuff.
All depends on where you're gonna be and what you're doing, though a 180 dollar flight suit will not stand up to brambles very long.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 20, 2012, 01:42:16 AM
They've never not been.
Nothing says you have to wear BDUs, I wear my jumpsuit all the time, especially on low impact summer stuff.
All depends on wear you're gonna be and what you're doing, though a 180 dollar flight suit will not stand up to brambles very long.
But I've never seen such a team assembled. Quite honestly? Mindblown if it actually happens.
Granted most wear field uniforms.
Quote from: davidsinn on March 20, 2012, 01:39:07 AM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 20, 2012, 01:37:39 AM
Quote from: billford1 on March 20, 2012, 01:33:53 AM
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 20, 2012, 01:01:16 AM
Quote from: billford1 on March 20, 2012, 01:00:03 AM
Whenever the ABU is introduced for CAP I hope they retire one of the uniforms we now use even if not everyone is eligible to wear the ABU.
IF it is introduced, it will slowly phase out BDUs which will be "running out".
IF.
If that's the case, and I'm sure you're right the phase out will mean another uniform that will I'm sure look great. I've seen GTs with four different uniforms. I'll get a bigger laugh to see five.
I know I've been out of the loop, but since when have flight suits and polos been allowed on ground teams?
They're not disallowed...
With the blue utility uniform thrown in as well we've got quite a collection.
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 20, 2012, 01:43:14 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on March 20, 2012, 01:42:16 AM
They've never not been.
Nothing says you have to wear BDUs, I wear my jumpsuit all the time, especially on low impact summer stuff.
All depends on wear you're gonna be and what you're doing, though a 180 dollar flight suit will not stand up to brambles very long.
But I've never seen such a team assembled. Quite honestly? Mindblown if it actually happens.
I've worn a polo and Gray BDU's in the field before (they were hemmed so that they didn't need to be tucked, that would look odd). I think I'm going to spring for some Propper tac pants and start wearing it again on the "low impact" (as Eclipse put it) stuff.
BITD, I saw people wear blues for ground team, to fly, or do anything else on a mission. The requirement is to be in uniform. It doesn't specify what uniform. Just my .02.
Thought the 39-1 does say that the BDU is worn anytime it is impractical or inappropriate to wear the service uniforms. Ground operations sound to me like inappropriate and impractical both.
Quote from: MSG Mac on March 19, 2012, 05:37:37 PM
They did!
DoD policy prevents the transfer, donation, and sale of digitized camouflage pattern uniforms to anyone outside the USAF with very few exceptions. Unfortunately Civil Air Patrol is not one of the exceptions. This prohibition is necessary to protect the unique technologies used in developing the uniform.
The National Board has placed a hold on all uniform changes pending a review of the entire CAP uniform structure. This review is ongoing by the CAP National Uniform Committee and a draft report will be presented to the Summer National Board Meeting in Baltimore in August 2012. The presentation will be available online via web stream but all CAP members are encouraged to attend.
From the National News Feed Dec 28, 2011
To bad that "DOD Policy" only existed in someone or a few people's head at NHQ. No supporting evidence has been found by several members (including myself) looking for the actual DOD policy. It's not real. Not saying it was a vast conspiracy, but I believe it was an idea that went to far to fast and they could not pull it back. One of those "you can't put the words back in your mouth" kinds of thing.
Its also like the "2 year uniform change halt" that ended by now...
Is it really so bad to have uniforms that are more stable than elements 117-120?
Tom Lehrer CHEMISTRY element song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYW50F42ss8#)
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 20, 2012, 03:49:26 AM
Thought the 39-1 does say that the BDU is worn anytime it is impractical or inappropriate to wear the service uniforms. Ground operations sound to me like inappropriate and impractical both.
"Ground Ops" can mean everything from ramp checks to survival camping. As long as you have the right gear, there's no reason ramp checks, door-to-door
well-being checks, ground photo surveys (which, BTW, are becoming a staple of Evals), shelter surveys (ditto), can't be done in blues, whites, golf, or even mess dress for that matter.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 20, 2012, 01:46:27 PM
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 20, 2012, 03:49:26 AM
Thought the 39-1 does say that the BDU is worn anytime it is impractical or inappropriate to wear the service uniforms. Ground operations sound to me like inappropriate and impractical both.
"Ground Ops" can mean everything from ramp checks to survival camping. As long as you have the right gear, there's no reason ramp checks, door-to-door
well-being checks, ground photo surveys (which, BTW, are becoming a staple of Evals), shelter surveys (ditto), can't be done in blues, whites, golf, or even mess dress for that matter.
When it is good conditions, it doesn't matter. But there are many factors that can change that.
Quote from: a2capt on March 20, 2012, 04:46:40 AM
Tom Lehrer CHEMISTRY element song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYW50F42ss8#)
My parents were big time Tom Lehrer fans. If you listen to that song enough times you will learn the periodic table.
At least good enough to pass HS chemistry. ;)
We used to listen to him on 45's. Who's Next?!!
Quote from: Eclipse on March 20, 2012, 08:36:02 PM
We used to listen to him on 45's.
Like, the pistol cartridge? >:D
Sarcasm. I know what you meant
Quote from: Eclipse on March 20, 2012, 08:36:02 PM
We used to listen to him on 45's. Who's Next?!!
Mark Russell
Mark Russell: The Line of Death Bar & Grill (1986) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZczL-P_5Ps#)
I dislike the ABU. When I was in the AF, I felt it had no tactical purpose as it was winter weight, looked white when it faded, and the pockets didnt differ much from the BDU's. I also dislike the cost. When senior leadership began "socializing" (showing off the uniform before it was authorized for all to wear) the uniform, they pitched how cost savings in dry cleaning would make up for the added cost. As some have posted, the cost is riddiculous!
We in CAP are not a tactical force, and shouldnt require a tactical uniform. We shouldnt be mandated, as volunteeers to have to go out and purchase ABU's so we "fit in" with the AF. We need a uniform that is fair in price, durable, and practical. I thing the current woodland uniforms are satisfactory and should no longer be "AF Style" but CAP distinctive. I also like the midnight blue BDU's and wouldnt mind those as an overall replacement should CAP decide to do away with BDU's.
When I was in CAP, we wore the OD green fatigues and I was excited about the chance to wear BDU's.
Quote from: Bullitt on March 23, 2012, 10:16:54 AM
I dislike the ABU. When I was in the AF, I felt it had no tactical purpose as it was winter weight, looked white when it faded, and the pockets didnt differ much from the BDU's. I also dislike the cost. When senior leadership began "socializing" (showing off the uniform before it was authorized for all to wear) the uniform, they pitched how cost savings in dry cleaning would make up for the added cost. As some have posted, the cost is riddiculous!
We in CAP are not a tactical force, and shouldnt require a tactical uniform. We shouldnt be mandated, as volunteeers to have to go out and purchase ABU's so we "fit in" with the AF. We need a uniform that is fair in price, durable, and practical. I thing the current woodland uniforms are satisfactory and should no longer be "AF Style" but CAP distinctive. I also like the midnight blue BDU's and wouldnt mind those as an overall replacement should CAP decide to do away with BDU's.
When I was in CAP, we wore the OD green fatigues and I was excited about the chance to wear BDU's.
The OD green was a tactical uniform. I wore it too when I was a cadet. We didn't wear it then because we were a tactical force, but because we wore same work and dress uniforms of our parent organization. Its has been that way historically, with minor alterations. In short, its tradition.
Respectfully,
Quote from: Bullitt on March 23, 2012, 10:16:54 AM
When I was in CAP, we wore the OD green fatigues and I was excited about the chance to wear BDU's.
Well what about the current people in CAP wearing BDU's, excited about a possible chance to wear ABU's.....?
From my understanding it's still going to be a few months before uniforms are put before the board. IMO we should let the process in place work it's course. If and when it's approved then lets get worked up over it, however there will be a huge cost to members over the phase in time.
And it's not a cost I am too happy about, but will I pay the extra that it costs over the BBDU? Yes.
I believe the BBDU is way cheaper than the ABU. Especially throwning in the sage boots which are by no means cheap, even with the prices I pay it still may be an exspensive deal for folks.
Quote from: abdsp51 on March 24, 2012, 01:46:49 AM
I believe the BBDU is way cheaper than the ABU. Especially throwning in the sage boots which are by no means cheap, even with the prices I pay it still may be an exspensive deal for folks.
An interesting point, a lot of times the discussion does come down to the boots.
In this hypothetical case of CAP getting the ABU, what would the odds be, that part of our "distinctiveness" will be black leather boots? :P
If we get ABU's there will be a long phase out date of BDu's. Ideally that is so the new uniform items can be bought over time so its not such a large chunk of money all at the same time, you know... boots this month, uniform in a couple months, hat and whatever a few months later... That way the BDU can be worn until you acquire a whole ABU uniniform.
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 24, 2012, 02:39:31 AMIn this hypothetical case of CAP getting the ABU, what would the odds be, that part of our "distinctiveness" will be black leather boots?
One can hope - those boots are useless to CAP members and not dual-purpose, which means another thing in the closet for twice-a-quarter wear.
If boots are a distinctive item for us I would rather see tan boots, not for functionality purposes or anything, but because of tan boots matching the uniform better than black boots. I have seen all three worn with the ABU on Campbell, and tan looks much much much better than black boots. It is just aweful.
If we have to go suede, at least you can approximate the tan at Wal*Mart, so I'd take those over the sage.
Just allow us to go sans blousing like on the BBDU and then you'll hardly see them.
Beat up, poorly cared-for black boots look a lot better than beat-up, poorly cared-for tan or sage.
I found a pair of sage boots for around $80... think they only had them in 8EEE though. There are way more tan boots available at "budget" prices.
Tan boots are much easier to come by nowadays for cheaper prices, high quality, and different styles. The tan boots look much better than the sage green boots IMHO. Plus, I've heard a lot of airmen say they want the tan boots, so if we get tan boots... oh wait, the AFI's only allow tan boots in theater. Pushing for an item used specifically on a deployment MIGHT peturb Ma Blue.
IMHO AF should have stuck with tan period and not this sage thing. Personally AF has bigger issues than to worry about uniforms right now.
Quote from: abdsp51 on March 24, 2012, 04:19:29 AM
IMHO AF should have stuck with tan period and not this sage thing. Personally AF has bigger issues than to worry about uniforms right now.
The Defense Department was established almost 65 years ago and you would think that between the several services they could come to some agreement on a common utility uniform, especially when they're being told to save dollars in a big way.
Quote from: MSG Mac on March 24, 2012, 04:32:25 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on March 24, 2012, 04:19:29 AM
IMHO AF should have stuck with tan period and not this sage thing. Personally AF has bigger issues than to worry about uniforms right now.
The Defense Department was established almost 65 years ago and you would think that between the several services they could come to some agreement on a common utility uniform, especially when they're being told to save dollars in a big way.
+1
Outside of the BDU that was in each branch highly doubtful that will happen.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 24, 2012, 03:31:19 AM
If we have to go suede, at least you can approximate the tan at Wal*Mart, so I'd take those over the sage.
Just allow us to go sans blousing like on the BBDU and then you'll hardly see them.
Beat up, poorly cared-for black boots look a lot better than beat-up, poorly cared-for tan or sage.
+ 100 on that one. My beat up, well cared for black boots still look good, even after 20+ years of wear.
Yes but beat up black boots still don't look good with ABU.
So far as the defense department goes with the uniform issue, it has been said quite a few times that they want all branches back in the same field uniform. They already do it in theater, and that is for a very big important reason.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 24, 2012, 01:12:57 PM
Yes but beat up black boots still don't look good with ABU.
So far as the defense department goes with the uniform issue, it has been said quite a few times that they want all branches back in the same field uniform. They already do it in theater, and that is for a very big important reason.
The DoD may want everyone in the same uniform but each branch is set right now on their own identity and distinct uniforms.
Quote from: abdsp51 on March 24, 2012, 01:43:58 PM
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 24, 2012, 01:12:57 PM
Yes but beat up black boots still don't look good with ABU.
So far as the defense department goes with the uniform issue, it has been said quite a few times that they want all branches back in the same field uniform. They already do it in theater, and that is for a very big important reason.
The DoD may want everyone in the same uniform but each branch is set right now on their own identity and distinct uniforms.
Yes they are, but they still look like junks but I must admit, the ACU is the most comfortable uniform I have ever worn, wash them ten times and they feel like PJs. Just too bad USAF didn't go with the ACU fabric and cut for the ABU.
AF leadership doesn't want us to have anything affiliated with the Army. Its the reason why those of us patched can't wear them.
Quote from: abdsp51 on March 24, 2012, 02:45:24 PM
AF leadership doesn't want us to have anything affiliated with the Army. Its the reason why those of us patched can't wear them.
You mean wear a combat patch?
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on March 24, 2012, 03:00:20 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on March 24, 2012, 02:45:24 PM
AF leadership doesn't want us to have anything affiliated with the Army. Its the reason why those of us patched can't wear them.
You mean wear a combat patch?
Yes sir.
That is a load of (junk), about as irritating as Simeon grin the Army with a CAB not being able to wear it on CAP uniforms.
I've always thought that the DoD should have a "state-side" utility uniform, BDUs or something. Then, when they decide to go to war, or need to conduct operations, they just have a uniform designed for that environment and everyone that goes, gets that uniform. So, if multi-cam is the color that makes most sense in the Stan, then Marines, Army, Navy, and Air Force folks put on a set when they leave the US. When they get back, they put on their state-side utilities again.
Next time, if we're going through somewhere like N. Korea, the pattern might need to be different, so, we just put together the camo that meets that environment.
I understand the need to have the Air Force feel like their part of a team, etc, but isn't the most important team "United States of America" and not "Air Force?" So, "United States of America" team should wear the same thing.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on March 24, 2012, 03:36:13 PM
I've always thought that the DoD should have a "state-side" utility uniform, BDUs or something. Then, when they decide to go to war, or need to conduct operations, they just have a uniform designed for that environment and everyone that goes, gets that uniform. So, if multi-cam is the color that makes most sense in the Stan, then Marines, Army, Navy, and Air Force folks put on a set when they leave the US. When they get back, they put on their state-side utilities again.
That sounds like a good idea, but it seems to me that the extra effort to issue ALL of the deployed with completely new uniforms on short notice would be somewhat of a logistical nightmare. But then again, I know next to nothing about how military supplies and logistics work, so take that with a grain of salt.
It would be a supply and fiscal nightmare, especially since body armor covers would have to be developed, equipment what can and cannot be worn etc. IMO opinion I do not see the DoD going towards any type of common uniform any time soon, each branch is trying to save there programs and manpower from the budget axe.
But the best type of camo would be Snake's sneaking suit or the Predator's. And I mean Snake's suit from Metal Gear Solid 4 :clap:.
I have always been a huge fan of black BDU pants bloused over black boots and the PT shirt with a black baseball hat with up to two badges an your rank, that would be a pretty dang good garrison uniform for anything that needs done around post. Then the field/combat uniforms and service dress uniforms.
Quote from: abdsp51 on March 24, 2012, 03:57:59 PM
It would be a supply and fiscal nightmare, ...
We all know the 1% that is making a fortune off of the military industrial complex. 8)
Doesn't sound bad. Personally I like the uniforms alot of the LE agencies here have pretty much adopted. Don't get me wrong I don't mind the ABU it's alot less maintenance free than the BDU but it can get hot and its expensive to boot. I pay about 60 bucks for a pair of green boots min but if I want something else I have to pay $100+. I personally thing that the AF should have stayed with the tan it looks better and to piggyback there are more choices available for them. Shoot we could have even stuck with black leather for the same reasons or gone to a black suede boot.
In many ways, its almost what they're doing now. An Airman deploy to a specific unit and the give them an entirely new set of multicam, etc. It would require the DoD to look past the current budget cycle and pre plan logistical by developing patterns and setting up suppliers, even keeping some materials front loaded, but American manufacturing and logistic channels can produce and distribute clothing very quickly if needed.
I don't see the fiscal nightmare, because everyone would be in one uniform, getting the bulk discounts, and in the case we have an operation, only those involved would get issued something. ABUs and ACUs don't work in jungle, jungles don't work in desert, etc. So, there's no point making your entire force dress in desert oriented camo for a limited amount of folks who are actually going to the desert.
We already spend over a trillion a year on DoD operations and we're worried about a few million here and there on mission specific uniforms?
[quote author=jimmydeanno link=topic=14961.msg271103#msg271103 date=1333202619
We already spend over a trillion a year on DoD operations and we're worried about a few million here and there on mission specific uniforms?
[/quote]
A few million that can help towards the 500 billion dollars in cuts that have come down the pipeline, which has resulted in numerous jobs lost among other things.
The government isn't a job creation service, and our economy shouldn't be built upon what budget the DoD gets that year.
A single service uniform should save money. Quantity discounts, etc.
The creation of single uniforms to be worn in the applicable environment should save money, since you aren't outfitting the entire service in them each time we start operating in a different environment.
The Army created the ACU because they were fighting in Iraq. Then they went to Afghanistan, and the pattern doesn't work as well. What if there's another Bosnia-type incident? Are they going to switch back to Woodland for the entire service? That is waste, and what we shouldn't stand for.
There inlies the beauty of the multicam, in one pattern lies the ability to blend rather nicely in three different types of terrain... Desert, jungle and mountain. The standard woodland only went well with jungle and the normal idea of woods here in CONUS, and the desert only worked in a desert... Go figure, and personally I don't think that jungle worked anywhere at all, it just had too much black. One uniform for all services would work in many different areas, and would cut down cost like crazy. And after wearing it in Afghanistan, I don't think even ACU even blends with desert or rocky mountains... It is junk pattern.
How about the service gets 3 uniforms. 1. Jungle/woodland 2. Urban 3. Desert
We'd be at the same amount of uniforms, but have something for everywhere
Awesome, but I thought we all agreed that camouflage is the exact opposite of what CAP needs.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 31, 2012, 11:41:28 PM
Awesome, but I thought we all agreed that camouflage is the exact opposite of what CAP needs.
I thought we agreed that we ought to be in the same uniform as our parent service.
Quote from: RogueLeader on March 31, 2012, 11:48:47 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on March 31, 2012, 11:41:28 PM
Awesome, but I thought we all agreed that camouflage is the exact opposite of what CAP needs.
I thought we agreed that we ought to be in the same uniform as our parent service.
Other than affinity, it serves little mission purpose, and the current rules split our membership artificially into two groups.
Safety issues, spirit issues, looks like more minus than plus.
Quote from: Eclipse on April 01, 2012, 12:14:26 AM
Quote from: RogueLeader on March 31, 2012, 11:48:47 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on March 31, 2012, 11:41:28 PM
Awesome, but I thought we all agreed that camouflage is the exact opposite of what CAP needs.
I thought we agreed that we ought to be in the same uniform as our parent service.
Other than affinity, it serves little mission purpose, and the current rules split our membership artificially into two groups.
Safety issues, spirit issues, looks like more minus than plus.
Safety issues???? Spirit issues???? What you talking about Willis? Other than the rules from Ma Blue, that is.
Being in camo, in the woods (or urban for that matter), doesn't make you more safe when you're doing SAR or DR.
Being "different" from the "other guys on your team" doesn't give you more spirit.
Neither is on the top of the charts as to CAP's challenges, but they are on the list, and should be
weighted heavily in decisions regarding any changes to our already schizophrenic uniforms choices.
Camo doesn't make you less safe either.
Quote from: RogueLeader on April 01, 2012, 01:26:19 AM
Camo doesn't make you less safe either.
Actually, is does, especially if you are lost yourself, and it can impede your mission capability if you are hoping to be seen by the person
you are searching for.
Camo's function is to hide something, generally a hunter from its prey, and vice verse. It serves no purpose in SAR.
But you must admit... In most places it helps identify easily who is who... Police wear BDUs in a lot of places for various reasons, so does EMS. So, it makes it easy to tell who is city county or state and who is CAP, it helps law enforcement realize they don't need to worry about the guys in BDU because they aren't theirs, same with EMS. And it helps CAP not to walk up to a cop from an odd angle not seeing a weapon or other identifiers asking him why he isn't with his team or why is he messing with the police.
I do not see how BDUs are dangerous if you are lost. You have a reflective vest, you should also have chem lights. There is enough that you can do to ensure you can be found if you are lost that wearing BDUs they will not hinder you in the least.
As I have said before, why not have OD BDU's?
They would hearken back to our history (pickle suits) and to my knowledge no branch of the Armed Forces uses them.
Quote from: CyBorg on April 01, 2012, 06:33:47 AM
As I have said before, why not have OD BDU's?
They would hearken back to our history (pickle suits) and to my knowledge no branch of the Armed Forces uses them.
Part of our appeal is the uniform. Face it.
Quote from: Eclipse on April 01, 2012, 01:32:09 AM
Quote from: RogueLeader on April 01, 2012, 01:26:19 AM
Camo doesn't make you less safe either.
Actually, is does, especially if you are lost yourself, and it can impede your mission capability if you are hoping to be seen by the person
you are searching for.
Cite please.
Mission effectiveness does not mean safe.
Quote from: RogueLeader on April 01, 2012, 07:33:55 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on April 01, 2012, 01:32:09 AM
Quote from: RogueLeader on April 01, 2012, 01:26:19 AM
Camo doesn't make you less safe either.
Actually, is does, especially if you are lost yourself, and it can impede your mission capability if you are hoping to be seen by the person
you are searching for.
Cite please.
Mission effectiveness does not mean safe. rule 13
FTFY
Another potential BDU source...for the interim.
From Commissioned Corps Bulletin:
"Q. What/when is the phase-in period? Will I still be able to wear my BDUs during the transition?"
"A. The planned phase-in will be tentatively set for 1 May 2012 with a 12 month phase until 1 May, 2013. You will still be able to wear you BDUs during the transition, however, on and after 1 May 2013, the BDUs will no longer be an authorized Corps uniform."
Source: USPHS Commissioned Corps Bulletin (http://dcp.psc.gov/ccbulletin/articles/Uniforms_03_2012.aspx)
I don't mean any disrespect... But I don't understand the connection of this to CAP. Please elaborate.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 04, 2012, 07:52:44 PM
I don't mean any disrespect... But I don't understand the connection of this to CAP. Please elaborate.
If the USPHS folks aren't wearing them, then their left-overs are a potential additional source for CAP.
Quote from: sandman on April 04, 2012, 06:07:55 PM
Another potential BDU source...for the interim.
From Commissioned Corps Bulletin:
"Q. What/when is the phase-in period? Will I still be able to wear my BDUs during the transition?"
"A. The planned phase-in will be tentatively set for 1 May 2012 with a 12 month phase until 1 May, 2013. You will still be able to wear you BDUs during the transition, however, on and after 1 May 2013, the BDUs will no longer be an authorized Corps uniform."
Source: USPHS Commissioned Corps Bulletin (http://dcp.psc.gov/ccbulletin/articles/Uniforms_03_2012.aspx)
But now our BlueDU's look like their uniform >:D
Quote from: Littleguy on April 04, 2012, 09:09:02 PM
Quote from: sandman on April 04, 2012, 06:07:55 PM
Another potential BDU source...for the interim.
From Commissioned Corps Bulletin:
"Q. What/when is the phase-in period? Will I still be able to wear my BDUs during the transition?"
"A. The planned phase-in will be tentatively set for 1 May 2012 with a 12 month phase until 1 May, 2013. You will still be able to wear you BDUs during the transition, however, on and after 1 May 2013, the BDUs will no longer be an authorized Corps uniform."
Source: USPHS Commissioned Corps Bulletin (http://dcp.psc.gov/ccbulletin/articles/Uniforms_03_2012.aspx)
But now our BlueDU's look like their uniform >:D
Kind of, but not really. The untuck ODU only has the two upper pockets, is a different shade of blue, and the insignia are different colors.
DCU or ABU or whatever? ???
The CG is about to transition to a new camo uniform as well. (for the small part that wears BDU's/ DCU's) Remember with military surplus the average military person is bigger than the average cadet, so these sources might not be that beneficial.
Quote from: EMT-83 on March 18, 2012, 02:32:38 PM
Quote from: Littleguy on March 18, 2012, 01:55:10 PMABU= We are praying we get them soon when the next uniform board comes around in a few months.
We are?
I am. It kills me knowing that we don't have them
Quote from: usafcap1 on April 10, 2012, 08:00:38 PM
Quote from: EMT-83 on March 18, 2012, 02:32:38 PM
Quote from: Littleguy on March 18, 2012, 01:55:10 PMABU= We are praying we get them soon when the next uniform board comes around in a few months.
We are?
I am. It kills me knowing that we don't have them
What's the big deal? A utility uniform is a utility uniform. Is the color really all that important? Our current uniform is more functional than its predecessor, and has no major appearance issues.
After several threads going multiple pages, I would just like to say to everyone that.....
I DON'T REALLY GIVE A BLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP..
Quote from: ol'fido on April 10, 2012, 10:15:19 PM
After several threads going multiple pages, I would just like to say to everyone that.....
I DON'T REALLY GIVE A BLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP..
Don't hold back, sir.... Tell us how you
really feel.
;D
Quote from: ol'fido on April 10, 2012, 10:15:19 PM
After several threads going multiple pages, I would just like to say to everyone that.....
I DON'T REALLY GIVE A BLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP..
I don't beleive you.....if you did not really care....you would just ignore the thread.
I disagree with your statement that the OD fatigues were a "tactical" uniform. Although OD in color, they were more of a utility uniform geared more towards garrison duty that being in the field.
I hate to rain on your opinion, but the OD fatigues were the standard field uniform in the Army until well after the Viet Nam War. I first wore them at ROTC Summer Camp in 1956 and then wore them in both the Reserves and Active Duty until at least 1975. I managed to spend some time during those years in "the field", wearing OD fatigues. In VN, we were issued jungle fatigues(guess what color they were?)--OD. You are likely too young to remember all that: the military world didn't start with BDUs.
I remember when my then-brother-in-law, who was in the Army, started transitioning from OD to BDU's.
I was in high school, so this would be sometime in the early 1980s.
He said that the point of doing so was so that all the Services would have a common field/work/combat uniform...see how THAT turned out.
I don't see any reason why we couldn't have already-available OD-cut BDU's.
(http://www.soldiercity.com/images/products/300PIX/BDU44009_300PIX.JPG)
For the "distinctiveness" crowd, we could do what the Air Force very briefly tried - replacing name/organisational tapes with the velcro flight suit leather nameplate.
We could also have bright (not subdued) grade insignia on the collar.
Both would save quite a bit in wear, and a heck of a lot in sewing.
No thanks, I would much rather stick as close to USAF as possible. I love having the tie in that we do.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 16, 2012, 12:21:31 AM
No thanks, I would much rather stick as close to USAF as possible. I love having the tie in that we do.
Don't get me wrong. I too love our shared heritage with the Air Force. That said why do we clamor to wear a uniform that is designed for their work needs. Why would us wearing a utility uniform that is independent of the USAF a bad thing? The "distinctive" theme that seems foisted upon us by the very organization we want to be a part of seems like enough of a message that they don't feel the same way.
Why can't we just celebrate those ties by focusing on Being Good at our mission rather than just looking good and trying to mirror our parent organization?
Quote from: SARDOC on April 16, 2012, 01:03:51 AM
The "distinctive" theme that seems foisted upon us by the very organization we want to be a part of seems like enough of a message that they don't feel the same way.
I don't think it's so much that as the walking-on-eggshells
perception ever since the days of the berry boards by our own leadership that the AF doesn't want us looking any more like them.
The reason I suggested OD is because I don't think we need camouflage, and the OD colour hearkens back to our pickle suits. Also, hopefully it would pacify those in our organisation who shout "distinctiveness!" all the time, though no doubt they would say the BDU's have to be grey. ::)
Quote from: CyBorg on April 16, 2012, 02:55:59 AM
Quote from: SARDOC on April 16, 2012, 01:03:51 AM
The "distinctive" theme that seems foisted upon us by the very organization we want to be a part of seems like enough of a message that they don't feel the same way.
I don't think it's so much that as the walking-on-eggshells perception ever since the days of the berry boards by our own leadership that the AF doesn't want us looking any more like them.
The reason I suggested OD is because I don't think we need camouflage, and the OD colour hearkens back to our pickle suits. Also, hopefully it would pacify those in our organisation who shout "distinctiveness!" all the time, though no doubt they would say the BDU's have to be grey. ::)
I know some members who would look pretty close to Mr. Castro in OD green w/ patrol cap ;). The facial hair is what really does it.
Raises hand. My beard isn't nearly as curly as Fidel's, though. ;)
Quote from: CyBorg on April 16, 2012, 02:55:59 AMThe reason I suggested OD is because I don't think we need camouflage, and the OD colour hearkens back to our pickle suits.
Uh, have you seen the Air Force utility uniform? Not really an issue. (Unless you're standing next to a blue spruce. ;))
Our current ones are more of an issue, that's why the vest is required.
Quote from: CyBorg on April 16, 2012, 02:55:59 AM... though no doubt they would say the BDU's have to be grey. ::)
Shhh. Don't give anyone ideas!
With other color uniforms, we may end up looking like opfor...
For those of you who scream for navy blue to not look like the military, some of us are going to end up looking like the USAF Thunderbirds because they too wear a navy blue flightsuit and utility uniform (it is different but similar). Also, I've seen local police departments use them, too.
My point is that no matter what we are going to some how resemble a USAF unit some how, some way.
http://afthunderbirds.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/120301-F-KA253-003.jpg (http://afthunderbirds.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/120301-F-KA253-003.jpg)
http://www.mildenhall.af.mil/photos/mediagallery.asp?galleryID=1405&?id=-1&page=33&count=24 (http://www.mildenhall.af.mil/photos/mediagallery.asp?galleryID=1405&?id=-1&page=33&count=24) (this picture gallery showcases the USAF blue coveralls, I have no clue if they are an actual uniform or just regular blue coveralls authorized for wear.)
Quote from: Littleguy on April 16, 2012, 11:55:04 AM
My point is that no matter what we are going to some how resemble a USAF unit some how, some way.
There's the pink camoflauge...
See, proof that being distinctive isn't necessarily better....
Quote from: bflynn on April 16, 2012, 04:16:59 PM
Quote from: Littleguy on April 16, 2012, 11:55:04 AM
My point is that no matter what we are going to some how resemble a USAF unit some how, some way.
There's the pink camoflauge...
See, proof that being distinctive isn't necessarily better....
;D I wouldn't mind that at all :o
Quote from: bosshawk on April 15, 2012, 08:06:58 PM
I hate to rain on your opinion, but the OD fatigues were the standard field uniform in the Army until well after the Viet Nam War. I first wore them at ROTC Summer Camp in 1956 and then wore them in both the Reserves and Active Duty until at least 1975. I managed to spend some time during those years in "the field", wearing OD fatigues. In VN, we were issued jungle fatigues(guess what color they were?)--OD. You are likely too young to remember all that: the military world didn't start with BDUs.
When I went to the Army Guard in 1982, from active duty, I was expecting new uniforms. I got three new sets of OD fatigues. The non prior service enlistees got BDUs. I had two sets of the OD jungle fatigues that I always got cash offers for.
Tanks for the memories Colonel. 8)
Quote from: bflynn on April 16, 2012, 04:16:59 PM
Quote from: Littleguy on April 16, 2012, 11:55:04 AM
My point is that no matter what we are going to some how resemble a USAF unit some how, some way.
There's the pink camoflauge...
That would go perfect with these:
(http://cdn5.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/pink_lite_16-tfb.jpg)
If only we had a combat-oriented mission...
>:D
That'th tho thilly... >:D
Quote from: Littleguy on April 16, 2012, 11:55:04 AM
For those of you who scream for navy blue to not look like the military, some of us are going to end up looking like the USAF Thunderbirds because they too wear a navy blue flightsuit and utility uniform (it is different but similar). Also, I've seen local police departments use them, too.
They don't. They scream for everything to be GREY, for reasons I shall never fathom.
Quote from: PhoenixCadet on April 17, 2012, 12:41:12 AMIf only we had a combat-oriented mission...
>:D
We do.....it is called green flag.....but not in the way that you mean. ;D
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 16, 2012, 12:21:31 AM
No thanks, I would much rather stick as close to USAF as possible. I love having the tie in that we do.
Quote from: SARDOC on April 16, 2012, 01:03:51 AM
Why can't we just celebrate those ties by focusing on Being Good at our mission rather than just looking good and trying to mirror our parent organization?
What if we did
both? What if we had a distinctive, military cut-yet different from any service utility uniform for all members? That way our specific needs would be satisfied for a utility uniform, but we still keep the USAF style dress uniforms for those who meet weight/grooming standards so that we can keep our ties to the Air Force visible in our uniforms?
Quote from: titanII on April 18, 2012, 03:00:29 AM
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 16, 2012, 12:21:31 AM
No thanks, I would much rather stick as close to USAF as possible. I love having the tie in that we do.
Quote from: SARDOC on April 16, 2012, 01:03:51 AM
Why can't we just celebrate those ties by focusing on Being Good at our mission rather than just looking good and trying to mirror our parent organization?
What if we did both? What if we had a distinctive, military cut-yet different from any service utility uniform for all members? That way our specific needs would be satisfied for a utility uniform, but we still keep the USAF style dress uniforms for those who meet weight/grooming standards so that we can keep our ties to the Air Force visible in our uniforms?
We have a number of valuable people to our organization that don't meet H/W standards or choose not to meet grooming standards. The Air Force dictates that those outside of limits can not wear the Air Force Style uniform, why must we disregard our own traditions and heritage to wear a uniform that is only a part of that. The Purpose of the CAP uniform is to identify us as the Civil Air Patrol. An organization that is technically Older than the Air Force itself. Why can we manage to have our uniform that holds true to our organizational missions and ideals? If that means we have separate our organization so that only a few can wear the Air Force style uniform, I think that degrades us as an organization.
The Civil Air Patrol Core Values. The fourth of which is RESPECT which according to CAPP 50-2 is defined as:
QuoteRespect: CAP members come from all walks of life. Therefore, it is extremely important that members treat each other with fairness and dignity, and work together as a team. To do otherwise would seriously impair CAP's capability to accomplish the mission.
How is it Fair and dignified and cohesive team building if we have some of our members that can't even wear the same uniform? It creates and artificial division among some folks.
Quote from: titanII on April 18, 2012, 03:00:29 AM
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 16, 2012, 12:21:31 AM
No thanks, I would much rather stick as close to USAF as possible. I love having the tie in that we do.
Quote from: SARDOC on April 16, 2012, 01:03:51 AM
Why can't we just celebrate those ties by focusing on Being Good at our mission rather than just looking good and trying to mirror our parent organization?
What if we did both? What if we had a distinctive, military cut-yet different from any service utility uniform for all members? That way our specific needs would be satisfied for a utility uniform, but we still keep the USAF style dress uniforms for those who meet weight/grooming standards so that we can keep our ties to the Air Force visible in our uniforms?
Military cut means BDU style to most people, and will be impractical (unless ofcourse you are suggesting making that dreaded BlueDU our utility uniform). I wear dress blues twice, maybe three four times a busy month with a wing conference included, and one of those times is with CAC which isn't really a public image thing. We'll lose a lot of connectivity with the USAF personnel who see us, and we'll be less on the same page as them IE on the Air Force team. I hate to say it really badly, but looks are important for organizations.
Quote from: SARDOC on April 18, 2012, 04:21:56 AM
How is it Fair and dignified and cohesive team building if we have some of our members that can't even wear the same uniform? It creates and artificial division among some folks.
We will have that dichotomy as long as the AF keeps current H/W standards, and for those who choose to have facial hair.
I had a beard before I joined CAP, but I shaved it off because I wanted to wear the AF uniform.
However, that isn't the only reason some choose the "corporate" uniforms.
Reasons I've heard are:
- They're cheap.
- You're a lot less likely to get gigged for uniform violations.
- They're cheap.
- There's no set standard for particular grey trousers or white shirts, and the polo shirt is only available from one vendor anyway.
- They're cheap.
- They're much easier to just throw on when you're in a hurry.
- They're cheap.
- You don't have to worry about C&C's in the corporate uniforms.
- They're cheap.
- You don't have to wear a hat, though some members wear a plethora of hats.
- Did I mention they're cheap?
Quote from: SARDOC on April 18, 2012, 04:21:56 AM
How is it Fair and dignified and cohesive team building if we have some of our members that can't even wear the same uniform? It creates and artificial division among some folks.
...we already have some members that can't wear certain uniforms.
I guess I'm confused. Are you refuting my idea, SARDOC, or are you expressing your dislike for the current uniform system?
Quote from: Littleguy on April 18, 2012, 04:31:54 AM
We'll lose a lot of connectivity with the USAF personnel who see us, and we'll be less on the same page as them IE on the Air Force team. I hate to say it really badly, but looks are important for organizations.
We're already wearing a uniform that NOBODY in the US Air Force wears (BDU's). Why would it he so bad if we changed the camo to a more mission effective color scheme? That's all I'm advocating. BDU's with a different color (that isn't camo).
Quote from: titanII on April 18, 2012, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: SARDOC on April 18, 2012, 04:21:56 AM
How is it Fair and dignified and cohesive team building if we have some of our members that can't even wear the same uniform? It creates and artificial division among some folks.
...we already have some members that can't wear certain uniforms.
I guess I'm confused. Are you refuting my idea, SARDOC, or are you expressing your dislike for the current uniform system?
Quote from: Littleguy on April 18, 2012, 04:31:54 AM
We'll lose a lot of connectivity with the USAF personnel who see us, and we'll be less on the same page as them IE on the Air Force team. I hate to say it really badly, but looks are important for organizations.
We're already wearing a uniform that NOBODY in the US Air Force wears (BDU's). Why would it he so bad if we changed the camo to a more mission effective color scheme? That's all I'm advocating. BDU's with a different color (that isn't camo).
Because it atleast was a recent USAF uniform, and if we get ABU's, we'll be back on track. Don't let the previous generation of berry board sufferers sway your opinion to want to get away from the USAF uniforms, they're traumatized for life.
Quote from: Littleguy on April 18, 2012, 05:33:17 AM
Don't let the previous generation of berry board sufferers sway your opinion to want to get away from the USAF uniforms, they're traumatized for life.
I'm one of those. I came into CAP just too late for the blue epaulettes and hard rank.
All of my initial contacts in CAP were very demoralised (and some quite bitter) about the berry boards and losing a visible connection because of the stupidity of a few.
My feeling about the ABU's is that I
hope we'll get them...and I'm a little burnt that AFROTC/JROTC gets them, not to mention SDF Air Wings who have no connection to the USAF, except through the ANG. I'm not holding my breath, though.
However, I get even more burnt with those who trumpet looking as
un-like the USAF as possible.
Quote from: CyBorg on April 18, 2012, 07:01:56 AM
Quote from: Littleguy on April 18, 2012, 05:33:17 AM
Don't let the previous generation of berry board sufferers sway your opinion to want to get away from the USAF uniforms, they're traumatized for life.
I'm one of those. I came into CAP just too late for the blue epaulettes and hard rank.
All of my initial contacts in CAP were very demoralised (and some quite bitter) about the berry boards and losing a visible connection because of the stupidity of a few.
My feeling about the ABU's is that I hope we'll get them...and I'm a little burnt that AFROTC/JROTC gets them, not to mention SDF Air Wings who have no connection to the USAF, except through the ANG. I'm not holding my breath, though.
However, I get even more burnt with those who trumpet looking as un-like the USAF as possible.
Not only do we look different than the USAF today, we mess everything up for the generations to come. We'll get them, and the crowd of anti-uniform people will retreat.
I think it is funny, really, that we are not excited to get the new ABU's. In JROTC (I hate to keep bringing it up, but it sometimes offers a great comparison) we are all PUMPED to get the new ASU dress blues, which for freshmen this year will be in their junior year. Maybe that's the difference, the motivation of all to get a new uniform.
I'd like an ABU outfitted in Woodland Camo. That'd fit the bill...
That would just be the BDU, the ABU is the same cut as the BDU, just a different pattern.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 23, 2012, 02:51:18 PM
That would just be the BDU, the ABU is the same cut as the BDU, just a different pattern.
But, but, but... it has more pen pockets. ::)
Quote from: jeders on April 23, 2012, 03:32:33 PM
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 23, 2012, 02:51:18 PM
That would just be the BDU, the ABU is the same cut as the BDU, just a different pattern.
But, but, but... it has more pen pockets. ::)
The ABU is made out of different materials too, right? If we could just get ABUs with the BDU camo pattern on them, I would be okay with that.
The ABU fabric is already really hot, and it has issues because it doesn't breathe well. Making it a darker pattern would just make things worse.
Plus, I plan on getting my ABUs in rip-stop, not that heavy junk. The Army really had it together when they made the ACU.
Rip-stop is not approved for ABUs. And the so called light weight ABUs are not approved for general wear AF wide just yet.
Quote from: abdsp51 on April 23, 2012, 04:07:50 PM
Rip-stop is not approved for ABUs. And the so called light weight ABUs are not approved for general wear AF wide just yet.
Let's hope it gets approved, there are plenty of suppliers of rip-stop ABUs that it wouldn't be a problem. The regular ABU is thicker than winter weight BDUs.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 23, 2012, 04:11:09 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on April 23, 2012, 04:07:50 PM
Rip-stop is not approved for ABUs. And the so called light weight ABUs are not approved for general wear AF wide just yet.w
Let's hope it gets approved, there are plenty of suppliers of rip-stop ABUs that it wouldn't be a problem. The regular ABU is thicker than winter weight BDUs.
Who ya telling I wear them daily and wouldnt mind a lighter approved version.
Quote from: abdsp51 on April 23, 2012, 04:19:38 PM
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 23, 2012, 04:11:09 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on April 23, 2012, 04:07:50 PM
Rip-stop is not approved for ABUs. And the so called light weight ABUs are not approved for general wear AF wide just yet.w
Let's hope it gets approved, there are plenty of suppliers of rip-stop ABUs that it wouldn't be a problem. The regular ABU is thicker than winter weight BDUs.
Who ya telling I wear them daily and wouldnt mind a lighter approved version.
Oh, I know you know, you know?
I couldnt stand to wear them daily as they are now. I fell in love with my ACUs when I put them on. When I first got them they were stiff as snot, and I washed them ten times straight, even throwing them in the dryer after each wash, and I am yet to find anything more comfortable. The fabric feels like lounging clothes once they are worn in, and it's too bad the Air Force didn't follow suit with their fabric. I think they should have just used the ACU and changed the pattern, the cut is great, and it makes everything so much easier when you are comfortable in what you are wearing, and having a jacket that doesn't have the extra pockets at the bottom is nice when you can't even use them for anything.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 23, 2012, 04:26:18 PM
I think they should have just used the ACU and changed the pattern, the cut is great
A hearty second to that, Sir. The Army really got it right with that design. The Air Force, it seems to me, didn't really try to make any huge improvements on the BDU when they were designing the ABU. (besides camo pattern, of course)
There have been alot of issues with the ACUs blowing seams early out. And the big thing that troops were complaining about is the velcro.
Two deployments, and no seam blow outs or Velcro problems.
I didn't let those idiots that we're "sizing" us for our ACUs, I got them the right size that I thought they should be, and they worked great! I know some of our heavier guys had blow out problems, but once they ordered replacements, and got them one size bigger, all was right in the world.
I have no idea about the Velcro problems, unless it was due to washing them without the Velcro closed and other junk got into them, but again, no issues.
I guess they were just perfect for me.
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 23, 2012, 05:29:05 PM
Two deployments, and no seam blow outs or Velcro problems.
I didn't let those idiots that we're "sizing" us for our ACUs, I got them the right size that I thought they should be, and they worked great! I know some of our heavier guys had blow out problems, but once they ordered replacements, and got them one size bigger, all was right in the world.
I have no idea about the Velcro problems, unless it was due to washing them without the Velcro closed and other junk got into them, but again, no issues.
I guess they were just perfect for me.
I heard that sand was embedding itself into the pile and making it impossible to close.
Hmmm, that's a new one on me. I didnt have any problems with it, and I would think being where I was in Iraq it would have happened to me. But maybe I just got really lucky, I know the Velcro on the old body armor was crap. It tore up before anything really happened anywhere else on your uniform. I know I replaced I myself before I even changed the batteries on my scope.
Quote from: abdsp51 on April 23, 2012, 05:11:02 PM
There have been alot of issues with the ACUs blowing seams early out. And the big thing that troops were complaining about is the velcro.
I am over the Velcro. I am not sure what problem it was a solution for, but I am not a fan. When I redeployed, one of the first things I did was get sewn on all that is now able to be sewn on.
I don't mind the fabric/cut (and I have had one or two seams resewn), but my biggest complaint is the camouflage pattern. It doesn't seem particularly effective in most terrain. (But if we ever go to war in a gravel pit...)
Quote from: manfredvonrichthofen on April 23, 2012, 05:29:05 PM
Two deployments, and no seam blow outs or Velcro problems.
I didn't let those idiots that we're "sizing" us for our ACUs, I got them the right size that I thought they should be, and they worked great! I know some of our heavier guys had blow out problems, but once they ordered replacements, and got them one size bigger, all was right in the world.
I have no idea about the Velcro problems, unless it was due to washing them without the Velcro closed and other junk got into them, but again, no issues.
I guess they were just perfect for me.
I don't know how many times my tapes got stuck to my sleeves or "traded" flags or patches when passing another troop. And I ALWAYS washed my uniforms with all patches on. Never had a seam bust.
Quote from: titanII on April 23, 2012, 04:30:24 PM
A hearty second to that, Sir. The Army really got it right with that design. The Air Force, it seems to me, didn't really try to make any huge improvements on the BDU when they were designing the ABU. (besides camo pattern, of course)
I don't know if I would consider the pattern on the ABU an improvement. Even the manufacturer of the pattern admits it. Read near the bottom:
http://www.tigerstripeproducts.com/airforcetiger.htm (http://www.tigerstripeproducts.com/airforcetiger.htm)
Quote from: titanII on April 18, 2012, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: SARDOC on April 18, 2012, 04:21:56 AM
How is it Fair and dignified and cohesive team building if we have some of our members that can't even wear the same uniform? It creates and artificial division among some folks.
...we already have some members that can't wear certain uniforms.
I guess I'm confused. Are you refuting my idea, SARDOC, or are you expressing your dislike for the current uniform system?
Quote from: Littleguy on April 18, 2012, 04:31:54 AM
We'll lose a lot of connectivity with the USAF personnel who see us, and we'll be less on the same page as them IE on the Air Force team. I hate to say it really badly, but looks are important for organizations.
We're already wearing a uniform that NOBODY in the US Air Force wears (BDU's). Why would it he so bad if we changed the camo to a more mission effective color scheme? That's all I'm advocating. BDU's with a different color (that isn't camo).
My real disdain is for the "separate but equal" nature of our current uniform system. I believe we should have a "Uniform" uniform system. I find it perfectly acceptable that the Civil Air Patrol wear a uniform that is a USAF style..as long as everyone can wear it. The priority is for us to celebrate our own heritage and help develop us as a team, if the USAF isn't willing to let certain members wear an AF style uniform then it defeats the whole point and we should move away from it to something we can all wear.
It's more important for us to develop our own sense of organizational pride than become dependent on the organizational pride of another group.
Quote from: Ford73Diesel on April 25, 2012, 04:25:50 AM
I don't know if I would consider the pattern on the ABU an improvement. Even the manufacturer of the pattern admits it. Read near the bottom:
http://www.tigerstripeproducts.com/airforcetiger.htm (http://www.tigerstripeproducts.com/airforcetiger.htm)
You know what, I agree! I have no idea what I was thinking when I typed that. I usually detest the ABU camo pattern!
Wow, that is pretty heavy commentary from the manufacturer. I am amazed about how our armed forces are continually allowed to make poor choices in developing field uniforms. We've got the "Almost Camoflage Uniform" or ACU that by all accounts is comfortable and wears well, but doesn't blend in any sort of environment short of a gravel pit. We've got the ABU, which the MANUFACTURER feels the need to apologize about. Navy drops three new digital patterns into the supply chain including the blue digital, which, by the way, is probably the smartest decision of all if it really does hide grease, paint, etc. Jarheads are running around in MARPAT. And what do most services adopt in theater in the 'Stan? A commercially available all terrain pattern that, despite it's effectiveness, will be quickly dropped from the supply system after the drawdown because of it's very status of being "commercially available". Seriously?
Let's just latch onto the BDU as hard as we can and push for availability for all members. If the GSA ever wises up and actually fixes the US military field uniform problem CAP will never be able to keep up with the changes!!
Quote from: SARDOC on April 25, 2012, 12:56:24 PM
My real disdain is for the "separate but equal" nature of our current uniform system. I believe we should have a "Uniform" uniform system. I find it perfectly acceptable that the Civil Air Patrol wear a uniform that is a USAF style..as long as everyone can wear it. The priority is for us to celebrate our own heritage and help develop us as a team, if the USAF isn't willing to let certain members wear an AF style uniform then it defeats the whole point and we should move away from it to something we can all wear.
Doubtless some five-watt bulb with a talent for pointing out the obvious will say, "we already
have a uniform that everyone can wear...the aviator greys and polos!" >:(
That's about on the level of (hi, JeffDG!) back in 1968 when Canada unified it's armed forces and the uniform was "any colour you like as long as it is green...you want your Navy and Air Force historical identity, that's what the cap and collar badges are for."
(http://collections.civilization.ca/public/objects/common/webmedia.php?irn=5262396)
(this was from a former RCN officer)
Fortunately, though, they decided that one unpopular pattern does
not fit all. We haven't.