Since we've talked a little bit about how 39-1 is really overdue for a re-write, what changes would you like to see in it? Here's my (partial?) list:
1. SMWOG stuff: Remove the CAP cutouts from the blue shirt (or anywhere else they are), remove the embroidered CAP cutouts from the BDUs and anywhere else; no grade insignia anywhere. This would make the SMWOG more in line with a new airman in the USAF and eliminate having to throw everything out in 6 months when the vast majority either promote or drop out. Allow them to wear the Officer flight cap (silver/blue) instead of the Cadet flight cap (blue only). If having nothing on the blues would make them look too much like USAF personnel, then authorize the grey epaulet sleeve with no grade insignia.
2. Remove the restriction that prohibits more than one of the following three items: Pager, two-way radio, cell phone. The USAF did away with it, and it doesn't make sense to tell ground teams that they have to choose between a radio and a cell phone. Further, the profession of many members requires them to carry a cell phone and a pager. Add language allowing it within reason.
3. Do away with the Golf Shirt uniform (we have enough uniforms that don't require weight/grooming standards to be met) and just make it a casual item of clothing that members can wear to show pride in the organization with the usual exceptions of those circumstances that would reflect poorly on CAP.
4. Eliminate the confusion surrounding the wear of the uniform pre and post activity. An hour is arbitrary; many activities take place more than an hour away from home for many members either occasionally or as a matter of course. Replace with language requiring members to make only necessary stops and travel before and after the activity.
I think you got it! Makes sense to me! The only things I can think of are, if most members make officer grade in 6 months or so, than maybe there's no need for the chevrons either, and either add CAP to the blue epaulet sleeves worn with the white aviator shirt, or take the CAP off of the grey ones (just for some consistancy) worn with the others. Taking them off of both will probably leave a bit of overstock with the greys, but the new ones will be less time consuming to make without the lettering, and as far as the blue ones for the white aviators shirt, you can just get the regular AF epaulet sleeves which are allready made.
Sorry! wasn't thinking about the diploma/GED thing required for officer ranks. If senior members don't have these, maybe the chevrons are needed (got to promote people to something sooner or later, if they don't have a diploma or GED...Where are they going to go?)
Quote from: JoeTomasone on November 12, 2008, 02:53:05 PM
Since we've talked a little bit about how 39-1 is really overdue for a re-write, what changes would you like to see in it? Here's my (partial?) list:
1. SMWOG stuff: Remove the CAP cutouts from the blue shirt (or anywhere else they are), remove the embroidered CAP cutouts from the BDUs and anywhere else; no grade insignia anywhere. This would make the SMWOG more in line with a new airman in the USAF and eliminate having to throw everything out in 6 months when the vast majority either promote or drop out. Allow them to wear the Officer flight cap (silver/blue) instead of the Cadet flight cap (blue only). If having nothing on the blues would make them look too much like USAF personnel, then authorize the grey epaulet sleeve with no grade insignia.
2. Remove the restriction that prohibits more than one of the following three items: Pager, two-way radio, cell phone. The USAF did away with it, and it doesn't make sense to tell ground teams that they have to choose between a radio and a cell phone. Further, the profession of many members requires them to carry a cell phone and a pager. Add language allowing it within reason.
3. Do away with the Golf Shirt uniform (we have enough uniforms that don't require weight/grooming standards to be met) and just make it a casual item of clothing that members can wear to show pride in the organization with the usual exceptions of those circumstances that would reflect poorly on CAP.
4. Eliminate the confusion surrounding the wear of the uniform pre and post activity. An hour is arbitrary; many activities take place more than an hour away from home for many members either occasionally or as a matter of course. Replace with language requiring members to make only necessary stops and travel before and after the activity.
Those are all terrible ideas.
1. SMWOG are just that. They have no grade. Similar to the Cadet Airmen Basics. What exactly do they have to "throw out?" A few sets of collar pins and some cheap CAP cloth stuff?
They shouldn't be allowed to wear the Officer style flight ap, due to the fact their not officers.
You said that you want to 'stop them from throwing a bunch of stuff away,' and then you suggest that they wear blank epaulettes, which are many times the price of CAP cutouts and cloth stuff.
2. I've never had a problem with that rule, so why change it?
3. Guys, seriously, get off the Golf Shirt topic. I know it may not fit into your views of what a quasi military organization should be, but it's a perfectly acceptably, cheap uniform for some members, and indeed, is a good choice for certain situations.
4. Why do you feel the need to elimate this rule? The rule doesn't say the hour must cover travel time.........
Better images showing where to put things. Diagrams instead of pictures. Share nametags across uniforms. Remove ribbons from 39-1, only describe how they are worn not what can be worn or in what order. Clarify what types of uniform changes wing commanders can and can not make(looking at you PAWG ;D) Clarify headgear(don't female Airmen in th AF wear the same caps as the males?). Give us some dang winter gear that works north of the Mason-Dixon for Pete's sake. A field jacket alone don't cut it below zero.(yeah yeah long underwear. It's still too frakkin cold for that without heavy outer gear.)
You know Dave.....I never thought of that! I'm going to freeze my "you know what" off up here in the winter. None of the jackets that are authorized are going to work here in Niagara Falls with the wind and the cold! I have a leather "Shearling" that I wear with layers underneath, and that doesn't even work sometimes!
Quote from: JoeTomasone on November 12, 2008, 02:53:05 PM
... Allow them to wear the Officer flight cap (silver/blue) instead of the Cadet flight cap (blue only). If having nothing on the blues would make them look too much like USAF personnel, then authorize the grey epaulet sleeve with no grade insignia.
Non-concur. If they are not officers they shall not wear officer stuff. Would much rather restrict "transitional" SM's without grade from wearing service uniform, CSU/TPU for the six months or so. Super Airman status should be retained for those not transitioning, or those transitioning to NCO status.
Case for the golf shirt?
Quote from: JoeTomasone on November 12, 2008, 02:53:05 PM3. Do away with the Golf Shirt uniform (we have enough uniforms that don't require weight/grooming standards to be met) and just make it a casual item of clothing that members can wear to show pride in the organization with the usual exceptions of those circumstances that would reflect poorly on CAP.
See above... I'd also turn that around on you and get rid of the quasi-military uniforms for you
non-conformists. Get rid of the Aviator shirt and the CSU/TPU... De-militarize the other CAP distinctive uniforms. i.e. pre-aviator shirt CAP distinctive uniforms (blazer nametag), golf shirts with field uniform trousers etc.
Ok, I can see the point on the flight cap issue, so you get another flight cap when you make officer....big deal! But I don't think I'm a non-conformist for choosing to wear the CSU. They're not my rules! I would prefer to wear the AF style uniform, but I'm not allowed to by CAP rules, not mine.
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
Those are all terrible ideas.
Thanks! Glad you like 'em! :clap:
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
1. SMWOG are just that. They have no grade. Similar to the Cadet Airmen Basics. What exactly do they have to "throw out?" A few sets of collar pins and some cheap CAP cloth stuff?
Plus they now have holes in the shirt collars where they will never again pin insignia, a flight cap they will never wear again, etc. I don't think that changing from 2nd. Lt. to 1st. Lt. is as bad since the ONLY thing you change is epaulet sleeves and BDU collars (for most members). But from SMWOG to 2nd. Lt. and assuming only blue shirt and BDUs, you are buying/getting rid of/re-sewing all of the above mentioned items after only 6 months for most members. And this is on top of that recent expense to buy the uniforms in the first place. I think that's a lot to ask, personally, of many members who may not have a lot of extra disposable income.
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
They shouldn't be allowed to wear the Officer style flight ap, due to the fact their not officers.
Quite frankly, I think of SMWOG as an "Officer Candidate" rather than an Airman Basic as some here do. If they are going to be an Officer/Flight Officer in 6 months, why split hairs? An Airman Basic in the AF isn't going to be pinning Officer stuff on for a VERY long time, if ever -- but a SMWOG is almost 100% going to in 6 months. I'm not suggesting that we make them officers, just that we eliminate the need to make them buy stuff that is useless in 6 months.
Hey, I wouldn't be opposed to having them wear the Golf Shirt uniform and/or Blazer exclusively while SMWOG -- which eliminates the majority of the upfront expense while they decide if CAP is for them and learn how to wear the military-style uniform for when they promote. Under those circumstances, I'd keep the Golf Shirt and Blazer.
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
You said that you want to 'stop them from throwing a bunch of stuff away,' and then you suggest that they wear blank epaulettes, which are many times the price of CAP cutouts and cloth stuff.
I'm not in favor of them wearing the "blanks" -- just offering it as a compromise since USAF might object to the only difference between a USAF Airman Basic and a CAP SMWOG being a nameplate.
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
2. I've never had a problem with that rule, so why change it?
Just because you haven't had a problem with it doesn't mean that others haven't. But okay, let's say you are a physician who has a cell phone and needs to wear a pager. Which one do you leave home when you go to the Squadron meeting? If you go on a Ground Team, do you give up the cell phone or the VHF radio?
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
4. Why do you feel the need to elimate this rule? The rule doesn't say the hour must cover travel time.........
Precisely - it doesn't cover ANYTHING - just says that you should not wear the uniform more than an hour past the activity. It's ambiguous and ultimately doesn't give you a clear guideline of what is acceptable and what is not. Let's say I live next door to where the Squadron meets and my commute home is about 1.5 minutes. Does that mean I can wear the uniform for the next 58 minutes no matter what I do when I get home? Can I go out to the store with it? Seems silly, right? And yet that is what the regs currently imply is acceptable. Now, what if I am attending an FTX 4 hours away from home -- am I required to bring civvies to change into since I won't make it home in time, or can I go with common sense and change when I get home?
Why change it? Because it SHOULD be changed. Not because it is giving anyone serious heartburn, just because it makes no sense and can be easily rewritten to clarify its intent.
Quote from: JoeTomasone on November 12, 2008, 04:35:35 PM
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
2. I've never had a problem with that rule, so why change it?
Just because you haven't had a problem with it doesn't mean that others haven't. But okay, let's say you are a physician who has a cell phone and needs to wear a pager. Which one do you leave home when you go to the Squadron meeting? If you go on a Ground Team, do you give up the cell phone or the VHF radio?
Simple solution. Put the cell phone in a pocket. I agree though that rule is overly restrictive and should be loosened.
Quote from: JoeTomasone on November 12, 2008, 04:35:35 PM
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
1. SMWOG are just that. They have no grade. Similar to the Cadet Airmen Basics. What exactly do they have to "throw out?" A few sets of collar pins and some cheap CAP cloth stuff?
Plus they now have holes in the shirt collars where they will never again pin insignia, a flight cap they will never wear again, etc. I don't think that changing from 2nd. Lt. to 1st. Lt. is as bad since the ONLY thing you change is epaulet sleeves and BDU collars (for most members). But from SMWOG to 2nd. Lt. and assuming only blue shirt and BDUs, you are buying/getting rid of/re-sewing all of the above mentioned items after only 6 months for most members. And this is on top of that recent expense to buy the uniforms in the first place. I think that's a lot to ask, personally, of many members who may not have a lot of extra disposable income.
Speaking as a former cadet who put a lot of holes in the collar of his shirt, I still wear that same shirt as a senior member. There isn't a single hole remaining. And if we're worried about people wasting money, have them wear the golf shirt, that's what it's there for.
Quote from: JoeTomasone on November 12, 2008, 04:35:35 PM
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
They shouldn't be allowed to wear the Officer style flight ap, due to the fact their not officers.
Quite frankly, I think of SMWOG as an "Officer Candidate" rather than an Airman Basic as some here do. If they are going to be an Officer/Flight Officer in 6 months, why split hairs? An Airman Basic in the AF isn't going to be pinning Officer stuff on for a VERY long time, if ever -- but a SMWOG is almost 100% going to in 6 months. I'm not suggesting that we make them officers, just that we eliminate the need to make them buy stuff that is useless in 6 months.
I may be wrong, though I don't think I am, don't ROTC cadets and OTs wear the regular enlisted flight cap (sans silver braid)? In which case, why should we be different. Besides, they can always sell there SMWOG stuff on Ebay.
Quote from: JoeTomasone on November 12, 2008, 04:35:35 PM
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
2. I've never had a problem with that rule, so why change it?
Just because you haven't had a problem with it doesn't mean that others haven't. But okay, let's say you are a physician who has a cell phone and needs to wear a pager. Which one do you leave home when you go to the Squadron meeting? If you go on a Ground Team, do you give up the cell phone or the VHF radio?
Put it in your pocket/bag. I carry a cell phone with me everywhere I go. It's always in either my pocket or a bag if I'm carrying one. If you really need to carry a pager and a phone, wear the pager and put the phone in your bag.
Quote from: JoeTomasone on November 12, 2008, 04:35:35 PM
Quote from: JThemann on November 12, 2008, 03:34:45 PM
4. Why do you feel the need to elimate this rule? The rule doesn't say the hour must cover travel time.........
Precisely - it doesn't cover ANYTHING - just says that you should not wear the uniform more than an hour past the activity. It's ambiguous and ultimately doesn't give you a clear guideline of what is acceptable and what is not. Let's say I live next door to where the Squadron meets and my commute home is about 1.5 minutes. Does that mean I can wear the uniform for the next 58 minutes no matter what I do when I get home? Can I go out to the store with it? Seems silly, right? And yet that is what the regs currently imply is acceptable. Now, what if I am attending an FTX 4 hours away from home -- am I required to bring civvies to change into since I won't make it home in time, or can I go with common sense and change when I get home?
Why change it? Because it SHOULD be changed. Not because it is giving anyone serious heartburn, just because it makes no sense and can be easily rewritten to clarify its intent.
Actually the rule says, and I'm paraphrasing here, an hour before and after the meeting/activity unless travel time is greater than an hour. Change into civies onve you arrive at your destination. Only essential stops when wearing the flightsuit.
Could it be clarified, sure. But not changed.
Forgot to add, as far as what changes I would like to see made:
NONE. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. Not until after we have the ABU in place. We've had enough changes over the past several years and it's time for us to leave the uniform alone and focus on the more important issues, like whether or not to put the MAJCOM shield on the door of a plane or the tail. ;D
Our uniforms are going to change soon enough, and when they do there will be a thourough rewrite of the regs as a matter of necessity. Lets wait until after that to worry about the rest of this stuff.
Quote from: jeders on November 12, 2008, 04:50:11 PM
I may be wrong, though I don't think I am, don't ROTC cadets and OTs wear the regular enlisted flight cap (sans silver braid)? In which case, why should we be different. Besides, they can always sell there SMWOG stuff on Ebay.
WIWAC, AFROTC cadets wore officer flight caps.
Also, according to AFROTCI 36-2008, Section 4.2:
Cadets will wear the officer flight cap with diamond braid (male or female) with all combinations of the service uniform, except when wearing the semi-formal dress uniform (para 4.1.4.) or when participating in activities listed in Chapter 8 of this instruction.
Just a question on uniform expenses that relates to all of this...........
I heard that our uniforms that we purchase are suppose to be tax deductable. If that's true, how many people have taken that route ?
I always give the bean counter my receipts for uniform purchases.
Is the deduction worth it?
I found that the deduction was really only worth it when I first came back to CAP. I spent a good chunk of change to get all of the uniforms and a couple sets of BDU's and everything that goes on to all of them. I probably won't find it worth it to deduct again until we get the ABU or somehow all of my uniforms need replacing.
Quote from: dhon27 on November 12, 2008, 05:03:03 PM
Quote from: jeders on November 12, 2008, 04:50:11 PM
I may be wrong, though I don't think I am, don't ROTC cadets and OTs wear the regular enlisted flight cap (sans silver braid)? In which case, why should we be different. Besides, they can always sell there SMWOG stuff on Ebay.
WIWAC, AFROTC cadets wore officer flight caps.
Also, according to AFROTCI 36-2008, Section 4.2:
Cadets will wear the officer flight cap with diamond braid (male or female) with all combinations of the service uniform, except when wearing the semi-formal dress uniform (para 4.1.4.) or when participating in activities listed in Chapter 8 of this instruction.
OK. I could've sworn that I saw ROTC cadets wearing the enlisted cap in college, but I guess I was wrong.
Wow! I was just reading everything, and I see how things go in a totaly different direction (my fault too)......I believe the question was "What uniform changes would you like to see?"
No changes for the BDUs until we switch to ABUs. Let us wear warmer coats with the blues.
Quote from: NCO forever on November 12, 2008, 05:35:52 PMLet us wear warmer coats with the blues.
I think you mean... "Let us wear civilian outerwear in lieu of regulation outerwear prescribed."
For starts, 39-1 needs to be updated in a way where SMWOG will not be confused on what to wear, not only in choice of wording, but maybe pictures or illustrations showing examples of members with out grade, with grade, and officers, instead of just one example.
As far as changes in uniforms themselves, I would actually like to see blue epaulet sleeves on the blue uniforms (the greys just don't look right to me), and maybe have the CAP embroidered on it to be different than the regular AF. I'd like to see the same for the new CSU, so the only difference would be the shirt (actually, I'd like to see everyone in the same uniforms, but for some reason, they want to have these standards that seperate everyone.....like it's the "fat person" uniform....why do they even make those uniforms in those sizes then?).
I'd like them to keep with AF stuff, and stop using different clothing from other branches of service (Army windbreaker...allthough it's pretty cool looking) and so. forth.
I'd actualy like to see them keep the polo's, but allow them to be worn anywhere since they are not really uniform like (I see them kind of like the T-shirts you can get with CAP and you're wing or squadron on them.....is there something that prohibits wearing them around?)
This is just what I'd like to see and I know there's changes currently being made to certain uniforms. The main thing is, I would like 39-1 to be revised to where it's understood by all ranks, and all the older stuff removed from the web that would cause confusion.
Quote from: MIKE on November 12, 2008, 06:21:09 PM
Quote from: NCO forever on November 12, 2008, 05:35:52 PMLet us wear warmer coats with the blues.
I think you mean... "Let us wear civilian outerwear in lieu of regulation outerwear prescribed."
Not sure what you mean by warmer, is it even possible to increase it?
When I wear blues in the winter, I've got an undershirt, long sleeve blues shirt (possibly the cardigan), all weather-coat with liner, gloves and earmuffs.
Same with the BDUs. In the cold, I'd wear thermal underwear, a black t-shirt, BDU blouse, gortex parka with fleece liner, gloves and a black knit watchcap.
It's pretty warm to me - and yes, it is cold here.
Quote from: Rob Sherlin on November 12, 2008, 06:26:45 PM
As far as changes in uniforms themselves, I would actually like to see blue epaulet sleeves on the blue uniforms (the greys just don't look right to me), and maybe have the CAP embroidered on it to be different than the regular AF. I'd like to see the same for the new CSU, so the only difference would be the shirt (actually, I'd like to see everyone in the same uniforms, but for some reason, they want to have these standards that seperate everyone.....like it's the "fat person" uniform....why do they even make those uniforms in those sizes then?).
Ok, let's start with this. It's the Air Force that would have to approve that and they want us to look similiar but also be different at a glance hence the grey epaulets. Even with "CAP" embroidered onto them I don't see the Air Force Approving that any time soon.
As far as the standards those are prescribed by the Air Force as the Blues, BDU's, Green Flight Suit, and Mess Dress uniforms are all Air Force uniforms. For some of our larger members we'd have to get the uniforms specially made, since the uniforms only come in certain sizes because that's all the Air Force needs.
Okay...here's my idea.
We would wear the exact same uniform as the USAF (both the fat & fuzzies and the clean shaved and trims) with the addition of a disctinctive patch (the current overseas wing patch) on the left sholder. The patch would go on all uniforms BDUs, ABUs, Blues, Service Coat, Lightweight Jacket (on the mess dress we use the current CAP crest). On the Gortex Jacket I would add a blue CIVIL AIR PATROL tab that would attach to the pocket flap so we don't disrupt the water proofing.
For all other items...we would wear the same as the USAF...same shoulder marks, same name tags, same insignia.
We would have to modify our specialty badges to make them smaller then wear them in the same places and by the same rules as USAF Occupational Badges.
So...we would be distinctive in all our uniforms....(the full color patch on the shoulder of all unifroms).....but in all other thing we would confrom and match USAF rules. IMHO this would satify everyones concerns....it looks professional, gets everyone in the same set of uniforms and make it plainly ovious to but USAF and Outside Personnel that we are infact the CAP and not the USAF.
And for future changes to our uniforms....we ditch 39-1 and get the USAF to add a chapter to the AFI that covers us. That way, we submit out chages to the USAF unfirom board direct, and when the make a change to the USAF uniform we match them.
I think that USAF should allow (and CAP/HQ should request to allow) all USAF service and ABU uniform items for wear by CAP as long as CAP distinctive insignia is worn. I really don't understand how a USAF commander can claim that they care about their people's welfare and well-being if they don't allow CAP members, who are their people are in danger of being hurt by wearing too little weather protection.
This of course specifically goes for the extreme cold weather items, but for hot weather items as well. We know that members will wear civilian clothing when appropriate even if goes against the regulations and uniformity, so why bother restricting them? We just end up looking unprofessional. USAF has no more to lose from authorizing us to wear ABU parkas and pants than us wearing the ABUs themselves. As long as there is CAP specific identification on them. However, allowing our members to wear these items officially, creates uniformity, professional appearance, safety, and <GASP> the slight feeling that our USAF aunts and uncles at HQ/USAF actually care about us. I'd say it would be a small price to pay for the Air Force, but they aren't paying for these, we are. We're allowed to wear all USAF service and service dress outerwear, why not ABU? It'd say these options are more important in field conditions than in the office anyway.
I'd also include USAF authorized undergarments (tees, underarmour, turtlenecks).
Quote from: MIKE on November 12, 2008, 03:53:14 PM
See above... I'd also turn that around on you and get rid of the quasi-military uniforms for you non-conformists. Get rid of the Aviator shirt and the CSU/TPU... De-militarize the other CAP distinctive uniforms. i.e. pre-aviator shirt CAP distinctive uniforms (blazer nametag), golf shirts with field uniform trousers etc.
I have to agree. Demilitarize the CAP distinctive uniforms. Go back to the blazer combo.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 12, 2008, 08:25:28 PM
Okay...here's my idea.
We would wear the exact same uniform as the USAF (both the fat & fuzzies and the clean shaved and trims) with the addition of a disctinctive patch (the current overseas wing patch) on the left sholder. The patch would go on all uniforms BDUs, ABUs, Blues, Service Coat, Lightweight Jacket (on the mess dress we use the current CAP crest). On the Gortex Jacket I would add a blue CIVIL AIR PATROL tab that would attach to the pocket flap so we don't disrupt the water proofing.
For all other items...we would wear the same as the USAF...same shoulder marks, same name tags, same insignia.
We would have to modify our specialty badges to make them smaller then wear them in the same places and by the same rules as USAF Occupational Badges.
So...we would be distinctive in all our uniforms....(the full color patch on the shoulder of all unifroms).....but in all other thing we would confrom and match USAF rules. IMHO this would satify everyones concerns....it looks professional, gets everyone in the same set of uniforms and make it plainly ovious to but USAF and Outside Personnel that we are infact the CAP and not the USAF.
And for future changes to our uniforms....we ditch 39-1 and get the USAF to add a chapter to the AFI that covers us. That way, we submit out chages to the USAF unfirom board direct, and when the make a change to the USAF uniform we match them.
I've said almost as much several times that our uniforms should more closely match our parent organization especially when it comes to occupational badges and such. What I disagree with is your proposal to do away with the grooming requirements to wear. Not only would the AF never go for this but I believe we should go the other route and make physical fitness more a part of the Senior Member program. We need to create a "culture" of being healthy and mission ready.
Since someone asked about the tax deduction -
You need to be using a 1040 and a Schedule A to take the deduction. Keep receipts for all your expenses, and don't forget the mileage.
As a deduction, vice tax credit, you only get back a portion of what you claim as a deduction, depending on your marginal tax rate - 10, 15, 25, 28, 33, or 35%.
Is it worth it? IMHO, every little bit helps. I don't know too many members who spend less that $200/yr, and in your average 25 and 28% brackets, $50-56 will buy a decent meal at a nice restaurant.
How about a 6 month moratorium on uniform threads? HQ is not listening.. So give it up.
Quote from: SarDragon on November 12, 2008, 09:07:20 PM
Is it worth it? IMHO, every little bit helps. I don't know too many members who spend less that $200/yr, and in your average 25 and 28% brackets, $50-56 will buy a decent meal at a nice restaurant.
If you don't itemize, it may not be worth it. However if you do itemize, take all you can get.
Quote from: winterg on November 12, 2008, 09:05:44 PMbut I believe we should go the other route and make physical fitness more a part of the Senior Member program. We need to create a "culture" of being healthy and mission ready.
Will never happen...and should never happen. We
are mission ready as far ahs physical fitness goes (for the most part). As much as people hate to hear this....we are a civilian organisation. I did PT for 22 years.....I don't want to "have to" do it again. When I can no longer hump my 24 hour pack the I'll stop being a GTM....but why make the 70 year old admin officer meet PT standards? What would those standards be by the way?
Quote from: Pumbaa on November 12, 2008, 09:21:30 PM
How about a 6 month moratorium on uniform threads? HQ is not listening.. So give it up.
It is getting a little redundent. I believe a lot of these same points were made not too long ago. As far as HQ not listening has anyone heard how Col White is doing with his committee on the new 39-1? That should be tieing up a lot of what we've been arguing about through out this board and the previous 25 on uniform changes.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 12, 2008, 08:25:28 PM
We would wear the exact same uniform as the USAF (both the fat & fuzzies and the clean shaved and trims) with the addition of a disctinctive patch (the current overseas wing patch) on the left sholder. The patch would go on all uniforms BDUs, ABUs, Blues, Service Coat, Lightweight Jacket (on the mess dress we use the current CAP crest). On the Gortex Jacket I would add a blue CIVIL AIR PATROL tab that would attach to the pocket flap so we don't disrupt the water proofing.
For all other items...we would wear the same as the USAF...same shoulder marks, same name tags, same insignia.
We would have to modify our specialty badges to make them smaller then wear them in the same places and by the same rules as USAF Occupational Badges.
So...we would be distinctive in all our uniforms....(the full color patch on the shoulder of all unifroms).....but in all other thing we would confrom and match USAF rules. IMHO this would satify everyones concerns....it looks professional, gets everyone in the same set of uniforms and make it plainly ovious to but USAF and Outside Personnel that we are infact the CAP and not the USAF.
And for future changes to our uniforms....we ditch 39-1 and get the USAF to add a chapter to the AFI that covers us. That way, we submit out chages to the USAF unfirom board direct, and when the make a change to the USAF uniform we match them.
I'm thinking some folks should just go ahead and join the Air Force.
Quote from: jeders on November 12, 2008, 04:50:11 PM
Speaking as a former cadet who put a lot of holes in the collar of his shirt, I still wear that same shirt as a senior member. There isn't a single hole remaining. And if we're worried about people wasting money, have them wear the golf shirt, that's what it's there for.
Mine were the other way 'round. YMMV I guess.
Quote from: jeders on November 12, 2008, 04:50:11 PM
Besides, they can always sell there SMWOG stuff on Ebay.
Sure, but my point is that they shouldn't have to. Nor is every member comfortable with or in a position to use Ebay. I've got cadets in my Group who don't have internet access at all.
Quote from: JoeTomasone on November 12, 2008, 04:35:35 PM
But okay, let's say you are a physician who has a cell phone and needs to wear a pager. Which one do you leave home when you go to the Squadron meeting? If you go on a Ground Team, do you give up the cell phone or the VHF radio?
Quote from: jeders on November 12, 2008, 04:50:11 PM
Put it in your pocket/bag. I carry a cell phone with me everywhere I go. It's always in either my pocket or a bag if I'm carrying one. If you really need to carry a pager and a phone, wear the pager and put the phone in your bag.
..And if you don't carry a bag?
Quote from: jeders on November 12, 2008, 04:50:11 PM
Actually the rule says, and I'm paraphrasing here, an hour before and after the meeting/activity unless travel time is greater than an hour. Change into civies onve you arrive at your destination. Only essential stops when wearing the flightsuit.
Could it be clarified, sure. But not changed.
Ah, yes, you are correct there.
Quote1. SMWOG are just that. They have no grade. Similar to the Cadet Airmen Basics. What exactly do they have to "throw out?" A few sets of collar pins and some cheap CAP cloth stuff?
They shouldn't be allowed to wear the Officer style flight ap, due to the fact their not officers.
You said that you want to 'stop them from throwing a bunch of stuff away,' and then you suggest that they wear blank epaulettes, which are many times the price of CAP cutouts and cloth stuff.
SMWOG is a made up term. Their grade is SM. C/AB is also a grade. Both have no insignia.
Right now SMWOG is equiv to Airman Basic on the adult side, hence they where enlisted flight caps. It would be equally appropriate to remove the metal cutouts, use the blank "CAP" grade slides, and consider them Officer Candidates. In fact, I would do away with SM as a grade & use "OC."
The times for wearing uniforms should be eliminated. You should not be allowed to wear it to a place that makes most of its income from alcohol sales (ie bar versus restaurant), to any political event, or in any situation where perception could arise that CAP supports or endorses something when that is not the case. Those should be disciplinary matters. Other than that, you should be able to use your best judgment & be answerable to your chain of command for your behavior. If local/wing CCs want to make that more strict, then they have the ability to do that.
And by the way... there's 30 pages of this discussion providing input to the uniform committee. If there's an idea on uniform reform, it's covered in that thread. The Cmte has their information & is working to finalize their proposals & revisions.
QuoteAnd by the way... there's 30 pages of this discussion providing input to the uniform committee. If there's an idea on uniform reform, it's covered in that thread. The Cmte has their information & is working to finalize their proposals & revisions.
So this begs the question... Why is this still being discussed?????
How about waiting until the cmte comes out with their revisions? Then the discussions on uniforms can begin again ad nauseum. Seems like a lot of wasted band width hacking away at something that is not going to change.
That was kind of my point.
Quote from: NCO forever on November 12, 2008, 05:35:52 PM
No changes for the BDUs until we switch to ABUs. Let us wear warmer coats with the blues.
Or spend the cash......
There's the woolly pully, and the All Weather Coat?
How much warmer does it get then a fur lined trench coat?
Quote from: DNall on November 12, 2008, 11:11:30 PM
That was kind of my point.
That's what I thought DNall... Thus I needed to simplify your message for those who still elect to continue on a fruitless path of uniform change discussion. As your eloquent prose went right over their heads...
I believe I missed the point of this thread. The object was to put forth a personal wish list of uniform changes that each person would like to see. That means each of us should be able to put something out without being dog piled. So on that happy thought....
1. Would like to see some combination of khaki cargo/BDU type trousers and the golf shirt. I suggest this since at many missions or disaster drills i see EMA or LEO or other emergency personnel dressed similarly. This would be more for mission base types or as casual wear.
2. Would like to see CAP uniforms parallel USAF as much as possible. That would mean blue epaulet sleeves and name tags ala 1980's. ABUs with subdued patches and nametags.
3. Use the old OD jungle fatigues as the alternate utility uniform so that the subdued patches would match. You can buy these from Brigades or Galls for about the same as the BBDU.
4. Nope nothing.. it's just that every wish list has an item #4.
Quote from: Angus on November 12, 2008, 09:28:02 PM
Quote from: Pumbaa on November 12, 2008, 09:21:30 PM
How about a 6 month moratorium on uniform threads? HQ is not listening.. So give it up.
It is getting a little redundant. I believe a lot of these same points were made not too long ago. As far as HQ not listening has anyone heard how Col White is doing with his committee on the new 39-1? That should be tying up a lot of what we've been arguing about through out this board and the previous 25 on uniform changes.
We are working to finalize all the details and various proposals. Fine tuning, cleaning them up, adding graphics and photos. Everyone just needs to be patient and in the end, all will be resolved. We are looking at a myriad of issues that we and other members have identified as needing correction, clarification, and revision. Please bear with us a bit longer. Its coming along for the WB where uniform issues are addressed.
:clap:
Quote from: LtCol White on November 13, 2008, 03:04:42 AM
Quote from: Angus on November 12, 2008, 09:28:02 PM
Quote from: Pumbaa on November 12, 2008, 09:21:30 PM
How about a 6 month moratorium on uniform threads? HQ is not listening.. So give it up.
It is getting a little redundant. I believe a lot of these same points were made not too long ago. As far as HQ not listening has anyone heard how Col White is doing with his committee on the new 39-1? That should be tying up a lot of what we've been arguing about through out this board and the previous 25 on uniform changes.
We are working to finalize all the details and various proposals. Fine tuning, cleaning them up, adding graphics and photos. Everyone just needs to be patient and in the end, all will be resolved. We are looking at a myriad of issues that we and other members have identified as needing correction, clarification, and revision. Please bear with us a bit longer. Its coming along for the WB where uniform issues are addressed.
Dave:
Good to hear from you! You must be busy, since you have not been on the boards for a while.
I was dropping your name on another thread, the one about the "CSU Clarification." I explained about how big your job was.
Quote from: davedove on November 12, 2008, 09:22:27 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 12, 2008, 09:07:20 PM
Is it worth it? IMHO, every little bit helps. I don't know too many members who spend less that $200/yr, and in your average 25 and 28% brackets, $50-56 will buy a decent meal at a nice restaurant.
If you don't itemize, it may not be worth it. However if you do itemize, take all you can get.
You can't do it if you don't itemize. That's what the Schedule A is for.
Quote from: SarDragon on November 13, 2008, 07:41:09 AM
Quote from: davedove on November 12, 2008, 09:22:27 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on November 12, 2008, 09:07:20 PM
Is it worth it? IMHO, every little bit helps. I don't know too many members who spend less that $200/yr, and in your average 25 and 28% brackets, $50-56 will buy a decent meal at a nice restaurant.
If you don't itemize, it may not be worth it. However if you do itemize, take all you can get.
You can't do it if you don't itemize. That's what the Schedule A is for.
Yeah, I know that. To be more precise, if you don't already itemize, it's pretty unlikely that these small amounts will enable you to itemize and thus deduct the costs.
Quote from: LtCol White on November 13, 2008, 03:04:42 AM
Quote from: Angus on November 12, 2008, 09:28:02 PM
Quote from: Pumbaa on November 12, 2008, 09:21:30 PM
How about a 6 month moratorium on uniform threads? HQ is not listening.. So give it up.
It is getting a little redundant. I believe a lot of these same points were made not too long ago. As far as HQ not listening has anyone heard how Col White is doing with his committee on the new 39-1? That should be tying up a lot of what we've been arguing about through out this board and the previous 25 on uniform changes.
We are working to finalize all the details and various proposals. Fine tuning, cleaning them up, adding graphics and photos. Everyone just needs to be patient and in the end, all will be resolved. We are looking at a myriad of issues that we and other members have identified as needing correction, clarification, and revision. Please bear with us a bit longer. Its coming along for the WB where uniform issues are addressed.
Sounds great sir, thank you for your help in this.
Quote from: lordmonar on November 12, 2008, 09:23:57 PM
Will never happen...and should never happen. We are mission ready as far ahs physical fitness goes (for the most part). As much as people hate to hear this....we are a civilian organisation. I did PT for 22 years.....I don't want to "have to" do it again. When I can no longer hump my 24 hour pack the I'll stop being a GTM....but why make the 70 year old admin officer meet PT standards? What would those standards be by the way?
Seriously? You think we should never have any kind of physical fitness program for seniors to help promote and maintain a healthy force? That's just absurd. We most definitely need one. And I'm not talking about retirees doing windsprints. It can be as simple as using a program like the President's Physical Fitness Challenge and requiring a certain number of points each month (I know, you can fudge it).
We have to face facts, we live in the most overweight country in the world. And it's starting to show in CAP. We're supposed to be providing an example to cadets, and it's not a good one when half our membership can't squeeze into the military style uniform.
So, I am going to commit a crime here and suggest the KISS uniforms. For seniors, we have too many uniforms.
Stay away from the AF uniform(s) that cause so many problems/confusion. Just have one/two uniforms that cover all occasions. Perhaps the white/grey combo and add the blazer for more formal wear. Keep the polo/grey for less formal wear. If you GT, the ABU would work, flight crew use the flight suit. Go with blue so we wont have to worry about AF flight suit regs. Thats it. 39-1 would be 4-5 pages. Just an idea to throw out, don't be upset!
I think we should all put a tac in the talk of ABU wear. We have to wait till the Air Force approves that and most likely we won't see that any time soon. I'm thinking 2010 at the earliest.
I agree, it will still be some years till we see the ABU. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm kind of anxious to see the new 39-1.
It could just be the photos I see, but isn't the Gill Robb Wilson ribbon the same as the National Commander's Citation ribbon, just flipped over?
I know the question is not on uniforms, but maybe they should look at re-designing one of the two and issue a "freebie" of the new designed one to whoever currently has that ribbon (just a thought)
Quote from: winterg on November 13, 2008, 04:24:59 PM
Seriously? You think we should never have any kind of physical fitness program for seniors to help promote and maintain a healthy force? That's just absurd. We most definitely need one. And I'm not talking about retirees doing windsprints. It can be as simple as using a program like the President's Physical Fitness Challenge and requiring a certain number of points each month (I know, you can fudge it).
We have to face facts, we live in the most overweight country in the world. And it's starting to show in CAP. We're supposed to be providing an example to cadets, and it's not a good one when half our membership can't squeeze into the military style uniform.
The current physical fitness program is open for senior members as well as cadets. I agree with you that people are getting larger, however, mandated physcial fitness program for our volunteers is absurd. How much time and mandated items do our volunteers need to give to the organization before their contribution is considered valid?
Quote from: Rob Sherlin on November 13, 2008, 05:07:30 PM
It could just be the photos I see, but isn't the Gill Robb Wilson ribbon the same as the National Commander's Citation ribbon, just flipped over?
Correct.
QuoteStay away from the AF uniform(s) that cause so many problems/confusion.
Negative. The AF uniforms are part of what make this organization great. It instills a sense of pride and professionallism that without would have significant impact on the success of the Cadet Programs IMHO.
If I were to suggest a change, it would be to consolidate the aviator shirt combo to one and get some consistency with the AF style. Also, use all the same attachments from the AF on the CAP Distinct for Flight and Utility.
For example:
Seniors within Weight and Grooming
Service Uniform:
As presently constituted.
Flight Uniform:
Green Bag with Cloth Grade and Cloth Name Badge
Utility:
BDU's as constituted until ABU approval
Seniors out of Weight and Grooming
Service Uniform:
White Aviator Shirt
Grey Epaulets
Grey Name Plate
Blue Slacks
CSU Jacket with Same Name Plate as AF Service Coat.
Flight:
Dark Blue Bag with cloth grade and Cloth Name Badge (same for blue and green)
Utility:
Blue BDU's as constituted
This way, all the Seniors buy the same NAMEPLATES, NAME TAPES, GRADE, cutouts, etc.
This would go a long way in eliminating confusion and costs.
Say a senior goes fuzzy, get a new coat and white shirt...done on the service side. Gain a little weight, white shirt, new coat, done.
Utility swap is easier, pull everything off the BDU's and apply to BBDU's
Flight, pull all the Velcro badges off the green, put on the blue. (Almost that easy now)
The blazer...leave for IACE.
Polo is OK.
Just my 2 cents
I would just need to say the uniforms need to be stream lined. I would say keep everything the same if you are in standards along with the AF style uniforms. If out of standards then keep it with ONE option comparable with the AF uniform. BDU-BBDU i.e. Allow the name tags to be the same. Also Keep the Polo. As a SM that is a great uniform. You stand out from the Cadets (young guys like me run into that problem sometimes) it is easy cheep and professional. You can do anything in it minus PT and moving through the woods. I also wouldn't mind see some other Service badges authorized on the uniforms as well but hey that is almost another thread in its self.
Reduce the amount of badges that one can wear on the BDU's. Some members look like Formula One race car drivers!
Keep the polo shirt, but make the pants khaki rather than gray. Looks better and most people have several pairs of khakis.
Uniforms that I will never use:
1. Mess Dress
2. AF blue service coat
3. CSU
4. Flight suit...I'm not a pilot nor do I serve as an air crew member...maybe it's just me, but I personally don't see the appeal.
If I can't wear AF style uniforms I'll be in the polo shirt uniform.
Quote4. Flight suit...I'm not a pilot nor do I serve as an air crew member...maybe it's just me, but I personally don't see the appeal.
I find them very comfortable in all weather and easy to use and not worry about getting dirty when climbing in/around/under the plane. Great Uniform for the need.
Very simple:
- Eliminate the embarrassing golf shirt "uniform" combo - save it for the golf course or some other "club".
- Eliminate the TPU and all it variants completely - given the corporate "suit", there is is no need for this uniform combo
- Return to the original MAJCOM patch (with U.S. Air Force Auxiliary listed) - visual reenforcement of our history and relationship
- Remove flag from BDU and BBDU - not sure why anyone felt compelled to add this in the first place
Quote from: A.Member on November 13, 2008, 09:01:43 PM
- Remove flag from BDU and BBDU - not sure why anyone felt compelled to add this in the first place
To get CAP ready for overseas deployment or maybe so we don't forget what country we're in? I've often wondered the reasoning myself.
The thing that those of you don't understand about the CSU/TPU is that it gives us who do not meet the standard for wear of AF Blue a real uniform to wear.
I am sure that most of you like wearing your unifoms with all of your recognition on them. So do we.
Eliminating this uniform gives us no means of doing this. Going back to the blazer is a step backwards and make us who wear the CSU/TPU second class citizens in our own organization.
FYI: I have not worn a uniform in over 3 months.
Quote from: A.Member on November 13, 2008, 09:01:43 PM
Very simple:
- Eliminate the embarrassing golf shirt "uniform" combo - save it for the golf course or some other "club".
- Eliminate the TPU and all it variants completely - given the corporate "suit", there is is no need for this uniform combo
- Return to the original MAJCOM patch (with U.S. Air Force Auxiliary listed) - visual reenforcement of our history and relationship
- Remove flag from BDU and BBDU - not sure why anyone felt compelled to add this in the first place
The Golf shirt combo is great for flying activities in the summer also at mission base it looks more professional.
The TPU/CSU I dont' agree with getting rid of it is great for those who don't meat the weight standards.
Going back to Aux Patch we don't need to the current one does the same but at the same time shows we are part of the AF.
I do have to agree with you on the removal of the Flag Patch, this was part of that entire "US Civil Air Patrol" debacle under he who shall not be named. If you look at a member of the Air Force they do not wear the flag as a patch, that's an army thing.
Quote from: CAP Producer on November 13, 2008, 09:26:01 PM
The thing that those of you don't understand about the CSU/TPU is that it gives us who do not meet the standard for wear of AF Blue a real uniform to wear.
Oh... I sure do understand, and that's precisely why I want the uniform gone.
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:29:44 PM
The Golf shirt combo is great for flying activities in the summer also at mission base it looks more professional.
No sale. I'm a pilot as well. And more professional than what? A t-shirt?
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:29:44 PM
The TPU/CSU I dont' agree with getting rid of it is great for those who don't meat the weight standards.
That's why the blazer combo exists. There is absolutely no need for the TPU/CSU.
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:29:44 PMGoing back to Aux Patch we don't need to the current one does the same but at the same time shows we are part of the AF.
The current patch makes no reference to our Air Force relationship.
(BTW, I can't believe I'm getting sucked into a uniform discussion. I must be bored. lol. I vowed to myself that I'd try and avoid these - they get
way too much attention)
Quote from: A.Member on November 13, 2008, 09:45:20 PM
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:29:44 PM
The Golf shirt combo is great for flying activities in the summer also at mission base it looks more professional.
No sale. I'm a pilot as well. And more professional than what? A t-shirt?
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:29:44 PM
The TPU/CSU I dont' agree with getting rid of it is great for those who don't meat the weight standards.
That's why the blazer combo exists. There is absolutely no need for the TPU/CSU.
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:29:44 PMGoing back to Aux Patch we don't need to the current one does the same but at the same time shows we are part of the AF.
The current patch makes no reference to our Air Force relationship.
So then ditch the golf shirt combo which has many uses and create another uniform that doesn't look professional at all.
The Blazer cobo doesn't look as professional or as sharp as the TPU/CSU
The way the patch in it's shield design makes the reference. And as I meant to add but didn't get in their at the same time, it shows our connection and at the same time it shows we're seperate.
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:51:17 PM
So then ditch the golf shirt combo which has many uses and create another uniform that doesn't look professional at all.
No need to create any more uniforms there are plenty of options already.
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:51:17 PMThe Blazer cobo doesn't look as professional or as sharp as the TPU/CSU
Opinions definitely differ. If a person wants to wear a military style uniform, then conform to the standards and wear the USAF-style.
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:51:17 PMThe way the patch in it's shield design makes the reference. And as I meant to add but didn't get in their at the same time, it shows our connection and at the same time it shows we're seperate.
It doesn't do it better than the original design. Keep in mind that throughout the years this relationship has been flaunted and for good reason. Evidence to this is the following patch during the 50's/60's:
(http://wiki.cadetstuff.org/images/d/d3/Dd_2.jpg)
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 05:00:25 PM
I think we should all put a tac in the talk of ABU wear. We have to wait till the Air Force approves that and most likely we won't see that any time soon. I'm thinking 2010 at the earliest.
The use of the ABU by CAP has already been approved by the USAF Uniform Board. The only issue is what distinctive insignia will be worn by CAP members.
I can't wait to buy my green boots. MCSS needs the $200 way more than I do.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on November 13, 2008, 10:30:28 PM
The use of the ABU by CAP has already been approved by the USAF Uniform Board. The only issue is what distinctive insignia will be worn by CAP members.
Interesting. Who /what is the source for that info? I was told in no uncertain terms by my Wing logistics/supply officer, who is
very qualified and knowledgeable, that we will be in BDU's for a
very long, long time. There is no shortage of BDU items.
I'm thinking 2011 will be the mandatory wear date for ABUs, but what the hell do I know.
Didn't we cover this already? ALL this information has been discussed in MASSIVE detail in a 30 page thread to advise the uniform cmte what the membership wants. That was only a few months ago. Every one of these items has been thoroughly suggested, debated, and either compromise reached or better idea developed.
The member input phase is over for now. The cmte is finalizing their work for presentation to NB within the year. CAP-USAF & CAP leadership have already provided positive feedback. It's in the prep to present phase. Everyone (including me) will see it all when the time comes. You may not all agree with some things (that wouldn't be possible), but you will absolutely love others. Overall, you will be extremely impressed with what they've done.
Once the vote occurs, then the formal regulation will be put out, with a member comment period (as required by regs). This will be the time when everyone here needs to dig in & find any detailed or technical problems or less than clear areas that need to be tweaked.
Uniform changes are (informally) on hold till that process plays out. After it happens, then changes will be on hold again for a while.
Quote from: DNall on November 13, 2008, 10:48:44 PM
I'm thinking 2011 will be the mandatory wear date for ABUs, but what the hell do I know.
Didn't we cover this already? ALL this information has been discussed in MASSIVE detail in a 30 page thread to advise the uniform cmte what the membership wants. That was only a few months ago. Every one of these items has been thoroughly suggested, debated, and either compromise reached or better idea developed.
The member input phase is over for now. The cmte is finalizing their work for presentation to NB within the year. CAP-USAF & CAP leadership have already provided positive feedback. It's in the prep to present phase. Everyone (including me) will see it all when the time comes. You may not all agree with some things (that wouldn't be possible), but you will absolutely love others. Overall, you will be extremely impressed with what they've done.
Once the vote occurs, then the formal regulation will be put out, with a member comment period (as required by regs). This will be the time when everyone here needs to dig in & find any detailed or technical problems or less than clear areas that need to be tweaked.
Uniform changes are (informally) on hold till that process plays out. After it happens, then changes will be on hold again for a while.
Thanks for the info. I'll have to look for the thread
(As I mentioned earlier, I vowed to stay out of all these bleepity bleep uniform discussions...evidently that decision has it's downsides ;) ).
Quote from: A.Member on November 13, 2008, 10:03:49 PM
Opinions definitely differ. If a person wants to wear a military style uniform, then conform to the standards and wear the USAF-style.
I could, of course, give you the 180-degree opposite viewpoint, which many members feel would be just as valid as yours above:
If you're so all-fired hot to wear the Air Force uniform ... then go join the Air Force.
I don't have any inside information, and I'm certain that Col. White or anyone else on the uniform committee will correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I have heard and seen, the CSU is not going anywhere. There are many members who do conform to AF standards that wear the CSU. And the hundreds, or maybe even thousands, who don't conform to the standards are certainly not going to let go of it -- not after paying $160 for the coat, they're not!
Besides, to read your argument, you're saying, in essence, "Shape up or ship out!" Is that the message you really want to send?
Jack
Quote from: ColonelJack on November 13, 2008, 10:55:42 PM
I could, of course, give you the 180-degree opposite viewpoint, which many members feel would be just as valid as yours above:
Not really...because it's mine. ;) :)
Quote from: ColonelJack on November 13, 2008, 10:55:42 PMIf you're so all-fired hot to wear the Air Force uniform ... then go join the Air Force.
Perhaps those people have or are currently. Or perhaps they can no more. Regardless, that's quite the Red Herring...
Quote from: ColonelJack on November 13, 2008, 10:55:42 PM
Besides, to read your argument, you're saying, in essence, "Shape up or ship out!" Is that the message you really want to send?
...followed up with a good ole' Strawman. ;) Perhaps we'll be able to cover all the logical fallacies here. :) What I said is that another uniform (the blazer) already exists for this purpose. Simply wear that one. What is your real concern with the wear of that uniform? I suppose in using your logic, I could've responded with the argument you just presented to me. That is: if you want to look military, then go join the military. Afterall, that's what you're trying to accomplish by wearing the TPU, right?
Or if you're so all-fired to serve your country, then meet the standards to do that or quit complaining until you've shown the personal discipline to overcome the challenges arrayed against you. The standard is NOT roll up an hour late with a box of doughnuts & the wrong uniform complaining about people telling you want to do. I'm not saying meet ht/wt or get out. I'm saying you are not owed anything for volunteering your time/money. You're asking for the opportunity to serve as part of the AF family. Either you can live with the rules that entails or you can whine & cry somewhere else.
Now, to clarify... I really don't know a whole lot about what's going on in that uniform cmte. I know the gist of the discussion from that 30pg thread & conversations during that timeframe when input was being taken & compromises reached. However, I have absolute utmost faith in these people, their direction, and quality of work. I rarely say that about real military officers, hardly ever about enlisted troops, and less so about CAP members. These people are squared away and deserve your trust in their competence to fix our uniform issues in a way that's good for the long-term health and interests of CAP. Again, you may disagree with some things, but I'm very confident you'll be impressed with other aspects as well as the overall product.
Quote from: NCO forever on November 12, 2008, 05:35:52 PM
No changes for the BDUs until we switch to ABUs. Let us wear warmer coats with the blues.
It'll be a real long time before CAP changes over to the ABUs. Not even all of the USAF have been issued them yet (maybe all of the Active Duty but there are ALOT of National Guard Units that do not have ABUs).
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:29:44 PM
Quote from: A.Member on November 13, 2008, 09:01:43 PM
- Remove flag from BDU and BBDU - not sure why anyone felt compelled to add this in the first place
I do have to agree with you on the removal of the Flag Patch, this was part of that entire "US Civil Air Patrol" debacle under he who shall not be named. If you look at a member of the Air Force they do not wear the flag as a patch, that's an army thing.
I agree about the Flag. We are supposed to have uniforms that are similiar to the USAF and their BDUs do not have the flag.
Quote from: Rob Sherlin on November 13, 2008, 05:07:30 PM
It could just be the photos I see, but isn't the Gill Robb Wilson ribbon the same as the National Commander's Citation ribbon, just flipped over?
I know the question is not on uniforms, but maybe they should look at re-designing one of the two and issue a "freebie" of the new designed one to whoever currently has that ribbon (just a thought)
They are equivalent awards. The GRW replaced the NCC.. You are proposing a solution for a nonexistant problem, The folks who wear either know how their ribbon goes.
Quote from: DogCollar on November 13, 2008, 06:25:50 PMLooks better and most people have several pairs of khakis.
Really? What's your source for that? I don't own any! Brown isn't a good color for me.
Quote from: SarDragon on November 14, 2008, 01:25:48 AM
Quote from: DogCollar on November 13, 2008, 06:25:50 PMLooks better and most people have several pairs of khakis.
Really? What's your source for that? I don't own any! Brown isn't a good color for me.
I've got 'em --- and every single one of them is a different shade of "khaki".
Gentlemen,
Let's not let this thread deteriorate into a "my opinion is better than your opinion" or it will get locked pronto.
After all we are the CIVIL Air Patrol.......
Let's all be nice and play well together in the sandbox before someone's mother comes along and slaps the (Bleep) out of you.
Thank You
like there's a hundred shades of gray? Yeah, moving on.
Makes sense to me to hold-off on the uniform reg. rewrite till the ABU's come out. t sounds like they are still long ways off but still closer than we all might think.
No more changes, please.
And one thing is for those who work with cadets--the AF-style uniforms are an essential part--we serve as the example and we lead as such.
My real wish regarding uniforms remains not with what we wear, but from whom we get it from.
Quote from: SarDragon on November 14, 2008, 01:25:48 AM
Quote from: DogCollar on November 13, 2008, 06:25:50 PMLooks better and most people have several pairs of khakis.
Really? What's your source for that? I don't own any! Brown isn't a good color for me.
Well the hospital were I work, there is a plethora of khaki trousers on doctors, admin, and chaplains like me...maybe only healthcare is keeping the khaki color alive?? :D
Now, I happen to like the golf shirt combo. One of the main reasons is that our squadron meets on Thursday nights and I am on-call for the hospital. If I have to leave the meeting to go back to the hospital it is better to do so in something similar to what I wear everyday then to arrive and do pastoral care in my BDU's.
Also, I am one of those persons required to have both a pager and a cell phone on my person when on-call. When at CAP functions I usually put the pager in my pocket.
Quote from: A.Member on November 13, 2008, 10:03:49 PM
Quote from: Angus on November 13, 2008, 09:51:17 PM
So then ditch the golf shirt combo which has many uses and create another uniform that doesn't look professional at all.
No need to create any more uniforms there are plenty of options already.
I was going for sarcasim. Unfortunately didnt' translate to well.
Quote from: rebowman on November 14, 2008, 12:45:28 AM
Quote from: NCO forever on November 12, 2008, 05:35:52 PM
No changes for the BDUs until we switch to ABUs. Let us wear warmer coats with the blues.
It'll be a real long time before CAP changes over to the ABUs. Not even all of the USAF have been issued them yet (maybe all of the Active Duty but there are ALOT of National Guard Units that do not have ABUs).
It's going to be sooner than you think. While yes most of the Air Force isn't in them, those that are in the ABU aren't turning in their BDU which is where we get a lot of ours from. Phase in will start probably 2010 maybe late next year.
Quote from: stratoflyer on November 14, 2008, 07:59:29 AM
Makes sense to me to hold-off on the uniform reg. rewrite till the ABU's come out. t sounds like they are still long ways off but still closer than we all might think.
I think that even if you change nothing the 39-1 rewrite is several years over due. We have an entire uniform that exists solely in ICL's which per regs are emergency use only and valid for only 90 days. That rewrite is very important. Changes...not so much so.
QuoteIt's going to be sooner than you think. While yes most of the Air Force isn't in them, those that are in the ABU aren't turning in their BDU which is where we get a lot of ours from. Phase in will start probably 2010 maybe late next year.
They probably don't turn in their BDUs because they don't realize that they can. They probably think that noone would want them. It has been widely advertised to Army & Air Guard personnel in my state that if they don't want their BDUs that they can donate them to CAP. My squadron has received alot of BDUs this way. Some are even fairly new.
I would favor not making any changes at all to the BDU uniform. Go ahead and fix whatever other issues are out there, but the liklihood of change to ABU in the not so distant future makes me just want to put everything on hold for the BDU, especially if we decide to follow the minimalist patch strategy as the AF has with that uniform.
I'm fairly certain that BDUs are frozen in place pending introduction of ABUs.
I don't know for sure, but I think the uniform cmte currently revising 39-1 is also working on a configuration for ABUs, however, the timing of implementation is up to the AF & dependent on their supply chain. I think you'll agree, it is prudent of us to already have an approved configuration ready to roll out when they give us the word. I can't really say about the initially authorized date, but I believe the final wear out date on BDUs will be no later than 2013. I actually expect ABUs to be authorized NLT 2010 & possibly before that.
I don't know what exposure yall have to AF personnel, but most of the ANG/AFRes personnel I see on an almost daily basis are in ABUs. The transition is moving along rather quickly at this point.
Quote from: DNall on November 14, 2008, 08:32:20 PMI don't know what exposure yall have to AF personnel, but most of the ANG/AFRes personnel I see on an almost daily basis are in ABUs. The transition is moving along rather quickly at this point.
My wing is only at about 25% with ABUs. Of them, they were only issued one set. So I imagine that's fairly across the board in the ANG/AFRES. Just because you see an airman in ABUs does not mean they have 4 sets. I was issued one set but that's just because I was on orders for a month earlier this year. Most, and I'd say it's closer to 90%, of the traditional guardsmen in my squadron (close to 70 people) do not have ABUs.
Well, without reading through all the threads, here is my wish list:
--Leave everything alone, except:
1.) Remove "CAP" cutouts from the CSU coat for CAP officers and NCOs [keep for cadet officers]. The CSU coat uses CAP-specific buttons, which is all that is needed by law. Since the coat design, buttons and color is not used anywhere else in the US military (AF authorizes color 1625 for pants still, but NOT for service coat), CAP cutouts are redundant and unnecessary IMHO. Taking the CAP cutouts off permanently also allows for more versatility in uniforms, such as suggestion #3 below, and reduces cost.
2.) Allow MEMS badge earned from SGAUS (http://www.sgaus.org) to be worn with CSU (if not already authorized). Ask for permission for wear on AF-style CAP uniform (if not already authorized--unknown because some SDFs allow wear on the AF service dress within their state). CAP members are allowed to earn this badge through SGAUS (see the weblink to the SGAUS site for the how-to).
3.) Make a "mess dress" version of the CSU coat incorporating AFROTC hard boards on the epaulettes, same silver braid as used on the sleeves, bullion rank devices on the boards, and replace the Hap Arnold button of the AFROTC board with the same-size bright CAP button. The boards would look almost exactly like AF mess dress boards, except that the boards would be black, not blue, and the boards would be pin-on, not "snap on" like mess dress boards. These proposed CSU "mess dress" boards would match the CSU coat sleeve braid like the AF boards match AF mess dress coat sleeve braid. The proposed CSU "mess dress" would also have a black bow tie (in contrast to the AF blue bow-tie), tux shirt, and black button studs and links (links optional--black studs and links would be in contrast to the silver studs and links on the AF mess dress, and thus the black rank boards, tie, and studs would all match). Hard-rank would not have to removed from the CSU epaulettes to put the boards on--the boards could be pinned on over the hard-rank already on the CSU coat epaulettes, and the hardboards could be removed after the formal function without having to pin the hard rank back on the CSU epaulet. Mini medals and badges would be worn instead of large badges and ribbons over the left welt pocket of the CSU. The brushed silver name tag would also be removed for the CSU "mess dress". I propose only having the mini badges and mini medals on the coat--with all other badges removed--due to the more formal nature of a CSU "mess dress" (in contrast to the CSU "semi formal" uniform aready authorized), but that's just my preference--however, all else about the CSU (specialty track badges, etc) could remain the same, thus minimizing need for constantly removing and changing those items for formal occasions, if that is what is decided for the mess dress. Again, NO CAP CUOUTS on the CSU "mess dress" due to the more formal nature of this uniform (and, as stated, I'd like to see the CAP cutouts removed from the CSU entirely--doesn't fit with the cut of the coat, IMHO, and is redundant--the coat, buttons, and devices worn on it are already CAP-destinctive).
I had sent a proposal of this CSU "mess dress: to LtCol White a while back, but need to send an updated proposal with updated pictures now since I have some mini-medals and the appropriate bullion rank to update the CSU "mess dress" rank board pictures I made using the AFROTC hard boards.
4.) I like the idea of removing the "CAP" embroidered on the gray epaulettes for AF-style uniforms that someone else suggested previously in this thread. Keep the gray epaulletes for the AF-style uniforms, and the blue for the CSU--no "CAP" embroidered on either, it would keep the AF-style uniform as destinctive (with gray epaulettes and no hard rank), and AF-style blue officer rank epaulette slides are already available. I agree that it would save some money on embroidery and cost for the gray boards, too.
5.) I know some people may hate it, but KEEP THE SILVER BRAID ON THE CSU. It is dinstictive from the AF service dress, and makes the CSU what it is--a CAP-specific service dress. I think using AF-blue commissioning braid on the CSU may confuse some people due to the similar blue uniforms and hard rank used on the CSU.
6.) Allow non-subdued sage green cloth rank on the AF-style flight suit. Plastic rank is becoming much harder to come by.
7.) Allow navy blue, non-subdued nametapes, "Civil Air Patrol" service tapes and rank on the BBDU and BBDU accessories. I think the the ultramarine looks AWFUL on the BBDU.
8.) When the ABU is authorized for CAP, use the same color schemes, rank devices, etc. for CAP as the AF uses. The only difference should be a "Civil Air Patrol" service tape. This reduces costs and availability of rank devices for members. If this is impossible, use ultramarine thread for CAP ABU nametapes, rank, etc. instead of the midnight blue that AF uses for the ABU nametapes, rank, etc. All else on the ABU for CAP should be the same as AF.
In summary, I don't want to see hard rank or blue epaulet slides taken away from the CSU. The CSU is clearly a destinctive uniform in and of itself--no other service or auxiliary, or even SDF, uses any uniform similar to the CSU of CAP. I think the above suggestions, other than the "mess dress" (which would be optional anyways) would help to reduce uniform costs within CAP and streamline the uniforms (AF and CSU) with each other--both the AF-style and CSU would have true "mess dress" equivalents. Except for the changes suggested above, I'd leave everything else alone!
Some good suggestions, NAYBOR, but there are also some that could use improvement. Here are my suggestions:
1.) Leave the CAP cutouts where they are on the corporate service dress jacket. The CAP-specific buttons are hard to tell from a distance. The price of cutouts are not that expensive.
2.) No problem with the SGAUS MEMS badge.
3.) With the exception of the shoulder boards, I like the corporate mess dress suggestion. For economic's sake, instead of creating a new set of shoulder boards, why not use the standard AF mess dress shoulderboards? When worn with the corporate jacket, the distinction shown by the cut of the coat, buttons and CAP cutouts are such that there should be no mistaking a CAP member from an AF member at a formal occasion. Design the boards so that they can be easily slipped on and off the epaulet. You'll still have to remove the hard rank to slip them on, though. I wouldn't have a problem with silver studs or the AF-blue bow tie either. As for badges, we should follow the AF example: either regular, mid or mini size, but don't mix or match them unless there is no equivalent in that size. In this case, the cutouts can go.
4.) I'd rather see 'CAP' come back to the AF blue shoulder marks. I haven't seen it yet (others may have) but I wouldn't be surprised if someone slips blue shoulder marks on AF-style.
5.) Agreed.
6.) Agreed. Also allow wear of cloth name badges on the flight suit made to a specific CAP wing or region approved design or a standardized national color design.
7.) Agreed. We already have dark blue background grade insignia, so why not the tapes on the BBDU?
8.) Agreed.
One thing I would like to see is to eliminate the name tag schizophrenia. Dump the gray three-line nameplate and keep the blue. And get rid of the two-line blue. I don't have a problem with the brushed silver corporate service nametag, except I'd like to see it worn with AF style service dress instead of the RealAirForce® version.
Open to comments, suggestions but no flames.
I agree with dark blue nametapes on the BBDU. The UM blue looks faded in comparison to the darker blue shirt and looks like they need to be replaced even when brand new.
Can you post a pic of the Mess-dress CSU? (CMDU?)
AlphaSig, I suggested the AFROTC-type board for CSU mess dress boards because they can be pinned on. I don't know how the AF mess dress boards could be attached to the epaulettes of the CSU coat. But, yes, if they could be attached somehow to the CSU coat, by all means, I'd rather use the AF mess dress boards. Then use blue bow tie and silver studs and links, just like the AF mess dress. And yes, I forgot the cloth nameplates--absolutely as you suggested. They were approved by the NB I understamd--just need to be implemented. I also agree with just one, blue name tag, and one brushed silver. I'd like to see it last name on the first line for both, though. Forgot that change I'd make too.
Kach, I will post pictures as soon as I can. Still working on the updated "CMDU" proposal pictures.
Quote from: NAYBOR on November 16, 2008, 08:25:53 PM
AlphaSig, I suggested the AFROTC-type board for CSU mess dress boards because they can be pinned on. I don't know how the AF mess dress boards could be attached to the epaulettes of the CSU coat.
I don't see a problem with Vanguard making a mod to the attachment of AF mess dress boards. If I remember correctly - I don't own a mess dress, so someone correct me if I'm wrong - there is a flap of cloth under the board; the tailor attaches a couple of strips of cloth on the jacket's shoulders to allow the board to slide on. A snap under the button secures it in place. I'm thinking that's how the Squiddies do it with their boards.
In answer to the actual posting.
The golf shirt stays, and if anything should be more encouraged to match the wear of other agencies, which are increasingly performing their tasks in "agency polos". A base staff comprised of dark blue golf shirts is more professional than everyone doing their own thing.
There is no issue with cel phones. The language is complete now, and nowhere does it indicate that GT's have to choose between one device and another. Anything required in the course of your duties is already authorized by the regs. Anyone with common sense can carry a cel phone, HT, and other necessary devices without looking like Batman.
Just Google it... attached is the full specification for USAFA cadet hard shoulderboards and shoulder marks.
It looks like either a thin leather or vinyl strap is attached to the bottom of the board.
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on November 16, 2008, 09:01:23 PM
Quote from: NAYBOR on November 16, 2008, 08:25:53 PM
AlphaSig, I suggested the AFROTC-type board for CSU mess dress boards because they can be pinned on. I don't know how the AF mess dress boards could be attached to the epaulettes of the CSU coat.
I don't see a problem with Vanguard making a mod to the attachment of AF mess dress boards. If I remember correctly - I don't own a mess dress, so someone correct me if I'm wrong - there is a flap of cloth under the board; the tailor attaches a couple of strips of cloth on the jacket's shoulders to allow the board to slide on. A snap under the button secures it in place. I'm thinking that's how the Squiddies do it with their boards.
The officer mess dress jacket has built in attachment loops for shoulder boards. The enlisted doesn't since chevrons are worn on sleeves.
The USAF/CAP mess dress shoulder boards don't attach to regular epaulets.
Quote from: NAYBOR on November 15, 2008, 11:09:46 PM
2.) Allow MEMS badge earned from SGAUS (http://www.sgaus.org) to be worn with CSU (if not already authorized). Ask for permission for wear on AF-style CAP uniform (if not already authorized--unknown because some SDFs allow wear on the AF service dress within their state). CAP members are allowed to earn this badge through SGAUS (see the weblink to the SGAUS site for the how-to).
It's not already authorized on the AF-style uniforms. State-level awards are allowed for wear on the AF uniforms when those Guard members are working for the state. When they become "federalized" they have to remove any state shenanigans (including ribbons).
CAP has already clarified that, since CAP members are not working for their respective states, that state awards are not authorized for wear on the AF-style uniforms.
I feel that CAP needs to trim down the number of uniforms that they have. Just trying to keep up with what we can and can not wear is enough to drive anyone over a cliff, or jump of a hanger roof.
Keep It Simple Sir......or Mame.
We could ask for permission to wear the MEMS badge on the CSU then. IF the AF won't give special permission for CAP members to wear it on the AF blues, that is absolutely their domain to do so, and we will respect and obey those orders. But CAP NHQ can give permission for wear of the badge on the CSU combos. Couldn't hurt to ask for specific permission to wear on both AF and CS uniforms. The worst that can happen is we'll get a "no" from both parties (AF and CAP). Did CAP specifically say "no" to the MEMS badge for both CSU and AF-style uniforms in their clarification? Did AF? Has any one officially asked for specific permission to wear the MEMS badge?
CAP does not allow any state awards to be worn on any CAP uniform, corperate or USAF style.
Quote from: NAYBOR on November 17, 2008, 03:07:50 AM
We could ask for permission to wear the MEMS badge on the CSU then.
And, once approved, the number wearing it would be statistically zero.
Quote from: Eclipse on November 17, 2008, 03:53:03 AM
Quote from: NAYBOR on November 17, 2008, 03:07:50 AM
We could ask for permission to wear the MEMS badge on the CSU then.
And, once approved, the number wearing it would be statistically zero.
Right... except it's not an award. It's a qualification badge that means something REAL in the Civil Air Patrol world. It's a standard an officer has met. This badge is to denote particular training (and it definitely means a hell of a lot more than some CPR patch).
I am all for our members participating in the MEMS program and for CAP authorizing the badge.
Quote from: afgeo4 on November 17, 2008, 04:20:10 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on November 17, 2008, 03:53:03 AM
Quote from: NAYBOR on November 17, 2008, 03:07:50 AM
We could ask for permission to wear the MEMS badge on the CSU then.
And, once approved, the number wearing it would be statistically zero.
Right... except it's not an award. It's a qualification badge that means something REAL in the Civil Air Patrol world. It's a standard an officer has met. This badge is to denote particular training (and it definitely means a hell of a lot more than some CPR patch).
I am all for our members participating in the MEMS program and for CAP authorizing the badge.
This isn't even a military badge - its a State Defense Force program.
Zero chance it's authorized for CAP.
Um....SDFs ARE military. STATE military, but military none the less. The MEMS badge is offered to ALL military and other emergency service agencies--US Armed Forces, National Guard, CAP, USCG Aux, etc. There are National Guard troops that earn this qualification in their respective states and wear it.
Kach, here's a link to the proposed "CMDU" pictures in Word document:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=J3MWRJMX (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=J3MWRJMX)
(After you click the above link and go to the webpage, enter the 3 letter code toward the top of that page. Wait for the download timer to reach "0", and the click the "free download" button. Sorry ahead of time for the long download wait time...)
Yes, that's a MEMS badge in the pictures. Remember, it's just a PROPOSAL--I know the MEMS badge is not currently authorized. I just used it as an example of a mini badge, since I have no others (like the CAP EMT badge, etc). I positioned the top of the mess dress medals with the top of the left welt pocket. More rows of medals would fall below that. Sorry I didn't have more medals, or pictures of General Officer bullion boards--only so much fundage for this proposal. Female "CMDU" would follow the same basic principles, but shirt, ties, etc. would be the same as the female AF mess dress, except black studs would be used (if studs are used with the female mess dress--I don't know).
I don't think it does, but if it was decided that this proposed "CMDU" needed to be "MORE CAP-ish", then the clutch-back CAP mess dress enamel "dinner plate" could be used. It could maybe be placed where the brushed silver name tag would go, or maybe a 1/2 inch below where the mini medals fall. The "dinner plate" may even be placed over the middle button of the left row of buttons, if need be. Again, I don't believe this would be necessary, but I'd rather see the proposal move forward if that would be all that would be required than not at all.
The State Guard Association of the United States, Inc. (SGAUS) awards the Military Emergency Management Specialist (MEMS) badge. SGAUS membership must be maintained as a condition for wear of MEMS badges and SGAUS awards. Officers and civilian annual dues are $25.
Must be a really neat badge to have to pay $25 a year for the honor of wearing it.
Quote from: NAYBOR on November 17, 2008, 06:30:51 AM
Um....SDFs ARE military. STATE military, but military none the less. The MEMS badge is offered to ALL military and other emergency service agencies--US Armed Forces, National Guard, CAP, USCG Aux, etc. There are National Guard troops that earn this qualification in their respective states and wear it.
SDF badges are not approved for wear by any of the 7 US Federal Uniformed services, which means they won't be on a CAP uniform any time soon.
Picking nits...
The orientation of the Capt's bars is 90 degrees off. The bars run parallel with the short edge of the board. Also, covering the button is good, but it looks tacky with the end of the board so far up the epaulet.
What is the source of the boards? Are they the regular AF mess dress boards? If so, why not just use the CAP mess dress boards? How did you attach them? I saw the frogs on the underside of the epualet, but are they part of the board or a contrivance to mount it?
As someone who has earned the basic MEMS badge (and does not wear it), the requirement for membership in the SGAUS is a large burden. Particularly if one does not support some of their views or actions - which is why I quit. IMHO, CAP would do better to develop their own badge utilizing the same criteria...
Except for the shoulder boards, I can put something together for a more impressive picture later...
I didn't see much in the MEMS qualifications that is not covered in the CAP required Ops Quals. An AOBD or GBD should meet most of the qualifications - especially after 31 Dec. CAP does have a badge for qualification in Emergency Management - the Incident Commander Badge. Anything less and you are working under supervision.
I see a couple of things in this thread that haven't been beaten to death yet, though I think they should be in another thread.
"SMWOG," "OC," "Officers and cadets," etc....
A couple of you have said "SMWOG" is a made-up Internet abbreviation. It is. "SM" is what you call a senior member without grade. They're not "officers" or "officer candidates," as some of them will keep their EM grade. None of them should wear officer uniform appurtenances. None of them are automatic "officer candidates," though certainly they may pin on butterbars later.
I'm almost sick to my stomach to see all senior members called "officers," just to get away from calling them "senior members." While the preponderance of us are officers, or claim to be, there are many who aren't. As much as some of us may not like being called "senior members," that term is more appropriate, unless you want to say "officers and airmen" instead to identify senior members.
Officer uniform items for people below the grade of second lieutenant
That AFROTC cadets wear officer braid on their flight caps is no reason for CAP SMs without grade to wear them -- AFROTC cadets wear braid because they're in an officer accession program. CAP is not an OA program, whether for cadets or seniors.
Comparing the uniforms of CAP members at any age or grade to AFROTC is apples and watermelons, not apples and oranges.
A flight officer is not an officer. While the CAPM 39-1 says they wear officer uniform appurtenances, it is an oversight in the CAPM 39-1 where it conflicts with CAPR 35-5 and a certain amount of common sense. You must be at least 21 to be an officer in CAP, and flight officers do not meet that standard.
A cadet is not an officer. Cadet officers are not officers -- they are cadets. They also do not wear officer uniform items.
An SM is also not an officer.
Why is that so difficult for some of our members to figure out? And why is the authority on uniform wear, CAPM 39-1, as well as our daily parlance inside CAP, in conflict with other regulations that govern who is and who is not an officer?
Why so much discussion about uniforms on this site?
Probably because of a few factors, including these two reasons that will surely start a flame war:
1. The uniforms we have are a confusing mess, especially since the immediate past national commander muddied the waters even more (TPU, flag on BDU, etc., etc.).
2. We have people in our ranks hung up on uniforms.
Yes, we have issues with our uniforms. But the best thing we could do is strip the crazy bling and start over, based on the Air Force uniforms and one practical CAP counterpart each. I don't think CAP uniforms should look like those of a banana-republic army's generals, do you?
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on November 17, 2008, 05:18:59 PM
Why is that so difficult for some of our members to figure out? And why is the authority on uniform wear, CAPM 39-1, as well as our daily parlance inside CAP, in conflict with other regulations that govern who is and who is not an officer?
Do not confuse who wears officer uniform items with who is considered an "officer" in the organization. Just because you are allowed to wear certain uniform items doesn't change your grade/rank/membership class - it's merely a uniform item. The grade/rank/membership class is still defined elsewhere regardless of what uniform items the member is authorized to wear.
The AFROTC comparison does make sense here. These are people who are not, at present time, officers. Maybe many of them will become officers down the road, if they complete certain training - but maybe many senior members without grade will become officers down the road, too, if they complete certain training. These not-at-present-time officers (AFROTC cadets), however, do wear officer uniform items such as the officer flight cap and service jacket sleeve braid - it doesn't make them considered as officers because they're wearing it.
Uh... I never wore sleeve braid in the AFROTC program.
Silver braid on the overseas cap, yes.
The officer-braid flight cap is not just a "uniform item." It denotes that you are a company grade or field grade officer. (And it gets brighter when you get a star.) It is also worn by cadets in the Air Force's three officer-accession programs, but we'll get back to AFROTC, OTS and USAFA in a bit.
If you are a SMWOG, you have NO rank or grade. You'll take Level 1 and CPPT, but every senior member is required CPPT and Level 1 is required for all seniors to make ANY grade at all. It doesn't make you an officer, or a pseudo-officer, or whatever. You can't wear indices of grade (braid, stripes or bars, etc.) when you have no grade to begin with.
For an SMWOG to be considered an officer by virtue of being a senior member would mean that an enlisted senior member, who outranks that SMWOG, is also an officer. EPIC FAIL.
No one with grade below butterbars is an officer, and CAP regulations also stipulate that. The cold, hard truth is in CAPM 35-5, section A. You don't get into that club without an ID card that has your grade on it.
Now... AFROTC is an officer accession (OA) program. It is one of three OA programs in the Air Force (the others being USAFA and OTS) -- they are specifically officer programs. They wear officer flight caps because of their OA program's specific nature, and yes, they have rank as cadets in all three organizations. (But don't confuse their cadet status with that of our teenage cadets or JROTC's, neither of which wear officer appurtenances nor are a direct commissioning route.)
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on November 17, 2008, 05:18:59 PM
I see a couple of things in this thread that haven't been beaten to death yet, though I think they should be in another thread.
"SMWOG," "OC," "Officers and cadets," etc....
A couple of you have said "SMWOG" is a made-up Internet abbreviation. It is. "SM" is what you call a senior member without grade.
The use of SM as you suggest leads to an ambiguity. It can refer to all non-cadet members, or it can refer to the specific subset having no grade. The use of SMWOG eliminates that ambiguity.
YMMV.
Quote from: CAPR 35-51-4. Initial Grades. All senior members will be enrolled as CAP senior members without grade, unless they are specifically exempt from Level I of the Senior Member Professional Development Program and immediately qualify for an officer grade in consideration of previous CAP experience, as set forth in section C.
Emphasis mine.Back to the uniform ranting.
Concerning the mess dress boards and orientation of the Capt bars--OOPS! Thanks for telling me about that--I should have automatically realized that they should have the same orientation on the boards as hard rank on the epaulettes--sorry about that. I am a little embarrased that I didn't take more time to do that for a presentation I spent so much time doing--I was trying to get the pictures "to market" as soon as I could. My sincere apologies... :-[
I used the black AFROTC hard boards to make these. I remember from my time as an AFROTC cadet that they were clutch-back, and could easily be attached to the coat epaulettes. Yes, the boards were moved up a little further on the epaulettes to help cover the actual epaulette button. In some pictures I took, I actually put the lapel collar on top of the board points, which didn't look too bad, but I don't think it should work that way. A way to attach the boards and keep the epaulettes "tied down" without the button underneath showing is the challenge. I'll try to work on a very easy solution, if possible. The pictures show the easiest solution I could come up with at this time. And, by the way, the hard rank DOES have to come off, or risk being exposed. The AFROTC boards somehow cover the AF coat epaulette button, these should be able to do the same too, I figure, for the CSU. I didn't use the CAP mess dres sboards because I wanted to use silver braiding to match the silver braiding on the sleves. Also, with the black boards, they would match the black bow tie, studs and cuff links required for any commercially available tux shirt with this uniform. They are also distinctive from the AF mess dress boards, which have a blue background.
Eclipse, I know you are correct concerning the MEMS badge--that's why I don't ever wear it on my CAP uniforms at any time. I just figured it couldn't hurt to ask, no matter how slim the chance of getting that permission would be. Miracles DO happen. ;D
Continued comments are welcome. And thank you all for your open and honest opinions.
Quote from: SarDragon on November 17, 2008, 09:54:02 PM
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on November 17, 2008, 05:18:59 PM
I see a couple of things in this thread that haven't been beaten to death yet, though I think they should be in another thread.
"SMWOG," "OC," "Officers and cadets," etc....
A couple of you have said "SMWOG" is a made-up Internet abbreviation. It is. "SM" is what you call a senior member without grade.
The use of SM as you suggest leads to an ambiguity. It can refer to all non-cadet members, or it can refer to the specific subset having no grade. The use of SMWOG eliminates that ambiguity.
YMMV.
I don't mind that we call them SMWOGs here, as long as we know it's Internet shorthand.
But traditionally, they're "senior members," and they use the SM abbreviation and, like flight officers, they're called "mister," "miss" or "Mrs." They ain't OCs....
I always had a problem calling senior members "senior members," because they don't carry a "S/" before their rank as cadets do. They're officers, flight officers and airmen. "Adult" members even works better. Or just "members" and "cadets."
Of course, if it was up to me, a senior member without grade would be called an
Airman Basic.
I agree that "adult member" is a better term, but "senior member" has been the referential term since long before I joined in 1964. It will be a very difficult change to make, IMHO.
YMMV.
Quote from: SarDragon on November 17, 2008, 11:19:40 PM
I agree that "adult member" is a better term, but "senior member" has been the referential term since long before I joined in 1964. It will be a very difficult change to make, IMHO.
YMMV.
And when I joined 20 years after you, in 1984....
(aaargh, no war stories!)
;D
um check for uniform updates i would like us to be able to wear air force stockings.
Quote from: capcadetwilliams on November 17, 2008, 11:22:52 PM
um check for uniform updates i would like us to be able to wear air force stockings.
Just out of curiosity, what are these "stockings" you are referring to? You mentioned in the other thread you wanted to wear them on your head? As for socks, the Air Force doesn't have a specific one.
Buckeye
Since when was the Flight Officer grades NOT officers? Reread the regulation. FO are officers, wear the blue and silver braid on flight caps.
The stockings with the line running down the back?
no no no .. leave them on....
PANAMA!!!
Sorry.. had too!
Quote from: NAYBOR on November 17, 2008, 06:30:51 AM
Um....SDFs ARE military. STATE military, but military none the less. The MEMS badge is offered to ALL military and other emergency service agencies--US Armed Forces, National Guard, CAP, USCG Aux, etc. There are National Guard troops that earn this qualification in their respective states and wear it.
Kach, here's a link to the proposed "CMDU" pictures in Word document:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=J3MWRJMX (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=J3MWRJMX)
(After you click the above link and go to the webpage, enter the 3 letter code toward the top of that page. Wait for the download timer to reach "0", and the click the "free download" button. Sorry ahead of time for the long download wait time...)
Yes, that's a MEMS badge in the pictures. Remember, it's just a PROPOSAL--I know the MEMS badge is not currently authorized. I just used it as an example of a mini badge, since I have no others (like the CAP EMT badge, etc). I positioned the top of the mess dress medals with the top of the left welt pocket. More rows of medals would fall below that. Sorry I didn't have more medals, or pictures of General Officer bullion boards--only so much fundage for this proposal. Female "CMDU" would follow the same basic principles, but shirt, ties, etc. would be the same as the female AF mess dress, except black studs would be used (if studs are used with the female mess dress--I don't know).
I don't think it does, but if it was decided that this proposed "CMDU" needed to be "MORE CAP-ish", then the clutch-back CAP mess dress enamel "dinner plate" could be used. It could maybe be placed where the brushed silver name tag would go, or maybe a 1/2 inch below where the mini medals fall. The "dinner plate" may even be placed over the middle button of the left row of buttons, if need be. Again, I don't believe this would be necessary, but I'd rather see the proposal move forward if that would be all that would be required than not at all.
I like the CMDU. Don't know if anybody else will.
Quote from: DogCollar on November 13, 2008, 06:25:50 PM
Reduce the amount of badges that one can wear on the BDU's. Some members look like Formula One race car drivers!
Badges aren't the problem, it's the patches. The Air Force allows three badges on the ABU. I think we could reduce many of our patches into badge type of qualification indicators, and get most of what we really need or want to show on the utility uniform within that boundary, but still maintain CAP distinctiveness. Just got to work on it.
After seeing the pics of the proposed CMDU:
Not bad at all. Other than the minor positional glitches of grade insignia that were already discussed, I'm OK with it.
As for the mini medals: I'd position them so that the bottom row of medals does not go below the lowest seam of the welt pocket. Miniature size wings (IMHO) looks too small on what is essentially a ceremonial service dress uniform, so I'd keep the choice of wearing full size or miniature badges but don't mix and match unless there's no equivalent. I'll have to order a pair of mess dress boards to see if an attachment idea I have in mind works.
I hate to throw another monkey-wrench in the works, and it's not like we really need another ICL, but last year USAF made a number of changes to their uniform regs that has been totally ignored by CAP, i.e., auth wearing black rigger's belts on BDU's, male flight cap as an option for females, wear of the silver nameplate on the pullover sweater, etc.
In keeping our USAF-style unies up to date with those of our patrons, you wouls think that someone would have taken notice (?)
Quote from: Eclipse on November 17, 2008, 03:17:11 PM
Quote from: NAYBOR on November 17, 2008, 06:30:51 AM
Um....SDFs ARE military. STATE military, but military none the less. The MEMS badge is offered to ALL military and other emergency service agencies--US Armed Forces, National Guard, CAP, USCG Aux, etc. There are National Guard troops that earn this qualification in their respective states and wear it.
SDF badges are not approved for wear by any of the 7 US Federal Uniformed services, which means they won't be on a CAP uniform any time soon.
Are our CAP specific badges authorized for wear on any of the 7 Federal Uniformed Services uniforms? We wear them on our CAP uniforms, including the AF variants. Just wondering.
The MEMS badge would have a place, I believe. It's relatively well known and would mean something to some of the agencies we play with when working disaster relief or other emergencies. The MEMS badge on a 1st Lt would be more meaningful at a command post than a Basic ES rating decorated with silver oak leaves. I'd be all for it as a way to recognize the serious ES players who aren't on a path to IC. Are CUL's less deserving of recognition than Ground Team Members?
The problem arises with the required membership in the State Guard Association for continuing wear. Pay once to cover admin costs? OK. $25 a year? Nope! Unless CAP made some sort of arrangement with State Guard Ass'n to exempt us from annual fees, few who could qualify for the award would bother to wear it.
A CAP variant of the same award? Maybe, but it wouldn't be recognizable by the non-CAP folks we play with. Kind of throws recognition out the window. Then again, few outside CAP recognize our IC or ground team badges.
Quote from: wuzafuzz on November 18, 2008, 01:22:09 PM
Are our CAP specific badges authorized for wear on any of the 7 Federal Uniformed Services uniforms?
No, they're not.
Quote from: wuzafuzz on November 18, 2008, 01:22:09 PM
A CAP variant of the same award? Maybe, but it wouldn't be recognizable by the non-CAP folks we play with. Kind of throws recognition out the window. Then again, few outside CAP recognize our IC or ground team badges.
I would agree. The Air Force has a bad tendency to want to work and play with others, but they don't allow the wear of other service badges. I don't think CAP should restrict those at all. I think the MEMS badge on CAP uniforms would show a willingness to both recognize qualifications from outside the organization, and the willingness to work with other agencies that recognize the same thing. The MEMS Academy has mutual goals with our ES program, and I think it fitting that the badge would be worn by our own.
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 19, 2008, 05:18:49 AM
I would agree. The Air Force has a bad tendency to want to work and play with others, but they don't allow the wear of other service badges. I don't think CAP should restrict those at all. I think the MEMS badge on CAP uniforms would show a willingness to both recognize qualifications from outside the organization, and the willingness to work with other agencies that recognize the same thing. The MEMS Academy has mutual goals with our ES program, and I think it fitting that the badge would be worn by our own.
There's a lot of agencies that have "mutual goals" with CAP, that doesn't mean we should start wearing their badges. Frame the cert and put it on your wall.
I suppose I'm sheltered, but this is the first time I've even
heard of MEMS - with all the talk about NIMS compliance, which actually does potentially bring us interagency cooperation and potential for funding, I don't see some SDF program being part of CAP nomenclature any time soon.
The problems with the MEMS badge as I see it:
1. It is specifically an award limited to State Guard units. Not all states have a State Guard. (Florida used to, but disbanded it). The award is part of a package of SG awards that apply ONLY to members of the SG. They cannot even be worn on uniforms of the National Guard, should a SG member join his federally-recognized NG force. Traditionally, NO state awards are worn on the CAP uniform.
2. We already have a badge that recognizes essentially the same achievement as the MEMS badge, the Incident Commander Badge. It may not be an exact match, but it is close.
3. As far as "Working closely with other agencies," I have long felt that CAP wings should be under the operational control of the state AG/Air in order to provide the "Unity of Command" necessary to carry out our Congressionally-imposed mandates of providing light aircraft support to states and local communities. IF we were so OPCON'ed, I would be willing to revisit the issue of the MEMS badge. But right now, we have no organizational connection to the Guard (either state or national), so I don't see the problem that the badge might fix.
Quote from: Eclipse on November 19, 2008, 05:39:44 AMThere's a lot of agencies that have "mutual goals" with CAP, that doesn't mean we should start wearing their badges. Frame the cert and put it on your wall.
Didn't say
should, said it would show solidarity with like mission agencies. Not the same.
On another point, every badge you wear is essentially a "certificate". It shows you have completed required training to perform a job. What difference does it make that CAP gave it to you or not? Does the fact that the badge and training are not CAP developed mean that the training has no value? Food for thought.
Quote from: Eclipse link=topic=6380.msg120980#msg120980date=1227073184I suppose I'm sheltered, but this is the first time I've even heard of MEMS - with all the talk about NIMS compliance, which actually does potentially bring us interagency cooperation and potential for funding, ...
Best place to start: http://www.sgaus.org/MEMS.html . It seems to be a pretty in-depth course, covering a lot of NIMS stuff, as well as content from a few other agencies. Download the student handbook, it covers a lot.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on November 19, 2008, 02:11:31 PM
1. It is specifically an award limited to State Guard units.
The SGA website shows very few requirements for participation: Current SGAUS membership is required and all military and
civilian members in good standing with SGAUS may enroll in the Basic MEMS qualification program. Which means it is not limited to State Guard units, or even State Guard members. The award is very much an individual one.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on November 19, 2008, 02:11:31 PMThe award is part of a package of SG awards that apply ONLY to members of the SG.
As I pointed out above, incorrect. The SGA does not put forth any such criteria. They even specifically state "
Permission to officially wear the MEMS badges and/or patches depends solely on state military authority and regulations and not SGAUS or the MEMS Academy". Which means that membership in both the SGA and a State Guard does not even entitle a State Guard member to its wear. The same applies to all SGA awards. Noone is entitled to wear any of them just because they're a member. The local SG chain of command must premit it.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on November 19, 2008, 02:11:31 PM
Traditionally, NO state awards are worn on the CAP uniform.
That is incorrect, and if you thought about it, you'd realize it. I have old copies of 39-1 that do show state awards. They were worn
below all military and CAP ribbons. Dig into your own old copies, you'll find it. So the statement of tradition is inaccurate. Only in the last few years has that allowance been written out of our pubs.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on November 19, 2008, 02:11:31 PM2. We already have a badge that recognizes essentially the same achievement as the MEMS badge, the Incident Commander Badge. It may not be an exact match, but it is close.
I honestly feel that the only person that can make such a judgement is someone that has both. Do you? It's kinda like the difference when it comes to people that say hurricanes are worse than earthquakes, but have never been through both events. Any judgement made without experience on both sides is supposition and opinion.
As one person stated above, other agencies don't recognize our GT and IC badges. Now, to be honest, I doubt that the MEMS badge would automatically endow a wear with seeming infallibility, but I think it will be far more recognized in the future than our own unique insignia.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on November 19, 2008, 02:11:31 PM3. As far as "Working closely with other agencies," I have long felt that CAP wings should be under the operational control of the state AG/Air in order to provide the "Unity of Command" necessary to carry out our Congressionally-imposed mandates of providing light aircraft support to states and local communities.
I would agree. There are a few states that are more closely aligned under their AG's, and when it comes to the operational side, the organization shows benefits when it comes to response time.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on November 19, 2008, 02:11:31 PMBut right now, we have no organizational connection to the Guard (either state or national), so I don't see the problem that the badge might fix.
Who said there's a problem to fix? What problem was fixed by creating an IC badge? I don't really know of any. Our IC qualified people are still IC qualified whether they have a badge or not. And when it comes to Incidents, the staff are usually wearing some type of clippy badge or a hi-vis vest with the title "Incident Commander" in about the largest print that can be fit onto the article. What does an IC badge do that those items don't?
What problem is fixed by allowing Air Force badges on a CAP uniform? Don't know of any there either. The knowledge someone gained in the Air Force is still valuable, even if they don't show it on their uniform.
Even if we did end up with an organizational connection with the State agencies, there is still no problem that gets "fixed". Not every action or solution is to deal with a problem.
Then again, I may be completely against the idea (contrary to what I've said otherwise), and am only playing Devil's Advocate to see if I can convince you. However, if it's going to be debate, we need to stick to facts. Opinions are OK, as long as they are stated as such.
As a reminder, I'm not attacking, just debating. I know I can be considered abrasive, so keep in mind that this isn't meant to be heated. I am very willing to continue the debate. I'd like to see more viewpoints.
I am leary of the SGAUS/MEMS issue for a couple of reasons:
1. SGAUS is a private corporation, just like NGUAS or AUSA. They could be here next year or gone. They could change their rules, curricula, or costs anytime they choose.
2. As others have pointed out, they require paid membership to take the course and wear their badge. I can't think of any other award or decoration that requires annual dues to wear on the uniform. That seems like a terrible precedent.
3. That said, they did do a pretty good job of selecting from among the various FEMA and allied agency distance learning courses to establish the curriculum. The knowledge is a good thing -- indeed probably something that every CAP member should have. But there is no reason that CAP could not simply take the project in-house and create our own CAP MEMS, based on a customized selection of the same FEMA and National Fire Academy courses that SGAUS' MEMS draws upon.
And FWIW, the California NG is in the process of revising their regs that will permit NG soldiers and airmen to wear the MEMS badge while in state status. The CA SMR already strongly encourages the badge and permits its wear.
Ned Lee
Quote from: Ned on November 19, 2008, 05:57:59 PM
I am leary of the SGAUS/MEMS issue for a couple of reasons:
1. SGAUS is a private corporation, just like NGUAS or AUSA. They could be here next year or gone. They could change their rules, curricula, or costs anytime they choose
A good point. Hadn't thought of that. If there was a Federal level organization that put forth concrete criteria for any SG type of awards, there would be far more validity to any awards. But, then it wouldn't be a state controlled militia, now would it?
Quote from: Ned on November 19, 2008, 05:57:59 PM2. As others have pointed out, they require paid membership to take the course and wear their badge. I can't think of any other award or decoration that requires annual dues to wear on the uniform. That seems like a terrible precedent.
Kind of a deal breaker there, isn't it? It is truly a disturbing precedent. If they were a completely non-profit organization, and charged for enrollment in the course (which is perfectly reasonable considering most extensive courses require payment for the instruction), and only charged for things like additional copies of certificates or badges then it wouldn't be an issue. But an annual payment for authorization to wear is definitely something to be considered.
Quote from: Ned on November 19, 2008, 05:57:59 PM
3. That said, they did do a pretty good job of selecting from among the various FEMA and allied agency distance learning courses to establish the curriculum. The knowledge is a good thing -- indeed probably something that every CAP member should have.
I'd agree. I did quake relief in California after the Northridge shake, and I have a feeling that if even a small majority of the agencies that participated had been actively trained in the NIMS program, it probably would have been far smoother. Since the advantages of ICS are obvious in events run only by a single organization, it would have helped us just as much internally. When you got your own house in order, it's easier to work with the nieghborhood.
Quote from: Ned on November 19, 2008, 05:57:59 PMBut there is no reason that CAP could not simply take the project in-house and create our own CAP MEMS, based on a customized selection of the same FEMA and National Fire Academy courses that SGAUS' MEMS draws upon.
No reason against it, but what is the point of duplicating training? ICS 100 is gonna be the same, no matter who creates it. It would be simple copycatting, and most people would figure it out.
If people really want a CAP unique badge, then have them enroll in the SGAUS course, bring the certificate in when complete, annotate and file it in the members personnel record, and award the CAP specific badge. It's an idea, but I don't see the point of creating another badge that means the same thing.
Then again, we give a badge for pilot's wings, and CAP doesn't train pilots (at least not up to the FAA levels our mission pilots are qualified. Same with EMT/medical, legal, and similar badges. There is precedence in that direction.
Quote from: Ned on November 19, 2008, 05:57:59 PM
And FWIW, the California NG is in the process of revising their regs that will permit NG soldiers and airmen to wear the MEMS badge while in state status. The CA SMR already strongly encourages the badge and permits its wear.
Nice to see it recognized, but with the precedent that you pointed out above, I'm really not sure if that may be a good thing. Have to think on it further.
Anyway, back to the original topic at hand.
I agree with cleaning up the various insignia across the dress uniforms. One shirt nametag for any dress shirt, one nametag for any dress coat, all the same color including cadets.
Same with epaulets. I don't see why cadets should wear a different color epaulet than seniors. If someone can't tell the difference between a cadet's rank insignia and a seniors without a color difference, then they need to either learn the difference, or get their eyes checked. One color for all epaulets. Simple and far more uniform.
I'm beginning to agree that we have far too many patches on our utility uniforms (and by utility uniforms, I'm considering the BDU, BBDU, and the hopefully soon to be adopted ABU). The Air Force allows three badges on the ABU (one above branch tape, one on the left pocket). To minimize the cluttered look, make the badges the same colors as AF ones on the ABU. I would suggest a fourth over the nametag, such as a badge indicating ES qual in lieu of the Pluto patch, or a commanders badge (but that's all).
Speaking of CC badge, why do we have two separate ones? Either eliminate one, or both and design a combination of the two. When it comes to that, mirror AF standards, they make sense. Over tape or name tag for sitting CC, below nametape/tag for graduated. While we're at it, ditch the Command service ribbon, it really isn't needed, we've got loads of ribbons already.
Not really a change, but I hope that the ABU doesn't use the "ultramarine" blue tapes we use now, they look ridiculous. I still think navy blue tapes and rank are the way to go. With the subdued background badges I mentioned above, it wouldn't look cluttered (although the color differences would take a bit to get used to).
I also agree with mirroring the Air Force on uniform changes. We shouldn't be wearing outdated items that the Air Force has phased out for the simple reason that we just haven't gotten around to updating our uniform manual. When the Air Force makes changes, send out changes for the pubs within the quarter. Most of us CAP part-timers have the time to write supplements locally, there's plenty of time for someone to do it, and just have National review and retransmit. I think most of us know about AF uniform changes before National seems to officially know anyway. Little things like socks, belts, t-shirts, etc don't really require a National Board vote on it.
And for the fish, ask again for the brown leather A-2. I know we probably wouldn't get it, but we got to give them something to turn down. :D
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 19, 2008, 10:07:17 PMWhile we're at it, ditch the Command service ribbon, it really isn't needed, we've got loads of ribbons already.
You're kidding, right? You're making impassioned arguments about us wearing a badge from some other random organization but want to drop a decoration that actually denotes real
CAP service?
Quote from: Eclipse on November 19, 2008, 10:21:42 PM
Quote from: Hawk200 on November 19, 2008, 10:07:17 PMWhile we're at it, ditch the Command service ribbon, it really isn't needed, we've got loads of ribbons already.
You're kidding, right? You're making impassioned arguments about us wearing a badge from some other random organization but want to drop a decoration that actually denotes real CAP service?
Fact 1: We have Commanders badges. One squadron, one group. The Air Force has a commanders badge, but there is only one. Where do you think CAP got the idea for it?
My suggestion is to A) eliminate one of them (either the squadron or group CC badge) and use the remaining one for all command positions regardless of level, or B) eliminate both of them, create an either completely new design or one combining elements of both and use that. The idea there is
one badge, not two.
Fact 2: We have a Command Service ribbon, the Air Force doesn't. How do they recognize Command Service? By stipulating that a former commander is authorized to wear the Commander's badge
below their nametag.
My suggestion there is to mirror the Air Force. The member simply moves the badge down on the uniform. If such a practice was authorized for CAP, then it would indicate Command Service, and a second award
for the same thing wouldn't be necessary. So eliminate the ribbon, we've got plenty as it is.
I wasn't talking about eliminating recognition of service, only recognizing it in a different manner. A totally new commander (meaning no prior experience as a CC) wouldn't necessarily have a CSR. But moving the badge,
that he/she already has, down to below the nametag is pretty simple. I'm sure most commanders are quite capable of it.
The USAF doesn't have Encampment, NCSA, Find, DR, or CAC ribbons, either. By that logic we should dump those as well.
Command service in CAP is very different at the different levels and should continue to be recognized as such. The way we do it today makes perfect sense in our world - only sitting CC's wear the badge, and their service is then recognized with a ribbon going forward.
A lot of members already have the space below the name tag occupied with a specialty badge.
It never ceases to amaze me what people latch onto with regard to uniforms.
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on November 17, 2008, 11:00:42 PM
Of course, if it was up to me, a senior member without grade would be called an Airman Basic.
As I said before, the grade "SM" is currently the equiv of Airman Basic & carries no insignia. That also requires an enlisted flight cap for six months & "CAP" cutouts pinned thru the shirt collar that look the same as a C/AB & damage the shirt (not a problem for cadets that will be pinning grade there for the next 2yrs & will grow out of it by then).
I think it would be better if we did use the blank CAP epaulet slide with the officer flight cap & call them officer candidates. They are in fact candidates to become officers (to include FOs). NCOs are appointed directly to their NCO grade w/o wait time.
Regarding the MEMS Badge, it's a slick looking badge, I'll give them that. BUT, it's not going to be authorized for CAP. CAP's uniforms are federal uniforms & abide by what the AF will permit its own active duty personnel to wear on them, plus CAP specific items which are each authorized by AF. No outside badge not allowed on active duty AF uniforms will ever be authorized. And, that's the end of that story.
If CAP wants to create an emergency mgmt badge (and I don't know why since we have a disaster relief ribbon) then we can do that. What'd be better is to update the requirements for the disaster relief ribbon. remove the DR ribbon with V for participation in a national disaster, and change that to an achievement award or commendation with E or something more appropriate (never liked use of the V).
Quote from: Eclipse on November 19, 2008, 11:01:56 PM
The USAF doesn't have Encampment, NCSA, Find, DR, or CAC ribbons, either. By that logic we should dump those as well.
I think a few of those could be reduced too. To me, a lot of awards are simply "biding time". Eliminate a few of the extras, consolidate a few.
Quote from: Eclipse on November 19, 2008, 11:01:56 PM
Command service in CAP is very different at the different levels and should continue to be recognized as such. The way we do it today makes perfect sense in our world - only sitting CC's wear the badge, and their service is then recognized with a ribbon going forward.
In a manner it does make sense. But the only real reason that we have both the CSR and the CC badge is because we created a CSR well before the Air Force thought about a CC badge. It would be a simple realignment to mirror the Air Force, and wouldn't require an additional purchase. Those who aren't willing or incapable of accepting change are the ones who get left behind.
Quote from: Eclipse on November 19, 2008, 11:01:56 PMA lot of members already have the space below the name tag occupied with a specialty badge.
On blues, you're only allowed four badges anyway, which is a perfectly reasonable rule. I think most people wouldn't really have a problem with the choice. Personally, I'd wear the CC badge (in a graduated position) on some occasions, my specialty badge on others. Most people with multiple badges can't wear them all on one individual uniform anyway, so many do the same thing.
Quote from: Eclipse on November 19, 2008, 11:01:56 PMIt never ceases to amaze me what people latch onto with regard to uniforms.
Don't see what's so "amazing" about it. The topic is "What Uniform Changes Would You Like To See?". I responded. I'm as entitled to my own opinion as much as you are to yours. You've made one input on what you'd like to see, and then either expressions of dramatic shock or definitive statements on what I or someone else would. I'm not going to change my opinion simply because you don't like it.
Quote from: DNall on November 19, 2008, 11:20:51 PM
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on November 17, 2008, 11:00:42 PM
Of course, if it was up to me, a senior member without grade would be called an Airman Basic.
As I said before, the grade "SM" is currently the equiv of Airman Basic & carries no insignia. That also requires an enlisted flight cap for six months & "CAP" cutouts pinned thru the shirt collar that look the same as a C/AB & damage the shirt (not a problem for cadets that will be pinning grade there for the next 2yrs & will grow out of it by then).
I think it would be better if we did use the blank CAP epaulet slide with the officer flight cap & call them officer candidates. They are in fact candidates to become officers (to include FOs). NCOs are appointed directly to their NCO grade w/o wait time.
Quick response, since I'm sneaking a break at work:
1. Flight officers are not officers. Never were, never will be.
2. If you're ruining the shirt putting pins in it,
you're doing it wrong!3. Calling an off-the-street new CAP member an "officer candidate" is inaccurate, and maybe a little unfair. Like I say, I'd rather call them
airmen basic. Especially when the NCO corps (finally) rejuvenates. Maybe then, calling someone up for officer grade an officer candidate would be OK.
First, Flight Officers are officers in the same sense that Warrant Officers are officers in the other services.
It's a difference between commissioned officer & warrant officer (warrant officers now actually receive a commission), which is all about the level of govt from which they derive their power (President/congress vs Secretary of the Army/Navy). Note: NCOs derive their authority from delegation of governmental powers by the officers appointed over them.
All CAP members are appointed to grade by virtue of the CAP Constitution & Bylaws. So, there is no distinction between FO & 2LT. They are both officers. It says so right in the FO title.
Second, what is the issue with people off the street being "officer candidates?" That is exactly what they are, a candidate training to become an officer. OCs in the military attending OCS/OTS are exactly civilians off the street. They are not NCOs, nor do they have the authority of NCOs (despite paygrade), but they do wear officer related items (flight caps, mess dress, etc).
I like using that title a whole lot more than "SM." It reinforces to new members that they are here to progress in the program, not to be permanent SMs. That they are actually in a training sequence to become an officer. Airman basic serves the same purpose, but would indicate in-training to become an airman, which they are not & cannot become.
Third, I've been poking badges thru uniforms for a very long time now. It leaves perm holes. You can do it a couple times & maybe iron it out so it's not noticeable, but several months of it & it's going to be visible. If you try that on a white shirt, it's going to be even worse.
Quote from: DNall on November 20, 2008, 12:10:53 AM
First, Flight Officers are officers in the same sense that Warrant Officers are officers in the other services.
Agreed. But they're not officers. CAP regulation (Ref: CAPR 35-5, para 1-2) stipulates as much, as if Real Military precedent isn't enough....
While members are appointed and promoted under the auspices of the CAP Constitution and by regulation, the Air Force retains sole authority over CAP's grade structure.
OCs in the military are not all civilians off the street. Many of them are EMs. They automatically are promoted to E-5 and, if they fail OCS/OTS, continue to serve at that grade. Civilians who fail have to serve out an enlistment.
SMWOGs do NOT wear officer flight caps or other officer insignia, as they are not officers (Ref: CAPM 39-1, para 1-3). However, flight officers do wear them. (Also ref: CAPM 39-1)
I agree with you that "SM" isn't a great term. OC isn't accurate, though. And while we would agree on AB, CAP has to finish the task and recreate an NCO corps. (That IS coming.)
Like you, I've poked badges through uniforms for years. I've never had an issue getting the holes out -- regular ironing, laundering, starching and wear hasn't hurt my shirts. I don't know what the white shirts are like, but the Air Force shirts do well on the badge test (they have to).
Ok, Mike gets the last word.