wear of the flight suit

[Psicorp]

For those of us who've decided (for whatever reason) to wear the blue flightsuit...

"Black Leather Jacket (atch 2.) A black leather jacket with side entry and patch pockets similar in style to the A-2 jacket was approved for wear by CAP senior members with the aviator shirt combinations, utility uniform, CAP flight suit or CAP polo shirt with gray slacks. The CAP command patch will be worn on the right breast with the black leather name patch on the left breast. This jacket may not be worn with any AF-style uniforms.
See Changes to CAPM 39-1, CAP Uniform Manual"

[Hawk200]

A verbal order outweighs a written order. SO, even if the Regs say one thing, if the Chief of Chaplains told him to do something else, that verbal order overrides regulations.

By this logic a verbal order from MG Pineda to fly CAP airplanes at 100' MSL despite what CAPR 60-1 says would be perfectly ok?  Nope.  No verbal order can override a CAP regulation unless the regulation itself gives someone in the chain of command some discretion on the issue. 

Actually...yes...all regulations are written orders form the commanding general....ergo...if MG Pineda says to do it....CAPR 60-1 is superseded.   I have argued this many time.  The top dog does not answer to us nor to the regulations.  If you regional commander or wing commander tried to issue the same order...that would be a different story.  But the National Commander is the issuing authority for all regulations/manuals/pamphlets and therefore he has the power to contermand those orders.

On another issue perhaps, but flight at 100' MSL ? Sorry, that dog don't hunt.

One, for the simple reason that it would be physically impossible in a large part of the continental United States.

Two, there are other organizations that trump our general. Such as the FAA. Fly at 100' MSL (where you can) and you had better hope that nobody catches your tail number. If they do, it will be about a week or two before you find your ticket punched. Willing to chance it on a generals order?

[Hawk200]

The top dog does not answer to us nor to the regulations.  If you regional commander or wing commander tried to issue the same order...that would be a different story.  But the National Commander is the issuing authority for all regulations/manuals/pamphlets and therefore he has the power to contermand those orders.

Looking at this from another angle: Commanding General does not answer to the organizations' regulations? While it may be true, in practice it would show a serious lack of integrity on that generals part. Especially if he or she had ratified the reg that they decided to countermand.

[Psicorp]

On another issue perhaps, but flight at 100' MSL ? Sorry, that dog don't hunt.

One, for the simple reason that it would be physically impossible in a large part of the continental United States.

Two, there are other organizations that trump our general. Such as the FAA. Fly at 100' MSL (where you can) and you had better hope that nobody catches your tail number. If they do, it will be about a week or two before you find your ticket punched. Willing to chance it on a generals order?

I'm sure that was meant facetiously.

I would think the obligation to dissobey an illegal order would apply there.  I'd be very careful about following an order that is specifically prohibited by regulations, even our own unless it were a life, death, or property risk situation. I can't see where having the order in writing would save you if in following the order you crossed legal lines.

[bosshawk]

For those of us who've decided (for whatever reason) to wear the blue flightsuit...

"Black Leather Jacket (atch 2.) A black leather jacket with side entry and patch pockets similar in style to the A-2 jacket was approved for wear by CAP senior members with the aviator shirt combinations, utility uniform, CAP flight suit or CAP polo shirt with gray slacks. The CAP command patch will be worn on the right breast with the black leather name patch on the left breast. This jacket may not be worn with any AF-style uniforms.
See Changes to CAPM 39-1, CAP Uniform Manual"

You are aware, of course, that the leather name patch is a new one: not the one normally worn on the flight suit?  Vanguard now has them: $9.35 each, as I remember.

[A.Member]

What the heck, I'll throw my $.02 in...

If you're not a member of an aircrew (MP, MO, or MS), then why would you wear a flight suit?   

If you're a chaplain (or simply don't have a rating), the simple solution is to just wear the BDUs and live worry free. 

[Chaplaindon]

A Member,

There are quite a few rated CAP chaplains ... there are also chaplains who are IC's, GTL's, CUL's, EMT and/or paramedics and so forth.

CAPR 265-1 (29 NOV 05) Section B (5) only prohibits chaplains from serving as unit commanders, deputy commanders, and testing officers. Beyond that, per the regs chaplains can do quite a lot of different roles. If a chaplain is serving as a flight crew member --I knew of a chaplain who served concurrently as a unit operations officer (and I know several who are CFI's)-- the wear of the flight suit WITH a chaplain's badge concurrent with their "wings" shouldn't be an issue.

My point is (a) since chaplains CAN and DO serve as flight crew members and (b) can wear the CAP or USAF  flight suit and (c) the USAF "rated" chaplains** can and do wear BOTH an aero rating badge AND a chaplain's badge on their flight suit name badge THEN CAP chaplains should likewise be permitted to do likewise.

Beyond that, frankly, I'd have no issue with permitting 1 additional operational qualification badge (e.g. EMT/Paramedic, GTM, IC --if/when it's approved, etc.) to be worn by qualified members upon their leather patch similar to the way the USAF does it.

**And as I mentioned before Ch, Maj Gen Charles C. Baldwin, USAF (the current USAF Chief of Chaplains) is a rated USAF officer -- a Vietnam era fighter pilot. I have seen him wearing such a patch with BOTH badges.

Ultimately, regardless of the consensus of CAP Talk or CAP NHQ, I know that I have no intention to alter my practice of imitating the USAF model and wearing both my wings and chaplain's badge.

If I am challenged personally, I will politely disregard any well-meaning attempt at correction. If the IC or OSC, AOBD, GOBD,  etc. STRONGLY objects on a mission, they can continue the mission without my skills or contributions (save for my prayers). I'll leave quietly BUT I won't remove my chaplain's badge from my BDU cover or my flight suit patch.

[lordmonar]

The top dog does not answer to us nor to the regulations.  If you regional commander or wing commander tried to issue the same order...that would be a different story.  But the National Commander is the issuing authority for all regulations/manuals/pamphlets and therefore he has the power to contermand those orders.

Looking at this from another angle: Commanding General does not answer to the organizations' regulations? While it may be true, in practice it would show a serious lack of integrity on that generals part. Especially if he or she had ratified the reg that they decided to countermand.

That is the responsibility of command.  Not a lack of integrity.

Assuming that there was a legitimate reason for the order...why would there be a integrity?   If it was a "I want to do this...but you can't" that would be something different.  The point was...a verbal order outweights written regulations....and the answer is.....sometimes that is true...depending on who wrote the original order (or regulations).

If I am a squadron commander and I write a policy letter saying we will wear blues ever first Monaday...then later say..."next Monday (a blues day) we will wear BDUs".  I am not lacking integrity...I am changing policy.  Like wise....If CAPR 60-1 says....no flying below 500' (or what ever it says...I have not looked) and then MG Pineda says....you need to fly at 100'....it is perfectly legal for him to do so (in relation to CAP regs...not FAA of course).

The same applies to uniform issues.  If the 39-1 says no "civilian medals" and then the National Commander tells some recipient of a Award to wear them...he is perfectly within his rights and authority to do so.  And again...it is not an integrity issue.

If he received a medal and wore it and then did not let anyone else to wear it.....that would be an integrity issue....but that is not what has happened in this case.

[lordmonar]

A Member,

There are quite a few rated CAP chaplains ... there are also chaplains who are IC's, GTL's, CUL's, EMT and/or paramedics and so forth.

CAPR 265-1 (29 NOV 05) Section B (5) only prohibits chaplains from serving as unit commanders, deputy commanders, and testing officers. Beyond that, per the regs chaplains can do quite a lot of different roles. If a chaplain is serving as a flight crew member --I knew of a chaplain who served concurrently as a unit operations officer (and I know several who are CFI's)-- the wear of the flight suit WITH a chaplain's badge concurrent with their "wings" shouldn't be an issue.

My point is (a) since chaplains CAN and DO serve as flight crew members and (b) can wear the CAP or USAF  flight suit and (c) the USAF "rated" chaplains** can and do wear BOTH an aero rating badge AND a chaplain's badge on their flight suit name badge THEN CAP chaplains should likewise be permitted to do likewise.

Beyond that, frankly, I'd have no issue with permitting 1 additional operational qualification badge (e.g. EMT/Paramedic, GTM, IC --if/when it's approved, etc.) to be worn by qualified members upon their leather patch similar to the way the USAF does it.

**And as I mentioned before Ch, Maj Gen Charles C. Baldwin, USAF (the current USAF Chief of Chaplains) is a rated USAF officer -- a Vietnam era fighter pilot. I have seen him wearing such a patch with BOTH badges.

Ultimately, regardless of the consensus of CAP Talk or CAP NHQ, I know that I have no intention to alter my practice of imitating the USAF model and wearing both my wings and chaplain's badge.

If I am challenged personally, I will politely disregard any well-meaning attempt at correction. If the IC or OSC, AOBD, GOBD,  etc. STRONGLY objects on a mission, they can continue the mission without my skills or contributions (save for my prayers). I'll leave quietly BUT I won't remove my chaplain's badge from my BDU cover or my flight suit patch.

Recently...our squadron chaplain served as the IC for a SAREX....when he was being the IC, he removed his chaplains badge...because a chaplain cannot be commander....including an incident commander.  So for the duration of the SAREX he was NOT a chaplain and removed his badge. 

Now....I don't know if that was legally kosher (I don't know if you can just turn of being a chaplain like that)...and I don't think anyone would have a problem with him wearing his badge while an IC...but it is an example of both trying to follow the letter and spirit of the rules in a very gray area.

Again...if a chaplain wanted to wear a flight suit, I see no reason why he should not wear his badge on the name patch.  And again...I am going by the spirit of the regulation and not the letter.  YMMV

[Chaplaindon]

There's absolutely NO prohibition on a chaplain serving as an Incident Commander or as pilot in "Command" ... etc. Just what's in CAPR 265-1.

Unless your chaplain is "reading into" the reg, there's no explicit prohibition whatsoever. As an IC myself, I regularly wear my chaplain's badge while IC-ing.

[A.Member]

A Member,

There are quite a few rated CAP chaplains ... there are also chaplains who are IC's, GTL's, CUL's, EMT and/or paramedics and so forth.

CAPR 265-1 (29 NOV 05) Section B (5) only prohibits chaplains from serving as unit commanders, deputy commanders, and testing officers. Beyond that, per the regs chaplains can do quite a lot of different roles. If a chaplain is serving as a flight crew member --I knew of a chaplain who served concurrently as a unit operations officer (and I know several who are CFI's)-- the wear of the flight suit WITH a chaplain's badge concurrent with their "wings" shouldn't be an issue.

My point is (a) since chaplains CAN and DO serve as flight crew members and (b) can wear the CAP or USAF  flight suit and (c) the USAF "rated" chaplains** can and do wear BOTH an aero rating badge AND a chaplain's badge on their flight suit name badge THEN CAP chaplains should likewise be permitted to do likewise.

Beyond that, frankly, I'd have no issue with permitting 1 additional operational qualification badge (e.g. EMT/Paramedic, GTM, IC --if/when it's approved, etc.) to be worn by qualified members upon their leather patch similar to the way the USAF does it.

**And as I mentioned before Ch, Maj Gen Charles C. Baldwin, USAF (the current USAF Chief of Chaplains) is a rated USAF officer -- a Vietnam era fighter pilot. I have seen him wearing such a patch with BOTH badges.

Ultimately, regardless of the consensus of CAP Talk or CAP NHQ, I know that I have no intention to alter my practice of imitating the USAF model and wearing both my wings and chaplain's badge.

If I am challenged personally, I will politely disregard any well-meaning attempt at correction. If the IC or OSC, AOBD, GOBD,  etc. STRONGLY objects on a mission, they can continue the mission without my skills or contributions (save for my prayers). I'll leave quietly BUT I won't remove my chaplain's badge from my BDU cover or my flight suit patch.

I hear ya but the original poster indicated he didn't have a rating.  But even if he did have a rating, there is no requirement that says an aircrew member must wear a flight suit (chaplain or not).  That was my point.

If someone is that concerned over the issue, just wear the BDUs and be done with it.  I have no heart-burn either way.

[lordmonar]

There's absolutely NO prohibition on a chaplain serving as an Incident Commander or as pilot in "Command" ... etc. Just what's in CAPR 265-1.

Unless your chaplain is "reading into" the reg, there's no explicit prohibition whatsoever. As an IC myself, I regularly wear my chaplain's badge while IC-ing.

Like you said...it depends on how you interpret 265-1.  I personally have no problem with it at all.  But as I said....here was a gray area....and one chaplain's attempt to satisfy the regulations.

[lordmonar]

I hear ya but the original poster indicated he didn't have a rating.  But even if he did have a rating, there is no requirement that says an aircrew member must wear a flight suit (chaplain or not).  That was my point.

If someone is that concerned over the issue, just wear the BDUs and be done with it.  I have no heart-burn either way.

Unless you live in one of the those wings that "require" nomex to fly.

[Smokey]

Why does everyone want to beat up on the chaplain?

The regs sometimes are in conflict.  Let's try some common sense and not be sooooooo nit picky. While I understand the regs and the reasons for them, common sense must enter in.   Example......you are flying a mission as flight crew wearing a green flight suit. Due to rainy weather, you land,  it is pouring rain like a hurricane.  In your survival kit you have a clear plastic rain poncho.  Do you put it on in violation of regulations (39-1 doesn't authorize it) to tie down your aircraft and get into shelter?   Or do you follow regs and get drenched to the skin?  

Let's get real folks.  Besides, those of you beating up on the chaplain , may just need him someday!!!!   Don't push your luck....he has friends in higher places than you can fly.

[Hawk200]

The top dog does not answer to us nor to the regulations.  If you regional commander or wing commander tried to issue the same order...that would be a different story.  But the National Commander is the issuing authority for all regulations/manuals/pamphlets and therefore he has the power to contermand those orders.

Looking at this from another angle: Commanding General does not answer to the organizations' regulations? While it may be true, in practice it would show a serious lack of integrity on that generals part. Especially if he or she had ratified the reg that they decided to countermand.

That is the responsibility of command.  Not a lack of integrity.

Assuming that there was a legitimate reason for the order...why would there be a integrity?   If it was a "I want to do this...but you can't" that would be something different.  The point was...a verbal order outweights written regulations....and the answer is.....sometimes that is true...depending on who wrote the original order (or regulations).

If I am a squadron commander and I write a policy letter saying we will wear blues ever first Monaday...then later say..."next Monday (a blues day) we will wear BDUs".  I am not lacking integrity...I am changing policy.  Like wise....If CAPR 60-1 says....no flying below 500' (or what ever it says...I have not looked) and then MG Pineda says....you need to fly at 100'....it is perfectly legal for him to do so (in relation to CAP regs...not FAA of course).

The same applies to uniform issues.  If the 39-1 says no "civilian medals" and then the National Commander tells some recipient of a Award to wear them...he is perfectly within his rights and authority to do so.  And again...it is not an integrity issue.

If he received a medal and wore it and then did not let anyone else to wear it.....that would be an integrity issue....but that is not what has happened in this case.

I think you totally missed the point. If a general says "I've signed off on this regulation. It will be followed", and down the road decides "That doesn't work for me right now, I'm not going to follow it.", that is a serious lack of integrity.

Now, if for instance, the general says "It's not according to reg right now, but go ahead and wear (or do) it . We'll will supplement or amend the reg in the near future.", then there wouldn't be any issues. That's adapting.

If a general changes his mind on a reg, he needs to follow up and change the reg, or be able to justify it. Arbitrarily deciding that he can ignore the reg when he feels like it is wrong. That's not changing policy, that is breakdown in the chain of command concept.

Plain and simple, general ignores regs, members will follow his example. Leadership is as it does.

[Smokey]

Pacific Region requires nomex flight suit, leather boots and gloves , preferably nomex to fly missions.  

Besides...nomex is the "smart" item to wear.  Just because a region or wing may not require it, why not wear it for safety reasons??

[Smokey]

BTW ...a side note.......about the wear of a flight suit.

I am the CAP rep for an ongoing militay activity at an AF Base.  When I attend meetings I usually wear the flight suit.  The reason.....uniform of the day at the base is flight suit for flight rated personnel.  (Note: I am pilot/obs/scanner rated) I wear the flight suit so as to "fit in" and not stand out like a sore thumb in in blues.  I feel it's better to blend in that have everyone wondering why the CAP guy showed up in blues when even the general is in a flight suit.

[Hawk200]

BTW ...a side note.......about the wear of a flight suit.

I am the CAP rep for an ongoing militay activity at an AF Base.  When I attend meetings I usually wear the flight suit.  The reason.....uniform of the day at the base is flight suit for flight rated personnel.  (Note: I am pilot/obs/scanner rated) I wear the flight suit so as to "fit in" and not stand out like a sore thumb in in blues.  I feel it's better to blend in that have everyone wondering why the CAP guy showed up in blues when even the general is in a flight suit.

I'd buy that. I think fitting in when working with the military is not only practical, it's polite. Showing up in something different may have them wondering why you think you're so hot that you can draw attention to yourself.

[Psicorp]

I'd buy that. I think fitting in when working with the military is not only practical, it's polite. Showing up in something different may have them wondering why you think you're so hot that you can draw attention to yourself.

Not to mention the unwritten rule of never outdressing the General.

[Ned]

On the issue of the National Commander having the authority to issue or verbally change regulations . . .

It is worth remembering that the National Commander is not the supreme authority in CAP.  That authority is vested in the BoG by law.

And while the CAP constitution gives the National Commander the authority to "adopt and maintain regulations," it also requires that all regulations be ratified by the National Board.  IOW, unless and until a regulation is ratified by the NB, it has no force or effect.  (There is an exception for emergency regulations to preserve life or property which does not require NB approval, although the NB may subsequently revoke even an emergency regulation promogulated by the National Commander.)

And of course the BoG has the authority to require the National Commander to issue, revoke, or rescind regulations.  Such actions do not require NB approval.

So, the bottom line is that the National Commander is bound by the same regulations as you and me, and absent an emergency is not authorized to change them or issue new ones on his own.

Ned