Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 20, 2018, 04:14:03 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Uniforms & Awards  |  Topic: Cadet Flight Duty Uniform
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All] Print
Author Topic: Cadet Flight Duty Uniform  (Read 2463 times)
stratocaster29
Newbie

Posts: 1
Unit: SWR-TX-051

« on: July 29, 2018, 12:13:03 PM »

Hey all, I've been doing some research more into CAP uniforms and I have a couple questions about the FDU and CFDU and Utility Coverall:

1) Would a cadet with a pre-solo flight rating be authorized to wear any of the 3?
2) What is the wear regulation in regards to regular squadron meetings?
3) Can cadets without any aeronautical rating wear any of the 3?
4) Cadets with outside solo endorsements authorized to wear any of the 3?

Sorry if these are stupid questions... I was not aware of cadet authorization of these until recently.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2018, 12:35:05 PM »

(Double posting is not necessary and violates the TOS).

Hey all, I've been doing some research more into CAP uniforms and I have a couple questions about the FDU and CFDU and Utility Coverall:

1) Would a cadet with a pre-solo flight rating be authorized to wear any of the 3?
No - "Pre solo" is not a flight rating.

2) What is the wear regulation in regards to regular squadron meetings?
Worn when you participate in aviation activities only.

3) Can cadets without any aeronautical rating wear any of the 3?
No.

4) Cadets with outside solo endorsements authorized to wear any of the 3?
No.

CAPM 39-1:
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/M391_E6F33EAAEC28A.pdf

Page 95
"8.1.1.1. The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are authorized functional
clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties.
Flight duty includes preparation,
preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. The
FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical
rating as defined by CAPR 35-6
, Aeronautical Ratings, Emergency Services Patch and Badges, and
Ground Team Badges, and/or have a current aircrew mission qualification (mission pilot, transport pilot,
observer, scanner, aerial photographer, etc.). Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission
qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on
days when actual flying is planned or anticipated. Wing commanders will determine when FDU and
CFDU wear is appropriate. "
Logged


arajca
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,281

« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2018, 04:10:59 PM »

See responses in italics in line in the quote.

Hey all, I've been doing some research more into CAP uniforms and I have a couple questions about the FDU and CFDU and Utility Coverall:

1) Would a cadet with a pre-solo flight rating be authorized to wear any of the 3? Is the pre-solo rating listed as a CAP aeronautical rating in CAPR 35-6?
2) What is the wear regulation in regards to regular squadron meetings? Does the regular squadron meeting include flight duties as listed in CAPM 39-1, para 8.1.1.1. ?
3) Can cadets without any aeronautical rating wear any of the 3? Reference CAPM 39-1, para 8.1.1.1.
4) Cadets with outside solo endorsements authorized to wear any of the 3? Is this a CAP aernautical rating?

Sorry if these are stupid questions... I was not aware of cadet authorization of these until recently.
Not necessarily stupid, just need to read the manual and follow the references. Also, follow your commander's guidance.
Logged
Mitchell 1969
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 806
Unit: PCR-CA-051

« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2018, 04:38:02 PM »

(Double posting is not necessary and violates the TOS).

Hey all, I've been doing some research more into CAP uniforms and I have a couple questions about the FDU and CFDU and Utility Coverall:

1) Would a cadet with a pre-solo flight rating be authorized to wear any of the 3?
No - "Pre solo" is not a flight rating.

2) What is the wear regulation in regards to regular squadron meetings?
Worn when you participate in aviation activities only.

3) Can cadets without any aeronautical rating wear any of the 3?
No.

4) Cadets with outside solo endorsements authorized to wear any of the 3?
No.

CAPM 39-1:
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/M391_E6F33EAAEC28A.pdf

Page 95
"8.1.1.1. The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are authorized functional
clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties.
Flight duty includes preparation,
preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. The
FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical
rating as defined by CAPR 35-6
, Aeronautical Ratings, Emergency Services Patch and Badges, and
Ground Team Badges, and/or have a current aircrew mission qualification (mission pilot, transport pilot,
observer, scanner, aerial photographer, etc.). Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission
qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on
days when actual flying is planned or anticipated. Wing commanders will determine when FDU and
CFDU wear is appropriate. "



With regard to your comment about regular squadron meetings, it doesn't say, as you claim,  ”Worn when you participate in aviation activities only.” It says they are for people ”who perform” aviation particular duties, not mandating that they are performING them at that exact moment or even on that day. In fact, they are authorized for people who formerly held ratings,  for whom ”Worn when you participate in aviation activities only” becomes essentially meaningless.

The ”actual flying” restriction applies to people not rated or not formerly rated. Don't mix them up, please.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,663

« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2018, 06:01:39 PM »

What kind of aviation-related duties do you perform in most squadron meetings, where you find that most squadrons do not have airplanes assigned to them? Are you calling the "flight-related duties" members arranging for O-flights?

HA!

Give me a break!

What is quoted, if you apply common logic, means that you cannot wear FDU or CDFU at a squadron meeting where you are not flying! It is clear. You are not preparing for a flight, you cannot wear FDU or CDFU.







Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2018, 08:51:26 PM »

The quote literally says exactly what is considered "flight duty",
and that verbiage does not include regular meetings.
Logged


MSG Mac
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,903
Unit: MER-MD-071

« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2018, 09:06:24 PM »

Question to ask yourself when considering wearing a flight suit.

1. Am I going directly to a flight in a CAP Aircraft?

2. Do I have an CAP Aeronautical rating? Pilot, Observer, scanner, Aerial Photographer, or Flight Crew?

3. If the Answer to one and two are Yes. wear the suit. If no DON'T
Logged
Michael P. McEleney
Lt Col CAP
MSG USA (Retired)
OldGuy
Seasoned Member

Posts: 435
Unit: TBKS

« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2018, 10:19:27 PM »

The quote literally says exactly what is considered "flight duty",
and that verbiage does not include regular meetings.

"The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are authorized functional clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties."

So we find out who can wear FDU above. Below defines duties that they must perform. No where is there a restriction that they ONLY wear the FDU while performing those duties.

"Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. "

Then the regs address who may wear FDU when not otherwise authorized above:

"Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated."
Logged
OldGuy
Seasoned Member

Posts: 435
Unit: TBKS

« Reply #8 on: July 29, 2018, 10:20:44 PM »

1. Am I going directly to a flight in a CAP Aircraft?
Where do the regs say that?
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #9 on: July 29, 2018, 10:39:09 PM »

1. Am I going directly to a flight in a CAP Aircraft?
Where do the regs say that?

"Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations."
Logged


OldGuy
Seasoned Member

Posts: 435
Unit: TBKS

« Reply #10 on: July 29, 2018, 10:48:06 PM »

"Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations."
Yep, that defines who can wear the FDU, where does it restrict same to just those activities?
Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,400
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #11 on: July 29, 2018, 10:54:08 PM »

"Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations."
Yep, that defines who can wear the FDU, where does it restrict same to just those activities?
This?
CAPM 39-1:
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/M391_E6F33EAAEC28A.pdf

Page 95
"8.1.1.1. The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are authorized functional
clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties.
Flight duty includes preparation,
preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. The
FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical
rating as defined by CAPR 35-6
, Aeronautical Ratings, Emergency Services Patch and Badges, and
Ground Team Badges, and/or have a current aircrew mission qualification (mission pilot, transport pilot,
observer, scanner, aerial photographer, etc.). Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission
qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on
days when actual flying is planned or anticipated. Wing commanders will determine when FDU and
CFDU wear is appropriate."


Unless you can provide contrary information from a different reg, I think this is pretty clear. If you are asking your Q just to "stir the pot", you can stop now.
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
Mitchell 1969
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 806
Unit: PCR-CA-051

« Reply #12 on: July 30, 2018, 01:31:07 AM »

1. Am I going directly to a flight in a CAP Aircraft?
Where do the regs say that?

"Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations."

You omitted the paragraph containing ”who perform” vs your interpretation which is ”are performing.” Nowhere does it say that the aviation duties must be performed during every minute where that uniform is worn. Also, consider, as I mentioned earlier, that persons who formerly held ratings may wear that uniform as well, with nary a flight duty being contemplated.

This is yet another poorly worded piece of direction. In the absence of clarity, it comes down to opinion. You (and others) have yours, I (and different others) disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.
OldGuy
Seasoned Member

Posts: 435
Unit: TBKS

« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2018, 09:13:14 AM »


You omitted the paragraph containing ”who perform” vs your interpretation which is ”are performing.” Nowhere does it say that the aviation duties must be performed during every minute where that uniform is worn. Also, consider, as I mentioned earlier, that persons who formerly held ratings may wear that uniform as well, with nary a flight duty being contemplated.

This is yet another poorly worded piece of direction. In the absence of clarity, it comes down to opinion. You (and others) have yours, I (and different others) disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yep. Pot stirrer? Not sure but if you cannot perform flight duties but can wear the uniform, sounds like it is not a uniform restricted to JUST flight duty. Nor does that phrase ('restricted to flight duty') appear anywhere in the regs.
Logged
foo
Forum Regular

Posts: 165

« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2018, 09:35:56 AM »

You omitted the paragraph containing ”who perform” vs your interpretation which is ”are performing.” Nowhere does it say that the aviation duties must be performed during every minute where that uniform is worn. Also, consider, as I mentioned earlier, that persons who formerly held ratings may wear that uniform as well, with nary a flight duty being contemplated.

I think that is addressed later in the same paragraph:

Quote
Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated.

Also consider the use of the term "functional clothing" in the regulation. I'm trying to think of ways the unique functionality of a flight suit would be beneficial at weekly squadron meetings that are in many cases not even held at an aviation facility.

Quote from: Mitchell 1969
This is yet another poorly worded piece of direction. In the absence of clarity, it comes down to opinion. You (and others) have yours, I (and different others) disagree.

No argument there. I will also add that I've never seen a CAP-RAP wearing anything other than a flight suit during a squadron visit, so it seems this gray area is not limited to CAP.
Logged
OldGuy
Seasoned Member

Posts: 435
Unit: TBKS

« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2018, 09:42:03 AM »



I think that is addressed later in the same paragraph:

Quote
Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated.
A clear implication is that those who have current ratings may wear same on other than days "when actual flying is planned or anticipated", moreover even those restricted to said days, appear to be able to wear FDU during non-flight activities.
Logged
OldGuy
Seasoned Member

Posts: 435
Unit: TBKS

« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2018, 09:42:51 AM »

I will also add that I've never seen a CAP-RAP wearing anything other than a flight suit during a squadron visit, so it seems this gray area is not limited to CAP.
Flight crews in active units wear FDU almost all of the time.
Logged
foo
Forum Regular

Posts: 165

« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2018, 10:14:30 AM »



I think that is addressed later in the same paragraph:

Quote
Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated.
A clear implication is that those who have current ratings may wear same on other than days "when actual flying is planned or anticipated", moreover even those restricted to said days, appear to be able to wear FDU during non-flight activities.

Many seem to disagree, making the implication rather unclear.
Logged
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,395

« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2018, 10:27:34 AM »

Hey all, I've been doing some research more into CAP uniforms and I have a couple questions about the FDU and CFDU and Utility Coverall:

Corporate uniforms are worn only be senior members, or cadets who are over 18 that do not meet the height and weight standards for the Air Force-style uniform.

If you are under 18, you will not wear the corporate.
Logged
arajca
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,281

« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2018, 11:21:50 AM »



I think that is addressed later in the same paragraph:

Quote
Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated.
A clear implication is that those who have current ratings may wear same on other than days "when actual flying is planned or anticipated", moreover even those restricted to said days, appear to be able to wear FDU during non-flight activities.

Many seem to disagree, making the implication rather unclear.
Many also seem to think that because CAP is flying somewhere, they can wear the flightsuit. I've had a member make that argument to me when I was a unit commander. I managed not to laugh in their face, but it wasn't easy.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #20 on: July 30, 2018, 11:44:12 AM »

The only members who are "unclear" on the intent of the wear instructions for the FDUs,
and this includes the previous revisions of 39-1 as well, are those looking to wear the FDU
in lieu of a more appropriate uniform.

Trying to justify wearing it at a random Tuesday-evening unit meeting in a squadron without an airport
within 30 NM because "I went to NESA in ought-5" speaks volumes about the member.

Logged


LSThiker
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,830
Unit: Earth

« Reply #21 on: July 30, 2018, 12:34:49 PM »

Quote
"8.1.1.1. <snip> Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate."

The only opinion that matters in this little uniform debate is your wing commander.  He/she is responsible for determining when the FDU/CFDU is appropriate.  If he/she determines that wearing it to a random Tuesday-evening unit meeting is appropriate, then you are good to go, regardless of the opinions on Facebook, CAPTalk, or any other member outside your wing.  If he/she determines it is not appropriate, then it is not appropriate.  After all, the wing commander is the person that makes the decision as to what qualifies as "other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations" for personnel that hold or have previously held an aircrew or aeronautical rating.   
Logged
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,929
Unit: of issue

« Reply #22 on: July 30, 2018, 04:37:12 PM »

Quote
"8.1.1.1. <snip> Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate."

The only opinion that matters in this little uniform debate is your wing commander.  He/she is responsible for determining when the FDU/CFDU is appropriate.  If he/she determines that wearing it to a random Tuesday-evening unit meeting is appropriate, then you are good to go, regardless of the opinions on Facebook, CAPTalk, or any other member outside your wing.  If he/she determines it is not appropriate, then it is not appropriate.  After all, the wing commander is the person that makes the decision as to what qualifies as "other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations" for personnel that hold or have previously held an aircrew or aeronautical rating.   

Pretty much this.

Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2007-2018 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,395

« Reply #23 on: July 30, 2018, 04:55:52 PM »

Your squadron commander can say "No flight duty uniforms at the weekly squadron meeting." They have that discretion under CAPM 39-1, 2.10.3.
Logged
Castle Bravo
Recruit

Posts: 31

« Reply #24 on: September 18, 2018, 12:19:43 AM »

Not to hijack this thread or anything but I felt like making my own for this wouldn’t be necessary. So the current 39-1 says that the undergarment to be worn is a black T-shirt but I read something put together by a squadron from 2008 that said that you could wear a black T-shirt or a “brown” T-shirt. Is that just a case of misinformation or were we allowed to wear two different shirts back then? Just a bit curious is all.
Logged
NovemberWhiskey
Recruit

Posts: 13
Unit: NER-NY-301

« Reply #25 on: September 18, 2018, 12:23:54 AM »

Refer to CAPM 39-1 attachment 9: the brown (also white!?) T-shirt with FDU was removed effective 1 Jan 2015.
Logged
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,395

« Reply #26 on: Yesterday at 09:41:04 AM »

Not to hijack this thread or anything but I felt like making my own for this wouldn’t be necessary. So the current 39-1 says that the undergarment to be worn is a black T-shirt but I read something put together by a squadron from 2008 that said that you could wear a black T-shirt or a “brown” T-shirt. Is that just a case of misinformation or were we allowed to wear two different shirts back then? Just a bit curious is all.

Refer to CAPM 39-1 attachment 9: the brown (also white!?) T-shirt with FDU was removed effective 1 Jan 2015.

In short, BDUs were once worn with several different shirt colors. CAP eliminated, in all but a few outstanding exceptions, the color variations and solely went with the black undershirt.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #27 on: Yesterday at 09:53:08 AM »

^ One of the small, but welcome victories.  I >hated< the look of the white t-shirt with the CFU,
especially when it wasn't especially "white".
Logged


jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #28 on: Yesterday at 10:00:51 PM »

Are we still debating the flight suit wear issue or has that been put to bed?
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #29 on: Yesterday at 10:07:16 PM »

Are we still debating the flight suit wear issue or has that been put to bed?

What's to debate? The regs are clear.

Only when flying, and only >after< the member has a rating.
Logged


jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #30 on: Yesterday at 10:21:28 PM »

Are we still debating the flight suit wear issue or has that been put to bed?

What's to debate? The regs are clear.

Only when flying, and only >after< the member has a rating.

But that's not how they read:

The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are authorized functional
clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties. Flight duty includes preparation,
preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations.


If it said "are performing" or "are on their way to or from performing" then I would agree that it's limited. It looks similar to the AF definition that if a person is in a flying AFSC then they wear the bag as their duty uniform regardless of performing flying duties that day.

This one makes it even more unclear:

The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical
rating as defined by CAPR 35-6


"or previously had?" That makes it sound like a person who was an observer back in the 60s could continue to wear the FDU anytime that they wanted. A person who previously had a rating would have no reason to wear it once they were no longer qualified.

The regs do not seem to be clear.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #31 on: Yesterday at 10:50:05 PM »

The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical
rating as defined by CAPR 35-6


"or previously had?" That makes it sound like a person who was an observer back in the 60s could continue to wear the FDU anytime that they wanted. A person who previously had a rating would have no reason to wear it once they were no longer qualified.

A person who previously had an aviation rating back in the 60s, and is working to re-qual, could wear the FDU.

A person who has never held an aviation rating cannot wear the FDU until he has attained that rating.

As per your quote, in both cases it would be while performing aviation particular duties.
That is, admittedly, subjective, but does not a unit meeting 80 miles from a plane, or
Ground Team training, etc.  Common sense should prevail over inconvenience or affectation.
Logged


jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #32 on: Yesterday at 11:13:14 PM »

The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical
rating as defined by CAPR 35-6


"or previously had?" That makes it sound like a person who was an observer back in the 60s could continue to wear the FDU anytime that they wanted. A person who previously had a rating would have no reason to wear it once they were no longer qualified.

A person who previously had an aviation rating back in the 60s, and is working to re-qual, could wear the FDU.

A person who has never held an aviation rating cannot wear the FDU until he has attained that rating.

As per your quote, in both cases it would be while performing aviation particular duties.
That is, admittedly, subjective, but does not a unit meeting 80 miles from a plane, or
Ground Team training, etc.  Common sense should prevail over inconvenience or affectation.

I have a feeling that we are going to end up going around the same circle because the reg is poorly worded. Or maybe it's on purpose because the prohibition is not actually there...  ;)

Based on the first quote a person can wear the FDU without attaining a rating. It says nothing about being rated, only that they perform flight duties. An un-rated scanner trainee can wear the FDU as could an unqualified re-trainee (that is covered further down in that paragraph of the reg).

The regs are not clear and as you said, subjective. And my quote does not say "performing", it says "perform". Going to a meeting 80 miles from a plane in a FDU is not a big deal if the person is a qualified aircrew member but I agree that it's not the best choice for GT training.

Logged
Mitchell 1969
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 806
Unit: PCR-CA-051

« Reply #33 on: Today at 01:33:23 AM »

The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical
rating as defined by CAPR 35-6


"or previously had?" That makes it sound like a person who was an observer back in the 60s could continue to wear the FDU anytime that they wanted. A person who previously had a rating would have no reason to wear it once they were no longer qualified.

A person who previously had an aviation rating back in the 60s, and is working to re-qual, could wear the FDU.

A person who has never held an aviation rating cannot wear the FDU until he has attained that rating.

As per your quote, in both cases it would be while performing aviation particular duties.
That is, admittedly, subjective, but does not a unit meeting 80 miles from a plane, or
Ground Team training, etc.  Common sense should prevail over inconvenience or affectation.

It’s poorly worded. But, worded it is. Once the end of the words has been reached, the path transitions to opinions. You have posted yours. It is not regulatory or governing. It is simply your opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.
THRAWN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,873

« Reply #34 on: Today at 11:06:47 AM »

Mother of pearl....

It's simple: flying? Wear it. Not flying? Don't wear it.

What's next?
Logged
Strup
"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #35 on: Today at 11:11:52 AM »

Mother of pearl....

It's simple: flying? Wear it. Not flying? Don't wear it.

What's next?

Seriously - another of CAP's top ten problems - people doing mental gymnastics to be able to do something
they know is clearly in violation of the spirit of poorly worded regs.

Any reasonable person, absent of the agenda of "But I really want to..." would understand the intent and
just comply and move on.
Logged


jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #36 on: Today at 11:14:35 AM »

Mother of pearl....

It's simple: flying? Wear it. Not flying? Don't wear it.

What's next?

And how we're at the dead horse.

That would be an appropriate response from the unit commander, or wing commander as the reg states, but the point is that your interpretation is an opinion and not what is stated in the reg.

Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate.
Logged
jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #37 on: Today at 11:20:16 AM »

Mother of pearl....

It's simple: flying? Wear it. Not flying? Don't wear it.

What's next?

Seriously - another of CAP's top ten problems - people doing mental gymnastics to be able to do something
they know is clearly in violation of the spirit of poorly worded regs.

Any reasonable person, absent of the agenda of "But I really want to..." would understand the intent and
just comply and move on.

No one here has mentioned anything about attempting to do something in violation of a reg. The wing commander makes the final determination of when it is appropriate to wear that uniform in his/her wing and some personal opinions were not consistent with the way the reg is worded.
Logged
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,663

« Reply #38 on: Today at 11:34:51 AM »

Question: What would be the best example of "attempting to do something in violation of a reg?"

Answer: "Some personal opinions were not consistent with the way the reg is worded."



« Last Edit: Today at 12:22:37 PM by Luis R. Ramos » Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #39 on: Today at 11:42:58 AM »

Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate.

So...members should email the Wing CC each time they go to a meeting and ask if they
can wear a given uniforms?

Or maybe there should be a report that's updated each week so when people get a rating
the Wing CC can access it to be able to respond?

Or...

Wear a flight suit when you're going to be in a CAP plane, and not when you're not.
Logged


jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #40 on: Today at 11:50:10 AM »

Question: What would be the best example of "attempting to do something in violation of a reg?"

Answer: "Some personal opinions were not consistent with the way the reg is worded."

Another good source is CAPR 1-2 Attachment 7 which has the definition of terms - what is directive, non-directive, etc. The words "Shall, Shall Not, Will, Will Not, Must or Must Not" or "May", "Should".

Logged
DocJekyll
Forum Regular

Posts: 172

« Reply #41 on: Today at 11:50:41 AM »

I mean, it's pretty clear, (emphasis mine):

Quote
8.1. USAF-style and Corporate-style Flight Duty Uniform (FDU) Guidance
8.1.1. Authorized FDU.
8.1.1.1. The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6, Aeronautical Ratings, Emergency Services Patch and Badges, and Ground Team Badges, and/or have a current aircrew mission qualification (mission pilot, transport pilot, observer, scanner, aerial photographer, etc.). Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated. Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate.

So:
  • Is authorized functional clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties.
  • Is authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6
  • Can be worn by those without an aeronautical rating / aircrew rating when actual flying is planned or anticipated.
  • Can be worn by those with an Aircrew or Aeronautical Rating (no restrictions are given except those outlined in 8.1.2 of the CAPM-39-1 for those WITH a rating)

That said, don't be the one dude at the squadron wearing a flight suit on a squadron meeting when everyone is in ABU's or Blues. Don't be that toolbag.
Logged
Always give 100%, unless you're giving blood.

Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #42 on: Today at 11:53:46 AM »

Another good source is CAPR 1-2 Attachment 7 which has the definition of terms - what is directive, non-directive, etc. The words "Shall, Shall Not, Will, Will Not, Must or Must Not" or "May", "Should".

Unfortunately that's not any more help, as NHQ does not follow it's own guidelines for that in a lot of cases,
and / or has regs that internally conflict with themselves, or conflict with other regs or pamphlets.
Logged


jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #43 on: Today at 11:54:31 AM »

Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate.

So...members should email the Wing CC each time they go to a meeting and ask if they
can wear a given uniforms?

Or maybe there should be a report that's updated each week so when people get a rating
the Wing CC can access it to be able to respond?

Or...

Wear a flight suit when you're going to be in a CAP plane, and not when you're not.

Your last idea would be an appropriate directive for a wing commander to issue according to the reg.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #44 on: Today at 11:55:46 AM »

I mean, it's pretty clear, (emphasis mine):

Quote
8.1. USAF-style and Corporate-style Flight Duty Uniform (FDU) Guidance
8.1.1. Authorized FDU.
8.1.1.1. The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6, Aeronautical Ratings, Emergency Services Patch and Badges, and Ground Team Badges, and/or have a current aircrew mission qualification (mission pilot, transport pilot, observer, scanner, aerial photographer, etc.). Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated. Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate.

So:
  • Is authorized functional clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties.
  • Is authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6
  • Can be worn by those without an aeronautical rating / aircrew rating when actual flying is planned or anticipated.
  • Can be worn by those with an Aircrew or Aeronautical Rating (no restrictions are given except those outlined in 8.1.2 of the CAPM-39-1 for those WITH a rating)

The problem with this assertion is it negates the need for 1/2 the verbiege - why assert only aero ratings and then
later say assert "anyone" regardless of rating?

That said, don't be the one dude at the squadron wearing a flight suit on a squadron meeting when everyone is in ABU's or Blues. Don't be that toolbag.

This.
Logged


jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #45 on: Today at 11:56:37 AM »

I mean, it's pretty clear, (emphasis mine):

Quote
8.1. USAF-style and Corporate-style Flight Duty Uniform (FDU) Guidance
8.1.1. Authorized FDU.
8.1.1.1. The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6, Aeronautical Ratings, Emergency Services Patch and Badges, and Ground Team Badges, and/or have a current aircrew mission qualification (mission pilot, transport pilot, observer, scanner, aerial photographer, etc.). Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated. Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate.

So:
  • Is authorized functional clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties.
  • Is authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6
  • Can be worn by those without an aeronautical rating / aircrew rating when actual flying is planned or anticipated.
  • Can be worn by those with an Aircrew or Aeronautical Rating (no restrictions are given except those outlined in 8.1.2 of the CAPM-39-1 for those WITH a rating)

That said, don't be the one dude at the squadron wearing a flight suit on a squadron meeting when everyone is in ABU's or Blues. Don't be that toolbag.

I'm not saying that he/she would not be a toolbag - that's a whole different discussion. I'm just saying that being a toolbag is not against regulations.  :D
Logged
jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #46 on: Today at 11:58:07 AM »

Another good source is CAPR 1-2 Attachment 7 which has the definition of terms - what is directive, non-directive, etc. The words "Shall, Shall Not, Will, Will Not, Must or Must Not" or "May", "Should".

Unfortunately that's not any more help, as NHQ does not follow it's own guidelines for that in a lot of cases,
and / or has regs that internally conflict with themselves, or conflict with other regs or pamphlets.

On that I agree with you.
Logged
DocJekyll
Forum Regular

Posts: 172

« Reply #47 on: Today at 11:58:44 AM »

I mean, it's pretty clear, (emphasis mine):

Quote
8.1. USAF-style and Corporate-style Flight Duty Uniform (FDU) Guidance
8.1.1. Authorized FDU.
8.1.1.1. The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6, Aeronautical Ratings, Emergency Services Patch and Badges, and Ground Team Badges, and/or have a current aircrew mission qualification (mission pilot, transport pilot, observer, scanner, aerial photographer, etc.). Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated. Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate.

So:
  • Is authorized functional clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties.
  • Is authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6
  • Can be worn by those without an aeronautical rating / aircrew rating when actual flying is planned or anticipated.
  • Can be worn by those with an Aircrew or Aeronautical Rating (no restrictions are given except those outlined in 8.1.2 of the CAPM-39-1 for those WITH a rating)

The problem with this assertion is it negates the need for 1/2 the verbiege - why assert only aero ratings and then
later say assert "anyone" regardless of rating?

That said, don't be the one dude at the squadron wearing a flight suit on a squadron meeting when everyone is in ABU's or Blues. Don't be that toolbag.

This.

It doesn't give blanket authorization though, it says "may be authorized", so that means they still need approval from someone higher up. I wouldn't say that negates any of the verbage above it.
Logged
Always give 100%, unless you're giving blood.

Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #48 on: Today at 11:59:13 AM »

I'm not saying that he/she would not be a toolbag - that's a whole different discussion. I'm just saying that being a toolbag is not against regulations.  :D

Maybe that should be General Order #1.

"Don't be a toolbag."
Logged


jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #49 on: Today at 12:01:27 PM »

I mean, it's pretty clear, (emphasis mine):

Quote
8.1. USAF-style and Corporate-style Flight Duty Uniform (FDU) Guidance
8.1.1. Authorized FDU.
8.1.1.1. The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6, Aeronautical Ratings, Emergency Services Patch and Badges, and Ground Team Badges, and/or have a current aircrew mission qualification (mission pilot, transport pilot, observer, scanner, aerial photographer, etc.). Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated. Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate.

So:
  • Is authorized functional clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties.
  • Is authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6
  • Can be worn by those without an aeronautical rating / aircrew rating when actual flying is planned or anticipated.
  • Can be worn by those with an Aircrew or Aeronautical Rating (no restrictions are given except those outlined in 8.1.2 of the CAPM-39-1 for those WITH a rating)

The problem with this assertion is it negates the need for 1/2 the verbiege - why assert only aero ratings and then
later say assert "anyone" regardless of rating?

That said, don't be the one dude at the squadron wearing a flight suit on a squadron meeting when everyone is in ABU's or Blues. Don't be that toolbag.

This.

It doesn't give blanket authorization though, it says "may be authorized", so that means they still need approval from someone higher up. I wouldn't say that negates any of the verbage above it.

May – indicates an acceptable or suggested means of accomplishment (nondirective).

CAPR 1-2 Attachment 7
Logged
jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #50 on: Today at 12:04:34 PM »

I'm not saying that he/she would not be a toolbag - that's a whole different discussion. I'm just saying that being a toolbag is not against regulations.  :D

Maybe that should be General Order #1.

"Don't be a toolbag."

If they had just added that we wouldn't have needed this entire discussion...
Logged
DocJekyll
Forum Regular

Posts: 172

« Reply #51 on: Today at 12:31:59 PM »

I mean, it's pretty clear, (emphasis mine):

Quote
8.1. USAF-style and Corporate-style Flight Duty Uniform (FDU) Guidance
8.1.1. Authorized FDU.
8.1.1.1. The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6, Aeronautical Ratings, Emergency Services Patch and Badges, and Ground Team Badges, and/or have a current aircrew mission qualification (mission pilot, transport pilot, observer, scanner, aerial photographer, etc.). Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated. Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate.

So:
  • Is authorized functional clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties.
  • Is authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6
  • Can be worn by those without an aeronautical rating / aircrew rating when actual flying is planned or anticipated.
  • Can be worn by those with an Aircrew or Aeronautical Rating (no restrictions are given except those outlined in 8.1.2 of the CAPM-39-1 for those WITH a rating)

The problem with this assertion is it negates the need for 1/2 the verbiege - why assert only aero ratings and then
later say assert "anyone" regardless of rating?

That said, don't be the one dude at the squadron wearing a flight suit on a squadron meeting when everyone is in ABU's or Blues. Don't be that toolbag.

This.

It doesn't give blanket authorization though, it says "may be authorized", so that means they still need approval from someone higher up. I wouldn't say that negates any of the verbage above it.

May – indicates an acceptable or suggested means of accomplishment (nondirective).

CAPR 1-2 Attachment 7

Read it again. "May be authorized" May (indicating a non-directive) be Authorized (having official permission or approval)

This indicates a higher authority can give them permission to wear it, but they don't have to. Don't get caught on one word, look at the whole thing. This ain't rocket science.
Logged
Always give 100%, unless you're giving blood.

Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,663

« Reply #52 on: Today at 12:48:34 PM »

Good Lord!   :-\

Stop taking it and understanding it piecemeal!  :-\ :-\

Read it in its entirety!  :-\ :-\ :-\

Interpret it in its entirety!  :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\

The answer has been given by Eclipse!!!  :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\
« Last Edit: Today at 12:56:19 PM by Luis R. Ramos » Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #53 on: Today at 12:57:05 PM »

Good Lord!   :-\

Stop taking it and understanding it piecemeal!  :-\ :-\

Read it in its entirety!  :-\ :-\ :-\

Interpret it in its entirety!  :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\

The answer has been given by Eclipse!!!  :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\  :-\

Relax. I thought there were more dissenters at the beginning of this thread, but maybe I am the only one left.

An answer was given by Eclipse, not the answer...
Logged
jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #54 on: Today at 01:20:28 PM »

I mean, it's pretty clear, (emphasis mine):

Quote
8.1. USAF-style and Corporate-style Flight Duty Uniform (FDU) Guidance
8.1.1. Authorized FDU.
8.1.1.1. The USAF-style FDU and Corporate FDU (CFDU) are Flight duty includes preparation, preflight, in-flight, post-flight, and other flight related duties associated with aircraft operations. The FDU and CFDU are authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6, Aeronautical Ratings, Emergency Services Patch and Badges, and Ground Team Badges, and/or have a current aircrew mission qualification (mission pilot, transport pilot, observer, scanner, aerial photographer, etc.). Personnel who do not have a current aircrew mission qualification or a current or prior aeronautical rating may be authorized wear of the FDU and CFDU on days when actual flying is planned or anticipated. Wing commanders will determine when FDU and CFDU wear is appropriate.

So:
  • Is authorized functional clothing for wear by individuals who perform aviation particular duties.
  • Is authorized for wear by personnel who have or previously had a CAP aeronautical rating as defined by CAPR 35-6
  • Can be worn by those without an aeronautical rating / aircrew rating when actual flying is planned or anticipated.
  • Can be worn by those with an Aircrew or Aeronautical Rating (no restrictions are given except those outlined in 8.1.2 of the CAPM-39-1 for those WITH a rating)

The problem with this assertion is it negates the need for 1/2 the verbiege - why assert only aero ratings and then
later say assert "anyone" regardless of rating?

That said, don't be the one dude at the squadron wearing a flight suit on a squadron meeting when everyone is in ABU's or Blues. Don't be that toolbag.

This.

It doesn't give blanket authorization though, it says "may be authorized", so that means they still need approval from someone higher up. I wouldn't say that negates any of the verbage above it.

May – indicates an acceptable or suggested means of accomplishment (nondirective).

CAPR 1-2 Attachment 7

Read it again. "May be authorized" May (indicating a non-directive) be Authorized (having official permission or approval)

This indicates a higher authority can give them permission to wear it, but they don't have to. Don't get caught on one word, look at the whole thing. This ain't rocket science.

I'm not advocating that we start wearing the bags at meetings or even change what seems to be a common interpretation of the regulation. I just think it is interesting that there is almost an anti-aircrew sentiment in an organization that has flying as an integral component of its mission. This is the only service that cares so much about this issue compared to other services including military, law enforcement, medical, etc. Every branch or agency that has rated flyers consider the flight suit their duty uniform whether they are flying that day or not.

Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #55 on: Today at 01:28:20 PM »

I'm not advocating that we start wearing the bags at meetings or even change what seems to be a common interpretation of the regulation. I just think it is interesting that there is almost an anti-aircrew sentiment in an organization that has flying as an integral component of its mission. This is the only service that cares so much about this issue compared to other services including military, law enforcement, medical, etc. Every branch or agency that has rated flyers consider the flight suit their duty uniform whether they are flying that day or not.

CAP doesn't even need the flight suit - the rest of the GA world flies in shorts and t-shirts.
Nomex in a Cessna is a silly affectation, and there is no statistical basis for it to be considered a
factor in reducing GA injuries, because thankfully there aren't enough GA crashes that include both
fire and Nomex.

CAP doesn't have a "duty uniform".  It does have an MBU, which is whites.

CAP doesn't issue uniforms to adults, nor compensate them for the purchase, therefore
they can't have a "duty uniform" (despite the assertion by 39-1 that a CC can set any UOD).

Expecting people to dress properly and leave the tactical onsie at home when it's inappropriate
for the activity isn't "anti-aircrew" it's "pro appearance and common sense".

However if there is an "anti-aircrew bias" look to the behavior of the "zipper-suited sun gods"
who in many cases disregard not only uniform but other CAP protocols and policies, including height and grooming,
not to mention wearing the same bag they bought 20 years ago, including the wrong insignia and coffee stains.
Logged


jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #56 on: Today at 01:47:15 PM »

I'm not advocating that we start wearing the bags at meetings or even change what seems to be a common interpretation of the regulation. I just think it is interesting that there is almost an anti-aircrew sentiment in an organization that has flying as an integral component of its mission. This is the only service that cares so much about this issue compared to other services including military, law enforcement, medical, etc. Every branch or agency that has rated flyers consider the flight suit their duty uniform whether they are flying that day or not.

CAP doesn't even need the flight suit - the rest of the GA world flies in shorts and t-shirts.
Nomex in a Cessna is a silly affectation, and there is no statistical basis for it to be considered a
factor in reducing GA injuries, because thankfully there aren't enough GA crashes that include both
fire and Nomex.

CAP doesn't have a "duty uniform".  It does have an MBU, which is whites.

CAP doesn't issue uniforms to adults, nor compensate them for the purchase, therefore
they can't have a "duty uniform" (despite the assertion by 39-1 that a CC can set any UOD).

Expecting people to dress properly and leave the tactical onsie at home when it's inappropriate
for the activity isn't "anti-aircrew" it's "pro appearance and common sense".

However if there is an "anti-aircrew bias" look to the behavior of the "zipper-suited sun gods"
who in many cases disregard not only uniform but other CAP protocols and policies, including height and grooming,
not to mention wearing the same bag they bought 20 years ago, including the wrong insignia and coffee stains.

The argument against the flight suit could be made for more than just GA. It's not usually the fire that kills you, it's the sudden impact prior to the fire.

I get it, it's a mentality that some are better than others or think that the rules don't apply for whatever reason. That is not limited just to CAP, trust me. It's just interesting to me that the flight suit is the only one where so many people scream "No! Never to our squadron meetings!" when it's just another uniform hanging in the closet.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,944

« Reply #57 on: Today at 01:53:31 PM »

I get it, it's a mentality that some are better than others or think that the rules don't apply for whatever reason. That is not limited just to CAP, trust me. It's just interesting to me that the flight suit is the only one where so many people scream "No! Never to our squadron meetings!" when it's just another uniform hanging in the closet.

What would you say to members who showed up every week wearing full GT battle rattle?
Logged


DocJekyll
Forum Regular

Posts: 172

« Reply #58 on: Today at 02:01:09 PM »

I'm not advocating that we start wearing the bags at meetings or even change what seems to be a common interpretation of the regulation. I just think it is interesting that there is almost an anti-aircrew sentiment in an organization that has flying as an integral component of its mission. This is the only service that cares so much about this issue compared to other services including military, law enforcement, medical, etc. Every branch or agency that has rated flyers consider the flight suit their duty uniform whether they are flying that day or not.

CAP doesn't even need the flight suit - the rest of the GA world flies in shorts and t-shirts.
Nomex in a Cessna is a silly affectation, and there is no statistical basis for it to be considered a
factor in reducing GA injuries, because thankfully there aren't enough GA crashes that include both
fire and Nomex.

CAP doesn't have a "duty uniform".  It does have an MBU, which is whites.

CAP doesn't issue uniforms to adults, nor compensate them for the purchase, therefore
they can't have a "duty uniform" (despite the assertion by 39-1 that a CC can set any UOD).

Expecting people to dress properly and leave the tactical onsie at home when it's inappropriate
for the activity isn't "anti-aircrew" it's "pro appearance and common sense".

However if there is an "anti-aircrew bias" look to the behavior of the "zipper-suited sun gods"
who in many cases disregard not only uniform but other CAP protocols and policies, including height and grooming,
not to mention wearing the same bag they bought 20 years ago, including the wrong insignia and coffee stains.

The argument against the flight suit could be made for more than just GA. It's not usually the fire that kills you, it's the sudden impact prior to the fire.

I get it, it's a mentality that some are better than others or think that the rules don't apply for whatever reason. That is not limited just to CAP, trust me. It's just interesting to me that the flight suit is the only one where so many people scream "No! Never to our squadron meetings!" when it's just another uniform hanging in the closet.

I was always politely informed that the reason for the fire bag is so that you can be properly identified after the crash, not to protect you from dying during a crash and the subsequent fire. lol.

But the May Authorize is in regards to those without qualifications.... for those who have them, there are no restrictions.

That said, and as I stated above... don't be that toolbag.
Logged
Always give 100%, unless you're giving blood.

jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #59 on: Today at 02:04:53 PM »

I get it, it's a mentality that some are better than others or think that the rules don't apply for whatever reason. That is not limited just to CAP, trust me. It's just interesting to me that the flight suit is the only one where so many people scream "No! Never to our squadron meetings!" when it's just another uniform hanging in the closet.

What would you say to members who showed up every week wearing full GT battle rattle?

Equipment is a different story. I would not expect 24/72 hour packs to be worn into a normal squadron meeting any more than I would expect a headset, gloves, or pockets full of charts.
Logged
jb512
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 813

« Reply #60 on: Today at 02:10:03 PM »

I'm not advocating that we start wearing the bags at meetings or even change what seems to be a common interpretation of the regulation. I just think it is interesting that there is almost an anti-aircrew sentiment in an organization that has flying as an integral component of its mission. This is the only service that cares so much about this issue compared to other services including military, law enforcement, medical, etc. Every branch or agency that has rated flyers consider the flight suit their duty uniform whether they are flying that day or not.

CAP doesn't even need the flight suit - the rest of the GA world flies in shorts and t-shirts.
Nomex in a Cessna is a silly affectation, and there is no statistical basis for it to be considered a
factor in reducing GA injuries, because thankfully there aren't enough GA crashes that include both
fire and Nomex.

CAP doesn't have a "duty uniform".  It does have an MBU, which is whites.

CAP doesn't issue uniforms to adults, nor compensate them for the purchase, therefore
they can't have a "duty uniform" (despite the assertion by 39-1 that a CC can set any UOD).

Expecting people to dress properly and leave the tactical onsie at home when it's inappropriate
for the activity isn't "anti-aircrew" it's "pro appearance and common sense".

However if there is an "anti-aircrew bias" look to the behavior of the "zipper-suited sun gods"
who in many cases disregard not only uniform but other CAP protocols and policies, including height and grooming,
not to mention wearing the same bag they bought 20 years ago, including the wrong insignia and coffee stains.

The argument against the flight suit could be made for more than just GA. It's not usually the fire that kills you, it's the sudden impact prior to the fire.

I get it, it's a mentality that some are better than others or think that the rules don't apply for whatever reason. That is not limited just to CAP, trust me. It's just interesting to me that the flight suit is the only one where so many people scream "No! Never to our squadron meetings!" when it's just another uniform hanging in the closet.

I was always politely informed that the reason for the fire bag is so that you can be properly identified after the crash, not to protect you from dying during a crash and the subsequent fire. lol.

But the May Authorize is in regards to those without qualifications.... for those who have them, there are no restrictions.

That said, and as I stated above... don't be that toolbag.

From what I understand I think the dog tags will be all that's identifiable at that point, but it's a good possibility!  8)

I concede that it can be looked at from both perspectives - what we can determine from the verbiage and what could be seen as the intent. The common thread though is always... don't be that toolbag.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All] Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Uniforms & Awards  |  Topic: Cadet Flight Duty Uniform
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.112 seconds with 25 queries.