Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 21, 2019, 02:30:51 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Uniforms & Awards  |  Topic: Errors, Ambiguities & Conflicts in CAPM 39-1
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7 Send this topic Print
Author Topic: Errors, Ambiguities & Conflicts in CAPM 39-1  (Read 22630 times)
Pylon
Administrator

Posts: 5,136
Unit: NER-NH-038

Michael Kieloch, Marketing Communications & PR Leadership
« on: November 27, 2007, 10:54:50 PM »

I'm trying to create a list of all of the errors, perceived ambiguities, gray areas, contradictions and conflicts that CAPM 39-1, the CAP Uniform Manual, has within itself and with other CAP regulations.  Please help point these out to me so we can get them corrected.

This is not a wish list of uniform items you wish we had, or changes to our insignia you wish they'd make, but rather pointing out existing issues.  There are a handful I'm already aware of and would like to ensure we get all of them.

P.S.: We know the photos are all, for the most part, bad examples.
Report to moderator   Logged
Michael F. Kieloch, Maj, CAP
Concord Composite Squadron, NH       
JCW0312
Seasoned Member

Posts: 226

« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2007, 11:49:26 PM »

The diagrams for placement of the embroidered rank for BDUs seems like someone forgot to finish them (especially for the "CAP" placement on the BDU field jacket). Some aspects just have to be "eyeballed" by the sewing member.
Report to moderator   Logged
Jon Williams, 2d Lt, CAP
Memphis Belle Memorial Squadron
SER-TN-144
MIKE
Super Moderator

Posts: 5,461
Unit: LANTAREA

« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2007, 12:10:22 AM »

Grade on the BDU caps should be centered on the front of the cap vertically and horizontally.  Not 1/2 inch up from the visor.

Address the wearing of more than one specialty insignia, and military badges in relation to same.

Ditch the requirement to crease shirt and blouse sleeves centered off the epaulet.

Model Rocketry badge placement for females needs to be looked at.  While you are at it, move the patch to the left pocket.

Change clothing accessories to be IAW AFI 36-2903.  Scarf color has changed to black IIRC.

CAPM 39-1 badge placement verses AFI 36-2903 badge placement.

Edit:  Grooming standards should be the same reguardless of cadet or senior status. i.e. Sideburns


Really have to go through the manual with a fine toothed comb to find them all.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2007, 12:23:37 AM by MIKE » Report to moderator   Logged
Mike Johnston
JohnKachenmeister
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,352

« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2007, 07:20:00 PM »

There are two tables for precedence of decorations.

One table places them AFTER all US ribbons,

The other table places foreign awards after US Military Awards, but ahead of CAP awards.

Report to moderator   Logged
Another former CAP officer
mikeylikey
Banned

Posts: 3,755

« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2007, 07:24:08 PM »

I never liked how there was a picture, and then there was a list of where things went.  Keep the picture but elaborate on the list, (take 6 pages) on the proper way to wear and place badges on the Service Coat.  Don't try to jam it all on one page.
Report to moderator   Logged
What's up monkeys?
cnitas
Seasoned Member

Posts: 425

« Reply #5 on: November 28, 2007, 07:38:11 PM »

As discussed here before, 39-1 conflicts with 39-3 in the wear of US Military awards and decorations.
Report to moderator   Logged
Mark A. Piersall, Lt Col, CAP
Frederick Composite Squadron
MER-MD-003
MIKE
Super Moderator

Posts: 5,461
Unit: LANTAREA

« Reply #6 on: November 28, 2007, 07:50:02 PM »

I never liked how there was a picture, and then there was a list of where things went.  Keep the picture but elaborate on the list, (take 6 pages) on the proper way to wear and place badges on the Service Coat.  Don't try to jam it all on one page.

The problem with the tables for badges and patches is that they lump everything together for males and females and the different but similar uniforms.  I wonder if it might be better to do the tables different or forgo all together in favor of much more detailed notes specific to each combination instead of two different places... the Figure and the Table?
Report to moderator   Logged
Mike Johnston
CASH172
Seasoned Member

Posts: 347

« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2007, 08:53:35 PM »

1.  Specify exactly whether or not the tie bar/pin is required.  AFI-36-2903 does not require a tie bar/pin but CAPM 39-1 hints that it's required. 

2.  Respecify exactly where certain cadet items go on CAP distinctive uniforms.  Many cadets have to leave much to their own way of how a uniform should be since the manual does not specifically cover this on some CAP distinctive uniforms. 

There are more things, but I'll have to dig through my mind for all of them. 

Report to moderator   Logged
ddelaney103
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 625

« Reply #8 on: November 28, 2007, 09:11:41 PM »

There was an illustration from a Marine uniform manual that looked helpful.  It seemed to designate places on the uniform and list what uniform items went there and how they went.  A list of what can go over the ribbons and what can go on the pocket could be very helpful.
Report to moderator   Logged
dwb
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,347

« Reply #9 on: November 28, 2007, 09:47:38 PM »

With this latest revision of the manual, a lot of Chapter 1 was changed from regular paragraphs of text to a tabular format, which is not the ideal way to display that information.  It should be reverted to regular paragraphs.

Also, not directly related... 39-1 is huge.  90% of the time, a simple one-sheet with a good portrait with callout boxes pointing out key areas is all you need.  With the revised 39-1 should come color one-sheets of every uniform combination suitable for posting on squadron bulletin boards.  Refer people to 39-1 for details and edge cases.
Report to moderator   Logged
AlphaSigOU
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,169
Unit: PCR-NV-069

The Kwaj Drafter!
« Reply #10 on: November 29, 2007, 12:12:12 PM »

With this latest revision of the manual, a lot of Chapter 1 was changed from regular paragraphs of text to a tabular format, which is not the ideal way to display that information.  It should be reverted to regular paragraphs.

Also, not directly related... 39-1 is huge.  90% of the time, a simple one-sheet with a good portrait with callout boxes pointing out key areas is all you need.  With the revised 39-1 should come color one-sheets of every uniform combination suitable for posting on squadron bulletin boards.  Refer people to 39-1 for details and edge cases.

You mean something like this? Attached are a couple of one sheet guides I prepared for the corporate blue and corporate gray uniform. (Well, not exactly one-sheets, but they can be easily edited.)

Sorry, don't have one yet for the AF-style blues.

* CIVIL AIR PATROL BLUE DISTINCTIVE UNIFORM INSIGNIA PLACEMENT.pdf (423 kB - downloaded 50 times.)
* CIVIL AIR PATROL GRAY DISTINCTIVE UNIFORM INSIGNIA PLACEMENT.pdf (146.14 kB - downloaded 28 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
Lt Col Charles E. (Chuck) Corway, CAP
Gill Robb Wilson Award (#2901 - 2011)
Amelia Earhart Award (#1257 - 1982) - C/Major (retired)
Billy Mitchell Award (#2375 - 1981)
Administrative/Personnel/Professional Development Officer
Nellis Composite Squadron (PCR-NV-069)
KJ6GHO - NAR 45040
dwb
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,347

« Reply #11 on: November 29, 2007, 01:21:08 PM »

Yeah, something like that, but with people modeling the uniforms.

I was initially going to suggest that we return to the pre-1997 uniform manual days when all the uniform "pictures" were drawings.  But, after looking at the 1997 manual again, it really is nice to see how the uniform is supposed to look on a real person, particularly for the items that don't have precise locations (e.g., the silver nameplate, or the nameplate/ribbons on female dress uniforms).

The 2005 pictures are a joke, but that's already been pointed out.
Report to moderator   Logged
jimmydeanno
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,155
Unit: ǝnƃoɹ

« Reply #12 on: November 29, 2007, 01:26:56 PM »

Just as a suggestion...

Why do we insist on showing how to wear the uniform of a higher grade officer in all our manuals?  The most likely person to even open the uniform manual is a new person, so shouldn't the examples be showing lower grade individuals and focus on how to put on CAP cutouts instead of Lt Col epaulet sleeves? 
Report to moderator   Logged
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill
davedove
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 964
Unit: MER-MD-003

« Reply #13 on: November 29, 2007, 02:06:09 PM »

Just as a suggestion...

Why do we insist on showing how to wear the uniform of a higher grade officer in all our manuals?  The most likely person to even open the uniform manual is a new person, so shouldn't the examples be showing lower grade individuals and focus on how to put on CAP cutouts instead of Lt Col epaulet sleeves? 

That's a very valid point.  It should be very explicit for SMWOG and Lieutenants, giving the exact position of EVERY device.  As you said, these are the people who are most likely to be looking at the manual.

The manual could then maybe give an example of a field grade officer to highlight the differences.
Report to moderator   Logged
David W. Dove, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander for Seniors
Personnel/PD/Asst. Testing Officer
Ground Team Leader
Frederick Composite Squadron
MER-MD-003
pixelwonk
Alt-F4 pilot
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,099

« Reply #14 on: November 29, 2007, 04:25:43 PM »

Just as a suggestion...

Why do we insist on showing how to wear the uniform of a higher grade officer in all our manuals?  The most likely person to even open the uniform manual is a new person, so shouldn't the examples be showing lower grade individuals and focus on how to put on CAP cutouts instead of Lt Col epaulet sleeves? 

Because 1) the majority of members are sm'officers, rather than SMwoGs.  2) Once you put on grade, it doesn't matter what it is, the placement remains the same unless you have stars.


Having said that,
there's nothing wrong with including a section for brand spanking new members.  Many of whom have never put on a uniform in their life.

If such an addition would be too lengthy for 39-1, a clear-as-the-nose-on-your-face pamphlet for the new member package and online might be a good idea.
Report to moderator   Logged
MIKE
Super Moderator

Posts: 5,461
Unit: LANTAREA

« Reply #15 on: November 29, 2007, 04:39:52 PM »

It would not be a bad idea to have a Figures specfic to NCOs and "Airmen".... Senior Members without grade.  Like they do with cadets.  Could have two pictures.  One SM and one NCO.
Report to moderator   Logged
Mike Johnston
MIKE
Super Moderator

Posts: 5,461
Unit: LANTAREA

« Reply #16 on: December 12, 2007, 02:45:30 AM »

Bump.

Rather than trying to pick apart CAPM 39-1 to find the existing issues, it might actually be easier to just start over.  As I've mentioned before, I think a lot can pretty much be copied and pasted from AFI 36-2903.  Also I think you can make some allowances for how it was versus how it's gonna be change wise.
Report to moderator   Logged
Mike Johnston
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,501

« Reply #17 on: December 12, 2007, 02:54:27 AM »

Bump.

Rather than trying to pick apart CAPM 39-1 to find the existing issues, it might actually be easier to just start over.  As I've mentioned before, I think a lot can pretty much be copied and pasted from AFI 36-2903.  Also I think you can make some allowances for how it was versus how it's gonna be change wise.


Instead of cutting and pasting from 36-2903, why not just make a CAP Supplement to AFI 36-2903?
Report to moderator   Logged
Hawk200
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,632

« Reply #18 on: December 12, 2007, 02:16:09 PM »

Bump.

Rather than trying to pick apart CAPM 39-1 to find the existing issues, it might actually be easier to just start over.  As I've mentioned before, I think a lot can pretty much be copied and pasted from AFI 36-2903.  Also I think you can make some allowances for how it was versus how it's gonna be change wise.


Instead of cutting and pasting from 36-2903, why not just make a CAP Supplement to AFI 36-2903?

A few reasons. One, a lot of folks in CAP have a problem with using an Air Force publication.

Two, that would require having two different pubs to put together a CAP uniform.

Three, there is corporate stuff that isn't listed in  36-2903, so there would have to be something separate anyway.

Plus, it's easier to just have a single pub for CAP uniforms. It would be a little cumbersome to have to look up stuff in two different manuals.
Report to moderator   Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,762

« Reply #19 on: December 12, 2007, 02:23:03 PM »

I've heard this "just use 2903" argument a lot lately, especially as a back-door to quickly getting new items approved (i.e. as soon as it hits 2903, it'd be ok for us).

I'm sure many of you can see the issue with that.

Since there are many USAF items prohibited for our wear, >our< manual should be complete, with no references to outside pubs.  This clears up any ambiguity wth regards to items we're not allowed.
Report to moderator   Logged


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7 Send this topic Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Uniforms & Awards  |  Topic: Errors, Ambiguities & Conflicts in CAPM 39-1
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.119 seconds with 26 queries.