National Conference Uniform Guidance (My Small Rant)

[SarDragon]

I currently wear a pair of Carolina Tacticals that I got at Boot World. They are very comfortable. They are not all leather, though, so aren't usable as flight boots.

Available online here.

[DNall]

^Agreed.
Has anyone read the posts made by Lt Col White on this thread:
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=3540.0
Read pg 12.

Holy Crap!! That thing went to 57 pages?!? That's insane!

I didn't check page 12, but somewhere in that thread there's a discussion on changing up the way we do uniform changes... specifically, a section of the website with items displayed, wear test, tester comments, then general comment period. I believe we also discussed a general comment/suggestion box aspect as well.

The fact that BDU's are going away is actually an *opportunity* for us - at least in the short term. I have a member who is in a nearby Army Guard aviation unit and asked him to see if he could scrounge us some BDU's for our cadets from people in his unit turning them in. He arrives to every meeting with boxes of them. Very similar to the kind of windfall we had when we transitioned from the old green fatigues to BDU's in the first place back in the 1980's.

Emphasis on SHORT TERM. BDUs doesn't continue to be a viable option five years out while trying to keep costs minimized for cadets.

ABUs will happen. I don't think anyone is in a big hurry. It certainly will not happen till everyone in the AF (active/ANG/AFRes) are fully transitioned, issues are settled, and supply chain is humming. I think it's best to use that time to identify what we're going to have the stuff on them look like - work w/ AF to resolve issues, and roll out a complete version w/ plenty warning to membership & not dozens of changes.

Far as boots... it does suck that everyone is doing their own thing. I could deal with every service having a different pattern (ABU, ACU, etc), but boots too? That was dumb. However, it'll still be much less of an issue than BDUs.

OH, WHILE I'M THINKING OF THIS... speaking of guard aviation units. We're currently turning in green flight suits (as well as tan 2-piece) to get the new A2CU 2-piece flight suit. That means there's going to be a bunch of green flight suits in the supply chain shortly. It doesn't work like BDUs in the above statement. In that case the soldier just keeps the BDU & we give them ACUs, if they want to donate then that's on them. Flight suits are PPE though and have to be turned it. They all get DX'd though & are still in good shape. Bump your LO to keep an eye out & I think you should be pleasantly surprised.

[Eclipse]

Do you have a decent photo of the A2CU?

I've never heard of that and most of the photos I can find quickly have gear blocking the mid section.

Is this "good" or "bad"?

[DNall]

A2CU: I don't really have a pic handy. They look pretty much just like ACUs though - top & bottom, just made of nomex. It still has exterior velcro for same tapes/patches. Only real dif is pocket closure is zippers instead of velcro. Shirt has a belt kind of thing just like on the green one, but about twice as wide. Pants don't have cargo pockets, have lower leg zip pockets just like the 1-piece; and, are worn outside/over the boot w/ a velcro closure just like the shirt cuff. Basically, it's just as good protection, good bit more comfortable (cooler), and looks like everyone else to snipers.

[jayleswo]

OH, WHILE I'M THINKING OF THIS... speaking of guard aviation units. We're currently turning in green flight suits (as well as tan 2-piece) to get the new A2CU 2-piece flight suit. That means there's going to be a bunch of green flight suits in the supply chain shortly. ... Flight suits are PPE though and have to be turned it. They all get DX'd though & are still in good shape. Bump your LO to keep an eye out & I think you should be pleasantly surprised.

Actually, my Army Guard member (CW3, Instructor Pilot) said his guys don't really like the 2-piece and prefer the old green bag - thus not so much in the way of surplus flight suits for us there. I take it this is not the case out your way.

-- John

[SAR-EMT1]

when was the timeline for our implementation I thought there was going to be a minor riot

A reliable source has told me that it seems unlikely that CAP will even try to request this anytime soon due to a loss of credibility with the AF. 

How did CAP "recently" lose credibility with the Air Force?

[AlphaSigOU]

How did CAP "recently" lose credibility with the Air Force?

Hmmm... good question. Perhaps it is 'uniform credibility'?

Methinks it was the end run El (former) General HWSRN put on the RealAirForce® with the TPU. While CAP-USAF could officially care less about the TPU because it is a corporate uniform, there were way too many similarities to RealAirForce® service dress when it was rolled out, which is why there were several ICLs making changes to the uniform, such as losing the AF cutouts for CAP cutouts and nixing the Navy-style custom of grade on the right side of the flight cap, among others.

The TPU ain't a bad uniform, and personally it could stand a few tweaks - [ditch] the silver sleeve braid and replace it with dark blue or simply leave it off. The silver chin strap on the bus driver hat I don't mind. Fix the buttons to make them a satin or silver oxide finish - super shiny silver is just too tacky.

We keep begging for the brown A-2 with the green bag; the AF will probably never grant us the privilege; after all only USAF aircrew are issued the jacket and only when they are considered combat mission ready. We've got a black A-2, but that's only for the corporate blue bag. Requests for cloth aircrew nametags and cloth grade insignia to replace plastic are ignored, whether its from Ma Blue or the PTB in the NB/NEC we don't know.

There may also be other operational credibility issues, but that's a whole 'nuther ball o' wax.

Edit - MIKE

[stratoflyer]

Quite frankly, I'm tired of this back of forth with the CSU and people thinking we lost credibility with the Air Force. Either we did, or we didn't, but so far, it seems we haven't. So unless someone out there is doing something stupid to make us lose credibility, I'd say the overall pattern has been one of gaining professionalism and importance among our missions.

So here's the thing: why has NEC told us why the requests are not being made, or if they have been made, what is the status on them? Nothing wrong with having an update here and there.

Besides the fact is, it don't matter 'cause as much as I despise ultramarine tapes, I still do my duties just fine, and I ensure my uniform reflects my attitude of professionalism.

And just for the record, the status I heard is the requests have been made, but the USAF is having a bunch of uniform tweaks of their own. Check out latest issue of AirForce Times.

[AlphaSigOU]

Quite frankly, I'm tired of this back of forth with the CSU and people thinking we lost credibility with the Air Force. Either we did, or we didn't, but so far, it seems we haven't. So unless someone out there is doing something stupid to make us lose credibility, I'd say the overall pattern has been one of gaining professionalism and importance among our missions.

Give that man a Pabst Blue Ribbon! (Or other potent potable of your choice.) Hopefully we learned our lesson with the infamous maroon shoulder marks years ago. We're slowly getting back into the good graces of the RealAirForce® team. We may not get everything back that we lost (hard rank on AF-style service dress or blue shoulder marks on AF-style shirts, for example) but now we look more like part of the team instead of red-headed stepchildren.

So here's the thing: why has NEC told us why the requests are not being made, or if they have been made, what is the status on them? Nothing wrong with having an update here and there.

That's what happens when you rule by decree - ahem, ICLs - instead of doing an update to the reg. I recently noticed that a bronze star is also now authorized for wear on the 'Comm-Comm' to denote a Region Commander's Commendation. The NB/NEC need to get their act together and get NHQ CAP to update regs and manuals on a timely basis. It's also not surprising to see some uniform changes approved die a quiet death. Case in point: cloth nametags on bags. Because the request also included them to be included on the green AF-style bag, it needs AF approval. Don't hold your breath.

Besides the fact is, it don't matter 'cause as much as I despise ultramarine tapes, I still do my duties just fine, and I ensure my uniform reflects my attitude of professionalism.

Same here.

And just for the record, the status I heard is the requests have been made, but the USAF is having a bunch of uniform tweaks of their own. Check out latest issue of AirForce Times.

Yep... We're very low on the AF Uniform Board food chain, so expect a miracle between now and the next Ice Age... 

[dogboy]

Just a point of fact, MCSS is AAFES. I was at Ellsworth this weekend at MCSS and they have no black boots nor are they getting any more. The same story at Offutt. I have a cadet that wears a size twleve. The least expensive he can find are pushing $100.00. Does anyone have another reasonably priced store?

I disagree with those who advocate buying expensive boots for a Cadet.

I wear the $30 boots from here. They're perfectly adequate.

http://www.galaxyarmynavy.com/products.asp?cat=101

I do replace the insoles with Spenco greens.

Remember that Cadet teenage feet are growing, so it's unlike the Cadet will wear out even cheap boots before he needs to replace them with a larger size. Boys growth spurt usually runs to about 20. Girls start earlier and the spurt ends around 18.

[stratoflyer]

Oh hey, thanks a lot!!

[DNall]

OH, WHILE I'M THINKING OF THIS... speaking of guard aviation units. We're currently turning in green flight suits (as well as tan 2-piece) to get the new A2CU 2-piece flight suit. That means there's going to be a bunch of green flight suits in the supply chain shortly. ... Flight suits are PPE though and have to be turned it. They all get DX'd though & are still in good shape. Bump your LO to keep an eye out & I think you should be pleasantly surprised.

Actually, my Army Guard member (CW3, Instructor Pilot) said his guys don't really like the 2-piece and prefer the old green bag - thus not so much in the way of surplus flight suits for us there. I take it this is not the case out your way.

The A2CU is cooler to wear. It's not as cool looking, in that it blends in with the regular joes rather than making you look like Mr Top Gun.

It doesn't really matter what anyone likes or not. It's the aviation uniform of the Army, all other versions (green 1-pc & tan 2-pc) will not be authorized in the near future and are being taken up in exchange for A2CUs. The timeline for that may vary by unit/state, but it will happen. For us that's going down this FY.

[DNall]

Regarding credibility... CAP-USAF's view of our performance at units or in the field has nothing at all to do with the AF relationship. I would venture to say that no one in all of CAP-USAF, including the CC, is in any way qualified to speak to the AF's view of CAP credibility, satisfaction w/ CAP, or anything related to the relationship.

The stuff we do is VERY small time in terms of the overall big picture AF & their ops. The few places and points in time when we are at our very best (at units or in the field), that's what every military unit is expected to do as a consistent minimum average. No one cares if you're a volunteer, contractor, civilian, reservist, or active duty. The standards/expectations are the same across the board, and we don't tend to meet those.

That's not because people out here suck, they don't. A lot of it is just the nature of CAP. The volunteer thing is a crutch. We actually spend just about the same time in weekly meetings as a reservist does at monthly drill. There are some issues though. A "volunteer" can leave or not participate as they see fit. Can I set high standards for someone in that position when I know it'll scare a bunch of people off, or do I dumb down the standards to make it easy on people so they'll hang around? If I do set high standards, then I have to provide the training & support to reach & maintain them. How do I justify investing in a resource that can disappear whenever it wants, not responsive to my orders, and may not be there when I need it? If I do set those high standards on par with what I expect of everyone else I work with (contractors to civilian employees to reserve to active; FEMA, AF, etc), and I do somehow squeeze the funds out of Congress to make it reality, what mission set of the AF/govt can I usefully accomplish that's important enough in the cost benefit analysis to justify my massive investment of resources that are also needed on a hundred other things?

The credibility in the relationship really doesn't have anything to do with how we do in the field. It has a whole lot more to do with the relationship between CAP leadership and AF leadership. When we end-run & side-step AF leadership/rules/etc to do our own thing, that hurts the relationship. That's what really matters, not how little they pay for what we do in the field or how well you do it or hard you work. They don't even see that stuff.

[O-Rex]

I usually am not the first on my block to have something new, but I did the 'salute & execute' with uniforms in 05-06, and got burned with the USCAP name-tape issue.

The Air Force is looking to tweak the boots, as well as a possible hot-weather ABU (?!)

Let the storm pass, and we'll see what shakes out.  Until then, take care of the BDU's you have, and as for black boots, ebay, ebay, EBAY! (I have choice new boots, and never paid more than $50 for them.)

[Major Carrales]

Dennis, I would like to see some documentation to substanitate these claims.

Regarding credibility... CAP-USAF's view of our performance at units or in the field has nothing at all to do with the AF relationship. I would venture to say that no one in all of CAP-USAF, including the CC, is in any way qualified to speak to the AF's view of CAP credibility, satisfaction w/ CAP, or anything related to the relationship.

The US AIR FORCE knows what CAP is.  They know our limitiations and have seen time and time again that we do a lot of GOOD with next to nothing. 

CAP-USAF is an instrumentality that "bridges the gap" between US and THEM.  How is it that they ar enot qualified on the matter?  Show me a high standing USAF General that berates CAP.  I wan't a quote and source.

The stuff we do is VERY small time in terms of the overall big picture AF & their ops. The few places and points in time when we are at our very best (at units or in the field), that's what every military unit is expected to do as a consistent minimum average. No one cares if you're a volunteer, contractor, civilian, reservist, or active duty. The standards/expectations are the same across the board, and we don't tend to meet those.

Again, they know we are not something like SAC was.  They know we are a part of their family and that we succeed in what we do.  Likely, if our taskings were more "substantial" we would rise to it.  I am sorry you do not feel that way.

That's not because people out here suck, they don't. A lot of it is just the nature of CAP. The volunteer thing is a crutch. We actually spend just about the same time in weekly meetings as a reservist does at monthly drill. There are some issues though. A "volunteer" can leave or not participate as they see fit. Can I set high standards for someone in that position when I know it'll scare a bunch of people off, or do I dumb down the standards to make it easy on people so they'll hang around? If I do set high standards, then I have to provide the training & support to reach & maintain them. How do I justify investing in a resource that can disappear whenever it wants, not responsive to my orders, and may not be there when I need it? If I do set those high standards on par with what I expect of everyone else I work with (contractors to civilian employees to reserve to active; FEMA, AF, etc), and I do somehow squeeze the funds out of Congress to make it reality, what mission set of the AF/govt can I usefully accomplish that's important enough in the cost benefit analysis to justify my massive investment of resources that are also needed on a hundred other things?

CAP is a community based organization with a national scope.  The relationships CAP makes are to those local communities via youth programs and Emergency Services.  Dennis, you fail to recognize this.  

You also fail to concentrate on the tens of thousands that make this work.  That too is a bit of a shame.

The credibility in the relationship really doesn't have anything to do with how we do in the field. It has a whole lot more to do with the relationship between CAP leadership and AF leadership. When we end-run & side-step AF leadership/rules/etc to do our own thing, that hurts the relationship. That's what really matters, not how little they pay for what we do in the field or how well you do it or hard you work. They don't even see that stuff.

Balderdash!  So, if "credibility in the relationship really doesn't have anything to do with how we do in the field" what can we ever do to establish a good relationship?  I find it hard to believe that "accomplishing the missions and subsquent objectives" is of such little importance.  On the contrary, I would say it is most high.  Value is determined based on results...not fashion.

You seem to want to concentrate on those "political" matters that I feel are more destructive than constructive.

The fact is that the CSU is not a "side step."  If it was it would have been nixed from day one.  It is a CAP distinctive uniform...which CAP has full control over.  The USAF, as you yourself alluded to, likely doesn't care about our distinctive uniform.  Y'all make much more "to do" over it than THEY actually do.

Stop reading non-existant conspiracy into the matter. 

<REMOVED FOR LATER PM>

It works, it works well...for what it is, a Civilian Auxiliary.

The next step up is the Reserves or Guard.  At this point in my life I cannot do that due to a host of complex reasons.  I choose to serve in CAP, to serve my "COMMUNITY, STATE and NATION" in that unique way.  Judge that as you all would like, but I know I am not alone.

Be more proud of what you are (and do it well) than ashamed of what you are not!!!

[DNall]

Joe, respectfully my friend.... don't take this stuff as an insult. I wouldn't be here if I didn't think CAP had great value.

I know what CAP-USAF is. They are knowledgeable about CAP & generally happy with our performance. That is not representative of the majority of AF personnel.

The AF is made up of the general public, and they equally never heard of CAP, much less what we do, how well we do it, or what we sacrifice to accomplish it. All they know is AF standards they are held to, and look down on anyone (uniformed, civilian, paid or not) that doesn't meet them.

The chief of staff and secretary of the AF have bigger fish to fry. When your unit does something awsome, it doesn't get briefed to the President next to the current threat report. While you and your unit are important to us, if you disappeared it wouldn't matter one way or another to the AF leadership. If all of CAP disappeared, it wouldn't impact the daily lives/jobs of 99.995% of airmen & it wouldn't cause the AF to change anything significant so they could keep doing their primary mission.

In other words, keep things in perspective!!!

The fact is, the part of the AF-CAP relationship that matters is not what you & me do out here in the real world. That's what's expected of us & we can do nothing to impact that relationship in any significant way. What matters is the relationship between key decision makers at the top of CAP & the AF, plus congress.

That's not the destructive personal office politics that permeate our wings. That's the power structure of our organization. And just so you know, the politics you're complaining about in CAP are just as bad as most civilian offices & not nearly as bad as the real military. I don't like it a lot of times either, but it's part of life, accept it and utilize to the betterment of your command with values.

The fact is that the CSU is not a "side step."  If it was it would have been nixed from day one.  It is a CAP distinctive uniform...which CAP has full control over.  The USAF, as you yourself alluded to, likely doesn't care about our distinctive uniform.  Y'all make much more "to do" over it than THEY actually do.

Actually, this goes back to me saying nothing CAP is on most of the AF's radar. The AF leadership didn't know that uniform existed until the then CAP/CC was wearing it in front of Congress. And, they are restricted by law from offering opinion on things they are not expressly in charge of. So, they cannot comment on a corp-style uniform, only give an opinion if it violates federal law for military uniforms, which only really applies to AF-style uniforms.

I'm not saying though that the CSU is some kind of great rift between the AF & CAP. That's not the case. I'm sure they don't much care about our uniforms for the most part. The issue is how it happened. We were rejected for changes to the blue service dress, so side-stepped to create a corporate uniform on which we could do all the things that just got disapproved (metal grade/blue eps). That's demonstrative of the discipline with which CAP operates. Same thing happens when I as a GBD give an order to a GTL, they don't like it & call the IC or just don't do it. In the military, I could put that person in jail. In CAP they can do whatever they want & if they don't get what they want they can just go home with no harm to their CAP career or livelihood in the real world. Likewise, CAP as a national org can disobey the AF w/ little real penalty. They can fail to comply with rules, not enact policy according to command guidance from the AF to the whole AF family, etc. And in fact CAP does do this on a very regular basis, citing volunteers, independent corporation, lack of funding, etc as crutches. Some of that is at times reasonable, but rather than seek solutions within the chain of command, we cite technicalities of us not being in their direct chain & do our own thing. CAP members notice that when it happens for a uniform they actually where. They don't so much notice when CAP fails to adopt or enforce a logistics policy or financial mgmt standard. All of it though is a lack of discipline, and that has a huge impact on the relationship.

[Major Carrales]

Dennis,

I greatly value your discourse and discussion and hope that, at all time, we can be candid..albiet respectful.  For the many years of such discourse, I thank you.

Dennis, the fact of the matter is plain.  Using the military model on CAP alone is folly.  That is why most Retired Military that come to CAP and apply such practices find it hard.  That is why ECI 13 and other CAP courses are necessary even to th e20 year military man.

CAP requires a leader to make their subordinates "desire" to do their assigned mission.  Issuing an "order" in CAP is precarious.  One has to understand the unique nature of the CAP Officer and Cadet.  They are there, because they want to be.  That is our greatest strength...not weakness.  There is nothing qite so pure and strong as a volunteer.  Never forget that.

Thus, you work togehter.  Commanders are guides...not tyrants.  They show what i sneeded and are backed up by the regulations.  If a person cannot make such a thing happen...cannot build the necesary relationship that requires CAP to work, then there is a need for the leader to reevaluate their approach.

That is what makes CAP work.  When an Aircrew or Ground Team does the job to the 10th hour, without pay, far from home and because they want to be there.

[DNall]

I hate to tell you this, but you have to make subordinates desire to follow your orders in the military also. You have to motivate people and influence actions to accomplish missions objectives. That's the Army definition of leadership almost word for word. Let me tell you from a guard perspective... that's especially true. The fact is if we piss someone off they can quit showing up & we can't do anything about it till they've missed more than half the year. At that point I can only give them an honorable or general discharge. Short of a felony, they can get away with a whole lot more than a CAP member before disciplinary action can be taken.

You could not in a civilian company flatly disobey your boss. You could not ignore the guidance given to you from higher on how to interpret stuff and execute your job toward their stated objective. You'd get disciplined & at some point fired if it doesn't change.

CAP members are sworn to obey regulations and the officers appointed over them, same as the military is, but CAP doesn't enforce that cause we don't want to run people off. We don't generally have to enforce that in the military, because we train people to obey their orders & do their jobs as professionals.

And all my folks are volunteers too. They may get a little bit of pay, but for the most part have to work many times more hours than they're paid for & have no choice in the matter when it interferes with their personal lives. They make great sacrifices - greater than CAP - to do their duty, and that doesn't even account for the potential to deploy overseas. I do very much appreciate CAP and what we do, but it's not a super amazing thing. It's a rather normal thing that we could be doing a lot better job of.

[Major Carrales]

Swaggering military types demanding 19th Century Prussian adherence to orders will not go far in CAP.

People have their family, jobs and a host of other...sometimes CAP related...issues to consider.  A good commander realizes this and acts accordingly.  There are to be no demigods in CAP. 

Once it becomes "bad," it really is time to leave. That is the reality.  People are attracted to CAP because they can serve and enjoy it.  The enjoyment is an extention of communitarianism.

Motivate your people with the understanding of their issues and they will return the favor over and over again.  Demand impossible things that take people from job and family for more than necessary and they will leave.

The USAF understands that.  The dedicated people of CAP do so much more than we are given credit for.  If I was able to do more...and believe me I do a great deal for my unit...I would join the USAF Reserves.  But CAP does it for me and I do my best for it.  USAF should know that.

The idea that they "hate" us or the relationship is strained is yet to be proven by you.   Which General has called us "less than desirable?"  Which documents point out CAP as a "drain" or insignificant?

All I have seen is then talk of CAP as a "force multiplier."

[mmouw]

One frustration that I have from time to time is when a member (volunteer) agrees to perform certain duties or work on a needed qualification in ES. Then decided they don't enjoy it and refuse to help out the group by completing or performing the tasks they are trained on. The closest analogy that I can put to this when explaining to others is, consider yourself on a volunteer fire department. Do you have the ability to decide what fires to show up to or when you do show up, what job you are willing to do? I surely hope not.

I think it goes back to the Leadership vs. Management. In my years with CAP I have been in many leadership roles. I have exercised my management skills more than my leadership. Talking to volunteers and stroking the egos that pop up to keep everyone happy is not something that I was familiar with on my day time job or military experience (AF/ANG). This is another reason why former/current military members have issues when dealing with this. I never thought that I would have seen some of the immature attitudes and behaviors by anyone like I have in CAP by certain members. I feel that this is where the AF may be getting that tainted image of us.

I honestly believe that the way to resolve all of the above is to be more selective of membership. If you have a funny feeling about that new person, take time to get to know them and lay out the expectations. It is the fair thing to do for that person and yourself.