Gray slacks/white shirt uniform

[ol'fido]

I'm not saying this will ever happen and I'm not even sure that I would want it to but I'm going to throw this out there for the dogpile.

Recently, I've been going through my old squadron's scrapbook and history materials trying to get it in some sort of coherent order and organization. And the thing I kept noticing is how neat some of the old style uniforms look and with the AF looking at adopting a "retro" style jacket here recently it got me thinking. Just a wild hair to be sure but....

Drop the gray/whites and the TPU/CSU/whatever and go to the old 1505 khakis with the long and short sleeve shirt and the old 4 pocket service coat in the same shade with the regular flight and bus driver hats. Use metal rank and CAP cutouts on the shirts and the coat and keep the black leather flight jackets but also authorize the navy blue nylon jackets. Use old Navy/USCG regs for facial hair and allow a certain amount of paunch for us "hmmmph" bigger people.

For the rest retain the golf shirt with khaki trousers or khaki cargo pants used with the plain desert tan BDUs which would become the utility uniform along with the desert boots or black (your choice). For you flying types, the plain tan desert bag would be the option.  

Go to the navy blue name and CIVIL AIR PATROL tapes as well as the sew on ranks and cutouts. Keep the blue plastic TPU name tags for the dress uniforms and pretty much stay with all our other insignia.  If this is really stupid or already been suggested elsewhere, you may all pile on.

That's certainly an interesting. I don't know what I think of it yet. You should at least get a gold star for thinking outside the box.

Actually, it's been considered before. Here's a good reason why we can't really consider it now: U.S. Navy Test uniform.

We attempt khaki, and we will look completely schizophrenic. Although we came out with our CSU first, we're gonna have some troubles with military personnel assuming that it's a soldier in an improper uniform. I know, we had it first. But there's still gonna be issues.

As to some of your other ideas, they're good ones. Cargo pants with the polo I like, even in polos it's nice to have places to put things.

Don't know about tan BDU's. I've seen some, and although they look OK, don't know about it. Tan flightsuit I'd definitely recommend against (even though I think it looks decent) for the simple fact that even used ones can be spendy. I can buy four or five used sage in excellent condition for the same price as a tan one. Good idea, but could cost a bit.

We have had the same nametags for years before the TPU came around, and we could really stand to reduce the number. But the basic ones as worn on blues, and the current white/grey combo are what we really need to hang onto. They tell both who and what we are.

Leather jackets I'd keep, but I wouldn't agree with nylon jackets for wear with service uniforms. Nylon is just not fitting for such formal attire.

Navy blue tapes? You got my vote (I'll figure out a way to vote several times under different names, if I can  ).

Some good ideas, but a few aren't practical. I wouldn't mind seeing the good ones adopted.

Actually, I was counting on the fact that the Navy still wears the khakis in my consideration. It would ease the supply issue as someones already making them and they are in the supply system. The only pproblem with that would be the service coat. Does the Navy one have the belt?

The Navy does wear the khakis. So do the CG, PHS, and NOAA. And we managed to get through several decades(40s,50s,60s) where all the services wore a version of the khakis without schizophrenia or identity problems. The headgear would be the most obvious outdoors where a lot of that sort of thing happens(saluting wise anyway).

The nylon jacket I mentioned was the blue windbreaker we wear with the blues although in looking at some of the old photos a nylon blue flight jacket of good quality looked pretty good with a khaki uniform.

The tan BDUs are considered because it keeps a consistent uniform color thoughout the concept without the schizophrenia of wearing camouflage BDUs with an orange safety vest. It is also a color used by a lot of civilian ES groups and would fit right in with the consistency that we are trying to get through NIMS.

The tan bag I would be flexible on. Like the BDUs I was just going for color consistency although I think in a couple of years the tan bags will be as available as the sage.

I didn't mention it in the previous post but this concept would even extend to the blaser combo with tan trousers, white aviator shirt(LS or SS) and the blazer.

[Gunner C]

I have seen in here the phrases fat/fuzzies and weight/grooming standards.  Folks need to separate the two - they are two separate issues.  One is just a haircut/shave away, the other is much more tangled.

[Hawk200]

I think there's too much desire to get rid of the Air Force, in uniform, regulation, oversight, etc.

The Air Force told us years ago that if certain standards weren't met, their uniform wasn't permitted to be worn. That's why we have the blazer combo now. It was allowing those not meeting certain standards to participate. In a way, the allowance had to be made, because telling people that they couldn't join if they were too heavy, or had long hair would have been a lawyer's wet dream.

It seems that people want to disassociate CAP from the Air Force, and have many different excuses. Stuff costs too much, I don't need a uniform, we're not the military, nobody tells me what to do, there's too many rules.

As to the CSU, I think it's OK as an alternate, but I don't prefer to wear it. Why should I have to go buy it because someone else doesn't fit in my size? I've got numerous things from my time in the Air Force that I still use in CAP. Free stuff (if you don't count the enlistment requirement). Why should I have to go out and buy "cheaper " stuff? I wouldn't be saving money at all, because I've got to spend it on something else.

We don't need to lose the Air Force uniform, anymore than we can handle losing the Air Force. CAP can not, and would not stand on it's own. You want an independant organization? Go find one. Don't change the Civil Air Patrol I joined because you don't feel like answering to someone.

But back to the original topic. I think we should lose one of the alternates, white/grey being the less "uniform" uniform. Or if you want to go cheap, ditch the CSU. Just pick one, and do something about it.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

+100

AMEN!

[Gunner C]

+100

AMEN!

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[wuzafuzz]

As to the CSU, I think it's OK as an alternate, but I don't prefer to wear it. Why should I have to go buy it because someone else doesn't fit in my size?

Because we are supposed to look and act like a team.  Shared vision, goals, and methods.  We should settle on something that works for all our senior members, performing all our missions, and ditch the rest.  

[Hawk200]

As to the CSU, I think it's OK as an alternate, but I don't prefer to wear it. Why should I have to go buy it because someone else doesn't fit in my size?

Because we are supposed to look and act like a team.  Shared vision, goals, and methods.  We should settle on something that works for all our senior members, performing all our missions, and ditch the rest.  

I concede that we should look like a team, when the large majority of CAP acts like one. I don't see a lot of that. There are too many divisions now within CAP. You can change the uniforms all you want, but you'll still have those that lack the integrity to follow the rules, that lack the self discipline to look presentable in the most basic of uniforms, lack the commitment to be part of shared visions, goals, and methods.

Personally, I don't care for "settling". That's part of the problem. Uphold the standards, don't lower the bar. If you can't meet the standards, don't join. Settling shouldn't be an option.

[Always Ready]

As to the CSU, I think it's OK as an alternate, but I don't prefer to wear it. Why should I have to go buy it because someone else doesn't fit in my size?

Because we are supposed to look and act like a team.  Shared vision, goals, and methods.  We should settle on something that works for all our senior members, performing all our missions, and ditch the rest.  

Going off of several members' thinking and my want of more esprit de corps (read: one uniform):
So let's think rationally. It would be more efficient and effective to use a current uniform out of our arsenal than create a new one. It would also be more efficient to use something that doesn't require any major changes from the current rules/situation. That leaves the white and grays as the only option out of the three (Blues, CSU, and white and grays). Since it is the only uniform out of the three we can all wear without major changes to 39-1 (the CSU isn't even in 39-1 and there are too many restrictions on the Blues), then why don't we just use the white and grays?

Pros:
-It is an existing uniform that is legit with set standards in the current 39-1.
-Everyone can already wear it.
-Pants are readily available and a significant number of our members already own them.
-The aviator shirt is readily available and a significant number of our members already own them.
-Same nameplate as the Blues.
   -Nameplate has "UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AUXILIARY" on it
-Would not require AF approval of most items because it is a corporate uniform (debatable...but not for this thread)
-Shoes and belt easily available
-Cheaper than Blues and the CSU *see below*

Cons:
-No military bling (this is a 'pro' for some)
-Initial cost for those who don't already own it (but this will be a con no matter what uniform we have)
   -Taking into account that the member may not own any uniform items common with the uniform
     *Prices can be cheaper or more expensive depending on supplier and not including appropriate outer or under garments (for those of you who wear them)*
      -Approximately $70 depending on your size and supplier for the white and grays
      -Approximately $150 for the CSU or Blues
-While some parts of the uniform have military lineage, it is not a current or former AF uniform.

Thoughts? (Not that you weren't going to give them anyway )

[wuzafuzz]

As to the CSU, I think it's OK as an alternate, but I don't prefer to wear it. Why should I have to go buy it because someone else doesn't fit in my size?

Because we are supposed to look and act like a team.  Shared vision, goals, and methods.  We should settle on something that works for all our senior members, performing all our missions, and ditch the rest.  

I concede that we should look like a team, when the large majority of CAP acts like one. I don't see a lot of that. There are too many divisions now within CAP. You can change the uniforms all you want, but you'll still have those that lack the integrity to follow the rules, that lack the self discipline to look presentable in the most basic of uniforms, lack the commitment to be part of shared visions, goals, and methods.

Personally, I don't care for "settling". That's part of the problem. Uphold the standards, don't lower the bar. If you can't meet the standards, don't join. Settling shouldn't be an option.

True, there is lots of division.  That's no excuse for not starting somewhere.  Looking like a team is the most visible place we could start, but not the only one.  As for "settling," well, the bar was set a long time ago.  That standard was to accept members that don't qualify to wear the Air Force uniforms.  As we move forward we can either perpetuate existing divisions or we can get our act together.

The current uniform circus is embarrassing.  We sometimes look like passers-by caught in an Army/Navy store explosion.  It's a failure of leadership that reflects on us all.  We can create one set of rules instead of having people run off in a bunch of different directions.  The leadership courage to do so is lacking.  We are damaging our image, our brand.

As long as most uniform wearers have their act together and look like a team, the few screw-ups shame themselves more than the rest of us.  I prefer to keep the supposed fat & fuzzy members fully engaged and uniformed like the rest of the team.  If people want to leave CAP because they can't rise to a standard that includes dressing properly, I'll hold the door open for them.  (In this context "dressing properly" means following the rules, having a properly maintained uniform, and a firm grasp on personal hygiene.  ;-)  )

Oh well.  It probably won't happen anyway.  But I did get some typing practice! 

[JohnKachenmeister]

I think there's too much desire to get rid of the Air Force, in uniform, regulation, oversight, etc.

The Air Force told us years ago that if certain standards weren't met, their uniform wasn't permitted to be worn. That's why we have the blazer combo now. It was allowing those not meeting certain standards to participate. In a way, the allowance had to be made, because telling people that they couldn't join if they were too heavy, or had long hair would have been a lawyer's wet dream.

It seems that people want to disassociate CAP from the Air Force, and have many different excuses. Stuff costs too much, I don't need a uniform, we're not the military, nobody tells me what to do, there's too many rules.

As to the CSU, I think it's OK as an alternate, but I don't prefer to wear it. Why should I have to go buy it because someone else doesn't fit in my size? I've got numerous things from my time in the Air Force that I still use in CAP. Free stuff (if you don't count the enlistment requirement). Why should I have to go out and buy "cheaper " stuff? I wouldn't be saving money at all, because I've got to spend it on something else.

We don't need to lose the Air Force uniform, anymore than we can handle losing the Air Force. CAP can not, and would not stand on it's own. You want an independant organization? Go find one. Don't change the Civil Air Patrol I joined because you don't feel like answering to someone.

But back to the original topic. I think we should lose one of the alternates, white/grey being the less "uniform" uniform. Or if you want to go cheap, ditch the CSU. Just pick one, and do something about it.

Hawk:

Please do not misunderstand my position.

I want to retain close ties to the AF, and be considered even more than we are to be a functioning entity within the Air Force.  That's why, if we were to go to a single uniform, I would recommend the TPU/CSU.  It can be marketed as a "Modified AF uniform," as opposed to our current "AF uniform with distinctive insgnia."

My first choice would be for the AF to modify its standards, especially with regard to weight.  But that is not likely.  Use of the TPU/BBDU, etc. for officers is an admittedly poor second choice.

And Nathan, for a three-diamond dude you seem to have a pitifully superficial grasp of our history and traditions.  We share a lot of history and tradition with the AF.  The AF, with its new "Heritage to Horizon" focus, has come to realize our contributions to victory in World War II were very real.  As a result of our submarine patrols, the AF can lay claim to the fact that CAP was the first irregular military force to engage and defeat an armed enemy force since the War of 1812.  Our cadet program reduced the washout rate from aircrew training significantly.  The "Triple Nickel," the 555th PIR, (an all-black unit) jumped in to put out forest fires started by Jap balloon bombs, but those fires were first spotted by CAP patrols.

Our heritage is intertwined.  That used to be reflected in our uniforms and performance, but things got confused over the years.

Now, CAP members with combat service are called "Inappropriate."

[Hawk200]

True, there is lots of division.  That's no excuse for not starting somewhere.  Looking like a team is the most visible place we could start, but not the only one.  As for "settling," well, the bar was set a long time ago.  That standard was to accept members that don't qualify to wear the Air Force uniforms.  As we move forward we can either perpetuate existing divisions or we can get our act together.

The current uniform circus is embarrassing.  We sometimes look like passers-by caught in an Army/Navy store explosion.  It's a failure of leadership that reflects on us all.  We can create one set of rules instead of having people run off in a bunch of different directions.  The leadership courage to do so is lacking.  We are damaging our image, our brand.

As long as most uniform wearers have their act together and look like a team, the few screw-ups shame themselves more than the rest of us.  I prefer to keep the supposed fat & fuzzy members fully engaged and uniformed like the rest of the team.  If people want to leave CAP because they can't rise to a standard that includes dressing properly, I'll hold the door open for them.  (In this context "dressing properly" means following the rules, having a properly maintained uniform, and a firm grasp on personal hygiene.  ;-)  )

Oh well.  It probably won't happen anyway.  But I did get some typing practice! 

So we throw away one of the deepest roots of our heritage. May as well go independent and fully corporate. Give up the Air Force funding, Air Force support, Air Force facilities. We'd really have no right to them.

The number one thing people here are forgetting is what team they're actually part of. There are people here that know which one, many don't. Think about it. If that doesn't change your viewpoint, you don't belong in CAP.

[SarDragon]

The Air Force told us years ago that if certain standards weren't met, their uniform wasn't permitted to be worn. That's why we have the blazer combo now.

Help me out here. The blazer has been around since at least 1968. Back then, WIWAC, there didn't seem to be a significant problem with weight and grooming, particularly the latter. Did I miss something?

[Slim]

Hawk:

Please do not misunderstand my position.

I want to retain close ties to the AF, and be considered even more than we are to be a functioning entity within the Air Force.  That's why, if we were to go to a single uniform, I would recommend the TPU/CSU.  It can be marketed as a "Modified AF uniform," as opposed to our current "AF uniform with distinctive insgnia."

My first choice would be for the AF to modify its standards, especially with regard to weight.  But that is not likely.  Use of the TPU/BBDU, etc. for officers is an admittedly poor second choice.

Yet again, said much better than I could.

+1

[Nathan]

And Nathan, for a three-diamond dude you seem to have a pitifully superficial grasp of our history and traditions.  We share a lot of history and tradition with the AF.  The AF, with its new "Heritage to Horizon" focus, has come to realize our contributions to victory in World War II were very real.  As a result of our submarine patrols, the AF can lay claim to the fact that CAP was the first irregular military force to engage and defeat an armed enemy force since the War of 1812.  Our cadet program reduced the washout rate from aircrew training significantly.  The "Triple Nickel," the 555th PIR, (an all-black unit) jumped in to put out forest fires started by Jap balloon bombs, but those fires were first spotted by CAP patrols.

Our heritage is intertwined.  That used to be reflected in our uniforms and performance, but things got confused over the years.

Now, CAP members with combat service are called "Inappropriate."

You misunderstand. I am well verse in CAP history and heritage.

But we were not wearing our current uniform when we were so intertwined with the USAF. Our current uniform is updated to reflect the traditions, heritage, and style of the USAF in contemporary times. While CAP has always had a close relationship with the USAF, when we moved away from combat missions, our relationship was not as close as in the war years. They fought in countless battles that we did not, likely without even thinking of us. While we moved into our current agendas, they moved into theirs.

The uniform we wear now is reflective of the current USAF, which is not nearly as meaningful or closely linked to our heritage as the WWII uniform might be. If we want to REALLY have heritage in our meaning, we can go back to those fatigues, I suppose.

Look, my argument is not that we should get rid of the USAF uniform. I wear it, and will continue to do so until told otherwise. My argument, though, is that we SHOULD put everyone in one uniform, since we have our own heritage and uniformity to worry about, and if we are going to do that, the USAF uniform is likely not the wisest choice.

[wuzafuzz]

True, there is lots of division.  That's no excuse for not starting somewhere.  Looking like a team is the most visible place we could start, but not the only one.  As for "settling," well, the bar was set a long time ago.  That standard was to accept members that don't qualify to wear the Air Force uniforms.  As we move forward we can either perpetuate existing divisions or we can get our act together.

The current uniform circus is embarrassing.  We sometimes look like passers-by caught in an Army/Navy store explosion.  It's a failure of leadership that reflects on us all.  We can create one set of rules instead of having people run off in a bunch of different directions.  The leadership courage to do so is lacking.  We are damaging our image, our brand.

As long as most uniform wearers have their act together and look like a team, the few screw-ups shame themselves more than the rest of us.  I prefer to keep the supposed fat & fuzzy members fully engaged and uniformed like the rest of the team.  If people want to leave CAP because they can't rise to a standard that includes dressing properly, I'll hold the door open for them.  (In this context "dressing properly" means following the rules, having a properly maintained uniform, and a firm grasp on personal hygiene.  ;-)  )

Oh well.  It probably won't happen anyway.  But I did get some typing practice! 

So we throw away one of the deepest roots of our heritage. May as well go independent and fully corporate. Give up the Air Force funding, Air Force support, Air Force facilities. We'd really have no right to them.

The number one thing people here are forgetting is what team they're actually part of. There are people here that know which one, many don't. Think about it. If that doesn't change your viewpoint, you don't belong in CAP.

I did not suggest throwing away any heritage or detaching from our relationship with the Air Force.  It would be preferable if the Air Force relaxed their standards so all our members could wear one uniform.  Absent that, we should present one image instead of segregating some of our members.  Our uniforms aren't our primary connection to the Air Force, our mission is.  

If we can't put everyone in the Air Force uniform, then, and only then, should we consider everyone in an alternative. There are plenty of examples of auxiliaries, reserves, and other volunteers who don't wear the same uniform as their parent organization.  They don't lose their personalities as a result, nor do they have to pack up their toys and go home.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Our problem is two-fold:

1.  The USAF has some standards.  They started out as grooming standards, (And, BTW, we had blazers back in 1963, but very few folks wore them except for on the IACE) and they progressed to height/weight standards.  Don't meet the standard, no USAF uniform.

2.  The other problem we face is with our own higher command.  The plethora of uniforms is simply not seen as a problem at NHQ.  Therefore, we have no advocate to go to the USAF and address the standards issue, and they have no incentive to reduce the total number of uniforms.

In fact, when the VSAF program kicked off, NHQ gleefully and enthusiastically offered another new uniform to be worn on this mission.  Even though the existing golf shirt ensemble served the same function as the Retail Store Associate Polo Shirt Uniform.

They sort of remind me of drunks, who cheerfully shout "That calls for a drink!" with every barroom event.  "Another mission?  Great!  That calls for a new uniform!"

Should the AF be approached with a request to modify standards?  Sure.  Under the CAP absolute-weight standards I can weigh a maximum of 205 for my height.  In the Army, I weighed as much as 221 and still met the body-fat standard.  Will NHQ do that?  Probably not.

[Smithsonia]

I have reviewed the various uniform discussions on this board over the past 4 years. If we talked about something else... we would have enough time left over to rescue everyone on the planet 5 times over.
Happy April Fools Day.

[Eclipse]

I would be more than happy to trade the current absolutes of height/weight to a performance-based PT standard.

A fitted shirt is never going to get a Christmas card from me, but I'm usually pretty close on the tables.  I ping-pong in and out of weight, which is one of the reasons that my closet is so full because as a Group CC I feel I have to set the example, and I can't, with a straight face, give someone else grief if I'm launching buttons myself.

With that said, I did a unit visit last night and didn't feel like strapping into my CSU (garters, etc.) so I wore my blazer.
Fully pressed, properly tailored, it still looked like crap.  Not a shred of military bearing or weight to it whatsoever.
The first thing the unit CC said to me was "Thanks for coming but my insurance needs are taken care of."  (heh, he doesn't need to waste money on new grade insignia for while)

I felt like crap the whole night because I had taken the "easy" way out because I didn't feel like the effort required to get into the service dress.

While my SD may have commented that the CSU is "shiny", at least it presents itself with a similar weight to a military uniform, including demonstrating my history and experience through the ribbons and badges.  It also shows my membership that I am willing to take and spend the same effort that I expect from them with their uniforms - its hard to speak with credibility about using a ruler to alighn your badges and ribbons when you're wearing a jacket with two pins (or worse that horrific magnetic pocket thing).

I won't be taking the lazy way out again any time soon.

And before someone makes the obvious joke about the CSU having "weight", save it - I know a number of members who are well within the tables and still chose the CSU simply because they like it.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I don't mind the TPU/CSU appearance so much anymore, since I got one.  Actually, other than the fact that only a complete moron would select a double-breasted uniform for fat guys, it does appear to be USAF-like in appearance.

Now that a lot of us have accepted it, however, NHQ and the NB go an screw it up by denying the veterans among us the right to wear military ribbons on it.  That has been hashed out already, though, and I have made my personal decision with regard to wear of the TPU/CSU now that I have been ruled "Inappropriate."

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Nathan, you start off so well (well, except for the typo), then you immediately fall on your face.

You misunderstand. I am well verse in CAP history and heritage.

But we were not wearing our current uniform when we were so intertwined with the USAF. Our current uniform is updated to reflect the traditions, heritage, and style of the USAF in contemporary times. While CAP has always had a close relationship with the USAF, when we moved away from combat missions, our relationship was not as close as in the war years. They fought in countless battles that we did not, likely without even thinking of us. While we moved into our current agendas, they moved into theirs.

Not only was CAP "not wearing our current uniform when we were so intertwined with the USAF," but the Air Force wasn't, either. We were wearing the THEN-current Air Force uniform. It evolved from the "pinks and greens" of World War II, which evolved from the Army's previous uniforms. It turned blue, then bluer, and then in 1992, became like the Army's mid-1940s "separate air force" design with no pockets.

And, oh, in case you haven't noticed, we're in the fight these days. Who flew over the WTC doing aerial recon? Who flies intercept-training flights for 1AF? Who is preparing for national emergencies (well, those of us who actually heeded the ICS-course warnings)? But if you're immersed exclusively in the cadet program, I could see you missing all that. The cadet program isn't exactly at the tip of the spear.

The uniform we wear now is reflective of the current USAF, which is not nearly as meaningful or closely linked to our heritage as the WWII uniform might be. If we want to REALLY have heritage in our meaning, we can go back to those fatigues, I suppose.

Fatigues are another uniform altogether, a work uniform many of us remember fondly as the "OG 507s" or "pickle suits."

You say the Air Force uniform isn't as closely linked to our heritage as that of the WWII uniform? There are a few folks inside the Air Force who might agree. But the WWII uniform was an Army uniform, and the Air Force (or at least Gen. McPeak) sought a distinct Air Force uniform... and went back to the separate-Air Force uniform the Army designed for such an occasion (and that wasn't used until 1992).

And the "heritage service coat" proposal is dead now. Seems Air Force leadership is more concerned with nuclear safety these days than uniforms, and that's a good thing. Maybe if more CAP members would spend time concerned with mission readiness (how many folks didn't do ICS 100/200/700/800 by the deadline, and had their ops quals suspended?) and less time designing their own uniform (former national commanders included), maybe we'd be a little more respected by the mothership and by its people.

We work side by side with First Air Force and the Air Force's homeland-security and SAR folks, not just under Air University to train cadets. We wear the same uniform because...

WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME TEAM.

So why deny our service connection, when we should be enthusiastic about being the Air Force's uniformed civilian auxiliary? If people have a problem with our military connection, they joined the wrong organization. I hear the Red Cross and Salvation Army are looking....