# Air Force's CADPAT name-tag & rank



## Yard Ape (8 Jun 2004)

What is up with the new name-tags & slip-ons of the Air Force?!

We spend extra $$$ to put swords, a bird, or an anchor beside the the all names so they can be recognized as "not army."  But its not enough!

First the Air Force decided thier bird would be after the name (unlike Army & Navy which have the graphic first). 

Now all thier name tags have the border & text in blue (that you cannot see from a distance), and the slip-on has rank & unit/trade/"CANADA" in the same blue (still barely visible.  Will units be expected to maintain a stash of regimental slip-ons in blue for the posted in Air Force pers?  (Some RSM is going to snap when he sees this show-up in the field while on an Ex)


I've got a quick money saving idea.  Lets stop throwing funds into "look at me I am special" projects.


 :fifty: :fifty: :fifty: :fifty: :fifty: :fifty:


----------



## bossi (8 Jun 2004)

(sigh ... why do I feel like I'm going to regret this in the morning ... ?  Oh, well - maybe I'll get a boy scout badge for "being kind to our feathered friends" ... and, after all - they did let me sit up front once ...)

So - as much as it pains me to defend the Air Force ...

First of all - let's "assume/agree" that they've made a reasonable decision to have the air force and navy identifiers on the name tags (after all - when we're "cammed up" in CADPAT, sometimes it's useful to be able to tell if somebody's a swabbie or a zoomie ...)

Okay, since they've got to reset the machine in order to sew the albatross or anchor instead of the manly crossed swords of the Army, it's not really the end of the world if they also change the colour of thread slightly.

Similarly, Army guys like to be able to wear their regimental flashes - air force and navy guys have pride in their service, too - so, "fair's fair".  We've got more than enough battles to fight, so let's choose them wisely (and, not fight amongst ourselves) - really, it doesn't really cost us that much to be magnanimous/gracious.

Also, I just finished reading some articles to the effect that the other services are fighting retention battles similar to the Army's - if a little coloured thread helps morale, so be it.


----------



## ZipperHead (9 Jun 2004)

I agree with Yard Ape on this one. To me, it is an exercise in the "I'm special and different, so let everybody know it". In the Armour Corps, there are still people who think that we shouldn't wear the wide brimmed field hat (boonie cap), because we have to retain our "identity". Well, I suppose driving around in a tank or Coyote should be sufficient enough. And we have to wear helmets one those vehicles now, anyway, so it's kind of moot. I'm a big fan of not getting my sun-catchers (ears) sun-burnt anymore, and as a bonus, I don't have to worry about having a "field" beret now.

I think the bird on the name tape should be sufficient, and the fact the the Air Force guys boots aren't dirty should be the big giveaway (and the pillow marks on the face from their stay in the 5 star hotel). I find though that some of the most hard core Air Force types (in my limited experience with "real" Air Force people) are the ones who are Air element, as opposed to hard Air trades (ie. a clerk who wears blue vs a flight engineer). They are the ones seeking for a special identity I think, not the guys who spend time in the air.

This issue should die the death of the Combat Bra, but the Air Force has a big kick ass budget to blow on things like this, so let them waste their money on that, and maybe they'll have to spend some time sleeping in mod tent, the 4 man sponge (4 man tent)or horror of horrors, a trench.

Al


----------



## Military Brat (9 Jun 2004)

I do believe there is also that same colour of blue in the actual uniform as well.

P.S. I don't think sailors are being issued CADPAT.


----------



## Spr.Earl (9 Jun 2004)

Military Brat said:
			
		

> I do believe there is also that same colour of blue in the actual uniform as well.
> 
> P.S. I don't think sailors are being issued CADPAT.


They sre getting CADPAT water wings.


----------



## MG34 (9 Jun 2004)

Too bad for our fine feathered friends that the blue crappy name tag and rank are not authorized for Airforce pers serving with Army units,I can't wait for the whining to start on that. ;D


----------



## willy (10 Jun 2004)

I read a CANFORGEN about this the other day.  The Air Force is doing away with its work dress as a cost saving measure, and they're all going to wear CADPAT from now on instead.  They're going to wear it with blue undershirts, however, and they're going to use blue rank slipons with it too.


----------



## AmmoTech90 (10 Jun 2004)

MG34

Where did you read that Airforce pers are not authorized to wear it when serving with Army units?  The CANFORGEN is quite clear that the blue name tapes and slip ons are to be worn at all times TW LWCC (Green CADPAT) is worn.  The blue tee-shirt is to be worn in garrison when serving in land operations, and the member may be ordered to wear the green on domestic or overseas trg and operations conducted with the Army.  The blue items are not authorized for wear with anything other than temperate CADPAT.

Just waiting for my purple rank and nametape...


----------



## MG34 (10 Jun 2004)

2CMBG  policy,I wouldn't count on the blue rank being oround for too much longer either.


----------



## Zoomie (10 Jun 2004)

MG34 said:
			
		

> 2CMBG   policy,I wouldn't count on the blue rank being oround for too much longer either.



Sorry MG34, 2CMBG policy does not supercede 1CAD directives.  

Blue thread on CADPAT is a reality and is here to stay.  It's been in the US Airforce for decades now.


----------



## AmmoTech90 (10 Jun 2004)

Zoomie beat me to it.

The CANFORGEN is a CLS/CAS coordinated message.  I was wondering if the Bde commander could over-rule CLS direction?  I wonder how the Squadron Chief at 427 would react to being told he couldn't wear his element identifiers?  Or how an Infanteer attached to a Air Force unit would react to being told to wear blue threaded rank and an Army name tape embroidered in blue with blue swords?  Some how I think the Air Force would respect the fact that he is Land element and allow him to continue to wear green.

Can't we all just get along  :


----------



## Bzzliteyr (10 Jun 2004)

CANFORGEN 070/04 CAS 031 171030Z MAY 04
AIR FORCE OPERATIONAL CLOTHING
UNCLASSIFIED


REFS: A. CANFORGEN 016/02 CAS 014 271300Z FEB 02 
B. CFP 265 CHAPTER 6 ANNEX D 



BASED ON VCDS DIRECTION TO UNDERTAKE COST SAVING MEASURES WHERE POSSIBLE, INCLUDING THE CONVERGENCE OF GARMENT DESIGN, CAS DIRECTED ADOPTION OF THE CADPAT COMBAT CLOTHING AS OPERATIONAL DRESS. REF A ANNOUNCED THE APPROVAL OF PROJECT 328, ACQUISITION OF LIGHT WEIGHT COMBAT CLOTHING (LWCC) AS THE AIR FORCE OPERATIONAL DRESS. THE CONVERGED DESIGN COMBATS WILL BECOME THE DRESS OF THE DAY FOR MOST AIR FORCE PERSONNEL ON ISSUE AND ORDER OF DRESS 3E (WORK DRESS) WILL EVENTUALLY DISAPPEAR. THIS CONVERGENCE INITIATIVE BETWEEN THE AIR FORCE AND ARMY HAS EXTENDED FROM COMBAT SHIRT AND PANTS IDENTIFIED AS LIGHT WEIGHT COMBAT CLOTHING (LWCC) TO THE NEW INTEGRATED CLOTHING ENSEMBLE (ICE) 


AS NOTED IN REF A, AIR FORCE LEADERSHIP IS WELL AWARE OF THE NEED TO PRESERVE AIR FORCE IDENTITY WITH THE NEW CLOTHING. TO ACHIEVE THIS AIM, THE AIR FORCE IS INTRODUCING DISTINCTIVE AIR FORCE IDENTIFIERS TO BE WORN WITH THE LWCC. APPROVED AIR FORCE IDENTIFIERS TO BE WORN BY ALL AIR DEU PERSONNEL WITH THE LWCC ARE AS FOLLOWS: 


DISTINCTIVE RANKS, BLUE THREAD ON CADPAT BACKGROUND, 


DISTINCTIVE NAMETAPE, BLUE THREAD ON CADPAT BACKGROUND AND THE AIR FORCE INSIGNIA (EAGLE) WORN ON THE LEFT OF THE NAMETAPE, AND 


DARK BLUE T-SHIRT 


THE DISTINCTIVE RANK AND NAMETAPE ARE TO BE WORN AT ALL TIMES. AUTHORITY FOR WEAR OF THE BLUE T-SHIRT IS DEPENDENT ON THE OPERATIONAL CONTEXT AND THE UNIT THE MBR IS POSTED TO WITHIN THE CF AS FOLLOWS: 


FOR AIR DEU PERS EMPLOYED IN UNITS CONDUCTING AIR OPERATIONS, THE DARK BLUE T-SHIRT IS APPROVED FOR WEAR IN OPERATIONS AND TRG IN CANADA. USE OF THE BLUE T-SHIRT ON OVERSEAS OPERATIONS WILL BE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE THEATRE COMMANDER BASED ON THE OPERATIONAL SITUATION 


FOR AIR DEU DESIGNATED PERS POSTED TO UNITS CONDUCTING LAND OPERATIONS, THE BLUE T-SHIRT IS AUTHORIZED FOR WEAR IN GARRISON WITH LWCC. MBR MAY BE ORDERED TO WEAR THE ISSUED GREEN T-SHIRT WHEN CONDUCTING TRG AND OPERATIONS IN CANADA AND OVERSEAS, AND 


FOR AIR DEU DESIGNATED PERS POSTED TO UNITS CONTROLLED BY OTHER THAN THE LAND FORCE OR AIR FORCE, THE BLUE T-SHIRT IS AUTHORIZED FOR WEAR WITH LWCC AS PART OF WORK DRESS FOR DAY TO DAY DUTIES WITHIN CANADA. UNIT CO S SHALL PROVIDE DIRECTION FOR WEAR IN CANADA FOR UNIT TRG OR OPERATIONAL TASKINGS 


PENDING AVAILABILITY OF THE BLUE T-SHIRT, AS AN INTERIM MEASURE, AIR DEU PERSONNEL MAY WEAR THE CURRENTLY ISSUED GREEN T-SHIRT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THEY ARE ISSUED WITH THE DARK BLUE T-SHIRT. THESE TWO COLOURS ARE THE ONLY COLOURS AUTHORIZED FOR WEAR WITH THE LWCC 


THE ACQUISITION PROCESS OF THE BLUE T-SHIRT MAY TAKE SOME TIME. AIR DEU PERSONNEL WHO SO WISH ARE AUTHORIZED TO ACQUIRE AND WEAR, AT NO COST TO THE CROWN, A BLUE T-SHIRT IN THE FOLLOWING BRAND NAME AND COLOR CODE: 


QUOTE FRUIT OF THE LOOM UNQUOTE EITHER 100 P COTTON OR 75 P COTTON /25 P POLY COLOR NAVY/BLEU COLOR NUMBER 20232, OR 


QUOTE HANES UNQUOTE EITHER 100 P COTTON OR 75 P COTTON /25 P POLY COLOR NAVY/BLEU COLOR NUMBER 5284/NY 


THESE IDENTIFIERS WILL COMPLEMENT THE CURRENT AIR FORCE HEADDRESS APPROVED FOR WEAR WITH OPERATIONAL CLOTHING. UNTIL FINAL DISTRIBUTION OF ALL IDENTIFIERS, AT MINIMUM, THE DISTINCTIVE AIR FORCE RANKS AND HEADDRESS ARE TO BE WORN BY ALL AIR DEU PERSONNEL 


THE NEW AIR FORCE RANKS AND THE NAMETAPES ARE READY FOR DISTRIBUTION AND WILL BE ISSUED WITH THE NEW LWCC. PERSONNEL WHO CURRENTLY HAVE BEEN EQUIPPED WITH THE LWCC IN CADPAT TEMPERATE WOODLAND (TW) COLOR ARE AUTHORIZED TO WEAR THE NEW IDENTIFIERS. THE CEMS PROJECT MANAGEMENT OFFICE WILL PROMULGATE THE QTY OF NAMETAPES, RANK SLIP-ONS AND T-SHIRTS TO BE ALLOTTED 


AIR FORCE IDENTIFIERS ARE ONLY AUTHORIZED FOR WEAR WITH THE TW CADPAT AND SHALL NOT BE WORN WITH OTHER CADPAT DESIGNS (I.E. ARID)


----------



## Yard Ape (10 Jun 2004)

Military Brat said:
			
		

> I do believe there is also that same colour of blue in the actual uniform as well.
> 
> P.S. I don't think sailors are being issued CADPAT.


The Air Force wears the exact same CADPAT uniform as the Army (in fact, our uniform has been modified to meet Air Force requirments).
Navy personel do get issued CADPAT.  It is the uniform they are expected to wear when posted to a Land Forces establishment.

The Blue thread cannot be seen on CADPAT from a distance.  That means you won't know who to salute untill too late.  It means they may as well not wear rank or nametags at all.


----------



## AmmoTech90 (11 Jun 2004)

The green thread on Army slip-ons and nametapes cannot be seen at a distance either.  This was discussed at the Army Dress Committee.  So the Army may as well not wear rank or nametapes either?


----------



## bossi (11 Jun 2004)

Isn't there a "Murphy's Law for The Army" that says:


> Try not to look important - it only draws attention ... and fire.



Frankly, I'm quite happy if the bad guys can't see my rank from a distance
(once upon a time, I was taught that sharpshooters/snipers aim for leaders ... and people with radios ... etc.)

Certainly, I hope we don't end up with neon rank slip-ons/name tags
(kinda like the US Army in the early days of Vietnam ...)
Why spend all that money on CADPAT, and then festoon it like a Christmas tree?


----------



## Yard Ape (11 Jun 2004)

AmmoTech90 said:
			
		

> The green thread on Army slip-ons and nametapes cannot be seen at a distance either.   This was discussed at the Army Dress Committee.   So the Army may as well not wear rank or nametapes either?


This was fixed a while ago.


----------



## ZipperHead (11 Jun 2004)

> Why spend all that money on CADPAT, and then festoon it like a Christmas tree?



I'm afraid that the answer to that question is that, we, as a military, are more concerned with appearance than functionality (style over substance).   

I myself have been forced to do the quick "up-gooddaysir-down" more than a few times due to the near invisibility of the rank on the slip-ons. But then again, I kinda thought that was the point. But no doubt a few ossifers have gotten upset due to the fact that they didn't receive their ***sniff-sniff***    salute. Save that for parades in DEU, is my opinion, but what do I know.....

Al


----------



## AmmoTech90 (11 Jun 2004)

Yard Ape said:
			
		

> This was fixed a while ago.



How so?  The minutes are from 2003.  I haven't changed my slip-ons since then.  I don't recall hearing anything in O-Gps about officers having new slip ons.


----------



## chrisf (11 Jun 2004)

I don't personally see a need for blue thread on the name tags. They've already got blue berets (Was that authorized for wear with cadpat? We've got an airforce clerk who as far as I remember wears a green beret, and we had a navy clerk who did wear a black beret...), that indentifies them as air force plenty. Isn't that enough?Or if it's not, fine, add the blue undershirts. If they want more then that, why not just go ahead and wear the airforce work dress? It's plenty distinct. Though it does need more care then the cadpat uniforms, which require virtually no effort beyond the act of hanging after removing from the dryer....

That being said, who really cares? If the airforce wants to pay for it, then let them. 

And while I'm ranting, you know what would be great? Capat slip-ons with gold embroidery for the ranks, say for garrison, and optional green embroidery for the field. We've already got the full colour and green flags (Though I don't think I've ever actually remembered to bring my green flags with me let alone wear them)


----------



## Gryphon (12 Jun 2004)

bossi said:
			
		

> Isn't there a "Murphy's Law for The Army" that says:
> 
> 
> > Try not to look important - it only draws attention ... and fire.
> ...


----------



## ags281 (12 Jun 2004)

Here's a simple idea: for around base just have everyone use the DEU style slipon. Can't get any more visible than bright gold, it doesn't require manufacturing a different type, and for anyone who thinks the obvious beret colour is not enough  ( ???), they also show what element you're with. For the field, have the almost invisible ranks on cadpat so that the cadpat actually works.


----------



## Zoomie (12 Jun 2004)

Just a Sig Op said:
			
		

> They've already got blue berets (Was that authorized for wear with cadpat?)



Yes, it is approved dress.   Read the CANFORGEN.


> If they want more then that, why not just go ahead and wear the airforce work dress? It's plenty distinct.



I believe that you have missed the point of why the AF is getting CADPAT.   Again   I suggest you read the CANFORGEN.


----------



## Marauder (12 Jun 2004)

I just kills me that we have people sitting around in some office somewhere thinking dumb shit like this up.

Why don't we just let all the zoomies wear Hawiian shirts as work dress. That's "distinct".  Of all the fish to fry, and this is the one being battered and served? I need a drink now...


----------



## sgt_mandal (12 Jun 2004)

Does anyone have any pictures about all this?


----------



## Bzzliteyr (12 Jun 2004)

I saw a great powerpoint presentation on it the other day, I will try to upload it and place it on my webspace.


----------



## McInnes (13 Jun 2004)

From what I have often seen, many people wear cadpat slipons with gold embroidery in garrison and either black or green embroidery in the field. Works quite well.


----------



## Yard Ape (13 Jun 2004)

AmmoTech90 said:
			
		

> Yard Ape said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've never had difficulty reading the light green thread.  It was damn near impossible when we used black thread though.



			
				Aquilus Lupin said:
			
		

> From what I have often seen, many people wear cadpat slipons with gold embroidery in garrison and either black or green embroidery in the field. Works quite well.


I've never seen this practice.  I have seen some wearing the CF dress slip-ons . . . not sure what I think of this either, but it would be a better Air Force solution that spening on a special blue-thread rank.




			
				Just a Sig Op said:
			
		

> If they want more then that, why not just go ahead and wear the airforce work dress?


Because then the CF would not save money through having everyone in the same uniform.



			
				Just a Sig Op said:
			
		

> That being said, who really cares? If the airforce wants to pay for it, then let them.


Because that is money that could be spent better somewhere else (and if the Air Force cannot find a better place to spend it, then the Army can!).


----------



## ags281 (13 Jun 2004)

> that is money that could be spent better somewhere else (and if the Air Force cannot find a better place to spend it, then the Army can!).



Like what, the MGS?   

It's kind of sad that we can get so worked up about rank slipons. I'm pretty sure that any extra money the different pattern blue style costs is trivial at best. The nametags have to be done up separately for each individual anyway, so using one colour of thread vs another is not a big deal. As for the ranks, I'll bet that the material/production cost of a single extra style of rank slipon would only get you a couple boxes of IMP's anyway. It's not the material cost that's wasteful, it's the salary for someone to debate ideas like this on DND time. If they want to use the already existing blue with gold slipon, great! If not, just let it go, because opposition will only justify more high-level jobs to make up a cost analysis and argue both sides ad nauseum.


----------



## ZipperHead (13 Jun 2004)

IMO, it's not just about the money, as admittedly, it can't be that much difference in the big picture. More than anything, it's like ags281 said: it's the fact that they pay somebody good money to deal with nausea like this. We, as soldiers, sailors and airmen, will b!tch about things, no matter how trivial or great. 

I think the thing, when it gets down to it, is that there will always be groups that want to be "different" within the military, and will go to any length to express that difference. I'm thinking MP's wearing their new black uniforms. I'm thinking maroon berets. I'm thinking black berets (Armour Corps only, the Navy one is NOT black..... oh, who am I kidding, it's black). 

Methinks that one day it will be cool to wear the OD combats because (eventually) everyone will wear CADPAT, so some people will want to go "retro" and wear the old stuff. Mark my words......

Al


----------



## tabernac (13 Jun 2004)

> IMO, it's not just about the money, as admittedly, it can't be that much difference in the big picture. More than anything, it's like ags281 said: it's the fact that they pay somebody good money to deal with nausea like this. We, as soldiers, sailors and airmen, will b!tch about things, no matter how trivial or great.
> 
> I think the thing, when it gets down to it, is that there will always be groups that want to be "different" within the military, and will go to any length to express that difference. I'm thinking MP's wearing their new black uniforms. I'm thinking maroon berets. I'm thinking black berets (Armour Corps only, the Navy one is NOT black..... oh, who am I kidding, it's black).
> 
> Methinks that one day it will be cool to wear the OD combats because (eventually) everyone will wear CADPAT, so some people will want to go "retro" and wear the old stuff. Mark my words......



Well wouldn't you know, you beat me to it.


----------



## Armymedic (13 Jun 2004)

Sorry to jump in late...

I have to back up MG43 statements about 2 CMBG thumbing at the CANFORGEN, but its directed at those soft airforce pers who are working at the army units, ie medics, clerks and supply techs.
They have no problem with the 427 Tac hel, and Base pers wearing thier blue tshirts.

Personally I have to agree, isn't the blue beret enough to differentiate 2 pers who do the very same job at the same place.


----------



## childs56 (13 Jun 2004)

well as i am in the airforce now and have seen the new slipons with the blue shirt i have to say the blue shirt has to go, ugly and very not military like, as for the slipons they are hard to see and honeslty not to bad looking. they can stay. the nice thing about the slipons is they identify the airforce from lets say a soldier, even though you cant see their rank. for people complainig about this. well move on to better complaints. the reson for this issue of uniform to the airforce is so that we will all have the same uniform (with small differences) if you look at the bigger picture we are trying to make a military that is fully deployable on a moments notice. that includes the navy army and airforce. as the airforce may be in country with you they need the same camo, the days of not being able to deploy rapidly because of uniform and kit  shortages are trying to be rectified. most of our military is lets say below standard of what we all would like to see. from the attitudes of the army and airforce i can see we will not reach this goal of true 24-48hrs deploability as we all have our heads up our a__'s. when we wine about a uniform change, yet we wine when the airforce doesnt go to the field what gives. we need to look outside of our own units and local intrest's and look at were we want the military as a hole to be in 5 years time. yes new uniforms and equipment need to be purchased. at the end of it all we will have helos that will direclty support the army, tactical airlift that will support the army and a  navy that will transport our army,  out of these three things the airfoce will have to be on the ground with the army, weather its in fob's or far's etc we may not be doing any fighting but we need to be kitted up and prepared to do it. as it takes maint pers to fix the helos  and look after them. and its not in hotels,  well enough ranting here as dumb as it might seem the name tags look good  and lets try to look at our future of were we should be going.


----------



## Garry (13 Jun 2004)

Seems to me to be a moot point anyways- when I was Army (Tanks) I pretty much always had coveralls on, no rank or name tag. When I was Tac Hel, (Airforce) I never had any rank or nametags on my combat  flying suit either.

Couldn't care less what we wore in Garrison, that's all Sgt-Maj stuff anyways.

and y'all are wearing helmets in AFV's now?..wow....


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (1 Jul 2005)

mover1 said:
			
		

> The USAF should have looked north of the border for once and looked at our Airforce who went "BLUE" in the mid 90's. Lesson Learned we all now wear CAD PAT.



I agree, it looks horrible.   However, before we get too smug, we have an AF that took a digital camoflage uniform and insisted on adding blue rank badges, blue name tags and a blue t-shirt, all in the name of "identity", as though the little birdy on the old name tags didn't do that well enough... :


----------



## Big Foot (1 Jul 2005)

Teddy, thats still cheaper, and looks better, than a completely different uniform.


----------



## mover1 (1 Jul 2005)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> I agree, it looks horrible.   However, before we get too smug, we have an AF that took a digital camoflage uniform and insisted on adding blue ranks badges, blue name tags and a blue t-shirt, all in the name of "identity", as though the little birdy on the old name tags didn't do that well enough... :



Sorry the AF is not ARMY enough for you. ANd the Blue rank and names and shirt. Actually look pretty good.


----------



## axeman (1 Jul 2005)

mover1 said:
			
		

> Sorry the AF is not ARMY enough for you. ANd the Blue rank and names and shirt. Actually look pretty good.



yup and they are invisible until you are 2 ft away from them unless they are brand new


----------



## 48Highlander (1 Jul 2005)

axeman said:
			
		

> yup and they are invisible until you are 2 ft away from them unless they are brand new



That's fine, just means less officers to salute


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (2 Jul 2005)

Big Foot said:
			
		

> Teddy, thats still cheaper, and looks better, than a completely different uniform.



True, but I cannot agree that any further distinction beyond what was already built into CADPAT (ie: the swords, anchor or eagle on the name tapes) was necessary.  Instead, the AF (which means - in the end - the entire CF) spent thousands of dollars modifying a perfectly good CF *tactical* uniform with obviously non-tactical accoutrements all in the name of increasing "group identity". I note that the Navy hasn't appeared to need to resort to such means to foster _esprit de corps_. A poor selection of priorities, IMHO.

Similarly, I don't really understand the need for the USAF to have a separate camouflage pattern. They have been using BDUs for years (both desert and temperate) and a USAF airman/woman is still instantly identifiable by rank and other badges. However, that's a problem for the Americans and their services are funded differently than ours.


----------



## Gunner (2 Jul 2005)

> Sorry the AF is not ARMY enough for you. ANd the Blue rank and names and shirt. Actually look pretty good.



Sorry mover1, I disagree.  The blue is just about the dorkiest looking thing I have ever seen on a CADPAT uniform (right up there with the Year of the Veteran Pin...).  The who purpose of having crossed swords, anchor, albatross on your name tag is so you can see what element he/she is with.  When is the navy bringout out their black slip ons with gold rank for the Cadpat?


----------



## mover1 (2 Jul 2005)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> True, but I cannot agree that any further distinction beyond what was already built into CADPAT (IE: the swords, anchor or eagle on the name tapes) was necessary.   Instead, the AF (which means - in the end - the entire CF) spent thousands of dollars modifying a perfectly good CF *tactical* uniform with obviously non-tactical aaccoutrement'sall in the name of increasing "group identity". I note that the Navy hasn't appeared to need to resort to such means to foster _esprit de corps_. A poor selection of priorities, IMHO.


Firstlythe NAVY wears their "naval Combats" as in Nomex work dress. That seems to be as good a Group Identity example as I can see. And as for the AF spending thousands of dollars modifying the perfectly good uniform with "obviously non-tactical aaccoutrement's   I say what non-tactical aaccoutrement's Blue thread? Blue Tshirts. Covering the buttons on the pocket so they don't snag on the Airplane and come off causing FOD and avoiding a crash, possibly saving lives and millions of dollars in equipment. 
The PPCLI wearing maroon, is tactical but a dark blue t-shirt isn't.
Like everything it takes time to get used to seeing the blue thread on the rank. Just like it took time to see the green in the Army rank.
Also interesting to note that all the Air Airforce Kit and Cadpat and uniforms. COMES OUT OF THE AIR FORCE BUDGET. And we do not get all the Clothe the Solder items Army types get. And I am talking basics here like Socks, Boots and Underwear.


----------



## axeman (2 Jul 2005)

The PPCLI wearing maroon, is tactical but a dark blue t-shirt isn't. the Patricia's   dont wear the maroon out in the feild only on pt and some really special days


----------



## mover1 (2 Jul 2005)

axeman said:
			
		

> The PPCLI wearing maroon, is tactical but a dark blue t-shirt isn't. the Patricia's    dont wear the maroon out in the feild only on pt and some really special days



The Ariforce hardly goes to the Field. Usually a hotel.


----------



## mover1 (3 Jul 2005)

2332Piper said:
			
		

> So then what was wrong with the AF's old work dress? If you are getting a CAMOFLAUGE uniform, why un-camo it with blue? Defeats the purpose n'est pas?


The AF old work dress reqired ironing. The shirts stained with oil easily and were not exchangable. THe Short Sleve Version had name tags which cause FOD. Plus it wasn't the best kit to wear at some of the FOL locations like Inuvik.
As for UN-Camoing it with blue. HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THE BLUE NAME TAPES OR RANK?  The blue is harder to see than the standard green.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (3 Jul 2005)

> As for UN-Camoing it with blue. HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THE BLUE NAME TAPES OR RANK?  The blue is harder to see than the standard green.



I have - many times.  It looks mega-goofy (if I can coin a phrase).

Moreover, the choice of blue on a digital pattern makes the rank and nametag nearly impossible to read.

I just don't get it...


----------



## mover1 (3 Jul 2005)

There is nothing to get really.  
Army is Army.
Air Force is Airforce 
Navy is.....

It doesn't look goofy. Your're just not used to it.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (3 Jul 2005)

Well, we'll agree to disagree and leave it at that.

I will say that it pales in comparison to what the USAF is suggesting and to other uniforms I've seen.  The Turkish AF wears a blue "cam" pattern that is right out of 'er.  ;D


----------



## mover1 (3 Jul 2005)

Yes I do agree to that. In fact this thread started out as that. Showing the goofy style the USAF wanted to go with.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (3 Jul 2005)

Our airforce clerks also wear their blue shirts with their combats in garrison but if deployed will be wearing the standard green.


----------



## mover1 (3 Jul 2005)

Pilots and most aircrew wear OD flight suits anyways. The only variations you get are the SQN T-shirts they wear under them. 
The Blue is pretty dark so it doesn't really matter.Between OD or the blue.

[Edited at request of mbr to remove sarcasim that no longer made sense when this post was split from another thread]


----------



## McG (4 Jul 2005)

mover1 said:
			
		

> Firstly, the NAVY wears their "naval Combats" as in Nomex work dress. That seems to be as good a Group Identity example as I can see.


Except that those uniforms are based on operational requirements on board a ship and they are not to fill a service environment's desire to look different.


----------



## Inch (4 Jul 2005)

MCG said:
			
		

> Except that those uniforms are based on operational requirements on board a ship and they are not to fill a service environment's desire to look different.



I would argue the value of the NCDs in fire protection. Every aircrew member knows that in order for our fancy new Nomex flight suits to provide any protection against burns, we have to wear double layers, ie long underwear and long sleeve shirts underneath (and they're cotton, not Nomex). The navy does not do this, so in a fire, Nomex acts just like any other natural fibre, you get burned but nothing sticks to the skin. Without the double layer, they might as well have kept the old postman shirts.

So I would say that the Navy really did get the NCDs to fill their desire to look different.

As to the AF subject, I like the blue T-shirt since it's so dark it's almost black, but I hate the name tags and rank.


----------



## GO!!! (4 Jul 2005)

Just to play RSM for a minute. 

This foolishness with the blue t-shirts should not be allowed. Just think how ridiculous a unit on parade would look with every trade/environment wearing a distinctive item of dress (other than berets). We would truly have "full spectrum" warfare then!

In addition to this, I am a jumper with my own distinctive head dress. What about bringing back the smock? Or allowing all jumpers to wear maroon t-shirts under their cbts? And special boots? The answer of course, would be no  . So. If I have to be standardised, and all aspects of my unit must be cleansed of any type of dress that could be (mis)construed as making it's members see themselves as "elite" why does the air force get to be special? I'm special too!!


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Jul 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Just to play RSM for a minute.
> 
> This foolishness with the blue t-shirts should not be allowed. Just think how ridiculous a unit on parade would look with every trade/environment wearing a distinctive item of dress (other than berets). We would truly have "full spectrum" warfare then!
> 
> In addition to this, I am a jumper with my own distinctive head dress. What about bringing back the smock? Or allowing all jumpers to wear maroon t-shirts under their cbts? And special boots? The answer of course, would be no   . So. If I have to be standardised, and all aspects of my unit must be cleansed of any type of dress that could be (mis)construed as making it's members see themselves as "elite" why does the air force get to be special? I'm special too!!



But: why different berets, then?

I remember, several decades back, the regular debates between e.g. the CO and Adjutant, on one side, and the Sig O, Maint O, Med O, Paymaster, Dentist and so on, on the other, re: which cap, stick, ascot, etc.

(_Pronto_, is memory serves, wore a Thomas & Stone _fur felt_ forage cap, the _regimental_ 'standard', while the others wore the normal Canadian Army caps, but the others wore RCR scarves and carried RCR officers' canes while _Pronto_ insisted on wearing his own corps' kit; but the Signal Corps NCOs carried RCR NCO canes â â€œ which the other corps NCOs did not, and so on, and so forth _ad infinitum_.  It made for lively chats over a beer or eleven, but ...)

Despite all the difference we, battalions of The Royal Canadian Regiment, full of other arms and services members, managed to go on parade now and again, and we did not look ridiculous.

I have no strong views on how _uniform_ our uniforms must be â â€œ I went through various iterations and, in one 'field' unit I had people from all three services and, from within the army, from different regiments and branches.  I told the sergeant major to enforce high standards of deportment â â€œ clean, pressed uniforms, shiny boots/shoes, no twisted laces, no _Irish pennants_, etc â â€œ while respecting different service, branch and regimental _quiffs_.  It worked for me but we did not have many parades and I don't think I ever saw even almost everyone in one place at one time.

For the record while I think the USAF's blue/grey _tiger stripe_ is nonsense, it cannot be worse than some of the things the Canadian Forces did over the years: remember work dress and garrison jackets, and ... and ... and _environmental_ name tags on CADPAT?


----------



## Garry (5 Jul 2005)

Not sure that I'm really worried about slip on colours anymore- seems there's so much more to worry about......

However, in the traditional scheme of things, I'd like to point out that the "bird" on the Airforce insignia isn't an "eagle" (as alluded to in the CanForGen) but an "Albatross". (a much more dignified bird, btw- kills it's own food, as opposed to the carrion eating Eagle)

There- I feel better now.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (5 Jul 2005)

How fitting.   I like part 2

al ·ba ·tross      ( P )   Pronunciation Key   (lb-trôs, -trs)
1.   n. pl. albatross or al ·ba ·tross ·es 
Any of several large web-footed birds constituting the family Diomedeidae, chiefly of the oceans of the Southern Hemisphere, and having a hooked beak and long narrow wings. 

2A.  A constant, worrisome burden. 
2B.  An obstacle to success.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Jul 2005)

Guys can check up on all my posts and note that I'm not at all one to snark or be snyde, but this one is a bit of an exception...so I'll bite... 


...some folks obviously have way more time on their hands than they know what to do with.   Not that I'm a particularly big fan of wearing blue slipons and name tape, but frankly, it's really not keeping me up at night.   Thankfully, I won't have to worry about blue slip-ons when I start wearing CADPAT(AR) in a few months.


Just for poops and snickers, I want to see all you "waste-hating" army guys wearing those fruity-looking CADPAT(TW) boots about to hit stores later in the summer while us AF plugs keep tundling along in our Greb MkIII's...   ;D

Cheers,
Duey

p.s.   How much did we spend on TCCCS/IRIS/C2SAS that still doesn't data swap/freq hop interoperably with any other allied/coalition military we operate with? Yup, best to solve the dreaded name-tape, slip-on debacle first...   :


----------



## Bert (6 Jul 2005)

Why don't we standardize this whole mess with nifty blue t-shirts for all elements.  I'd like that.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Jul 2005)

I think they did away with the CADPAT boots.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Jul 2005)

CFL said:
			
		

> I think they did away with the CADPAT boots.



Nope, in fact DLR 5 was sporting a spiffy pair at a meeting I was at  in 101 a few days ago...nice green plastic sole, too!  You Army folks will have totally outdone the AF and its meagre attempt at sillyness with our spiffy blue tags and slip-ons. ;D


----------



## 48Highlander (6 Jul 2005)

Duey said:
			
		

> Nope, in fact DLR 5 was sporting a spiffy pair at a meeting I was at   in 101 a few days ago...nice green plastic sole, too!   You Army folks will have totally outdone the AF and its meagre attempt at sillyness with our spiffy blue tags and slip-ons. ;D



Yes, yes, we do our share of silly things.

If I remember correctly, the CADPAT boots are a go, and are supposed to replace combat boots FOR FIELD USE ONLY.  Now, I don't wanna be propagating any unfounded runmours here, so if anyone can either support that or disprove it....help?


----------



## Icer (6 Jul 2005)

CFL said:
			
		

> How fitting.   I like part 2
> 
> al ·ba ·tross      ( P )   Pronunciation Key   (lb-trôs, -trs)
> 1.   n. pl. albatross or al ·ba ·tross ·es
> ...



For the record, the bird that the Air Force uses as a symbol is an Eagle- it is not an albatross or even a seagull.

Ref:  http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/traddocs/trada_e.asp

I think it's best to stop that part of the discussion and it is not wise to slam a symbol especially when you do not know what it is.  Let alone using that definition to describe a part of the CF.

Cheers.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Jul 2005)

Hey sunshine if you can't take a joke then you may want to stay away from internet  forums.  I commented on what another member said about the bird.  I could give a ---- what kind of bird it is.  In the moment I put up the DICTIONARY description.  Don't have a sense of humor do we.


----------



## Icer (6 Jul 2005)

No problem, just making sure all understand what the facts are before the thread gets hijacked. . .

Sunshine out.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Jul 2005)

48Highlander said:
			
		

> Yes, yes, we do our share of silly things.
> 
> If I remember correctly, the CADPAT boots are a go, and are supposed to replace combat boots FOR FIELD USE ONLY.



In my years I've seen us do more than our share. :

As to the second part, why look for a good replacement for the Mk III if we're still going to wear them in Garrison. Field or garrison, it's a lousy boot that ruins feet. Personally, I can't see it. Post your sources please on the "Field Use Only".


----------



## mover1 (7 Jul 2005)

http://www.airforce.ca/index2.php3?page=about#eagle

Albatross or eagle the answer is in here.

January 1943 this general badge of the RCAFwas approved by H.M. the King. The Chester Herald's description ofthe badge clearly and specifically refers to the bird in the design asâ Å“an eagle volant affronte, the head lowered and to the sinister.â ? In short, it was still an eagle and always had been  ­ although thealbatross was a very nice bird, too


----------



## Good2Golf (9 Jul 2005)

recceguy said:
			
		

> In my years I've seen us do more than our share. :
> 
> As to the second part, why look for a good replacement for the Mk III if we're still going to wear them in Garrison. Field or garrison, it's a lousy boot that ruins feet. Personally, I can't see it. Post your sources please on the "Field Use Only".



Recceguy, 

I don't get it either...what ever happened to "train like you fight"?  Surely we're not so hurting for cash (i.e. put what we get in the right places!) that we think that keeping Mk III's for Garrison only is some kind of way to save money for other things... :

...although I will say, the MkIII is still better than that silly Garrison boot that somebody thooght up for the 'abortive' attempt as Garrison dress years ago.

Back on topic, has anyone seen CADPAT(AR) slip-ons and name tape in AF blue?  I'm off to Kabul in a bit and I'm picking up my AR in a few weeks.  Maybe I should stay quiet and go into theatre in "stealth mode"? ;D

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## axeman (10 Jul 2005)

yes i have seen em all it is , is sewn in blue  thats it with the bird instead of the crossed swords or anchor


----------



## Garry (10 Jul 2005)

Horse hockey.

I still say it's an albatross.


----------



## PViddy (10 Jul 2005)

So on the topic of this thread.

To get this straight, that standard is for the eagle to be to the right of the name, when looking at the name tape (say from an inspection perspective).  I read the CANFORGEN posted on the first page, but just wanted to clarify because i have seen it both ways.

Thanks for your input ladies and gents.  Oh and for the record, i always thought it was an Albatross as well...good to know. 

cheers

PV


----------



## Icer (11 Jul 2005)

Looking at the mbr you see the name, followed by the eagle on the right-all in dark blue lettering with a border in dark blue as well.


----------



## Eagle_Eye_View (12 Jul 2005)

Speaking of CADPAT, have you guys seen our new coverall?
Its a CADPAT 2 pieces and we can unzip the pants to make it look like a short. The ranks goes on the shoulders and the top part looks more like a jacket.
cheers


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Jul 2005)

TB said:
			
		

> Speaking of CADPAT, have you guys seen our new coverall?
> Its a CADPAT 2 pieces and we can unzip the pants to make it look like a short. The ranks goes on the shoulders and the top part looks more like a jacket.
> cheers



Well, I had worked with Doug Palmer (a.k.a. Mr. Clothe the Soldier) years ago when 10 TAG and FMC were still both alive...we were working on the converged CADPAT between LF and 10 TAG pers back in '96.  We were trying to get a one-piece converged design for aircrew and crewman...nomex, CADPAT, etc... to save on costs and other things.  The follow-on was going to be a CADPAT on NOMEX 2-pc flight suit that us guys in Tac Hel could wear.  In the end, the AF shot down the CADPAT 2-pc/NOMEX deal for a number of reasons...not the lest of which was then LGen Lloyd Campbell (then CAS) being heard to say, "there''ll be Aiur Force personnel in camouflage flying suits over my dead body!"  Well...when the CAS won't support the boys in the cockpit/field, what the heck can you do?  I'd still like to see both TW and AR CADPAT 2-pc flying suits in NOMEX, but the real world commonality, integrated, look like everybody else apparently is still not strong enough to outweigh senseless and unjustified personnel opinion that becomes policy because someone has more leaves on their shoulder than the warfighters in front with chevrons and bars....ooops, sorry....that was a bit rantish wasn't it?  :-[

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## ArmyAviator (12 Aug 2005)

Duey

     Update yourself dude   ;D.   They will be testing four submission of CADPAT FR 2 Pce flight suit/crew suit this fall.   The battle has been won and 1 Wing and the Army are very close to winning the war on this issue.


----------



## kj_gully (12 Aug 2005)

I'm surprised no-one has taken issue with the wedge worn with Cadpat. The blue wedge is definitely distinctive! :rage: The drive of the "new" Airforce is to be relavent (sp?) and deployable. The Army should applaud the Airforce for wearing Camo at all! There is an incredible amount of heel dragging within the Airforce community to be battle ready. Blue insignia? Not much chance that anyone from the big blue will ever be so close to the enemy that the blue will make a difference. When it comes to SERE, best to be sterile anyway so leave it at home when you go fly missions. Maybe the CF should abandon saluting in Cadpat?  ? Don't freak out... the salute as a mark of respect has its place.If you are summoned to an office, or on parade it is simple to know who to salute and when. You must admit that the salute is a difficult custom to maintain in the Airforce anyway. The Aircrew of any plane eat live and fight together, and seldom salute each other when together as crew. When I walk with my crew to meals, or to my 5 star lodgings , I do not salute my collegues who fly the plane, and on the days that I am not flying in their crew, it is uncomfortable and unnatural for all when I do give them the marks of respect they deserve. There is very little headdress on the hangar line, probably to alleviate the necessity of constant saluting. ( don't jump on me with the "FOD" argument, it's an excuse imo) I think this is a viable option, and would end the problem.


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Aug 2005)

kj_gully said:
			
		

> I'm surprised no-one has taken issue with the wedge worn with Cadpat. The blue wedge is definitely distinctive! :rage: The drive of the "new" Airforce is to be relavent (sp?) and deployable. The Army should applaud the Airforce for wearing Camo at all! There is an incredible amount of heel dragging within the Airforce community to be battle ready. Blue insignia? Not much chance that anyone from the big blue will ever be so close to the enemy that the blue will make a difference. When it comes to SERE, best to be sterile anyway so leave it at home when you go fly missions. Maybe the CF should abandon saluting in Cadpat?   ? Don't freak out... the salute as a mark of respect has its place.If you are summoned to an office, or on parade it is simple to know who to salute and when. You must admit that the salute is a difficult custom to maintain in the Airforce anyway. The Aircrew of any plane eat live and fight together, and seldom salute each other when together as crew. When I walk with my crew to meals, or to my 5 star lodgings , I do not salute my collegues who fly the plane, and on the days that I am not flying in their crew, it is uncomfortable and unnatural for all when I do give them the marks of respect they deserve. There is very little headdress on the hangar line, probably to alleviate the necessity of constant saluting. ( don't jump on me with the "FOD" argument, it's an excuse imo) I think this is a viable option, and would end the problem.



Kj, a small minority of the powder-blue air force actually not only doesn't mind wearing CADPAT, we actually prefer to.   In fact, notwithstanding that a previous CAS said "there'll be CADPAT flying gear over my dead body" (thanks for thinking of the troops, sir!) I think you'll find tac hel guys don't get fussed over trying to wear blue crap at every opportunity.   My blue beret (properly formed, not like how Gen Baril used to wear it   ;D ) is about as much blue as I'll ever want to wear in my life time.   I have to tear my house apart to find that wedgie thing whenever a parade comes up with 1A's.   

It was funny to not the rest of the aircrew in the air force making jokes about our 2-pc tac hel flying suits in the late 80's/early 90's..."looks like crap", "whacha doing?   Trying to play army?", etc.... funny how they started to wear the stuff once they actually started to fly to and from things that didn't always have a 5-star hotel.

Anywhooo...the day that we get the 2-pc NOMEX CADPAT flying gear that we've been asking for (for at least 9 years, back in 96 I worked with PD CTS, Doug Palmer to get this stuff, but "true blue" AF officers higher up the chain continue to shut down such efforts) and we put up with a few more years of the air force joking about relish pajamas, etc... I'll be a happy camper...imagine, some decent, tactical/operational clothing to go with that kick-*** big-honking helicopter with 7.62mm mini-guns bristling out the doors and ramps that the CDS is going to get me next year! 

Hu-ah! 

Cheers,
Duey


*_edited for speeling_*


----------



## Bert (12 Aug 2005)

Until it changes, there are distinctive characteristic and cultural differences between the elements.
Some units allow a standard of dress that may not be common in the wider military. I've seen 
specific ball caps and unit T-shirts being acceptable for dress of the day.  So what?  Depending
of the deployment, CADPAT dress for AirForce is subject modification and variations in kitting more
in line with the Army.  I guess you can look at everything from a combat arms point of view but its 
often forgotten by some theres a wider military out there.


----------



## Zoomie (12 Aug 2005)

On the issue of CADPAT and its Airforce link - has anyone seen the new rigs that 500 series techs are wearing on the flight line?  They have zip off CADPAT pants which do not blouse, along with a CADPAT tunic of the old OD style (ie epaulets on shoulders).  The shorts look comfy and must make it more bearable for the boys on the flight line - the lack of blousing of the pants looks IMHO shoddy...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Aug 2005)

any pics?


----------



## Zoomie (13 Aug 2005)

nope - i have only seen it in action while at work - apparently it is a pretty new piece of kit - Comox is always the first base to get it - they start distributing from West to East.


----------



## Eagle_Eye_View (13 Aug 2005)

Yeah its pretty comfy...and funny. Seeing a pair of CADPAT shorts and extreme white legs with black boots (when there are brand new). 
 ;D


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (13 Aug 2005)

These shorts I must see.


----------



## Inch (13 Aug 2005)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> nope - i have only seen it in action while at work - apparently it is a pretty new piece of kit - Comox is always the first base to get it - they start distributing from West to East.



Our guys have had them since Feb when we got the rest of our CADPAT kit


----------



## Zoomie (13 Aug 2005)

Inch said:
			
		

> Our guys have had them since Feb when we got the rest of our CADPAT kit



Brrr.. shorts in Feb - and in Halifax no less...

I could see the boys in YQQ getting away with that all year round but not Halifax.


----------



## Inch (14 Aug 2005)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> Brrr.. shorts in Feb - and in Halifax no less...
> 
> I could see the boys in YQQ getting away with that all year round but not Halifax.



I guess our techs are just more manly out here!  ;D

They have had the two piece CADPAT coveralls though since then, but even on the hottest days here, I haven't seen anyone with the legs zipped off.


----------



## Judy (14 Aug 2005)

This has probably been discussed in this thread somewhere, but I didnt read all 6 pages of it.

The rank on the army cadpat is hard enough to see, but the blue airforce rank is even WORSE.  It's awful when you're walking by someone and you have to squint at their chest, and they're doing the same to you.  It's ridiculous, and it makes me hate walking around outside!  

Maybe we should all go back to the sweet DEUs - nice blue jacket with bright yellow rank!  Ha ha.


----------



## kj_gully (14 Aug 2005)

Hey Judy, how 'bout my idea? Stop saluting in CADPAT?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (15 Aug 2005)

yeah that's brilliant.


----------



## Gunnerlove (15 Aug 2005)

If we can have red and white flags why not garrison name and rank as well? 

Crazy I know, but it might just work.


----------



## DG-41 (16 Aug 2005)

Quasi on topic: count me in as one of the people who finds the illegibility of name, rank, and unit on the CADPAT uniforms a SERIOUS pain in the ass.

Ditto the decision to move rank off the shoulders and onto the front of the uniform - it is now impossible to determine rank from the sides/rear.

DG


----------



## Bert (19 Aug 2005)

Make him wear a blue T-shirt too.


----------



## GO!!! (20 Aug 2005)

Duey said:
			
		

> Don't kid yourself, GO...you'll be begging to be Cbt Arms Spec on an MH-47G spewing 6,000 rds/min of 7.26 out of an M-134 mini-gun!   ;D



As soon as we get SOA Chinooks, or miniguns, give me a call - but I don't see them in the near future!


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Aug 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> As soon as we get SOA Chinooks, or miniguns, give me a call - but I don't see them in the near future!



Wait for it...I hear tell there's some movement up in the hallowed halls...    

I'll keep you in mind, GO, for the "Mission Spec short list"....6000rds/min wouldn't scare you, would it?  

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## Scoobs (2 Sep 2005)

CFL,

I will start a new topic.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 Sep 2005)

If you pm the mods they can cut an paste into a new topic


----------



## Scoobs (2 Sep 2005)

New topic subject is "Tac Hel".


----------



## Eagle_Eye_View (9 Sep 2005)

About the new ranks for the air force, The flightcrew will have new ranks on the shoulder for their flight suits. Right now they have the "old army green olive ranks" but soon they'll be issued the new ones. They are basically the same, but instead the rank will be blue. So it will be blue ranks on a green surface. They are thinking about issuying the same ranks for us, the techs. Thats all because of the confusion and everything. 
It was mentioned today by the WCWO, this is how I found out.
cheers


----------



## pteosborne (6 Jul 2006)

Are we supposed to be issued the blue t-shirts? ???
In in CFSATE and have been told I have to buy them, either from canex
for $5.99 or from the canteen for $10.00 and it has a CFSATE crest on it.


----------



## Zoomie (6 Jul 2006)

You get five blue t-shirts issued from supply.


----------



## mover1 (6 Jul 2006)

certan sizes are unavailable because one of the contractors that DIDN'T get picked to produce them launched a lawsuit against DND. Therefore all T-shirt production has (or Was ) halted. But please feel free to purchase them at Canex.


----------



## navymich (6 Jul 2006)

The way I understand it, is that if you are required to wear something, and unable to get it from the supply system, they cannot make you pay for it out of your own pocket.  In otherwords, you would be reimbursed if you had to purchase them from the Canex.  I guess this leads me to 2 questions:  am I correct in my above statement?  and, are you required to wear the blue T?  For example, in the Navy, you are allowed to wear a white crewneck Tshirt under your NCDs, but as it is not mandatory, you are responsible for the purchase of them.


----------



## I_am_John_Galt (6 Jul 2006)

navymich said:
			
		

> The way I understand it, is that if you are required to wear something, and unable to get it from the supply system, they cannot make you pay for it out of your own pocket.  In otherwords, you would be reimbursed if you had to purchase them from the Canex.  I guess this leads me to 2 questions:  am I correct in my above statement?  and, are you required to wear the blue T?  For example, in the Navy, you are allowed to wear a white crewneck Tshirt under your NCDs, but as it is not mandatory, you are responsible for the purchase of them.



There aren't any blue t-shirts in the system, so it sounds the same: you can wear the issued green or buy the blue at canex and wear that.  Both are acceptable (subject of course to local unit SOPs).


----------



## childs56 (6 Jul 2006)

DO not go out and buy blue t shirts at Canex or from the unit unless you want to (not because you were ordered to). They can threaten you all they want with not wearing the blue shirt. But the bottom line is until you are issued with the new blue shirts the previous issued green shirts shall work fine. 
If they have any probelms with that then ask them for a copy of the CanAirgen or the Canforgen (not sure which one it was) on the in-term wearing of green shirts until the new approved blue shirts are issued. 
They took away your clothing up keep allowance of $17 a month, they cannot order you to buy at your own expense uniform parts that have yet to be issued. 


On a side note I like the blue rank insignia because I can recognize an officer from an enlisted member with in saluting distance. The Army Cadpat insignia is hard to distinguish some time.


----------



## I_am_John_Galt (6 Jul 2006)

CTD said:
			
		

> On a side note I like the blue rank insignia because I can recognize an officer from an enlisted member with in saluting distance. The Army Cadpat insignia is hard to distinguish some time.



Really?!?  You are the first person that I've heard say that ... everyone else, myself included, seems to find the Army ranks much easier to read than the AirForce CADPAT (the AirForce OD, like on flightsuits, is a different story).


----------



## eurowing (6 Jul 2006)

Comox is fortunate to be issued the blue shirts.  As I understand it, Comox  shirts were paid for by 19 Wing as a QOL issue. When I left my last unit we were still wearing the green. I was pleasantly surprised to get them here.


----------



## pteosborne (7 Jul 2006)

A funny side note about the AF rank.
Theres a guy on my course whos rank contains a a black bar
at the bottom (just the cadpat pattern). And because 
the word canada is in blue thread the bar actually looks blue from a distance or in bad lighting.
so hes had the pleasure/misfourtune of being saluted a number
of times now from as high ups as WO.    
It was fairly amusing to witness.


----------



## Popurhedoff (7 Jul 2006)

We only got the Blue nametags and rank insignia because after 4 years and 2 million dollar study it was determined that this is the single item that will drive the Army guys nutz... all a part of a bigger picture...

This was part of a nefarious plot to divert their attention from the fact that the Air Crew are getting C8's and Sig Saurs P226's for PDW in the TacHel world.  The blue T-shirts are just the icing on the cake   

Maybe we can trade in our Berets in for Wedgies again????  would that be way over the top at the Army bases????

BTW.... I stayed at the Holiday Inn Express last night  ;D


----------



## bison33 (13 Jul 2006)

argue your flying crap elsewhere..........this thread is way off topic now............anyways....a new rank slip-on with a lighter blue is in the works and should be approved in the near future. It will be a garrison only slip-on though.....heaven forbid anyone know what rank you cadpat wearing folks are overseas.   :


----------



## Loachman (17 Jul 2006)

bison33 said:
			
		

> a new rank slip-on with a lighter blue is in the works and should be approved in the near future.


Great. Another stupid waste of money and effort.

As one of our techs said to another in the canteen just after being briefed about this madness of ruining CADPAT with blue crap by Comd 1 Wg a couple of years ago "Why don't we just go back to wearing dickies?"


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (29 Jul 2006)

I'm not sure if this is the right category to post this but here goes....
Last week when I was up in Greenwood visiting I was really having a hard time discerning the ranks on the Air Force people. That light blue thread on the CADPAT is almost impossible to see...the Chief Warrant Officer one is ridiculous.

Some one up there said oh yeah they are going to change them I hear.
Anyone else hear that? and what will they change them to?
Why don't we just go back to the way it was with all green stripes etc for everyone? Or maybe black?


----------



## 17thRecceSgt (31 Jul 2006)

Because that would

1.  Be easy
3.  Make sense

 ;D

hence the military's inability to do that.


----------



## air-ops (4 Aug 2006)

It seems that cooler heads may prevail, and that a semi-intelligent, cost effective, but as yet unconfirmed decision has been made regarding Air Force cadpat and rank insignia. There had been some discussion, and direction from above, that the cadpat slip-ons for the Air Force would be changed to use a lighter blue thread to make the ranks more visible. The latest word is that the present AF cadpat slip-ons with the dark blue thread will be maintained and worn when deployed on active and overseas duty. While in garrison only, the Air Force will wear the slip-ons originally developed for the present average green flight suits - dark blue rank on average green. If this is confirmed, it will be a major cost saving as plans were in the works for the new lighter blue, and even a reversable slip-on with light blue on one face and dark blue on the other. Now the Air Force can make use of a rank slip-on that has already been developed and is in the system. We will have to wait and see if this plan is implemented or changed.


----------



## geo (4 Aug 2006)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> Why don't we just go back to the way it was with all green stripes etc for everyone? Or maybe black?


Well, some time ago, when Cadpat was just in the testing phase, they did try the ranks & nametags in black.................
If you think they dissapear & are hard to read in green (or) blue..... they vanish in black


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Aug 2006)

air-ops said:
			
		

> It seems that cooler heads may prevail, and that a semi-intelligent, cost effective, but as yet unconfirmed decision has been made regarding Air Force cadpat and rank insignia. There had been some discussion, and direction from above, that the cadpat slip-ons for the Air Force would be changed to use a lighter blue thread to make the ranks more visible. The latest word is that the present AF cadpat slip-ons with the dark blue thread will be maintained and worn when deployed on active and overseas duty. While in garrison only, the Air Force will wear the slip-ons originally developed for the present average green flight suits - dark blue rank on average green. If this is confirmed, it will be a major cost saving as plans were in the works for the new lighter blue, and even a reversable slip-on with light blue on one face and dark blue on the other. Now the Air Force can make use of a rank slip-on that has already been developed and is in the system. We will have to wait and see if this plan is implemented or changed.



...or save even more money and use the green stripe on CADPAT slip-on.  

Good thing this AF-(whatever shade of)-blue "a$$-hatery" didn't make it's way to CADPAT(AR) slip ons.  What a complete waste of time, energy and money!  :

Saving up 2 ¢ to help pay for the new slip-ons...*ughhh*

Duey


----------



## Loachman (5 Aug 2006)

air-ops said:
			
		

> It seems that cooler heads may prevail


Those heads are so cool that they're below the minimum temperature necessary to sustain life.

This obsession with blue everything is maddening. It's a sign of some immature identity crisis. The Navy doesn't need special T shirts and rank insignia to know who they are.

The real air force (RCAF) did not paint/upholster/dye/stain/wallpaper/carpet everything blue, or confuse infrastructure for combat formations (bases were "Stations", not "Wings" - wings are the air force equivalent of brigades).

I'm still awaiting the initial issue of pills to turn our bodily wastes blue - I'm sure that somebody's wasting too much time and money on R&D somewhere though.

Style over substance every single time.


----------



## air-ops (5 Aug 2006)

Not meaning to be defensive, but no-one complained when the Army, as they adopted the DEU, wanted regimental shoulder flashes AND regimental metal shoulder titles AND regimental collar badges AND regimental cap badges - 4 different identifiers on one uniform to say who they are. This is nothing wrong with the army having these things, because it is part of a long tradition. There is also nothing wrong with a the Air Force having a little blue. Surely the millions saved by the adoption of the cadpat uniform by the Air Force, instead of developing their own operational clothing, more than balances off the cost of the blue thread.


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Aug 2006)

air-ops said:
			
		

> Not meaning to be defensive, but no-one complained when the Army, as they adopted the DEU, wanted regimental shoulder flashes AND regimental metal shoulder titles AND regimental collar badges AND regimental cap badges - 4 different identifiers on one uniform to say who they are. This is nothing wrong with the army having these things, because it is part of a long tradition. There is also nothing wrong with a the Air Force having a little blue. Surely the millions saved by the adoption of the cadpat uniform by the Air Force, instead of developing their own operational clothing, more than balances off the cost of the blue thread.



Your example would be the equivalent of airmen and airwomen at different units having separate squadron flashes and crests......oh wait, we have that already, in both full colour and low-vis variants. You've countered your own point.

The blue CADPAT slips ons were an ill-conceived way to appease perceived lack of identity of air-force personnel.  It smacks of identity and environmental insecurity.  Apparently the eagle/albatross/a$$hat-bird/whatever on the name tape (when it could actually be seen in OD green) wasn't enough.

Air Force vision: "To be the premier CF organization that ensures fashion is appeased before function."

I remain entirely unimpressed...  :-X ...thankfully I don't have to worry about blue headgear for a while...

Duey


----------



## air-ops (6 Aug 2006)

Ahhh, Poker. I love it! I'll see your squadron badges, and raise you brigade patches and command pocket badges, plus metal collar rank. When counting the number of service identifiers, etc. the Army wins every time.

See, this is getting very silly. 

Bottom Line - The Air Force adopted the Army cadpat uniform, saving taxpayers the countless millions of dollars that could have been expended in the development, production costs, prototypes and field testing of an Air Force specific equivalent order of dress. The trade off was a desire by 1 Canadian Air Group to have Air Force personnel identifyable as Air Force, not an overly unreasonable request. This was addressed by simply using blue thread instead of green on the slip-ons, achieved through the simple task of changing the spool of thread on the embroidery machine. The Air Force slip-on rank design is identical to that of the Army, so new patterns are not required. You seem very upset about this comparatively small expenditure.

The primary functions of badges and insignia in the military include identification of branch of service, unit affiliation within that branch, rank and trade or skill. Therefore I do not agree with your statement - the Air Force vision: "To be the premier CF organization that ensures fashion is appeased before function." The Air Force is trying to ensure that the badges used on the cadpat fulfil two functions - identification of branch of service and rank.

Its unfortunate that you are taking this so personally. I don't know what the Air Force did to you in the past, but it must have been very traumatic. By the way, it is an eagle and it has been since WWI.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Aug 2006)

So wouldn't the eagle on the name tag plus whatever wing on the slip on be an identifier enough?  Once again the Navy is happy with the anchor and unit (whatever the navy term is) on the slip on when wearing CADPAT, why does the Airforce need blue t shirts and blue thread?


----------



## Zoomie (6 Aug 2006)

air-ops said:
			
		

> The trade off was a desire by 1 Canadian Air Group to have Air Force personnel identifyable as Air Force, not an overly unreasonable request.



You sound like someone in "the know" - maybe you could clarify a muddy issue for us aircrew types.  

You insist that we wear blue t-shirts (which 19 Wing thankfully has issued us 5 - out of the Wing's budget, mind you) yet do not issue us long-sleeve blue shirts in order to appease the ALSE gods.

Point of note - I will not be getting my flight suit adjusted for the new blue on OD slip-ons.  I will stick with my OD ones, the flight suit indicates that I am AF, enough said.

Duey is not bitter - he is a pragmatic soldier who calls a spade a spade.  The CWO in Ottawa that dreamed up all this blue thread drivel is someone that is despised throughout the AF.


----------



## air-ops (6 Aug 2006)

I can't answer the T-shirt question. Maybe the CFAOs have something. These mix-ups are part of the evolution of a new uniform type and ususlly sort themselves out over time.

QUOTE - Point of note - I will not be getting my flight suit adjusted for the new blue on OD slip-ons.  I will stick with my OD ones, the flight suit indicates that I am AF, enough said.

In reference to this, there really isn't a choice. This is the military. The OD slip-ons are obsolete, designed and produced for a long gone clothing type. The new OD with blue slip-ons are simply the approved rank badge and therefore must be worn on the flight suit for which they were developed. For the same reason, the Airforce does not wear green berets with their blue DEU, or blue wedge caps with cadpat. These clothing items were not designed and approved for this use. That's not to say that you can't wear the OD slip-ons, because the DHH cannot be everywhere watching every shoulder and sleeve. It just isn't accoring to regs.

QUOTE - Duey is not bitter - he is a pragmatic soldier who calls a spade a spade.  The CWO in Ottawa that dreamed up all this blue thread drivel is someone that is despised throughout the AF.  

I must confess that I was having some fun at Duey's expense. I find it amusing that someone from the the most badged up branch of the service has a problem with blue thread on cadpat slip-ons. Sure, this birth of the idea was a result of a CWO and some thread smaples from his wife's sewing kit, but the slip-ons were put through the system, evaluated and approved by the DND clothing committee (an all service committee). 

Just before something hits the fan, I should qualify my reference to the Army as the "most badged up branch of the service". This is a statement of fact, but not a critisism. The badges and insignia worn by the Army are based on long-standing traditions, and I respect their meaning and purpose. The comment was made simply to provide some perspective. Personally, I believe that the eagle on the name tag, in green, would have been sufficient as a service identifier. The Air Force and DND Clothing Committee thought differently. They want blue and that's what is being implemented. The point is, this is a small issue and not the crippling expense suggested in some of the posts above.

The Air Force motto "Per Ardua Ad Astra" is still as relevant today as it was when we adopted it in 1924.


----------



## eliminator (6 Aug 2006)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> Point of note - I will not be getting my flight suit adjusted for the new blue on OD slip-ons.  I will stick with my OD ones, the flight suit indicates that I am AF, enough said.



I heard that the old OD slipons were not flame retardant. So, I guess if you crash and burn your slipons will be ablaze.


----------



## aesop081 (6 Aug 2006)

air-ops said:
			
		

> For the same reason, the Airforce does not wear green berets with their blue DEU, *or blue wedge caps with ca*dpat.



I beg your pardon !!

You have not been on an air force base lately have you ?  Take a walk around several different wings and count how many people wear wedges with CADPAT ( i think it looks stupid BTW). As far as the slip-ons on my flightsuit, well, if they want me to go to blue ones, they'll have to wai until they promote me again because i'm not going through that whole mess just to change from ODs........damned tailor shop !!


----------



## air-ops (6 Aug 2006)

QUOTE - You have not been on an air force base lately have you ?  Take a walk around several different wings and count how many people wear wedges with CADPAT ( i think it looks stupid BTW). As far as the slip-ons on my flightsuit, well, if they want me to go to blue ones, they'll have to wait until they promote me again because I'm not going through that whole mess just to change from ODs........damned tailor shop !!

Like I said above, DHH cannot be everywhere so odd things do happen. The Air Force introduced the blue beret for these orders of dress, but unless someone is watching and giving specific direction to everyone, people make up their own minds. I certainly don't credit Air Force personnel with having any more intelligence or good judgement than the Army or Navy.

I understand the frustrations that you are speaking about regarding re-badging, tailor shops, etc. Until the promotion comes through, don't smoke to close to your slip-ons.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Aug 2006)

air-ops there is a quote function which might make things easier.



			
				air-ops said:
			
		

> Like I said above, DHH cannot be everywhere so odd things do happen. The Air Force introduced the blue beret for these orders of dress, but unless someone is watching and giving specific direction to everyone, people make up their own minds. I certainly don't credit Air Force personnel with having any more intelligence or good judgement than the Army or Navy.
> 
> I understand the frustrations that you are speaking about regarding re-badging, tailor shops, etc. Until the promotion comes through, don't smoke to close to your slip-ons.


----------



## navymich (6 Aug 2006)

aesop081 said:
			
		

> You have not been on an air force base lately have you ?  Take a walk around several different wings and count how many people wear wedges with CADPAT ( i think it looks stupid BTW).


Or a Navy Base either.  I see at least a couple people a week wearing their wedges with CADPAT, and I agree with you aesop, it looks stupid.  


Is there actually a directive out stating that "thou shall not wear wedges with CADPAT"?


			
				air-ops said:
			
		

> ...introduced the blue beret for these orders of dress, but unless someone is watching and giving specific direction to everyone, people make up their own minds. ...


If there isn't, then you can't enforce anything, and yes, people will make up their own minds, because they would have the choice to.


----------



## Zoomie (6 Aug 2006)

air-ops said:
			
		

> I must confess that I was having some fun at Duey's expense. I find it amusing that someone from the the most badged up branch of the service has a problem with blue thread on cadpat slip-ons.



The amusing point here is that Duey is a hard air MOC.

I agree Pat,  Elaine the Tailor won't be getting her hands on my flight suits any time soon.

Wedge with CADPAT is a sin...


----------



## air-ops (6 Aug 2006)

Sorry Duey! I painted you green by mistake.


----------



## rifleman (6 Aug 2006)

navymich said:
			
		

> Or a Navy Base either.  I see at least a couple people a week wearing their wedges with CADPAT, and I agree with you aesop, it looks stupid.
> 
> 
> Is there actually a directive out stating that "thou shall not wear wedges with CADPAT"?
> If there isn't, then you can't enforce anything, and yes, people will make up their own minds, because they would have the choice to.


The dress manual is wriiten in the way, that if you do not see that it is allowed, it isn't,
i.e. Unless wedge is listed as Cbt dress, it isn't


----------



## geo (6 Aug 2006)

rifleman said:
			
		

> The dress manual is wriiten in the way, that if you do not see that it is allowed, it isn't,
> i.e. Unless wedge is listed as Cbt dress, it isn't


(hehe.... it has started a couple of fights though )


----------



## Inch (6 Aug 2006)

air-ops said:
			
		

> I understand the frustrations that you are speaking about regarding re-badging, tailor shops, etc. Until the promotion comes through, don't smoke to close to your slip-ons.



I, for one, do not buy into all this flame retardant tripe. On one hand I have to wear long underwear and flame retardant velcro/slip ons on my flight suit, on the other hand I wear a goretex immersion suit complete with latex (or rubber) wrist and neck seals which sure as shit are not flame retardant. The suit itself may be, but I'll guarantee the wrist and neck seals are not. Not to mention the issued liner is nylon and they're all dated 1970 something. I'll take my chances with flammable slip ons, they're the least of my concerns the 2 months of the year that I'm not wearing an immersion suit while flying.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Aug 2006)

Inch said:
			
		

> I, for one, do not buy into all this flame retardant tripe. On one hand I have to wear long underwear and flame retardant velcro/slip ons on my flight suit, on the other hand I wear a goretex immersion suit complete with latex (or rubber) wrist and neck seals which sure as crap are not flame retardant. The suit itself may be, but I'll guarantee the wrist and neck seals are not. Not to mention the issued liner is nylon and they're all dated 1970 something. I'll take my chances with flammable slip ons, they're the least of my concerns the 2 months of the year that I'm not wearing an immersion suit while flying.



+1

Air-ops, no harm, no foul.  I'm just pissed off that some folks up the chain, whoses actions appear to put into question how they spend the Queen's shilling, fart about with a multitude of chromatic-based esprit-de-corps enhancers when there are other more pressing matters, like...oh, I don't know...how about "Get your sh1t together on putting CP140 into theatre before 999 sh1t-cans the entire fleet for lack of relevancy...especially when the MP world got a $75M gift from A2517, the CFUTTH project, to buy MX-20s with what was going to be CH146 ERSTA money.  I digress, but not before pointing out how much I personally detest the d1cking about that goes on with small sh1t!  :rage:

p.s.  Folks truly in the know will remember the incident in theatre where McCallum asked a soldier in CADPAT(TW) what the "little bird" on his name tape meant.  The reply was, "It means I'm in the Air Force, sir."  To which the then Minister horrified one of the AF doggy-rubbers patting along behind the MND when he replied, "Oh, I didn't know we had Air Force personnel on an Army operation?"  Well, frick!  Rumour has it the CWO AF person was on the INMARSAT to the Air Staff faster than you can say, "Airforce is insecure!"  :  The rest is, as they say, history.  If only we had spent as much time educating the children about Canada's great victory over the fjords beaches of Norway...aye carumba!

Hmmmm...let's see, do I now have to wear CADPAT slip-ons with tan stitching?

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Aug 2006)

Duey when are you going to start running things?


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Aug 2006)

Quagmire said:
			
		

> Duey when are you going to start running things?



Quag...must build trust slowly then...aw heck, I'm screwed.  ;D  

There are enough "true-light-blue" folks that don't think I'm as big on the AF as I should be...I'm pooched.  Let's just say being CAS isn't in my future any time soon.  On the flip-side (meaning not the AF) 999 seems to like (tolerate?) me.  Last time I had the opp to talk with him in AFG, he even promised to sign my 12 month ops waiver to go back to the 'box if the Air Force's ba$tard children (Tac Hel) were eventually sent in -- or maybe that was just to get me out of the country again to provide some relief to the Air Force in general? Hmmm... :-\  

At this point I can only do my job and facilitate "stuff" from within the unit.  Huah.

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## air-ops (7 Aug 2006)

Duey said:
			
		

> Air-ops, no harm, no foul.  I'm just pissed off that some folks up the chain, whose actions appear to put into question how they spend the Queen's shilling, fart about with a multitude of chromatic-based esprit-de-corps enhancers when there are other more pressing matters, like...oh, I don't know...how about "Get your sh1t together on putting CP140 into theatre before 999 sh1t-cans the entire fleet for lack of relevancy...especially when the MP world got a $75M gift from A2517, the CFUTTH project, to buy MX-20s with what was going to be CH146 ERSTA money.  I digress, but not before pointing out how much I personally detest the d1cking about that goes on with small sh1t!  :rage:
> 
> Cheers,
> Duey



Hi Duey

I enjoyed our sparring earlier over slip-ons and thread colour, but there is no disputing what you said above. This is a small, small thing compared to the operational requirement challenges facing the CF today (and for the past 20+ years). We live in a world of big promises but small, if any, deliveries. I guess it is easier and safer for the brass to push for little things, especially since they can do that from their desk. Although I still have no issue with the blue on the cadpat slip-ons, I do share your disgust that this is the issue that the CAS took on as a priority and is championing personally.

Lets hope that some of the billions promised by Harper actually become tangable equipment in the field.

Cheers


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Aug 2006)

air-ops said:
			
		

> ...Lets hope that some of the billions promised by Harper actually become tangable equipment in the field.
> 
> Cheers



+1


----------



## Loachman (7 Aug 2006)

My annoyance - and promotability - is similar to Duey's.

I've spent 24 years in Tac Hel and seen one asinine dress disaster after another - in particular, but not limited to, blue flying clothing with labels that said "Coveralls Flyers Combat" on the user label. We fought for decades for our two-piece green flying suits and were told time-after-time that our community was too small to warrant suitable clothing.

The a** f**ce has no concept of Tac Hel and its requirements. I would even say that it's stifled our growth as a community. Our operational capability has languished as a result of our political afiliation. It is a sign of our institutional immaturity that we have to have Army "mission specialists" posted in as we do not properly train all of our personnel in the necessary functions. An Army Aviation Corps would see soldiers first and pilots/FEs/techs second rather than the sorry reverse that we see today. Officers would progress through relevant Army staff courses rather than a** f**ce ones completely irrelevant to Tac Hel and our customers. People would actually understand our primary customers as they would be part of the overall organization and not a part-time add-on that cannot be relied upon.

As for overbadging, how many badges do you see on Army CADPAT? Name, Rank, and unit flash and that's it. Olive green embroidery and T-shirts are not signs of being Army. OG is a low-visibility colour chosen so that these items do not stand out from distances longer than necessary. This is operational dress and not a parade uniform. There's a coloured hat with a badge on it for garrison wear and that's enough.

Personally, I would not care what outlandish nonsense the a** f**ce adopted if Tac Hel were to revert back to the Army where it originated and where it rightfully belonged.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (7 Aug 2006)

Duey said:
			
		

> +1


+another one


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Aug 2006)

air-ops said:
			
		

> ...Like I said above, DHH cannot be everywhere so odd things do happen. *The Air Force introduced the blue beret for these orders of dress*, but unless someone is watching and giving specific direction to everyone, people make up their own minds. I certainly don't credit Air Force personnel with having any more intelligence or good judgement than the Army or Navy.



Actually, this isn't exactly accurate.  A blue beret simply followed the existing green beret once the CF's were retired and DEUs were introduced.  Prior to what, 88-ish/89-ish?, 10 TAGers all wore green beret (w/Air Ops hat badge) with our tan or dark green flight suits.  Come the DEUs, the blue beret was introduced to replace the green beret, much as our green CF forage cap was replaced with a blue, AF-specific forage cap.  In the early DEU days, you would usually only see the Air Force's ba$tard children from 10 TAG actually having the temerity to wear the beret (either with flying gear or S4Bs, or whatever the heck it is we call the SS shirt order of dress now ???)  Everybody else seemed so proud to strut around with a nice blue wedgie on.  As time passed, more and more folks started wearing the beret...perhaps to soak up some of the keeness (well, relative inside the AF anyways) clearly evident from the manner in which Tactical Aviators carried themselves.  The only thing the AF "fashionistas" never allowed was the wearing of the beret with #1's.  I have no idea whay, as apparently it seems to work for the Army...oh, that's right...did I mention the Air Force is insecure in its own image?  :

Fortunately, there are those lucky enough to be given a reprieve from all the AF siliness for a while...ahhhhh, upcoming parade...hmmmm, what to wear with my #1's?  Oh, I know...ah yes, my beret!  Ché Guevara would be proud...he he he.

Loachman, prepare to help me repel boarders to the good ship "AF, Thine Name is Insecurity"   ;D

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## Loachman (8 Aug 2006)

Duey said:
			
		

> Loachman, prepare to help me repel boarders to the good ship "AF, Thine Name is Insecurity"


Join me anytime at PHQ (Forward) CAAC - Provisional HQ, Canadian Army Aviation Corps. No insecurities here.


----------



## air-ops (8 Aug 2006)

I know this is off the topic of cadpat name tags and rank, but it does stem from the discussions above. I checked out CFP 265, CF Dress Regs. to see what they had to say about headgear for the Air Force. It seems that berets are OK for Service Dress and flying clothing, which is fine, but it also seems that the Wedge Cap may be approved for wear with the cadpat?!? although the regs. don't mention cadpat by name.  Excerpts:

The 2005 CF regs, the latest avaliable edition, does not refer to cadpat, but it does refer to Field Combat Clothing. It states that the following non-operational headdress may be worn if the situation permits, and are the norm for the unit outside of field operations: Beret, *Wedge Cap*, Turban, Balmoral, Glengarry

The following non-operational headdress may be worn with flying clothing: Wedge Cap, *Beret*, Turban, Balmoral, Glengarry, Caubeen, Khaki Tam-o-shanter and Tuque

For Air Force No. 3 Service Dress (it refers to 3E as an exception): Cap/Hat Service, or *Beret*, or Wedge, or Tuque, or Turban

Cheers


----------



## rifleman (8 Aug 2006)

The guide I use is when medals are on, so is the wedge.


----------



## GK .Dundas (9 Aug 2006)

Many years ago after a conversation with a very very senior AF type . I came awayutterly convinced that  the raison de' atre for the airforce was flight pay. No more no less .This thread only reinforces that view.
 I can only hope that one day very soon that changes Maybe membership in Army.ca should be a job requirement  for AF Chief of Staff or perhaps the ruxted group should be allowed to vet the choices?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (9 Aug 2006)

could you elaborate


----------



## aesop081 (9 Aug 2006)

GK .Dundas said:
			
		

> . I came awayutterly convinced that  the raison de' atre for the airforce was flight pay. No more no less .



Yes, that must be it.  I go to work every day to fly a 26 year old airplane for 10-12 hours just for my $274 a month in flight pay  :


----------



## Journeyman (9 Aug 2006)

air-ops said:
			
		

> ...the following non-operational headdress may be worn...Beret, Wedge Cap, Turban, Balmoral, Glengarry


Well, I don't know Loachman yet, but I'd love to see Duey in a Balmoral..and flight suit...with or without kilt   ;D 

(clearly I have nothing of value to contribute to this otherwise valuable thread   : )


----------



## Loachman (9 Aug 2006)

My preferred hat to date has been the plain old green beret that I started with. I've no interest in wearing those other funny hats, or kilts. All power to those that do wear them, but they're not for me.


----------



## air-ops (9 Aug 2006)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Well, I don't know Loachman yet, but I'd love to see Duey in a Balmoral..and flight suit...with or without kilt   ;D



When I dug out the dress regs I was surprised to see the variety of headgear approved for wear with the flight suit. It was puzzling, but now it makes sense. That's why Tac Hel wanted a 2 piece flight suit - so they could wear their kilt and balmoral on the flight line. A bit breezy, but those Tac Hel guys are tough. 

I wonder if the people who write the dress regs ever served anywhere except in their office - that's assuming that they are in the CF in the first place.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (9 Aug 2006)

I can echo that many of the tac-hel concerns about kit exist in the MH world, too.  It took over ten years of deploying to the Gulf, flying in 40-50C temperatures, to convince anyone in authority in the Air Force that wearing a blue WOOL flight suit was maybe not appropriate.

It seems that, until some item of flying kit becomes a problem to a fighter pilot, it is just not an Air Force priority.  And I have about given up on writing UCRs.  I'm tired of people who do not have one operational flight hour in my helicopter (or any helicopter) refusing to staff my UCRs.

The system is pretty broken, IMHO.


----------



## GK .Dundas (9 Aug 2006)

aesop081 said:
			
		

> Yes, that must be it.  I go to work every day to fly a 26 year old airplane for 10-12 hours just for my $274 a month in flight pay  :


Do'nt shoot the messenger  The coversation took place in the early nineties.The guy in question without a doubt at least in my mind was an utter idiot.
 He spent most of the conversation slagging  Navair any form of support for the army etc. quoted the Red Baron once or twice.
I had just spent the last six months it seemed running to every moron in a Airforce uniform for some strange reason.I was at the time really starting to wonder about CF recruiting standards 
 In recent years I seem to be running into cream of the crop so to speak.The guy in question


----------



## GK .Dundas (10 Aug 2006)

I don't know what happened to my posting(s)?? After that conversation and my other run ins during that previously mentioned 6 month period. I felt very saddened by what appeared to a be a service that had lost it's way . It had become more concerned with externals then with doing the Job.
And while there may those still who are more concerned about the  colour of your t-shirt. I feel better knowing that there are people like all you who post here who have never forgotten that it's the defence of the country that matters.
 I feel very privileged to be allowed to post here and at times a little humbled. Take bow Duey, aesop, loachman etc. you guys have earned it! 
                       respectfully 
                             Gordon Dundas


----------



## bison33 (4 Oct 2006)

Mods...chose this board as it's more AF related than army but feel free to move it to the appropiate board, like you need my ok 

Well....we got the new AF rank slip-ons....bloody horrible IMO but  now we won't hear the complaining about not getting saluted from 50ft away. Let the snickering begin....at least until these things fade with a million washings


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Oct 2006)

_*sigh*_

...unecessary...

I'll be waiting for the CANAIRGEN and amendment to the CFP-265 before I put that clap-trap up.


G2G


----------



## big bad john (4 Oct 2006)

OOOOOOOHHHHHHHH  Pretty!


----------



## bison33 (4 Oct 2006)

Hold out!!!.......here in tachell, 408 anyways, we(aircrew for now, rest to follow shortly) have to have them up by friday. They'll look really nice once we get the cadpat flying clothing.......god, what a waste of money.


----------



## 17thRecceSgt (4 Oct 2006)

How un-switched on looking.

Don't suppose the option to wear a normal CADPAT one will happen.

sigh

Why why why can't there just be one simple friggin standard?

 :


----------



## Sig_Des (4 Oct 2006)

I saw an officer wearing one on his CadPats today. Was wondering to myself what the hell he was doing wearing an OD slip-on. Thought maybe he'd put on the one for an OD jacket or something...now I'll just laugh at people...Inside, though


----------



## aesop081 (4 Oct 2006)

Next they will say that we are going back to coloured badges on the flightsuit !!

What a freakin waste.


----------



## mover1 (5 Oct 2006)

Simple fix would have been to use a lighter blue intermixed with the darker suff.


----------



## Loachman (5 Oct 2006)

But a LOGICAL fix would have been to go back to the original green embroidery on CADPAT.

The a** f**ce needs therapy.

We only just got CADPAT and blue unit titles for the CADPAT slip-ons, so they're already out-of-date. One wonders what that's cost the taxpayer.

I think that my blood pressure's up a bit...


----------



## DG-41 (5 Oct 2006)

I'm not a big fan of the blue stitching, but the solid OD backing makes a lot of sense. The legibility of the CADPAT name tags and slipons is effectively zero, no matter what colour the stichng is.

DG


----------



## navymich (6 Oct 2006)

Is it just the slip-on that has been changed to OD?  Or will the nametags be switching too?


----------



## aesop081 (6 Oct 2006)

navymich said:
			
		

> Is it just the slip-on that has been changed to OD?  Or will the nametags be switching too?



new name tags are on their way...SCWO announced it yesterday. We should have them within a month.


----------



## rifleman (6 Oct 2006)

Mud Recce Man said:
			
		

> How un-switched on looking.
> 
> Don't suppose the option to wear a normal CADPAT one will happen.
> 
> ...



There is a standard, army wear green, air force wear blue. The air force is just addressing the inability to see the rank. Perhaps they should have just stayed with the OD from the beginning - but then we'd be complaining that it didn't match the CADPAT..... ;D


----------



## bison33 (6 Oct 2006)

geez.....wondering now if the fishies will want these with black stitching .......and I heard at work that the army types will go to something similar....makes sense, we apparently have lots of money to waste on trivial things ;D


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (6 Oct 2006)

bison33 said:
			
		

> geez.....wondering now if the fishies will want these with black stitching .......and I heard at work that the army types will go to something similar....makes sense, we apparently have lots of money to waste on trivial things ;D



We "fishies" wish to be left alone. When we are posted to Army or Air Force Bases we'll wear the green stuff but at sea we'll be keeping our NCDs...at least that's the plan so far.


----------



## bison33 (6 Oct 2006)

I know you keep the NCD's while in the fishpond, heck, I even loved them. Wore them when I was AirDet...way more comfy than the old blue workdress or cadpat....but if I was some an*l chief with too much time on my hands....I'd probably suggest that the navy have a similar slip-on (OD with black stitching) for the cadpat.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (7 Oct 2006)

bison33 said:
			
		

> I know you keep the NCD's while in the fishpond, heck, I even loved them. Wore them when I was AirDet...way more comfy than the old blue workdress or cadpat....but if I was some an*l chief with too much time on my hands....I'd probably suggest that the navy have a similar slip-on (OD with black stitching) for the cadpat.



They are comfy and of course way easier when you go to the heads than having to take the combat shirt off.
A lot of guys would like to see us go to coveralls, like the submariners. I'm not sure the women would find those as comfy especially when they have to go to the heads. A few years ago we had trouble with the seems...lowest bidder...they fell apart the first time you wore em...lol...you had to get them re-sewn..I think the bosun's used to do that. ;D


----------



## Revan (6 Dec 2015)

I did some searching on the site and found reference to an old canforgen about the air force slip ons and name tag from 2004. Was hoping someone could clear something up for me since I have to order some name tags from cpgear (was told they take 10 months if i ask for them here while training).  The eagle for air force comes after the name on the name tag correct?


----------



## Jorkapp (6 Dec 2015)

Correct


----------



## Revan (6 Dec 2015)

Thank you very much.


----------

