Ballcaps restricted: Tell us what you think

[CommunityEditor]

Command ball caps are dying a slow death. They’re not authorized to be worn with the new Navy Working Uniform, which began rolling out to the fleet last month in Norfolk, Va.

Now, as utilities and wash khakis are phased out in favor of digital cammies, these caps — emblazoned with a unit’s name and crest — will be seen less and less on the waterfront.

We’d like to hear what active-duty sailors think about losing this symbol of command identity and being allowed to wear their ball caps with coveralls only.

We’d also like to hear from commands who might be thinking about allowing sailors to wear the ball caps with the NWU onboard ship or while underway.


Article: http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/02/navy_ballcaps_021009w/

[KentheShark]

Commands have a vehicle of showing their unit identity with their command patch on the NWU. Not all commands will do that but those that do, their sailors can wear their command crest visibly and proudly.

[smarg]

The ball caps have always looked stupid and unprofessional. This is a wise move.

[tmurphy]

It's a good thing that the Navy is finally fading out the command ball cap. I don't need to be an advertising billboard for whatever command I am assigned with. Think about how much money the Navy spends on individual command ball caps. For example, a CVN with Ships Company, 2500 sailors times $8.00, that is $20,000.00. That money could be used to improve quality of life issues. My example only considered just one carrier without the air wing. Now factor in all the different shore commands, aviation squadrons, surface and sub commands. Then add up how many sailors are checking in every month to new commands that need a new command cover. It is a tremendous waste of money; keep command pride in our spirits NOT on our covers!

[KentheShark]

Very well said SK2.

[PAMICH]

I don't see a good enough reason to wear the Ball cap with the NWU and would highly clash with the SU. You still need a cover for the coveralls. The example of the money savings would be awesome. But would the saved money go to QOL programs or to spare parts that will not get installed?

[GUNMATE1]

I don't see a good enough reason to wear the Ball cap with the NWU and would highly clash with the SU. You still need a cover for the coveralls. The example of the money savings would be awesome. But would the saved money go to QOL programs or to spare parts that will not get installed?

If you look at the Marines that wear coveralls, They wear their Marpat cover. So why can't we do that with our coveralls? Figure its cheaper in the long run as well.

[PAMICH]

Aboard ship, ball cap covers get mighty dirty. We would need to police the wear off ship of the 8 point covers if the Sailor leaves in NWU. Thanks for the lesson. I never knew the Marines called their covers MARPAT.

[jeffersj]

It's a good thing that the Navy is finally fading out the command ball cap. I don't need to be an advertising billboard for whatever command I am assigned with. Think about how much money the Navy spends on individual command ball caps. For example, a CVN with Ships Company, 2500 sailors times $8.00, that is $20,000.00. That money could be used to improve quality of life issues. My example only considered just one carrier without the air wing. Now factor in all the different shore commands, aviation squadrons, surface and sub commands. Then add up how many sailors are checking in every month to new commands that need a new command cover. It is a tremendous waste of money; keep command pride in our spirits NOT on our covers!

Not looking at provoking a debate here, looking for a point of clarification.

When did the commands begin funding command ball caps and issuing them to the Sailors?

Back in the day when I was on sea duty, the Sailor either wore the grey ball cap (old utilitiy uniform), the white hat (dungarees) or shelled out the money from their personal funds to buy a command ball cap. Profits from the sale went to MWR programs. Command ball caps were authorized for wear with civilian attire so long as they were not marked with specific billet titles (OPS, CHENG, Deck LCPO, etc.).

Now, if the command wants to use their discretionary funds to provide you a command ball cap that's their business.

[MexDoc]

I agree it is a great Idea to get rid of the ballcap. A lot of sailors are going to have to get used to not putting the new cover in their lower back between their shirt and pants though. Saw a few sailors get chewed out by the Army for doing it in ACU's. For HM's it is one of the first things they teach us to quit in FMSS or we suffer the wrath later on. :)

[GUNMATE1]

Not looking at provoking a debate here, looking for a point of clarification.

When did the commands begin funding command ball caps and issuing them to the Sailors?

Back in the day when I was on sea duty, the Sailor either wore the grey ball cap (old utilitiy uniform), the white hat (dungarees) or shelled out the money from their personal funds to buy a command ball cap. Profits from the sale went to MWR programs. Command ball caps were authorized for wear with civilian attire so long as they were not marked with specific billet titles (OPS, CHENG, Deck LCPO, etc.).

Now, if the command wants to use their discretionary funds to provide you a command ball cap that's their business.


I am not sure when you came in the navy but i have been in since 1996 and when you checked into the command the CMC gave you your first ball cap. Anything after that you had to buy at the ships store. Some commands made it easy, they had the name in all yellow and a picture of the ship, the ones you could buy at almost any exchange. Some like my first ship came out with unique designs so you could only buy them on the ship. Not sure what Grey cover you are talking about. My ship had specific colors for the CSTT (Orange), DCTT (Red), ECTT (Green) and we had a Grey one for something specific. I dont believe the commands are using to much of discretionary funds to purchase hats. But this will be easier in the long run. If you use your 8-point coveralls underway IE: Carrier Hanger Bay. At least when i was on the IKE we had to wear covers in the hanger bay, you should be able to use your 8-point. The ball caps showed a uniqueness but that is being replaced with the NWU command patches. The patches should be cheaper in the long run than covers. Also will take up alot less room than a cover in the ships stores or the spaces where those supplies are kept.

[forcedj]

I was never stationed at a command where a “command” ball cap was mandatory. Nor have I ever known of a command requiring sailors to possess a “command” ball cap. Nevertheless, you have always been required to possess “a” ball cap equivalent to what was issued in boot camp (when they were a seabag item). Those were either a plain blue/black hat with nothing embroidered on it, or later the same hat with “NAVY” embroidered on it in yellow/gold letters. At commands that provided their own unique “command” ball cap, they were permitted and accepted as a substitute. As far as I know, commands did not pay for them with OPTAR funds. They were paid for with funds either MWR funds, or funds generated from a geedunk slush fund. Like GUNMATE indicated, many times the CMC or CCC would give you one when you checked in. Otherwise the sailor would have to purchase them with their own money if they wanted one.

Dan

[jeffersj]

I am not sure when you came in the navy but i have been in since 1996 and when you checked into the command the CMC gave you your first ball cap. Anything after that you had to buy at the ships store. Some commands made it easy, they had the name in all yellow and a picture of the ship, the ones you could buy at almost any exchange. Some like my first ship came out with unique designs so you could only buy them on the ship. Not sure what Grey cover you are talking about. My ship had specific colors for the CSTT (Orange), DCTT (Red), ECTT (Green) and we had a Grey one for something specific. I dont believe the commands are using to much of discretionary funds to purchase hats. But this will be easier in the long run. If you use your 8-point coveralls underway IE: Carrier Hanger Bay. At least when i was on the IKE we had to wear covers in the hanger bay, you should be able to use your 8-point. The ball caps showed a uniqueness but that is being replaced with the NWU command patches. The patches should be cheaper in the long run than covers. Also will take up alot less room than a cover in the ships stores or the spaces where those supplies are kept.


I came in in 1978.

At that time E-6 and below wore utilities that are significantly different from the current style. The cover was a plain dark grey baseball-style cap. While the appearance left something to be desired, it was a lot more comfortable than some of what came along later.

When the Navy shifted to dungarees, the white hat was the required cover, and command ball caps were (at least in the area I was stationed) not allowed to be worn off the pier.

Command ball caps were optional - if you wanted one you shelled out your own money to get it. Only folks that got issued caps were in specific roles that required you to be able to identify who/what they were, and that was embroidered on the cover.

[tmurphy]

Not looking at provoking a debate here, looking for a point of clarification.

When did the commands begin funding command ball caps and issuing them to the Sailors?

Back in the day when I was on sea duty, the Sailor either wore the grey ball cap (old utilitiy uniform), the white hat (dungarees) or shelled out the money from their personal funds to buy a command ball cap. Profits from the sale went to MWR programs. Command ball caps were authorized for wear with civilian attire so long as they were not marked with specific billet titles (OPS, CHENG, Deck LCPO, etc.).

Now, if the command wants to use their discretionary funds to provide you a command ball cap that's their business.
Good question, any SK that has been the primary credit card holder can tell you. From my past commands they were purchased on a government credit card with a memo signed by the CO.
Oh ya GUNMATE1; I totally forgot about the money that is also wasted on the red DCTT hats and all the other training teams we ordered also. Think about the money dollar amount?

[SailorAide]

Good question, any SK that has been the primary credit card holder can tell you. From my past commands they were purchased on a government credit card with a memo signed by the CO.
Oh ya GUNMATE1; I totally forgot about the money that is also wasted on the red DCTT hats and all the other training teams we ordered also. Think about the money dollar amount?

Any Command that is using their funds correctly will buy some Command ballcaps with ship's funds to be issued upon check-in, one per Sailor. After that they can be purchased from the Ship's Store, it's no different than the ship providing bars of soap or belt buckles, the money just cycles itself through.

As for training team caps being "wasteful," I disagree completely. The cap is what indicates to you that someone is a trainer and during drills is extremely important so that confusion is avoided. When everyone is wearing the same uniform (coveralls), this distinguishing factor is perfect.

[Yggdrasil]

As for training team caps being "wasteful," I disagree completely. The cap is what indicates to you that someone is a trainer and during drills is extremely important so that confusion is avoided. When everyone is wearing the same uniform (coveralls), this distinguishing factor is perfect.

But then there's still other non-training team caps as well. For example, the red "Fire Dept" caps for R-Division personnel. That hat isn't going to do any good for DCFN Kochenbalz when he's in an FFE like everyone else in his paygrade.

[SailorAide]

That agrument holds some weight, Yggdrasil. I have no problem with them setting themselves apart by wearing those because in my experience that is your At-Sea FIre Party, an extremely important job. But it shouldn't be Command paid for.

[Dad'sMyFavCheif]

Personally, I can't wait to wear the new cap with my uniforms; I find the ball caps to be too much of a hassle to try and wear with my bun. The cap sits in just the "right" spot, where I have to wear the loop over my bun, which then gets me yelled at for my hair being dis-orderly.

Also, has anyone noticed how much vision is impaired by the bill. I am of short stature and have a hard time seeing the ranks of taller officials, especially if I am carrying something.

[Sabrina76]

I have never had to worry about the ball cap getting in the way with having my hair in a bun. I wear my bun down as low as I can and the 8 point cover doesn't really sit right. And, yes my bun is done properly.

As far as getting rid of the ball cap. I guess I'm one of the few that would rather not get rid of it. But that's just me. I'm also looking at the point of the number of covers we have to worry about. Combinations/white hat for Dress Whites and Blues, Garrison for SU, 8 point with NWU, and ball cap with Coveralls. I thought the point of all of this new uniform stuff was to get rid of the tons of uniforms that we have. I was happy to throw out my garrison covers back in '96. I guess I should have kept them.

[dhc]

The ballcaps are the most useful common sense headgear item the navy has. Garrison cover doesn't like the wind at all, provides no protection from the sun or rain. Enlisted white hats look like they're suppose to be collecting water on top of your head in case of any unforeseen emergencies out in the rain. Combo covers, forget them. I'd pick a comfy baseball-style ballcap over an 8-point cover anyday.
Let's face it, there will be a lot of sloppy looking sailors if we have everyone wearing 8 points. Everyone know how to put a ballcap on their head.

[jeffersj]

The ballcaps are the most useful common sense headgear item the navy has. Garrison cover doesn't like the wind at all, provides no protection from the sun or rain. Enlisted white hats look like they're suppose to be collecting water on top of your head in case of any unforeseen emergencies out in the rain. Combo covers, forget them. I'd pick a comfy baseball-style ballcap over an 8-point cover anyday.
Let's face it, there will be a lot of sloppy looking sailors if we have everyone wearing 8 points. Everyone know how to put a ballcap on their head.

We all see different things.

My experience, if you can wear a ball cap properly, you can wear the 8-point cover properly. Have seen more sloppy sailors wearing ball caps than were wearing the 8-point cover.

As for protection issues, they are both not especially useful.

[dhc]

We all see different things.

My experience, if you can wear a ball cap properly, you can wear the 8-point cover properly. Have seen more sloppy sailors wearing ball caps than were wearing the 8-point cover.

As for protection issues, they are both not especially useful.

Yeah, I agree with you about there being more sloppy sailors in ball caps than 8 points. Now imagine all those same folks, who can't seem to get utilities (a shirt, a pair of pants, and a baseball cap) right, wearing 8 points and cammies. :eek:

What we also need is a no shine boot like the other guys.

Anyways, ballcaps need to stay.

[Yggdrasil]

Now imagine all those same folks, who can't seem to get utilities (a shirt, a pair of pants, and a baseball cap) right, wearing 8 points and cammies. :eek:

This makes no sense. You have it backwards. Keeping squared away utilities is many times more difficult than keeping squared away cammies.

[jeffersj]

This makes no sense. You have it backwards. Keeping squared away utilities is many times more difficult than keeping squared away cammies.

Only if assigned to a ship with limited availability of an iron and time to properly use it. Otherwise, no difference. Have worn the old utilities, dungarees, new utilities, and the current BDU's.

Hardest part to keep looking decent with the BDU's was with the old 8-point cover that did not have the stitching around the crown.

[MexDoc]

What is the big problem :confused: If Marines can go to the field in their uniform for weeks come back and still look sharp I do not understand why our leadership is so worried. They are worried because they are weak leaders..if you see something wrong and you are an E1 or above you can correct it. if you do not..your officers will...someone will! The Army has the new breathable combatshirts..I own one and forget what they are called but they are disiplined enough not to wear them where they are not allowed. Are they better then the Navy???NO WAY!!! ooh how wierd is this I just saw the first NWU here while I am writing this.. it does look like colonel guiles uniform haha! looks good though

[jeffersj]

What is the big problem :confused: If Marines can go to the field in their uniform for weeks come back and still look sharp I do not understand why our leadership is so worried. They are worried because they are weak leaders..if you see something wrong and you are an E1 or above you can correct it. if you do not..your officers will...someone will! The Army has the new breathable combatshirts..I own one and forget what they are called but they are disiplined enough not to wear them where they are not allowed. Are they better then the Navy???NO WAY!!! ooh how wierd is this I just saw the first NWU here while I am writing this.. it does look like colonel guiles uniform haha! looks good though

Perhaps the reason the Marines can go to the field and look sharp is because their leadership is also concerned about the issue and make the concerns known down to the lowest level.

[Yggdrasil]

Perhaps the reason the Marines can go to the field and look sharp is because their leadership is also concerned about the issue and make the concerns known down to the lowest level.

Or even more likely, the fact that cammies are not as high-maintenance as utilities.

[jeffersj]

Or even more likely, the fact that cammies are not as high-maintenance as utilities.

My experience, they both require an equal amount of maintenance. In fact, the cammies require more as you have to do a little extra to keep the cover looking decent, especially if, like me, you have the old style that doesn't have the stitching around the crown.

I have some experience in the matter, as I've worn the old 1970's utilities and dungarees onboard ship, new utilities, coveralls, Working Khaki's, and the woodland pattern BDU uniform on shore.

[Yggdrasil]

The NWU's are "wash & wear". You can buy cap block at the NEX for the 8-point cover.

Utilities? Iron, starch, press, military creases, etc, etc.

[jeffersj]

...
Utilities? Iron, starch, press, military creases, etc, etc.

You should still iron both. BDU's are flat pressed with no creases. In fact, I had to make it a point to tell the cleaners that as they had Army, Marines, etc., bring their stuff in for cleaning and pressing, and the cleaners automatically put creases in.

Military creases in utilties, etc. - been awhile, only had them in the set I kept for inspections. Rest were flat pressed with no creases, same as the BDU uniform.

Starch - not a bright move. Tends to close the pores in the clothing. Result is in warm conditions whatever garment you wear becomes even more uncomfortable, not to mention the result when someone looks at you with NVG's.

Cover block - you still have to fit it to the cover and then find a place to let it dry. Ball cap - they tend to keep their chape without too many issues.

[Yggdrasil]

From what I've seen, the Air Force is the only service that irons their respective new cammies. I'm stationed on an Army post, and there are Marines here as well - I don't see personnel in either of these services ironing their cammies.

[jeffersj]

From what I've seen, the Air Force is the only service that irons their respective new cammies. I'm stationed on an Army post, and there are Marines here as well - I don't see personnel in either of these services ironing their cammies.

Everyone sees different things.

I live in an area rife with Army, Marines, Air Force, and Navy personnel and installations. Rarely do I see anyone from any branch in BDU's that didn't apply an iron to them while in garrison.

Funny how this topic got changed from a simple discussion on command ball caps to a debate on how folks maintain their uniforms.

[Sabrina76]

Here's one of the reasons that I wish we kept the ball caps. If you are inside and need a place to keep your ball cap where it's out of the way, out of your hands, but still close at hand what do you do with it. Undo the adjustable strap in the back and clip it around a belt loop or your belt. WA-LA! You have it with you all the time so you don't lose it, get it stolen, etc. You can't do that with the 8 point. I wear DCU's right now I end up folding my 8 point and shoving it in to one of the cargo pockets on my pants. Some people get their 8 points starched and blocked, some people don't. I see people that have the 8 point pulled all the way down on their head, other people set it on their head similar to the way the Marines wear their 8 point. There are too many ways that people wear the 8 point differently.

[Yggdrasil]

Here's one of the reasons that I wish we kept the ball caps. If you are inside and need a place to keep your ball cap where it's out of the way, out of your hands, but still close at hand what do you do with it. Undo the adjustable strap in the back and clip it around a belt loop or your belt. WA-LA! You have it with you all the time so you don't lose it, get it stolen, etc. You can't do that with the 8 point. I wear DCU's right now I end up folding my 8 point and shoving it in to one of the cargo pockets on my pants. Some people get their 8 points starched and blocked, some people don't. I see people that have the 8 point pulled all the way down on their head, other people set it on their head similar to the way the Marines wear their 8 point. There are too many ways that people wear the 8 point differently.

Yeah, but as we all pointed out, the Air Force has shown us that ball caps look like ass when worn with cammies. Sorry, but the arguement for the 8 point ("It looks better") far supercedes the arguement for the ball cap being less likely to be stolen.

[jeffersj]

Here's one of the reasons that I wish we kept the ball caps. If you are inside and need a place to keep your ball cap where it's out of the way, out of your hands, but still close at hand what do you do with it. Undo the adjustable strap in the back and clip it around a belt loop or your belt. WA-LA! You have it with you all the time so you don't lose it, get it stolen, etc. You can't do that with the 8 point. I wear DCU's right now I end up folding my 8 point and shoving it in to one of the cargo pockets on my pants. Some people get their 8 points starched and blocked, some people don't. I see people that have the 8 point pulled all the way down on their head, other people set it on their head similar to the way the Marines wear their 8 point. There are too many ways that people wear the 8 point differently.

Concur with the comment on different ways to wear the 8-point.

But then, there are a plethora of ways people can wear any cover. Wish I still had the photo essay on the different ways one Sailor wore his white hat, ending with the one of him wearing it properly when made to do so.

Yeah, Navy is allowed now to use light starch with BDU's, but it is highly discouraged. At one time if you used starch it was a hit on inspection as it wasn't allowed for comfort and safety reasons.

[Yggdrasil]

Wish I still had the photo essay on the different ways one Sailor wore his white hat, ending with the one of him wearing it properly when made to do so.

As I understand it, before Vietnam, there was no "wrong" way to wear your cover. Hell, there was no "wrong" way to wear your uniform back then - have you seen those old black and white photos of Sailors tying their neckerchiefs with any knot they want, and then wearing that knot down by their waists? Or Sailors in their dungarees without even buttoning their shirts? The very concept of being "squared away" didn't seem to hit the Navy until the Vietnam era.

[jeffersj]

As I understand it, before Vietnam, there was no "wrong" way to wear your cover. Hell, there was no "wrong" way to wear your uniform back then - have you seen those old black and white photos of Sailors tying their neckerchiefs with any knot they want, and then wearing that knot down by their waists? Or Sailors in their dungarees without even buttoning their shirts? The very concept of being "squared away" didn't seem to hit the Navy until the Vietnam era.

Au Contraire.

Since you want to bring up neckerchiefs, I just looked up the 1947 Navy Uniform Regulations - seems to match what you should be doing now. Yes, I have seen the pictures showing them tied in various and sundry methods, and Hollywood movies set during the 1940's that show them hanging every which way but loose. While I haven't seen a specific comment on how to wear the cover, I have seen the various pictures where Sailors wore their covers in various and sundry manners to try and show they were "salty".

Also, you should remember that in some cases the CO could locally relax standards based on environmental conditions. For example, when I did WESTPACS during the summer months once we got out of port the uniform of the day was dungaree trousers, white undershirts, and no covers. Personnel working in the laundry were authorized shorts.

[GUNMATE1]

Wow its really funny that we went from discussing ball caps to uniform infractions. Isn't it up to us the senior leadership to lead by example. Take those sailors aside who wear the uniform articles improperly and fix it. I'm tired of walking around bases and seeing sailors wearing their pants around thier ass, and thier ball caps tilted to the side. It's sickening. I have corrected these sailors but if thier leaders don't do anything about it it doesnt get fixed. It's truly up to us as leaders, ALL OF US, to set the example and take a round turn in the fleet and shore commands and make sure we are all in the proper uniform.
Ball caps were a great idea back in the day, they have served their purpose so we had some identity when we walked around the base. But it also made you a target if you did something wrong as well. Some leaders would look at the ball cap and look at the name and contact the chiefs mess or even the wardrooms of those ships to track down the individual with the infraction. Regarding the utilities, some of us ironed them flat and some of us put military creases in them. The problem with that was if you ironed them flat you werent considered as squared away as those who put military creases in them. Does that mean you were a crappy sailor? NO. The new NWU is a uniform that can be work afloat or ashore. Every one is equal. Now that doesnt mean take your NWU's throw them in the wash and wait for them to be a ball of wrinkles when you put them on but nothing is preventing you from putting an iron on them. Just don't put creases in them. Its as simple as that. People are blowing this new uniform way out of proportion in my opinion. I want the new uniform at my command and i can't wait till October when i might be able to wear it. If we keep nit picking every thing about the new uniform it makes us as leaders look bad. Those of you who are officers and chiefs, get over it. I hope to put on my anchors this year but its not the shirt or pants that makes the leader, its the person wearing them. And for those who are under the misguided directiono that all cheifs are great is just simply wrong. As MCPON West said. It's time to get rid of those who aren't leaders and are just biding their time to collect more retirement. I just have one thing to say to a select few in the Mess. "You are doing a great job the LPO's and junior sailors look to you for guidance and get it." "Those of you who are hiding behind your anchors and think your invincible, watch out MCPON will find you and weed you out." I have said my piece.

[Yggdrasil]

I want the new uniform at my command and i can't wait till October when i might be able to wear it. If we keep nit picking every thing about the new uniform it makes us as leaders look bad. Those of you who are officers and chiefs, get over it. I hope to put on my anchors this year but its not the shirt or pants that makes the leader, its the person wearing them.

For the record, I've been wearing the NSU for three months now, and the novelty has worn off.

In retrospect, I think that the only thing wrong with the previous service uniforms was how often we wore them. Think about it: there were times when all hands were required to be in summer whites. Ever notice how the whites of CPOs and officers were purely pristine compared to those of E6 and below? What's the reason for this? E6 and below are required to wear them far more than CPOs and officers - so E6 and below summer whites are going to be very dingy.

IMHO, this transition to the current service uniform would not have been necessary had our uniform policies been in line with those of the other services. I.e., the ONLY people that should be required to wear their service uniforms on a daily basis are recruiters. Everyone else needs to be in the working uniform. That's how every service, except for the Navy, does it.

[Snuggle Bunny]

You should still iron both. BDU's are flat pressed with no creases. In fact, I had to make it a point to tell the cleaners that as they had Army, Marines, etc., bring their stuff in for cleaning and pressing, and the cleaners automatically put creases in.

Military creases in utilties, etc. - been awhile, only had them in the set I kept for inspections. Rest were flat pressed with no creases, same as the BDU uniform.

Starch - not a bright move. Tends to close the pores in the clothing. Result is in warm conditions whatever garment you wear becomes even more uncomfortable, not to mention the result when someone looks at you with NVG's.

Cover block - you still have to fit it to the cover and then find a place to let it dry. Ball cap - they tend to keep their chape without too many issues.

The Marines do not allow creases in their uniforms. Neither does the Army. It is forbidden. While the NWU NAVADMIN does not forbid it, it says the NWU is "intended" to be wash and wear. It only forbids starch and other artificial stiffeners. That leaves wiggle room for E-6s bucking for Chief to crease their NWUS. But thankfully, in swept Region Mid-Atlantic, the first Region to implement the NWU, and THEIR message says you will NOT crease the uniform. I have faith in all the follow-on Regions that they will follow Mid-Atlantic's lead.
You can flat iron the NWU but if you put creases in it, you're in the wrong. That's how it should be too - this is a working uniform, and noone should be doing anything other than shaking it out or maybe running an iron across it for 5 seconds.

[jeffersj]

The Marines do not allow creases in their uniforms. Neither does the Army. It is forbidden. While the NWU NAVADMIN does not forbid it, it says the NWU is "intended" to be wash and wear. It only forbids starch and other artificial stiffeners. That leaves wiggle room for E-6s bucking for Chief to crease their NWUS. But thankfully, in swept Region Mid-Atlantic, the first Region to implement the NWU, and THEIR message says you will NOT crease the uniform. I have faith in all the follow-on Regions that they will follow Mid-Atlantic's lead.
You can flat iron the NWU but if you put creases in it, you're in the wrong. That's how it should be too - this is a working uniform, and noone should be doing anything other than shaking it out or maybe running an iron across it for 5 seconds.

I agree. In fact, as I recall the Navy does allow light starch in the woodland BDU uniform, but it is highly discouraged. That was a change several years ago from the policy of no starch.

Creases - never were supposed to be creases in working uniforms as I recall, although I do recall one command having a policy of not giving an outstanding on an inspection if you didn't have them way back when. But then, I never creased my BDU's while I was working on getting my Anchors. I simply had my gear clean, pressed so it didn't look like I slept in it, and in good repair. All I did was run an iron over them to take out the wrinkles and make the pockets look decent. Same for my dungarees when I was on shore duty.

[F/A-18 AOC]

Not looking at provoking a debate here, looking for a point of clarification.

When did the commands begin funding command ball caps and issuing them to the Sailors?

Back in the day when I was on sea duty, the Sailor either wore the grey ball cap (old utilitiy uniform), the white hat (dungarees) or shelled out the money from their personal funds to buy a command ball cap. Profits from the sale went to MWR programs. Command ball caps were authorized for wear with civilian attire so long as they were not marked with specific billet titles (OPS, CHENG, Deck LCPO, etc.).

Now, if the command wants to use their discretionary funds to provide you a command ball cap that's their business.


Good point! I was going to comment on this post as well. I don't remember EVER having commands fund ball caps. However, being in an aviation squadron, all my commands have given me my first ball cap for free. I say for free, but in fact it was paid for out of our geedunk proceeds, not the Navy's dime.
Secondly, when I joined the Navy we wore dungarees with dixie cups. It wasn't until around '94 or '95 when we were authorized to even wear ball caps. (I was ship's company from '93-'95 prior to moving over to the hornet community) So, with that said, if we lose ball caps it won't be a big loss since they really haven't been around all that long to begin with. Be flexable, embrace change, and move forward, smartly.

[jeffersj]

Good point! I was going to comment on this post as well. I don't remember EVER having commands fund ball caps. However, being in an aviation squadron, all my commands have given me my first ball cap for free. I say for free, but in fact it was paid for out of our geedunk proceeds, not the Navy's dime.
Secondly, when I joined the Navy we wore dungarees with dixie cups. It wasn't until around '94 or '95 when we were authorized to even wear ball caps. (I was ship's company from '93-'95 prior to moving over to the hornet community) So, with that said, if we lose ball caps it won't be a big loss since they really haven't been around all that long to begin with. Be flexable, embrace change, and move forward, smartly.

Thanks.

We did wear command ball caps with dungarees back in the 1980's but there were restrictions on where you could wear them when off the ship. Forget exactly what they were, but in the immediate vicinity of the ship comes to mind.

[tmurphy]

Good point! I was going to comment on this post as well. I don't remember EVER having commands fund ball caps. However, being in an aviation squadron, all my commands have given me my first ball cap for free. I say for free, but in fact it was paid for out of our geedunk proceeds, not the Navy's dime.
Secondly, when I joined the Navy we wore dungarees with dixie cups. It wasn't until around '94 or '95 when we were authorized to even wear ball caps. (I was ship's company from '93-'95 prior to moving over to the hornet community) So, with that said, if we lose ball caps it won't be a big loss since they really haven't been around all that long to begin with. Be flexable, embrace change, and move forward, smartly.
No geedunk money pays for them now but a government credit card and a memo from the commanding officer will do the job. Some commands give you your first one; some don't. The point is still the same, IT IS A WASTE OF MONEY. Spend that money on the berthing spaces and run down barracks we live in. This is where you get them... http://www.thecorps.com/index2.asp ($22.95)

[CDE]

I've never heard of commands actually funding ballcaps either. On every ship I was on the ballcaps were purchased with MWR funds which are Non-Appropriated Funds (NAF). Typically the CMC kept stock of a bunch of these for new check-ins. So, these ballscaps are not funded with Appropriated Funds (taxpayer money from the US Treasury).

[forcedj]

Thanks.

We did wear command ball caps with dungarees back in the 1980's but there were restrictions on where you could wear them when off the ship. Forget exactly what they were, but in the immediate vicinity of the ship comes to mind.

Not sure when it started, but up thru the early 80s the ballcap was the only cover authorized with dungarees (Or the plain blue ballcap issued in basic training. Later the ballcap issued in basic was embroidered with NAVY on the front.). I think it was mid-80s when the white hat (dixie cup) was again prescribed for wear with dungarees.

Dan

[jeffersj]

Not sure when it started, but up thru the early 80s the ballcap was the only cover authorized with dungarees (Or the plain blue ballcap issued in basic training. Later the ballcap issued in basic was embroidered with NAVY on the front.). I think it was mid-80s when the white hat (dixie cup) was again prescribed for wear with dungarees.

Dan

Not too sure myself of the timeline.

I know the old utilities phased out in the early '80s and recall being told that outside the immediate vicinity of the ship you were only allowed to wear the white hat with dungarees. A few years later you were authorized to wear the ball cap as an optional item. If I remember correctly the current "Navy" ball cap was required with the new utility uniform.

[Bruce]

Whenever something on the Navy uniform gets popular among civilians, then its time to ban it. The Navy went to straight-leg polyester dungarees when the cotton bell bottoms got popular in the 1970s. When leather flight jackets became the rage, the Navy was wearing grayish bomber jackets. When bomber jackets were in, the Navy and the AF went back to leather. If you want to know what's fashionable, find out what the Navy has rejected. I guess now ball caps with ship names will be hugely popular in the civilian market.

[GUNMATE1]

I saw something that disturbed me today when i was looking through the pictures of navy.mil today. I applauded the CO of the USS Scranton for putting his entire crew in the NWU before they left to go on thier deployment. I thought it was awesome. Might help some of the tight wads in DC understand the fleet and shore sailors want this uniform NOW. Then i came across this picture http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/photos/090317-N-0780F-003.jpg
it shows a Scranton sailor standing watch wearing his uniform with no pride. Boots unbloused, 9mm thigh holster straps not tucked in and if you look close enough he is wearing a ball cap under the kevlar. Now what is the deal with this. The Scranton is a sub. Not to many people on board. Shouldn't the OOD or what ever a sub has, i'm not a sub guy, have squared that sailor away before he went on watch????? This picture just proves that sailors with out the proper leadership are going to ruin this NWU Shift before it really kicks off.

[tmurphy]

I saw something that disturbed me today when i was looking through the pictures of navy.mil today. I applauded the CO of the USS Scranton for putting his entire crew in the NWU before they left to go on thier deployment. I thought it was awesome. Might help some of the tight wads in DC understand the fleet and shore sailors want this uniform NOW. Then i came across this picture http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/photos/090317-N-0780F-003.jpg
it shows a Scranton sailor standing watch wearing his uniform with no pride. Boots unbloused, 9mm thigh holster straps not tucked in and if you look close enough he is wearing a ball cap under the kevlar. Now what is the deal with this. The Scranton is a sub. Not to many people on board. Shouldn't the OOD or what ever a sub has, i'm not a sub guy, have squared that sailor away before he went on watch????? This picture just proves that sailors with out the proper leadership are going to ruin this NWU Shift before it really kicks off.
The straps on the pistol always come out when you walk around, you really have too tuck them in good. I think the reason his trousers are unbloused is because he is wearing cold weather gear. It's the gortex trousers right? They don't blouse at the bottom. If you look closely there is black velcro on his shelve meaning he is wearing a jacket, the regular blouse doesn't have velcro on it.

[dulatice]

I saw something that disturbed me today when i was looking through the pictures of navy.mil today. I applauded the CO of the USS Scranton for putting his entire crew in the NWU before they left to go on thier deployment. I thought it was awesome. Might help some of the tight wads in DC understand the fleet and shore sailors want this uniform NOW. Then i came across this picture http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/photos/090317-N-0780F-003.jpg
it shows a Scranton sailor standing watch wearing his uniform with no pride. Boots unbloused, 9mm thigh holster straps not tucked in and if you look close enough he is wearing a ball cap under the kevlar. Now what is the deal with this. The Scranton is a sub. Not to many people on board. Shouldn't the OOD or what ever a sub has, i'm not a sub guy, have squared that sailor away before he went on watch????? This picture just proves that sailors with out the proper leadership are going to ruin this NWU Shift before it really kicks off.

I don't know if you've ever worn those helmets, but they don't have anything for support on the inside. It's just a hollow shell, so he's probably wearing a ball cap under it so it doesn't hurt. AND I am sure that he was told to wear it that way.

[GUNMATE1]

I don't know if you've ever worn those helmets, but they don't have anything for support on the inside. It's just a hollow shell, so he's probably wearing a ball cap under it so it doesn't hurt. AND I am sure that he was told to wear it that way.

And to answer your question Yes I have stood over 6 years of topside and external watches. I have also worn the old military helmets, climbing helmets to the Kevlar. So I know about the comfort level of the helmets. But that still doesn’t authorize the ball cap wear in the NWU. If you were wearing your Dress uniform on watch on a QD or even a roving watch would you wear the ball cap with it???? Even if you were told you could???? No you wouldn’t because that is not authorized and it would be sea lawyering for someone to tell you you could. Even if it was the CO. The regulations are put forth not as a suggestion but as guidelines to follow. I find it funny you just mentioned the cover. Never mentioned that the sailor has his pants unbloused. If you look at this picture: http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=68929 , the same ship 1 month prior that Sailor is wearing the uniform properly. Are you telling me that only one sailor is jacked up on their and that happens to be the day they take a picture??? Come on police your people.

[dulatice]

And to answer your question Yes I have stood over 6 years of topside and external watches. I have also worn the old military helmets, climbing helmets to the Kevlar. So I know about the comfort level of the helmets. But that still doesn’t authorize the ball cap wear in the NWU. If you were wearing your Dress uniform on watch on a QD or even a roving watch would you wear the ball cap with it???? Even if you were told you could???? No you wouldn’t because that is not authorized and it would be sea lawyering for someone to tell you you could. Even if it was the CO. The regulations are put forth not as a suggestion but as guidelines to follow. I find it funny you just mentioned the cover. Never mentioned that the sailor has his pants unbloused. If you look at this picture: http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=68929 , the same ship 1 month prior that Sailor is wearing the uniform properly. Are you telling me that only one sailor is jacked up on their and that happens to be the day they take a picture??? Come on police your people.

I have to tell you, that I think that you are whining too much. I do agree with you on the importance you place on making sure our personel are squared away. On my base, I see the NDs wearing ballcaps with the current cammies all the time. I also see cooks and corpsman wearing ballcaps with winter blues and summer whites. It isn't a big deal, it's just a uniform. I am certain that there is going to be many situations where the "proper" wear of the uniform is going to be modified for a particular situation or command. Sea lawyering the uniform regs is about as useful as dating your sister.

[Booter3rd]

I saw something that disturbed me today when i was looking through the pictures of navy.mil today. I applauded the CO of the USS Scranton for putting his entire crew in the NWU before they left to go on thier deployment. I thought it was awesome. Might help some of the tight wads in DC understand the fleet and shore sailors want this uniform NOW. Then i came across this picture http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/photos/090317-N-0780F-003.jpg
it shows a Scranton sailor standing watch wearing his uniform with no pride. Boots unbloused, 9mm thigh holster straps not tucked in and if you look close enough he is wearing a ball cap under the kevlar. Now what is the deal with this. The Scranton is a sub. Not to many people on board. Shouldn't the OOD or what ever a sub has, i'm not a sub guy, have squared that sailor away before he went on watch????? This picture just proves that sailors with out the proper leadership are going to ruin this NWU Shift before it really kicks off.

On the other hand, he is awake and alert. While perhaps it was unwise to relax blousing when there were photographers around, I think that wearing the uniform in the most comfortable, easy way possible while underway makes sense?
Brim of that ball cap probably keeps the sun out of his eyes... he can now spot threats at a greater distance. Problem?

[Kyoowashugi]

On the other hand, he is awake and alert. While perhaps it was unwise to relax blousing when there were photographers around, I think that wearing the uniform in the most comfortable, easy way possible while underway makes sense?
Brim of that ball cap probably keeps the sun out of his eyes... he can now spot threats at a greater distance. Problem?

Last I checked, COs could authorize unblousing the trousers, and who cares if he's wearing a ballcap under his helmet? If you follow the rules to the letter, he shouldn't be wearing the holster, flak, or kevlar in the first place, because "this isn't a tactical uniform".

Who. Cares?

[SeaChicken]

It IS a big deal BECAUSE it's a uniform. Who exactly is sealawyering the regs when you say, do what you want because the NDs do? A holster, helmet and vest, do not a tactical uniform make.

I admire gunmate's passion although I don't share it completely. I do think those who are wearing the NWU during it's first rollout phase should be extra cautious to make sure they are wearing it correctly. You should be anticipating being seen a lot. The kid in the first picture is obviously a bit of a soup sandwhich and it's unfortunate that he was the one who had his picture taken, but I don't know the whole story behind the picture so I am not going to jump all over the kid.

[PnoyET]

:rolleyes:
And to answer your question Yes I have stood over 6 years of topside and external watches. I have also worn the old military helmets, climbing helmets to the Kevlar. So I know about the comfort level of the helmets. But that still doesn’t authorize the ball cap wear in the NWU. If you were wearing your Dress uniform on watch on a QD or even a roving watch would you wear the ball cap with it???? Even if you were told you could???? No you wouldn’t because that is not authorized and it would be sea lawyering for someone to tell you you could. Even if it was the CO. The regulations are put forth not as a suggestion but as guidelines to follow. I find it funny you just mentioned the cover. Never mentioned that the sailor has his pants unbloused. If you look at this picture: http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=68929 , the same ship 1 month prior that Sailor is wearing the uniform properly. Are you telling me that only one sailor is jacked up on their and that happens to be the day they take a picture??? Come on police your people.

I don't know but the kid looks like he's wearing parka, and pants for the parka is never worn blouse in or else it will defeat the purpose for foul weather gear.

[retirednuke]

It's a good thing that the Navy is finally fading out the command ball cap. I don't need to be an advertising billboard for whatever command I am assigned with. Think about how much money the Navy spends on individual command ball caps. For example, a CVN with Ships Company, 2500 sailors times $8.00, that is $20,000.00. That money could be used to improve quality of life issues. My example only considered just one carrier without the air wing. Now factor in all the different shore commands, aviation squadrons, surface and sub commands. Then add up how many sailors are checking in every month to new commands that need a new command cover. It is a tremendous waste of money; keep command pride in our spirits NOT on our covers!

But compare that cost to what it costs to buy the command insignia and have it sewn on for EACH uniform the member is required to have in his seabag. Then, when he is transferred, he has to remove the old and buy and sew on the new command insignia. And add to that the fact that sailors will probably have more than the minimum number of required uniforms - especially if looking at a six-month deployment - and the cost gets even greater. I vote for the ballcap. Let it be worn with the NWU under all conditions as a supplement to the 8-point.

retirednuke

[retirednuke]

It's a good thing that the Navy is finally fading out the command ball cap. I don't need to be an advertising billboard for whatever command I am assigned with. Think about how much money the Navy spends on individual command ball caps. For example, a CVN with Ships Company, 2500 sailors times $8.00, that is $20,000.00. That money could be used to improve quality of life issues. My example only considered just one carrier without the air wing. Now factor in all the different shore commands, aviation squadrons, surface and sub commands. Then add up how many sailors are checking in every month to new commands that need a new command cover. It is a tremendous waste of money; keep command pride in our spirits NOT on our covers!

But compare that cost to what it costs to buy the command insignia and have it sewn on for EACH uniform the member is required to have in his seabag. Then, when he is transferred, he has to remove the old and buy and sew on the new command insignia. And add to that the fact that sailors will probably have more than the minimum number of required uniforms - especially if looking at a six-month deployment - and the cost gets even greater. I vote for the ballcap. Let it be worn with the NWU under all conditions as a supplement to the 8-point.

retirednuke

[retirednuke]

It's a good thing that the Navy is finally fading out the command ball cap. I don't need to be an advertising billboard for whatever command I am assigned with. Think about how much money the Navy spends on individual command ball caps. For example, a CVN with Ships Company, 2500 sailors times $8.00, that is $20,000.00. That money could be used to improve quality of life issues. My example only considered just one carrier without the air wing. Now factor in all the different shore commands, aviation squadrons, surface and sub commands. Then add up how many sailors are checking in every month to new commands that need a new command cover. It is a tremendous waste of money; keep command pride in our spirits NOT on our covers!

But compare that cost to what it costs to buy the command insignia and have it sewn on for EACH uniform the member is required to have in his seabag. Then, when he is transferred, he has to remove the old and buy and sew on the new command insignia. And add to that the fact that sailors will probably have more than the minimum number of required uniforms - especially if looking at a six-month deployment - and the cost gets even greater. I vote for the ballcap. Let it be worn with the NWU under all conditions as a supplement to the 8-point.


retirednuke

[euzkadiCA]

Get rid of those nasty ballcaps! Who cares what command you are assigned to? I dont see some guy walking around with a halo of "pride" because he is assigned to the USS Uptyshmuck. They look un-military and goofy. The 8 point says professional and military. And as for cost of sewing, do like the Army does and put Velcro on strategic spots. I mean for crying out loud we put a man on the moon and we are still sewing things permanently on to a uniform, when they can and do change? Wheres the logic in that?
And as for that guy in the picture. Putting a cap under the Kevlar was almost S.O.P. because the cutting edge in body armor isssued to us on subs is almost always missing the thing meant to keep it on your head...you know, the liner? So maybe we should ask the question of why doesn't it have a liner. Probably because its the same Kevlar given to the boat when it was comissioned and the COC doesn't feel it necessary to spend money on things like that.

[jeffersj]

Get rid of those nasty ballcaps! Who cares what command you are assigned to? I dont see some guy walking around with a halo of "pride" because he is assigned to the USS Uptyshmuck. They look un-military and goofy. The 8 point says professional and military. And as for cost of sewing, do like the Army does and put Velcro on strategic spots. I mean for crying out loud we put a man on the moon and we are still sewing things permanently on to a uniform, when they can and do change? Wheres the logic in that?
And as for that guy in the picture. Putting a cap under the Kevlar was almost S.O.P. because the cutting edge in body armor isssued to us on subs is almost always missing the thing meant to keep it on your head...you know, the liner? So maybe we should ask the question of why doesn't it have a liner. Probably because its the same Kevlar given to the boat when it was comissioned and the COC doesn't feel it necessary to spend money on things like that.

Ever hear of a little something called esprit d'corps? Command ball caps were one way to help establish that.

I suppose next you will want to get rid of the Unit Identification Marks that go on the service and service dress uniforms. For that matter, I guess you would also want to abolish the wearing of anything but a plain belt buckle with all uniforms, which eliminates command belt buckles, as well as the ones with warfare devices, rate insignia, and so forth.

[Wereldboom]

Ever hear of a little something called esprit d'corps? Command ball caps were one way to help establish that.

I suppose next you will want to get rid of the Unit Identification Marks that go on the service and service dress uniforms. For that matter, I guess you would also want to abolish the wearing of anything but a plain belt buckle with all uniforms, which eliminates command belt buckles, as well as the ones with warfare devices, rate insignia, and so forth.

Well, I do agree that it's time for ballcaps to go, because of the NWU. I hate the utilities, but I would have been fine if we had kept the old denim & chambray dungarees and wore the ball cap with them. It appears it has been discussed already, we already see what it looks like when the Air Force wears ballcap with their BDU/ABU - not very professional.

I'd actually be all for doing away with the UIM as well - in favor of the white piping that went around the seam of the arm of the crackerjacks during before WWII.

I think that we need to have pride in being in the Navy as a WHOLE. USMC uniforms reflect this, as they're the only service to not have anything on their uniforms that indicate what command they're attached to.

I often wondered why you see so many USMC Eagle, Globe, and Anchor stickers on people's cars, more than any other service, when the USMC is the smallest service in the DoD. Then it hit me - it's because for people who served in the Army, they have all these 82nd Airborne, Sapper, 3rd Infantry, etc stickers instead of overall Army stickers; while we in the Navy have EAWS, Submariner, Seabee, etc stickers instead of overall Navy stickers.

It looks to me like Marines are proud of the service to which they belong, while those of us in other services merely take pride in our commands.

[forcedj]

... - in favor of the white piping that went around the seam of the arm of the crackerjacks during before WWII.



That was a rank insignia. Seaman First Class.

http://www.bosamar.com/images/virgil4.jpg

[jeffersj]

Well, I do agree that it's time for ballcaps to go, because of the NWU. I hate the utilities, but I would have been fine if we had kept the old denim & chambray dungarees and wore the ball cap with them. It appears it has been discussed already, we already see what it looks like when the Air Force wears ballcap with their BDU/ABU - not very professional.

I'd actually be all for doing away with the UIM as well - in favor of the white piping that went around the seam of the arm of the crackerjacks during before WWII.

I think that we need to have pride in being in the Navy as a WHOLE. USMC uniforms reflect this, as they're the only service to not have anything on their uniforms that indicate what command they're attached to.

I often wondered why you see so many USMC Eagle, Globe, and Anchor stickers on people's cars, more than any other service, when the USMC is the smallest service in the DoD. Then it hit me - it's because for people who served in the Army, they have all these 82nd Airborne, Sapper, 3rd Infantry, etc stickers instead of overall Army stickers; while we in the Navy have EAWS, Submariner, Seabee, etc stickers instead of overall Navy stickers.

It looks to me like Marines are proud of the service to which they belong, while those of us in other services merely take pride in our commands.

True, you do see a lot of stickers with simply the EGA on them. Don't recall seeing a lot of AF decals, do see a lot of decals that say simply "US Army" or "US Navy", sometimes with the qualifier "Reserve" or "Retired". Have seen some Army unit stickers. Occasionally see a car with either a sticker or tags bearing Naval Aviator insignia, stickers with a SWO pin or Dolphins, etc., but to me they're the exception, not the rule. Don't recall seeing a sticker on a car regarding a specific Navy Command unless it was being displayed in conjunction with being able to park in a designated area.

[euzkadiCA]

Ever hear of a little something called esprit d'corps? Command ball caps were one way to help establish that.

I suppose next you will want to get rid of the Unit Identification Marks that go on the service and service dress uniforms. For that matter, I guess you would also want to abolish the wearing of anything but a plain belt buckle with all uniforms, which eliminates command belt buckles, as well as the ones with warfare devices, rate insignia, and so forth.

I have to agree with the UIM. the rest is nonsense. But W. is right, The Marine Corps takes pride in the entire service and the EGA. And while there is some my unit is better than your going on, they don't take it beyond a certain point. Esprit d'corps coming from a ballcap!!?? Brother, i guess i need to change jobs. Because in the Navy that i've seen, we had a minor crew mutiny and everyone stopped wearing their command ballcaps to protest our stellar leadership...

[Badmojo]

I quite honestly am shocked to read most everyone wanting to get rid of command ballcaps. I full heartedly agree with the Master Chief in the article about being proud of wearing it. The day I completed "Battle Stations" was one of the most memorable days of my Navy career. As tired as I was, I couldn't wait for that chief to get to me, shake my hand and hand me that ugly trucker hat which I wore with pride for nearly 2 years. It was the same when I reported to my ship.

[CDE]

TFU = The Failure Unit