Wearing a G-1 flight jacket off base?

At Fallon, where there is barely a shoe to be found, bags off-base are a
big no-no.

In the 80's. Bags were allowed off base at the Eagle bar. I guess the CO at
Fallon was a bit more enlightened. I think it was pushed by the Strike U folks
but when on det there it was nice to at least be able to go to one bar in town
to drink fire water. We played a lot of Pattsy Cline on the Juke Box.

Michael wrote:
"Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal" wrote in message
...
(b) Currently, they have proliferated it and made it something less
"special" or unique to aviation. Not that I wear khakis very often, but
when I do, I am proud to be a "brown shoe." Nowadays, the black shoes
have the option of wearing brown shoes too (though honestly most don't
for the same reason I don't wear the black ones)

Why are they given the option of wearing brown shoes now?!

It's been 30 years, now, but staff officers (I was 1655), must have had the
option -- whether officially or unofficially -- of wearing the color shoes
that fit in with the outift we were attached to. I definitely wore brown
shoes with khaki in Pensacola in the early '70s, at the urging of the SO
aviators in the division, even though my designator was not aviation.

--
John Miller
My email address: Domain, n4vu.com; username, jsm

God requireth not a uniformity of religion.
-Roger Williams

Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal wrote:
Keeping in mind my only contact with the black shoe Navy was limited--an
occasional AW conference with the small boy crews in San Diego during my
CVW Strike Ops tour and the assorted bump-intos with staffers assigned to
the CVN, my view may be a bit skewed (not to mention my Neanderthal
pilot-monkey bias), but even the standard light-weight Nomex jackets were
coveted by these guys and immediately festooned with DESRON, DDG, CG, etc
patches (just like their aviator counterparts).

Sounds like you object to being admired! Remember, what makes you a Naval
Aviator isn't the clothes you wear. And no matter how salty their jackets,
you've got one thing those guys never will: your wings.

Kinda makes me wanna hurl.

I gotta stop responding to these posts. I feel like I'm just ranting and
beating a dead horse. Truly, folks, I don't lie awake nights freaking out
about this stuff.

Life's definitely too short for that sort of thing.

Here's one: I've got a pristine G-1. I've also got a collection of patches
from commands in which I served, passenger traps on the Lex, a VIP ride
with Blue Angel #7, you get the picture. I am a pilot, but not a Naval
Aviator. Do you take any comfort in knowing that I haven't festooned my
jacket with the patches? (Just asking, but asking sincerely.)

Hey, sitting around Trader's maybe I couldn't drink as much as you guys, but
I could get just as drunk.

--
John Miller
My email address: Domain, n4vu.com; username, jsm

Polymer physicists are into chains.

Glad to see the Navy loosen up on wearing flight suits. Only took
about 30 years. Must have had to retire a lot of old crusty admirals.
USAF loosened up back in the 60s, command by command, base by base.
Don't know who was last to loosen up, SAC or ATC probably. ADC was
first, then TAC, I believe. I do remember in 62 we had a pilot land a
102 at Salt Lake Muni with an aft fire light on continuously. A crack
in a combustion chamber shot hot gas out through fuselage skin, also
cut a HP air line so lost all pneumatics. Once on the ground couldn't
get his clothes and kit out of the missile bay. Up at Hill AFB
(AirMaterielCommand=AMC=AMillionCivilians)they wouldn't let him in the
club to eat in his goat skin. Club Manager relented and fed him in the
kitchen. We 'rescued' him the next day but he was some p'oed and got
out when his time was up.
A' propos of the supply line, back in 56 on Okinawa I had one (1)
flying suit and it was about 25% patched out with cloth from my
fatigues. At the same time we had 2 F86Ds that couldn't fly at night
because we were short two landing lights.
Walt BJ

On 10/19/03 8:40 AM, in article , "John Miller"
wrote:

Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal wrote:
Keeping in mind my only contact with the black shoe Navy was limited--an
occasional AW conference with the small boy crews in San Diego during my
CVW Strike Ops tour and the assorted bump-intos with staffers assigned to
the CVN, my view may be a bit skewed (not to mention my Neanderthal
pilot-monkey bias), but even the standard light-weight Nomex jackets were
coveted by these guys and immediately festooned with DESRON, DDG, CG, etc
patches (just like their aviator counterparts).

Sounds like you object to being admired! Remember, what makes you a Naval
Aviator isn't the clothes you wear. And no matter how salty their jackets,
you've got one thing those guys never will: your wings.


John,

I don't object to being admired. I do object to folks that aren't in my
line of work who want to wear the same clothes I do (in uniform) and then
out of the other side of their mouths tell me where I can and cannot wear
mine.

Don't play in MY sand box while trying to dictate the sand box rules.

Kinda makes me wanna hurl.

I gotta stop responding to these posts. I feel like I'm just ranting and
beating a dead horse. Truly, folks, I don't lie awake nights freaking out
about this stuff.

Here I am not heeding my own advice again. I do what I shouldn't do, and
don't do what I should do.


Life's definitely too short for that sort of thing.

Here's one: I've got a pristine G-1. I've also got a collection of patches
from commands in which I served, passenger traps on the Lex, a VIP ride
with Blue Angel #7, you get the picture. I am a pilot, but not a Naval
Aviator. Do you take any comfort in knowing that I haven't festooned my
jacket with the patches? (Just asking, but asking sincerely.)


John, I don't mind you festooning the jacket like a Winnebago... wearing it
to the Food World... whatever. Have at it. In fact, I bought one and
patched it up for a dear friend of mine who would NEVER have physically
qualified to fly in the military.

The problem I have is with uniformed military non-aviators or folks not
within the aviation community dressing like aviators. (I thought that was
an understood point... My apologies.)

Keep in mind, my opinion on this is more of a pet peeve--even less than
that--a slight objection, but I don't understand how these folks that
haven't earned the wings (and hence the flight attire) want to run around in
the flight clothing.

Doesn't that lead to the slightly embarrassing "JAG moment?" e.g. (from a
real conversation between an civilian who had obviously seen the T.V. show
and a JAG wearing a flight jacket):
"You're a JAG then?"
"Yes, I am."
"What kind of airplane do you fly?"

I guess if folks want to deal with that kind of mild embarrassment, you can
be my guest. Granted, the question was as much about the T.V. show as the
jacket, but the jacket added to the illusion, and all things being equal, he
was legal to wear the jacket because he was working on an aviation flag
staff. I relate this story for the humor as much as the evidential value.

By the way, when I retire, I plan on wearing both of my "Winnebagos" out in
town with the rotund gut I intend to grow and thick, short gray hair, so
everybody can spot me as a ustabe. Fragile ego. Needs fed. |:-)

--Woody

Hey, sitting around Trader's maybe I couldn't drink as much as you guys, but
I could get just as drunk.

I don't do the drunk thing any more. Not worth the cost in the cost/benefit
analysis. |:-)

In article t,
lid says...
"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message


If it's good enough to get shot at in, it's good enough to wear to
McDonalds.

I'm looking forward to seeing Marines in line at McD's wearing their PASGT
vests and Fritz helments...

The post I work at has a Bradley and an M1A1 kept as a float for the units
in state.

Can I take on up to the McD drive through ??



(It's a joke, Doug! See :-)


PLEASE ????


--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

On 17 Oct 2003 06:36:20 -0700, (Michael) wrote:

"Jake Donovan" wrote in message news:%OKjb.80113$AH4.25335@lakeread06...
Woody,

You almost got it right. Leather jackets can be worn any where in khakis or
flight suit.

Nomex (green) jacket can only be worn on flight line. You can wear it coming
on base, or leaving base but can only be "seen" in it on the flight line and
the O'club. (Or entering and leaving quarters to or from the flightline.)

There is some leeway made for transient pilots with downed aircraft.

I honestly had a black shoe Chief quote me the regs in an on base Navy
Exchange while waiting on repairs (went and had lunch). I told him "this is
what I arrived in, I wasn't sitting in 40 deg weather for hours in the
transient shack and if he would like, he could accompany me to the Base CO
and discuss it."

Backed down and said, "I guess they allow that, Capt" and walked off.

JD

Thanks for the answer JD.

And Woody, this wasn't something I was "worried" about, just something
I wondered about. I've got zero problem with a flyer wearing his G-1
off base, rules permitting or not.

Thanks,

~Michael



"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message
...
On 10/16/03 4:38 PM, in article
, "Michael"
wrote:

What are the current regulations in regard to this? A friend of mine
in Chicago said while he was at lunch the other day he saw a Navy
officer in uniform and his G-1 at a fast food joint. He was suprised
to the see the flight jacket, because he was under the impression they
weren't allowed to be worn off base. I figure since the guy was in
uniform and the G-1 doesn't really get used in the air much anymore,
that it was fine to be wearing it.

Thanks,

~Michael

There are more important things to worry about but...

My understanding of the current regulations is:

Leather jackets may be worn either with khakis or with a flight suit on or
off base.

The green flight jacket may be worn only with the flight suit or with the
"working khakis" and then only on base.

Of course, I don't get spun up about it since I believe that pilots should
dress like pilots and a flight suit in town (jacket or no) expresses a
positive image to the public.

--Woody


Fly-Fly boys should be required to obey regs just like everyone else, they are
not some sort of "ubermench"

Al Minyard

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 19:17:19 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal" wrote:

On 10/17/03 1:52 PM, in article ,
"Ogden Johnson III" wrote:

"Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal" wrote:

Of course, I don't get spun up about it since I believe that pilots should
dress like pilots and a flight suit in town (jacket or no) expresses a
positive image to the public.

Maybe the flight suits of the Blue Angels or the Thunderbirds. I know
the flight suits worn by any number of the pilots in the squadrons I
served in would express anything *but* a "positive image to the
public", were they to be seen in them off-base.

OJ III
[Maj Foo, my OpsO, to Maj Bar, a Wing pogue assigned to fly with us to
maintain currency, "'Slick', when are you gonna survey that flight
suit? I'm ashamed to be seen on the flight line walking out to the
aircraft with you. The plane captains don't want you /sitting/ in
their aircraft, much less flying them. Maintenance Control wants me
to bring the book to you to sign the bird out and in, so you won't
have to enter their shack. ... ... ..."]

Strictly referring to the uniform itself (or organizational clothing for you
purists): When I go to the grocery store in my flight suit, I am
immediately recognized as a pilot by the public. Since 9/11, OEF, and OIF,
it expresses a positive image to the public because they know it's my
business clothes.

If you're referring to the overall condition of the garment, that's a matter
of personal responsibility and command leadership (i.e., the XO needs to
pound a few heads and rattle the supply folks).

If it's good enough to get shot at in, it's good enough to wear to
McDonalds.

--Woody

Then why can't the Enlisted folks wear their dungarees off base??

Al Minyard

On 10/23/03 6:27 PM, in article ,
"Alan Minyard" wrote:


Fly-Fly boys should be required to obey regs just like everyone else, they are
not some sort of "ubermench"

Al Minyard


You're trolling.

On 10/23/03 6:27 PM, in article ,
"Alan Minyard" wrote:

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 19:17:19 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
wrote:

Strictly referring to the uniform itself (or organizational clothing for you
purists): When I go to the grocery store in my flight suit, I am
immediately recognized as a pilot by the public. Since 9/11, OEF, and OIF,
it expresses a positive image to the public because they know it's my
business clothes.

If you're referring to the overall condition of the garment, that's a matter
of personal responsibility and command leadership (i.e., the XO needs to
pound a few heads and rattle the supply folks).

If it's good enough to get shot at in, it's good enough to wear to
McDonalds.

--Woody

Then why can't the Enlisted folks wear their dungarees off base??

Al Minyard

That's a great point. I see absolutely no reason why a clean set of
dungaress shouldn't be allowed off base. Unfortunately, I have little/no
say in the matter.

The Navy does allow the cammy uniforms to be worn off base though.

--Woody