Major Changes to CATO 55-04

[lone bugler]

This should be showing up on the cadet.ca if not soon, no effective date was mentioned so as far as i know it's effective today

A new order of dress - C-8 - mess dress! White shirt and bow tie and now authorized!

OG-107 (those of you who dunno, It's the olive drab combats) has been transferred to the CCO and is now considered a cadet uniform. Staff and course cadets on certain courses will get them temp issued.

CADPAT is specifically mentioned as not being authorized for cadets at all. Civvie versions of combats and CadetPAT are mentioned as being authorized for wear in the field but rank slip-ons, berets, etc are forbidden while wearing it.

A mention of which eyelet on the boot to which the bottom of the trousers comes is codified (3rd eyelet - but is that from the bottom or top? Probably bottom as 3rd from the top would result in the King of all Flood Pants).

 

[Excolis]

was white shirt and bow tie not the mess dress all along?

 

[Neill McKay]

was white shirt and bow tie not the mess dress all along?

It's been widely done, but was not authorized.

 

[cdn031]

1) C-8 - mess dress! White shirt and bow tie and now authorized! (been done forever)
2) OG-107 Staff and course cadets on certain courses will get them temp issued. (been done forever)
3) CADPAT is specifically mentioned as not being authorized for cadets at all. (still a silly idea but I'll stop there)
4) A mention of which eyelet on the boot to which the bottom of the trousers comes is codified

Some days ya gotta wonder how people spend their time. This codifies what has already been in practice for quite some time (with the possible exception of 4) which is detail to the level of silly 'cause some of my kids grow at an alarming rate so they wil almost always be "out of spec"

My point being that how many person hours were spent revising this when I can name many more deserving projects... Evidence of the greater state of decay in the CCO. With Operational tempo at it's highest level in the last 50 years in the CF, the CCO is left with risk adverse regulars that spend their days codifying the obvious... Its a shame.

Of course, I could just be grumpy today... ;D

 

[Neill McKay]

My point being that how many person hours were spent revising this when I can name many more deserving projects...

That's a fair comment, but we can't have people inventing their own dress regs either.  I think the choice was to either codify the current practice if it had been deemed acceptable by those in authority or stomp it out if it hadn't.

 

[Darkage]

When they say that the CADPAT is not to be worn by cadets, does that includes CIC?

 

[Neill McKay]

When they say that the CADPAT is not to be worn by cadets, does that includes CIC?

No, CIC officers are not cadets and are not governed by the air cadet dress regulations.

 

[gun runner]

CIC officers are just that.. reserve officers and therefore are mandated to wear the uniform of the forces at that time. Which is the CADPAT combat uniform. Am I correct in this observation? Cadets are civilians and therefore not mandated to wear any field uniform except surplus equipment commercially available, and that also comes with its own restrictions. (combat knives, webbing restrictions,etc..)

 

[Jabrwock]

CadetPAT are mentioned as being authorized for wear in the field but rank slip-ons, berets, etc are forbidden while wearing it.

Just to note, this is for Air Cadets only (and likely Sea). Army cadets are required to wear rank slip-ons, berets, etc, while wearing CadetPAT or OG107 in the field (but they are not required to purchase or be issued said clothing). CATO 46-01 will be updated soon, at the moment there's just a memo from the SSO (dated Oct 2007).

Seems silly that one branch gets to wear it "officially", and the others don't. But that's bureaucracy for you.

And yes, CIC is a branch of the armed forces (quasi-reservists), so they can wear DEU 1A, 3, and 4. Cadets are a "youth group" supported by Cadets Canada, their respective League, and the DoD, so they don't get the same gear the armed forces do (which is why even cadet "parade" uniform is different). I imagine when CADPAT gets replaced, it will become "authorized" for cadets to wear it after a few years.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

DOD is an american term, ours is DND

 

[Neill McKay]

And yes, CIC is a branch of the armed forces (quasi-reservists),

CIC officers are reservists.  There's no "quasi" about it.

Cadets are a "youth group" supported by Cadets Canada, their respective League, and the DoD,

The cadet movement is a partnership between DND and the Leagues (Navy League, Army Cadet League, and Air Cadet League).  There is no third partner, nor is "Cadets Canada" an organization.  (It's a marketing brand.)

 

[gun runner]

As for the CADPAT uniforms coming acailable for purchase in a few years,I am sorry to say that will not happen. These uniforms are destroyed at the local levels as per order of the DND. This is so that the actual patterns cannot be copied. (There is something about the material that renders the soldier invisible to infrared light.) Sorry that is a bit off topic. Ubique

 

[Jabrwock]

CIC officers are reservists.  There's no "quasi" about it.

Fine, "non-primary reservist" then.

As for the CADPAT uniforms... (There is something about the material that renders the soldier invisible to infrared light.) Sorry that is a bit off topic. Ubique

Nowhere near invisible. Just resistant to being detected by near infrared image intensification devices (night-vision).

The pattern itself is copyright, but authorized for manufacture through certain dealers, as long as it's not printed on the special cloth (which is patented), and doesn't match current clothing cuts. But I see no reason why that restriction would stay in effect after the military designs the next generation of ops wear.

 

[gun runner]

I thank-you for the information...I hate it when I cant get the full reason behind something and look a fool for it. You are quite correct that the material is only for night vision equip. purposes, that I didnt know. Again thank-you. Ubique

 

[canauck]

The specific pattern on CADPAT is also a registered trademark of the DND (the digitial pattern is why).

 

[Burrows]

The specific pattern on CADPAT is also a registered trademark of the DND (the digitial pattern is why).

Which wouldn't affect the DND allowing cadets to use it in the slightest.

 

[gwp]

Which wouldn't affect the DND allowing cadets to use it in the slightest.

The simple fact that everyone here knows is that cadets are not members of the Canadian Forces.  The Chain of Command has decided after due consideration as directed that cadets shall not wear Canadian Forces uniforms ... and will be identified as cadets when wearing obsolete pattern CF dress, field dress or army cadet cadetpat.  That is the direction.  It is a matter of personal safety for the cadets and public perception.

One may only speculate about what happens to cadpat when it becomes obsolete so that aspect is irrelevant to the discussion.  The decision will be made by someone who today is a 2Lt or A/S/Lt when they are a senior, flag, or general officer 30 years from now.

As for field dress for cadets ... in the so called "good olde days" it consisted of black or beige coveralls.

 

[Burrows]

Cadets aren't members of the CF.  The gem of obviousness shines today.

If you look at the post I replied to, you will notice why I said what I said.

To clarify, which is evidently needed - the fact that the DND owns a patent for CADPAT logically has no bearing on them deciding if cadets can or can't wear the stuff.  Something like the IR resistance of it is an arguement that makes sense.

As far as safety of the cadets - nobody who is going to direct their violent actions against a troop will give two farts on what they're wearing. Unless of course we're worried about them getting run over by cars because that green just camoflauges so darn well with the sidewalk.  Lets just make the cadets wear pink hit-me vests.  That will make them REAL safe.

Why don't we go back to the "good olde days" then and issue a field uniform or at least make a standard.  Until that much is done,  what will you tell little Timmy who purchased his CADPAT in the interim when DCdts couldn't make a decision?  Are you going to let him trade in his CADPAT for something acceptable?  Or do you plan on telling him tough cookies and leaving him with a uniform in his closet that he can't use?  I maintain that until you issue a field uniform or remunerate the cadets who have purchased what you now consider taboo, you can not attempt to regulate things beyond what might infringe on another human rights.  Doing so is morally wrong.

 

[Jabrwock]

It is a matter of personal safety for the cadets and public perception.

I don't believe for a minute it has anything to do with personal safety. It's a PR issue. Cadets is a youth group sponsored by the CF, but is not part of the CF. Therefore they wish to establish that divide, and so cadets don't get current CF gear unless on very specific training courses (like para).

As for field dress for cadets ... in the so called "good olde days" it consisted of black or beige coveralls.

I believe we still have some of those in the back of stores.

I wonder if the Air Cadet League has any plans to create their own version of the "field dress" for air, ala CadetPAT that is authorized for army cadets? Army isn't the only one that does field ex's.

I maintain that until you issue a field uniform or remunerate the cadets who have purchased what you now consider taboo, you can not attempt to regulate things beyond what might infringe on another human rights.  Doing so is morally wrong.

Technically the cadets shouldn't have been able to purchase "real" CADPAT, at least not in a cut/style that matches DEUs. If they did, it was in violation of quite a few regs that have been around prior to 55-04 coming out. And as for non-DEU styles, there the regs seem to be a bit vague. Is CADPAT the pattern, or the pattern & cut? If it's the whole thing, then we have a problem. But if it's just the pattern (IE CADPAT-style pants from an authorized reseller, aka the "civie combats"), then as long as it's not worn with cadet insignia, then it appears to be ok.

Considering that the CATOs don't require ANY purchase of clothing (especially for field gear), I fail to see how someone's choice of purchase outside the program becomes a "human right" just because the program forbids it's use.

 

[Burrows]

Considering that the CATOs don't require ANY purchase of clothing (especially for field gear), I fail to see how someone's choice of purchase outside the program becomes a "human right" just because the program forbids it's use.

  I meant it like this:  The program is well within the moral highground to forbid the cadets wearing of t-shirts with racist slogans for example.  It becomes morally wrong for the program to forbid wearing of ALL CADPAT material when there has been an extensive period in which cadets could have purchased a CADPAT(-esque) uniform.  The surplus stores stand ready to wallet-rape people like cadets by using this restriction to jack up the prices on their old and tattered OD. 

If DCdts wants to turn around and tell cadets that the clothes they purchased are no longer allowed to be worn despite the lack of offending anyone it becomes an issue.  They should at the very least ensure that every cadet has "field acceptable" clothing in trade in for what is now, no longer allowed. 

I'd like to apologize for being a bit abraisive in my previous post.  Many of those whom used to be my cadets were told buying CADPAT was a good idea and we're left high and dry.

CADETPAT was sponsored by the Army Cadet League and is grotesquely overpriced for a denim suit.  More importantly - it is not "field passable" and holds more water than a camel.