Navy Community - discussions, photos, video - Navy Times

Letters

Goodbye to ball caps

After the April 6 article “Ball caps on the brink,” I feel like ball caps will be reduced to souvenir items for purchase when one visits museum ships.

I have a cap from every command that I have been assigned to, beginning with Chaplain School in Newport, R.I. Being from Arkansas, the ball cap from my first duty at Naval Operational Support Center Little Rock was really special, as it featured a razorback with a “Dixie cup.”

My first fleet assignment with Big Navy was as chaplain of a destroyer squadron. I always found the ball cap to be helpful doing deck-plate ministry on the waterfront, as I served seven ships rather than just one. It helped leaders recognize a new face as part of the squadron staff.

I recently returned from an individual augmentee tour with an Army unit. During my nine months with them, I found that soldiers take a lot of pride in their unit patches and combat patches. Our command sergeant major presented me with the unit’s patch, and I proudly wore it on my Army combat uniform until I detached from that unit.

In the same way, the commander of the first destroyer I embarked with presented me with a ball cap from his ship as a thank you. That meant more to me than if he had just given me a coin.

Taking the unit patches away from the Army would be unheard of, and taking our ball caps away is the same in my book. If I do another IA tour with the Army, you can bet that my former unit “combat” patch will be on my right arm.

Lt. Jason Chambers

Great Lakes, Ill.

I read your April 6 editorial, “Let ball caps stay,” with great interest.

I disagree with your view that ball caps should be allowed to be worn with the new “cammie” uniform.

Command ball caps were never intended to be worn with all uniforms, just dungarees and coveralls. They were for wear with the working uniform and to give the sailors an alternative to the white hat. But the Navy allowed commands to authorize ball caps to be worn with various uniforms, such as summer whites and winter blues, and in some cases we had officers, chiefs and enlisted sailors wearing caps with dress blues. I and others believe that was wrong.

Ball caps should never have been worn with those uniforms, and I believe the Navy sent the wrong message to our sailors by allowing those changes.

It is important that sailors learn how to wear the new working uniform properly.

I do believe you are correct in your view that ball caps reflect command spirit. But what a sailor carries in his heart and soul about the Navy is more important than a ball cap. Sailors’ pride in their units is also shown in how they carry themselves on liberty, on the job, and how they care for their ships.

The Navy should consider focusing more attention on the traditional “Dixie cup.” I understand this hat is only worn with the dress uniform, but our recruits could be given the white hat during the Battle Stations ceremony in boot camp.

CWO4 Arthur E. Campomizzi (ret.)

Norfolk, Va.

In 1944 and 1945 at the supply depot on Guam, we wore jungle green uniforms with boondockers and a billed cap of the same color. This didn’t look very Navy, but it was a good working uniform — the coral surfaces would cut up a pair of black shoes in a day.

We didn’t have to pay for these green uniforms, the floppy billed caps or the boondockers — they were issued as needed.

Early in 1945, someone in a command position decided he wanted us to look like sailors. So it was back to dungarees, chambray shirts, black shoes and the while hat. Now, we looked like sailors.

The sun shines almost all day, every day in Guam; a squared white hat worked very well at reflecting the rays onto our noses so they received a double dose.

ETCM Allan LeBaron (ret.)

Moulton, Ala.

Stay-or-go board criteria

I’ve been in 22½ years, and I’ll be going to this board [“Career risk for chiefs,” April 20].

I should probably feel lucky — I’ve done what I love — but I just cannot shake the feeling that I’m about to be screwed by an organization that I gave decades to.

I agree we have a lot of fat in the E-7, E-8, and E-9 communities, but the problem is, how do you sort it out? We could use evaluations, but the problem with them is they no longer evaluate performance; it’s time onboard, who transfers next, who are the “yes” people.

We could use awards, but once again, awards are awarded by commands, and commands vary. You may be at command that does not award them, or you may be at a command that gives them at the drop of a hat. I’ve been to the following types of commands: Everyone gets an end-of-tour award; if you got an award mid-term, you cannot get an end-of-tour award; or, it takes an act of God to get awarded. Sadly, I have not been to a command that gives them at the drop of a hat.

What’s left in the official records? Qualifications could be used, but different commands have different requirements: At one command it’s OK for you to get this qual, but at another you cannot.

College is great, but just because you have a degree does not make you a leader.

So, what are they going to use?

Can I send in things like the e-mail from my detailer, where I tried to go back to sea but could not because I’d been at sea too long, tried to go to Japan but it cost too much, tried to go to a staff but he did not want to send me to a school?

Good luck to everyone in the same boat.

OSCS (SW) Phillip Heldt

Naval Station Rota, Spain

Defending NMCRS

The article “A pinch on emergency aid” [April 6] is disappointing for what it omits as well as what it reports. For instance, there is:

• No analysis of the implications if the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society were to significantly alter its loan-to-grant ratio (substantially less financial assistance).

• No reference to the society’s 105 years of learning that the best experience our Navy and Marine Corps families can have is receiving prompt financial assistance, then paying it back.

• A failure to discuss some of the other important services provided by the society: financial counseling, visiting nurses, budget for baby classes and the layette program, support to widows, thrift shop savings and more.

• A failure to cite the society’s role in defeating predatory lending and our popular Quick Assist Loan alternative ($6.9 million Quick Assist Loans to 24,000 active-duty sailors and Marines in 2008).

• A reliance on stale data from the American Institute of Philanthropy, a charity-rating organization that is biased against men and women currently serving in uniform.

I expected higher-caliber, more balanced and better-researched reporting from Navy Times.

Adm. Steve Abbot (ret.)

President and chief executive officer

Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society

Arlington, Va.

Mayport right for carrier

There is an old saying that “all politics is local.” However, that adage must not apply to important national security decisions, such as the one to homeport a nuclear aircraft carrier at Naval Station Mayport, Fla. [“Mayport carrier plan faces further review,” April 20].

The leadership of the Defense Department and the Department of the Navy decided to homeport a CVN at Mayport because it is the best military decision. Naval Station Mayport mitigates the risks to the fleet in case of a catastrophic attack or natural disaster.

These facts are clear, and I would add one more: There are no ongoing negotiations between federally elected officials in Florida and Virginia to reverse the Navy’s decision. It’s difficult to negotiate something when only one side shows up and the side that is best suited to make the decision isn’t invited. However, it may make for a good press release.

The Navy’s decision was based on military strategic implications — not political implications.

Strategic dispersal of the fleet allows us to protect our naval assets from attacks, natural disasters and other risks.

On the East Coast, having all of our nuclear carriers in one location is not the best option. Naval Station Mayport, in the professional opinion of Navy leadership, is the best location to ensure the protection of fleet.

One needs only to review the historical lessons of Pearl Harbor to know that concentration of vital assets in one place can provide an important target to the enemy. The Navy also correctly considered implications of environmental catastrophes that could shut down the entire Atlantic Fleet. These risks could endanger our national security and prevent our Navy from meeting a variety of global threats. The second nuclear home port at Mayport will reduce the risks to our fleet.

Although we are in a fiscally constrained environment with regard to discretionary defense and nondefense spending, choices that are in our country’s best interest and are expensive sometimes have to be made.

The security of the American people is not something that can easily be assigned a price.

Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Fla.)

Chumuckla, Fla.