Roger Ball, good and not-so-good questions about the world of "Paddles"

[HeyJoe]

Article 88 does NOT apply to individual senators

Are you sure you are in the right thread? We have a nice LSO threadjack going on and you want to talk about Aritcle 88?

 

[blur]

well, this is a hi-jack of a hi-jack, of my own thread...but looking at that latest picture, aren't those guys hair-cuts non-regulation? Were regs different back then?

 

[skim]

was that pre-beard navy of the 70's or post beard?

 

[Flugelman]

well, this is a hi-jack of a hi-jack, of my own thread...but looking at that latest picture, aren't those guys hair-cuts non-regulation? Were regs different back then?

CNO Adm. Zumwalt relaxed the haircut/facial hair standards back in the day. Look at the aircraft in the background. An A-6, RA-5C, and F-4. I would guess the picture is from around 1972.

 

[Hozer]

Is that definitely an RA-5C? Vigi's are some of the most aesthetic aircraft I've ever seen.

 

[FastMover]

Yep, that's a Vig (modex 602 above). Definitely a great looking airplane and also difficult to get aboard from what I've read.

 

[Flugelman]

Is that definitely an RA-5C? Vigi's are some of the most aesthetic aircraft I've ever seen.

Yep. Look at the little window behind the cockpit (?? Am I allowed to say that??? ) That's all the backseater had to look out. Keep 'em in the dark and ... etc etc

There's one on static display at Fallon. Was there just last week. I had forgotten just how big that sumbitch was.

 

[brownshoe]

Yep. Look at the little window behind the cockpit (?? Am I allowed to say that??? ) That's all the backseater had to look out. Keep 'em in the dark and ... etc etc

There's one on static display at Fallon. Was there just last week. I had forgotten just how big that sumbitch was.

Yep they were big! I hated working the deck when they were operating.

Steve

 

[xj220]

What's the rationale behind that? Safety?

They look caged down there...I can see how that could cramp their style.

That's awesome, I'm loving the sideburns.

 

[MIDNJAC]

even so, I have seen some pretty lax haircuts nowadays in the fleet on summer cruise(s).......then again, if you actually read the USN regs, you will see that you can get away with a lot technically speaking (compared to what us NROTC/Academy types are used to)

 

[jus2mch]

even so, I have seen some pretty lax haircuts nowadays in the fleet on summer cruise(s).......then again, if you actually read the USN regs, you will see that you can get away with a lot technically speaking (compared to what us NROTC/Academy types are used to)

And what USN regs would those be?

 

[skim]

should we merge this with the bald is beautiful thread??

 

[Intruder Driver]

That's awesome, I'm loving the sideburns.

I believe this is a shot from the Independence. I was on her in '77 and we had Vigi's, plus there is a VF-33 Phantom in the background.

 

[MIDNJAC]

And what USN regs would those be?

you can read 'em yourself, but I would say 2" on top (max length 4") with the caveat of "tapered and neat" is a lot more lenient than my unit would have been

 

[jus2mch]

you can read 'em yourself, but I would say 2" on top (max length 4") with the caveat of "tapered and neat" is a lot more lenient than my unit would have been

I've seen a lot of "laxed" haircuts from MIDN/Academy types. At my ROTC unit we were held to the Navy reg standards, which don't seem very lax to me. They standards actually seem pretty detailed and strict, but to each their own.

http://buperscd.technology.navy.mil/bup_updt/upd_CD/BUPERS/Unireg/Chapter2.PDF