Curiosity regarding uniforms...

[ZigZag911]

Institution of TPU is more recent than latest version of 52-16, and it was clearly stated that cadets not meeting USAF weight standards could wear TPU....there needs to be a change to 52-16  to reflect this.

Wouldn't a change to CAPM 39-1, the sole uniform source, to reflect it be more usefull?

Yes, but if 52-16 is also going to be used as a source by CP personnel, it needs at least to reflect the correct reference to 39-1.

[ZigZag911]

"Corporate service dress" works fine as a formal designation.

"TPU" is simply an accurate, informal, abbreviated term.....as someone observed, current HeadCap 1 developed it, he should get design credit!

[LtCol White]

"Corporate service dress" works fine as a formal designation.

"TPU" is simply an accurate, informal, abbreviated term.....as someone observed, current HeadCap 1 developed it, he should get design credit!

No different from when Gen McPeak redsigned the USAF uniform and it was referred to as the "McPeak uniform".  This was the version of the current USAF service coat that had the officer rank on the sleeve cuffs instead of the shoulders.

[RogueLeader]

Why not call it the TPU? He is the General, he is the one that invented it, and isn't it the birthright of every General to have a legacy?


Besides TPU sounds better then "bus driver uniform" ...even if it looks the same.

What's good for the GOOSE is good for the GANDER.  If it is  not right to call "service dress" class "A" or refer to a 1st Lt as 1LT and a Lt Col as LTC; then it should follow that this uniform not be called "TPU."  Unless it appear that way in print.

Now, there is that CAP culture issue, the same sort that calls the "New Serice Coat" the McPeak via "Air Force Culture."

I guess there is a balance that must be reached.

Besides bdu is already taken 

[Sgt. Savage]

Why not call it the TPU? He is the General, he is the one that invented it, and isn't it the birthright of every General to have a legacy?


Besides TPU sounds better then "bus driver uniform" ...even if it looks the same.

What's good for the GOOSE is good for the GANDER.  If it is  not right to call "service dress" class "A" or refer to a 1st Lt as 1LT and a Lt Col as LTC; then it should follow that this uniform not be called "TPU."  Unless it appear that way in print.

Now, there is that CAP culture issue, the same sort that calls the "New Serice Coat" the McPeak via "Air Force Culture."

I guess there is a balance that must be reached.

I agree and disagree. It's not a really big deal though, Member Search abbreviates 1st Lt as 1Lt and 2nd Lt as 2Lt.

There are some inconsistencies in the system

[SarDragon]

I agree and disagree. It's not a really big deal though, Member Search abbreviates 1st Lt as 1Lt and 2nd Lt as 2Lt.

There are some inconsistencies in the system

As has been explained before, MIMS, being a computer database, uses shorter abbreviation as an economy of effort measure. Shorter abbreviations take up less memory space, and shorten processing time. These can be significant when dealing with 55,000 or so records in a relational database. Each of the grades above provide a 50% savings in memory, and some indeterminate savings in processing time.

[afgeo4]

Why not call it the TPU? He is the General, he is the one that invented it, and isn't it the birthright of every General to have a legacy?


Besides TPU sounds better then "bus driver uniform" ...even if it looks the same.

What's good for the GOOSE is good for the GANDER.  If it is  not right to call "service dress" class "A" or refer to a 1st Lt as 1LT and a Lt Col as LTC; then it should follow that this uniform not be called "TPU."  Unless it appear that way in print.

Now, there is that CAP culture issue, the same sort that calls the "New Serice Coat" the McPeak via "Air Force Culture."

I guess there is a balance that must be reached.

After it was first introduced, I began using the terms "corporate or CAP service dress" and " AF service dress" to differentiate between them. I got several comments about why was I calling the TPU something besides the TPU. I also use "Corporate Blue" and "Corporate Grey" to identify the the two flavors of aviator shirt uniforms. Simple and descriptive.

I wonder if it works like the dictionary...if it gets used enough, it'll make its way into 39-1.   

Sure, if things actually made their way into the 39-1... EVER

[Hawk200]

I agree and disagree. It's not a really big deal though, Member Search abbreviates 1st Lt as 1Lt and 2nd Lt as 2Lt.

There are some inconsistencies in the system

As has been explained before, MIMS, being a computer database, uses shorter abbreviation as an economy of effort measure. Shorter abbreviations take up less memory space, and shorten processing time. These can be significant when dealing with 55,000 or so records in a relational database. Each of the grades above provide a 50% savings in memory, and some indeterminate savings in processing time.

So why don't we just abbreviate it, use less ink as well, and make it easier overall? I still think it looks wierd to see "1st LT" on a flightsuit nametag. We're wearing military uniforms, just match it up. It would make an easier transition for members coming from the military, and would show our cadets how the Air Force usually displays it.

[Pylon]

I agree and disagree. It's not a really big deal though, Member Search abbreviates 1st Lt as 1Lt and 2nd Lt as 2Lt.

There are some inconsistencies in the system

As has been explained before, MIMS, being a computer database, uses shorter abbreviation as an economy of effort measure. Shorter abbreviations take up less memory space, and shorten processing time. These can be significant when dealing with 55,000 or so records in a relational database. Each of the grades above provide a 50% savings in memory, and some indeterminate savings in processing time.

So why don't we just abbreviate it, use less ink as well, and make it easier overall? I still think it looks wierd to see "1st LT" on a flightsuit nametag. We're wearing military uniforms, just match it up. It would make an easier transition for members coming from the military, and would show our cadets how the Air Force usually displays it.

Easier transition for members coming from the military?  Uh... our official grade abbreviations are how the Air Force abbreviates their ranks officially, too.

Each service has a different way of abbreviating their ranks, and the Associated Press has its own standard, too.  We share a relationship with the Air Force, right?  Then we should continue to abbreviate it like they do.

Yeah, I understand there's a few database benefits achieved by using the least characters possible, but outside those circumstances (for example: correspondence, flight suit nametags, email and forum signatures, signage/plaques/certificates, regulations and pamphlets, forms, websites, etc.) we should be using the official abbreviations.  2d Lt, 1st Lt, Capt, etc...

[Hawk200]

Easier transition for members coming from the military?  Uh... our official grade abbreviations are how the Air Force abbreviates their ranks officially, too.

Show me enough U.S. Air Force flightsuits with the rank indicated as "1st Lt" that would provide a legitimate statistic, and I will concede. No knockoffs, one off, or wannabe costumes, but legitimate uniforms utilized by the Air Force.

Yes, there are databases that abbreviate for the sake of economy. My question is: Why shouldn't we just write it that way? Why should we use six (1st Lt) positions or characters to express the grade, when three (1LT) will do?

KISS principle applied. No practical reason to make it longer. Both convey the same information. Short, sweet, and to the point. If someone writes "1LT", do you really not know what it means? Or is the argument more important?

[CAP428]

Yes, there are databases that abbreviate for the sake of economy. My question is: Why shouldn't we just write it that way? Why should we use six (1st Lt) positions or characters to express the grade, when three (1LT) will do?

KISS principle applied. No practical reason to make it longer. Both convey the same information. Short, sweet, and to the point. If someone writes "1LT", do you really not know what it means? Or is the argument more important?

It's not a matter of what is easy, it is what is right.  I don't see any reason to have 1st Lt over 1LT either, but until it is officially changed, I will continue to abbreviate the proper way because...well, it is right.  Yes, it is 3 less characters to write 1LT but does doing it correctly and typing 1st Lt really take that much more energy?

There are lots of things in life that are easier, but that doesn't mean it is right or correct.  I'll be happy to abbreviate 1LT but only once it is officially changed that way.

[Hawk200]

There are lots of things in life that are easier, but that doesn't mean it is right or correct.  I'll be happy to abbreviate 1LT but only once it is officially changed that way.

Was wondering when someone was going to mention it, it's pretty much the primary point. Why don't we suggest it? Wouldn't take much effort, and a lot of the pubs are due for rewrite soon anyway.

An abbreviation of "2LT" or "LTC" may not be the official way in the regs and such, but I've seen enough military paperwork to know that it is the norm. I don't believe I've seen much that was written out as "1st Lt", etc. in writing when I was active duty.

[DNall]

I agree and disagree. It's not a really big deal though, Member Search abbreviates 1st Lt as 1Lt and 2nd Lt as 2Lt.

There are some inconsistencies in the system

As has been explained before, MIMS, being a computer database, uses shorter abbreviation as an economy of effort measure. Shorter abbreviations take up less memory space, and shorten processing time. These can be significant when dealing with 55,000 or so records in a relational database. Each of the grades above provide a 50% savings in memory, and some indeterminate savings in processing time.

Which is literally why the Army switched to the standardized 3-letter identifiers. Which are also used many times in the AF. It's just not considered professional in official communications cause it's slightly inpolite & sways to the Army which obviously the AF just cannot do. 

The TPU is officially known (I think) as the alternative corporate service coat, or something to that effect, but that's a mouthful & in general there are no acronyms for the corp-style uniforms.

[AlphaSigOU]

The TPU is officially known (I think) as the alternative corporate service coat, or something to that effect, but that's a mouthful & in general there are no acronyms for the corp-style uniforms.

CAP Corporate Uniform = 'TPU'
CAP Aviator Shirt Uniform = CAP grays (per CAPM 39-1)
CAP Distinctive Field Uniform = Blue BDUs

Gen. Pineda eventually will step down from National Commander, but the 'TPU' moniker will stick to the blue corporate uniform.

[JC004]

...
CAP Distinctive Field Uniform = Blue BDUs
...

*Blueberry Suit   

[SAR-EMT1]

...
CAP Distinctive Field Uniform = Blue BDUs
...

*Blueberry Suit   

CAP Coastie Uniform

Operational Note: All members wearing said uniform shall be under the jurisdictional command of the Admirals of the Great State of Nebraska. 

[jimmydeanno]

...
CAP Distinctive Field Uniform = Blue BDUs
...

*Blueberry Suit   

I believe this name was already used by the ultramarine blue flight suit that was phased out in the late 90's...

[JC004]

...
CAP Distinctive Field Uniform = Blue BDUs
...

*Blueberry Suit   

I believe this name was already used by the ultramarine blue flight suit that was phased out in the late 90's...

I thought that was the smurf suit? 

[jimmydeanno]

...
CAP Distinctive Field Uniform = Blue BDUs
...

*Blueberry Suit   

I believe this name was already used by the ultramarine blue flight suit that was phased out in the late 90's...

I thought that was the smurf suit? 

Maybe you're right, I don't remember exactly, I was just a lowly cadet when they phased it out, I do remember allusions to looking like a blueberry when certain "senior members" walked by...I have been known to be wrong before   

[JC004]

...
CAP Distinctive Field Uniform = Blue BDUs
...

*Blueberry Suit   

I believe this name was already used by the ultramarine blue flight suit that was phased out in the late 90's...

I thought that was the smurf suit? 

Maybe you're right, I don't remember exactly, I was just a lowly cadet when they phased it out, I do remember allusions to looking like a blueberry when certain "senior members" walked by...I have been known to be wrong before   

I'll bet they looked like this, 'cuz the seniors I had when I was a lowly airman did: