8
   

Calling all military know-it-alls.

 
 
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2010 09:08 pm
Mo has to do a 5-10 minute "how to" demonstration for school. He has decided to do it on how to identify a soldier's rank from his uniform insignia (is that the right word for the patches and collar emblems and such? I guess my first question is -- what is that stuff called?) and what each rank commands.

He already knows the insignia of the non commissioned officers and the commissioned officers but he (nor I) know the real difference bettween the NCOs and the COs (is that what they're called?) It seems that I recall hearing that it was determined by if the soldier graduated from one of the military acadamies. Is that correct?

Also, we are wondering if this command line-up is right:

2 Lieut. - section
1 Lieut. - platoon
Captain - company
Major - battalion
Lieut Col. - brigade
Colonel - division
B General - corps
M General - command
L General - army
General - army

Is this anywhere close to right? We've just kind of pieced it together from a book we have that is written for kids.

And how does this work with the NCOs? What do they command?

I appreciate any and all help but please keep in mind that this presentation will be to a group of 3rd graders so it needs to be pretty basic.

Thanks!



 
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2010 09:21 pm
@boomerang,
It all depends on the type of unit you are referring to.
http://www.army.mil/symbols/Images/NewRanks_03.jpg

In my former artillery unit:
2LT.
1LT. platoon
Captain - battery
Major
Lieut Col. - battalion

My memory is failing me on these details right now.
Colonel - division
B General - corps
M General - command
L General - army
General - army

A reference guide:
http://www.army.mil/info/organization/unitsandcommands/oud/

Five star generals haven't been used for awhile.
George Marshall 16 December 1944
• Douglas MacArthur 18 December 1944
• Dwight D. Eisenhower 20 December 1944
• Henry H. Arnold 21 December 1944
• Omar Bradley 22 September 1950
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2010 09:33 pm
@tsarstepan,
The Army is just too confusing for words. I should have known that it wasn't that clear cut about who commanded what. I know how goofy it's been with my brother.

Maybe Mo should just concentrate on rank insignia.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  3  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2010 10:38 pm
@boomerang,
You sure know how to expose a feller's ignorance.

So far as I know, the stuff at the top of the sleeves are just called patches or unit insignia. The patch on the left shoulder designates the current assignment. The one on the right designates a unit assignment either in combat, or at least during wartime. In the early 60s, I knew a couple of old guys wearing the CBI (China, Burma, India) patch on the right.

Collar "brass" goes with the type of unit. Crossed rifles for infantry, crossed muzzle loading cannon for artilery, crossed flags for signal corps, etc. I seem to recall that that type of brass is worn on the left collar, with a simple US being worn on the right. Enlisted persons have round brass with raised letters. Officers use a more skeletized brass, without the round field.

Officers' brass is as described by Tsarstephen, worn on the shoulders - both sides. It would also be worn on garrison caps, fatigue hats, and field caps. It is not worn on a dress hat, which is otherwise embellished. Company grade officers get a gold band on the front of the dress hat. Field grade (major through colonel*) gets further embellishment on the bill of the hat. General officers get lots of stuff (brass hats, ya know) on the bill.

Officers (that always means commissioned officers) give orders, and are addressed as "sir". Non Commisioned Officers (NCOs) do not give orders, but don't push it! They are addressed by rank; never as "sir". This is to indicate they work for a living, as opposed to Commissioned Officers.

NCOs wear their stripes on both shoulders below the patches. The more stripes, the better.

On dress uniforms, officers have stripes on the outside seam of the dress pants. It is yellow. We will not speculate on the origin of the tradition.

On enlisted dress uniforms, there may be gold stripes on the lower sleeve, starting just above the cuff. These are called "hash marks", and I believe each one represents five years service. People who wear them are called "lifers" or NCOs, which sometimes stands for No Chance Outside. The jacket portion of the dress uniform is called a blouse. Again, not to speculate.

* I do not know why colonel is pronounced Kernel.

I wish I could be more specific after all these years. Anyhow, officers receive a salute when out of doors. The general army rule is "If it moves; salute it. If it doesn't; paint it". This simple rule covers nearly all situations
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2010 10:49 pm
Generally, this is how it runs:

2nd Lt., platoon
Lt., platoon, perhaps company
Capt., company
Majors usually act as staff officers to field grade officers
Lt. Col., battalion
Colonel, regiment
Brigadier General, brigade
Major General, division
Lt. General, Corps
General, Army

These are pretty fluid, though, because in time of war, it often falls out that casualties mean that people of a lower rank will command formations. The most extreme example of which i know was in a Light Infantry regiment in Napoleon's army in 1809, at the battle of Wagram. When it finally came out of the line, the regiment was in the command of the senior corporal--all of the officers and sergeants had been killed or incapacitated by wounds.

Insignia for officer ranks in the U.S. army are:

one gold bar, 2nd Lt.
one silver bar, Lt. (or, 1st Lt.)
two silver bars, Capt.
gold oak leaf, Maj.
silver oak leaf, Lt. Col.
silver eagle, Col.
One silver star, Brigadier General
two stars, Major General
three stars, Lt. General
four stars, General.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2010 10:53 pm
By the way, rank determines precedence, not graduation from the USMA. However, there is a professional, social snobbery attached to USMA graduates, to "West Pointers," who sometimes socially exclude officers who gained their rank from ROTC, OCS (officer candidate school) or promotion from the ranks.

On the battlefield, you can forget that ****--only competence counts.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2010 10:59 pm
@Setanta,
in the modern army Brigades are smaller than they once were, and are commanded by Col's.

Major's are xo's on the BN's in addition to having staff jobs.
Merry Andrew
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2010 11:06 pm
Set's rundown is quite accurate. Just one word of caution: what, exactly, an officer of a given rank commands or doesn't command depends largely on the type of outfit you're talking about. In the combat branches -- infantry, armor, artillery -- a lieutenant (1st or 2d, doesn't matter) will generally command a platoon but he could also command a company if no captains are available. A major will usually be a staff officer, rather than have command. But I recall that a buddy of mine who was serving in the ASA (Army Security Agency) in Korea told me his company commander had a major's rank and I've known a 4.2 inch mortar platoon to be commanded by a captain. And that captain was officially designated as 'platoon commander' rather than the more usual 'platoon leader' which is standard infantry useage. Another thing to remember is that these things change with just about every army reorganization. Since WW II, the army has been totally reorganized at least four times that I'm personally aware of. What was true 20 years ago might not hold true today.
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2010 11:10 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Major's are xo's on the BN's in addition to having staff jobs.


An xo (executive officer) is a staff job. It involves no command.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2010 11:30 pm
@Merry Andrew,
Army organization has long varied, and will probably continue to do so as the times and the means of making war change. From the 1780s reorganization until 1871, the French without a doubt had the best organized army in the world, and the Americans copied that in preference to the English system. The French, however, used the "tripod" system. Three divisions (what we would call companies) formed a battalion, three battalions formed a regiment--but brigades were ad hoc formations. Divisions were formed of as many regiments, troops of cavalry and artillery batteries as the Corps commander thought the commander capable of using effectively. The French also had superior tactical and operational doctrine in that period of more than 80 years. The Americans copied this to a point. Formations higher than a regiment for the period up to the Civil War were usually ad hoc, and were assignments based upon the judgment of the army commander. Zachary Taylor used regimental formations independent but operating in concert, while Winfield Scott formed divisions from the assignment of regiments and sections of artillery (a section, usually two, sometimes three guns, were the organizational sub-units of a battery).

During the American civil war, it was usual to assign five, and sometimes six regiments to a brigade, and two or three brigades to a division. During the Spanish War, the army reverted to regiments as the central organizational unit, assigning regiments to a commander. So, for example, old Joe Wheeler was put in command of the cavalry which was sent to Cuba, and ended by commanding all of the regiments that were put ashore near Santiago de Cuba (then the Spanish colonial capital, on the opposite end of the island from Havana). He used his regiments as the prime maneuver formation in his assault on San Juan, the key to the defense of Santiago.

In the First World War, the Germans and the French used the tripod system, and a division was made up of three regiments, plus organic artillery and engineer units. The British continued to use brigades, and for them, the battalion and the regiment meant entirely different things. A regiment was the administrative unit, and there were always at least two battalions. One battalion would be the cadre of the regiment, which would train newly admitted levies, and one battalion would be sent to serve in the field. Some regiments had more than two battalions, some as many as five--with one at home as the cadre formation, and the rest serving in the field. A British brigade was made up of the battalions assigned, and batteries of the Royal Artillery. The Royal Artillery and the Royal Engineers were administratively independent of the army.

The Americans in the First World War developed a sort of "hybrid" system. They used the tripod system, and to form a brigade, used three regiments. Two brigades then formed a division, with the artillery, engineers and other support units organic to the division. This meant that in 1917 and -18, many American division were as large as or larger than entire German and French corps (formed of more than one division) because those formations had been reduced by casualties and "wastage."

In the Second World War, the army used a complete tripod system for their divisions. Three battalions formed a regiment and three regiments formed a division. Divisional artillery was a regiment, formed of three battalions, each comprised of three batteries. Generally, a battalion of artillery was informally assigned to support each regiment, and often a single battery was assigned to support each battalion. Engineers and other support units were organic to the division. There were exceptions, of course. Airborne divisions usually were comprised of four, and sometimes five regiments. There would be three PIR (parachute infantry regiments) and a glider regiment. The glider regiment would bring in light artillery, mortars and any vehicles the division was prepared to drop. There might also be a fifth "commando" PIR in a division. Armored divisions were organized on an entirely different model. These would be made up of three combat commands--Combat Command A, Combat Command B and Combat Command R. A and B were roughly equivalent to brigades, with organic artillery and mechanized infantry units, and CCR was the reconnaissance unit of the division.

The army also employed RCTs--regimental combat teams. This would be a regiment--often reinforced--with small support units assigned, so many artillery batteries, an engineer company or two, a heavy weapons company. Arguably the most famous was the 442nd RCT. The 442nd regiment was formed of Japanese-American volunteers from California and the west coast, and it was reinforced with the 100th Infantry Battalion, made up of Japanese-Americans from Hawaii. It was one of the most (possibly the most, but i'm not certain of this) decorated regiments in the army. It suffered in excess of 350% casualties during the war, and fought the nasty, dirty, muddy nightmare war in Italy, and then landed in the south of France.

Today, divisions are, supposedly, made up of two brigades, and how they are organized depends on the mission for which they are intended. All support units, including artillery, are organic to the division, and are assigned missions as needed at the discretion of the division commander.
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 12:31 am
@Merry Andrew,
The US military also includes Aviation in the Combat Arms as do most countries,
with a further break down of artillery to Field Artillery and Air Defence,
and Armour into Armour and Cavalry - so the complete list is :
Infantry, Armour, Cavalry, Field Artillery, Air Defence, Aviation
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 01:27 am
The Original Names
The Regimental system has its basis in area recruiting where you would expect members of the same area to serve together. As wars lengthened, a Regiment divided into battalions, where one might be re-equiping and recruiting whilst another was fighting. This idea quickly went by the board, and it was common to have a whole regiment with all its battalions serving together and to have a reserve battaliion to take care of recruitment. Grenadiers were originally larger men who could throw grenades, though the best use was to drop grenades in sieges. Eventually a battalion consisted of grendiers, light infantry and line organised into companies to better deal with any situation at a battalion level. For administrative purposes, companies were divided into platoons and sections. These were increasingly used as battlefield units as guerilla warfare became more common, for example the Napoleonic Wars.

A Colonel was in charge of a Regiment, a Lieutenant Colonel was also called a brevit colonel and was really waiting for his official promotion or money to purchase a colonency for the Regiment he was in command of. As Headquarter units grew, the Leiutenant Colonel became an official rank. A Major was in charge of a Battalion, a Captain in charge of a company, and Lieutenant in charge of a Platoon. Lower ranking officers, ensigns (later to be called second lieutenants) were in charge of the colours (the unit flags) escorted by a colour sergeant and a staff sergeant who carried a staff/spear.

A chosen man was later called a corporal. A sergeant, the next rank up, was the corporal assisting the Lieutenant to command a platoon. A company had a Company-Sergeant-Major (a senior sergeant at compnay level if you like) and a Battalion had a Battalion-Sergeant-Major and A Regiment a Regimental-Sergeant-Major (RSM). Senior sergeants are now being called Warrant Officers, having a warrant to carry out their duties.

The importance of the RSM can not be overstated. Most Australian units, everyone knocks at the Commanding Officers door (Lieutenat Colonel usually) except the RSM. He walks in and says, Sir we have a problem...the CO puts down his pen and says, Tell me RSM..what is it ? And you had better not be the problem.

Two or more regiments were grouped into brigades with a Brigadier General, two or more brigades were joined into a division commanded by a Major General, and two or more divisions were joined to make an army corps commanded by a Lieutenant General. Two or more army corps were joined to make an Army commanded by a General. Then we have the rank of Field Marshall who might command several armies or be farmed out as required.

All this was in place by the time of the Napoleonic Wars. As the US sepearated from british tradion some 20 years previous, there are minor differences in detail but the above is basuically correct for the USA circa 1800, though with name changes for ranks as the previous posts show.

For example, the US prefers sections to operate together as squads so they can have a experienced sergeant in command, Aust has preferred to have corporals in command with sections the smallest field unit. The british have stayed with the regiment system and move a battalion into and then out of a war zone as a body of men. The US chose not to..this caused unnecessary casualties in Vietnam as soldiers could not bond with the new guys flown in to the unit whilst the unit stayed in country. The US has since gone some way to reversing this, by implementing a system of regiments back into the army. The US also has far more sergeant ranks than most armies. In WWII, a division was the common unit moved by headquarters, but now the common manouver unit is reduced brigade size, or an all arms team, often put together to do a task, with a battalion around which supporting units are added to meet the job requirements. Rough terrain might call for a infantry battalion to be the basis, whilst desert terrain might call for a cavalry unit and so on....

Let me know if you have any specific questions, otherwise I will leave you in shock and awe at how all this came about from throwing rocks at each other...
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 06:40 am
@boomerang,
Concerning non-coms, Non-commissioned officers are not really officers, they are senior enlisted men who rise up to a position of authority. Think Sergeants, Staff Sergeants, etc. All commissioned officers of the same rank are nominally equal regardless of if they graduated from a military academy.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 09:12 am
Oh my. You're all so smart. This is way more complicated than I thought. I'm afraid Mo might have bitten off more than he can chew.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 10:49 am
@boomerang,
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-non-commissioned-officer.htm

Quote:
Is a Corporal a Non-Commissioned Officer?
I have been surprised by several answers to the question “Is a corporal a non-commissioned officer?”, saying that a corporal is not an officer. I have been even more surprised to discover that some of these answers have been made by members of the Fighting Services.

In a effort to keep this brief, I will try to avoid both the Naval Service and the Aviation Service, and limit my comments mainly to the Military Service, as I do not wish to discuss the Naval Service’s:

ship-corporal

police-corporal

admiralty commissioned officers

ordnance ordinary officers

navy ordinary officers

commander’s sub-ordinary officers

commander’s petty officers

commander’s substantive-rates

commander’s non-substantive rates.

In other words: sailors no, soldiers yes, flyers no

Obviously there is no such thing as a non-commissioned officer. The phrase “Non-Commissioned Officer” taken on its’ own is gobbledy-gook. A corporal is an officer. No one can hold authority as an officer without a commission. A corporal holds a commission. Therefore a corporal is a commissioned officer, usually referred to as a “Non-Commissioned Officer”.

There are many occupations, besides the Military Service, that use phrases which, separated out on their own, clearly make no sense. Those members of the Fighting Services who have made such silly answers about corporals should immediately review their Articles-of-War, and I suggest, their articles-of-common-sense.

An officer is a lord, or gentleman, or man, who holds no authority of his own.

An officer is a lord, or gentleman, or man, who as an inferior, is given a rank of an officer over other ranks, which rank holds the complete authority or partial authority of his superior who has given such authority to such inferior, either in writing, or on the understanding that it will be given in writing as soon as possible. Such writing is usually referred to as a “commission”, and on some rare occasions as a “warrant”.

In case of the Military Service, any rank in the presence of the enemy, who disobeys a verbal order given by a soldier of higher rank who is also an officer of his regiment, such officer being present, makes himself liable to capital punishment according to the Articles of War.

Accordingly, a corporal is far more likely to be an “officer” than a general is likely to be an “officer”. But I won’t argue the point, and for the moment I will accept that both a corporal-check and a lieutenant-general are officers.

Whether a spiritual lord (bishop) or a temporal lord (peer), Military Service rank always takes precedence over a temporal lord’s (peer’s) rank or spiritual lord’s (bishop’s) rank whilst such lord is in the Military Service.

A bishop or arch-bishop is a lord, but is not a peer.

At this stage there will be no further discussion of bishops or arch-bishops, as not only are they illegal in calvinist countries, but in many non-calvinist countries where they have always been legal, nevertheless bishops and arch-bishops are no longer part of the civil government or even civil state.

A peer is not an officer because he holds his own authority, and therefore commands his own inferiors, or his own soldiers, or his own forces, on his own authority, not on someone else’s authority. Exactly the same apples to a knight.

Of course both a peer and a knight are appointed by patent (letter-patent) which is the same as an officer appointed by commission. So what is the difference between a patent and a commission? The difference is that the superior giving any commission, including a commission under the written Articles of War, can bring an officer’s commission to an end under strictly laid down written conditions: completing years agreed, or agreed retirement, or court-martial, and so forth. A superior giving a patent to a peer or knight, gives that patent forever, because the superior can never bring the patent he has granted to his inferior to an end. A patent (letter-patent) is forever. Of course these days patents (letter-patents) are usually given by governments for useful inventions and products, not for lordships or knighthoods.

Of course a knight’s patent (letter-patent) comes to an end when he dies, because a knighthood cannot be inherited. The point is that the superior can never take back a knighthood’s patent (letter-patent) granted to his inferior.

A dame is simply the lady (wife) of a knight, and therefore can never inherit a knighthood.

A lord’s (peer’s) patent (letter-patent) does not come to an end when he dies, or in rare cases if it’s a lady (peeress) when she dies, but often does because there is no one to inherit the peership, or the peeress-ship in those rare cases.

It is only in the Royal Family that females have the absolute right to inherit the monarchy, because just as kings are not peers, so queen-regnants are not peeresses.

However in almost all peerage families, the patent strictly lays down that the peerage can only be inherited by “male issue”, meaning a natural-born and legally-born male child. That means that there is a high probability that the family will lose the peerage.

Of course those peerage families that existed before 1199, I believe there is only one such family, and those very few peerage families where the patent lays down “general issue”, are allowed to have female inheritance. Obviously “general issue” means any natural-born and legally-born child. But this is pretty meaningless, because unlike sons where the oldest son always inherits, the oldest daughter can never inherit, because all daughters must inherit equally. Clearly you must split the land between females, but you can’t split a peerage title, so the peerage must die. So it is only those very rare occasions where upon the death of the lord (peer) or lady (peeress) and there is only one daughter, that those very few peerages of “general issue” can ever be inherited by a female.

The term “corporal” means an officer in charge of a corps.

In the Military Service the size of a corps has changed over the centuries, ranging from 1000 men to 60000 men.

The term “corporal” means an officer NOT in charge of a corps in the Military Service.

Over the centuries the numbers of men a corporal-check has held command over have varied from three to sixty. But never a 1000 men, let alone 60000 men.

In recent times a corporal-check commissioned officer is unknown, except for a few instances where the leader of a country has made his entire cavalry regimental body-guard, or horse-guards, all commissioned officers.

A “commissioned officer” in the Military Service (not Naval Service or Aviation Service) means:

King’s Commissioned Officer

Queen’s Commissioned Officer

Parliamentary Commissioned Officer

Speaker’s Commissioned Officer

Governor-General’s Commissioned Officer

Governor’s Commissioned Officer

Viceroy’s Commissioned Officer

Congressional Commissioned Officer

President’s Commissioned Officer

Chief-Executive’s Commissioned Officer

A commissioned officer always holds his rank no matter as to how many different regiments he is transferred to throughout his service in the Military Service (or army). In effect a commissioned officer has not only regimental rank, but also Military Service (or army) rank.

That is why all field marshals or generals always have to hold the rank of Colonel-Horse, or Colonel-Foot, or Colonel-Array, or Colonel-Commandant, in their own regiment, as there is no such thing as a regiment of generals or field-marshals.

A “non-commissioned officer” in the Military Service (not Naval Service or Aviation Service) means:

Colonel-Commandant’s Commissioned Officer

Colonel-Horse’s Commissioned Officer

Colonel-Foot’s Commissioned Officer

Lieutenant-Colonel’s Commissioned Officer

A non-commissioned officer does not hold any rank in his particular Military Service (or army). He only holds rank in his own regiment, and therefore loses his non-commissioned officer rank if he ever transfers to another regiment, and immediately becomes a:

private-man

common-man

common-soldier

private-gentleman

private-soldier

private-rank

private-sentinel

private-piquet

private-vedette

horse-guard

dragoon

lancer

trooper

foot-guard

fusilier

carabineer

ranger

rifleman

parachutist

marine

maximman

matross

The fact that such non-commissioned officer is demoted to private-man upon joining his new regiment, is almost invariably promoted up to his old non-commissioned officer rank within 24 hours upon joining his new regiment, is irrelevant. He had to lose his non-commissioned officer rank and become a private-man rank upon his transfer to his new regiment, if only for a few hours.

The private-man rank and the commissioned officer rank are both the same, in the sense that they both keep their rank when they transfer to another regiment.

Talking about ranks, it might be useful to list the basic ones over the centuries:

Common-Man (or Common-Soldier)

Corporal-Check

Cornet (or Guidon, Ensign, Partizan, Exempt, Sub-Lieutenant)

Lieutenant-Horse (or Lieutenant-Foot)

Captain-Horse (or Captain-Foot)

Captain-Major (or Corporal-Major)

Lieutenant-Colonel

Colonel-Horse (or Colonel-Foot)

Corporal-Field (or Corporal-General, Brigadier-General)

Corporal-Major-General & Field-Marshal (or Major-General)

Lieutenant-General & Field-Marshal (or Lieutenant-General)

Captain-General & Field-Marshal (or Captain-General)

As you can see, there used to be only one private-man or common-man rank:

Common-Man

And there used to be only one non-commissioned officer rank:

Corporal-Check

Although the rank of corporal-check is common in infantry regiments, it is only in english speaking countries that it is common in both infantry and cavalry, or armor regiments. Most other countries use a different name for the rank in non-infantry regiments, such as:

Brigadier-Check

Bombardier-Check

As a matter of interest, during World War I, the following terms were adopted to clarify officer authority and officer rank:

Section Commander

Corporal-Check

Platoon Commander

Sergeant-Foot, Ensign, Partizan, Exempt, Sub-Lieutenant, Second-Lieutenant

Company Commander

Captain-Foot

Officer Commanding

Lieutenant-Colonel

General Officer Commanding

Major-General, Lieutenant-General

General Officer Commanding in Chief

Captain-General, Field-Marshal

artillery sub-brigades (exactly the same as regiments) used:

Detachment Commander

Bombardier-Check

Troop Commander

Conductor-Array, Sergeant-Array, Second-Lieutenant

Battery Commander

Captain-Array

Officer-Commanding

Lieutenant-Colonel

cavalry regiments or armor regiments used:

Patrol Commander, Vehicle Commander

Corporal-Check

Troop Leader (the term “Troop Commander” has already been used above)

Corporal-Horse, Sergeant-Horse, Sergeant-Array, Cornet, Guidon

Squadron Leader (why “Squadron Commander” is not used is not known)

Captain-Horse, Captain-Array

Officer Commanding

Lieutenant-Colonel

In the present day Military Service there are a few more ranks than those already mentioned above, but I just want to concentrate on one peculiar one: the lance-corporal

The lance-corporal is an officer but, is not an officer rank, is not a non-commissioned officer, and is not a commissioned officer.

A lance-corporal is in fact a private-man drawing the same pay and holding the same officer authority or commander authority as a corporal-check. However he is not a Colonel’s Commissioned Officer, he is a Colonel’s Temporary Officer. Therefore a lance-corporal can be demoted for no reason whatsoever by the Lieutenant-Colonel, and no court-martial is required, and neither is any allegation of inefficiency or impropriety required.

Before the term “non-commissioned officer” was invented, the term “staff-officer” was used, or occasionally “regimental officer”. Staff officer means something completely different these days, and regimental officer is no improvement on non-commissioned officer, so I will stick to “non-commissioned officer”, despite the difficulty the term appears to be causing to a few members of the Fighting Services.

The best substitution for “non-commissioned officer” would be “petty officer”, but I guess the Naval Service has used it so long that it would now never allow its’ duplicate use by the Military Service.

I hope the above may be of some interest to those inquiring into the most important and most powerful officer rank ever created in the Military Service, or more accurately, the Non-Military Service officer rank of Non-Commissioned Officer rank of corporal-check created in the regiments of the Military Service:

the CORPORAL!


0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 11:55 am
Well, that certainly is not going to help Boom at all, and it appears to be from a Canadian or otherwise a Commonwealth source, since it includes a lot of nonsense which has absolutely no relevance to the United States Army.

Boom, i would advise that you take from these posts the information on the grades of officer, from Second Lieutenant through General, along with the illustration provided of their rank insignia (which is the proper term, since there are other insignia on uniforms which do not denote rank). I'll go see if i can find the same thing for non-commissioned officers (a term which is definitely not and oxymoron).
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 12:01 pm
Here, this is gonna stretch the page, but it shows all the current rank insignia for enlisted personnel in the United States Army:

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w9/ChuckAnderson_/US.jpg

It might be really cool for Mo to make his own displays, he could draw and color the rank insignia of enlisted personnel and officers. We'll just slip over the issue of Warrant Officers, and keep it simple.
Seed
 
  3  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 12:18 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Here, this is gonna stretch the page, but it shows all the current rank insignia for enlisted personnel in the United States Army:

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w9/ChuckAnderson_/US.jpg

It might be really cool for Mo to make his own displays, he could draw and color the rank insignia of enlisted personnel and officers. We'll just slip over the issue of Warrant Officers, and keep it simple.


Some of those ranks haven't been used in a long time Set. Spc-# are not longer used. There is only one 1Sgt Rank as well

As far as officers positioning of where they are within the command structure really depends on what is needed for the unit and what is available. I have seen many 1st LTs as Company commanders. And even seen a Major as battalion commander.

but generally this is who it went (well since I have been in in the past 5 years)

2nd Lt- Goffer lol Low Ranking staff positions at the Battalion level, , as well as Plt Leader
1st LT- staff positions at the Battalion level, , PLT leader, company executive officer (second in charge of the company) and company commander
Captain- Company Commander, Mid Level Staff postions at the Battalion level
Major - Battalion Executive officer, Mid level Staff Position at the Battalion level, Battalion Commander.
Col.- Battalion Commander, Division Commander

Higher ranks I never had much dealings with. I never bothered to know much about them as I would never really have any interaction with them at my level. Though they are your Generals and they run post, and all sorts of other things. Also, it should be noted that just because you are a certain rank, it doesn't matter where you are located in the structure. A 2nd Lt could be working in a Division Staff position just as much as a Major could be. It all depends on your unit and like stated at the start, what the current need is.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 01:32 pm
@Seed,
No more Specialist grades? I am crushed.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 01:35 pm
@roger,
A minor caveat, Boomerang. No matter how many hash marks Uncle General has, "Lifer" is not a proper form of address, and should not be used.
 

Related Topics

Small mystery container - Question by XxCaprixX
Disqualified for something I don't have - Question by garretr1945
Muslim are terrorists? - Question by usmankhalid665
Any US Navy/Army Veterans on this site? - Question by AlliCat15
Military uniforms during postpartum - Question by genamarie
Confused again??? - Question by bulldog-2010
home visits - Question by Shirley Breyfogle
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Calling all military know-it-alls.
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/01/2021 at 04:01:25