# Naval Officers Once Again to Wear the Executive Curl



## Blatchman

This was posted in another forum I frequent thought it would be of interest.

Lauzon Presents Bill to Reintroduce Executive Curl to Navy Uniform

Ottawa March 5, 2010 - OTTAWA - Today, Guy Lauzon, MP for Stormont-Dundas-South Glengarry, introduced and spoke to his Private Members Motion in the House of Commons to reintroduce the Navy Executive Curl to the maritime command uniforms of the Canadian Forces. This motion comes as the Navy is preparing to celebrate its 100th anniversary.

“The loss of the executive curl on navy uniforms was a huge hit to morale back in the 1960s. This is one of the reasons why I want to give back part of the navy's pride and traditions which were lost with amalgamation in 1968”, said MP Lauzon.

“Today, Canada's navy is the only blue-water force in the world that does not incorporate some form of executive curl, national emblem, or a nautical icon”, Lauzon continued.

“I hope that this motion will gain support from all parties in the House,” he concluded. “To some people, this motion seems very simple and unimportant. But to many historians, military enthusiasts, and our veterans, it is just a small token to show our respect and appreciation.”


----------



## gcclarke

The title mostly speaks for itself. Since the House of Commons started sitting once again post-proroguement, one of the first private members motions that was brought forth was by Guy Lauzon, a Conservative party MP from eastern Ontario, who moved "That, in the opinion of the House, in light of the upcoming centennial of the Canadian Navy, the government should consider reinstating the Navy executive curl on its uniforms." This motion was, after about 13 minutes of bantering, unanimously adopted by the House.

And I do realize that this particular motion is not binding, it merely requests that the government should consider the idea. That having been said, what with the unanimous support, I don't think it's an idea that will be ignored. 

Here is a transcript of the proceedings.


[quote author=Mr. Guy Lauzon, CPC]The navy uniform, in particular, lost one of its very unique traditions which distinguished it from the two junior services. The navy executive curl, also known as Elliott's Eye, was removed from the sleeve of naval officers' uniforms. This left Canada as the only blue water navy in the world whose officers did not sport either an executive curl, a stylized national emblem, a nautical icon or a star in its ranking scheme.

It is important for us to realize that for members of the Canadian Forces, the navy being no exception, these small details and the traditions associated with them bring much pride and esprit de corps. Even members of the Canadian Coast Guard wear a maple leaf with their rank insignia with the original intention to set itself apart from the navy and its executive curl.

The tradition of the navy incorporating the executive curl is a long one. In 1856, the Royal Navy instituted an executive curl and when the Canadian Navy was created in 1910, it adopted the curl as well. In fact, of the 22 countries in the Commonwealth who maintain a navy, 18 of them incorporate the executive curl into their ranking system. This loss of the executive curl on the navy uniform meant a loss of some of the identity of the navy.

I believe the timing of the motion is significant and important as well. With the 100th anniversary of the Canadian Navy, what better time to right this wrong and reincorporate the executive curl into the uniform of the navy? That is why I am here today to ask the House to support my efforts. This motion is aimed to give the navy back part of its identity lost in 1968 and to support the men and women of the Canadian Forces.
[/quote]


----------



## ModlrMike

Call me a cynic if you will, but I look forward to reading the "we have better things to spend money on" arguments. Just to clarify my bias, I support the initiative.


----------



## GAP

uhhhh....guys....knowing little about the navy, could someone explain what this Navy executive curl is? haircut/decoration/what?


----------



## kratz

I know wikipedia is not always the best reference, but this article does have an image  of the executive curl. It's the Officer's rank, with one bar having a curl in it on their uniform.


----------



## GAP

Ok...that makes more sense now....thanks


----------



## gcclarke

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Call me a cynic if you will, but I look forward to reading the "we have better things to spend money on" arguments. Just to clarify my bias, I support the initiative.



Oh, I'm sure some people will be mentioning it. But I personally feel that this particular program will have a rather large "bang for your buck" factor. I personally lament the fact that we have lost many of our traditions, and that this is a great step in the right direction. And I know that I'm certainly not alone in that regard. And it's not like a few slip-ons, a pair of shoulder-boards and tailoring a tunic will be all that expensive per person. 

Now if only we could get the "Royal" back and stop pretending that anyone thinks the new toasts of the day were a good idea.


----------



## Acer Syrup

I guess the only person who won't like it will be the base tailor... a new challenge is always good though.

So I guess my question would be, what would some of the junior officers ranks look like? i.e SLt and A/SLt

The RN uses this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Navy_officer_rank_insignia

And from my understanding (as I am a wipper snapper) the RCN used:

Mid, SLt, A/Lt, Lt, ...

What to do with that little bar???


----------



## hugh19

That's easy. Just a loop with the little bar. Just like RN Warrant Officers used to have.


----------



## FDO

I think it's a good idea. They gave us back our uniform, sort of. Why not the curl. I think we should go back to wearing our ranks too. Can you imagine how screwed up some RSM would be to have a "Hookie Scribe" working for him/her!!?


----------



## Journeyman

As today's Duty Nay-Sayer, the motion merely reads that "the government _consider_..." -- it's not a done-deal.

That being said, I also hope you swabbies get your curl back.  :nod:



(And agreed, I've no love for the new toasts. But I've been at enough Joint Mess Dinners to appreciate the creativity of some Subbies in _somehow_ working the original ones into their spiel   )


----------



## willellis

Like the idea myself. I can understand the argument that some people might make about $$ could be put to better use, but this can't really cost that much, can it?


----------



## gcclarke

With regard to the subbies, I also don't think it'd bad to have the loop with the full bar, and then the stripe below.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Call me cynical (correct term?) but by the time the contracting and production of the curl wouldn't the centennial be almost over?

Edited for spelling


----------



## MSEng314

Seems pretty unlikely considering it was discussed recently at the Naval Board 03-09 in October of 2009:



> .....
> Item XIII - Round Table ......
> 
> 32. Comd MARCOM. The Comd MARCOM briefed the Board on the following issues:
> 
> The emerging way ahead on the Operational Service Medal and the Naval applications he expects to be instituted for this medal. He also briefed on the ongoing work for the seas service badge as a CNC project.
> _ The Navy is not considering a return to the executive curl, the square rig or the White Ensign._
> 
> .....


----------



## gcclarke

Just because the Navy's senior leadership wasn't going to go ahead and try to make their rank insignia different (more special?) than the other branches unprompted, does not mean that they wouldn't gladly support doing so upon being prompted (directed?) to by Parliament. And I agree, this isn't something that should have been initiated by CMS, or anyone in the CF for that matter. We lost the curl as the result of an act of Parliament, it is only right that it is Parliament that initiates us getting it back.


----------



## Edward Campbell

I think the _executive curl_ is just another problem unless it is part of a larger, Navy, solution.

Back when the earth was still cooling and I was in the staff college, one of my classmates, who went to achieve very, very high rank in the navy, proposed just such a solution: total *Navy* identity for all naval personnel - this is before we had _"Coates of many colours"_, i.e. the DEU introduced by then Minister of National Defence Robert Coates to replace the _"jolly green jumper"_ - wherein their status as Navy overrode their status as members of this, that or the other branch.

I can't remember the details but I do recall that it involved the curl for MARS and MARE and straight stripes plus a badge for all others, plus colours between the stripes and so on. I also recall that he had an all ranks solution.

Some years later, when he held flag rank and we were reminiscing over a pint or two, he mentioned that the idea was not dead but it never quite worked its way up anyone's list of priorities. He also reinforced the notion that _identity_ 'solutions' for the Navy and the Air Force, while very highly desirable, were still fraught with difficulties and needed to be comprehensive: all ranks and all branches, in both services, and all at once.


----------



## Journeyman

Again, this isn't my turf, but are they considering "straight bars" for RegF and "wavy navy bars" for Shads Res?

 :stirpot:


----------



## Michael OLeary

Will proposed changes changes to rank insignia, except for promotions and initial issue, be at personal expense?


----------



## Monsoon

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Again, this isn't my turf, but are they considering "straight bars" for RegF and "wavy navy bars" for Shads Res?


As long as the all Reg F guys who were trained by Res folks get to wear wavy bars too, why not?


----------



## 1feral1

Personally, I think this is great.

Thre is nothing wrong with identity between branches of service. I signed up in Jan 1976, and I do remember the days of the generic CF Greens, where we all wore the same uniforms and rank.  Much was lost and destroyed with our customs and traditions in the Trudeau era.

OWDU


----------



## gcclarke

As the motion was only passed in Parliament on Friday afternoon, it will likely be some time before we actually hear any details as to how it's going to be being implemented. 

Which, of course, doesn't stop us from engaging in rampant speculation. I doubt there will be any difference between the Reg and Res insignia. After all, the motion only mentioned the re-introduction of the Executive Curl. The same goes for the re-introduction of branch colours between your stripes (For everyone other than the surgeons of course, who do currently have their red stripes). I would consider that a separate initiative. Not that I'd mind a little green in there. 

As for the question of who pays for it, well, frankly considering how bloody hard it is to get a pair Lt(N) slip-ons today, while they may not intend for it to be at personal expense, it may just end up being that that's the only way one is able to actually get a hold of them in a timely fashion.


----------



## FSTO

There will be no difference between Reg and Res.
Also, scuttlebutt says that the Admiral was dead against it but that he was overrode by the Minister and CDS.


----------



## jollyjacktar

They have had the curl on the mess dress for a while now, and there also is the maroon embedded in the medical officers shoulder boards too.  As such, I would say it is a work in progress.


----------



## quadrapiper

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> They have had the curl on the mess dress for a while now, and there also is the maroon embedded in the medical officers shoulder boards too.  As such, I would say it is a work in progress.


Scarlet/red for medical officers; maroon is used by, if I understand it correctly, medical administrators (formerly wardmasters). Saw such on a Lt (N) nurse.

So this would mean good-by to the "plastic" single-sheet rank braid?

Mia must be having fits right about now... visions of all of MARPAC's commissioned and NCdt population lined up at her door, tunics in hand; unless the snotties stay curl-less.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

No worries Journeyman [3]: the "wavy-Navy" stripes were canned in canada shortly after WWII while the Navy was still Royal. So there is no going back. After the "Wavy" and until unification the reserve officers of all Reserves (in those days there were two reserves: the Volunteer reserve and the Reserve, which was made of Merchant seaman. Each had its own different wavy pattern in WWII) wore the straight bars with an "R" inside the curl.

By the way, Mia does not have to worry: I have seen how the Brits do it: The curls and wide bar are a single piece pre-sewn at the shop by the supplier so all there is to do for the tailor is sow it on the uniform in one piece, just like the "tape" we now use.

P.S.: We could just start wearing them at least at sea, without "formal approval". In the days of the green unibags, that is how we started the Navy Whites revolution: we just started buying USN pattern whites and wear them on special occasions, then on Fridays for weepers, then when officer of the day, then ... You get the point.


----------



## Snakedoc

This is great news to see and about time!  I never thought the politicians would ever have this on their radar, let alone pass a motion to consider bringing this back.  I fully support this and think that it would be great for a stronger sense of naval identity.  Not a bad Centennial gift for the Navy IMO.


----------



## gcclarke

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> P.S.: We could just start wearing them at least at sea, without "formal approval". In the days of the green unibags, that is how we started the Navy Whites revolution: we just started buying USN pattern whites and wear them on special occasions, then on Fridays for weepers, then when officer of the day, then ... You get the point.



I actually do know one MARSie who already does this for. He either them made, or obtained a pair of Royal Navy Lieutenant shoulderboards. He typically wears them for things like RPCs and when the XO orders "red sea rig". 

As for quadrapiper's question, no executive curl for snotties! That is to say, Portugal is the only country that I noticed where naval cadets (Aspirante) wear "Elliot's Eye". I highly doubt we'll be following their lead in this regard.


----------



## RhumRunner

If the naval officers get their executive curl, I think it would be fair for the NCMs to get their sea-time service stripes.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

RumRunner said:
			
		

> If the naval officers get their executive curl, I think it would be fair for the NCMs to get their sea-time service stripes.



Hear! Hear! RumRunner.

And their trade level badges, and the killicks instead of maple leaf for PO2 and below.


----------



## Sailorwest

I am going to take a very much wait and see approach on this. A motion in parliament such as this doesn't have a lot of weight behind it and given that the Naval Board comments, it certainly doesn't seem to be a priority of the adults in the Navy. 

The comment that intrigued me was that the 'man who would be king' while attending  a ceremony he was at in Canada, questioned the CDS or the minister why his Canadian Naval uniform did not have the curl. Apparently the CDS and MND are the ones who have pushed for this to occur after being asked about it by Charles. I heard that there is to be an announcement in May. All rumours of course but fun to share.


----------



## ModlrMike

Is there some specific reason the Minister and CDS can't make it so on their own authorities?


----------



## Michael OLeary

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Is there some specific reason the Minister and CDS can't make it so on their own authorities?



Well, firstly:



			
				Sailorwest said:
			
		

> All rumours of course but fun to share.



And think of how long a thread we'd have here if the Minister and the CDS simply decided one day to order the Navy to start wearing the curl "because the Prince wanted it".

It would be an orgy of online rhetoric from the Naval protectionists, the ant-Monarchists and the "first, let's kill all the politicos" in their race to be the best at butchering the Queen's English over the affront it would have been to each of them personally.


----------



## ModlrMike

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> And think of how long a thread we'd have here if the Minister and the CDS simply decided one day to order the Navy to start wearing the curl "because the Prince wanted it".
> 
> It would be an orgy of online rhetoric from the Naval protectionists, the ant-Monarchists and the "first, let's kill all the politicos" in their race to be the best at butchering the Queen's English over the affront it would have been to each of them personally.



Too true!    

However, is there any regulatory limit?


----------



## dapaterson

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Too true!
> 
> However, is there any regulatory limit?



QR&Os have an idea.

17.01 – UNIFORMS

Members of the Canadian Forces shall wear the uniforms prescribed by the Chief of the Defence Staff.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Slowly undoing the poison's of the Trudeau era. Looking forward to it becoming official.


----------



## OldSolduer

Colin P said:
			
		

> Slowly undoing the poison's of the Trudeau era. Looking forward to it becoming official.



I remember not too fondly the "Trudeau era" The decade of darkness was in reality about two decades. 
Sorry, got off topic.

To my Naval comrades, I hope that it does happen!


----------



## dapaterson

Colin P said:
			
		

> Slowly undoing the poison's of the Trudeau era. Looking forward to it becoming official.



I guess this will be next, then...


----------



## dimsum

FSTO said:
			
		

> There will be no difference between Reg and Res.
> *Also, scuttlebutt says that the Admiral was dead against it* but that he was overrode by the Minister and CDS.



I personally can't think of any reason why the Admiral (or anyone else, for that matter) would be against it, unless it was based on $ or convenience reasons (ie. Mia trying to get all west coast Naval Officers to get it done at once.)  Were there any reasons put forward why the senior leadership would be against it?  It's not like they're trying to change the entire uniform.


----------



## Chanada

> Slowly undoing the poison's of the Trudeau era. Looking forward to it becoming official.


Sorry ...you can blame PET for a lot including ushering in the decades of darkness...but the "distinctive" green uniform and approach to a single set of rank badges etc... to it came with Lester Pearson and the architect/designer of the green was the CDS at the time...JV Allard...


----------



## Steel Badger

Chanada said:
			
		

> Sorry ...you can blame PET for a lot including ushering in the decades of darkness...but the "distinctive" green uniform and approach to a single set of rank badges etc... to it came with Lester Pearson and the architect/designer of the green was the CDS at the time...JV Allard...



Very true! (especially the bit about blaming PET a lot > )


----------



## IntlBr

I hope this may  indicate an eventual return to the pip-system for Army officers, and a less-visually-repulsive system for our Air Force officers (aka, the blue-on-blue of our commonwealth contemporaries/historic uniforms).


----------



## WLSC

> I hope this may  indicate an eventual return to the pip-system for Army officers, and a less-visually-repulsive system for our Air Force officers (aka, the blue-on-blue of our commonwealth contemporaries/historic uniforms).



I think it is a good idea for the navy.   It doesnt change a thing but the pip system, it's an other story.  I'm in for 24 years and never saw that here.   Aldo, I know the system.  The actual rank system his good.  Dont change it.


----------



## Old Sweat

Chanada said:
			
		

> Sorry ...you can blame PET for a lot including ushering in the decades of darkness...but the "distinctive" green uniform and approach to a single set of rank badges etc... to it came with Lester Pearson and the architect/designer of the green was the CDS at the time...JV Allard...



The green uniform was actually introduced to the public circa 1966, which was before JV Allard becoming CDS. The actual architect is lost in the mists of time, but it probably originated in one of Paul Hellyer's circle of toadies advisers. It was a logical extension of the amendment to the NDA which came into effect at the end of February 1968 and grouped us all into a single service. Thus, it was planned before the act was passed and promulgated. Edit to add: Allard became CDS in mid-1966, but I still maintain the single service uniform had been unveiled before then. Could he have changed the decision to go for a single uniform? Probably not, even if he had wanted to. I still maintain it was a political decision.

Allard, who was a large officer, embraced it and appeared in a CF green dress uniform at one of the last ceremonial parades herld by 4 CMBG in North Germany before the move to Lahr and Baden. Suffice to say, he looked like a pale version of Idi Amin, or maybe a Franco Herman Goering. If that does not give you an indication of what I thought about the whole bloody thing, you have not been paying attention.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Corps of Guides said:
			
		

> I hope this may  indicate an eventual return to the pip-system for Army officers, and a less-visually-repulsive system for our Air Force officers (aka, the blue-on-blue of our commonwealth contemporaries/historic uniforms).



Would be great for our friends in the "R"CAF. Why stop there. Even under unification, we in the Navy managed to re-introduce our rank system as it quickly became clear that the "army" ones didn't work for us: A ship with seven Captains!!! That was worse than a Captain with seven children!!! So why not relieve the air force of the lieutenants, captains, majors and so forth to give them back their Flying Officers, Squadron Leaders and Group Captains ? If the Navy could do it under unification (and it was official in the CFAO's) the Air Force could get it done even now without any Act of Parliament.


----------



## Neill McKay

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> So why not relieve the air force of the lieutenants, captains, majors and so forth to give them back their Flying Officers, Squadron Leaders and Group Captains ?



I think the main reason is that the rank names do not fit with the current organization of the air force; there's been a rank inflation of one step in key command positions.

If they were to shift back to their pre-unification ranks they would have wing commanders commanding squadrons and group captains commanding wings.  Squadron leaders would not lead squadrons, and there is no longer such a thing as a "group" in the same sense that there was in the RCAF.


----------



## Old Sweat

Pre-unification as far as I can recall, RCAF squadrons were commanded by Wing Commanders. I believe this also was the case in the later years of the Second World War. 

Given the close ties between our air force and the USAF, I wonder how much support there is for a reversion to RCAF ranks.


----------



## dimsum

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> So why not relieve the air force of the lieutenants, captains, majors and so forth to give them back their Flying Officers, Squadron Leaders and Group Captains ?



Adding to what N. McKay said, there are also many in the AF who aren't aircrew that may object to being called "Pilot Officer" or "Flying Officer".  However, if you want to lessen the amount of "Captains" onboard ship, reverting back to Flight Lieutenant might be easier (and won't confuse the Navy so much.)   :blotto:


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Adding to what N. McKay said, there are also many in the AF who aren't aircrew that may object to being called "Pilot Officer" or "Flying Officer".  However, if you want to lessen the amount of "Captains" onboard ship, reverting back to Flight Lieutenant might be easier (and won't confuse the Navy so much.)   :blotto:



There always were "non-aircrew" types in the AF, even in the days of Flight Officers and Pilot Officers. No confusion in ranks in the Navy: we have always known what you other types are called. Only confusion I ever saw was on the faces of assorted landlubbers at AF bases and Army camps when I simply ignored anyone calling me by other than my proper rank. P.S. Dimsum, with "Flight Lt's" are you proposing the return to the fold of those people now in light blue that are kind enough to accept our hospitality from time to time?


----------



## dimsum

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> P.S. Dimsum, with "Flight Lt's" are you proposing the return to the fold of those people now in light blue that are kind enough to accept our hospitality from time to time?



Well, if they spend over half the year onboard a ship...    

To appease the "but we're not sailors!" crowd, perhaps something distinctive like keeping the light blue shirt with the Naval uniform?  keeping the shaggy mane?   ;D

I shouldn't continue with this too much longer; "they" may start to question my loyalty to Big Blue vice Big "Darker" Blue!


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The green uniform was actually introduced to the public circa 1966, which was before JV Allard becoming CDS. The actual architect is lost in the mists of time, but it probably originated in one of Paul Hellyer's circle of toadies advisers. It was a logical extension of the amendment to the NDA which came into effect at the end of February 1968 and grouped us all into a single service. Thus, it was planned before the act was passed and promulgated. Edit to add: Allard became CDS in mid-1966, but I still maintain the single service uniform had been unveiled before then. Could he have changed the decision to go for a single uniform? Probably not, even if he had wanted to. I still maintain it was a political decision.
> 
> Allard, who was a large officer, embraced it and appeared in a CF green dress uniform at one of the last ceremonial parades herld by 4 CMBG in North Germany before the move to Lahr and Baden. Suffice to say, he looked like a pale version of Idi Amin, or maybe a Franco Herman Goering. If that does not give you an indication of what I thought about the whole bloody thing, you have not been paying attention.



Thank you for the background, as always with this site you will learn something new everyday. Regardless of who introduced it long past due to be rid of the whole sorry idea.


----------



## Pusser

A couple of things to note in the comments above:

The "Wavy Navy" was the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve (RCNVR) made up of non-professional sailors, usually trained at units inland.  Their officers wore wavy rank stripes and the curl was squarish.  The Royal Canadian Naval Reserve (RCNR) was made up of professional sailors (e.g. merchant marine) and their officers' rank stripes were made up of two intertwined half-strips of braid and their curl formed a six-pointed star.  These stripes were sometimes referred to as "cable-link."  The regular (RCN) officers were sometimes referred to as "straight-stripers."  In the 1950s, the RCNR and RCNVR were amalgamated into the RCN(R) and the wavy and cable link stripes disappeared.  The placement of an "R" inside the curl is used in the UK, but I don't believe it was ever used in Canada.  I think we had switched to green before that was introduced there.

The RCN discontinued trade level badges (i.e. the use of stars and crowns to denote level) in 1951 when new Canadian trade badges were introduced to replace the British ones (a Mainguy report recommendation to make the RCN more Canadian).  Thus, everybody from Ordinary Seaman to Chief wore the same badge (with a maple leaf) except in those cases where career advancement meant actually changing trades (e.g. mechanics became artificers).  This practice has been carried into the naval trade badges currently in use.  Interestingly, the Army versions denote trade level.

I don't think the Naval leadership was so much against this intitiative as much as they just see other priorities right now.  The Fleet is on the verge of rust-out.  On the other hand, sometimes little things can do a lot for morale and should be considered.  Sometimes the leadership can forget that.

Doing something just because the Prince asked a question?  It wouldn't be the first time.  There's an entire regiment of the British Army where everyone wears corporals stripes (i.e two of the them).  It all started apparently because Queen Victoria commented one day that one stripe looked a little scruffy on a guard at the palace.  The next day everybody had two and have had them ever since.  The current CF salute actually came from the Navy who started turning the hand forward (vice the traditional Army open-handed salute that he Mounties sitll use) back in the 19th Century because Queen Victoria didn't like to see the sailors' tar-stained hands.

Not that it's really on topic, but I just absolutely cringe when I hear people say "Captain Navy So and So" or "Lieutenant Navy Bloggins."  The ranks are pronounced "Captain" or "Lieutenant" (non-existent "Fs" aside) and "Navy" is not supposed to be said OR written out.  The book says that when it is a naval rank, the letter "N" shall follow in brackets to denote that it is a naval rank.  Nowhere does it say that you say it or write it.  Thus, it should be Capt(N), Captain(N), Lt(N) or Lieutenant(N) and that's it!!!  If you need to tell people that you are a Captain or Lieutenant "Navy" when speaking to them, your command presence is not sufficient for the office you hold.  Minor concessions are allowed for telephone conversations if necessary (e.g. securing accomodations for a Captain(N)).

As for the executive curl, I'm all for it.  I think our regular uniforms should match our mess kit.  I'd also like to see the Army with pips and crowns (although perhaps using something other than the British Bath Star might be in order - a maple leaf perhaps?).  Junior sailors should also be in square rig, but I'm not holding my breath on that one.


----------



## gcclarke

The following is best spoken in a nice southern drawl:



> Now, is that a "Yes Sir!" Captain, or a "Hey you!" Captain?



People making the distinction when there is no reason whatsoever to do so is probably my 2nd biggest work-related pet peeve. The first being people who say "The HMCS Insert-ship-name-here". If it's Friday in the NCR and you're introducing me, then sure, you might want to specify what element I'm in. But if I'm in uniform, they can bloody well see that I'm in the Navy. 

The most egregious example that I've seen was at an NTO Mess dinner, at which awards were being presented for top candidates for various phases in the CSEO and MSEO training. The nice Lieutenant who was making the announcements made sure that he specified that this award, which inherently can only be presented to a Naval Officer, was being awarded to a "Lieutenant(Navy)". This despite the fact that the only two people in the room who weren't in the Navy were the Air Force Image Tech taking the pictures and the Bartender. 

Oh, and in those rare occasions where one has to specify verbally, I typically use "Naval Lieutenant". It just sounds less idiotic.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Pusser said:
			
		

> The placement of an "R" inside the curl is used in the UK, but I don't believe it was ever used in Canada.



It was: I have seen some on display in Reserve Units "mini-museum" display cases. They had the "R" and Canada shoulder badges.



			
				Pusser said:
			
		

> I don't think the Naval leadership was so much against this intitiative as much as they just see other priorities right now.  The Fleet is on the verge of rust-out.



It should not be a priority for them. I have been around since mid-70's and the verge of rusting out has been the natural peacetime condition of the Canadian Navy since the early 60's. There is nothing the Naval leadership can do about it (except scream at politicians, perhaps!). This comes from an imbecilic procurement system. It may (I emphasize may before someone crucifies me) make sense for the army, for instance, to buy 100 Leo's in one shut. But no self respecting businessman who operates a fleet of 100 trucks with a lifespan of ten years buys them all at one. He buys 10 new ones every year. That is how Navy procurement should operate too. The fleet is 33 ships strong now (or is it 32?) with an average life span of 35 yrs. We should be welcoming a new ship to the fleet every year, while saying goodbye to another one, just as we should see one unit a year go into mid-life and one return from it. It is incredible that politicians who have been struggling for years to come up with a shipbuilding support policy do not even grasp such a simple concept. 

P.S.: I agree it would be nice to see the square rig  back, but please, with a modern day solution to the %^&*$#@ jumper that took an hour to get into.


----------



## gcclarke

I will say, tradition for tradition's sake is fine, but not when it comes at the expense of functionality. I can't really see any way of designing square rig that's more functional than the NICE NCDs that are coming out. And you know what? Should someone manage to do so, I'd expect Officers to wear them too. Wearing different kit is all well and good when ashore (DEU versus NCDs), but operational kit should reflect the job that people are doing, not their rank.


----------



## FSTO

gcclarke said:
			
		

> I will say, tradition for tradition's sake is fine, but not when it comes at the expense of functionality. I can't really see any way of designing square rig that's more functional than the NICE NCDs that are coming out. And you know what? Should someone manage to do so, I'd expect Officers to wear them too. Wearing different kit is all well and good when ashore (DEU versus NCDs), but operational kit should reflect the job that people are doing, not their rank.


DEU's and square rig (if that came about) would be only for ceremonial or if you are posted ashore. Working dress will always be the NCD's.
My biggest pet peeve is seeing folks who are posted to an office (MARPAC/LANT CMS Ottawa) wearing NCD's. They think it makes them look operational, I think it makes them look stupid.


----------



## Michael OLeary

So, a new square rig would be like a Navy version of Garrison Dress?


----------



## Pusser

No, "square rig" is a ceremonial uniform.  The Americans refer to it as their "Cracker Jack" outfit.  It's a traditinal sailor suit, complete with bell bottom trousers, seaman's cap (the one the sea cadets still wear) and an open-front jumper with seaman's collar (the flap on the back).  It's a sharp uniform and leaves no doubt that the person wearing is a sailor.  I was wearing the current DEU one day and someone asked me if I worked for Air Canada (which was a step above being confused for a bus driver or baggage handler, which happened to me when we wore green, but still wrong)!

It is worth noting that the US Navy dropped their "Cracker Jacks" in the 70s and saw their recruiting numbers plummet.  They were re-introduced shortly thereafter.

On the subject of colour between rank stripes (officially known as "distinction cloth").  Both the RCN and RN dropped it in the early 60s (prior to unification), largely because they ran out of colours.  There were too many specialist branches to go with the colours of cloth available and so many were wearing light green, which ended up as the general catch-all colour.  There is the story of a laundry officer during WWII who was captured and taken for "special" interrogation because the Nazis thought he was an intelligence officer (both branches wore light green - BTW, the electrical branch wore dark green).  The only branch(es) that kept distinction cloth were the medical officers (doctors) who wore (and still wear) scarlet and the non-doctors of the medical branches (pharmacists, nurses, MAOs, etc) who wore (and still wear) maroon. 

Oldegateboatdriver - did your jumper not have a zipper?  I thought the RCN re-designed them in the 50/60s (many years before the RN did the same).  I certainly had no difficulty putting on the one I wore as a sea cadet in the 70s (which had a zipper).  And no, mine was not specifically manufactured for the Sea Cadets.  As I recall, the Tip Top Tailor tag inside said it was manufactured in the late 50s - I thought it was kind of cool to wear a uniform that was older than I was!


----------



## gcclarke

Ahhh my mistake. Sorry.


----------



## RhumRunner

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> It should not be a priority for them. I have been around since mid-70's and the verge of rusting out has been the natural peacetime condition of the Canadian Navy since the early 60's. There is nothing the Naval leadership can do about it (except scream at politicians, perhaps!). This comes from an imbecilic procurement system. It may (I emphasize may before someone crucifies me) make sense for the army, for instance, to buy 100 Leo's in one shut. But no self respecting businessman who operates a fleet of 100 trucks with a lifespan of ten years buys them all at one. He buys 10 new ones every year. That is how Navy procurement should operate too. The fleet is 33 ships strong now (or is it 32?) with an average life span of 35 yrs. We should be welcoming a new ship to the fleet every year, while saying goodbye to another one, just as we should see one unit a year go into mid-life and one return from it. It is incredible that politicians who have been struggling for years to come up with a shipbuilding support policy do not even grasp such a simple concept.



 :

There you go again. Making perfectly good sense.

OGBD FOR PRIME MINISTER  ;D


----------



## Privateer

If the executive curl were to be reintroduced, I wonder what this would mean for commodores and admirals?  Would they revert to sleeve rings only (and lose the shoulder rank), or would all the admirals have a sleeve rank that looks like a commodore and keep the shoulder ranks?  I think that to do this properly it would have to be the former.  Perhaps this is what causes angst among the higher-ups:  Loss of uniform rank insignia at the flag/general officer level.


----------



## mariomike

Pusser said:
			
		

> It is worth noting that the US Navy dropped their "Cracker Jacks" in the 70s and saw their recruiting numbers plummet.  They were re-introduced shortly thereafter.



Jack Nicholson wore the USN "Cracker Jack" in a movie filmed ( some of it in Toronto ) back in the early 1970's. There was a lady who made a sarcastic remark about the uniform. He told her _exactly_ what he liked most about it!


----------



## tabernac

gcclarke said:
			
		

> As for quadrapiper's question, no executive curl for snotties! That is to say, Portugal is the only country that I noticed where naval cadets (Aspirante) wear "Elliot's Eye". I highly doubt we'll be following their lead in this regard.



When you look at other navies with the curl, it's always with a thick bar. Now consider the rank of SLt. That little spaghetti strap will obviously have to be curled, so by extention, why not NCdts?  It's only logical to have all officers wearing the curl - be it subordinate or commissioned.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Pusser said:
			
		

> Oldegateboatdriver - did your jumper not have a zipper?  I thought the RCN re-designed them in the 50/60s (many years before the RN did the same).  I certainly had no difficulty putting on the one I wore as a sea cadet in the 70s (which had a zipper).  And no, mine was not specifically manufactured for the Sea Cadets.  As I recall, the Tip Top Tailor tag inside said it was manufactured in the late 50s - I thought it was kind of cool to wear a uniform that was older than I was!



We must have been in the Cadets about the same time. I can most certainly tell you that my jumper did NOT have a zipper and was service pattern. Neither did my father's but he left the service shortly after Korea. I seem to remember the summer white jumper having a zipper but I only wore it a few weeks on a gun crew for sunset ceremony. Is that the one you had in mind?



			
				Privateer said:
			
		

> If the executive curl were to be reintroduced, I wonder what this would mean for commodores and admirals?  Would they revert to sleeve rings only (and lose the shoulder rank), or would all the admirals have a sleeve rank that looks like a commodore and keep the shoulder ranks?  I think that to do this properly it would have to be the former.  Perhaps this is what causes angst among the higher-ups:  Loss of uniform rank insignia at the flag/general officer level.



The former (the old sleeve rings only) would be visually more pleasing. I do not think the admirals would complain: If you ever saw a British Vice Admiral walking by with a British Lieutenant General beside him, I can almost guarantee you would be much more impressed with the admiral than the general. Moreover, the current officer rank system, which was kept from unification, used the naval stripes system. Before that, army generals never wore a broad stripe on their sleeves. I think that the consistency of the naval system is such that, even if we went back to the sleeve rings only for admiral, there is enough exposure to the "system" that anyone from the army or air force would easily figure it out: "Gee Sarge! She's got one of them broad stripie and two smaller ones above, would that make her, like two ranks above a Bgen?"


----------



## gcclarke

cheeky_monkey said:
			
		

> When you look at other navies with the curl, it's always with a thick bar. Now consider the rank of SLt. That little spaghetti strap will obviously have to be curled, so by extention, why not NCdts?  It's only logical to have all officers wearing the curl - be it subordinate or commissioned.



My guess would be that the issue of how to work the Subbie curl into things will be to place the stripe below the bar and curl. I suppose alternatively we could work it the same way it is done on the mess kit, which is to have no visual indication whatsoever between the two. Or give subbies the bar, and have our "Midshipman" equivalents wear that little white tab thingie they did before the day everyone wore green. And still do in every other Commonwealth navy. 

If we follow your logic we should also have all officers receiving salutes, be it subordinate or commissioned. It's all the same, right?  :

The entire point of this motion is to go back to our roots, re-introduce a traditional emblem that we inherited from the RN. I don't think we'll be doing so by giving our NCdts a rank insignia that they would not wear anywhere else in the Commonwealth.


----------



## tabernac

gcclarke said:
			
		

> My guess would be that the issue of how to work the Subbie curl into things will be to place the stripe below the bar and curl.


That would be one bastardized looking rank. 



			
				gcclarke said:
			
		

> I suppose alternatively we could work it the same way it is done on the mess kit, which is to have no visual indication whatsoever between the two. Or give subbies the bar, and have our "Midshipman" equivalents wear that little white tab thingie they did before the day everyone wore green. And still do in every other Commonwealth navy.


I'm a NCdt, not a MIDN. I like my spaghetti strap, thanks. 




			
				gcclarke said:
			
		

> If we follow your logic we should also have all officers receiving salutes, be it subordinate or commissioned. It's all the same, right?  :


No. The _only_ difference in the current sleeve and shoulder insignia between an ASLt and a NCdt is 1/4 of an inch of gold braid. 

Both ranks wear a bar as indicator of rank. Likewise, adding the curl to both would not change anything. One rank entails the possession of a scroll, the other does not; one rank gets a salute, the other does not - seems pretty clear to me.



			
				gcclarke said:
			
		

> The entire point of this motion is to go back to our roots, re-introduce a traditional emblem that we inherited from the RN. I don't think we'll be doing so by giving our NCdts a rank insignia that they would not wear anywhere else in the Commonwealth.



That's fine, however it would be something that is distinctly Canadian, while still returning to our roots.


----------



## Michael OLeary

Pusser said:
			
		

> No, "square rig" is a ceremonial uniform.



Well, that makes it quite simple.  All the Navy has to do is authorize a pattern and then decide to what level it's going to delegate the responsibility to raise the non-public funds to pay for them.



> CANADIAN FORCES DRESS INSTRUCTIONS
> 
> CHAPTER 5
> 
> FULL DRESS AND UNDRESS UNIFORMS
> OVERVIEW
> 
> 1. *Full dress and undress are optional uniforms* which may be worn on formal occasions. Together with standard mess dress (No. 2 Order – see Chapter 6, Annex B), they form a group of related items which reflect the functional heritage of military organizations.
> 
> 2. *Except as provided in paragraph 3., these optional uniforms are worn at no expense to the public* (see Chapter 2, Section 1, paragraphs 24. to 27.).
> 
> 3. Grants are provided to assist authorized bands and alternative voluntary ceremonial sub-units in maintaining ceremonial uniforms not provided at public expense. See QR&O 210.345, 210.354 and CFAO 210.18. Full dress and some undress uniform items are provided at public expense for RMC and the Ceremonial Guard, Ottawa.


----------



## gcclarke

cheeky_monkey said:
			
		

> That would be one bastardized looking rank.
> I'm a NCdt, not a MIDN. I like my spaghetti strap, thanks.
> 
> No. The _only_ difference in the current sleeve and shoulder insignia between an ASLt and a NCdt is 1/4 of an inch of gold braid.
> 
> Both ranks wear a bar as indicator of rank. Likewise, adding the curl to both would not change anything. One rank entails the possession of a scroll, the other does not; one rank gets a salute, the other does not - seems pretty clear to me.
> 
> That's fine, however it would be something that is distinctly Canadian, while still returning to our roots.



When I was referring to Midshipmen, I was going by the RN usage of the term vice the USN usage, equivalent to out A/SLt.

As for the rest of it, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, and see how things actually play out when the new dress instructions are promulgated.


----------



## Neill McKay

Pusser said:
			
		

> It is worth noting that the US Navy dropped their "Cracker Jacks" in the 70s and saw their recruiting numbers plummet.  They were re-introduced shortly thereafter.



The affected members having voted overwhelmingly in favour (in some sort of plebiscite), as I understand it.


----------



## ekpiper

I am actually happy to see the return of the executive curl, although I hope this is the first step to an increase of awareness for the Navy's current plight.  Sadly, however, the new budget has already been presented with no funding specified for new vessels, so I'm inclined to think that new ships will be postponed for another couple years at least.

With regards to the insignia for the NCdt, I think that they will have the curl, styled similarly to the old RN Warrant Officer rank shown here: http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Pers-Warrant%20Rank.htm

With respect to the rest of the system (S/Lt, Adm.), I'm inclined to think that the CF will not change the structure of the insignia any more than by adding the curl.  By that, I mean that the S/Lt will have the curl on the thin stripe, and all Admirals will have a single broad stripe with a circle "curl" just touching the stripe .  Epaulette wise, I think that nothing will change, save for the addition of the curl from NCdt-Capt.


----------



## Acer Syrup

> That would be one bastardized looking rank.



Iceland did it....


----------



## Blackadder1916

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The green uniform was actually introduced to the public circa 1966, which was before JV Allard becoming CDS. *The actual architect is lost in the mists of time*, but it probably originated in one of Paul Hellyer's circle of toadies advisers. It was a logical extension of the amendment to the NDA which came into effect at the end of February 1968 and grouped us all into a single service. Thus, it was planned before the act was passed and promulgated. Edit to add: Allard became CDS in mid-1966, but I still maintain the single service uniform had been unveiled before then. Could he have changed the decision to go for a single uniform? Probably not, even if he had wanted to. I still maintain it was a political decision.



While the actual idiot architect (save Hellyer or his principal toady, Bill 'Leaky' Lee) of the concept for single uniform may never be categorically identified, there was some mention of the officer who accomplished this assignment in a thesis*, a copy of which I found in my office when I retired from the military. (_I don't know why or how it came to be in my office, but I kept a copy_)

* Varner, Joseph Bruce.  Unification of the Canadian Armed Forces and the impact of Inter-Service Rivalry.  Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Political Science. Acadia University 1991

from page 40 of the thesis
". . .
     The RCAF even designed the new uniform, which was derived from the USAF officers' dress.  Ed Reyno was responsible for designing and pushing through the new order of dress.  The Minister picked the rifle green colour to make it truly Canadian and then the old uniforms, along with their great traditions, were discarded. 57
. . . "
footnote 57 references  Paul Hellyer's book Damn The Torpedoes: My Fight To Unify Canada's Armed Forces pp. 172-173 and an interview with Mr Hellyer as the source for this information.

The "Ed Reyno" mentioned is Air Vice Marshal Reyno who was Chief of Personnel.


----------



## Old Sweat

Thanks for the additional info. As Chief of Personnel, Reyno supervised the directorate that looked after dress and ceremonial. I remember three things about Reyno, who was a Battle of Britian veteran. First, in 1966 he sat in on a 4 CIBG officers' study group. When asked by the commander to add some remarks, he told the brigade officers that he had been able to solve the RCAF pilot drain by coming up with a retention bonus. The brigade commander, who had as short fuze, opined that he didn't give a .... if every officer in the RCAF got out tomorrow.

Reyno also would have played a major part in the adoption of the automatic promotion to corporal, which I believe was introduced because TB would not authorize a large pay raise for career privates, ordinary seamen and especially leading aircraftsmen and women. It played havoc with discipline, the chain of command and the very structure of the army and I suspect the other services.  

And last, but not least. There used to be a program called the Deserving Serviceman Program in which a very few selected junior ranks who were retiring and spouse were given seats on the air transport global training and resupply flights which flew around the world. There were only a few flights a year, and usually only one or two members went on these flights. Anyway, circa 1971 Reyno was retiring and he and his wife got the deserving seviceman spaces on a 707 flight that was off on a several week west to east circumnavigation flight of the world. (Such a thing would be unthinkable these days, what with blogs, army.ca and other devices that tend to point out sneaky tricks like this.)

Sorry for the hijack, but I disliked him and some of the stunts he pulled intensely. The intervening years have not modified my feelings for the better.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Old Sweat is correct about the bastardization of the corporals and captains being a pay issue.

Most of you weren't even born, but we had a series of fairly sharp recessions in the 1950s that played havoc with the nation's finances. One or two people here will recall _'Dief the Chief_'s (Prime Minister John Diefenbaker) "austerity programme." It made the "decade of darkness" look positively bright. Anyway, the financial problems were coupled with rampant inflation in the cost of burgeoning new technologies (in every service) and a growing public dissatisfaction with the high levels of peacetime defence spending authorized by St Laurent and continued, relatively, by Diefenbaker and Pearson.

There was, also, a _"we support the troops when we're needing them, not when we're just feeding them"_ feeling about in the country, especially amongst the World War II veterans who were, by then (1960-70), in positions of influence and authority in government and industry.

The defence _bureaucracy_, intent on building a better educated military, was pushing hard for pay raises; the political _centre_, under public pressure, would not agree. Military salaries in the late '50s and early '60s were falling father and father behind, making it harder and harder to recruit the people needed - quantitatively and qualitatively.

The _'Hellyer corporal'_ and the commissioned counterpart the _'instant captain'_ and their corollaries the CFLs (captain and corporal for life) were the result of a little ill considered bureaucratic sleight of hand that got badly out of hand.

There was a follow-up: 'benchmarking' military occupations with civil service _equivalents_. That project, which was a real boon to our, military, pay packets, was also ill considered and sloppily implemented.

Good intentions, even the best of intentions in all cases, but second rate staff work - too little analysis of consequences, produced less than optimal results.


Edit: typo


----------



## Sailorwest

ekpiper said:
			
		

> I am actually happy to see the return of the executive curl, although I hope this is the first step to an increase of awareness for the Navy's current plight.  Sadly, however, the new budget has already been presented with no funding specified for new vessels, so I'm inclined to think that new ships will be postponed for another couple years at least.
> 
> With regards to the insignia for the NCdt, I think that they will have the curl, styled similarly to the old RN Warrant Officer rank shown here: http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Pers-Warrant%20Rank.htm
> 
> With respect to the rest of the system (S/Lt, Adm.), I'm inclined to think that the CF will not change the structure of the insignia any more than by adding the curl.  By that, I mean that the S/Lt will have the curl on the thin stripe, and all Admirals will have a single broad stripe with a circle "curl" just touching the stripe .  Epaulette wise, I think that nothing will change, save for the addition of the curl from NCdt-Capt.



I could see that we return to the former rank structure for the dress uniform where there is broad stripe with additional stripes for rear an vice admirals. As for subbies and cadets, my thoughts are that cadets will retain a single thin stripe, with no curl, acting subs will retain the same single stripe, with no curl and subbies will get the single stripe with a curl.


----------



## Pusser

Cheeky Monkey, you do realize that a Midshipman outranks a Naval Cadet don't you?  The rank of Naval Cadet is not new, nor is it simply a naval re-wording of Officer Cadet.  The rank existed in the RCN long before unification.  The insignia of the Naval Cadet was a long embroidered button hole and button.  The Midshipman's insignia was (and still is in the RN) the same button hole on a white background.  As I recall, in their last iteration in the RCN, Naval Cadets were students at VENTURE (the original RCN program, not the current one which dates from the mid-70s) and Midshipmen were graduates who had gone onto the Fleet for additional training before commissioning.  Midshipman in the RCN were equivalent to 2Lts in the Army.  However, they were not commissioned.  At unification, the Midshipman disappeared because the equivalent rank level in the Navy now had to be commissioned as were his Army and Air Force counterparts (no navy in the world commissions its Midshipmen).  This is when the Acting Sub-Lieutenant became a substantive rank.  The Naval Cadet disappeared altogether as it had only had a very limited application anyway.

I don't understand why there is so much speculation on what will happen with the Naval Cadet anyway.  A curl in the thin bar has been authorized for Naval Cadets' mess kit for several years. See page 3A-1-6 in the Dress Manual.  The reason we never actually see it is because very few Naval Cadets actually have mess kit (along with a shocking number of commissioned junior officers who lack professionalism in my view, but that's another issue).

I think putting the half-stripe underneath for Sub-Lieutenants makes a lot of sense and looks a lot sharper than curling the half stripe.  I also think that adopting RCN style sleeve braid for Commodores and Admirals is the best route to go.  They would likely continue to use the current shoulder boards and slip ons for shirts and white jackets (ie. crowns and maple leaves).  This would fit in with the former RCN style as well as the current, RN, RAN, USN, etc style.

Mike O'Leary, when I said that square rig is a ceremonial uniform, I meant that it is a dress uniform (sorry, for poor choice of words), as opposed to a working uniform (i.e. NCD).  If we were to go back to it (which I suspect will never happen), it should be provided at public expense, as is everyone's dress uniform.  We could actually introduce it as a cost-cutting measure, it being a simpler garment and, therefore, cheaper to manufacture! ;D


----------



## tabernac

Pusser said:
			
		

> Cheeky Monkey, you do realize that a Midshipman outranks a Naval Cadet don't you? The Naval Cadet disappeared altogether as it had only had a very limited application anyway.


No, I didn't know that. And I wouldn't be surprised if most of my NCdt brethren didn't know either. In my experience, the history of the RCN isn't something that gets much exposure.


			
				Pusser said:
			
		

> I think putting the half-stripe underneath for Sub-Lieutenants makes a lot of sense and looks a lot sharper than curling the half stripe.


I disagree. And as for the logic, if NCdts get a thin curl, then why not curl the thin SLt bar? 


			
				Pusser said:
			
		

> I also think that adopting RCN style sleeve braid for Commodores and Admirals is the best route to go.  They would likely continue to use the current shoulder boards and slip ons for shirts and white jackets (ie. crowns and maple leaves).  This would fit in with the former RCN style as well as the current, RN, RAN, USN, etc style.


Our current sleeve insignia works well for Flag ranks, infact I think it looks quite sharp without the clutter of additional bars on top.


----------



## TangoTwoBravo

cheeky_monkey said:
			
		

> No, I didn't know that. And I wouldn't be surprised if most of my NCdt brethren didn't know either. In my experience, the history of the RCN isn't something that gets much exposure.



Your refreshingly honest statement about a general lack of knowledge of the history of the RCN reveals a problem that should be fixed.


----------



## Neill McKay

cheeky_monkey said:
			
		

> I disagree. And as for the logic, if NCdts get a thin curl, then why not curl the thin SLt bar?



I've seen a rendering of each, and I must say that the half-stripe with a curl above a full stripe is one mighty odd-looking thing.



> Our current sleeve insignia works well for Flag ranks, infact I think it looks quite sharp without the clutter of additional bars on top.



One problem with it is that all Canadian flag officers look like commodores alongside flag officers from any other navy in the world.  Ours is a very unorthodox system of insignia at those ranks, in a world where naval officers' ranks are otherwise almost the same across most navies.


----------



## Pusser

Another argument against curling the sub-lieutenant's half stripe is that it would be a pain to tailor.  The A/SLt has a curled full stripe that would have to be removed and then replaced with a straight stripe.  Then a curled hal-stripe would have to be applied.  When promoted again, the curled half-stripe would have to be removed and replaced with the curled full stripe.  Why not do it as the RCN did (and is still done on mess kits).  Has anybody ever noticed that a SLt's stripe on his/her mess kit is further from the bottom of the cuff than the bottom Cdr's stripe?  That's because the SLt's stripe is sewn on and left in the same location, with subsequent straight stripes added underneath, until promoted to Captain(N) - at which point the officer probably needs a new jacket anyway!


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

Pusser said:
			
		

> I don't understand why there is so much speculation on what will happen with the Naval Cadet anyway.  A curl in the thin bar has been authorized for Naval Cadets' mess kit for several years. See page 3A-1-6 in the Dress Manual.


I agree - the simplest approach would be to use the ranks already authorised for mess kit.  In my opinion, there is very little difference between an A/SLt and SLt so I would also be quite happy for them to wear the same rank (as they currently already do on their mess kit, should they own one).


----------



## Snakedoc

Tango2Bravo said:
			
		

> Your refreshingly honest statement about a general lack of knowledge of the history of the RCN reveals a problem that should be fixed.



Not sure if Cheeky Monkey has done his MARS II/NETP-O course yet but this is generally when the 'bulk' of Canadian Naval history is introduced to a MARS Officer (though from what I recall, it was more like 'read this and then you get quized' type of format).  Also, would naval history not be incorporated in the education at RMC in some way?

There is much to learn from our history and I agree that a lack of knowledge is a problem that should be fixed.


----------



## Neill McKay

Lex Parsimoniae said:
			
		

> I agree - the simplest approach would be to use the ranks already authorised for mess kit.  In my opinion, there is very little difference between an A/SLt and SLt so I would also be quite happy for them to wear the same rank (as they currently already do on their mess kit, should they own one).



Fair point, but it would look odd alongside the corresponding army and air force ranks.


----------



## willellis

N. McKay said:
			
		

> Fair point, but it would look odd alongside the corresponding army and air force ranks.



That's a good point! Since we are one force essentially, it should be the same rank insignia for everyone. At least I think it should.


----------



## hugh19

But we are not one force. If we were a marine engineer and a combat engineer could switch places. But we do serve the same master. The three services are different for a reason.


----------



## 1feral1

willellis said:
			
		

> That's a good point! Since we are one force essentially, it should be the same rank insignia for everyone. At least I think it should.



Its not the Canadian Armed Force is it.

The one force concept died many years ago ( first appearing in about 1989'ish if I remember right), when air force got its blues, navy its whites and the army kept the garbage hand-me-downs from everyone else.

I think it is a return to individual branch/service pride sadly lost in the Trudeau era.

One thing I like about being down here is that nothing has changed in 70+ years, all three services have their own identity, esprit du corps, and own rank structure/badges of rank. 

Its how Canada once was not so long ago. This makes it important to maintain and preserve long standing customs and traditions in which otherwise would be lost.

OWDU


----------



## gcclarke

sledge said:
			
		

> But we are not one force. If we were a marine engineer and a combat engineer could switch places. But we do serve the same master. The three services are different for a reason.



And that's all well and good for a total of 3 trades: MARS, NCSEO, and MSEO. Every single other naval officer is in a purple trade. So when you have Naval Logistics Officers on course in Borden side by side with their , people should be able to tell, at a glance, that those SLts are equivalent to those Lts. The same goes for our Bioscience Officers, Health Care Admins, IntOs, Military Police Officers, Nurses, Personnel Selection Officers, Pharmacists, Public Affairs Officers, Social Work Officers, and Training Development Officers.


----------



## Edward Campbell

gcclarke said:
			
		

> And that's all well and good for a total of 3 trades: MARS, NCSEO, and MSEO. Every single other naval officer is in a purple trade. So when you have Naval Logistics Officers on course in Borden side by side with their , people should be able to tell, at a glance, that those SLts are equivalent to those Lts. The same goes for our Bioscience Officers, Health Care Admins, IntOs, Military Police Officers, Nurses, Personnel Selection Officers, Pharmacists, Public Affairs Officers, Social Work Officers, and Training Development Officers.



Which was my point a few days ago:



			
				E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I think the _executive curl_ is just another problem unless it is part of a larger, Navy, solution.
> 
> Back when the earth was still cooling and I was in the staff college, one of my classmates, who went to achieve very, very high rank in the navy, proposed just such a solution: total *Navy* identity for all naval personnel - this is before we had _"Coates of many colours"_, i.e. the DEU introduced by then Minister of National Defence Robert Coates to replace the _"jolly green jumper"_ - wherein their status as Navy overrode their status as members of this, that or the other branch.
> 
> I can't remember the details but I do recall that it involved the curl for MARS and MARE and straight stripes plus a badge for all others, plus colours between the stripes and so on. I also recall that he had an all ranks solution.
> 
> Some years later, when he held flag rank and we were reminiscing over a pint or two, he mentioned that the idea was not dead but it never quite worked its way up anyone's list of priorities. He also reinforced the notion that _identity_ 'solutions' for the Navy and the Air Force, while very highly desirable, were still fraught with difficulties and needed to be comprehensive: all ranks and all branches, in both services, and all at once.



Even if all that is done is to reintroduce the _executive curl_ or _Elliott's eye_ for MARS and MARE officers the effect will still be to _sideswipe_ the 'other' naval officers.

But bringing a _coherent_ naval identity programme to fruition would involve, I suggest, a complete rethink of the CF's _identity_ philosophy, whatever it is, and will involve questions like: what is more important? service (navy, army, air force) or branch? and: is the _branch_ a military organization or a _professional association_?

I think the reason even small changes to _identifiers_, like the _executive curl_, are resisted by so many senior officers is that they have no stomach for the larger questions - not when there are so many other important things on their plates.

I also think the 'identity issue' is important and is something of a _festering sore_ in the CF that ought to be treated sooner rather than later - before it erupts.

My guess is that the Navy can manage the _executive curl_ for MARS and MARE if no other changes, such as _inverting_ the SLt rank stripes, are made but anything beyond that will be deemed to be too complicated. I also guess that individual MARS and MARE officers, themselves, will have to pay for this change, which will be, of necessity, mandatory.


----------



## Pusser

Do not even THINK about limiting this to MARS and MARE officers!!!  ALL officers in the RCN had the curl.  Naval Logistics Officers are just as much a part of the Navy as the others and in fact, some of us have more sea time.  Any kind of differentiation of this sort would create a "we're better than you" mentality that would be devastating to morale.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Pusser said:
			
		

> Do not even THINK about limiting this to MARS and MARE officers!!!  ALL officers in the RCN had the curl.  Naval Logistics Officers are just as much a part of the Navy as the others and in fact, some of us have more sea time.  Any kind of differentiation of this sort would create a "we're better than you" mentality that would be devastating to morale.




OK, so you want the CMS to impose a new Navy _thing_ on the Log Branch, and, by extension, on the whole CF.

What if the Air Force, for example, wants all AF members to wear the Air Ops cap badge? (I know one recently retired very senior AF officer who thinks that's an important, indeed *essential* step forward for the Air Force - to affirm _service_ loyalty.) Would the Log Branch be OK with that? 

Is the Log Branch an important military organization, within the CF, or is it just something akin to a _professional association_ or _trade union_? What about you, Pusser, are you a Navy logistics officer or a Logistics officer in the navy?


----------



## gcclarke

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> OK, so you want the CMS to impose a new Navy _thing_ on the Log Branch, and, by extension, on the whole CF.
> 
> What if the Air Force, for example, wants all AF members to wear the Air Ops cap badge? (I know one recently retired very senior AF officer who thinks that's an important, indeed *essential* step forward for the Air Force - to affirm _service_ loyalty.) Would the Log Branch be OK with that?
> 
> Is the Log Branch an important military organization, within the CF, or is it just something akin to a _professional association_ or _trade union_? What about you, Pusser, are you a Navy logistics officer or a Logistics officer in the navy?



I am a NTO, so I may be somewhat biased in this. In this case, it's actually more so Parliament imposing something upon the Canadian Forces. But even if this was a CMS initiated measure then yes, I do not have a problem whatsoever with him enforcing a change to *Naval Rank Insignia* for all personnel who wear that Naval Rank Insignia. Your point about cap badges is a complete Non Sequitur. Nothing about this change affects anything that is *unique* to the Logistics Branch. 

Now, if the CMS went ahead and unilaterally re-introduced the coloured branch stripes between bars on the rank insignia (Which, by the way, I am in favour of) without consulting the various branches, then perhaps your argument would have merit. If he suddenly decided that all Naval LogOs would we wearing a pink stripe between their yellow bars, then yes, that's an issue. Same if he decided that they weren't allowed to wear their cap badges anymore.

The CMS is not be imposing a new Navy _thing_ on the Log Branch, he'd be imposing it upon all Naval Officers, including those who happen to be LogOs. There is a big difference there. 

And regardless of all of that, the CF Dress Instructions are issued under the authority of the Chief of the Defence Staff, who certainly does have the right to impose his will with regard to this issue upon all members of the Canadian Armed Forces, including the Logistics Branch.


----------



## FSTO

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Is the Log Branch an important military organization, within the CF, or is it just something akin to a _professional association_ or _trade union_? What about you, Pusser, are you a Navy logistics officer or a Logistics officer in the navy?



A Sea Logistics Officer (in my mind) is part of the Navy. They have to do logistics in a unique environment that their counterparts in the AF and Army do not face.


----------



## Edward Campbell

gcclarke said:
			
		

> I am a NTO, so I may be somewhat biased in this. In this case, it's actually more so Parliament imposing something upon the Canadian Forces. But even if this was a CMS initiated measure then yes, I do not have a problem whatsoever with him enforcing a change to *Naval Rank Insignia* for all personnel who wear that Naval Rank Insignia. Your point about cap badges is a complete Non Sequitur. Nothing about this change affects anything that is *unique* to the Logistics Branch.
> 
> Now, if the CMS went ahead and unilaterally re-introduced the coloured branch stripes between bars on the rank insignia (Which, by the way, I am in favour of) without consulting the various branches, then perhaps your argument would have merit. If he suddenly decided that all Naval LogOs would we wearing a pink stripe between their yellow bars, then yes, that's an issue. Same if he decided that they weren't allowed to wear their cap badges anymore.
> 
> The CMS is not be imposing a new Navy _thing_ on the Log Branch, he'd be imposing it upon all Naval Officers, including those who happen to be LogOs. There is a big difference there.
> 
> And regardless of all of that, the CF Dress Instructions are issued under the authority of the Chief of the Defence Staff, who certainly does have the right to impose his will with regard to this issue upon all members of the Canadian Armed Forces, including the Logistics Branch.




First, I'm not sure parliament is trying to or even can _*impose*_ much of anything on anyone. The private member's motion, as I understand it from the first post on the first page of this thread, will, if it passes at all, simply *request* the government to do this. The government, advised by the CDS and CMS, might just yawn and carry on as we are today.

Second, I think, as I said earlier, that service vs CF identity is an issue, maybe not a HUGE issue right now but, as evidenced by this thread, one that is _festering_ and I also think that it is one that most senior officers would rather ignore or, at least, towards which they would rather adopt a "wait and see" attitude. But when IF it makes it to the top table then service cap badges for the Navy and Air Force, to cement service loyalty, will, I am certain, be at the top of the agenda.

This issue of the Log Branch vs Naval Logistics Officers is at the heart of the dilemma. I'm not sure that the senior leadership has a common view on that. What comes first: Navy or Logistics? I suspect that most senior officers know there is little common ground amongst their colleagues and that is why they hope the problem will just go away.

By the way, I favour: common _service_ identities for all Navy and Air Force members, officers and NCMs, with branch/occupation/trade  identifiers being secondary. At the top level, (and in addition to a _joint_ planning/operations/support staff) for personnel, doctrine, equipment and similar issues, I favour three professional "heads of service" (CMS, CLS, CAS) and several _purple_ technical chiefs (Communications, Intelligence, Logistics, Medical, etc) _advising_ them on special to branch matters.

So, I hope you fellows, at least the MARS and MARE folks, get your executive curl but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## Neill McKay

An interesting point has been raised here: with what do service members identify most strongly?

It's been formally studied, or course, and the conclusion of one study I read a couple of years ago was that naval personnel tend to identify with the navy as a whole; army personnel tend to identify with their regiment or branch; and air force personnel tend to identify with their trade.

I don't think current attitudes would support restricting the curl to hard-sea officers.  While it originated as a way to set Executive Branch (what we would now call MARS officers) apart from the other branches, it had gone Service-wide a very long time before unification took it away altogether.  I doubt that there is a navy in the world that distinguishes its ship-drivers from other officers in this way anymore.


----------



## TN2IC

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Is the Log Branch an important military organization, within the CF, or is it just something akin to a _professional association_ or _trade union_? What about you, Pusser, are you a Navy logistics officer or a Logistics officer in the navy?




I may be a NCM in MARLANT. But I for sure do not see myself working in the Navy. I am an Army MSE Op posted to the Air Det of the Navy Fleet. Soldier first, tradesmen second.  :nod:


----------



## Pusser

I will be very very clear on this issue.  I am a Naval Officer first, foremost and forever.  Logistics is my specialty.  Every senior leader I have ever heard on the subject was also very clear that it is essential for everyone one to be a sailor (or soldier, etc) first and a tradesman second.  Any Logistics officer who doesn't understand this needs to take off their uniform and go work as a corporate manager somewhere.  They have no business trying to lead people in war.  When the bullets start to fly, there is no escaping the fray at sea.  We're not even "in the rear with the gear."  We're right in the thick of it.  Just as an Army Logistics Officer has to be able to lead soldiers in a firefight, the Naval Logistics Officer also has a role to play in fighting the ship and it isn't auditing claims!  During my last tour at sea, I basically ran a section base for firefighting and damage control and I was in charge of all CBRN monitoring.

In 27 years I have never met anyone who has described themselves as "a member of the Logistics Branch of the Canadian Forces."  To a man/woman they have all said, "I'm in the Navy," "I'm in the Air Force," or "I'm in the Army."  So, yes people tend to identify with their element.

As an aside, I am in favour of having all personnel in naval uniform wearing a Naval Ops cap badge (same for all air force folks and the Air Ops badge).  This was the case in both the RCN and the RCAF.  The current concept of separate branch badges came from the Army who had individual corps or regimental badges (and arguably still do).  I also think the re-introduction of distinction cloth (the colour between the stripes) would be pretty cool.  Incidentally, the colour for the Supply and Secretariat Branch of the RCN was white, not pink!

Finally, I think the reintroduction of the curl is a lot closer to reality than some may believe.  Notwithstanding that this thread started because of a Private Member's Bill, the issue has been simmering for years and prototypes and cost analyses have been conducted.  There has been much discussion at various levels and a fair bit of staff work has been going on.  The rumours I've heard have also been coming from some fairly credible sources.  I won't bet the farm on it quite yet, but I won't be surprised if this happens soon.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

N. McKay said:
			
		

> I doubt that there is a navy in the world that distinguishes its ship-drivers from other officers in this way anymore.


FYI - the United States Navy does.  Their Navy Officers serve either as a line officer (MARS equivalent but with NTO subsumed) and wear a star above their stripes or in one of the staff corps (Supply, Medical, Dental, Chaplain, etc) which have their own Officer Designators.  However, I haven't heard anybody suggest this for Canada nor would I personally support it.  I believe that all naval officers should wear the curl.  I'd support the coloured cloth between the bars (like medical already wear) but I haven't heard that was in the works with this proposal.

I believe that we should use the ranks already authorised for mess kit.  The only area that would be unclear would be the SLt rank but there is very little difference between an A/SLt and SLt in training, level of responsibility, and prestige (completion of MARS IV as an example).  Many SLt are only in that rank for <1 year as they move through the training system.  As a sailor I am happy with any of the possible solutions already discussed: wearing one stripe (as currently done for mess kit), having the curl on the skinny stripe, or inverting the skinny and thick stripes.


----------



## Neill McKay

Lex Parsimoniae said:
			
		

> FYI - the United States Navy does.  Their Navy Officers serve either as a line officer (MARS equivalent but with NTO subsumed) and wear a star above their stripes or in one of the staff corps (Supply, Medical, Dental, Chaplain, etc) which have their own Officer Designators.



You're correct.  I was thinking in terms of the curl specifically, rather than other branch identifiers.

Arguably the USN does the same thing we do, with hard sea officers wearing the star and other officers wearing their own branch identifiers.  (Of course, the concept of "hard sea" is slightly different in the USN, where the colour purple doesn't exist.)


----------



## cobbler

gcclarke said:
			
		

> And that's all well and good for a total of 3 trades: MARS, NCSEO, and MSEO. Every single other naval officer is in a purple trade. So when you have Naval Logistics Officers on course in Borden side by side with their , *people should be able to tell, at a glance, that those SLts are equivalent to those Lts.* The same goes for our Bioscience Officers, Health Care Admins, IntOs, Military Police Officers, Nurses, Personnel Selection Officers, Pharmacists, Public Affairs Officers, Social Work Officers, and Training Development Officers.



They should, but that can and should come from professional knowledge. 

In the ADF the three services have different ranks and different rank insignia, but if I come across an Army guy I am expected to be able to identify his rank, if not I would be a fairly poor excuse for an officer. 

You cant tell me that with all the knowledge required in a military career you cannot memorise another few ranks.

Just my two Australian Cents worth.


----------



## 30 for 30

I want the Curl, but if the Curl becomes reality it should be popped on top of the current ranks exactly as they look now. A skinny curl for SLts might look odd but any new naval rank shouldn't be too different from the current CF structure. We're still the post-unification CF, not the RCN. Having army and AF ranks identical and then navy ASlts and Slts walking around with the same slide is a bizarre and confusing (to outsiders) deviation. If we want 1950s navy identity then bring on the pips and blue stripes.


----------



## Pusser

I've never understood how sailors all seem to understand the CF rank structure and anytime they call a sergeant "PO" it is a slip of the tongue, not because they don't know the difference.  Unfortunately, I can't say the same for our Army and Air Force brethren, many of whom seem to have difficulty figuring it all out (then there are those who somehow think it's amusing to intentionally mix them up).  Sailors may be better at it simply because we're in the minority and the Army ranks are probably drilled into their heads on basic training.  For us older folks, it may also have something to do with the fact that prior to 1984 (introduction of DEU) although we were allowed to use naval rank titles in speech and internal correspondence, our "official" rank titles were still the CF ones.  For example, you could call me "Leading Seaman," but the flight manifest for my trip to Halifax would say "Corporal."

Nevertheless, is learning separate rank structures really that hard?  I remember working in a NATO headquarters where not only did we learn three different services, we also had 25 countries and a lot of different insignia to deal with!  We managed.


----------



## Steel Badger

Sometimes the Holy Grail of Uniformity takes precedence over everything else.

The old ( Pre unification ) Military managed 3 ranks systems plus a slew of Regimental and Corps titles ...

(Anyone remember when EME wanted to re-introduce "Craftsman" as the title for their trained PTE's?)


----------



## OldSolduer

Steel Badger said:
			
		

> Sometimes the Holy Grail of Uniformity takes precedence over everything else.
> 
> The old ( Pre unification ) Military managed 3 ranks systems plus a slew of Regimental and Corps titles ...
> 
> (Anyone remember when EME wanted to re-introduce "Craftsman" as the title for their trained PTE's?)



I remember that.  And Signals wanted to substitute "Signaller" for Pte....which I think they did. Am I wrong?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

This is getting interesting. A long time ago someone ( A reserve Colonel if I remember well, but I cannot recall his name) said that if you pulled a single thread from the cloth of unification, it would unravel itself completely. Are we there yet?

Let me say here also to Pusser, you are my kind of seaman (in the generic sense). I will steam with you any time. Yes, you are correct, even if it displeases E.R. Campbell, anyone in a "non-hard-sea trade" (I hate that terminology) who elects to wear the navy blue for her career is Naval first and forever, then a tradesman. TN2IC got it right: He calls himself soldier first and, even though currently posted to a naval ship or base, I am sure that he wears a green uniform.  He is not and does not have to call himself "navy" and his services are no less appreciated for that. 

E.R. Campbell asked " Is the Log branch an important military organization within the CF? And the answer is no. It is a Branch, not an organization at all. While in the army they have a large part of the logistical functions performed by Service battalions, which are "organizations", in the Navy, logistics is a function that is performed in each organization, such as ships, stations and  bases, by highly trained specialists who are Naval first. 

Gcclarke's comment, that its "well for MARS, NCSEO and MSEO but not others, makes no sense: It is just as important for army and airforce officers to tell that MARS, NCSEO and MSEO are the same rank or outrank them when they meet them anywhere as it is to tell the "purple" trade ones. Professional knowledge is the key. This is done routinely by just about every other commonwealth nations military personnel such as Australia, New-Zealand, Pakistan, India, to name a few, as they  retained the old British system, where it is also still in use. If the soldiers and airmen of those countries can do it, Canadians can too.

As for Steel Badger's Holy Grail of uniformity taking precedence, there is another way than similitude of rank identifiers: The american have a system of "level" for all their military  that is uniform across the services. An E-5, for instance, will be a Sergeant in the army and Marines, but a Staff sergeant in the airforce and a PO2 in the navy. In their army and marines, a Staff sergeant is an E-6. Nobody gets confused, since it is the actual E, W or O level that dictates your seniority and relative rank.


----------



## Snakedoc

As easy as it may be to learn new rank structures etc., I think if we do add the curl, we should keep the change as basic as possible without altering the rank structure and causing any type of confusion between us and the army/air force.

This would mean the only visual difference in the current ranks would be the addition of the curl, making the SLt's thin bar into a curl.  For flag officers, I think using additional stripes would make sense, keeping in line with other commonwealth countries around the world.  For subordinate officers, I personally wouldn't be opposed to seeing them without the curl until they've obtained a commission.

My personal opinion and  :2c:


----------



## Steel Badger

Ps:  I never chased that particular grail..... I think I am allergic to total unification......


And I like the Technovikings new title of Uber-Staffenfurher... It suits him


----------



## dimsum

Lex Parsimoniae said:
			
		

> I believe that we should use the ranks already authorised for mess kit.  The only area that would be unclear would be the SLt rank but there is very little difference between an A/SLt and SLt in training, level of responsibility, and prestige (completion of MARS IV as an example).  Many SLt are only in that rank for <1 year as they move through the training system.



Just to clarify; while that may be true for Reg Force MARS officers, Reserve MARS officers have to spend 3 years at the SLt rank (sailing or otherwise) before getting promoted to LT(N).  SLts in the MCDVs are frequently the DeckO or NavO, so there can be a big difference in training and responsibility between A/SLts and SLts.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Just to clarify; while that may be true for Reg Force MARS officers, Reserve MARS officers have to spend 3 years at the SLt rank (sailing or otherwise) before getting promoted to LT(N).  SLts in the MCDVs are frequently the DeckO or NavO, so there can be a big difference in training and responsibility between A/SLts and SLts.


My bad.  Apologies to any reservists that I've offended by my oversight.  

WARNING - TOPIC DIVERGENCE FOLLOWS:  

Your observation about the employment of SLt on the Kingston Class raises the whole issue of the "Hellyer Corporal/Captain" and the rank inflation at the LS/Lt(N) level...  

BACK ON TOPIC:  

Be that as it may, I'm happy with any of the possible solutions already discussed: wearing one stripe (as currently done for mess kit), having the curl on the skinny stripe, or inverting the skinny and thick stripes.  It would be logistically simpler to have the curl on the skinny stripe but I would just be happy to have the curl back.


----------



## Sailorwest

We are one of a very few navies that retain this rank. I think that the RAN rank appears the same for Subbies and Acting and it probably makes sense that we do the same. Or you go with the idea that an unqualified commissioned naval officer does not get an executive curl and resolve the problem for both them and naval cadets.


----------



## CountDC

FSTO said:
			
		

> My biggest pet peeve is seeing folks who are posted to an office (MARPAC/LANT CMS Ottawa) wearing NCD's. They think it makes them look operational, I think it makes them look stupid.



Nope - don't think it makes me look operational, no cap or knife, it happens to be the dress of the day for me. It is also more comfortable, easier and requires less money to maintain.  I have done the DEU's every day and much prefer NCDs on a daily basis.

edit it add:  If the majority of the Officers want it then I am all for bringing back the curl.  Always thought it looked better when navy and army mixed.


----------



## Monsoon

Sailorwest said:
			
		

> We are one of a very few navies that retain this rank. I think that the RAN rank appears the same for Subbies and Acting and it probably makes sense that we do the same. Or you go with the idea that an unqualified commissioned naval officer does not get an executive curl and resolve the problem for both them and naval cadets.


It's not even a matter of retaining it - A/Slt was never a "rank" in the pre-unification RCN. It was just an acting-lacking promotion to full Sub-Lieutenant; the displayed rank was the same because the actual rank was the same. Hence the convention of not speaking the "acting" part of the rank (but it was written, just as A/MCpl is written but not spoken today). I believe the rank was awarded to people who had completed their trade training but didn't yet have a BWK (back in the days when all naval officers had one), or vice-versa.

Today it's more or less supplanted Midshipman (an untrained officer, i.e.); I'm not really certain what a pre-unification Naval Cadet was. I remember hearing that it was either someone who hadn't yet finished basic training or someone attending service college. Anyone recall?


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

hamiltongs said:
			
		

> It's not even a matter of retaining it - A/Slt was never a "rank" in the pre-unification RCN. It was just an acting-lacking promotion to full Sub-Lieutenant; the displayed rank was the same because the actual rank was the same. Hence the convention of not speaking the "acting" part of the rank (but it was written, just as A/MCpl is written but not spoken today). I believe the rank was awarded to people who had completed their trade training but didn't yet have a BWK (back in the days when all naval officers had one), or vice-versa.
> 
> Today it's more or less supplanted Midshipman (an untrained officer, i.e.); I'm not really certain what a pre-unification Naval Cadet was. I remember hearing that it was either someone who hadn't yet finished basic training or someone attending service college. Anyone recall?


A Naval Cadet was the rank for officer candidates while in the service college.  E.G. In the beginning of the RCN, students at the Royal Naval College of Canada were NCdt and they became Midshipmen upon graduation and eventually A/SLt. 

During the wars, many new officers were promoted from MIDN to Probationary Temporary Acting Sub-Lieutenants RCNVR and worked their way through to A/SLt.  

A good webpage for this kind of thing in the UK Navy is:  http://www.naval-history.net/WW2aaRN-PayTables00Ranks-Badges.htm


----------



## FSTO

Scuttlebutt has it that the Executive Curl will be introduced (along with the Sea Service Indicator) by the MND at BOA ceremonies in Halifax in May of this year.


----------



## ModlrMike

For what it's worth, I think the SSI is a stupid idea, and hope it's cancelled. I can only see a "them vs us" sense of elitism being fostered. Those of us who serve(d) in purple trades don't need to be reminded that we're not hard sea.


----------



## FSTO

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> For what it's worth, I think the SSI is a stupid idea, and hope it's cancelled. I can only see a "them vs us" sense of elitism being fostered. Those of us who serve(d) in purple trades don't need to be reminded that we're not hard sea.



If you have drawn sea pay you will be eligible for the SSI.


----------



## dimsum

Sorry if this has been answered (I've searched to no avail and haven't been at work for a while) but what is the SSI?


----------



## Pusser

Oldgateboatdriver, thank you for the compliment.  It might also please you to know that I used to grease engines in gate vessels as well.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> For what it's worth, I think the SSI is a stupid idea, and hope it's cancelled. I can only see a "them vs us" sense of elitism being fostered. Those of us who serve(d) in purple trades don't need to be reminded that we're not hard sea.


I disagree.  Many purple trades will merit the top level of the SSI.  I've sailed with a number of cooks, supply techs, air crew, etc that have many years of sea time.  I think of the SSI as a campaign medal for sailors.  Many sailors spend significant periods deployed (especially those belonging to MOG 4/5) yet only have a CD.


----------



## ekpiper

I too am curious about what the Sea Service Indicator is.  I have a couple of guesses, but they're just that.  Can anyone clue me in?


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

ekpiper said:
			
		

> I too am curious about what the Sea Service Indicator is.  I have a couple of guesses, but they're just that.  Can anyone clue me in?


Purely speculation at this point but the rumour is...

The SSI will be a metal badge worn above the right pocket of the short sleeve shirt and an embroidered cloth version sewn on the left sleeve of the tunic. The colour of the SSI will indicate the number of years an individual has served at sea (gun metal grey, bronze, silver, and gold).


----------



## Steel Badger

Did they consider reintroducing the old navy's Hash marks instead of a new pin?


Or how about bringing back the Tot for our thirsty Jacks instead?


----------



## FSTO

Lex Parsimoniae said:
			
		

> Purely speculation at this point but the rumour is...
> 
> The SSI will be a metal badge worn above the right pocket of the short sleeve shirt and an embroidered cloth version sewn on the left sleeve of the tunic. The colour of the SSI will indicate the number of years an individual has served at sea (gun metal grey, bronze, silver, and gold).



For those of you on the DIN here is the link for the SSI

http://marcom-comar.mil.ca/cms-cem/cms-files-eng.asp


----------



## CountDC

or for more direct route:

http://marcom-comar.mil.ca/repository/floatfiles/feb/10/RDIMS_189224.doc

No speculation. 

Highlights for those that do not have access:

The specifications of the proposed design are as follows:

a.	Name.	The official name of the insignia will be the, Sea Service Insignia – insignes de service de mer;

b.	Description.  The SSI will consist of a stand alone naval crown superimposed in the center of a fouled anchor; the year "1910" will be incorporated onto the stock of the anchor above the crown. As the insignia will be worn on the sleeve of the Air Force and Army tunics, modifications to the original selected design were required (removal of banner);

c.	Material.  The insignia will be produced in both metal and cloth. Metal insignia will be worn on the short sleeve shirt and cloth insignia will be worn on the tunic;   

d.	Colour.  The insignia will be produced in four colours; gun metal, bronze, silver and gold. Each colour will represent a corresponding level of sea days. In order to achieve a high level of visibility the entire badge will change colour with each appropriate level;

e.	Location.  As decided at ref D, the SSI will be worn at the following locations:
(1)	Naval tunic – above the nametag;
(2)	Air Force/Army tunics – 12 cm from the bottom of the left sleeve, or 1.2 cm above any existing badge or insignia positioned there;
(3)	male short sleeve shirt (all environments) – centered on right pocket panel; and
(4)	female short sleeve shirt (all environments) – centered on right pocket panel. Should female members have concerns with the location of the insignia, the committee included a caveat to relocate the insignia if required;

It is intented to unveil the Sea Service Insignia during the Battle of the Atlantic Ceremonies to be held in May 2010

how about the Army do one up for Field Time? ;D


----------



## Journeyman

CountDC said:
			
		

> ....how about the Army do one up for Field Time? ;D


Wait for it. With DHH being overwhelmed recently, I've heard there's a bling-petition template being created as we speak   >

While I posted "good on ya" for the original Executive Curl, I have no dog in this fight. Never having been a sailor, I have no opinion -- valid, informed, or otherwise -- on navy fashion.


----------



## Loachman

And flying time, nights spent in Holiday Inns...


----------



## CountDC

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Wait for it. With DHH being overwhelmed recently, I've heard there's a bling-petition template being created as we speak   >
> 
> While I posted "good on ya" for the original Executive Curl, I have no dog in this fight. Never having been a sailor, I have no opinion -- valid, informed, or otherwise -- on navy fashion.



ahh but it won't just be Navy fashion - para e indicates Army and Air Force with sea time will be wearing them too.


----------



## RhumRunner

I personally know of a few Cooks, Storesmen and Stewards of various ranks that do have more sea time than your average sailor. And some of them wear the army and air force DEUs.


----------



## RangerRay

Congrats to the Navy on the return of Elliot's Eye!  

Now we just need to introduce a Canadian White Ensign and  bring back the "R" in RCN (and RCAF).


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

RangerRay said:
			
		

> Now we just need to introduce a Canadian White Ensign and  bring back the "R" in RCN (and RCAF).



And it would be so easy: The best choice is already in stock. The Naval Jack is a Canadian White Ensign in disguise: Its whiteness connects us to the British tradition of ensigns, while its Canadian Flag in the upper quarter is a clear national identifier and its anchor, styled after the old Marcom badge, connects us to the contribution of the navy to the unified forces within which we now operate. All that needs be done is to reverse the current Ensign and Jack positions. It has the added advantage of putting the real national flag back where it belongs: the Jack, which is the highest honour position in British naval traditions. 

Beauty is, for those CFAVs that have a Jack, they already have a "blue" equivalent, so it is also in the system to give them a "Blue Ensign" to steam under.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

This is how I would replace the ranks with the Executive Curl: 






Like the Jamaician Coast Guard's rank of Lieutenant (Junior Grade), I would reverse the bars for the rank of Sub-Lieutenant. 
I have never liked the 1/2 bar curl for naval cadets (for the mess uniforms). The half bar with the curl was worn by Warrant Officers during the period of the RCN (according to Lt(N) Arbuckle's book). 





This just looks butt ugly to me. And this would be worse: 





Cheers!

Lastly, I was having fun last year, and here are slip ons with the curl:


----------



## Blatchman

Good Day 

I think we should keep the 2inch from the bottom of the sleeve, the ranks that high up the sleeve look awkward to me.


----------



## ekpiper

I believe that CTJJ.Stevenson's intent was just to demonstrate the insignia themselves and not the location of the insignia on the cuff.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't really think that there is much more use in guessing at what the new ranks will look like.  We'll find out soon enough, and then we'll all have our opinions about it.

The interesting thing that I've seen from this thread is that there is almost no opposition to this; one of the few times this will happen with regards to a uniform decision, I think.

ekpiper


----------



## Pusser

In the RCN and on current mess kit, the distance from the bottom strip to the bottom of the cuff varies by rank.  This is because the sub-lieutenant's ring is sewn on first and remains in place as new stripes are added when the officer gets promoted.  This makes tailoring easier and avoids having to re-apply the curl each time the rank changes.  Mind you, this only holds true up to commander.  Captains(N) need to have the whole thing re-done.  By that point, they're probably due for a new jacket anyway, especially if they go for a tailcoat with their mess kit.


----------



## ModlrMike

I rather like CTTJ.Stevenson's proposal. The SLt rank is sufficiently similar to the current version so as to minimize any confusion in the other services. In addition, as Pusser pointed out, it's the way we do it now on Mess Kit and there seems to be no confusion.


----------



## Edward Campbell

How far out in front of the horse is this particular cart?

Has anyone IN the Navy or in the Naval Officers' Association heard/read anything that would indicate that this (executive curl) is going to happen?

I repeat: It's a nice idea but I suspect some (senior) noses will be out of joint - probably no matter what happens.


----------



## Pencil Tech

I'd love to see something like this too.  :nod:


----------



## Pusser

I think changing the ensign is a dog that won't hunt.  We need to stay within the realm of the realistic.  I have some fairly reliable intel that the curl is going to happen, but I'm still not holding my breath.   I'll believe it when I see it.


----------



## FSTO

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> How far out in front of the horse is this particular cart?
> 
> Has anyone IN the Navy or in the Naval Officers' Association heard/read anything that would indicate that this (executive curl) is going to happen?
> 
> I repeat: It's a nice idea but I suspect some (senior) noses will be out of joint - probably no matter what happens.



It is being annouced at Battle of Atlantic Ceremonies in Halifax by Defence Minister McKay. The Navy will start wearing it during the International Fleet Review (Victoria June 9). 
I was in contact with the Canex tailor at Naden, she informed me that the material is coming from England. You can order shoulder boards from her right now because she will use the material that she uses for Mess Kit. It's expensive (50.00 for Lt, 70.00 for LCdr).

That price is for Mia's shoulder boards, I assume that the issued ones will be borne by the crown.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Pusser said:
			
		

> I think changing the ensign is a dog that won't hunt.  We need to stay within the realm of the realistic.  I have some fairly reliable intel that the curl is going to happen, but I'm still not holding my breath.   I'll believe it when I see it.




I'm glad the curl will return. Good for whoever decided, at last.

Re; the flag. As Oldgateboatdriver said there is a _white ensign_ in the form of the Canadian Naval Jack:






Since I know nothing about flags and ensigns and jacks I (obviously) have no idea who decides which goes where. Can some admiral, _the_ admiral, decide or is it some issue that has to be decided by _grownups_ or _gnomes_ in Geneva?


----------



## Pencil Tech

Pusser said:
			
		

> I think changing the ensign is a dog that won't hunt.  We need to stay within the realm of the realistic.  I have some fairly reliable intel that the curl is going to happen, but I'm still not holding my breath.   I'll believe it when I see it.



Well, you know I only said it was something I'd like to see.


----------



## observor 69

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The green uniform was actually introduced to the public circa 1966, which was before JV Allard becoming CDS. The actual architect is lost in the mists of time, but it probably originated in one of Paul Hellyer's circle of toadies advisers. It was a logical extension of the amendment to the NDA which came into effect at the end of February 1968 and grouped us all into a single service. Thus, it was planned before the act was passed and promulgated. Edit to add: Allard became CDS in mid-1966, but I still maintain the single service uniform had been unveiled before then. Could he have changed the decision to go for a single uniform? Probably not, even if he had wanted to. I still maintain it was a political decision.
> 
> Allard, who was a large officer, embraced it and appeared in a CF green dress uniform at one of the last ceremonial parades herld by 4 CMBG in North Germany before the move to Lahr and Baden. Suffice to say, he looked like a pale version of Idi Amin, or maybe a Franco Herman Goering. If that does not give you an indication of what I thought about the whole bloody thing, you have not been paying attention.



Gen.Allard also came to RCAF Station 4 Wing during this time period. He spoke to the members of the Junior Ranks club, all still wearing the old RCAF uniform, while wearing the new green uniform and a Sam Browne belt.

An image I will never forget.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

Mia's Tailor Shop does produce very good shoulder boards. I have a set of Lieutenant(N) and the current Sub-Lieutenant for my mess kit jacket. That being said, seeing that I am still a subbie, I will have to wait until the decision will be made for the case of that rank before I purchase new sub-lieutenant shoulder boards. 

Cheers!


----------



## MARS

FSTO said:
			
		

> It is being annouced at Battle of Atlantic Ceremonies in Halifax by Defence Minister McKay. The Navy will start wearing it during the International Fleet Review (Victoria June 9).



I have heard the same.  Also that initially, 268 officers across the three formations will be authorized to wear it.  This has something to do with getting the supply contract lined up and sufficient material in stock.  Further allocations would follow thereafter.


----------



## MSEng314

MARS said:
			
		

> I have heard the same.  Also that initially, 268 officers across the three formations will be authorized to wear it.  This has something to do with getting the supply contract lined up and sufficient material in stock.  Further allocations would follow thereafter.



What is your source? Could you provide a link on the DIN?

I'm all for it, but I'm not going to get too excited about it until I hear something official.


----------



## andpro

MARS said:
			
		

> I have heard the same.  Also that initially, 268 officers across the three formations will be authorized to wear it.  This has something to do with getting the supply contract lined up and sufficient material in stock.  Further allocations would follow thereafter.



Will it be authorized if you are not one of the 268 and you incur the cost yourself?


----------



## q_1966

Well its about friggin time they brought it back.

God Save The Queen


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

Hi everyone, 

My contact at Logistik Unicorp has informed me of the following today: 

1) The rank of the rank of sub-lieutenant will have the larger braid on the top, and the smaller one one the bottom. 
2) The rank of naval cadet will remain the same. 

He has informed me that the slip ons and shoulder boards will not be ready until June of this year. 

I guess with this unofficial information, I will have a tunic prepared for the change and I will contact Mia's soon enough. 

Cheers!


----------



## MSEng314

ctjj.stevenson said:
			
		

> Hi everyone,
> 
> My contact at Logistik Unicorp has informed me of the following today:
> 
> 1) The rank of the rank of sub-lieutenant will have the larger braid on the top, and the smaller one one the bottom.
> 2) The rank of naval cadet will remain the same.
> 
> He has informed me that the slip ons and shoulder boards will not be ready until June of this year.
> 
> I guess with this unofficial information, I will have a tunic prepared for the change and I will contact Mia's soon enough.
> 
> Cheers!



Thanks for the info, can't wait!

Cheers!


----------



## Snakedoc

ctjj.stevenson said:
			
		

> 1) The rank of the rank of sub-lieutenant will have the larger braid on the top, and the smaller one one the bottom.



Quite interesting, thanks for the unofficial information.  This will take a while to get used to seeing!


----------



## gcclarke

Oooh I won the "guess the format of the new rank insignia" game. Or at least the options that I preferred have prevailed. 
Still no word on flag ranks though, eh?


----------



## FSTO

gcclarke said:
			
		

> Oooh I won the "guess the format of the new rank insignia" game. Or at least the options that I preferred have prevailed.
> Still no word on flag ranks though, eh?



Flag Officers are getting it as well. It will be the same as all other Commonwealth Navies rank insignia.


----------



## ekpiper

Heh, yeah you won...and I was completely wrong!  It will take awhile to get used to seeing the inverted SLt rank, and I'm not going to try guessing about flag ranks.


----------



## FSTO

ekpiper said:
			
		

> Heh, yeah you won...and I was completely wrong!  It will take awhile to get used to seeing the inverted SLt rank, and I'm not going to try guessing about flag ranks.



Flag Ranks will look like this:


----------



## dimsum

So, out of curiosity, will the flag ranks lose the leaves, etc on the shoulders of the tunic?


----------



## Halifax Tar

Soooooooooooo when do we in the lower decks get our old ranks back ?


----------



## MARS

Dimsum said:
			
		

> So, out of curiosity, will the flag ranks lose the leaves, etc on the shoulders of the tunic?



If FSTO is correct, then yes, they would-should lose the shoulder leaves.


----------



## kratz

Looks good FSTO, but while we know where Commodore fits into that, how would that rank look?


----------



## ekpiper

Well, from current info, here are the new rank insignia.


----------



## Pencil Tech

Well that's from MARCOM. Sweet! Congratulations Swabbos!


----------



## ekpiper

PencilTech,

That image isn't official CF.  I named it that just to distinguish it from the source image I borrowed from FSTO.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

I was having a little fun yesterday, and worked on improving my earlier version for the monarch's and vice-regal ranks: 







The GG's rank sleeve has existed since at least the 1970s. I believe that it should remain, and give the GG the bars of an admiral. As for the monarch, it would be a good idea to have a similar to the GG, and have the bars of an Admiral of the Fleet. Also, it will show that the GG is subordinate to the monarch and not his/her equal. 

Cheers!


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

I have also ordered my shoulder boards for a sub-lieutenant with the inverse rank. I should get them soon.


----------



## dimsum

Dag-nab it , I *knew* I should have kept my  SLt shoulderboards.  Now they're antique/collector items!   :blotto:


----------



## tabernac

ekpiper said:
			
		

> Well, from current info, here are the new rank insignia.



I wonder what the new Flag Officer shoulder boards will look like. IMO, they look very sharp as they stand now.

Now on to something else: I know I might be beating a dead horse here, but I really hope that NCdts are included in the rank redux. It just doesn't make any sense to have Elliot's Eye for all Naval Officers in mess dress - NCdt incl'd - yet no curl for NCdts in DEUs.


----------



## George Wallace

That is why they are "Subordinate" officers.  They also do not hold a Commission.  We wouldn't want them to walk around mascarading as real officers now would we?     ;D


----------



## Monsoon

cheeky_monkey said:
			
		

> I wonder what the new Flag Officer shoulder boards will look like. IMO, they look very sharp as they stand now.


If you're thinking of the gold should boards worn on short-sleeved shirts and high-collar whites, I don't imagine they'll change. They're already patterned after something similar in the RN and other navies (one very thick bar and three smaller ones are a bit of a squeeze for the shoulder).


----------



## ekpiper

In my opinion, the NCdt rank should be consistent with the implementation of the curl.  So either they have it on both mess and service dress, or they haven't got it on either.

Whether or not they should have it is another matter.  I suppose I would use other countries as a source of reference:  The US Navy, which uses the star as a form of replacement, does give Officer Candidates the privilege of wearing the star, while Midshipmen generally don't wear it unless they are midshipman officers.  The RN's midshipman wear the uniform of an officer, but as they don't have a rank stripe, we can't infer precisely what they would use.  In the Italian Navy, the 'Aspirante guardiamarina' or Ensign Apprentice is similar to a midshipman, and they do not have an executive curl, but that is the difference between the two ranks' insignia.  In general, Midshipman and Officer Candidates are treated and classed as Officers in all respects except for the commission, and all implications of the commission.  The executive curl doesn't seem to have an incredible amount of specifics for its wear, so I don't see anything that says that the NCdt should not wear it from what I've read for the commonwealth, but the Italians do not give it.

I am quite curious as to the end result when the announcements are made, especially given that in July, I will be becoming a Naval cadet.  Whatever the case, I'm glad that we are finally getting back on the right track WRT uniforms.  I would like to see an 8 button service jacket, but that would require re-issuing and purchasing new tunics for everyone, and that does not make financial sense.

ekpiper


----------



## Snakedoc

I agree with Hamiltongs, I think the flag officer shoulder boards will stay the same (imo it looks much better anyways) but the bars on the sleeves for No.1 dress will be as described (large thick bar with thinner bars above).  This is similar to what the RN does.

I also personally think that it is better not to have the curl for subordinate officers.  Most major navies around the world (i.e. RN and USN) differentiate their rank insignia significantly between Commissioned Officers and officers without a commission such as slanted stripes for the USN and white tabs for the RN.


----------



## Pusser

I suspect that Naval Cadets will have a curl, simply because they already have it on their mess kits and have had it for several years now.  I agree that the flag officer shoulder boards will likely stay the same as they are uniquely Canadian, yet match the same style used in the USN, RN, RNZN, RAN, etc.  It is interesting to note that in the last 10 years, the flag officer shoulder boards of the RN, RNZN and RAN have all been altered to correspond to the same pattern as the US and Canadian Navies (WRT the number of stars).  In the old RN pattern (also used by the RCN and formerly in the RNZN and RAN), the Commodore's shoulder board was similar to all the other officers in that it was a broad band with a curl.  Rear Admiral was the first rank where they used the gold background with a crown, stars and other paraphernalia.  This meant that the Rear Admiral (a two star rank in the modern context) only had one star.  All the "Royal" navies now use two stars for Rear Admirals, but interestingly, the RN still uses the old broad band and curl for their Commodores (ie. there is no "one star" badge of rank in the RN.

Now that the Navy appears to be reclaiming a piece of its heritage, how long will it be before the Army wants its pips and crowns back (or perhaps maple leaves and crowns?)


----------



## Edward Campbell

One "star" ( a _pip_) above a crossed sword and baton was our (Army) old two star rank (MGen). Our old three star rank (LGen) was a crown over the crossed sword and baton. I suspect the _old_ RN RAdm badge may have been 'standardized' with the British Army or vice versa.






Edit: image added


----------



## Pusser

The RCN (and former RN, RNZN and RAN) shoulder boards were actually bit different from the Army pattern.  All Admirals had a crown surmounting a crossed sword and baton and then the Rear Admiral had one huge star, the Vice Admiral had two smaller stars and the Admiral three stars.  Now, each rank gets one more star and they're all the same size.  The Admiral of the Fleet (which is basically defunct anyway - I think Prince Phillip is the only one left) used to have basically the same badge as the Field Marshal, but now a crossed sword and baton have been added in the same pattern as the other admirals, with the wreath and crossed batons below.  Yes, an Admiral of the Fleet now has three batons on his badge, but none in reality!  Field Marshals in the British Army are actually presented with a baton upon promotion, but Admirals of the Fleet are not.


----------



## Old Sweat

Edward

The badges of rank appear to be First World War vintage. Sometime after the war, brigadier generals became brigadiers and their rank badge became three pips and a crown. They also turned in their general officer cap badges and put up the same badge worn by full colonels, which is quite similar to the one worn by current land forces colonels.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Edward
> 
> The badges of rank appear to be First World War vintage. Sometime after the war, brigadier generals became brigadiers and their rank badge became three pips and a crown. They also turned in their general officer cap badges and put up the same badge worn by full colonels, which is quite similar to the one worn by current land forces colonels.



Right you are, that (BGen > Brig) occurred around 1920, as a result of a rather nasty exchange in parliament. The Army was accused, yet again, of being "all bands and generals," or something like that, and the "too many generals" thing resonated with the government of the day. The Army's solution, brigadiers, was, actually, a brilliant bit of _guerilla bureaucracy_ - solved the *political* problem (perception) at low cost and minimal disruption to Whitehall.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

I am also in agreement that the flag officer shoulder boards should remain as they are. I would not mind to see flag officer slip ons, with gold lace below in insignia (much like the shoulder boards) however, I do not think that would actually happen. As for NCdt, I would recommend that no NCdt should wear the curl, for any dress. Anyways, I have seen it on a mess dress, and it is butt ugly.


----------



## Pusser

I don't think changing the slip-ons for flag officers is that far out of the question.  After all, the USN, RN, etc have gold slip ons for their flag officers.  When new Canadian flag officer shoulder boards were first introduced with the DEU in 1984, they were simply navy blue (black) boards with gold embroidery.  The gold backing braid came a bit later.  I always figured it was because the flag officers of the day simply banded together and demanded it.  I have nothing to base this on though.  Either way, it looks great.

Now that it looks like we will getting our uniforms back to where we should be, I wonder if in a few years we older sailors will look back in fondness and remember our "traditional" green uniforms?  Perhaps we will dust them off and wear them to Rembembrance Day parades!


----------



## FSTO

Pusser said:
			
		

> Now that it looks like we will getting our uniforms back to where we should be, I wonder if in a few years we older sailors will look back in fondness and remember our "traditional" green uniforms?  Perhaps we will dust them off and wear them to Rembembrance Day parades!



I highly doubt it.


----------



## Halifax Tar

lol I will poke again... So what about the rest of the Navy? The lower decks I mean...

Anything in our future ?


----------



## DBF

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> lol I will poke again... So what about the rest of the Navy? The lower decks I mean...
> 
> Anything in our future ?


In theory I'd support it (keeping in mind that the executive curl is still a rumour and not a fact) but it depends on the details I guess.  

What are you thinking of?  

Changing the current ranks to the older RCN ranks?  IIRC, there were only 6 ranks in the RCN so how would you accommodate the current 8 ranks?  

Maybe scrapping the current naval trade badges and going with something different?  (On that note, how different are the current naval trade badges from the old RCN ones?)  Without wanting to push our luck, perhaps we could re-introduce trade designators (coloured clothe between the rings) for the officers at the same time...

Certainly 2010 would be the year to make those changes.  Rumour has it that the executive curl came from Prince Charles’ visit earlier this year when he wore the CF naval uniform for the first time and commented to the MND that we needed the curl.  Don’t know if it’s true but a good dit for sure!


----------



## ModlrMike

I don't see the NCM ranks changing any time soon. While the Officer ranks are certainly different, they are not "revolutionary" in the context of the amount of change that would be required of the NCM ranks. In other words, the new Officer ranks are not that divergent from what is in use by the Army and Air elements and the same would need to be maintained for the NCM ranks.


----------



## ekpiper

I think it's time that we bring back the rum ration!  For all ranks, of course.


----------



## Steel Badger

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> lol I will poke again... So what about the rest of the Navy? The lower decks I mean...
> 
> Anything in our future ?



Based on conversations with my Naval confreres here at the Centre: They will be satisfied if the Tot is restored to the lower deck  >


----------



## Pusser

I find it interesting that people often renminisce about the daily tot as if it was something that was taken away.  It wasn't that simple.  The reality is that there was much discussion and the daily tot was discontinued more or less at the sailors' request (at least one can look at it that way).  First off, the daily tot for officers was discontinued in the RN in 1881, before the RCN even existed and considering that the RCN was originally just a smaller copy of the RN, Canadian officers have never received daily tots (they had the Wardroom bar instead)  In the late 60s it was noticed that more and more sailors were choosing to be classed as "temperate."  This meant that rather than drawing their daily tots, they received a bonus on their pay (only applied to sailors who were old enough though - underage sailors received neither rum nor extra pay).  Keep also in mind that the daily tot and a ration of beer was the only alcohol that sailors got on board (meanwhile the Wardroom bar ran freely), so when they were offered bars in the messes in exchange for the tot, everybody thought they wer making progress!


----------



## Steel Badger

I stand educated Sir!

My Naval Colleagues however are still maintaining that they want Beer Machines AND the Tot.


----------



## Pusser

The beer machines are still there and we still issue tots on special occasions.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

Personally, I would not mind a return of the square rig. I would believe that the Canadian Navy is one of the world's only navies that do not wear such a type of uniform. Also, I would believe that it would also be a bit less expensive to have these uniformes for OS to MS then what is currently offered. 

As for ranks. Parts of me would think 2 things. One, keep it as it is to have a touch of Canadianist or, to use what the Royal Canadian Sea Cadets use today. 

Cheers!
Stevi


----------



## armyvern

ekpiper said:
			
		

> I think it's time that we bring back the rum ration!  For all ranks, of course.



This is one for that other thread running ...

You know know old when you remember issuing out the Tots to those who would deliver them to the troops in the field from the MSA in Gagetown & Rations in Halifax.

Stocktaking was always fun too.


----------



## tabernac

ctjj.stevenson said:
			
		

> Personally, I would not mind a return of the square rig. I would believe that the Canadian Navy is one of the world's only navies that do not wear such a type of uniform. Also, I would believe that it would also be a bit less expensive to have these uniforms for OS to MS then what is currently offered.


It should be up to the NCMs to decide. If a growing element within the naval NCM body wants a return to square rig style dress, then due attention should be paid. Likewise, if reaction to such implementation was to be negative. And I debate the cost savings that you think would be had. It would be expensive implementation, and it would make the double breasted tunics more expensive as there would be fewer members requiring them. But I digress.



			
				ctjj.stevenson said:
			
		

> use what the Royal Canadian Sea Cadets use today.



Don't they now use a CF style structure?


----------



## Halifax Tar

I would love to see a return to square rig for OS - MS but purely as a replacement of our current Naval NCM Dress. Not for work dress or operational dress.  I don't see this happening though as I think there would be much resistance from MS and below mess.

As for the ranks Currently we have:

OS-AB-LS-MS // PO2 - PO1 // CPO2 CPO1

VS

OS-AB-LS // PO2 - PO1 // CPO2 CPO1

I propose we keep the chevron for AB. LS would now wear the single fowled anchor and the MS the fowled anchor with a single chevron underneath.

Or we could just do away with the MS rank and go back to the Killick filling that role as they did in the past. This would mean that people would now become ABs for life instead of Killicks. To implement this It would simply be that all MS left work on Friday as an MS and came back on Monday as LS. All LS left on Friday and came back as ABs. Simple change of insignia and title.

Just my  :2c:


----------



## sapperboysen

cheeky_monkey said:
			
		

> Don't they now use a CF style structure?



The rank names are the same, but the badges used are closer to what the RCN used.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

ctjj.stevenson said:
			
		

> Personally, I would not mind a return of the square rig. I would believe that the Canadian Navy is one of the world's only navies that do not wear such a type of uniform. Also, I would believe that it would also be a bit less expensive to have these uniformes for OS to MS then what is currently offered.
> 
> As for ranks. Parts of me would think 2 things. One, keep it as it is to have a touch of Canadianist or, to use what the Royal Canadian Sea Cadets use today.
> 
> Cheers!
> Stevi



Good luck with that as those that want the square rig  back in the MS and below level are in the minority. Remember for most of us the style of uniform that we wear now is what we were taught to have pride with. To bring something back that we have no connection with is only asking for further erosion of morale.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Good luck with that as those that want the square rig  back in the MS and below level are in the minority. Remember for most of us the style of uniform that we wear now is what we were taught to have pride with. To bring something back that we have no connection with is only asking for further erosion of morale.



Exactly my point. I am in that minority that would love to see a return of the square rig but I don't see it happening.

Anyways I feel I have derailed the wardrooms nice thread on their cute little curl  ;D So back to you fellas!


----------



## Blatchman

Boysen said:
			
		

> The rank names are the same, but the badges used are closer to what the RCN used.



The Sea Cadet Rank Badges are the same except with an anchor instead of a maple leaf on MS & Crossed anchors on PO2.

They use basically the RCN rank structure only on their gun shirts and now that we have introduced the rank of LS it is not the same as LS is two chevrons and MS is the anchor (Killick).


----------



## Pusser

In the RCN, the badges of rank were the anchors (one for LS, two crossed for PO2 and two crossed with crown for PO1).  The chevrons were for years of good conduct (one for three years, two for eight and three for thirteen).  A "three badge AB" was an Able Seaman who had at least 13 years of service, but had never been promoted to leading seaman - not that uncommon.  A man with one chevron and an anchor outranked a guy with just three chevrons.   This must have confused the heck out of the Army and Air Force!.  I can't see us switching back to a system like that.

As an aside, the rank of Master Seaman was introduced before everybody managed to get into the green uniform.  The badge of the new MS on the square rig was supposed to be a single fouled anchor with a crown above.  I've only seen this described in a regulation.  I've never seen a picture of anyone actually wearing it.

I'd love to see square rig come back.  I wore it as a sea cadet and for special events when I was in the Naval Reserve.  The reaction we got from the public was amazing (especially when compared to when people thought I was a bus driver in green).  It really is true that all the nice girls love a sailor!  If the lower deck could see what a magnet square rig is for the opposite sex, they might think differently of it.


----------



## jollyjacktar

I would love to have the Square Rig back.  When I was a youngster I thought hard about joining the RN just for the uniform as I wanted to look like a Sailor.  Thankfully I never served as a Sailor when the greens were in use.  I shudder to think of how shitty that must have looked in person.  The photos on the walls of  CFNES from back in the day are bad enough.  While the present DEU is a proper Naval uniform, I would prefer it regulated to the Officers and Chiefs.  But that is just my  :2c:

In reality, we won't turn back the book.  Too expensive and we have bigger fish to fry such as getting new ships out of the penny pinchers in Ottawa.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

Firstly, never would I have proposed that a return to square rigs to become the only naval uniform in Canada. I would imagine the following if square rigs were to return as orders of dress: 

No. 1 (Ceremonial) Dress

No. 1 - Navy blue square rig uniform with medals, swords, etc. 
No. 1A - Navy blue square rig uniform with medals only 
No. 1C - White square rig uniform, with medals 
No. 1D - White square rig uniform, with ribbons only



No. 2 (Mess) Dress

No. 2 - Navy blue square rig with ribbons
No. 2A - white square rig with ribbons 

No. 3 (Service) Dress

No. 3 - Square rig with ribbons (either blue or white)
No. 3A - as it is for the moment
No. 3B - as it is for the moment - however, replacing service cap for seamen's cap. 
No. 3C - As it is for the moment - however, replacing service cap for seamen's cap 
No. 3D - As it is. 


No. 5 - Operational Dress - Remain as it is. 


Cheers!


----------



## gcclarke

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Thankfully I never served as a Sailor when the greens were in use.  I shudder to think of how shitty that must have looked in person.  The photos on the walls of  CFNES from back in the day are bad enough



It always amused me how it apparently took until the 80's for the Navy to discover what a colour photograph was for the Commandant's picture.


----------



## FSTO

For those of you with DIN access:
http://otg-vcd-webs018.ottawa-hull.mil.ca/Cid/project-home_e.asp

Pretty much as official as you can make it without the announcement.

Also SSI details as well;

http://otg-vcd-webs018.ottawa-hull.mil.ca/Cid/project-home_e.asp

If you have problems go to CID home, Level 1 Sponsors, CMS, Implementation, Project Type, Equipment, Executive Curl or Sea Service Indicator.


----------



## ekpiper

FSTO said:
			
		

> For those of you with DIN access:
> http://otg-vcd-webs018.ottawa-hull.mil.ca/Cid/project-home_e.asp
> 
> Pretty much as official as you can make it without the announcement.
> 
> Also SSI details as well;
> 
> http://otg-vcd-webs018.ottawa-hull.mil.ca/Cid/project-home_e.asp
> 
> If you have problems go to CID home, Level 1 Sponsors, CMS, Implementation, Project Type, Equipment, Executive Curl or Sea Service Indicator.



Would it be possible for you to post the contents here?  I do not have DIN access.

Thanks.


----------



## FSTO

ekpiper said:
			
		

> Would it be possible for you to post the contents here?  I do not have DIN access.
> 
> Thanks.



Eventhough the website is within the unclass section of the DIN, I will not copy and paste until the official announcement is made. This has nothing to do with OPSEC, just a personal deal I have made with myself. Sorry. 
Suffice to say it outlines the process that is used to get the item to the users.

Cheers


----------



## Snakedoc

Pusser said:
			
		

> I suspect that Naval Cadets will have a curl, simply because they already have it on their mess kits and have had it for several years now.



I took a look at the links on the DIN.  FSTO is right, basically as official as possible without an announcement.  One note I would like to make is that in the project description for the executive curl, it states that "Officer cadets will retain the current CF rank insignia without the executive curl."  This confirms earlier assertions that NCdt's will not have the curl.  It also states that a Canadian Disruptive Pattern version of the executive curl for garrison or non-tactical use will be made for those out in the field.


----------



## Pusser

I find it interesting that NCdts will not have a curl, especially considering that they've had it on mess kit for several years.  Are they going to have to take if off their mess kits?  This will surely upset all three of them that actually have mess kit! ;D


----------



## ekpiper

That will be 4 by the end of the summer !


----------



## tabernac

Snakedoc said:
			
		

> "Officer cadets will retain the current CF rank insignia without the executive curl."



Damn!

The way I see it (aside from the obvious use of the curl with NCdt mess dress), if they're willing to bastardize SLt insignia by inverting it, they might as well continue on bastardizing by giving me (and my fellow NCdts) a wee little curl.

 :2c:


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

ekpiper said:
			
		

> That will be 4 by the end of the summer !


Don't do it!  Wait until you've passed MARS IV and then treat yourself.  You won't need mess kit before then.


----------



## ekpiper

Lex Parsimoniae said:
			
		

> Don't do it!  Wait until you've passed MARS IV and then treat yourself.  You won't need mess kit before then.



Heh, I suppose that that would be prudent, given the failure rate of the MARS phase training.  Being already active military circles here at home, there is a relatively good chance that I may need it.  It may not be terribly necessary, but I feel that I should get it as soon as it is within my means, since while I have Army alternatives for dress, I will not have many navy ones (just 2B).

ekpiper


----------



## Blackadder1916

Pusser said:
			
		

> . . .
> As an aside, the rank of Master Seaman was introduced before everybody managed to get into the green uniform.  The badge of the new MS on the square rig was supposed to be a single fouled anchor with a crown above.  I've only seen this described in a regulation.  I've never seen a picture of anyone actually wearing it.
> . . .



Not to derail the discussion again to square rig, but a photo of the insignia (on a blue jumper) can be found at:

http://mpmuseum.org/rcn_uniform_ratings2.html  (mid-way down the page)



> The rank insignia is that of a Leading Seaman with at least 3 years service. The Crown above the Leading Seaman's rank insignia is uncommon and it is described in CFP 152 (Seaman's Handbook) dated 6 July 1970 "Master seaman wear a crown above the leading seaman insignia." This would have been in wear until the "square rig pattern uniforms" were withdrawn in the mid 1970s and replaced by the CF Greens.


----------



## Pusser

Now that's curious.  The crown in the picture is a Tudor crown, which was replaced by St Edward's crown on badges at least ten years before unification and the rank of Master Seaman existed.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

Things do change over time, eh. The Royal Navy also no longer uses these shoulder boards for their admirals, seeing that they now follow the more common system of stars (Rear Admiral with two, Vice Admiral with three and Admiral with four). However, commodores in the UK are not considered flag officers as they are here.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

_Je sera audacieux_  (as we say at HMCS QUÉBEC) tomorrow. I will have a service dress tunic prepared with executive curls tomorrow (to be ahead of the line up). 

Cheers!
Stevi


----------



## gwp

ctjj.stevenson said:
			
		

> _Je sera audacieux_  (as we say at HMCS QUÉBEC) tomorrow. I will have a service dress tunic prepared with executive curls tomorrow (to be ahead of the line up).  Cheers!
> Stevi


The role out is going to be very orderly. Warming the bell is not recommended.  The new insignia will not appear "willy nilly." 

As of today there is not enough material in the country to do what is planned for the reveal that will occur several weeks after the official announcement.


----------



## donaldk

I am happy the executive curl is finally seeing the light of day.  Obviously it won't role out over night... and I would expect the base tailor to be completely out of stock at all times anyways.  I component transferred from the reserves last year (from MS 00225 to SLt 00345) and found out how hard it was to get slip-ons let alone even one pair of shoulder boards (too bad it is not allowed to mix an NCM white short sleeve shirt with navy officer rank slip-ons...)

Anyone know if there will be private sales of these items in the Halifax area?  I know of Mia at the CANEX by Naden on the west coast.. but despite my years in Halifax I never have known about a similar merchant here.


----------



## Pusser

Your best bet in Halifax is Quinpool Tailor, which, oddly enough, is NOT on Quinpool Road, nor even that close to it.  It's on Oxford St, closer to Bayers Rd.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

The dockyard tailor shop will also do this kind of work.  Prices are slightly higher than Quinpool Tailors.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

One may always order online or by phone with Mia's, and the service is quick. Anyways, I do believe that she does have stock for quick people who want to look "cool" with the updated ranks insignias. For online information, www.medalscanada.com.


----------



## Snakedoc

Any idea if the one's sold at Mia's are the 'regulation' ones?


----------



## gwp

> May 02, 2010 09:45 ET
> Navy Welcomes Uniform Changes
> OTTAWA, ONTARIO--(Marketwire - May 2, 2010) - The Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence today announced changes to the Canadian Navy uniform in commemoration of Canada's Naval Centennial.
> 
> The navy will add a badge called a Sea Service Insignia (SSI), a visible and formal recognition for those who have spent significant amounts of time at sea. Also, the government will reinstate the "executive curl," a loop on the braid of a naval officer's rank insignia, on the top-most stripe of a tunic sleeve or epaulette. The executive curl was adopted by the Canadian Navy when it was formed in 1910.
> 
> "The executive curl provides a distinct naval officer identity that was lost when the National Defence Act unified the three services in 1968. What better time to bring back this tradition than in the year of the Canadian Navy's 100th anniversary" said the Honourable Peter Mackay, Minister of National Defence. Vice-Admiral P.D. McFadden, Chief of the Maritime Staff, also welcomed the changes saying, "Recognition of people is vital to our long term operational effectiveness. The creation of the SSI is intended to recognize the efforts of all those who serve at sea and to re-enforce the key role that naval operations play in Canadian security at home and in diplomacy abroad."
> 
> The SSI is a visible and formal recognition of the time the navy's sailors, as well as members of the army and air force who sail on HMC Ships, spend at sea, away from their homes and loved ones. It is a way of saying "thank you" to all those who have spent significant amounts of time away from their homes and families in service to the Canadian Navy. Four different levels have been designed, with members receiving the first insignia for 365 days spent at sea.
> 
> 
> For more information, please contact
> 
> Navy Public Affairs



Watch for a CANFORGE/MARGEN regarding effective date and implementation


----------



## RangerRay

And army officers get pips/crowns when...?   ;D


----------



## dapaterson

RangerRay said:
			
		

> And army officers get pips/crowns when...?   ;D



Hopefully, never.  We don't need more archaic, useless Brit traditions.


----------



## medicineman

RangerRay said:
			
		

> And army officers get pips/crowns when...?   ;D



Great, then our WO's will be getting saluted by those that can't tell us apart from a  Major...

MM


----------



## Snakedoc

Article on CTV about the announcement with a nice picture of the curl on a Canadian uniform.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20100502/canadian-navy-centennial-100502/20100502?hub=Canada

Navy marks centennial by reinstating 'executive curl'

HALIFAX — After serving 43 years in the Canadian navy, including two tours during the Korean War, you wouldn't think someone like George Aucoin would be moved by something so insignificant as a small gold braid. 

But you would be wrong. 

"The navy has come back to life," Aucoin exclaimed Sunday after Defence Minister Peter MacKay announced he would reinstate the so-called executive curl on officers' uniforms to mark the navy's 100th anniversary in Canada. 

The curl is a loop of braid that appears above an officer's rank insignia on their epaulettes and tunic sleeves. Its origins can be traced to the 1850s during the Crimean War, and it was adopted by the Royal Canadian Navy when it was formed in 1910-11. 

But the curl was dropped when the branches of the Canadian Forces were unified in 1968. 

Aucoin, a retired chief petty officer from Margaree Harbour, N.S., said that was a bad idea. 

"Its significance is that it shows we have a navy," he said after MacKay spoke to a small crowd of sailors at Canadian Forces Base Halifax. 

"It's hard for some of the new personnel to see the significance because they didn't wear the old uniform ... It was part of our identity. It will mean a great deal to us seeing it come back." 

But the uniform change is only one of many ways the navy plans to commemorate its centennial. 

There will be international fleet assemblies at naval bases in Victoria and Halifax, port visits by Canadian warships along the St. Lawrence River, Great Lakes and Canada's coastlines, a musical revue, publication of a coffee table book and the unveiling Monday of a stamp series by Canada Post. 

On Tuesday, more than 2,000 sailors will parade through the streets of Halifax and Victoria, marking 100 years since royal assent was given to the Naval Service Act, which established Canada's Department of Naval Service. 

As well, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Vice-Admiral Dean McFadden, Chief of the Maritime Staff, will present a ship's bell -- dubbed the Canadian Navy Centennial Bell -- during a ceremony on Parliament Hill. 

Later this summer, the Queen will pay tribute to the navy when she visits Halifax. 

MacKay also announced Sunday the navy will soon offer all members of the military a badge called a Sea Service Insignia to recognize those who spend at least 365 days of cumulative time at sea during their military careers. 

The minister made the announcements prior to the annual tribute to those who served during the Battle of the Atlantic, one of the longest campaigns of the Second World War. 

"It was during this time that our navy acquired its sense of purpose," MacKay said. "Our men and women in uniform sacrificed so much and they very much deserve our thanks and recognition." 

MacKay spoke briefly about the navy's support during the Vancouver Olympics, the humanitarian assistance it offered after a devastating earthquake hit Haiti in January and its ongoing missions to combat piracy off the Horn of Africa. 

He said he had just returned from the High Arctic where navy ships have helped reassert Canadian sovereignty despite harsh conditions, and he commended Canada's sailors for their efforts to thwart terrorism in southwest Asia since the 9-11 attacks in 2001. 

"Tonne for tonne, sailor for sailor, we take a back seat to no one -- Canada's navy is among the best in the world," he said. 

But there was a time when the navy didn't have much to crow about. 

Only four years after it came into being, the Royal Canadian Navy had only two ships and 350 men as Canada was thrust into the First World War. It could offer little more than modest patrols while German U-boats sank several Canadian fishing trawlers and schooners off the East Coast. 

By contrast, the navy played a decisive role during the Second World War by assuming responsibility for the northwest Atlantic, the only major theatre of the war to be commanded by Canadians. 

The Battle of the Atlantic saw the navy escort more than 25,000 merchant ships to Europe. The RCN lost 14 warships to enemy attack and another eight ships to accidents at sea, with about 2,000 sailors losing their lives. 

As well, at least 70 merchant navy ships were lost during the war, claiming the lives of 1,700 seamen. 

By the close of the war, Canada had the third-largest navy in the world with 90,000 men and 6,000 women in uniform, and 434 commissioned vessels including cruisers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes and auxiliaries. 

"The Canadian navy came of age then," said Rear Admiral Paul Maddison, Commander Maritime Forces Atlantic. 

"Unlike Vimy, there was no land to hold, no flag to plant, no memorial to build. We just went out, did what we needed to do alongside merchant mariners and we came back, turned around, and we did it again and again and again." 

During the Korean War, eight Canadian destroyers were dispatched to the Far East. They blockaded the coast, protected aircraft carriers, bombarded enemy-held coastal areas and provided humanitarian aid. 

The advent of the Cold War prompted the navy to improve its ability to track Soviet submarines and long-range aircraft while working with NATO allies. 

More recently, the Canadian navy was deployed during conflicts in Persian Gulf, the former Yugoslavia and East Timor. 

"We haven't stopped, " said Maddison, adding that the navy is looking forward to the modernization of its 12 Halifax-class frigates -- starting this September -- refurbishment of all four Victoria-class submarines, development of an Arctic patrol ship and introduction of the Cyclone helicopter to replace the aging Sea King.


----------



## thehuntforredoctober

Happy birthday RCN, and congratulations on regaining your curls!

A few observations from across the pond, if I may:

The RN did actually have A/S/Lts, from the 1950s until about 1993. They wore the same rank insignia as S/Lts, just like the RAN.

The first stripe with the curl is nowadays available with the curl pre-made so it just has to be sewn on. It is sewn so that it does not need to be shifted on promotion to Lt: i.e. if you put a S/Lt and Lt's cuffs side by side the curl is in the same place. Promotion to Lt-Cdr takes another 8 years or so, so by then all the lace has to be replaced. If you put a Lt and a Lt-Cdr's cuffs side by the side the bottom stripe is in the same place. 

One thing to be careful of if you are ordering lace from the UK is that although the regulations specify 1/2" lace, most naval tailors actually use 9/16" lace as it looks better without being obviously different.

Now all you guys need are some 8-button jackets!


----------



## Dennis Ruhl

thehuntforredoctober said:
			
		

> Happy birthday RCN, and congratulations on regaining your curls!



Since we now admit to it being a navy, a nice touch would be to again call it the RCN.


----------



## Blatchman

The official poster.


----------



## George Wallace

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> Since we now admit to it being a navy, a nice touch would be to again call it the RCN.



Right!  You staff it and present it to the Queen for approval.


----------



## Dennis Ruhl

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Right!  You staff it and present it to the Queen for approval.



It was called the RCN when it had sailors in the mere hundreds.  Perhaps they could get a 2 for 1 deal with the queen and re-Royal the airforce.


----------



## gcclarke

I must say, I'm always amused at how, whenever deciding how to display the insignia for ranks, they always seem to use the one example that gets the least amount of actual wear, outside of mess kits.

I wonder how they're going to deal with the slip-ons for Cdrs and Capt(N)s, what with the curl taking up so much room. Make the slip-on longer, squish the stripes, or some combination thereof?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> Since we now admit to it being a navy, a nice touch would be to again call it the RCN.



Why? When most of the sailors serving are proud of what our Navy has accomplished without being Royal any longer. Does that pride not count for something? Sorry but my Navy evolved from the RCN and while the past is important so is the present and the future. The Royal is neither wanted or really is on the radar for the rank and file of most members. Being the RCN will not stop our people from leaving in droves. Worry and address that rather then worry about something as frivilous as a Royal addition. Last I checked our ships were still called _*Her Majesty's/ Canadian Ship *_* and not the Canadian Naval Ship (CNS) and the Queen has not asked us to stop so guess what everyone is happy with the silent Royal. :*


----------



## aesop081

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> re-Royal the airforce.



There is no air force to "re-royal".


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

I am curious though as to what the SSI looks like and what orders of dress we will wear it on.


----------



## Dennis Ruhl

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> There is no air force to "re-royal".



Then someone should report these frauds whoever they are.

http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/v2/index-eng.asp

Yes, a name is just a name but if I remember the 1960s correctly admirals heads were rolling because they believed otherwise.  Incidently the statement that a name is just a name proves my point also unless someone believes that a royal title is somehow odious.


----------



## aesop081

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> Then someone should report these frauds whoever they are.
> 
> http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/v2/index-eng.asp



 :

You know damned well that there is no entity called "Air force" in Canadian law. The ther term is in common usage is neither here nor there. There is no "Canadian Air Force" that you can add the Royal title to. That is a simple fact.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

:boring:

Do we have to go through this again?

 :boring:


----------



## jollyjacktar

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> I am curious though as to what the SSI looks like and what orders of dress we will wear it on.



I saw on line, the display board of the presentation given at the announcement on Sunday.  It is a fouled anchor with gun metal, red, silver and gold as the colour of each.  Sorry I cannot find it to post at this time.  Was no indication of how and where the badge is to be worn.  Would appear it will be indicating "days at sea" instead of time posted to a ship.

And, WRT  RCN vs Maritime Command.  I am not in your camp I'm afraid, and I am not alone in this either.  Even if a Rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.  Maritime Command sucks in my opinion.  I notice that even you use the term "Navy" when speaking of the institution.  But I do agree there are big systemic problems facing the Navy today and in the future such as retention and new ships.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

My shoulder boards came in this morning and they look great. I will wear them with pride tomorrow!


----------



## Dennis Ruhl

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> :boring:
> 
> Do we have to go through this again?
> 
> :boring:



I've finished my rant.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I saw on line, the display board of the presentation given at the announcement on Sunday.  It is a fouled anchor with gun metal, red, silver and gold as the colour of each.  Sorry I cannot find it to post at this time.  Was no indication of how and where the badge is to be worn.  Would appear it will be indicating "days at sea" instead of time posted to a ship.
> 
> And, WRT  RCN vs Maritime Command.  I am not in your camp I'm afraid, and I am not alone in this either.  Even if a Rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.  Maritime Command sucks in my opinion.  I notice that even you use the term "Navy" when speaking of the institution.  But I do agree there are big systemic problems facing the Navy today and in the future such as retention and new ships.



Not everyone is jolly but I feel there are better solutions and more outstanding problems out there for the Navy then reintroducing Royal to our name.

Thanks for the description of the SSI, I will have to take a look before our Freedom of the City parade tomorrow.


----------



## ctjj.stevenson

It would seem that we will have to wait until the official CANFORGEN is out ... therefore I guess that I will have to wait to wear them.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I saw on line, the display board of the presentation given at the announcement on Sunday.


Here it is: http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/gal/photos-eng.asp?id=232&WT.svl=potd

The Sea Service Insignia will be a metallic cloth badge (for service dress tunic) and metal pin (for service dress short-sleeved shirt and high-collared white tunic) produced in four colours (gun metal, brass, silver, and gold) each representing time spent at sea - the first level will be one year (365 days) with periodicity for higher levels to be established.  Note that the SSI was created to recognize 'time spent at sea' and not time posted to a sea-going unit.


----------



## Otis

If they do the SSI by "days at sea" rather than sea time as defined by posting to a sea-going unit, isn't that going to be an adminstrative nightmare?

I say scrap the whole thing ... a sailor is a sailor.

And does anyone really think that some Air Force guy is going to want to stick crap on his uniform because he was sailing on a ship fixing Sea Kings?


----------



## Nuggs

Otis said:
			
		

> If they do the SSI by "days at sea" rather than sea time as defined by posting to a sea-going unit, isn't that going to be an adminstrative nightmare?
> 
> I say scrap the whole thing ... a sailor is a sailor.
> 
> And does anyone really think that some Air Force guy is going to want to stick crap on his uniform because he was sailing on a ship fixing Sea Kings?



When I read it today, and I'm paraphrasing:

... days at sea is defined as any period of 8 hours or longer ...

So it looks like its actually sailing time not time at the wall.


----------



## AmmoTech90

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> Since we now admit to it being a navy, a nice touch would be to again call it the RCN.



If you want to live in the past, go whole hog.

Naval Service of Canada


----------



## Occam

Lex Parsimoniae said:
			
		

> Here it is: http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/gal/photos-eng.asp?id=232&WT.svl=potd
> 
> The Sea Service Insignia will be a metallic cloth badge (for service dress tunic) and metal pin (for service dress short-sleeved shirt and high-collared white tunic) produced in four colours (gun metal, brass, silver, and gold) each representing time spent at sea - the first level will be one year (365 days) with periodicity for higher levels to be established.  Note that the SSI was created to recognize 'time spent at sea' and not time posted to a sea-going unit.



If you look at the full-size photograph, Level 2 is awarded for 1095 sea days, Level 3 is awarded for 1460 sea days, and Level 4 is awarded for 1825 sea days.

It literally took *years* for the Navy to do a SDA verification not that long ago, and that was only to verify time posted to a sea-going unit.  If they have to go back and calculate actual days at sea, not counting alongside time in Halifax, Esquimalt and foreign ports....I hope they've hired additional staff!

edit:  added Esquimalt - not everyone was lucky enough to be East coast.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

Occam said:
			
		

> If you look at the full-size photograph, Level 2 is awarded for 1095 sea days, Level 3 is awarded for 1460 sea days, and Level 4 is awarded for 1825 sea days.


Well spotted!


----------



## FSTO

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> :
> 
> You know damned well that there is no entity called "Air force" in Canadian law. The  term is in common usage is neither here nor there. There is no "Canadian Air Force" that you can add the Royal title to. That is a simple fact.



If there is no desire in Air Command to resurrect the "Air Force" then why is CFB Winnipeg called 17 Wing etc. In fact, the original bill that unified the Forces did not include Air Command. All aviation assets that flew over the water was owned by Maritime Command. AFAIK there was no amendment to the NDA to create Air Command, it just kind of evolved on its own!


----------



## wayjosh

ctjj.stevenson said:
			
		

> It would seem that we will have to wait until the official CANFORGEN is out ... therefore I guess that I will have to wait to wear them.



You will not be allowed to wear them until after the official unveiling at the Pacific IFR in June.


----------



## Cronicbny

wayjosh said:
			
		

> You will not be allowed to wear them until after the official unveiling at the Pacific IFR in June.



Really? I think you may see some senior personnel wearing them during our respective marches tomorrow... or not.


----------



## CountDC

Otis said:
			
		

> If they do the SSI by "days at sea" rather than sea time as defined by posting to a sea-going unit, isn't that going to be an adminstrative nightmare?
> 
> I say scrap the whole thing ... a sailor is a sailor.
> 
> And does anyone really think that some Air Force guy is going to want to stick crap on his uniform because he was sailing on a ship fixing Sea Kings?



Yes that will be an administrative nightmare and thank god I will not be involved in it.  Been hard enough over the years to straighten out the sea time as it is let along trying to figure out if the member actually sailed during that period. Imagine - did the ship sail?  What dates?  Was this member with that ship?  Was he landed? Loaned out? Sent on course? If loaned out did that ship sail?  Way to many factors to try getting.  Going with awarded sea time would be a lot easier.


----------



## CountDC

This is the info we have received:

The Sea Service Insignia is meant to recognize the significance of service at sea by those who have and continue to serve in HMC Ships and Submarines.

	The specifications of the SSI are as follows:
	a.	Name.	The official name of the insignia will be the, Sea Service Insignia – insignes de service de mer;
	b.	Description.  The SSI will consist of a stand alone naval crown superimposed in the center of a fouled anchor; 
	c.	Material.  The insignia will be produced in both metal and cloth. Metal insignia will be worn on the short sleeve shirt and cloth insignia will be worn on the tunic;   
	d.	Colour.  The insignia will be produced in four colours; gun metal, bronze, silver and gold. Each colour will represent a corresponding level of sea days;
	e.	Location.  The SSI will be worn at the following locations:
		(1)	Naval tunic – above the nametag;
	(2)	Air Force/Army tunics – 12 cm from the bottom of the left sleeve, or 1.2 cm above any existing badge or insignia positioned there;
	(3)	male short sleeve shirt (all environments) – centered on right pocket panel; and
	(4)	female short sleeve shirt (all environments) – centered on right pocket panel. Should female members have concerns with the location of the insignia, the committee included a 	caveat to relocate the insignia if required;	

	All those serving in the CF on 1 Jan 2010 will be eligible to receive the SSI as they meet the required minimum sea days. *A sea day will be defined as a minimum of 8 hours at sea, at anchor or combination there of*. As illustrated in the attached document, there are four(4) qualifying levels to the SSI which correspond to colour and actual days at sea. Those levels are as follow:

Level 1 - Gun Metal 365 days;
Level 2 - Copper 1095 days;
Level 3 - Silver 1460 days, and 
Level 4 - Gold 1825 days.


	The administration of the SSI is currently under the responsibility of DMAR PERS who have assembled a tiger team to commence the accounting processes. It is anticipated the awarding of the SSI will commence in January 2011. As you can well imagine, this will not be a simple task and will take some time to accomplish. More details and information provided as their work progresses.


----------



## Sailorwest

I find it interesting that they have chosen to award the SSI for 1, 3, 4, and 5 years of actual sea days. I guess that gap from 1 to 3 years isn't that significant. I agree that this will be an administrative nightmare to figure out how many days at sea people actually served.


----------



## Loachman

FSTO said:
			
		

> If there is no desire in Air Command to resurrect the "Air Force" then why is CFB Winnipeg called 17 Wing etc. In fact, the original bill that unified the Forces did not include Air Command. All aviation assets that flew over the water was owned by Maritime Command. AFAIK there was no amendment to the NDA to create Air Command, it just kind of evolved on its own!



The RCAF did not ever call its bases "Wings". They were Stations, ie RCAF Station Trenton etcetera. Many years ago, a Commander Air Command decided that "we have to have Wings again", but got it wrong. Wings are the equivalent of Army brigades, ie a grouping of units with a common operational purpose. There is indeed a Wing at CFB (formerly RCAF Station) Trenton as there are several Transport Squadrons there, but the base infrastructure does not constitute a Wing in the proper sense.

The National Defence Act does not need to be amended in order to create or modify formations. It would, however, have to be amended in order to re-create three services out of the one that we currently have. Air Command did not "evolve". It was created on purpose, to "give all airmen a common identity" - completely ignoring the fact that there were still many Army and Naval Aviators around who felt little "common identity" with their former RCAF counterparts and were somewhat resentful of being lumped in with them while simultaneously having their heritages wiped out completely. Until that time, 10 Tactical Air Group, now 1 Wing, belonged to Mobile Command, now Land Force Command, while Maritime Air Group belonged to Maritime Command - both far more natural command relationships.

Anyway, congratulations about being curly again, but I don't want any more a** f**ce influence over Tac Hel than we're already stuck with.


----------



## Sailorwest

What follows is CANFORGEN on wearing of Executive Curl and SSI. Not a complete copy of message. Contact info for queries and French portion not included.

RE: CANFORGEN 091-10 CMS 031-10 271456Z APR 10 - EXECUTIVE CURL AND SEA SERVICE INSIGNIA

UNCLAS CANFORGEN 091-10 CMS 031-10
SIC WAB
SUBJ: EXECUTIVE CURL AND SEA SERVICE INSIGNIA BILINGUAL MESSAGE/MESSAGE
BILINGUE 
1.  IT IS WITH GREAT PLEASURE THAT I AM ABLE TO ANNOUNCE TWO VERY IMPORTANT INITIATIVES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CANADIAN NAVAL CENTENNIAL 
2.  FIRST, THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA HAS BESTOWED UPON THE NAVY THE AUTHORITY TO REINTRODUCE THE EXECUTIVE CURL BACK INTO THE NAVAL RANK INSIGNIA.  THE REINTRODUCTION OF THE EXECUTIVE CURL REFLECTS ON THE
PROUD HISTORY AND CONTRIBUTIONS THAT THE NAVY HAS MADE TO CANADA 
3.DISTRIBUTION AND AUTHORITY TO WEAR THE EXECUTIVE CURL WILL COMMENCE WITH A PHASED APPROACH.  THE PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL FLEET REVIEW (IFR) PARADE OF NATIONS 11 JUN 10 WILL MARK THE FIRST OFFICIAL FUNCTION WHERE THE EXECUTIVE CURL WILL BE WORN.   AS THERE IS ONLY A LIMITED SUPPLY OF AUTHORIZED BRAID AVAILABLE FOR TUNICS ONLY
PERSONNEL PREVIOUSLY NOTIFIED VIA SEPARATE CORRESPONDENCE WILL BE AUTHORIZED TO COMMENCE THE QUOTE LACING UP UNQUOTE TUNICS FOR THIS EVENT.  FURTHER DIRECTION WILL FOLLOW FOR SUBSEQUENT PHASES OF DISTRIBUTION/IMPLEMENTATION 
4.  DMRS HAS COMMENCED THE PROCUREMENT OF SERVICE DRESS SLIP-ONS AND SHOULDER BOARDS.  THESE ITEMS WILL BE
AUTHORIZED FOR WEAR ONCE INTRODUCED INTO THE SUPPLY SYSTEM.  IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT SLIP-ONS WILL BE AVAILABLE IN APS 10.  FOR OFFICERS WHO ARE IN POSSESSION OF HARDBOARDS AS PART OF MESS DRESS, THE WEARING OF THE EXECUTIVE CURL IS AUTHORIZED WITH SUMMER DRESS (HIGH COLLAR WHITES/WHITE SHORT SLEEVE SHIRT) COMMENCING 11 JUN 10 
5.  THE INTRODUCTION OF THE EXECUTIVE CURL IS A FOND REMINDER OF OUR RICH CANADIAN NAVAL HISTORY AND IT SHOULD BE WORN WITH PRIDE BY ALL NAVAL OFFICERS 
6.  SECONDLY, IT IS ALSO WITH GREAT PLEASURE THAT I AM ABLE TO INTRODUCE THE NEWLY CREATED SEA SERVICE INSIGNIA (SSI).  THE SSI HAS BEEN CREATED AS A MEANS TO RECOGNIZE THE SERVICE OF ALL SEA GOING PERSONNEL REGARDLESS OF ENVIRONMENT 
7.  THE CANADIAN NAVAL CENTENNIAL AND IN PARTICULAR, THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE BATTLE OF THE ATLANTIC SERVE
AS AN IMPORTANT REMINDER TO ALL THAT NAVAL PERSONNEL AND ALL THOSE WHO GO TO SEA PLAY A VITAL ROLE WITHIN THE CF.
8.  SAILORS HAVE TOLD ME THAT MUCH OF THEIR TIME SPENT AT SEA HAS HISTORICALLY NOT BEEN FORMALLY RECOGNIZED.  THE SSI WAS CREATED TO RECTIFY THIS OVERSIGHT.  THE SSI IS CURRENTLY BEING DEVELOPED AND SHOULD BE READY FOR DISTRIBUTION DURING 2011.  IN THE INTERIM D MAR PERS HAS BEEN TASKED TO REVIEW THE RECORDS OF ALL CURRENTLY SERVING MEMBERS OF THE NAVY WITH A VIEW TO CREATING A SEA SERVICE DATABASE THAT WILL KEEP AN ACCURATE RECORD OF ALL DAYS SPENT AT SEA.  IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE WILL BE MANY EX NAVY OR NON NAVY PERSONNEL WHO WILL QUALIFY FOR THE SSI.  A SSI WEBPAGE IS CURRENTLY BEING DEVELOPED TO GUIDE THOSE INDIVIDUALS, DETAILS TO FOLLOW IN A SUBSEQUENT MSG 
9.  TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE SSI, YOU MUST BE CURRENTLY SERVING IN THE CF. THE SSI WILL CONSIST OF FOUR LEVELS, RECOGNIZED BY COLOUR WHICH WILL INCLUDE: GUN METAL, BRONZE, SILVER AND GOLD.  EACH LEVEL REPRESENTS A CORRESPONDING AMOUNT OF TIME SPENT AT SEA (NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH DAYS IN RECEIPT OF SEA DUTY ALLOWANCE).  INITIAL ELIGIBILITY WILL COMMENCE WITH THE ACCUMULATION OF 365 DAYS AT SEA. SUBSEQUENT LEVELS WILL BE REACHED AT 1095 DAYS, 1460 DAYS WITH THE GOLD LEVEL ACHIEVED AT 1825 DAYS.  A SEA DAY IS DEFINED AS 8 HOURS SPENT AT
SEA.  A COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW OF ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, DEFINITION OF A SEA DAY AND FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQS) WILL BE FOUND AT THE SSI WEB PAGE 
10.  THE CREATION OF THE SSI ESTABLISHES A FORMAL RECOGNITION OF THE SACRIFICES AND EFFORTS OF ALL THOSE CF PERSONNEL BOTH NAVY AND NON-NAVY WHO HAVE SERVED CANADA ON BOARD A HMC SHIP


----------



## Dennis Ruhl

Loachman said:
			
		

> Wings are the equivalent of Army brigades, ie a grouping of units with a common operational purpose.



Everywhere else they are equivalent to battalions.  Because our wings are led by "Group Captains" and our squadrons by "Wing Commanders" old airforce ranks don't work anymore


----------



## Fishbone Jones

This is a Navy thread. Keep it that way.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## medicineman

Sailorwest said:
			
		

> I find it interesting that they have chosen to award the SSI for 1, 3, 4, and 5 years of actual sea days. I guess that gap from 1 to 3 years isn't that significant. I agree that this will be an administrative nightmare to figure out how many days at sea people actually served.


I feel for the clerks that are going to have to sort this (add your own expletive/derogatory descriptor) out.

MM


----------



## jollyjacktar

medicineman said:
			
		

> I feel for the clerks that are going to have to sort this (add your own expletive/derogatory descriptor) out.
> 
> MM



And they should have it all worked out (or snafu'd royally) by the time I hit 55 in 6 years time.  Poor sorry buggers, I feel for them too.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Interesting stuff... This SSI sounds like a monster of a problem...


----------



## wayjosh

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Interesting stuff... This SSI sounds like a monster of a problem...



How so? Why are people so quick to try and find negatives? The intent of the SSI is to formally recognize time spent at sea and to recognize the hard work of the sailors and officers who go to sea.


----------



## Snakedoc

AmmoTech90 said:
			
		

> If you want to live in the past, go whole hog.
> 
> Naval Service of Canada



Just read this article and thought it was relevant to the previous posts.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/its-time-to-call-the-navy-a-navy-once-again/article1555492/

Globe editorial
It’s time to call the Navy a navy once again 
Canadian Forces Maritime Command is hardly a stirring name


Today marks the 100th anniversary of Canada’s navy, which fought with distinction in two World Wars and the Korean War, and is now, alas, known as the Canadian Forces Maritime Command, a bulky and obscure label that communicates little of what it is and what it has done. 

What better way to mark the centennial than to restore its rightful name, the Royal Canadian Navy, which it carried from 1911 to 1968, when defence minister Paul Hellyer unified the navy, army and air force under one command. (At one time, each service reported to its own cabinet minister.) The unification does not need to be undone. The navy does not need to go back to having its own command structure. Just the name will do.

The Royal Canadian Navy conjures up images of the Battle of the Atlantic, which has been described as the longest battle of the war – from September, 1939, to May, 1945. From a tiny force of just 3,000, with just 13 warships, in 1939, the navy grew to encompass 99,688 men and 6,500 women, and 471 fighting vessels. By the time the Allies defeated Nazi Germany, Canada, with a population of just 10 million people, had the world’s third-biggest navy.

When Britain stood alone in Europe against the Nazis, before the United States and the Soviet Union entered the war, Canada helped provide a lifeline to its imperilled ally by protecting supply ships across the Atlantic. The Royal Canadian Navy sank or shared in sinking 33 enemy submarines, says the Canadian Encyclopedia, and lost 24 warships (including the armed yacht Raccoon, sunk by a U-boat in the St. Lawrence River in 1942) and 2,024 people. And Canada’s own Rear-Admiral Leonard Warren Murray, the only Canadian to head an Allied theatre of operations, was commander-in-chief of what was known as the Canadian Northwest Atlantic.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay has honoured the service and sacrifice of the navy by announcing on the weekend that the executive curl, a distinctive loop on the upper stripe of naval officers’ uniforms that disappeared after unification, will make a comeback. He should take the next step and bring the name back. 

No child dreams of joining a maritime command. No one ever says Canada’s glory was, or is, its Maritime Command. Maritime Command sets no spines a-tingling. But the Royal Canadian Navy, with its proud history and its still useful role in many conflicts, linking past fights for democracy to present ones, whether in peacekeeping, peacemaking or war, should once again be a name to be reckoned with.


----------



## Snakedoc

Apologies for all the article posts but I thought this quote from the CMS on the name 'Maritime Command" was also interesting in this CTV article:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20100504/fredericton-returns-navy-100504/20100504/


"And while he pointed out that he has more important things to worry about, McFadden said he supported the idea of officially changing the navy's name from Maritime Command to the Canadian Navy. 

"I think most sailors, I think most Canadians, don't really have any connection with something called Maritime Command. That's an organizational construct," McFadden said. "But certainly the Canadian Navy resonates, it resonates with our sailors. I think when I hear people talk about it, they refer to us as the Canadian Navy. I think it's a recognition of a truly national, unifying institution.""


----------



## Occam

wayjosh said:
			
		

> How so? Why are people so quick to try and find negatives? The intent of the SSI is to formally recognize time spent at sea and to recognize the hard work of the sailors and officers who go to sea.



...by creating a monumental pile of work?


----------



## jollyjacktar

wayjosh said:
			
		

> How so? Why are people so quick to try and find negatives? The intent of the SSI is to formally recognize time spent at sea and to recognize the hard work of the sailors and officers who go to sea.



Just getting your sea pay audit correct alone is headache enough.  This is more like picking fly shit out of pepper.  As previously mentioned (read the thread) they will have to figure out which days were sea days for each person.  I don't envy the task .


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

First, let me say I for one am not married to the "Royal" desig - But "Canadian Navy" would rally the old Royal bunch as well as the more modern and "republican" younger generation behind something we can all ...well, get behind!

As for the SSi, the difficulty in implementation will be self induced if we insist on the goddamned centralized control that seems to pervade any "administrative" task. Otherwise, it could happen fairly easily.

To start with you pay a visit to a little appreciated Directorate in Ottawa: DHistory.  Every year, this Directorate receives from each ship the documents that junior O's and Mars IV's, under the whip of the Nav Os, have come to hate: The Ship's Log. This Directorate could easily, from these documents, generate an approved calendar of days each ship in the navy was considered "at sea" for the last 30 years. I am sure the professional historians that are custodians there would love the task, which would be right up their alley.

Then, each unit individually, using the approved calendar and the personnel files showing postings, would review each seaman's file and "grant" her the days at sea that correspond to her posting periods to any ship on the calendar. This grant could be in the form of a memo signed by the CO put in the pers file. To avoid pointless discussion, we would ignore for the original implementation, details such as leave period or medical absences, etc., as well as ignore temporary  transfers for a few days here and there. The figures generated may not be perfect, but they would be generally correct and rapid implementation would be the benefit derived from waxing over the details.

For the future, any individual on a ship would have his days at sea recorded in his pers file, and for greater certainty, indicated in his PER. With most units having between 2-3 hundred individuals, such a review could probably be carried out  within about a year. 

Here is a small point to ponder: The SSI is not a trade designator, special qualification badge, medal or ribbon. It is an indicator of sea time, akin to the old years of service badges. Most navies in the world have some form of service badges, stripes, pins, etc. to recognize and affirm such time in the sea service for their seaman - however, I am not aware of any navy, and I am certain no "British" style navy, that has such a "badge" system for the officers. Might it not sound a little goofy for officers to explain what that thing is on our uniforms when we meet our colleagues of other nations?


----------



## medicineman

wayjosh said:
			
		

> How so? Why are people so quick to try and find negatives? The intent of the SSI is to formally recognize time spent at sea and to recognize the hard work of the sailors and officers who go to sea.



Then Sir, I'd suggest that you help the unit and Base clerks sort through how many actual sea days each person in CF has under their boots, because they're going to need all the help they can get...they aren't deriding the badge itself, just the crap and abuse everyone has to go through to get them issued on time, especially when there aren't enough clerks to do the work that REALLY needs to be done on a day to day basis (yes, my wife is RMS and on a ship).   :2c:

MM


----------



## wayjosh

medicineman said:
			
		

> Then Sir, I'd suggest that you help the unit and Base clerks sort through how many actual sea days each person in CF has under their boots, because they're going to need all the help they can get...they aren't deriding the badge itself, just the crap and abuse everyone has to go through to get them issued on time, especially when there aren't enough clerks to do the work that REALLY needs to be done on a day to day basis (yes, my wife is RMS and on a ship).   :2c:
> 
> MM



From the beginning, it was clearly understood that there may be some challenges to getting this done. However, the benefits of creating a formal recognition for all those that go to sea far outweighed these challenges. Sea day counts are already well underway.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

medicineman said:
			
		

> Then Sir, I'd suggest that you help the unit and Base clerks



I never suggested that the clerks should be saddled with this. It is a professional recognition issue - not an administrative one, so it seems to me it for D.O's and D.P.O's to deal with doing this.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Here is an old fashioned idea. You sign onto a ship, they make a note in you sea book, when you sign off the Officer notes the date and the number of days at sea. It's not rocket science and that pretty much what every merchant service does. It's also easy to make it electronic.


----------



## Michael OLeary

Colin P said:
			
		

> It's not rocket science and ..... It's also easy to make it electronic.



This is DND.  In 20 years of networking computers we haven't even managed to create a user friendly e-mail system.


----------



## Occam

Colin P said:
			
		

> Here is an old fashioned idea. You sign onto a ship, they make a note in you sea book, when you sign off the Officer notes the date and the number of days at sea. It's not rocket science and that pretty much what every merchant service does. It's also easy to make it electronic.



That's great for tracking sea days from this point onward; unfortunately, it does nothing for the thousands of people who served in the past, who will have to have their sea days calculated manually.


----------



## CountDC

wayjosh said:
			
		

> Sea day counts are already well underway.



They are?  When did we start that?? Wait - D Mar Pers are the ones doing it and they certainly haven't had enough time to have it "well underway".


----------



## wayjosh

CountDC said:
			
		

> They are?  When did we start that?? Wait - D Mar Pers are the ones doing it and they certainly haven't had enough time to have it "well underway".



What do you base your assumption on?


----------



## Occam

wayjosh said:
			
		

> From the beginning, it was clearly understood that there may be some challenges to getting this done. However, the benefits of creating a formal recognition for all those that go to sea far outweighed these challenges. Sea day counts are already well underway.



Define "well underway".  As someone whose Naval service was in the '80s and '90s, and isn't even wearing that colour of uniform anymore, can I expect to see the SSI anytime soon?  (Once they figure out which deployments I took leave on, joined in the middle of, or departed early, that is...)


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Occam said:
			
		

> That's great for tracking sea days from this point onward; unfortunately, it does nothing for the thousands of people who served in the past, who will have to have their sea days calculated manually.



You might just have to say that for historical purposes, indicate which ships you have served on and your length of service. then they will use a formula to determine time at sea. It won't be perfect, but that life. In fact that's how Transport Canada dealt with the whole Hovercraft seatime issue at one point.

Micheal you have a point, lets stick to pens and books, no doubt some enterprising soul will come up with a non-offical excel based system.


----------



## Michael OLeary

Colin P said:
			
		

> Micheal you have a point, lets stick to pens and books, no doubt some enterprising soul will come up with a non-offical excel based system.



The problem won't be in creating a calculating spreadsheet or web-app, I have no doubt that any number of sailors have the necessary skills, the problem will be in getting a common solution approved and effectively distributed past the digital dinosaurs trying to protect us from any creative use of the DWAN.


----------



## CountDC

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I never suggested that the clerks should be saddled with this. It is a professional recognition issue - not an administrative one, so it seems to me it for D.O's and D.P.O's to deal with doing this.



Thank you - that would be nice.  Now for reality - it will involve clerks like everything else they come up with. Clerks hold the pers files so even if someone else was to do the actual looking through the files (which would be amazing for once) the clerk still has to issue the files,  maintain a bf for return and process the file back when it is finally returned.  Odds are more likely that the clerks will have to go through the files and find the information on the members just like when the sea pay audits were done.  Ignoring the loaners is not an option either as the members will want all their time counted and guess what - that information may not be on the pers file as sometimes the Navy loans people without letting the clerks know. Sometimes it is the Div Notes that lets us know the member was sent somewheres. Sometimes it is the clerk that has made life difficult for the rest of us as they didn't publish the att-post into HRMS and didn't PA the msg to the pers file.

This will not be any more fun than the sea pay audits.  Imagine - Oscar has 3 years credit towards sea pay but only 7 months credit towards this and doesn't undertand how that is possible ( and yes it is possible).  Oscar does not feel it is right so a ROG is filed.  More work for clerks and a few officers.

Want to keep it simple?  Use the Sea Pay numbers that have already been audited to death and redressed up the yingyang.

Wait - what am I thinking.  Keep the system!  At least I don't have to worry about getting one to take care of.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Know what CountDC, you may be close to a dog that will hunt!

Have a Tiger team pull out one hundred  pers files, review them and come, for each one, to an agreed figure for days at sea. Then, add the days at sea all up and, add their corresponding  sea pay all up: make an average percentage figure of the days at sea to days of sea pay and order that it be applied to everyone in the fleet to derive their individual days at sea starting figure , just add new days from now on. Make it as an administrative order and then no one can redress the application of the average figure, as it will be applied equally to all.

P.s.: Has the Navy changed so much since I retired 12 yrs ago? Are you saying D.O.'s do not read through the pers files of their charges? If so, it is sad.  I know that was always the second thing I did every time I got assigned a new division, right after meeting my D.P.O.


----------



## medicineman

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I never suggested that the clerks should be saddled with this. It is a professional recognition issue - not an administrative one, so it seems to me it for D.O's and D.P.O's to deal with doing this.



Driver, sorry that came out when/where it did, but it was actually directed at wayjosh.

Back to our regularly scheduled programming.

MM


----------



## wayjosh

CountDC

I think most everyone would agree that a clerk’s job is very busy. However, are you saying that if clerks do have to get involved in some way that recognition of our people is not worth the extra effort?

Sea Duty Allowance may have been an option but I personally don’t think it is reflective of how much time someone has at sea.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

wayjosh said:
			
		

> Sea Duty Allowance may have been an option but I personally don’t think it is reflective of how much time someone has at sea.


Agreed.  I think that the whole point of the SSI is to indicate time 'at sea' and not posted to a sea going unit yet managing to sail very little.  If the SSI was awarded based on sea pay increments then it would have very little intrinsic value (to me anyways).  

I also agree that it will be very difficult to calculate past sea time but should be much easier to do on a going-forward basis.  A sheet in the UER signed off by the DCPO after coming alongside should suffice.  I think that the effort to calculate past entitlements as closely as possible will be worth the effort but that's just one sailor's opinion.


----------



## Sailorwest

A buddy of mine had an interesting question last night about this. If you sail at 0800 Monday and come alongside at 0730 on Wednesday, do you get two days, three days or 5.94 days toward the SSI? The definition of a sea day is 8 hrs spent at sea. Is that entire 47.5 hrs spent at sea all counted or do you only get to count one 8 hour period per calander day? Someone is going to hate this idea for sure.  BTW, reservists don't have UER's.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Sailorwest said:
			
		

> BTW, reservists don't have UER's.



UER = Unit Employment Record


In the Army world you do, it lists what exercises/positions/taskings/callouts/tours you have done.....I would think the Navy world you would too....


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

Sailorwest said:
			
		

> A buddy of mine had an interesting question last night about this. If you sail at 0800 Monday and come alongside at 0730 on Wednesday, do you get two days, three days or 5.94 days toward the SSI? The definition of a sea day is 8 hrs spent at sea. Is that entire 47.5 hrs spent at sea all counted or do you only get to count one 8 hour period per calander day? Someone is going to hate this idea for sure.


"A sea day will be defined as a minimum of 8 hours at sea, at anchor or combination there of."  http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/92470.240.html  In your example above, that would count as 2 days.



			
				Sailorwest said:
			
		

> BTW, reservists don't have UER's.


?


----------



## wayjosh

Sailorwest said:
			
		

> A buddy of mine had an interesting question last night about this. If you sail at 0800 Monday and come alongside at 0730 on Wednesday, do you get two days, three days or 5.94 days toward the SSI? The definition of a sea day is 8 hrs spent at sea. Is that entire 47.5 hrs spent at sea all counted or do you only get to count one 8 hour period per calander day? Someone is going to hate this idea for sure.  BTW, reservists don't have UER's.



Sailorwest - good question - a sea day is a min 8 hrs in a 24 hr period. So to answer your question it would be 2 days, had they tied up at 08oo hrs it would have been 3. You wouldn't get credit for 3 sea days if you stayed out for 24 hrs.

At least that is my take.


----------



## kratz

NavRes has been using software packages for a number of years now vice UERs. Previously that information was captured using TORIS and that has been updated to NRIMS. This is used in conjunction with data entered into PeopleSoft.

If someone CTs into NavRes from a career that had a UER, it is reatined with their PERs envelope, but not normally referred to.


----------



## George Wallace

Sailorwest said:
			
		

> ..........  BTW, reservists don't have UER's.



Depends on the Unit.  Ours has UER's for our pers.


----------



## Sailorwest

Lex Parsimoniae said:
			
		

> "A sea day will be defined as a minimum of 8 hours at sea, at anchor or combination there of."  http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/92470.240.html  In your example above, that would count as 2 days.
> ?


I'll clarify. Naval Reservists do not have UER's. Haven't since 1989 or so.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

kratz said:
			
		

> NavRes has been using software packages for a number of years now vice UERs. Previously that information was captured using TORIS and that has been updated to NRIMS. This is used in conjunction with data entered into PeopleSoft.
> 
> If someone CTs into NavRes from a career that had a UER, it is reatined with their PERs envelope, but not normally referred to.


Seen.  The regs also use software (Peoplesoft) but the UER is still mandated to be maintained up to date (usually done in a panic before WUPS...).  Is there an official NAVRES direction to 'cease and desist' maintaining the UERs or is it a unit directive?


----------



## Pusser

The calculation of sea days is going to be a nightmare plain and simple.  The problem is that there is no means to calculate this figure with any degree of accuracy.  Your MPRR will tell you when you were posted to a ship.  It MIGHT tell you if you were attach posted to a ship.  It won't tell you how much time the ship spent at sea, nor will it say whether you were onboard when it did go to sea.  Divisional notes may or may not mention specifics, but since they were never intended for this purpose, I wouldn't count on it.  Furthermore, Div notes aren't kept forever.  They are culled and destroyed periodically.  There is no way Div Notes could be used to track someone's sea days.  

It is possible to compare posting history to operational schedules, but again, that won't say who was onboard at the time.  Annual Historical Reports only list officers by name, but again, they don't say who made what trip.  This information is NOT in the Ship's Log.  I thought the Op Tempo screen in EMAA might be able to do this, but I just checked mine and noticed that it only seems to track information for the previous two years or so.  I can already see a few holes in my own records.  Things that I did, that are not mentioned:  1) several weeks of sailing in gate vessels of while in the Naval Reserve, 2) at least one week of sailing with the Naval Reserve after transferring to the Regular Force (with permission to play with my old Reserve Unit - never did get the sea pay though), 3)  four months in YUKON for MARS IV where we were very much at sea, 4)  two days in a submarine while doing a study, 5) several weeks in ORIOLE when I was actually posted to VENTURE, and there are other holes I'm sure.  In each of these cases, my record of sea pay is the only indication that I did these things.

I suspect that we went down this road because there is a mortal fear that we just might give someone some credit where it may not be due.  My fear with the SSI is that with this method of calculation, we will deny this award to far more people who truly deserve it than we will to those who don't.  The end result of that scenario is division and that's never a good thing.  We went through a similar exercise years ago when we were reviewing entitlement to Sea Duty Allowance (SDA) and we came to accept that there were people drawing SDA who didn't really deserve it, but the problem was not nearly as pervasive as some would believe and trying to clamp down on it too hard would have done more damage than good.

In the area of sea duty, SDA is the most accurate measure we have.  It's not perfect, but it seems silly to ignore it.


----------



## Kat Stevens

I'm absolutely stunned that there are 20 pages dedicated to officers getting a drunken bar on their cuff.  We sure know how to make a long story even longer around here!


----------



## wayjosh

Pusser said:
			
		

> I suspect that we went down this road because there is a mortal fear that we just might give someone some credit where it may not be due.  My fear with the SSI is that with this method of calculation, we will deny this award to far more people who truly deserve it than we will to those who don't.
> In the area of sea duty, SDA is the most accurate measure we have.  It's not perfect, but it seems silly to ignore it.



I think the intent of creating the SSI and counting actual time at sea is completely opposite of what you are suggesting. We went down this road because sea day counts will be far more accurate than using SDA. Moreover, the SSI was created as formal recognition of going to sea, and where there is doubt, the benefit of the doubt will go to the member. Yes there will be some holes, we can only use the tools we have available but the intention is to have the members provide the info where there are holes in the MPRR. Is this perfect, no but what system is. Please remember this process is very young and it will improve with time. 

As far as knowing when ships were at sea, sea day reports are compiled and submitted by all ships every month.


----------



## Monsoon

wayjosh said:
			
		

> I think the intent of creating the SSI and counting actual time at sea is completely opposite of what you are suggesting.


The "intent", yes. But the likelihood of administrative oversights and sloppy record-keeping combining to ensure that a great many people with past qualifying sea service don't get the SSI means that the SSI could become a sore spot on the scale of the Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal - at least for a few years. In this case, the best (eight hour sea days) is the enemy of good enough (the SDA calculation).


----------



## wayjosh

hamiltongs said:
			
		

> The "intent", yes. But the likelihood of administrative oversights and sloppy record-keeping combining to ensure that a great many people with past qualifying sea service don't get the SSI means that the SSI could become a sore spot on the scale of the Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal - at least for a few years. In this case, the best (eight hour sea days) is the enemy of good enough (the SDA calculation).



The vast majority of sea time will be available for calculation. With the large amount of time required between levels I don't think the missing days (if there are any) will truely make a difference. However, the member will be provided an opportunity to advise on any missing sea time.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

wayjosh said:
			
		

> We went down this road...


Since you were involved in creating the SSI - can you explain how the 4 levels were chosen?  

1.  Going with 1, 2, 3, and 4 years seems more logical than 1, 3, 4, and 5.  
2.  Anecdotally many will fall between 1 and 3 years and thus the SSI won't really show the difference between 'some' sea time and 'lots' of sea time. 
3.  Service medals are awarded for 30 - 180 days (depending on the medal).  Why did the navy go with intervals of 365 and 730 days?

Just curious.


----------



## wayjosh

Lex Parsimoniae said:
			
		

> Since you were involved in creating the SSI - can you explain how the 4 levels were chosen?
> 
> 1.  Going with 1, 2, 3, and 4 years seems more logical than 1, 3, 4, and 5.
> 2.  Anecdotally many will fall between 1 and 3 years and thus the SSI won't really show the difference between 'some' sea time and 'lots' of sea time.
> 3.  Service medals are awarded for 30 - 180 days (depending on the medal).  Why did the navy go with intervals of 365 and 730 days?
> 
> Just curious.



It was a function of spreading out the levels, so that those who receive level 4 will truly be in an elite class. Further, once you reach level 2, I think it does show "lots" of sea time. I agree that many will fall into that range (btwn level 1 and 2) but is there really anything wrong with that?


----------



## Monsoon

wayjosh said:
			
		

> However, the member will be provided an opportunity to advise on any missing sea time.


But I presume that this "advice" would have to take the form of fairly ironclad proof - proof that I, for one, don't have going back more than a couple of years. I'm surely not alone in not having kept records of a career metric I had no reason to suspect that I would need in the future.


----------



## cobbler

Lex Parsimoniae said:
			
		

> Since you were involved in creating the SSI - can you explain how the 4 levels were chosen?
> 
> 1.  Going with 1, 2, 3, and 4 years seems more logical than 1, 3, 4, and 5.
> 2.  Anecdotally many will fall between 1 and 3 years and thus the *SSI won't really show the difference between 'some' sea time and 'lots' of sea time. *



I'd say.

The RAN Sea Readiness Badges are also represented by four tiers
Tier 1 = 0-3 years at sea
Tier 2 = 3-6 years at sea
Tier 3 = 6-12 years at sea
Tier 4= >12 years at sea

"at sea" for the purposes of the badge is taken to mean time posted to a ship, including time alongside, in dry dock, in the gulf, etc
Time loan posted to a ship or attached to a ship for a temporary period does not count.






from top to bottom: 4, 3, 1, 2

There are some whp aren't fans, but I think stuff like this has a place. 
Yes everybody contributes both at sea and ashore, but the hard truth is that personnel who have done a reasonable amount of time at sea should be recognised as such. They walk onto a ship with more credibility towards all things "at sea".


----------



## RhumRunner

I, for one, like the idea of the using actual sea days rather than attaching it to the sea duty allowance. I know a few sailors who were posted on a vessel for a number of years, drawing sea pay and accumulating sea time, but never actually sailed. It irks me to no end. Why join the navy if you don’t like to sail?

Pusser,

Oldgateboatdriver has it right. The NavOs are required to log all timings when entering/leaving harbour into the Ship’s Log. As well, there are a couple of messages that are regularly cut (monthly I think) that summarize the activities of the ship, including days at sea. With all that information, a calendar can be generated fairly easily for each sea-going unit for their respective actual sea days. Now, you’re right, it doesn’t tell who was onboard. That is where your pers file with all its TD/APOST/CRSLOAD messages, the MedCat docs and the Coxn’s personnel landed message come in. The initial set-up will certainly be a challenge but the big nightmare will be the actual audit of each individual sailors’ pers files. No doubt this will have some groaning (yes I meant groaning) pains, just like the Sea Duty Allowance Audit of a few years back, but from then on, it will simply be maintenance.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Pusser said:
			
		

> 5) several weeks in ORIOLE when I was actually posted to VENTURE,



Hey Pusser, sailing in Oriole is its own reward: It shouldn't count towards SSI.  

Now everyone, did I miss something here?

SSi is not sea pay, it caries no extra money or responsibilities nor increases your rank or authority. Perfection is not warranted nor I suggest desirable if it can only be achieved at the expense of rapid implementation. Can anyone tell me that we will have, for example, hundreds of seaman that are so close to the mark for the next level that they will feel frustrated they did not get the next level up?

For that matter if, after an honest file review is made, I was informed by the reviewer that I have 1200, or 900, or 3000 days at sea, I would not have a clue if they are right and am fairly sure I would not be able to contest any of those figures. I can hardly remember what I did last week, let alone thirty years ago. 

In view of the newness of the matter, if the original figures make the slightest sense, I suspect that 99.9% (there are always complainers) of our people will be more than happy to use the starting figure they are given, be glad for the recognition it carries and will proudly wear the original Indicator they are given until they qualify for the next one.


----------



## wayjosh

Oldgateboatdriver 

Great post, for those that are close to the next level, every effort will be made to be as accurate as possible. 

Pusser

Oriole time will count.


----------



## jollyjacktar

I'll be one of the  .1%,  who don't give a damn about the SSI and won't put it up unless I have no option.  And even then...


----------



## wayjosh

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I'll be one of the  .1%,  who don't give a damn about the SSI and won't put it up unless I have no option.  And even then...



Why the hostility towards something that is meant as a formal recognition of your efforts?


----------



## CountDC

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Know what CountDC, you may be close to a dog that will hunt!
> 
> Have a Tiger team pull out one hundred  pers files, review them and come, for each one, to an agreed figure for days at sea. Then, add the days at sea all up and, add their corresponding  sea pay all up: make an average percentage figure of the days at sea to days of sea pay and order that it be applied to everyone in the fleet to derive their individual days at sea starting figure , just add new days from now on. Make it as an administrative order and then no one can redress the application of the average figure, as it will be applied equally to all.
> 
> P.s.: Has the Navy changed so much since I retired 12 yrs ago? Are you saying D.O.'s do not read through the pers files of their charges? If so, it is sad.  I know that was always the second thing I did every time I got assigned a new division, right after meeting my D.P.O.



I think that is a good way to go but have doubts it will happen and know that it will not keep at least some from redressing if they do not get the level they feel they should.  The tiger team is happening at D Mar Pers but I do not know how they will gather the info and decide.  Can't see them checking the pers files though as the files are located all over Canada.  I would imagine that they will have to come up with a list off all serving members that have ever been posted or attach posted to a ship as a starting point. Should be easy enough to come up with as long as the att-post was published.  I see the "loaners" and att-post being the real difficulty as they were not always properly documented or published into HRMS although the sea pay audits should have straightened that out. 

PS - when I was in the Ships Office (01-03) I do not recall anyone reviewing a pers file other than when the member was charged or I raised an issue with something submitted by the member.


----------



## Sailorwest

This will change the way people view day sails.  I can see it now. The XO tells the Cox'n that the ship will only sail in the forenoon on Friday and give the crew sliders in the afternoon. The Cox'n will reply that won't work for the crew as it will take a sea day away from the sailors. You either sail for a full 8 or you don't sail at all.


----------



## jollyjacktar

wayjosh said:
			
		

> Why the hostility towards something that is meant as a formal recognition of your efforts?



As I mentioned earlier, I am not a Boy Scout, Yank or (and this will raise some ire) in the Army.  I don't feel the need or have the desire for badges on my uniform other than my rank or trade badges.  WRT sea time, my only concern is that the Pay Office does not screw up my sea pay.  It's bad enough I have this bloody CNC pin to deal with for the entire year.  And I do believe the SSI has the potential to be divisive amongst those who have this colour or that.  Is there not already enough of that?  ie the Lower Decks should be seen and not heard?


----------



## CountDC

With you on that Jolly.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Ta.  CountDC.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

With you on that one too Jollyjacktar, that's why I wondered earlier how we officers would answer questions on this when asked. Personnally, other than my rank, the only thing I do not mind on my unibag is medals and ribbons earned for actually doing something. Everything else is a given: you are part of the service and it is expected of you.


----------



## RhumRunner

Oldgateboatedriver, that is a good point. I never thought about it that way. A 2-and-halfer "_MAY_" get to the first level and a 3-ringer "_MAY_" get to the second level. A third and fourth level SSI-wearing officer would be an oddity.

I guess that is why the officers got their curl back... to change the topic of conversation away from the SSI and toward the pretty curly band on the arm.  ;D


----------



## whitehorse

I have a friend who in total may have accumulated about 400-500 sea days but has no formal records of the time as such. I suspect if he pushed he might get a gun metal (I like the name) SSI. 

Of course his sea time was between May 1943 and May 1945.  

Its not about how long you did it its what you did while you were there. 

(For what its worth I think I also have about 400 - 500 days but in a far more gentler time.)
 I don't have any problem with it other than hoping that the awarding of the Insignia isn't too bureaucratic in nature.


----------



## pegasus454

RumRunner said:
			
		

> If the naval officers get their executive curl, I think it would be fair for the NCMs to get their sea-time service stripes.



Hi All
   I have just join this august forum. I to would love to return crossed anchors and crown as a proper PO1 would wear. Maybe to speed things along that a poll should be done here to help the command level understand the issue.


----------



## Matt_Fisher

CPGear is now doing Canadian Naval Officer rank epaulet slip-ons with the executive curl/Elliott's Eye in the following uniform combinations:

NCD:  Black epaulet slip-on with gold embroidery (to match current NCD rank insignia and name tapes CANADA text is pre-embroidered on the slip-on; No need to order separate unit flash).

CADPAT TW Combats:  OD epaulet slip-on with black embroidery (CANADA text is pre-embroidered on the slip-on; No need to order separate unit flash).

CADPAT AR Combats:  CADPAT AR epaulet slip-on with tan embroidery (CANADA text must be ordered as an add-on).

http://www.cpgear.com/StoreBox/rank_insignias_unit_flash/8018.htm


Just be sure to put in the special instructions section that you require the Naval style officer insignia with the executive curl or Elliott's Eye, otherwise we won't be able to differentiate what style you want (Army/Air Force or Naval).

We will be getting a Naval officer specific rank insignia section up online in the next 2 weeks, but in the meantime, for those who don't want to wait...  ;D

Cheers,

Matt


----------



## Neill McKay

Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> NCD:  Black epaulet slip-on with gold embroidery (to match current NCD rank insignia and name tapes CANADA text is pre-embroidered on the slip-on; No need to order separate unit flash).



Are these any different from naval DEU slip-ons?


----------



## Matt_Fisher

Naval DEU slip-on uses an embroidered ribbon sewn onto the material, rather than having the thread embroidered directly on.


----------



## gcclarke

Are they being made a different size than the current slip-ons? I ask because the "Executive Curl - Interim Policy Guidance" document specifies the following:


> d.	Slip-ons Service Dress and Naval Combat Dress.  Slip-ons will be unisex and slightly longer than current naval male slip-on (by 5mm).  In order to ensure that the slip-on will fit all service and Naval Combat Dress (NCD) dress articles, a notch modification will be incorporated on the underside to ensure that it fits all shirts, sweaters and jackets.  CF Gold ½ inch and ¼ inch width embroidered thread with executive curl will be used for Acting/Sub Lieutenant to Captain (Navy) rank.  Officer-Cadet slip-ons will also use the embroidered thread but will not have the executive curl.  Flag Officer slip-ons will remain unchanged from the current standard.



I just wasn't sure if anyone had forwarded you a copy of that document.


----------



## Neill McKay

gcclarke said:
			
		

> Are they being made a different size than the current slip-ons? I ask because the "Executive Curl - Interim Policy Guidance" document specifies the following:
> I just wasn't sure if anyone had forwarded you a copy of that document.



Would you mind posting it here?


----------



## gcclarke

N. McKay said:
			
		

> Would you mind posting it here?


For the most part, the relevant sections (ie non background info which we've discussed to death in this thread) were posted either above or in this thread.

Pretty much all else you need to know is that the thickness of bars and stripes for shoulder-boards will be 1/2 inch and 1/4 inch respectively, shoulder boards to be unchanged for flag ranks. Oh, and female Capt(N) shoulderboards will have to be custom sized. For tunics, it's as per the chart that had previously been posted, with any new mess kit being bought to conform to the same patterns. 

If anyone else wants a copy of the full text I can e-mail it to them, but I don't think it's worthwhile to post the entire 4 page document.


----------



## Blatchman

CP Gear Has posted images of their NCD Slip-Ons

http://www.cpgear.com/StoreBox/nametapes_and_embroidery/8000.htm


----------



## gwp

The executive curl is not returning because it never left.  

The executive curl continued to appear on "vintage" mess dress (vice CF mess dress) after integration in 1968 and continued on contemporary mess dress from 1986.  After integration the curl remained in use on the regular uniform until about 1975 as it took about seven years for the reserves to be kitted out in CF green.  

Since its founding the Canadian Navy has had a variety of officer insignia. In 1910 it was natural for the emerging Canadian Navy to adopt the same straight rings with the executive curl for the permanent navy and subsequently the “wavy” shaped gold rings for the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve (RCNVR) and the rings of narrow interwoven gold lace for the Royal Canadian Navy Reserve (RCNR).  

Being distinguished by their sleeve lace the standing wartime jest was that …  “the RCNVR are gentlemen trying to be officers, the RCNR are officers trying to be gentlemen and the RCN are neither trying to be both.”

Other variations in rank insignia included sky blue lace with a diamond shaped loop for officers of the Women’s Royal Canadian Naval Service and Sea Cadet Corps officers had a small anchor in place of the executive curl.

Following the Second World War, the Royal Canadian Navy was reorganized with a single reserve component.  In 1946 the distinctive wavy gold braid of the reserves gave way to the straight braided executive curl of the regular force until 1968.  With the integration of the Canadian Armed Forces, unembellished straight braid became the common rank insignia for all officers of both the Regular and Reserve Forces.  The executive curl was reserved for naval mess dress. 

There is also a notion that the executive curl is a pehaps reflective of a British Tradition. While it is true that 19 of 22 Commonwealth navies use the executive curl ... according to Janes Fighting Ships 54 navies use the insignia. 

Argentina                  Australia                         Bahamas                 Bangladesh
Barbados                  Belgium                           Brazil                       Brunei
Canada  Colombia                  Congo (DRC)                  Cyprus                     Denmark
Estonia                      Fiji                                   Gabon                     Ghana
Greece                       Iceland                           India                        Iran
Italy                            Jamaica                          Kenya                     Latvia
Lithuania                   Malaysia                        Mauritania             Mexico
Morocco                    Mozambique                Netherlands          New Zealand
Nigeria                       Norway                         Pakistan                  Panama
Poland                       Portugal                         Qatar                      Romania
Slovenia *                 South Africa                  Spain                      Sri Lanka
Sweden                      Thailand                        Tonga                      Trinidad & Tobago
Tunisia                        Turkey                          United Kingdom     Uruguay
Venezuela


It returns to the service dress uniform at 9:52 a.m. PDT on June 11 when CMS, MARPAC and MARLANT exchange their jackets with 1968 vintage insignia for jackets with the executive curl at a short ceremony in downtwon Victoria after which the Fleet Review Welcoming Centre will be officially opened followed by the Fleet Review Parade of Nations .


----------



## Pusser

The Glorious 11th of June? ;D


----------



## kratz

Pusser said:
			
		

> The Glorious 11th of June? ;D



IF a battle hounor could be culled out of that, I'm sure it would be.  ;D :nod: ;D


----------



## pegasus454

While it is nice to have the Officers to get their traditional ranks  back again, it should have never been taken away, when are the NCO's and M/S and below get there Naval rank insignia back. 

  This should not be only for the officers but for all naval personnel. 

    Hopefully the senate will return the designation of Royal to the Canadian Nay so that once again we are know as the Royal Canadian Navy,  as the editorial in last Saturdays Globe and Mail highly recommended the senate do as it being debated within that chamber of sober second thought.


----------



## Kat Stevens

One more time.  The Senate, the Prime Minister, The Commons, the char lady in the Parliamentary scoff hall, even the GG herself, cannot bestow a Royal Charter on anything.  The Sovereign granted it once, Canada tossed it away, and only the sovereign can re-issue it.


----------



## gcclarke

pegasus454 said:
			
		

> While it is nice to have the Officers to get their traditional ranks  back again, it should have never been taken away, when are the NCO's and M/S and below get there Naval rank insignia back.
> 
> This should not be only for the officers but for all naval personnel.
> 
> Hopefully the senate will return the designation of Royal to the Canadian Nay so that once again we are know as the Royal Canadian Navy,  as the editorial in last Saturdays Globe and Mail highly recommended the senate do as it being debated within that chamber of sober second thought.



Agreed. Might be be as bold as to suggest that you write both Member of Parliament indicating your opinion on this subject, as well as each Senator from your province / territory? 

As per the Royal part, yes, only the Queen can give it back. But we can, at the very least, nicely ask for it back. Her Royal Majesty isn't going to just go and change our name without provocation.

Hand-written that is. E-mails and printed letters don't give quite as much of an impact.


----------



## Pusser

If advised by her Canadian Prime Minister, the Queen of Canada would happily give back the royal title.  That's how a constitutional monarchy works.  Thus the debate in the Senate is valid.  Whether it leads to anything is another question...


----------



## wayjosh

As of today, slip-ons for use with DEU and NCD are available at the CFSU(O) clothing stores.


----------



## Blatchman

Any word on when they will be available in Halifax?

By the way here is what they look like (note picture taken from another form).


----------



## wayjosh

Blatch said:
			
		

> Any word on when they will be available in Halifax?



They have been shipped to MARPAC, MARLANT and NAVRES (CFB Valcartier). Not sure when clothing stores will have them available>


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

I've been told that officers taking part in the IFR (liaison officers etc.) will receive them before the rest of us...


----------



## Blatchman

KrazyHamburglar said:
			
		

> I've been told that officers taking part in the IFR (liaison officers etc.) will receive them before the rest of us...



Makes sense, I headed up north on the 24th I was hoping to get my issue before then.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

KrazyHamburglar said:
			
		

> I've been told that officers taking part in the IFR (liaison officers etc.) will receive them before the rest of us...



I guess I have to correct myself... I just got my new slip ons from the taylor in Halifax, but the shoulder boards are not in yet... you can always order them
but at 95$ it's pretty expensive


----------



## Blatchman

The Slip-Ons are in?

How many sets they give you?

I went to Quinpool Tailor and Joe quoted me $75.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

I received 3 sets, as for ol' crusty Joe, it's in his interest to do them cheaper... I'll probably go there myself


----------



## Blatchman

KrazyHamburglar said:
			
		

> I received 3 sets, as for ol' crusty Joe, it's in his interest to do them cheaper... I'll probably go there myself



That was odd having to sign for the slip-ons but nice to have them. Joe has the same moves every time no matter how simple the tailoring is he always responds with "Jesus christ," followed by a mile long stare out the window.


----------



## tomahawk6




----------



## Pat in Halifax

I must say, not a one looks happy to be wearing them!


----------



## CombatDoc

They're probably thinking about how much it cost to have the Executive Curl gold braid sewn on at Mia's.   ;D


----------



## kratz

I'm checking out the Air Force officer's sleeves.


----------



## Matt_Fisher

kratz said:
			
		

> I'm checking out the Air Force officer's sleeves.



I was noticing that myself...

On another note, is it just me, or does the ribbon bar worn by the the Capt (N) in the picture look higher than normal on the Naval DEU jacket; He's obviously wearing them above the breast pocket, but it looks like the way the jacket is tailored more in the style of the pre-unification/Royal Navy jacket with ribbons worn substantially higher.


----------



## Loachman

kratz said:
			
		

> I'm checking out the Air Force officer's sleeves.



Don't anybody go and get any stupid ideas.


----------



## aesop081

kratz said:
			
		

> I'm checking out the Air Force officer's sleeves.



Not a Canadian.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> I was noticing that myself...
> 
> On another note, is it just me, or does the ribbon bar worn by the the Capt (N) in the picture look higher than normal on the Naval DEU jacket; He's obviously wearing them above the breast pocket, but it looks like the way the jacket is tailored more in the style of the pre-unification/Royal Navy jacket with ribbons worn substantially higher.



Looks correct to me with the bottom of the ribbon running parallel to the top of the pocket.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Not a Canadian.



RAF?


----------



## aesop081

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> RAF?



Could be. Maybe even RNZAF.


----------



## TN2IC

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> RAF?




I sure looks like RAF to me.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

TN2IC said:
			
		

> I sure looks like RAF to me.



I concur...


----------



## Old Sweat

Does the RAF still wear a cloth belt with a shiny normal civvy buckle? Also the RAF used to have shiny buttons, as opposed to CF dull finish ones.


----------



## Mick

I would say RNZAF.  RAF uniform has a black tie, and the tie in the photo is blue.  Also, RAF uniforms have a belt, which the uniform in the photo is lacking.


----------



## Pusser

As to the expression on their faces, I would say it has nothing to do with the curls.  Those are pretty much the expressions those guys always have. ;D

PS:  They probably didn't have to pay to have their jackets done at Mia's.  I bet they were on the "list."


----------



## Pencil Tech

I work in NDHQ and today (Monday 14 June) there are executive curls on shoulder boards and slip-ons all over the place already. I must say, it does look classy. It looks like they used better gold thread than on the old ones so they're very shiny.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Was on Halifax all day.  Many of the Officers are sporting them.  Looks good, about time.  Bloody Hellyer.


----------



## Monsoon

Pencil Tech said:
			
		

> I work in NDHQ and today (Monday 14 June) there are executive curls on shoulder boards and slip-ons all over the place already. I must say, it does look classy. It looks like they used better gold thread than on the old ones so they're very shiny.


I have a hunch that the one's you're seeing this early are using mess dress braid on tunics and shoulder boards (as I shall shortly do). From pictures I've seen elsewhere, it looks like silk braid will be _de rigeur_.


----------



## Pusser

No, I confirmed this with the DND tailors.  It will be metal braid all-round (except for the embroidered slip-ons).  Silk doesn't curl.


----------



## MARS

Whatever it is - the mess dress quality braid does curl - that is what most of us will be sporting.


----------



## Pusser

I think the big difference _might_ be that mess kit tailors usually use 5% gold braid and I believe the CF specs only call for 2% gold; however, don't quote me on that.  The size of the braid and the spacing is the same though.  Shoulder boards and tunics appear to be straight forward, but it will be interesting to see if some folks opt for braid vice embroidered slip-ons.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

I think a braid version of slip-ons would be too thick to be comfortable. The way the curl is made, it had almost a 1/4 inch to the thickness, it would probably feel like wearing the sweater with shoulder boards on which is not too great a feeling and in my opinion, looks kind of strange... also the wavy part would probably catch in the wool sweater or in the NCD jacket interior...

but for the shoulder boards, the new braid curl certainly had some "bling" to our already awesome uniform ;D


----------



## medicineman

Started seeing alot of curls in Vic today - at first I thought we were still being over run by Aussies and Kiwis from IFR, but then the neurons started synapsing again...

MM


----------



## wayjosh

Pusser said:
			
		

> Shoulder boards and tunics appear to be straight forward, but it will be interesting to see if some folks opt for braid vice embroidered slip-ons.



The metal braid will not be authorized for the slip-ons.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

Little bit of an update on the SSI: (Email rec'd via many from Cdr Houle who is the overseer of this program):

_*1.  Further to our discussion this morning, I am forwarding info on the Sea Service Insignia (SSI).

BACKGROUND

2.  The Minister of National Defence announced the introduction of the Sea Service Insignia (SSI) on 2 May 2010.  The SSI is meant to recognize the significance of service at sea by all CF personnel.

3.  All those serving in the CF on 1 Jan 2010 will be eligible to receive the SSI as they meet the required minimum sea-days.  A sea-day will be defined as a minimum of 8 hours at sea and/or at anchor.

ISSUE

4.  Initial feedback has indicated that the original sea-day qualification levels may be too high and revised sea-day qualification levels are currently being examined.

Original Qualifying Sea-Days

Level 1 - Gun Metal 365 days;
Level 2 - Copper 1095 days;
Level 3 - Silver 1460 days, and 
Level 4 - Gold 1825 days.

	Revised Qualifying Sea-Days

Level 1 - Gun Metal 365 days (1 year) (no change);
Level 2 - Copper 730 days ( 2 years);
Level 3 - Silver 1095 days (3 years), and 
Level 4 - Gold 1460 days (4 years).


5.  To date, sea-day counts have been completed for 3,028 MARCOM personnel with the following results:

Original Sea-Day Qualification Method 

No level - 1,729 pers  - 57.1%
Level 1 -   987 pers   - 32.5%
Level 2 -   209 pers   - 6.9%
Level 3 -   84 pers    - 2.77%
Level 4 -   19 pers    - .6%

Revised Sea-Day Qualification Method

No Level - 1,729 pers - 57.1% 
Level 1   -  631 pers  - 20.8%
Level 2   -  356 pers  - 11.75%
Level 3   -  209 pers  -  6.99%
Level 4   -  103 pers  -  3.4%

6.  As can be seen from the data above, the revised sea-day qualification method would allow for more personnel to qualify for Levels 2, 3 and 4 and therefore may be a better qualification model given the results above.  The question to be answered is "What should be the target percentages for each Level, especially, Level 3 and level 4.  In other words, do you believe that the Revised Sea-Day Qualification Method is the better model?   * _ 

We shall see where this one goes next.


----------



## captloadie

Time to ask a stupid question. A sea day is a minimum 8 hours at sea or anchor. I assume this is per calandar day so that you can't get a 3 for 1 deal?

Time to ask a second stupid question. Of the 3000 plus files checked, 52% did not qualify for any SSI level? Did they start with Base personnel that have never gone to sea or aren't in an actual sea trade?


----------



## Stoker

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> Little bit of an update on the SSI: (Email rec'd via many from Cdr Houle who is the overseer of this program):
> 
> _*1.  Further to our discussion this morning, I am forwarding info on the Sea Service Insignia (SSI).
> 
> BACKGROUND
> 
> 2.  The Minister of National Defence announced the introduction of the Sea Service Insignia (SSI) on 2 May 2010.  The SSI is meant to recognize the significance of service at sea by all CF personnel.
> 
> 3.  All those serving in the CF on 1 Jan 2010 will be eligible to receive the SSI as they meet the required minimum sea-days.  A sea-day will be defined as a minimum of 8 hours at sea and/or at anchor.
> 
> ISSUE
> 
> 4.  Initial feedback has indicated that the original sea-day qualification levels may be too high and revised sea-day qualification levels are currently being examined.
> 
> Original Qualifying Sea-Days
> 
> Level 1 - Gun Metal 365 days;
> Level 2 - Copper 1095 days;
> Level 3 - Silver 1460 days, and
> Level 4 - Gold 1825 days.
> 
> Revised Qualifying Sea-Days
> 
> Level 1 - Gun Metal 365 days (1 year) (no change);
> Level 2 - Copper 730 days ( 2 years);
> Level 3 - Silver 1095 days (3 years), and
> Level 4 - Gold 1460 days (4 years).
> 
> 
> 5.  To date, sea-day counts have been completed for 3,028 MARCOM personnel with the following results:
> 
> Original Sea-Day Qualification Method
> 
> No level - 1,729 pers  - 57.1%
> Level 1 -   987 pers   - 32.5%
> Level 2 -   209 pers   - 6.9%
> Level 3 -   84 pers    - 2.77%
> Level 4 -   19 pers    - .6%
> 
> Revised Sea-Day Qualification Method
> 
> No Level - 1,729 pers - 57.1%
> Level 1   -  631 pers  - 20.8%
> Level 2   -  356 pers  - 11.75%
> Level 3   -  209 pers  -  6.99%
> Level 4   -  103 pers  -  3.4%
> 
> 6.  As can be seen from the data above, the revised sea-day qualification method would allow for more personnel to qualify for Levels 2, 3 and 4 and therefore may be a better qualification model given the results above.  The question to be answered is "What should be the target percentages for each Level, especially, Level 3 and level 4.  In other words, do you believe that the Revised Sea-Day Qualification Method is the better model?   * _
> 
> We shall see where this one goes next.



Are they going to audit the Navres people in Halifax too or do we have to wait several years to have it done in Quebec?


----------



## Occam

Stoker said:
			
		

> Are they going to audit the Navres people in Halifax too or do we have to wait several years to have it done in Quebec?



And how about those now serving in other elements?


----------



## Pusser

Hmm...

Based on these numbers, it would seem that 57.1% of naval personnel will appear as if they've never been to sea.  Methinks there is a tragic flaw here.  This will only be compounded by the fact that there are a LOT of legitimate sea days that are not recorded anywhere.  As the bunfights begin, one has to wonder that this is going to improve morale how?


----------



## Pat in Halifax

Holy s*** people - Why the doom and gloom!!!? No system is perfect and:
No, I have no idea who was audited
No, I have no idea when NAVRES will be done but I thought we were total Force (?) - don't segregate YOURSELF!

I tried to do my own and it was a nightmare so I stopped but I believe there is a 'team' somewhere doing their VERY best. If you are flustered with discussing it....don't discuss it!!

This is why I guess, emails like the one I enclosed aren't circulated to the general populace - I will keep that in mind next time I get the urge to pass something on through this informal network.


----------



## Stoker

Hey Pat thanks for the info, its nice to know someone is doing something.


----------



## MSEng314

I don't think it's fair to say that 57% of the navy has _never_ been to sea, it just means that they have less than one year of sea time. Myself and most of my colleagues that have been in less than a year only have about 1 month of sea time at this point.


----------



## Michael OLeary

Out of curiosity, has that statistic been broken down between hard sea trades and the "purple trades" that wear Navy DEU but for whom sea-going billets are limited opportunities even if desired?  For example, how many MPs chose to wear black for its slimming effect but will likely never have a ship-board posting?


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> Revised Qualifying Sea-Days
> 
> Level 1 - Gun Metal 365 days (1 year) (no change);
> Level 2 - Copper 730 days ( 2 years);
> Level 3 - Silver 1095 days (3 years), and
> Level 4 - Gold 1460 days (4 years).


I like it.


----------



## MSEng314

Or what about non-navy personnel serving on board HMC ships, like firefighters, which is always an air force trade, yet all ships have a department of them on board. As well most supply departments contain a good variety of air force and army personnel.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

Unless they go by the ship's log and compile everybody that were on board on each small and big trips, I don't see how they can accurately find those numbers... I sure hope it's not by the MPRR


----------



## Pat in Halifax

MSEng:
Not sure what you are asking. Read the original posting of the email again- it says "To date, sea-day counts have been completed for 3,028 MARCOM personnel with the following results:"
Last I looked, all those people fall under the MARCOM umbrella if employed onboard or in support of sea going units. I actually know a few supply people (and they are probably on this board) who likely have more sea days than I do and I roughly calculated my own between 3 and 4 years.
Someone here at the School came up with a (very) rough calculation that will NOT apply to all. Essentially, for every 6 years SDA, 1 year of sea days.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

KrazyHamburglar said:
			
		

> Unless they go by the ship's log and compile everybody that were on board on each small and big trips, I don't see how they can accurately find those numbers... I sure hope it's not by the MPRR


I don't disagree with you but it's not like we're firing a rocket to the moon and it needs to be 100% accurate down to each time somebody took the blue boat between FDU(P) and Esquimalt.  Like hand grenades, close enough is probably good enough for past service and then create a system to track future sea time days.  No doubt there will also be an appeal process for those who feel that some sea time was missed.  The exec curl was well handled and I have faith that the SSI will be similarly successful.

PS:  The ship's log won't tell you who was onboard.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

Lex Parsimoniae said:
			
		

> The ship's log won't tell you who was onboard.



Of course it won't... but it's the only accurate way (depending of the OOW really) to determine for how much time a ship was at sea... Why put a 8 hour minimum if they are going to ballpark it? They could have put one day for each day the ship was at sea or for each time, on a daily basis, that the ship was off the wall... 
Ss for who was really on it, I guess if you want some accuracy you need to link it to posting messages, but even then, you'll miss some.

Overall I think its a positive thing to recognize sea time. Anyway, as a CSE officer, I'll be lucky it I ever get the gun metal one... the only thing I'm most likely to sail is an desk in Ottawa or at FMF...


----------



## C-Aitchison

Just a quick question.

Do Naval Cadets also wear the Curl, or is it only Acting Sub Lieutenant and up?


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

2587PDub said:
			
		

> Just a quick question.
> 
> Do Naval Cadets also wear the Curl, or is it only Acting Sub Lieutenant and up?


 Acting Sub-Lieutenant and up.  Not sure whether this applies to mess kit or not.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

A NCdt with a mess kit, that would be money thrown out the window...


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

KrazyHamburglar said:
			
		

> Why put a 8 hour minimum if they are going to ballpark it?


Why would you assume that they're going to ballpark it?  Collecting the 'days at sea' per ship is the easy part (and has been reported elsewhere on navy.ca as having been done already).



			
				KrazyHamburglar said:
			
		

> Unless they go by the ship's log and compile everybody that were on board on each small and big trips, I don't see how they can accurately find those numbers... I sure hope it's not by the MPRR


Sorry - I misread this to think that you were talking about how to "compile everybody that were on board " and didn't realize that you meant number of hours at sea.  Why would they look at people's MPRR to figure out the sailing history of ships?


----------



## Pat in Halifax

> Of course it won't... but it's the only accurate way (depending of the OOW really) to determine for how much time a ship was at sea... Why put a 8 hour minimum if they are going to ballpark it? They could have put one day for each day the ship was at sea or for each time, on a daily basis, that the ship was off the wall...
> As for who was really on it, I guess if you want some accuracy you need to link it to posting messages, but even then, you'll miss some.


Hey, I finally figured out how to do 'quotes'!! (One extra beer this eve for me!)
Anyway, ship's sea days are indeed tracked (NavO) as is who is actually on the ship for that/those day/days(Cox'n). Where this info goes, I do not know but suspect where ever it is, that is where the info for the SSI comes from. 
Everytime a ship sails from Halifax or Esquimalt, the Cox'n's Office creates a nominal role and the NOK box goes ashore. If you are repatted mid deployment, this gets recorded. If you stay ashore in St John's for 4 days between port visits because you were REALLY tired during a FISHPAT, this gets recorded. (trust me on this one!!!!)
Bottom line, the info is out there and has been collected since before World War II. It would seem that we now have a use for it!

Also, as NCdt is technically not a commissioned rank (don't start with the MS/MCpl thing again!), I am pretty sure there would be no curl.
_____________________________________
By the way, anyone going to downtown Halifax tomorrow, today was an absolute mad house and for God's sake, if you have little kids, bring water. When I was out for my nooner walk, I bought 2 little boys a bottle of water each because mom and dad were whining and arguing about it being $3!

Best view? Get to know someone in PSU and get on a RHIB! - Seriously though, the walk from inside dkyd, through the south gate (Ark Royal and Wasp are at NB) at SCO all the way along the Boardwalk to beyond Pier 21. (Did I say bring water?) ATH is beside Sackville and TOR is with the Brazilian ship down by the NSPC building near Pier 21. There is also a new monument down there from the ACPOA. USN and RN vessels around Piers 21, 22, 23 as well....Enjoy!


----------



## Pusser

Yes, we know a ship's sea days.  That's not the problem.  The problem is that we have no way of knowing who was actually on board at the time.  The Coxswain keeps an accurate record of who is on board at the moment, but the main use for this information is so they know who to inform if the ship sinks.  No permanent record of this information is kept.  The only permanent records we keep that are relevant and remotely accurate are the MPRR (indicates postings and attach postings) and pay records (indicates receipt of Sea Duty Allowance).  Unfortunately, these too are flawed in that attach posting are not necessarily recorded accurately and receipt of SDA does not necessarily mean you were at sea at the time.   All things considered, I still argue that SDA is the simplest and most accurate recording method we have for past sea service.  The future is another story.  We can develop a more accurate method for the future.

The new rules for the executive curl state that Naval Cadets don't get one.  However, it was authorized for Naval Cadets' mess kits several years ago.  Whether, this will be reconciled remains to be seen, but I suspect it's not a huge issue considering that very few Naval Cadets actually have mess kit.


----------



## wayjosh

Pusser said:
			
		

> The new rules for the executive curl state that Naval Cadets don't get one.  However, it was authorized for Naval Cadets' mess kits several years ago.  Whether, this will be reconciled remains to be seen, but I suspect it's not a huge issue considering that very few Naval Cadets actually have mess kit.



For NCDTs who have mess kit they will be grandfathered, however, like sub-Lts, for any new mess kit they will be required to it in the new rank structure.

For those of you who have asked questions about the SSI, you can expect to see a CANFORGEN in the very near future. It will provide more detail on how and when sea-day counts will be conducted.

I was quite surprised to see internal email posted to this forum. Although the emails were not sent out PB,  I don’t think the author would have expected them to be copied and pasted on an external forum.

What are DND’s regulations wrt posting this type of information.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

The email was sent out and included a caveat for 'widest distribution'. As there was no security issue, I saw no problem. There are likely alot of 'Navy' people who would not have rec'd this other than through here. I know of a MS in Borden who knew nothing about the MARGEN re "Sailors" wearing NCDs during the Centennial year. I know, he should have found it on his own but "Navy" ways do not seem to be too popular outside of Halifax and Esquimalt.
Besides, what is the secret?? Why would you NOT want to broadcast the idea being considered?


----------



## quadrapiper

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> The email was sent out and included a caveat for 'widest distribution'. As there was no security issue, I saw no problem. There are likely alot of 'Navy' people who would not have rec'd this other than through here. I know of a MS in Borden who knew nothing about the MARGEN re "Sailors" wearing NCDs during the Centennial year.


Which MARGEN is that?

You can add all but a very few Sea CIC to the list of naval-looking people unlikely to get "perfect transmission" for policy changes, ___GENs, etc.


----------



## wayjosh

Occam said:
			
		

> And how about those now serving in other elements?



A soon to be released CANFORGEN will answer your questions wrt pers serving in other elements and NAVRES.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

quadrapiper said:
			
		

> Which MARGEN is that?


CANFORGEN 198/09 VCDS 031 191500Z NOV 09.  There is an entire thread here: http://forums.navy.ca/forums/threads/90643/post-892355.html#msg892355


----------



## Pat in Halifax

Les Parsimoniae:
Thank You!!!
For the Mods, I see this has turned into a cat fight on another thread. If you want to 'purge' all this re my email posting, go ahead - Last thing on my mind was what seems to have transpired. I was trying to encourage people to respond to the proposal in the email - as was requested by the author of said email.

Maybe, just maybe, some decisions are better left to the 'boys' rather than the 'adults'.  (Cryptic for the coast rather than the 'Centre').


----------



## wayjosh

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> Besides, what is the secret?? Why would you NOT want to broadcast the idea being considered?



PatinH, If you look at the dist list, you will quickly see it was meant for input mainly from the C1 level. I do not think it is productive to send an email to the entire Navy requesting their input. I trust in the comments from the C1s.
Moreover, decisions are not topically made by engaging the entire population.

I am not saying discussion is bad, I think this forum is a great tool to discuss issues. However, I question posting internal documents to the site.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

From the email:
"This is a unique opportunity to have input into the sea day qualification levels for the SSI. Please give max dist"


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> From the email:
> "This is a unique opportunity to have input into the sea day qualification levels for the SSI. Please give max dist"


Posting it seems reasonable to me.  That doesn't mean that the OPI will accept 'advice' from emails signed "I_am_a_sailor_trust_me@hotmail.com" etc but it is certainly an effective (and 21st century) way to get the message out.


----------



## wayjosh

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> From the email:
> "This is a unique opportunity to have input into the sea day qualification levels for the SSI. Please give max dist"



I don't dispute what was written wrt "max distribution". However, I am surprised you don't see a difference between distribution within the CF, and releasing a document onto a public forum.


----------



## dapaterson

DND's obsessive insistence that information needs to be kept from those who needs it routinely handicaps its efforts to improve.

News Flash:  not all service members spend their days glued to a monitor.  Using social media or other means to distribute routine information is an optimal solution to improve the disemination of information.

In other news, DND's routine attemtps to frustrate public access to information are doomed to failure.  The attempts to secure all information mean that truly important information security is ignored, as the important information gets lost in the cloud of the rest of the drivel.

Information represents power, and DND's attempts at information control are all about some individuals attempting to assert power over others - there is no solid policy or security reason to restrict information, only a desire by some to be seen as important.


In these instances, we're debating baubles (with no GiC implications).  That information has no restrictions on release.

The sooner DND/CF remember that they are accountable to the public and thus must provide maximum transparency in their activities, the better off we will all be.


----------



## gcclarke

Frankly, if people don't want it posted on the internet, they'd best be slapping at least a "Protected A" upon that document.


----------



## Occam

gcclarke said:
			
		

> Frankly, if people don't want it posted on the internet, they'd best be slapping at least a "Protected A" upon that document.



That was the argument I tried to make, but it fell on deaf ears.  Regardless of the subject of the material - any material - if it requires special handling, it's the responsibility of the originator to identify what type of special handling is required.  It has been that way for a very long time.  For example, if a message which contains CANEYES ONLY material has the wrong caveat placed on it by the originator, and is sent via a CAN/US network, it'll be the originator that pays for it, not the communications personnel.


----------



## Pusser

Now, if we could move a little closer back to the original theme of this thread:

Did everyone notice that the Duke of Edinburgh was wearing a *Canadian* naval uniform during the Fleet Review in Halifax yesterday (complete with only six buttons, CNC pin and pilot's wings worn on the breast)?  This is the first time I've ever seen him in a naval uniform that wasn't RN.


----------



## Privateer

Yes, and I was curious as to whether he was wearing the uniform of an Admiral of the Fleet given that is what he wears as an RN uniform.  But in counting the rings, I see that he is merely a full admiral in Canada.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Well, Admiral is the highest rank in our Navy. I'd rather see him wearing this ultimate rank than wearing the funky sort of scrambled not quite know what rank that the Governor-General wears when she wears a naval uniform.


----------



## Privateer

Pointless but interesting (to me at least) constitutional / military law question:  Can the Governor-General of Canada as CIC of Canadian Forces issue a lawful order to HRH Prince Philip in his capacity as a Canadian admiral?  (Feel free to split off to another topic if this shouldn't be here.)


----------



## gwp

Privateer said:
			
		

> Pointless but interesting (to me at least) constitutional / military law question:  Can the Governor-General of Canada as CIC of Canadian Forces issue a lawful order to HRH Prince Philip in his capacity as a Canadian admiral?  (Feel free to split off to another topic if this shouldn't be here.)


Prince Phillip and Prince Charles are Honorary members of the CF in the same fashion as any other honorary appointee.   

Her Excellency is Commander in Chief of Canada ... and wears the CF uniform as appropriate at military ceremony.


----------



## MSEng314

Thought some people might like to see the new stripes compared to Admirals from other navies. I found this picture on the US CNO's website, it was taken in Halifax while all the Admirals were here for the fleet review. 

Enjoy!







As an aside: the CMS looks much sharper with the new curl on his uniform than the CDS's army uniform  ;D


----------



## Edward Campbell

MSEng314 said:
			
		

> Thought some people might like to see the new stripes compared to Admirals from other navies. I found this picture on the US CNO's website, it was taken in Halifax while all the Admirals were here for the fleet review.
> 
> Enjoy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As an aside: the CMS looks much sharper with the new curl on his uniform than the CDS's army uniform  ;D




Very _spiffy_, indeed. My initial skepticism was, thankfully, misplaced. Very nice to see; it may not be a new ship or more sailors but it is still a 'step up' for the Navy.


----------



## Neill McKay

For anyone who was hesitant about the slip-ons sold by CP Gear/Wheeler, I picked up several sets today and they have revised the design.  They now resemble the issued slip-ons very closely (and may be identical -- I haven't seen an issued one in person to be able to say for sure).  I doubt that they will be distinguishable to the unaided eye.


----------



## Old Naval Guard

Hello I support the mesure to bring back more Tradtion to our "Navy". While I am happy for the Officers it would be nice to see Tradtional Naval Ranks for the NCMs. Perhaps with a slightly modified Canadain Slant to them ex Master Seamen a Leaf and a Anchor ect as an example. A nice gesture for the Navy on it Birthday. Cheers :cheers: Splice the Main Brace


----------



## ModlrMike

While I appreciate the sentiment of traditional, Canadianized ranks for the NCM corps, I don't think it's wise to go down that road. One of the effects of adding the curl was that the officer ranks are still essentially the same as they were before the curl. To wit that Lt(N) for example still looks like an army/air Capt... essentially. To modify the NCM ranks would just lead to unnecessary confusion. It's already a challenge for our army and air brethren and sisteren to address us appropriately without throwing new badges into the mix. My  :2c:


----------



## Neill McKay

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> To modify the NCM ranks would just lead to unnecessary confusion. It's already a challenge for our army and air brethren and sisteren to address us appropriately without throwing new badges into the mix. My  :2c:



I'm not a strong advocate for modifying the NCM badges either (but would be if I had the impression that there was an interest on the part of those wearing them).  However, the confusion argument holds no water with me: most armed forces in the world have element-specific rank insignia and seem to manage well enough.  Even Canada was able to make it work for the first 60 or so years of the navy's history.


----------



## George Wallace

N. McKay said:
			
		

> I'm not a strong advocate for modifying the NCM badges either (but would be if I had the impression that there was an interest on the part of those wearing them).  However, the confusion argument holds no water with me: most armed forces in the world have element-specific rank insignia and seem to manage well enough.  Even Canada was able to make it work for the first 60 or so years of the navy's history.



Apples and oranges.

Three distinct and seperate Services vice one unified CF.




In those days the Navy had:  OS and LS
and the Air Force had:            AC and LAC
and then the Army had:         Pte and LCpl
just for starters.


Tell me this would be easy to keep straight in a "Unified" force.


----------



## Neill McKay

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Tell me this would be easy to keep straight in a "Unified" force.



Consider it told.  I know the names and insignia for all ranks in the RCN, RCAF, and pre-unification Army, not to mention the RCMP, in addition to the current CF ranks.  And I'm sure there are countless foreign service members who know all of their countries' various services' ranks.  Further, there are a good many cadets who know all three cadet rank systems (and they are quite different from one another in cadets -- but with equivalence across elements just as there would be in the CF).

If a person can learn one set of rank insignia then he or she can learn three.  People do it all over the world, including Canadian teenagers.


----------



## ModlrMike

N. McKay said:
			
		

> If a person can learn one set of rank insignia then he or she can learn three.  People do it all over the world, including Canadian teenagers.




It should be that simple. However many years of experience has taught me that it is not so. You would not believe the number of times I've been addressed by an "other than naval rank" when I'm dressed in No1. This from WO/Sgts and even officers. If our senior pers won't or can't do it, what hope is there for the junior ones?


----------



## George Wallace

Why don't we just make it SIMPLE.  There is a NATO RANK TABLE that lists every rank in NATO.  We can just call all our OS/AC/PTES ------- OR1s   All our officer ranks would be OF1 through OF9 and remember that some militaries have OF10s.  Our NCMs would start at OR1 and possibly progress to OR9.  We would have WO1 through WO5.

That way we don't have to know what a Corporal of Horse is, nor a Hauptfeldwebel, nor a nadpraporčík.  Catch my drift?


----------



## Old Sweat

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Apples and oranges.
> 
> In those days the Navy had:  OS and LS
> and the Air Force had:            AC and LAC
> and then the Army had:         Pte and LCpl
> just for starters.
> 
> 
> Tell me this would be easy to keep straight in a "Unified" force.



The three examples you cited, George, don't quite fit.

Leading Seaman in the RCN was the equivalent of Corporal in the army and the RCAF.

However, a Leading Aircraftsman was the same as Able Seaman in the RCN and Private (and all the others) Trained, Higher Rate in the army. The difference was that the others services did not have a distinguishing badge, while a LAC wore a horizontal propellor on each sleeve.

The other services did not have an appointment (not a rank) similar to Lance Corporal. A unit could appoint 12.5% of the privates to Lance Corporal. It was used as a stepping stone and a means of assessing developing young soldiers. If posted, a Lance Corporal reverted to Private.

Still, it would not be beyond most of us to learn more than one system of badges of rank.


----------



## Good2Golf

MSEng314 said:
			
		

> As an aside: the CMS looks much sharper with the new curl on his uniform than the CDS's army uniform  ;D



Some folks are measured by the salad on the wrist, others by the salad on the chest...


----------



## George Wallace

Thanks OS

Guess I forgot a few over the years.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Having worked for the CMS and CDS give me Walt anyday...


----------



## aesop081

Old Naval Guard said:
			
		

> Hello I support the mesure to bring back more Tradtion to our "Navy".



Personaly i'm all for hanging people from yardarms.........let us bring that one back.


----------



## Old Sweat

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Personaly i'm all for hanging people from yardarms.........let us bring that one back.



That works as long as you are the hanger and not the hangee!


----------



## Neill McKay

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Why don't we just make it SIMPLE.  There is a NATO RANK TABLE that lists every rank in NATO.  We can just call all our OS/AC/PTES ------- OR1s   All our officer ranks would be OF1 through OF9 and remember that some militaries have OF10s.  Our NCMs would start at OR1 and possibly progress to OR9.  We would have WO1 through WO5.
> 
> That way we don't have to know what a Corporal of Horse is, nor a Hauptfeldwebel, nor a nadpraporčík.  Catch my drift?



Would work... but sounds an awful lot like the civil service!


----------



## McG

MSEng314 said:
			
		

> As an aside: the CMS looks much sharper with the new curl on his uniform than the CDS's army uniform  ;D


The absolutely rediculous solution has already been identified: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/94678/post-950380.html#msg950380


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

I don't see why we are even discussing this... if it's not broken, don't try to fix it... and it's clearly not broken


----------



## OldSolduer

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Personaly i'm all for hanging people from yardarms.........let us bring that one back.



Would that not be metrearms? ;D


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Would that not be metrearms? ;D



LOL Nope the Navy uses yards and nautical miles for distance.


----------



## Good2Golf

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> LOL Nope the Navy uses yards and nautical miles for distance.



Good thing you added LOL, ED. I was going to tag you with a 100% sense-of-humour FAIL.  Instead, I'll keep it to just a 50% SOH FAIL.  

Jim, because it was your 'Silverback-like experience' talking, you faked me out on picking up the metricification joke...my cat was staring at me like I had a toaster for a head while I was trying to pronounce 'metrearm' out loud...for that I believe I deserve the full 100% FAIL that I was going to slam Ex-Dragoon with...FML.  :-\

G2G


----------



## aesop081

lol.........

"Yardarm" has nothing to do with any measurement.


----------



## Old Sweat

I don't think having a BBQ in the backmetre will catch on either.


----------



## Pusser

Well of course not!  The BBQ is on the quarterdeck (usually next to the gas cans)! ;D


----------



## Grinton

I apologise if this has been answered somewhere else already but the search function came up lacking.  I know the direction for the curl on our shoulders.  But what is the historical significance of the direction of the curl?  Seems like it could just be logic, but since when has the name done something logical without some tradition backing it?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

While I have no idea what the real reason might be (if there even is one), couldn't it have something to do with the fact that most tailors and seamstresses are right handed?


----------



## Pusser

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> While I have no idea what the real reason might be (if there even is one), couldn't it have something to do with the fact that most tailors and seamstresses are right handed?



Except that the curls always come in pairs (except maybe on CADPAT uniforms) and there is a left and a right.  In other words, it wouldn't make any difference if the tailor was left or right handed because he would have to make one of each anyway.

The part of the curl that is on top and overlapping the other part is the "bow" and always points forward.  An officer who is wearing his curls on the wrong side is said to be "running astern."  This usually only happens when wearing shoulder boards.  One hopes that the tailor gets it right when putting them on the tunic!


----------



## Neill McKay

Pusser said:
			
		

> One hopes that the tailor gets it right when putting them on the tunic!



It happens that mine didn't the first time...  Rather costly mistake.


----------



## Pusser

If the tailor gets it wrong, then you shouldn't have to pay for it, unless you gave them the wrong instructions.


----------



## Neill McKay

Pusser said:
			
		

> If the tailor gets it wrong, then you shouldn't have to pay for it, unless you gave them the wrong instructions.



I didn't.  I meant that it was a costly mistake on the part of the tailor!

I gave them pre-fab lace to sew on (labour cost ca. $50) and they got it backwards.  "Are you sure?", they asked?  "Yes, it should be like the lace on the mess jacket in your front window", said I.  "Come back tomorrow", said the tailor.

The next day I went in to discover that the tailor hadn't been able to remove the lace without destroying it, so they put new lace on *by hand*, the labour and materials cost for which is well over $100 (and the tailor absorbed the difference).  My luckiest day in a while, especially since the hand-sewn lace on my tunic is a lot nicer than the pre-fab was.

I think this makes up for the cost overrun on my white tunic and my mess kit having been two months late.


----------



## Snakedoc

Pusser said:
			
		

> Except that the curls always come in pairs (except maybe on CADPAT uniforms) and there is a left and a right.



Out of curiousity, has any direction been given on which one (left or right) to wear on CADPAT uniforms?


----------



## dapaterson

Snakedoc said:
			
		

> Out of curiousity, has any direction been given on which one (left or right) to wear on CADPAT uniforms?



Left for MARPAC and right for MARLANT?


----------



## CombatDoc

Pusser said:
			
		

> Except that the curls always come in pairs (except maybe on CADPAT uniforms) and there is a left and a right.  In other words, it wouldn't make any difference if the tailor was left or right handed because he would have to make one of each anyway.
> 
> The part of the curl that is on top and overlapping the other part is the "bow" and always points forward.  An officer who is wearing his curls on the wrong side is said to be "running astern."  This usually only happens when wearing shoulder boards.  One hopes that the tailor gets it right when putting them on the tunic!


Hmmm.  According to the dress regs posted here in MARPAC: "The underside of the curl must face forward" Canforgen 091-10, CMS 031-10.  I looked online, and all of the google photos that I found of CF or RN Officers showed the underside of the curl facing forward, not the "bow" forward.  Is it possible that both coasts have different dress regulations for the executive curl?   I couldn't find any further specific direction online.


----------



## CombatDoc

Snakedoc said:
			
		

> Out of curiousity, has any direction been given on which one (left or right) to wear on CADPAT uniforms?


According to the dress regs, Admiralty Curl insignia are not authorized for wear with CADPAT.  Instead, the regs state that we should wear black thread rings over olive drab (or whatever they are calling it) background.  The AC rank that cpgear sells and that I have purchased are all right hand slipons (underside of the curl facing forward).


----------



## Snakedoc

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Left for MARPAC and right for MARLANT?



LOL  ;D



			
				CombatDoc said:
			
		

> Hmmm.  According to the dress regs posted here in MARPAC: "The underside of the curl must face forward" Canforgen 091-10, CMS 031-10.  I looked online, and all of the google photos that I found of CF or RN Officers showed the underside of the curl facing forward, not the "bow" forward.  Is it possible that both coasts have different dress regulations for the executive curl?   I couldn't find any further specific direction online.



I've seen Naval Officers on both coasts and the standard is the same.  This is also detailed in the dress regs for the mess kit shoulder boards.  I think the only confusion here is just in the description, 'underside of the curl' facing forward is the same as the 'bow' facing forward or in other words the 'overside' facing back.



			
				CombatDoc said:
			
		

> According to the dress regs, Admiralty Curl insignia are not authorized for wear with CADPAT.  Instead, the regs state that we should wear black thread rings over olive drab (or whatever they are calling it) background.  The AC rank that cpgear sells and that I have purchased are all right hand slipons (underside of the curl facing forward).



Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the dress regs have been officially updated yet for the wearing of the executive curl.  However, according to the executive curl's Interim Policy Guidance document, the executive curl slip-on is authorized for wear with the temperate woodland version of the CADPAT, but not the other versions (arid etc.).  Unfortunately it doesn't detail whether it is the left or right slip-on that is to be worn on the CADPAT.

"e.   Slip-ons CADPAT Lightweight Combat Clothing.  Distinct navy slip-on identifiers are approved for wear with CADPAT Lightweight Combat Clothing (LWCC) Temperate Woodland (TW) in Canada dependent on the operational context of the unit – i.e. in non-tactical situations as deemed by the operational commander in accordance with reference D.  The current navy slip-on identifier is black thread rank insignia on Canadian Average Green.  The new navy identifier slip-on for CADPAT LWCC (TW) will be modified to incorporate the executive curl and it will be a unisex design as per the service dress/NCD slip-on.  For tactical situations, the slip-on will be the CADPAT TW standard slip-on with no navy identifier (no executive curl).   Authorization on overseas operations will be at the discretion of the Theatre Commander based on the operational situation.  All other CADPAT designs (i.e. Arid Region, Arctic) will use the appropriate CADPAT design slip-on, again with no navy identifier."


----------



## Pusser

I have an arid slip-on with curl (from CP Gear).  If I end up in the sandbox, I'll have to see how adventurous I am in deciding whether I'll try wearing it.


----------



## CombatDoc

Snakedoc said:
			
		

> LOL  ;D
> Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the dress regs have been officially updated yet for the wearing of the executive curl.  However, according to the executive curl's Interim Policy Guidance document, the executive curl slip-on is authorized for wear with the temperate woodland version of the CADPAT, but not the other versions (arid etc.).  Unfortunately it doesn't detail whether it is the left or right slip-on that is to be worn on the CADPAT.
> 
> "e.   Slip-ons CADPAT Lightweight Combat Clothing.  Distinct navy slip-on identifiers are approved for wear with CADPAT Lightweight Combat Clothing (LWCC) Temperate Woodland (TW) in Canada dependent on the operational context of the unit – i.e. in non-tactical situations as deemed by the operational commander in accordance with reference D.  The current navy slip-on identifier is black thread rank insignia on Canadian Average Green.  The new navy identifier slip-on for CADPAT LWCC (TW) will be modified to incorporate the executive curl and it will be a unisex design as per the service dress/NCD slip-on.  For tactical situations, the slip-on will be the CADPAT TW standard slip-on with no navy identifier (no executive curl).   Authorization on overseas operations will be at the discretion of the Theatre Commander based on the operational situation.  All other CADPAT designs (i.e. Arid Region, Arctic) will use the appropriate CADPAT design slip-on, again with no navy identifier."


Snakedoc, I think you're right, and I stand corrected.


----------

