# "Sig" or "Sigs"??



## Bintheredunthat (17 Sep 2005)

Who can tell me if a Signals Troop/Platoon/Sqn is called a Sig Troop or Sigs Troop?

The way I remember it from the past, was......for example........HQ & Sig Squadron - but I've heard some people corrected for incorrectly calling it the HQ & Sigs Squadron. :tsktsk:  Apparently HQ & Sigs is right - but when you added the Sqn - you dropped the "S".   ???

It is Sig Troop - or is it Sigs Troop.

Does an infantry battalion have a Sigs Platoon - or is it Sig Platoon.

Now, before everyone goes jumping in with, "When I was there we called it _____".  I'm looking for the clear correct way to call a Signals unit.  References appreciated.

Bin


----------



## Signal-Man (17 Sep 2005)

Sig Tp . . . Sig Sqn . . . but HQ & Sigs ...

I guess it depends . . . however, our unit is called a Signal Squadron _Sig Sqn_ and I've been told by others to make sure my written correspondance and e-mail signatures are displayed as such.

Hope that helps.


----------



## Bintheredunthat (17 Sep 2005)

I've heard the same however I'm looking for a justification, reason, and/or reference.  Can't go telling someone they're wrong nowadays without a good old "Ref", Pub, or link now can we?

We've become so "by the book" over the years haven't we?  Sheesh.

Bin


----------



## Michael OLeary (17 Sep 2005)

The "sig/sigs" entries in the Manual of Abbreviations are as follows:



> A-AD-121-F01/JX-000
> CANADIAN FORCES MANUAL OF ABBREVIATIONS
> 
> sig - signal, signaller
> ...


----------



## luck881 (18 Sep 2005)

The newest craze on leave passes for us is 2CMBG Hq & Sig Sqn
I'm not sure but maybe the extra letter didn't fit in the box


----------



## Bintheredunthat (18 Sep 2005)

That's not a new craze at all - see first post above.

HQ & Sig Sqn

BUT

HQ & Sigs

Crazy - is this a mystery that shall never be solved???

Bin


----------



## Pinto (6 Oct 2005)

The old Royal Canadian Corps of Signals manual was quite specific. Unfortunately, I don't have it handy right now, so I can't give you a word for word quote. But it all boils down to grammar.

Signal is an adjective, Signals is a noun.

So, it is Signal Squadron, Signal Troop, Signal Platoon, Signal Officer, Signal Operator, abbreviated Sig Sqn, Sig Tp, Sig Pl, Sig O, Sig Op.

Dang... gotta go to a meeting... MTF.

Cheers!


----------



## Pinto (6 Oct 2005)

OK, found it:
---
Excerpt from the standing orders for
The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals
September, 1966

*SIGNAL TERMINOLOGY*

Signaller/Signalman

3.84	The word "Signaller" denotes a member of a corps other than RC SIGS, of that trade or specialty (e.g. Signaller RCA, Gunner-Signaller). Conversely, a Signalman denotes only a member of RC SIGS of that rank.

3.85	Generally speaking "Signals" is used as a noun and "Signal" as an adjective. The following examples illustrate the application of this principle:

a.	Signal (Adjective):
Signal Officer
Signal Centre
Signal Communications
Signal Instruction
Signal Diagram
Signal Squadron
Signal Regiment
Signal Security
U.S. Signal Corps

b.	Signals (Noun)
The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals
The Royal Canadian School of Signals
"Send it to Signals"
"Signals will take care of it"

c.	Exceptions
The Canadian Signals Association
Signals Welfare Incorporated
Signals Despatch Service

_*3.86	The use of slang abbreviation "sigs" is not looked upon with favour.*_

Despatch Rider
3.87	The phrase "Despatch Rider" denotes only a member of RC SIGS of that former trade. A member of any other corps whose trade or specialty consists of the operation of a motorcycle is a motorcyclist. For the sake of uniformity, the spelling despatch (rather than dispatch) is considered correct in the Canadian Army.
----

In my opinion, it doesn't get more official than that. YMMV, of course. Hope this helps.

Cheers!


----------



## Bintheredunthat (6 Oct 2005)

Wow - thanks for that.   

Very informative indeed.

My fave is "3.86   The use of slang abbreviation "sigs" is not looked upon with favour."  Uhhhhh..........ok.  I think that one has been long forgotten in the past 40 years since that book has been in print.  Sigs seems to be a pretty common word now.  Not too often you won't hear Cbt Arms guys refer to the "Sigs" in any other way but that.  Didn't bother me any though.  Got other things to worry about I suppose.

Heard a Tp WO calling his troop "Sigs Troop" awhile back.  Now THAT, drove me insane like nails on a chalkboard!!  Now I know why.  It just didn't sound right, and for good reason.  It WASN'T.

Bin


----------



## Pinto (6 Oct 2005)

I would agree that it is probably less "unfavourable" to use "Sigs" as it might once have been... so long as they are saying it with respect! But only on its own, never in front of the word "Troop" or "Platoon."

But it can be a tough fight; I spent 2 years as the "Sig O" of an infantry battalion... despite my almost daily pleas, some of them still called me "Sigs O" and my troops the "Sigs Platoon."  : ARGH! It doesn't help that we have "Signals" on our shoulder flashes. And the whole "Adjective/Noun" reasoning was almost a waste of time... infanteers not being the most grammatically minded folks in the army  

Cheers!


----------



## Bintheredunthat (6 Oct 2005)

I can definetely remember those days.  The term "Sig O" was like a four letter word in some units.  It was as though whenever there was a problem in the unit with anything that plugged into the wall, "Sig O's responsibility".    It was pretty bad.   :brickwall:

And the unit I was using in my situation recently joined the rest of us with the regular lettering naming convention.  Welcome to the real world.

But anyway, I'm happy now.  

Bin


----------



## G-Fresh (7 Oct 2005)

Pinto, 

Thanx for the informative post.  I've been having disagreements with people on the topic for several years.  It always helps to be able to go to people with the reference in hand.  Thanx again.   :cheers:


----------



## Pinto (7 Oct 2005)

G-Fresh

Nema Problema, my UN Friend. I tend to be a bit Anal Retentive about these kinds of things, and yes, it helps when you have the reference to back you up!

Cheers!


----------



## Shilly (7 Oct 2005)

My Daily Rummage through the N.D.A.
Just shows the different terminology in the rank structure
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/N-5/86182.html#rid-86338
Ref: R.S., 1985, c. N-5, Sch.; R.S., 1985, c. 31 (1st Supp.), s. 60; 1998, c. 35, s. 91(F).

Also in Operational Training - Vol 2 - Unit Administration 
Chaper 5, Section 504, Paragraph F, Sub (10) the customs and traditions of some units permit the use of alternate terminology as follows: (d) *Signal.*   The term "signalman" may be used in place of "Private".
 Have a good long weekend


----------



## Radop (12 Oct 2005)

You guys really need a life!!!!!

There are only two ranks for a Private - Private and Seaman 

All trades have names for various ranks but ultimately they are one of the ones listed in the QR&O.  I love rubbing this in on the MBdrs out there.  Tradition is tradition and I agree with using them when I can but most official correspondance goes with the above rather than the traditional names.


----------

