Author Topic: Artillery callsigns vs other trades  (Read 3289 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline slayer14

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,995
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 120
Artillery callsigns vs other trades
« on: July 25, 2018, 20:15:46 »
Was wondering if anyone knew the reasoning why the DCO (2IC) of an artillery regiment's callsign was 98 instead of 9A like the infantry or armoured? Same question for the Ops O actual being 95 seagull instead of 9B.

Tried looking it up in B-GL 371-004 but no joy.


Online Old Sweat

  • Fixture
  • *****
  • 227,535
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,955
Re: Artillery callsigns vs other trades
« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2018, 22:09:58 »
I was a junior lieutenant when it happened circa 1966, so don't blame me. It may have been because of our tight integration with the RA in BAOR, but I don't know., especially for Sunray Minor.

The Ops Officer was a new appointment for us at the time, and the use of 95 may have been to distinguish between the CO and out of his tac.

Short answer - probably because the Brits did it.

Offline AlDazz

  • New Member
  • **
  • 820
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Artillery callsigns vs other trades
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2019, 20:37:05 »
An interesting observation.  There does not seem to be any obvious reason other than its the way the RCA fixed call sign table is set up.  Other differences are RSM - 97 rather than 9C and the BSM position is 17 rather than 19C. Any information on why they are different would be appreciated.
If you are an old soldier you can be forgiven for muttering " Things aren't what they used to be." True, but then they never were.

Offline jeffb

  • Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 27,451
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 679
Re: Artillery callsigns vs other trades
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2019, 23:19:15 »
The better question for me is why does the rest of the Army use the wrong call signs? :)
~ Ubique ~
Simple is better except when complicated looks really cool.