|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Last edited by 1stmotors; 20-06-11 at 12:58 AM. |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Hello Tom. I am not familiar with that pattern smock. What does the label say?
What are you doing it up as? Band? Or Canadian Airborne Regt? Or one of the other units of the SSF?
__________________
Res ipsa loquitur |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Last edited by 1stmotors; 20-06-11 at 12:57 AM. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Good imformation guy's i heard there was a Canadian Special Air Services Regiment around the same time as the British did during WW11 era it would be great to have the group reopened again since we need Elite special Force's this days around the world.
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
first issue jimmy buttons...?
Quote:
pointing wrong way. I had the first of the Trade Qual Badges when I returned from Kingston to Gander, and was one of the first on station with the Jump Boots, smock and brass buckle (all of which needed polishing and were instantly hated.) I was told to get it all on cause some General was coming through. I remember guy with a strange collar dogs that I couldn't quite place asking me how I liked the new dress blah blah.... He then whispered for me to take off that qual badge and sew on my tans for the mess dinner that night...I ask no questions. I was only a private I think, and got roaring drunk till daylight with the Command Chief of the Canadian Arm Forces and some General.... And he was probably the only guy in the Army that could tell the difference at that time between a rubberhead dress and undress badge. I had to trace my steps back to the mess the next morning and pick up the uniform trail which led directly back to the Officers Mess lol. Memories.... Some of which seem to be returning since I got of the booze hahaha. BZ |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
Clearing Up A Couple Of Points
Good day all,
Just to clarify a few points from the above posts. Bill, in your post #7, naming conventions are pretty specific for the CF. In full, a unit's name is spelled out completely, e.g. Second Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment. The short form should not have any nominal lettering, e.g. "st/nd/rd/th". So the correct short form for the Second Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment is always 2 RCR. Anything else is incorrect. For 'Huggies Baby', Canada's SAS Company was only in existence for a short time after WW II, two to three years at the most. Although the Officer Commanding, Capt Guy d'Artois, based the company's training on his experiences in OSS during the war, the main purpose of the unit was to maintain a parachute expertise in the Canadian Army. This expertise was carried on after this by designating battalions in the Army's Regular Force regiments as airborne/air transportable. Since the demise of the Canadian Airborne Regiment, the CF has started two SF units, Joint Task Force 2 and the Canadian Special Operations Regiment, who are in the game overseas. And Jo, I don't think the Special Service Force was ever 2 SSF. 2 Combat Group, SSF, 2CMBG is the way it went I believe. Ian
__________________
The day the government succeeds in taking away our dress uniforms, badges and colours, and all the so called "non-functional" items; they will find themselves with an army that cannot defend them. Robert Heinlein, "Starship Troopers" |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
Hi Ian, Ed has alluded to this naming convention, but is there a directive/manual/ro that explains this somewhere?
__________________
Res ipsa loquitur |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Bill, I can't give you the publication number. However, I'm pretty sure it is one of the "Military Staff Writing" manuals. Ed, or a currently serving member might be able to give you the correct pub number.
Ian
__________________
The day the government succeeds in taking away our dress uniforms, badges and colours, and all the so called "non-functional" items; they will find themselves with an army that cannot defend them. Robert Heinlein, "Starship Troopers" |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Update and Confused
I am retired from the CF.
I don't think there is a manual with naming conventions, I generally look to CF websites for the correct name. Perhaps someone else can answer this as there could be a digital version lurking about on the DWAN. From Icu2, I am confused by the statement; "I had the first of the Trade Qual Badges when I returned from Kingston to Gander, and was one of the first on station with the Jump Boots, smock and brass buckle (all of which needed polishing and were instantly hated.)" I believe the 'Jump Boots' were actually the Garrison Dress Boots and the 'smock' was actually the Garrison Dress Jacket. 'All" did not require polishing as you do not polish clothing, nor the Corps or Regimental brass buckles worn with Garrison Dress which were anodized so the only item requiring any form of polishing were the Garrison Dress boots. |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
Sorry Ed, somehow I thought you were still in. And my SLC course in 1988 was probably the last time I cracked a Staff writing manual, so I could be mistaken. I still think there is a section or chapter in one of the manuals that deals with writing unit names, both long and short. But you know how it goes when you get "Old Timers".
Ian
__________________
The day the government succeeds in taking away our dress uniforms, badges and colours, and all the so called "non-functional" items; they will find themselves with an army that cannot defend them. Robert Heinlein, "Starship Troopers" |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Manuals
A lot of the traditional 'housekeeping' functions associated with DND have been dropped over the years or transferred to on-line applications. Hard-copy manuals are quickly becoming a thing of the past and many of these digital copies are now tightly controlled.
There was a lot of good information buried in the old printed manuals but I think that technology, staffing and budgets cuts along with increased security will make civilian access and owning current versions of these items much more difficult. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
The source document would likely be A-AD-121-F01/JX-000 Canadian Forces Manual Abbreviations but nearly all manuals have been removed from open source so I cannot even locate it to actually provide a specific passage in regards to abbreviated unit titles.
|
#28
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks Richard. Just listened to a radio discussion about how historians are already trying to figure out how to save material for future analysis. This topic was part of the discussion. Despite conventional wisdom, the internet does not save everything for posterity...
Doing historical work on the 90's and 2000's will be much harder than working on previous decades.
__________________
Res ipsa loquitur |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Saving Digital Material
The digital age has only been with us for 20 years, good to hear that some historians have finally awoken to the fact that a plan is needed to save electronic media. Of course it will probably be another two decades before anyone has a plan in place.
|
#30
|
||||
|
||||
I don't know if this was part of the discussion Bill is referring to as I didn't hear it, but scientists at the Canadian Conservation Institute (CCI) and elsewhere have been trying to figure out this one for quite a few years now. Paper, even crappy paper, and parchment are far more durable and have a much longer life span. Every time something is converted or transferred to a newer digital version or format something gets lost.
If anyone's interested, they have published several publications available online (Technical Bulletins #25, #27, #30: https://www.cci-icc.gc.ca/resources-...eng.aspx?id=18 Symposium proceedings: https://www.cci-icc.gc.ca/resources-...&thispubid=506 and a CCI Note on the longevity of CDs and DVDs: http://canada.pch.gc.ca/eng/1439925167385 David |
|
|