|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Sorry to hear that Mick. It must be a kick in the "you-know-whats".
Paul |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Those who live by the sword will be shot by those of us who have progressed. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Not the one I am thinking of servicepub but the riggers are another one none of us have mentioned yet. I am assuming all riggers were part of the Service Commando. The one I am thinking of did not belong to any Commando but had separate status such as E Battery or the Engineers had but was a much smaller organization of less than 20 personnel.
Paul |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
maroon beret
Was it the 12 Hussars and there Airborne recce 7 lynx . I believe there were 21 one of them.
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Nope sapper 83. But you are a little warmer because like the armoured jumpers it was not an infantry unit.
Paul |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
2 Fd Amb - Airborne Evacuation Platoon?
2 Svc Bn - Tactical Air Movements Section? 2CER - Jump Troop? Phil
__________________
Courtesy of The Canadian Forces: https://www.canada.ca/en/department-.../lineages.html Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
Airborne cooks?
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
No dice Phil and Tanker Mike but it is good to see some of the other Airborne elements mentioned. One last clue before I give the answer. Although it was not an infantry unit it was a Combat Arms unit.
Paul |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
pathfinders
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
AA section
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
You got it on the second try sapper 83 if by AA you mean the Air Defence Troop Jump Section. The establishment was only one Sgt section commander and five three-man dets although we usually only had enough troops for two men per det. It used to take quite awhile to dig a blowpipe trench with overhead and protected storage for the missiles with only two of us. I am not sure when the Section started up as I arrived in the spring of 82. It ceased to exist in the summer of 85 when the Troop was moved to Chatham, NB to become part of the new 119 Air Defence Battery.
Paul |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Was Jim Bouleau part of this section
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
I am not remembering him being part of the section while I was there but is he the guy who remustered to the air force and was later posted in Greenwood?
Paul |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Phil
__________________
Courtesy of The Canadian Forces: https://www.canada.ca/en/department-.../lineages.html Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
There was nothing destinctive worn. Our dress and badges were identical to what E Battery wore. As part of the normal administrative chain of command we were part of Regimental HQ Battery. In a tactical scenario we, like E Battery, were part of the Airborne Regiment Battle Group under command of the Airborne Regimental HQ. As the Blowpipe required five detachments to protect a point target the section was always tasked as a complete entity (unless you had a commander who did not understand the principles of employment of the Blowpipe and parceled out the detachments resulting in an ineffective air defence posture). With only one section of Blowpipes only on target could be protected.
Paul |
|
|