British & Commonwealth Military Badge Forum

Recent Books by Forum Members

   

Go Back   British & Commonwealth Military Badge Forum > Canadian Military Insignia > Formation and Tasking Signs

 Other Pages: Galleries, Links etc.
Glossary  Books by Forum Members     Canadian Pre 1914    CEF    CEF Badge Inscriptions   Canadian post 1920     Canadian post 1953     British Cavalry Badges     Makers' Marks    Pipers' Badges  Canadian Cloth Titles  Books  SEARCH
 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 18-03-15, 02:33 PM
Bill A's Avatar
Bill A Bill A is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,529
Default Greenlight Force

Several Canadian units were committed to the Kiska operation. Those part of TF 9 wore the Kiska patches (actually TF9 patches). Members of the Canadian Fusiliers as part of Greenlight Force wore the Pacific Command patch with the unofficial addition of a small yellow star. Immediately after withdrawal from Kiska the "stars" were ordered removed.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_0007.jpg (38.8 KB, 30 views)
__________________
Res ipsa loquitur
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 18-03-15, 02:39 PM
Voltigeur's Avatar
Voltigeur Voltigeur is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Montreal,Canada.
Posts: 5,778
Default

Hi Bill, my question is why.....
Jo
__________________
"There truly exists but one perfect order: that of cemeteries. The dead never complain and they enjoy their equality in silence." -

“There are things we know that we know,” “There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know.”
Donald Rumsfeld, before the Iraqi Invasion,2003.

Age is something that doesn't matter, unless you are a cheese.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 18-03-15, 02:40 PM
Bill A's Avatar
Bill A Bill A is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,529
Default

Sorry Jo? Why did they add the star? Or, why was it ordered taken down?
__________________
Res ipsa loquitur
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 18-03-15, 03:38 PM
Voltigeur's Avatar
Voltigeur Voltigeur is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Montreal,Canada.
Posts: 5,778
Default

...yes why add it....then take it down after the troops are back in Canada...(I suspect the Ottawa high priced help did not like it....)

Jo
__________________
"There truly exists but one perfect order: that of cemeteries. The dead never complain and they enjoy their equality in silence." -

“There are things we know that we know,” “There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know.”
Donald Rumsfeld, before the Iraqi Invasion,2003.

Age is something that doesn't matter, unless you are a cheese.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 18-03-15, 04:19 PM
Bill A's Avatar
Bill A Bill A is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,529
Default

Jo, from what I have been able to gleen from the documentation, the "star" was unofficially added, probably intended as a distinction for the service in Kiska. That would be contrary to the purpose of the formation patches; to be used as identification. Additionally, other units in Greenlight did not wear the "star", and when the Rocky Mountain Rangers asked permission to add the device to their patches they were denied.
__________________
Res ipsa loquitur
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 18-03-15, 11:59 PM
Michael Dorosh Michael Dorosh is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill A View Post
Jo, from what I have been able to gleen from the documentation, the "star" was unofficially added, probably intended as a distinction for the service in Kiska. That would be contrary to the purpose of the formation patches; to be used as identification. Additionally, other units in Greenlight did not wear the "star", and when the Rocky Mountain Rangers asked permission to add the device to their patches they were denied.
Begging the question of why they would ask permission to add an unofficial device that no one else apparently had permission to use anyway...

So what does the star represent? I know the Americans give "battle stars" for campaign ribbons, so I'm wondering if this is somehow related to that concept.

I'm not positive the star contravenes the "purpose of the formation patches," at least in an unofficial sense.

Soldiers in the Great War had a unique relationship with the Battle Patches of the C.E.F. when individuals were returned to Canada. Even though they no longer served in C.E.F. formations, they still had great pride in having been under fire with those formations, and the patches became something of a mark of distinction. I actually thought general orders were promulgated at some point that permitted the wear of battle patches for this purpose, but I may be remembering this incorrectly - I also seem to remember there being a blanket reversal of this policy at some point (perhaps after the war?) to the effect that C.E.F. battle patches would no longer be worn.

There were similar uses in the Second World War - all unofficial - the 8th Army patches being the best example, where Mediterranean vets sewed the patches to their shoulder straps even after returning to 1st Canadian Army.

The Americans have an interesting take on this, and from at least as early as the Second World War, if you saw combat with a formation, you were permitted to wear the SSI of that formation on the right sleeve of your dress uniform, with the SSI of your current formation on the left, which makes for all kinds of interesting combinations. For example Hal Moore wore the SSI of the 1st Cavalry Division while in Vietnam on his left shoulder, but as a combat vet of the 7th Infantry Division during the Korean War, also wore the shoulder patch of that division on his right sleeve.

Anyway, some food for thought. Other than just designating formations currently served in, there is precedent of varying degrees of legitimacy over the years for the use of formation patches as a kind of combat recognition device as well.
__________________
canadiansoldiers.com
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 19-03-15, 01:34 PM
Bill A's Avatar
Bill A Bill A is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,529
Default

Hello Michael, The request to add the device is indicitive of the struggle to control, or more aptly the stuggle with the lack of control exercised by authorities over those wearing the insignia. Depsite repeated attempts to strictly control the use of badges by those in a position of authority, it was an on-going battle. The Canadian Fusiliers added the device for reasons un-determined at this point in time, and the device was not authorized by anyone above the level of the Officer Commanding the Canadian Fusiliers. There is some conjecture that the device has something to do with Greenlight Force, the name of the formation under which some of the Canadians were tasked. The Rocky Mountain Rangers did not know that the additional device was unauthorized which explains their request.
Your memory is correct regarding the First World War battle patches. At the end of the war the demobilizing Canadian Corps members who served with the militia were permitted to wear their battle patches into the mid-late 1920's when they were required to remove the same.
The same did not extend to the wearing of formation patches during the Second World War. There were continuing admonishments from the Senior Combatant Officer (assigned responsibility for approval of insignia and wearing of the same overseas), CMHQ (responsible for acquisition and supply of insignia overeas) and NDHQ (responsible for both approval and use of insignia in Canada during the war) that only certain insignia were approved and were only to be worn in authorized manners. In the Canadian army, the shoulder titles and formation patches were intended for identification only and were to be worn on both sleeves. Wearing of two formation signs was prohibited. It was confusing and counter-productive to the purpose of "formation signs":to which formation did the soldier belong? There are repeated CAO's, GO's, and RO's stressing the manner in which badges were to be worn. It was pointed out that only the formation patch to which the soldier was assigned was to be worn, one on each sleeve. Soldiers returned to Canada were required to remove their fomation patches unless their return was temporary (eg on leave or on course). If permanently returned to Canada they were to remove the sign and if re-assigned, adopt the sign of the new formation to which they were attached, if there was one. (This was changed at the end of the war circa early1945. Soldiers being repatriated were allowed to wear their formation insignia in Canada, but it was again rescinded and all formation signs were ordered removed by Jan 1, 1947.)
The practice of wearing the 8th Army patch (and in some cases the 21st Army Group patch) was an unauthorized practice adopted at the end of the war. With the surrender of Nazi Germany, the enforcement of insignia regulations were relaxed or ignored. It was diffiucult to figure out who was supposed to be wearing what when high points men from all different units were being processed through repatriation depots. And, even when enforcement was attempted, once the soldier was in transit it was difficult and somewhat meaningless to enforce the regs.
Of course there are exceptions. Ex-members of the FSSF were granted permission to wear both their FSSF patch and formation and regimental titles of their subsequent posting. Some did so, while others were prohibited doing so by their new OC's.
In Korea, the practice of only wearing one formation sign on both sleeves was changed. The Canadian brigade wore the 25 Brigade sign on one sleeve and the Commonwealth Division sign on the other. That practice continued with UN deployments where the 25 Brigade sign (now used as a Canadian nationality sign) was worn on one arm with the UN sign on the other. Recent practice appears to follow this precedent, with brigade patches on one sleeve and division patches on the other.
__________________
Res ipsa loquitur
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 21-03-15, 02:45 PM
Michael Dorosh Michael Dorosh is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 224
Default

Interesting discussion. The subject of "combat recognition" is an active one in Canada, as many militaries have awarded visible marks for coming under fire - the various assault badges of the Wehrmacht being the most memorable, along with the Combat Infantry Badge and Combat Action Badge of the U.S. military, along with the aforementioned use of the SSI. Canada, of course, has maintained a policy of giving campaign medals and (some feel, grudgingly) recognizing wounds but not actually recognizing service under fire with a tangible, visible uniform distinction. I'm not advocating for or against, incidentally, as it would not apply to me. Just find it interesting.

The 1SSF badge is mentioned above - I am guessing it has some kind of totem status among special forces operators as it appears on combat uniforms in a lot of photos, most recently after the death of a serviceman in Iraq, by those carrying his mortal remains (if I am seeing the photo correctly.)

__________________
canadiansoldiers.com
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 21-03-15, 03:27 PM
Bill A's Avatar
Bill A Bill A is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,529
Default

A bit of a puzzle the use of the FSSF patch. It has apparently been adopted by CSOR as a regimental badge. That in itself poses a big question. The CSOR is a Canadian regiment which wears a badge that represented a dual nationality formation? It has the USA / CANADA which in some circumstances could be confusing as too exactly who CSOR is.
__________________
Res ipsa loquitur
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 21-03-15, 03:34 PM
Michael Dorosh Michael Dorosh is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill A View Post
A bit of a puzzle the use of the FSSF patch. It has apparently been adopted by CSOR as a regimental badge. That in itself poses a big question. The CSOR is a Canadian regiment which wears a badge that represented a dual nationality formation? It has the USA / CANADA which in some circumstances could be confusing as too exactly who CSOR is.
I've seen other photos of Canadians in Afghanistan wearing it, and always presumed it was unofficial - a good luck charm or just something they happened to like based on the reputation of the 1SSF. I wonder if, as with motorcycle gangs and their jackets, it isn't something 'outsiders' aren't supposed to enquire too deeply about. I wonder if the CSOR fellows were all that pleased to have their images on the CBC news website - a number of fellows from the reserves here have tried out for CSOR, JTF, etc., and have been (understandably) skittish about their online presence to the point of scrubbing the internet of their names and faces.
__________________
canadiansoldiers.com
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 21-03-15, 03:35 PM
Michael Dorosh Michael Dorosh is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill A View Post
It has the USA / CANADA which in some circumstances could be confusing as to exactly who CSOR is.
And of course, with a unit like CSOR, that's probably not a bad thing, Bill.

Colonel Frederick originally chose the name and unit designations to purposefully confuse people as to the size and intent of the organization. "Special Service Force" did nothing to betray their actual numbers or purpose.
__________________
canadiansoldiers.com
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 21-03-15, 06:33 PM
ddaydodger ddaydodger is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Calgary Alberta
Posts: 443
Default

From the DND website:

"The unit proudly traces its roots to the First Special Service Force (FSSF), the fabled Canadian-American Special Forces unit that was stood-up in 1942 and earned the “Black Devils” moniker for daring night raids on Nazi forces at the Anzio beachhead. CSOR proudly carries the Black Devils’ battle honours, and the Devils’ spirit lives on at CSOR."

Lots of Canadian units wear obsolete patches as part of their uniform (unofficially of course). I have seen the red and white PPCLI patch on Arid combats in Afghanistan, highland tartan attached to helmets, etc.

The rule of thumb is: the further from Ottawa and NDHQ, the more stuff you can get away with.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 21-03-15, 06:58 PM
Bill A's Avatar
Bill A Bill A is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,529
Default

Hi Bruce, My understanding is that this is the CSOR patch, not a commemorative or obsolete patch. There are images from Afghanistan with the CSOR personnel wearing the same.
Yes, the rule of inverse approval is certainly a factor with a lot of insignia.
__________________
Res ipsa loquitur
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 21-03-15, 08:15 PM
Michael Dorosh Michael Dorosh is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill A View Post
Hi Bruce, My understanding is that this is the CSOR patch, not a commemorative or obsolete patch.
That *is* odd, if true. Despite my flippant remark above, I agree with you that it seems out of character for DND to approve a confusing patch with a foreign nationality identifier on it...
__________________
canadiansoldiers.com
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 23-03-15, 03:22 PM
ddaydodger ddaydodger is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Calgary Alberta
Posts: 443
Default

My first thought is that it is not an approved patch, strictly unofficial, and not approved by DND. DND has no approved unit patches for wear on the sleeve of camouflage uniforms. I’m sure there are some who will say that the CO approved it, but that doesn’t make it “officially” approved. I’ve seen lots of examples of unit patches being worn on operations, some with only the section commander or platoon commanders authorization. I’ve even seen mini blue and white PQ flags worn in lieu of the Canadian flag.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

mhs link

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:31 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.