Army Branches to revive "Royal" designations

[shootemup]

Recieved this past weekend:

Colleagues,
1. On May 31, the Commander Canadian Army sent a letter, to the CDS' attention, which seeks to inform and receive the CDS' support of our way-ahead on a number of changes related to the restoration of Royal prefixes. This email aims to inform you of those elements.

2. As you have all been consulted, it is believed that the six Army level two (L2) organizations, namely the four Land Force Areas (LFAs), the Land Forces Doctrine and Training System (LFDTS) and the 1st Canadian Division Headquarters (1 Cdn Div HQ), would be better served by aligning their name after the Army's current name vice that of Land Forces. As such, and in line with historical lineage, the Army Commander is seeking the support in principle from the CDS to re-designate the LFAs using the divisional structure, and to change the name of LFDTS to Canadian Army Doctrine and Training Centre. 1 Cdn Div HQ, as well, would be renamed to be changed to 1 Cdn Div. Dependencies of those organizations, of course, would also follow suit, i.e. Area Training Centres would become Divisional Training Centres. If supported, a change would also be brought to the Canadian Land Forces Command and Staff College, in order to be renamed Canadian Army Command and Staff College.

3. The second element highlighted was the former arms units and corps' respective interest in restoring their Royal prefixes. Having received the appropriate feedback from a variety of stakeholders, the following has been proposed to the CDS:
a. The Communications and ElectronicsBranch recommends the reinstatement of the 'Royal Canadian Corps of Signals' . The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals would remain a component of the Communications and Electronic Branch along with the associated members of the RCAF;
b. The Electrical and MechanicalEngineering Branch recommends the reinstatement of the 'Royal Canadian Electrical and Mechanical Engineers ';
c. The Military Engineer Branchrecommends the reinstatement of the 'Royal Canadian Engineers' ;
d. The Military Police Branch, whichoriginated from the Canadian Provost Corps, and recommends to be known as the CF Military Police Branch, with a Canadian Army Military Police Group;
e. The Logistics Branch, whichoriginated from the Royal Canadian Ordinance Corps, the Royal Canadian Army Service Corps, the Royal Canadian Postal Corps and the Canadian Army Pay Corps, recommends not changing their current name;
f. The Medical Services Branch and theDental Branch, which originated from the Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps and the Royal Canadian Dental Corps, have sought independently and received CDS's approval to seek replacement of their current names to Royal Canadian Medical Service' and 'Royal Canadian DentalCorps';
g. The Chaplain Branch, whichoriginated from the Royal Canadian Army Chaplain Corps recommends not changing their current name;
h. The Infantry Branch, whichoriginated from the Royal Canadian Infantry Corps, recommends not changing their current name, as it felt that Royal designations are best fit with individual infantry units or regiments. As a Corps, however, they would be supportive of any infantry unit that wishes to seek a Royal designation;
i. The Armour Branch recommends theofficial reinstatement of The Royal Canadian Armoured Corps; and
j. The Artillery Branch was accordedthe unique distinction of also being designated as a regiment, the Royal Regiment of Canadian Artillery - no change, therefore, is sought or required.

5. The third aspect which is discussed in the letter relates to the titles that refer to key Canadian Army HQ staff positions.

6. The fourth and final category ofpotential changes includes the following elements of Army's heritage:
a. The Land Forces Command March, "Celer Paratus Callidus " , be changed to adopt the march " The Great Little Army " , composed by Kenneth J. Alford in 1916;
b. The Army would like to explore thepossibility of officially using the designations of various rank designators (gunner, trooper, sapper ... ), which are all of common usages, but not official; and
c. The Army will seek DHH staffing toofficially change the Land Force Command Badge to the well recognized design of three separate maple leafs, which was the 1940-Army badge (ie pre-1968).

7. Once CDS's support is received, Army staff will continue their discussions with the appropriate offices tomaterialize these changes in the near future. We will keep you appraised.

Michael R. Dabros
Brigadier-General / Brigadier-général
Chief of Staff Land Operations / Chef d'état-major opérations terrestre National Defence | Défense nationale
Ottawa, Canada K1A 0K2

[Bill A]

After the "Royal" prefix was reinstated last summer, it was only a matter of time before the corps and branches moved to have their historic designations again. Interesting that some branches will not revive the old designation, and the logic can be seen in that.
Another important policy change is in the infantry branch section:
h. The Infantry Branch, which originated from the Royal Canadian Infantry Corps, recommends not changing their current name, as it felt that Royal designations are best fit with individual infantry units or regiments. As a Corps, however, they would be supportive of any infantry unit that wishes to seek a Royal designation;
The previous policy of not granting any further "Royal" honours has been relegated to the past.

[shootemup]

Bring back the pips and crowns next! The airforce should have their "barcode" rank and unique rank names back too! Undo everything Trudeau and Hellyer did!

[Phillip Herring]

Originally Posted by shootemup

Bring back the pips and crowns next! The airforce should have their "barcode" rank and unique rank names back too! Undo everything Trudeau and Hellyer did!

Actually it was Pearson and Hellyer.
Integration and Unification were a done deal by the time Trudeau became PM in 1968.

Phil

[Voltigeur]

Paul Hellyer's views on "his" reasons for unification.
Jo
http://www.canadashistory.ca/getdoc/...8/default.aspx

[Bill A]

Rather than stars and crowns, something uniquely Canadian could be re-introduced. A stylized maple leaf?

[servicepub]

Originally Posted by shootemup

Bring back the pips and crowns next! The airforce should have their "barcode" rank and unique rank names back too! Undo everything Trudeau and Hellyer did!

Years ago (over 30!) I submitted a proposal to return to a 'pips and crown' rank system. I argued that the traditioonal 'pips' were based on the Star of the Order of the Bath, except in Guards regiments where the pip is based on the Star of the Order of the Garter. Canada could use the same system but base the pips on the insignia of the Order of Canada - a snowflake. Received a very nice letter telling me to mind my own business.
Last year an attempt was made, from within DND, to re-introduce pips and the insignia of the Order of Military Merit was proposed. This insignia would 'rest' on an 8-pointed star shape - reminiscent of a Dragoon helmet plate. No word on what happened.
There are a surprisingly large number of countries that use the pip and crown rank system, including Jordan and Egypt. The Crown is either replaced with a national device (Eagle/Falcon in Egypt) or the indiginous crown of the ruling monarch (Jordan).
Clive

[shootemup]

Clive, perhaps if can get a large enough letter writing campaign together, we can target the same pro-military politician, and get some results. I like the idea of a "Canadianized" pip/star, but the Order of Canada snowflake? There is virtually no connection between the Order of Canada and the Canadian Forces...

[Phillip Herring]

I see nothing wrong in using the Order of Canada in lieu of stars for Canadian Army ranks. It is just as appropriate as the Star of the Order of the Bath.

Phil

[Wyn vdSchee]

There is only a very tenuous connection between the Order of Canada and the Canadian Forces, other than that they are both Canadian. The Order of Canada is very deliberately not awarded to people who have a military background unless they have accomplishments that are not military. The thinking is that the military has its own system of honours and awards, and thus do not need to be eligible for the Order as well.
Also note that general officers wear maple leaves to denote rank on the shoulder, where they used to wear "pips" or stars.

[servicepub]

The point is that the Order of Canada is the senior (Canadian) national order and is on a par with the British Orders of the Bath and Garter is is a suitable symbol to be used by a military whose allegiance is to the Government of Canada. In addition, it can be expected that many other uniformed services may follow suit - as they did with the original crowns and pips and then with the current 'universal' rank. To use the insignia of the Order of Military Merit would limit its usage to the military and police (whose Order of Police Merit share the same insignia).
I also believe that the six-pointed snowflake is a better device, over the Cross Patee, to make into a small badge - but that's a personal preference.
The maple leaves could be retained for use by General/Flag officers.

[shootemup]

Fair enough. Now to make it happen!

[Wyn vdSchee]

Why not go the whole hog and designate the successor to the RCASC, RCOC, RCPC and RCAPC as the Royal Canadian Logistics Corps. There is a precedent; the British Army has a Royal Logistics Corps, as well as a catch-all Adjutant General's Corps.

[shootemup]

I believe the Log branch (as per the above) is not in favour of the idea.