Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

34 posts ยท Mar 22 2002 to Mar 26 2002

From: Scott Case <tgunner@h...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 12:29:53

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

LOL! Now that is what you get when the Federal Government lays down a standard
and the Armed Forces throw in a good dose of tradition.

The O and E structure is uniform through out the US military, with O standing
for Officer and E standing for Enlisted. You can also throw in a set of WO for
warrent officer, a rank no one really seems to understand other than they out
rank enlisted types, and in turn are out ranked by 'real' officers. Guess it
gives them most of the authority of an officer

without the pay. You gotta love congress!:P

Any way, the branches of the US armed forces take that rank structure and
hang their own hats on it: for example, an e-3 in the Army is a Private
First Class, while the same e-3 in the Marine Corps is called a lance
corporal... and you got me what the Navy and the Air Corps (snickers) call
that rank (sorry for that little interservice jab up there;).

To confuse that even more the Amry use to have a parallel rank called
Specalist, which started at E-4 and went up to something like E-7! These

guys were usually 'not' combat troops... guess the Army wanted to keep the
'real' titles in the Infantry. That changed in the 80's with the exception
of the E-4 rank... which can either be a specalist, a guy who has the
grade and pay, but hasn't gone to PLDC or the Primary Leadership Development
Course, and so CAN'T be promoted to Sergeant. Not going to PLDC, in peace
time, and being an E-4 means that you are well on your way to becoming a
PFC (private f&*(%^$ civilan) once again;)

If all of this mess makes you want to go running around while pulliing your
hair and screaming, don't feel too alone;)

HOPS VINCET! ATWTMATMUTATB

From: Ryan Gill <rmgill@m...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 09:20:34 -0500

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> At 12:29 PM -0500 3/22/02, Scott Case wrote:

The advantage of this system is that sometimes people identify
themselves as being an E-X or O-X. That allows you to understand
their general level (4th level soldier, vs 4th level soldier officer to use
gaming terms) in the grand scheme. It also helps folks in different services
understand who out ranks who.

For example a Captain in the army is out ranked by a captain in the Navy by
several degrees. iirc, an Army captain is something like the following:
navy    army/airforce/marines
ensign 2nd lt LT JG 1st lt LT Captain Lt Cdr Major Cdr Lt Col Capt Col

Throw British ranks in and it gets really complex.

Some ranks in the army are lance corporal, others are Fusilier, others are
Trooper, and still others are private or corporal....all around the same rank
area. Much is due to the long tradition and history.

From: DAWGFACE47@w...

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 08:41:49 -0600 (CST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

specialist 4 e-4, eh?

orginally specialist pay grades and ranks were replacements for the WW II and
KOREAN WAR technician ranks in the US ARMY.

well i do remember that the majority of combat soldiers (grunts) were spec 4s
in the US ARMY in the 1960s and 1970s.

this also held true for air cav, armored cav, armor, artillery,
engineers,  combat medics,  and military police-the troops most likely
to FIGHT the enemy.

LOL-and the vast majority of non combat   enlisted  personnel were
"specialist "ranks as a way of promotion even with a shortage of NCO slots to
be promoted too.

corporal was strictly an artilery rank, or reserved for bozos who used
to be   NCO s  E-5 or higher who got  busted as low as he/she could go
while still retaining NCO status.

PFC E3 almost became a lance corporal in the late 1960s, early 1970s, when it
grew a rocker under the chevron, because, PVT E2 swapped a slick sleeve for a
chevron during the later stages of the RVN WAR.

and this happened because we had two (2) slick sleeve private ranks;
PVT E-1  and PVT E-2,  one a "trainee" and the other a "trained" pay
grade.

PRIVATE E-2 was a promotion board  rank, and PRIVATE E-1 was an
automatic rank upon being sworn into the ARMY.
see PFC E-3 below  for explanation of a promotion board.

PRIVATE FIRST CLASS  E-3 was a promotion board rank-just like all E-4
and upward E pay grades. this meant that a candiadte for  E-3 had to
appear in person before a selection board of 1 officer and 6 NCOs where the
service record was examined, the individual examined, and questioned as to
expertise in the MOS.

PVT E-1s  were routinely sent to the RVN until an under age VOLUNTEER
PVT  E-1 was decorated for COMBAT heroism and the politicians went
apeshit over an "untrained boy" being sent into combat (he was a 17 year old
parental approval enlistee) and suddenly EVERYONE going to the
RVN became a   PVT E-2 "trained soldier"  before leaving the  country!

and later still everyone going to the RVN became a PFC E-3 "experienced
trained soldier" before going to the RVN.

i went before  promotion boards for  E-2, E-3, and E-4 promotions. LOL
but my NCO ranks came in combat!

i well remember going before the PFC E-3 board in the States, and being
beat out by another PVT E-2 ( a very decorated 173rd AIRBORNE  RVN vet
who had been in the ARMY for 3 YEARS).

LOL, he earned it the hard way!

 slick sleeve airman basic or airman 3rd class  E-1 , airman 2nd class
E-2 band airman 1st class E-3  in the late 60s onwards, with SGT E-4
being the start of the USAF NCO ranks.

(again a POLITICAL MOVE to try and silence the LOUD complaints from the
USAF enlisted personnel who were airman 1st class E-4s with many years
service and NO NCO slots available for promotion upwards so overnight, ll of
those bitching and moaning A1C E4s became bitching and moaning
SGT E-4s performing the duties of non NCOs!)

USN rates (note rates, not ranks!) are stil a semi-mystery to me.
SEAMAN 3rd, SEAMAN 2nd, SEAMAN 1st CLASS were the basic E-1 thru E-3
unrated pay grades. (diagonal slashes on the sleeve above the elbow).

PETTY OFFICER pay grades begin at PO 3rd  CLASS E-4, followed by PO 2nd
CLASS E-5, and PO 1st CLASS E-6.
(insignia of rank is upside down chevrons similiar to those seen in UK NCO
ranks LCPL, CPL, and SGT)

then we jump to CHIEF PETTY OFFICER pay grades. THESE ARE ENLISTED
PERSONNEL, NOT WARRANT OFFICERS.  pay grades run from  E-7 throught E-9.

NOW, i am told the  top NCO in branch of our armed forces is an E-10,
and that an O-10 rank  exists in the officer corps.
i do not know if this is true or not.

From: Roger Books <books@m...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 10:14:27 -0500 (EST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

On 22-Mar-02 at 09:42, DAWGFACE47@webtv.net (DAWGFACE47@webtv.net)
wrote:
> NOW, i am told the top NCO in branch of our armed forces is an E-10,

The E7-E9 ranks go Chief, Senior Chief, Master Chief.  The top enlisted
in the US Navy is "Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy", he/she/it
is still an E9.

From: John Leary <john_t_leary@y...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 07:41:21 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> --- Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com> wrote:

> Throw British ranks in and it gets really complex.

Fusilier and Trooper are titles, fusilier is a enlisted soldier in a Fusilier
Reg., and Trooper is the title for a cavelry soldier, both would hold the rank
of Private.

Bye for now,

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 08:16:53 -0800

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> Ryan Gill wrote:

> For example a Captain in the army is out ranked by a captain in the

Correct. Except that any USN officer who is the CO of a ship is always called
Captain while onboard his own ship, regardless of rank, and a naval officer of
the rank of Captain is never called captain while onboard another officer's
ship (IIRC the honorific for such an officer is Commodore, but I could be
wrong).

3B^2

From: Ryan Gill <rmgill@m...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 11:29:02 -0500

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> At 8:16 AM -0800 3/22/02, Brian Bilderback wrote:

And I've read more than once that an Army/Marine/Navy Captain on a
Navy ship is given the honorific rank of Major as, again, there is only one
captain on any given vessel.

Here's a question. Are CAG's Captain ranks or typically Cmdr or Lt-Cmdr
ranks?

From: Roger Books <books@m...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 11:59:31 -0500 (EST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> On 22-Mar-02 at 11:17, Brian Bilderback (bbilderback@hotmail.com) wrote:

> Correct. Except that any USN officer who is the CO of a ship is

I wonder what the conversion is since the Navy did away with the rank of
Commodore. FYI the name was changed to "Rear Admiral, Lower Half." It is
somehow...appropriate.

From: Joe Ross <ft4breedn@h...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 17:06:18 +0000

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

Actualy, in a time of war, rear-admirals are divided into lower and
upper halves, during peace time, they are both referred to as commodore, the
"rank" has not been done away with, per se, but it is like calling a
leuitenant that skippers a boat a captain... kinda but not really..

> From: Roger Books <books@jumpspace.net>
wrote:
> > Correct. Except that any USN officer who is the CO of a ship is

> naval

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 09:09:29 -0800

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> Roger Books wrote:

> I wonder what the conversion is since the Navy did away with the

Couldn't tell ya, but I'll find out.

FYI the name was changed to "Rear Admiral, Lower
> Half." It is somehow...appropriate.

No comment. ;-)

3B^2

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 09:09:31 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> --- David Brewer <davidbrewer@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> There's some misalignment between US and UK junior

The Official NATO-approved rank equivelancy runs thus:

US Rank   UK Rank
Private   Private
PFC Lance Corporal Corporal Corporal Sergeant Sergeant SSG Sergeant
SFC/MSG   Color Sergeant
1SG/SGM   WO
CSM/SMA   Whatever you call it with the lions holding
up the coat of arms and a crown on top.

I've got pictures but not titles for the UK stuff. It's from the KFOR Handbook
and the point is really to show who you salute and who you don't. And even
then
no one cared--I kind of startled an RRF major when I
actually knew to salute him once.

From: Roger Books <books@m...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 12:18:12 -0500 (EST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> On 22-Mar-02 at 12:07, Joe Ross (ft4breedn@hotmail.com) wrote:

> "rank" has not been done away with, per se, but it is like calling a

Just before I got out 10 years ago a directive came down that said we were no
longer to use the word Commodore, we were to use the
term RA-LH.  It even had justification, Commodore was being confused
with Commander by the civilians.

From: Joe Ross <ft4breedn@h...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 17:20:57 +0000

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

Same thing with our ranks structure... frinstance:

I know that a leuitenant in the usn is a captain in the marines, am LT in the
corp is an ltjg in hte navy... etc.

> From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com>

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 09:21:55 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> --- Scott Case <tgunner@hotmail.com> wrote:

> of the E-4 rank... which can either be a specalist,

That's not true.  I've been an E-4 for forever--came
in the Regular Army that way. Specialist the whole time.

Specialist: Overpaid senior private. It's almost automatic at 26 months of
service, but can be given at 18 months (with waiver). Frequently acts as an
NCO in
an E-5 slot, but without the NCO legal authority.

There are 3 hoops you have to go through to make E5 Sergeant.

Promotion Board: Stand up in Class As and answer a bunch of questions. Pretty
stupid, but there's about a 75% pass rate and you can retake it

PLDC: Primary Leadership Development Course.

Points: Arcane system, not given to discussing in brevity.

Now, you have to have all 3 to permenantly be promoted to sergeant. If you
have just the Board, or the board and PLDC, you are a Specialist (Promotable).
If you have the Board and the points, you can be "Frocked" to
E-5 which means you get the promotion but it's
contingent on passing PLDC. If you flunk PLDC, then you not only get busted to
SPC, you get to pay back the difference between SPC and SGT pay for the time
you were recieving SGT pay. You can actually go to PLDC before going to the
board, but that's pretty rare since most units don't have enough slots to get
all their promotable specialists to PLDC much less other ones.

Corporal: Specialists in any leadership positions can be laterally promoted to
Corporal, which means basically all the responsibilities and the authority of
a Sergeant, without the pay and with the hindrance of being junior to a real
sergeant. Frequently used for people who are promotable and been to PLDC who
haven't made points yet.

There's also DA corporals, but I've never met one and have no idea why DA
would make anyone a corporal.

Oh, and an enlisted man who medically retires (we had a guy come down with
cancer in Germany, for instance) is automatically promoted to Corporal because
you cannot retire as a junior enlisted man. Have to be an NCO or officer.

From: Joe Ross <ft4breedn@h...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 17:23:57 +0000

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

Well, when I received an LOC from a lower-half a few years ago, he
referred to himself as "the commodore" (of the wing; comasubfltlant IIRC)

> From: Roger Books <books@jumpspace.net>

From: Ryan Gill <rmgill@m...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 12:27:42 -0500

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> At 11:59 AM -0500 3/22/02, Roger Books wrote:

Every time I hear that, I think its some kind of "crossing the line" title.

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 09:33:58 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> --- DAWGFACE47@webtv.net wrote:

> NOW, i am told the top NCO in branch of our armed

There was some discussion last year about an E-10
paygrade for CSMs at the Army and higher levels (Fleet for Navy??) and for the
senior EMs in all the services. It died out and they all get E9 pay.

O-10 (5 stars--General of the Army) is a wartime only
rank--General Bradley was the last one in service.

From: Scott Case <tgunner@h...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 18:29:42

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> That's not true. I've been an E-4 for forever--came

Times must be changing then. When I was in (1989-93) there was a silent
clock ticking when you hit E-4... either go to PLDC or start packing
your bags. How long have you been in and are you combat arms?

HOPS VINCET! ATWTMATMUTATB

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 10:39:20 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> --- Scott Case <tgunner@hotmail.com> wrote:

3 years (almost to the day) and yes.

From: Roger Books <books@m...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:39:01 -0500 (EST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> On 22-Mar-02 at 12:22, John Atkinson (johnmatkinson@yahoo.com) wrote:

Wow, frocked enlisted get paid at their frocked rate in
the Army?  In the Navy you get paid as your pre-frocked
rate until you are officially promoted. The scary thing is if you get busted
while frocked first they remove the frocked rank then they bust you.

From: DAWGFACE47@w...

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 15:41:09 -0600 (CST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

you know this is pretty stupid, even for NATO.

a UK lance corporal gneral performs the task levels /responsibiities to
a US sergeant E-5.

a UK corporal usually holds down the same TOE slots of a US staff sergeant.

UK sergeant holds a position of responsibility equal to a US sergeant first
class.

staff sergeant and color sergeant in the UK perform at the same levels as US
master sergeants.

UK company sergeant majors are WARRANT OFFICERS., NOT SENIOR NCOS like a US
first sergeant.

a UK warrant officer, not holding down a sergeant major slot at company or
battalion level, as i recall is referred to by his job title, or MISTER.

and a UK regimental sergeant major is a CHIEF WARRANT OFFICER, NOT A SENIOR
NCO like a US sergeant major.

calling a UK sergeant major of either type "sergeant" or "sarge" or referring
to them as NCOs, instead of their job title," SAR'T MAJOR" or "MISTER" would
be about as popular as going to the US MARINE CORP BALL dressed as a hippie!

THERE IS REALLY NO US EQUIVALENT OF A UK SERGEANT MAJOR!

THIS GOD LIKE INDIVIDUAL, WITH SMART TURN OUT, PACE STICK, LEATHER LUNGS, AND
BULL DOG OR FIGHTING COCK PERSONA IS TRULY UNIQUE! TO THE UK MILITARY
TRADITION!

this is true of all Commonwealth nation armies and marine corps.

too this day, i can still hear and see in my mind those sarn't majors in
Germany on the grinder!

when their wrath was aroused they would seem to "SWELL", GO WHITE THEN RED
FACED, jab that pace stick toward the offender, and bellow out in a GOD like
voice:

"THAT MAN!"

"YOU 'ORRIBLE LITTLE MAN!"

LOL, followed by language that would make a USMC drill instructor blush!

or even worse, stand right in front of the offender and address him in a near
whisper that made balls shrink and blood curdle....

i well remember, when i as a young private, walked up to this middle aged
soldier standing by the grinder watching TOMMY go thrugh his paces, and saying
something like;

"HEY, SARGE! HOWZIT GOIN'? YOU GUYS SURE LOOK SHARP!"

the reply left me in a near catatonic state, wondering who my parents really
were, when i rode my bike to their wedding, why i was born, CONVINCED i knew
zilch about anything, why was even on the same planet as this man, and
wondering just who had told me i was really a soldier!

then i got told everything i did not want to know about KING'S OWN LOYAL ROYAL
WELSH IRISH SCOTS AND ENGLISH TAP DANCING AND SINGING INFANTRY!

AND A LECTURE ON FOREIGN MILITARY RANKS!

all the while standing at attention, being tapped and poked by that pace
stick, examined under an electron microscope, name taken and etc, before being
dismissed!

when he was not in whisper mode, his mouth was open so wide i thought i could
see the dangly thing at the back of his throat.

JEEZ-ZUSS!

when that was over i felt like i had been worked over by the KGB! made a
lasting impression to.

DAWGIE, who later got to meet his own sergeant major and be destroyed verbally
all over again....

> --- David Brewer <davidbrewer@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> There's some misalignment between US and UK junior

The Official NATO-approved rank equivelancy runs thus:

US Rank   UK Rank
Private   Private
PFC Lance Corporal Corporal Corporal Sergeant Sergeant SSG Sergeant
SFC/MSG   Color Sergeant
1SG/SGM   WO
CSM/SMA   Whatever you call it with the lions holding
up the coat of arms and a crown on top.

I've got pictures but not titles for the UK stuff. It's from the KFOR Handbook
and the point is really to show who you salute and who you don't. And even
then
no one cared--I kind of startled an RRF major when I
actually knew to salute him once.

John

From: db-ft@w... (David Brewer)

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:35:42 -0800

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> Ryan Gill wrote:

It isn't that complex.

Most regiments and corps have a descriptive term meaning "private", so that in
a regiment of fusiliers, the private soldiers are called... Fusiliers. Gunners
are Artillery privates, Signalmen from the Royal Corps of Signals, Engineers
are Royal Engineers, Troopers are cavalry, Guardsmen from Guards regiments.

There are much fewer oddities above private. One of the cavalry
regiments calls "sergeants" Corporals-of-Horse and has
Corporal-Majors. The Royal Artillery calls "corporals"
Bombardiers. Sergeant might be spelled with a J. I'd expect to find a few
more.

There's some misalignment between US and UK junior NCOs, so that a US Army
sergeant is, I think, a UK corporal.

From: Derek Fulton <derekfulton@b...>

Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 09:36:37 +1100

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> At 09:09 22/03/02 -0800, John wrote:

Since the Australian Army has a similar system, I'll have a punt

> 1SG/SGM WO

Warrant Officer Class 2, normally holds the Company Sergeant Major position.

> CSM/SMA Whatever you call it with the lions holding

Warrant Officer Class 1, normally the Regimental Sergeant Major. Top soldier
in the unit or formation.

Cheers

From: Derek Fulton <derekfulton@b...>

Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 09:55:33 +1100

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> At 09:09 22/03/02 -0800, you wrote:

Further to what I posted Colour Sergeants are rare, seeing units don't go into
battle carrying their regimental colours anymore:) So How it fits in to the
'normal' scheme of things is problematic.

Warrant Officers are a different breed than both non-commissioned and
commissioned. They hold a warrant as opposed to a commission, small
distinction BUT IMPORTANT:)

Cheers

From: John Leary <john_t_leary@y...>

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 19:49:07 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> --- Roger Books <books@jumpspace.net> wrote:
..
> I wonder what the conversion is since the Navy did

Commodore is not a rank in the U.S.N.. A Commodore is the senior captain in a
group of captains of equal rank.

Bye for now,

From: Roger Books <books@m...>

Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 21:40:54 -0500 (EST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> On 22-Mar-02 at 22:49, John Leary (john_t_leary@yahoo.com) wrote:

> Commodore is not a rank in the U.S.N.. A Commodore

The US had Commodore as a rank from 1862-1899, 1943-1950,
and 1983-1986.

http://www.history.navy.mil/trivia/triv4-5k.htm

From: Joe Ross <ft4breedn@h...>

Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 03:39:50 +0000

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

You call him Captain. Not THE captain, but normally Captain so-and-so.
Frinstance... "The Captian is doing the zone inspection this week, and
Captain Jack will be doing a walk-though as well."

When your XO is a Captian as well, when he is not called XO, it is just fine
to call him Captian, but you would use his surname to keep the confusion

down.

> Roger Books (I still wonder what they call a Captain who is not

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 12:47:50 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> --- Derek Fulton <derekfulton@bigpond.com> wrote:

I was guessing as to the rank title: 3 stripes and a little crown over it.

From: Derek Fulton <derekfulton@b...>

Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 12:01:43 +1100

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> At 12:47 24/03/02 -0800, John wrote:

> --- Derek Fulton <derekfulton@bigpond.com> wrote:

Ah, Then that might be a "Staff Sergeant" also a rare and endangered species
these days as well, only ever met one of them a retired regular solider in the
reserves. I gathered that his rank was a hold over from his regular days, sort
of a "living fossil" as it were:)

Cheers

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 07:29:37 -0800

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

Joe Ross

> You call him Captain. Not THE captain, but normally Captain so-and-so.

> fine

Hmm. My father as well as other friends in the Navy led me to believe this
was not so.   Maybe things have changed?

3B^2

From: Robert Makowsky <rmakowsky@y...>

Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 06:59:43 -0400

Subject: RE: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

Joe is correct, they do not modify ranks anymore, they use The Captain for
the one that runs the ship, if there is an Army Captain on board (O-3)
they would call him Capt Smith (Yes I know that is not the way you abbreviate
Army Captains but that is the way the Navy/Coast Guard abbreviate their
Captain so they pronounce it that way <G>).

Magic USCG SAR

> -----Original Message-----

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 06:36:16 -0800

Subject: RE: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> From: "Bob Makowsky" <rmakowsky@yahoo.com>
they
> would call him Capt Smith (Yes I know that is not the way you

So much for tradition. Oh, well, I suppose nothing ever stays the same.

3B^2

From: Roger Burton West <roger@f...>

Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 14:43:25 +0000

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 06:36:16AM -0800, Brian Bilderback wrote:

And ships aren't even "she" any more on Lloyd's List:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=518&u=/ap/20020320/ap_on
_re_eu/she_sailed_it_sailed_1

(should be all on one line)

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 06:50:45 -0800

Subject: Re: Force sizes-Confusing US ranks

> Roger Burton West wrote:

Yes, and that's sad too. Though I liked this article on the issue better:

http://www.satirewire.com/briefs/ships.shtml

3B^2