I found this in a site.
http://www.geocities.com/commentariat/defence_off_rank.htm
In all, the author says that the British rank insignia system has flaws and should be corrected.
I thought the same thing. The (apparently anonymous?) fellow has some interesting ideas, but they seem like solutions in search of a problem.Medic_in_Uniform wrote:I've looked at these pages before and I'm afraid I find several of the arguments put forward to be deeply flawed. The author would appear to have some fundamental misconceptions about the way in which these systems evolve and are currently applied by different nations.
He also appears to be attempting to apply a level of rigid logic to the "numerical equivalence" of different individual markings within the overall scheme of rank insignia which is not necessarily appropriate.
I'd agree, it does seem a bit superfluous!J.T. Broderick wrote:One thing I wondered about, though: He shows RN full dress shoulder boards for all commissioned ranks. Are these official? It was my understanding that the cermonial day coat was authorized flag officers only, with exceptions apparently having been made for the Prince of Wales and Duke of York. Are these royal instances enough to prompt regualtions for gold shoulder boards for all officer grades?
At any rate, those insignia would be so rare (and always backed up by sleeve lace) that I can't really see making a fuss about them.
best regards,
Justin
I see, thank you. I thought maybe there was just a single catch-all shoulder board design for captain and below. I can't find any really good pictures online that show the PoW or DoY's shoulder boards as commanders, but in some images from the Charles-Diana wedding it looks as if there is just a crown on the shoulder board, no anchor, plus the royal cypher for a personal ADC to the queen. But it's hard to tell.Medic_in_Uniform wrote:As far as I know, the day coat is indeed limited to Flag Officers, but with the stipulated exception of members of the Royal Family - hence it's use by the Prince of Wales and the Duke of York when not Flag Officers. I guess the specifications for the full-dress, gold-faced, shoulder-board rank insignia must still exist somewhere but my understanding is that they are simply derived from the pattern of insignia worn on the old bullion-fringed dress epaulettes, as shown on your site.
Yes, that's true. Executive branch epaulettes were extended to all officers in late 1918, just after the war ended, and both grades of captain combined with one epaulette star in 1924.A certain amount of updating would obviously need to apply though: the insignia of the old Executive Branch ranks would presumably now be worn by all officers. Equally, the recently updated numbers of stars for Admirals also applies and the insignia for Captains and Commodores are (if I remember correctly...!) streamlined to one and two stars respectively.
I agree, that was a change that really didn't seem necessary. I doubt there were major issues of confusion, but probably something more along the lines of a few very senior officers feeling an extra star would befit their status!Personally, I think it's a shame the Royal Navy bowed to modern "convention" and changed their numbers of stars to match those of their US counterparts; the eight-point stars of RN admirals have been around a LOT longer than the five-point stars of USN admirals!
And that would be the main discrepance with the epaulettes, as it was the bullion fringe (or lack) that distinguished sub-lieutenant from lieutenant. The system shown on the website in question makes sense, that way, but I didn't know if it was official or just his extrapolation.The Royal Navy doesn't have an "Ensign" rank (only Acting Sub-Lieutenant) so that is an irrelevance which only leaves the rank of Sub-Lieutenant itself. I honestly can't remember if it should be a single star or a blank shoulder-board but, as we're almost certainly never going to see it used, I really don't think it matters!
It is interesting that Prince Andrew didn't wear that uniform until he had left active duty, perhaps he didn't want to set himself apart from fellow serving officers? AFAIK the first major event where Prince Charles wore the day tailcoat was Lord Mountbatten's funeral in 1979, also after leaving active duty.Actually, to expand upon this a little further, the Duke of York, as a Lieutenant, wore standard No.1 Dress for his marriage in 1986 and not the day coat although as a Commander in 2002 he did wear the day coat for the funeral of his grandmother. The Prince of Wales, as a Commander, wore the day coat for his marriage in 1981.All of which stirs vague memories that I may have read somewhere that the absolute restriction in its use may be officers of the rank of Commander and above (in other words, only if you're entitled to oak leaves!).
Well, I don't care about that, in fact I'll derail the thread further with some more questions: Is the day coat uniform optional or required for flag officers? Is it worn by female flag officers?Anyway, all of this is entirely tangential to the original point of this thread, so I'll stop now!
Yes, I'm sure you're right about the uniform being limited to commander and up. What I was thinking was that there were occasions after Prince Andrew made commander on active duty that he did not wear the tailcoat, while his father and brother did. I could be wrong, though.A couple of thoughts here - the Prince of Wales was already a commander at the time of Lord Mountbatten's funeral, so that doesn't really help us. By the same token, both the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Edinburgh were wearing the day coats at the Duke of York's wedding.