To be or not to be Royal...that is the question.

[Gino]

Nothing wrong with calling what it used to be known as, just as long as you realize and make sure people don't mistake your post for meaning the RCN is still in existence.

You may be right, but there are still a lot of people who want RCN back.  We may be unified, but the term Canadian Navy is continually used in official documents.  Once you grant the term Navy, then Royal must surely follow, for are we not still the Queen's service, are our warships not still Her Majesty's?  This would be a perfect initiative for the Navy's Centennial.  I'm not optimistic, but if enough people stand up, maybe it can happen.  Then if we can put RCN after our names, we can dispense with those !@#$  (N)s after the lieutenant and captain ranks.

 

[axeman]

what about the royal for the army and the air force then?

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

There never was a Royal Canadian Army.

Personally I think there are better things to worry about then whether or not we have a Royal in front of our elements. How about new equipment? Not to be ignorant to those that did serve in the RCAF and RCN but personally I think it would be a waste to revert back to the old titles. Most serving members in those elements were not in during Unification and the ones I have talked to over the years could care less if they were part of the "Royal" Canadian Navy or not. I am just proud to have Canada on my epualets and sewn on the shoulder of my tunic.

 

[Gino]

There never was a Royal Canadian Army.

Very true, but all regiments got to keep their Royal designations, if applicable.

Personally I think there are better things to worry about then whether or not we have a Royal in front of our elements. How about new equipment? Not to be ignorant to those that did serve in the RCAF and RCN but personally I think it would be a waste to revert back to the old titles. Most serving members in those elements were not in during Unification and the ones I have talked to over the years could care less if they were part of the "Royal" Canadian Navy or not. I am just proud to have Canada on my epualets and sewn on the shoulder of my tunic.

Easy for you to say, mate.  Is that a Royal Canadian Dragoons badge I see as your avatar?  Don't worry, there's lot's of very high priced help worrying about equipment, while almost no one gives a damn about customs and traditions.  Why would reversion, be  a waste?  It could be done as economically as possible.  We change organizations and designations frequently and no one seems all that concerned about waste.  I'm proud to wear Canada flashes as well, and that certainly wouldn't change.  Unification was a kick to the sack for the navy and we have been treated as second class citizens by the "green machine" ever since.  It's no wonder the average sailor may not be too concerned about the navy's Royal heritage when it's been watered down so much over the years.  But why is it that I still see young sailors with tattoos that say RCN?  Who wants to say that they belong to "Maritime Command"?  The response from most Canadians would be, "huh?".

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Personally I have no idea why the army regiments got to keep their Royal Designations while the RCAF and RCN lost theirs but I would have been just as proud to have been a Canadian Dragoon as I was as a Royal Canadian Dragoon. Having the Royal designation does not make you any better then anyone else. I am sure in a few years when the CSOR has been around it matters to them whether or not they had the big capital R in front or not.

As for the high priced help worrying about the equipment we all have seen what foul ups they make in equipment procurement all the time. Myself and others have to use this equipment everyday on deployments and on exercises so I think we have a right to be concerned on what we use.

Yes agreed Unification was a kick in the sack for the Navy and Air Force but whats done is done. There are also a lot of people in the CF and in Canada that would love to see our ties with the monarchy severed. Don't they have a say?

In closing I am proud to be part of the Canadian Navy that emerged from the Royal Canadian Navy.

 

[FSTO]

Personally I have no idea why the army regiments got to keep their Royal Designations while the RCAF and RCN lost theirs but I would have been just as proud to have been a Canadian Dragoon as I was as a Royal Canadian Dragoon. Having the Royal designation does not make you any better then anyone else. I am sure in a few years when the CSOR has been around it matters to them whether or not they had the big capital R in front or not.

As for the high priced help worrying about the equipment we all have seen what foul ups they make in equipment procurement all the time. Myself and others have to use this equipment everyday on deployments and on exercises so I think we have a right to be concerned on what we use.

Yes agreed Unification was a kick in the sack for the Navy and Air Force but whats done is done. There are also a lot of people in the CF and in Canada that would love to see our ties with the monarchy severed. Don't they have a say?

In closing I am proud to be part of the Canadian Navy that emerged from the Royal Canadian Navy.

We are not quite at Canadian Navy yet. It's been Canada's Navy on most of the promo stuff I've seen.

Timeline for the names of the Naval Service (Which I think is the name of the bill creating the RCN)

RN
RCN
Maritime Command
Canada's Navy (C'sN)
Canadian Navy? (CN) seagoing railway
Canadian Forces Navy? (CFN) sounds like a TV station
Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) Thats better

 

[Gino]

Personally I have no idea why the army regiments got to keep their Royal Designations while the RCAF and RCN lost theirs but I would have been just as proud to have been a Canadian Dragoon as I was as a Royal Canadian Dragoon. Having the Royal designation does not make you any better then anyone else. I am sure in a few years when the CSOR has been around it matters to them whether or not they had the big capital R in front or not.

As for the high priced help worrying about the equipment we all have seen what foul ups they make in equipment procurement all the time. Myself and others have to use this equipment everyday on deployments and on exercises so I think we have a right to be concerned on what we use.

Yes agreed Unification was a kick in the sack for the Navy and Air Force but whats done is done. There are also a lot of people in the CF and in Canada that would love to see our ties with the monarchy severed. Don't they have a say?

In closing I am proud to be part of the Canadian Navy that emerged from the Royal Canadian Navy.

Jesus wept, you're a republican.  That explains your attitude.  I won't even delve into the issue of oaths of allegiance, then.  Many complain that adherence to customs and traditions, minimal as it may be, merely detracts from our real operational focus.  Seems to me that we used to be able to give adequate focus to both.  It also sounds to me like you can attest from your equipment concerns (which I share) that we have allowed our heritage to be lost without necessarily gaining much in return.

As Milton said, "When we cannot measure the things that are important, we ascribe importance to the things we can measure".

 

[Michael OLeary]

Personally I have no idea why the army regiments got to keep their Royal Designations while the RCAF and RCN lost theirs but I would have been just as proud to have been a Canadian Dragoon as I was as a Royal Canadian Dragoon. Having the Royal designation does not make you any better then anyone else. I am sure in a few years when the CSOR has been around it matters to them whether or not they had the big capital R in front or not.

The reason is that on unification the separate services ceased to exist:

There is no doubt that the [Canadian] military, until a short time ago, have not, had the support they deserve. Equipment has become elderly and sometimes obsolete and the manpower allocation has been insufficient. The upheaval caused by the passing of the Canadian Forces Reorganization of Act of 1 February 1968 caused a drop in efficiency and in the effectiveness of the Command and Control of the forces which has only been restored recently with the functioning of the new commands. Under the Act, the Navy, Army and Air Force ceased to exist as legal entities and between 1968 and 1973 the total regular armed forces strength was' reduced from 120,780 to 82,000. By 1977 the total was only 78,000, far too small to meet all the requirements placed upon them.
    The reorganization was carried out in two phases, the first was termed "integration" and involved the grouping of the former services under a common command structure and the second, "unification", was the creation of a single service. All members were issued with the same uniform and came under the control of a single personnel branch. The common uniform is still worn although it is noticeable that various embellishments and titles have started to appear. - Colonel Norman L. Dodd, The Defence of Canada, The Army Quarterly and Defence Journal, Vol. 108, No. 1, January 1978

Apparently there was no precedent, or effort to create one, to have some portion of the Navy or Air Force retain the "Royal" designation at the time.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

No, I am a Canadian that puts other matters before titles that do little. Whether my oath is to the Queen or the Prime Minister all that matters to me is doing my job for Canada.

Gino, I am just curious were you in the Navy at the time of Unification?

 

[Gino]

No, I am a Canadian that puts other matters before titles that do little. Whether my oath is to the Queen or the Prime Minister all that matters to me is doing my job for Canada.

Gino, I am just curious were you in the Navy at the time of Unification?

Doing your job for Canada and the Queen are the same thing.  The PM may have certain democratic legitimacy, but his authority stems from being invited to form a government as the Queen's First Minister because he commands the confidence of the Commons.

I was not in the Navy during unification, I merely got to suffer through the aftermath.  Thank you very much, UFO crackpot Paul Hellyer.

 

[Neill McKay]

Personally I think there are better things to worry about then whether or not we have a Royal in front of our elements. How about new equipment?

That's not a very good argument.  You're suggesting that returning Royal to the navy's name would detract from the resources used to procure equipment.  But DHH doesn't procure equipment, does it?

Not to be ignorant to those that did serve in the RCAF and RCN but personally I think it would be a waste to revert back to the old titles.

Only if we burn the old letterhead instead of just using it up -- too easy.

I am just proud to have Canada on my epualets and sewn on the shoulder of my tunic.

Me too.  (It's just like they had it in the RCN, by the way.)

There are also a lot of people in the CF and in Canada that would love to see our ties with the monarchy severed. Don't they have a say?

As a matter of fact, those in the CF don't.  It's a violation of their oath (and a service offence if one is rude about it, as rather a lot of republicans are).

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Well I will have to agree to disagree with you folks, whether we have Royal or not does not make us a better Navy. Having the people there that take pride in their jobs is what makes us a good navy. Sorry but arguing for a name change when we should be worrying about other things is just a waste of time.

 

[Gino]

Well I will have to agree to disagree with you folks, whether we have Royal or not does not make us a better Navy. Having the people there that take pride in their jobs is what makes us a good navy. Sorry but arguing for a name change when we should be worrying about other things is just a waste of time.

Names can be very important and a source of service pride.  They provide a living connection to those who went before and sacrificed so much.  Are you suggesting that trying to regain some of our lost (stolen, rather) heritage and being operational are mutually exclusive?  Your logic eludes me.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Being a member of the CF and the Canadian Navy is very important and a sense of service pride to me. I believe wearning the uniform of your country will always provide a source of connection to those that provided the ultimate sacrifice. I don't need to have a Royal in front to know whats in my heart.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Btw split off to avoid hijacking the original topic.

 

[Neill McKay]

Being a member of the CF and the Canadian Navy is very important and a sense of service pride to me. I believe wearning the uniform of your country will always provide a source of connection to those that provided the ultimate sacrifice. I don't need to have a Royal in front to know whats in my heart.

It's one element in the whole thing, though.  We might just as easily say that you don't need a navy blue jacket either -- red would do as well.  But both the uniform and the name of the Service are parts of the naval culture.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I would not leave the navy if they changed colours of my uniform. Naval culture adapts with the times, sometimes for the worse. How often do you see the good naval traditions these days? make and mends (maybe at sea if you are lucky), sliders (if you are very lucky and even rarer since the last marlant Commander came on scene) and the rum ration (I had it once in my 12 years in the navy). The navy used to have the mantra of work hard play hard, now its just work hard. You want the younger generation to get into the naval culture more then you have to give them something they can look forward to. No kid on a duty watch looks forward to Colours and Sunset, few enjoy the Bosn call. These days you have to make things worthwhile for them. Look at all the guys today that just serve their initial contract and get out. Whats their common reason to get out "too much BS", Mr McKay you might not see it from your end but we see it more and more from our end.

 

[aesop081]

I agree with ex-dragoon here,

The airforce is no different.  Changing back to RCAF will do nothing for our retention problems.  the royal title will not attract more pilots and retain the ones we have.  It doesnt motivate our overworked technicians one bit. We already wasted enough money bringing in our own "identity" with these stupid blue name tags and ranks.  Then we wasted more  with blue t-shirts to wear with CADPAT ( thus defeating the purpose) in the name of Moral and tradition. Comander 1 CAD didnt like being refered to as CAD so everything had to be changed to  1 can air div.......how much did it cost to do everything over ?

We serve in the unified canadian Armed Forces ( yes, ARMED !!) and instead of longing for the old pre-unification days, its long time to make things work for the better.  Re-naming the services ( than no longer legaly exist) will do nothing to increase combat power, nothing for recruiting/retention and would be nothing more than some officer's PER browny points.

What will improve things you ask ? I am willing to bet that new fighters, LRPA. transports and helicopters on the ramps of canada's air bases would.  I am sure that a fleet of working submarines would do wonders with attracting and, more importantly , retaining sailors.  PMQs that actualy cost less than civilian housing, A canex that sells cheaper than the civilian market, overseas postings.........those are things from the old days that would do wonders.

 

[Gino]

I would not leave the navy if they changed colours of my uniform. Naval culture adapts with the times, sometimes for the worse. How often do you see the good naval traditions these days? make and mends (maybe at sea if you are lucky), sliders (if you are very lucky and even rarer since the last marlant Commander came on scene) and the rum ration (I had it once in my 12 years in the navy). The navy used to have the mantra of work hard play hard, now its just work hard. You want the younger generation to get into the naval culture more then you have to give them something they can look forward to. No kid on a duty watch looks forward to Colours and Sunset, few enjoy the Bosn call. These days you have to make things worthwhile for them. Look at all the guys today that just serve their initial contract and get out. Whats their common reason to get out "too much BS", Mr McKay you might not see it from your end but we see it more and more from our end.

I might since I've got enough years in that I can easily leave if they piss me off too much.  That being said, I agree that the service is more important than the colour of the uniform.  I also agree that much of the fun has been taken out of the navy, but a lot of that is due to the current international climate and lack of funding.  Force protection, which I admit is mostly necessary, has taken much of the enjoyment out of foreign port visits.  But, if having our young sailors pay respect to our ensign by performing the ceremony of colours is an example of a dissatisfier, then there is something fundamentally wrong with their attitude that really needs to be addressed.  There is far less of that sort of BS, as you call it, in the navy than there used to be.  Our carriers and cruisers used to parade guards and bands at colours.  I'm guessing you wouldn't have enjoyed that.  I realize our sailors work hard at sea, but getting every Friday afternoon off while alongside is not a God given right the way some people think.  I think we give our sailors adequate recompense with a guaranteed two day weekend when on duty, Sunday routines and modified daily routines.  Perhaps people's expectations are too high these days.  The navy is not a soft berth, but that's why it's called "serving your country (and Queen)".

 

[Sailing Instructor]

So here's my belief about the CANADA shoulder titles that will stir up the pot: they're aesthetically unpleasing.

I have one old RCN admiral who agreed with me, but I do not have the history books here to mention his name.  Take my word on it. (Stand by for a ref when my laziness ceases.)

This is not some anglophilic claim that goes hand-in-hand with the pre-1910 debates on whether to have a navy or not, this is simply a claim based on the look of the uniform.  The naval uniform has historically had fewer thingys on it than the army (who are always telling you everything about the particular soldier), so the absence of words from our clothes fits right in with that (and the CANADA on the buttons is small enough not to affect my aesthetic desires).

Hopefully now there would be no confusion 'twixt the RN and Canadian navy, seeing as we've other differences, not the least of which is 10 maple leaves on our cap badge.

But, as to the actual question: I am ambivalent.  I used to be pro- 'Royal Canadian Navy' but after looking at the history of anglophilia and nationalism, perhaps the nationalists deserve this tidbit.  Then I can safely stuff a handkerchief up my cuff and say, 'Canadahr.'