GDI Military Structure Discussion

[Warringer]

Originally Posted by king of hybrids

i forget, have we got a service branch to serve as a coordinating/standardising thingy for the HomeGuard in peacetime/Member states millitaries in wartime?

They are simply the National Armed Forces...

For example the US Army, the British Royal Air Force, the Bundesmarine...

Things like that...

[king of hybrids]

Originally Posted by Warringer

They are simply the National Armed Forces...

For example the US Army, the British Royal Air Force, the Bundesmarine...

Things like that...

yes, but do we have a coordinating/standardising (in terms of Arms/equipment) organisation?, since some seem intent on reducing them to National guard levels of autonomy

edit:

Originally Posted by John117xCortana

Fleet Admiral sounds better.

i suppose your right, grand admiral does scream Earthwank

[walkir]

Originally Posted by king of hybrids

yes, but do we have a coordinating/standardising (in terms of Arms/equipment) organisation?, since some seem intent on reducing them to National guard levels of autonomy

GDI should have an standardization arm that sets doctrines for what is allowed offworld. If it's a M4 or a Leopard 3 isn't relevant, as long as it does comply.

Plus, GDI is going to have the biggest military supranational R&D budget and GDI standard equipment represents the easiest way to acquire BT/SL/CE-combination gear.

[Knobby]

Barring a human with blue skin and glowing red eyes, no "Grand Admiral".

[Tetsurou]

Considering the current size limitations for GDI, 10 Devisions as I recall, common military ranks should be no problem, because of their wide spred use due to imperialism over the centuries and millennia. However, since we are looking at creating a multinational military no current rank traditions should be used, to avoid the implication of undue influence on the structure there of by any one member nation. As since the major complaint is about the use of captain and the confusion that that could bring, personally I always prefered that Captain was more of a title that should be reserved for Masters and Commanders of ships, military and civilian.

So I propse the following:
Lieutenant 3rd Class(Ensign Navy)
Lieutenant 2ed Class(Lieutenant J.G. Navy)
Lieutenant 1st Class(Lieutenant)
Lieutenant Commander
Commander
Major
Lieutenant Colonel
Colonel
Flag Officers Admirals or Generals depending on Service branch.

[Prince Charon]

Originally Posted by king of hybrids

now of course comes the stupid question. which naval tradition should the GDI Navy/Starfleet use, british or american?

Why not Russian? Why not Chinese?

[Tetsurou]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

Why not Russian? Why not Chinese?

Which is why I suggested that we don't use one from any existing military, though use the ranks that we all know.

[Tyrchon]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

Why not Russian? Why not Chinese?

Russian and Chinese naval traditions are not as widespread. Also, they are based upon British and American naval traditions, more so the British for the Russians as the Brits were masters of the seas at the time and more so the Americans for the Chinese as the U.S. had just become the dominant naval power following the end of WWII.

Also, Russian and Chinese ranks are rather hard to pronounce and even more difficult to spell when not translated to English. Seeing as how English is the basic language of the entire Inner Sphere, the lingua franca so to speak, it would only make sense to utilize English spelled ranks. Thus, using the ranks of Ensign, Lieutenant, Lt. Commander, Commander, Captain, and Admiral with the various degrees and grades.

Also, the Russian and Chinese navies are hardly good examples of modern navies. The Russian navy even in the Clancyverse is rusting away. The Chinese even in Clancy are just starting to seriously develop their own naval vessels beyond those they had initially purchased from the Soviets and the Russians. Their naval traditions and ranking structure are not as strong or as well developed currently.

If you are going to adopt someone's traditions and incorporate them into your own then you look for the best. In terms of naval tradition you want those that belong to whomever rules the seas. This means you go with either the British or the Americans. Since both use incredibly similar traditions and ranks, basically the same in many regards, it would not be that hard to incorporate them, especially when every modern navy is based upon those traditions as well.

The problem with adding in ranks like Major, Lt. Colonel, and Colonel into naval ranks are that it would be confusing. Naval ranking is supposed to be different from those of Army ranking. It is deliberate as it designates specialization. Such traditions have worked for centuries and will continue to work. Making dramatic changes to them will only cause confusion.

[Atarlost]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

Why not Russian? Why not Chinese?

Because Britain has had the most powerful navy in the world for much of modern history, and the US does currently. China has never been a significant naval power until very recently and Russia's naval tradition probably had a jarring discontinuity when the tzarist navy was purged.

Japan's naval tradition was interrupted by the terms of the peace after WWII and Germany's was probably interrupted by the division of that nation. I suppose France's naval tradition could be adopted, but since this is an English language round robin most writers and readers are going to be more familiar with English language military traditions.

[Gosu]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

Why not Russian? Why not Chinese?

Because the DC has Japanese ranks, the Lyrans use some German-sounding ranks, the Capellans use Chinese ranks, and the Davions and Mariks use variations of English ranks. The Clans are yet another completely different system.

Why add yet another system unfamiliar to most here to the story?

[Knobby]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

Why not Russian [naval traditions]? Why not Chinese?

Because they don't exactly set outstanding precedents for how to operate a large navy across great distances?

Russia, "Soviet Union" or otherwise, has never really had a functional "blue water" navy, outside of their submarines. That detail hasn't changed from RL, in the Ryanverse.

As for the Chinese... hell, China technically doesn't even have a navy, it's a branch of their army. Good luck on getting western militaries to go along with that particular organizational system.

More seriously, in general I don't see why some insist on making things more complicated than they need to be, with new rank systems. Humans tend to be creatures of tradition, fictional or otherwise, especially when the argument to ignore tradition and go marching off on a new path boils down to "because it's new".

If this were a story with aliens in it, making up stuff for the aliens would be fine, but since it's not, for the purposes of this RR, I don't see why it's necessary to throw out everything previous to the fictional "now".

[Tetsurou]

Originally Posted by Knobby

Because they don't exactly set outstanding precedents for how to operate a large navy across great distances?

Russia, "Soviet Union" or otherwise, has never really had a functional "blue water" navy, outside of their submarines. That detail hasn't changed from RL, in the Ryanverse.

As for the Chinese... hell, China technically doesn't even have a navy, it's a branch of their army. Good luck on getting western militaries to go along with that particular organizational system.

More seriously, in general I don't see why some insist on making things more complicated than they need to be, with new rank systems. Humans tend to be creatures of tradition, fictional or otherwise, especially when the argument to ignore tradition and go marching off on a new path boils down to "because it's new".

If this were a story with aliens in it, making up stuff for the aliens would be fine, but since it's not, for the purposes of this RR, I don't see why it's necessary to throw out everything previous to the fictional "now".

The GDI Navy would be best served to take the best traditions from its various member nations and amalgum them all together into its own seperate military culture, distinc from its origines while properly and honoribly reprisenting them, without being a shell for anyone of them.

[EdBecerra]

Originally Posted by Atarlost

Japan's naval tradition was interrupted by the terms of the peace after WWII and Germany's was probably interrupted by the division of that nation.

And the Japanese aren't ashamed to admit that they based all of their naval traditions and doctrines on the British navy - even to the point of adopting the Brit "high tea" tradition. This was before WW2.

Ed.

[Prince Charon]

Originally Posted by Knobby

As for the Chinese... hell, China technically doesn't even have a navy, it's a branch of their army. Good luck on getting western militaries to go along with that particular organizational system.

That's why I suggested it.

Really, why have separate rank systems for different branches? It makes more logistical sense to use the same system of Army-style ranks for all branches of the GDI.

[Death By Chains]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

That's why I suggested it.

Really, why have separate rank systems for different branches? It makes more logistical sense to use the same system of Army-style ranks for all branches of the GDI.

Perhaps, but for now GDI's pulling most of its people from the national militaries, and they're bringing with them their own martial traditions - 95% of which feature the distinct army/navy split seen here - and those traditions will all blend and coalesce into the basis of GDI's institutional traditions and culture. With that cultural identity already well-formed in GDI's collective consciousness, if not already then certainly by the time of Samsonov's Tantrum, any attempt to shove through a Canadian-style 'unified rank structure' reform will be rejected by the vast majority of GDI's personnel and backers as...
... well...

[Knobby]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

That's why I suggested it.

Really, why have separate rank systems for different branches? It makes more logistical sense to use the same system of Army-style ranks for all branches of the GDI.

What do ranks have to do with logistics?

Anyway, while I'm leery of using "it's tradition" to justify not changing things, I'm even more suspicious of changing things just for the sake of breaking with tradition.

And, really, citing the PRC's military as anything worth emulating is laughable, especially the one on CEarth, which had its head handed to it by NATO not that much prior to the RR's present day.

(And dismissing it as "author fiat", as happened when I mentioned the UIR's spanking in EO, doesn't change the fact that it's canon for Ryanverse and for this RR. )

[evilauthor]

Originally Posted by Knobby

What do ranks have to do with logistics?

Anyway, while I'm leery of using "it's tradition" to justify not changing things, I'm even more suspicious of changing things just for the sake of breaking with tradition.

Really, whatever rank structure the GDI adopts, it should follow the O and E model.

O is for officers. O-1 is the bottom of the rung. O-3 is company command. O-5 is Battalion command. O-6 is regiment/brigade/ship command. Anything above O-6 are General and Admiral Types.

E is for Enlisted. E-1 is a Private/Airman/Seaman/Grunt. E-9 is Sergeant Major of the Army (or whatever GDI equivalent).

Now what names do you guys want to slap on each O and E rank?

[Tyrchon]

Originally Posted by evilauthor

Really, whatever rank structure the GDI adopts, it should follow the O and E model.

O is for officers. O-1 is the bottom of the rung. O-3 is company command. O-5 is Battalion command. O-6 is regiment/brigade/ship command. Anything above O-6 are General and Admiral Types.

E is for Enlisted. E-1 is a Private/Airman/Seaman/Grunt. E-9 is Sergeant Major of the Army (or whatever GDI equivalent).

Now what names do you guys want to slap on each O and E rank?

I've combined British and American systems as they are the most prolific and the ones on which the majority of the world's militaries have their rank structure based upon. These are the most common ranks and the one that will be the easiest to adapt to considering they are the basis for every modern militaries' rank structure.

Ground Forces Officers:

O-1: 2nd Lieutenant
O-2: 1st Lieutenant
O-3: Captain
O-4: Major
O-5: Lieutenant Colonel
O-6: Colonel
O-7: Brigadier General
O-8: Major General
O-9: Lieutenant General
O-10: General
O-11: General of the Armies (*)

(*) The only Five Star or equivalent. Only one allowed at a time.

Ground Forces Enlisted:

E-1: Private
E-2: Private First Class
E-3: Lance Corporal/Specialist*
E-4: Corporal
E-5: Sergeant
E-6: Staff Sergeant
E-7: Gunnery Sergeant
E-8: Master Sergeant/1st Sergeant**
E-9: Sergeant Major

(*) Specialists might be the preferable as they are more common than Lance Corporals
(**) 1st Sergeant is often used as the designation for the Senior most non-com of a unit and is technically higher than Master Sergeant, a distinguishment when there happen to be multiple Master Sergeants in a large unit.

Space/Naval Forces Officers:

O-1: Ensign
O-2: Lieutenant Junior Grade
O-3: Lieutenant
O-4: Lieutenant Commander
O-5: Commander
O-6: Captain
O-7: Commodore
O-8: Rear Admiral
O-9: Vice Admiral
O-10: Admiral
O-11: Admiral of the Fleet (*)

(*) The only Five Star or equivalent. Only one allowed at a time.

Space/Naval Enlisted:

E-1: Seaman Recruit
E-2: Apprentice Seaman
E-3: Seaman
E-4: Able Seaman
E-5: Petty Officer 2nd Class
E-6: Petty officer 1st Class
E-7: Chief Petty Officer
E-8: Senior Chief Petty Officer
E-9: Master Chief Petty Officer/Command Master Chief Petty Officer*

(*) Command Master Chief Petty Officer used to distinguish the more senior non-com in large units that have more than one Master Chief Petty Officer

Warrant Officers:

W-1: Warrant Officer
W-2: Chief Warrant Officer Third Class
W-3: Chief Warrant Officer Second Class
W-4: Chief Warrant Officer First Class
W-5: Master Chief Warrant Officer

Warrant officers are highly skilled, single-track specialty officers that are found in both branches. They are above Enlisted Personnel (E-9), but below Officers (O-1). Warrant Officer's primary task as a leader is to serve as a technical expert, providing valuable skills, guidance, and expertise to commanders and organizations in their particular field. They perform duties that are technically oriented, that is, requiring skills directly related to previous enlisted service and specialized training, while not significantly affecting their ability to perform those duties through advancement to other duty positions and responsibilities—allowing the military to capitalize on their experience.

[Tetsurou]

Originally Posted by evilauthor

Really, whatever rank structure the GDI adopts, it should follow the O and E model.

O is for officers. O-1 is the bottom of the rung. O-3 is company command. O-5 is Battalion command. O-6 is regiment/brigade/ship command. Anything above O-6 are General and Admiral Types.

E is for Enlisted. E-1 is a Private/Airman/Seaman/Grunt. E-9 is Sergeant Major of the Army (or whatever GDI equivalent).

Now what names do you guys want to slap on each O and E rank?

Lieutenant 3rd Class(Ensign Navy) O-0
Lieutenant 2ed Class(Lieutenant J.G. Navy) O-1
Lieutenant 1st Class(Lieutenant) O-2
Lieutenant Commander O-3
Commander O-4
Major O-5
Lieutenant Colonel O-6
Colonel O-7

My reasoning for the extra O rankings is because of the need for substantially better trained and more expereinced officers in GDI than in any previous military CEarth has ever known. Because anyway you dice it the GDI military will have to have the widest skill set ever simply due to demands of fighting such a massive and extreamly entrenched culture over vast tracts of space, and then their going to do it with possibly the largest single military organization their planet has ever known...eventually. To facilitate that, graduating from a military collage is usually equivilant to a BS degree in civilian colleges, what I propose is that to progress to O-4 and higher an officer must have completed a MA equiviliant, and to progress to O-8 and higher an officer must have a Doctorite. Third Lieutenant is indeed a SST reference, essentially its an apprentance officer, just like it was in the book.

[Tyrchon]

Originally Posted by Tetsurou

Lieutenant 3rd Class(Ensign Navy) O-0
Lieutenant 2ed Class(Lieutenant J.G. Navy) O-1
Lieutenant 1st Class(Lieutenant) O-2
Lieutenant Commander O-3
Commander O-4
Major O-5
Lieutenant Colonel O-6
Colonel O-7

My reasoning for the extra O rankings is because of the need for substantially better trained and more expereinced officers in GDI than in any previous military CEarth has ever known. Because anyway you dice it the GDI military will have to have the widest skill set ever simply due to demands of fighting such a massive and extreamly entrenched culture over vast tracts of space, and then their going to do it with possibly the largest single military organization their planet has ever known...eventually. To facilitate that, graduating from a military collage is usually equivilant to a BS degree in civilian colleges, what I propose is that to progress to O-4 and higher an officer must have completed a MA equiviliant, and to progress to O-8 and higher an officer must have a Doctorite. Third Lieutenant is indeed a SST reference, essentially its an apprentance officer, just like it was in the book.

While the stipulation for higher education works in a sense, you are placing to much emphasis on it. I am a Graduate student who just completed his Master's and is going for my PhD. Such things take up a considerable chunk of time and effort. While the modern military does encourage its officers to pursue at least a Master's degree they do not require it let alone require a doctorate. Also, you will see officers promoted without such degrees because of the needs of combat and war and because teh officer actually has experience that make him/her worthy of further promotion. Your suggestion would be good if this was just a peace time situation where many officers are available and relatively idle, but in times of war it would be superfluous.

Also, you leave out the upper echelon of ranks which are necessary. You creation of the Third Class Lieutenant Rank is redundant as it would just be called Ensign as that is what it is called and what everyone is familiar with. Your inclusion of the Major and Colonel ranks is a poor idea as it screws up and confuses the ranking structure that the majority of the world's militaries are based upon and used to. Militaries really hate changes in systems they view as being traditional and still very practical and will fight tooth and nail against them. It is better to just use and already existing system that everyone is familiar with rather use a new system which is rearranges everything and only leads to confusion.

[Tetsurou]

Originally Posted by Tyrchon

While the stipulation for higher education works in a sense, you are placing to much emphasis on it. I am a Graduate student who just completed his Master's and is going for my PhD. Such things take up a considerable chunk of time and effort. While the modern military does encourage its officers to pursue at least a Master's degree they do not require it let alone require a doctorate. Also, you will see officers promoted without such degrees because of the needs of combat and war and because teh officer actually has experience that make him/her worthy of further promotion. Your suggestion would be good if this was just a peace time situation where many officers are available and relatively idle, but in times of war it would be superfluous.

Also, you leave out the upper echelon of ranks which are necessary. You creation of the Third Class Lieutenant Rank is redundant as it would just be called Ensign as that is what it is called and what everyone is familiar with. Your inclusion of the Major and Colonel ranks is a poor idea as it screws up and confuses the ranking structure that the majority of the world's militaries are based upon and used to. Militaries really hate changes in systems they view as being traditional and still very practical and will fight tooth and nail against them. It is better to just use and already existing system that everyone is familiar with rather use a new system which is rearranges everything and only leads to confusion.

Mind you, GDI is going to have a peacetime footing for a few years yet, to be sure, moreover, we don't know what sort of educational structure would be made aviable for the GDI officer (don't want to speculate too much without consulting someone, could be accerated). And depending on the teaching method, and how the schedual is set up, it could still be done around the tight time constraints of an officer in the field...also, it doesn't have to be all at once, spread it over the years between getting one degree and progressing to the rank needed. And as for exceptions, yeah, there probably will be some when needed, and until the degree requirement is met, it COULD be a provisional or Brevet promotion, but that could be flexible.

3LT, is called Ensign in the Navy, and I prefer that extra level for actual field experience before any actual command positions are given to them, let an NCO teach them how things are done outside the classroom.

Major, I would like to keep, I have this thing where only the Master of a Ship should be called Captain, it is a time honored title that has lost a lot of its meaning in the last couple of centuries, and here is a great oppertunity to start correcting that.

As for Lieutenant Colonal and Colonal, yeah, those could be Vice-Commadore and Commadore in the Navy.

Flag ranks:
O-8 Brig. General / Counter Admiral
O-9 Major General / Rear Admiral
O-10 Lieutenant General / Vice Admiral
O-11 General / Admiral
O-12 General of the Armies / Admiral of the Fleets

[Tyrchon]

Originally Posted by Tetsurou

........snip.......

In the majority of naval forces not all commanders of ships are actually Captains. Many smaller vessels are actually commanded by Commanders instead. Larger, more important vessels are almost always commanded by a Captain, though sometimes they will be commanded by a Flag Officer like a Rear Admiral. The tradition is that there is only one Captain on a ship. Ground forces have no authority on ships and as such Captains in a ground forces are automatically brevetted to Major temporarily while on board. Every modern Navy in the world does this and there is little/no chance of that tradition being changed.

I do not see your revised ranking structure ever being realistically accepted by any naval arm, be it blue water or space. This is due to the preservation and perseverance of traditions, the desire to avoid confusion by making needless changes, and the fact that the different ranking system makes Naval officers distinctive from non-Naval officers.

[Tetsurou]

Originally Posted by Tyrchon

In the majority of naval forces not all commanders of ships are actually Captains. Many smaller vessels are actually commanded by Commanders instead. Larger, more important vessels are almost always commanded by a Captain, though sometimes they will be commanded by a Flag Officer like a Rear Admiral. The tradition is that there is only one Captain on a ship. Ground forces have no authority on ships and as such Captains in a ground forces are automatically brevetted to Major temporarily while on board. Every modern Navy in the world does this and there is little/no chance of that tradition being changed.

I do not see your revised ranking structure ever being realistically accepted by any naval arm, be it blue water or space. This is due to the preservation and perseverance of traditions, the desire to avoid confusion by making needless changes, and the fact that the different ranking system makes Naval officers distinctive from non-Naval officers.

I know many smaller ships don't have captains of the rank captaining them, but as they are a shipmaster, then they are a Captain as a title not linked to rank, but actual position.

Then the rank name overlaps are only coincidence then? The unified ranking structure is meant to decrease confusion, and the Navy will get their own unique ranks. Besides, there is more to tradition than ranks, and the GDI Navy will have plenty of traditions to draw upon.

[Tyrchon]

Originally Posted by Tetsurou

I know many smaller ships don't have captains of the rank captaining them, but as they are a shipmaster, then they are a Captain as a title not linked to rank, but actual position.

Then the rank name overlaps are only coincidence then? The unified ranking structure is meant to decrease confusion, and the Navy will get their own unique ranks. Besides, there is more to tradition than ranks, and the GDI Navy will have plenty of traditions to draw upon.

It doesn't matter. It is already a well established and popular tradition. There is not way any military would agree to such a change. The military likes having the traditional ranks system of separate ranks for naval and non-naval personnel. Not only is it traditional, but it also denotes specialization. You would not expect a Sergeant or Major to know how to operate a ship, but you would expect a Petty Officer and a Lt. Commander to know how, just as you wouldn't expect a Petty Officer and a Lt. Commander to know how to engage in successfully using an MBT or leading a ground assault. The different structures implies specialization and nearly every military force in the world that has both a navy and an army uses such distinctive systems. It isn't going to change.

[Tetsurou]

Originally Posted by Tyrchon

It doesn't matter. It is already a well established and popular tradition. There is not way any military would agree to such a change. The military likes having the traditional ranks system of separate ranks for naval and non-naval personnel. Not only is it traditional, but it also denotes specialization. You would not expect a Sergeant or Major to know how to operate a ship, but you would expect a Petty Officer and a Lt. Commander to know how, just as you wouldn't expect a Petty Officer and a Lt. Commander to know how to engage in successfully using an MBT or leading a ground assault. The different structures implies specialization and nearly every military force in the world that has both a navy and an army uses such distinctive systems. It isn't going to change.

What about a Major in the infantry, should I ask him/her about an MBT then? What about a Petty Officer in the SEALs, is crewing a ship part of their speciality? How about a Lt. Commander in the Navy Air Wing instead? You hit on the issue when you said specialities, officers of the same rank (effective or otherwise) can and will have seperate specialities regardless of what their rank implies ('I'm a Captain of the Army damnit' sort of thing).