Will CSOR have a set of regimental colours

[eliminator]

Just a random question: Will CSOR have a set of regimental/queen's colours?

THANX

 

[Michael OLeary]

That may first require a revision to the reference A-AD-200-000/AG-000 THE HONOURS, FLAGS AND HERITAGE STRUCTURE OF THE CANADIAN FORCES which gives the following under entitlement to colours:

ENTITLEMENT

6. Colours may only be presented to combatant or potentially combatant navy and air force higher formations; army and air force units organized and roled to stand in the line of battle; and the Royal Military College of Canada, which is treated for these purposes as if it was an infantry battalion.

7. The following are entitled to single Colours, with their type noted in brackets:

a. Maritime Command (Queen's Colour);

b. armour regiments:

(1) horse guards and dragoon guards (Standard),

(2) others (Guidon); and

c. operational flying squadrons with 25 years service or which have earned the Sovereign's special appreciation for outstanding operations (Standard).

8. The following are entitled to a stand of Colours composed of a Queen's Colour and a command/college/regimental Colour:

a. Air Command;

b. Royal Military College of Canada; and

c. infantry and airborne battalions, other than those from rifle regiments (rifle regiments have no Colours as their original tactical role precluded them from carrying and using Colours on the battlefield). (See Note below.)

NOTE
The drums of rifle and voltigeur regiments are not Colours, although they may be emblazoned with battle honours and honorary distinctions. Drums shall not be paid compliments. (See also Chapter 4, Annex A.)

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

I think one got missed, and of course it being the weekend I don't have DIN access until tuesday.

But there is no mention of the Artillery in the above post. But the following from the RCA Standing Orders

406. COLOURS
1. Traditionally, the colours of The Royal Regiment of Canadian Artillery are its guns.
They serve the same central role in pride and identity as do the guidons or colours of armour
and infantry regiments.
2. The custom of the guns being the colours of the artillery has its origin in the British
practice of designating the largest piece in an artillery train as the “flag gun”. This gun was
accorded the honour of carrying the equivalent of today’s Queen’s Colour. Use of the flag gun
has been recorded as early as 1722. Later, the guns themselves came to be regarded as the
colours of the artillery as gunners in battle rallied to their guns in the same fashion as regiments
of cavalry and infantry rallied to their colours.
3. The introduction of rockets and missiles has in some cases changed the nature of the
artillery’s equipments. Consequently, the term “guns” shall be deemed to include all weapon
systems of the artillery, other than small arms, used to inflict damage or casualties on the enemy.
Thus, rocket and missile launchers, despite not being inscribed with the Royal Cypher, will
be accorded compliments when they are on ceremonial parade with formed artillery units or
sub-units.
4. Compliments are not paid by the troops on parade to the guns during roll pasts or other
parade movements. The artillery has no equivalent to the “Trooping the Colour” ceremony. It
should be noted that spectators will pay compliments to the guns, as colours, during a roll past or
during similar movements on formal parades and ceremonies.
5. Although it may be impracticable in modern times to treat guns as colours in nonceremonial
circumstances, they must be accorded the dignity and respect they deserve. Such
practices as smoking on or near the guns, sitting or leaning on them, decorating them for social
occasions and leaving them unprotected are intolerable.

 

[Michael OLeary]

I think one got missed,

It didn't get missed, it has no direct relevance to the question.

 

[garb811]

I think one got missed, and of course it being the weekend I don't have DIN access until tuesday.

One possible non-DIN point of access:  http://www.saskd.ca/heritage.pdf.  Google is your friend, even on the weekend.

Chapter 5, Section 1, Para 5: Traditionally, the Colours of The Royal Regiment of Canadian Artillery are its guns, though the word "gun" is now deemed to include rockets and missiles on launchers, and any other main-equipment weapon system of the artillery. It is impracticable in modern times to consider guns as Colours on nonceremonial occasions, but they are always treated with dignity and respect. When on ceremonial parade with formed artillery units or sub-units; however, artillery guns are accorded the same compliments as other Colours.

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

Thank you much my good man

 

[Blackadder1916]

This is an interesting question re military heraldry.  Even if authorized under (an amended) A-AD-200-000/AG-000, if one was to take a traditional approach, colours would not be carried by a regiment whose tactical role on the battlefield is performed under stealth.  Such is the case for rifle regiments.  

 

[eliminator]

while we're talking about colours, may as well pop another question. Any update on CSOR getting its own cap badge to go with their tan berets?

thanx for the input so far

 

[HItorMiss]

Micheal

In your link it says Airborne Forces are not enttiled to colours, how then did the CAR have a set?

Seriously curious now....

 

[3rd Herd]

This is an interesting question re military heraldry.  Even if authorized under (an amended) A-AD-200-000/AG-000, if one was to take a traditional approach, colours would not be carried by a regiment whose tactical role on the battlefield is performed under stealth.  Such is the case for rifle regiments.  

Adding to the curiosity
1) Was not the decision to remove colors from the battle field to prevent their loss. I can think of three examples within in the PPCLI including the re-covering of the colors under fire. Both the Cpl and Sgt, involved were not cited for merit as it would have brought forth the issue of the dangers to the colors.
2) What colors does the regiment parade with ? There was some talk and maybe hopes of the FSSF linkage ?

edit: spelling

edit to add:

"Fortunately, we have now reached an age when valuable lives can no longer be spent in defending military flags in battle. Regulations prevent the taking of colours into battle. Before battle, they are ceremoniously laid up in an appropriate church or federal building for safekeeping, until the regiment returns." http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Colours

"5 Mar 1995 - Church parade, laying up of Colours in the Canadian Airborne Forces Museum, final dismissal on Nicklin Parade Square. The Chief of the Defence Staff ordered that the Regiment be struck from the order of battle of the Canadian Forces with effect that date, in accordance with Ministerial Order 95003. "http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/The_Canadian_Airborne_Regiment

 

[George Wallace]

Micheal

In your link it says Airborne Forces are not enttiled to colours, how then did the CAR have a set?

Seriously curious now....

HoM

You need glasses to go with those Oakleys.......read again.

8. The following are entitled to a stand of Colours composed of a Queen's Colour and a command/college/regimental Colour:

a. Air Command;

b. Royal Military College of Canada; and

c. infantry and airborne battalions, other than those from rifle regiments (rifle regiments have no Colours as their original tactical role precluded them from carrying and using Colours on the battlefield).

 

[George Wallace]

Following along the lines of logic for FSSF, then if CSOR and JTF2 were to be categorized as "Infantry" then why not have Colours?

 

[Michael OLeary]

Thank you much my good man

AryNewbie, garb811,

The orginal question dealt with CSOR receiving colours and, therefore, entitlement to colours.  The fact that the Artillery treats its guns as its colours is not relevant to the original poster's question.

 

[Haggis]

Following along the lines of logic for FSSF, then if CSOR and JTF2 were to be categorized as "Infantry" then why not have Colours?

United States Army Special Forces (the Green Berets) carry colours, including the Battle Honours of the FSSF (as did the Cdn AB Regt).  They are not, stricly speaking, "Infantry".  Similarly, nor are CSOR or JTF2.  US Army Rangers have distinctive colours.  So do the SAS. 

From an international perspective, the precedent for the issue of colours to CSOR has been set.

 

[George Wallace]

United States Army Special Forces (the Green Berets) carry colours, including the Battle Honours of the FSSF (as did the Cdn AB Regt).  They are not, stricly speaking, "Infantry".  Similarly, nor are CSOR or JTF2.  US Army Rangers have distinctive colours.  So do the SAS. 

From an international perspective, the precedent for the issue of colours to CSOR has been set.

They are not "Rifles" either, and thus not 'exempted', is what I was trying to get across. 

 

[Michael OLeary]

United States Army Special Forces (the Green Berets) carry colours, including the Battle Honours of the FSSF (as did the Cdn AB Regt).  They are not, stricly speaking, "Infantry".  Similarly, nor are CSOR or JTF2.  US Army Rangers have distinctive colours.  So do the SAS. 

From an international perspective, the precedent for the issue of colours to CSOR has been set.

The Commandos of the Airborne Regiment received colours after 1979 (if I recall the date correctly) when they received their regimental affiliations to the three Reg F infantry regiments, this would have made them eligible by being recognized as units of the infantry.  As fas as I know, and I stand to be corrected, the unit did not have colours before that time.

 

[Haggis]

They are not "Rifles" either, and thus not 'exempted', is what I was trying to get across. 

Agreed.  They (particlularly JTF2) are like no other unit in CF history.  Therefore, conventional interpretations cannot be applied to unconventional units.

The Commandos of the Airborne Regiment received colours after 1979 (if I recall the date correctly) when they received their regimental affiliations to the three Reg F infantry regiments, this would have made them eligible by being recognized as units of the infantry.  As fas as I know, and I stand to be corrected, the unit did not have colours before that time.

According to some notations at this site, the Cdn AB Regt colours were first presented on 09 June 1973 at DZ Buxton in Edmonton.

 

[3rd Herd]

The first offical parade of the regiment was in Edmonton in 1969.The Edmonton Pipe Band website covers that.
http://www.epspipeband.ca/Canadian%20Airborne.htm

"On April 8th, 1968 the charter for the formation of The Canadian Airborne Regiment was signed and the Regiment itself was formed in Edmonton. Initially organized as two infantry commandos, one artillery battery, one engineer field squadron, one signal squadron, and a service company, the Airborne Regiment was manned entirely by volunteers who were active paratroopers. Parachute instruction support was provided by the Canadian Airborne Center, while the Canadian Forces Parachute Maintenance Depot provided technical support. Both of these units are located in Edmonton."http://www.airborneassociation.com/cgi/history-histoire/history.php

Colors: http://www.airborneassociation.com/cgi/memory-memoire/Guidon-e.php

Edit to add: I am sure one those will appear to set us all straight.

 

[geo]

I also remember the CAR in it's infantry incarnation as "3 Mech Cdo" based in Germany in the early 70s. (prior to becoming 3 RCR).

 

[a_majoor]

Agreed.  They (particlularly JTF2) are like no other unit in CF history.  Therefore, conventional interpretations cannot be applied to unconventional units.

Somewhere in the puzzle palace there is at least one cubical with a person devoted to finding or creating a conventional interpretation........