US Army Warrants
Two Ton Pickle.....after someone had been told how the system works...one would think an educated person and an Officer could figure it out (even if not both simultaneously).
It is nice to know that you felt a fellow commissioned officer was out of his place by being in your mess.
Did you ever convey that to him and try to be completely honest or were you merely being two faced and ingratiating when you accepted his offer of a drink?
It is nice to know that you felt a fellow commissioned officer was out of his place by being in your mess.
Did you ever convey that to him and try to be completely honest or were you merely being two faced and ingratiating when you accepted his offer of a drink?
"......I was suprised (as a Senior Aircraftman) to be addressed by a Sergeant First Class (or so it seemed) as "Sir"....."
I would imagine that was just the young lady in question being polite and courteous towards newly-arrived guests in her country. A charming gesture.
SASless, in the RAF it is often the 'commissioned ex-rankers' rather than the straight-through baby officers who make the most smoke and noise about their new-found status in life. Real officers treat RAF WOs with the respect their status rightly merits.
I would imagine that was just the young lady in question being polite and courteous towards newly-arrived guests in her country. A charming gesture.
SASless, in the RAF it is often the 'commissioned ex-rankers' rather than the straight-through baby officers who make the most smoke and noise about their new-found status in life. Real officers treat RAF WOs with the respect their status rightly merits.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"SASless, in the RAF it is often the 'commissioned ex-rankers' rather than the straight-through baby officers who make the most smoke and noise about their new-found status in life. Real officers treat RAF WOs with the respect their status rightly merits."
Beagle
In my experience that is arse. As a "hairy it took me about 2 years to stop calling WOs sir when in uniform, and I had been a member of Sgts mess so had a bit of time to get used to the first name terms.
However, it does take the green shielders less time, because they usually drop their first bollock within a minute of meeting a WO on station. At this point their ears get pinned so far back that they cannot keep stop their SD hat sliding down to their nose.
Regards
retard
Beagle
In my experience that is arse. As a "hairy it took me about 2 years to stop calling WOs sir when in uniform, and I had been a member of Sgts mess so had a bit of time to get used to the first name terms.
However, it does take the green shielders less time, because they usually drop their first bollock within a minute of meeting a WO on station. At this point their ears get pinned so far back that they cannot keep stop their SD hat sliding down to their nose.
Regards
retard
Beags,
The young lady that was so courteous was probably just respecting her elders when Two Ton stepped down from the rear of the bus.
The young lady that was so courteous was probably just respecting her elders when Two Ton stepped down from the rear of the bus.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: London
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought a US sergeant first class was equivalent to a leading aircraftsmen. Or are Sergeants First Class commissioned?
By the way Septics everywhere this is a British tradition (you'll have those in a few centuries) known as sarcasm.
Now who's going to bite?
By the way Septics everywhere this is a British tradition (you'll have those in a few centuries) known as sarcasm.
Now who's going to bite?
ME,
One has to have the necessary weapons to engage in a battle of wits....and despite our humble origins...we decline to take advantage of the unarmed.
(That is not Army Warrant Officer Sarcasm by the way.)
One has to have the necessary weapons to engage in a battle of wits....and despite our humble origins...we decline to take advantage of the unarmed.
(That is not Army Warrant Officer Sarcasm by the way.)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ME,
One has to have the necessary weapons to engage in a battle of wits....and despite our humble origins...we decline to take advantage of the unarmed
One has to have the necessary weapons to engage in a battle of wits....and despite our humble origins...we decline to take advantage of the unarmed
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For goodness' sake... this thread seems to have deteriorated from being a bit of banter into a snide, vituperative slanging match. Surely we're all better than this?
SASLess, West Coast, et al... you demand that we respect your rank system, yet you have no appreciation of why we're making our arguments. In HM Armed Forces, if someone hears "Warrant Officer" they will assume - correctly for all but the US - that the individual concerned is a highly-experienced, massively well-respected senior Noncommissioned Officer. NOT a commissioned officer, and certainly not someone with less than 15 years' military experience. This is NOT intended as an insult or a form of disrespect - simply an indication of the fact that nobody has time to learn the nuances of the rank structures of each of our NATO allies. If anything, Warrant Officers as they are perceived by Brits have immense experience, and are generally the most battle-hardened and respected individuals around. Dry your eyes, and understand that we do not disrespect rank. The immediate assumption on meeting a Warrant Officer will be: "Aha - this man clearly knows what the hell he's talking about".
Oh, and West Coast... until you piped up about our Royal Family (all of whom, apart from Prince Edward, have genuine, decorated military experience) no-one had had a go at your system of government. Since your current President's military experience extends to dodging Vietnam, maybe you could find a more convincing argument about why our Royal Family should not command our respect? It will, of course, fall on deaf ears, because I'm sure that all of the British posters here are actually quite proud to serve the Queen. As proud as you are to serve... whomever.
And to my Brit fellows - why are we getting so wound up about this? New WO1 - the clue's in the name - has not toiled as hard as some other Warrant Officers have (I'm thinking 20-odd years' consistent effort and graft) to obtain his rank, by his own admission. He may have earned it, but only as much as I have earned MY rank (now into the 4th year of my commission). What New WO1 hasn't learned is the difference between deference and respect. He can make as many airmen salute him as he wants, but he probably won't earn one iota of respect for it. I think we can agree that on the whole we work very well indeed with our American friends. Why damage that relationship because of the naiveté of a single pompous arse?
SASLess, West Coast, et al... you demand that we respect your rank system, yet you have no appreciation of why we're making our arguments. In HM Armed Forces, if someone hears "Warrant Officer" they will assume - correctly for all but the US - that the individual concerned is a highly-experienced, massively well-respected senior Noncommissioned Officer. NOT a commissioned officer, and certainly not someone with less than 15 years' military experience. This is NOT intended as an insult or a form of disrespect - simply an indication of the fact that nobody has time to learn the nuances of the rank structures of each of our NATO allies. If anything, Warrant Officers as they are perceived by Brits have immense experience, and are generally the most battle-hardened and respected individuals around. Dry your eyes, and understand that we do not disrespect rank. The immediate assumption on meeting a Warrant Officer will be: "Aha - this man clearly knows what the hell he's talking about".
Oh, and West Coast... until you piped up about our Royal Family (all of whom, apart from Prince Edward, have genuine, decorated military experience) no-one had had a go at your system of government. Since your current President's military experience extends to dodging Vietnam, maybe you could find a more convincing argument about why our Royal Family should not command our respect? It will, of course, fall on deaf ears, because I'm sure that all of the British posters here are actually quite proud to serve the Queen. As proud as you are to serve... whomever.
And to my Brit fellows - why are we getting so wound up about this? New WO1 - the clue's in the name - has not toiled as hard as some other Warrant Officers have (I'm thinking 20-odd years' consistent effort and graft) to obtain his rank, by his own admission. He may have earned it, but only as much as I have earned MY rank (now into the 4th year of my commission). What New WO1 hasn't learned is the difference between deference and respect. He can make as many airmen salute him as he wants, but he probably won't earn one iota of respect for it. I think we can agree that on the whole we work very well indeed with our American friends. Why damage that relationship because of the naiveté of a single pompous arse?
"find a more convincing argument about why our Royal Family should not command our respect?"
Command respect for simply being the royal family?
My amusement is with the concept of having a king/queen, not so much the characters involved. Its my understanding that Andy flew his helo in some sort of picket duty in the Malvinas, looking to soak up an exocet before it hit the ship. Big balls. No bigger however than any other chap from a working class family. Respect is earned, not given simply because of birthright
"all of whom, apart from Prince Edward, have genuine, decorated military experience"
Is that factually correct? What about the lads?
"they will assume - correctly for all but the US - that the individual concerned is a highly-experienced"
Can't speak for the other services, but I'd love to see someone tell a Marine Corps Gunner (combat arms CWO) that.
"He can make as many airmen salute him as he wants, but he probably won't earn one iota of respect for it"
Sort of my point about the royal family.
Command respect for simply being the royal family?
My amusement is with the concept of having a king/queen, not so much the characters involved. Its my understanding that Andy flew his helo in some sort of picket duty in the Malvinas, looking to soak up an exocet before it hit the ship. Big balls. No bigger however than any other chap from a working class family. Respect is earned, not given simply because of birthright
"all of whom, apart from Prince Edward, have genuine, decorated military experience"
Is that factually correct? What about the lads?
"they will assume - correctly for all but the US - that the individual concerned is a highly-experienced"
Can't speak for the other services, but I'd love to see someone tell a Marine Corps Gunner (combat arms CWO) that.
"He can make as many airmen salute him as he wants, but he probably won't earn one iota of respect for it"
Sort of my point about the royal family.
Not enough $$$ ...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone about to enter the Australian Army, I have to say I've found this thread very enlightening.
Before this I had absolutely nil real understanding of ranks other than where they fit on the "Ranks and Insignia" chart, but now I feel like I've got much more sense of "my place" once I start (I'll be an Officer Cadet for about 18 months, then a 2nd Lt for a while before I even make it to full Lt).
I had an experience recently where I witnessed a very young (21) Lieutenant speaking to a couple of Warrant Officers under his command. He was, I thought, extraordinarily "familiar" with them - he displayed no apparent respect for them or their level of experience in their jobs, and threw in several attempts at humour that missed their mark entirely and were not well received. As he turned away from these two WO's, the look they gave him was one of pure murder. Not exactly high on the "natural leader" qualities, this bloke.
So ... I look forward to NOT being like that guy, and I thank all of you who have contributed to this thread, for several reasons.
First, it helps me understand why Americans have WO pilots - and how they compare to our rank structure. Really, New_WO1, you are a Cadet, pure and simple. Your rank is a training rank, you've said so yourself. To compare your rank with a grizzled veteran of many years service, well what can I say.
Second, it helps me understand our NCO ranks, and gives me a much greater respect for them, for which I thank the UK guys.
New_WO1, go back and read your leadership manual, it's FM 22-100, I've got a copy if you can't find yours. You'll find a whole bunch of great info in there that it seems you've missed.
Knuckle down to your study, finish your training, and get on with the job. Be good at it - that's your main responsibility right now. Nobody even cares who you are until you're a useful member of a unit, so stop being so self-centred and focus on learning how to fly.
Cheers, mate.
Before this I had absolutely nil real understanding of ranks other than where they fit on the "Ranks and Insignia" chart, but now I feel like I've got much more sense of "my place" once I start (I'll be an Officer Cadet for about 18 months, then a 2nd Lt for a while before I even make it to full Lt).
I had an experience recently where I witnessed a very young (21) Lieutenant speaking to a couple of Warrant Officers under his command. He was, I thought, extraordinarily "familiar" with them - he displayed no apparent respect for them or their level of experience in their jobs, and threw in several attempts at humour that missed their mark entirely and were not well received. As he turned away from these two WO's, the look they gave him was one of pure murder. Not exactly high on the "natural leader" qualities, this bloke.
So ... I look forward to NOT being like that guy, and I thank all of you who have contributed to this thread, for several reasons.
First, it helps me understand why Americans have WO pilots - and how they compare to our rank structure. Really, New_WO1, you are a Cadet, pure and simple. Your rank is a training rank, you've said so yourself. To compare your rank with a grizzled veteran of many years service, well what can I say.
Second, it helps me understand our NCO ranks, and gives me a much greater respect for them, for which I thank the UK guys.
New_WO1, go back and read your leadership manual, it's FM 22-100, I've got a copy if you can't find yours. You'll find a whole bunch of great info in there that it seems you've missed.
Knuckle down to your study, finish your training, and get on with the job. Be good at it - that's your main responsibility right now. Nobody even cares who you are until you're a useful member of a unit, so stop being so self-centred and focus on learning how to fly.
Cheers, mate.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wishtobflying said:
You could not be more wrong. You DO NOT have an understanding of the U.S. Warrant Officer system.
A WO1 is NOT a Cadet. While it is true U.S. Army WO1 pilot maybe straight out of Warrant Officer Candidate School and flight training with less than 2 years in the Army, there are also many of non-pilot WO1s who have years of service. I know a couple of Special Forces Army WO1s who would take great anger at being compared to a Cadet. Other Army WO specialities require a minimum length of service and a minimum enlisted rank from an applicant. I am not positive, but I think it is Sargent (E-5) and 5 yerars of service.
I did not see any posts from New_WO1 saying he was still in training. Army Warrant Officer candidates that are enlisted for the WOFT (Warrant Officer Flight Training) program do not receive their WO1 Warrents until completion of flight training and earning their wings. So New_WO1 has at least 4 months of basic training and 1 year of flight training as a "Cadet" prior to receiving his Warrant as a WO1. If he is a WO1 pilot, he is a winged aviator in an operational flying billet. Further, to have been in the U.K. and been in the position of asking about how he was treated, he has to have completed all training in his specific airframe - at least another 6 months of duty. So he probably has somewhere around 2 years of service. He IS NOT a Cadet. If fact, he probably already has been to or is very near going to Iraq or Afganistan since helo pilots are currently in big demand there.
In the USN and USMC, Warrent Officers start at WO2 and they ARE COMMISSIONED OFFICERS. To apply, they must be at least a E-7 (Chief Petty Officer or Gunnery Sargent) and that will have taken at least 10 years of service to achieve.
I find it extremely humorous to see a "wanna-be" (since you have not even started your military service yet) lecturing a serving WO on leadership. It reminds me of your story of the 2 WOs and the young Lieutenant. You are already on the road to being like that guy.
New_WO1, you are a Cadet, pure and simple. Your rank is a training rank, you've said so yourself. To compare your rank with a grizzled veteran of many years service, well what can I say.
Knuckle down to your study, finish your training, and get on with the job. Be good at it - that's your main responsibility right now. Nobody even cares who you are until you're a useful member of a unit, so stop being so self-centred and focus on learning how to fly.
Knuckle down to your study, finish your training, and get on with the job. Be good at it - that's your main responsibility right now. Nobody even cares who you are until you're a useful member of a unit, so stop being so self-centred and focus on learning how to fly.
A WO1 is NOT a Cadet. While it is true U.S. Army WO1 pilot maybe straight out of Warrant Officer Candidate School and flight training with less than 2 years in the Army, there are also many of non-pilot WO1s who have years of service. I know a couple of Special Forces Army WO1s who would take great anger at being compared to a Cadet. Other Army WO specialities require a minimum length of service and a minimum enlisted rank from an applicant. I am not positive, but I think it is Sargent (E-5) and 5 yerars of service.
I did not see any posts from New_WO1 saying he was still in training. Army Warrant Officer candidates that are enlisted for the WOFT (Warrant Officer Flight Training) program do not receive their WO1 Warrents until completion of flight training and earning their wings. So New_WO1 has at least 4 months of basic training and 1 year of flight training as a "Cadet" prior to receiving his Warrant as a WO1. If he is a WO1 pilot, he is a winged aviator in an operational flying billet. Further, to have been in the U.K. and been in the position of asking about how he was treated, he has to have completed all training in his specific airframe - at least another 6 months of duty. So he probably has somewhere around 2 years of service. He IS NOT a Cadet. If fact, he probably already has been to or is very near going to Iraq or Afganistan since helo pilots are currently in big demand there.
In the USN and USMC, Warrent Officers start at WO2 and they ARE COMMISSIONED OFFICERS. To apply, they must be at least a E-7 (Chief Petty Officer or Gunnery Sargent) and that will have taken at least 10 years of service to achieve.
New_WO1, go back and read your leadership manual, it's FM 22-100, I've got a copy if you can't find yours. You'll find a whole bunch of great info in there that it seems you've missed.
Westie...
They are correct about the decorated service....Lord God man have you seen the Gongs they wear on ceremonial occasions...Patton himself could have designed the uniform for all one would know. I appreciate the fact some of the Royals have served and done so quite honorably but one can only guess how the Officer Reports went..."excellent worker when cornered"...."troops follow him if only to see what else he can **** up"....I am sure there has not been a promotion missed based upon performance and secondary duties amongst the Royal Serving Family.
I would imagine being a Royal in a flying squadron with yer Mum the sitting Queen might be tough duty.....as compared to being an F-102 pilot with yer Daddy a Senator. Seems to me Mum carries a bit more stick than a mere Senator or am I wrong here? Either one would get preferential treatment.
Think not....ask old Randy about his visit to the USA...when he bonked a member of the PSD escorting him around Washington....she even gave him a unique gift of a PSD id pin that if even "lost" innocently by a male colleague generated a full fledged investigation. Now...understand....I would have done the same....bonking the bird....but the issue is nothing was said to either party because of who he was....Mum's youngun.
At the same time Westie....we have to remember that we do not choose which family we are born into....and we cannot all be farmer's sons thus I really have sympathy for the Royals....having to assume all that burden by sheer birthright. Terrible burden that must be....keeping up appearances and all.
Let's just hope none of them run for political office....now would that not be a situation made for pprune.
They are correct about the decorated service....Lord God man have you seen the Gongs they wear on ceremonial occasions...Patton himself could have designed the uniform for all one would know. I appreciate the fact some of the Royals have served and done so quite honorably but one can only guess how the Officer Reports went..."excellent worker when cornered"...."troops follow him if only to see what else he can **** up"....I am sure there has not been a promotion missed based upon performance and secondary duties amongst the Royal Serving Family.
I would imagine being a Royal in a flying squadron with yer Mum the sitting Queen might be tough duty.....as compared to being an F-102 pilot with yer Daddy a Senator. Seems to me Mum carries a bit more stick than a mere Senator or am I wrong here? Either one would get preferential treatment.
Think not....ask old Randy about his visit to the USA...when he bonked a member of the PSD escorting him around Washington....she even gave him a unique gift of a PSD id pin that if even "lost" innocently by a male colleague generated a full fledged investigation. Now...understand....I would have done the same....bonking the bird....but the issue is nothing was said to either party because of who he was....Mum's youngun.
At the same time Westie....we have to remember that we do not choose which family we are born into....and we cannot all be farmer's sons thus I really have sympathy for the Royals....having to assume all that burden by sheer birthright. Terrible burden that must be....keeping up appearances and all.
Let's just hope none of them run for political office....now would that not be a situation made for pprune.
Some light relief:
Charles and Camilla are apparently a bit flummoxed by the whole marriage thing; it's reported that on their wedding night the following took place:
As Camilla was making last-minute preparations to walk down the aisle, she found that her shoes were missing. She was forced to borrow her sister's, which were a bit on the small side.
When the day's festivities were finally over, Charles and Camilla retired to their room, right next door to the Queen's and Prince Phillip's. Because of the type of construction done following the Windsor Castle fire, the adjoining walls were made of plasterboard.
As soon as Charles and Camilla were inside their room, Camilla flopped on the bed and said,
"Darling, please get these shoes off. My feet are killing me."
The ever-obedient Prince of Wales attacked the right shoe with vigour, but it was stuck fast.
"Harder!" Camilla yelled. "Harder!"
"I'm trying, darling!" The Prince yelled back. "It's just so bloody tight!"
"Come on! Give it all you've got!"
There was a big groan from the Prince, and then Camilla exclaimed,
"There! That's it! Oh that feels good! Oh that feels SO good!"
In the bedroom next door, the Queen turned to Prince Phillip and said,
"See? I told you, with a face like that she was still a virgin."
Back in the bridal suite, Charles was trying to pry off the left shoe.
"Oh, my God, darling! This one's even tighter!" exclaimed the heir to the throne.
At which Prince Phillip turned to the Queen and said,
"That's my boy.. Once a Navy man, always a Navy man!"
Charles and Camilla are apparently a bit flummoxed by the whole marriage thing; it's reported that on their wedding night the following took place:
As Camilla was making last-minute preparations to walk down the aisle, she found that her shoes were missing. She was forced to borrow her sister's, which were a bit on the small side.
When the day's festivities were finally over, Charles and Camilla retired to their room, right next door to the Queen's and Prince Phillip's. Because of the type of construction done following the Windsor Castle fire, the adjoining walls were made of plasterboard.
As soon as Charles and Camilla were inside their room, Camilla flopped on the bed and said,
"Darling, please get these shoes off. My feet are killing me."
The ever-obedient Prince of Wales attacked the right shoe with vigour, but it was stuck fast.
"Harder!" Camilla yelled. "Harder!"
"I'm trying, darling!" The Prince yelled back. "It's just so bloody tight!"
"Come on! Give it all you've got!"
There was a big groan from the Prince, and then Camilla exclaimed,
"There! That's it! Oh that feels good! Oh that feels SO good!"
In the bedroom next door, the Queen turned to Prince Phillip and said,
"See? I told you, with a face like that she was still a virgin."
Back in the bridal suite, Charles was trying to pry off the left shoe.
"Oh, my God, darling! This one's even tighter!" exclaimed the heir to the throne.
At which Prince Phillip turned to the Queen and said,
"That's my boy.. Once a Navy man, always a Navy man!"
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Oh come now SASless, you have your royal families - Kennedys, Gores´, Bushs´etc, you´re just a bit more coy about it. And at least our don´t actually get to run the country....... 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From time immemorial, it's been a time honoured pastime where the Windsor writ runs large, to tease ever so gently, our cousins who dwell in the home of the brave and the land of the free.
And since time immemorial, (or certainly after the British burnt the White House in August 1814), the cousins usually rise to the occasion.
Sometimes our cousins tend to irritation because they lack the ability not to not take themselves seriously and laugh at themselves. They confuse robust argument with personal opprobrium. Some have a tendency to try and inflict American life, times, values and US military customs and practice on the rest of us. Our traditional response, refined over the years, and in countless encounters, has been to extract the urine or remove the snake’s hiss. And so it is in this thread.
Having said that, I fear we reach new heights of hypocrisy in attempting to compare a 14 (yes fourteen) month warrant (note the spelling please HAL Pilot ) officer straight out of US Army flight training, occupying a very junior position in a flying unit, with a seasoned veteran warrant officer of long service who has earned both his warrant (note the spelling again, please HAL Pilot ) and the respect of his comrades and colleagues.
In the Royal Australian (note the spelling please, HAL Pilot) Air Force, newly graduated pilots posted to flying units are known as “bog rats” or “boggies”– a derisory term that encapsulates their general worth in the flying environment. With the greatest of respect, there’s no evidence on this thread to suggest that an “instant” US Army WO1 of similar flying experience in a comparable flying environment is of any greater value on a squadron than his/her “boggie” equivalent. Yet learned US contributors persist in comparing the US equivalent of a “boggie” to a long serving US, UK or Australian veteran warrant officer. May I use the Crocodile Dundee vernacular and say: “Mate, if you believe that, I can surely interest you in some Sydney real estate that joins the North and South shore, that’s on the market for a song”!
Also, only the Americans can have “commissioned warrant officer”. Surely one either holds a warrant or a commission – but not both validly together. If it’s the latter, then one becomes a commissioned officer from the granting of the commission. If it’s the former, then one is truly a warrant officer and entitled to all the respect and privileges that go with that ancient rank and title.
Seems like too much Duff beer to me!
And since time immemorial, (or certainly after the British burnt the White House in August 1814), the cousins usually rise to the occasion.
Sometimes our cousins tend to irritation because they lack the ability not to not take themselves seriously and laugh at themselves. They confuse robust argument with personal opprobrium. Some have a tendency to try and inflict American life, times, values and US military customs and practice on the rest of us. Our traditional response, refined over the years, and in countless encounters, has been to extract the urine or remove the snake’s hiss. And so it is in this thread.
Having said that, I fear we reach new heights of hypocrisy in attempting to compare a 14 (yes fourteen) month warrant (note the spelling please HAL Pilot ) officer straight out of US Army flight training, occupying a very junior position in a flying unit, with a seasoned veteran warrant officer of long service who has earned both his warrant (note the spelling again, please HAL Pilot ) and the respect of his comrades and colleagues.
In the Royal Australian (note the spelling please, HAL Pilot) Air Force, newly graduated pilots posted to flying units are known as “bog rats” or “boggies”– a derisory term that encapsulates their general worth in the flying environment. With the greatest of respect, there’s no evidence on this thread to suggest that an “instant” US Army WO1 of similar flying experience in a comparable flying environment is of any greater value on a squadron than his/her “boggie” equivalent. Yet learned US contributors persist in comparing the US equivalent of a “boggie” to a long serving US, UK or Australian veteran warrant officer. May I use the Crocodile Dundee vernacular and say: “Mate, if you believe that, I can surely interest you in some Sydney real estate that joins the North and South shore, that’s on the market for a song”!
Also, only the Americans can have “commissioned warrant officer”. Surely one either holds a warrant or a commission – but not both validly together. If it’s the latter, then one becomes a commissioned officer from the granting of the commission. If it’s the former, then one is truly a warrant officer and entitled to all the respect and privileges that go with that ancient rank and title.
Seems like too much Duff beer to me!
(a bear of little brain)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: 51 10 03.70N 2 58 37.15W
Age: 75
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wouldn't a British (or Australian) Warrant Officer who was then, after officer training (or battlefield promotion presumably), commisioned be a “commissioned warrant officer”?