SMALL WARS COUNCIL
Go Back   Small Wars Council > Military Art & Science Applied > Catch-All, Military Art & Science

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-16-2011   #1
Pete
Council Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Mountain, West Virginia
Posts: 990
Default U.S. Army Trivia Question

Did there used to be an Army regulation or pamphlet that caused the commanding officer's jeep or vehicle to be numbered with a -6 suffix on the bumper, as in HQ-6, A-6, B-6, etc? During my time in service there was no such requirement that I'm aware of, but the tradition was still put into practice. If I recall correctly from my military history reading the -6 suffix also was sometimes used informally in radio call signs until Signal operating instructions got away from that procedure.
Pete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011   #2
82redleg
Council Member
 
82redleg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mother Sill
Posts: 222
Default

I've never heard of a regulation, but its been that way for the last 15 years.

In the mech units I've been around, when the CDR has a fighting vehicle (tank, IFV, etc) and a HMMWV, the HMMWV is -6, and the fighting vehicle is -66.

Also since I've been in the Army, we've had freq-hopping, encrypted radios, and used Hollywood callsigns almost exclusively. Every commander I've ever been around has used the unit call sign with the -6 expander. (Dragon 6, AllAmerican 6, Devil 6, Warrior 6, Thunder 6, etc). This is true from company level on up. Inside a platoon, the PL is the company call sign, then 16 (first PLT PL), -26, -36, etc. PSGs are -5 or -7, 1SGs/CSMs are usually -9 (or sometimes -7), XOs are -5. Primary staff are usually -1, -2, -3 and -4, but then they get garbled (because CDRs, XOs, DCOs, 1SGs/CSMs use their numbers) and usually have some two digit expander.
82redleg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011   #3
Pete
Council Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Mountain, West Virginia
Posts: 990
Default

Thanks, Redleg, during my Field Artillery service in '77-'84 nobody could tell me why we did it that way, except to say that's the way it had always been done. Maybe it started in a technical bulletin from the '50s.
Pete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011   #4
Pete
Council Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Mountain, West Virginia
Posts: 990
Default

In around '79 or '80 we were equipped with Vinson secure units for our tactical radios, which I believe were frequency-hopping. Before that our secure units consisted of devices with male rods that fitted into female recepticles, and the settings on the device had to be changed daily according to that day's settings specified in the Communications-Electronics Operating Instructions. However, call signs then included in the CEOI did not have unique suffixes that identified the specific element within the organization.

Last edited by Pete; 01-16-2011 at 11:31 PM.
Pete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011   #5
Pete
Council Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Mountain, West Virginia
Posts: 990
Default

One of the hazards of being an old U.S. Army fa*t is that the terminology and acronyms we are accustomed to change all the time. When we see it happen our first step after taking deep breath is to assume that the new term can't be that much different from the old one, hence SOI, Signal Operating Instructions, turns into CEOI, Communications-Electronics Operating Instructions. Generally we keep up with these changes, but let me tell you, boys, Gettysburg was hell.
Pete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011   #6
sullygoarmy
Council Member
 
sullygoarmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fort Stewart
Posts: 223
Default

It was like that back in 1994 in the anti-tank companies in the 82d Airborne as well. Not sure when it started but definitely still in effect in combined arms battalions today as well.
__________________
"But the bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet withstanding, go out to meet it."

-Thucydides
sullygoarmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ramadi Revisited; Cracks in Jihad SWJED Who is Fighting Whom? How and Why? 14 08-31-2007 07:51 PM
Muqtada al-Sadr: Spoiler or Stabilizer? Jedburgh Who is Fighting Whom? How and Why? 15 08-22-2007 11:16 AM
Iraqis jailing innocents, U.S. officials say tequila Iraqi Governance 1 05-15-2007 09:51 AM
U.S. Is Extending Tours of Army in Battle Zones SWJED The Whole News 23 04-22-2007 07:48 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7. ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Registered Users are solely responsible for their messages.
Operated by, and site design 2005-2009, Small Wars Foundation