John Penta wrote:

looks Y'know, why don't they do the USN rank structure like THIS:


O-6 commanding squadron: Fleet Captain
O-7: Commodore
O-8: Rear Admiral
O-9: Vice Admiral
0-10: Admiral
O-11 (5-star): Fleet Admiral.

It provides a nice symmatery, I'd think.

Symmetry too. ;-

Unfortunately, at the top end there will never again be a five-star
Admiral, Fleet or otherwise [nor a five-star general, either]. The
only reason we ever had them [remembering that Washington's and
Pershing's designations as Generals of the Armies came well after
their respective wars] was as an attempt to shut up Monty, who was
causing Ike all sorts of grief. It was a hope that making Ike a
five-star to match Monty's baton would ease things. And if Ike got
five, then Leahy, Marshall, King, Arnold, Nimitz had to get them too.
Which made it Army 4 to the Navy's 3. That wouldn't do, so ...

At the bottom end there are even more problems. Rear Admirals of
either flavor, O-7 or O-8, are very protective of their rank title.
Are you too young to remember the, mercifully brief, imbroglios when
O-7s were briefly titled Commodore/Commodore-Admiral? They grudgingly
accepted, after a long fight, wearing only one-star, but the title of
Commodore or Commodore-Admiral was anathema. The only flag officers
to carry the rank/title of Commodore were the retreads called back in
WWII to command convoys. "And you want to call *us* Commodores?"

And O-6 division/squadron/whatever commanders are also very parochial
about their being called Commodore. "Fleet Captain? Sounds like I'm
the Sixth Fleet Chief of Staff. I *command* a [SubRon, CruDesRon,
WhateverRon], I don't push papers for some Admiral like an Executive
Assistant."

We Marines are very protective of our own history, customs, and
traditions, but we have to tip our covers in admiration of the Navy
Officer Corps attitudes in that respect. They make us look like we
chase the latest fads.