From CFB Baggotville, Quebec: IMG_0964mod001.jpg (1/1)

"Jacques & Laurie" wrote in message
. ..
Xcuse me! . . .

Did you also know that CFB Bagotville was also referred to as "BAG Town"? I
have come to know it as such because every service man that I knew in Canada
called it as such. Endearing term, if you wish . . .

As far as I was concerned, I served with the "Air Force" in Canada
(1972-1977) even though WE all wore GREEN. Remember those days?

Jacques
(former corporal, CANADIAN AIR FORCE)

I first joined a unit that is widely known in Ottawa and The Royal Regiment of
Canadian Artillery as the "Bytown Gunners," but widespread usage does not in
any way make the name official.

It is fine to use colloquialisms like "Air Force" in places where they will
not confuse. You are, however, posting to an international forum where not
everyone is au fait with the National Defence Re-organization Act, 1967, its
disestablishment of the navy, army and air force as services in Canada, and
its establishment of the single service with "forces" (regular, reserve and
special) as the basis for managing personnel establishments.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

Andrew Chaplin wrote:
"Jacques & Laurie" wrote in message
. ..
Xcuse me! . . .

Did you also know that CFB Bagotville was also referred to as "BAG Town"? I
have come to know it as such because every service man that I knew in Canada
called it as such. Endearing term, if you wish . . .

As far as I was concerned, I served with the "Air Force" in Canada
(1972-1977) even though WE all wore GREEN. Remember those days?

Jacques
(former corporal, CANADIAN AIR FORCE)

I first joined a unit that is widely known in Ottawa and The Royal Regiment of
Canadian Artillery as the "Bytown Gunners," but widespread usage does not in
any way make the name official.

It is fine to use colloquialisms like "Air Force" in places where they will
not confuse. You are, however, posting to an international forum where not
everyone is au fait with the National Defence Re-organization Act, 1967, its
disestablishment of the navy, army and air force as services in Canada, and
its establishment of the single service with "forces" (regular, reserve and
special) as the basis for managing personnel establishments.

I really think that you should loosen up a bit.

It is highly unlikely that anyone, apart from you maybe, has any
problems with those who fly military aircraft in Canada being referred
to as "air force" as a means of identification. Similarly, for those who
serve in ground based, or sea based rôles there is no problem with
references to "army" or "navy" in terms of their particular rôles.

To quote a sombre note from the RCAF website: "The Canadian Forces
Reorganization Act came into effect on 1 February 1968. With that, the
identity of the RCAF, its records and its achievements, were laid to
rest in the pages of Canadian aviation and military history."

The same website, however, also confirms the right to an identity by
stating: "In 1999 the Canadian Air Force celebrated its Diamond Jubilee
after 75 years serving Canadians. With its current unified command
structure, new programs, and new aircraft Canadians can be proud of
their air force and look to the future with much optimism."

Canada's armed services have a proud heritage and have made a
disproportionate contribution to world security over a great many years,
and an act of parliament, passed for whatever reason, seemed an attempt
by some, it has been said, to dilute the spirit that made them great.
It's interesting that this was driven through parliament by Prime
Minister Pierre Trudeau and Defence Minister Paul Hellyer, both of whom
seemed to court controversy. Indeed, the attempt to abandon service
traditions was less than popular in some quarters as was the concept of
one single uniform and rank structure throughout, hence the fact that it
was not fully implemented across the board - personnel of Maritime
Command, for example, maintained their naval rank designations.

--
Moving things in still pictures!

Thank you for that walk in history, sir. That is all true . . . Was under
the flag inthose days too . . .

Jacques


"®i©ardo" wrote in message
.uk...
Andrew Chaplin wrote:
"Jacques & Laurie" wrote in message
. ..
Xcuse me! . . .

Did you also know that CFB Bagotville was also referred to as "BAG
Town"? I have come to know it as such because every service man that I
knew in Canada called it as such. Endearing term, if you wish . . .

As far as I was concerned, I served with the "Air Force" in Canada
(1972-1977) even though WE all wore GREEN. Remember those days?

Jacques
(former corporal, CANADIAN AIR FORCE)

I first joined a unit that is widely known in Ottawa and The Royal
Regiment of Canadian Artillery as the "Bytown Gunners," but widespread
usage does not in any way make the name official.

It is fine to use colloquialisms like "Air Force" in places where they
will not confuse. You are, however, posting to an international forum
where not everyone is au fait with the National Defence Re-organization
Act, 1967, its disestablishment of the navy, army and air force as
services in Canada, and its establishment of the single service with
"forces" (regular, reserve and special) as the basis for managing
personnel establishments.

I really think that you should loosen up a bit.

It is highly unlikely that anyone, apart from you maybe, has any problems
with those who fly military aircraft in Canada being referred to as "air
force" as a means of identification. Similarly, for those who serve in
ground based, or sea based rôles there is no problem with references to
"army" or "navy" in terms of their particular rôles.

To quote a sombre note from the RCAF website: "The Canadian Forces
Reorganization Act came into effect on 1 February 1968. With that, the
identity of the RCAF, its records and its achievements, were laid to rest
in the pages of Canadian aviation and military history."

The same website, however, also confirms the right to an identity by
stating: "In 1999 the Canadian Air Force celebrated its Diamond Jubilee
after 75 years serving Canadians. With its current unified command
structure, new programs, and new aircraft Canadians can be proud of their
air force and look to the future with much optimism."

Canada's armed services have a proud heritage and have made a
disproportionate contribution to world security over a great many years,
and an act of parliament, passed for whatever reason, seemed an attempt by
some, it has been said, to dilute the spirit that made them great. It's
interesting that this was driven through parliament by Prime Minister
Pierre Trudeau and Defence Minister Paul Hellyer, both of whom seemed to
court controversy. Indeed, the attempt to abandon service traditions was
less than popular in some quarters as was the concept of one single
uniform and rank structure throughout, hence the fact that it was not
fully implemented across the board - personnel of Maritime Command, for
example, maintained their naval rank designations.

--
Moving things in still pictures!

Part time soldier, eh? I know of which you speak. 30 Mile snipers, 30th
Field was. What was it you had? 2 batteries? (2 guns), WWII specials at
that . . .

Just teasing . . .

Jacques

"Andrew Chaplin" wrote in message
...
"The Visitor" wrote in message
...


Jacques & Laurie wrote:


Jacques
(former corporal, CANADIAN AIR FORCE)



Yep. My brother inlaw calls it the "Air Force". He is still in.

It's an "air force" to be sure, just not the "Air Force".
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

"Jacques & Laurie" wrote in message
. ..
Part time soldier, eh? I know of which you speak. 30 Mile snipers, 30th
Field was. What was it you had? 2 batteries? (2 guns), WWII specials at
that . . .

Just teasing . . .

May 73 to Dec 74, Pri Res; Jan 75 to Jan 96, Reg F; Jan 96 to May 2000, Pri
Res.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

Jacques & Laurie wrote:
Thank you for that walk in history, sir. That is all true . . . Was under
the flag inthose days too . . .

Jacques


"®i©ardo" wrote in message
.uk...
Andrew Chaplin wrote:
"Jacques & Laurie" wrote in message
. ..
Xcuse me! . . .

Did you also know that CFB Bagotville was also referred to as "BAG
Town"? I have come to know it as such because every service man that I
knew in Canada called it as such. Endearing term, if you wish . . .

As far as I was concerned, I served with the "Air Force" in Canada
(1972-1977) even though WE all wore GREEN. Remember those days?

Jacques
(former corporal, CANADIAN AIR FORCE)
I first joined a unit that is widely known in Ottawa and The Royal
Regiment of Canadian Artillery as the "Bytown Gunners," but widespread
usage does not in any way make the name official.

It is fine to use colloquialisms like "Air Force" in places where they
will not confuse. You are, however, posting to an international forum
where not everyone is au fait with the National Defence Re-organization
Act, 1967, its disestablishment of the navy, army and air force as
services in Canada, and its establishment of the single service with
"forces" (regular, reserve and special) as the basis for managing
personnel establishments.
I really think that you should loosen up a bit.

It is highly unlikely that anyone, apart from you maybe, has any problems
with those who fly military aircraft in Canada being referred to as "air
force" as a means of identification. Similarly, for those who serve in
ground based, or sea based rôles there is no problem with references to
"army" or "navy" in terms of their particular rôles.

To quote a sombre note from the RCAF website: "The Canadian Forces
Reorganization Act came into effect on 1 February 1968. With that, the
identity of the RCAF, its records and its achievements, were laid to rest
in the pages of Canadian aviation and military history."

The same website, however, also confirms the right to an identity by
stating: "In 1999 the Canadian Air Force celebrated its Diamond Jubilee
after 75 years serving Canadians. With its current unified command
structure, new programs, and new aircraft Canadians can be proud of their
air force and look to the future with much optimism."

Canada's armed services have a proud heritage and have made a
disproportionate contribution to world security over a great many years,
and an act of parliament, passed for whatever reason, seemed an attempt by
some, it has been said, to dilute the spirit that made them great. It's
interesting that this was driven through parliament by Prime Minister
Pierre Trudeau and Defence Minister Paul Hellyer, both of whom seemed to
court controversy. Indeed, the attempt to abandon service traditions was
less than popular in some quarters as was the concept of one single
uniform and rank structure throughout, hence the fact that it was not
fully implemented across the board - personnel of Maritime Command, for
example, maintained their naval rank designations.

--
Moving things in still pictures!


Thanks Jacques,

We disregard or abandon our heritage at our peril!

®i©ardo

--
Moving things in still pictures!

"®i©ardo" wrote in message
.uk...
Andrew Chaplin wrote:
"Jacques & Laurie" wrote in message
. ..
Xcuse me! . . .

Did you also know that CFB Bagotville was also referred to as "BAG Town"?
I have come to know it as such because every service man that I knew in
Canada called it as such. Endearing term, if you wish . . .

As far as I was concerned, I served with the "Air Force" in Canada
(1972-1977) even though WE all wore GREEN. Remember those days?

Jacques
(former corporal, CANADIAN AIR FORCE)

I first joined a unit that is widely known in Ottawa and The Royal Regiment
of Canadian Artillery as the "Bytown Gunners," but widespread usage does
not in any way make the name official.

It is fine to use colloquialisms like "Air Force" in places where they will
not confuse. You are, however, posting to an international forum where not
everyone is au fait with the National Defence Re-organization Act, 1967,
its disestablishment of the navy, army and air force as services in Canada,
and its establishment of the single service with "forces" (regular, reserve
and special) as the basis for managing personnel establishments.

I really think that you should loosen up a bit.

It is highly unlikely that anyone, apart from you maybe, has any problems
with those who fly military aircraft in Canada being referred to as "air
force" as a means of identification. Similarly, for those who serve in
ground based, or sea based rôles there is no problem with references to
"army" or "navy" in terms of their particular rôles.

To quote a sombre note from the RCAF website: "The Canadian Forces
Reorganization Act came into effect on 1 February 1968. With that, the
identity of the RCAF, its records and its achievements, were laid to rest in
the pages of Canadian aviation and military history."

The same website, however, also confirms the right to an identity by
stating: "In 1999 the Canadian Air Force celebrated its Diamond Jubilee
after 75 years serving Canadians. With its current unified command
structure, new programs, and new aircraft Canadians can be proud of their
air force and look to the future with much optimism."

Canada's armed services have a proud heritage and have made a
disproportionate contribution to world security over a great many years, and
an act of parliament, passed for whatever reason, seemed an attempt by some,
it has been said, to dilute the spirit that made them great. It's
interesting that this was driven through parliament by Prime Minister Pierre
Trudeau and

Trudeau did not become prime minister until April 68, more than two months
after the re-organization. The Act itself passed in the late spring of 67,
AIRI. It was Lester Pearson's cabinet that drove it, and they did it in a
minority Parliament, meaning they had broad support; it wasn't done on a
whipped vote. Trudeau was largely indifferent to the CF (when he wasn't being
mistrustful) and only voted on the changes as a member of cabinet and then in
the House.

Defence Minister Paul Hellyer, both of whom seemed to court controversy.
Indeed, the attempt to abandon service traditions was less than popular in
some quarters as was the concept of one single uniform and rank structure
throughout, hence the fact that it was not fully implemented across the
board - personnel of Maritime Command, for example, maintained their naval
rank designations.

Actually, the single rank structure was implemented across the board. It was
one of the first aspects of unification dropped. The use of naval rank was
tolerated unofficially and then formalized in the late '70s, IIRC. The use of
former army ranks in the artillery, sappers and GGHG is still unofficial but
tolerated.

I have no problem with people referring collectively to Canada's military air
fleet, the air crew, ground crew and support wallahs as "the air force." What
I have a problem with is the turning of this collectivity into something
distinct from the rest of the CF by use of "Air Force" as a proper noun.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

Andrew Chaplin wrote:
"Jacques & Laurie" wrote in message
. ..
Xcuse me! . . .

Did you also know that CFB Bagotville was also referred to as "BAG Town"? I
have come to know it as such because every service man that I knew in Canada
called it as such. Endearing term, if you wish . . .

As far as I was concerned, I served with the "Air Force" in Canada
(1972-1977) even though WE all wore GREEN. Remember those days?

Jacques
(former corporal, CANADIAN AIR FORCE)

I first joined a unit that is widely known in Ottawa and The Royal Regiment of
Canadian Artillery as the "Bytown Gunners," but widespread usage does not in
any way make the name official.

It is fine to use colloquialisms like "Air Force" in places where they will
not confuse. You are, however, posting to an international forum where not
everyone is au fait with the National Defence Re-organization Act, 1967, its
disestablishment of the navy, army and air force as services in Canada, and
its establishment of the single service with "forces" (regular, reserve and
special) as the basis for managing personnel establishments.


Ah yes, I remember Bag Town ... when I was with the 10th Mountain
Division (ages ago), we went on maneuvers with some Canadian Army unit
(can't recall but believe they were also mountain, snow troops). They
ran us into the freeking ground on cross country ski exercises. They
all must have been born on skis.

Great bunch of guys, however and the NCO club at Bag Town Base was one
rocking joint just like the one in Baden Baden, GE ...

Oh Canada!

Cheers,
Dave

"CWO4 Dave Mann" wrote in message
. ..
Andrew Chaplin wrote:
"Jacques & Laurie" wrote in message
. ..
Xcuse me! . . .

Did you also know that CFB Bagotville was also referred to as "BAG Town"?
I
have come to know it as such because every service man that I knew in
Canada
called it as such. Endearing term, if you wish . . .

As far as I was concerned, I served with the "Air Force" in Canada
(1972-1977) even though WE all wore GREEN. Remember those days?

Jacques
(former corporal, CANADIAN AIR FORCE)

I first joined a unit that is widely known in Ottawa and The Royal Regiment
of
Canadian Artillery as the "Bytown Gunners," but widespread usage does not
in
any way make the name official.

It is fine to use colloquialisms like "Air Force" in places where they will
not confuse. You are, however, posting to an international forum where not
everyone is au fait with the National Defence Re-organization Act, 1967,
its
disestablishment of the navy, army and air force as services in Canada, and
its establishment of the single service with "forces" (regular, reserve and
special) as the basis for managing personnel establishments.


Ah yes, I remember Bag Town ... when I was with the 10th Mountain
Division (ages ago), we went on maneuvers with some Canadian Army unit
(can't recall but believe they were also mountain, snow troops). They
ran us into the freeking ground on cross country ski exercises. They
all must have been born on skis.

Great bunch of guys, however and the NCO club at Bag Town Base was one
rocking joint just like the one in Baden Baden, GE ...

Oh Canada!

Are you sure that wasn't Canadian Forces Base Gagetown (AKA "Gag Town,"
"Gage-Nam" and "Camp Swamp-on-the-Hilltops")? There are not many ground
manoeuvre areas around Bagotville, and the Combat Training Centre (our "Centre
of Excrements") is in New Brunswick, along with the tac hel training mob.

By necessity, all Canadian regular units in the field force are "snow troops."
Winter warfare exercises are an annual qualification, usually done in late
January when the weather is dependably cold. While we may train "off the
reservation" in spring, summer and autumn, winter training is almost always
done on DND land because it is too hard to clean up the brass and pyro
afterward.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

Andrew Chaplin wrote:
"CWO4 Dave Mann" wrote in message
. ..
Andrew Chaplin wrote:
"Jacques & Laurie" wrote in message
. ..
Xcuse me! . . .

Did you also know that CFB Bagotville was also referred to as "BAG Town"?
I
have come to know it as such because every service man that I knew in
Canada
called it as such. Endearing term, if you wish . . .

As far as I was concerned, I served with the "Air Force" in Canada
(1972-1977) even though WE all wore GREEN. Remember those days?

Jacques
(former corporal, CANADIAN AIR FORCE)
I first joined a unit that is widely known in Ottawa and The Royal Regiment
of
Canadian Artillery as the "Bytown Gunners," but widespread usage does not
in
any way make the name official.

It is fine to use colloquialisms like "Air Force" in places where they will
not confuse. You are, however, posting to an international forum where not
everyone is au fait with the National Defence Re-organization Act, 1967,
its
disestablishment of the navy, army and air force as services in Canada, and
its establishment of the single service with "forces" (regular, reserve and
special) as the basis for managing personnel establishments.

Ah yes, I remember Bag Town ... when I was with the 10th Mountain
Division (ages ago), we went on maneuvers with some Canadian Army unit
(can't recall but believe they were also mountain, snow troops). They
ran us into the freeking ground on cross country ski exercises. They
all must have been born on skis.

Great bunch of guys, however and the NCO club at Bag Town Base was one
rocking joint just like the one in Baden Baden, GE ...

Oh Canada!

Are you sure that wasn't Canadian Forces Base Gagetown (AKA "Gag Town,"
"Gage-Nam" and "Camp Swamp-on-the-Hilltops")? There are not many ground
manoeuvre areas around Bagotville, and the Combat Training Centre (our "Centre
of Excrements") is in New Brunswick, along with the tac hel training mob.

By necessity, all Canadian regular units in the field force are "snow troops."
Winter warfare exercises are an annual qualification, usually done in late
January when the weather is dependably cold. While we may train "off the
reservation" in spring, summer and autumn, winter training is almost always
done on DND land because it is too hard to clean up the brass and pyro
afterward.


Well which base is right north of Fort Drum. seems to me we did a road
march with vehicles and the border inspectors on the Canadian side
remarked that the last time this has happened was the war of 1812 or
something like that.

Anyway, a great time was had by all, to be sure!

Cheers,
Dave