I have some questions regarding Burr Smith...
First, a little technical one... He was a T/4 (technician 4th grade) prior to D-Day... Is this rank the same thing than T/SGT (technical sergeant)???? I think not, but i want to make sure. I'm not from the U.S., so i'm not really familiar with U.S. Army ranks (i'm from France, where ranks are a bit different)...
Anyway... i also wanted to know what was his duty in Easy Company HQ section prior to D-Day (according to his daughter, he "was with Company HQs for 4 months before D-Day for some reason")... I mean, according to the US Parachute Infantry Company TOE from 1944, there should be only 3 Sergeants in the Company HQs section (and we already had S.Sgt Roberts (mess sergeant), Sgt. Murray (supply/operations sergeant) and Sgt. Riggs (communications)). From some infos that i gathered, Burr Smith became acting operations sergeant after re-organization of the Easy Coy on D Day night until he got wounded in Carentan on june 13th... but what his duty in HQs section BEFORE that...
And when did he returned to the company after being wounded? Did he return to 1st platoon?

I'll answer your first question for you about the rank. The T-4 rank is one rate below the T/Sgt rank, which would also be considered a T-5 for purpose of comparison.

Seconly, Burr Smith's daughter is on the forums here, I'm sure she could answer any questions you may have about Mr. Smith.

See you on the DZ,

Brig

Brig, thanks for the quick answer...
I'm not sure i got well the comparison with the T/5 rank. I always thought that T/5 was the equvalent of a Corporal for technicians and T/4 was the equivalent of a Sergeant for technicians (and T/3 the equivalent for a Staff Sgt for technicians). Am i correct here?
And T/Sgt is higher than this, right? This rank is only used for technicians NCO's?
Actually i'm not even sure i understand clearly the "concept" of technical ranks... The people with those ranks are only soldiers with "technical" duties (communication, whatever), is that it???
Sorry for my lack of knowledge about this... In the french army (as far as i know) you only have two levels for this rank:
- Sergent (or Marechal des Logis for the armored units)
- Sergent-Chef (or Marechal des Logis-Chef)
And i don't think there is any special ranks for specialized/technical duties (i might be wrong, but when i served in a armored regiment, the technicians had same ranks than "regular" soldiers)

You also should consider contacting Long John from this forum. He is the the brother of Burr Smith.

Chris, you have it backwards. T-4 is a corporal. Just like now, an E-4 can be a enlisted rank or NCO rank depending on what position they are serving in. T/5 is equivilent to Sergeant, T/6 to Staff Sergeant. If the number is higher, so is the rank. E-1 = recruit. E-9 equals Sergeant Major.

Are you sure about this rank issue?
I found this website, about WWII us army ranks, take a look at it...
http://www2.powercom.net/~rokats/wwii_era.html
It is clearly stated here that T-5 and Corporal were equvalent (grade 5, two chevrons), T-4 and Sgt were equivalent (grade 4, 3 chevrons), T-3 and S/Sgt were equivalnet (grade 3)... Also, on this page i discovered that Technical Sgt was the equivalent of First Sgt before sept.42, then was inbetween S/Sgt and 1/Sgt and was just a rank for technical NCO's...
Is this webpage wrong or what?
Still regarding those ranks issue, what exactly is the mission for a Technical Sergeant and for a Master Sergeant/Sergeant Major???
Sorry for all this boring technical questions, but i want to make sure i understand clearly the hierarchy and the specific missions of each soldier in a company...
Does this mean that all Technicians (T-5, T-4, T-3, T/Sgt) were only to serve in HQs section or HQ Companies?
From what Burr Smith's daughter said, he did most of WWII in the 1st platoon (except for a couple of month before D-Day in the HQs section), so i'm a bit confused...
If anyone knows, don't hesitate...

He also was assigned to Chilton Foliat as a jump instructor, so there you go, anoother piece of the puzzle.

Dear Chris,

I am just as confused as you. My dad was a T/4 and I was always told this meant he was a technical sergeant with some specialty. My understanding was he was a demolitions specialist of some sort on D-day. He was always with Easy Company, from Toccoa til Austria. But somewhere in there, just prior to D-day, he was assigned to Easy's company headquarters, not the regiment's headquarters, and lived and worked with the men who eventually went down on Lt. Meehan's plane. Only because that stick was over full did Winters move him to another plane. In Winters' new book he says he put my dad on his own stick, #67, but I show him as being on #68. I don't know if we will ever know. In any event, he obviously was very lucky and survived D-day.

None of the men can recall why he went to Chilton Foliat for a while but he has jumpmaster wings and I have his jump log which shows he made over 45 jumps. My uncle believes he was a teacher for a while at the jumpmaster school. I may have all my terms incorrect. I show him on several first platoon rosters at different times during the war, but Frank Perconte swears my dad was in second platoon for a time and doesn't recall when he came over to first. Johnny Martin told me he was my dad's squad leader in the first platoon. I have gathered bits and pieces and have certain records, but it is all hazy to me as well. He was always referred to as a sergeant in all the paperwork I have (company rosters and such), but was demoted at one point back to private and remained so for the rest of the war. Bill Guarnere told me years ago that once Winters was displeased and demoted someone, he would rarely promote them again. In my dad's own words in a letter to Winters, he says he was demoted for a stupid security breach. I think my uncle told me my dad wrote a letter home giving away their position. I also have copies of certain things the men sent Ambrose when he was writing the book and they always refer to my dad as a sergeant.

I think my understanding was that the technical sergeants had a specialty, like Luz who was a T/5 was a radio man. I don't think there were that many technical sergeants in Easy. I don't believe my dad was ever a platoon squad leader like the other sergeants. However, his closest friends in the war and throughout his life were the men that made sergeant early on, Malarkey, Guarnere, Rader, Ranney, Bain, Randleman, to name a few that come to mind. Perconte also swears my dad didn't return to the company after their wounds on the same day in the attck on Foy until just before VE Day, but I have company rosters that show my dad back from the hospital as a private long before that. I do know that he was a machine gunner and carried a BAR at some point.

The official roster of the men dated May 4, 1944 shows my dad as a T/4 at that time.

It is all very confusing and I need educating on this topic as well! I just wish my dad was here to explain this all to me!

Susan

One more comment...my dad clearly was not just a soldier with technical duties. My understanding from his own writings is that he was a demolitions specialist of some sort for D-day, but was a machine gunner after that. Earl McClung told me years ago that himself, Earl, had the reputation of killing the most Germans in Easy Company and he always felt bad about that because as a machine gunner, he said my dad clearly killed more soldiers than Earl did. He said my dad would clear the fields and then Earl and the others would go in afterwards....that is simplifying it of course, but the gist of it was that Earl felt embarrassed that this was attributed to him, not my dad. And Bull Randleman's wife told me after Bull passed away that he felt my dad never got the credit he deserved for the fine soldier that he was and she said he mentioned this often. It is clear in my mind, at least, that many of the men respected his contributions to Easy Company and I am very proud of him.

The roster for company headquarters of the men who were killed shows the following:

1st Sgt. William Evans
Sgt. Elmer Murray
S/Sgt. Murry Roberts
Sgt. Richard Owen
Sgt. Clifford Halstead
Sgt. Carl Riggs
T/4 Benjamin Stoney
T/5 Jerry Wentzel
T/5 Ralph Wimer
T/5 Hermin Collins

It is clear there were more than 3.

My dad did return to first platoon after his wounds at Carentan and remained assigned to them for the remainder of the war, even after returning from his wounds at Foy.

Susan

I've always wondered how Mr. Smith could have been left out of the BOB story (book and movie). I know he was mentioned a few times in the book but not prominently. You could fill a book/movie with just Mr. Smith's many exploits throughout his life.

Susan,

Thank you very much for taking the time to answer my question regarding your father...
I can obviously agree that it's both sad and weird that his was left off the BoB serie/book.

Yes, from the rosters i have and from the infos i have gathered, it seems like there was only one T-4 in easy (your father), and one Technical Sergeant (James Diel, but he is also often referred as S/Sgt, so i'm not even sure he was a T/Sgt, or maybe just for a time). From my understanding, your father never was a platoon leader, you're right... that's exactly the reason i did post this message, because i was wondering what truly was his function in the company. If he was a technician with special abilities, isn't it weird that he was used as a regular trooper (not that this is bad to be "just" a trooper, of course... this isn't my point)? And isn't it weird that a man with such a rank and experience was kept without "authority" or specific "technical" jobs in the company? That's really why i wanted to know if someone had ever heard of him having a special duty in the company, except for this couple of days in june 44, where he became acting operations sergeant after the death of Sgt Murray...

As far as i know, Sgt Clifford Halstead was in regimental HQ Company, not in Easy. And T/4 Benjamin Stoney was transfered to HQ 2/506 before D Day (he is not listed anymore in the may 1944 roster). Are you sure Sgt Richard Owen was in the HQs section of Easy???

Do you have any infos of when exactly your father was demoted back to private?

Anyway, thanks a lot for all your nice and clear informations.
Do you happen to have typed rosters for Easy company? (or even scans, of course). I have only two rosters (09/43 and 05/44), so if you have more and are willing to share them, you can PM me or something.

Thanks a lot,
Chris

Dear Susan,

Thank you so much for all these fine explanations.

Nathalie

LOL, I checked out that web link Chris, it is as clear as mud. I found some other written sources which contradict that information. Then in 1948, they changed it again and you had the Specialist rates replacing the old Tech rates. Now, I can tell you that Spec rates went from Spec-4 up to Spec-9. It does seem odd that the military would pay a soldier E-9 pay and expect no NCO responsibilities from them. I have a strong feeling that the senior Specs would have had some sort of authority, even if it was informal. Then the Spec ranks were eliminated, except Spec-4, because the army was faced with hi paid techs who were not providing any leadership role. No one ever said the army is smart when it comes to these things!

See you on the DZ,

Brig

Snookums,

You - and the rest of the gang - have a problem with military rank designations, but I think I can clear that up for all of you.

There is an essential difference between Technical Sergeant (T-6) and Sergeant Technician (T-4) Technical Sergeant is three stripes up, two rockers down. Staff Sergeant is three stripes up, one rocker down, and Sergeant Technician is three stripes with a T under the stripes. An E-4 (Sergeant) has command authority over a T-4, Sergeant (E-4) being Operational and T-4 being Technical. You might look at is as one being a Line rank (Sgt) and the other being a staff rank (T-4)

Your dad was a Sergeant Technician (T-4), a demolitions specialist and machinegunner with the 1st Platoon of Easy Company ... until Major Dick Winters busted him back to Pvt. at Kaprun, Austria for a security breach in a V-mail (Victory Mail) to your grandparents (reminding me very much of my own enlisted years) I'm not entirely certain, but I think your dad was moved to Hq. & Hq. Co., 2nd Bn, 506th PIR immediately following the NCO mutiny at Aldbourne and was assigned from there to Chilton Foliat as a Jump Master. Again, I have no way of knowing for certain, but I rather imagine he was in Hq. & Hq. Company as a munitions and demolitions planner.

Your Dad, according to Dick Winters (see Beyond Band of Brothers), jumped in Lt. Winters stick on D-Day because the Chalk Number for Hq. and Hq. Company, one aircraft ahead of Winter's Chalk Number, exceeded weight and balance and they had to move two men back one aircraft, thus putting your dad on Dick Winters' aircraft and in his stick on D-Day. And that, I suppose, is why your dad wound up as Lt. Winters' Operations Sergeant from D-Day until he was wounded at Carentan, 2nd Bn. being scattered all over the Cotentin Peninsula and miles from their planned DZ.

If you carefully read Dick Winters' action reports in "Beyond" for Carentan, Market Garden and Foy, you will notice that Lt/Capt/Major Winters always used 1st Platoon to lead the attack, backed by 2nd Platoon and with 3rd Platoon in reserve. In Carentan your dad was in the lead platoon and wounded at the crossroads leading into Carentan, as reported by Dick Winters in "Beyond Band of Brothers." We know from your dad's and Carwood Lipton's letters that he was on the ground next to 1st Sgt. Lipton when he was wounded in the battle for Foy, echoing Dick Winters' recollection of the disposition of 1st Platoon and Easy Company during the attack on Foy.

Anyhow, that's the name of that song.

Love ya,

Unc John

Dear Chris,

A quick reply for now. There were hundreds of men left out of Band of Brothers..there was no way they could include everyone. My dad was actually a character in the script bible but for whatever reason, they took him out. It's not a big issue...men like Sgt. Bob Rader, another Toccoa man and lifelong friend of my dad's, was never mentioned in the series. Hack Hanson. Dewitt Lowery. Many others. I was told long ago by one of the writers that they chose men who for the most part were still alive so they could be used in the narrations, or men who were wounded or died in dramatic ways. I don't know if this is true or not, but it really doesn't matter. There are so many men who were never mentioned in the book OR the series...does that make them any less important? I don't think so. Just saves my dad's life story for me to tell!

Where have you seen rosters and information? The information I have either comes from my dad's own records, or from documents Bill Guarnere let me make copies of several years ago. There were other T4's in Easy Co....my dad and Floyd Talbert wereT/4's. Luz, Carson, Perconte, all T/5's but I show Luz as a T/4 at one point. Bill Maynard was also listed as a T/5 as was Herman Hack Hanson.

I guess I am not sure what you are getting at. I think Winters promoted who he wanted to, whom he had confidence in, but there are only a few slots open for platoon leaders or squad leaders so that doesn't mean any of the others were less qualified. Only so many could be in positions of leadership. I am not sure what you mean by "special duty".

Sgt Clifford Halstead's name is on a roster showing men from company headquarters killed in action along with Benjamin Stoney (whom my dad called "Bulldog"). I am not sure of the accuracy of this info. Where are you reading otherwise? I haven't really studied any of this too closely and don't have a clue. I do not know the accuracy of this list but I got it from Bill. And if you know Bill, he has a photographic memory. These papers were among those submitted to Ambrose when the book was being written and were complied by the men themselves probably, maybe with Jake Powers' help. I have no clue who the source was. Some of the lists I have are also from the 40's, not reconstructions. Jake Powers is probably one of the few people around who has studied all this intently.

The list that shows my dad's promotions and demotions is missing in action! I'll have to ask my sister to send me a copy coz she has the original from his jump journal. I will try to find it.

Thanks for your interest in my dad!

Susan

There is a down side to linking pay to rank, even with seniority payments. I had some pretty good people who were worth their weight in gold technically but who possessed no leadership skills (or desire). They get lost to civilian status because their is no way of sufficiently remunerating them.

Uncle John,

I believe Dad was with Easy Company Headquarters for four months, not regimental headquarters. It is all so confusing!!!!!! This is from his own writings.

Also, he was busted back to private long before Austria....I believe that was another incident...the one dad refers to in in long letter to Winters which was quoted in Band of Brothers and the new biography. If I could find his list of his promotions, it shows the dates. He went up and down! But all the men did. Guarnere was a private when hit but they still refer to him as Sgt. Guarnere.

I haven't really thought of this in years and would have to dig out my papers.

Susan

Susan, John and others,

Again, thank you so much for taking the time to make clear and nice answers... (even if this always bring more questions, eheh)...


Regarding Sgt Halstead, i'm referring to several documents, first one being a may 3, 1944 roster posted on this forum ( http://forums.wildbillguarnere.com/index.p...opic=5254&st=30 )... Sgt Halstead isn't appearing on it. Also, if you look in the WW2 Currahees KIA roster, letter H ( http://www.506infantry.org/Memorial/wwh.htm ), you can see that he is listed as a member of HQ Company, 1st BN. Finally, if you look at the roster of all the soldiers who served in Easy company during WW2 ( http://www.easy506th.org/companyE.php ), his name is not listed.
About T/4 Benjamin Stoney, he is not listed anymore in the Easy Company's may 1944 roster, and i have in my notes the following infos : "BENJAMIN J. STONEY (ASN 39 530 033) - PFC (02/43), T/5 (aptd 02/43), T/4 (?), transfered to HQ 2/506 shortly before D Day (not listed in 05/44 roster) – KIA 06/06/44 (T/4, HQ 2/506)". He is listed in the WW2 Currahees KIA roster, letter S ( http://www.506infantry.org/Memorial/wws.htm ) as a member of HQ Company, 2nd BN.



Chalk Number for Winter's stick was #67, and Chalk number for the aircraft ahead (#66) correspond to Lt Meehan stick, which is actually the HQ section for Easy Company, and not HQs Regimental Company... so, i would be tempted to say that Burr Smith was in Easy Company HQ section instead of regimental HQs Company... I'm not claiming i can say this for sure of course, since both of you (who are close relative to him) don't know for sure... i'm just trying to guess...


Susan, sorry if my english isn't always perfect and if i made you feel like i was thinking that your father was less qualified in a way or another... My point is: what is the point of promoting a soldier to the rank of Sgt if it is not to put him in a position of leadership?... I might be totally stupid here, but from my experience with army (again, that was the french army, so maybe it's totally different), officers and non-commisioned officers (called "sous-officiers" in France, which could be translated as "sub-officers") have a duty, being in command of the company, a platton, a squad, or being the assistant leader, etc... At the level of a company at least, i have never seen (in my little experience, so, i'm not trying to say i know everything for sure, ok?) a NCO who was figthing like a regular private, without a specific hierarchical duty... So, maybe technical ranks are something specific, which isn't implying a position of leadership. Maybe, this is as simple as that actually...

All this is really interesting, but totally confusing, especially for someone who isn't american (language is really an issue, even if i can speak/write/read a bit, it is still complicated to get all the points and to make my own point easily... )

Chris, I am positive you are correct in that my dad was with the headquarters section for Easy not regiment hqtrs. but only for a short period of time and I have not been able to find anyone who knows why he was sent away from the rest of the group. He states in his own words that he was with this group in writings he sent to author George Koskimaki. I am not sure about the lists you have. Everything I have is directly from the men of Easy Co. themselves. But even then, memories are prone to mistakes. Winters says my dad was on chalk 67 but Jake Powers' list shows him on 68 which sounds more plausible as he landed with men on that chalk (from my dad's own writings where he talks about who was close by when he landed (Perconte and Rader, both on Chalk 68). I feel I know much less than I actually know and fear I will never know the answers.

I also tend to believe you are correct in that perhaps the technical sergeants were not expected to be in positions of leadership, but maybe their specific extra skills set them apart and so they were given a higher ranking. My dad was very intelligent and very literate and maybe Winters saw something usable in him but chose not to put him in charge of others. He was demoted very early on in the war and so apparently lost Winters' favor. I have never directly asked Winters and don't know if he'd even remember. My sister is looking for the record that I lost where he gives dates of his demotion.

In any event, he went on to distinguish himself as a highly skilled paramilitary specialist, very well respected by his peers, and also painstakingly and slowly put himself through the necessary training to rise in the Army Reserves ranks all the way to Lt. Colonel while raising a family and working, even while active with the CIA. I am very proud of my dad's service to his country, but more proud of the man he was. I attribute a lot of what made him the man he became to his training with Easy Company and his love and respect for Dick Winters, whom he was still writing just weeks before he passed away.

Susan

Snookums,

Whatever - I know I sent letters to your dad addressed to Hq.& Hq. Co., 2nd Bn, 506PIR, 101st Airborne Div.
You and Chris are right, he wasn't at Regiment level, he was assigned to 2nd Battalion Hq. When we talked with Frank Perconte at the Hollywood Premiere, Frank looked at the list we both had and said they were all 1st Platoon men and he was 1st Platoon but his name wasn't on that list. He also claimed Burr was in the same stick with him and that the man between them had been hit and killed by flak, and Frank and your dad unhooked him and went on out the door, so memory of that time and that instant changes from trooper to trooper.

If Dick Winters says your dad was in his stick, I think I'd tend to believe the good Major instead of Jake Powers. Dick Winters was there, Jake wasn't. We also know your dad was moved back to the C-47 behind the one hauling Lt. Meehan and the Hq. Company stick, and that's the way Dick Winters remember it.

You can discontinue saying or thinking Technical Sergeants were not expected to be in positions of leadership; Bill Guarnere was a Tech Sgt. Technical Sergeants (E-6) were usually on the TO&E (Table of Organization and Equipment) as platoon leaders, each company limited to something like 4 Tech Sergeants. Sergeant Technicians (E-4) weren't necessarily on the TO&E, meaning there could be many more of them than Technical Sergeants or even Sergeants. Some organizations creeated a lot of Technicians for pay purposes and as a reward for performance, the promotions not changing the TO&E. I, for example, was a E-4 before changing to T-4 with US Mil Govt.

Still confused? So am I, 65 years later.

Unc

The point is that pay, and pensionable engagements, are usually related to rank. Although there are some means of giving a bit extra pay (or a lot extra pay in the case of aircrew) for specific training or roles, this is not generally applied for everything. Long John mentions this in his message a bit further down - a 'Technical' rank allows a soldier to be given extra pay without putting him in a formal leadership role.

Similar systems exist for dealing with specific recruitment issues as well. For example, a graduate's market value may be greater than the normal initial entry rank (Pilot Officer in the case of the Royal Air Force). To get round this, the RAF offered graduates additional 'seniority' in rank based upon qualifications, length of course and relevant (ie, industrial) experience. This would give a graduate engineer with a good degree a year or two extra seniority. As the pay grading in a rank is based upon seniority, this provided a formal mechanism for paying 'market value'.

In addition, junior officer rank promotion is time-based (subject to good behaviour!), so by the time a graduate got through initial Officer and Branch training, they might have gained sufficient seniority to reach Flight Lieutentant (Army Captain).

The downside of this is that a student could technically outrank his instructor (particularly in the flying side), which can lead to a bit of resentment. They also have very little real-life Service experience, so people may have false expectations of an individual's capability. Rank tabs offer no clue as to experience, so you'd hear questions such as "Excuse me Sir, are you a Real Flight Lieutenant or just a graduate?" when an NCO wanted a proper decision.

If he was a demolitions specialist he would have been in the heavy weapons platoon. They could be assigned to any platoon as needed.

From what other WW2 vets have told me, assignments could be on an as needed basis. Short or long term they moved people around as needed without processing paperwork. The example,Burr being moved from #66 plane. I don't think that anyone was going to fill a form dash whatever that night . It was a case of "lets go and damn the details" as one Easy vet put it.

My dearest darling beloved uncle,

Now I am more confused than ever! I believe dad's own words over what anyone says! His writings say he wasliving with the men in company headquarters for 4 months prior to D-Day and that's the story I stick to! Jake Powers has complied his lists, I am surmising, with Dick's help, and they should be fairly accurate. That Frank didn't at first recognize Dad's name on Chalk 68 was because Dad was thrown on there at the last minute. The list we showed Frank was prepared by Jake. With all due respect to them all, everyone has trouble remembering 60 years ago so there is no point in comparing versions. They can all tell the exact same incident sifferently. Everyone remembers what they want to remember.

Anyway, none of it matters, and there are very few alive who know or remember the whole story. We may never know what really transpired. I have tried for 5 years to piece Dad's military history together and the stories never match up.

Happy Easter to all!

Susan

http://www.sproe.com/r/rank-enlisted.html

"The rank insignia for the U.S. Army in World War II were modified on January 8th, 1942 with the addition of the ranks of Technician 3rd Class (T/3), Technician 4th Class (T/4) and Technician 5th Class (T/5). On September 4th, 1942 a "T" was added to the standard chevron designs for these new grades.

A T/5 was properly addressed as a "corporal," while T/4 and T/3s were referred to as "sergeants." Although they wore chevrons similar to corporals and sergeants, technicians had no command authority or duties, and could not issue orders to regular sergeants, corporals or privates. The technician grades were deleted in 1948, and the enlisted ranks were further restructured in 1955."


This just shows how stupid and uninformed I am...I thought a T/5 was a higher rank than a T/4!

Susan

Snookums,

Um, uh ... yeah. Wellums, the Technician Enlisted grades during WWII were as you have noted, but remember that a Sergeant (Technician) was two steps lower down the line in duties and command authority than a Technical Sergeant. Staff Sergeant Technician was as high as the Technician ranks went (T-3)

You have the advantage of having all your dad's letters from Toccoa to Kaprun, so I yield to your superior source, although I still think he was in Hq & Hq. Co., 2nd Bn. 506th PIR for those 4 or 5 months. Try to space that event in with his time at Chilton Foliat and I think you will find they were concommitant.

Unc

Okay, thank you all for trying to help clarify all this...
I had the naive feeling that things were actually much easier, and that there would be a certain "administrative" trace when moving troopers, but it also make sense that things could be less "rational" at war, and that people were move whenever needed, etc...
Anyway, i learned a lot of things here, thanks a lot to you all...

My uncle was a T/4 during WW2, he said the difference was almost unnoticable and there was usually nothing 'technical' about his work at all.


According to someone I know who is in the Army right now, they are looking to get rid of the rank of Corporal. I find this odd, seeing that Specialist can be cut out and Corporal simply made a non-NCO rank. He said Specialist is a pointless position and everyone has to attend special classes to advance to Sergeant anyway...

They should just be like the Navy, where there are no 'equal ranks' for E-1 thru E-9.

They should just be like the Navy,

Those words alone will kill that idea.

Well think about it.... in the Navy when one advances from Seaman to PO3 (E4) there is no equal in that E-4 position.... essentially anyone advancing beyond E-3 in the Navy must be capable of taking on the roles of a Petty Officer.

Now in the Army, it's interesting to see Specialist and Corporal in the same paygrade... let alone hear a rumor that the Army will ditch a 200 year old rank to maintain 'Specialist.' Why not just get rid of Specialist and maintain Corporal? (Specialist of what!?) It just doesn't make sense to stuff two different ranks into the same paygrade when either way one must attend special training to advance to Sergeant in the first place. I doubt the Army would function much differently if everyone was made a corporal.

Yeah but if the other services don't need 2 different ranks at E-4, what makes the Army need them. Why not just remove the Junior NCO status entirely and make PFC's earn the qualifications through their time in service along with the proper training. It doesn't seem to make sense that one needs to attend special schools to earn Sergeant, along with (certain unknown) qualifications to wear the rank of Corporal. By being more like the Navy I meant just funnel E-3's into Corporal (E-4).

Or they should have just kept Corporal T/5.... why the 'Specialist' title and the different insignia..... beyond me