ARmy Rumour SErvice

**putteesinmyhands** · 03-07-2011, 23:41

Originally Posted by Gremlin

THE QUEEN'S REGULATIONS FOR THE ARMY 1975
(Amendment No 26) February 2000 Refers

Appointments and Precedence 9.169. Warrant Officers Warrant Officer – class 1
(i)
Conductor, RLC
Royal Artillery Sergeant Major
Academy sergeant major, RMAS
Garrison sergeant major London District
(ii)
Master gunner, RA.
(iii)
Garrison sergeant major (except London District).
(iv)
Regimental corporal major
Regimental sergeant major.
Bandmaster
Staff sergeant major. RLC or AGC(SPS)
Sergeant major

You omitted:

Any other appointment on the establishment of a unit or corps carrying
the rank of warrant officer, class 1, e.g. artificer sergeant major,
superintending draughtsman.

**Gremlin** · 03-07-2011, 23:45

Originally Posted by stacker1

This site reckon its the glorious loggies...
British Army Non-Commissioned Officer Rank Structure: Warrant Officer - UK's #1 Community: Navy, Marines, Army, RAF

Stacker, that site's owned by mil.com - do you really want to trust them?

**Gremlin** · 03-07-2011, 23:50

Originally Posted by putteesinmyhands

You omitted:

Good point, well presented, do carry on.....

I could have just linked to the thread from 7 years ago of course!

RSM of the British Army?

**putteesinmyhands** · 03-07-2011, 23:51

Perhaps we shouldn't be drawn to the table, but by the relevant part of QRs.

9.164. Seniority between those of the same substantive rank is to be determined in accordance with their dates of
promotion to that rank, except where provided to the contrary. Seniority of individuals promoted on the same date is to
be determined as follows:
a. If in different corps - by corps precedence as shown in para 8.001.
b. If in the same corps - by their relative positions on the corps rank seniority roster.
c. When it is necessary to determine the seniority of soldiers listed in paras 9.169, 9.171, 9.172 and 9.173, the
seniority will depend on the period of reckonable man's service as defined in the Pay Warrant 1964 and, should
this be the same, then on age.

The groups in the table at para 9.169 evidently count for SFA when it comes to determining seniority. So the Londist GSM and AcSM could well find themselves down one of the legs at the Mess Dinner...

**stacker1** · 03-07-2011, 23:56

Originally Posted by Gremlin

Stacker, that site's owned by mil.com - do you really want to trust them?

I've found a site that is saying good things about the loggies, don't ruin it.

**BCFC Sam** · 03-07-2011, 23:56

does "them" have a RSM

**ironrations** · 03-07-2011, 23:58

Originally Posted by BCFC Sam

does "them" have a RSM

The "them" SM.

**LancePrivateJones** · 04-07-2011, 00:01

Originally Posted by BCFC Sam

does "them" have a RSM

No.

They have three of them.

**Gremlin** · 04-07-2011, 00:04

So according to Putties the RASM gets to win again!

Excellent!!

**Gremlin** · 04-07-2011, 00:07

Originally Posted by putteesinmyhands

Perhaps we shouldn't be drawn to the table, but by the relevant part of QRs.

The groups in the table at para 9.169 evidently count for SFA when it comes to determining seniority. So the Londist GSM and AcSM could well find themselves down one of the legs at the Mess Dinner...

OI you git - stop editing your posts and put back the bit where it shows the RASM to be the senior appointment!