The mystery of the recurring "(v)".

[JSPrest]

Can anybody out there clear up this mystery?

We were told long ago in the sands of time that the (v) was to no longer be used (one army concept and all that spin!!!!).

HOWEVER, more and more it is making a comeback. It is now in use by MS on board results, operational postings etc.

My question is ............... to (v) or not to (v).

I would much prefer "(STAB)" because at least thats the true face of the three army concept (Reg, TA and not yet mobilised).

 

[Whiskey_60]

Doesn't really bother me! Although my Battalion doesn't use the (v) come to think of it.

 

[dra1n5]

I don't actually think this is necessarily a regulars/reserves issue. I reckon it's more to do with precedence in the reserves - militia came first (peasants with pitchforks), then yeomanry (gentlemen with their own horses) and finally the Victorian volunteer movement which was a response to concerns about Napoleon III invading.

I am sure that the Royal Mons RE will hang on dearly to its militia title (the only one left according to http://www2.army.mod.uk/rmonre/index.htm) and that our remaining Yeomanry regiments will do likewise.

I'm happy to retain the (v) bit for my own unit as it is part of our link with our past. We still hold the notebook with the minutes of the meeting which resolved to form a volunteer unit.

 

[Dr_Chris]

I don't actually think this is necessarily a regulars/reserves issue. I reckon it's more to do with precedence in the reserves - militia came first (peasants with pitchforks), then yeomanry (gentlemen with their own horses) and finally the Victorian volunteer movement which was a response to concerns about Napoleon III invading.

I am sure that the Royal Mons RE will hang on dearly to its militia title (the only one left according to http://www2.army.mod.uk/rmonre/index.htm) and that our remaining Yeomanry regiments will do likewise.

I'm happy to retain the (v) bit for my own unit as it is part of our link with our past. We still hold the notebook with the minutes of the meeting which resolved to form a volunteer unit.

Fcuk me, sounds like you guys must have a riot on parade nights, reading through old notebooks and talking about Napoleon.

 

[arfah]

"My question is ............... to (v) or not to (v).

I would much prefer "(STAB)" because at least thats the true face of the three army concept (Reg, TA and not yet mobilised)"

You're obviously an PSG / ARAB looking to start yet another REG vs T.A. thread !

 

[Hescoheed]

As the 'V' stands for Volunteer and the Army does not press gang people into its ranks anymore and the fact that regular soldiers have volunteered to join up, what say people about everyone using (V) or no one at all?

 

[Goku]

Slow day at the office?

It identifies us as TA. Wear it with pride or sit back, ignore it, and let the apathy wash you over.

Do you really care that much about being tagged with (V).
I don’t.

 

[oldnotbold]

I recall an RNR buddy telling me that one reason for their total integration uniform-wise was that it was becoming embarrassing to see just how many posts were being filled by reservists of various hues.

 

[Boxy]

as in no 'Wavey Navy' badges of rank?

 

[msr]

as in no 'Wavey Navy' badges of rank?

Yes, they have removed the 'R' from their rank slides.

msr

 

[81cufc]

Can't say it matters to me!

 

[Frangipano]

I don't actually think this is necessarily a regulars/reserves issue. I reckon it's more to do with precedence in the reserves - militia came first (peasants with pitchforks), then yeomanry (gentlemen with their own horses) and finally the Victorian volunteer movement which was a response to concerns about Napoleon III invading.

I am sure that the Royal Mons RE will hang on dearly to its militia title (the only one left according to http://www2.army.mod.uk/rmonre/index.htm) and that our remaining Yeomanry regiments will do likewise.

I'm happy to retain the (v) bit for my own unit as it is part of our link with our past. We still hold the notebook with the minutes of the meeting which resolved to form a volunteer unit.

You should come along and watch Musket Drill!

Fcuk me, sounds like you guys must have a riot on parade nights, reading through old notebooks and talking about Napoleon.

 

[Hairy_Maclary]

There is precious little sign of a (V) in 5 MI Bn as far as the regular staff are concerned.

But then again they do work under the principle that the TA is a great place to work if it wasn't for the troublesome volunteers asking awkward questions and not being able to get to the other side of the country on a work day morning!

 

[Poacher]

Why not use some reverse pyschobable and put (ARAB) after all the regular stuff?

 

[Abandon_Ship!]

Can anybody out there clear up this mystery?

We were told long ago in the sands of time that the (v) was to no longer be used (one army concept and all that spin!!!!).

HOWEVER, more and more it is making a comeback. It is now in use by MS on board results, operational postings etc.

My question is ............... to (v) or not to (v).

I would much prefer "(STAB)" because at least thats the true face of the three army concept (Reg, TA and not yet mobilised).

My understanding is the "V" suffix is appended to The Titles/Names of TA units, not individuals. Eg. 9 Supply Regt. RLC (Reg), 166 Supply Regt RLC(V) (TA).

 

[arfah]

Why not use some reverse pyschobable and put (ARAB) after all the regular stuff?

Because ARAB also refers to those of the Middle East. The correct acronym is PSG(Pea Ess Gee) as in Potential Security Guard !

 

[brave-coward]

Gist of it is (as was explained to me), for units which share a cap-badge with regular Tps, the (V) is used, where it is soley a TA capbadge then no (V) required.

So for instance in the RLC where the cap-badge is shared:

123 Underwater Fuel Delivery Sqn RLC(V) = TA
456 Indep Cdo Blanket Stacking Sqn RLC = Reg

Where capbadges are different (e.g. the RAC):

RWxY = TA (no (V) as "everyone" would know that the abreviation RWxY = TA, i.e. there is no regular element)

Same goes for individuals:

Capt A B Smith RLC = Reg
Capt C D Jones RLC(V) = TA

Capt E F Potter RWxY = TA
Capt G H McNasty QDG = Reg

The reasons that you need to differentiate between regular and TA personnel in the MS world, by adding a (V) where their Corps or Regimental abbreviation does not make it clear, are many fold. Leaving aside FTRS for a moment, clearly there are some "TA" jobs, where the incumbent is expeced to work TA hours where as the majority work "regular" hours needing a regular officer/soldier.

On the FTRS/mobilised TA side, my view is that it is often handy to know a little about someone from his or her title as it allows one to asses what their likely level of experience/previous knowledge/etc. before actually speaking to them (clearly rank alone will not always give you this). So for instance if you know you are speaking to a TA officer you are more likely to cut him/her some slack if he/she has a lower level of understanding of the subject being discussed or the army in general.

 

[mushroom]

Gist of it is (as was explained to me), for units which share a cap-badge with regular Tps, the (V) is used, where it is soley a TA capbadge then no (V) required.

So for instance in the RLC where the cap-badge is shared:

123 Underwater Fuel Delivery Sqn RLC(V) = TA
456 Indep Cdo Blanket Stacking Sqn RLC = Reg

Where capbadges are different (e.g. the RAC):

RWxY = TA (no (V) as "everyone" would know that the abreviation RWxY = TA, i.e. there is no regular element)

Same goes for individuals:

Capt A B Smith RLC = Reg
Capt C D Jones RLC(V) = TA

Capt E F Potter RWxY = TA
Capt G H McNasty QDG = Reg

The reasons that you need to differentiate between regular and TA personnel in the MS world, by adding a (V) where their Corps or Regimental abbreviation does not make it clear, are many fold. Leaving aside FTRS for a moment, clearly there are some "TA" jobs, where the incumbent is expeced to work TA hours where as the majority work "regular" hours needing a regular officer/soldier.

On the FTRS/mobilised TA side, my view is that it is often handy to know a little about someone from his or her title as it allows one to asses what their likely level of experience/previous knowledge/etc. before actually speaking to them (clearly rank alone will not always give you this). So for instance if you know you are speaking to a TA officer you are more likely to cut him/her some slack if he/she has a lower level of understanding of the subject being discussed or the army in general.

It would certainly have helped one regular WO1 working in a high profile Regular/TA interface job,who spent twenty minutes telling me how much he hated the TA. He called a 'Stabs in the HQ meeting' and was embarrassed to find that I was one of them.

 

[oldnotbold]

As my unit were yeomen, of sorts, it was always fun to see the hired help/permanent staff describing us along the lines of the Loamshire Yeomanry (v)

 

[Northern Monkey]

Why concern about the (V) appendage? Wear it with pride, you're either proud to be TA or you're not!

That's from a PSG. (I prefer ARAB; it reflects my personality better)