Knowing how over zealous our bureaucrats in Ottawa are, does anyone foresee the day that we will have our regimental system stripped from the infantry in favour of a generic "no-name brand" system to indicate our units? For example, instead of 1 RCR, 2 RCR, and 1 PPCLI, 2 PPCLI. We would have 1 CAI (Canadian Army Infantry), 2 CAI, 3 CAI, and 4 CAI. As rediculous as this seems, things seem to moving more towards the Americanization of the Canadian Army.

As to going to generic infantry (and I assume armoured) Regiments and I can't see it. It is not cost effective and by changing you are not gaining anything. Besides that, those that try we eventually give up as they will find it not worth the hassle.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RCA:
Asd far as I know the Aussies never had named regiments, just numbered battalions of number regiments ie 6/5 Ausralian Regiment. .

---

?????????????

When I was on loan to the Scottish Division in 1990, I served alongside men from the Royal New South Wales Regiment (RNSWR), The Royal Queensland Regiment, the Royal South Australia Regiment, the Royal Victoria Regiment, and the Royal Western Australia Regiment and I believe the Royal Australian Regiment (RAR). I believe the RAR was regular and the others were territorial but I could be wrong.

The Byron Scottish at one time were affiliated with the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders.

I have never heard of such a thing as "The Australia Regiment."

I suspect even more strongly now that the RAR is the regular force component and quite probable that the territorials still have titles like RQR, above. It wouldn't be much different from us having only three regular regiments, and dozens of militia ones.

quote:

---

Originally posted by McG:
http://regiments.org/milhist/australia/aargts.htm

---

Sheesh, why didn' t I think of that? Good work - and thanks!