king802 Posted November 30, 2012 Share #1 Posted November 30, 2012 As is customary here in the City of London -Friday is Regimental Tie day so i am wearing the tie of one of my old units, 1st Bn The Royal Anglian Regiment (The old Royal Norfolk Regiment Tie). Are Regimental ties used much in the United States and do they have as much significance as they do here in the UK ? Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrejet Posted November 30, 2012 Share #2 Posted November 30, 2012 I read somewhere that whereas the diagonal stripes on British regimental ties typically slope from the viewers' right to left, it's the opposite on equivalent ties in America. Anyone care to verify that...or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king802 Posted November 30, 2012 Author Share #3 Posted November 30, 2012 Ian, I heard somewhere that the differences go back to the Revolutionary War but i'm not 100% on American heraldry Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrejet Posted November 30, 2012 Share #4 Posted November 30, 2012 Ian, I heard somewhere that the differences go back to the Revolutionary War but i'm not 100% on American heraldry Rich Well, they apparently turned our chevrons upside-down, so why not the stripes too!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrejet Posted November 30, 2012 Share #5 Posted November 30, 2012 Two American examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrejet Posted November 30, 2012 Share #6 Posted November 30, 2012 A typical British style pair.. 3rd King's Own Hussars....1st King's Dragoon Guards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgawne Posted November 30, 2012 Share #7 Posted November 30, 2012 In a word, no. ties really have never been as big in the US military as in England (nor for schools as well). I am not sure if that makes up more, or less, civilized. They are a VERY recent phenomenon in the US military, and quite spotty in their use. If someone in the unit wants to push their use, they may get worn, if not, probably no. It's mostly been a commerical venture by tie companies trying to find more customers. I would not be surprised to find that most of them are sold to non vets It's just not a tradition as it is with the British. Same with schoools. VERY few people actually wear school ties, and almost no one has a clue as to what they really are. Same with blazers. Mostly you find schools shown as rings, and military units by fairly common items like windbreakers, baseball caps, or the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrejet Posted November 30, 2012 Share #8 Posted November 30, 2012 I've seen documentaries on tv featuring some of your "better" schools (ie private) in which the students looked very "British" in terms of their school uniform...blazers and ties for the boys and skirts, blouses and ties etc for the girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CW4AFB Posted November 30, 2012 Share #9 Posted November 30, 2012 I've seen documentaries on tv featuring some of your "better" schools (ie private) in which the students looked very "British" in terms of their school uniform...blazers and ties for the boys and skirts, blouses and ties etc for the girls. Ian--that may be so, but I am willing to bet that, among American members on this forum, you would be hard pressed to find many of us who attended such schools---probably find many more folks knowledgeable about juvenile detention than about "old school ties."Nonetheless, in 1976, after the NATO exercises in Norway, Denmark and Germany, our platoon drew liberty in Portsmouth before our ship headed back to Camp Lejeune and we found a British store that sold Royal Marine ties so I bought one--closest I ever came to having an official tie---my kids always wanted me to wear it at Christmas because it looked like a christmas wreath and holly---kids, go figure....regards,Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrejet Posted November 30, 2012 Share #10 Posted November 30, 2012 Ian--that may be so, but I am willing to bet that, among American members on this forum, you would be hard pressed to find many of us who attended such schools---probably find many more folks knowledgeable about juvenile detention than about "old school ties."Nonetheless, in 1976, after the NATO exercises in Norway, Denmark and Germany, our platoon drew liberty in Portsmouth before our ship headed back to Camp Lejeune and we found a British store that sold Royal Marine ties so I bought one--closest I ever came to having an official tie---my kids always wanted me to wear it at Christmas because it looked like a christmas wreath and holly---kids, go figure....regards,Al Al...how about upgrading to a RM's bow-tie?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VMI88 Posted November 30, 2012 Share #11 Posted November 30, 2012 I remember wearing my VMI tie to a social function at my basic course soon after graduation. The British exchange officer was very interested in it because he hadn't seen Americans wearing a regimental tie (or a similar item) before. I believe he was wearing his regimental tie and we had an interesting discussion over military customs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king802 Posted November 30, 2012 Author Share #12 Posted November 30, 2012 Nonetheless, in 1976, after the NATO exercises in Norway, Denmark and Germany, our platoon drew liberty in Portsmouth before our ship headed back to Camp Lejeune and we found a British store that sold Royal Marine ties so I bought one--closest I ever came to having an official tie---my kids always wanted me to wear it at Christmas because it looked like a christmas wreath and holly---kids, go figure....regards,Al Al,I don't think any Bootneck would object to you wearing a RM tie, both Corp's are very close.Wear it with pride.I'm surprised the USMC don't have a tie.When I go to Regimental get together's you can tell what Bn guys have served in by the tie they wear. Just like Regimental Colour's.Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J_Andrews Posted November 30, 2012 Share #13 Posted November 30, 2012 There have been very few regimental ties in the US Army, and fewer that follow the diagonal stripes pattern. For often some version of the DUI is used, on a branch of svc color background. There are blue ties with white crossed rifles for Inf, red with crossed cannons for FA, and green for SF with white DUI, also blue with jump wings for Abn. Even those have never "caught on" and remain obscure. I designed one for the 175th Inf (5th Maryland), but to my knowledge it was never made (gray/scarlet/buff, ratio 3:2:1, gray for CSA/State militia unif, red for the 1774 redcoats, buff for the 1774 facings). My attempt for the 11th SFGA went over like a lead balloon and the unit fund went for T-shirts instead. It was rifle green with narrow teal-white-red stripes). The 69th NY has had two, and one or both may be still in use: green (what else?) with gold wolfhound crest or with conjoined 6 and 9, like the symbol on weather charts for hurricane, The 220th Inf of Mass, while it existed in to 1970s-1980s, had a that was scarlet and buff (never saw one, but heard of it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sjef Posted November 30, 2012 Share #14 Posted November 30, 2012 In Holland we have regimental ties as well, but they aren't worn as much these days as they were in during the Cold War when we still had conscription. They look similar in design as the British ones. Officially you have to prove you are entitled to wear a particular tie before you are allowed to buy it. I believe it is the same in Britain (officially at least). I think it is a very nice tradition. You will immediately recognize a brother in arms without the whole world recognising you too. As far as I know US stripes go the other way universally, not only the military ties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CW4AFB Posted December 1, 2012 Share #15 Posted December 1, 2012 Al, I don't think any Bootneck would object to you wearing a RM tie, both Corp's are very close. Wear it with pride. I'm surprised the USMC don't have a tie. When I go to Regimental get together's you can tell what Bn guys have served in by the tie they wear. Just like Regimental Colour's. Rich Rich--thanks for the kind words---my radio team served with British Marines in Norway and after about a week, except for the haircuts, you couldn't tell us apart---we traded so much of our uniforms to each other we all looked like refugees from an Army/Navy surplus store---they liked our C-rations and we liked their rum ration so it all worked out well----good times.. man, to be 19 and bulletproof again..even for just a few days... s/f Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
101CH47 Posted December 1, 2012 Share #16 Posted December 1, 2012 Most US Army veterans tend to identify with their division assignments rather than regimental. At the get togethers I have been to most will wear a tie or lapel pin with unit insignia rather than a tie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rr01 Posted December 2, 2012 Share #17 Posted December 2, 2012 This company offers a nice selection: http://www.medalsofamerica.com/ItemList--Army-Ties--m-717 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hbtcoveralls Posted December 2, 2012 Share #18 Posted December 2, 2012 here's a company that makes kilts in tartan patterns dedicated to the US service branches http://www.sportkilt.com/index.php?p=view_category&search_text=usmc+tartan&x=13&y=12 Guess when the tie is just too sedate, you can always go for the Kilt and perhaps even be "regimental" Tom Bowers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quack Posted December 2, 2012 Share #19 Posted December 2, 2012 I spent 30 years on active duty in the US Army-- I have never seen a US regimental tie. I'm sure they exist, but that is simply not part of our military tradition. Efforts to develop them are usually the bright idea of a single individual, and if the ties are created, they die as soon as that individual gets transferred. Generally, Americans wear fewer ties in daily life than the Brits do, and in the military we have a much weaker regimental system. These two facts mandate against widespread use of regimental ties. We currently have about 177 regiments in the US Army system, many with only one company or battalion affiliated with them. On the other hand, we have some large system-wide regiments, such as the Army Medical Department Regiment, which contains every medical, nursing, medical support, etc. person in the Army-- An estimate as to how many people are affiliated with the AMEDD regiment would be interesting, but it is in the tens of thousands, if not more. Except in Washington, there is no real feeling of "regimental affiliation". Soldiers tend to associate with other levels of the force structure, rather than the regiments, which really seem to have no function, other than on paper. Thus, I will be surprised if US Army regimental ties ever become much more popular. Note that even the commercial source referred to in post #17 really has no "regimental" ties, these are commercially designed and produced for sale, and have no real relevance to any existing or previous unit. They are really more associated with "affiliation groups", rather than military regiments. Some are made for Divisions, but none are shown for regiments. In other locations you can find a few "regimental" ties, but they usually have no formal relationship to any regiment or regimental organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
101CH47 Posted December 2, 2012 Share #20 Posted December 2, 2012 I spent 30 years on active duty in the US Army-- I have never seen a US regimental tie. I'm sure they exist, but that is simply not part of our military tradition. Efforts to develop them are usually the bright idea of a single individual, and if the ties are created, they die as soon as that individual gets transferred. Generally, Americans wear fewer ties in daily life than the Brits do, and in the military we have a much weaker regimental system. These two facts mandate against widespread use of regimental ties. We currently have about 177 regiments in the US Army system, many with only one company or battalion affiliated with them. On the other hand, we have some large system-wide regiments, such as the Army Medical Department Regiment, which contains every medical, nursing, medical support, etc. person in the Army-- An estimate as to how many people are affiliated with the AMEDD regiment would be interesting, but it is in the tens of thousands, if not more. Except in Washington, there is no real feeling of "regimental affiliation". Soldiers tend to associate with other levels of the force structure, rather than the regiments, which really seem to have no function, other than on paper. Thus, I will be surprised if US Army regimental ties ever become much more popular. Note that even the commercial source referred to in post #17 really has no "regimental" ties, these are commercially designed and produced for sale, and have no real relevance to any existing or previous unit. They are really more associated with "affiliation groups", rather than military regiments. Some are made for Divisions, but none are shown for regiments. In other locations you can find a few "regimental" ties, but they usually have no formal relationship to any regiment or regimental organization. In the late 80s I was on active duty when the Army decided to implement the regimental system, everyone had to affiliate with one or one would be assigned. As a BN S1 I had the job in my battalion of implementing the program in our battalion. The system was screwed up to begin with because many officers had a poor understanding of what a regiment was. It was amazing how many times I had to explain that battalions made up regiments and regiments made up brigades. All too often they thought a Regiment was larger than a Brigade. As the system was supposed to work a soldier choose a regiment to be affiliated with based on current or previous assignment, if none were chosen one would be chosen for them normally the current assigned unit’s regiment. In our case if was the 101st Aviation Regiment. After the leaving the regular Army for the National Guard I had a running battle with the S1 section to leave my regimental affiliate alone. They operated on an old directive from the MSNG Group commander that all in the MSNG would affiliate with the Group regimental affiliation. It wasn’t that big a deal but I was determined to get this mess straight, it wasn’t until after I presented them a copy of the regulation showing the soldier had a choice in choosing and maintaining a regimental affilitation along with a proposed letter to my congressman that their collective light bulbs came on. With such a poor understanding of regiment structure, regimental history and the purpose of the system coupled with the Army’s never ended restructuring where regiments disappear and reappear on a whem it is no wonder Army personnel do not identify with a regiment. Pride in belonging to a particular division is much more common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgawne Posted December 2, 2012 Share #21 Posted December 2, 2012 As to school ties- they are somewhat coming back for high schools in that there is a new movement for uniforms. But i actually went to a private high school where we actually did have a tie (if we wanted), and no one ever, EVER bought one. I sort of which I had now, but no one would have a clue what it meant. A handful of very elite schools do have then (to show how elite they are), and you have some Catholic schools that wear more of less generic school ties, and now a number of school that are trying to level the playing field by making the kids wear uniforms, but I think they are really more for being part of the uniform, and pretty much discarded when they graduate. I picked up a few ties in England over the years and would wear them at times. The Middlesex (bright red and yellow) is a hard one to find something it looks good with ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrejet Posted December 2, 2012 Share #22 Posted December 2, 2012 Still have my old blue/gold striped grammar school tie from the 60s...and what's more it still fits!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack's Son Posted December 2, 2012 Share #23 Posted December 2, 2012 Ian--that may be so, but I am willing to bet that, among American members on this forum, you would be hard pressed to find many of us who attended such schools---probably find many more folks knowledgeable about juvenile detention than about "old school ties." Al Al, was reading my mind!! My school tie........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J_Andrews Posted December 3, 2012 Share #24 Posted December 3, 2012 I was the Command Historian of the MDNG when "Shan" Meyer's brain-f*** of a "Regimental System" was buzzing. As already stated, senior officers (and NCOs, and for that matter any rank) were clueless as to what a Regiment was, or had ever been. My attempts to explain the Combat Arms Regimental System (CARS), in memos and in briefings, may as well have been a reading of a treatise on Thomistic theology to a kennel of dogs. The 1983-ish DA reg on who picks what Regt for their personal affiliation was nuts. You did not have to serve in a Regt to pick it; just whatever you liked. By implication any RA Regt was better than any NG Regt, so there were Guardsmen who wore the DUI of their Daddy's WWII unit and females wearing the 7th Cav and 504th Inf (their boyfriends' units). And you did not have to be in the BRANCH of your affiliated DUI; a Nurse MAJ wore the 7th Inf -- because she was from New Orleans and that unit was in the Battle Thereof. I worked at the Pentagon and an FA Maj picked the 29th FA -- because they were (then) at Ft Carson and that was where he wanted his next assignment to be; he had never been in the 29th, but thought the 17th and 83rd (his old outfits) were ugly. The Asst AG (BG) in MD kept changing, from one MDARNG Regt to another, to "honor them", and then the RA 77th FA, then SF (never was in it), then 75th Inf (same). He wanted to wear the 1st Inf (he was FA branch his whole career) -- until I explained that, contrary to his inspiration, it was NOT the Oldest in the Army. The thing that killed Meyer's Regtl System was POSTAGE. REALLY. "Franking" (free postage) was dead., There was no money in any budget for postal charges involved with Regtl newsletters, reunions or pamphlets. Secondarily was PRINTING and COPYING -- no budget(s). This was in the days when The Big Crackdown transpired on postage, printing and copying.....EVERYthing was tracked and cost-accounted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
101CH47 Posted December 3, 2012 Share #25 Posted December 3, 2012 I was the Command Historian of the MDNG when "Shan" Meyer's brain-f*** of a "Regimental System" was buzzing. As already stated, senior officers (and NCOs, and for that matter any rank) were clueless as to what a Regiment was, or had ever been. My attempts to explain the Combat Arms Regimental System (CARS), in memos and in briefings, may as well have been a reading of a treatise on Thomistic theology to a kennel of dogs. The 1983-ish DA reg on who picks what Regt for their personal affiliation was nuts. You did not have to serve in a Regt to pick it; just whatever you liked. By implication any RA Regt was better than any NG Regt, so there were Guardsmen who wore the DUI of their Daddy's WWII unit and females wearing the 7th Cav and 504th Inf (their boyfriends' units). And you did not have to be in the BRANCH of your affiliated DUI; a Nurse MAJ wore the 7th Inf -- because she was from New Orleans and that unit was in the Battle Thereof. I worked at the Pentagon and an FA Maj picked the 29th FA -- because they were (then) at Ft Carson and that was where he wanted his next assignment to be; he had never been in the 29th, but thought the 17th and 83rd (his old outfits) were ugly. The Asst AG (BG) in MD kept changing, from one MDARNG Regt to another, to "honor them", and then the RA 77th FA, then SF (never was in it), then 75th Inf (same). He wanted to wear the 1st Inf (he was FA branch his whole career) -- until I explained that, contrary to his inspiration, it was NOT the Oldest in the Army. The thing that killed Meyer's Regtl System was POSTAGE. REALLY. "Franking" (free postage) was dead., There was no money in any budget for postal charges involved with Regtl newsletters, reunions or pamphlets. Secondarily was PRINTING and COPYING -- no budget(s). This was in the days when The Big Crackdown transpired on postage, printing and copying.....EVERYthing was tracked and cost-accounted. Exactly why in the US division associations survive and regimental associations do not. The very sad part I found was there I was an officer with a commission from ROTC having to explain to West Pointers what a regiment was. You would think of all types they would have known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now