Re: [OT] Military Rank Comparison

In a message dated 12/11/2000 2:47:08 PM Mountain Standard Time, 
nezach@earthlink.net writes:

<< (my only qualification for this is that it doesn't show the USAF
 having "Buck" Sergeants). >>

Note: We DON'T have "Bucks" anymore. Haven't since around 85 or so. I
was one 
of the last :o)
(Got my E5 Staff Sgt. around 86 and didn't see any more after that)
Phased out because, other than being an actual "NCO," all duties and 
responsibilities were the same as a Senior Airman. They were both E4 and
the 
pay was the same. So they shaved the rank. Made sense to me. Though it
did 
cause problems with "Airman" writing performance reports on "Airman."

Randy
From - Wed Dec 13 16:39:05 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA30975;
	Mon, 11 Dec 2000 19:34:59 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBC1Und31302;
	Mon, 11 Dec 2000 17:30:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 11 Dec
2000 17:30:48 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBC1UlE31281
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 17:30:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:dmR7POjzQMY0BOgGkXaMJk3OfivUUDlN@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBC1UkP31276
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 17:30:46
-0800 (PST)
Received: from imo-r14.mail.aol.com (imo-r14.mx.aol.com
[152.163.225.68])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBC1Ujf82167
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 17:30:45 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from ShldWulf@aol.com)
Received: from ShldWulf@aol.com
	by imo-r14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id d.f5.570f1ed (3315)
	 for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 20:30:38 -0500
(EST)
From: ShldWulf@aol.com
Message-ID: <f5.570f1ed.2766d9bd@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 20:30:37 EST
Subject: Re: No campaign system acceptable for SG2? 
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 124
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000852

Oh yes, and I might add that with "Cerberus" your units are pretty much 
already taken care of. So all you have to do is run both games. It
leaves 
little details like the "specifics" of the units up to you :o)

Randy
From - Wed Dec 13 16:39:07 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA11973;
	Mon, 11 Dec 2000 20:24:03 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBC2G4d32766;
	Mon, 11 Dec 2000 18:16:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 11 Dec
2000 18:16:02 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBC2G0n32745
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 18:16:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:1Uv523U4bY/njTMKgsHpTpTRrC7IWviE@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBC2FwP32740
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 18:15:58
-0800 (PST)
Received: from scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net
(scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.121.49])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBC2Fuf88178
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 18:15:57 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from nezach@earthlink.net)
Received: from oemcomputer (1Cust38.tnt1.monterey.ca.da.uu.net
[63.59.135.38])
	by scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id
SAA15495
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 18:15:55 -0800
(PST)
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001211181939.007a6ae0@earthlink.net>
X-Sender: nezach@earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 18:19:39 -0800
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
From: Ndege Diamond <nezach@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [OT] Military Rank Comparison
In-Reply-To: <ce.dc045eb.2766d96c@aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000856

At 08:29 PM 12/11/00 EST, you wrote:
>In a message dated 12/11/2000 2:47:08 PM Mountain Standard Time, 
>nezach@earthlink.net writes:
>
><< (my only qualification for this is that it doesn't show the USAF
> having "Buck" Sergeants). >>
>
>Note: We DON'T have "Bucks" anymore. Haven't since around 85 or so. I
was
one 
>of the last :o)
>(Got my E5 Staff Sgt. around 86 and didn't see any more after that)
>Phased out because, other than being an actual "NCO," all duties and 
>responsibilities were the same as a Senior Airman. They were both E4
and the 
>pay was the same. So they shaved the rank. Made sense to me. Though it
did 
>cause problems with "Airman" writing performance reports on "Airman."

*shrug* I was in around 92-95 and one of the TIs in my basic training
squadron was a Buck Sgt and my first supervisor was a Buck as well. My
remark was indicating that the only thing I checked to see if the page
was
up to date was if they included Sgt as an actual rank for the USAF. They
didn't, so it is reasonably up to date by that standard.

To bring this kinda on topic: has anyone done up a list of ranks for the
various forces in the Tuffleyverse? 

Ndege Diamond
----------------------------------------------------
One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, 
the number of entities required to explain anything.