Squadrons of the CME

[McG]

Are you saying there never was a 7 FER but only the "7th Distrcit Engineers"?

 

[dapaterson]

I'm not sure of the history of all units; what I was attempting to show is that many of the current FER titles are derived from old district affiliations.  Whether postwar administrative groups are worthy of preservation and perpetuatoion is what the debate is about - keep old administrative titles, or create new administrative titles for units .

 

[McG]

If FER is just an "administrative title" to be dropped for the sake of being dropped (along with the number), then why bother hold onto the historical squadrons.  The "Field Engineer Regiment" name still reflects a unit's historical evolution within the RCE.  If 7 FER existed and we want to maintain that lineage, then lets have a 7 FER to unite the squadrons in BC.  If there never was a 7 FER, then go ahead and creat a 41 CER.

As an aside, 1 FER was the engineer regiment that supported 1 Cdn Div.  When it was stood-down its squadrons were embeded in the brigades.  These squadrons have evolved into the Regualr Force CERs of today.

 

[Lager and Ale]

FES in Fredricton

FES in F'ton??? Really? since when?

 

[Kat Stevens]

The number 7 should never be associated with an FER, CER, or Fd Sqn    :rage:

 

[John-Boy]

I have 7 Fd Squadron in St Thomas as part of 31 CER (historically 7 Fd Sqn was in London), any suggestions as to what it should be named?

 

[Kat Stevens]

The number seven has usually been applied to Armoured Engineer formations, both in the British Engineer Corps and our own.  You really have 7 field squadrons in one regiment? That must be quite the CofC parade.

 

[John-Boy]

I think you are thinking of callsigns where 7 is usually armoured.  We have two Field Squadrons, 7 (St Thoms) and 48 (Waterloo) and it was all based on all the Field Squadrons in the Canadian Army having there own number and then being grouped under Field Engineer Regiments.  7Fd was part of 11 Field Engineer Regiment.  Make sense?  The CofC was great.

 

[Kat Stevens]

I stand corrected...

 

[geo]

DAP....

3 FER derives from, way back when, 4th district engineers (thus 4FES affiliation) and even further back to the two Montreal Engineer Companies.  It is only in 1957 that 4 & 16 FES were put under the command of 3rd division RCE

CERs FERs are pretty much a post war phenomenon.  Brigades had Field Companies to support them throughout WW1 & 2 thus, the lion's share of history in the CME lies in the "hands" of our Field Squadrons/companies. 
If they decide to rename 3FER (as proposed) 34CER, (4 & 16 FES will continue to be the it's components).  4 FES will continue to perpetuate 4th district Engineers

PS.... on a historical perspective, 3FER also has a "claim" on 23 FES.

 

[McG]

FERs existed when we were RCE.  CERs were created in CME.

 

[geo]

Combat engineer regiments have Field squadrons....
FER & CER pert much equal nomenclature IMHO.

 

[dapaterson]

PS.... on a historical perspective, 3FER also has a "claim" on 23 FES.

Actually, it's 23rd Field Park Coy, RCE... but why fuss?

 

[geo]

Doh!

 

[Echo9]

The other nomenclature note to make is the distinction between a CER and FER.  While we're going full speed ahead at bastardizing the naming to suit what sounds cool, there is a clear definition for each (admittedly, this comes from Corps 86, so take it FWIW).

The FER is an organization that provides close support to infantry formations.  Similarly, the AER (armd engr regt) provides close support to armoured formations.  The ESR is the divisional level general support engineering organization.

The CER is the (engineer) combined arms organization that involves a mixing of field (infantry supporting), armoured (tank supporting), and general support engineers into one organization.  So, a true CER doesn't really exist outside of 1 CER at the moment, and likely won't ever in the reserve world.


It's the same process of devolution that has us adopting the term CMBG, which originally denoted the Corps Mechanized Brigade Group (essentially, the corps reserve).  In our normal Canadian doctrinal bastardization, we change the Corps to Canadian and keep marching.

 

[geo]

I see ya Echo & I agree with ya BUT as you have pointed out, 2 & 5 CER started off cheating.  Then someone in Ottawa (or Toronto) decided to give the Elgins a CER designation when FER woulda / shoulda been adequate.

All in all, the distinction between CER & FER has been lost,

Forever more?

stay tuned!

 

[rifleman]

Names and numbers change - I think that the Regiment/ Squadron should reflect the formation that they belong to - That would be the Engineer thing to do (Get it done)

 

[geo]

Sure rifleman,
and the name of the infantry unit you used to belong to should be changed to ummm:

1st Bn of the 30 something regiment of the 30 something brigade?

Most sappers have an attachment to their Squadron numbers.... you want to get her done and change those numbers too?.....

 

[rifleman]

We aren't taking about an Infantry Regiment here, we are talking Engineers...There has been Field Parks, Railroad units, FERs, CERs, Forestry units - All with various names, numbers. I'm not saying you can't have fond memories of a unit you were in.

I am pround of my former unit, but tradition is great as long as it doesn't get in the way of reality

 

[McG]

I am pround of my former unit, but tradition is great as long as it doesn't get in the way of reality

but why should we change tradition when it is not in the way (there is no impact, from the name "2 FER" nor the name "32 CER," on the operations of 32 CBG)?