Talk:Military parade/Archive 1

I created this page, (Weatherman667,) before I got my account. As soon as I figure out how to sign it to my name, I will.

This article is well done. Maurreen 16:00, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Cleared up some things for me. BritBoy 22:37, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

-

The bit about kilted soldiers not bringing their legs up to 90 degrees is wrong. As an ex-sergeant major in a Highland Regiment I can assure you that when I was taught drill and when I taught it myself,there was always insistence on having the thighs parallel to the ground and the lower leg at right anglesat the top of the movement.

coileachmor@ntlworld.com 01:14, 8th May 2005


 * Maybe you're talking about slow marching. --Iamcon 10:39, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * No he is talking about all British Drill. Kilted or not, the thigh is always taught to be 90 degrees to the ground, and people are often punished for not doing so when on parade. Philip.t.day (talk) 20:04, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

-

This article doesn't represent a world-wide view, as it is a mixture of American, British Commonwealth, and other methods of military parades. Might we consider splitting up each section of drill into perhaps American and British Commonwealth? Patar knight 22:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

- The Article suggests formation fighting ended in late 1800's but did the British Not fight in Africa in the early 1900's in formation as they had in the previous century with good effect? Philip.t.day (talk) 20:04, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Drill
Most of this article concerns drill. This is another article's worth of information. There can still be an article on military parades in general.--jrleighton 00:36, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Why?
I'd be interested to see more discussion on what drill is really for in the modern world. Apart from the one reference to riot control, it appears to be largely a matter of ceremony nowadays. In this world of defence cutbacks how can our fighting forces waste so much time learning what are essentially ceremonial maneuvers?!

Of course the other answer is that it encourages teamwork, but then there are plenty of other exercises that do this too, while teaching more practical skills. Or is it a way of training people to respond to orders without thinking? Or to break the minds of the more belligerent conscripts?

Just some food for thought. I don't know enough about the subject, but would be interested to see more on this in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.106.135.90 (talk) 13:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC).

It instills discipline and teamwork into a group of soldiers, and can makes them think, while constantly learning new movements. It also teaches soldiers how to respond to orders quickly and effectively Patar knight 13:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * It also looks a hell of a lot better than a crowd running from point A to point B. Also, everyone stays together, so if someone faints/falls/gets bit by a rattlesnake/explodes, you know about it. By the way, one usually equates "soldiers" with the army. There are other branches that drill. --76.212.171.89 06:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Merger
Support. I support the fact that this article should be merged, both are pretty close to the same anyways, so why keep them apart? And also they are not just "ceremonial maneuvers" as it was so crudely put, they are there so that is is easy to know where everyone is and where you can go. Zazzer 00:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The merger with Drill(military) if it was needed, which I contest as being neccessary,has been the wrong way. Parade drill is only one aspect of military drill. Whilst moving parade military to military drill would make sense.The two articles fit badly together in the parade article. What place has for example unarmed combat drill and musket drill have in a page titled parade. Just because the parade article was the longer of the two does not make it the logical destination page for a merger. If the merger is deemed appropriate, I propose resurrecting the Drill(military) page and making parade a subsection of it.Koonan the almost civilised 11:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Merge suggestion
Plz see Talk:Drill commands. `'mikka 23:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Types of drill
All actions at the halt should be classified as 'static drill'. Then the seperate sub sub headings of turns, etc can be added. it also presents more information. I will check what the other types, marching, etc, are officially called. --Iamcon 10:45, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Worldview
Would like to suggest that this article be organized by country. That is, I. British Commonwealth, II. United States, III. something else, etc. As it is, it seems as though the article is mainly British, with some US contrasts thrown in as asides, and it's really hard to follow what's going on. Maybe a section first on history, common terminology, overall concepts. But really, the article as-is does not represent a full picture of the subject. --Mukk 19:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with that, it should be done by country. Dreamy  §  19:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

How about moving the page to Military parade in the British Commonwealth and also create a page called Military parade in the United States and then separate the current page into the two. It can all be merged into Military parade at a later date if there is enough for a worldview. Jh fireboy  Talk  14:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * There'd be an awful lot of overlap, though, if those two pages were created.
 * In the meantime, there's interwiki links to a number of foreign language wikis -- these will probably be able to expand the worldview of the article. I can tackle the Polish wiki; anyone here speak Danish, German, or Swedish? --Mukk 08:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

You guys should check out the 50th anniversary chinese national parade
That's the best parade I ever seen, it just make other parade seems easy and not as good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.227.170.226 (talk) 07:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

American Drill and Ceremony (D&C)
I don't know about other countries, but America has several services. That needs to be taken into account when describing military parade drill.

As a member of the Active U.S. Army reading this article, I found it very confusing and inaccurate. The Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines do things very differently, to the point that we don't really speak each other's language, when giving or responding to parade orders.

I agree that different countries should have their own pages, but also, each page should be broken down by service, and by that service's history. As few as ten years ago, there were some different commands used, and modifications to some of the positions.

Example: In the Army, Stand At Ease comes before At Ease in strictness. When Standing At Ease, the Soldier's hands are placed in the small of the back just below the ribcage, identical to Parade Rest, the difference being the head must be turned to follow any speaker in charge of the formation, as long as they remain in front of the formation. The position of At Ease is where the hands and shoulders may drop to a more relaxed position, and the head may be turned at will. Technically one should not speak at any position but Rest, but I've never known any formation to be silent when waiting At Ease, not even in Basic Training! :) The article has these positions in the opposite order. I refrained from changing them, because I do not know what the other services standard is for these commands. The article may or may not be right for other U.S. services. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.244.34 (talk) 22:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

How far will this go?
At what point is someone going to say "enough is enough" and have a discussion on what level of detail is actually appropriate for the article? The Canadian Forces Manual of Drill and Ceremonial alone is over 600 pages. Will it, and the manuals of every other country, eventually end up in the article? This article needs to be pruned back big-time. CU L8R AV8R ... J-P (talk) 13:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Comment Removed from Article
I removed the comment (from someone else) below from the actual article:

(This article would benefit from being broke down into various service branch sections, since for example, the US Marines use different commands and drills than the US Army.)

-  Ro   Bo   Tam   ice 15:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Issue with Turning Motion section
While this section is accurate as far as I know with respect to Commonwealth drill, but the U.S. equivalent is NOT "To the rear, march", at least not the way the movement is described:

>>About Turn (U.S.:To the Rear, MARCH): A 180° turn to the right, done as an exaggerated version of the right turn. United States units do not make exaggerated gestures with the legs or arms.<<

In the US Armed Services, "To the Rear, March" means *every* serviceman in the formation pivots 180 degrees *simultaneously* with the next step. There is also "Counter Column, March" where the unit changes direction 180 degrees but the squads interweave, and the platoon leader cuts across the formation (which reduces to half-step pace after the turn to allow the commander time to traverse the distance), so that all the original squad leaders are now leading the formation 180 degrees away from the previous heading, whereas it sounds as though UK/Commonweath troops make a wide right turn pivoting on an external axis to change direction 180 degrees, which is not a standard US maneuver. After a Counter-column command, the US unit will be marching at half-step by default and must be given the command "foward, March" to resume the normal marching stride. I speak from a US Navy/Marine Corps Drill background. The UK units have to make exaggerated motions because the outer squad has to move a greater distance in the same amount of time as the inner squads which go a shorter distance. "Counter-column, March" is the closest US equivalent to "About Turn". Aggiememenon (talk) 19:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

International drill
Thank you for the Yanky perspective, as expected from Wikipedia. What about the rest of the world? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.122.40 (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Rifles Drill?
I'm no expert and it's been a long time since I was involved with this, but I believe this is still appropriate. British Army Rifle regiments, (formerly The Light Infantry and Royal Green Jackets, now The Rifles), and I believe some Ghurkha Rifle regiments used a more efficient parade drill. This originated from the rifle regiments role to be first in and last out of the battlefield and to march at pace (140 paces/min rather than 120 paces standard for Line regiments).

All commands are/can be issued from the at-ease position, and most finish at-ease. It is possible to deliver, for example, the single command "to the left, quick march", at which the formation would without pausing, come to attention, turn left, and step off, and in the first few steps transfer the rifle from the "shoulder arms" position, to the trail position. It was then possible to command "to the front, halt", which would involve a halt, shoulder arms from the trail, left or right turn to face the "front", and stand at ease.

And just to make it interesting, all these commands can be issued as bugle calls.

Worth finding a suitable authority on the subject, for completeness?