Posted on Apr 2, 2015
Is there a certain psychology behind the way Rank Insignia looks between services?
17K
22
15
5
5
0
In my years of seeing the different types of enlisted ranks amongst the services, I often wondered of there is a trigger, a mental recognition, or a certain perception that changes between the way Enlisted Rank Insignia looks, and how people think of that rank.
This has come up for me because of how the USAF went from the Army rank insignia to what it is today. To me, the E-6 rank in particular looks tougher, more respectful and shows a sense of growth in ranks far better than the USAF E-6 rank.
I think this goes a long way for junior ranking enlisted. I know when I saw a Marine or an Army E-6 I always thought it looked better. I just put on E-6, yes it still means something different but the look is not different than the E-5 like it is in Army or Marines. Share your thoughts.
This has come up for me because of how the USAF went from the Army rank insignia to what it is today. To me, the E-6 rank in particular looks tougher, more respectful and shows a sense of growth in ranks far better than the USAF E-6 rank.
I think this goes a long way for junior ranking enlisted. I know when I saw a Marine or an Army E-6 I always thought it looked better. I just put on E-6, yes it still means something different but the look is not different than the E-5 like it is in Army or Marines. Share your thoughts.
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
4
4
0
The Air Force did improve upon the Top 3 Enlisted ranks by switching to rockers over the top of the five base chevrons. Before they did that I remember how difficult it was at times to decipher a MSgt from a TSgt at a distance.
Then again, during my career there were a lot of changes...to include the elimination of Sgt and the coloring in of the star for all junior ranks.
Then again, during my career there were a lot of changes...to include the elimination of Sgt and the coloring in of the star for all junior ranks.
(4)
(0)
CCMSgt (Join to see)
The old three below days. I had no trouble spotting them. Being a photo interpreter, there were two Key ID features. First, it was they way they walked. Second, they carried a clipboard.
The switch to the three chevrons on top was a wise move that really cemented the mindset that the MSgt was a SNCO. I was disappointed that they got rid of the Buck Sergeant.
The switch to the three chevrons on top was a wise move that really cemented the mindset that the MSgt was a SNCO. I was disappointed that they got rid of the Buck Sergeant.
(3)
(0)
Capt (Join to see)
That I can see would be a challenge. That would be hard to really get the respect deserved for the rank because you would be spending half your time deciphering what the rank meant. By then, it's acknowledgement for sure.
(1)
(0)
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter
I always felt the top stripes in the Air Force for the at one point new ranks of Senior and Chief Master Sergeant paid homage to Warrant Officer, W1 and Chief Warrant Officer W2 to W4 and acknowledged their existence. Although the Warrant Officer in the USAF still existed no new Warrants were being made at that time. I never had trouble identifying any rank insignia. Stripes below the AF stars represent NCOs, stripes divided by the stars Airmen up until the E4 Airman First Class became an E4 Sergeant. when I was an E3 it was as Airman second Class, then when I became an Airman First Class, I didn't get promoted, I was still and E3, they just changed the title, I still had two stripes. As a MSgt I had no top stripe, My first top stripe was as a SMSgt and six stripes under. , then I had to change insignia, Now had two top stripes but only five under now. I never has any confusion over what the insignia meant in any branch of the Armed Forces, it just not that complicated and I don't feel the changes were needed at all. I'm not suggesting anything be changed back but leave it alone and stop changing the rank insignia !
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
There actually is some psychological advantages between the different services insignia.
The two big ones are Size & Color, followed by position of placement.
On color, Red is generally a more "aggressive" color, and has been shown to make someone "more attractive" than wearing alternate colors. The USMC Red Background makes it standout on both of our uniforms (Dress/Service) and also makes the Chevrons appear larger. It's more of an optical illusion than anything. Compare this to the other services, notably the USAF, and you get a "bleed" effect, which actually makes their chevrons appear smaller. until you get rockers.
Additionally, the USMC has one additional Rocker for E9 (3 up, 4 down) compared to Army (3 up, 3 down), which actually makes them physically larger for upper ranks.
Finally is a matter of placement. Ours are set from Shoulder seem 4" until E7, then 3". I "believe" the army is centered from elbow to shoulder (please don't quote me). This changes the way we perceive them.
When we get to the Navy side, they tend to suffer from all of the effects, AND they only wear Chevrons on one sleeve, not centered.
The two big ones are Size & Color, followed by position of placement.
On color, Red is generally a more "aggressive" color, and has been shown to make someone "more attractive" than wearing alternate colors. The USMC Red Background makes it standout on both of our uniforms (Dress/Service) and also makes the Chevrons appear larger. It's more of an optical illusion than anything. Compare this to the other services, notably the USAF, and you get a "bleed" effect, which actually makes their chevrons appear smaller. until you get rockers.
Additionally, the USMC has one additional Rocker for E9 (3 up, 4 down) compared to Army (3 up, 3 down), which actually makes them physically larger for upper ranks.
Finally is a matter of placement. Ours are set from Shoulder seem 4" until E7, then 3". I "believe" the army is centered from elbow to shoulder (please don't quote me). This changes the way we perceive them.
When we get to the Navy side, they tend to suffer from all of the effects, AND they only wear Chevrons on one sleeve, not centered.
(3)
(0)
CCMSgt (Join to see)
I am not sure if we can fit any more on his cuff.
David Farragut - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
David Glasgow (aka Glascoe)[1][2][3][4] Farragut (July 5, 1801 – August 14, 1870) was a flag officer of the United States Navy during the American Civil War. He was the first rear admiral, vice admiral, and admiral in the United States Navy.[5][6] He is remembered for his order at the Battle of Mobile Bay, in which he was victorious, usually paraphrased as "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" in U.S. Navy tradition.[7][8]
(1)
(0)
Capt (Join to see)
I like your analysis of the Chevrons. I can see how those aspects are so different. When it comes to the Navy, I have always made the joke of, once they graduated basic training, they handed them each a sharpee marker and then told them to squiggle something on for there rank...lol.
All jokes aside, there rank is rather interesting too. Navy ranks are similar bit to each other. But they don't look like the Air or ground services. Makes it a bit challenging.
All jokes aside, there rank is rather interesting too. Navy ranks are similar bit to each other. But they don't look like the Air or ground services. Makes it a bit challenging.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Capt (Join to see) Keep in mind that Naval & Ground forces Chevrons "used to" point the same direction (point down, like Navy). If I remember correctly it was during WW1 that they inverted the Ground Forces stripes.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Perhaps not the criteria, but Navy and Coast Guard with Chevrons pointing down such as the hull of a ship. Army and Marines up such as the top of a tent while out in the field. Air Force, winglike (like a bird ) chevrons to represent the flying service.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google