Since a Colonel wears the Eagle on his collar then, why doesn't the GO ranks an Eagle with a Star and the General wear two beautiful Eagles?

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 09:18:19 -0400

This is only exploratory to comprehend the reason why the Eagle is not used more in identfying our ranks. This is the senior officer ranks as a test tray.

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Sep 10 at 2020 9:28 AM

Lt Col Jim Coe — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 09:28:32 -0400

A good friend made Colonel just before I retired. He said, it’s funny you get promoted to a rank where it matters which direction it goes on your collar and then you get your lobotomy. To that I add, stars don’t have a right or left collar version.

BTW the O6 eagle must face forward on the collar.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 10 at 2020 9:46 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 09:46:52 -0400

For that answer, you would have to travel back in time and ask the Continental Army as they mirrored their stuff from the British...which was all they really knew...and threw their own twists on the ranks

Response by PV2 Robert H. made Sep 10 at 2020 10:02 AM

PV2 Robert H. — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:02:57 -0400

If you look at the navy, the "eagle" is featured much more in that branch. As every enlisted rank starting at petty officer has it included (except for billet positions) and is featured at captain (Navy Colonel) on the field of battle it was easier to read and see the stripes. And off it was easier to just ad another strip to the top (or later a rocker to the bottom) on your uniform than it was to worry about which side which one was supposed to be on. That is a ceremonial, and appearance thing and although they fought in what would be concidered their "dress uniform" it was also their battle gear. So it stands to reason that they would rather have the soldiers and Marines focused on battle drills than that kind of novelty.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 10 at 2020 10:53 AM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:53:51 -0400

This inspires more questions.
Why doesn't the Brigadier General command a Brigade?
Anyone else have a hard time distinguishing an old SPC from a LTC and 1-Star since we put rank on the chest?
2 Eagles would look very weird
There could be a lot of rank changes to make things easier to recognize. Real nomenclature for Warrant ranks, more difference between 1SG/SGM/CSM, unique distinction for any command position compared to non command (enlisted and officer), bring back the SPC ranks (there's plenty of use for em)

Response by LCDR Joshua Gillespie made Sep 10 at 2020 11:23 AM

LCDR Joshua Gillespie — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 11:23:26 -0400

My take? It was all about economies of scale. At the time of the Revolution, officer rank was complicated, and involved everything from the number of buttons, to the layers of braid around facings. The Continental Army adopted a color-code for cockades and sashes-likely because it was cheaper/faster than trying to outfit all our officers in the same vein as their British counterparts. Later, we adopted a somewhat complex system of the number of epaulets and/or chevrons (yes, there was a time officers wore them). By the 1830s, it came down to how many senior officers existed in the Army... and which "color" of insignia was more prevalent. I've often surmised the "bars" were adopted from the French (and replaced the "pips"), and that "oak leaves" replaced the "crown" of British field grade officers. The Navy, in her infinite capacity for ambiguity... simply kept adding "stripes" to the ends of their sleeves... while also adding silver anchors to the then conventional Army ranks. We still had to call everyone by different ranks though... because, NAVY!