Talk:Army ranks and insignia of the Russian Federation

message: There is no such rank as podpraporschik in russian military, look here: Talk:Russian military ranks#Podpraporshchik/Bootsman. --DimaY2K 16:03, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  podpraporschik rank 

message: The US rank equivalents need to be fixed for both the Army and the Air Force.  There are only three US junior or company grade officers, not four as in the Russian Army.  This will result in one of the Russian officer ranks having no US equivalent, but I'm not sure which would be the best Russian rank to skip.  Also, the rank insignia of two gold bars does not exist in the US military.  The proper title and insignia for US company grade officers are:
::Captain: 2 silver bars
::First Lieutanant: 1 sliver bar
::Second Lieutenant:  1 gold bar
Nicholas F 05:37, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I Agree with you. US Army dosen't have 2 gold bars insignia and dosen't have a rank of Lieutenant look here. Also russian rank of Major General should not be compared with US rank of Brigadier General. I have made the changes but they were reverted. --DimaY2K 07:54, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I know the changes with the ranks as "First Lieutenant, Lieutenant, and Second Lieutenant" are wrong, but I did not do that. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 00:12, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What are two gold bars doing here, THEY ARE NOT APART OF THE U.S. MILITARY!! IT IS A NON EXISTANT RANK, I DID NOT DO THIS!!!! εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 22:00, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rank comparison problems 

message: There seem to be two problems with the insignia that I believe was copied from http://www.uniforminsignia.net/index.php?p=state&id=123 
First, the isnignia for a General of the Army actualy belongs to a militsiya officer, as the color of the shoulder board is grey. It's probably not much of a problem because officer insignia for MVD is very much similar to the army and Internal Troops one, but enlisted insignia differs substantially, not to mention that latter are technically the military while the militsiya is the police forces.
Then, the golden parade shoulder board of a Major has an all-forces emblem, which is not necessary at all (only used by medics and justice generals wear shoulder board insignia, because sleeve insignia has one same emblem for all generals).
But the white shoulder board of a colonel has no emblem, which is not right because  white/green shirts are missing sleeve insingia so the emblem moves to the shoulder boards. --DmitryKo 16:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please make the notes under the pictures more accurate. --Nixer 10:07, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean? I tried to be as accurate as I could - if you think there are errors besides the above-mentioned ones, feel free to correct them... --DmitryKo 14:50, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This sentence is outdated. Это касалось пространственного расположения, но теперь всё выглядит нормально.--Nixer 14:55, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems 

message: What does the "VS" stand for on the Other Ranks' insignia? 202.89.153.228 01:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "ВС" ("VS") stands for Vooruzhonniye Sily which means armed forcess in russian --DimaY2K 04:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "VS" 

message: I think that rank comparisons ought to be avoided altogether. It is almost impossible to achieve perfect grade-for-grade equivalency at the best of times, let alone a comparison between systems that are so different. A better alternative is to show the ranks with their commensurate command appointments, but it's sufficient to just categorise rank groupings (Marshals & Generals, Field Officers, Company Officers, etc.) It is also questionable to use American ranks for comparison, because in this case the American way of doing something - as usual - is the exception, not the rule. The rank comparison article that is cited is WRONG. Rank comparisons must be determined according to function, rather than superficial nonsense like the number of stars, or how many grades there are between certain ranks. There is no Russian equivalent of Brig-Gen, and such a rank is unnecessary anyway. Japan, for example, does without it too. Brigade-size formations are commanded by colonels in both the Russian and American armies, and division-size formations are commanded by major-generals in both the Russian and American armies (there is no formation between brigade and division). Ergo, Russian and American major-generals are basically equivalent.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.223.81 (talk) 14:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Either have no comparison with anything, or if there must absolutely be a comparison, use a NATO--Russia comparison, or even provide a link to some old Warsaw Pact--NATO conversion thing (just put a NATO rank code on each row). That said, I still think a comparison is not needed here, and is to placate pro-US or US-centred sentiment among some editors. 118.90.23.59 (talk) 12:39, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Any attempts to use the "Command Appointment" strategy is a bad idea with the Russian armed forces due to the high importance of the post in comparison to the rank. For example, a Lieutenant Colonel commands a battalion in both the Russian and the American forces. But in Russia, so can a Major, or even a Captain. Comparisons fall a bit flat after that. --Kazuaki Shimazaki (talk) 14:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't think there would be any problem -- I believe that idea is workable, and it was used in at least one major work on the topic in Russia. The only catch is that US uses rigid system of rank-position correspondence, whilr in USSR and Russia it is flexible. That is, when American officer is gven the Captain's billet, he is promoted (or, if he lacks seniority, brevetted) to Captain's rank, and vice versa. In Russia, if an officer lacks seniority for promotion he is simply not promoted, and serves in his current rank until he accumulates it, after which he would be promoted automatically. Informally it is called "walking up the rank" (выхаживать звание). The reverse also happens: when officer is due to promotion, he is usually given the corresponding position. If the such position isn't available, or the higher-ups decide that the officer is unfit for promotion despite his seniority, he is simply not promoted -- this is called "overwalking the rank" (перехаживать звание). Nevertheless, the correspondence between the rank and the position remains, there's just some flexibility in it. --Khathi (talk) 13:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem, IMO, is that thanks to that "some flexibility", we have to make some hard choices if we are to use positional comparison and present an accurate picture in the attempt. For example, take again the post of Battalion Commander (which is AFAIK the most problematic). In America, he's a Lieutenant Colonel. Now the Russian side. We can certainly use the shtat rank, which AFAIK calls for a Lt. Col. But unless the Russian Army has changed sharply since the end of the Cold War, this will AFAIK ignore the reality that many o most Battalion Commanders are Majors, and there are apparently more Captains serving than Lieutenant Colonels (Dick C.J., for example estimated in 1985 that 60% of the Soviet MRB commanders were Captains). So, should we compare using the [i]shtat[/i] limit, or try and aim for the "center of reality", or draw out the entire likely range, and if we take that last option do we have to provide some indication of the "spread"? Or maybe this is less of a problem in the Russian Army - say most of the current battalion commanders are Lieutenant Colonels with only a sprinkling of Majors, but that in itself would IMO be worthy of mention in the text. I don't object to this idea, but we have to get a consensus if we are going to do this, and I am not even getting into Verifiability, accusations of Original Research, and the like... --Kazuaki Shimazaki (talk) 10:04, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, it's a good question and it warrants some careful consideration. I'll try to figure how to get around it and look for some literature on the matter. --Khathi (talk) 14:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  General rank comparisons 

message: Gefreiter is the German rank, I think Efreitor is a more correct latinized version of Russian "Ефрейтор" (translit: "Yefreytor"). 95.69.152.59 (talk) 10:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gefreiter or Efreitor 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Army ranks and insignia of the Russian Federation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051123192515/http://wbase.duma.gov.ru/ntc/vdoc.asp?kl=4488 to http://wbase.duma.gov.ru/ntc/vdoc.asp?kl=4488
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070317183721/http://document.kremlin.ru/doc.asp?ID=27589&PSC=10&PT=3&Page=1 to http://document.kremlin.ru/doc.asp?ID=27589&PSC=10&PT=3&Page=1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified