Needing Genuine Brit Input

[kilemall]

That Punjab stuff reminds me, I haven't settled on a name for the British fleet forces IMTU (the TC one).

Should it be Royal Navy?

Royal Aerospace Force?

Royal Star Navy?

Royal Space Navy?

Royal Star Force?

Royal Space Force?

Something else?

I know the British Army and the Royal Marines would stay as is, just not sure what would be done with the navy, whether it would retain it's current name as the Nautical Force Command equivalent and some other new name, or adapted to the new 'waves to rule'.

And since I am waaaay too American to know what is 'right' in the gut, I thought I would ask our resident Brits for input.

 

[Condottiere]

The Royal Navy is unlikely ever to upgrade it's name, even if they're down to one ship. Nor the British Army.

Politics will determine if a fourth service would be created.

 

[simonh]

Historically aircraft and personnel have been frequently loaned and transferred back and forth between the RAF and Fleet Air Arm.

How about this. The Fleet Air Arm gains oversight of early space warfare assets because launches are conducted from a Navy base near the equator and recoveries are conducted at sea. That would logically place space assets under Navy control, leading to the formation of the Fleet Aerospace Arm, or following another historical precedent the Royal Navy Space Service. So it would actually still officially be part of the Royal Navy itself, just as aircraft operating from Navy bases and aircraft carriers are now.


Simon Hibbs

 

[McPerth]

I'm not British, so I cannot answer you directly, but maybe you can find some inspiration in 2300AD, as it depicts a UK with a Space Force.

I'd suggest you to look for it in Etranger, as it uses to have quite developed 2300AD militaries, though I cannot promise you about it, as I've not specifically read too much about British sections on it.

 

[Condottiere]

Pulp scifi writers probably leaned towards creating a fourth service.

Budget battles would probably ensure that both the RAF and RN would try to co-opt any new roles to ensure their pre-eminence.

Again, it probably comes down to how you want to make the political climate.

If it's primarily big spaceships, the RN might have a leg up.

 

[Vargas]

Fleet Space Arm of the Royal Navy?

 

[mike wightman]

The RAF began its life as the RAAC - Royal Army Air Corps.

I could see a Royal Space Navy starting out as a branch of the RAF - note that is Stargate the Airforce, not the Navy, got to fly the starships.

Royal Air and Space Force - RASF - becoming the Royal Space Force after a time for RSF.

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

The RAF began its life as the RAAC - Royal Army Air Corps.

I could see a Royal Space Navy starting out as a branch of the RAF - note that is Stargate the Airforce, not the Navy, got to fly the starships.

Royal Air and Space Force - RASF - becoming the Royal Space Force after a time for RSF.

or, the Royal Aerospace Force, which has the benefit of keeping the historic and recognisable "RAF" title, and tying into the history is a useful PR and recruitment tool.

other options would be the Space Fleet of the Royal Navy (If the RN still has significant wet navy assets), or just the Royal Navy (if it has none or almost no water based ships anymore), if you want to use naval ranks for your spaceship crews.

another option would be a general re-org the military structure, with all planet bound forces falling under the Army (including atmospheric aircraft and wet navy vessels,in in subordinate Atmospheric and Maritime Commands, something like how the Canadians do things), and anything space based or space capable being part of the Royal Navy. If you don't want to shuffle the RAF out of existence, you could give them control of in system craft like SDBs and fighters, while the RN controls jump capable ships.

either way, we brits are very proud of our history, and generally I would suggest trying to tie any newly invented names into existing structures, because that's how we think and often how such bodies are formed (the RAAC (which sill exists, minus the "royal"), the RNAS, the signals branch of the Royal Engineers, the American USAAC, etc)

I think part of the question is "how wet naval do you like your space navies?". A RAF derived force would "feel" a lot different than a RN derived force.

 

[Condottiere]

A Fifties take on it.

 

[kilemall]

Thanks for input- unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a Britsensus on this question and so I am left to making my own decision using my defective former colony mind.

The results could be DISASTROUSLY UNBRITISH.

 

[BlackBat242]

The RAF began its life as the RAAC - Royal Army Air Corps.

Actually, no.

First was the Air Battalion of the Royal Engineers, which did the initial experimentation of the Royal Army with heavier-than-air flying machines.

This was converted into the Royal Flying Corps on 13 May 1912.

The Royal Naval Air Service split off from the RFC on 1 July 1914, but the RNAS and RFC were again merged on 1 April 1918, with the combined service being named the Royal Air Force.

With the growing recognition of the potential for aircraft as a cost-effective method of reconnaissance and artillery observation, the Committee of Imperial Defence established a sub-committee to examine the question of military aviation in November 1911. On 28 February 1912 the sub-committee reported its findings which recommended that a flying corps be formed and that it consist of a naval wing, a military wing, a central flying school and an aircraft factory. The recommendations of the committee were accepted and on 13 April 1912 King George V signed a royal warrant establishing the Royal Flying Corps. The Air Battalion of the Royal Engineers became the Military Wing of the Royal Flying Corps a month later on 13 May.

It was the US Army that had a US Army Air Corps (USAAC), which grew into the US Army Air Forces (USAAF), then became a separate service as the USAF.

 

[epicenter00]

The results could be DISASTROUSLY UNBRITISH.

I've heard from a little birdy that colonies have this distressing habit of going in totally different directions from their mother country and doing things completely differently due to their own local conditions.

So the colony might do things in a not-british way, but that in itself would make the colony more interesting and unique and not just England, Ireland, Scotland, Cornwall, and Wales in outer space with the file numbers filed off. Unless that's exactly what you want.

I think the easiest way to figure these things out would be to actually look at which service in the real UK has more of an interest in space things.

If the RAF takes the lead, then the space force might be descended from the RAF and it might be called the RAF it'd just stand for the Royal Aerospace Force.

If the RN takes the lead, then the space force might be more naval in origin, perhaps descended from the Fleet Aerospace Arm or the Royal Aerospace Fleet.

If there's too much infighting between the two or the neither service takes an interest, then there might be a third service with some heinously dull name like "Cosmic Service of the Federation of Greater Britain, Scotland, and Offworld Posessions" or something similarly stomach-churning.

Just as a note, a friend of mine was associated with the United States Air Force and remembers one of the generals wrote a directive about how the Air Force had to lead in space, because there was no way the United States should ever have "starfleet" so this politicking is a very real thing.

 

[Condottiere]

Most importantly, a successor organization inherits the institutional culture of the parent organization.

Air Forces as a new Service, had to justify their independence, and fight for a share of the budgetary pie.

 

[Reban]

The RAF began its life as the RAAC - Royal Army Air Corps.

Actually, no.

First was the Air Battalion of the Royal Engineers, which did the initial experimentation of the Royal Army with heavier-than-air flying machines.

This was converted into the Royal Flying Corps on 13 May 1912.

The Royal Naval Air Service split off from the RFC on 1 July 1914, but the RNAS and RFC were again merged on 1 April 1918, with the combined service being named the Royal Air Force.

It was the US Army that had a US Army Air Corps (USAAC), which grew into the US Army Air Forces (USAAF), then became a separate service as the USAF.

Beat me to it, but just to add the observation that there is an Army Air Corps as part of the British Army but they are concerned with battlefield co-operation missions and the operation of the BA's helicopter forces.


Not a Brit Disclaimer


Contributors have already said most of what I wanted to say regarding the naming being based on the parent service of origin and 2300AD containing good background to use.

The origin story of your fleet forces should also influence your choice.

Some observations that might help. The RN and RAF are Royal because they are established by Royal warrant or Act of Parliament. The dates being 1707 for the RN and 1918 for the RAF.

The Royal Navy are the "Senior Service" followed by the Army and RAF. So your new fleet force will be the junior service if it's entirely separate. If it remains part of one of the other services the Brits will come up with rules or precedence which will vary with circumstance.

The British Army isn't "Royal" because since the Civil Wars and Restoration its traditionally been seen as Parliament's and not the Sovereign's.

You might find some unusual un-British term adopted if your fleet forces came from combined or cross-service origins. Commando for example was a Boer word which came into the British lexicon during the Boer Wars. Likewise Flying Column was a term adopted by British Army mobile forces during the Irish War of Independence from the IRA.

Thanks for input- unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a Britsensus on this question and so I am left to making my own decision using my defective former colony mind.

The results could be DISASTROUSLY UNBRITISH.

One thing my British friends involved in military and military history circles are giving out about a lot lately is the MOD (Ministry of Defense) adopting Americanisms like "Warrior" and "War-fighting" as well as other impenetrable military sounding PR babble.

So maybe your fleet force does end up with a "DISASTROUSLY UNBRITISH" name or designation imposed by the civil servants that the other services use to mock the new junior force.

 

[Condottiere]

I suspect warfighting warriors was coined more for recruiting and morale purposes, since crusader was politically incorrect, and knight elitist.