[Gunner]

Hi Guys:

The Artillery had Master Gunners (the highest technical qualification achievable) and the Ordnance Corps had Conductors (same same).

These were men of deep experience who were charged with the technical examination of military stores and fortress armaments. Generally each fort had a Master Gunner and each "trayne" had a Conductor. The title of Conductor died out many years ago.

About 10 years ago the army separated the Master Gunner qualification from the trade progression of the artillery. Ths was done so that everyone who aspired to CWO (in the Guns) didn't have to take the Mr Gnr course. Concurrently the course was moved to RMC and tied to the new Canadian version of the Technical Staff course which was at one time only open to arty and RCEME officers. Now called the Army Technical WO course with the traditional name of Mr Gnr tied to the qualification, it is open to all army WO+ who wish to follow a technical career path in equipment acquisition, testing and life cycle maintenance. It has next to nothing to do with the technical aspects of actually firing Guns in anger as these skills are taught at a much earlier stage in career development for Gunners and mortarmen. Mr Gnrs are the techie 'dweebs' (meant in the same respectful term as I use for my 'dweeb' brother who makes much more than I do!) of the army. Master Sniper and Master Driver ( a new one on me) do not require the university level knowledge of the Master Gunner (no insult to either as they are certainly masters of their skills) but Mr Gnr, to the best of my knowledge, is still the only master skill badge worn by WO+.

The Mr Gnr of St James Park is the senior serving Gunner of the Commonwealth forces and has direct access to HM, the Captain General of the Artillery. He is usually a retired MGen or higher and the role is purely ceremonial and tied to the heart of the Royal Regiment as opposed to its technical brain like the Mr Gnrs created at RMC.

There is no truth to any stories about the Gunners abandoning their Guns and then having another Corps or Regiment gain some honour for "saving" them. For example, the rearguard action at Liliefontein was a cooperative action by Lt Morrison's two gun section of D Bty (no historical connection to D Bty, 2 RCHA who choose perpetuate the role but actually have less claim to it then 2 (Ottawa) Fd Bty, 30 RCA). "Tiny" was awarded a DSO (as a LT this means it was for valour and at the time one down from the VC.) There were many medals handed out for this action but this is always lost in the shadow of the RCD's well earned VCs.

There was no "saving" the guns in the sense of the Gunners running away... in fact one of the Guns was put into deep jeopardy by the detachment delaying their withdrawal so that Sgt Holland could jump aboard with his smoking Colt MG clutched in his blistered hands and arms. In what we would now call "pepper potting", the RCD and Guns alternated between galloping rearwards and deploying to stall the Boers and protect the rear of the column. It was this courageous and all out effort to PROTECT THE COLUMN that won all the medals, not "SAVING" the Guns. Hundreds of lives would have been lost and untold materiel would have fallen into the Boers hands had they managed to disrupt the column or cause it to withdraw in an unorderly fashion (read- retreat from Moscow).

On the lanyard issue there is some truth to the fact that they were moved in 1920 when Royal was bestowed on the Non-permamnent militia part of the artillery. Photographic evidence shows the "regulars" (as we know them now) wearing the lanyard on the right well before 1920 and they had been granted Royal back in 1881. Rob is right on the button about why they are white.

UBIQUE! Mike (in Mali)