Jump to content

Talk:United States Air Force enlisted rank insignia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Untitled

[edit]

Nothing against the image creator, but the USAF's web site has some higher-quality, higher-resolution graphics that are public domain and can be modified as necessary.

Like this one: Airman

RADICALBENDER★ 17:58, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I think either one would be fine; the AF ones seem cleaner but apparently lack the proper color.
I've been confused today about these; have the enlisted rank insignia changed since the mid-'80s? I know for example a master sergeant used to have six down, none up, and a senior airman and below used to have blue stars, one didn't get a white star until making the rank of sergeant (NCO but at the same pay grade as senior airman). - Hephaestos|§ 18:24, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Tell you what I'll do. If I get some time later tonight (I have to run now), I'll see if I can't futz with the AF image to get it in color (it's PD, so they won't have a problem. This is where I got that graphic, by the way: [1] RADICALBENDER★ 18:35, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Sounds like we need to check the actual information. I did this all so long ago, it's quite possible things have changed. Or that the First Sergeant info is wrong. - Wguynes 18:55, Mar 25, 2004 (UTC)
I was convinced I was right until I did some Googling, now I'm convinced they've probably changed. Perhaps there should be a historical section (senior airman was added some time after the establishment of the Air Force for example). - Hephaestos|§ 20:13, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'm not against it. My efforts right now are to get the breadth of the current U.S. armed force insignia fleshed out and get the pages fully integrated (linkwise) into the rest of the US armed forces pages. As I've said, up until now my next thoughts were to work on insignia for other countries. I certainly don't discount historical interest, but I'm not quite ready to add another dimension (time) to my workload.
However, the wonders of Wikipedia are such that everyone feel free to jump in with more facets! I'll provide what limited support I can. - Wguynes 20:25, Mar 25, 2004 (UTC)
While my insignia are cartoonish in nature, and a bit simplistic in design, it was done by intent. My goal was (is? open to debate) to make consistent designs and insignia sizes for all the armed forces for cross reference purposes. If the chevron curve is what is bugging us, I can certainly rework these to suit.
Looking at the AF link provided, I could see how one would observe these as higher quality in one respect, but in another, they look like poor snapshots (i.e. off center, tilted, etc). I guess it all comes from your perspective. Take a look at the other armed forces pages, too. I just added a navigation menu. - Wguynes 18:51, Mar 25, 2004 (UTC)
Well, the image syntax can be used to force all entries to an equal width. For example, it's very easy to shrink the above airman image to any size I need (because the original is like 650 pixels wide). Like so:

Airman Airman Airman Airman

etc. This way if someone wants to use the larger image for something else (because of the GFDL license), they aren't limited to a small image. Besides, if the military already has these images available, I generally prefer not to reinvent the wheel.
Also, most of the U.S. Army/AF/Marine officer ranks are already in the database. See General or Colonel for examples. RADICALBENDER★ 18:04, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
What isn't obvious is that resizing a large image and displaying it as a small one is bandwidth intense. It does not get resized until it's been downloaded into the browser. 11 * 50Kb images require 550Kb of download bandwidth and corresponding wait time, even if they're displayed small. I certainly have no argument against having big ones available and used, but putting them all on one page is going to be a bit of a load on the servers. Also, I'm mindful that not everyone has broadband. - Wguynes 00:23, Mar 28, 2004 (UTC)
After checking my facts, it appears the server is actually doing the resizing. Quite a surprise for me. Can someone verify my results by examining the above sizes on their browser vs. the markup? Is the server resizing every hit? Or does it do it at submit-time and store a seperate image on disk? - Wguynes 05:35, Mar 28, 2004 (UTC)

Ok, Hephaestos and I went through some discussion. He confirms that when using the large graphic, with XXXpx tag, that a copy is made at submit time only, eliminating my concerns about server overhead or bandwidth issues. My only remaining concern was that the graphics on the airforce site referenced from www.af.mil website are actually too extremely curved. Such a small issue. Any color issues I can fix. I'll start work and dig around to see what's available already on Wikipedia. - Wguynes 07:14, Mar 28, 2004 (UTC)

Command Chief Master Sergeant
Command Chief Master Sergeant

Switch is done. New graphics uploaded and this page edited to point to new versions.
Does anyone know what this star means? Command Chief Master Sergeant - Wguynes 22:20, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)

This page needs clarification about the difference in job functions of First Sergeant and Command Chief Master Sergeant. Something similiar to the text in U.S. Army enlisted rank insignia. -- Wguynes 19:33, Apr 1, 2004 (UTC)

Commons images

[edit]

These insignia are also available on commons at commons:Category:United States Air Force ranks. Pimlottc 15:32, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

chart revision

[edit]

I've been going through and editing the insignia charts of the various armed services to look standardized, but the AF enlisted chart may be less clear now than it was before. There might be confusion with the E-7, E-8, and E-9 ranks due to the first sergeant duty. I tried to clarify this w/ a footnote, but I'm not sure it suffices. Anyone have any ideas?

--Mordien 23:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I moved and subdivided your comment, I hope you don't mind. I, for one, think you did a pretty good job with the chart. My only caveot is that my browser is 1172px wide, and I'm still having to scroll horizontally. Did you try "smallening" the images, and how does it look if you do? Just my 3¢. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 23:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minor historical note: In 1970 or 1971, Air Forces Times carried an article about the AF's first E-4 (Sergeant) First Sergeant. 68.110.202.8 19:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New reverted insignias will be active 1 Jan. 2007

[edit]

I suppose we are going back to "old school", because we are changing the insignia back to what it was for over 70 years starting 1 Jan. 2007, among other uniform changes. See thisMilitary.com article. If this link goes out of date, just search for it. Please someone keep this in mind for future editing. 141.156.182.189 01:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC) Ado[reply]

No real change to the stripes will occur. As of 1 October, we enlisted folks can't wear shoulder boards on our blue shirts. The 1 Jan 07 change is a reversion to using US insignias contained in a cirle (albeit with a slight change in finish). Otherwise, business as usual. Reverendlinux 13:45, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of CAP promotion information

[edit]

I've removed the following good faith edit from an IP user due to being off topic which, while not precisely a policy, is still relevant here. The material, while not being disputed, is not within the topic of USAF enlisted rank insignia, and does not belong here. This material is already contained within the article on the Civil Air Patrol and elsewhere.

Removed material: Civil Air Patrol members who attain the rank of Cadet Second Lieutenant are eligible for promotion to the rank of Airman First Class (E-3) upon enlistment in the United States Air Force.

If there are any questions about this, please drop a note on my talk page.  Etamni | ✉  09:41, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on United States Air Force enlisted rank insignia. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:41, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't the enlisted ranks also list E4 as SGT as it was in 1974!! I am very upset about this!!

[edit]

SGT E4 IN 1974 Please list in rank chart. Thank You: Sgt Michael A Pospeschil E4 (1972 to 1976) KI Sawyer AFB 2600:6C44:7D7F:33AD:1A5:188B:60DA:226B (talk) 19:34, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:United_States_Air_Force_enlisted_rank_insignia&oldid=1239670461"