I always wondered why the AF uses ranks like colonel and geeral, instead of captain and admiral. I know, the USAF was orginally part of the Army-thus the generals. But are there any air forces that use the equivelnet naval rank (captain, admiral). Air forces seem to have a lot in common with navies-so why not?
The RAF appears to, for one.
ETA: (As well as many of the countries outside the current UK, but formerly members thereof.)
The Canadian Air Force rank structure is the same as the Canadian Army’s.
The Israeli military uses the same ranks for all its branches of service, so…
You can check the rank names for various forces at the International Encyclopedia of Uniform Insignia Around the World. Browsing that site, it seems to me that there are plenty of countries that use the same rank names for all of their Armed Forces ranks.
The rank structure may be the same, but the rank names are not.
Yes, it’s a bit of a mixture. Some of the commissioned officer ranks have names based (in part) on naval ranks, while the NCO ranks are in general based on the corresponding army ranks.
I’m not sure I understand what you mean. Private, Corporal, Master Corporal, Sergeant, Warrant Officer, Master WO, and Chief WO are the same in the Air Force and the Army.
Officer Cadet, Second Lieutenant, Lieutenant, Captain, Major, Lt Colonel, Colonel, Brigadier General, Major-General, Lieutenant-General, and General are the same.
What am I missing?
Yes, they are. The Canadian Air Force and Canadian Army are the same. The RCAF lost their ranks upon the unification of the Forces. In the Navy, we were taught that we kept our ranks because we were the “Senior Service,” but I doubt that was the actual motivation.
Perhaps that was a deliberate decision, when the RAF was created from parts of both the Army and Navy?
Argh! I misread it as the Canadian Air Force and Canadian Navy had the same ranks. You didn’t miss anything; I did.