# First Navy Jack? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 4, 2002, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901 "2002-09-04T01:56:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/1 "2002-09-04T01:56:37Z")
OK, so Lady Chance is a software designer for a military contractor. She gets all the fleet-wide email announcements. Today she gets this: > [@](#): > > _deleted_ > RMKS/1. PURSUANT TO REF A, THE FIRST NAVY JACK WILL BE FLOWN ON BOARD ALL U.S. NAVY SHIPS IN LIEU OF THE UNION JACK DURING THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM. TO HONOR THOSE WHO DIED DURING THE ATTACK OF 11 SEP 01, ALL AFLOAT COMMANDS WILL COMMENCE FLYING THE FIRST NAVY JACK AT MORNING COLORS ON 11 SEP 02. THIS DISPLAY OF THE FIRST NAVY JACK IS AN AUTHORIZED > EXCEPTION TO SECTION 1258 OF REF B. > _deleted_ I deleted a lot of extraneous stuff. OK, so the 'First Navy Jack I can handle. I looked it up and, while [a bit hard on the eyes](http://www.anyflag.com/history/firstnav.htm) is certainly in keeping with American ‘flag ethos’. But I’m more confused about the sentence that reads “…will be flown on board all US Navy ships in lieu of the **union jack** …” When did the US Navy fly the Union Jack? Did they finally get fed up with GWB and go looking for other employment? Of course I’m missing something here. Can anyone bring me up to speed? ---
**Author:** ![Uncle\_Toby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/b3f665/32.png) [@Uncle\_Toby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncle_Toby)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/2 "2002-09-04T02:25:14Z")
As opposed to the Confederate jack? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/3 "2002-09-04T02:34:37Z")
What the US Navy means by “Union Jack” is the blue field with the 50 stars. “Union” here doesn’t refer to the United Kingdom, but rather the Union of the United States of America. During my tenure aboard the USS INDEPENDENCE, that ship became the oldest operating warship (excluding the USS CONSTITUTION) in the US fleet and thus flew the First Navy Jack instead of the Union Jack. Of course, had “Reference A” and “Reference B” (not to mention the originator and subject line of the message) not been deleted, you’d probably have gotten this info already. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/4 "2002-09-04T02:42:49Z")
Oh, you’re giving the Navy a bit too much credit on the communications angle. I _have_ the entire communique in my inbox. Nowhere does it say anything like what you described. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/5 "2002-09-04T03:20:33Z")
Well, having retired in the not so distant past as a Personnelman First Class, I’m fully aware that such a “communique” has no force whatsoever unless it’s either a NAVADMIN, ALNAV, or message from the SECDEF or the President. How about posting the entire thing here? Or you can check out the US Navy Regulations available as a link from [http://bupers.navy.mil](http://bupers.navy.mil) which is quite likely what “TO SECTION 1258 OF REF B” is part of. ---
**Author:** ![owlstretchingtime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/958977/32.png) [@owlstretchingtime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/owlstretchingtime)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/6 "2002-09-04T11:57:59Z")
The “Union Jack” (the UK one) isn’t called that in any official capacity. It’s properly referred to as the Union Flag, “Union Jack” is a nickname, akin to “Old Glory”. The Roral Navy don’t fly the Union Flag, but the White Ensign (which incorporates it). I’m intrigued to find out the USA has a “Union Jack” as well. Ours is prettier. ---
**Author:** ![sirjamesp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@sirjamesp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sirjamesp)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/7 "2002-09-04T12:07:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by owlstretchingtime \* > The “Union Jack” (the UK one) isn’t called that in any official capacity. That’s a debateable point - an act of Parliament in 1908 stated that “the **Union Jack** should be regarded as the National flag”. [http://www.goldenjubilee.info/StaticPage.jsp?StaticPageId=78](http://www.goldenjubilee.info/StaticPage.jsp?StaticPageId=78) [http://www.flaginst.demon.co.uk/fiunionflag.htm](http://www.flaginst.demon.co.uk/fiunionflag.htm) ---
**Author:** ![owlstretchingtime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/958977/32.png) [@owlstretchingtime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/owlstretchingtime)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/8 "2002-09-04T12:10:30Z")
Every one knows what the “Union Jack” means. However it is correctly called the Union Flag. It’s a pedant’s delight. ---
**Author:** ![owlstretchingtime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/958977/32.png) [@owlstretchingtime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/owlstretchingtime)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/9 "2002-09-04T12:17:11Z")
What I meant to say is that “Jack” is a nautical term for flag, so it could be accurately called a “union jack” if flown on a ship, but not on land. Also no British ship would, principally, fly the Union Flag/Jack but either the white or red Ensign (or Royal Standard). ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/10 "2002-09-04T12:17:39Z")
You want it? You got it. Straight from the CNO… > [@](#): > > ADMINISTRATIVE MESSAGE > ROUTINE > R 301329Z AUG 02 ZYB PSN 317224S19 > FM CNO WASHINGTON DC//N4// > TO NAVADMIN > INFO CMC WASHINGTON DC > CMC WASHINGTON DC > UNCLAS > MSGID/GENADMIN/CNO WASHINGTON DC/-/AUG// > > SUBJ/DISPLAY OF THE FIRST NAVY JACK ON BOARD ALL U.S. NAVY SHIPS// > > REF/A/DOC/SECNAVINST/31MAY2002// > REF/B/DOC/U.S. REGULATIONS 1999/-// > NARR/REF A IS SECNAV APPROVAL OF THE DISPLAY OF THE FIRST NAVY JACK. REF B IS THE U.S. NAVY REGULATIONS MANUAL.// POC/JIM LIBERKO/LCDR/OPNAV N412J/- > /EMAIL: **Contact info removed by JC** > > RMKS/1. PURSUANT TO REF A, THE FIRST NAVY JACK WILL BE FLOWN ON BOARD ALL U.S. NAVY SHIPS IN LIEU OF THE UNION JACK DURING THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM. TO HONOR THOSE WHO DIED DURING THE ATTACK OF 11 SEP 01, ALL AFLOAT COMMANDS WILL COMMENCE FLYING THE FIRST NAVY JACK AT MORNING COLORS ON 11 SEP 02. THIS DISPLAY OF THE FIRST NAVY JACK IS AN AUTHORIZED > EXCEPTION TO SECTION 1258 OF REF B. > > 1. THE FIRST NAVY JACK IS A FLAG CONSISTING OF A RATTLESNAKE, SUPERIMPOSED ACROSS 13 HORIZONTAL ALTERNATING RED AND WHITE STRIPES WITH THE > MOTTO “DON’T TREAD ON ME.” THE JACK WAS FIRST EMPLOYED BY COMMODORE ESEK HOPKINS IN THE FALL OF 1775 AS HE READIED THE CONTINENTAL NAVY IN THE > DELAWARE RIVER. HIS SIGNAL FOR THE WHOLE FLEET TO ENGAGE THE ENEMY WAS THE STRIPED JACK AND ENSIGN FLOWN AT THEIR PROPER PLACES. THE TEMPORARY > SUBSTITUTION OF THIS JACK REPRESENTS A HISTORIC REMINDER OF THE NATION’S AND NAVY’S ORIGIN, AND WILL TO PRESERVE AND TRIUMPH. > > 2. NON-DEPLOYED SHIPS AND CRAFT AUTHORIZED TO FLY THE FIRST NAVY JACK WILL RECEIVE AN INITIAL FIRST NAVY JACK VIA THEIR LOCAL FLEET AND INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CENTER’S LOGISTIC SUPPORT CENTER REPRESENTATIVE. DEPLOYED SHIPS WILL RECEIVE THEIR FLAG VIA FPO. DISTRIBUTION COMMENCED 27 AUG 02. > THREE ADDITIONAL FLAGS, ONE HOLIDAY AND TWO REGULAR, WILL BE FORWARDED TO EACH AFLOAT COMMAND THROUGH COMMERCIAL VENDOR AT A LATER DATE. ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES WILL BE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE STOCK SYSTEM AFTER DEC 02. > > 3. AN ACTIVE PUBLIC AFFAIRS POSTURE IS ENCOURAGED TO HIGHLIGHT THIS INITIATIVE. LOCAL COMMANDS AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICERS SHOULD FACILITATE > COVERAGE TO INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL MEDIA ON THE FLYING OF THE FIRST NAVY JACK ON BOARD U.S. NAVY VESSELS 11 SEP 02. > > 4. VADM CHARLES W. MOORE, JR. SENDS.// > > BT ---
**Author:** ![owlstretchingtime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/958977/32.png) [@owlstretchingtime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/owlstretchingtime)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/11 "2002-09-04T12:28:03Z")
Of course some people might think it ironic to commemorate the “War against terrorism” by flying a flag aimed against the forces of the only nation guaranteed to fight along side you in any actual war. Only some people would find that ironic of course. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/12 "2002-09-04T14:54:50Z")
That message says exactly what I described, JC. For one thing, it’s a NAVADMIN message. For another, it references both the Secretary of the Navy instruction (although they did fail to indicate which particular instruction as the Navy uses a numerical Standard Subject Indicator Code (SSIC)) and the Navy Regulation Manual. Also for your edification, from Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary: > [@](#): > > Main Entry: union jack > Function: noun > Date: 1674 > 1 : a jack consisting of the union of a national ensign & > [@](#): > > Main Entry: [1]jack > Pronunciation: 'jak > Function: noun > Etymology: Middle English Jacke, familiar term of address to a social inferior, nickname for Johan John > Date: 1548 > {all definitions other than 5 removed by Monty} > 5 a : a small white target ball in lawn bowling b : a small national flag flown by a ship c (1) : plural but singular in construction : a game played with a set of small objects that are tossed, caught, and moved in various figures (2) : a small 6-pointed metal object used in the game of jacks So, you will see that what I said above is exactly what the “communique” (actually Navy Message Traffic) says. Anyhoo, why are you being so contentious about it? The United Kingdom is not the only country on this planet composed as a union. There are, after all, Mexico and the United States of America, to name two others. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/13 "2002-09-04T14:59:03Z")
Also for your enlightenment: [http://neds.nebt.daps.mil/directives/10520\_6.pdf](http://neds.nebt.daps.mil/directives/10520%5F6.pdf) which clearly reference the US Navy Regulations. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/14 "2002-09-04T16:36:37Z")
Actually, “contentious” is the wrong word. For some odd reason, I completely forgot the connotation of the thing. Basically, I meant “Why can’t you accept what’s presented when it’s backed up?” I’m sure there’s a nicer way to say that but I can’t think of it. Anyway, I mean it in the nicer way to say it (whatever that way is). ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/15 "2002-09-04T16:57:53Z")
Well, I didn’t think I was disputing it. I was just goggling at the Navy’s use of a term, while being technically correct, that is vastly open to misinterpretation. I don’t think there’s any doubt that in popular parlance the phrase ‘union jack’ is identified with one flag and one nation. After all, you could refer to the american flag as the ‘stars and bars’ but I don’t think you’d be communicating properly. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2002, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/16 "2002-09-04T17:37:14Z")
In popular parlance, you’re right. But in the communication in question, the Navy was employing a phrase for a specific meaning that its own people understand in context. Any field has some specialised terms and language – you can call it “jargon” or “terms of art” – that is useful and necessary in context. To a seaman, a “jack” is a flag flown from the jackstaff of a ship and the only union jack people associated with the U.S. Navy have ever flown from their own ships is the American union jack, not the British Union Jack (which is not a jack). So in this context, it was perfectly correct to use the term “union jack” in this manner. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2002, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/17 "2002-09-05T00:15:47Z")
I just wanted to pipe in and add that when I saw the message excerpt, I knew exactly what the message was referring to (that is, the blue pennant with 50 stars). It is a jack with the union of the U.S. flag on it. I seriously doubt any U.S. sailor would wonder for which country they were to display the union of. BTW, the U.S. flag is always referred to as the “National Ensign.” (Not to be confused with the U.S. Navy officer rank of ensign.) Again, the nation in question is understood. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2002, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/18 "2002-09-05T01:15:57Z")
No sweat, JC. Here’s another interesting tidbit for you: Navy ships don’t have ganglplanks. We Sailors[sup]\*[/sup] refer to the thing you walk on to get from the pier to the ship and vice versa as the ship’s brow. Regarding “Stars and Bars”: Nah, I think it’s pretty well known that’s the affectionate title of the Confederate flag. It does raise an interesting question in my mind: What exactly is the cut off point before a stripe becomes so wide that it’s referred to as a bar? (A similar question was posed by my Linguistics teacher in class this morning.) [sup]\*[/sup]robby: Sometime back in the 1980s, the SecDef issued a directive that Soldier, Sailor, and Airman would all be capitalized as Marine always has been. Of course, feel free to disregard. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2002, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/19 "2002-09-05T02:48:47Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Monty \* > \*\*[sup]_[/sup]robby: Sometime back in the 1980s, the SecDef issued a directive that Soldier, Sailor, and Airman would all be capitalized as Marine always has been. Of course, feel free to disregard. \*\* I was all ready to say _mea culpa_, but have decided not to, for several reasons. First of all, I seem to recall this campaign to get folks to capitalize “sailor” was far more recent than the 1980s. It had to have been within the last five years–it’s far too polically correct for the 80s. Second of all, I don’t believe it was ever a directive. Third, IMHO, it always smacked of pandering by the brass to our hard-working enlisted men. (i.e. “If we capitalize “Sailor”, they won’t notice they’re being dumped on.”) Similarly, it also smacks of Marine Corps envy. But finally, I see no evidence that capitalization usage has ever officially changed. My admittedly brief web research came up with: Cite: [http://www.army.mil/soldiers/styleguide/styleguide4.html](http://www.army.mil/soldiers/styleguide/styleguide4.html) > [@](#): > > **Marines, marine:** Uppercase when referring to the branch of service (the Marine Corps, a Marine helicopter), but lowercase when referring to individual service members (soldier, sailor, marine). Another cite: [http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/jfq\_pubs/0416pgs.pdf](http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/jfq_pubs/0416pgs.pdf) > [@](#): > > EDITOR’S NOTE: Maj Kennedy’s letter raises a point that may also concern other marines—as well as soldiers, sailors, and airmen—on capitalizing the names of services and servicemembers. The only use of the term in question without an initial capital M occurs when reference is made to an individual or group of individuals. Thus the short and long renderings of the name of a service (in this case, Marine Corps, U.S. Marines, U.S. Marine Corps) or any terms denoting a service as a whole (here, the Marines) are always capitalized. But individual members of a service (such as marine or marines) are not. The ultimate (official) guide in matters of style makes this clear: Marine Corps; the corps; Marines (the corps); but marines (individuals) > —United States Government Printing Office Style Manual(1984) In any event, notwithstanding my feelings on the matter, I certainly intended no disrespect to any sailor or Sailor who may have been offended by my failure to capitalize the term. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2002, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901/20 "2002-09-05T03:31:57Z")
Hey, robby, no offense intended nor taken. I can tell you that the campaign (hey, maybe it was the SecNav & not the SecDef) was before I transferred to Japan. That event happened near the end of 1990. IIRC, it was caused by some hullaboo about the papers, such as the Army Times and the Navy Times, using AP style abbreviations for the military ranks. Oh, and I completely agree with you that the modus operandi is to dump on the Enlisted Member, especially on the single Enlisted Member. There are different types of directives: regulations, instructions, orders, ALNAV, ALMAR, etc. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-navy-jack/126901.md?page=2)