I served in the British Army in the 60s and, I’m sure in common with all men and women who have ever been in the military, I can remember my Army number to this day, It was an 8 digit number beginning 240… and I noted with interest then that the earlier you had enlisted the lower your number. I remember wondering just how far back the numbering went. Did it start at 1 at some point in the distant past and then carry on for some 24 million-odd soldiers until I enlisted? If so there was presumably a soldier with the number 1. Who was he and when did he live? I don’t know what the numbering has reached in the almost half-century since I served.
Anyone have info on this? Does the US or Canadian Army have sequential numbering like this?
I was in the US Army (drafted) from 61-63 with number US 55703837. An 8-digit number, indicating that I was drafted. Enlisted men had a number beginning RA (regular army). I assume those numbers are delegated sequentially, but do not know.
The US Navy had sequential numbers, but they started at various times with 1,000,000-1,999,999 or 10,000-99,999. In the case of the former, the first number in the range depended on the decade served in, so the 1920s range was 2,000,000-2,999,999. In Vietnam, numbering was changed to a “B” series (my number was B93 08 06), as by then the original numbering system was hopelessly screwed up. Eventually, service numbers in the US were changed to the Social Security Number.
Originally (pre-WW1) each regiment (usually two-battalion ones since the Cardwell reforms) had its own sequence of numbers, from No.1. When someone died or retired the number was recycled. In WW1 this raised the possibility of duplicates for very common names, and about 1917 a renumbering exercise started for the Territorial Force.
By WW2 unique blocks of numbers were allocated to specific regts or corps. The RASC started from Number 1 - 294,000. By 1944 it was realised that military intelligence could get a good idea of which unit a man was in (or had originally enlisted in, for it did not change if he was posted) from analysing the blocks, and new entrants were enlisted in the General Service Corps (14,200,001 - 15,000,000) for administrative purposes and then posted to a regt.
If the man became an officer he got a new number from a unique block, without regard to regt.
Nowadays ORs numbers are just allocated sequentially, without regard.
Humm, I was in from 61 to 64 with an RA 186 starting number.
This might be an indication of the numbers of enlistees vs drafted.
That is about the split back in those days I would think.
Also back then, we noted that officers that had come from the National Guard or OCS ( officers candidate school ) had different numbers from West Point Grads.
I was lucky, I never had an asshat as the first person up the chain from me. A little farther… WTF ???
Marine Corps, 1969, enlisted, 7 digits, numbers went sequentially higher for those entering service later. At some point, not too much later, I believe Social Security numbers were used. Not 100% sure on that.
I joined the U.S. Army in 1971 and used my SS number.
During my Army career (which ended in 2013) we initially used our SSNs, but they then phased them out in the last year or two as an identifier due to concerns over identity theft. The only thing that we had that was even close was a “battle roster” number, which was simply the first letter of your last name followed by the last four digits of your SSN.
It wasn’t unique (there are only 26,000 possible combinations,) but was usually good enough to identify individuals at the battalion level downwards.
The last time I got an ID card (DD FORM 2 (RETIRED)) in August of 2011, it had a new number in the place of the SSAN. The new number is called “Benefits Number”. Yeah, I know: “Yet another freaking number for the government to hose and for me to remember.”
Speaking of identifying numbers, barbitu8; it might not have been such a good idea to post your actual number. That is a unique identifier.
I was in the Officers’ Training Corps (the British equivalent of ROTC), which meant I was technically in the Territorial Army. My Army number was still 8 digits long, starting ‘251’ - about 100 people joined on the same day as I did, and we were all assigned sequential numbers.
[I redacted the actual number.]
My big brother enlisted in the Army, circa 1959-1962. He mentioned to me at the time (or shortly afterward) that they used Social Security number for the ID.
You are correct that the military has been concerned about identity theft and has been phasing out the use of the SSN. But this has nothing to do with the use of battle roster numbers. Battle roster numbers never replaced SSNs. Did you ever fill out a 4187 using your battlie roster? What about an NCOER? Or a recommendation for award? Did you ever see a battle roster number on your ERB? Of course not.
The purpose of the battle roster number isn’t really protecting identity theft. The battle roster number allows for operational security and brevity when sending status reports, and also quickly identifying not only the person, but his/her unit. There is not regulation governing battle roster numbers, but the SOP for most units is to have a letter to designate the battalion or task force, then the company, then the last name, and then the last four. In Afghanistan, my battle roster number was EBN1234. “E” designated Task Force Eagle. B was for B Co, 1-503rd. (B Co, 2-503rd was actually “F” or something). “N” is first initialy of last name, and then followed by last four of SSN. Unlike just a name or a SSN, the battle roster number could be used to immediately identify where a person came from. They really come into play when several units are participating in the same battle, and there are casualties everywhere. It helps keep track of who is getting injured and from what units. Someone monitoring the battle can even get an idea of which units are losing more people than others.
The plan is to replace the SSN with a DOD ID number, which used to be called the EDI-PI, or Electronic Data INterchange Personal Identifier. Every soldier has had an EDI-PI from the time they were first issued a Common Access Card (CAC). The CAC uses this number for things like digital signing and database stuff. So ever since the early 2000s when CAC issuance began, soldiers have had this unique number assigned to them and their identification card. It is already associated with their SSN and other data, so it is a perfect seamless replacement for the SSN. Since about 2011, the SSN is not longer printed on the back of the CAC or on the front of dependent ID cards. Now the DOD ID number is printed on the back of the card. It had always been hidden in the chip and the barcode, but now it is printed on the back as well. Eventually, this DOD ID number will completely replace the SSN for everything. It will be used on forms, applications, and everything except payroll and tax documents and Tricare (insurance) claims or referrals. The SSN will still be used for its intended payroll purposes, and another number–the Benefits Number–will be used for insuranace issues.
The new Benefits Number is used for all Tricare referrals and insurance claims. The Tricare system has always used this number apparantly, and it is cross referenced in their system with the person’s SSN. They don’t use the DOD ID number though. So the Benefits Number is a completely seamless replacement for the SSN, whearas using the DOD ID number here would have caused major problems and a rocky transition.
So now we have three numbers instead of one! A SSN for taxes and payroll, a DOD ID number for personnel and administration, and a Benefits Number for insurance claims and referals.
I enlisted on October 22, 1967 and had a RA number (RA11885559.)
The Army did not start using SSN’s until about a year later IIRC.
When I joined the Canadian Army in the 70s we used the Social Insurance Number (basic training corporal yelling at trainee “What’s your SIN, soldier?”). This had replaced the older British-style Regimental Number dating back to WW1 sometime in the 60s. It was originally supposed to be a temporary measure, as it was not a legislatively approved use of the SIN, and was replaced by the X12 345 678 format Service Number in the 1990s.