The NZ Navy Boards: Royal?

[flyjoe180]

Just a thought Dave, shouldn't the New Zealand Navy boards in fact be the Royal New Zealand Navy boards?

[Dave Homewood]

No because before October 1941 the Navy was the New Zealand Division of the Royal Navy so the generic title covers both.

[Dave Homewood]

Also the collective board title covers the Fleet Air Arm, which some members of were RNZN, some RNZNVR some RN and some RNVR, some were RAF and some were and are RNZAF.

It also covers kiwis who have flown with the RAN, US Navy and other naval air forces.

[flyjoe180]

Okay, that clears that query up nicely, cheers.

[Dave Homewood]

No worries. I did wonder if there should be seperate boards for pre-Oct 1941 and post-Oct 1941 Navies, but there doesn't seem much point as the Navy boards get so little traffic - most of the posts are about the modern navy replacement ships and Seasprite activities, so a board for the NZ Div of the RN would be rather empty sadly.

[ngatimozart]

Dec 2, 2011 20:59:15 GMT 12 Dave Homewood said:

Also the collective board title covers the Fleet Air Arm, which some members of were RNZN, some RNZNVR some RN and some RNVR, some were RAF and some were and are RNZAF.

It also covers kiwis who have flown with the RAN, US Navy and other naval air forces.

Ok Dave in that case then the RNZAF board title needs to be changed because the the RNZAF did not exist until 1 April 1937. Prior to that it was the NZPAF. Same rules should exist for both services. Also the RNZNVR is part of the RNZN. I served in both the RNZAF and the RNZNVR and as far as I am concerned the committment was the same. The name of this board should be changed to Royal New Zealand Navy because the RNZN also recognises the mana, history, honour and sacrifice of those who have served in the RNZN as the NZ Division of the RN & those who were part of the RN and sister navies. By changing the name you are reflecting an actuality and not diminishing their mana. However in your capacity as mod you do need to respect the RNZN, what it has achieved, as well as all those who have served under the White Ensign.

[meo4]

Good point especially being the senior service, I think some people forget we are a maritime nation and the important role the RNZN plays.
Its sort of similar to the view average uninformed joe public (including TV presenters) think we don't have an airforce due to the whole scrapping the air combat wing forgetting all the other components rotary ,Maritime patrol etc.

[Dave Homewood]

Ok Dave in that case then the RNZAF board title needs to be changed because the the RNZAF did not exist until 1 April 1937. Prior to that it was the NZPAF. Same rules should exist for both services.

I knew someone was going to say that. The board title is not going to change.

Also the RNZNVR is part of the RNZN. I served in both the RNZAF and the RNZNVR and as far as I am concerned the committment was the same.

Committment was never in dispute.

The name of this board should be changed to Royal New Zealand Navy because the RNZN also recognises the mana, history, honour and sacrifice of those who have served in the RNZN as the NZ Division of the RN & those who were part of the RN and sister navies. By changing the name you are reflecting an actuality and not diminishing their mana. However in your capacity as mod you do need to respect the RNZN, what it has achieved, as well as all those who have served under the White Ensign.

Here was I thinking that by not singling out the RNZN alone in the title I was ensuring that all the other factions of the Navy past and present were being given equal respect and coverage. If the Navy people here really think I have got the title wrong I will add the Royal in.

As for your suggestion I ned to gain some respect, if I did not respect the Navy, it's people and their achievements I would never have created a board here. It is one of three forums I have ever found that has a dedicated area for discussing the NZ Navy past and present. The other two being the RNZN Association's board which is largely naval politics and personal reminiscinces, and the World Navy Forums which has a small kiwi history section.

I have learned a great deal about our Navy past and present here thanks to this Navy board. In the past two years I have also learned a shedload more about our WWII sailors and naval aviators through meeting them personally and recording their stories.

I still feel many recent and modern defence policies surrounding our Navy are wrong but then I think that about the Army and RNZAF too, and I respect all our servicemen and servicewomen, whether past or present, regulars or territorials/volunteer reserve.

[ngatimozart]

Hey Dave its not personal. Its an institutional thing. I'm talking about you as the moderator as an institution or a body corporate not as a person, that's all. My POV is that natural justice determines that the the two boards RNZAF and RNZN should either both have the Royal annotation or not at all. My personal preference is for the Royal to be included because it is not just reflecting a services present day status but also it's history. To some it may be semantics but to some of us it's quite important because it's part of us, our history and tradition. Thats all.

[Dave Homewood]

You will note I did change both board titles to include the Royal he other day.

[ngatimozart]

Thanks Dave. Much appreciated.

[davidd]

Just a "Johnny come Lately" here, but cannot resist adding a little extra flavour to the mix. It is interesting to note that the NZ Division of the RN and the original RNZN were really one and the same animal (if you will pardon the expression) - when the RNZN title was adopted as from 1st October 1941 it was regarded as purely cosmetic, but was intended to acknowledge the part already played by NZ Naval personnel, whether serving in NZ or Pacific waters, or aboard those vessels serving overseas under Admiralty control, such as LEANDER in the Indian Ocean, etc, and individual members serving on RN ships on attachment under various schemes) and to give greater prestige to the service. The change was enacted by "Order in Council" and really had no effect on serving personnel at all, and no serious legislation was involved in the change, just the change of name of the constituent parts. It was found necessary, in order to enact the change, to alter the names of all serving ships (whether owned by the NZ Govt or the Admiralty) by changing the "prefix" (what is the proper name for this?) from HMS to HMNZS, and no doubt tally bands for sailors hats also had to reflect the new title. One sometimes reads of the RNZ Navy being "formed" on this date (1/10/41), but it was just not like that at all. There was a very small article in the newpapers after the official announcement (this was before the actual change, and mentioned the fact that King George VI had sanctioned the change at the request of the NZ PM, Peter Fraser, who was in the UK at the time) explaining the reasons for this event, and then it was not mentioned again. Everybody in the Navy would have been aware of it, but its impact was very slight, and shipboard and shore life continued as before without missing a beat. I am glad this minor problem has been solved already by cool diplomacy and level heads!
David D

[davidd]

As you can see, the change over from NZ Div of RN to RNZN was very similar to the change from NZPAF to RNZAF. The only real administrative difference was that in the latter case, the Territorial element of the air force (the NZAF [Territorial]) retained this title until it was reformed as the TAF in 1937. However it has always confused people that the Navy in NZ had such large ships with so many RN personnel (particularly the officers) manning them. This was because these ships were employed here on a loan basis (actually a rental - we had to pay many pretty pennies to keeep these ships guarding our shores!) and NZ had so few qualified officers that we had to rely on the RN to provide all that we could not, not to forget the Marines detachment! Another difference between New Zealand's air force and navy is that the former introduced its own ensign in 1939 (basically the RAF ensign "defaced" by the insertion of the letters "NZ" on the red central dot), whereas the Navy did not get its own distinctive ensign until as late as 1968, and I think it was at about that time that the Navy also finally gained its first NZ-born CNS. The RNZAF's first NZ-born CAS was Air Commodore Leonard Isitt in December 1943. The RNZAF used "hired" RAF aircraft, but this was not until 1952 when they were issued Vampires in Cyprus, with later similar arrangements for Vampires and Venoms, then Canberras in Malaya, and Iroquois helicopters in the Sinai. All the big ships in the NZ navies were hired (mainly the cruisers) although I think the ROYALIST was purchased outright late in its RNZN career. Many of our ships were purchased "as bargains" or hired from the US Navy, or were gifted by Australia, but that is another story, and the RNZAF has suffered similar humiliations over the years.
David D