Owing to the expansion of our naval organization in the past war, the rank of Commodore has been revived. Expansion of our organization and operations demands the appropriate designations of officers as Task Force Commanders, Striking Group Commanders, and Commanders of minor units. Fleet organization has presented the need for the establishment of new categories of command and corresponding ranks.
Besides the title of Commodore, we have only Admiral and Commander which are especially emblematic of naval office. While there are three grades of the title of Admiral in use and only one Commodore, it is apparent that the latter rank could be further classified in view of the greater variation in places of authority for such office since the previous times of its original use in our Navy. Destroyer Commodore or Cruiser Commodore would tend to differentiate the rank and would also tend to distinguish it from the occasional civilian usage of the title in connection with yacht clubs or nautical regattas. Division Commodore and Squadron Commodore would also serve to further qualify the corresponding grades of the rank and be more in keeping with naval parlance. The same ship or organization designations used with the title of Commander, such as Cruiser Commander, Division Commander, or Squadron Commander, would also present a further means of doing away with the title of Captain and further the usage of a more distinctive naval official rank.
While the term of Captain in the Navy undoubtedly came into use to differentiate between the Commanding Officer of a man-of- war and the Master of a merchantman, at the time of its adoption it was of a somewhat analogous status with that of Captain of a military company ashore. Since the time of such initial use, however, the differentiation has become greatly marked in view of the development and organization of the Navy. As the title of Captain in our Navy remained to denote the Commanding Officer of our most important warships, in other navies such divergence between the title for Commanding Officers ashore and afloat brought into usage definitely naval designations to eliminate confusion as well as to attach significance to purely naval titles. This was accomplished by classifying the titles according to the types of ships for which the Commanding Officers were qualified.
Of the leading maritime powers, the United States and Great Britain stand alone in using the ranks of Lieutenant Commander and Commander. In place of these ranks, other navies adhere to the term of Captain as being most closely associated with the idea of denoting the officer in chief command but the title is further qualified by associating the terms of corvette, frigate, and vessel with it to differentiate grades corresponding to responsibility associated with these ship designations.
While we respect our most cherished naval traditions, it is apparent that while the days of the sailing ship have long since passed, the traditional terms attached to these vessels have persisted in the titles used abroad. Instead of Captain, we find in France a Capitaine de Vaisseau, in Italy a Capitáno di Vascéllo, and in Germany a Kapitan zür See. Surely these titles cannot be confused with the title of Captain as applied to any military or civilian organization. Although the term Commander as a general rule is limited to the Navy, except for the occasional mistaken identity of the Commander of a post of war veterans in civilian circles, we find the corresponding rank abroad more nautically expressed as Fregalten Kapitan (Germany), Capitaine de Fregate (French), and Capitáno De Frégala (Italian). Our rank of Commander corresponds to that of a Commanding Officer of a frigate according to the traditional naval terms in other services. While the “vessel” portrays the leading ship of the line and the “frigate” represents the intermediate or second line warships, the term “corvette” is used as the most junior Captain’s grade. We find the Lieutenant Commander rank of our Navy as that of Korvetten Kapitan in Germany, Capitaine de Corvette in France, and Capitáno di Corvétta in Italy.
From the foregoing we can see that although the title of Captain is retained to maintain the implication of its representing the officer in command of the ship concerned, the grade is more distinctly nautical in sense since it is associated with the various traditional types of ships of the sailing ship era.
Aside from indicating command of small task forces or groups of ships, it is believed that a more fitting change in other titles of rank would tend to further differentiate the degrees of responsibility and authority commensurate with rank. If our Navy associated the title of Captain with the ship designations such as destroyer, cruiser, and battleship, it would have a more marked naval significance and would not be misconstrued with the title of Captain as applied to the military, athletic clubs, and other civilian groups. The novelty of using the grade designations of Destroyer Captain or Battleship Captain might seem awkward at first but such titles cannot be more difficult to handle than the present ones of Lieutenant Commander or Lieutenant, Junior Grade. Such usage of distinctive naval titles in official and formal practice would not necessarily mean the abolition of using the term of Captain in personal address to the Commanding Officer of a ship, for after all, no matter what the type of ship, be it a tug boat, gate vessel, auxiliary, or man-of-war, the Captain thereof would still be the Commanding Officer, the “skipper,” or the “old man” as long as we have ships.
In searching for a title more commensurate with the prestige and responsibility now attached to the present rank of Captain, we must bear in mind that the Commanding Officer is not the only Captain on board ship. There is the Turret Captain, Captain of the Hold, Plane Captain, and even the lowly Captain of the Head. With the title, or rather the term, of Captain indiscriminately used on board ship, might it not be more appropriate to use the title of Commander of various grades to designate naval rank of command qualifications?
While corvettes and frigates have reappeared recently as modern men-of-war, these terms cannot be as closely associated with our modern Navy as can the terms of division and squadrons; task forces and groups; or destroyers, cruisers, and battleships. The rank designations with reference to corvettes and frigates used in other navies as previously mentioned have a more foreign tone to them than would those of destroyer and cruiser designation to our own Navy. Instead of a Corvette Lieutenant then, we could designate our Junior Grade Lieutenant as a Destroyer Lieutenant. Such a designation surely would not be confused with that of the local police official by the folks back home! Similarly the term Cruiser Lieutenant would be more naval in meaning than the plain title of Lieutenant, a term also used in civilian organizations.
Following the above scheme of modern naval designation, our present long-handled title of Lieutenant Commander which sounds like a joint Army-Navy title to the laymen, could be replaced by Destroyer Commander and the more senior rank of Commander could become Cruiser Commander. The present indefinitely used title of Captain could then be replaced by the term Battleship Commander, a more truly naval designation than the former or, considering the various billets filled by Captains in our modern Navy, the Division Commodore could be most appropriate. Squadron Commodore would follow in appropriate order.
As a further step in the general revision of navy rank in conformity with modern naval operations and organization, the Rear Admiral and Vice Admiral titles could be changed. These terms, being holdovers from the old ship-of-the-line days, could be replaced by the terms Group Admiral and Force Admiral. Our present four star Admiral could then have the title of Fleet Admiral and the Commander in Chief of the United States Fleet could then enjoy the title of Admiral of the Navy. Such changes would go still further toward following the distinctive designations for rank and authority commensurate with their responsibility. Such changes as these, along with the ones previously mentioned as tending toward closer adherence or connection with naval activities, would follow the same pattern as the titles used in the air forces, viz., Flight Commander, Group Commander, or Wing Commander.
At the present time the greatest variation in degree of responsibility in the Navy is present within the rank of Captain. We now have Captains with from about 17 to 35 years of commissioned service on active duty. The Captain’s bracket of rank over an 18-year period of service covers officers of the wide band of responsibility all the way from Commanding Officers of minor auxiliaries to Fleet Air Wings and battleships and including in between these widely different types of ships, division and squadron commands of intermediate types of noncombatant as well as combatant ships. As well as being used indiscriminately on board ship, the title has been used to cover the widest range of command responsibility in the general service. Suffice it to say that the Commanding Officer of a battleship, with all the prestige and responsibility reposing in his position and with respect to his 30-odd years of service, would not feel flattered, by virtue of the plain title of Captain, to be placed in the same category with the Commanding Officer of an auxiliary or noncombatant ship. Both Commanding Officers could be Captains, and to obviate any similar misconception of thought as to responsibility, qualification, and prestige of rank, the title of Captain could be replaced by the Commander or Commodore ranks as previously mentioned since the latter are more naval in meaning.
While the restoration of the rank of Commodore has helped to eliminate part of the wide variation in naval responsibilities, it is felt that in addition to fulfilling the need for appropriate title designations as demanded by present naval organization and operations, the further variation in the grades of Commander and Commodore with the elimination of the title of Captain would be more in conformity with general naval usage. In view of the wide service bracket now covered by the rank of Captain, there is a further need to designate officers in this category according to their command qualifications and responsibilities. The adoption of titles with naval background and inference would tend to eliminate confusion with army and civilian organization officials and would be of inestimable value to the morale of a Captain who, upon retiring, after a lifetime spent in the service of the Navy, generally finds himself unhonored and unsung due to the fact that he is merely a Captain, one of many of various local civic organizations. The recent restoration of the rank of Commodore has opened the way toward eliminating this difficulty, and although it has helped solve the need for filling the gaps in command billets in our present Navy, it is felt that a further graduation in the ranks of Commander and/or Commodore along with the elimination of the Captain title would help to differentiate and improve the designation of the various ranks in the Navy.
To meet the suggestions set forth, the following table of rank could be effected:
PRESENT
Ensign
Lieutenant (Junior Grade)
Lieutenant
Lieutenant Commander
Commander Captain (Junior)
Captain (Senior)
Commodore
Rear Admiral
Vice Admiral
Admiral
COMINCH
PROPOSED
Ensign
Destroyer Lieutenant
Cruiser Lieutenant
Destroyer Commander
Cruiser Commander
Battleship Commander/Commodore
Division Commodore/Destroyer Commodore
Squadron Commodore/Cruiser Commodore
Group Admiral/Division Admiral
Force Admiral/Squadron Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Admiral of the Navy