Collar Tab Branch devices & colors

[k3rvmfusa]

Hi everyone,

I am trying to understand how the collar tab color and device combinations are supposed to work. Which part of the insignia represented the parent formation, and which represented the specific unit? For example, if an armor unit was attached to an infantry formation, did personnel of the armor unit wear black collar tabs or red collar tabs. Which devices did they wear on their tabs -- tanks or Motor rifles? Thanks,

Jeff
K3R USN

[vikingraider1]

In answer to your question the parent unit's branch of arm colour would be worn on the collar tab with the wearers branch of arm insingia being worn. So in answer to your question, if an armor unit was attached to an infantry formation they would wear red collar tabs with tank insignia denoting them belonging to an armoured unit.

[k3rvmfusa]

Thanks!
Being a Navy man myself, I've always been perplexed on this issue.
Jeff
K3R USN

[otlichnik]

I have to disagree slightly. My understanding (and it is a confusing issue which I don't fully understand yet) is the following:

Soviet uniforms were based on the soldier's military unit at the "chast" level. "Chast" was either a regiment or an independent battalion. Soldier's wore the branch of service colour of the unit's (chast's) branch of service. They also wore the branch of service insignia of their branch of service.

However, in the vast majority of cases (like 98%) this meant that a soldier was wearing "proper" or regular uniform insignia. Exceptions, like seeing armour branch insignia on red collar tabs were very, very rare.

The regiment/chast was considered the basic building block of Soviet force structure. Each regiment belonged to only one branch of service. All pesonnel in a given regiment generally belonged to only one branch of service even if they had a different specialty. Even the mortar crews and engineers in a motor rifle regiment were generally part of the motor rifle troops. The key seems to have been training. If the soldier could be trained from within their own regiment then they were considered to be part of that regiment's branch of service. Only soldier's whose specialty was so different and specialized that it required training from another branch of service would be conidered to be members of that other branch of service.

"Attachments" were an ad hoc re-organization of sub-units. Tank troops "attached" to a motor rifle unit wore standard tank troops insignia and colours (full standard tank troops uniforms) because they did not belong to the motor rifle regiment. They were just on loan from their parent tank regiment.

By the 1980s truely mixed units did exist and were very different than attachments. For example, by then most Motor Rifle regiments included an organic tank battalion. It was these personnel, the members of the motor rifle regiment's organic tank battalion, who wore their own tank insignia on the red branch of service colour of thyeir motor rifle regiment.

So there were a few key questions when determining what insignia soldiers wear. What was their actual unit? They wore standard uniforms if they were part of their regiment's branch of service (even if they have a different speciality, i.e. motor rifleman - mortar operator). If they are attached from another regiment they kept the insignia and colour of their original regiment. They wore their own insignia on the different regiment branch colour only if they were organic to that regiment, BUT, had a different speciality, AND are in fact trained by another branch.

I have seen many photos of tankers with tank insignia on red collar tabs. They wuld be from motor rifle regiments' organic tank battalions. I have also seen a few photos of transport personnel with their insignia on red collar tabs - so there must have been some transport battalions organic to motor rifle regiments.

However, I have never seen evidence of some combinations that you would expect to exist. I have never seen signals troops with signals insignia on red. I have never seen medical insignia on black. I am not sure of exactly why this is either. My guess is that such personnel belong to their own branch of service - signals or medical in these cases - and are only "posted" to the military unit temporarily but can be re-deployed by their branch high commands anytime.

As I said, a very confusing issue.

Shawn

[vikingraider1]

HEllo Shawn,
In reply to the last past of you post, indeed it was very rare to see signals, etc on red collar tabs but I recently purchased an old parade tunic for conscripts dated 1967 with magenta shoulder boards and signals insgnia attached. This must have been rare as I have not seen this combination in any photographs..