Talk:Sapper

Airborne tab/arch

The assertion that the Sapper tab is one of four authorized is curious, since the airborne arch is not listed as one of the four.Sketch051 (talk) 20:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it should be merged with the article about combat engineer. MathKnight 13:51, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

You wear the airborne tab if and only if you are: 1)actively assigned to an airborne unit, or 2)wearing it with your combat patch when you were in combat with an airborne unit. The SF, Ranger, Sapper, and President's Hundred tabs, however, can be worn regardless of what unit you are assigned to. Perhaps there should just be a clarification on that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.90.232.96 (talk) 02:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

combat engineer - merging subject?

• References to modern British sappers should cross reference to Combat Engineer. M Hunt RE retired.

This article should still exist with cross-references. "Sapper" is an important historical term. Since there's been no action in well over a year, the merge suggestion should be removed.

--Ajdz 07:19, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I think it sould be merged; I just haven't gotten around to how to do it. Sapper is not only an important historical term, but an important modern term in British usage, where it clearly overlaps combat engineer. Keeping sapper as a redirect to the combined combat engineer + sapper should be fine. --A D Monroe III 13:44, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

The Sapper entry should be left as a seperate entry as it is an important part of British and New Zealand Military History. (This from 203.173.153.25 (talk · contribs))

I think that the entries should remain separate. Noisy | Talk 13:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I think that "Sapper" should be merged, It is not that long to begin with anyway, and it fits perfectly in with combat engineering.

As a former Combat Engineer in the US Army, i concur that this should be merged with Combat Engineering. In current policy Combat Engineers that attend Sapper School are authorized to where a "Sapper" tab; a device once only allowed for graduates of Ranger School and Special Forces training. -SPC Diazdelindo, Juan M., US Army

An article should be left at Sapper to disambiguate between the author, the rank and the profession of combat engineering. GraemeLeggett 11:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

It should be noted that for the terms "sapper" and "combat engineer" there are two distinct areas where these terms are used. At the individual level, they are similar. A "combat engineer" MOS my become a "sapper" by an additional training course. This course elevates the soldiers "standing" as a sapper in that he has qualified at a higher level of proficiency than the average MOS trained combat engineer. combat engineer is a job title, and sapper is a qualification, much like the airborne, ranger, and air assault. At the unit level, it is much different. A combat engineer company or battalion may have sappers in it, but it's METL is different that a sapper company. Again, dependant on which realm you want to talk, there is a difference. You may refer to www.wood.army.mil and go to the engineer school page to learn more. There is no clearance requirements for some, but others are only for official use only and classified. In summary, I believe the two should not be combined. 68.216.170.66 16:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)1LT Kevin Middleton, EN, LAARNG

The two articles should remain as separate entities. First of all, a Sapper in England does not mean that the soldier is a combat engineer. Second, a combat engineer is not a Sapper; just as a Sapper is not a combat engineer. Is an infantryman a Ranger? Or are Rangers infantrymen? Are those two articles merged? No. So why would we merge these. I am a Sapper Leader Course graduate (Class 07/01) but I am not a combat engineer. SSG Tinsman, Jonathan 21N

Jonathan, are you a soldier of the British Army? It does not appear so to me? How is a Sapper not a Combat engineer or vice versa in the British Army? AshLin (talk) 13:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

• • • A few notes for the innexperienced personel: A infantryman is not a Ranger unless he serves in a Ranger battlion (1/75, 2/75, 3/75) regardless if he is Ranger qualified (i.e. Ranger School Graduate), now a person with a Ranger qualification has an automatic secondary MOS that of an Infantryman (Regardless of their MOS, they can transfer to 11B without going to 11B AIT portion of their OSIT training). Now in the case of being a Sapper I agree that the title of Sapper should go to Sapper qualified people or combat engineers serving in that capacity as like the term Ranger is used, and like you said your not a combat engineer so likewise with being a Ranger school graduate you are not a Sapper but Sapper qualified.

24.22.186.164 (talk) 04:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC)Informed Army Soldier24.22.186.164 (talk) 04:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course there's also the page at Military engineer to cross reference to.GraemeLeggett 16:32, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I am a combat engineer of the Indian Army and therefore I am a sapper too, in my case, a Bombay Sapper! I feel the articles should not be merged. The combat engineer part be developed to display the modern context, the Sapper article to display the regimental and historical context. In any case, the articles be written such that the usage of the terms in each army be well-explained.AshLin (talk) 13:26, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Fictional references

I'm thinking this section would read better if it were a bulleted list. Any ideas? Steneub 20:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

French army

Depictions of sappers from the Napoleonic period usually feature men with beards, aprons and holding axes - what is the origin of this uniform, and the reason for it? Drutt (talk) 01:39, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Combat Engineering

On the list of engineering fields there was Combat Engineer, however i doubt sapper is the proper link.