“Houston, We Have a Drill Problem…”
Regulation and Ceremonial Drill Standards
What we call regulation drill comes from:
- Army Training Circular 3-21.5,
- Marine Corps Order 5060.20, and
- Air Force Pamphlet 34-1203
We also have ceremonial drill that is kept mostly in internal documents for the Army’s 3rd Infantry Regiment, the Old Guard; the Barracks Order for Marine Barracks Washington, the internal manuals for the Navy’s Ceremonial Guard and Coast Guard’s Ceremonial Honor Guard, and the USAF’s AFI 34-515 for the USAF/USSF Honor Guard and the Base Honor Guard Manual for Base Honor Guards worldwide.
The regulation drill manuals were written decades ago with multiple updates over the years. I have searched for and obtained every legacy D&C manual I have been able to find and have what seems to be every version of from each of the services since the founding of the country. The US military made progress in explaining drill and ceremonies from von Steuben’s time in the late 1700s into the split for manuals of the North and South during and after our Civil War and the creation of one manual for the Army and a Landing Party manual for the Marine Corps and Navy leading up to WWI.
After WWII, a fresh look was given to the service D&C manuals and newer, expanded versions were created. In the 1960s and 1970s significant progress was made in providing information for color guard, especially.
Ceremonial vs. Regulation
Ceremonial drill has an explanation for every aspect of a performance and the reasoning behind it all. For instance, every colors presentation for any type of ceremony is completely mapped out. There is no guesswork, no “use your best judgement”. Ceremonial drill has evolved over time to what we have now, and it works so much better than regulation drill. I am concentrating on colors here, but this also applies to firing party and pallbearers, the three ceremonial elements, and standard formations (Battalion/Wing).
What does Regulation Drill need?
Concentrating on color guard here. Tighter, fully explained guidelines = a better performance. Because expanded guidelines provide a vastly better understanding of standards and the expected outcome. Similarly, loose guidelines = poorer performance because the team is forced into guessing what to do at times.
Expanded and Precise Guidelines: Dr. Spock destroyed child rearing with his asinine advice (from 1946 to petering out in the early 1980s) to raise with praise only and not setting strict guidance or even punishing. He did this on purpose (that’s a deep rabbit hole), following the guidelines for training a dog. A dog doesn’t understand punitive measures but reacts much better to positive reinforcement. Not so the child. In order to not figuratively wander, a child needs strict parameters and as much information as possible as he/she grows in order to make the best decisions possible.
Active Duty, National Guard, and Reserve color guards constantly flounder due to a lack of information and strict guidelines. Now we bring in ROTC, JROTC, and cadets in other programs and we have a weak application of necessary and yet vague requirements across the board.
Authority to Enforce: The Decline and Fall of Roman Empire, a book by Edward Gibbon, details how Rome fell. In a brief nutshell that doesn’t do the book any justice, Rome fell due to standards dropping like a stone. Suddenly, everyone became a Roman citizen, cultures collided and established Roman standards died a quick death.
Army:
- TC 3-21.5 used to be a Field Manual which held authority.
- An FM (TM, ADP etc.) is doctrine a set of well-supported and generally accepted instructions on how to do specific tasks or achieve goals. Deviation from doctrine is not prohibited, however, you assume all risk in that moment.
- The Army has given color guard information for the military parade and a bit more for a very specific presentation of colors indoors but even that isn’t complete.
The Army created Field Manual 22-5, Infantry Drill Regulations, in 1939. It was a mix of D&C and combat information. In 1958, 22-5 was retitled to Drill and Ceremonies and expanded to include all kinds of information to include the first brief description for the color guard. FM 22-5 went through many changes, became FM 3-21.5 and then became a Training Circular.
Marine Corps, Navy, & Coast Guard:
- MCO 5060.20 is an order. It holds supreme authority.
- The Navy did away with its D&C manual and the Marine Corps picked up that job but left the Navy uniqueness out which was a very bad oversight.
- The MCO should be a Department of the Navy publication and include the Navy and Coast Guard color guard requirements.
- The MCO does somewhat better than the Army’s TC for color guard information by providing guidance for low clearance areas and even doorways, ceremonies that are outside of a military parade, but it is also not complete.
The Navy’s Landing-Force Manual (I have the 1921 edition) had a small section for individual armed drill. Renamed, The Landing Party Manual by at least 1950 had D&C removed. The Bluejacket’s Manual had some individual armed drill (I have the 1943 edition). NAVMC 2691, Marine Corps Drill and Ceremonies, was created as far as I can tell in 1980. Why it was titled just for the Marine Corps and did not include the Navy and Coast Guard leaves me scratching my head. It seems obvious to at least mention the other two services that rely solely on the manual. However, US Navy Regulations (1990) states that 2691 is followed for funerals. The concentration was on combat applicability with ceremonies briefly mentioned.
The Navy: scrapped 2691 and published it in a new category and number, MCO P5060.20 (2003), and later dropped the “P” in 2019. It’s an Order, it is followed. However, one of the statements at the beginning of the manual is that it doesn’t apply to Marine Barracks Washington, quite understandable since they perform purely ceremonial drill, nor does it apply to either Recruit Depot or Officer Candidate School. So, who does it apply to? Apparently no one until they get to the Fleet which is a bit late. Standards begin in initial training and should be the same for your whole career.
Air and Space Forces:
- The Air Force/Space Force pamphlet, AFPAM 34-1203, went from beginning as a manual (holds guidance authority), to years later becoming a regulation (has strict authority that will be followed), back to a manual (weakened), and is now a pamphlet (no authority whatsoever, tantamount to a sticky note on the edge of your computer screen).
- The color guard information has always been extremely limited, but that was on purpose. The reader was told to use the other two manuals based on rifle type (which NEVER made any sense at all and still doesn’t).
- In reality and using logic, an armed flight or element is to use the TC (the senior service), and a color guard is to use the MCO because the guards are at the outside shoulder.
The AF is my service, and this paragraph is the most disappointing to me. When the USAF became a service in 1947 drill and ceremonies was still guided by the Army’s FM. In 1953, the AF wrote the first D&C manual , AFM 50-14. In 1985, it was reclassified as a regulation, but in 1996 it was redesignated a manual and in 2022, with all of its massive problems that I wrote about here, here, and here, It was redesignated again and demoted to a mere pamphlet creating guidance that has no authority behind it whatsoever, not even a paper tiger but a lace doily tiger. In spite of the issues with the now AFPAM, it is salvageable with some applied logic although AFJROTC has abandoned it and CAP went off the rails creating its own D&C and even honor guard manuals that are not fit to be followed. We are broken.
We Are Utterly Failing!
How do AF Academy cadets form a color guard with the colors reversed right behind a supposed “expert” in D&C? Is it negligence or apathy? I think it’s a combination that comes from a lack of emphasis that D&C is vital to the military as it teaches foundational principles. We’ve lost sight of that completely because of “the mission”. It’s systemic.
The thought process is to forget the stupid little stuff (like marching) and concentrate on the bigger stuff. For the USAF, we need to “Fly, Fight, and Win!” How do we do that? By “Flying, Fighting, and Winning!” That’s just over-the-top rhetoric that means nothing.
Stop, take a breath, and now look at the accession process:
- Commission – Train – Work – Train – etc.
- Enlist – Train – Work – Train – etc.
We have time and we need to take and even MAKE the time to ensure EVERY facet of training is taken care of and that includes the proper training and application of D&C.
Culture Change
We have service leadership (the top people at the Pentagon) who cyclically consider doing away with drill and ceremonies, cutting the military music programs, and even doing away with the service drill teams with horse-and-buggy thinking because the military trains to fight and win wars. We don’t fight without adequate training, and the following is probably news to some: our training must include D&C. I’m not looking for perfection, just levels of excellence.
The Value of Drill
I’ve taught many JROTC units across the country both in-person and through video. At one high school, there was a cadet who was determined to improve himself. He marched poorly but knew that if he applied himself by joining the drill team and constantly marching regulation and exhibition sequences, he would improve enough to be able to handle the basic requirements of Army ROTC in college and being an Army officer. He did it and he is a successful Army officer today. He doesn’t march every day and he’s not going to volunteer for the Old Guard in DC, but he knew the value of D&C. You should too.