Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Sponsored by Chamberlains - complete legal services for business

Should training accidents count for the roll of honour?

By johnboy - 9 February 2011 19

belona

The Herald Sun has a story on the mother of the late Lance-Corporal Mason Edwards who wants her son to be included in the War Memorial’s Roll of Honour here in Canberra after he died in training for his third deployment to Afghanistan:

The Roll of Honour records the names of those who have died on active service while a member of the Australian Defence Force and within the designated period of a particular campaign.

The Australian War Memorial, run by an independent council chaired by General Peter Cosgrove, is responsible for decisions on name additions.

A spokeswoman for Veterans Affairs Minister Warren Snowdon said the Australian War Memorial council tried to make decisions consistent with criteria set when the Roll of Honour was established for deaths during World War I.

“Lance-Cpl Edwards’ contribution to the service of our country will never be forgotten,” she said.

His name is listed on a memorial at Sydney’s Holsworthy Barracks.

Thoughts Rioters?

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments
19 Responses to
Should training accidents count for the roll of honour?
1
Captain RAAF 9:42 am
09 Feb 11
#

It might sound harsh but no, his name does not belong on the roll of honor. You open this floodgate then you better be prepared for a deluge because a lot of servicemen and women have died during training in Australia.

Members that have died in training should be remembered at local memorials, at their units or base, not at the AWM, or better still, the AWM can build a memorial outside in the gardens and have it dedicated to all those lost during training, but again, it’s going to be costly if you want to put everyones name on it.

Having your name on the roll of honor is not an award or a prize, nor is it a convenience because lets face it, everyone eventually visits it and sometimes quite often and I’m sure we’d all like a central repository for all our military dead, so people seeking to have their loved ones name who was killed during training in Australia put on it should not be thinking it’s something they are entitled to, cos it aint!

The names on it are of those that died ‘on active service’, you start including those killed during training and you’ll get a lot of brave and well deserving soldiers, sailors and airmen but you’ll also get a goodly amount of dickheads that are not worthy of the roll and this will cheapen the entire wall and what it represents.

Personally, I wish we had gone down the path the United States did, with a National Cemetery like Arlington so that our dead can be laid to rest in a place where all Australians could pay their respects and I think you’d struggle to find too many soldiers that wouldn’t want to be interred there.

Report this comment

2
PBO 10:01 am
09 Feb 11
#

I will stand against you on this one Captain, The fact that these people have died whilst in service to this country should be grounds enough for their names to be placed on the roll. I do agree however there would be some questionable entries.

Report this comment

3
Thumper 10:02 am
09 Feb 11
#

What Captain RAAF said.

But by all means have a seperate memorial elsewhere. The week my dad joined his SQN a P2 toasted a wing and went down with all crew killed.

http://www.hawkesburygazette.com.au/news/local/news/general/flyovers-mark-anniversary-of-tragedy/1424208.aspx

Report this comment

4
Hosinator 10:22 am
09 Feb 11
#

Captain RAAF said :

Personally, I wish we had gone down the path the United States did, with a National Cemetery like Arlington so that our dead can be laid to rest in a place where all Australians could pay their respects and I think you’d struggle to find too many soldiers that wouldn’t want to be interred there.

Agreed, nothing like a white cross to show the kiddes what sacrifices are required of our men and women of our armed services to protect this country.

Captain RAAF, on a separate note and probably opening a can of worms here, any thoughts on the SASR soldiers from the 1980s who are requesting compensation for injuries sustained during training?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/sas-fights-for-recognition/story-e6frf7l6-1111114298316

The background being that their unorthodox training methods paved the way for the SASR from the mid 90s to be effective operationally and avoid injury as the guys in the 80s/90s did the hard yards in terms of developing tactics for dynamic entry, the use of explosives etc.

Now they are asking to be compensated for their training injuries by the Defence force the same as what they would be if they had sustained injuries during an operation.
I know this opens up the rest of the military to claim the same, but could they limit it to just the SASR?
The issue being that these guys really had to set aside army guidelines to achieve the results in training that they were after, to ensure that when they did go operational that their tactics would work successfully in the field.

Report this comment

5
Captain RAAF 10:46 am
09 Feb 11
#

‘We broke a lot of rules’ statement from the CO won’t help their cause.

If what they did wasn’t in writing, from the very top and was just an unspoken expectation to carry out whatever training was deemed necessary, then Army and Gummint can just wash their hands of the problem, citing that rules and regulations were not followed and place the blame squarely on the chicken stranglers.

There are a lot of military professions that require members to do pretty stupid things because there is no other option, happens all the time in every arms corps, every day (though less than it used to happen). I remember man-handling a piece of Artillery that normally required 2 or 3 people minimum by myself because it was a rapid cease-fire, get the hell outta dodge situation and there was no-one else around to help me, it was just one of the perks of the job and you sucked it up like a big brave boy.

I have no doubt that the SAS boys did some real hard core sh*t in the line of duty whilst training but this gets the nod you’ll find a long line of Infanteers, trail apes, engineers and probably a few stores clerks all lining up for the same kind of consideration.

The army of the 80’s and 90’s did not look after it’s troops.

Report this comment

6
bigfeet 11:25 am
09 Feb 11
#

It’s a difficult one.

My uncle is on the Roll of Honour at the AWM and his death was as a result of a training accident.

In fact his unit has 64 names listed and about 95% are accidental deaths. The others died of illness.

Report this comment

7
Captain RAAF 11:32 am
09 Feb 11
#

bigfeet said :

It’s a difficult one.

My uncle is on the Roll of Honour at the AWM and his death was as a result of a training accident.

In fact his unit has 64 names listed and about 95% are accidental deaths. The others died of illness.

Were they in Australia?

Report this comment

8
Davo111 11:58 am
09 Feb 11
#

I agree with Captain RAAF, no i dont think they should be included in the roll on honour. There really should be two lists – those who were killed in battle (roll of honour), and those who died while in service

Report this comment

9
bigfeet 12:12 pm
09 Feb 11
#

Captain RAAF said :

Were they in Australia?

Yes. Mostly Victoria, Tasmania and Bass Strait.

It was a training unit for conversion to twin engines . Mainly Hudsons and Beauforts.

Report this comment

10
homeone 12:19 pm
09 Feb 11
#

Isn’t it that the serviceman was on ‘active duty’ at the time ie in a place that would qualify them for a RAS badge (or todays equivalent if that changed) the measure?

Report this comment

11
PBO 12:55 pm
09 Feb 11
#

homeone said :

Isn’t it that the serviceman was on ‘active duty’ at the time ie in a place that would qualify them for a RAS badge (or todays equivalent if that changed) the measure?

Excellent point, There was a SASR fellow many years ago who was gored to death by an elephant in Borneo during a training exercise. I always wondered if he was on the roll.

Report this comment

12
Captain RAAF 1:22 pm
09 Feb 11
#

bigfeet said :

Captain RAAF said :

Were they in Australia?

Yes. Mostly Victoria, Tasmania and Bass Strait.

It was a training unit for conversion to twin engines . Mainly Hudsons and Beauforts.

Ah, there’s the rub, it was during WW2. A world war has far greater theatres of operation than say, the Vietnam war.

Report this comment

13
bigfeet 7:09 pm
09 Feb 11
#

PBO said :

[Excellent point, There was a SASR fellow many years ago who was gored to death by an elephant in Borneo during a training exercise. I always wondered if he was on the roll.

He is.

http://www.awm.gov.au/research/people/roll_of_honour/person.asp?p=563802

This happened during an operational patrol though, not a training excercise.

Report this comment

14
LSWCHP 9:39 pm
09 Feb 11
#

I agree with Captain RAAF. I also know from personal experience that the profession of arms is a hard and inherently risky business, unimaginable to those who haven’t been there. For this reason I think that it would be A Good Thing for our nation to honour those who have died while training for war with a memorial of their own.

Report this comment

15
musician 10:41 am
12 Mar 11
#

I am writing an essay about the Kapooka Tragedy on 21 May 1945, in which 26 lives were lost in an explosion whilst training with hand grenades. This was a training accident, and these men are included in the Roll of Honour.

The rules seem to be inconsistent if LCpl Edwards is excluded.

Report this comment

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2016 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.

Search across the site