Following on from a quite interesting (in parts) thread in the STAB forum, one of the points raised was that no one has asked the regular army what kind of reserve it wants. Now I have always thought that 3 and 5 MI are to a certain extent exempt from the existential issues that dog other cap badges for the following reasons:

1. The contribution to Ops is considerably more than 10% (percentage of TA pers on Ops at any one time) in fact over 20% of all deployed Corps personnel apparently.
2. Many members of 3 and 5 come from other parts of the UK INT architecture.
3. 5 have a direct relationship with 1 and 4 MI.
4. 3 provide constant support to strategic customers without "nicking" PIDs.
5. All the 3 MI coys are special to role - and in a form that has no equivelent amongst the reg Bns.
6. The regs are well exposed to, and understand reservists.

Am I wrong about this? Do the reg Bns want and (more importantly need) support from 3 and 5 in the current form? If not what would be better?

Furthermore (following on from another point in the aforementioned thread) RUMINT has it that there may be an increase INT Corps (V) manning on the cards. Are the CO/RSM/ADJT/PSI roles valued by the Corps as a whole or are they a drain on manpower?

Just wondering.

Bump. In the context of the publication of FR20 and general SDSR upgrades. Not even a bit of piss-taking?

You smell off elderberries, feel better?

Much. Cheers.

The ability to use apostrophes correctly?

It would be nice to think the silence is because we're getting it about right ... no idea whether that's true or not, but it's not like they throw stones at us these days when we turn up, which I suppose is a positive sign.

Whatever the Regs think, I feel that having a Reg CO, RSM etc is central to our success. Long may it continue.

From my perspective our biggest need is to transition from a rather exclusive gap year provider to a TA unit. Not an easy thing to do as nearly all the drivers are outside our control. The fact that TA units keep all recruits, mobilised, FTRS etc bods against unit PIDs does rather obscure the yawning demographic trough we have. You don't have to lose many of the old and bold before the value we add on weekends plummets.

If I ruled the world ... I'd drop the fantasy that it's 1913 and soldiers can walk to the TAC. Some of the Coys should be relocated geographically to suit their sponsors, target recruiting in the surrounding areas and start separate training nights. I'd argue that now we have too strong a Bn focus, which can detract from the Coy level mission. That said, some of that is inevitable as lack of people means you can only organise some things at Bn level. Chicken and egg.

Oh, and the whole 3 vs 5 thing got old very fast. It's childish, demeaning and can get in the way of doing useful things. I'd be happy to see us go back to 1 Bn to avoid that sort of crap. Call it the MI Group (V) maybe ?

Realistically an RSM is an RSM regardless and a former RSM 3 has made Corps RSM. Due to how officer jobs are perceived, I'll be very surprised if an ex CO 3 or 5 ever makes director (although that might even be difficult for those in command of regular units shortly.............).

Still some like jobs in London and I'm sure Coulby Newham must have some attractions............................

Originally Posted by One_of_the_strange

Oh, and the whole 3 vs 5 thing got old very fast. It's childish, demeaning and can get in the way of doing useful things. I'd be happy to see us go back to 1 Bn to avoid that sort of crap. Call it the MI Group (V) maybe ?

Agreed. The worst side effect of the 2Bn model, for my money, has been the strategic/tactical role nonsense whereby the most suitable troops for task are excluded by dint of being in the wrong Bn. However I would still like to now what our regular brethren think.

Originally Posted by Op_Int_and_Spy

I'll be very surprised if an ex CO 3 or 5 ever makes director

I wouldn't

I'm sure Coulby Newham must have some attractions............................

Apparently she moved to Middlesborough

***********

Originally Posted by theblindking

Agreed. The worst side effect of the 2Bn model, for my money, has been the strategic/tactical role nonsense whereby the most suitable troops for task are excluded by dint of being in the wrong Bn. However I would still like to now what our regular brethren think.

we think you're a vast impovement on some of the numpties sent out to bosnia in '95. now stop fishing and get down the bar