I think the RAF Regt should be re badged to someting a bit tri-service. Something where their skills and experience would be of value and enable them to maintain their traditions and with the minimum of additional training required.

MPGS !

Barrier Goes Up ! Barrier Goes Down !

Originally Posted by arfah

I think the RAF Regt should be re badged to someting a bit tri-service. Something where their skills and experience would be of value and enable them to maintain their traditions and with the minimum of additional training required.

MPGS !

Barrier Goes Up ! Barrier Goes Down !

Believe me, they'd fvck that up.

Barbs, have to ask before I start adding to the record unemployment numbers, were the RAF and or RAF Regt represented at this meeting?

How many RAF Reg are there vs the FE@R levels required to deploy? Given the move towards only needing them in one airbase (KAF) plus BAS till we draw down, it doesnt seem that many are required to do their primary role?

If we can shift away from airfield defence as a primary role, and instead dual hat an infantry btn to do it - effectively stick another 72hrs NTM tasker on some pooor overcommited unit, what does this free up? How would it best be integrated into the army and the Infantry OCP? If we split up the units and penny packet distribute them to balance out manning, we'd lose a lot of people who feel disenfranchised from the RAF. if we keep them as a formed set of Bns, Coys etc, then is there a danger of keeping the sense of RAFness a bit too long? More to the point, how long would it take to get a Regt unit ready to operate as a regular infantry unit - given the different requirements for vehicles etc?

Finally, are we the last unit in NATO to have an airfield defence regiment in our air force?

RAF Regt is a needless creation, an abonimation perhaps, and should be gotten rid off.

Airfields, in reality, only need protecting overseas and I don't see much point in having a specific guard force for this. In many countries local CivPol or ForMil will do it. And why we are still operating airfields in conflict zones when we could or should be using full proper size carriers to sorte fighters out of.

Originally Posted by Mr Happy

RAF Regt is a needless creation, an abonimation perhaps, and should be gotten rid off..

Music to my ears mon brave! The Force is strong in you.

So if their got rid of who guard the air fields ? if I was taliban would be itching to have go at the airfields .Only way there going to get an apache isnt it ?

Originally Posted by woody

So if their got rid of who guard the air fields ? if I was taliban would be itching to have go at the airfields .Only way there going to get an apache isnt it ?

the Infantry would do it mate. Wed do a much better job of it too. there would be no problems there.

Originally Posted by woody

So if their got rid of who guard the air fields ? if I was taliban would be itching to have go at the airfields .Only way there going to get an apache isnt it ?

Inf. Or RA, MPGS. Achmed the cleaner. Some bloke I met down the pub caled Bernard and if they're all busy - some RAF servicemen.

Or at least RAF blokes inside the wire, Army outside the wire.

Originally Posted by Mr Happy

Originally Posted by woody

So if their got rid of who guard the air fields ? if I was taliban would be itching to have go at the airfields .Only way there going to get an apache isnt it ?

Inf. Or RA, MPGS. Achmed the cleaner. Some bloke I met down the pub caled Bernard and if they're all busy - some RAF servicemen.

Or at least RAF blokes inside the wire, Army outside the wire.

RAF servicemen? Yiou may as well have Achmed the cleaner!