ARmy Rumour SErvice

Originally Posted by msr

Depends by what you mean 'at the top'?

Runs from SNCO to aged Captain to Lt. Col. There need to be more sensible cut off points at every level, as there are in the Regular Army. The differing age limitations alone are cause for concern. It does not make sense to retain people in the TA after the age they would have been forced out of the Army if we want the TA to be as capable and deployable as the Army.

Dads Army and or Home Forces are something that can be, perhaps, looked at in a different way, if required, and we can afford it.

The TA should and could be as young and deployable as the regulars if you applied the same age criteria.

Where I was we had a FP Plt made up of TA Inf. Little bit bigger than a normal Plt (4 sections of 10 for a start) and had it's own CQMS commanded by a Capt. Jolly good blokes they were too, and did a thoroughly good job.

Originally Posted by chocolate_frog

Where I was we had a FP Plt made up of TA Inf. Little bit bigger than a normal Plt (4 sections of 10 for a start) and had it's own CQMS commanded by a Capt. Jolly good blokes they were too, and did a thoroughly good job.

No doubt that they did, the combined experience of any TA deployed unit should enable them, to at least, get fed

Originally Posted by Boumer

Ultimately, is our future not the Wehrmacht model? Highly capable troops, able to think up and assimilate rapidly augmented reserves to support the mission sent down?

That would be similar to the British Army pre WW2, officers were trained to function 1 or 2 ranks above. They would then staff the expanding army, I believe this took place in summer 1940 (a number CO's in inexperienced formations were replaced by regulars, obviously this included a number of TA).
The expansion/modernisation of the army started in 1930 by reroling around 1/2 the infantry TA battalions as Arty anti-aircraft (and not equipping them too well, no radar's, old navy guns, etc)...

Originally Posted by bokkatankie

Runs from SNCO to aged Captain to Lt. Col. There need to be more sensible cut off points at every level, as there are in the Regular Army. The differing age limitations alone are cause for concern. It does not make sense to retain people in the TA after the age they would have been forced out of the Army if we want the TA to be as capable and deployable as the Army.

Dads Army and or Home Forces are something that can be, perhaps, looked at in a different way, if required, and we can afford it.

The TA should and could be as young and deployable as the regulars if you applied the same age criteria.

An interesting line of inquiry to open up. some current thinking doing the rounds is that as the top third of individuals who can survive and thrive in civvy street leave early, MCPs are effectively hullscrapping activity to remove the worst barnacles.

Within the TA, an active unit/sub unit command element with a good training programme well resourced and supported by its regular counterparts can be all that's needed - those not up to it or interested in the more physical elements can walk. A practical eye does need to be cast on "enablers".

Originally Posted by smallbrownprivates

An interesting line of inquiry to open up. some current thinking doing the rounds is that as the top third of individuals who can survive and thrive in civvy street leave early, MCPs are effectively hullscrapping activity to remove the worst barnacles.

Current in the respect that people have been spouting it for at least 30 years(and probably longer)

Originally Posted by bokkatankie

Runs from SNCO to aged Captain to Lt. Col. There need to be more sensible cut off points at every level, as there are in the Regular Army. The differing age limitations alone are cause for concern. It does not make sense to retain people in the TA after the age they would have been forced out of the Army if we want the TA to be as capable and deployable as the Army.

Dads Army and or Home Forces are something that can be, perhaps, looked at in a different way, if required, and we can afford it.

The TA should and could be as young and deployable as the regulars if you applied the same age criteria.

Ageist.

It can be a young mans game , but to get rid of people just because of age is a waste.

Originally Posted by smallbrownprivates

An interesting line of inquiry to open up. some current thinking doing the rounds is that as the top third of individuals who can survive and thrive in civvy street leave early, MCPs are effectively hullscrapping activity to remove the worst barnacles.

I'd agree with that. Most of the blokes who are in for the full duration are NOT neccesrily the best blokes. They literally just didn't have the gumption to do anything else. Yet all along the line you see capable, intelligent and compentant blokes leaving... for a number of reasons. They don't neccesarily know they can survive and thrive, but they just get bored of the mindnumbing drivel that can accompany forces life. Another big one is the effect of these cling on morons on the intelligent, thrusting lads.