ARmy Rumour SErvice

Originally Posted by WelshWarrior87

Well it's nice to see that 2nd Battalion the Royal Welsh are now firmly in the firing line to be cut, something that was only made known to its members today and bearing in mind the decision is supposed to be announced on Thu it's a bit late notice! Great way to celebrate Armed Forces Day! Nice to know that even if you are the most Experienced armoured infantry battalion in the British Army coupled with the fact that you are supposed to take over lead armoured battle group in 2013 doesn't mean you're safe. Disgrace

Why a disgrace? Perhaps when the dust settles and we have the army we can afford then we can look forward rather than hang onto names that are frankly outdated and have no real significance. there can be 3 or 4 regiments in the Corps of Inf and the number of Bns will shrink or expand as required. Its a job be thankful you still have one!

Originally Posted by oldmanron

-and not a zulu in sight!!

And most of the defenders were English, or Irish.

One of things I do not understand (and I know there are amny others) is the recruiting story as illustrated below:

DT Today: Figures seen by The Daily Telegraph show that at least three of the 36 infantry battalions — the Royal Highland Fusiliers (2 Bn The Royal Regiment of Scotland), 1st Bn Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment and 5 Bn The Rifles — have between 15 and 20 per cent of troops drawn from overseas. Common recruiting grounds include the Caribbean and Fiji.

Now is that a deliberate recruiting policy by the regiments, do they send teams on trips to Fiji and Barbados or is it a process applied at ATR?

From what I saw of the new process at ATR (albeit on a TV doccie) the recruitment process appears to shift toward battalion need, within the larger super regiment, at that time rather than an individual having absolute choice. Thus if 4 Rifles is down for tour they get the bods to ensure battalion is up to strength.

It would also follow that if, for whatever reason, a battalion had more overseas recruits than another, it becomes a bit of a self selection process for the recruits, wanting to feel more at home in the unit they serve with.

5 Rifles is the Paderborn based former 1LI and is Warrior equipped. It will soon be returning to the UK for good so reducing this Bn from the strength will possibly cause less immediate pain (apart from reunions when I will clearly have to keep my head down) and if the manning bods decided that sending F&C soldiers there was right at the time then provided the manning bods dont unneccesarily make the F&C soldiers redundant based on race I cant see there being a problem.
If there are enough vacancies in the Rifles as a whole to absorb those soldiers from 5th Bn then there may be little need to make anyone redundant. I do forsee less senior ranks and officers making the cut!
Thats the way it goes I'm afraid and I seem to recall when the LI was 3bns into 2 there werent many compulsary or even voluntary redundacies as the old 1st Bn had been allowed to run down. If the Army choses wisely it could manage this well and soldiers with no immediate career future in the regt can serve out their contracts and those about to retire not be replaced. I'm sure in a 5 Bn regt that would solve most of the issues going into 4 Bns and save a lot of money as well!

Originally Posted by ugly

5 Rifles is the Paderborn based former 1LI and is Warrior equipped. It will soon be returning to the UK for good so reducing this Bn from the strength will possibly cause less immediate pain (apart from reunions when I will clearly have to keep my head down) and if the manning bods decided that sending F&C soldiers there was right at the time then provided the manning bods dont unneccesarily make the F&C soldiers redundant based on race I cant see there being a problem.
If there are enough vacancies in the Rifles as a whole to absorb those soldiers from 5th Bn then there may be little need to make anyone redundant. I do forsee less senior ranks and officers making the cut!
Thats the way it goes I'm afraid and I seem to recall when the LI was 3bns into 2 there werent many compulsary or even voluntary redundacies as the old 1st Bn had been allowed to run down. If the Army choses wisely it could manage this well and soldiers with no immediate career future in the regt can serve out their contracts and those about to retire not be replaced. I'm sure in a 5 Bn regt that would solve most of the issues going into 4 Bns and save a lot of money as well!

That being the purpose, as I undertood it of the super regiments anyway. It allowed for expansion and contraction without all the famous name willy waving.

But it does beg the question why a 1st. Battalion would be for the chop, all logical until it goes unlogical.

Originally Posted by bokkatankie

One of things I do not understand (and I know there are amny others) is the recruiting story as illustrated below:

DT Today: Figures seen by The Daily Telegraph show that at least three of the 36 infantry battalions — the Royal Highland Fusiliers (2 Bn The Royal Regiment of Scotland), 1st Bn Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment and 5 Bn The Rifles — have between 15 and 20 per cent of troops drawn from overseas. Common recruiting grounds include the Caribbean and Fiji.

Now is that a deliberate recruiting policy by the regiments, do they send teams on trips to Fiji and Barbados or is it a process applied at ATR?

From what I saw of the new process at ATR (albeit on a TV doccie) the recruitment process appears to shift toward battalion need, within the larger super regiment, at that time rather than an individual having absolute choice. Thus if 4 Rifles is down for tour they get the bods to ensure battalion is up to strength.

It would also follow that if, for whatever reason, a battalion had more overseas recruits than another, it becomes a bit of a self selection process for the recruits, wanting to feel more at home in the unit they serve with.

Good points. Battalions don't do their own recruiting, and trainees - while given the opportunity to express their personal preference - may be directed wherever they are most needed. Unsurprisingly, Bns which are between tours and nowhere near starting their PDT don't get the same priority.

Another point being missed from recent "inspired" stories is that Bns don't all have the same establishment.

The largest inf bn establishment is 608 and the smallest 523 - quite a difference - armd inf bns being the largest.

Bns get renumbered, it happened with the LI, originally 4 reg Bns and eventually 3 reg and 4 TA Bns finishing as 2 and 1 with the 1st Bn absorbed into the 2nd and 3rd and those renumbered up 1.
In 68 the RGJ were offered the chance to go large with the LI but refused, lucky for them NI saved 3 RGJ (and the Hamps and A&SH) from disbandment but eventually what comes around. troops in a large regt can form composite companies and post Ballygawley we received such a coy formed from our other two reg Bns.
So if a Bn is short it gets shuffled around the numbers move but the folk remain pretty much the same!

Originally Posted by ugly

Bns get renumbered, it happened with the LI, originally 4 reg Bns and eventually 3 reg and 4 TA Bns finishing as 2 and 1 with the 1st Bn absorbed into the 2nd and 3rd and those renumbered up 1.
In 68 the RGJ were offered the chance to go large with the LI but refused, lucky for them NI saved 3 RGJ (and the Hamps and A&SH) from disbandment but eventually what comes around. troops in a large regt can form composite companies and post Ballygawley we received such a coy formed from our other two reg Bns.
So if a Bn is short it gets shuffled around the numbers move but the folk remain pretty much the same!

Yes same here, 1RGJ getting the chop with 2 becoming the new 1, and 3 becoming the new 2. The rationale was that everyone lost something.