148 battery

#2
When I was a Cdo gunner - long before I saw the light and joined the inf - the only way into 148 was from 29 or the RN (AACC trained) - they were the only two mil types in it. There might have been a few booties at any time but I never saw any.
 
#4
One of the mercanaries out in Bosina, Kit Freeman or something or other, was para but then transferred over to 148 battery. I have got his book somewhere and will look it up.
 
#7
I was attached to 29 Cdo in 2001/2002, and spent a week in 148's camp (in the med centre I may add, I'm as hattish as they come) but the general line I heard was that 148 are like 16AA Pathfinders in that you can volunteer from any capbadge, complete AACC/NGA/Para courses and then rebadge to RA. Maybe the Trg Wing at 148 in Poole can help?
 
#10
WHY on EARTH would you wish to transfer from a COMBAT ARM to a combat SUPPORT (read 'homo') arm? You wierd guy! These badge collecting walty wommando-pawa gunner-engineer corps weasels are all frustrated infantrymen, who make up for their tiny and mishappen genitals by moulding their berets in the manner of a travelling dancing troupe, and boring the hell out of all they meet.

I should just go for a light jog, and have a haircut if I were you. Get it out of your system.
 
#11
Well-That's certainly a point of view! I have actually commanded an infantry company at war,without being an infanteer.Certainly an interesting job during war fighting,but very dull in camp(what do you guys do all day?)While there are many guys who can operate in an infantry war fighting environment,how many infantry types could move over quickly to (say) a gunner,sapper role? If they could,believe me,they would want to remain! ''Here endeth the lesson''

GROWNUPS_BEWARE said:
WHY on EARTH would you wish to transfer from a COMBAT ARM to a combat SUPPORT (read 'homo') arm? You wierd guy! These badge collecting walty wommando-pawa gunner-engineer corps weasels are all frustrated infantrymen, who make up for their tiny and mishappen genitals by moulding their berets in the manner of a travelling dancing troupe, and boring the hell out of all they meet.

I should just go for a light jog, and have a haircut if I were you. Get it out of your system.
 
#12
muhandis89 said:
Well-That's certainly a point of view! I have actually commanded an infantry company at war,without being an infanteer.Certainly an interesting job during war fighting,but very dull in camp(what do you guys do all day?)While there are many guys who can operate in an infantry war fighting environment,how many infantry types could move over quickly to (say) a gunner,sapper role? If they could,believe me,they would want to remain! ''Here endeth the lesson''

GROWNUPS_BEWARE said:
WHY on EARTH would you wish to transfer from a COMBAT ARM to a combat SUPPORT (read 'homo') arm? You wierd guy! These badge collecting walty wommando-pawa gunner-engineer corps weasels are all frustrated infantrymen, who make up for their tiny and mishappen genitals by moulding their berets in the manner of a travelling dancing troupe, and boring the hell out of all they meet.

I should just go for a light jog, and have a haircut if I were you. Get it out of your system.

I hope you build bridges better than you construct your sentences.
 
#13
GROWNUPS_BEWARE said:
WHY on EARTH would you wish to transfer from a COMBAT ARM to a combat SUPPORT (read 'homo') arm? You wierd guy! These badge collecting walty wommando-pawa gunner-engineer corps weasels are all frustrated infantrymen, who make up for their tiny and mishappen genitals by moulding their berets in the manner of a travelling dancing troupe, and boring the hell out of all they meet.

I should just go for a light jog, and have a haircut if I were you. Get it out of your system.
What a load of tosh. Posturing jackanapes...you are probably a Royal Anglian!

I believe 148 has gone open-application including the RAF! Oh tempus, oh mores!
 
#14
Well-That's certainly a point of view! I have actually commanded an infantry company at war,without being an infanteer.Certainly an interesting job during war fighting,but very dull in camp(what do you guys do all day?)While there are many guys who can operate in an infantry war fighting environment,how many infantry types could move over quickly to (say) a gunner,sapper role? If they could,believe me,they would want to remain! ''Here endeth the lesson''
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear - don't reinforce our views of you tradesmen and technicians, my friend. I refer you to one of our only 2 great generals of the last century:

Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm. The role of the average artilleryman, for instance, is largely routine; the setting of a fuse, the loading of a gun, even the laying of it are processes which, once learnt, are mechanical. The infantryman has to use initiative and intelligence in almost every step he moves, every action he takes on the battlefield. We ought therefore to put our men of best intelligence and endurance into the Infantry.

What we 'do all day' is train for all the different things we have to do, as opposed to training to do the same thing over and over again...
 
#15
OK I'm taken exception to this thread, I have long defended the infantry and its role in comparison to the RA (please check this thread out Read my second post on this thread)

But I'm not going to take this on the chin

GROWNUPS_BEWARE said:
WHY on EARTH would you wish to transfer from a COMBAT ARM to a combat SUPPORT (read 'homo') arm? You wierd guy! These badge collecting walty wommando-pawa gunner-engineer corps weasels are all frustrated infantrymen, who make up for their tiny and mishappen genitals by moulding their berets in the manner of a travelling dancing troupe, and boring the hell out of all they meet.

I should just go for a light jog, and have a haircut if I were you. Get it out of your system.

Oh the old combat support line then, alright then how about popping around to the families of Gunners Wright, Vanua, Thornton and Lawrence and tell them that they didn't die in combat, they died in combat SUPPORT and while you were at it [pop round Cpl Marc Taylor from the REME family and tell them he didn't die fighting incombat, rather he was a lowly support arm wallah attached to a bunch of combat homos so obviously didn't die in combat at all.

As stated in that earlier thread I do not claim to be a infantry soldier nor do I want to be one, but to disregard soldiers simply by a classification is abhorrant.

Also I find the constant reference to the RA as being Combat Support phoney anyway because

a. We activily engage the enemy with weaponry, OK direct fire from an AS90 is possibly out but not impossible but the AD role is direct contact

b. WE do not deploy in the rear with the gear , most Gunners are up either on or near the FEBA, call us nine mile snipers if you want but the shoot and scoot nature of close and depth ops mean that the guns do often need to come forward. MLRS needs to fire near the fronat as well to best get use of its depth, thats depth BEHIND the FLET not the FLOT. Other elements of the RA are also deployed embedded with the inf/armour (OPs, CAD) even the STA elements get in on the act, the Radar doesn't work if you are not near the action to get the deflections and ASP is pointless if its too far behind the lines (one ex in germany once someone stuck the Sound Ranging Mic baseline some 8 miles from the FEBA, bloody pointless)

c. In the modern theatre of war we are required to constantly do the more "infantry" based role, we have done forever, in NI the RA suffered the most casualties ar one unit, the UDR/RIR (which isn't suprising) we had the first and last casualties, but then again I suppose they were in "support" of the RUC

Banter is one thing, scorn through ignorance is another

What also grips my shite is the failure to complain about the AAC as a Combat arm, after all a good 90% of the corps is miles from the front, not all mil helos are attack and modern ones have missle capability to put us to shame, but no big gucci apache for a handfull of lads = combat apparently (that is in no way a snipe at our begotten AAC brethren)

Nibbler said:
What we 'do all day' is train for all the different things we have to do, as opposed to training to do the same thing over and over again...
Yeah like we RA types like just do Gun Drill and like thats all we ever do yeah ? All that gunnery in Iraq yeah ?

EVERYBODY trains for different things everyday, not just the Infantry

Just to get back on topic, why join 148 Bty ? Becuase its a fcuking good crack thats why, I had a good friend there and he was always away doing loads of different things, yeah they wear a lot of badges, but they do a lot of courses required for their role, its probably the only unit where everyone has to do the commando course AND their jumps course (please note I am not up to date on all RM units, I'm sure there are small dets that require 100% parachute capability). Don't scold a guy for wanting to do something different.


I would like to state at this point that I have nothing but respect for our Infantry cousins, especially the lads in the 'stan right now and its silly to argue symantics
 
#16
Oh the old combat support line then, alright then how about popping around to the families of Gunners Wright, Vanua, Thornton and Lawrence and tell them that they didn't die in combat, they died in combat SUPPORT and while you were at it [pop round Cpl Marc Taylor from the REME family and tell them he didn't die fighting incombat, rather he was a lowly support arm wallah attached to a bunch of combat homos so obviously didn't die in combat at all.
Careful there Welly:

a) No-one has implied any disrespect in this thread to any soldier killed in action - that's a cheap shot, and unnecessary.

b) Your bite reveals exactly why the Infantry is not for everyone. We don't need to worry about how we're perceived, we just get on with it - and frankly, my dear, we don't give a damn what you think. If you don't like a touch of Infantry humour, bugger off to your own board and post jokes about thick infantrymen there - we won't mind, honest... Now let us continue to despise all badge-hunters, people who get trade pay, dropshorts, blanket stackers and the RAF. (have I missed anyone lads?)
 
#17
OK I agree, naming names is a cheap shot and I suppose I overlooked the banter side too much, my response was more against later posts that the original (I hope) tounge in cheek "homos" thread.

Perhaps I'm being a little touchy but to be called a homo less than a week after losing 3 blokes can do that to you.

Perhaps I'm just sick to death of all the references to being remfs, too manys girlies, frustrated infantry etc. Banter is one thing but when someone claims that you are not up to the job becuase you are not a "teeth arm" is a bit galling. It wasn't that long ago somebody poured scorn on 1 RHA losing 2 guys claiming if it was an infantry unit they wouldn't of got ambushed and wouldn't need saving, what like infantry units never get ambushed nor require QRF units ?

Perhaps I do have a chip on my shoulder as big a a 5.5 shell

or perhaps I'm just on the blob, after all I am a gunner ergo a girly
 
#18
Nibbler said:
Well-That's certainly a point of view! I have actually commanded an infantry company at war,without being an infanteer.Certainly an interesting job during war fighting,but very dull in camp(what do you guys do all day?)While there are many guys who can operate in an infantry war fighting environment,how many infantry types could move over quickly to (say) a gunner,sapper role? If they could,believe me,they would want to remain! ''Here endeth the lesson''
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear - don't reinforce our views of you tradesmen and technicians, my friend. I refer you to one of our only 2 great generals of the last century:

Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm. The role of the average artilleryman, for instance, is largely routine; the setting of a fuse, the loading of a gun, even the laying of it are processes which, once learnt, are mechanical. The infantryman has to use initiative and intelligence in almost every step he moves, every action he takes on the battlefield. We ought therefore to put our men of best intelligence and endurance into the Infantry.

What we 'do all day' is train for all the different things we have to do, as opposed to training to do the same thing over and over again...
If you knew of what you speak, you would realise that the "art" of the infantryman hasn't really changed much in a thousand years - though weapon systems and tactics have. By contrast the art of the Gunner has changed so often in the past twenty years that periodically we have to stop work, check the name-tag in our vests and then carry on!

Gunners do perform a lot of tasks to a proforma but there is always need and room for individual initiative - for example if NIG Gunner Smith sees a bad thing on the position he can bring eight guns, a hundred guys and computing power twenty times that of the NASDA Appollo missions to a grinding halt by just shouting "Stand fast"! Moreover the only person who can revoke stand fast is the person who gave it...

As for being up the sharp end, in 1991 the first main body troops to cross into Kuwait were the Gunners - ten days before the main body during depth fire artillery "raids".

Apart from all that, I know that you were only having a bantering knock at 148 and the Royal Regiment in general but being infantry you lacked subtlety! As I believe Plato once said "Feck off you red-nosed bast4rd" and on with the humour...
 
#19
If you knew of what you speak, you would realise that the "art" of the infantryman hasn't really changed much in a thousand years
Very true - I think what FM the lord Wavell was implying by his line about 'in modern war' was more that other arms and services had become more about manning the machine, and therefore - to a degree - more stereotyped, as opposed to the infantryman's art having changed...

Anyway: I love gunners really - they're useful for telling the time, and confirming exactly where we are (even if they can't hit exactly what we want...) - and they always have lashings of hot water and useful storage space.
 

Latest Threads

New Posts