19 regt disbanding in two years

I would have thought that they would be the safest regiment as they are about to be "digitised" - but stanger things have happened!

It probably is a 1RHA plot to ensure that the donkey wallopers do not have to share the same mess as the plastic jocks! :lol:
19 Reg have only just re-formed as a 4 gun Bty Regiment. And converting to Bowman.
I should know, I'm in 19. Although the gay tartan rankslide is a bit too much...
surely as its got one of the best levels of recruitment it would be safe enough!! Oh well woolwich probably needs a new gold set of sinks or something and the money has to be found somewhere!
sure thing, GQ.

All i know at the moment is that 52 BTY (less for their OP troop) are disbanding in a year or 2. they'll definetly be with us for TELIC 6 as a bty though.

i'll see what else i can dig up
We all knew that 52 Bty RA were going to lose their guns after such a stink was made prior to their AP last year (with 127 Bty RA leaving 26 Regt RA at the same time).

The great rumour that surfaced after their arrival was their 'imminent' departure to 40 Regt RA as a Light Gun Battery! I suspect that 40 Regt RA can handle that task just fine...

12 Brigade, whom 19 Regt RA support, have 4 BGs, hence the requirement for 4 Tac Groups. However, the decision to 'absorb' the fourth Gun Group strikes me a being slightly suspect. I feel that 7 (Para) RHA's Avn Tac Gp policy did much to sow the seeds for the demise of 52 Bty RA Gun Group, as a discrete element.

The reason all this happened? Money!!!
Poor bloody 19 have had batteries added and taken away more times than I can keep up with. But 40 have had to deal with the stand alone tac gp before when 129 Bty had this inflicted on them in the late 90s. Load of arrse I say. At least they got the gun group back last time, but not much chance now I would have thought :(
Don't get the logic myself. Take a good Bty (52), move it, give it BOWMAN, ensure it is the only operational Gun Battery that has fired BATUS, and then disband the gun group. This was decided long ago. Rather than look at the strength of other Batteries, rather than look at acapabilities, they disband on a basis of seniority etc. Seems a little odd.

I must say I am not from Niagara, but having worked with them for a while they are an outstanding bunch, with a set of values that will be sorely missed. I just hope that the boys go to new units and spread the good news. 8)
I'm an old niagara man. They washed us away in 93 45fld rgt shipping 52 of to 4th fld rgt.

But back then we were using Abbots (yea those antique things that they claim could swim) far cry from the FH70 in Colchester (what a gun).

Does the FH70 still see service or has it been sold off for something better.

Damn it i'm a crow again, can no one get anywhere in this life!

FH70 in the museum shocking. The only other shells I have seen as big as that are in the service of the RN and they were rather larger.

Well I should bloody thinks so...........Its about time they got rid of the Home Guard Regiment.
Highland Gunners my arse!!!!
Later Losers
ibbo said:
The only other shells I have seen as big as that are in the service of the RN and they were rather larger.

Obviously did not see the rounds of the M107 or M110 of the "old" heavy regiments then?
I did some time on 109's they had nothing on FH70 as far as i can remember

Hmmm....I've just managed to prevent myself falling off my chair in hysterical amusement.

M109 was a 105mm system. FH70 was a 155mm system. That answers that then.

M107 was 175mm, and M110 was 203mm. Or was it the other way around....? :D
Yep, that was what I meant - but I couldn't very well edit it, could I??

My post was designed to highlight the fact that there couldn't possibly be much between the 2 systems.

Apologies - and good drills, BQ! :D
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Medals 10
T Military History and Militaria 11
arse-eye Aviation 26

Similar threads

Latest Threads