AJAX - the ‘NOT the CR2 upgrade’ thread

Agreed

This is the sticking point. The majority of people join and serve in the Army for very short periods of time. and during that time move through ranks and roles with amazing frequency.

Recce is currently carried out by a certain group simply move that group, it's people and equipment into another formation and carry on.

This of course would mean reductions, leaving the ex RAC units at about 4 and logic dictates they in turn could be amalgamated with those totally useless light infantry units. Of course the 2 CR3 units would be stand alone perhaps both RTR under D Inf..

Every skill in the Army is transferrable up to the more technical trades.
What you suggest is that trade doesn't depend on capbadge?
Heresy! :)
 
Agreed

This is the sticking point. The majority of people join and serve in the Army for very short periods of time. and during that time move through ranks and roles with amazing frequency.

Recce is currently carried out by a certain group simply move that group, it's people and equipment into another formation and carry on.

This of course would mean reductions, leaving the ex RAC units at about 4 and logic dictates they in turn could be amalgamated with those totally useless light infantry units. Of course the 2 CR3 units would be stand alone perhaps both RTR under D Inf..

Every skill in the Army is transferrable up to the more technical trades.
And within 2 years of that group of people being moved from Armour to Infantry thr specialist long range recce skill set using vehicles would be gone.

By doctrine infantry units are meant to cover a very narrow area around them, about 2km if I remember rightly. Different levels of recce cover further. By the time the Army managed to rewrite doctrine and sort out the training courses, which will invariably include an utterly pointless and excessively long insertion tab carrying too much kit that requires new batteries every 8 hours, the people with the skills to conduct recce in depth will have left.

What a clever idea.....
 

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
This is the sticking point. The majority of people join and serve in the Army for very short periods of time. and during that time move through ranks and roles with amazing frequency.

Recce is currently carried out by a certain group simply move that group, it's people and equipment into another formation and carry on.

This of course would mean reductions, leaving the ex RAC units at about 4 and logic dictates they in turn could be amalgamated with those totally useless light infantry units. Of course the 2 CR3 units would be stand alone perhaps both RTR under D Inf..

Every skill in the Army is transferrable up to the more technical trades.
This is at least one step too far. Are you Nick Carter? :)

Firstly, if you actually want to deploy an armoured brigade for a [protracted period you need three of them. One deployed, one working up and one recovering. Or rather, you need three of each of the major units, as the Bde HQ should trickle post. So that's 6 RAC regiments on CR3, plus 3 inf Bns on each set of Warrior Boxer Whatever. Given WFM this should be possible, albeit obvuiously the wear and tear will increase.

Secondly, individual skills may be transferable, institutional opnese are not. Classic example, up thread a few tens of pages, is the impact of re rolling infantry from lt to mech as per cold war. Doing on 4 year cycle meant that only at the end had they got the hang of it.

Finally, given DInf has somehow managed to stay with the capabilities of the 1930s as it's preferred solution (and ,as per other threads, it doesn't even understand that very well) the last place I would put anything to be run is at of that particular sleepy hollow.
 
This is at least one step too far. Are you Nick Carter? :)

Firstly, if you actually want to deploy an armoured brigade for a [protracted period you need three of them. One deployed, one working up and one recovering. Or rather, you need three of each of the major units, as the Bde HQ should trickle post. So that's 6 RAC regiments on CR3, plus 3 inf Bns on each set of Warrior Boxer Whatever. Given WFM this should be possible, albeit obvuiously the wear and tear will increase.

Secondly, individual skills may be transferable, institutional opnese are not. Classic example, up thread a few tens of pages, is the impact of re rolling infantry from lt to mech as per cold war. Doing on 4 year cycle meant that only at the end had they got the hang of it.

Finally, given DInf has somehow managed to stay with the capabilities of the 1930s as it's preferred solution (and ,as per other threads, it doesn't even understand that very well) the last place I would put anything to be run is at of that particular sleepy hollow.
It would make more practical sense to break up infantry battalions and permanently attach armoured infantry companies to tank regiments, with organic artillery, engineers, logistics and medical, repair and recovery.
But that would chop out a swathe of " command" posts.

The army needs to decide if it wants to be effective against peer or near peer adversaries, or continue to be a disorganised rabble in support of careers for officers.
 
To me though, there is very little excuse for excessive engine noise or vibration any more. Modern large diesels are far quieter than they were even 20 years ago and NVH techniques can eliminate almost all of the vibration. Take a look at modern construction plant; it’s near silent.
A number of years ago, I went to Babcock at Colchester where they were doing a lot of work on the 432 fleet, I believe it was part of the Bulldog up grade program. Which was I think, the replacement of engine, gearbox, steering and braking systems.
They were test driving a batch around the place, it was quite astonishing how quiet the old girls were, with the new pack all I could hear really were the tracks. Seemed strange not to hear that distinctive howl, coming out as they accelerated.
 
It would make more practical sense to break up infantry battalions and permanently attach armoured infantry companies to tank regiments, with organic artillery, engineers, logistics and medical, repair and recovery.
But that would chop out a swathe of " command" posts.

The army needs to decide if it wants to be effective against peer or near peer adversaries, or continue to be a disorganised rabble in support of careers for officers.
Don’t some of the Australian Light Horse Regts operate along those lines, but without the Artillery as part of the unit.
 

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
It would make more practical sense to break up infantry battalions and permanently attach armoured infantry companies to tank regiments, with organic artillery, engineers, logistics and medical, repair and recovery.
But that would chop out a swathe of " command" posts.
No it would not, as that would lose the necessary flexibility of matching the organisation to the task.
 
Got to love ARRSE - a mix of erudite debate, pertinent anecdotes, and blackest humour; while also managing to poke fun at cap badges, Sleepy Hollow and the Chief of the General Smoothie-Chops. All on one page!

:number1:
 

TamH70

MIA
It would make more practical sense to break up infantry battalions and permanently attach armoured infantry companies to tank regiments, with organic artillery, engineers, logistics and medical, repair and recovery.
But that would chop out a swathe of " command" posts.

The army needs to decide if it wants to be effective against peer or near peer adversaries, or continue to be a disorganised rabble in support of careers for officers.

Amalgamate them into Panzergrenadier Divisionen then? If so, I agree wholeheartedly. It makes sense.
 
It would make more practical sense to break up infantry battalions and permanently attach armoured infantry companies to tank regiments, with organic artillery, engineers, logistics and medical, repair and recovery.
But that would chop out a swathe of " command" posts.

The army needs to decide if it wants to be effective against peer or near peer adversaries, or continue to be a disorganised rabble in support of careers for officers.
No it wouldn’t. Organic artillery, engineers and logistics means not enough. All three should be concentrated on the main effort.
 

TamH70

MIA
No it wouldn’t. Organic artillery, engineers and logistics means not enough. All three should be concentrated on the main effort.

Yes it would. All that lot would be the main effort. We don't have enough warm bodies to do otherwise.
 
It would make more practical sense to break up infantry battalions and permanently attach armoured infantry companies to tank regiments, with organic artillery, engineers, logistics and medical, repair and recovery.
But that would chop out a swathe of " command" posts.

The army needs to decide if it wants to be effective against peer or near peer adversaries, or continue to be a disorganised rabble in support of careers for officers.
That would be nice but we do not have anywhere near the resources to create that. The whole Bde Combat team concept is simply a fantasy caused by combining far to much Absinthe and Skunk.

What we actually have is some CR2 with limited survivability on the battlefield, Some EOL Warriors the same, Some Boxers on order which may turn up one day but there is no Doctrine in place for their use and a pitiful amount of under gunned 105mm Artillery pieces . And Ajax, not here, not working and no defined role that even brushes up against reality.

So build the dream Division from that :)
 
It would make more practical sense to break up infantry battalions and permanently attach armoured infantry companies to tank regiments, with organic artillery, engineers, logistics and medical, repair and recovery.
But that would chop out a swathe of " command" posts.

Yes it would. All that lot would be the main effort. We don't have enough warm bodies to do otherwise.

@TamH70 , has identified the main problem . . . that "We don't have enough warm bodies" !!

But, to then organise those that we do have, into an amorphous, anonymous, indistinguishable mass . . . or MESS . . . is NOT the solution !!

If the abortion of an aberration that is the RLC teaches us anything . . . it is that such cross-function mergers, result in the reduction of trade specific expertise; loss of control and management of individual functions; abandonment of core principles; all of which may be represented within - and, maintained by - the SNCOs of the "Forming Corps", but will be lost within a generation of SNCO being appointed from within the (now) merged "Super Corps".

The army needs to decide if it wants to be effective against peer or near peer adversaries, or continue to be a disorganised rabble in support of careers for officers.

It is unfortunate that @oscar1whisky has such a life experience, that it has led to a misunderstanding of the role and function of officers :( !!

To better illustrate my arguement, it may be possible to use as an extreme example . . . a multi-discipline, civilian manufacturing operation. Applying what has been suggested in this thread today, all the "managers" would be removed from the different functions . . . the canteen/catering . . . the stores/purchasing/supply . . . all the different individual manufacturing/assembly operations . . . the multitude of office support, wages, HR, patents/legal . . . security . . . etc..

And, it is suggested - today in this thread - that "supervisors" from each specific, individual, function could be moved from one area to another . . . that they would all continue to operate seamlessly and efficiently.

I think NOT !! Now transfer that scenario, from the local industrial estate, into a combat zone and add in fatigue, stress, uncertainty, and that the unit is trying to kill the enemy that is - in turn - trying to kill them, and it is suggested that today's "New Military Doctrine of Misplaced Jointery" as espoused on ARRSE, is at best misplaced and at worse counterproductive and dangerous !!
 
A number of years ago, I went to Babcock at Colchester where they were doing a lot of work on the 432 fleet, I believe it was part of the Bulldog up grade program. Which was I think, the replacement of engine, gearbox, steering and braking systems.
They were test driving a batch around the place, it was quite astonishing how quiet the old girls were, with the new pack all I could hear really were the tracks. Seemed strange not to hear that distinctive howl, coming out as they accelerated.
My goodness . . . HOW - JOLLY WELL - DARE YOU ?! ;) .

There is one particular contributor to this thread, that will be along - eventually - to explain to us all, and using, quoting logarithmic tables, astrology, precision measuring instruments and audio recording/measuring devices, that you mis-heard and are - in fact - WRONG !!
 
That would be nice but we do not have anywhere near the resources to create that. The whole Bde Combat team concept is simply a fantasy caused by combining far to much Absinthe and Skunk.

What we actually have is some CR2 with limited survivability on the battlefield, Some EOL Warriors the same, Some Boxers on order which may turn up one day but there is no Doctrine in place for their use and a pitiful amount of under gunned 105mm Artillery pieces . And Ajax, not here, not working and no defined role that even brushes up against reality.

So build the dream Division from that :)
Forget current platforms and organisations if you want effectiveness at some point in the future, preferably sooner rather than too late.
As I understand it the army's commitment to NATO is a single armoured brigade somewhere in Europe?
We have the people and equipment to do that right now, but because it would result in mass redundancies in the officer posts, it doesn't happen.
Let's instead imagine our fantasy armoured brigade:
3, preferably 4, tank battalions, each with an organic infantry company, an organic artillery battery, a field workshop, a supply platoon, medical platoon, MPs and whatever else.
Collect the equipment and crews in one place, then weed out what's unnecessary.
Forget cap badges and arms of service, from now on this entire brigade sized formation will be known as, say, 1st Dragoons. A single chain of command, a single badge, a single HQ for both command and administration.
That saves, or gets rid of, a handful of battalion hqs, a similar handful of disparate qm departments, and the supposed flexibility of organisation to task is down to the brigadier in charge.
If you really, really must keep light infantry, put them somewhere else to do the follow up stuff like holding PoWs or aiding civpop.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top