All Roles Now Open To Females

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you look at the number of contact battles that your "four years of World War experience" OC actually fought, once you allow for modern medicine and the resulting increase in survival rates of wounded, did they do that much worse than would a modern, thirty-something, decade of time served, officers when faced with a peer enemy?

Taking infantry battalions as an example, the Royal Scots suffered an 11% casualty rate across the whole of WW1 (they started the war with 2,000 regulars and 5,000 reservists. Roughly 100,000 served in the Regiment during the war, 40,000 became casualties, 11,000 died).

If you look at the the Royal Scots during WW2, the 8th Bn spent 10 months fighting in North-West Europe (June 1944 to April 1945), and lost 237 dead and 1019 wounded. 7th/9th Bn fought from the Scheldt onwards (October 1944 to April 1945), and lost 60 dead / 260 wounded. The reformed 1st Bn fought at Arakan, Kohima, and through Mandalay (1943 to 1945) - 146 killed, 476 wounded. Remember that an infantry battalion was about 1,000 strong in those days.

I'm not sure how or whether that can be compared with battalions on HERRICK or TELIC.

Of course, we'd like to think that the current officer career structure results in a far greater proportion of more competent and professional OCs - but are we sure of it? I suspect that the answer is that these days, we see fewer, utter, choppers in a position where they can really f**k up and get people killed - or perhaps the wartime battalions made up for that by being more willing to sack people before they got to that stage. I genuinely don't know.
Other regiments were wiped out, it doesn't of course mean there was bad leadership it could be other factors but it probably played a part.
Of course there are still utter buffoons serving now, but what could make or break a battle might be experiance.
 
I just heard this snippet of fresh info from a female senior NCO from one of the IDF mixed battalions:
The issue of the difference in levels of self-motivation between the girls and the boys in these units has been known about for a long time. About two months ago, in an effort to solve the problem, IDF started conducting separate infantry training for the boys and the girls of the mixed battalions, the idea being to train them separately and then put them back together for operational duties/deployment.
Some very interesting points from the IDF experience.

I'm sure you're far more up to date on things there than I am, but not too long ago the mixed bns were way off being able to get enough men to fill the male posts in the bns as the men were able to refuse to serve in them on religious grounds.

As they're mainly conscripts you'd have thought that being required to carry less weight for shorter distances in a considerably less hostile environment would have had considerable appeal - as would being outnumbered by young, fit women rather than hairy-arrsed men.
The reverse, though, was very much the case.

During a period of poor recruiting, particularly for the infantry, you would have thought that would have been a point worth noting.

But no ..... in terms of "chopperdom" it doesn't get much worse than that.
 
to which you reply this, as though it is wrong.
No, it's not "wrong" at all and that's not what I suggested. It's simply (and very clearly) not saying what you claimed - that the Adjt is responsible for managing officers careers.
Will you clarify what an RCMO does, that an adjt does not which allows an. RCMO to be titled a career manager but not an Adjt say they were involved in managing careers?
Yes. The RCMO manages ORs' careers when at RD, in conjunction with the CO, 2ic and OCs.

The Adjt doesn't perform the same function for offrs, not least because offrs follow a very different career path which is usually primarily away from RD.

Like arms plotting and short-term re-roling, Thor and PES, etc, etc, there are superficial similarities which an out and out chopper with minimal understanding of his job and the military may confuse with them being the same, but the reality is that they're fundamentally very different.
still doing the sums?
No. Never started.
 
Secondly, apart from very limited internal posts, usually temporary such as trg / cadre officers, all other posts are controlled by RHQs and Glasgow based on input from the offrs' 1st and 2nd ROs - even if, unusually, they're moved from one bn PID to another within the bn.
is the above not also true for ORs? Or does an RCMO make decisions and post people unilaterally?
No, it's not "wrong" at all and that's not what I suggested. It's simply (and very clearly) not saying what you claimed - that the Adjt is responsible for managing officers careers.
Yes. The RCMO manages ORs' careers when at RD, in conjunction with the CO, 2ic and OCs.

The Adjt doesn't perform the same function for offrs, not least because offrs follow a very different career path which is usually primarily away from RD.
And an Adjt doesn’t do the same for subbies? Or does he just "deal" with them, which is correct terminology whilst manage is totally wrong

I never said the Adjt did all the career management, or for all officers.


  1. Adjts have no offr career management input.

Fd Army - Adjutant – PSO responsible to CO for all MS within unit. Sldr MS delivered by RCMO through Adjt, Offr MS retained by Adjt
 
Last edited:

Kefi

Old-Salt
I just heard this snippet of fresh info from a female senior NCO from one of the IDF mixed battalions:
The issue of the difference in levels of self-motivation between the girls and the boys in these units has been known about for a long time. About two months ago, in an effort to solve the problem, IDF started conducting separate infantry training for the boys and the girls of the mixed battalions, the idea being to train them separately and then put them back together for operational duties/deployment.
So which sex are we to suppose are the ones with the self-motivation issues, you did not say ?
And when they are brought back together how will the poorly motivated ones going to know if they are any better having not expereanced anything other than their own gender in training ?
 
the only posts for an Inf Major in their mid-30's and above in an inf bn are Bn 2ic and CO.
First look quota from the ACR:

YoS 11 (FOS: YoS 8 ) – up to 35% of field.

What age would that make someone promoting to major? When would they then go on to do SUC.
 
So which sex are we to suppose are the ones with the self-motivation issues, you did not say ?
And when they are brought back together how will the poorly motivated ones going to know if they are any better having not expereanced anything other than their own gender in training ?
Note the quoted post I was "replying" to there, which was one of my earlier posts on the subject. The answer to your query is the part in bold.
Regarding what is going to happen, your guess is as good as mine. Who is better isn't important compared to the need for familiarity with the other guys in your fire team and all being on the same page with procedures and working as a team.
The important question is how will the organic unit operate as one when its two halves have trained separately? It does not sound ideal, to say the least.
 
The important question is how will the organic unit operate as one when its two halves have trained separately? It does not sound ideal, to say the least
Are you talking about all training, including PDT, or just basic / recruit training (CIC equivalent)?

If just CIC equivalent then the British Army's been doing that for years with Juniors and Adults - two totally different training programmes and syllabii where the trained recruits only come together once in their bns / field army. Three if you go back to Junior Soldiers and Junior Leaders.

That's never presented any problems at all, or any suggestion that one group are "second class".

If, though, they only come together on deployment, not even for PDT, that's a very different matter and a recipe for disaster. I have to say I'd be very surprised if the IDF's doing that.
 
is the above not also true for ORs?
No.
Or does an RCMO make decisions and post people unilaterally?
What part of "the RCMO manages ORs' careers when at RD, in conjunction with the CO, 2ic and OCs" do you not understand?
And an Adjt doesn’t do the same for subbies?
No.
Or does he just "deal" with them, which is correct terminology whilst manage is totally wrong
Yes.
I never said the Adjt did all the career management, or for all officers.
You wrote: "I have explicitly stated a contemporary normal infantry career path and when an infantry Adjt managed the careers of those who have followed it" (post #3,220).

It's like trying to explain the basics of how the military works to a precocious child who's read some copies of Soldier magazine and for whom English is a second language. In terms of serving officer chopperdom, you're scaling new heights.
 
No.
What part of "the RCMO manages ORs' careers when at RD, in conjunction with the CO, 2ic and OCs" do you not understand?
No.Yes.
You wrote: "I have explicitly stated a contemporary normal infantry career path and when an infantry Adjt managed the careers of those who have followed it" (post #3,220).

It's like trying to explain the basics of how the military works to a precocious child who's read some copies of Soldier magazine and for whom English is a second language. In terms of serving officer chopperdom, you're scaling new heights.
well then, perhaps explain, without hiding behind just saying “manage”, what an RCMO does to career manage but and Adjt does not. Maybe give some examples.
 
Last edited:

Boris_Johnson

ADC
Moderator
DirtyBAT
I think this thread has run its course.

The subject matter is now 14 months old so no longer "news" and the thread itself only appears to serve as a platform for John G to write very long posts and other members to post his personal details despite it being a clear breach of forum rules (even in the NAAFI it is unacceptable).

One could say the thread was killed a long time ago, but sadly it's all too common these days.

I was going to delete the whole thread but there are some very good posts in the early pages especially.

I may prune it all at some point in the future if I have a decade or two to spare. But for now it can stay locked to spare any further blushes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top