Army ‘to be cut by 20,000’ if No 10 plan is approved

B42T

LE
Quite how that complete joke of a military organisation the RAF Regiment has managed to survive so long is beyond belief.
You do have a bit of form for slagging the RAF Regiment off, did one of them shag your missus while you were on a 2 week course on how to change a Land Rover wheel? :grin:
 
for a while now I've thought that the whole of the UK deployable force structure needs to be modelled on the USMC which if memory serves has around the same budget yet manages a lot more bang for its buck. we just seem to throw money away continuously.

a strong navy that is fully deployable and fitted with not for.

the RAF should be reduced to an airline/air national guard and be told no more often.

the useless infrastructure and top heavy brass contingents need to either be slashed or make the civvies at abbey wood deployable. why do we have a lt General for green issues FFS? a corporal can do that job.

IMO we also need to do something about the voluntary reserves by training them properly, giving the right cash incentives and legal protections while having enough of them to actually be usefull
Re. the bit in bold. While not being an RAF fanboy the fact remains that we have minimal air-defence apart from RAF aircraft. No air supremacy, or at least equality, means we would all die even more quickly. Not to mention that we don't have sufficient artillery either, so the RAF fulfil that role too.

Also, isn't the USMC soon to be turned in to marine-infantry and not much else by the Pentagon bods ?
 
If they are talking about cutting PIDs - fine - that won't hurt, especially if it is the unmanned AR liability. Cutting Regular actual held trained strength would be a disaster.

Will be important to see which one it is. The Army wouldn't actually push back about having its liability (especially AR) cut. Also, the mythical 82,000 is a bit of a millstone.
 

surfincivi

Clanker
I am not sure that you should release such sensitive material in a public forum.

The reduced fleet (both size and manning) has already been in near-sea trials. The manning position per ship has met the target, but the seagoing nature of the vessels has some further engineering issues to resolve. The armament and victualling costs are deemed acceptable.

I have a secret video of the trials and as long as this goes no further than just the two of us you can see it here:
Peashome Park?
 
for a while now I've thought that the whole of the UK deployable force structure needs to be modelled on the USMC which if memory serves has around the same budget yet manages a lot more bang for its buck. we just seem to throw money away continuously.

a strong navy that is fully deployable and fitted with not for.

the RAF should be reduced to an airline/air national guard and be told no more often.

the useless infrastructure and top heavy brass contingents need to either be slashed or make the civvies at abbey wood deployable. why do we have a lt General for green issues FFS? a corporal can do that job.

IMO we also need to do something about the voluntary reserves by training them properly, giving the right cash incentives and legal protections while having enough of them to actually be usefull
The inane rantings of the 22yr LCpl.....
 

In_Twists

Clanker
If we really do go the way of 'home-defence plus troops for NATO' then we would best be served with serious planning about it, not just random reductions of the easiest bits. Last year sometime I did suggest keeping Para and RM (two battalions equivalent each) and their support. Everything else army-related should be volunteer-reservists with a structure to mobilise them rapidly, possibly comprising ready-reserve (eg. twelve weeks) and twelve months NTM units. To make that work would take planning and training over more than one government lifetime, and including a big boost in some sort of nationalism at schools in order to ensure enough serious volunteers. So it will never happen.
Probably right. It won't happen because theres no appetite for war anymore. Nationalism in schools now would be shot down in flames by the Woke Brigade with howls of "racism".
WW2 vets are all but gone. Falklands vets slowly realise noone cares. Iraq & Afghan vets know full well noone cares. Govt will never support Armed Forces the way USA does. No appetite.
 
Turned out to be a guarantee of performance in every past conflict though.
I concede the point. As a former cavalryman (QOH), I love a regimental holiday as much as the next trooper (although both of my examples did not involve cavalry glory) I went through amalgamation as the army had made many experienced people redundant through ‘Options for Change’.
All just clutching at straws at the clubs of London.
The fighting teeth of the army should have been scooped up, not making more roles for Commanding Officers, Regimental Colonels, etc
 
for a while now I've thought that the whole of the UK deployable force structure needs to be modelled on the USMC which if memory serves has around the same budget yet manages a lot more bang for its buck. we just seem to throw money away continuously.

a strong navy that is fully deployable and fitted with not for.

the RAF should be reduced to an airline/air national guard and be told no more often.

the useless infrastructure and top heavy brass contingents need to either be slashed or make the civvies at abbey wood deployable. why do we have a lt General for green issues FFS? a corporal can do that job.

IMO we also need to do something about the voluntary reserves by training them properly, giving the right cash incentives and legal protections while having enough of them to actually be usefull
1. The USMC sit within a much larger DoD. Our similarly sized MOD has to handle the whole shebang from the top to the bottom.

2. Agree - get rid of the missile magnet carriers and re-focus on an actually deployable and useful Navy that can defend the UK's waters.

3. The RAF should be disbanded, with Ground attack and support going to the AAC and everything else going to the Navy. That way, Air procurement and operations will be done in a customer centric way, rather than as a vehicle to make sure pilots still have careers.

4. Shite argument. Senior Officers in Capability and Acquisition roles have decades of experience. A Cpl would dknow how to do a Sect attack or run a Det. Guess which one would make a better Chief of Defence Materiel...
 
1. The USMC sit within a much larger DoD. Our similarly sized MOD has to handle the whole shebang from the top to the bottom.

2. Agree - get rid of the missile magnet carriers and re-focus on an actually deployable and useful Navy that can defend the UK's waters.

3. The RAF should be disbanded, with Ground attack and support going to the AAC and everything else going to the Navy. That way, Air procurement and operations will be done in a customer centric way, rather than as a vehicle to make sure pilots still have careers.

4. Shite argument. Senior Officers in Capability and Acquisition roles have decades of experience. A Cpl would dknow how to do a Sect attack or run a Det. Guess which one would make a better Chief of Defence Materiel...
I genuinely don’t know whether to laugh out loud or despair that the like of these walk amongst us.
 
I'm pretty sure that we had about 55,000 troops in BAOR during the '80s. It seems crazy to think that they're planning on cutting the entire army to the size of what we used to have in Germany.
 

Brotherton Lad

LE
Kit Reviewer
I'm pretty sure that we had about 55,000 troops in BAOR during the '80s. It seems crazy to think that they're planning on cutting the entire army to the size of what we used to have in Germany.
Yes, it was 55000 , though a fair slice were actually in N Ireland.
 

Mölders 1

Old-Salt
Re. the bit in bold. While not being an RAF fanboy the fact remains that we have minimal air-defence apart from RAF aircraft. No air supremacy, or at least equality, means we would all die even more quickly. Not to mention that we don't have sufficient artillery either, so the RAF fulfil that role too.

Also, isn't the USMC soon to be turned in to marine-infantry and not much else by the Pentagon bods ?
To be fair l believe that General David Berger the C.O. of the U.S.M.C. has no choice but to restructure the Corps. Although the traditionalists/die hard Marines are giving him a hard time, l believe that the U.S.M.C. can no longer afford to keep all of it's current equipment, capabilities and Manpower levels.
 
One of Cummings jobs is to sort out the civil service. So the armed forces being on his radar isn’t that surprising.
The government probably think that they can get reservists to do the job of regulars if push comes to shove. Saves a fortune, no need for army barracks, Mod land, army housing, pensions etc etc.
I doubt that Johnson or Cummings ever had any interest in the military themselves.
 
Have seen various reports about what may or may not be in the defence review. Cummings doesn't suffer fools gladly and the Service chiefs would do well to remember that they have to justify their existence in terms the the politicians and general public understand. Otherwise, they're toast.
With respect to the bold text, in a sane and organised nation the government (plural, over time) have clear aims and capabilities required of all departments and so the departments (including MoD) should be measured against the requirements and enter discussion regarding budgets and so on. As we have things now, it appears (from outside the halls og government and civi-service anyway) that the Staff have to make a sexy presentation as though they are trying to sell carpet-cleaner, yet with little awareness of whether tha customer has any carpets, or might in the future, or maybe they only want wood floors.
 
Interesting read in the ST today that shows earlier fears about the Cummings influence maybe just true. The CCF sized operation we will now have looks concerning (not sure what rank Johnson held in the CCF).

Defence chiefs have drawn up plans to slash the army by a quarter and reduce the Royal Marines to a bit part as part of Boris Johnson’s defence and security review.​
The drastic cuts, which would also close airfields and take helicopters out of service, were drawn up in response to Treasury demands that Whitehall departments map out cuts of 5% or more as part of the government’s comprehensive spending review.​
In the worst-case scenario:​
• Army manpower would fall from 74,000 to 55,000​
• The Royal Marines commando brigade would be disbanded, losing its artillery, engineers and landing craft. Royal Navy minesweepers would also face the axe​
• The RAF would shut several airbases and shed its fleet of Hercules transport planes and small Puma helicopters.​

I'd like you, please, to re-post this in the Dominic Cummings Appreciation thread, where the boy is adored as though he were the second Cumming of the Messiah.

I'm sure you'd find the responses interesting, if not reassuring :-D
 
Even before 'Options for Change raised its ugly head in 1990, civilianisation of service units was well in place in the 1980's. Airwork Services was "managing" the eng/supply side at some flying training stations such as, IIRC, Linton-on-Ouse and Church Fenton.
Worked For Airworks for a short period at LoU between KSA contacts, not a bad job but left after having holiday booked for three months and supervisor forgot he was no longer a FS. Told me I'd have to cancel (due to his poor admin) and was somewhat taken aback when I gave my notice there and then. "No need to be like that." "Too late."

Biggest thing I noticed when starting at BAE BTW, being managed as an asset.
 
One of Cummings jobs is to sort out the civil service. So the armed forces being on his radar isn’t that surprising.
The government probably think that they can get reservists to do the job of regulars if push comes to shove. Saves a fortune, no need for army barracks, Mod land, army housing, pensions etc etc.
I doubt that Johnson or Cummings ever had any interest in the military themselves.

If the cost-saving Regular-reductions are done properly, there must be sufficient barracks and facilities (and materiel) to train and house the mobilising Army of reserves. Eeeeek, this sounds like WW1 / WW2, but you get the idea. Will there ever be national warfare ever again? Who knows but for a long time (Options for Change?) that hasn't even been an option. . .
 

Latest Threads

Top