Army 2020 Refine

I won’t pretend to be an expert but from my research.....

DERR lamented that their lack of a readily identifiable County connection was a major factor on their recruiting (the “Duke of Edinburgh’s” part supposedly had some young people thinking they were a Scottish Regt !)......this directly influenced the choice of “The Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire, and Wiltshire Regiment” title on amalgamation.

Also even though there was an North Sea oil boom in the late 80’s, The Scottish Division was the best recruited in the Infantry. The Gordon’s Aberdeen based TA Coy. had to suspend recruiting, as IIRC, they were overmanned at 150 AND they had plenty more who wanted to sign up.

The Highlanders, before Jackson, was actively talking about changing their title to something along the lines of “The Seaforth, Gordon, and Cameron Highlanders” to emphasize their origins as it was felt people weren’t signing up to a generic Regt (IIRC I had read that they surveyed young people who wanted to join their dad’s/uncle’s/grandad’s Regt. Or the one that was on the local memorial which they thought was no longer in existence. They had no idea what “amalgamation” was)

Again these are just a few examples I have come across.
 
Last edited:
The Regimental system seems to come across as a fairly large part of that ‘Moral Component’ piece of fighting power, one I think we’d be loathe to use (a bit like how the US Army has a fair bit of writing about trying desperately to bring back its Officers Clubs and SNCO Clubs)

But at the same time there’s an argument that maybe we should move to all Infantry being Light Role at the core, but then be Armoured, Mech or Mobility (Warrior/Mastiff/Jackal) as a specialism. The issue as ever is cost of that much equipment etc..
 
Dear G

Very intense reply, you are obviously passionate about your views. I dont know where to start with that brain download you gave but here goes I will keep it short, please dont think I am putting you down but after serving this country since 89 in the Infantry I am also slightly passionate in my view.

Britains Infantry has evolved since Charles II started the standing Army we currantly have, we have seen the country through the great War and the second World War which is why we dont speak German and iradicate minorities, every task given since 1945 Malaya Korea Kennya Cyprus Suez Brunei Dehofar Aden NI Falklands Bosnia Kosovo Gulf War Iraq Afghanistan and many more has been dealt with by this counties Infantry no disraspect to the remainder of the Army.

A lot of Blood has been given and maybe you do not see it or understand it but there is a reason that a Yorks Rifles Para Mercian Fusilier will all stand sholder to shoulder in war and hate each other in peace, being diffrent is Ok.

I am a Tiger, and when my regiment was formed in 92 although my liniage goes back to 1661 we were called the Pride of the South, and I have served with commonwealth soldiers infact I owe my life to some and they owe their life to me. I can confirm if your from Fiji your as much a Tiger as a man from Kent, I do not see colour I see blue yellow blue.

like I said its just a view not a personnal attack, but you in my view are wrong G. We are worth our salt every one from the Guards to the Rifles with every Regimental system inbatween, it may well be that we will all join the US system and in the view of men who belive they are doing what is right strippping and re assembaling a better infantry. I for one belive that to be a complete mistake and wish it never to happen.

P.S. sorry for the spelling mistake.
 
Last edited:
DERR lamented that their lack of a readily identifiable County connection was a major factor on their recruiting (the “Duke of Edinburgh’s” part supposedly had some young people thinking they were a Scottish Regt !).......
Everybody had / has a different excuse. All, though, ignored that the vast majority of their recruits didn't join because of family or county connections but because that was all they were offered. Some, though, were certainly dumb enough to think as you say - we ended up in my pl in the Queen's with one soldier from Glasgow because he'd only been able to fit "Queen's" instead of "Queen's Own Highlanders" into the box on his application and his recruiting officer (with good reason) didn't want to inflict "Gungy" on the Scots Div (they got him back in the end!).

If Regts are really that bad at PR they can't get their message across that they were the County regt then they only have themselves to blame.
DERR lamented that their lack of a readily identifiable County connection was a major factor on their recruiting (the “Duke of Edinburgh’s” part supposedly had some young people thinking they were a Scottish Regt !)......this directly influenced the choice of “The Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire, and Wiltshire Regiment” title on amalgamation.
Not quite true. The DERR's actual title, officially, was "the Duke of Edinburgh's Royal Regiment (Berkshire and Wiltshire)" which is pretty readily identifiable (unlike, say, "The Queen's Regiment" or "the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers" which have no such county titles) and they were re-named RGBW on amalgamation with the Gloucesters as there was little else they could have been named. The County titles were simply continued for all three counties.
Also even though there was an North Sea oil boom in the late 80’s, The Scottish Division was the best recruited in the Infantry. The Gordon’s Aberdeen based TA Coy. had to suspend recruiting, as IIRC, they were overmanned at 150 AND they had plenty more who wanted to sign up.

The Highlanders, before Jackson, was actively talking about changing their title to something along the lines of “The Seaforth, Gordon, and Cameron Highlanders” to emphasize their origins as it was felt people weren’t signing up to a generic Regt (IIRC I had read that they surveyed young people who wanted to join their dad’s/uncle’s/grandad’s Regt. Or the one that was on the local memorial which they thought was no longer in existence. They had no idea what “amalgamation” was).
I'd be VERY interested to see some of your "research", particularly on the Scots Div's supposed excellent recruiting record which, for regular units (I don't know about TA recruiting as it's a very different demographic) was as appalling in the 80's and 90's as it is now and far from being "in the late 80’s, The Scottish Division was the best recruited in the Infantry" the regular side were among the worst.

These were myths put around by the "Save Our Scottish Regiments" campaign (run by someone who had never actually been in the Army!) and totally untrue in the 80's and 90's just as they were a decade later when they were the main recipients of the Commonwealth recruits as all Scottish Regts had to be capped at 15%.

You made the claim, so maybe you could support it ... maybe not.
 
Very intense reply, you are obviously passionate about your views. I dont know where to start with that brain download you gave but here goes I will keep it short, please dont think I am putting you down but after serving this country since 89 in the Infantry I am also slightly passionate in my view.

Britains Infantry has evolved since Charles II started the standing Army we currantly have, we have seen the country though the great War and the second World War which is why we dont speak German and iradicate minorities, every task given since 1945 Malaya Korea Kennya Cyprus Suez Brunei Dehofar Aden NI Falklands Bosnia Kosovo Gulf War Iraq Afghanistan and many more has been dealt with by this counties Infantry no disraspect to the remainder of the Army.

A lot of Blood has been given and maybe you do not see it or understand it but there is a reason that a Yorks Rifles Para Mercian Fusilier will all stand sholder to shoulder in war and hate each other in peace, being diffrent is Ok.

I am a Tiger, and when my regiment was formed in 92 although my liniage goes abck to 1661 we were called the Pride of the South, and I have served with commonwealth soldiers infact I owe my life to some and they owe ther life to me. I can confirm if your from Fiji your as much a Tiger as a man from Kent, I do not se colour I see blue yellow blue.

like I said its just a view not a personnal attack, but you in my view are wrong G. We are worth our salt every one from the Guards to the Rifles with every Regimental system inbatween, it may well be that we will all join the US system and in the view of men who belive they are doeing what is right strippping and re assembaling a better infantry. I for one belive that to be a complete mistake and wish it never to happen.
The sort of utter nonsense I'd expect from the old and bold who know far less about their own unit and it's history than they care to admit, preferring a potted version based on myth and mistake, so thank you for destroying your own argument so fully.

I, too, was a PWRR / Tiger although it's a cap badge I never actually wore as I was wearing others at the time. The Queen's, which you evidently know very little about despite it being your parent regiment, don't date from 1661 but directly from 1 May 1572 and the Regt was never called "the Pride of the South" prior to the amalgamation (apart from in the TA). That the amalgamation worked so well and so painlessly, unlike the previous one in 1966 which highlighted everything wrong with amalgamations, is testimony to just how little import is given to parent units and how much to those you serve with - unless that county system is abused and taken advantage of, to the detriment of others.

We could argue indefinitely about this, albeit that my views are based on fact and history not fantasy, but the simple fact remains that the county system is an outdated anachronism that no longer applies across the vast majority of the infantry and if applied it prevents any maximisation of potential, minimises the massive benefits of cross-posting and selection, and minimises any possibility of the Army moving into the 21st century and having a professional infantry that can actually deliver what it's required to do operationally rather than provide a good Mess dinner.
 
Last edited:
John

Ok let me slap my head first because we have butted heads in the past when you are in this mood, but if you look back we have had productive, reasoned discussions too (I guess when you’re on your meds ;)..... joke John, a joke !!!)


Everybody had / has a different excuse. All, though, ignored that the vast majority of their recruits didn't join because of family or county connections but because that was all they were offered. Some, though, were certainly dumb enough to think as you say - we ended up in my pl in the Queen's with one soldier from Glasgow because he'd only been able to fit "Queen's" instead of "Queen's Own Highlanders" into the box on his application and his recruiting officer (with good reason) didn't want to inflict "Gungy" on the Scots Div (they got him back in the end!).

If Regts are really that bad at PR they can't get their message across that they were the County regt then they only have themselves to blame.
Not quite true. The DERR's actual title, officially, was "the Duke of Edinburgh's Royal Regiment (Berkshire and Wiltshire)" which is pretty readily identifiable (unlike, say, "The Queen's Regiment" or "the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers" which have no such county titles) and they were re-named RGBW on amalgamation with the Gloucesters as there was little else they could have been named. The County titles were simply continued for all three counties.
I'd be VERY interested to see some of your "research", particularly on the Scots Div's supposed excellent recruiting record which, for regular units (I don't know about TA recruiting as it's a very different demographic) was as appalling in the 80's and 90's as it is now and far from being "in the late 80’s, The Scottish Division was the best recruited in the Infantry" the regular side were among the worst.

These were myths put around by the "Save Our Scottish Regiments" campaign (run by someone who had never actually been in the Army!) and totally untrue in the 80's and 90's just as they were a decade later when they were the main recipients of the Commonwealth recruits as all Scottish Regts had to be capped at 15%.

You made the claim, so maybe you could support it ... maybe not.
I am aware of the DERR full title, what I stated in my post I read in the following book by David Stone (a former Bn commander:

Cold War Warriors: The Story of The Duke of Edinburgh's Royal Regiment (Berkshire and Wiltshire) 9 June 1959- 27 April 1994.

Here is the Hansard regarding the POW Div trained strengths 1987-1991:
House of Commons Hansard Debates for 15 Jul 1991

As for The Scottish Div, Antony Beevor states that they were the best recruited Div in the Infantry in his book:

Inside The British Army (1990)

I also seem to have somewhere "The Scottish Division Newsletter 1987" (IIRC) that also mentions this. FWIW the Light Div was the worst recruited which was acknowledged in Bramall's authorized biography.

Finally my info for the Gordon's TA is from "Life of a Regiment: The History of The Gordon Highlanders Volume VII 1970-1994"

So John if you want to go on with a reasoned conversation about the Regimental System, good or bad, with the rest of us, I do like to see some of your opinions and insight. However if I need to start going through boxes to direct quote books and/or regimental journals/MOD documents.....well its a Saturday I have two young ones.....I'll get back to you when I have time.
 
The Regimental system seems to come across as a fairly large part of that ‘Moral Component’ piece of fighting power, one I think we’d be loathe to use (a bit like how the US Army has a fair bit of writing about trying desperately to bring back its Officers Clubs and SNCO Clubs).
I'm not against a regimental system - that's @Andre's complete mis-reading of my post. What I'm against is one falsely based on Counties which despite what he's said doesn't date from Charles II (actually he should have said Oliver Cromwell) but from the Cardwell and Childers reforms of 1870 and 1881 - far more recent.

What I'm for is simply binning the County links which were 'of their time' and whose usefulness has now gone and replacing it with a system which is not only far more effective but far OLDER, based on role.

Where do you think the titles 'Grenadiers', 'Fusiliers', 'Light Infantry', 'Paras' (OK, that one's a bit newer but it highlights what should be an ongoing process) come from?

Everyone should be trained as a 'light infantryman' as the basic stock-in-trade, but after that you're posted and progress where you're best suited. Maximise potential and expertise, minimise wastage on training, postings, moves and upheaval for families, etc. The only people who lose are the old and bold, and if they were old enough and bold enough they'd realise that the old system worked and worked well and the county system was only a temporary arrangement for its time, which has now passed.
 
G

So you are a Soldier of the Queen.

Well for that I do give you the respect you deserve as a fellow Queensman. I am no doubt a NIG to you? but I too was a soldier of the Queen, and am proud of that fact, I went straight to NI as a Qnsm and my education was blunt, by the sweats.

I did however stand day one week one as a Tiger and in time tour after tour I finnaly went to Iraq 2004 where I fought side by side with my fellow soldier. Did I belive that the man next to was worth giving my life for because I was a Tiger or from London and the home counties? NO I did it because we were there, and that was my job and his job.

You have not seen it but there are some very special people in the PWRR, younger beter then me. You can call it bullshit and piss on the regiment but I would and will die for it and I know that is not shit.

I do not want to lock horns with a man that has strong belifes and a fellow soldier, but I stand by it the infantry is stronger not fucked with, we are what we have become I currantly work with the Rifles and am humbled by there casualty loss in recent tours and the men I work with belive in the Rifleman.

Andre
 
Here is the Hansard regarding the POW Div trained strengths 1987-1991:
House of Commons Hansard Debates for 15 Jul 1991
I'm not disputing that, so not sure what the point was.
... my info for the Gordon's TA is from "Life of a Regiment: The History of The Gordon Highlanders Volume VII 1970-1994"
TA. Totally different demographic to regular infantry, so irrelevant.
As for The Scottish Div, Antony Beevor states that they were the best recruited Div in the Infantry in his book:

Inside The British Army (1990)
As a Div, including TA, they were - but not as regulars. That was also 14 years before the Jackson amalgamations you referred to.

So John if you want to go on with a reasoned conversation about the Regimental System, good or bad, with the rest of us, I do like to see some of your opinions and insight. However if I need to start going through boxes to direct quote books and/or regimental journals/MOD documents.....well its a Saturday I have two young ones.....I'll get back to you when I have time.
No "need" to, but if you're going to start making claims of fact which are incorrect it'd be nice if you could back them up.

... FWIW the Light Div was the worst recruited which was acknowledged in Bramall's authorized biography.
Indeed it was, being very much county based at the time. I can't help remarking that (reserves aside) the Rifles (Lt Div as were) have less visible county affiliations and links now than anyone else in the infantry but they now have the highest profile and best recruiting stats. I'm not suggesting that one follows the other, but I'm sure that if the reverse was the case some certainly would, and it does rather put the lie to this claim of how important county links are*.


*: again, except for the AR (TA as was), where Rifles still have a problem. Again, it's a totally different demographic for the infantry for reserves and regular, which it isn't for other units, so the two must be looked at separately if they're to mean anything.
 
You have not seen it but there are some very special people in the PWRR, younger beter then me. You can call it bullshit and piss on the regiment but I would and will die for it and I know that is not shit.
I'm not "pissing" on the regiment - this is totally absurd. What I'm saying is that the County affiliations are now meaningless, which is a totally different matter.
I did however stand day one week one as a Tiger
Exactly my point, which negates absolutely everything you've said about County links and cap badges being so important - you can't have it both ways, however much you may like to.

the infantry is stronger not fucked with, we are what we have become
Sorry to disillusion you, but the infantry of the 80's which you joined (and I served in) was largely crap - not all, by any means, but far too many were and things haven't got any better. We're still recruiting exactly the same people in a desperate bid to play the numbers game, and the only difference is that now they're being passed out of depots and on to units to try to do something with. Nothing's changed and now it's crunch time. Simply saying "we have seen the country though the great War and the second World War which is why we dont speak German and iradicate minorities, every task given since 1945 Malaya Korea Kennya Cyprus Suez Brunei Dehofar Aden NI Falklands Bosnia Kosovo Gulf War Iraq Afghanistan and many more has been dealt with by this counties Infantry" and so we deserve a big pat on the back and to be left alone as we're doing a great job doesn't cut it.
 
YES big pat on the back and be left alone "if it aint broken dont fix it" why does it not cut it G? I do not get your point about county Regiments, why not be a part of a system that on the 16 of May every single year has the silant toast and remembers Albuhera and the pure off the scale courage shown by the Middlesex and Buffs? why not give meaning to being a TIger or a YORKS MERCIAN GUARDS etc etc? why not belive in where you come from, and when you look at the PWRR coulours and see the 550 battle honours see that the man from where you are from fought in this countries wars why not take the Sergeant Bernard McCabe example of selfles comitment?
sobraon.jpg
 
Last edited:
YES big pat on the back and be left alone "if it aint broken dont fix it" why does it not cut it G?
Because it's broken.

20% not fully deployable doesn't cut it.

Nor does passing out inf recruits who can't pass their MATTs.

Nor does allowing inf soldiers to continue to serve who can't pass MATTs in their units.

Nor does being 20 to 30% undermanned.

Nor does a retention rate that's steadily going off the scale.

Nor does morale that's lower than it's ever been since measurement started.

Nor does pretending that a tenth of every current inf bn could be tier 2 SF.

Nor does pretending that if you decimated all your inf bns and took the top 10% you'd have anything left worth having.

Nor does being short of officers when you've got soldiers who'd make far better officers than half the pl comds I had.

The list goes on, but it's got little to do with A2020.
I do not get your point about county Regiments, why not be a part of a system that on the 16 of May every single year has the silant toast and remembers Albuhera and the pure off the scale courage shown by the Middlesex and Buffs?
Because a Silent Toast doesn't solve or excuse any of the above or make the soldiers any better or recruiting or retention any higher or the infantry any better organised.

The band on the Titanic may have been inspirational, but they didn't stop it sinking.
 
Last edited:
G

As much as it hurt my romantic beliefs YES you are right. Its become a poor show, I see the soldier of yesterday believing the soldier today is the same, they are not, some not all are poor. That said the Infantry is not a broken machine, there is still the ability and passion to restore what was a fine Infantry that the World wished to emulate.

I can say that and knowing it to be true that the Tigers are still an impressive capable and fit for purpose Regiment and that is gen.

I think this is a tipping point and we need to be HONEST and be what this country pays us for. I know you do not believe in the county Regimetnal system but I believe it is still worth its salt and when I work with a MERCIAN they are all from that whippet loving part of England, and all look at me as a Londoner. In the PWRR we did have a Taff, no Irish, no Scots but two northerners all I have to say bloody good soldiers however the rest were all southern, as were our forefathers QUEENS R HAMPS.

I get it you believe in a 110% capable Infantry that is the honest work horse and needs to be a functioning piece of kit, and understand that county ties do not work in this modern world.

Respectfully disagree.
 
Last edited:
... YES you are right. Its become a poor show, I see the soldier of yesterday believing the soldier today is the same, they are not, some not all are poor. That said the Infantry is not a broken machine, there is still the ability and passion to restore what was a fine Infantry that the World wished to emulate.
Sorry, but that doesn't cut it either - You're far more insulting of today's infantry and soldiers than I am.

They ARE the same today. Yesterday's soldiers (you and I) weren't "fine" - we (generally) were just as bad, we just weren't as tested or quite as far down the spiral.
In the PWRR we did have a Taff, no Irish, no Scots but two northerners all I have to say bloody good soldiers however the rest were all southern, as were our forefathers QUEENS R HAMPS .
Wrong.

Maybe in your pl / experience but more than one of those I was privileged to know was Irish and that included one who should have been commissioned early, was a CSgt at RMAS and went on to be RSM in PWRR and commissioned, serving in both bns; several were scousers, others from Fiji, St Kitts, Greek and Turkish Cypriots, etc, etc. N, S, E or W, it didn't matter.
 
I get it you believe in a 110% capable Infantry that is the honest work horse and needs to be a functioning piece of kit, and understand that county ties do not work in this modern world.

Respectfully disagree.
Do you think the geographical ties mean more than the Regimental identity?
 
Ok John,
As you can see I am not looking for a headbutting session with you as I even "liked" one of your posts. However when I post something I usually add caveats such as "from what I researched" or from "what I read" .........I was never in the British Army so I cannot say from experience.

LD17 said:
Here is the Hansard regarding the POW Div trained strengths 1987-1991:
House of Commons Hansard Debates for 15 Jul 1991
John G said:
I'm not disputing that, so not sure what the point was.

The point was that I did not make stuff up out of thin air or overly rely upon one source (the DERR book).

LD17 said:
As for The Scottish Div, Antony Beevor states that they were the best recruited Div in the Infantry in his book:
Inside The British Army (1990)
John G said:
As a Div, including TA, they were - but not as regulars. That was also 14 years before the Jackson amalgamations you referred to.

So now getting back to our friend Hansard....... 14 June 1991
House of Commons Hansard Debates for 14 Jun 1991

As we can see Chart One, the average rate of recruitment and outflow for the HC/RAC and Divs of Inf over the last 10 years, so beginning in 1981.......

Chart two, latest available figures, as at 31 March 1991, for the strength of the regular Army by rank in each of the divisions

Now I did some math and subtracted all the General Officers, Colonels and Lt Cols form each Div (and yes I know about ERE)

Guards - 5,993 Officers & Other Ranks which at 8 Bns comes out to an average of 749 per Bn OR with we use other ranks only that's an average of 696 per Bn

Scottish - 5,377 Offs & ORs which at 7 Bns comes out to an average of 768 per Bn OR 706 ORs per Bn

Queen's - 6,081 Off & ORs which at 9 Bns comes out to an average of 675 per Bn OR 617 ORs per Bn

King's - 6,075 Off & ORs which at 8 Bns comes out to an average of 759 per Bn OR 692 ORs per Bn

POW's - 6,614 Off & ORs which at 9 Bns comes out to an average of 734 per Bn OR 669 ORs per Bn

Light - 4,257 Off & ORs which at 6 Bns comes out to an average of 709 per Bn OR 652 ORs per Bn

John G said:
No "need" to, but if you're going to start making claims of fact which are incorrect it'd be nice if you could back them up.

So even though I didn"t caveat anything with the words "fact", "certitude", or "gospel truth".....
my research on the subject of recruitment/manning in the 1980's/early 90's were based on the books I mentioned in the previous posts and these Hansard archives that I had saved during my research.

So now back to Army 2020 Refine !
 
Sorry, but that doesn't cut it either - You're far more insulting of today's infantry and soldiers than I am.

They ARE the same today. Yesterday's soldiers (you and I) weren't "fine" - we (generally) were just as bad, we just weren't as tested or quite as far down the spiral.
Wrong.

Maybe in your pl / experience but more than one of those I was privileged to know was Irish and that included one who should have been commissioned early, was a CSgt at RMAS and went on to be RSM in PWRR and commissioned, serving in both bns; several were scousers, others from Fiji, St Kitts, Greek and Turkish Cypriots, etc, etc. N, S, E or W, it didn't matter.
G your just being a bell end for the sake of it.
 
Ok John,
As you can see I am not looking for a headbutting session with you as I even "liked" one of your posts. However when I post something I usually add caveats such as "from what I researched" or from "what I read" .........I was never in the British Army so I cannot say from experience.

LD17 said:
Here is the Hansard regarding the POW Div trained strengths 1987-1991:
House of Commons Hansard Debates for 15 Jul 1991
John G said:
I'm not disputing that, so not sure what the point was.

The point was that I did not make stuff up out of thin air or overly rely upon one source (the DERR book).

LD17 said:
As for The Scottish Div, Antony Beevor states that they were the best recruited Div in the Infantry in his book:
Inside The British Army (1990)
John G said:
As a Div, including TA, they were - but not as regulars. That was also 14 years before the Jackson amalgamations you referred to.

So now getting back to our friend Hansard....... 14 June 1991
House of Commons Hansard Debates for 14 Jun 1991

As we can see Chart One, the average rate of recruitment and outflow for the HC/RAC and Divs of Inf over the last 10 years, so beginning in 1981.......

Chart two, latest available figures, as at 31 March 1991, for the strength of the regular Army by rank in each of the divisions

Now I did some math and subtracted all the General Officers, Colonels and Lt Cols form each Div (and yes I know about ERE)

Guards - 5,993 Officers & Other Ranks which at 8 Bns comes out to an average of 749 per Bn OR with we use other ranks only that's an average of 696 per Bn

Scottish - 5,377 Offs & ORs which at 7 Bns comes out to an average of 768 per Bn OR 706 ORs per Bn

Queen's - 6,081 Off & ORs which at 9 Bns comes out to an average of 675 per Bn OR 617 ORs per Bn

King's - 6,075 Off & ORs which at 8 Bns comes out to an average of 759 per Bn OR 692 ORs per Bn

POW's - 6,614 Off & ORs which at 9 Bns comes out to an average of 734 per Bn OR 669 ORs per Bn

Light - 4,257 Off & ORs which at 6 Bns comes out to an average of 709 per Bn OR 652 ORs per Bn

John G said:
No "need" to, but if you're going to start making claims of fact which are incorrect it'd be nice if you could back them up.

So even though I didn"t caveat anything with the words "fact", "certitude", or "gospel truth".....
my research on the subject of recruitment/manning in the 1980's/early 90's were based on the books I mentioned in the previous posts and these Hansard archives that I had saved during my research.

So now back to Army 2020 Refine !
@LD17, were you by any chance involved in the appallingly flawed "Save our Scottish Regiments" campaigns of the 80's and 90's which used exactly the same irrelevant statistics to support their campaign which, while it failed to achieve its aim (which was impossible under the circumstances as they didn't understand what they were talking about, and the regiments were so badly recruited they were beyond saving as separate entities) effectively so screwed Mike Jackson's plans to drag the Army out of the 19th and into the 21st century that they turned what had been a mess into a total shambles?

The campaign that put those in the Scottish Division at such a massive disadvantage when competing against those in larger more effective regiments such as the Rifles, so that far from being on a level playing field for promotion and career posts their senior ranks and, more particularly, their officers were totally screwed when it came to careers and promotions to VSOs?

I appreciate that you (and they) did a great deal of research, but it was all flawed as you (and they) didn't understand what you (and they) were talking about.

Your books are at best skewed by and at worst based on TA stats which have no bearing on Regular Army recruitment demographics and manning. In simple terms, the reason reservists joined the TA had no connection with why regulars joined the Regular Army. Different age, career, motivation, interests, etc.

Your Hansard references are based on unit strengths, and have nothing to do with whether they were under (or over) strength but are equally reflections of their different ORBATS. As you can see from the "liabilities" for A2020, inf bns vary in planned strength from over 730 down to under 270, but they're still inf bns. Similarly back in the 80's and 90's. A bn then with an actual strength of, say, 660 could be over strength (for a '650' bn) or it could be over 10% under strength (for a '720' bn). Without knowing what the planned strength was you simply have no way of knowing and your stats are completely meaningless apart from to muddy the waters - which the "Save Our Scottish Regiments" campaigns did, totally screwing the regiments they were trying to save in the process.

To use a simple analagy, it's like comparing the engines in a McLaren and in a DAF truck by only looking at their cc and their torque figures without looking at what they were supposed to do and their different roles.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top