Army 2020 Refine

So a unit that is based in 1 barracks with a shared purpose etc etc can’t have espirit de Corps?

My argument is not necessarily change them to 1-32 Inf Bn, it is not allowing a “need” to retain cap badges to reduce combat capability
irlsgt

I belive in what I belive in. I have served in this countries infantry since 20 years old, not a rodney but a soldier. I had no care for the cap badge I wore until years into the job when it meant something to me after fighting shoulder to shoulder with fellow Tigers, so much that as a Sgt sent to the Anglians who told me to wear there cap badge I said "NO" to there Commnding Officer, trust me that was not a good move.

As it goes a bunch of other Tigers from the second Battalion attached to the Anglians also said the same, they got away with it as they were leaving the Army, I was attached and in the end was orderd to do it.

I am not so fuc__ng stupud as to belive that it means I am a better soldier then the man in another Unit, if I did I would be a Para or a Marine. It represents 5 home counties who have stood with the same embelems as me.

You may think that is sh_t, and I am not upset or offended by that and will not be seeing the UWO Monday, but trust me one of the biggest honours I had was turning the Page in Canterbury Cathederal in the Warrior Chappel.

x100 Privete soldeirs per turn of the page in a book one of four that was at least 10 cm thick of paper all names of men that had gone before me including a soldier in my section.

Shit on it all you want, but I am happy to say no I do belive in the system I have served, just not so sure about that the leaders above me belive in it.

Like I said before this 24 hour plus exchange, I do not belive there is a need to rip it all up and throw away the infantry that has stood since 1661 doing everything this country has asked of it including the great and second world War.

Fusilier Guardsman Rifleman Private Kingsman etc all part of the remaining 17 Regimental systems, do not need to be smashed, I would say a re ballance and look at how we can best employ them in an effective Army so that we can serve Britain for another 357 years. Just maybe so that we also think about the needs of the Country Army and the soldier and his family.

Rant over.
 
Last edited:
Taffd

I stand corrected regards your sons view on paras and marines merging, as for made up stories maybe the battal honours sown to the colurs are not real?
There's actually a paper written about the RM ethos floating about the ether. If you can find it, and understand it, it explains what I mean by made-up histories.

My son by the way, once tried to explain to me that Bootnecks were so called because they wrapped the tongues of their boots around their necks in the old days, to stop sailors cutting their throats. Not a bite, there's plenty of Booties who'll believe such things.

Total bollocks of course but it's what he'd been led to believe.
Was he not told the real reason during the Corps History lessons at CTC?
 
Serious question, how has that recruiting area changed in those 29 years. Has it grown, shrunk, shifted or is it exactly as it was?
PWRR is Kent, Surry, Sussex, Middlesex Hampshire no change in almost 26 years. For the other 3 years in QUEENS it was Kent, Surry, Sussex, Middlesex.
Unsurprisingly, @CAARPS, @Andre is incorrect on all counts.

The Queen's Regt recruited from the Home Counties (Kent, Surrey, Sussex and Middlesex) and the Isle of Wight - there are usually half a dozen or so "islanders" in each bn, plus a smattering from the Channel Islands.

On amalgamation with R HAMPS to form PWRR they obviously added Hampshire to the previous five counties. Since the RRF was reduced from two bns to one in 2014 they (the RRF) have tended to recruit less from London and that 'slack; has been taken up by PWRR.
 
Last edited:
Espirit de Corps doesn’t mean regiments are required, just a team!

Exactly nothing to do with cap badges
Esprit de corps is a feeling of loyalty and pride that is shared by the members of a group who consider themselves to be different from other people in some special way. This could be by geographical location or family connection. Some Cap badges have that in buckets whether ones going back to Culloden or the newer ones like the Lancs or Yorks, so a team build round a shared identity certainly adds to the Esprit de corps.
Don't throw out cap badges because you don't like them, the Canadians did that and rather regreted it.
As far as I can see no-one here's in favour of getting rid of all infantry capbadges and just having a large arm/corps of infantry. The point all bar one posting agree on is that the regimental system should be based on role, not their historical recruiting area which is of its time and that time has well and truly past.

Cap badges / colours / mess silver / traditions etc do play an important part in esprit de corps, particularly in peacetime so they should be preserved, it's just how they preserved and at what cost operationally and financially.
There has to be some common bond. I served with the Infantry Demonstration Battalion in the 80s which was totally composite and mission focused and I probably had more fun in it than my own Battalion.
Surely a "shared identity" as a Para / Royal Marine / Light Infantryman* / Fusilier* / Grenadier* / Ranger*, etc, based on what you are professionally has more significance and is far more of a "common bond" than what area you were living in when you applied, as many (all Commonwealth and Irish, so at least 15%, plus many others) don't actually come from or have any direct connection with the regiments they end up in?


*: or whatever the light / mech / armd / SIBn bns would be re-named as.
 
Last edited:
Sorry Taffd I think I may be missing your point? not you me I am sure. I am sure your son was told a very correct history of the RM Corpe in CTC.
Again, I don't know. Maybe his teachers believed the same bollocks, who knows. It was just a passing conversation we had one time.

One of my brothers in law was convinced that Greenjackets were the first Marines, what with Riflemen serving at Trafalgar because that's what he'd been told about Greenjacket history.

Hadn't occurred to him that the Marines had been going for 150 odd years previous to that. But that mistaken belief formed part of his unit pride.

These things are as important as we choose to make them. Just look at all that's invested in a simple hat. Every Bootie I've ever seen in rig has been unable to resist ensuring his special hat is adjusted just so, every few seconds.
 
I would ask, do most potential recruits have a thought to 'join the Army' or do they think 'I think I'll have a look at joining the local regiment'? I suggest the answer is obvious.

I think first thoughts are to join the Army, then a realisation that there's all sorts of things to do in the Army, so there's then the choice of role. I think that, without family or friend ties to a regiment, the local regiment is one of the last considerations, unless maybe they've been exposed to it during a school visit, for example.
Exactly, @Taffd. As I suggested before,, from anecdotal experienc and my own of formally interviewing hundreds of recruits and talking to hundreds of soldiers I commanded less formally I'd say that less than a third of regular recruits know of or are interested in joining their county infantry regt - in most cases it's all they're offered.

It's an entirely different case for reservists who usually do make that conscious choice, hence my point that you shouldn't look on regular and reserve recruits as having the same motivation and interests as they're very different.
 
As far as I can see no-one here's in favour of getting rid of all infantry capbadges and just having a large arm/corps of infantry. The point all bar one posting agree on is that the regimental system should be based on role, not their historical recruiting area which is of its time and that time has well and truly past.

Cap badges / colours / mess silver / traditions etc do pay an important part in esprit de corps, particularly in peacetime so they should be preserved, it's just how they preserved and at what cost operationally and financially.

Surely a "shared identity" as a Para / Royal Marine / Light Infantryman* / Fusilier* / Grenadier* / Ranger*, etc, based on what you are professionally has more significance than what area you were living in when you applied, as many (all Commonwealth and Irish, so at least 15%, plus many others) don't actually come from or have any direct connection with the regiments they end up in?


*: or whatever the light / mech / armd / SIBn bns would be re-named as.
They only play an important role because people have chosen these things to make important, precisely to engender such feelings.

Your idea of changing the focus of import to role would be as effective.

Or you could let people's professionalism let each unit develop their unique tradition, aura, esprit and have it evolve as each Army generation came through.

A bit like good ships and bad ships, unit pride must be a composite of the people serving in it at any given time.

i wonder what causes the troops in Stackers unit feel so good about it that it's apparently the *sparkly* unit of its type, the one people want to be in; d'you think it's the history or mess silver?
 
Exactly, @Taffd. As I suggested before,, from anecdotal experienc and my own of formally interviewing hundreds of recruits and talking to hundreds of soldiers I commanded less formally I'd say that less than a third of regular recruits know of or are interested in joining their county infantry regt - in most cases it's all they're offered.

It's an entirely different case for reservists who usually do make that conscious choice, hence my point that you shouldn't look on regular and reserve recruits as having the same motivation and interests as they're very different.
In fact, you only need to notice the number of 'what regiment should I choose' threads on here.
 
In fact, you only need to notice the number of 'what regiment should I choose' threads on here.
Most don't "choose" at all - it's all that's on offer for many, apart from the Pioneers (who, I hasten to add, I've only ever been impressed with).
They only play an important role because people have chosen these things to make important, precisely to engender such feelings.

Your idea of changing the focus of import to role would be as effective.

Or you could let people's professionalism let each unit develop their unique tradition, aura, esprit and have it evolve as each Army generation came through.

A bit like good ships and bad ships, unit pride must be a composite of the people serving in it at any given time.
I agree with you, @Taffd, but by changing the focus of identity to 'role' you're killing two birds with one stone, as those for whom tradition, ceremonial and mess functions are important are catered to as well without any detriment to the professional / recruiting / retention side. It's a win/win situation if only someone had the courage to do it.
 
Dunno. I know that many in the RN of my time thought that the 3 stripes on the collar represented 3 of Nelson's battles or some similar shite. In fact they're merely decorative.
Same with Sappers blue Lanyard and the Gunners white one. The myth that the Lanyard was awarded to the Sappers because the gunners ran away is quoted as fact by some. Nice story as it is, it was actually added to the uniform in the 50’s as a decorative accoutrement.

Similar stories about yellow in stable belts meaning cowardice (why would a Regt?) and even the balls on the old RAOC cap badge being large due to the provision of the wrong ammo, ignoring the fact that if they were in proportion to the cannon, they would have been invisible :)

All very nice stories to instil pride in one capbadge over another. Not a grain of truth in any of them though!
 
irlsgt

I belive in what I belive in. I have served in this countries infantry since 20 years old, not a rodney but a soldier. I had no care for the cap badge I wore until years into the job when it meant something to me after fighting shoulder to shoulder with fellow Tigers, so much that as a Sgt sent to the Anglians who told me to wear there cap badge I said "NO" to there Commnding Officer, trust me that was not a good move.

As it goes a bunch of other Tigers from the second Battalion attached to the Anglians also said the same, they got away with it as they were leaving the Army, I was attached and in the end was orderd to do it.

I am not so fuc__ng stupud as to belive that it means I am a better soldier then the man in another Unit, if I did I would be a Para or a Marine. It represents 5 home counties who have stood with the same embelems as me.

You may think that is sh_t, and I am not upset or offended by that and will not be seeing the UWO Monday, but trust me one of the biggest honours I had was turning the Page in Canterbury Cathederal in the Warrior Chappel.

x100 Privete soldeirs per turn of the page in a book one of four that was at least 10 cm thick of paper all names of men that had gone before me including a soldier in my section.

Shit on it all you want, but I am happy to say no I do belive in the system I have served, just not so sure about that the leaders above me belive in it.

Like I said before this 24 hour plus exchange, I do not belive there is a need to rip it all up and throw away the infantry that has stood since 1661 doing everything this country has asked of it including the great and second world War.

Fusilier Guardsman Rifleman Private Kingsman etc all part of the remaining 17 Regimental systems, do not need to be smashed, I would say a re ballance and look at how we can best employ them in an effective Army so that we can serve Britain for another 357 years. Just maybe so that we also think about the needs of the Country Army and the soldier and his family.

Rant over.
I’m not suggesting that.

But if a regiment consistently can’t recruit the troops it needs..... should regiments only be allowed recruit people from specific areas?

And should the “need” to retain a regiment that cannot recruit sufficiently be an overarching issue in the combat efficiency of the British Army?

I understand the desire to retain history but if it potentially is costing lives.....
 
Same with Sappers blue Lanyard and the Gunners white one. The myth that the Lanyard was awarded to the Sappers because the gunners ran away is quoted as fact by some. Nice story as it is, it was actually added to the uniform in the 50’s as a decorative accoutrement.

Similar stories about yellow in stable belts meaning cowardice (why would a Regt?) and even the balls on the old RAOC cap badge being large due to the provision of the wrong ammo, ignoring the fact that if they were in proportion to the cannon, they would have been invisible :)

All very nice stories to instil pride in one capbadge over another. Not a grain of truth in any of them though!
No dragons, then?
 
John


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

Some up to date figures were given in Hansard 1st February 2017

HANSARD

Ministry of Defence
Army
Commons
Question 61398
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the manning shortfall by rank was for reserve and regular soldiers and officers in (a) London Regiment, (b) Rifles, (c) Royal Gurkha Rifles, (d) Parachute Regiment, (e) Royal Irish Regiment, (f) Royal Welsh, (g) Merciant Regiment, (h) Yorkshire Regiment, (i) Royal Anglian Regiment, (j) Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, (k) Duke of Lancaster's Regiment, (l) Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment, (m) Royal Regiment of Scotland, (n) Welsh Guards, (o) Irish Guards, (p) Scots Guards, (q) Coldstream Guards and (r) Grenadier Guards in the last 12 months.
A
Answered by: Mike Penning
Answered on: 01 February 2017
For Regulars the total strength of the Infantry as at 1 December was 19,420 compared to a total Infantry Liability of 20,164. Of this, 4,380 Infantry Personnel are serving outwith their Regiments' units, for example in other Arms/Services and infantry Units, at HQs, and training and instructional establishments. This overall infantry manpower can be used flexibly.
The Infantry regiments are made up of one or more Battalions which include infantry personnel and Attached Arms, such as drivers, medics, clerks etc. We are not able to provide shortfall data against this overall regiment establishment as data is not collected for the Attached Arms in the format requested.
The figures in the attached table show the shortfall between the strength of infantry capbadged personnel vs infantry capbadged establishment for each of the listed Regiments’ units (ie infantry personnel serving within their capbadge battalion(s)). Figures are as at 1 December 2016
For Reserves the total strength of the Infantry as at 1 December was 6,240 compared to a total Infantry Liability of 6,048. Of this, 1,420 Infantry Personnel are serving outwith their Regiments' units, for example in other Arms/Services and infantry Units, at HQs, and training and instructional establishments. This overall infantry manpower can be used flexibly.
The Infantry regiments are made up of one or more Battalions which include infantry personnel and Attached Arms, such as drivers, medics, clerks etc. We are not able to provide shortfall data against this overall regiment establishment as data is not collected for the Attached Arms in the format requested
The figures in the attached table show the shortfall between the strength of infantry capbadged personnel against infantry capbadged establishment for each of the listed Regiments’ units (ie infantry personnel serving within their capbadge battalion(s)). Figures are as at 1 December 2016
Regular

The total strength of the Infantry as at 1st December was 19,420 compared to a total Infantry Liability of 20,164. Of this, 4,380 Infantry Personnel are serving outwith their Regiments' units, for example in other Arms/Services and infantry Units, at HQs, and training and instructional establishments. This overall infantry manpower can be used flexibly.

The Infantry regiments are made up of one or more Battalions which include infantry personnel and Attached Arms, such as drivers, medics, clerks etc. We are not able to provide shortfall data against this overall regiment establishment as data is not collected for the Attached Arms in the format requested.

The figures in the attached table show the shortfall between the strength of infantry capbadged personnel vs infantry capbadged establishment for each of the listed Regiments’ units (ie infantry personnel serving within their capbadge battalion(s)). Figures are as at 1 December 2016

1521459369923.png

Notes/Caveats:
The figures are for Regular Army only and therefore exclude Gurkhas, Full Time Reserve Service and Mobilised Reserves.
The manning shortfall by rank for each Regiment is calculated by taking the strengths, by rank, of those serving with the units (less attached Arms) from the authorised establishments of those units. Those infantry soldiers serving away from their Regiments (4,380 in total) are not shown in the table.
Liability for Regimental Duty has been provided Army Manning (Infantry)
Regimental Duty is defined as personnel who are currently serving at Regimental units, for example a Regular Mercian Soldier serving at 3 Mercians


The raw Regimental figures can be extrapolated to identify battalion types where only one or two apply to each line - the rest is subtractions of identified elements from the line total
eg Irish Guards are Light Role
Lt Col, Majors [7], Captains [15] Subs [9] Offrs [32 ]
WO1 + WO2 [10], SSgt [18] Sgt [27] Clp [80] L/Clp [96] Pvt 237 [501]

This could give
By Unit Size [Armoured Infantry] 612
1st Bn The Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment 33 Officers 579 ORS
1st Bn The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers 33 Officer 579 ORS
1st Bn The Yorkshire Regiment 33 Officers 579 ORS
1st Bn The Mercian Regiment 33 Officers 579 ORS
1st Bn The Royal Welsh 33 Officers 579 ORS
5th Bn The Rifles 33 Officers 579 ORS

By Unit size
Heavily Protected Mobility 606
1st Bn The Scots Guards
4th Bn Royal Regt of Scotland
4th Bn The Rifles

The Parachute Regiment 33 Officers + 558 ORS
Light Protected Mobility [6 Battalions]
1st Bn Welsh Guards 32 + 473 [505]
3rd Bn Royal Regt of Scotland,
2nd Bn The Royal Anglian Regiment
2nd The Yorkshire Regiment
1st Bn The Royal Irish Regiment
3rd Bn The Rifles

Light Role Battalions [501]
1st Bn The Grenadier Guards
1st Bn The Coldstream Guards
1st Bn The Irish Guards
1st Bn The Royal Regiment of Scotland
2nd Bn The Royal Regiment of Scotland
2nd Bn The Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment
1st Bn The Royal Anglian Regiment
1st Bn The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment
2nd Bn The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment
2nd Bn The Mercian Regiment
1st Bn The Rifles
2nd Bn The Rifles

Public Duties Scotland
The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Balaklava Co [6 Officers + 99]

Public Duties London
The Grenadier Guards - Nijmegan [5 + 88]
The Coldstream Guards - 7 Coy [5+ 88]
The Scots Guards - F Coy [5 + 88]
29 Bns 949/14769–(15718) [32/509–542]

By Type of Unit [whole unit (attached personnel)]
Armoured Infantry [729 (117)]
Heavy Protected Mobility [709 (103)]
Parachute Regiment [660 (67)]
Light Protected Mobility [581 (76)]
Light Role [561 (60)]1
Royal Regiment of Scotland [PDC] [110 (11)]
Balaklava Co
Public Duties Company [Guards][106 (13)]
By Seniority of Regiment

1st Bn The Grenadier Guards 501
The Grenadier Guards Nijmegan 93

1st Bn The Coldstream Guards 501
The Coldstream Guards 7 Coy 93

1st Bn The Scots Guards 606
The Scots Guards F Coy 93

1st Bn The Irish Guards 501

1st Bn The Welsh Guards 505

1st The Royal Regiment of Scotland 501
2nd Bn The Royal Regiment of Scotland 501
3rd Bn The Royal Regiment of Scotland 505
4th The Royal Regiment of Scotland 606
The Royal Regiment of Scotland Balaklava Co 99

1st Bn The Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment 612
2nd Bn The Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment 501

1st Bn The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers 612

1st Bn The Royal Anglian Regiment 501
2nd The Royal Anglian Regiment 505

1st Bn The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment 501
2nd Bn The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment 501

1st Bn The Yorkshire Regiment 612
2nd Bn The Yorkshire Regiment 505

1st Bn The Mercian Regiment 612
2nd Bn The Mercian Regiment 501

1st Bn The Royal Welsh 612

1st Bn The Royal Irish Regiment 505

1st Bn The Rifles 501
2nd Bn The Rifles 501
3rd Bn The Rifles 505
4th Bn The Rifles 606
5th Bn The Rifles 612

2nd Bn The Parachute Regiment 593
3rd Bn The Parachute Regiment 593
16096​

The rest is just maths - it does all work back to the Regimental totals
 
The same source gave data on the

Reserve



The total strength of the Infantry as at 1st December was 6,240 compared to a total Infantry Liability of 6,048. Of this, 1,420 Infantry Personnel are serving outwith their Regiments' units, for example in other Arms/Services and infantry Units, at HQs, and training and instructional establishments. This overall infantry manpower can be used flexibly.



The Infantry regiments are made up of one or more Battalions which include infantry personnel and Attached Arms, such as drivers, medics, clerks etc. We are not able to provide shortfall data against this overall regiment establishment as data is not collected for the Attached Arms in the format requested



The figures in the attached table show the shortfall between the strength of infantry capbadged personnel vs infantry capbadged establishment for each of the listed Regiments’ units (ie infantry personnel serving within their capbadge battalion(s)). Figures are as at 1 December 2016


REGIMENT
London Regt
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 373 1, 6, 10 10 0 7, 8, 24, 58, 67 182
Diff -145 0, 0, -5, 5, 0, 0, 0, -15, -40, -30, -65

REGIMENT
The Rifles
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 885 2, 13, 23 23 2 17, 19, 56, 134, 155 441
Diff -90 0, 5, 10, 0, 0, 15, 10, -5, -50, -50, -20

REGIMENT
Parachute Regt
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 470 1, 7, 11 13 0 8, 9, 28, 70, 80 243
Diff - 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 10, 15, -5, -30, -10, 30,

REGIMENT
Royal Irish Regt
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 373 1, 6, 10 10 0 7, 8, 24, 58, 67 182
Diff -45 0, 5 0, 0, 0, 10, 5, 0, -30, -10, 65,


REGIMENT
Royal Welsh
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 394 1, 6, 11 10 1 8, 9, 26, 61, 71 190
Diff -70 0, 0 0, 0, 0, 10, 5, -10, -25, -20, -25,


REGIMENT
Mercian Regt
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 491 1, 7, 12 13 1 9, 10, 30, 73, 84 251
Diff -80 0, 0 10, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -25, -5, -35,

REGIMENT
Yorkshire Regt
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 463 1, 7, 12 12 1 9, 10, 29, 68, 76 238
Diff -140 0, 0 0, 10, 0, 5, 10, -5, -35, -35, -70,

Royal Anglian Regiment
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 394 1, 6, 11 10 1 8, 9, 26, 61, 71 190
Diff -85 0, 0 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -5, -40, -30, -10,

Royal Regiment Fusiliers
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 394 1, 6, 11 10 1 8, 9, 26, 61, 71 190
Diff -100 0, 0 0, 0, 0, 10, 10, 0, -25, -35, -55,

Duke of Lancaster's
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 394 1, 6, 11 10 1 8, 9, 24, 63, 74 188
Diff -40 0, 0 0, -5, 0, 10, 10, 0, -30, -20, 0,

PWRR
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 394 1, 6, 11 10 1 8, 9, 26, 61, 71 190
Diff -30 0, 0 5, 0, 0, 5, 10, -5, -25, -30, 5,

REGIMENT
Royal Regiment of Scotland
Lt Col, Maj, capt, Sub WO1, WO2, SSgt, Sgt, Clp, L/Clp, Pvt
Est 788 2, 12, 22 20 2 16, 18, 52, 122, 142 380
Diff -190 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 10, 10, 0, -60, -65, - 75


Notes/Caveats:

The figures are for the FR20 population consisting of Group A Army Reserves, some Sponsored Reserves and those personnel serving on FTRS contracts who were previously Army Reservists.

The manning shortfall by rank for each Regiment is calculated by taking the strengths, by rank, of those serving with the units (less attached Arms) from the authorised establishments of those units. Those infantry soldiers serving away from their Regiments ( 1,420 in total) are not shown in the table.

Liability for Regimental Duty has been provided Army Manning (Infantry)

Regimental Duty is defined as personnel who are currently serving at Regimental units, for example a Regular Mercian Soldier serving at 4 Mercians.

Infantry Battalions by Established size 2016 [HC 2017]
 
Last edited:
I am reading that right ?

The regular infantry is 700-800 under strength but they are actually around 5,000 under strength when people serving in none infantry battalion jobs are taken out????

That’s roughly the equivalent of 10 Light role infantry battalions!!!
 
I think it's that the Infantry in Inf units stands at 4,820, with 1,420 Inf personnel serving at places other than in their Bn's.

So total liability of Inf in Inf roles is 6048, of which 4,820 are filled, leaving us 1,228 Infantry personnel diffy.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads