Army 2020 Refine

The British Army would be better served have true all arms integral capability at Bde level (which assuming they were organised (correctly) would be task org’ed to BG Level.

With theatre entry, theatre level, 3rd line, specialist, lesser used capabilities etc etc held at Divisional and Force level
Pretty much like the Irish Army eh?
 
Of course an all arms Bde should give all arms BGs. So it could mean less regiments/battalions but more squadrons/companies.

If your saying your Bde will have 4 BGs, then your Armd Regt needs 4 Armd Sqns, your Arty Regt has 4 full 155mm btys, your Engr Regt has 4 Fd Engr Sqns etc etc
 
If your saying your Bde will have 4 BGs, then your Armd Regt needs 4 Armd Sqns, your Arty Regt has 4 full 155mm btys, your Engr Regt has 4 Fd Engr Sqns etc etc
That doesn’t follow at all. In a 4BG Bde with 4 armoured Sqns, there’s not enough armour to group a 2:2 or 3:1 BG without leaving one or two BGs without tanks. That’s why we used to have square brigades....

The artillery and engineer piece is counter to pretty much any doctrine on the employment for guns and Sappers.

The BG needs the effect of arty, potentially (probably) in far bigger numbers than a single Bty. Meanwhile the guns need to be able to fire and manoeuvre and be sustained with ammunition in a different part of the battle space from the BG.

Sappers, slightly different. Your key critical assets need to be grouped where they are likely to be needed, not penny packeted out in BGs.

We used to be very good at this sort of thing. Rapid regrouping of BGs, close support combat support etc etc. There’s hardly anyone left with knowledge and experience; just people who take the piss out of the BAOR generation.
 
That doesn’t follow at all. In a 4BG Bde with 4 armoured Sqns, there’s not enough armour to group a 2:2 or 3:1 BG without leaving one or two BGs without tanks. That’s why we used to have square brigades....

The artillery and engineer piece is counter to pretty much any doctrine on the employment for guns and Sappers.

The BG needs the effect of arty, potentially (probably) in far bigger numbers than a single Bty. Meanwhile the guns need to be able to fire and manoeuvre and be sustained with ammunition in a different part of the battle space from the BG.

Sappers, slightly different. Your key critical assets need to be grouped where they are likely to be needed, not penny packeted out in BGs.

We used to be very good at this sort of thing. Rapid regrouping of BGs, close support combat support etc etc. There’s hardly anyone left with knowledge and experience; just people who take the piss out of the BAOR generation.
Precisely. This suggested penny-packeting of arty and engr on a conventional battlefield is totally counter-productive. Worth doing insome coin scenarios but under no circumstances as some sort of standard.
 
That doesn’t follow at all. In a 4BG Bde with 4 armoured Sqns, there’s not enough armour to group a 2:2 or 3:1 BG without leaving one or two BGs without tanks. That’s why we used to have square brigades....
Slight miscalculation there on my part but in infantry not armour. A2020R is going to give you just that (1 Armd Regt and 3 inf Bns). Remember this is an Armd Inf Bde not an Armd Bde.

The last I saw that 3rd inf Bn was to be Masstif mounted - Imho pointless so I’d make it Armd inf, otherwise you don’t have enough.

So it would be 3 BGs of 1 Armd Sqn and an Armd Inf Bn. The Armd Regt having a 4th Armd Sqn could create a 4th BG (but only if you task org Inf Coys (I wouldn’t)).

The artillery and engineer piece is counter to pretty much any doctrine on the employment for guns and Sappers.

The BG needs the effect of arty, potentially (probably) in far bigger numbers than a single Bty. Meanwhile the guns need to be able to fire and manoeuvre and be sustained with ammunition in a different part of the battle space from the BG.

Sappers, slightly different. Your key critical assets need to be grouped where they are likely to be needed, not penny packeted out in BGs.
Point taken but my point is that if your deploying just a BG rather than a Bde or Div, then you have enough subunits to rotate properly.

Or if your operating as a Bde you can have the possibility of independent/detached ops. (But mainly the rotation issue).
 
Last edited:
Are you over your tantrum yet John
If you give the infantry an extra role they need extra manpower in their orbat to do it so there's no fix at all!
Number one, what extra role? The Light Cavalry as it stands currently is a collection of surplus soldiers with surplus equipment, weapons and vehicles left over from Afghanistan which somebody cleverly invented a new 'Arm'. Cap badge preservation nothing more. Pretty much like 'Strike' if you think about it.
What 'starting point' ? I'm still no closer to having any idea what you're talking about.
Perhaps you should consider the advice to shut up and listen then?
I don't agree for the same reason that I don't think the Army should be one big corps - you need Engineers, Signallers, Gunners, Drivers, who are specialists who can do more than their Infantry equivalent of Assault Pioneers, Sigs Pl, Mor Pl, MT, etc.
No One is suggesting one big corps, read and comprehend
There's a finite limit and a fine line to be drawn and I draw the line at 105mm, etc, which I just see as not something that's within the infantry's range in so many theatres.
So explain 3 Cdo Bde and 16 AA Bde?
Stuck in the Cold War era because not every theatre or op requires armour or arty, and in many cases air sp (hels or fast air) is far more appropriate.
That is just stuff and nonsense as the same was applicable in the Cold War
Not in career interests as a major who does his time at RD as an arty bty comd or armd sqn comd lacks the relevant experience for inf bn comd that a rifle coy comd has. TBH I'm surprised I have to explain that to an infanteer - is this a wind up?
It's not all about current Officer career management

You see one of your problems John is you went to an English public school where from a very early age total submissive conformity is rammed in to you. You chaps just can't think outside the box. Try looking at this from a whole army perspective not simply you rather John centric view.
 
On the Light Cav, I agree it’s surplus equipment (cheaper than MBT or Ajax), personnel and cap badges but it could have its uses
That's the point, everyone came home from Afghanistan and found they had forgotten what the Army was for and CGS was told to come up with a design.

There are two ways you can do this:

Make a consideration of threats, risks and tasks, identify adequate responses, create formations and units that can deliver responses

or,

Have two fields, one with 82,000 bods and the other with a huge pile of broken, worn out and unnecessary equipment. Planning for the future starts with a VSO meeting that starts along the lines of:

"OK, tell me how many Brigadiers we would like"
 
Last edited:
Are you over your tantrum yet John

Number one, what extra role? The Light Cavalry as it stands currently is a collection of surplus soldiers with surplus equipment, weapons and vehicles left over from Afghanistan which somebody cleverly invented a new 'Arm'. Cap badge preservation nothing more. Pretty much like 'Strike' if you think about it.

Perhaps you should consider the advice to shut up and listen then?

No One is suggesting one big corps, read and comprehend
So explain 3 Cdo Bde and 16 AA Bde?

That is just stuff and nonsense as the same was applicable in the Cold War
It's not all about current Officer career management

You see one of your problems John is you went to an English public school where from a very early age total submissive conformity is rammed in to you. You chaps just can't think outside the box. Try looking at this from a whole army perspective not simply you rather John centric view.
I think you've finally lost it - you're just burbling random unintelligible thoughts.
 
On the Light Cav, I agree it’s surplus equipment (cheaper than MBT or Ajax), personnel and cap badges but it could have its uses
It doesn't just have its uses, it's a vital role but one which is inf and should be done by inf.

Problem is inf don't have the personnel to do the jobs they already have so would need extra pax to do it and simply re-badging lt cav pax to inf isn't the answer. They're not "surplus" until and unless cav overall are fully manned, which they're not so all you're doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Sorry, but you're listening to burbling that hasn't been thought through.
 
It doesn't just have its uses, it's a vital role but one which is inf and should be done by inf.

Problem is inf don't have the personnel to do the jobs they already have so would need extra pax to do it and simply re-badging lt cav pax to inf isn't the answer. They're not "surplus" until and unless cav overall are fully manned, which they're not so all you're doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Sorry, but you're listening to burbling that hasn't been thought through.
OK John, tell me the units that carried out this specific role prior to lets say 2012? I mean a bunch of soldiers charging around the battle space with GPMG, LAW and Grenade Launchers in Jackal and Coyote (not CVRT which is pretty much the role of Ajax).

Which formations will they support? When and how?

You are having a sulk but not coming up with any facts.
 
It doesn't just have its uses, it's a vital role but one which is inf and should be done by inf.

Problem is inf don't have the personnel to do the jobs they already have so would need extra pax to do it and simply re-badging lt cav pax to inf isn't the answer. They're not "surplus" until and unless cav overall are fully manned, which they're not so all you're doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Sorry, but you're listening to burbling that hasn't been thought through.
The vehicles are surplus and paid for, extra Ajax aren’t.

You could use Jackal to equip (Light) Infantry Support Coys for which they are probably much more suitable than WMIKs.

But they aren’t APCs, (there aren’t any dismounts).

Where would I see the Light Cav?
- well if a SIB is getting kinetic from the off
- COIN ops & supporting light infantry (in a Recce & fire support role (as .... well .... Cav))
- rear area security, flank protection, screening, convoy protection etc etc for the Armd Inf Div/Armd Inf Bde/Strike Bde (depending on who the en (and their capabilities) is)
- a kind of LRDG Light Strike force for diversions, SFSG support
 
... my point is that if your deploying just a BG rather than a Bde or Div, then you have enough subunits to rotate properly.

Or if your operating as a Bde you can have the possibility of independent/detached ops. (But mainly the rotation issue).
No, @irlsgt, you can only "rotate properly" if all you need are equal shares of infinite resources. We don't have the latter and the former seldom applies.

It works for a Cdo and an AA bde as you're taking all the Cdo and AA resources but it doesn't beyond that as the resources aren't there.

It's la-la land.
 
The vehicles are surplus and paid for, extra Ajax aren’t.

You could use Jackal to equip (Light) Infantry Support Coys for which they are probably much more suitable than WMIKs.

But they aren’t APCs, (there aren’t any dismounts).

Where would I see the Light Cav?
- well if a SIB is getting kinetic from the off
- COIN ops & supporting light infantry (in a Recce & fire support role (as .... well .... Cav))
- rear area security, flank protection, screening, convoy protection etc etc for the Armd Inf Div/Armd Inf Bde/Strike Bde (depending on who the en (and their capabilities) is)
- a kind of LRDG Light Strike force for diversions, SFSG support
We're in agreement - all inf tasks.

Problem is there aren't enough inf to do them.

Fine, re-badge lt cav pax to inf - but the cav don't have enough pax either so the obvious issue is what about re-badging lt cav to cav instead, which I'm sure they'd prefer and which consequently just might have a better effect on retaining them.

It's la-la land and ignore reality time again.
 
No, @irlsgt, you can only "rotate properly" if all you need are equal shares of infinite resources. We don't have the latter and the former seldom applies.

It works for a Cdo and an AA bde as you're taking all the Cdo and AA resources but it doesn't beyond that as the resources aren't there.

It's la-la land.
Ok let’s say, 1 Strike Bde is tasked with providing a full Bn based BG with all the bells and whistles (eg a Arty Bty and Engr Sqn).

If 1 Strike Bde have 3 Inf Bns but only 2 Arty Btys and only 2 Fd Engr Sqns..... then the tour rotations will require the resources of another Bde sooner.

I’m not suggesting by the way, each BG having its own Engr Sqn.

If a Bde is ORBAT’ed to have say 4 BGs, then the Arty Regt, Engr Regt etc (of the Bde), should have 4 Arty Btys, 4 Fd Engr Sqns etc etc. That means each BG can have the CS & CSS resources if/when required.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads