Campaign Signal Regiments etc

Discussion in 'Royal Signals' started by PoisonDwarf, Jul 11, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Everybody is probably aware of the Corps' plan to reorganise to meet the need of our enduring ops, do a bit of future-proofing and so on. However, given the fact that no one ever canvasses opinion down at grass roots level, perhaps we could have a (not entirely serious) discussion via these highly classified means instead.

    So....if given the chance to re-organise the Corps, what would YOU do? Do we need more of some trades and less of others, more of some ranks and less of others? Hey you never know, if somebody makes an inspired suggestion HQ SOinC(A) might even nick it and pass it off as their own idea! :p
  2. It seems with the amount of FP requirement going about, we are returning to the old Combat Signaller role?

    Seemingly we need more IS based tradespersons, and less RSE's and Operators?

    Any thoughts? or am on the wobbly to early :? :wink:
  3. mmmmm wobbly
  4. Ice cold at that :wink:
  5. It's NEVER too early for some wobbly.
  6. or late it seems :wink:
  7. Speaking as a geek, I would like to see the Corps identify a structure at supervisory (and officer) level for the IS mob. At the moment they have some Sqns with a handful of both, but other Regts (who will have DII-FD, Falcon and Cormorant next year) have a single WO2. Hopefully this big CSR plan will bring a degree of structure.
  8. There has been a reccommendation made that each RSIST gets a CL1 ED to support them. Don't know who made that!!! 8O 8)
  9. Wasn't me honest!

    Its probably to employ them, as they don't have much to do with all these new contracts knocking about.
  10. We had an ED in RSSST, he hated hanging out with all the techs. We used to let him clean the springs on our SCS.
  11. Weren't you lot kind :wink:

    I use Techs to clean the bogs :D
  12. In my not so humble opinion the Corps is going in the right direction. Combine FofS/IS stream, SET/IS Engr to CS Engr etc.

    I am sure the hexidecimal crowd will be upset when I say there is no future in an IS Engr trade group! Note I have not said not required or failed just no future. It is under-staffed, under-recruited and never taken seriously.

    Campaign Regts are the way ahead mainly cause they will be formed years in advance of a tour with the correct establishment, PDT time etc prior to tour as opposed to recieving both training and manpower too late to make a difference.
  13. I'm fairly sure we wont get upset. I fully agree the merged trade is the way ahead - it makes our Engineers more flexible and employable across the broad spectrum of jobs and equipment around the Corps.

    Whilst the single IS trade group had to end, what doesnt go away is the requirement for the skill set. Within the CSR the equipment and support we provide to our formation HQ's must mirror the campaign as closely as possible to give us what we require on the Op. The skillset most definately has a future - just look at the current training burden for a CS Engr or IS Assistant going to Herrick. If we dont get CSR's right, we'll gain nothing from them.
  14. Have you got a GCSE in stating the obvious? The trade was killed off months ago.