Does the RAF regiment have a future?

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
Or two groups who operate in the same space protecting the same assets for the same reason. 80% of RAFP do not use 'police' skills, 100% of RAF Regiment are not infantry.

Oh I nearly forgot they already work together on the same tasks.

You are confusing being in the same team with doing the same jobs - and for the FP Sqns that is again not what is going on. The only only common element is asset protection. RAFP are doing this on the carriers now as well, but that is more immediate to the aircraft than it is the whole area and beyond (Rocks domain).

Also, the 80% comment - all they do is MP work, of which policing is a part of it.

The Army, Navy, RM and RAF all go to the exact same location now to do their basic MP course.
As far as the work done: once past substantive cpl it is hugely varied, a lot of which i have no idea in terms of scope - from sneaky beaky to SOC, vetting, cyber stuff (?), CP. I saw an image of an RAFP dog handler in Stan with the Booties, I know their scope (doggies) is varied too, and they are very good at the training and deployment of said hounds.

Just sayin...
 
You are confusing being in the same team with doing the same jobs - and for the FP Sqns that is again not what is going on. The only only common element is asset protection. RAFP are doing this on the carriers now as well, but that is more immediate to the aircraft than it is the whole area and beyond (Rocks domain).

Also, the 80% comment - all they do is MP work, of which policing is a part of it.

The Army, Navy, RM and RAF all go to the exact same location now to do their basic MP course.
As far as the work done: once past substantive cpl it is hugely varied, a lot of which i have no idea in terms of scope - from sneaky beaky to SOC, vetting, cyber stuff (?), CP. I saw an image of an RAFP dog handler in Stan with the Booties, I know their scope (doggies) is varied too, and they are very good at the training and deployment of said hounds.

Just sayin...
I am not confusing anything it seems to be you who seems to be suffering inflexibility of thought. Yes they do the same MP course as Monkeys and Regulators who also have a huge proportion that never do Police work. The RAF Police have a single specialist Squadron that does all the so called sexy stuff, Cyber, Investigations and Int. The rest are just knuckle draggers. Yes their dog handling is the best in the three services, but it is dedicated to Force/Aircraft protection, with a sliver doing other things from time to time.

In the Force protection roles they are simple one side of a coin with RAF Regiment being the other, inner and outer cordon, that's all and for that role they are already in the same CoC.
 
Snip/

As far as the work done: once past substantive cpl it is hugely varied, a lot of which i have no idea in terms of scope - from sneaky beaky to SOC, vetting, cyber stuff (?), CP. I saw an image of an RAFP dog handler in Stan with the Booties, I know their scope (doggies) is varied too, and they are very good at the training and deployment of said hounds.

Just sayin...
In Stan?

Does anyone really call it that without a degree of cringe?
 
I am not confusing anything it seems to be you who seems to be suffering inflexibility of thought. Yes they do the same MP course as Monkeys and Regulators who also have a huge proportion that never do Police work. The RAF Police have a single specialist Squadron that does all the so called sexy stuff, Cyber, Investigations and Int. The rest are just knuckle draggers. Yes their dog handling is the best in the three services, but it is dedicated to Force/Aircraft protection, with a sliver doing other things from time to time.

In the Force protection roles they are simple one side of a coin with RAF Regiment being the other, inner and outer cordon, that's all and for that role they are already in the same CoC.
Well, seems like you know more than me, and i was in it.
 
In Stan?

Does anyone really call it that without a degree of cringe?

A UK attempt to invoke the alliness of 'Nam' (or even better, cue Doors or CCR soundtrack, 'the Nam')?
 
Time to revive the Royal Tournament and we can put al the bravado to the test. The Navy can do their field gunning (impressive), the gunners can do their musical ride (impressive also), would be good to see tent pegging again as well. The Royal Marines can abseil from the roof (fair enough) the RAFP can get their dogs to leak through burning hoops (not bad) and the RAF Regiment can do that synchronised mincing with rifles thing.
 
would be good to see tent pegging again

I believe the RLC are one of the best at this. I wouldn’t put my house on that though, just something I vaguely remember reading in the Spunkstainer.
 

dan_brown

War Hero
I am not confusing anything it seems to be you who seems to be suffering inflexibility of thought. Yes they do the same MP course as Monkeys and Regulators who also have a huge proportion that never do Police work. The RAF Police have a single specialist Squadron that does all the so called sexy stuff, Cyber, Investigations and Int. The rest are just knuckle draggers. Yes their dog handling is the best in the three services, but it is dedicated to Force/Aircraft protection, with a sliver doing other things from time to time.

In the Force protection roles they are simple one side of a coin with RAF Regiment being the other, inner and outer cordon, that's all and for that role they are already in the same CoC.

Yeah, that's a bit bollocks.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
I am not confusing anything it seems to be you who seems to be suffering inflexibility of thought. Yes they do the same MP course as Monkeys and Regulators who also have a huge proportion that never do Police work. The RAF Police have a single specialist Squadron that does all the so called sexy stuff, Cyber, Investigations and Int. The rest are just knuckle draggers.

This reply is illustrative. I've been in an audience where the RAF Provost Marshal says 80% of the work done by his organisation is security, the remainder, policing.

The RAFP doesn't have a single specialist Squadron - it has a single specialist wing. All the 'non-specialist' sqns, written off here by 21st as knuckle draggers, have organic int analysts, protective security sections that also blur into C4I sqns to do computer network assurance. Security governance and assurance is massive and a growth industry for the RAF and therefore the RAFP.

If I put it in simple terms for @twentyfirstoffoot, the US cousins have a massive dog in the fight in terms of F35. They have the final say and if they don't think it is protected they can basically stop the program. And the UK wants information advantage to balance out Russian/Chinese combat mass - so guess what, any future capability land sea or air, needs to think about interoperability with F35 to be meaningful.

The average holdings of classified material on an army barracks are far less than that to be found on a RAF station. Security risk management and all that goes with it is tedious as hell but necessary.

Now if one was to acknowledge 21st has demonstrated a woeful lack of understanding about the RAF, the RAFP and security of an air force with next generation aspirations, could it be indicative of the average army thinking?

And then turn that to the RAF Regt. Last time I was in Kabul FP was a scratch coy of TA individual Augmentees. I've probably said it before on here and likely will again, but the consideration CAS has regarding his shiny new 100m a pop toys is, does he/ can he trust the army to protect them, if the general view is FP is a job that can be done as basically stagging in a rear echelon whilst manoeuvre units are doing all the sexy stuff forward? Or does he retain the RAF Regt, because for all their shortcomings, that dedicated air FP concept is more reliable than an army ad hoc approach?
 
I understand it is bad form to quote one's own post, but the RAF commander in Kosovo only trusted the army and RAF Reg, or thought us expendable.

I also did a pub quiz in Estonia with the RAFs only MC winner. I chose his company over the pilots, FJ ground crew and assorted hangers on. Not because of bling awe, but because he had fought.

Group Captain at Pristina? Universally loathed and known in the trade as the Prince of Darkness.
 
I have mentioned this elsewhere. 12 of my 22 years in the regular army were in air support roles. I worked with the RAF for a long time.

Pristina APOD in 99 where, apparently, a young Blunt prevented World War 3, commander mobilised everyone after the Russians drove a truck across the runway whilst the first inbound aircraft was on approach. RAF commander lost his rag, our Sqn and II Sqn were sent into fire positions. The rest of the RAF, webbing worn like an off the shoulder number, were "defending" our camp.

Every tour attached to the RAF I associated more with the Reg than the militant arm of EasyJet.

They are not soldiers, but they are pretty close.
Is now a good time to remind the congregation that II Sqn RAF Regt eventually turned up at Pristina without sufficient ammo or rations? We (TCW) had to split our with them until the Logs chain from Thessaloniki caught up as we had brought loads of both.
 
Hadn’t realised that we had entrusted the security of the massed RAF F35s at Kabul to the TA.
This reply is illustrative. I've been in an audience where the RAF Provost Marshal says 80% of the work done by his organisation is security, the remainder, policing.

The RAFP doesn't have a single specialist Squadron - it has a single specialist wing. All the 'non-specialist' sqns, written off here by 21st as knuckle draggers, have organic int analysts, protective security sections that also blur into C4I sqns to do computer network assurance. Security governance and assurance is massive and a growth industry for the RAF and therefore the RAFP.

If I put it in simple terms for @twentyfirstoffoot, the US cousins have a massive dog in the fight in terms of F35. They have the final say and if they don't think it is protected they can basically stop the program. And the UK wants information advantage to balance out Russian/Chinese combat mass - so guess what, any future capability land sea or air, needs to think about interoperability with F35 to be meaningful.

The average holdings of classified material on an army barracks are far less than that to be found on a RAF station. Security risk management and all that goes with it is tedious as hell but necessary.

Now if one was to acknowledge 21st has demonstrated a woeful lack of understanding about the RAF, the RAFP and security of an air force with next generation aspirations, could it be indicative of the average army thinking?

And then turn that to the RAF Regt. Last time I was in Kabul FP was a scratch coy of TA individual Augmentees. I've probably said it before on here and likely will again, but the consideration CAS has regarding his shiny new 100m a pop toys is, does he/ can he trust the army to protect them, if the general view is FP is a job that can be done as basically stagging in a rear echelon whilst manoeuvre units are doing all the sexy stuff forward? Or does he retain the RAF Regt, because for all their shortcomings, that dedicated air FP concept is more reliable than an army ad hoc approach?
d
 

Latest Threads

Top