"Embedding" RLC G4 (Supply) personnel within the QM's of a Teeth Arms unit.......

#1
Seem to remember this was a hot topic around a year ago and may even have been mentioned in the first 3 pages of the Corps mag.

Was it pie in the sky stuff or something that may actually happen?

The best days Ive had in this man's army were when I was attached to Inf/RAC units on LSD's for exercises and/or Ops.

I'm a bit out the loop in my current job so I'm not really sure what's going on in mainstream.
 
#2
I have often observed that the main flaw in the Army logistic system is the Undetected Criminal/Rank Amateur at the penultimate end of the chain..

Even in these days of inspired incompetance in the management of logisitics, is it not time we got rid of the "jobs for the boys" QM role?

Would it be acceptable to use a commissioned MD or DOWO as an infantry company commander? So why is it acceptable for a commissioned infantry WO to run the logistics management of a unit?

Having capbadge presence right down to unit level may actually inject some reality into the Corps role...

Why not - the Navy and RAF do it, as do many other Armies of the world!
 
#3
"jobs for the boys"
HE117- stop answering your own questions. Your point is well made and understood but it simply wouldn't do to have an SME (read 'G4 Puke') working their 'dangerous ju-ju' in the teef arms innit?
 
#4
There are LSTs with various battle groups at the moment. However not everyone in them are first line trained (or for that matter second line trained).
Not sure if it work would being based in barracks though. A QM is normally the second most powerful person in a unit, The RQ is normally the top WO2, might not be to popular if loggies started telling the infantry how things are going to be.
 
#6
There are LSTs with various battle groups at the moment. However not everyone in them are first line trained (or for that matter second line trained).
Not sure if it work would being based in barracks though. A QM is normally the second most powerful person in a unit, The RQ is normally the top WO2, might not be to popular if loggies started telling the infantry how things are going to be.
..and therin lies the problem my son!

Well past the time for some balancing of power and responsibility across the G3/4 chasm IMHO...

G3 may win the odd fight, but it is G4 that will win (or lose) the war. If you talk to the Navy, they are quite clear that this is the Army's achilles heel, and a problem that has got seriously worse over the past thirty years. Check you history, and you will find that all the great field commanders were more G4 than G3. It was Patton, not Monty that had to stop his advance because he ran out of fuel.

The crass arrogance of some Teeth arm COs on matters G4 and the blatant criminality of the actions of some of their QMs is the biggest change I have seen in the Army and for the worst and needs to be tackled, partiularly in these days of diminishing resources..

I Quote...

[SIZE=+2]L[/SIZE]ogisticians are a sad and embittered race of men who are very much in demand in war, and who sink resentfully into obscurity in peace. They deal only in facts, but must work for men who merchant in theories. They emerge during war because war is very much a fact. They disappear in peace because peace is mostly theory. The people who merchant in theories, and who employ logisticians in war and ignore them in peace, are generals.


Generals are a happy blessed race who radiate confidence and power. They feed only on ambrosia and drink only nectar. In peace, they stride confidently and can invade a world simply by sweeping their hands grandly over a map, point their fingers decisively up trrain corridors, and blocking defiles and obsticles with the sides of their hands. In war, they must stride more slowly because each general has a logistician riding on his back and he knows that, at any moment, the logistician may lean forward and whisper: "No, you can't do that." Generals fear logisticians in war and, in peace, generals try to forget logisticians.


Romping along beside generals are strategists and tacticians. Logisticians despise strategists and tacticians. Strategists and tacticians do not know about logisticians until they grow up to be generals--which they usually do.


Sometimes a logistician becomes a general. If he does, he must associate with generals whom he hates; he has a retinue of strategists and tacticians whom he despises; and, on his back, is a logistician whom he fears. This is why logisticians who become generals always have ulcers and cannot eat their ambrosia.
 
#7
..and therin lies the problem my son!

Well past the time for some balancing of power and responsibility across the G3/4 chasm IMHO...

G3 may win the odd fight, but it is G4 that will win (or lose) the war. If you talk to the Navy, they are quite clear that this is the Army's achilles heel, and a problem that has got seriously worse over the past thirty years. Check you history, and you will find that all the great field commanders were more G4 than G3. It was Patton, not Monty that had to stop his advance because he ran out of fuel.

The crass arrogance of some Teeth arm COs on matters G4 and the blatant criminality of the actions of some of their QMs is the biggest change I have seen in the Army and for the worst and needs to be tackled, partiularly in these days of diminishing resources..

I Quote...

[SIZE=+2]L[/SIZE]ogisticians are a sad and embittered race of men who are very much in demand in war, and who sink resentfully into obscurity in peace. They deal only in facts, but must work for men who merchant in theories. They emerge during war because war is very much a fact. They disappear in peace because peace is mostly theory. The people who merchant in theories, and who employ logisticians in war and ignore them in peace, are generals.


Generals are a happy blessed race who radiate confidence and power. They feed only on ambrosia and drink only nectar. In peace, they stride confidently and can invade a world simply by sweeping their hands grandly over a map, point their fingers decisively up trrain corridors, and blocking defiles and obsticles with the sides of their hands. In war, they must stride more slowly because each general has a logistician riding on his back and he knows that, at any moment, the logistician may lean forward and whisper: "No, you can't do that." Generals fear logisticians in war and, in peace, generals try to forget logisticians.


Romping along beside generals are strategists and tacticians. Logisticians despise strategists and tacticians. Strategists and tacticians do not know about logisticians until they grow up to be generals--which they usually do.


Sometimes a logistician becomes a general. If he does, he must associate with generals whom he hates; he has a retinue of strategists and tacticians whom he despises; and, on his back, is a logistician whom he fears. This is why logisticians who become generals always have ulcers and cannot eat their ambrosia.
Great post HE117.

Spent a great deal of time in the early 2000s on Exercise with the Battle Groups of 19 Mech Bde.

We spent a great deal of time getting to know and train with each other. We got to see their frustrations with the G4 role and they got to see first hand that when they asked for a piece of equipment the process and more importantly understand it.

LSDs were embedded with the units, and as relationships started to grow, misunderstandings were ironed out.

Front line units that are frustrated with the supply chain only see the forward movement of CSups and Material. The reverse supply chain is a science on it's own and one that is not easily controlled. We cannot and should not involve ourselves with the G4 of individual units, but train them to use the supply chain in a careful and realistic manner through our BOWO/DOWO and Log Sp branches. We don't need TRF's to identify ourselves, closer cooperation with our 'customers' will bring them on board and show the greener side of the Army what we a truly capable of.
 
#8
Well we dont rely on the user to fix his kit - the REME do it; we dont expect them to cook for themselves - the Chefs do it. Why on earth does 18 years as a teeth arm operator equip you to provide for the BG/Bn. It doesnt! Simply the QM is the gopher for the CO, on the plus side, the CO wont ignore the QM so why not have the QM department partly manned by professional RLC personnel who understand the supply chain, have personal relationships back to 2nd and 3rd line. Furthermore, why dont the RLC run the MT for the Bns - allowing more 'teeth arm' soldiers to do their dangerous job!?
 
#9
Well we dont rely on the user to fix his kit - the REME do it; we dont expect them to cook for themselves - the Chefs do it. Why on earth does 18 years as a teeth arm operator equip you to provide for the BG/Bn. It doesnt! Simply the QM is the gopher for the CO, on the plus side, the CO wont ignore the QM so why not have the QM department partly manned by professional RLC personnel who understand the supply chain, have personal relationships back to 2nd and 3rd line. Furthermore, why dont the RLC run the MT for the Bns - allowing more 'teeth arm' soldiers to do their dangerous job!?
loggiepuke's post was my understanding of the matter too; no-one imagines that the QM of any "host" unit would suddenly be replaced by an RLC Major but the placing of RLC Supply soldiers in the Dept would certainly help matters; especially when it comes to the black art of the reverse supply chain....

Incidentally, on the 4 or 5 LSD's I've done,the unit we were attached to were always tremendous to us. They treated us like lords and in return we did a lot of things "out of the box" for them rather than hiding away in the 9x9, which is what I know a few of my peers did.

Count me in if it ever comes to pass.
 
#10
If, as it appears the consensous is, RLC personnel were to placed in "teeth-arm" (whatever happened to asymetric war-fighting?) Quartermaster departments as RQMS/QM's perhaps it might be a good idea to trial this concept in the RLC? Unless things have changed massively in the two and a half years since I became a civvy then RQ's and QM's in RLC regiments are ex-RSM's/Master Drivers/MTI's and NOT ex-BOWO's/DOWO's or even Sup Specs/Sup Cons. Maybe trialling the concept/putting your own house in order and proving it would go a long way to winning the arguement with those upon high? Just a thought!!
 
#11
If, as it appears the consensous is, RLC personnel were to placed in "teeth-arm" (whatever happened to asymetric war-fighting?) Quartermaster departments as RQMS/QM's perhaps it might be a good idea to trial this concept in the RLC? Unless things have changed massively in the two and a half years since I became a civvy then RQ's and QM's in RLC regiments are ex-RSM's/Master Drivers/MTI's and NOT ex-BOWO's/DOWO's or even Sup Specs/Sup Cons. Maybe trialling the concept/putting your own house in order and proving it would go a long way to winning the arguement with those upon high? Just a thought!!
More evidence of "jobs for the boys" and how outdated this concept is..

Do we not have any whelk stalls for these folk to run...?
 
#12
If, as it appears the consensous is, RLC personnel were to placed in "teeth-arm" (whatever happened to asymetric war-fighting?) Quartermaster departments as RQMS/QM's perhaps it might be a good idea to trial this concept in the RLC? Unless things have changed massively in the two and a half years since I became a civvy then RQ's and QM's in RLC regiments are ex-RSM's/Master Drivers/MTI's and NOT ex-BOWO's/DOWO's or even Sup Specs/Sup Cons. Maybe trialling the concept/putting your own house in order and proving it would go a long way to winning the arguement with those upon high? Just a thought!!
You've went a bit higher up the ranks than what was rumoured.....
 
#13
There are LSTs with various battle groups at the moment. However not everyone in them are first line trained (or for that matter second line trained).
Not sure if it work would being based in barracks though. A QM is normally the second most powerful person in a unit, The RQ is normally the top WO2, might not be to popular if loggies started telling the infantry how things are going to be.
Or taking 15-20% of their WO2 establishments!
 
#14
I don't think that we should be replacing the QM and RQ etc as their capbadge identity is very important, as some have suggested adding some specialists into the mix would be extrememly valuable and early idications from the LSTs support this. The RLC does not routinely do 1st line and indeed Log Spec (Sup) still have to do the AA Stmn Cse before taking on this role in an RLC unit QMs Dept. Under MJDI the stackers will be more competent with 1st line issues so I think perhaps an RLC SNCO and a couple of JNCOs within a QMs Dept would be a force multiplier (on the unit estab not detached from the LSR). These roles would be a fantastic proving ground for future OWOs and could also improve all aspects of the supply chain. There may be some mileage in BG Log Os being RLC LE or possible even DE (akin to Adjt/Ops O in career and experience terms) when we get supply trg right for the junior officers - we may then be even more competitive for Bde DCOS appts.
 
#15
why not have the QM department partly manned by professional RLC personnel who understand the supply chain, have personal relationships back to 2nd and 3rd line.
There are lots of loggies (suppliers) who don't have a clue how to work in a QMs dept.
What can help is loggies having mates in the 2nd line who knows where certain kit is and when its coming in, but even then I'd say that would only work on tour.
 
#16
..and therin lies the problem my son!

Well past the time for some balancing of power and responsibility across the G3/4 chasm IMHO...

G3 may win the odd fight, but it is G4 that will win (or lose) the war. If you talk to the Navy, they are quite clear that this is the Army's achilles heel, and a problem that has got seriously worse over the past thirty years. Check you history, and you will find that all the great field commanders were more G4 than G3. It was Patton, not Monty that had to stop his advance because he ran out of fuel.

The crass arrogance of some Teeth arm COs on matters G4 and the blatant criminality of the actions of some of their QMs is the biggest change I have seen in the Army and for the worst and needs to be tackled, partiularly in these days of diminishing resources..
HE117, It seems you have a bee in your bonnet and are floundering around looking for "jobs for RLC boys", are you in danger of suffering cuts in the Corps that you now have to find some meaningful work for them to undertake and having found none in your own Corps have to go elswhere (i.e. Inf, RAC, RA - Teeth Arms).

If you are aware of any QM who has acted blatantly criminal then you have a duty to report it - quite simple to make such an accusation here on Arrse to embellish a story. Having been an Inf QM, I had a superb working relationship with the RLC CoC (DOWO, BOWO, SO2 etc), never had any complaints from them and sailed through LSI's. Placing an RLC bod at the head of a unit G4 chain would simply not work. Maybe having a RLC Sgt Storeman as a procedural advisor may?

If you are unhappy with the way the current crop of QMs are doing business, your first point of call must surely be the QM cse at Deepcut where they are instructed for six weeks on how to do the job?
 
#17
To me it makes perfect sense, the correctly trained and experienced people doing the their job to support those who they are attached to. Why have a dog and bark yourself?
 
#18
HE117, It seems you have a bee in your bonnet and are floundering around looking for "jobs for RLC boys", are you in danger of suffering cuts in the Corps that you now have to find some meaningful work for them to undertake and having found none in your own Corps have to go elswhere (i.e. Inf, RAC, RA - Teeth Arms).

If you are aware of any QM who has acted blatantly criminal then you have a duty to report it - quite simple to make such an accusation here on Arrse to embellish a story. Having been an Inf QM, I had a superb working relationship with the RLC CoC (DOWO, BOWO, SO2 etc), never had any complaints from them and sailed through LSI's. Placing an RLC bod at the head of a unit G4 chain would simply not work. Maybe having a RLC Sgt Storeman as a procedural advisor may?

If you are unhappy with the way the current crop of QMs are doing business, your first point of call must surely be the QM cse at Deepcut where they are instructed for six weeks on how to do the job?
Guilty as charged M'lud..! And perfectly happy to accept accusations of hyperbole - however this is ARSSE after all, and one is allowed, nay, encouraged to rant!

However on the serious side, I think there are problems on the G3/4 balance both at unit level and up the chain of command..

The "Loggie puke" attitude is seriously corrosive and has to be challenged.. The loggies need to concentrate on getting to grips with their role and stop trying to be crypto stormtroopers equally the steely eyed ones need to stop biting the hand that (literally) feeds them and grow up sometimes...!

As they say.. you need two to tango, and the current willy waving does not help. A Naval loggie I was speaking to remarked that the Army still seemed to be in the dark ages with the attitude of the G3 staff to loggie issues. The "snap the fingers" attitude by G3 staff to G4 staff at Bde and Div HQ was observed as being the root cause of much wasted time, money and effort. There is NO DOUBT that this is carried through to units by COs. A ships captain that ignores or abuses his engineering or supply staff will suffer in many ways!

No, I am seriously not looking for an empire building move to invade all unit stores, however with our ever increasing dependence on technology and with diminishing resources, we do need to achive a much better level of integration. Equally however, can we seriously accept that the logistics management task in a unit is something that can be run by second career individuals? Another way to look at the problem is that the longer the G4 supply system is kept out of 1st line and allowed to ignore what is happening at the sharp end, the worse the system is going to get.
 
#20
We might like to consider:

The reinstatement of worthwhile second line stock inventories in order that RLC pax could practice as routine their supply duties thereby enabling their performance on ops; that their dependencies demand off said inventories, and that a significant % of this demand is satisfied without extraction, thereby replicating what happens (should happen) on ops; and building useful and productive relationships between suppliers/user.

That ES Mat Rebalancing is reversed, thereby consolidating and strengthening a fragemented and dysfunctional supply chain.

That sufficient RLC personnel are embedded in the base supply area, thereby giving said personnel, in conjunction with postings at 1st, 2nd and 3rd?? (if this entity can even be considered to exist anymore) the opportunity to gain an E2E understanding of how the whole shebang works.