"Future Army Structure" 2005-2008

#1
Is this pure guess work??

http://www.regiments.org/regiments/uk/lists/ba2005.htm

All but one of the existing TA regiments will disband or be significantly redesignated, but with no reduction in companies, and companies will realign with the new regimental structure to form one TA battalion per regiment. After 2009 the new TA battalions might normalise at 4 rifle companies and an HQ company per battalion, with about six companies disbanding.

A Lancashire TA company (Blackburn or Warrington) may rebadge and join RRF.

Some regular battalions may refuse to amalgamate (e.g. The Black Watch)
and instead disband, but the result will still be new large regiments with the TA elements of the disbanded regulars still represented

The Mercian Regiment (The Princess Royal's)

new "large" regiment; senior Colonel-in-Chief lends her name; between 2006-2008 3 regular bns merge into 2 and omit subtitles; TA reverts closely to 1967 structure
 
#2
V interesting. The TA structure seems reasonable to me. Can't see the London Regiment getting broken up though.
 
#3
Yes, it's largely guesswork and at least in some ways inaccurate.

polar said:
Is this pure guess work??

http://www.regiments.org/regiments/uk/lists/ba2005.htm

All but one of the existing TA regiments will disband or be significantly redesignated, but with no reduction in companies, and companies will realign with the new regimental structure to form one TA battalion per regiment. After 2009 the new TA battalions might normalise at 4 rifle companies and an HQ company per battalion, with about six companies disbanding.

A Lancashire TA company (Blackburn or Warrington) may rebadge and join RRF.

Some regular battalions may refuse to amalgamate (e.g. The Black Watch)
and instead disband, but the result will still be new large regiments with the TA elements of the disbanded regulars still represented

The Mercian Regiment (The Princess Royal's)

new "large" regiment; senior Colonel-in-Chief lends her name; between 2006-2008 3 regular bns merge into 2 and omit subtitles; TA reverts closely to 1967 structure
 
#4
Not really very good for the TA Inf, you get the impression from posts on here that being a TA Infantryman means your more likely to goto the gulf than a regular one. (Have regular WFRs, Staffs, Cheshires, RAnglians, Green Howards, PWO etc gone on Telic no doubt they have from the TA)

So they should be looking at doubling TA inf - to reduce the odds? Or just admit SDR was an ill thought out exercise and put it back to how it is.
If things stay as they are and they TA inf continue to perform as they have..... will the cuts be limited to 4 regular battalions?

Anyone see Look North tonight and the slot on the Normandy Coy (looks to be predominatley East and West Riding Regt + RRF).
 
#5
cheshires are coming back from Basra next week I think, as for the other units I dont think they have been yet

I dont think we need to double the TA inf, I think we should just cut all the undeplyables and replace them with blokes who are keen to go.

Say on average you have 10 guys go on each op telic from a company you still wont get called up more than say every four years, and that's not taking in to account new lads and volunteers. We have had two big call ups because our parent regs were on telic 3 and 4 so we should get a break for a bit now, until 6 anyway I guess, but they have a lot of volunteers for 7 im told because a lot of lads are finishing uni that summer.
 
#6
come_to_arrest_the_zulus said:
I dont think we need to double the TA inf, I think we should just cut all the undeplyables and replace them with blokes who are keen to go.
Do you mean undeployables within the Inf or TA in general?

I get the impression that the Regs have moaned about the REMF's but not the teeth arms of the TA. So backing up my comment about SDR being wrong - the more deployable/succesful part of the TA is the teeth arms, which goes against SDR when it tried to make the TA into predominatley rear area troops.
 
#7
polar said:
come_to_arrest_the_zulus said:
I dont think we need to double the TA inf, I think we should just cut all the undeplyables and replace them with blokes who are keen to go.
Do you mean undeployables within the Inf or TA in general?

I get the impression that the Regs have moaned about the REMF's but not the teeth arms of the TA. So backing up my comment about SDR being wrong - the more deployable/succesful part of the TA is the teeth arms, which goes against SDR when it tried to make the TA into predominatley rear area troops.
Which Corps though ? The only reason you've not seen more of mine is that we all got deployed before Telic - but that's another story.

Equally, and I'm not trying to kick off a Regiment-Corps fight here (although we'll get one anyway) the more specialised nature of some Corps posts means that problems are far more apparent. After all, if you've got gaps in an infantry section you can always draw other infantrymen in from elsewhere in the Coy/Bn. Where you've got a section trained in a unique role you're a bit stuffed if one or two don't go for whatever reason. I'd be interested to see the percentages of deployable/non-deployable and how many got exempted broken down by capbadge.
 
#8
polar said:
So they should be looking at doubling TA inf - to reduce the odds? Or just admit SDR was an ill thought out exercise and put it back to how it is.
If things stay as they are and they TA inf continue to perform as they have..... will the cuts be limited to 4 regular battalions?
The TA Inf will see a slight expansion, although the strength of the TA is being unaltered. It will be at the expense of non-infantry units.
 
#9
come_to_arrest_the_zulus said:
I dont think we need to double the TA inf, I think we should just cut all the undeplyables and replace them with blokes who are keen to go.
Okay, bearing in mind that we won't find a great resevoir of people keen to go, what you're suggesting is effectively the destruction of the TA. All those personnel who have jobs and can't go right now would be kicked out, leaving a hardcore of those who want to be regulars, but couldn't get in (call them "Mikes") and the unemployed!

We might as well adopt the Australian system, which is very attractive to that hardcore, doing the regular courses etc., but wouldn't work for the masses.

PS 2nd Australian Division (their reserve) looks good on paper but is very hollow
 
#10
One_of_the_strange said:
Which Corps though ?
Mine maybe? My regt has probably deployed one soldier per telic (several on the first and one on the last).
While I'm glad about that, it doesn't seem fair on the inf where the figure quoted by 'come_to_arrest_the_zulus' was about 10 per Coy per Telic.
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#11
Yeah but what employer would want to take someone on who they expect to lose for 9-12 months every 4 years? Not me. That would make the TA unemployable.

I joined the TA. If I wanted to soldier full time I'd have joined the regs.

We've also got to look at the fact that the demand for inf is high as successive cuts have left a gap in the Inf with the Regs want the TA to fill. We're cheaper to maintain, even with RHA etc.
 
#13
come_to_arrest_the_zulus said:
maybe their should be to grades of ta soldier? those who are able and willing to be deployed more often and those with family or work commitments than make it more difficult?
Been there ,Done that already.The "Ever Readies"of the 60's(AER)
 
#14
galgenberg said:
come_to_arrest_the_zulus said:
maybe their should be to grades of ta soldier? those who are able and willing to be deployed more often and those with family or work commitments than make it more difficult?
Been there ,Done that already.The "Ever Readies"of the 60's(AER)
not heard of these. did they actually get deployed?

I think a big problem the TA has is that most of its officers and sncos do have families and careers that they cant leave at the drop of the hat, where as most of the junior ranks are not married and are students, or in non-career jobs

Because of this there is probaly a lot of junior ranks who are deployable but after a few call ups it will be hard to find the senior ranks to fill the posts.
 
#15
does anyone think that if there was a grading of TA soldier's deployability this might lead to a HSF style force being ressurected?
 
#17
Ive heard something about this. Rumour has it that the RRV is being split up and the companies reassigned to TA Inf Bns. If you look at 3PWRR for example, the PWRR Coy from the RRV will become amalgamated with 3PWRR to complete the Bns orbat as pool from which to draw troops when the 1 and 2 PWRR go on ops.
 
#18
I went to the ukraine on excercise with the RRV, they were a good bunch of lads but there was a bit of friction between the different capbadged coys. maybe it would be for the best if they were split between other battalions of their own capbadge?
 
#19
come_to_arrest_the_zulus said:
I went to the ukraine on excercise with the RRV, they were a good bunch of lads but there was a bit of friction between the different capbadged coys. maybe it would be for the best if they were split between other battalions of their own capbadge?
Funny you should mention that.....
 
#20
isleofwightrifles said:
come_to_arrest_the_zulus said:
I went to the ukraine on excercise with the RRV, they were a good bunch of lads but there was a bit of friction between the different capbadged coys. maybe it would be for the best if they were split between other battalions of their own capbadge?
Funny you should mention that.....
please elaborate..... :?:
 

Similar threads

Top