Last mentalist on here who did that was squeakyboat/joeydeacon. User name for that particular creation was KIM74. Pretty sure they're all one and the same, throw Tinman74/himmler in there too. Fcuking barking.Why did you pretend to be a female starting RMAS? It's really, really odd behaviour.
I'm thinking that as the Army gets smaller can it afford to keep distinct small, specialist Corps.
Whether the Army would be better thinking of driving internal change so every pound the Army gets can go as far as it can or if as the Army gets smaller, instead of taking the risk of an SoS Def. armed with Treasury costings, who simply puts a red pen through the organisational structure to bring it more into line with the money in the bank?
Given the vast amount of knowledge on the site, I'm sure plenty are scoffing that my thoughts are daft and will never happen, but I wonder who, would've thought that the regular army is no longer be big enough to fill the national football stadium?
If the issue is about professional excellence why waste time, money and effort, recreating the wheel when surely it would be easier to expand the Parachute Regiment and even the Royal Marines.Two thoughts:
1. Divisions of Infantry. What meaningful purpose do they serve?
2. The continuing link between Ranger Bns and parent regiments looks a bit lame. Why not just launch the Rangers as a separate organisation recruited exclusively on professional excellence, from right across the Army, rather than (at least in part) on the basis of cap badge?
Because they both lack the operational capabilities for the role, the Royal Marines are not part of the Army, and your Basic Infantryman with Parachuting abilities is not what's needed.If the issue is about professional excellence why waste time, money and effort, recreating the wheel when surely it would be easier to expand the Parachute Regiment and even the Royal Marines.
Ah, but won't HM get ever so cross if there is any talk of chopping Guards numbers.Not much of a reward for being well recruited and manned is it? Rifles = 5Bn's reasonably well manned and losing 921 PIDS, Footguards (for comparison) = 5Bn's reasonably undermanned and losing nada.
We're a forward thinking and modern army apparently.......
- Unconventional Warfare
- Direct Action
- Domestic Counter-Terrorism
- High Value Targets
- Close Protection
- Maritime Operations
- Unconventional Warfare
- Foreign Internal Defence
- Information Operations
- Security Force Assistance
- Nation Building
SFSG.... Pressure, Discipline, Headstrong, Precision, Aggression.
Rangers.... Leadership, Patience, Culture, Languages, Compassion.
FOCSmall, specialist Corps would be things like SASC, RAPTC, RADC, RAVC etc.
R SIGNALS has (currently) 13x regular regiments, and numerous smaller units/dets. It’s brush heads are larger than the Guards Division's busbys. And virtually nothing to do with the Army.
Because they don't match the specified requirement perhaps? (given that it doesn't appear to be a need for more commandos and paratroopers)If the issue is about professional excellence why waste time, money and effort, recreating the wheel when surely it would be easier to expand the Parachute Regiment and even the Royal Marines.