Have we suffered skillfade?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Outstanding, May 13, 2013.

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. It seems that the increased numbers of "Peace Support" and "Crisis Response" style of operation have had a significant effect on our ability to fight "General Mechanised Wars". This is evident from some of the results of recent (re-) training in Grafenwohr, where soldiers are obviosuly not used to spending extended days and nights in the field unsupported by portaloos/showers and PB/FOB stayle facilities. Has this come about through over training for serious operations in ISAF or as result of mismanagement and a risk averse posture by COs?
     
  2. you are talking rubbish, soldiers spend 4 weeks on the prairie, all the support is in the field. Carrying out mechanised warfare. All units are rotated through this, you are trying to make an argument over something that you obviously know little about.
     
  3. Thanks Dave, clearly you do, but your slightly aggressive tone seems to indicate that you not prepared to discuss it. Of course some soldiers spend time in Canada (but not the whole BG at one time) and some spend time in Germany as well. That itself does not mean that they are able to fit into an integrated all arms battle scenario.

    The loss of large scale extended training events has had a effect and it was this that I was considering, not simply the amount of time people spend on "Carrying out mechanised warfare" whatever that means? Indeed many infantry blokes think that spending time on Mechanised warfare is dull and "not what I joined for".
     
  4. I would present an argument that it is acknowledged and recognised with the ever increasing phase “Return to Contingency”. I also think that with the CLF’s obvious interest in CBRN (NBC in old money) soldiers are going to find themselves getting very used to spending time in their respirators whilst ‘re-learning’ their MCO skills ^~
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Yes, there is skill fade (by the infantry at least). Most soldiering at present is either PDT or on operations which is obviously based on counter-insurgency type warfare. Obviously units do train for conventional warfare when feasible and budget requirements allow them to do so.

    When I was at Support Weapons School (Warminster) last year the school noticed the lack of understanding by many students on the courses in reference to conventional warfare type soldiering both in administration in the field and understanding of larger formation tactics and warfare.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  6. It's all a load of old HORROCKS anyway ^~
     
  7. Hasn't COIN* become "conventional warfare" these days? Haven't large-scale wars become the exception rather than the rule?
    Of course, no-one sane would suggest that "big war" not be an integral part of training (and procurement decisions), but to what extent should it retain its central position as the predominant training scenario?


    *Or whatever the fück it's called this week
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. There seems to be a definate skiff-fade of late, my softie doss bag hood no longer smells of Craftsman Casey's arse!
     
  9. I suppose most operations in the near future will be along the lines of COIN but the way I see it all types of warfare are basically branch off's from conventional operations. I think it's easier to convert to COIN from CONOPS than vice versa.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  10. It’s like the old saying goes ‘Train hard, fight easy’ (as that was ever the case!), but has Fallsch says, far easy to ‘step down’ from multi Bde manoeuvre warfare in a Joint & Combined Arms environment than it is to ‘step up’ :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Actually, even in the 70s I was surprised on my first major BAOR exercise to find that the Div HQ would be visiting a nearby school gym for shower and perfume during the week, and the so-called NBC phase was as phoney as the commitment to any sort of reality. It may have been a rare exception, but the attitude of most of the HQ staff was very complacent. I would have thought that the increased pace of operations since then would have jolted that sort of mindset into other, more suitable career paths.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. I'm sure it has. Operations have a tendency to catch out the bluffers unless of course said bluffers skive off them.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. That is all part of the Divisional demoralisation plan, the trickle up system of cushyness, you obviously joined a unit where the stag list was solely for the manning (or is it unmanning) of the officer's glory holes and not a gun pit full of fresh pig slurry. The best example I saw of this was in Bosnia, Split based Div HQ shiny arses complained about us "rough transit types" using all the hot water and being loudly drunk in the mess, the problem was the same in the hotel in Sipovo where the Bde HQ shinies all had a big stack of care boxes under their desk: biccies, tea, coffee, lard, Harrods beer, choccy bars, my lads never received one, then they complained about having to queue with us, the dreadful unwashed who'd not seen a phone or a shower for four months, to use the welfare phones!

    I still have that whistling shovel by the way!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Sorry grumpy at the moment , just that I was impressed as OM in BATUS at the standard of Mechanised warfare at its most basic of level. Also the soldiers no matter how bad it got they still stuck in.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Would the British Army be able to deploy an armoured brigade at the moment (in addition to Afghanistan)?

    When the teeth arms are largely withdrawn from Afghanistan I would assume there will be a period of reorg & consolidation?

    The army should be better organised to fight either or type of combat with the new brigade structure, instead of say having to train on warrior and mastiff.


    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)