How big with the TA be after the new Review?

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by MrTracey, Oct 27, 2010.

  1. Larger - probably nearer to 45,000 to accommodate Regular manpower reductions

    10 vote(s)
  2. Same - proportionally an increase (as aganist the regular force)

    18 vote(s)
  3. Smaller (15-20k) - it was a smoke screen after all

    30 vote(s)
  4. Very small (less than 15k) - the price of integration

    13 vote(s)

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. Opinions are divided.

    Some imagine that this 'new' Review is merely smoke and mirrors to appease the institutional support for the Reserve and that it's just a method of applying the cuts they planned as part of SDSR - Regulars getting their own back for the reversion of the Training cut last year?

    Some are convinced that the STAB approach has, like the cold war, been consigned to the past. That the regular Army has turned a corner in it's approach to the Reserve and that the future is about harmony and integration.

    Some believe that this is a real turning point - that the US/Canada model is the answer and that we could see a real increase in TA numbers and contribution.
  2. We could just say what we want on here. It's all conjecture. Until the 6 month TA review is over and the paper is submitted.

    Having said that, if they are looking for defence on the cheap, the TA, or at least some form of reserve forces is the only way to go. Why pay for squaddies to sit around in barracks? Have a small cadre to look after what vehicles we have left, bring in the reservists for camp and weekend training and compulsory call up the manpower when it's needed.

    If they go for something along the lines of the American model, once you have signed on the dotted line there's nothing 'voluntary' about it. 'Drill' at weekends and AT (Annual Training) are compulsory parades and if you need a course you are called up to attend it.

    That 'good' or 'bad'? Depends on your situation.
  3. I hope its option 3. I rather fear its option 1. ....and a Staff Frustrated is something to be feared. Having been told " Reshow" by DC lets hope they actually put the thinking caps on rather than just digging in the heels.
  4. Either I'm having a "deja vu" moment, Tracy, or you opened up exactly the same thread a few weeks ago: expect the same answers as before. And your fantasies of a vast new TA with its own Armoured Brigades etc etc are no more realistic than they were then - much as I personally would love to see it. Wake up and smell the coffee - there is no money. The reason much of this kit is being taken away is that HMG thinks that it can do without it - and not that it wants to give it all to you and me.
  5. Sadly the only person who believes the second two options are likely is Mr Tracey... There's no "some" about it. And neither is there the political will to introduce ballsy legislation to enable a National Guard style TA.

    But if it keeps you happy until the results of the review, keep on dreaming. And then he TA forum can fall back on furiously shaking their fists at the CoC ( virtually and anonymously, obviously ) and ranting "One day you'll be sorry! And you'll BEG for me to come back!"

  6. Ask your PSI.
  7. THIS big.

    * demonstrates, waving hands *
  8. Are you sure you'll need both hands?
  9. They shouldn't be, the figures are out there...(allegedly)
  10. A dilemma or a new vision?

    Hard to say, given the random decisions of the coalition. For example, I'm not sure why we had to lose any soldiers, airman or seamen as a result of SDSR. The savings are ultimately marginal and could have easily been made by budget cuts, cancellation of big ticket procurement or the removal of more civil servants. As ever, no-one thought out of the box and what happened to 'people are our agile edge'? - they can't be if you have fewer of them! Thus I suspect that any review of the reserves will already have it's 'findings' pre-written in the 'statement of principles' issued to the project team.

    I suspect that the words and phrases 'integrated', 'better trained' and 'operationally focused' are already enshrined in their thinking. The real challenge will be if they have the courage to suggest a solution to the principle dilemma:

    That the Reserve should be of a scale to deliver a robust yet flexible capability properly in support of the regular force, not a scale dictated by an arbitrary amount of money allocated within a centrally dictated budget.

    If it is the former, then we can have no argument (whether that means it is larger or even smaller anyway). If it is the latter, then shame on them.
  11. I do hope the value of the TA property portfolio has nothing to do with the review, but it could just have some bearing on the final decision!
  12. I agree. There's your opinion and everybody else's.

    How quaint that, in the guise of MrTracey, the TA have their very own evangelist.
  13. I dont think that anyone knows how strong the TA really is at present. If you cut away all of the PUDS, deadwood, biffs, none attenders, join up & get a uniform and then use it as excusse to shag arounds a real picture could be formed.
  14. MrTracey, what the fook does "opinions are divided" mean? And why, Sangreal, are you agreeing with him?

    There can be a division of opinion, no problemo: where something is put to a vote and the result is 50:50. But a division of opinions?

    How can a single division apply to multiple questions? And what are the questions? I think Homer Simpson put it best when he said: "Who's doing what, now?"

    And Sangreal, if it's MrTracey vs The World, then there isn't a division of opinion and you shouldn't be agreeing with him.
  15. Strange. Not like you to not read up thoroughly...

    Does that help?