Is 148 Bty being binned?

Discussion in 'Gunners' started by McDick69, Oct 19, 2012.

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. I was just looking through the forum and seemed to notice several people saying that 148 is now a victim of sdsr just wondering if that's true. Does 148 do HALO/HAHO?
     
  2. Probably, but the capability is being retained by all accounts, probably doing it with bootnecks and matelots. And just standard parachuting.
     
  3. Yes. The Army has no requirement for the capability.
     
  4. Tell that to all the army units in the falklands,the sas and sbs insisted on having their own teams, tell that to the scots guards or the paras, tell it to the us navy seals in iraq, i could go on but its lost on mouthey ***** like you who no fuckall about 148 or ngs.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Why do chavs like you make it past the NAAFI part of this forum?
     
  6. another loud mouthed ****, i was in 148. Whats your claim to fame.
     
  7. He may spell like a Somali infant but he's certainly done the business, what did you get up to? And which homosexual member of your family wrote "All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain" in your sig block, beeeeeeeeeeef!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. I wish to appologise to degeneral i got him mixed up with petardier, on the thread, the h.a.c. whats the point.
     
  9. Hey Plums,

    'Mighty Meiktila' may yet go to the wall as the focus shifts towards re-investing equipment into batteries but the fact the Gunners are retaining loads of FSTs across the board means that the fate of 148 is by no means assured. Plenty of water yet to flow. But I think we'll see it disbanded - a real shame.

    Worst case - lets merge the capabilities with 4/73 - I really do think any decision to bin specialist batteries likes these demonstrates that the Gunner hierarchy know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
     
  10. Don't under-estimate an Army 4* led plan to either remove 3 Cdo Bde from the OrBat entirely, or take over the task (and money) from the RN and then subsume them into the Army and make it a rotational task - a bit like the Air Assault Bn in 16X...
     
  11. A nice thought Lait, but 148,s, main focus is the 3 cdo brigade, B.R.F. /I.S.T.A.R. (which the army copied), but still made them selves available to all army units. On op herrick they have worked with every army unit, they are truly a national asset. So i think politics are involved, the same way the S.A.S. tried to take over the S.B.S. why would you want to disband such a versatile unit who are in great demand across the whole spectrum of infantry units by using the excuse they belong to the navy. Again tell that to all the army units since the second world war right to the present day who request their services.
     
  12. We get so wound up/distracted fighting off the RAF's grabs for our air assets we forget there is an arguably greater asset we have (3 Cdo in its entirety) that another service would quite like to nick/assimilate. Granted, I can't really think of some capability we're trying to extract from the other services right now? There must be something, I doubt we're innocent of this empire building.

    Can't we all just get along!!




    *NB I did however get wound up overhearing a RM Sgt in Faslane tell the RN Medic he was talking to 'Look, I don't know the Navy version of this system' - what colour's the ID card old chap??
     
  13. Your lot went out of the FJ business when u scrapped the FRS2!!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. I'm lost now; I thought this was about 148 Bty? Is someone now suggesting that there is a point to the HAC? (Apart from the very nice sports facilities they have just in front of the Royal Hospital in Chelsea of course).
     
  15. Agree - I refer you to the nearby thread about Willy McCracken of 148 Bty who pulled 3 PARA out of the pooh on Longdon...
     
    • Like Like x 1