The arguement that the 'RAF man the equipment and the Army equip the man' has been thrown around for some time now. Being RAF and with quite some time in the Joint world I have always been fairly happy with that as a basic statement. However, things seem to be changing. I'd suggest that, more and more, the Army is 'manning the equipment'. A couple of points to support my suggestion: - The RAF (and the RN) have always been capabilities based around technologically advanced weapons platforms. Weapons, sensors, comms etc all combined to provide capable and complex platforms that required manning and operating, not to mention serious maintenance. - Since TELIC we have seen some quantum leaps in Land warfare equipment and capabilities. Take Mastiff or any other similar vehicle. So much more than wheels, an engine and some armour. Sensors, displays, countermeasures, remote weapon mounts etc. It is now a complex weapons platform that needs to be manned. - The soldier. No longer just a bloke with a gat and a radio. Again, since TELIC, the soldier is part of a man-portable system that has capabilities beyond what required a vehicle 20 years ago. Would a commander want one more man with a finger on the trigger, or would they want the ECM he carries? It is so much more complex now, not just about literal firepower, but the ability to jam, transmit, receive and everything else all those man-worn systems are capable of. So, happy for it to be picked to bits, but I'd say the Army is edging far more towards manning the equipment now and in the future.