Merge the three Services

Re military police, and civil police too, would it not be cheaper, nationally, to train all " police" to a single standard, then add modular courses for, eg, military, nuclear, MOD etc police?
ie, bin all current MPs and subcontract the job of policing garrisons, ships and airfields to civpol?
Its been suggested several times to merge the polices services on civvie street.
 

Alamo

LE
I use to fire it up the CoC at every unit, unfortunately people like you are in charge.

Those at the very top of the Army couldnt even sort out shirts in/out for years so you stop the bollocks that the SNCOs play a major part in these type of decisions. Thats just a cop out for for officers incompetence. An SNCO can suggest things (Like not mounting an investigation to look for a 3p washer) only for it to be ignored, be hey, us clever people at the top would have thought about it if it was a good idea, we didnt so it must be shit.

Wearing cam cream is to instill a sense of martial purpose? Are you seriously sat there with a straight face when you typed that? If you want to do infantry training, then do infantry training, plaster on the cam cream and run around Otterburn for a few weeks. Dont **** about on tech exercises trying to look warry because that is just embarrassing.

Is 41k not enough for you? If everyone saved 41k how much would the MOD save? Or is it just not really good enough to go on an OJAR?


As someone who served 34 years and looked at ways of saving money, why did Mattb have to explain why having two supply chains costs more than one? What is your supply background?
And so, like every other thread you post on, you reduce it to an offs v ORs bore off. Honestly, you have some good points to make but you’re worse than a stuck record.
 
Its been suggested several times to merge the polices services on civvie street.
over the bodies of dead CC's. If you want an exemplar of how not to do it ....Border Force. Immigration and Customs are easy. Train each side up to do the other and an immigration officer remains one and A customs officer does too. However- there is facility for Customs to act as Immigration officers under the immigration act 1971 but not the other way round.
 
And so, like every other thread you post on, you reduce it to an offs v ORs bore off. Honestly, you have some good points to make but you’re worse than a stuck record.
I take it you didnt notice Truxx shifting the blame downwards then?

Officers are in charge, they can take the blame, if you had shares in Tesco and they go down due to stupid decisions do you blame the till operator or the board?
 

Mölders 1

Old-Salt
Two entirely different capabilities. With entirely different force structures. You would be as well comparing chalk and cheese. The RAF is not without its faults (and never has been) but the comparison is nonsense.
I suppose that it could well be argued that the Israeli Air Force has to operate on a smaller budget than the R.A.F.

I do think it is worth noting though how the Israeli Air Force buy American Aircraft and refit them with Homegrown Avionics.
 
Close the thread :p

On a more serious note, efficiency is never going to work very well if you don't know your inputs and output and nailing those down (to a sufficient level) only works if you don't plan on using your armed forces for contingency. This feels like something that govt doesn't quite "get". Then again, neither did Rolls-Royce when I was there.
First thing cut in a procurement is always the spares and logistic support because it doesn't show on the headline numbers. Right up until the point that certain aircraft fleets are unable to get more than 40% of the forward fleet on the line, or ships are STOROBbed to f8ck and the effort required to do so knocks back all the other programmed tasks. Meaning other ships are late or miss A&A opps.

If SoS edict to get the fleet availability figures up has a knock-on effect, it's hopefully that the support funding gets better protected. Not holding my breath though.
 

Truxx

LE
Let civvies do what? Take over logistics because they dont have to wear cam cream on exercise?
What is supposed to be the main purpose of CT2 and 3 for suppliers? Is it looking warry so the CO gets a stiffy or is it to practise their trade in the field for any potential future deployment?

How is Carrillion, Capita etc and the rest of the great contracts working the MOD?
A better analogy would be to look at KBR and Halliburton in the US context.

Even the sharper bits can be done by contractors. Not just loggie functions.

Let me play devil's advocate here. You tell me why only you, in uniform, could have done your job.
 

Truxx

LE
From the RN's technical side, we waste a stupid amount of man-hours (and potentially time off task) because our documentation is lacklustre, both for diagnosis and ordering stores support.

It is far too common to bounce a request to DE&S either to give us an NSN (documents not held on board/impossible to understand/don't actually exist) or authorisation to EPC some lesser widget. The big stuff is usually patternised and can be demanded (to be delivered sometime after the Ship's making-of date, but it can be demanded!) but smaller things cause a lot of wasted time.

On a related note, Ships sail around with a whole load of internal lights out and DE&S wastes money on lamp contracts because nobody thought to explain the business process that meant our routine demands kept getting knocked back*, and the Ships are used as the warehouse "buffer" rather than all the idle storehouses in the dockyards.

*Lamps - bulbs to the rest of the world - are ordered through a steady-state contract, which means demands above about 50 at a time get automatically rejected with no notification. Ships tend to order several hundred before deploying/because they're nearly out.
That's all because some senior rate cock in the supply system is having an ooo look at me I saved 567 quid this year on lightbulbs moment.
 

Truxx

LE
First thing cut in a procurement is always the spares and logistic support because it doesn't show on the headline numbers. Right up until the point that certain aircraft fleets are unable to get more than 40% of the forward fleet on the line, or ships are STOROBbed to f8ck and the effort required to do so knocks back all the other programmed tasks. Meaning other ships are late or miss A&A opps.

If SoS edict to get the fleet availability figures up has a knock-on effect, it's hopefully that the support funding gets better protected. Not holding my breath though.
Lots of that about. Justified by the notion that if the system has to be used in anger then the whole operational funding machine can be coaxed into action. Fitted For Not With....
 
A better analogy would be to look at KBR and Halliburton in the US context.

Even the sharper bits can be done by contractors. Not just loggie functions.

Let me play devil's advocate here. You tell me why only you, in uniform, could have done your job.

KBR and Halliburton that cost a fortune? The ones who were nowhere to be seen when handing over FOB Inkermen to the US Marine.

How did Blackwater handle the "sharper bits"?

Im sure there were a few of us, but basically I was fit enough to deploy where ever the British Army told me to deploy at very short notice. I also couldnt arrive in theatre and say, this might be dangerous I'd like to go back now.


However whats that got to do with Cam cream on a tech exercise? You have had 34 years of experience surely you have a better reason than just some people want to act warry?

I might have missed it earlier, what did you say your supply background was?
 

Truxx

LE
Two entirely different capabilities. With entirely different force structures. You would be as well comparing chalk and cheese. The RAF is not without its faults (and never has been) but the comparison is nonsense.
Still didn't stop the light blue having major palpitations at the time. It was also the genesis of the points you raise. Prior to to 1994 all the RAF had to do was to say Battle of Britain and Red Arrows and the naughty questions went away.
 
That's all because some senior rate cock in the supply system is having an ooo look at me I saved 567 quid this year on lightbulbs moment.
I had cause to ring the Major in charge of the supply of RST (Ring, Sealing, Toroidal aka O seals) to explain why his arbitrary limit of four per order was unworkable. Officers are at least as capable at being jumped-up twats as ORs are.
 

Truxx

LE
KBR and Halliburton that cost a fortune? The ones who were nowhere to be seen when handing over FOB Inkermen to the US Marine.

How did Blackwater handle the "sharper bits"?

Im sure there were a few of us, but basically I was fit enough to deploy where ever the British Army told me to deploy at very short notice. I also couldnt arrive in theatre and say, this might be dangerous I'd like to go back now.


However whats that got to do with Cam cream on a tech exercise? You have had 34 years of experience surely you have a better reason than just some people want to act warry?

I might have missed it earlier, what did you say your supply background was?
I would consider myself a supply customer not a practitioner.

As for cam cream I consider that line of debate to be a spurious winge masquerading as a serious point so I will ignore it. If you could not see any point then the illogical conclusion is that you were simply a civvie in uniform. And an expensive one to boot. I was never obliged to fire my weapon in anger during 36 months on and off of operational deployments. Neither did I have to run 3 miles (except for fun) put on my respirator, or patch up a wounded colleague

Why bother then with all that training and expense?
 
Last edited:

Truxx

LE
I had cause to ring the Major in charge of the supply of RST (Ring, Sealing, Toroidal aka O seals) to explain why his arbitrary limit of four per order was unworkable. Officers are at least as capable at being jumped-up twats as ORs are.
Good man. I was once phoned by one of the equipment management staff in Andover. Circa 1987

"How many DUKW (WW2 vintage amphibious trucks) are there in service? " he asked

"2" I said. "Down with ATTURM at Instowe"

"2 eh?. Any reason why they need carburettors?"

"They don't. They are both converted to diesel engines"

"Then why do we buy 26 DUKW carburettors every year?"

"You tell me......."
 
I would consider myself a supply customer not a practitioner.

As for cam cream I consider that line of debate to be a spurious winged masquerading as a serious point so I will ignore it. If you could not see any point then the illogical conclusion is that you were simply a civvie in uniform. And an expensive one to boot. I was never obliged to fire my weapon in anger during 36 months on and off of operational deployments. Neither did I have to run 3 miles (except for fun) put on my respirator, or patch up a wounded colleague

Why bother then with all that training and expense?
To clarify you know **** all about supply? Fair enough, but maybe you shouldnt waffle on about it. I dont advise the infantry on how to attack a position.

You want to ignore cam cream because it a perfectly good example of the Army doing something pointless, that costs money and can be easily rectified and you have not thought about it despite your 34 years in the Army.

You wont say why the Army does it other than it apparently make people feel martial. This is despite the fact the RLC generally doesnt wear cam cream on tour, wont wear cam cream when exercising with proper buildings for accommodation and if you really want to feel like a big brave soldier you can go do an infantry based exercise anytime you like.

Are you mental? Do you need to practise firing your weapon or patching up someone on a trade exercise? I cant believe that someone with 34 years of experience doesnt think that you can practice all the green skills on CT0/1 exercises or on battlecamps.

Right, lads we had a set time limit to set up (and take down) a storehouse/RV/ammo compound in the field, get the computers set up and do some issues, receipts, maintenance and stock taking, oh wait, lets practice some first aid instead, or firing blanks because you'll learn a lot of trade training by doing that :roll:
 
What about hackles? Would the navy and air force corps within combined service have to wear those?
I think just go for dark blue berets for everyone - think of the savings.

And all other “embellishments” can go as well. Must be £10s of savings.
 
Still didn't stop the light blue having major palpitations at the time. It was also the genesis of the points you raise. Prior to to 1994 all the RAF had to do was to say Battle of Britain and Red Arrows and the naughty questions went away.
The question had already been raised when I was on the 4th Floor in ‘92. The answer was - in effect - “Yeah, well reasons”.

I went digging and found 49 Admin Branch Group Captains. Compared to 4 Rockape Group Captains. I also found 5,000 RAF admin posts that had a different war role (like NBC shelter marshals) or NO war role at all. Not to mention the wastage in the BBMF or the Queen’s Flight.

We were told “no more sacred cows”. The default option should have been “adopt a profile similar to the Israelis unless you can make an argument for each and every extra post” but at that time the bottom fell out of the pound and we had to leave the ERM. The entire MB staff were told “no more bad news” and zeal for reform faded away.

I use the RAF as an example because that’s the desk I was sat at. The other two services weren’t guilt free. One only has to remember the fuss made by the Household Division over losing their second battalions.

@Truxx is right. But the argument with @stacker1 is a false dichotomy. People should be encouraged to make savings suggestions and even rewarded for them.
However, the only way to significantly slim the defence budget without ‘salami slicing’ is to do less with less people. The only way to do that without destroying operational effectiveness is to properly define the role of defence and equip it accordingly.

Oh, and @Truxx, I’d still vote for you, but please please don’t use ‘genius’ as an adjective!
 

Latest Threads

Top