Merge the three Services

Edited for accuracy. But your point is well made. See also wimmin in the teeth arms.

As I said right at the start, the only real way of spending less on defence is to do less defence. Less folks with less capable toys doing fewer things less often and to a lower standard.

That said I think merging the services would be a great way to do all of that, by sleight of hand, in a single hit, particularly the lower standards bit.
I too have been lurking this thread for a couple of days, avoiding the RLC cnut off.

TBH I think both you and @Stacker are right, but you are arguing different things. Stacker’s point is about efficiency; spending money the allocated to defence better. Yours is about reducing spending. They are not the same thing.

I suspect there are still a mass of minor inefficiencies that can readily be identified by those at the coal face; shoes and cam cream may be two; the actual examples are not really the point. Until you come up with a way of incentivising those at the coal face to deliver their tasks “faster, better, cheaper” those savings can never be realised.

Equally, I’m not convinced that the big stuff has really been done. Or if it has, it hasn’t been undone. Organisations tend to build overhead; it’s true of big business too. Empires need to be built. Without a strong culture of seeking efficiencies, they bloat.

Despite it now approaching 40 years since NMS was rolled across the MoD and other public sector organisations, few have really addressed their cost base from top to bottom and connected it to outputs.

As for merging the three services, my bet is that merged functions would slowly separate into stovepiped empires. It would provide short term savings but empires would then be built.
 
...

As for merging the three services, my bet is that merged functions would slowly separate into stovepiped empires. It would provide short term savings but empires would then be built.
You are, without doubt, correct. People will get streamed as a matter of necessity. There will be those, though, who can 'prove' that it has properly merged, by pointing to a RAF sonar operator who has served for twenty years on subs.
 

again - peanuts.

If you want savings, you chop entire fleets/capabilities/classes of ship and make the people associated redundant.
Or start with merging all the Infantry into a ”Corps” of Infantry?
 

Truxx

LE
If I could pick up on @bobthebuilder 's point about NMS and a culture that thinks cost and incentivised spotting waste my hypothesis is that, to an enormous extent, that point has been reached.

By way of example virtually all of the debate thus far has centred around cost, only a tiny handful have ventured into whether a merge would result in better combat effectiveness, whether such a construct might be a better reflection of society, whether such a move would enhance our national standing internationally, or any one of a hundred other things.

We have instead chosen to rabbit on about cost. Which tells me that if NMS were designed to engender a culture of judging everything by its cost then that has been a raging success.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted 3147

Guest
Interesting, how long ago? They were Midi's 2 years ago.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk
No they weren't i was on the staff in 99 and they were OCs, when I went through in 92 we were OCs.
 
No they weren't i was on the staff in 99 and they were OCs, when I went through in 92 we were OCs.
That's why I think it might have changed back. 2018 they were all pretty adamant they were Midshipmen not Officer Cadets.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk
 
D

Deleted 3147

Guest
Despite it now approaching 40 years since NMS was rolled across the MoD and other public sector organisations, few have really addressed their cost base from top to bottom and connected it to outputs.
I disagree. I don't know your background but if you were in the Navy at OF4/5 upwards in a HQ function you'd be exposed to this all the time and see the efforts to drive out duplication/RMC waste, increase efficiency and use that to increase operational effectiveness.

The costs are well known and getting better understood all the time. Managing that between three TLBs is the issue.
 
That's why I think it might have changed back. 2018 they were all pretty adamant they were Midshipmen not Officer Cadets.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk
This is an officer cadet


Note: the white patch on the shoulder is horizontal, this is not saluted, nor addressed as sir or ma’am by the lower decks.

This is a midshipman’s rank slide

Note the white patch is vertical. This is saluted and addressed as sir/ ma’am by the lower decks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Let's do this one paragraph at a time

I am not a supplier. Thank God. But I do know a heck of a lot about support to the armed forces (all 3) particularly on ops.

I dismiss the shoe idea because until you can give me the numbers it's just bullshit.
You dismiss them because after 34 years and hanging around clever people who make decisions you cant even get the basics right.

So for your benefit.
Most people whether they are in supply or not, know that bulk buying usually brings the overall cost of an item down, which is why people buy 96 bog in Costco instead off 9 in Tesco.

However, a clothing item that the Army buys for a tenner, doesnt not cost the army a tenner by the time it gets to the end user.
Its starts in Bicester where it is placed on a shelf, it will probably be subject to a stock take once a year, it has to be transported to which ever unit has ordered it, (Assuming it doesnt go via 2nd line which is more added cost) it will be subjected to an annual stock check once a year (again). It will have its own receipt and issue paperwork.
If you have two similar items that perform the same function you have potentially doubled that.
Now add in a percentage of NSN being discrepant, if you have 1000 items an 1% is discrepant then you have 10 items to investigate, if you could amalgamate those numbers and have 900 items and 1% is discrepant then you have 9 items to investigate. 10% less work for the S&R team.
In addition to that as was pointed out by Mattb earlier, if you go to one QMs and they dont have the item you are forced to have, but you need it immediately the chances are the military are going to give you the morning off to go to another unit.

None multiply that cost across multiple NSNs and multiple units. Is it still trivial?

Ive put that as basically as I could, I can understand if none supply people were unaware of the additional costs and that an item does not just cost the military the basic unit price, but I would have thought someone with 34 years experience and hangs around with all the clever people who know best would have more of an idea.

Your comments about abortion and homosexuality are hereby ignored.
Why? You were the one bringing up the use of cam cream 30 years ago, I merely pointed out that the military had other habits 30 years ago, that were changed, granted no one had the common sense at the time to change things and they had to be forced by legal means to change things, you would think that someone with 34 years experience might have some common sense...
My support for cam cream is straightforward. Cam and concealment is of particular importance to CSS units. Getting individuals to think like a soldier (martial mindset) is fundamental. Clearly the lesson was lost on you.
Utter and total ******* bullshit,. The only place the vast majority of RLC will ever use cam cream is on some (not all) exercises, never on tour, in barracks or ranges, how do they manage to have a "Martial mindset" in those places?
If you want to instill a "Martial mindset" and cam up, go on a battlecamp and fill you boots. Running around live firing, throwing thunderflashes and doing various infantry taskings will give soldiers a "Martial mindset" more than putting on cam cream before standing under massive spotlights in a stores area.
What has happened is your were taught a load of crap 30 years ago and so you have carried on doing it, it must be right otherwise we wouldnt be doing it. On another thread there is a post about an female officer whinging about being called Sir on the phone, why is it still happened, because people have the same mindset as you and just do whatever they saw being done when they joined and think that is the only way of doing it.

In 2006 or 2007 4 LSR had to do some pre tour training in Pirbright which consisted of walking around stands, we took webbing, helmets, weapons and body armour (Just the juniors had to wear body armour) when we go there most of the stands were run by infantry who all promptly took the piss, why the **** were we dressed like that?
Then as we were would stood in groups, one group started to cam up, now in fairness I dont know which rank ordered it, but I had a good chuckle when a bootie who was on one of the stands ripped into them. Funnily enough that day not a single officer told the infantry or the bootie (Who kept going on about our stupidity and how our officers seem to interpret, turn up and listen into dress up like you are going to war) that we were doing it for the "Martial mindset"
It is truly embarrassing that a grown man and soldier with 34 experience thinks that soldiers get "Martial mindset" by wearing cam cream on tech exercises.


My point about training was that there is no difference. If you or a group are training, then regardless of the type of training, it is to prepare you or the group for operations. Even trade training. Clearly the point was lost on you.
Now you are telling porkies, on a battle camp in Otterburn do you stop to set up storehouse or check the CES of a truck? Or do you concentrate on infantry basic skills? So why on a trade exercise would you bother doing infantry basic skills?
I wonder how many manpower hours your lads wasted because of you wanting to look warry.


None of the things you mention are any impediment to a go-getting service provider providing support. Now answer my question. Why could your job not have been done by a contractor?
All of those things are an impediment. In KAF one of my old WO2 was on a 6 figure sum plus perks (Plus didnt pay tax). On of my friends was a LCpl left and worked with KBR for around 2 and half time the wages. Contractors to war zones are not cheap.
Add to that, they were under no obligation to go there or indeed stay there. A soldier doesn't have much of choice.
 
If I could pick up on @bobthebuilder 's point about NMS and a culture that thinks cost and incentivised spotting waste my hypothesis is that, to an enormous extent, that point has been reached.

By way of example virtually all of the debate thus far has centred around cost, only a tiny handful have ventured into whether a merge would result in better combat effectiveness, whether such a construct might be a better reflection of society, whether such a move would enhance our national standing internationally, or any one of a hundred other things.

We have instead chosen to rabbit on about cost. Which tells me that if NMS were designed to engender a culture of judging everything by its cost then that has been a raging success.
After I left the MoD I went to work for the UN.

They don’t use NMS or anything like it.

At one point 10 of our 25 EOD teams in Cambodia were off the road because of a dues out on tyres, because we’d overspent on the tyre budget line.

This was an organisation that was about brigade sized.

An NMS-like, activity-based budget would have been a godsend.
 

Truxx

LE
You dismiss them because after 34 years and hanging around clever people who make decisions you cant even get the basics right.

So for your benefit.
Most people whether they are in supply or not, know that bulk buying usually brings the overall cost of an item down, which is why people buy 96 bog in Costco instead off 9 in Tesco.

However, a clothing item that the Army buys for a tenner, doesnt not cost the army a tenner by the time it gets to the end user.
Its starts in Bicester where it is placed on a shelf, it will probably be subject to a stock take once a year, it has to be transported to which ever unit has ordered it, (Assuming it doesnt go via 2nd line which is more added cost) it will be subjected to an annual stock check once a year (again). It will have its own receipt and issue paperwork.
If you have two similar items that perform the same function you have potentially doubled that.
Now add in a percentage of NSN being discrepant, if you have 1000 items an 1% is discrepant then you have 10 items to investigate, if you could amalgamate those numbers and have 900 items and 1% is discrepant then you have 9 items to investigate. 10% less work for the S&R team.
In addition to that as was pointed out by Mattb earlier, if you go to one QMs and they dont have the item you are forced to have, but you need it immediately the chances are the military are going to give you the morning off to go to another unit.

None multiply that cost across multiple NSNs and multiple units. Is it still trivial?

Ive put that as basically as I could, I can understand if none supply people were unaware of the additional costs and that an item does not just cost the military the basic unit price, but I would have thought someone with 34 years experience and hangs around with all the clever people who know best would have more of an idea.


Why? You were the one bringing up the use of cam cream 30 years ago, I merely pointed out that the military had other habits 30 years ago, that were changed, granted no one had the common sense at the time to change things and they had to be forced by legal means to change things, you would think that someone with 34 years experience might have some common sense...

Utter and total ******* bullshit,. The only place the vast majority of RLC will ever use cam cream is on some (not all) exercises, never on tour, in barracks or ranges, how do they manage to have a "Martial mindset" in those places?
If you want to instill a "Martial mindset" and cam up, go on a battlecamp and fill you boots. Running around live firing, throwing thunderflashes and doing various infantry taskings will give soldiers a "Martial mindset" more than putting on cam cream before standing under massive spotlights in a stores area.
What has happened is your were taught a load of crap 30 years ago and so you have carried on doing it, it must be right otherwise we wouldnt be doing it. On another thread there is a post about an female officer whinging about being called Sir on the phone, why is it still happened, because people have the same mindset as you and just do whatever they saw being done when they joined and think that is the only way of doing it.

In 2006 or 2007 4 LSR had to do some pre tour training in Pirbright which consisted of walking around stands, we took webbing, helmets, weapons and body armour (Just the juniors had to wear body armour) when we go there most of the stands were run by infantry who all promptly took the piss, why the **** were we dressed like that?
Then as we were would stood in groups, one group started to cam up, now in fairness I dont know which rank ordered it, but I had a good chuckle when a bootie who was on one of the stands ripped into them. Funnily enough that day not a single officer told the infantry or the bootie (Who kept going on about our stupidity and how our officers seem to interpret, turn up and listen into dress up like you are going to war) that we were doing it for the "Martial mindset"
It is truly embarrassing that a grown man and soldier with 34 experience thinks that soldiers get "Martial mindset" by wearing cam cream on tech exercises.



Now you are telling porkies, on a battle camp in Otterburn do you stop to set up storehouse or check the CES of a truck? Or do you concentrate on infantry basic skills? So why on a trade exercise would you bother doing infantry basic skills?
I wonder how many manpower hours your lads wasted because of you wanting to look warry.




All of those things are an impediment. In KAF one of my old WO2 was on a 6 figure sum plus perks (Plus didnt pay tax). On of my friends was a LCpl left and worked with KBR for around 2 and half time the wages. Contractors to war zones are not cheap.
Add to that, they were under no obligation to go there or indeed stay there. A soldier doesn't have much of choice.
I have already said that I am not going to continue the cnut off.


That is all.
 
I have already said that I am not going to continue the cnut off.


That is all.
Of course mate, I certainly wont bring up "martial mindset" (snigger) by the wearing of cam cream in the future.
 

Truxx

LE
After I left the MoD I went to work for the UN.

They don’t use NMS or anything like it.

At one point 10 of our 25 EOD teams in Cambodia were off the road because of a dues out on tyres, because we’d overspent on the tyre budget line.

This was an organisation that was about brigade sized.

An NMS-like, activity-based budget would have been a godsend.
A mate of mine left the Army and got a 2 year contract with the UN tasked with travelling around the world counting how many light aircraft the UN owned.

It took him all of the 2 years plus a bit besides.
 

Truxx

LE
Of course mate, I certainly wont bring up "martial mindset" (snigger) by the wearing of cam cream in the future.
Fill your boots. Water off a ducks back. I said to someone else yesterday that I would not do this but would you tell the boys and girls how come you didn't reach warrant rank?

I sense somehow that Defence might have missed out.
 
Now you are telling porkies, on a battle camp in Otterburn do you stop to set up storehouse or check the CES of a truck? Or do you concentrate on infantry basic skills? So why on a trade exercise would you bother doing infantry basic skills?
Stacker

How long does a battle camp at Otterburn last ? A week - 2 weeks - Time limitations apply.

If you have taken part in a BATUS for example - You would know that CES checks take place periodically out on the prairie.

If you have taken part in even longer Operations - You would know that '' Maintenance Days '' ( Other terms / names are available ) are a must. CES checks should also be part of that maintenance day.

Why should you bother doing Infantry basic skills.

Should be self explanatory.

Even the enemy will dedicate troops to hunting down / destroying / disrupting / disabling / killing the supply chain.
 

Latest Threads

Top