One year in five?

#1
The British are preparing to hand back Basra by next March, allowing a cut in forces to just over 3,000. Defence chiefs are so short of frontline troops they are planning to force all Territorial Army (TA) soldiers to serve at least one year out of five on operations, say senior defence sources. The plan is likely to cause anger within the TA, where only about a third of those eligible have been prepared to serve on operations abroad.

However, under a reorganisation in both the regular and territorial armies, defence chiefs are determined every possible resource is used.

The role of the TA — now to be called the Reserves — has changed from “home guard service”, said one senior officer. It is now regarded as a back-up force for frontline troops.

The reorganisation, the army’s second in as many years, follows two reviews that revealed there too few infantry units to sustain future deployments.

About 12,000 members of the TA have served in either Iraq or Afghanistan, but now commanders want the remaining 20,000 to be ready to deploy.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-2450184,00.html

msr
 
#2
I feel a 'back of a fag packet' calculation coming on:

20,000 ready to deploy
less 5000 recruits
=15,000
less 5,000 awaiting discharge
=10,000
assuming regular army levels of medical downgrade (10%)
=9,000
less those who may fail MATTS
=5,000
Less those who hold SNCO rank, for the regular army has no use
=4,000
less those who are caring for elderly relatives/ family circumstances etc
=2,000
less those whose employer will object/ students
=1

Will that man step forward?

msr
 
#3
Another idea down the pan then!

Come on, who the hell would ever have thought that a dickhead plan like that would work. It'd play havoc with recruiting as well.
 
#4
“home guard service”, said one senior officer.

Wanker.

And wrong.

msr
 
#5
The role of the TA — now to be called the Reserves — has changed from “home guard service”, said one senior officer. It is now regarded as a back-up force for frontline troops.
The ARRSE effect in action again?

What the hell were we doing 3 years ago on Telic 1 then?! :roll:
 
#6
Don't tell them your name Pike...........

I would very much like that Senior Officer to come on here and justify that Home Guard comment, To$$er.

While I am not suprised to hear the plans, I agree, do they really think it would work.......

Yes I must have imagened Telic II, instead I must have been working in the Warmington on Sea church hall......
 
#7
If they're talking about forcing people into active service, well, why does that need a change? Doesn't compulsory mobilisation accomplish the same thing?

Or is there some grubby political thing going on?
 
#8
Lance_Jacked said:
I would very much like that Senior Officer to come on here and justify that Home Guard comment, To$$er.
Alright as a SNCO, whats wrong with that. I'm ready at the drop of a hat to do my duty (although legislation won't let me). I do home duties (I would do overseas if suitable arrangements existed - like keeping wife, kids and employer happy plus I'd get a real job not something noone else wanted), please don't start CCRF b*llo*cks - that will never happen.

I agree with msr, they've had their cake and eaten it. Ask for volunteers and get the people that want it, otherwise they are sticking another knife into the TA, this one would be fatal.
 
#9
polar said:
Lance_Jacked said:
I would very much like that Senior Officer to come on here and justify that Home Guard comment, To$$er.
Alright as a SNCO, whats wrong with that. I'm ready at the drop of a hat to do my duty (although legislation won't let me). I do home duties (I would do overseas if suitable arrangements existed - like keeping wife, kids and employer happy plus I'd get a real job not something noone else wanted), please don't start CCRF b*llo*cks - that will never happen.

I agree with msr, they've had their cake and eaten it. Ask for volunteers and get the people that want it, otherwise they are sticking another knife into the TA, this one would be fatal.
I wasn't knocking the TA working on duties in the UK, my gripe is the image of the wording 'Home Guard'. Apoligies if the wrong end of the stick was gotten....
 
#11
Lance_Jacked said:
Don't tell them your name Pike...........
I'd tell him to his face, if I ever met him.

msr
 
#12
I'm planning to do a tour in Iraq next year after August 07 does this 'hand back' of Basra in March entail a complete withdrawl of troops in Iraq? if so thatd really screw up my plans next year.
 
#13
Last time we were there for 40ish years........
My dad was a snowdrop at RAF Shiaba as his last forces posting in the late 50's!some small time later No1 son visits same place. Yes I think your plans for next year are fairly safe, that orthe first sandpit which will still be available.
 
#14
Don't worry, you can always volunteer for Afghanistan.

msr
 
#15
msr said:
I feel a 'back of a fag packet' calculation coming on:
20,000 aye?

When I last checked, excluding UOTC's, PSAOs and NRPS the TA had 29,000 on the books, with 11,500 in Phase 1/ awaiting discharge and 6,000 not Phase 2 trained (Feb 06 numbers). Although Hansard seems to indicate a slight rise in the numbers on the books (by about 1,000) in the last 6 months.

The numbers on mobilised service in a Theatre of Operations are (as of last week) 510 officers and men (and falling). This would indicate a requirement to mobilise roughly 1,000 reservists per year at the moment.

Thus of the 12,000 Trade Qualified Soldiers, excluding SNCOs/ Offrs (about 5,000? (assumes 1/7th are Offrs and 2/7th SNCOs)) we end up with 1 year in 7, and that assumes the sword falls equally, and not heavily on those wanting to go on tour.
 
#16
Sapukay said:
The numbers on mobilised service in a Theatre of Operations are (as of last week) 510 officers and men (and falling). This would indicate a requirement to mobilise roughly 1,000 reservists per year at the moment.
Not if the regular army decided to cut back their provision...

Beware extrapolation from current manning levels.

msr
 
#18
msr said:
Not if the regular army decided to cut back their provision...

Beware extrapolation from current manning levels.

msr
True, but consider who they currently are.

The 300 TA tps in Iraq are mainly the Force Protection Coy (from 7 Scots) and some IRs

The 210 TA Tps in Afghanistan are mainly RAMC, plus the RV Force Prot Coy and some IRs.
 
#19
Agreed, but what if there is 'suddenly' a need for a TA BG or bigger, as there are no regulars left to deploy within the harmony guidelines or a need for Light Guns somewhere and the regular re-training from AS90 isn't sufficient?


msr
 
#20
There has not been a single incidence (in the combat/ combat support arms) of units taking their WFE increment from the TA that I'm aware of. If it happened I suppose it could wreck the TA rather quickly. 100 or 103 can provide the WFE for 1 Field Rgt each. The same with a TA Inf Bn, there's little left after providing WFE to a Reg Bn.

The same can't be said of the CSS arms, for example 17 P&M Regt RLC needed a TA subunit to cope with Telic, and in the AMS things are verging on silly.
 

Similar threads

Top