Paras without planes: RAF running out of Hercules

#41
Fallschirmjager said:
CavalryCaptain said:
Merely a bit of good natured, inter-service, rivalry, Fallschirmjager.
Yes, that's fine. But why the rivalry? Do you feel threatened in any way?
Nope, each to one's own, although a friend of mine did cross that line when in the RAC Para Sqn. Now that was parachuting in style.
 
#42
Fallschirmjager said:
western said:
Isn't it time the Army bit the bullet and called the Parachute Regiment and Airborne Forces Army Commandos?

Why? What would that achieve?

Not knocking the quality of the blokes but the whole Parachuting thing is becoming a millstone now.

A millstone? Para pay for Airborne forces doesn't even equate to small change in the MoD's annual budget.
I imagine the millstone is not the para pay, but the need to take valuable aircraft away from the frontline.
 
#43
No need to rename, but I would think that now is the time to remove the Parachute bit.

It was a viable option in WW2 and soon after. But now we have helicopters.

Will there EVER be a need to drop a Bn in again?

Perhaps the ability to drop in a Company and a bit of fire support could be retained, whislt the majority of the Bn are retained as air landing.

P coy etc is maintained to keep the ethos, fitness and fighting spirit. And Para pay could be based upon the passing of a different set of skills.

I beleive that the Para Regt once prided itself on being forward thinking and able to adapt to the situation.... I beleive it is time for this mentality to make the jump again.
 
#44
Fallschirmjager said:
Of course you are jealous. You know deep down that your Regiment is/was total shit so you try to make amends by slagging other regiments off. It's natural so don't worry about it. Not all soldiers can be as good as us. :wink:
...... or indeed as bad.

You are now demonstrating all the signs of a rather small man with an inferiority complex. But my hearty congratulations on your mastery of the written word - most unusual: have you got a chum there helping you with the reading bit?

I'm quite happy that my Regiment was a very fine one, thank you. We had our ups and downs over the years I spent in it as all organisations do; since then it's become something else - it's got a silly name but it's still an outstanding Infantry Regiment, indeed, it is the most highly decorated Regiment in the army.

Whilst in the Airborne Brigade as 'non-disposable' troops I seem to recall beating the simple folk from Aldershot with their sludgy off-pink hats at most things from musketry to the march and shoot.

You're the fellow slagging other regiments off. You profess to proud to be arrogant too - an odd boast and yet another sign of your innate sense of inferiority.
 
#46
The Skyvan is a great plane and there is no reason that the MOD couldn't charter them at about £300/lift tops, which equals £15 per jump per man. Far cheaper than thrashing hercs for days on end. If you only have 2 skyvans then you can drop between 20-40 at a time, which provides far more flexibility than trying to turn round a herc.

Hercs could be used for 1 jump per course, with all jumps to retain currency being done out of Skyvans. Should you need the capability to drop loads of blokes then you can cover it using hercs whilst on PDT or prior to taking on ABTF.

The other great thing about using skyvans is that you could build up the expertise within the Army to run jump programs, and cut the RAF out of the loop until you need hercs.
 
#47
Papa_Lazarou said:
The sheer scale of the work needed to grow an airborne insertion capability, when you look at aircrew, PJI's, Air despatchers, paratroopers etc and the relevant quals they need to first gain then maintain, if UK bins its airborne insertion capbility then it will not be re-grown without tremendous pain.

That may seem like a good idea now, but to maintain the capability is far cheaper and more sensible than binning it and then having top re-grow.

Just because we havent used something in anger doesnt mean it automatically comes up for cutting. The RAF have no shot down a plane since the 70's and then it was one of their own, but not having a air interdiction capability (of sorts) is not being considered. We havent used TRIDENT but that again is expected to be maintained and replaced. These are all capitol intensive capabilites that are retained "in case of" rather than because of regular utility. Which I woudl suggest is exactly what defense capability is, "in case of" or insurance. If you maintain a capability it acts both as a deterrent and as an option for military planners at the government of the days behest. It allows for political activity under the cover of credible capability.

Back to the airborne capability, as resources decrease the UK and its nationals are invovled in more and more of the the worlds shitholes, many of which are landlocked. If you want the option to get them back, under a NEO which could easily be opposed, then you need an airfield. The only way to take an airfield in a landlocke country is TALO, and if cratered then airborne overhead assualt with engineer heavy equipment to repair the airfield and then TALO in the rest of the TF. So do we suggest we bin the capability and wait until we need it and try and re-grow it? That would come just after some local warlord holds the UK to ransom and we either gave in, or hand our nationals returned in little pieces as the fuzzy wuzzys so like to do.

My question then is, I guess, why do we feel the need to revist ceasing a capability which has more utiltiy now as insurance and demonstrable force projection in many real world sceanrio's than many other ones, on what often is simply based on beret colour?
A most sensible post I've seen in a long time, if I may say so.
---------------
And by the way, I'm also most arrogant, and have been since the 60's.
Guess it runs in the blood.
We also got quite a few out of the s'''t on op's, but we won't boast about it because it was our job.
The same ole inter rivalry claptrap / argument where the Regiment is concerned, hasn’t changed in all these years. We know what were capable of when the sh*t hits the fan.

Long may the jealousy and dig’s continue.
 
#48
Fallschirmjager said:
western said:
Isn't it time the Army bit the bullet and called the Parachute Regiment and Airborne Forces Army Commandos?

Why? What would that achieve?

Not knocking the quality of the blokes but the whole Parachuting thing is becoming a millstone now.

A millstone? Para pay for Airborne forces doesn't even equate to small change in the MoD's annual budget.
You missed my point mate. Putting it slightly blunter, if the papers are to be believed the Parachute Regiment does not Parachute or for that matter have exclusive rights over Air Assault, which all Infantry seem to do now. So come up with a Title that fits their role, personally you could be Star Ship Troopers for all I care just find a Star Ship to drive.

Millstone was a nice term for embarrassment it’s all getting to be like when the American 10th Mountain Division were unable to operate effectively on arrival in Afghanistan and their answer was ‘we don’t train in Mountains.

Also I imagine some of the Junior Ranks are pretty p1ssed off that their pay, which they worked bloody hard to qualify to earn is being denied to them, nice to see that the CO got his jumps in for the D Day thing though.
 
#49
Queensman said:
Whilst in the Airborne Brigade as 'non-disposable' troops I seem to recall beating the simple folk from Aldershot with their sludgy off-pink hats at most things from musketry to the march and shoot.
Really, when would this be and which event?

IIRC 5 Abn Bde and now 16 AA has always had an Airlanding element, in my time in it was the Gurkhas out at Church Crookham then the RRF. Since 1990 I'd be guessing but RIR, RRS and possibly the Gurkhas (again) have done the job.

Are you referring to the Bde Platoon compitition that used to be run, because in my time no non Para Regt team won the event, granted a few were well placed, as in the top 10.
 
#50
Queensman said:
...it is the most highly decorated Regiment in the army.
That's interesting. Are there figures to back this up?
 
#51
Im sure someone has already mentioned it but para slagging and hat slagging, each brings up stupid arguments, for every para regt bloke telling someone to get fcuked you hat there is a jeoulous individual that does not like the praise or elevated postion para regt adopts so repeatedly slags it off or quotes says there is no need for para regt any more (seems to be cavalrymen in this thread)

That argument is as bone as this:

We probably wont be fighting the Russians over the plains in massed tank warfare anymore so why dont we get rid of the tanks and just retain mechanised forces?


Its simple, we should not be fighting the current battles but looking toward future conflict, to assume we would not need para regt or jump qualified troops in the future is a dangerous thing, assumtion being the mother of all fcuk ups and to predict the future of modern warefare to the point where you adjust troop training abilities/cost-cut is somthing we cannot afford to do (in fact i reckon it is this attitude that has left our armed forces in its current state)

And the argument but now we have Helicopters, are you joking? nip over to Afghan and see how often you use SH these days, why do you think the vikings are getting beasted.

Excellant post by Papa_Lazarou, as he pointed out just because something has not been used in some time does not mean it will not be needed in the future.
 
#52
Dollsteeth said:
That argument is as bone as this:

We probably wont be fighting the Russians over the plains in massed tank warfare anymore so why dont we get rid of the tanks and just retain mechanised forces?
You may think it is Bone, but that is one discussion that is taking place inside the MOD. MBTs do not fit in the Expeditionary warfare model and there is serious consideration to bin them.
 
#53
Just a left field thought
How many Para's can a Globemaster drop?
Surely its better to have more airframes dropping smaller numbers for greater flexibility than a huge drop and potential of huge loss should one get downed.
 

the_boy_syrup

LE
Book Reviewer
#54
stickybomb said:
Queensman said:
...it is the most highly decorated Regiment in the army.
That's interesting. Are there figures to back this up?
I think (forgive me if I'm wrong) Queensman is PWWRR
After Telic 4 and the awards they recived including a V.C. they were the most decorated
However I think that after two recent Afghan tours Para Reg have lso won a shed load of medals including a V.C
 
#55
Always thought that the records of Decorations went back to the creation of the founding Regiments, not five or six years?

On that basis P(one W)RR go back about 400 years, Para Reg, 60 something, more time, more medals I guess.
 
#56
Dollsteeth said:
Just a couple of observations if I may

Im sure someone has already mentioned it but para slagging and hat slagging, each brings up stupid arguments, for every para regt bloke telling someone to get fcuked you hat there is a jeoulous individual that does not like the praise or elevated postion para regt adopts so repeatedly slags it off or quotes says there is no need for para regt any more (seems to be cavalrymen in this thread)

That argument is as bone as this:

We probably wont be fighting the Russians over the plains in massed tank warfare anymore so why dont we get rid of the tanks and just retain mechanised forces?

Certain Tank/Cav unit personnel are being employed elsewhere at the moment in Dvr Gunner Roles

Its simple, we should not be fighting the current battles but looking toward future conflict, to assume we would not need para regt or jump qualified troops in the future is a dangerous thing, assumtion being the mother of all fcuk ups and to predict the future of modern warefare to the point where you adjust troop training abilities/cost-cut is somthing we cannot afford to do (in fact i reckon it is this attitude that has left our armed forces in its current state)

Great sentiment however, it is all budget driven and everyone is being forced to focus on ‘The’ war not ‘A’ war that may or may not happen. The reason for the state of our armed forces is the fact that the MOD is skint and there is no new money in the foreseeable future (regardless of who is in number 10)

And the argument but now we have Helicopters, are you joking? nip over to Afghan and see how often you use SH these days, why do you think the vikings are getting beasted.

I think that you will find that the Helos in Theatre are providing a service as well.

Excellant post by Papa_Lazarou, as he pointed out just because something has not been used in some time does not mean it will not be needed in the future.
Should we keep an airborne capability undoubtedly yes or to use the fashionable golf bag analogy. It gives us a recovery wood if required.

In the current climate can we afford it (yes, however can the money better spent elsewhere)

Once we lose it will we be able to get it back (not without significant cost)
 
#57
You have proven my point if they are considering cutting mbts

This is not an argument in capability or neccesity, it is simply a cost cutting measure with no thought of the bang, only the buck.

What should be addressed is why in current world climate, of all the areas the government could save money their default setting is always defense?

I might have a crack at invading the Uk soon, the way things are going there will be no one to stop me, MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
 
#58
western said:
Always thought that the records of Decorations went back to the creation of the founding Regiments, not five or six years?

On that basis P(one W)RR go back about 400 years, Para Reg, 60 something, more time, more medals I guess.
To be honest western, I don't believe anyone can associate the earnings of medals on any one Regiment, different era's times and conflicts, in a place at the right or wrong time.
Many who should have been recognised that have not, in all regiments / services.
No argument in my view.
 

the_boy_syrup

LE
Book Reviewer
#59
western said:
Always thought that the records of Decorations went back to the creation of the founding Regiments, not five or six years?

On that basis P(one W)RR go back about 400 years, Para Reg, 60 something, more time, more medals I guess.
I think you are correct PWRR and there former regiments do go back awhile longer than Para Reg so are probably way out in front
 
#60
True2Blue said:
western said:
Always thought that the records of Decorations went back to the creation of the founding Regiments, not five or six years?

On that basis P(one W)RR go back about 400 years, Para Reg, 60 something, more time, more medals I guess.
To be honest western, I don't believe anyone can associate the earnings of medals on any one Regiment, different era's times and conflicts, in a place at the right or wrong time.
Many who should have been recognised that have not, in all regiments / services.
No argument in my view.
I really did try mate and I think I might know what you are trying to say, but what went into the keyboard doesn't seem to have come out the same on the scree. Could you try again? :)
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top