Queens Div regiments to merge?

#1
Heard a rumour on Remembrance Sunday that PWRR, RRF and Royal Anglians are to go large large regiment in the not too distant future - anyone else heard this :?:
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#2
Go the way of the Light div? Tragic but possibly the cheapest way to cut the RHQ costs.
If it happens I hope that you do it better than we had it done! Still a fair bit of resentment in the new Rifles, some sons from Geordie land went to the RRF to avoid going dark side.
I could see the RRF not wanting it due to the Nortern connections, Northumberland and Lancs but R Ang and PWRR, thats a possibility.
 
#3
a 9 battalion regiment? (6 reg & 3 TA)

can't see it myself but hey, the Rifles and Scots are not that far behind
 
#4
TheSpecialOne said:
a 9 battalion regiment? (6 reg & 3 TA)

can't see it myself but hey, the Rifles and Scots are not that far behind
One of the possibilities back in 2004 was the Hants elm of PWRR breaking out of the PWRR to form a 2 reg Bn R Wessex with D&D and RGBW (specifically, 1 R Wessex being Devon, Dorset and Gloucs, 2 R Wessex being Berks, Wilts and Hants), and the rump of the PWRR (Queen's) to amalgamate with RRF into a 3 reg Bn Queen's Fusiliers (a Bn each for the Home Counties, London and up North), so the Queen's Div took one of the lost Bns. Hopefully we're beyond that...
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#5
The RA and the PWRR have very close links and often work together, as they did when it was Queens Rgt and RA.

As sad as such an event might be, people could work together IMHO.
 
B

benjaminw1

Guest
#6
Well if we are playing fantasy mega regiments....

RANGLIANS & PWRR

RRF & MERCIAN

WELSH & RIRISH

LANCS & YORKS

is more logical... (and of course v. stupid if you want to hack off the rest of the Inf)
 
#7
Diehard,

It was mentioned at the time of the last round of amalgamations but I can't see it happening in the near future due to the politics involved and all the senstitivities, etc, etc

You could argue that the Queens Div is a 6 Bn regiment anyway as personnel get posted between them on a regular basis anyway, particularly at Officer level but more so now at soldier level too, so there isn't actually much point in going one step further just to upset people for the sake of it....

So I would say that it might be the subject of the odd chat here and there but unlikely to happen for a while yet.

Adjt
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#8
That already large regiment argument was used before the Rifles was formed and held no water with the dark side/maffia. Someone was determined to do away with the county association and RHQs that existed. Part of the problem lay in making the RGBW and D&D amenable to becoming Light Infantry. They were awarded the title LI and then swallowed into the maffia which has effectively destroyed the association with the counties and killed of the not very massive RHQs.
What grips me is that reading the LI history from 1968 when it was formed from a 4 regt Brigade of 6 counties into a 4 then 3 Bn regt was that the Green jackets were prior to this offered the chance to go very large.
That would have spared us 40 years (nearly) of seperate identities which will take longer to break down into the new regiment. Sons of my former colleagues now join other regiments or corps rather than go dark side!
Sad but destruction of family ties is another casualty!
 
#9
benjaminw1 said:
Well if we are playing fantasy mega regiments....

RANGLIANS & PWRR

RRF & MERCIAN

WELSH & RIRISH

LANCS & YORKS

is more logical... (and of course v. stupid if you want to hack off the rest of the Inf)
Interesting that the York and Lancaster Regiment was only disbanded in 1969, so it could easily be re-formed!!
 
#10
Now a cynic such as myself might suggest that the only reason Jacko "I kiss liarbours arrse" Jackson created these large infantry regiments was to protect the Paras.

Why should Devon and Dorsets get the chop when the Paras have 3 battalions and only one in role? Why should the Glosters get the chop when the paras have 3..etc etc.

So when the next round of defence cuts come (as they will), the Paras can argue "why should we get the chop? We only have 3 battalions and the Jocks have 5! Cut one of their battalions instead".

But obviously that is just cynical.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#11
I dont think disbanded regiments can be reactivated and keep seniority, bns put into suspended animation can!
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#13
Didnt the Aussies decide that and share the role around the RAR?
 
#14
The-Goose said:
Of course the Paras will argue that as Special forces they should be exempt. Cant help thinking they are past their sell by date?
Yeah they really looked past their sell-by date in afghanastan :roll:
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#15
Go on then I'll bite, how many jumped during that tour?
I know what the arguments will be and I'm in favour of expansion not reduction. None of them should have gone in the last round of cuts but then we shouldnt be fighting two wars either with the chance that the one eyed git will have you all deployed to Africa soon on another adventure say Darfur?
 
#16
Good point ugly however shouldn't we be backing ALL our capbadges and not turn every thread into para's vs the rest like some of the posters.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#17
I thought thats what I was trying to do!
 
#18
JP47 said:
The-Goose said:
Of course the Paras will argue that as Special forces they should be exempt. Cant help thinking they are past their sell by date?
Yeah they really looked past their sell-by date in afghanastan :roll:
Good point, a regular county regt. could never have done as well as the para's stirling efforts. Look at the pathitic attempt by the Vikings, oh hang on a minute...
 
#19
Sorry ugly my mistake, as for the vikings they carried out a fantastic job under extreme conditions and again proved why and I will say again ALL capbadges should be backed
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Themanwho Military History and Militaria 15
S Infantry 34
diehard57 Infantry 16

Similar threads

New Posts

Top