RAC Regiments

#1
Having had nothing to do with the RAC, what is the difference between Lancers, Hussars and Dragoons. And do the different roles still excist today. Regards
 
#2
They all still exist mate.

Hussars are equipped with the Challenger 2's although they now have a RECCE troop as well.

The dragoons and lancers are equipped with the scimitar light tanks and are strictly RECCE
 
#3
Cheers matey, and when yopu chaps were in the horse riding business was is basically the same thing?
 
#4
The_0ne said:
They all still exist mate.

Hussars are equipped with the Challenger 2's although they now have a RECCE troop as well.

The dragoons and lancers are equipped with the scimitar light tanks and are strictly RECCE
Sadly it isnt as simple as that many dragoon regiments are on MBT
I think they are roled as follows
SCOTSDG - MBT
QDG -Formation Recce
RDG - MBT
KRH - MBT
9/12th Lancers - Formation Recce
Light Dragoons - Formation Recce
QRH- MBT
1 RTR - NBC/MBT
2 RTR -MBT
Blues and royals - formation recce
Life Guards -Formation Recce.

Apologies if i missed anyone or got current roles wrong.
 
#5
boristhecat said:
Cheers matey, and when yopu chaps were in the horse riding business was is basically the same thing?
Strangely enough it wasn't the same.

Dragoons were heavy cavalry, whereas Hussars and Lancers were light. Looking at it now you could say the MBT role was heavy and the recce role, light - so in some cases it's a reversal of roles.
 
#6
vandyke said:
Sadly it isnt as simple as that many dragoon regiments are on MBT
I think they are roled as follows
SCOTSDG - MBT
QDG -Formation Recce
RDG - MBT
KRH - MBT
9/12th Lancers - Formation Recce


Light Dragoons - Formation Recce
QRH- MBT
1 RTR - NBC/MBT
2 RTR -MBT
Blues and royals - formation recce
Life Guards -Formation Recce.

Apologies if i missed anyone or got current roles wrong.
Delete Blues & Royals and The Life Guards and insert HCR - HCMR & FR
QRL - FR
 
#7
GDav said:
boristhecat said:
Cheers matey, and when yopu chaps were in the horse riding business was is basically the same thing?
Strangely enough it wasn't the same.

Dragoons were heavy cavalry, whereas Hussars and Lancers were light. Looking at it now you could say the MBT role was heavy and the recce role, light - so in some cases it's a reversal of roles.
Gdav thank you very much, and is it only the Blues and Royals, Life Guards that still do the horse riding bit?
 
#9
boristhecat said:
GDav said:
boristhecat said:
Cheers matey, and when yopu chaps were in the horse riding business was is basically the same thing?
Strangely enough it wasn't the same.

Dragoons were heavy cavalry, whereas Hussars and Lancers were light. Looking at it now you could say the MBT role was heavy and the recce role, light - so in some cases it's a reversal of roles.
Gdav thank you very much, and is it only the Blues and Royals, Life Guards that still do the horse riding bit?
For many years they are the only ones who officially do ceremonial duties on horseback. They can transfer between roles however. You will also find that the other cavalry regiments still maintain sizeable stables and are heavily involved in equestrian sports. Some, through tradition, still have drumhorses or ceremonial troops but these are largely provided by the stables staff or volunteers. Apart from the drumhorses I don't know of any official mounted troops in line cavalry units.
 
#10
Learnt something today thank you. Regards, and a good New year to you all.
 
#11
Originally the Lancers and Hussars did the same job and were only named as L or H because of the style of uniform they wore . Dragoons originally acted more as mounted infantry and did not do their fighting on horse back. Nowadays there is no real difference as they all alternate and fill all the roles at one time or another depending on the make up of teh RAC. There are less of them on tanks now simply because there are less tanks.
 
#13
Pretty much the same role, but they now work at Brigade level, rather than being Div Troops.
The life expectancy of FR has increased a bit too from the days of the cold war and Wolfenbuttel :)
 
#14
craftsmanx said:
Originally the Lancers and Hussars did the same job and were only named as L or H because of the style of uniform they wore . Dragoons originally acted more as mounted infantry and did not do their fighting on horse back. Nowadays there is no real difference as they all alternate and fill all the roles at one time or another depending on the make up of teh RAC. There are less of them on tanks now simply because there are less tanks.
Now now, behave. Lancers and Hussars did NOT do the same job. That's why they both existed. The lancers were in the van and supposed to break through the enemy's front with lances whilst the hussars followed up with agressive swordsmanship.
 
#18
craftsmanx said:
Dragoons originally acted more as mounted infantry and did not do their fighting on horse back.
Really ?.......so, the mounted Dragoon charges that went on all day at Waterloo are just a figment of an overactive imagination then ? Likewise those heavy Dragoon charges that took place at Blenheim, Ramillies,
Oudenarde, Malplaquet and the War of Spanish Succession must have been a PR job ?

I beg to differ most earnestly.
 
#19
The_Dragoon said:
craftsmanx said:
Dragoons originally acted more as mounted infantry and did not do their fighting on horse back.
Really ?.......so, the mounted Dragoon charges that went on all day at Waterloo are just a figment of an overactive imagination then ? Likewise those heavy Dragoon charges that took place at Blenheim, Ramillies,
Oudenarde, Malplaquet and the War of Spanish Succession must have been a PR job ?

I beg to differ most earnestly.
In fairness to the guy he's partly right, as we both know. Dragoons, like the knights of old, are mounted infantry. What he hasn't considered is the fearsome power of the dragoon charge - slow, heavily armoured and armed, and determined.

It used to be said that sending British heavy cavalry against other forces was almost a war crime because of the outcome. In fact it's been said about our use of cavalry in general because British cavalry was so effective.
 
#20
GDav, I know exactly what you mean mate but, lets not let the riff-raff get too knowledgable.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top