Ranger Brigade(s)

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
I’d only note that Brig Gus Fair is no-ones description of a “wannabe”.
Wrong point.

Will all four Rangers Bns deploy together? No

So there is no need for a 1* HQ. End of.

And that's before we get into the utter wastes of taxpayers money that are the infantry divisional HQs. And somehow they survive without actually delivering anything of value. Possible exception is Household Div HQ which does a bit of public duties organising.
 

itchy300

Old-Salt
OF course, these prospective recruits be definition know sod all about what makes "ally" or there realities of combat and soldiering. Not least because they have been fed a diet of MOD PR and recruiting films from Crapita..

The realities of combat currently consist of using ancient equipment to lose wars against people in flip flops.

If only there was some kind of office interested people could go to to talk to actual serving soldiers from the area to see what it's really like
 

huscarl

Old-Salt
That Pic is not Ranger Regiment , The Regiment will be revealed on the 1st.

the Lad holding the UAV is an Arty.

skynews-army-cut-ministry-of-defence_5594591.jpg
Needs to get a grip and sort his chinstrap out the creature ("NURSE....my medicine"!)!
 

45x45

On ROPS
On ROPs
Just wondering if the Scots are going to face the same issues that the LI had when they were ended up part of the Commando BG. I am not knocking 1 SCOTS but only a small proportion will be SF level fitness. Possibly 10-20% depending upon the course standard. The Army has always been good at hiding it's poor levels of personal fitness to keep numbers up.
 
Some how I think they got it wrong there is no infrastructure in place for PWRR in tidworth or Bulford 2020 has just finished and there is no room for any more building

Yep aware of that being as I am involved with the MOD side of the infrastructure upgrade. There is room but SPTA would not be happy.
 

itchy300

Old-Salt
Which countries are likely to seek training, guidance and reinforcement by a company or so of Rangers, given the woeful lack of good outcomes wherever locals have been allegedly trained by the British army?
I honestly don't know but I think we need to look at ourselves and focus on our own training to bring our own standards up before we start going preaching elsewhere
 
Are you surprised? I bet if you did a poll of school leavers they couldn't name more than a handful of regiments.

Mercians, PWRR, RRF, Anglians......who?

How can they expect a community to form any loyalty to its local regiment when it changes its name and identity every 10 minutes. If it takes the navy three years to build a ship and three centuries to build a tradition then surely it must be the same for a regiment.

I don't think lads want to go to ally regiments, I think they want to deploy and have a scrap in body armour and shorts like the 'good old days' of Afghan, not get stuck on some shit exercise in the winging PR obsessed, risk averse woke mess the army has become.
Son of CH is in the Infantry. Been in his working Unit now for a year. When he joined he honestly didn’t know what Regt was his local one. He wanted to join a Regt that was ”going abroad” as he said but by the time he was going through training he went from Anglian, to PWRR then where he ended up now, changes not of his choice. I don’t think now there is much emphasis on local regiments but more keeping slots filled so you go where you are told.
 

itchy300

Old-Salt
Son of CH is in the Infantry. Been in his working Unit now for a year. When he joined he honestly didn’t know what Regt was his local one. He wanted to join a Regt that was ”going abroad” as he said but by the time he was going through training he went from Anglian, to PWRR then where he ended up now, changes not of his choice. I don’t think now there is much emphasis on local regiments but more keeping slots filled so you go where you are told.
Young lads see soldiers on the telly on OPs and want to do that. They have no connection to what would have been the local regiment so are happy to go wherever.

Tbh the regiments are not really different enough anymore to make a difference so if the person going in is a blank slate ref. Regimental ties/preference who's really bothered
 

Gunner82

War Hero
Isn't a "Ranger" reg just SFSG? And if they want to train other nations Isn't that the point of Spec Inf battalions (and in a US context thats the Green Berets)
I wonder what happened to the "Chindits", these really rough and tough units pop up every time there is a reduction in manpower, opps sorry person power.
 
Just wondering if the Scots are going to face the same issues that the LI had when they were ended up part of the Commando BG. I am not knocking 1 SCOTS but only a small proportion will be SF level fitness. Possibly 10-20% depending upon the course standard. The Army has always been good at hiding it's poor levels of personal fitness to keep numbers up.


Is there some sort of extra fitness level required for this Ranger thing then?
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Just being my usual cynical self but I see this Ranger Regiment going for a few years then when the experiment has been seen to fail, change the name, merge Bns into one and mice on to the next re-org!

It is almost as though the army is being reduced to a series of cadres which can be used to train up the cannon-fodder conscripts needed to fight the next war.
 

Alamo

LE
Wrong point.

Will all four Rangers Bns deploy together? No

So there is no need for a 1* HQ. End of.

And that's before we get into the utter wastes of taxpayers money that are the infantry divisional HQs. And somehow they survive without actually delivering anything of value. Possible exception is Household Div HQ which does a bit of public duties organising.
The function of HQs is not merely to command on ops.
 

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
The function of HQs is not merely to command on ops.
Indeed.

But of it's not an operational HQ (as the Ranger Bde HQ and indeed 6 Div HQ patently are not) why dress them up as if they are? And why not leave the non operational HQ functions to MS and AG?

I suspect that a large part of the Army's (and probably other services') problems emanate from having way too many chiefs bitching about who is in charge of the indians. Very few (if any) successful commercial organisations have so many tiers of management. While structure in necessary within combat units and formations it is not for the rest. And if it is not about combat (i.e. manning, HR, procurement, accounting etc.) then the commercial sector is the structure that should be followed.

Can anyone explain what value is added by HQ 6 Div or the Infantry divisional HQs?
 

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
Is there some sort of extra fitness level required for this Ranger thing then?
Bound to be. What else are they going to do while they wait for some banana republic to request their support.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top