Ranger Brigade(s)

QRK2

LE
FFS, can't these Woke Lefty Tossers ever give it a rest?

View attachment 617960.


Very American Sci-Fi looking, but very modern too, I like it - a refreshing addition to the UK CapBadge collection.
I'd like to know more.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
Can anyone articulate what military challenge we're facing that this new conglomeration can successfully overcome? It seems on the face of it that someone's been mad enough to buy into the concept of the 'All Arms Platoon'.

One doesn't need to be a ninja to train people and an under-strength company, which is the effective operating strength at any given time of a unit of 300 (assuming, of course, that force protection, administration, life support and other such niff naff and triv is handled by someone else), has limited utility for anything else.
 
To me, as an outside observer nowadays, it looks like they have decided to create hyped up element, to align with what other countries (the USA) have in their bag of tricks.

I read that they will pick the cream of the crop, get extra specialist training in kit and languages, and be an NCO heavy organisation. That brings about a couple of questions and observations:

1. If they are simply lifting and dropping entire structures into this then where does the cream of the crop come in.
2. How will they actually receive and understand extra training if simply lifted and dropped - with the greatest respect some blokes are not in the infantry because they have an aptitude for learning languages and techy things.
3. My observation: If they are trying to emulate the US type of Ranger they have failed. Their blokes are volunteers, go through an initial assessment, are continually assessed through their selection/training - including assessment by fellow candidates, and have to undergo selection again if promoted to a higher ranking role within the regiment.
4. The comment I saw about an NCO heavy organisation also smells of US SF, a model which the Germans have followed in their KSK. Pass selection into either nationalities units and you immediately become a Sgt. There are two reasons for this: 1. The rank gives credibility, 2. The increased pay for a job that is more dangerous and demanding.

Just my thoughts based on what I have read.
I know that I know bugger all of this level of organisational planning but coming from an educational background, I tend towards the education/training end of things when I consider a solution to any proposition. And I’m fully aware that this level of consideration and planning is complete and formation is well under way. So, here goes anyway:



This is an organisation which requires super educated, emotionally literate, highly trained, trainers, leaders and linguists. This will generate a massive training (educational) requirement. Although it is a Brigade, it will never deploy as such and doesn’t require normal Brigade Command elements although it does require peacetime administration. It is being formed from troops currently serving in existing units, indeed from current formed units. Slots will then fill by trickle posting.



Solution: organise it as a ‘Ranger School’ instead of a Brigade. It is still a 1* command. It has a training capability heavy core which is less ‘running about and shouting’ and more academic in tone. The core staff would be Train the Trainer experts, as well as psychologists and linguists, rarely found in deployable units of any arm, drawn army wide and organised as a ‘special to arm’ school. The school would provide initial acceptance and selection, continuation training, advanced skills, specialist promotion courses etc.. Day to day responsibility/activity being high intensity, high level skills training of the Ranger Battalions, lifting this responsibility from junior commanders, thus freeing them for further training. This ensures no dilution of standards across the Brigade and achieves some economies in training facilities and personnel. Departments within this core specialise in all aspects of the Ranger skill set, from military skills, language and diplomacy to remembering to remove sunglasses when talking to civpop (remember that?). This is a massive ask if we are starting with your average tom or jock and would require specialist training staff in specialised facilities.



For training purposes, each Battalion forms a wing of the school, with the core providing day to day Brigade HQ admin functions. Should it be required, the core can also provide a scaleable, deployable, proto Brigade HQ as well as a pool of higher skill level SMEs to deploy in support of each Battalion on operations. RHQ Para was once tasked to provide a Brigade HQ ‘light’ for the TA para Bns, so bits of this have been exercised.



Battalions deploy as required up to Battalion strength’ or even multiple Bns, with core elements in their proposed Ranger role.



The core, or Ranger School, can also: provide training for officers across the army in what the Ranger role is and how they interact with or influence wider army operations (Ranger mindedness); train individual officers and ORs with Ranger skills useful within their own units, carrying a lesser ‘Ranger’ qualification (similar to the US model); facilitate generation of further Ranger units should the need arise, possibly drawing on army wide Ranger qualified personnel.



My key proposal would be that it is a school with deployable sub units. Very much not the current model of a Brigade. There is a subtle flavour here of ‘Special Companies’, which grew into Commando Forces and the practical use of Airborne Forces before they became available in sufficient numbers. Both deployed units straight from the training organisation and without higher level command organisations. If The Rangers are desperate for a ‘tradition’, they could do worse than to look to these for inspiration.



All random ramblings, but considering I’ve been a headteacher of several schools rather than a Brigade Commander, It’s how I might set about doing it.



Please tear this to shreds. I’d both welcome it and learn from it.
 
I know that I know bugger all of this level of organisational planning but coming from an educational background, I tend towards the education/training end of things when I consider a solution to any proposition. And I’m fully aware that this level of consideration and planning is complete and formation is well under way. So, here goes anyway:



This is an organisation which requires super educated, emotionally literate, highly trained, trainers, leaders and linguists. This will generate a massive training (educational) requirement. Although it is a Brigade, it will never deploy as such and doesn’t require normal Brigade Command elements although it does require peacetime administration. It is being formed from troops currently serving in existing units, indeed from current formed units. Slots will then fill by trickle posting.



Solution: organise it as a ‘Ranger School’ instead of a Brigade. It is still a 1* command. It has a training capability heavy core which is less ‘running about and shouting’ and more academic in tone. The core staff would be Train the Trainer experts, as well as psychologists and linguists, rarely found in deployable units of any arm, drawn army wide and organised as a ‘special to arm’ school. The school would provide initial acceptance and selection, continuation training, advanced skills, specialist promotion courses etc.. Day to day responsibility/activity being high intensity, high level skills training of the Ranger Battalions, lifting this responsibility from junior commanders, thus freeing them for further training. This ensures no dilution of standards across the Brigade and achieves some economies in training facilities and personnel. Departments within this core specialise in all aspects of the Ranger skill set, from military skills, language and diplomacy to remembering to remove sunglasses when talking to civpop (remember that?). This is a massive ask if we are starting with your average tom or jock and would require specialist training staff in specialised facilities.



For training purposes, each Battalion forms a wing of the school, with the core providing day to day Brigade HQ admin functions. Should it be required, the core can also provide a scaleable, deployable, proto Brigade HQ as well as a pool of higher skill level SMEs to deploy in support of each Battalion on operations. RHQ Para was once tasked to provide a Brigade HQ ‘light’ for the TA para Bns, so bits of this have been exercised.



Battalions deploy as required up to Battalion strength’ or even multiple Bns, with core elements in their proposed Ranger role.



The core, or Ranger School, can also: provide training for officers across the army in what the Ranger role is and how they interact with or influence wider army operations (Ranger mindedness); train individual officers and ORs with Ranger skills useful within their own units, carrying a lesser ‘Ranger’ qualification (similar to the US model); facilitate generation of further Ranger units should the need arise, possibly drawing on army wide Ranger qualified personnel.



My key proposal would be that it is a school with deployable sub units. Very much not the current model of a Brigade. There is a subtle flavour here of ‘Special Companies’, which grew into Commando Forces and the practical use of Airborne Forces before they became available in sufficient numbers. Both deployed units straight from the training organisation and without higher level command organisations. If The Rangers are desperate for a ‘tradition’, they could do worse than to look to these for inspiration.



All random ramblings, but considering I’ve been a headteacher of several schools rather than a Brigade Commander, It’s how I might set about doing it.



Please tear this to shreds. I’d both welcome it and learn from it.
Only change to that IMHO would be to get a decent Cap badge and dump the Ranger name. Army Commando force please I hate the use of Ranger, it’s Americanism at its worse!
 
I know that I know bugger all of this level of organisational planning but coming from an educational background, I tend towards the education/training end of things when I consider a solution to any proposition. And I’m fully aware that this level of consideration and planning is complete and formation is well under way. So, here goes anyway:



This is an organisation which requires super educated, emotionally literate, highly trained, trainers, leaders and linguists. This will generate a massive training (educational) requirement. Although it is a Brigade, it will never deploy as such and doesn’t require normal Brigade Command elements although it does require peacetime administration. It is being formed from troops currently serving in existing units, indeed from current formed units. Slots will then fill by trickle posting.



Solution: organise it as a ‘Ranger School’ instead of a Brigade. It is still a 1* command. It has a training capability heavy core which is less ‘running about and shouting’ and more academic in tone. The core staff would be Train the Trainer experts, as well as psychologists and linguists, rarely found in deployable units of any arm, drawn army wide and organised as a ‘special to arm’ school. The school would provide initial acceptance and selection, continuation training, advanced skills, specialist promotion courses etc.. Day to day responsibility/activity being high intensity, high level skills training of the Ranger Battalions, lifting this responsibility from junior commanders, thus freeing them for further training. This ensures no dilution of standards across the Brigade and achieves some economies in training facilities and personnel. Departments within this core specialise in all aspects of the Ranger skill set, from military skills, language and diplomacy to remembering to remove sunglasses when talking to civpop (remember that?). This is a massive ask if we are starting with your average tom or jock and would require specialist training staff in specialised facilities.



For training purposes, each Battalion forms a wing of the school, with the core providing day to day Brigade HQ admin functions. Should it be required, the core can also provide a scaleable, deployable, proto Brigade HQ as well as a pool of higher skill level SMEs to deploy in support of each Battalion on operations. RHQ Para was once tasked to provide a Brigade HQ ‘light’ for the TA para Bns, so bits of this have been exercised.



Battalions deploy as required up to Battalion strength’ or even multiple Bns, with core elements in their proposed Ranger role.



The core, or Ranger School, can also: provide training for officers across the army in what the Ranger role is and how they interact with or influence wider army operations (Ranger mindedness); train individual officers and ORs with Ranger skills useful within their own units, carrying a lesser ‘Ranger’ qualification (similar to the US model); facilitate generation of further Ranger units should the need arise, possibly drawing on army wide Ranger qualified personnel.



My key proposal would be that it is a school with deployable sub units. Very much not the current model of a Brigade. There is a subtle flavour here of ‘Special Companies’, which grew into Commando Forces and the practical use of Airborne Forces before they became available in sufficient numbers. Both deployed units straight from the training organisation and without higher level command organisations. If The Rangers are desperate for a ‘tradition’, they could do worse than to look to these for inspiration.



All random ramblings, but considering I’ve been a headteacher of several schools rather than a Brigade Commander, It’s how I might set about doing it.



Please tear this to shreds. I’d both welcome it and learn from it.

I'm curious where the Army intends to find enough high quality personnel for the so called Ranger Brigade, never mind how it intends to train, develop and generally nurture them.

Perhaps a better cap badge for the new unit would be a white elephant.
 

Quoth

War Hero
FFS, can't these Woke Lefty Tossers ever give it a rest?

View attachment 617960.


Very American Sci-Fi looking, but very modern too, I like it - a refreshing addition to the UK CapBadge collection.
origin.jpg


Quartermaster General also livid at leave being cancelled to generate NSN's for shorty shorts and original Adidas three stripe trainers.
 

Wagner-Group

Old-Salt
Only change to that IMHO would be to get a decent Cap badge and dump the Ranger name. Army Commando force please I hate the use of Ranger, it’s Americanism at its worse!

You do realise that the Term "Ranger" has been used by British Troops way before the American started using it right?

The US Army Rangers were inspired By Rogers Rangers, a British Infantry Coy from the 17th Century, "The Rangers" A British TA unit was formed in 1860, The Royal Irish Regiment used the Term "Ranger" to describe their Soldiers as early as 1800.

US Ranger School opened in 1950
The 75th was formed in 1986

So you tell me how is "Ranger" a Yankee thing?

 
Which of course the original Rangers ie Selous Scouts carried at all times… (I served with a relative of the original Selous as it happens )
Selous Scouts usually carried AK47's on operations. Especially when deployed in the pseudo role for obvious reasons. The photos of shorts, t-shirts, tackies and FN's were publicty shots as part of the deception that they were an elite combat tracker unit.

PnzEmSo6J4Boh-i1V2QDhUDe6b0szekguRH4g0DBe-I.jpg
 

The US Army Special Forces are configured to support their Operational Detatchment Alpha's on the front line with quite a substansial support organisation. They also have the John F Kennedy Special Warfare School at Fort Bragg.​


Special Warfare School

Special Forces Group Organization​

Each Special Forces Group consists of :

  • Headquarters & Headquarters Company (HHC)

  • Group Support Battalion
    supports the Special Forces Group HHC and consists of 3 companies, providing logistical, intelligence, medical, and signals support.

  • 4 Special Forces Battalions (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th), each comprising:
    • 1 Operational Detachment-Charlie (ODC)
      The Special Forces Operational Detachment Charlie (SFOD-C) is the Battalion Headquaters and is responsible for command and control of the Special Forces Battalion.

    • 3 Special Forces Companies (A,B,C), comprising:
      • 6 Operational Detachment-Alpha (ODA).
        ODAs are usually 12-man units, lead by a captain.. The ODA is the primary fighting force of the Special Forces. Each SF Company usually contains 6 ODAs.

        more info : Special Forces ODAs

      • 1 Operational Detachment-Bravo (ODB)
        A SF Company usually contains one ODB, of around 12 men, which provides support and command and control to the SF Company's ODAs. ODBs provide support in:
        • training
        • intelligence
        • counter-intelligence
        more info : Special Forces ODBs
    • 1 Battalion Support Company
      The Battalion Support Company consists of signallers, mechanics, riggers, cooks, intelligence, personnel services, chaplain, legal and others, who support the Special Forces Battalion.
      • The Military Intelligence Detachment (MID) provides intelligence to the Special Forces Battalion. Operational ogranization may vary but will typically consist of:
        • Analysis and Control Team
        • Counter Intelligence / HUMINT Section
          • HUMINT Collection Team
          • CI Analyst
        • SIGINT Section
          • Technical Control and Analysis Element (TCAE or SOTB)
          • 6 Special Operation Teams "Aplha" (SOTAs)
            4-man SOT-As attach to Special Forces ODAs in order to gather signals intelligence
    • 1 Special Forces Company within a Special Force Group is designated as a CIF (Commander's In-Extremis Force) Company. The CIF Company is focused on Direct Action missions.
 
I know that I know bugger all of this level of organisational planning but coming from an educational background, I tend towards the education/training end of things when I consider a solution to any proposition. And I’m fully aware that this level of consideration and planning is complete and formation is well under way. So, here goes anyway:



This is an organisation which requires super educated, emotionally literate, highly trained, trainers, leaders and linguists. This will generate a massive training (educational) requirement. Although it is a Brigade, it will never deploy as such and doesn’t require normal Brigade Command elements although it does require peacetime administration. It is being formed from troops currently serving in existing units, indeed from current formed units. Slots will then fill by trickle posting.



Solution: organise it as a ‘Ranger School’ instead of a Brigade. It is still a 1* command. It has a training capability heavy core which is less ‘running about and shouting’ and more academic in tone. The core staff would be Train the Trainer experts, as well as psychologists and linguists, rarely found in deployable units of any arm, drawn army wide and organised as a ‘special to arm’ school. The school would provide initial acceptance and selection, continuation training, advanced skills, specialist promotion courses etc.. Day to day responsibility/activity being high intensity, high level skills training of the Ranger Battalions, lifting this responsibility from junior commanders, thus freeing them for further training. This ensures no dilution of standards across the Brigade and achieves some economies in training facilities and personnel. Departments within this core specialise in all aspects of the Ranger skill set, from military skills, language and diplomacy to remembering to remove sunglasses when talking to civpop (remember that?). This is a massive ask if we are starting with your average tom or jock and would require specialist training staff in specialised facilities.



For training purposes, each Battalion forms a wing of the school, with the core providing day to day Brigade HQ admin functions. Should it be required, the core can also provide a scaleable, deployable, proto Brigade HQ as well as a pool of higher skill level SMEs to deploy in support of each Battalion on operations. RHQ Para was once tasked to provide a Brigade HQ ‘light’ for the TA para Bns, so bits of this have been exercised.



Battalions deploy as required up to Battalion strength’ or even multiple Bns, with core elements in their proposed Ranger role.



The core, or Ranger School, can also: provide training for officers across the army in what the Ranger role is and how they interact with or influence wider army operations (Ranger mindedness); train individual officers and ORs with Ranger skills useful within their own units, carrying a lesser ‘Ranger’ qualification (similar to the US model); facilitate generation of further Ranger units should the need arise, possibly drawing on army wide Ranger qualified personnel.



My key proposal would be that it is a school with deployable sub units. Very much not the current model of a Brigade. There is a subtle flavour here of ‘Special Companies’, which grew into Commando Forces and the practical use of Airborne Forces before they became available in sufficient numbers. Both deployed units straight from the training organisation and without higher level command organisations. If The Rangers are desperate for a ‘tradition’, they could do worse than to look to these for inspiration.



All random ramblings, but considering I’ve been a headteacher of several schools rather than a Brigade Commander, It’s how I might set about doing it.



Please tear this to shreds. I’d both welcome it and learn from it.

Thank you, I did not want to be as forward as that. What makes special forces (applying the term in the broadest sense) is the level of ongoing varied training they are given, and experience they gain subsequently. This lot are effectively being molded as a Tier 3 special forces unit, and will doubtless have elements within that are Tier 2. This follows the US Ranger model where they are considered, depending who you speak with, either Tier 2, or Tier 3. There are though elements, specialist sub-units, within the US Rangers that operate above the normal level of the 75th - this is why the 75th is a very fertile recruiting ground for Delta/CAG. If it helps think of the 75th as the Parachute Regiment, and their specialist units as the Pathfinders.

You are right with the education requirements. This is effectively a massive shift in the educational and cross skilling requirements of the entire Brigade, as it will be. Even at the lowest levels for what they have in mind for this lot even basic Privates will need to be operating at Cpl level. Especially if the degree of autonomous decision making and individuals skills being twaddled about are to materialise in reality.

Along with your thoughts I would say that they need to set a benchmark standard for skills, and ability, both physical and academic (academic because along with practical, monkey see, monkey do, skills they will also need to learn some more thinky skills). To kick it off take the Bns mentioned, but make it clear that in order for an individual to stay after a given date those standards must be reached. Individuals not reaching the standard can return to line infantry, and others can apply for a Ranger vacancy to fill slots.

I always liked the term, "Chosen Man", borrowed by Dick Couch for his book describing US SF selection entitled, Chosen Soldier.



View attachment 618782

Quartermaster General also livid at leave being cancelled to generate NSN's for shorty shorts and original Adidas three stripe trainers.

As stated its a posed PR piccy. The Reid-Daly book, Pamwe Chete, stated that they wore hockey boots - along with blacking up, big fuzzy afro wigs, and floppy hats to hide european features.

iu
 
Top