Ranger Brigade(s)

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
But is that not the same for US Army Cav/Aviation? Lt Cols Command the “Squadron”, which is actually their name for a Battalion?

Or are they literally Commanding 60(ish) blokes and gals?

The latter. The unit is a brigade level command, the squadron is a battalion level command.
 
Small units might make sense for some operations, but rebranding a reinforced company as a battalion just to preserve a capbadge smacks of desperation on the part of the Army. And all these mini-battalions will have a Lt Col commanding still where by formation size it really ought to be a Major or even a Captain...

This ^.

How many soldiers currently serving in the Rifles think that Dorset Battle Honours or Gloucester Battle Honours or Lancs or Wilts etc ....... have any relevance to why they will put themselves in harms way today.

I totally understand how they will do it for The Rifles.
 

exspy

LE
What about for the Royal Corps of Infantry, if there ever was such a thing?
The Australians manage to.

On the topic of a British Corps of Infantry, I bring forward Major Frederick Myatt's book The British Infantry 1660-1945 (1983) in which he discusses just this issue in the epilogue.

Myatt puts forth the question, and remember he's writing after all of the amalgamations and disbandments resulting from the 1957 White Paper have occurred, that if after the British Army abandoned the Cardwell system in 1946, a 'Corps of Infantry' had been created would the infantry "have been a stronger and more cohesive arm that it is now? I don't know if Myatt was including the Guards or the Paras in this question or just the 64 regiments of the line.

So what say you all?
1) Would forming the British Army into 64 numbered battalions within a Corps of Infantry in 1946 have been a good thing?
2) Would such a cataclysmic change have been even possible?

Cheers,
Dan.
 
The second step forward is the Littoral Strike Group, which will represent a global capability to provide a discrete raiding force and intervention role around the world. There will be at least two LSGs in existence, operating in the Med/Baltic and in the wider East of Suez role.
This just seems to be going back to the Commando Carrier concept of the sixties and seventies. Converted light fleet carriers HMS Bulwark and Albion with Wessex Helicopters, landing craft and a full RM Commando Group together with Assault Ships HMS Fearless and Intrepid with 3 Cdo Bde RM based in Singapore.

Although on a far smaller scale and probably equiped to do no more than chase pirates.
 
This just seems to be going back to the Commando Carrier concept of the sixties and seventies. Converted light fleet carriers HMS Bulwark and Albion with Wessex Helicopters, landing craft and a full RM Commando Group together with Assault Ships HMS Fearless and Intrepid with 3 Cdo Bde RM based in Singapore.

Although on a far smaller scale and probably equiped to do no more than chase pirates.
Might well be, there's little new under the sun. My point is that there's a clear vision here and it's easily explained. Despite all sorts of https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/attachments/useful-principles-zip.180500/ there is no simplicity, no clarity, and no easy way to explain the future of the army to the lay person.

Someone needs to get a 3 paragraph description and fast for the army or the politicians are going to give more resources to the RN on the basis that 1) they can understand why and 2) they can explain it to their voters.
 
Might well be, there's little new under the sun. My point is that there's a clear vision here and it's easily explained. Despite all sorts of https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/attachments/useful-principles-zip.180500/ there is no simplicity, no clarity, and no easy way to explain the future of the army to the lay person.

Someone needs to get a 3 paragraph description and fast for the army or the politicians are going to give more resources to the RN on the basis that 1) they can understand why and 2) they can explain it to their voters.
Well they could always say that the role of the Army is to garrison the empire and provide an expeditionary force in case of an future war on the continent.
 
Am I mistaken in remebering a you tube video of Portugese Soldier operating in the CAR in this thread?
 

JCC

LE
This makes depressing reading from a green perspective: Positive Waves - Why The Defence Paper Is Good News For The Royal Navy

"In terms of the state of the current fleet, it seems that the RN has successfully pushed forward a proposal that will see the UK operate essentially a three tier Navy. At its heart will be the Carrier Strike Group, which will be the centrepiece of UK defence and provide a valuable force that can operate on a national or coalition basis.

The second step forward is the Littoral Strike Group, which will represent a global capability to provide a discrete raiding force and intervention role around the world. There will be at least two LSGs in existence, operating in the Med/Baltic and in the wider East of Suez role.

The final step is that there will be a globally deployed and permanently based navy that has ships operating out of a range of shore bases around the world. There is a commitment to keeping the RIVER class Batch 2s busy, as these ships, which will likely be replaced by Type 31 in due course, will be global workhorses based all over the world."

Can anyone fit the future of the army into 3 paragraphs which can be understood by anyone with GCSE maths, English and geography?

This question comes up again and again and is never answered: WTF is the BA for?
 

JCC

LE
1. Officer careers
2. Preservation of CEA
3. Promotion of equality and diversity
Wouldn't it be cheaper to build a few boarding schools for them and reduce the BA to the Household Division with horses and lots of drill for the tourists? It would keep them out of harm's way and I'm sure any allies would rather not be troubled looking after several hundred ill-equipped LI.
 
I suspect this latest review is a Johnson/ Cummings plan to put the army on the spot, and force through changes that the army won't.
Stand by for a tasking that requires tanks and armoured infantry, and an utter clusterfeck as the head shed attempt to cobble together a force from current, not planned for a decade hence, equipment and people.
Swiftly followed by mass P45s for a lot of senior officers, assorted garrison hq staffs, and all the other non deployable dross that eats money but does nothing militarily useful.
 

JCC

LE
I suspect this latest review is a Johnson/ Cummings plan to put the army on the spot, and force through changes that the army won't.
Stand by for a tasking that requires tanks and armoured infantry, and an utter clusterfeck as the head shed attempt to cobble together a force from current, not planned for a decade hence, equipment and people.
Swiftly followed by mass P45s for a lot of senior officers, assorted garrison hq staffs, and all the other non deployable dross that eats money but does nothing militarily useful.
CDS I want a square Armoured Divison self-sufficient and on the ground in Ukraine within 72 hours and 1,2,3 go...
 
Top