Re-role of RLC Regts?

#1
Who, What, where, when? As usual our illustrious leaders seem to think keeping us in the dark is the way of doing buisness. Answers anyone.
 
#4
Ehh! That rumours been around for nearly ten years.Wheres Mike?
 
#6
The current GS and CS Regts are to be re-organised into 5 identical Logistic Support Regiments (LSRs). Each new regiment will affiliate to a heavy or mech Bde (1, 4, 7, 12, 20). 19 Mech is re-roling as a Lt Bde and will be supported by a CSS Bn with an RLC composite Sqn.
 
#7
just heard that the wheel is being reinvented again with 3rd line re-roling?
 
#9
mostly idle gossip as i was at the directorate for a meeting t'other day....3rd line regts to become LSRs....work in progress, watch and shoot..
 
#10
The creation of the RLC started as idle gossip - we were told not to worry about it at the time!
 
#11
The idea of the RLC goes back as far as 1977 when the Logistic Executive (Army) HQ DOS collocated with Logistic Executive (Army) when RCT Regiments & RAOC Battalions started to be re-rolled. The Logistic Support Review (LSR) started in 1988 ending up as 'Options for Change' in 1990. So NOTHING would surprise me in what HQ DRLC thinks or does.

What does surprise me however is how the REME managed to stay independent thou all this? Since the Parachute and AMF(L) Logistics Battalions (Combined RCT/RAOC/REME units) were held as future models!
 
#12
goon_bde said:
mostly idle gossip as i was at the directorate for a meeting t'other day....3rd line regts to become LSRs....work in progress, watch and shoot..
Oh good. That means we can get rid of Transport Regiments and Supply Regiments and waste a shed load of cash changing names but not functions.

Synicism aside, what's changed in the battlespace that requires yet another resructuring of the way we do business.

By the way I thought 3rd 2nd line etc was dropped doctrinally?
 
#13
qman said:
goon_bde said:
mostly idle gossip as i was at the directorate for a meeting t'other day....3rd line regts to become LSRs....work in progress, watch and shoot..
Oh good. That means we can get rid of Transport Regiments and Supply Regiments and waste a shed load of cash changing names but not functions.

Synicism aside, what's changed in the battlespace that requires yet another resructuring of the way we do business.

By the way I thought 3rd 2nd line etc was dropped doctrinally?
They have Qman.....Force and Formation is the new black!
 
#14
Qman,

the change in the battlespace is the reality of prosecuting two medium scale enduring operations. 27 Regt on Op HERRICK is effectively working as an LSR, however this is not a permanent re-rolling/restructuring.

CH1520 is right about the new doctrine change which is now in the new JDP4. The new nomenclature is Unit, Formation and Force, although I think it will be years before 1st,2nd and 3rd line drop out of circulation. As Liddel-Hart said ‘The only thing harder than getting a new idea into the military mind is to get an old one out.’

DRLC have been tasked to conducting a Force Level Logistic review which is looking at Log Bde units. This might result in some restructuring.
 
#16
qman said:
Any chance of re-roling Pet Ops out of Fuel Sqn's back to Pet Sqns then?
We can but hope, but if that happened who would the drivers get to do all the jobs they wont/cant?
 
#17
qman said:
Any chance of re-roling Pet Ops out of Fuel Sqn's back to Pet Sqns then?
Now cut that out! The powers that be wont have that blasphemous talk around this mans Army!
Now look forward to your final years in the Army ensuring the Drivers pass their ECI's, because a Green on that means the world!!! :wink:
 
#18
CH512O said:
qman said:
Any chance of re-roling Pet Ops out of Fuel Sqn's back to Pet Sqns then?
Now cut that out! The powers that be wont have that blasphemous talk around this mans Army!
Now look forward to your final years in the Army ensuring the Drivers pass their ECI's, because a Green on that means the world!!! :wink:
not sure on this and correct me if i am wrong but wasn't that SARCASM? 8O
 
#19
Sounds like a good idea to me. For what it's worth.

Bde size deployments seem to be the way ahead, so being able to send a particular Bde, job lot, rather than assembling has got to be a winner.

What happens to the Tank Tptr units? I thought they were supposed to go quasi civvie.
 
#20
Third line is still configured to large scale intervention operations and is not aligned in barracks for medium scale deployments. Logistics deployment doctrine is rarely if never implemented, but rather in recent times has been adapted and constantly readapted for purpose. Whilst this would outwardly give the impression of being slap dashed or cuffed I think there is genuine merit to this approach. The logistics (inc ES) tail or footprint is defined by so many factors that it is quite natural that it is a malleable organic process. Doctrine, whilst giving a basic commonality of thought tends to be the ideas of the Officers of the one/two star organisation that were in charge at the time; the only consistent factor being that these people invariably fail to envisage the next ten years of operations. Why not then concentrate on enhancing flexibility, by reducing structure and doctrinal constraint? RHQs don’t add any real value outside of functional areas, so why not do away with this unnecessary bureaucracy? Combine the transport regiments and combine the supply regiments, allowing their commander to intelligently flex assets across a range of commitments as required. I don’t think this is especially radical, indeed flexibility is expunged as a principal of logistics yet at every stage there seems to be a need to introduce ridgedity, nominally for an officer corps that fails to understand the nature of its own business.

Still, what will most probably happen is that a few poor Sqns will have to stag on, on Ops, for an additional four months until the rest of their newly formed Regiment catch up (as happened with the LSRs;) no doubt so there can be a forming up parade (maybe they could spell the name of the Regt in people and take a photo from a RTCH / Helicopter?!?!)

It should also be noted that any organisation or grouping which has the capacity to magnify one staff officer’s error across an entire theatre should avoid naming conventions that would have Angelina Jolie laughing and she has a child called Shila Pitts (I hope in those expensive schools the kids don’t swap the starting letters of your first and last name round as they would have in mine). Whatever they do with it, however, they reconfigure farce support or turd line they should think what a squaddie will do with that name or those initials so that the whole RLC does not go down in flames when one person fails to book portaloos for five thousand people.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
petrolboy RLC 75
adam225 The NAAFI Bar 61
BPS666 RLC 3

Similar threads

Latest Threads