Realigning the British Army after Ukraine

[Alamo]

In turn, do you think that the Treasury just passed over cuts without considering where they will be made? The easiest cut is always the most expensive element, which is the soldier/sailor/airman. Carriers may cost £Billions but the cost of Manning them is huge. Same, same for RAF and Army. Equipment is v expensive but not as expensive as personnel and associated costs.

The cuts are hugely political so you can bet your bottom $ that personnel cuts would be at the forefront of any discussion. It is naive to think the Treasury just hands out money with no thought for the consequences!

I’ve been involved in several Planning Rounds, all of which have involved the deletion of some units, and occasionally the creation of new ones. At no stage has a Treasury official been anywhere near the decision. Now, deletion of (for some reason) sacred cap badges may be political, but the MOD has made the proposals.

 

[Cold_Collation]

Which of course is why the Parachute Regiment, LRDG, Commandos and SAS were so crap in the Second War having no tradition or history to call on.

The Parachute Regiment (formed 1942) is our oldest full-time regiment outside the Household Division - a point made elsewhere (probably by me in the 'Changing the Army - how?' thread).

I'm increasingly dubious as to the usefulness or viability of cap badges. The Rifles? Formed in 2007. Anything before that is probably moot, and I say that as the son of a DLI man.

But how has a thread about realigning the Army descended into infantry cap badges again?

(Not aimed at you personally, BTW; we just always seem to end up in the same bloody places.)

 

[Deleted 139028]

Paras, marines and guards - and even the pointless rangers - aren't cap badges, they're capability.

Line infantry is just a big singular pool of capability that can be trickled in to the relevant unit role (light, mechanised, armoured or whatever evolves in time) when the trained soldier is allocated a unit that needs the bods.

So according to you the paras, marines & guards don't have cap badges and important senior people to fight the politicians on their behalf?

Spheroids, you could do the same to the Paras and Guards as you suggest for the rest of the infantry whilst retaining their capabilities, the Marines however are a different kettle of fish.

Next, the amalgamation of REME* and RASC, Ordnance Corps, RCT, RLC?


* And I'm well aware REME were formed in part from the RASC, sort of a homecoming.

 

[oscar1whisky]

So according to you the paras, marines & guards don't have cap badges and important senior people to fight the politicians on their behalf?

Spheroids, you could do the same to the Paras and Guards as you suggest for the rest of the infantry whilst retaining their capabilities, the Marines however are a different kettle of fish.

Next, the amalgamation of REME* and RASC, Ordnance Corps, RCT, RLC?


* And I'm well aware REME were formed in part from the RASC, sort of a homecoming.

Put it in RLC, but rename RLC as Combat Support Corps, or similar.?

 

[Glad_its_all_over]

We are where we are. The Army's not going to grow and its abandonment of peer- and near-peer capability isn't going to change, either. The Land defence of Europe speaks Polish, various Baltic and Scandinavian languages and US-accented English and we should stop kidding ourselves that two pisspot little brigades with aged-out kit and utterly inadequate fires and AD will/could/should make any difference whatsoever in a major ground war.

We're going to remain firmly in the 'storm ashore and break lots of stuff' and related air assault activities against Mbongo Gorge levels of opposition and we'll probably be quite good at Foreign Internal Defence, training and such, provided we can find a suitable nation with the appetite for our services, but that's about it. The future of the British Army, at least in the short term and absent an existential Land threat, is Toyota Wars - although, one hopes, also without the endless, oozing-sore, pointless and slow-moving, risk-averse patrolling exercise in places where everyone hates us, which so characterised the Noughties and Teens of this century.

The RAF and the Navy, by contrast, are still very much in the peer game and I don't necessarily accept that's a bad strategic posture. It certainly matches our historical strategic approach, which, with the exception of 1914 to 1918 and 1939-1963, has never relied on a mass Land capability,

 

[Glasgow_Jock]

I mind on HERRICK 'Commonwealth Day' fell on a date while deployed.

Of the coy plus there, around a platoon minus must have been qualified as 'Commonwealthers' as they stood around having their photo taken with our OC to commemorate the occasion.

This didn't even take into consideration the Sassenach Lowlanders and English that constituted our sub-unit. From a 'highland' battalion.

If folk wish to believe that our non Teuchters highlanders buy into the highland tradition etc then fair enough. I think I stopped caring when I realised I wasn't going to the Argylls 5 SCOTS on week 12 of training.

 

[Spanks]

If anyone still wonders why nothing seems to change within the MOD one just needs to read the multitude of threads on Arrse over the past twenty years relating to this very topic.

Great discussions, great ideas, great and intelligent debates but there has never been nor will there ever be an agreement on to how to fix it.

 

[Brotherton Lad]

Cut foreign aid to zero, spend the equivalent on defence.

Foreign aid is a form of defence.

 

[Cold_Collation]

We are where we are. The Army's not going to grow and its abandonment of peer- and near-peer capability isn't going to change, either.

That has been done, as far as I can see, without the nation's consent.

 

[Glasgow_Jock]

So according to you the paras, marines & guards don't have cap badges and important senior people to fight the politicians on their behalf?

Spheroids, you could do the same to the Paras and Guards as you suggest for the rest of the infantry whilst retaining their capabilities, the Marines however are a different kettle of fish.

There's always going to be a need for the capability of specialised amphibious and airborne troops until we start fighting our enemies in space/ Mars etc. Then we'll have fancy adeptus astartes space marines.

In retrospect I struggle to justify the niche 'capability' of guards. If Aunt Liz feels having several battalions worth of blokes - and lassies - in fancy dress mincing around castles and palaces is a niche capability worth retaining then who am I to argue with her.

There have always been 'guards' units since time immemorable though for society's perceived elite.

 

[Glasgow_Jock]

But how has a thread about realigning the Army descended into infantry cap badges again?

I know, I know, right, mea culpa for my part.

My last post on anything involving 'cap badges'... Tedious crap.

 

[Deleted 139028]

Really is just an over quoted Army urban myth though isn't it?

No, it certainly isn't and those of us in Corps that get attached to Regiments throughout their service are, generally*, very proud to have served in them. I'd even add that despite not being happy to have served in some Regiments I met some great people in them and (if I wasn't such an old Biff) I'd be more than happy to serve with them again.


* Happy to have served my whole career in REME as Reg, TA, FTRS, NRPS.
Also very proud to have served with 4/7 RDG, QDG, 19 Fd Amb Colchester (attached from 8 Fd Wksp REME),1st Bn Irish Guards, ASMT (now DST) Leconfield, 2 Sig Regt York, ES Branch HQ UK NSW Banja Luka, 160 Tpt Regt (V).

Not so happy to have served with 1st Bn Coldstream Guards, 1 RTR, 225 Med Regt (V).

ETA - Also happy to have served with 3 Royal Anglian Regt as UN & SBA whilst attached from 8 Fd Wksp REME

 

[Deleted 139028]

Put it in RLC, but rename RLC as Combat Support Corps, or similar.?

A possibility, I'm aware that when RLC was being talked about REME were supposed to have been included, but that was very strongly objected to by the Ord Corps as they had eyes on the Officer side of things which wouldn't happen if REME came on board.

I'd expect similar if it was talked about afresh.

 

[Glad_its_all_over]

That has been done, as far as I can see, without the nation's consent.

Absolutely. It's been nakedly political, with the utter connivance of generations, now, of VSOs. But it's OK because, you know, SAS and Light Infantry! Oh and Cyber and Rangers, of course.

 

[twentyfirstoffoot]

Put it in RLC, but rename RLC as Combat Support Corps, or similar.?

RASC?

 

[twentyfirstoffoot]

No, it certainly isn't and those of us in Corps that get attached to Regiments throughout their service are, generally*, very proud to have served in them. I'd even add that despite not being happy to have served in some Regiments I met some great people in them and (if I wasn't such an old Biff) I'd be more than happy to serve with them again.


* Happy to have served my whole career in REME as Reg, TA, FTRS, NRPS.
Also very proud to have served with 4/7 RDG, QDG, 19 Fd Amb Colchester (attached from 8 Fd Wksp REME),1st Bn Irish Guards, ASMT (now DST) Leconfield, 2 Sig Regt York, ES Branch HQ UK NSW Banja Luka, 160 Tpt Regt (V).

Not so happy to have served with 1st Bn Coldstream Guards, 1 RTR, 225 Med Regt (V).

Thanks for confirming it does not matter where you serve or what cap badge the CO is or how long you stay in a unit. Tell me did you have a special arrangement to return to a particular unit if war broke out?

 

[Deleted 139028]

There's always going to be a need for the capability of specialised amphibious and airborne troops until we start fighting our enemies in space/ Mars etc. Then we'll have fancy adeptus astartes space marines.

In retrospect I struggle to justify the niche 'capability' of guards. If Aunt Liz feels having several battalions worth of blokes - and lassies - in fancy dress mincing around castles and palaces is a niche capability worth retaining then who am I to argue with her.

There have always been 'guards' units since time immemorable though for society's perceived elite.

Not having a go but if you struggle to justify the niche capability of the Guards, how can you do so for the Paras? What the Paras and the Marines provide has no dependence on them retaining a seperate cap badge or, in the case of the Marines, a different master.

You could easily bring the Paras into Infantry (Main) and dissipate a Company to each Brigade, Marines could be brought into the Army and dissipated to a specific Brigade (or Brigades). No doubt some horse trading would be required like 17 Port & Maritime leaving RLC behind for the Navy and all Aircraft coming under the control of RAF, but control would be through Brigade/Divisional Staff from those specific capabilities so not much of a change at the higher level.

 

[medwaymud]

But how has a thread about realigning the Army descended into infantry cap badges again?

I think I can give a partial answer to that.

The Russians are being driven back, defeated locally time and again, by two-man teams of Infantry armed with battlefield-changing, anti-armour weapons.
I realise this is backed up by top-notch real-time Int . But actually destroying RUS armour - wherever it is found is being done mainly by part-time Infantry.

The relevance to the Thread could be ........ maybe we should increase the number of Inf Bns and ( learning from the UKR practical experience ) spend a lot more time on this kind of training.

This will directly link into " Well, if we are going to increase the number of Bns - I highly recommend 1 Loamshires be recalled to the Colours ! )
And it continues from there ....

 

[QRK2]

Not having a go but if you struggle to justify the niche capability of the Guards, how can you do so for the Paras? What the Paras and the Marines provide has no dependence on them retaining a seperate cap badge or, in the case of the Marines, a different master.

You could easily bring the Paras into Infantry (Main) and dissipate a Company to each Brigade, Marines could be brought into the Army and dissipated to a specific Brigade (or Brigades). No doubt some horse trading would be required like 17 Port & Maritime leaving RLC behind for the Navy and all Aircraft coming under the control of RAF, but control would be through Brigade/Divisional Staff from those specific capabilities so not much of a change at the higher level.

Which of course is part of the reason behind FCF for the RM.

 

[Deleted 139028]

Thanks for confirming it does not matter where you serve or what cap badge the CO is or how long you stay in a unit. Tell me did you have a special arrangement to return to a particular unit if war broke out?

For me no, when I left Regular Service under Options For Change I had no Reserve Liability. If I did have with my parent Corps being REME I'd have gone wherever they decided to send me, it could have been any unit or cap badge but I'd still have been a REME soldier (well, Artificer ).