Reg Hollis VC Armoury

Discussion in 'Int Corps' started by Sir_Sidney_Ruff_Diamond, Mar 6, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Coulby Newham - Middlesbrough the top place for poverty in the UK. Just the place to put an MI Bn HQ and Det?

    Middlesbrough nightclub lists while residents try to stay afloat | Society | The Guardian

    The poverty maps of England | News | guardian.co.uk


    I have nothing against the place but if the Int Corps (V) is to expand, perhaps a bit more thought about where people live, can access, centres of population etc. might be of value, instead of 'Oh look! an empty TAC! why don't you go there!'

    To paraphrase John Shuttleworth, 'I live in Hope (But I used to live in Barnsley)'
     
  2. I understand from my Northern colleagues that Volunteers are never seen at that particular location; they do seem to get quite upset about it.

    Your point is extremely important mind, dahn saarf like wot I am assuming everyone lives and works in London because that's where Bn HQ is looks pretty ******* stupid when actually looking at where people live shows you the ones in the Midlands. I reckon we need to go back to regional Coy locations with proper staffs and local recruiting if you genuinely want to grow sustainably. Currently we appear to be doing what we've always done and assuming that something different will happen - of course if we do get lucky the system will fall over as no extra capacity has been added. If I was looking after things I'd try and identify training bottlenecks before we try and jam a load of new soldiers through them. But then again that's why I'd never make a good staff officer. PowerPoint, vigorous indication gestures and the exhortation to "crack on". The answer to all of life's problems.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Surely it is a TA Free-Zone. After all wouldn't want any of those pesky STABs disturbing golf practice.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Or X country, or fishing or half-marathons, or more golf.

    It is said that 5 MI volunteers spend hours of fun playing 'spot the STAB' in Part 1 orders. Well actually it doesn't take long, because there aren't any.
     
  5. well, I'm sure the assembled brainpower on here can assist the staff effort. Instead of vague, common-sense suggestions, why not get specific? Bearing in mind that every other capbadge wants to be in the population / accessible centres as well, what is your suggestion?

    Any of us can sit back and say "I reckon our Company HQs should be there, there and there and the Bn HQ should go somewhere in the middle", but I am guessing that reality gets in the way? Surely we can only move into TACs / regular locations with spare real estate?

    So instead of the same old criticisms which pop up on here every time someone says "Coulby Newham"... why not point out the specific locations, with spare real estate, where you feel we could better be based? I'm sure some of the heirarchy who lurk on the site would welcome practical input instead of the same old vague moaning... :wink:



    and wait...
     
  6. Lovely town, cracking football team...
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. the_boy_syrup

    the_boy_syrup LE Book Reviewer

    The Uni has a large graphic design centre so might find something for loads of stab students to do
     
  8. For 3 I'd start off by looking for room at or near their sponsors, without even thinking I'd stash the usual suspects at a certain airfield somewhere in Cambridgeshire - so obvious it hurts. 5 might be a problem as post HERRICK the Corps has been kind of quiet about what they are actually supposed to be doing. So I'd get a population map of the UK, draw some travel contours and look to cover some ground.

    As for Bn HQ(s), who cares ? Stick it (them) at Chicksands as we don't go there enough anyway and it's equally inaccessible for everyone. In fact, if the HQs are colocated then maybe they can talk to each other and keep the daftness isolated from the rest of us. Now there's a plan.

    Or we can reinvent the Sy Coy for the 21st Century, ditch the 3/5 nonsense and cover the whole of the UK. Proper resilience. Bring back Int Coys as well to cover that angle based near the sponsor. Having a single HQ and calling it a Gp may be a touch old fashioned - although there will be an ambitious staff officer out there somewhere who needs to get the Pointless Change box ticked so I'm not going to rule it out.

    I also think that the current view that we'll simultaneously expand the TA and reduce the estate is, well, a little flawed. And by that I mean impossible, new estate will be needed. We've seen a lot of talk about multi-capbadge TA centres and I think that is one solution. Of course the loss of individual trainsets will result in whining audible from orbit .... Bring it on I say, the sooner we can get taught (say) shooting by the Inf instead of the usual "gottagetitalldoneinaweekendaswedonthaveenoughskilliesorrangebookingsandletsrearrangeitallatthelastminuteanywayandletsstartasearlyaspossibleasweneedtocramitallintoallowforallthetraveltimeohanddowehavenoughdriverswhatdoyoumeanwevehadalaterunofapplicationsohgodweneedanotherweekendanditsbloodymarchalready" the better.
     
  9. devil's in the detail though, isn't it? take the above example - where in chicksands, exactly? just because there is green space, doesn't mean the site has the office space / infrastructure / accommodation / quartering etc to accept your plan. a suggestion of a single additional portakabin as extra office space was rejected as too expensive, not long ago... yes, there may be future options if people move off site etc, but as you know, what seems like a bright idea for locating HQs & dets isn't as simple as "is it near a motorway and a population centre".
     
  10. Re-locate the coys or whatever we want to call them at the units/organisations they are supposed to be supporting: It's all very well saying that "we are special to role" and doing a course (or not!) to prove it, but it means bugger all without constant STR training and networking - not so much an issue for the cambridgeshire mafia, but definately for everyone else; especially the lot who are often shown on ORBATS of an organisation that is very much not 3MI (and their co-located collegues).

    This of course destroys the regional model. Well, brilliant - lets be national then. Attach a section to 15 POG (for example), chuck a company a piece at 1, 2 and 4 MI and genuinely make it easy to transfer between them as the needs of the army and the soldier corrospond.

    I don't think that real estate is the issue (although it is AN issue). I can imagine a conversation happening somewhere in Chicksands:

    "So, we have a presence in Coulby Newham?"
    "Yes Sir - It's 5MI HQ and a det Sir."
    "Righto, but we don't actually seem to have any soldiers parading there."
    "Erm, no sir."
    "What is in Coulby Newham to make it a suitable HQ location?"
    "Well, it's kind of in the middle of the North, Sir, and there's some real estate."
    "Oh I see. So 5MI are a northern Bn?"
    "Weeeeeell, yes - apart from the bits of it in the South West."
    "Ah, so what units do 5 MI support in the north and south west?"
    "Oh that's easy Sir. None. They seem to spend a lot of time providing bodies for units around Salisbury Plain"
    "Hang on. Aren't 3MI the southern lot?"
    "Easy mistake to make Sir. They're actually "strategic"" etc etc etc
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. It's going to cost, no doubt about that and I don't underestimate the effort involved. But the goverment has mandated that the TA be unfucked and so far the Army has generated little other than excuses and frenzied attempts to make everything better by doing exactly what we do now only more of it.

    Besides, the changes that "super garrisons", closing Germany, ceasing enduring operations, loss of MQs, a 20% cut in manpower and so on are going to force on the Army will make relocating the odd drill hall look like an easy win.

    I'd also point out that unless the Army does start to unfuck the process the government is going to start getting quite irritated that "the world's most professional army" can't find its own arse with a tracker dog and a torch when it comes to managing change. I doubt the Corps is better or worse than the rest, but change is on the way and if the Army can't define what it should be then some politician will. That will apply to the Corps as much as to anyone else so if the Director, 1MIX and the usual suspects don't know how to play this one they may find it getting played for them. Don't think I'm a fan of this approach, but it's my reading of the current political runes.

    Besides, I'd go back to one HQ for (V) for the whole UK and halve the problem.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. unless they decide to combine the swingeing cuts with the drawdown from germany? that would make sense. e.g. if they decide to bin a brigade, why bin a UK-based one and have to reshuffle the deckchairs? why bin a UK PID if there is an identical role in a BFG unit?

    i appreciate it's more complex than that, but you get the point as a general principle for managing the change.


    appreciate you're not aware of all the work done, but you ought to have some confidence in the leadership on this.


    i seem to remember a certain amount of whingeing from the Volunteers before the 3/5 split, about geographical distance from their Bn HQ... :)
     
  13. Allow me to help here, it looks like there is some demand for more HQs. Perhaps HQ Int + Sy Gp (V) could be established near Chilwell to manage 3 and 5 MI Bns ?

    PS: Is it not the mysterious RACF who manage TA real estate and NOT the Army per se?
    A TA HQ at Cowes, Ascot, Twickenham, Silverstone or Edinburgh would seem to make more sense in terms of summer revenue earning potential from authorised encroachments.
     
  14. Nice to see one of our Regular colleagues taking a genuine interest in all of this. Personally, I've always thought two TA Bns were unnecessary but I won't bang on about it. As far as the BHQ is concerned, it doesn't really matter where it is located although I think it would be best at Chicksands as it is the home of the Corps and it puts the TA at the centre of the MI community. Coulby Newham (CN) as a location, it is fit for purpose as a BHQ although other posters are right; you never see STABs there. It was never planned to be a Coy/Det location as well as a BHQ. At the time CN was short-listed there was another favourable location in Warrington which was considered. On the M6 and M62 corridors, providing fairly easy access from Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Preston, Stoke/Birmingham etc. There was sufficient accommodation for a BHQ, a Coy location, garages, stores etc. However, the CO of the day was set against it although he didn't really communicate why....I suppose he didn't really have to. He was the CO after all. I think much of the gripe about CN, comes from some of the staff up there. Ex Regs on FTRS possibly with an unhelpful view of the TA. I remember one year they had a BHQ Christmas social and they failed to invite the Senior Volunteer and Senior Volunteer Warrant Officer, preferring to keep it an all Regular (although as FTRS now, they are STABs themselves) affair. It's naive "own-goals" like this, which fails to endear them to the TA.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. Fair enough. Who actually holds info on real estate? Is it squirreled away in a multitude of RFCA offices or is it easily accessible to the decision makers?