When the Cardwell reforms came in there was enough battalions for every county to have a regiment. These days you're doing well if the local battalion covers less than five. It's a sad fact the army is going to have to get off it's arse and accept, the local Reg with a 250 year history is a ****ing Dodo and it's time it grew up and put away the silly belts, badges and mini dusters. I can't believe were faffing over seniority in this day and age.
There could be 3 Inf regts, Light, Heavy and London (Woodentops and the special ones). The jocks will soon be wee ecks problem, not only will he only be able to afford a part time company of archers but he wont be able to recruit them from the pasty ginger hedge as the dole pays better! I wonder how soon he will pick up the tab for the alleged 82000 adult jobseekeers in Scotland?
Even more reason to struggle to fill the places, It is however a private eye moment, the news headlines announced an increase last night in overall jobless figures (school and colllege leaver spike) to come shortly and 5 minutes later stated that private businesses had employed more people this quarter than were laid off by the govt.
Lies, damn lies and statistics. I'm sure if needed the recruits could be found, young scotsmen wanting to join should be encouraged rather than made to form a queue in a quota system as has been alleged by the anti F&C brigade. I seem to recall a very high wastage in Junior leaders (I expect maturity or lack of and choice to leave waved under noses a big factor) when compared to the adult training companies who managed in my experience to keep 3/4s of recruits in the system where the figures seemed to be reversed for IJLB!
This all becoming a tad tedious and the Torygraph keep punting this up, so maybe the question is more about what their agenda is!
It is only a few years since the Royal Regiment of Scotland came into being. Not even the length of a normal career for one soldier! The formation of RRS saw the demise of all the old Scottish Regiments and although the name is retained within Bn titles, in effect they have gone, or have they? Soldiers and officers join the RRS now and there are fewer and fewer former members of the antecedent Bns. And yet some Bns are well recruited and some aren't - how does that work if they are all one Regiment and people can be moved as required? Surely each Bn should be showing roughly the same numbers as recruits are fed into the Bns to maintain equal sizes - or are there agendas at play here also?
The report gives the Highlanders Bn & A&SH Bns as the worst recruited yet the rumour is the A&SH will be merged with the Black Watch Bn - seems there is more than recruiting being brought into play.
Right! Enough of the conspiracy theories. As I said before, once the changes are announced and the implementation started, the planners will start working on the next round of cuts/changes/'improvements' and in no time at all we will all be back here discussing exactly the same thing, but with a more southern flavour as Scotland will have been dealt with! Be afraid, be very afraid!!!
Sad thread. My old regiment (and a finer one never drew breath) managed to survive unamalgamated for well over 300 years right up until its subsumption into the RRS was announced, reasonably well recruited, never had a Gurkha Coy attached and very, very few F&C bods. They were amalgamated with the oldest regiment in the Army, one with a glorious tradition and a wonderful record of service to the Crown who were struggling, numbers wise even with a plethora of Fijian lads (though they did come to the forefront of army rugby)! It has proved to be a successful union and reasonably well recruited, interestingly they do not use their parenthetical title, preferring to call themselves, and rightly so, 1SCOTS.
Its time to stop amalgamating persistently under manned regiments whose recruiting figures indicate they are not as well thought of as their HHQs would like to believe. Time for them to go. Better to form a Corps of Infantry with a common uniform and keep our fingers crossed that 30,000 young indigenous Brits will have enough of a sense of adventure to join them.
Mind you there'll still be a recruiting problem if the Government insist on implementing their Affirmative Action policy to ensure regiments reflect the ethnic demographic of their recruiting area.
As alluded to in my post one of the many threads about the Gurkhas apparently revealed this figure, I didnt challenge it as I dont care how many are unemployed in truth, its me I care about. If there are unemployed Jocks then the Army was always a good job for them as evidenced by the masses of PWs in the corps as well as reasonably well recruited regiments. That said if the Jocks lose a Bn then its fair to spread it about and other divs/large regts could stand to lose one as well. Alternatively they could offer the troops in underused units the option to transfer to an infantry unit!
This is a difficult one for me as I am a strong believer in the Golden Thread, but I am not stupid enough not to realise that those days are gone.
Scotland is only just starting to get behind the RRS. The creating of the RRS was used by the SNP to fire up the outrage bus, to accuse the "Westminster Government" of trying to destroy the infrastructure of the Scots, tear out their proud heart..and all the other waffle they came out with. Nothing was mentioned of the fact that the proud people of Scotland were not joining or heading south of the border to join the Paras or RM and so the regiments had to be amalgamated to save long term jobs.
It has taken 8 years for the people to recognise the regiment, and even now they are often refered to by the Battalion names, especially on the local news.
The Highlanders and the Gordons are dear to my heart, but they are gone. Looking at the demographics for the recruiting area for 4 SCOTS you realise that it covers by far the largest area, but with a very sparse population, much of which is farming or estate land where young men work on their family farms and cannot afford to leave the farm.
To me it is bloody obvious that a regiment that has 2 battalions 20% understrength has to be at the top of the "culling" pile...but I am sure the SNP will gain supporters by saying otherwise.