Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Sf to be hit by cutbacks

Point being made above is about political uncertainty around the globe... bit like 1981 and all those cuts they were dreaming up...

Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)

Uncertainty has little to do with it to be fair, the elements being removed were added on, as in were not part of the pre Iraq/Afghan shenanigans.
Be under no illusions that manning in that side of the military is no better than anywhere else, so when they say they are cutting a squadron (much like most units really) the reality is the other squadrons benefit from being closer to full strength.

SFSG was a stay of execution for 1PARA, everyone knows that and were they to be binned then there number would be more than welcome in the other two battalions along with the experience they would bring with them (were that to happen)

SRR have been kicking about in various different guises since way back when so more likely just another name change for them rather than a loss in capability.

Its hardly a great surprise 21/23 are for the chop either, for starters they would always go before a regular counterpart and rightly so. Any and all issues regarding use of part time soldiers that occur for the wider field army also apply to them, the colour of the beret doesnt change that. As a result they also come with a broad range of caviats(?) restricting their use on OPs so how much they bring to the party versus their cost probably sways the vote.

All in all its the future of the military as a result of cuts, despite their obvious use they were never going to be spared any damage and are simply being scaled back in line with the rest of the field army, afterall they were sneaking about the world doing jobs long before the wider SF group concept and Im sure they will continue to do so once its gone.
What is certain is that after the cuts to the wider army have taken affect they will never have the problem of dividing their numbers between theatres ever again.
 
Because we are skint and are not running two manpower intensive ops simultaneousy anymore so the forces brought in or extended to plug a hole are being moved on now there is no hole to plug. Seems understandable to me.

Yep, which is what I indicated in my post.

BUT unless there is a marked change in foreign policy or someone un-invents conflict, it won't be long until UKSF is back to working overtime. Even in the relatively short period since the announcement of our 2014 Afghan pullout Brit Mil has committed to Libya and Mali. The increasingly unstable Syria and Iran seems to be on Hagues radar and lets not even mention the resurgent left footers across the water, who have proven to be quite manpower intensive to subdue in the past.
 
Once Afghan goes away I would hazard a guess they would be on around the same footing as they were in the eighties/nineties, the difference being is it doesnt take a genius to figure out where they are these days (obv bearing in mind a squadron was permanently out in the province back then).
Plus rather then doing most of this sort of stuff alone the US provides the lionshare of the resources to lighter the load even more.

Im not saying its a good thing, but it is one of those inevitabilitys(?) that comes with a broke country and a Govt that likes to fight wars on the cheap and I dont see how post Afghan DSF would have been able to justify the size of his grouping to the bean counters that run the show.
 
Once Afghan goes away I would hazard a guess they would be on around the same footing as they were in the nineties, the difference being is it doesnt take a genius to figure out where they are these days (obv bearing in mind a squadron was permanently out in the province back then).
Plus rather then doing most of this sort of stuff alone the US provides the lionshare of the resources to lighter the load even more.

Im not saying its a good thing, but it is one of those inevitabilitys(?) that comes with a broke country and a Govt that likes to fight wars on the cheap and I dont see how post Afghan DSF would have been able to justify the size of his grouping to the bean counters that run the show.

DSF's justification should be "it works". Like I said, they're one of the few corners of Brit Mil who actually "punch above their weight" and managed to come out of Iraq and Afghan with their credibility intact.

You can forget about US support on the scale we have previously seen. Our performances in Basra and Helmand has pigeon holed us as the unreliable partner that simply can't be trusted to get the job done.

In fact, the US/UK's shared intelligence network is one of the only few remaining attractions we can even offer the US. Seeing as UKSF has a vague role in that, albeit as the blunt instrument, then further cuts only makes us even less relevant to a nation that is progressively looking to the Far East anyway.

All in all, I think it's a daft move and cost cutting should be aimed elsewhere.
 

Nehustan

On ROPS
On ROPs
Oh look, 22 SAS wins in a resourcing fight. I wonder what background DSF has......

Rumour has it (and this is Arrse after all!!) that while not being on the balcony, Msr/Herr Schmidt was in the garden...

(edited to add I put Msr as in Messieur, This tribe linked me to superfly stove..blacksploitation...Msr X...)
 
Rumour has it (and this is Arrse after all!!) that while not being on the balcony, Msr/Herr Schmidt was in the garden...

(edited to add I put Msr as in Messieur, This tribe linked me to superfly stove..blacksploitation...Msr X...)

Good going if thats true, as it was six years before he joined up.
 

Nehustan

On ROPS
On ROPs
Good going if thats true, as it was six years before he joined up.

Now I said Herr Schmidt not Mr. Carleton-Smith...I think we're talking about 'different' people...the fellow I know was a trooper during the Princes Gate debacle, and a Captain when I met him in 1995...mind you then again he could have been commissioned in 1986 so it could have been him...when he attested me he was badged as a Para...but that wouldn't preclude it being him Guards Parachute Platoon/G Squadron prior to commission. I always thought his X Para persona was black sticky for the Artists anyhow.
 

Nehustan

On ROPS
On ROPs
You've actually got my mental juices flowing now as I saw a picture of the Gentleman in question at a celebration on the Falkland Islands (Black Sticky included and SF/SAS Wings). I'm wondering if he was old enough to be 3 Para/GPP/G Squadron in 82? Looks damn good for his age if so...

(edited to add...if I'm right this fellow has the MOST serious service record of anyone I've ever met!! Entry God knows when...selection...Trooper in 80...NCO in 82...commissioned in 86...scary fellow)
 

Styron

Old-Salt
It was reported back in 2009 that 150 extra Paras were joining 1 Para and the SFSG.

100 more join Special Forces Support Group | The Sun |News|Campaigns|Our Boys

Now it's being reported that the SFSG is to be cut by 156.

Special Forces: 600 Support Posts To Go

As for all this talk of 40% cuts to special forces it's all journalistic rubbish.

There are to be no cuts to the regular SAS, whilst the SBS may go from four to three squadrons, but this has not been decided yet. The SBS was only three squadrons strong prior to 2003.

There is also the potential of merging 23 SAS and 21 SAS to form a smaller SAS Reserve, but given the fact that it's difficult to maintain an elite reserve any where near the calibre of 22 SAS this is hardly surprising. It also should be noted that 4 Para is set to become a permanent part of 16 AAB under Army 2020, which will actually enhance the role of reserve forces within the rapid reactive element of the army.

The reorganisation of the special forces will also see units such as the Special Reconnaissance Regiment concentrate on supporting the SAS and Special Forces rather than being independent units and the SRR will therefore face some cuts with personnel redistributed back to other Intelligence Units, who will take over some of SRR's independent responsibilities. The SRR having worked closely with a number of agencies such as those related to Law Enforcement and National Security.

The main thrust of the Special Forces review is related to removing certain responsibilities and units from the UKSF budget. It should be noted this review is about concentrating budgets where they are needed most and not about sustaining roles that can be carried out perfectly well outside the special forces remit.
 

Styron

Old-Salt
In terms of the Special Forces TA Units, reform has been on the cards for some time now. The options were to remove the SAS (R) from the special forces or to merge the TA regiments. As a result 21 & 23 SAS look set to merge in to a single unit. Perhaps the SAS (R) would be best off concentrating on Specialist Reconnaissance Roles, Intelligence/Security support and as a reinforcement/reserve for the Special Forces Support Group.

The Telegraph (April 2010) said:
SAS reservists withdrawn from Afghan front line - Telegraph

SAS reservists have been withdrawn from front line operations in Afghanistan following a review of their unit's operational capability, it can be revealed

Troops from 21 and 23 SAS, the regiment's Territorial Army battalions, had been responsible for "mentoring" members of the Afghan National Police, but that task has been handed over to a "regular" infantry unit.

Instead of taking part in operations alongside the regular SAS, the troops from the reserve battalions are now responsible for guarding members of the Foreign Office based in the Afghan capital, Kabul.

It is understood to be the first time in the regiment's history that its troops have been used to guard civil servants on a full-time basis.

The change in roles followed the drafting of a secret military document which examined the "utility" of the territorial SAS on operations.

It is understood that the report found that the TA SAS lacked a clearly-defined role, and also stated that the reservists lacked the military capability and skillset to serve alongside the regular Special Forces.

The territorial SAS allows hundreds of ordinary civilians to serve in the Special Forces. Volunteers need to pass a selection programme and training programme similar to those for the regular SAS.

The lack of a defined role for the TA SAS has now lead to fears that one or both battalions could be axed as part of a raft of cuts expected under the next strategic defence review.

The Tories have already stated that under a new strategic defence review, "everyone and everything" within the armed forces will have to be justified, and if Labour win the election the same approach will almost certainly be adopted.

The SAS report, which was drawn up towards the end of last year for the commander of the SAS in Afghanistan, is understood to have caused divisions within the Special Forces world.

While many regular SAS personnel supported its findings, TA troops were said to be furious.

The report followed the deaths of four British troops – three members of 23 SAS and Corporal Sarah Bryant, 26 – who were killed when their Snatch Land Rover was blown up by an improvised explosive device in June 2008 near to Lashkar Gah.

Cpl Bryant became the first female British soldier to be killed in Afghanistan.

At the inquest into the deaths of Cpl Sean Reeve, 28, LCpl Richard Larkin, 39, and Private Paul Stout, 31, it was disclosed that the troops had not carried out mandatory searches when their patrol entered what was a clearly-identifiable "vulnerable point".

One SAS commander also claimed that the reservists did not receive proper counter-IED training and were ill-prepared for operations in Helmand.

The Cold War role of the SAS reservists was to conduct long-range patrols and report on the movement of Warsaw Pact forces as they crossed into western Europe – a role which no longer exists.

Reservists were deployed into the Balkans in the mid-1990s as a composite unit known as "V" Squadron where they took part in peace support operations, which allowed regular members of the SAS to be used for other tasks.

One senior military source said that there had been a long-held prejudice with the SAS against using members of the TA which stemmed from the first Gulf War in 1991.

He said: "The TA SAS were used as battle casualty replacements in the first Gulf War but it wasn't that successful and since then there has been a certain resentment by more senior elements of the SAS to the TA.

"In many cases they refuse to work with them. But they are a fantastic talent and a role should be found for them."

The source added that they could be used to supplement the Brigade Reconnaissance Force in Helmand, or the Pathfinders, a parachute-trained organisation which also conducts long-range patrols.

UK-based roles, the source added, could include military support to the intelligence and security community.

The TA SAS were first deployed to Afghanistan in 2003 where they helped to establish a communications network across Afghanistan and also acted as liaison teams between the various political groups, Nato and the fledgling Afghan government.

But when the insurgency in Helmand began in 2006, that role was withdrawn.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: "We do not comment on Special Forces."

ARRSE Thread at the time - http://www.arrse.co.uk/current-affa...s-reservists-withdrawn-afghan-front-line.html
 

And nothing to do with a 22 SAS attempt to ensure that 22 SAS are primus inter pares of the SF Community, and DSF will always be a 22 SAS Officer. Cap-badge politics aren't just for Cavalry Regiments.
 
D

Davetheclown

Guest
What annoys me the most is the amount of lives saved in various places round the world british and foreign nationals and also inside our borders. Most of which is unreported and hidden away. Why do politicians see conflict contained within borders, they are only lines on a map. The same AQ cell within Pakistan may be controlling ops within Helmand and at the same time be recruiting from a major UK city.

As a premiere nation we need to ensure that we overmatch any threat to UK and remain reactive in support of Foreign Policy. I would rather see more TA units disbanded (leaving the SAS(R) element intact) than losing men and women within UKSF.

Overmatch is often seen as overspend by the bean counters, Overmatch is a insurance policy that we need to maintain.
 

Styron

Old-Salt
I nearly spat out my coffee when someone's attempting to put the 'RAF Regt and SF' in the same sentence..

The best way to cut the SFSG would be to cut the RAF Regt unit and Royal Marines and just concentrate on 1 para which is probably going to be cut back down to around 400 men anyway. :)
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top