Sustaining cap badges

Discussion in 'Strategic Defence & Spending Review (SDSR)' started by whitecity, Mar 9, 2013.

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. Discuss: Should HM Armed Forces be structured and organised around the maintainance of 'cap badges' or effective 21st century combat formations?

    What is the British military for: the defence of UK sovereignty; constabulary support for FCO or No.10 overseas initiatives; or, to provide a clear and structured professional career development opportunity to regular officers?

    Of course, this notion of saving 'cap badges' runs beyond the RAC and is just as prevalent within the infantry.

    Source: Army 2020 announcement - British Army Website

    Have some sympathy with the thoughts expressed here: Cap badges and cuts – the UK army in 2020 | Kings of War
     
  2. Glad you turned up. If we give you an answer, are you going to quote us by name in your paper?
     
  3. I've been called many things on ARRSE over the years, but never a journo. First time for everything I suppose.

    Otherwise, do you have any other reason for not engaging in a serious and rather important discussion?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Your in the Royal Navy so he probably does not want your opinion.


    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
     
  5. In what way does your cap badge make you a better soldier/sailor/airperson?

    In what way does the cap badge you wear, as opposed to you wearing another design, enhance UK security and defence?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Must be why that cap badge took the biggest hit in the cut-backs. Drain-sniffer logic!
     
  7. Because this has been done to death on multiple threads on here. If there was a revolutionary concept behind your question then it'd be quite interesting to answer, but it's the same old same old. Go read Stonker's posts in toto for a flavour of the discussions that have been had.
     
  8. Yawn...I'm a little bit past subalterns' essays. Do your own staffwork Whitecity!

    uqfegd

    pp
     
  9. There is nothing wrong with keeping capbadges, and having combat formations.

    For example the Rifles, could even have individual capbadges for the area recuited from along the lines of the old LI units, so could various other units.
    We run ops by battlegroups anyway ,which is made up of an all arms combined force of many different cap badges.
     
  10. And you will also read my posts on the subject in the same threads.

    Now we have a 'new' structure announced and, more interestingly, a quote made openly by CGS as to a major part of the reasoning behind the 'solution'.

    It seems a sensible time to revisit the question given these two points:-
    The premise that preserving cap badge for the sake of tradition is now out in the open rather than just what some wanted to claim as being misdirection or worse. This means a discussion can be had without half the participants wailing that one side is basing its arguments upon a fallacy - as a justification to keep the status quo. And, that we now have a 'new' structure to consider viz effectiveness in defence/security provision and the effects that cap badge retention have on that effectiveness.
     
  11. Is this for an essay?
     
  12. But this reasoning was driven by the PM, to avoid being accused of stabbing the army in the back, with the economic situation still being on the down slide. I cannot see FA2020 ever lasing beyond 2015 before more cuts force another round.
    My regiment is already looking towards this, I posted the text below on another thread but I belive it is just as relevant here.

    The Queen’s Div have not come out of this as bad as others (Despite the loss of 2 RRF). We now have 2x Bns in the Armored Infantry Roll in the Reactive force (1 PWRR and 1RRF), with the rest 2 PWRR, 1 and 2 R Ang rotating through Cyprus.

    The stability of living in one place for your whole career may appeal to the pads, but the chance of foreign travel and diverse rolls will pay off when recruiting. There has always been cross posting amongst the Bns of the Queen’s Div and no doubt this will continue, as it gives better career diversity.

    In the latest copy of “The Fusilier” (Journal of the RRF) Brigadier Paterson (colonel of the Regiment) talks of the pain of the loss of 2 RRF, but goes on to say.

    “The next few years will be difficult and provide demanding challenges, but we will come through it. I remain convinced that the future for our officers and soldiers, and those of the Queen’s Division more widely, resides in the formation of a new large regiment of 5 battalions under a single unifying brand. Only by coming together will we provide the necessary career structure for the serving Regiment, secure our long term future and protect our past, and I will work hard towards achieving this goal.”

    I think that keeping 5 Bns is a tad optimistic though!
     
  13. Indeed they could. So why the need for the retention of battalion/level single cap-badged formations?

    Precisely. Would it not be better for UK defence (viz cohesion, training etc etc) for battlegroups to be the permanent peacetime structure of choice rather than single-branch formations that then get divvied for operational training prior to deployment?

    Is it effective to have multiple (and redundant operationally) discrete single-arms units instead of a smaller number of permanently configured all-arms battlegroups? The old argument that economies of scale are created by grouping like equipment together was always tenuous. It is now utterly counter-productive when you consider that the entire 'reaction' armoured force is grouped around a single location: SPTA.
     
  14. Why not bin all of it. Cap badges, Corps, Service etc. Generally we're shrinking everywhere. So lets bin the RAF and RN ~ amalgamate everyone into a USMC type organisation [although obviously not as big!] Lets bin hundreds of years of tradition/family/esprit de corp etc............. while we're at it shall we?