There is a tendency within the MoD to suggest that cutting the reserve forces would produce significant savings. This is a fallacy. The cost of a TA soldier is about 1/5 of the cost of a regular. Therefore to save the cost of a regular Company the MoD would have to disband a TA Regiment. TA soldiers do not require housing, large welfare costs or even No 2 uniforms. It should be remembered that during the last two world wars most of the fighting (and dying) was done by non regular troops, sailors or airmen. The same can be said of the Korean, Malayan, Suez and Borneo campaigns.Even the Battle of Britain was won by University and reserve squadrons. During the Viet Nam war virtually all US air transport was carried out by the US Air National Guard. In the US many airfields have National Guard aircraft lined up along runways piloted by commercial airline pilots. Students can train to fly the latest fighters etc by signing on for 1 or 2 years and then going on the reserve. The same can be applied to the Navy using those ships currently mothballed. Much of the army's heavy equipment, such as tanks, heavy artillery etc could be stored and maintained in parks then used by TA soldiers when required. Instead of each regiment having its own complement of guns, tanks etc, they would only require a few for training but would draw their wartime issue from the storage parks. Finally I'd just like to add I am not advocating the disbandment of any regular forces but merely suggesting that if savings have to be made the reserve forces are not the place to start.