The "2010" BG - buzzword bullshite or a workable goal?

Discussion in 'Staff College and Staff Officers' started by stabtastic, Mar 1, 2007.

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. Around 5 years ago I attended a short course at the Land Warfare School entitled the 'Manouevre Support Coy Commanders' Course'. In actual fact there was very little practical application but there was a great deal of regurgitation of 2010 doctrine. Cut out all of the Euro Corps 'this' and promises of new kit 'that', and the main thrust was that BG Tac and Main would be no more and that there would be a true step-up org of 'A' HQ and 'B' HQ.

    Even to my stabtastic Captain's mind at the time (i.e. perhaps not over-educated in the finer points of warfare, although being a STAB, embarrassingly keen and willing to learn), it struck me as remarkably naive in many ways, not least that full capability of each segment rested on the ability of RE and RA (at least) to supply 2x BGEs, 2 x BCs..

    ("right BC's ack..Sgt..., erm, whoever you are, 'A's been hosed down by some airline pilot in a National Guard A10, you're the man - I want your OS concept of ops for this attack option 3, and, tell me, what else can we do about NA13 and the left of KA1, if we stay in defence......... hello? hello? where's he gone, he was just there......")

    I did mention that and there was a deathly hush as the SO1 paused and worked his lips and then eventually said 'yes, obviously, there are things to be worked out still'.

    So - cutting to the chase - is it optimistic doctrinal bollox, or not? I left TA relatively recently after a succession of JDSCs, CATACs, camps and Telic caused Mrs Stabtastic to forecast dire consequences on the Stabtastic family's future - so I confess I've not kept up with the times.
     
  2. <tumbleweed rolls down dusty street>

    <wind blows saloon door, bangs against hitching rail>

    OK, I give up. It must be working swimmingly then..
     
  3. To be honest, I've seen neither hide nor hair of this particular beast, although I concede that I may have been asleep when this lecture was programmed in at Shriv.

    Anyone?
     
  4. If it was '2010' doctrine, it has probably been put back to 2017 in order to coincide with the introduction of FRES. :D
     
  5. IIRC Inf 2010 was binned as soon as the relevant DINF had left- as it wasn't funded and nobody had bothered to ask the relevant other arms (eg RA, RE) if they could supply the extra staff in BGHQ it called for. It also meant an Inf BGHQ was completely different from an RAC one.
    The cadreisation of platoons (translated as "hope we never have to deploy all the battalions at the same time") got finally binned under FAS.
     
  6. Bottom line (and I am talking AI, which BG-wise is probably the largest BG HQ in terms of bits) we aren't scaled vehicle-wise or manpower-wise. Speaking in AI terms, the 2IC is far more likely undertaking a controlling HQ role for ltd periods of time whilst the BG moves / crosses an obstacle and whilst Main thrashes itself (relatively as it's still largely 432 based) to get into its next location.

    Never mind not getting a second BGE, we don't get a second FPC, BGLO cell, AD tp HQ, you get the drift.

    Nice idea, never funded!
     
  7. Ah! So it was the buzzword bullshite option then.. Thought so.