Discussion in 'The NAAFI Bar' started by The-Goose, Aug 7, 2007.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Are they a complete waste of space or is there a purpose to the RAF maintianing them?
Tell me - I give up .............
Not a great deal. Keep fit, go to the EFI, go to lunch...go on the internet, go back to the EFI for a coffee...
There is a great video on t'interweb somewhere which shows them larking about....
No. Likewise, get rid of the rest of the RAF except CAS and heavy lift, but put them squarely under the comand of the army.
There isnt much else that can't be done by a Tomahawk Cruise Missile a) cheaper and b)safer (no future shot down aircrew being paraded on Al-Jazeera TV, for example)
Ah, either you're trying to get a bite, walt, or you've no real idea how the RAF in general works.
Oh, well, in that case we should ditch the Navy as well then?
And the uk SAR while we're at it?
Well I for one think that they should go, they really have no role that cannot be done better by existing soldiers. They are actually an expensive overqualified and time expired relic of the cold war, who now see justification in their infantry skills. In Walt terms they are Professional walts.
Outstanding, you're sayin you'd be happy with the Infantry taking over the role of Airfield defence? People always bash the RAF Regiment for only guarding etc., but if they were ditched, then that role would go to the infantry.
What is so different in airfield defence than other key point defence. I would keep the Regt for the job but what do they think they do that soldiers could not?
No, thats what MPGS is for , alternatively, hod the dod, why not make the techs, cooks, bottle washers and all the other dross do the occasional stag, commanded by the provosts. REME do stags, RLC do stags, why shouldn't the techs and supply merchants shoulder some resposability?
No, you miss my point, one-flew-over. I'm not saying they do anything special, what i'm saying is if they were got rid of, then the defence of airfields and surrounding areas would fall to the infantry. Who would then moan about having to do it because it is not the most exciting of roles.
Keep the regiment because they guard the airfields and surrounding locale, therefore freeing up the infantry.
Now i know my spelling and grammer is pish but i think you mean, "Are they a complete waste of space or is there a purpose to the RAF maintaining them"?
I always thought that every time you seen the raf regiment they put a smile on your face as on the way back from a patrol you knew you were almost back at base
Argh Mr Jaybee and his Napoleonic Eagle again, where did your Squadron fight to win that agian? (sic)
Separate names with a comma.