Longer Afghanistan tours for British soldiers

[SRENNAPS]

Absolutely disgusted to read this, this morning. Why??.....just to save a little bit of money I suspect :ugh::ugh::ugh:

BBC News - Longer Afghanistan tours for British soldiers (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22520249)

Also will there be an impact on Sqn tours (and support of course)??

[AR1]

This is shocking. I don't know if the casualty stats have changed, but I wouldn't mind listening in to the comments when the lads were told 'we're going to keep you out there 50% longer'

[fawkes]

Unless they also change the R&R entitement, it will mean no saving in flights overall, because the RIP will be compensated for by the"second" bit of R&R. If they do change the R&R entitlement then Tommy, Jack and Kevin will be unhappy.

But not nearly as unhappy as when they realise that some staff officers in nominated "continuity" appointments will be getting an enhanced Allowance for the period over 6 months whilst they will not!

The supreme irony is that we are looking to extend tours now for reasons of fore generation, when the six monthitis and poor continuity with the Afghans has been amongst the contributory factors in the failure of the mission.

Stable Doors etc

[Whenurhappy]

Quite a few staff tours were designated as continuity posts and have been 9 months for some time.

Coincidentally, I have just been notified that I will lose two of my 3 RAF staff to AFG on back-to-back OOAs from Aug 13 until Nov 14...

Fair to say that they are sanguine about it. Their names came to the top of the DWR pile and it was their respective turns. It's just a b*gger having to manage such a big gap at work. What disappoints me is that the pain isn't shared equally across the RAF (I can't speak about the other Services); perhaps I harp on about this too often, but there are some quite senior folks who have managed to get promoted by studiously avoiding the desert(s) or spend the minimum amount of time in Theatre in order to get some non-commemorative bling...

[Deepest Norfolk]

Not necessarily to save money, but if you've sacked so many that there aren't enough to rotate, the result will be longer tours.

Still, as long as our masters still get their perks, it's OK.

DN

[BEagle]

Why??.....just to save a little bit of money I suspect...

Perhaps it's so that the UK can send troops into Syria...:mad:

BBC News - Syria conflict: US and UK pledge to bolster opposition (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22509646)

[cokecan]

actually, it might be an idea to put the outrage bus into neutral.

the tour changeovers are April and October: next April theres a presidential election in Afghanistan, and for very obvious reasons its not considered a clever plan to have the tour changeover at the same time as what could be a spectacularly violent election. then we have the following Herrick tour which is due to leave in October and be replaced by another Bde - except that this Bde with end operations and withdraw a mere 8 weeks later.

does that sound like a clever idea, or an absolute waste of logistics and training effort?

so 2 Bde's get dicked for 9 month tours, allowing continuity, a reduction in the logistic effort, a saving on Herrick medals, not sending 8000 blokes somewhere only to bring them back 8 weeks later - and most importantly it allows the Army to train that Bde in full contingency operations instead of Afghan-centric COIN, meaning the Army will be ready to do a 'proper' war 6 months earlier than it might otherwise be.

[FODPlod]

Some UK service personnel may have to deploy for up to eight months? I doubt that US service personnel will be that sympathetic:
(http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/02/15/army-may-extend-current-afghanistan-deployments-due-to-budget-cuts/)Army May Extend Current Afghanistan Deployments Due To Budget Cuts (http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/02/15/army-may-extend-current-afghanistan-deployments-due-to-budget-cuts/)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Soldiers deployed to Afghanistan next year may see their war tours extended because budget cuts will drastically limit training for brigades to replace them, the top Army general said Friday.

...In 2007, the Army extended the year long deployments to 15 months in order to meet the demands of the Iraq war, including the surge of troops ordered by then-President George W. Bush. In many cases, combat brigades returned home and were ordered to deploy again 12 months later, leading top military leaders to worry that the force was being strained almost to the breaking point.

Over time, as the Iraq war ended, the Army deployment times were scaled back to a year, and most are now about nine months long...

I have often wondered how the six-month HERRICK tours of UK forces allow for any continuity or stability in theatre as new arrivals spend much of their time acclimatising, gaining situational awareness and re-building local relationships while their commanders implement ever more initiatives in an attempt to earn their spurs in the limited time they have available.

P.S. The norm for RN SSN deployments is now 10 months.

[SRENNAPS]

No complex response from me; I will keep it plain and simple.

Most British troops have served in Afghanistan several times now so “……new arrivals spend much of their time acclimatising and gaining situational awareness…..” is not a significant factor in my opinion. However there is some truth in the statement “commanders implement ever new initiatives in an attempt to earn their spurs in the limited time they have available”. :E:E

With respect to the Bde change in the October, there is logic in what you say. However, what happens when the withdrawal moves to the right again and again. You could end up with troops being in a situation where they have no idea when they are coming home or if they will be replaced. You have to stick to a roulement plan or things can get very awkward.

I do not accept the election logic. There have been plenty of elections in Afghanistan over the years, the violence is always the same and the election outcome is definitely always the same. Therefore we can be prepared for a presidential election in other ways rather than making troops stay out there longer.

US Service personnel have always had longer tour lengths, but they also have other factors of service life to compensate for that and these are factors that the British Serviceman does not get. So, no comparison in my opinion.

As I said earlier, it is all down to cost cutting, the fact that we as an armed force are stretched too far and as Beagle suggests it is to stretch even more so that we can potentially accommodate Syria.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

It should perhaps be a condition of office that our Government be obliged to put its offspring into front line Service . That is the only thing which might bring decent terms and conditions. To the best of my knowledge, the only leader in that position is HM the Queen.

[sharpend]

One of the reasons why I terminated my service some 2 years early is because I was getting fed up with living in a tent 24/7. That is not what I joined up to do. I joined a total different Air Force; almost a flying club. We flew 5 days a week, sport on Wednesday afternoons and loads of time off. We could take a jet away for the weekend and got paid more money that we needed.

More importantly, we got loads of flying hours in! As much as we wanted. And we felt that we were the best. That was so important. The pursuit of excellence was the goal, not how cheap could we achieve the task.

By today's standards life in the Officers' Mess was a bit primitive, but who cared? We had full batting and life in general outside the RAF was also pretty primitive. But the Mess was certainly not a tent. Yes, we did sleep rough at times, but only on survival courses or in the bushes outside the pub on a Saturday night.

Don't get me wrong...when younger I did sleep rough at times, under boulders in the Llanberis Pass or tied to a rock face half way up a mountain in the Alps. But when one passes thirty the appeal wears off. When one passes sixty the minimum standard is a warm double bed and ensuite; preferable with a lovely lady ;)

Once married, a week away from home was not good, especially when the new baby arrived. A month was far too long. Those who did volunteer for long dets found that divorce loomed... it happened to me... I found out whilst on active service! :D

Nine months is ok for some... but bad news for others.

ps though I did terminate my service some two years early, I did still serve for 39 years! Most of which was absolutely brilliant!

[FODPlod]

One of the reasons why I terminated my service some 2 years early is because I was getting fed up with living in a tent 24/7. That is not what I joined up to do...

So you were put off by all the camping?

http://www.raf.mod.uk/bombercommand/images/c1700.jpg

[sharpend]

Actually, my Father was in the RAF in the Second World War... being a fighter pilot in the Battle of Britain was not all bad nor did they suffer camping hardship... read 'The Silver Spitfire' by Tom Neil.. much of the time they lived in manor houses and had a great time. Most 'proper' pilots, including myself, would give their eye teeth to have been there. :ok: However, being shot down in flames probably was not much fun!

And I'm not so sure about being a Lancaster pilot though. They certainly were the bravest of the brave.

And most of the civilians in London had a terrible time. But they did party as if there was no tomorrow. Often there was not.

[just another jocky]

actually, it might be an idea to put the outrage bus into neutral.

the tour changeovers are April and October: next April theres a presidential election in Afghanistan, and for very obvious reasons its not considered a clever plan to have the tour changeover at the same time as what could be a spectacularly violent election. then we have the following Herrick tour which is due to leave in October and be replaced by another Bde - except that this Bde with end operations and withdraw a mere 8 weeks later.

does that sound like a clever idea, or an absolute waste of logistics and training effort?

so 2 Bde's get dicked for 9 month tours, allowing continuity, a reduction in the logistic effort, a saving on Herrick medals, not sending 8000 blokes somewhere only to bring them back 8 weeks later - and most importantly it allows the Army to train that Bde in full contingency operations instead of Afghan-centric COIN, meaning the Army will be ready to do a 'proper' war 6 months earlier than it might otherwise be.

But the outrage bus is so much more fun. :E

[sharpend]

Actually, looking again at FOD Plod's photo (correct me if I am wrong) but it appears to show a group of Fairy Battle pilots somewhere in France circa 39 - 40. The Fairy Battle, and indeed the Boulton Paul Defiant, were no match for experienced Luffwaffe pilots in Me 109s.

Those RAF pilots did live in tents and were often on the move, mainly in retreat. Those who survived to fight the Battle of Britain were heroes, but perhaps those of the British Expeditionary Force were unsung heroes.

Incidentally, as this topic is about tour lengths, my Father went to war in 1939 and came home in 1945. His detachment lasted over 5 years!

Moreover, in 1937, he married on a Saturday and sailed in HMS Glorious the next day. That night a fierce storm blew up and a chimney pot fell on his new bride as she lay in bed, killing her instantly. He was not told of her death for 3 months!

Times are now hard in HM Forces, but harder then!

[Heathrow Harry]

sounds a bit odd to get all bent out of shape when we ask the Army to fight - or are they supposed to exist to be trained and stay in Germany or Cyprus?

[FODPlod]

Actually, looking again at FOD Plod's photo (correct me if I am wrong) but it appears to show a group of Fairy Battle pilots somewhere in France circa 39 - 40. The Fairy Battle, and indeed the Boulton Paul Defiant, were no match for experienced Luffwaffe pilots in Me 109s...

Quite right. See: RAF History - Bomber Command 60th Anniversary (http://www.raf.mod.uk/bombercommand/diary_france.html)

Strange to think that the Battle of France was all over in six weeks.

[SRENNAPS]

Times are now hard in HM Forces, but harder then!

My father also served 25 years in the RAF during the fifties, sixties and seventies. During his time he did several dodgy tours including a 12 month tour in Aden (he got the GSM with the Radfan clasp for that one) where he saw a great deal of horror. There was no communications as such and letters could take months. Definitely no R&R. Spending 6 months in Gan without any R&R while we lived in Penang was considered a luxury by him.

During my (nearly) 30 years I moaned about some of the dets I did…..but I know that they were picnic grounds to what he went through. It was something I always really did appreciate when I was away on one of my many 3 or 4 month trips to the desert.

But at the end of the day, in the year 2013, we should be continually improving conditions, not making them worse to save a bit of money! And mark my words, they may say this is just for the withdrawal phase of Afghanistan but I suggest it will set a precedent for tour lengths during future deployments around the world.

[cokecan]

Harry - one concurs.

if people don't like the idea of spending more time than is ideal in far-flung, war-torn ****holes, perhaps they ought not to bother applying to join the Forces...

[sharpend]

'if people don't like the idea of spending more time than is ideal in far-flung, war-torn ****holes, perhaps they ought not to bother applying to join the Forces... '

Trouble is, for the average 17 year old, he cannot see further than his nose! When I joined, I had absolutely no idea of what lay ahead; all I wanted to do was fly.

For the average squaddie, he wants a job and the recruiting sergeant will not be telling him the bad bits!

[airborne_artist]

Most British troops have served in Afghanistan several times now so “……new arrivals spend much of their time acclimatising and gaining situational awareness…..” is not a significant factor in my opinion.

A mate has done five Herrick tours, admittedly three have been behind a desk.

He's a TA Sgt :\

[Always Up]

Harry - one concurs.

if people don't like the idea of spending more time than is ideal in far-flung, war-torn ****holes, perhaps they ought not to bother applying to join the Forces...

Yeah right cause changing your view because your job environment or terms of conditions change once you are in is wholly unrealistic:ugh:

Cokecan you are Sir with respect a stirrer and a plank. My heart goes out to those who will be bringing this sorry saga to a conclusion.

[HEDP]

I suspect that the bigger issue here is the timing of the announcement which has clearly been delayed until those affected are 'warned for operations' and therefore cannot activate their Notice to Terminate as a result of the news. I suspect that an outflow might have occurred had they not done so.....

[alfred_the_great]

Most, if not all, of those on a 9 month tour will not be serving 'outside the wire'. Most, if not all, will be associated to the J4 drawdown, and thus whilst at risk from IDF etc, are not advancing into contact on an hourly basis.

Those Inf nominated for the tour will be acting as a QRF for Afg forces, who may also be QRF for Afg forces already on the ground. In effect, they are standing by to stand by. They are unlikely to be in the small FOBs that have characterised the fighting in Afghanistan for the last decade.

In sum, if you think this is young lads doing 9 months of vallon patrols you're wrong.

[Always Up]

Most, if not all, of those on a 9 month tour will not be serving 'outside the wire'. Most, if not all, will be associated to the J4 drawdown, and thus whilst at risk from IDF etc, are not advancing into contact on an hourly basis.

Those Inf nominated for the tour will be acting as a QRF for Afg forces, who may also be QRF for Afg forces already on the ground. In effect, they are standing by to stand by. They are unlikely to be in the small FOBs that have characterised the fighting in Afghanistan for the last decade.

In sum, if you think this is young lads doing 9 months of vallon patrols you're wrong.

Think you have missed the point somewhat. 9 months in the life of your young kids is 9 months irrespective. Nobody is making playground arguments about who is doing dangerous stuff:=

[Jimlad1]

If it helps give some context, I know of US deployments where the National Guard unit was airborne and on its way home after a 12 month tour, only to turn around mid air and get extended on the spot for a further 6 months.

Here we have given affected persons a very large amount of notice that they will be spending 8 weeks extra on tour (and getting £350 per week extra into the bargain after a certain point). Given that my experiences have been that by the time you take off RSOI (an RAF colleague has just returned spending nearly 3 weeks on getting to theatre, RSOI, then local RSOI for non BSN location) and then R&R (lets be honest, its usually getting close to 3 weeks once flights are usually handled, particularly if you arent at a MOB) and hand over, actually you're getting close to 6 weeks anyway, which is a fair chunk of a 24 week tour.

My view would be that its better to expect people to stag on for an extra 8 weeks twice over, rather than dick around over 8000 people and tax the movements system even more during a very complicated draw down.

Considering our US colleagues have been doing 15 months tours for years (usually with 2 weeks R&R), moaning about an extra few weeks seems a little churlish in my book.

[VinRouge]

Why not do RSOI in the uk away from IDF? We shouldn't be training in theatre, period.

[alfred_the_great]

AU - having done an 8 months tour, frankly once you're past 4 months, it doesn't really matter how long the tour is, especially as they know even before they leave how long they'll be away.

[Jimlad1]

Vin rouge - I think I realised HERRICK was past the point of parody when RSOI became a week long package at bastion for all new arrivals (AIUI). My colleague who was doing a comfy desk job in ISAF did pre-deployment training, a week at BSN doing RSOI, transit to ISAF, 2 days doing Kabul RSOI, 3 days of ISAF induction and that was before beginning his handover. Add in R&R and his handover and a 26 week tour lost nearly 10 weeks due to training, travel and handovers.

[VinRouge]

There's the solution. Cut the bull **** instead of increasing the tour length. Never happen though, too many justifying existences providing useless training.

[Lima Juliet]

VR

I agree. The last time I went to Afg I did no RSOI, no R&R, no "decompression", no Joint Support Unit guff, no induction, no range 'zero your weapon' and a 24hr 'high five' handover. It saved me nearly 4 weeks and so I did 4 weeks less! :ok:

That said, they weren't Army and they definately played 'big boys' rules - screw up and you RTU with a career limiting report.

So not only do I agree with your sentiment about building empires but it is also the bullsh!t of treating everyone to the lowest common denominator - I think I blame Bliar/Broon and Nu Labour for that little dumming down episode!

LJ :ok:

[Al R]

Sharpend: Trouble is, for the average 17 year old, he cannot see further than his nose! When I joined, I had absolutely no idea of what lay ahead; all I wanted to do was fly.

For the average squaddie, he wants a job and the recruiting sergeant will not be telling him the bad bits!

Thats a good point, but there is the law of unintended consequence. I have just read a report about the types of people who are dislocated from society and who end up being disadvantaged because of it.

Project SLAM now brings our serving soldiers closer to a comparable standard of living with UK counterparts; back in the day, I lived in a room at Aldershot which had a hole in the wall that I could slip my hand through. If we assume that the average Tom will now spend 6 years or so in uniform and if he or she will now spend a higher proportion of that time away (lets not forget pre-training and decompression), then the sense of isolation and the cycle of upheaval is more volatile and can only become more pronounced. I'm not referring to overseas stations and garrisons where you can replicate an element of UK culture, awareness and stability, but operational tours.

Stand by for another report from the serving and retired echelon in a few years calling for far far more to do done to prevent increased alienation from former servicemen back in society.

[Onceapilot]

Quote Jimlad1
"If it helps give some context, I know of US deployments where the National Guard unit was airborne and on its way home after a 12 month tour, only to turn around mid air and get extended on the spot for a further 6 months.

Here we have given affected persons a very large amount of notice that they will be spending 8 weeks extra on tour (and getting £350 per week extra into the bargain after a certain point). Given that my experiences have been that by the time you take off RSOI (an RAF colleague has just returned spending nearly 3 weeks on getting to theatre, RSOI, then local RSOI for non BSN location) and then R&R (lets be honest, its usually getting close to 3 weeks once flights are usually handled, particularly if you arent at a MOB) and hand over, actually you're getting close to 6 weeks anyway, which is a fair chunk of a 24 week tour.

My view would be that its better to expect people to stag on for an extra 8 weeks twice over, rather than dick around over 8000 people and tax the movements system even more during a very complicated draw down.

Considering our US colleagues have been doing 15 months tours for years (usually with 2 weeks R&R), moaning about an extra few weeks seems a little churlish in my book".

Did you propose this idea Jim, lad?:rolleyes:

OAP

http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.pprune.org/report.php?p=7842904) http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/buttons/reply_small.gif (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=7842904&noquote=1)

[Jumping_Jack]

If only it were £350 a week. After tax &NI you'll be lucky to see £200. :sad:

[Pontius Navigator]

Actually, looking again at FOD Plod's photo (correct me if I am wrong) but it appears to show a group of Fairy Battle pilots somewhere in France circa 39 - 40. The Fairy Battle, and indeed the Boulton Paul Defiant, were no match for experienced Luffwaffe pilots in Me 109s.

My eyes are dim, I cannot see, I have not brought my specs with me, but I see only one set of pilot's wings amongst the group. Even more, is the LAC on the right even RAF? His shoulder badge is difference from the rest, Belgique?

[Always Up]

AU - having done an 8 months tour, frankly once you're past 4 months, it doesn't really matter how long the tour is, especially as they know even before they leave how long they'll be away.

Well frankly I and my 3 month old, his big sister 4 years going on 13 and my wife will just need to disagree with that. But hey, good luck with it, as they say you fill your boots Frank.:=

[Heathrow Harry]

Fairey Battle picture looks like a group of Air gunners (almost certainly 226 Squadron from the "MQ" marking)

Air Gunners in a Battle in 1940 .... not much chance of surviving for 4 weeks never mind 4 months........................


10th May 1940 : 4 Battles despatched to dive-bomb German troops advancing through Luxembourg. 2 bombed target and 2 FTR.