New CDS Announced [Archive]

Chinny Crewman

21st Jan 2016, 21:36

From The Times:
Airman beats army and navy rivals to top job | The Times (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/defence/article4671469.ece)

Text for those unable to access behind the paywall:
A straight-talking airman will be named tomorrow as the new head of the armed forces in an apparent snub to a top army officer and the head of the Royal Navy who had been favourites for the job.
Air Chief Marshal Sir Stuart Peach, vice chief of the defence staff, will take over the top post from General Sir Nicholas Houghton in the summer, The Times understands.
His appointment will be welcomed by many senior officers within the Ministry of Defence who regard him as a strong, smart leader who is not afraid of speaking truth to power.
The choice of Air Chief Marshal Peach will come as a surprise, however.
Top brass at his level often step down after serving in two, consecutive four-star posts.
The former fast jet airman has been the No 2 in the armed forces since May 2013 and beforehand was the commander of Joint Forces Command, a new, four-star headquarters that oversees operational elements of the army, the navy and the RAF.
General Sir Richard Barrons, the incumbent joint forces commander, had been regarded as one of the most likely people to take over from Sir Nicholas, even though his appointment would make it three army officers in a row as chief of the defence staff.
“If anyone has had his nose put out of joint it will be Barrons,” a Whitehall source said.
Also in the running had been Admiral Sir George Zambellas, the first sea lord.
The top job had been considered his to lose three years ago because it was “the navy’s turn” to lead the military, defence sources said at the time.
However, Admiral Zambellas has had to struggle with big challenges facing his service, including a shortfall of engineers and questions over whether there were enough sailors to man all the ships and submarines that are due to come on line.
The last time a navy officer headed the armed forces was between 2001 and 2003 when Admiral Lord Boyce was in charge during a testing period that covered the 9/11 attacks and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Since then the army has held the post on three occasions, with General Lord Walker of Aldringham at the helm from 2003 until 2006, General Lord Richards of Herstmonceux from 2010 to 2013 and most recently General Houghton.
Air Chief Marshal Lord Stirrup, an RAF man, was the longest-serving chief of the defence staff in recent times, holding the post from 2006 until 2010. The position is usually held for three years.
Born in 1956 in the West Midlands, Air Chief Marshal Peach commissioned into the RAF in 1977 to train as a navigator.
He flew in a photo reconnaissance aircraft before moving into the navigator seat, also known as the weapon systems operator, on a Tornado fast jet.
He commanded IX (Bomber) Squadron at RAF Brüggen in Germany between 1994 and 1996. He has served in Iraq and Kosovo and also conducted operational tours in Belize, Hong Kong and Germany.
Climbing up through the ranks, Air Chief Marshal Peach was chief of defence intelligence and deputy chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee between 2006 and 2009.
He is married with two children.
The Ministry of Defence declined to comment when asked for confirmation of the appointment.

Courtney Mil

21st Jan 2016, 21:55

A clever man. I had the pleasure of working for him twice, once out of area. Congratulations, Sir.

ICM

21st Jan 2016, 22:08

And a Nav as CDS - who would ever have thought that possible? Huge congrats to Stu, a colleague from his time as PSO to CinC RAFG/2ATAF.

And NB that he has risen through the Star ranks in Purple appointments and without being head of his own Service.

KPax

21st Jan 2016, 22:15

Has the Chief of the Air Staff ever been a Nav.

Courtney Mil

21st Jan 2016, 22:22

Nope. Unless I missed one very recently. The first one was an infantryman!

Megaton

21st Jan 2016, 23:21

Top bloke. I worked for him a couple of times too.

NutLoose

21st Jan 2016, 23:55

Question, if the post is three years normally, does that mean post term they are retired? Or do they then revert to their previous position, i.e. Is CDS your swansong so to speak.

Finningley Boy

22nd Jan 2016, 00:09

NutLoose,

It certainly is, for most senior appointments, heading your respective service is usually the retirement one. What's interesting about this, is since the first full time appointed head of HM Forces, Sir William Dickson (incidentally had an uncanny resemblance to Sir Stuart Peach), in 1956 this is only the third time that a former Vice Chief of Defence rather than an individual service chief of Staff has been appointed, the out going Nicholas Houghton and Lord Vincent in 1991 being the only other two. Also interesting that a senior officer who has never held either such prior appointment was also considered and the preferred choice of the MOD.

Personally I'd have thought Sir George Zambellas would have been appointed CDS, the last Naval chief was Lord Boyce; 2001-2003!:8

FB:8:8

thing

22nd Jan 2016, 00:17

Well done to Sir Stuart. Quick question from one who left a long time ago; I notice he was born the same year as me so that's makes him 60 this year, so maybe 63 ish when he retires. Are CDS allowed to be that old these days? I'm not inferring that he is too old to do the job at all, just seem to remember that everyone retired at 55 when I was in.

Finningley Boy

22nd Jan 2016, 00:19

Nope. Unless I missed one very recently. The first one was an infantryman!

Royal Scots Fusiliers I believe Courtney.

FB:)

The Oberon

22nd Jan 2016, 05:35

Time flies, hardly seems any time at all since I worked for him at the AWC.
Well done, Sir.

Old-Duffer

22nd Jan 2016, 05:59

thing,

At the very top, age is not really the issue. It's lower down the 'stars' that one is more vulnerable and it has now become a situation that after - say - an appointment at 1 or 2 star, if you can't be appointed to another job, you will be required to leave. There is also much inter-service competition for joint/combined service posts. I know of a one star and two 2 stars who had to leave despite being exceptionally gifted.

The interesting thing is: who will be VCDS vice Sir Stuart?

Old Duffer

Al Richey

22nd Jan 2016, 06:00

Also worked for him at the AWC. One of the best bosses I had and really pleased he has got the top job.

Melchett01

22nd Jan 2016, 06:15

An interesting appointment that appears to be dividing people and very surprising given that Gen Barrons was widely regarded as being the most politically astute and successful at navigation the corridors of power.

O-D,

I believe there has been a change in recent years on the policy of directed retirement whereby the stars are pensioned off if no suitable follow on appointment. Whereas it used to be 2-star upwards it has indeed moved down to the 1-star level which I can see causing a degree of bed blocking as gp capts unsure of a positive trajectory decide not to take promotion and risk 5+ years of gp capt pay and pension for a couple of years as a star. Given the shrinking of the services as a whole, I wouldn't be surprised, if longer term, that wasn't further reduced to directed retirement at gp capt to keep the career flow going.

airsound

22nd Jan 2016, 06:50

Presumably SODCAT will be organising the bash to end all bashes. Not sure I'm on the mailing list any more.

airsound

✮ In case you're too young - Society of Directional Consultants and Allied Trades

99 Change Hands

22nd Jan 2016, 07:44

Not bad going for the stroppy drunk Flt Lt I met at Pirelli's party at BGG.

The Oberon

22nd Jan 2016, 08:11

Not bad going for the stroppy drunk Flt Lt I met at Pirelli's party at BGG.

Or for a 1* who rode a SWO's bike to and from work whilst wearing his old aircrew leather jacket.

Wensleydale

22nd Jan 2016, 08:43

Parties? I was on YUAS with him (Sheffield Uni) in the 1970s.......now where was the address of that journalist from The Sun?

Jumping_Jack

22nd Jan 2016, 09:00

Is having a RAF hater a good thing as CDS? My understanding is that he was embittered by never getting CAS and has made his feelings clear about the RAF in the past. Just hearsay from those supposedly in the know.....

Tourist

22nd Jan 2016, 09:08

Does he like the Navy?

teeteringhead

22nd Jan 2016, 09:11

A good bloke by all accounts - so much for "no stick no vote!"

Seriously, his purple background is immaculate and I would guess that such a career path is the way ahead.

Look at his recent appointments: CDI, CJO, CJFC, VCDS - makes him a shoo in for CDS.

The single-Service Chiefs these days are barely even "providing commanders", more like Inspectors General.

"The future's bright, the future's purple!"

[although I will always treasure the look on his face at the Royal Banquet when GAPAN (Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators) became HCAP (Honorable Company of Air Pilots ....... incorporating Air Navigators!) ] :ok:

KPax

22nd Jan 2016, 10:57

Maybe the RAF will get over what looks like snobbery and promote the best person for the CAS job rather than the 'best' Pilot.

Bismark

22nd Jan 2016, 11:33

Well done that man an excellent choice for CDS. Rumour has it that Barrons was telling everyone he had it in the bag - never a good move - and Zambellas upset a few during SDSR.

Another rumour has a non aviator as a potential CAS - don't know the name though I think he is ACAS?

Davef68

22nd Jan 2016, 11:51

Another rumour has a non aviator as a potential CAS - don't know the name though I think he is ACAS?

If so, he's an Engineering Officer

RAF - Assistant Chief of Air Staff (ACAS) (http://www.raf.mod.uk/organisation/assistant-chief-of-airstaff.cfm)

You know you are getting on when a candidate for CAS is younger than you.....

Congratulations to Sir Stuart on his CDS appointment

teeteringhead

22nd Jan 2016, 11:54

Current ACAS is an engineer - Richard Knighton.

He has had a number of high profile non-engineer posts - see here (http://www.raf.mod.uk/organisation/assistant-chief-of-airstaff.cfm), which would fit him well for the "heights"

But ACAS is only (sic!) a 2-star post, so there's a long way to go yet - but he certainly has the time - born in '69. That's after I joined ...... :{

And he's about 4 years younger than Jock Stirrup was when he was ACAS ........

CoffmanStarter

22nd Jan 2016, 13:11

Many congratulations Sir Stuart ...

In other news ...

Scientists remain baffled by the seismological readings seen in the last 24 Hrs with an epicentre located on the Island of Grenada. Apparently an accompanying afterglow remains around the island where the residual incandescence has been measured in Giga Lumens ...

2Planks

22nd Jan 2016, 13:39

Congrats to Sir Stu.

There will be a lot of 'po-faces' around the other 2 services and our very own fast-jet pilot community

Tourist

22nd Jan 2016, 13:49

Can you blame the RN for being put out?
Rotating seems a not unreasonable idea. It keeps everybody honest.

MSOCS

22nd Jan 2016, 13:54

There will be a lot of 'po-faces' around the other 2 services and our very own fast-jet pilot community

Anyone with that much 'concern' clearly needs a busier day job and doesn't know what Joint even means. Just let the inter-Service rivalry go ladies and gents - it isn't welcome in today's Armed Forces and many who question the choice aren't privy to the criteria and reasons that SofS applied in choosing the candidate.

Sir Stuart is an excellent choice for CDS IMHO. One of the sharpest, if not THE sharpest, minds in Defence.

Heathrow Harry

22nd Jan 2016, 14:43

"Rotating seems a not unreasonable idea. It keeps everybody honest."

No - you get the best person for the job regardless of the colour of their uniform - anything else would be a disgrace

Mick Strigg

22nd Jan 2016, 14:44

It is criminal that Admiral Sir George was not selected. It doesn't matter that it was "our turn", he was just the right man for the job.

Very unusual for VCDS to step up one isn't it>?

CoffmanStarter

22nd Jan 2016, 15:02

The PM has said ...

I'm confident that Air Chief Marshal Sir Stuart Peach is the right man to continue General Sir Nick Houghton’s great legacy. For over a decade Sir Stuart has delivered exemplary leadership of the armed forces, with an extraordinary record of achievement. His experience as Commander Joint Forces Command and Chief of Joint Operations will be invaluable as we continue to ensure our brave armed forces remain among the most capable and agile in the world ...

Bismark

22nd Jan 2016, 15:03

Very unusual for VCDS to step up one isn't it>?

No, it is now traditional (tradition = it happened last time).

But ACAS is only (sic!) a 2-star post, so there's a long way to go yet

Adm Essenhigh went straight from 2* to 4* not so long ago.

Kitbag

22nd Jan 2016, 15:40

For a man with such 'Purple' credentials as espoused here, any betting on where the '100 year experiment' may end up?

Tankertrashnav

22nd Jan 2016, 17:07

You know you are getting on when a candidate for CAS is younger than you.....

You also know you are getting on when the CDS was commissioned the same year that you left the service :(

MPN11

22nd Jan 2016, 18:42

Whatever, it's a good day when the colour of the uniform or the badges on it take 2nd place to perceived competence in the role.

Who is this bloke anyway? After my time, I assume ... which is a bit scary! Commissioned 1977? Sh*t ... I was a sqn ldr by then. Where did I go wrong? :(

And go easy on the pies, Sir ;)

Sun Who

23rd Jan 2016, 08:17

I have met him on several occasions.
An intelligent and considered man who follows the facts and takes no prisoners.
As others have said, a genuinely purple background. Respected by the Army senior brass. I have no knowledge of his standing with the Navy, but if they are prepared to work with a man who has the best interests of national security at the forefront of his mind, then all will be well.

Sun.

Courtney Mil

23rd Jan 2016, 09:55

He's the sort of man that will support that which the Armed Forces actually need, but certainly won't put up with pettiness in any of the arms. He will expect the Navy to get their manning issues sorted. He's a thinking man who will expect his subordinate commanders to use their heads.

Of the VSOs available, he certainly gets my vote. Uniform colour is pretty much irrelevant. Sir George lacks the experience of the other services. Apart from a stint as PSO to CDS, his posts have always been very Dark Blue. I'm certain that would have counted against him.

ian16th

23rd Jan 2016, 12:35

but he certainly has the time - born in '69. That's after I joined ......

You should worry, its after I was demobbed. :sad:

ian16th

23rd Jan 2016, 12:38

Can you blame the RN for being put out?
Rotating seems a not unreasonable idea. It keeps everybody honest.

It can also ensure that the best man does NOT get the job, because it is the Army/RN/RAF's turn.

Tourist

23rd Jan 2016, 14:41

Well the current system means that the politicians can pick the biggest yes man each time.....

You don't think that any of the top guys could do the job?

izod tester

23rd Jan 2016, 15:42

It used to go in rotation until 1985 when Admiral Fieldhouse was chosen to be CDS. Sir Keith Williamson would have been CDS if Margaret Thatcher had not been impressed with Admiral Fieldhouse as the 4* commander for Op Corporate and chose to break the rotation tradition.

Tourist

23rd Jan 2016, 15:55

It does make sense to rotate.

Nobody at the top is going to be cr@p, and despite what is said about peoples purple-ness, at the end of the day humans are tribal. Consciously or unconsciously, they will have bias.

Any one service having too much time in charge will have consequences.

MSOCS

23rd Jan 2016, 18:11

Somebody needs a hug!

:rolleyes:

Courtney Mil

23rd Jan 2016, 18:44

Nobody at the top is going to be cr@p

Maybe, if you say so. But there have been plenty you wouldn't want to be CDS. Or CAS.

As for tribalism, some more than others. I'm struggling to recall any acts of favouritism shown by recent CDSs.

If the RN really is/are "put out" then tough. Deal with it. The future of the Armed Forces and getting "it" right is far more important. As for rotating, thank God that's over. It would be a bit like rotating Government between the parties, just to make it "fair". Or insisting that 50% of board members have to be women, regardless of their suitability.

Get over it.

Fortissimo

23rd Jan 2016, 19:03

Why would you want to abandon the 'best man for the job' principle just because the job is the top one? As for the suggestion that the current nominee might be the biggest yes-man at his level, those who know him will also know of his reputation for saying no! If the politicians like him, it is probably because he is credible, honest, and won't just tell them what they want to hear.

Fortissimo

23rd Jan 2016, 19:25

Courtney Mil

23rd Jan 2016, 20:34

With you there, Fortissimo. A "yes man" he is not.

Hangarshuffle

23rd Jan 2016, 22:00

What are the biggest challenges he faces?
What does he bring in that others lack?
I can imagine him being about a million miles away from the average joe in a uniform.
And at the end of the day its not like he is say, head of a large corporation who can bring in a real change of direction (for better or worse and be held accountable to boot).
The politicians and the treasury have the real power, same as ever.
So a "yes" man he will be . I'll be impressed the day one of them ever resigns and walks away as a protest against some of the utter **** that's been dropped on their own men and women in the last 20 odd years.
He's just another suit now biding his time in a chair before he goes to the Lords or some other institute, just like most of the rest before him.

Just This Once...

23rd Jan 2016, 22:15

Whenurhappy

24th Jan 2016, 06:30

That chip is showing again HS. Stu Peach is about as far from 'another suit' as you can get. He is an extraordinary man who has achieved extraordinary things.

My only surprise is the unusually ballsy move of the PM to select him as CDS; till now he seems to have preferred more politically astute yes men.

Sir Stu is politically astute as well, but that doesn't equate to being a yes man. I hosted him recently - an enlightening experience.

howiehowie93

24th Jan 2016, 08:46

Congratulation to Peachey ! :ok:

Was OC IX when it became IX(B), only met him twice as he was the boss in the time between my tours in Bruggen, we passed like ships in the night as it were. Was a difficult time then as there were some incidents with Tonkas and he banged out of a jet too ( :rolleyes: I think).

Second time was at a Hanger Bash at Marham for the Sqn 95th he was El Presidente of the of the IX(B) Sqn Association and gave a very rousing speech.

Very nice man but you could see he didn't suffer fools gladly so hopefully there can be a bit of sense passed up and down the ladder.

Ra Ra - up the Bats !

24th Jan 2016, 09:24

He was my first flight commander in 1989 and I can certainly confirm that he doesn't suffer fools gladly. Or at all.

4everAD

24th Jan 2016, 09:25

Well he takes over at a time when there is a serious morale problem in some parts of the RAF, from my personal pov I will assess his tenure by what he does to improve this (admittedly a different score card than most will judge him by).

Courtney Mil

24th Jan 2016, 10:06

Hangarshuffle

24th Jan 2016, 10:38

They're appointed by political process. Previous CDS have sat and watched over the last 20 years of what?...look at the utter mess its in.
I hope he is as good as you are all bigging up=truly needs to be.
1. Morale.
2. Pay and conditions.

If he can raise either of the above he will get respect throughout the military-if not, just another talking head sat within the establishment.

Onceapilot

24th Jan 2016, 11:07

Here is a thought,... Many of the present top brass are products of the 70's/80's and the hyper-aggressive fast jet culture of the time. The ones who weren't so aggressive (but good) seem few and far between.:hmm: Is it coincidence that these "me first" people are now at the top and, that the whole fabric of the RAF seems to be in tatters in their wake?:uhoh:

OAP

Finningley Boy

24th Jan 2016, 11:33

You can also rest assured that he won't feel the need to explain his actions to the likes of you or I.
Courtney Mil is online now Report Post Reply

Well he jolly well ought, I for one would like an explanation for any radical changes made!!!:E

By the way, any Senior officers who have flagged up their intent to resign in the past appear to have been occupying the 1st Sea Lord post. Sir David Luce threatened to resign over the cancellation of the then new Carriers. I also understand that Sir Nigel Essenhigh went early because of the plan to retire rather than upgrade the Sea Harrier.

FB:)

4everAD

24th Jan 2016, 11:51

4ever,

RAF morale is more a job for CAS, CinC, AOC and local commanders. He will get his fingers into pies if he feels the need, but I would expect him to have the odd word in various shell-likes if feels things aren't being done properly.

Hangarshuffle,

Once again you are writing rubbish about a man and a post you clearly know nothing about. But if your bitter delusions fit your model of the world and give you comfort, then go with them.

As for being impressed by top people resigning, we've been through this before. I am more impressed by those that stick it out and fight for what they feel is right. The Armed Forces are not democracies where petulant teenagers can throw all their toys out of the cot because they didn't get their own way. Rest assured, Sir Stu will be a fighter, where required. You can also rest assured that he won't feel the need to explain his actions to the likes of you or I.

Courtney, agreed it should be a job for the RAF SLT however in my humble opinion they've been so hell bent on protecting/acquiring kit through the SDSR process that they've taken their eyes off the manpower issues the RAF has. I may appear to be a bit bitter about this and I can assure you it is with good reason: My pay stands to be cut in 3 years by £2,000 if protection is not extended, my rent on my Quarter is due to double, my pension is now far less than promised and my NI payments are due to go up by £32 a month. My trade's future direction is uncertain and from anecdotal evidence pvrs are soaring. Good news is very sparce at the moment!

Tourist

24th Jan 2016, 12:06

As for tribalism, some more than others. I'm struggling to recall any acts of favouritism shown by recent CDSs.

I'm struggling to recall any acts demonstrating Spine from any recent CDSs.

To not resign over the gutting of the armed forces over the last couple of decades means that none of them have an ounce of respect from me.

You might say that it is better to work from within, but the evidence suggest that that is not the case.

A succession of CDSs resigning would have an effect.

I'm not a believer in apolitical military leaders when it comes to the actual survival of the military.

Courtney Mil

24th Jan 2016, 12:47

Tourist,

As we discussed some time ago, the Government will not be held to ransom by VSOs (or the heads of any organisation or department) resigning on points of principle. Their response would simply be that he felt he had to go due to irreconcilable differences of opinion. And then they'd get another one. The top team spend a lot of time providing evidence, rather than opinion or personal wishes, to the politicians and explaining what is required to achieve the Government's desired effect. That effort within a sound and professional relationship has far more effect than simply walking out.

You have moved on from tribalism, which was your point that I was replying to.

I suspect your perception of your VSOs not respecting you because they haven't all resigned is a tiny bit precious.

Tourist

24th Jan 2016, 13:45

You have moved on from tribalism, which was your point that I was replying to.

I suspect your perception of your VSOs not respecting you because they haven't all resigned is a tiny bit precious.

Well, I realised that there is little point in arguing whether various people were truly purple with a bunch or RAF when the new guy and many of the last guys were light blue.

It's a bit like standing at the wrong end when a ref makes a bad decision. Not many around you tend to see a problem.

I have no interest in whether VSOs respect me. What I do have interest in is whether they fight our corner or whether they bend over and let the military take it negative lube.

Post resignation post K complaints earn no respect fro me.

If you imagine a CDS resignation over an issue would hold no fear from our current crop of politicians then I think you underestimate how scared they are of public opinion.

MSOCS

24th Jan 2016, 17:56

Tourist.

Your argument seems to have transcended its original point, and by that I mean the repetitive succession of "light blue", as you like to point out, and has now morphed into VSO resignations out of principle as a means of showing spine. [note: last two CDS' were Army btw]

I'm sorry but Sir Stuart hasn't even taken the job yet and you are pontificating about him resigning over the perceived p*ss-poor state of the Armed Forces?!!

Are you for real or a Union boy? Nobody's taking your jobs. My speculative guess, as shared by many, is that the top job went to the best man, as many have intimated.

Seriously, tell me who stole your lunch money and I'll try and do something about it mate.

Or just get over yourself precious.

Old-Duffer

25th Jan 2016, 06:01

I attended a lecture where a VSO was asked why he had not resigned after his minister had given him a public rebuke.

He said that to have done so would have been a 'one day wonder'. Better to stay and work gradually to achieve the result desired if at all possible. To have 'run away' would have been the betrayal and staying and trying to sort out the issues was more important.

Perhaps years' later, the VSO is widely respected by those who know him, whilst the politician is generally reviled and thought to have misused his position for personal gain.

As was said by another who was close to the event, the VSO had nothing to lose or gain financially by staying but his self respect would have been tarnished had he left.

O-D

Tourist

25th Jan 2016, 06:29

It's funny that everybody on here is happy to agree that pretty much all politicians are w@nkers, yet when they chose another light blue suit for CDS, "it's because he is the best man for the job"

We all agree that politicians are only interested in one thing, themselves, so how does that equate to choosing the best man to run the forces?

Given the chance, the politician will always choose the CDS that does as he is told.

There is more to the top job thN being a yes man.

Old Duffer.

Weak excuse.
If staying and fighting from the inside worked, the military would not be in the parlous state it is today.

Mach Two

25th Jan 2016, 08:03

they chose another light blue suit for CDS

Wow, you Navy guys really are cut up about this, aren't you? Your bitterness shines through magnificently and I am happy to bathe in it.

Personally, I couldn't give a toss what colour uniform he wears, I happen to know him and work with him regularly and couldn't be more delighted by his selection. Although there are a couple of Browns and Darks around at the moment, none with Peachy's breadth of experience or understanding of the other two services. So the good news is, the other services will end up being very happy with him too - the general feeling in the Big Building this week is one of approval.

If staying and fighting from the inside worked, the military would not be in the parlous state it is today.

Funny how the further down the food chain you are or the more removed from the Services, the more expert you are in the business of the higher echelons.

MSOCS

25th Jan 2016, 08:15

If staying and fighting from the inside worked, the military would not be in the parlours state it is today.

I'm pretty certain your rancid attitude and sweeping generalisations of VSOs aren't shared by the serving RN at large Tourist. When it comes down to it I suspect your comments are really a bit of a personal rant at the 'have's' by a 'have not'.

Once again I invite you to get over that little ego of yours. You clearly have absolutely no idea about the way things work at the higher Pol-Mil levels.

howiehowie93

25th Jan 2016, 09:33

You can also rest assured that he won't feel the need to explain his actions to the likes of you or I.
Very true Courtney

Jimlad1

25th Jan 2016, 10:23

I think it is very telling that everyone serving who has ever met ACM Peach is united in agreeing that he is the perfect man for the job. He is bloody good, ideal for the challenges we face and just the sort of man who will happily not just challenge sacred cows, but probably eat them raw for breakfast :E

Junglydaz

25th Jan 2016, 12:17

""If the politicians like him, it is probably because he is credible, honest, and won't just tell them what they want to hear""

If ever there were reasons for politicians NOT to like him.......:eek::ok:

In fairness, I don't believe that anyone would put their "service loyalties" above the security of the nation. Not in this day and age anyway. That said, the RAf did get rid of the Harrier........:P

Tourist

25th Jan 2016, 12:57

Funny how the further down the food chain you are or the more removed from the Services, the more expert you are in the business of the higher echelons.

Interesting point.

I would certainly say that yes, as a scrote, I know exactly what I want from the higher echelons.

I want them to put their subordinates before their career.
I want them to put getting the right equipment before the directorship post career.

I used to spend quite a lot of time dealing with VVSOs because of the job I did.

Some impressed me, some did not. Some were altogether too excited about their own importance and intelligence and believed that management speak is a good proxy for intelligence.
It isn't.

Army were mostly very polite and human, though Dannet's bag carrier was a prize tw@t.

Navy seemed pleasant enough.
RAF VSOs wouldn't even shake my hand in general much less talk to me.

It does not matter if I have been a senior officer any more than it matters if a rugby fan can coach.
You still know when the manager should be fired, and this millennium has been an abortion.

Tourist

25th Jan 2016, 13:07

I'm pretty certain your rancid attitude and sweeping generalisations of VSOs aren't shared by the serving RN at large Tourist.

Senior officer were we?

Mach Two

25th Jan 2016, 14:53

Senior officer were we?

I'm most terribly sorry, I underestimated you. Bitter AND chippy.

And as for,

Army were mostly very polite and human, though Dannet's bag carrier was a prize tw@t.

Navy seemed pleasant enough.

RAF VSOs wouldn't even shake my hand in general much less talk to me.

Ah! I think I see the real issue now. You don't like the RAF or VSOs. Well done, that man! :D:D:D:D:D

Tourist

25th Jan 2016, 15:02

Mach

The current crop of VSOs have just lost 2 wars in succession against stone-age countries.

That makes them failures.

They are not to be respected, they should be vilified, either for their inability to come up with a plan, or their inability to persuade politicians to not go to war if indeed there was no viable plan.

That is their job.

Winners get respect, not losers.

Courtney Mil

25th Jan 2016, 15:04

I'm sure you would have been much better at the job. Shame you didn't hang around long
enough.

You seem you have done a 180 on your opinion two days ago,

Nobody at the top is going to be cr@p

Compared with today,

The current crop of VSOs have just lost 2 wars in succession against stone-age countries.

That makes them failures.

Tourist

25th Jan 2016, 15:14

Henman failed, it doesn't mean he was cr@p. It just means he wasn't good enough.

In the words of the great philosopher

"Losers do their best, winners go home and @#'# the prom queen"

The last few are losers.
Many died for nothing and the blood is at least partly on their hands. Those are the perks of command.

No, I wouldn't be better at the job, not my thing, politics. I like flying.

Hangarshuffle

25th Jan 2016, 20:34

Very true. The problem (if it is a problem) with many on this site is the real world. CDS is nothing. Osborne and Cameron laugh about them.....Senior Officers are nothing but hot air to them. All the politicians laugh about them.
Our politicians are in an exclusive club, constantly voted in but never catching out. They are rich, they are educated... they are incredibly arrogant.
A little new crab is nothing to them.
Has CDS a twitter account? Does he tweet.? Do people know his name? What does he bring to them? To make them richer? Happier?
He brings in to them nothing..at all.
The military are presently bringing to the nation only failure, tears and tales of woe. Tales of charity, injury. Defeat.
Yes I long for the happy times to return, but they are gone.

Hangarshuffle

25th Jan 2016, 20:51

I got to 14 pages of hits on google about Peach before I got to 4th division websites about him.... it thinned out at about 10 pages.
Is it true he led the "allies" air campaign against Libya? Is it fair to point out.. y'know... did he think that through? I mean to where we are now, with Libya?
Is he Cameron's "Yes " man?
Like often, I get on this site looking for the hard, no bull**** truth. From hard faced professional airman, and Lord there are a few on here who tell me like it is... or as they see it.
But he is looking like a Conservative party shoe in. A yes man. At least on a quick hit on the internet.
Zero faith in our current crop of SO regardless of colour.
Sorry if I've offended people lately. Don't mean to - just my age and cynicism.
I'll be watching the news for Peach.

Union Jack

25th Jan 2016, 21:42

No - you get the best person for the job regardless of the colour of their uniform - anything else would be a disgrace - HH

Quite right, although some of the posts give the impression that this thread is becoming like the Academy Awards argument in more ways than one.:=

Jack

Chinny Crewman

25th Jan 2016, 22:08

No - you get the best person for the job regardless of the colour of their uniform - anything else would be a disgrace - HH

Jack

Before this thread flamed the point being argued was that we should have maintained the rotational system; the counter to this is that we get the best person for the job. My understanding is that there were 3 candidates and the PM choose who he thought was best having met them. So the 'best man' is merely the subjective opinion of the PM. To paraphrase a previous CDS 'being in the CCF at Eton does not make him a military expert' At least rotation would remove this political input.

Mach Two

25th Jan 2016, 23:50

I am very happy to be able to report to all you ex-RN chaps with huge and very obvious chips on your shoulders that the vast majority of my currently-serving Royal Navy colleagues do not share your naive, bitter, blinkered views about the other services. By posting your personal, self-opinionated, ill-informed bile in public you do little more than discredit your former Service.

Since you guys left, things have moved on. Maybe you should too.

Tourist

26th Jan 2016, 03:05

Mach

Trying to sell the idea that political appointees are the way ahead for the military does your intelligence no service.

We all know that politicians want yes men.

At least a rotation gives us some hope of the occasional spine.

p.s. You are wrong about what the RN believes. We all think light blue are wet!:ok:

Easy Street

26th Jan 2016, 09:29

Hangarshuffle,

ACM Peach was the Chief of Joint Operations during the Libya campaign. That means that he was responsible for the conduct of the campaign in pursuit of the military strategic objectives set for it, not for the decision to launch the campaign in the first place. As the military campaign was entirely successful in reaching its own limited objectives, Peach deserves none of your inferred criticism. If the Government's wider strategy was inept in failing to anticipate the subsequent political difficulties that is hardly his fault (or, indeed, his problem).

As to your comments regarding the relationship between politicians and the CDS, instead of posting your half-baked cod analysis of some stuff you found using Google, why don't you go to the library and get Lord Richards' autobiography "Taking Command"? You would get some first-hand reporting from a former CDS, not some rubbish on a blog, about how politicians react to the advice they get from the professional head of the services. The response to Richards' recommendations during the development of the Syrian civil war makes enlightening and slightly alarming reading, and would firmly debunk your idea that our CDS's are "yes men".

Courtney Mil

26th Jan 2016, 12:05

+1 Easy Street. Well said.:ok:

1.3VStall

26th Jan 2016, 13:33

And to reiterate a point previously made, anyone who thinks Peachy is a yes man couldn't be further wide of the mark!

Navaleye

26th Jan 2016, 13:34

If the Big Crab is the right person for the job, then thats fine by me.

t7a

26th Jan 2016, 17:51

Enough of this niff-naff and trivia. When does he start his pilot training?

Megaton

26th Jan 2016, 18:10

When he was a one star, I recall him telling us that he'd been dragged down to HQ STC for a bollocking. He was made to sit in the outer office for a number of hours before being marched in, bollocked and then sent on his way back to Waddington. I can't recall the reason for the bollocking but it certainly wasn't because he was a yes man.

Odanrot

26th Jan 2016, 19:03

A first class choice for CDS. The appointment is made by the PM and needs HM's approval it is not a rotational post - any more.

Peachy got it because he impressed the PM in his previous appointments/commands.

He delivers on time on budget no BS or politics.

He is his own man.

I know, and some of you know because you worked for him.

Well he worked for me.

Finningley Boy

26th Jan 2016, 21:17

Maybe the RAF will get over what looks like snobbery and promote the best person for the CAS job rather than the 'best' Pilot.

Or indeed why anyone in a military uniform? why not the best recommendation from a fancy really expensive management consultancy!:E

How about the the chap who currently runs google:E:E

FB:)

Mick Strigg

27th Jan 2016, 09:18

I suppose the good news is that Admiral Z will now be snapped up by industry and actually paid what he is worth, not a capped wage that for running a large multi-national company!

Evalu8ter

27th Jan 2016, 10:00

Mick,
Perhaps so, but "on the other side" there is an increasing gap between what Senior Officers think they're worth and the reality of what Industry is prepared to pay. True, this perception is at its worst at OF5/1* level - I've had to stop giggling when some old colleagues of mine have thought that they're worth £130-150K "because I need to cover school fees, ski trips and a massive mortgage...". Frankly my advice to them is stay put and buy a house while you're still in and young enough to get a decent mortgage...A lot of the ex-mil guys who are doing really well in Industry left as SNCOs and SO2s and have worked themselves up the ladder through ability and hard work, rather than relying on a string of post nominals and an address book as a "pass" to the top echelon.

Back on topic - Peachy is probably the strongest intellect I've ever met. He used to growl for effect as Cmdt AWC when I was on an OEU and we all listened. More recently he seems to have chilled a bit - I even saw him smile at a recent briefing he gave.......

Chris Kebab

27th Jan 2016, 11:04

...that wasn't a smile mate; that's simply a twitch that happens when he swallows a razor blade.

Wander00

27th Jan 2016, 11:29

I recall that when I left the RAF (early 90s) I worked for a while in career change - remember "Opportunities" newspaper? - I did some individual advice, some times for VSOs. One multi-starred gent firstly got tee'd off that I did not call him sir. We went though a few issues, and then I commented that he did not have a computer terminal on his desk. "No, I have chaps out there (indicating outer office) to do that". He was not impressed with the suggestion that nipping down to the local evening classes and doing a basic IT course might be worthwhile. The classic end to the session was when I asked him what sort of second career he had in mind. "Thought I would quite like to be the Master of an Oxford college" had me almost choking!

FODPlod

27th Jan 2016, 11:57

Stu Peach's appointment as CDS has been on the cards since he was appointed from a cast of thousands as the first Commander of Joint Forces Command. Although I would have preferred to see someone wearing dark blue (or even lovat) occupying the post, particularly to oversee the exploitation of the RN's formidable range of new capabilities in a joint environment, I don't believe I'm the only 'simple sailor' who thinks we could have done a lot worse...

...and he can smile. :)

http://i1188.photobucket.com/albums/z412/Anonymouse365/Stu%20Peach.jpg

Roland Pulfrew

27th Jan 2016, 11:58

Tourist: Given the chance, the politician will always choose the CDS that does as he is told.

Tourist: We all know that politicians want yes men.

Hangarshuffle: But he is looking like a Conservative party shoe in. A yes man.

If that's what the politicians think they've got, they are in for a bit of a shock.

+1 for East Street

Haraka

27th Jan 2016, 13:24

I don't know the guy,I've never met him and I have been out of the business for years.
Having said that, he was drawn to my attention several years ago as being . allegedly , the subject of attempts to block his ascent by certain senior unnamed others in the RAF Int. Community.

If so , then he has my sympathy and also my admiration for triumphing.

Time might ( possibly ) tell.
In any event I wish him well.

Mightycrewseven

27th Jan 2016, 15:05

Sir Peach automatically got offered the post after his closest rival, Chuck Norris, gracefully stepped aside knowing he couldn't compete......:ok:

Chinny Crewman

29th Jan 2016, 08:40

Interesting new take on this appointment from The Times, apparently Barron was the MoDs choice but was overuled by the PM. Barron was offered VCDS but declined and resigned. Article in full for those who are interested:

A Royal Marine is expected to be given the No 2 job in the armed forces as part of a reorganisation of the top echelons that will also establish new heads for the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy, The Times can reveal.
Lieutenant-General Gordon Messenger, a decorated Afghan veteran, is the surprise choice for vice-chief of the defence staff after David Cameron derailed the Ministry of Defence’s succession plans by overruling its recommendation for the top job, chief of the defence staff, senior defence sources said.
Air Marshal Sir Stephen Hillier, a highly respected pilot, is expected to become the chief of the air staff, and Vice-Admiral Sir Philip Jones is set to be the next first sea lord.
The appointments, due to be confirmed as early as today, come after the prime minister last week selected Air Chief Marshal Sir Stuart Peach, the vice-chief, as the next head of the military rather than General Sir Richard Barrons, who had been preferred by the MoD’s senior appointments committee, a senior source said.
It is highly unusual for a prime minister to overrule the committee. The move, seen by some as political meddling, has left several senior officers very unhappy, the source added.
It also created a dilemma over who would fill the other top posts because Air Chief Marshal Peach had been expected to remain in his job. One insider described the subsequent jostling for power between the army, air force and navy as like “Game of Thrones inside the Ministry of Defence . . . you either win or die”.
At first General Barrons, head of joint forces command, another four-star post, was offered the job of vice-chief, but he turned it down and handed in his notice, sources said.
General Messenger was considered for the vice-chief job along with Lieutenant-General Sir Christopher Deverell, head of army equipment. General Messenger looks set to have won the contest and will rise to the position of four-star officer at the early age of 53. It will also make him the first Royal Marine to reach such a high rank in almost 40 years. The last four-star Marine served in 1977.

Tourist

29th Jan 2016, 08:56

Yea, but what do the MOD know about military leadership?

I think a PSW politician is the man to choose these things...

Union Jack

29th Jan 2016, 09:29

The last four-star Marine served in 1977.

Rather later than that, according to the attached biography of General Sir Peter John Frederick Whiteley (http://www.flyingmarines.com/Biographies/1941-1950/Whiteley.htm)

Jack

Courtney Mil

29th Jan 2016, 23:09

Yea, but

Come on! Rotation is finished. Best man got the job. RN will get a go if the right man is available. Why not see if this guy is good enough?

Tourist

30th Jan 2016, 10:40

Best man got the job.

How do you justify that statement?

He is not the man that the MOD recommended.

He is a politicians choice.
That is not a universally recognised stamp of quality in military bosses.....

This thread would give the impression that the RAF finds him a universally popular choice and a generally all round good bloke.

I don't know the man, but I currently work with 95% ex RAF.

A little bit of asking the RAF/Army guys got these responses.

RAF chap 1:- "Tw@t. Typical F3 angry nav"

RAF chap 2:- "Quite clever, utter @~~t"

(personally, I find that latter response quite heartening since that is exactly what I do want running the military)

Army chap "Used to work with him and Admiral Z at different times when I was in PJHQ. Admiral Z is a lovely bloke, used to make me drink with him. Completely barking like Melchett off Blackadder. Mad as a fish. New CDS however is an awful arrogant ill-mannered human being"

The Army chap also had some very interesting info re the behind the scenes manoeuvring and why it has turned out like it has which I await with interest to see what the future holds. He thinks that the Marine might be being prepared for the top job.

Union Jack

30th Jan 2016, 11:00

He thinks that the Marine might be being prepared for the top job.

Moi aussi!:ok:

Jack

Red Line Entry

30th Jan 2016, 11:04

Tourist,

I wouldn't rely on the opinion of your first RAF mate - Stu Peach never flew in F3s (except if he ever had a pax ride!)

Tourist

30th Jan 2016, 11:07

Tourist,

I wouldn't rely on the opinion of your first RAF mate - Stu Peach never flew in F3s (except if he ever had a pax ride!)

Fair enough! It's possible I misheard the type. He seemed quite confident of his assessment though.

1.3VStall

30th Jan 2016, 12:22

He is not the man that the MOD recommended

Hmm, this is the MOD that has destroyed an airworthiness system, tried to blame the MoK pilots, attempted to procure the Nimrod AEW3 and MRA4 and, who's most recent track record is to prove its inability to manage a fleet of air cadet gliders.

Why would any sensible politician accede to the MOD's advice?

Oh, and Tourist, I have served on the same sqn as Peachy and utterly refute your ex-RAF mates denigration of him.

I am with Courtney Mil: the best man for the job.

Wrathmonk

30th Jan 2016, 12:35

Tourist

30th Jan 2016, 12:55

Hmm, this is the MOD that has destroyed an airworthiness system, tried to blame the MoK pilots, attempted to procure the Nimrod AEW3 and MRA4 and, who's most recent track record is to prove its inability to manage a fleet of air cadet gliders.

Why would any sensible politician accede to the MOD's advice?

Oh, and Tourist, I have served on the same sqn as Peachy and utterly refute your ex-RAF mates denigration of him.

I am with Courtney Mil: the best man for the job.

Love it!:D

Politicians are better than MOD at choosing military men!

Tourist

30th Jan 2016, 13:00

Tourist

If you're still serving you should PVR immediately in disgust. That'll show them.;)

After all, that's what many on the 'shop floor' demand our VSOs should do when they don't get what they want.....

Ah, no!

The job of a CDS is to advise the Prime Minister.
The previous guys either put across bad plans for the wars or failed to dissuade ministers from employing bad plans.

Either way, it is not disgust they should resign in, but shame!
They have failed to do their primary task.

We know this because we lost.
Twice!
There is never an excuse for losing a war of our own choosing....

I, by contrast, do my task with an average amount of success, thus no impetus to resign whatsoever:ok:

30th Jan 2016, 18:23

Tourist,
I also served with him and I do think him to be the best man for the job. I also disagree with your ex-RAF chaps' comments: he's not quite clever, he's very clever. Apart from that, they're totally spot on!

London Eye

30th Jan 2016, 18:34

Mach Two

30th Jan 2016, 20:37

Courtney Mil

30th Jan 2016, 21:00

MT,

Matthew 13:5/6

And no offence taken.

langleybaston

30th Jan 2016, 21:05

Perhaps the current chaps were not exposed to the new man when he was at Wg Cdr/ Gp Capt level.

Chinny Crewman

30th Jan 2016, 21:57

Tourist, you seemed a little cynical about:

"Politicians are better than MOD at choosing military men!"

You do know who/what MOD is?

Chiefs of the Defence Staff are appointed on the recommendation of the Secretary of State for Defence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_State_for_Defence) to the Prime Minister (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister_of_the_United_Kingdom)

My understanding is that the MoD Senior Appointments Committee which consists of the Chiefs and various other VSOs recommends 3 candidates to the SoS and the PM then chooses. The MoD has been briefing that the military's preferred choice was Gen Barron but the PM preferred ACM Peach.
I don't know any of them, I'm sure they are all equally good but it is a political appointment. Had the PM chosen someone else I'm sure others would say he was the best man over Peach. I think (?) this is the point Tourist is making which has been lost in an inter service slanging match.

Mach Two

31st Jan 2016, 00:20

Chinny, you are pretty much right, as is London Eye. The submissions go up, through the Secretary to the PM. The process this time was not as cut and dried as you may have "heard" and whilst there was some unofficial briefing, it did not necessarily reflect what was going on. What you may not be aware of is the balls of the PM in picking the man most likely to give the polis the biggest headache on behalf of the Armed Forces. A very interesting choice and not without its reasons.

As for tribalism, be a little careful about whom you level that accusation at.

Tourist should be able to speak for himself although he's a long time out of the Forces, so I doubt his familiarity with the process or the personalities involved.

Chinny Crewman

31st Jan 2016, 08:02

However it happened I hope the appointment is a success.

As for being careful, it's the Internet no one is careful on the Internet as some of the above posts show but it's not me flaming. Tourist I'm sure will be along in the fullness of time to comment on my assumptions about his opinions.

Tourist

31st Jan 2016, 11:36

Tourist,

Your straw poll of EX-RAF mates is not representative of CURRENT mates, RAF or otherwise. I'm sure you will hear and beleive what you choose to hear and your obvious bitterness that it's not a RN guy will continue. All I can tell you is that the vast majority of currently serving "chaps" are delighted with the selection and seem, mysteriously, not to share the opinion of your cynical, retired has-beens that have lost touch with today's military - no offence intended to those retired "chaps" that post here with considerable knowledge.

I love the fact that Ex RAF who agree with you are "chaps that post here with considerable knowledge" and ones that disagree are cynical retired has-beens, and yes, as intimated a few posts back, these are guys that knew him as he climbed the slippery pole, not those who he now waves down upon from above. Where do you think one should go to judge character?

Incidentally, where do you get the impression I am a long time out of the forces?

I have never met the new CDS, but it is obvious from the responses on here that the general trend if not the detail of my advisors is fairly accurate.

Chinny is basically correct. I don't think that it is a position that should be chosen by the PM, and I do think that rotation keeps the worst aspects of tribalism at bay.
The RN will always think their guy is the most suitable, the RAF their guy etc etc.

Personally I believe that tribalism is a good thing in the main, and helps to give something to strive for. Militaries which have gone single service have found it not very satisfying, and while jointery is always sold as fantastic by higher ups, it is often painful as operators for all concerned seemingly often ending up lowest common denominator rather than highest.
A good example is the RN and RM. Totally separate, fiercely tribal, but work fantastically well together

The simple fact is that after x years in a service, you are going to be institutionalised to some degree.
No RN Admiral is ever going to suggest that we should get rid of carriers.
No RAF Air Marshall is ever going to think that the Army are the best people to operate Apache etc etc.

Too much time with any one service at the top will inevitably cause bias at the political level.

Not_a_boffin

31st Jan 2016, 13:32

No view on Peach, never met him, although a number of people I respect sing his praises. I have however, met Adm Z and rate him highly.

If there is RN angst at the appointment of Peach, I would suggest it probably stems from a combination of the following :

1. It's 13 years since a naval service officer held the post of CDS. That is three terms of the Army and a very long term of RAF (Stirrup). There are some understandable reasons for the Army bias (given contemporary operations), but no longer. It's fair to say that there is a sense that it really should be the navy's turn - not in a strict rotational sense, but generally because the return to contingent ops ought to require that sort of perspective. It is also noteworthy that in the 30 years since Fieldhouse took up the post in 1985, only he and Boyce from the NS have actually held the CDS post. There are some who will say - with some justification - that this may not reflect well on those in the RN who achieve high rank.

2. Adm Z is very highly regarded and as a leader is a step change from some of his more recent predecessors. I suspect there is a palpable sense that if he couldn't make it, there'll be a long wait for the next one. This may or may not be true and it might not be a dark blue suit that becomes the next leading candidate, if the rumours are true.

I sincerely hope Peach lives up to his reputation and proves to be the best man for the job. I have no doubts that Adm Z would have proven equally capable and am sad to see that he'll be leaving in April.

The Old Fat One

31st Jan 2016, 14:34

Spent a very long boozy night on the lash with him when he was a wingco. Bloody good bloke I thought.

That is all.

langleybaston

31st Jan 2016, 15:07

Admiral Z must have had a varied career to go on the lash as a WingCo.

Bismark

31st Jan 2016, 15:31

Peach is a Joint as they come and very able, just like Nick Houghton. This is what the PM wants. George Z, whilst extremely capable, was probably seen as too partisan and too direct in his opinion. Whilst he and Pulford got on well and we did not see the internicene warfare of recent generations, Z still fought the RN (particularly the FAA) corner very hard, perhaps too hard at times. Z stood for grand strategy and as we know the Govt hate grand strategy.

As a side note. Tourist, you should step back a little from your pontificating - it is embarrassing.

Courtney Mil

31st Jan 2016, 17:28

Zambellas wasn't going to make CDS for two reasons. First, his CV lacks the depth and "purpleness" the post demands; all but two of his posts were Navy centric and, as Bismark said, he has always been too tightly focussed on the FAA to be seen as a balanced Defence Cheif.

More importantly, his ill-conceived and inappropriate foray into politics effectively meant that he ruled himself out of the running. Whilst his articles in the Telegraph were excellent, stepping over the line and trying to dabble in the Scottish Independence Referendum achieved nothing better than to embarrass and piss-off the Government, especially his own minister. Fallon was never going to recommend him after that. The episode was made worse by the fact that his statements were then strenuously denied and held as incorrect. The Government was never going to appoint a man that attempted to speak for them - out of turn.

He has been a good First Sea Lord and I have always held him in high regard, just not what the Government needs for CDS - and perhaps the other two Services too.