LJ:
Thanks for coming back. I apologise for not being more clear when I posted my thoughts on military aircraft registration. What I was (badly) trying to put over was that if the RAF spent public monies to actually purchase a fleet of aircraft (to be clear, so that they owned the assets) and then operate these aircraft within the regulatory structures then in place (most notably to write and own the Release to Service) then, as far as I'm aware, the aircraft had to be on the military register. I know that's a slightly circular argument.
You quote the example of 'your' Grob Tutors, which are on the civilian register. Actually, they're not 'yours', they're owned and operated by Babcock under a PFI deal. The MoD gets a fleet that supports all three services, and, as you quite rightly point out, doesn't have to go through the hoops of complying with all the MAA regs. The Voyagers are operated to Part 145, but I think you'll find most of them are on the military register, and have a Release to Service to cover military operation. Likewise, the Shadows are military registered, and, again I believe, have a Release to Service.
However, on the really important bit, I thoroughly agree with you. If there was an appetite to provide the RAF with the world's largest fleet of gliders as a recruiting tool, then I'm sure ways could be found to do it. Where we part company is on whether that should be done. I don't think any public money should be spent on this any more.
Best Regards as ever to all those giving their time and effort to the ATC,
Engines