Armed Forces overstretched
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lake District
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At least I wasn't hearing things or falling for some jolly wheeze to wind old Vim up...I'd heard 34k and 6 main camps. Would'nt like to be a techie with career aspirations....
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sleaford
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Left for work following Ingram's comments this morning, told to come home happier by the "Boss". I cannot believe the lies that this Government spout on a continuous basis. My work is suffering (like most others) for a lack of funds, lack of personnel and a large weight of PC bull**** in dealing with contractors and the DPA. But, overall, my strongest feelings surround this question: Does Ingram really believe anything he said or has he been mis-informed by our Seniors who seem little interested in ensuring that the public know the truth about our current Forces? I remember hearing once that there was a very effective "shyt filter" system in the military, I believe that this is still the case! Still it will all be OK in the fullness of time .............. won't it?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am starting to suspect that the relationship between our seniors and the politicians resembles the scenes between Jodl, Keitel and Hitler portrayed in the film "Downfall".
We have chiefs that are either obsequious in their supine behaviour or ignored by deluded politicians who believe they can have their cake and eat it, as well as sharing it with their friend Dubya.
We have chiefs that are either obsequious in their supine behaviour or ignored by deluded politicians who believe they can have their cake and eat it, as well as sharing it with their friend Dubya.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sleaford
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My main objection is that even at my lowly level near the bottom of the food chain, I am having to play politics if I wish to progress. Whatever happened to doing the right thing for the benefit of the man in the field, on the sea or in the air. I wish that we could leave the politics to the politicians and all act like the soldiers we are meant to be. And that includes our Lords/Airships. I realise that this is a niave and idealist opinion in the current climate but, I couldn't tell you what I would give to see a very senior man/lady resign on all of our behalf to make the point that we can not run the Forces like a Corporate Business!
Too many are looking at time and cost and ignoring capability, it is only a matter of time before we see an even bigger disaster than Typhoon.... good luck the Navy!
Too many are looking at time and cost and ignoring capability, it is only a matter of time before we see an even bigger disaster than Typhoon.... good luck the Navy!
Last edited by Testingtheseatlimit; 15th Jun 2005 at 16:17.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: s of isk
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd heard 34k and 6 main camps
I've heard the 34K thing as well. I was just choosing not to believe it. Sounds like it may have some substance. Wonder how many extra duties and deployments they can send me on when we are down to a figure such as that?!!
No doubt the 34K+6 is the usual maskirovka, so that when the actual number turns out to be 38K+7 there's a huge feeling of relief and the fact that there has been a substantial cut is overlooked.
Still, airlines are beginning to recruit again. For example EasyJet have realised to their cost that they can't afford to dick around waiting for decisions over mil pilots - the guys are being eagerly snapped by others whilst the orange folk are still deliberating!
Still, airlines are beginning to recruit again. For example EasyJet have realised to their cost that they can't afford to dick around waiting for decisions over mil pilots - the guys are being eagerly snapped by others whilst the orange folk are still deliberating!
vecvec......
You say ...."What you have to remember is that the report stated that the problems affected 2% of the armed forces - which means that 98% are fine and doing dandy thank you very much."...
The report actually said that 38% of forces had "serious weaknesses" in their readiness levels - with 2% described as "critical".
It is nice to hear that overstretch is not a problem in your part of the FAA. Perhaps we should let the First Sea Lord, or whoever runs your outfit, know so he can up your tasking to catch up with the work rate affecting most of the rest of the military. Just because everything is sweetness and light in your portion of the military what arrogance gives you the right to say that there are no problems elsewhere!!
Without talking about the RAF, which you obviously have a chip on your shoulder about, just look for some blatant examples in the Army. As has been mentioned the lack of medical staff has resulted in the need to hire outsiders at up to £600 a day. The number of TA members leaving because they are faced with 6 months away every 3 years, which is the most the government can squeeze out of them!! My point here, because no doubt you will simply have a go at the TA members on the basis that "they signed up for it, tough, etc" is how short the Army obviuosly is to have to need to continually draw on this TA support. What is the turn round time for an infantry battalion between "operational tours" whether it be Iraq, NI etc vs the Army board target.
The NAO believe overstretch exisits, even the MOD mandarins admit it, so what makes you so highly qualified to say that it is a myth. Maybe your next tour should be as an LO with an infantry battalion!!!
By the way, you have gone awfully quiet!
BEagle et al
34k? Yes I can beleive it, but when. Getting down to the current target has taken nearly 3 years by the time it finishes. Is tranche 1 for the next round going to overlap with tranche 3 of the last. As for 6 main camps, again maybe, but before 2013?? Kinloss and Lyneham (both with no long term future) are in business until then I believe. 34k and 6 bases by 2015-2020 maybe, before then???
You say ...."What you have to remember is that the report stated that the problems affected 2% of the armed forces - which means that 98% are fine and doing dandy thank you very much."...
The report actually said that 38% of forces had "serious weaknesses" in their readiness levels - with 2% described as "critical".
It is nice to hear that overstretch is not a problem in your part of the FAA. Perhaps we should let the First Sea Lord, or whoever runs your outfit, know so he can up your tasking to catch up with the work rate affecting most of the rest of the military. Just because everything is sweetness and light in your portion of the military what arrogance gives you the right to say that there are no problems elsewhere!!
Without talking about the RAF, which you obviously have a chip on your shoulder about, just look for some blatant examples in the Army. As has been mentioned the lack of medical staff has resulted in the need to hire outsiders at up to £600 a day. The number of TA members leaving because they are faced with 6 months away every 3 years, which is the most the government can squeeze out of them!! My point here, because no doubt you will simply have a go at the TA members on the basis that "they signed up for it, tough, etc" is how short the Army obviuosly is to have to need to continually draw on this TA support. What is the turn round time for an infantry battalion between "operational tours" whether it be Iraq, NI etc vs the Army board target.
The NAO believe overstretch exisits, even the MOD mandarins admit it, so what makes you so highly qualified to say that it is a myth. Maybe your next tour should be as an LO with an infantry battalion!!!
By the way, you have gone awfully quiet!
BEagle et al
34k? Yes I can beleive it, but when. Getting down to the current target has taken nearly 3 years by the time it finishes. Is tranche 1 for the next round going to overlap with tranche 3 of the last. As for 6 main camps, again maybe, but before 2013?? Kinloss and Lyneham (both with no long term future) are in business until then I believe. 34k and 6 bases by 2015-2020 maybe, before then???
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re Vecvechookattack.
On the Chinook Disaster thread he stated with regard to his experience on the Chinook HC2 -(paraphrased)- that he had "about 80 hrs gained on RWTS at BD". The inference being that he had attended ETPS.
On another thread he stated " Following my exchange (with the Royal New Zealand Navy) I was invited to join but declined."
There can't be many (if any) RN pilots who have done both ETPS and an exchange with the RNZN.
On the Chinook Disaster thread he stated with regard to his experience on the Chinook HC2 -(paraphrased)- that he had "about 80 hrs gained on RWTS at BD". The inference being that he had attended ETPS.
On another thread he stated " Following my exchange (with the Royal New Zealand Navy) I was invited to join but declined."
There can't be many (if any) RN pilots who have done both ETPS and an exchange with the RNZN.
Now I don’t have any problem with the NAO report, especially the elements that criticise readiness and funding for maintenance and training, but I do have a teeny weeny issue with this overstretch thingy that is obviously genuinely stirring up emotion amongst those on this forum
Using the MOD’s own figures it is apparent that currently 4.6 % of UK regular and reserve forces are deployed , that’s correct, 4.6%!
How can a deployed percentage like that be causing so much grief to so many?
Surely a figure of less than 5% deployed is well below what we would comfortably expect to be able to handle without it causing wailing and gnashing?
Using the MOD’s own figures it is apparent that currently 4.6 % of UK regular and reserve forces are deployed , that’s correct, 4.6%!
How can a deployed percentage like that be causing so much grief to so many?
Surely a figure of less than 5% deployed is well below what we would comfortably expect to be able to handle without it causing wailing and gnashing?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
prOOne,
Would you like to Quantify that.
Is the percentage you quote that deployed worldwide or that deployed in Iraq?
Do we not still have Personnel in Afghanistan; in the Carribean on anti drugs patrols, in the South Atlantic, in Northern Ireland. The people involved in these tasks would doubtless prefer to be with their families but accept their duties.
Would you like to Quantify that.
Is the percentage you quote that deployed worldwide or that deployed in Iraq?
Do we not still have Personnel in Afghanistan; in the Carribean on anti drugs patrols, in the South Atlantic, in Northern Ireland. The people involved in these tasks would doubtless prefer to be with their families but accept their duties.
Cazatou,
8,350 in the Gulf area including 7,500 in Iraq.
1,100 in Afghanistan.
1,177 in the Falklands
991 in Bosnia
187 in Kosovo
98 in Sierra Leone
40 on AScension Island
329 on UN missions or training/liaison parties.
8,350 in the Gulf area including 7,500 in Iraq.
1,100 in Afghanistan.
1,177 in the Falklands
991 in Bosnia
187 in Kosovo
98 in Sierra Leone
40 on AScension Island
329 on UN missions or training/liaison parties.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pr00ne, as Napoleon found out in Russia, for every person deployed, you need the logistics chain to support him/her.
Those 5% have to come home. If you make it twice a year, that is 10% OOA in one year. 4 month tours and it goes up to 15%. There's training time, leave and the myriad garrison duties that require attention. And that is just for formed unit personnel. I don't have a figure to hand for the % of formed unit personnel but I bet a large sum that it is less than 50%. So the 5% increases to 10% for an annual rotation, 20% for a six-month rotation and to 30% for a 4 month rotation.
The supposed Army between-tour length is 24 months and it was reduced to 6 months for the Black Watch and other units. No Army unit has met the 24-month target.
There was a figure for the % of Army deployed on Telic 1 and I think it was around the 40% mark. I will find out.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone else think that Admin Guru has remustered to the dark blue?!
Must be a wind up. I cannot believe that vecvec..... is a real person. If so, there's a really nice RAF shrink at Brize Norton who's probably not overstretched......
Must be a wind up. I cannot believe that vecvec..... is a real person. If so, there's a really nice RAF shrink at Brize Norton who's probably not overstretched......
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call me paranoid, but to have 47% of the Army committed as a minority partner in a coalition operation against a low-threat opponent with no simultaneous major committments is bloody scary! 
Please correct me if I am wrong, but do the Army not still operate under the "field army" and "home army" concept? I vaguely recall that the field army has 1-2 divisions of perhaps 3 brigades each. A brigade is typically 5,000 troops so the "field army" is perhaps 30,000 strong. This would be just under 30% of the strength of the Army or thereabouts.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but do the Army not still operate under the "field army" and "home army" concept? I vaguely recall that the field army has 1-2 divisions of perhaps 3 brigades each. A brigade is typically 5,000 troops so the "field army" is perhaps 30,000 strong. This would be just under 30% of the strength of the Army or thereabouts.
How many parades, birthdays, and other ceremonial bashes could be foregone to free up more troops for field service? How many "military" positions could shift to "civilians" to the same effect?
We have the same problem....but also refuse to admit it....the last bunch of 82nd Airborne troops headed for Iraq trained in the Piney woods of Camp McCall in North Carolina....and not at Fort Irwin at the Desert Training Center....reason....the 11th ACR (Training Cadre at Fort Irwin) were deployed to Iraq for field operations. That tell you how bad it has gotten here?
The recruiting short fall is not as bad as the press is making it out to be. The Army is growing....thus the shortfall is actually an increase in raw numbers over last year but still shows as a shortfall. The active duty military are having re-enlistment rates at historical high percentages....the troops are re-inlisting. The Reserves and National Guard are seeing some shortfall and down turn in re-enlistments...but that is no surprise. When Muffy and others found out that there is more to the Reserves (Territorials) than college money and pay and retirement....as so many thought.....they are leaving after their enlistments are up. Units are still able to deploy so it is not a crisis yet.
We have the same problem....but also refuse to admit it....the last bunch of 82nd Airborne troops headed for Iraq trained in the Piney woods of Camp McCall in North Carolina....and not at Fort Irwin at the Desert Training Center....reason....the 11th ACR (Training Cadre at Fort Irwin) were deployed to Iraq for field operations. That tell you how bad it has gotten here?
The recruiting short fall is not as bad as the press is making it out to be. The Army is growing....thus the shortfall is actually an increase in raw numbers over last year but still shows as a shortfall. The active duty military are having re-enlistment rates at historical high percentages....the troops are re-inlisting. The Reserves and National Guard are seeing some shortfall and down turn in re-enlistments...but that is no surprise. When Muffy and others found out that there is more to the Reserves (Territorials) than college money and pay and retirement....as so many thought.....they are leaving after their enlistments are up. Units are still able to deploy so it is not a crisis yet.
prOOne
Just to agree/reinforce Jess the Dog's point. Most of the people I meet in Iraq are on 2, 3, 4 and at most 6 month deployments. Even the Black Watch only did 6 months. Therefore while we might only have 4.6% depoloyed at any one time (which I doubt includes NI as that will no doubt be considered part of the UK), YOU HAVE TO MULTIPLY THAT BY A FACTOR TO FIND THE NUMBER/PERCENTAGE DEPLOYED IN ANY 12 MONTH PERIOD.
As already stated certain units/specializations deploy more frequently than others, for example I would assume artillery and Tank units are deploying less frequently than infantry units. In the same way the UK AEW fleet isn't spending time in sandy places, but it has become a way of life for the SH boys.
As I have already stated, overstretch is not even across the armed forces, but that does not mean it does not exisit.
Statistics need to be relevant to be of any use. I would suggest looking at % deployed at any one stage is an oversimplification.
Just to agree/reinforce Jess the Dog's point. Most of the people I meet in Iraq are on 2, 3, 4 and at most 6 month deployments. Even the Black Watch only did 6 months. Therefore while we might only have 4.6% depoloyed at any one time (which I doubt includes NI as that will no doubt be considered part of the UK), YOU HAVE TO MULTIPLY THAT BY A FACTOR TO FIND THE NUMBER/PERCENTAGE DEPLOYED IN ANY 12 MONTH PERIOD.
As already stated certain units/specializations deploy more frequently than others, for example I would assume artillery and Tank units are deploying less frequently than infantry units. In the same way the UK AEW fleet isn't spending time in sandy places, but it has become a way of life for the SH boys.
As I have already stated, overstretch is not even across the armed forces, but that does not mean it does not exisit.
Statistics need to be relevant to be of any use. I would suggest looking at % deployed at any one stage is an oversimplification.