Para training to be stopped for 4 yrs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in my combat underpants
Age: 53
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Para training to be stopped for 4 yrs
Blimey crikey!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...7/nparas17.xml
Are things getting bad? 16 Assault Brigade has less of a ring to it.
"Instead of flying to meetings around the world, senior officers should "encourage staff to consider video conferencing, e-mail or the telephone". WOW - really? Do you think the Taliban would mind a cheeky on-line skirmish or something? Save deploying the troops!
It has gone feckin mad!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...7/nparas17.xml
Are things getting bad? 16 Assault Brigade has less of a ring to it.
"Instead of flying to meetings around the world, senior officers should "encourage staff to consider video conferencing, e-mail or the telephone". WOW - really? Do you think the Taliban would mind a cheeky on-line skirmish or something? Save deploying the troops!
It has gone feckin mad!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Middle Drawer
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately, this is another example of the way HM Forces have been treated by the fiscal policy of the destructive ruling Labour party.
Quote and interpretation taken from 2 pus,
In an effort to stay within budget, he proposes measures including a "moratorium on recruitment" of civilian manpower and that all "existing contracts for agency or casual staff be terminated".
Does this mean that the removal of all the "Agencies" and "Casual" staff will improve frontline services? I think not.
During Labour's crucifying cutbacks in uniformed and professional posts, who do you think took up the Agency and casual staff positions?
Forces personnel simply hung up their boots and took these positions.
Okay, a lot of non ex mil work for the agencies but you can see where I'm going.
Getting shot of Agencies can only be remedied by inreasing the number of people in uniforms.
And we all know that will never happen.
Regards
TW
Quote and interpretation taken from 2 pus,
In an effort to stay within budget, he proposes measures including a "moratorium on recruitment" of civilian manpower and that all "existing contracts for agency or casual staff be terminated".
Does this mean that the removal of all the "Agencies" and "Casual" staff will improve frontline services? I think not.
During Labour's crucifying cutbacks in uniformed and professional posts, who do you think took up the Agency and casual staff positions?
Forces personnel simply hung up their boots and took these positions.
Okay, a lot of non ex mil work for the agencies but you can see where I'm going.
Getting shot of Agencies can only be remedied by inreasing the number of people in uniforms.
And we all know that will never happen.
Regards
TW
Last edited by Talk Wrench; 17th Dec 2006 at 02:13. Reason: typo
JetBlast member 2005.
JetBlast member 2006.
Banned 2007
JetBlast member 2006.
Banned 2007
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The US of A - sort of
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you think the Taliban would mind a cheeky on-line skirmish or something?
Wait a minute, that's exactly what they had in Star Trek episode 23 (Season 1, Production Number 023, Airdate 23feb1967) A taste of Armageddon. The famous TOS episode
One half of an Airborne Infantry Battalion...of Three Infantry Battalions in one of three Brigades of one Airborne Division doing a training drop.
Perhaps your Para's could tag along....they would be welcome I am sure!
Perhaps the feckers at the top never heard of the concept of practice makes perfect....and the more you sweat in training...the less you bleed in combat!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
To quote the Telegraph story,
To be fair, how many of those troops on operations use their parachute ability?
I understand that the 'esprit de corps' of the Parachute Regiment revolves around jumping out of planes for a living but it is very expensive to train and keep people current in this role, which is very under-used. Can the MoD hand on heart say they are providing the very best for 'ordinary' infantry regiments whilst spending a vast amount of money training a different regiment to do something they haven't done on-mass since Suez?
I would rather we in the Armed Forces had more money so that we could afford exuberances such as three battalions of Para-trained infantry plus the many squadrons of personnel from the Corp's also trained but we don't have the luxury of a bottomless budget and with our overseas exploits proving very expensive the realities of providing money for what is actually needed rather than what would be nice to have must be followed. I would prefer that our normal line infantry were better equipped and supported.
Of course there may be an effect on recruitment but the Para's have suffered from quite bad retention/recruitment of late even with parachute training being (reasonably) available so perhaps the problem lies mainly elsewhere.
Senior officers were aghast last night at the latest round of cuts. One said: "It is extraordinary that at a time when the Armed Forces are fighting two wars and are stretched to the very limit, defence spending is being pared back in this way."
I understand that the 'esprit de corps' of the Parachute Regiment revolves around jumping out of planes for a living but it is very expensive to train and keep people current in this role, which is very under-used. Can the MoD hand on heart say they are providing the very best for 'ordinary' infantry regiments whilst spending a vast amount of money training a different regiment to do something they haven't done on-mass since Suez?
I would rather we in the Armed Forces had more money so that we could afford exuberances such as three battalions of Para-trained infantry plus the many squadrons of personnel from the Corp's also trained but we don't have the luxury of a bottomless budget and with our overseas exploits proving very expensive the realities of providing money for what is actually needed rather than what would be nice to have must be followed. I would prefer that our normal line infantry were better equipped and supported.
Of course there may be an effect on recruitment but the Para's have suffered from quite bad retention/recruitment of late even with parachute training being (reasonably) available so perhaps the problem lies mainly elsewhere.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First up - Talk Wrench: when 2PUS talks about getting rid of 'agency staff' he isn't talking about defence agencies he's talking about casual labour provided by employment agencies to make up for our undermanning. These bods are v.useful but also v.expensive.
Now the main thread - This is realism guys. We haven't been properly training paras as air delivered light infantry for ages; we've been giving them training jumps so they can wear wings and feel good about themselves. The argument that we need a para capability is tenuous to say the least, but what is very clear is that this is a hugely expensive capability - IIRC it takes 21 C130s (16 in a stream with 5 more making second runs) to deliver the equivalent of a light infantry company which can only sustain itself for 3 days before it has to be relieved or resupplied by those 21 x C130s. I don't think this is remotely cost effective and can understand why it is being put on the shelf for the moment.
I expect even the Paras would prefer more Chinook hours, on time Tristar service and more CAS from Harriers on operations to practising for a company drop that will almost certainly never be needed on operations.
Now the main thread - This is realism guys. We haven't been properly training paras as air delivered light infantry for ages; we've been giving them training jumps so they can wear wings and feel good about themselves. The argument that we need a para capability is tenuous to say the least, but what is very clear is that this is a hugely expensive capability - IIRC it takes 21 C130s (16 in a stream with 5 more making second runs) to deliver the equivalent of a light infantry company which can only sustain itself for 3 days before it has to be relieved or resupplied by those 21 x C130s. I don't think this is remotely cost effective and can understand why it is being put on the shelf for the moment.
I expect even the Paras would prefer more Chinook hours, on time Tristar service and more CAS from Harriers on operations to practising for a company drop that will almost certainly never be needed on operations.
Once the expertise has gone it will be almost impossible to get it back. Practically, and politically (' well you have managed without it all this time' ). What else will be sacrificed to President Blairs' desire to strut the world stage 'like a colossus'.
In c1400 Christine de Pizan wrote :
'What will the wise Prince do when he must undertake wars and fight battles ? First of all, he will consider how much strength he has or can obtain , how many men are available and how much money. For unless he is well supplied with these basic elements , it is folly to wage war, for they are necessary to have above all else, especially money.'
Oh that WE had such a wise Prince. The British Armed Forces ( the ONE part of the UK that commands world wide respect ) are being destroyed from within.
In c1400 Christine de Pizan wrote :
'What will the wise Prince do when he must undertake wars and fight battles ? First of all, he will consider how much strength he has or can obtain , how many men are available and how much money. For unless he is well supplied with these basic elements , it is folly to wage war, for they are necessary to have above all else, especially money.'
Oh that WE had such a wise Prince. The British Armed Forces ( the ONE part of the UK that commands world wide respect ) are being destroyed from within.
I got the impression from reading that, that this is the Para's salvo in the current whitehall spending round. We all know the budget is under pressure, and most units are making statements on the impacts of cuts. The paras have almost certainly drawn up their "worst case scenario" option and leaked it to the press, particularly in light of the VC announcement this week. The RN's done the same with the slip escorts to 20 paper and I'm sure the RAF will do something similar (lower standards of hotels to 3*? 
)
)
That last post was going quite well - until that stupid crap about hotels.
No, the Army and Navy will kick up a fuss - but the RAF will, as usual, roll over and take it just as long as no-one threatens the single seat cold war fighters.
Can you really imagine the fast jet-centric Airships accepting that updated AT/AAR and RW fleets are of more urgency than more little jets going whoosh at RIAT and Farnborough?
No, the Army and Navy will kick up a fuss - but the RAF will, as usual, roll over and take it just as long as no-one threatens the single seat cold war fighters.
Can you really imagine the fast jet-centric Airships accepting that updated AT/AAR and RW fleets are of more urgency than more little jets going whoosh at RIAT and Farnborough?
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
IIRC it takes 21 C130s (16 in a stream with 5 more making second runs) to deliver the equivalent of a light infantry company which can only sustain itself for 3 days
Will this signal the end of PTS at the famous Oxfordshire airbase? How the RAF has managed, or wanted, to hang on to this role makes no sense.
On a positive note the pubs of Carterton will not have to endure testosterone fuelled paras trying to convince the locals how hard they are.
The downside will be that there will be less SNCO's for orderly dog, and loss of a wingco post for a PEdO!
As the SAS prefer their free fall training to be done by the americans will the Falcons wither on the vine?
On a positive note the pubs of Carterton will not have to endure testosterone fuelled paras trying to convince the locals how hard they are.
The downside will be that there will be less SNCO's for orderly dog, and loss of a wingco post for a PEdO!
As the SAS prefer their free fall training to be done by the americans will the Falcons wither on the vine?
I'm not normally one to be lost for words, but this government leaves me unspeakably appopleptic with the general disregard shown to the armed forces as a whole.
So Commanders in Afghanistan can have anything they want can they Tony? Would that be anything as long as it isn't more helicopters or an airborne capability??? Because I guarantee you we will be in country longer than the moratorium on Para trg.
And whilst the arguments about how expensive it is and how troops would rather get more CAS, helos etc, there is one flaw in that argument - the money cut sorry saved won't be re-directed to fund extra assets elsewhere! Probably go to fund some new disabled African single-parent lesbian drop in centre in Tower Hamlets.
And as I type, the news is on and Tony is as usual leading from the front with a stirling example of using email and video conferencing by commencing his pre-Christmas middle east jolly. But then again, it always was one rule for senior civil serpents and politicians and another for the rest of us.
So Commanders in Afghanistan can have anything they want can they Tony? Would that be anything as long as it isn't more helicopters or an airborne capability??? Because I guarantee you we will be in country longer than the moratorium on Para trg.
And whilst the arguments about how expensive it is and how troops would rather get more CAS, helos etc, there is one flaw in that argument - the money cut sorry saved won't be re-directed to fund extra assets elsewhere! Probably go to fund some new disabled African single-parent lesbian drop in centre in Tower Hamlets.
And as I type, the news is on and Tony is as usual leading from the front with a stirling example of using email and video conferencing by commencing his pre-Christmas middle east jolly. But then again, it always was one rule for senior civil serpents and politicians and another for the rest of us.
"That last post was going quite well - until that stupid crap about hotels."
Sorry Beags, cheap shot but nice to see it got someone reeled in
In all seriousness, it will be interesting to see what the RAF begins to leak about threatened cuts. My guess is that there would be limited sympathy for any rumours about losing more Typhoons, and there is no chance of losing any multi engine assets. I wouldnt be surprised to see moves in place to threaten JSF (can't afford it etc) as this then leaves people questioning its role, and losing JSF could also write off the carriers - cue nice resolution of finance black hole.
Sorry Beags, cheap shot but nice to see it got someone reeled in
In all seriousness, it will be interesting to see what the RAF begins to leak about threatened cuts. My guess is that there would be limited sympathy for any rumours about losing more Typhoons, and there is no chance of losing any multi engine assets. I wouldnt be surprised to see moves in place to threaten JSF (can't afford it etc) as this then leaves people questioning its role, and losing JSF could also write off the carriers - cue nice resolution of finance black hole.
Whilst I agree with a lot of the argument here, the bottom line is the financial black hole. Not able to reach recruiting targets, getting rid of civilian staff, moratoriums on promotions, PVR on the up. We are witnessing the total meltdown of our Armed Forces. This has been a terrible year and next year is going to be worse. That PVR button is looking attractive!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As ever the Chiefs of Staff are out of kilter on this and completely failing to grasp the real problem. For the record, military operational parachuting has taken place in very recent operations and there continues to be a real need for this skill in future operations. To remove the ability of paras to qualify in this discipline will harm recruitment of personnel wishing to become part of the regiment and also part of UK special forces.
Even worse for the wider UK Armed Forces we are witnessing a meltdown in personnel. The PVRs winging their way in at the moment will not bite for another 12 to 18 months. Chiefs of Staff are fooling themselves if they seek to ignore this fact. The Parachute Regiment has just been honoured with awards for incredible gallantry, what on earth do they think this will do to morale? Why risk the hit to retention? Typhoon is a white elephant in all this, by retaining Typhoon one almost gets the impression RAF Chiefs have been bought off. Well Sirs, the unpalatable fact is that for the last 10 years, with the odd exception Ops have been carried out by less fashionable sections of the RAF. Saving Typhoon will not save the RAF, just as acquiring a replacement for Trident will not save the military. Your people are your greatest asset and they are walking away in disgust and who can blame them for the shoddy way they have been treated.
Even worse for the wider UK Armed Forces we are witnessing a meltdown in personnel. The PVRs winging their way in at the moment will not bite for another 12 to 18 months. Chiefs of Staff are fooling themselves if they seek to ignore this fact. The Parachute Regiment has just been honoured with awards for incredible gallantry, what on earth do they think this will do to morale? Why risk the hit to retention? Typhoon is a white elephant in all this, by retaining Typhoon one almost gets the impression RAF Chiefs have been bought off. Well Sirs, the unpalatable fact is that for the last 10 years, with the odd exception Ops have been carried out by less fashionable sections of the RAF. Saving Typhoon will not save the RAF, just as acquiring a replacement for Trident will not save the military. Your people are your greatest asset and they are walking away in disgust and who can blame them for the shoddy way they have been treated.
Last edited by nigegilb; 17th Dec 2006 at 15:43.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Of course, there's quite a lot of other capabilities we've not used in anger, and so could be mothballed/disposed of:
Nuclear weapons for start - what else?
Nuclear weapons for start - what else?