"General Two Dinners" - CGS
 

[QUOTE]
He cuts an imposing figure at 6ft 2in and nearly 20 stone.

But ­Britain's new Army chief – who ordered a tougher training regime for troops – has had to buy a bigger uniform because his old one is too tight.

General Sir Peter Wall, 55, who took over as Chief of the General Staff this week and is known as a 'big eater', was measured up for a new Service Dress uniform at a cost of £1,000, which he paid for himself.

A military source said: 'A tailor had to come into the office because the jacket and trousers on the old one were too small for him.

'The general is a very big, imposing man, but you would never tell him that.'

A keen rugby player in his youth, the burly ex-Paratrooper, nicknamed 'the Bear', is known to enjoy his food and likes a drink with dinner. His favourite tipples are whisky, wine and port
One colleague recalled last night how ten years ago, while visiting Scotland as commander of 16 Air Assault Brigade, Sir Peter ordered a young major to get him two portions of fish and chips.

The major returned with only one portion. When the general asked where the second portion was, the hapless major admitted he had eaten it, believing he was being treated to a fish and chip supper by his boss.

But Sir Peter barked out: 'Go and get me the other portion. I'm hungry.'

In his previous role as Commander in Chief of Land Forces, General Wall ordered a review of physical training of troops to prepare them for combat in Afghanistan.


The popular £165,000-a-year ­general is regarded as one of the military's best brains and served as the head of operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan. All officers and soldiers are ­supposed to pass an annual battle fitness test but Sir Peter has not had one for ten years.


He has never been turned away from action. When he was pictured at an Airborne Forces parade in Colchester, Essex, in July, his uniform certainly appeared close fitting.


An Army source said: 'Sir Peter used to be super-fit when he played rugby, but his job now is as a commander and strategist rather than serving in a more active operational role. 'His size certainly has no effect on his abilities to carry out his duties.'


An Army spokeswoman said: 'The Army takes fitness very seriously. It is vital to ensure our soldiers have the strength and stamina to cope with physical challenges of operations as tough as any we have had to cope with in several decades.'


Read more: General Two Dinners forks out £1,000 for XXL uniform... Embarrassment for 20-stone Army chief who ordered tough new fitness tests for troops | Mail Online

Read more: General Two Dinners forks out £1,000 for XXL uniform... Embarrassment for 20-stone Army chief who ordered tough new fitness tests for troops | Mail Online]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/...68_233x568.jpg

I guess this opens the door to all the people that have been dismissed for not doing their fitness tests then? :ugh:

The B Word

Mind you, its his big brain not his anaconda like intestines that he's been elected CGS for.:ok:

FB

I notice the photo is attributed to a Corporal Rupert Frere. I bet he gets some stick over that!

Maybe the General has a valid medical reason. The article did not go into depth.

The guy looks like he's in his late 50's, and is a former para. Who gives a rats ass, if he is good at his job.

Sir Jock Stirrup is built like a twiglet, but has repeatedly been found wanting as CDS.

Make up your minds what you want.

So he's over weight but it's OK because he's good at his job, I would suggest that excuse is not playing very well for a few folk across the 3 services at the mo :=

I would suggest that most of the people 'that's not playing well for' at the moment are in their early 20's and unlikely to have achieved the level of fitness required to join the airborne forces. When they have, and they are in their late 50's, maybe they can take issue with the gentleman then.

Let's not have another bleep test p1ssing match, although it has been a month or so since the last one.

MGD

He's 55yrs old and he hasn't done a fitness test in 10 years - does that mean that everyone over 45yrs old need not bother? What about Staff Officers? We can't have one rule for one and one for another can we?

Runaway Gun

"Maybe the General has a valid medical reason". What about these people? Supposedly, they're being asked to leave because they're injured...

Veterans criticise leaked 'plan' to rid Army of injured soldiers (From Herald Series)

I know it's all a bit "Devil's Advocate", but I think this stinks! He should get his 3 warnings like everyone else, if he fails the 3rd then "out!". It might open up the promotion quotas again then!?

The B Word

To be honest, I would prefer not to have another valuable senior officer phys obsessed to the extent that he drops down dead, with all the disruption to command that must cause.

But then again, thats not the message seniority are pushing out is it?

Perhaps a more pragmatic approach wrt to the fitness test would be better?

You know, like we had before the phys wallahs got all "administrative action" wrt to the fitness test, a system that didnt stop us winning the battle of Britain, the Falklands, the first gulf war and all the other minor ops the RAF was involved in?

You are either fit to do your job, or you are not. Its as simple as that really, isnt it. You arent fit, you get 1021'd, lose your pay until you are fit or choose to leave. Its that simple.

Wonder how many of 'the few' had to can flying for the morning to get down the gym and run 20m shuttles before their boss lost all ability to run a Sqn due to all the paperwork from the mat stackers.

Really, thats the way it should work. Sengo to chief - chief, you need to get down the gym and cut back on the pies. you have till your next ojar to get this sorted.

Ie, management, Vs the complete and utter job justifying bollox we currently have, generated by, guess what, 2 trades that could very easily be contractorised in SDSR, admin and PEd.

Vin Rouge

I agree with you. Maybe the new CGS will attack the new muscle-mechanic built empire with a dose of common sense? Somehow, though I suspect not, that is, until someone sues the Services for more money that we do not have. :(

The B Word

Here is his US cousin...
http://www.thelmagazine.com/images/b...at_soldier.jpg

:E:E:E

Not at all; it's entirely logical and reasoned.

I have been doing the fitness test since it was introduced in 1993. That's quite a few. Of those Ive watched wait behind as I left, most seemed to be in their 20's.

Your experience may be different, but I assure you from discussions in the crewroom, many seem to have shared my experience of watching a fairish percentage of 20 somethings fail.

Of those, many are unlikely to have passed Sandhurst, pre-para and P Coy as the CDS will have done in his youth.

So which bit of the statement is stupid?

The bit that assumes said youth would ever consider applying for sandhurst, p cy etc and instead settle in a service that uses brains rather than brawn. Using someone past track record to justify later Ills is like saying shipman is still a good doctor because he passed med school. And that's not how the regs currently read.

Or one of those ct's that can run amarathon but are **** at their job.

Hmmm, no actually I disagree with your Shipman analogy.

That would suggest that the CDS was mad, or his judgement was in question. Neither of these seem to be the case, he is just a little portly.

Torpy was always very keen with regards to the RAFFT, but was probably the poorest CAS in a generation. Are we saying that Torpy was a good leader because he was up to date RAFFT?

I am not disagreeing with you, just merely pointing out that there is more to running a branch of the armed forces than just the ability to trot up and down a gym, especially when you reach CGS and are of advancing years.

The Chief Tech analogy works no better. One would hope that the General was unlikely to be supervising an engine change in the desert.

I'd think of a witty comeback but Im too busy laughing. You are very wide of the mark me old.

Whatever................

What a load of ill-informed garbage. The man is over 55 years of age. The Army annual fitness tests are not compulsary for anyone over 50. He is a brave and decorated para who was super fit and tough as nails when it was required. The prats who condemn him for lack of leadership should grow up. They would probably not recognise leadership if it bit them on the arse.

The RAF fitness test is compulsary over 50 and if you continue to serve over 55 years of age - so why the Delta between the Army and RAF regulations?

LJ

Practical common sense?

The RAF fitness test is compulsary over 50 and if you continue to serve over 55 years of age - so why the Delta between the Army and RAF regulations?


The RAF has more other ranks serving to 60 than the Army?
I assume only officers in the Army can serve past 40?

I bet the medical reason for his condition is that he eats too much and exercises too little.

You are probably right but thankfully because he is quite a clever chap failing to take his annual fitness test from the age of 45/46 appears to have done him no harm at all, apart from the clinical obesity of course :=

I'm suggesting that a medical condition might not allow him to run to the levels required, and he may have a exemption. For example, a knee problem. As typical on here, the guy is being pre-judged when we don't know all of the facts.

Its just his glands...

Fitness and Leadership
 

Most of the posters here are talking through their, well, let's no go there!

I have seen Sir Glen 'in action' on the 5th floor defending air power (for that it what it is about) and I was mightily impressed. I have seen Sir Jock weighed down by all of Defence's problems (most notably when that errant ANP killed 5 UK personnel) and looking like death. But both of them took time to rejuvenate in the fitness centre/cellar or out in the park, ready to fight another day. Walking through the General Staff before 1000 is akin to walking through a locker room - most guys in phys gear and towels hanging over the 1.6m linear space partitions. The Air Staff just arrive late, claiming to have been, err, in the gym!

However, we cannot compare Sir Peter with some overweight crab who spent the better part of 20 years shuttling between porky postings in Germany and dull as f#ck jobs in Swaffam Mortuary or Abbey Wood or wherever lazy fatties are sent these days. Sir Richard Dannett was no racing snake, either...but there are few (at least in the Army) who did not think the world of him.

The ice cap melts, Sangin gets handed over to the Americans and Continental Drift creeps ever onwards. But its good to see some things don't change on Prune.

Polarised (Racing snakes but crap coal face workers Vs the Slobs but gusty, hardy grafters) knock for knock blows aside, and whatever the General is allowed to do and whatever he is like at his job, what about what he should do as an example to the troops?

A positive attitude towards personal fitness reflects an attitude towards the job and there is little point in the Nation being reminded of the 'Covenant' and being asked to go the extra mile for the troops, if he can't even be arsed to go the extra mile on the running machine.

Oh god, (sorry Lord) here it comes again - the fitness std is a minimum. I failed it once - the shame of it. Had to execute an emergency less pizza and beer regieme combined with upping the evils of running and cycling.

A bit later - one retest satis and end of sarky comments from crewroom.

I swore never again, and kept it up till I PVR'd.

You need a certain amount of fitness - while I vehemently disagree about it it is the one you do - man up and do the bloody thing.

it's not that hard and if you are so arrogant that no-one else can do your job you are about to eat some humble pie.


A bit of phys never hurt anyone - too much running hurts me, so I cycle and swim instead.

fly safe, fix safe and don't let the bull**** admin grind you down.

CS

Actually it quite frequently does - lots of people get hurt in the gym and on the very odd occasion die. Can't remember the last time I heard of a guy dropping dead at his desk though :}

I take it none of the knockers has served/worked with 9 Sqn RE, his first posting, and his first command? They are some of the fiercest, most capable guys you will ever meet, who would give any infantry soldier a nasty shock, and then get on with their combat engineering task. No surprise that many find their way to Hereford.

It is with some distress I note the ramblings of a bunch of brain dead loonies with little better to do than rant about the appointment of a slightly portly gentleman who, in his later years is about to step into a highly critical and demanding position. That the individual has had a distinguished career to date, acquitted himself well so far, has by all accounts an above average brain and is highly regarded by those who have served with him seems to be of no account. There are far too many people venting their spleens who need to get a life. We need leaders with a proven track record, let’s cut the BS and get on with some good management

There is no doubt that good leadership should extend to setting an example on the Phys front but I have worked for Gen Wall & he is outstanding. On the other hand I have worked for plenty of people who could probably run 4 min miles who were to55ers.

Being able to run is not the defining capability.

The usual Pprune shi*e spouts forth...Like Andyy, I have worked with General in question - he is a top bloke, came through the rather hard route to where he is and is a mountain-bear of a man. There is no hiding with him.

As said above, 9(Para)Sqn RE was never an easy walk to P Coy - people were broken before even getting to Depot Para - he passed. I winced at the state of some of the Sappers on my visit to Depot Para for the extra sessions of PT with boots on.

So...give it a rest about 'Wrong example, one rule for one etc' He is a General, there to do General stuff, to lead (and he can, very well).

Maybe the RAF could do with some like him?

:ok:

Undoubtedly - but they'd never rise to General as they probably wouldn't fit in a Harrier cockpit....:rolleyes:

Which is almost a comment I could see our green breathen making were this an appointment of a slightly rotund RAF senior officer.

"How the hell does/did he fit into an ejector seat" etc, etc.

Of course should those nasty crabs make observations about one of their own it all turns into "well he's being employed for whats in his head" etc.

"Standards, standards, get your double standards here, get them while they're 'ot, lovely..."

:rolleyes:

And yes, having worked with 9 Sqn RE I know just what a double hard b****** lot they are and some cracking lads to boot, but does serving on a very physical task early in your life mean you get away with twisted sock chit for latter in life and an "its alright, he knows a lot"?

If that was all he's done, perhaps, but his CV has rather more to it, not surprisingly after such a promising start.

Grow up the lot of you! Let him do his job irrespective of the size of his uniform. Just like CAS is doing, oh no maybe not!

Having served on operations with the General those who are casting aspertions on his fitness to carryout the task required of him have no measure of the man.

Peter Wall is one of the most impressive officers I met during my RAF Service. A true warrior he has held some of the most demanding operational command appointments in recent years. He is an asset to the Army as CGS, not only as great leader, but tireless in his support of his troops (whatever uniform they are wearing). We also have officers of this stature and if they have similar qualities they will rise to a similar level..

Peter may be overweight from his RE Para days but I would hesitate to mention it to him - I am a devout coward and hate the sight of my own blood