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

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?

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.

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.

Somebody needs a hug!

:rolleyes:

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.

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.

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.

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

Whats in his "in " tray?
 

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.

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.

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 !

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

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).

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.

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.

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

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:)

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!