tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post8101790316561861065..comments2024-02-29T11:45:01.870+01:00Comments on UK Armed Forces Commentary: Future Force 2020: Army structure - moving away from divisionsGabrielehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-6617981819610335882013-06-28T01:37:49.859+02:002013-06-28T01:37:49.859+02:00I think your ideas are very interesting, especiall...I think your ideas are very interesting, especially for CARs, much more rational than what we are supposed to already have.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-47802135980031087452012-04-30T18:17:02.122+02:002012-04-30T18:17:02.122+02:00There was a requisite for an ultra-light Self prop...There was a requisite for an ultra-light Self propelled howitzer in 2005, LIMAWS(G), but it was cancelled for lack of funding, and the L118 that had to be replaced by 2020 is now expected to last into 2033. <br />So i really wouldn't hold my breath for any development in this field.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-62841992962012115712012-04-30T18:14:57.921+02:002012-04-30T18:14:57.921+02:00Very good point and no doubt another battalion wou...Very good point and no doubt another battalion would be cut!<br /><br />What's your opinion on the AS90? I think maybe the adoption of the Archer system or a similar quicker deployable system for both armoured, mechanized and even light would be a better idea for standardization and transport via the A400M which is an added bonus.Alinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-27529108850020921472012-04-29T14:48:38.487+02:002012-04-29T14:48:38.487+02:00Its assignment to the SF role was, already when it...Its assignment to the SF role was, already when it happened, an imaginative way to save it from the cuts in manpower of the day. <br />Overall, it kind of makes sense: parachute capability is good for SF role. <br /><br />It would be better to have all PARA battalions in the airborne brigade and have another battalion formed specifically for SF, but then again we'd talk about an expanding army and not one who struggles to survive constant downsizing...Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-37165524158616229042012-04-29T14:36:41.208+02:002012-04-29T14:36:41.208+02:00Gabriele,
Thank you for a good insight and has he...Gabriele,<br /><br />Thank you for a good insight and has helped my understanding of the subject.<br /><br />What's your opinion on 1 PARA in the Special Forces Support Group?Alinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-25658595779343233342012-04-29T00:17:45.600+02:002012-04-29T00:17:45.600+02:00Thank you and welcome, first of all. I'm glad ...Thank you and welcome, first of all. I'm glad to hear you find good stuff on my blog. I do my best. <br /><br />Coming to the point, technically, the Commando Battlegroup is already the main reaction force of the UK, as it is that kept at highest readiness and, when it takes to the sea, it is forward deployed as well. <br />Then there's the air assault battlegroup, which is actually broken down in at least 2 phases as described in the article [airlifted troops, and, later, the true airmobile element including helicopters] and is available within 2 to 5 days. <br />Since 1st PARA battalion is in the Special Forces role, the airborne battlegroup is formed around 2nd and 3rd PARA on rotation and with the support of the 2 infantry battalions in the brigade. <br /><br />"Attaching" a MRB is an exercise done depending on the needs of the moment and on the scenario at hand. <br />It could well happen that the Commando or even the Airborne battlegroup go in first and then are followed by an MRB.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-2467527645478873962012-04-29T00:12:33.657+02:002012-04-29T00:12:33.657+02:00Gabriele,
Forgot to mention THE most important th...Gabriele,<br /><br />Forgot to mention THE most important thing!<br /><br />Fantastic blog and I thoroughly enjoy reading it!<br /><br />AliAlinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-20759993041625368092012-04-29T00:10:41.170+02:002012-04-29T00:10:41.170+02:00Hey Gabriele,
I was wondering would it be a good ...Hey Gabriele,<br /><br />I was wondering would it be a good idea to establish the Commando Group as the principle rapid reaction force and have the MRB's attach to it? <br /><br />Kind of like a US Marine MEU but with follow on support if needed up securing a beachhead.<br /><br />Also I was thinking what's your opinion on taking away 16 AA brigade and creating an Airborne Group in a similar fashion to what the Commando Group is fitted out but with air deployable kit and can be used in a similar way? <br /><br />So having 3 Commando Groups (40 Commando, 42 Commando and 45 Commando)<br /><br />And also having 3 Airborne Groups (1 PARA, 2 PARA and 3 PARA)<br /><br />Yes I have taken away 3 PARA from the SFSG but I think that should be an entirely seperate unit and would be beneficial to have an extra airborne group.<br /><br />A Commando Group could rotate every six months of every year and this would be the same for the Airborne Group.<br /><br />Just some thoughts from the top of my head about rapid reaction and I hope it's not barmy mad!Alinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-72930483029963778582012-04-01T00:04:27.529+02:002012-04-01T00:04:27.529+02:00Frankly, i don't want to believe it.Frankly, i don't want to believe it.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-35461654594277383612012-03-31T23:46:35.752+02:002012-03-31T23:46:35.752+02:00Gabriele
I don't know whether you have yet s...Gabriele <br /><br />I don't know whether you have yet seen the "Telegraph" article by Sean Rayment, timed at 9.00pm on the 31st March.<br /><br />It is entitled "Britain's most Famous Regiments Spared in Defence Cuts" but goes on to list the most horrific details of forthcoming cuts to the British Army.<br /><br />Apparently, no fewer than 11 infantry regiments are to go, many more than I have seen predicted. There are also to be swingeing cuts to support elements, includng the Royal Engineers, REME, the Royal Logisic Corps, etc. etc. Can we give credence to such a report? I wouldn't mind hearing some of your comments on this. How on earth can operations be supported if there are insufficient support elements?MikeWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-26891367999431127702012-03-29T21:44:27.141+02:002012-03-29T21:44:27.141+02:00It could well be true, but it could also have BEEN...It could well be true, but it could also have BEEN true, with how fast things evolve and change these days in Army planning. <br />Until we hear some kind of confirmation, i'll keep up my hope that the cut can be avoided. I truly hope it does not come around.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-58832276366897183132012-03-29T21:27:48.893+02:002012-03-29T21:27:48.893+02:00Gabriele
The only evidence I have for the withdra...Gabriele<br /><br />The only evidence I have for the withdrawal of RCLs and LCVPS at Marchwood is that provided by a contributor on the ARRSE website. He worked at Marchwood and seemed to know what he was talking about. He said that their withdrawal was scheduled, that the Rigid Raiders had already gone but that there had been an increase in the number of Combat Support Boats available. Sorry, perhaps I should not rely on such evidence.MikeWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-9266245416199683582012-03-29T20:36:41.310+02:002012-03-29T20:36:41.310+02:00The Common Weapon Locating Radar should have compl...The Common Weapon Locating Radar should have completed the asssessing phase last year, even if there is not a contract. Hopefully it will become a much greater priority programme now. <br />The COBRA cut has been kind of on the cards for some time now... the COBRA is said to be very, very expensive. <br /><br />For what i read time ago, COBRA was being kept around to temporarily replace the MAMBA in Afghanistan while the MAMBA system underwent maintenance and fixing. <br />I'm guessing that, with the MAMBA going back online, COBRA is being sacrificed with the hope of getting the CWLR soon enough to replace MAMBA as well. <br /><br />The M3 rigs. I don't really know what's happening with them. After reading of the mothballing plan out to 2015, there was a very large exercise involving the M3s as well, and no mention of abandoning them. <br />Later i heard that at least a troop would continue to work with them. I don't know what the current situation is. <br /><br />As to the RCL and LCVPs, i must admit i've heard nothing about that ever since you mentioned the possibility of their loss to me. Has it been confirmed? <br /><br />As to DROPS, i think a 2014 date is unthinkable in any case. With the withdrawal from Afghanistan to do and 11000 containers to move and uncountable tons of stuff to move, i don't think it is feasible. <br />2014 might be an aspirational date for a replacement, since DROPS is a system i highly doubt the army can do without. I think DROPS will eventually be life-extended, but 2014 i just can't see it happening. <br /><br />For sure, these aren't good news at all.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-10415815729983021072012-03-29T20:25:02.557+02:002012-03-29T20:25:02.557+02:00Gabriele
"Jane's Defence Weekly" ha...Gabriele<br /><br />"Jane's Defence Weekly" has just revealed the the British Army will retire its COBRA counter-battery radars at the end of 2012, without a replacement having been decided on.<br /><br />So, where are we now? Within the space of a year or so, the Army has lost the following equipments: the FUCHS CBRN vehicles, the Shielder minelaying vehicles, the M3 bridging rigs (although these might return), the Supacat ATMPs, the RCLs and LCVPs from Marchwood and now the COBRA radars. The DROPS vehicles (both versions)are due to be withdrawn by the end of of 2014.<br /><br />All these examples of salami-slicing have been done very unobtrusively. The Army seems to be suffering from death by a thousand cuts, both in terms of manpower and kit. Will it be in any shape to fight any kind of conflict in the future? I am becoming increasingly pessimistic. There's not even the consolation of the prospect of any exciting new kit coming through.MikeWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-80110565671795844432012-03-10T22:30:43.290+01:002012-03-10T22:30:43.290+01:00A very informative comment, gute! Thank you for it...A very informative comment, gute! Thank you for it, and welcome on my blog. I hope you'll enjoy it here, and find some good stuff, even if you seem to know more than me, actually! <br /><br />Anyway, yes, the third maneuver battalion into the BCTs is probably going to appear soon in the new US Army review, even if it will probably mean going down to 33 BCTs, the same number as in 2003. <br />But i totally understand the unwillingness of commanders to trade an additional battalion for the RSTA squadron: that's an immensely useful asset, after all. <br /><br />The US Army generals have already said that no Stryker BCT will be cut, because they are the most flexible and regarded as very precious. How far the little Stryker went in these years, considering that it was an "interim" solution, and that many in the Army did not want it at all! <br /><br />There is no doubt that the British Army is now following a lot of the US BCT guidelines in the new force structure shaping: Agile Warrior 2011 indications for the Multi Role Brigades paint a picture that, believe me, reminds immediately of the US Army's own structure. <br /><br />I've tried to think about what General Carter might have tried to go in order to get 10 brigades, but i find that the game is not worth it. Whenever you try to combine the force available, it doesn't really work. There's just too few stuff. <br />I think i might try and write a quick follow up article with my reasoning on BCTs for the British Army, but more for interest and discussion than for anything else. <br />In the end, i managed to create 10 brigades myself, and with organic artillery... But there are problems. Again, the RA is going down to 5 Strike regiments, and there are 5 Engineering regiments plust 2 General Support regiments. Cutting further would be just suicidal and pretty much negate enduring operations (would not meet the rule of the five, personnel would have to do longer tours, or spend a lot less than the desired 24 months at home). <br />Besides, more brigades means more HQs, more overhead, and as useful as that is, it all has to come from a force capped at 82.000. <br /><br />Even assuming that all engineering regiments are passed to the TA (i fear that such a move would have deletery effects on capability, but let's pretend it works) and most of CSS follows, leaving the Regulars doing the fighting, the situation improves only partially. <br /><br />Until it meets a new problem: shortages of equipment, of vehicles first and foremost. <br /><br />I personally keep believing that the Army will come out of the review with 5 brigades, each with its engineer and artillery regiment and a CSS element. <br />But we should know within a couple of months, in any case!Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-86533991158624551612012-03-10T21:42:25.022+01:002012-03-10T21:42:25.022+01:00You may have mentioned this, but the smaller BCTs ...You may have mentioned this, but the smaller BCTs were designed with two maneuver battalions to create as many rotational brigades as possbile. Initially, 3ID was instructed to organize into five (pentomic anyone) brigades, each with the firepower and abilities of the legacy three brigade division - they could not do it. Best they could do was four brigades, turning the division artillery brigade hqs into a BCT hqs. The 101st Air Assault was next in line and the rest is history. The Stryker brigades or interim brigades were left alone because the brigades were a model for the Future Combat System.<br /><br />Also, the modular BCT supposedly has the command and control capabilities to fight up to five maneuver battalions plus cav, support, arty, etc.<br /><br />The modular BCTs did not major combat operations in Iraq until about 2004-2005. A Rand Corporation study put out in June 2011 analyzed the BCTs and surveyed present and former BCT commanders. The majority said they would like to add a third maneuver battalion, but did not feel have only the two hindered their operations. Also, the majority of commanders were unwilling to trade the RSTA squadron for a third maneuver battalion.<br /><br />The real downside to the modular BCTs - expense. Every BCT has an organic Special Troops Battalion (soon to be a brigade engineer battalion with opcon signals, MI, combat engineer company and combat construction company, surveillance company), two maneuver battalions, cav squadron, fires battalion and brigade support battalion. All with the same number troops, rifles, trucks, howitzers, etc. <br /><br />It seems to me that General Carter is looking to the U.S. Army model, but with modifications such as not having organic engineering and artillery. Also, IMO 10 brigades is possible because not all will have five maneuver elements, but able to fight up to five if necessary. <br /><br />There is a good article about the modular army titled, Small Brigade Combat Teams Undermine Modularity. I believe the article was awritten by a retired Army Colonel named Melton.<br /><br />Also, check out the U.S. Army Combined Arms Center Digital library. One can bring up student papers about the BCTs and recommended changes, structure, future.<br /><br />If all this already known I apologize.<br /><br />guteAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-79965620022447022142012-02-21T09:14:03.420+01:002012-02-21T09:14:03.420+01:00I don't think the ATMP has been retired entire...I don't think the ATMP has been retired entirely. For sure several have been retired, but i don't think the whole force is gone. And Springer should definitely still be out in Afghanistan: what will happen in 2015 when the UOR funding ceases to arrive, i don't know, though. <br /><br />The drones are very interesting though. The TRAKKAR, in particular, seems by far the most promising in the list.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-47110917597034205312012-02-21T09:10:27.585+01:002012-02-21T09:10:27.585+01:00Well, thanks very much for all that information. ...Well, thanks very much for all that information. I was under the impression that both Springer and Supacat (ATMP) had now disappeared from service. Perhaps there is Springer 2 coming along. 16AA would miss the ATMP, there is no doubt of that.<br /><br />Interesting news about the load carrying drones.MikeWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-27732109662853576672012-02-20T23:52:47.308+01:002012-02-20T23:52:47.308+01:00I honestly haven't heard anything about Storme...I honestly haven't heard anything about Stormers being re-used as load carriers. <br /><br />The Infantry Load Carrier effort in the interim is to go on with quad-bikes with trailers, Springer/Supacat, Husky and Wolfhound. <br /><br />For the future the army would also like to have a load carrying drone. Here i covered in detail the options available: http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot.com/search/label/Assisted%20Carriage%20System<br /><br />According to what i recently read, the Boeing R-Gator was extensively trialed, but judged not mature. <br />In the US, the americans have cancelled their MULE, but the LM Squad Mission Support System should be working in Afghanistan by now (a few units, as an UOR/experiment). <br />It is not at all a closed chapter, and an Assisted Carriage platform is due to reapper sooner rather than later on the list of plans.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-67338997217339841242012-02-20T23:47:28.055+01:002012-02-20T23:47:28.055+01:00Thanks very much for all your opinions. I hope th...Thanks very much for all your opinions. I hope they get some kind of replacement bcause sure as hell we're gonna have to fight a more conventional war some time in the future.<br /><br />How about the vehicles? A possibility of using them as HMLCs? Th Infantry has been looking for that kind of support for years.<br /><br />Thanks for the advice about (not)missing comments.MikeWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-6836988103322754142012-02-20T21:53:05.476+01:002012-02-20T21:53:05.476+01:00I found out about the Shielder looking into the MO...I found out about the Shielder looking into the MOD Accounts reports. I think it is the 2010 report. Each year, the MOD releases an assurate report on its financial management, and this report contained the blunt statement that the Shielder vehicles, mines and canisters had been retired, deemed surplus to requirement. <br />I'm not entirely sure, but the statement seems to suggest that the system is retired entirely, with no training and probably no kind of maintenance or storage for the minelaying kit. I fear it is gone.<br /><br />I was not pleased, to say the least. The system is indeed very recent still, perhaps dates back to 1999, 1998 at most, and cost over one hundred millions. <br /><br />But put in perspective, it is perhaps not so bad. Shielder can create a minefield very rapidly, but it is a minefield extremely easy to delete as the mines aren't even buried, but out on the surface. It is also kind of hard to say when and where such a system could possibly be used. It takes a large, mechanized war to see it happening. <br /><br />In terms of replacement, there is (was? it is always so damn hard to know!) a body in the Army research on working on requirements and possible systems for enhancing mobility and countering enemy mobility. <br />A Shielder replacement, possibly using remotely-controlled, intelligent mines, and other high-tech solutions (but also more COIN-adequate solutions including the special nets that are put on the road and can tangle into the wheels of vehicles and stop even a truck in just meters) was (is?) on the cards. <br />The system was meant for use aboard a flatbed FRES SV platform, as part of RECCE Block 3. We'll see what eventually comes out of it. <br /><br /><br />By the way, never worry about me missing comments: no matter how old the post, i do receive a mail warning me of comments, so you don't have to worry. I'll know when i have to reply! :)<br />I hope i was of help here.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-40579537707519704832012-02-20T13:12:08.833+01:002012-02-20T13:12:08.833+01:00Gabriele
I have just seen on TD's site your i...Gabriele<br /><br />I have just seen on TD's site your information about how then Stormer-Shielder vehicles have been withdrawn from service. That is a real loss because the time will come when we are fighting an entirely different kind of campaign and will have to lay mines in a hurry. Presumably the mine-laying part of the system has been retained and they will be able to put it back on the Stormer or another vehicle if needed? It's a very recent piece of equipment, isn't it?<br /><br />It might of course be similar to the M3 situation where the first news was that they would all be withdrawn (because the unit was needed for Afghanistan), then came news that some of them were still in service.<br /><br />As far as the Stormer vehicles are concerned, I read on the ARRSE unofficial British Army site that they had tried many vehicles to replace the Supacat ATMPs withdrawn from Afghanistan , even including the Stormers with the Shielder equipment removed! Where did you find out such info, by the way?<br /><br />I hope you see this on here. If not I'll post it again on a more recent thread.MikeWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-74910422205711797282012-02-08T23:09:15.738+01:002012-02-08T23:09:15.738+01:00No, the Royal Marines haven't been cut down un...No, the Royal Marines haven't been cut down under 7000, but 7000 includes Fleet Protection Group and all other RM components that are technically not part of 3rd Commando Brigade. <br />Deployed fully, 3rd Commando as a brigade numbers 5200. <br /><br />The improvements in the use of the Reserves will require funding to stay high. If the 1.5 billion is thrown at the TA but then the commitment to the reserve is abandoned again, it won't work. <br />As to whater it will be possible to train it sufficiently and make it work, i really cannot answer. I believe it is certainly doable, but obviously challenges remain. <br /><br />As to equipment, there's not going to be TA tanks and armored vehicles acquired. There just is no money. But this is somewhat less urgent an issue, since in training and in deployment the soldiers, regular and TA, will pretty much use the same vehicles. <br />As a matter of fact, a lot of people, including the regulars, will continue to travel in Land Rovers until the Medium Multi Role Vehicle Protected is not shaped up, funded and delivered. And money makes it all very challenging. <br /><br />As to VBCI, you are not alone in having heard that there was rather wide support for adopting it within the Army. I think back then times were not mature, though, for ordering a French vehicle for such a large and important top class order. <br />WHen FRES UV is eventually reopened, though, things are likely to be very different in this sense.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-54438310317319586042012-02-08T20:58:35.243+01:002012-02-08T20:58:35.243+01:00Gabriele
“I don't care, so long as the kit ne...Gabriele<br /><br />“I don't care, so long as the kit needed is delivered." You might very well be right on that. By the way, I seem to have vague recollection of reading a report stating that the British Army selection people (or some of them) last time actually preferred the VBCI and wanted it to enter service (it being available and reasonably inexpensive). I dunno. Perhaps I am imagining the whole thing.<br /><br />I wanted to ask a question about the TA. If the idea is to have two Reserve Brigades supporting each of the MRBs, then that raises the whole question of whether the TA can be improved to the necessary level of competence. In particular, can it be brought to the level where it can enter a “state of high readiness” with comparative ease? Is £1½ billion going to be enough to effect the necessary improvement?<br /><br />Then there is the whole question of equipment for the Reserves. I remember you saying that you did not think there would be enough money to buy any new kit for them. So what’s the answer? It might be that in some of the CS and CSS formations some of the kit used by the regulars will be transferred or even shared but as far as the Infantry is concerned, can they still be expected to travel in Land Rovers or similar? Perhaps there is a case for making some of the Army’s trucks into armoured or protected versions: e.g. a 6-tonne with armoured infantry-carrying pod on the rear?<br /><br />Incidentally, are the Royal Marines down to 5,200? I thought I had read a figure only a few months ago suggesting that they still number around 7,000.MikeWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-25149899574269031202012-02-08T10:57:31.820+01:002012-02-08T10:57:31.820+01:00Well, the VBCI was on the shortlist in 2008 for FR...Well, the VBCI was on the shortlist in 2008 for FRES, and reportedly was a good deal. <br />Boxer, of which the UK had been a part before pulling out, would arguably be an even more embarrassing alternative. <br /><br />When the evaluation restarts, selecting again the Piranha V will also present issues, after what's happened. <br /><br />But ultimately, the point is that when there's no money, you have no alternative but swallow bitter pills. <br />I don't care, so long as the kit needed is delivered.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.com