As news gradually slips out about how the Army intends to meet the SDSR and a half force reductions a couple of themes seem to be emerging, many of them widely predicted or stated in the SDSR so they should come as no great surprise.
- The Scottish regiments are highly politically sensitive and will distort/influence the final result
- A greater reliance on reserve forces for logistics, medical and cyber
- A greater reliance on contractors for engineering and logistics
- A greater reliance on allies for support functions
- Retention of combat capabilities to concentrate on areas that cannot be fulfilled by reserves or contractors, i.e. more teeth and less tail in the regular Army
- An inexplicable increase on civil resilience duties (I refuse to use the term ‘homeland’)
- Additional funding for reserve forces of £1.8m over the next ten years, this sounds a lot but divide by ten and then divide by 30,000
- Force groups involving artillery, engineering, intelligence and logistics will provide maneuver support and logistics
- Most changes to occur between 2014 and 2016
- Retention of an assault brigade equipped with attack helicopters.
- Three armored infantry brigades equipped with medium and heavy vehicles, including the Challenger tank
- Seven infantry brigades of various sizes made up of paired regular and reserve forces
Those last three bullet points are a straight lift from one of the article below, mmm, interesting!
Just to add an interesting point on the greater use of reserves, a recent Parliamentary answer revealed that only 66.5% received their bounty payment, 17,850 personnel.
The training bounty is a payment for personnel meeting the minimum training requirement.
As details become clearer I will do a more in depth post but for now, a handful of links worth reading;
And if anyone fancies a refresh from the last time we covered this in January this year…
Which includes a discussion on the Australian Army structure similar to the MRB, a prediction from me about concentration of reductions in the CS/CSS functions, economies of scale in the RA/FR ISTAR community, jointery, retention of combat elements and a worry about politics and vested interests being barriers to reform.
I don’t often do this but go and have a read of that post the comments!
Not too bothered about speculation on individual units, that doesn’t help those involved and I find it rather distasteful so can we keep discussion to general themes?
As soon as the details emerge I will do another post but until then can I ask that comments stay on this thread please.