Lawyer finds Missing Battalion!

[warlord]

The current 850 is the current agreed total, and typically shortsightedness will doubtless prevail thinking only of the next few financial years instaed of the longer term.....
but, in terms of potential future operational & capability nexus, is this proposal (or variations of...) really that outlandish or beyond the possibilties of current/projected DF funding environemnt(s)?

DISCUSS! (quoted from another thread by Spooky.)



Outlandish might be a bit of an understatement,do you realise how much strain the DF is under at the moment to meet the 850 mark. For Ireland to have its very own BG it would need a massive investment in cash, manpower, equipment, training, infrastructure and would need several years prep time before we'd be in a position to deploy a BG.

We'll never be in that position because the politicians concept of neutrality is ' ah sure we can't be putting money into defence we'd be able to defend ourselves then, sure ya can't be doing that'.

[JAG]

"Outlandish might be a bit of an understatement,do you realise how much strain the DF is under at the moment to meet the 850 mark."

Call me a dumbass, but why does a force of 8,500 have difficulty deploying 10% of their number?

Six month tours for BG's of 1,500 would allow deployment every 2 1/2 years, with one reserve, one training and 4,000 troops left over.

[warlord]

Take into consideration courses, training, exercises, duties, details, ATCP and peoples private lifes.

And if you still have problems seeing how it is a difficulty then join up, serve a few years in a line unit and then you'll grasp the difficulties.

[Come-quickly]

Supposing we could possibly withdraw from the majority of ATCP tasks or hand over a lot of the burden to the non integrated reserve without the government instantly disbanding large chunks of the Army.
How much more flexible would we be? What are the restrictions imposed by our own logistics at unit and brigade level?

[warlord]

We simply don't have the logistical infrastructure to support anything beyond what we're performing at the moment.

[Come-quickly]

Is that in terms of manpower in logs specifically or kit or both?

[warlord]

Its in terms of everything you can think of. The only thing we're not lacking is experience.

[JAG]

"Take into consideration courses, training, exercises, duties, details, ATCP and peoples private lifes."

Rationalisation and centralisation would, on some dodgy mental calculations and fading memories, free up, hmm, around 600 of those troops overnight. If you want an explanation of how I came up that figure, PM me. Civilianisation (what is the story with soldiers acting as barman, cooks & waiters, or has this stupidity finally stopped?) another hundred at least.

Oh look, I found a battalion. Add that to 850 currently overseas, and you have a battlegroup. Now all we need to do is convince the government to use some of the surplus available from centralisation for equipment instead of a six lane highway from Trim to Dublin. Cool.

Warlord, I don't think spending six months in 30 on active service is an unreasonable expectation of a professional service. Especially considering the US is CONSIDERING a law which will limit maximum deployment of RESERVE soldiers to one year in five, which is the same as I'd suggest, except I would guess it's easier for the soldier and his family if he is away for six months at a time and not 12. Three month deployments would be even easier, I suspect.

As I have said before, it's not a case of mission impossible- the PDF & RDF could be better trained, equipped, housed and fed and could be transformed into a larger, more effective and more coherent force within exising budgetary contraints. It can be done, it should be done.

It just isn't being done.

[Come-quickly]

Would still need far more CSS personnel which would mean either extra troops or converting bayonets to biros if you know what I mean.

[warlord]

"Take into consideration courses, training, exercises, duties, details, ATCP and peoples private lifes."

Rationalisation and centralisation would, on some dodgy mental calculations and fading memories, free up, hmm, around 600 of those troops overnight. If you want an explanation of how I came up that figure, PM me. Civilianisation (what is the story with soldiers acting as barman, cooks & waiters, or has this stupidity finally stopped?) another hundred at least.

Oh look, I found a battalion. Add that to 850 currently overseas, and you have a battlegroup. Now all we need to do is convince the government to use some of the surplus available from centralisation for equipment instead of a six lane highway from Trim to Dublin. Cool.

Warlord, I don't think spending six months in 30 on active service is an unreasonable expectation of a professional service. Especially considering the US is CONSIDERING a law which will limit maximum deployment of RESERVE soldiers to one year in five, which is the same as I'd suggest, except I would guess it's easier for the soldier and his family if he is away for six months at a time and not 12. Three month deployments would be even easier, I suspect.

As I have said before, it's not a case of mission impossible- the PDF & RDF could be better trained, equipped, housed and fed and could be transformed into a larger, more effective and more coherent force within exising budgetary contraints. It can be done, it should be done.

It just isn't being done.

Are you another one of these number crunchers who thinks you can shift them from A to B and hey presto your problem is solved, it doesn't work like that. People are in there positions for specific reasons, granted I don't see a need for barmen or waiters they'd be better utilised as another pair of boots on the ground, but cooks? get real.

Personally I'd love if we had our own BG and I'd love it if we constantly got deployed but the simple truth is we don't have the bodies, we don't have the resources, we don't have the cash to transform the PDF & RDF into effective combined arms forces and most importantly we don't have a single politician who has the balls to say we need a bigger better equipped DF that can deploy and be self sustainable overseas.

As soon as you'd have those bodies freed up the Govt. would axe them saying we're overmanned.

[JAG]

The only thing stopping the DF from transforming into a far more efficient & effective force is all the people who keep saying it can't happen without bucketloads of cash, which is not gonna magically appear anytime soon.

Take unit admin. In the two units I was in, on the rare occaisions I was there during the day, you could expect anything up to four people hanging around. For admin? Bollox. In civvy world the same job would be done by one person part-time.

Take that one step, multiply it by every RDF unit in the country. How many troops are no longer spending their days flicking paperclips around their desk?

[warlord]

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt since you're talking about the RDF but don't try to apply that theory to the PDF, you have no idea at the amount of admin that needs to be done on a daily basis in Coy Offices. Admin in a civvy job is not a bit like the admin in the DF so don't compare the two.

The only way the current budget can transform the DF into an efficient and effective force is if you drastically slash its strength and sell off more barracks. If that happens you'll have even less bodies to the same workload.

JAG no this respect to you but you haven't a clue what you're talking about, you use to be a reservist and you've seen the DF from that viewpoint. That viewpoint shows only a small portion of the whole picture so don't comment on things you've no comprehension of.

[JAG]

"Admin in a civvy job is not a bit like the admin in the DF so don't compare the two."

So, admin in the PDF doesn't consist of paperpushing, supplies procurement, distribution, scheduling, goal setting & achievement, rewards and incentives for performance, ongoing training and upskilling?

If not, why not?

"JAG no this respect to you but you haven't a clue what you're talking about, you use to be a reservist and you've seen the DF from that viewpoint. That viewpoint shows only a small portion of the whole picture so don't comment on things you've no comprehension of."

No offence taken. But if I have the wrong picture, why not enlighten me instead of just telling me I don't have a clue?

[Alf]

As an aside, just what is the total number of soldiers in the PDF who could be counted as effective boots on the ground? For example I know during that foot and mouth the DF was able to scrounge people out of every nook and cranny to keep the border secure, but how many troops do we have offhand who would be capable of being dropped in somewhere in the state in the event of a major natural disaster or terrorist strike?

[Groundhog]

One way of reducing the amount of Admin puppies would be to radically reduce the amount of stupid paperwork.

I was a Coy Clerk for a year once and the stupid returns requested from on high would boggle the mind. My favourite was a requirement to breakdown all the subsistence allowance claimed for the month under 9 different headings. E.G. How much was claimed for transporting troops to hospital. It took me two days.

Every time there's a training or admin inspection, somebody comes up with some new form or return in triplicate to be submitted every month.

We could also reduce the numbers of HQs, schools and directorates. But if we did the govt would just use the excuse to reduce the size of the DF anyway so we would be no better off.