Where is the RDF going to end up?

Reilly616

ruserious wrote: »

You tried 'NSR' in google and presumably got info on Hondas judging from your previous post.
I said then to try 'Naval Service Reserve' if you want info on that.

Ah. But the my post you quoted says I realised that he meant the Naval Service. :P

davetherave

Slow day in work, so here are some more useless stats taken from the dail debates site. The RDF is screwed and we all know it. I know in my own unit it wouldn't be uncommon for more cpls to show up than ptes of a parade night... We had a SD1's inspection for the Easter GOH and myself and two others showed up. They were looking for people to do support for a course next week and the excuses that people came up with was unbelievable, you're a student doing bog all for the summer and go out there and earn a bit of money... They are still going to get the own seven days camp, add on these five and another one or two here and there and that will give them the 14 days grat instead of the 7 days.


There is a lot of table code here....I really hope this works <--- bah edit in progress oh Christ..... back to the the way it was, not pretty but it's the best I'll get it bye bye tables

For anyone that had to see all I apologise....I stick to screenshots in future.....






final edit....much better

Cryos

I think at this stage your getting down to the nitty gritty of who is turning up, i can only speak for the unit im in but ive never seen so many people on parade nights now; There's about 5 waiting to get in (potentials).

That number will probably increase again, i think the introduction of Fitness for career courses has maybe disheartened people; Recruits now have to go on a Recruit Camp in the BTC etc....

But what do i know, im one of those Core unit people who sit and drink coffee right ?

Morpheus

Ive never seen so FEW people turn up on a training night. im a red ar$e corporal off the last PNCO course held in the east and its been soul destroying this last 6 months.

Tubsandtiles

It was the same for me the last few months I attended, no nco's would turn up with about two or three privates only turning up. I was basically just attending to sign my name, have a chat for five minutes and head home, soul destroying leading me to loosing interest. After things didn't work out for me joining the BA, I don't know if i will ever get a career in the military

BigDuffman

Tubsandtiles wrote: »

It was the same for me the last few months I attended, no nco's would turn up with about two or three privates only turning up. I was basically just attending to sign my name, have a chat for five minutes and head home, soul destroying leading me to loosing interest. After things didn't work out for me joining the BA, I don't know if i will ever get a career in the military

We've the opposite in our neck of the woods....gaggles of NCO types sauntering around and no Pte.'s how about a swap!

Tubsandtiles

BigDuffman wrote: »

We've the opposite in our neck of the woods....gaggles of NCO types sauntering around and no Pte.'s how about a swap!

Agreed

Morpheus

Tubsandtiles wrote: »

Agreed

if youre still effective transfer to 65th A Coy swords!!!! were currently on vacation but training resumes on 28th july. see you there.

SamuelFox

It’s been a long time since I was involved, but having been a home in Ireland last week and met a few friends who remained involved, I have to say that it has really got worse. One major issue my mates identified is the quality of the RDF officers and the PDF cadre – the planning and organisation before camps and courses and the leadership on camps are appalling – really, really frustrating to be involved in by all accounts. I don’t know what the solution is to this but for young, eager NCOs like my friends it’s the major problem facing the reserve.

Poccington

Downsize all RDF Infantry units to Coy size and make it part of a PDF Bn. Downsize as appropriate for Corps Units and integrate into their respective PDF units.

Cadre staff could be done away with completely since the RDF units would now be part of a PDF unit.

The numbers aren't there and won't be there anytime soon to carry on the illusion that RDF Bn's can field anything more than a Coy, same goes for Squadron's, Regiments etc.

The time has come for the DF to either try make something of the RDF and make it of use to the PDF, or else just disband the RDF completely. Cause as it stands, the existence of the RDF is utterly pointless.

easkey1

Poccington wrote: »

Downsize all RDF Infantry units to Coy size and make it part of a PDF Bn. Downsize as appropriate for Corps Units and integrate into their respective PDF units.

Cadre staff could be done away with completely since the RDF units would now be part of a PDF unit.

The numbers aren't there and won't be there anytime soon to carry on the illusion that RDF Bn's can field anything more than a Coy, same goes for Squadron's, Regiments etc.

The time has come for the DF to either try make something of the RDF and make it of use to the PDF, or else just disband the RDF completely. Cause as it stands, the existence of the RDF is utterly pointless.

I’ll take from your post that you are a member of a corps unit and live near a military barracks.
Integration won’t work unless the government change the law on time off for the RDF members.
As for the cadre staff some of us members live in rural areas and require the staff for communications and organisation purpose.

Recruitment has being restricted for the past few years and that’s why it’s hard to have the numbers turning up, because there not in the organisation.

As for the “utterly pointless” comment I think its time for you to step up and try to improve the RDF

Regards

RDF Infantry units Member.

Tubsandtiles

Morphéus wrote: »

if youre still effective transfer to 65th A Coy swords!!!! were currently on vacation but training resumes on 28th july. see you there.

That would be a five hour commute for me .. the joys of being in a small town unit

OS119

easkey1 wrote: »

As for the “utterly pointless” comment I think its time for you to step up and try to improve the RDF

the RDF will not improve in any substantive way unless and until someone gives it a reason to exist.

very few people will consistantly come home from work every day and hit the road for an hour, or spend their weekends studying a module on Joint Fires or FISH/CHIPS, if they know in their heart of hearts that they will never be required to put their fitness and skills into action.

individuals might work hard, you may get the odd section up to speed for a given period of time, but in the round people will think 'fcuk it' because, unlike most other facets of an individuals life, there is no penalty for letting it slide.

if you neglect your work you run the risk of being 'let go' and having no money.

if you neglect your wife/girlfriend/whatever you run the risk of being single.

if you neglect your friends you run the risk of being a lonely bugger.

there are no real consequences of letting your fitness/attendance/skills slide, nobody's going to stop your mortgage being paid, and you're never going to find yourself in some sandy ****hole being shot at from every direction thinking that you wished you'd worked harder at phys, target indication, movement or shooting.

unless and until the RDF becomes important, nobody will treat it with importance.

Poccington

easkey1 wrote: »

I’ll take from your post that you are a member of a corps unit and live near a military barracks.

I'm very much Infantry, thank you.

easkey1 wrote: »

Integration won’t work unless the government change the law on time off for the RDF members.
As for the cadre staff some of us members live in urban areas and require the staff for communications and organisation purpose.

Integration didn't work for a number of reasons. Employment protection isn't the be all and end all of Integration's failures.

In the new model RDF I spoke of, Cadre staff wouldn't be needed as you'd be serving in a Coy in a PDF Infantry Bn.

easkey1 wrote: »

Recruitment has being restricted for the past few years and that’s why it’s hard to have the numbers turning up, because there not in the organisation.

I was a member of the RDF not so long ago, I remember what parades were like. The numbers have not been in the organisation since before active recruitment got knocked on the head.

The RDF doesn't have the numbers, nor will it ever have the numbers to continue the illusion that it could somehow field 9 Infantry Bn's, a few Cav Squadrons, Arty Regiments etc. if ever required.

Hence why all Units need to be downsized and brought into their PDF units. Resources and budgets could then be better handled, training would be of a higher standard and RDF personnel would actually be of use to the PDF.

easkey1 wrote: »

As for the “utterly pointless” comment I think its time for you to step up and try to improve the RDF

As much as I'd love to improve the RDF, I wear a black beret.

My utterly pointless comment still stands. In it's current form, the RDF is of no use to anybody.

easkey1

OS119 wrote: »

the RDF will not improve in any substantive way unless and until someone gives it a reason to exist.

very few people will consistantly come home from work every day and hit the road for an hour, or spend their weekends studying a module on Joint Fires or FISH/CHIPS, if they know in their heart of hearts that they will never be required to put their fitness and skills into action.

individuals might work hard, you may get the odd section up to speed for a given period of time, but in the round people will think 'fcuk it' because, unlike most other facets of an individuals life, there is no penalty for letting it slide.

if you neglect your work you run the risk of being 'let go' and having no money.

if you neglect your wife/girlfriend/whatever you run the risk of being single.

if you neglect your friends you run the risk of being a lonely bugger.

there are no real consequences of letting your fitness/attendance/skills slide, nobody's going to stop your mortgage being paid, and you're never going to find yourself in some sandy ****hole being shot at from every direction thinking that you wished you'd worked harder at phys, target indication, movement or shooting.

unless and until the RDF becomes important, nobody will treat it with importance.

All I can say is that the RDF has improved so much in the last 30 years, skills and expertise.
As for neglecting the work, wives and friends that’s just management of ones time (no offence intended). I have two lads one which never joined the RDF but the second one has joined and loves the organisation. They make a lot of friends from different parts of the county/country and keep in touch on facebook.
Its up to the individual how much he puts in an gets out of the organisation, 60% of recruits leave within 18 months but what you left with is people who have a interest in the organisation.


If nothing else the RDF is a stepping stone for the PDF (private, Nco or Officer). So the training they get is not lost. I would regard being a member RDF on a CV an important plus for a job.

easkey1

Poccington wrote: »

I'm very much Infantry, thank you.



Integration didn't work for a number of reasons. Employment protection isn't the be all and end all of Integration's failures.

In the new model RDF I spoke of, Cadre staff wouldn't be needed as you'd be serving in a Coy in a PDF Infantry Bn.



I was a member of the RDF not so long ago, I remember what parades were like. The numbers have not been in the organisation since before active recruitment got knocked on the head.

The RDF doesn't have the numbers, nor will it ever have the numbers to continue the illusion that it could somehow field 9 Infantry Bn's, a few Cav Squadrons, Arty Regiments etc. if ever required.

Hence why all Units need to be downsized and brought into their PDF units. Resources and budgets could then be better handled, training would be of a higher standard and RDF personnel would actually be of use to the PDF.



As much as I'd love to improve the RDF, I wear a black beret.

Besides the PDF (Officers) not fully committing to integration the most important aspect is “Employee protection” for the RDF member.

I corrected an error in the last Post the word Urban to Rural.
In approximately 2005 the they downsized the RDF and moved a lot of the units into the big cities (barracks) but the problem was recruitment didn’t match the figures ( poor recruitment from the big cities).
The unit I am a member became a stand alone unit 70 miles from a military barracks.
Do you think it unfair to only recruit in urban areas?

I think the members we have today are very committed to the organisation, and the amount of time they give up for the RDF is immeasurable.

I’m a little biased but I think we need to look at the positives the members get from the organisation.
If not in the RDF where would they be and what would they be up to?

My utterly pointless comment still stands. In it's current form, the RDF is of no use to anybody.

Was it an advantage to you being a member of the RDF when you joined the PDF?


Regards
Passionate RDF member

Manic Moran

Poccington wrote:

The RDF doesn't have the numbers, nor will it ever have the numbers to continue the illusion that it could somehow field 9 Infantry Bn's, a few Cav Squadrons, Arty Regiments etc. if ever required.

Hence why all Units need to be downsized and brought into their PDF units. Resources and budgets could then be better handled, training would be of a higher standard and RDF personnel would actually be of use to the PDF.

I think OS119 is closer to the truth than you are. At the risk of overgeneralising, you seem to be arguing that it's a useless organisation because there's a pitiful number of people participating, while OS119 is arguing that because it's a useless organisation, the number of people involved is pitiful.

'Professionalise' the force. Make it so that there are defineable responsibilities and benefits associated with membership, and enforce both adherence to the responsibilities, and issuance of the benefits. There's a motto my old squadron commander had: Our cav squadron is the only combat arms unit in the State, except a brand new engineering company. The motto was "Nobody joins the Cav because it's easy. They join because it's hard" and it's closer to the truth than many realise. I think you'll find that if the RDF were to become more appealing, that attendance would increase to the extent that the dramatic downsizing you suggest may not be required.

NTM

Poccington

Manic Moran wrote: »

I think OS119 is closer to the truth than you are. At the risk of overgeneralising, you seem to be arguing that it's a useless organisation because there's a pitiful number of people participating, while OS119 is arguing that because it's a useless organisation, the number of people involved is pitiful.

'Professionalise' the force. Make it so that there are defineable responsibilities and benefits associated with membership, and enforce both adherence to the responsibilities, and issuance of the benefits. There's a motto my old squadron commander had: Our cav squadron is the only combat arms unit in the State, except a brand new engineering company. The motto was "Nobody joins the Cav because it's easy. They join because it's hard" and it's closer to the truth than many realise. I think you'll find that if the RDF were to become more appealing, that attendance would increase to the extent that the dramatic downsizing you suggest may not be required.

NTM

I completely agree with the "Professionalise" the RDF idea. My idea of downsizing plays into that, I think.

I don't suggest downsizing purely because the numbers aren't there. I suggest downsizing so the RDF can properly integrate with the PDF. As in 5 Bn C Coy would be the RDF Coy within a PDF Bn. This idea of 9 RDF Bn's for a force of what will soon enough be 6 PDF Bn's is ridiculous.

I have my ideas on how it should be done but it's late and I'll bang it out tomorrow. Essentially though, the PDF needs to embrace the RDF, ditch the "Those baggers" attitude, mould it into something that functions profressionally and with an actual purpose. If they don't do that, they may as well wrap it all up because it's running around like a headless chicken at the moment.

Poccington

easkey1 wrote: »

Besides the PDF (Officers) not fully committing to integration the most important aspect is “Employee protection” for the RDF member.

What about the empire protecting from some RDF units? Lack of volunteers? Lack of communication to RDF personnel from their own units about what Integration actually was?

The failure of integration cannot be laid purely at the door of the PDF and employment protection.

easkey1 wrote: »

I corrected an error in the last Post the word Urban to Rural.
In approximately 2005 the they downsized the RDF and moved a lot of the units into the big cities (barracks) but the problem was recruitment didn’t match the figures ( poor recruitment from the big cities).
The unit I am a member became a stand alone unit 70 miles from a military barracks.
Do you think it unfair to only recruit in urban areas?

Where is the sense in having Units in locations where they must travel to a barracks to draw stores and conduct proper training? Especially when the DF is paying the rent for such facilities which really have no military purpose.

A situation where troops are in locations with no immediate access to weapons should not exist.

easkey1 wrote: »

I think the members we have today are very committed to the organisation, and the amount of time they give up for the RDF is immeasurable.

I’m a little biased but I think we need to look at the positives the members get from the organisation.
If not in the RDF where would they be and what would they be up to?

Who cares what they'd be upto?

The RDF is supposed to be a military organisation, not somewhere to just keep people out of trouble. I think some of the members the RDF has today are committed and fit for purpose. There's still plenty who simply aren't fit for purpose.

What positives does the PDF get from the RDF as a whole?

easkey1 wrote: »

Was it an advantage to you being a member of the RDF when you joined the PDF?

No.

Manic Moran

I have to say, I wonder how much has improved or disimproved over the years. Anyone with any pull in 62nd Res Cav interested in inviting me up one night to observe? I can pay my way, give a course of instruction on the operation of the M4 carbine or something...

I completely agree with the "Professionalise" the RDF idea. My idea of downsizing plays into that, I think.

Not necessarily. Last month I asked my guys why we scored so horrendously on the light cav gunnery table the month before, and we decided we needed more trigger time. So, with no 'regular army' involvement at all, I decided then and there that in April we would have a live-fire event with machineguns and mortars to prepare us for the next likely gunnery table in May. We book the range like anyone else, we fill in the ammunition request paperwork and just like the regular army's paperwork (mainly because it's the same form), it gets fulfilled by the ammo depot without need of 'adult' supervision. Seems professional enough to me: Identify the problem. Identify the solution. Execute the solution. What more do you want, and why would you need PDF integration to do it?

The nutshell is that instead of considering the RDF as the 'step-children' of the PDF as a company working under a PDF battalion, they would be more professional if given 'equal partner' status. They would not be being trained to be suckling on the tit of the PDF and be spoonfed tasks or resources and (heaven forbid) actually need to execute the leadership duties of the ranks that they happen to have on their shoulders and sleeves.

BUT... and this is where the 'reality check' hits, there needs to be an entire re-think by the government to give the reserves both carrot and stick. Give them the authorities to do what they need to do, the resources to do it (including employment protection) and hold leaders accountable when they fail to get things done.



Out of interest, is there a perception of.. well, I hesistate to say 'superiority', but 'they're only weekend warriors' in the PDF to American Guardsmen?

NTM

Manic Moran

Where is the sense in having Units in locations where they must travel to a barracks to draw stores and conduct proper training? Especially when the DF is paying the rent for such facilities which really have no military purpose.

A situation where troops are in locations with no immediate access to weapons should not exist.

My arms vault is.. oh... 8'x16'. That contains all the sensitive gear for 90 some soldiers to include rifles, pistols .50 MGs, 7.62mm MGs, 40mm MGs, Javelin CLUs, LRAS... and at least one 25mm cannon. It's not that big a facility. Is there any particular reason why they can't just build a shed vault big enough for a rural RDF unit attached to the back of the local Garda station and fit it with an alarm?

NTM

easkey92

Poccington wrote: »

No.

thats complete and utter lies ! your trying to say a knowledge of basic foot drill and teots on weapons did not give you and advantage in PDF training . Either your just trying to support your poor argument or you just wasted your time as a reserve .

xflyer

Ah NTM, you've been in America too long. It could never be that easy in this gun shy country. The notion that there would be a stash of automatic weapons in a small town Garda station would cause conniptions among the Gardai themselves and the townspeople. It couldn't happen.

My suggestion would be to professionalise the RDF too, make it hard to get into. Make it something to aspire too. The problem right now is that it's regarded as something of a joke both among the PDF and public at large. An example, I saw an obese girl and member of the RDF walking around here several times. It was unbelievable that the woman could be any kind of soldier. Imagine what a member of the public would think? That kind of thing must stop.

I would go further though and reduce the PDF, make the RDF the mainstay of the defence forces with a hard core of highly professional PDF units fully integrated with the RDF. Properly trained, just like NTM's unit they could be activated and sent overseas.

None of it will happen though. In reality the RDF is in the process of being wound down. Politicans in this country never had the wit or imagination to reform the military. I would blame the Officer Corps too, there were never really interested in allocating resources to the RDF or improving it. Frankly you have to ask the question why the Chief of Staff is happy to have a large proportion of poorly trained, poorly equipped and essentially militarily ineffective troops under his command?

What's needed is a serious rethink of the Defence forces as a whole. Will we get that...........No of course not but it's free to speculate.

Jim236

I'm a recruit in the RDF atm, so heres my 2 cents.

I agree with the idea of professionalising the RDF. Whatever about it becoming more integrated with the PDF, the one thing the RDF needs now is a defined purpose. Even if its just something as basic as being given the role of helping out with flood defences, supplying aid to the public in such events, and helping to keep roads/footpaths clear from snow (which is now becoming the norm in winter). And if there were more opportunities for RDF soldiers to train with the PDF, that in itself would be a huge recruitment tool.

But I'd be against the idea of making the RDF "hard to get into". By all means have fitness requirements, but the idea of making it so hard to get into that all you're left with is a core group of enthusiasts just seems like a backward step IMO. At the end of the day, the RDF will always be a part-time role, so you have to make it as accessible as possible. Turning it into some elite reserve ARW will just send out the message that its impossible to get into, and this will just drive away skills rather than increase them.