RAF Regiment win military comps

discus

Put it like this, the RAF regiment can put their lads on P-company or the All Arms Commando Course. Regular infantry, engineers, artillery, medics also go on these courses. With these two facts, you could almost deduce that the RAF regiment are, as a whole, not as good as any of the commando or para regiments. Just saying.

tac foley

Discus, old floon, I've been trying VERY hard to be as non-commital as I can about the RAF Regiment. I think you'd agree that, for the most part, I've kept my comments reasonable and polite, since the OP has obviously never had anything to do with the British Army or Royal Marines, and therefore has not been in a position to enquire directly about his questions.

I'm no longer serving, but in the thirty-three years that I DID serve, I never heard the words 'we are an elite bunch of blokes' come out of the mouth of any member of the RAF Regiment while he was conscious.

As I noted, suffice it to say that if a member of the RAF Regiment took on a member of the Parachute Regiment or Royal Marines, there is a 98% chance that he would be slaughtered, and I mean that in all sincerity.

tac

pablomakaveli

Basing the eliteness of a unit based on how they do in competitions is the wrong approach. The guys on the shooting teams are usually picked because they are a good shot and spend a lot of time away with the shooting teams practicing.

As for Cambrian patrol it's a very tough competition but the team from my regt won a bronze this year and we are certainly not elite. It was probably more down to the team putting in plenty of training beforehand.

Incidentally my friend on the Cambrian team told me a team from the Defence Forces won a silver. Didn't even know they entered teams into Cambrian patrol.

discus

Yeah, the irish team model pit was next to my batterys model pit. The irish lads must have removed the flags from their uniform, because the lads assumed they were dutch until they opened their mouths.

Totally agree about competitions. Great bragging rights, but unless you are picking a team completely at random from your unit/regt, it proves **** all in most cases.

SPPL

Hi again thanks for your reply, still not sure im getting to the bottom of this and i appreciate i may be kicking the hornets nest, im an insurance claim investigator for some large companies so i spend my time looking at stats and being pretty nerdy which is why things dont compute still for me. I deal with alot of people who talk alot but dont actually answer your questions so i'm sorry if it feels like i'm pushing ....i am

SFSG is made up of the RM and Paras both elite groups of soldiers, SFSG also includes RAF regt that also do all the really important stuff like forward observing, but despite being in an elite unit with other elite units, they arent considered elite, they may only have 27 people there but thats 27 more people than the rifles or the Mercians? Sorry gents to an outsider i dont get it?

I dont know how many military competitions there are but i belived for infantry units cambrian patrol was one of the toughest competitions- the RAF regt always perform well, if they went to more military competitions would they win more? how many competitions dont they go to? - but again they arent considered elite depite their past form - i dont get it still?

The RAF regt no long have a rapier force (though my info could be wrong)

My question about why there is an RAF regt has been answered but i have not clarified it yet - here goes and dont shoot the messenger!!!!

The RAF regt was formed because the army consistantly kept on losing airfields to smaller sized enemy forces, the straw that broke the camels back was the battle of crete. The RAF regt was formed and have never lost an airfield to an enemy force. Again despite clearly out matching the army in this area by a country mile- they arent considered elite? gents i dont get it ?

SPPL

Sorry gents im just getting used to this forum thing so i have missed some of the comments that were made.

I havent actually had anyone from the RAF regt say they are elite to me and i have enquired about there role on FB

Apparently they attacked an airport in IRAQ (enemy surrendered without a shot so no biggy but they still attacked not just defended)

Alot of the comments about picking random teams for competitions are fair but im sure every unit only picks there best guys. Though i read a thread on FB and the RAF regt were laughing because they only had a weeks training in the lakes and still won either a bronze or silver at Cambrian.

there are physically more challenging tests to get into the RAF regiment than an army infantry regiment, in general the lads i have seen in Northallerton at there freedom of Northallerton parade were all six footers and completley overshadowed the army infantry guys so im not sure i go for the 98% get slaughtered.

Sorry lads but i work off proof and it just feels that you make alot of throw away comments but dont have any hard facts, you could probably prove 100% that an Royal Engineer had poorer soldiering skills than an infantry solder ...so why cant you do the same with the RAF regt ...smells fishy, and sounds a little more like people just dont like the idea of the RAF having soldiers.

It seems more obvious to me that the Army would have better soldiers just after someone to give some evidence as at the moment it overwhelmingly supports the RAF regt

pablomakaveli

SPPL wrote: »

Sorry gents im just getting used to this forum thing so i have missed some of the comments that were made.

I havent actually had anyone from the RAF regt say they are elite to me and i have enquired about there role on FB

Apparently they attacked an airport in IRAQ (enemy surrendered without a shot so no biggy but they still attacked not just defended)

Alot of the comments about picking random teams for competitions are fair but im sure every unit only picks there best guys. Though i read a thread on FB and the RAF regt were laughing because they only had a weeks training in the lakes and still won either a bronze or silver at Cambrian.

there are physically more challenging tests to get into the RAF regiment than an army infantry regiment, in general the lads i have seen in Northallerton at there freedom of Northallerton parade were all six footers and completley overshadowed the army infantry guys so im not sure i go for the 98% get slaughtered.

Sorry lads but i work off proof and it just feels that you make alot of throw away comments but dont have any hard facts, you could probably prove 100% that an Royal Engineer had poorer soldiering skills than an infantry solder ...so why cant you do the same with the RAF regt ...smells fishy, and sounds a little more like people just dont like the idea of the RAF having soldiers.

It seems more obvious to me that the Army would have better soldiers just after someone to give some evidence as at the moment it overwhelmingly supports the RAF regt

The Cambrian patrol teams at my regiment at least are made of of people who get dicked for it, normally the newest lads, and a tiny number of volunteers. So not exactly the best in the regiment. I can't speak for other units though.

Also had a look at the fitness standards for the RAF regt on the RAF site and the mile and a half time is 10:30. Same as for the army. In fact a minute less than the 9:30 required for specialist regiments in the artillery. Those being 7 RHA and 29 which are paras and commandos respectively. If the RAF regt were elite it would be 9:30 max.

Also push-ups and sit-ups are 40 and 41 respectively compared to the armies 44 and 50. So not better there either.

In fact looking at the Potential Gunner Selection Course the things they do on that aren't much different to the selection i did for the army.

So your assumption that it's more challenging to get into the RAF regt that it is an infantry regiment is just wrong.

I don't doubt that there are guys in the RAF regt who have gone on to do para or commando training but the RAF regt as a whole or not elite.

tac foley

SPPL wrote: »

Sorry gents im just getting used to this forum thing so i have missed some of the comments that were made.

I havent actually had anyone from the RAF regt say they are elite to me and i have enquired about there role on FB

Apparently they attacked an airport in IRAQ (enemy surrendered without a shot so no biggy but they still attacked not just defended)

Alot of the comments about picking random teams for competitions are fair but im sure every unit only picks there best guys. Though i read a thread on FB and the RAF regt were laughing because they only had a weeks training in the lakes and still won either a bronze or silver at Cambrian.

there are physically more challenging tests to get into the RAF regiment than an army infantry regiment, in general the lads i have seen in Northallerton at there freedom of Northallerton parade were all six footers and completley overshadowed the army infantry guys so im not sure i go for the 98% get slaughtered.

Sorry lads but i work off proof and it just feels that you make alot of throw away comments but dont have any hard facts, you could probably prove 100% that an Royal Engineer had poorer soldiering skills than an infantry solder ...so why cant you do the same with the RAF regt ...smells fishy, and sounds a little more like people just dont like the idea of the RAF having soldiers.

It seems more obvious to me that the Army would have better soldiers just after someone to give some evidence as at the moment it overwhelmingly supports the RAF regt

I've tried very hard to be kind, but sadly, my patience is about used up.

Sir, you don't appear to be listening to what serving soldiers in the British Army are telling you. You are NOT in any of the organisations that you are so freely discussing as an ill-advised observer with a very naive outlook on life in any part of the military, so you will understand that I'm being kind in my responses to you. Pablo and Discus WILL understand what I mean, but you, unless you join us, never will.

Whoever told you that the RAF Regiment has a different set of standards to qualify for entry - simply not true.

Using the RE as an example of lower standards is deeply insulting - as anybody in the BA will tell you, the RE has won more medals - including VCs - than any other part of the British Army.

I'm out of here before I say something that will be deeply insulting, and more likely get me banned.

tac

SPPL

Tac you telling me one thing and the RAF regiment are telling me another so i am being given information by soldiers who are currently serving, the difference is that the RAF regiment support there statements with facts you dont. In actual fact when i push them on awkward questions they have never behaved like a spoilt child who hasnt got there own way, which is a constant problem with the Army!

It is true that they have a different set of standards, at a very basic level they have to pass there mile and a half run in 10:30 where as the Infantry have 12:45 on there pre selection test, this is fact and is on both Army and RAF regiment websites.

I have also looked at past test papers for the army and RAF, the difference is vast, the RAF test is bloody hard and the army test is of a very low standard. So instantly the RAF regt get someone who is fitter and more inteligent!

You seem to have deliberatley tried your hardest to take offence at the RE comments, you suceeded well done!

Over all Tac you have made several comments about the RAF Regiment that just arent true and you comments that can be easily dismissed after spending 2mins on a search engine, in all you have been no help at all and have spent more time giving me red herrings! My initial message to ask for no unsubstantiated waffle!

Pablo thanks for the feedback its interesting to speak to a serving Infantry soldier, maybe military competitions isnt the best way to judge and thanks for giving me some actual evidence why!

Though there was a massive difference on the pre selection tests 1.5 miler you didnt mention.

No one has countered why the RAF regt say they were formed either, infact everyone has avoided the question, some throwing teddys out the cot just so they dont have to answer it, which speaks volumes to me.

My thoughts are
RAF regiment para trained sqn are elite- they tick all the elite boxes (im not saying they are SF)
The rest of the RAF regiment are somewhere in between normal grunt and elite, essentially they just dont have the same fitness standards.

Why does the Army have such a problem with this? and bloody hell they really seem to!

My only conclusion i have come to is that the Army just dont like the idea of some blue beret wearing tossers being better than them....ask yourself a question ....how many rock apes have commented on this thread?

How many people have had a really bad attitude on this thread and from what service are they from?

I constantly hear people saying that the RAF regiment go around telling everyone they are elite, it seems to be that the Army goes around telling everyone the RAF regiment call themselves elite...nothing more!

tac foley

SPPL wrote: »

I constantly hear people saying that the RAF regiment go around telling everyone they are elite, it seems to be that the Army goes around telling everyone the RAF regiment call themselves elite...nothing more!

Since it appears that you actually live in the North of England, I suggest that instead of listening to people who tell you that they are 'elite' whatever that means to you, you go to Catterick and talk to the staff there and ask them about the RAF Regiment.

tac

SPPL

Why will they have any facts are will they continue to make generic comments?

Th Raf regiment arent telling me they are elite, the Army are going round telling everyone the RAF regt call themselves elite...theres a difference.

Jawgap

I've a copy of Oliver's history of the RAF Regiment written by a former Deputy Director of the RAF Regiment.

The only reference I can find to they themselves describing the regiment as 'elite' is in respect of their ceremonial drill.

They are highly specialised and operate in a relatively narrow field of expertise, but I wouldn't say - as a unit - they fall into the 'special forces' category.

I think you're comparing apples and oranges - just because army, air force or navy personnel use the same tools doesn't mean they are immediately comparable.

tac foley

SPPL wrote: »

Why will they have any facts are will they continue to make generic comments?

Th Raf regiment arent telling me they are elite, the Army are going round telling everyone the RAF regt call themselves elite...theres a difference.

I don't understand your first sentence.

There will always be righteous antagonism - we call it banter - between the three services, and you will notice, I hope, that I have done nothing to insult or to cast aspersions on those who choose to join the RAF to soldier, as opposed to those who join the Army to soldier.

The RAF Regiment are undoubtedly good at what they do, and I never said anything to the contrary, but what they are decidedly NOT is 'elite'.

If they were as 'elite' as you imagine them to be, then they alone would man the entire SFSG.

My suggestion was for you to go to the ARMY unit - ITC Catterick -

http://www.army.mod.uk/training_education/24482.aspx

and discuss your opinions with those who train the Army's recruits.

Then, do the same with the equivalent unit at RAF Honington.

Then come back here with your results.

tac

SPPL

Hi Jawgap thanks for your reply, i suppose you have answered my question which is the RAF regt dont go around calling themselves elite.

aplles and oranges - maybe ... seems more like granny smiths and golden delicious though, surely the basic infantry type training overlaps massively? section attack drills, anti ambush, same training different unit?

Hi Tac i dont think i will have the opportunity to go to ITC Caterick and Honnington, i think the instructors may tell me to get lost.

I think the full title is Joint Special Forces Support group - emphasis on the joint, and im not naive enough (even as a civvy) to belive the army would ever let the RAF regiment own that unit, i dont think they could live with themselves, i think 27 gunners probably kills them especially as they seem to have the most important roles?

I'm happy to roll with what i have at the moment unless anyone has any damning evidence, and i dont mind if they do as i dont actually care who the best trained Regiment is i was just very interested due to all the bad press the Raf regt recieve from the army.

The only role that both the army and RAF regiment have both done is airfield defence, the Army performed quite badly and the RAF regt have never lost an airfield (though i have only been told this, but cant find any evidence to the contrary) so as an outsider what conclusion would you come to?

pablomakaveli

SPPL wrote: »

Tac you telling me one thing and the RAF regiment are telling me another so i am being given information by soldiers who are currently serving, the difference is that the RAF regiment support there statements with facts you dont. In actual fact when i push them on awkward questions they have never behaved like a spoilt child who hasnt got there own way, which is a constant problem with the Army!

It is true that they have a different set of standards, at a very basic level they have to pass there mile and a half run in 10:30 where as the Infantry have 12:45 on there pre selection test, this is fact and is on both Army and RAF regiment websites.

I have also looked at past test papers for the army and RAF, the difference is vast, the RAF test is bloody hard and the army test is of a very low standard. So instantly the RAF regt get someone who is fitter and more inteligent!

You seem to have deliberatley tried your hardest to take offence at the RE comments, you suceeded well done!

Over all Tac you have made several comments about the RAF Regiment that just arent true and you comments that can be easily dismissed after spending 2mins on a search engine, in all you have been no help at all and have spent more time giving me red herrings! My initial message to ask for no unsubstantiated waffle!

Pablo thanks for the feedback its interesting to speak to a serving Infantry soldier, maybe military competitions isnt the best way to judge and thanks for giving me some actual evidence why!

Though there was a massive difference on the pre selection tests 1.5 miler you didnt mention.

No one has countered why the RAF regt say they were formed either, infact everyone has avoided the question, some throwing teddys out the cot just so they dont have to answer it, which speaks volumes to me.

My thoughts are
RAF regiment para trained sqn are elite- they tick all the elite boxes (im not saying they are SF)
The rest of the RAF regiment are somewhere in between normal grunt and elite, essentially they just dont have the same fitness standards.

Why does the Army have such a problem with this? and bloody hell they really seem to!

My only conclusion i have come to is that the Army just dont like the idea of some blue beret wearing tossers being better than them....ask yourself a question ....how many rock apes have commented on this thread?

How many people have had a really bad attitude on this thread and from what service are they from?

I constantly hear people saying that the RAF regiment go around telling everyone they are elite, it seems to be that the Army goes around telling everyone the RAF regiment call themselves elite...nothing more!

First of all i'm artillery not infantry.

I do know that any male running a 12:45 will not get a place in training. I wasn't able to go ahead and do selection till i could pass a 10:30. I know this because on a pre-selection test i ran a 10:50 and was told i had to come back and get below 10:30 before i could go onto selection. With the reduction in numbers they can afford to be picky and anyone running a mile and any guy expecting to get into the infantry with a run time over 10:30 is in dreamland.

Also no one has actually said to you that the RAF think they're elite. In fact the only people i hear doing this aren't even in the forces. An slagging the army gives the RAF regt is just military banter. It happens between all units and between the three forces. The humour in the forces is never understood very well by civilians.

Jawgap

SPPL wrote: »

Hi Jawgap thanks for your reply, i suppose you have answered my question which is the RAF regt dont go around calling themselves elite.

aplles and oranges - maybe ... seems more like granny smiths and golden delicious though, surely the basic infantry type training overlaps massively? section attack drills, anti ambush, same training different unit?

Hi Tac i dont think i will have the opportunity to go to ITC Caterick and Honnington, i think the instructors may tell me to get lost.

I think the full title is Joint Special Forces Support group - emphasis on the joint, and im not naive enough (even as a civvy) to belive the army would ever let the RAF regiment own that unit, i dont think they could live with themselves, i think 27 gunners probably kills them especially as they seem to have the most important roles?

I'm happy to roll with what i have at the moment unless anyone has any damning evidence, and i dont mind if they do as i dont actually care who the best trained Regiment is i was just very interested due to all the bad press the Raf regt recieve from the army.

The only role that both the army and RAF regiment have both done is airfield defence, the Army performed quite badly and the RAF regt have never lost an airfield (though i have only been told this, but cant find any evidence to the contrary) so as an outsider what conclusion would you come to?

I know feck all and I've never served but I would've thought assaulting, overcoming and defending an airfield is [relatively] easy enough - I presume that what the RAF Regiment bring to the party is an ability to do that in a way that minimises the type of destruction and damage that would prevent flight ops or at least would allow the airfield to be brought back into use as quickly as possible? That's a peculiar and specialised capability which probably is only superficially comparable to what a line infantry battalion does.

As regards having never lost an airfield, that's unsurprising given that airfields tend to be quite far back from the 'frontline.'

SPPL

I may not be qualified at all to understand the humour in the forces so i take that point though some of it isnt banter...i guess that when you start using the word walt its considered a harsh insult in military circles?

I also belive that in my first reponse to my initial message Tac said that the RAF regiment are responsible for there own bad press, and in other forums i have heard this. I have seen a tiny sliver of this i.e a silly comment made by the RAF regiment in a video, but the Army seem to hang on to this.

Not sure why the Army would state a certain time and then when you turn up say its not good enough, though i understand that its the same for the RAF regiment too i.e there are only a certain number of places up for graps so essentially the potential recruits are competing against one another - so at a stab in the dark i would say not many of these guys would be accepted for training if they only hit 10:30 mins because someone else would have beaten that time. That aside the academic tests are light years apart.

SPPL

Hi Jaw gap

I completley agree in the 21st century i would say airfields are an awful lot easier to defend, though it hasnt always been the case, in some actions against the japs in world war 2 the RAF regiment lost all their officers and SNCOs but still didnt lose the airfield, without banging on about this because i know i will be pissing people off but this wasnt the case with the Army they consistantly surrended airfields to smaller sized enemy forces, infact during ww2 if the british army came up against an equal sized enemy force they normally lost ( i was shocked at this stat!)


I genuinely dont think they have any additional training to reduce the destruction to an airfield - i think they take the bull in a china shop approach.

Has anyone any comments on the battle of Bastion and how the RAF regiment performed?

discus

Avdn45 = cruasder777 = this guy.

I'm starting to see why I can ring the same insurance company three times, and get three wildly different quotes. Obviously stats dont get in the way of some good BS! Laters

SPPL

Well thought out argument, cheers for your facts and figures we are overloaded with generic comments so why not have another one?

Happy to clarify any BS ...are you?

discus

Myself and others have tried hard to clarify, it seems you are impervious to our wisdom!!

Jawgap

pablomakaveli wrote: »

.......

Also no one has actually said to you that the RAF think they're elite. ......

Actually, that does raise an interesting point. Of all the services, I'd respectfully submit that the RAF are the most 'anti-elite.'

All the way back as far as Trenchard there are plenty of examples of how they actively internally resisted the creation of elites - which is not to say they were anti-excellence or in favour of mediocrity - just that the idea of an 'elite' within the service did not seem to sit well with its ethos (likewise the idea of the fighter 'ace').

One of the better examples of this is the resistance there was to setting up of the Pathfinder Force in Bomber Command which was bitterly opposed by Harris and to a lesser extent by Portal. Portal had to practically order Harris to establish it and even then Harris took great care to ensure the potential for it to be viewed as an 'elite' formation was minimised.

SPPL

Thanks Jaw gap, will have to bow to your wisdom there mate.

Discus- im not sure what youself and others have clarified, it seems that whatever you dont know you have tried to make up!

Any awkward statements i have made are unanswered, i can ask them yet again if you like?

SPPL

#Againgoodcomeback

discus

SPPL wrote: »

Thanks Jaw gap, will have to bow to your wisdom there mate.

Discus- im not sure what youself and others have clarified, it seems that whatever you dont know you have tried to make up!

Any awkward statements i have made are unanswered, i can ask them yet again if you like?

I'm actually not gonna bother. Tac and pablo have a much finer command of the language, my anger filled, frustrated posting is only diluting their sensible responses!

SPPL

No your command of the English language seems very good, excellent vocabulary.

You just seem to lack any answers, and i mean any answers at all.

tac foley

Are you being paid by somebody in the RAF Regiment to continue this pointless thread?

IMO all you are doing is p!ssing off at least two serving members of the Army and one former member of the Army, all of whom have told you that even if we thought that the RAF Regiment was, in our opinion, a bunch of total lookatme wannabes that is entirely comprised of attention-seeking dwongs, that opinion is our own, and would not be repeated to ANY civilian on a public forum, let alone one based in a foreign country. My definitive last word to you, a civilian, as far as I am concerned, and take this any way you like, is that ANYBODY who puts on a uniform of any colour in the service of his country gets my total respect.

Period.

I've already told you that they are very good at what they do, but would also like to point out that FACs come from ALL parts of ALL three Teeth Arm elements of the British Armed Forces - it's hardly the RAF Regiment-only task that you think it is. How do you think we all managed in GW1, GW2 and A'stan BEFORE the RAF Regiment element got the job?

I'd be wasting valuable bits of what remains of my life to continue this thread, so I'll stop there, except to say that NO member of the RAF Regiment EVER appeared at the school of which I was Chief Instructor, and that time included five years as an instructor, and five years as the Chief Insructor.

I'm sure that the RAF, who actually were the principal sponsors for the school concerned, had their reasons for that.

Nor was any member of the RAF Regiment ever part of the British Military Mission to the Group of Soviet Forces in Germany - at least, while I was there.

I'm sure that the RAF, who had personnel there from Cpl [Driver], Cpl phot/Sgt photo, F/S AEOP, to WO MLM and officers from Flt Lt up to Gp Capt [the Deputy Chief of Mission] had their reasons for that.

I therefore recommend that if you REALLY want to engage in a reality check about the RAF Regiment, and what the Army and RM REALLY think [or not], please feel free to join the rest of us over on Army Rumour Service, and get ready for some VERY heavy incoming.

ENDEX.

tac

PS - now I come to think about it, since you live in UK, why haven't you already joined us on www.arrse.co.uk? Why pick a foreign website? Is that an embarrassing question for you?

SPPL

I can confirm no payment has been received by the RAF regiment…your right it is pointless I’ve never seen someone write so much rubbish but not actually say anything new or more importantly just answer the question. It’s like interviewing an Asian taxi driver about their dodgy insurance claim and they get all hot under the collar because the questions are too awkward!

There a bunch of wannabes – then in the paragraph later they are very good at what they do…I doubt you have any experience of either …I think what you didn’t read on Wikipedia you made up! I wonder if all the dead wannabes got the attention that you seem to think they so desperatley wanted? im not buying this anyone who puts on a uniform gets my respect crap, its a poor attempt at covering your arse which is transparent from outer space!

I made it clear in my first message that YOU responded to that I wasn’t interested in unsubstantiated waffle ….so you proceeded to give me your unsubstantiated waffle and then go on and on with your unfactual and generally incorrect assumptions about the RAF regt i.e. in your opinion blab blab bla and now you are the one getting upset...arrrggghh i dont want oppinions!…here’s another question for you …are you taking the ****1ng p1ss?

I don’t think I will be joining the other forum as I’m going to take a wild guess that people will roll out the same old boring nonsense and not produce any hard evidence. In-coming is not an issue but only if it’s worth my time, taking you as a demographic I would say it isn’t!

In actual fact the RAF Regiment have come across to me extremely well, modest, honest and factual, unfortunately the Army has come across as a bunch of empty vessels (not everyone). Maybe spending a decade in a training wing during the cold war didn’t do you any favours, sounds like a cushy number?

By avoiding answering my awkward questions i.e why is there a RAF regt and not countering what they have to say - you actually gave me the answer

tac foley

Troll alert.

tac

SPPL

wondered how long it would be before you defaulted to that, if you were black you would be playing the race card

tac foley

Sadly, Mr SPPL, you are as unable to take on board what I wrote as you are to make any coherent contribution to this thread except as a troll.

Please re-read what I did, in fact, write - I'll put it here again for you in case you've somehow lost it...

I wrote 'even if we thought that the RAF Regiment was, in our opinion, a bunch of total lookatme wannabes that is entirely comprised of attention-seeking dwongs, that opinion is our own, and would not be repeated to ANY civilian on a public forum, let alone one based in a foreign country.'

Now please go away and try and destroy another site.

tac

SPPL

Yes the "even if" is clearly a poor attempt at a completley ungenuine disclaimer

tac foley

SPPL wrote: »

Maybe spending a decade in a training wing during the cold war didn’t do you any favours, sounds like a cushy number?

I suppose that you are right, only four deployments in ten years [that's two fives, not a continuous decade, BTW] probably DOES qualify me as a desk jockey REMF in some peoples' eyes.

However, being an instructor does not get you an 'out' from deployment in your primary MOS.

Please remember that in the Armed Forces, unlike the way that things work in civilian life, you have to be better at your job in order to teach skills than those you are teaching.

And as for 'cushy number', Sir, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Anyhow, AFAIAC, your posts are beginning to venture into the ad hominem zone, so I'm reporting you.:P

tac

OS119

up.

OS119

down.

OS119

up..

OS119

down..

OS119

nice shades.

OS119

fancy an ice cream?

tac foley

Neapolitan for me, or, if you can do it, Tillamook Rocky road, the one with the REAL lumps of chocolate.

tac

Manic Moran

Infact during ww2 if the british army came up against an equal sized enemy force they normally lost

That would probably apply to all armies. One is supposed to have an advantage before going up against an enemy sized force.

I wasn’t interested in unsubstantiated waffle ….

You are asking for something which cannot be provided. There is no quantifiable 'ranking' system to units.

[Mod]

wondered how long it would be before you defaulted to that, if you were black you would be playing the race card

And that gets you your warning. I must admit to be thinking along similar lines as Tac and suggest that you properly evaluate the intended result of any further posts by you on this thread.
[/Mod]

Jawgap

SPPL wrote: »

.....

........ infact during ww2 if the british army came up against an equal sized enemy force they normally lost ( i was shocked at this stat!)


.........

Manic Moran wrote: »

That would probably apply to all armies. One is supposed to have an advantage before going up against an enemy sized force.

I'd like to see the source for original quote - certainly in the Italian campaign the British, US, Canadian, New Zealander, Polish, French and even the Brazilian units of all sizes met (attacked) and defeated similar sized or even numerically superior German units under pretty difficult topographical, meteorological and logistical conditions.

In terms of military personnel in the country the Allies had significantly more than the Germans and Italians, but there was near equivalence with respect to infantry numbers.

tac foley

Jawgap wrote: »

I'd like to see the source for original quote - certainly in the Italian campaign the British, US, Canadian, New Zealander, Polish, French and even the Brazilian units of all sizes met (attacked) and defeated similar sized or even numerically superior German units under pretty difficult topographical, meteorological and logistical conditions.

In terms of military personnel in the country the Allies had significantly more than the Germans and Italians, but there was near equivalence with respect to infantry numbers.

Monte Cassino instantly comes to mind...

tac

ChicagoJoe

Jawgap wrote: »

I'd like to see the source for original quote - certainly in the Italian campaign the British, US, Canadian, New Zealander, Polish, French and even the Brazilian units of all sizes met (attacked) and defeated similar sized or even numerically superior German units under pretty difficult topographical, meteorological and logistical conditions.

In terms of military personnel in the country the Allies had significantly more than the Germans and Italians, but there was near equivalence with respect to infantry numbers.

I'm certainly no Nazi admirer but it must have been against Hitler Youth units or what was called the Stomach Battalions of old men forced into service towards the end of the war. Now the regular German army not to mention the Paratroopers or the dreaded Waffen SS would be another matter altogether.

ChicagoJoe

Excellent stuff from the guys of the RAF regiment. Air Force personnel in general are often underated, in America the other services often tease the USAF as the " chair force " I see from the OP that the RAF reg. guys have to score higher in the education/IQ test which would make them have more adaptablity/ingenuity than other regiments of whom it could be said wouldn't the brightest of light bulbs such as the British Parachute regiment (who make up most of the SAS I believe? ). As a yank I actually took pleasure in seeing the US Rangers been shown up after bragging about been the " best of the best "

Well done again RAF regiment your an elite.

Jawgap

ChicagoJoe wrote: »

I'm certainly no Nazi admirer but it must have been against Hitler Youth units or what was called the Stomach Battalions of old men forced into service towards the end of the war. Now the regular German army not to mention the Paratroopers or the dreaded Waffen SS would be another matter altogether.

Not when they forced the Gustav Line, landed at Salerno or Anzio / Nettuno.

At Cassino they fought both jaeger (light infantry) and fallschirmjager formations - not to mention mountain / alpine troops, panzergrenadiers as well as the usual assortment of 'marching divisions.'

....and during Operation Olive, the assault on the Gothic Line they took on trained mountain troops (at least two divisions) and forced the positions despite having being stripped of a goodly portion of their air support (to support the Dragoon / Anvil landings in southern France) and all their own mountain capable units (this was before 10th Mountain arrived in the US V Army).

The other not insignificant problem was the coalition nature of the forces - which made it very problematic for senior commanders to order even divisional commanders about given that in many cases those commanders had rights of appeal back to their own national governments.

Compare that to the German chain of command and the fact that you had some excellent and capable generals commanding from Kesselring down.

The idea that Allied soldiers were facing old men and boys in Italy should be confined to the same dustbin wherein you will find the similarly expressed notion that they were D-Day dodgers safely enjoying sunshine and vino while the 'real' fighting took place in NW Europe.

cruasder777

tac foley wrote: »

The RAF Regiment is NOT part of SF, not way back when, not now and not in the future.

The problem with many members of the RAF Regiment is that they firmly believe that they are an elite, somehow 'special' organisation.

They do a great of job of being the RAF Regiment, but neither jump to work, nor operate in isolation as combat troops. Their role, as I'm sure you have read, is principally defensive, and not offensive.

'Walting' members of the RAF Regiment are responsible for their bad press among those us in the Army and RM - taken for what they are, they are a great bunch of lads.

Horses for courses, Sir.

An RAF Regiment Gunner telling a Royal Marine that they are equal in any way will have just one result. You'd be very lucky to recognise the Gunner as a human being.

tac

On the RAF website it has stated the RAF Regiment are an elite fighting force, fact.

cruasder777

Tac Foley quote


That is why they have a basic infantry role and the capacity to shoot down enemy aircraft using missiles.

They are also used in A'stan as camp protection, hence the role of exterior patrolling of the various camps, particularly Bastion.

As far as SFSG is concerned - The SFSG follows the general structure of an infantry battalion; it comprises an HQ company, four rifle companies (referred to as "strike" companies and designated A, B, C and F) and a support company. The SFSG is mainly drawn from 1st Battalion, The Parachute Regiment. The Royal Marines mainly form F Company which specializes in supporting amphibious operations. The RAF Regiment also provide a platoon in one of these companies and Forward Air Controllers to direct close air support.[12] The Support company comprises mortar, sniper and patrol platoons. The Patrol platoon operates vehicles including the Jackal and includes Fire Support Groups which include Parachute Regiment, Royal Artillery and RAF Regiment personnel.

Note the numbers we are talking about here - a platoon is 27 men - NOT the entire RAF Regiment organisation. Those selected after passing P Company, like every other member of the UKAF who wears wings on his shoulder, join this single platoon.

As I noted earlier, there is a real misconception held by many members of the RAF Regiment that they are somehow elite. This is categorically NOT the case. It is the constant referral to this claim of elitism that p!sses off those who really DO fit that description.

IF you join the RAF Regiment, you will be joining in a great bunch of professional soldiers who just happen to be in the RAF, and true, they do do well in competitions. However, they do not do these things in large numbers, like the rest of the Army/RN.

tac[/QUOTE]



" They do NOT jump to occupy airfields, or anything else"

Really tell that to the lads from 2 Squadron RAF Regiment who jumped with the Pathfinders and 22 SAS as part of operation Silkman, Sierra Leone

OPERATION SILKMAN - SIERRA LEONE 2001

"Op SILKMAN was the ongoing public information and capability demonstration within Sierra Leone. It was designed to reassure the law abiding locals of the continuing UK commitment to ensuring the stability within the region; whilst also providing an aggressive reminder to the rebels of the UK’s over-the-horizon military capabilities. This demonstration was to take the form of a strategic parachute insertion, live armed, into theatre."


You Really dont have a clue in Iraq the RAF Regiment also patrolled the wadis with rigid raiders and have taken part in other amphibious operations.




They have also held the world record for Tabbing with a loaded Bergan, thats how poor their fitness is.


A WORLD RECORD ATTEMPT - SUCCESS

The Squadron made a second attempt on the Bergathon world record on 21 April 1991, at the London Marathon. The Squadron team completed the route in 4 hours 33 minutes and 58 seconds, beating the previous record by 1 minute and 29 seconds.
.



As not not having mountain warfare skills, they provide instructors to the RMs and Army for FFs

Stop posting inaccurate opinionated nonsense.



here is what 2 sqd RAF Regiment actually do...see for yourself. From jumping with US Special Forces to various operations and aggressive patrols, TAC Foley I am convinced you are a walt.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafregiment/squadrons/iisqnhistory.cfm

cruasder777

tac foley wrote: »

The RAF Regiment is NOT part of SF, not way back when, not now and not in the future.

The problem with many members of the RAF Regiment is that they firmly believe that they are an elite, somehow 'special' organisation.

They do a great of job of being the RAF Regiment, but neither jump to work, nor operate in isolation as combat troops. Their role, as I'm sure you have read, is principally defensive, and not offensive.

'Walting' members of the RAF Regiment are responsible for their bad press among those us in the Army and RM - taken for what they are, they are a great bunch of lads.

Horses for courses, Sir.

An RAF Regiment Gunner telling a Royal Marine that they are equal in any way will have just one result. You'd be very lucky to recognise the Gunner as a human being.



tac

proven wrong on every point.

cruasder777

http://www.recordholdersrepublic.co.uk/recordholdersdetails.asp?id=967


For years the Royal Marines have attempted to beat this record they have always failed.

Not forgetting the fact the RAF regiment have won more cambrian patrol gold medals then any other unit in the UK armed forces.