I agree with much that you have said and am largely in the same boat but I do think the UK and Crown should have done a better job to maintain the links. It definitely feels very half assed relations wise in the 20/21st century.
I agree that they left out the question of whether it needs to continue. In fact I would say this is a very CAF style article that is more about pats on the back and supporting the narrative then critical analysis with alternate ideas moving forward
I guess the question is while we wait for this new crown, when has anything the government "remade" turned out better?
Also I wonder how many people in the PMOs office had been loosing sleep over the religious symbols found on the crown. I imagine most at this point would just consider it...
Does this apply though only to Rangers who have attended the new Ranger Basic Course? I cant see how you would charge someone who has never had to do any sort of training. This is the issue I have heard from some over the years during Ranger exercises
I've heard from higher that things have sorta changed since that Ranger went to go visit the PM a couple years ago but yeah. Rangers have always been a convenient way to pump money into isolated communities but I remember there being quiet the scene during Op Lentus in BC during 2017 when...
The Rangers has grown a lot in the last decade including their funding. There has been a fair bit of mission creep in my opinion and some of their deployments during for example domops could be seen as scandalous under certain lights.
There are definitely ex service members in the patrols particularly in BC but a significant majority of the Rangers are not ex service members including the local patrol leadership who get voted in.
Surprised no one has mentioned the Ranger Bar for the SSM you can get after 3 or 4 ranger exercises.
Choose your own kit, vote on your ranks, no accountability, and spotlight trips to the PMs residence..... sounds like a sweet gig!
https://web.archive.org/web/20150326190445/http://army.gov.au/~/media/Content/Our%20future/About/Army%20101%20Brief%20Ver%207%20-%20Modernising%20from%20Beersheba%20and%20Beyond%20v4.pdf
While old, the attached force structure for the Australian Army in 2015 flys in the face of a pretty admin...
This is completely unacceptable and unworkable as the Royal Westminster Regiment won't be given the jump tasking and as you may know the regiment was a jump regiment not so long ago....../s
All jokes aside I myself was thinking much the same thing with an attempt at a heavy and light division...
Seems like a possible easy fix by focusing on having sub units for CS and CSS units drawn from their end of the country even if you cant do most armored engineer roles in Vancouver for example.
Like I said it would appear that even though there has been consideration of a squadron of tanks for training as well as about 100 LAVs set aside as well bit no2 it would appear that all equipment is on the table to be pushed out to the field force with in house training going on at the unit...
Keep in mind there are currently 82 MBTs and those are all in play moving forward.
A big thing that people don't seem to be mentioning here is that the housing and infrastructure for these vehicles is a big deal. We only have realistically space for 4 squadrons atm and that's split evenly...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.