The Ranger Regiment is a major part of the British Army’s new global posture and was established as part of Future Soldier, the biggest transformation of the British Army in over 20 years… but what is it for?

It is understood that as part of the newly established Army Special Operations Brigade it will be routinely deployed alongside partner forces around the world to counter Violent Extremist Organisations and hostile state threats.

With regards to the new Ranger Regiment, the British Army says the following:

“The Army’s Special Operations Brigade will complement the work of special operations troops across in the Armed Forces and those of our allies. The Ranger Regiment will be capable of operating discreetly in complex, high-threat environments, deterring adversaries and contributing to collective deterrence by training, advising and – if necessary – accompanying partners in support of our national interests.

The Rangers draw their name from an elite unit that fought in the British Army in the 18th Century in North America, using irregular tactics. The British Army shares this heritage with US Special Operations Forces, whose 75th Ranger Regiment traces its lineage back to the same grouping. In addition, our Ranger Regiment draws on the proud tradition of British Army units and formations honed for unconventional operations such as the Special Service Brigades, the Raiding Support Regiment, V-Force, the Chindits and T-Force during World War Two.”

Speaking to the House of Commons, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said:

“On the Rangers, we envisage that a large proportion of their time will not necessarily be spent with NATO allies. They may be in Africa, the middle east or further afield. We have already started spending the money to equip them to be, if necessary, more independent. The reason that they are partly special is that they will often have to deploy without the usual huge amount of logistical support that a normal conventional unit gets, so they will have to be effectively a more selected cadre of people with better equipment to be able to be more independent and more 360 in their integration.

They may well be alongside an African country with a lesser communications capability. Part of what we are trying to do is to help those countries by sometimes being their enabler and giving them support in signals, helicopters, or intelligence and surveillance so that they can understand what is coming, and I think the Rangers will be able to do that. In anticipation of NATO’s requirements, we will be plugged into the NATO special operations forces to make sure that we are aligned where we can be.”

The Regiment, initially announced earlier this year, will stand-up on 1 December 2021, commencing cadres and training for its four battalions.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

124 COMMENTS

  1. Rangers are a good idea. Forward based, partnered with local forces, the aim is to snuff out trouble before it takes hold. I still don’t understand why they just don’t call them Army Commandos; that way we don’t need to create ANOTHER infantry Regiment in a small Army. I also think the new cap badge is a bit Action Man but overall it’s a good move.

    One problem I do see is that in such a small Army having yet another elite formation will mean that the recruiting base for exceptional soldiers, even if we are expanding elite roles, gets smaller. Anyway the very best of luck to the new Regiment and everyone who serves therein.

    • Commandos as a title suggest raiding forces in littoral areas. These Rangers won’t be doing that.
      But I do agree that there is a difficulty in having too many elite forces. There is a related problem in having a lot of highly specialised forces (therefore not too many general purpose forces) in a small army.

      • The term Commando comes from the Boer war where small groups of Boers were teamed into a group called a Commando (Dutch word for command group). They operated independently on the high velt miles away from the sea. I think the term fits exactly with the concept of operations these Rangers will undertake.

    • Different CONOPS. They will not deploy as formed units, but in small teams of a a few dozen – like the advisers sent to Oman.

    • Rangers only one glasgow rangers now 2 never surrender , Nicola will never get her way, The ultimate name for a fighting force the RANGERS ps all the bears will b signing up. Just you,s Scotland bashers watch rangers celtic game you will see wot i am going on about ,snp will never win ,Scottish& British ,Rule Britannia that,s what us rangers fan,s sing .

  2. “Partly special” WTF is that? More spin in order to keep the Infantry capbadge mafia happy. Yes they may get some extra funding but I guarantee they will not be independent in any shape or form, and all these extra “assets” will just be ripped out of your normal Regiments to back fill as the task/org requires. Concept is good but let’s say it a it is, just a bunch of reduced manned Battalions to keep the cap badges alive!

    • Absolutely. The logical end point to this nonsense will be to end up with dozens of so called elite 200-300 man battalions with vague notions of providing training, reconnaissance and partnering with local forces upstream of the threats…..but with no actual Army that could take on anything like a pier adversary left because it’s been completely gutted.

      Fine if you effectively want a purely peacekeeping and advisory force. Not so good if you want anything remotely impressive and useful to offer up to NATO to contribute to high-end warfare!

      • “The logical end point to this nonsense will be to end up with dozens of so called elite 200-300 man battalions with vague notions of providing training, reconnaissance and partnering with local forces upstream of the threats…..but with no actual Army that could take on anything like a pier adversary left because it’s been completely gutted.”

        In one, no meat on the bone left to cut and solely reliant on other nations if we ever do need to defend ourselves against a peer adversary.

        You would have to be blind not to see what’s coming next.

        China, Russia approve 2021–25 road map to increase military co-operation24 NOVEMBER 2021

        https://www.janes.com/defence-news/terror-insurgent-group/latest/china-russia-approve-202125-road-map-to-increase-military-co-operation

      • You have a good point. The army will become too fragmented and too specialised and will only be able to do niche operations at small to medium scale – and for a short period of time.
        We have moved a very long way from the 5 identical (versatile) multirole brigades (MRBs) under FAS (Next Steps) which ran up to mid-2012.

      • I don’t think there’s any real intent for the Army to contribute to NATO anymore, it seems that’s left to the Navy and Airforce.
        And in fairness it would take years of rebuilding for that to change anyway. This seems like a good way of wringing some use out of otherwise useless numbers.

        • Do say more. How is the RAF Regt over trained? Their utilty as airfield defenders has reduced – they don’t do LLAD anymore – they gave their Rapier FUs to the Royal Artillery years ago.

          • Correct never has an organisation believed they so good yet have no combat history to prove it! My son in law has done over 20 years in the RAF Reg (he is now allowed in my house so I’ve softened a lot with age lol) and he knows the score with their nonsense. But, FFS keep them in the ORBAT as real soldiers may get dicked to stag on bases/RAF based if they get binned!!!!!

          • Yes mate a few JTACs, CBRN det and a few lads in a rifle company! But mostly as an organisation are full of self importance and not effective in most roles (and that’s from my son in law) 😂! They will be for the chop if the RAF need to lose PIDs mate believe me.

        • I personally think this could have been a role for the RAF Regt or a number of current Army units on rotation who already do this. Why create a ‘partly special’ unit. SFSG has worked imo so let’s not dilute our elite forces.

      • Germans found this in WW1,creating stormtrooper units due out the best from other infantry units which weaken them overall. When they broke through there was no back up from other units

        • I believe the Waffen SS took the best men. And it was the Waffen SS always on the scene as fire brigade to stem the breach or lead assaults.

          • Correct mate even later on in the war when it was conscription for the Waffen SS they still got all the hardest and most reactive tasks to stabilise fronts or extract lesser motivated forces!

          • I’d suggest 2nd SS Panzer Korps around Kharkov offensive early 43 and of course the Roman army two of the most effective fighting forces ever seen.

            Well off topic now.

          • Well off topic but very interesting subject, Kharkov and later tank battles are a subject I find most interesting.

        • Good question, and what sort of selection will it be? Probably quite naff TBH, as the Rangers will not be fighting anyone no matter what chuff the spin says to justify this rather poor idea. They may mentor, train and work with other developing countries militaries but as for kinetic ops, no chance.

  4. Hollywood has a lot to answer for. It seems that after watching loads of vids where a single SF guy (or of late female) can drop into darkest Africa, armed with a paperclip, a roll of harry black maskers and a vegan ration pack can take out an entire army of ak47 carrying thugs, rescue the girl and be back before the 10pm news. As others have pointed out, when you reduce your recruiting pool, you reduce the calibre of people. Just glad I’m a big fat hairy civy.

    • And the sad reality is, when US SOF units have dropped into “darkest Africa” as you say, they got ripped to shreds by the locals cos they were lightly equipped without the proper supporting arms, c.f. the Tongo Tongo ambush in Niger in 2017, and the infamous battle of Mogahdishu, which coincidentally involved a large Ranger force, and in true Hollywood tradition, was later turned into a major US military victory by Jerry Bruckheimer

  5. Great idea, although I’m not sure why the “special” units currently in existence can’t be built on and used to do this job. We have the SAS, SBS, SRR, SFSG (as well as a more “commando” focused Royal Marines Commando force) already that if expanded and resourced sufficiently could surely do this job on top of all they already do. The SAS, SRR and SFSG already recruit predominantly from an ever decreasing infantry force within the regular Army and this is obviously going to put more pressure on an already under pressure part of the army. Not a great title for the new unit though. It’s a relatively small complaint for me and don’t get me wrong I think the British probably had more of a right to adopt the Ranger title than any other country at one time, given that Rogers Rangers, Butler Rangers etc all existed as Provincial forces but within the British Army during the war with France in North America and the American war of Independence. However we disbanded all these units and the US Army formally adopted the title for its special operations light infantry forces 80 years ago and this just looks like a lame attempt at copying them. Surely with our history we could have come up with another historically significant “British” title for this new and special unit. failing that I’m not too sure why they didn’t just form an British Army Commando Brigade and reform No.1, No.2, No.3 and No.4 Commando to make it up.

    • “I’m not sure why the “special” units currently in existence can’t be built on and used to do this job. We have the SAS, SBS, SRR, SFSG”

      Morning. Having units like “Rangers”, the SFAB, S OPs Bde and the FCF enables those true Tier 1 units to get on and do their stuff on more important operations that let them use their unique skills.
      SFSG was originally created to do exactly that, despite rumours of favouritism from General Mike Jackson. The SFSG themselves have seen an expansion in tasks. They are also not a Tier 1 SF unit like the SAS,SBS,SRR.

      This “new” “Special Operations” Brigade does not mean Special Forces. True SF have been overstretched for decades as they are the natural first port of call by HMG, so any help in the Grey Zone area of sub threshold war is a plus.

      I would be wary of “building on” SF units, if you mean making them larger to take on more roles.
      They should be small and elite. Let other units do this stuff.

      Like the Parachute Regiment, then Pathfinder Platoon, I would expect the Ranger Regiment to be a natural stepping stone to those going on to apply for UKSF.

  6. The Royal Irish Rangers? You remember, even if Whitehall’s tactful memory lapse doesn’t.

    England, then the United Kingdom has fought no major war without allies (including Empire forces) abroad since William and Mary. Before that you have to go further back to the time of bows and arrows. We are too small a nation to fight such a war, though luckily, we have had some wonderful Jack Tars to level up the odds at sea. Almost by accident we have discovered a different way to fight, taught to us by our opponents and allies. We learned a few cunning plans. We fought two, perhaps three ‘off the books’ confrontations, emergencies, since the 50s so successfully few know much about them. Unfortunately having a few blokes in the right place at the right time usually means you cannot talk about it. Good.

    • So I’m guessing the Falklands doesn’t count because it wasn’t a major war, and it wasn’t a major war because it didn’t involve two or more coalitions of allies fighting eachother? How nice neat and circular.

  7. I just wonder why we are reinventing the wheel, give 42Cdo its support company back free up 1 Para from SF duties and you have the core of a Ranger force right there, the old red and green kick arse machine. Also when you think of all the old cap badges we have lost including the Irish Rangers the pessimist in me is saying this is just more political BS for the media to say they are making the Army bigger and more effective.

    • Steven wrote:
      “”the pessimist in me is saying this is just more political BS for the media to say they are making the Army bigger and more effective.””

      Oh how we all laughed at the carry on up the Kyber film and the Devils in skirts, now it reads as dev and bill in a skirt

      • The Paras are down to just 2 units as 1 Para is permanently assigned to SF protection something the Spearhead battalion could do, 47Cdo was stood up a couple of years ago for fleet protection but it was 42Cdo that lost its support company and has now become the fleet protection specialists so now there is just 2 Cdo units.
        Both the Para and the Marines specialise in out of area operations and so by bringing 1 Para and 42 Cdo together you would not be reinventing the wheel and ripping the hart out of other regiments who will lose most of there able bodied personnel to the new Ranger’s.
        The deal has been signed but is it just more showboating buy our political and military elite.

        • In regard to 1 Para they do a lot more than SF protection! Teams take on many tier 2/1 type tasks without SF teams involved, or form part of the actual assault teams etc. Their role is vast and has increased certainty over the last 10 years. I agree with your overall thought process however but the Rangers are more akin to the old BATTs but with a lot more government spin!

          • Sorry for the delay in getting back to you I have been out and about for a couple of days,
            I know 1 Para are well integrated into the SF and it would have been a non starter as the dirty deal has already been signed, I just do not understand the thinking behind what the MoD are trying to prove, we have the Riffles who would have been ideal for this as well but seem to be being pushed to the side line ready to be axed quietly when no one is watching. The MoD keep blowing their trumpet saying how well the Army is doing and how well it is going to to be in a few years time but all the time cutting the numbers and wasting money on kit that dose not work. Maybe I am getting a bit long in the tooth and am missing something but I do believe a few years ago most of our poilitical and military elite of today would be hung for treason.

      • Paras and Commandos (highly agressive warfighting troops are classically inserted in a novel/specialised way). They have a completely different role to the new Rangers who are “capable of operating discreetly in complex, high-threat environments, deterring adversaries and contributing to collective deterrence by training, advising and – if necessary – accompanying partners in support of our national interests”.

    • Watched a vid on the Black Watch (Canada) my drill sergeant was proper Red Hackle(Perthshire), consider HLI,KOSB rubbed out and now ‘rangers rifles..fck knows who else,never mind we’re getn CRT and we’ll all be nice..just look at Q at recruitment..? Oh you’ve got 2 mummies,want a commission?
      GFY. 15 para.

  8. The regimental badge is already coming In for a bashing. It looks like that of an “Apartheid” unit apparently?

    Though I recall that the same happened with the badge of the SFSG. It looked to Waffen SS for some! 😆

    Whatever. To work the S Ops Bde needs enablers of its own. None if which yet exist.

    I, like Rob, don’t see why they just designate individual battalions “commando ” within existing regiments.

    I guess that doesn’t give enough spin or headlines while the army’s kinetic ability is further reduced.

    • Daniele.

      Maj problems with this new review:

      Artillery (or Fires – a horrible Americanism). We still don’t know what replaces the 105mm light gun, what SP wheeled 155mm we are getting or the numbers including enhanced GMLRS. A stand off Army surely needs plenty of artillery.

      Air Defence. Yes we have the new Land Ceptor but so few. How will these light forces based over seas defend themselves?

      Why, if the Brigade Combat Teams are meant to be all arms self supporting units, are the logistics, Signals and Engineering forces organised separately?

      Oh and then there is the omnishambles of the next generation vehicle procurement which, trust me, has some way to run.

      • Snap mate. The enablers have remained separate. Sceptically? It makes 3 Div look bigger when a layman looks at a website with the orbat.
        Look at 6 Div. It has a S Ops Bde and 77 Bde in it. Neither are full brigades. Divisions in name Only.

      • Rob, the article is about the Ranger Regt. Are you suggesting they need huge arty sp? They exist to: be capable of operating discreetly in complex, high-threat environments, deterring adversaries and contributing to collective deterrence by training, advising and – if necessary – accompanying partners in support of our national interests.

        • To do that should they not require?

          Their own AAC element.

          Their own Logistic tail – RLC Regiment, REME Bn, RAMC unit.

          Artillery – not necessarily a regiment of guns, but how about a regiment of agile vehicles with Brimstone or Spike NLOS?

          Signals Reg for EW/SIGINT.

          None of which exist. Or if they do they are pulled from other areas. They could exist, if the army distributed the headcount it has better, but that would mean upsetting the Cap Badge Mafia.

          I read that the reg will be spread from the Middle East to Africa.

          • Mate they are going to be a little like the old BATTs but with more spin and possible kinetic capability (but not much). As I’ve said mate any other assets they need will be ripped from other big standard units to cobble together for whatever op they are deployed on.

          • BATTs, which in recent years were the “Specialised Infantry Group” of up to 5 battalions, which were halved in size and called “new” by the MoD.

            Which are now morphing into the Security Force Assistance Battalions. Which by my understanding do much the same thing, train and advise while letting proxies do the bulk of the fighting.

            SF from a non CRW or deployed sqn were also used for that, and made good money for HMG.

            They should keep the Reapers and assign them directly to S Ops Bde for starters.

          • You know that the Ranger units and the SFA units will all end up doing pretty much the same thing mate.

          • This is the issue, yes. Which makes me think it’s at heart a cuts exercise “getting rid” of battalions from an all arms brigade format as the enablers from the CS and CSS arms don’t exist for them.

            If the enablers were found for it fine, as I understand the rationale behind the Grey zone jargon.

        • In short, YES. If you deploy a light force forward they need to be backed up with something. For the new Ranger Regiment that means good local air defence, secure logistics and long ranged fires. If we are moving to a stand off strategy, and we are, then you need stand off weapons.

          • Just read of the 1st enhancement to S Ops Bde.

            The HAC Patrols Sqn will provide Sp OP patrols to the Bde.

            They already do this in support of 4/73.

    • People have said it’s like the Rhodesian Selious scouts? If that’s the case then what’s the issue, the scouts were absolutely the best at what they did mate. Very interesting combat history for those lads.

      • Are they C Sqn Rhodesian SAS? Or am I getting mixed up?
        I read somewhere 22 tried to retain some lineage with them.

        • Hi Daniele/Airborne. I have a friend who is an ex Selous Scout-a mild mannered and genuinely devout Christian who just had his church with a largely Black congregation, looted and badly damaged in the July unrest. They were a unit much in the mould of many specialised units the world over. If they were a Death squad then basically not much different from soldiers the world over-that is their trade. The men they were opposing used similar tactics-downing civilian aircraft for example in the shooting down of Viscounts and in one case butchering the survivors including women and children. No side had a monopoly on savagery.in that war.
          Cheers
          from drizzly Durban

          • Mate they were tough professionals in their trade, the same as many other previous and current units and operators. You fight the wars that you are sent to and on occasion have to fight the way the opposition does, otherwise you will not have the impact required. Cheers mate.

        • The scouts were initially recruited from C Sqn in the 60s although my knowledge on the subject is sadly limited, as my time was with 44 Bde when I was in SA. Although the Scouts and Rhodesia were still a popular subject for the blokes to chat about.

    • Very similar to the Selous Scouts capbadge – this Rhodesian Army’s premier counter-insurgency unit. Formed from C Squadron 22 SAS (22 SAS had been called the Malayan Scouts and was formed by Mike Calvert (former Chindit and WW2 SAS commander) from the territorial 21 SAS (Artists Rifles) and a contingent of Rhodesian volunteers (with experience with Z Force in Burma in WW2, fighting alongside the hill tribes) for the Malayan emergency. After three years C Squadron went back to Rhodesia and was replaced by an ANZAC squadron (which later became the Aus and NZ SAS). After UDI in 1965, C Squadron together with African soldiers from the Rhodesian Rifles formed the Selous Scouts. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.bidorbuy.co.za%2Fimage%2Fupload%2Fuser_images%2F717%2F454717%2F454717_120806104802_IMG_0003.JPG&f=1&nofb=1

  9. Does this mean that with so many elite units, the Queen will be guarded by the SAS at Buckingham Palace? Will we have enough “ordinary” troops to do any war fighting?

    • Your irony is acute! The Queen is guarded by Protection Command of the Metropolitan Police, as I am sure you know. But I do agree that with too many specialised units there will be less ‘core’ units for conventional warfighting.

    •  “Queen will be guarded by the SAS at Buckingham Palace? “

      No. Public duties are unchanged and are split between LDist and 4LBCT.

      We have Infantry but many of the battalions have been reduced. What the army lacks is the CS and CSS formations to organise them into effective all arms formations. Which is what these BCT are supposed to be about.

      Tier 1 SF are from UKSFG, assisted by the SFSG, which are Tier 2.

      The Ranger Regiment acts much as the FCF will do. In the Grey Zone, where most of the operations currently are. “Under the threshold” as they call it.

      We still require war fighting elements. That is 3 Div. Which is currently lacking.

  10. So what will they be able to do that an ordinary infantry battalion couldn’t do with a bit of extra training?
    Where is the crown on the badge?

    • Jacko,’where is the crown on the badge?’ Absolutely.That’s why I said above it looks a bit Action Man. Even if they aren’t a ‘Royal Regiment’ (yet?) they need some British heraldry somewhere.

    • The Ranger Regiment is a brand new regiment and does not have Royal in its title – such an honour can take 50 or more years to earn – hence no crown in the badge.

        • Haha Paul-when SA became a Republic in 1961 many of the “English” Army regiments lost their Royal titles. The (Royal) Durban light infantry had to say goodbye to the’R’ but hung on to the Crown by referring to it as a heraldic device-a rose by any other name! For many years thereafter they toasted the Queen on her birthday in the Officers Mess

    • They will not be deployed as battalions – they provide a cadre of ‘advisers’ who can lead and mentor groups of local forces. The Russians do this with their Wagner Group, the Americans Green Berets. We have used SAS and SBS to do this in the past, but there are nowhere near enough to go around, and its a waste of their skills.

      They will be deployed in small teams of probably no more than 10 to 15, expected to operate independently from thier battalion HQ, embedded in local forces. They will be deployed in regions semi-permanently, so build up trust, local knowledge and language skills to gain an intimate understanding of these conflicts, the main adversaries and partners before things get to the level of needing a major conventional deployment.

      Presently that could include with Ukrainian COIN forces, or Somali, Kurdish and Mozambican forces combating ISIS, for example.

      They will both help these forces fight better to contain a crisis, and also develop the in-country expertise and trust needed to ensure a full deployment is properly informed and thus makes the right assumptions and decisions. They also provide early warning of upcoming crises by virtue of being in-situ.

      It should not be forgotten that one of the reasons we were successful in 1982 is that many of the Royal Marines staff officers had been to the Falklands and knew the place intimately from sailing around it and other pursuits. In Afghanistan we got so much wrong becuase no-one was ever in country for more than 6 months.

      Z Force of WW2 is the best equivalent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z_Special_Unit

  11. Envisaging, the future Army being leaner ie regular force 70.000 with 30.000 reservists Creating another Batt/ Regiment of Rangers from a shrinking Pool .Would this mean that Other Regiments such as 1 of the Rifles would disappear as for the New Cap Badge its already ruffling feather for its similarities too the old South African Apartied Death squad

    • Hi Tommo. just a comment-the unit was not South African but was the Rhodesian Selous Scouts. It was named after the early pioneer Frederick Selous, a fine soldier and multi talented naturalist. Apartheid was never official policy in Rhodesia and the cap badge featuring a raptor-eagle or similar bird of prey is used all over the world in Military insignia. In short this Daily Mail article is a pile of Horseshit!!!

      • O bugger , looks like I’m going too have to cancel my Daily Mail subs thanks Geoff, Rhodesia, can I say that name without upsetting wakey Wokies

        • Hi Tommo. At the risk of provoking further Wokie anger I could say that I only read it for the Tits and Ass 😄. It is however an enjoyable read full of appalling grammar and syntax and lots of really shoddy journalism!!

          • Morning my friend.

            We get the DM, but are increasingly wondering why! I’d never use any newspaper for defence related stuff.

          • Hello Daniele. Hope you and your family are well. On the subject of Rhodesia and mention elsewhere of the English Civil War,many forget that the Rhodesian conflict on the ground and politically had elements of Civil War about it. Much of the settler population was British born or the sons and daughters of British parents including Ian Smith, much of his cabinet, his Police commissioner,the first President and many of the military men-top brass and enlisted men. My late father in law was ex RAF and flew as a spotter pilot for the RhAf. Much of the Army had strong links to the UK and uniforms, ranks, insignia etc were based on British counterparts. It was a sad and dreadful conflict. If the government of Ian Smith and Abel Muzorewa had been recognised by Thatcher, Zimbabwe would have been a beacon of hope in the mess of post colonial Africa. Mugabe was truly one of the worlds most evil megalomaniacs.
            20 degrees but with a chilly wind here today but much better tomorrow-28 degrees
            Cheers my friend

  16. There’s a lot of mixed up descriptions in the news about the Ranger Regiment, which is frustrating me in understanding what the intention is with them (maybe that’s the point?).
    They’re supposed to be SF and provide support and training in the “grey zone” to allies and stuff like that. Which is sort of like the US Army Green Berets (which I’ve heard them referred to), except that those guys are very much top tier SF and specialise in all kinds of other stuff too. But they’ve also referenced the US 75th Ranger Regiment, which is an entirely different outfit and more analogous (I think) to the UK’s Special Forces Support Group (SFSG), if that even still exists. Turning a Scottish infantry battalion (or any other standard infantry battalion of the British army) into the core of a tier one unit à la the Green Berets does not sound achievable to me without significant wastage. If they’re just another 75th Rangers, then what are 1 Rifles and the Paras supposed to be doing?
    I like the idea of a Ranger Regiment to deploy to Ukraine and wind up Putin’s little green men, but without a clear understanding of where they fit in the new ORBAT I’m not sure why one of our existing tier 1 or 2 SF units aren’t already doing that. Is this supposed to be somewhere between the SAS and the Paras? If so, once again I’m not sure why we’re trying to use a regular infantry battalion as the core. Am I missing something?

    • Because we have so many infantry battalions and so few CS and CSS to pair them with, creating proper all arms formations.

      So get rid of 4 with Rangers, another 4 with SFAB, and reduce them to 250, 300 men while we’re at it.

      Yes SGSG exist.

      I don’t describe Green Berets as teir 1 though.

  17. Sad Future for once a proud force, all little bits that just do not work together with no real weight of fight. The Top Brass have to take their share of blame for ripping the heart out of what once was the best in the World.
    With regards to Scots serving, it provided way more than it’s share of the fight in the past, that’s how we had an Empire and kicked ass. Sorry to say the WOKE Brigade have gotten in and you can’t even call your mate ‘MATE’ in case it upsets someone.
    God help us all if there is a real fight to deal with. Just as well the Fleet is still working with the RM who can still deliver.
    Heavy heart. 😠

  18. As a Ex Special Forces lad I think this is absolutely ridiculous we are taking off Paul to give to Peter if you see what I mean but this is just the NON MILITARY HELMETS trying to be clever..

  19. I can’t help but think that all those M1117, the Americans left in Afghanistan, would have been ideal for this UK Ranger unit.

    • Most of the time they will be training and advising foreign armies – if it all turns to warfighting, won’t it all have gone horribly wrong?

      • The reports say the Rangers are expected to fight alongside the friendly armies that they train. I am too old to be a Ranger, but if I was, I would rather be in an armoured, ied proof M1117, than an open land rover.

        • It sounds as if they are too lightly equipped to be credible as warfighters. Why be sucked into some other country’s war, particulalary one where there are no ‘British interests’?
          What if that war goes badly – would we reinforce the Ranger unit from the UK – or pull it out with some embarrassment? Who has actually thought this through?

          • Think things through? Have you looked at our officials & politicians lately? They think it more important to virtue signal than to deal with the real world.

  20. Whereof the British insistence on designating what are really battalion size units as regiments? Although technically correct, it gives off a false impression and certainly does not deceive a potential adversary.

  21. These are just renamed Royal Marine Commandos in a half size unit doing the dirty work enforcing oligarchical mandates to exploit poor nation’s resources.

    You’ll find them in the Congo protecting child labour mining lithium. They’ll be sent to Syria to help ISIS murder the indigenous just as the SAS do today. They’ll pop up in the Pamirs (northern Afghanistan) disrupting China’s Belt and Road initiative to help JPMorgan make a few extra billions in profit at the expense of the British taxpayer.

    The Royal Marines have been of no practical use since the dissolution of the Royal Navy in the 1950s, and they are finally getting their just desserts by being amalgamated with the Pongos!

    This whole Ranger Cod’s Wallop is just pure hypocrisy a la Ministry of Defence. The British army consists of two divisions (approximately 16,000 men) plus a few loose cannons like the SAS and SBS. The British Army is not able to defend the UK and Northern Ireland as it is. To send a bunch of poseurs off around the world is pure stupidity.

  24. While it is possible to paint an alluring picture of all the things these Rangers will be able to do, the concept is basically flawed.

    As I understand it, when an infantry bn is given a training and mentoring role, it keeps the 250+ officers, WOs and NCOs, who will organise and lead the training/mentoring – but loses nearly all its 300 squaddies, who are distributed between the other battalions in their infantry admin Division.

    It means the battalion ceases to exist as a combat unit and becomes the equivalent of the old British Army Training team (BATT). It will be useful to train up Nigerian, Kenyan etc troops to combat ISIS insurgents etc.

    But I can’t see it being able to conduct grey zone operations outside these partner countries, unless maybe short OAU-led deployments. For which it will be dependent on host nation CS and CSS of variable quality, or swiping the same from UK combat formations.

    One also has to question whether we, with our now very small army, can afford to gift 8 battalions away (4 Ranger, 4 SFAB) to help out around the globe. That is a quarter of our infantry that will not be available to the UK if needed. The US Army staffs said quite recently that their equivalent battalions could possibly be re-formed as combat battalions later on in any wider war – this because they would need to train up 300 squaddies to reach establishment.

    I can see the attraction of the Rangers and SFAB to the Government and Treasury, it lets them effectively cut 4 battalions, avoid the public opprobium of axing local regiments and of course save lots of money. When the political spin doctors get to work on it, it can be portrayed to the ordinary person as some marvellous new ‘special’ force and Britain playing this big role on the global stage.

    From a military standpoint, deploying a good chunk of your army in penny-packets around the globe, is a rather flawed strategy if you suddenly need to shape up to more existential threats closer to home.

    HMG got away with pulling this stunt once with the SFABs. That should be it, we haven’t the troops to spare for more. We should cap this political indulgence at 4 bns rather than 8, call them SFABs, Rangers, BATTs, Little Gray Men or whatever they like, but not pretend to think they are some super new ‘special’ force.

    Better still, leave these battalions alone and simply recruit a new Rangers regt from scratch, attract those who are happy to serve overseas for extended tours, rather than dragooning others whose family commitments make long service overseas less attractive.

  25. I wonder who dreams these things up, and whether they really do believe that this kind of garbage, distracts those interested in this subject matter?

    A New British army outfit = another cut in numbers. The really is that simple. There are many reasons why there are less individuals looking to join infantry regiments.

    No Afghan, no real action now in any theatre around the globe, for young fire pissing trained soldiers to go to, and …

    Shite pay, mediocre living conditions, shite food, shite piss poor organisation at times, we could go on but hey …

    Going slightly off subject … I see (not for the first, nor second time lately) Americans intelligence are suggesting that Russia has amassed 175,000 troops on the border of Ukraine, showing clear signs of mega sabre rattling, which could result in … well who knows.

    Russia has and active army of 1,013,628, with 2,000,000 reserves. Maybe this new jock led bunch of ‘fire pissers’ could help reduce tensions on the Ukraine border, as well as other world hot spots?? (and save money into the bargain)

    If it wasn’t so laughable, it really would be quite sad!

  27. Public relations,but we’ll cut down the white men,get 30% women and go full potatoes on multicultural with prayer breaks in the middle of a firefight,and scrap Scottish Regiments,yea way to go dickhead,down the pan.🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿😠

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here