One of the revelations in the recently published MoD document ‘Future Soldier’ that has received relatively little publicity has been the demise of the 1st Battalion of the Royal Regiment of Scotland, The Royal Scots Borderers, known as 1 SCOTS in army parlance.
On December 1st this year they became the 1st Battalion, The Rangers (1 RANGERS), part of the new four battalion Ranger Regiment.
The author, Stuart Crawford, was a regular officer in the Royal Tank Regiment for twenty years, retiring in the rank of Lieutenant Colonel in 1999. Crawford attended both the British and US staff colleges and undertook a Defence Fellowship at Glasgow University.
This article is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.
Sadly, this is yet another step in the dismantling of the historical, some would say traditional, Scottish infantry regiments, and we need to go back a few years to get a proper handle on what’s actually going on here. At the end of the twentieth century there were six regular infantry regiments in the administrative grouping known as the Scottish Division; they were the Royal Scots, the Royal Highland Fusiliers (RHF), the King’s Own Scottish Borderers (KOSB), the Black Watch, The Highlanders, and the Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders. These were themselves in most cases the result of previous amalgamations.
In the late 1990s the idea was mooted that the Royal Scots and KOSB should amalgamate, an idea driven largely by poor recruiting figures at the time and the fact that their traditional recruiting areas were contiguous. Although this decision was temporarily rescinded, it was eventually implemented as part of the ‘Options for Change’ reforms, and on 1st August 2006 the traditional Scottish regiments were amalgamated into the amorphous Royal Regiment of Scotland. As part of that process the Royal Scots and KOSB joined and became The Royal Scots Borderers, 1st Battalion, Royal Regiment of Scotland (RRS).
This was all driven through by the MoD and the Chief of the General Staff at the time, General Sir Mike Jackson, in the teeth of a fairly energetic and vociferous campaign to keep the traditional Scottish regiments in which I was intimately involved. In the end, aided by a fairly supine Council of Colonels Commandant of the Scottish regiments, the forces of darkness prevailed. One of our main arguments had been that it was easier, politically and emotionally, to cut one unit from a multi-battalion regiment (which the RRS became) than it was to axe one of the historic regiments.
And so it has come to pass. Only six years after the formation of the RRS, the Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders (5 SCOTS) was reduced to single company strength – Balaklava Company – to be used for ceremonial duties in Scotland. Thus were the descendants of the famous “Thin Red Line” of Crimean War folklore and every war fought by Britain since reduced to what amounts to no more than a small support unit for VisitScotland.
Now it has happened again. The Borderers, 1 SCOTS, has become one of the four regular infantry battalions from which the new Ranger Regiment will be “seeded” as it is stood up. In time anyone from across the army can apply to join the Rangers, and if they successfully complete an eight week, two part assessment process then recruits will be posted to the new Regiment and undergo a further eight months of additional training before they are good to go.
Whether the Ranger Regiment will live up to the hype remains to be seen, but the current Chief of the General Staff (CGS), General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith, has more or less staked his reputation on it being a success. For Scottish readers, however, a few more details of what this actually means for us should perhaps be underlined. First of all, obviously the RRS loses another battalion, down from an initial five to three plus one company. On top of this, each Ranger battalion will be only 250 strong, half that of 1 SCOTS.
Furthermore, the new battalion will, as far as I can ascertain, sport the grey beret and other accoutrements designated for it, and there would appear to be no record left of its previous “Scottishness”, subject to confirmation at time of writing. So, essentially, another Scottish infantry battalion has been lopped off the order of battle in a smoke and mirrors operation that would make any magician proud.
Does any of this matter? Well, it depends on your point of view. I have always believed that those currently serving are the custodians of the history of those who went before and the future of those who are yet to come. Our military should not be changed and re-organised at the whim of those currently in command; after all, they work for us, the electorate, not the other way around.
What is not in doubt is that the Scottish element of the British army has once again been diminished. What is also clear is that, up to this point, no politician of note from any of our political parties has said anything about it publically.
Does it just not matter to them anymore?
I always got the impression that the Scottish regiments had recruitment problems; is this still the case?
Absolutely. You only have to look at the photo to see that the RRoS is still having to recruit from abroad to keep up numbers. The Commonwealth guys make a valuable contribution, but do not have that connection to the Golden Thread.
I am ex Gordons/Ex Highlanders and have a real passion for the Scottish Regiments, but with under recruiting, this is inevitable.
How much of it is due to wee Jimmy Cranky and her SNP shenanigans.
I’ve always maintained that if HM.Gov wanted full recruitment and a waiting list. They could do it almost overnight. All it takes is the correct incentives/benefits package.
You don’t half talk shite pal. The scottish government have zero influence in defence matters. This is just another covert attack on the regimental system in Scotland. Reduced from six full battalions at the end of the Cold War to three today.
The Army moot it as a new regiment being raised. It isn’t. It’s four regular battalions of line infantry being re-purposed and reduced in strength by half. So two full size regiments ( 1000 to 1200) men cut from the standing army. The Tory es have never been the friends of the Army. Every one of their governments have savagely and regularly reduced military strength since 1990.
bull mate.
Scotland punches well above its weight in population percentage terms and the SNP fought hard to oppose Tory and Labour cuts to the regiments.
You should stick to your sectarian nonsense and stay out of Scotlands grown up politics
Your reply just dropped in my mail today.
My point about SNP shenanigans was their stirring up of hatred for people south of the border and in Westminster. Having an effect on recruitment into the British Armed Forces. A bunch of historical rivalry nonsense. When we decide to stand together united, we are strong. Proof of the pudding was creating the largest empire the world has ever known.
As for the sectarian remark. I’ve always considered that to be a religious polarisation thing but I suppose it can be a nationalist too. (BTW atheist, so I have no part in those shenanigans either.)
I have family on both sides of the border. I’m proudly British before claiming allegiance to any single country. Even in sports I cheer for all four home nations. So, I don’t think I deserve that particular slur. Then again, if it makes you feel good, have at it bonny lad.
Steve,
When the BAOR drawdown started the Army wanted to relocate units to Scotland. The SNP demanded (and won) that only Scottish regiments be placed in Scotland problem there very few purse Scottish regiments other than Inf. Then when the inf regiment were cut (more than just the Scottish) The SNP painted the picture that only scottish unit were getting cut, when actually it was across the board .
thats is a complete and utter set of utter mistruths you have just regaled us all with.
We have NEVER had all / only Scottish regiments based in Scotland.
since the 90’s there has been mainly English regiments of infantry and marines in Scotland (albeit with a few token Jocks).
We have also magically gone from 7 battalions in 1993 down to 3 in 2021.
The loss of Scottish (particularly Highland Regiments) represents specific cultural loss to Scotland in a way which simply does not occur with the loss of Mash from the South….. but then, you would neither know nor care about that would you because you have only a far right unionist horse in that race
oh dear, what a clown. And pray tell us what exactly have the SNP got to do with it?
in fact, they are the ONLY party standing up for Scottish regiments
I was Adjt 1 KOSB 99-01. We deployed to Cyprus for a 2 year posting. At the time of deployment we were fully manned to establishment. The problem for us was that 1RS were having understandable recruitment issues (their area was smaller and more affluent than ours), and their problem was always going to be ours.
It’s also about numbers scotland used to have loads of different regiments and Scotland has a population of about 5 million it’s about the same amount as east anglia yet the royal anglian are only 2 battalions and 1 reserve so it stands to reason Scotland is going to struggle to fill so many different battalions
As per Ian below, I’ve always understood that one of the criteria the Army had when reducing establishment was which regiments were under-recruited and were at risk of becoming ineffective. My view on this is that the Army must stay relevant in the modern day and that cannot be subservient to being slaves to history. You preserve where you can but change where you must.
One battalion cap-badged regiments are somewhat anachronistic in a 73,000, 21st century army, surely? Pretty much all of our peers have a Corps of Infantry of some sort. By all means keep the traditions alive, but not to the detriment of the efficiency and agility of our armed forces. In the RAF famous squadrons are no more than ‘number plates’ these days for aircrew managed centrally, the RN has mulitple crews who rotate through ships and has long since made it’s ‘flotillas’ purely administrative lables. The Army must do the same.
I left school 1975 my school friends joined marines army. They joined RHF.as lots of soldiers joined from ayrshire.it seems mod are making a mockerybof our great lads by cutting back regiments and changing other regiments .no member of Parliament has had a voice in all the changes do sad .
I’m surprised this hasn’t kicked up a bit of a political stir. I’m definitely no expert, but the state of the Union is not great at the moment and the dismantling of Scottish historical regiments could be seen as a negative action taken by the MoD to diminish Scottish influence in the armed forces. What do you think?
One would have expected politicians who are ex forces to have objected. Sad, they stayed quiet
Who would make trouble? Politicians? The SNP would rather inherit something small or non-existant on the military side so they do not get critised for cutting it.
In the next significant conflict I’m sure all the old regiments will return.
the SNP fought hard to retain the regiments because they alone understand and care about the cultural loss
The SNP are pushing two competing messages. Firstly they wish to convey an image of a small independent country free from the financial strain of a large military whilst at the same time inferring that all the old regiments would rejuvinated. The SNP used to point to Norway as a similar economy to Scotland living off fossil fuels with a slim and efficient military. Norway’s future is carbon free & heavily militarised part of an expanding NATO until the threat from the Russian bear is forever at an end.I fear Scotland is in a similar position.
Oh dear, another reply to a poster which was 4 months late, and projecting a SNP desperate fascist agenda! Very much like the SNP you are very slow at communication, incorrect on many points and rather sad and angry. Cheers.
The SNP has made politic out of Scottish Regts for ages – that had to change.
The Scots have had problems recruiting – that had to change.
It’s changed.
I doubt that the Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment will last much longer – KORBR+QLR+KR were merged to form it.
Society is changing, the offer has been spurned and a new rank concept needs to be formulated, especially in such a small defense force and that will mean far fewer ex Captains/Majors/Colonels and Brigs floating around writing articles and drawing a pension and hopefully a modern, fully equipped, enabled, and supported fighting force.
I think a Ranger regiment will have far more appeal to a generation brought up on Call of Duty; the regimental system has been both a source of strength and weakness for the British Army, it needs to be adapted to fit the 21st century.
It will sound good at the start, and with plenty of volunteers who want to be a bit “ally” but without the graft of certain other arduous courses, such as selection, SRR etc, but let me assure you the Ranger concept will be pretty much the same chuff as the “engagement Battalions” and while the spin will be good the job will turn out to be a round of training commitments, similar to the old BATTs. Its a simple excuse to keep the same number of Battalions but have over a third of the Infantry in 250 man units. Cheap, none peer deployable and no full time dedicated CS and CSS assets.
bollox.
all the airborne do extra is two weeks p coy then jump training
Rangers have almost 9 months of selection and training
jealousy is a bad thing
Wow you have answered a post from over a year ago, and waffling some shite about the so called Rangers! Do make an effort at doing one or both then come back. How do you suddenly get 1500 so called rangers from a group of bog standard, 15% of Bn downgraded to a new Rangr Regiment? Tell me ………jealously is a bad thing, but lack of knowledge and experience is worse! Believing your own press is dangerous…..next?
Also, just to educate you in matters you obviously are unaware of, P Coy is only a 5 day period within basic training (where did you get this two weeks nonsense from?) It’s just an extra physical test, with some mental strength requirements thrown in! Jumps use to be an easy 4 weeks at Brize, but now even easier with just 6 required over an undetermined period of time from the penguins in Bn. What makes an Airborne warrior is above and beyond your understanding and therefore I won’t try to confuse or embarrass you in the explanation. Just keep pumping out your echo chamber nonsense and I’m sure you will love what you write. Good lad.
In India, the Skinners Horse still stands tall and proud and no generation appeal or adaption would ever be allowed by Army Chief. And cadets when they go to train, aspire to join the old regiments because of their history
Frankly it’s about time. The Cap-Badge Mafia/Hysteria has done more to destroy the British Army and render it unfit to fight for decades than even the politicians. The Royal Navy and the RAF don’t go around behaving like this when ships and squadrons are decommisioned or stood up. Only in the Army do we keep on setting out orders of battle that are irrelevant to function, simply to keep some cap badges alive.
I hear this comment a lot, but I think the comment is overblown. I served in the army from 1975-2009 and have kept abreast of army matters since. Over this time, the number of amalgamations and disbandments of famous name regiments has been an absolute flurry. Why claim that extraordinary and irrational efforts are made to keep famous names alive (to the prejudice of effectiveness and efficiency) when so many famous names have actually been lost.
With the army now being so small is there really 1000+ high quality individuals of all ranks “spare” in the non SF and Parachute Regiment parts of the army to fill these posts? This project reminds me of the 2009 plan that was going to turn 1 Rifles into “Army Commandos” as part of a beefed up 3 Commando Brigade. That cunning plan soon ran out of steam!
I served in 1 RIFLES over the whole period. The plan was never to create Army Commandos -the RM didn’t want or need that, The Rifles didn’t want or need that. The sole aim was to add a fourth manoeuvre unit to the Brigade so that it could maintain a 3 unit HERRICK rotation AND a Lead Commando group at readiness. Once the Bde came off the HERRICK cycle it was no longer needed so we ‘left’ the Bde.
So what happens if hardly anyone transfers over from 1 Scots. Will they be given the opportunity to transfer over to another battalion? Also, 205 Sc Field Hospital is to vanish and amalgamate with another medical unit.
Several of the current Field Hospitals are. They are becoming Multi Role Medical Regiments!
Another rebranding that might change in years to come.
I know this is a bit late but I just wanted to know what will change in the rebranding of the field hospitals
Lots I’d expect. Some are merging, others disappearing.
Once their internal make up is outlined we will know more. Squadrons will vanish, amalgamate and form I expect.
You can’t go and make changes to a grade 1 building without everybody agreeing, however when it comes to people’s jobs or regiment they can do what they want. 22 years service and proud to have been 1st BN The Black Watch.
The Royal Scottish Rangers with batallions or companies named after the old cap badges…. Boom, problem solved.
Good idea and said before keep the badges and repurpose and as people say just form new corps or multi battalion.regiments.Good idea and think it should work.Get army back up to a sensible size is beyond common sense to look the idea over?For many even youngsters tradition does mean more than call of duty vids.My dad etc served in and so on.Any way good luck to them all.
Ideal suggestion. Top of the range concept !!
And you just perpetuate the problem. Clean break start the Rangers fresh without ANY historical baggage.
Why is retaining some of the history a “problem”?
Its not, in fact the British Army had Rangers back in the time of the American war of Independence, I think they were called the Queens Rangers. I also seem to remember the Royal Irish Rangers and the Sherwood Rangers. I think but I might be wrong but the rank of Ranger still exists in the Royal Irish Regt.
As for training and skill set for the new Ranger Regt, base it on Commando, Gurkha and possibly the old LRDG skills.
I’m not 100% sure but I think in some ways that was a job for the old rifles, to act as skirmishers, small recce teams, kill enemy officers etc. Times move on but sometimes the old skill sets are just as valid.
WW1 and my grandpa was in the Connaught Rangers!
Commandos do a commando role ok but Gurkhas don’t do anything different from a line infantry regiment
Exactly what I was thinking. The history lives on at company level and can be spun off to form a live battalion/regiment if we ever see an expansion of the Army.
Sorry but Ranger doesn’t sit well with me, too American! I’d much rather the name Army Commando could have been expanded on.
And as for the Grey beret and that cap badge that looks like it came out of a Xmas cracker.
Britain had Rangers before America was even invented 😉
I know mate, we had them during the War of Independence. But the Yanks have adopted the name for them selfs.
Still think it should be Army Commando.
Commando is actual a Boer term used during the Boer War and used long before we used it. No one word in the English language belongs to one country anymore than another. We have the Royal Irish Rangers for one.
I recall they were called Roger’s Rangers – Hollywood did a movie about them with Spencer Tracy in the lead role in the 1930s – early 1940’s. I recall as a kid watching it on TV and I think it was about fighting what is now refered to as the Red Indians.
So Bde of Guards have got their way Royal Scots gone lets them say they are the oldest Regt in army we know Royal Scots where Pontius Pilate s body guard.
I don’t see why they don’t keep battalion names and just have the ( Ranger ) designation after. Like the battalions of RRS now since the earlier amalgamations when they kept their names.
Because they want to create someting new – with it’s own unique identity, CONOPS and esprit d’corps.
Hi Daniele, yeah I was wondering about this, why not just keep them as they are and train them for the ranger role, or take these new special role battalions and brigade them as Rangers, as a administrative, non-deployable brigade, responsible for training.
Also, the Borderers aren’t the only historic battalion to be disappearing, isn’t 4 Rifles going as well, which is the direct descendant of the original 95th Rifle Regiment…
And also, would the Rangers be the only multi-battalion infantry regiment outside the Paras where all constituent battalions specialise in the same role?
English regiments gave always suffered more, being diluted to eventually mean very little. I joined the prince of wales division, with 9 battalions, 7 english, 2 welsh. None exist in the same format today
This is in a nutshell why the army is such a mess. All about tradition and the past and nothing about the future.
It may not be of any consequence but the QARANC suffered the same fate. All tradition lost. Identity lost. Consigned to history. Many brave women gave their lives but to what end. Amalgamate, save money, be one, of what?
? The QAs are still going.
They are. I work with them every day.
Thank you all for your comments. Of course I don’t always get it right, and of course people are perfectly entitled to have a pop, but I don’t mind. The debate is the important thing. Keep it coming!
Thank you for your article Stuart. Is there not a straight forward mathematical way of looking at this? The British army has, I understand, 33 regular battalions (of which 2 Gurkha). Scotland makes up 8% of the UK population to provide for 5 SCOTS battalions + Scots Guards, i.e. 18% to 19% of infantry battalions. Now one could debate whether some battalions (e.g. Para) should be in or out of the above calculation, however at some point demographic gravity takes over.
Pretty much disagree with everything he says. We have far to many Infantry Battalions with no real role, not fully manned, and no old school regional recruiting grounds remaining to justify a “local connection”. The “Cap Badge Mafia” so to speak need to understand that while Regimental history is important, so is future capability, and with so many unusable Battalions the Infantry have become a paper tiger. Regimental history can and should be remembered, by utilising “Regimental/Battalion History rooms” etc, but that history cannot and should never dictate the future shape of the modern and hopefully progressive British Army.
Unfortunately reductions will need to take place, reductions of units not people, to enable the remaining Battalions are fully manned and equipped, with a role within the ORBAT which is realistic and useable. The Ranger Concept is garbage, as it is an excuse to leave the Battalion numbers the same, but operate nearly 10 of them with 250 PIDS on average. Lets concentrate on CS and CSS, not sexy to some, but the organisations which enable Armies to deploy, operate and win. My blokes can be the hardest, nastiest, biggest gringo tashed, best trained Airborne throat rippers in the universe, but once out of ammo, food, water, no Arty, no Comms, no RE, no resupply, no med support etc we all just become a group of people ready to be rolled up.
Mr Crawford is being rather Nationalistic in his thought process, and while experience is valued, and we all have opinions, experience needs to be relevant and up to date. Cheers.
Absolutely, when people start worrying and the colour of the uniform cap as being important you know they’ve lost the big picture.
Correct mate, we need to be making harsh but sensible choices in all areas of the Army, but most certainly in the Infantry.
A sensible comment. Thank goodness; I was about to sign up for bereavement counselling……
Cheers mate….save the bereavement counselling for the usual Troll target stories, the F35s and the Carriers lol
Just found this. Nail on head mate. CS & CSS all the way. Cut at least 6 battalions and create RS, RA, RE, RLC, RAMC regiments with the PIDS to enable another DEPLOYABLE brigade.
11 SFAB the perfect example. 4 “LBCT” is a golf bag, nothing more.
Roger that mate, got to be tough choices made! Tough but essential to dig the Army out of its home made mess!
” the infantry have become a paper tiger ” .
One of the reasons the Russians aren’t making progress in Eastern Ukraine is because they don’t have effective infantry battalions, which should go forward and hold territory – and get out of their vehicles.. M Anderson.
I do fail to see the point of these articles.
Many regiments have disappeared over the centuries, including my namesake Gordon Highlanders. My dad served with the regiment including during the Malaya Emergency. So I have that pride. Indeed, inspired me to join the services, though the RN, being raised in Pompey.
The regiment’s history has not disappeared, being readily accessible in books and physically at the museum.
It seems to me that the Army has far more valid concerns confronting the realities of it’s modern role:- force structure, recruitment pool and equipment balance. It lags behind and cannot afford to still be looking behind.
Time for a root and branch reform of The British Army. A Corps of Infantry with fewer but larger regiments that have historic but non-geographical names – The Rifles, The Fusiliers, The Grenadiers etc.
It wouldn’t solve all of the problems but it would be a big step in the right direction by enabling the infantry to be trimmed back to fewer full strength battalions and a properly balanced field force of 5 or 6 deployable brigades rather than the 1 or 2 we have now due to the chronic lack of enablers and modern equipment.
Agreed mate for sure.
Good luck trying that with the Gaurds.
You could also merge a number of regiments into a large national regiment, akin to the Royal Australian Regiment, with the usual custom of old honours and traditions of historic regiments incorporated into the new regiment.
In terms of the wider issue of too many no role light infantry battalions, would it help to devote all battalions of these new whole regiments to a single role, rather than different battalions fulfilling different roles? i.e. all battalions of the Rifles would be light infantry, Fusiliers would be mechanised infantry, Grenadiers armoured infantry, etc. or would that no make a difference? Just thinking it would be easier to fold understrength battalions into sister battalions to maintain full strength units in the deployable brigades…that way work backwards from what the requirement is to keep the deployable brigades at full strength with the infantry they need, rather than committing to an arbitary number of infantry battalions and then, once the spaces have been filled in the deployable brigades of the reaction force, they are allocated the light role catch all and dumped in the non-deployable brigades of adaptable force (which, given the lack of enablers available, is anything but…)
Given how tribal we are in Scotland I think a certain number of young folk are going to find it hard to join anything called ‘The Rangers’. Don’t think there’s much clue down south about this.
Change has eventually to come to everywhere and everyone. Those that don’t adapt don’t survive. Are you saying Scotland isn’t capable of adapting to live in the modern world.
Not at all. I don’t know which part of the UK you’re in but I don’t think you understood my comment. Up here, ‘The Rangers’ means something entirely different and some recruits seeing ‘The Rangers’ may think of a football club and either be happy to join or head straight for another part of the army. It’s that polarised.
Hi DaveNBC
I think the idea has come from “down south” !!
Ian
The British Army has derived much strength over the years from the Regimental system giving a sense of pride, of continuity, of belonging to individual soldiers not to mention reputations to maintain in battle. Obviously the modern era has different challenges which necessitate the loss of some famous names, but as a Commonwealth Brit looking from the outside I would say that the UK has to maintain as much of that history as possible. The retention of famous names and the ‘esprit de corps’ they engender is critical in boosting morale. Here in Kwazulu-Natal as with many other parts of the Commonwealth, we have some famous Regiments modelled on those of the British Army-the (Royal) Durban Light Infantry, the Natal Mounted Rifles, the Umvoti Rifles and the Natal Carbineers among them. Sadly the ANC government has, in its drive to rightly correct the balance in names and symbols but also to eradicate much of our history, is in the process of changeing names and cap badges. Could not some of these Regiments in the UK be resuscitated in the Reserve Corps? Are your reservists attached to Regular Regiments or are they organised into their own structures?
What about the other 4 English battalions??!!!!
Tradition is hard to earn ..soldiers fight for their friends and some times an intangible sense of being a special group or unit.. tact with .eg a tartan beret would certainly allowed to natural option of recreating the regiments if a ..hopefully never..need arises.
I really can’t see what these ‘battalions’ are going to offer that a normal one could not achieve with a bit of ‘specialist’ training whatever that will entail! The rest of the Army is going to regard these rangers with a good bit of derision if I’m not wrong.
I like what was said, the trouble is, boots on the ground days are dimming out, same at sea, when one saw the fleet review of 1953 at the Queens Coronation it is unbelievable size. The RAF has shrunk to almost zero. The problem is long projected war has gone, it is about drones, gizmos unbelievable stuff. The Afgan war, or conflict showed that you cannot have men and women maimed minus legs arms, less of all leave the country still in a mess. War to day is to be so swift so fast sneeze and it has gone. Myself I privately hate loath demise these changes, the old county regiments were great recruits, but !! Must be a old stick in the mud, but I am glad I served when I did and had a party
I’m captain in the Italian Army and reenactor in 11eme leger (napoleonic)… so I give my opinion as”foreigner”…I think that it is not good to cancel very old tradition for new Army model..ok now each army wolud like to have Rangers..also we italian have trasformed Paratroops for Mountain Troops (Alpini) in Ranger but we have called it “4° Regiment Mountain Paratroops Ranger”…ranger is a specialization (old time the name was light infantry)…this title could be given to old battalion without cancel old tradition…English Army could form 4 battalions of old light infantry (for example the Rotal Green Jackets heirs of the famous 95 rifle or the Scottish Borderes) in Ranger warfare..and then create a regiment with old battalions names…a good example was the Camel Corp in Sudan campaign. Livio SIMONE OF2 IT Eng. Corp
Sad to see 1 SCOTs go (and with it the lineage of the Royal Scots and the KOSBs). However the Royal Regiment of Scotland is under recruited. That is why 5 SCOTs (Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders) is now a Coy. Look at the above photo; Lots of Commonwealth guys (thanks fellas) but you can’t sustain a Regiment or even a Battalion if the home grown recruits aren’t there. Meanwhile some Regiments (Like the RRF or PWRR) who are recruiting well lose Battalions too – I wonder why??
5 scots was never unmanned it had a role in 16 air assault brigade and never failed its fit for role test they were striped to bolster other scottish battalions
It’s just a total coincidence all the BAME guys are at the front of this picture, they didn’t engineer it at all, which would be humiliating for all concerned. Not at all. Nope. Nooo.
Cap badges shouldn’t be sacred, tradition has its place but to the average soldier does the history of their unit have any impact on their ability to do do their job? The airforce and particularly navy seem to fix run just fine with out the nostalgia glasses. Otherwise there would always be a Warspite, Ark Royal or Ajax.
What about the following, which doesn’t affect the modern operational plan one jot.
1st Bn The Rangers
(Royal Scots Borderer Rangers)
2nd Bn The Rangers
(Queens Royal Tiger Rangers)
3rd Bn The Rangers
(Kings Lions of England Rangers)
4th Bn The Rangers
(Rifles Rangers or Ranger Rifles)
This plan, using either seed regimental titles, old divisional or nicknames retains the thread of tradition within, and not to the detriment of the new Rangers identity.
Each Ranger Battalion will be affiliated with one of the new Divisions of Infanty (essentially regiments). So one each from Queen’s, Union, Light and Guards and Para Divisions. Presumably they will then offer places to sucessful applicants from across those divisions. So keeping a cap-badge might be useful, but probably serves little purpose and the Rangers will be recruited from across the army like SF and originate from many cap badges.
If you look at the last round of Infantry amalgamations, those that were successful did away with individual Bn identities and when all in (ie The Rifles). Those that tried to maintain an individual Bn identity such as the SCOTS and MERCIANS faired less well. The important thing is to get an identity to which everyone feels a part. That doesn’t have to be a purely historical identity. You need to remove division to be successful.
While I sympathise for this obviously painful incident – and no doubt most of us commenting here would like nothing better than to see a restoration of a 150,000-plus strong, credible British Army with all required support units in all its capbadged glory – the sad fact is that this is not currently achievable given the current (lack of) public support for funding and we must cut our cloth to suit the taxpayer’s will.
The current situation is that too few bodies are spread over too many infantry units. One additional consideration is that there is a lack of combat support units. Budget for equipment aside, one of the reasons this is so, is because of the lack of manpower.
If the Army wants to retain its cap badges, I have a suggestion: instead of creating these half-strength light infantry battalions, re-role them as combat support units. This may sound nigh heresy but it is one way of solving both problems at once.
The question one must ask oneself is, is playing “Visit Scotland Company” more palatable than say serving as “Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders Logistics Regiment”.
When lower ranks in the army are underpaid, there will be recruitment problems. In India regiments raised during thre British rule still stand proud – armoured, infantry and even Sapper regiments. If there is a recruitment problem from among the Scots, there is no reason to disband a regiment as immigrants have settled down all across the UK. No harm them being taken in to serve Queen and Country, but let the regiment stay. In India the Assam Rifles carry out recruitment from among the Gurkhas mainly
Is the lack of recruitment reflective of the Scottish political environment, where the influence of the SNP and some of their more extreme supporters view the British Army as an English Army despite the regiment names. If you put their support overall at 45% in the wider electorate. Then even if only half of their supporters who might have otherwise joined don’t join then that is recruitment down some 22%. If you support the SNP, but bemoan the reductions in the Scottish regiments then you might want to look at your whole stance v the British Army and the wider defence establishment.
your whole perspective there is bull mate.
The SNP is very pro Scottish Soldiers as cultural icons as opposed to the Tories and Labour who speak with forked tongues and cut while saying they dont
My 10 bobs worth is, I think the British army has to reinvent itself, it has been a political whipping boy for the last 3 decades and is seen as the poor cousin to the RN and the RAF.
We still need people to stand and fight, put them selves in harms way, dig in to stop the other side from advancing, and generally be a pain in the backside for any one who wishes to do harm to the UK. It is not romantic and if you what to be good at it then it take’s a lot out of you, some of which you never get back, but just ask any ex squaddie was it worth it!! I believe that 99% will say “to right”
So the Army has to have a leader who is going to take them forward and out of the doldrums they seem to be stuck in.
The army can’t cling onto every regiment with a history just because of history. History is based primarily on light infantry regiments and there are far too many of them compared to the heavier armored regiments which the army desperately needs. The army is criticality short of hard hitting firepower.
Don’t stop with the regiment, let’s go back to the Victorian policy and rename “Scotland” as “North Britain”
I might have a different opinion to the author, despite both having served with the RTR. For my sins, I am ex REME, and when I joined there were 4 RTR’s, in the RAC, along with the Scots Dragoon Guards (recruiting in Scotland) and Queens Dragoon Guards (recruiting in Wales), plus other Cavalry Regts. The RTR is now down to just 1 Regt, whilst SDG and QDG have survived any attempts to cut them. If that isn’t the “Mafia” then I am not sure what is. To quote “Simmerson” in Sharpe: “Don’t you know I have friends in Horse-guards.
Everyone knew the unwritten rukle that the Black Watch would never be re-named or amalgamated as long as the Queen Mother was alive (her brother served with them in WW1 and lost his life).
Sadly I do believe that the Regt system has now reached the end of its life and needs a serious re-branding. Perhaps whilst they are at it, the RA may want to dish out some of the “old” battery silver stored in the vaults, or at least put it on display in the museum in Larkhill
No sin being ex R.E.M.E Mark!
It is indeed sad that another regiment with a glorious history has been used to fill ‘another’ idea by an outgoing CoDS. But this isn’t new, and dare I say it, the army is, for better or worse, evolving. And if things don’t evolve they die. That is the same for all branches of the military.
I personally think that these historic regiments have been badly handled over the years, but poor recruitment is a sure fire way of deducting that there is (still) a problem with recruitment per se, but also that there are areas of the UK that either attracts young people to a. Another organisation or b. the desire to join a local regiment is not as high as it once was, clearly there are a myriad of reasons why this is so, unemployment etc but the fact remains.
Back to evolving, and I’m definitely not anti cap badge saving because the history of these regiments are so important to the fabric of our nation, but as sad as it is, what’s the alternative?
I am not 100% convinced of this Ranger Regiment, I think the name is confusing for the job that they will be doing (in regards to other Ranger regiments worldwide) or that one can just ‘stand up’ a new formation and say it’s special. It took SFSG 10 years + to be in a position to say that after earning its spurs, and it can still be an uphill battle at times, which unfortunately is the way our forces have been forced to carry on for far too long, justifying existences. This regiment is clearly needed, but still manages to reek of desperation to save units that are struggling to exist as they are. It’s great news that RSB will not just disappear, but how that effects morale only time will tell. I hope this Ranger Regiment gets r we hat it needs, but to contradict my point about evolving slightly, not at the price of something else that degrades the effectiveness of the rest of the army.
Does this man do nothing but moan?
Yet again, Stuart Crawford, unleashes his anger at the changing face of the British Military.
This time about the loss of History and Tradition…
Well Stuart, I’m sure if you had been around when the ‘County’ system was implemented in place of the numbering system, you would have been against it, after all, why change what had worked since 1660!, Why use names instead of Numbers!
The British Army cannot afford to stagnate under ‘Tradition’ when the young men and women who will be in the regiments will be putting their lives in the line.
We have always had one of the smallest peace time Armies of the ‘bigger’ European nations, yet, despite this fact, we have been triumphant in 3 global spanning wars!
So how did we manage that?,
Well it was not because we stood still, deep in the mud of tradition… It was because we innovated, engineered, invented, changed, took chances…
As you are an ex tanker, you should be fully aware that the vehicle you went to war in was the result of men looking for a way to break the stalemate of the trenches…
After all, the traditional cavalry had been proved ineffective on the western front… But thankfully, people threw tradition and history aside.
imho
It was very sad that all Scottish regiment s were algimated to form regiment of Scotland
So much anti scottish propaganda in these comments, so many lies, so many political reasons to get rid of the Scottish cultural identity and all at the hands of London Labour and Tories.
The fact is that Scotland does not need to cram foreigners into its ranks in the same way that english regiments do. Scotland produces far more soldiers per population capita than the rest of the UK
i should also add that there is a sectarian element to this change of name too. The Rangers aligns it to a Northern Irish sympathy and with the Royal Scots reduced to 250 men and stationed in Ireland, they are eliminating a whole chunk of Scottish ethnicity from the army. They are doing the same thing with the Scots DG vy amalgamating them with the Northern Irish also in gray berets calling the new regiment The Scottish and North Irish Yeomanry.
Your chip on that shoulder my old China is weighing you down. Have you managed to pass so called Ranger selection by firstly coming off the sick chit, and secondly passing your BFT for the first time in 4 years? Or do you have a mates dadd, friend who knows someone in the “SAS” who said Rangers are good 😂😂😂
what a clown
the battalions which became rangers were already selected from across their divisions as capable of a more advanced role in mentoring other forces. Then, when the Rangers were formed, they were further selected for the Rangers (8 weeks of tests) and only then do they get the 8 months of training.
Insulting experienced infanteers who are further selected in a similiar way to Commandos or those who do Pathfinders is an utter travesty you bloating mong
Nope! Anyway, wow, first you try to justify promoting average soldiers to semi SF, a quick way to get them killed (you’re not in the military I take it) and secondly you resort to childish name calling! You do understand the issues children classified with mongolism have yes? And you use it as a term of abuse! Wow, what a hat! Ah you mention PF…..now we can chat my little wannabe!
and Rangers, unlike para ARE actual special forces who HAVE been selected. Even Para or Marines needs to be selected into Rangers if thats what career path they choose
You are amusing. Do you want to try to comment on something a, you know about and b, maybe in a thread less than a year old pal?
And your sad SNP fascism is showing, you need to calm your pants and drink an iron bru, or whatever gives you that William Wallace feeling for an hour or so, before you log on internet benefits and claim your pound of undeserved flesh! I await your informed and hopefully not a year late reply, my old China! PS do take note of the various threads date range and try not to be a year late replying, good lad.
oh dear, so you have gone from wearing a green bomber jacket and desert boots and acting like a wannabe school bully in the garrisons to a britnat pontificating and lecturing and smearing me with bullshit based on my nationality.
ps Those who were at the battle of the china fleet were either para or not and the nots didnt get second prize
pps.
You think that believin your own bullshit of self appointed superiority as a regiment makes it true but the problem is it isnt. Men were fighting and dying for centuries and still are in highly respected infantry units long before the Cameron Highlanders were used as the primary foundation of 2 para. I served in the same regiment as others from my family who are lying in the ground in France and other places around the world.
ps
last time you and me may have accidentally met was on the Norland.
Wow you are an angry pontificating grumpy SNP sheep. Calm yourself down, I didn’t ask for a pretend CV and maybe try to be less keyboard tough guy on your future posts. All your doing is looking very sad and frothy, good lad. Ps do you have a Ranger Calendar on your wall, groupies are laughed at mate, we get a few.
typical shite from a passive aggressive 🤡
all pretendy nicey nicey but all the while sticking a boot in then squealing when it gets called out unequivocally
the people who get laughed at in the infantry are paras mate. Birdshite with big gobs, dessie boots and green bombers 🤡🤡🤡
Called out? Hilarious, you do seem to have an anger problem as well a problem posting relevant up to date posts. This thread has been dead for over a YEAR😂😂😂😂 and you’re still posting absolute shite. It’s ok, however not everyone can make the grade to be a Parachute Regiment soldier, and your service on whatever pie and mash Battalion you served in is fine, if it makes you feel better. Anyway as I previously asked, do you want to comment on any other up to date subjects on this fine website?
And on having a quick recce on your previous nonsense your allegiances do sadly show, so troll or fascist? Who knows:
Steve
8 months ago
This war had nothing to do with Britain in tye beginning.
Us involving ourselves would be similiar to Russia arming the IRA when Britain was still fighting to prevent Irish independence or if Russia got involved with arming Argentina against Britain in the Falklands War.
We cant even defend out own island properly so why the heck are we so desperate to spend all this money on another country so far away?
Brexit is the root of our problems not Putin
Reply
i stand by all of that
Britain is not big enough to be throwing its weight about in stuff we have no involvement in. We should never have been in afghan for a start. Iraq maybe but not Afghan and not ukraine.
I have served the crown both in uniform and in civvies all my days. but that has sfa to do with political autonomy or the concept of a federal uk and the constant erosion of Scotlands assets till they are bled dry to suit clowns like Bozo Johnstone and Truss etc.
out
Yaaaawn do stop pontificating and giving a brief resume of your pie and mash Battalion history, no one cares, but in your post you state Putin is not the root of our problems, who stated he is? and why go straight to the defence of Putin?
My Theory,
for what it is worth, there was no good publicity , Investimant process or inovation or money in the recruitment process for an Infantry Soldier. Given bad publicity from NI, and First Gulf war. Gulf war Syndrom , Kit failures, injections etc. There was no publicity on the fact that you could to expand the diversity or disseminetion of information to turn it into civvy qualifications NVQs or even publicity to the fact that you could get even your HG1 Class, even in the Infantry . So the average teen off the street thought there was no prospects, not even in joining the Army never mind the Inafantry.
There was also a problem in Society, the Drug population Smack etc, 2nd or even third generation. Raves getting out there head enjoying every weekend,
Jerry Corbin did not help and still does not.
However now the younger populaion are getting into computers, Drones, AI etc the Forces Recruitment process should jump on that oppertunity.