The British Army say here that the reconnaissance troops who are first in for the British Army’s Global Response Force have tested their firepower on the windswept Stanford Training Area Ranges in Norfolk.

The Pathfinders are the advance force for 16 Air Assault Brigade Combat Team (BCT), trained to infiltrate behind enemy lines to find and relay vital information back to assist mission planning.

According to the Army:

“A key role is identifying drop zones and landing zones where the main body of troops can be parachuted or landed by helicopter. Pathfinders work in small, self-sufficient patrols, either in vehicles or on foot. While operating with-out being spotted provides their best defence, troops need the firepower to get themselves out of trouble.”

Out on the ranges, troops practised fire and manoeuvre tactics by day and night in their RWMIK patrol vehicles, which are mounted with Heavy Machine Guns and Grenade Machine Guns. Soldiers also fired the potent and precise NLAW anti-tank missile.

A Pathfinders troop commander was quoted as saying:

“Conducting reconnaissance missions in vehicles – which we refer to as ‘Mobo Ops’ – means we can operate deep into enemy territory to set the conditions for the main force. Firepower is always a last resort, but the weaponry we carry is much heavier than an enemy would be expecting recce troops to carry, so we can fight ourselves out of any situation. It also means that we can strike targets of opportunity when they are least expecting to be attacked.”

After completing its primary reconnaissance role Pathfinders are freed up as a strike force to support 16 Air Assault BCT missions, carrying out raids on high-value targets or feints in support of larger attacks.

“As the Global Response Force, the BCT is specially trained and equipped to deploy by air and held at very high readiness to respond to global crises. It is a key element of how the British Army will operate under the Future Soldier vision as an ever more agile, lethal, and expeditionary force.”

You can read more on this from the British Army here.

Tom Dunlop
Tom Dunlop
Tom has spent the last 13 years working in the defence industry, specifically military and commercial shipbuilding. His work has taken him around Europe and the Far East, he is currently based in Scotland.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

110 COMMENTS

  1. Why are they still using RWMIK, haven’t they been proven to be a death trap. Speed might be essential for reconnaissance, but equally your exploring and im sure foreign militiaries have seen how useful IEDs can be as area of access control/denial.

      • So do M1117 & at least they give you some protection. Plus the US has been giving away their surplus M1117 to allies. Why has the UK not asked for some? Too proud to take 2nd hand cast offs? Even if they are much safer.

        • Yes they fit but PF aren’t armoured troops, most recce jobs involve leaving the vehicle to get eyes on, setting up a DZ etc. Would it be nice to have a few available depending what task is given, possibly, but no one in rig at platoon/Coy level has asked for an M1117, or another armoured recce vehicle for Airborne jobs. Remember that PF only has about 40 blokes give or take selection numbers, and getting such a small number of different wagons wouldn’t be logistically viable. If long range mobile ops are needed Jackel can be used and if necessary there has been a bit of time utilised on Bushmasters. Cheers.

        • Parts and servicing of another platform, when we dont have stocks would be expensive. and FOOTPRINT of the M1117 including its engine clatter. not good.

        • RWMIK is lightly armoured, that armour being built in to the chassis.
          M1117 is big and heavy for a Pathfinder force.

          • The UK is supposed to be buying 2700 JLTV about 10.2 tons. Perhaps then we can scrap open Land Rovers for risky situations.

        • Cos the Dont offer the 360° view the recce troops of brits prefer… The are stuck in a tin can.. Armoured it may be but they can’t fire bk…

    • Hi Steve,

      The point about PF and SF is that they want to stay unseen. As Ariborne points below they have not requested an armoured vehicle for a reason – big and heavy doesn’t fit every military mission. SF are famous for chasing down bad guys in caves, storming embassies (OK I’m showing me age with this one) and blowing stuff up.

      That is not their main peer on peer wartime role. They are strategic recce assets whose job is to go in, look, hide and, if appropriate, call in other assets to deliver hard effects. The PF troop recces the FOB for the rest of the force to deploy into. If the PF troops get spotted the chances are it is mission over, head to the exfil site ASAP.

      Big heavy armoured vehicles are way too obvious and difficult to hide. The Long Range Desert Group of WW2 fame used light trucks as opposed to armoured cars for similar reasons. Also light trucks can go a lot further than an armoured vehicle on a gallon of fuel and that matters, especially if the initial drop is some distance from the intended area of ops.

      Cheers CR

        • Hi Steve,

          The US bought a few RSOV (Landrovers) for their Rangers because they fitted into the back of Chinooks and did well in the desert in 1991 – better than the Humvee apparently. The latter point is probably down to ground pressure issues for the Humvee on the desert sand.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranger_Special_Operations_Vehicle

          My understanding however is that the military variant of the Landrover Defender was fitted with uprate suspention based on the Ranger Rover’s – but I might be wrong about that.

          The article linked to above highlights that the vehicle is more of a defensive platform capable of shooting its way ‘out’ of trouble rather than getting into touble. That fits with the recce role which is definately to see and not be seen.

          The Landrover got a bad press because it was used as a light APC in Iraq and Afghanistan. As such it was totally inappropriate and should never have been used. The fact that the Rangers are apparently still using their’s in the recce role suggests that it is good at that job.

          Not sure about the rest you list, but I believe that the Russians have their own tough 4×4 vehicle similar to the Landie.

          Cheers CR

    • Its all about that Light Footprint and speed, and delivery. over survival, and Lower Profile.
      yes we know IEDs are a good weapon, but these will be in advance of the Main-group so.
      and Army still has 1000s, unlike there original replacement

    • Why are they still using RWMIK? They were only issued from 2011 – in army terms that is ‘nearly new’.
      A reasonable size IED can devastate a medium armoured vehicle and disable a tank (mobility kill). I don’t think that light recce vehicles, even with some armour fitted, have a chance against IEDs.
      Light forces use light vehicles and accept their relative vulnerability. Pathfinders should soon be joined by main body para forces then by heavier weight troops.
      RWMIK is lightly armoured, that armour being built into the chassis – definitely a level up from basic LR – good enough for a light recce force.

    • Because they fit in a Chinook, and thus can be used in Air Assault. They should be replaced by something similar sized, Jackal is too big.

      • The loading ramp of the Chinook is too narrow for todays armoured vehicles. Land Rovers are an old design too, so they do fit. That does not mean you have to be open & unprotected. Israel uses the MDT David based on the MK4 Land Rover. 3.6tons. Air conditioned. Lets not forget Shorland made armoured cars based on the Land Rover back in the troubles. They could withstand 7.62 Nato at short range. 2.9 to 3.3 tons.

      • The Jackel will fit into a Chinook. But the Jackel has to be prepped first. This means nothing hanging off the sides, the HMG pintle lowered and some of the roll cage removed. For the Chinook, the aircraft has to be on solid level ground. As the Jackel’s weight will twist the ramp’s hinge, if its uneven.

    • As far as I know the PF love the land rovers. They are simple, reliable and get them where they need to go. They may be vulnerable but they also are very quick to jump out of and they allow all onboard to see everything around them. To be honest they probably really come across IEDs as they operate well outside of the areas the enemy predict to see any opposition soldiers. They also need things that can be thrown out the back of an aircraft easily and something they can hide quickly if needed.

  2. How many more troops have to die before we realise open top Land Rovers are death traps? Look at the firepower Russian Army units have & British units would be wiped out in a straight fight. I know there is no money, but could we not beg for the cast off 155mm M777 light howitzers from the USMC?

    • They are used as they fit in the back of a C130 and open topped recce vs closed down armoured? For light role Airborne troops open top every single time!

        • Closed/armoured ones can flip off a bridge and end up upside on water drowning 5 blokes! Whatever you use people can die!

        • You can die Crossing the Road, Last Person to Die in an RWMIK Dates and locations, please. The last person to die in an MBT, and suddenly you find being armored to the hilt is no good when you are on a recce.

          did you use to be in the catering core as you seem to lack any common sense.

          • No idea the last person, but James Wharton’s book gives an account from June 2007 ” A WMIK had flipped and rolled off the side of the road and everyone onboard was seriously hurt. There was also an Iraqi interpreter travelling on board…who…was dead. His head had been squashed between the vehicle rolling over him and the desert floor. His brains had come out…”

          • Mate we had quite a few WMIKS mashed up and blokes hurt, same as the blokes in the Armoured wagons, vehicles hit and blokes hurt and killed, Its horses for courses, its war, you cannot put things into a comfortable box and say its right! You need a varied amount of platforms to do certain jobs. The WMIK/Jackal, for Airborne/Air Assault recce, is ideal, for IED counter insurgency warfare, possibly not. Horses for courses mate.

          • True, but the British Army tends to leap from one extreme to the other. Open Land Rovers are cheap & easy to deploy, but you get too many body bags coming home, with lots of bad press about inadequate death trap vehicles. So the high ups panic & you then get the 42 to Ajax monstrosity. I get we want small & light, but we also want some protection & air con. I know we need to keep under 20 tons for ease of deployment, but M1117 are roughly 13.5 tons. Mine protected from BAE RG31 16tons, RG32M 7 tons or other South African DCD Mountain Lion 10.9 tons. Not forgetting the enclosed version of Jackal, the Supacat SPV400 7.5 tons. Plus of course all those JLTV we are supposed to be buying off America.

          • The simple fact is mate we need a range of the correct vehicles for various types of operations and deployment, and at the moment the Army is such a shit show its no use hoping things will change soon. Cheers.

          • They probably don’t need it but there will ultimately be a politically important Senator or Congressman in the District where the things will be assembled , from parts made in other Districts with their own Senators and Congressman who will want them made…Pork Barrel at its best!

      • To add to that, as Airborne said, Pathfinders are dedicated recon assets, so they won’t be driving in convoy on potential IED’d roads…

        The Herc will land in an out of the way spot, the Land Rovers head out and disappear into the environment…..

        Though they lack protection, their cross country mobility, limited size (in comparison with some heavily armoured vehicles) ability to bug out in said terrain, along with a good defensive weapons fit makes them still very capable for certain tasks, though age is getting the better of them now, to be fair…..

        • Also LR’s are very fast over rough terrain as well as being easy to fix in the field.

          I’ve rebuilt a few in odd places with not much more than some spanners and a big wrench.

    • What use is a howitzer in a recce role?

      Horses for courses and I’m guessing the RWM1K is the right horse for this particular course

        • Hi John,

          Not necessarily. It depends on the mission. If it is a strategic recce mission and you get rumbled early chances are the mission is already a bust. 16 Air Mobile is a light formation so if the enemy turn up on a landing zone it is time to get the PF guys out – probably via an alternative exfil site. Remember Arnhem?

          Cheers CR

          • Thinking more of 1970s Oman when the SAS at Mirbat, held back a larger adoo assault, by using a single old 25 pounder.

          • The Adoo however were a tribal militia force with limited OS capability and the 25 pounder was fired over open sights mate. The lads who held the BAT house, with the Omani troops were outstanding, but fixed field defences also helped in slowing the Adoo down.

          • Hi John,

            Yeh, I think I read about that years and years and er years ago. Needless to say I had forgotten about it, thanks for reminding me. It was definately in the Rokes Drift mould, but that sort of action is the kind of action to try to avoid rather than look to get involved in.

            The British Army has had some famous and many not so famous ‘thin red lin’ battles. There will always be times when it goes wrong and things get desperate, but you plan and equip to avoid such situations. If you plan to get into those situations then you would rightly come under significant politic fire.

            Also, as Airborn highlights below when the main drop comes in there will be 81mm mortars and 105mm light guns. The recce troops are there to make sure those forces are not dropped straight onto enemy occupied ground. None of these heavier weapons or units are recce assets, they are toe to toe type weapons. Of course if an armoured div turns up you better hope XXX corps makes this time – if you catch my drift 🙂

            Cheers CR

        • PF will be first down, mark the drop zone, secure the DZ as best they can, lads will drop to include, wedges and door bundles, SP Coy with 81mm then heavy drop to include 105mms from 7RHA. Plenty of OS for a DZ.

    • RWMIK is small, light and nimble – just what PF needs – and it is lightly armoured. PF assets aim not to be seen or engaged by the enemy.

      • That “junior officers reading club” book gave an account of an operation in Afghanistan. The British force in WMIKs had to fight for every inch up a valley. A few days later they came back the same route without a shot being fired, as this time they had a Canadian armoured column with them. The Taliban were happy to take on open Land Rovers, but not Canadian armour.

        • Again, horses for courses, you cannot decide what is right and what is wrong due to one op/incident. We don’t know the state of the Talibs at that time, did the local commander have the men, the comms, the IEDs, the RPGs, the 107mm rockets, etc etc…what he positioned right, did he have the men, assets he wanted, what was the Talibs commander battlefield appreciation, did NATO forces have air cover one way, not the other, shows of force flights fast and low, 105mm in support,? JTACs and fast air on station? Apache chugging overhead….. so many variable that while you can say the option of attacking light role vehicles may seem easier, its not always that way. Cheers.

          • Agreed.

            The other thing there was that NATO forces being about was expected.

            So going down a valley wasn’t really subtle at all.

            Whereas PF would be going into a cold(ish) location and would have the element of surprise.

        • John, Is the take-away from that example that all our troops should be in very well protected vehicles when driving on surfaced roads in terrain with little to no cover and no doubt faced with insurgents on high ground to their flanks?

          It would be useful to find out what armour was in the armoured column and what is was doing – Canadians deployed to Afghanistan with Leopard 2s, LAV-IIIs, Bisons and Coyotes – so it would be one or more of those types.

          Well none of those vehicles or anything like them are used by Paras, who are our lightest of light forces.

          • Even when we had a pair of Leopards in the patrol, it didn’t stop the attacks. I was in one patrol when the lead Leopard had a IED go off underneath it. The explosion was so huge, the Leopard left the ground. We reckon that the Taliban had used both old Russian stacked anti-tank mines combined with a large number of 152mm shells tied together.

            Thankfully, the Leopard had been enhanced with additional under belly armour. But it didn’t stop it from being a right off. The crew were all saved and had minor injuries, but were heavily concussed. After the Leopard was hit, we had at least 50 fighters open up on us (there were probably more) as that was the number of bodies we counted.

            The trailing Leopard came up to provide shelter so first aid could be provided. Still had to do mine awareness drills whilst under contact. The second Leopard was letting loose with 120mm HE along with its MGs.

            I won’t go into the contact details. But suffice to say it lasted more than 2 hours. With the assistance of a pair of Dutch AH64s and USMC F18s, we pacified the area.

            The Leopard was proper fecked. Both tracks and most of the wheels blown off. The tank looked twisted from the back. The Canadians along with the USMC mounted a massive effort to recover it. Where it got low-loaded back to Kandahar Airfield.
            It sat there in the MT yard for 6 months before it was airlifted back to Germany for assessment. I don’t know if it was scrapped or not?

          • Thanks for the dit. Dramatic stuff and very lucky the Leo crew survived. You are a Brit? Just wondering how you patrolled with Canadians.
            I know others want our guys to have the best protected vehicles possible but even tanks get taken out by IEDs such as those you describe.
            Pathfinders are light troops and go in light vehicles.

          • Yes, I’m a Brit. As part of my last tour we were embedded with the Canadians. We were under the auspices of the civilian military cooperation (CIMIC) team, (except we were something else) and that the Canadians were our force protection. Our area was centred on Kandahar City and we would visit villages as far as 100 miles away. We also did patrol the main supply routes running east to west and north to south, towards the Pakistan border.

            The CIMIC teams were the guys who tried to do the hearts and minds with villagers. Bringing in nurses and doctors, plus engineering projects like a new well or a school. But they also paid money for damages done to farmland through fighting. EOD would also tag along as the villagers regularly ploughed up mines left behind by the Russians. They would pick them up and leave them by the side of a path/track. But it was also a great way of finding out what was happening locally! Seeing who would turn up for informal and formal (Shura) meet and greats, or who didn’t!

            The Canadians used the same Solex personal role radio as us, so that made things easier. They did not use Bowman, but instead relied on multi-channel Harris HF/VHF/UHF which we also used, plus it took the same crypto. They also used a lot of the ECM we developed.

            Interoperability, I thought was much easier than with the Yanks. The Canadians still use the same tactical paraphrases we use, whilst the Yanks, use different words, although the meaning will be the same. So sometimes there can be a language barrier. Plus they had some magnificent moustaches.

            There will be some in the know. Kandahar Airfield had a Timmy Hortens. The Canadians would treat us to a regular dose of coffee and donuts each Sunday. Whilst we took them for a decent curry in the Brit mess.

          • Thanks Daveyb, I had no idea we had anyone on the ground in Kandahar but I of course knew about the Brit log HQ at KAF up to about spring 2009, when it relocated to Bastion. Why a British CIMIC team outside Helmand?

            I know the Canadians well – I had an Exchange posting to Ottawa in 2004-2006 at their equivalent of DE&S. They were planning to scrap their Leo1s at the time and buy 105mm LAV-IIIs, but later rescinded and bought Leo2s.

            When I was in Bastion, I periodically went to KAF and was delighted to see that Tim Hortons on the boardwalk and have a coffee and doughnout there as well as taking a tin or 2 of coffee home on R&R.

            Canadians – great guys and very professional – very well equipped too.

          • Reread the dit, especially the bit in brackets! Also remember what Kandahar City was, prior to the invasion of 2001.

            I heard that the LAVIIIs with the 105 kept damaging the turret ring. Which may be one of the reasons it was shelved.

        • Not true in the slightest from my experience. Having been embedded with the Canadians based in Kandahar City on my last tour. Pretty much every patrol we were on was hit. We initially had a pair of WMIKs, that were then replaced with two Foxhounds. The WMIKS had a pair of gimpys and a 50 cal on top. We could put a serious amount of hurt down range. The Canadians had LAV 3s and RG31 Nyalas (Pope Mobiles) MRAPs. These were deliberately targeted by IEDs and Iranian sourced EFPs. The EFPs were fired in pairs with one facing up to take out the engine, whilst the other was fired horizontally to take out the passengers. They initially used radio or mobile phone to trigger them, but our ECM proved too effective and they went to command wires, which meant they had to get close.

          My first day out of the gate, we got proper malleted. We were travelling in a Canadian Nyala. I don’t know what is worse hearing incoming striking steel, or watching it hit armoured windows? I knew it was armoured glass, but… There is definitely something unnerving watching a string of bullet strikes hit the window you have just ducked down from.

          As others have said the WMIK was rugged and pretty reliable in use. It was a very god gun platform and support vehicle. It did leave you exposed, but you dealt with it. The Foxhounds were better than the Nyalas, in my opinion, as our two had the gimpy mounted on a RWS. When it came into service our RWS only had day and night cameras, they have thermal imagers now, which would have made a massive difference during contacts. Plus they “felt” safer. You still had to get out of the hatch to replace the ammo and change a barrel. Plus provide rear and side watch, so you were still vulnerable to sniper fire. The human eye still trumps digital cameras for spotting and possible target recognition. The Canadian Nyalas got RWS about half way through my tour, but it didn’t stop us from being targeted.

          When we handed the Foxhounds back to MT, they were shocked by the number of hits they had taken. Yet they still kept going, even when one took a near miss from a RPG that blew the tyre off the rim. The composite armour was very good. Unlike steel it didn’t ring, just a dull thump. For the mission were had to do the Foxhound was the better vehicle. As a support vehicle it can only mount one RWS, with either a gimpy, 50 cal or a GMG. A WMIK can provide more fire support per vehicle.

    • Believe me, British units would NOT be ‘wiped out’ in a straight fight with Ivan! As an ex-soldier I know what we can do, & so do the Russians, they have a great respect for British forces, & it is well deserved!

      • The Russians have looked at how the Americans fight now. An initial onslaught of Tomahawk, JASSM cruise missiles, JDAM guided bombs, ATACMS. Wipe out the defences then move in. In the first Chechen war the Russians just sent tanks & conscripts into urban areas. They were ambushed & wiped out. In the second Chechen war, the Russians used their full time contract troops to identify enemy strongpoints from afar, then wipe them out with missiles, rockets, airpower, artillery. The days of WW2 Stalingrad suicide charges are gone. They will use drones, elint to find their enemy & pulverise them , before they risk their precious 18-19 year old conscripts.

        • Russkie tactics have always been massive use of OS firepower with their Arty and rockets, mixed in with a bit of chemical munitions thrown in. None persistent was the plan as the chemical agent needs to have dispersed within a few hours before the leading Guard Armoured Div roles though (Cold War scenario…..poss future) While they do have guided munitions they don’t have them in abundance like the yanks, so they still do rely on the overwhelming superiority in dumb ordnance! Dumb ordnance and I didn’t mean Parliament! 👍

        • OK General! How can you compare the Chechens with UK forces? Answer is, you can’t! UK forces are a different animal, what do you think they would do, sit around drinking tea, waiting to be ‘pulverised’ British forces work on Jackie Fisher’s dictum “Hit first, hit hard & keep on hitting” so don’t pontificate on something you know nothing about flower.

    • Given that 16th air assault initially had the much more armored Jackal, and yet actively traded them for WMIKS. Id say their pretty happy with them. If the pathfinders are coming under fire from amour then something has gone terrible wrong and I’m sure in that case they prefer a fast and nimble vehicle. The a sluggish oversized MRAP with poor mobility, observation, Speed and with practically no armor in that situation.

      • I think we need to realise how UAV, of all sorts, from cheap civilian, to high end military & all stops in between, mean that roaming round unnoticed, is getting harder.

    • Mark wrote:

      Sort of defeats the argument when we are about to lose the C130Js.

      Actually the government has sorted that issue out and have plans to sell off all the green fleet.

    • RAF are choosing to lose the hercs, the loss of capabilities is not their prime Task, and the Army doesn’t want to support that cost.
      So selling off the Herc Fleet will eventually increase the capabilities and Force the A400S to complete their Roles.

      • Let’s see what happens when the rethinking starts shortly: wherever happens in Ukraine?

        The C130J have life and use to them.

        More A400M would be nice too.

      • Army would not support the cost of keeping RAF Hercs in service. No, of course not. That is not how defence funding works.

  4. Seems a few are not aware of Pathfinder Platoons role.

    They don’t need covered vehicles or armour, they will often be free falling in and then carrying out other brigade tasks as a BRF in which case Jackals seem to be favoured.

    Still recall an excellent documentary on them in 1995-6 time frame, as part of the series “defending the realm”, they were testing the Barrett for the first time and the interviewer wanted to know how many they needed. Brigadier in charge fobbed him off with a number out of thin air I suspect, 56. The guy was ex too SF I recall, quite a character.

    I wonder if Airborne knew some of them?

    • Good documentary mate, that was the time when PF had DIY made “WMIKs” using stripped down LR90s, death traps lol! We did have some uprated stripped down V8s LR Wolfs, bloody hell they were powerful! And I remember one of the lads on patrol and talking “all this and £30 a day”….lol people moan about pay nowadays lol!

      • Lol, I know the guy you mean. He said he’d be robbing a bank if he wasn’t doing this. Somedays he says it was worth it, some days it wasn’t, but tomorrow might be nice. A guy called Dennis was the SNCO.
        I’d guess most of them went on to SF anyway, as it’s a natural stepping stone and was encouraged by the head sheds.

        • Lots of lads moved onto SF, PF in particular, the Battalions and the Brigade in general. Quite a lot of attached arms had the right state of mind to pass SF selection as well, which goes to show the quality of the people in the Brigade mate.

          • Do the path finder vehicles drop in by parachute also? Land rovers, bikes, quads etc. Or is it not worth the hassle, breakages on landing etc.
            They can do the whole slide out the back of a running plane etc and helicopter them in but that’s really noisy.

          • Yes, all the Bde land rovers, pinzgauers and 105mm can be dropped using the Medium Stress Platform, generally comes in P plus 10 (or thereabouts) onto the heavy drop zone (in training a safe distance away from the pax, in real time ops same DZ). The wagons are generally rigged a day or so prior to the lob, with teams from each sub unit rigging at the air mounting head. Used to be done quite regularly with a fair number of A/C allocated, with x 2 MSPs per airframe. Not done so much nowadays though mate. And each aircraft used to have a wedge (ammo etc) on the tailgate which went on the red, and door bundles, then tactical loading of the troops with “must go loads” marked with orange mine tape (comms kit/mortar etc) that means if the bloke is injured/killed or unable to jump the next guy gets told to bin his Bergen and take the load off the disabled man lol….sorry mate I digress and am swinging that lamp again 😂👍!

          • I thought the MSP was a skill that had been gapped. It needs revitalizing,
            The whole bloody brigade does!

          • It’s still around but not sure if the lads use it much anymore, and if not the rigging course won’t be needed! I think JATE have been trialling different systems but not 100% sure as my info is getting a bit long in the tooth. Have to check my in uniform sources, aka mates and family lol

    • Yep the pathfinders are an astonishing set of people. They invented HALO insertion and even then went further to invent super high parachute insertion. They are not even officially an special forces unit but they operate in astonishing conditions and are by far the best in the world at what they do.

      • They invented HALO and HAHO? Didn’t know that.

        Who knows if they’re the best. I’m sure the 4 Air Troops of 22 would dispute that.
        They are certainly elite.

        We have some superbly trained soldiers, an area of the army and RM unaffected by equipment screw ups.

        As for PP, the RM have a little known equivalent, Brigade Patrol Troop. But smaller, There is also the Mountain and Arctic Warfare Cadre.

        • Agreed mate, 22 lads of the Air Troop from each Sqn are the SMEs on insertion by air, and I have to say the RM Mountain and Artic Warfare cadre blokes are probably the best trained “none SF” in the world!

      • Good lads as you say but the USAF invented HALO mate, and have used it more than any other nation, in operations since Vietnam. They aren’t SF and the cadre is quite short, just 6 weeks, but training never stops and the lads skill sets are quite substantial.

  7. The questions in regard using RWMIKs are cropping up in relation to their continued use. To concur that they are still used due to their light role, stable weapon platform ability, and small footprint with the capability to be fitted easily in a C130 and underslung with minimum prep. Therefore they are ideal for light role, Western/Eastern European Airborne/Air Assault Recce. However were they suitable for Afghan or other COIN operations where you operate from a fixed base for an extended timeframe, carrying out observable and high profile framework patrolling?….No they were not, NOT AT ALL, but in the early days they were all that was available so the lads did the best they could, with the tools at hand. The early days in 2006 was more of a close call than people realise. FFS my first patrol into Sangin was 18 of us, in the backs of a few ANA Toyota friggin Hilux….but that’s another cluster f**k story to be told later lol.

    • Yep. The U.K. really underestimated what was needed on the ground for a Helmand operation. Massive area to cover and not the most welcoming people there. Right next to the tribal region in Pakistan. If the job is to provide stability and shore up a government long term it takes a lot of man power as it’s like a police force. Take the size of the U.K. police force and it’s a mostly peaceful unarmed country.
      Some knew at the time it was risky.
      My thoughts were if Iraq had not distracted and sucked up resources and that had all been put into Afghan and it was known the mission would take 50 years to get generations raised under a better system it may have got it on its feet.
      But that’s a massive commitment and would never of happened.
      All said tho how happy would anyone be if foreign troops walked ur streets saying they were here to make things better for you in a language you didn’t understand

      • Went a bit off there. The land rovers have there place and are still great assets. Being able to be dropped out a plane and still run on landing it amazing

      • I would be interested to see the Combat Estimate (if I remember the right term) for the Helmand mission.
        Given that the province is the size of Wales and given the nature of the opposition, it really needed an infantry division (plus air and avn support, CS and CSS etc). Initially we deployed just a BG! It is only ever politicians who cap military numbers.

        • I remember being in FOB outside of Gereshk, their for about 3 weeks in May 2006, then with feck all notice, after local Governors moaning to head sheds, Coy group sent up to Sangin, then Musa Qala, then Nowzad and the shit sandwich kept getting bitten for the next 5 months! All with 500 blokes, 6 light guns (broke into 2 x 3) and a Troop of re-roled 7 RHA blokes, Enginer Troop and no wagons! Now that’s British Army planning for you. Alas it was a bit more complicated than that, and with a few extra lads sent but that was pretty much it for Herrick 4!

          • Thanks Airborne for the recap of your experience. I was at the blunt end of Herrick as COS Camp Bastion Nov 08-May 09, so I haven’t got any dits worth telling!
            We definitely needed a British infantry div (+) in Helmand. I was in Bastion during the US surge – embarrassing that the Yanks had to put manpower into ‘our’ province to help us out.

          • It definitely makes you think. As I remember both KAF and Bastion from start to finish. Where they ended up as small towns, by the time things were getting ready to be pulled back. What was perhaps striking is that on one side of the runway at Bastion was a whole Marine expeditionary group, that included everything from logistics, it own air wings plus all the jarheads. It was similar at KAF. The US Army was there big time, but also the USMC. The Brits were there along with the French, Dutch and Belgiums, Aussies, Estonians and Romanians. It is sad to say we really were like the poor cousins to the US. As they also had significant forces in Kabul and Bagram amongst others. The US surge definitely worked as the number of incidents significantly dropped after they arrived. When they left it got back to “normal”.

  8. If covert, using vehicles and deploying long range; pathfinder likely to deploy via chinook or over land. Some of the other vehicles mentioned wouldn’t fit.

    In Afghanistan the best defence to IED’s was to use unpredictable routes. But the RWMIK has better countermeasures for IED’s and armour built into the chassis compared to the old WMIK bouncing around predictable daily patrols in Iraq (Non SF). 

  9. Just hope that in all seriousness that if the British Army ever had to go up against any peer adversary that our men and women are seriously well armed and protected and mobile with good supply lines.
    Looking at the Russian forces and all their deadly toys on the
    Ukrainian borders, maybe they could be getting a wee bit over confident, perhaps? Hope it doesn’t come to a conflict, but if it does may the Ukrainian people and the West be strong and prevail. I’m getting sick of hearing in various reports that Ukraine will be overrun in two days. With allied support, training, weapon imports and the Ukrainian peoples tenacity, any invading party will be stopped.
    Btw, God Save the Queen (congrats on 70 years) and (why not) God Save Ukraine (too)! 🇬🇧🇺🇦

    • Hi Quentin, I can’t think of the last time that the British Army had to go up against a peer adversary in conventional warfare – was it the Korean War, I wonder? [The Iraqi and Argentinian armies being regarded as sub-peer, clearly]

      Sad to say that the British Army’s core equipment for a mechanised/armoured war is lacking in quantity and quality. If we had to fight today we would deploy a small force (one or 2 brigades only) equipped with 50-year old Scimitar recce vehicles, barely 200 of the 25-year old Challys, near-40-year old Warriors, and barely 100 of the 30-year old AS90s – none of the above having been much upgraded.

      A good job these weaknesses will be hidden in an Alliance – hope our men and women get an easy and short piece of ‘the front’ allocated.

      • Well put Graham. As a result of its activities over the past 30 or so years, the UK has turned its armed forces into on the one hand an interdiction force and on the other a garrison/occupation force, neither of which is suited to fight on any kind of ‘front’ as you put it. So too have most of the other militaries in NATO.

        This is one of the reasons why the Russians feel so confident at the moment. They have an army that has spent the last 20 or so years quietly re-equipping and reorganising itself based on updated doctrines of the Red Army. Most importantly they have a fully air/land integrated fighting force of probably 150-200,000 with a large number of the important elements having been through Syria.

        Whilst NATO forces may on paper be bigger and better equipped, they are fragmented and ill suited for war in Europe which is probably more vulnerable than at any time since WW2.

        Saying that will go down like a lead balloon here but consider one are of critical importance. How many critical defence installations in Europe have any air defence at all? Then compare that with how much AD there is east of the Russian border. Even Moscow has rings of ABM and SAM systems.

        NATO is a great organisation for attacking lessor countries but actually defend Europe? It is not quite a single point of failure grouping but take out of action the 20 major military airfields and what is left?

  10. I know and understand those skills, they are very crucial in an warfare asymmetric, we saw it in a major conflict in the 90’s.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here