At least they don't have to shout "bang"....yet

[English assassin]

In a (belated) posting from the land of you-couldn't-make-it-up, news that, to save costs, the Parachute regiment is, err, not going to do any parachute training any more

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...7/nparas17.xml

Parachute training in the Army is set to be halted for four years as part of a £1 billion cost-cutting programme by the Ministry of Defence (MoD).
The proposals mean that Britain will be without a parachute-trained force for the first time since the Second World War when the Parachute Regiment was created on the orders of Winston Churchill.
Documents leaked to The Sunday Telegraph reveal that no new recruits or even serving members of the Parachute Regiment or airborne forces will be trained in military parachuting from next year until 2011

[Banquo's Ghost]

You're just cynical. This is clearly an example of Joined-up Government (TM).

If the paras just leap straight to their deaths, the MoD won't have to answer embarrassing questions about why they have no body armour, ammunition or usable boots.

Or:

[InsaneApache]

It's not as though they have any 'planes to jump from though, is it?

Maybe the money they wasted invested in helicopters that can't fly is the reason.

[Pannonian]

In a (belated) posting from the land of you-couldn't-make-it-up, news that, to save costs, the Parachute regiment is, err, not going to do any parachute training any more

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...7/nparas17.xml

When's the last time we dropped troops by parachute? Didn't we discontinue it because we felt the paras were too valuable to be inserted by that method? If silence is so necessary, surely SAS would be more suited to that kind of mission than paratroopers.

PS. The Guards shouldn't spend so much time on horsework either. We lack combat troops, they're reportedly less fit than frontline units - ergo the logical conclusion would be for them to spend less time guarding the Queen, and more time in Afghanistan.

[Banquo's Ghost]

PS. The Guards shouldn't spend so much time on horsework either. We lack combat troops, they're reportedly less fit than frontline units - ergo the logical conclusion would be for them to spend less time guarding the Queen, and more time in Afghanistan.

To drift off-topic a moment: One of the compensations for being mildly dyslexic is mis-reading things. I first read the above as:

The Guards shouldn't spend so much time on housework either.

That'll be an image to cheer me up from now on.

[Tribesman]

The Guards shouldn't spend so much time on housework either.

But those Bearskin hats are just perfect for cleaning cobwebs from the ceiling .

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This particually tickled me as when I was a little Army Cadet, sometimes we had to shout bang or "nagga, nagga" instead of actually firing blank rounds.

You get to sixteen, start mixing with regies and then next summer while your section is shouting themselves hoarse you load up the spare mags you nicked off them.

On a far more serious note, American Paras were used in IraqII, so it could happen and totally removing the capability is a bad idea, I assume that since they won't be jump-qualified they'll no longer be eligable for higher pay.

Saves money, doesn't it.

[Somebody Else]

Sounding like some mad petitioner... clicky
Oh, and the Guards would be good at housework, they spend all their time polishing stuff...

[King Henry V]

When's the last time we dropped troops by parachute? Didn't we discontinue it because we felt the paras were too valuable to be inserted by that method? If silence is so necessary, surely SAS would be more suited to that kind of mission than paratroopers.

PS. The Guards shouldn't spend so much time on horsework either. We lack combat troops, they're reportedly less fit than frontline units - ergo the logical conclusion would be for them to spend less time guarding the Queen, and more time in Afghanistan.

The Household Cavalry is a tank regiment and has served in recent theatres of conflict, as well as trotting up and down horse guards.

Most major militaries have parachute regiments, and airborne forces were used to secure airfields and oilwells in Iraq and Afghanistan. To dispense of such vitally important units is complete idiocy, just typical of this government.

[Lorenzo_H]

I was just reading in the Guardian about how overstretched the once glorious Royal Navy and Army and RAF are.

They are selling most of their ships.

They are 40% under strength in all infantry regiments.

They sold all their new Eurofighter Typhoons to Saudi Arabia or some place, so they are still going to have to use Tornados, which became obsolete about 30 years ago.

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

Erm, the Tornado was introduced in 1979. Which was less than 30 years ago.

[Tribesman]

Erm, the Tornado was introduced in 1979. Which was less than 30 years ago.

Would you like to read the article diablo said he read BKS ?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/s...989468,00.html
Since it surprisingly doesn't say what he says it does

[Pannonian]

The Household Cavalry is a tank regiment and has served in recent theatres of conflict, as well as trotting up and down horse guards.

Some chap at another forum reckoned they were a notch below regular units, on those occasions when they were in the field together. He felt they spent too much time in Blighty, and not enough time seeing real action, and that extra time in the field would do them good.

Most major militaries have parachute regiments, and airborne forces were used to secure airfields and oilwells in Iraq and Afghanistan. To dispense of such vitally important units is complete idiocy, just typical of this government.

Aren't they meant to be inserted by helicopter?

[KukriKhan]

Aren't they meant to be inserted by helicopter?

My son, PFC Smith, is a US para in Iraq. He jumped out of perfectly good airplanes for training, but they're inserted these days exclusively via Blackhawk helicopter.

Maybe diablodelmar is thinking of the US B-45 Tornado, introduced in 1948?

Bloody shame, the Brits having to draw down/merge so much. One hopes there's a group of Sergeants Major safeguarding the record of traditions and histories of these outfits.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

No such luck, we don't need to draw down and one of the reasons for the merging of regiments is to destroy local loyalties and regimental identity, in order to make it easier to shift troops between regiments.

Anyone who knows anything about a military will tell you this is a recipe for disaster, unfortunately the consultants know knothing, full stop.

[Del Arroyo]

When's the last time we dropped troops by parachute? Didn't we discontinue it because we felt the paras were too valuable to be inserted by that method? If silence is so necessary, surely SAS would be more suited to that kind of mission than paratroopers.

GAAAAAAAAAAHH!!