As the self appointed 'barrack room laywer' of this forum I just wondered what you thought of the following. It was in an article contained in a Regimental magazine privately published by some ex military buddies who have no love for the RN or RAF.
The meat and bones of the article were:
"The October strategic defence review came down heavily on the RN and the cuts will be deeply felt, but it seemed to be good news for the Gold Braid mob.
Up to 5000 lower rank positions are to be axed in the Navy, but in the December Court Circular there was an announcement that 12 new Senior positions were recently gazetted, these were 6 Commanders and 6 Captains (none of which will ever get their feet wet comanding a sea going vesssel).
Currently the Senior Roster of the Senior Service is : 2 Sea-Lords, 33 Admirals,
6 Vice-Admirals, 25 Rear-Admirals, 290 Captains, 1090 Commanders and 2320 Lieutenant-Commanders".
Just being an old brownjob I don't do the maths anymore, but for a peacetime Navy this all seems a little top heavy.
This is for RODDERSUK
Re: This is for RODDERSUK
Very interesting. If our navy was as big as it was say, during the Korean war, then those numbers would be acceptable.
I wonder how the Army compares.
I wonder how the Army compares.
RoddersUK