"How good was the Territorial Army?" Topic

One for anybody who served in the 1980s. How good was the TA? Obviously it was not on a par with the regular British Army, but it was a volunteer force intended to go into the line. If the RM and Paras were A class, other regulars B class, what was the TA? C class? D class? E class even?
BTw, ignore 21 & 23 SAS.

Bliley, you've opened a can of worms here. There's a lot of different units and standards within the TA (now AR) All that can be safely said is that a reservist can never be as well trained as a regular, but they often compensate for that with enthusiasm (generally cringeworthy enthusiasm) I'd be careful using to many different classes, there are a lot of people who would disagree with you saying Para Regt/RM are A class and the rest B. There are a few Inf battalions that aren't particularly good, but that's generally through lack of experience, but most can easily hold their own against the Paras (except for physical in a specialist way).
But if I had to classify, personally I'd go A Class – SAS/SBS A-Class – MAWC/Pathfinders etc, B Class – all Inf, C Class – all TA inf Arty/Eng in inf role, D Class – everyone else.
This'll starts some arguments "but I was a Pay Corps clerk and we could beat the Paras easily"

In the 1980s, the 101st Medium Artillery Company TA often won shooting competitions over their Regular Army counterparts. This was apparently because the Terriers had spent more hours on the artillery ranges than the Regulars, who had other things to do.

Bliley, you've opened a can of worms here

I thought it was a bit quiet so decided to start the week with a few grenades!

there are a lot of people who would disagree with you saying Para Regt/RM are A class and the rest B.

I know, but needed a reference point using nice easy wargamimg lingo.

Thanks

Well we can't have been that bad since they were mobilised for the gulf.

So was the mobile laundry unit😂

Harsh!

Yes the mobile laundry unit had the whitest Ys and sorted even the worst skids:)
When your short of regulars everyone else is good enough and I think when deployed all and sundry get to be through hard learnt in country experience as good as the next unit regular or not.

I fancy that the Catering Corps killed more men than any other arm. Unfortunately their own side. (LOL)

Clearly, little of that matters, excepting perhaps the quality of the marching band.

Obviously it was not on a par with the regular British Army

Possibly true or maybe not.

Two points to ponder:

a) Operation Granby – numerous Int. Corps deployments made up solely of TA or Special engagements, many regulars left in Germany.

b) 21 SAS had slightly better successes than 22…..

DB

Gennorm, I take it your question was in regard to BAOR and seeing off the Russians.

TA units could be a good or better than regular in lots of ways. Equioment is liable to be older but could be maintained better, many TA soldiers ex regular army, TA more liable to be enthusiasts and servingina Branch/unit theywant to be in, possibly be better technical skills from 'normal' work.

Some army units – medical, for instance – are liable to have a good proportion of TA staff with the regulars.

Example: I was in RA subunit of OTC – all graduates/undergraduates of a technical university. One year we let our 25 pounders behind and arranged to borrow 3 105mm from Regular Junior Leaders unit – basically, oung soldiers training to be NCOs. None of their guns were in working order. For our lot,it was great training. Stripping and reassembling things was pretty much what most of our unit did all the time. The guns worked pretty well after that.

OK, OTC v Young Leaders – but still, Territorial v Regular all the same. Plus our unit had at least two officers who had been accepted for the Territorial SAS (who I would imagine to be at least the equal to most Regular units) and Regular Guards.

HAC – Corps Patrol Unit along side 21/23…

Pretty good even though I say so myself…

Especially with "that" rifle…

Reactionary I like the colour of your cloth

Gennorm… So when I Left the Regulars I immediately went down a quality level. Surprisingly some TA units are quite good, and Regular Regiments stuck in BOAR were rather ill-equipped and out of shape.

But to be fair if scrabbling to meet 3rd Shock Army and no time for pre-deployment training I would go with Foxweasel's assessment of units quality

We were all enthusiastic and steely-eyed killers (in our own minds anyway). I expect the enthusiasm would have worn off fairly quickly though. In our role, rear-area security, I think we would have done just as well as regulars and if called on to dig-in and defend a village or bridge as well. However, I think we'd be a bit less effective in counterattacks or drafted into a regular Mechanised unit as replacements although those that survived the first few actions would improve considerably.

In wargame terms – +1 for enthusiasm initially and, as Reactionary says, +2 for being armed with "that" rifle.

I would like to say that the HAC were awful, but then Cavalry47 is a very good friend!!

I joined the Shropshire Yeomanry (C Sqn QOMY) in 79 when it was still a bit of a drinking club. Things got somewhat more serious as a few ex Regular Infanteers joined and in 84 we were best non Infanty and 4th overall in the West Midland District Patrol Competition.

Apparently the tradition was kept up and the chaps were generally keen and fairly well trained, but I joined the Regular Army in 85 (Almost at the same time a certain young man was moving the other way, Barrie!)

Tally Ho!

RMR … same as the RM Regulars ;-)
No pointy heads in our units.

It's a broad question. I was a regular in the Australian Army and I was always posted to units that contained Reserve elements.

Most folks consider the army to be made up of front line fighting troops. Now all Australian troops are trained as basic combat soldiers with the Arms corps trained to a higher level. In many cases (I won't say all) the regulars are trained to a higher level.

That said, other corps' have reservists that, in their civilian life, have a higher level of training in their field and they bring these skills to their unit. For instance a reservist transport NCO might be a diesel mechanic in civvy life, so his troop will have a level of integral repair capability.

There was a reservist in the Q store in one unit I was posted to. She was treated like an idiot because a) she worked in the Q, b) she was a reservist & c) she was a lady. One day I asked what her real job was and she told me she was a coroner.

I recall an article I read in the late seventies which favourably compared the TA's fitness with that of regular US units.
Just sayin'.

I did bend a 1 Tonne and a LWB during my time mind…

And had a wee problem with some PE when trying to build a hide on Lionheart '84….

Getting sandbags out of the top of trees is difficult, but essential if you are attempting to be covert…

The Royal Signals has a specialist TA unit made up entirely of BT Engineers, all experienced in Telephone exchange building and modification. Was called on to help swap out the old analogue exchange at RAF Akrotiri and replace with a Digital Exchange.
So as we have said those "Specialist units" have more skilled people.

A good friend of mine was in the RAF Regt TA and then the Paras. They had to do stag at the barracks in Lincoln armed with pick axe handles instead of rifles, and his mate's favourite little game was to wind up the drunks staggering home from the pub and try and goad them to cross the line onto MOD property, whereupon he promptly felled them with his lump of wood. A Police complaint about his behaviour stopped his little game after he got too carried away one night.

Aaaand. My Sabre Commander ended up as A Major General…

At the end of Gulf War 1, there were 2 Field Hospitals operatiNG in theatre; one mainly TA and one mainly Regular – and there was an outcry when the predominantly Regular staffed one was sent home first – it was seen as the MOD abusing the goodwill of the Terriers. But as the Army said at the time, if you had your legs blown off by an IED, who would you rather have treating you, regular army surgeons, or NHS surgeons who operated and anesthetised every day of their working lives?

As has been said above, independent TAVR units probably didn't spend that much less time in the field than their regular counterparts. And it varied from unit to unit – in B Company 4RRW the Coy Commander was ex Reg, (commissioned into the regular RRW from the ranks of the Welsh Guards); the CSM was serving Reg (Permanent Staff), and all 3 of my sections were commanded by ex regulars – and this was a TAVR 'B' class Home Defence roled unit!

If you really want to compare the performance, look at WW2 – basically there was no difference…When the Regular 51st Highland Division went into the bag at Calais in 1940, the Terriers carried the division on to fame and glory from Alamein to the Rhine just as well…

And to follow Bruce, the Shropshire Yeomanry went to annual camp in 39 and returned in 45!

Tally Ho!

I did bend a 1 Tonne and a LWB during my time mind…

As have pretty much every Regular unit, on a regular basis. (pun totally intended)

If your unit isn't breaking equipment, you're not using it enough.

Agreed Lion, but it was thought I was being a little selfish doing two by myself…

Nah, I'm sure your unit was below-curve on damaged equipment.

I was a platoon commander in a NATO committed infantry battalion between 1978 and 1981. My company was pretty well manned and had a small number of ex-regulars including my platoon sergeant and one of my corporals. The majority of us attended every training weekend and weekday, plus annual camp, so we were as well trained as we could be.

But you would be kidding yourself if you thought that that was anywhere near enough training to be half-way effective in the field. We practised pretty much everything from assault river crossings to helicopter assaults but apart from rangework we only did these things once or twice in a year. Yes the training was varied, but it wasn't repetitive enough to enable us to be truly proficient in much beyond shooting. Yes we could beat regular army units at Bisley or in local range competitions, but could we mount an effective company attack or withdrawal in contact?

The real disaster for my battalion came when the colonel decided that he wanted to impress the powers that be by having a 1,000 man battalion. We accepted anyone. Dismissed no-one. And I would spend my training evenings driving round the town visiting soldiers that hadn't turned up for weeks and try to get them to come back. They weren't interested any more but the colonel wouldn't let them go.

This resulted in us having to hide certain soldiers when inspected by General Haigh (no less) when on exercise in Germany, and having to retrace our steps during a night exercise when it was discovered that the guy with the 84mm had decided it was too heavy to carry any further and had thrown it away. I kid you not.

Looking back I can see that we would have done a job, but not for very long. But I enjoyed every minute of it, well, most of it.

Sounds about right deephorse. I joined the reserves in the 80s, did a couple of years then joined regular, I left the regulars last year and went straight into the reserves. Without upsetting some of the people on here, I think the the following sentence sums it up. When a man joins the regulars from the reserves he has to complete the full basic training.

Yes but neither Regular nor Territorial are considered fit to deploy unless they have been brought up to speed through pre-deployment operational training at unit level. That would have been necessary in theatre for all units coming from the UK, regular or reserve. Assuming there was time!

The original question was about the 80s, not the 6 months PDT before an Afghanistan tour. In the 80s it was "pack your kit, you're off"

I served in a NATO-roled TA infantry battalion from 1989-1991, converting from SLR/GMPG/SMG to SA80/LSW in '91. We deployed on Exercise Potent Gauntlet in September 1989 literally two months before the Inner German Border was opened forever, but no-one had any inkling and we had war stocks of ammo not far away while on exercise. With German re-unification we learned that our wartime role would be to dig in 16km from the IGB and cover main force elements as they deployed. Our life expectancy was one hour apparently, so probably just as well they didn't tell us beforehand!

The battalion was pretty much up to strength with a MILAN Platoon of six posts, although a further 18 from regular units would apparently have been added in wartime. We were entirely motorised, with nothing more substantial than a Land Rover engine block for protection while on the move. We did become quite good at digging in though, proven by an FV432 barrelling over one of our occupied trenches while on exercise!

In terms of quality, comparing ourselves to regular units in Germany or the UK we seemed to be on a par in terms of marksmanship, as skilled in terms of driving, digging in and the like, but were generally not as fit embedded in teams as the Regs. While Regular units would have been brought up to strength with replacements and reinforcements there would still have been a more solid core than we had as TA infanteers. They were generally more familiar with their equipment; I never saw a bayonet in my entire service, for instance.

Morale was high in my unit – many were itching to serve in the UN-Iraq war – but combat experience was limited to a few S-type deployments in Ulster or the occasional ex-regular who'd been in the Falklands. I think we'd have done fairly well against Third Shock Army, forcing them to deploy and using heavy weapons to good effect but it's impossible to predict what Soviet artillery would have done to civil servants and shop assistants pulled from comfortable jobs mere days beforehand. We all talked about fighting on after being overrun and did Escape and Evasion training with a unit that cannot be named but who knows?

In wargames terms I'd say we were under-equipped compared to Regular units, of comparable morale and technical ability but probably with less staying power.

Interesting. I'm surprised you never saw a bayonet. Did you have the frog so you could at least set your webbing up properly even if you didn't get used to carrying it?
We would check the fall of shot on ranges with bayonets fitted after zeroing and we generally drew bayonets out with the weapons for both live and blank firing exercises – they were a must on live exercises (you couldn't obviously fit them when blank firing).
One of my guys did stab himself through his foot at one time when he put his foot onto the dummies chest before he stabbed it with his bayonet instead of after.
Issuing the lads with their bayonets also stopped the muppets who liked swanning about with their own rambo knives and kitchen kukris etc.
I think the TA units were more of a speed bump to be honest to buy a bit of time before reinforcements could storm in from across the atlantic. As with all units some were better than others but they didn't work together enough at battalion level for their command structures to be fully effective.

I served ten years before typhoon2 and never saw a bayonet either, or the frog. Never saw any unit conducting rangework with bayonets fitted.

… still plenty of room today for a few good men (and women): royalnavy.mod.uk/rnr … link

Am I blatant in offering a Hoofingly good career choice here?

YES!!

Ok – different experiences then.
I'm surprised though – not even on parade?

I saw a bayonet we marched through York with fixed bayonets.

The only parades I took part in were for Armistice Day. I did four or five in my time but weapons were never carried during these.

I was in 2/52 Lowland in the early '90's, just after the first Gulf war.
We had a few in HQ (Royal Scots) who were seconded to the regulars in Iraq '90-'91. Medics, MT, sigs, REME Etc.

We had a few in HQ and A coy who were ex-Royal Scots who had been in Germany and Ireland.
We had a few in C coy who were ex-Guards and had been boys in the Falklands. One also who was an ex-corporal in the French Foreign Legion.
D coy had ex-Paras and ex-RTR (Royal Tank Regiment).
HQ coy CSM was ex-Paras.
Our Colonel and RSM were Regulars (KOSB).
Medial Staff Sargent was Regulars (Royal Scots).
C Coy Colour Sergeant was KOSB regular. (He said female squaddies worked harder than males to show they were as good as males)
So there were always regulars and ex-regulars in our unit and we had troops going off to do S-Types in Ireland.

I did live firing on a range once with a bayonet. Really made the SA-80 fell quite different and front heavy. I also took part in a live firing exercise with fixed bayonets. (Although I didn't fix one as I had the SAW)

We mightn't have had as much repetitive tasking but I like to think we would have improved very quickly. You would notice the difference on annual training.
I always think of the 43rd Wessex Div in Normandy at Hill 112, fighting against the 9th SS Panzer Division and 102nd SS-Panzer Battalion (Tiger Is) and hope that we could have done something similar.

AS to the above recollection about the fixed bayonets, I would like to just make clear the SAW was the LSW. Bipod didn't allow for bayonet to be fixed.
Sorry about that Chief.

Thanks for all of the input chaps. Good stuff.