BAOR ORBAT Version 9

[LouieD]

https://www.orbat85.nl/documents/BAOR-July-1989.pdf

 

Updated the following:

-Gurkha Coys roles explained

- GDP for Para Regt Gp added

- expanded on the RE section regarding the change to Close Support/General Support Engineer Regts

- added explanation and roles of General Service Units

Again, the devil is in the details, please peruse it and you will find many more additions & explanations.

 

Edited January 6, 2021 by LouieD

[Stuart Galbraith]

Thank you for sharing this with us Louie, im sure we all appreciate your efforts on this.

[Darth Stalin]

This is wonderful! Thanks a lot, Louie!

 

BTW:

 

Quote

The RAC expected to have every regiment back up to the Type 57 establishment in the 1990’s (except for the in-Armd role Household Cavalry)

 

Would it mean, that:

1) Berlin Bde and Cyprus would have their "own", separate tank/recce sqns, with their "parent" regiments maintaining 57-tank structure?

2) the Bovington tank regt being 57-tank type?

3) Life Guards being a 57-tank regt with Chal 1?

 

BTW2:

if the above would be true (i.e. Berlin and Cyprus having their "own" sqns), AND "the Tidworth option" being introduced (i.e. with full 57-tank regiment instead of Recce regt with tank sqn), could it be, that... AN ADDITIONAL ARMORED REGT could be formed?

I mean, the "overseas deployment regt", say, "2nd RTR", with subordinate sqns deployed as follows:

a) 1 sqn to Cyprus (recce)

b) 1 sqn to Berlin (tank)

c) 1 sqn (recce) to AMF

d) 1 sqn (recce) to UKMF (if still requiring a recce sqn) or (tank) for Home Defence (say, with 56th London "Guards" Bde)

thus leaving the Bovington regt available for creation of a wartime "surplus" bde

 

BTW3:

Did the 107th Bde (under HQ NI) receive a wartime "deployment" role?

AFAIK the 3rd, 8th and 39th would either remain in NI or be moved to "main island", yet still remaining with Home Defence tasks.

Edited January 10, 2021 by Darth Stalin

[LouieD]

16 hours ago, Darth Stalin said:

This is wonderful! Thanks a lot, Louie!

BTW:

Would it mean, that:

1) Berlin Bde and Cyprus would have their "own", separate tank/recce sqns, with their "parent" regiments maintaining 57-tank structure?

2) the Bovington tank regt being 57-tank type?

3) Life Guards being a 57-tank regt with Chal 1?

The quick and dirty answer is YES & NO..... Now in the past the RTR provided an Independent Armd Sqn in Berlin, it was formed and disbanded twice in the 1950' & 60's, so that was possible. As for Cyprus..... the Army/RAC liked to be able to send units on tours of 'Sunny Climes', especially since the RAC was basically stuck in the FRG. So I think they would of still rotated  Sqns through this AND the UN Sqn.

http://british-army-units1945on.co.uk/royal-armoured-corps/independent-squadrons.html

The Bovington/Catterick Regt had a role to form the Corps Armd Delivery Regt in TTW. HOWEVER....knowing Army/Regimental politics I firmly believe that if there was time and equipment (I believe there would have been enough CHIEFTAINS) they would have been formed into an Armd Regt and sent to BAOR, but most likely to reinforce an existing Bde

Technically the Life Guards and Blues & Royals were Household Cavalry, they shared the roles of the RAC but were NOT a part of the RAC. They each had 3x Sabre Sqns because each had their fourth Sqn as part of the Household Cavalry Mounted Regt (the mounted troops on Public Duties). These Sqns had MHD roles. They would most likely stay at three sqns. HOWEVER, on TTW they might have (like in both previous World Wars) simply become 1st & 2nd Household Cavalry Regts, reinforced by REDRUM & reservists (both Household Cavalry & RAC)

BTW2:

if the above would be true (i.e. Berlin and Cyprus having their "own" sqns), AND "the Tidworth option" being introduced (i.e. with full 57-tank regiment instead of Recce regt with tank sqn), could it be, that... AN ADDITIONAL ARMORED REGT could be formed?

I mean, the "overseas deployment regt", say, "2nd RTR", with subordinate sqns deployed as follows:

a) 1 sqn to Cyprus (recce)

b) 1 sqn to Berlin (tank)

c) 1 sqn (recce) to AMF

d) 1 sqn (recce) to UKMF (if still requiring a recce sqn) or (tank) for Home Defence (say, with 56th London "Guards" Bde)

thus leaving the Bovington regt available for creation of a wartime "surplus" bde

See above, the plans were to form the Tidworth Armd Recce Regt into an Armd Regt (there will be more detail in my UKMF paper). UKMF/1st Inf Bde would be a Mech Bde Gp in all but name (1xCHIEFTAIN Regt & 3x SAXON Inf Bns) to reinforce the Danish/FRG Corps in Schleswig-Holstein.

BTW3:

Did the 107th Bde (under HQ NI) receive a wartime "deployment" role?

AFAIK the 3rd, 8th and 39th would either remain in NI or be moved to "main island", yet still remaining with Home Defence tasks.

COVID is hampering my efforts on this, I simply haven't seen anything on this yet

 

 

See answers above

 

Regarding any additional Bdes.....all I have found so far is that BAOR in 1986 wanted an additional Armd Bde AND Airmobile Bde. This was after the successful trial of the airmobile concept by 6 Bde. 6 Bde was converting back to an Armd Bde (the eighth in BAOR), they wanted 1st Inf Bde pulled from UKMF and formed into a Armd AND Airmobile Bde. My UKMF paper will explain further but when this came to naught, 24th Inf Bde became the Airmobile Bde which left 2 ID one Bde short, necessitating using 29 Engr Bde (see the BAOR paper) taking over command on operations of some of the TA Bns to allow 15 Inf Bde to take 24 Bdes role as the reserve. This still left BAOR short an Armd Bde......again COVID, still waiting for answers from the Tank Museum and Kew. Suffice it to say the money was just not there to get another Bde formed (see the PRG, correspondence specifically states that money was the obstacle and that to 'trick' the Treasury they would continue using the Group name and just trickle in supporting units). Oh, as for 19 Inf Bde (1x CHIEFTAIN & 3x SAXON Inf Bns), BAOR wanted it kept where it was under 4 AD. Now certainly on TTW, just like COGRAM, if the war was still going after 30 days you could well see additional Bdes formed (cadres from the Bdes in NI, like COGRAM plans). I just haven't seen anything on paper yet.

Edited January 11, 2021 by LouieD

[Darth Stalin]

15 minutes ago, LouieD said:

Technically the Life Guards and Blues & Royals were Household Cavalry, they shared the roles of the RAC but were NOT a part of the RAC. They each had 3x Sabre Sqns because each had their fourth Sqn as part of the Household Cavalry Mounted Regt (the mounted troops on Public Duties). These Sqns had MHD roles. They would most likely stay at three sqns, HOWEVER on TTW they might have been (like both previous World Wars) simply have become 1st & 2nd Household Cavalry Regts and reinforced by REDRUM & reservists (both Household Cavalry & RAC)

Again, thanks a lot!

However - what do you mean as "they"? These two 4th squadrons forming HCMR or these regiments being filled up to 4 sqns and becoming 57-tank regiments? 

Or, I can see something like this:

1) reserve etc. forms 4th sqn for Household tank regt (say LG) to become 57-tank unit

2) 1 sqn of the HCMR becomes Recce and fills in the gap left by "Tidworth option" in AMF-L or 5th Para Bde

3) remaining HCMR sqn is a nucleus to form (from reserves etc.) a HCM tank or recce regt to be used in Home Defence, with possibility to be further expanded into 2 regiments (say, recon and tank)

 

Quote

The Bovington/Catterick Regt had a role to form the Corps Armd Delivery Regt in TTW, HOWEVER....knowing Army/Regimental politics I firmly believe that if there was time and equipment (I believe there would have been enough CHIEFTAINS) they would have been formed into an Armd Regt and sent to BAOR, but most likely to reinforce an existing Bde

Well, maybe; but as the PRG counted for a Saxon bn to support themn, then why not suppose, that Bovington + 2 x Saxon bns + mech (T) bn from School of Infantry and arty bn from 24th Bde form (say, under HQ umbrella of 107th Bde) an "ad-hoc" Mech Bde to fill in the gap, or even become 3rd bde of the 2nd ID, thus leaving 24th Airmobile bde, though without 155mm guns, yet with 3 x airmobile bns and a regiment of AT Lynx choppers  to be a reserve anti-tank protection force.

 

Is that plausible assumption, given Your knowledge of the British Army practice of the era?

Anyway, during the late 70s and 80s they've been experimenting with many structures...

[LouieD]

10 hours ago, Darth Stalin said:

Again, thanks a lot!

However - what do you mean as "they"? These two 4th squadrons forming HCMR or these regiments being filled up to 4 sqns and becoming 57-tank regiments? 

The Life Guards and Blues & Royals.....they have the same roles as the RAC but NOT part of it. They both periodically switch roles between BAOR (Armd) & Windsor (Armd Recce) in their own Arms Plot. Each Regt (it doesn't matter which role) only have 3x Sabre Sqns, each Regt has an additional Sqn as part of the HCMR for Public duties. As I mentioned in other posts, the HCMR had a MHD role. What I was saying is that in the last World War, they, the Household Cavalry, merged themselves into the 1st Household Cavalry Regiment and the 2nd Household Cavalry Regiment for active service. As a precedent was already set I presume that this can happen again, which also lets them fill up their WE regardless of Cap Badge.

OT for a second, prior to the 'Wide Horizons' changes in 1975-77 all RAC (and Household Cavalry) had 3x Sabre Sqns, the 1975-77 restructuring added a fourth (as well as adding a fourth Rifle Coy to Inf Bns). The 1982 reforms reduced the Inf Bns back to 3x Rifle Coys (most could never recruit up to four) but let the RAC stay with four (however they too had trouble recruiting the fourth). FM Lord Bramall stated, that from World War 2 experience ,the most tanks any HQ could control effectively was no more than 45 (about three Sqns). Now I don't know for a fact if this was the impetus to try the Type 43 Regt when CHALLENGER started coming into service, but it may have been the combination of this (Bramall's statement, not directly, but Army institutionalized knowledge), recruiting challenges or the rush to get regiments completely CHALLY equipped.  

Or, I can see something like this:

1) reserve etc. forms 4th sqn for Household tank regt (say LG) to become 57-tank unit

Possible, but I have not found anything to back this up

2) 1 sqn of the HCMR becomes Recce and fills in the gap left by "Tidworth option" in AMF-L or 5th Para Bde

NO, HCMR was scheduled to become the London District Recce Regt for MHD

3) remaining HCMR sqn is a nucleus to form (from reserves etc.) a HCM tank or recce regt to be used in Home Defence, with possibility to be further expanded into 2 regiments (say, recon and tank)

No, see above 

Well, maybe; but as the PRG counted for a Saxon bn to support them, then why not suppose, that Bovington + 2 x Saxon bns + mech (T) bn from School of Infantry and arty bn from 24th Bde form (say, under HQ umbrella of 107th Bde) an "ad-hoc" Mech Bde to fill in the gap, or even become 3rd bde of the 2nd ID, thus leaving 24th Airmobile bde, though without 155mm guns, yet with 3 x airmobile bns and a regiment of AT Lynx choppers  to be a reserve anti-tank protection force.

PRG didn't count on that SAXON Bn, it MIGHT have been deployed north of their TAOR, either under PRGs command OR 22 AB.

The FH-70 Regts were part of the GS Arty Gps

Though the TA Bdes like 107 Bde had a Regular command cadre, they were NOT prepared for active service (at least immediately, the first 30 days)

Is that plausible assumption, given Your knowledge of the British Army practice of the era?

My assumption, for the first 30 days everything and everyone was going across the Channel to reinforce existing formations, after 30 days, well anything is possible, that's if the war was still on and there was no instant sunshine being flung about.

Anyway, during the late 70s and 80s they've been experimenting with many structures...

 

Edited January 11, 2021 by LouieD

[Darth Stalin]

On 1/10/2021 at 8:14 PM, LouieD said:

Though the TA Bdes like 107 Bde had a Regular command cadre, they were NOT prepared for active service (at least immediately, the first 30 days)

Okay, thanks once more.

However, this rise up another question:

were the regular (3rd, 8th and 39th) NI brigades ever scheduled to be "active & deployable"? And if not all of them, then which one coul/would most likely be?

 

EDIT:

BTW: AFAIK the Coldwargamer (Andy Rix?) was a staff officer in BAOR during Cold War (I believe I've read this here in TankNet). Can anyone confirm/deny this? And if so, where did he serve?

He definitely seems to know the issues he's writing about...

 

Edited January 11, 2021 by Darth Stalin

[demobbed]

On 1/10/2021 at 9:44 PM, Darth Stalin said:

Okay, thanks once more.

However, this rise up another question:

were the regular (3rd, 8th and 39th) NI brigades ever scheduled to be "active & deployable"? And if not all of them, then which one coul/would most likely be?

 

EDIT:

BTW: AFAIK the Coldwargamer (Andy Rix?) was a staff officer in BAOR during Cold War (I believe I've read this here in TankNet). Can anyone confirm/deny this? And if so, where did he serve?

He definitely seems to know the issues he's writing about...

Coldwargamer is a former officer of 1 QLR and served in BAOR when the Bn was on a tour as part of 33 Armd Bde in the late 1980's and quite probably held staff appointments as well.

 

[Darth Stalin]

Thanks for answer!

I knew there were bells jingling but didn't know in what church...  (a Polish proverb, in case of confusion).

[demobbed]

Not a problem, he was actually my OC (Company Commander) when the Bn was based in Tidworth and Omagh.

[Darth Stalin]

Heh, good Old days... at what rank did he finish his service? 

[LouieD]

@Darth Stalin

Perusing some more documents......

"UKLF Concepts and Equipment Committee Level 2 Enhancements:

Serial 4  Allocation of an armoured regiment for UKMF (The Tidworth Proposal)

Manpower: 65         Target Date: 1990

The proposal generates a RHQ, 3x armd sqns, and 1x med recce sqn from a reroling of current recce regt. An additional 44 MBT (33 UE + 11 WMR) are required. These will be found from Chieftain assets on establishment of 7th Challenger regiment. The manpower bill is being reviewed."

 

Edited January 23, 2021 by LouieD

[Allan W]

40 minutes ago, LouieD said:

@Darth Stalin

Perusing some more documents......

 

Tidworth Option.pdfUnavailable

Tidworth Option.pdfUnavailable

Both show as unavailable...

[LouieD]

16 minutes ago, Allan Wotherspoon said:

Both show as unavailable...

@Allan Wotherspoon I had to type it out, sorry......

[Stuart Galbraith]

Thanks again Louie.

Have you found anything in the documents about the ammunition supply? I found a 1973 MOD document that suggests that we had ammunition for 6 days of 'High intensity warfare' and 'because of the financial situation, further economies may have to be made'. Im just wondering if they ever made good on that.

[LouieD]

8 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Thanks again Louie.

Have you found anything in the documents about the ammunition supply? I found a 1973 MOD document that suggests that we had ammunition for 6 days of 'High intensity warfare' and 'because of the financial situation, further economies may have to be made'. Im just wondering if they ever made good on that.

Stuart,

A lengthy discussion about this is taking place on ARRSE https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/british-defence-planning-and-britains-nato-commitment-1979-1985.303352/page-4#post-10534082

The impetus of the Battlefield Attrition Study and Review of Ammunition Rates and Scales was the Yom Kippur War. After a week of combat the IDF was short of everything and experts now credit the massive U.S. effort to re-supply them (from tanks to shells) with the IDF being able to take the offensive. The 30-Day NATO supply was the result of this and British Army planning was based on keeping things going with what they had on hand for at least 30-Days. The Hobson Library at the JSCSC has a copy of the study I believe, when the current unpleasantness is over I will try to get it. I have not found anything, so far, detailing plans to switch factories to a war footing to churn out vehicles and ammo (the U.S. had extensive plans and would have been putting the M-1 Abrams factories on 24-hour shifts for instance. We also had extensive plans to start churning out boatloads of ammo !)

 

[LouieD]

BTW, another one for @Darth Stalin

The Queen's Royal Irish Hussars  July 1989  (RAC Training Regt/RAC Centre Regt)

Catterick

- Basic Military Training Sqn

- Trade Sqn (SHQ, D&M Wing, Signals Wing, Gunnery Wing)

- Support Sqn (SHQ, Vehicle Wing consisting of MBT Tp ; 45 MBTs, CVR (T) Tp, FFR Tp, MT Tp, & QM Dept)

-RHQ (with Regt Band and Pipes & Drums)

Bovington

-Vehicle Sqn (SHQ, Heavy Track Tp, Light Track Tp, MT Tp, Radio Tp, MT Tp, & MDT)

Lulworth

- Support Sqn (SHQ, Tank Tp = 5x Chieftains 8x Challengers; CVR Tp = 7x Scimitar, 3x Fox, 4x FV432; GW Tp = 6x Strikers; Warrior Tp = 8x Warrior (Inf manned); MT Tp)

The 45 tanks at Catterick were described as 'heaps' when QRIH first arrived but they got many running. There were also 10 Chieftain Mk 1s that were used only for driver training. The Support Sqn at Lulworth had true runners.

[Stuart Galbraith]

That is a seriously great thread on ARRSE Louie, some superb documents linked there. Many thanks for that.

[TrustMe]

Personally, I believe that if the Soviets had of invaded Western Germany starting WW3 then it would of gone tactically nuclear by day three. Logistics wouldn't of really mattered much then.

Edited January 27, 2021 by TrustMe

[Stuart Galbraith]

Yeah, I dont disagree. Although the problem there is, how willing would the West Germans to see their country go down under buckets of sunshine for the greater good? They didnt seem all that willing in one of the later command post exercises in the late 1980's.

There probably was a difference between Europeans and Americans on how they felt about nuclear weapons. One historian suggested the Americans felt nuclear weapons were not to be threatened, but were to be actually used if it came to it, whereas the Europeans felt the exact reverse.

OTOH, if we ran out of conventional ammunition....

[TrustMe]

I think the West German use of nuclear weapons would come down to this. "Shall we lets the soviets invade a parcel of land or should we destroy it to save the rest".

I don't know the answer to that but be assured that whoever fired off the first nuke a retalitory strike would of been ordered to "gain a nuclear balance". This "tit for tat" tactical exchange could of led to a strategic exchange and the whole northern hemisphere would of died. Looking back on those times now i'm glad it never kicked off.

[WRW]

a slight diversion here - does anyone here know about the role of 122 and 13 intelligence and security company  of the BA in the 80/90/00 

i asked over on arrse and some seem to think I am either IRA, Chinese MSS or a journalist - not sure which is worse

[Stuart Galbraith]

Erm, good question. Ive never heard of them. Where were they based?

[WRW]

Sorry that should be 12 and 13 companies. 12 definetly NI probably running Vengeful IT and other such systems. 13 not sure but think also NI . Maybe Humint but am guessing

[Stuart Galbraith]

Reputedly there was an Army unit using  using helitelli to monitor miners strikes, but it strikes me as unlikely they would set up a special unit to do it.