The British Army is confusing

Because it’s the British Army, simple as #britisharmy #ww1 #militaryhistory #ww2 #history #ww2history #military #ww1history #army

[Rizzmaster]

They try to preserve regiments for historical purposes. So they kind of become a cultural "shell" that can include extra battalions

[Dibby]

It gives you an extra thing to fight for. Especially given how many of the infantry regiments are named regionally

[josephradley]

Historically, most infantry regiments had two battalions, one for deployment and one to stay home for recruitment and training, the second battalion would send casualty replacements to the first battalion periodically.

[History--Stamp]

Post WW2 regiments are meant to be able to expand greatly during periods of conflict, possibly even duplicate themselves as happened during WW2. How possible/ fast this would be achieved today is arguable.

[wavavoom]

In the British Army an Infantry Regimemt is a cultural, geographical or occupation association. Ie. Irish Guards (cultural/geographical), Rifles (geographical) or Paras (Occupational).

[lordbonney]

A regiment is an organisation, battalions are then assigned to said organisation. These battalions often work in tandem with each other, and historically infantry regiments would have exactly 2 battalions; one would deploy to the frontlines whilst the other trained recruits at home, then these two would swap to provide a break for the fighting force.

[aaronpaul]

Im sorry but years of austerity have completely hollowed out the british armed forces. Tough to even call them a regional power at this point.

[noahversusacat]

It is somewhat similar to how most armies use the concept of "Divisions" in today where similar to a Regiment, a Division is not really a proper tactical unit but a organizational thing where several smaller units or detachments could be placed under for a particular purpose, like for the US often since the end of the cold war and in the wars in the middle east where you would see all sorts of different units being attached to a particular division though lately in the last few years the US military in particular have been moving back to using the Division as a proper tactical unit and not just a headquarters organizational thing. Primarily the main reason they are doing this is to move away from lower intensity/counter-insurgency kind of conflicts and moving back to fighting in big wars against peer to peer enemies

[robertmoore]

And with the Childer "Reforms" of 1881, regiments when from numbers to mouthfuls. Very much a step backwards

[PSVids]

The British army is in a sorry state nowadays. The only thing we lead in are our special forces - we're outclassed in pretty much every other arm of the military by many countries.

[andrewcombe]

A Regiment in the British infantry is not a tactical unit but an organisational force responsible for its own training and traditions. This is historically based in the militias of the regions such as the Yorkshire Regiment that would be raised for service in war time but responsibility for training and arming fell on the local gentry and representative of the Crown such as a Duke or Earl. There were then the Crown’s regiment’s chiefly the Guards regiments whose primary role was as a standing body deployable at any time. These were the elite units of the British Army similar to today’s special forces - the Coldstream, Grenadier, Scots, Welsh Guards. In contrast cavalry regiments were organised in the 19th century around their role played and weaponry carried - Hussars, Dragoons as light cavalry with lances and no armour used for scouting and rapid attacks, Household cavalry Life Guards and Blues and Royals as heavy cavalry wearing breast plates and carrying heavy sabres.

The adoption of the title Regiment as a tactical force evolved in WW1 due to the fact that armour and machine guns required their own tactical units hence the Royal Tank Regiment and Machine Gun Regiment.

So yes, it is a mess. But so is British history.

[mikep]

Infantry Regiments don’t deploy as tactical units because they recruit from a specific location. A particularly bad encounter would deprive that area of a lot of young men, so they mix the battalions up and call them a brigade.

[charliereader]

Actually the Guards tend to be the exception to this rule. In WW1 and WW2 they fought together in the Guards Division (Guards Armoured Division in WW2). This was also the case in the 18th century and the Napoleonic Wars

[tomtom]

If you are confused, your enemy will be as well- Sun Tzu

[buckplug]

A regiment was an organisation unit for hundreds of years. As far back as the late 18th century, British companies of a regiment (an administrational unit) would be grouped into battalion (a tactical unit). In WW2, the Americans would group their battalions and companies into combat commands with adjacent companies of a different arm (infantry with tanks for example). And modern British regiments are based on an idea that you only need 1 active battalion in peacetime and numerous reserve battalion for activation during wartime, with the regimental structure in place to make mobilisation more efficient.

[TheGrenadier]

The british regimental system is the best. I always like to hear about some Princess Light Infantry being a normal battalion in Normandy, and not something fighting Napoleon.

[mikekelleher]

A traditional British regiment (pre 1914) consisted of two battalions. One on active duty, the other at home base recruiting and training.

[matty]

It's actually easy when you have served. O was a Royal Engineer for thirteen years, we have many regiments. The point is that each one specialises in a different aspect of the job. Bomb disposal, armoured Engineering, air support, GEO, and more. The infantry are different but similar at the same time. They have different roles to play. Mechanised, cavalry, anti tanks, recce. These will usually be platoons but some cap badges will specialise in some of these rolls. Such as the H Cav, Paras ect. It's not that confusing when you know how it works. On top of that you have the regional units, people want to join the Yorks, or the Royal Welsh, because that's where they're from and will fight for that as well as the Union flag.

[StephenKennington]

One explanation I heard was it was to prevent military coups. There is a sibling rivalry between regiments which was encouraged so it would be hard for one individual to take over. Not sure if it’s true or not. May just be an explanation that sort of fits.

[Lekirius]

Yeah the same thing with the Malaysian Army (former Brit colony). The regiment is more for tradition purposes. We have a regiment consisting of 27 battalions and another consisting of only 10.

They're dispersed into Brigades which are the regiment-sized tactical units.