New Scots Regiment may be wearing cheap foreign tartan

[Panache]

This news means that wearing a Stillwater kilt (or other non Scottish made Kilt ) is in ; a strange way now, completely traditional. For now the Scots regiments will now be doing the same thing.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.............

[macwilkin]

This news means that wearing a Stillwater kilt (or other non Scottish made Kilt ) is in ; a strange way now, completely traditional. For now the Scots regiments will now be doing the same thing.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.............

Not quite...it's not a "done deal" yet, as we would say in the Ozarks.

Todd

[An t-Ileach]

After the Scottish Parliment building mess and all the other wastes of money I'm not gonna buy the money is short whine. I'd bet they waste more money to no benefit at all in one week than the tartan costs for an entire year.

As a quick "back of the cigarette packet" calculation it should cost - at retail prices - about £150,000 per battalion (on war establishment) to kit them out with kilts [500 x £300]. That's only £900,000 for all six regular battalions - say, a grand total of £2Million for regular and reserves at retail prices and on war establishment (450 men - I don't know what peace establishment is now - say, 300?). That's probably a week's heating bill for the Scottish Parliament during the winter. I'm sure there're Scottish weavers and kiltmakers who would bid for the contract with that sort of money in the offing, but it's peanuts when set against the wastage at MOD. And it's a reducing cost, as the initial contract would be to equip all the battalions with kilts for all personnel - in future, as kilts are returned to the QM when people leave there'd only be a replacement and repair budget needed, meaning the cost to the taxpayer would be much less. Anyway, I'm sure if they put it to a referendum whether the taxpayers wanted to stomp up the money for the kilts I'm sure they'd get a resounding 'yes'.

(Oh, [after editing], and officers traditionally have to buy their own equipment in the British armed forces: so that takes out about 30 people per battalion.)

[macwilkin]

As a quick "back of the cigarette packet" calculation it should cost - at retail prices - about £150,000 per battalion (on war establishment) to kit them out with kilts [500 x £300]. That's only £900,000 for all six regular battalions - say, a grand total of £2Million for regular and reserves at retail prices and on war establishment (450 men - I don't know what peace establishment is now - say, 300?). That's probably a week's heating bill for the Scottish Parliament during the winter. I'm sure there're Scottish weavers and kiltmakers who would bid for the contract with that sort of money in the offing, but it's peanuts when set against the wastage at MOD. And it's a reducing cost, as the initial contract would be to equip all the battalions with kilts for all personnel - in future, as kilts are returned to the QM when people leave there'd only be a replacement and repair budget needed, meaning the cost to the taxpayer would be much less. Anyway, I'm sure if they put it to a referendum whether the taxpayers wanted to stomp up the money for the kilts I'm sure they'd get a resounding 'yes'.

(Oh, [after editing], and officers traditionally have to buy their own equipment in the British armed forces: so that takes out about 30 people per battalion.)

Of course, the best way to save money in this instance is to allow the Battalions to retain their old kilts/trews in their own tartans! :mrgreen:

Cheers,

Todd

[Valencian Kilted]

Of course, the best way to save money in this instance is to allow the Battalions to retain their old kilts/trews in their own tartans! :mrgreen:

Cheers,

Todd

Absolutely agree!!!... I bet that even the plain soldiers would agree in paying it for themselves if they were offered the chance to keep their colours!

¡Salud!

T O N O

[An t-Ileach]

And you could save even more money by letting them keep their cap badges. And while we're at it, why not keep their regimental names and identities as well? Let's just scrap the whole Royal Regiment of Scotland idea.

Actually, there would have been some grudging support for having a Highland Regiment and a Lowland Regiment, if MOD's hell bent on having Big Regiments, sort of recreating 51 (Highland) and 52 (Lowland) Divisions of WWII fame. Actually, at one point there was a 52 (Lowland) Regiment in the Territorial Army - in the late 70s or 80s, I think.

And, historically, even though the Regimental Colonels wouldn't have liked it, there would have been a justification for going back to (nearly) square one and calling it the Royal Highland Regiment and keeping the Government Tartan.

In fact an analogous solution to this was suggested by the CO of one of the (real) Light Infantry battalions (MOD invented two new LI battalions so that the West Country regiments could all be merged into one - previously the designation Light Infantry had to be won on the battle field, and was associated with the Light Companies of the line regiments which operated independently and usually together with Rifle Companies from the Rifle Brigade and the King's Royal Rifle Corps. It was the Light Companies of the 13th Foot attacking the North American colonists that led up to the Battle of the Brandywine). MOD has merged all the LI battalions with all the Royal Green Jacket battalions into one soap opera sounding unit called "The Rifles". The LI CO suggested that the new name should be The Rifle Brigade, which, he said, has the benefit of history and tradition behind it; but none of the bureaucrats was listening.

And why merge the Royal Scots with anybody? The First of Foot, Pontius Pilate's Bodyguard, deserved to be preserved if only just for sentiment: they date from the 1600s, maybe even earlier.

[Hugh]

Most repugnent! However, it is like our troops wearing berets made in China :confused:

Aye, you're right, but my green beanie was made in Canada and since i retired before the BS, i may never have to wear the black Chinese one. Still subject to recall, but they haven't scraped the bottom of the barrel yet.

[Hugh]

Said it before and I'll say it again. The rangers stole the black beret from the Cavalry first, so I'm darn glad that it got taken away from them too.

Adam

You know you are right, when i went on active duty in '74 to the Armor Officer Basic Course, i got to wear my first beret, the black one, the more things change the more they stay the same. The beret made more sense in tanks and APCs that the baseball caps or probably the BDU cap. And it protected your head from the minor bumps and cuts. But still hated some twerp general who never made a fist without his . . . in it make some silly decision about head gear.

[Hugh]

The Special Forces was the first authorized to wear a beret with the uniform, the green beret. Rangers were the first authorized to wear the black beret with the uniform.

The key word is "authorized", although Armor and Cav were wearing the black ones in the early to mid '70's

[David Dalglish]

The whole idea of destroying Scottish regiments that have been around for centuries, would make old soldiers turn in there graves & the idea of their kilts being made anywhere other than Scotland is ????????????