How many lieutenant colonels does it take to.....

Snickers Man

..staff an army the size of the Irish Defence Forces?

This article in The Journal says that women are under-represented in senior ranks in the Irish Defence Forces. It says that there are only three women lieutenant colonels out of a total of 125 officers currently holding that rank.

125!!!!!

How the hell can there be 125 Lieutenant Colonels (or equivalents in the Navy and Air Corps) in an army of only two brigades? Surely there must be some mistake. Or are they also counting officers who retired from the army with that rank?

Even then I would have thought that 125 would be excessive.

If women currently make up 6% of the Defence Forces and three of them are Lt Cols, a proportionate total would be 50 Lt Cols currently serving across all branches.

Which is still way too many.

Or am I overestimating the seniority of a modern Lieutenant Colonel?

tac foley

That figure of 125 Lt Cols seems a mite excessive to me, given the size of the Army branch of the PDF.

In many armies a Lt Col commands an entire regiment, or is head of a minor branch of the Arm, head of a training college and so on. Also, a Lt Col is often a staff appointment in the ministry of defence, head of procurement, special projects and the like.

With all that in mind, I'm really at a loss to figure out why the PDF needs such a large number at this rank, no matter what the sex disparity in numbers might be.

tac


,

Peregrine

Here's a table showing the strength of the PDF at each rank and gender: https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2015-06-09a.7&s=Strength+in+the+army#g9.r

Evade

tac foley wrote: »

That figure of 125 Lt Cols seems a mite excessive to me, given the size of the Army branch of the PDF.

By percentage of personnel it's more than twice as many Lt. Colonels (or equivalent) as the British Armed Forces. Roughly 1.4% here and 0.65% in the UK.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

Larbre34

More Captains that Lieutenants and 1 Captain for every 12 privates. Mega Lol.

Manach

Offhand from my reading on pre-WWII armies ( US ) a similar type of force structure was in place for number of officers. One reason would have been the assumption that senior ranks would be needed to perserve the initiutional memory should the service need be expanded to serve in a conflict with mass conscripts. However given the low likelihood of such a circumstance in Ireland's case the figures are a tad askew.

Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

Manach wrote: »

Offhand from my reading on pre-WWII armies ( US ) a similar type of force structure was in place for number of officers. One reason would have been the assumption that senior ranks would be needed to perserve the initiutional memory should the service need be expanded to serve in a conflict with mass conscripts. However given the low likelihood of such a circumstance in Ireland's case the figures are a tad askew.

The cold hard fact is the argument for an abundance of officers in relation to enlsited men only applies to militaires that are consitently actively engaged in high intensity operations that will more than likely result in significantly high losses. Main examples being the US, UK, Russia, France and so on.

Do you ever think maybe, posts and appointments were created for or all these men just so they would have something to do and as the saying goes have ''jobs for the boys''. Classic example of one group feathering their own nest over the expense of others. Story old as time really.

Think how better all the money spent on superfluous officer salaries could be better spent on training and assets for the wider DF. The senior ranks they need to hold onto would be senior NCOs with technical / specialist knowledge and operational experience and a token amount amount of senior officers, not 125 Lt Cols!

discus

Keep in mind, that small militarys and organisations will always have accountability and a management structure at their core, and that this is multiplied threefold when you consider that this is for Army, Navy and Air Corps, and then the overall heirarchy who join them and command them.

Just a fact of life.

tac foley

Evade wrote: »

By percentage of personnel it's more than twice as many Lt. Colonels (or equivalent) as the British Armed Forces. Roughly 1.4% here and 0.65% in the UK.

Are you counting the [equivalent ranks of] RN Commanders and RAF Wing Commanders in your figures?

Don't overlook also that the Reserve Forces of the UK are also much bigger than the RDF - are you including them as well?

tac

Evade

tac foley wrote: »

Are you counting the [equivalent ranks of] RN Commanders and RAF Wing Commanders in your figures?

Don't overlook also that the Reserve Forces of the UK are also much bigger than the RDF - are you including them as well?

tac

The report I linked only looks at regular forces which is what was looked at with the DF. I calculated the percentage using equivalent ranks across the BA, RN, and RAF but if you only include the army Lt. Colonels make up 0.53% of the personnel there.

Jawgap

IrishFeeney92 wrote: »

Somebody please correct me if im wrong, but I assume the reason there are so many high ranking officers is because the Defence Forces has been designed around the principal of having the ability to "Rapidly Expand" if needs be. It makes more sense to have the officers in place already, it takes 15 months to train an officer. It takes 17 weeks to train enlisted men.

I thought armies / defence forces that wanted a capacity to expand rapidly would be heavy on senior NCOs?

It might be interesting to compare Irish Defence Forces ratios with the IDF.

Manic Moran

There are also going to be various departments which have to have a certain rank structure. For example, the head of procurement is probably going to be an LTC regardless of how big the Army is, the head of logistics has got to be able to stand up to battalion commanders and have rank regardless of how many battalion commanders there are, and so on.

tac foley

Manic Moran wrote: »

There are also going to be various departments which have to have a certain rank structure. For example, the head of procurement is probably going to be an LTC regardless of how big the Army is, the head of logistics has got to be able to stand up to battalion commanders and have rank regardless of how many battalion commanders there are, and so on.

Quote - In many armies a Lt Col commands an entire regiment, or is head of a minor branch of the Arm, head of a training college and so on. Also, a Lt Col is often a staff appointment in the ministry of defence, head of procurement, special projects and the like. [/QUOTE]

Yup.

tac

Morpheus

Also that some of these people are in long enough to be remnants from a once much larger force?

tac foley

Morpheus wrote: »

Also that some of these people are in long enough to be remnants from a once much larger force?

That does not happen in the British Army. If you have made Lt Col but get no further because of lack of good supporting Annual Confidental Reports then that's you done and gone. No full colonel commands anything, but is usually a staff officer, indeed, many majors go to Staff College to prepare them for higher rank.

If you have dropped a clanger somewhere or made a CFA of your job, then you will be asked to leave, although it must be very evident to anybody in that position that they will not get any further, and in any case, the maximum age for an officer is 55, regardless of the rank achieved, unless, of course, you are a Field Marshal, and there is only one of them at a time.

In the British Army we have many thirty-five year-old Lt Colonels who can justifiably expect to be Brigadiers less than eight years later. I don't think that the PDF has many senior officers in that position.

However, all this begs the question as to why one of the smaller armies in Western Europe has 125 Lt Colonels.

tac

ohnonotgmail

Does the irish defence forces operate an "up or out" policy?

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

IrishFeeney92 wrote: »

With high ranking officers it does.

does that include Lt Cols?

tac foley

Obviously not, if there are 125 of 'em.

tac