Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Who has the more tougher Training: US Navy SEALS or British SAS?
ChaosEnforcer    2/1/2005 3:27:55 AM
Whenever I read upon the US Navy SEALS, it says that US Navy Seals go through the toughest training in the world. When I read about the SAS, it said they go through the toughest training in the world. So which is tougher? Navy SEALs or British SAS. I know that Navy SEALS train for Sea, Air and Land Operations whereas British SAS are an Special Air Service which means more dedication towards Air. So what do you guys think? USA Navy SEALS or British SAS. Who has the more tougher training?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5   NEXT
Bluewings    RE:Who has the more tougher Training: US Navy SEALS or British SAS?   2/1/2005 2:34:32 PM
" I assure you they do do the full range of tasks, not just intel gathering " Indeed RM-Nod . But you know what happen when you try to be the jack of all trades , and SAS ~as they say themselves~ is already overstreched regarding the type of Operations they are usually task to accomplish . Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

RM-Nod    RE:Who has the more tougher Training: US Navy SEALS or British SAS?   2/1/2005 2:51:36 PM
So now you're saying that they do train for these roles but they're not great at any of them? A bit of turn there ;) Seriously though, certain squadrons do specialise, but don't neglect other operational capabilities. The SAS is organised into troops, Boat Troop, Mountain Troop, Mobility Troop and Air Troop. Each one has a specific task that they specialise in; they also all rotate through the CRW wing. So while each troop specialises, overall the SAS can do the full range of tasks. Just to point out though that just because a soldier is in Mountain troop doesn't mean they don't train for other environments. It's the same with the SBS.
 
Quote    Reply

RM-Nod    RE:Who has the more tougher Training: US Navy SEALS or British SAS?   2/1/2005 2:52:51 PM
Oh forgot to say, they've added another Sabre Squadron so overstretch shouldn't be a problem now, especially with the re-roled 1 Para.
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings    RE:Who has the more tougher Training: US Navy SEALS or British SAS?   2/1/2005 6:45:15 PM
Agreed . I just wanted to point out that the SAS has "turned" into a quite different Unit since GW1 ... As you know ;-) They took a turn in the last 10 years or so . Geo-political thing ... Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

RM-Nod    RE:Who has the more tougher Training: US Navy SEALS or British SAS?   2/1/2005 6:59:03 PM
I disagree there, can you elaborate?
 
Quote    Reply

Worcester    RE Blue Wings   2/1/2005 7:59:52 PM
1. You said SAS "aren't good in jungle", preferring deserts; since SAS were specifically recreated to fight in Malaya and Borneo from 1947-65, i.e 18 YEARS in the jungle AND since the FIRST phase of every troopers Continuation Training is taking the Jungle Warfare Instructors course in Brunei... 2. Then you said they do intel "a la James Bond". No doubt they will replace winged Excalibur with a martini glass..."Who Cares who wins". You also mentioned that you couldn't take a harbor with them..well you could, or an airfield. SAS have a number of roles of which the oldest and primary remains strategic reconnaissance and raiding (the original and primary role) expanded to include Stay Behind Parties in Europe. Indeed, traditionally and even today, SAS were not permitted to wear their "wings" on the breast of their uniform rather than their shoulder until they had been in a full "squadron action". Their strategic recon and raiding task against Germans in North Africa and France and then terrorists in the jungle or desert perfected their Stay Behind skills but especially their handling of resistance cells and "turned" prisoners. This work made them useful in the urban jungle of Aden and then Northern Ireland. Hence, counter terrorism is not new, merely an extension of previous decades. As it is, since 1978 they have not run "agents" in Northern Ireland - this is a specialist role requiring long-term high risk agent running operated by "14 Regiment" of the Brit Army Intelligence Corps, an all arms, male/female unit which has recently been retasked to include the Middle East. It included some SAS originally, but under 14 Regt control - and not nearly the numbers claimed by IRA propaganda; today it includes a wide variety of individuals based on their personality or language skills or skin color or cultural identity. Not skills which are either tested by Selection or improved by Continuation. Read the last UK Defense White Paper; it talks about "retasking 14 Regt" and the transfers of personnel from infantry to "engineers, signals and intel operators" is one of the recent reasons for reorganization. Read the CGS Statement last month. SAS in NI were tasked by Army Command in Lisburn, not by 14 Regt or the Special Branch or MI5 or 6 or whoever; just as they have always reported to an Army Commander: 1 Br Corps, now 1 Br Div in Germany or Land Commander, Wilton, UK or when untasked or out of theater to Director SF in London. CRW: If tracking terrorists led from the jungle to the streets, it didn't go very far because trained intel operators took over agent handling just as the Special Branch did in towns in Malaya or Northern Ireland. SAS remained soldiers. Among the strategic raiding skills, the snatching or killing of a senior officer in his headquarters was always traditional and practiced for use against Warsaw Pact HQ by Stay Behind Parties in Europe during the 1950s-1980s. Raiding became more useful when it was realized that the SAS "explosive entry" techniques could rescue hostages as well as snatch Russian generals. Just as they can snatch people, so they also taught others Close Protection to prevent said snatching. Now, of course, this is a standard Military Police function. There have been instances where retired SAS have been used for non-war recon in difficult terrain, such as in Afghanistan back in 1981-6 and this undoubtedly continues. But these are clearly retired soldiers, working for front companies (Sandline, e.g.) using equipment which could convincingly have been found on the second hand market. It must be deniable and must not use serving soldiers and is, ipso facto, tiny in relation to the whole. The role in Afghanistan and elsewhere - so far as anyone has reported - remains the Close Target Reconnaissance for which they were famous in Malaya, Borneo, Radfan, Ireland and Iraq etc. etc. The presence of 1Para means they can act on bigger tasks or mount a raid without having to regroup a series of small patrols or uproot recon teams in situ. It does not mean they dont raid..which they do, neither does it mean they are spies, which they are not.
 
Quote    Reply

Worcester    RE:RM-NOD   2/1/2005 8:05:16 PM
"No one here's been through one of those training regimes" How do you know? P>S> I'm pretty sure Rambo-gixx has.
 
Quote    Reply

Worcester    RE:Chaosenforcer   2/1/2005 8:09:04 PM
Ok..so far you had Turkey as non-NATO, Israel as NATO, England as the same as UK, and now SAS has something to do with the "air"? You mean SAS like the Scandinavian Air line? Just kidding!
 
Quote    Reply

bomber    RE:Who has the more tougher Training: US Navy SEALS or British SAS?   2/1/2005 9:58:54 PM
I agree with RM-NOD. The SAS/SBS has one of the hardest jungle warfare courses. A mate of mine was in the SAS (he's out now) and he's been rather busy over the last few years.... Certainly there's a huge amount of slagging off between the SAS and SBS but I did see a Discovery programme about the SEAL teams and was amazed that they actually got encouragement and were pushed by the training staff. SAS/SBS selection puts the pressure on the individual candidates to just get on with it and if they fail you get RTUd (Returned to Unit). At the end of the day you're not going to have an instructor standing over you in a contact screaming at you. The SAS/SBS has done a lot of special operations for the US as the US Government has been reluctant in the past to use it's own special forces for covert work due to significat fiascos in the past. The failed Iranian hostage rescue by Charlie Beckwith's Delta Force is one that springs to mind. And who was that nobber that said that the SAS had limited jungle warfare experience? Do they realise that the UK is the only western country to ever win a jungle war? The SAS played a huge role in that operation. For any doubters, the proof is in the successful live operations. In Afghanistan in 2002 Operation Trent involved hitting a big al-qaeda position. A HALO team went in first and secured a Drop Zone and harbour area which was followed 24 hours later by twelve c130 flights landing two sabre squadrons in the desert and rolling all the SAS fighting vehicles off the still moving aircraft. The 40 vehicle convoy then drove 250km unsupported to the target and were forced to hit it at 11am (broad daylight for those of you who don't get up before midday) because the US air support was only available at that time and then only for an hour. Four hours later they took the position and then made their way to the RV. Bear in mind that the Trent mission took place after the highly pre-publicised Delta Force and Ranger missions near Khandahar. Delta went to hit Mullah Ohmar's residence and the Rangers went to play silly buggers in an alreay secure drop zone. Nothing exciting happened to the Rangers (except for finding a small arms cache that the Special Forces teams alread knew about) and Delta had every AK47 weilding man and his dog turn up to the the party after 12 Spectre gunships had torn up the countryside and essentially announcing their arrval. Both jobs were a complete waste of time and the film that was to be made of both missions was never shown. It was supposed to demonstrate that the US could operate with impunity on the ground which they could as long as the enemy didn't turn up!
 
Quote    Reply

El Gringo Said    RE:Who has the more tougher Training: US Navy SEALS or British SAS?   2/2/2005 3:26:04 AM
"SAS has very little Sea Warfare training" So considering that in each of the 4 sabre Squadrons, what do boat troop spend all their time doing? "and they are very limited in Jungle Warfare too" And what makes you think this? Asides from the fact that the conflict which brought the SAS back into the British Army was Malaya and Bourneo? "They mostly train on Desert/Rocky terrain" Sorry?? Qualify this statement. "Their Combat training focuses on stealthy assault of small facilities , retreat under heavy enemy fire and Rescue Ops ." And alot more... In short, you could not be more wrong if your name was Andy McNab...
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics