A quick thread on the challenge the Army has in describing itself to decision makers and the public in order to secure funds for projects. A little tongue in cheek...
💬 “We need to replace an ageing squadron of aerothings. Our purchase will support our aerospace sector worth £34B in exports.”
- Royal Air Force
💬 “We require five warboats to replace our well worked vessels. We’ll need to place orders now though, for long lead items that warboats clearly need, such as radars, guns, rockety missiles and engines.”
- Royal Navy
💬 “We need a few thousand blue bits for FTLW, red blocks to fulfil S2DR, obviously we’ll need 120,000 green bits to add to these to form Adaptable Britallionigades as required. We’ve looked at UK bits and we only fancy the yellow ones from here.”
- Army
If the Army can instead describe itself in packages with a guide to purpose, such as complete Brigades, Marine Expeditionary Units, (Heavy) Stryker Brigade Combat Teams etc with assumptions of all the components that make up those units, the Army will have a much easier time.
Similarly, if the Army can describe how it’s programs support or leverage a sector they will find more ears ready to listen and advocate their position.
/FIN
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.