Personally, I can't really see the big aura. The regiments ‘BG Course’ predominantly comprises of anti-ambush counter attack and high risk operational procedures. Etiquette and protocol are not on the course syllabus and the course is based more around ‘training the trainers’, enabling training teams to deploy and train other countries in anti-ambush drills as opposed to a ‘full-on’ proper CP Course. It is without doubt that members of the SAS are amongst the best soldiers in the world. This is due in part to the selection and training process of those members and also the UKSF adopted policy of operating procedures. However, Close Protection involves personal attributes that arguably work directly in conflict with those attributes of SF soldiers. Since the famous Iranian Embassy siege, ‘Operation Nimrod’, in 1980 the regiment has been at the forefront of related media articles. The excellent publicity provided by unprecedented live TV coverage of the event ensured the future of the SAS regiment was guaranteed as it had previously been under threat of disbandment. As a result of this publicity, the SAS continually attracts a disproportionate amount of media coverage to their actual individual skill sets including that of CP and it is widely assumed, as a result, that all members are experts in all related subject matter. Contrary to this misplaced perception, this is indeed not the case. Stating this, is in no way attempting to debase their reputation but is underlining important principles of reality, knowledge and values in Close Protection which I have experienced first-hand, both operationally, and in training, on another UKSF course. Grief, the guys even needed extra tuition on firing a Sig.
Most of the blokes I have worked with are full of matcho ego BS. When it comes down to the drills they fail dismally. I would never have ex-regt on my team. On the flip side of this the ex-SBS I have worked with have always been a step above. Now that is a strange comment from someone who is also ex-para reg!
Rich H