Next squadrons to stand up? Who/Where/When?

[Benjybh]

Firstly, please excuse my intruding - I am but a mere wannabe (hopefully of Dark Blue persuasion), but I thought you lot might be able to help. Secondly, apologies if this question has been asked recently; I had a search but couldn't find much.

So, as the title - which squadrons will be the next to be awoken from hibernation? How many are left to stand up with Typhoons? And how about when the A400M arrives etc?

Of the same vein, as it stands who is going to get the F-35s for the RN? Can it be assumed that it will be a return to 800/801/899 as OCU?

Sorry for so many questions, it was just something I found myself musing over earlier.

Thanks in advance! :)

[AED24]

Due to SDSR, it has been very sad that the mighty Number 1 Fighter Squadron has been put to rest. This magnificent squadron must stand before too long, ideally in a fast jet (Typhoon) role.

[ALM In Waiting]

70 for A400 I believe, followed by 30.

[WE992]

Bring back 53!

[mmitch]

I was sure I read that No 1 would be standing up again with the Typhoon in time for their centenary in June. But checking the RAF website page they are still operating the Harrier in Afgan! :confused:
RAF - 1 Squadron (http://www.raf.mod.uk/organisation/1squadron.cfm)

[Inverted81]

I'm sure some Jedi call signs have been around recently. I believe 1(F) will be standing up with Typhoons at Leuchars at somepoint this year.

Are 6 and 1 then likely to move to Lossiemouth once Leuchars closes?

[BEagle]

What is this ridiculous expression 'standing up'?

Surely squadrons form/reform/disband?

[El_Presidente]

BEagle What is this ridiculous expression 'standing up'?

Surely squadrons form/reform/disband?

I think it's an old Army term Beags...possibly...

:}

[blaireau]

Once the squadron has "stood up", one can mount the aeroplane....

[fantom]

208 with real bullets.

[Benjybh]

What is this ridiculous expression 'standing up'?

Surely squadrons form/reform/disband?

That is of course what I meant. Though I'm sure I've heard 'Stand Up' or 'Stand Down' in an official capacity before? :hmm:

[Wensleydale]

Next squadrons to stand up? Who/Where/When?


Does this mean that seats have been removed from AT in order to fit more persons on board to save money? Perhaps officers at least should be supplied with a hand strap hanging from the roof?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Research the old squadrons of the Air Force Board members- there's your answer!

[Bob Viking]

Never has a truer word been spoken.
Was it any coincidence that 19 Sqn recently had to stand aside to be usurped by IV Sqn at Valley? Despite the fact that, in my humble opinion, 19 had a far more illustrious history (first RAF Spitfire Sqn, BoB Sqn etc)?
I think not.
Was it anything to do with ex-Harrier pilots occupying the higher echelons of the RAF?
Maybe.
The excuse of the sqn receiving a new aircraft didn't really wash since 19 had been operating the Hawk T2 for almost 3 years by then.
BV:confused:

[Archimedes]

At the risk of being labelled (entirely fairly) a dull history spotter-type...

Seniority is the trump card in all cases, bar for 617 (and, if we get an MPA, 120 which is in the same boat - no pun intended), which is treated as a special case because it was awarded its standard ahead of the 25-year accumulated service point in recognition of wartime service.

I am guessing that 1(F) will be making a reappearance fairly soon - it is the second most senior squadron in the RAF after II(AC), and IV is not far behind. My assumption - which will probably be entirely incorrect - is that 1(F) will get Typhoon, as it is the most senior available numberplate, and the rules decree that the most senior available numberplate will reform at the earliest opportunity, give or take some degree of latitude in terms of association with a particular role if there is a choice of numberplates (i.e. you might reform 25 on the A400M, since it is senior to 70, but 25 is not 'role associated' with AT).

IV has presumably taken over the numberplate at Valley for one of two reasons - either (a) because it is being kept going until JSF (or similar, see PPrune, passim) whereupon it will become the first light blue JCA unit or (b) because there is a more machiavellian plan at hand, which is to tie IV's numberplate up with the Hawk, thus clearing the way for the reformation of a slightly less senior unit - for instance, don't rule out the possibility of 19 reappearing as the final Typhoon squadron. In truth, only one squadron has ever come close to benefitting from 'type b' shenanigans, namely 74 - which the Air Staff attempted to reform on numerous occasions during the 1970s, only to find that they couldn't generate a sufficient reason to get around the barrier of 74's relatively lack of seniority. Pre-fiscal disaster, it did look as though the numberplates in the way of 74 becoming a Typhoon squadron were being put into use so that we could have an FJ Tiger Squadron again (the RN may have to reform 804 to get that happening).

There is a slight complication in that in theory, the rules do not apply when granting a numberplate to a Reserve squadron - which is why 76, which is well down the list of seniority could reform, drawing upon local links between that squadron and the area around Linton-on-Ouse.

As a final point, seniority has been calculated in some odd ways in the past (including, prior to the 1960s, via the awarding of points for having a VC awarded to a squadron member, points making prizes) and 'most senior' does not mean 'oldest'.

If you've stayed awake this long, well done.

[BBadanov]

Archimedes,

Very interesting, stayed awake thru the whole phase brief :rolleyes:

Now, question without notice (but please, no answer without thought!).
208 was always "Naval 8" (i.e. 8 RNAS = 208 RAF). Was 206 then "Naval 6"?? :confused:

BBad

[WhiteOvies]

Benjy,
On the subject of RN Sqn numbers the same seniority rules apply, hence 800NAS should be the first RN Sqn on F-35. This is why 800 was the first RN Sqn to form with GR7 at Cottesmore. Plans were made for 801 to form later but various political wranglings prevented this from happening and led to the creation of the brand new and numberless Naval Strike Wing (NSW) before an eventual return to 800NAS. For note operational Sqns usually are 8xx and training Sqns are 7xx. 899 and 848 are OCUs but also have/had an operational role.

However, the F-35 is a joint asset under 1 Grp RAF so the first (and possibly only if you believe some reports) Sqn will almost certainly be an RAF one. 1(F) Sqn may be held onto for this, particularly if we go back to the STOVL F-35B due to it's Harrier past.

There was talk of the F-35 OCU being 899NAS when 20(R) Sqn was still in use as the Harrier OCU but again I feel the chances of this happening are slim to non-existent.

Hope that helps.

[FFP]

Next Sqn to stand up ? XIII surely ?

[retrosgone]

Having served 3 tours on 206, I can certainly confirm that the Sqn was indeed originally No 6 Sqn RNAS - formed during WWI and serving as a fighter Sqn in France. I even travelled with an official party to Armistice Day ceremonies in St Omer a few years back, where we visited the scattered war graves of many Navy (and RAF post April 1918) Squadron members.

Despite the history, we were never referred to latterly as "Naval 6" - perhaps because it just does not have the same ring as "Naval 8".

[Motleycallsign]

"Does this mean that seats have been removed from AT in order to fit more persons on board to save money? Perhaps officers at least should be supplied with a hand strap hanging from the roof? "

Wensleydale old chap, the Officers will stand in the centre of the a/c with the chaps on the outside of them to hold them in place and to stop groundfire hitting them surely...................................................... .....

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

checking the RAF website page


I wouldn't bother, it's full of mistakes (and not just lack of being updated).

Given the senior sqns currently dormant, and the paucity of new aircraft coming into service, it's not looking good for the old RNAS sqns is it? Under current plans, the only one left in 4 years time will be 230, plus 206 and maybe 207 as reserve units.

[Tankertrashnav]

At least the RAF still has to have squadron numbers. How long before it's THE squadron ? :(

Not that crazy - when I joined in 1964 there were 8 home commands. Am I right in thinking that there's just one now?

[Ken Scott]

You are right, there is just Air Command now.

It would be a vaguely interesting exercise to total up the number of Air Ranks then, with 8 Commands, compared to now with just the one....any one?

[pr00ne]

So, when do Squadrons sit down?

[airsound]

I'm with WE992 Bring back 53! I never understood why 99 got the C-17, when 53 had much more seniority, not just as a Strat T sqn, but also in its earlier history - formed May 1916, and distinguished service in the late unpleasantness.

But, even better, let's have 53 with A-400M. Despite almost 50 years' separation, Grizzly (or Atlas for the po-faced) is surprisingly similar to the late and great Belfast. Obviously there've been some improvements in the past half-century, but they're definitely from a similar mould.

So, let's get the 53 standard back from St Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh and reinstall it at Brize.

airsound
unbiased in this matter, not

[BBadanov]

But, even better, let's have 53 with A-400M.

Yep 53 would work! Two fuglies in a row - Belslow and the Grizzly. Perhaps known as the pregnant squadron? Did they have the Beverly too to add to that gaggle?

[XV277]

Was 53 more senior than 99? Pre-C-17, 53 had ~40 years service, 99 had ~50 years service.

[Brian 48nav]

When I was at South Cerney in 65/6, I recall there being an article in a colour supp' about the V Force and a comparison was made between the number of bombers and the number of officers of AM rank and above. IIRC the latter was 91.

I expect someone has a 'List' from that era and can confirm!

[Biggus]

I seem to remember in the late 80s reading a letter in Air Clues, in the days when they still published dissenting comments, about the number of Air Ranks.

The author of the letter compared the number of Air Ranks as published in the Air Force List of 1946, with the latest one available, 198?.

In 1946, just after the end of WW2 and before many could be de-mobbed, the RAF had a manpower strength of approx. 1 MILLION!! In 198? it was approx. 100,000. And the relative ratio's of Air Ranks? It was approx. 10:9, i.e. the Air Rank strength had decreased by about 10% in 40 odd years, while overall manpower had dropped by 90% in the equivalent period...!!!



I said to start with that all the above is trawled from my memory, but if anyone has the actual figures for 1946 and today as a comparison I'm sure it would make interesting reading.......

[dctyke]

We need to promote one of the four hundred ? Group Captains to look into this:)

[Biggus]

400 odd (no doubt someone will quote the exact number) Gp Capts for 35,000 odd (" " " ") personnel means, on average, 1 Gp Capt for every 90 odd people.....



Crazy or what!!

[Finningley Boy]

So, when do Squadrons sit down?

When they're tired!

FB