1 Sqn to Stand up at Leuchars

[Finningley Boy]

It's been reported in the local Courier Newspaper that 1 Sqn are to stand up with Typhoons at Leuchars. I don't know what this means long term altogether, but it is welcome news. Further, for what its worth, whatever the long term future of Leuchars, I can't see anything to worry about on the Horizon for Lossiemouth, I suspect as has been mooted, that F35s and or, possibly, P8 Poseidon will end up there. :ok:

FB:)

[MrBernoulli]

Have they been doing a lot of lying down? :E

[Finningley Boy]

Have they been doing a lot of lying down?

OK form then!

FB

[Doctor Cruces]

Rumour down here in Naaaarfolk is that the F35s are going to Marham to be close to USAF ones at Lakenheath.

Having said that, it was the local MP talking so as her lips were moving, she was probably not telling the truth anyway.

Interesting times for all, I think.

[sitigeltfel]

the F35s are going to Marham to be close to USAF ones at Lakenheath.
That's all we need, lonely insecure fighters :rolleyes:

[hum]

Was at the 100th anniversary 'do' at Wittering last weekend where the announcement was made, September 15th I seem to recall, UK's 4th Typhoon Squadron :D

[Doctor Cruces]

sitigeltfel,

I think it's more to do with the yanks refusing to release all of the top secret jiggery pokery wiggly amp and computery sort of stuff that we will need to do updates and repairs etc. That way Uncle Sam can just nip over from Lakenheath to Marham and thus keep their secrets out of undesirable hands. There was quite a thread going on this some time ago.

[mikip]

That way Uncle Sam can just nip over from Lakenheath to Marham and thus keep their secrets out of undesirable hands.

Surely those last four words should read IN undesirable hands!

[Wrathmonk]

If the MOD/RN/RAF are going for the -B then wasn't the planning originally for them to be based at Lossie (partly due to noise) with all the GR4s being moved South and then slowly withdraw from Service at Marham? Were the infrastructure works halted there when the decision was "temporarily changed" to the -C? Unless the RAF get -C as a replacement for the GR4 I can't see RAF Norfolk surviving (as an operational airfield) past the GR4.

Besides, not sure the 'locals' will be too happy with the -B at RAF Norfolk (but at least they will have no shortage of fingers to stick in their ears:E)

[TEEEJ]

Typhoon Growth Continues with Reformation of No1(F) Squadron (http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafleuchars/news/index.cfm?storyid=55B729D4-5056-A318-A86E3619B20BE1ED)

[Lima Juliet]

The clue was in the "Basing? Decisions?" thread when CAS mentioned "Scottish bases" and named all the others. Maybe he knows that Morayshire is radioactive!!!

I reckon a Leuchars/Lossie U-turn is just around the corner - bring back Maggie and 'this lady is not for U-turning'!

LJ

[airpolice]

Leon, you need to give up on Leuchars. The decision makers have.

Air Commodore Parker said:
“As we prepare to transition the Typhoon Force in Scotland to RAF Lossiemouth over the next few years, having two squadrons will improve our resilience and increase our flying capacity, allowing us to maximise our training opportunities, whilst meeting our operational commitments.

I don't see much of a reason for changing that plan any time soon.

[Jackonicko]

The RAF's fighter force?

3, 11, 6 and 1.....

And not 19, 92, 56, 74, 43 or 111. Someone's been paying too much attention to arcane length of service calculations and ignoring actual heritage and history.

[Lima Juliet]

AP

You may be right, but this is a rumour website; plus, knowing Gav, it wouldn't be the first time for him to be wrong! :ok:

JN

I think you're right. The mud-mover mafia took over the Asylum a while ago (there are a few 1-star/2-star fighter mates in the wings, but the last bunch didn't really get a look in (excepting Simon the CInC!)). I always fancied seeing a Typhoon with Tiger stripes, but that was never to be...:sad:

LJ

[thunderbird7]

The RAF's fighter force?

3, 11, 6 and 1.....

And not 19, 92, 56, 74, 43 or 111. Someone's been paying too much attention to arcane length of service calculations and ignoring actual heritage and history....

and you might add, 201 Sqn, ex No1 Sqn RNAS, Flt Sub Lt Warneford, the first true fighter suadron in defence of the homeland? Zeppelin LZ 31-37 over Bruges.....

...and he wasn't even flying a Nimrod!

[fantom]

Hello...

208.

[Pheasant]

I thought that as the F35 buy was being reduced, the FAA are going to get them based at Yeovilton.

[Archimedes]

JN - this is the way that business over numberplates has been done since the 1950s. The reason that analysis of worth (if you will) of numberplates' heritage isn't given much in the way of weight is because the AHB worked out when attempting to ascertain which squadrons should survive in the post-Sandys era that 'worth' is based upon subjective judgement. They concluded that going with what you call 'arcane' seniority rules was imperfect, but probably the best way to go about things.

There is some free-play, since if you go by 'arcane calculation' 74 wouldn't have reformed on the Phantom. 39, which was dormant at the time, was ahead in the queue, and there was a case for 45 to drop the TWCU reserve plate and step up to being the F-4J squadron.

3 suffered over 100% loss of unit establishment at Cambrai (pressed into service as mud-movers). 11 is arguably the first dedicated fighter squadron in any air force in the world (albeit the Vickers FB5 wasn't much of a fighter...). Until the Jag went, 6 had absolute unbroken service, which included flying around in Hurricane IIDs at skightly lower airspeed and height than was desirable in the face or the flak surrounding German armour. Who's to say that those squadrons don't have equally distinguished records of achievement/historical reasons for survival? Throw into the mix the risk of AOCs arbitrarily deciding that they didn't like X Squadron, bitter rivals of Y Squadron (the AOC's first squadron...), and the seniority-based approach looked sensible. Submit a well-reasoned piece of analysis to the AHB explaining why they should change this long-standing policy and I can guarantee that they'll at least consider it.

Leon - I suspect, by the by that the Air Staff probably has at least a small faction in it working out how to reform 74, since the records show that the period 1971-1984 was filled with efforts to reform the Tigers/Ginger Toms (delete according to prejudice) on Hunters, the Phantoms from 892, Victors (there was a hint of desperation creeping in here...) and then the aborted third Lightning squadron. I know that there's a suggestion out there that the squadron was deemed to have put up a 'black' by painting the tails of the Lightnings black when out in Singapore, which is why it took so long to reappear, but that simpy isn't the case, just as Trenchard's supposed 'revenge' against 8 Sqn becomes a difficult legend to sustain when you realise that he personally chose that numberplate to be one of the founding squadrons of the post-1918 RAF, and it ended up overseas because there was less chance of it being disbanded where it was than it it were in the UK... <removes anorak>

[thunderbird7]

And therein lies the destruction of the RAF as a fighting force - arguments among knuckleheads as to which fast jet squadron is the most precious....

[Archimedes]

It applies to all the squadrons, TB7 - the most 'precious' is arguably 24 (first single seat fighter, unbroken service).

I do find it slightly ironic that discussions about heritage and history get dismissed as coming from knuckleheads/and anoraks (although I am a self-confessed metaphorical wearer of the latter garment), and then when efforts are made to destroy the RAF, or strip it of capabilites using arguments based upon wild factual inaccuracy or what can demonstrably be proven to be an 'interesting reinterpretation' (i.e. wilful lying) of what actually happened, it's the 'knuckleheads' who have to deploy their anorak skills while those who come onto Pprune to deride the knuckleheads are utterly unable to do anything to refute the case of the 'opposition' because they can't engage with the supposed 'facts' that make up the seemingly plausible rationale for doing something. It happened in SDR, it happened in SDSR and will doubtless happen again at the time of the next SDSR. If those who you deride as 'knuckleheads' because they have some historical interest in the service were in complete control, you'd have cause for concern - but the sad, proven fact of defence reviews is that you need some of them/us around... :=

[Jackonicko]

Archimedes,

The problem is that the 'system' isn't uniformly applied.

If 617 and 120 were special cases, then so too should 19 and 92 have been (especially 92, as the most successful RAF fighter unit in WWII), and I really shouldn't have to explain why 43, 56, 74, and 111 deserve to be saved.

I'm aware of the histories of 3, 11, 6 and 1, but they're not in the same league.

[Archimedes]

Not absolutely uniformly, but there is consistency there by and large.

For 19 and 92, you'd have to ask George VI and those who advised him why the same criteria weren't applied as for 617 and 120.

Actually, for 19, you wouldn't, since they fall victim to the simple fact that by the time these decisions were made, they had the 25 years accumulated service to get their standard, so couldn't be awarded it early...

Anyway, this is about 1(F), and it's difficult to dispute the choice of that numberplate.

[dctyke]

If it wasn't for 'hearts and minds' it could be argued that numbering our remaining 'real' sqns from 1 upwards would make the general public realised that we have been skinned to the bone. If we did what number would the last sqn be I wonder?
Of course it's easy for me to say being 1 (f) for many a year...................... although 45 sqn (Hunters) will always have a special place (1st cut is the deepest and all that)

[Lima Juliet]

Just one minor correction - Shifty Fix is still going as the ISTAR OEU...:ok:

LJ

[Beancountercymru]

"Number 1 (Fighter) Squadron will reform officially at the RAF Leuchars Jubilee Airshow on 15 September becoming the fourth front line squadron to operate the multi-role FGR4 Typhoon." - RAF press release.

Is this a record for the slowest introduction of a type into service?

[XR219]

Is this a record for the slowest introduction of a type into service?
Well, the Bucc would take some beating (first (RAF) squadron: 12 Sqn in 1969, last: 216 in 1979) but it looks like the Typhoon might just beat it...

[Alber Ratman]

JN, 6 Squadron's battle honours include a few more that what are on its Standard and as well as its Tin Opener and Hurri rocket exploits, did quite a bit of air control over a certain middle eastern country pre WW II, where quite a few DSO's and DFC's were awarded, but you wouldn't see that in many histories published. This was at the time some of your favourites were doing Hendon airshows as their main occupation.

It was always planned to be the third Tiffy unit and should have seamed from the Jaguar unit like the other changes from 1969.. But we all know what happened.:(

A lot of numberplates are deserving, but not enough aircraft fleets/ aircraft / people / money nowadays..

[Jackonicko]

I happen to be a big fan of sh*tty six, Mr Ratman, and am well aware of its pedigree. Of the current Typhoon units it's the only one I wouldn't renumber. But 1, 3, and especially 11 have always seemed less 'worthy' than the classic Battle of Britain and post War Fighter Command fighter squadrons, especially 92 and 74 (Malan's old outfit) as well as 43, 54, 56, and 111.

[Airborne Aircrew]

Never fear. No. 1 Squadron has served consistently and honorably since December 1921... :D:D:D

RAF Regiment, of course... :E

[MAINJAFAD]

Shouldn't that be No 1 Armoured Car Company RAF for its first 21 years AA:=

[Al R]

AA makes a valid point (MAINJAFAD - lets not get bogged down in the semantics! ;)).

I think I'm right in saying that the RAF Regt is the only regular infantry formation to have been on active service, each year, somewhere, every year, since WW2 (didn't the Royal Marines take 1967 off?). And before anyone has a go at the Regt, I can't be done with willy waving these days, I think the Short Range Desert Group tag is absolutely hilarious and if I ever get my hands on the Mover who stole my issue penknife..

As a 1(F) old boy, this is good news. How many served on both 1 Sqns, I wonder? I can think of two others (I know, too much time etc).

[XV490]

That press release (http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafleuchars/news/index.cfm?storyid=55B729D4-5056-A318-A86E3619B20BE1ED) tickled me for exemplifying the common confusion over the words re-form and reform.

According to the Oxford online dictionary:
reform - cause (someone) to relinquish an immoral, criminal, or self-destructive lifestyle: the state has a duty to reform criminals (as adjective reformed) I’m considered a reformed character these days

So has 1(F) now promised to behave?

[Alber Ratman]

bet they won't beat the 1(F) Harrier Squadron record of the shortest peace time Squadron detachment of one night (Madrid 1991 or 2, I believe).. "Who did it??" "I'm Spartacus!" "I'm Spartacus!":E

[dctyke]

bet they won't beat the 1(F) Harrier Squadron record of the shortest peace time Squadron detachment of one night (Madrid 1991 or 2, I believe).. "Who did it??" "I'm Spartacus!" "I'm Spartacus!"http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/evil.gif

I was there, we never even got to breakfast................. and yes I'm Spartacus;)

[Al R]

That rings a bell. Remind me again.. :hmm:

[Rakshasa]

If it wasn't for 'hearts and minds' it could be argued that numbering our remaining 'real' sqns from 1 upwards would make the general public realised that we have been skinned to the bone. If we did what number would the last sqn be I wonder?


I'm annoraky enough to have the depressing answer to that; 29!

[Alber Ratman]

Does that include all the reserve squadrons?? That would be scary!:(

[PTR 175]

I think you will find it was Albecete. Sorry if the Spell'in is not correct.

I did not even get to see the Hotel let alone not get breakfast.:eek:

[Alber Ratman]

So you can't be Spartacus then... Rumour was... it was the Horseman...:E

[TEEEJ]

Typhoon in 1(F) Squadron markings.

Wall Photos | Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=415673998455923&set=a.156514791038513.27932.140704179286241&type=1)

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Combat-Aircraft-Magazine/140704179286241

[teeteringhead]

Someone said to me years ago that when we got down to two sqns, it would have to be 1(F) and 617 ......:(

....... getting pretty close now - 29! Used to be more Canberra sqns in Germany than that! :(:(

[If I exagerate, it's only slightly - but I'm not (quite) anoraky enough to look it up!]

[Phil_R]

I have met people who assumed we had six hundred and seventeen squadrons of Tornado, let alone anything else.

[oldmansquipper]

..I guess that will be the politicians and the treasury who think there are that many Tonka squadrons then?