PDA

View Full Version : Dambusters latest


smujsmith
3rd Mar 2013, 15:52
Just spotted this in the Torygraph. I wonder if it improves the chances that JSF will enter service ?

Dambusters saved from axe to fly new fighter - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9905679/Dambusters-saved-from-axe-to-fly-new-fighter.html)

Smudge

Tankertrashnav
3rd Mar 2013, 16:04
How they going to fit one of those whirly bomb thingies under a JSF :confused:

CoffmanStarter
3rd Mar 2013, 16:06
A large Athletic Support :E

papajuliet
3rd Mar 2013, 17:18
The picture heading the Telegraph article actually shows Gibson, with his two flight commanders, when he was CO of 106 Sqd. Neither of his companions, to the best of my knowledge, ever flew with 617.
That picture is in John Searby's book "The Everlasting Arms"

diginagain
3rd Mar 2013, 17:22
I wonder if it improves the chances that JSF will enter service ?

Historically, announcements such as "x-million to be spent on refurbishing RAF station" and "xxx Sqn saved" are known as The Kiss of Death.

Ken Scott
3rd Mar 2013, 17:37
It was in the Sunday Times too, except they were too lazy to use a picture of Gibson, they used a publicity still of Richard Todd in the film - perhaps they thought the actor & the film would be more familiar to Joe Public than the real fellow & the actual sqn.

Timelord
3rd Mar 2013, 17:51
Times and Telegraph reports were almost word for word identical. Very suspicious.

syncro_single
3rd Mar 2013, 17:56
Privileged status my ar*e, they should have lost their number when they moved up to Lossiemouth and left a great Sqn (208) to reserve status.

Ex Bucc boy here, rant over.

Biggus
3rd Mar 2013, 18:17
The basic rule is that an RAF Sqn has to have 25 years of service before it can be awarded a Standard. That rule has only been broken twice to my knowledge - a Standard can be awarded sooner if the Sqn in question has earned the monarch's appreciation for outstanding operations.

One of the exceptions was 617 Sqn (hence the privileged status?), the other Sqn was disbanded as part of the 2010 SDR and it's nameplate hasn't been preserved by being passed on to a training/support Sqn as is often the case these days.


Which equally privileged Sqn is/was it that simply disappeared? Answers on a postcard - or since most of my posts on pprune are ignored, maybe no answers at all......

akula
3rd Mar 2013, 18:27
Biggus,

CXX

Biggus
3rd Mar 2013, 18:32
Not really surprising that you knew - with a name like akula!! :ok:


For anyone interested:

Royal Air Force Kinloss Station Website : Squadrons : RAF Kinloss Squadrons : 120 Squadron History (http://www.kinloss-raf.co.uk/120sqnhis.html)

see paragraph eight!

Ivan Rogov
3rd Mar 2013, 19:08
I've have never understood the logic for 617 or 120 Sqns often quoted 'protected' status. I understand they got given their standards before the usual 25 years in recognition of WW2 service, but wasn't this a reward for junior Squadrons to put them on a level with Squadrons that already had a standard, not a higher award to mark these as more important Squadrons.

What am I missing that they did that makes them more significant than many other distinguished Squadrons?

smujsmith
3rd Mar 2013, 19:16
Maybe it sounds a bit "corny" as the cousins would say, but, whilst squadron numbers may identify noble deeds collectively, a squadron comprises a number of aircrew, and occasionally ground crew. With the greatest respect to the crews who flew the dams raids, a number hardly justifies their individual bravery. I think Gibson and his crews would be happy to know that they did their bit!

Archimedes
3rd Mar 2013, 20:59
I've have never understood the logic for 617 or 120 Sqns often quoted 'protected' status. I understand they got given their standards before the usual 25 years in recognition of WW2 service, but wasn't this a reward for junior Squadrons to put them on a level with Squadrons that already had a standard, not a higher award to mark these as more important Squadrons.

What am I missing that they did that makes them more significant than many other distinguished Squadrons?

I suspect that the fact that the King was in no small part responsible for the distinction may have had something to do with it; in essence CXX and 617 had the royal seal of approval, and this was held to give them that 'something' extra.

At the time, it wasn't seen - at least from the documentation I've seen - as bringing them up to a level with squadrons with a standard, but as a sign of particular distinction: think of it as being along the lines of, but perhaps not identical to, a US Presidential Unit Citation for a USAAF formation, or the conferring of a high award upon a body/institute (akin to the GC to the RUC and Malta).

Easy Street
3rd Mar 2013, 23:34
Early award of standard shouldn't mean that a sqn is 'superior' to other sqns that already had standards. If a sqn already has a standard, it is not eligible for the special distinction of early award... so how else can it be recognised? If by the award of a higher honour, then why didn't 617 or 120 get that higher honour?

Archimedes
3rd Mar 2013, 23:54
ES - You'll need to ask that question of several long-dead senior officers and one deceased Head of the Air Historical Branch... That's how it was interpreted, that's all I'm saying - my attempt at illustrating the idea of there being some special distinction by applying something tangible to illustrate it when the idea appears intangible may not have helped...

It's always been the case when it comes to cutting back on squadron numbers that 617 and 120 have been preserved (as long as there is an aircraft type for them to move on to, of course).120 were junior when the Shackleton was retired and replaced by a smaller number of Nimrod units, but the documentation clearly shows that the early standard award gave special status and the squadron reformed on Nimrods at the expense of (IIRC) 204 Squadron which came higher in the list of seniority than 120; 83 went instead of 617 when the Vulcan force was cut back in the late '60s, and there was, from what I can ascertain, some discussion of ensuring that 617 re-equipped with the Tornado rather than disbanding when the Vulcan was retired, again on the basis of the early standard award.

Roadster280
4th Mar 2013, 00:17
What does it matter? There's only going to be six FJ squadrons (per AVM Bagwell), so their identities are really by-the-by. May as well call them 801-806 Naval Air Squadrons, and put the other few ISTAR, AT & SH squadrons in the Army and have done with it.

Even as an ex-soldier, it gives me no pleasure to point this out, but really, what's the point of it all? The viability of the RAF as a stand alone force is rapidly diminishing, and the headshed doesn't seem to be able to do anything about it.

Climebear
4th Mar 2013, 01:51
What does it matter? There's only going to be six FJ squadrons (per AVM Bagwell), so their identities are really by-the-by. May as well call them 801-806 Naval Air Squadrons, and put the other few ISTAR, AT & SH squadrons in the Army and have done with it.

Even as an ex-soldier, it gives me no pleasure to point this out, but really, what's the point of it all? The viability of the RAF as a stand alone force is rapidly diminishing, and the headshed doesn't seem to be able to do anything about it.

The Royal Air Force will still be larger than the vast majority of other air forces that seem to remain viable in their nations' eyes.

It will also remain larger than the Royal Navy; however, you don't appear to question the viability of that Service.

sisemen
4th Mar 2013, 04:55
According to the web site CXX are in for a long wait if they are to be re-equipped with the MR4. :E

Flatiron
4th Mar 2013, 10:26
As I recall, in 1945 the Commands were asked to nominate their most distinguished unit to be kept in being. Bomber Command chose 617, Transport Command chose 511 and Coastal Command chose 120 Sqn. That list must have fallen by the wayside or C-17s would be flown by 511 Sqn rather than 99 Sqn. The Air Historical Branch keeps a list of squadrons with points awarded for longevity, number of VCs, service in the Battle of Britain etc. But all these procedures and lists went out of the window when 74 Sqn was re-established instead of 45 Sqn because the ex-74 Sqn air rank mafia made such a fuss. Expect the same sort of undercover lobbying when the next Tornado squadrons have to be retired.

Trim Stab
4th Mar 2013, 10:52
Ask somebody not in the RAF to name an RAF Squadron, and if they could name any at all, it would be 617. Makes perfect sense to keep it.

To be honest, I think I would struggle to think of more than three off the top of my head - 617Sqn, 1Sqn and 47Sqn - after that I'm guessing!

Willard Whyte
4th Mar 2013, 12:11
What does it matter? There's only going to be six FJ squadrons (per AVM Bagwell), so their identities are really by-the-by. May as well call them 801-806 Naval Air Squadrons, and put the other few ISTAR, AT & SH squadrons in the Army and have done with it.

Even as an ex-soldier, it gives me no pleasure to point this out, but really, what's the point of it all? The viability of the RAF as a stand alone force is rapidly diminishing, and the headshed doesn't seem to be able to do anything about it.

As ex-raf I agree.

I'd just start renumbering from 1 upwards until all sqns are accounted for. Might even make double figures.

sp6
4th Mar 2013, 12:40
"Ask somebody not in the RAF to name an RAF Squadron, and if they could name any at all, it would be......."


633 Squadron

bit pish but the music is fab.........

I think all remaining RAF Squadrons should start with a 6. Just like the Navy, with an 8. Like MI5 & MI6 it brings an air of mystery as to what happened to 1,2,3,4......

Kluseau
4th Mar 2013, 13:12
As ex-raf I agree.

I'd just start renumbering from 1 upwards until all sqns are accounted for. Might even make double figures.

There was a fascinating lineup on the static display at the 2012 Leuchars Airshow: one aircraft from each of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 squadrons. Three Typhoons, a Tornado, a Hawk and a Sentinel, which rather disrupted the visual flow of the line...

diginagain
4th Mar 2013, 13:20
I think all remaining RAF Squadrons should start with a 6.
Plenty of room in the 651+ block, and it'll make assimilation all the easier after 01-Apr-18. :E

Ronald Reagan
4th Mar 2013, 13:21
Local newspaper today
First of new generation of fast jets could be based in Scotland - so where does that leave RAF Marham - News - Eastern Daily Press (http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/first_of_new_generation_of_fast_jets_could_be_based_in_scotl and_so_where_does_that_leave_raf_marham_1_1963862)

Archimedes
4th Mar 2013, 13:40
Plenty of room in the 651+ block, and it'll make assimilation all the easier after 01-Apr-18. :E


How so? By making the personnel of the RAF's new attack helicopter force feel a little happier?

Roadster280
4th Mar 2013, 14:53
RAF Sutton Craddock :)

Archimedes
4th Mar 2013, 14:55
633? RAF Sutton Craddock (in reality RAF Bovingdon).

Have I mentioned that I probably need to get out a bit more?:ouch:

Pontius Navigator
4th Mar 2013, 15:15
Local newspaper today
First of new generation of fast jets could be based in Scotland - so where does that leave RAF Marham - News - Eastern Daily Press (http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/first_of_new_generation_of_fast_jets_could_be_based_in_scotl and_so_where_does_that_leave_raf_marham_1_1963862)

Norfolk?

If we have Typhoon and Dave, with Dave at Lossie, what indeed about Marham post 2019? I thought the Tornado was due to remain in service till 2025 but 2019 was posited over the weekend.

Marham would be very handy for the Thetford training areas :}

Finningley Boy
4th Mar 2013, 15:15
Having read the report on the Eastern Daily Press link it does appear that this MP has jumped straight to conclusion, there is no way Typhoons and F35s will be co-located at Lossiemouth. Perhaps there'll be some way of moving 617 sqn from Lossiemouth to Marham? hmmmmmmmmmmmmm! Who knows.


R.A.F. Bovingdon, now H.M.P. The Mount.

FB

sp6
4th Mar 2013, 15:49
Thinking beyond JSF, and taking FR20 into account, the Aviation Arm of the HSBC/Kia/Samsung/Huywai Sponsored English Defence Forces will be UAV's flown by reservists.

So the remaining Squadrons will be 600, 602, 603, 612 etc

oh sorry 602, 603 and 612 are Scottish so they will get RBS sponsored r/c electric motors re-charged by wind energy whereas the affluent English forces will have glo-plug two strokes using Ethanol imported from Russia and Brazil.


(it has been a long day....)

Haraka
4th Mar 2013, 18:26
As ex-raf I agree. Willard

So do I . As one of a proud Halton, Cranwell family going back to the 30's, sadly I doubt if the R.A.F. will make it much beyond its Century.

Arguably, there is surely now no further justification for an independent Air Force. The death knell came initially with the loss of holding the Nation's " Independent" nuclear deterrent.
What is left now that is not direct support to the other Forces and therefore arguably should not be directly subordinated to them?
"Air Defence of the U.K." hardly bears serious examination as justification for continued further independencce.
We are back to pre-1918.
Trenchard would turn in his grave.

Pontius Navigator
4th Mar 2013, 19:33
What is left now that is not direct support to the other Forces and therefore arguably should not be directly subordinated to them?
"Air Defence of the U.K." hardly bears serious examination as justification for continued further independence.

As Air Defence of the UK was an RN responsibility . . .

What is not in direct support?

I suppose all assets can be considered useable in direct support so the question is what missions remain that are not in direct support?

Rivet Joint could possibly regain the strategic role enjoyed by the Comets/Nimrods of 51 Sqn.

Would a counter air campaign be best controlled by a battlefield commander or at a higher level with a specialist air advisor?

Interdiction, is it still a viable role or would the battlefield commander want to retain the assets?

turbroprop
4th Mar 2013, 21:42
My choice for the F35 would be 1208sqn. From a time when Lossie last had a maritime wing of two great squadrons. One still survives and one lost out to 6 foot spit.

If it fell to a current SQN it should be 12sqn. 12 May 1940 the SQN was awarded two VC's for their fatal raid. By keeping 12sqn as well as FO Garland and Sgt Gray the third member of the crew LAC Renyolds ( who received no award ) will be honoured.

Courtney Mil
5th Mar 2013, 07:59
Marham would be very handy for the Thetford training areas

And it will still be in the UK after Scotland separates.