View Full Version : Manning levels
plans123
10th Sep 2005, 13:50
Just a bit of boring trivia for a Sat afternoon.
Disney World employs more people on one site than any other company in the US. During peak times it ranges between 55,000-60,000 which is about half of the Disney employees worldwide.
ROYAL AIR FORCE
Total Requirement 48,740
Total Strength 48,960
Surplus/Deficit 230
Go figure. :rolleyes:
Pontius Navigator
10th Sep 2005, 13:54
Oh good. I am glad there is a surplus. Just send some of them my way.
See PM Plans 123
Phoney Tony
10th Sep 2005, 14:13
70,000 personnel required to keep Heathrow going
60,000 personnel required to keep Chicago OH going
60,000 armed personnel in the NYPD
Stats do not tell the full story and do not reflect the effect the RAF is capable of delivering...........but the great unwashed need to understand what risk the grown ups are carring.
Farmer 1
10th Sep 2005, 14:30
Royal Air Force - Total strength 48,960.
In World War II, RAF Bomber Command alone lost 55,000 members. More trivia?
Pierre Argh
10th Sep 2005, 14:40
Manning levels... what about the females serving in the RAF?
stillin1
10th Sep 2005, 15:24
"Manning levels... what about the females serving in the RAF?"
R U trying wind people up again?:yuk:
Vage Rot
10th Sep 2005, 20:08
Certainly think that female aircrew should have to sign a "no pregnancy agreement" where they repay training costs if they leave in first 5 years.
Rakshasa
10th Sep 2005, 20:26
No pregnancy agreement? I can see a whole heap of problems trying something like that.
Time Bandit
11th Sep 2005, 15:44
It's the slippery slope gentlemen.
http://www.armedforces.co.uk/raf/listings/l0001.html
"1980 figures are for comparison purposes"
Would NOT like to see the same chart updated in 20 years time.
ZH875
11th Sep 2005, 15:53
Be fair the AEW component has Doubled in size, the Helicopter Squadrons have grown by 2½ times and Ground Defence Squadrons has gone up by 40%.
Must be an improvement, how can you deny these figures.
(I seem to have forgotton to mention the decreases!)
Two's in
11th Sep 2005, 17:23
The true stats may be misleading, but at least plans did compare 2 similar Micky Mouse outfits.
Rakshasa
12th Sep 2005, 00:03
It's the slippery slope gentlemen.
http://www.armedforces.co.uk/raf/listings/l0001.html
"1980 figures are for comparison purposes"
Would NOT like to see the same chart updated in 20 years time.
I assume those figures are not counting Training units and OCUs?
Role1a
12th Sep 2005, 21:26
Them 1980 stats cannot be correct
Surely we had more than 4 helo sqns in 1980
come on pruners list them
Sven Sixtoo
12th Sep 2005, 22:01
22, 28. 33. 72. 84, 202, 230.
pr00ne
12th Sep 2005, 22:10
Sven Sixtoo,
18 was also a rotary winged thingy Sqn in 1980 so that makes 8.
Sven Sixtoo
13th Sep 2005, 10:43
Wasn't quite sure when the Wokka came on line (was 18 a Wessex Sqn before that?)
202, in about 1978, had a huge load of stickers printed that said
"202 Squadron have the biggest choppers in the RAF".
Don't know what happenned to the 980 or so that never got used.
Sven
Role1a
13th Sep 2005, 15:05
18 Sqn re-roled from Wessex to Chinook around about 1981 I think.
It was certainly Chinook for the FI conflict
R1a