Civil Aircraft Issued with RAF Serial Numbers for Diplomatic Reasons

[Warmtoast]

I've been reading the statistics in Colin Cummings excellent book “Last Take-off — a Record of RAF Aircraft Losses 1950 to 1953”, published by Nimbus Publishing and am intrigued by one entry which refers to the loss of a Hemes IV WZ839 on 23 July 1952 at Pithiviers, France . As the entry states:

....."The aircraft was owned by BOAC and leased to Airwork and registered G-ALDB. It was allocated an RAF serial number for diplomatic reasons when undertaking trooping flights. The aircraft was carrying a crew of 8 and 68 military passengers from UK to Malta and the starboard outer engine ran away and components disintegrated causing damage to the starboard inner engine. At night and with no visual cues, the pilot was faced with an emergency landing which was carried out with great skill and avoiding overhead power lines and pylons which appeared when the landing lights were put on. The aircraft stopped quickly and was evacuated by all those aboard, mostly members of the Border Regiment. Several people were injured including the captain but all survived. This is one of three serious air trooping accidents in the period under review. Another Hermes: G-ALDF (also WZ841 [sic]), was lost off Trapani Sicily on 25 Aug 52 whilst carrying UK diplomatic personnel under charter to the Sudanese Government. Seven fatal casualties occurred included several children and the air hostess. A York aircraft: G-AHFA, owned and operated by the Lancashire Aircraft Corporation, was lost in the Atlantic with the loss of all 39 aboard. Besides the operating crew, the casualties were military personnel and their families but the aircraft was not operating under a military ‘cover’ serial number."............

So what were the diplomatic reasons in 1952 that allowed civilian aircraft to be allocated RAF serials?

I can understand RAF aircraft being given a civilan registration "for diplomatic reasons," possibly to ease transit at overseas stops, but to do it the other way around appears weird - in fact when looking at 1952 events through 2007 eyes, both methods appear equally weird, but presumably there were good and compellng reasons to do so at the time.

So does anyone know the answer?

Tony

[LFFC]

It's not weird at all, I suspect that it was due to the Chicago Convention (http://www.mcgill.ca/files/iasl/chicago1944a.pdf).

Part One, Chapter One, Article Three(b) states that:

Aircraft used in military, customs and police services shall be deemed to be state aircraft.

[ORAC]

Without being able to give a definitive answer, I would imagine it had todo with the transit and overflight gareements between the allies/NATO nations. Military aircraft in transit would not be subject to civil licensing or registration requirements, nor have to have commercial insurance, and would be able to carry armed and uniformed troops etc.

I would have got around the sort of problems that require those going to the Falklands to be in civilian clothing etc in case of a diversion to Rio etc.

[norilsk]

It still goes on when there is a need to transport MUW. I remember it being used in "Re_inforcer 80"

[enicalyth]

Did not RAF pilots and navigators leave to join BOAC and fly Mosquito aircraft in civil markings from leuchars to sweden during WW2?

[London Mil]

"When I was in Germany" we would often issue civil aircraft with military callsigns. The 'standard' was BAL 951, a civil 737 that had been given a hideous slot time for a GAT trip to Luton. Re-file an OAT flight plan (DOM BOTROP LIMA MC6 MLD EGGW) , call him RRR8951, and he would go all the way OAT, no slot time, with some helpful controller in the UK selling the aircraft to Luton radar.

Also, as someone else has hinted, civil ac on Ex REFORGER were given military status.

Sorry, but certainly in the 1980s there was no Machivellian reason.

[A2QFI]

When overflying Turkey (legally) in the 60s there was stated requirement to have the camera doors (on a recce a/c) taped up and we were sometimes intercepted for inspection. To get a diplomatic clearance to overfly Egypt during the same period it was necessary to supply an airframe number 3 weeks before the sortie. This meant that one often had a valid clearance but were in the wrong airframe. In many cases, as the airframes were numbered in sequence, it was possible to do a lash up with bodge tape and hope that one was not intercepted (unlikely) or that the tape didn't peel off in flight (possible!)

[Tiger_mate]

The RAAF C47 Dakota now residing in a Berlin museum was given a ZD serial to transit the Berlin corridor. circa 82ish

[Green Flash]

enicalyth

I thought the BOAC Mossie's were flown by RAF crews on a break from combat ops.:confused:

[wokkameister]

All the Griffins/Squirrels at Shawbury are Civvy, owned by Serco but given mil registration numbers.

[Rigga]

COMR aircraft are not used for anything but training and are often flown by non-military contract Pilots on special AOC rules. However; Police AOC operators are now registered under non-EASA State Aircraft operating rules (but civil operated and registered) - which just goes to show how the rules can change!

[helidriver]

Rigga,

'COMR aircraft are not used for anything but training and are often flown by non-military contract Pilots on special AOC rules.'

Not strictly true. The AAC operates 2 different types of COMR aircraft in operational roles and with mil crews.

h

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

HP.81/3WZ839Hermes Mk.4f/f 24/09/1949, ex G-ALDB, to WZ839 for trooping flights 1952, w/o 23/07/1952
according to http://www.ukserials.com/results.php?serial=WZ (http://www.ukserials.com/results.php?serial=WZ)
That surprised me as I expected to find it had been civilianised from a Hastings.

Not directly related but I found it odd that we've nearly exhausted the Z series of Serial in such a short time; bearing in mind how few aircraft the Air Force acquires these days. Apart from "real aircraft" Serials being allocated to UAVs, every foreign export machine seems to acquire a UK Serial. Presumably manufacturers don't have their own civil series of registrations anymore.

[XV277]

Rigga,

'COMR aircraft are not used for anything but training and are often flown by non-military contract Pilots on special AOC rules.'

Not strictly true. The AAC operates 2 different types of COMR aircraft in operational roles and with mil crews.



And don't forget 84's Griffons in Cyprus

Not directly related but I found it odd that we've nearly exhausted the Z series of Serial in such a short time; bearing in mind how few aircraft the Air Force acquires these days. Apart from "real aircraft" Serials being allocated to UAVs, every foreign export machine seems to acquire a UK Serial. Presumably manufacturers don't have their own civil series of registrations anymore.

Not such a short time - the first Z series aircraft were in 1979/80 time frame, and they still allocated 'blackout blocks' in those days (until about ZH if I recall).

What is wierd is the way they have started jumping about - ZZ for the C-17, Contract HUnters and A330Ms, ZR for the A109Es, ZM for the A400M

[Krakatoa]

In late 1952 I was part of a ferry crew stranded in Malta with an U/S aircraft. At that time there were a number of Airwork Hermes aircraft passing through on trooping flights to and from the Suez Canal Zone.
I understood that for diplomatic reasons only military aircraft and military personnel could fly into the Canal Zone.
The aircraft still had their airline colour scheme but carried RAF roundals and serial numbers. I believe the flight deck crew wore RAFVR uniforms. The "cabin crew" were two SNCO Air Gunners who were in charge of the bar !

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

XV277, Thanks for that insight. It was the ZZ series of C17s that made me think we had exhausted the Z series. I must visit the Ian Allen shop more often.

So when we reach ZZ999, do we gain a letter and lose a number again? such in the way we had Lancaster L7533, 44 Sqn 1942 then Lancaster NN709, 44 Sqn 1945.

Sorry about the Thread drift but I'm curious.

[Barry Bernoulli]

While the 'State Aircraft' definition of the Chicago Convention applies to all aircraft operated by state, or federal government agencies, this does not imply a requirement to carry state registration. For example, military aircraft will (may) carry a military registration but federal police, customs and other agencies' aircraft will usually carry civilian registration. Also, civil aircraft chartered by the military will obviously carry a civil registration but are considered state aircraft under the Chicago Convention. All state aircraft, regardless of whether that have military or civil registration, will require diplomatic clearance to fly into foreign airspace and will usually be allocated a state callsign as part of the diplomatic clearance process.

The difference between military and civilian registration defines the technical and operational regulation that applies to the aircraft. I can't quote chapter and verse here, but I understand that the conventions applied to the operation of military aircraft is that they operate on a 'due regard' basis. That is, they don't need to be strictly adherent to ICAO or foreign state rules on, say, licensing, navigational equipment, noise and environmental laws or technical equipment carriage.

I have flown military aircraft that were registered on the civil register. They also carried military markings. The technical and operational airworthiness of the aircaft was in accordance with civil regulations and the military aircrew operating them held the appropriate civil licenses and ratings (and were thus liable to civil prosecution if they stuffed up carrying out their miltary duties - but that is altogether another topic).

I would, therefore, agree with ORAC that the reason would probably have had to do with the aircraft or operation not meeting the civil regulations for the particular country or airspace. There would be no need to apply state (military) markings to the aircraft unless it was required in order to comply with the Law of Armed Conflict for a conflict in progress.

[Phil_R]

What happens when you get to ZZ999?

Start again at AAA1?

I base this supposition that many preserved Spitfires have early-sounding serial numbers such as AR213 and AB910, but I have no idea how it actually works.

Phil

[HaveQuick2]

"What happens when you get to ZZ999?"

Don't you mean IF? Not sure that recent procurement policies would make that eventuality something worth considering.

Although, it seems that units can now choose "personalised" registrations (like 45 Sqn and 32 Sqn have managed) if this article is anything to go by :-

http://www.wolverhamptonaviationgroup.co.uk/out_of_sequence.htm

Wonder if you have to pay MoD like you would to DVLA for a personalised car plate? How much for ZZ617?

[XV277]

What happens when you get to ZZ999?
Start again at AAA1?
I base this supposition that many preserved Spitfires have early-sounding serial numbers such as AR213 and AB910, but I have no idea how it actually works.

British Military aircraft registrations started in 1912 with '1', blocks allocated to the RFC and RNAS. When they reached 99999, they changed to A1 - A9999 for the RFC and 'N1' for the RNAS. This continued up to J1 - J9999, when they settled on a 5 digit registration number , so started again at K1000. When they reached the equivalent of Z9999, during WW2, it changed to AA100 - we are still in that sequence today.
There were anomolies, such as Naval Aircraft haning 'N' and 'S' numbers for a while in the 20s & 30s, some letters being missed as they looked like numbers, and 'blackout blocks' They were pretty much sequential until a few years back when it all went nutty. (Future Lunxes have been allocated ZZ4 serials)
There are a few books on the subject out there.
http://www.ukserials.com/

[XV277]

The reasoning behind assigning military registrations was to give the aircraft diplomatic protection when transiting (especially to the middle East0 on trooping flights.

Aircraft issued with these inclded Vikings, DC-3s, Yorks, Hermes, Tudor 1& 2 and Bristol 170

[Warmtoast]

Thanks for all the replies to my original query - it's much appreciated.

Tony

[Speedbird48]

In the early and mid-fifties, when I started in this aviation business, I worked for Skyways of London at Bovingdon and Stansted. At Bovingdon we got the 10 Hermes from BOAC and converted them for trooping and they did not have military serials, although at the same time some of Airworks Hermes at Blackbushe did.

There was a connection between Skyways and Lancashire Aircraft Corporation so aircraft ownership was a bit mixed.

When the Bovingdon operation closed, after the 10 Hermes had been converted, I transfered to Stansted and saw several Yorks with military markings and the crews wore RAF/VR uniforms when flying them. I thought that the aircraft used their old military serials when flying these trips but I could be wrong at this late date!! I seem to remember numbers like MW???

There were also several Yorks on the dump/spares/awaiting conversion pile that had military marking and a civil registration hastily painted on. These were ferry markings to get them to Stansted from the RAF, MU's.

At the time the Yorks were busy with Middle East and Far East military contracts. The Hermes were used for Singapore trooper flights and to Cyprus. When the Hermes came on line the York flights were coming to an end.

[norilsk]

Military pilots were kept current on Viscount, Comet and later BAC111 to fly the Berlin corridors in case they were ever closed by the Russians

[Krakatoa]

I believe the Suez Canal Zone was under a lease agreement from the Egyptian government. This agreement only allowed military aircraft to operate in and out of the Canal Zone.