No 72 (Eurofighter) Sqn ????

[teeteringhead]

My disappointment at hearing that 72 was to disband in March 2002 when the Wessex goes was alleviated a bit by a buzz I heard in the pub the other night. Buzz being that the numberplate will be held for a Eurofighter Sqn. Fell over laughing at first, but then thought:

a. It was a B of B Sqn and has the battle honour on its standard.

b. CinC Strike was an OC 72 Sqn.


Any thoughts? or has anyone else heard the same dit?

[Pub User]

I heard it's going to be used for a joint Puma, Chinook & Merlin OCF at Benson, called 72(R) Sqn.

[TURNBULL]

Why don't we let the stiff wing lot have 27(R) Sqn back and we can keep good ol' 72!!

[ 02 December 2001: Message edited by: TURNBULL ]

[Archimedes]

Didn't 27 lose its 'R' some time ago? Seem to recall a letter from the CO to some journal to this effect.

72 has a long fighter heritage, but suspect that Eurofighter won't come about as a result of the 'competition' from the F3 units, plus the old favourites of 19,74 and 92, plus (but less probably) the three Jag units.

Of course, if the huge increase in funding for the 'war against terror' (as predicted in some leading news sources)increases the number of Eurofighters on order, then maybe.... :D

[Arkroyal]

Must say that the motto 'swift' seemed a little out of place on the dear old Wessie.

Nicest thing about the 72 squadron Spitfires, was the squadron code 'RN' :D

[Gainesy]

About this time last year, the Air Force Board announced that the EF OpEval Unit would be 17Sqn and the OCU would be 29Sqn.

Be more useful if they worried about having a fighter without a gun rather than head scratching over what Sqn numbers to allocate.

[Kiting for Boys]

Guns?

How about a debate about the proposal for the design of a special Eurofighter insignia to be worn by all national contingents?

[Jackonicko]

Gainesy,

Keep up! The gun's back in.

Archimedes,
'Less probably' the three Jag units?

No.41 - the top-scoring unit in the Battle of Britain?

No.54 - similarly distinguished?

No.6 with its long and virtually unbroken period in service?

All units with a multi-role background, compared to the decidedly 'second-string' No.s 5, 11, and especially the undistinguished ex-Bloodhound unit, 25?

I'll give you 43 and 111, and how 19, 92, 56 and 74 ever ceased to be frontline identities is beyond me! But even if they ditch 25, 5 and 11, there are more Squadron identities worth saving than unit's to use them on.

Now's got to be the time to do what the French do and allocate squadron identities to what are now Flights. Then (and here's a novelty) you'd have 'Squadrons' commanded by Squadron Leaders, and four-ship leader Flight Lieutenants would be leading 'Flights'.

Or would this just underline the over-abundance of Air Officers?

[Gainesy]

Jacko,
Trying to mate :rolleyes:

Get Out Clause:
But it wasn't this time last year when they debated the numbers :D

[Archimedes]

Jacko,

'Less probably' only because the Jag units will go only after all the Eurofighter units are up and running.

[f4aviation]

74? Don't think so. Check out what AVM Robinson said at its disbandment parade last year at http://www.f4aviation.co.uk/Hangar/74sq/74sq.htm

[ 04 December 2001: Message edited by: f4aviation ]

[Rude C'man]

27 Sqn lost it's R a long time ago ... do keep up
another rumour is 72 Sqn being formed as EH101 Sqn at Benson as 28Sqn will be too big if it holds all the 101's! Any way why didn't 230 Sqn get disbanded there all a bunch of pussies anyway! Plastic Pig !etc etc :rolleyes:

[imooshiz]

It's such a shame that 72 Sqn is finally going................not!

[Helpful One]

The gun's back in but only for C of G / controllability and the expense of fly-by-wire software rewrite. The last I heard from the IPT was that the barrel would have a hole drilled through it to disable it but that the armaments engineers were still insisting that it be serviced at normal intervals even though it would just be very expensive ballast.
If I am wrong please issue the good news.

[Jackonicko]

Early EFs were always going to have the gun, physically, just as ballast, not serviced, not trialled, not cleared, and with no ammunition of in-service support funded. Later aircraft were to have had it removed entirely.

It's now back in as a funded weapon system according to our sources.

Anyone know if IPA001 flew on the 6th as planned? Or was it held up waiting for the Germans to fly their production aircraft first....?

[Jackonicko]

Perfectly serious. Last time I saw IPA 001 it was VERY close to completion, and that was before Il Presidente Tonio declared that it must fly THIS YEAR. A normally reliable source at BAE Warton told me that they were shooting for 6/16 December for the first flight. I can't remember which he said, and it wasn't appropriate at the time to scribble a note of it, while journo chums had expected it on 6 December.

It's supposed to be delivered this year, too!

[Genghis the Engineer]

I remember working on the wind tunnel tests of that beastie in 1990, 11 years on still not in service.

Emphasises clearly to me why I chose to leave HMQs service and work in civil aviation, where concept to service is routinely under one decade, and can occasionally be in one "posting".

Incidentally, wasn't the gun being eliminated on paper to keep the German (as opposed to the noble Bavarians who build the thing) beancounters happy ? I thought that about half the RAF a/c where getting it anyway, or has that changed since I left in 97 ?

G

[Jackonicko]

You've seen her more recently than I have, and talked to BAE people who deign to enter the hangar. From their lofty perches in their air-conditioned offices, my sources may be a bit 'chief Koala' like.

Like you, I found it interesting that BT001 is so much more advanced than the second UK IPA (which wasn't even in the shed last time I was there), n'est ce que pas?