Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Manning levels

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10th Sep 2005, 13:50
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: KORR somewhere
Posts: 378
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Wink Manning levels

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.
plans123 is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2005, 13:54
  #2 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 81
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Oh good. I am glad there is a surplus. Just send some of them my way.

See PM Plans 123
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2005, 14:13
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Phoney Tony is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2005, 14:30
  #4 (permalink)  

Combine Operations
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K.
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Royal Air Force - Total strength 48,960.

In World War II, RAF Bomber Command alone lost 55,000 members. More trivia?
Farmer 1 is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2005, 14:40
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: wherever I lay my headset
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Manning levels... what about the females serving in the RAF?
Pierre Argh is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2005, 15:24
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Manning levels... what about the females serving in the RAF?"

R U trying wind people up again?
stillin1 is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2005, 20:08
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Just down the road from ISK
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Vage Rot is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2005, 20:26
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Umm, where did I put the Garmin?
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No pregnancy agreement? I can see a whole heap of problems trying something like that.
Rakshasa is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2005, 15:44
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: London
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Time Bandit is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2005, 15:53
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 64
Posts: 2,278
Received 37 Likes on 15 Posts
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!)
ZH875 is online now  
Old 11th Sep 2005, 17:23
  #11 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,874
Received 60 Likes on 18 Posts
The true stats may be misleading, but at least plans did compare 2 similar Micky Mouse outfits.
Two's in is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2005, 00:03
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Umm, where did I put the Garmin?
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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?
Rakshasa is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2005, 21:26
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Them 1980 stats cannot be correct

Surely we had more than 4 helo sqns in 1980

come on pruners list them
Role1a is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2005, 22:01
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Retired to Bisley from the small African nation
Age: 68
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
22, 28. 33. 72. 84, 202, 230.
Sven Sixtoo is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2005, 22:10
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,926
Received 139 Likes on 64 Posts
Talking

Sven Sixtoo,


18 was also a rotary winged thingy Sqn in 1980 so that makes 8.
pr00ne is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2005, 10:43
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Retired to Bisley from the small African nation
Age: 68
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lightbulb

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
Sven Sixtoo is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2005, 15:05
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
18 Sqn re-roled from Wessex to Chinook around about 1981 I think.
It was certainly Chinook for the FI conflict

R1a
Role1a is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.