Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Squadron Numbers

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
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.

Squadron Numbers

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 22nd October 2010 | 13:35
  #21 (permalink)  
40 Countries Visited
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 1,960
Likes: 1
From: The Whyte House
Best not get BAES to do the mods, it'll cost £200m and take 20 years to reach IOC.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Reply
Old 22nd October 2010 | 13:38
  #22 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 16,700
Likes: 54
From: Lincolnshire
Just had a thought to help out our dark blue brethern. I am posting here for what I hope are obvious reasons.

The RAF is running out of sqns to number and the RN is running out of ships.

My plan is simple; it would either double the number of bombers or halve the cost of replacement.

As we know, each bomber has two crews, a port and starboard (or it had). Instead of calling then port and starboard call them Oberon and Oberoi for instance. Instantly 2 boats for the price of one. As they spend most of their time submerged, who would know .

If they went for the '4-boat' option they could buy another 4 T45s as well.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Reply
Old 22nd October 2010 | 13:42
  #23 (permalink)  
40 Countries Visited
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 1,960
Likes: 1
From: The Whyte House
I think it would be easier to give each airframe an individual sqn number, there are enough (sqn numbers) to go around.

Not sure a Wg Cdr would be needed for each one though.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Reply
Old 22nd October 2010 | 14:17
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
From: at the end of the bar
If the rumoured second Reaper squadron comes into being, could we see 1 as an RPV operator?
XV277 is offline  
Reply
Old 22nd October 2010 | 14:27
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
From: UK
The disbandment of 1(F) Sqn must be sending out shockwaves. Its not 12 months since we were briefed along the lines of "They are going to scrap a Harrier Sqn - will it be the oldest Sqn in the world or one of the other two - I know where my money would go".
muttywhitedog is offline  
Reply
Old 22nd October 2010 | 14:32
  #26 (permalink)  
50 Countries Visited
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,454
Likes: 212
From: Location: Location!
As we know, each bomber has two crews, a port and starboard (or it had). Instead of calling then port and starboard call them Oberon and Oberoi for instance. Instantly 2 boats for the price of one.

Great lateral thinking PN! Next pair could be VICTORY and VICTORIOUS, but VICTORY would always have to be the off crew - and inevitably the "port" crew .....

As they spend most of their time submerged, who would know?

Not all of them apparently .....

Jack
Union Jack is offline  
Reply

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 © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.