Squadron Numbers
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 679
Likes: 56
From: York
Squadron Numbers
In the dim and distant past when a low numbered squadron disbanded it never had long to wait till it reformed in a similiar role with a posh new aircraft type. Sadly that will not be the case anymore and in the future (post Stan Tornado draw-down) it is only going to get worse. Surely the Royal Air Force will not go any length of time without a No 1 (f) Sqn?. Who is going to lose, who will gain? Maybe there is a case for just renumbering all of what we have from one upwards, if nothing else it would certainly show joe public and the world how little we have left! I realise everybody is going to be up in arms protecting ‘their’ squadron number from the chop however there are going to be many good squadrons going to the wall soon, some of them too good to lose forever.....or are they?
Ps, in my case I ‘demand’ 1(f), XV, 45 & 58 (damn that owl looked good)
Ps, in my case I ‘demand’ 1(f), XV, 45 & 58 (damn that owl looked good)
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Joined: Dec 2002
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 16,700
Likes: 54
From: Lincolnshire
Reduce each sqn to 6 aircraft. Not wholly illogical as they are all supposed to be much more capable than in the past.
Brigade sqns as wgs under one wg cdr - say 3 sqns each commanded by a sqn ldr. Two wgs on a station commanded by a gp capt.
That would up the sqn numbers and cut the number of wg cdrs - win - win.
Brigade sqns as wgs under one wg cdr - say 3 sqns each commanded by a sqn ldr. Two wgs on a station commanded by a gp capt.
That would up the sqn numbers and cut the number of wg cdrs - win - win.
Gentleman Aviator
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,722
Likes: 91
From: Teetering Towers - somewhere in the Shires
There was so much kerfuffle in ('92?) the SDR before last, that rules were laid down.
IIRC "seniority" is not down to numbers, but accumulated years of front line service. So if your Sqn disbanded between WWI and WWII, you were likley to be very much a second class citizen compared to those who hadn't.
Which is why 230 trumped 72
Keeping Sqn Numbers going as (R) Sqns keeps the standard and the books, but earns no more seniority .......
Personally I would guess the RAF's last (FJ) Sqn numberplates to go would be 1 (F) and 617 .......
IIRC "seniority" is not down to numbers, but accumulated years of front line service. So if your Sqn disbanded between WWI and WWII, you were likley to be very much a second class citizen compared to those who hadn't.
Which is why 230 trumped 72
Keeping Sqn Numbers going as (R) Sqns keeps the standard and the books, but earns no more seniority .......
Personally I would guess the RAF's last (FJ) Sqn numberplates to go would be 1 (F) and 617 .......
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Joined: Dec 2002
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 16,700
Likes: 54
From: Lincolnshire
Things change.
Who, in 2003, would have thought that we would have 4, 3, 2, 1 or none in MPA?
Who, in 2003, would have thought that we would have 4, 3, 2, 1 or none in MPA?
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 679
Likes: 56
From: York
To the people who say 617 sqn must be a cert, a quick google of just 1 - 5 Sqn's (3 of which will be gone soon and the 4th post stan) puts them way ahead in front line service, after all they had 1918 - 1942 start! They must be quite a few more in the same ilk!
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
From: UK
Calling Archimedes
Archimedes is the most obvious Pprune resident expert on such things. See inter alia:
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...-squadron.html
S41
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...-squadron.html
S41
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 30
From: Swindonshire
'Expert': such a nicer word than the more precise one - 'dullard'...
To save anyone going through that thread again:
617 have an advantage in that they were awarded their Standard ahead of the 25 year qualifying period (i.e you have to have 25 years service before the Sovereign will grant the award of the Standard), and this, to date, has made them invulnerable to disbandment other than briefs period in limbo before getting a new type (e.g. transition from Vulcan to GR1).
The interesting question here is what happens to 120 - they too gained their standard ahead of time (likewise in recognition of their distinguished work in WW2) and have enjoyed similar benefits in terms of surviving ahead of more senior units
As for 1(F), I assume that they will simply become the next Typhoon sqn to form, since they are ahead of any of the other possible candidates in terms of seniority.
In truth, there has been a growing school of thought that says that the squadron needs to be rethought, and I suspect that PN's idea of us seeing a number of smaller squadrons (say of eight aircraft each for the FJ) may gain traction with the chaps on 5th floor who are looking at force structure issues.
To save anyone going through that thread again:
617 have an advantage in that they were awarded their Standard ahead of the 25 year qualifying period (i.e you have to have 25 years service before the Sovereign will grant the award of the Standard), and this, to date, has made them invulnerable to disbandment other than briefs period in limbo before getting a new type (e.g. transition from Vulcan to GR1).
The interesting question here is what happens to 120 - they too gained their standard ahead of time (likewise in recognition of their distinguished work in WW2) and have enjoyed similar benefits in terms of surviving ahead of more senior units
As for 1(F), I assume that they will simply become the next Typhoon sqn to form, since they are ahead of any of the other possible candidates in terms of seniority.
In truth, there has been a growing school of thought that says that the squadron needs to be rethought, and I suspect that PN's idea of us seeing a number of smaller squadrons (say of eight aircraft each for the FJ) may gain traction with the chaps on 5th floor who are looking at force structure issues.
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,049
Likes: 535
From: Wherever it is this month
In truth, there has been a growing school of thought that says that the squadron needs to be rethought, and I suspect that PN's idea of us seeing a number of smaller squadrons (say of eight aircraft each for the FJ) may gain traction with the chaps on 5th floor who are looking at force structure issues.
Such units would be mutually dependent on each other for supervision and training; current sqns are barely big enough given the high dilution rates and rapid turnover of crews. So they would not be independent fighting units by any sense of the word.
Joined: Oct 2009
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 801
Likes: 173
From: Land of Oz
Just a historical note. When 237 OCU Buccs at Honington (later Lossie)picked up its war role in 1984 for designating for RAFG Tornado, the unit was going to receive a "shadow sqn" number.
At that stage TWCU had 45 Sqn, 237 OCU was muted to be getting 58 Sqn. Shades of Wittering! However, it never came to pass. I bet not many people knew that bit of trivia.
At that stage TWCU had 45 Sqn, 237 OCU was muted to be getting 58 Sqn. Shades of Wittering! However, it never came to pass. I bet not many people knew that bit of trivia.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Joined: Dec 2002
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 16,700
Likes: 54
From: Lincolnshire
V-bomber sqns only had 8 aircraft.
As for dilution, if one sqn could not split to two operational smaller sqns then you imply more than 50% dilution now. But there should be a lot more experience available next year.
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,049
Likes: 535
From: Wherever it is this month
I was just thinking that the last aircraft in the RAF could be a red Spitfire of No 617 Sqn, equipped with a smoke pod, a Paveway 4, an ASRAAM, and able to drop off a single paratrooper from a hastily-bodged ramp in the rear fuselage...