Next squadrons to stand up? Who/Where/When?

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

checking the RAF website page

I wouldn't bother, it's full of mistakes (and not just lack of being updated).

Given the senior sqns currently dormant, and the paucity of new aircraft coming into service, it's not looking good for the old RNAS sqns is it? Under current plans, the only one left in 4 years time will be 230, plus 206 and maybe 207 as reserve units.

[Tankertrashnav]

At least the RAF still has to have squadron numbers. How long before it's THE squadron ?

Not that crazy - when I joined in 1964 there were 8 home commands. Am I right in thinking that there's just one now?

[Ken Scott]

You are right, there is just Air Command now.

It would be a vaguely interesting exercise to total up the number of Air Ranks then, with 8 Commands, compared to now with just the one....any one?

[pr00ne]

So, when do Squadrons sit down?

[airsound]

I'm with WE992

Bring back 53!

I never understood why 99 got the C-17, when 53 had much more seniority, not just as a Strat T sqn, but also in its earlier history - formed May 1916, and distinguished service in the late unpleasantness.

But, even better, let's have 53 with A-400M. Despite almost 50 years' separation, Grizzly (or Atlas for the po-faced) is surprisingly similar to the late and great Belfast. Obviously there've been some improvements in the past half-century, but they're definitely from a similar mould.

So, let's get the 53 standard back from St Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh and reinstall it at Brize.

airsound
unbiased in this matter, not

[BBadanov]

But, even better, let's have 53 with A-400M.

Yep 53 would work! Two fuglies in a row - Belslow and the Grizzly. Perhaps known as the pregnant squadron? Did they have the Beverly too to add to that gaggle?

[XV277]

Was 53 more senior than 99? Pre-C-17, 53 had ~40 years service, 99 had ~50 years service.

[Brian 48nav]

TTN and Ken Scott

When I was at South Cerney in 65/6, I recall there being an article in a colour supp' about the V Force and a comparison was made between the number of bombers and the number of officers of AM rank and above. IIRC the latter was 91.

I expect someone has a 'List' from that era and can confirm!

[Biggus]

I seem to remember in the late 80s reading a letter in Air Clues, in the days when they still published dissenting comments, about the number of Air Ranks.

The author of the letter compared the number of Air Ranks as published in the Air Force List of 1946, with the latest one available, 198?.

In 1946, just after the end of WW2 and before many could be de-mobbed, the RAF had a manpower strength of approx. 1 MILLION!! In 198? it was approx. 100,000. And the relative ratio's of Air Ranks? It was approx. 10:9, i.e. the Air Rank strength had decreased by about 10% in 40 odd years, while overall manpower had dropped by 90% in the equivalent period...!!!



I said to start with that all the above is trawled from my memory, but if anyone has the actual figures for 1946 and today as a comparison I'm sure it would make interesting reading.......

[dctyke]

We need to promote one of the four hundred ? Group Captains to look into this

[Biggus]

400 odd (no doubt someone will quote the exact number) Gp Capts for 35,000 odd (" " " ") personnel means, on average, 1 Gp Capt for every 90 odd people.....



Crazy or what!!

[Finningley Boy]

So, when do Squadrons sit down?

When they're tired!

FB