Eighth RAF Typhoon squadron to form?

[barnstormer1968]

In laymans terms does this mean the future AD force will have a radar that is less capable for AD than the Typhoons in other squadrons?

[Rhino power]

Originally Posted by melmothtw

True, but irrelevant to this discussion - RAF to field retained Tranche 1 Typhoons as stand-alone air defence force | IHS Jane's 360

Yes, I know all about the (supposed) intended use for the Tranche 1 jets, I was simply highlighting the fact that they're not just AD capable, since that has been the assumption of some folks previously in other discussions...

-RP

[Martin the Martian]

Well, give or take a few months, the current seniority for inactive squadrons is:

-No.9 Squadron (96 years)
-No.12 Squadron (96 years)
-No.25 Squadron (92 years)
-No.111 Squadron (90 years)
-No.23 Squadron (85 years)
-No.208 Squadron (84 years)
-No.43 Squadron (83 years)
-No.20 Squadron (74 years)
-No.19 Squadron (67 years)
-No.15 Squadron (65 years)

I've included the Tornado squadrons as they don't have much longer left before the GR.4 finally goes.

[Finningley Boy]

Quote:


Originally Posted by Finningley Boy View Post

What's the current UE of a Typhoon Sqn? I'm assuming about 16, if so, bearing in mind that at one point a UE of 10 was established for sqns in Germany in the 1970s it should be easy enough to simply move airframes around to leave about a dozen each among six units and some spares. As for airframe hours, are they being used up at a comparative high rate. Recalling the amount of movement, again, during the '70s and 80s... I can't see airframe fatigue being anything to give concern.

FB

Sure it will be fairly easy to move airframes to create two new sqns, you just won't have the engineers to fix em. The manning situation is dire with the sqns we have at the moment never mind more.

Then what's needed is a recruitment campaign, every town throughout the land should have someone bringing a drum on behalf of the RAF, with a SWO type character, in best blue, reassuring fretful mothers that 'he'll look after their little Johnny and see he gets three squares a day, a chance to see the world and serve the colours at the same time'!

FB

[downsizer]

I vote for 9, especially given the shameful actions that gave the junior sqn F35s....

[Finningley Boy]

Ok,

Here's my expected deployment;

FGR4 Sqns: 2, 6, 9, 12, 11 and 31

F2 Sqns: 1 and 3

In other words, the existing and single new FGR4 units will be re-numbered to continue the last of Tornado units. While 1 and 3, traditionally Figter units will be come the numbers of the Interceptor Sqns. I also understand there'll be more F-35 Sqns, I imagine one of the afore mentioned or 15 Sqn will provide the next RAF number plate in that regard.

FB

[Treble one]

If this squadron is going to be a dedicated AD squadron it needs a (F) squadron number plate?


Admittedly I am a tad biased but surely it has to be either 111 or 43....?

[Sandy Parts]

dctyke - or, put all the engineers in a Line Servicing Sqn and have them work on all the 'sqn's' jets in that location? Deploy with a team suitable for task and rotate the guys as needed. Avoids pinch point trades but admittedly reduces 'sqn' cohesion. Has been done successfully on other fleets.

[Finningley Boy]

Treble one, I would like to see just that; 43 and 111, but in keeping with the custom of oldest first with special status also given priority, i.e. 617, then 1 and 3, both of which also are identified as (F) Squadrons by tradition, will likely take the mantle. It will also allow the three remaining Tornado units the opportunity to continue with Typhoon in the primarily offensive support role with the FGR4s.

FB

[Rhino power]

Originally Posted by Finningley Boy

F2 Sqns...

There are no F.2's any more, all single seaters are FGR.4's and the twin-sticks are T.3's...

-RP

[Finningley Boy]

There are no F.2's any more, all single seaters are FGR.4's and the twin-sticks are T.3's...

-RP

I thought the Tranche 1 aircraft that are intended to make up the two dedicated Interceptor units were F2s?

FB

[Heathrow Harry]

"first with special status also given priority, i.e. 617,"

I can see the DMail headlnie already

" Air Force Bosses kill off Dambusters!" (optional to add "OUTRAGE!!")

[Rhino power]

Originally Posted by Finningley Boy

I thought the Tranche 1 aircraft that are intended to make up the two dedicated Interceptor units were F2s?

FB

No, all Tranche 1 F.2's were re-designated FGR.4 when they received the 'austere' air-to-ground upgrade from Block 5 onwards, the first Block 5 jet was ZJ939, jets from previous Blocks were upgraded to this standard as well so the entire F.2 fleet eventually all became FGR.4's.

-RP

[Finningley Boy]

No, all Tranche 1 F.2's were re-designated FGR.4 when they received the 'austere' air-to-ground upgrade from Block 5 onwards, the first Block 5 jet was ZJ939, jets from previous Blocks were upgraded to this standard as well so the entire F.2 fleet eventually all became FGR.4's

Ok copied!

FB

[melmothtw]

Will the designation not pertain to their role (air defence - F2) rather than their capability (multirole- FGR4)? Genuine question.

[dctyke]

Originally Posted by Sandy Parts

dctyke - or, put all the engineers in a Line Servicing Sqn and have them work on all the 'sqn's' jets in that location? Deploy with a team suitable for task and rotate the guys as needed. Avoids pinch point trades but admittedly reduces 'sqn' cohesion. Has been done successfully on other fleets.

Cannot argue it has worked on heavy fleets and flying training. Not so sure about war fighting pointy things though. The bean counters would welcome it as I'm sure they could find savings in it. As long as the balloon doesn't go up and the sqns don't demand the eng manpower at the same time at dispersed locations.

[Treble one]

Your proposed squadron realignment does seem sensible FB-however just wondering how the boys currently flying FGR4's in 1 and 3 squadrons with all those shiny new toys to use coming up in the multirole environment will feel about having to fly a less capable airframe?


Surely better to have a core of pilots experienced in AD (From an F3 background rather than Harrier/GR4) in these new squadrons and reform with old numberplates as I suggest? (There's even at least one Phantom driver left flying the Typhoon now IIRC)


Just a thought?


I'm sure they'll do what they are told....or leave....

[Rhino power]

Originally Posted by melmothtw

Will the designation not pertain to their role (air defence - F2) rather than their capability (multirole- FGR4)? Genuine question.

Not really any point with another re-designation, The 'F' in FGR.4 will be the same role as the 'F' in 'F.2', so it would be pointless...

-RP

[Davef68]

Originally Posted by melmothtw

Will the designation not pertain to their role (air defence - F2) rather than their capability (multirole- FGR4)? Genuine question.

No, the Phantom was air defence only for years, but still retained FGR2 designation. Just because an aircraft is only roled in a particular task doesn't affect it's capability.

Now there might be an argument for the more capable aircraft being redesignated FGR5 or 6...

[XR219]

Now there might be an argument for the more capable aircraft being redesignated FGR5 or 6...

Absolutely, but it appears whoever is in charge of these things has decided in their infinite wisdom that all Typhoons from Tranche 1 Block 5 standard up to and including Tranche 3 shall be known as either Typhoon T3s or FGR4s.