207 Squadron
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As pointed out by Brian at post 8, I am an occasional poster but long-term 'lurker'. Yes, I am honoured to be the previous OC 207 and I have already (privately) congratulated Wg Cdr Scott Williams on his new appointment. When it was announced last year that 207 was to be the F35 OCU, I was both delighted and it has to be said, a little surprised. However, knowing of both the Royal Naval origins of the Sqn and that 207 has a long and distinguished service at Marham with both the Valiant and Washington, it all made some sort of sense.
Perhaps I can add a bit of clarity/knowledge to the 'silver' discussion, as I have a clear memory of itemising and carefully packing the silver etc. in accordance with the then regulations (DCI?) and sending it to 7MU at Quedgley. When 207(R) formed at Linton, they asked for all this to be restored to them. What arrived was a paltry few items (the CO's board was the most prominent!) and I confirmed that there had been considerably more originally. I was still in uniform at the time and in conjunction with the chaps at Linton I got involved with trying to find it. By this time, it had all been moved to Stafford (when Quedgley closed) and I had some prolonged discussions with a very helpful civil servant who searched all the paperwork he could find. Sadly to little avail. I remember lots of documentary and photographic stuff that resided in my office which now seems to have been lost and believe it is there to be found rather than having been 'stolen'. To me, the most important is a small piece of original artwork done in 1922 by a previous Boss, Sqn Ldr A Tedder. It is of note that he subsequently achieved more than any Sqn Cdr from any other Sqn that may also be at Marham.
Perhaps I can add a bit of clarity/knowledge to the 'silver' discussion, as I have a clear memory of itemising and carefully packing the silver etc. in accordance with the then regulations (DCI?) and sending it to 7MU at Quedgley. When 207(R) formed at Linton, they asked for all this to be restored to them. What arrived was a paltry few items (the CO's board was the most prominent!) and I confirmed that there had been considerably more originally. I was still in uniform at the time and in conjunction with the chaps at Linton I got involved with trying to find it. By this time, it had all been moved to Stafford (when Quedgley closed) and I had some prolonged discussions with a very helpful civil servant who searched all the paperwork he could find. Sadly to little avail. I remember lots of documentary and photographic stuff that resided in my office which now seems to have been lost and believe it is there to be found rather than having been 'stolen'. To me, the most important is a small piece of original artwork done in 1922 by a previous Boss, Sqn Ldr A Tedder. It is of note that he subsequently achieved more than any Sqn Cdr from any other Sqn that may also be at Marham.
Easy Street - what a load of pompous pontificating. The RAF's arrangements for the safe keeping of squadron silver, paintings are like a colander with extremely large holes. Time for you to respond to Old Duffer's suggestion at post #13 I think.
RAF News shows the second F35 Sqn to be : 207, a unit disbanded in circa 1984.
Given the RAF's 'low number' policy (except 617) for squadrons and the plethora of other 'claims' which must be out there, does anybody know the reason for the 207 nameplate to be reactivated?
Old Duffer
Given the RAF's 'low number' policy (except 617) for squadrons and the plethora of other 'claims' which must be out there, does anybody know the reason for the 207 nameplate to be reactivated?
Old Duffer
I'm being unfair...I'm sure the target headcount is at least 10x that = 2070.
Tankertrashnav wrote:
How right you are!
When I was serving at pre-pongo Wattisham on Suphpholk's phinest phighter squadron, one of our ploys to take control of the Officers' Mess Committee was to volunteer, or in my case be volunteered, for various posts in order to achieve a majority. So I found myself as the Sqn Silver representative. Trying to resolve our swag against the property book was an absolute nightmare - we had things which weren't recorded and other items had simply disappeared. Probably through incompetence rather than theft though! So I did my best and unvolunteered sharpish. Good luck to whoever looks after 56(F)'s silver these days!
The RAF's arrangements for the safe keeping of squadron silver, paintings are like a colander with extremely large holes.
When I was serving at pre-pongo Wattisham on Suphpholk's phinest phighter squadron, one of our ploys to take control of the Officers' Mess Committee was to volunteer, or in my case be volunteered, for various posts in order to achieve a majority. So I found myself as the Sqn Silver representative. Trying to resolve our swag against the property book was an absolute nightmare - we had things which weren't recorded and other items had simply disappeared. Probably through incompetence rather than theft though! So I did my best and unvolunteered sharpish. Good luck to whoever looks after 56(F)'s silver these days!
I can well remember being ordered to try to find certain items of one of my squadron's silver. I got absolutely nowhere. The most helpful suggestion that I got was to get myself invited to the next Group or Command dining-in night and I might be quite amazed by what appeared on the table.
Originally Posted by tankertrashnav
Easy Street - what a load of pompous pontificating. The RAF's arrangements for the safe keeping of squadron silver, paintings are like a colander with extremely large holes. Time for you to respond to Old Duffer's suggestion at post #13 I think.
He was being FUNNY.......................................
Thread Starter
Easy Street,
Let's leave our little spat behind. Sadly, the squadrons with which I have been associated (103 & 110) have gone the way of all flesh and although I served alongside 230, I cannot claim reasonably to have been a member. My one attempt at resurrecting a sqn number plate (194) the first RAF helicopter sqn fell on deaf ears - hence 28 Sqn when the Hong Kong detachment of Whirlwinds was raised to a sqn. I am sure those who serve with 207 will do so proudly and hopefully they will embrace those who no longer serve but might be in the sqn association and will want/value highly, the chance to renew their friendships.
O-D
Let's leave our little spat behind. Sadly, the squadrons with which I have been associated (103 & 110) have gone the way of all flesh and although I served alongside 230, I cannot claim reasonably to have been a member. My one attempt at resurrecting a sqn number plate (194) the first RAF helicopter sqn fell on deaf ears - hence 28 Sqn when the Hong Kong detachment of Whirlwinds was raised to a sqn. I am sure those who serve with 207 will do so proudly and hopefully they will embrace those who no longer serve but might be in the sqn association and will want/value highly, the chance to renew their friendships.
O-D
207 was always an interesting nd slightly left field choice for the second Tucano squadron, but makes more sense for the Lightning F-35 with it's shared RAF and RN heritage.
One does wonder what the next two scheduled Lightning uints after 809 will be.....
One does wonder what the next two scheduled Lightning uints after 809 will be.....
O-D, if you'ff forgive me, the prevalence of low-numbered squadrons (and some 200-series numberplates) is a consequence of policy, not direct policy.
The over-riding consideration is seniority, with role assocation as another key factor (thus were, say, a Poseidon OCU to be formed, although the 19 Squadron numberplate is senior, it would be less likely to be chosen than that of 42 Squadron - association via Nimrod and being an OCU for MPA - or 22 Squadron - a pretty senior numberplate, operated Vildebeests, Beauforts and Beaufighters in the ASuW role in WW2).
207 was one of the squadrons which Trenchard selected to be the backbone of the RAF in the much-reduced circumstances of the immediate post- First World War era, and despite its disappearance from the lists after the retirement of the Devons, its accumulated seniority was still sufficient for it to be in the running for revival.
Trenchard required his staff to produce a list of 32 squadrons which had distinguished themselves; the squadrons were to include RNAS units and to represent all roles and all theatres of war. The resultant list had three alterations made to it by Trenchard - 8, 186 and 201 were replaced from that list by 203, 208 and 210. When two more squadrons were required, 8 and 151 were proposed; Trenchard concurred with 8 but decreed that 45 should be the next one. A similar process occurred at the commencement of further RAF expansion, thus the order in which squadrons formed was not on a numerical basis, and seniority and low numbering do not automatically fit together.
Clearly, some of what should be the most senior numberplates around disappeared from the lists over time - for example 267 Squadron was one of Trenchard's originals, but after the retirement of the Argosy and the subsequent reduction of the transport force during the 1970s, no opportunity to reform it has arisen - role association playing a key part in the disappearance. 205, 210 and 238 have also suffered similarly from that 1919 list signed off by Trenchard.
Forgive the diversion into slightly arcane history.
The over-riding consideration is seniority, with role assocation as another key factor (thus were, say, a Poseidon OCU to be formed, although the 19 Squadron numberplate is senior, it would be less likely to be chosen than that of 42 Squadron - association via Nimrod and being an OCU for MPA - or 22 Squadron - a pretty senior numberplate, operated Vildebeests, Beauforts and Beaufighters in the ASuW role in WW2).
207 was one of the squadrons which Trenchard selected to be the backbone of the RAF in the much-reduced circumstances of the immediate post- First World War era, and despite its disappearance from the lists after the retirement of the Devons, its accumulated seniority was still sufficient for it to be in the running for revival.
Trenchard required his staff to produce a list of 32 squadrons which had distinguished themselves; the squadrons were to include RNAS units and to represent all roles and all theatres of war. The resultant list had three alterations made to it by Trenchard - 8, 186 and 201 were replaced from that list by 203, 208 and 210. When two more squadrons were required, 8 and 151 were proposed; Trenchard concurred with 8 but decreed that 45 should be the next one. A similar process occurred at the commencement of further RAF expansion, thus the order in which squadrons formed was not on a numerical basis, and seniority and low numbering do not automatically fit together.
Clearly, some of what should be the most senior numberplates around disappeared from the lists over time - for example 267 Squadron was one of Trenchard's originals, but after the retirement of the Argosy and the subsequent reduction of the transport force during the 1970s, no opportunity to reform it has arisen - role association playing a key part in the disappearance. 205, 210 and 238 have also suffered similarly from that 1919 list signed off by Trenchard.
Forgive the diversion into slightly arcane history.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting... out of idle curiosity, is the full list available anywhere (Google has not been my friend)
There’s a list of the 30 most senior squadrons somewhere from an FOI request. The last full list seems to be from the late 70s and is in the National Archives at Kew, but there may well be something more up to date there. I’ll see if I can find the FOI link,
Well if it dates back to the 70's it can be redone anytime - no previous administration can bind it's successors............... so if the Minister's Dad served in 54325 Squadron he can resurrect that anytime..............
The rules could be revisited and changed ( but no CAS has seen fit to oversee much fiddling with them (there has been minor tinkering) since Trenchard introduced the idea), but claiming that (say) 74 Squadron has managed to add 45 years to its accumulated service through the application of quantum physics and is therefore 10th on the overall list could be a smidge trickier.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: listening to the sound of aviation
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Er... The list is based upon accumulated service. Unless someone manages to change Time itself....
The rules could be revisited and changed ( but no CAS has seen fit to oversee much fiddling with them (there has been minor tinkering) since Trenchard introduced the idea), but claiming that (say) 74 Squadron has managed to add 45 years to its accumulated service through the application of quantum physics and is therefore 10th on the overall list could be a smidge trickier.
The rules could be revisited and changed ( but no CAS has seen fit to oversee much fiddling with them (there has been minor tinkering) since Trenchard introduced the idea), but claiming that (say) 74 Squadron has managed to add 45 years to its accumulated service through the application of quantum physics and is therefore 10th on the overall list could be a smidge trickier.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque..._passthrough=1
Is this the list?