201 Sqn to be re-badged?
 

Heard a rumour today from a mate on 201 that the Boss plans to drop the words "Flying Boat Sqadron" from the Sqn crest and add "Guernsey's Own".

I know that it is known as "Guernsey's Own" but what a shame, unilaterally changing a sqn's history like that by altering the crest. Bloody young whipper-snappers.:rolleyes:

Will it make them any good?

Not his badge, tis the Queen's. Therefore, not his call:=

True. It's a good way to unite the squadron:}

When I was on the Shinies we had just lost our 'B' Flt to centralised servicing but the one sqn Ldr on the sqn was OC "A" Flt. The sqn was 12(B) Sqn.

The boss, as we only had one 'flight' proposed dropping the OC "A" Flt and the 12(B) Sqn until someone pointed out what the (B) meant.

It is quite an education to walk down the gallery at the RAF Club and note the original sqn badges.

Not his badge, tis the Queen's. Therefore, not his call

Absolutely right - HM takes a very close interest in such matters, all of which must receive Her personal approval and signature.

Jack

In fairness to the Boss,

I believe that the official squadron crests (i.e whats on the standards) no longer has "Flying Boat" on. Same as 42 no longer has "Torpedo Bomber" Etc. So he's not changing the Official Sqn Crest.

I still prefer it the way it is now though.

I'll have a look tomorrow - think there's a new standard on the offing soon though!

Well I think he's fully entitled to change the sqn crest in terms of the badge worn by the aircrew... However he's not going to get the sqns flag changed...

Doesn't it read "Squadron" on the flag anyway, no F-B-S...

/me reaches for his "Flying Goat Squadron" badge.

It seems that the official crest does indeed include the words "Flying Boat Squadron". See here:

Royal Air Force Heraldry Trust, the Squadron Badges List

Gentlemen, please; it's a BADGE, not a crest, and a STANDARD, not a flag!:ugh:

I seem to recall there was a GAI / DIN a few years back (around the time that XIII Squadron reformed IIRC) that directed that the only squadrons that could include letters after their squadron number on badges (and I mean badges, for the use on flying suit:hmm:), letterheads etc were those officiclaly accredited with either being a BofB squadron (F) or an Army Co-operation Sqns (AC). The reasons given, I believe, were that in many instances the letters no longer reflected the true role of that particular squadron. This would not affect the official crest or standard though.

Perhaps someone with a bit more historical knowledge/memory may be able to shed more light on this?

lauriebe,

From your link:

Royal Air Force Heraldry Trust, the Squadron Badges List

it would suggest that 84 Sqn should have the word 'Bomber' incorporated in the Sqn badge. The badge issued by the College of Arms dated April 1946 and approved by HM King George VI does not have 'Bomber' in it. I would suggest that that link is not the definitive list of RAF Sqn badges.

Does anybody know the Latin for "It's not Ideal". 42 (Torperdo Bomber) Sqn might be looking to change what's at the bottom of our Badge the way things are going at the moment!

Is there a definitive source of Sqdn badges on the net?

Are the 'location' associations, such as ‘Guernsey’s Own’, permanent?

Of personal interest, 214 Sqdn, was ‘214 Federated Malaya States Sqdn’, on the badge this was abbreviated to ‘214 FMS Sqdn’. When I ordered my blazer badge, because I described it as 214 FMS Sqdn, the manufacturer assumed that I wanted the badge with a King’s crown. They seemed to think the ‘FMS’ was dropped by 1952, but during my time on the Sqdn, between 1959 and 65, ‘FMS’ was always on the badge.

Surley there must be a link to current badges and standards on the net?!?!

All the ones I've seen so far ar Kings Crown?

TWZ:confused:

"201 was affiliated with Guernsey in April 1939 as part of the Municipal Liaison Scheme" it sez here. Presumably selected with a pin by some Air Ministry blunty.

Interestingly (or not) 216Sqn was designated Bomber Transport Squadron.

And I'd never noticed the GR in front of 206 Sqn either.

It's a bloody shame if people start wiping out a unit's history, though (even if the unit is 201).

Given that the squadron was based at Calshot, IIRC, and that is not a hundred miles and less than a day's flying for a flying boat . . .

Besides, it doesn't have the same ring as Falmouth's Feckers.

Air Ministry Orders in 1939 and then again in 1941 stopped the practice of including roles (e.g Flying Boat) in badges. In effect, there are two official badges - the current one, without a role included in the border and the old-style one.

Links with locations (74 [Trinidad]; 139 [Jamaica], etc, etc) were brought to an end in 1952.

There were several reasons for this - these included the fact that some squadrons had adopted these names for reasons which weren't entirely clear, and even the Air Ministry had been a bit too busy between 1939 and 1945 to see whether the link should be made official. Also, as it was appreciated that many squadron numberplates would disappear as the RAF reduced in size, there were concerns that disbanding a unit could cause problems, particularly if the unit had the name of a country in its title.

This didn't stop squadrons from continuing their links with other nations, though - when 139 disbanded, the Jamaican government demanded (as near as damn it) that the squadron be reformed instantly, since it was an insult to Jamaica. A polite 'don't tell us how to number our squadrons' missive was sent to the Jamaican govt, pointing out that no RAF squadrons had been known by their affiliation since 1952 (at least not officially, although they didn't say this), as the result of an AMO, and therefore, the FCO and their Airships regretted that 139 could not be granted special treatment - although there was a possibility (this was true) that it might appear as a Buccaneer squadron in due course.

By the by, II(AC) were at one point in breach of two AMOs - one which required all squadrons to use Arabic instead of Roman numerals, and another which said that a role, current or historic, shouldn't be stated in brackets after the number. II(AC) appear to have mislaid the instruction, and allowed the bureaucracy to come round to their way of thinking in due course...

It's not ideal but.. in latin
 

Zedder,
Some random internet converter thinggy came up with:

is est non specimen tamen

Probably has duff grammar and the likes...

MT