Gallantry Recognition for Royal Air Force Squadrons
 

A comprehensive report.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/r...-for-gallantry

Oh, what nice news. Well done to all involved! :ok:

Overall good to see, but slightly disappointing that 28(AC) Sqn wasn't recognised for service in Iraq with the 'right to emblazon'. Everything the link talked about in terms of 33 Sqn applied equally to 28 in Basrah, all underlined by the award of the first DFC to a female pilot and remembering the absolutely torrid summers of 06/07 when Basrah Air Stn was under repeated and very heavy IDF.

From that perspective, I would suggest that 28 more than met the criteria of 'direct confrontation with the enemy and displaying gallantry and spirit under fire.

https://www.gov.uk/government/polici...d-north-africa

Nice how they never mention bombing the sh*t out of the place in all of that... :O

Agree with MPN11

Great news. This, and the fact that the uniforms of so many now carry the ribbons of gallantry medals show that although the RAF is now a much depleted service it is nevertheless still a highly effective one.

Congratulations to all concerned.

As a small cloud over proceedings, who pays for the modifications to the Standards? I assume Squadron Funds of some sort, as don't suppose it comes cheap.

I'd be very surprised if there's any question of modifying existing Standards. My understanding is that Squadrons entitled to emblazon these new Honours will have one or two more to choose from when next presented with new Standards - normally up to a maximum of 8 from those awarded? And depending on when those current Standards were presented, that choice could be up to 25 years away.

Thanks for the clarification. No interim upgrade, wait for the new Standard. Seems a shame, but there we are.

Following the ‘Al Faw landings’ on day 1 when members of 18 (B) Sqn landed inside Iraq some of them were also slightly disappointed not to be awarded the ‘right to emblazon’. The explanation given was that the 540 entries didn’t reflect the required level of participation. We know what happened and I know the female pilot you refer to and her crew, they have my utmost respect.

These honours are not awarded lightly and quite rightly so which makes the award of them special. We are making history let’s be proud.

Wait and see which defence contractor gets their logo on the next new standard....

As alluded to, a key component of the Sqn being recognised for any particular Battle Honour is the content of the F540. And more importantly, that the JO responsible for the document remembers to actually fill it in..........😎

Re updating the standards - I wouldn't be in the least surprised if the work is now done by one of the many firms that specialise in this sort of work in Pakistan. I used to buy military blazer badges from there when I was in business and I know that the firm I dealt with had contracts to supply wire embroidered rank and trade badges to the British armed forces.

FIRST UK LAUNCHED STRIKES SINCE WW2
 

FFS MoD, get your own history correct. AAR support was provided by VC10s; Voyager wasn't in service in 2011!

What an odd choice of squadrons in the right/no right to emblazon. Presumably they used dice or straws as part of the scrutiny.

Don't want to nit-pick or denigrate the service given by the recognised units but these awards are not for GALLANTRY, they are for participation. Individual awards can be for gallantry. The only gallantry award to a non-individual of which I am aware, is the George Cross given to the island of Malta for service during WW2.

Chinny, CBTL,

Thanks for the clarification. It is most definitely a cause for pride and celebration, and it was a genuine query on my part. Let's just put it down to having a certain affinity for the Sqn in question .

And no I wasn't the F540 officer for the det!

Also awarded to the Royal Ulster Constabulary in 2000.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/...d.johnpaterson

No - if the Sqn OC has not gripped the 540 then the fault lies with them. Spinning dits in the crewroom doesn't get you the right to emblazon on your Standard.

Do YOU want to get your story straight Beags? :*

OAP

Well, if BEagle is unable...
MOD, Get your facts straight! The Quote referring to Voyager is a gross error, it should refer to TriStar and VC10 tankers. I suggest the following ammendment:
"This historic event was the first direct delivery of airborne weapons launched from Royal Air Force aircraft based in the United Kingdom since World War Two and demonstrated the Royal Air Force’s ability to conduct highly effective surprise airstrikes at great distance. The missions were ably supported by RAF TriStar and VC10 in-flight refuelling aircraft, which were used four times during the eight-hour sortie".

I do hope that the full story is written correctly somewhere?

OAP