Disbanding Squadrons
Regiment? Royal Flying Corps, shurely?
And if it were to be a new RFC, most of the current plates would be returning 'home'. With the exception of the 200-series units, most, if not all the current RAF squadrons started life as army units...
And if it were to be a new RFC, most of the current plates would be returning 'home'. With the exception of the 200-series units, most, if not all the current RAF squadrons started life as army units...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we are being a bit backward thinking here.
Why not have one big sqn, lets call it 1 Sqn, and have a Fighter Flt, a Bomber Flt, an ISR Flt, a Helo Flt and an AT Flt (Inc AAR tankers).
Each Flt could have a Flt Cdr (Or empowered MACR) who would look after the 7 servicable ac.
The rest of the 30-40, 000 personnel left could administer themselves into a frenzy.
Why not have one big sqn, lets call it 1 Sqn, and have a Fighter Flt, a Bomber Flt, an ISR Flt, a Helo Flt and an AT Flt (Inc AAR tankers).
Each Flt could have a Flt Cdr (Or empowered MACR) who would look after the 7 servicable ac.
The rest of the 30-40, 000 personnel left could administer themselves into a frenzy.
Presumably the cdr of each flight would have to be a Group Captain (at least)....
We have an air force about the size it was in the mid-1920s and four times the number of Air Officers...
We have an air force about the size it was in the mid-1920s and four times the number of Air Officers...
Rather than seeing a numberplate fading into obscurity forever, why not give the UAS's a numberplate?
e.g No XX(Birmingham UA) Sqn
Personally I'd rather see that than historic squadrons lost forever.
Incidentally why was 207 Sqn brought back at Linton, as opposed to ,say, 92 or 74. I think it was last disbanded in the early 80's flying Devons, so why not a more recently disbanded unit, and also why not a fighter plate rather than a bomber plate seeing as Linton's studes are streamed FJ IIRC? Haven't done the maths on that but did that go along with your theory Archimedes?
e.g No XX(Birmingham UA) Sqn
Personally I'd rather see that than historic squadrons lost forever.
Incidentally why was 207 Sqn brought back at Linton, as opposed to ,say, 92 or 74. I think it was last disbanded in the early 80's flying Devons, so why not a more recently disbanded unit, and also why not a fighter plate rather than a bomber plate seeing as Linton's studes are streamed FJ IIRC? Haven't done the maths on that but did that go along with your theory Archimedes?
Jobza,
Yes, spot on, seniority again. Despite having disbanded in the 80s, 207 was/is still senior to 92 and 74. Role doesn't really matter (unless it's required as the justification for choosing one plate over another.
).
A cynical view, on the other hand, is that, as with 72's plate going to Linton, it was done so as to allow the next most senior units to reform on the Typhoon (the awkward issue of more senior F3 and Jag squadrons being dealt with later). And the next two most senior units are...?
(If I said 'Hissssss' and 'Meow!' would that give you a clue?)
Yes, spot on, seniority again. Despite having disbanded in the 80s, 207 was/is still senior to 92 and 74. Role doesn't really matter (unless it's required as the justification for choosing one plate over another.
).A cynical view, on the other hand, is that, as with 72's plate going to Linton, it was done so as to allow the next most senior units to reform on the Typhoon (the awkward issue of more senior F3 and Jag squadrons being dealt with later). And the next two most senior units are...?
(If I said 'Hissssss' and 'Meow!' would that give you a clue?)
Thread Starter
VR
You might, I most certainly will not.
Archimedes Hisss and meow
At least the RAF will have a "fighter" Tiger Sqn, not that they will ever be able to afford to go to any meets!
As for hisss I wonder if the zap near the NAFFI @ wildparts is still there or was it removed for some Colonels visit after RAFG drawdown?
As for which station is chosen for closure, simple, look for any big spend on accomodation & recreation and then check see if i've been posted there
We will all be part of a Ship's Company or in Regiments soon!
Archimedes Hisss and meow
At least the RAF will have a "fighter" Tiger Sqn, not that they will ever be able to afford to go to any meets!
As for hisss I wonder if the zap near the NAFFI @ wildparts is still there or was it removed for some Colonels visit after RAFG drawdown?
As for which station is chosen for closure, simple, look for any big spend on accomodation & recreation and then check see if i've been posted there
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why don't we just do what we eventually did with the Groups?
(Heresy, but what the hell!) - ie, start from scratch - disband all sqns, and start numbering the ones left from 1?
Taking cover............
(Heresy, but what the hell!) - ie, start from scratch - disband all sqns, and start numbering the ones left from 1?
Taking cover............
Archimedes
As the font of knowledge on this subject is seniority measured from the formation of the Royal Air Force or from Sqn formation? If the latter then your comment about the 200 series being relatively junior is incorrect as they came from the RNAS squadrons ie 1 Sqn RNAS became 201 Sqn RAF and so is almost as old as 1 Sqn RFC. Seniority? A complex issue
And I agree with Jobza particularly as the UASs have an EFT role, but there are more apt number plates ie 609 (or was it 607?)North Riding Squadron for Yorkshire UAS??? After all I believe they were the RAFs first operational jet squadron.
As the font of knowledge on this subject is seniority measured from the formation of the Royal Air Force or from Sqn formation? If the latter then your comment about the 200 series being relatively junior is incorrect as they came from the RNAS squadrons ie 1 Sqn RNAS became 201 Sqn RAF and so is almost as old as 1 Sqn RFC. Seniority? A complex issue
And I agree with Jobza particularly as the UASs have an EFT role, but there are more apt number plates ie 609 (or was it 607?)North Riding Squadron for Yorkshire UAS??? After all I believe they were the RAFs first operational jet squadron.
Zulu Hotel
Bu**er. You are right
That would be the 609 (West Riding) Squadron Room in the former Officers' Mess at Fenton - old age and alcohol begins to bite. And the Meatbox gate guard at Finningley was in 616 colours.....wasn't it?!?
Bu**er. You are right
That would be the 609 (West Riding) Squadron Room in the former Officers' Mess at Fenton - old age and alcohol begins to bite. And the Meatbox gate guard at Finningley was in 616 colours.....wasn't it?!?
RP, Dunno about things in Officers messes, and ain't lucky enough to have served at Finningley, but as a Professional Yorkshireman, I have an interest in most things to do with Yorkshire.
Tally Ho
Tally Ho
RP,
Think you're referring to impiger's post, not mine? My point was that 201, 206 & 208 aren't at all junior, but amongst the most senior units in the RAF (as are 202 and 207 for that matter). 204 and 205 were also right up there, but their disbandment with the drawdown of their fleets in the late 60s and early 70s changed that a little - they've lost 30 years' seniority since the 1968 list.
I think I'm right in saying (that some of the RNAS units started out as flights that were then renumbered as squadrons in the RNAS and then made into 200-series RAF units post April '18.
I'm far from a font of knowledge on this - an eggcup would be a more apposite vessel to choose. I only know the above because I answered a query from a learning centre inmate about how senior II(AC) were by looking at the file in the PRO when I happened to be there a couple of years back.
If some of the things in the file had been acted upon, quite a few current units wouldn't exist. (84 as a Chinook unit? 74 as a Jag or GR4 unit for starters!)
Think you're referring to impiger's post, not mine? My point was that 201, 206 & 208 aren't at all junior, but amongst the most senior units in the RAF (as are 202 and 207 for that matter). 204 and 205 were also right up there, but their disbandment with the drawdown of their fleets in the late 60s and early 70s changed that a little - they've lost 30 years' seniority since the 1968 list.
I think I'm right in saying (that some of the RNAS units started out as flights that were then renumbered as squadrons in the RNAS and then made into 200-series RAF units post April '18.
I'm far from a font of knowledge on this - an eggcup would be a more apposite vessel to choose. I only know the above because I answered a query from a learning centre inmate about how senior II(AC) were by looking at the file in the PRO when I happened to be there a couple of years back.
If some of the things in the file had been acted upon, quite a few current units wouldn't exist. (84 as a Chinook unit? 74 as a Jag or GR4 unit for starters!)
Archimedes
Sorry you are right I did mean Impigers post!!
You are right on the RNAS bits. I seem to remember from the Sqn History that 201 were originally formed as A Flight RNAS, then became 1 Sqn RNAS and ultimately renumbered as 201 Sqn RAF when the RFC + RNAS = RAF.
But does service as an RNAS or RFC unit count towards seniority? I guess so as otherwise all those Sqns in existance on the date the RAF stood up would be of similar seniority.
Sorry you are right
I did mean Impigers post!!You are right on the RNAS bits. I seem to remember from the Sqn History that 201 were originally formed as A Flight RNAS, then became 1 Sqn RNAS and ultimately renumbered as 201 Sqn RAF when the RFC + RNAS = RAF.
But does service as an RNAS or RFC unit count towards seniority?
I guess so as otherwise all those Sqns in existance on the date the RAF stood up would be of similar seniority.
Gentleman Aviator
Roland P
not quite mon brave. Quite a number of sqns were disbanded between the wars (peace dividend, no more wars blah) and not reformed until the late 30s. Similarly, a number were disbanded in the immediate post WW2 days, (peace dividend, no more wars blah) to reform as the cold war got going. And it's only time "active" that counts.
So those involved in "colonial policing" between the wars in Mesopotamia (aka Iraq) and the NW frontier (aka Afghanistan) have a good 15 years ahead of their mates. (Hence 72 now flying Tincans while the Tiger Beer Labels still fly in NI!)
Of course, now we've beaten Saddam (peace dividend, no more wars blah) and will catch OBL in time for the US elections, we can disband lots more .....
all those Sqns in existance on the date the RAF stood up would be of similar seniority
So those involved in "colonial policing" between the wars in Mesopotamia (aka Iraq) and the NW frontier (aka Afghanistan) have a good 15 years ahead of their mates. (Hence 72 now flying Tincans while the Tiger Beer Labels still fly in NI!)
Of course, now we've beaten Saddam (peace dividend, no more wars blah) and will catch OBL in time for the US elections, we can disband lots more .....
Yes, I should have made that point.
When the RAF was slashed in the post WW1 cuts, Trenchard had to decide upon which numberplates were to be assigned to the surviving units (I don't have the list to hand), so these sqns, the 'originals' as some term them, had a head start. They were then joined by more units in the early '30s (such as 74 and 112), which gained a few years, then 'the rest'.
So in essence, there are three types of unit:
1. Those whose seniority stretches pretty much unbroken from 1912/or date of formation in WW1 as an RFC sqn
2. Another batch of units whose seniority starts in 1915-ish, stops in 1919 and then starts again in 1930s
3. A further group where the seniority calculation starts from date of formation, but is interrupted by a series of disbandments/ time in reserve
74 is a classic example of the latter, with its seniority being worked out as something like 1916-1919; 1935-1971; 1984-1992 (the dates are approximate here) - so although calculating the seniority goes back to 1916/17, it stops for periods of 14, 13 and 12 (to date) years (again, approximately).
When the RAF was slashed in the post WW1 cuts, Trenchard had to decide upon which numberplates were to be assigned to the surviving units (I don't have the list to hand), so these sqns, the 'originals' as some term them, had a head start. They were then joined by more units in the early '30s (such as 74 and 112), which gained a few years, then 'the rest'.
So in essence, there are three types of unit:
1. Those whose seniority stretches pretty much unbroken from 1912/or date of formation in WW1 as an RFC sqn
2. Another batch of units whose seniority starts in 1915-ish, stops in 1919 and then starts again in 1930s
3. A further group where the seniority calculation starts from date of formation, but is interrupted by a series of disbandments/ time in reserve
74 is a classic example of the latter, with its seniority being worked out as something like 1916-1919; 1935-1971; 1984-1992 (the dates are approximate here) - so although calculating the seniority goes back to 1916/17, it stops for periods of 14, 13 and 12 (to date) years (again, approximately).
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting
I thought if a Sqn was "disbanded", the Standard went to Cranwell for ressurection at a later date ( for whatever patriotic reason or MoD whim)
But if "laid up" it went to St Clement Danes - and- end of story.
By the way - CXX, 201 & 206 at ISK are soon to celebrate their 90th (unbroken) service on the front line
I thought if a Sqn was "disbanded", the Standard went to Cranwell for ressurection at a later date ( for whatever patriotic reason or MoD whim)
But if "laid up" it went to St Clement Danes - and- end of story.
By the way - CXX, 201 & 206 at ISK are soon to celebrate their 90th (unbroken) service on the front line