When was the last time an RAF Squadron was renumbered?

[Dave Fleming]

Other than OCU/Reserve squadrons, when was the last time a front-line squadron swapped one numberplate for another from a disbanded squadron? It happened in the 50s/60s as the RAF contracted and historic squadron numbers took the place of less historic ones (e.g. 192 became 51).

Just wondering if we may see No 1 Squadron on Typhoon sooner than we think.

[XV107]

Hah-hah... You thought this was a straightforward question, sir, but you were mistaken....

When the Buccaneers retired, 27 and 617 left Marham (617 may be going back...) for Lossie. However, 12 Squadron was based at Marham from October 93 until January 94, when it moved to Lossie. This was because the new, re-equipped, 12 Sqn was, in fact, 27 Squadron... The 27 numberplate transferred to 240 OCU (as 27[R]) and then returned to the front line with a residual OCU responsibility.

This, to all intents and purposes, means that 12 and 27 were the last squadrons which saw one being renumbered at the expense of a more senior numberplate.

However.... Although you will see some impeccable sources state that 27 renumbered as 12 in October 93, there is a school of thought that says that technically-speaking, 27 actually disbanded, and 12 reformed on the Tornado. The reason for this is that 27 disbanded on 30 Sept 93, while 12 reappeared on 1 Oct 93 (IIRC, 27 went at 2359hrs on the 30th, and 12 reformed at 0001hrs of 1st Oct) In effect, the 27 Sqn personnel were posted en masse from 27 to 12, being in a holding post for all of one minute on 30th Sept/1st Oct 93...

The reason for this is that in the flood of renumberings post the 1957 defence review, you ended up with squadrons with a fairly proud history being arbitrarily renumbered (89 Sqn found itself being turned into 85 Sqn overnight), while 3 Squadron renumbered twice - 96 Squadron lost its identity as 3 reformed on Javelins, and when the Javelins went, to keep a senior numberplate alive, 59 Sqn was renumbered and 3 ended up with the Canberra. When another raft of disbandments took place post 1968, the Air Council decided against arbitrary renumbering, and extant squadrons, even if junior to a numberplate which was disbanding, would stay in place.

This is why it depends upon how you interpret events - if 27 renumbered, then that's the answer to your question: 12/27 Sqns, October 1993.

However, it is more likely that the formal record shows a clear break, with 27 disbanding and 12 reforming.

In which case, I think that it's 3 taking over the 59 numberplate in 1961 (its certainly no later than the early 60s).

I suspect that what'll happen with 1 Sqn is that it'll become the fourth front-line Typhoon squadron, up at Leuchars. It is the most senior available numberplate, and the RAF's numberplate policy is that the most senior numberplate not in use is resurrected.

As you might expect, there's a qualification even to this.

When 216 Squadron disbanded in 1975, it was the most senior numberplate unallocated when the time came to form the last Buccaneer squadron. Although 216 had a bomber-transport heritage and the Bucc was a bomber, it was thought that using this numberplate was a bit odd, and the caveat in the numberplate policy which allowed for some recognition of a squadron's past history to be taken into account when deciding upon the numberplate was given greater consideration after this.

This, in turn, led to 74 reforming on the F-4J when it wasn't the most senior available numberplate (that was 39) - its fighter heritage, the fact that the Air Staff had been trying to reform it ever since disbandment in 1971, and a desire to have an RAF FJ unit at Tiger Meets

led to this decision

In terms of 1 Sqn, then, I'd suggest that the likely outcome will be that it reforms as the next Typhoon squadron - it'll almost certainly be the most senior numberplate available, and as it is the second most senior squadron in the RAF (II[AC] is the most senior), unless it's been assigned to something else, then its a shoo-in.

For completeness - Again allowing for its not being reformed in the interim, 4 is in prime position to be the 5th Typhoon unit.

I won't detain you with the permuations of the GR4 fleet reduction...

There is a review of force structure going on, though, and it may well be that we end up with smaller squadrons - because the reduction in the number of senior officers means that there's now a feeling on the 5th floor that maybe we need to look at what a squadron is again - not least since we're still, in effect, using the basic model laid down in 1912 by Lt Col (later Maj General Sir) Frederick Sykes for the RFC - and we could see the EAWs being led by a Wg Cdr, with a Wg Cdr XO and a Wg Cdr Ops (who flies) with a number of squadrons beneath them led - whisper it gently - by..... Sqn Ldrs...

But in essence - 1 will rise again, and fairly soon.

Edited November 3, 2010 by XV107

[Dave Fleming]

Thanks XV107 - I had hoped you would respond!!

I've often thought we could rename component Flights as Squadrons to give us more options!

Edited November 3, 2010 by Dave Fleming

[Scarlet]

When the Buccaneers retired, 27 and 617 left Marham (617 may be going back...) for Lossie. However, 12 Squadron was based at Marham from October 93 until January 94, when it moved to Lossie. This was because the new, re-equipped, 12 Sqn was, in fact, 27 Squadron... The 27 numberplate transferred to 240 OCU (as 27[R]) and then returned to the front line with a residual OCU responsibility.

This, to all intents and purposes, means that 12 and 27 were the last squadrons which saw one being renumbered at the expense of a more senior numberplate.

However.... Although you will see some impeccable sources state that 27 renumbered as 12 in October 93, there is a school of thought that says that technically-speaking, 27 actually disbanded, and 12 reformed on the Tornado. The reason for this is that 27 disbanded on 30 Sept 93, while 12 reappeared on 1 Oct 93 (IIRC, 27 went at 2359hrs on the 30th, and 12 reformed at 0001hrs of 1st Oct) In effect, the 27 Sqn personnel were posted en masse from 27 to 12, being in a holding post for all of one minute on 30th Sept/1st Oct 93...

The reason for this is that in the flood of renumberings post the 1957 defence review, you ended up with squadrons with a fairly proud history being arbitrarily renumbered (89 Sqn found itself being turned into 85 Sqn overnight), while 3 Squadron renumbered twice - 96 Squadron lost its identity as 3 reformed on Javelins, and when the Javelins went, to keep a senior numberplate alive, 59 Sqn was renumbered and 3 ended up with the Canberra. When another raft of disbandments took place post 1968, the Air Council decided against arbitrary renumbering, and extant squadrons, even if junior to a numberplate which was disbanding, would stay in place.

This is why it depends upon how you interpret events - if 27 renumbered, then that's the answer to your question: 12/27 Sqns, October 1993.

However, it is more likely that the formal record shows a clear break, with 27 disbanding and 12 reforming.

In which case, I think that it's 3 taking over the 59 numberplate in 1961 (its certainly no later than the early 60s).

I suspect that what'll happen with 1 Sqn is that it'll become the fourth front-line Typhoon squadron, up at Leuchars. It is the most senior available numberplate, and the RAF's numberplate policy is that the most senior numberplate not in use is resurrected.

As you might expect, there's a qualification even to this.

When 216 Squadron disbanded in 1975, it was the most senior numberplate unallocated when the time came to form the last Buccaneer squadron. Although 216 had a bomber-transport heritage and the Bucc was a bomber, it was thought that using this numberplate was a bit odd, and the caveat in the numberplate policy which allowed for some recognition of a squadron's past history to be taken into account when deciding upon the numberplate was given greater consideration after this.

This, in turn, led to 74 reforming on the F-4J when it wasn't the most senior available numberplate (that was 39) - its fighter heritage, the fact that the Air Staff had been trying to reform it ever since disbandment in 1971, and a desire to have an RAF FJ unit at Tiger Meets

led to this decision

In terms of 1 Sqn, then, I'd suggest that the likely outcome will be that it reforms as the next Typhoon squadron - it'll almost certainly be the most senior numberplate available, and as it is the second most senior squadron in the RAF (II[AC] is the most senior), unless it's been assigned to something else, then its a shoo-in.

For completeness - Again allowing for its not being reformed in the interim, 4 is in prime position to be the 5th Typhoon unit.

I won't detain you with the permuations of the GR4 fleet reduction...

There is a review of force structure going on, though, and it may well be that we end up with smaller squadrons - because the reduction in the number of senior officers means that there's now a feeling on the 5th floor that maybe we need to look at what a squadron is again - not least since we're still, in effect, using the basic model laid down in 1912 by Lt Col (later Maj General Sir) Frederick Sykes for the RFC - and we could see the EAWs being led by a Wg Cdr, with a Wg Cdr XO and a Wg Cdr Ops (who flies) with a number of squadrons beneath them led - whisper it gently - by..... Sqn Ldrs...

But in essence - 1 will rise again, and fairly soon.

And breathe!

Got a headache after reading that lot.

So when's 74 reforming?

[XV107]

Got a headache after reading that lot.

Imagine what I got after typing it!

[Dave Fleming]

My insomnia?

[Roland Pulfrew]

And just to muddy the waters 201 (formerly 1 Sqn RNAS) and 120 (also with a heritage like 617 - Sqn standard awarded early by the King) are about to become available. Sadly I can't imagine the FJ dominated AFB wanting these numbers appearing in some of their fast pointy sqns!!!!

[XV107]

There's a rumour that 120 might be found a home soon, even if only as a reserve numberplate (possibly the RWOTEU or the AWC's UASTEU)...

[Armadillos]

It`ll be a real shame to see 120 go the same way as other historic numberplates such as 16 and 85 to become a Grob Tutor squadron, my old man went nuts when i mentioned 57 had become a Tutor squadron.

At the same time such a number shouldn`t just cease to exist. In short resurrect Nimrod MRA4!!!

[Vickers McFunbus]

It`ll be a real shame to see 120 go the same way as other historic numberplates such as 16 and 85 to become a Grob Tutor squadron, my old man went nuts when i mentioned 57 had become a Tutor squadron.

To be fair, a Tutor Sqn, it's instructors and students, have just as much right to a "proper" Sqn numberplate as the Tucano, Hawk and King Air Sqns (and the rotary ones at Shawbs too). At a time when "ethos" is taking a prominent place in service life as the RAF shrinks, giving students who are doing their flying training a Sqn identity, and the history with it, can only be considered a good thing. Far better than seeing a Sqn consigned to history forever.

207 and 72 at Linton are excellent examples, and have cemented the links between the Sqn associations (particularly 207 in my experience) and the RAF itself.