RAF Typhoon Squadron markings

[NiceGuyEddie]

Apologies if this has been asked to death - I could only find a topic from a few years back that vaguely touched upon this, but:

I recall reading a good while back that the RAF were sadly scrapping Typhoon squadron markings, something to do with the fact that airframes are pooled between squadrons and cutting costs.

Although I have since seen many photos of unmarked Typhoons, I am still seeing quite a few that have squadron markings applied.

Can anybody enlighten me as to why some do and some don't?

[Phoon]

I believe it's because Typhoons are switched between units regularly and are involved in front line ops / air policing etc. Saying that a number of airframes at Coningsby, particularly 29 sqn have re-applied marks in the past few months, and last year we had 5 aircraft in full 11 sqn marks at some point - ZK304/10/346/431 and 437 - only ZK304 and 310 have those currently applied. 29 sqn have ZJ913/914 - Blackjack display aircraft/916/929/937/942 and T3s ZK380/381/382 all marked currently. 12 sqn aircraft seem to have been dispersed everywhere but I've noted ZK331/366/372 and 373 marked, their T3 ZK383 hasn't been about for a while but it is marked. 41 sqn only have ZK375 in full marks. No 3 sqn aircraft are currently marked, but ZK325 and 328 were marked up last year.

Lossiemouth also have a few jets marked, ZK320 and 346 are in full 1 sqn marks, ZK378/428 and ZK439 wear full 6 sqn marks, unsure on 2 sqn, 9 sqn have a fair few jets marked up including ZJ923/935/939.

[jamesg23]

Not all typhoons deploy on ops. Some have issues that mean they are unable to carry out operations but can continue to carry out normal training so these may be ones that have been marked up. Are 3 sqn currently deployed? That may explain why none of theres are marked up.

[Finty]

I think 3 (F) are currently in Romania

[verreli]

I understand the RAF have too few jets to fully equip their squadrons and so have to pool their limited resource. However, squadrons are such an intrinsic part of the airforce culture that it would be a shame to lose their identity. Is it not possible to paint fuel tanks in squadron markings which are easy to swap on a mission by mission basis? This is surely a cheap compromise that satisfies both operational and cultural aims. I guess this would work for Typhoon but F35 is a harder nut to crack.

[POL]

Beyond the fact that your opening statement seems entirely nonsensical, the point of pooling jets is to reduce the overhead costs of having to do everything multiple times in the same location. Having squadron painted tanks would mean they'd need to be removed/swapped every time an aircraft changes unit...which costs money.

[Agent K]

I understand the RAF have too few jets to fully equip their squadrons and so have to pool their limited resource. However, squadrons are such an intrinsic part of the airforce culture that it would be a shame to lose their identity. Is it not possible to paint fuel tanks in squadron markings which are easy to swap on a mission by mission basis? This is surely a cheap compromise that satisfies both operational and cultural aims. I guess this would work for Typhoon but F35 is a harder nut to crack.

What utter nonsense..... the squadrons are fully equipped with the aircraft they need..... think it through! as with for example the Tornado, during drawdown, the less jets available, they reduced squadrons.

Also the RAF is not some flying club required to paint its jets to show off to enthusiasts, swapping tanks to suit the enthusiasts really is not a high priority! can you imagine it?!

[NiceGuyEddie]

I am of the opinion that squadron markings are great for the old "esprit de corps" and it is quite sad to see it come to this.

[verreli]

Having squadron painted tanks would mean they'd need to be removed/swapped every time an aircraft changes unit...which costs money.

Does it? It potentially takes time but that time is already paid for so there's no increase in cost.

[verreli]

Also the RAF is not some flying club required to paint its jets to show off to enthusiasts, swapping tanks to suit the enthusiasts really is not a high priority! can you imagine it?!

So why not scrap squadrons, battle honours, etc? The same for units of the other armed forces. The history means something to those that serve in the units and contributes to its fighting effectiveness. Any way to reinforce this rather than dilute it must be a good thing?

[Phoon]

I understand the RAF have too few jets to fully equip their squadrons and so have to pool their limited resource. However, squadrons are such an intrinsic part of the airforce culture that it would be a shame to lose their identity. Is it not possible to paint fuel tanks in squadron markings which are easy to swap on a mission by mission basis? This is surely a cheap compromise that satisfies both operational and cultural aims. I guess this would work for Typhoon but F35 is a harder nut to crack.

What utter nonsense..... the squadrons are fully equipped with the aircraft they need..... think it through! as with for example the Tornado, during drawdown, the less jets available, they reduced squadrons.

Also the RAF is not some flying club required to paint its jets to show off to enthusiasts, swapping tanks to suit the enthusiasts really is not a high priority! can you imagine it?!

Until recently the RAF was always very proud of it's squadrons, and aircraft wore their unit's badge / codes with pride - even during wartime. Maybe some of that pride is missing from the modern day RAF?

[blackhandgang17]

It all started going wrong in my opinion when they went from individual squadron marked aircraft with E.G. IX(B) jets being A* 14 being B* 17(F) being C* and 31 being D* for example in the case of the Bruggen wing and the Tornado F3 with 43 being G* and 111 being H* to a fleet based scheme with codes starting at 001 for the GR1/4 and now the typhoon going to a system based on the last 3 of the serial number.
It takes pride away from the squadrons air and ground crew as squadrons used to fight to keep there own marked jets and we’re loath to let other sqns borrow them as you could guarantee that the aircrew were of the opinion that we don’t need it again so we won’t snag it leading to more work for the donating sqn.
Suppose as usual with the forces now that it all comes down to cost and time for the stickers to be applied and removed before the jet goes on ops.

[Canberra TT.18]

I always wondered why remove codes/markings on operations? Eg. The USA or France aircraft keep their codes/markings. To answer my own question, maybe this is because they have a more aircraft per unit.

[Pete Da Bear]

OK, so not squadron markings as such but someone at Coningsby has a sense of humour.
RAF Coningsby 10 June 2015 by Peter Jackson, on Flickr

[Agent K]

So why not scrap squadrons, battle honours, etc? The same for units of the other armed forces. The history means something to those that serve in the units and contributes to its fighting effectiveness. Any way to reinforce this rather than dilute it must be a good thing?

A squadron is not just a badge, or a colour, it's a self contained entity and structure with command and organisational structure, so not sure why you'd want to scrap your whole organisation structure? and replace by what?

A squadron, I believe, is not just a badge, it's a unit, a history, a family and much much more that extends way beyond what is on an aircraft or not.

Personally, I find the dull grey types monotonous, and trips to CBY are far less than I used to make as it's just a stream of grey identical jets. To see at the least, every aircraft with fighter bars and a badge would be far better, and a single black tailed or equivalent leaders aircraft.

[f14stumpy]

Agent K, I totally agree with you. Its a shame that squadron markings are now few and far between and would appear that the US airforce seem to be following in the same steps now with unmarked KC-135's and F-15's at Seymour Johnson that has been reported.
Where is the pride in the squadron's and their assigned aircraft.

[Seahornet1]

OK, so not squadron markings as such but someone at Coningsby has a sense of humour.
RAF Coningsby 10 June 2015 by Peter Jackson, on Flickr

I must be missing something; all I can see on the jet is 29 squadron's usual "Triplex" marking....

[65thAgressor]

I have noticed that a number of f15 jets at Lakenheath have the same issue. Red band on the tail for the 494th but squadron badges on the side for the 492nd,and vise versa on a jet with a blue fin.Looks odd and messes with my melon.

[NiceGuyEddie]

OK, so not squadron markings as such but someone at Coningsby has a sense of humour.
RAF Coningsby 10 June 2015 by Peter Jackson, on Flickr

I must be missing something; all I can see on the jet is 29 squadron's usual "Triplex" marking....

Clue is in the pilot's surnames...

[TomG]

Lossiemouth also have a few jets marked, ZK320 and 346 are in full 1 sqn marks, ZK378/428 and ZK439 wear full 6 sqn marks, unsure on 2 sqn, 9 sqn have a fair few jets marked up including ZJ923/935/939.

Illustrating how fluid this is ZK439 is now unmarked, ZK362 ex 12 Sqn was noted unmarked at Lossie last week and the bulk if not all of the IX Sqn fleet are fully marked (as all are Tranche 1 aircraft then their movement around the Typhoon Force is probably limited to 29 Sqn so makes sense to have them marked).