Reactivation of 433 and 401 Fighter Squadrons (a split & merged thread)

[rotrhed]

To be fair to the Fighter Force, their aircraft to Unit ratio is higher than other arms of the Air Force, (with Sqns defined as LCol-led Units - I am not counting the CSS Sqns just to keep the numbers relative):

Fighters - 77 a/c - 3 Sqns (409, 410, 425) = 25.7 per Sqn
Tac Avn - 72 a/c - 7 Sqns (400, 403, 408, 427, 430, 438, 450) = 10.3 per Sqn
MH - 28 a/c - 3 Sqns (406, 423, 443) = 9.3 per Sqn
LRP - 18 a/c - 3 (now 4) Sqns (404, 405, 407, 415) = 4.5 per Sqn
AM - 37 a/c - 6 Sqns (412, 426, 429, 436, 437, 440) = 6.2 per Sqn
SAR/AAR - 33 a/c - 5 Sqns (103, 413, 424, 435, 442) = 6.6 per Sqn
EW - 0 a/c - 1 Sqn (414) = 0 per Sqn  >

With 5 Fighter Sqns (assuming Cold Lake goes from 2 to 3), that would be 15.4 per Sqn, which is still the highest ratio in the RCAF.

If the rumours I am hearing are accurate, 30 June should be an interesting announcement! 

Harrigan

A more relevant comparison would be squadron manning ie. how many bodies does each LCol lead?

 

[Harrigan]

What you fail to take into account is that 400 Sqn is now a maintanence sqn.  They don't have a full complement of aircraft.  438 in a similar boat being a reserve sqn has a fraction of aircraft strength compared to the operational units 430, 408, and 427 - all of which have 15 or so aircraft.

The other obvious point you fail to mention is 450, which has their own fleet of 15 that isn't divisible among the other tac hel units.

I know that 400 and 438 Sqns are both reserve sqns without the same aircraft strength as the other three, but they are still led by LCol's, no?  And I didn't forget 450 Sqn - it is a Tac Avn unit like the others, and while I agree that their aircraft are not "spreadable", the point is that the average Tac Avn Sqn led by a LCol has 10.3 aircraft (if the overall numbers are correct).  I specifically excluded the CSS Sqns and their Griffons as their CO's are Majors. 

Come to think of it, I should have excluded 103 Sqn for the same reason, which would make it 30/4 or 7.5 a/c per Sqn in SAR/AAR.

In any case, my point is that the Fighter Force would still (with 5 Sqns) have the highest number of aircraft per Sqn.

Harrigan

edited for excessive underlining.....

 

[Harrigan]

A more relevant comparison would be squadron manning ie. how many bodies does each LCol lead?

I agree that would be a better comparison, but I don't have those figures handy.  I suspect, though, that the Fighter Force Squadrons would still be at or near the top in Establishment per LCol (for Air Force units at least).

Harrigan

 

[Fraz]

Any word on whch Sqn was re raised?

 

[vonGarvin]

I saw that 401 was resurrected.  It was on my Facebook feed.

 

[Mick]

401 Sqn it is.  It's on the 4 Wing website, but no mention of its reactivation.

http://www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/en/4-wing/401-squadron.page

 

[smale436]

It happened today. I was at the parade. For all intents and purposes the split has occurred, however everyone will still be working "together" for some time in the future in various ways. One hangar needed massive renovations after being virtually unused for years. Basic items like tools are another good example. You can't just split everything (aircraft, tools, techs, amse) in half and say Go when in some cases you only have one of everything and it's an item that is no longer produced. Thankfully everyone still thinks as one team no matter where they will end up by summer's end. At the end of the day, most everyone is glad the split is happening and wishes it happened years ago.

 

[Ostrozac]

But why do we need more fighter squadrons, right now?

Is this so that the RCAF can have a framework for managed readiness for the bombing campaign in the middle east? ie some squadrons deploy to Kuwait, other squadrons stay in Cold Lake/Bagotville, rotate as required.

Or is this to prepare for some squadrons being non-operational as they transfer to F-35, while the other squadrons carry on operational roles with CF-18 for the period of transition?

Or did the large squadrons simply prove too unwieldy for span of control? And now we have to backtrack to the old model.

 

[Gorgo]

Quick question:  How does the Air Force decide which squadron is allowed to come back into active service again?  Is there a set list or is it just random?  401 Squadron was always a reserve squadron based in the Montréal area; I'd suspect 416 or 441 would be brought back first.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

But why do we need more fighter squadrons, right now?

Is this so that the RCAF can have a framework for managed readiness for the bombing campaign in the middle east? ie some squadrons deploy to Kuwait, other squadrons stay in Cold Lake/Bagotville, rotate as required.

Or is this to prepare for some squadrons being non-operational as they transfer to F-35, while the other squadrons carry on operational roles with CF-18 for the period of transition?

Or did the large squadrons simply prove too unwieldy for span of control? And now we have to backtrack to the old model.

Or did they just need slots for a few more LCols?

 

[cavalryman]

Or did they just need slots for a few more LCols?

Taking a page from the Big Book of Reserve Unit Organisation?  ;D

 

[Loachman]

I know that 400 and 438 Sqns are both reserve sqns without the same aircraft strength as the other three, but they are still led by LCol's, no?  And I didn't forget 450 Sqn - it is a Tac Avn unit like the others, and while I agree that their aircraft are not "spreadable", the point is that the average Tac Avn Sqn led by a LCol has 10.3 aircraft (if the overall numbers are correct).  I specifically excluded the CSS Sqns and their Griffons as their CO's are Majors.

1 Wing has 67 Griffons and 15 Chinooks, for a total of 82 machines, plus 2 inactive Griffons used for tech trg. That includes 427 Squadron, which actually belongs to SOFCOM rather than 1 Wing.

400 Squadron is a maintenance Squadron, and has no aircraft of its own. Its incoming CO is an AERE Officer. That, then, is an average of 14 machines in each of the six flying Squadrons - not radically different from the fighter situation. There are also a few hundred ground vehicles in the mix.

1 Wing is also more dispersed. Despite that, though, there is only one Colonel Wing Commander for the lot.

Neither 400 nor 438 Squadrons are Reserve Squadrons. To date, they've been "Reserve-Heavy", but that no longer applies. Both Squadrons' re-roling and resultant pers changes has ended that. 438 Squadron is absorbing the Advanced Trg Flt (ATF) and Land Aviation Trials and Evaluation Flight (LATEF) from 403 Squadron.

I see nothing wrong with reverting to an earlier organization for the fighter squadrons.

I am curious about the choice of 401 Squadron, though, which was last a Reserve Kiowa Squadron in St-Hubert, until disbanded in 1996 and folded into 438 Squadron.

Disbandment of a (semi) Tac Hel Squadron is bad enough. Turning it into a fighter squadron, though? That's a real junk-kicker.

 

[Mick]

It makes sense to me that neither 416 nor 441 TFS were reactivated since choosing only one of the 2 could have been seen as controversial.  It made sense to reactivate 433, as it had been rolled into 425, which continues to exist.

Of the other CF18 Sqns, 421 "Red Indians" may not have been a politically correct choice, and 439 is now 3 Wing's Combat Support Squadron.

I'd wager that 401 was chosen as it was the only RCAF fighter squadron that fought in the Battle of Britain, and this year marks the 75th anniversary of that battle.

While 401 Sqn represents a conversion from Tac Hel to Fighter , it balances out 439's conversion from CF18 to CH146  ;D

 

[geo]

401 city of Westmount squadron colours were recovered from Westmount last week. They should be in cold lake by now.

 

[geo]

1 Wing has 67 Griffons and 15 Chinooks, for a total of 82 machines, plus 2 inactive Griffons used for tech trg. That includes 427 Squadron, which actually belongs to SOFCOM rather than 1 Wing.

400 Squadron is a maintenance Squadron, and has no aircraft of its own. Its incoming CO is an AERE Officer. That, then, is an average of 14 machines in each of the six flying Squadrons - not radically different from the fighter situation. There are also a few hundred ground vehicles in the mix.

1 Wing is also more dispersed. Despite that, though, there is only one Colonel Wing Commander for the lot.

Neither 400 nor 438 Squadrons are Reserve Squadrons. To date, they've been "Reserve-Heavy", but that no longer applies. Both Squadrons' re-roling and resultant pers changes has ended that. 438 Squadron is absorbing the Advanced Trg Flt (ATF) and Land Aviation Trials and Evaluation Flight (LATEF) from 403 Squadron.

I see nothing wrong with reverting to an earlier organization for the fighter squadrons.

I am curious about the choice of 401 Squadron, though, which was last a Reserve Kiowa Squadron in St-Hubert, until disbanded in 1996 and folded into 438 Squadron.

Disbandment of a (semi) Tac Hel Squadron is bad enough. Turning it into a fighter squadron, though? That's a real junk-kicker.

401 sqn has a fine history as a fighter sqn during wwII.

 

[Good2Golf]

...That includes 427 Squadron, which actually belongs to SOFCOM rather than 1 Wing...

Pedants will note that 427 SOAS remains under Full Command of 1 Wing, and OPCOM of CANSOFCOM.

 

[McG]

Pedants will note that 427 SOAS remains under Full Command of 1 Wing, and OPCOM of CANSOFCOM.

What does that mean in practice?  Is it more than a symbolic relationship on a piece of paper? 

 

[Loachman]

401 sqn has a fine history as a fighter sqn during wwII.

That's no excuse.

 

[Loachman]

What does that mean in practice?  Is it more than a symbolic relationship on a piece of paper?

It seems to mean whatever they want it to mean, and it sometimes changes.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

It seems to mean whatever they want it to mean, and it sometimes changes.

That's because anyone that would bitch about it is dead, so they can say, and do, as they please. :nod: