New aircraft for the Royal Auxilliary Airforce.

Lets suppose for a moment that the defence cuts don't shut down the RAuxAF flying squadrons. It's aircraft by the mid 50's badly need replacing. Which would be the most realistic aircraft to equip them with?

Personally I think the Folland Gnat would be a good candidate.
 
Lets suppose for a moment that the defence cuts don't shut down the RAuxAF flying squadrons. It's aircraft by the mid 50's badly need replacing. Which would be the most realistic aircraft to equip them with?

Personally I think the Folland Gnat would be a good candidate.

I think that the F1 Gnat would certainly fit the role.

Although it is worth noting that while cheap to make and operate it did require considerable servicing on the ground relative to similar aircraft types - this mainly due to its compact nature making access to some components difficult - also early versions had unreliable Hydraulic and control systems.

However if perhaps the RAuxAF aircraft leveraged the work done on the T1 Trainer and subsequent changes along the lines made to the Indian HAL Ajeet version (built in the 70s) then some of these issues may be resolved over the life time of the Aircraft in RAuxAF service

Also it (The Ajeet) proved to be a capable fighter in service with the IAF more than holding its own vs the PAF F86 Sabres (considered by many to be the best dog fighting jet) in combat

An improved F1 fit for purpose would not likely be 'realistically' available until the early 60s

If it continued service into the 70s/80s then it might be upgraded to an F2 variant with Sidewinder missiles etc although the obvious thing would be to replace it with the Hawk

Would the 20 Squadrons all be light fighter or would some be re-rolled to other AC types - ie Helicopter / transport aircraft squadrons?
 
I would think there would be some helicopter squadrons, perhaps dedicated to work with the Territorial Army Light Infantry. Transport aircraft would also be reasonable. I see this version of the RAuxAF as primarily a way of maintaining the skills of those who's enlistment in the RAF was over, and at this time that includes National Service, be they air crew or ground crew. As for numbers of each type lets say 10 fighter units, 6 Helicopter, 2 transport and 2 maritime patrol. The Aircraft being Gnat, Whirlwind, Twin Pioneer and Short Seamew.
Whirlwind and Twin Pioneer replaced by Wessex and Andover mid 60's. The Seamew would also likely be replaced fairly quickly by Fairey Gannets.
 
Last edited:
I kind of like the idea of RAuxAF personnel being "attached" to regular RAF units serving in the UK. This appears to be a win win solution as it keeps the costs down and the RAuxAF guys get to keep their skills fresh on first rate active service aircraft. It would also allow for smaller peace time UK squadrons as their war establishment would be made up by some of the RAuxAF, much like the RAF Reserves do today.

The RAuxAF personnel could then at a pinch act as an immediate emergency reserves for their squadrons if the cold war hots up quickly. Or if there is a slower drift to war like the second half of the 1930's could either quickly be formed into separate independent squadrons or kept as a strategic reserve.
 
If it continued service into the 70s/80s then it might be upgraded to an F2 variant with Sidewinder missiles etc although the obvious thing would be to replace it with the Hawk
I wonder if this would result in the Hawk 200 being designed at the same time as the trainer version or if they'd just build the Hawk T1A.

upload_2017-1-12_21-0-49.png
 
Auxiliary forces in peacetime are limited in working hours so low maintenance types are best suited. Transport types suffer from being away from the local base too often and this impacts upon available working time too.

A close support type to work with the Army leaving the Regular force to concentrate upon air defence, interdiction and maritime roles and which has substantial commonality with Regular types will reduce the cost, capital and workload.

This would suggest finishing off the hours on Venoms, thence to an earlier Strikemaster and ultimately Hawk. Although the cost of Hawks is vastly more so keeping the Strikemaster would have some merit or transitioning to something akin to the Super Tucano.

Auxilliary forces are not direct swaps for Regular ones. They need roles and kit to match their capabilities. In some roles members would be best integrating with Regular units as staff multipliers rather than in discrete Auxilliary units,
 
Auxiliary forces in peacetime are limited in working hours so low maintenance types are best suited. Transport types suffer from being away from the local base too often and this impacts upon available working time too.

A close support type to work with the Army leaving the Regular force to concentrate upon air defence, interdiction and maritime roles and which has substantial commonality with Regular types will reduce the cost, capital and workload.

This would suggest finishing off the hours on Venoms, thence to an earlier Strikemaster and ultimately Hawk. Although the cost of Hawks is vastly more so keeping the Strikemaster would have some merit or transitioning to something akin to the Super Tucano.

Auxilliary forces are not direct swaps for Regular ones. They need roles and kit to match their capabilities. In some roles members would be best integrating with Regular units as staff multipliers rather than in discrete Auxilliary units,
Based on that my two penneth is that the squadrons would originally re-equip with Hunter F.4 and F.6 aircraft made redundant by the disbanding of most of the Hunter squadrons in Fighter Command and RAF Germany. As many as possible would have been rebuilt to Hunter FGA.9 standard and replaced by Hawks in the 1970s.

According to some RAF files I read from the middle of the 1960s the RAF wanted to increase the number of FGA and FR squadrons from 8 to 10 because the Top Brass thought that the Service had been reduced below the strength needed to fight a limited war.

The Air Marshalls thought the RAF was entitled to many more than 10 FGA squadrons. At that time the requirement was for 2 FGA squadrons for each infantry brigade, which meant the RAF had enough FGA squadrons to support 4 infantry brigades. But the British Army had more than 4 infantry brigades. I don't have the exact Ordbat for the 1960s British Army, but it was along the lines of 3 or 4 in the UK Strategic Reserve, 7 in Germany, not including the one in Berlin, one in Middle East Command, and 4 or 5 in Far East Command.

Retaining the RAuxAF squadrons as FGA squadrons would help.
 
Last edited:
At the time of disbandment IOTL (March 1957) the RAuxAF had 25 squadrons. That is 10 squadrons of Meteor, 10 squadrons of Vampires and 5 squadrons of Auster AOP aircraft (Nos. 661, 662, 663, 664 and
666).
 
Top