How do squadron numbers get allocated and who (should) check to ensure they’ve not been duplicated? 
I know that when DFs become Sqns they can have a brand new one or can use an old one where the sqn has been ‘stood down’ for some time.
They can’t be duplicated, but numbers can be reissued. For instance the original 3F Squadron was not in Helston, but when Helston was made into a squadron it was given 3, because it was vacant.
Not even some time.
A DF in my wing assumed the number of a squadron which closed barely a year before.
1 Like
Usually at the end of the following financial year 
Someone needs to let HQAC know….
Which two squadrons have the same number then?
201 (Overseas)
201 (Macclesfield)
I only discovered this when attempting to email the Macclesfield one about a potential cadet who lives closer than a squadron in our wing and nearly emailed the overseas one.
1 Like
Overseas are different as the overseas part is part of the number iirc.
1 Like
Yeah, so it’s
201 (Macclesfield) Squadron
and
201 Overseas (Guernsey) Squadron
Completely different 
Glad they didn’t issue this squadron with the ‘F‘ suffix, just the number.
35 (Wetherby) is another confusing one without an F but a number below 50
I believe if a Founder sqn (one of 1st 50 formed) was closed/lost sqn status it could re-pen with the same number sans the F and the same if a new sqn fancied the number.
I was chatting to someone who said the sqn he was on was due to be one of the first 50, but due to clamour to open sqns when the ADCC formed, they missed out by a couple of months as the paperwork took time.
Why choose an existing number though? There’s a few overseas squadrons so why choose the same as an existing UK one - daft logic
There’s a particular arrangement and attachment to Guernsey with 201, though, with the RAF squadron of the same number being known as “Guernsey’s Own”. The number will have been picked deliberately for the historic connection. All the other overseas units are, I believe, numbered between 1&10.
I must admit, ive never understood why the Corps ever allowed the re-issuing of Sqn numbers…
Why do that, why not just use the next number in the list?
After all if for example Borsetshire Sqn goes out of existence in 1980, but in 2022 someone wants to restart it… it would be a shame if their number was taken by a unit 400 miles away!
1 Like
I think it would be acceptable to reuse the number if a unit reopens in the same location, but I agree, to reassign it miles away seems unfair - former cadets remember their Sqn numbers and, historically, they mean something to a geographic area and the people in it.
1 Like
Exactly what happened with Helston.
But if you look at the original 50, there were duplicated locations. Something like 1F, 2F and 3F were all in the same city, with no named demarcation between them.
And Teflon is right. If a Founder squadron lost squadron status, its F was not returned even if it subsequently became a Squadron. Examples include 13 (City of Exeter) and 19.
19 apparently upset a out losing their F, managed to convince someone to give them numerals instead, hence why they are XIX squadron on their Brassards.
1 Like
Yeah this has caused contention before! I quite like it though 
I think they asked the Duke or something. And who’s going to argue with him?