I’ve read the linked page now and accept your argument that this was done in full knowledge it was a copy of the RAF sqn’s badge.
Difficult to imagine the justification for a Newbury-based sqn to have a badge based on links to Bruges but, apparently, ‘we have the same number as the RAF sqn’ worked on that occasion. Different inspectors may take a different view.
So I think the justification was
So if a squadron has a legacy Sqn number & wants to continues the history it is possible but they need to get permission first.
If you are a low numbered ATC unit (under 100) chances are that you won’t be able to as the RAF may still want to use the Sqn number (but you might be able to do a defaced or amended variant).
It’s clear There’s flexibility in the rules (from college of arms perspective) so it just needs a bit of flexibility, pragmatism & common sense.
The problem is, that shouldn’t have happened.
The RAF unit identity still exists.
It being done that way once isn’t reason to do it repeatedly. As with heraldry generally, there shouldn’t be duplication because the whole point is establishing a visual and unique identity.
And again, the fact that quirks like this exist and further confuse matters, this is why it needs gripping and to go through a formal process only.
There’s too much nuance for people with but a passing familiarity with the world of heraldry to make their own stuff up.
The RAF inspectorate & college of arms disagree with your interpretation & did so in the full knowledge of the conventions.
It went through the formal approval process & everything was known up front.
So, things have changed since 2006. Not so long ago I heard talk of all the WW1 and WW2 sqn numbers being reactivated for swarming drone sqns.
I already have with you, you’ve got a copy 
Sorry, I meant the other half of the equation. Have seen it now!
I understand your point, but the whole point of heraldry is the creation of a unique visual identity.
It may be that the ATC badge was approved on the basis that the rest of the badge made it clearly distinct (red circlet, astral crown etc).
The laws of arms etc do change over time. It is not currently acceptable.
So what do you propose then? That sqn has to change their approved badge?
So it was acceptable, is currently not, but may be acceptable once again in the future…?!?
This is getting a tad tedious at this point, so I’m going to start dialling it back.
My central point is quite consistent.
It is a very complicated system that can, at times, flex in unexpected ways, and in the broader context of heraldry, is largely whatever the Kings of Arms wish it to be.
It can be complicated enough already, so getting every Tom, Dick, and Harry involved with their own interpretation is pointless.
You want to play the game, get an authorised badge through the appropriate channels and secure your legacy. That way, no matter what happens, it’s set in stone and preserved.
Until you do that, you have absolutely no rights.
Currently scratching my head about mottos. Assume we can’t just use the same as our council’s?
I would have to ask this question.
I don’t think the mottos that accompany armorial achievements are the same.
If I wished to change my motto, I was told I could do that at will as it isn’t actually included in the blazon, even though it does appear on the grant of arms.
Whereas these military badges have the motto as part of the “sealed pattern”, so to speak.
So if I end up engaging you formally, I will happily put that forward and cite the council motto. If it’s a problem, we’ll be told.
I’m not being facetious here, it is a genuine question. Squadron meets criteria of inspectorate of badges, but not your criteria. So what happens next? Does that count as approved or not?
That’s not quite a fair representation of the scenario. Again, nuance.
It has been granted by the Inspector of RAF Badges, therefore it is secure and legitimate.
If it is the only one that is a total copy, it gets to take its place as an interesting and historical quirk.
What this doesn’t mean is that everyone can point at this example and say “see, my unauthorised badge can copy whatever I like”.
It really is to be frank.
You’re laying down “rules” which don’t appear to exist. Because we have clear examples from several sources that the College is fine with units doing exactly what you say they won’t do. Which is just going to undermine you going forwards.
You’re the one being too rigid in my opinion, because you’re forgetting that a key part of Heraldry is legacy. Badges and coats of arms change and develop with time, for a variety of reasons, such as merging families or units. Making a political point, a change in attitudes.
When Legacy is important, it makes perfect sense for a badge to be passed down to a successor in title. Such as 211 RAF to 211 ATC, or the plethora of Sea Cadets units who have inherited the names and badges of former Royal Navy Vessels.
As someone asked above, can you use a council motto? Almost certainly yes. The Devonshire Regiment and it’s successors shared ‘Semper Fidelis’ with the city of Exeter. The West Kent regiment used ‘Invicta’ as does Kent itself. I’m sure there are many more examples.
16 Regt RA also uses (or at least used) ‘Invicta’. The regiments of the Household Division all use the same motto to reflect their unity.
However, what we’re talking about here is somewhat different. When SO2 Badges and Ceremonial says ‘no duplication of mottoes’ he’s clearly talking about the mottoes within his remit: i.e. no ATC Sqn or CCF section can propose to use a motto that is already on his register of approved badges and mottoes for another unit. This clearly rules out ‘Venture Adventure’ for example, which is approved for the ATC badge but also appears on the unauthorised badges of several wings.
This just illustrates that a little bit of knowledge can be dangerous.
You’ve made a number of statements there that are oversimplifications and therefore are inaccurate.
Or you happen to be correct, but have no idea why you’re correct. That pre-disposes you to make other extrapolations that will then be incorrect.
Military badges are not the same as armorial achievements for individuals and corporate bodies. RAF badges are under a different remit than those of other services. I don’t have knowledge of that, so I’m going to avoid passing comment on it.
Edit: @Baldrick
I wasn’t suggesting squadrons could share mottos, (mottoes?)
But the blanket statement that they must be unique is nonsense. The ‘rules’ are clearly not hard and fast at all, so pretending they are is a fools’ errand.
And you’ve made a load that have been demonstrably proven incorrect, and continued to ignore the evidence to the contrary and repeated the lines again and again.
I know which one I’d rather be…