Sorry if your wing is not on here I only got about 60% done. Want to know what you think.. (Also none of these are official)
small little project i worked on just making some ideas thought with the new IDs i post it.
This isn’t allowed under heraldry rules. Specifically use part of the badge, it’s all or nothing.
Correct me if I’m wrong @OC.1324
1 Like
It’s a really nice idea, but if there’s any chance I can encourage you not to do this publicly, I’d be grateful.
A lot of work is going into helping people understand what is and isn’t authorised and because of how our organisation is structured, any identifying patches like this would need to align with unit badges, otherwise it would be completely unmanageable.
You’d have units with badges that can’t edit them to look like the ones you’ve made here (as @alex.corbin correctly states, you can’t edit a unit badge, even to extract the central image) , and you’d have other units claiming the same ideas but in this format, with no way to say one unit can use a certain design but another can’t.
If there was anything like this to be done, I’d be getting in touch with your boss straight away and inviting you to join me at HQ for a side project.
As we can’t do it in this way and the designs are created by the Inspectorate of RAF Badges (not us), the best I could do would be an invitation to help digitise the official record, should that appeal and be something within your skill set?
3 Likes
I’d happily have a rubberised Velcro version of the wing badge to put on my left arm.
there’s just no need for anything tactical and if there is take it off, I wouldn’t be adverse to a nice bit of colour.
4 Likes
Yeah I completely understand it was just made for some fun nothing officially happening with them
I’ve seen the parent service putting unit badges on the left arm.
My formal proposal was to put the unit badge on a rectangular, dark blue patch so that it would fit beneath the union flag.
I agree. Full colour. If the point is to have identifying patches, they should be full colour. Take them off if that’s a problem.
1 Like
Definitely a skill to nurture though. I wish I had your skills.
1 Like
It was just a idea I saw floating around nothing official and I would never made them for real. My Photo shop skills aren’t amazing tbf 
Just in case I wrote that poorly, that wasn’t a threat to grass you up, rather just to say I’d approach them to offer you a job!
1 Like
No worries I never thought you ment it as a threat if you would like I’ll happily take it down just so you don’t have a squadron run off with them. (You know what some squadrons are like with badges )
To be honest I just thought green looks cool
I’ve always been a proponent of taking the centrepiece from a badge and using it in isolation: to make it clearer, more distinctive, and striking — like the RAF has done for years with the eagle, RAFAC now does with the ATC falcon, 8 Sqn tail art, etc. — but some of these examples from wings show why that doesn’t always work.
Without the context of the Astral crown and the wording on the circlet, some of these are just the symbols of counties, nations, and other corporate entities. As has already been said, we can’t use these (even if we ‘think’ we have ‘permission’).
2 Likes
Well they were baced off the wing crests (lot Unofficial what’s a shame) wings mostly don’t have there own identity
1 Like
Exactly, and many of them aren’t close to anything that would ever become official.
Sorry, can I just ask what is the point of a TRF/whatever that is only discernable/identifiable at about 30cm?
A TRF/whatever is about identifying people, if you can’t see it, because it’s the same colours as the uniform it’s backed on to, and can’t read it because it’s made from two colours that are indistinguishable from each other, then what is the point of it?
Dudes…
Personally, I see no point in Wing/Region flashes, the number of times they would be useful is not many - we do however need a decent ACO formation badge, that I’d easy to see and to read (and by read I don’t mean it has words on it, I mean easy to determine which unit/formation people are from because of it’s design/colours).
It’s not necessarily about utility alone.
Many people are proud to identify with their region etc, so for many it’s nothing more than a desire to feel a part of something (in the same way wearing the uniform does).
I’m sure there are many who aren’t remotely bothered, but there are so many unauthorised patches out there that there’s clearly an itch that many would like to scratch.
3 Likes
I’d argue that’s exactly what you have. It draws on links to the parent service with a clear symbol in the ATC falcon.
Granted, it would be better without words: but it’s a whole lot better than the old WO/SNCO TRF that had black imagery and text against dark blue and maroon backing.
1 Like
Absolutely concur here. There is absolutely no reason for anyone in the RAFAC organisation to have a TACTICAL Recognition Flash. A recognition flash yes but since we aren’t in a war zone (for now anyway) then the tactical bit is nugatory.
1 Like
the RAFAC Flash goes in the TRF space anyway, any Wg/Rgn patches would be in The Formation patch place anyway.
I’ve been very careful to refer to these potential patches as FPs
I should probably adopt that term so it’s clearer when I discuss it.
1 Like