Talk:Structure of the Royal Air Force

Military history: Aviation / National / British / European

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	National militaries task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

This article was created or improved during the "The 20,000 Challenge: UK and Ireland", which started on 20 August 2016 and is still open. You can help!

Edit revertion

Hi @SmartyPants22:, you reverted my edit updating the No. 1 Group section to what you allege to be the 'correct structure'. It is apparent from the RAF webpage that each RAF group is divided into forces (e.g Typhoon Force) with relevant units sitting below that which is why I changed it to that. The current page doesn't communicate that structure, rather it just shows is a list of stations with the units based at them. That aside there are several errors in the list which were corrected and referenced in my revision, which are now still present after your revert (e.g locations of 1 ISR Wing units, UK ASACS is actually under 2 Group). Keen to understand what is incorrect about my edit and why you consider it necessary to have 'RAF' after each unit, given that the page is about the structure of the RAF it seems a bit redundant. thanks Thx811 (talk) 21:42, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page title

@SmartyPants22 would it help if the page title was 'Structure of the Royal Air Force in 2021', that way you don't have to keep updating this and rely on old information? I know Buckshot gave the same suggestion regarding my equivalent on the Royal Navy. Just a thought though, because I know the Army one should definitely change because of the future structure paper coming out in August. J-Man11 (talk) 01:57, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]