12 replies to this topic

[edorc]

Have just been given two brass RAF cap badges which I believe are WW1 issue( as they came with some RFC buttons).  They are without the royal crown.  However what interests me is that one looks left and the other looks right.  Anyone any thoughts on why this should be?

[old owl]

They could be sleeve badges similar to those worn on the fore sleeve by the R.N.A.S.  Do they have two screwed lugs on the back and a back plate?

[old owl]

I have just checked the Royal Naval Air Service 1914-1918 and they show a pair of these with the heads facing in opposite directions.

See:  www.britairforce.com/rnas  

If you click on the thumbnail you should see your newest aquisition.

Robert

[Andrew Upton]

Early RAF sleeve rank badges featured the eagle looking to the rear on each sleeve, so came in symmetrically "matched" pairs (rather like many Officers collar badges, or the RA guns when worn over NCO's rank):

http://postimage.org/image/cks9873at/

[GRUMPY]

it is not an eagle: the men called it a shitehawk.

[Andrew Upton]

GRUMPY, on 16 July 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:

it is not an eagle: the men called it a shitehawk.

I'm not sure how seriously that was intended, but officially it always was, and still remains, an eagle (even in Naval use, despite persistent accounts of it being an albatross), eg:

http://www.network54...fficer uniforms

"When the design of the RNAS badge was published (Admiralty Weekly Order No. 2 of 23rd June 1914) it stated that 'The badge of an eagle will be worn by members of the R.N.A.S. at the top of the left sleeve'. The Eagle was also worn by the RFC and when the two joined to form the RAF in 1918, the same bird remained. I'm sure I have another document somewhere from about the same date confirming the eagle (besides, the bird that is depicted never has webbed feet!)."

[GRUMPY]

Believe me, the men, and many officers, only knew it as a the said hawk!

[edorc]

Thank you gentlemen.  The information would fit as I know the owner was in the RFC when it became the RAF.  The badges do indeed have a back plate and lugs.
May thanks for the interest.

[Vulcan works]

Grumpy has it spot on, some claim it is an eagle, some claim it is an albatros, but throughout my service career it was always a Shitehawk and as far as I know it still is.
Perhaps someone should pen a follow-up article to the one on the Fairies badge in the last C&C journal!

[KizmeRD]

Vulcan works, on 19 July 2012 - 07:40 PM, said:

Grumpy has it spot on, some claim it is an eagle, some claim it is an albatros, but throughout my service career it was always a Shitehawk and as far as I know it still is.
Perhaps someone should pen a follow-up article to the one on the Fairies badge in the last C&C journal!

The RAF badge is officially described as "...ensigned by the Imperial Crown an eagle volant and affronte Head lowered and to the sinister"
(or sinister & dexter in the case of RAF sleeve badges).

[Vulcan works]

I should never have opened this particular can of worms but that is an AWESOME riposte! I take my hat off to you sir.
Now if you can tell me the origin of the term 'fizzer' I will be totally blown away.

[KizmeRD]

I don't think anyone knows the origins of 'Fizzer' for sure, but the meaning of the term is to be put on a charge, so I can only guess that in some way it is analogous to lighting a fuse (and waiting for the inevitable explosion).

[Vulcan works]

Please excuse my lighthearted response to your first post - I always loved the folklaw of the RAF and the 'Shitehawk' explanation of the bird on the RAF cap badge was something which was explained to us at Halton. One of the old Dicip SNCO's had a story which went with it, something about its nesting habits and diet if memory serves me right. It seems that the confusion over its identity suited the RFC and RNAS combining in 1918 which must have caused some difficulty where the traditions of the Senior Service came up against the newly acquired habits of the Flying Corps. The 'fizzer' is another which is lost in the mists of time and has several plausible explanations but comes down to what you think is the best fit. With all the current acrimony on other Forums over the usual contentious issues perhaps it is best to put this one to bed before we both get 'shot down'!