Talk:No. 450 Squadron RAAF

Article improvement

Hi guys, per converstion with Rupert on my talk page, I just want to note some things here and perhaps kick off further dicussion:

• Stopping by the Mitchell Library yesterday, I verified all the uncited material I could via the RAAF Historical Section’s Units of the RAAF and Eather's Flying Squadrons, and it looks to me that information in the WP article that's not in either of them has also now been cited, which is great.
• Units disagrees with Brown re. total claims in North Africa, so if I can I'll look at those side by side and check any other figures I can find.
• I'm also a bit surprised by the implication in the infobox that two squadron codes were in use simultaneously between December 1941 and April 1942, although the one cited source I've checked, Combat Codes, does indeed imply this. The AWM squadron codes page however says "DJ" in 1941 only and "OK" in 1942-45" only, which is more what I'd expect, so I might investigate that further as well...
• I think we should minimise use of the squadron association website and cite things to more obviously reliable sources (e.g. Eather, Units, official history) where we can -- I'm happy to look into this.
• The article takes some pains to put 450's operations in the context of the rest of the Desert Air Force and 1st Tactical Air Force, which is fine, but it could use some broader sourcing to verify that picture. I'm familiar with at least one such book at the Mitchell, Shores, Christopher (1969). Fighters Over the Desert: The Air Battles in the Western Desert June 1940 to December 1942. London: Neville Spearman. OCLC 164897156. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthor= ignored (|author= suggested) (help), and might be able to dig out some others.
• I'd like to put in a little material that I've come across while writing about Steege, mainly the difficulties he experienced just getting the squadron flying in the early days.
• As mentioned to Rupert, I have at least one photo of the period featuring the squadron ops room/tent that I'll scan for the article.
• On the formatting side, I think the sections below the prose history could be tidied just a little bit, though I know they're common to other Article XV squadron articles.
• Even allowing for the above, it looks quite close to B-Class now, and some (perhaps most) of what I've mentioned could possibly wait until after that and a run at GA or maybe even A-Class. Thoughts? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
  • G'day, Ian, great points. Having a look over the article, I wonder if some of the information that is in the lead, should be duplicated in the body somewhere. For instance the info about 450 being an Article XV Squadron and the comment about Lord Haw Haw's comment. I think also it would be good if we could get an image for the "Europe" section. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 04:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
    • G'day, again, Ian, I made a few more tweaks today. Please review if you get a chance. Unfortunately I will have to return my copies of Eather and Barnes' works to the library next Friday (1 Nov). Not sure if you want to nom for GAN before then, or not, though. If not, I probably won't have access to the books again until February next year after I've moved house. Sorry. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:10, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
      • Hi mate, I would've done more myself but haven't dragged myself to the Mitchell lately, though hope to this week so I can do more of my share on this one before it goes to GAN (or, dare I say it, ACR). The good news is that Barnes, as well as Eather and the RAAF Historical Section Units volumes, are available there so no issue if you have to return them because if any sourcing questions at a subsequent review arise I can always get hold of the books again. The Mitchell is not a lending library so as long as I reserve something, it's always there... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:32, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
        • @Ian Rose: G'day, Ian, sorry this one went off the boil and it seems it is a year since any of us worked on it...I have a period of leave now, so have a bit of time to work on this before I move house yet again to take up another posting. I've never put a squadron article up for GAN, though. Would you like to go in together as co-noms? Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 20:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
          • Heh, I've got a lot more experience at it now than I used to (with hat tip to Nick for several great prototypes). Yeah, I still haven't scanned that image I mentioned at the top because my scanner went on the blink but I can do it at the Mitchell. I'll have to get my head around where I was up to with Barnes vs. Eather vs. RAAF Hist Section because I think there are still some contradictions in stats. Anyway, I was planning to head into the Mitchell for other things in the next few days -- very much like to join you in taking this through GAN and maybe ACR/FAC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:18, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
            • @Ian Rose: Cheers, Ian, do you want me to nom now or wait until next weekend? Either is fine with me. I have copies of Barnes and Eather, but not the RAAF Hist Section. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
              • That's brilliant, I have the RAAF Hist Section (courtesy of the Air Power Development Centre's scan) so we have all the unit history sources in our hot little hands. I'd still like to check one or two books in the Mitchell before a potential run at ACR/FAC but it can wait for now. Would you mind if I took a pass at this from a style/formatting perspective and to just compare what's in there against the RAAF Hist Section source before we go for GAN? Should have a chance to to do it in the next few days. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:52, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
                • G'day, Ian, no worries, that's fine. I'll hold off until you've gone through it. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 02:34, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
                  • Hi Rupert, I think I've done all I wanted to do prose/style/content/referencing-wise for GAN, just wanted to run a few image possibilities past you. I've uploaded a non-free image of the official crest that I think should be in the infobox and a PD image of what appears to be the earliest design of the crest from the AWM that could go in the main body when the origin of the sqn nickname and motto are mentioned (unless you think both is overkill). There seems room in the Europe section to move the current infobox image. Lastly I have a photo from my father's collection of him in front of a tent in N. Africa that carries a sign identifying it as the 450 Ops Room, which I don't think any of the AWM images have, along with a sign in German what was presumably captured. Let me know if you think that might be worth uploading or would be a bit indulgent. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:25, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

@Ian Rose: That all sounds fine to me. I like the idea of the ops room photo as it would be good to get an image of the squadron's personnel (as currently we only have the aircraft). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 17:04, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi mate, I haven't used the ops room one (not yet at least owing to spacing -- mistook the infobox image for Europe when it fact it was N. Africa) but see what you think of the overall effect now. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:25, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

G'day, Ian, that looks fine to me. Cheers. Are you happy for me to nom for GA now? Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 19:42, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry mate, busy day... Sure, by all means nom it. From memory, adding a co-nom isn't that straightforward but happy to do it manually when you've finished the normal process. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:39, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

No worries at all, I've nommed it now, adding a note about it being a co-nom. I think that's the way to do it, but if there is another way, please adjust. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:19, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Canadian unit

As a suggestion for further development of the article, it might be worth noting that the Royal Canadian Air Force subsequently formed a 450 Squadron, despite this being a RAAF unit, and this unit remains active today. The RCAF says that this occurred as a result of an administrative error, and it appears to have been decided to retain the designation to mark the links between the RAAF and RCAF ([1] says that the RCAF received permission to keep the number). Apparently there was a relationship between the No. 450 Squadron RAAF association and the Canadian squadron: [2]. I guess this rules out the squadron being re-formed as part of the current program of re-raising some of the RAAF's 400-series squadrons. Nick-D (talk) 10:27, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Fascinating, I never knew that -- tks Nick! cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:17, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that info, Nick, that is fascinating. We should definately include something about this prior to ACR, potentially in a "legacy" section? Anyway, I'm pretty keen to continue work on this while we have some momentum (plus after 25 Dec I will probably not have much time for Wikipedia for a few months - moving/posting/courses etc) so if possible I'd like to nom for ACR in the next two weeks. Ian, when you get a chance would you mind listing the discrepancies you found in the sources, and I will see if I can help iron them out while I've got some free time. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:40, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

A Legacy section is exactly what I was thinking, Rupert. I could add that Steege was patron of the 450SQN Association in his later years. I'd also like to nom for ACR this month, should have time this w/e to get working on that... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Following up, Rupert, I think we've now resolved most of the outstanding concerns from the initial improvement section at the top of this page, still some to do. I hope to look at all the suggested images tonight so we can agree those. I'll also let you know some other figures I have for claims/casualties. Lastly I've noticed the list of COs differs in its dates from what's in the RAAF Historical Section, might even have to go to the Ops Record Book at NAA (yes, it's been digitised) to see who that agrees with. Anyway, more later... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:30, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Added/tweaked further detail/refs. Also experimented with the images, pushing the original crest to the COs section, but of course let's discuss further. I'm thinking the shot my father had of the operations tent in N. Africa (possibly around Gambut, will check) might be good for the airfields section, and I'd like to work the shot of the damaged Kittyhawk from Italy in there too ideally -- shows how much punishment the Kittys could take and still get you home...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:58, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Cheers, Ian, those changes look great. I've added a little bit about the Canadian helicopter squadron, please feel free to tweak as you see fit. More than happy to add a couple of images where you think they can fit. One thing I wonder about for ACR, though, is whether the lead should be expanded to maybe two paragraphs. Thoughts? Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 21:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Just checking in briefly. Tks for adding the legacy section, Rupert, will read later. Yes, forgot to say that we really should have a two-para lead for ACR/FAC. I guess it could divide as formation/ME/Africa in the first para and Italy/disbandment/legacy in the second? Happy to have a go say tonight unless you want to. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:51, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for adding that, Ian. The changes look great. Sorry I didn't reply earlier, had some a bit of a medical emergency to deal with (spent the night at hospital with one of the little ones). Is there anything else you'd like to see done before an ACR? Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

No prob, mate -- hope all well now! The last thing I'd like to do, if you agree, is a) take one more pass at the article with Herington and the RAAF Historical Section open, and b) verify as best we can the three tables at the end (aircraft/airfields/COs). The reason I say that is that the tables were added/cited before you and I really took an interest in the article (I think) and given that the COs' terms differ somewhat from the list in the RAAF Historical Section, I'd like to try and resolve any discrepancies. As I said above, the squadron's ops record book is digitised at NAA (don't have the link handy but it wasn't hard to find before) so although I don't think we need use it as a source per se, I'd like to compare the dates it gives for items in the tables. That could be time-consuming of course, but perhaps between the two of us... :-) BTW, the ops book even says the squadron was formed on 16 February 1941, but it notes a history wasn't kept until some time after the unit arrived in the Middle East, so I think the 7 February date we've used per Barnes, Eather, etc, is probably more reliable in this instance... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:42, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, okay now, thanks. Yes, that sounds like a good idea. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:20, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

COs list

G'day, Ian, Barnes has a list of COs with the date that they assumed the appointment but not the date it ended. I have checked all of the dates and the majority of entries don't match Barnes' dates. In many cases they are out by a couple of days (in some cases just one). I wonder what the best course of action here is. I think that maybe the level of precision currently used (the exact day of commencement and end) is partly the cause of the discrepancies. If we were to go with just month and year, it would probably resolve the problem. Additionally, is it really necessary to have the date the appointment ended? Thoughts? AustralianRupert (talk) 02:00, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Rupert, I'm half way through checking the CO's terms in the Ops Record Book, in the AWM 450SQN page, and in RAAF Historical Section -- will let you know how I go. Be interested in seeing the dates Barnes has, if you feel like duplicating the article table here and just substituting his dates -- they might be based on the RAAF Historical Section's, for instance. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:36, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Ok, no worries, these are the dates Barnes has (p. 254):

From	To	Name
7 February 1941		Formed
25 March 1941		Flight Lieutenant Bruce McRae Shepherd (temp)
31 May 1941		Squadron Leader Gordon Henry Steege, DFC
7 May 1942		Squadron Leader Alan Douglas Ferguson
18 October 1942		Squadron Leader John Edwin Ashley Williams, DFC
2 November 1942		Squadron Leader M. H. C. Barber, DFC
16 March 1943		Squadron Leader John Phillip Bartle
6 November 1943		Squadron Leader Sydney George Welshman, DFM
6 December 1943		Squadron Leader Kenneth Royce Sands
7 April 1944		Squadron Leader Ray Trevor Hudson, DFC
15 June 1944		Squadron Leader John Dennis Gleeson
25 October 1944		Squadron Leader Jack Carlisle Doyle, DFC & Bar
20 August 1945		Disbanded

Cool, those CO start dates agree completely with what's in the RAAF Historical section (except that the latter doesn't mention Shepherd, the temp). Of course Barnes may simply have taken the dates from the RAAF Historical Section, as his book came afterwards (is Units of the Royal Australian Air Force in his bibliography?) but he's obviously done his own research on the formation of the unit (or perhaps just used Eather's date -- is Eather in the bibliography?!) since as I said, the Ops Record Book and Units give a 16 Feb 41 establishment, not 7 Feb. Might just complete the CO check in the Ops Record Book but good that Barnes and Units agree at least. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:29, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

G'day, Ian, sorry I only have photocopies of the relevant pages in Eather and Barnes, so I can't check the Bibliography. I think Anotherclown (talk · contribs) has these books, though, so he might be able to check them for us. AC: would you mind taking a look at Ian's post above? Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Heh, hope it's not sounding too obsessive, I just figure we'll have to take responsibility for all the data if we're going to ACR/FAC and since some of our sources disagree with what's in the tables at the moment (and which are mainly sourced from books I can't find in the library) I'd prefer to make the checks... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:37, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

I quite agree. It's all good. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:56, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello gents. I checked Barnes - unfortunately he doesn't have a bibliography or a definitive list of sources. He does mention the RAAF Historical Section in his acknowledgements though (nothing about Eather). Sorry I don't think this helps. Anotherclown (talk) 01:06, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

That's okay, just curious -- tks for checking. In a way I'm glad he acknowledged the Historical Section and not Eather as it probably means he was using if not Units (the narratives of which were generally based on Ops Record Books) then the Ops Record Book directly, so he was presumably aware of the 16 Feb 41 formation date in the latter but decided 7 Feb was more reliable (which as I say seems fair enough given the Ops Record Book mentions that unit history wasn't formally maintained until after arrival in the Middle East and the earliest entries were reconstructed). Oh, and tks for Article History as well, AC! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:20, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi guys, once again my apologies for tardiness. Finally was able to pick up where I left off picking through the ops record book to check CO dates. It essentially agrees with the RAAF Historical Section's (and hence Barnes') takeover dates in all but one (partial) case, which I believe is a typo, i.e. Ferguson's should be 27 May, not 7 May (RAAF Historical Section says 7 May in its table, which Barnes must've used, but 27 May in its body, which agrees with the ops book). So I think we have two options, either keep the From/To columns and use the ops record book or just go with takeover dates and use the RAAF Historical Section and Barnes (for Shepherd) -- I'd be quite happy to stick with secondary sources and do the latter, if you are. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:58, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

G'day, Ian, sorry I've been away for a week. Yes, probably best to do the latter. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 03:44, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Not at all, hope it went well. Okay, I'll tweak to what we discussed, then I think it's time we let our peers have at it in an ACR -- would you like to write the nom or will I? No prob either way... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:55, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

If you wouldn't mind doing it, that would be great. I have a busy week ahead finalising my move. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 05:19, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Airbase list

G'day, Ian, Eather has a list of airbases, but it is only month and year. How do we want to proceed in this regard? AustralianRupert (talk) 02:00, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Maybe that's enough. OTOH it's no skin off my nose to check the Ops Record Book for air base dates as well as COs and see how they compare to what's in the article at the moment... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:39, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

G'day, Ian, Eather p. 104 provides the following airbases: AustralianRupert (talk) 20:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

• Williamtown: Feb-Apr 41
• Abu Sueir: May-Jun 41
• Amman: Jun-Jul 41
• Damascus: Jul 41
• Haifa: Jul-Aug 41
• El Bassa: Aug 41
• Rayak: Aug-Oct 41
• Damascus: Oct-Nov 41
• Burg el Arab: Nov-Dec 41
• Qassain: Dec 41 - Jan 42
• LF 'Y': Jan 42
• Sidi Heneish: Jan-Feb 42
• Gambut: Feb - Jun 42
• Sidi Azeiz: Jun 42
• LG 75: Jun 42
• Sidi Heneish: Jun 42
• El Dada: Jun 42
• LG 106: Jun 42
• LG 91: Jun - Oct 42
• LG 224: Oct 42
• LG 175: Oct-Nov 42
• LG 106: Nov 42
• LG 101 and LG 76: Nov 42
• LG 142: Nov 42
• Gazala: Nov 42
• Martuba: Nov - Dec 42
• Belandah: Dec 42
• Marble Arch: Dec 42
• Amel-el-Chel: Dec 42 - Jan 43
• Hamararet: Jan 43
• Sedada: Jan 43
• Bir Dufan: Jan 43
• Castel Benito: Jan-Feb 43
• El Assa: Feb-Mar 43
• Neffatia: Mar 43
• Medenine: Mar-Apr 43
• El Hamma: Apr 43
• El Djem: Apr 43
• Kairouan: Apr - May 43
• Zuara: May-Jul 43
• Luga: Jul 43
• Pachino: Jul-Aug 43
• Agnone: Aug-Sep 43
• Grottaghe: Sep 43
• Bart: Sep 43
• Foggia: Sep-Oct 43
• Mileni: Oct-Dec 43
• Cuttalla: Dec 43 - May 44
• San Angelo: May-Jun 44
• Guidonia: Jun 44
• Falenum: Jun-Jul 44
• Crete: Jul-Aug 44
• Lesi: Aug-Sep 44
• Foiano: Sep 44
• Lesi: Sep-Nov 44
• Fano: Nov 44 - Feb 45
• Cervia: Feb-May 45
• Lavariano: May-Aug 45
• Disbanded: 20 August 1945

Hi mate, tks for that, apologies again for not completing my check of the COs/bases in the ops record book as yet -- had no time for any article work this week but will aim to finish up by the w/e. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:33, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, I didn't get a chance to check landing grounds in the ops record book (life's too short!) but I had no particular reason to doubt what's in the article now, which I did re. the CO dates. I can see only one or two minor discrepancies between the article table and Eather, so no issue with leaving the article table as is unless you feel differently. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:27, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

G'day, Ian, no worries, I'm happy to leave it as is, if you are. Cheers, 03:44, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

FAC

Hi Rupert, was there anything you wanted to do before making a run at FAC? I could grab Stewart Wilson's Spitfire, Mustang and Kittyhawk in Australian Service at the Mitchell Library to see if there's more precise info on the conversion to P-51s at war's end but other than that I think we're about ready to go -- WDYT? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:39, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

I just checked my copy of that book, and it doesn't have anything about No. 450 Squadron converting to Mustangs that I could see. Nick-D (talk) 00:01, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Nick. G'day, Ian, there's nothing I can think of at the moment. Sorry, I'm not going to be much use for the next three months or so. I have quite a bit on at work at the moment and on short notice I have to go away for about 12 weeks. I will most likely have my computer and internet, but my time online will potentially be inconsistent. I will try to help out if I can, though. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:38, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry Nick for not acknowledging your efforts checking that book -- must've missed the diff at the time! Anyway, Rupert, just letting you know that I was planning to nom at FAC on our behalves in the next day or so... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:56, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

G'day, Ian, thanks. I will try to help as best I can, but don't have much time of late. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:23, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on No. 450 Squadron RAAF. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071120191115/http://www.defence.gov.au/news/raafnews/editions/4605/history/story01.htm to http://www.defence.gov.au/news/raafnews/EDITIONS/4605/history/story01.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:01, 21 September 2017 (UTC)