WIX Archives

Re: "Struck off Charge"

Posted by Paul McMillan on Thu Mar 06, 2003 06:25:00 AM

In reply top "Struck off Charge" posted by andy saunders on Thu Mar 06, 2003 06:03:39 AM

Andy this question came up on AB-IX a while back.. See the relevant replies including one from Jim Halley


What is the definitive answer to the question, why does the R.A.F. refer to
aircraft as "struck off charge". What is the origin of this term/expression.
Is the opposite - "Taken on charge"?

Peter Donovan.



Jim Halley wrote:

I think the phrase 'on charge' goes back well before the RAF existed. It is
based on the principle that any government property had to be the
responsibility of someone, be it a unit or an individual.

When a unit received a piece of equipment, like a cannon or an aircraft, it
was 'taken on charge' or, sometimes, 'taken on strength' and listed on the
squadron's equipment record. It was then part of the Establishment of the
unit until something happened to it. The unit then asked its higher
formation for permission to strike it off charge, thus relieving them of the
responsibility for it and, more importantly, clearing the way for a
replacement from Stores.

In wartime, this included losses to enemy action which were reported on unit
wastage forms. Taking aircraft as an example, the daily wastage return
showed the number of aircraft under various damage categories. A separate
signal was sent to the rather grandiose-titled 'State Room' where the
current State of the RAF was maintained. When permission to strike off
charge was issued, it was written off the records, sometimes weeks after the
aircraft had ceased to exist. This sometimes has caused confusion as if the
actual date of loss was not noted for some reason, the only final reference
is SOC and a later date.

Advices in the UK went by Postagram, presumably a combination of a telegram
and a hand-delivered message, although I have never been clear exactly how
it worked. From overseas they came by radio and in the later years of the
war the overseas Commands sent a return of all aircraft SOC in their area
every four weeks.

'Written off charge' was also used by the Navy. As George says, the USN was
different. Stores Officers were so overwhelmed by grief at losing a piece of
their equipment that they were 'stricken'.


The final admission was to record an aircraft as 'Presumed Struck off
Charge' when it could not be found on any census. Post-war, there was a
total census and each aircraft serial was compared with the movement record
for that aircraft. The final unit shown was queried but by 1947 a lot of
them had disbanded. When convinced that the aircraft no longer existed it
was authorised to be PSOC.

We have found quite a lot of reasons for these aircraft vanishing, including
accidents and enemy action. But they stayed on the State because the
appropriate forms that would have removed them failed to reach home base.
Paper got lost, especially during a war.


Dave Horsted wrote:


I believe the term(s) comes from the RAF holding their aircraft on
inventory. All aircraft and major equipment are controlled by being
recorded in an inventory allocated to a person. At one point, when I
was at Coningsby, I had 4 Phantoms on my inventory. The phrases "Taken
on charge" and "Struck of charge" I believe refer to the initial
allocation to an RAF inventory and its final removal, although we also
used "Taken on charge" for the transfer to another inventory.

Follow Ups: