[Graham Boak]

Don't forget to factor into your sums the number of units that operated the Dakota but did not rate as full squadrons. There would be a large number of detached Flights, and quite a lot of Dakotas in training units. Then the MUs would have new Daks not yet delivered to squadrons, and a regular cycle of aircraft returning for major overhauls, repair after damage, fitting of modifications, etc. Then subtract the number of Daks lost during the war, those delivered but never allocated to any unit because of the end of the war, and those passed directly onto other nation's units without entering RAF service.

For the one fighter unit in the Middle East for which I've seen the figures, the average duration of an aircraft on strength was one month. So in a year twelve times the Offical Establishment would be needed. Presumably the turnover in an ETO transport unit would be quite a bit less, but still require a considerable factor on OE.

I can imagine that transport units would need fewer aircraft than an equivalent bomber or fighter unit, because the more intensive use would require a larger number of crews per aircraft, inflating the size of the unit. But I don't recall seeing a figure such as you quote.