Why no F/24 -34?

[Michael]

Why has the AF chosen to jump fighter designations from 22 to 35?

Thanks

[Andreas Parsch]

Michael wrote:

> Why has the AF chosen to jump fighter designations from 22 to 35?


http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/nonstandard-mds.html#_MDS_F35

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Michael" > wrote in message
om...
>
> Why has the AF chosen to jump fighter designations from 22 to 35?
>

The USAF didn't make that choice. An undersecretary of defense who was
clueless about the designation system screwed up. The X-32 and X-35 were
not prototypes, they were technology demonstrators. Whichever one of them
won the JSF contract, the resulting aircraft was to be designated the F-24.
(F-24 was next in line, the F-23 was the Northrop bid that lost to the
F-22.) When the winner of the JSF competition was announced the
undersecretary was asked what the new aircraft would be designated. He
screwed up, saying it would be the F-35 because the X-35 had won the
competition. Rather than make him look stupid the JSF officially became the
F-35.

[Chad Irby]

In article t>,
"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:

> The USAF didn't make that choice. An undersecretary of defense who
> was clueless about the designation system screwed up.

For another example, look at the world-famous RS-71.

Oops, Lyndon Johnson called it the "SR-71."

Change the name...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Chad Irby" > wrote in message
om...
>
> For another example, look at the world-famous RS-71.
>
> Oops, Lyndon Johnson called it the "SR-71."
>
> Change the name...
>

Of course, RS-71 wouldn't have fit any better into the designation system.

[Andreas Parsch]

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
>
> "Chad Irby" > wrote in message
> om...
>>
>> For another example, look at the world-famous RS-71.
>>
>> Oops, Lyndon Johnson called it the "SR-71."
>>
>> Change the name...

It wasn't LBJ's fault - see

http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/nonstandard-mds.html#_MDS_SR71

>
> Of course, RS-71 wouldn't have fit any better into the designation system.

Technically, it would. The "RS" prefix was explicitly allowed as a "special"
designation in the regulation of 1962.

Andreas

[Steve Hix]

In article >, Andreas Parsch >
wrote:

> Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
> >
> > "Chad Irby" > wrote in message
> > om...
> >>
> >> For another example, look at the world-famous RS-71.
> >>
> >> Oops, Lyndon Johnson called it the "SR-71."
> >>
> >> Change the name...
>
> It wasn't LBJ's fault - see
>
> http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/nonstandard-mds.html#_MDS_SR71
>
> >
> > Of course, RS-71 wouldn't have fit any better into the designation system.
>
> Technically, it would. The "RS" prefix was explicitly allowed as a "special"
> designation in the regulation of 1962.

And it was to have been preceded by the RS-70, a version of the B-70 that
didn't get bought/built.

[Qman]

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

> Of course, RS-71 wouldn't have fit any better into the designation system.

Why not, at least R stands for recce stuff.


Qman

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Qman" > wrote in message ...
>
> Why not, at least R stands for recce stuff.
>

Yes, but S stands for antisubmarine, and the -71 is out of the bomber
series.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Andreas Parsch" > wrote in message
...
>
> Technically, it would. The "RS" prefix was explicitly allowed as a
> "special" designation in the regulation of 1962.
>

Well, that's the point. If it had fit the designation system a "special"
designation wouldn't have been needed.

[Steve Hix]

In article . net>,
"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:

> "Qman" > wrote in message ...
> >
> > Why not, at least R stands for recce stuff.
> >
>
> Yes, but S stands for antisubmarine, and the -71 is out of the bomber
> series.

In sequence immediately following the RS-70, the (unsuccessful) last
gasp effort to keep the B-70 program alive.

[Alan Minyard]

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 23:41:46 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:

>
>"Qman" > wrote in message ...
>>
>> Why not, at least R stands for recce stuff.
>>
>
>Yes, but S stands for antisubmarine, and the -71 is out of the bomber
>series.
>
No, the "S" stands for "strategic".

Al Minyard

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
>
> No, the "S" stands for "strategic".
>

No, "S" in the Tri-Service designation system stands for antisubmarine. The
"SR" in SR-71 stands for Strategic Reconnaissance as a special case.

[Alan Minyard]

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 17:33:16 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:

>
>"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> No, the "S" stands for "strategic".
>>
>
>No, "S" in the Tri-Service designation system stands for antisubmarine. The
>"SR" in SR-71 stands for Strategic Reconnaissance as a special case.
>
I thought we were addressing the SR-71. Note that the primary ASW a/c
in the US inventory is the P-3 Orion, no "S" there!

Al Minyard