![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
The speculation is rather academic anyway, because the was a valid reason why the JSF demonstrators used [snip] non-sequential numbers. That valid reason being the assignment of the intervening numbers, X-33 and X-34, to other projects. .... and that the X-32 slot, originally assigned to the JAST (Joint Advanced Strike Technology) program, was taken over by the JSF program. Although JSF's objectives were much different than JAST's (develop - in the long term - an operational aircraft vs. "only" technology demonstration), JSF was effectively a continuation of JAST by another name. Therefore keeping the allocated vehicle designation was a logical decision, even if the JSF demonstrator(s) wouldn't be _purely_ experimental machines. If JSF hadn't had JAST as a precursor program, it's IMHO much more likely the aircraft would have been designated F-24/25 from the beginning. Andreas |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Canadian ATC aircraft designation | abripl | Home Built | 2 | February 4th 05 06:35 PM |
| Designation Book | David R Townend | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | September 4th 04 03:29 AM |
| Aircraft Designation Book | David R Townend | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | October 16th 03 03:25 AM |
| Aircraft Designation Book | David R Townend | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | October 16th 03 03:25 AM |
| Aircraft Designation Book | David R Townend | Home Built | 0 | October 16th 03 03:25 AM |