User avatar
Cyanide2703
Topic Author
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed May 16, 2018 11:51 am

"Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Thu Dec 20, 2018 3:11 pm

Image

(Image credits: google)

So that^ picture has all the generations of fighter jets and I noticed something. Generation 1 has the F-80. You'd expect the next Generation to be something like F-81 or even F-90. But Generation 3 has the F-4 and the F-6. What's the order or system they're using? Also, why did they start out with F-80 and not F-10 or F-1?

(I'm quite new to all of the industry jargon)
do not go gentle into that good night
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 1140
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Thu Dec 20, 2018 3:25 pm

I could scribble reams of waffle about this, but Wikipedia already has it covered, at least in terms of US aircraft;
In a nutshell "Prior to the 1962 [tri-service designation system], the U.S. armed services used separate nomenclature systems. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962_Unit ... ion_system

As for the others; different manufacturers, different countries, all featuring vaguely similar but different systems. There is no global standard. For instance the RAF prefer names, not numbers, hence a USAF F-4 was identical to an RAF Phantom (apart from the Spey engines...)

ps this isn't "Civil Aviation", so expect this thread to be moved, pronto.
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
WIederling
Posts: 7333
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Thu Dec 20, 2018 6:27 pm

Cyanide2703 wrote:
https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Evolution-The-Aviationist-460x728.jpg


Strange selection and strange ordering.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Ozair
Posts: 3219
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:02 pm

Cyanide2703 wrote:
Image

(Image credits: google)

So that^ picture has all the generations of fighter jets and I noticed something. Generation 1 has the F-80. You'd expect the next Generation to be something like F-81 or even F-90. But Generation 3 has the F-4 and the F-6. What's the order or system they're using? Also, why did they start out with F-80 and not F-10 or F-1?

(I'm quite new to all of the industry jargon)


The Wiki page on fighter generations has some good info on the various ways people have tried to classify them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fighter_generations

I prefer the Air Force magazine split,
1. Jet propulsion : F-80, Me 262
2. Swept wings; range radar; infrared missiles : F-86, MiG-15
3. Supersonic, pulse radar, Beyond-visual-range missiles : Century Series, F-105, F-4, MiG-17, MiG-21
4. Pulse-doppler radar; high maneuverability; look-down/shoot-down missiles : F-15, F-16, Mirage 2000, MiG-29.
4+. High agility; sensor fusion; reduced radar signature : Eurofighter Typhoon, Su-30, F/A-18E/F, Rafale
4++. Active electronically scanned arrays; continued reduced signatures or “active” (waveform canceling) stealth technology, supercruise : Su-35, proposed F-15SE
5. All-aspect stealth with internal weapons bays, extreme agility, full-sensor fusion, integrated avionics, some or full supercruise : F-22, F-35.

Which I think is where the Aviationist has taken their ranking from. The reality is there is no fixed or agreed definition and marketing has strongly influenced the definitions and their use.

For the aircraft naming, they went through a rationalisation as can be found here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962_Unit ... ion_system although several of the US services are beginning to stray away from that standard.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 4008
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:11 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
I could scribble reams of waffle about this, but Wikipedia already has it covered, at least in terms of US aircraft;
In a nutshell "Prior to the 1962 [tri-service designation system], the U.S. armed services used separate nomenclature systems. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962_Unit ... ion_system

As for the others; different manufacturers, different countries, all featuring vaguely similar but different systems. There is no global standard. For instance the RAF prefer names, not numbers, hence a USAF F-4 was identical to an RAF Phantom (apart from the Spey engines...)

ps this isn't "Civil Aviation", so expect this thread to be moved, pronto.


Don't forget before the realignment, the trusty F-4 in USAF service was the F-110 "Spectre"
The last of the famous international playboys
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 1140
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Fri Dec 21, 2018 12:21 am

Cyanide2703 wrote:
So that^ picture has all the generations of fighter jets and I noticed something. Generation 1 has the F-80. You'd expect the next Generation to be something like F-81 or even F-90. But Generation 3 has the F-4 and the F-6. What's the order or system they're using? Also, why did they start out with F-80 and not F-10 or F-1?

(I'm quite new to all of the industry jargon)


Ok, so here comes my second bite at an enormously big cherry;
why did they start out with F-80 and not F-10 or F-1?


The F-80 was also known as the P-80, from the days when the preferred terminology for US fighter aircraft was "P" for PURSUIT. This series began way back in 1924 with the Curtiss P-1 Hawk, but you will probably be more familiar with WWII examples such as the P-38 Lightning, P-47 Thunderbolt, and of course the Cadillac of the Skies, P-51 Mustang. When jet engines came along, they continued the same sequence, hence the P-80 Shooting Star. It was at this point that they elected to drop the "Pursuit" title ("P") and adopt the more obvious "F", hence the P-80 morphed into the F-80. I shall now confuse everyone by mentioning that the last USAF piston engined fighter to enter service was the F-82 (made up of two P-51 Mustangs....)
Image

This "F-" series continued through examples such as the F-86 Sabre, and F-89 Scorpion, before continuing into the "Century Series". Here are five of them together; F-100 Super Sabre, F-101 Voodoo, F-102 Delta Dagger, F-104 Starfighter, and F-105 Thunderchief.
Image

This series carried on for only a few more designs before officially ending with the F-111, (which in truth was more Bomber than Fighter). This led on to the 1962 Unified system (as I mentioned above), which adopted several existing US Navy designations (F-1 to F-4), before really getting into it's stride with clean sheet designs such as the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter, F-8 Crusader, F-14 Tomcat, F-15 Eagle, and others. These followed more or less sequentially until the F-22 Raptor, after which somebody had a brain-fart and decided F-35 was next in line. :banghead:

Meanwhile, you might well ask where does the F-117 NightHawk fit in all this? The answer is that as a Black Project, it got bracketed with such exotic beasts as the YF-112 (Captured Soviet Su-22), YF-113 (Captured Soviet Mig-23). But these are mere anomalies.

The main US systems can be summarised as
P-1 to P-80 (1924 to ca 1948)
F-80 to F-111 (1948 to 1962)
F-1 to F-35 (1962 to date)


Don't be fooled by the "F-6" listed in your original post; that is a Chinese a/c, which itself is a copy of a Russian design. Their systems are something else.....
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
User avatar
TheFlyingDisk
Posts: 1269
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:43 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Fri Dec 21, 2018 7:29 am

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
These followed more or less sequentially until the F-22 Raptor, after which somebody had a brain-fart and decided F-35 was next in line. :banghead:


It's only because the two prototypes for the JSF fighter selection were designated as X-Planes. Maybe it's because the planes isn't developed specifically for the USAF?
I FLY KLM+ALASKA+QATAR+MALAYSIA+AIRASIA+MALINDO
 
steman
Posts: 1530
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 4:55 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Fri Dec 21, 2018 8:20 am

SheikhDjibouti wrote:

This series carried on for only a few more designs before officially ending with the F-111, (which in truth was more Bomber than Fighter). This led on to the 1962 Unified system (as I mentioned above), which adopted several existing US Navy designations (F-1 to F-4), before really getting into it's stride with clean sheet designs such as the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter, F-8 Crusader, F-14 Tomcat, F-15 Eagle, and others. These followed more or less sequentially until the F-22 Raptor, after which somebody had a brain-fart and decided F-35 was next in line. :banghead:

Meanwhile, you might well ask where does the F-117 NightHawk fit in all this? The answer is that as a Black Project, it got bracketed with such exotic beasts as the YF-112 (Captured Soviet Su-22), YF-113 (Captured Soviet Mig-23). But these are mere anomalies.

The main US systems can be summarised as
P-1 to P-80 (1924 to ca 1948)
F-80 to F-111 (1948 to 1962)
F-1 to F-35 (1962 to date)


Don't be fooled by the "F-6" listed in your original post; that is a Chinese a/c, which itself is a copy of a Russian design. Their systems are something else.....


Just a small correction, the F-8 was developed well before the 1962 harmonization process, as Vought F8U (8th Navy Fighter from Vought). In 1962 they renamed all models still in service, even though some were about to be withdrawn or were in service in very small numbers.
The F-1 was actually the latest versions of the FJ Fury. There was even an F-10, which was the Douglas F3D Skynight. Not sure about F-2, -3 and -7. F-6 was the F4D Skyray, the F-9 was the F9F Cougar. Some designation were applied to imported/experimental models, like the IAI Kfir that got called F-21 Lion.

Of course this applies only to the US. Other countries have different naming system. As reported above, the British prefer giving their airplanes a name, followed by letters designating the type and a number designating the mark, like Phantom FG.1 or Tornado GR.4. By the way, have they come up with an official name for the F-35B? Lightning FGR.1 maybe?

The Italian Air Force has introduced not long ago an harmonized system loosely based on the USAF: F for fighters (The Typhonn is called F-2000A) and A for Attack/Fighter Bombers (The Tornado is the A-200A and the AMX is the A-100A. The F-35 already has a name that complies with this rule).
 
mxaxai
Posts: 734
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Fri Dec 21, 2018 2:30 pm

Cyanide2703 wrote:
So that^ picture has all the generations of fighter jets and I noticed something. Generation 1 has the F-80. You'd expect the next Generation to be something like F-81 or even F-90. But Generation 3 has the F-4 and the F-6. What's the order or system they're using? Also, why did they start out with F-80 and not F-10 or F-1?

First of all: Remember that names are 100% marketing. There also is no international standard for naming jets. Not only the brits but many other european air forces like to assign names instead of numbers, often but not always using winds ("typhoon"), natural phenomenons ("lightning") or animals ("gripen"). Countries importing jets sometimes rename them and sometimes don't. The popular name (e. g. "warthog") can differ from the official one ("thunderbolt II") or the formal designation ("A-10").

Russia, for example, numbers their fighter jets individually for each design bureau (MiG, Su, LaGG etc...). The only "rule" I can make out is that any fighters or attackers tend to use odd number while transport aircraft and helis get even numbers more often. While some russian designs got major ugrades without a new number, a recent trend has been to assign new numbers to an overhauled or export version of an existing fighter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... nd_the_CIS
That is why you get things like the Su-35 and MiG-35 (derivatives of the Su-27 heavy multi-role fighter and the MiG-29 air superiority fighter, respectively).


Looking over to China, they also have some sort of system but since many of their jets are imports or copies of russian designs it can, again, get quite confusing at times. Their marketing department seems to be quite creative, naming their equivalent to the Predator drone "Wing Loong".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAIG_Wing_Loong
Image
(photo taken this year by myself, click to enlarge. There are no recent images in the database)
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 1140
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Fri Dec 21, 2018 2:49 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
This led on to the 1962 Unified system (as I mentioned above), which adopted several existing US Navy designations (F-1 to F-4), before really getting into it's stride with clean sheet designs such as the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter, F-8 Crusader.....

steman wrote:
Just a small correction, the F-8 was developed well before the 1962 harmonization process, as Vought F8U (8th Navy Fighter from Vought). In 1962 they renamed all models still in service, even though some were about to be withdrawn or were in service in very small numbers.
The F-1 was actually the latest versions of the FJ Fury. There was even an F-10, which was the Douglas F3D Skynight. Not sure about F-2, -3 and -7. F-6 was the F4D Skyray, the F-9 was the F9F Cougar.


Yes, you got me :D
I was trying to simplify things a little for the benefit of the OP, who by now is probably wondering why the F4D became the F-6, whilst the F4H became the F-4. That explanation alone could occupy several paragraphs, so I suggest we move on. :white:
The surprising truth is that out of the first thirteen designations in the "new" series, only one (Northrop F-5) was a fresh designation, and even that one comes with it's own baggage. With development commencing prior to 1962, it was initially identified as Northrop product N-156. The USAF didn't want it as a fighter, but instead adopted it as the T-38 Talon trainer. It was only later in 1962 itself that the Kennedy Administration revived the requirement for a low-cost export fighter, selecting the N-156F as winner of the F-X competition on 23 April 1962 subsequently becoming the "F-5A", [thanks Wikipedia]

From the F-14 Tomcat onwards, the "new" system begins to make sense, but of the remaining designations leading up to F-13......
F-13 was omitted because it is an unlucky number
F-12 was a proposed fighter version of the SR-71 Blackbird (only 3 built)

But the majority of the other 11 (i.e. 10 of them!) were all US Navy designs that pre-date 1962, and thus already had USN designations that required changing.
Between us we have already mentioned a few; here is the full list;
F-1 NA Fury (Previously designated FJ-2, FJ-3 & FJ-4)
F-2 McDonnell Banshee (Previously designated F2H)
F-3 McDonnell Demon (Previously designated F3H)
F-4 McDonnell Douglas Phantom II (Previously designated F4H and F-110)
{F-5 Northrop Freedom Fighter / Tiger II}
F-6 Douglas Skyray (Previously designated F4D)
F-7 Convair Sea Dart (Previously designated F2Y)
F-8 Vought/LTV Crusader (Previously designated F8U)
F-9 Grumman Cougar (Previously designated F9F-6)
F-10 Douglas Skyknight (Previously designated F3D)
F-11 Grumman Tiger (Previously designated F11F)

Of course this applies only to the US.
... the British prefer giving their airplanes a name, followed by letters designating the type and a number designating the mark, like Phantom FG.1 or Tornado GR.4. By the way, have they come up with an official name for the F-35B? Lightning FGR.1 maybe?
So far, not that I know of. It's probably fair to say that historically many designs were commonly known by name only, right up until the point when more than one variation was required. The original Hawker Hurricane and Supermarine Spitfire were (AFAIK) identified exactly as written, until the day somebody proposed an improved "Mk.II" version. At that point you need to go back and "invent" the Mk.I. :lol:

With the F-35B Lightning; if/when the RAF define more than one (sub) variation, there will be more need to identify the first model as "FGR.1". It is equally probable that in some MoD departments, people already use this nomenclature either in an official or unofficial capacity, and it just hasn't reached the general public yet. Of course the simple fact that half of the UK F-35s will be operated by the Royal Navy, and deployed on aircraft carriers, suggests to me that somebody somewhere will find an excuse to define them differently in some way. Watch this space....
Meanwhile....Wikipedia wrote:
For some aircraft types (e.g. the C-17 which is currently known in RAF service as the "C-17 Globemaster III" ) the UK armed services have used the US designation rather than assigning their own designation.



p.s. I'm perfectly willing to be shot-down on any or all of the above. I'm not speaking from any position of authority; just sharing what I believe to be correct. 8-)
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 7407
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Fri Dec 21, 2018 7:18 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
F-1 NA Fury (Previously designated FJ-2, FJ-3 & FJ-4)
F-2 McDonnell Banshee (Previously designated F2H)
F-3 McDonnell Demon (Previously designated F3H)
F-4 McDonnell Douglas Phantom II (Previously designated F4H and F-110)
{F-5 Northrop Freedom Fighter / Tiger II}
F-6 Douglas Skyray (Previously designated F4D)
F-7 Convair Sea Dart (Previously designated F2Y)
F-8 Vought/LTV Crusader (Previously designated F8U)
F-9 Grumman Cougar (Previously designated F9F-6)
F-10 Douglas Skyknight (Previously designated F3D)
F-11 Grumman Tiger (Previously designated F11F)


After that:
YF-12 ( SR-71 cousin )
F-13 Omited
F-14 Tomcat (we all know and love)
F-15 Eagle
F-16 Fighting Falcon
YF-17 (looser to the F-16, and became the F/A-18)
F/A-18 Hornet
F-19 Omitted officially, supposed to be a black project, or the supposed destination of the F-117A Nighthawk
F-20 Tigershark (single engined, third generation F-5)
F-21 Lion (as mentioned, IAI Kfir for adversary duty, NAVY Top Gun school)
F-22 Raptor
YF-23 (looser to the F-22)
F-24 - F-34 Omitted, but the losing contender for the JSF: Boeing X-32, was supposed to be called the F-32. The rest of the numbers, who knows? Black project, misleading? The X-planes and the F-planes seems to be a bit crossed YF-23. The JSF should have been called the YF-24 and YF-25, but instead were the X-32 and X-35.
F-35 Lightning II
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2581
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Sun Dec 23, 2018 1:40 pm

If you include the x-planes then X-29 was the forward swept plane.
The rest of the missing numbers can be found here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... l_aircraft
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2581
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Sun Dec 23, 2018 1:47 pm

Now the intriguing question would be if the what designation will the T-X trainer would be and how they would it fit in if they decide to make it a fighter for export? Or would they call it an A- aircraft instead?
bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
texl1649
Posts: 744
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Sun Dec 23, 2018 7:24 pm

RE: 12 the X-29 was only the first modern FSw plane. The Nazis had flown/experimented similarly (but obviously not fly by wire).

RE:13 The T-X will never be acquired as a fighter aircraft, or use air to air weapons. Light attack is a possibility but a remote one. The battlefield has changed since the F-5 days too dramatically.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 7407
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Mon Dec 24, 2018 12:37 am

Why can't the T-X be modified into a cheap fighter, think South America or African air forces.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
WIederling
Posts: 7333
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:34 am

texl1649 wrote:
RE: 12 the X-29 was only the first modern FSw plane. The Nazis had flown/experimented similarly (but obviously not fly by wire).
.

postwar and a jet:
Image
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburger ... _Hansa_Jet

devel path .. and later:
https://www.mh-aerotools.de/company/pap ... pperle.pdf
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 1140
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Mon Dec 24, 2018 12:47 pm

texl1649 wrote:
RE: 12 the X-29 was only the first modern FSw plane. The Nazis had flown/experimented similarly (but obviously not fly by wire).
.

Lol, Wlederling just beat me to it with a fabulous overhead shot that shows the reverse swept wings. :bigthumbsup:

Here are two more photos from the database; one showing the wings from below, and a final one demonstrating it was a civilian aircraft too. Note also the iconic LHR control tower from the good old days when everything was B&W and the runway markings were in latin.

Hansa Delta-Tango-Oscar cleared for take-off from runway XXVIII Sinister.

Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
WIederling
Posts: 7333
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Mon Dec 24, 2018 1:26 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
... demonstrating it was a civilian aircraft too.


Design objective was a bizjet for the US market.
A slightly enlarged HFB330 was projected.

Later an engine conversion to the TFE 731 was "looked at" for the HFB320.

The original installation was a "screamer". about as loud as a 707 taking off
from Fuhlsbüttel ( watching/listening from the Schrebergärten at the perimeter.

As a small boy our "Sonntagsausflug" on occasion brought us along the levy
past the XFW plant ( at the time doing Noratlas, Transall and the HansaJet.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
RetiredWeasel
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:16 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:15 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:

.... I shall now confuse everyone by mentioning that the last USAF piston engined fighter to enter service was the F-82 (made up of two P-51 Mustangs......
....


After WWII, all the P-51's were renamed to F-51's. My dad had over 900 hours in the F-51 with the Spokane ANG.
 
User avatar
cpd
Posts: 5699
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Tue Dec 25, 2018 2:06 am

Dutchy wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
F-1 NA Fury (Previously designated FJ-2, FJ-3 & FJ-4)
F-2 McDonnell Banshee (Previously designated F2H)
F-3 McDonnell Demon (Previously designated F3H)
F-4 McDonnell Douglas Phantom II (Previously designated F4H and F-110)
{F-5 Northrop Freedom Fighter / Tiger II}
F-6 Douglas Skyray (Previously designated F4D)
F-7 Convair Sea Dart (Previously designated F2Y)
F-8 Vought/LTV Crusader (Previously designated F8U)
F-9 Grumman Cougar (Previously designated F9F-6)
F-10 Douglas Skyknight (Previously designated F3D)
F-11 Grumman Tiger (Previously designated F11F)


After that:
YF-12 ( SR-71 cousin )
F-13 Omited
F-14 Tomcat (we all know and love)
F-15 Eagle
F-16 Fighting Falcon
YF-17 (looser to the F-16, and became the F/A-18)
F/A-18 Hornet
F-19 Omitted officially, supposed to be a black project, or the supposed destination of the F-117A Nighthawk
F-20 Tigershark (single engined, third generation F-5)
F-21 Lion (as mentioned, IAI Kfir for adversary duty, NAVY Top Gun school)
F-22 Raptor
YF-23 (looser to the F-22)
F-24 - F-34 Omitted, but the losing contender for the JSF: Boeing X-32, was supposed to be called the F-32. The rest of the numbers, who knows? Black project, misleading? The X-planes and the F-planes seems to be a bit crossed YF-23. The JSF should have been called the YF-24 and YF-25, but instead were the X-32 and X-35.
F-35 Lightning II


F24 = Boeing fighter plane

F-121 = ???


Aside from these naming conventions, I've always like the British fighter plane names based around bad weather / stormy conditions:
> Hurricane
> Lightning
> Tornado
> Typhoon
> Tempest
 
WIederling
Posts: 7333
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Tue Dec 25, 2018 11:32 am

cpd wrote:
British fighter plane names based around bad weather / stormy conditions:
> Hurricane
> Lightning
> Tornado
> Typhoon
> Tempest


What kind of weather phenomenon is a "Spitfire" ? :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 1140
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Tue Dec 25, 2018 12:26 pm

WIederling wrote:
cpd wrote:
British fighter plane names based around bad weather / stormy conditions:
> Hurricane
> Lightning
> Tornado
> Typhoon
> Tempest


What kind of weather phenomenon is a "Spitfire" ? :-)

A "Spitfire" is very bad weather, especially if it ever came across a Messerschmitt Bf108 Taifun. :duck:
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
User avatar
cpd
Posts: 5699
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Tue Dec 25, 2018 4:48 pm

WIederling wrote:
cpd wrote:
British fighter plane names based around bad weather / stormy conditions:
> Hurricane
> Lightning
> Tornado
> Typhoon
> Tempest


What kind of weather phenomenon is a "Spitfire" ? :-)


I didn’t write Spitfire.
 
WIederling
Posts: 7333
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Tue Dec 25, 2018 5:15 pm

cpd wrote:
WIederling wrote:
cpd wrote:
British fighter plane names based around bad weather / stormy conditions:
> Hurricane
> Lightning
> Tornado
> Typhoon
> Tempest


What kind of weather phenomenon is a "Spitfire" ? :-)


I didn’t write Spitfire.

you wrote:
cpd wrote:
British fighter plane names based ..........


On my side this was more of a tongue in cheek quip.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
cpd
Posts: 5699
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Tue Dec 25, 2018 7:22 pm

WIederling wrote:
cpd wrote:
WIederling wrote:

What kind of weather phenomenon is a "Spitfire" ? :-)


I didn’t write Spitfire.

you wrote:
cpd wrote:
British fighter plane names based ..........


On my side this was more of a tongue in cheek quip.


And listed five planes. None of them are what you wrote. I deliberately named them to stop the pedants.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 6239
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: "Generations" of fighter jets/naming conventions

Wed Dec 26, 2018 1:34 am

I thought first generation fighter aircraft were WW1 fighters like the Spad?
You know all is right is the world when the only thing people worry about is if the president had sex with a pornstar.


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos