YF-twenty-WHAT?
Thread Starter
YF-twenty-WHAT?
Reading the online bio of Colonel Joseph A. Lanni, Commander of the 412th Test Wing, Air Force Flight Test Center, Edwards Air Force Base, I was impressed that:
He has: "more than 4,300 flying hours in over 70 different types of aircraft including the F/A-22 and numerous classified prototypes."
I was intrigued that he had been: "commander of our nation's only classified flight test squadron."
And I was simply baffled to learn that: "Aircraft flown include: F-4C-E, F-5E, F-15, F-16A-D, F-14, F-18, HH-60G, F/A-22, YF-24."
Which begs the question: "What is the YF-24?"
He has: "more than 4,300 flying hours in over 70 different types of aircraft including the F/A-22 and numerous classified prototypes."
I was intrigued that he had been: "commander of our nation's only classified flight test squadron."
And I was simply baffled to learn that: "Aircraft flown include: F-4C-E, F-5E, F-15, F-16A-D, F-14, F-18, HH-60G, F/A-22, YF-24."
Which begs the question: "What is the YF-24?"
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has happened before in on-line bios, notably for types referred to as YF-110 and YF-113. This is a saved version of one for Col. John T. Manclark; the current official bio has those types excised.
This is an interesting read - much supposition, but fascinating for all that. It suggests that YF-110 = MiG 21 and YF-113 = MiG 23, exept that it also suggests it's not as simple as that!
[Edited following a Google search for "YF-24" which threw up a link to a discussion by Peter Merlin , a previously well-informed commentator on this sort of thing, who says: "There have been at least seven (and as many as 11) classified manned aircraft flown at Groom Lake since the mid 1980s that have yet to be unveiled. "
Still, it could be true.
]
This is an interesting read - much supposition, but fascinating for all that. It suggests that YF-110 = MiG 21 and YF-113 = MiG 23, exept that it also suggests it's not as simple as that!
[Edited following a Google search for "YF-24" which threw up a link to a discussion by Peter Merlin , a previously well-informed commentator on this sort of thing, who says: "There have been at least seven (and as many as 11) classified manned aircraft flown at Groom Lake since the mid 1980s that have yet to be unveiled. "
Still, it could be true.
]
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F-110
DaveW
I believe that the F-110A is better know to all of us as the F-4C; when the USAF took on the Navy Phantom, they had to "improve" (or at least f*ck about with it), and as well as changing the tyres and things, they also changed the designation. After a short period, the Americans got a consistent system and integrated the (previously distinct) USAF and USN designations (IIRC in 1962ish?).
I read somewhere that the higher F-112 to F-116 were captured MiGs; presumably the reason that the F-117 designation was sloted in there.
Out of interest, the F-21 was actually an IAI Kfir C2 leased to the USMC for adversary training in the late 1980s.
I'll get my coat.....
S41
I believe that the F-110A is better know to all of us as the F-4C; when the USAF took on the Navy Phantom, they had to "improve" (or at least f*ck about with it), and as well as changing the tyres and things, they also changed the designation. After a short period, the Americans got a consistent system and integrated the (previously distinct) USAF and USN designations (IIRC in 1962ish?).
I read somewhere that the higher F-112 to F-116 were captured MiGs; presumably the reason that the F-117 designation was sloted in there.
Out of interest, the F-21 was actually an IAI Kfir C2 leased to the USMC for adversary training in the late 1980s.
I'll get my coat.....
S41
This: http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...aft/index.html
website says:
MiG-21 aircraft acquired by the United States under the Foreign Materiel Acquisition/Exploitation program are designated as the YF-110
and
MiG-23 aircraft acquired by the United States under the Foreign Materiel Acquisition/Exploitation program are designated as the YF-113.
Doesn't answer your question Jacko I'm affraid
T
website says:
MiG-21 aircraft acquired by the United States under the Foreign Materiel Acquisition/Exploitation program are designated as the YF-110
and
MiG-23 aircraft acquired by the United States under the Foreign Materiel Acquisition/Exploitation program are designated as the YF-113.
Doesn't answer your question Jacko I'm affraid
T
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squirrel, I know that.
However, the official designations of these covertly operated aircraft are unlikely to have been chosen to logically follow from what has gone before, or which comes later. The purpose is to deliberately obscure.
After all, there is significant incentive for the designators to confuse the issue, is there not? The fact that the F-4C started life as the "F-110A" doesn't mean that a "YF-110" isn't an entirely different aircraft: especially if "F-110A" is already an obsolete - but relatively recently obsolete - piece of terminology. Clearly an opportunity for some carefully crafted confusion there, I'd guess. Especially within the flight test community, which is where recent aircraft designations are likely to be used; Groom Lake even today is reportedly Detachment 3 of the Air Force Flight Test Center at Edwards AFB...
To continue this point: If Peter Merlin and AW&ST are correct, the "YF-113" is an entirely different aircraft from the "YF-113G" - one is a MiG 23 and the other is a US black technology demonstrator: That confusion is obviously deliberate, to hide the existence of a programme.
However, the official designations of these covertly operated aircraft are unlikely to have been chosen to logically follow from what has gone before, or which comes later. The purpose is to deliberately obscure.
After all, there is significant incentive for the designators to confuse the issue, is there not? The fact that the F-4C started life as the "F-110A" doesn't mean that a "YF-110" isn't an entirely different aircraft: especially if "F-110A" is already an obsolete - but relatively recently obsolete - piece of terminology. Clearly an opportunity for some carefully crafted confusion there, I'd guess. Especially within the flight test community, which is where recent aircraft designations are likely to be used; Groom Lake even today is reportedly Detachment 3 of the Air Force Flight Test Center at Edwards AFB...
To continue this point: If Peter Merlin and AW&ST are correct, the "YF-113" is an entirely different aircraft from the "YF-113G" - one is a MiG 23 and the other is a US black technology demonstrator: That confusion is obviously deliberate, to hide the existence of a programme.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: In the Doghouse...
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YF-24, not YF-23
Whoa, Black Omega. followed closely by Black Cadillacs have pulled outside the dooorrrr...!!!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: I have a home where the Junglies roam.
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Out of interest, the F-21 was actually an IAI Kfir C2 leased to the USMC for adversary training in the late 1980s.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: [loh-key-shuhn] 1. a place of settlement, activity, or residence 2. a place or situation occupied
Age: 52
Posts: 238
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ground attack variant of F/A-22?
http://www.dreamlandresort.com/forum...ges/16442.html
Obviously a reputable source
http://www.dreamlandresort.com/forum...ges/16442.html
Obviously a reputable source
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's probably worth pointing out that the 'Y' designation points to an aircrafts experimental status. The YC 14 and YC 15 competition to replace the C130 in the 70's, sticks in my mind for some obscure reason
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ball gazing
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The YC 14 and YC 15 competition to replace the C130 in the 70's, sticks in my mind for some obscure reason
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mystic,
Replacement for C130 link
You're correct that it eventually led to development of the C17, but the link above confirms my original assertion that the flyoff was for the C130 replacement.
Edited for spelling. Damn my incorrect dictionary.
Replacement for C130 link
You're correct that it eventually led to development of the C17, but the link above confirms my original assertion that the flyoff was for the C130 replacement.
Edited for spelling. Damn my incorrect dictionary.
Pedantic mode set to armed:
The "Y" designation actually means "prototype" -- not fully productionized, whereas the "X" designation is for "experimental".
Depends upon the build standard and the rules under which it is flown. (TP or non-TP)
I assume that prototype means that there is a plan to put it into production whereas an experimental platform is primarily for research at the moment but could result in greater things.
I feel that there are times when the "wrong" use has been made of X and Y designations perhaps to muddy the waters.
Tarnished
All made clear in here:
http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/afi16-401(i).pdf
The "Y" designation actually means "prototype" -- not fully productionized, whereas the "X" designation is for "experimental".
Depends upon the build standard and the rules under which it is flown. (TP or non-TP)
I assume that prototype means that there is a plan to put it into production whereas an experimental platform is primarily for research at the moment but could result in greater things.
I feel that there are times when the "wrong" use has been made of X and Y designations perhaps to muddy the waters.
Tarnished
All made clear in here:
http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/afi16-401(i).pdf