F-35B - RAF/RN designation?
 

Apologies if this has been asked and answered elsewhere (I did try and check), but do we yet know what the F-35B will be called - formally, at least - in UK service?


To the best of my knowledge we've never stuck a 'II' at the end of a name, either when using one for the second (or third?) time, or when buying an American type like the Phantom II. In the former case, the original almost always pre-dated the current designation system, so there wasn't any problem making the new one F.1 or GR.1, with the exception of the Harrier II, which jumped straight in as Harrier GR.5.


On that basis is it fair to expect the Lightning FGR.7 (or FGR.8 if it's deemed that the F.7 did actually exist on paper), or is it going to be a law unto itself?

Fairey IIIF anyone??

Well for its last few types (Hawk, Tornado, Typhoon) the RAF has been reviving old Hawker names. SO I'd assumed the UK F-35 would be called the Tempest, or perhaps the Hart/Hind/Demon.

PDR

I expect it will be the Lightning FG.1, unless we accept it as the F-35B. Remember that the C-17 is still the C-17, even after we bought it outright, and never became the Globemaster C.1.

Of course the RAF can change their mind in naming new types-IIRC the Airbus A400M was originally to be known as the Grizzly in RAF service (now the Atlas of course).


Or am I having a senior moment?

But surely you can only use each mark number once, and Mk 1 was the F.1? Hence Tornado GR.1 and F.2, Typhoon T.1 and F.2 etc.


I did remember that, but haven't we called 51 Sqn's new toys Airseeker R.1 instead of sticking with RC-135W?

You are correct, as Grizzly was the Airbus name for it. I understand that the then-CAS was heard to mention something like 'over my dead body' before the RAF adopted the name.

Why not call it the F-35 the Vampire? It's so stealthy and lowly observable that it can't see its own reflection in a mirror. :E (Not to mention how its cost may suck the blood out of a defense budget ... :} :cool: )

Canberra II.................hat, coat.........

I thought we did a vote thread on this years and years ago......and we ended up with it being called Dave....... :) despite whatever official name the MOD may bestow on the thing :E

Well yes, but it's a yank. So rather than "Dave" surely we'd call it something like "Hiram T. Lightningsun"

PDR

Lightning FG1.

As long as they don't call it Planey MacPlaneface I don't really care!

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. Close the thread. ;)

:D+1..................

Underbolt,

You can reuse the mark numbers when the aircraft is a new type - the Harrier was a greatly updated version, but still a Harrier. The F-35 has no progressional relationship with the old EE product, so it's a new type.

(Actually can't think on an example where the RAF/UK has re-used a name in recent times that was relatively recently in being out of service - several WW2 and earlier ones, but not any in service in the last 50 years or so)

The English vocabulary is surely sufficiently extensive to allow a new name? Do we have to live in the past?

The English vocabulary is surely sufficiently extensive to allow a new name? Do we have to live in the past? - MPN11

It certainly is, so perhaps, certainly so far as future squadron service in the new carriers is concerned, it might almost be named "Mirage" - Oh! hang on.....:=

Jack

Lets resurrect 'Dave' which was doing the rounds on PPRuNe a couple of years ago.

I think we should follow the late and much missed Iain M Banks' concept in naming military equipment. OK, so it may not adapt so well to the naming of aircraft types, but I still think the two CVFs should have been named "HMS Diplomacy Has Failed" and "HMS No More Mr Nice Guy".

PDR