Ascoteer Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 It lost the 'S' because 'S' in naval parlance was 'nuclear strike' and the FA2 didn't have that capability. FA was chosen to infer a capability similar to the Hornet 'Strike' wasn't Naval parlance for Nuclear attack, it was NATO parlance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 'Strike' wasn't Naval parlance for Nuclear attack, it was NATO parlance. I must have missed all those Jaguar and Tornado SR1s then........ I didn't say 'Strike' was naval parlance, but 'S' as a designator for fixed wing aircraft. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrovian Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 79 and 234 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 Nah lets have 800 and 801 and end the 100 year experiment lmap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ascoteer Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 What, you mean give naval aviation back to the pongoes? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 I think you will find ( according to various publications) that it was the royal navy who were the movers and shifters in the early days...the army didn't really see the benefits initially ...soon caught up though 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 (edited) Ok so I'm going for 111 and and um 23 When's the announcement/lottery Edited May 9, 2016 by junglierating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ascoteer Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 I think you will find ( according to various publications) that it was the royal navy who were the movers and shifters in the early days...the army didn't really see the benefits initially ...soon caught up though Oh I'm aware of the Army's initial lack of faith in aviation, but I would also point out that, until 1 Jul 1914, Naval Aviation existed as the Naval Wing of the Royal Flying Corps. Hence my (slightly facetious) comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 Oh I'm aware of the Army's initial lack of faith in aviation, but I would also point out that, until 1 Jul 1914, Naval Aviation existed as the Naval Wing of the Royal Flying Corps. Hence my (slightly facetious) comment. Hmm wasn't aware of that or maybe o choose to ignore it subconsciously that is I will have to read the paladins again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaudioN Posted May 15, 2016 Share Posted May 15, 2016 The RAF refer to it as the RC-135 or Rivet Joint. What about calling it the Rivet R. Mk.1? I can see a Shackleton ancestry... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now