Confused about British aircraft naming convention

[Jon Bryon]

On 10/9/2020 at 9:41 AM, Giorgio N said:

 

Not that there have been many names reused over time, only that comes to my mind is Atlas, the AW biplane in the '20s and today's transport. There could have been a Fury if the RAF had adopted the Hawker fighter in the late '40s, but only the FAA got them as Sea Fury.

 

 

There are not many, but 'Nimrod' and 'Whirlwind' also spring to mind. Any others?

 

Jon

[Truro Model Builder]

41 minutes ago, SAT69 said:

I'm open to being corrected, but I thought the early single-seaters were designated F. Mk.2 and when updated became F. Mk.2A. Whether they were subsequently brought up to FGR. Mk. 4s I can't say. Early trainers were T. Mk.1 and T. Mk.1A when updated, as I recall.

 

This is where it does get confusing:

 

Typhoon T.1 -Tranche 1 Batch 1 two-seater, upgraded to Tranche 1 Block 5 as T.3

 

Typhoon T.1A -Tranche 1 Batch 2 two-seater, upgraded to Tranche 1 Block 5 as T.3

 

Typhoon F.2 -Tranche 1 Block 2 single-seater, upgraded to Tranche 1 Block 5 as FGR.4

 

Typhoon T.3 -Tranche 1 Block 5 and all later two-seaters

 

Typhoon FGR.4 -Tranche 1 Block 5 and all later single-seaters

[alt-92]

3 hours ago, Truro Model Builder said:

I did hear a rumour that the MoD dropped the 'Mk' from designations due to the inability of software to deal with it, but have never had it substantiated.

No doubt a consultancy jobbie.

"FGwhatnow? Just call it PlaneyThingey!"

[Dave Swindell]

On 09/10/2020 at 09:41, Giorgio N said:

only that comes to my mind is Atlas,

Manchester, Avro biplane and monoplane

Wildcat, Grumman fighter and  AgustaWestland helicopter

[Welkin]

My head is starting to hurt!   🥴

[Truro Model Builder]

1 hour ago, Jon Bryon said:

 

There are not many, but 'Nimrod' and 'Whirlwind' also spring to mind. Any others?

 

Jon

ANDOVER (Avro and Hawker Siddeley)

ATLAS (Armstrong Whitworth and Airbus)

BULLDOG (Bristol and Scottish Aviation)

FIREFLY (Fairey (biplane) and Fairey)

FURY (Hawker and Hawker)

HORNET (Hawker (prototype only) and de Havilland)

LIGHTNING (Lockheed, English Electric, and Lockheed Martin)

NIMROD (Hawker and Hawker Siddeley)

SCOUT (Bristol and Westland)

TEMPEST (Hawker and (possibly!) BAE Systems)

TORNADO (Hawker and Panavia)

TYPHOON (Hawker and Eurofighter)

WHIRLWIND (Westland and Westland)

WILDCAT (Grumman and AgustaWestlnd)

[Graham Boak]

I'm pretty sure there are more names reused: there is an entire book by Gordon Wansborough-White dedicated to the names given to different British military aircraft, and the differing systems that were used throughout the 20th Century.  However, just to pick out a couple from the above list.  In the first World War Scout was a term used to describe aircraft that we would now call fighters.  I rather doubt that the Bristol M.1 was ever allocated Scout as an individual name, although it was used for this and indeed other Bristol types - the Scout D was a biplane IIRC.  Firefly has also used for the rework of the Fournier RF 4 (RF 5?) used for elementary training until recently.

 

Vickers reused Viking, the initial one was a flying boat.

Venom was used by Vickers and de Havilland.

Hercules was used by de Havilland and Lockheed.

Dragonfly was used by de Havilland and Westland.

Widgeon was used twice by Westland

Wessex was used twice by Westland.

There are more...

 

(OK, I admit sneaking some civil ones in there.)

[825]

Don't forget the Navy presently has some Avenger trainers, which are new and not some old Grumman kites. 

[Work In Progress]

1 hour ago, Graham Boak said:

Firefly has also used for the rework of the Fournier RF 4 (RF 5?) used for elementary training until recently.

Not the RF-4 or RF-5, both of which are motor gliders powered by VW derivatives and completely adorable. You are thinking of the very different RF-6 which is a conventional light aeroplane and which was never a very happy design.

 

The Firefly as adopted for Babcock as a primary trainer for British military pilots, i.e. T-67M Mark II, T-67M200 or T-67M260 variants, has practically no commonality with the Fournier RF-6 design other than a loose outline resemblance , as the structure is entirely different, being all-composite rather than wood. But that didn't seem to help, except in making it a bit less unsuitable to be left out in the rain.

 

Some people like the Firefly, and it's better than staying on the ground, but I never really liked the one I used to fly. I always felt the Bulldog was a vastly more capable and pleasant machine, providing you could find one that hadn't been hammered to death, which all the ex RAF ones I encountered certainly had been. But quite a few export models came home, and many of those were in good condition with decent fatigue indices, and generally delightful.

Edited October 10, 2020 by Work In Progress

[Britman]

Avenger is not a name that I could associate with the King Air. 

 

Keith

[Truro Model Builder]

If you really want to get going, start including engine and missile names.

 

The Wainsborough-White book is a fascinating read on the subject. Personally I always thought it was a shame we stopped naming bombers after cities. Panavia Truro has a nice ring to it...

[Welkin]

5 hours ago, Truro Model Builder said:

Personally I always thought it was a shame we stopped naming bombers after cities. Panavia Truro has a nice ring to it...

Not so sure about the Supermarine Slough!

[Nigel Bunker]

Or the Westland Watford?

[DrumBum]

Well, that opened up a can of worms for sure.

 

Thanks all for the input, very interesting stuff. 

 

 

[Hook]

Weren't the twinsticker Tornados of the TTE designated GR.1T's? 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

[Truro Model Builder]

1 hour ago, Hook said:

Weren't the twinsticker Tornados of the TTE designated GR.1T's? 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

 

Only unofficially. The only suffixes applied to the GR.1 were the GR.1A reconnaissance variant and GR.1B with Sea Eagle capability.

[Work In Progress]

22 hours ago, Truro Model Builder said:

Personally I always thought it was a shame we stopped naming bombers after cities

Back when bombers were cities and fighters were generally creatures or weather, I am with hindsight surprised that the Mosquito wasn't a city. AFAIK they named it before the notion of a fighter version arose. Just as well, really.

[Giorgio N]

Don't know how I missed the two Whirlwinds and the Typhoon, they should have been the most immediate in my mind. The Nimrod too is something that I should have known,

Good to know that the old designation system is now not used anymore, this explains all the doubts about the more recent types. It's a pity in a sense as I was used to the old naming system but in the end the system has to work for those involved in the operation of the aircraft.

[Truro Model Builder]

31 minutes ago, Work In Progress said:

Back when bombers were cities and fighters were generally creatures or weather, I am with hindsight surprised that the Mosquito wasn't a city. AFAIK they named it before the notion of a fighter version arose. Just as well, really.

 

Yes, it doesn't seem to fit with the naming policy, the responsibility for which passed to the Ministry of Aircraft Production in 1939. MAP declared that experimental aircraft, unless they were derived from an existing type, would be designated by the designer's names and the specification number, such as Gloster F.9/40. Names would be allocated as soon as it was evident a production order would be placed, and would be selected from the revised categories set out:

 

FIGHTERS: General words indicating speed, activity or aggressiveness

 

BOMBERS: Place names -an inland town of the British Empire or associated with British history

 

ARMY CO-OPERATION: Classical words

 

GENERAL PURPOSE TORPEDO: British historical names (including general reconnaissance land planes)

 

TRANSPORT: Counties or districts of the British Empire

 

FLYING BOATS: Coastal towns and seaports of the British Empire

 

TRAINERS AND TARGET TUGS: Words indicating tuition and places of education (but not Air Force training establishments)

 

GLIDERS: Historic military leaders

 

NAVAL AIRCRAFT: As proposed by the Admiralty

 

American aircraft would fit in with the categories, but with an American theme.

 

There were one or two others that did not quite fit in either. Liberator was originally a British name.

[Hook]

There was also the convention of naming British engines after birds of prey (Rolls Royce piston), rivers (Rolls Royce jets), felines (Armstrong Siddely piston), gems (Armstrong Siddely jets) and mythological figures (Bristol), wasn't there? 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

[Dave Fleming]

On 10/10/2020 at 5:43 PM, Truro Model Builder said:

II did hear a rumour that the MoD dropped the 'Mk' from designations due to the inability of software to deal with it, but have never had it substantiated.

 

 

 

That was apparently also the reason for the Sea harrier going from F/A.2 (which was designed to mimic the Hornet) to FA2 - the computer system couldn't cope with the '/' - although MOD reports and Inquries into accidents still used the F/A2 designator right up to the end.

https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080206052849/http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/Templates/InformationProfile.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRNODEGUID={703D1D29-D26B-49F9-823A-46D4100E968A}&NRORIGINALURL=%2fDefenceInternet%2fAboutDefence%2fCorporatePublications%2fAirSafetyandAviationPublications%2fMAAS%2f2000s%2f20030611SeaHarrierFa2Zh805.htm&NRCACHEHINT=Guest

 

As Dervish says, there is no standard (even for what the designators mean) and they make it up as they go along. So 'A' can mean Attack, Army, Anti (submarine) or Airborne (as in AEW) or whatever the project team want it to. Even the same designator can have different meanings - AH was traditionally Army helicopter, but i believe for the Apache it stands for Attack Helicopter.

Edited October 12, 2020 by Dave Fleming

[Dave Fleming]

On 10/10/2020 at 2:28 PM, Dervish said:

The U.K. no longer has a system for naming aircraft and allocating role prefix letters and hasn’t had for some time. It is up to the MOD service department introducing a new aircraft to give it a name or designation. They only have to have mark numbers starting at ‘1’ although even that has gone by the wayside for, as previously mentioned, the F-35B along with Airseeker don’t even have mark numbers. Military Aviation Authority Regulatory Article 5307 refers.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/863141/RA5307_Issue_2.pdf

 

This is one of the most telling statements in that standard:

d the use of the next available number would imply greater design changes than have actually been made.

 

i.e. it might suggest we've spent more money that we want you to think

[Work In Progress]

3 hours ago, Hook said:

There was also the convention of naming British engines after birds of prey (Rolls Royce piston), rivers (Rolls Royce jets), felines (Armstrong Siddely piston), gems (Armstrong Siddely jets) and mythological figures (Bristol), wasn't there? 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Yes, those were themarketing choices of the makers though, nothing to do with official policy

[Dave Fleming]

26 minutes ago, Work In Progress said:

Yes, those were themarketing choices of the makers though, nothing to do with official policy

 

No, those were official too. For example. in July 1918, it was decreed that Rolls Royce should use Birds of Prey, Napier, Arms and Weapons, Armstrong-Siddely cats, Bristol, stars and Planets and Wosley , Snakes.

 

The allocations did change later, and as more companies became engine manufacturers and others faded into obscurity

Edited October 12, 2020 by Dave Fleming

[pigsty]

On 10/11/2020 at 1:07 PM, Truro Model Builder said:

Personally I always thought it was a shame we stopped naming bombers after cities. Panavia Truro has a nice ring to it...

The trouble with this is that they preferred alliteration.  Vickers would have been in a spot of bother - the next biggest town after the ones they'd already used was probably Ventnor.