RAF/RN aircraft not receiving UK designations.

[FRADUHunter]

Firstly, I'm new here on FC and this is my first post, so "hi"..! I'm a lifelong aviation enthusiast, and was also lucky enough to get in some flights on operational aircraft back in the 1990s (an RAF SARTU Wessex HC.2, an FAA FRADU Hunter T.8C and a 707 NAS Sea King HC.4). Unfortunately an issue with one of my eyes stopped my flying career before it started 20 odd years ago, having only got as far as Cranwell. So that's me in brief..!

The main reason for this post: I’m interested to know if any members know why the RAF seems to have stopped assigning traditional “British-style” designations to some of it’s recent (mainly US) aircraft types. Whilst this isn’t completely new – e.g. the second-hand F-4J(UK) jets in the 1980s retained their US designation, but this was for the reason of avoiding confusion between Tornado F.Mk 3 and a “Phantom F.Mk 3”. Also on a day-to-day basis the RAF unofficially uses US designations for aircraft that have been assigned an official UK designation – e.g. Sentry AEW. Mk 1 is often referred to within the RAF as “E-3D”, and Hercules variants often referred to as “C-130s”.
But, whilst many new types have received a formal UK designation (Atlas C. Mk 1, Juno HT. Mk 1 etc – also the T-6C Texan II is referred to on the RAF website now as "Texan T.Mk 1" – I’m not sure if the latter is official?), the RAF has not given a UK designation to the C-17 Globemaster, RC-135W Rivet Joint, MQ-9A Reaper or the F-35B Lightning II (although there seems to be some effort to refer to the latter as “Lightning”, although without a mark number). The only non-US type I can think of offhand without a UK designation is the Leonardo AW109SP GrandNew with 32 Sqn.
I’m unable to find anything from the RAF/MoD re any specific reason for not assigning UK designations to those aircraft types. So, has the RAF just got “sloppy” with it’s designations or is there a reason for it? The only possible reason I can think of, with ongoing coalition ops, is that for multi-national ops planning-purposes it would be much simpler to have, for example, all coalition F-35s called “F-35s” (as opposed to UK ones being called “Lightning FG. Mk 1” or something and causing confusion) etc? But that’s just speculation on my part. And I know that none of this really matters ("What's in a name?" and all that!), but it just intrigues me, and also slightly messes with my orderly mind if I'm honest..!!!
Has anyone heard any OFFICIAL reasons for not giving these (mainly US-built) types official UK designations?

Cheers,

Ade

[tommc]

Cannot answer your original question, but can correct a couple of things.

Phantom F-4J is the correct designation (NOT Phantom F-4J(UK))

Your use of the full stop/period/dot in your text is incorrect.

For example, the full name would be Texan T Mark 1
You can abbreviate the word Mark to Mk. (note the full stop)
So this would then be Texan T Mk. 1
You can even drop the Mark/Mk. totally.
This would be Texan T1

So, you can use:-
Texan T Mark 1
Texan T Mk. 1
Texan T1

But, Texan T.1 is incorrect, because the dot is superfluous, as the word Mark is not being used or shortened.
This incorrect use of a full stop anywhere else in the designator has long been repeated in enthusiast publications.

Still reading.............?

[FRADUHunter]

Cannot answer your original question, but can correct a couple of things.

Phantom F-4J is the correct designation (NOT Phantom F-4J(UK))

Your use of the full stop/period/dot in your text is incorrect.

For example, the full name would be Texan T Mark 1
You can abbreviate the word Mark to Mk. (note the full stop)
So this would then be Texan T Mk. 1
You can even drop the Mark/Mk. totally.
This would be Texan T1

So, you can use:-
Texan T Mark 1
Texan T Mk. 1
Texan T1

But, Texan T.1 is incorrect, because the dot is superfluous, as the word Mark is not being used or shortened.
This incorrect use of a full stop anywhere else in the designator has long been repeated in enthusiast publications.

Still reading.............?

Thanks very much Tom - all noted and appreciated.

I'd still be interested if anyone can shed light upon the original query.

[Seahornet1]

I'm right with you, Ade! I also have an 'orderly mind', and this sort of thing feels like having a stone in your shoe. Like trying to figure why the VC-10 never had a 'proper' name in RAF service - was this the thin end of the wedge...?

[slogen51]

Interesting

I must admit I often use the dot incorrectly e.g. Tornado GR.4 or Typhoon T.3 ( mainly because I think it looks nicer) but now I know better.

I think VC-10 is just VC10 that's what they were in airline service. The RAF Tristar just stayed the same as the civilian name.

I would like training types to revert back to cities so the Texan could be the Oxford etc?

The A400M could be the Falkirk etc

The RAF often put the dot before the Mk abbreviation?

[tommc]

Interesting

I must admit I often use the dot incorrectly e.g. Tornado GR.4 or Typhoon T.3 ( mainly because I think it looks nicer) but now I know better.

I think VC-10 is just VC10 that's what they were in airline service. The RAF Tristar just stayed the same as the civilian name.

I would like training types to revert back to cities so the Texan could be the Oxford etc?

The A400M could be the Falkirk etc

The RAF often put the dot before the Mk abbreviation?

TriStar has a capital "S"

Yes, I like the idea of training types having city names too.

A400 is already named Atlas

If you are referring to the RAF website putting the dot in? Well, that publication is a whole different matter.

[IanM]

I’m not sure this is a particularly recent issue. The HS125 / BAe 125 aircraft that operated with 32 Sqn and the BAe 146 never received names although they did get mark numbers.

Ian

[Bushpilot]

From your examples it looks like it may have something to do with how the aircraft was ordered. Those ordered from an MoD spec e.g. Typhoon get F Mk* but those ordered off an existing production line seem to keep the manufacturers designation e.g. A400M. Of course there are bound to be examples where this doesn't apply but it's only a theory.

Julian

[POL]

But the A400M is the Atlas...

[slogen51]

TriStar like McDonalds ?

[FRADUHunter]

I'm right with you, Ade! I also have an 'orderly mind', and this sort of thing feels like having a stone in your shoe. Like trying to figure why the VC-10 never had a 'proper' name in RAF service - was this the thin end of the wedge...?

Ha - I'm glad it's not just me then...!!!

Re the examples given in the above replies like the VC-10, HS.125 plus the BAe 146 etc, those manufacturers designations were accepted as the offical RAF "name" (totally unimaginitive though it was!) and given role/mark numbers in the standard way, but with the RC-135W. F-35B, C-17 and MQ-9A, I'm assuming those designations have been accepted as "official RAF names", even though following the US rather than UK designation system..?? Like I said, all I can think is that the MoD have made the conscious decision to retain those US designations for frontline US-supplied types that will be likely to serve operationally alongside similar US-operated aircraft during coalition ops. If so, this would be similar in logic (but different in application) to the US/UK agreement during WW2 (Jan 1944) under which names of US supplied aircraft were kept common between both countries to avoid confusion during ops etc - an example being the USN Grumman F4F Wildcat being designated Martlet in RN service, until Jan 44 when all RN aircraft took on the US name Wildcat - not just subsequently delivered aircraft, but all previously supplied aircraft were now referred to as Wildcats (e.g. F4F-4B Wildcat was designated Martlet Mk IV in RN service, until Jan 44 when it became Wildcat Mk IV).

I'd love to get to the bottom of it "officially" though..!

[22A]

Like trying to figure why the VC-10 never had a 'proper' name in RAF service - was this the thin end of the wedge...?

Go back to 1918; did the Handley Page O/400 or SE5 ever have names?

[Doughnut]

The F-35A/B/C was named Lightning by Lockheed as a tribute to the WW2 Lockheed P-38 Lightning. The fact that English Electric use the name Lightning is totally a coincidence.
The RAF standard preference is the use of a type name, suffex donating the aircraft role and mark number indicating a variation or upgrade which changes the the basic type.
example Tornado GR1 upgraded to Tornado GR4, and Tornado F3 as a having a different role.
The Sea Harrier FRS1 was upgraded to Sea Harrier FA2.
It would be interesting to see confirmation of the F-35B suffix, disregarding the use of the name Lightning, "FA1" (fighter attack) would seem the most appropriate but equally "FGR1" as used by the Typhoon.

[POL]

The F-35B is known as "Lightning II" in British service, as per the response to my FOI request: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ ... ng-1218825

[FRADUHunter]

The F-35B is known as "Lightning II" in British service, as per the response to my FOI request: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ ... ng-1218825

Thanks for that - exactly what I was after - official confirmation. Strange response in the reply they gave you though "The correct name for the aircraft is Lightning II F-35B" - that's even more arse about face than I was expecting (i.e. using a US designation, but presented back-to-front)..!

[tommc]

The official register lists them as "LIGHTNING II".

[FRADUHunter]

The official register lists them as "LIGHTNING II".

Have you got a link to that offical register / where is it found?

[tommc]

The official register lists them as "LIGHTNING II".

Have you got a link to that offical register / where is it found?

No.

[Seahornet1]

Like trying to figure why the VC-10 never had a 'proper' name in RAF service - was this the thin end of the wedge...?

Go back to 1918; did the Handley Page O/400 or SE5 ever have names?

Ah, but those designs were originally procured into UK military service (and presumably were allocated their familiar alphanumeric designations) by the RNAS and RFC respectively. Also, I imagine it took a little while for the RAF to develop a naming policy for aircraft types, rather than it arriving fully formed on 01/04/1918.

I'd be interested if anyone can think of a type introduced into full RAF service (say, post 1920) before the VC-10, without having or being given a 'verbal' (as opposed to alphanumeric) name.

(No prizes though, this close to Christmas, I'm boracic.... )

[FRADUHunter]

Like trying to figure why the VC-10 never had a 'proper' name in RAF service - was this the thin end of the wedge...?

Go back to 1918; did the Handley Page O/400 or SE5 ever have names?

Ah, but those designs were originally procured into UK military service (and presumably were allocated their familiar alphanumeric designations) by the RNAS and RFC respectively. Also, I imagine it took a little while for the RAF to develop a naming policy for aircraft types, rather than it arriving fully formed on 01/04/1918.

I'd be interested if anyone can think of a type introduced into full RAF service (say, post 1920) before the VC-10, without having or being given a 'verbal' (as opposed to alphanumeric) name.

(No prizes though, this close to Christmas, I'm boracic.... )

I think the only such type is the Northrop N-3PB (floatplane patrol bombers) - which were not really RAF aircraft, as they were ordered by Norway but delivered to 330 (Norwegian) Squadron, RAF Coastal Command after the occupation of Norway and only used for a year or so until replaced by Catalinas during late 1942 - they were never given a "proper" RAF name...