A-1 "Skyraider"

[plan_D]

This may sound like a stupid question but; Why is the "Skyraider" designated A-1?

I know the logic behind American designations but this one just doesn't fit it in. It goes backwards. The A stands for Attack and the number after is the design number like A-36 is the 36th attack design on U.S drawing boards. How is the "Skyraider" the first? Did they restart the process in the 60s?

 

[Nonskimmer]

Good question. It's like the "Century Series" fighters. F-100, F-101, F-102, and so on.
My guess is just what you said: They restarted it. Why is anyone's guess. FJ or evan might know.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The original designation was AD-1 (Attack Douglas 1) under the post war navy designation system. During the war years when it was being developed it was originally designated XBT2D-1. In the 1960s it was redesignated A-1.

 

[evangilder]

US military designations have always been one of those things that has irritated me. You get used to the way they designated in one era, then it changes for the next. But FBJ is correct for the era is was created, in Yoda speak: Attack, Douglas, 1.

 

[BombTaxi]

I understand that the designation system was standardised in 1962, so both air force and navy used common type designations. So the AD-1 became the A-1, in line with airforce attack designators.

 

[plan_D]

Okay, thanks.

I thought U.S designations were logical until now.

 

[evangilder]

Well, they make more sense now. The old WWII designations were different for the Army than the Navy. They both made sense once you understood how they worked, especially with the Navy.

 

[BombTaxi]

Yeh, the Navy ones were wierd. The Wildcat of WW2 fame was the F4F...but the Phantom (of Vietnam fame) was the F4H, while the Corsair was the F4U...then post 1962, F-4 referred to the Phantom only. Odd system!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Yeh, the Navy ones were wierd. The Wildcat of WW2 fame was the F4F...but the Phantom (of Vietnam fame) was the F4H, while the Corsair was the F4U...then post 1962, F-4 referred to the Phantom only. Odd system!

F4A3BD-2Y

 

[cheddar cheese]

Bless you

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

blimey!!

 

[Nonskimmer]

I will not!

 

[HealzDevo]

Yes Wierd designation system isn't it? Consider this, although the F-117 Stealth Fighter isn't really an actual fighter but more a bomber with fighter capabilities it is known as the F-117. Also the B-1B Lancer after the B-29, the B-52, the B-47, the B-50 etc.

 

[plan_D]

The F-117 is designated a fighter because they want to please the pilots into thinking they're flying a fighter. The correct designation would be A-117 or F/A-117.

 

[evangilder]

Agreed, D. They are allegedly capable of carrying air to air missiles. But for the attack role, that is where they do best.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The F-117 is designated a fighter because they want to please the pilots into thinking they're flying a fighter. The correct designation would be A-117 or F/A-117.

The 117 designation came from aircraft "117" among the first coming down the assembly line. For the longest time no one knew the designation of "the article." When Lockheed was putting together the "-1" AKA the pilot's manual, there were numerous pages referring to "117" so the name stuck. At the same time you had the "foamers" thinking that the F-19 was the real deal, so this really confused things as well, but made the security guys happy.

The F-117 was the first configuration with the smaller V tail. The "A" model came with the larger tailplane and "other" modifications as well. This was probably done on the 5th or 6th production model, with all other retrofitted.

 

[HealzDevo]

Still you get what I am saying don't you? There was apparently an idea to make a type called the Seahawk for the US Navy but apparently the project was cancelled. At least nothing further seems to have come of it... Also there is the B-1B Lancer. The B-2 Spirit. The B-52 which seems to be totally out of wack with the rest of the sequence. Probably changed so the US forces could claim that some embarassing problems didn't occur like the B-70 Valikyrie, and those Pogos and other types. Wipe the record and start off at zero and try and keep those types from becoming public knowledge. If that was the intention in this day and age they have failed, to keep these types information under lock and key.

 

[evangilder]

Hey now, the XB-70 was cool! Some prototypes make it, some do not. It's part of the free-market economy and competition in it. It makes for better airplanes.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Still you get what I am saying don't you? There was apparently an idea to make a type called the Seahawk for the US Navy but apparently the project was cancelled. At least nothing further seems to have come of it... Also there is the B-1B Lancer. The B-2 Spirit. The B-52 which seems to be totally out of wack with the rest of the sequence. Probably changed so the US forces could claim that some embarassing problems didn't occur like the B-70 Valikyrie, and those Pogos and other types. Wipe the record and start off at zero and try and keep those types from becoming public knowledge. If that was the intention in this day and age they have failed, to keep these types information under lock and key.

Actually the DOD numbering designation system changed in the early 1960s. The B-52 designator was assigned in the late 40s when the B-52 was conceived. When Robert McNamara was the US Sec. of Defense in the early 1960s, he wanted standardization though out the military, that's why the numbering system went back to "1." The McDonnell F-110 became the F-4, etc.

 

[HealzDevo]

Still it seems a rather odd way of doing things. Even if it was standardized. Still a lot of information was surpressed about some failures, even still there is doubt over whether we know of all of them... Quite odd and ecentric aircraft were developed during the 50s like the Pogo and that. The Pogo was an attempt to create a VTOL fighter that failed. Still Area 51 could be used to hide some of those failures. (Looks around for any US Government CIA agents...)