Air Force Unveils New 'E-Series' Designation for Advanced Aircraft and Weapons

I reacted in the TX thread first but I really can't let this go. This is one of the stupidest additions to the US designation system in years (since YAL-1?).

Every aircraft or other system being developed today will be extensively designed, tested, and modelled in simulation before they start cutting metal. So this designation should in theory be applied to basically all new programs. It adds no value, meaning, or insight whatsoever. It's a sign of how out of touch the Air Force is that they think this actually helps in any way.
 
TomS said:
I reacted in the TX thread first but I really can't let this go. This is one of the stupidest additions to the US designation system in years (since YAL-1?).

Every aircraft or other system being developed today will be extensively designed, tested, and modelled in simulation before they start cutting metal. So this designation should in theory be applied to basically all new programs. It adds no value, meaning, or insight whatsoever. It's a sign of how out of touch the Air Force is that they think this actually helps in any way.
Click to expand...

Almost as bad as, "F/A".
 
sferrin said:
TomS said:
I reacted in the TX thread first but I really can't let this go. This is one of the stupidest additions to the US designation system in years (since YAL-1?).

Every aircraft or other system being developed today will be extensively designed, tested, and modelled in simulation before they start cutting metal. So this designation should in theory be applied to basically all new programs. It adds no value, meaning, or insight whatsoever. It's a sign of how out of touch the Air Force is that they think this actually helps in any way.
Click to expand...

Almost as bad as, "F/A".
Click to expand...

As in F/A-22? Yeah, that was sad.

At least F/A-18 kinda sorta made sense given the program history of the Hornet (the original idea being to build two distinct but rapidly convertible models, the F-18 and the A-18).
 
Gimme a break. What happens to the E-2 / E-3 / E-4 varied aircraft, in this case ? Will their successor be called EE-15 (for example) ?

..and then, English Electric heirs won't be happy at all.
 
Do I get it right?
Lower case letter "e", not a capital letter "E".
eT-7A, not ET-7A.

The USAF took the wrong lessons from the smartphone industry, i.e my smartphone Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact.
 
Archibald said:
Gimme a break. What happens to the E-2 / E-3 / E-4 varied aircraft, in this case ? Will their successor be called EE-15 (for example) ?

..and then, English Electric heirs won't be happy at all.
Click to expand...

Well, the idea is that this only gets applied during development. So it's kinda equivalent to the X or Y prefixes but only for stuff that hasn't been built yet, I guess. Still silly though.
 
Entirely unnecessary. Can you imagine the brain damage resulting from attending the meetings of the focus group responsible for this? :eek:
 
Why e? Why not d? Surely 'd' for digital would make more sense?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom