Naming of AFV, ships, aircrafts etc...

[chino]

I don't quite know where to post this as I want to talk about naming in general but not exclusive to any type of weapon/equipment.

 

But since this is tanknet, et's start with AFV...

 

In Germany, they seemed to have more or less continued with the tradition of naming their AFV after cats or other animals. There are exceptions - the West German "Kanone". ANd of course, in the early days the tanks didn't have "names" and were simply called Panzerkampfwagons I, II, III or IV. Which was the first German tank to have an officially-recognised "name"? Is it the Panther?

 

In the UK, they seemed to have carried on with using "C" names for tanks. Churchill, Cromwell, Crusader, Centurion, Chieftain, Challenger. The other AFV get "S" names like Scorpion, Stormer, Scimitar etc. Which is the first UK tank to start this tradition of using "C" names? Was the Churchill tank named after Winston Churchill?

[chino]

In the US, they have carried on naming their all their AFV after generals. Bradley, Abrams, Patton, Sherman, Lee, Stryker. I would be curious what they do with Desert Storm's Norman Schwarzkopf. Imagine the Norman MBT or Schwarzkopf IFV... All sound very wrong... Or maybe the Stormin' Norman sound more promising.

 

US aircraft carriers are named after presidents. And unlike AFVs they can use the whole name, like USS Ronald Reagan. When did this system of using presidents' names start?

 

Is there a system for naming US combat aircrafts? We have Mustang, Falcon, Eagle, Hornet, Tomcat, Raptor... But then we have Sabre, Phantom etc. I don't know if "Warthog" is official? There don't seem to be a strict adherence other than that they are all creatures.

 

It seems to me that all other countries are very ad hoc in naming their fighting vehicles, planes or ships.

[chino]

UK also name some of their AFV with "W" names like Warrior and now the Warthog (STK Bronco).

 

What's the difference between the UK's "S"-named AFVs and the "W"-named AFVs?

[Tomas Hoting]

The official name is A-10 Thunderbolt II, the nickname is Warthog.

 

It seems that the French army didn't give their armoured vehicles names like the German, British or US armies did. The only exception is the Leclerc, named after General Philippe Leclerc de Hauteclocque, commander of the 2nd Armored Division (French: 2e Division Blindée), which was involved in the Liberation of Paris in 1944.

 

The name of the truck-based 155mm Caesar artillery system is the abbreviation for Camion équipé d'un système d'artillerie.

[bojan]

...Which is the first UK tank to start this tradition of using "C" names?...

 

Covenanter.

 

Was the Churchill tank named after Winston Churchill?

Yes.

[shep854]

I believe that the US adopted naming vehicles from the British. "Grant/Lee", "Stuart" and "Sherman" were originally British names. For PR reasons, the naming convention carried on.

 

The practice of pronunciating acronyms was orginated by Americans, though.

[BansheeOne]

In Germany, they seemed to have more or less continued with the tradition of naming their AFV after cats or other animals. There are exceptions - the West German "Kanone".

 

Jagdpanzer Kanone was, of course, not a name but a type designation - "tank destroyer, gun", as to distinguish it from the supplementary "tank destroyer, missile". Neither was ever named, though the Jagdpanzer Rakete evolved into the Jaguar. They appeared at a time when equipment wasn't very much named anyway, like the HS 30.

[Guest aevans]

In the US, they have carried on naming their all their AFV after generals. Bradley, Abrams, Patton, Sherman, Lee, Stryker. I would be curious what they do with Desert Storm's Norman Schwarzkopf. Imagine the Norman MBT or Schwarzkopf IFV... All sound very wrong... Or maybe the Stormin' Norman sound more promising.

 

WRT the Stryker:

 

The vehicle is named for two American servicemen who posthumously received the Medal of Honor: Pfc Stuart S. Stryker, who died in World War II and Spc Robert F. Stryker, who died in the Vietnam War.

 

Even though Abrams was commander of MACV and eventually Army Chief of Staff, his greatest contribution as an armor officer was probably as a battalion commander in WW2.

 

US aircraft carriers are named after presidents. And unlike AFVs they can use the whole name, like USS Ronald Reagan. When did this system of using presidents' names start?

US aircraft carrier naming policy is complex. Currently they are using presidents' names, but they have also used the names of politicians who supported the Navy (Carl Vinson, John C. Stennis), a secretary of the Navy (Forrestal), and a historically famous admiral (Nimitz). They have also used names of hsitorically famous US Navy combatants--Enterprise, Ranger, Constellation, etc. The first carrier named after a president was John F. Kennedy, which was commissioned in 1968.

 

Is there a system for naming US combat aircrafts? We have Mustang, Falcon, Eagle, Hornet, Tomcat, Raptor... But then we have Sabre, Phantom etc. I don't know if "Warthog" is official? There don't seem to be a strict adherence other than that they are all creatures.

 

I don't think there's a system for fighters so much as a preferrence for predatory flying critters to match the imagined nature of the type.

 

Bombers are named after their perceived qualities:

 

Flying Fortress and Superfortress refer to their heavy defensive armament (and evoke the siege-like nature of early strategic bombing campaigns)

Liberator evokes the self-image of the WW2 US Army (which ran the Air Force at the time)

Peacemaker evokes the ideal of not having to fight if you are prepared to fight

Stratojet and Stratofortress refer to the strategic nature of the planes' mission (and in the case of Stratofortress also tips a hat to earlier marks)

Lancer evokes the penetrating nature of the low-level attacks that the B-1 was designed to conduct

Spirit evokes the stealth characteristics of the B-2

 

It seems to me that all other countries are very ad hoc in naming their fighting vehicles, planes or ships. As obvious from the above, no more than the US.

[Argus]

I think the 'C' names came with Cruiser, so Covenanter and Crusader , but the Churchill was officially named after Winnie's illustrious ancestor the Duke of Marlborough.

 

shane

[chino]

The official name is A-10 Thunderbolt II, the nickname is Warthog.

 

haha! Stupid mistake....

 

Thanks

[chino]

I find something very confusing as to why the Americans call everything a M1 or M2 or M3 and this continues to this day.

 

There are M2 halftracks, M2 Bradley.

 

M3 Stuart, and then M3 Lee. M3 Halftracks, then the M3 Grease Gun.

 

M1 Garand, M1 carbine. M1 Thompson.

 

And just when you thought the Americans prefer small numerals, they suddenly surprised everyone with M14. What happened to the M5 rifle, or the M7, M10 or M13 rifles? There weren't any far as I know. So how come we jumped straight to M14? What does the 14 signify? Or the M16 for that matter?

 

Is M48 Patton named for the year it was designed? Is the M60 still called a Patton?

 

What does the "M" stand for? Mark? Military? Model? Or nothing.

 

Just when you thought M113 was a big number unusual for US, they came up with M551. Was there a M246 etc? Why "551"?

Edited June 25, 2009 by chino

[Xavier]

I believe that the US adopted naming vehicles from the British. "Grant/Lee", "Stuart" and "Sherman" were originally British names. For PR reasons, the naming convention carried on.

 

The practice of pronunciating acronyms was orginated by Americans, though.

And now they often use some seriously "creative" grammar to create long sentences that can be "shortened" to a UBERCOOL acronym, the stupid morons.

 

 

As for numbers, very often they don't follow the sequence either, e.g. F-35* or SSN-21

 

* why was there even a X-32 and X-35, instead of YF-24 and YF-25?

Edited June 25, 2009 by Xavier

[Special-K]

I find something very confusing as to why the Americans call everything a M1 or M2 or M3 and this continues to this day.

 

There are M2 halftracks, M2 Bradley.

 

M3 Stuart, and then M3 Lee. M3 Halftracks, then the M3 Grease Gun.

 

M1 Garand, M1 carbine. M1 Thompson.

 

And just when you thought the Americans prefer small numerals, they suddenly surprised everyone with M14. What happened to the M5 rifle, or the M7, M10 or M13 rifles? There weren't any far as I know. So how come we jumped straight to M14? What does the 14 signify? Or the M16 for that matter?

 

Is M48 Patton named for the year it was designed? Is the M60 still called a Patton?

 

What does the "M" stand for? Mark? Military? Model? Or nothing.

 

Just when you thought M113 was a big number unusual for US, they came up with M551. Was there a M246 etc? Why "551"?

 

 

 

 

I'm wondering if some of the 'M-X' rifles were rifles that were trialled but not officially adopted. Perhaps the FAL as an example when it was competing with the M-14? Then again, I seem to recall they were using 'T' designations too. FWIW the M-15 rifle was an automatic rifle variant of the M-15 with a heavier barrel and different stock, so I guess the following M-16 makes sense - but why then the Car-15 designation for the carbine variant? Why the M-4 the also? And why wouldn't the XM-8 have been the M-17 or something?

 

Ugh. I'm going to go take a few Tylenols now.

 

 

 

 

 

-K

[shep854]

The US "M" designations are only part of an item's "name". The "M" is for "Model". A full designation gives the item first, subtype or caliber then the model number. Once upon a time (until the 1920s or so) the model number was the year of adoption, with significant modifications designated with "-A1", -A2", etc.

 

Examples: US Rifle, Cal .30 M1903 (or, "Model of 1903")

US Pistol, Cal .45 M1911 (or, "Model of 1911")

 

Using the more recent nomenclature, you get,

 

US Rifle, Cal. 30, M1

US Carbine, cal. 30, M1

 

up to: US Rifle, Cal.7.62x51mm M14

US Rifle,5.56x45mm, M16

 

And of course,

 

US Tank, Medium, M3

US Tank, Light,M3

 

and so on.

 

In very recent times, M numbers have gotten huge, as in 4-digit numbers for various HMMWVs. The M1 tank and M2/M3 IFVCFVs are an attempt to reset the system. Presumably, the M4 retains its number continuity with the classic WWII-era carbines due to the rarity of US carbines.

 

IOW, it's confusing; maybe a form of OPSEC.

Edited June 25, 2009 by shep854

[Guest aevans]

I find something very confusing as to why the Americans call everything a M1 or M2 or M3 and this continues to this day.

 

There are M2 halftracks, M2 Bradley.

 

M3 Stuart, and then M3 Lee. M3 Halftracks, then the M3 Grease Gun.

 

M1 Garand, M1 carbine. M1 Thompson.

 

That's the Army nomenclature system at its finest. As explained on this page, the numbers are only unique within a type. As is obvious from above, types can be pretty narrowly defined.

 

And just when you thought the Americans prefer small numerals...

 

The numbering convention has gone through several iterations over the last century, using year of introduction, straight serial numbering from 1, and (I think) serial numbering from within reserved number groups.

[ScottyB]

The first carrier named after a president was John F. Kennedy, which was commissioned in 1968.

 

Actually, the first CV named for a president was the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt (CVB-42), commissioned on October 27th, 1945.

 

Scott

[Doug Kibbey]

but why then the Car-15 designation for the carbine variant? Why the M-4 the also? And why wouldn't the XM-8 have been the M-17 or something?

 

Ugh. I'm going to go take a few Tylenols now.

-K

 

Well, it could have been worse. Before being type standardized, it was the XM-177.

[Guest aevans]

Actually, the first CV named for a president was the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt (CVB-42), commissioned on October 27th, 1945.

 

Scott

 

Forgot about that one.

[Old Tanker]

For the most part of U.S. military naming tanks like Patton , Sherman , Sheridan and Abrams was just a public relations game for the general population.

 

I never called an M-48 a Patton , nor a M-41 a Walker Bulldog , nor an M-1 rifle a Garand. Grease Gun was G.I. slang not an official designation. Never heard Bazooka but I knew what a 3.5" rocket launcher was.

Never heard of a Scorpion but I knew what a SPAT was ( M-56 Scorpion Self-propelled anti-tank).

In some cases we didn't even use the model number such as truck was a 1/4 ton (jeep) , Duece and a half or 6 by (2.5 ton ) , 5 ton or 8 by.

About the only item referred to by civilian name was the Jeep frequently but not always as 1/4 ton truck designation was used also..

 

On this forum is a Sparky thread as he is a one-man organization to name the M-113 APC the Gavin , 50 years after it was introduced. It was never given an official name .

[thekirk]

Stratojet and Stratofortress refer to the strategic nature of the planes' mission (and in the case of Stratofortress also tips a hat to earlier marks)

 

I may be off-base here, aevans, but I believe the root for both the Stratojet and Stratofortress is not "Strategic", but "Stratospheric". Or, at least, this is what I remember reading somewhere...

[Doug Kibbey]

I never called an M-48 a Patton ,

 

When I was in, anyone who had referred to a "forty-eight" or "sixty" as a Patton ("You guys go bring that Patton over to the field support office.") would have been looked at in befuddlement or as if they were from Mars (then the laughter would have started). Never heard the expression.

 

M151A1's and A2's were referred to as "Jeeps". Never heard the term "Mutt" 'til many years later. M37 was still a "Beep" or "three-quarter" (the Kaiser Jeep thingy , or M-517, regardless of the actual model) was a "five-quarter"). Common wheeled vehicles were all referred to by capacity, except the "Jeep". Same-same on my driver's license. Tracked vehicles by model number. M578's were "VTR's" and M88's were "eighty-eights".

 

We did refer to M551's as "Sheridan's" (or in VN sometimes as "Shanks", which I've never heard anywhere else...Sheridan + Tank = "Shank", even easier to say than "Sheridan").

[chino]

Why are some US aircrafts using "A" instead of "F"? Example, A4 Skyhawk and A10 Thunderbolt (thanks Tomas). A6 Intruder and its electronic warfare version, the EA6 Prowler. Is the "A" designation for ground attack planes? But then what about the AV-8 Harrier? Is the Harrier also a designated a ground attack plane?

 

Are there any other planes with the A designation?

 

Are there any differences between how an Army, Navy, Airforce or Marine aircraft is named? BTW, do these different branches still design.operate aircrafts that the other branches don't?

 

What seemed most consistent are the transport planes that all have a "C" name like C-130, C-47. Or the bombers like B-17, B-29, B-1, B-2. Are there any exceptions in these two areas?

[pikachu]

As for numbers, very often they don't follow the sequence either, e.g. F-35* or SSN-21

 

* why was there even a X-32 and X-35, instead of YF-24 and YF-25?

X-32 and X-35 follow the eXperimental aircraft designation (NACA/NASA X-planes) instead of the Fighter aircraft designation used by the USAF. The reason for this is that JSF started as JAST, which was originally intended to be a technology demonstration project rather than a real fighter competition. Originally (before JAST), there wasn't even supposed to be an X-35, only X-32. X-31 was a canard-delta tech demonstrator bearing a distinct resemblance to the Eurocanards that was fitted with a paddle-style thrust vectoring mechanism. The original X-32 was supposed to continue more or less on the fighter demonstrator theme, while the X-33 was a lifting body demonstrator for NASA's SSTO (Single Stage To Orbit) project - later canceled. The X-34 was a future space shuttle flying model. When JSF came into being, the X-32 designation was reassigned to the Boeing consortium, and the X-35 (the next unassigned number at the time) was assigned to Lockheed consortium's plane. It must be noted that the original X-35 planes, in all three versions, didn't even have their weapons bays (or even bay doors) built. They were flown with counterweights.

 

Actually, the USAF has been rather lenient with the F designation. The F-20, for example, jumped one number on Grumman's request and the F-21 is asigned to Kfirs borrowed from Israel.

 

Why are some US aircrafts using "A" instead of "F"? Example, A4 Skyhawk and A10 Thunderbolt (thanks Tomas). A6 Intruder and its electronic warfare version, the EA6 Prowler. Is the "A" designation for ground attack planes? But then what about the AV-8 Harrier? Is the Harrier also a designated a ground attack plane?

 

A is for Attack, yes. E is for Electronic warfare, and V is for VTOL, but the Harrier was actually the only plane in service with that designation until the V-22 came along (the other Vs were prototypes). The Harriers in service with the USMC are considered ground attack planes in their primary role because they're intended to provide marines with close air support.

 

Are there any differences between how an Army, Navy, Airforce or Marine aircraft is named? BTW, do these different branches still design.operate aircrafts that the other branches don't?

 

The Army only operates helicopters, and excepting the F-35 (of which the Navy actually has its own version) and E-2 Hawkeye, no other service operates Naval fixed-wing a/c like the F/A-18.

 

As an aside, F/A designation is given because the plane is primarily a fighter (so the F comes first) and not large enough to be classified as a bomber despite the fact that it functions more like a bomber than a ground attack plane. The / is put there to prevent people from reading it as fa.

[swerve]

As for numbers, very often they don't follow the sequence either, e.g. F-35* or SSN-21

 

* why was there even a X-32 and X-35, instead of YF-24 and YF-25?

X-numbers, with no F (or B, or whatever) are in a different series. There were, for example, the X-29 & X-31.

 

Y numbers are prototypes.

 

It appears that someone high up decided that the entire designation system could be discarded for the X-35 (should have been F-25), as with the F-18E (should have been F-24) & AIM-9X (should have been AIM-9T - the X was a place holder while it was an experimental project, not intended to be used for a deployed weapon). They've more or less abandoned suffices for variants, e.g. F-16C covers a vast range of different types, & allocated out of sequence letters, e.g. F-16N. The T-6 is completely out of sequence. What was devised as a logical system has degenerated into a complete mess.

 

Are there any differences between how an Army, Navy, Airforce or Marine aircraft is named?

No. They all adopted a standard designation system in 1962. BTW, the US army does have some fixed-wing aircraft, e.g. the RC-12. The F/A thing is another breach of the system, adopted for marketing reasons. Previous fighter-cum-attack aircraft (e.g. the F-105) stuck with the simple F-, as has the F-35.

 

http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/aircraft.html

Edited June 26, 2009 by swerve

[binder001]

Just a few extra comments in no particular order.

 

Some US designations can be confusing, especially when the system is changing. For instance, in WW2 the US Army was purchasing items with "model of year" designations (US Rifle, Cal. .30, M1903A3) (Hat, Wool, M1941), at the same time the Army had tried to go to a "simplified" model system (Medium Tank M4) (Halftrack Car M2A1) AND had items using manufacturer designations (Truck, 2 1/2 Ton, 6X6, GMC Model CCKW), (Tractor D7)

 

Some designations are political; why was a re-engined Medium Tank M26A1 called an "M46", becuase (the story goes) that Congress would fund a new type tank, but would balk at rebuilt ones. The USAF went through similar thinking with the B50 (an upgraded B29). Why was the T26E3 a "Heavy Tank" while it was later type classified as "Medium Tank M26"? Becuase 1) it was much heavier than previous medium tanks, and 2) the troops and public wanted to know why the US Army didn't have a Heavy Tank of their own while the Germans had several. The T26E3 wasn't meant to he a support or breakthrough tank - it was always intended to fill the role of a medium tank.

 

Somewhere along the line the British decided to name their tank models, they then applied names to the tanks received from the USA, hence the naming of many WW2 tanks after American Civil War generals, "Stuart", "Sherman", "Lee", etc. The US Army NEVER referred to their tanks by name, always by model number. The press reports probably brought the "Sherman" name (and others) into use by the public, which later migrated into military use. The PR value dawned on the US Army, so the M26 became the Pershing and the M24 the Chaffee, both of these are US names, not British. The M46 was christened Patton, the M47 was Patton II, then M48 went back to Patton. The M60 never had an official name, it just tends to be grouped as "Patton" by modelers and historians. It would have been intersting to see the actual M# of the MBT70, had it been adopted, and if it would have received a PR name (the "simplifed" version was XM803). Thankfully "Abrams" became attached to a tank worthy of the name.

 

Some names seem to have been "made up" or their use promoted by modelers or earlier tank historians (often from Europe). I have never seen anything before the 1970s referring to the 90mm Gun Motor Carriage M36 as a "Jackson", and where did anyone come up with calling a 75mm Howitzer Motor Carriage M8 a "Scott"?

 

The US Navy used to have a very straightforward naming policy. Battleships were named after states, carriers were named after battles or famous ships, cruisers were cities, destroyers were notable naval personnel, submarines were named after sea creatures (real or mythical). Then politics reared its ugly head. No more battleships = states feeling slighted, so let's name SSBNs after states. The real problem probably started with the FDR (CVB42) - now the carrier is named after a former president. Then in 1963 a well-meaning effort named CVA67 the John F. Kennedy. The genie was out of the bottle. CVN68 was Nimitz, now we are naming carriers after admirals (should have been a destroyer type) and CVN69 was Eisenhower (a general and a president) now we are really off track. CVN70 was the Vinson, now we are naming multi-billion dollar defense assets after political appointees! Common sense and tradition have mixed with silliness to where every ex-president now expects his own CVN! Historic battles went to cruisers, and cities went to SSNs.

 

Some aircraft have been named by their manufacturers sometimes during design or development. "Flying Fortress" was reportedly taken from a press comment, so its later, bigger brother became "Superfortress", then came "strato" with Stratocruiser, Stratojet, Stratotanker, etc. Boeing blended the two with the B52 "Stratofortress", which is now called a BUFF (among other things). Republic had "thunder" (Thunderbolt, Thunderjet, Thunderchief), Grumman went to "cat" names, etc.

 

Back to M-numbers, I have never quite understood the Army's fascination with large numbers for their trucks and logistic vehicles. Now they are into four-digit numbers for various trucks.

 

Some equipment started with a manufacturer's designation, then went through different modes of acceptance. The Colt CAR15 was bought in limited numbers for Special Operations in VietNam. I had heard that "CAR" stood for "Colt Automatic Rifle". Later the same basic weapon was proposed for limited use as a firing port weapon for the XM2/XM3 as the XM177. Then the weapon proved useful and was placed in general service as the M4 carbine.

 

I've left GI jargon alone ("SPAT" for instance).

 

Gary