On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 12:55:12 -0500, "John A. Weeks III"
wrote:

In article , Cub Driver
wrote:

And how do they name planes?

It seems to be a collaborative effort between the manufacturer and the
air force. Then, after the uniformly awful names are applied, the
pilots and crews name it something else entirely.

It used to be something that the manufacturer did. For example,
North American used the "thunder" series names (Thunderbolt,
Thunderchief, etc)

You mean Republic, right?

North American built the Mustang and Twin Mustang. They built a series of Navy
fighters all bearing the name Fury and there was the Sabre and Super Sabre.
I don't think that the XF-107 was ever Christened with a name.

Lockheed originally named there XP-38 the "Atlanta". It was the Brits who
bestowed the name "Lightning". Likewise, the Brits named the P-51"Mustang", as
NAA called it the "Apache".

Grumman built fighters in FAA service received the names "Martlet" and "Gannet",
utterly awful to American ears. They eventually adopted Grumman's names of
Wildcat and Hellcat. Grumman also produced three different aircraft based upon
the same airframe, "Tracker", "Tracer" and "Trader". These being the S2F-1, WF-1
and the TF-1. Later these were re-designated S-2, E-1 and C-1.

The common thread to Boeing bombers was the word "Fortress", not really anything
related to the atmosphere.

As far as I can determine, Only Grumman has adhered to tradition over the long
haul. Republic had the Thunderbolt II (A-10), LVT had the Corsair II (A-7),
McDonnell had the Phantom II (F-4 series) and most recently Lockheed-Martin
offered the Lightning II (F-22). Both the A-10 and F-22 have alternate names
(Warthog, etc) now, and the Phantom and A-7 are essentially history.

My regards,

Widewing (C.C. Jordan)
http://www.worldwar2aviation.com
http://www.netaces.org
http://www.hitechcreations.com