Off-standard US DoD aircraft designations (EA-37B, E-130J etc.)

[Robert]

The US MDS designation system is truly dead.

EC-37B Mission Design Series designation change to EA-37B

Air Combat Command’s EC-37B has been redesignated to become the EA-37B effective October 27, 2023.

www.acc.af.mil

EA-37B, really? It's an A-37B Dragonfly modified with special electronics?

 

[aim9xray]

Yes, a modified A-37B Dragonfly with also a coffee maker and stand-up loo.

 

[TomS]

The US MDS designation system is truly dead.

EC-37B Mission Design Series designation change to EA-37B

Air Combat Command’s EC-37B has been redesignated to become the EA-37B effective October 27, 2023.

www.acc.af.mil

EA-37B, really? It's an A-37B Dragonfly modified with special electronics?

Oh, FFS! Why do they even have a nomenclature office anymore?

 

[_Del_]

Oh, FFS! Why do they even have a nomenclature office anymore?

It's not a cargo plane with a bunch of fancy stuff bolted on. It's an "electronic attack" plane. Which one do you think would be in more danger of budget pressure in a committee meeting full of people who can't tell a 747 from a Cessna 172?

 

[Robert]

That's fine, give it a proper electronic attack designation, like EA-15.

 

[TomS]

That's fine, give it a proper electronic attack designation, like EA-15.

Or EAC-37, which isn't a strictly correct MDS but doesn't put the new Compass Call in the same base designation as the Tweety Bird.

 

[apparition13]

EA-37B? EC-37 makes sense since that Gulfstream is the C-37, but A-37 is already a designation, for the A-37 dragonfly CAS/COIN aircraft that the USAF flew. Which so far as I know is still in service in South America.

Combined with the OA-1K designation for the new SOCOM overwatch aircraft (A-1 Skyraider anyone?) and it seems the USAF has forgotten how the designation system it invented works.

 

[Stargazer]

Although I wholeheartedly agree with all the remarks regarding the total disdain of the U.S. DoD for nomenclature, I believe it is worth mentioning here that the A-37 designation itself must have seemed equally annoying to aviation enthusiasts when it appeared... Indeed, the "A-37" designation was simply carried over from the T-37 (the YA-37A was initially designated as YAT-37D). Still, since the A-37 had never been officially allocated in 1942 (after being tentatively reserved for the Hughes DX-2), it was not too shocking for the Dragonfly to take that spot.
Also, I can think of at least one equally annoying example of a reused designation in times past: when the B-26 "Marauder" was retired, and the A-for attack mission cancelled, the A-26 "Invader" became the B-26... only three years after the end of WW2, and while Marauders were still called B-26 in foreign countries that still used them.
But yes, I agree, while those were isolated examples, the trend nowadays seems to be that such nonsense has become the rule.

 

[DWG]

And to add to the nominative oddity that is the EA-37B, we now have the E-130J to replace the E-6 Mercury on the TACAMO mission.

Yes, E-130J, not EC-130J.

US Navy designates E-6B replacement the E-130J

The US Navy's fleet of E-6B Mercury nuclear missile command and control jets will be replaced by a Lockheed Martin C-130J-based platform, now designated the E-130J.

www.flightglobal.com

 

[Kiltonge]

And to add to the nominative oddity that is the EA-37B, we now have the E-130J to replace the E-6 Mercury on the TACAMO mission.

Yes, E-130J, not EC-130J.

The only surprise now is that they even use the MDS prefixes in any form, instead of just calling it SuperCommandPlane-130J.

 

[apparition13]

Since we have a topic for this, I (re)submit F-15EX for myself and everyone else who has mentioned it. F-15F is right there and obvious. Why are we tacking X on to the end?

Of course once I saw someone call it the F-1SEX I haven't been able to see anything else. Colonels Beavis and Butthead in the designation office getting their yucks in I guess.

 

[Robert]

Yes, E-130J, not EC-130J.

That couldn't possibly result in any confusion whatsoever.

USAF EC-130J Command Solo III
USN E-130J TACAMO

 

[Stargazer]

Several possible explanations to the nonsense that DoD aircraft designations have become:

1. Nomenclature is now in the hands of total morons who don't understand how the system works.
2. Nomenclature people think the military people are total morons that won't be able to understand how the system works, so they do stuff like that so that the average airbase or office guy doesn't have to think twice.
3. The DoD requested that a heavy dose of WTF-ness be introduced in order to confuse and obfuscate the general public, either to more easily conceal programs that could be running without being so easily traced.
4. Some perverse mind out there has a lot of fun coming up with such ploys to annoy the hell out of us lot.

Which one seems the most likely to you? Or can you think of other possibilities I may have overlooked?

 

[DWG]

5. All of the above

 

[Scott Kenny]

Several possible explanations to the nonsense that DoD aircraft designations have become:

1. Nomenclature is now in the hands of total morons who don't understand how the system works.
2. Nomenclature people think the military people are total morons that won't be able to understand how the system works, so they do stuff like that so that the average airbase or office guy doesn't have to think twice.
3. The DoD requested that a heavy dose of WTF-ness be introduced in order to confuse and obfuscate the general public, either to more easily conceal programs that could be running without being so easily traced.
4. Some perverse mind out there has a lot of fun coming up with such ploys to annoy the hell out of us lot.

Which one seems the most likely to you? Or can you think of other possibilities I may have overlooked?

Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence.

So #1 is high in my books.

 

[Yellow Palace]

That's fine, give it a proper electronic attack designation, like EA-15.

Or just plain E-12. Or create a new MDS for offensive electronic warfare. J and N are available and wouldn't create confusion.

Combined with the OA-1K designation for the new SOCOM overwatch aircraft (A-1 Skyraider anyone?) and it seems the USAF has forgotten how the designation system it invented works.

A-15 was right there.

Several possible explanations to the nonsense that DoD aircraft designations have become:

1. Nomenclature is now in the hands of total morons who don't understand how the system works.
2. Nomenclature people think the military people are total morons that won't be able to understand how the system works, so they do stuff like that so that the average airbase or office guy doesn't have to think twice.
3. The DoD requested that a heavy dose of WTF-ness be introduced in order to confuse and obfuscate the general public, either to more easily conceal programs that could be running without being so easily traced.
4. Some perverse mind out there has a lot of fun coming up with such ploys to annoy the hell out of us lot.

Which one seems the most likely to you? Or can you think of other possibilities I may have overlooked?

The 'EA-37' and 'EA-18' nonsense - it should be the EF-18G, or better yet EF-24C - can partly be explained by the misapprehension that the nomenclature is an acronym. See also 'F/A', and whatever the hell has happened to USN hull classification.

Some of the other rubbish, I think they've just forgotten that systematic nomenclature exists for a reason, and that 'rule of cool' is a perfectly valid way to assign designations. In which case give up entirely and do it the RAF way, where you stick a cool name on the front and hide the nonsense away in mark numbers.