>Block>Tranche>Mark>Flight>A#>Obr>#[letter]Is there any objective way to compare variant designation systems? How might you determine if one system is better than another, and how might you improve them?
>>65173298The US system is of course superior.Tank M1A1 SEP4Equipment descriptionModel Number M1Major Variant A1Then use SEP/block/flight to track minor upgrades or differences that don't merit a new variant.
>>65173374That itself is already superior, but the US has even better type designation systems for other types of equipment. The 1962 tri-service aircraft designation system, 1963 tri-service missile designation system, and joint electronics type designation system are works of art. As for non-US systems, the Chinese 3-letter type designation system(s?) seems like it might be good but I'm not really sure how it works other than that it's sort of like the ones mentioned above.
>>65173374There are some flaws in that system, sport...
>>65173298It's inter service retardation. Like why is the F-15E not the F/A-15E? It's mandated by law all branches use the same nomenclature and they can't even manage that, much less the far more diverse world of munitions
>>65173419>F/A-15EFunnily enough, the F/A-18 designation is non-compliant with the standardized tri-service aircraft designation because of Navy-specific retardation and it should be AF-18 or just F-18. The F-22A was also briefly redesignated "F/A-22A" but changed back for obvious reasons.
>>65173425I would believe it. My understanding is the Navy (or maybe just McD's) wanted to emphasize the fighter part of a strike fighter when it was introduced so that's how it got the name. That's not a egregious as just also calling super hornets F/A-18s when it's almost a completely different airplane
>>65173516It is okay, your supply sergeant will order the item by national stock number.
>>65173374SEP became retarded the second they implemented armor upgrades without making a new A variant. We should be on either A3/A4 currently with the A4/A5 being in development
>>65173431Tri service designation system is a mockery of its former self unfortunately. Super Hornet should be the F-24. F-35 should be the F-25, or maybe F-26 if the Boeing entry still got the low number. What the fuck is an F-15EX? We never called anything EX before. What happened to B’s three through twenty? How are all the new fighters 40 series? The last one we made is -35. At least the MV-75 is in sequence. Everything else is a disaster.
>>65175725Alas I also must concur. The ongoing F-16 enhancement was labelled the "Post-Block" modification program for crying out loud. Now not even specifying "F-16C block 50" ensures any two tail numbers in that set will meet the same capability standards.
