Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnews!military
From: wb9omc@ea.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane P Mantick)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: US fighter designations
Message-ID: <1990Jul31.223700.6607@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 31 Jul 90 22:37:00 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 29
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: wb9omc@ea.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane P Mantick)
>>From: eachus@linus.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
>In article <1990Jul27.015630.22235@cbnews.att.com> wb9omc@ea.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane P Mantick) writes:
   >F111: Now that's funny...I can't remember the name of this thing to save
	   >my life OR who built it.
   >That's easy. TFX did have a name assigned, but the only one that
>stuck to the F111A was McNamara's Folly.  Built by General Dynamics in
>LBJ's home state of Texas.  GD is a defense contractor much more
>famous for its ships and submarines...
	
	Robert, this was a wonderfully funny post!  Can you imagine an
Airshow announcer calling out, "look to your right as the F111 McNamara's
Folly passes the flight line...."

	Nobody would see the plane 'cause they'd all be on the ground
laughing! 

	BTW, General Dynamics can claim the F16 Fighting Falcon as a
major aviation success - got to have something to counteract the F111.  :-)

	I recall reading a book that indicated the F111 was supposed to
be a more modern, economical and effective (role-wise) replacement for
the B58 Hustler.  Why it got an "F" designation is beyond me...I don't
recall that it ever had any use as a fighter but it does appear to
have some uses in the precision bombing role.

Duane