Iconic Aircraft Aviation Forum

by **10680** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 5:05 pm

What determines an aircraft's number?

Why XH558 ?
but XM655
and XM607 for Vulcans

XM192 Lightning

Is it a date thing or more complicated?

by **Hazzer111** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 5:11 pm

10680 wrote:What determines an aircraft's number?

Why XH558 ?
but XM655
and XM607 for Vulcans

XM192 Lightning

Is it a date thing or more complicated?

I know that with the Vulcan's any with xm have the more powerful Olympus 301 engines

by **Mayfly** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 5:24 pm

I think in principle each type had a series of numbers allocated - but different MKs could be given a different prefix as Hazzer has pointed out above

I know The Central Flying School had a pre fix of 'F' and in the very early days I believe balloons had a prefix of 'B'

by **Cluny** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:59 pm

Got in one Ken , the prefix is date related [sort of]

by **Dan4th** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 11:51 pm

Naive Murkin that I am, I have always
believed that the numbers just went
from "AA01" to "ZZ99" in sequence as
aircraft were added to the RAF inventory

If I'm wrong, please put me out of my Misery :((

Or is this too simple??????????

Danf.

by **Vulcan Bomber** » Sun Sep 23, 2012 4:36 pm

XM192 is an older aircraft than XM607 or XM655. However, XH558 is older than any of these.

WK333 at brunty is older still.

And the eurofighter, being younger start ZH etc...

by **Molerat** » Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:38 pm

ZZ are oddballs

The allocation of ZM serials is interesting

by **Sooty655** » Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:44 pm

Take a look at this link, Dan.

by **10680** » Mon Sep 24, 2012 11:38 pm

Thanks everyone for the replies.

This is interesting but possibly pose more questions

Sooty655 wrote:Take a look at this link, Dan.

by **Dan4th** » Mon Sep 24, 2012 11:41 pm

HA!

I just KNEW you Brits would be
incapable of keeping it SIMPLE

US military suffers the same affliction :))

Danf.

by **Robdsn** » Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:45 pm

Hazzer111 wrote:
10680 wrote:What determines an aircraft's number?

Why XH558 ?
but XM655
and XM607 for Vulcans

XM192 Lightning

Is it a date thing or more complicated?

I know that with the Vulcan's any with xm have the more powerful Olympus 301 engines

Not strictly true, IIRC XM573 was 201s and from their on it 301s. XL391 also had 301s.

by **Vulcan Bomber** » Sat Sep 29, 2012 4:36 pm

Robdsn wrote:
Hazzer111 wrote:
10680 wrote:What determines an aircraft's number?

Why XH558 ?
but XM655
and XM607 for Vulcans

XM192 Lightning

Is it a date thing or more complicated?

I know that with the Vulcan's any with xm have the more powerful Olympus 301 engines

Not strictly true, IIRC XM573 was 201s and from their on it 301s. XL391 also had 301s.

10 or so 201 series engine Vulcs got retro fitted to 301's.... Quite a bit of work went into that.

Iconic Aircraft Aviation Forum

Question on aircraft numbering

Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Re: Question on aircraft numbering

Who is online