# Explain the naming convention of US fighter planes **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 20, 2005, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122 "2005-06-20T21:35:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122/41 "2005-06-21T23:09:32Z")
> [@sewalk](#): > > Apologies to **Airman Doors** and **Tripler** and any other poor USAF dopers out there. No need to apologize. Air supremacy demands air superiority. If we happen to be developing new technologies a little ahead of schedule, I see this as a perfectly acceptable thing. We need to evolve (even at the cost of a few bucks) eventually. Better now than behind the power curve. Tripler “'Tis better to have a Colt .45 Auto in yer holster in midst of a 1776 musket fight.” – me. ---
**Author:** ![Padeye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@Padeye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Padeye)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122/42 "2005-06-22T00:25:55Z")
> [@Gorsnak](#): > > On the other hand, the initial Allison-engined Mustang was labelled the A-37 Intruder. Upon having a Merlin bolted to the front end, it’s designation was changed to P-51. And of course the RAF called the same two variants simply Mustang MkI and Mustang MkII. I believe this is incorrect and probably due to some confusion with the Mustang prototype designed for the British being designated [NA **73**](http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/Gladwin-Simms/3722.htm) which has probably been transposed into A-37. I’ve heard a lot of people call it the A-37 but have not been able to find a reference that supports it. The only A-37 I can find is the Cessna jet and I have never heard a Mustang variant called “Intruder.” I got a good look at the [A-36 Apache](http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap21.htm) in the Wright-Patterson Air Force Museum. It can be distinguished from the nearly identical [P-51A Mustang](http://aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/museums/az/pofaz/43-6251.htm) by the slotted dive brakes that extend from the upper and lower wing surfaces. Both planes have an Allison engine which can be identified by the top mounted carburetor scoop, flared exhaust stacks and a three bladed prop. The Merlin engine in B and later models has a bottom scoop, unflared stacks and a four bladed propellor. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122/43 "2005-06-22T00:45:04Z")
> [@Padeye](#): > > I believe this is incorrect and probably due to some confusion with the Mustang prototype designed for the British being designated [NA **73**](http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/Gladwin-Simms/3722.htm) which has probably been transposed into A-37. I’ve heard a lot of people call it the A-37 but have not been able to find a reference that supports it. The only A-37 I can find is the Cessna jet and I have never heard a Mustang variant called “Intruder.” > > I got a good look at the [A-36 Apache](http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap21.htm) in the Wright-Patterson Air Force Museum. It can be distinguished from the nearly identical [P-51A Mustang](http://aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/museums/az/pofaz/43-6251.htm) by the slotted dive brakes that extend from the upper and lower wing surfaces. Both planes have an Allison engine which can be identified by the top mounted carburetor scoop, flared exhaust stacks and a three bladed prop. The Merlin engine in B and later models has a bottom scoop, unflared stacks and a four bladed propellor. My apologies. A-36 is correct, and I’m not sure why I thought it was called Intruder. Serves me right for working from memory. ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122/44 "2005-06-22T00:51:41Z")
> [@Padeye](#): > > I believe this is incorrect and probably due to some confusion with the Mustang prototype designed for the British being designated [NA **73**](http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/Gladwin-Simms/3722.htm) which has probably been transposed into A-37. I’ve heard a lot of people call it the A-37 but have not been able to find a reference that supports it. The only A-37 I can find is the Cessna jet and I have never heard a Mustang variant called “Intruder.” > > I got a good look at the [A-36 Apache](http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap21.htm) in the Wright-Patterson Air Force Museum. It can be distinguished from the nearly identical [P-51A Mustang](http://aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/museums/az/pofaz/43-6251.htm) by the slotted dive brakes that extend from the upper and lower wing surfaces. Both planes have an Allison engine which can be identified by the top mounted carburetor scoop, flared exhaust stacks and a three bladed prop. The Merlin engine in B and later models has a bottom scoop, unflared stacks and a four bladed propellor. Re: “The Intruder” your link for the A-36 Apache has the plane nicknamed “Intruder” But yeah, it was never called the A-37. That would be the attack jet based on the T-37C jet trainer. ---
**Author:** ![Padeye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@Padeye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Padeye)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122/45 "2005-06-22T05:55:44Z")
I guess I should look closer at my own cites. ---
**Author:** ![Padeye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@Padeye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Padeye)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122/46 "2005-06-22T05:57:32Z")
…actually the air force website says Invader, not Intruder. ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122/47 "2005-06-22T06:24:12Z")
Uhm… _looks both ways_ Hey! Is that a demonic duck of some sort! _hides_ ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122/48 "2005-06-22T10:44:37Z")
> [@sewalk](#): > > I think that the biggest reason that the F-22 hasn’t been canceled is institutional inertia. That, and the affinity blue-suiters have for bright shiny objects. “Ooh, it goes fast. Gotta get one of those.” Apologies to **Airman Doors** and **Tripler** and any other poor USAF dopers out there. Yeah, just imagine the blazing speed of the C-130 I fly in, with its matte gray finish and a whole boatload of mission equipment on the wings dragging its top speed down to where it might go faster if I got out and pushed. Bright, shiny, fast. Uh huh. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Padeye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@Padeye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Padeye)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122/49 "2005-06-22T12:25:22Z")
On the bright side with all that drag you could probably point the nose straight down, push the throttles to military and never reach V[sub]NE[/sub]. ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122/50 "2005-06-22T13:14:33Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > Yeah, just imagine the blazing speed of the C-130 I fly in, with its matte gray finish and a whole boatload of mission equipment on the wings dragging its top speed down to where it might go faster if I got out and pushed. > > Bright, shiny, fast. Uh huh. 🙂 Faster than walking, right? 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-naming-convention-of-us-fighter-planes/309122.md?page=2)