Alberchico From United States, joined Sep 2004, 1998 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2183 times:
This might seem like a really stupid question, but if the F-117 stealth jet was technically a light bomber why was it given a fighter designation. It should have logically been called the B-117 like its stealth cousin the B-2. ??? Anybody know why that happend ???
short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
Blackbird From United States, joined Oct 1999, 3436 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (2 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2168 times:
Well first of all, it wasn't a bomber, it was a ground-attack airplane. Ground attack airplanes among other things are of a tactical nature, where as bombers are strategic.
Additionally the fighter designation was used deliberately to mislead our enemies into thinking it was a fighter development not a ground attack airplane.
TGIF From Sweden, joined Apr 2008, 84 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (2 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2126 times:
I was told by my professor (and I've heard it from other sources) that the F-designation was used to attract the best pilots in the AF who were needed because of the flight characteristics (or lack of them). The best pilots will however not settle for a A-117/B-117 since it gives them little bragging rights among their pilot buddies.
Maybe just a urban legend. I'm as curious as the OP about the 'F'.
Oroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 252 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (2 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2114 times:
'F-117' was to throw any spys off of the trail of this program. The higher 'F-11X' numbers were being used as designations for foreign aircraft that the USAF was evaluating. So if 'F-117' slipped up in a document somewhere, it would be lumped in with the other evaluation aircraft.
Technically it is not a fighter, but I am sure there was an aspect of bluff with the Fighter designation. The Soviets were scared of the F-117, and the idea that it was a fighter too probably made it more intimidating.
J.mo From United States, joined Feb 2002, 570 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (2 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1877 times:
According to one of the chief designers, from a program on the Military Channel, the Air Force wanted fighter pilots to fly the F-117. If it was a FB-117 they would not attract the fighter jocks. Same reason it was painted Black, so he said.
Jmo
What is the difference between Fighter pilots and God? God never thought he was a fighter pilot.
TGIF From Sweden, joined Apr 2008, 84 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (2 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 1761 times:
Quoting Blackbird (Reply 5): Are all fighter pilots better in skill than all bomber pilots though?
That I'm not so sure of. But as Jmo said, it's perhaps easier to attract many pilots if they know they'll be flying a 'fighter'. With a large group to select from, it's probably easier to find the person best suited for the task.
I'm in now way saying one type of pilot is better than the other. This was just the reason I was given by my professor.
Blackbird From United States, joined Oct 1999, 3436 posts, RR: 5 Reply 13, posted (2 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1692 times:
Then how do they decide (in the old days at least) who ended up in TAC, SAC, ADC, and AMC (Now they have different command set-ups which I forgot, I know there's ACC, AMC... but I don't know if there's anything else)?
PhilSquares From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 3714 posts, RR: 53 Reply 14, posted (2 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1672 times:
Quoting Blackbird (Reply 13): Then how do they decide (in the old days at least) who ended up in TAC, SAC, ADC, and AMC (Now they have different command set-ups which I forgot, I know there's ACC, AMC... but I don't know if there's anything else)?
When I went through UPT, everyone in the class was ranked by using academic and flying scores. The highest person was number one and the lowest person was at the end of the list. On assignment night, the top guy got his choice and as the list got smaller and smaller the choices dwindled. Finally, the last guy got the one remaining aircraft.
PhilSquares From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 3714 posts, RR: 53 Reply 16, posted (2 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1657 times:
Quoting Blackbird (Reply 15): I would assume nobody on the top would have ever picked ADC, SAC, MAC, over TAC (the olde commands), huh?
In my block of assignments we had 2 F-4, 1 T-33, 3 T-38, 2 T-37, 5 C-141, 5 C-130, 5 KC-135 and 2 B-52. The F4 slots went to the first 2 guys, the 141 and went next, then the T-33. IIRC, the 135s went at the end. Everyone has their reasons for picking their aircraft, but the system seemed to work then. Not quite sure how it's done now.
Jgarrido From Guam, joined Mar 2007, 182 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (2 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1600 times:
Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 14): When I went through UPT, everyone in the class was ranked by using academic and flying scores. The highest person was number one and the lowest person was at the end of the list. On assignment night, the top guy got his choice and as the list got smaller and smaller the choices dwindled. Finally, the last guy got the one remaining aircraft.
I'm sure you'll be indifferent to know that i still works that way At least it did 4 years ago when I was stationed at a UPT base.
Moose135 From United States, joined Oct 2004, 629 posts, RR: 7 Reply 19, posted (2 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1575 times:
Quoting Jgarrido (Reply 17): I'm sure you'll be indifferent to know that i still works that way. At least it did 4 years ago when I was stationed at a UPT base.
Really? Because I went through UPT in 1984, about 7 years after PhilSquares, and the process was different then what he described, although I flew with guys who went through that sort of selection system.
About half way through T-38 phase, we were rated as "Fighter/Attack/Recon" (FAR) qualified or "Tanker/Transport/Bomber" (TTB) qualified. You submitted a "dream sheet" listing your choices of aircraft, in order, along with broad geographic preferences - there were about 30 spots on the form, and you had to fill them all in. Actually, you filled in the "dream sheet' before you found out if you were FAR/TTB. The personnel types at HQAF went through the list of assignments and matched up people based on available aircraft, class rank, FAR/TTB rating, and other factors.
What usually happened was the top 2 or 3 in the class got their choice of assignment, then the next bunch were siphoned off to be FAIPs (First Assignment Instructor Pilot) back at your base, then from there it was mix and match to get people assigned. Although I had a number of fighters up top on my sheet, I was TTB, and got my first choice in that group, the KC-135. Other than stating our preferences on the "dream sheet" we didn't have much say in our assignment. And you are wondering, if you were FAR qual, but requested a heavy, you usually received it - unless they FAIPed you, as was the case with my first T-38 IP.
For the final portion of UPT, the FAR guys got more formation rides, the TTB did more instrument work, but that was about the only difference. These days, from what I understand, they make a similar type of rating determination after the T-6 phase, and the fighter types (actually I think that includes bombers now also) go on to the T-38, while the heavy guys fly the T-1 Jayhawk.
From my conversations with the pilots it was my understanding after the T37's each class was ranked on their performance up to that point. The top of the class got his choice, and it went down from there. The guys that got cargo/tankers went to the BE40's and the fighters/bombers went T38. Perhaps, though, it's just as you described the top few get their choice and rest of the details are more complicated.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Sep 2004, 1998 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Apr 2008, 84 posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 252 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 3714 posts, 
From Guam, joined Mar 2007, 182 posts, 
At least it did 4 years ago when I was stationed at a UPT base.
From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 297 posts, 