F or F/A?

[upyr1]

13 minutes ago, Cab said:

Designations for multipurpose airplanes is not unique. There have been TF, EA, and FB, just to name a few. The anomaly with the Hornet is why the inclusion of the "/" between the F and the A. There was an effort during the first half of the nineties to take out the "/" and make it FA-18, but that was obviously not successful.

EA, EB, EF and ac indicate an aircraft that was modified for a role. FB was political so was F/A as the term fighter includes multi role for the Navy and ground attack for the usaf 

21 minutes ago, Cab said:

Designations for multipurpose airplanes is not unique. There have been TF, EA, and FB, just to name a few. The anomaly with the Hornet is why the inclusion of the "/" between the F and the A. There was an effort during the first half of the nineties to take out the "/" and make it FA-18, but that was obviously not successful.

EA, EB, EF and ac indicate an aircraft that was modified for a role. FB was political so was F/A as the term fighter includes multi role for the Navy and ground attack for the usaf 

[Cab]

Including the "/" does not conform with the Tri-Service Aircraft Designation System. That was my only point.

I had already written I thought the whole "F/A" thing was more of a gimmick than anything.

[upyr1]

On 1/28/2022 at 9:30 AM, Cab said:

U.S. Navy and Air Force have been using a common designation system since the early 60's. Prior to that what we now know as the F-4 Phantom II was called the F4H by the Navy and the F-110 by the Air Force. Here is an Air Force Magazine article from 1962: F-110: USAF's New Tactical Fighter - Air Force Magazine

 

They do have a common design system but they don't apply them due to service culture. As I pointed out  Air Force A-7s were flown by  fighter squadrons and Navy A-7s were flown by Attack squadrons 

[Cab]

Now you're talking squadron designations versus aircraft designation. 

There is no commonality when it comes to squadron designations.