NATO Reporting Names for Soviet Aircraft

While not WWII related in all but the most abstract ways, the reporting names for Soviet aircraft have always interested me. Is there any reason for why such names are chosen, or is it all rather arbitrary? Examples: Su-27 "Flanker", Su-25 "Frogfoot", MiG 17 "Fresco", MiG 21 "Fishbed".

I assume all these designations start with 'F' to indicate fighters (as Soviet bombers start with a 'B', such as the Tu-95 Bear or Tu-22M Backfire), but is there anything else behind these codenames?

Thanks

 

Probably chosen to be easily understood / not confusable over a radio.

As you say:
F indicates Fighters, B indicates Bombers, H indicates Helicopters

AA Missiles:
A indicates Air Launched e.g. Atoll
G indicates Ground Launched e.g. Guideline

No doubt lots of other systems as well


Tom

 

Zhuhov:
While I dont' have a definitive explanation, I do believe the designations are chosen at random. A similar system was used in naming Japanese aircraft designs by the U.S. in the Second World War.
I remember hearing a story that they wanted to name a certain Japanese fighter the "HAP" in honor of General "Hap" Arnold. He was not pleased AT ALL.
The aircraft recognition "code" for this particular aircraft was 'renamed' the "HAMP" instead... if I am remembering the story correctly.

Tim

 

How about these?

Su-25 Frogfoot
Su-22 Fencer

These are Fighter bomber and a Ground attack aircraft?!

 

Early misidentification of role? Easier than adding an "A" series for attack aircraft?

In addition to F for Fighter, B for Bomber, M for Miscellaneous, etc. there was also the rule of thumb (for helicopters at least) that one syllable indicated that it was piston engined and two or more syllables for turbine engines.

That's what I've been told by pilots - each name is easier to understand (and slightly quicker) than reporting "Mig Two One" as opposed to "Fishbed".

Strangely enough knowing the reporting names (still called, incorrectly, in some books "code names") also improves your vocabulary - spandrel, shaddock etc. Real words, not nonsense.

 

NATO was forced to make callsigns for Russian Aircraft because, during the Cold War, the actual names of these aircraft was never released by the USSR. F for figher, B for bomber, C for transport etc. The Su25 is designated under F because, technically according to NATO definitions, it is a fighter as it has a limited anti-air capability. the A-10 is also a fighter

 

A-10 is in the A -series of US designation - attack aircraft...
It was designed as a close air support type to operate under conditions of friendly air superiority. The 'winders that it can carry are for self-defence only.

 

Thank you for the clarification guys.

Here is an interesting website explaining reporting names of quite a few different countries (including Germany 1939-45!):

http://www.designation-systems.net/non-us/index.html

I have not been able to find Soviet/Russian reporting names for Western aircraft, but if I do I'll be sure to post it up here. I'm sure it's strange in its own rights.

 

AFAIK the Soviets used the Western names for Western aircraft, since those names were freely available in the press.
Soviet-period secrecy went to extremes: there's the classic story of a NATO observer at one of the May Day parades who, while watching the fly past, asked "What sort of aircraft is that?" The reply he got was "It's the one YOU call Bounder".
And there are stories that Soviet-era aerodynamicists learnt their craft using performance figures from Western aircraft - they weren't allowed to know anything about the particular aerodynamics of Soviet ones until they went to work in the design office...

 

Weren't Allied code-names also supposedly intentionally derrogatory, i.e. Faggot, Farmer, Backfire, implying backward aircraft and technology?

One poster also commented on Japanese aircraft, the Allied code-names for which were governed by a simple rule (IIRC Fighters = Male, Bombers/Floatplanes/Attack = Female, can't remember where transports or trainers fitted in) and named by the intelligence officer who initially identified them, so bombers etc often found themselves with the name of the identifying officer's wife/girlfriend.

The Mitsubishi A6M was more correctly the "Zeke", but let's face it Zero (From the Japanese calender which had 1940 (The year the fighter was introduced) as Year 0) was just more catchy and seems to have stuck.

 

I haven't ever come across anything saying they were intentionally derogatory (don't forget that fagot is only a large meat ball or a stick in the UK so it's hardly an insult). But I do know that one aircraft has its name changed for being too complimentary... Beauty became (IIRC) Bounder.
I also proposed many years ago in a an article for the magazine of the Soviet Military Research Group that MiG-29 might also get renamed - Fulcrum is a little too complimentary!
OTOH someone did manage a sense of humour breakthrough at ASCC - MiG 1.44 (which really shouldn't have a reporting name - it'll never see service let alone combat) has been given the name Flatpack. It was a proposal for the (then) Soviet requirement for MFI

 

The Mig 1.44 is like the Russian's F-22 (and from what i hear very similar performance-wise), but unlike the Americans the Russians can't afford to field such an expensive plane... Still, who knows. If Russia gets a little richer in the next decade the Obiect 1.44 might be developed further, beyond prototype stages...