What happens after ZZ999?

This was actually a topic of discussion within the RAF in the ’80’s.
One suggestion was to reverse the number (ie 101AA) the reasoning being that you could still use the three digits for individual a/c identification.
It seems the most logical to me, but when have the military been that?

Never, in my experience.

simplest?

I think the simplest would be to either add a fourth numeral (N) and start at AANNN, or add a third ‘alpha’ and stick to 3 numerals (AAANNN). Then again, flipping the alpha and numeral isn’t that far fetched, its exactly what happened here in Ontario with our automotive license plates (from AAA*NNN to NNN*AAA and now AAAA*NNN) so the same is feasible for aircraft. (the asterix here represents the lovely ‘Queen’s Crown’ which adorns our plates – either between the alphas and numerals or as a decal in the corner on ‘vanity’ plates)… but then I digress. Besides, why worry – just as long as there are still aircraft purchased and flown, how the MOD registers them is of minor consequence.

JJ

The serials system has gone a bit nuts since the C-17 team reserved ZZ171-9 (given an ‘out of range’ serial to signify the fact that they were on lease and not part of the RAF engineering inventory) since then we have has the 32 Squadron Agustas given ZR, the A-330Ms have ZM*** reserved, the HUnters, Reapers and Beech 350s in the ZZ range – and also had the AAC Defenders given unused serials in the ZG range first issued in the 80s – presumably to match the Islanders (actually the same happened for the third 32 Squadron Twin Squirrel)

Prior to all this it was almost strictly in order (allowing for blackout blocks – and even they were abandoned during the ZH range)

First ‘out of sequence’ serials were for the Hawk 200 – ZG200 and ZH200

And if you look you will see there is only one serial allocated in the entire ZT batch and four in the ZR batch. I think it will be a long long time before we reach the end of the Z* series

ZZ190 & 191 (Hunters) are in use now, also serial blocks can be alocated well before use on a flying aircraft, and big blocks of serials can go unused.
I would have thought the serial sequence question would be a serious consideration with the MoD now.

Not really…..years and years to go yet….probably enough left for the future of manned RAF a/c maybe…….?

The quoting of those ZZ for the Hunters is a bit of a red herring, in that IIRC, ZZ*** range has been allocated for other reasons, and as mentioned earlier, they are only up to the ZK range for general issue.

I think the first ZA numbers appeared in the mid 1980’s….??

ZZ999 is a LONG way away.

In actual fact, they have been allocating serials into some of the old “blackout blocks” recently, and if this was to continue then there should be no sign of reaching ZZ999 for very many decades.

My “Why” referred to the process of worrying about it, rather than the fact that they may be close to the end of the available list under the current system.

I fully understand that the allocation of a few ZZ prefix serials suggests the end of the current serials system may be close, though I suspect that the use of “ZZnnn” serials for the Hunters was a possibly deliberate allocation of a block of “out of sequence” serials set aside especially to denote use of a civilian operated machines, rather than the two serials being the next unallocated serials on the list.

As fatcivvy pointed out in an earlier post on the thread, MoD appear to have reached the “ZKnnn” serials for routine issue at present, rather than “ZZnnn”, so the end may not be as close as the Hunter serials suggest?.

Paul F

Why?

Because as Ive said ZZ is in use now, and whole blocks of serials don’t get used, which speeds up the serial allocations.

With you on that RPS!

Perhaps they could go back and start using those leftover gaps introduced in serial batches in WWII.

Whoever designs/decides I hope it’s not the same person that introduced the new UK car registration numbering system :confused: 😀

Do you realise you may have just suggested MoD a solution?

Whoever designs/decides I hope it’s not the same person that introduced the new UK car registration numbering system :confused: 😀

Roger Smith.

I would have thought the serial sequence question would be a serious consideration with the MoD now.

Why? None of the people in MoD at the moment will still be there when the problem arises – they’ll all be sitting by the fire enjoying their civil service pensions….so why should they worry about such matters?

And, as has been said above, with the current trend for an ever reducing defence spend, the current “register” system will probably run for far longer than might be expected – unless we plan to procure squadrons of A400M Transporters and wings and wings of JSFs :rolleyes:

Paul F

With the present rate of procuring aircraft for the British military, I don’t think that any of us are going to be alive long enough to find out. Especially when you think that the ZA range was started nearly 30 years ago and it’s only up to the ZK range now.

ZZ190 & 191 (Hunters) are in use now, also serial blocks can be alocated well before use on a flying aircraft, and big blocks of serials can go unused.
I would have thought the serial sequence question would be a serious consideration with the MoD now.

What happens after ZZ999?

We all have to buy bigger decal sheets! 😀

With the present rate of procuring aircraft for the British military, I don’t think that any of us are going to be alive long enough to find out. Especially when you think that the ZA range was started nearly 30 years ago and it’s only up to the ZK range now.

This was actually a topic of discussion within the RAF in the ’80’s.
One suggestion was to reverse the number (ie 101AA) the reasoning being that you could still use the three digits for individual a/c identification.
It seems the most logical to me, but when have the military been that?