I think we need to revisit the moniker issue.
I had posted about it a while back then.
F= Fighter ==> Savaşçı (TR literal tranlatio)
F= Avcı (TurAF designation) Its usage is almost identical to “Jagd” by Germans, meaning “Hunter”
B= Bomber ==> Bombacı (TR literal translation)
B= Bombardıman (TurAF designation) quite self-explanatory here.
A= Attack ==> Saldırı (TR literal translation)
A= “ ==> Taaruz (Arabic tranlation) When Turkish Air Force was formed as a new born service within the Ottoman Army, any “attack” mission was designated as “taaruz” from Arabic, not “Saldırı” as in modern Turkish language.
The list goes on, ”T”, “X” and so on. But won’t go that far.
TurAF has derived its customs from naval traditions from day one like every other Air Force and as a result just like their naval counterparts they observe those traditions passionately. Any personnel within Turkish Air Force using “savaşçı“ or “bombacı” instead of “avcı” and “bombardıman“ respectively, would probably get a slap on the wrist, if not demoted.
Please let’s not sacrifice a century old grass root traditions to poor Turkish language skills of self appointed social media “experts”
Also, the ”T” prefix denoting to its country of origin, hence TF, TB, TA or TT.
Why?
Do we really have to emphasize the ‘Turkishness’ (horrible word, sorry) of the aircraft?
These sophisticated platforms, mathematically thinking, will only have around 200 possible customers around the world. Any possible customer among those will be on the market knowing what they are shopping for at first place.
These are not kitchen gadgets for mass production/consumption.
Stick to our Western block heritage and go with F, B and so on without sacrificing our century old AVCI and BOMBARDIMAN designations.
OR
Do what the British and French did! Skip the hassle and go with names. Simple.