 | | Re: Military Weapon Designations? —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | (...) I understand that it's quite arbitrary, and includes some amount of marketing tactics as well as back-biting amongst the various military departments and contract bidders. For example, the M-16 is a 5.56 caliber carbine fully-automatic rifle (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | |
| | | | | (canceled) —Jamie Obrien
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Military Weapon Designations? —Mark Sandlin
|
| | | | <snip> (...) The "Y" designation refers to a pre-production fighter's experimental status. I think if the government is producing it, they give it the "X" prefix. ~Mark (24 years ago, 15-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Military Weapon Designations? —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | OK, here's something hopefully definitive: (...) However, the Mustang experimental craft were "XP-51," while the Superfortress designation was "YB-17," and they came from the same level of production. Rather than designating sector of origin, (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Military Weapon Designations? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) **snip of some interesting stuff!** (...) this) The only $.02 I can contribute: I just bought an Osprey book of Lockheed "cutaways" featuring some interesting breadth info about a number of aircraft without much depth about any specific model. (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
