Subject:
|
Re: Military Weapon Designations?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.fun
|
Date:
|
Sat, 15 Jul 2000 09:36:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
327 times
|
| |
|
|
<snip>
> And then it gets weird. In looking for a new advanced tactical fighter, the
> USAF held a competition between two contractors' entries, each woth a
> different
> designation (YF-22 and YF-23), BEFORE the USAF decided which one to adopt.
> But
> when the Army looked for a replacement for the old M1911 sidearm, they
> reserved
> the M-9 designation for the winner.
>
> Huh, that's not much better than "I dunno". :-, But I suspect that
> it is largely marketing.
>
> Cheers,
> - jsproat
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
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Military Weapon Designations?
|
| 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Military Weapon Designations?
|
| (...) 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)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
