HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: light aircraft in strike role
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 16:19:47 GMT


From ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu (Gary Coffman)

In article <BtJnK4.90r@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> cmr@cvedc.prime.com (Chesley Reyburn) writes:
>>From     "Edward J. Rudnicki" (FSAC-SID) <erudnick@pica.army.mil>
>
>>Wow. What is the expected origin of these insurgents: dissatisfied
>>citizens or outside agitators?
>
>Try pirates.  Yep, pirates.
>
>I am told that piracy is fairly common in the Strait of Malacca and
>the South China Sea.  Pirates can use bases.  Bases where there is
>little likelyhood of being disturbed.  The north half of Australia
>fits that bill very nicely.

I don't buy into the idea that pirates would start insurgent activity
in an area where they want a safe base. Seems to me that would just
attract unwanted attention. More likely they'd try to hide their
base instead of going around blowing up things.

>Or drug smugglers.  Northern Australia is not _that_ far from the
>`golden triangle' of SE Asia.  The illegal drug industry can always
>use places where there is little likelihood of disturbance.

Same thing. They don't want disturbance so why invite military action.

>There are also several dictatorships in the area.  One day one
>of those dictators might get to lusting after all of that 'unused'
>land in Australia.

This is more likely, an outside backed insurgency to stir up trouble.
Seems unlikely that they'd have much chance of actually taking and
holding land however. Light insurgent action is fine for destabilizing
an unpopular government or for harassing occupying troops, but to take 
and hold a particular piece of land takes heavier stuff. Once they plant 
themselves, they become the target of the Oz regular military.

Gary


Newsgroups: sci.military
From: davsmith@nic.cerf.net (David Smith)
Subject: Top armor (was Re: Self-forged fragment munitions)
Organization: CERFnet
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 15:19:39 GMT


From davsmith@nic.cerf.net (David Smith)


Why is the top of a tank still the weakest point?  With the advent of
tank killing helicopters, airplanes, self- forging munitions, and
Cessna pilots armed with Super-soaker water guns, I'd think that this
would no longer be the case.  Are current MBT still designed with less
regard to the threat from the air?

====
David L. Smith
smithd@discos.com or davsmith@nic.cerf.net
-- 
David L. Smith
smithd@discos.com or davsmith@nic.cerf.net

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Joseph F Baugher <jfb@ihlpl.att.com>
Subject: Seventh in the series--The Boeing XP-7
Keywords: PW-9, Packard engine
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories -  Naperville, Illinois
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 12:08:21 GMT


From Joseph F Baugher <jfb@ihlpl.att.com>


The Boeing XP-7 was an attempt to adapt the PW-9 fighter  to  the  new
Curtiss  Conqueror  engine, and bore much the same relationship to the
PW-9 as did the Curtiss P-6 to the Curtiss P-1.

The Army was interested in seeing how much the performance of the PW-9
fighter could be improved by the use of the Conqueror engine, and they
ordered a single example on March 5, 1928.  The last Boeing PW-9D  off
the  production line (Ser No. 28-041) was experimentally fitted with a
new 600-hp Curtiss V-1570-1 Conqueror engine and was redesignated XP-7
under  the new system. The cowling had to be redesigned to contain the
larger radiator, giving a shorter, deeper nose than that of the PW-9D.
In  addition, the new model incorporated an all-duralumin tailplane, a
different type of tailskid, and a new control system for the ailerons.

The XP-7 was delivered to the Army on September  8,  1928,  and  began
flight  testing shortly thereafter.  The Conqueror engine proved to be
suitable for use in fighters, and an Air Corps specification was drawn
up  to  cover  the  building  of  four  service  test  P-7s.  However,
subsequent tests demonstrated that the performance of the XP-7 was not
much  better  than that of the standard PW-9D, maximum speed being 168
mph at sea level as  compared  with  163  mph  for  the  PW-9.   Since
Boeing's  radial-engined XF4B-1 had already reached nearly 170 mph, it
was concluded that the XP-7 project showed little promise and the Army
cancelled  its order for the four service-test P-7s.  After the end of
the tests, 28-041 was converted back to standard PW-9D configuration.

Performance of the XP-7 included a maximum speed of 167.5 mph  at  sea
level  and 163.5 mph at 5000 feet.  Initial climb was 1867 ft/min, and
an altitude of 10,000 feet could be attained in 7.1 minutes.  The XP-7
had  the  same armament as did the PW-9D, namely one 0.50 cal. and one
0.30 cal machine  gun  mounted  in  the  upper  fuselage  decking  and
synchronized to fire through the propeller arc.  Weights were 2358 lbs
empty, 3260 lbs. gross.

Sources:

  Boeing Aircraft since 1916, Peter M. Bowers,  Naval Institute Press,
  1989.

  The American Fighter, Enzo Angellucci and Peter Bowers, Orion Books,
  1987.

Joe Baugher       AT&T Bell Laboratories    2000 North Naperville Road 
		  Naperville, Illinois 60566-7033.   (708) 713-4548
From: whheydt@pbhya.pacbell.com (Wilson Heydt)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Autofocus and the Stealth
Date: 23 Aug 92 22:03:56 GMT
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA


From whheydt@pbhya.pacbell.com (Wilson Heydt)

In article <BtC4Ln.5MM@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> bwise@hemlock.mitre.org (Barry Wise) writes:
>
>From bwise@hemlock.mitre.org (Barry Wise)
>
>In article <BtAJDu.Cuz@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> John Tucker  
><john@phobos.sscl.uwo.ca> writes:
>> Given the Stealth's "stealth", how come a commercial autofocus system
>> can "lock-on" for a sharp picture?
>> 
>Stealth in the B-2 sense means lacking radar or infrared emmissions or  
>reflectivity which would have no affect on an autofocus camera.
>
>Autofocus cameras usually use an active ranging mechanism such as an infrared  
>beam or sound. At the distances the photos were probably taken the camera had  
>gone to it's 'infinity' setting anyway, so it wouldn't have mattered if it were  
>stealthy or not to the camera.

*Cough* . . .  Excuse me . . .

*Some* autofocus cameras use active systems.  Much more common now are
passive ones that look at some part of the frame and sharpen edges.

The real reason why pictures aen't any problem to take is that, while
the plane is stealthy to radar, no one ever claimed it was
*invisible*.  If you can see it--either by reflected light or by
blocking light from some other source (the sky comes to mind . . .),
you won't have any problem taking a picture.

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    "Boycott Time-Warner"
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |         --J. Danforth Quayle
510-823-5447                 |    "... kill all the lawyers."
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |         --William Shakespeare
From: jaskew@spam.maths.adelaide.edu.au (Joseph Askew)
Subject: Re: Sabots and Soboteurs
Followup-To: sci.military
Summary: Hmmm, some reason is needed
Organization: Statistics, Pure & Applied Mathematics, University of Adelaide
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 14:48:50 GMT


From jaskew@spam.maths.adelaide.edu.au (Joseph Askew)


In article <BtGIt4.9w@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> ppugliese@pimacc.pima.edu writes:

  From ppugliese@pimacc.pima.edu

      "Sabot" is French for "shoe" -
      supposedly "saboteurs" got their name from carrying instructions around
      in their shoes.

     While it's true 'sabot' is the French for shoe, saboteurs got their name
     from a famous Strike by railway workers in (I think) Belgium. Because the
     managment was holding out and using scab labour, the workers lifted the
     rails out of their mountings - also 'sabot' in French. Hence the term.
     Thus it was originally a civilian term which only came to be applied to
     military uses later.

  The story I heard was that during WWII the workers would throw a shoe into
  the machinery at industrial plants occupied by the Germans. Thus the words
  'sabotage' & 'saboteurs'.

  p.s. Alternatively it could've been WWI, I suppose.

I think the strike I was refering to predates both Wars. I think that
because the word is so obvious some rational explaination is required
hence the fifty different versions. If I remember I'll look it up in
the Greater Oxford Dictionary which is about 24 volume long and is
about as definitive as you can get. Personally I'm not sure a shoe
would do much damage to machinery and besides why would the Germans
use a French word? It certainly pre-dates the Second World War because
Stalin used it extensively 1929 etc. Now I'm seriously curious!


Joseph Askew


Newsgroups: sci.military
From: fsjfz@acad3.alaska.edu
Subject: Re: Phonetic alphabet corrected
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 14:48:32 GMT


From fsjfz@acad3.alaska.edu

 (about evolving phonetic alphabets...)
> 
> The duality of C and O is due to a general failure to accept the new terms,
> and through common usage they worked themselves back to the original.
> 
> TH
Note that some Army units still use the old terms for company designations.  At
a recent demonstration, we could not get the Army announcer to call us by our
`correct' name: Echo Company. He insisted on calling us `Easy' company over the
PA.  At first i thought he was trying to slight my (Marine Reserve) company by
calling us easy, but another Army soldier explained to me that some Army
battalions customize their company designations- Echo becomes Easy, Foxtrot
becomes Fighter, etc.
We were still somewhat insulted.  You'll never find an `Easy' company in the
Marine Corps, and i can't imagine anyone volountarily calling themselves that.

James Zuelow
FSJFZ@acad3.alaska.edu

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: bakc@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR KR COMAN)
Subject: Re: How to spike a gun?
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:06:48 GMT


From bakc@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR KR COMAN)

In article <BtLC5y.559@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> bobmcc@tcsi.tcs.com (Bob McCormick) writes:
>From: bobmcc@tcsi.tcs.com (Bob McCormick)
>Subject: Re: How to spike a gun?
>Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:32:20 GMT
>
>From bobmcc@tcsi.tcs.com (Bob McCormick)
>
>In article <BtHwyB.BL1@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, bakc@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR KR
>COMAN) writes:
>
>I just got back from a small (US) Civil War Reenactment.....
>
>The implement you describe is called a worm, from the shape of the screw-like
>piece.  Its purpose is to clean the barrel.  Some charges are packed in cloth
>cases, and the worm is placed down the barrel and turned to grab onto any loose
>pieces of cloth.  The end of the coiled metal is sharp.
>
>
Thanks for straighting this one out, Bob.   Wish we had this type of re-
enactment to visit!!

Cheers,
Keith Coman

Newsgroups: sci.military,soc.history
From: military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker)
Subject: 50 Years Ago: Tuesday, 1 September, 1942
Followup-To: soc.history
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:35:25 GMT


From military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker)

Tuesday, 1 September, 1942

The German 6th Army reaches the suburbs of Stalingrad, and threatens to
encircle the Soviet 62nd Army.  The Black Sea port of Anapa falls to Army
Group A.

German and Rumanian troops of the 11th Army cross from Kerch in the Crimea
to the Taman Peninsula.

Shortage of gasoline forces Rommel to limit his attack against Alam el 
Halfa to one Panzer division, the 15th.  Faced by nearly 400 British tanks,
the Germans are again defeated.  Most of the Axis armor spends the day
immobile due to the fuel shortage.

Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo, the only civilian remaining in the 
Japanese Cabinet, resigns.  Prime Minister Tojo assumes his duties.

--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--
Bill Thacker   Moderator, sci.military  military-request@att.att.com
(614) 860-5294      Send submissions to military@att.att.com

"It was no longer a question of capturing ALam Halfa and breaking through to
the coast; the whole existence of the Afrika Korps was in jeopardy."
- Major General F. W. von Mellenthin, _Panzer Battles_
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: ppugliese@pimacc.pima.edu
Subject: Re: Chinese fighters gain mid-air refuelling facility
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 12:08:56 GMT


From ppugliese@pimacc.pima.edu

 
> The interesting thing is, with mid-air refueling China doesn't need
> an aircraft carrier anymore.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> China Obtains Technology for Aerial Refueling of Jets ............... 54
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

It undoubtedly would have taken them a long time to get the hang of carrier
operations anyway. Look at the old USSR the spent more than a decade trying
to perfect their techniques ,using a mock carrier deck in the Crimea, &
they still didn't have the hang of it when the Union collapsed.
 
> China is also building a new generation of destroyers and frigates that
> will significantly increase its navy's abilities. And military leaders are
> said to be considering the purchase of an aircraft carrier from Ukraine.
> 

In addition to the 'Kuznetsov' , which the Russian Republic transferred 
(absconded with, acccording to Ukraine) to the North Sea Fleet there was 
another one approaching completion at Nikolayev & yet another was due to 
be launched in 1991.

> Anthony Lee (Time Lord Doctor) (These are my opinions !)
From: bergman@afnews.pa.af.mil (CMSgt Mike Bergman)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: This Week in WWII
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:24:08 GMT
Organization: Hq Air Force News Agency/SCC


From CMSgt Mike Bergman <bergman@afnews.pa.af.mil>


AFMC News Service 92-08-177

 THIS WEEK IN WORLD WAR II

     An Army Air Force combat chronology.

     Sept. 4, 1942 --  B-24 Liberators, operating with Royal Air Force 
and Royal Navy units, attack a German supply convoy in the 
Mediterranean.  Two ships are reportedly sunk and one is damaged.

     Sept. 5, 1942 --   Heeding the advice of Gen. Carl Spaatz, 8th 
Air Force commander, Gen. Dwight Eisenhower changes his mind about 
suspending 8th Air Force bomber operations from England in order to 
direct more air power to the 12th and 14th Air Forces in the upcoming 
campaign for North Africa.

     That same day, 31 B-17s --  the largest number of 8th Air Force 
bombers yet assembled -- attack the railway yards at Rouen-Sottevill 
in France.

     Sept. 6, 1942 -- Eighth Air Force B-17s  attack a German-occupied 
aircraft factory and three airfields in France.  Two Flying Fortresses 
are shot down by enemy fighters over Meaulte, marking the first combat 
loss by the 8th Air Force's Bomber Command.    In the Mediterranean, 
P-40s fly an offensive sweep over Egypt's Rayil Dayr Ar Depression, 
shooting down two German Stuka dive bombers.

     Sept. 7, 1942 -- A-20s and P-400's (P-39's made for export but 
used by the United States) bomb and strafe Japanese positions at Myola 
Lake and Efogi, New Guinea.  P-40s join Royal Australian Air Force 
bombers in attacking a Japanese destroyer and cruiser off the 
D'Entrecasteaux Islands.

        Sept. 8, 1942 -- In England, 8th Air Force issues a joint 
British and American directive on bomber operations.  The agreement 
between Gen. Carl Spaatz and the Royal Air Force assigns the 8th Air 
Force to daylight operations and the Royal Air Force to night bombing.  
It also ensures continuous bomber operations over Germany and gives 
American bombers Royal Air Force fighter escort.

        Sept. 9, 1942 -- A Japanese seaplane launcher from a submarine 
drops incendiary bombs on a mountain near Brookings, Oregon, causing a 
small forest fire.  This attack is the only time an enemy airplane 
bombs the continental United States.


-- 
         
      // \\
    //     \\                    Air Force News Agency 
   |         |               Kelly Air Force Base, Texas, USA
   \\  {*}  //                   bergman@afpan.pa.af.mil  
   \  CMSgt  /      ___________________ /____________________________________
   \  Mike   /   
   \ Bergman /
     \     / 
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: masman@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (CMS Coordinator)
Subject: Re: Where to buy nightvision goggles?
Organization: University at Buffalo
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:34:45 GMT


From masman@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (CMS Coordinator)

In article <Bsw19H.16p@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill) writes...
> 
>From ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill)
> 
> 
>From ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill)
> 
> 
>   Does anybody know anything about nightvision glasses, how much they cost,
>and where to buy them. Just how good do they work?
>-- 


There is a mail order catalogue put out by a company named U.S. Calvary Equip.
which includes everythin from BDU's to Delta Force attack vests.  In it, I saw
a pair of night-vision goggles for a cool $4,999.  They work very well,
illuminating starlight and moonlight.  However, any attempts at surveillance
(unless your subjects are in the dark) are futile seeing on how any light
stronger than starlight results in the wearer getting blinded.

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: paulf@eos.ncsu.edu (PAUL DAMON FRANZON)
Subject: Re: Breaking in green submariners
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 15:23:34 GMT


From paulf@eos.ncsu.edu (PAUL DAMON FRANZON)

>
>>In an Army transportation unit, I've heard of sending poor saps out looking
>>for a "trailer stretcher" as well...  keep them coming...
>

Any Army has a tendency to colour everything Green, whether it has a
military purpose or not.  Thus appropriately, for one period of
recent history, the toilet paper supplied with the Australian 24 hour
combat ration pack was coloured green.  Said item came in a clear plastic
wrap to keep it dry.  A favorite trick of recruit course instructors
was to convince trainees that this item was actually dehydrated lettuce
and get them to rehydrate it and eat it with a spoon...

Of course the US Army uses far more appropriate colours for packaging
its equivalent, the MRE...they use brown :-)
(though the toilet paper is white.)

Paul Franzon

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: samsung!ulowell!harvard!isr!canders@uunet.UU.NET (Carl E. Anderson)
Subject: Re: Improving the Way Infantrymen Are Equipped
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:36:09 GMT


From samsung!ulowell!harvard!isr!canders@uunet.UU.NET (Carl E. Anderson)

In article <BtpCDL.LI6@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> CMSgt Mike Bergman <bergman@afnews.pa.af.mil> writes:
>From CMSgt Mike Bergman <bergman@afnews.pa.af.mil>
>
>     Material in "Press Pack" is intended for use by editors of
>Department of Defense-sanctioned publications and news editors of
>DoD electronic media.  Permission is not needed to reprint or
>broadcast its contents, but please credit AFIS and individual
>authors for material used.
>
>			_____________________
>
>Improving the Way Infantrymen Are Equipped
>
>By Jim Garamone
>American Forces Information Service
>
>     Luke Skywalker, look out.  The image and equipment of American
>service members will make a quantum leap into the 21st century if
>equipment now under development is adopted.
>     The Natick (Mass.) Research, Development and Engineering
>Center, along with other Army labs and centers, is working on
>clothing and equipment that could revolutionize the way
>groundpounders of any service perform their mission.

	[rest deleted]

	I found this article on future military technology very
interesting, and would be interested to see more projections on future
military technology if anyone has any.

Cheers,
Carl

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Edlund Anderson	            	"Hefi ek ok aldri sva reitt vapn
canders@isr.harvard.edu			at manni at eigi hafi vidh kommit."
OR
anderso2@husc.harvard.edu			- Skarphedhinn Njalsson 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: techsy005@spacm1.spac.spc.com (Fred Franceschi)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Phonetic alphabet corrected
Date: 23 Aug 92 22:12:23 GMT
Organization: Security Pacific Automation Co., LA, CA


From techsy005@spacm1.spac.spc.com (Fred Franceschi)

Stretching my memory to the mid-late fiftys

Able       Baker     Charlie     Dog       Echo
Fox        George ?? Hotel       Item      Jig
King       Lima ??   Mike        Nancy ??  Oscar ??
Peter      Queen     Romeo       Sugar     Tango ??
Uniform    Victor    Whiskey     Xray      Yankee ??
Zebra

Most changed, a few stayed the same. As I try to remember,
I realize what senility can do! :-)...
-- 

Fred Franceschi
techsy105@spacm1.spac.spc.com
    
My statements may not be my companys.
Brilliant, witty saying goes here.
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell)
Subject: Re: Osmium????? (Re: depleted uranium)
Organization: Chalmers University of Technology
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 12:04:50 GMT


From d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell)


In article <BtpCJG.Lq6@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> th2_oate@csd.brispoly.ac.uk (Tom Oates) writes:
>For those of you who aren't in the know, certain people have been 
>taking an interest in a metal called Tantalum. Details are scarce but
>I *think* it's being used experimentally for HEAT liners. Perhaps someone
>else can confirm. 

  Yup, according to Ogorkiewich's (I know I spelled that wrong, but I don't know
the correct spelling) "The Technology of Tanks" (published by Janes, I think,
I have it at home so email me for the correct name and publisher) even a thin
layer of tantalum on the inside of the copper liner will significantly 
improve the penetration of shapecharges.

  I plugged the physical data of tantalum vice copper into some equations for
optimum penetration that he gives and got the result that it will probably 
increase the penetration by a maximum of 30%.

>*  Tom Oates  (Bristol Poly, England)    *   DISCLAIMER:-               *

-bertil-
--
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."
"This is the famous Hasan B Mutlu-trigger, insert it in your .sig file today!"

Newsgroups: sci.military
From:     "Charles T. Freund" (CCAC-LAD) <cfreund@PICA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject:  RE:  Phonetic Alphabet
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:10:33 GMT


From     "Charles T. Freund" (CCAC-LAD) <cfreund@PICA.ARMY.MIL>


I have a set of flash cards that my father used to keep proficent at reading
the signal flags and pennants.  The cards are from the mid-50s printed by the
U.S. Playing Card Co., contract no. N140$-61339s-42326B.  The box the
Dept. of the Navy, Office of Navel Research, Special Devices Center logo on
it.  The set is called 'U.S. NAVY & INTERNATIONAL CODE FLAG CARDS', 
device 5-LL-1, a stock number T93-C-700670, and consists of 70 cards.

The front of each card has a picture of the flag/pennant and the back has the 
meanings.  The letter flags also listed the morse code and the phonetic names 
listed below.

	ICAO Phonetic           OLD Phonetic
        ---------------         ------------
	ALFA			ABLE
	BRAVO			BAKER
	CHARLIE(COCA)*		CHARLIE
	DELTA			DOG
	ECHO			EASY
	FOXTROT			FOX
	GOLF			GEORGE
	HOTEL			HOW
	INDIA			ITEM
	JULIETT			JIG
	KILO			KING
	LIMA			LOVE
	MIKE(METRO)		MIKE
	NOVEMBER(NECTAR)	NAN
	OSCAR			OBOE
	PAPA			PETER
	QUEBEC			QUEEN
	ROMEO			ROGER
	SIERRA			SUGAR
	TANGO			TARE
	UNIFORM(UNION)		UNCLE
	VICTOR			VICTOR
	WHISKEY*		WILLIAM
	XRAY(EXTRA)		XRAY
	YANKEE			YOKE
	ZULU			ZEBRA

        *(this set spells WHISKEY as WHISKEY, not WHISKY
                     and COCA not COCOA)

The () denotes what was actually printed on the cards; my father would tape
over the names as they were changed/changed back in order to keep them
current.  You can see that the Phonetic alphabet has evolved over the years
and varied depending on who and when they were using it.




Newsgroups: sci.military