Re: Numbers for Bombers & Fighters (v. OT, but Somebody Here Probably Knows)
- From: Neil Gerace <geracen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 06:04:03 -0700
On Aug 27, 5:40 am, Pat Flannery <flan...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Brian Thorn wrote:
The Air Force brass
sure does seem to have been neutered in the last 20 years... "we don't
care what our regulations say, Boeing, Lockheed and Northrop, we'll
designate your planes whatever you want.
Here's a goody: At the moment we are up to the Boeing 787...then comes
the 797...and then? :-\
Pat
In the early 90s, I think, the 767's replacement was to be the 7J7.
Because J is the tenth letter.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Numbers for Bombers & Fighters (v. OT, but Somebody Here Probably Knows)
- From: Proponent
- Re: Numbers for Bombers & Fighters (v. OT, but Somebody Here Probably Knows)
- From: Brian Thorn
- Re: Numbers for Bombers & Fighters (v. OT, but Somebody Here Probably Knows)
- From: Pat Flannery
- Re: Numbers for Bombers & Fighters (v. OT, but Somebody Here Probably Knows)
- From: Brian Thorn
- Re: Numbers for Bombers & Fighters (v. OT, but Somebody Here Probably Knows)
- From: Pat Flannery
- Numbers for Bombers & Fighters (v. OT, but Somebody Here Probably Knows)
- Prev by Date: Re: what is orbital speed around the moon?
- Next by Date: Re: Numbers for Bombers & Fighters (v. OT, but Somebody Here Probably Knows)
- Previous by thread: Re: Numbers for Bombers & Fighters (v. OT, but Somebody Here Probably Knows)
- Next by thread: Re: Numbers for Bombers & Fighters (v. OT, but Somebody Here Probably Knows)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|