I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as 1911, is in fact, 1911a1, or as I've recently taken to calling it, a1 plus 1911. A1 is not a firearm unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning 1911 system made useful by the Bridgeport, lathe, and vital firearm components comprising a full firearm as defined by the NFA. Many firearm users run a modified version of the A1 system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of A1 which is widely used today is often called “1911,” and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the A1 system, developed by the John Browning. There really is a 1911, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use.
What does the a in a1 stand for, anyway?
>>64653837it stands for alligator
>>64653908That's just to confuse the enemies, it's actually crocodile
>>64653837I always thought it stood for alteration or advancement. US arms nomenclature is weird.>M usually stands for model>number after is sometimes which, or the year it was adopted>but sometimes those numbers are out of order (M1, M14, M16, M4 for example)>or sometimes those numbers repeat or skip large distances (M1-4, M26, M48, M60, back to M1) and yes I know there some tanks between but not 60 variants>then there's aircraft>Patrol, Fighter, Attack, Bomber>post WW2 no identifying code for manufacturerIt's all a little silly to me. The German system made much more sense.>small arms get the year of adoption and a type designation (rifle, carbine, submachine gun, machine gun, etc)>tanks just get a "we're on the 4th or 15th or whatever design" adoption number with an alpha numeric subset for design variant>planes get a manufacturer code and numeric code with similar variant descriptor as tanksI know the RLM had some peculiarities in naming conventions as well, but far less than the US.>but what about the BongsWe don't talk about them.
>>64653834I prefer the AK-47 version of this.
