Confusion over Special Targets, Star gauged, C&R Match rifles etc

Greetings

Spent another day at NARA and found some good gems and I really like this document. Figured it was worth sharing. (I found it before, but lost it years ago on my first laptop and didn't realize where I originally found it. Like losing your wallet and finding it years down the road with money in it.)

I like it for several reasons.

First, I like how it shows terminology is both confusing and important. I'll frequently ask people for clarification, it's not meant to challenge them or that I'm preparing for a standoff. But sometimes what someone is trying to convey isn't received in the same manner. It helps to ask before going further.

Secondly, I like how it shows terminology changes and evolves. If you talk about one item in one year, that takes on an entirely different definition only a few years later. So it helps to know "when" something is being discussed.

Hope you guys enjoy it.

If you get a different interpretation, or see something I don't please chime in.

Happy Monday!

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...zbDEV4bl-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...amNejkgl-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...6BGjJmZl-1.jpg

I posted more docs that go along with this over on the cmp forum on a recent discussion.

Recent 1903 pickup - CMP Forums

Nomenclature is all important when discussing equipment, especially when different entities are communicating with each other. I believe misunderstandings over nomenclature are the root of a lot of confusion over interpretation of available information. We are all vulnerable. I hope your work leads to clarification of many disputes, which can only advance all our interests.

A bit of irony is in order. Did you know that the first attempt to land a module on Mars, a joint American-European effort, failed because a failure of the two factions to use identical units lead to the module crashing due to excessive descent speed? The second effort also failed, for the exact same reason. The brightest scientists on both continents made the same stupid mistake twice in a row.