| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Numbered Air Force article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It is more of an article with a list than just a list. --Pmsyyz 02:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Numbering of subordinate units edit
I don't understand this sentence: "Units directly subordinate to a NAF are generally numbered 6XX (where XX is the NAF number)." So if a NAF has two units directly subordinate to it, then they would both have the same number (6XX)? That doesn't seem to make any sense to me. The cited source no longer exists, so I can't verify this statement. Anyone have any idea? 74.71.93.111 (talk) 05:18, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
O-G edit
I tried to translate "operationally-gained" into standard English. This looks like a technical term, which would be unknown to readers not versed in the bureaucratic nuances of the United Sates Air Force. If it is important enough to be in this article, then its definition should be used here. I made a stab at doing that. Nick Beeson (talk) 09:47, 14 April 2017 (UTC)