Talk:Ram (rocket)
Latest comment: 6 years ago by MandolinMagi in topic Major discrepancies
 | A fact from Ram (rocket) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 January 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minor items edit
Another interesting article! A month's development, that was quick. Here are a couple points:
- "the traditional bazooka's weapon"? Isn't the bazooka a weapon? Is that redundant? Perhaps, "more armor penetration than that of the traditional bazooka". Even "traditional" is kind of odd. Conventional? Established?
- In the sentence, "to use the HVAR or napalm;[8] with the end of the war in 1953", that semi-colon should probably be a period.
- Which planes carried the Ram? The photos show the Ram loaded on a Corsair and a Bearcat, but neither those nor any other planes are mentioned in the text.
Boneyard90 (talk) 05:01, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
- I've modified the article per your suggestions. Thanks! - The Bushranger One ping only 05:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Major discrepancies edit
It's odd that the information credited to Ms Babcock's Magnificent Mavericks and the major Caltech historical documents on their Anti-Tank Aircraft Rocket (ATAR a.k.a. RAM) program state contrary "facts". Are we to disbelieve the Caltech reports of their own rocket programs? I hope some of the other editors will work with me on this, especially if you possess a copy of Mavericks.Magneticlifeform (talk) 06:12, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
- More specifically, can anyone confirm that page 181 of Mavericks actually claims that RAM can penetrate 24 or 25" of steel armor plate?Magneticlifeform (talk) 06:57, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
- Can confirm. HERE--MandolinMagi (talk) 03:49, 3 November 2017 (UTC)