|
Re: Lancaster varients
That's why I stressed the official side of things. Informally, people called them what they liked. Thankfully, they didn't have to consider that a Corsair II wasn't the same thing as a Corsair Mk.II.
I do believe that possible confusions can be reduced if we use the official terminology when it does add clarity. Differentiating between different variants is one area where this is true. There's a thread on j-aircraft lamenting the use of the Allied code names for WW2 Japanese aircraft, now that the official Japanese names are known, but here I think the the opposite is true: the "incorrect" use is preferable for clarity.
There are similar points raised about the use of the A/B/C system for RAF roundels. It is totally unofficial but so much clearer. More unclear is the present state of the NATO names for Soviet types: I'm sure almost everyone speaks of MiG 15s not Fagots, yet is quite happy with Bears and Badgers. Not to mention Fitters and Floggers (though the initial confusion around the MiG 23 designation must have helped there). It will be interesting to see if use of the NATO codenames disappears quicker that the Allied codenames for Japanese types!
Apologies if this is moving too far from the original question.
|