As with so many things military, no rhyme or reason or consistency, depends on the era, I suppose. When the Army altered the M1903 at TR's insistence from the rod bayonet to the more practical M1905 bayonet the designation M1903 was not changed, nor was it changed when the caliber was changed from 30/03 to 30/06 in 1906. The M1903 modified for the Pedersen Device was designated the Mark I. The original designation for the M-1 Garand was US Semiautomatic Rifle, Caliber .30, M-1. When the gas trap was dropped in favor of the more practical gas port design-no change in nomenclature. The changes in the M1911-shorter trigger, arched mainspring housing, change in the frame cut for the tip of the trigger finger, e.g. -were so minor that you could easily convert one to the other. Conversely the differences between the M3 and M3A1 Grease Guns-dropping the cocking handle in favor of a simple finger hole in the bolt,e.g.-led to the A1 designation.
US Military Designations
- Thread starter '88Scrat
- Start date
I suppose it depends on the judgement of what ever ordinance board has the jurisdiction at the time. Changing the bayonet isn't a fundamental change in the rifle. Nor is changing a couple of parts. Not sure where the tipping point might be, and it could likely be different for each different design and each different designation board.
One point about the 1911A1, the change in the frame (the finger relief cuts) cannot be "back dated" so you cannot change a 1911 into an A1 or an A1 into a 1911. What you can do, is what was done, 1911s were maintained with A1 parts as needed,
Now, with the grease gun, the changes were a little more. Removing the cocking handle and the "grasshopper leg" lever system and springs, replacing the lower housing (mounting the ejector) with a new one without the mounting hole for the cocking handle, and, of course, a new bolt.
My guess would be they felt that was enough to justify the M3A1 designation.
Changes between the M1 and M1A1 smg are minor, a fixed firing pin (new bolt) and a simple stamped rear sight without ears was apparently enough too.
The thing about military designations and nomenclature is that it always makes sense to somebody, but the rest of us are just left to guess about it, most of the time.
Sometimes we can crack the code and figure out what and why, but other times it is a matter of "just what the hell were they thinking???"
One point about the 1911A1, the change in the frame (the finger relief cuts) cannot be "back dated" so you cannot change a 1911 into an A1 or an A1 into a 1911. What you can do, is what was done, 1911s were maintained with A1 parts as needed,
Now, with the grease gun, the changes were a little more. Removing the cocking handle and the "grasshopper leg" lever system and springs, replacing the lower housing (mounting the ejector) with a new one without the mounting hole for the cocking handle, and, of course, a new bolt.
My guess would be they felt that was enough to justify the M3A1 designation.
Changes between the M1 and M1A1 smg are minor, a fixed firing pin (new bolt) and a simple stamped rear sight without ears was apparently enough too.
The thing about military designations and nomenclature is that it always makes sense to somebody, but the rest of us are just left to guess about it, most of the time.
Sometimes we can crack the code and figure out what and why, but other times it is a matter of "just what the hell were they thinking???"
there are times when knowing the system can be.. advantageous...
As a unit armorer I was able to teach a certain officer a lesson about screwing EMs just because he could, and enjoyed it, and about reading what he signed.
there was a daily inventory, done by count only, and signed by an officer. This duty was assigned to each officer of the company, in a weekly rotation. A couple of them would actually show up at the end of each day, and sign off on the form. Most would show up on Friday, and sign a week's worth of the forms.
The Monthly inventory was done by serial #, performed in the presence of, and signed off by the CO or XO.
One week a particular officer did their duty, signing a week or inventories on a Friday (a bending of the regs, to begin with but one that was overlooked) and, he signed off that we had an M60 main battle tank in our inventory. The company had 4 M60 machine guns but no tanks, and a tank couldn't fit in our 20x20 arms room, anyway...
So, now, I had a valid, legal "hand receipt" from him stating we had an M60 tank (with a valid chassis #
) and the next time he became a pain in the butt, I asked him where the tank was...(at the time I believe the tank cost $285,000 and his signature made him responsible for it)
There was a bit of back and forth between the lowly PFC (me) and the officer (in private behind closed arms room doors..)
end result was a less than happy officer who learned not to sign what he didn't read, and not to screw with the guy filling out the paperwork he has to sign, because all M60s are not created equal..
He also learned that not all enlisted men were stupid and inferior just because they wore stripes instead of bars. And that, was my whole point. Well, that and "get off my ass".. Which, by the way, he did...
As a unit armorer I was able to teach a certain officer a lesson about screwing EMs just because he could, and enjoyed it, and about reading what he signed.
there was a daily inventory, done by count only, and signed by an officer. This duty was assigned to each officer of the company, in a weekly rotation. A couple of them would actually show up at the end of each day, and sign off on the form. Most would show up on Friday, and sign a week's worth of the forms.
The Monthly inventory was done by serial #, performed in the presence of, and signed off by the CO or XO.
One week a particular officer did their duty, signing a week or inventories on a Friday (a bending of the regs, to begin with but one that was overlooked) and, he signed off that we had an M60 main battle tank in our inventory. The company had 4 M60 machine guns but no tanks, and a tank couldn't fit in our 20x20 arms room, anyway...
So, now, I had a valid, legal "hand receipt" from him stating we had an M60 tank (with a valid chassis #
) and the next time he became a pain in the butt, I asked him where the tank was...(at the time I believe the tank cost $285,000 and his signature made him responsible for it)There was a bit of back and forth between the lowly PFC (me) and the officer (in private behind closed arms room doors..)
end result was a less than happy officer who learned not to sign what he didn't read, and not to screw with the guy filling out the paperwork he has to sign, because all M60s are not created equal..
He also learned that not all enlisted men were stupid and inferior just because they wore stripes instead of bars. And that, was my whole point. Well, that and "get off my ass".. Which, by the way, he did...
Anyone willing to spend a little bit of time searching on the internet can come up with answers to just about any question you can think of.
Military designations start with a descriptor of the item. That is followed by M signifying that the item has been listed in the inventory system. Next comes the number in order of listing. So Rifle, M1 or Helmet, M1, or Tank, M1 (sherman), Anti-Tank Rocket Launcher, M1 (the old bazooka), etc, etc. Rifles in field testing or experimental will get an X before the designation.
As for what followed the M1 rifle, here is a video about the M2 rifle. And yes, there is a M3 rifle, M4 rifle, etc. They just didn't make it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWrJ8DSguEM
Military designations start with a descriptor of the item. That is followed by M signifying that the item has been listed in the inventory system. Next comes the number in order of listing. So Rifle, M1 or Helmet, M1, or Tank, M1 (sherman), Anti-Tank Rocket Launcher, M1 (the old bazooka), etc, etc. Rifles in field testing or experimental will get an X before the designation.
As for what followed the M1 rifle, here is a video about the M2 rifle. And yes, there is a M3 rifle, M4 rifle, etc. They just didn't make it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWrJ8DSguEM
The Sherman was the M4 series. The next main battle tank was the T-26 which became the M26 Pershing, which moved us from mediums into the heavy tank class. Over the years after that, we developed the M-47, M-48 and then the M-60. The series ended with the M60A3 RISE in the mid 70s. The next proposed tank would have been the MBT-70 a joint US-West German project, and like so many thing of the era, it got loaded down with so many different (and sometimes contradictory requirements) it never got past the prototype testing stage before being cancelled.
Some years later, and primarily due to continued Soviet tank development we created a new design and it became the M1 Abrams, starting the sequence over, again.
Note that we went up to B-52, and then B-70 then "reset" the system and now have the B-1 and B-2 bombers (while keeping the aged B-52 in service, still).
Fighter plane designations went to F-111 before dropping back to F-14,15, 16, 18, then 22 and what are we up to now? F-35?
(the F-117 is an oddball, outside the regular squence)
It doesn't make sense to outsiders often, but then, its not supposed to....
In WWII when the USAAF was still officially part of the Army, fighter planes-the P-38, P-47, P-51, the P-61-were designated P-for pursuit-since the pre-war defensive mentality said they were designed to pursue enemy bombers. When the Air Force was established the "fighter" designation was adopted. The Lockheed Shooting Star saw service in WWII as the P-80 and in Korea as the F-80.
gbclarkson
New member
I always just assumed that some dude named Marcus was involved.
We use M=model and sometimes Mark (Roman numeral) for some things in certain applications. Often model is for something developed by or for the military and mark is somthing bought off the shelf. Sometimes not.
Its also common in general military slang to refer to the "Mark I eyeball" when describing something seen with the naked eye. Other nations have their own versions of the saying.
Its our system probably as much a matter of tradition as anything these days. And, if we don't or can't easily manage another nation's system, we make up one and apply it to their equipment.
During WWII, we gave code names to Japanese aircraft, for our own ease of use and to hopefully reduce misunderstandings. We did something similar with Soviet aircraft during the coldwar.
Though a fight between our M4s and German Mk IVs could get a bit confusing being described that way.
Its also common in general military slang to refer to the "Mark I eyeball" when describing something seen with the naked eye. Other nations have their own versions of the saying.
Its our system probably as much a matter of tradition as anything these days. And, if we don't or can't easily manage another nation's system, we make up one and apply it to their equipment.
During WWII, we gave code names to Japanese aircraft, for our own ease of use and to hopefully reduce misunderstandings. We did something similar with Soviet aircraft during the coldwar.
Though a fight between our M4s and German Mk IVs could get a bit confusing being described that way.