Category talk:Military equipment

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Technology / Weaponry Category‑class
WikiProject iconThis category is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
CategoryThis category does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Military science, technology, and theory task force
Taskforce icon
Weaponry task force

Anyone else think there's some definite overlap between this and Category: Weapons?

If so, should one of these be a subset of the other? Oberiko 00:36, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Weapons are now under "Military equipment by type."

Hierarchy[edit]

Since this is essentially the root of all military related technology, I'm going to propose a hierarchy here.

We should have three main sorting criteria: era, type and nationality.

Era[edit]

The eras I suggest are similar to those used on the weapons page: (Note: added period boundaries - eras include bookend time around the specific event that may have given the era its name. Joshbaumgartner 02:49, 1 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

  • Ancient (all weapons up to the Middle Ages)
  • Middle Ages
    • Can cover all from the fall of Rome up to the Age of Exploration.
  • Age of Exploration (mostly naval)
    • Covers the 16th Century
  • Age of Sail (ships only)
    • Only for classification of ships, due to their unique development path. Covers from the beginning of the 17th Century through the middle of the 19th Century.
  • Victorian Age
    • Era covers the second half of the 19th Century
  • World War I
    • Generally from the beginning of the 20th Century through the end of World War I (1900-1919)
  • Interwar period (Aircraft only)
    • Only aircraft had enough development to warrant seperating this out, covers aircraft developed after World War I but which weren't part of World War II.
  • World War II
    • For most, anything from after World War I through the end of World War II (1920-1945), for aircraft maybe not those of the Interwar Period.
  • Cold War
    • Everything from after WWII through the end of the Cold War (1945-1990)
  • Modern
    • Everything from the end of the Cold War through today (1990-Present)
  • Future
    • Planned, proposed, and hypothetical items.

We can place specific conflicts within the various eras: Vietnam military equipment would be a subcategory of Cold War military equipment etc.

Additional periods can be created to fit the needs of the specific country and/or type of equipment. Joshbaumgartner 02:49, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Type[edit]

Our main types would differ somewhat according to the era, but I think the main types would be:

  • Vehicles
    • Armored fighting vehicles
  • Naval ships
  • Aircraft
  • Personal equipment
  • Space equipment
  • Weapons 1

1 - Weapons includes the following: Guns, bombs, missiles etc. There is thus some overlap with personal equipment and weapons.

The type list will undoubtedly get larger, but I think we can subcategorize mostly within those boundries. Oberiko 16:37, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)


In Defense of My Putting "Tomahawk" in this Category[edit]

The page on Tomahawk says it was used as a melee weapon during Vietnam, and is now used sometimes in Iraq for breaking down doors and fighting once inside.

Military Systems[edit]

Ok, so I am totally confused as to where to put military systems like ABCS and FBCB2. These two systems are Battle Command related and they do not quite fit into the Category:Military electronics or any other category besides Category:Military equipment. Are ABCS and FBCB2 weapons? Yes, but not in the traditional sense.

The categorization being used does not take into account the current organizational method of system/sub-system and mounting/un-mounting as in the case of mounting/un-mounting sensors into a vehicle. Honestly, I do not think that the implication of "serving to equip" in the word "equipment" is of benefit to categorization. I really believe that "system" is a much better word.

Furthermore, the Wikipedia Commons categorization does not seem to mirror at all the categorization used here.

What do y'all propose that I do? Thank you in advance for your help in this matter.

Sidna (talk) 13:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]