Topic: [APPROVED] Lockheed Martin aircraft

The bulk update request #12956 is active.

create alias f-22 (5) -> f-22_raptor (144)
create implication f-22_raptor (144) -> lockheed_martin (579)
create alias sr-71 (7) -> sr-71_blackbird (185)
create implication sr-71_blackbird (185) -> lockheed_martin (579)
create implication sr-72 (26) -> lockheed_martin (579)
create alias f-35 (2) -> f-35_lightning_ii (140)
create implication f-35_lightning_ii (140) -> lockheed_martin (579)

Reason: Small bur to consolidate redundant aircraft tags and imply their manufacturer, in this case Lockheed Martin (hopefully I've done this in the correct order)

EDIT: The bulk update request #12956 (forum #476859) has been approved by @spe.

Do you think we ought to also alias F-22 to F-22 Raptor (with the implication to Lockheed_Martin attached to the latter) as well? I like your idea of aliasing SR-71 and F-35 to SR-71 Blackbird and F-35 Lightning II. The longer names look more descriptive to me. (Obviously, since they haven't given the SR-72 a name beyond its designation, it wouldn't be so aliasable. We can do that in the future.)

clawstripe said:
Do you think we ought to also alias F-22 to F-22 Raptor (with the implication to Lockheed_Martin attached to the latter) as well? I like your idea of aliasing SR-71 and F-35 to SR-71 Blackbird and F-35 Lightning II. The longer names look more descriptive to me. (Obviously, since they haven't given the SR-72 a name beyond its designation, it wouldn't be so aliasable. We can do that in the future.)

Agreed on the 22; I will edit the bur

lust_demon_laz said:
Agreed on the 22; I will edit the bur

This should reflect on your other BURs as well so that the naming convention is consistent; e.g., f-14_tomcat on topic #61226, a-10_thunderbolt_ii on topic #61228, etc.
Also consider any other tags and implications that involve "vague" sounding designations that not everybody would know about.

The bulk update request #12956 (forum #476859) has been approved by @spe.