Talk:Weteye bomb

Name?
Why was it called the Weteye bomb ? This does not seem to be discussed in the article. Cirt (talk) 10:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not, not yet anyway, I got that part coming. But just fyi it was because of the liquid nerve agent (the "wet" part) and the fact that the guidance system was originally supposed to be a camera based system, this was never incorporated but the nickname stuck, I am going to add a section about the name because the actual military nomenclature was Mark-116 I believe or "Mk-116". --IvoShandor (talk) 10:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. :-)--IvoShandor (talk) 11:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

NORDS (Naval Ordinance), China Lake, CA, was the developer of this munition. The "Eye" series bombs was so termed as they were guided by the "Mark I eyeball". There are numerous other munitions termed -eye, such as the rockeye, which never had plans for optical guidance. What made the weteye unique was its high agent-to-munition weight, use of longitudinal shaped charges (4 MK5 Mod 0 bursters) and system of internal baffles to keep the minimum void in the tail section so as not to disrupt the center of gravity -- a well designed munition for a liquid (wet) content.--Reid Kirby (talk) 05:00, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Reference
This reference seems to be saying something relevant, but it isn't so straight forward. Please add it to the article if you find useful. Also, there is some info here and here. -- Suntag  ☼  16:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There are some photos of the weteye here and here. The website says they are official U.S. Navy photos and they would almost have to be. Try uploading them to commons and see if they will accept chinalakealumni.org's assertion that the photos are official U.S. Navy photos. -- Suntag  ☼  16:31, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks, you're right, they almost have to be official government photos, no one else would have access to chem/bio weapons. --IvoShandor (talk) 04:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)