http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gMmyAMcajM
Skip to 6:05...he got a good shot of the funnel cloud as he's pulling away!
I don't quite think Justin was correcting him on the RM-130 part of the name... read the post before you go slamming people.SirenkiD wrote:Minor correction: All the sirens I have seen personally in Billings were RM-130's. Those versions don't have 25 batteries, either.500 AT fan wrote:Minor correction, it'd be PN20, not P-20.
Good to see it's still used. Sounds a bit higher pitched than usual.
Get over peoples' mistakes. We are all human. While Justin shouldn't have pushed incorrect information at least he has the balls to stick his hands up and say that he was wrong!jkvernon wrote:500 AT fan - "What I was trying to say is the ACA name for it was PN20, not P-20. I'm quite aware the ones made by ASC were named RM 130, and I'm not implying Billing's sirens are ACA branded, either. Where in my post did I say it wouldn't have been named RM 130? Explain that, please."
500 AT fan - "I talked to Jim Biersach about it a while back. The yellow ones were Performance + Penetrators, and the gray/improved ones were PN20s. One main difference between the two is that the Performance + Penetrator used 25 batteries, and the PN20 used not so many. I don't know where "RM-130" originated."
500 AT fan - "What I meant was I didn't seen anything like a catalog or brochure from ASC stating the RM/OM names."
You're welcome.
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 4 guests