Title/Designation is incorrect.
Reference 1 has a typographical error. The correct designation is AGM-176.
http://www.marinecorpsgazette-digital.com/marinecorpsgazette/201205?pg=32#pg32 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 20:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- I can't see the link, but that may be an error on their part. The designation appears to be AGM-175. See  and also that a Google search for "AGM-176 Griffin" gets 0 hits. The catch is that MQM-175 also appears to be a valid designation for an entirely different vehicle...! - The Bushranger One ping only 05:18, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
well in fact agm-176 is correct. all those stuff about an "agm-175" came from that article on Seapower. however, this designation was obviously incorrect. there is already a MQM-175. one type number can never be assigned to two different thing... on Yahoo! group "Military Aviation Designations" the author of that article once said: "I was the author of the Seapower item that used the AGM-175 term. It was told to me by the Raytheon program official for a short article on the Griffin. I did not check with DOD, so that is probably the reason for the error. I would now go with AGM-176." (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Military_Aircraft_Designations/message/4706) in a word the term agm-175 must be wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 尼古拉叶若夫 (talk • contribs) 11:20, 4 January 2013 (UTC)