Terminology used by a fraternity is moot,
unless you are part of that fraternity. What I mean is, when you are part of the team associated with, say, an aircraft type, the vocabulary takes on a life of its own. You refer to things in the context of how it fits in the team's overall world, as long as that terminology is precise enough to be understood by colleagues, and generally as concise as possible.
eg; a Shorts 360. To the manufacturer or aviation journalist , it would probably be described as such. Or as SD3-60. Or as SD360. In my experience on a regional airline it was a defined, verbally or in writing, as either a 360, a Shorts, a Shed, an SH36, or a Sh**-Heap. If we had operated different versions, we would probably have referred to them only as a dash-number.
The term used is always going to be enough to define the subject, without excessive ink or syllables, so I could imagine that, within the context of the workforce, "one and a half strutter" could be abbreviated to "Strutter". Six syllables become two.
Of course, when I referred earlier to "journalism", I specified journalists who understand what they are writing about. Its interesting to note that the BBC News website currently has a feature on 60 Years of Loganair, one picture captioned "A Sports Skyvan ........".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...iness-63505252