diff --git a/docs/re/BACKLOG.md b/docs/re/BACKLOG.md
index 645904a0..c1c2e390 100644
--- a/docs/re/BACKLOG.md
+++ b/docs/re/BACKLOG.md
@@ -6854,3 +6854,29 @@ partition is declared × *mounted*, not whether a package ships.
 `eff_h308`, `eff_j002_e01`, `eff_j002_e02`, `eff_n0071`. ❔ The `.xpr` route is
 exhausted under every prefix the disc uses; a different container or a runtime
 generator is the remaining possibility.
+
+---
+
+## ✅ 2026-08-28 — `wep_85` is the ONLY declared-but-unshipped asset; the gaps are unused numbers
+
+Item (a). The obvious follow-up to `wep_85`: the weapon packages number **00–84
+with 26 holes** — are those holes cut weapons too? Partitioning every number
+00–85 by *package present* × *named in the parsed pak data*:
+
+| | named in data | not named |
+|---|---|---|
+| **package present** | **59** | **0** |
+| **package absent** | **1** | 26 |
+
+`59 + 0 + 1 + 26 = 86`. 🔑 **The 26 gaps are unused numbers — nothing names
+them.** The single occupied cell is `wep_85` (named 16×, no package): **an
+isolated cut, not a pattern.** ⚠️ The other zero matters too — **0 shipped
+packages are never named**, so the two sets agree in both directions but one.
+
+✅ **Craft models: 16 of 16, both residuals empty.** Same test on `rou_f###`: 16
+in an `.xpr` and named, **0** named-but-unshipped, **0** shipped-but-unnamed. The
+16 are `f001–f004`, `f101`/`f102`/`f104`–`f106`, `f201`/`f202`, `f301`–`f303`,
+`f401`/`f402` — the hundreds digit groups them into five families with internal
+holes (no `f103`, no `f203`). **No craft was cut.**
+
+Written up in [arsenal-item-weapon-chain](structures/arsenal-item-weapon-chain.md).
diff --git a/docs/re/structures/arsenal-item-weapon-chain.md b/docs/re/structures/arsenal-item-weapon-chain.md
index be0d3f5b..65bf9431 100644
--- a/docs/re/structures/arsenal-item-weapon-chain.md
+++ b/docs/re/structures/arsenal-item-weapon-chain.md
@@ -90,3 +90,45 @@ screen side.
 * `Dependency` and `MissionObjective` are empty on the sampled item; what fills
   them elsewhere is unread.
 * Which `Weapon` records the 26 never-on-a-turret weapons are.
+
+## ✅ `wep_85` is the only declared-but-unshipped asset — the gaps are unused numbers
+
+The previous iteration found `wep_85` declared in the datasheets with no
+`rou_f001_wep_85.xpr`. The obvious next question is whether it is the tip of a
+family: the shipped packages number **00–84 with 26 holes**, so are those holes
+cut weapons too?
+
+Partitioning every number 00–85 by *package present* × *named anywhere in the
+parsed pak data*:
+
+| | named in data | not named |
+|---|---|---|
+| **package present** | **59** | **0** |
+| **package absent** | **1** | 26 |
+
+`59 + 0 + 1 + 26 = 86` — the numbers 00 through 85.
+
+🔑 **The 26 gaps are simply unused numbers, not unshipped weapons.** Nothing in
+the data names them at all. And the one occupied cell is the one already known:
+**`wep_85`, named 16×, with no package**. It is an isolated cut, not a pattern.
+
+⚠️ The other zero is worth as much: **0 shipped packages are never named** — every
+`rou_f001_wep_NN.xpr` on the disc is referenced by the data. So the weapon
+package set and the weapon vocabulary agree in both directions but one entry.
+
+### ✅ Craft models: 16 of 16, both residuals empty
+
+Running the identical test on the `rou_f###` craft family — every number that
+appears inside an `.xpr` against every number named in the parsed data:
+
+* in an `.xpr` **and** named: **16**
+* named but not in any `.xpr`: **0**
+* in an `.xpr` but never named: **0**
+
+The 16 are `f001–f004`, `f101`, `f102`, `f104`–`f106`, `f201`, `f202`,
+`f301`–`f303`, `f401`, `f402` — the hundreds digit groups them into five
+families, with holes inside each (no `f103`, no `f203`).
+
+So **no craft was cut**, and the method that found `wep_85` returns a clean
+negative here. Across both families the disc ships exactly what it declares,
+with the single exception of that one weapon.