User talk:Born2flie
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!!!
|
[edit] Welcome
Just wanted to say hello and welcome aboard. It's always good to have new blood editing articles on military related topics. If you ever need anything let me know and I will help you out where possible. Again, great to see you here and best of luck.--Looper5920 07:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Helos
Just noticed your user page and was wondering what choppers you flew/fly for the military, (if it is ok to ask) A75 05:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- I fly the OH-58D for the U.S. Army. (Born2flie 23:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC))
- Thanks, I am a big fan of Army aviation. A75 02:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- Nice work on the updates to Attack Helicopter. It might be worth noting that the interim Cobra, although much modified, remains in production 40 years later. I myself flew Cobras for 18 months in Vietnam. Dan D. Ric 06:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] To-Do lists
I just saw the (template {{todo}}) on the Talk:Air Force One page. Have you considered using the template on some of your projects, such as on the OH-58 Kiowa page? Just asking. Seems like it might work for your purposes. -- BillCJ 23:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
The template looks good on your project pages. It get your attention; that's why I noticed it on the AF1 page.
Btw, I'm working on standardizing the Related content on the Bell helicopter pages to WP:AIR format. I've already done the one on the UH-1 Iroquois page, so look and see if that outline works for you. I'll be putting it on the OH-58 and ARH-70 pages (modified of course) this week, but don't want to work at cross-purposes as you've been working on them also. Thanks for fixing the Designation list on the UH-60. I hope to get to the Sikorskys next, but I keep running into more Bells! Ended up doing a major rework on the Bell 47 today, and haven't even gotten to the Related content yet. --BillCJ 00:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- Related content? I'm not gonna fight you. I left WP:Air due to their unwillingness to define themselves and their goals sufficiently that other editors wouldn't need to search to find it. When it was suggested that I was being bureaucratic (the implication was that I was being draconian) about such things, I decided that I would just go out and do my own thing, that way WP:Air won't be able to take credit as a group for my edits. If you want to implement their page content ideas, I may have comments, but I'm not going to get into a stupid edit war. (Born2flie 22:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC))
I understand your viewpoint. So far, I like what they are doing, but I work better within a framework anyway, and I like theirs for the moment. I myself might have trouble with them in the future.
The helicopter pages are very haphazard right now, esp the bottoms of the pages. The standardized format seems to work to me, b/c at least it brings some consistency. I'll try to keep it simple; I won't be trying to put 3 or 4 designations in one slot like some have done with the H-60 variants. Any constructive comments or edits would be much appreciated. -- BillCJ 00:32, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] ARH-70 Questions
Some quick question on the ARH-70: Do you know the reasoning for not having a mast-mounted sight? You've stated you fly the Kiowa, so I assume you use the sight there. In addition, it is "optimized" for urban combat--what does that entail? Also, are you going to move to the ARH-70, or do you even know yet? (Just curious.) --BillCJ 00:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- MMS is not COTS to the airframe. That's about the most likely reason. I believe the original MMS required a year or two to integrate into the design of the OH-58D, and the timeline for ARH can't afford that kind of delay. Also, due to the stated urban focus of ARH, a NMS has better lookdown capability and isn't obscured by the rotor system and aircraft body. Also, I think the NMS has greater range of motion based on the system they selected and its use by Law Enforcement agencies. I don't know if or when I'll be going to the ARH, but ultimately, if I stay in long enough, all OH-58D units will be ARH units. (Born2flie 22:25, 14 November 2006 (UTC))
Thanks. --BillCJ 22:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hughes Helicopters
Some user slapped a {notability} tag on the Hughes Helicopters article. I removed it (to get his attention, as some people don't read the talk pages), and posted comments on the talk page also. I don't know what his problem witht he page is, but it might be that it's unsourced. He just put the unreferenced tag up today, so it's not like noone won't know that's a problem. Can you take a look, and see what you think? If you have a list of sources that might have some info, I'll be glad to run them down and try to cite what's already in the article. Thanks. - BillCJ 07:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
