Talk:Atlas Oryx

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Atlas Oryx article.

Article policies
AVIATION This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Hmmm, to start the discussion on the Atlas Oryx page, I'm considering removing the armament section. Though there was a Puma modified by Atlas to carry the armament mentioned in that section, no Oryx has ever been modified in that way, and they remain unarmed, aside from the possible fitment of a door-mounted machine gun. Any objections?

Impi 16:59, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Where...

Where can I find great pictures of this chopper?

[edit] Upgraded Pumas or New Manufacture product

I have found sources that suggest both upgrades of delivered French-made Pumas and a wholly domestically-made product different from the French models. Even Denel's website makes it seem that way: [1]

Anyone know for sure?--SAWGunner89 11:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Not for sure, since nothing has been confirmed, but some believe that the Oryx conversions were done on +- 50 IAR-330L licence-built Puma airframes from Romania. It's almost certain that they were not built in SA, as Atlas Aircraft (Denel's predecessor) had neither a legal licence nor the tooling to build them. — Impi 11:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Power output

I reversed the HP and kW figures, without doing further research. They used to say 1400kW (1044HP) which is the wrong way around, I guess. Thomasonline 10:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the original kW figure was correct, it was the HP that was wrong. I've reverted your change and placed the correct HP conversion in. — Impi 11:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)