Talk:Ukrainian Air Force

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Ukraine Portal This page is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

	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.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Military aviation task force National militaries task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): Russian and Soviet military history task force

Contents 1 old talk 2 update needed indeed 3 size of the Ukrainian Air force 4 putting numbersi in this article is absurd! 5 Land Force

[edit] old talk

People, this article is obsolete regarding the official naming and structure of the force. It has been recently merged with Ukraine's Air Defense Force, and the new name is not "Air Force" (at least, literally not). However, this article is supposed to retain its English name. To be continued. AlexPU

P.S. Would you please also add any info you find on the merger to Military of Ukraine? AlexPU

This website has related material (including images): [1]--Riurik 04:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] update needed indeed

Here are three paragraphs that need to be dealt with asap:

At this time, Ukraine maintained 4 Air Force Armies... etc.

we need reference for that.

Ukrainian Air Force, as befits the second largest country in Europe, boasts a formidable array of modern combat and transport aircraft.

This statement without comparative numbers is meaningless. --Irpen 04:03, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

The Ukrainian Air Force is considered to be the country's foremost guarantor of its independence and territorial integrity.

This statement plainly looks strange. As of now, as everyone knows, the only threat to Ukrainian independence (for now an indirect one) comes from its northeastern neighbor. While the threat is indirect it is being dealt with different degrees of success by political means. Should the threat become direct, Ukrainian airforce or its entire military would not be a meaningful deterrent from our much more mighty neighbor. The only potential deterrent, should things go really bad, are possible alliances that Ukraine is yet to make. So, pls modify the statement. I just don't want to hurt anyone's feelings for now by marking it "dubious" which I would have done if this was a non-Ukrainian topic. --Irpen 04:03, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

In 2005, the UAF is/was planning to restructure, in an effort to improve efficiency. Moreover, Ukraine is planning to put more advanced jet aircraft into service in upcoming years.

Obvious. --Irpen 04:03, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] size of the Ukrainian Air force

am i the only one that sees a problem with the digit 220 (aircraft) in the upper right corner of the article, when the number is obviously much bigger if you add up all the aircraft from below. please fix if possible (or explain). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.100.60.93 (talk) 01:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

The 220 aircraft number comes from the recent AirForces Monthly article on the Ukrainian Air Force (per the reference given in the article). I believe the numbers listed further down in the article are, most likely, the number of those types of a/c "inherited" from the USSR and don't reflect some or all of the drawdown/sales/scrapping that took place between then and now. - Aerobird ^{Target locked - Fox One!} 01:42, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

aw, come on!. what european country would have 220 aifcraft total in th air force? Also, why are there specific mumbers in the article?

How in the world do the bunch of mouse-potatoes at globalsecurity.org know how many airplanes a former soviet country has? It's not like the government told the americans the layout of theit entire military. I say, remove the numbers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.50.184.231 (talk) 18:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

"IISS assesses the overall force size as 817 aircraft of all types and 49,100 personnel"...Doesn't anyone see a difference between these figures and the ones in the upper-right corner (55000 personnel, 220 aircraft)? Which figures are correct and which ones aren't? Which ones should be removed?...and I honestly don't think that 220 is reasonable. And secondly, why would they need 55000 personel for 220 aircraft? (I'm sure this includes anti-air forces but still) Bogdan 00:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] putting numbersi in this article is absurd!

wow, this article is terrible. why do people feel the need to throw out random numbers of aircraft? What does globalsecurity.org have contacts with the CIA that it knows exactly how much military equipment and of what kind every country in the world has? I'm removing the whole number table - it's absurd. If it's so useful and important, why doesn't the US Air Force article have one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.251.0.233 (talk) 16:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean, "If it's so useful and important, why doesn't the US Air Force article have one"? Not only does it have its own table, it has its own article. Bogdan ^що? 16:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Land Force

Redirects to canadian something or other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.119.185.104 (talk) 03:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)