Jump to content

Talk:3 Commando Brigade Air Squadron

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some ideas for improvement towards GA

[edit]

G'day, well done on getting this article to B-class. Very interesting (and hairy) service in the Falklands. I wanted to make some suggestions wrt improving the article towards GA.

  • all the abbreviations should be in full when first mentioned (ie Lieutenant Colonel, DFC, AAC, HELARM), and you can put the abbreviation in parentheses after that then use the abbreviation from then on.
  • the gallery of pics is a bit much, I'd drop "Scout departing Coypool" as shows less than the other one of Coypool, drop "Approaching HMS Hermes" as the other pic of the carrier is much better, and drop the front-on one of the Scout, as the other pic is better. Usually we try to make sure there isn't any duplication in an article, and less is more, if you know what I mean. Have a look at WP:IMAGES
  • the way you've done the referencing is clunky. I suggest you pull out the "cite book" templates and put them in a separate section after the citations. Have a look at 13th Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Handschar (1st Croatian) for the use of sfn (shortened footnote) citations and a References section. If you try this and get stuck, leave me a message on my talk page and I'll show you how.
  • the External links don't look like reliable sources, so I'd drop them.
  • there is quite a bit more linking you could do, MC, DFC, San Carlos Water, etc
  • once you've named someone, you just use their surname after that, not their rank and surname. Unless of course there is more than one in the article with a particular surname, then the first name is usually used as well. I've done that with the lads who were buried at sea.

Hope some of the above helps. Don't be shy if you need a hand with any of it? Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:38, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Peacemaker67: many thanks for the pointers - I've done my best at working through them. Hopefully there is some improvement! --Bye for now (PTT) 20:00, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, glad to help. I'll have another look later on. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 21:59, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Have gone through the references now, as suggested - hopefully that's them sorted. --Bye for now (PTT) 15:58, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nailed it. There is just the Burden one now that doesn't link, (which is my fault for screwing around with it...), I'm not sure the cite book template supports five authors, so that could be the problem. One way around it would be to use "Burden et al" in the last1= field. I might have a look at the cite book documentation and see what can be done. Great job. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 02:22, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the cite book template, it's the sfn template. It doesn't support more than four authors. I checked Google Books and Worldcat, and they only list Burden, so I've cut it down to just him. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:46, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
testing: 3,000 m (9,800 ft), 100 m (330 ft) --Bye for now (PTT) 14:13, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Photographs

[edit]

This article currently includes photographs of 847 Naval Air Squadron aircraft. They are the Lynx AH.7 and Gazelle in 2002. Considering that there is a separate article for 847 NAS and this article need only give a brief mention and link to it, is does not seem necessary to leave those, particular photographs in this article. I suggest that the Lynx image be moved there, then, both images be deleted from this, 3 CBAS article. What do others think of this? Dreddmoto (talk) 13:26, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When I looked over this article again, the photos seemed to give the impression that 3CBAS just operated Scouts, so I thought photos of a Gazelle (20 years in service with them) and a Lynx (13 years) would balance this. I put these two photos there for illustration really, because these aircraft were physically/actually with 3 CBAS up to the point of the handover to 847. Also as a sort of legacy-thing at the end of the article. Technically, these aircraft may well still belong to the British Army (and will be maintained by REME personnel).
  • Would you be happier with pre 1995 photos? Though a Lynx one could be pretty hard to come by (that meets the Commons criteria).
  • Would you accept generic photos of a Gazelle and a Lynx that don't state which squadron they were operating with at the time?
  • Or could the captions be changed on the existing photos? --Bye for now (PTT) 14:45, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Former 3 CBAS Gazelle in service with 847 NAS in Oman, 2002
Former 3 CBAS Lynx AH.7, in service with 847 NAS in 2005
For now, I've just changed the captions: --Bye for now (PTT) 16:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
BTW 847 and CHF need sorting also. They are on my list --Bye for now (PTT) 16:24, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is something strange about the Gazelle photo/caption: Camp Justice is in Iraq rather than Afghanistan. I don't think 847 have ever been in Afghanistan, unless they were part of the 40/45 Cdo battle group[1]. What's even more curious about this photo is that they weren't obviously in Iraq in 2002 either.[2][3] Operation Telic. Weird or what? --Bye for now (PTT) 19:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The source is HERE with a caption: A Gazelle AH-1 Helicopter piloted by Captain Jack Frost of the Commando Helicopter Force, Royal Naval Air Station, Yeovilton, Somerset, UK takes off from Camp Justice, during Operation ENDURING FREEDOM; Photographer's Name: TSGT MARVIN PRESTON, USAF; Location: CAMP JUSTICE; Date Shot: 4/12/2002 - and there are several more,[4] (see page 2) so, Afghanistan it may have been. Or it coul've been Oman[5][6] --Bye for now (PTT) 10:48, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's official: Camp Justice, Masirah, Oman [7] (Click on "Additional information about this item") --Bye for now (PTT) 10:58, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bye for now, the changes that you made to the captions were a good idea. They make this clear. There is just one more edit that should be made, to reflect the fact that Lynx AH.7s are no longer in 847 NAS service. They were replaced with Lynx AH.9As. Maybe it could be reworded as Former 3 CBAS Lynx AH.7, also formerly in service with 847 NAS? You could suggest a better wording, if you can think of one. Dreddmoto (talk) 14:37, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Gazelle caption. I noticed that it was discussed in section 5 here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aérospatiale_Gazelle The consensus there that it was in Afghanistan, matched the caption for the same photo at http://www.eliteukforces.info/gallery/helicopters/gazelle-chf.php Dreddmoto (talk) 14:38, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have raised the Gazelle caption thing on the Talk page as I am pretty sure they got it wrong at the time. Cheers, --Bye for now (PTT) 15:48, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bye for now, there is a potential for ambiguity with the photographs because, unlike the rest of the Fleet Air Arm, aircraft of 847 NAS are marked with the words ROYAL MARINES, in capitals. This has been the case since 1995. This makes it important to make clear in the captions, which unit (3 CBAS or 847 NAS) and when, the aircraft in the photographs are from. Dreddmoto (talk) 14:24, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dreddmoto, I have swapped the photo for one that has a date and a source caption establishing who it was in service with at that time. To my mind the captions are adequate for their purpose now. Should you wish to change the captions or delete the photos entirely, please go ahead. They were never intended as a major part of the article in any case - just there for illustration as explained above. Cheers, --Bye for now (PTT) 15:28, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Either photograph is fine, for this article. They are both illustrative. The captions are good now. Maybe this, latest image could also be included in the 847 NAS article, while the previous one could be added to the History section of the Commando Helicopter Force article. What do you think? Dreddmoto (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The latest pic would be ok for 847 as well but the previous one, nice though it is, does not come with a date (at least not that I have found). The BERP blades date it a bit, but not enough for me to say categorically that it was either 847 or 3 CBAS at the time the photo was taken. So what would the caption be for it? --Bye for now (PTT) 18:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have not found a date for it but, it could have a caption like A Lynx Mk7 helicopter carrying commandos, while in service with the Commando Helicopter Force. Dreddmoto (talk) 21:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me, cheers --Bye for now (PTT) 21:46, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Formation

[edit]

In the Formation section of this article, it mentions that "six, TOW-armed Westland Lynxes replaced the Scouts." It does not mention which Lynx variant. Can someone add that? Dreddmoto (talk) 14:49, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:3_Commando_Brigade_Air_Squadron&oldid=1197031015"