Talk:Embraer EMB 312 Tucano/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

Colombia bougth 24 Super Tucano in a deal of 233 million USD. I see that today in the news when the first one reached CATAM military airfield. But I think they come in 2 packs.--ometzit<col> 17:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Pilatus PC-9

It bears a superficial resemblance to the Pilatus PC-9. Was the Brazilian plane at all based on the Swiss one? Drutt 22:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The Tucano actually flew some 4 years before the PC-9 did, so the question is was it based on the PC-7. Honestly, single-seat turboprop trainer aircraft all look pretty much the same.--Dali-Llama 23:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Copyvios

Over the last two weeks, User:Josl22 has contributed a large amount of text to this article. Unfortunately, this is a user with a history of copyvios, and some of the text here has been directly lifted from websites as well, including this one and one from aviastar (the latter itself no doubt plagiarised from somewhere else). I've rolled back to the end of June. --Rlandmann (talk) 21:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I had the same concerns, but was not aboe to find proof. I'll try to look though the history later to see if anything usefull was added by other users in that timeframe. Also, the same user has been active on the Short Tucano and EMB-314 pages. Have you been able to chack them as yet? - BillCJ (talk) 22:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

No - I'd had enough for one day! The "Copy-Paste-Change a Few Words" technique makes tracking down the sources difficult and time-consuming. Any help would be appreciated. I was looking for stretches of clear English to plug into Google, or phrases with advanced vocabulary. --Rlandmann (talk) 23:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Almost by default the best English-language article about the aircraft is this one by Greg Goebel; it's public domain, although I imagine it would be bad form to just copy and paste it into Wikipedia and then lock the page from all future editing. I would support blanking Wikipedia's article and turning it into a redirect to Goebel's page. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 17:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Just place the link in the EL section. Locking articles or redirecting them to off-Wiki-Foundation sites is contrary to the Founder's vision, and so would never fly (asumming you were serious). As to using Greg's material, he's fine with it as long as it is credited to his site, but his writing style is a just bit too informal for WP, so it would have to be rewritten anyway. However some Powers-That-Appointed-Themselves-To-Be in FA reviews have declared that Vectorsite and Joe Baugher are not suitable as reliable sources, so we've had to go back and find their original sources to cite. They both list their sources, but do not use in-text citations. - BillCJ (talk) 18:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Joseph Kovács

Why is it almost never mentioned that the designer of the Tucano and other early Embraer aircraft was the Hungarian Joseph Kovács? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.79.95.241 (talk) 12:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

It may be because it is not mentioned in the standard reference works on the subject but you are welcome to add that fact if you can find a reliable reference. MilborneOne (talk) 12:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I found a reliable reference and added this. Who says old issues don't get resolved? Kyteto (talk) 03:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Number unit built

The last serial number produced by EMBRAER is the 312504 plus 160 units produced by shorts = 664 units Dafranca (talk) 14:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Embraer EMB 312 Tucano/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 20:40, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take this review--sorry you've had to wait so long for one. In the next few days I'll do a close readthrough, noting any issues I can't immediately fix, and then go through the criteria checklist. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:40, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Initial readthrough

• My first impression in looking at the article is that though it appears well-sourced and comprehensive, the grammar is still far from meeting GA requirements. Normally I'm quite happy to do minor copyediting as I go, but this article appears to need major work. My copyedits to the lead can be seen here [1] as an example, and there's one sentence fragment in there I couldn't fix. (asterisk below)

The first sentence of the body gives more examples of the sort of persistent minor errors I see:

• • "The Brazilian military government considered aircraft a strategic equipment and in effort to reduce dependency from foreign companies, state-owned Embraer was establish in 1969" -- "strategic equipment" is an uncountable noun (shouldn't have "a"); the complete phrase should be "in an effort"; and the phrase should be "was established".

I hate to be a jerk about copyediting, especially when one of the main editors here is contributing in a second language and writes English a thousand times better than I write Portuguese. But this will need to be improved to pass GA, and it's more work than I as the reviewer should do myself. If you don't know any editors who might be able to help out, my suggestion would be to request a copyedit from the Guild of Copyeditors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. I'll put this on hold for a week so that this issue can be addressed. If that's not enough time, this one may need to just be renominated at some point in the future.

• "Initially supported by a local order for 118 aircraft with options for an additional 50 units in October 1980, later matched by an Egyptian licence-produced purchase in 1993 and subsequently by an improved variant as the Short Tucano licence-produced in the United Kingdom" -- a sentence fragment. What was initially supported? Embraer?

Thanks for all your work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

G'day, I have copy edited the article. I don't know if this alleviates all your concerns or not. Please review my changes and feel free to revert/tweak anything you do not agree with. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Rupert--I've been following your progress and it looks like a substantial improvement. I'll do a more detailed review later today or tomorrow, but I think you've largely addressed the problems in this area. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:24, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

No worries, happy to help. AustralianRupert (talk) 21:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Continuing readthrough

Okay, this looks much improved. Thanks again to Rupert for the clean-up. Here's some more comments that I'd like to hear your thoughts on. I've now worked through to the "Brazil" subsection. -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:44, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

I will do on the weekend. Thanks Dafranca (talk) 10:57, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

• " Encouraged towards the follow on project "Universal II"" -- I'm not clear on this phrase. What is "the follow"?
• "endowment of ejection seats" -- what does "endowment" mean here? Would "addition" have the same meaning?
• "weapons captive flight trials" -- what does this phrase mean?
• "whither it reached a maximum diving speed of 607.5 kilometres per hour" -- Doesn't whither mean "to where"? I'm not sure I understand the meaning of this sentence.
• "A third prototype YT-27, further modified from the previous two prototypes, received the civilian registration mark PP-ZDK, and flew on 16 August 1982,[31] and in the following month made its international debut at the Farnborough Airshow, crossing the Atlantic just a few days after its maiden flight. " -- consider breaking up this long sentence.
• "Many features of the EMB-312 became standard in later basic training aircraft designs." -- What's the statement in the original source that supports this claim? I've read through the article twice, and I'm not sure that I see it. This could just be my mistake, though.
• " It was the first turboprop trainer developed from the beginning with military jet capability." -- this claim will need a citation.
• "making the EMB-312 the world's first trainer aircraft fitted with an ejection seat." -- also needs a citation
• The clarification needed tag should be addressed.
• "in which it is fitted" -- what is "it" in this sentence?
• "four years later six more AT-27s that had been withdrawn from the Peruvian Air Force were bought" -- rewrite to avoid passive voice
• " the Tucanos are currently used " -- rewrite with more precise date or "As of" per WP:REALTIME; looks like the source is a decade old.

• G'day, I've made a couple more tweaks, which I think deal with a few of the issues listed above. I don't have access to the sources, though, so I have not been able to deal with the point about "weapons captive flight trials" (I wasn't sure what it meant) or the citation need tags, etc. As before, please feel free to change/revert any of my changes you don't agree with. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 21:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Closing review

This one has definitely improved in the course of this review, but work remains to me done, as with the unsourced information noted above and the clarification needed tag; since it's been more than a week without action on these, I'm closing this review for now, though I hope it'll be renominated soon after these issues have been addressed. Thanks everybody for your work on this one--I think it's definitely getting there, -- Khazar2 (talk) 04:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Afghanistan

It appears Afghanistan will be receiving 20 of these. Just a heads up for inclusion at some point. [2] --Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 16:25, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Advertisement Tag

I have noticed multiple issues with articles relating to Embraer aircraft being written in peacock language, and sounding like grandiose advertisements. This issue is especially prevalent in the opening paragraph of this article, where the accolades on how the EMB 312 was ahead of its time are sourced from Embraer itself. Zkidwiki (talk) 22:47, 23 June 2018 (UTC)