Jump to content

Talk:Eurocopter EC120 Colibri

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Eurocopter Colibri)

the kurdish police has bought at least two ec 120 helicopters

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeBRbWkLRmE&feature=related — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.73.96.63 (talk) 10:42, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute

[edit]

Ksyrie believes that the alternate nomenclature for the Eurocopter Colibri is the HC-120. I've provided verifiable sources that demonstrate that CATIC (via Harbin) has a subordinate role in the development of the aircraft and that the HC-120 will be a Chinese-assembled variant. The Australian Aerospace production line will provide EC 120 production for the rest of Asia and the Pacific rim, a fact which also seems to relegate production of the HC-120 for the internal Chineses aerospace market.

The nature of my dispute is that I feel Ksyrie has taken a less than neutral position on this article and is promoting a nationalistic or regionalistic viewpoint. The HC-120 is already listed as a Variant and CATIC and Harbin feature prominently in the lead-in proportional to their involvement. I believe that Ksyrie's edits serve only to mislead as to the nature of Harbin's involvement in the worldwide production of the EC 120 and attempts to simply give the HC-120 a treatment of greater importance in the article. (Reposted on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft/Rotorcraft task force) --Born2flie 03:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IT's clear that HC-120 is the chinese name for this helicopter and EC 120 is the name for Eurocopter made one.It's just this product have got two different names under two different companies.Some one can assert HC-120 is a variant of EC 120,and on the other hand,someone may assert EC 120 is a variant of HC-120.--Ksyrie 04:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It seems pretty clear to me that the EC-120 is derived from the other Eurocopter models, which would then make the HC-120 as the license-built variant. Another issue that should be addressed, though, is the some of the text in the "development" section reads as if it was taken from a Eurocopter sales brochure, and is promoting the product rather than merely describing it in neutral terms.Akradecki 04:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can you provide the sources to support EC-120 is derived from the other Eurocopter models？--Ksyrie 04:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the helicopter is the EC 120 Colibri, everywhere in the world, except China, where it is produced as the HC-120. Only in China is it called the HC-120, so if the lead-in says Eurocopter Colibri, it doesn't mean "HC-120", it means EC 120, because that is the model number and name that Eurocopter has given it, and how it is marketed worldwide. The HC-120 is covered under Variants, but the inserting of HC-120 everywhere else in the article is disruptive and misleading. This article from Eurocopter, clearly suggests that the HC 120 is a term intended solely for the Chinese aerospace market.

You had also written into the article that all companies had an equal share in the project (diff). Based on the online references, specifically a reference to the premier book reference (Jane's), CATIC and HAI have less than 1/4 share. You can play word games all you want about which is the origin of which, but verifiability is required. --Born2flie 04:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO,EC 120 will be the name fabricated in France,and HC-120 will be the name fabricated in Harbin.Yes,until now all the international sales are french ones,but if the HC-120 entered the international market,the name HC-120 will be used.And from the website where you had cited,I cann't find EC-120 is derived from the other Eurocopter models--Ksyrie 05:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And I didn't mean to play the word game.It is an international project,The names from all the partners should be respected.Yes,Singaporean and chinese participation are not as important as Eurocopter.So I just add the name HC-120 after EC 120.--Ksyrie 05:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't support listing the HC 120 as a "variant", but rather as the Chinese designation for their market. In time, the HC 120 may have enough local content to be called a true variant, but according to the sources at this time, both models are made from the same components. - BillCJ 05:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From reading the online sources in the References, and from printed sources, this is what I found: The EC 120 was a new project between Eurocopter (61% share), CATIC (24%), and STAe (15%). Production was originally in France alone, but is now/will be (timeframe uncertain) also produced in China and Australia. Each partner produces certain components, and these are all delivered to the assembly line in France. (I assume the same arrangement exists for the other lines, theough there may be some local content.
The helicopter is known as the EC 120 throughout the world, but is designated the HC 120 in the Chinese market. They are basically the same aircraft, and until the Chinese assembly line was built, were both produced in France. The EC 120 and the HC 120 are neither variants or licensed copies of the other, but the same aircraft. However, outside China, it is the EC 120, and given that this is an international website, that is the name that should be used. It should be noted that it is called the HC 120 in China, but should not appear throughout the text to avoid confusion. On the Chinese WIki, I would expect HC 120 to be used in the text.
I just wrote down they are equal partner,means their status in this project are equals.--Ksyrie 05:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are equals on the EC 175 project, 50/50. --Born2flie 05:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that I can agree with Ksyrie and BillCJ that we not treat it as a variant. I don't agree that HC-120 be as prominent in the article as Ksyrie is editing it. I would recommend that the HC-120 designation be used in reference to the production done by Harbin, or HAI, or whatever name it is going by. For instance:

The rest of the article, unless it specifically mentions the aircraft that are produced in China should refer to the EC 120 or just plain "Colibri". --Born2flie 05:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That looks like some good text. As for the variant issue, are you sure? We routinely treat license-built helicopters as variants, for instance, see the variant list for UH-1 Iroquois - all the license-built aircraft are their as variants under their respective designations. Seems we should be consistent. Akradecki 14:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alan, in this case, CATIC and Eurocopter are partners in the venture. Harbin/Hafei is handling the production/assembly for AVIC II, its parent, who is also 50% share owner in CATIC (or was back in 1999). The partnership stipulates that China can manufacture the aircraft in-country and market it as the HC-120.[1] The Chinese manufacture has come later than expected. It is not clear that each company produces part of the aircraft and that they are then shipped for assembly at each location, it may be that the partners were responsible for the design of specific components as a member of the design team and that each partner has access to the different component designs to produce a whole helicopter. Seems that building specific parts and then shipping them for assembly somewhere else is a bit more costly than if you just put your heads together to design a helicopter that you all could build.

I have argued against separate articles elsewhere[1][2], even for the license-built variants and any variants that sprout off from there, but can't seem to build a consensus for it yet. I believe that it violates WP:NPOV because it promotes nationalism, which I would normally be all for, except that it violates Wikipedia policy. --Born2flie 15:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check MBB/Kawasaki BK117 for comparaison

[edit]

--Ksyrie 16:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC) and Bell/Agusta BA609--Ksyrie 16:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a joke for promoting nationalism saying.--Ksyrie 17:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried previously to merge the BK117 with the Eurocopter 145, but ran into a lack of consensus. The Romanian aircraft also suffer from a lack of NPOV, as well. I haven't attempted the nationalism angle against NPOV to push the issue, but its gaining more and more credibility in my mind for tackling these kinds of issues. How does the current first paragraph read for you? --Born2flie 18:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The "nationalism" of the MBB/Kawasaki BK117 article, only extends to the difficult title of the article. Every other mention of the two companies and their respective countries are mostly my edits to attempt to give a fair and accurate treatment of their involvement based on the sources that are available to me. Prior to the Development section being established, it read more as an add for the aircraft. I'd still prefer to roll that up into the EC 145 article because a. the EC 145 is the most popular version of the BK117, and b. the BK117 is part of the development history of the EC 145. The problem on the English Wikipedia is establishing consensus and maintaining reasonable verifiability of the sources being used by the individuals. --Born2flie 18:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Bell/Agusta BA609 fairly deserves its name.It just a name,and if all the partners of whatever project make consensus over the naming dispute,there wont be problems.And what I had written down was just giving the name from another partners.If we regarded the chinese name stands for nationalism,why not the Eurocopter stand for the same meaning？It's just a name,and none of bussiness of so-called nationalism.--Ksyrie 18:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NPOV calls for fair treatment of all aspects of the subject. I feel that I have, in good faith, provided that treatment to the HC120 produced in China. The French production has been active since 1997, and the Australian production line since 2003. Together, they have produced over 400 aircraft before the Chinese production line produced even one HC120.[1] Is it fair to promote that as equal in achievement, equal in appearance? Chinese production didn't begin until about August of 2004,[2], and by 2005, 8 were believed to have been produced for the Army's aviation training.[3]. 8 helicopters produced in China——which is realistic since 6 were produced the first year in Australia——compared to 400 already produced in France and Australia, plus a year and a half worth of continued production and delivery at the non-Chinese assembly locations. Just how much credit does the HC-120 deserve apart from what any one individual feels it needs in this article?
Worldwide, the aircraft is known as the EC 120. Only in China is it known as the HC120 (once again, acknowledged by both Eurocopter[1] and HAI[2]). China has a production capacity that can only meet China's demands for the aircraft, based on Eurocopter's evaluation of the Chinese market, which is actually favorable. The HC120 is a minority production version of the EC 120, and it should be given that representative prominence in the article in accordance with the Wikipedia policy of WP:NPOV. What I see happening is an attempt to introduce a bias into the article on behalf of HAI's production of the HC120. --Born2flie 19:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hardly understood what you want to express.HC-120 is just another name for this helicopter,no matter the past production capacity.While you claims I put foward the Name HC-120 as a chinese nationalism,and I may regard your removal of HC-120 and Stick to EC 120 as an European nationalism.Why one of the official and formal names for this light helicopter should be deemed as a variant,and the other is seen as the legitimate？--Ksyrie 19:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A similar example is the AS 350 Ecuirel/Squirrel, which is sold as the AStar in North America, and the Ecuirel 2 as the TwinStar. While there is not a US partner comparable to the Chinese company, AStars have been manufactured in the US.
For whatever reasons, the official name of the aircraft is the EC 120, except in Chinese markets. They could have named the helicopetr the EHS 120, or something like that, yet they chose not to. Eurocopter may be exibiting a European bias in doing this, but that's their choice - they can name it whatever they want, as they are the senoir partner with a 61% share. Recognizing that fact of naming choice is not a European bias, but accuracy. HC 120 is merely the marketing name in China only; it does not need to be mentioned more than the few times necessary to point this out. I think we are all in agreement now that the HC 120 is not a variant, but a marketing name, as far as our sources have shown to this point. - BillCJ 20:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your exemple isn't valid,AStar is sold under the Eurocopter subsidiary American Eurocopter,while Harbin is an independant company.--Ksyrie 20:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I acknowledged the difference. However, Harbin is a partner on the project, not a simply another company simply building the aircraft under license. THe comparison is that both names are different for marketing purposes. - BillCJ 21:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to get technical, but the most authoritative source for the name of any aircraft is its type certification documents. The and JAA TCDS (type certificate data sheet) lists the model only as the EC-120 (EC-120B, actually). No mention of an HC 120. Because it's not listed officially as the HC 120, Ksyrie is incorrect by saying it's "just another name for this helicopter." It may be a marketing name, as Bill said, but it's not an official designation, at least not in the parts of the world that recognize JAA certification (which includes the US, as the FAA typically will recognize JAA certification). Unfortunately, I don't have any way of checking the Chinese certification of the HC-120, but I'm guessing that there will be some differences. For instance, certification includes requirements like cockpit markings and required placards (like Emergency exits). For JAA and FAA certifications, this must be in English. Though I don't know for certain, if the Chinese follow tradition, their certification requirements will mandate that this stuff be in the dominant Chinese language. Also related is the production certificate. I doubt that the aircraft being built in China are being built under a JAA or FAA production certificate. These may be a minor things, but the point that I'm trying to make is that the two aircraft are likely not interchangeable. It is highly unlikely that you'd be able to take an HC-120 to Europe or the U.S. and register it, because it wasn't built under a FAA/JAA production certificate and is not listed as an EC-120 for type certificate purposes. This is the reason that I advocate the HC-120 being considered a variant, not just another name. To use the example above, an Ecuriel is just another name for an Astar...there are no differences in the physical helicopter, nor is there in the certification, and the same helo can be registered in Europe or in the US> Since the HC 120 is not listed on the JAA TC, unless someone can demonstrate conclusively through refs, though, we should not assume that the HC-120 is being being built under an FAA/JAA-recognized production certificate and type certificate, and therefore it is not an identical model. Akradecki 22:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Eurocopter EC120 Colibri. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Eurocopter EC120 Colibri. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:04, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Eurocopter EC120 Colibri. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:47, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Production Engine

[edit]

This article rattles on about were the doors and various other parts are constructed, but does not even mention what engine / was installed, other than the development of a diesel engine. Also, it would be interesting to know why it had such a short production run. Was it that small light turbine helicopters have taken over from piston engine variants, or did it just have poor sales? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.210.119 (talk) 12:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eurocopter_EC120_Colibri&oldid=1201843507"