Talk:Grumman JF Duck

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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States

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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Inaccurate, incomplete

Over the next days, I will rewrite the article. A total of over 600 Ducks were built, the article claims only 48. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 11:53, 2 April 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Is there even a need for this article given that the J2F Duck article is fully developed? FWiW Bzuk (talk) 13:03, 2 April 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Agree; should "merge" be requested? DPdH (talk) 01:21, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Use by Argentina?

I's unclear where the mention of Argentine Navy use of the JF-2 is a confusion with the documented use of the J2F. See for example the G-15/20 entry in Histarmar website (accessed today), and the book Grumman G.15, G.20 & J2F Duck (Serie Aeronaval Nro. 15) ((in Spanish); Nuñez Padin, Jorge Félix; Buenos Aires, Argentina: Museo de Aviación Naval, Instituto Naval; 2002). Can anyone help clarify this? ThanksDPdH (talk) 01:20, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is the JF the same plane as the G-15?

I'm confused... this article mentions the G-20 as a variant of the JF-2; while the article about the Grumman J2F Duck refers to that plane as the G-15. Is this correct? If so, based on which verifiable source? Thanks DPdH (talk) 01:29, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Air Enthusiast article, the G-20 was an armed version of the JF-2 used by Argentina, while the G-15, despite the earlier designation, was the Grumman designation of the J2F. Argentina had eight G-20s in 1937 followed by four G-15s in 1939. Cite added to the article for the G-20.Nigel Ish (talk) 09:51, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grumman JF Duck. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120325044407/http://www.planesandpilotsofww2.webs.com/Grumman2.html to http://www.planesandpilotsofww2.webs.com/Grumman2.html

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) 15:24, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]