Jump to content

Talk:List of active Ukrainian military aircraft

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

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Equipment of the Ukrainian Air Force. 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) 06:51, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please Check before editing

[edit]

I spent some time fixing errors on this page only to have them reverted by someone who clearly doesn't know that an SA-6 SAM is a 2K12 Kub and not a 9K37M Buk as is currently linked to. Ukraine no longer operates the 2K12 as it is obsolete and therefore should not be included on this list in the first place.

Furthermore while the link to the Ukrainian Defence Ministry page detailing the retirement of the last S-200 systems has vanished (I'm working on finding an archived version), the system is listed as retired on the main s-200 page with a source (I've updated to link to the archived version), therefore don't edit here to say otherwise you introduce conflicting information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.72.137.48 (talk) 11:56, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Airframes

[edit]

Yes, aside from some transport planes made by Antonov the Ukrainian air force's airframes really are all over 27 years old. Whilst the country has the capacity to maintain and renovate existing airframes it does not have the capacity (excluding Antonov) to manufacture new planes, nor the cash (or inclination) to buy new ones from Russia. Until news surfaces of a major aircraft order, and you can search for the last 20 years without finding one, all aircraft should read as having been produced in the Soviet Union. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.72.137.48 (talk) 12:59, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edits by Fox 52

[edit]

I have raised this with Fox 52 on their User talk page, only to have them deleted without comment. I copy them here because these edits need to be addressed.

I am putting this here as a request for engagement following your edits of this page. I have posted before above with pertinent information and you have not responded there to the points that I made, therefore this should be considered a step in dispute resolution over this page. These are the points I wish to make:

  1. Globalsecurity.org has not updated their figures for the number of Ukrainian Air Force planes in service in three years, despite regular updates in Ukrainian media detailing planes having been restored to service (citations can be provided as evidence). Other publications such as the Military Balance, a far more trustworthy website, have made these updates, Globalsecurity has not, suggesting the lists hosted there are out of date.
  2. Up to date information from the official Ukrainian Industrial Portal contradicts a number of up-to-date official media releases by Ukrainian government sources. As another example your edit claims that the S-300V1 is operated by the air force. This is an error as the latest information, a quote from the Defence Minister, states that the system is not currently operational. Secondly the V in S-300V stands for 'Voyska' which means ground forces. Both of these are sourced here at defence-blog for you to verify http://defence-blog.com/army/ukraine-modernise-s-300v1-air-defence-system.html. As another example I provided an archived version of an official Ukrainian government website announcing the withdrawal of the S-200 system from service, yet this was entirely ignored in amending the article.
  3. Planes produced before 1992 must be labelled as manufactured in the Soviet Union and not 'Russia' which did not officially exist save as the Russian SFSR before that date. As an example according to the Beriev-12 page production of the aircraft ceased in 1973, therefore it cannot have been produced in 'Russia'. This is also the case with other aircraft such as the AN-26, production of which ceased in 1986 and therefore cannot be regarded as having been produced in Ukraine.
  4. I note that you have again edited a piece to read SA-6 Gainful SD 3M9 despite me notifying of this error in the article talk. This is factually inaccurate as the SD 3M9 missile is used in the 9K37M Buk system (see the Buk missile system page), which has a NATO designation of SA-11 Gadly and not SA-6 Gainful which is the earlier 2K12 Kub system.
  5. I note that you have deliberately added elements to the page only to delete them in a second edit. I can only surmise that these are deliberate attempts to make the article harder to edit, and are not in keeping with wikipedia policy.

I respectfully ask that you please not continue to make edits based on faulty information and revert to the edit dated 14:51, 11 May 2018 by editor‎ Arjayay, making changes to that template as necessary. As the article currently stands it is lacking in up-to-date information and in conflict with official Ukrainian Air Force announcements and contemporary sources. This article needs major amending to remove inaccuracies, which I have done, yet you have deleted, please explain why.

I responded in my edit summary for you to bring here - The problem is not the information, but the source used; "blogs" are not a reliable source per WP:BLOGS - And you can not just say something is because you say so, that's considered original research. before you add content you need to verify it by citing a reliable source, further please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources –Thank you FOX 52 (talk) 15:03, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware that blogs are not a reliable source, however Defence-Blog is a news blog as explained here http://defence-blog.com/about-us, not 100% authoritative as per the policy but then neither is globalsecurity. Furthermore I have also used http://uprom.info/en/category/news/vpk/ the official Ukrainian government industrial portal to provide data which you have deleted. All the information I provided was based on statistics provided by the Military Balance 2018 and cited as such, a publication endorsed by leading defense figures such as Robert Gates and clearly meeting all wikipedia sourcing requirements.

Furthermore I have provided content backed up with citations, as an example an archived link to the Ukrainian military portal detailing retirement of the S-200 system. https://web.archive.org/web/20131115151029/http://mil.in.ua/news/ukraina/5159-ukraina-ostatochno-vidmovylasia-vid-zrk-s-200 It seems that you haven't looked at this reference as I see that the system is included on your edit. Why? I see that you have even added a source in your latest edit for including the S-300V1 (reference 5 Armament of Ukrainian Armed Forces) which is a broken link and has been for some time. It isn't fair to say that I'm not paying attention to sources when you clearly are not.

Also I am not saying something just because I say so as per Original Research, that is in fact what you are doing. At this point you are saying, and making edits to the effect, that the aircraft in UAF service have been produced in Russia or Ukraine post 1991 without providing any evidence to back up that assertion. Taking the Antonov-26 as one example, production for that ceased in 1986 during the Soviet Union as referenced in Gordon, Yefim. Komissarov, Dmitry & Sergey. “Antonov's Turboprop Twins”. Hinkley. Midland. 2003, cited in the aircraft's wiki article. Therefore saying this aircraft has been produced in Ukraine is not accurate.

This article is riddled with errors, which you don't seem inclined to allow to be fixed and you seem reluctant to engage on any of the points raised in my earlier post. Therefore I think I will have to Request a third opinion using wikipedia procedures to resolve this.

I have today checked the globalsecurity page that you, Fox 52 have used to source your edits. Noting that this page indicates it's source as the Military Balance, which I have used directly for all my edits I feel justified in reverting your changes. I would note also that a website that provides figures for Ukrainian air force equipment dated 2025 cannot be considered reliable given the current year. If you have any issues with my edits please talk them out here before making changes and I will defend them on a point by point basis, giving way if needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.139.221 (talk) 11:33, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_active_Ukrainian_military_aircraft&oldid=1201922299"