Jump to content

Talk:List of rotorcraft

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

TGR Helicorp

[edit]

I guess some day someone will write about the TGR Helicorp models. http://www.tgrhelicorp.com/home.htm Nurg 09:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not. TGR Helicorp in receivership --Born2flie (talk) 14:35, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Original versus license versus acquired designs

[edit]

How should this be handled on the list? For instance, Hughes designed and originally built the Model 369/500, which is now built by MD Helicopters, and the AH/MH-6, a variant of the original OH-6 which is now built by Boeing IDS. The 500 designs and NOTAR variants were also built by McDonnell Douglas Helicopters, not to mention all the license-built versions around the world. Is the list intended to list each design, or is it intended to list each manufacturer and the respective designs they produce, which results in the current duplication on the list? --Born2flie (talk) 14:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of comparison, these are (or should be) listed in turn under each manufacturer in the main List of aircraft that this list is supposedly a subset of... --Rlandmann (talk) 01:28, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I'm taking your answer correctly. Are you saying, yes, list the 369/500 under Hughes Helicopters, McDonnell-Douglas Helicopters and MD Helicopters? --Born2flie (talk) 05:08, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That would be consistent with how things are done (in theory, if not always in practice) in the main List of aircraft. I think it would be logical for this list to remain consistent with what the main list does; but that's just a personal opinion. --Rlandmann (talk) 07:25, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, that would be desirable to remain consistent. I wasn't sure on the intent of the list, though. Thanks! Are you also saying that the contents of this list should also be found on the aircraft list in the same format (e.g. Japanese manufacturer of license-built Hughes/MD/MDHI designs)? Sorry, if I'm dense on this. --Born2flie (talk) 14:33, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The litmus test for inclusion is: "Is the aircraft known under this name?" So, Hughes OH-6, McDonnell Douglas OH-6, Boeing OH-6, and Kawasaki OH-6 should all be included. To put it in perspective: a reader shouldn't have to know that this "Kawasaki OH-6" they've heard of was a licence-built version of someone else's product - they should be able to find it immediately under the name that they know. On the other hand, I can't (for example) find any reference to this being called the "Kawasaki MD500", so that name shouldn't be included.
I also don't know whether it's worth distinguishing between "McDonnell Douglas Helicopters" and "MD Helicopters"; in the main list the normal practice for company name changes where the product line is substantially the same is to just put "see Xyz" under one of the names. --Rlandmann (talk) 19:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hughes Tool Company; Aircraft Division was split out by Howard Hughes as Hughes Helicopters when he sold off the Hughes Tool Company. McDonnell Douglas purchased Hughes Helicopters and renamed it as McDonnell Douglas Helicopter Company (later Systems). When Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas, I believe that the division retained its name. When the civil designs were sold off to the Dutch RDM Holdings, the name MD Helicopter Holdings was chosen to tie into the legacy, and the military designs were retained by Boeing and rolled over into Boeing IDS. When Patriarch Partners acquired MDHI in 2005, they renamed it as just MD Helicopters, presumably to avoid confusion with and maintain legacy with the MD designations of the previously produced airframes. As it is, the OH-6 and its variants have been produced by Hughes Tool Company; Aircraft Division, Hughes Helicopters, McDonnell Douglas Helicopters and Boeing IDS, notwithstanding license-produced versions. The MD500 has similar production history, except it was never built by Boeing IDS and is now built by MD Helicopters which is a different company than McDonnell Douglas Helicopter Systems. Quite confusing, but that's the way things go in the helicopter world. --Born2flie (talk) 22:59, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake; the previous advice was (as you've correctly surmised) on the incorrect assumption that MD Helicopters and McDonnell Douglas Helicopters were the same entity rebranded. Based on your account above, they definitely need separate entries. --Rlandmann (talk) 23:25, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If I understand this discussion, there should be a Vertol section and many of the Piasecki and Boeing Vertol rotorcraft should be listed there. NeoPhyteRep (talk) 22:47, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not exactly. Piasecki Helicopter was renamed to Vertol after Frank Piasecki left the company. The fact is that Vertol never produced any aircraft, rather the company under that name designed both the Model 106 and Model 114), and built prototypes, but it was Boeing-Vertol that did all the manufacturing of the production aircraft. Only those two designs from Vertol were carried over as Boeing-Vertol designs. All previous helicopters were manufactured as Piasecki Helicopters. Piasecki Aircraft designs after Frank Piasecki left PV-Engineering/Piasecki Helicopter/Vertol are strictly Piasecki Aircraft (PiAC) designs and are not tied to Boeing-Vertol (now Boeing IDS). --Born2flie (talk) 03:06, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

There is a problem with the link for Model 3 A-1 because it only links back to the list of rotorcraft.--76.226.225.9 (talk) 16:50, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the redirect - although it hasnt really got an article to go to. MilborneOne (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in List of rotorcraft

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of List of rotorcraft's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "JAWA 82-3":

  • From List of aircraft (X): Taylor, John W. R.. Jane's All the World's Aircraft 1982-83. Jane's Publishing Company. London. 1983. ISBN 0-7106-0748-2, ISBN 978-0-7106-0748-5
  • From List of aircraft (R): Taylor, John W. R. (1983). Jane's All the World's Aircraft 1982-83. London: Jane's Publishing Company. ISBN 0-7106-0748-2.
  • From List of aircraft (E): Taylor, John W. R.. Jane's All the World's Aircraft 1982-83. Jane's Publishing Company. London. 1983. ISBN 0-7106-0748-2

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:10, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Table format including images

[edit]

I'm thinking of doing to this article what I did to List of busses. Any objections? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:27, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This page is part of a WikiProject Aircraft series that includes List of aircraft engines, List of aircraft, List of aircraft manufacturers and others. I am not sure it makes sense to change just one of them to a new format. - Ahunt (talk) 01:17, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
good luck finding images for any more than a few of the listed types, and all those images would make the page load time completely unmanageable. That is why there is a link - the page linked to has the extra information, such as images, factoids, etc, so they don't need to be here.NiD.29 (talk) 03:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I'll pass on this one. Thanks for the feedback. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:51, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of rotorcraft. 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) 06:11, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_rotorcraft&oldid=1200922697"