Talk:Operation Sky Shield

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States / Cold War

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 not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Untitled

This was a NORAD exercise - it included Canada as well as the USA. I suggest that the text be reworded to give it less of an American bias.

What is the point, or meaning, of the statement that Skyshield was forgotten during the September 11 2001 grounding of airliners?124.197.15.138 (talk) 01:41, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably that when the US actually NEEDED to ground all non-military traffic, as in the September 2001 attacks, it, for whatever reasons, didn't. Military exercises are generally a waste of time if you then forget the lessons learnt in them - perhaps the author was trying to make that point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.77.186 (talk) 13:50, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ZPotts, LandonSherwood.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Skyshield I

Sky Shield I included an "attack" by eight Royal Air Force (RAF) Vulcan B.2 bombers.

This has to be an error as the first B2 was not delivered to the first B2 squadron until 23 December 1960. The narrative seems to be confusing Skyshield II with #1. As far as I can tell, there was no RAF participation in #1. Two Vulcan B1s from Goose Bay at 48000ft participated in Exercise Eyewasher in April 1959 to exercise the Eastern Air Defence Command. The comment about the Vulcan's low-level capability in this instance is irrelevant as low-level tactics were not introduced until 1963/64. XJ784 (talk) 16:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I added to that section, I will need to check the source which is at work in the expectation that one day I will find a few moments peace to read it. That the RAF did not introduce low-level operations for the Vulcan until 63/64 may not be relevant if the Vulcans were imitating a low level Soviet bomber (the Valiant "Black Bomber was flying in the 1950s so low level was never that far from the Air Staff's mind). I think generally a lot more variety of sourcing from UK and US angles is required to establish what went on. (eg there may be coverage in books on SAc, the Soviet threat etc) GraemeLeggett (talk) 18:27, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A quick glance found B.2As getting through at 56,000 in 1961 but I didnt spot anything elseGraemeLeggett (talk) 19:39, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The 1960 RAF 'participation' may have stemmed from an incorrect US DoD statement in 1963 as reported in Flight. The article is about the US denial of Vulcan penetration in 1961 but the spokesman said '1960' in error, as noted by the magazine with a 'sic'. Agree that more US (and Canadian) perspectives are vital. XJ784 (talk) 11:33, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Operation or Exercise?

All official references I have seen from UK sources use 'Exercise Skyshield': eg RAF Nuclear Deterrent Forces p313, Wynn, HMSO, 1997 (an official history), and two National Archive files with search for skyshield. Certainly in UK parlance, Skyshields were exercises because they were simulations rather than 'for real'. Googling "skyshield" brings up more instances of 'Operation' by a large factor but I wonder if WP is perpetuating an old error. XJ784 (talk) 16:59, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed something similar with Nato naval "exercises", some are at Operation xxxx and some at Exercise yyyy. I moved one to Exercise... on the grounds that I the sources backed it up. WP:CommonName applies though; if the sources mostly call it Operation Skyshield then it ought to stay at this title. But that said, if sources also call it Exercise Skyshield then that should be in the opening sentence as well as a redirect to this article. GraemeLeggett (talk) 18:02, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brief news item in a 1961 issue of Flight on UK participation in Sky Shield II here; [1]

Size

"operations involved 6,000 sorties flown"... "the largest military aviation exercise ever held"

Bogus. Exercise Ardent in 1952 had 1,000 aircraft flying 7,500 sortees over a period of a week. It was both larger and much more intense than what this article describes. Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:53, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]