Talk:Military helicopter

Why is the history of military helicopters not mentioned? --82.41.42.96 07:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Good question. --Born2flie 21:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

How best should the history be done, as a history of each of the types of helicopter integrated with a description of its role and operational use or as a seperate history section? KTo288 22:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

• Either way could work if handled properly, I think. Given what's in the article now, adding a separate History section would be easiest. -Fnlayson 19:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

LOL, I came here ask about history too. Please can someone put in the history and evolution of military helicopters. I don't really know much about the subject (hence why I came here in the first place), but perhaps the section could start by talking about the Luftwaffe first, then how the American's mass produced them and how everyone followed suite. Then the evolution of the attack chopper. (Just a thought, don't jump down my throat anybody) Ryan4314 (talk) 00:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you to the editors who've taken the time to assess this article. KTo288 19:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

The caption about the survivability is somewhat misleading and somewhat wrong. The survivability of the Apache is complex, and divided into two areas of low susceptibility and low vulnerability. I will try to work on this aspect of the information in an understandable format.--THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^TALK 19:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Any corrections will be welcome, I might have been rather taken in by claims made less than accurate sources, however there is only so much you can put into a caption, maybe better to put in the article, might need to create a 'Design of military helicopters' section which could be used to include the existing systems subsection. KTo288 00:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sure collaboration would be good.--THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^TALK 01:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

So one is being able to take hits, like 23 mm shells? And the other avoiding anti-aircraft fire/missiles? Thanks. -Fnlayson 05:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yes, the latter and the former, respectively. I'd be glad to discuss this elsewhere if you like.--THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^TALK 13:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

I believe that the proper title for this article would be Military helicopter without the plural. However, if military aircraft articles have different naming standards, I am mistaken. --UberScienceNerd _{Talk Contributions} 23:30, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I agree, I have moved Military helicopters to Military helicopter per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals). --Neo-Jay (talk) 18:56, 12 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

There is not a clearly defined delineation between these three "types" of helicopters. Often, the distinction is just how each service chooses to distinguish the helicopters it uses in these roles. These two sections should probably be combined and the artificial distinctions between the terms removed, or at least severely blurred. --Born2flie (talk) 01:31, 14 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

merged Utility and Transport helicopter sections. --Born2flie (talk) 22:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.army-technology.com/projects/kiowa/

  Triggered by \barmy-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 10:10, 3 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

  Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 21:05, 9 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Military helicopter. 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/20070909172530/http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.2232 to http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.2232
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070919175334/http://www.army.mod.uk/aac/index.htm to http://www.army.mod.uk/aac/index.htm

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) 06:01, 31 January 2018 (UTC)Reply