Jump to content

Talk:Bell UH-1Y Venom: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m restore format in project banners
 
(38 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talk header}}
{{Talk header}}
{{American English}}
{{WPAVIATION|class= C
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=
{{WikiProject Aviation
|B-Class-1=no <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. -->
|B-Class-1=no <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. -->
|B-Class-2=yes <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. -->
|B-Class-2=yes <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. -->
Line 7: Line 9:
|B-Class-5=yes <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->
|B-Class-5=yes <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->
|Rotorcraft= yes}}
|Rotorcraft= yes}}
{{WPMILHIST|class= Start
{{WikiProject Military history|class= Start
|B-Class-1=no <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. -->
|B-Class-1=no <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. -->
|B-Class-2=yes <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. -->
|B-Class-2=yes <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. -->
Line 14: Line 16:
|B-Class-5=yes <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->
|B-Class-5=yes <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->
|Aviation= yes |US= yes}}
|Aviation= yes |US= yes}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Low}}

}}
== Venom? ==
{{Annual readership|expanded=true}}

Bill, I haven't even looked yet. Is it going to be called "Venom"? --[[User:Born2flie|Born2flie]] 15:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

:Was news to me to when I found this page last night. My first thought was to move it to "Bell UH-1Y". However, I Googled "UH-1Y Venom, and cam up with lots of hits. (Alot more than a similar search for "ARH-70 Araphaho" (sp) will bring up.) This site ([http://acquisition.navy.mil/programs/air/uh_1y Department of the Navy RDA]) seems fairly official, being on a Dept. of Navy domain name. Check it out and see what you think.

:I was suprised at how good this page actually is. It solves a problem I've been noticing, in that info on the UH-1Y is spread out among the Bell Huey articles (UH-1, 212, and 412). The only problem is, there are NO links to this page in those articles. I had planned to take care of that today, and still will if you see no problems keeping this page. - [[User:BillCJ|BillCJ]] 16:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

::I don't if you don't. This is right up that alley we were talking about with the AH-1, also. --[[User:Born2flie|Born2flie]] 16:19, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

:OK, it's done. - [[User:BillCJ|BillCJ]] 17:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

:According to Bell Helicopter publications/Posters etc.....it's called the SuperHuey, not the VENOM! [[User:Stevee617|Stevee617]] ([[User talk:Stevee617|talk]]) 03:13, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

::Bell does not name US military aircraft, the DOD/USAF does, though that does not mena Bell cannot use it's own names internally and for export versions. This [http://acquisition.navy.mil/programs/air/uh_1y Department of the Navy RDA] site clearly gives the name as "Venom". However, the final word on DOD names is the the DOD 4120.15-L Addendum. I've written Andreas at Designation-Systems.Net to ask him to check his sources on that document to see what names, if any, are listed for the UH-1Y and AH-1Z. Hopefully that can settle the issue, and if no name is assigned, then we'll move the page to [[Bell UH-1Y]], and put Venom and SUperHuey in quotes. - [[User:BillCJ|BillCJ]] ([[User talk:BillCJ|talk]]) 03:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

::That could be Bell's commercial version of the [http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/aircraft/military/bellUH-1Y.cfm UH-1Y]. I did a search on Bell's web site for Super Huey and found [http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/company/pressReleases/PR_07_1204_Wildfires.cfm 1 article about the Bell 412]. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 05:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

:::CAL FIRE has ungraded UH-1Hs that are called [http://www.rvcfire.org/opencms/functions/airattack/Helo.html "Super Hueys"], which is what I believe the Bell article is referring to. Andreas responded to my inquiry, reminding me that the Popular names for the UH-1Y Venom and AH-1Z Viper are listed in the [http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/412015l.pdf DOD 4120.15-L - Addendum of 2004]. I have found several internet sites, such as Deagle.com, that refer to the UH-1Y as the "Super Huey", so I have no problem putting it in the Lead sentence, like we've done for the AH-1Z and "SuperCobra". - [[User:BillCJ|BillCJ]] ([[User talk:BillCJ|talk]]) 08:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:::: OK, the article was not clear to me. I'm fine with mentioning Super Huey, but don't think it should be bolded. The the AH-1Z is different situation as there was some uncertainty in the past whether it would keep the SuperCobra name or change to Viper. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 18:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

This article should have the name changed to "UH-1Y Huey" Bell Helicopter was the originator of the Venom and Viper names when they were developing the upgrade aircraft and those incorrect names have made their way into various websites including a Navy website. No Marine Corps entity has ever used those names and on the Marine Corps Aviation website, both the UH-1N and UH-1Y are named the Huey and both the AH-1W and AH-1Z are named the Cobra. Link to UH-1 info: http://hqinet001.hqmc.usmc.mil/AVN/documents/aircraft/rotarywing/uh1.htm Link to AH-1 info: http://hqinet001.hqmc.usmc.mil/AVN/documents/aircraft/rotarywing/ah1.htm All reference needs to be updated to Huey and Cobra vice the incorrect Venom and Viper. [[User:USMC UH-1|USMC UH-1]] ([[User talk:USMC UH-1|talk]]) 17:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

:The "Viper" and "Venom" names are in the official DOD MDS documents([http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/412015l.pdf DOD 4120.15-L - Addendum of 2004]). If they have been removed in an update of that document, proof needs to be provided. A closely-related example is [[UH-1 Iroquois]], even though that name is hardly ever used, it's still the ''official'' DOD name for the aircraft. - [[User:BillCJ|BillCJ]] ([[User talk:BillCJ|talk]]) 18:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

::For one, those fact sheets like like something a public affairs official cobbled together for the public to see, not any sort of official publication or internal use document. Secondly, both of them only really has the stats on the legacy airframes... the photos of the new aircraft seem to be tacked on as an afterthought. I would hardly call that proof positive that the Corps isn't calling them "venom" and "viper". '''[[User:Bahamut0013|<span style="background:#918151;color:#000;">bahamut0013</span>]]'''[[User talk:Bahamut0013|<span style="background:#D2B48C;color:#000;"><sup><small>words</small></sup></span>]][[Special:Contributions/Bahamut0013|<span style="background:#D2B48C;color:#000;"><sub><small>deeds</small></sub></span>]] 17:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

:For the record, [http://www.usmc.mil/units/marforpac/imef/3rdmaw/Pages/3rdMAWMarinefliesabovetherest,setsexample.aspx this is a USMC article] from 8/13/2009 that calls the UH-1Y the "Venom" in 4 places. Official or not, "Venom" is being used. In addition, [http://www.miramar.usmc.mil/newspage164.htm this] is a January 2009 story from MCAS Miramar that calls the AH-1Z the "Viper". Of course, the use the nickname "Zulu" throughout the rest of the article! Anyway, thses two articles contradict the claim above that "No Marine Corps entity has ever used those names", one even occuring 5 months before this statement was made! I'm not claiming these are "official Corps policy documents; I'm just showing that the names have been used in USMC web publications this year. - [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 09:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

==Merger with UH-1N Twin Huey?==
I've posted a [[UH-1N Twin Huey]] page to see what we could come up with, using content from the [[Bell 212]] page. On further consideration, I think it would be better to have both the UH-1N and UH-1Y on the same page, as the program is basically an upgrade (the first 10 Ys will be re-built Ns). I'd prefer [[UH-1N/Y Twin Huey]]. Any thoughts? - [[User:BillCJ|BillCJ]] 16:49, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

:Aren't all the rest of the Venoms going to be new manufactures? It's not like the OH-58D where every aircraft is a remanufactured airframe of a previous OH-58A/C. Are there going to be significant airframe differences between the 10 remanufactured "prototypes" and the produced airframes? Just some questions and a thought. --[[User:Born2flie|Born2flie]] 08:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I already decided not to do it after talking with Alan. It's psted elsewhere, but I didn't update here. I also think will be able to find plenty of content for the UH-1N, as they've served in alot on militaries. With the UH-1Y nearing service entry, content there shouldn't be a problem either. THanks again. - [[User:BillCJ|BillCJ]] 15:42, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
* That seemed like that'd be a good move. Either way is fine though. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] 18:22, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

: Hi, I think that the new engines, power train, tail, avionics and rotor systems make it a different helicopter entirely. Unlike the UH-1N that was essentially the military version of the Bell-212, the UH-1Y is not identical to the Bell-412. In fact, the only things that remained the same are the mission configuration equipment (seats, door guns, etc...), as the cabin itself remained the same. For all these reason, just as the 212 got it's own page apart from the single engine Huey models, it should not be merged. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Moditvl|Moditvl]] ([[User talk:Moditvl|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Moditvl|contribs]]) 08:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Promo tone ==
This article is promotional and/or overly enthusiatsic in tone and should be flagged as not in encyclopedia style. [[User:202.82.171.186|202.82.171.186]] 04:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

* In which sections? -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] 04:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

::Yes, that would be helpful. - [[User:BillCJ|BillCJ]] 05:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

::: I was noticing the same thing, but it appears to have been untouched for seven years now. Anyone know the aircraft well enough to take a stab at improving the article? [[User:Bagheera|Bagheera]] ([[User talk:Bagheera|talk]]) 22:13, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
:::* Why do you think it has been untouched that whole time? Text has trimmed and reworded multiple times. For example, the quoted text below was remove from the article a long time ago. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 22:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

:::: Suspect I was mis-reading some date stamps. Obviously, I was wrong on that point. Still strikes me as a bit Promo sounding, but that's why I made the comment here rather than taking a stab at editing the article. I don't know the aircraft well enough (source material, etc.) to really feel confident making it feel more encyclopedic. Cheers. [[User:Bagheera|Bagheera]] ([[User talk:Bagheera|talk]]) 18:03, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
::::* I've trimmed some uncited text that might seem promotional. I won't bother doing much more until some specifics are provided... -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 18:55, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

The end of paragraph five of the Development section sounds like something straight from a promotional pamphlet.

'The UH-1Y will have the power needed to maneuver aggressively and evasively. Ground forces commanders riding in the Venom will have all the radios and fire power they need and the range of the transport helicopters carrying their men.'

Could do with someone cleaning it up. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/87.102.23.20|87.102.23.20]] ([[User talk:87.102.23.20|talk]]) 05:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: Long gone. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 22:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

==Production status==
A decision about starting full-rate production was expected last year [http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/company/pressReleases/PR_08_0305_threeH-1Delivered.cfm according to Bell]. But I can find no press releases or articles about OKing or delaying full production. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 22:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

==Deleted Image==
The Commons page for the image indicates that it is Public Domain [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UH-1Y_Venom.jpg File:UH-1Y Venom.jpg]. Is there a reason to think that this is incorrectly licenced? - [[User:Ahunt|Ahunt]] ([[User talk:Ahunt|talk]]) 11:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

:Yes. It's from Vectorsite. Greg generally marks PD images as "PD" or "GVG / PD", and Greg credits "Bell Helicopter" under the image, not PD. Compare the PD images on the image source page, http://www.vectorsite.net/avhuey.html . I've seen that image in print also (possibly Frawley's Military 2002-03), so most likely it is a Bell image. - [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 12:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

: I searched for UH-1Y images at defenseimagery.mil or navy.mil and am not finding that image. Not a complete search but I'm not seeing any similar show-type images either. It looks like an image from an roll-out or maybe air show display. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 12:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

::Bill, if you are fairly certain of that then perhaps you should tag it on Commons, otherwise it will remain as tagged, PD. I found it on another language version of the Wikipedia article, which is why I added it here. It seems to have been widely used across other languages. - [[User:Ahunt|Ahunt]] ([[User talk:Ahunt|talk]]) 12:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

:I'm certain now: It's credited to Bell on page 33 of Frawley, Gerard (2002). The International Directory of Military Aircraft, 2002-2003. Fyshwick, ACT, Australia: Aerospace Publications Pty Ltd. ISBN 1-875671-55-2. Looks like a roll-out image to me too, or possibly a mock-up. I can never find the correct tags on Commons, and I can't look right now either. - [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 13:12, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

::No problem, with that ref you cited I can go to Commons and tag it. - [[User:Ahunt|Ahunt]] ([[User talk:Ahunt|talk]]) 13:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

:::Thanks! - [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 13:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

::::Okay I have nominated it for speedy deletion from Commons [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UH-1Y_Venom.jpg File:UH-1Y_Venom.jpg]. Thanks for all your input on this. It is, of course, important that we don't have copyrighted images misrepresented as PD on Commons. Incidentally it is easy to nominate a Commons image for speedy deletion as a copyright violation - just tag it with '''<nowiki>{{copyvio|source or reason}}</nowiki>'''. No other action required - they are usually gone within a few hours. - [[User:Ahunt|Ahunt]] ([[User talk:Ahunt|talk]]) 14:04, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

:::::It has been now deleted. - [[User:Ahunt|Ahunt]] ([[User talk:Ahunt|talk]]) 18:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

== Comparison of capabilities between UH-1Y and UH-60? ==

Should there be a section comparing the performance of the two aircraft since they perform similar functions for the same (Marine/Army) military? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.212.59.152|74.212.59.152]] ([[User talk:74.212.59.152|talk]]) 04:31, 1 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Under Wikipedia policies you would need to be able to cite a reference that actually compares these two aircraft. You can't take a ref that describes one and a ref that describes the other and make up your own comparison as that would be [[WP:SYNTHESIS]] and [[WP:OR]]. So if you have such a ref that actually compares the two then such a section can be written! - [[User:Ahunt|Ahunt]] ([[User talk:Ahunt|talk]]) 12:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

: They are fairly similar. For a detailed comparison it matters which UH-60 variant is compared to as the they have progressively improved with more powerful engine versions over the years. I think it better to just describe the UH-1Y and say what it can do. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 13:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

: Hi, although they are both designated for the same role as medium/heavy utility helicopters, they are not similar. The Venom has changed the traditional PT-6T3 'twin-pack' engine configuration to the more common dual-engine design, and uses the same T700 engine family as the UH-60, but the rest of the helicopter is different (power train, flight controls, electrical system, etc...). A comparison would be in place, but it would only show the UH-60 supersedes the UH-1Y in every category (cabin volume, payload, etc...), except maybe in operating costs. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Moditvl|Moditvl]] ([[User talk:Moditvl|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Moditvl|contribs]]) 08:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Range seems inaccurate ==

Hi, the article states 130nm as the helicopter's range. This seems short as it means that it has only ~1 hour endurance at cruise speed. Since the Bell UH-1Y handbook ([http://www.bellhelicopter.textron.com/en/aircraft/military/pdf/UH1Y_PG_3-06_web.pdf]) on page 55 states that the usable internal fuel capacity is 1443lt (3,170lb) and this amount should give it approx. 2:15 minutes fuel time (goes up to 3.3 hours with aux fuel tanks), I think that the 130nm refers to combat radius (as stated on p.59 of the handbook). Therefore I changed the range to 260nm. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Moditvl|Moditvl]] ([[User talk:Moditvl|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Moditvl|contribs]]) 08:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: Right, check the sources when in doubt. 130 nmi was changed to a combat radius field as stated in the Bell guide (ref. 8). Thanks. -[[User:Fnlayson|fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 14:28, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

== Payload Improvements ==

In the development section the article lists a 125% increase in payload over the UH-1N but in the design section it lists the same stat but with 170% increase. Which is it? -[[User:Noha307|Noha307]] ([[User talk:Noha307|talk]]) 19:48, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

: Bell sources list the 125% on the [http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/aircraft/military/bellUH-1Y.cfm UH-1Y page] and 170% in the [http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/aircraft/military/pdf/UH1Y_PG_3-06_web.pdf pocket guide]. Maybe 125% was the minimum goal for the project. Anyway, I combined the text and listed the lower 125%. -[[User:Fnlayson|fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 20:29, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

:: According to Wikipedia, payload increased from 4,500 lbs. to 6,600 lbs. -- an almost 47% increase (note non-fan-boy arithmetic). Percent is hard, huh? The links are dead. <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/206.53.21.210|206.53.21.210]] ([[User talk:206.53.21.210|talk]]) 19:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== Number of vehicles in service ==
== Number of vehicles in service ==

The article states that 31 are in service, but that was in back in 2010. Can anyone update that statistic? [[User:Coolgeek96|Coolgeek96]] ([[User talk:Coolgeek96|talk]]) 23:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
The article states that 31 are in service, but that was in back in 2010. Can anyone update that statistic? [[User:Coolgeek96|Coolgeek96]] ([[User talk:Coolgeek96|talk]]) 23:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
: Just updated to 54 in use from Aviation Week's 2014 source book. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 00:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
: Just updated to 54 in use from Aviation Week's 2014 source book. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 00:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)


Can someone with adequate sources please update again? Nearly 6 years passed since this. Thanks, [[User:DPdH|DPdH]] ([[User talk:DPdH|talk]]) 19:46, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
== Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page ==
: Did you check the article? The numbers in service is not listed in the article; probably removed by another editor that thinks that info is fluff or something. [[User:Fnlayson|-Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 20:18, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

::The infobox says {{tq|Number built 92}}, but the ref is 2015. This can certainly be updated, but we need a newer ref! - [[User:Ahunt|Ahunt]] ([[User talk:Ahunt|talk]]) 15:08, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
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 necessaryily 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 [[MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist|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 [[MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist|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 [[meta:Talk:Spam Blacklist|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:'''

*<nowiki>http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/uh_1y/</nowiki>
*:''Triggered by <code>\bnaval-technology\.com\b</code> on the local blacklist''
*<nowiki>http://www.army-technology.com/Projects/uh1y-huey-helicopter</nowiki>
*:''Triggered by <code>\barmy-technology\.com\b</code> 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.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green;font-family:Neuropol">cyberbot II]] [[User talk:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:arnprior">Notify]]<sub style="margin-left:-6.1ex;color:green;font-family:arnprior">Online</sub> 09:43, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

{{done|Resolved}} This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II]] [[User talk:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">Notify]]<sub style="margin-left:-5.8ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">Online</sub> 21:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)


:::[https://www.flightglobal.com/reports/world-air-forces-2020/135665.article World Air Forces 2020] lists 140 UH-1Ys, but I have difficulty getting the PDF address on from my tablet.
== External links modified ==
:::{{ping|DPdH}} {{tl|update inline}} exists for requesting updates to a specific item in a sentence, line, Infobox, etc. - [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 01:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
::::{{ping|BilCat}} Didn't know, thanks! [[User:DPdH|DPdH]] ([[User talk:DPdH|talk]]) 04:26, 14 December 2022 (UTC)


:::* Just note that the total number in service is not the same as the number built (no. built > no. in service). There may be prototypes and test aircraft that are not put into operational service, along with aircraft lost in crashes. [[User:Fnlayson|-Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 01:13, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,


== Crew count ==
I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[Bell UH-1Y Venom]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=706008181 my edit]. If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
The crew number under specifications indicate 2 (the pilot and co-pilot), but all Marine Corps utility helicopters fly with a Crew Chief. Would it be appropriate to include the Crew Chief as part of the crew? [[User:LokenAkhanteros|LokenAkhanteros]] ([[User talk:LokenAkhanteros|talk]]) 15:06, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121003182837/http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.NavairNewsStory&id=4972 to http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.NavairNewsStory&id=4972


: That is listing what the crew that are required for flight, not necessarily the full mission crew. [[User:Fnlayson|-Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 15:10, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
::This doesn't stay consistent with other aircraft articles, such as the [[Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey]] and [[Sikorsky CH-53K King Stallion]] which ''does'' specify other mission crew members. [[User:LokenAkhanteros|LokenAkhanteros]] ([[User talk:LokenAkhanteros|talk]]) 15:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


::* I only gave a reason why it is like it is now. I am not finding any sources currently cited in article that list 3 or 4 crew members now. The Navy Fact File lists 12: pilot and co-pilot, crew chief, gunner and eight troops. But other sources in the article only list pilot and co-pilot. [[User:Fnlayson|-Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 15:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
::*:I believe the fact file to be the most reliable source of information about this anyway - The 8 marines listed would better fit in cargo specifications, and gunners are optional, but the Crew Chief is a permanent member of a Venom Crew, no matter the mission. I think it should be included in the crew count. [[User:LokenAkhanteros|LokenAkhanteros]] ([[User talk:LokenAkhanteros|talk]]) 15:45, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


::::* I feel other source(s) are needed for only flight crew (excluding troop passengers) so this does not get into [[WP:No original research|original research]] territory. But I won't argue if someone else updates it. [[User:Fnlayson|-Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 15:36, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner]]:Online</sub></small> 22:13, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
{{Checked}} - [[User:Ahunt|Ahunt]] ([[User talk:Ahunt|talk]]) 18:23, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 23:21, 11 December 2024


Number of vehicles in service

[edit]

The article states that 31 are in service, but that was in back in 2010. Can anyone update that statistic? Coolgeek96 (talk) 23:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just updated to 54 in use from Aviation Week's 2014 source book. -Fnlayson (talk) 00:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone with adequate sources please update again? Nearly 6 years passed since this. Thanks, DPdH (talk) 19:46, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you check the article? The numbers in service is not listed in the article; probably removed by another editor that thinks that info is fluff or something. -Fnlayson (talk) 20:18, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The infobox says Number built 92, but the ref is 2015. This can certainly be updated, but we need a newer ref! - Ahunt (talk) 15:08, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
World Air Forces 2020 lists 140 UH-1Ys, but I have difficulty getting the PDF address on from my tablet.
@DPdH: {{update inline}} exists for requesting updates to a specific item in a sentence, line, Infobox, etc. - BilCat (talk) 01:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@BilCat: Didn't know, thanks! DPdH (talk) 04:26, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just note that the total number in service is not the same as the number built (no. built > no. in service). There may be prototypes and test aircraft that are not put into operational service, along with aircraft lost in crashes. -Fnlayson (talk) 01:13, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Crew count

[edit]

The crew number under specifications indicate 2 (the pilot and co-pilot), but all Marine Corps utility helicopters fly with a Crew Chief. Would it be appropriate to include the Crew Chief as part of the crew? LokenAkhanteros (talk) 15:06, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is listing what the crew that are required for flight, not necessarily the full mission crew. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:10, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't stay consistent with other aircraft articles, such as the Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey and Sikorsky CH-53K King Stallion which does specify other mission crew members. LokenAkhanteros (talk) 15:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I only gave a reason why it is like it is now. I am not finding any sources currently cited in article that list 3 or 4 crew members now. The Navy Fact File lists 12: pilot and co-pilot, crew chief, gunner and eight troops. But other sources in the article only list pilot and co-pilot. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe the fact file to be the most reliable source of information about this anyway - The 8 marines listed would better fit in cargo specifications, and gunners are optional, but the Crew Chief is a permanent member of a Venom Crew, no matter the mission. I think it should be included in the crew count. LokenAkhanteros (talk) 15:45, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]