Talk:Eurocopter UH-72 Lakota

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Military history (Rated B-Class)
MILHIST 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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Aviation / Rotorcraft (Rated B-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 
 
Taskforce icon
 This article is supported by the rotorcraft project.

Armed Scout version[edit]

EADS North America has teamed up with Lockheed Martin on a "Armed Scout 645". It will use the EC145/UH-72 airframe. An example of the 645 was displayed at a recent Army convention. More info: [1] [2]. Since the EC 145 article is mainly civilian content, what about a a brief variant entry on this here? Thanks. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Concur that is it better covered here for the time being. Looks like the EADS model number is EC 645. If the model is offered to other customers, we would then make a page for that model, and/or the US version of the EC 645. - BillCJ (talk) 21:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Related to the Armed Scout competition, which is delayed for 18 months (for now, anyway), is this. I'll try to add something on the X2 LTH to the Sikorsky X2 article later today/tonight. - BillCJ (talk) 22:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I could not find a mention of EC with the 645 in Eurocopter or Euro NA's press releases so I used AS 645 like some of its other military helos. I read about the X2 version a day or two ago but had not seen a picture. Thanks. -Fnlayson (talk) 22:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
The AS as used by EC NA, refers to the armed scout mission rather than a throwback to the Aerospatiale designations. Much like they did with the UH-145 marketing designation. I agree that the aircraft is better covered here, but only for the meantime because I do not see the EC 645 being the next big thing in the Army. The armed scout program may not require a COTS airframe in the future, especially if any further RFI does not yield a favorable response from industry. If it was me, I'd ask for the helicopter equivalent of the F-22 engine, supercruise without afterburner, essentially efficient fuel consumption for greater endurance. Say, an HTS-900-2 at or better than Rolls-Royce 250 consumption rates. And I know the AS645 can't accomplish that with a 2,200-pound MEP. --Born2flie (talk) 03:07, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Being that it is Eurocopter, they may well offer the EC645 to other nations, if they get enough interest from outside the US. For the msot part, the UH-72 seems to be quite a success, but the current Congress is quite protectionistic. In the end, they'll buy American made rubber band-powered mini-helicopterss, and those will still be too expensive! I hope for change. :) - BilCat (talk) 03:22, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

UH-72 overheating issue[edit]

"During flight tests in Southern California in mild 80-degree weather, cockpit temperatures in the UH-72A Lakota soared above 104 degrees, the point at which the Army says the communication, navigation, and flight-control systems can overheat and shut down."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/11/10/new_army_helicopters_have_heat_flaw/

(217.93.137.222 (talk) 15:11, 23 February 2010 (UTC))

"Disaster" is an overstatement, especially since that story is over 2 years old, and may have been an old story even then. I believe those problems have been addressed. but I don't have a source in front of me. It should not be too hard to find if true. - BilCat (talk) 15:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
I've found one source so far with some updated info, which is at the bottom of the page. - BilCat (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Also note that this has been covered in the article, in the Operational history section. And no, it's not called a "disaster" there. - BilCat (talk) 15:52, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Yep, the overheating issues has been in the article for some time. I believe they added cooling units that are optional on EC 145. The latter part needs to be stated and cited in the text though. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Concur. As I understand it, A/C is standard on the civil EC145s, but the Army generally does not use A/C, and didn't think it was necessary when they ordered the type. I believe air vent changes solved most of the cooling problems in average weather, while A/C was to be installed on aircraft likely to be used in hot environments or for medevac missions (all within the US). This is in no way a "design flaw" as reported in some of the forums I saw today while searching on this, but rather an issue due to customer preference that is not normally encountered in civil models. Standard teething problem with a straightforward solution. - BilCat (talk) 16:21, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I updated the article text using the Defense Industry Daily reference to update the article. Thanks for finding that Bill. Adjust/update my wording if needed. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Good job! The DID report was the only one I cound find with a cursory glance t=at the links on the firt search page. The rest were reprints of the original story, or forums talking about the original story. - BilCat (talk) 16:58, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Change page title[edit]

Does anyone know how to change the display page title? I work for EADS North America, which is the prime contractor on this program (feel free to reference www.uh-72a.com). Eurocopter is a division of EADS but not the prime in this case. I appreciate any help that can be provided. I do not want to italicize the title, rather, just change it. More challenging than it looks. Nightskybear (talk) 15:31, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

There are actually two issues here. The first is a technical one in that page titles can only be changed using the "Move page" process. This is fully explained at Wikipedia:Moving a page. If you have any further questions on the techniques and process of moving a page, you may ask at my talk page, User talk:BilCat.
The second issue is whether or not the page should be moved. Technically, you are correct that EADS NA is the prime contractor, and in most cases the prime contractor (or a short version of its name) is listed as the manufacturer in WP aircraft article titles. WP titles are governed by the Wikipedia:Article titles guideline, which basically states that "Article titles should be recognizable to readers, unambiguous, and consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources." Additionally, Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft (WP:AIR) has guidelines at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (aircraft), which are an attempt to standardize how aircraft airticles are named on WP. Normally, aircraft articles are named by the Manufacturer-Designation-Name (M-D-N) format.
The Common names section of WP's Naming conventions states that "The most common name for a subject, as determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources, is often used as a title because it is recognizable and natural." Eurocopter is of course the manufacturer of the Eurocopter EC145, and the UH-72 is a minimum-change version of that aircraft. As such, the common name given for the manufacturer is usually just "Eurocopter", and of course the UH-72 itself is assembled by American Eurocopter. That's why we chose to use "Eurocopter" as the manufacturer for the UH-72.
As you probably realize by now, WP operates by Consensus, so you need to build a consensus here on this talk page to move the page to EADS North America UH-72 Lakota. That can be done informally, as we are doing now with this discussion. To gain broader input, a formal move request can be made through Wikipedia:Requested moves, which involves adding a Move Request section to an article's talk page when the move is contested or controversial, which this is. I can help you to do that here, if you decide after reading my explanation here that you still wan thte article move.
To build a consensus, you need to present your reasons as to why your preferred title is better. If you can find print and online published sources from major aviation periodicals and sites which consistently refer to the aircraft's manufacturer as "EADS North America" or similar (EADS NA for example), then that would help your case here.
I hope that helps! - BilCat (talk) 21:35, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

AAS-72X vs AAS-72X+[edit]

I think someone should add some content that draws a better distinction between these models. How much difference is there between a UH-72 and a EC145? Subsequently, what is the true leap to becoming an AAS-72X and AAS-72X+, respectively? --THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 15:16, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Some of the confusion seems to be the poorer-quality sources that were uesd. I found 2 articles on FlightGlobal, which is generally accurate when it comes to reporting the details of aircraft types. See EADS, Lockheed launch technology demonstration for OH-58 replacement and EADS urges US Army to buy new scout helicopter. The main difference is that the AAS-72X uses the basic UH-72/EC145 aurframe with conventional tail rotor, while the AAS-72X+ uses the fenestron (fan-fin) of the EC145T2 model. There are photos of the demonstators of each type in the linked articles, and here also.
As to the difference between the commercial EC145 and the UH-72, as I understand it, there isn't much difference overall, other than the UH-72 is built in Mississippi, not Europe. The UH-72 is basically a civil off-the-shelf EC145 with US Army specified equipment such as radios, etc. It's not up to military standards such as survivability. It's mainly for US in the US only, and isn't expeceted to ever be used in combat. The AAS-72X/+, however, must be modified "to meet the army's military airworthiness specifications." Not to mention armament, combat avionics, etc. - BilCat (talk) 16:52, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
That's good info, problem is what are the specifics of the military airworthiness requirements? These could be just FAA requirements being accepted by the military. Now I know some things being looked at, but we have to present published info. Here's is a 72X+ brochure [3] --THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 23:29, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eurocopter UH-72 Lakota. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 08:16, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Eurocopter UH-72 Lakota. 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.

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 21:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eurocopter UH-72 Lakota. 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.

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 15:10, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eurocopter_UH-72_Lakota&oldid=822293415"