Talk:Afghan Air Force: Difference between revisions
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
→Aregent: new section Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
Line 134: | Line 134: | ||
The ranks that were originally listed were of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Seeing as this article primarily pertains to the Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, and the Taliban has not made any declarations of intentions to start an air force, the old ranks should be returned, and this article should refer to a disbanded military branch. [[User:Adykens|Adykens]] ([[User talk:Adykens|talk]]) 14:15, 24 August 2021 (UTC) |
The ranks that were originally listed were of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Seeing as this article primarily pertains to the Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, and the Taliban has not made any declarations of intentions to start an air force, the old ranks should be returned, and this article should refer to a disbanded military branch. [[User:Adykens|Adykens]] ([[User talk:Adykens|talk]]) 14:15, 24 August 2021 (UTC) |
||
== Aregent == |
|||
I am Nasir Ahmad I want to help me I am in Afghanistan I am a journalist the Taliban want kill me [[Special:Contributions/23.88.197.229|23.88.197.229]] ([[User talk:23.88.197.229|talk]]) 17:23, 28 November 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:23, 28 November 2022
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Afghan Air Force article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
What the hell
Afghanistan needs a strong Air Force .. since United States is the primary country training the Military , why dosnt the United States give a bunch F-16, F-18, and B-52 bombers to its Afghan Allies. Instead of those crappy east European planes that they are using now... and while there at it adds some Cobra helicopters to the Afghans wish list —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.130.141 (talk) 06:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- It's mostly likely due to the fact that the military of Afghanistan is not yet capable of handling f-16s, f-18s, B-52s. Giving those types of planes to them now is dangerous because there isn't any well trained Afghan Airforce pilots.--Kipperz (talk) 23:11, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- Also, the United States won't make the mistake of arming the terrorists again. Afghanistan is far too unstable to be given/sold any advanced aircraft at the risk of them being stolen by the insurgents. And the fact that the military is woefully underfunded to take any large amount of high-cost aircraft like B-52s or F-16s and maintain them. The extremely poor infrastructure may also have something to do with it. Canationalist (talk) 18:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Official name
The official name is "Afghan National Army Air Corps" (ANAAC)[1][2] --Raoulduke47 (talk) 15:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Attack aircraft instead of pure trainer.
I understand L-39 is a trainer, but in this case, what are they training for? They have no jet fighter so I see the L-39 as attack aircraft, not as pure trainer. So they only train to pilot for the same aircraft they are flying, the L-39. Are they planning to train for front line jets to be purchased in the future? Miguel.A.Lopez.Regalado (talk) 15:30, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Moved to Afghan Air Force Mike Cline (talk) 22:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Afghan National Army Air Force → Afghan Air Force – per [3], [4], and List of Afghan Air Force aircraft.TAzimi (talk) 07:46, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Support. The ISAF site has 135 deghosted examples for "Afghan Air Force", and only 2 that sort of correspond to the current title. Here is an example of the proposed form in Aviation Week. Kauffner (talk) 15:56, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
First A-29 Super Tucano Pilots Graduate
Hello all, I have added [1] that the first A-29 Super Tucano pilots have graduated from Moody, regards. Twobells (talk) 16:04, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
References
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Afghan Air Force. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081210171746/http://z-bok.se:80/Afghanistan.html to http://www.z-bok.se/Afghanistan.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Afghan Air Force. 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:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123159865
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081210171746/http://www.z-bok.se/Afghanistan.html to http://www.z-bok.se/Afghanistan.html
- Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5wQIhdcO2?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.defenselink.mil%2Ftranscripts%2Ftranscript.aspx%3Ftranscriptid%3D4126 to http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4126
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120624091631/http://www.kansas.com:80/2012/06/14/2375065/embraer-hawker-beechcraft-face.html to http://www.kansas.com/2012/06/14/2375065/embraer-hawker-beechcraft-face.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150403104143/http://www.pajhwok.com/en/2011/12/10/us-delivers-18-aircraft-afghan-air-force to http://www.pajhwok.com/en/2011/12/10/us-delivers-18-aircraft-afghan-air-force
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
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) 03:14, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
A-29 name
The A-29 should be called the A-29, which is synonymous for the EMB 314. Separate variants include the A-29A (single seat) and A-29B (two seater). According to this source they are the same aircraft: http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=718
As well the Afghan Air Force calls it's the A-29 not EMB 314. Garuda28 (talk) 17:29, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
- Going off of that it seems like when the Canadians call their F/A-18s CF-118s, even though their the same aircraft. Looks like Fox52 is mis reading the information and seeing a separate variant when it's just an alternate designation. 2600:100E:B008:85F8:8463:5EDE:B6DE:1973 (talk) 18:23, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- I'd disagree the aircraft manufactures baseline model is called the EMB 314, hence you have the section for the variants 47.152.57.146 (talk) 22:47, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- It seems that the variants are only A-29A and A-29B, with an emphasis on the A and B indicating single seat and duel seating. As it is mentjln in the intro the EMB 314 is also known as the A-29, no A or B designator, indicating that the A-29 is the main platform and an A-29A is a variant. This is in a similar manner that the F-15 is the baseline aircraft, but the F-15A is the variant. Either way, A-29 cannot be used as a variety as it does not fit these categories. Move to rename A-29 as the main aircraft. 24.192.250.124 (talk) 17:10, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/12/28/after-delays-a29-attack-aircraft-to-arrive-afghanistan-2016.html here's another article saying there are the same aircraft 24.192.250.124 (talk) 17:33, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- It seems that the variants are only A-29A and A-29B, with an emphasis on the A and B indicating single seat and duel seating. As it is mentjln in the intro the EMB 314 is also known as the A-29, no A or B designator, indicating that the A-29 is the main platform and an A-29A is a variant. This is in a similar manner that the F-15 is the baseline aircraft, but the F-15A is the variant. Either way, A-29 cannot be used as a variety as it does not fit these categories. Move to rename A-29 as the main aircraft. 24.192.250.124 (talk) 17:10, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- I'd disagree the aircraft manufactures baseline model is called the EMB 314, hence you have the section for the variants 47.152.57.146 (talk) 22:47, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- Done I'd say you guys put up a good argument - so going with consensus and have changed the name to A-29 - FOX 52 (talk) 20:18, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Afghan Air Force. 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:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123159865
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081210171746/http://www.z-bok.se/Afghanistan.html to http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_337.shtml
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4126
- Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5wQIhm23B?url=http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2009/02/afghan_national_army.php to http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2009/02/afghan_national_army.php
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.afcent.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123209135
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.kansas.com/2012/06/14/2375065/embraer-hawker-beechcraft-face.html
- Added
{{dead link}}
tag to http://www.afcent.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123260962 - Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131006140706/http://www.disamjournal.org/articles/afghanistan-security-forces-fund-asffthe-past-present-and-future-860 to http://www.disamjournal.org/articles/afghanistan-security-forces-fund-asffthe-past-present-and-future-860
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120405223030/http://www.aco.nato.int/shindand-air-base-rising-on-the-wings-of-national-efforts--international-support.aspx to http://www.aco.nato.int/shindand-air-base-rising-on-the-wings-of-national-efforts--international-support.aspx
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150403104143/http://www.pajhwok.com/en/2011/12/10/us-delivers-18-aircraft-afghan-air-force to http://www.pajhwok.com/en/2011/12/10/us-delivers-18-aircraft-afghan-air-force
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) 15:12, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Black Hawks
The source reads: "'More than 150 Black Hawks, divested from US Army stock, will be shipped to Afghanistan over the next five years,' says Giovanni Estrada, country programme manager at the US Army Security Assistance Command. Under current plans, this total [159] would include 61 aircraft to be used in a basic utility configuration, plus at least 58 armed examples." [5] The second sentence obviously does not affect the total 159 Black Hawks. [6] The "119 in delivery" is therefore a misleading statement. [7] The United States Congress has already approved the program in which 159 Black Hawks to be given to Afghanistan and the U.S. military is currently busy in completing this project. This is very relevant information for this article so it should be presented as is, without adding personal opinions on the number of the aircraft.--Wipeblade39 (talk) 14:03, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
General John W. Nicholson: "So this is the quality we’re talking about. So this is a form of adaptability. Another example would be the Air Force. We have Afghan pilots who since we first flew our first combat sortie of the A-29 aircraft last year have dramatically increased the use of Afghan air power. And then these… this air is controlled by Afghan tactical air controllers on the ground. We have our first four Black Hawk helicopters have arrived in Afghanistan. Afghan pilots are being trained on the Black Hawk helicopter. So they’re extremely adaptable to the technologies necessary to go forward, and to the tactics of the enemy." [8]
"KABUL (Reuters) - The Afghan Air Force took delivery of its first four U.S.-made UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters on Tuesday as part of a planned replacement of its aging fleet of Russian-made Mi-17 helicopters, officials said." [9]
"KABUL, Afghanistan: Afghanistan on Saturday officially inducted four freshly-arrived U.S.-made UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters into its nascent air force, which many saw as a much-needed boost in fire power in the battle against insurgents." [10]--Wipeblade39 (talk) 12:33, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Return the previously listed ranks
The ranks that were originally listed were of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Seeing as this article primarily pertains to the Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, and the Taliban has not made any declarations of intentions to start an air force, the old ranks should be returned, and this article should refer to a disbanded military branch. Adykens (talk) 14:15, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Aregent
I am Nasir Ahmad I want to help me I am in Afghanistan I am a journalist the Taliban want kill me 23.88.197.229 (talk) 17:23, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- C-Class military history articles
- C-Class military aviation articles
- Military aviation task force articles
- C-Class national militaries articles
- National militaries task force articles
- C-Class Asian military history articles
- Asian military history task force articles
- C-Class South Asian military history articles
- South Asian military history task force articles
- Start-Class aviation articles
- WikiProject Aviation articles
- C-Class Afghanistan articles
- High-importance Afghanistan articles
- WikiProject Afghanistan articles