Talk:Hurricane Hunters
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Tropical cyclones, which collaborates on tropical cyclones and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones. |
 |
This 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. | ||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||
|
|||||||
Contents |
[edit] Jets?
Out of curiosity, are all hurricane hunter aircraft propeller type planes, or are there hurricane hunter planes that use jet engines? TomStar81 08:36, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Deaths?
Have any hurricane hunters ever crashed and died? Yes, When the original Navy Hurricane Hunters were assigned the weather reconnaisance mission, they lost a P2V7 Neptune aircraft in 1955 while penetrating hurricane Janet. Last report from the aircraft indicated they were beginning penetration. No further reports were received.
There is in fact no mention of Navy Hurricane Hunters (VW-4 and predecessors), and scant mention of Typhoon Trackers (VW-1), both of which played major roles in hurricane hunting for many years. (And this is coming from an Air Force guy.)--Buckboard 11:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Aircraft Names
The two P-3 NOAA aircraft are named Kermit the Frog and Miss Piggy the Gulfstream IV is named Gonzo after the Muppet's by Jim Henson. You can see the article and images[1]-Wxweenie91 (talk) 01:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Split
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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.
No consensus - five months since proposal, and no new discussion since then - BillCJ (talk) 10:55, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
This article covers two things at present:
- Aerial reconnaissance of tropical cyclones
- The aircraft of certain USAF squadrons and NOAA that fly into hurricanes and are known as the hurricane hunters.
Two separate concepts here so two separate articles. The one on the concept can go into the whole concept of aerial recon and its history. The one on the planes can give the details of the squadrons and their histories.--Nilfanion (talk) 02:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- But they are both two aspects of the same subject, so they should stay within the same article. You are suggesting two incomplete articles on this subject. Better stay with the status quo. The currect article answers two questions about the Hurricane Hunters.
- Who they are;
- What they do.
--Blanchardb (talk) 18:47, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Two incomplete articles, which can be improved, are superior to one which cannot. I think there is actually significant benefit to an article on aerial recon disassociated from the actual aircraft in use. Basically I'm saying this article would be retained as one about the planes - and would answer your two questions; but we would have a different article to discuss the concept.--Nilfanion (talk)
- Except that here, the situation is not, as you say, two incomplete articles, which can be improved vs one which cannot. The article can be improved.
- Remember: one article, which states:
- the problem; and
- how it is dealt with.
- I already see one possible improvement to what you intend to do once you're done. That would be to merge both articles into a single one. To me, the split is a non-starter, plain and simple. --Blanchardb (talk) 18:58, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Two incomplete articles, which can be improved, are superior to one which cannot. I think there is actually significant benefit to an article on aerial recon disassociated from the actual aircraft in use. Basically I'm saying this article would be retained as one about the planes - and would answer your two questions; but we would have a different article to discuss the concept.--Nilfanion (talk)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.
