Talk:UH-1N Twin Huey

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Rotorcraft task force

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Military aviation task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

[edit] A word of explanation

A couple of days ago, I ran into the UH-1Y Venom article by accident, and discovered it had almost no links in other articles on Bell Huey-derived models. In the course of fixing this ove3rsight, I was faced with were to put the links to the UH-1N, on which the UH-1Y is based. Info on the UH-1N was, for the most part, spread between the UH-1 Iroquois and Bell 212 articles. However, there was very little info on the very-long UH-1 page on the N. While the 212 page was focused primarily on the civil model, it did contain the shared development histroy of both the UH-1N and the 212.

Several months ago on the UH-1 talk page, several editors expressed a desire to see the article divided into several pages focused more on the individual Huey variants. In light of that discussion, I decided to go ahead and make a page on the UH-1N and military 212. I beleve there is more than enough info on the N and military 212s to make a good page. If this does not bear out, however, I would suggest merging this page with the UH-1Y Venom page, probably as the UH-1N/Y Twin Huey. THanks. - BillCJ 06:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's in a name?

Hey, I'm trying to think of how to integrate the fact that "Twin Huey" is a marketing and common name for the UH-1N and its derivatives. Officially, the UH-1N family retained the Iroquois name. I'm not sure which name should be more prominent to avoid confusion in either direction. I'm thinking about putting a line about the official name in the introduction, and also changing it in the variants listing, but leaving the infobox as it is now. Suggestions? Comments? -- Thatguy96 18:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

• Twin Huey should be in quotes in the early mentions at the least, since it is nickname. Seems something like adding the NATO names on Soviet jets. Add a sentence something like: The UH-1N was marketed by Bell (or commonly referred to) as "Twin Huey". I'm not familiar enough with it to say how common that nickname is. -Fnlayson 18:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

This is an interesting issue. It is true that in US service the UH-1N was officially called the "Twin Iroquois", but in Canadian service it was officially called the Twin Huey. To make it more fun the Canadian specifications and orders were the original ones that created this aircraft and named it, but US DOD doesn't seem to like the Huey tag, at least officially. I would suggest leaving the name as it is and not in quotes, for these reasons. It is worth mentioning the different nomenclature in different national service, however. Ahunt 00:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Officially, according to DOD 4120.15-L Model Designation of Military Aircarft, Guided Missiles, and Rockets, the UH-1N's official name is simply "Iroquois" like its single engined brethren (only the UH-1Y officially carries a new name, Venom). Twin Huey and Twin Iroquois are marketing/unofficial monikers. -- Thatguy96 01:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

As the one who chose the name of the article, I see Ahunt has got most of my reasoning right, namely the CH-135 is called the Twin Huey in CF service. In addition, at the time I split this page off of the UH-1 Iroquois page, there was a unsourced statement in the text that "Twin Huey" was the official name of the UH-1N in the USMC. That was later removed as we could not find corroboration. I also agree we should clarify the nomenclature in the article, but just leave the page as is. Also, if we used UH-1N Iroquois, it might be easer to confuse which variant is being reference (very minor point tho). - BillCJ 01:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I have added a bit more fuel to the Huey vs Iroquois name debate, with information from Lou Drendel's definitive book Huey (including a cited reference). The actual quote cited says of US Service personel: "In fact popular usage has rendered "Huey" immortality, while Iroquois remains the name of an indian tribe". - Ahunt 19:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

• That's good to mention "Huey" is commonly used by US personnel. But that was never really in question. There are plenty of US aircraft with nicknames that are used more than their official names (Bone, Viper, Warthog, etc). Doesn't change anything... -Fnlayson 20:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair'nuff! I think those articles ought to mention the nicknames, but only when a credible reference can be found to support them. We have had some aircraft articles that abound with "original research" nicknames, heard at the local flying club, but undocumented! - Ahunt 00:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry, I just don't think nicknames are a big of a deal. I'm all for documented nicknames. In this case Huey is part of the official CF name. -Fnlayson 00:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)