Talk:Grumman S-2 Tracker

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Grumman S-2 Tracker article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States

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.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Aviation: Aircraft

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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

single airframe?[edit]

What does "single airframe" in the lead mean? Dicklyon (talk) 05:31, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From the first sentence in the body: "The Tracker was intended as a replacement for the Grumman AF Guardian, which was the first purpose-built aircraft system for ASW, using two airframes for two versions, one with the detection gear, and the other with the weapon systems." I'm not sure how to condense that down into something suitable for the lead, or if we should just remove the term "single airframe" as too confusing in the lead. I guess we shouldn't assume that readers will actually read the whole article before asking questions! ;) BilCat (talk) 07:38, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think it should be removed as uninterpretable, even after reading that bit. I was just trying to figure out if it needed a hyphen, but getting rid of it would be better. Is there any source about it being the "first" such? By the way, I got there as I was just watching an oral history interview with my old bud Bert Sutherland, who used to fly one and maintain the electronics for 20 of them. Dicklyon (talk) 11:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The prior one that "consisted of two airframe variants" is confusing, too. It really means the same airframe, differently outfitted, as I would interpret these words. But I'm not in the aircraft industry, so maybe they consider those to be distinct "airframes". Dicklyon (talk) 11:39, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Came here for clarification. "uninterpretable" as Dickylon says. It seems like, in cars, there are some frame differences for convertibles. That's not usually a big deal, and not a first-paragraph fact? PRR (talk) 21:45, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Took me a while to understand what it is trying to say, it was the first type of ASW aircraft able to operate on its own. Similar to early use of Pave Spike and Paveway (where one aircraft carried the laser designator and a second carried the guided bomb) being replaced by a single aircraft carrying both.

Current wording is was the first purpose-built, single airframe anti-submarine warfare (ASW) aircraft to enter service with the United States Navy. Could be changed to was the first anti-submarine warfare (ASW) aircraft capable of lone operation to enter service with the United States Navy or similar. I looked back a few years through the history to see if there was a better wording as there often is but it's been there at least six years. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 09:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that might help clarify! - Ahunt (talk) 11:44, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might be useful to point out somewhere here that other aircraft, such as the Fairey Firefly, the Gannett and the Short Sunderland combined hunter/killer roles in a single aircraft in other air arms before the USN used the Tracker. - Nick Thorne ^talk 12:24, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed but the qualifier is 'first in the US Navy', mentioning the British types would be off topic. The 'first' appears to be backed up by a citation from Francillon, I don't have that source to check. The Guardian was also a first according to this article, may be true but two firsts before we get far down the page stands out. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 12:41, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but far too many sources omit that qualifier. In fact, a YouTube video has been doing the rounds in the last few days and it does not include that rider, it just claims that the Stoof was the first a/c to combine both roles. We could insert words to the effect that "although several non-US aircraft existed that combined these roles before the Tracker". Wikipedia is already too far USA centric, it does not need to happen everywhere. - Nick Thorne ^talk 13:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We report what the sources state, not our own research, even if we "know" the source is "wrong". So it's important to know the context, such as carrier capability, and what other sources report also. So what reliable sources claim some other aircraft was the first to combine the hunter and killer role? And we need to check the original Francillon source also to make sure it is actually making this claim. BilCat (talk) 20:53, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]