Talk:Mil Mi-28: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 06:08, 30 August 2010

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Aviation: Rotorcraft Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the rotorcraft project.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Military history: Aviation / Russian & Soviet C‑class

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

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not 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
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Russia Start‑class Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Source

The data was quoted from http://www.aviation.ru/Mi/#28 by the owner of www.aviation.ru

NPOV

"Supierior to the Apache" is NPOV violation and will be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ProdigySportsman (talk • contribs)

+1 as AH-64 is listed in "comparable aircraft" section --jno 10:04, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what about "It is superior to the Apache in some respects?" since weapons payload and speed are slightly higher compared to the AH-64? It's neutral and factual...? (Bobbo9000 00:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)Bobbo9000)[reply]
I think making simple comparisons is misleading to the reader. You can't just simply say something is superior. Is the MI-28 battle tested, like the AH-64D? Is it superior by specifications or actual combat experience? Unless you have detailed personal knowledge it would be best to omit these assessments.--The Founders Intent 15:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

image

Can anybody find a newer image for this article? Please try remove this old, black & white picture.Eurocopter tigre 20:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a better in-flight image at [[1]] (just click on the pic to get the image). However, the image info is in a Cyrillic language (probably Byelorussian?), so I don't know if it's a pic we can legally use. - BillCJ 00:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cost?

I was researching military aircraft, but was unable to find a price for this particular one. Anyone know? If anyone adds it, please let me know.

RebDrummer61^alalala! [22:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)][reply]

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 18:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Venezuela

Its is not true that they will receive 48 more helis in 2010, the russians said that they have now 12 helis for export ordres including Venezuela. Chavez ordered 4 MI-28 and final number rumored to be 10-12. The country cant afford to operate so many MI-28. John, Athens, 1 Jan 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.75.33.190 (talk) 05:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

North Korea?

The main article claims that Mi-28NAe export version was offered to North Korea. But it is very unrealistic that North Korea, of which economy and military budget has long been collapsed, will buy such expensive high-tech weapon system overseas. It is also unrealistic that russia would offer such weapons to north korea. I could not find such offer in newspaper or military journals. Can anybody find a source for that claim? Shaind (talk) 12:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It needs a source, although it does seem plausible. In the early 2000s North Korea managed to acquire a license for producing T-90, BTR-80 and SA-17 derivatives, after Russia refused to sell them (along with requests for Tor SAMs, Su-27SK, MiG-29SMT, Mi-35, S-300V and a production line for MiG-23s). Not to mention, that North Korea's military budget is more than $ 5 billion. North Korea isn't as incapable as most people believe...

P.S.: I did find a source. Actually it was the first Google hit. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 19:22, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same mechanics of Mi-17?

This Russian helicopter uses the same motor as Mi-17. Does it also uses the same mechanics as the Mi-17= too?Agre22 (talk) 16:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)agre22[reply]

Turkey to acquire Mi-28

Just want to point out that Turkey is in the negotiation phase in the acquirement of the Mi-28. [[1]]

I believe this should be listed. Thanks. AussieSkeptic82 (talk) 17:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are negotiations still going on or did they fall through? I can find no news articles on this after July 2009. -fnlayson (talk) 17:20, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Fnlayson for your quick response, I will try and find additional references to this but I still believe it should be listed under a "possible acquisition" section on the article page. AussieSkeptic82 (talk) 05:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply but it seems that you are correct. There is no new information regarding the decision to purchase the MI-28 by Turkey after 2009. Still I believe all foreign nations that have put forward the intent to purchase should be listed on the Wiki article as it directly is a part of the relevant history of the Mi-28. The foreign nations that are listed should not just be nations that have expressed interest but have actually submitted the intent of purchase as in the case of Turkey (even if negotiations of purchase fail). AussieSkeptic82 (talk) 06:08, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 05:41, 20 August 2010 edit AussieSkeptic82 (talk \| contribs) 59 edits mNo edit summary ← Previous edit		Revision as of 06:08, 30 August 2010 edit undo AussieSkeptic82 (talk \| contribs) 59 edits m →‎Turkey to acquire Mi-28 Next edit →
Line 63:		Line 63:

	Thank you Fnlayson for your quick response, I will try and find additional references to this but I still believe it should be listed under a "possible acquisition" section on the article page. [[User:AussieSkeptic82\|AussieSkeptic82]] ([[User talk:AussieSkeptic82\|talk]]) 05:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)		Thank you Fnlayson for your quick response, I will try and find additional references to this but I still believe it should be listed under a "possible acquisition" section on the article page. [[User:AussieSkeptic82\|AussieSkeptic82]] ([[User talk:AussieSkeptic82\|talk]]) 05:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

			Sorry for the late reply but it seems that you are correct. There is no new information regarding the decision to purchase the MI-28 by Turkey after 2009. Still I believe all foreign nations that have put forward the intent to purchase should be listed on the Wiki article as it directly is a part of the relevant history of the Mi-28. The foreign nations that are listed should not just be nations that have expressed interest but have actually submitted the intent of purchase as in the case of Turkey (even if negotiations of purchase fail). [[User:AussieSkeptic82\|AussieSkeptic82]] ([[User talk:AussieSkeptic82\|talk]]) 06:08, 30 August 2010 (UTC)