Jump to content

Talk:Wideband Global SATCOM: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Replace deprecated banner
Line 20: Line 20:
usa paid for 5, aus paid for 1, it is a joint us/aus partnership with each to have access to the 6, perhaps the article should reflect this ..as far as i know and have read, only usa and australia will exclusive use this system, i noticed in the copy that said it will be used by many nations, i think you will find this is wrong http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_And_Australia_Share_New_Communications_Satellites_999.html
usa paid for 5, aus paid for 1, it is a joint us/aus partnership with each to have access to the 6, perhaps the article should reflect this ..as far as i know and have read, only usa and australia will exclusive use this system, i noticed in the copy that said it will be used by many nations, i think you will find this is wrong http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_And_Australia_Share_New_Communications_Satellites_999.html
here is another link to the partnership http://www.deagel.com/news/Australia-Gets-Access-to-Wideband-Global-SATCOM-System_n000003065.aspx
here is another link to the partnership http://www.deagel.com/news/Australia-Gets-Access-to-Wideband-Global-SATCOM-System_n000003065.aspx

== International Partners ==

I removed the following and refered it to the talk page, as I think there maybe a mixup between WGS and the AEHS system. It can be replaced when and if there is an official USA statement linked to it, does everyone agree ?


After the United States and Australia also some other countries have intrests in the programme, on October 10th 2011 the Dutch Defense minister Hans Hillen announced that he would join the group of international partners for the WGS programme following Canada, Denmark , Luxembourg and New-Zealand. All will be paying for the 9th satteliet together with de United States

[[Special:Contributions/112.213.152.52|112.213.152.52]] ([[User talk:112.213.152.52|talk]]) 03:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:57, 11 October 2011

WikiProject iconSpaceflight Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Technology / North America / United States C‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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
CThis article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion not met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
/ 
Taskforce icon
Military science, technology, and theory task force
Taskforce icon
North American military history task force
Taskforce icon
United States military history task force


Categories

I'm unsure what to do about categories for this article, as it is about the system as a whole rather than just the satellites. Any suggestions? (Sdsds - Talk) 16:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know that's actually a good point, one in fact I never really considered. The article does in fact try to address the constellation as a whole, rather than deal with an individual satellite. But by comparing it with the excellent page on GPS, they've decided to make the article all inclusive. As such, maybe we should consider categorizing it in a similar way. (Kronik overkill - Talk) 16:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australia buying into program buying one themselves?

From the Australian newspaper

Unsure if this is the right program please verify add?

Looks right it says 5 in article then says australia paying for one of the six.

[1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.96.65.142 (talk) 20:18, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

usa paid for 5, aus paid for 1, it is a joint us/aus partnership with each to have access to the 6, perhaps the article should reflect this ..as far as i know and have read, only usa and australia will exclusive use this system, i noticed in the copy that said it will be used by many nations, i think you will find this is wrong http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_And_Australia_Share_New_Communications_Satellites_999.html here is another link to the partnership http://www.deagel.com/news/Australia-Gets-Access-to-Wideband-Global-SATCOM-System_n000003065.aspx

International Partners

I removed the following and refered it to the talk page, as I think there maybe a mixup between WGS and the AEHS system. It can be replaced when and if there is an official USA statement linked to it, does everyone agree ?


After the United States and Australia also some other countries have intrests in the programme, on October 10th 2011 the Dutch Defense minister Hans Hillen announced that he would join the group of international partners for the WGS programme following Canada, Denmark , Luxembourg and New-Zealand. All will be paying for the 9th satteliet together with de United States

112.213.152.52 (talk) 03:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wideband_Global_SATCOM&oldid=454984667"