Talk:AN/APQ-120

Military history: Aviation / Maritime / Technology / 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 not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Aviation Stub‑class

	Aviation portal 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
Stub	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

More info, bad reference, variants used

First, can't this say somewhere which radars were used in which variants of F-4? And how about some general info, not just a list of obscure tech stats. Can it track-while-scan? How many targets? Look-up, shoot-up? Etc. Next, I own "The Great Book of Modern Warplanes" by Gunston and Spick, and none of the information credited to that book is in my version. The second set of ISBN numbers don't match, so mine may be a newer edition, but it is exactly 520 pages, as it says on the page linked in this article, so I'm dubious. My book doesn't say anything about the F-4 Phantom. AnnaGoFast (talk) 22:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on AN/APQ-120. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:29, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article mis-titled

This article reads more like a list of Aero-13 variants than it is about the AN/APQ-120 specifically. The article lacks any detail at all about the AN/APQ-120 itself. 101.175.195.39 (talk) 06:04, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page Needs Massive Rework

This seems like a tracking of the Aero-1A FCR, but it contains irrelevant information, and the AWG-10 FCS is a completely different set with nothing in common with the Aero-13 and Aero-1 FCRs.

"AN/APG-59 FCR is a modified AN/APQ-72 designed for the British. The main difference between AN/APG-59 and its predecessor is that the radar dish could be swung sideways in order to reduce the length of the aircraft to 54 feet so that it could fit on the small deck lifts of British carriers." This is one hundred percent false. APG-59 was the first airborne pulse-doppler radar set and has nearly nothing in common with APQ-72. APQ-100, 109 and 120 are related to 72. APG-59, 60, and 61 are part of AWG-10 and should have their own page altogether.

APQ-72 is also part of Aero-1A. Why Aero-1A is separate on this page, I have no idea.

I know little about Wikipedia editing, so I will do my best to provide adequate sourcing and accurate information in the coming months as I try to edit this, as this current page provides neither.

For the parts that I know are wrong but I cannot provide sources for, I will try to make a running list of them under this post and will not edit them until I have sources. Any help finding sources for those would be greatly appreciated. Heatloss (talk) 07:56, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]