Talk:Improvised vehicle armour

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Improvised vehicle armour 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

Military history: Land vehicles

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 not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military land vehicles task force

No killdozer? 99.236.221.124 (talk) 18:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

This should be a no-brainer. Hillbilly armor is just a US/Iraq-centric version of improvised vehicle armour: were the articles very long then the current split might be prudent, but for now we should merge them. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:17, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The amount of stuff at Hillbilly armor would somewhat overwelm this article ans see Talk:Hillbilly_armor for why the current split exists.Geni 14:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's true for now, but given that most of that material is directly applicable here wouldn't it be better to have people contribute it to the parent article instead of to a specialist example article? The other talk page even suggests this parentage. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hillbilly armor has a bunch of politics attached. Improvised vehicle amour tends not to.Geni 11:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's as may be, but that doesn't preclude the bits about armour as opposed to funding being merged in here. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you keep the politics seperate then you have to have a an article for Hillbilly armor thus you can't meaningfuly merge. You may wish to expand the coverage of Hillbilly armor in this article but that is secondary.Geni 15:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Politicas aside, this makes a lot of sense to me. We can have the hilbilly armor as one of the major sections, and keep the politics there. bahamut0013 ♠♣ 15:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forerunner

Need to dig out a ref to romans sewing on extra chain mail during the gaulish wars.©Geni 14:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

criminal uses

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/08/world/americas/08mexico.html?_r=3

©Geni 06:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Improvised vehicle armour. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 12:43, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Use of improvised slat armor in Russo-Ukraine war.

Section is reflecting very narrow scope written more to justify a disputed term with poor citations rather than discuss more nuanced aspects of these improvised modifications. I found this article from Nov 2021 to be more in-depth and neutral. Please use this to expand that section constructively. Ohsin 17:08, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to this discussion on talk page of T-90 tank for more context on disputed term. Ohsin 17:13, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Has reappeared on T62s:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ancient-russian-t-62-tanks-spotted-wearing-cage-armor-in-ukraine

©Geni (talk) 23:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Possible source for the stuff the Russian army are putting on their trucks

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45108/russias-increasingly-bizarre-artisanal-armor-looks-more-mad-max-than-major-power

©Geni (talk) 07:12, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

added a couple of sentences.©Geni (talk) 16:48, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I like turtles

Further to the Azovets stuff, the other vehicle with improvised armour that might bear mentioning in the Russo-Ukrainian War section is "the Turtle", which if you're following the specialist media you already know about. I'm not adding anything on that thing to the section myself at this time, chiefly due to the same concerns around sourcing I mentioned in this edit summary, but I thought I'd mention the Turtle here, and maybe someone else is interested in adding something. I personally don't actually know if there's only one Turtle or if the Billy Mays pitch line applies. ("But wait...") —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 19:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Azovets

Azovets was not an "improvised vehicle armor" vehicle. It was industrially designed at Malyshev Factory, a major military plant, professionally armed with reactive armor, not to say about various innovations. Unfortunately contractors tried to con the military by installing non-military-grade cameras from China intended for household intercoms. The workshop was arrested by police who started an investigation for corruption. But the Azov soldiers stole Azovets (obviously intending to proceed with the design) but damaged it by mishandling.^[1] Therefore I don't think this paragraph belongs to this article. - Altenmann >talk 00:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ [1]

While questions as to what is to be considered a "real" seriously professionally designed military prototype, and what is "merely" improvised armour are kind of on a continuum and ultimately often functions of subjective esteem, if the information on the Azovets vehicle were to be removed from this article, care should be taken not to thus create another redirect to nowhere, but to instead either find another better redirect target, or turn the Azovets redirect with possibilities into an actual article. The notability is there. It's only the question which (side's) sources are acceptable that's highly partisan on anything broadly in this area (hence personally, I'll prolly Drop, Parry, Avoid further involvement). —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 08:00, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The notability is there - there is no notability. There was a single broken vehicle. Who knows how many of them were concocted during this war by both sides. what is "merely" improvised armour - that's simple: if sources call it "improvised", then let it stay. But from what I read, considerable money was involved in its design by a professional designer team working in professional environment for several years, with considerable modifications. So it is far from "improvisation", i.e., we are not talking about a couple of armor sheets welded on a truck in field. highly partisan on anything broadly in this area - I dont think Ukrainian sources are partisan in what I read about the affair and Russian sources are irrelevant beyond the minor details about the find. - Altenmann >talk 17:06, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If any of you are based in or visiting Moscow, you could take the opportunity and go to the currently-ongoing "Trophies" exhibition in Victory Park to take and upload some unencumbered pictures of the Azovets now on display there. I have (seen) pictures/videos, but to my understanding none of those are unencumbered (read: freely licensed and republishable), so they're probably not good candidates for upload to Commons. Yours could be the first. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 17:37, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [1]

[1]