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:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
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:
We don't need to state that
the sky is blue. I've therefore reverted the removal of the sentences re the exercise being part of the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. In many countries, such exercises take place every week. That this specific exercise was part of them does not, IMHO, need a reference.
Mjroots (
talk) 21:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Have you actually read the policy you linked to? It says you actually do have to cite that. Not every aircraft interception training exercise is part of the aftermath to 9/11.
Nathan121212 (
talk) 21:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Tend to agree with
Mjroots. But highly unlikely one would ever find a public domain source to support this claim? The sky isn't always blue, sometimes it's full of smoke, from burning aircraft.
Martinevans123 (
talk) 21:13, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
The thing is, interceptor aircraft have been around since before 2001 and I doubt that they only started training with them in response to 9/11. See also:
WP:NOTBLUENathan121212 (
talk) 21:17, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
@
Nathan121212: - I've invited input from members of
WP:AV and
WP:MILHIST. Let's see what the consensus is from non-involved editors.
Mjroots (
talk) 21:18, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Well, kind of. Except that looks very different, more like a race, at 2.2 Mach. Was the Concorde without comms? Was it suspected of being a terrorist hijack? Hard to tell from that description.
Martinevans123 (
talk) 21:32, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
I haven't found any sources that said these exercises were related to the 9-11 attacks, but I did find several saying this was a routine test of the Quick Reaction Alert squadrons of incursions into Germany airspace by uncommunicative aircraft. I think saying this is in any way related to the 9-11 attacks would be speculation and require citation. --
Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû(
blah?) 22:51, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Do not include - in the unlikely event it was true it adds no value to the article, these training exercises have been going on for years, well before 9/11. For example any aircraft (including civil) flying over the North Sea could use a "codeword" on the radio that gave permission for it to be used as an intercept target and it was regularly done years before 2001.
MilborneOne (
talk) 19:40, 21 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Thanks all for your input.
Nathan121212, I've removed the text per your original edit and consensus here.
Mjroots (
talk) 15:05, 22 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Luftwaffe a/c regn?
Does anyone know the military serial of the Typhoon?
Mjroots (
talk) 20:51, 3 August 2014 (UTC)reply
Does anybody know if BFU reports are copyrighted? The illustration on page 45 of the final report would make a good addition to this article, but the only result from reading
Commons:Licensing and
Copyright_rules_by_territory#Germany is that my brain now hurts. I still have no idea if we're allowed to use the picture.
80.2.106.75 (
talk) 06:22, 4 September 2015 (UTC)reply
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:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
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:
We don't need to state that
the sky is blue. I've therefore reverted the removal of the sentences re the exercise being part of the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. In many countries, such exercises take place every week. That this specific exercise was part of them does not, IMHO, need a reference.
Mjroots (
talk) 21:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Have you actually read the policy you linked to? It says you actually do have to cite that. Not every aircraft interception training exercise is part of the aftermath to 9/11.
Nathan121212 (
talk) 21:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Tend to agree with
Mjroots. But highly unlikely one would ever find a public domain source to support this claim? The sky isn't always blue, sometimes it's full of smoke, from burning aircraft.
Martinevans123 (
talk) 21:13, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
The thing is, interceptor aircraft have been around since before 2001 and I doubt that they only started training with them in response to 9/11. See also:
WP:NOTBLUENathan121212 (
talk) 21:17, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
@
Nathan121212: - I've invited input from members of
WP:AV and
WP:MILHIST. Let's see what the consensus is from non-involved editors.
Mjroots (
talk) 21:18, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Well, kind of. Except that looks very different, more like a race, at 2.2 Mach. Was the Concorde without comms? Was it suspected of being a terrorist hijack? Hard to tell from that description.
Martinevans123 (
talk) 21:32, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
I haven't found any sources that said these exercises were related to the 9-11 attacks, but I did find several saying this was a routine test of the Quick Reaction Alert squadrons of incursions into Germany airspace by uncommunicative aircraft. I think saying this is in any way related to the 9-11 attacks would be speculation and require citation. --
Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû(
blah?) 22:51, 20 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Do not include - in the unlikely event it was true it adds no value to the article, these training exercises have been going on for years, well before 9/11. For example any aircraft (including civil) flying over the North Sea could use a "codeword" on the radio that gave permission for it to be used as an intercept target and it was regularly done years before 2001.
MilborneOne (
talk) 19:40, 21 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Thanks all for your input.
Nathan121212, I've removed the text per your original edit and consensus here.
Mjroots (
talk) 15:05, 22 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Luftwaffe a/c regn?
Does anyone know the military serial of the Typhoon?
Mjroots (
talk) 20:51, 3 August 2014 (UTC)reply
Does anybody know if BFU reports are copyrighted? The illustration on page 45 of the final report would make a good addition to this article, but the only result from reading
Commons:Licensing and
Copyright_rules_by_territory#Germany is that my brain now hurts. I still have no idea if we're allowed to use the picture.
80.2.106.75 (
talk) 06:22, 4 September 2015 (UTC)reply