Talk:H2X

Military history: Aviation / Technology / British / European / North America / United States / World War II Start‑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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-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 not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

Aviation

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

On 16 August 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to AN/APS-15. The result of the discussion was not moved.

By the numbers

The 1132 number was removed on the basis of 150 sorties/day. Was that for the entire bomber force, or the entire Pathfinder force? If the bomber force, the 1132 for radar Pathfinders isn't unreasonable; if the Pathfinders, maybe not, either. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 23:45, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 August 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Reading Beans 10:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

H2X → AN/APS-15 – The article's lede immediately identifies that the only system discussed is the AN/APS-15. It is common practice when naming articles for devices which use the American military JETDS naming convention for the article to be like either "AN/APS-15" or including the system name and type like "AN/APS-15 H2X radar". For many examples, see Category:Military electronics of the United States. This move would make the page far easier to locate since most users will search for either AN/APS-15 or AN/APS-15 H2X radar. But I am open to ideas. Please share your thoughts — TadgStirkland⁴⁰¹ (Tadg^Talk) 21:20, 16 August 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Waqar💬 18:33, 25 August 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Reading Beans 08:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this subsection with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Oppose. No rationale given in terms of article naming policy. The current title is concise and well attested in sources. Andrewa (talk) 10:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Both names are valid, but I see no reason to support a rename to the later and much less well-known AN series number, per COMMONNAME. Even the lede wording "H2X, officially known as the AN/APS-15" is inappropriate. It was 'officially' known under both, at different times and contexts. But H2X still has the edge for COMMONNAME. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per the two comments above. The present name seems fine, not seeing a reason to chagne. — Amakuru (talk) 12:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments: — TadgStirkland⁴⁰¹ (Tadg^Talk) 21:20, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Military history and WikiProject Aviation have been notified of this discussion. Reading Beans 08:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Aviation and WikiProject Military history have been notified of this discussion. Reading Beans 08:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: Relisting to allow further input from notified WikiProjects Reading Beans 08:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been the subject of multiple bold moves, so an RM is a great idea and should hopefully lead to stability. Andrewa (talk) 10:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

BTO source

In this edit, a 3-day editor in 2020 added a source that contains "bombing through overcast" and "bombing through the overcast", but not "BTO". Is there a better source for that TLA? Dicklyon (talk) 04:18, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I find this book that says "The H2X air-to-ground radar system had been designed for high-altitude bombing through cloud cover—a form of weapons release known as bombing through the overcast, or BTO", which doesn't quite support the idea of the H2X being called a BTO set, but maybe suggests it. Maybe this book is better, though it's ambiguous about which set(s) were called BTO? Or maybe BTO is too generic, and not really an alternative name for this the H2X? Dicklyon (talk) 04:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]