Talk:Bell 204/205

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was the article was merged. --Born2flie 10:18, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Global Eagle

(Moved from

BillCJ
)

  • Variants section of the UH-1 article. --Born2flie 21:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]

I'ved added in a brief mention of the Global Eagle in the variants list, but I really don't think the rest of the page merits inclusion. It's mostly promotional material, which can be accessed from the cite link. -

BillCJ 05:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

So, we're almost complete with a merge, then? --Born2flie 09:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge complete. --Born2flie 10:18, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


Australian Defence?

I'm pretty sure the Australian military use this for recon purposes. However, I haven't found any mention of Australia on this page. The Australian Defence force page lists the Bell 204/205 helicopter and not the UH-1 Iroquois, so maybe its a mistake on their end.

The terms UH-1 and Bell 204/205 are often used interchangeably. SOme military forces bought modles form Bell as UH-1s, while others bought them as 204s or 205s, but they were really the same military model, or at all were to militray specs. Some militaries, esp smaller ones, bought the civilians versions, the (204B or the 205s. In addition, many surplus UH-1s were sold to civilian governtment agencies and commercial operators. Confusing, yes, and it's often hard to tell the difference. As such, we are just covering civilian usage and history here, and covering military usage and history on the
UH-1 Iroquois
page. Included here would be non-military government agencies, such as a Forestry Service, civil police (local and national), Customs, Fire departments, and so on. I hope that makes sense. This way we really don't have to worry about the exact model each military had, which can be hard to track down, and can just concentrate on who used them and what they did.
So, in answer to your query, the Australian military usage would go on the
BillCJ 03:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

UH-1D or UH-1H

Bill, I thought that the UH-1D is the first of the Model 205 line? Is the UH-1H referenced because they started the Model 205A-1 after the UH-1H was in service? --Born2flie 22:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, the first civil model was the 205A-1, and was based on the UH-1H. Yes, the D is technically a 205, but there wasn't a direct civil counterpart per my sources. Of cource, many Ds did end up in civil service. -
BillCJ 23:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Thanks, Bill. I'll see what I can dig up, as well. --Born2flie 04:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monroe County Sheriff's Office

Removed this from the Police Operators. Not sure which Monroe County it referred to. The Monroe County, Florida's Sheriff Office used to have a UH-1, but no longer do. If I'm wrong, please revert! Thanks! Ratmangxa (talk) 12:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I propose that

Panha Shabaviz 2-75 be merged with this article. It is clearly AT BEST a refurbished Bell 204/205 with POSSIBLY SOME locally sourced parts.--Petebutt (talk) 02:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Support - per nom. - BilCat (talk) 02:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I second that motion. FOX 52 (talk) 04:03, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Minor variant with not enough text for a stand-alone article. - Ahunt (talk) 13:43, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Text has been copied from
Panha Shabaviz 2-75 (which see for attribution) and replaced with a redirect. MilborneOne (talk) 22:47, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bell 204/205. 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
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 07:38, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checked - Ahunt (talk) 12:27, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Bell 204/205. 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.

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:47, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bell_204/205&oldid=1206229544"