Talk:M-87 Orkan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Orkan in Georgia
There are no M87 Orkan MLRs in Geiorgian Army. Bosnea wanted to sell their Orkans to Georgia, but Georgia didn't bought them. Kos93 —Preceding comment was added at 12:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Bosnia is not M87 user, never was, Serb Army in Bosnia had 2 M87, one got destroyed by Croatian HV, and 1 was handed over to Serbian Army proper, Bosnian federal Army never had any M97. Serb Army proper has 1M87 and 1 modified M87 based on Zil truck chasis. Mic of orion (talk) 13:49, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Forward thinking
The article has a rather promotional tone with text like "The Yugoslav ideology when developing the system was based on the premise that countries who copy designs are at least five years behind of those who have the weapons developed. Accordingly the Orkan is unique because it has the ability to disperse antitank or antipersonnel mines up to 50 km from the firing location. This example illustrates the forward thinking that went into designing Orkan". Whilst I very much approve of weapons articles covering the organisational & political background instead of just listing tech specs, we shouldn't let them become a platform for nationalist flag-waving or spam. I do not understand why we should praise a nation for being at the cutting edge of military-technical innovation just for putting rocket launcher tubes on the back of old imported truck designs. bobrayner (talk) 02:56, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
This article talks about a history and current status M-87 Orkan. SFRY was communist social regulated country and had official development and defense strategy and in defense strategy goals considering defense, arms procurement and arms development. There is nothing nationalists or spam in it. You have before this Talk deleted huge part of article based on sentence "Then why is it mounted on an old Mercedes copy?". If you don't have a knowledge about some area or you are not familiar with something is that justification for deletion.
First and above all article M-87 Orkan states that M-87 is mounted on chassis of FAP 2832. Fabrika automobila Priboj-FAP is manufacturer based in Priboj Serbia. If you are not familiar with this type of vehicle designer and manufacturer on what basis do you claim it is just simple old Mercedes Copy. Do you have any justification for that claim? Is there Mercedes law suite for unauthorized copy and were is justification to call it simple copy. And what is Mercedes model and characteristics to claim copy.
About your latest claim "just putting" do you have a knowledge of how many countries of more than 170 countries in world where able to "just putt" MLRS on truck with range of 50km in 1987. Or do you have a list of countries who developed MLRS over 50km in 1987 with types of MLRS just for comparability and giving your claims that there is nothing to praise and that technological achievement is something usual like baking bread and spam.
And last and not less important when i finished reading all your talks i have a question for you do you have political or nationalist prejudice when it comes to Serbia and SFRY and do you use it when moderating articles from that geographic area?
- It's not an illegal copy. FAP has a license. FAP started copying Saurer trucks, then in 1970 they switched to copying Mercedes trucks. Of course they're still producing NG/SK based trucks which Mercedes replaced decades ago:
Nonetheless, at least some of the new generation’s children and grandchildren have still not disappeared entirely. The basic cab of the NG 80 series and the now more than 30 year-old engine concept of the OM 352 (130 hp) and the V10 OM 403 with 320 hp are still doing sterling service for the Serbian manufacturer FAP in Priboj, for example.
- Of course, if you haven't read Daimler say, or what the Serbian government says, or what FAP themselves say, you could just look at a picture. FAP still boast about their products on their website, using photos of old Mercedes designs which still have a 3-pointed star on them. bobrayner (talk) 14:32, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
First to make a copy or to produce under licence is two different stuff. Second I think you have not read your own references. For example in Serbian government it clearly say that i quote "FAP signed a new licensing agreement with
Daimler-Benz and its products have been based on this cooperation"
ever since." and "FAP offers its vehicles with power systems manufactured by Mercedes-Benz, Cummins, MAN and Famos".
Your saying that FAP 2026 is "old imported truck designs" still doesn't stand at all. It is not even a licence. FAP 2026 is a truck designed by Military Technical Institute Belgrade and not Mercedes Benz. If they have similar look it doesn't mean it is the same. "Products have been based on this cooperation" doesn't mean "old imported truck designs".
"30 year-old engine concept of the OM 352 (130 hp) and the V10 OM 403 with 320 hp" - what is point in this sentences. Is it a point that you say truck uses 30 year old engine in 2013 or today or you say that in 1987 it was modern engine. 2013-1987 = 26 years. Today FAP 2026 uses MERCEDES BENZ OM 906 LA EURO 3 engine and in 1987 and 1978 when entered service it used FAMOS engine based license from the British Leyland and there is today(2013) FAP 2228 which is more modernized version.
Just for your notice FAP 2026 was exported to Egypt and Saudi Arabia(few thousand's s of trucks)
And still you don't give any arguments about M-87 MLRS and that is a point of your previous comments and reason behind unreasonable deletion of huge part of article. MLRS is on table here and not FAP 2026 and your claims that M-87 Orkan is just simple as "putting" on the back of old imported truck designs and therefore it doesn't have technological significance but it is nationalistic or spam. I don't remember that anyone on this planet called Vostok 3KA-3, Saturn V or R-7 Semyorka spam or nationalistic and they are for sure military-technical innovations and many are praising that facts but not making spam from it. Loesorion (talk) 17:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
- I agree that FAP used to use Leyland engines; I agree that they now use EURO3 engines, and that these are "more modern" than what FAP previously used. It's still a copy of an obsolete design (due to emissions regulations in several developed countries, Mercedes haven't sold Euro 3 for several years). None of this should be a big deal; unfortunately these facts are incompatible with the nationalist fluff about "Orkan was never a copy of any previous designs. The Yugoslav ideology when developing the system was based on the premise that countries who copy designs are at least five years behind of those who have the weapons developed". It's more than five years in this case. bobrayner (talk) 17:34, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
"It's still a copy of an obsolete design" - you continue you claims without any facts. Because you believe something is obsolete it doesn't make it obsolete. What have a claim "Mercedes haven't sold Euro 3 for several years" with a FAP truck from 1987 or with some other manufacturers truck from any year. "Orkan was never a copy of any previous designs" - what is nationalist in here explain or stop spamming.
Once again you edit this article at 18:27, 22 June 2013 with posting some ridiculous claims from "FAS" organization who btw claimed that Iraq had WMD in 2003 as support Bush administration for military intervention. If you have careful read their article they claimed I quote:"JNA apparently had developed and produced 122mm, 152mm, and 155mm artillery shells; air-delivered bombs (of an unknown type); 122mm, 128mm rockets, and 262mm rockets; and chemical warfare mines. There are unconfirmed reports that the JA has binary sarin munitions fir use with 155mm artillery shells.'
They do not quote any recourse or sources for their article about 262mm missile with chemical warhead so it is imagination of article creator.
There is not a single fact anywhere in the world to confirm that it was ever produced missile with chemical warhead for any of Yugoslavia MLRS including Orkan M-87. It is only speculations.
They use word as "apparently" and "unconfirmed". Let's say that Mercedes "apparently" mounted ss-18 SATAN on their truck because I think so, would you take that as "apparently" or as "THEY have done it" Encyclopedic articles should not be based on believes or faith but on facts. Ana they also claim that FR Yugoslavia was last state in Europe In April 2000 "to agree to adhere to the convention banning chemical weapon". Andorra signed in 2003 and Montenegro signed in 2006 so much about their claims who are most based on political view they have about some state. They also forget to mention that FRY, composed of Serbia and Montenegro was not member of UN between 1992-1999 so how could FR sing a treaty earlier then in 2000 or in 1993 when treaties was ratified for first time by member states. That is truly political point they are making of Yugoslavia and chemical weapons since country did not have access to this convention prior 2000 not by her fault.
And most importantly they "forget" to say Yugoslavia ratified the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BWTC - Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction) on October 25, 1973 (Signed 10 April 1972) witch makes SFR Yugoslavia one of founding members of that convention before most of other states in world including most of europe.
One more fact about FAS political motivated article is that they have not a single mention about first ever used chemical weapons in history by Great Britain. btw FAS has many technical and other errors, misguidance and political views of technical stuff on their pages related to equipment, air bases, weapons, WMD and etc when they use incorrect data and claiming some unproven situations as facts. They are very unreliable source but they are trying to propose themselves as ultimate guidance for military and WMD as self-commercial propaganda. Loesorion (talk) 20:40, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
- Can't we try to bring the article in line with what reliable sources say? Please take your finger off the revert button. Article ownership is a Bad Thing. bobrayner (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Again in 22:26, 22 June 2013 you add section about chemical weapons in Orkan M87 without citing a proper sources for your claim. And you go further in this article and chemical weapons with:Orkan was also capable of deploying chemical weapons; thousands of rockets were made with chemical warheads. Many were deployed in Iraq..."
You are misguiding readers to think there were rockets with chemical warheads delivers to Iraq without references in which is confirmed that fact. In none of references added there is not a single prof or hard citing of chemical warhead and all is hearsay without any proof that even rocket with any kind of warhead for Orkan where on ships mentioned in articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loesorion (talk • contribs) 22:47, 22 June 2013 (UTC)