Talk:Ottoman Aviation Squadrons

message: Needs references. Cla68 07:52, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: I have started work on the Air commanders of World War I. Any help that editors can offer in the Ottoman section, or elsewhere, would be greatly appreciated. Greenshed (talk) 21:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for help

message: Never heard of him.  Reference?Murat (talk) 05:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is Benjy Gordon? 

message: Too much of the terminology is in modern Turkish rather than Ottoman (Bakanlik vs Nezaret); this should be fixed. 69.110.145.155 (talk) 08:13, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Terminology

message: Story of Turkish Aviation (This page is last updated on: 01.08.2008.)
In this article before 01.08.2008 = like this.
Takabeg (talk) 15:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright problem 

message: There is an article, written by no other than Major Erich Serno, commander of the Ottoman Air Force, titled "The History of the Ottoman Air Force in the Great War".  It was translated and edited by Dr. Brian P. Flanagan (original recovered by a Major Hans Hattendorff from Serno's widow, and I am holding in my hand a rare replica), and appeared in the famous CROSS & COCKADE, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1966, pp 140-154.  Not only in the title of the article Ottoman Air Force is prominantly mentioned, throughout the whole lengthy article it is referred to with that name.  Note that this is a respected aviation magazine, a primary source. As opposed to Erikson, whose focus was more on the land battles and mentions Aviation Squadrons only in passing which a particular editor here seems to have locked on and this is hardly Erikson's expertise. Then there are those close to 200 or so google hits (in English), which seem to be redundant at this point.  
I urge you again to restore the original title of the article as you have implied you would upon me producing a suitable and proper reference, and then we can certainly continue the argument and parse Erikson's passing comment.  I also propose a re-direct from Squadrons.  Thank you.Murat (talk) 01:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for talking abou the references here. Why, may I ask, have you not added all this data and refs before, which might have avoided the issue (for at least the 14-18 period)? Please do go ahead and add everything in including isbns where available. OK, that's the situation by some point during WW1. We have a variety of mentions of an Aviation Inspectorate etc before WW1 - do you have any data on the situation before the war? Kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 03:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

text: First, please everybody cease accusations of racial bias etc. This is a relatively simple question of fact, which we owe it to our readers to get right. We are not interested in creating a phantom organisation should one not have existed. If there were actually only seperate avaition departments within the army and navy, we should not refer to an 'Ottoman Air Force.' Murat, Takabeg seems to be making some reasonable arguments based on fact. Would you please respond directly as to whether his statements are correct, and if not, refute them? It is quite plausible that the organisation was named in English popular works the 'Ottoman Air Force' while correctly they should have been refering to the Ottoman Army or Navy Aviation Inspectorate or department. Please respond directly regarding the organisation titles Takabeg is refering to. Buckshot06 (talk) 12:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Why Ottoman Air Force

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section 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.
*Support. Sources: 1) Lawrence and the Arab Revolts By David Nicolle, 2) Satellite remote sensing for archaeology By Sarah H. Parcak, 3) The Arab Revolt 1916-18: Lawrence Sets Arabia Ablaze By David Murphy, 4) Air power history: Volumes 52-53: "Thus began the Ottoman Air Force. The modern Turkish Air Force, the successor of the Ottoman Air Force, traces its origin to these events of 1911.", 5) Cross & Cockade journal, Volume 25, Issue 6 - Volume 26, Issue 6, 6) Sir Frederick Sykes and the air revolution, 1912-1918 By Eric Ash, etc. There are many more - these are just a sample. SilkTork *Tea time 11:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You are aware that you have made a mistake? Did you look at the sources I've linked to below? This is not a matter of opinion - the sources are very clear that there was an Ottoman Air Force, that it was called Ottoman Air Force, and that it had several army and navy squadrons within its force. I think you have misunderstood the nature of those squadrons and assumed that the squadrons controlled the Air Force rather than the other way round. But the sources are clear that the Air Force was formed by the government, not the army, and that it came under direct command of the War Ministry. SilkTork *Tea time 11:42, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

text: I aslo use Ordered to Die to write articles. And we know this author points that the very term Ottoman Air Force is a gross exaggeration and he avoids to use the term in the text of his books. As I said above, we can use the term "Ottoman Air Force" expediently in appropriate sentences. But it is unsuitable for the title of this article. Military aviation in the Ottoman Empire is more comprehensive and suitable title for this article. Why do you oppose it ? Takabeg (talk) 13:59, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand how you arrived at your conclusion, but you note that the source you depend on is calling it the Ottoman Air Force. His argument is that, while overall command was with the government, as an air force it was poorly organised, and tactical command was local. I think you are misreading the phrase the very term Ottoman Air Force is a gross exaggeration to mean that it wasn't called Ottoman Air Force; however, it doesn't mean that, it means that the author feels that the size and operation of the air force was small and confused. It isn't saying that the term Ottoman Air Force is wrong, but that this very early example of an air force was not as we understand an air force today. The thrust of his argument is that even though in fact and theory controlled by the government and as such independent of the army or navy, it happened that most of the day to day operations were decided by whoever was using or flying the planes, which was mainly the Army. It is a step too much to go from that to claiming that the air force was Army owned, and that in fact it wasn't an air force at all, but simply an aviation squadron of the Army. The Turkish Air Force is a separate unit from the Turkish Army, and regards the Ottoman Air Force as its origins.  All sources, including the one you quote, are saying that it was called the Ottoman Air Force, and that (despite local operations coming under control of either the Army or Navy) it was an independent organisation directly controlled by the War Ministry. I understand why you made the mistake. The wording at first glance can lead a reader to think that control was in the hands of the army. But it's worth a re-read. SilkTork *Tea time 10:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also worth noting that while some army officers were trained to become pilots, the air force also used pilots from other countries, such as France. That some of the personnel came from the army and that idea was army initiated makes the matter cloudy, but the Bülent Yılmazer source does say that control of the air force (albeit "loosely") was in the hands of a War Ministry department. Given that reliable sources use the term Ottoman Air Force, that overall control (however loosely, and however poorly realised) was independent of the army and was intended to be a distinct force, and that the Ottoman Air Force is seen as the forerunner of the Turkish Air Force, it seems appropriate to call this article Ottoman Air Force. SilkTork *Tea time 11:18, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Bülent Yılmazer has never used the term "Ottoman Air Force" in the article titled "Ottoman Aviation, Prelude to Military Use of Air Craft" . Takabeg (talk) 14:19, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: http://www.bogaziciyayinlari.com.tr/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=258
http://ataturkilkeleri.istanbul.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Onder_Kocaturk-Osmanli_Pilotlarinin_Istanbul_Kahire_Iskenderiye_Seyahati-icindekiler.pdf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.255.15.141 (talk) 09:43, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advice to read: http://www.bogaziciyayinlari.com.tr/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=258 

message: Ottoman troops opened fire on an Italian aircraft on 15 December 1911. The first aircraft to be brought down in a war was that of Lieutenant Manzini, shot down on 25 August 1912
Credible references I can find says Manzini suffered engine failure shortly after takeoff, and that the first aircraft actually shot down in combat was being flown by M. Popov, hit by shrapnel shells over Adrianople on 30 October 1912.
here
here
Can anyone get a good counterexample?
Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:44, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ummm, need some more cites on this one... 

message: "In August 1914, the Ottoman military aviation had eight planes assigned for operations and four in the flying school in San Stefano; of six operational planes, two were sent to eastern Anatolia, with the others retained at the flying school."
This statement is confusing. So they had twelve planes, with two operational in eastern Anatolia, eight in flying school and two unknown? 91.10.47.242 (talk) 21:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section "Operations" 

message: Section Structure and organisation says:
"By the war's end, the Ottoman aviation squadrons had become a potpourri of about 200 supplied, purchased, and captured aircraft from Germany, France, Russia, and Britain."
Section Operations says:
"With the signing of the Armistice of Mudros on 30 October 1918, the Ottoman military aviation effectively came to an end. At the time of the armistice, the Ottoman military aviation had around 100 pilots; 17 land-based airplane companies (4 planes each); and 3 seaplane companies (4 planes each); totalling 80 aircraft."
These two statements seem inconsistentNickpheas (talk) 14:26, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many planes