Talk:Raytheon Sentinel

message: If this page is about the ASTOR project (for example, ASTOR redirects here, labeling the link as "Airborne stand-off radar"), and the Raytheon Sentinel is mainly notable as the proposed airframe for this project, then should the bulk of this page be moved to Airborne stand-off radar? Ojw 18:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Page move?

message: The name of the engines is Rolls-Royce Deutschland BR710 turbo fan. source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7881031.stm?lss  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.194.216.101 (talk) 09:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it doesn't matter whether its a German or another countries engine. --91.221.58.27 (talk) 07:15, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The name of the company is Rolls-Royce Deutschland, formerly BMW Rolls-Royce. The article is at Rolls-Royce BR700 because in most cases the manufacturer is referred to as just Rolls-Royce, as the company no longer distinguishes where its engines are made. - BilCat (talk) 07:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rolls-Royce Deutschland BR710 turbo fan  

message: The 'English' of this article is atrocious. Would anyone mind if I translated it into real English?Keith-264 (talk) 17:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have had a go at a tidy up but your welcome to improve on my attempt. MilborneOne (talk) 19:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Language

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Raytheon Sentinel. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101222022127/http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/%40dg/%40en/documents/digitalasset/dg_191634.pdf to http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_191634.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120129165846/http://bfbs.com/news/worldwide/reprieve-axed-sentinel-r1-spy-plane-53697.html to http://bfbs.com/news/worldwide/reprieve-axed-sentinel-r1-spy-plane-53697.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.defensenews.com/air/2017/10/16/india-informs-us-its-ready-to-buy-istar-aircraft-from-raytheon/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061020012358/http://www.raytheon.com/feature/stellent/groups/public/documents/content/cms04_018168.pdf to http://www.raytheon.com/feature/stellent/groups/public/documents/content/cms04_018168.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:35, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: "During 2014, it was announced that a contract for the development of a maritime-capable software upgrade was to be placed in the spring of 2015; the defense periodical Jane's has speculated that such an upgrade would allow the Sentinel to detect surface vessels and potentially submarine periscopes, furthermore, that other sensors could be fitted as a 'low-end' capability for maritime surveillance to complement a 'high-end' platform such as the P-8A Poseidon."
I believe the above content has some merit, although it does need refactoring to consider if it did or did not take place. Planned upgrades that add an additional role or functionality to a platform are normally mentioned, as per entire sections of Lockheed U-2 and Boeing AH-64 Apache - this paragraph, once copyedited and updated to reflect the passage of time/planned nature better, should be up to standard with the relevant work. Kyteto (talk) 22:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: 1 and 3 are the same reference. And 2 is broken. So I'm not saying I disagree with inclusion if we can find some references and context as to what did/didn't happen, and why.  But as is, better out. Mark83 (talk) 22:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible reinclusion after editing  

message: You can't say stuff like . I have corrected it once but it got swept away in further changes. If you look at it carefully I hope you can see why it is wrong and why I object to it. Anyway, I am happy to just make my mark here so that at least it is properly recorded, and I think I must now walk away and leave you to it. Happy editing. 82.34.153.236 (talk) 10:06, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Forgive me, but that doesn't appear to be a grammar issue to me. It's perhaps a bit obtuse, but it makes the point about the prime contractor that your version leaves out. (Gotta love them I-drive-bys! No follow up.) BilCat (talk) 18:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar