Talk:Imperial Russian Air Service

Untitled

The actual Russian name translates as "Emperor's Military Air Fleet". Just sayin'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.100.98.109 (talk) 12:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Request for help

I have started work on the Air commanders of World War I. Any help that editors can offer in the Russian section, or elsewhere, would be greatly appreciated. Greenshed (talk) 21:09, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Dibovski/Dybovsky (etc.)

In any case just a transliteration difference of course. The point is that the man himself (however you spell his name) certainly didn't "sell his patent to the British", in fact it isn't clear if his earlier (Russian) gear was a synchroniser at all - from the description it looks a lot more like a "pop-up" gun deflector system. This is one thing I left out of the new synchronization gear article - I included deflectors mounted on the propeller itself mainly because it would have been impossible to tell the story of the Fokker synchroniser otherwise. Patents for pop-up deflectors show cam wheels on the prop pushing up a "deflector" through a hole in the cowling! No "pop-up" deflector system ever actually worked, which is hardly surprising. Did Dibovski (or Dybovsky) invent a pop-up system in Russia, and then go on to co-operate with Scarff in the invention of a true synchroniser in England, or is the whole connection fanciful (at least from the Russian side)? I am by means sure that our sources give us quite enough information here. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 06:47, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

English language problems

This article shows signs of having been compiled by an editor or editors with less than perfect English. (No shame in that, in itself, I'm sure I couldn't write an encyclopedia article in Russian, or even in French, for that matter!) In fact some passages have already been "translated" by other editors so that they read less infelicitously. Among other inconsistencies, fixed winged aircraft have been described, at random, as "airplanes", "planes", "machines", "aeroplanes", "aircraft", and even "aircrafts". I have replaced all instances of "plane(s)", "airplane(s)" and "aircrafts" with "aeroplane(s)", or "machines" or even (when this did not raise ambiguities) "aircraft". If a consensus is ever established that this (Russian) subject needs to be in U.S. spelling rather than what is after all the predominant European version of English then "airplane" can be painlessly switched in to replace "aeroplane". In the meantime it is at least consistent, rather than neither Arthur nor Martha. I have also removed unnecessary "scare quotes" around terms that are perfectly good English, like "flying boats". No substantial content changed or modified at this stage of the game - just rendered the written English more consistent and professional looking. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 09:01, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Was going to post on the same topic (ten years later)...I noticed at least one american spelling and the use of 'aeroplane' rather than 'airplane' (imo 'aircraft is always preferable unless necessary to exclude LTA stuff) ...nothing changes , & judging by the lack of response this is not a topic which excites strong emotions.TheLongTone (talk) 14:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC)