Talk:No. 114 Mobile Control and Reporting Unit RAAF

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:No. 114 Mobile Control and Reporting Unit RAAF/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cdtew (talk · contribs) 14:57, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

I would be happy to undertake this review; it will be a humbling experience to get to review the work of such a fine editor! I will hopefully have full comments to you by this evening. Cdtew (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Well hearing that from a damn good editor himself, I think I'm the one that's humbled -- tks, and I look fwd to the review! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:21, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, please, you've been at this ages longer than I have. And I'm one of those guys that tends to stick to the "stone age" of warfare, so I'm branching out of my comfort zone to lend a hand in the reviewing process since just about everyone who reviews my work is stepping outside of their preferred realms. Cdtew (talk) 00:34, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments: Cdtew (talk)

• Alright, here's where my absolute lack of expertise in the subject matter comes in handy. Know that most of my comments are me looking at this as a lay reader, and generally address 3a, but naturally there's no need to violate 3b in the process. I read through the entire article, which, by the way, is immensely well-written, and thorough as can be, but still am not sure what the men assigned to the No. 114 actually did at certain points.

• What assignments did they have in WWII? I imagine much of their job consisted of directing fighters (which, I presume, had no radar interface of their own) towards Japanese aircraft, or bombers toward targets. That's just my assumption, and a reader with even less (if that's possible) knowledge might be left confused. Also, please correct me if I'm wrong.

• Yes, it was an air defence role, specifically ground control of fighters to targets. The sources are a bit esoteric but will see if I can't prise loose a bit more on their tasks without going into OR territory... :-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:46, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

• How did they register a kill on 31 October '43? In other words, its unclear to me how the No. 114 takes credit for a kill by an aircraft in what seems to be another unit.

• Heh, the main source offers no more than what I've said, though clearly it means the unit guided the fighter into the interception. However another source I have at least mentions "ground control interception" so I think I can safely elaborate here... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:46, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

• "failed to be offloaded" - This may be an idiosyncrasy of Australian English, but the use of passive here might make this statement less clear (only change if you feel like it/if your sources permit)
  • Actually it's almost funny, seems the boat left before all the gear was unloaded - will clarify... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:46, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
• What is a GCI role (for the uninformed like myself) - as mentioned in the Malaya section?
  • I'd hoped "ground control interception" would be enough to explain -- the source says no more... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:46, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
• What is TADS?
  • Just the name of a system (hence the capital letters) -- will see if I can find more on it. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:46, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Otherwise, fabulously well-written with no apparent problems in cites, images, or format. This meets all criteria, but I'll wait to pass to see if any of the above can/should be addressed. Cdtew (talk) 00:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Tks mate! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:46, 19 June 2013 (UTC)