Talk:Schiebel Camcopter S-100

Category name

I do agree that the category name could be somewhat misleading, as it refers of course not to a work originated by, but rather in the holdings of the museum; and to which the museum has bestowed recognition comparable to that of a major design award. What about shifting this to Category:Industrial design collection of the Museum of Modern Art instead?--Pharos (talk) 16:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Exhibit categories are not really appropriate for aircraft articles, some aircraft types appear in many museums so would be overwhelmeed by such categorisation. Most aircraft articles do have a listing of aircraft on display in museums and I dont have a problem with a mention in the text with a reliable reference, but sorry not a suitable cat. MilborneOne (talk) 17:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, such a list would be appropriate. Good idea. I really question the existence of that category. — Huntster (t @ c) 22:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Operators

Many of them were just trials and not purchases — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.137.89.64 (talk) 22:34, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

IMO the use of Schiebels CAMCOPTER in the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine should me mentioned. I do not know whether OSCE operated these by itself or if they are operated by one/some of the OSCE member states. --77.116.211.12 (talk) 22:25, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

How much does this thing cost?

What's the cost of the Schiebel Camcopter S-100? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.25.65.57 (talk) 09:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Query about the range

Does a range of 180km mean 180km out and 180km back or does it mean 90km out and 90km back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.25.65.117 (talk) 21:16, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

The brochure gives an endurance of around six hours with a typical payload and an economical cruising speed of 55 knots, so running the maths I'm fairly sure that the range data is actually the radius of action, e.g. 90km there and 90km back. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 10:20, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

20 April 2022 shot down

I saw that it has been marked for cite needed and since i personally can see that it's an VM-V and not an S-100 i guess i have to show with pictures that it wasn't an Horizon Air S-100 but rather VM-V helicopter target and make it possible to remove the CN request. The page i will use for images of VM-V is the official homepage "TSNTU "Dynamics" at MAKS-2019: a debut in the field of unmanned aircraft". Dinamika-Avia.ru. АО ЦНТУ «Динамика». I will also use images posted by the Ukraine government of the wreck "Two regular Russian UAVs "Horizon Air S-100" and "Orlan-10" shot down by air defense units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine". For the picture of S-100 i will use the one from this wikipedia article, it should be clear where the images comes from that i will edit to show that it's actually an VM-V and not an S-100. "Analysis of claimed 2022-04-20 S-110 shotdown". shows that it's an VM-V and not an S-100.919181512a (talk) 08:34, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• CAMCOPTER S-100 207.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:51, 24 November 2022 (UTC)