Talk:Hiller OH-23 Raven

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Aviation: Aircraft / Rotorcraft Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

Start

This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the aircraft project.
	This article is supported by the rotorcraft project.

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was the article was not moved. However, the article was moved in accordance with Wikipedia's Naming conventions (aircraft). --Born2flie 02:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move article

The Hiller model 360 was previously, and is currently produced as the UH-12. It has more of a presence commercially even though it is more popularly known as a military aircraft in aviation circles. I recommend that the article be renamed to one of two options:

Hiller UH-12
Hiller UH-12/OH-23

The former makes the most sense with "Hiller H-23" and "Hiller OH-23", etc. redirecting to the new name. (Born2flie 19:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I'd support Hiller UH-12/H-23. As you stated, it is "more popularly known as a military aircraft in aviation circles", so it makes sense to me to include the military name, in addition to the civil name. - BillCJ 02:11, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Pic position

I had tried that pic below the History header yesterday. However, it left a wide gap between the TOC and the header in my browser (IE7), so I put it above the Intro, and it looked right. - BillCJ 02:11, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked the current configuration of the article in IE7 on mine and it looks the same as in Firefox. Does it still have a gap on yours?

--Born2flie 15:02, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. I view on 800x600, that might make a difference. Does placing the pic above the Intro in the make a difference in your viewing of it? - BillCJ 16:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At 1024x768 when you have both the infobox and the pic at the beginning of the page, the links to edit the lower sections get displaced to much lower in the page. I figured the functionality of the edit links was more important than exactly where the pic placement occurs. I'll have to verify that the same thing occurs in IE7 with your pic location.

--Born2flie 17:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a Firefox phenomenon, possibly Mozilla-wide?

--Born2flie 17:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the links are more important than the gap, so whatever you need to do to get it to work right for the Firefox/Mozillas is fine with me, assuming eveerything is viewable in IE7 also. - BillCJ 18:04, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I put it back into the history section.

--Born2flie 21:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bell or Hiller

quote: all later models featured the "Goldfish bowl" canopy similar to the Bell 47, and also featured the Bell-designed short weighted gyro-stabilizer bar. :

Not true.

The "bowl" is visually similar, yes. The UH-23 never employed Bell design for it's rotor system. Stanley Hiller invented the Rotormatic system, with paddles. This system is very much alive today, Radio Control helicopters use this system almost exclusively.

Pulse Helicopters and Dynamic Aviation are a couple of web sources for images and/or info.

69.29.248.91 17:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged the offending statement for verification. If I can't find a verified source for it, I will remove it myself.

--Born2flie 22:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Variants

An IP editor made this edit (diff) which I reverted because it eliminated some information and chose to group several variants as only "marketing". However, some of the edits to variants were possibly valid, for instance, the editor stated that there was no civilian UH-12D and that UH-12D models are UH-23D aircraft conformed to the type certificate for civilian operation. This seems to be substantiated by the Type certificate (4H10) for the UH-12D. In any event, the edits should be reviewed and incorporated where they are shown to be valid. --Born2flie (talk) 16:58, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

twin or double

The Raven could be armed with twin M37C .30-caliber on the XM1 armament subsystem or twin M60C 7.62 mm machine guns on the M2 armament subsystem. I suggest the Hiller was armed on both sides, so twin machine guns would mean this tiny thing had 4 guns. Is that correct?--WerWil (talk) 12:14, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hiller OH-23 Raven/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

The Wikipedia statement concerning the OH23 Raven Hiller helicopter is incorrect in its statement under

"OPERATIONANL HISTORY" wherin it states "AND ALSO FEATURED THE BELL-DESIGNED SHORT WEIGHTED GYRO-STABILIZER BAR".Although the Arthur M. Young stabilizer bar did provide some stabilization to the Bell 47 ,it was not the same thing as the the Hiller "Rotormatic " system that was used on all Hillers from the late 40's into the mid60's , and later on,prior to ,much later,the Hamilton Standard "L' rotor used on "L" models and FH1100s and OH5As. The Hiller Rotormatic had short paddle devices at right angles to the main rotors which provided such stability that the helicopter could be trimmed to fly hands off for indefinate periods.It also provided the ability to eliminate unintential small control inputs. The Hiller UH12A through UH 12G used this simple system in which the pilot controlled the paddles which in turn controlled the main rotors through gyroscopic precesion .In the early days of helicopters there was no other ship flying which had the stability or the ability to provide less fatigue to pilots until modern systems such as the Hamilton Standard SAS became available. You may refer to Jay Spencer's "Vertical Challenge" page 35 through 38.You may also want to see the photograph of Stan Hiller and Lang Washburn hanging onto the engine mounts over the San Francisco Bay on page 53 with no one in the cockpit. You could not do that with a Bell or a Sikorsky in those days. Thank you for considering my correction.My father was a Proud Master Flight Test Mechanic for Hiller from 1951 through 1966 when the Palo Alto plant was closed and merged to Fairchild in Hagerstown Maryland.These Early designed Hillers are still manufactured in Firebaugh Ca and used throuought Agriculture spraying along with the Bell 47s and are remanufactured at the former Fort Wolters site where many Vietnam Vetrans got their basic training in Texas.These units all still use the simple Famous Rotormatic.

Kevin R. McGuireKevin McGuire 22:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC) 408 2430187 Frunobulax poodle @netzero.net[reply]

Last edited at 01:43, 1 January 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 17:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

What is a "three-place" aircraft...?

The opening sentence states that the Hiller OH-23 is a "three-place" helicopter. What does this mean...? Did someone mean "three-piece" (cockpit, engine, body) perhaps...? Could someone please correct or define what this is supposed to mean...? Thx. Gmeades (talk) 05:22, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's seating space for 3 people. It may mean 3 individual seats, 3 sets of seat belts on a bench seat, or some combination. In this case, I'm not certain which it means, so I'm hesitant to change it. - BilCat (talk) 05:35, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation, BilCat. A bit curious though, for a couple of reasons. One being, of course, why whoever wrote the line didn't say "3-seat" to make their statement clear. But even more curious being the fact that under the "variants" section of the article, it explains that the seating configuration for this model ranged from 2 to 4 seats, depending on the particular variant that was ordered/produced. This would appear to make the statement, regardless of whether it meant seats or seatbelts, to actually be incorrect, and a description more like it being a "2-4 seat, light-observation helicopter" to be more appropriate, perhaps. Gmeades (talk) 06:10, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

“3 place” is a common aviation term maybe we need to make it easier for non pilots to understand what it means ? RobertGary1 (talk) 01:20, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nickname

What is meant by the nickname "Hiller killer?" It should probably be explained in the text.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 14:48, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]