Talk:M50 Ontos

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the M50 Ontos article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Land vehicles / Technology / Weaponry / Asian / North America / Southeast Asia / 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 land vehicles task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Asian military history task force
	North American military history task force
	Southeast Asian military history task force
	United States military history task force

United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

name

why it can reduce a word which means etimologically "the being" (compare the greeks)to a object for destroying? Francesco Palmirotta, fpalmir@tin.it

They called it "Ontos" because "Ontos" means "The Thing" because look at it! The name suits it! Its a strange looking beast! It could be a robot from a Sci-Fi movie its so odd looking. --Theredstarswl 01:17, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

service section

I commented the following sentence out since it makes no sense at all.

In Operation De Soto, history was made when a platoon moved 25 miles south of Quan Ngai City carried in slings underneath the large CH-53 Sea Stallion helicopter.

Also, the reference for it shouldn't be flicker but the news paper it came from.Imaslee pviking ( talk ) 02:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Popularity in service

To say that the Ontos was "particularly liked" by it's crews is debatable. They were rather slow, difficult to reload, and the armor was quite thin (if an Ontos ever hit a mine, you would be hard-pressed to even find all the pieces).172.190.126.69 (talk) 05:46, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources please?

This article is largely unreferenced; few sources metioned (none printed) and even less inline citations. Can anyone please help here? ThanksDPdH (talk) 23:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

units on display

I used to volunteer on China Lake Naval, restoring aircraft for display, and I don't ever remember seeing an Ontos anywhere. That was about 5-6 years ago. --Nkuzmik (talk) 10:44, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

105 mm or 106 mm

I'd like to start a discussion so we can reach a consensus concerning how we should refer to the caliber of the M40 recoilless rifles the Ontos uses. My understanding is the rounds were designated 106 mm to prevent confusion with another weapon. Since the actual caliber of the M40 is 105 mm I vote we refer to it as such in the article. - Samf4u (talk) 19:05, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My two cents - the same as in M40 recoilless rifle - that is 105mm throughout most of the article, but do add a blurb about the 105/106 issue (as there are, I assume, plenty of sources calling it 106mm per the original official specs (which were off on purpose for compatibility reasons)).Icewhiz (talk) 19:53, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, Icewhiz's solution seems good to me. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:52, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input Icewhiz and AustralianRupert. Made the changes but not 100 percent happy with it. If you feel you can improve I'll thank you for it. - Samf4u (talk) 16:39, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]