Talk:Air battle of Mansoura

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sources[edit]

Are there any other sources for this battle? Most of it is attributed to this site, of whose reliability I'm not sure, and Al-Ahram. I'm asking because none of the sources I've checked mention anything about this battle, and some, such as Pollack's book, which I cited, simply contradict it. Thanks. -- Nudve (talk) 18:26, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are, as far as I know, at least two other sources for this article, but they are not in my possession. I've asked other users to make their contributions to the article. As for Lon Nordeen's statement "ten Arab aircraft" were shot down on the October 14 offensive, with few Israeli losses, is not directly related to the article. This air battle did not occur during the offensive; the offensive had ended by the time the air battle began.--Sherif9282 06:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow, Nice article.. It's nearly the same information mentioned at Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 units in combat p.43 by David Nicolle and Tom Cooper, but this book said that the resulting engagement put 62 MiG-21s against exactly 120 Phantom IIs and Shyhawks.-- Vagueman (talk) 01:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please guys add this book as a reference because I don't know how to add it..

David Nicolle & Tom Cooper (March 25, 2004). Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 units in combat. Osprey Publishing.p.43. ISBN 1 84176 655 0 -- Vagueman (talk) 02:04, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article has alot of perspective from the Egyptian side. Not that anythings wrong with that (at all) but I imagine it misses on an important aspect/s of the battle. Plus, I deleted a line regarding Mubarak's explanation for not engaging the Israeli fighters; I don't see how thats relavent - Adam —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.122.116.113 (talk) 23:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A weird figure[edit]

There's this quote at the end, attr. to Pollack: "...In all, the Egyptians succeeded in shooting down 5-8 Israeli aircraft while losing 172 of their own to Israeli fighters". 172! There's got to be some error there - could someone check the quote's been copied accurately? Shimgray | talk | 00:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nudve added that piece of information to the article. I don't know if its true; its not for me to decide, but I believe Nudve copied that quote correctly. --Sherif9282 (talk) 09:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How odd. The rest of the article seems fairly confident of a figure substantially lower, and various related articles bear it out. If the total was even thought to be anything like as high, you'd expect the Israelis to have mentioned it at the time! Shimgray | talk | 11:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
...right, this might make more sense. I've tracked down Pollack on Google Books, and he does indeed say this exactly. However, as far as I can tell from the section, he's not discussing Oct. 14 specifically, but rather it seems to be about the conflict as a whole. (There's a footnote, but on partial-view I can't see it) This presumably explains the discrepancy... Shimgray | talk | 12:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It certainly is odd. I've added a few words to explain Pollack is speaking of the war as a whole.--Sherif9282 (talk) 06:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's something weird about the whole thing, and I think it might even be a WP:REDFLAG issue. According to the description, with about 160 aircraft, this was one of the largest air battles in history. At 53 minutes, it was also one of the longest. indeed, according to Al-Ahram, it broke (and still holds?) the world record. So I find it odd that it is not mentioned in any history of the was or the Israeli Air Force that I know of. It is evidently supported by one scholar, David Nicolle, who is presumably reliable, but might be a fringe opinion. I'll try and find out more. -- Nudve (talk) 07:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have my doubts concerning the engagement period (of 53 minutes). The battle only really started at 15:30 (when Nicolle uses 15:15 as the starting point of the battle), and ended most likely under 40 minutes. As for the number of aircraft, I believe dogfights in WW2 and probably the Korean War reached such a number. Operation Mole Cricket 19 involved 200 aircraft in all, and I assume the air engagement lasted around an hour, did it not? --Sherif9282 (talk) 12:57, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was the biggest and longest battle between fighter jets in history. The Germans had fighter jets in WW2, but these were not extensively used in combat if at all. ( ΡHARAOH  The Muslim  21:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

I have just removed the 2 planes figure from the infobox. The reason i did so is that such figure is attributed to a source that did not mention the occurrence of the battle. It is just not logic to add a reference that did not mention the subject of an article as a source for its events. Egyptian sources said that the IAF lost more aircraft to the air defense units that day. Also about removing the "in several waves" phrase from the inforbox, that was because of that the info box here is for the total number, and that that information is already illustrated in the article. The EAF aircrafts did come in several waves as well, so it is unnecessary to add that phrase to the infobox, as it is illustrated well in the article. --( ΡHARAOH  The Muslim  13:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added disputed to the figures of losses. There seeems to be enough disagreement to warrant this. - Adam —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.122.116.113 (talk) 23:45, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fiction[edit]

This work of fiction relies principally on two sources. A German article that appears on some blog and another online blog where apparently anyone with a password and user ID can log on and contribute, sort of like Wikipedia. The latter source was written by a fella named Sherif Sharmy who shares the same name as the principle editor of this Wikipedia article. Could be just a coincidence. But irrespective, it’s not a reliable source. It has not been subjected to a vetting process and peer review. The other sources listed are not cited to support facts addressing the specific battle and are rather noted for ancillary issues only, perhaps to give the article a veil of legitimacy.

By contrast, no author or scholarly work of note mentions this battle even in passing. Not Abraham Rabinovich, not Kenneth Pollack, not Zeev Schiff, not Chaim Herzog, not Martin van Creveld, not Edward Luttwak, not George Gawrych, not Bren Adan, not the Insight Team of the London Sunday Times, not Time Life’s the Epic of Flight, Fighting Jets and I don’t even think that Saad El Shazly mentions it. In sum, this article is the stuff of science fiction and not worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 22:08, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Exceptional claims that are contrary to all mainstream scholarly work require exceptional sources and this article is devoid of any. Accordingly, I have tagged the article and may request an RfD--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 01:31, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There are other references given other than those two sources. Have you cross-checked any of them? ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 00:20, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After a lengthy search I have found no mention of this air battle in any non-Egyptian source. In light of the comments on this page by several editors, I have restored the tags that were removed.--Geewhiz (talk) 15:57, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Arab MiG-19-19 and MiG-21 units in combat is a non-Egyptian source. Not being mentioned in other sources is not a valid argument. --Sherif9282 (talk) 17:37, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


I can't believe this has been up for so long[edit]

This article is blatantly made up, it cites Israel as losing more fighters on the 14th than Israel during the entire war according to most sources. The main source appears to be a sketchy online article that doesn't cite any sources.174.111.245.63 (talk) 02:43, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli Sources[edit]

There is also information on this battle from Israeli sources:

  • Aloni, Shlomo (2004). "Israeli F-4 Phantom II Aces". Osprey Publishing. Retrieved 2011-07-23.
  • Gilboa, Chagay (2001-02-01). "The Survivor" (in Hebrew). Israeli Air Force Magazine. Retrieved 2011-07-23.
  • Glik, Yifat (2002-12-01). "Mr. Safety" (in Hebrew). Israeli Air Force Magazine. Retrieved 2011-07-23.

Megaidler (talk) 20:21, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Try Google translation. Megaidler (talk) 07:06, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the word "Mansoura" is highlighted in a document is no proof for the bombastic claims in the lead of this article.--Geewhiz (talk) 06:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Having read the Israeli sources in Hebrew, I can say these points are clear:
  1. A battle did take place
  2. The raid was not only against the Mansura airfield, but also, and perhaps mostly, against Tanta. I could surmise that the Egyptian choice of naming it so related to the meaning of the name and the historical battle that took place there.
  3. Only 2 Israeli jets were lost, one to friendly fire. 2 pilots became POWs, no one died.
  4. Although the airfields were bombed, the overall attack failed
  5. For internal political reasons Mubarak, then the EAF commander, falsified the kill records Valleyofdawn (talk) 15:51, 27 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]

ACIG WP:SPS[edit]

ACIG is a WP:SPS and is not peer-reviewed and therefore does not qualify as a WP:RS. Unfortunately, much of the article's substantive allegations rely on this poor SPS. This article was once nominated for deletion and the problems that existed then, including extremely poor sourcing and possible COI issues have not been remedied or addressed.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 07:04, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Enough changing the result![edit]

The result of this battle is not unclear and it is not an Israeli victory. Israel failed to achieve its strategic goals and had to withdraw because of the Egyptian Air Force and therefore lost, there is no question about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Turnopoems (talk • contribs) 13:32, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It should be agreed that the Israeli air raid failed. But an air battle in which the Egyptians lost to most reliable accounts, twice as many fighter jets as the Israelis is hardly an Egyptian victory. Valleyofdawn (talk) 13:43, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Who said Egypt lost twice as many fighter jets?! what's your source? an Israeli source or a pro Israeli source?! go to Egypt, Mansoura, ask the farmers there what happened to the Israeli air force in that battle, they will tell you the truth which they witnessed, Israel had to withdraw because of the high number of downed aircraft, do you really believe Israel would withdraw just because they lost 2 aircraft out of 160-180 aircraft? Israel lost more than 17 aircraft — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wasteland1 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Low casualties[edit]

Despite supposedly involving very many aircraft, over a lengthy period, the number of casualties is very low. That seems strange.122.59.167.152 (talk) 10:03, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Air battle of Mansoura. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:38, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Air_battle_of_Mansoura&oldid=1204623070"