This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
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
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
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
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
This page started as a simple plan to organize the Curtiss Model names. 10 hours later it became this rather long list. I hope it helps people find the Hawk Aircraft they are looking for out of all the choices of designations. And all I really wanted to do was add a link to the Curtiss F11C Goshawk page. --Colputt04:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Good job putting this together. I fixed some redirects for you: The SC Seahawk already exists, while the F6C Hawk page exists as a redirect to P-1 Hawk. I left F6C Hawk as a redirect as I assume you might be planning on an article on the F6C soon. (There is NO info on the P-1 Hawk page about the F-6C, so a new article on the F6C would probably be the best way to go. - BillCJ15:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, I do like how Piotr Mikołajski adjusted the formatting, it looks much better now. I had tried about three diffrent methods, none looked as good as this one. I agree the F6C should be a seperate page the F6C had a radial engine vs the Vee of the P-1 and was intended for USMC use. I'll look into it. --Colputt15:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)Reply