This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
The USPS does not own any aircraft and has not for many years.
I'm a bit surprised at your enthusiasm for reverting these additions. With a few hours work I'm sure I can come up with some cites, but is it really worth it? What I stated is and has been known by professional pilots for 30 years and, IMHO scarcely qualifies as original research on my part. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grumpyoldgeek ( talk • contribs) 18:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Read what I said. Grumpyoldgeek ( talk) 02:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Here is a thread on a professional pilot's forum that I initiated to discuss the issue. Please advise if and how this can be incorporated into the B727 page.
pprune.org B727 sinkrate accident discussion Grumpyoldgeek ( talk) 00:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
As far as 5 fatal crashes in the first six months, it might take some work to find them, but I'm sure there were stories written in newspapers or magazines at that time. They would be fine to source the accidents and investigations, and a number of publishers have online archives going back pretty far, so it might not be that dificult to do. - BillCJ ( talk) 04:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
For what it is worth at this late date, here are the first 5 crashes of 727s:
1965
1966
Note that the time spread is about 15 months, not 6 months as speculated above. 65.37.66.238 ( talk) 09:51, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
The Boeing 727 is used as a cargo plane by the Colombian Air Force can someone correct the military operators? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.118.135.111 ( talk) 13:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
How many liters is 100.000 lb jet fuel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.50.196 ( talk) 21:43, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:Mexicana-LAX-radar.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:06, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Added a paragraph under Operational History about the 727's use on rough air strips (using First Air as an example). Not sure where the best place to put this, but the high mounted engines do make the aircraft a good candidate for gravel and/or ice runways. I have flown the flight from YRB to YOW myself, and know that First Air continues to use the aircraft on this route. Hans Johnson 194.137.210.183 ( talk) 19:59, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
The article does not state the passenger capasity of the aeroplane. This should be added by someone who knows it. Hkultala ( talk) . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hkultala ( talk • contribs) 18:32, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm curious whether or not anyone things that it is worth mention that Middle Tenn state university has a 727 that was donated by Fedex to the aerospace program. Reg N117FE. It however is stuck at Murfreesboro mun airport. I've been told that that for 2 reasons 1st the runway is too short and that the plane exceedes the max weight that they belie the runway and taxiways can support -- T18 ( talk) 15:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
It seems to me that the second paragraph under "Noise" and the last paragraph under "Operational history" say largely the same thing. Since both paragraphs concern the reasons for the aircraft's retirement, I think they should be combined under "Operational history". Thoughts? Carguychris ( talk) 18:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
US Airways used to use a large number of both 727 100's and 727 200's, back when they were called both Allegany Airlines, and US Air. I believe that Mohawk Airlines also used the 727, prior to being purchased by Allegany. I've personally flown on them many times as a child! They were a very good plane for what they were intended - a short haul, low occupancy plane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DansNowHere ( talk • contribs) 03:44, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
An IP user added comments to the civil operators list based on other wikipedia articles here. I reverted this edit as other wiki pages are not reliable sources. Also, I don't think this was needed as sentence states August 2009, matching the Flight International reference. - Fnlayson ( talk) 19:13, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Midwest Airlines is listed as a user of several 727's. AFAIK (and according to the Wiki article on the airline) Midwest never operated 727's. They did have a fleet of 717's however. N9jig ( talk) 01:23, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Kalitta Charters II does operate a fleet of (5) 727-200 aircraft in an all cargo configuration. The webpage states 3 but is out of date. http://www.kalittacharters.com/urgent.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 727driver ( talk • contribs) 23 May 2010
How do they compare with other models? 67.243.7.240 ( talk) 00:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
I propose that the C-22 article be merged with this article, as the C-22s were virtually stock 727s with little modification and the subject could be adequately covered at Boeing 727, improving that article. Petebutt ( talk) 04:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Ihave removed this table as there is already a graph there
1983 | 1982 | 1981 | 1980 | 1979 | 1978 | 1977 | 1976 | 1975 | 1974 | 1973 | 1972 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 11 | 38 | 68 | 98 | 125 | 133 | 113 | 50 | 88 | 92 | 119 |
1971 | 1970 | 1969 | 1968 | 1967 | 1966 | 1965 | 1964 | 1963 | 1962 | 1961 | 1960 |
26 | 48 | 64 | 66 | 125 | 149 | 187 | 83 | 20 | 10 | 37 | 80 |
1984 | 1983 | 1982 | 1981 | 1980 | 1979 | 1978 | 1977 | 1976 | 1975 | 1974 | 1973 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
8 | 11 | 26 | 94 | 131 | 136 | 118 | 67 | 61 | 91 | 91 | 92 |
1972 | 1971 | 1970 | 1969 | 1968 | 1967 | 1966 | 1965 | 1964 | 1963 | 1962 | 1961 |
41 | 33 | 55 | 114 | 160 | 155 | 135 | 111 | 95 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
One or the other but not both! Petebutt ( talk) 09:48, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Someone added a split tag to the Accidents and incidents section in this article. This seems like a reasonable suggestion given the numerous accident entries in the article. - Fnlayson ( talk) 18:40, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
The specs section says the maximum cruise speed is "Mach 0.9 (685.1 mph)" and typical cruise "599 mph (521 kn)". As a fairly minor point, the units there should be consistent. More significantly, the quoted 685mph seems extremely high. Compare, for example, the maximum speed of the 747-400 series, quoted as "Mach 0.92 (614 mph [...])" — a higher Mach number but lower speed in mph. Strictly speaking, Mach number of a particular speed depends on air temperature so it is technically possible that these figures are both correct, if they refer to different temperatures. But the claim of 685.1mph seems implausibly fast: I had a quick look through the current offerings by Boeing and Airbus and none of them quotes a maximum cruise speed higher than that figure of 614mph. Dricherby ( talk) 18:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
The first flight of Boeing 727 was recorded in Wiki on 9th Feb 1963 whilst the introduction of Boeing 727 with the Eastern Airlines was recorded as in Feb 1964. Is this normal i.e. the first flight was to fly to wherever the Eastern Airlines was domiciled and that took a good 300+ calendar days?
An explanation would be appreciated. Winniechui ( talk) 04:41, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
This YT video shows a Mexicana B727 fitted with RATO. There were only 12 727-200s that were built with the JATO provision and they were actually the more powerful 727-200 Advanced versions. Mexicana was in a unique position of serving several high-altitude airports in its network where the 727-200 as built would have been payload restricted to account for the possibility of the loss of one of the three engines at takeoff. Mexicana took delivery of twelve 727-200s that got around this limitation by having a JATO installation in the lower aft fuselage just behind the wings. These aircraft could be identified by having a shallow dorsal fairing ahead of the #2 intake that accommodated some of the rerouted avionics and air conditioning ducting that was displaced by the JATO provision. Without the JATO, the aircraft would have to be payload restricted to account for the need to reach a safe altitude in the event of an engine loss after committing to takeoff. By having the JATO provision, Mexicana could operate its 727-200s at full payload. In the event of a loss of engine at past V1, the JATO unit would fire and allow the heavily-laden jet to reach a safe altitude and get aerodynamically cleaned up. (unashamedly pinched from PPRuNe) Kitbag ( talk) 10:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
FedEx donated one of its planes for use as an aircraft emergency training facility at Albany International Airport. I'm not sure this is notable enough for the article, but I thought it was interesting enough to share. http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-local/article/Albany-airport-applies-for-FEMA-grant-for-mock-6393929.php — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.0.130.202 ( talk) 12:41, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
"An unusual feature of the fuselage is the 10 inch difference between the lower lobe forward and aft of the wing as the higher fuselage height of the center section was simply retained towards the rear". Huh ? Rcbutcher ( talk) 04:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello.
I noted, that it's mentioned nowhere in the article, that the 727 is one of the two aircrafts that have an escape door at the bottom. (I have no idea, which one the other aircraft is. ) That's the way how Dan Cooper escaped. -- S536870912 ( talk) 17:13, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
After the DB Cooper episode Boeing designed a device called the Cooper Vane that prevented the rear airstairs to be opened in flight. This is depicted under the "Design" section of the main article. N9jig ( talk) 20:33, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Boeing 727. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:11, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi all, would anyone object to updating the infobox picture with one that is similar angle but shows the landing gear? The resolution is quite similar (aka pretty good for 727 photos on wiki). Besides showing the landing gear (as many other infobox photos of aircraft do), the newer photo has a bit more detail (you can see more regarding the windows, wing-mounted beacons, vents on engines etc. -- a bit sharper?), and the highlights are not as washed out. It also has a slightly better view of the tail-mounted #2 engine, and it helps that the tail livery is not as dark so more details can be seen.
Regards, SynergyStar ( talk) 17:36, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Boeing 727. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:58, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
@
BilCat: At
[1] I changed The 727 is Boeing's only trijet aircraft.
to The 727 is the only Boeing-designed commercial trijet aircraft.
, and was reverted. The statement was not completely accurate as it stood (it is neither current production, nor the only production), nor was it cited; The ref explained, but made little of, one of the exceptions (the five years of MD-11 production by Boeing-owned MD), but it didn't mention the X-48/BWB. So, instead of just removing the statement, I qualified it and updated the ref with some missing details. While I was at it, I added more info about the other trijet designs they considered, since it was in a footnote anyway, and does not distract from the flow of the lede. Alternate suggestions? —[
AlanM1(
talk)]— 01:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Boeing’s only trijet, so it might not be acceptable as a source. - BilCat ( talk) 07:30, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
The proposed picture faces away from the text in default layout but it seems worth it to me.-- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 11:21, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
I copied those in commons and trimmed bad film scans or posters and added captions. The black & white pictures are neat but convey an older feeling than necessary, the 727 isn't a WW2 era plane. The three other (Planet Airways, Champion Air and Aviogenex) are interesting but a bit level and don't really give a view of the wing. Better than the Turkish above but not really than the current Ariana Afghan Airlines, and not as interesting as the Iberia.-- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 07:22, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
For the Iberia pic: 1 proposition, 1 Not sure, 1 best contender, 1 best of the bunch, and significantly better than the current one, so I'll go ahead and change it.-- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 21:42, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
The USPS does not own any aircraft and has not for many years.
I'm a bit surprised at your enthusiasm for reverting these additions. With a few hours work I'm sure I can come up with some cites, but is it really worth it? What I stated is and has been known by professional pilots for 30 years and, IMHO scarcely qualifies as original research on my part. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grumpyoldgeek ( talk • contribs) 18:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Read what I said. Grumpyoldgeek ( talk) 02:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Here is a thread on a professional pilot's forum that I initiated to discuss the issue. Please advise if and how this can be incorporated into the B727 page.
pprune.org B727 sinkrate accident discussion Grumpyoldgeek ( talk) 00:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
As far as 5 fatal crashes in the first six months, it might take some work to find them, but I'm sure there were stories written in newspapers or magazines at that time. They would be fine to source the accidents and investigations, and a number of publishers have online archives going back pretty far, so it might not be that dificult to do. - BillCJ ( talk) 04:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
For what it is worth at this late date, here are the first 5 crashes of 727s:
1965
1966
Note that the time spread is about 15 months, not 6 months as speculated above. 65.37.66.238 ( talk) 09:51, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
The Boeing 727 is used as a cargo plane by the Colombian Air Force can someone correct the military operators? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.118.135.111 ( talk) 13:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
How many liters is 100.000 lb jet fuel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.50.196 ( talk) 21:43, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:Mexicana-LAX-radar.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:06, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Added a paragraph under Operational History about the 727's use on rough air strips (using First Air as an example). Not sure where the best place to put this, but the high mounted engines do make the aircraft a good candidate for gravel and/or ice runways. I have flown the flight from YRB to YOW myself, and know that First Air continues to use the aircraft on this route. Hans Johnson 194.137.210.183 ( talk) 19:59, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
The article does not state the passenger capasity of the aeroplane. This should be added by someone who knows it. Hkultala ( talk) . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hkultala ( talk • contribs) 18:32, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm curious whether or not anyone things that it is worth mention that Middle Tenn state university has a 727 that was donated by Fedex to the aerospace program. Reg N117FE. It however is stuck at Murfreesboro mun airport. I've been told that that for 2 reasons 1st the runway is too short and that the plane exceedes the max weight that they belie the runway and taxiways can support -- T18 ( talk) 15:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
It seems to me that the second paragraph under "Noise" and the last paragraph under "Operational history" say largely the same thing. Since both paragraphs concern the reasons for the aircraft's retirement, I think they should be combined under "Operational history". Thoughts? Carguychris ( talk) 18:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
US Airways used to use a large number of both 727 100's and 727 200's, back when they were called both Allegany Airlines, and US Air. I believe that Mohawk Airlines also used the 727, prior to being purchased by Allegany. I've personally flown on them many times as a child! They were a very good plane for what they were intended - a short haul, low occupancy plane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DansNowHere ( talk • contribs) 03:44, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
An IP user added comments to the civil operators list based on other wikipedia articles here. I reverted this edit as other wiki pages are not reliable sources. Also, I don't think this was needed as sentence states August 2009, matching the Flight International reference. - Fnlayson ( talk) 19:13, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Midwest Airlines is listed as a user of several 727's. AFAIK (and according to the Wiki article on the airline) Midwest never operated 727's. They did have a fleet of 717's however. N9jig ( talk) 01:23, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Kalitta Charters II does operate a fleet of (5) 727-200 aircraft in an all cargo configuration. The webpage states 3 but is out of date. http://www.kalittacharters.com/urgent.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 727driver ( talk • contribs) 23 May 2010
How do they compare with other models? 67.243.7.240 ( talk) 00:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
I propose that the C-22 article be merged with this article, as the C-22s were virtually stock 727s with little modification and the subject could be adequately covered at Boeing 727, improving that article. Petebutt ( talk) 04:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Ihave removed this table as there is already a graph there
1983 | 1982 | 1981 | 1980 | 1979 | 1978 | 1977 | 1976 | 1975 | 1974 | 1973 | 1972 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 11 | 38 | 68 | 98 | 125 | 133 | 113 | 50 | 88 | 92 | 119 |
1971 | 1970 | 1969 | 1968 | 1967 | 1966 | 1965 | 1964 | 1963 | 1962 | 1961 | 1960 |
26 | 48 | 64 | 66 | 125 | 149 | 187 | 83 | 20 | 10 | 37 | 80 |
1984 | 1983 | 1982 | 1981 | 1980 | 1979 | 1978 | 1977 | 1976 | 1975 | 1974 | 1973 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
8 | 11 | 26 | 94 | 131 | 136 | 118 | 67 | 61 | 91 | 91 | 92 |
1972 | 1971 | 1970 | 1969 | 1968 | 1967 | 1966 | 1965 | 1964 | 1963 | 1962 | 1961 |
41 | 33 | 55 | 114 | 160 | 155 | 135 | 111 | 95 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
One or the other but not both! Petebutt ( talk) 09:48, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Someone added a split tag to the Accidents and incidents section in this article. This seems like a reasonable suggestion given the numerous accident entries in the article. - Fnlayson ( talk) 18:40, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
The specs section says the maximum cruise speed is "Mach 0.9 (685.1 mph)" and typical cruise "599 mph (521 kn)". As a fairly minor point, the units there should be consistent. More significantly, the quoted 685mph seems extremely high. Compare, for example, the maximum speed of the 747-400 series, quoted as "Mach 0.92 (614 mph [...])" — a higher Mach number but lower speed in mph. Strictly speaking, Mach number of a particular speed depends on air temperature so it is technically possible that these figures are both correct, if they refer to different temperatures. But the claim of 685.1mph seems implausibly fast: I had a quick look through the current offerings by Boeing and Airbus and none of them quotes a maximum cruise speed higher than that figure of 614mph. Dricherby ( talk) 18:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
The first flight of Boeing 727 was recorded in Wiki on 9th Feb 1963 whilst the introduction of Boeing 727 with the Eastern Airlines was recorded as in Feb 1964. Is this normal i.e. the first flight was to fly to wherever the Eastern Airlines was domiciled and that took a good 300+ calendar days?
An explanation would be appreciated. Winniechui ( talk) 04:41, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
This YT video shows a Mexicana B727 fitted with RATO. There were only 12 727-200s that were built with the JATO provision and they were actually the more powerful 727-200 Advanced versions. Mexicana was in a unique position of serving several high-altitude airports in its network where the 727-200 as built would have been payload restricted to account for the possibility of the loss of one of the three engines at takeoff. Mexicana took delivery of twelve 727-200s that got around this limitation by having a JATO installation in the lower aft fuselage just behind the wings. These aircraft could be identified by having a shallow dorsal fairing ahead of the #2 intake that accommodated some of the rerouted avionics and air conditioning ducting that was displaced by the JATO provision. Without the JATO, the aircraft would have to be payload restricted to account for the need to reach a safe altitude in the event of an engine loss after committing to takeoff. By having the JATO provision, Mexicana could operate its 727-200s at full payload. In the event of a loss of engine at past V1, the JATO unit would fire and allow the heavily-laden jet to reach a safe altitude and get aerodynamically cleaned up. (unashamedly pinched from PPRuNe) Kitbag ( talk) 10:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
FedEx donated one of its planes for use as an aircraft emergency training facility at Albany International Airport. I'm not sure this is notable enough for the article, but I thought it was interesting enough to share. http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-local/article/Albany-airport-applies-for-FEMA-grant-for-mock-6393929.php — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.0.130.202 ( talk) 12:41, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
"An unusual feature of the fuselage is the 10 inch difference between the lower lobe forward and aft of the wing as the higher fuselage height of the center section was simply retained towards the rear". Huh ? Rcbutcher ( talk) 04:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello.
I noted, that it's mentioned nowhere in the article, that the 727 is one of the two aircrafts that have an escape door at the bottom. (I have no idea, which one the other aircraft is. ) That's the way how Dan Cooper escaped. -- S536870912 ( talk) 17:13, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
After the DB Cooper episode Boeing designed a device called the Cooper Vane that prevented the rear airstairs to be opened in flight. This is depicted under the "Design" section of the main article. N9jig ( talk) 20:33, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Boeing 727. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:11, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi all, would anyone object to updating the infobox picture with one that is similar angle but shows the landing gear? The resolution is quite similar (aka pretty good for 727 photos on wiki). Besides showing the landing gear (as many other infobox photos of aircraft do), the newer photo has a bit more detail (you can see more regarding the windows, wing-mounted beacons, vents on engines etc. -- a bit sharper?), and the highlights are not as washed out. It also has a slightly better view of the tail-mounted #2 engine, and it helps that the tail livery is not as dark so more details can be seen.
Regards, SynergyStar ( talk) 17:36, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Boeing 727. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:58, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
@
BilCat: At
[1] I changed The 727 is Boeing's only trijet aircraft.
to The 727 is the only Boeing-designed commercial trijet aircraft.
, and was reverted. The statement was not completely accurate as it stood (it is neither current production, nor the only production), nor was it cited; The ref explained, but made little of, one of the exceptions (the five years of MD-11 production by Boeing-owned MD), but it didn't mention the X-48/BWB. So, instead of just removing the statement, I qualified it and updated the ref with some missing details. While I was at it, I added more info about the other trijet designs they considered, since it was in a footnote anyway, and does not distract from the flow of the lede. Alternate suggestions? —[
AlanM1(
talk)]— 01:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Boeing’s only trijet, so it might not be acceptable as a source. - BilCat ( talk) 07:30, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
The proposed picture faces away from the text in default layout but it seems worth it to me.-- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 11:21, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
I copied those in commons and trimmed bad film scans or posters and added captions. The black & white pictures are neat but convey an older feeling than necessary, the 727 isn't a WW2 era plane. The three other (Planet Airways, Champion Air and Aviogenex) are interesting but a bit level and don't really give a view of the wing. Better than the Turkish above but not really than the current Ariana Afghan Airlines, and not as interesting as the Iberia.-- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 07:22, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
For the Iberia pic: 1 proposition, 1 Not sure, 1 best contender, 1 best of the bunch, and significantly better than the current one, so I'll go ahead and change it.-- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 21:42, 6 January 2019 (UTC)