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 |
So please don't place it on 5th gen lists. Hcobb ( talk) 20:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Egads, it's NGAD now. So I move that we move the article. Do I have a second?
www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2508669/posts But a Boeing official told me the acquisition process for a new fighter for the US Navy and US Air Force has already begun. The navy has renamed its program from F/A-XX to next generation air dominance (NGAD) as it enters the analysis of alternatives stage. The air force, meanwhile, also is starting an alternatives study for an F-22 replacement.
Hcobb ( talk) 15:59, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I noticed that the article claims that speeds of Mach 3-4 would be inhibited by stealth technology, citing the F-22's supercruise speed of Mach 1.8. This isn't its maximum speed, as the article claims, as it is Mach 2.25. Should we just change the claimed max speed, or erase that part of the section, due to the incorrect information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonestar117 ( talk • contribs) 14:40, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Mark those statements that are not carried by the current refs and I'll ref or delete them then. Hcobb ( talk) 19:47, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Hcobb -- It's now been several months since I marked the paragraphs with cite-needed tags, and nothing has been cited. I am planning on deleting them today if they do not get cited. - SidewinderX ( talk) 11:55, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
This article was moved from "F/A-XX" but it appears to be the common name for the programme, should it be moved back? MilborneOne ( talk) 20:08, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
That would seem to violate both WP:OR and WP:CRYSTAL. As it stands right now, they are two separate programs. We can guess that they will be similar or have similar engines, but those are only guesses. -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 05:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
This is several different spins on the issue than our coverage. Do we include Gardner's main points or not? Hcobb ( talk) 13:20, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
This program seems to have gone through several name changes that the page hasn't caught. According to http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing39s-fighting-comeback-359258/, the U.S. Navy program name started as F/A-XX then was changed to NGAD, which the page says now, but was then changed again to air-dominance fighter (ADF). The Air Force program to acquire a sixth-gen fighter is apparently entirely separate and called F-X. This page grouped both those programs together since they are both searching for the same type of aircraft, but the two are not connected. How should this page go regarding the various names and what should be done about the Air Force program? America789 ( talk) 15:58, 13 January 2014 (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 |
So please don't place it on 5th gen lists. Hcobb ( talk) 20:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Egads, it's NGAD now. So I move that we move the article. Do I have a second?
www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2508669/posts But a Boeing official told me the acquisition process for a new fighter for the US Navy and US Air Force has already begun. The navy has renamed its program from F/A-XX to next generation air dominance (NGAD) as it enters the analysis of alternatives stage. The air force, meanwhile, also is starting an alternatives study for an F-22 replacement.
Hcobb ( talk) 15:59, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I noticed that the article claims that speeds of Mach 3-4 would be inhibited by stealth technology, citing the F-22's supercruise speed of Mach 1.8. This isn't its maximum speed, as the article claims, as it is Mach 2.25. Should we just change the claimed max speed, or erase that part of the section, due to the incorrect information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonestar117 ( talk • contribs) 14:40, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Mark those statements that are not carried by the current refs and I'll ref or delete them then. Hcobb ( talk) 19:47, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Hcobb -- It's now been several months since I marked the paragraphs with cite-needed tags, and nothing has been cited. I am planning on deleting them today if they do not get cited. - SidewinderX ( talk) 11:55, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
This article was moved from "F/A-XX" but it appears to be the common name for the programme, should it be moved back? MilborneOne ( talk) 20:08, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
That would seem to violate both WP:OR and WP:CRYSTAL. As it stands right now, they are two separate programs. We can guess that they will be similar or have similar engines, but those are only guesses. -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 05:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
This is several different spins on the issue than our coverage. Do we include Gardner's main points or not? Hcobb ( talk) 13:20, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
This program seems to have gone through several name changes that the page hasn't caught. According to http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing39s-fighting-comeback-359258/, the U.S. Navy program name started as F/A-XX then was changed to NGAD, which the page says now, but was then changed again to air-dominance fighter (ADF). The Air Force program to acquire a sixth-gen fighter is apparently entirely separate and called F-X. This page grouped both those programs together since they are both searching for the same type of aircraft, but the two are not connected. How should this page go regarding the various names and what should be done about the Air Force program? America789 ( talk) 15:58, 13 January 2014 (UTC)