This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why was this moved from the more common usage, not to mention naming convention Laird Super Solution. Is there an over-riding reason for it, if not please move it back as it wil cancel out a lot of double re-directs Petebutt ( talk) 17:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC) I can't see any reason why the company's name should be omitted in this case, when it is used for all other aircraft - renamed page back to what it should have been. NiD.29 ( talk) 04:10, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm not convinced the engine was an R-985 as this engine was only just entering production as the aircraft was being built is there any concrete evidence for it as opposed to an R-1340. Petebutt ( talk) 17:22, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why was this moved from the more common usage, not to mention naming convention Laird Super Solution. Is there an over-riding reason for it, if not please move it back as it wil cancel out a lot of double re-directs Petebutt ( talk) 17:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC) I can't see any reason why the company's name should be omitted in this case, when it is used for all other aircraft - renamed page back to what it should have been. NiD.29 ( talk) 04:10, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm not convinced the engine was an R-985 as this engine was only just entering production as the aircraft was being built is there any concrete evidence for it as opposed to an R-1340. Petebutt ( talk) 17:22, 13 November 2011 (UTC)