This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Airliner article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The contents in the commercial aircraft article is essentially referring to the same type of aircraft variant, but some information there is salvageable to rule out a complete redirect. A suggested merge is the most reasonable thing to do. ╫ 25 ◀RingADing▶ 19:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC) ╫
There is no mention of the development of airliners here and it seems to concentrate entirely on modern jet types. GraemeLeggett 15:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The article should explain why modern airliners are so uniform. Today tail-engined planes (like DC-9 or Tu-154) become ever more rare. Almost all new designs are twin-engined, low-wing, engines in underwing pods, at least both Airbus and Boeing do this. We have a boring degree of uniformity!
The lack of aerospace diversity is suprising, for example the modern automobile industry has so much variation in car body form, position of engine, drive types, etc.
It looks like airliner-making is in stagnation, we have engineering advances (new material types used mainly), but we have zero scientific advances (new shapes and new propulsion types).
Reasons for this unfortunate situation should be explained in the article. 91.83.12.110 ( talk) 23:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
It would be interesting to add typical speeds and altitudes for airliners. -- Beland ( talk) 04:54, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Evektor is an aircraft manufacturer in Czech Republic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.81.120 ( talk) 14:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
What is the standard operating speed of a jet airliner ? Are they all the same ? Needs some mention about this . Eregli bob ( talk) 07:38, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
The mention of the An-2 is not appropriate in this article: it was never meant as an airliner, though it may occasionally have served the role. The An-2 really belongs to general aviation. Lacking sensible replies, I intend to remove it. Jan olieslagers ( talk) 17:21, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps this can be mentioned and a cruiser-feeder concept page can be made ? See http://www.atc-network.com/News/41331/Futuristic-cruiser-feeder-concept-saves-fuel 91.182.189.103 ( talk) 14:54, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps new aircraft designs such as blended wing body aircraft and other airplanes with other improvements can be mentioned in the article (new article section). Notable are:
109.130.138.81 ( talk) 11:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
References
I have added a graph which shows the dramatic development of the capability of long range airliners. It uses figures from the Wikipedia pages for those aircraft provided they are relevant, exceptions are stated below..
The graph starts in the 1930s as that is arguably when the first aircraft that we would recognize as modern airliners appeared. All aircaft are the first model of their type where possible. There is no point in using a 747-8 as an example of what a 1970s aircraft could do. It is not always easy to find exactly comparable figures, but the aim is to show the large contrast between decades not subtleties between similar aircraft. This is only about the most capable long range aircraft of their time so several notable aircraft like the DC10 and Tristar are not included as they are medium range aircraft. Not all the relevant aircraft are shown, only enough to make the point or the graph gets too cluttered. Concorde is not shown because its speed causes all the other aircraft to bunch up at the bottom of the graph!
www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/brochures_publications/aircraft_families/Airbus-Family-Figures-Mar13.pdf. The 747 page states that it is range at Maximum Take Off Weight, but www.boeing.com/boeing/commercial/747family/pf/pf_classics.page has the same figure and calls it "Maximum Range".
I will improve it or upload the original spreadsheet if requested. Chris.Bristol ( talk) 12:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
In most countries, the specific term "airliner" is not a legal term, just a commonly used word by laymen to describe a particular class of aircraft. As such, I've added a citation needed in the bottom of Airliner#Commuterliners_used_by_regional_airlines_and_air_taxi_operators, where it says that at least 2 engines are needed for an aircraft to be considered an "airliner". 203.198.165.29 ( talk) 02:40, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I compiled some relevant information about real prices : User:Marc_Lacoste/sandbox/Airliner_prices. Do you think it would be better suited in Competition between Airbus and Boeing, in Airliner, Jet Airliner, or another relevant article? Thanks. -- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 16:23, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Added to Competition between Airbus and Boeing -- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 14:10, 28 January 2015 (UTC) thanks-- Naqsh-e hJahan ( talk) 16:02, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Airliner/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Sadly lacking. Most sections ar just a few lines, the descriptions of the different sizes being mainly a listing of aircraft in that category. Need a lot of history to be added. Start -class. |
Last edited at 21:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 06:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Airliner. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
(This was tagged as an RFC until 3 Jun 2020.)
Does WP:CRYSTAL mean that projections of future deliveries in Airliner#Forecasts should be removed from Wikipedia? -- Beland ( talk) 20:28, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
@ Marc Lacoste: Greetings! Regarding this revert: regardless of how long it's been in the article, this is the sort of material which is excluded by the Wikipedia is not a crystal ball policy, since it concerns future events of the type for which there are plenty of reasons to expect they will not come to pass. Exhibit one being the current pandemic, which I just heard people on the radio saying may depress air passenger volume for 4-8 years, and which has already shut down some manufacturing. -- Beland ( talk) 22:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
It is not appropriate for editors to insert their own opinions or analyses) and
forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included. This is exactly the case here : the forecast come from the perfectly reliable Aviation Week & Space Technology, while the original research speculation come from you when you state "there are plenty of reasons to expect they will not come to pass". I agree with you opinion, but as editors, we should not rewrite history (the forecast made in Dec 2018 was accurate in reporting what people sought then) but update it with a new reliable ref. Many are available in Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on aviation. I made the appropriate changes by changing the tense of the prediction. Please add an updated reliable source on delivery projections, but please avoid deleting WP:reliable sources. Thanks.-- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 05:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
Well, that seems like a straightforward third opinion. Since it's been open about a month, I closed the RFC and dropped the section. Thanks! -- Beland ( talk) 04:47, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 18:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
@ Marc Lacoste: Why are you objecting to the removal of the Forecast section again? Though these are updated projections, they are just as unlikely to be accurate as the previous set the RFC above decided to remove. And it's certainly not appropriate for a single editor to take action contradictory to the decision of an RFC. -- Beland ( talk) 05:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Airliner article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The contents in the commercial aircraft article is essentially referring to the same type of aircraft variant, but some information there is salvageable to rule out a complete redirect. A suggested merge is the most reasonable thing to do. ╫ 25 ◀RingADing▶ 19:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC) ╫
There is no mention of the development of airliners here and it seems to concentrate entirely on modern jet types. GraemeLeggett 15:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The article should explain why modern airliners are so uniform. Today tail-engined planes (like DC-9 or Tu-154) become ever more rare. Almost all new designs are twin-engined, low-wing, engines in underwing pods, at least both Airbus and Boeing do this. We have a boring degree of uniformity!
The lack of aerospace diversity is suprising, for example the modern automobile industry has so much variation in car body form, position of engine, drive types, etc.
It looks like airliner-making is in stagnation, we have engineering advances (new material types used mainly), but we have zero scientific advances (new shapes and new propulsion types).
Reasons for this unfortunate situation should be explained in the article. 91.83.12.110 ( talk) 23:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
It would be interesting to add typical speeds and altitudes for airliners. -- Beland ( talk) 04:54, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Evektor is an aircraft manufacturer in Czech Republic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.81.120 ( talk) 14:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
What is the standard operating speed of a jet airliner ? Are they all the same ? Needs some mention about this . Eregli bob ( talk) 07:38, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
The mention of the An-2 is not appropriate in this article: it was never meant as an airliner, though it may occasionally have served the role. The An-2 really belongs to general aviation. Lacking sensible replies, I intend to remove it. Jan olieslagers ( talk) 17:21, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps this can be mentioned and a cruiser-feeder concept page can be made ? See http://www.atc-network.com/News/41331/Futuristic-cruiser-feeder-concept-saves-fuel 91.182.189.103 ( talk) 14:54, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps new aircraft designs such as blended wing body aircraft and other airplanes with other improvements can be mentioned in the article (new article section). Notable are:
109.130.138.81 ( talk) 11:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
References
I have added a graph which shows the dramatic development of the capability of long range airliners. It uses figures from the Wikipedia pages for those aircraft provided they are relevant, exceptions are stated below..
The graph starts in the 1930s as that is arguably when the first aircraft that we would recognize as modern airliners appeared. All aircaft are the first model of their type where possible. There is no point in using a 747-8 as an example of what a 1970s aircraft could do. It is not always easy to find exactly comparable figures, but the aim is to show the large contrast between decades not subtleties between similar aircraft. This is only about the most capable long range aircraft of their time so several notable aircraft like the DC10 and Tristar are not included as they are medium range aircraft. Not all the relevant aircraft are shown, only enough to make the point or the graph gets too cluttered. Concorde is not shown because its speed causes all the other aircraft to bunch up at the bottom of the graph!
www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/brochures_publications/aircraft_families/Airbus-Family-Figures-Mar13.pdf. The 747 page states that it is range at Maximum Take Off Weight, but www.boeing.com/boeing/commercial/747family/pf/pf_classics.page has the same figure and calls it "Maximum Range".
I will improve it or upload the original spreadsheet if requested. Chris.Bristol ( talk) 12:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
In most countries, the specific term "airliner" is not a legal term, just a commonly used word by laymen to describe a particular class of aircraft. As such, I've added a citation needed in the bottom of Airliner#Commuterliners_used_by_regional_airlines_and_air_taxi_operators, where it says that at least 2 engines are needed for an aircraft to be considered an "airliner". 203.198.165.29 ( talk) 02:40, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I compiled some relevant information about real prices : User:Marc_Lacoste/sandbox/Airliner_prices. Do you think it would be better suited in Competition between Airbus and Boeing, in Airliner, Jet Airliner, or another relevant article? Thanks. -- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 16:23, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Added to Competition between Airbus and Boeing -- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 14:10, 28 January 2015 (UTC) thanks-- Naqsh-e hJahan ( talk) 16:02, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Airliner/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Sadly lacking. Most sections ar just a few lines, the descriptions of the different sizes being mainly a listing of aircraft in that category. Need a lot of history to be added. Start -class. |
Last edited at 21:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 06:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Airliner. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
(This was tagged as an RFC until 3 Jun 2020.)
Does WP:CRYSTAL mean that projections of future deliveries in Airliner#Forecasts should be removed from Wikipedia? -- Beland ( talk) 20:28, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
@ Marc Lacoste: Greetings! Regarding this revert: regardless of how long it's been in the article, this is the sort of material which is excluded by the Wikipedia is not a crystal ball policy, since it concerns future events of the type for which there are plenty of reasons to expect they will not come to pass. Exhibit one being the current pandemic, which I just heard people on the radio saying may depress air passenger volume for 4-8 years, and which has already shut down some manufacturing. -- Beland ( talk) 22:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
It is not appropriate for editors to insert their own opinions or analyses) and
forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included. This is exactly the case here : the forecast come from the perfectly reliable Aviation Week & Space Technology, while the original research speculation come from you when you state "there are plenty of reasons to expect they will not come to pass". I agree with you opinion, but as editors, we should not rewrite history (the forecast made in Dec 2018 was accurate in reporting what people sought then) but update it with a new reliable ref. Many are available in Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on aviation. I made the appropriate changes by changing the tense of the prediction. Please add an updated reliable source on delivery projections, but please avoid deleting WP:reliable sources. Thanks.-- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 05:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
Well, that seems like a straightforward third opinion. Since it's been open about a month, I closed the RFC and dropped the section. Thanks! -- Beland ( talk) 04:47, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 18:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
@ Marc Lacoste: Why are you objecting to the removal of the Forecast section again? Though these are updated projections, they are just as unlikely to be accurate as the previous set the RFC above decided to remove. And it's certainly not appropriate for a single editor to take action contradictory to the decision of an RFC. -- Beland ( talk) 05:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)