Talk:Verville-Sperry R-3

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:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Source[edit]

link: http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Air_Power/inter_war_period/AP10G1.htm

Airspeed Record?[edit]

Quoted:

For the 1923 Pulitzer, a Curtiss D-12 engine was installed in the plane which eliminated some vibration problems that the H-3 engine had. With the new engine the top speed now was approaching 233 mph. That year a Curtiss biplane was the winner. With Orville Wright officially observing from the ground, Lieutenant Alexander Pearson, Jr. set a World Speed Record of 167.74 mph over a 10-lap course on March 31, 1923 at Wilbur Wright Field.[5]

Is 233 the record or 167?

Nasa-verve (talk) 02:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aero-web links[edit]

This edit by Nasa-verve added two external links to aero-web.org, two pages with scant information about the R-1 and the R-3. The only interesting bit on the R-1 is this composite image which shows two views of the staggerwing biplane. The R-3 page had this and this image. None of these images are accompanied by encyclopedic details such as place, date, circumstances, photographer or artist, publishing media, etc. At WP:ELYES the external links guideline tells us that "sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues" are ones which should be considered for inclusion. The three photos linked above are certainly neutral and accurate but they are not relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject—they are devoid of context. The two external links have no value beyond these images. Binksternet (talk) 16:29, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, good writeup. Nasa-verve (talk) 21:22, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]