Template talk:Aircraft specifications

"alt" parameters in template should be removed

The most common usage for specifying the "alt" parameters of this template is to specify the same parameter as main in a different unit. Not infrequently, the unit conversion for the parameter is incorrect. Example 850 km/h is approx 530 mph, but one aircraft page had:

|max speed main= 850 km/h
|max speed alt= 600 mph

A better option would be to remove the "main" and "alt" versions of the same parameter, keep just one and use Template:convert, which will automatically yield the same result and avoid good-faith mistakes:

|max speed = {{convert|850|km/h|ph}}

This will keep good-faith authors from shooting themselves in the foot.User:skcpublic (talk) 02:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Rotor switch

When a user selects the rotor switch while filling in the specifications, any alternate use of the propeller descriptions and dimensions should either be disabled, since the rotors are the wings of the helicopter, or partially allowed with a rotor heading rather than the current propeller heading. --Born2flie (talk) 14:21, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Can you give an example of what it does at the moment that it shouldn't do, so we can see the problem. If we do alter it, will there be any effect when the aircraft has both rotor and propeller (as in some gyrodynes)? GraemeLeggett (talk) 15:50, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Aerospecs template

I saw a merge tag on {{Aerospecs}}, and a post on its talkpage suggests that this {{Aircraft specifications}} template is a more modern version of that one. Is that true? And if so, would it make sense to merge them? Debresser (talk) 05:37, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Cant see any merge tags anywhere? both templates are being used by different authors with Aircraft specifications being used on 3335 articles and Aerospecs on 2689 dont see any value in trying to merge them if they both work. I suspect merging the code so they both work from the same template may be complicated but I am not an expert. MilborneOne (talk) 13:27, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I removed the merge tags. If they are compatible, it makes sense to merge them, as a rule. After all, it seems they are meant to fulfill the same function.

After looking at the code and the documentation, I'd say that they are more or less equal. If a merge would be done, some parameters would have to be added, whatever way one would merge them. Debresser (talk) 15:46, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

There is also {{Aircraft specs}} which is more recent again - the different templates have different attributes - any discussion about merging them or depreceating templates would need a much wider forum than here. I suspect it would be hellishly difficult to automatically convert one template to the other, with manual changover probably being needed.Nigel Ish (talk) 17:50, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

There is some complex history to the three templates, reflecting different opinions about the extent of the automation of unit conversions and presentation of the specification. aircraft specifications was the first to be adopted by the project. aircraft specs is aerospecs developed to make it more like aircraft specifications. I believe aerospecs was originally drawn up for glider aircraft parameters. it's all there in the project talkpage archives somewhere. As said any discussion about one or other taking precedence needs to be done elsewhere. GraemeLeggett (talk) 17:58, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I think it would not be hard at all. One template should be selected, its parameters enriched with parameters it is missing in comparison with the other templates, including alternative names of the same parameters. In a second phase, alternative names could be eliminated. It is just a considerable amount of work to be done, that is all. Debresser (talk)

Not a simple task at all, because the templates don't simply display the same data - for example "aircraft specifications" relys on every field having its units filled in manually with data being added to main and alt fields, with "aerospecs" having individual fields for metric and imperial units (e.g. |length m=, |length ft=, |length in=, with the user filling in all of these fields, and in aircraft specs the user fills in just one of them and the and the template works out the others using vconvert - any changeover process will need a great deal of intelligence.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:18, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed, but forgot about that. Conversions are always a pain in the behind. If just the whole world would use the metric system. Debresser (talk) 18:24, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Savoia-Marchetti SM.81

Hello. There's a problem with the "specifications" section ("Performance when fitted with Alfa Romeo 125 engines" subsection) of this article and i don't know how to fix it. I know nothing about templates and I thought I'd better report it here. --92.154.149.104 (talk) 08:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Thank you for reporting the problem.

David Wilson (talk · cont) 11:15, 15 January 2012 (UTC)