Template talk:Giant aircraft
|WikiProject Aviation / Aircraft||(Rated Template-class)|
If there is a runt in this litter, it is definitely the Brabazon. Or is my understanding of its size as compared to the rest incorrect? For reference, a 777 is bigger in most dimensions, and close in the rest, and it is not lumped in with this group. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 16:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- ah, but what is the definition for inclusion, there isn't one specificied so i went with the fact that of its time it was a giant aircraft (like the Sikorsky Ilya Muromets) was of its time.GraemeLeggett 16:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
It's sort of a loose definition, and I figured that was the reason you included it. I personally vote for including aircraft that are contemporarily considered giants. Otherwise we are basically listing size records in sequential chronological order. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 16:27, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Is it worth putting the decade after each entry so that the historic context can be considered? And on a related note - can the template take the big flying boats eg Princess. GraemeLeggett 16:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree, giant is a highly generalized term. There must be certain accurate technical specifications to qualify certain aircrafts under the category "giant".
I would suggest we could have certain minimum floor space for passenger aircrafts and minimum load capacity for freighters, to be specified to the category.