Talk:Petlyakov Pe-8

the only four-engined bomber the USSR used during the war

didn't they also used extensively the old TB-3 which also had 4 engines?

Yes, they did. Pe-8 was the only 4-engine bomber built during the war. While TB-3 were extensively used in the early days of the war, their role reduced to cargo flights during it. --jno 11:14, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

--

Data quoted from http://www.aviation.ru/Pe/#8 by the owner of aviation.ru --

I feel that the TB-3 should be mentioned somewhere in the article.

"BAP" term

Folks, I aint sure it's right to translate "BAP" as "bomber wing".

BAP is a transliteration of russian БАП which is stand for Bombardirovochny Avia Polk (бомбардировочный авиаполк). Hence, P here is for polk which is usually translated to english as regiment.

On the other hand, the term wing as couple of squadrons will match the polk in this meaning...

--jno 11:16, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

4 vs 5 tons of bombs

I believe, "it's not a bug, it's a feature". 4 tons was the normal load. 5 tons stated for the fact of 5-tons bombs using, I think. --jno 19:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Early history of the Pe-8

Actually, the Pe-8 was orignally developed as the ANT-42/TB-7 by the Tupolev Design Bureau in 1934. When production rights were granted to Petlyakov, it was redesignated the Pe-8. The Pe-8 made her first flight on December 27, 1936; the second protoype first flew a year later. Therefore, add this information to this article.

Hm... Petlyakov was the leader of TB-7 project being an emploee of Tupolev, then separated to the production plant. It should be rephrased in english... --jno 12:10, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

The aircraft was known as the TB-7 until Petlyakov's death in 1942 when it was renamed in his honor. - Emt147 ^Burninate! 02:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Soviet Air Raid on Berlin, 1941

http://zhukov.mitsi.com/sovietbombers.htm

We should consider doing a whole Wikipedia topic on this battle. It's a fantastic read and very little known about the Soviet strategic bomber force in World War II.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Petlyakov Pe-8/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

  The book Air Power by Bill Gunston and others (compilation of various Purnell/Phoebus History of the World Wars titles) claims Tupelev designed the plane and Petlyakov "prepared it for series production" in 1939. Does this gel with any of your sources?

  Both Gunston's Encyclopaedia and Gordon specifically state that the task of meeting the requirement was given to the Tupolev OKB which assigned it to a brigade led by Petlyakov. I've rewritten the statement to clarify things a bit.

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

  I'm not sure the Varients section works; it might be better merging the first para into Design & Development and the rest into Operational History, which could be subdivided into WWII and Post-War as I feel the post-war info should appear chronologically after the wartime history.

  Since John Taylor isn't linked, best describe him, e.g. "military historian John Taylor". Also I assume he is synonymous with the Michael J.H. Taylor in the References - best make the name the same in both instances...

  I have identified him. They appear to be two people, father and son. Jehochman ^Talk 14:34, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

  I've followed Ian's suggestion and merged the Variants section into the others. And deleted the whole PS-42 claim since I haven't actually seen the book in question. Gunston and Gordon make absolutely no mention of any airliner version so I think that Taylor was simply speculating or was confused by the ON versions.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

• It is stable.

  No edit wars etc.:

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

  a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

  We should have alt text in images.

  I've taken care of this. Jehochman ^Talk 14:24, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

  All up very good, if you can respond the the above we should be able to pass soon. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I saw this pop up on my watchlist, so I've taken the liberty of butting in. Jehochman ^Talk 14:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Satisfied with responses/actions so consider this passed for GA - well done! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

PS-42?

1) While Jane's Encyclopedia of Aviation does claim that it is "believed" that there was a 70 passenger version of the TB-7, the claim appears to have not been made by John W. R. Taylor, who is not listed as the editor or a contributor to the book, which was edited by Michael Taylor (definately a different person).

2) There is a reference to what appears to be this project on p85 of Duffy, Paul (1996). Tupolev: The Man and His Aircraft. Shrewsbury, UK: Airlife. ISBN 1 85310 728 X. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help), although the designation PS-42 is not mentioned and it is suggested that the aircraft was not built.Nigel Ish (talk) 15:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I've dropped all mention of it for reasons outlined in the GAR.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:49, 28 November 2009 (UTC)