Talk:Blended wing body: Difference between revisions
Dispute details |
|||
Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
==Dispute: List of wing body aircraft== |
==Dispute: List of wing body aircraft== |
||
Many aircraft are not BWB aircraft. As stated earlier in article, "having no clear dividing line between the wings and the main body of the craft." For example, the XP-67 and RQ-3A clearly have fuselages. Further, the internal links to some of the aircraft, like the RQ-170, distinctly state they are flying wings and directly conflicts with their inclusion on this list. A citation should be supplied to verify inclusion on the list rather that appearing as an inclusion on the basis of an individual's opinion.[[User:Jleipold|Jleipold]] ([[User talk:Jleipold|talk]]) 23: |
Many aircraft are not BWB aircraft. As stated earlier in article, "having no clear dividing line between the wings and the main body of the craft." For example, the XP-67 and RQ-3A clearly have fuselages. Further, the internal links to some of the aircraft, like the RQ-170, distinctly state they are flying wings and directly conflicts with their inclusion on this list. A citation should be supplied to verify inclusion on the list rather that appearing as an inclusion on the basis of an individual's opinion. |
||
[[User:Jleipold|Jleipold]] ([[User talk:Jleipold|talk]]) 23:46, 30 October 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:46, 30 October 2017
![]() | Aviation: Aircraft B‑class | ||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Physics: Fluid Dynamics C‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||||
|
Removed from article
The following section was in the middle of the article:
- The first example of a BWB design is generally credited to be the Junkers G.38 which first flew in 1929 for Luft Hansa (present day Lufthansa). This aircraft, the largest land plane in the world when it first flew, seated passengers not only in the central fuselage but also in the wing structures. At a time when competing aircraft, like the Ford Trimotor, could carry ten to twelve passengers, the Junkers carried over thirty.
I have removed it, as the Junkers G.38 clearly did not fit the design concepts which currently define BWB aircraft. Georgewilliamherbert 01:42, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Well, it's back. It must not have stayed removed for long.
B-1B and Tu-160 don't belong
In my opinion, we should remove the B-1B and Tu-160 from the See Also list... they're too much a conventional aircraft to fit in the BWB category.
I will wait a few days for opinions, but intend to remove them later this week. Georgewilliamherbert 21:15, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Image:BWB-Composite.png
This was deleted per discussion at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 July 12#Image:BWB-Composite.png. I've only commented it out from the article in the hopes that the non-free Boeing image that was in there can be replaced with a free image instead and the image re-uploaded. howcheng {chat} 17:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Advantages section is almost a sales pitch
Perhaps it could be converted into a Advantages/Disadvantages section. Two disadvantages I can see are listed below.
- Few passengers get window seats. In order to let them see out, a series of camera turrets may be needed.
- Evac would be slow as passengers are farther from exits.
Will (Talk - contribs) 18:46, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Some fighters could be thought of as having a "blended wing body"
The best examples would include the MIG-29. Will (Talk - contribs) 19:26, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Design/operational constraints
Should we include design or operational constraints that has effected this type of aircraft from entering the markets ???
moved 797 hoax info here following discussion on X-48 talk page
title says all. this is fully verified info and has been moved here following discussion on X-48 talk page, where it was first created.
any issues? please lets discuss first and decide afterwards. --Krishvanth (talk) 11:26, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Assessment comment
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Blended wing body/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.
As an article on a particular configuration, this definitely deserves top priority. |
Last edited at 04:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 09:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
List of blended wing body aircraft
Can't we also mention the MIT Double Bubble D8 there ? See https://www.nasa.gov/content/the-double-bubble-d8-0/ KVDP (talk) 06:38, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- That doesn't meet the definition for BWB in the article. Do you have a reliable source that calls it a BWB? It's NASA page doesn't. In addition, the list is for aircraft with WP articles, which this one apparently doesn't have. - BilCat (talk) 09:07, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Blended wing body. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121204000341/http://www.boeing.com:80/Features/2012/08/corp_x48_08_07_12.html to http://www.boeing.com/Features/2012/08/corp_x48_08_07_12.html
- Added
{{dead link}}
tag to http://pdf.aiaa.org/getfile.cfm?urlX=%2C%3CWI%277D%2FQKS%2B%22R0%27M%0A&urla=%25*RD%26%220%20%20%0A&urlb=!*%20%20%20%0A&urlc=!*%20%20%20%0A&urld=(*%22L%25%23P*%40TA%3C%20%0A&urle=%27%2BB%2C%27!P.GT%20%20%20%0A&urlf=%27%2BB%2C%27!P.GT0%20%20%0A
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:13, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Dispute: List of wing body aircraft
Many aircraft are not BWB aircraft. As stated earlier in article, "having no clear dividing line between the wings and the main body of the craft." For example, the XP-67 and RQ-3A clearly have fuselages. Further, the internal links to some of the aircraft, like the RQ-170, distinctly state they are flying wings and directly conflicts with their inclusion on this list. A citation should be supplied to verify inclusion on the list rather that appearing as an inclusion on the basis of an individual's opinion. Jleipold (talk) 23:46, 30 October 2017 (UTC)