Talk:Supermarine Air Yacht/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Usernameunique (talk · contribs) 23:36, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

This is fairly short, and could use a bit of expansion

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Development

The Supermarine Nanok, an armed version of the Supermarine Southampton built at the Supermarine works at Woolston near Southampton — Three uses of "Supermarine" in quick succession. Can the third be reworded?

Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:00, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was commissioned by Guinness as a replacement for his Solent — Why did he need a replacement a mere year after purchasing the first one?

Explanation given (he needed a bigger one, probably). Amitchell125 (talk) 17:36, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is "a problem which may have influenced Guinness's to replace it with another aeroplane" in the source, or is it your speculation? If the latter, it seems reasonable, but I would still take it out—it's still implied by the preceding clause, "the Solent's hull had a restricted height and passengers were unable to stand up fully once inside". --Usernameunique (talk) 20:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Text removed (it was in the source, but I agree with your comment). Amitchell125 (talk) 20:34, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Design

I don't suppose there are any photographs or diagrams of the interior?

I looked around, but couldn't find anything. If something emerges, I'll include it. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:01, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Performance

Was the prototype a separate aircraft, or was the final product simply the prototype with some changes?

I've changed 'prototype' which was misleading as it implied other aircraft were built afterwards. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This section says what the aircraft didn't do, but doesn't really say what it could do. Worth discussing some of the specifications here?

I've added a bit more, but to be honest it didn't get a lot of flying time except during the trials. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:38, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Operational history

Mrs June Jewell James — Jewell, or Jewett? Any information about her?

Jewett (thanks for spotting that, some sources do give her name as 'Jewell'). I've added a few more details about her. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:45, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why did she buy the aircraft if it had those problems?

One account says she saw the plane 'by chance', and by all accounts she acted on impulse. Text amended accordingly. Amitchell125 (talk) 19:09, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Windward III — Any word on what Windward I and Windward II were?

Unfortunately nothing so far, but I might not be looking in the right place... Amitchell125 (talk) 15:30, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

the crew and passengers came close to drowning — How? Did the plane flood?

Looking at other accounts, I think "close to drowning" is perhaps a little too dramatic, so the sentence has been modified. Amitchell125 (talk) 19:06, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If it stopped at Cherbourg and Naples, how was it a direct flight to Egypt?

I can't verify that it was a direct flight (the citation is by another editor), so the word has been taken out. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:48, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Any word on how much the plane was used? From the sounds of it only a few times, but perhaps it actually flew frequently during its four-month lifespan? Were all of its flights part of the journey to Egypt?

It flew once following its purchase by Mrs James, ending up in Capri. I'll check the text to make sure that this is clear to readers. Amitchell125 (talk) 18:43, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Any word on why it never flew again?

It was written off. Text amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:38, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

4 & 5 are the same.

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

Amitchell125, this is a nice article, but it feels a bit on the short side. Are there any more sources with additional details you could add? A quick search on newspapers.com turned up several that look promising: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:36, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Usernameunique for your review, and the helpful links to the newspaper cuttings), many of which are now incorporated into the article. (I couldn't use the image, as it overlapped another one). They have inspired me to search more details out, and I am finding them. I'll let you know when I think I found them all. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernameunique: - I have hopefully now completed addressing the issues you raised. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:40, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great, Amitchell125. Nice work on it initially, and then expanding it quickly. Left one comment above, but nothing to stand in the way of a pass. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]