Talk:Lockheed Corporation

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lockheed Corporation article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Aviation: Aircraft C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Trains: Monorail C‑class Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the Monorail task force.

Questions

If you're going to put up pictures, how about one of the L1049 Connie? She's at least as important as the Blackbird. --squadfifteen

This company was mentioned in bowling for columine, wasn't it?

Columbine was in 1999, so I suspect any reference would be to Lockheed Martin, not plain 'ol Lockheed. Willy Logan 17:34, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People! There is a call for discussion open on this page, and absolutely no discussion going on! I, for one, agree that the two articles should be merged. Anyone else? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? chizotz 07:11, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with merge -vlcmkd

Agree with merge Ecozeppelin 15:40, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POS

Did Lackheed manufacture Point of Sale equipment at one point? At my post office, they have a Lockheed Martin cash register/POS. Any comments?

Lockheed Scandal

There is little or no information about what was termed in the 1960's the "Lockheed scandal".

Where bribes were handed out for lockheed to attain contracts to supply western europe, most notably west germany, with jet fighters.

This is briefly mentioned on this page, but the redirect is to a vanilla "about lockheed" page, which has no reference to the scandal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Hartmann

And the same paragraph is repeated in the main text, but a little more information or detail might be in order from US sources, where they may now have access to information about the investigations and economic impact of the scandals.

Comments please?

- Xelous - 21st June 2007

Should make a good article, assuming we can find some verifiable sources. I found this source on the Netherlands Prince Bernhar's role in the scandal, but nothing else at the moment (haven't searched Google yet tho). - BillCJ 16:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lockheed Bribery Scandal is also a redirect here, and possible alternate title. - BillCJ 16:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

F-104#International_service and Bernhard_of_Lippe-Biesterfeld#Scandals has already some written information about the scandal - perhaps that can be gathered into a starting article. --MoRsE 22:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've been reading a couple of Corky Meyer's books about his experiences at Grumman as a test pilot, and he headed the Grumman team that was selling the F11F-1F Super Tiger to the countries that Lockheed bribed to by the F-104. He has some unique observances, but alot of it is his personal opinions, and not objectively useful beyond being used as colorful quotes. Meyer did state that he wans't allowed by Grumman Corp to use bribes in any way. But he has definitely piqued my interests in the topic. As for a title, how about Lockheed 1960s bribery scandal? - BillCJ 23:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Title works for me. A question: I remember that there was a scandal surrounding some bribery and the C-5 program...same one or is there more than one Lockheed bribery scandal? AKRadecki^Speaketh 23:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure on the C-5 part. Most of the F-104 stuff happened in the late 50s/early 60s, right before the C-5 development began. That's probably something the research stage would reveal. - BillCJ 23:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have vague rememberances of it causing problems for some members of congress...but you're right, research! AKRadecki^Speaketh 23:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be interested in participating in this. --John 01:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. What would you be commfortable doing? I haven't started any research yet, and good online sources may be hard to find because of the time period. Wikipedia doesn't have much in depth in the articles above, so this will pretty much have to be done from scratch. I'm not that good at writing text from scratch, esp from printed sources. I don't mind doing some online searching, and dumping text in a sanbox to be rewritten later, and I'm pretty good at formatting and editing. If writing's not your strong suit either, then we could split up some sources, work on those, check wach other's work, and then edit them together. I can set up a sandbox on my userspace, and then we can start finding sources, and discuss more on the sandbox's talk page. - BillCJ 02:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can write original text if it's distilled from sources. If we can find good sources I can write something, I have a book and a couple of websites already in mind. I like the sandbox idea. I suggest you do it and tell me here and/or in my talk where it is and I will look at it and try to develop it. It's a fascinating subject. --John 02:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK,it's at User:BillCJ/Sandbox/Lockheed 1960s bribery scandal. We can use a different title when we go ilive if we have a better one. - BillCJ 03:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Give me 24 hours or so. --John 03:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

F-35 missing on the fighters list

Shouldn't it be there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.32.55.200 (talk) 22:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, it should not be there. The F-35 is a Lockheed Martin product, produced long after the merger of 1995. It's come back several times since this post, but I've removed it again. - BilCat (talk) 15:59, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Electra/Orion

Odd that there's no section on the Lockheed L-188 Electra, a turboprop airliner introduced in 1958 that was initially plagued with a design flaw leading to several highly publicized crashes before it was fixed. A military version, the Lockheed P-3 Orion, remains in service and was used by the Australian Air Force in the search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 in 2014. Sca (talk) 14:12, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Water pollution in the United States

Template:Find sources notice The article was added to this category, but the article seems to be missing some information about Lockheed Corporation's environmental record. Jarble (talk) 03:22, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lockheed Corporation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160102033628/http://flightproficiency.com/resources/lockheed.PDF to http://flightproficiency.com/resources/lockheed.PDF

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:26, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Too much consideration of politics and scandals

This is yet another POS Wikipedia article by some oaf with an axe to grind. Most of the article deals with the financial problems and resultant scandals of the company. Not near enough space is devoted to what it did, build some of the world's greatest aircraft. Why is it we cannot achieve balance here? I believe Kelly Johnson is mentioned once. Not near enough. Indeed, if one deletes every sentence that does not relate to an aircraft (the company's raison d'être, duh), the article would shrink to 10 seconds of mumbling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarvinLuse (talk • contribs) 17:38, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bribery scandals, crisis in the Dutch monarchy I need to see to, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Bernhard_of_Lippe-Biesterfeld, that's not covered by the word political, they are royal , the Dutch crown was endangered, but save by a non fair deal, not reveling the true story to the majesty, or the investigation commission.