Talk:Aircraft dope
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Aircraft dope article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
2007-09-29 Automated pywikipediabot message
[edit]This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary. The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there. |
--CopyToWiktionaryBot 04:05, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
intuitive description of strength to weight ratio wanted
[edit]Usually fabric has a good strength to weight ratio and stiffness if it has long straight fibers in tight contact with other fibers (woven) pointing in the same direction. From the short description it seems as if fibers would slip into each other much like in a muscle if the dope is applied. May be we can compare it to heat shrinking of polyester. For most sails or for spokes in wheels and buildings the tension is actively applied. Dope is only used if this is not possible. -- Arnero (talk) 15:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Re: Dope-on-tissue model aircraft construction
[edit]First off, let me apologize if my reason for removing the "citation needed" tag from the line concerning model aircraft was inadequate. However, having some knowledge of model aircraft construction, I must stand by my opinion. Dope is routinely applied over tissue, and attempting to find a reference stating as much would likely be as hard as finding a reference stating that the sky is up. I could of course cite such things as magazine articles and build logs that mention using dope over tissue, but I doubt that those would meet the standards of a Wikipedia-worthy reference either (If they do, please mention it and I will gladly provide some). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.134.101 (talk) 03:56, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
- No problem. As per WP:V every bit of substantial text that makes claims needs to cite a reference, no matter how obvious to some people. If this is really very common knowledge then it should be easy to find references. - Ahunt (talk) 11:13, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
- All of the above is of course true 8) so I've added a line on modelling use with a reference p.r.newman (talk) 22:03, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
White?
[edit]I removed this as it is unreferenced, and in my view plain wrong. I have been around aircraft for a long time and have only come across two colours for dope - Clear and Silver. These are used to taughten the fabric and over painted to give colours. They are rarely used with added pigment as it usually degrades the performance of the dope.
White is most common to reflect damaging sunlight, but any colour can be supplied and existing colors can usually be matched by manufacturers.[citation needed]
--Petebutt (talk) 04:59, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Aircraft dope. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
- Attempted to fix sourcing for http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/AccidentReports/5gdtvpydpxoghm45trrzdcu31/X03222012120000.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 01:31, 29 March 2016 (UTC)