Talk:Rolls-Royce Crecy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Aviation / Aircraft engines (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
This article is supported by the aircraft engine task force.

Fair use rationale for Image:Rolls-Royce Crecy.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Rolls-Royce Crecy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


Bore and stroke given yield 1593.4 cuin., not the 1536 given. 5.1x6.25 = 1532.1. AMCKen (talk) 02:18, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

and 1536 cu. ins. is nowhere near 26 litres, whereas 1593 is 26.1 ! (talk) 04:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Correct figure is 1,593 cu in according to Gunston. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

cancelation date (year)[edit]

Can we please have a separate reference for the cancelation date? I think it was Dec 1944 but do not have Nahum, Foster-Pegg and Birch to hand. Btw: good work! PeterGrecian (talk) 21:06, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Took a while to find it but the date is given as December 1945 (Page 40, Foster-Pegg), the wording in the source is the programme was abandoned in December of 1945. I have amended the text as it said 'cancelled' which is possibly a different meaning, there doesn't seem to be a company memo or letter directly saying that this engine was cancelled, there are many others in the book and I would have expected it to be included. It fits with the timescale of Rolls-Royce writing to the Aeronautical Research Council on 14 January 1946 to say that any further two-stroke engine development would not be useful. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:25, 6 November 2013 (UTC)


I notice that an edit in 2010 changed the sfc from 0.55 pints per horsepower-hour to 0.69 pounds/hphr. This implies that a pint of fuel weighs 1.25 pounds, which is not correct. (talk) 23:37, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I added the 0.55 figure in November 2008, it would have been from the cited source. Afraid I can't keep up with all the changes that are made to cited engine specification sections, well done for spotting it. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:14, 4 April 2014 (UTC)