Talk:Twin-fuselage aircraft

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

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.

Definitions and borderline cases[edit]

Borderline cases include some poorly-documented types, some asymmetric designs and one or two other oddballs. The scope of this list is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft#Twin tails and twin fuselages. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 16:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A380[edit]

I think this article should mention the A380 was originally going to be a twin-fuselage aircraft, but the idea was scrapped. 73.0.184.227 (talk) 22:54, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tables[edit]

Table format seems a good way to go with lists like this. But I am unhappy with the usual wikitable styling, as it focuses on the tabular nature of the display rather than as a "tidied-up list" which we have here. So I have tried a couple of alternative stylings alongside: the topmost table is simply the unstyled default, while the bottom table has a small tweak to help delineate the column headings. If people think such an alternative approach might be worth adopting more widely then we can kick off the wider discussion process, otherwise we can just change them all to the current standard. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:36, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Status[edit]

I created three tables for types of different status, but am now thinking that a single table with a sortable Status column would be better. But what values to use for status? I am thinking of; Production, Prototype, One-off, Experimental and Project. Any comments? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:51, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking along the same lines. Sounds good, though as there there aren't many entries maybe a few less cats - production, experimental and project maybe as the other two are sub-types of experimental.NiD.29 (talk) 18:09, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Then I thought, the Bf 109Z never got as far as experimenting, so I added Unfinished status. Feel free to adjust. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:24, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]