Archive page 1 747 Table Hi how are you On the table I created at Boeing 747 I intentionaly left the first 2 years before deliveries at zero to give a clear picture of when the fisrt plane was delivered to a customer Had I started with 1969 it might make it seem like some deliveries might have been missed But I started with 1967 and 1968 at zero to show a marked begining of 747s in service If you do nt mind I like to put it back to Zero I m good Sure change that back That makes sense It looked like maybe the deliveries started 2 years behind schedule Went ahead and changed the 1967 number back to 0 777 300ER thanks People always make this range mistake Another guy asked me why a 777F has more fuel than 777 200ER yet has 5 000 km less range It took a while for him to get it Sure If you can improve the wording there more please do so 787 How is it going On Boeing 787 there are 8 different aircrafts in the specs I believe we should remove all of them Have a nice 3 table specification chart on the 787 3 787 8 787 9 and that s it We can even bring the 3 way cross section of the 787 right next to this spec chart I believe articles need to be stand alone and comparing it to everything diminishes this Why not add Ilyushin il 96 here too then Or many other aircaft The 787 article is very very poorly done Its not an encyclopedic entry Its simply a collection of newsbits It has become a forum to bash the A350 or even the A380 As soon as a story comes out somebody writes a paragraph there I have been doing some updates and I want to know if you agree about making the article more about the 787 and less about other planes Hey going OK here I can see both sides on the comparison chart 2 planes one smaller and one larger for comparson is enough It d be OK to remove non 787 planes since other airliner articles don t have them The fact this is a new plane helps causes lower quality in the article I think People spend more time just adding info than cleaning it up and all I ll keep an eye on it and do what I can Take it easy Bangabalunga 747 8 Speed You are correct It was 85 and 845 on Boeing last week I do nt know when they changed it I know that wind tunnel testing has not gone well and the 747 8 will have more drag than 747 400 but I guess in order to have bragging rights against the A380 they must be faster I am sure airlines will still cruise at 0 845 though in the Intercontinental just to be efficient Take care No problem The 747 has had a cruise speed of Mach 0 85 for some time Don t think there s not that much a difference there Good catch on the upper deck 3 10 windows thing I was confused before Hughes Helicopters Some user slapped a notability tag on the Hughes Helicopters article I removed it to get his attention as some people don t read the talk pages and posted comments on the talk page also I don t know what his problem with the page is but it might be that it s unsourced He just put the unreferenced tag up today so it s not like noone won t know that s a problem Can you take a look and see what you think Thanks Sure Will do Inlet geometry On F A 18 Hornet you added the F 16 as having variable inlet geometry I always understood that it was fixed on the F 16 and I can have several printed sources on that Has that been changed on later F 16s I only reverted a change where the F 4 replaced the F 16 in this sentence The engine air intake of the Hornet is notable among its contemporaries for being fixed unlike the F 14 F 15 and F 16 which have variable geometry or variable ramp engine air intakes The F 4 is from an earlier era Please correct that if needed Thanks OK I didn t check the earlier history I just wanted to ask first to find out why it there in case you had a reason and now I know I ll take it out THanks Use