Talk:Leading-edge slot

message: The result of the VFD can be found here: Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Slot -- AllyUnion (talk) 00:35, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  VFD Result 

message: This is now much more than a simple definition. A bit more than a stub. --Colputt 01:44, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looks like a keeper 

message: I corrected this earlier, but it seems to have been reverted. A slat is not necessarily retractable, although it often is. The definitive difference between a slot and a slat is that a slot is a notch cut out of an existing airfoil, while a slat is formed by an add-on structure outside the defined airfoil. I need to hunt down some support for this, but I recall this being the definition used in all of my aerospace engineering textbooks.
To be clear:
Slat http://www.zenithair.com/stolch701/pic06/slat.jpg
Slat http://www.b737.org.uk/le_slat.jpg
Slat http://www.stolspeed.com/uploads/images/Slats.jpg
Slot http://www.tetonaviation.com/HU-16A_files/slot.jpg  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.19.219 (talk) 18:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an interesting issue, one that we have been around before in this article. The main problem is that there are lots of expert textbooks on this subject and they all disagree. The one I cited, From the Ground Up is considered "the" definitive textbook used in Canada and it says if they move they are slats and if they don't move then they are slots, but there are other sources that say that slats can be fixed and slots can move. There is no agreement, so I have picked the clearest definition and cited that. I think if we are going to go the route that slats can be fixed and slots can move, then the whole article should be merged into the slats article, although this was proposed before and did not pass.  00:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a comment several years on, the slat vs slot semantic disparity remains in the literature. I agree with the position advanced in the article and above, and the differentiator should be whether the device is movable or attached to an existing wing (slat) or conceived by the designer as integral to the wing (slot.) Whether it is a separate physical structure is immaterial. The Zenith designs for instance locate the aircraft datum at the leading edge of the device, which would indicate that he considers it integral to the wing. Altaphon (talk) 04:30, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "slats" being considered retractable by definition 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Leading edge slot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121010040014/http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Aerospace/Handley-page/Aero51.htm to http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Aerospace/Handley-page/Aero51.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified