Talk:Monoplane

message: This was recently added to the opening paragraph to the section on the low wing; "It is the configuration most commonly found on passenger airliners." I removed it because it is not about the low wing as such and many other types also commonly have a low wing. My removal was reverted with the edit comment; "Surely it is a matter of note that almost all jetliners are low wing?" The answer is yes if you can source that remark, no if you cannot. But either way, for the reason I just gave the opening paragraph is the wrong place for it. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 08:51, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: "Blather": long-winded talk with no real substance (n), talk long-windedly without making very much sense: (vi).  Is it good faith to use such an epithet? "Cheers" Arrivisto (talk) 17:03, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blather 

message: The 1874 DuTemple monoplane (which presumably never flew) seems a poor lead image.  I suggest it be replaced with something more appropriate, such as a Supermarine Spitfire. Arrivisto (talk) 18:28, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead picture - 1874 DuTemple monoplane 

message: I just reverted some additions to the section on parasol wings. They were primarily historical and mostly belonged in the history section. They were also uncited and there is far too much uncited historical comment as it is. If new historical developments are to be added, let's do it properly. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:51, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  History and citation 

message: Ahunt I agree I erroneously wrote without proper citation, however, that statement is supported by several other articles; I am attaching just a few below. I agree that the statement should have been slightly more appropriately framed.
https://airplaneacademy.com/high-wing-vs-low-wing-aircraft-pros-cons-and-key-differences/
https://www.pilotmall.com/blogs/news/high-wing-vs-low-wing-what-s-the-difference-between-them
https://singleenginepilot.com/which-is-better-high-wing-or-low-wing-planes/
If you find this adequate, could you restore my edit with proper changes? Thanks Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 08:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your note here. The text you tried to add, regarding high-wing airplanes was  I removed it because it was unsourced, but it is also fundamentally not correct from a piloting point of view. None of the three sources you have cited above support the claim, either. The closest any of them come is the first one which says  But here he is clearly talking about generally being able to see the airport environment and traffic from the circuit, which is true. I have owned both high-wing and low-wing aircraft and the idea that high wing aircraft are easier to land because you can see down is a common fallacy, based on the idea that a pilot looks down at the runway when landing. We don't, or if you do, you will risk a hard landing. In fact a pilot looks out the windscreen down the runway, towards the opposite end of the runway, to land. It is the only sight point that gives the proper perspective for touchdown. - Ahunt (talk) 13:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Any statement that “... helps in aircraft landings ...” may come from a published source, but not a reliable source. I have flown both high-wing and low-wing airplanes. I prefer the latter in the circuit area. When a pilot is flying in the vicinity of a runway (TO and landing) it is important to look out almost continuously - sighting other airplanes and monitoring the location of the airplane relative to the runway and other ground features, and general situational awareness. In a high-wing airplane as soon as a turn is commenced, if the pilot looks in the direction of turn the wing is “in the way”, obscuring the desired view. In contrast, when making a turn in a low-wing airplane the view in the direction of turn is clear and even enhanced by the wing-tip falling well below the horizon. On the basis of all operations in the circuit area I prefer the low wing. Dolphin (t) 04:18, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for taking your time out for responding.Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 19:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit on 22 December 2021