Talk:Rolls-Royce Crecy

message: :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)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Rolls-Royce Crecy.jpg

message: 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)
replies: text: and 1536 cu. ins. is nowhere near 26 litres, whereas 1593 is 26.1 ! 31.52.97.94 (talk) 04:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct figure is 1,593 cu in according to Gunston.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.31.130.17 (talk) 22:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Bore/Stroke/Displacement

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: cancelation date (year)

message: 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.  86.0.163.227 (talk) 23:37, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Sfc 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Rolls-Royce Crecy. 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/20081115085010/http://www.rolls-royce.com/history/heritage/default.jsp to http://www.rolls-royce.com/history/heritage/default.jsp
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) 21:41, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)