Talk:Avro 618 Ten

message: I've removed the note about the last Ten and the Monospar wing.  According to Jackson, British Civil Aircraft the Monospar machine was a Fokker F.VIIB/3m, serial J7986.  The same author, in Avro aircraft since 1908 says the last Ten, K2682 was with the RAE Wireless and Equipment flight at Farnborough from late July to late October 1936, with no mention of Monospar though this could have come later.
To add confusion, Peter Cooper's history of Farnborough logs J7986, the Fokker not the Avro as in the Wireless flight at this time.  There is an independent web document about cg measurements of the Fokker with this same reg.
Does anyone know more?TSRL (talk) 14:40, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The July 2010 ed of FlyPast (p.70) has a  photo captioned " ... tested by 22 squadron at Martlesham Heath was the ... Fokker VII J7896, which was flown in 1926."  However, Fokker Commercial aircraft (pub Fokker) on p. 184 records F.VIIa-3m c/n 4917 going to the Air Ministry as J7986, in agreement with Jackson on serial and the Monospar wing (but F.VIIa not b).  Probably FlyPast jumbled the reg.  The Fokker book also has K2862, an Avro Ten (licence built F.VIIb-3m) going to RAF in July 1936, in agreement with Jackson.TSRL (talk) 08:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

message: I'm wondering if this is true, or if the two referred to are UMG and UMH, the survivors of Australian National Airways which were sold on to Virtue? FiggyBee (talk) 06:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've checked with http://www.goldenyears.ukf.net/ who have 8 entries for Australian 618 Tens: the five Australian Nationals, the re-registered UXX plus UNU and UPI of Queensland Air Navigation.  These last two have no other Australian reg  and must be the two mentioned.TSRL (talk) 08:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

text: The stamp image appears to be a de Havilland Express. MilborneOne (talk) 20:07, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: "Another two 618 Ten aircraft were also sold to Australian companies"

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Avro 618 Ten. 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/20080724170047/http://www.tomcampbellblack.150m.com/ to http://www.tomcampbellblack.150m.com
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:24, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Looking at the Avro 619 Five in comparison with the Avro 618 Ten, it becomes clear that the 619 Five is a completely different design and should have an article of its own, rather than being lumped in with the 618 Ten. I just reverted someone's attempt on Commons to classify the 619 Five as a version of the Fokker F.VII, which I suspect was inspired by this article treating the 619 Five as a variant of the 618 Ten. (Actually, apart from having three engines, the 619 Five reminds me more of the Fokker Super Universal.) --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 20:54, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree as it was a new design rather than a licenced Fokker. MilborneOne (talk) 21:03, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Avro 619 Five should have its own article.