Talk:Royal Aircraft Establishment

message: "Barnes Wallis used the water tanks here to test scale prototypes of the bouncing bomb used for the Second World War Dambusters raid." According to all the references I have found Wallis did his testing at the National Physics Laboratory at Teddington. DJ Clayworth 14:03, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Did RAE not have other sites, too, eg Bedford?
And is there not more than 1 listed WT building?
Sc147 23:19, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have cross-referenced to the Marine Aircraft Experimental Establishment which it joined as a 'merger' in WW2 - perhaps someone can do the same with the Bedford installations? Ephebi 13:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: cleanup tag added

message: These are obviously misplaced - hardly a product of the Royal Aircraft Factory!!
They should be moved into the portion of the article dealing with the RAE - but exactly where - anyone with more background in the history of the post 1918 establishment have any ideas?Soundofmusicals (talk) 11:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rockets and Missiles

message: Wasn't The RAE and Farnborough airfield bombed by the Luftwaffe during World War 2?
Surely this is a worthwhile section on it's own?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevorsem (talk • contribs) 12:17, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bombed in WW2 

message: This article is surely the worst I've ever encountered on Wikipedia. With a few exceptions, poorly researched, and there is so much missing it beggars belief. Examples being the ground-breaking research on metal fatigue that began with the investigation into the (then) mysterious crashes of the Comet airliner. Then there was RAE's role as the leading design authority for the first generations of Britain's atomic and thermonuclear bombs (in which I had a small bit part). Then the work on the front end improvements to the Polaris missile, known as Chevaline. 
There is hardly a single aircraft project of the Cold War that the RAE was not involved with, primarily because the RAE was the British Government's own in-house source of independent unbiased technical advice; independent in the sense of not being a part of industry with a product to sell. In many ways RAE was comparable with Sandia National Laboratory in the United States. The RAF, the Royal Navy and the Army wrote their aircraft specifications with advice from RAE, and only the RAE had the expertise to advise them on proposals submitted by industry, the independence of industry to be trusted, and the expertise to monitor compliance.
No doubt I'll now be hounded by the trolls, - all no doubt deeply offended at these comments. Water, duck's backs etc etc are words that come to mind. 
Sadly, I cannot find the time to restructure the article myself. Hopefully someone else can. Wikipedia is a valuable resource especially for the education of the young, who have no direct experience of those times. So it's important to get it right. Especially when the veteran scientists and engineers who worked at RAE are dying off. Roy Drommett's being the latest death in late 2015. Roy worked in the Air Armaments Dept at Farnborough on many leading-edge missile and nuclear weapon projects. We owe it to Roy Dromment and others like him to get it right for the benefit of future generations. George.Hutchinson (talk) 15:20, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: "You cannot find the time" - and yet someone has to, don't they? At present the article is actually a bit like the proverbial "curate's egg". Taken as an article about the Royal Aircraft Factory it is at least a fair start - but there is very obviously a great deal missing for the period after 1919! Bear in mind that an encyclopedia article is not a place for new, original thought - everything needs to be "sourced" to authoritative texts published "elsewhere". The first really good book about the "Factory Period" is really quite recent (predates most of the article in fact) - has anything been published about the rest that we could use as a basic source? Is what you are asking for a new book, rather than an updated article here? --Soundofmusicals (talk) 03:35, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Article quality

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Royal Aircraft Establishment. 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/20101202210527/http://www.raes.org.uk/pdfs/3164COLOUR.pdf to http://www.raes.org.uk/pdfs/3164COLOUR.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060909150234/http://www.riskybuildings.org.uk/docs/15wind/index.html to http://www.riskybuildings.org.uk/docs/15wind/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070222132627/http://www.remuseum.org.uk/specialism/rem_spec_aero.htm to http://www.remuseum.org.uk/specialism/rem_spec_aero.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) 19:30, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Royal Aircraft Establishment. 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/20110202122827/http://www.raes.org.uk/cmspage.asp?cmsitemid=Library_NAL to http://www.raes.org.uk/cmspage.asp?cmsitemid=Library_NAL
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) 00:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)