User talk:Nimbus227/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

Talkback

Hello, Nimbus227. You have new messages at Sp33dyphil's talk page.
Message added 02:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 02:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Replied, no need to use talkback folks, I explained this several times last year. Per wiki convention I watch all pages that I have edited. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 03:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Claude Johnson at Rolls-Royce

Hi again. I have no knowledge or access to knowledge of Johnson's achievements while running RR. I expect to be able to get to look at and perhaps read part of a 1967 biography of Johnson by W J Oldham in the next few weeks. I may get some salient points from there but would you have a better knowledge of what he actually did and how it contributed to RR's success if so anything you came up with might be better balanced than anything I could slap together. cheers, Eddaido (talk) 06:37, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Updated as requested. Missing at the moment is his War Office involvement with production of aero engines during WWI and other facts (he disliked women drivers quite strongly apparently), can be added later. Afraid I had to remove the Silver Ghost images, like the company article this should focus on the subject, I have added an image that shows two subjects mentioned in the text and also uploaded a non-free image for the infobox, which hopefully I have licensed correctly. I also removed text which said something like 'see images on the right', it is convention not to do this as other editors frequently move images around a page, making the text confusing and redundant. I have added a source in the further reading section, I do not have it or know the ISBN but it would obviously be a very good source for this article, if not the best. Hope that was helpful. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Helpful, no. Just another attack by you on other people's efforts. I will sleep on it and then sort out your often unfortunate amendments. Eddaido (talk) 10:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I was on my way to fixing the errors in Ernest Hives and was surprised to find nothing about johnson. How sorry I am I wasted any thought for either. Eddaido (talk) 10:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I think you are taking my advice the wrong way, there is no attack here just a summary of several WP guidelines and best practises. I'm sorry you feel my work is not an improvement there, you are free to revert back to the version before I started. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Then you take my advice, attack much much less and instead learn to co-operate not be a smasher of other's efforts. Yes, that is criticism, its what you are so good at. Eddaido (talk) 10:45, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry but I don't accept that. I give advice (hesitantly mostly, always civily) so that articles can be improved, I don't know your experience as an editor on WP. I can link to the guidelines if required but doing that can become or appear pointy. I am going to ask for a second opinion from an administrator on this as I'm concerned that I am being accused of wrong-doing where I believe all my edits on this particular article have been constructive. I will accept what they have to say. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:55, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Eddaio, there is no attack there, and no criticism. If you think there is, well, you're wrong - it was a very polite and reasonable explanation of how things could be done better. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:01, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Bushangel the above follows testy (from me) exchanges on my talkpage please read them and change your opinion! I don't go all spiky without good reason, perhaps Nimbus can't understand the messages given him there? I slept nicely thank you and then sat up and went all spiky again. Eddaido (talk) 01:00, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Another (talk page stalker) here. I have reviewed both this and your talk page, User:Eddaido. My conclusion is that User:Nimbus227 has been extremely courteous and polite in his dealings with you, almost excessively so, while, particularly at User_talk:Eddaido#Claude_Johnson you were in turn quite rude and uncivil. I would suggest that you have a read of WP:CIVIL and if you can't incorporate that into your interactions with other editors then perhaps look at taking up a new hobby. - Ahunt (talk) 01:30, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Aeroengine-term-stub

FYI - I've proposed this stub template for deletion. DexDor (talk) 09:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

May I give you a hint?

Hi Nimbus, take a look at the excellent technical drawings made ​​by an equally good user in it.wiki. See it:Heinkel HeS 1, IMHO it:Utente:Nubifer is a resource to share as much as possible. ;-)--Threecharlie (talk) 15:46, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, he looks like he's been very busy creating new aero engine articles. I often visit the other language wikis to see if there is anything useful to borrow, there are a lot of images but many of them are not on Commons. Cheers. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 17:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

If you want I'll move on Commons this and all other images I find that they have a compatible license (now move this). Bye :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 20:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Great! Let me know where you put them, I know my way around Commons but it's amazing what can get missed.Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:28, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello Nimbus! You might find it rewarding to join the debate at Talk:Flight#Lift-to-drag ratio. Dolphin (t) 23:48, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

We shall see if it is rewarding! Cheers. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 05:50, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Isotta Fraschini

Nimbus I have moved Isotta Fraschini as requested on the talk page, are you happy to clear up the links and stuff or do you need some help? MilborneOne (talk) 19:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, no problem, I'll do it now. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:45, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Mostly done, there will be many links in the aircraft articles which will need updating in time. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I will have a look at sweeping up the others later. MilborneOne (talk) 20:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

There are links in the 'see also' sections of engine articles as well, I'm plodding through them. Glad it wasn't Rolls-Royce!! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:32, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Rolls-Royce Vulture

I have just bought a brilliant book on the Avro Manchester which has the most detailed information on the development - or lack thereof - of the R-R Vulture that I have ever read. Apart from coolant and oil flow problems the Vulture's biggest problem was an unusual "star" conrod design which was made of a brittle steel with low ductility and high Brinell hardness - it also turned out to be a dead-ended development. With sufficient development it might have been a good engine, better than the Sabre (for example, when it was actually running properly it was turbine smooth) but there was just no chance with R-R's commitment to the Merlin & Griffon etc. (The book also details the Manchester's woes) ◆Min✪rhist✪rian◆MTalk 12:01, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Great, does it say how much it weighed?!! For such an unusual/notable (notorious?!) engine the sources are a bit thin, from memory what I found in Flight said that the numbers were classified. There also doesn't seem to be a complete engine surviving anywhere (may be in someone's shed?!). Good stuff. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 12:05, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Dornier 28 Pic

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/winter99-00/pg79.gif Looks like the CIA was user of this aircraft also. https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/winter99-00/art7.html Ckrug49 (talk) 21:34, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for the late reply. I'm not sure what you are requesting? I did create the Dornier Do 28 article but don't have a big interest in it, it was just an obvious missing aircraft article that I could translate from wiki:de. If you want to add that the CIA was an operator you wouldn't be able to use those photos as a source directly but possibly any text that you can find at the same website (which I would say is a reliable one). Cheers. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:58, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Pratt & Whitney R-2800

Just bought this http://www.amazon.com/R-2800-Graham-White/dp/1840373350 for NZ $60 - what a gahhh jaw dropper! Everything ya needed to know about the engine, and the aircraft powered by it. Didn't realise that Ford, Chevrolet and Nash Kelvinator were major R-2800 manufacturers, and could explain why Ford declined the Merlin contract, not only because of Henry's Anglophobia but also because they had their hands full building a brand new factory for the P & W after signing the contract in September 1940. Ford total: 57,637; peak daily production: 186 engines, 8 July 1944.

I'll have a closer look at the article, some time. (Also got http://www.amazon.com/R-4360-Pratt-Whitneys-Major-Miracle/dp/1580071732 in the same deal for an extra $40 NZ). Cheers ◆Min✪rhist✪rian◆MTalk 23:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Good stuff, seems to be some original research in the article or possibly just uncited stuff. Perhaps work on it and put it up for peer review, think we did that with the Merlin (or maybe not, I can't remember now!). Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:39, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Hokay - I have just started a complete overhaul of the article, starting in R-2800 Variants, using a similar format to the R-R Merlin. Comments would be welcome. Cheers ◆Min✪rhist✪rian◆MTalk 01:25, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

It's going to be a long list of variants! Perhaps split it off like the Merlin (WP:SUMMARY) and leave the main ones (most produced?) behind. Looks like the R-2800 was built by several companies that are not mentioned in the text (yet!). There's some hyphenated 'Double-Wasps' about and being an American product perhaps the dates should be in the US format? Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:22, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I'll concentrate on describing some (not all) of the most important variants, particularly those that were built in large numbers or represented major engineering changes (eg: B or C series etc). I'm still working my way through White's book and supplementing this with other info where needed (White sometimes gets a little confused with various aircraft sub-types), so it'll be a long process. I might even start on the R-R Vulture, depending on time constraints...◆Min✪rhist✪rian◆MTalk 00:08, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Might be worth starting a section on the R-2800 talk page for suggested improvements (so that everyone who is watching the article can see it). It has been assessed as B class but the checklist has not been completed. I think the infobox applications list is pushing it with nine entries (usually limited to three in aircraft articles, we squeezed it to four in the Merlin article!) and the entry format is inconsistent (the aircraft project moved last year to manufacturer, designation, name for US aircraft). An 'engines on display' section is missing, a 'survivors' section is probably not needed as it is a current engine for 'working' aircraft. Do you have a new reference source for the Vulture? I can't find the weight anywhere!! Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 11:04, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Gliding stubs

I have gone through the stubs again. feel free to re-assess any you don't agree with. On another note; one of the guys on my Tornado course at Warton was Nick Aram, the generation after mine in the GSA world, I expect you know him well. He has left Saudi now but I don't know what he is doing.Petebutt (talk) 02:42, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Pete, I've not looked at the glider articles lately but most of them are pretty good now I think. Yes, I know Nick well. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 11:09, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a go at engine stubs as well!--Petebutt (talk) 08:05, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Salmson AD.9

Hi, me again. I'vre looked into the Salmsons lately and have had to come to the conclusion that the A.C7, A.C.9 and A.D.9 engines were only produced by British Salmson. The question is were they direct copies or distinct variants? The only sources I can find giving the AD and AC designations have been in reference to British Salmson engines. I have also started to tidy up the Salmson issue with the Hartmann article proving to be invaluable. Would you be happy with the Salmson AD.9 article to be editted to refer only to British salmson engines. If not it would be best to merge into Salmson water-cooled aero-engines. Any thoughts? (please leave a note on User talk:Petebutt or reply there)--Petebutt (talk) 03:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Salmson AD.3

Further to the Above. The only reference that mentions AD.3 is Flight. All other refererences dealing with Salmson engines give the designation as Salmson 3Ad. Is there more evidence than the Flight article, as the early Flight journalists tended not to pay attention to accuracy with names and designations.--Petebutt (talk) 03:50, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I would hold fire on any more undiscussed page moves related to this companies engines, there is archived discussion at the engine task force with no clear solution. The Salmson section in Gunston's encyclopedia does not mention the British company at all but the same engine types are listed (so they must all have been French originally like the British built Gnome rotaries). I put some time into Template:Salmson aeroengines to help sort things out but I really don't have the answers that you are looking for beyond that. It would be good to discover the full and clear story though. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:03, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I was unaware of further discussion but I think I have made a god starting point for future development of the Salmson question.--Petebutt (talk) 11:59, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Italian motorjet: what motor?

At Caproni Campini N.1, an editor recently changed the Isotta Fraschini motorjet engine type from radial piston to V-12 piston. I looked around some book sources and the ones that specify a type agree that it was radial. However, the engine maker was indeed known for putting Vees in aircraft, and I am not aware of any specific radials they may have been producing. Got any ideas? Binksternet (talk) 03:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I think the IP editor might well be correct. I have a 1945 book on gas turbines which describes the engine as an 'Isotta Fraschini liquid cooled engine of 900 hp', (the vast majority of radial engines are air-cooled). Along with the description in the article text of an 'RC.40' this would make the engine the Isotta Fraschini Asso XI (a liquid-cooled V-12 of just under 900 hp). In the specs section the number of cylinders given is 12, most radial engines have an odd number of cylinders.

There may be confusion as the same 1945 source shows a diagram of the Campini CC.1, an unbuilt design, with an unidentified radial engine. Bill Gunston's 'Development of jet and turbine aero engines' shows a detailed side-view of the aircraft internals, it clearly shows an inline engine (upright 'V') but is labelled only as 'power unit'. The side view is virtually identical to the one shown here, missing in that view is the coolant radiator which is shown sitting behind the three forward fans in Gunston's view. What I don't have unfortunately is a single reliable source that can be cited to identify the exact engine. Hope that helped anyway! Cheers. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Sources do conflict though! Geoffrey Smith (author of the 1945 book I have) wrote this in 1942, he was led to believe it had a radial engine but by 1945 he had changed his mind with the words 'it is now known...to have been fitted with an Isotta-Fraschini liquid cooled engine...'. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:22, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Still intrigued so I kept looking! The museum webpage states the engine is an Isotta-Fraschini Asso L121RC40 900 CV. This entry is available in English and I would have thought can be used as reliable source as it's hosted by the Italian Ministry of Defense. Through the Italian version of the Campini wiki article I came to the Isotta L121 article, it lists the Campini as an application, not referenced but I believe them and there is a nice photo! The English and Italian wikis seem to be using different names for the same engine, hence no interwiki links, I will look at that. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 12:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Scratch the last bit! the Isotta Fraschini Asso XI and the Isotta Fraschini Asso L appear to be slightly different types and we haven't written the matching article yet. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 12:28, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Wow, you've really gone wild with your research! What we are working against are standard books:

• Chris Bishop's 2002 The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War II, p. 325
• Jim Winchester's 2008 World's Worst Aircraft, p. 40
• Walter J. Boyne's 1994 Messerschmitt Me 262: Arrow to the Future, p. 149
• Louis and Judene Divone's 1989 Wings of history: the air museums of Europe, p. 166

I think the problem started when patchy reports of the Italian plane were received in the UK and the USA. Your link to Geoffrey Smith's article in Flight magazine makes it clear that the notional radial engine was a hazarded guess. Life magazine put together an article on jet engines in 1944 and repeated this 'fact' but without the caveat of dubious authority. I'm guessing that from there it was repeated by a number of authors. Binksternet (talk) 15:03, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Yep, the way I read the first Smith article is that it implied the first design (CC.1 with a radial engine) had flown, in his later book he says it was not built. Certainly an interesting type and I think with the museum ref we can be fairly sure the N.1/CC.2 had a V-12. Having a peek down the inlet would seal it, assuming the engine is still fitted (they often aren't) but that would be OR! If it was brought to Britain after the war and examined by the RAE there should be a report on it in the archives, finding it won't be so easy. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 15:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I have corrected the article according to the museum webpage (and in the knowledge of Smith's later update.) Binksternet (talk) 15:47, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Have to give the IP a Barnstar as well! Would still like to open it up and have a look. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 15:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Italian images

Afternoon Nimbus: I could give you a hand with uploads if required. Have you a list of those you've already done which others can see and add to? When you say Commons upload bot, is that the standard route via the Commons sidebar tool, or is there a better way? My system seems to run in treacle just now, so the throughput may not be large, but they are useful images. Cheers, TSRL (talk) 15:36, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Marvellous!! I've only done a few, they are listed with a bold 'N' here. I did the Walter Sagitta and an Isotta Fraschini one (can't remember, but it's the rear view one in the list I posted at AETF). You could save them to your hard drive and upload them using the standard 'Upload Wizard' but all the details and license templates have to be typed in manually. There is a 'CommonsHelper' bot that doesn't seem to be working and 'CommonsHelper2' which sort of half works. There are two licensing templates (PD-Italy) and (PD-1996|Italy|1 June 1996), use {{}} either end!

I've asked if this task (file transfer from other wikis) can be added to the upload wizard, probably in the 'too difficult' category!! Cheers. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 15:48, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I think I was supposed to leave a 'Now Commons' template on the original image pages, hopefully a bot will do that (as I used identical file names), all a bit messy really! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 16:00, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

'Sconosciuto' in the author field means 'unknown' and is not the author's name BTW! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 16:04, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I've uploaded File:Colombo S.53.jpg. Could you have a quick squint and tell me if this OK and complete?TSRL (talk) 17:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks ok, doesn't say that it is a copy of a file uploaded by someone else, not sure how the attribution trail works on Commons. I looked at that engine as there is an Italian article on it but can't find it in any of my sources, reluctant to directly translate some of the wiki:it articles as some of the facts don't seem to add up. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 17:26, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Ta. I'll keep a lookout for the "someone else" bit. There is quite detailed info on the S.53 in the Flight article they cite. Also Jane's 1938-39 has a note to the effect that in 1931 Alfa-Romeo "undertook the manufacture" of this engine.TSRL (talk) 17:54, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Saw the Flight ref, at least it is in a language that we can understand!! Just wondering if there are 'free' images lurking in other wikis? Most of them are non-free, for some reason the uploader of the Italian ones didn't put them straight on Commons. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 17:58, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Bashed in the block through Colombo to the end of FIAT. Details, cats etc might be more refined. Had to remove leading numbers like 800px from aes. otherwise as they were.TSRL (talk) 20:58, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Great, I found them and refined the category (we have individual engine categories now over there or at least a manufacturer and type of engine category). One of them has been tagged by a bot for deletion for lack of copyright info (seems strange considering the licensing templates?). Just got to marry them up with articles now, probably quite a few that we don't have articles for. Cheers and thanks very much. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I hope that that tagged file is OK - I'd originally missed out the licensing templates but put them in after the bot warning. I don't know how to remove the tag, though - not obvious from the edit menu.TSRL (talk) 09:12, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I just went in and deleted the wiki code! Didn't see any others with tags. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:55, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Glider numbers

Morning Nimbus: I have been going through the unidentified glider category in WikiCommons and have identified several of them. There remain two UK aircraft with clear numbers on the side, 507 at the Cairngorms and 556 at the Parks. I wondered if, as a glider flyer you know where this numbers are listed for i/d purposes; I thought they would be BGA numbers but the types don't match. No triglyphs vsible either. If you go to that catalogue, there are another couple of aircraft that should be recognisable but turn out to be hard to pin down: both in Austria, a blue Y-tail at the Munich beerfest and a little pod and boom effort in the Aviaticum. Any thoughts on any of these? Cheers,TSRL (talk) 10:32, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Bit of a challenge! The three figure 'competition' numbers list would be held by the BGA, they are paid for annually and some gliders are wearing numbers that now belong to someone else! They are fairly old photos as they should all be wearing 'G' registrations now (EASA regulation). '507' is almost certainly a Schempp-Hirth Standard Cirrus, the only other near identical glider is the Mini-Nimbus which has a slightly larger cockpit area and trailing-edge flaps. '556' is almost certainly a Grob Astir, the Grob logo can just be made out on the fin and it has the outer portions of the ailerons painted red (standard on Astirs), 556 is a familiar number to me, it's possible that it is ex-RAF Germany (comp numbers were made-up from the German registration so this Astir could have been D-8556). Stumped on the Aviaticum one, quite similar to a Start Flug Hippie. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 11:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

That's very helpful - thanks. I did notice that the Cairngorn club's record distance was 507 km (Alan Mosssman); might not be a coincidence, thouh I don't have a date.TSRL (talk) 13:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

He probably had longer wings than the 15 metre Cirrus! Some big distances have been done in Scotland in the wave lift but the problem is that the country is not very wide so you have to do a cat's cradle task pattern from coast to coast which has too many turning points for distance record flights (but it's still great fun!). I've had a few scary moments low down in the Grampians including a near 'in the water' out landing in Loch Etive, more dangerous than the Austrian or French Alps from experience. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:08, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

What was Petebutt thinking?

Just saw his "contribution" to Rolls-Royce Merlin - what was that about??? ◆Min✪rhist✪rian◆MTalk 19:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Afraid I can't say what I think about it but you can have a guess. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:52, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

He wasn't thinking, just offering up some lame excuse about a non-existent "discussion" reaching a "concensus". Phtooy! ◆Min✪rhist✪rian◆MTalk 23:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I see your conversation. He has completely misunderstood the gist of my two-year old post on the talk page as you point out, assuming it was actually read before the 'chainsaw' came out (AGF and all that). Over 15,000 bytes of text was cut and pasted into the variants article without attribution (or even an edit summary) and two perfectly good cites in the main article were quietly converted to a templated form against WP:CITEHOW and the long established format for some strange reason. There are other ongoing problems elsewhere unfortunately. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:32, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Zeppelins

Section on nomenclature on the Aircraft Project is loud with the sound of tumbleweed rolling by, so I propose hacking into this: as I said, best sources I have have the space. & the Geman Wiki usage seems a good backup. Kind of you to offer help, but there are actually very few articles to be renamed and I don't think any are rendered unmovable by a redirect. I'm sure you have better tings to do (Only one of the Maybach engine types has an article, & Maybach is almost all about unbelievably ugly and overpriced cars). Interestingly, there are no type articles on any of the WW1 zeppelin designs, some of which were built in quantity: just a couple on notable individual ships.TheLongTone (talk) 16:55, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Well silence generally means consent (WP:SILENCE)! A problem occurs with creating redirects instead of moving the page in that the navbox entries do not auto bolden on individual pages as they should. Redirecting also loses the page history and attribution which is much more important. When pages are moved a redirect is automatically left behind, this messes the navbox up and is missed by most page movers. Quite happy to help moving them as there appears to be no objections. I saw the LZ 4 article, if you have more details on the engine types used on these airships I can try to link them to existing engine articles (or create redlinks if we don't have the article). Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 17:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

No, I'm moving the pages: if there are any that do need an admin to do the switcheroo I'll make an appeal. I'll also attend to the navbox, which also ultimatly should split so that it contains a 'Zeppelins by Class section'. Pointless at the moment since there is only one article of this type, the Hindenberg Class. (that should keep me busy!). As far as the engines of the earlier Zeppelins go, all the info in the sources I have is that they were made by Daimler & horsepower figures: they were quite possibly special builds, but I'm sure you know more about this than I do.TheLongTone (talk) 18:36, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Good stuff, I've seen this image on Commons, belonged to LZ 1 according to the caption. Might create a category for airship engines as there are not very many. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:48, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Found another Zeppelin image that could be used...then there's this. ◆Min✪rhist✪rian◆MTalk 00:45, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Led Zeppelin 2007

Never got into 'Led Zep' though I was once caught playing air guitar to the Immigrant Song! I am making up for it by being very restrained and sensible now (possibly!). Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:51, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Worst most overplayed song,ever written? "Stairway to Heaven" bleh! Rolf Harris did a fantastic version of this. ◆Min✪rhist✪rian◆MTalk 08:07, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Nice heavy metal photo - the engine, that is. I'll stick it it the article.TheLongTone (talk) 09:10, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

I remembered that I had some photos of a British airship engine from Old Warden, a 1909 J.A.P. It's lurking in a display case but I think it's quite historic as it is the actual engine used in the Willows No 3 and 4. Here's the engine and its placard with the story. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:04, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

From its file name this image appears to belong to LZ 6. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:29, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

I seem to have aroused your curiousity! Exraordinary difference between the two Zeppelin engines: the first gave 14 hp: LZ 6's 115.TheLongTone (talk) 10:47, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, airships are fascinating things! I met one once coming round a cloud in the opposite direction at the same height, he was powered and I was not ('sail before steam') but I thought it wise to give way! Sorting through the airship engines I was surprised that there were some petrol ignition types, had in my mind that they mainly used diesels to avoid the sparks? I might have other photos of parts of the R100/101 as they have a lot of them at Old Warden. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 11:08, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Very wise, they aren't exactly nippy!TheLongTone (talk) 11:18, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

If I remember rightly it was a Goodyear Blimp or something very similar and I mused that if I hit it I would have bounced off of its rubber skin like a childrens' castle! I do occasionally 'strafe' hot air balloons, gives the passengers something to look at but the pilots get a bit stroppy if you get too close. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 11:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

From what I've read, they seem to have generally used petrol engines. The use of diesels in R101 seems to have been regarded as innovatory, and the reason for doing so was concern over the volatility of petrol with regard to its intended use in the tropics. The first internal-combustion engine powered airship used an ignition system involving a platinum tube heated by an external flame. That all ended badly... Have a good Christmas!TheLongTone (talk) 15:32, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Request for a name change

Need more eyes to look at what is a bit of a contentious issue in assigning a name to an aircraft-oriented article. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 15:36, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Have added my two pennies, if I had started the article it would have used the French version. Have created a few German aviation museum articles recently, all using their German names, just seems natural to me and false to make up English titles. Slightly trickier with the Nungesser aircraft as there is an acknowledged translated name so it seems to be a matter of counting exactly how many reliable sources use each form (and I wish everyone the best of luck with that!). Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 17:26, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Season's tidings!

To you and yours, Have a Merry ______ (fill in the blank) and Happy New Year! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:06, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Have a Great Christmas

'Greetings Nimbus227! We don't have a White Christmas here in NZ 'cos it's SUMMER! We have Barbeques on the Beach! Have a good 'un and don't let Santa get to the rum under the tree - he's driving! ◆Min✪rhist✪rian◆MTalk 23:36, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks guys, sorry for the late reply, been otherwise detained!! Merry Christmas! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 15:02, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Schempp-Hirth Mini-Nimbus

Hi Nimbus! A few years ago you added a link to a Flight test evaluation on the Mini-Nimbus published in Soaring magazine. See your diff. Unfortunately this link no longer links to anything related to gliders. I'm hoping you might know where the FT evaluation went to! Cheers. Dolphin (t) 04:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, looks like its gone, I tried the wayback machine but that was no help. I do have the report in pdf though if needed. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 07:14, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that offer. The report in .pdf would be much appreciated. Dolphin (t) 12:10, 30 December 2012 (UTC)